Displaying posts published in

February 2013



Quick quiz. An inquiry set up by the UN Human Rights Council has just released a draft report condemning:

A) Iran

B) China

C) Sri Lanka

D) Israel

The answer, of course, is D — Israel. This is yet another UN document that deserves to be filed in the same dustbin as the ugly and discredited Goldstone report [1]. Never mind Iran, China, Sri Lanka et al. As the Geneva-based monitoring group, UN Watch, points out, [2] since the UN set up its “reformed” Human Rights Council in 2006, “there have been seven one-sided inquiry missions on Israel, and only five on the rest of the world combined. Mass atrocities committed by Iran, China, or Sri Lanka, for example, have never been subjected to a single HRC inquiry.”

This latest report, due to be formally presented to the Council in March, is captioned “Advanced Unedited Version.” I assume they meant to say ”Advance,” since there is nothing advanced about this product. It’s the latest in a long series of exhibits that attest not to the realities of the Middle East, but to the unrelenting bigotry of what is supposed to be the UN’s leading human rights body. The full title – brace yourself, this is one of those UN doozies — is: “Report of the independent international fact-finding mission to investigate the implications of the Israeli settlements on the civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights of the Palestinian people, throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including East Jerusalem.”

The three “high-level experts” appointed by the president of the Human Rights Council to produce this document arrogate to themselves, in its introduction, a description of their work as “Guided by the principles of ‘do no harm,’ independence, impartiality, objectivity, transparency, confidentiality, integrity and professionalism…” Yes, and pigs can fly.

UN Watch gives an incisive summary of the contents [2] of this report, and makes the vital point that while the UN is supposed to foster peace, this kind of inquiry has the very opposite effect: “It has the perverse outcome of pushing the parties further apart, while also inappropriately pre-judging final status issues that can only be resolved through direct negotiations.” I’d add that in obsessively savaging Israel, while ignoring most of the genuine perpetrators of gross human rights violations, the UN Human Rights Council — and the UN generally — waste the considerable resources they are given, dishonor their charter mandate, and do a horrendous disservice to the truly downtrodden.



Why do the media’s Middle East pundits ignore the Jew-hatred intrinsic to Islamic doctrine?

A month has passed since the Middle East Media Research Institute posted a 2010 video interview [1] of Muslim Brotherhood leader, and now Egyptian President, Muhammad Morsi spewing Antisemitic vitriol. Morsi’s comments [2] included a characterization of today’s Zionists — plainly Jews in his parlance — as “descendants of apes and pigs” — a specific invocation of Koran 5:60 [3], which he had repeated, elsewhere, in print interviews [4], and commentaries [5].

That this dehumanizing Koranic [6] depiction was in reference to Jews has been validated by the most authoritative classical and modern exegeses [6]* (“tafsir,” or commentaries) on the Koran [7], the words [8] of Muhammad himself (as recorded in the sira, or pious Muslim biographies of Islam’s prophet), as well as a large corpus of Islamic theological writings [6] which demonstrate the motif’s application [6] by Muslims over a nearly 1400-year continuum.

Yet to this day, thousands of reports and opinion pieces later (search “Morsi” + “apes and pigs” using Google.com to estimate the vast output [9]), only a handful have noted this irrefragable [6] link to a Koranic verse [7] (i.e., 5:60 [3]) declaring the Jews to be apes and pigs. The apotheosis of this negationist trend was captured in a January 27, 2013 Times of Israel interview [10] of Charles Small, head of the itinerant Institute for the Study of Global Antisemitism and Policy (ISGAP). Small piously proclaimed that ISGAP was uniquely committed to addressing what was framed as “Islamic” Antisemitism, because,

There’s a reluctance among scholars to open up this subject [i.e., “Islamic” Antisemitism]. This subject is dangerous, embarrassing. It touches on various political interests in international relations that people don’t really want to engage with.

However, also ignoring Morsi’s repetition of the Koran 5:60 [3] “apes and pigs” reference, Small made this pathognomonic assertion [10], “The danger does not come from Islam itself.”

What explains the almost uniform, egregious omission of Morsi’s Koranic reference, and Small’s [10] broader see-no-Islam in “Islamic” Antisemitism mindset, displayed even by politically centrist [11] or conservative [12] Western media outlets, and the centrist or conservative “Middle East experts [11]” opining for them? I argue that such willful blindness is rooted in the misrepresentation of Islamic Jew-hatred — indeed its frank denial as a coherent doctrine — by one of the leading contemporary scholars of Islam, turned late-blooming, ubiquitous public intellectual, whose limited, dogmatic investigation of the subject, has smothered all such desperately required discussion. That scholar is Bernard Lewis.

