Displaying posts published in

June 2012



Forty-five years ago, on June 5, 1967, the world was writing Israel’s obituary. The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and Sudan, along with military contingents from many other Arab and Muslim regimes, were all poised at tiny Israel’s vulnerable borders, ready to annihilate the Jewish state. The odds appeared immensely stacked against Israel, and the likelihood of any outside military support, even from the United States, seemed remote. Israel stood alone.

The Arab Muslim street was shrieking bloodcurdling threats of mass extermination for all Israelis, young and old, and the Arab leaders were falling over themselves to see who could utter the most hideous promise of massacre and slaughter. The Muslim Arab cry Itbah Al-Yahud, an Arabic phrase meaning “Slaughter the Jews,” was spewing from every Arab regime’s controlled radio and television station.

Khaybar ya Yahod, another Arabic battle cry — referring to a seventh-century attack by Islam’s prophet, Mohammed, and his followers against the Jewish community in Khaybar, in present-day Saudi Arabia — was also being shouted by huge Arab mobs. Mohammed’s surprise attack, breaking a ten-year treaty, resulted in the forced expulsion of all the Jewish men, women, and children. In 627 AD, Mohammad also attacked the Jewish Bani Quraysh tribe, beheading many of the men and boys and enslaving the women and young children.



When it comes to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the political right accuses the left of pursuing a fantasy — namely, that peace is possible. At the same time, however, the right suffers from what many consider its own fantasy: that Israel can defy the world, and particularly the U.S.

In addressing the right’s “fantasy,” the fact is that you can count the instances where Israeli prime ministers have defied the U.S. on the fingers of one hand.

Ben Gurion’s declaration of statehood is one such example, as was his refusal to withdraw in the ’48 war to the Partition line. He insisted instead on the Armistice lines. In part for his intransigence, he was punished with the creation of UNRWA.

Other instances of Israel bucking the United States include, perhaps, Eshkol’s decision to pre-empt the Six-Day War and Begin’s courageous decisions to bomb Iraq’s nuclear reactor at Osirak, and to push on to Beirut in the first Lebanese War.

Begin, uncharacteristically, gave up every inch of the Sinai, after much pressure and prodding. He even came to the conclusion that doing it was a good thing. The most important reason was because Egypt, then Israel’s biggest Arab enemy, was prepared to break the Arab rejectionist front by making peace with Israel. This was considered a very big deal at the time.



The Devil Obama Knows By Will Oremus
When you’re trying to raise $1 billion for your campaign, hobnobbing with glitzy donors is inevitable. But when one of your main messages is that your opponent is out of touch, you might want to be a little more discreet about how you do it than this.



A flattering Vogue magazine profile of Asma al Assad, the First Lady of Syria, has vanished from the magazine’s official website.

Anchor Marco Werman talks to Paul Farhi, a Washington Post reporter, who tells why it is significant that the articles about Assad was ‘disappeared.’

Asma al-Assad: A Rose in the Desert

by Joan Juliet Buck | photographed by James Nachtwey

“Asma al-Assad is glamorous, young, and very chic—the freshest and most magnetic of first ladies. Her style is not the couture-and-bling dazzle of Middle Eastern power but a deliberate lack of adornment. She’s a rare combination: a thin, long-limbed beauty with a trained analytic mind who dresses with cunning understatement. Paris Match calls her “the element of light in a country full of shadow zones.” She is the first lady of Syria.

Syria is known as the safest country in the Middle East, possibly because, as the State Department’s Web site says, “the Syrian government conducts intense physical and electronic surveillance of both Syrian citizens and foreign visitors.” It’s a secular country where women earn as much as men and the Muslim veil is forbidden in universities, a place without bombings, unrest, or kidnappings, but its shadow zones are deep and dark. Asma’s husband, Bashar al-Assad, was elected president in 2000, after the death of his father, Hafez al-Assad, with a startling 97 percent of the vote.”


