Displaying the most recent of 90443 posts written by

Ruth King

DANIEL GREENFIELD: THE STATE OF THE END OF THE UNIVERSE

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/ The current round of class warfare taking place in this country can hardly be called that because it is taking place within a single class. This is no great conflict between the construct of a 1 and 99 percent, this is a civil war taking place within the 1 percent. The very name of […]

DANIEL GREENFIELD: NO COUNTRY FOR OLD INCUMBENTS

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/ A storm is not a good time to be at the wheel of a ship and a worldwide economic disaster is not a good time to be at the wheel of the ship of state. Hard times are supposed to bring great men to the fore, but instead we have some of the sorriest […]

“Existential Defeatism” Abroad and at Home:Bruce Kesler

http://maggiesfarm.anotherdotcom.com/archives/19868-Existential-Defeatism-Abroad-and-at-Home.html In the fall of 1971, in grad school, I did a 60-page analysis of the Nixon/Kissinger détente policy. I concluded it was largely a holding action meant to slow down what otherwise was believed by its primaries as the inevitable declining power of the West in the face of rising Soviet and Chinese power. […]

Jerusalem or al-Quds? The European Union’s Choice by Bat Ye’or (June 2012)

http://www.newenglishreview.org/blog_display.cfm/blog_id/42270

Originally appeared in the Journal for the Study of Antisemitism vol.3 #2, 2011

The overwhelming effect of the international campaign of defamation and delegitimization of Israel does not easily allow identifying where the blows come from, nor its original source. Yet the operations and strategiccenter of this widespread war that seeks to replace Jerusalem with al-Quds is the Organization of the Islamic Cooperation (OIC, formally called Islamic Conference), which brings together Muslim countries and those with a Muslim majority.

Created in 1969, this gigantic multinational religious organization declares that it is rooted in the Koran and Sunna. It includes a large number of subsidiary committees as well as various organizations embracing theological, legal, and political sectors. Since 2000, the OIC stated in many documents that its mission is to speak for the Ummah, the worldwide Muslim community, which also includes those Muslims who emigrated to the West. It claims to be their protector, with a particular responsibility toward those living in Europe, since they are exposed to the immoral customs and ideas of non-Muslims. The OIC constantly castigates these customs and ideas as “Islamophobia,” making every effort to have it penalized in the international courts and by European governments. Countless international networks of multiculturalism, pro-immigration, and anti-Zionism, financed by European governments and the European Union, are totally devoted to it and act as its sounding board within Western societies. Those promoting the line blaming the West and the victimization of the Palestinians feed from its sap. In Europe its lobbies spread its arguments, and benefit in the universitiesand at the international level from maximum media exposure as they operate with the tacit approval of European governments and churches, which provide them with unofficial, opaque financing.1 This Euro-OIC cooperation takes place through countless dialogue networks, partnerships, and associations that preach diversity and multiculturalism and that generally invoke the noble motives of “peace, justice and human rights.” Drawn from human rights platitudes, these ideals incorporate the principles of Jihad and dhimmitude,imperceptible for a European public unaware of them.

RAPHAEL ISRAELI’S NEW BOOK “THE OSLO IDEA- THE EUPHORIA OF FAILURE”

Were the Oslo Peace Accords fatally flawed?

The Oslo Idea traces the roots of the current campaign to delegitimize Israel. The campaign is not linked to Israeli resistance, to the absence of an acceptable settlement between Israel and the Palestinians, or to Israel’s reluctance to abandon territory. It results from a change of tactics by the Palestinian leadership. Raphael Israeli argues that these tactics have been used to exhaust, reduce, and replace Israel rather than produce a compromise.

The Oslo Idea deconstructs the immense illusion of the Oslo peace accords, which initiated the so-called “peace process.” He shows how Oslo lured a naive Israeli leadership into a trap. He shows how outside factors, bent on finding and supporting an evasive peace, have helped perpetuate the fiasco Oslo represents. He shows how Oslo’s supporters have advanced the “peace process” by coaxing and threatening Israel behind the scenes, and binding Israel alone with the Oslo commitments and their derivatives. More importantly, the author outlines and analyzes the basic and seemingly unbridgeable points of contention that remain: security, refugees, settlements, water, borders, and the status of Jerusalem itself.

Click Here To Order

About the Author
Raphael IsraeliRaphael Israeli is professor of Islamic, Chinese, and Middle Eastern history at the Hebrew University. He has authored over thirty books, including Islamikaze, The Iraq War, Muslim Minorities in Modern States, and Blood Libel and Its Derivatives, as well as over a hundred scholarly articles in the fields of Islamic radicalism, Islamic terrorism, the modern Middle East, and Islam in China and Asia.
Product Details

Blood Libel and Its Derivatives: The Scourge of Anti-Semitism by Raphael Israeli (Apr 18, 2012
Product Details

The Islamic Challenge in Europe by Raphael Israeli (Jun 16, 2008)

DANIEL GREENFIELD: THE WEEK THAT WAS PART 2

THE GIFT THAT KEEPS ON GIVING Peter Beinart has become the clown prince of the Anti-Israel left. His big blog project, Zion Square, Open Zion or I Can’t Believe It’s Not Zion, grinds along, unattended. Desperate for attention, Beinart scrambles into any issue to pick a fight with the “right-wing” Jews, who have even less […]

