http://pjmedia.com/rogerkimball/2012/09/01/obamas-skin/?print=1 Everyone knows that Barack Obama has a skin issue. Liberals pretend that it’s skin color. The real issue, though, concerns thickness, not color. James Taranto, in a characteristically splendid article in the Wall Street Journal [1] today, underscores this point. “The question of race,” he notes, is central to the leftist media’s protectiveness toward […]
http://pjmedia.com/blog/pj-media-exclusive-anwar-al-awlaki%e2%80%99s-long-lost-u-s-speech-from-september-1-2001/?print=1 The Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), which bills itself as “the largest Islamic umbrella organization in North America,” is meeting in Washington, D.C., this weekend for its annual conference [2]. One former ISNA speaker won’t be in attendance this year — al-Qaeda cleric Anwar al-Awlaki was killed in a CIA drone strike [3] […]
URL to article: http://pjmedia.com/andrewmccarthy/2012/09/01/crucifixion-must-be-the-aspirations-of-arab-peoples-for-greater-freedom/
Crucifixion? Must Be the ‘Aspirations of Arab Peoples for Greater Freedom’
From the Republican platform adopted this week:
We recognize the historic nature of the events of the past two years – the Arab Spring – that have unleashed democratic movements leading to the overthrow of dictators who have been menaces to global security for decades. In a season of upheaval, it is necessary to be prepared for anything. That is true on the ground in the Middle East, and it will be equally true in the next Administration, particularly with a new President unbound by the failures of the past. We welcome the aspirations of the Arab peoples and others for greater freedom, and we hope that greater liberty – and with it, a greater chance for peace – will result from the recent turmoil.
I hope that Mitt Romney becomes our new president, but if he is going to be “unbound by the failures of the past,” he should ignore the above plank. To truly “be prepared for anything,” the new president would have to understand that what the “Arab Spring” has “unleashed” is Islamic supremacism. Whether we face up to it or not, that is the mainstream Islam of the Middle East.
My imminent new book, Spring Fever: The Illusion of Islamic Democracy, acknowledges that there are indeed democrats in the Middle East; the problem is that they are vastly outnumbered. With due respect to the GOP’s “Islamic democracy” enthusiasts, the “aspirations of the Arab peoples,” in the main, are not for “greater freedom.” In the Middle East’s predominant construction of Islam, the concept of freedom is decidedly not our idea of liberty; it is “perfect slavery,” as the 13th century Islamic scholar Ibn Arabi put it — selfless submission to sharia, Allah’s framework for society which dictates all of human life, from the great matters down to the small details.
Contrary to the tired retort of Sen. McCain, former Secretary Rice, and the rest, what I just said is not an insult. Trying to understand one’s adversary is a form of respect, not ridicule. It is not that the Muslims of the Middle East don’t grasp the Western notion of liberty; it is that they don’t want it. They think their civilization is superior. They are wrong, but they’ve been wrong for fourteen centuries, and they are certainly not going to change now when they are winning.
http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2012/09/the_arabs_of_south_america.html
I would like to remind the author of this ominous piece that the Mormons also have a beneficent role in Brazil where they have many converts due to the missions sent from Utah…..rsk
Most Americans are unaware of this, but there is a massive Arab community in Latin America. Overall, 5% of Latin America is Arab in origin, which corresponds to roughly 25-30 million people. This can vary from a low of 2% in Uruguay to an astounding 9% in Argentina; but still you rarely hear about it, except for the occasional arrest of an al-Qaeda member. There is a good reason for this.
Latin-American Arabs are overwhelmingly Christian; usually they are Syrian Orthodox or Roman Catholic, the older liturgical churches which blend in seamlessly in the area. Those who aren’t have often converted to Evangelical Christianity. Islam, though found, is not so common among them. Overall, probably 97% or more of Latin-American Arabs are Christians, though this can vary from country to country.
The reason we rarely hear about these Arabs is because they are, for the most part, Westernized Christians. It was this Christianity which became the instrument of their assimilation and success.
The Arabs in South America tend to be elites. In many ways, their rise has mirrored the success of Jews in the United States, and even surpassed them.
