http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/the-abcs-of-journalisms-eroding-integrity I joined the Society of Professional Journalists (SPJ) in April 1979, thirty-three years ago. The preamble to its Code of Ethics says, “Professional integrity is the cornerstone of a journalist’s credibility” and that journalists should “test the accuracy of information from all sources and exercise care to avoid inadvertent errors.” Someone needs to send […]
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/
In Israel and America, the proponents of Jewish suicide are successfully wiping themselves out, while the proponents of Jewish survival are filling up cradles. The race between the Jewish values of Debbie Wasserman-Schultz and their values is already being won.
A month ago, Debbie Wasserman-Schultz sat down with the host of a Jewish television channel and could not name any reason for Jews to vote for Obama except for his support for abortion. Which is to say that the favorite muppet of the Democratic Party could not think of any reason to support B.O. except a mutual commitment that fewer Jews be born.
It is a little-known fact that Margaret Sanger, that pioneer of eugenic solutions to “racial, political, and social problems”, began by targeting Jews, opening her first center in Brownsville, Brooklyn, complete with Yiddish and Italian flyers, aiming for the two immigrant groups whose high reproduction rates were considered a social problem.
Abortion as a Liberal Jewish value has been a stunning success. In New York City, where Sanger first set up shop, 74 percent of all Jewish children are members of the traditionalist Orthodox religious group. Liberal Jews are already panicking over the prospect of a future Jewish population in New York City that is staunchly conservative and religious.
A recent survey of New York City Jews also shows a nearly even split between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama. 46 percent of New York Jews are planning to vote against Obama, and a majority of New York City Jews think that Romney would be better at fixing the economy than B.O. But it is only to be expected that the group for whom abortion isn’t a Jewish value would come to outnumber the group for whom abortion is a Jewish value.
The problem with values is that you have to live with their consequences. When your values dictate that terrorists deserve all the protections of the civilian justice system, then you have to be ready to live with the explosions. If your values dictate minimal population growth, then you have to accept the consequences of extinction. Values that are contrary to survival carry their own natural cost. And when your values are at odds with your interests, then your values might as well be an open window, a loaded revolver or a dose of strychnine.
http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2012/08/06/the-abedin-familys-pro-jihadist-journal/ Steadily burgeoning [2] evidence [3] indicates that one of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s closest aides, Huma Abedin, despite Ms. Clinton’s protestation [4], was inadequately vetted for either family, or personal ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Diligent, open [5] source [2] investigation [3] has already uncovered and documented numerous alarming connections. One can reasonably […]
http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3251/military-procurement Since experienced military officers have been removed from the procurement system, the only people who now judge whether or not a weapon or a piece of equipment is ready to go into service are the Pentagon’s lawyers, accountants and political appointees. The power of lobbyists also grows directly out of the system’s lack of […]
http://www.prudenpolitics.com/newsletter?utm_source=P&P%20Auto%201&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=4196
The great chicken-sandwich controversy has come and gone, leaving a moral lesson as consequential and lasting as the clucking in a hen house. The clucking was media-made – loud, fierce and angry.
And then it was gone. The result, such as it was, was not quite what the media had in mind.
The good guys and the bad guys looked well-cast: doe-eyed innocents, eager to kiss, shout and fondle in pursuit of the love that shouts its name, against evil church folk determined to deprive gay brides of their rightful ration of peau de soie and gay husbands of their rightful perch atop a wedding cake.
The controversy was presented as the latest offensive against same-sex marriage, which most Americans regard as not quite marriage at all, led by a corporation determined to compel everyone to “eat mor chikin,” and wolf it down before the cows come home. The villainy was compounded by the outrage that the corporation was owned by born-again Christians.
Dan Cathy, a devout and successful Baptist businessman, openly talks of his faith and operates on a business model based on Christ’s Sermon on the Mount, as recorded in Matthew 5:41: “And whosoever shall compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain.” Two miles is more generous than one.
