1. Hamas Takes Chutzpah To A New Level - I cannot think of many things that Jews have invented that Arabs in general, and Arab terrorists in particular, have improved upon. But obviously, Hamas has taken chutzpah to a new level.
Finally, to conclude this segment, if Hamas does agree to release Gilad Shalit in exchange for a bunch of their terrorist brethren, and if they show up at the exchange point with a coffin like Hezbollah did with the remains of Ehud Goldwasser and Eldad Regev in 2008, then shoot every last one of the terrorists being released. That is what should have happened to Samir Kuntar, the despicable terrorist who in 1979 murdered 4 Israelis, including a 4 year old girl he murdered by using "blunt force against a rock". Instead, Kuntar gets treated like a conquering hero and, among other things, received the Syrian Order of Merit from that grand humanitarian Bashir Assad.
I'm just sayin.....
2. Hamas Learned "Uber-Chutzpah" From The Useless Nations - among other places. Read the first sentence of this article and tell me if something seems amiss - The U.N. Prepares for Durban III | The Weekly Standard - did you see it?
The UNGA elected Qatar as president and Iran as a vice-president of the UNGA for the next year.
Qatar and Iran. Qatar and Iran. Qatar and Iran. Qatar and Iran. Qatar and Iran. Qatar and Iran. Qatar and Iran. Qatar and Iran. Qatar and Iran. Qatar and Iran. Qatar and Iran. Qatar and Iran.
Here's what the Qatari delegation head to Durban I said at that antisemitism festival in 2001:
At the first Durban conference on “combating intolerance and xenophobia” the head of Qatar’s delegation, Abdul-Rahman H. Al-Attiyah, declared: “all the Israeli heinous violations are justified as a means to bring back every Jew to a land that they raped from its legitimate owners and denied them their right to claim it back.”
What do you expect from such a corrupt organization? That permits Saudi Arabia to be on the UN Women panel - a nation in which among other things, women are not allowed to drive. And check this out from when Saudi Arabia was elected to the UN Women Panel:
After all, who could forget the farce that ensued when a Saudi delegation appeared for the first time before the UN women's rights panel in Geneva in 2008 and absurdly insisted that women in their country faced no discrimination?
But the most ludicrous claim came when the UN committee asked why Saudi men could marry up to four wives. With a straight face, a Saudi delegate — a man, of course — explained that it was to ensure a man's sexual appetite was satisfied legally if one wife could not fulfill it.
What do you expect from an organization that permits the following countries to serve on the United Nations Human Rights Council - Saudi Arabia (double winner!), China, Cuba, Jordan, Kuwait, Russia, Kyrgyzstan, and Qatar (double winner!). And Libya was a member until it was suspended just a few months ago.
The whole useless organization should be figuratively, if not literally, blown up. Whatever good work it might do is far outweighed by its corruption, hypocrisy and overall inability to perform its mandate.
3. Take That, Political Correctness #1 - In what I think was a surprising verdict (not because of right or wrong, but in terms of the trial taking place n one of the most Liberal nations on earth and the degree to which Europe has gone overboard to accommodate the demands of Islamicists), Geert Wilders has been acquitted of uttering hate speech - Geert Wilders Acquitted | FrontPage Magazine.
6. The "Ceeb"? When it comes to Israel, CBC Reporter Neil MacDonald never lets the facts get in the way of a good story - Contrary to CBC Reporter Neil MacDonald, Israel Sees Assad's Regime as a Brutal Destabilizing Force (June 23, 2011) - when you look at this link, look at how many times this type of thing has happened - how about assigning him to covering the frequency of bowel movements of the penguins on Antarctica? And for my money, he can take his abysmally unfunny brother, "comedian" Norm MacDonald with him - not because he should pay for the sins of his brother, but because in my opinion, he is so painfully and spectacularly unfunny.
CD (interviewer): There’s an ongoing debate about the ways in which radical Islamist groups such as Hezbollah and Hamas are portrayed in the media. For example, there’s controversy over terms such as ‘terrorist’ or ‘militant’, and from one side complaints that the ideological extremism of these groups is never spelled-out, and from the other that the legitimacy of their territory-based grievances aren’t given due prominence. A noticeable curio is the tendency to ‘balance out’ the rather more unsavoury aspects of these organisations – for example, by emphasising their social charity work – as if they were just Islamic equivalents of the Salvation Army, albeit with more literal weapons. What’s your take on this?