DANIEL GREENFIELD: THAT WEEK THAT WAS PART ONE

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/ THE DEAD BABY MEDIA If the text on that one is too small for you, it’s a CNN piece headlined, “Why the Syrian regime is killing babies.” There’s not much to add to that. The Syrian regime may be killing babies, but CNN killed journalism. With some help from the New York Times, the […]

AFTER THE JEWISH PANDERAMA….OBAMA SUSPENDS EMBASSY MOVE TO JERUSALEM: BRIDGET JOHNSON

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/06/01/friday-docu-dump-obama-again-suspends-embassy-move-to-jerusalem/
Friday Docu-Dump: Obama Again Suspends Embassy Move to Jerusalem

Just two days after hosting a Jewish American Heritage Reception at the White House, President Obama used executive authority to suspend once again a 1995 bill requiring the government to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem.

“I hereby determine that it is necessary, in order to protect the national security interests of the United States, to suspend for a period of 6 months the limitations set forth in sections 3(b) and 7(b) of the Act,” Obama said in a short memorandum to the secretary of State today.

Under the act, which was overwhelmingly approved in House and Senate, the Embassy was supposed to be relocated from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem by May 31, 1999.

Each of Obama’s suspensions, in six-month intervals, have included the same language.

And each misses a sentence that was in President George W. Bush’s suspensions of limitations under the Jerusalem Embassy Act.

“My Administration remains committed to beginning the process of moving our embassy to Jerusalem,” Bush wrote in his presidential determinations on the matter.

JANET LEVY: UNDER ALLAH WITH SHARIA FOR ALL

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2012/06/under_allah_with_sharia_for_all.html

Last week, a white African-American friend and her husband returned to Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) from a European trip and observed an American-Muslim woman from their flight navigating U.S. Immigration and Customs. The couple watched attentively as the covered woman approached the immigration officer, who avoided eye contact, glanced hastily at the woman’s ID, and waved her heedlessly through. When it was their turn to be processed, the officer carefully scrutinized their faces, studied their passport photos, and then repeated the sequence a second time.

While shopping in a Washington, D.C. suburban supermarket, an Iranian-American human rights activist, who fled Iran following the Khomeini-led revolution, spied a woman in a multi-layered hijab shopping with her playful young daughter. In the parking lot, the woman struck her meandering daughter as they passed by the stunned Iranian woman. The activist reprimanded the mother for hitting her daughter and cried out, “And please don’t force her to wear a headscarf when she grows up.” Two hours later, two police officers arrived at the Iranian woman’s home to question her after the irate Muslim mother, who had recorded the activist’s license plate number, summoned them.

Are these incidents indicative of hypersensitivity to potential accusations of Islamophobia, or do they reveal an already entrenched subservience to Muslims — dhimmitude — or both? A closer examination of both leads to the conclusion that perhaps the two concepts are one and the same. Both reflect a fear of Muslims which appears to lead to special treatment. Conceivably, it’s a matter of degree, with dhimmitude being the end result of pervasive concerns about manifesting Islamophobia.

BARRY RUBIN NAILS IT….WHAT TO SAY TO THOSE WHO STILL THINK OBAMA IS GOOD FOR ISRAEL

What to Say When You’re Handed the Obama-is-Good-for-Israel Talking Points

http://pjmedia.com/barryrubin/2012/06/01/obama-is-good-for-israel-talking-points/

Many Americans, and particularly Jews, are starting to receive mailings encouraging them to vote for or donate to the reelection campaign of President Barack Obama by arguing that he is pro-Israel. Several readers have asked me to provide them with responses. Here is a brief answer.

These emails and mailings, though designed to look as if they were written by concerned individuals, clearly draw their texts from talking points posted on the Obama reelection site. The arguments are very thin and selective but are presented as if they represent the totality of Obama policy.

The main arguments are:

1. Obama says he likes Israel.

That’s nice but so what? Of course it is good when he says nice things (by coincidence, no doubt, usually to Jewish audiences) but one can also find a lot of nasty remarks by him, his advisors, and various officials appointed by him. Every president for the last half-century has said similar nice things; not all the presidents put together during this period have said or done so many hostile things. While it is a great exaggeration to say that Obama hates Israel or wants to destroy it, I think it is fair to say that no president (including Jimmy Carter when in office) has been so cold toward Israel and basically failed to understand its nature and interests.

2. Israeli leaders say Obama is great.

Yes, that’s nice but it’s not what they say in private. I can tell you authoritatively that not a single Israeli leader in any party has a high opinion of Obama with regard to Israel and its interests. But it is their job to lavish praise on America’s president. Their task is not to defeat Obama or to critique him but to get along with him as well as possible in order to protect Israel’s long-term alliance with the United States without sacrificing any of Israel’s vital interests. They’ve done it well. The one moment the truth emerged was when Obama betrayed Israel, on the diplomatic level, by announcing, without consultation, a new policy on peace terms while Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was flying to Washington. You think Israeli leaders (and this is not ideological, not a matter of left or right) have a high regard for Obama? Read Netanyahu’s speech to the joint session of Congress.

Perhaps the equation can be summarized as follows: Obama just gave Israeli President Shimon Peres a presidential medal of freedom. He also has just helped give Israel a second Muslim Brotherhood-dominated regime next door and insists that this is a good thing.