Quoting from the Bible was villainy compounded for liberals gagging on their celebrated tolerance, understanding, and goodwill for all. The contretemps was fueled when Mr. Cathy, chairman of Chick-fil-A, gave an interview to Baptist Press, meant mostly for church folk, and was asked to explain the success of Chick-fil-A, a family business that has grown from a single diner in suburban Atlanta to a chain of 1,608 restaurants with annual sales of $4 billion. What he actually said, and how he said it, was lost in the din of outrage over what others, not so well-meaning, said he said.
https://donate.jstreetpac.org/candidate/allcandidates
SURPRISE, SURPRISE…THERE ARE NO REPUBLICANS ON THE LIST OF THE JACKASS ENDORSEMENTS….SOME ARE EGREGIOUS LIKE KEITH ELLISON, OTHERS LIKE AMI BERA RUNNING AGAINST DAN LUNDGREN ONE OF THE BEST CONGRESSMEN IN AMERICA. THEY ALL SUPPORT THE TWO STATE DELUSION….I WILL BE POSTING THE NAMES OF ALL THE PEOPLE RUNNING AGAINST THE JACKASSES…. I MEAN NO DISRESPECT IT IS VERY APPOSITE THAT THE NATIONAL SYMBOL FOR THE DHIMMICRATS IS THE JACKASS. RSK
What is the Meaning of Religious Freedom? Molly Pitcher
From the conclusion of this war we shall be going downhill. Both the leaders and the people themselves would soon forget the importance of these principles and stop fighting for their preservation.
Thomas Jefferson, 1782 1
Virginia’s initial draft of the Declaration of Rights and constitution was written by George Mason, who drawing from John Locke’s Letter Concerning Toleration, wrote:
All men should enjoy the fullest toleration in the exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience, unpunished and unrestrained by the magistrate, unless, under color of religion, any man disturb the peace, the happiness, or safety of society, or of individuals. 2
James Madison proposed,
All men are equally entitled to the free exercise of religion, according to the dictates of conscience, unpunished, and unrestrained by the magistrate, unless the preservation of equal liberty and the existence of the State are manifestly endangered.3
With this language, Madison turned freedom of conscience into a “Natural and absolute right.”4
James Madison, father of our country, was nothing short of brilliant when putting forth an argument for what he believed truth. One of the clearest examples of his power of reason took place in a debate with Patrick Henry over “A Bill for Establishing a Provision for the Teachers of the Christian Religion.” 5
The bill was intended to encourage religion through taxation and was based on a widely held belief that Christianity guided men’s morals, restrained their vices, and helped to preserve the peace. Patrick Henry’s bill had wide support, including that of George Washington. With his bill, “Voters could designate the denomination or even the specific church that their tax dollars would go to. Those who didn’t want to support religion could target their tax dollars toward education more broadly.”6
Congressional Elections – Critical to US-Israel Relations
Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought”
“Israel Hayom”, July 25, 2012
http://bit.ly/M8nOOA
During a June 15, 2012 seminar at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, Dr. Bill Schneider, a leading expert on US politics, reaffirmed that both chambers of Congress play a key role in determining US-Israel relations.
In 1990, US Secretary of the Navy asked Senator Inouye, Chairman of the Appropriations Subcommittee on Defense, to delete from the proposed defense bill an amendment to upgrade the port of Haifa for the benefit of the Sixth Fleet: “Senator, I am the Secretary of the Navy, and I know that the Six Fleet does not need the upgrade.” Inouye retorted: “Mr. Secretary, according to the US Constitution, I supervise you, and I have determined that the Sixth Fleet would benefit from such an upgrade.” Inouye’s position derived from the end of the Cold War which eroded the importance of the port of Naples, and from the gathering sandstorms from the Persian Gulf (leading to Iraq’s invasion of Kuwait) which enhanced the significance of the port of Haifa for the Sixth Fleet. The port of Haifa was upgraded despite opposition by President Bush and Secretary of State Baker who orchestrated Secretary Lehman’s appeal.
The recent Egyptian turmoil exposes the uncertainty surrounding US-Egypt relations and the reliability of the port of Alexandria. Therefore, it has elevated the relevance of the Israeli ports of Haifa and Ashdod to the Sixth Fleet. It underscores the vitality of Congress as a joint-front-seat-driver in setting the national security agenda.