MJT (Michael J. Totten): First of all, Hamas and Hezbollah don’t have territory-based grievances. They explicitly say, in no uncertain terms, that they wish to erase an entire nation from the face of the earth. No other country gets discussed in this manner. I don’t believe that if the Irish Republican Army vowed to conquer London and massacre the English that even the most radical of British leftists would find the IRA remotely acceptable or describe its program as “territory-based.”
Second, I’ve never understood why some people think it’s such a big deal that Hamas and Hezbollah engage in charity work. They’re still terrorists. They’re still fascist movements that place the murder of Jews at the core of their ideologies. Pol Pot may not have built hospitals, but Hitler did. Both Hitler and Pol Pot built schools. So what?
10. Comment From A Reader - in item 17 of last Saturday's blog posting, I gave voice to some of my opinions about the Shoah. After the item, I included a number of Shoah-related pictures, and prefaced them with the words "Caution - Graphic Images below..."
A reader named "CL" posted a comment that I will summarize as being to ask why I had given such a caution, as that gave readers a way out of having to look at the images (the full comment is published here). Interesting comment. CL is free to interpret the caution as they night, but my intent was anything but.
I am certainly not an expert on the Shoah, but at the same time, I believe that I am fairly well informed on the subject. I have read dozens of historical works (many of which are very graphic in words as well as images), watched numerous documentaries (many of which are very graphic), talked extensively with many survivors, given presentations on the Shoah to Jewish and non-Jewish groups, visited the USHMM, visited Yad Vashem 5 times (including its new (in 2005) museum 4 times), and participated in the 2005 March of the Living (which included visits to Auschwitz, Aushwitz-Birkenau, Majdanek, Treblinka, and other Shoah sites in Poland).
Even with all that background, I still find that I have to steel myself emotionally when "engaging" in something to do with the Shoah - reading a book, watching a documentary, or whatever. The sheer horror of the details of what was done to millions of innocent men, women and children simply because they were Jewish still overwhelms me every time. And I think that's a good thing - one should not want the subject of the Shoah to become trivial or mundane.
So my intent was not at all to warn people so that they could turn away. My intent was simply to tell people to brace themselves emotionally for the images I had included.
As a last point on this issue, I think that everyone (Jews and non-Jews) should become much more educated about the Shoah - to become much more aware of the depth of evil that perpetrated in the Shoah (and that still exists today in other ways) and that collaborated in it, and to become aware of the heroism of those who resisted (and resistance took many forms), those who somehow survived, the righteous gentiles who rescued Jews, and, quite frankly, the dignity of the victims. And to prevent it from happening to anyone again.
... A miracle occurred. Two hundred children did not cry out. Two hundred pure souls, condemned to death, did not weep. Not one of them ran away. None tried to hide. Like stricken swallows they clung to their teacher and mentor, to their father and brother, Janusz Korczak, so that he might protect and preserve them. Janusz Korczak was marching, his head bent forward, holding the hand of a child, without a hat, a leather belt around his waist, and wearing high boots. A few nurses were followed by two hundred children, dressed in clean and meticulously cared for clothes, as they were being carried to the altar. (...) On all sides the children were surrounded by Germans, Ukrainians, and this time also Jewish policemen. They whipped and fired shots at them. The very stones of the street wept at the sight of the procession.
Read more about Janusz Korczak here - my visit to the orphanage at Siena Street in Warsaw was one of the most emotional parts of my trip on the March of the Living.
17. Ship Of Fools Update - there is a legal maxim (volenti non fit injuria) which means that "to a willing person, no injury is done" - in other words - if you are dumb enough to poke a bear in the eye, and the bear subsequently tears your tuchis off - don't try to sue the bear. The utterly stupid useful idiots who are planning to sail on flotillas to Gaza should take that maxim to heart.
So guys - don't whine and moan no matter what happens to you - you're on your own!