The richest man in the world is a Lebanese-Mexican, Carlos Slim. A president of Argentina, Carlos Menem, was of Syrian origin. Three presidents of Ecuador were of Lebanese origin as well as one president of Colombia, Julio
While it is obviously unwise for anyone to put themselves in the middle of a combat zone, it is unlikely she would have acted so recklessly in the absence of a broader atmosphere of anti-Israeli hysteria. http://www.thecommentator.com/article/1571/israel_not_guilty_over_rachel_corrie_but_what_of_those_who_encouraged_her_to_go_to_gaza_
A court in Haifa, Israel, has this morning found that the State of Israel was not responsible for the death of American citizen Rachel Corrie in Gaza in 2003. Corrie, 23, was killed by an Israeli armoured bulldozer while acting as a “human shield” in front of Palestinian buildings that the Israelis were demolishing for security reasons near the Egyptian border.
Corrie became an international cause célèbre after her death, but the essential finding underpinning the judgment — that the driver of the bulldozer had not seen her — was predictable, credible and fair. According to the Times of Israel, the driver testified that, from the cabin, he had a limited view of what was going on directly in front of him, a problem exacerbated by the fact that Corrie was kneeling down in front of the bulldozer’s blade.
While we agree with the judge that Corrie’s death was a “very unfortunate accident” it can hardly be disputed that he was also right in saying it was the “result of an accident she brought upon herself”. Tragically, indeed it was. She was effectively shielding terrorists in the very same area where attacks had been launched against the IDF just hours before her death.
But there is more to say than this. While it is obviously unwise for anyone to put themselves in the middle of a combat zone, it is unlikely she would have acted so recklessly in the absence of a broader atmosphere of anti-Israeli hysteria. At 23, she must, of course, be considered accountable for her actions, and for the views that led to them.
But neither must we forget the vast international network of anti-Zionist fanatics, buttressed by fellow travellers inside the mainstream, that helped encourage a naive young American woman to believe it was reasonable to head half way round the world to “defend” the Palestinians against Israeli “oppression”.
In the end, Rachel Corrie was a fool to go to Gaza, and the price she paid was far greater than she deserved. But that foolishness was embedded in an agenda of hate.It is now time for the authors of that agenda to acknowledge that they too must share some responsibility for Rachel Corrie’s death.
http://www.thecommentator.com/article/1581/the_guardian_s_beacon_of_islamist_justice_the_crescent_moon_shines_bright_on_comment_is_free You’d be forgiven for glossing over The Guardian’s daily cartoon. We usually do. Today however, something caught our eye. In the cartoon by Nick Hayes, The Guardian illustrates its interpretation of yesterday’s Israeli court verdict that ruled that Rachel Corrie’s death in 2003 was accidental. The image, as you can see below, shows a […]
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/
What’s the difference between a president and a can of Pepsi? When it comes to winning elections, the answer is very little. The 2008 election was not about issues, it was about image. Not just the image of the candidate, but the image of his brand.
In marketing terms, a brand is not just a label, it’s the way that the customer is meant to perceive the product and interact with it. Take the can of Pepsi. It doesn’t matter what’s actually in the can, you don’t have access to the full list of ingredients anyway. And if you did, it would take extensive research to even make sense of them. It’s not even about how the actual soda tastes. That matters, but not very much. All that really matters is how the customer perceives the brand. It’s not about the content. It’s only about how people view the brand.
From a marketing standpoint, it’s not what the product is, but how people perceive it in relation to themselves. This is an entirely image based approach, but a common one now. What that means is, is this a brand I want to be associated with. Do I want to be seen drinking this can of Pepsi? Is this a brand that makes me feel good about myself? Does it enhance my self-image?
The branding of American politics worked the same way. Obama was not sold as a set of positions and a track record, but as a brand. A brand that people were encouraged to feel enthusiastic about or at least comfortable with, using the same techniques that were used to sell soft drinks. Cheerful posters, meaninglessly simple slogans, celebrities, theme songs, merchandise, social media, viral videos, fonts, color schemes, logos and everything else that goes into pushing a billion dollar product from the shelves to the kitchen.
That transition took Hillary Clinton by surprise and hurt her most of all. Hillary had been working the party and the traditional campaign circuit, only to be sidelined by a media centered frenzy that centered around brands, not people. By the old political rules she should have won, but the new rules were in and they weren’t political anymore.
Few voters could really nail down the policy differences between Obama and McCain, a mistake that was in part McCain’s own fault and played into the image over substance approach of the Obama campaign. And those who couldn’t, mostly voted for the candidate they felt most comfortable being associated with. The election came down to a cultural split with the cultural weapons of mass distraction in the hands of an omnipresent media and social media empire.
