Displaying the most recent of 91051 posts written by

Ruth King

YEDIDYA ATLAS:ERIC CANTOR IS SPEAKING THE TRUTH AND NO AMOUNT OF ARAB PROTEST CAN CHANGE IT

Eric Cantor is merely speaking the truth something no amount of Arab protest can change
Dr. Ahmed Tibi, MD, an Arab member of the Israeli Knesset, and former advisor to PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat, recently wrote an op-ed in the Richmond Times-Dispatch attacking US House Majority Leader Eric Cantor for having declared that “If the Palestinians want to live in peace in a state of their own, they must demonstrate that they are worthy of a state.” In and of itself hardly a remarkable position considering the history of organized Palestinian Arab terrorism that has gone on unabated since the founding of the PLO in 1964 and before. Yet Dr. Tibi then infers that Mr. Cantor therefore “holds all Palestinians responsible for the violence of a few.”
This interesting assumption made by Dr. Tibi is that Palestinian Arab violence and support of said violence is the handiwork of a “few”, a small minority. To determine whether this is true, two basic issues have to be clarified. One, whether or not said violence is the result of only “a few” who implicitly carry out their violent work against the wishes of the Palestinian Arab leadership and without popular support from the Palestinian Arab population. And two, what is considered to be moderate and non-violent means in the view of Dr. Tibi.

LESLIE SACKS: POLITICAL CORRECTNESS-OUR TITANIC

Political Correctness – Our TitanicLeslie Sacks

Pandering to P.C. demands will sink us, will weaken our foundations and our unique culture; a culture of tolerance yet of logic, of equality but also of independence.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.11138/pub_detail.asp

Pandering will sink us, will weaken our foundations and our unique culture; a culture of tolerance yet of logic, of equality but also of independence.

It is our behavior (and not our thoughts) that should be the real issue. How we treat each other, whether we abuse or respect each other, whether we acknowledge all people with equality and fairness. That is the American way.

It is not the American way to become more like Saudi Arabia or Iran. There they have public dress codes, Shariah law and other niceties like stonings, beheadings and honor killings. Ours is a modern society based on humanistic behavior, on accommodating the individual – not serving the Sheik, the Imam, the police or local thugs.

Here we protect and nurture the individual, not subvert our freedoms in the service of the “greater good” as defined by Allah’s unblemished representatives here on earth, or by a dictator’s goons, as the case may be.

When the Irish, the Jews, the Indians and the Hindus applied for jobs, they chose their workplace and accommodated to the rules accordingly. When was the last time a Hasidic Jew with full length black coat and fur hat demonstrated outside Miami City Hall for the right to wear their preferred dress in any job of their choosing? When did Hindus demand new cafeterias to accommodate their dietary needs? When did Mormons require separate prayer facilities or Buddhists their temples? What of vegetarians, anorexics, Rastafarians?

A WARNING FROM RUSSIA: CYNTHIA E. AYERS

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.11136/pub_detail.asp
A Warning from Russia

Cynthia E. Ayers

An EMP or electromagnetic pulse attack, a high altitude nuclear blast wiping out electronics across a massive area may be, according to a Russian source, “right around the corner.”

On the 15th of December, the English version of the Russian newspaper Pravda published a stunningly accurate portrayal of the results of an electromagnetic pulse (EMP) attack and included a frightening warning: “Does that [an EMP attack] seem like science fiction? It’s not. In fact, it may be right around the corner.”

The article proceeded to explain who the target would most likely be:

“. . . it’s almost a given that some power or group might get put out with the behavior of the U.S.A. and decide to go this route. . . . If Americans knew about this very real possibility, they might utterly panic. It is up to them to make their government stop angering others, tell the government to mind their own business, take care of the home front and stop interfering all over the globe. . . . Perhaps they ought to close the bases, dismantle NATO and bring the troops home where they belong before they have nothing to come home to and no way to get there.”

HOLDER’S RACIAL POLITICS MAY BACKFIRE

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203391104577125532355717866.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_LEADTop
The AG’s attack on voter ID laws may backfire legally and politically.

Eric Holder must be amazed that President Obama was elected and he could become Attorney General. That’s a fair inference after the Attorney General last Friday blocked South Carolina’s voter ID law on grounds that it would hurt minorities. What a political abuse of law.

In a letter to South Carolina’s government, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Thomas Perez called the state law—which would require voters to present one of five forms of photo ID at the polls—a violation of Section 5 of the 1965 Voting Rights Act. Overall, he noted, 8.4% of the state’s registered white voters lack photo ID, compared to 10% of nonwhite voters.

