RUTHFULLY YOURS

First: I like and admire Daniel Pipes. His support for Israel and his opposition to the two state delusion has been inspiring for me personally. I also know that his opinions have evolved over the years because unlike many scholars he is open to new ideas which are buttressed by history and facts.

Second: I like Andrew Bostom, a physician who has studied Islam meticulously and authored three authoritative books on the subject. Of particular interest to me is “The Legacy of Islamic Anti-Semitism-From Sacred Texts to Solemn History.”

Daniel Pipes maintains that a form of Islam, called “Islamism” is anti-Semitic whereas Islam itself is not. Furthermore, he states that Jews and Muslims have a history of comity.

Andrew Bostom, citing several sources categorically denies this.

Why not a debate?

It sure would be far more enlightening than all these so called interfaith dialogues.

Here are two Jews, two scholars, two Americans with the best intentions and regard for the security and destiny of Israel and America.

How about it?

http://www.americanthinker.com/2013/05/dangerous_times_the_genocidal_logic_of_anti-zionism.html

Physicist Stephen Hawking is a famous media scientist, with all the pristine morality of a Hollywood starlet starving for publicity. By calling for an academic boycott of Israel, Hawking just joined the long, long list of bloody-minded professors, as Winston Churchill called his Hawking’s species.

Paul Johnson’s excellent book Intellectuals shows that most of the famous professors of the 20th century actively promoted mass murder — far away from home, of course. Most of the bloody-minded gang favored leftist mass murderers like Stalin and Mao, but others supported Hitler before he started to lose. Famous philosopher Martin Heidegger even joined the German Nazi Party, and he never renounced his support. French intellectual star Jean-Paul Sartre managed to serially support Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot, for a record high murder count of 80-90 million human beings. Sartre never renounced his support, either.

Whaddaguy.

Even today, bloody-minded professors are a dime a dozen on the campuses. They are obscene, but they still thrive like poison mushrooms.

Yet even a Professor Hawking should be able to follow this logic.

1. Israel is the only democracy in the Middle East. It has about 7 million Jews, almost all descended from refugees from deadly persecutions in Europe and the Middle East.

After Mr. Obama called for Hosni Mubarak to resign as president of Egypt in 2011, the “Arab Spring” started mass killings in all the Muslim countries around Israel. Some 100,000 Syrian Arabs have died, and unknown thousands of Libyans, Tunisians, and Egyptians. When refugees from the jihad war in the Sudan run for safety, they often find refuge in Israel. Not in the surrounding Islamist countries, because they are the wrong religion.

2. Israel is the only country left standing after the “Arab Spring.” Egypt is starving. Libya is in chaos. Syria is in terminal civil war. Israel is stable and well-defended.

3. It is therefore clear to the shining genius of Professor Hawking that Israel must be an illegitimate foreign substance in the rich native soil of the Middle East and must disappear as soon as possible.

That is the goal of the academic boycott.

4. Israel has always been surrounded by crazy calls for genocide of the Jews (and also for killing Arab Christians, Bahá’ís, and atheists).

Since Jimmy Carter handed Iran to theocrat Ayatollah Khomeini three decades ago, all the schoolchildren in that peaceful country have been forced to chant every single day, “Death to Israel! Death to America!”

Only liberals are idiotic enough to convince themselves that the daily hate indoctrination in Iran means nothing.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/348677/10-pm-phone-call-andrew-c-mccarthy

‘What would you be focusing on in the Benghazi investigation?” I spent many years in the investigation biz, so it’s only natural that I’ve been asked that question a lot lately.

I had the good fortune to be trained in Rudy Giuliani’s U.S. attorney’s office in Manhattan. Rudy famously made his mark by making law enforcement reflect what common sense knew: Enterprises take their cues from the top. Criminal enterprises are no different: The capos do not carry out the policy of the button-men — it’s the other way around.
So if I were investigating Benghazi, I’d be homing in on that 10 p.m. phone call. That’s the one between President Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton — the one that’s gotten close to zero attention.

Benghazi is not a scandal because of Ambassador Susan Rice, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland, and “talking points.” The scandal is about Rice and Nuland’s principals, and about what the talking points were intended to accomplish. Benghazi is about derelictions of duty by President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton before and during the massacre of our ambassador and three other American officials, as well as Obama and Clinton’s fraud on the public afterward.

A good deal of media attention has quite appropriately been lavished on e-mail traffic between mid-level administration officials in the days leading up to Sunday, September 16. That is the day when Ms. Rice, a close Obama confidant, made her appalling appearances on the Sunday-morning political shows. Those performances were transparently designed to mislead the American people, during the presidential campaign stretch run, into believing that an anti-Islamic Internet video — rather than a coordinated terrorist attack orchestrated by al-Qaeda affiliates, coupled with the Obama administration’s gross failure to secure and defend American personnel in Benghazi — was responsible for the killings.

Fraud flows from the top down, not the mid-level up. Mid-level officials in the White House and the State Department do not call the shots — they carry out orders. They also were not running for reelection in 2012 or positioning themselves for a campaign in 2016. The people doing that were, respectively, President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton.

