Daily Alert

28 March 2008

Mayor Koch Not Convinced

Koch's Comments: The questions asked about Obama
JPOST: Koch's Comments

Barack Obama's speech last week addressing his 20-year relationship with his radical pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, was very well done, yet unconvincing.

Obama sought to explain that relationship and why he could not end this close association, despite the minister's hate-filled rhetoric. He said, "There will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Rev. Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church?"

Yes, those are the questions that people are asking.

Many of Rev. Wright's incendiary statements are on videos sold by his church. Minister Louis Farrakhan, a friend of Rev. Wright with whom he traveled to visit Muammar Qhadaffi in Libya, also makes his sermons and those of others associated with the Nation of Islam available for sale. Their attacks on the US and Israel often coincide with those of Rev. Wright.

Rev. Wright's sermons charge that the US government gives African-Americans drugs, created AIDS and is deliberately infecting blacks with that disease. His sermons claim that the US unjustifiably nuclear bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki in World War II, and that 9/11 and the deaths of 3,000 Americans were caused by US foreign policy. He alleges Israeli state terrorism against the Palestinians; calling Israel a "dirty word" and "racist country." He blames Israel for 9/11 and supports the divestment campaign against it, denouncing "Zionism." His venomous thoughts are summed up in his most discussed sermon in which he says the US government "wants us to sing God Bless America. No, no, not God Bless America. God damn America. God damn America for killing
innocent people."

Senator Obama in his speech acknowledged that the rantings of his minister are "inexcusable," but stated, "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother - a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe."

Before we discuss his grandmother, let's examine the impact of Rev. Wright's statements on the Senator's two daughters. Nothing says it better than a song from the musical "South Pacific," to wit, "You have to be taught to hate and fear...You've got to be carefully taught." Few dispute that Rev. Wright's sermons are filled with hate. Why didn't Senator Obama stand up in the church and denounce his hateful statements or, at the very least, argue privately with his minister? It was horrifying to see on a video now viewed across America the congregation rise from the pews to applaud their minister's rants.

Now to Obama's grandmother. There was a time spanning the 70's to the mid-90's when many blacks and whites in large American cities expressed the same feelings on street crime held by Obama's grandmother. Indeed, Reverend Jesse Jackson made similar comments in 1993 at a meeting of his organization, Operation Push, devoted to street crime. According to a November 29, 1993, article in the Chicago Sun Times, he said, "'We must face the No. 1 critical issue of our day. It is youth crime in general and black-on-black crime in particular.' Then Jackson told the audience, 'There is nothing more painful to me at this stage in my life than to walk down the street and hear footsteps and start thinking about robbery. Then look around and see somebody white and feel relieved.... After all we have been through,' he said. 'Just to think we can't walk down our own streets, how humiliating.'"

Isn't that exactly what Obama's grandmother was referring to? To equate her fears, similar to Jesse Jackson's, with Wright's anti-American, anti-white, anti-Jew, and anti-Israel rantings is despicable coming from a grandson. In today's vernacular, he threw her under the wheels of the bus to keep his presidential campaign rolling. For shame.

What is it that I and others expected Obama to do? A great leader with conscience and courage would have stood up and faced down anyone who engages in such conduct. I expect a President of the United States to have the strength of character to denounce and disown enemies of America - foreign and domestic -- and yes, even his friends and confidants when they get seriously out of line.

What if a minister in a church attended primarily by white congregants or a rabbi in a synagogue attended primarily by Jews made comparable statements that were hostile to African-Americans? I have no doubt that the congregants would have immediately stood up and openly denounced the offending cleric. Others would have criticized that cleric in private. Some would surely have ended their relationships with their congregation. Obama didn't do any of these things. His recent condemnations of Wright's hate-filled speech are, in my opinion,
a case of too little, too late.

It is also disturbing to me that Obama's wife, Michelle, during a speech in Wisconsin last month, said, "For the first time in my adult lifetime, I'm really proud of my country, because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback."