Book Review: The Long Road to Freedom By Richard A. Baehr

http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/../2013/02/book_review_the_long_road_to_freedom.html The Long Road to Freedom — Cubanos in Wisconsin by Silvio Canto, Jr. and Gabriel Canto With the collapse of the Soviet Union, and the fall of the iron curtain more than 20 years ago, most Americans do not think any more about the threat from Communist regimes or how people lived in these […]

Girls Just Wanna Have Guns By Marion DS Dreyfus *****

“Net-net, our now-disemboweled military, with the addition of albatross soldiers in duties for which they are unfit and unsuited, will be rendered a laughingstock and present a continuing danger.This is not “equal rights” for women. It is unacceptable wrongs, for men, and for women. Adoption of this foolhardy misstep will entail headaches, loss of efficacy, and needless deaths. Those in the military who know whereof they speak have already predicted “almost certain needless deaths.”
By virtue of being lithe and of lower body mass, and having much smaller feet, in the main, women have always been terrific at mountain climbing. Women with ‘scopes were first among perseverant astronomers, though their achievements were largely ignored and stepped on by males with high-power magnification. Women are superlative and self-abnegating in the lab, often working 50 and 60 years, unmarried and unchilded, in the shadows of their discoveries before they reap awards and recognition.

Women are great in a myriad of occupations and professions, are as brave and heady as males in the full spectrum of human endeavors — not to mention childbirth, which Norman Mailer quipped would never be anything a male could do.

Since time began, women aspiring to “male” jobs and occupations have been derided and disrespected as a consequence of their menstrual periodicity. Everything suspect, from womb-connected “hysteria” to lack of judgment and inferior cognition was assigned to the female, and used as a club to deny women representation in education, careers, the opportunity rung on the rigorous escalator of achievement.

But women, on the whole, are not the best candidates for firefighter roles, other than support. The heavier duties of carrying deadweight injured comrades, the upper-body strength needed for many of the tasks associated with the military, and the steadiness required to maintain combat positions in the face of withering fire and lengthy attack, are not the circumstances where women shine. To disagree that women are, in fact, different from men in these specifics is to live in a faux-construct — we have many strengths, but we are not gorillas, and we have different musculo-skeletal apparatuses and hormonal tides than men.

All this by way of explaining why Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta’s recent initiative to open some 328,000 combat jobs is a bad idea. The prospective groundbreaking decision overturns a 1994 Pentagon rule restricting women from artillery, armor, infantry and other similar combat roles.

Career advancement, yes, does often result from valorous action in war, and to date these emoluments and ribbons of glory have been male-only. But there are numerous reasons not aired in the miles of ink generated by Panetta’s (and the president’s) little change of definition of who qualifies for what in combat-forward posts and training.

As Ryan Smith, an ex-military (currently a lawyer) who served several battlefield tours in Iraq explains in “The Reality That Awaits Women in Combat: A Pentagon push to mix the sexes ignores how awful cheek-by-jowl life is on the battlefield,” there are egregious battlefront conditions that absolutely militate against women being involved in frontline combat.

If you rejoinder that “women can take it,” assuredly yes, we can. If we choose to subject ourselves to the glaring lack of hygiene, the days-long stakeouts without toilets, the long spans without proper bivouacking, the shattering noise and grime, and the eternal close quarters with men in the same clutch of duty, without end. But the esprit de corps that is critical to unit success in the military is broken by having women around — even expertly trained, above-average-strength women with top honors in pushups and hauling and obstacle-course running.

Women are great firearms experts. We win awards in shooting competitions year after year. And Annie Oakley is a proud estrogenic legend in this country. But shooting is not the sum of tasks in combat. Most of the time is spent in awkward human-human contact that is uncomfortable, difficult, dangerous — and messy.



If a mainstream Israeli party such as Likud was promoting vile slanders against women, it would be plastered all over the BBC. When it’s Hamas, the silence is deafening

Imagine if the leading outlet associated with Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu had featured an article replete with misogynystic prejudices about women being responsible for spreading disease across Israel. Imagine that the essence of the argument was that women are chatter boxes who have a natural tendency to gather in groups. Imagine finally that the best defences against the health dangers that women pose were for them to wear face masks so as to stop them infecting people and that they should submit to the discipline of men.

Plainly, you’d never hear the end of it. But since it is Hamas, and since Western media outlets such as the BBC are engaged in a campaign to whitewash the realities of mass societal bigotry among Israel’s opponents, it is completely ignored.

Fortunately, organisations such as the Middle East Media Research Institute, MEMRI, exist to provide a more rounded picture of the realities of the Middle East.

In its latest report, MEMRI highlights a disturbing illustration of what Hamas is all about. The article, pegging off an epidemic of Swine Flu in the West Bank, is by columnist Issam Shawer in the Hamas daily Falastin. In it, the author says the following:



The administration of Barack Obama is likely to be remembered, in the short term at the very least, for saying, “No” to Americans owning rifles, but “Yes” to the Muslim Brotherhood’s demands for F-16 fighter jets.

