.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Emet m'Tsiyon

Sunday, May 17, 2015

New York Times Lies about Pope Calling Mahmud Abbas "an Angel of Peace"

The New York Times lies once again. And lies to the detriment of Jews. The NYT is softly sliding into the status of an open enemy of the Jews.  The Pope did not call PA/PLO leader Mahmud Abbas "an angel of peace." Rather, he expressed the wish that Abbas would become one by reaching an agreement with Israel. The NYTimes was not the only media outlet to lie about what the pope said when he met Abbas [Abu Mazen] at the Vatican. The AFP & AP, Agence France Presse and Associated Press, and many others did it too. But let us use the NYT as representative:
Mr. Abbas’s meeting with the pope ended with an exchange of gifts. Presenting Mr. Abbas with a medallion, the pope said it depicted an angel of peace “destroying the bad spirit of war.” It was an appropriate gift, the pope added, since “you are an angel of peace.” [New York Times, May 16, 2015]
However, according to the Vatican Insider site of the respected daily La Stampa, the pope actually said: you could be an angel of peace: lei possa essere un angelo della pace». He had already called both Peres and Abbas "uomo di pace" [man of peace] when he met them separately in Israel last year [he met abbas in Bethlehem]. However some media outlets would rather hear "you are an angel of peace."

Just to reinforce the point, here are how some other Italian news sites covered the same event:
Here is Il Giornale. It has:  Papa Francesco ha visto questa mattina il presidente dell'Autorità palestinese, Mahmud Abbas, che ha accolto con un abbraccio e un auspicio, chiedendogli di essere "un angelo della pace".
That is, the pope met Abbas, "asking him to be 'an angel of peace'"

This report for a women's website quotes the pope saying: Ho pensato a lei: che lei possa essere un angelo della pace». I thought of you, that you could be an angel of peace."

La Stampa's Vatican Insider site also quotes from the Vatican's official statement about the pope's meeting with Abbas. The pope was definitely talking about negotiations and not about unilateral steps, whereas lately Abbas has been taking a unilateral approach in violation of prior agreements with Israel, including the Oslo Accords. The statement says that both the pope and Abbas were:
"expressing the wish that direct negotiations between the parties might resume. in order to find a just and lasting solution to the conflict."
In this regard, the pope is friendlier to Israel than the French who want a UN-imposed settlement.
"si è parlato del processo di pace con Israele, esprimendo l’auspicio che si possano riprendere i negoziati diretti tra le Parti per trovare una soluzione giusta e duratura al conflitto. A tale scopo si è ribadito l’augurio che, con il sostegno della Comunità internazionale, Israeliani e Palestinesi prendano con determinazione decisioni coraggiose a favore della pace. Infine, con riferimento ai conflitti che affliggono il Medio Oriente, nel riaffermare l’importanza di combattere il terrorismo, è stata sottolineata la necessità del dialogo interreligioso»" [Vatican Insider of La Stampa]
So keep in mind that mainstream publications in the United States and other Western countries cannot be trusted when they report about Israel. They cannot even quote the pope correctly and honestly.

- - - - - - - - - - - -
here is an English language version of the Vatican Insider site reporting on this event at the Vatican.
Tom Gross placed this story among his Mideast Dispatches [here].

Here is a report in Spanish [aqui]:
En el intercambio de regalos el Papa le entregó a Abbas, un medallón del ángel de la paz, y le dijo: “El ángel de la paz destruye el espíritu maligno de la guerra”. Y añadió: “He pensado en su persona para que sea un ángel de la paz”. El Santo Padre le regaló también la exhortación apostólica Evangelii Gaudium en idioma inglés."
The encyclical Evangelii Gaudium is said to be sympathetic to Jews.

Three passages from Evangelii Gaudium are found on this blog post in English, as well as discussion of what the pope said and its grammatical fine points [here]

Vatican Radio in Italian reported the story of the Pope Francis-Mahmud Abbas meeting, which is tantamount to an official statement. No mention of "an angel of peace" [qui].
Vatican Radio in German has "Be an angel of peace" [OR May you be an angel of peace] --  "Sei ein Friedensengel“ sagte Papst Franziskus laut italienischen Nachrichtenagenturen [hier]
Walter Russell Mead on papal diplomacy and papal canonization of two Arabic-speaking saints [here]

5-19-2015 Brian of London and the Israellycool blog have done good work on exposing the media lie [here]

Labels: , ,

Sunday, May 03, 2015

Obama & Kerry to Iran: If you like your nuke you can keep your nuke!!

If you like your doctor, you will be able to keep your doctor, period.
Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States
to the AMA 15 June 2009 

Prez Obama lied to his own people when he wanted to push through his so-called Obamacare medical plan, in order to quiet down opposition and prevent his electoral base from verging into opposition to that plan. In fact, his plan has led to a severe reduction in medical care for many Americans, including those retired people living on Social Security and used to receiving medical care under the previous Medicare plan. And under Obamacare, many Americans cannot keep their doctor. Obama is lying again today. If Obama is capable of lying to his own people so as to negatively affect their medical care, and thus their health, why would he not lie to nations outside the USA?

He sent secretary of state Kerry to lie for him to the Arab states opposed to and threatened by a nuclear Iran, as well as to Israel which shares common ground with Arab states, at least on this one issue on which both Israel and most Arab states share fears of an Iranian Bomb. Last night [Saturday night]  I heard Kerry say on Israel TV channel 10:
"We will have inspectors in there every single day. That's not a 10-year deal. That's forever. There have to be inspections," he said. [Also see Jerusalem Post, 2 May 2015, Internet ed.]
Every day? Have the Iranians agreed to that? In fact, Iran has been legally bound for several decades to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty which already obliged Iran to undergo inspections of nuclear sites or suspected nuclear sites. But Iran has long resisted compliance with the treaty and prevented inspectors from the IAEA [international atomic energy agency] from inspecting in Iran as they had the legal right to do by virtue of the treaty. Which Iran has been violating for years by that fact alone, among others. Nonetheless, major Western powers, the UK, France, Germany and the USA have given Iran several "last chances." The first "last chance" was in 2003. Hence, you have to ask whether these powers really wanted to stop Iran from obtaining The Bomb --- or did they quietly want Iran to have The Bomb?