Strange. This is a woman who has had a good life, with opportunities few whites or blacks have been given. When she entered Princeton and Harvard and later became a partner in a prestigious law firm, didn't she feel proud to be an American? When she and the Senator bought their new home, was there no feeling of accomplishment and pride in being a US citizen? When her husband was elected to the state legislature and subsequently to the United States Senate, didn't she feel proud of her country?

Senator Obama was asked if he thought his speech changed any minds. He replied he didn't think so, and certainly not of those who weren't already for him. A more important question is, whether his 20-year relationship with Wright has done lasting damage to his candidacy. We will soon know.



Nicely said Mayor. Maybe I am crazy but if my Rabbi were playing footsie with internationally recognized terrorist supporters like Khaddafi (prior to his supposed rehabilitation) he would no longer be my Rabbi. One of the strongest points that Mayor Koch makes concerns the standing ovation from the congregants in attendance to Wright's damning America sermon. Is it not enough that Obama stayed around out of loyalty to Wright but that he by default, had to tolerate the enthusiastic support for Wright's racism and anti-Jewism by the congregation at TUCC? If he is a normal person, much of his social network is based upon his relationship with his fellow congregants, or as they might put it, fellowship.

For Obama to be credible in his disassociation, not only must he leave TUCC behind and separate from Wright, but disown his social network. How convenient that it took the stakes of democrat nomination not to mention a Presidency to recognize that TUCC and Wright are liabilities? Wright reportedly warned Barry of the dangers of association when he joined the church. Wouldn't a politically clever and charismatic man like Barry H. have stayed far away from such a controversial pastor and church unless his and his wife's inner conscience drew them to TUCC? There are plenty of churches in the Chicago area which would have served Barry's spiritual needs. Why this one? Obama cannot answer that question for to do so would result in his downfall. The credibility of the Obama associations theory continues to garner support. Perhaps Mayor Koch says it best:

I expect a President of the United States to have the strength of character to denounce and disown enemies of America - foreign and domestic -- and yes, even his friends and confidants when they get seriously out of line.


Stumble Upon Toolbar

27 March 2008

Rice With a Side Order of Netanyahu


Here is a piece from Israel National News that I posted earlier today on Free Republic. I refer the reader to the comment below the article posted by Freeper Turret Gunner A20 . It needs no further commentary. Just read it. Maybe Turret Gunner A20 will be the next Secretary of State.




Rice to Snub Netanyahu During Mid-East Tour


(IsraelNN.com) US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice will break with standard protocol and will not meet with Opposition Leader Binyamin Netanyahu during her upcoming visit to the region, apparently as punishment for Netanyahu's recent call to build up the so-called E-1 corridor between Jerusalem and Ma'aleh Adumim. The United States opposes the plan.

The snub is the second this year from senior US figures for Netanyahu. In January President George W. Bush refused to meet with the Likud chairman until a public outcry forced him to schedule time with the Opposition Leader.

Rice is due to visit the region in early April. Exact dates for the visit have yet to be announced.





posted by Turret Gunner A20

To: APRPEH
It's time to post this one again -- it's still appropriate to the present as well as to the day it was written.
May 9, 2002 8:45 a.m. Why Don’t I Care About the Palestinians? The options, as I see them.

Why don't I care about the Palestinians? It is, of course, wrong of me not to care. It can't be much fun being a Palestinian. You, or your parents, or your grandparents, ran for their lives in the 1948 war. You — and/or they, plus a couple of generations of uncles, aunts, siblings, and cousins — have been huddled in some squalid refugee camp ever since, living off UNRWA handouts. ("UNRWA," by the way, stands for "U.S. taxpayer." But you knew that!) There is no economy worth participating in. Your leaders won a fragmented, halfway sort of autonomy for you at Oslo; but it didn't work, you're not sure why. Nothing really got any better, and now the Israelis have smashed it all up anyway. The other Arabs all hate you (a little-known factor of Middle East political life, but one attested by my colleague David Pryce-Jones, who knows the Arabs better than anyone). Things look bad, and you are sunk in despair. Shouldn't I feel sorry for you?

