Another Tack: Flat Earth – 20 years on Time was when sensible folks truly believed that if you venture too far, you’ll fall off Earth’s jagged edge into the endless void below. That was the majority view, the widely-accepted and fundamentally unquestioned conventional wisdom. By today, though, one would assume that nobody swallows that any more, […]
http://www.nysun.com/foreign/israel-awaits-an-apology-from-architects/88410/
Twenty years ago this week, Israel committed one of the greatest strategic blunders in its modern history, one that is still casting a long and painful shadow over the entire Middle East.
Ignoring military intelligence, moral principles, and basic common sense, Prime Minister Rabin signed the Oslo Accords with Palestine Liberation Organization’s terrorist-in-chief, Yasser Arafat, on the White House lawn on September 13, 1993, setting the stage for unprecedented bloodshed and unparalleled instability.
Nonetheless, despite the passage of two decades, the architects of Oslo stubbornly refuse to acknowledge the error of their ways and continue to ignore the damage they have wrought. It is time for them to do so.
Under Oslo, Israel allowed Arafat and his cohorts into Gaza and gave them weapons as well as territory to control. In return, we received the worst wave of violence and terror in the nation’s history.
Instead of harmony, Oslo brought horror, resulting in an immediate, predictable, and painfully prolonged wave of stabbings, shootings, and suicide bombings.
Here is a simple fact which speaks volumes: in the five years after Oslo, more Israelis were killed by Palestinian terrorists than in the 15 years prior to the signing of the agreement. A total of 279 men, women and children were murdered in the half-decade following the accords, while 254 were killed in the previous 15 years.
http://www.carolineglick.com/e/2013/09/israels-twenty-year-nightmare.php?utm_source=MadMimi&utm_medium=email&utm_content=Israel%27s+twenty+year+nightmare&utm_campaign=20130913_m117212046_Israel%27s+twenty+year+nightmare&utm_term=Continue+reading___
Twenty years ago today, Israel’s so-called peace process with the PLO was officially ushered in at the White House Rose Garden.
A year or so later, when the death toll of Israeli victims of the massive terror offensive that the PLO organized shortly afterwards reached what then seemed unbearable heights, a popular call went out to “Put the Oslo Criminals on Trial.”
Needless to say, with Shimon Peres, the architect and godfather of the so-called peace process now serving as the President of Israel, nothing ever came of the call.
The demand for an accounting was not unprecedented. There was no reason, on the face of things for those who made it to be perceived as anything other than reasonably enraged, and responsible citizens insisting that those responsible for the largest, most destructive strategic error Israel has ever made pay a personal price for their actions.
Twenty years before that ceremony at the White House, Israel suffered the worst military defeat in its history.
Israel did win the Yom Kippur War, in the end. It was a sloppy, painful, tragic and costly win. Victory owed to tactical errors by the Syrians; to the unbelievable heroism, and dogged determination exhibited by the IDF’s junior officer corps and line soldiers, particularly on the Golan Heights; and to the emergency resupply of war materiel Israel received midway through the war from the United States.
Just as was the case twenty years later, when Israelis (having been introduced to the suicide bomber), decided their leaders had betrayed them; following the Yom Kippur War, the demobilized soldiers, the bereaved families and the general public demanded an accounting from the senior political leaders and the IDF brass that had led them down the vicious, deadly garden path.
WASHINGTON, DC (September 12, 2013) — The so-called “chilling effect” immigration enforcement is alleged to have on police trust in immigrant communities is a myth, concludes a new publication from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) presenting a collection of government and academic research.
The Center finds that many law enforcement leaders believe that robust immigration law enforcement produces significant criminal justice cost savings as well as public safety benefits. Many of these leaders advocate for local officers to assist and participate in immigration enforcement, and welcome U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as a public safety partner agency. A diverse group of local law enforcement leaders has endorsed the SAFE Act (H.R. 2278), which would mandate better cooperation between ICE and local police agencies and increase and expedite the removal of criminal aliens.
“Career law enforcement professionals understand that the best way to build trust in the communities that they protect is to enforce all laws in a predictable, fair and non-discriminatory manner, and not to pick and choose based on the demands of grievance groups,” says Jessica Vaughan, Director of Policy Studies at CIS. “And given the irrefutable connection between illegal immigration and certain crime problems, it is no wonder that local officers feel compelled to participate in immigration enforcement. In my experience, most local officers want to help ICE, not obstruct them from doing their job. ”
View the entire publication at: http://cis.org/Immigration-Policy-Fact-Sheets/immigration-enforcement-and-community-policing
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10304285/Nick-Clegg-backs-teachers-who-want-pupils-to-remove-veils-in-class.html By Peter Dominiczak, Political Correspondent The Deputy Prime Minister said that he can “totally understand” why people say that children should not to be allowed to wear full-face veils during lessons. Mr Clegg said that teachers “want to be able to make contact” with their pupils. His comments came after he said that he […]
http://www.thecollegefix.com/post/14565/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+thecollegefixfeed+%28The+College+Fix%29&utm_content=FeedBurner
By Nathan Harden
Richard Dawkins, an Oxford University professor and author of a bestselling book defending atheism entitled, “The God Delusion,” has provoked outrage with his comments on child sex abuse:
Salon.com reports:
In a recent interview with the Times magazine, Richard Dawkins attempted to defend what he called “mild pedophilia,” which, he says, he personally experienced as a young child and does not believe causes “lasting harm.”