In November 2012, Americans will elect all 435 members of the House of Representatives, 33 U.S. senators and thousands of state and local elected officials, some of whom will eventually reach Capitol Hill. According to a July 23, 2012 Rasmussen national poll, since mid-2009, Republican congressional candidates have been systematically more popular than Democrats. 43% of likely voters would vote for Republican congressional candidates, if the election were held today, while 40% would elect Democrats.
www.TheEttingerReport.com
Israel’s Economic Culture Praised by Philips Global
Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought”
Straight from the Jerusalem Boardroom #166, August 3, 2012
While global economy deteriorates and its ripple effects erode Israel’s economic indicators (e.g., unemployment increased to 7%):
1. Frans Van Houten, the CEO of the Dutch giant, Philips Global: “Israel’s economic and organizational culture is consistent with Philips’ requirements…. Philips owes part of its enhanced performance (2nd quarter’s earnings – 17% above projections) to Israel’s excellent engineers in the imaging, data processing and data storage areas. Philips has expanded its Israeli presence and acquisitions since 1999, when it acquired part of Israel’s Elscint, then Israel’s CDP and CDC…. Philips will expand its current 600 employee research & development center (Globes Business Daily, Aug. 2, 2012). “
2. Marcos Battisti, Head of Intel Capital in Europe and Israel, hired additional investment directors in Israel, expanding Intel’s pursuit of Israeli start ups. Since 1991, Intel Capital invested in 60 Israeli companies, collaborating with Intel’s four research & development centers and two manufacturing plants in Israel (Globes, July 26). Israel’s Kayak raised $91MN in a Wall Street IPO led by Morgan Stanley (Globes, July 23). Abingworth Ventures, 7 MedHealth Ventures, Arch Ventures, MPM Capital and F3 invested $38MN in a round of private placement by Israel’s Chiasma (Globes, July 24). Battery Ventures and Bessemer Ventures led a $12MN round of private placement by Israel’s Vayyar Imaging (Globes, Aug. 3).
http://www.jinsa.org/fellowship-program/evelyn-gordon/levy-report-chance-regain-lost-diplomatic-ground
Adopting a blue-ribbon legal report reasserting the validity of Israel’s claim to the West Bank wouldn’t undermine Israel’s international image, but bolster it.
JINSA When a blue-ribbon panel of Israeli legal experts issued a report this July declaring that the West Bank isn’t “occupied territory,” but territory to which Israel has a legitimate claim, and that settlements therefore cannot be considered ipso facto illegal, it raised an outcry both in Israel and overseas. A group of prominent American Jews even wrote Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to urge him against adopting the report, arguing that it would imperil both “the two-state solution, and the prestige of Israel as a democratic member of the international community,” because the latter depends on persuading the world that Israel is “committed to a two-state vision.” Many Israeli pundits voiced similar concerns.
Since the Levy Report essentially reiterates the official position of all Israeli governments, this concern seems strange. Nevertheless, its opponents are right to see it as a potential game changer. Where they err is in deeming it a negative one. In reality, the report offers Israel a golden opportunity to start regaining the diplomatic ground it has lost over the last two decades.
No honest appraisal could deny that Israel’s international standing has deteriorated since it signed the Oslo Accords in 1993. Anti-Israel boycotts, once confined to the Arab world, are now routine agenda items for universities, certain Western churches, and trade unions. Courts in several European countries have considered indicting Israeli officials for war crimes, and European polls routinely deem Israel a prime threat to world peace. References to Israel as an “apartheid state” have become commonplace, and academics and journalists openly question its very right to exist. All this would have been inconceivable 20 years ago.
This deterioration has many causes, but one is directly germane to the Levy Report: Though officially, Israel still insists on the validity of its claim to the West Bank, post-Oslo Israeli leaders have generally downplayed this claim. Instead, they have touted the Palestinians’ “legitimate and political rights” to the territory, at times even adopting the Palestinian rhetoric of “occupation.”
Their goal was well-intentioned: to show that Israel was indeed “committed to a two-state vision,” thereby creating an atmosphere conducive to peace. But once Israel stopped asserting its own rights in the West Bank, there was nobody to counter the Palestinian claim that it is “occupied Palestinian land” to which Israel has no rights whatsoever. Consequently, the unchallenged international narrative now views Israel not as a magnanimous peace-maker willing to cede territory for peace, but as an unrepentant thief who stole land and refuses to return it.