Sure, I personally favor Israel in this conflict. That's my right as a freethinking person. I'm a Christian, though, aren't I? Shouldn't I have some Christian compassion to spare for the poor suffering Palestinians? Ask not for whom the bell tolls, etc., etc.

Well, I suppose I should, but to be honest about it, I don't. Why not? Why don't I care about the Palestinians? The answer is NOT any of the following. I like taking showers with Jews.
Palestinians have dark skin and I'm a racist.
My name was originally Derbstein.
My British blood is boiling with shame over the lost empire.

I am a lackey of, or am trying to ingratiate myself with, the Jews who run the U.S. media. The answer isn't exactly compassion fatigue, either. That's pretty close, though. I am aware of a certain level of compassion fatigue in regard to the world at large, and it spills over into the Palestinian issue.

The other day I had the depressing experience of reading, one right after the other, Stephen Kotkin's wonderfully titled "Trashcanistan" in the April 15th New Republic, then Helen Epstein's "Mozambique: In Search of the Hidden Cause of AIDS" in the May 9th New York Review of Books. The first of these was a long portmanteau review of six books about the fates of various components of the old U.S.S.R. in the years since the thing fell apart. The second tries to discover why a sleepy rural area of Mozambique, populated by courteous folk practicing a traditional way of life, has high levels of AIDS.

Kotkin's account of the ex-Soviet colonies — Ukraine, Moldova, the central Asian and Caucasian republics, etc. — is hair-raising. Principal features of the landscape here are utter economic collapse, "gangland violence among state ministers," rising Islamofascism and the flight of large sectors of the population. (One-third of the able-bodied workforce of Moldova has fled. I have just been reading another report about that wretched country. Sample quote: "Experts estimate that since the fall of the Soviet Union between 200,000 and 400,000 women have been sold into prostitution — perhaps up to 10 percent of the female population.") Kotkin writes beautifully about this appalling situation, which stretches across the entire southern and western marches of the old U.S.S.R., illuminating his account with memorable one-liners like: "Ukraine has gotten its state and is eating it, too."

Helen Epstein's piece on Mozambique tells of a state of affairs just as awful. The fundamental problem, she discovers, is that: "These people are so poor ... that sex has become part of their economy. In some cases, it's practically the only currency they have." The men go away for months on end to work in the South African mines — where, of course, they console themselves with prostitutes. The women left behind survive as best they can, often by becoming the mistresses of the few local men who can actually afford to eat. Why are they all so poor? Because Mozambique has been wrecked by corruption, tribal war and stupid economics.

What a world! You can only read a certain amount of this stuff before you start to avert your eyes. What on earth can anyone hope to do about all this? All the simple explanations for the horrors that stain a large part of our planet have been used up. We now know that it's not the fault of colonialism, or neo-colonialism, or capitalism, or socialism. It's just the way these places are. They can't handle modernity, for some cultural reason we don't understand and can't do anything about.

That's the context in which I see the Palestinians. The Palestinians are Arabs; and the Arabs, whatever their medieval achievements (as best I can understand, they were mainly achievements of transmission — "Arabic" numerals, for example, came from India) are politically hopeless. Who can dispute this? Look at the last 50-odd years, since the colonial powers left. What have the Arabs accomplished? What have they built? Where in the Arab world is there a trace or a spark of democracy? Of constitutionalism? Of laws independent of the ruler's whim? Of free inquiry? Of open public debate? Where in your house is there any article stamped "Made in Syria?" Arabs can be individually very charming and capable, and perform very well in free societies like the U.S.A. There are at least two recent Nobel prizes with Arab names attached. Collectively, though, as nations, the Arabs are no-hopers.

All of this applies to the Palestinians. I spent some of my formative years in Hong Kong, a barren piece of rock with zero natural resources, under foreign occupation, chock-full of refugees from the Mao tyranny. The people there weren't lounging in UNRWA camps or making suicide runs at the governor's mansion. They were trading, building, speculating, manufacturing, working — with the result that Hong Kong is now a glittering modern city filled with well-dressed, well-educated, well-fed people, proud of what they have accomplished together, and with a higher standard of living than Britain herself. If, following the Oslo accords — or for that matter, in the 20 years of Jordanian occupation — the Palestinians had taken that route, had set aside their fantasies of revenge and massacre, and concentrated on building up something worth having, I might have respect for them. As it is, I don't.

