http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/07/aiding_islamist_propaganda.html In the latest clashes between the Egyptian Army and Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, at least 51 mostly Muslim Brothers were killed near a Cairo military building, prompting Muslim Brotherhood leader Mohammed Badie to vilify — you guessed it — Jewish people. “Even the Jews have never done to Egypt what the army did,” Badie stated. […]
http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/07/fake_outrage_in_the_martinzimmerman_case.html Having lived half my life in the Middle East, I am especially sensitive to recognizing fake outrage and shaming forced upon ordinary people by the social system. Every society uses shaming to define its morality, but some societies go too far in using and abusing shaming words that make people cringe and shrink whenever […]
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/16/daddyless-daughters-promiscuity-self-mutilation_n_3600946.html?icid=maing-grid7%7Chtmlws-main-bb%7Cdl20%7Csec1_lnk3%26pLid%3D344651
THERE ARE NOW FOUR GENERATIONS OF CHILDREN BORN TO TEENAGE MOTHERS REPEATING THE MISTAKES OF THEIR GRANDMOTHERS AND TRYING TO REAR CHILDREN WITHOUT FAMILY STRUCTURE, FATHERS OR A MEANS TO SUPPORTS THEM. THE “WOMEN’S RIGHTS” GROUPIES AND BLACK LEADERS FAIL TO CONFRONT THIS PERNICIOUS TREND….RSK
For girls who grow up without fathers, it’s not unusual to act out sexually and look for validation in all the wrong places. Promiscuity is often observed as a common practice among “daddyless daughters” and is just one possible effect of not having a father figure. It’s also something Dr. Steve Perry, founder of Capital Preparatory Magnet School, has seen in his work with fatherless girls, leading him to a startling definition of promiscuity as a whole.
“Promiscuity is the main thing,” Dr. Perry says in the above video from “Oprah’s Lifeclass,” on the topic of daddyless daughters. “It’s rarely seen as self-mutilation, but that’s exactly what it is.”
Iyanla Vanzant, a prominent voice in the discussion on both daddyless daughters and fatherless sons, agrees. “Absolutely. It’s violence against the self,” she says.
Dr. Perry continues, “Often when we look at young girls who are dealing with pain, we think of self-mutilation as the cutting. That, too, but [promiscuity is] the self-mutilation of allowing someone to physically enter you.”
“Wow, that’s a big one,” Oprah says. “Self-mutilation comes in the form of promiscuity and it’s violence against the self. I never thought of it that way before.”
For Harlem Children’s Zone founder Geoffrey Canada, there’s something even more troublesome about promiscuous girls. “The thing that shocks me with these young girls is that… they don’t necessarily even like the guys that much,” he says. “I’m like, ‘Why did you do that? You don’t even like the guy?’… They don’t know.”
Ian Rutherford Plimer is an Australian geologist, professor emeritus of earth sciences at the University of Melbourne, professor of mining geology at the University of Adelaide, and the director of multiple mineral exploration and mining companies. He has published 130 scientific papers, six books and edited the Encyclopedia of Geology.
http://www.dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/2584/Princess-Huma-the-Media-and-the-Muslim-Brotherhood.aspx Princess Huma, the Media and the Muslim Brotherhood MRC’s Tim Graham picks up on the New Republic’s Isaac Chotiner’s pick-up on a particularly fawning New York Magazine gush-crush by Mark Jacobson about Huma Abedin — aka Mrs. Anthony Weiner, aka veritable Muslim Brotherhood Princess. Oops. Neither Graham nor Chotiner mention this salient aspect of […]
http://nsroundtable.org/straight-talk/message-of-the-day/
Actually, this should be Question of the Day:
The President of the US and his Attorney General were unaware of Benghazi, IRS, Fast & Furious and other FEDERAL debacles, yet feel compelled today to stick their noses in a STATE case, i.e., Florida’s George Zimmerman trial. What’s wrong with this picture?
Update To ‘Blabbermouths Inc.’
Official sources in Jerusalem say “there is no anger” toward the US administration over leaks to CNN and The New York Times regarding an “alleged Israeli attack” in Latakia, Syria, this month (see “Blabbermouths Inc.”).
Still, Israel is still trying to understand how and why it happened, i.e., why twice in the past two months American media ran reports – based on tips from US officials – that could get Israel caught up in a military conflict with Syria.
Well, Israel, one reason could be the current US administration can’t keep its mouth shut, even if its life, rather someone else’s life, depends on it. See some examples here, here, here, here, here and here.
Another reason could be politics, i.e., wag the dog-type considerations that have nothing to do with you and more to do with the motley crew in the White House today.
http://www.jewishpress.com/news/jcpa-were-the-voice-of-american-jews-many-beg-to-differ/2013/07/17/0/ The JCPA went to congress urging the U.S. to restart the “peace talks.” It also claims to be the the representative voice of the organized Jewish community. Both ideas are wrong-headed according to many who spoke with The Jewish Press. As we conclude the somber observance of Tish B’Av, the time when so […]
Leonard Garment, Key Fighter of Zionism is Racism Resolution, Dies
Leonard Garment, 1924-2013
UN Watch mourns the passing on Saturday of Leonard Garment. He was 89. Wall Street litigator, adviser to President Richard Nixon, gregarious man with a talent for jazz, and champion of human rights, Mr. Garment will be remembered for many things.
