RUTHFULLY YOURS

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/149968#.TsqKTYR8FF4

SO DOES THE LITTLE BATRACHIAN (TOAD) HASHEMITE WHOSE PHONY RULE IN PALESTINE IS AS VULNERABLE AS ISRAEL IN A TWO STATE DISSOLUTION…RSK

Israel Radio reported Monday morning that King Abdullah of Jordan said “Israel has an expiration date.”

Abdullah’s comments were reportedly made to the BBC last week. During the interview Abdullah said Israel’s survival was dependent on a two-state solution. Israel does not realize it needs such a solution, he added.

Abdullah added his government would increase pressure on Israel to reach a final status agreement with the Palestinian Authority.

He did not, however, provide any concrete facts to buttress his oft repeated assertion of Israel’s imminent doom.

Israel remains a regional leader in the realms of economics, military, science, and technology.

Meanwhile, former defense minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer said Israel cannot afford to cut the defense budget because Israel is likely to find itself in renewed conflict with Egypt in the long-run.

http://townhall.com/columnists/danieldoherty/2011/10/22/the_decline_of_american_history_in_public_schools/print A few weeks ago, several friends and I braved the impending rainstorm and went to the National Book Festival on the Washington Mall. The purpose of attending — besides the obvious reason of wanting to stand in the company of Hollywood actors, renowned historians and poet laureates — was to hear David McCullough speak. […]

http://yoelmeltzer.com/the-party-is-over/ As Solomon the wisest of men once said “there is nothing new under the sun”. With this in mind it should come as no surprise that the recently proposed “rightist” bills have elicited the usual responses: lots and lots of Bibi-bashing together with accusations that Israel’s democracy is under attack and that freedom of […]

http://www.americanthinker.com/2011/11/post_normal_claws_teeth_and_slime.html As the memories of the Soviet Union and Mao’s China fade, a new generation of Marxists has materialized.  Still-living members of the old generation are keeping the faith. How can anyone be a Marxist given the Marxist horrors of the 20th century?  It could be jealousy, rebelliousness, primordial archetypes, indulgent child-rearing, or a college […]

http://www.dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/1959/COIN-Colonel-Changing-Religious-Mindset-May-Not-Be-Realistic-Goal-in-A-stan.aspx It happened again.  There we were, going from one happy-dappy government account of COIN success in Sangin District at DVIDS  — With the use of counter insurgency operations, or COIN, the Marines are finding new ways to remove the insurgent networks from areas and assisting local villages in creating the peace the people of […]

http://spectator.org/archives/2011/11/21/super-dud The supercommittee was bound to fail. Naturally, the Pentagon will be the fall guy. Newt Gingrich was wrong. Last week, he said, “I am watching the ‘super committee’ in Washington with amazement. This is the dumbest idea I’ve seen in a very long lifetime.” Mr. Speaker, please admit it: the “super committee” isn’t the dumbest […]

http://www.dianawest.net/Home/tabid/36/EntryId/1958/Whats-It-All-About-Alfie.aspx After 12 visits to Afghanistan in five years, Telegraph defense correspondent Thomas Harding is trying really, really hard to be positive about NATO, and, particularly, British gains. Now, Harding writes, after decade of Western blood and treausre, Afghan farmers know how to trellis their grape vines so the fruit doesn’t moulder on the ground […]

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.10865/pub_detail.asp It would be interesting to draw some parallels between Occupy Wall Street and a phenomenon that preceded and that fed the rise of Nazism and the ascension of Nazi power in Germany. That phenomenon was the post-World War I paramilitary Free Corps (Freikorps), or Freebooters. When Germany lost the war, its army was disbanded, […]

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.10864/pub_detail.asp

The newly renovated New York Historical Society has a new movie presentation on New York history that presents a misleading picture of the 9/11 attacks.
The New York Historical Society was New York’s first museum, founded in 1804 and dedicated to fostering the history of New York and the United States. Until recently, it was an under-utilized, somewhat stodgy institution with comprehensive collections of Audobon prints, Tiffany lamps and historical paraphernalia – but little pizazz. In the shadow of its formidable neighbor, the Museum of Natural History, it stood little chance of attracting large crowds and remained a small curiosity on a prime piece of New York real estate. In the past few years, it has undergone a transformative renovation and has just re-opened with a glorious façade and two wide- windowed entrances displaying an elegant lobby on Central Park West and a colorful gift shop with a soon to be opened café on west 77th street. A full page ad in the NY Times of Nov 8th featured the museum’s replica Tiffany lamp collection and assorted gift items priced under $30 to appeal to Christmas shoppers who might otherwise never have ventured beyond those appealing doorways. It is clear that the museum has decided to jump into the second decade of the 21rst century with a new self-importance and some strategic marketing help.

When you buy your admissions ticket, you are given an automatic pass to the orientation film about New York – an approximately 20 minute summary of the historical and social evolution of our city from its beginnings as New Amsterdam to the current metropolis that is arguably the most cosmopolitan city in the world. On a panoramic, multi-paneled screen, we are quickly introduced to one of the salient focal points of the museum – the pervasive and determining role of slavery in our country’s history. We are reminded of its place in New York, both in the use of slaves to build the city itself and in the production of products created or manufactured by slaves and shipped out of New York Harbor. There is no attempt to whitewash our national guilt in this shameful human trafficking – in fact, there seems to be the opposite intent, to place this sin front and center whenever possible. In this regard, the film echoes what is seen throughout the building. At the front of the main lobby is a bust of George Washington with slave shackles attached to its back and a small statue of a Black man next to him; additional displays or references to slavery are on every floor. Eventually, the film reaches modern times and we see the shocking footage of 9/11 with its tragic rubble and chaotic frenzy. At the right side of the screen is an enlarged NY Times headline reading, “Hijacked Jets Attack New York.” There is no further elucidation of who attacked us and no attempt to give 9/11 any context whatsoever, including no mention of how many people were killed. For the classes of young school-children who are ushered in to this auditorium, this could just as easily be interpreted as an aviation accident or an isolated incident that had no repercussions beyond the destruction of some skyscrapers downtown.

The most pivotal event to happen in New York and the United States in this century was the attack on our country on 9/11 – a topic of far greater moment for young students of today than George Washington’s slaves – yet the Museum has chosen not to identify its perpetrators nor to discuss its aftermath or significance. There is no mention of Al Qaeda or Radical Jihad, no mention of who the hijackers were – not a word about the heroism of firemen, policemen and other first responders. Though an earlier photo-montage of the Triangle Shirt Fire mentioned how many victims perished and the section on the Draft Riots of the Civil War discussed its enormous ravages, 9/11 is bereft of statistics and in a museum dedicated to history – it is suspended in a vacuum, lacking both causes and consequences.

HILLARY IS STRICTLY IN THE ALBRIGHT, POWELL, CONDOLEEZA RICE MOLD (MOULD?) ….SCOLDING ISRAEL PASSES FOR STRATEGY….CALLING BASHAR ASSAD “MODERATE” NOT TOO LONG AGO, AND FOR A SELF STYLED FEMINIST SHE HAS UTTERED NOT A SINGLE WORD ABOUT ISLAMS DEGENERATE TREATMENT OF SOMEN AND CHILDREN…..OH PULEEZ!!!RSK
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203611404577041950781477944.html
The Hillary Moment President Obama can’t win by running a constructive campaign, and he won’t be able to govern if he does win a second term.

When Harry Truman and Lyndon Johnson accepted the reality that they could not effectively govern the nation if they sought re-election to the White House, both men took the moral high ground and decided against running for a new term as president. President Obama is facing a similar reality—and he must reach the same conclusion.

He should abandon his candidacy for re-election in favor of a clear alternative, one capable not only of saving the Democratic Party, but more important, of governing effectively and in a way that preserves the most important of the president’s accomplishments. He should step aside for the one candidate who would become, by acclamation, the nominee of the Democratic Party: Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Never before has there been such an obvious potential successor—one who has been a loyal and effective member of the president’s administration, who has the stature to take on the office, and who is the only leader capable of uniting the country around a bipartisan economic and foreign policy.

Certainly, Mr. Obama could still win re-election in 2012. Even with his all-time low job approval ratings (and even worse ratings on handling the economy) the president could eke out a victory in November. But the kind of campaign required for the president’s political survival would make it almost impossible for him to govern—not only during the campaign, but throughout a second term.
Put simply, it seems that the White House has concluded that if the president cannot run on his record, he will need to wage the most negative campaign in history to stand any chance. With his job approval ratings below 45% overall and below 40% on the economy, the president cannot affirmatively make the case that voters are better off now than they were four years ago. He—like everyone else—knows that they are worse off.