RUTHFULLY YOURS

Although an unobservant Jew who considered his religion “an accident
of birth,” Greenberg said at the end of his life (he died in 1986)
that he was startled to find himself “wanting to be remembered not
only as a great ballplayer, but even more as a great Jewish
ballplayer.”

On a central Illinois baseball field in 1931, a 20-year-old minor
leaguer named Hank Greenberg was heckled by the opposing team’s third
baseman with anti-Semitic insults — language that we in 2014 would
call hate speech. When Greenberg could no longer stand the
provocations, which were echoed by an angry, roaring crowd, he
confronted the third baseman and was rushed out of the park by local
police for protection. Greenberg later said the fracas was “scary.”

Born in New York’s Greenwich Village, Greenberg, standing a little
under 6 feet 4 inches, spent most of his major league career as a
first baseman playing for the Detroit Tigers. He hit 58 home runs in
1938, only two short of Babe Ruth’s 1927 record, and he was twice
chosen as the American League’s most valuable player. He achieved this
against a recurrent aural backdrop of “Christ killer!” and other
anti-Jewish taunts.

Inez Weissman, friend, a stalwart member of Americans for a Safe Israel and a warrior for Jewish causes died on July 19, 2014 in Portland,Oregon. Her memory is a blessing, and John and Beth Newman of Portland who carry on her work are a blessing to her memory.

With condolence and regret….rsk

HBO “Real Time” host Bill Maher left no doubt on his show Friday about who he thinks is responsible for the violence in Gaza.

“I feel terrible for a Palestinian child who dies,” Mr. Maher said. “But if it’s your father, your brother, your uncle who’s firing those rockets into Israel, whose fault is it really? Do you really expect the Israelis not to retaliate?”

The comment drew applause from his audience and, surprisingly, gave Mr. Maher something he rarely has on his show: agreement with one of his conservative guests.

Jamie Weinstein, an editor of The Daily Caller, said that extremists will always be trying to harm Israel regardless of the country’s actions.

“I don’t think you can understand the conflict without reading Hamas’ charter, upon which they were founded, which clearly calls — and it’s chilling — calls for not only the destruction of Israel but the murder of Jews generally,” Mr. Weinsten said.

“They say the day will come when the trees will call out and say ‘here’s a Jew come kill him.’ This is the mentality of the people that Israel is fighting,” he continued.

Mr. Maher said he believes that Israel has been effective at defending itself in part because of its scientific expertise.

“Jews have, I think, 155 Nobel Prizes. Muslims have two,” he said. “That seems like kind of a big advantage for team Hebrew.”

The host found himself in hot water earlier this week for a tweet he sent out about the conflict.

“Dealing w/ Hamas is like dealing w/ a crazy woman who’s trying to kill u – u can only hold her wrists so long before you have to slap her,” his message wrote.

UNDERSTANDING OBAMA

What both men have in common is a hard left background which has taught them that the only defining principle in politics is Lenin’s “Kto-Kovo”. Kto-Kovo or Who-Whom reduced all interactions to warfare. The Bolsheviks ushered in the end of rules, decency or honor. All that mattered was who would be able to destroy whom. It didn’t matter whether you had justice on your side, but what you would do about it.
Obama and Putin have the same message for America. “Kto-Kovo.” “Sue me.” “So what?” “I won.”
A Kto-Kovo leader, whether in the 7th century or the 21st century, operates by rallying his followers through bold acts that expand their power and humiliate and destroy the morale of their enemies.
Obama and Putin’s Savage World Order

Amnestiers: The Bible Doesn’t Say Strangers, It Says Resident Aliens

IN THE NAME OF ISLAM

The Muslim Brotherhood’s battalion attacked the village of Kfar Darom and forty-five Israeli militia members protected 400 men, women and children. The Brotherhood’s attacks were beaten back with determined resistance until its Jihadists were forced to retreat leaving behind seventy of their dead.
After the village came under attack from Egyptian armor and air power, it had to be abandoned for decades until Israel liberated the territory on which it had stood. Then the diplomats and reporters who hadn’t cared about the tiny village before, suddenly declared that Kfar Darom was a settlement and the Jews who lived there were occupiers for resettling the land that Muslims had conquered in 1948.
When Kfar Darom was ethnically cleansed again in 2005, the media and the diplomats cheered. Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar entered the Kfar Darom synagogue and laid claim to it in the name of Islam.
Israel’s War with the Muslim Brotherhood

Washington Post Muslim Reporter: Was Hamas Expected to Turn the Other Cheek?