Anyhow, with Obama & Kerry and their team of lethal clowns in power, things are getting worse from the nuclear non-proliferation standpoint. Now, in order to calm down Arab opposition to the Iran nuke deal, the White House is said to be offering them high tech weapons never offered to them before (which they are however well able to pay for). But the USA is already committed to maintaining an Israeli upper hand over the Arabs in armaments, in view of the fact that the  Arabs were long threatening Israel but Israel was not threatening them. Since Obama has no compunctions about violating the international obligations of the United States, including treaties, it might sell these Arab states the very most advanced weapons. This will create a very dangerous situation in the Middle East which will be worse than the present dangerous situation. Some Arab states may work to develop their own nuke weapons to reinforce themselves, supposedly, against Iranian aggression. 

So Obama's "peace efforts" are looking more and more like war efforts. Nevertheless, Kerry claimed that:
"I say it again. We will not sign a deal that does not close off Iran's pathways to a bomb and that doesn't give us the confidence to all of our experts and global experts, that we will be able to know what Iran is doing and prevent them from getting a nuclear weapon."

A sure way to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon would be to make sure that Iran divests itself of its nuke bomb making capacity. The Lausanne framework as proclaimed by Obama and by Iranian officials [who did not agree on the content of the framework] is meant to contain Iran's capacity to produce a nuke bomb, not to eliminate that capacity. Hence, according to what Obama and his minions are admitting to now, the agreement which is not yet an agreement will allow Iran to keep its nuke bombmaking capacity. Hence there is always the danger that it will make a bomb, The Bomb, once it has decided to do so. And in a short time. Furthermore, Kerry's claim about "inspectors in there [watching Iran's nuke project] every single day" sounds groundless, given the fact that Iran has been preventing IAEA inspectors from viewing its nuke project for years, and when not preventing access for the inspectors, it has been making things difficult for them. 

So other regional governments, Arabs, Israel, and others, believe that Iran will have The Bomb sooner or later and most likely sooner. Therefore, 
"Leading Persian Gulf states want major new weapons systems and security guarantees from the White House in exchange for backing a nuclear agreement with Iran, according to U.S. and Arab officials." . . . [Wall Street JournalJAY SOLOMON And  CAROL E. LEE, May 2, 2015]
". . . The demands underscore what complicated diplomatic terrain Mr. Obama is navigating as he drives toward one of his top foreign-policy goals, and they demonstrate how a nuclear deal with Iran aimed at stabilizing the Middle East risks further militarizing an already volatile region." [Ibid, WSJ, 2 May 2015]
Although these Arab countries are mainly interested in having the most advanced weapons to counter the Iranian threat, which will grow if Iran has The Bomb,  their having these weapons will also threaten Israel. 
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu shares the Arab governments’ belief that Iran poses the greatest security challenge to their region. But there remains fear in Israel that over the long term any sophisticated systems sold to the GCC countries could eventually be turned on Israel, according to Israeli officials. [Ibid.]
Another danger is that the failure to enforce existing and longstanding treaties, like the NPT [nuclear non-proliferation treaty] or the laws of the sea treaties or the treaty guaranteeing US defense of the Marshall Islands, relevant in regard to the ship seized by Iran last week that was flying the Marshall Islands flag, is dangerous.
Assuming America does not act to enforce international conventions, however, Iran will have proved her point that the conventions are no longer enforced. [Cmdr J E Dyer, USN ret here]
This means that the USA under Obama is helping make treaties ridiculous, and thereby increasing the risk to peace in other ways than simply letting Iran build The Bomb.

Once again, Obama and Kerry's "peace efforts" turn out to be war efforts.
- - - - - - - - - -

Sarah Honig supplies additional reasons not to trust Obama's administration [here].
Karen Elliott House explains and describes Saudi Arabia's new diplomacy [here] on 1 May 2015 in Wall Street Journal. See this paragraph: 
". . .  in two weeks . . . Mr. Obama hosts a summit of the Gulf Cooperation Council, or GCC, a collection of small Gulf countries plus Saudi Arabia, that Riyadh is seeking to lead in combating Iran’s Middle East expansion. The Saudis still hope to persuade Washington to be more active in the fight not just against Islamic State forces but also against Bashar Assad in Syria.
Mr. Obama seems to see the summit as simply an opportunity to encourage these nations to fend for themselves, showing U.S. concern for their security without offering concrete action. As Saudis point out, there is a chasm between Mr. Obama’s words and actions—as seen in his unilateral erasing of the “red line” he declared regarding Mr. Assad’s use of chemical weapons in Syria."

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, April 24, 2015

High Schoolers in Land of Arab Spring Revere Hitler & ISIL

Hitler was very popular among Arab nationalists before WW2 in the 1930s. Now, 70 years after the end of the Nazi German Holocaust, perpetrated under Hitler's command, he is popular among some Arab youth, students at at least two high schools in Tunisia, the land where the Arab Spring began. This has been revealed in French media organs

In Tunisia, "Islamofascism" is not merely a media formula. It can take on a quite concrete appearance. . . . At the high school in  Jendouba in the northeast of the country, a banner showing Hitler saluting the German flag was displayed, the site of Francetv Géopolis reports.
En Tunisie, l'«islamofascisme» n'est pas qu'une formule médiatique, et peut prendre un visage bien concret. . . . .Au lycée de Jendouba au nord-est du pays, une bannière représentant Hitler saluant le drapeau allemand a été déployée, rapporte le site de Francetv Géopolis.

In another high school in the area of Jendouba, it was the black flag of the Islamic State that was put on display. . . . .

Dans un autre lycée de la zone de Jendouba, c'est le drapeau noir de l'Etat islamique qui a été exhibé. . . . 

In the girls high school of Kairowan (LJFK), the religious center of Tunisia, a banner showing a representation of the persecutions of the Islamic State was hung on a wall. One can see on it a masked warrior armed with a scimitar accompanied by two prisoners dressed in the typical orange pajama. One of them in flames might represent the Jordanian pilot burned alive by Da`ash [ISIL] last February. 

