SHARIA ON THE WEST BANK: MARK TAPSON

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/mark-tapson/%e2%80%9cour-streets-are-islamic%e2%80%9d-sharia-on-the-west-bank/

The Palestinian newspaper Al-Hayat Al-Jadida reported last week that six people have been arrested in the West Bank and one of them sentenced to a month in prison for “desecrating the holiness of the month of Ramadan by eating in public during daytime.” “Our streets are Islamic,” said the chairman of the Palestinian sharia court, and legislation should be enacted to “severely punish” anyone who eats publicly during the Muslim holy month.

Fasting during Ramadan is one of the five pillars of Islam, and under Islamic law, eating and drinking, smoking, and sexual relations are prohibited from sunrise until sunset during that month. According to the Times of Israel, article 274 of the Palestinian penal code states that citizens who violate Ramadan by eating or smoking in public can be punished by a month in prison or a fine of 15 Jordanian dinars – about 21 U.S. dollars.

In addition to his warning about the gravity of violating Ramadan, Sheikh Ida’is, the Chairman of the Palestinian Authority Supreme Court for Sharia Law, said even non-Muslims and those who cannot fast for health reasons should be prohibited from eating in public. He explained in a Palestinian TV interview:

We have to monitor the streets and severely punish anyone who [eats] in public during Ramadan, and this is the responsibility of the security forces. Our streets are Islamic, praise Allah. Any person caught committing this sin in public during Ramadan has to be imprisoned until the end of Ramadan, as an example to others. I call upon others [non-Muslims] to be considerate of Muslims’ feelings.

Approximately 10 per cent of Palestinians in the West Bank are Christian, so presumably those Christians and other infidels are expected to respect Muslim feelings at risk of being thrown in jail or, if the sheikh gets his way, of more severe penalties. The host of that same TV program said:

If someone doesn’t fast for some reason [during Ramadan] because he follows a different religion or has health reasons, it’s his right. However, he breaks the spirit of Ramadan by eating or drinking in public or at work.

And anyone, even non-Muslims, “breaking the spirit of Ramadan” is considered to have committed a serious offense against Islam itself. The Egypt Independent reported on a fatwa delivered last week by Dar al-Ifta, a centuries-old institute within Cairo’s Al-Azhar University that issues sharia-based religious opinions, declaring that authorities take steps to ensure that no one, including non-Muslims, openly violates the fast in public places. The fatwa reads, in part, that such an act

is not a personal freedom, but a form of chaos and an attack on the sanctity of Islam. Those who openly break the fast during Ramadan commit an overt sin, which is forbidden. It also goes against public taste in a Muslim country, and is a clear violation of the sanctity of the community and respect for religious freedoms. [Emphasis added]

In Saudi Arabia too, authorities issued their standard Ramadan warning this year to all non-Muslim foreigners to “show consideration for feelings of Muslims” and “preserve the sacred Islamic rituals” by observing the fast in public until the end of the month; otherwise, a ministry statement said, Saudi authorities will cancel violators’ work contracts and expel them.

DAVID SOLWAY’S KNOCK OUT OF DERSH THE BLACKBELT PREENER, POSEUR AND PONTIFICATOR

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/frontpagemag-com/alan-dershowitz-vs-david-solway-on-obama-and-israel/print/

Et Tu, Dershowitz?
By David Solway

A year and a half ago, I posted an article on this site expressing my skepticism of Alan Dershowitz’s insights into American politics and questioning his bias in favor of President Obama and the Democratic party. I wrote there: “when it comes to the international figure who may well be the most serious threat to Israel’s well-being and perhaps even to its survival—by whom I mean not Mahmoud Ahmadinejad but Barack Obama—Dershowitz’s pen tilts to the “sinister” side of the page as he no doubt meditates his still unwritten The Case for Obama.” I pointed out that Dershowitz does not so much as notice what National Post columnist George Jonas called “the malodorous miasma of gall, social engineering zeal, anti-Semitism and Arabist agenda that emanates from the Obama administration.” Mark Steyn probably said it best: “I suppose it’s conceivable that there are a few remaining suckers out there who still believe Barack Obama is the great post-partisan, fiscally responsible, pragmatic centrist he played so beguilingly just a year ago.”

True to form, Dershowitz has just published a column in The Jerusalem Post in which he declares his support for Obama as the president who is “best for America and for the world,” and, of course, for Israel. As a trained and practiced lawyer, he proceeds to marshal the evidence for his case. But as critical readers, we must see that the evidence is, to put it mildly, unpersuasive, if not disturbingly misleading.