Spotted owl stops Tombstone’s pipeline repairs
Saturday, June 9, 2012
The owl is a threatened species, and until a few days ago its presence in fire-scorched Miller Canyon was a matter of speculation. But now that it has surfaced, the owl could be a game-changer in the water war between the U.S. Forest Service and the Wild West city made famous by the 30-second gunfight at the O.K. Corral. Read more…

Read more: http://times247.com/#ixzz1xOBJ4D36

HANDRAHAN: Eric Holder’s sizzling summer

HANDRAHAN: Eric Holder’s sizzling summer
Lori Handrahan | U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder was up on the Hill last week testifying before Congress, again, about the Department of Justice’s gun-tracking Fast and Furious operation. There are allegations of lies and obstruction of justice committed by department employees and claims that the attorney general himself is covering for his staff rather than upholding the U.S. Constitution. Read more…

Read more: http://times247.com/#ixzz1xOAQDL4E
range missiles. Read more…
Conservative barred from giving high school speech
The Blaze
Saturday, June 9, 2012
Gerald Molen — a retired Marine who also produced “Jurassic Park” and “Twister” — told the Hollywood Reporter earlier this week that Tom Stack, principal of Ronan High School, disinvited him from speaking to graduating seniors specifically because he was a “right-wing conservative.” Ronan School District Superintendent Andy Holmund confirmed that the incident “did, in fact, occur.” Read more…

Read more: http://times247.com/#ixzz1xOAj8473
EDITORIAL: Slick Willy is sinking Barack
We all have ringside seats in Clinton vs. Obama




Bill Clinton was many things, but stupid was never one of them. Even his supporters were eventually forced to admit that most of those things were true. Sloppy, corrupt, impulsive, amoral, vindictive, petty and loving every minute of it. Sure. But not stupid. Clinton was of the left, but he was a politician first. He understood politics as more than just gamesmanship, a set of rules, procedures and technicalities, powerful people to court, an image to cultivate and opponents to destroy.

What Clinton understood, and Obama doesn’t, is that politics is about people. And that politics is nothing without people. 400 glowing articles don’t compare to what people are feeling when they’re unemployed, when they’re not sure how they’ll make payroll next month and when they sit toting up the numbers late at night and worrying about the future.

Obama isn’t so much a machine politician as he is a politician of the machine. A man whose career was made by one machine after another. Smooth gleaming urban monstrosities guiding him from one organization to another, from handshakes to dinners to ballots to signatures. Politics to him is nothing but a power game almost completely detached from the people. They’re spectators, showing up to faint, cheer and buy him drinks afterward.

Politics to Obama is its own game, like law or basketball. The people in the stands and benches make it necessary, but they don’t really figure into it except as a nebulous crowd providing moral support. What really matters are how you win the game, the rules and the way you can break the rules. It’s all that matters.

Considering his level of emotional detachment, Obama has been good at faking it. But most of the fakery is second-hand. The work of an army of advisers and a grass-roots movement determined to create a Hollywood idea of the hero, who wins elections, defeats conservatives, and like at the end of every political movie, connects with the voters by delivering a speech that sets out the stakes.

Bill Clinton knows that’s a load of crap. He’s played that game, he’s had those advisers, and he’s given those speeches, but he has enough of a background in real world elections to know that nobody really gives a damn about the speeches. They’ll listen to them when they’re first getting to know you or when something important happens, but mostly people elect politicians to do things for them.

Clinton, like McCain, underestimated the power of the machine behind Obama. The new world order of digital power, manufactured cult-of-personality media complex and sheer arrogant rule-breaking. Slick Willy had tasted two out of that three in his time, but no one ever worshiped him as a god. And certainly no one was going to faint on listening to his wife or build statues to her. Hillary would not inspire works of art or paeans of praise.

But Bill also had the last laugh. Because gods are not allowed to let you down. Gods are not allowed to keep blaming Bush or the Republicans. They’re not allowed to promise to take care of things later. That’s not what people elect gods for.

There’s no doubt that he saw this coming early on and that in the dregs of his bitterness at losing, not just failing to win, but the humiliation of defeat, he knew that the day would come when the statues would fall. When people would stretch out their hands expecting help… and when it did not come, the hands would clench into fists.

People expect less of Presidents, than they do of gods. They expect more of men who claim to be able to lower sea levels and change history. And they don’t take “no” for an answer. Being ignored only makes them angrier.