VANITY UNFAIR

Mark Levin has called Jon Stewart a self-hating Jew. That’s a mostly inaccurate term that needs to be put to bed. Jon Stewart likes himself. It’s us he doesn’t like.
Jon Stewart doesn’t hate himself. His fake neurotic routine is just a hack comic’s mashup of Woody Allen and Jerry Seinfeld. It allows him to pose as a non-threatening figure while he’s saying nasty things.
Stewart, like many leftists, does hate being Jewish.
The real problem isn’t Stewart, who was doing bit parts in sitcoms until he lucked into the Bush Administration, and would in a better world be desperately hoping to get to play the delivery boy on an episode of Modern Family.
The problem is that far too many American Jews have become so cut off from their culture that they identify a hack comedian with three facial expressions and a watered down version of a Borscht Belt routine as a cultural lodestone…
Jon Stewart Isn’t a Self-Hating Jew, He Just Hates Being Jewish

Amidst news the Israelis have turned down secretary of State Kerry’s latest, apparently Qatar-inspired, ceasefire, not to mention the other day’s nauseatingly familiar anti-Israel fusillade from the mega-Orwellian UN Human Rights Council, comes word that Hamas had been planning a gigantic attack on Israel this September via its dozens of tunnels.

From the Gatestone Institute [1]:

Hamas had apparently been preparing a murderous assault on Israeli civilian targets for the coming Jewish New Year Holiday, Rosh Hashanah, which begins on September 24, according anonymous sources in the Israeli security services, as reported today [2] by the Israeli daily Maariv.

The Hamas plan consisted of what was to be a surprise attack in which 200 fighters would be dispatched through each of dozens of tunnels dug by Hamas under the border from Gaza to Israel, and seize kibbutzim and other communities while killing and kidnapping Israeli civilians.

Assuming this to be true–and Hamas has already used the tunnels for a similar attack last week–questions arise. Why didn’t Israeli and U.S. intelligence know about the extent and dangers of these tunnels earlier — if they didn’t? And if they did, why didn’t they do something about it?

Well, we don’t know. But at least the Israelis are doing something about it now, even with resistance from the Americans.

Meanwhile, another culprit waits in the wings, perhaps the greatest enabler of all of Hamas terror — the United Nations. I strongly suspect the UN has not just been consistently biased and hateful toward Israel, it has also — at the very least — looked the other way as mass murder and kidnappings (sedatives and handcuffs have been found in the tunnels) were being planned against Israel’s citizens.

We already know that Hamas hid missiles in at least two UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency) schools in Gaza. Ban Ki-moon claimed to be shocked, but I predict he will be really shocked if a full investigation were made because there is far worse.

The Washington Post reports that the presiding judge in the military commission prosecution of the 9/11 plotters has severed from the still unscheduled trial one of the five defendants, Ramzi Binalshibh. That means that, if ultimately tried at all, Binalshibh would be tried separately, who knows when.

As related in the report, the ruling seems very strange. The judge, Army Col. James L. Pohl, is said to have explained, as the Post puts it, that “the court needs to resolve whether Binalshibh has the mental capacity to participate in the trial.” This is difficult to square with the report’s simultaneous assertion that “neither the government nor Binalshibh’s lawyer argue that he is mentally incompetent.” To be sure, there have been questions for years about the terrorist’s mental state; but one of his civilian lawyers insisted to the Post that Binalshibh wanted to go to trial with his co-defendants. He did not wish to be severed.

There is also said to be a conflict-of-interest issue to sort out, but that claim, too, does not fare well under scrutiny.