Dans le lycée de jeunes filles de Kairouan (LJFK), centre religieux de la Tunisie, une banderole représentant des exactions de l'Etat islamique a été accroché sur le mur. On y voit un guerrier masqué armé d'un cimeterre accompagné de deux prisonniers vêtus du typique pyjama orange dont un, dans les flammes, pourrait représenter le pilote jordanien brûlé vif par Daech en février dernier.
The article in Le Figaro looks for an excuse why many in the Arab world are so fascinated with Hitler. And the reporter finds a false reason.
The fascination for the 3rd Reich is not rare in the Arab countries, which did not undergo the trauma of Nazism and are gladly hostile to Israel.
La fascination pour le Troisième Reich n'est pas rare dans les pays arabes, qui n'ont pas subi le traumatisme du nazisme et sont volontiers hostiles à l'Etat d'Israël. . . . [Le Figaro, 15 April 2015]

This reason is false because in fact Nazi German troops, the Wehrmacht, did occupy Tunisia in late 1942 and early 1943. The Jews there were subjected to the preliminary stages of the Holocaust while mass murder camps were being built in North Africa. In fact, Walter Rauff, the Nazi expert in murdering Jews spent several months in Tunisia. Read excerpts from his reports to his superiors and diaries here.

Labels: , ,

Monday, March 16, 2015

The Delusions of Diplomats & Generals

see at bottom

PM Netanyahu has his enemies at home as well as abroad. Some domestic enemies use their supposed expertise in military matters or intelligence to criticize the prime minister. It's no secret that the Labor Party continued to have great influence over state institutions even many years after the Likud became the major party in the country or  a party of roughly equal weight to Labor. The police, judiciary, military and intelligence services still underwent great Labor Party influence, including in appointments and promotions. Lately, a group of roughly 200 retired military and intelligence officials signed a joint statement decrying Netanyahu's policies and advocating election of Yits'haq Herzog as prime minister on the list of the Zionist Camp Party, basically a continuation of the Labor Party formed in combination with the small HaTnu`ah Party of Tsipi Livni  on an ad hoc basis for this election.

These military and intelligence "experts" made all sorts of criticisms of Netanyahu, including some regarding last summer's war in Gaza. Some of these criticisms attacked the prime minister from the "right," asking why he had not crushed Hamas totally, etc. Ya`aqov Amidror, himself a former intelligence chief, responded to some of these criticisms:
One of the critics claimed the Israel Defense Forces would be able to defend any border that emerged from the negotiations. This statement holds no water because sometimes you cannot fight terrorism at the border (in case you forgot: Israel had to reconquer Judea and Samaria in 2002 to stop the wave of terrorists attacks). It is very sad to see such professionally misguided comments be used for the sake of political mudslinging.
So any border can be defended, can it? But at what price? Do we want to give the Arabs military advantages, such as strategic terrain, mountains etc, that will tempt them to start another war? These would-be peacemakers end up causing war.

Amos Yadlin, a former defense official now designated by the "Zionist Camp" to be defense minister if it wins the election, objected to Netanyahu accepting an invitation from the US Congress to address it on the issue of the Iranian nuclear project.
He agrees with Netanyahu that the Iranian nuke is a problem but offers a different way of dealing with it. He proposes talking quietly to the US foreign policy and military establishments and winning their cooperation for acting jointly against the Iranian nuke. The problem is that Israel has no way of forcing the United States to cooperate in working against the Iranian nuke. Especially if it does not want to. And we now see that the White House and the State Department and the military and national security establishments of the United States are right now interested in allowing Iran to get The Bomb. For this purpose, they are accusing the senators and congressmen who had questioned their policy of interfering with policymaking and with their negotiations with Iran although the US constitution clearly gives the Senate the right and duty to examine all treaties before signature and then to approve or reject them. On the Iran Bomb issue, the previous Bush administration was not all that active in opposing an Iran Bomb and gave Iran "one last chance" to come clean about its efforts as far back as 2003. Gilad may understand that the present US Govt wants Iran to have The Bomb but what he is saying is totally different. He is holding out the pie-in-the-sky notion that Israel with a government led by Herzog could somehow persuade the American officials to do what they have not shown a desire to do over the last 15 years. Herzog for his part, supposedly told an American journalist that he trusted Obama to get a good deal in negotiations with Iran. Many or most US senators, including many Demcrats, do not agree. Maybe we could put a cute blonde wig on Herzog and call him Pollyanna.

Then there is the diplomat, Michael Oren. He believes in unilateral withdrawal from Arab population centers in Judea-Samaria, the so-called "west bank." He would retain most settlements under Israeli control but would withdraw the army from many areas, while "Israeli troops would still patrol strategic borders." Of course, Israel would be more vulnerable to terrorist attacks and conventional military attack the more territory that it withdraws from. Moreover, some of the reasons that he cites for such a withdrawal, such as ending "occupation" of Arab-inhabited areas and Arab population growth outpacing Jewish population growth, are not valid. Israel gave up control nineteen years ago of all major Arab cities and population  centers to the "Palestinian Authority". What places is he talking about? Then it is also not true that Arab population growth in Judea-Samaria is so much greater than Jewish population growth in Israel. Lastly, we meet the main refutation of the utility of unilateralism. That is, any borders or lines that Israel withdraws or retreats to will not be recognized by the US or by the so-called international community or the UN,  EU, etc. Instead, Israel will be asked: Why don't you go farther? Why don't you go all the way? And pressure on Israel is sure to increase in such an eventuality.  Further unilateral retreat will be seen as a sign of admission of guilt for alleged "occupation of Arab lands" prior to the retreat.

Despite the stupidities of these ideas, whether or not sincerely held,  we will hear them over and over. Maybe they conceal some very cynical political calculations.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
A previous version of this post incorrectly identified Amos Gilad, who is still serving in the Israeli defense establishment, with the retired general, Amos Yadlin. Gilad is still serving as said. He is the head of the political/security branch of the Defense Ministry. He too, like Netanyahu, believes that Iran is the greatest security threat to Israel.


Wednesday, February 18, 2015

Obama Is Negotiating with Hitler's Iranian Spiritual Heirs

Other than developing a nuclear bomb in violation of Iran's commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the NPT, what else is Iran doing in violation of international law and of all decency? Our last post showed threats made by the present ayatollah government of Iran against the Jews of Israel. These threats violate UN Charter, Article 2:4. Some of these show an uncanny resemblance to Hitler's threats to annihilate the Jews, as shown in the previous post. So on those grounds alone there seems to be something wrong in negotiating with Iran as if somehow an agreement with the present ayatollahs' regime could bring about a peaceful resolution of Iran's quest for The Bomb in violation of the NPT. Part of the problem with Obama's negotiating stance --and that of the P5+1 powers as a whole-- is that they seldom if ever speak of the treaty violation embodied in the very quest by the ayatollahs' regime for a nuclear weapon.