This is the yawning chasm the Justice Department is now using to justify the unprecedented federal intrusion into state election law, and the first denial of a “pre-clearance” Voting Rights request since 1994.

The 1965 Voting Rights Act was created to combat the systematic disenfranchisement of minorities, especially in Southern states with a history of discrimination. But the Justice position is a lead zeppelin, contradicting both the Supreme Court and the Department’s own precedent. In 2005, Justice approved a Georgia law with the same provisions and protections of the one Mr. Holder nixed for South Carolina. In 2008, the Supreme Court ruled 6-3 in Crawford v. Marion County Election Board that an Indiana law requiring photo ID did not present an undue burden on voters…..READ THE REST AT THE SITE

SHOWDOWN AT THE EURO-CORRAL

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203391104577124480046463576.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories
Deepening Crisis Over Euro Pits Leader Against Leader
By MARCUS WALKER in Berlin, CHARLES FORELLE in Brussels and STACY MEICHTRY in Rome

BERLIN—On a chilly October evening in her austere chancellery, Angela Merkel placed a confidential call to Rome to help save the euro.

Two years after the European debt crisis erupted in little Greece, the unthinkable had happened: Investors were fleeing the government debt of Italy—one of the world’s biggest economies. If the selloff couldn’t be stopped, Italy would go down, taking with it Europe’s shared currency.

Her phone call that night to the 16th-century Quirinale Palace, once a residence of popes, now home to Italy’s octogenarian head of state, President Giorgio Napolitano, trod on delicate ground for a German chancellor. Europe’s leaders have an unwritten rule not to intervene in one another’s domestic politics. But Ms. Merkel was gently prodding Italy to change its prime minister, if the incumbent—Silvio Berlusconi—couldn’t change Italy.
Details of Ms. Merkel’s diplomatic channel to Rome haven’t previously been reported.

Her impatience shows the extent to which Italy’s woes undid Europe’s strategy to fight the crisis. Until then, Europe had followed a simple formula to preserve the euro: The financially strong would save the weak. But Italy, with nearly €2 trillion, or about $2.6 trillion, in national debt, was simply too big to save.

This Wall Street Journal reconstruction, based on interviews with more than two dozen policy makers, including many leading actors, as well as examinations of key documents, reveals how Germany responded to the dangers in Italy by imposing its power on a divided euro zone. Ms. Merkel, widely criticized for not dealing forcefully with the crisis in its early phase, was at the center of the action, grappling with personal tensions and Byzantine politics among the 17 euro nations.

ROBERT SPENCER: FIVE EASY STEPS TO END ISLAMOPHOBIA

http://frontpagemag.com/2011/12/30/five-easy-steps-to-end-islamophobia/

Five Easy Steps to End ‘Islamophobia’ Posted By Robert Spencer

No comedy show, no matter how clever or winning, is going to eradicate the suspicion that many Americans have of Muslims. This is because Americans are concerned about Islam not because of the work of greasy Islamophobes, but because of Naser Abdo, the would-be second Fort Hood jihad mass murderer; and Khalid Aldawsari, the would-be jihad mass murderer in Lubbock, Texas; and Muhammad Hussain, the would-be jihad bomber in Baltimore; and Mohamed Mohamud, the would-be jihad bomber in Portland; and Faisal Shahzad, the would-be Times Square jihad mass-murderer; and Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, the Arkansas military recruiting station jihad murderer; and Naveed Haq, the jihad mass murderer at the Jewish Community Center in Seattle; and Mohammed Reza Taheri-Azar, the would-be jihad mass murderer in Chapel Hill, North Carolina; Ahmed Ferhani and Mohamed Mamdouh, who hatched a jihad plot to blow up a Manhattan synagogue; and Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the would-be Christmas airplane jihad bomber; and many others like them who have plotted and/or committed mass murder in the name of Islam and motivated by its texts and teachings — all in the U.S. in the last couple of years.

The fact that there are other Muslims not fighting jihad is just great, but it doesn’t mean that the jihad isn’t happening. This comedy show simply doesn’t address the problem of jihad terrorism and Islamic supremacism.