UN Watch pays special tribute to his historic role, as a U.S. delegate to the United Nations, in fighting the U.N.’s infamous Zionism is Racism resolution. Today we publish on the Internet Mr. Garment’s powerful Oct. 17, 1975 U.N. speech calling the resolution what it was: “obscene.”
http://www.unwatch.org/cms.asp?id=4319630&campaign_id=63111
In Memoriam: Leonard Garment, 1924-2013
July 15, 2013 at 1:47pm
Statement by Leonard Garment, United States Representative, to the United Nations General Assembly’s 3rd Committee (Human Rights), on equating Zionism with racism and racial discrimination, October 17, 1975.
My delegation has read the new proposal before us. It is unusually straightforward. It asks to determine “that Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination.”
As simple as this language is, we are concerned that what may not be fully understood is that this resolution asks us to commit one of the most grievous errors in the 30-year life of this organization.
This committee is preparing itself, with deliberation and foreknowledge, to perform a supreme act of deceit, to make a massive attack on the moral realities of the world.
Under the guise of a program to eliminate racism the United Nations is at the point of officially endorsing anti-semitism, one of the oldest and most virulent forms of racism known to human history. This draft explicitly encourages the racism known as anti-semitism even as it would have us believe that its words will lead to the
elimination of racism.
I choose my words carefully when I say that this is an obscene act. The United States protests this act. But protest alone is not enough. In fairness to ourselves we must also issue a warning. This resolution places the work of the United Nations in jeopardy.
The language of this resolution distorts and perverts. It changes words with precise meanings into purveyors of confusion. It destroys the moral force of the concept of racism, making it nothing more than an epithet to be flung arbitrarily at one’s adversary. It blinds us to areas of agreement and disagreement, and deprives us of the clarity of vision we desperately need to understand and resolve the differences among us. And we are here to overcome our differences, not to deepen them.
Zionism is a movement which has as its contemporary thrust the preservation of the small remnant of the Jewish people that survived the horrors of a racial holocaust. By equating Zionism with racism, this resolution discredits the good faith of our joint efforts to fight actual racism. It discredits these efforts morally and it cripples them politically.
The language of this resolution has already disrupted our efforts here to work together on the elimination of racism and it will continue to do so. Encouraging anti-semitism and group hostility, its adoption would bring to an end our ability to cooperate on eliminating racism and racial discrimination as part of the official work of the Decade.
Once again our failure to reason together has encouraged some delegations to exploit our collective shortcomings and individual vulnerabilities and impede our attempts to further the protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms.
The United Nations, throughout its 30-year history, has not lived by the force of majorities; it has not lived by the force of arms. It has lived only—I repeat, only—because it has been thought that the nations of the world, assembled together, would give voice to the most decent and humane instincts of mankind. From this thought has come the moral authority of the United Nations, and from this thought its influence upon human affairs.
Actions like this do not go unnoticed. They do not succeed without consequences, many of which while only imperfectly perceived at the time soon become an ineradicable part of a new and regrettable reality. Let us make no mistake: at risk today is the moral authority which is the United Nations’ only ultimate claim for the support of our peoples.
This risk is as reckless as it is unnecessary. But it is still avoidable.
Accordingly the United States will support resolutions A and B. We support, without reservation, the work of the United Nations to combat racism and racial discrimination. We have taken part in these vitally important activities in the past and want to be able to do so without obstruction in the future. We will vote against the third resolution. We call upon other delegations to do likewise.
On its adoption the third resolution becomes inseparably linked to the first two. Therefore, if all three are sent to Plenary the United States will vote against all three at that time.
Photo:
“At a press conference held early this evening, Daniel P. Moynihan, Permanent Representative of the United States, and Leonard Garment, Counselor to the US delegation, answered questions from correspondents concerning the statement which Mr. Garment had just made in the Third Committee on the draft resolution which would equate Zionism with racism and racial discrimination.” Seated at the table are Daniel P. Moynihan (right), and Leonard Garment. 17 October 1975. UN Photo/Michos Tzovaras.
https://www.facebook.com/notes/un-watch/in-memoriam-leonard-garment-1924-2013/10151764488204273
http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=4997&r=1 Whether Israeli wanderlust stems from some nomadic Jewish gene is unclear. One thing is certain, however: Touring and traveling — with backpacks or in five-star hotels; at home and abroad — is an Israeli passion, if not an outright obsession. Perhaps it’s a form of claustrophobia. Living in a country that can be traversed […]
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/353518/green-crusade-goes-national-devin-nunes The tried and true formula underlying Obama’s climate speech Having grown up on a farm in California’s San Joaquin Valley, I have seen firsthand how environmental extremists smashed a flourishing agricultural region. Citing the need to protect a three-inch baitfish called the Delta smelt, green activists succeeded in getting farmers’ water supplies drastically cut. […]
