http://www.emetonlineblog.com/author/adam-turner/ On July 4, 2012, a 17-year-old Frenchman was the victim of a violent anti-Semitic attack on a train from Lyon to Toulouse. The teenager is a student of Ozar Hatorah school in Toulouse, where three children and a family were killed by Mohamed Merah on March 19, 2012. A source close to the investigation […]
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2012/07/05/Paul-Ryan-We-Win-We-Repeal
Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI), chair of the House Budget Committee–and potential running mate of Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney–told Breitbart News this week that the party’s leaders are “absolutely” committed to repealing Obamacare.
“It would have been nice for the Supreme Court to repeal it for us,” he said, “but it’s no harder today than it was the day before the decision. We win, we repeal. It’s just that simple.”
Ryan, speaking exclusively with Breitbart News, added that there was no disagreement about repealing Obamacare among the various Republican leaders, or with the Romney campaign. “Not in any of the meetings I have been having,” he said.
Earlier in the week, conservatives criticized apparently conciliatory postures by the Romney campaign and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY). McConnell and Romney have since confirmed their commitment to repealing Obamacare as a first priority after the election.
Asked whether Republicans had a plan ready to replace Obamacare, Ryan pointed to several plans that had already been proposed, including his own and that of Rep.Tom Price (R-GA). While there was common agreement on the need for a “patient-centered” system, Ryan said there were “differences of opinion” on the details of an alternative, particularly on the issue of whether to use tax credits to help people buy insurance.
“I don’t think those differences will be resolved between now and the election,” Ryan said. “There will be a cacophony of ideas.” He explained that Republican leaders would introduce reforms one-by-one, following repeal of Obamacare in the 113th Congress.
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/1378/criminalising_the_boycott_bullies
At the National Union of Students conference on April 25th, 2012 the Union of Jewish Students stall was defaced. Numerous stickers each bearing the slogan “Boycott Israel” were plastered over the stall. The majority of stickers were deliberately placed on the Star of David symbol, virtually eradicating it so that only the letters UJS could be read with the Star of David no longer properly visible.
How is such an incident to be approached? The fellow traveller (or, better, the useful idiot) would come up with the doped up campus theory that this is simply the manifestation of angst over geo-political concern on the micro-level.
He would probably add some sort of hoary line about this being a demonstration of “freedom of expression” and a legitimate political addition to vital debate through the use of postmodern guerrilla-esque tactics.
The apologist would argue that these are students just being silly students. He would refuse at that point to engage in a justification or discussion of the incident as he would be in full flow about issues and concerns in the Middle East and how this incident should be seen in isolation but in the “context” of much wider problems which all right-minded citizens should be concerned with.
After five minutes he would declare the conversation over without having once tried to understand how upsetting and distressing this incident would have been to Jewish students and the wider Jewish Community.
http://times247.com/
Jobless numbers: A referendum on the president
Bloomberg
Friday, July 6, 2012
News
The monthly jobs report has taken on so much political significance amid voter discontent with the economy that it amounts to a regular “referendum” on the president, said Kathleen Hall Jamieson, a professor at the University of Pennsylvania. “Once every month the public sees it as a signal of either the competence of the president or his failures.” Read more…
Read more: http://times247.com/#ixzz1zpyjsAq1
Presbyterians reject measure to divest from Israel
Associated Press
Thursday, July 5, 2012
News
By a razor-thin margin, the largest Presbyterian group in the United States rejected a proposal Thursday to divest from three companies that do business with Israel. Read more…
Read more: http://times247.com/#ixzz1zpz2dwOm
Muslim Brotherhood set to lead Libya after vote
The Telegraph
Thursday, July 5, 2012
News
While the elections for Libya’s 200-member National Congress is unlikely to grant a majority to any one faction, the Muslim Brotherhood and its Islamist allies are confident they can join their counterparts in Tunisia and Egypt at the helm of leadership. Read more…
Read more: http://times247.com/#ixzz1zpzG6spJ
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-18693709
THANKS TO YISRAEL MEDAD WHO ALSO NEVER RESTS WHEN IT COMES TO DEFENDING ISRAEL….RSK
Israeli settlements ‘jeopardising’ Palestinian prosperity
Jeremy Hobbs, Executive Director of Oxfam International: “These discriminatory policies and practices have pushed more Palestinians into poverty and are destroying the prospects for two states living side by side in security and peace”
The economic potential of Palestinian communities in the Jordan Valley area of the West Bank is being jeopardised by Israeli settlement activity, a report by the UK charity Oxfam says.
The study suggests Palestinians could generate an extra £1bn ($1.5bn) a year if restrictions to their use of land, water and movements were removed.
It says Palestinians can use only 6% of the land, while settlers control 86%.
Israel criticised the report, saying it had “a clearly political agenda”.
