Jack Engelhard, author of “The Bathsheba Deadline” and “Indecent Proposal”, as well as the award-winning memoir of his experiences as a Jewish refugee from Europe, has decided to make public a private exchange of letters he had with the world-famous and brilliant former New York Times editor Abe Rosenthal.

Rosenthal faced up to the mistake of New York Times’ minimization during WWII of the slaughter of the Jews of Europe in an editorial in 1996. He admitted that the daily wrote about what was happening to Jews on inner pages. He regretted that error deeply and worried about the state of israel.
Engelhard’s decision to release the letters to Israel National News for publication followed the recent op-ed by PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas published by the New York Times.

“So what else is new when, upon reading the paper Tuesday, May 17, here’s Mahmoud Abbas getting himself published as an op-ed contributor,” Engelhard wrote in an opinion published by INN. “This is like Al Capone getting to tell his side of the story, or Josef Mengele giving advice in the Journal of the American Medical Association.”

Abbas NYT piece effectively buried the Oslo Accords, upon whose ratification Roshenthal famously said, “The signing of these accords proves the anti-semites wrong – Jews aren’t smarter than other people.”

The Gray Lady’s decison to give Abbas a bully-pulpit, and its skewed reporting of Itamar massacre, Nakba, and Obama’s Cairo speeches, makes one wonder what Rosenthal, a 56 year veteran of the New York times (1943-1999) and 1960 Pulitzer Prize winner for international reporting, would say about her were he alive today.



I was pleased to hear from Shannon Smith, executive director of Wyoming Humanities Council, but disappointed to learn that she disagreed. When people disagree with facts, it means they cannot abide information that conflicts with their belief system. Did she not grasp that our world is afire? That our World Trade Center was bombed and 3,000 citizens killed? That Christians are being slaughtered in Africa and Asia? That Jews are fleeing Europe again? That Sweden and Norway have been called the rape capitals of the world? That the violence occurring around the globe is caused by one group and one group only?

The books gifted by the Muslim Journeymen were described as containing “history, faith, and Muslim culture around the world.” Islamic history, antithetical to all we believe and trust, is severely misrepresented in their accounts. They do not divulge their 1400-year history of violence, slavery, destruction of 270 million people and their cultures, the permanent land grabs, and the forced imposition of Islamic ideology to 1.3 billion people. They do not disclose their cruel Islamic law, Shari’a, and its incompatibility with our heritage and Constitution. Our God is not their God; our Torah and Bible are not their Qur’an, of which eighty percent deals with killing the infidels. The adherents will not live harmoniously with other nations and ideologies and they are a danger to all humanity. Their literature warrants inspection.

Of the five novels the libraries received, Smith and her staff read Persepolis, by Marjane Satrapi, and admitted it was disturbing. So was In the Country of Men, by Hisham Matar. Both are stories of a desolate future and inappropriate, vulgar material. In the former, Marjane lives in Iran, a country in transition from secular to Islamic religious extremism; in the latter, nine-year-old Suleiman lives a frightening life in despotic Libya. Both books deal with issues of repression; abandonment and neglect; explicit sexuality and drugs; both have unsavory characters, and deal with issues of unhappiness, anxiety, martyrdom and death, and “life is pain.” These are very different from the decent, moral literature that produced the people who created our great nation.

The immersion in degradation is intentional. The books were chosen to discourage the innocent from reading and creative thinking, to produce “common” and “standard” (Common Core Standards) workers who are compliant and easily controlled, like the masses who lost their will to rise up against the Islamic and socialist regimes. In the words of Montesquieu, “As virtue is necessary in a republic…so fear is necessary in a despotic government.”