Unlike Clinton, Obama isn’t able to step out there with an apologetic shrug and a heartfelt speech about tough times. The speech can be written for him by the campaign that never ends, which will find a poet from Chicago who writes rhymes about the Great Depression that reflect class and social divisions, while sipping a craft beer, to do the hard work of laying out all those words, it will be touted for two weeks by the media as the final response to an ungrateful nation, it will upstage three television programs that people actually enjoy watching in these hard times, and it will sound and feel exactly like the time your neighbors sent over their spoiled brat to apologize for breaking your window on pain of losing his trip to Disneyland.

Obama’s detachment is his gift. That coolness which convinces supporters that his mind is exploring other realms, contemplating deep thoughts on racial identity and postmodernism or probing the moral paradoxes of soft power. It makes his occasional bouts of attentiveness seem more intense, like a coma patient occasionally waking up to check in, before checking out again.

His pathological need for attention is wholly self-centered and he is not at all surprised to find that the world revolves around him. But it’s an attention that he has never had to fight for. It was the birthright that he gained from his dysfunctional family, his coddled educational background and his red carpet ride through politics.

Bill Clinton has never checked out in his life. Of the two men, he looks like the lazy one, but is the genuine hard worker. Even after serving two terms, he is still searching for something to do. After a term or two in office, you won’t find Obama frothing at the mouth to run someone else’s campaign. Chatting with the folks on Martha’s Vineyard, maybe. Delivering speeches on facing the challenges of tomorrow, for a cool million a pop, to Chinese corporations, almost certainly. But not working.

When it comes to attention, Clinton fights for it. His permanent campaign is a personal one that never goes away. Give him five minutes anywhere and he will make himself the center of attention, not because he deserves it and certainly not because it’s handed to him as a token prize for his race or his coolness, but because he wants it more than anyone else in the room.

There is an emptiness in many entertainers that drives them to be the center of attention and from there into explosive bouts of self-destructive behavior. Clinton is of their breed. Give him five minutes in any room and he will own the room. And then the next room. But he isn’t an actor. The actor is his rival, the cool man with the big ears, who spends more time entertaining himself than anyone else. Who reads his lines, waits for the peasants to applaud and takes off for the next venue.



A day before, a Muslim man in Germany beheaded his wife in front of his six children – while screaming “Allahu Akbar!” or, “Allah is Greater!” – ” throwing her dismembered head from the roof of their apartment.”

According to yesterday’s edition of Youm7, two brothers in a village in Assuit, Egypt, slaughtered their mother, sister, and aunt, “after discovering their sister’s actions were contrary to morality.”

After chaos erupted in the house, including gunfire, local police surrounded and broke into the home, only to find the aunt, Saida Muhammad Mukhtar, 55-years-old and a housewife, “with her head sliced off”; the mother, Amina Ahmed Muhammad, also 55 and a housewife, found “drowned in blood by the entrance of the house”; and the sister, Sana Mukhtar, 39-years-old and a widow, found butchered in a room.

The two brothers—Ahmed Mukhtar, 35, and Abd al-Basit, 24—were subsequently arrested, and confessed to the murders in detail.

Such slayings are not rare occurrences in the Islamic world, and even in the West—wherever there are Muslims. A day before this story emerged, a Muslim man in Germany beheaded his wife in front of their six children—while screaming “Allahu Akbar!” or “Allah is greater!”—”throwing her dismembered head from the roof of their apartment.”

Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center and an Associate Fellow at the Middle East Forum.


2012.06.09 (Muangdaw, Myanmar) – Four Buddhists, including a doctor and an elderly man, are stabbed to death by Muslim rioters following Friday prayers.
2012.06.08 (Maiduguri, Nigeria) – A Religion of Peace suicide bomber sends five Nigerians to Allah.
2012.06.08 (Baghdad, Iraq) – A brutal ambush of a family vehicle by Mujahideen leaves a married couple dead and their three children injured.
2012.06.08 (Peshawar, Pakistan) – Four women and a child are among nineteen innocents on a bus torn to shreds by a Sunni bomb.
2012.06.07 (Quetta, Pakistan) – Five children are among fifteen people blown up by sectarian Jihadis outside a Sunni seminary.
2012.06.06 (Narathiwat, Thailand) – A woman is among two villagers shot to death by Muslim ‘insurgents’, who also burn down a school.