The only halfway sympathetic thing I can find to say about the Palestinians is that UNRWA has surely been part of the problem. If you go to the UNRWA website, you will see how proud they are of having fed, clothed, sheltered, educated and cared for the Palestinian refugees of 1948... and their children... and their grandchildren. The number of people UNRWA cares for has gone from 600,000 in 1948 to nearly four million today. Now, I understand that the prime impulse of bureaucracies, especially welfare bureaucracies, is the consolidation and expansion of their turf, and a steady increase in the number of their "clients"; but this is ridiculous. The good people of Hong Kong should go down on their knees every night and thank God that there was no UNRWA in the colony in 1949. So, come to think of it, should the German and East European refugees who flooded into Western Europe after WWII. (I have seen the number 14 million somewhere — the Sudeten Germans alone numbered three million. Where are the festering camps? Where are the suicide bombers?)

Even if their lives had not been poisoned by the ministrations of a huge welfare bureaucracy, though, I doubt the Palestinians would have got their act together. None of the other Arabs have. Everywhere you look around the Arab world you see squalor, despotism, cruelty, and hopelessness. The best they have been able to manage, politically speaking, has been the Latin-American style one-party kleptocracies of Egypt and Jordan. Those are the peaks of Arab political achievement under independence, under government by their own people. The norm is just gangsterism, with thugs like Assad, Qaddafi, or Saddam in charge. It doesn't seem to be anything to do with religion: the secular states (Iraq, Syria) are just as horrible as the religious ones like Saudi Arabia. These people are hopeless. We are all supposed to support the notion of a Palestinian state. Why? We know perfectly well what it would be like. Why should we wish for another gangster-satrapy to be added to the Arab roll of shame, busy manufacturing terrorists to come here and slaughter Americans in their offices? I don't want to see a Palestinian state. I think I'd be crazy to want that.

What, actually, are the possible futures for the Palestinians? I think the following list is exhaustive.

1. An independent state, under Arafat or someone just as thuggish.
2. Military occupation by Israel.
3. Re-incorporation into a Jordanian-Palestinian nation. 4. Some sort of U.N. trusteeship.
5. Expulsion from the West Bank and Gaza, those territories then incorporated into Israel.

Number 1 is what we are all supposed to want. As I have already indicated, I don't want it, and I can't see why anyone else would, either. Except Palestinians, I suppose: If they yearn to be ruled by amoral hoodlums (as, according to polls, they apparently do), I suppose they have some theoretical right to see their wishes fulfilled — but why should the rest of us allow it to happen, given the dangers to us?

Number 2 might work for a time, but the Israelis would eventually get fed up with it, and then we'd move on to one of the other options.

Number 3 would get us back to the pseudo-stability of pre-1967, but is deeply unpopular with Jordanians — and look what happened in 1967!

Number 4 undoubtedly has the UNRWA bureaucrats drooling, but as with number 1, it's hard to see what's in it for the rest of us. Aren't we handing over enough of our money in welfare payments to our own people?

Which leaves us with number 5: expulsion. I am starting to think that this might be the best option. I'm not the only one, either. Here is Dick Armey, Republican leader in the U.S. House of Representatives, talking to Chris Matthews on Hardball:

MATTHEWS: Well, just to repeat, you believe that the Palestinians who are now living on the West Bank should get out of there?

Rep. ARMEY: Yes.