Dawkins went on to say that one of his former school masters “pulled me on his knee and put his hand inside my shorts,” and that to condemn this “mild touching up” as sexual abuse today would somehow be unfair.
“I am very conscious that you can’t condemn people of an earlier era by the standards of ours. Just as we don’t look back at the 18th and 19th centuries and condemn people for racism in the same way as we would condemn a modern person for racism, I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild pedophilia, and can’t find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today,” he said.
Plus, he added, though his other classmates also experienced abuse at the hands of this teacher, “I don’t think he did any of us lasting harm.”
Read the full story here. [1]
I find these comments as sad as they are infuriating. But they are the logical extension of Dawkins’s belief system. In a world without God, there is no such thing as an absolute right and wrong. In this sense, though we may rightly be shocked by his remarks, we shouldn’t be surprised by them. This is what moral relativism means–plain and simple. At least we can say this for Mr. Dawkins–he is being logically consistent.
Normally, Dawkins’s brand of cocky, biting atheism angers me. But today, as I read his words, I can’t help feeling sorry for the man. His life no longer has moral meaning, even to himself.
It’s sad.
Nathan Harden is editor of The College Fix and author of the book SEX & GOD AT YALE: Porn, Political Correctness, and a Good Education Gone Bad [2].
http://pjmedia.com/blog/is-america-ready-for-obamacare/?print=1 This is the second in a series of articles on the rollout of Obamacare and how the law will change our health care system. Each week, we will publish two articles: one on the changes in medicine and medical care, and one on changes in the insurance industry. We hope this series of articles […]
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/mark-tapson/the-muslims-are-coming/print/ This Friday marks the Chicago, Seattle, and Los Angeles premiere of a documentary called The Muslims Are Coming!, which features a band of Muslim comedians touring middle America “to explore the issue of Islamophobia!” The exclamation mark is there to let you know that the show is going to be great fun! And all […]
http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/the-violence-we-dont-see/
Lashawn Marten was playing chess when he announced, “I hate white people.” Then he began hitting random white people who were walking by. By the time he was done, several were wounded and one lay dead.
I have walked by countless times and seen the chess players sitting near the overhang of the Union Square subway entrance; mostly black men daring white passerby into a money game. At the fountain to the left, Moonies squat on a blanket and sing their sonorous chants. To the right, the remnants of Occupy Wall Street set up tables to collect money and dispense buttons.
In warmer weather, break dancers perform on the stairs and office workers sit beneath the statue of George Washington expelling the British and eat lunch. Elderly Puerto Rican men push makeshift wooden carts piled with unlabeled bottles of homebrewed soda pop.
Jeffrey Babbitt, the man Lashawn beat to death, looks familiar to me because he has that type of New York face that you pass on the street. You see it worn by plumbers and high school teachers. It’s the badge of the vanishing New York City working class.
No conclusions will be drawn from the murder. Lashawn Marten was obviously mentally ill. And if his mental illness took the form of violent racism toward white people, that is an incidental fact. The murder is an incident. The details are incidental. No conclusions will be drawn from what happened between the chess tables.
Incidents take place all around us, but patterns have to be articulated. The incident is insignificant. It’s the pattern that counts.
http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/diana-west-swimming-against-the-mainstream?f=puball
“The most obvious, important realities are often the ones that are hardest to see and talk about.”
That was the wisdom offered by award-winning novelist David Foster Wallace to the Kenyon College class of 2005, after he opened his memorable commencement address with this “didactic little parable-ish story”:
There are these two young fish swimming along and they happen to meet an older fish swimming the other way, who nods at them and says “Morning, boys. How’s the water?” And the two young fish swim on for a bit, and then eventually one of them looks over at the other and goes “What the hell is water?”
The graduates were then challenged by Wallace to recognize that their education did not necessarily teach them “how to think,” but rather to realize their ability to determine what to think about. The rest of his speech focused on that determination and the resulting differences in interpretation based on one’s self-awareness and worldview.
Wallace’s wise “This is Water” words came to mind as I watched the drama begin to unfold around conservative author Diana West’s new book, American Betrayal: The Secret Assault on Our Nation’s Character. For if “water” could represent the generally-accepted reality about whatever it is a person might determine to think deeply about and then challenge — then not only has West, like the “older fish” in Wallace’s story, been “swimming the other way.” She also asked, “How’s the water?” and proceeded to write a book about her discoveries after she dared peer closely into the water’s depths.
West’s book seems to have stirred major ripples in the taken-for-granted narrative; ripples that have splashed the toes of the mainstream and its recognized experts, both liberal and conservative.
From the left, the negative response was expected. From the right, the reaction from some influential sources could be described, at the very least, as perplexing.
The current that West dared swim against? Narratives such as: McCarthy was wrong; powerful and influential communist spies and sympathizers did not really infiltrate the highest levels of our government, media, and entertainment; and any such spying since proven by historians had no real influence on our strategy during World War II or in its resolution and aftermath.
