RUTHFULLY YOURS

http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/

Once upon a time it was the objective of the military to win wars. Now the objective of the military is to avoid incidents.
An incident happens when civilians are killed, prisoners mistreated or some other event that is photographed, videotaped and then flashed around the world. This results in an Incident, capital I, that triggers much artificial soul-searching by the media which spends the next two years beating the incident to death and flogging its corpse across television programs, newspaper articles, books, documentaries and finally, if it’s a big enough incident, a real life movie version that is based on the book, which was based on the article, where the idealistic reporter/lawyer/activist who uncovered the truth about the incident will be played by Matt Damon or George Clooney.

The main objective of the military in most civilized countries is to prevent this chain of articles, programs, books, documentaries, dramatized plays and Matt Damon movies from coming about by making sure that no Incident can ever happen. And the best way to do that is by not fighting. And if the enemy insists on fighting, then he must be fought with razor sharp precision so that no collateral damage takes place. And if someone must die, it had better be our own soldiers, rather than anyone on the other side whose death might be used as an Incident.

Incidentism isn’t derived from a fear of Matt Damon movies, but from the perception that wars are not won on the battlefield, but in the minds of men. And that perception has a good deal to do with the kind of wars we choose to fight.

http://spectator.org/archives/2012/11/19/say-no-to-susan Susan Rice, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, is reportedly being considered as a possible replacement for Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who is believed to be leaving soon to spend more time with Bill (i.e., to start her 2016 presidential campaign). Because of Rice’s central role in the Obama administration’s attempt to […]

BILL CLINTON? YOU MEAN THE ONE WHO AS PRESIDENT HAD YASSER ARAFAT OVER TO THE WHITE HOUSE MORE TIMES THAN ANY OTHER FOREIGN “OFFICIAL”?….THE ONE WHO COULD HAVE NABBED BIN LADEN IN KHARTOUM BUT DID NOT?….THE ONE WHO IGNORED THE BOMBING OF THE COLE? WHO BOMBED SERBIA INDISCRIMINATELY WHEN MILOSEVIC HAD ALREADY PACKED HIS BAGS? WHO SPOKE ADMIRINGLY OF IRAN’S “ELECTIONS”????? McCAIN IS AN ASS AND CLINTON SHOULD FADE INTO HISTORY….RSK

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/11/18/mccain-recommendation-hand-the-mideast-crisis-from-obama-to-bill-clinton/?print=1

He was summoned to save President Obama’s re-election campaign, and now Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) has suggested summoning Bill Clinton to step into Obama’s shoes to salvage any hope of peace in the Middle East.

“Remember, the president’s first priority in 2009 was the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. Obviously, there was no progress there. And there are various reasons for it. We won’t waste the time,” McCain said this morning on CBS’ Face the Nation.

“I would find someone even as high-ranking, frankly, as former President Bill Clinton to go and be the negotiator,” he said. “I know he’d hate me for saying that, but we need a person of enormous prestige and influence to have these parties sit down together as an honest broker. But we have a lot of work to do to regain some credibility because we’re crumbling all over the Middle East.”

McCain noted that al-Qaeda is “on the comeback” with new footholds in Mali and western Iraq, Kurds and Iraqis are fighting, and Iran barrels toward nuclear weapons capability.

http://pjmedia.com/tatler/2012/11/18/state-dept-official-to-attend-oic-meeting-today-on-banning-defamation-of-islam/?print=1 After the disaster of trying to blame an obscure YouTube video for the attack on the CIA operation in Benghazi and Obama’s prophecy at the UN that “the future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam,” Hillary Clinton’s State Department appears to be taking another run at the First Amendment […]

http://www.americanthinker.com/printpage/?url=http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2012/11/hamas_renews_its_annihilationist_jihad.html Tuesday, 11/13/12, after participating in a remarkable conference on the Benghazi debacle in Washington, D.C., I was privileged to brief Representative Louie Gohmert (R-Texas), his staff, and other interested parties, highlighting salient points from my recently published book, Sharia Versus Freedom. This briefing took place against the backdrop of ongoing rocket fire by jihad […]

Click here: Stand With Israel Rally – Maggie’s Farm
http://maggiesfarm.anotherdotcom.com/archives/21014-Stand-With-Israel-Rally.html
Stand With Israel Rally

About 1500 Jews and Christians attended a rally today in San Diego to Stand With Israel.