EDWARD CLINE:Fearless Speech vs. “Hate Speech”


I usually do not pay attention to news about biblical movies. The Bible has been a subject of film for well over a century, logging in literally hundreds of titles. Although filmmakers know there is a wealth of stories to lift from the Bible, the ones that make it to the big screen are relatively few. The only difference between them lies in the progress of special effects, winding up today with computer generated images to create miracles and swell the sizes of the crowds and to add other technological icing. If you’ve seen one Ten Commandments or Ben Hur or The Robe, you’ve seen them all.
When Hollywood runs out of new takes on zombie plagues, alien invasions, capitalist conspiracies to take over the world, and catastrophic “climate changes” that dehydrate or drown the globe, there are always Red Seas to part, waters to walk on, and loaves and fishes to multiply. Jesus himself has undergone a number of make-overs during the film industry’s century-plus history, from handsome hunks preaching love on the hill to crowds of extras to a rockin’ Super Star.”
Anyone for Duck Dynasty’s Phil Robertson as Moses? Or as Mohammad? After all, we have Russell Crowe gallomping around as a pious but Ark-ready Noah.
A character in “House of Cards,” Secretary of State Catherine Durant, played by Jayne Atkinson, too strongly resembles former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. I think that was intentional. Durant is a frumpy and dumpy white-haired Southern gal, as well, and is Frank Underwood’s policy poodle, ready to tailor her diplomatic spiel to Underwood’s. Will Hillary’s publicity agent protest the characterization? Likely not; it’s advisable not to call attention to the similarities between Hillary and Durant when a real life, alleged candidate is already having image and truth problems.
But suppose handsome George Clooney was picked to portray former president Bill Clinton in some improbable “docudrama”? Would his publicist crank out a protest? Absolutely not, not even if Bill Clinton as president were depicted espousing free market principles, siding with the Serbs, nailing bin Laden on the first try, and keeping his roaming hands off of his interns’ tushes.
But all it takes is someone’s whisper to get the ball rolling to a politically correctness-governed scandal, and the media, for lack of anything else to do, will lap it up and grow it to tabloid headline size.
For example, I chanced upon this February 17th story by Jeff Sneider from MSN:


http://sarahhonig.com/2014/02/19/deutsche-chutzpah/ Deutsche Bank, Germany’s largest bank, shows signs of mild embarrassment in the wake of reports that it had consigned Israel’s largest bank, Bank Hapoalim, to a list of firms deemed too “ethically questionable” for investment by the ostensibly more ethically-minded investors. Bank Hapoalim indeed featured on the list but Deutsche Bank later averred that this […]


To those who complain about the NY Times but continue to subscribe I say…”get over it and stop reading it….” I did and other than a peek at the obituaries I don’t miss it…..rsk

There were exceptions in high editorial positions even during the “worst of times.”

Abraham Michael Rosenthal, who became know as “A.M.” or “Abe” to his friends was was the executive editor (1977–88) and columnist (1987–1999). His columns “On My Mind” were critical of the left and supportive of Israel. He was edged out in 1999 and wrote columns for the New York Daily News until 2004. He died in 2006.

William Safire, who died in 2009 joined the New York times in 1973 as a political columnist after a stint as President Nixon’s speechwriter. He never failed to defend Israel, especially during the Lebanon War when the media went viral with criticism. Among his many bon mots he called Hillary Clinton “a congenital liar.”

Here are his words in 2002 in a column entitled “The Israeli Choice” (http://www.nytimes.com/2002/11/25/opinion/the-israeli-choice.html)

I’m a shtarker. This Yiddish word, rooted in the German stark, ”strong,” is defined by the lexicographer Sol Steinmetz as ”a strong-minded person willing to wield power.”

This week, 300,000 members of Israel’s hard-line Likud Party will choose as their candidate one of two shtarkers: Prime Minister Ariel (Arik) Sharon and Foreign Minister Benjamin (Bibi) Netanyahu.

The dovish Labor Party last week swung far left: its candidate, Amram Mitzna, promises to divide Jerusalem, uproot all settlers and re-offer all other concessions Yasir Arafat spurned two years ago. Likudniks scorn him as ”Yossi Beilin with a beard,” a reference to the ever-hopeful architect of the Oslo disaster.