Nevertheless, it would be helpful to display the threats that the present Iranian regime has made in order to properly appreciate the nature of the regime and its purposes. The threats were not only against Israel:

"Israel will disappear and the Western countries that defend it would do well to abandon it so that they themselves are not overwhelmed by the rage of hundreds of millions of Muslims. If the rage of the peoples of the region becomes a storm, it will not be contained within the boundaries of Lebanon and Palestine but will crash down on you too. Think of your own long term interests in the region. This is our final word."
[Muhammad Ahmadinejad 20 October 2006, quoted by Carlo Panella in Fascismo Islamico (Milan: Rizzoli 2007), pp 23-24. Also in Le Monde, 22-23 Octobre 2006; p4]

For those who want to check, here is the quote above as translated into Italian by Carlo Panella:

"Israele scomparirà e i Paesi occidentali che lo difendono faranno bene ad abbandonarlo per non essere essi stessi travolti dalla rabbia di centinaia di milioni di musulmani. Se la rabbia dei popoli della regione diventa una tempesta, non sarà contenuta nei confine del Libano e della Palestina, ma si abbaterà anche su di voi. Pensate ai vostri interessi a lungo termine nella regione. Questa è la nostra ultima parola." [Mohammed Ahmadinejad, 20 ottobre 2006, citato da Carlo Panella in Fascismo Islamico (Milan: Rizzoli 2007), pp 23-24]

Let's examine what Ahmadinejad said above. He made these threats against the Western countries, although the United States had helped the Khomeini regime take power in 1979 when Ahmadinejad was just a junior regime thug leader. France too had helped Khomeini by letting him take refuge in France before he came back to Iran. The US role was described by George Lenczowski in a piece in American Spectator circa 1981. A-jad threatens a storm against the Western countries, although some had helped the regime take power in Iran. He threatens Western interests in the Middle East, but he suggests that these interests will be protected if only the Western states collaborate in destroying Israel. This is explicit in another part of A-jad's statement of the same date. Addressing the UK and the USA, he says: "You . . .  brought into the Middle East this Israeli people of terrorists and enemies of religion [ie, of Islam]. You helped it to subdue the peoples of the region. The best thing now is for you yourselves to take it away." [Panella, op cit, p24]. The remark: "This is our final word," has a strong odor of Hitler's bombastic threats and ultimatums.

Unfortunately, some of Ahmadinejad's demagoguic lies are widely believed nowadays, so much so as to be what Max Nordau called "conventional lies of civilization." For the record, Jews have always lived in the Middle Easten region and in the Land of Israel in particular since the beginnings of the Jewish/Israelite people thousands of years ago. About half of Israel's Jewish population migrated from Muslim-ruled lands, including Iran where Jews were oppressed. So much for the UK and USA bringing Jews into the Middle East. Next, since Israel became independent in 1948 --which was opposed by the UK & USA-- they have usually favored and encouraged the Arab states and PLO against Israel. As of now, the USA and the EU to which the UK belongs contribute something like a billion dollars per year to the budget of the Palestinian Authority. One may add the millions donated by the EU and its member states to so-called non-governmental organizations besmirching Israel and undermining it in public opinion.

Finally, A-jad threatened Europe in particular. "The Americans are far away but you are the neighbors of the peoples of this region. . .  [If you support Israel, you must expect] the hatred of the peoples of the world. . . if the hurricane is unleashed, its effects will not be limited to the borders of Palestine and they will strike you."
[quoted in Panella, op cit, pp 24-25; also Le Monde, 22-23 Octobre 2006; p4]

This is the nature of the regime that Obama claims will restrain itself and keep an agreement if he conducts proper negotiations with it. Can Obama not know the thuggish, fascistic nature of the regime in Teheran?

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

Saturday, February 14, 2015

Negotiating with Iran, the Powers Avoid Crimes against the Jews

The Major Western Powers --the US, UK, France, & Germany -- have been negotiating with Iran over its nuclear bomb project for many years. As far back as 2003, these powers, all sitting on the board of governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency, got a motion passed at that body to give Iran "one last chance" to prove that it was not in violation [non-compliance] with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the NPT. Of course Iran was in violation and of course everybody knew it. But such are the strange ways of diplomacy that mild sanctions were not applied against Iran for non-compliance until 2007 while "biting sanctions" took effect only in January 2012. All the while Iran was developing the capacity to produce a nuclear bomb.

Meanwhile, in 2006 these four Western powers were joined by Russia and China in a group called P5 +1, referring to the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany. The biting or punitive sanctions imposed as of January 2012 were having a severe effect on the Iranian economy. However, in late 2013 Obama and Kerry decided to ease the sanctions and negotiate with the ayatollahs. All this instead of enforcing the terms of the NPT. In fact, the NPT is hardly ever mentioned, which likely leaves many people wondering what is the legal ground for preventing Iran from developing The Bomb.

Nevertheless, my object in this post is a violation of international law by Iran that the P5 + 1 powers seem to be totally disinterested in. I refer to the threats against Israel coming out of Teheran. Such threats are forbidden by the UN charter, Article 2, clause 4:
"All Members shall refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Purposes of the United Nations."

Hatred for Jews and Israel goes back to the early days of the Khomeini takeover of Iran, facilitated at the time by the policy of Zbigniew Brzezinski, national security advisor for President Carter.

However, the first threat that I have dug up goes back to 20 October 2006 when Ahmadinajad stated:
"Israel will disappear . . . [because of] the rage of hundreds of millions of Muslims"
[quoted by Carlo Panella in Fascismo Islamico (Milan: Rizzoli 2007), pp 23-24]

Since then assorted Iranian leaders and officials have threatened Israel again and again:

11/09/2014: Ayatollah Khamenei’s Twitter: “This barbaric, wolflike & infanticidal regime of #Israel which spares no crime has no cure but to be annihilated." [here]

July 28, 2014: On #Eid al-Fitr we pray that #God repels& fends off the evil existence of oppressive & bloodthirsty Zionists from #Palestine& region.8/31/11 #GazaUnderAttack:[here]

 8/28/2013: “Gen. Mohammad Ali Jafari, chief of Iran's powerful Revolutionary Guards, used stronger rhetoric while talking to the Tasnim news website, saying an attack on Syria would draw in Israel. "The Zionists should know that a U.S. military attack on Syria will not save the fake regime from the resistance but it means the immediate destruction of Israel," Jafari was quoted as saying.” [here]

8/26/2013 ". . . . the Zionist regime will be the first victim of a military attack on Syria,” Iran’s Fars news agency quoted senior parliamentary official Hossein Sheikholeslam as saying on Monday.”[here]

Iran chief of staff, Maj. Gen. Hassan Firouzabadi in a meeting of defense officials in May 2012: “The Iranian nation is standing for its cause and that is the full annihilation of Israel.” [here]

And we could go on and on.