A group of about 25 pro-Palestinians showed up and tried to interfere with their vile chants of hate through a loudspeaker. The leader of the chants read them off a phone. When the leader stopped for a moment their crowd stopped, like the puppets they are. — As I and my family were leaving, a guy shouted his curses in my ear. I flipped him off and told him to come on and try me. He backed off as I called him a “xxxxx” (begins with f and ends with t). Pro-Pal punks.

http://campaignstops.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/11/18/is-rush-limbaughs-country-gone/?hp&pagewanted=print

The morning after the re-election of President Obama, Rush Limbaugh told his listeners:

I went to bed last night thinking we’re outnumbered. I went to bed last night thinking all this discussion we’d had about this election being the election that will tell us whether or not we’ve lost the country. I went to bed last night thinking we’ve lost the country. I don’t know how else you look at this.

The conservative talk show host, who had been an upbeat, if initially doubtful, Romney supporter throughout the campaign, was on a post-election downer:

In a country of children where the option is Santa Claus or work, what wins? And say what you want, but Romney did offer a vision of traditional America. In his way, he put forth a great vision of traditional America, and it was rejected. It was rejected in favor of a guy who thinks that those who are working aren’t doing enough to help those who aren’t. And that resonated.

Limbaugh echoed a Republican theme that was voiced before and after the election: Barack Obama has unleashed a coalition of Americans “who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing, to you-name-it – that that’s an entitlement. And the government should give it to them” – as Mitt Romney put it in his notorious commentary on the 47 percent.

You can find this message almost everywhere on the right side of the spectrum. The Heritage Foundation, for example, annually calculates an “Index of Dependence on Government,” which grows every year:

Today, more people than ever before depend on the federal government for housing, food, income, student aid, or other assistance once considered to be the responsibility of individuals, families, neighborhoods, churches, and other civil society institutions. The United States reached another milestone in 2010: For the first time in history, half the population pays no federal income taxes. It is the conjunction of these two trends-higher spending on dependence-creating programs, and an ever-shrinking number of taxpayers who pay for these programs-that concerns those interested in the fate of the American form of government.

William Bennett, conservative stalwart, television commentator and former secretary of education under President Reagan, complained on the CNN website that Democrats have been successful in setting

the parameters and focus of the national and political dialogue as predominantly about gender, race, ethnicity and class. This is the paradigm, the template through which many Americans, probably a majority, more or less view the world, our country, and the election. It is a divisive strategy and Democrats have targeted and exploited those divides. How else can we explain that more young people now favor socialism to capitalism?

In fact, the 2011 Pew Research Center poll Bennett cites demonstrates that in many respects conservatives are right to be worried:

http://blogs.the-american-interest.com/wrm/2012/11/18/america-israel-gaza-the-world/ As Israeli airstrikes and naval shells bombarded Gaza this weekend, the world asked the question that perennially frustrates, confuses and enrages so many people across the planet: Why aren’t the Americans hating on Israel more? As in Operation Cast Lead, the last big conflict between Israel and Hamas, and as during the operation against […]

http://www.phyllis-chesler.com/1101/palestinian-human-sacrifice I have been getting email and phone calls from dear friends in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. The Tel Avivians and Jerusalemites are sober but slightly shocked to have woken up to a lesser, but still a Sderot-like reality. Senior citizen friends cowered in stairways and hunkered down in “safe” rooms. Younger citizens rushed to […]

Just a couple of weeks back, Haaretz together with the so-called
“Dialogue” public opinion polling group published an enormously biased
and twisted pseudo-poll, one initiated by Hebrew University
far-leftist professor Amiram Goldblum, a founder of Peace Now,
claiming to show that most Israeli Jews are racists and support
apartheid. So obviously nothing this gang does in teh area of opinion
polling should be accepted at face value.

But even this gaggle of Far Leftists cannot hide the ENORMOUS public
support for the military operations against the Gazan savages,
Haaretz headline today reads that over 90% of Israeli Jews (84% when
Arabs are counted) support the operation. That probably really means
that 99.98% of Jews outside of Ben Gurion University support the
operations.

There is actually something amusing about those numbers. About 18% of
Israelis are Arabs. When Arabs are added to teh survey results,
support for the war drops by 6%. Well, you do not have to be a
mathematician to understand from this that 2/3 of Israeli Arabs ALSO
are supporting the operations!
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/haaretz-poll-more-than-90-percent-of-israeli-jews-support-gaza-war.premium-1.478903#
Haaretz poll: More than 90 percent of Israeli Jews support Gaza war
Six days into the aerial attack on Gaza, 84 percent of the Israeli public supports Operation Pillar of Defense, with 12 percent opposing it, according to a Haaretz-Dialog poll taken Sunday. The poll surveyed proportional samples of Jews and Arabs, indicating that Jewish support for the war stands at upwards of 90 percent.