Dershowitz argues that Obama is “a pragmatic, centrist liberal who has managed—with some necessary compromises—to bring us the first important healthcare legislation in recent history, appointed excellent justices to the Supreme Court, supported women’s rights, eliminated the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy, maintained the wall of separation between church and state [and] kept up an effective war against terrorism.”

Well, let’s see. A “pragmatic, centrist liberal” is, by all reasonable counts, precisely what Obama is not. His record and his antecedents show beyond the slightest doubt that he is a far-left ideologue who wishes to “fundamentally transform” America into a redistributionist welfare state on the failing European model. The “excellent judges” he has appointed to the Supreme Court include Sonia Sotomayer (of “wise Latina” fame) and Elena Kagan, who did not recuse herself when voting for the Affordable Care Act, though she had “participated as ‘counselor or advisor’ of the law when she was solicitor general, and…is clearly not impartial about the fate of ObamaCare.” Obama’s support of women’s rights is arguable and many disapprove of the “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell” policy, but we can leave these issues to debate and opinion. As for the separation of Church and State, the Catholic Church would surely not agree following the contraception flap. His “effective war against terrorism” consists of scrubbing terms like “Islam” and “jihad” from U.S. security documents and inviting the Muslim Brotherhood, in the person of Egyptian president Mohamed Morsi, to the White House. (The hunting down of Osama bin Laden was already in progress during the tenure of the previous administration.)

“President Obama has kept his promises,” Dershowitz avers. But Obama’s broken promises are legion, whether it is his promise to close Guantanamo, to reverse President Bush’s anti-terrorist policies, to establish “an unprecedented level of openness in Government,” to constrain the lobbying industry, to create five million more energy jobs and keep unemployment under 8 percent, to bring down health care premiums, to halve the deficit by the end of his first term (the 2013 budget envisions a deficit of more than $1 trillion)—the list is nigh endless.

BRUCE THORNTON: WILL DEMOCRACY’S CRITICS BE PROVEN RIGHT IN NOVEMBER?

http://frontpagemag.com/2012/bruce-thornton/will-democracy%e2%80%99s-critics-be-proven-right-this-november/ This year’s presidential election will be about something more than this or that policy or political philosophy. The larger issue at stake is the viability of democracy itself. An Obama win will be a validation of every anti-democracy critic going back to ancient Greece. We are so used to using the word “democracy” as […]

MARK STEYN: OLYMPIC SPECTACLE

Olympic Spectacle The world’s most disruptive sporting event comes to London. http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/313105/olympic-spectacle-mark-steyn I scrammed out of London a few days before the Olympics began, but after getting an earful on what the locals make of it. On the whole, the residents of that great city would rather the honor of hosting the world’s most disruptive […]

YUVAL LEVIN: OBAMA’S HOLLOW REPUBLIC

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/312771/hollow-republic-yuval-levin President Obama must surely wish he could undo the campaign speech he delivered in Roanoke, Va., on July 13. That was where he offered up the view that “if you’ve got a business, you didn’t build that, somebody else made that happen.” It is a line that could haunt him right to November, revealing […]

WILL IRAN TAKE OVER IRAQ? by N. M. GUARIGLIA

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/will-iran-take-over-iraq Although the war in Iraq officially concluded on December 15, 2001, in truth, the war ended some time before that. Despite all odds, the U.S. military subdued the years-long insurgency and defeated the Ba’athists, al-Qaeda, the militias, and the Iranian-backed terrorists trying to destroy a free country in its infancy. The most amazing fact […]

APPROACHING AMERICA’S MORAL CROSSROADS: by ALAN CARUBA

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/approaching-americas-moral-crossroads Who said this and when? “…it would be peculiarly improper to omit in this first official act my fervent supplications to that Almighty Being who rules over the universe, who presides in the councils of nations, and whose providential aids can supply every human defect, that His benediction may consecrate to the liberties and […]

DON’T ASK, DON’T TELL FOR MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD: LT. COLONEL JAMES G. ZUMWALT, USMC (RET)

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/dont-ask-dont-tell-for-muslim-brotherhood “Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of man?” So began the introduction to one of the most popular radio dramas of the early 20th century. Later featured as a masked film hero dressed in black, “The Shadow” used his villainous traits to fight evil. The plot to each story played out to […]

RICHARD LANDES: ROMNEY MERELY SAID WHAT ARABS THEMSELVES HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10000872396390443866404577566770697427382.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop

Richard Landes: Romney Is Right on Culture and the Wealth of Nations
A 2002 United Nations report written by Arab intellectuals acknowledges the problems the Republican candidate pointed out.

