http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=2mZC18EAl5o&autohide=1&version=3&autoplay=1
THIS SUMS UP AMERICAN AND ISRAELI POLICIES IN A WORD: AP”PEACE’MENT…..
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/frontpagemag-com/one-nation-under-allah-on-the-glazov-gang/
This week’s Glazov Gang had the honor of being joined by Nonie Darwish, author of “The Devil We Don’t Know,” Michael Chandler, an American Patriot, and Dwight Schultz, a Hollywood actor (dwightschultzfansite.nl).
This week our Gang members gathered to discuss Hassan Rouhani: Moderate Monster. The discussion focused on Iran’s new president-elect and our eternal self-deception about “liberals” in the enemy camp.
The Gang also shed a disturbing light on One Nation Under Allah, wondering why our children in a Colorado public school are saying the Pledge of Allegiance to Islam’s Allah in Arabic. The guests also discussed The Brotherhood Game, focusing on how Islamists play the “moderate” charade that we desperately embrace.
And much, much more. . . .
To see both parts of this two-part series, see below:
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/robert-spencer/britain-bans-freedom-fighters/print/
ROBERT SPENCER: BRITAIN BANS FREEDOM FIGHTERS
Wednesday morning I received an official letter from the British Home Office, notifying me that I would not be allowed to enter the country on the grounds that “your presence here is not conducive to the public good.” My colleague Pamela Geller received a similar letter. We had planned to lay a wreath at a memorial to British soldier Lee Rigby, who was beheaded by Islamic jihadists on a Woolwich street on May 22. But it is not conducive to the public good in Britain to oppose jihad violence and Islamic supremacism.
For that is why the ban came down. The Home Office’s letter to me said:
You are reported to have stated the following:
[Islam] is a religion and is a belief system that mandates warfare against unbelievers for the purpose for establishing a societal model that is absolutely incompatible with Western society because media and general government unwillingness to face the sources of Islamic terrorism these things remain largely unknown.
I said no such thing, of course. I generally speak and write in coherent English. But the point is clear enough. I certainly have pointed out that Islam mandates warfare against unbelievers. This is not really a controversial point to anyone who has studied Islam at all. One man who has done so has said that “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth.”
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/david-solway/cmon-man/
“The two conjoined words, “President” and “Obama,” are connotatively among the great oxymorons of the current age. ”
ESPN’s Monday Night Football pre-game show is watched chiefly for its “C’mon man!” segment. The phrase, which derives from common speech and was big in the Sixties, has now become iconic, a mainstay of the sports lexicon, and may be cogently applied to the political world as well. Implying as it does an attitude of stunned disbelief or eyebrow-raising amazement at any statement or event so palpably absurd as to beggar credibility, it fits the political domain like a catcher’s mitt burying a perfect strike. It is especially apt when brought to bear on the utterances of Barack Obama. As for example, to cite at random:
“Hope and change”—C’mon man!
“We are the ones we’ve been waiting for”—C’mon man!
“This was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and the planet began to heal”—C’mon man!
“The state of our union is strong”—C’mon man!
“I don’t know what the term is in Austrian”—C’mon man!
“Navy corpse-man”—C’mon man!
“Our nation honors its unbroken line of fallen heroes, and I see many of them in the audience here today”—C’mon man!
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/169296#.Ucv9wK8UHQx
STEVEN PLAUT COMMENTS
It is not really news when someone discovers that the bulk of the Arab citizens of Israel (not of the West Bank but inside Green Line Israel) are pro-terror anti-Israel jihadists. What is news is that this time it is the Marxist sociologist Sami Samouha (or Samoha) who is saying so. And if Samouha reports findings of 58% of Israeli Arabs endorsing anti-Jewish violence, I suspect the true number is much higher. After all, Samouha has a long track record of prettifying the political positions of Israeli Arabs and has also participated in “One State Solution Conferences,” which call for Israel’s complete annihilation. For more on Samouha, see http://www.isracampus.org.il/third%20level%20pages/Editorial%20-%20Lee%20Kaplan%20-%20Sammy%20Smooha.htm
Here are the details on the new poll:
Poll: Most Israeli Arabs Support Violent Uprising
Most Israeli Arabs oppose a Jewish majority, support a Palestinian uprising and want Iran to have nukes.GIL RONEN
Gil RonenAbout 58% of the Arab citizens of Israel say that the Palestinian Authority Arabs would be justified in starting a violent rebellion (“intifada”) if the diplomatic process does not advance. A similar percentage advocate an “intifada” by Israeli Arab citizens if their situation does not improve considerably, according to a poll, which was carried out by Prof. Sami Samoha of Haifa University, with the Israeli Democracy Institute.
The views are in line with the call Monday by an Arab Knesset Member, for an Arab intifada inside Israel.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/dr-matusitz-humiliates-islamic-intimidation-group-cair?f=puball
Hassan Shibly, Director of the CAIR Tampa Office and Emerge USA instinctually attack anyone who challenges their Sunni version of Islamic doctrine and theology. CAIR and Emerge USA were counting on a weak academic professor to attack, not the academic cage fighter Dr. Jonathan Matusitz.
CAIR and EMERGE USA Attack Dr. Matusitz
Hassan Shibly of CAIR Tampa and Ms. Laila Abdelaziz of Emerge USA attacked Dr. Jonathan Matusitz by publicly calling him unsubstantiated vile epithets hoping to derail his academic career and personal reputation as a source expert in Terrorism and Communication. All CAIR and Emerge USA succeeded in doing was bringing shame and dishonor on themselves, their organizations, and their families.