When I say "the best option," I don't mean "best for the Palestinians". I don't think they have any good options. Being Arabs, they are incapable of constructing a rational polity, so their future is probably hopeless whatever happens. Their options are the ones I listed above: to be ruled by gangsters, or Israelis, or Jordanians, or welfare bureaucrats. Or to go live somewhere else, under the gentle rule of their brother Arabs. Would expulsion be hard on the Palestinians? I suppose it would. Would it be any harder than options 1 thru 4? I doubt it. Do I really give a flying falafel one way or the other? No, not really. — iMr. Derbyshire is also an NR contributing editor/i


28 posted on 03/27/2008 1:34:42 PM CDT by Turret Gunner A20

Stumble Upon Toolbar

26 March 2008

Its the Jews Fault, Obama Adviser Says


Obama Advisor Blames US Jews for Lack of Mid-East Peace (will open new window)



19 Adar Bet 5768, 26 March 08 05:07
by Avi Tuchmayer(IsraelNN.com)
Once again, a furor surrounding US Presidential candidate Barack Obama has erupted, this time over a senior military advisor to the Obama campaign with a history of anti-Israel remarks. He has strongly criticized pro-Israel Jews in the United States for allegedly torpedoing peace efforts in the Middle East.

In a 2003 interview with The Oregonian newspaper unearthed by The American Spectator magazine, General Merrill "Tony" McPeak, a former chief of staff in the United States Air Force who is a candidate for secretary of defense in a potential Obama administration, claimed that efforts to bring peace between Israel and the Palestinian Authority failed because there is no US-written "playbook" to create peace.

An interviewer asked General McPeak "So where's the problem? State? White House?" McPeak pulled no punches. "(The problem rests in) New York City. Miami. We have a large vote here in favor of Israel. And no politician wants to run against it…nobody wants to take on that problem. It's just too tough politically. So that means we can't . . . you can't develop a Middle East strategy. It's impossible," he said.

Even prior to the Oregonian interview, McPeak was known as a long-time critic of Israel's presence in Judea, Samaria, Gaza and the Golan Heights. In a 1976 article in Foreign Affairs magazine, he criticized Israel for refusing to withdraw from areas liberated in the 1967 Six Day War, even as he wrote poignantly about the vital security advantages Israel obtained by conquering those areas.

"At the Suez Canal, Israel had the best 'tank ditch' in the Middle East. The Gaza Strip, long a nursery for Egyptian-supported terrorism reaching to within a few miles of Tel Aviv, had come under Israeli administration. On the Golan, Israel at last held the high ground. The bulge of the West Bank, an implicit threat that Israel would be cut in two, had been superseded by the line of the Jordan River. More important, the air threat to Israel had disappeared, at least for the moment. Tel Aviv had been 12 minutes flying time from Egyptian bases in the northern Sinai," he wrote.

Yet the same article calls for an Israeli withdrawal from those areas, and seems to suggest that despite Israel's legitimate security concerns, "genuine security depends on regional accommodation, which the Arab states say cannot occur until all of the occupied territory is returned."

Latest storm
The storm surrounding McPeak is the latest in a series of anti-Israel revelations to tar the Obama campaign in recent months. Obama has long been a favorite son of left wing elements in the United States, but has been strongly criticized for failing to cut ties with radical preacher Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Wright has called Israel a "racist country," said that "Israel" is a dirty word, and claimed US foreign policy was responsible for the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Another anti-Israel activist, Arab-American Ali Abunimah, has claimed to know Obama well and to have met him on numerous occasions at pro-Palestinian events in Chicago.

During his tenure as a junior air force commander, McPeak spent time in Israel and participated in joint exercises with the Israeli air force. He acknowledged that he enjoyed his experiences here, "but that's maybe the more cosmopolitan, liberal version of the Israeli population," he added.

Zionist Canard
McPeak also charged Jews and Christian Zionists with dual-loyalties, and said that concern for Israel manipulated American foreign policy in Iraq.

"Let's say that if one of your abiding concerns is the security of Israel as opposed to a purely American self-interest, then it would make sense to build a dozen or so bases in Iraq," he said.



This is a follow up to The Secret Thoughts of Barry H. OBAMA (opens in new window). APRPEH implied that judging Obama by his associations is not only acceptable but now mandatory. He may get a pass once or twice, but the pattern that has been produced of now daily insults to intelligence leaves no benefit of the doubt in its wake. One must go out of his way to surround himself with the likes of people Obama has chosen as mentors, friends, advisers and associates. And as stated in the earlier post cited above, believability/credibility of the claims is supported by the consistency of the claims. This story would not have been credible last summer. Today, it is yet another in a chain of events which should send waves of warning shivers down the backs of American Jewry. Obama's choice of associations, a sign of what makes him comfortable and of that which is familiar is the best evidence of his real beliefs. It is the evidence, not his words which really do matter, or should matter most to the voting public and more importantly to American Jewry.