Amazing Resemblance to Hitler's Threats Against Jews:
The form of these threats is very similar to the form of the threat that Hitler made to wipe out the Jews. He said in 1939:
"If the international Jewish financiers in and outside Europe should succeed in plunging the nations once more into a world war, then the result will not be the bolshevization of the earth, and thus the victory of Jewry, but the annihilation of the Jewish race in Europe!" [here]

 Note that in this quote Hitler presents himself as pro-peace and as an enemy of international finance capital, as if he were a Marxist-Leninist [as in Lenin's Imperialism, the Highest Stage of Capitalism], while at the same time defining Bolshevism as an enemy. Whatever his many faults, Lenin did not write in the book cited that finance capital was Jewish. Moreover, you can see from the quote that Hitler was pretending to be a friend of peace and was blaming the Jews in advance for the world war that he planned to start.

 Furthermore, let's bear in mind that the very name of Hitler's party, for which Nazi was a convenient abbreviation, was a very "Leftist" name. It was officially called the National Socialist German Workers Party [Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei (NSDAP)]. His party was not only socialist but it was a "workers party." You can't ask for more than that.

Iranian officials use another rhetorical device to present themselves as "leftists." In this vein, an Iranian member of parliament identified the regime with "revolutionaries." On 8/27/2013 the semiofficial Fars news agency quoted Mansur Haqiqatpur, an influential member of Parliament, as saying on the preceding Tuesday: “In case of a U.S. military strike against Syria, the flames of outrage of the region’s revolutionaries will point toward the Zionist regime.”

 The resemblance of Iranian threat rhetoric against Israel to Hitler's threats against the Jews is so astoundingly similar as to imply that the Iranian ayatollahs and their minions copied directly from Hitler's rhetoric. Consider this from General Jafari of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards: "The Zionists should know that a U.S. military attack on Syria [if it happens] will not save the fake regime from the resistance but it means the immediate destruction of Israel." This sentence contains an implicit IF clause. That is, IF the US attacks Syria, that means the immediate destruction of Israel. Of all the Iranian statements that I have quoted above, this statement is the one most blatantly similar to Hitler's IF threat of 1939, also quoted above.

All the above makes outrageous the failure of the P5 + 1 powers to make the threats against Israel part of the negotiations with Iran, part of the condemnation of Iran for violating international law. These powers are demonstrating to the world that international law is a sad joke. And that they do not care for Jewish lives.

The international laws are enforced when major powers see fit, when it is in their current interest. Otherwise, the law is just words on paper.

Labels: , , ,

Monday, January 26, 2015

Obama's White House Interferes in Israeli Elections, Despite the Pretense of No Interference Abroad

See updatings at bottom of page.

Important info on Obama's interference in Israel's  internal affairs. Obama's gang at the State Dept, National Security Council, CIA, etc. hate Netanyahu mightily. He is seen as an obstacle to all of their destructive plans for the Middle East and for Israel in particular.

This report comes from HaArets through the Independent Media Research & Analysis run by the son of the esteemed Joseph Lerner [ז''ל] whom I was honored to know years ago in Jerusalem. Someday I should talk about some of the things that I learned from Joe Lerner.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Monday, January 26, 2015
Foreign Funding Bankrolls Anti-Netanyahu Campaign – Flies in 5-Man Obama Team
Foreign Funding Bankrolls Anti-Netanyahu Campaign – Flies in 5-Man Obama Team

Dr. Aaron Lerner Date: 26 January 2015
Haaretz reporter Roi Arad revealed in an article in the Hebrew edition today that the foreign funded organization, “One Voice”, is bankrolling the  V-2015 campaign to defeat Binyamin Netanyahu’s national camp in the March  2015 Knesset Elections.

One indication of the generous financing is that it has now flown in a team of five American campaign experts (including Jeremy Bird, the Obama  campaign's national field director) who will run the campaign out of offices  taking up the ground floor of a Tel Aviv office building.

V-2015 is careful not to support a specific party - rather “just not Bibi”.  As such, the foreign funds pouring into the campaign are not subject to  Israel’s campaign finance laws.

Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director IMRA
IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis

- - - - - - - - - - -END - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Here is Ro'i Arad's article on OneVoice and the anti-Netanyahu campaign:

The Obama campaign strategist who could break the Israeli elections wide open

The group V15, which denies that its motto is ‘anyone but Bibi,’ is working with U.S. political strategist Jeremy Bird to replace the government in March.

By | Jan. 26, 2015 | 11:26 PM
During a stroll along Tel Aviv’s Lilienblum Street, it was difficult to avoid noticing that the ground floor of one office building had been converted into a campaign headquarters, packed with “Victory 2015” signs and young people wearing V15 campaign buttons. Hanging on the wall is a map of greater Tel Aviv, marked into numbered districts, and scrawled on a whiteboard are various slogans in advertising language.            

The place looks like a television set for a series about a presidential campaign. I signed up and walked into a motivational lecture with about 30 enthusiastic young Israelis who were learning how to approach potential voters. After a few minutes they realized there was a journalist in the room, and a more organized meeting was arranged in the adjacent offices of the OneVoice Movement.
It was only a month ago that Itamar Weizmann, a 22-year-old history student, posted the following, rather banal, text on Facebook: “Hi. There’s an election. Let’s do something different this time.”
Nimrod Dweck, the 33-year-old founder of Dice Marketing whose Linkedin page describes him as a “marketing ninja,” pounced on the idea. The pair rapidly arranged a meeting of activists. Former Shin Bet security service head Yuval Diskin jumped on board, and supporter numbers are rising constantly.

The group, which began with nothing more than an idea and youthful energy, soon morphed into something far greater, a movement with real offices whose goal is nothing less than an electoral upset. If the momentum continues to gather according to plan, V15 could carry influence in the upcoming election.

With the help of American money and a former campaign adviser to President Barack Obama, V15 is trying to replace Israel’s government. The money and organization comes from V15’s partnership with OneVoice.