The Fastest Growing Religion in America Is…

Do you know what the fastest growing religion in America is? It isn’t Christianity. According to the latest U.S. Religion Census that was just released on May 1, 2012, the fastest growing religion in America is Islam. The data for the census was compiled by the Association of Statisticians of American Religious Bodies, and the results were released by the Association of Religion Data Archives. From the year 2000 to the year 2010, the census found that the number of Muslims living inside the United States increased from 1 million to 2.6 million – a stunning increase of 66.7 percent. That is an astounding rate of growth. Meanwhile, most Christian denominations had rates of growth that were far below the overall rate of population growth in the United States, and some Christian denominations actually lost members. Sadly, when Barack Obama once said that “we are no longer a Christian nation” he wasn’t too far off the mark. Christianity is rapidly losing influence and other religions such as Islam are rapidly gaining members and building new places of worship. As other major religions such as Islam continue to grow in the United States, it is inevitable that this will reshape America in many different ways in the years ahead.



As many have already noted, June 5th through 10th of this year marks the forty-fifth anniversary of the Six Day War. Up until then, Arabs had refused to accept an Israel that was a mere 9-15 miles wide via the 1949 armistice lines. For some perspective, many people travel farther just to go to work or for a visit to the shopping mall. Indeed, President George W. Bush stated that Texas had driveways larger than that. Israel is the problem–not its size. As I like to suggest, find it on a world globe without a magnifying glass…I dare you.

Armistice lines are not borders. They merely mark where fighting officially stops in wars. Those in question here designated where fighting ceased after the invasion of Israel by a half dozen Arab nations in 1948. The U.N. did nothing to halt that blatant aggression, but jumped in only after Jews turned the tide to limit Arab losses.

Recall that from 1949 to 1967, Arabs controlled Gaza and the West Bank, and no one demanded a second Arab state in the original April 25, 1920 Mandate of Palestine’s territory at that time. Jordan was created in 1922 from almost 80 percent of the area, a gift from British imperialist shenanigans. So much for the Arab claim that Jews got most of Palestine.

Having been (once again) blockaded by Egypt at the Straits of Tiran and the Gulf of Aqaba (a casus belli); witnessing over 100,000 Egyptian troops, tanks, and so forth amassed on the armistice line after Egypt ordered the U.N. peacekeeping force out of the area; and subjected to other hostile acts as well, a beleaguered Israel desperately struck out to cancel Arab plans for another Holocaust. In six days in June 1967, it was over…at least temporarily. I have a large cooler filled with original newspaper articles from those frightening days–pictures of tens of thousands of Arabs calling for Israel’s destruction, the massacre of Jews, and so forth.




“If the left in Europe and, increasingly, the United States is so hospitable to anti-Zionist and anti-Semitic ideas, what does that mean for the future of “Jews and the Left”? Michael Walzer explained the historical Jewish affinity for the left as a straightforward matter: “We have supported the people who support us.” The historical insights of the “Jews and the Left” conference suggested that things were never so simple—or mutual. So, when that basic equation no longer holds—if the left are no longer “the people who support us”—will we continue to support them? The “rising generation” of the left will contain its share of Jews, maybe even more than its share; but whether it will be a Jewish left, as it was in the past, is very much in doubt.”

“Why so many alte kockers? Where is the rising generation?” The grumbler sitting behind me at the conference [1] on “Jews and the Left,” sponsored by YIVO last week at the Center for Jewish History in New York, was not exactly being fair. Any academic conference will attract an older-skewing audience, and for all the gray hair in the seats and on the dais, the YIVO conference did have its share of eager young attendees.

Behind the complaint, however, it was possible to hear a larger, more painful question. For the first two-thirds of the 20th century, from the first immigrant generation through the baby boom, the radical and revolutionary left played a hugely important role in defining how the rest of America saw Jews and how Jews saw themselves. From Mike Gold’s proletarian novel Jews Without Money all the way down to Tony Kushner’s Angels in America, the literature and mythology of American Jewish radicalism has often appeared identical—to a certain audience—with Judaism itself. Even now there are people who revel in bygone lore about the Forverts and the Freiheit, Jay Lovestone and Max Shachtman. But living heirs to that tradition can be hard to find. Somewhat plaintively, my neighbor at the conference—like many of the participants—seemed to be asking, Is there still such a thing as a Jewish left? And if not, ought we to regret it?