Of course, given Mohammed Morsi’s penchant for anti-Semitism, a fact that extends further than the unscrupulous brain of just the Egyptian President himself, you may have thought the American government would think twice before arming the regime with devastatingly effective fighter jets.

Alas, once again, we are forced to stomach the dealings between Western powers and nasty theocracies.

As we are all painfully aware of by now, many Democrats and a significant number of Republicans are in favour of extending gun control in the United States – an irony not lost on numerous political commentators who have noticed that US legislators seem more comfortable with a heavily armed Islamist bully state than a responsibly armed American public. It is no stretch of the imagination to call it scandalous.

Senator Rand Paul has rightly ignited the debate in the United States regarding arms sales to Egypt and what it means for America’s ally, Israel.


The year 2013 features an anomaly for American Jews – The first day of Hanukkah coincides with Thanksgiving, on 11/28/2013. I was curious how often this happens. It turns out that it has never happened before…and it will never happen again.

Thanksgiving is set as the fourth Thursday in November, meaning the latest it can be is 11/28. 11/28 is also the earliest Hanukkah can be. The Jewish calendar repeats on a 19 year cycle, and Thanksgiving repeats on a 7 year cycle. You would therefore expect them to coincide roughly every 19×7 = 133 years. Looking back, this is approximately correct – the last time it would have happened is 1861. However, Thanksgiving was only formally established by President Lincoln in 1863. So, it has never happened before. Why won’t it ever happen again?

The reason is because the Jewish calendar is very slowly getting out of sync with the solar calendar, at a rate of 4 days per 1000 years (not bad for a many centuries old calendar!). This means that while presently Hanukkah can be as early as 11/28, over the years the calendar will drift forward, such that the earliest Hanukkah can be is 11/29. The last time Hanukkah falls on 11/28 is 2146 (which happens to be a Monday). Therefore, 2013 is the only time Hanukkah will ever overlap with Thanksgiving. You can see the start date of Hanukkah as a function of time in the attached plots [shown on the web site indicated above]. In the long timescale plot, the drift forward is clear.

Of course, if the Jewish calendar is never modified in any way, then it will slowly move forward through the Gregorian calendar, until it loops all the way back to where it is now. So, Hanukkah will again fall on Thursday, 11/28…in the year 79,811.


http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/ First they came for the Cakemakers. Over in Oregon, two lesbians came to Sweet Cakes and demanded a wedding cake. The owner let them know that he only does cakes for men and women looking to get married. No sooner did the door close than the Oregon Department of Justice, which had already solved […]

Saudi Arabia’s Efforts to Expand Radical Islam and Support Terrorism by Rachel Ehrenfeld

www.econwarfare.com On the eve of the Arab Spring, Rachel Ehrenfeld published a lengthy and important study titled, “Their Oil Is Thicker Than Our Blood“*on Saudi support for Islamist terrorism and the global expansion of the radical Islamic base, as well as the inadequacies of the Kingdom’s purported anti-terrorist efforts. While much has happened since, very […]



At a time when demographers-of-doom attempt to frighten Israel into retreat from the mountain ridges of Judea & Samaria into the 9-15 mile wide sliver along the Mediterranean, it would be instructive to examine the demographic pressure on the Founding Father of Zionism, Theodore Herzl.

Demographers of doom did not deter Theodore Herzl

Shimon Dubnov, a leading Jewish demographer/historian
(researched by Yakov Faitelson, expert on Jewish-Arab demography)

Public Letters on Ancient and Modern Judaism (1897-1907)

Sixth Letter (March 1898), http://bit.ly/VuCPJE

“Let’s examine the impact of new and detached dreams on the establishment of a political base for the Jewish People… (p. 161)

“What a gap between the construction of a few modest settlements in Palestine and the realization of the vision of an autonomous Jewish center there… Fifteen additional settlements were erected during 1882-1898, and the Jewish population of Palestine grew by 15,000. However, a great gap exists between the settlement of a few tens of thousands of Jews in Palestine on one hand, and the political resurrection of the ten million exiled Jewish People on the other hand… How far is reality from the dream?! (p. 162).

“If the Basel Congress were non-political, then it would reach a resolution that Judaism is a nationality, which should not be advanced by messianic means in Zion, but by a credible struggle for realistic Jewish interests in the Diaspora… (p. 165).

“Zionists hope to retrieve the lost [enlightened] son via a Jewish State in Palestine. However, such an idea preconditions an attainable goal upon an unattainable tactic. The establishment of a Zukunftstaat constitutes a nice dream – a messianic utopia… (p. 167).