That means that the party of the shtarkers will win the parliamentary election in January. But which shtarker will be in charge, and does it matter?


8,000 people die in the UK every year due to what is being called “Fuel Poverty”. Fuel Poverty is a trendy term for those who can’t afford to heat their home because all the solar panels and windmills, the coal bans and the wars on fracking have made it too expensive for people not to freeze to death..

The left, which never misses a chance to blame profiteering for the failure of its policies, is staging “Die-Ins” outside energy companies to protect the real “Die-Ins” that they caused. But the real “Die-Ins” don’t involve bored university students lying down on the concrete and posting the results to Tumblr. They end with the generation that saved Europe from Hitler dying in their own homes.

Rising fuel prices can in no small part be attributed to environmental mania. Energy companies are not run by saints, but neither do they have an interest in pricing their product out of the reach of ordinary people. It’s hard to sell home heat to the dead or the destitute. On the other hand environmentalists do indeed want to make it hard for ordinary to be able to afford to heat their homes. That’s not a conspiracy theory. It’s their policy.

Talk of using carbon credits for “super-energy efficiency” is an admission that a movement using dead seniors as a prop is actually pushing to make energy use as expensive as possible and to reduce its use as much as possible. The “Die In” crowd isn’t for lowering energy prices, it’s for adding more taxes that will benefit their own parasitic clean energy experts.

Say what you will about energy companies, but their business plan involves selling a product. The anti-energy environmentalists want to make it as expensive as possible. The costs of their policies are not just a talking point, but a grim reality.

The family that has to choose between feeding their children or being able to drive to work and heat their home is not a talking point; they are the new Kulaks, the victims of an ideological activist policy that is killing innocent people for the Green greater good of the environment.

Stalin killed millions to industrialize the Soviet Union, the Green Left is preparing to kill millions to deindustrialize North America, Europe and Australia. It’s already doing it. While its activists are trying to peg the blame for fuel poverty fatalities on a government which is badly out of cash, it need look no further than its own activists and celebrities who preach the green life from their mansions.

Clear energy has become the new Communism, an ideological program that can never be achieved, but for which we must all strive no matter how many die all along the way. In Scotland, the perennially deranged Scottish National Party called for generating 100 percent of the country’s electricity from wind, wave and tidal power by 2020.

This plan would add 900 pounds to the average fuel bill. And that is how fuel poverty gets started.

Wales, which has the highest fuel poverty rate in the UK, is working on one of Europe’s largest wind farms and has a plan for total clean energy by 2025, if anyone is still alive and hasn’t frozen to death. Wind farms don’t tend to do too well in the cold and human beings don’t do too well without heat.

New Report Highlights Hillary Clinton’s Role in the “Preventable” Benghazi Attack That Left Four Americans Dead

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/new-report-highlights-hillary-clintons-role-in-the-preventable-benghazi-attack-that-left-four-americans-dead?f=puball New Report Highlights Hillary Clinton’s Role in the “Preventable” Benghazi Attack That Left Four Americans Dead by OPSEC TEAM February 19, 2014 A new OPSEC report combines for the first time in a single document the findings of multiple official investigations and media reports about Hillary Clinton’s role before, during and after the attack […]



Holocaust museums around the globe present in remarkably graphic form pre-war Nazi conditions that promoted anti-semitism and the belief that Jews were sub-human. Children read schoolbooks in which Jews were depicted as exploitive, dangerous, lacking in essential human qualities. Jews were demonized to an extent that led inexorably to concentration camps and extermination. The horror of this period is told and retold in museums as a reminder that this must never happen again. Propaganda of a vicious variety has consequences, a condition the world now knows all too well.

Or does it? For decades Palestinian school texts repeat the same dangerous lies about Jews. A crossword puzzle for children asks “what is a four letter word for an exploitive people? Answer: Jews.” Summer camp bunks in the Arab section of the West Bank are named after “martyrs” who have killed Israeli women and children.