Founded in 2002 by the Mexican-born, U.S.-based businessman and philanthropist Daniel Lubetzky, OneVoice describes itself on its website as “an international grassroots movement that amplifies the voice of mainstream Israelis and Palestinians, empowering them to propel their elected representatives toward the two-state solution.” It is known for bringing various celebrities to the region, including actor Jason Alexander (“Seinfeld”’s George Costanza), but it has faced suspicion from all sides, particularly the left — and like George, the organization never really gained traction.
OneVoice is expected to merge with V15 before the March 17 election. The groups have a common goal: To recruit tens of thousands of volunteers for house-to-house canvassing, knocking on anywhere between 150,000 and 1 million doors — a method that was effective in Obama’s first presidential campaign, in particular.

Their secret campaign weapon is Jeremy Bird, a 36-year-old American political strategist who worked for Obama. Bird has come with a team of four consultants that will try to channel the energies of V15 into an organized methodology. Bird was the field director for South Carolina in Obama’s primary campaign for the 2008 election. Early opinion polls in the state gave Obama and Hillary Clinton equal odds, but in the primary vote Obama beat her two to one. That victory helped Obama to clinch the Democratic nomination, and it resulted in Bird’s promotion to deputy national field director for the 2008 national election. For Obama’s 2012 reelection campaign, Bird was national field director. After the election, Bird parlayed his success into 270 Strategies, a political consulting firm that helps election campaigns all over the world to build grassroots strategies.
“It’s not right to do in Israel exactly what we did in the United States, the context is completely different,” admits Bird, who still has some of the Hebrew he learned as a student in Haifa in 1999. But he says the mess in the OneVoice office — many empty cartons from newly purchased equipment — reminds him of Obama headquarters, he says: lots of energy and lot of talent. Israel is an ideal country for a door-knocking campaign because of its relatively small size, Bird says. Israel has very complex politics, a large number of parties and relatively high voter turnout, he says, adding that it’s possible to speak with enough people here to replace the government.
“The goal is not to promote a specific candidate or party, but to put your ego aside for the greater good,” Dweck says. When I asked whether their goal was “Anyone but Bibi,” referring to the nickname of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, they corrected me: “We say ‘replace the government,’ it’s not directed at specific individuals. There have been many years of right-wing governments during which little happened, it’s time to change course and give people hope.”
“The response is great because there is great disgust,” Dweck says. “Almost 2,000 people offered to volunteer. We will go to homes and we will win. Bird’s team helps direct the wave of enthusiasm so it doesn’t turn into loud noise that disappears but rather into a wave of change. The work with the research team that Bird brought has really ignited sparks. There are Israelis with experience who were in shock over the level of cross-checking of information” the team does, he says

- - - - - - - -END of HaAretz Article - - - - - - - -
Is anybody surprised that Obama works to get rid of Netanyahu? . . . . . to get rid of an obstacle to his horrendous policy? Note that Obama's gang is working with those in Israel who call themselves "Left." In other places like Ukraine, Obama's gang is just as happy to work with those considered "extreme right," like Right Sektor and Svoboda.

UPDATING: 1-26-2014 The OneVoice organization that is sponsoring these psychological warfare experts against Netanyahu has as partners [here]
1-- The US State  Department
2-- The European Commission of the EU, the European Union's governing body.
3-- New Israel Fund [NIF]
4-- Rockefeller Brothers Fund

Also see: Elder of Ziyon [here] and JE Dyer's very informative piece [here]
Report by Aaron Klein from the V15 leader, N Dweck [here]
Lori Lowenthal Marcus on the Obama "community organizing" campaign against Netanyahu [and for a successful Arab war against Israel][see here]
Lori Lowenthal Marcus on the Likud's charges that V15 and OneVoice are violating Israeli law by using foreign funding in an Israeli election campaign [here]

Labels: , ,

Saturday, January 24, 2015

Obama Will Not Go to the 70th Anniversary of the Liberation of the Auschwitz Murder Camp

Obama hates Jews. Why would we expect him to go? What happened to us and what is happening to us is not important to him. He did not go to the Paris march by heads of state against mass murder terrorism. Eventhough the victims in Paris were mostly non-Jews. And Kerry couldn't go, supposedly, because he was on a trip to India. Very nice. Good excuse. So why didn't Obama send vice president Biden? Biden was not busy and he doesn't have much to do anyway. He is high ranking but, as said, does not have much to do. Why didn't Obama send him?

This report is from the Washington Free Beacon. By the way, Auschwitz is called in Polish Oswiecim, a name for the place that was used fairly often 50 and 60 years ago.

Obama Will Not Attend 70th Anniversary of Auschwitz Liberation

Heads of state from France, Germany, Belgium, Austria, the Netherlands, and Denmark will be present
Barack Obama
Treasury Secretary Jack Lew will represent the United States at the 70th anniversary ceremony for the liberation of the Auschwitz concentration camp on Tuesday—rather than President Barack Obama or Vice President Joe Biden—while other countries are slated to send their heads of state.
Tuesday’s ceremony will likely be the last major anniversary where a significant number of survivors of the Nazi camp are present. About 300 are expected to attend, and most of them are in their 90s or older than 100. Nazi authorities killed 1.1 million people at the camp, mostly Jews, which was liberated by the Soviet army in January 1945.
The New York Times reported  on the foreign dignitaries that would be present:
A preliminary list of those attending includes President François Hollande of France, President Joachim Gauck of Germany and President Heinz Fischer of Austria, as well as King Philippe of Belgium, King Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands and Crown Prince Frederik of Denmark. The United States delegation will be led by Treasury Secretary Jacob J. Lew.
President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia said he would not attend because his schedule was too crowded and because he had not received an invitation. Museum officials said no head of state had received one. Mr. Putin had attended the 60th anniversary ceremony in 2005 — it was Soviet troops, after all, who liberated the camp in 1945 — but relations between Russia and Poland have soured over the conflict in Ukraine.
British Prime Minister David Cameron visited the camp last month and toured it with the state museum director.
Bernadette Meehan, National Security Council spokeswoman, said in an email that, “President Obama will be in India, on a long-scheduled trip.”
The Obama administration faced a barrage of criticism earlier this month when it declined to send Obama or Secretary of State John Kerry to a march in Paris expressing solidarity with the victims of the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attack. The heads of Great Britain, Germany, and Israel all attended.

Labels: , ,

Wednesday, January 07, 2015

France Is Rewarded for Its Pro-PLO Vote at the UN -- 12 Murdered

Unfortunately, sometimes our dismal and dreary predictions come true. My last blog post last week foresaw that France would be "rewarded" for its outrageous pro-PLO vote at the UN Security Council.