I am curious though, where is the esteemed, respected, thoughtful, insightful, highly intelligent, cogent Eric Yoffie of Reformist fame warning us about the Obama anti-Semitic attack conspiracy? Yoffie presser (new window will open). Shalom TV (new window will open) had the taped interview up on their website at one time. It may still be available if you have access to Shalom TV. Oh Eric, I am waiting?

Stumble Upon Toolbar

24 March 2008

Who is a Ger?


Now that the dust has settled some on the geirus issue, below, you will find links to four articles which address the Geirus policy recently agreed upon by the RCA and the Chief Rabbinate in Israel. Two of the articles are written by dayanim, one by a well known congregational Rabbi and another a collaboration between a Rosh Yeshiva and retired congregational Rabbi. I will leave the reader to digest and take into consideration the purpose, meaning, vision and intent of each of the essays. It is worth the time to read through all four to better understand the flow of American and Israeli Orthodoxy.

I have written in the past of what I believe is a need for more unity and a common "gate keeper" within Orthodoxy. It appears to me that in terms of Geirus, the policy concluded by the RCA and the Chief Rabbinate is a significant step forward in bringing the Jewish people together and to set realistic and attainable road marks to conversion to Judaism. It has been implied that the role of the congregational/local Rav has been jeopardized as a result of this policy. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Rav's role has been strengthened by having a better idea how to prepare the potential convert (knowing what is expected from various dayanim and which beis din is a better choice for any particular candidate) and will help organize the time frame needed to do so. Potential converts also see the path that has been set up for them which eliminates the black hole experience for which some gerim have complained. (one person going through gerius once confided to me, {paraphrased}to the goyim I am a Jew, to the Jews I am a goy, when does this end?). Bringing Orthodoxy to common standards within the range of universally acceptable halachic boundaries should be the interest, goal, mission and purpose of every Orthodox Jew. Preventing the proverbial "I thought I was a Jew until...." conundrum should be the driving impetus.


(4 March 08) Conversion deal with Chief Rabbinate could diminish a major Jewish rift



(5 March 08) The Chief Rabbinate-RCA Deal: Two Views (Taking power away from the rabbis. Rabbi Marc Angel, and Rabbi Avi Weiss. Special to The Jewish Week)



Myths and Facts about the RCA's GPS - Geirus Policies and Standards
Mar 13, 2008 -- by Steven Pruzansky
Rabbi, Congregation Bnai Yeshurun in Teaneck, New Jersey
Treasurer, Rabbinical Council of America
Member, RCA's Geirus Policies and Standards Committee
Rosh Beit Din of the Beit Din L’Giyur in Bergen County, NJ.


An additional article to note in working through the conversion discussion:
Rabbis Form New Orthodox Organization

Stumble Upon Toolbar

The Secret Thoughts of Barry H. OBAMA

Arab-American Activist Says Obama Hiding Anti-Israel Stance

17 Adar Bet 5768, 24 March 08 05:00
by Gil Ronen (IsraelNN.com)

Democratic presidential hopeful Sen. Barack Obama is currently hiding his anti-Israel views in order to get elected, according to a well-known anti-Israel activist. The activist, Ali Abunimah, claimed to know Obama well and to have met him on numerous occasions at pro-Palestinian events in Chicago.

In an article he penned for the anti-Israeli website Electronic Intifada, Abunimah wrote:

"The last time I spoke to Obama was in the winter of 2004 at a gathering in Chicago’s Hyde Park neighborhood. He was in the midst of a primary campaign to secure the Democratic nomination for the United States Senate seat he now occupies. But at that time polls showed him trailing.