CAIR and Emerge USA became the laughing stock of the Civil Rights movement in their anger filled emotional response to the facts presented in this video.
How Culture Shapes Terrorism – Dr. Jonathan Matusitz & Rep. Sandy Adams
Meet Dr. Jonathan Matusitz
Dr. Jonathan Matusitz (Ph.D., University of Oklahoma, 2006) is currently a tenured associate professor in the Nicholson School of Communication at the University of Central Florida (UCF). He studies globalization, culture, terrorism and health communication.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/critical-tunnel-vision-at-the-washington-times On June 19th, the Washington Times ran Frank Csongo’s review of Diana West’s book, American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on American Character. It was a supercilious review that ignored West’s chief themes, labored under inaccuracies and fallacies, and generally was meant to discredit West and her book. I was so startled by its inherent […]
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/352144/social-security-dead-part-ii-jillian-kay-melchior The dead aren’t roaming the earth, but they may well be collecting Social Security checks. I reported recently on how the Social Security Administration’s Office of the Inspector General succeeded, in a single two-year period, in securing 282 criminal convictions and recovering $16.6 million in stolen funds from people who fraudulently collected benefits when […]
http://www.steynonline.com/5605/ukip-shakes-up-westminster
It’s all but impossible to launch a new political party under America’s electoral arrangements, and extremely easy to do so under Continental proportional representation. The Westminster first-past-the-post system puts the task somewhere in between: tough, but not entirely the realm of fantasy. The Labour party came into being at the dawn of the 20th century, and formed its first government in 1924. The United Kingdom Independence party was born in 1993 and now, a mere two decades later, is on the brink of . . . well, okay, not forming its first government, but it did do eerily well in May’s local elections. The Liberals were reduced to their all-time lowest share of the vote, the Tories to their lowest since 1982, and for the first time ever, none of the three “mainstream” parties cracked 30 percent: Labour had a good night with 29, the Conservatives came second at 25, and nipping at their heels was the United Kingdom Independence party with 23 percent.
They achieved this impressive result against not three opponents but also a fourth — a media that have almost universally derided the party as a sinkhole of nutters and cranks. UKIP’s leader, the boundlessly affable Nigel Farage, went to P. G. Wodehouse’s old high school, Dulwich College, and to a sneering metropolitan press, Farage’s party is a déclassé Wodehousean touring company mired in an elysian England that never was, populated only by golf-club duffers, halfwit toffs, rustic simpletons, and hail-fellow-well-met bores from the snug of the village pub. When I shared a platform with him in Toronto a few months back, Mr. Farage explained his party’s rise by citing not Wodehouse but another Dulwich old boy, the late British comic Bob Monkhouse: “They all laughed when I said I’d become a comedian. Well, they’re not laughing now.”
The British media spent 20 years laughing at UKIP. But they’re not laughing now — not when one in four electors takes them seriously enough to vote for them. So, having dismissed him as a joke, Fleet Street now warns that Farage uses his famous sense of humor as a sly cover for his dark totalitarian agenda — the same well-trod path to power used by other famous quipsters and gag-merchants such as Adolf Hitler, whose Nuremberg open-mike nights were legendary. “Nigel Farage is easy to laugh at . . . that means he’s dangerous,” declared the Independent. The Mirror warned of an “unfulfilled capacity for evil.” “Stop laughing,” ordered Jemma Wayne in the British edition of the Huffington Post. “Farage would lead us back to the dark ages.” The more the “mainstream” shriek about how mad, bad, and dangerous UKIP is, the more they sound like the ones who’ve come unhinged.
UKIP is pronounced “You-kip,” kip being Brit slang for “sleep.” When they write the book on how we came to this state of affairs, they’ll call it While England Kipped. A complacent elite assured itself that UKIP would remain an irritating protest vote, but that’s all. It was born in 1993 to protest the Maastricht treaty, the point at which a continent-wide “common market” finally cast off the pretense of being an economic arrangement and announced itself as a “European Union,” a pseudo-state complete with “European citizenship.” The United Kingdom Independence party was just that: a liberation movement. Its founder, a man who knew something about incoherent Euro-polities, was the Habsburg-history specialist Alan Sked, who now dismisses the party as a bunch of “fruitcakes.” As old-time Perotistas will understand, new movements are prone to internecine feuds. UKIP briefly fell under the spell of the oleaginous telly huckster Robert Kilroy-Silk, who subsequently quit to found a party called “Veritas,” which he has since also quit.
But Farage was there at the founding, as UKIP’s first-ever parliamentary candidate. In 1994, a rising star of the Tory party, Stephen Milligan, was found dead on his kitchen table, with a satsuma and an Ecstasy tab in his mouth, and naked except for three lady’s stockings, two on his legs and one on his arm. In his entertaining book, one of the few political memoirs one can read without forcing oneself to finish, Farage has a melancholy reflection on Milligan’s bizarrely memorable end: “It was the sad destiny . . . of this former President of the Oxford Union to contribute more to public awareness — albeit of a very arcane nature — by the manner of his death than by his work in life.” That’s to say, the late Mr. Milligan more or less singlehandedly planted the practice of “auto-erotic asphyxiation” in the public consciousness — since when (as John O’Sullivan suggested here a while back) the Tory party seems to have embraced it as a political philosophy.