What we don't know is how the Arabs/Muslims in France will reward Hollande. Now, that France has voted at the Security Council in favor of an outrageous pro-PLO/PA Arab proposed resolution, maybe the days to come will bring more Muslim and Arab rewards for France. [here]

Now we see that terrorists, apparently professional killers, went into the offices of Charlie Hebdo, a satirical weekly that several years ago published an issue mocking Muhammad and more recently published a cartoon mocking him. The attack was well-planned and the attackers knew things that were not generally known. The offices of Charlie Hebdo had been firebombed several years ago after the issue on Muhammad was published. The attackers knew the new address which was not supposed to be public knowledge. They also seemed to know that there was going to be an editorial staff meeting in the offices at the time that they attacked. They went around the office asking, Are you so-and-so [names of cartoonists, writers, editors, etc]? Those who answered, Yes, were shot and killed. Before entering the offices, the policeman guarding the entrance was shot. One of the terrorists came up to him as he lay on the ground and made sure he was dead with additional shots.

The terrorists made their motives clear. They screamed, Revenge for the Prophet Muhammad & Allahu Akbar.

On the way out, the terrorists commandeered a car, perhaps a police car. They fled from the offices of Charlie Hebdo on Boulevard Richard Lenoir in the 11th borough [arrondissement] of Paris to the 19th borough. The last that I heard was that they were surrounded by police in one of the suburbs, banlieues, of Paris.

President François Hollande arrived at the scene of the crime and was joined by other high officials. He said some of the expected platitudes, including a promise to pursue and catch the culprits. Will he understand that this event was a reward for voting in the UN Security Council in favor of setting up another Arab state to be called "Palestine," whereas the Palestinian Authority was not willing to agree that this state to be would exist at peace with Israel and that it would foreswear any future claims against Israel and would acknowledge that the Israel was a Jewish national state?

 - - - - - -  - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Here are relevant links in French [ici] One of the attackers shouts that he took revenge for the sake of "the Prophet Muhammad" & "Charlie Hebdo is killed"
The cartoonists/writers who were murdered [ici]
François Hollande, president of France, calls this event "an act of exceptional barbarity"[ici]
Javier Solana, chief foreign affairs officer of the European Union, receives Arab/Muslim demands to censor European publications that are said to insult Islam [here]. Solana reminds  me very strongly of Pierre Laval. Solana traveled to Arab capitals to receive demands in the wake of the Muhammad Cartoons controversy and riots in late 2005 and early 2006.

Labels: , , , ,

Tuesday, December 30, 2014

Will France Betray Decency Again -- After Being Rewarded for Past Betrayals in True Arab/Muslim Manner?

A couple of weeks ago, the French parliament, the Assemblee Nationale, voted in favor of the unjust idea of an Arab state in the Land of Israel to be named "Palestine."  The  resolution was pushed through by the socialists, communists and ecofreaks [les verts].

 A few days later, on  Saturday. a week ago, a jihadist went into a police station in a Paris suburb and stabbed several policemen before being shot dead by another policeman.  The next day, a jihadist ran over a dozen or more people walking on the sidewalks of the city of Dijon in several different places. The day after that, another jihadist ran over people attending an outdoors Christmas fair in the city of Nantes, killing one victim and wounding many others. The jihadist driver knew that he would find Christians, unbelievers, kufar, at the Xmas fair. So we see how France was rewarded for its pro-PLO, pro-Arab, pro-Muslim gesture.

Now, despite the negative rewards France received from Muslim jihadists, French diplomats said before the Security Council vote that they would vote "consistent" with their views. As it turned out France voted for a wild and destructive and arrogant Arab resolution put forth by the Arab states at the behest of the PLO/PA government which siphons off a good share of the massive foreign aid for the PA ["Palestinian Authority"] into the pockets of individuals close to the plate in the PA, including Mahmud Abbas himself.


How can we explain France's position? Since the eve of the Six Day War, when De Gaulle clearly stated his pro-Arab stance as Nasser and other Arab leaders openly threatened Israel with mass murder, as a mob of  millions marched through Cairo waving the skull and crossbones flag (the flag of death), France has been pro-Arab and basically anti-Israel. That might explain a pro-Arab, anti-Israel vote. But the present resolution at the Security Council dispenses with real negotiations  and makes demands on Israel of an imbalanced, unilateral nature. France has never gone so far in that direction.

Why has France now gone even further in the pro-Arab direction to the point that France voted with Russia and China?
Think of French President Francois Hollande's domestic situation. During the last presidential election campaign [spring 2012] his socialist party issued a manifesto containing some 58 promises to the French people. He and his party must have known during the election campaign that there was no money for the pie in the sky promises and that they could not be kept. In 2014, we know that the French economic situation is a disaster, even worse now than under Sarkozy. The promises of economic improvement as well as of additional social welfare could not be fulfilled. France does not have the money for more social welfare and cannot make reforms to improve the economy and cannot get sufficient help from other Eurozone states to overcome the German mania for austerity, which has been a very destructive factor for almost all of the Eurozone.  The only promise Hollande kept out of the 58 was to recognize or legalize gay marriage. Most French people are fed up with him. His approval ratings are lower than Obama's, about 15%. France's economic growth rate is about zero or maybe a fraction above zero. He is a failure. So he flails around looking for an issue where he can show how strong and decisive he is.
Then he looks at the French population and sees at least 10% Muslims. Indeed, one "thinker" (Pascal Boniface), one of the intellectual leaders of  the Socialist Party, recommended years ago that the  party cultivate the Arab vote and support the "palestinians" since there were more Arabs and more Muslims in France than Jews. That  way  the party was sure to get the Arab vote. The PLO representative in France, one Leila Shahid, supposedly a granddaughter of the Nazi mufti Amin el-Husseini, is popular on TV in France and is given free rein to incite anti-Jewish as well as anti-Israel hatred.

 So Hollande may have decided to vote for the Arab/PLO resolution at the Security Council for domestic reasons: In order to make France and himself look relevant and to ingratiate himself and the socialists with the Arab/Muslim vote in France. Add to what we can expect from Hollande the fact that his father was a Vichyite. 