"As he came in from the cold and took off his coat, I went up to greet him. He responded warmly, and volunteered, 'Hey, I’m sorry I haven’t said more about Palestine right now, but we are in a tough primary race. I’m hoping when things calm down I can be more up front.' He referred to my activism, including columns I was contributing to the The Chicago Tribune critical of Israeli and US policy [and said:] 'Keep up the good work!'"

Barack, Michelle, Edward and Mariam
Abunimah's report included a photo of Obama with his wife Michelle seated at a table with virulently anti-Israeli Professor Edward Said and his wife Mariam, in what Abunimah said was a May 1998 Arab community event in Chicago at which Said gave the keynote speech.

In an interview earlier this year for the leftist radio show "Democracy Now!," a daily TV and radio news program hosted by Amy Goodman and Juan Gonzalez, Abunimah said he knew Obama for many years as his state senator "when he used to attend events in the Palestinian community in Chicago all the time."

"I remember personally introducing him onstage in 1999, when we had a major community fundraiser for the community center in Deheisha refugee camp in the occupied West Bank," he recounted. "And that's just one example of how Barack Obama used to be very comfortable speaking up for and being associated with Palestinian rights and opposing the Israeli occupation."

About face 'to get elected'
The Arab-American activist went on to say: "In 2000, when Obama unsuccessfully ran for Congress I heard him speak at a campaign fundraiser hosted by a University of Chicago professor. On that occasion and others Obama was forthright in his criticism of US policy and his call for an even-handed approach to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict."

"Obama's about-face is not surprising," Abunimah wrote. "He is merely doing what he thinks is necessary to get elected and he will continue doing it as long as it keeps him in power."

When Obama first ran for the Senate in 2004, the Chicago Jewish News interviewed him on his stance regarding Israel's security fence. He accused the Bush administration of neglecting the "Israeli-Palestinian" situation and criticized the security fence built by Israel to prevent terror attacks: "The creation of a wall dividing the two nations is yet another example of the neglect of this Administration in brokering peace," Obama was quoted as saying.




Had this story broken prior to the mainstream liberal media finally reporting the truth about Barry Hussein Obama's church affiliation would anyone have paid attention? Probably not. Just a hit piece you would say. Okay, maybe I don't really intend to vote for Obama, the fictitious person would say, but this is not believable. Today however, it is believable. After awhile, when circumstantial evidence starts piling up like a snow drift in Wisconsin, the benefit of the doubt is worn thin revealing that perhaps, the nay sayers may have a point.

Now personally, I learned early on about Obama's church and the Reverend Wright and wondered why the story had no legs. My inner political nerve wants me to say that the timing of the Wright story is merely another merit badge earned for the Clinton political legacy. Hiller'uh's campaign is one foot in the grave and needs to win decisive victories in the upcoming Pennsylvania primary in April(polls) and as many delegates as possible to enter the Democrat National Convention without Obama securing the number of delegates necessary to claim the nomination. The Clinton team wants to make Obama look unelectable in a race against John McCain. The only way to accomplish that feat is to tie him to undesirables. The Clintons know this arena very well and have succeeded playing in it before. If the race is decided at the convention, the atmosphere and game playing is certainly in favor of the Clintons.

Now, add the INN story into the mix. My dear Democrat voting Jews, can you really afford the luxury of supporting Obama when day after day new reports of his honesty and integrity are painting a picture of a man that a rational person must conclude, isn't consistent with the surface appearance? Can an old adage really be true; Don't judge a book buy it's cover? Is the Obama of the political campaign for President the real Obama? Are you so sure that you are willing to take such chances depositing the blood of your brothers in Israel as your collateral?

Mind you, I do not think that a second Clinton Presidency would be preferable to McCain, (chas v'sholom) but if I had to choose between Obama and Hiller'uh its a no-brainer, her hug affair with Suha Arafat not withstanding or forgotten.



Yes, it is Obama's associations with Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Tony Rezko, Robert Malley, Zbigniew Brzezinski, Samantha Power, Samantha Power and Obama's Foreign Policy Team which make the Ali Abunimah story credible. In the end, it may not be. But in terms of believability, Obama's past and his choice of associates is his worst nightmare. How does one avoid dealing with his past in a political campaign? Ignore it and talk about the future. I pronounce the defendant: Guilty.