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=276448
The only proper thing for two-staters to do is to admit error, apologize for the vast damage they have wrought, and bow out of public life.
The problems that exist in the world today cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created them. – Albert Einstein
This insight encapsulates the predicament that two-staters have inflicted on us. The problems that have arisen from the pursuit of the policy of two-states-for-two-peoples cannot be solved by the level of thinking that created those problems – i.e. by the continued pursuit of that policy.
Two-stater bewilderment
Over the past several months, two-staters have been in a flap, displaying growing frustration and bewilderment over the refusal of reality to conform to their political prescription. Increasingly, their public statements show signs of despair and desperation, at times tinged with tones of panic. It is becoming evermore common to encounter expressions of what once would have been considered heretical musings, reflecting mounting doubts whether their formula for resolving the conflict is at all feasible.
One of the more outlandish responses to this spreading desperation was that articulated recently by Shimon Peres – who might well be dubbed “the-two-stater-in-chief” – at last month’s Presidential Conference in Jerusalem.
Addressing a plenary session titled “Learning from Mistakes on the Way to Tomorrow,” Peres seemed to advocate that we shouldn’t.
Learn from mistakes, that is.
His recipe for attaining peace – which of course has worked so splendidly up to now – was to forget the past because “we can’t change it.”
By:- Ed Ziegler – Columnist
In America and all westernized countries females have the same rights as men. It is safe to even say women tend to receive a little more respect then men. In many Islamic societies women are openly treated as the property of men, of lower value, perhaps even as slaves. Where Muslims have emigrated to other countries there are numerous instances where they maintain their custom of abusing women.
The authority allowing men to control women comes from the Hadith and the Quran. One such verse (4:34) in the Quran reads “Men are the protectors of woman, because Allah has given one more than the other. Therefore the righteous woman is devoutly obedient.”
According to the ISNA news agency, the Euro 2012 games are aired on television in football-mad Iran. However women are banned from watching with their menfolk. Bahman Kargar, Iran’s deputy police commander in charge of social affairs, said “It is an inappropriate situation when men and women watch football in theatres together,” “Men, while watching football, get excited and sometimes utter vulgar curses or tell dirty jokes,” he said. “It is not within the dignity of women to watch football with men. Women should thank the police for the ban.”
In a sermon, former Pakistani lawmaker and prominent Islamic cleric, Maulana Abdul Haleem, justified Honor killings of women who opt for secular education. He threatened to forcibly marry off Western female staff of secular non-governmental organizations who visit the district of Kohistan to work with women’s education, health, and other welfare projects. He termed formal education for women un-Islamic.
In April 2012 the Egyptian website Youm 7 reported Azza al-Jarf, a female Member of Parliament representing the Muslim Brotherhood’s “Freedom and Justice Party,” was trying to abolish laws enjoyed by Egyptian women—including preventing them from divorcing or even separating from their husbands, because “the man has the authority and stewardship.”
Another female politician, Mona Salah, declared that “women are deficient in intelligence and religion,” and that, in agreement with Sharia law, they are banned from running for the presidency.
On June 25, 2012 “The Sun” reported “I wed age FIVE in the UK “ (http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/4244979/I-married-at-the-age-of-FIVE-in-the-UK.html ). Samina, the subject of the article, has decided to speak out after Britain’s Forced Marriage Unit revealed that last year they investigated 1,468 cases of forced marriage including another girl of five.
In March 2012 Mohamed al-Omda, deputy head of the People’s Assembly’s Constitutional and Legislative Affairs Committee, has submitted a resolution draft to cancel a woman’s right to divorce (Khula) or separate from her husband.
On June 4, 2012 “The Independent” reported Charlotte Proudman, has represented Muslim women pro bono at Sharia courts across the UK. Proudman received a call from Nasrin, who pleaded for help to obtain an Islamic divorce from a forced marriage characterized by rape and physical violence. The Sharia council refused to provide her with a divorce. The Sharia council told Nasrin that her gender prevents her from unilaterally divorcing her husband. She was told to return to her husband, perform her wifely duties and maintain the abusive marriage.
http://frontpagemag.com/2012/matthew-m-hausman/annexation-wins-hands-down-over-a-two-state-solution/
Reprinted from IsraelNationalNews.com.
It has become an article of political faith in the West that the creation of an independent Palestinian state will resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict. But the two-state paradigm is based on fictional assumptions – that an ancient Palestinian people occupied the land for thousands of years until its displacement by Israel, that the conflict is driven by this displacement, and that Israel usurped ancestral Arab soil.
These false premises are used to obscure the true nature of the conflict, which is not really a dispute between Israelis and Palestinians over real estate, but rather is a war of annihilation being waged by the entire Arab-Muslim world. The establishment of an independent Palestine will not facilitate peace because the goal of this war is Israel’s demise.