Last year Syria had a four part television series on “the blood libel” the claim that Jews kill Christian youth so their blood can be used for the making of matzos. Saudi textbooks have actually reprinted perverse Nazi cartoons from the 1930’s. And the Protocols of The Elders of Zion, a classic anti-semitic book based on nothing more than the ill-advised ideas of a fantasist, has been reprinted in many Arab venues and has been circulated by imams as evidence of Jewish turpitude.

None of this material is surprising. It has been revealed in many newspapers and journals. There have been courageous journalists who have campaigned against these contemporary atrocities. Yet progressive Jewish leaders and Holocaust museum curators ignore these conditions.

If one attends a Holocaust museum, the last exhibit is invariably on genocides in our time from the boat people in Vietnam, to the long march in Cambodia, to Darfur. Poignant photographs are displayed that tug at the heart strings and display Jewish sensitivity to human depravity. This is as it should be. If any group is aware of the horror people can inflict on one another it is the Jews.

However, what is missing is the existential evidence of anti-semitism. Where are the tracts pointing to the rise of anti-semitism in many European communities, the hatred directed against Jews in Muslim populations, and the vile images about Jews promoted in Arab and Persian nations? I suspect the reason for this obvious omission is political correctness. It is certainly not a lack of awareness.


Under Creative Commons License: Attribution

An enduring memory of my late Father is of him sitting in his chair by the fireplace reading The New York Times. As far as he was concerned, he was receiving the most accurate news of the nation and the world. Despite the many Pulitzer Prizes it has received over the years, he wasn’t.

One of them went to Walter Duranty in 1932, a reporter who was an apologist for the Soviet Union’s Stalinist regime. History revealed that he failed to accurately report on the 1932-1933 famine that killed countless thousands in the Ukraine where collective farming had been imposed. In November 2003 the Pulitzer Board, decided not to revoke the prize. In its review of the 13 articles, the Board “concluded that there was not clear and convincing evidence of deliberate deceptions, the relevant standard in this case.” The Board extended its sympathy to Ukrainians.

Ukraine is the site of major protests as a new generation seeks to align the nation with Europe and not the Russian Republic that replaced the failed Soviet Union. The nation is sharply divided.

A Breitbart news story about The New York Times reported that on Thursday of last week it had announced that “profits had fallen nearly 50% in the fourth quarter of 2013 compared to the same period a year before.” Total revenues were down 5.2% and advertising revenues were down 6.3%. A rise in the number of digital readers has not resulted in digital advertising revenues. “Ultimately, the question is whether readers still want the content the Times is providing.”

BRIDGET JOHNSON…MORE WISDOM FROM THE WHITE HOUSE: ” Employers Can Prevent Job Losses After Minimum Wage Hike by ‘Accepting Lower Profit Margins’


The White House lauded a Congressional Budget Office report on the proposed minimum wage hike to $10.10 per hour while brushing off one key finding: that such a bill could cost half a million jobs, and maybe more.

“The new Congressional Budget Office (CBO) report finds that 16.5 million workers would get a raise from increasing the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour and this would help millions of hard-working families, reduce poverty, and increase the overall wages going to lower-income households,” Jason Furman, chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers, and Betsey Stevenson, Council of Economic Advisers member, wrote in a White House blog post this afternoon.

“On employment, CBO’s central estimate is that raising the minimum wage to $10.10 per hour would lead to a 0.3 percent decrease in employment and CBO acknowledges that the employment impact could be essentially zero,” they continued. “But even these estimates do not reflect the overall consensus view of economists which is that raising the minimum wage has little or no negative effect on employment. For example, seven Nobel Prize winners and more than 600 other economists recently stated that: ‘In recent years there have been important developments in the academic literature on the effect of increases in the minimum wage on employment, with the weight of evidence now showing that increases in the minimum wage have had little or no negative effect on the employment of minimum-wage workers, even during times of weakness in the labor market.’”

The CBO report says that “once fully implemented in the second half of 2016, the $10.10 option would reduce total employment by about 500,000 workers, or 0.3 percent, CBO projects.”