I heard an interesting comment from my gentile neighbour who is an arch supporter of Obama. Of course he and I disagree politically. His opinion was that Obama's strategy in using the 67 borders was intended only as a kick off point which will lead to negotiations; furthermore he had to take this harsh line in order to force Netanayahu to show greatness. Reminders about all the concessions Israel has made to date were acknowledged as well as admitted there was intransigence on the part of the Muslims. In his opinion he believes that Abbas is a goner no matter what move he will next take. When I asked him what he proposed that Israel do next short of disappearing off the face of the earth, his answer was "I don't know", but a great man would. How would you or anyone one reading uyour blog respond?
I was recently invited to participate in a discussion about the ills of the police who were warned well in advance to target certain G8 protestors. The audience was manipulated into believing that our rights were being eroded. I had no problem interjecting that she failed to mention that professional agitators were imported from Quebec via the German organization called "Black September" whose aim is to destroy capitalism, and the very freedoms that democracies espouse. It didn't take much to dismantle the arguments of this useless idiot. The bigger question is why anyone would financially support any institution that erodes our values?Why aren't educators being held accountable? Their usual riposte is that "freedom of speech is being eroded". Why isn't the counter argument aired about fairness, accountablilty and behaving responsibility? Bah, humbug, send em all to the Gulag.
Read This Year in Jerusalem and tell me whether you are still as impressed and supportive of Richler as Barbara Kay is? Richler was an unoffical member of the wild bunch of Jews who did not hold themselves accountable, nor did he show any respect for Judaism and the traditions of a very famous Jewish grandfather who was a well respected sage ( Sholom Aleichem)He was even less informed about Israel and yet wrote about it in a very damaging way which would only fuel the delegitimization narrative. He was a drunk who was embarrased by his Jewish heritage and although he was engaging and provocative in his writings, he was the epitome of self hating Jew. Yes, he was as irritating as a Montreal pothole, where you'd lose your hubcaps going over a bump A.S.
While you are free to disagree with something I have said or posted, you must not use inappropriate language - comments that are profane, racist or otherwise objectionable will not be tolerated.
I heard an interesting comment from my gentile neighbour who is an arch supporter of Obama. Of course he and I disagree politically. His opinion was that Obama's strategy in using the 67 borders was intended only as a kick off point which will lead to negotiations; furthermore he had to take this harsh line in order to force Netanayahu to show greatness. Reminders about all the concessions Israel has made to date were acknowledged as well as admitted there was intransigence on the part of the Muslims. In his opinion he believes that Abbas is a goner no matter what move he will next take. When I asked him what he proposed that Israel do next short of disappearing off the face of the earth, his answer was "I don't know", but a great man would. How would you or anyone one reading uyour blog respond?
ReplyDeleteI was recently invited to participate in a discussion about the ills of the police who were warned well in advance to target certain G8 protestors. The audience was manipulated into believing that our rights were being eroded. I had no problem interjecting that she failed to mention that professional agitators were imported from Quebec via the German organization called "Black September" whose aim is to destroy capitalism, and the very freedoms that democracies espouse. It didn't take much to dismantle the arguments of this useless idiot. The bigger question is why anyone would financially support any institution that erodes our values?Why aren't educators being held accountable? Their usual riposte is that "freedom of speech is being eroded". Why isn't the counter argument aired about fairness, accountablilty and behaving responsibility? Bah, humbug, send em all to the Gulag.
ReplyDeleteRead This Year in Jerusalem and tell me whether you are still as impressed and supportive of Richler as Barbara Kay is? Richler was an unoffical member of the wild bunch of Jews who did not hold themselves accountable, nor did he show any respect for Judaism and the traditions of a very famous Jewish grandfather who was a well respected sage ( Sholom Aleichem)He was even less informed about Israel and yet wrote about it in a very damaging way which would only fuel the delegitimization narrative. He was a drunk who was embarrased by his Jewish heritage and although he was engaging and provocative in his writings, he was the epitome of self hating Jew. Yes, he was as irritating as a Montreal pothole, where you'd lose your hubcaps going over a bump A.S.
ReplyDelete