RUTHFULLY YOURS

So she doesn’t know how to use a fax machine. Big whoop. If there is a “smoking gun” in the 3,000 pages of Hillary Clinton e-mails released by the State Department this week, it’s not in her technological ineptitude, or her calling her hairdresser “Santa,” or her continuing to encourage Sid Blumenthal to offer bad advice, or her fetish for ice tea, or her bizarre demand that John Podesta wear socks to bed. The most revealing dispatch, the one dripping with unintended irony and status detail and sanctimony dressed as social conscience, is the e-mail Lynn Forester de Rothschild, centimillionaire, addressed to Clinton on the morning of August 26, 2009. It is 122 preening and obsequious words long. I reprint it here:

H,

I spent yesterday with Les Gelb on Nantucket. He had lots to say which might be of interest, but I thought the most important thing to tell you is to make sure are aware of the Parade magazine piece he wants to do about you. He would like to do a day in your life, when you meet with members of Congress and international figures. He wants to show the impact you are having domestically and internationally. He said he would give you a veto over content and looked me in the eye and said, ‘she will like it.’ Maybe you know this, but did not want it to fall between the cracks. Enjoy your vacation and love to all of you.

Xoxo

L

Ah Nantucket! The island redoubt of the well heeled and au courant, where the billionaires go to escape the proles of the Vineyard, where you watch John Kerry windsurf from the starboard window of your private jet. Only a matter of time before this exclusive hideaway made an appearance in the correspondence of Hillary Clinton. And how perfect that it was during a summer in Nantucket, with the breeze coming off the sound and a Waterford pitcher of Cape Codders sitting on the patio table, that Lady Lynn communed with Dr. Gelb, who has worked in the Senate, at the New York Times, at the Brookings Institution, and is now president emeritus of the Council on Foreign Relations. Difficult to find such established and credentialed personages. In Nantucket they’re everywhere.

“To learn who rules over you, find out whom you are not allowed to criticize.”
— Voltaire

If you’re wondering what Americans can do as our ruling class sets about enforcing its redefinition of marriage, start by looking back at what it did to the citizens of Indiana when their legislature raised the possibility that someone might object to joining in celebrations of homosexual marriage.

Support for homosexual unions was incidental to the insistence of the likeminded folks atop society’s commanding heights on punishing Indiana. What incurs their ire has less to do with any substantive matter than with the American people’s resistance to honoring their fantasies. These fantasies can be reversed without notice. (Obama opposed homosexual marriage until 2013.) But dissenting from any of them — whether about race, or sex, or science, or anything else — risks ostracism and disqualification from earning a living.

Indiana’s Republicans, its churches, and conservatives in general pled for the liberty to speak and act according to religious faith. They did not and do not argue the worth of the Judeo-Christian religious beliefs that the ruling class deems odious. This has proved to be self-defeating. Appeals for tolerance of all beliefs in the name of America’s traditional freedoms fail because they concede the ruling class’s assertion of its own moral-intellectual superiority, as well as its underlying assumption that good and evil, better and worse, are just other words for its own likes and dislikes.

My fellow Americans:

In a few moments the celebration will begin here in New York Harbor. It’s going to be quite a show. I was just looking over the preparations and thinking about a saying that we had back in Hollywood about never doing a scene with kids or animals because they’d steal the scene every time. So, you can rest assured I wouldn’t even think about trying to compete with a fireworks display, especially on the Fourth of July.

My remarks tonight will be brief, but it’s worth remembering that all the celebration of this day is rooted in history. It’s recorded that shortly after the Declaration of Independence was signed in Philadelphia celebrations took place throughout the land, and many of the former Colonists — they were just starting to call themselves Americans — set off cannons and marched in fife and drum parades.

