Main

January 21, 2009

Liberals Are, Um, Liberal Till the End

Seraphic Secret has received a dozen notes asking us what we thought of President Obama's inauguration. Here are some brief impressions:

1. It was a coronation. President and Mrs. Obama were treated like royalty.

2. President Obama's speech went like this: on the one hand big government is not the complete solution, on the other hand big government is going to save you. As always, Obama counts on delivery and his stirring oboe tones to mask the fact that he's not really saying anything. Just maintaining a cool, in-control image designed to reassure everyone.

3. Rev. Joseph Lowery's prayer was absurd. Didn't he notice that a black man has just been inaugurated as POTUS.

Black will not be asked to get in back;

When brown can stick around:

When yellow will be mellow;

When the Red Man can get ahead man;

And then white will embrace what is right.

That all those who do justice and love mercy say Amen. Say Amen.

Utter and complete drivel.

4. Somebody puh-leese grab the poet, send her to Gitmo to recite her verses, and I guarantee the terrorists will sing like birdies. Torture. Real torture.

5. The vast audience cheered Jimmy Carter, an openly anti-Semitic creature whose administration ushered in the age of modern Jihad by enabling the Islamic Republic of Iran. History is dead, does not matter when you are a liberal.

6. I was hoping that the multitudes would keep the oft-repeated Obama promise that we have entered a new era of change, cooperation and bi-partisanship. But of course that only applies to Democrats. When President Bush appeared, he was loudly and roundly booed. Same for Mrs. Bush, Vice-President and Mrs. Cheney. Take a look at the You Tube video above.

Classy 'till the end.

We fear that we have just glimpsed the next four years—and Seraphic Secret is vaguely ill.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:29 AM | Comments (29)

November 19, 2008

Obama: House Negro

“I hate Jews, Christians, Hindus, Catholics, Zoroastrians,
Negroes, and Americans. But, it's all your fault. I keel you! ”

I didn't say it, G-d forbid, nope, Ayman al-Zawahri, Al-Qaida's #2 cut throat has decided that President-elect Barack Obama is more Barry than Hussein and has opened up with a salvo of trash talk:

In al-Qaida's first response to Obama's victory, al-Zawahri also called the president-elect—along with secretaries of state Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice—"house negroes."

Speaking in Arabic, al-Zawahri uses the term "abeed al-beit," which literally translates as "house slaves." But al-Qaida supplied English subtitles of his speech that included the translation as "house negroes."

Oh, that's much nicer than slaves. That'll definitely score points in Berkeley and with their buddy William Ayers.

The message also includes old footage of speeches by Malcolm X in which he explains the term, saying black slaves who worked in their white masters' house were more servile than those who worked in the fields. Malcolm X used the term to criticize black leaders he accused of not standing up to whites.

I can see Jeremiah Wright using this as a power-point in his next rousing speech.

In Washington, State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the latest message was just "more despicable comments from a terrorist."

The State Dept. Finally, they're outraged by terrorists. But Hamas, who have vowed to kill ever Jew on planet earth, well, nothing to get excited about.

The 11-minute 23-second video features the audio message by al-Zawahri, who appears only in a still image, along with other images, including one of Obama wearing a Jewish skullcap as he meets with Jewish leaders. In his speech, al-Zawahri refers to a Nov. 5 U.S. airstrike attack in Afghanistan, meaning the video was made after that date.

Obama wearing a yarmulke. I smell Jewish conspiracy here, engineered, no doubt, by those evil Jooz at the George Soros financed J-street. Y'gotta love it.

Al-Zawahri said Obama's election has not changed American policies he said are aimed at oppressing Muslims and others.

Oh, yeah, we're oppressing Muslims all over the place, like in Gaza, where the genocidal lunatics are hurling rockets at the dumb Jews who are supplying the Jew-killers with the fuel with which to hurl the Jew-killing rockets. I think I'm gonna hurl.

The complete story here.

The American homeland has not been attacked—except by a bunch of revolting Hollywood movies that have not made a dime, the chattering classes and the MSM—since 9-11, and the American people have pretty much forgotten that we are locked in a mortal dance of death with Islamic terrorists.

Well, now that the man Newsweek just compared to Abraham Lincoln—welcome to the new and improved Jonestown cult—is under attack, maybe they'll get angry and turn their wrath from Sarah Palin to the real enemy: Islamo Nazis.