There was no longer any point in discussing programs or issues. They had become details, like the fine print at the end of a television commercial that no one can read, and no one is meant to read. It’s there to fulfill an obligation, not to inform or play any meaningful role in the decision making process. All that mattered was the brand.
http://q4j-middle-east.com
Egypt’s new Muslim Brotherhood Islamist leader, President Mohamed Morsi, recently rejected an invitation to visit Israel in an attempt to stabilize the cold peace his military predecessors brought about which has existed between the two countries for over three decades now.
Returning to hostile pre-treaty language, it was announced that he would reject setting foot in the Zionist entity. He did this soon after Egypt, under the guise of combating Sinai-based terrorists, injected tanks, other armored vehicles, and anti-aircraft batteries close to the lines which have demarcated the border with Israel since the treaty was signed in 1979…with the help of billions of dollars of modern equipment America itself has supplied Egypt with. There was no prior consultation with Israel in ignoring the heavy weapon demilitarized terms of the treaty, and the introduction of sophisticated anti-aircraft batteries can have only one target in mind–and it isn’t Arabic in origin. The temporary and mutually-agreed upon reintroduction of tanks could perhaps be explained–but why the anti-aircraft apparatus?
One after another, harsh, despotic, largely secular Arab regimes are falling to harsh, intolerant, despotic Islamist ones instead–all allegedly in the name of “democracy.”
While many wish otherwise, the sad reality is that such Islamist “democracy” will only translate into the tyranny of the majority. The model to look at is the non-Arab (yet Arabized) Iran of Ahmadinejad and the mullahs.
Time marches on.
No, I’m not going to next sing Tevye’s Sunrise, Sunset, but it is, nevertheless, a profound reality which forever humbles mortal man.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/princeton-s-iranian-agent-influence_651372.html?nopager=1 As the Islamic Revolution has devoured its own, many Iranians have sought refuge in the West. After the fraudulent 2009 presidential elections and the crackdown that followed, the United States and Europe were flooded with Iranian pro-democracy dissidents and even pro-regime types who fell afoul of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei’s shrinking definition of “loyal.” […]
http://daphneanson.blogspot.com/
Due to time differences I am asleep while my e-pal David Singer, a prominent lawyer and international affairs expert writes and practices law in Sydney Australia, but David never sleeps.
His latest column:
“A new strategy to resolve the 130 years old Jewish-Arab conflict is urgently needed with the growing recognition that the “two-state solution” proposed by the Oslo Accords and the Bush Roadmap for the last 20 years is dead and buried .Dr. Carlo Strenger has recently expressed this view in an article entitled “Requiem for a two- state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict”.
Dr Strenger is Chair of the Clinical Graduate Program of the Department of Psychology at Tel Aviv University. He serves on the Permanent Monitoring Panel on Terrorism of the World Federation of Scientists, the Seminar of Existential Psychoanalysis in Zurich, and the Scientific Board of the Sigmund Freud Foundation, Vienna in addition to maintaining a part-time practice in existential psychoanalysis.
He is – and has been – a constant critic of the policies of Israel’s Government and its Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.
Dr Strenger’s summation of the current position is succinctly stated:
“I came to the conclusion that the two-state solution was dead at the end of 2011, when Abbas’ bid for recognition of Palestine by the UN failed. Ever since I published this assessment, friends and readers have asked what I suggest as an alternative. Some thought that I had finally moved to the extreme left’s endorsement of the one-state solution; others thought that I had moved to the right.
Neither is the case. There are moments when reality flies into your face, and in which you realize that your political program is no longer viable, even though you do not endorse any of the alternatives. I do not derive much comfort from being in good company: The remainders of Israel’s left pay lip service to the two-state solution, knowing that there is no longer a way to implement it.
My conversations with European diplomats and politicians generate the impression that the same holds true for Western Europe. For lack of an alternative to the two-state solution, European governments have not endorsed any alternative conception, but they are beginning to realize that the two-state solution won’t happen.”
Dr Strenger further confesses that he too “does not have any coherent strategy to propose.”
There is however a coherent strategy or alternative conception that can be pursued outside the options mentioned in his article – which Dr Strenger and Western Europe have failed to consider – focusing on Jordan – 78% of former Palestine.