Obama and Clinton had been the architects of American foreign policy. As Election Day 2012 loomed, each of them had a powerful motive to promote the impressions (a) that al-Qaeda had been decimated; (b) that the administration’s deft handling of the Arab Spring — by empowering Islamists — had been a boon for democracy, regional stability, and American national security; and (c) that our real security problem was “Islamophobia” and the “violent extremism” it allegedly causes — which was why Obama and Clinton had worked for years with Islamists, both overseas and at home, to promote international resolutions that would make it illegal to incite hostility to Islam, the First Amendment be damned.

All of that being the case, I am puzzled why so little attention has been paid to the Obama-Clinton phone call at 10 p.m. on the night of September 11.

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/348687/autocrat-accountants-mark-steyn Once government is ensnared in every aspect of life, a bureaucracy grows increasingly capricious. Speaking at Ohio State University earlier this month, Barack Obama urged students to pay no attention to those paranoid types who “incessantly warn of government as nothing more than some separate, sinister entity.” Oddly enough, in recent days the most […]

Rabbi Akiva and the IRS As the IRS scandal unfolds, it is worth recalling that , according to the medieval rabbis, the practice of reciting kaddish, the Jewish prayer for the dead,originated in the medieval story of Rabbi Akiva found in Mahzor Vitry. Walking in a cemetery, Akiva meets a naked man, carrying wood on […]

http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Into-the-Fray-Deciphering-delegitimization-313419 For a secure Israel to regain legitimacy, the idea of a Palestinian state must be discredited as a possible means of resolving conflict. How is it that after all the wrenching concessions it has made, Israel is far more reviled today than during the rigid “rejectionism” of Yitzhak Shamir? I believe we have to […]

http://pjmedia.com/andrewmccarthy/2013/05/17/humas-moonlighting-no-problem-just-dont-mention-her-crescent-lighting/

Well, well, well, the Huma Abedin controversy has finally hit the legacy media. Okay, okay — it’s not the Huma Abedin controversy, but it’s one Obama’s court stenographers apparently feel comfortable talking about.

It seems Ms. Abedin, accurately described by the New York Times as Hillary Rodham Clinton’s ”longtime aide and confidante,” spent her last months at the State Department not really at the State Department. Despite maintaining her title as Secretary of State Clinton’s deputy chief of staff, she was permitted, upon returning to government service from maternity leave in mid-2012, to remain at home in New York with her newborn child and her husband, the disgraced former Congressman Anthony Weiner — he of the notorious Weiner all aTwitter photos. While the State Department was paying her $135,000 as a “special government employee,” Abedin was also permitted to moonlight as a “strategic consultant” for Teneo, a firm founded by Doug Band, a former adviser to President Bill Clinton. (Teneo, the Times informs us, advises such firms as MF Global, the brokerage firm whose investors were broken by Jon Corzine — the former New Jersey governor and Obama campaign bundler.) In addition, Abedin found time in her busy “special government employee” schedule to do consultant work for the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation.

With that familiar Clinton flare, Abedin did not disclose her consultant income on government financial disclosure forms. According to the State Department, you see, her new “part-time” position as “special government employee” meant the usual disclosure requirements did not apply to her … notwithstanding that, the Atlantic Wire reports, Abedin continued to be referred to in official documents as deputy chief of staff to the United States secretary of state. The arrangement finally came to an end in March when Ms. Abedin officially left the State Department to head up Mrs. Clinton’s six-person “transition office” — i.e., the transition from secretary of state to what the tongue-in-cheeky Atlantic calls Mrs. Clinton’s “version of private life.”

Apparently not to the great delight of the Clintons, Weiner, as part of his effort to come back from his virtual sex scandal and maybe make a run for New York City mayor, decided to release the couple’s 2012 tax returns. They show that these dedicated public servants made just shy of a half-million dollars last year. Turns out Weiner’s been “consulting” too, but the couple is not saying how much of the haul comes from Abedin’s extracurricular activities while she was still on the government payroll.

This story is getting some attention — sure to be fleeting — from the reliably Clinton-adoring press and some “good government” types. But that has more to do with a potential Weiner political campaign than with the tangled web of government policy-making and Clinton cronies (like the Saudis and Qataris — multi-million dollar donors to the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation who do mega-business with the State Department). There has to date been scant media interest in Abedin’s earlier part-time job.

As detailed previsously here at Ordered Liberty, Ms. Abedin began her long professional association with Mrs. Clinton in 1996, as an intern to the first lady in the Clinton White House. In the years that followed, she remained a Clinton staffer from the White House to the Senate, and eventually to the State Department. At the same time, she also served from 1996 through 2008 as assistant editor of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, a publication founded by Abdullah Omar Naseef, a major financier of al Qaeda whose Islamic “charity,” the Rabita Trust, is a designated terrorist organization (on which Naseef colluded with Wael Hamza Jalaidan, an Osama bin Laden intimate who is one of al Qaeda’s founders).