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Extinguishing a Feeding Frenzy

On a day where the media is focused on the work of the Malach HaMahves in Iraq, where the number 4,000 is bounced around from network to network, station to station, newspaper to newspaper, here is a nice little story proving the military is more than a statistic. Refuah Shlaima Gavin.



Small soldier gets his wish

Posted on: Friday, March 21, 2008, 4:36 AM
By George P. Slefo
Killeen Daily Herald


FORT HOOD – Five-year-old Gaven Cox was given one wish to do anything he wanted.

Instead of asking to go to Sea World or to meet Cowboys quarterback Tony Romo, Gaven modestly asked for some McDonald's food. The child's parents laughed and told him to make another choice.

"He told us he wanted to be an Army soldier," said Melissa Heminger, Gaven's mom. "I was a little bit surprised that he asked for McDonald's, but in reality, he wanted to be a soldier since he was 3."

Gaven, who is diagnosed with acute lymphoblastic leukemia, was granted one wish by the Make-A-Wish-Foundation.

Heminger said Gaven's stepfather was a former soldier and his Army medals fascinated Gaven.

While the Army has age restrictions on how old a person must be to enlist, it decided to make an exception.

Gaven, the nation's youngest soldier, is from Crandall and was "sworn in" there. Crandall is 27 miles southeast of Dallas.

The 5-year-old and his family arrived at Fort Hood early Thursday morning and were greeted by more than a dozen soldiers. He was wearing a miniature-sized combat uniform. In a few minutes, he was given a Kevlar helmet and dog tags and was promoted from specialist to sergeant.

After his promotion, young Sgt. Cox gave a proper Army salute and was given a mission.

"All right, Sgt. Cox, your mission is to go through that gate, ride a horse and kill five enemies," said Sgt. Christopher Gaines. "Are you ready?"

His 8-year-old sister Jade shouted, "Let's get them!"

After defeating the "enemy" on horseback, the country's youngest soldier got to do what most never get to do: Gaven flew a Longbow helicopter.

Well, sort of.

He was granted access to enter a trailer-sized home that was made for training helicopter pilots.

After being seated in the middle of five large rectangular screens, Gaven put on his helmet, equipped with a radio and a microphone.

Eric Fremming, a retired Army aviator who now teaches soldiers how to fly via simulation, began telling Gaven's father what was going on.

"Right now, we got (Gaven) flying in Iraq," Fremming said, while pointing to a 12-inch monitor. "When (Gaven) sees some bad guys, he can start shooting."

After a few seconds, Fremming points to the screen again.

"Oh, wait. Yup, he's engaged the enemy," Fremming said.

The simulated machine gun noise overpowered the training area.

"He's the youngest soldier I've ever trained," Fremming said. "This is just like flying a $40 million Longbow."

Yet the simulation was just a taste of what was to come as Gaven got perhaps the best gift the Army could give him: an actual ride in a Black Hawk helicopter.

Yet even with all the fun, Gaven became overwhelmed with activity and collapsed to his knees after finishing an activity. Within seconds, a soldier identified only as Pvt. Isaac picked him up and put him on his shoulders.

"You all right?" Pvt. Isaac asked.

Sgt. Cox nodded.

"Good," Pvt. Isaac said. "You're a soldier now."

Gaven's disease is a cancer of the white blood cells, which are the cells in the body that fight infections. With ALL, immature white blood cells are overproduced in the bone marrow. This causes damage and death to other cells by overcrowding the other white blood cells and ultimately spreads to other organs.

However, there is an 85 percent success rate of curing the disease in children, according to the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society's Web site.

"He's been going through some very aggressive therapy," Heminger said. "But he's been very strong ? I'm having fun, and I think (Gaven) is having fun – it's nice to forget that he's sick for a day."

Contact George P. Slefo at gslefo@kdhnews.com or call (254)-501-7469

Stumble Upon Toolbar

Sderot QassamCount - via Daled Amos

Nice Jerusalem Video from Yeshiva Beit Orot

The Path To The Final Solution

 
Who links to my website?