**********

Okay folks, it's that time of year again. Please support Project Valour IT. Here at Seraphic Secret we ask that you make a contribution to the Air Force. Your contribution goes to a worthy cause. Injured troops get tech equipment, laptops, cell phones, etc. All the of-so necessary hi-tech stuff that allows people to communicate, get jobs, create jobs, and hey, even get on-line and read great blogs like Seraphic Secret.

Look, I don't care if you're a Democrat, Republican, or a member of the Whig Party, we all owe our wounded troops a huge debt of gratitude, so please, click the “make a donation” button and give, give give.

I'll be your bestest friend.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:48 AM | Comments (13)

November 12, 2008

School Girl Crush

“Yo, Brother Barack, have I told you how I got my start in race
hustling? Two words: Tawana Brawley.”

For the past eight years, President Bush has been brutally and mercilessly pilloried by the dinosaur media and the chattering classes.

On Nov. 9, The New York Times, true to form when Republicans are in office, published an article revealing that, gasp, covert ops have been running down and killing Islamic terrorists in rogue states.

Memo to the clueless: America, at the moment, has military advisors, in approximately 45 countries across planet earth. We are fighting some very bad people, and some very decent, freedom-loving people need our help. Only liberals, it seems, cheerily surrender helpless women to honor killings, Christians to the rampages of murderous Islamic mobs, and Jews to the proudly genocidal intentions of the Palestinians and the totalitarian Persian state.

These people call their ideology of appeasement and defeatism progressive. Talk about an Orwellian use of language.

I suppose it never occurred to the editors of the New York Times that one of the reasons that the American mainland has not been attacked since 9-11 is that we've been on the offensive against the Muslim terrorists. Indeed, President Bush and his team have done their duty by authorizing black-ops against an implacable IslamoNazi enemy.

President-elect Obama, G-d help us, seems more inclined to extend Habeas Corpus to non-citizen terrorists—who do not serve under any nation-state flag nor wear any nation-state's uniform—and transfer them to general population in Sing-Sing. That'll be hilarious.

No wonder the dinosaur media has a school girl crush on President-elect Obama.

What will the media do for the next four years?

Certainly they won't pile on President-elect Obama. That would be like, y'know, criticizing the Messiah.

Oh, wait, they will be really mean to Governor Sarah Palin.

What could be simpler.

Silly me.

For the past eight years liberals have been the most ungracious losers this Republic has ever suffered—and now, revealingly, they emerge as equally ungracious winners.

And hey, look who else has a massive girlie crush on President-elect Obama: The People's Weekly World. Yup, the official newspaper of the American Communist Party. Good grief.

And what's Hollywood going to do?

Oh, dopey me.

Oliver Stone presents his next box office failure. Sarah Up North—Is Alaska Really a State?

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:39 AM | Comments (13)

November 05, 2008

Obama Supporters: The Day After

There's a new clinical designation called The Post Obama Election Syndrome. Here's a report on a sad and serious state that grips Obama's supporters from sea to shining sea.

You deserve a good laugh.

Let's roll the videotape.

Obama Win Causes Obsessive Supporters To Realize How Empty Their Lives Are

Hat Tip: Dirty Harry's Place

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 04:43 PM | Comments (16)

President Elect Obama

“Boys, no matter who's elected POTUS, we daven for his health and for HaShem to give him wisdom.”

So: as Ohio, New Mexico and Pennsylvania go to Obama I turn off the news channel, click on my DVR library and screen a couple of old movies.

Karen is working at the bedroom desk.

The love of my life has this uncanny ability to hear the movie I'm watching and correctly evaluate its plot, the year it was produced—give or take a year or two—and even the film's quality. It's really remarkable because Karen has no special knowledge or interest in classic Hollywood movies. In fact, the sound tracks of silent movies—wall to wall scores—send her into a Homeland Security red-alert frenzy, so either I mute the sound or just screen the film when Karen isn't around.

Anyhoo.

At one point, Karen, without even looking up, says: “Boy, you really don't want to watch anymore election coverage, do you?”

Meaning, the film I'm watching is not so hot.

“True, true.”

A few minutes later, I'm blasted with a revelation and I hit the pause button on the remote.

“Hey, now that Obama's President does this mean that they'll stop accusing us of being a racist country?”

Oh man, wouldn't it be great if race hustlers like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson are, um, retired from their less than honorable industries.