What a contrast with the sober scene that had taken place a short time earlier in Independence Hall. Fifty-six men came forward to sign the parchment. It was noted at the time that they pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honors. And that was more than rhetoric; each of those men knew the penalty for high treason to the Crown. “We must all hang together,” Benjamin Franklin said, “or, assuredly, we will all hang separately.” And John Hancock, it is said, wrote his signature in large script so King George could see it without his spectacles. They were brave. They stayed brave through all the bloodshed of the coming years. Their courage created a nation built on a universal claim to human dignity, on the proposition that every man, woman, and child had a right to a future of freedom.

Again this year we celebrate July 4 as the anniversary of the day one hundred and sixty-nine years ago on which we declared our independence as a sovereign people.
In this year of 1945, we have pride in the combined might of this nation which has contributed signally to the defeat of the enemy in Europe. We have confidence that, under Providence, we soon may crush the enemy in the Pacific. We have humility for the guidance that has been given us of God in serving His will as a leader of freedom for the world.

This year, the men and women of our armed forces, and many civilians as well, are celebrating the anniversary of American Independence in other countries throughout the world. Citizens of these other lands will understand what we celebrate and why, for freedom is dear to the hearts of all men everywhere. In other lands, others will join us in honoring our declaration that all men are created equal and are endowed with certain inalienable rights–life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Here at home, on this July 4, 1945, let us honor our Nation’s creed of liberty, and the men and women of our armed forces who are carrying this creed with them throughout the world.

“The fathers of our country were young men when they wrote and signed the Declaration of Independence—it was a young man’s document and it expressed the faith and hope and ideals of youth. Ex-President Hoover, in his speech the other night, said that the Republican Party recognized that this was a time when youth would take over. Comparatively few states have made it really easy to be in the armed services, still assurance was given to both the men and the women in the services that they would be consulted and have a voice in our policies for the future. This is in line with our tradition—good, sound, old American doctrine.

People in the older nations of Europe must have laughed at the young upstarts who thought they could put into words anything which would so inspire a people that a new country would be founded and shape its policies in accord with their declaration. The amusement did them no harm, and neither will it hurt the young people of today if they speak out their convictions and write from their hearts.

Many of the things which were said in the original declaration I think the youth of today will reaffirm. It would be hard to improve on: “We hold these truths to be self-evident. That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.” These are brave words, and the men who wrote them meant them, for they ended thus; “And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.” That is what the youth of today is carrying out. God grant their elders help them.”

On the British front in the West and the North of Caen, the strategy set by general Montgomery finally starts to pay: since the English run up against the North of the city to the German defenders , the Canadians are sent to sail round Caen by the West and to capture the airport located near the locality of Carpiquet. This offensive lies within the scope of the Windsor Operation, planned by general Dempsey, which begins on July 4.

Carpiquet, located at 1 kilometer in the West of Caen, is attacked by the 8th Brigade of the 3rd Canadian Infantry Division, Royal Winnipeg Rifles Regiment, North Shore Regiment, Queen’s Own Rifles Regiment and the Canadien French Regiment la Chaudiere, which run up against the German defenders of the 12nd SS Panzer Division, largely bombarded by the allied artillery and the British Typhoon fighters.

At the end of the day, the Canadians control Carpiquet as well as Northern part of the airport and push back a great number of German counter-attacks.

In the South of Carentan in the Cotentin peninsula, the Americans continue the siege of the La Haye-du-Puits. Many units are gathered in the North of this village which have to be thrown in the battle the next day.

In the North of Saint-Lo, the 7th Corps of general Collins continues its offensive which begun the day before, and the 83rd and 90th American Infantry divisions must deal with German soldiers belonging to the 7th Army. The combat are extremely violent. The soldiers of the 90th Infantry Division reach the village of Sainteny, defended by SS Pomegranates of division Götz von Berlichingen and by elements belonging to the 6th German Parachutist Regiment. The American losses are terrifying and reach thousand of men out of fight, for a very limited Allied progression in this sector: only 200 meters.