Earlier this year the FBI began probing a defense leak of a manifesto written by Binalshibh’s more notorious co-defendant, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. The manifesto was among the many documents covered by a court non-disclosure order. As I detailed in a National Review column, the Bureau ended up interviewing a contract “security officer” responsible for giving Binalshibh’s defense team access to sensitive discovery materials. The security officer’s employer alerted the defendant’s lawyers about the investigation, causing them to complain to the court.

Theoretically, if a defense attorney is alerted to the fact (or at least, the likelihood) that the government is investigating him for possible wrongdoing, that could create a conflict of interest with his client. The lawyer could have a motive to curry favor with prosecutors in order to persuade them not to charge him; that, the thinking goes, could induce him to represent his client less zealously. It is difficult, however, to see that happening here. Not only is the potential conflict highly speculative; the Post reports that the FBI closed its investigation more than two months ago without filing charges.

At this point, the commission judge is considering a variety of pretrial motions filed by all five defendants. That process is expected to last until at least the end of the year. Based on what we know at the moment (and admittedly, there are always things we don’t know – things known only to the litigants in a trial), there seems to be no reason why any potential conflict-of-interest question could not easily be resolved in the next five months – in time for Binalshibh to be tried jointly with his co-defendants. Indeed, I’m betting that the judge has at least a few issues more difficult than that one to deal with.

Republicans need to drive home the obvious: Hillary Clinton owns ALL of Barack Obama’s failures.

In June, before the stunning, gaffe-generating disaster of Hillary Clinton’s book tour, Senator Claire McCaskill (D., Missouri) said on MSNBC’s Morning Joe that the former first lady, U.S. senator and secretary of state is the “piñata that everyone loves to hit” because she is the “dominant candidate” for president in 2016.

The 2016 Real Clear Politics’ general election match-up polls support McCaskill’s argument. Hillary Clinton leads every Republican presidential hopeful by an average of 10 percentage points.

However McCaskill’s reference to Clinton as the “dominant candidate” reveals what an attractive target for Republicans Clinton, a dominant national figure for more than two decades, presents.

Republicans need to position Clinton as the de facto “incumbent presidential candidate” and hold her accountable for the unpopular, failed policies of President Obama as if they were her very own.

This tactic was successfully employed against Republicans by Obama and the Democrats during the last two presidential elections.

In 2008 Obama’s general election campaign waged war against the policies of President George W. Bush even though Arizona Senator John McCain, not Bush, was on the ticket.

The Democrats didn’t even need to update that playbook in 2012. Obama re-used the Bush card against the hapless Mitt Romney – an easy call when 68 percent of voters still blamed Bush for the continuing economic stagnation that was then in its sixth year.

Two years from now the GOP can win if Republicans have forged a strong campaign message against the record and policies of an Obama/Clinton ticket. In strictly practical terms, this ticket is easier to believe than either the Bush/McCain or Bush/Romney combo, for Clinton actually served a full term in the Obama White House, and neither McCain nor Romney served in the Bush administration.

Slandered, despised, insulted, degraded, Israel is nonetheless winning its war against Hamas. The number of rocket attacks launched by the terror group each day has been halved. The IDF is uprooting the underground tunnels Hamas uses to smuggle weapons, contraband, and terrorists in and out of the Gaza Strip. On Wednesday evening, Israel’s Channel Two newscast carried footage of Hamas terrorists surrendering to the IDF. The jihadists carried white flags. They stripped to their shorts, proving they were not wearing suicide belts. These are facts Hamas does not want you to know, images Hamas does not want you to see.

And you probably won’t see them. Since the evening of July 17, when Israel launched its ground offensive, Western media has been filled with Hamas propaganda. In the United States, the debate over the conflict is invariably couched in terms favorable to Hamas: Are civilian casualties too high? Is it safe to fly into Ben-Gurion airport? Has the IDF targeted schools and hospitals? One MSNBC anchor calls Israel, which abandoned Gaza in 2005, the “occupying authority.” Another praises a “gutsy” Israeli, who refuses to serve in her nation’s military.

On CNN, the Islamist Turkish prime minister says Israel has “surpassed what Hitler did.” A CNN reporter calls Israelis “scum”; an NBC reporter tweets a scurrilous article calling U.S. Jews who join the IDF “America’s Israeli jihadists”; and a writer for Gawker says it’s time to send the Jews back to Germany. Reporters once embedded with military forces. Now the talking points of a military force — the talking points of Hamas — are embedded in the U.S. media.