P. DAVID HORNIK: ISRAEL STANDS UP TO GENDER EXTREMISTS BUT THE NYTIMES (AND HILLARY CLINTON) IGNORE THE STORY

Israel Stands Up to Gender Extremists Posted By P. David Hornik URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2011/12/30/israel-stands-up-to-gender-extremists/ “Man spits at eight-year-old girl.” Add “in Israel” to that and you have another international media circus. No doubt, the phenomenon—ultra-Orthodox Jewish men harassing girls on their way to school for supposedly “immodest” dress—is appalling enough. And well over 99 […]

RYAN MAURO: THE NEW YORK TIMES RIDICULES GINGRICH ON SHARIA….SEE NOTE PLEASE

http://frontpagemag.com/2011/12/30/new-york-times-ridicules-gingrich-on-sharia/

New York Times Ridicules Gingrich on ShariaPosted By Ryan Mauro

THE CONSERVATIVE MAINSTREAM MEDIA….FOX AND FOOLS IS SO IN THE TANK FOR ROMNEY…IT IS DISGUSTING….RSK

On December 21, the New York Times published an article by reporter Scott Shane titled “In Islamic Law, Gingrich Sees Mortal Threat to U.S.” The article tried to subtlety discredit Gingrich and others talking about the Islamist agenda in the U.S., twice stating that “many scholars” feel the threat is being overblown and it is “roundly rejected” by most experts.

The Times opens up with some of Gingrich’s quotes, such as when he called Sharia a “mortal threat.”

“Stealth jihadis use political, cultural, societal, religious, intellectual tools; violent jihadis use violence. But in fact they’re both engaged in jihad, and they’re both seeking to impose the same end state, which is to replace Western civilization with a radical imposition of Shariah,” Gingrich says.

Gingrich’s warning is then characterized as a “much-disputed thesis in vogue with some conservative thinkers but roundly rejected by many American Muslims, scholars of Islam and counterterrorism officials.” Those warning about the Islamist threat within the U.S. are thus depicted as being part of a political fringe without credibility.

DANIEL GREENFIELD: THE CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS’ JIHAD AGAINST THE FREE WORLD

The Center for American Progress’ Jihad Against the Free World Posted By Daniel Greenfield
URL to article: http://frontpagemag.com/2011/12/30/the-center-for-american-progress%e2%80%99-jihad-against-the-free-world/

The colors of the American flag are red, white and blue, but the colors of the Center for American Progress are red, white and green. Red for the left and green for Islam.

The Center for American Progress is not just any organization. Headed up by John Podesta, a co-chairman of Obama’s transition team and backed by a 38 million dollar annual budget, it is George Soros’ most ambitious attempt to turn his Shadow Party into a shadow government. CAP is the organization with the single greatest influence on the Obama White House and its foreign and domestic policy.

CAP is more than just another think tank; it’s a lever for shifting the Democratic Party further to the left, bought and paid for by George Soros and a roster of secret donors whose names are not made public by the secretive and powerful organization. Those who buy influence with it also get anonymity as part of the package.

But the Center is more than a rogue billionaire’s brand of progressivism turned into talking-point groupthink by Washington insiders. It is a link between the American left and the Muslim right, articulating the Islamist agenda as a vehicle for the foreign policy of the post-American left. It’s where Ali Gharib can run pieces whitewashing the Muslim Brotherhood while Zaid Jiliani attempts to justify the ambassador to Belgium’s comments denying the existence of Muslim anti-Semitism.

A CAP report co-authored by Wajahat Ali, a defender of Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists, and a board member of the Muslim Students Association, a Muslim Brotherhood front group, claimed that counterterrorism analysts were misrepresenting the threat of Sharia law and that Sharia was “overwhelmingly concerned with personal religious observance such as prayer and fasting, and not with national laws.” That particular revelation might come as a shock to raped women in Pakistan and gay men in Iran.

SO…WHAT FINALLY CAME OF THE “SHELLACKING” OF 2010? FRANK SALVATO

So, What Actually Came of the ‘Shellacking’ of 2010? By Frank Salvato
BasicsProject.org

We were so full of “hope” for “change.” No, I am not talking about the election of Barack Obama, one of the most effective Progressive presidents in American history. I am speaking of the excitement felt within the Conservative, Libertarian and Center Right and Left political communities after the 2010 election delivered the House and a non-filibuster proof Senate to the American people. Finally, most of us thought, some balance in the federal government. Maybe, just maybe, the Progressives and Liberal Democrats in federal government would be forced to the ingenuous table of true and honest compromise; compromise fitting of a truly free people. But, as we look back over the year, what did we really get for all that so-called “compromise?”