On America’s two hundredth birthday it was Israel that showed the world the “Spirit of 1776.”

On June 27, 1976, Air France Flight 139, carrying 248 passengers and a crew of twelve, took off from Athens, heading for Paris. Soon after the 12:30 p.m. takeoff, the flight was hijacked by two Palestinians from the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine – External OperationsGerman “Revolutionary Cells (RZ)” (Wilfried Böse and Brigitte Kuhlmann), who commandeered the flight, diverting it to Benghazi, Libya. The plane left Benghazi, and at 3:15 it arrived at Entebbe Airport in Uganda.

At Entebbe, the four hijackers were joined by three “friends” supported by the pro-Palestinian forces of Uganda’s President, Idi Amin. The hijackers were led by Böse. They demanded the release of 40 Palestinians held in Israel and 13 other detainees imprisoned in Kenya, France, Switzerland, and Germany–and if these demands were not met, they threatened to begin killing hostages on July 1, 1976 that deadline was extended to July 4th.

“They (the Jews of St. Eustatius, Caribbean Antilles) cannot too soon be taken care of – they are notorious in the cause of America and France.”
Admiral Sir George Rodney commander of the British Fleet, February, 1781.

The Colonial American Jewish experience 1654 – 1770 was characterized by sharp departures from historic European anti-Semitic patterns of isolation, social, economic, physical, legislative and religious discrimination. The American Colonial world was growing, changing and evolving so rapidly it did not have time to focus on historical Jewish scapegoat-ism. The demands of the frontier and the expanding new American economic power needed the best of all of its people.

Jews in Colonial America struggled and won rights that were inconceivable and nonexistent in Europe. Jews struggled for and won the rights to equal economic opportunity, to own land, to go to higher secular education, to serve in the armed militias, to vote and in some colonies to become members of the legislative bodies. In some colonies the struggle was easy, in others it was very hard.

Americans actually began celebrating July 4th as an official national holiday only after Franklin Delano Roosevelt made it so in 1941.

In his radio address to the nation on July 4 of that year, FDR acknowledged a worldwide threat to civilization and to democracy, the American democracy included. His remarks were clearly meant to prepare Americans for entry into WWII, an idea that was not popular at that time. FDR stood on American principles and not on political convenience.

Here are some excerpts from the radio address:

“In 1776, on the Fourth day of July, the representatives of the several States in Congress assembled, declaring our independence, asserted that a decent respect for the opinion of mankind required that they should declare the reasons for their action. In this new crisis, we have a like duty.

“In 1776 we waged war in behalf of the great principle that government should derive its just powers from the consent of the governed. In other words, representation chosen in free election. In the century and a half that followed, this cause of human freedom swept across the world.

“If we deny any connection between terrorism and religion, then we are saying there is no problem in any of the mosques; that there is nothing in the religious texts that is capable of being twisted or misunderstood; that there are no religious leaders whipping up hatred of the West, no perverting of religious belief for political ends.” — Boris Johnson, Mayor of London.

“O Muslims, Islam was never for a day the religion of peace. Islam is the religion of war… Mohammed was ordered to wage war until Allah is worshipped alone… He himself left to fight and took part in dozens of battles. He never for a day grew tired of war. — Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, leader of the Islamic State.

While Western politicians claim that the Islamic State is not Islamic, millions of Muslims around the world — referring to what is approved in the Islamic texts — believe that it is.

The BBC has rejected demands by British lawmakers to stop using the term “Islamic State” when referring to the jihadist group that is carving out a self-declared Caliphate in the Middle East.

Lord Hall of Birkenhead, the BBC’s director general, said that the proposed alternative, “Daesh,” is pejorative and using it would be unfair to the Islamic State, thereby casting doubt upon the BBC’s impartiality.

Prime Minister David Cameron recently joined the growing chorus of British politicians who argue that the name “Islamic State” is offensive to Muslims and should be banned from the English vocabulary.