Mitt Romney caused a firestorm last week in Jerusalem by commenting on the cultural dimensions of Israeli economic growth. Palestinian spokesman Saeb Erekat, correctly seeing an implied criticism of Palestinian culture, called Mr. Romney a “racist” and complained that Palestinian economic woes are really caused by the Israeli occupation. Analysts said Mr. Erekat’s reaction was a sign that Mr. Romney has disqualified himself as a broker for peace. The episode reveals as much about the dynamics of the Middle East conflict as about presidential politics.

In making his brief case, Mr. Romney cited two books: “Guns, Germs and Steel,” by geographer Jared Diamond, and “The Wealth and Poverty of Nations,” by economist David Landes (my father). As in other fields of social “science,” economists argue about whether development derives from cultural advantages or from natural ones such as resistance to disease and access to primary resources. Prof. Diamond, whose book focuses on societies’ natural advantages, last week wrote an op-ed in the New York Times emphasizing both culture and nature and trying to draw Prof. Landes in with him.

But Israel (which neither book examined) and the Arab world (which only the Landes book examined) illustrate the primacy of culture as both necessary and sufficient for economic development. Israel, a country with no natural resources, an economic backwater even in the Ottoman Empire, rose to the top of the developed world in a century on culture alone. The Arab nations, on the other hand, illustrate the necessity of a certain kind of culture: Even those with vast petrodollars still have among the least productive economies in the world.

DANIEL GREENFIELD: FROM RUSSIA WITH GUILE?

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/

After terrorizing the West for two generations, no one pays much attention to the Great Bear anymore. The latest unrest in Russia has merited a fraction of the headlines about the Arab Spring, Palestine or upset Muslims in Burma. The old journalistic guidelines used to be, “If it bleeds, it leads.” The new journalistic guidelines are, “If it’s not about Muslims, we don’t care.”

But the events in Russia are highly educational, not in their absurd specifics involving a female punk band and overweight thugs beating up people in their street, but in the glorious spectacle of what happens when a government mafia starts running out of money and the economy that it has been feeding off can no longer nurture its numberless ranks of official and semi-official parasites.

Most countries have their mafias, and by that I don’t mean the jolly grunters who run numbers out of basements or break legs over interest rates that even banks can’t charge. The government mafia is a web of mutual connections for mutual profit.

Say Ivan wants a construction contract. So he talks to Alexei, who knows someone in politics who can get him that contract in exchange for a bribe. That someone is Boris, who owes his position in a ministry of something or other to his friendship with Anatoly back when they were both junior KGB thugs whose fathers were also in the same business. Ivan gives some money to Alexei, who takes a percentage and passes along the rest to Boris, who takes a percentage and passes it to Anatoly who ushers in Ivan to see Vladimir, who is the undersecretary to the deputy minister of construction, who then demands a bribe that is twice as large as the cost of construction, but that’s okay because the bid is four times the cost of construction.

This is obviously a very inefficient system. In the United States, Ivan would be named John, there would be only half as many people to see, and the bribe would be known as a campaign contribution. And this is also why the United States has fewer bribes and higher taxes, because we don’t believe that government contracts should be handed out to unqualified people on the basis of bribes. We believe they should be handed out to unqualified people on the basis of race, sexual orientation or imaginary environmental crisis.

Our versions of Boris, Anatoly and Vladimir still have to make money. Our version of Ivan runs an NGO dedicated to building clean energy windmills in Ghana or underwater electric cars to feed the hungry in Oslo. Boris and Anatoly didn’t meet while badgering a frightened poet in a Lubyanka basement, but passing a joint at an anti-war rally that the KGB boys in the Lubyanka probably helped organize. Their fathers were both professors of radical history at Yale and have written well-regarded books on how the Founding Fathers only started the American Revolution to protect their monopoly on cotton. They scored the dough for the Ghana underwater hungry windmills by adding a 4 percent tax on gasoline, cough drops or tanning salons. It doesn’t matter because so long as the money exists, the mafia can keep stealing it one way or another.