What we don't know is how the Arabs/Muslims in France will reward Hollande. Now, that France has voted at the Security Council in favor of an outrageous pro-PLO/PA Arab proposed resolution, maybe the days to come will bring more Muslim and Arab rewards for France.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
1-4-2015 Here is an earlier post on Emet m'Tsiyon about an earlier French betrayal of Israel, another betrayal by Hollande's government [here]
1-6-2015 Here is an article on the persecution of Jews in France which became a major threat about 14 years ago. The article seems to have been published  in  2004 [here]

Labels: , , , ,

Sunday, December 21, 2014

Hypocrisy in Higher Education

The moral corruption of the American academic world is well underway. We now have academic departments, especially those devoted to Middle Eastern, Arabic and Islamic studies, that are funded by oil-rich Arab governments. We also have today branches of once prestigious American universities that operate in the Persian Gulf sheikdoms. Yale, once highly prestigious as one of the top schools of the prestige-encrusted Ivy League, kowtowed  to real or anticipated pressure from wealthy Arab patrons. This became notorious in August 2009 when the Yale University Press was about to publish a book about the Muhammad Cartoons controversy. After the Yale administration "consulted with experts" (according to the NY Times), the Yale Press decided not to publish any of the Muhammad cartoons nor any of the old and classic artistic representations of Muhammad that were to be in the book.

Now, it just so happens that in April 2009, Yale had appointed a woman who served as an academic operative for Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal to a prestigious, if temporary post.
"In April, Yale named Muna AbuSulayman a “Yale World Fellow” for 2009. This isn’t some honorific, and she’ll reside from August through December in New Haven. (Her Facebook fan page, August 16: “I need help locating a Town House/condo for short term leasing near Yale University… Anyone familiar with that area?”) Can you imagine a better way to set the stage for a major Alwaleed gift? Hosting for a semester the very person who structured the Harvard and Georgetown gifts, and who now directs Alwaleed’s charitable foundation? A stroke of genius." [Martin Kramer, emph. added]
Now, we see that  Madame Abu Sulayman had already been instrumental in bringing some of Prince Al-Waleed's generosity to Harvard and Georgetown. Could it be that Yale too was hoping to share in some of Prince Al-Walid's largesse? Maybe Yale was only acting  like those prestigious professors of mathematics who lent their names in exchange for money to the Mathematics Dept at King Abdulaziz University in Jedda, Saudi Arabia. Does this matter? Yes, it does, if academic integrity and honesty have any worth anymore. Yes, if the academic world is to have any more claim to the  respect of decent and informed people.

In this vein, Jonathan Marks has discovered another reason not to honor the academy. He tells a story involving the fanatical bds movement, the movement to boycott Israel which began with funding in part from the well-connected and well-established Ford Foundation.
. . . . this year’s award for higher education hypocrisy surely must go to eight signatories of the latest anti-Israel petition to emerge from our universities. The petition itself, signed by members of the faculty of New York University, is the standard call to punish corporations that can be connected in some way to Israel’s activities in the West Bank or Gaza. What’s striking about this one is that eight of the signatories, more than ten percent of the present total, are affiliated with NYU’s satellite campus in Abu Dhabi. NYU’s Abu Dhabi outpost, “wholly bankrolled by the oil-rich Abu Dhabi government,” opened in 2010, and its permanent campus, located alongside an “idyllic resort” under development on Saadiyat Island, was completed in 2014. So I wonder when these eight faculty members, who pompously stand on NYU’s “long and proud tradition of demanding that the university live up to its professed values,” will be renouncing their affiliation with the government of the United Arab Emirates. As Freedom House observes in its 2014 report, the UAE bans political parties, and “criticism of the government, allies [and] religion” is prohibited by law.
The UAE also has a labor problem. UAE’s mostly foreign workers do not have the right to organize, bargain collectively, or strike. Expatriate workers can be banned from working in the UAE if they try to leave their employer prior to at least two years of service. NYU responded to this difficulty by issuing a statement concerning labor values they expected to be adhered to in the building of the campus. Nonetheless, some of the workers who built the campus “lived in squalor, 15 men to a room.” Almost all had to pay a recruitment fee, consisting of about a year’s wages, for the privilege of getting the job, then worked 11 to 12 hours per day. Workers with the temerity to strike were arrested, beaten, and deported. But it’s a lovely campus, and I am sure the faculty members who want NYU to live up to its values are enjoying it. Who can begrudge brave and hardworking anti-Israeli petition signers their day at the beach? Besides as the signatories of this letter—who include three of the faculty members who signed the anti-Israel position—explain, “our partners are trying to do their best.” Moreover, many of the NYUAD faculty discuss “the complexities of labor in the Gulf” with their students, which is undoubtedly a comfort to the workers, who, because they were not allowed to hold onto their passports and sometimes not even to have their own bank cards, had little hope of escaping their employers, much less bettering their conditions.
It’s nice, though, that NYU’s Abu Dhabi faculty feels able to discuss labor “complexities” since, according to Freedom House, faculties at Western universities typically “take care to not criticize the UAE government or its policies out of fear of losing funding.” There are other incentives for silence as well: “in 2012, several academics critical of UAE government policies were dismissed from their positions and either arrested or expelled from the country.”
But it is commendable that these faculty members, busy enjoying a campus built by indentured servants, and the hospitality of a government that honors neither academic nor political freedom, have found time away from kayaking in Saadiyat Island’s lovely mangrove lagoons, to demand that NYU break with Israel and live up to its values. Some would call this breathtaking hypocrisy. I call it the quintessence of the academic anti-Israel movement.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Talking about the conditions of indentured servitude in Abu Dhabi, reminds us that the working conditions and shameful treatment of workers in Abu Dhabi are similar to those in Qatar, although the situation in Qatar may actually be worse. The hypocrites and self-righteous Judeophobes who sign petitions to boycott Israel and who praise and justify Hamas, conveniently omit from their concerns the oppressed, exploited and humiliated foreign workers in Qatar who often die under the burden of their harsh working conditions. Qatar is of course a major funder of Hamas, which declares its genocidal goal regarding Jews in its Charter (Article 7).

While we're talking about the nefarious influence of Muslim money, of Islamic filthy lucre, on Western intellectual life, we may recall that more than 200 years ago the French playwright Beaumarchais put into his famous play, The Marriage of Figaro, how a play was censored because of the pressure of Muslim potentates on a European monarch. This was brought to light by the columnist Ivan Rioufol writing in Le Figaro, the newspaper precisely named after the hero of Beaumarchais' play.

Labels: , , , ,