And yet the immediate danger to the success of this necessary war does not come from the electronic intifada. It does not come from resurgent anti-Semitism, or the United Nations Human Rights Council, or the failure of so many Western elites to recognize the causes of this war, their inability to distinguish between a democratic country struggling to protect its people and a terror state using children as hostages. Hate, law-fare, decadence — they are all challenges for Israel. But Israel can endure them for now. Israel is used to it.

What Israel should not endure is the premature conclusion of hostilities. Disarming Hamas — seizing its rocket caches, collapsing its tunnels, killing and capturing its forces — is vital to Israeli security. And an artificial ceasefire imposed by outside powers, a ceasefire written in terms favorable to Hamas, would undermine the security gains Israel has made to date. President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have given no sign that they recognize this fact. Or maybe they understand it all too well: The Obama administration’s top priority is imposing a ceasefire at exactly the moment when Israel’s military success is becoming clear.

No, Israel is not murdering Palestinians.
The Hamas charter proudly proclaims that the organization exists for the single purpose of destroying Israel, claiming all territory therein for Palestinians as part of the global Islamic-supremacist movement. Manifestly, Palestinians knew this when they voted to be led by this notorious Muslim Brotherhood franchise, which has ruled Gaza for nearly a decade.

They also knew that Hamas operatives wage war through barbaric jihadist methods: intentionally targeting civilians for mass-murder attacks; refraining from wearing uniforms or otherwise distinguishing themselves as military combatants; blending in among the non-combatant population, and using civilian infrastructure — schools, hospitals, mosques, homes, etc. — as the launch-pad for rocket attacks, the storage depot for their arsenal, and the safe-haven for jihadist training and plotting.

These tactics are gross violations of the centuries-old laws and customs of war, long codified in modern international law. Yet, as Palestinians are well aware, the mass-murderers they’ve elected are not interested in abiding by the enemy-West’s rules of civilized warfare. Hamas uses its atrocious tactics to make retaliatory attacks difficult and to exploit for propaganda purposes the carnage that inevitably results from its willful deployment of children and other non-combatants as human shields.

Here, I use the term “non-combatant” advisedly. Many Palestinians are not “civilians” in the ordinary sense of that word. Though not themselves violent jihadists, such Palestinians are more than willing to provide material support to the jihad — financial contributions, helping hide terrorists and store weapons, and so on. This goes a long way toward explaining how the terrorist organization could win a popular election: As the many streets and schools in Gaza named after terrorist commanders and suicide bombers attest, a high percentage of the populace is invested in the jihad.

Furthermore, Hamas places a high priority on the training of children for jihadist operations. Youngsters, already marinating in the Jew hatred that gushes from government-controlled schools and media, attend summer camps where terrorist tactics are taught. Article Seven of the Hamas charter instructs that the end times will be marked by a final battle in which rocks and trees will help Muslims kill all remaining Jews. The story, like tales of Allah turning Jews into apes and pigs, comes straight from Islamic scripture and is a leitmotif of Palestinian media. Not surprisingly, many Palestinians are already participating in violent jihad by their teen years.

Once again, we are living through the hallucinatory, sickening
experience of seeing Israel’s morally-elevated defence against
murderous fanatics provoke a global explosion, of Israel-bashing and
naked anti-Jewish hatred, especially in demonstrations across Europe.

For sure, the current war in Gaza has engendered more sympathy than
previous such Israeli military campaigns. More and more people
understand that Israel alone is fighting a murderous Islamic
aggression which threatens themselves, too. People are less inclined
to blame Israel or believe media reports that are often not far off
inflammatory incitement against Israel and the Jewish people.

Many in the intelligentsia frame this conflict as if Israelis are the
war criminals and genocidal Hamas the victims. They uncritically
swallow the Hamas death count, even though it orders all casualties to
be described as “civilians” whereas untold numbers are armed killers.

The Hamas strategy is to maximise civilian deaths and give the widest
circulation to horrific pictures of mutilated children in order to
turn Western opinion against Israel.