A more rational resolution, and one that makes historical, legal and demographic sense, would be for Israel to annex some or all of Judea, Samaria and other areas that were part of the ancient Jewish commonwealth, which was the only sovereign nation ever to exist between the Jordan and the Mediterranean.
The western media relegates any discussion of annexation to the lunatic fringe, but there is nothing radical about the concept. Indeed, the San Remo Conference of 1920 and the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine of 1922 originally contemplated Jewish settlement throughout the traditional homeland, well before the term “Palestinian” entered common usage after 1967 as a dissimulative weapon in the propaganda war against the Jewish state.
After Transjordan was created on the bulk of Mandate lands under British control, the goal for the remainder was unrestricted Jewish habitation west of the Jordan River. This objective was recognized long before the dialogue was hijacked by the myth of Palestine, a nation that never existed, and by the canard that Judea and Samaria were historically Arab lands. No amount of subterfuge can change the fact that Palestinian nationalism is an artificial construct or that Judea and Samaria were never lawfully part of any sovereign Arab nation.
Ironically, commentators who condemn any discussion of annexation as right-wing extremism conveniently ignore the singular role of Arab-Muslim rejectionism in perpetuating the state of war with Israel. The liberal media portrays the Palestinian Authority as moderate despite a charter that plainly calls for Israel’s destruction and regardless of its reconciliation with Hamas, whose own charter screams for jihad and genocide.
The Obama administration and European Union remain deaf, dumb and blind to Palestinian prevarications and incitement, even as they chastise Israel for not offering ever more unilateral concessions. Arab provocations are ignored or rewarded, while Israel is labeled obstructionist, despite the unrequited compromises she has made in the naive search for peace with those who seek her destruction.
http://pjmedia.com/rogerkimball/
The hilarity never stops among those lovable jihadists. When they’re not trying to calculate exactly how thick a stick you may use to beat your wife (all the best authorities seem to concur that it’s about the thickness of your thumb), they’re pouring through the vegetable kingdom in order to discover cruciferous foods that they can then ban. (Interesting, is it not, that a Google search for the allowable thickness of the stick with which to beat your wife brought up 122,000,000 “hits,” so to speak; clearly it is a matter of concern among the followers of the Religion of Peace.)
Regular readers will recall that just the other day I reported in the space on the unhappy fate of the noble tomato. Slice it down the middle and, lo! there you’ll find a delectable cross shaped structure holding in the luscious fruit. But wait just a second, Mohammed, that tomato, containing in its inmost heart the shape of a cross, may be the work of the devil! So hands off.
I reported this in general terms the other day. It is one of the benefits of being at The New Criterion that we attract the very highest quality intern. One of our current crop, a student at Yale, is Nicholas Aubin, and, seeing my post, he helpfully provided this translation of the Arabic script:
It is a sin to eat the tomato, because it is Christian and it praises the Cross instead of Allah, and bears witness to the fact that Allah is one third of the Trinity. God Forbid…. Swear by Allah that you will spread the news of this, because there is a Sister from Palestine who saw the Prophet Muhammad in a vision, and he called out a warning of death to those who eat of it.
Don’t say you weren’t warned!
http://pjmedia.com/jchristianadams/2012/07/05/chris-rock-and-a-patriots-grave-in-virginia/?singlepage=true
The comedian tweeted yesterday: “Happy white peoples independence day the slaves weren’t free but I’m sure they enjoyed fireworks”
Some websites consider Richard Henry Lee a president of the United States. In fact, Lee was president of the Continental Congress and actually made the motion in Congress to declare independence from Great Britain. In other words, he was the man willing to literally stick his neck out in a body still unconvinced that open rebellion was prudent. Lee signed the Declaration of Independence and was eventually elected a senator from Virginia.
Yesterday, on July 4, I visited the odd and charming grave of Lee, tucked away in a Westmoreland County, Virginia, cornfield. It isn’t easy to find. Nevertheless, I wasn’t the only visitor. Others had left wreaths and notes of thanks. A dirt road travels through the middle of a cornfield, a field that used to comprise his family estate Burnt Fields. Suddenly the corn gives way to a small circle with the Lee family plot enclosed by a brick wall.
Lee was a Southern gentleman farmer, which to people like Chris Rock means slaveholder. Of course wiser Americans know the principles in the Declaration were so transcendent that even though it might take two centuries to fully realize, the authors of that document were revolutionaries both philosophically and politically. The human experience is now better because of those men, for blacks and whites alike.
Rock’s rancid attitude wasn’t new to me. If you’ve read my book Injustice, you know that hatred of the founders is a deep undercurrent of the racialist left. Documenting how that nasty undercurrent has become public policy is a central theme of my book:
