LIBYA’S MUSLIM BROTHERS EMERGE FROM THE SHADOWS “MODERATE ISLAM” IS HARSH SHARIA WITH LIPSTICK…..RSK http://www.jamestown.org/programs/gta/single/?tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=38699&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=26&cHash=430c52119b7f59edc746709b23d85b74 Political parties continue to multiply in Libya, but few are so well prepared and organized as the National Gathering for Freedom, Justice and Development (NGFJD), the political front of Libya’s long-repressed Muslim Brotherhood and associated Libyan Islamists. Led by Shaykh […]
http://righttruth.typepad.com/right_truth/2011/11/j-street-founder-seeks-to-redefine-pro-israel.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+typepad%2FN4OYM51%2Fright_truth+%28Right+Truth%29
J is for Jekyll and Hyde – the truth about J Street By Tabitha Korol
The Cleveland Jewish Jews recently reported that Jeremy Ben-Ami, founder of J Street, was disappointed with the unenthusiastic welcome from the rabbis of the Cleveland Board of Rabbis, and that local congregations had not extended him invitations to speak at their congregations. Although he paints his J Street as being pro-Israel, it seems that more people are beginning to judge him by his deeds, not rhetoric. While his words insist that J Street is the home for American Jewry who want peace for Israel, his actions are disturbing.
Ben-Ami ignores 14 centuries of Islam’s violent history of conquest over Jews, Christians, and other civilizations in the Middle East. Beginning with Muhammad’s expectation that Jews and Christians would accept him as a prophet, and his rejection by both in Mecca and Medinah, Muhammad’s position changed to uncompromising hostility and justification for brutality, and his adherents follow his examples to the letter.
There is nothing to suggest that there has been a revision of the Koran to dictate otherwise. If anything, a careful study of events worldwide substantiates that the Giant has awakened, and the goal is complete Islamization. So why would Ben-Ami assume that Israel could suddenly be looked upon with favor by the Muslims if Israel were to relinquish one more Israeli neighborhood to the Arabs?
Why would Ben-Ami imagine that Mahmoud Abbas’s declaration to never accept the sovereign Jewish Nation in the region was reversible? And why would Ben-Ami expect that Abbas’s vow to use a new Palestinian state to wage war against the diminished Israeli state could be overturned if Israel would only give up more land?
The answer is simple. He doesn’t assume; he doesn’t imagine, and he doesn’t expect. He knows his stance is antithetical to peace between the Arabs and the Jews, but he is a Jewish stealth jihadist. Whatever his motive, he knows his words and actions could cost the Jews their homeland.
It takes only one glance at the map to understand that a two-state solution isn’t viable, with Israel having to cede more land from her one/one-thousandth fraction of the Middle East to the Muslims who occupy the remaining 999. With each passing day, more threats and plans for Israel’s destruction emanate from the Palestinian-Arab territories. Now we hear that thousands of jihadists (perhaps a million) will march into Jerusalem and claim it for their own, and will Ben-Ami agree that Israel should give up her capital of 4,000 years “for peace” to a people who only invented themselves in 1967? Would he, in fact, delight in leading the peaceful onslaught?
History proves that Arabs have always wrought violence against the Jewish and Christian people, since their beginning. Jihad is a permanent state of war, always in existence among the Arabs, first as tribal wars – rivalry that created a permanent state of instability and unrest. Jihad shifted the focus of attention from the tribes to the outside world as religious zeal and so that they could sustain themselves economically from the booty. Elements from Judaism (although Judaism was not a missionary religion) and Christianity (that was not a redemptive or state religion at its outset) provided Islam with a dual nature, a defensive-offensive character that permanently declared war against the world. It became a politico-religious mission that conditioned the Islamic attitude as a conquering nation, with a demand for perseverance, endurance, and steadfastness, until “the vanquished become brethren of their conquerors.”
The day after Israel became a Jewish State, seven Arab armies declared war and fought the fledgling state as their permanent obligation to impose its rule upon the non-believers. When there was no housing construction, there was Arab violence; when there was housing construction, there was a Arab violence. Surrounding circumstances do not affect Islamic violence. Ben-Ami and his likeminded followers do not appear to recognize that the same imposition is occurring in America and, indeed, throughout the world.
Ben-Ami appears to be either disingenuous or oblivious to the Koran’s directives of having anything but an Islamic state. When I last challenged his statements, he was astounded that I called him a turncoat, but it happened to be the most appropriate term I could find.
Wolfe – Settlements Are the Issue Robert Wolfe New English Review August 2011http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/93385/sec_id/93385
thanks to: LOVE OF THE LAND… http://calevbenyefuneh.blogspot.com/
You often hear defenders of the Netanyahu government say, in opposition to demands for a settlement freeze, “Settlements are not the issue. The issue is the Palestinian refusal to accept the existence of Israel as a Jewish state.” The unspoken subtext behind this argument is that if only the Palestinians would accept the existence of Israel, the issue of the settlements could easily be resolved, with Israel retaining some and abandoning others. And it is certainly true that the Palestinians have never accepted the existence of Israel and have always found one pretext or another to avoid a peaceful resolution of the conflict, but even if the Palestinians would formally accept the Jewish state, it is far from clear that a compromise on the question of settlements is either possible or desirable.
In the first place, although some Palestinian negotiators have given the impression that they would accept Israeli retention of the large settlement blocs in return for the surrender of some Israeli territory elsewhere, the official Palestinian and Arab position has remained that Israel must withdraw to the 1949 armistice lines, which are invariably referred to as the “1967 borders.” When the Palestinians ask individual countries to declare their support for the unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state, the boundaries of that state are always described as the “1967 borders.” All this creates the impression that one of the main reasons why the Palestinians are not interested in a negotiated settlement is precisely because they are not willing to accept the existence of any Israeli settlements, whether big or small, beyond the 1949 armistice lines. This impression is further reinforced by the repeated statements by Abbas and other Palestinian leaders that they do not intend to accept the presence of even one single Jew within the territory of their new Palestinian state.
http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=875&r=1 Israel’s unique contribution to the US “Israel is responsible for over 600 modifications in the current generation of General Dynamics’ (GD) F-16 fighter aircrafts, providing General Dynamics a multi-billion dollar bonus in research and development, improving General Dynamic’s competitive edge in the global market, expanding U.S. employment and its export base and enhancing U.S. national security,” General […]
http://jewishworldreview.com/1111/glick112511.php3
There is a price to be paid for calling an enemy an enemy. But there is an even greater price to be paid for failing to do so.
Next month, the US’s long campaign in Iraq will come to an end with the departure of the last US forces from the country. Amazingly, the approaching withdrawal date has fomented little discussion in the US. Few have weighed in on the likely consequences of US President Barack Obama’s decision to withdraw on the US’s hard won gains in that country. After some six thousand Americans gave their lives in the struggle for Iraq and hundreds of billions of dollars were spent on the war, it is quite amazing that its conclusion is being met with disinterested yawns.
The general stupor was broken last week with The Weekly Standard’s publication of an article entitled, “Defeat in Iraq: President Obama’s decision to withdraw US troops is the mother of all disasters.” The article was written by Frederick and Kimberly Kagan and Marisa Cochrane Sullivan. The Kagans contributed to conceptualizing the successful US-counterinsurgency strategy in Iraq, popularly known as “the surge,” that former president George W. Bush implemented in 2007.
http://townhall.com/columnists/carolineglick/2011/11/25/the_scourge_of_clientitis/print For many years, observers of the US State Department on both sides of the American political spectrum have agreed that State Department officials suffer from a malady referred to as “clientitis.” Clientitis is generally defined as a state of mind in which representatives of an organization confuse their roles. Rather than advance the cause […]
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970204323904577037921612867912.html?mod=WSJ_Opinion_AboveLEFTTop ‘For all our social discord we yet remain the longest enduring society of free men governing themselves without benefit of kings or dictators.’ Any one whose labors take him into the far reaches of the country, as ours lately have done, is bound to mark how the years have made the land grow fruitful. […]
http://www.hudson-ny.org/2607/united-nations-devil-jury In Stephen Vincent Benét’s story “The Devil and Daniel Webster,” Satan called a jury of the damned composed of turncoats, traitors, and Blackbeard the Pirate, “with the stench of hell still upon them.” At the United Nations Human Rights Council, accusations against the Dutch political leader Geert Wilders will be heard by Chinese and […]
http://www.thejc.com/blogs/advis3r/shameful-in-manchester-0
There are more Jews living in Judea and Samaria than in the whole of the British Isles and yet the “Guardians” of British Jewry do not consider that a representative of the Jews of Judea and Samaria has any right to be heard at their big tent fest in Manchester next week. Maybe I should not be surprised since the good people of Manchester tried to hound out Efrat’s Chief Rabbi Rabbi Shlomo Riskin Shlita when he tried to speak there a few years back.
Yisrael Medad has written the following blog [http://myrightword.blogspot.com/2011/11/wineman-not-wise-man.html] which I reproduce with his written approval.
If you do not know, my presence at the Manchester Big Tent is prohibited as a speaker/presenter. The flap has flopped and I am out. There will be many people there as presenters, workshop facilitators, panelists and greeters.
I was personally “disinvited” although I am not sure that I ever was officially invited. I think my name was proposed at the organizing meeting last Thursday for I was told that opposition was strongly expressed by Board of Deputies head, Vivian Wineman, in that the feeling shared around the table, it would seem, was that I had insulted the gentlemen and ladies thereof.
Wineman, however, is truly the odd Jew in this situation.
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/ In the wake of the latest instability everyone has an opinion on the future of Egypt. But the future of Egypt is the past, not the distant past of its pre-Arab culture, but a repetition of the last century. In a region that has never escaped from the past, history is not a road, […]