Without missing a beat, Karen responds: “Robert, those who voted for Obama are not racists, the rest of us have to be sent to reeducation camps.”

Karen and I congratulate President-elect Obama and pray that he will use the awesome powers of his office with wisdom and justice.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:13 AM | Comments (8)

November 04, 2008

The Upside to the Next Four Years

Carole Landis tells Victor Mature: “Don't worry, Barack will save us.

Ohio has gone for Obama.

Ditto for PA, and New Mexico.

I'm gonna go and have a drink of something or other—something very strong.

Oh, wait, I don't drink. Liquor gives me migraines.

Okay, I'll watch an old movie instead.

Probably The Man From Down Under (1943) a little known Charles Laughton gem. And oh boy, get a load of the young and exquisite Donna Reed.

The next four years are going to be bad for America and absolutely ruinous for Israel, but here's the upside: an Obama administration is going to be fab-u-lous for Conservative bloggers for as British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher once said: “The facts of life are Conservative.”

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 06:42 PM | Comments (31)

Election Prediction

Joan Crawford holds up the flame of liberty.

I'm a screenwriter. Don't know how to read a poll. But I do read bloggers who know how to read and interpret polls and Joshuapundit is among the best in the blogosphere. Here's his latest prediction.

My predictions are ... McCain wins, 286 electoral votes to 252.

As far as the battleground/states listed as toss ups go, I believe McCain will take Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, North Carolina, Florida, Missouri, Nevada, Arizona and possibly Virginia.

Obama will take Iowa, Colorado, New Mexico and possibly Virginia..although I'm calling Virginia for McCain. If Obama does manage to eke out a win in Virginia, McCain will win it 273-265.

Well, okaaaay. From Joshuapundit's mouth to G-d's ears.

To read the complete article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 03:56 PM | Comments (4)

Black Panther Thugs at Philly Polling Station

As we pointed out the Democrats are adept at voter fraud and voter intimidation. In the City of Brotherly Love an, ahem, "security detail" of Black Panthers, a group steeped in violence, murder and Jew-hatred—read David Horowitz's amazing book, Radical Son—were present to secure a victory for the great uniter Barack Obama.

Jane Russell, a prominent Hollywood Republican, puts her
six shooter to good use.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:05 PM | Comments (1)

October 30, 2008

My (Phone) Schlep to Florida

Rabbi Abraham Avrech prepares to pull the trigger for...

Vital Stats:

Gender: Male
Religion: Jewish
Age: 89
Marital Status: Happy
Residence: Miami Beach, Fl.
Hobbies: Golf, and, er, more Golf.
Occupation: Orthodox Rabbi, Col. U.S. Army, 42nd Division, Retired.
Political Party Affiliation: Democrat; the other party is feh!

“So listen, I'm calling to find out if you've made up your mind about whom you're going to vote?”

“Yes, yes, I have.”

“I'm listening...”

“Well Robert, I'm voting for McCain.”

My knees turn to jelly. I'm pretty sure I just heard thunderous claps of lightning.

“Did you say McCain?”

“Robert,” my father sighs, “for the first time in my life I'm voting for a Republican.”

Caution: Head. About. To. Explode.

“I'm like speechless, Dad.”

He can hardly believe what he's saying. “Yep, first time in my life, a Republican.”

“Total Oy-vey.”

We chuckle.

I get on the phone with Sylvia, my lovely and loving step-mother.

“Can you believe it, Robert, your father's actually voting Republican.”

“Sylvia, I think the Moshiach is up next.”

“Amazing, huh?”

“Tell me something, the people in your building, Democrats or Republicans?”

“Oh, Democrats, except for me.”

Sylvia has worked in small business her entire life so she's a natural Republican; she knows how government just gets in the way of business and free enterprise.

“So they're voting for Obama?”

“Nooo. No, no, no! This time the whole building—except for one complete meshuganah—is voting for McCain.”

“Wow.”

“Yeah, something, huh?”

“How come”

“You think we want that anti-Semite Farrakhan near the White House? What do they take us for?”

I'm not a pollster. But if my father and his entire co-op—except for one complete meshuganah—are voting for the McCain-Pailn ticket, well, Florida could get very interesting.

Apparently, U.S. Citizens in Israel agree with my father by an overwhelming majority.

And from Judith Apter Klinghoffer, Why Obama's Victory Would Be Osama's.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:08 AM | Comments (30)

October 29, 2008

Another Terrorist on Obamaland

The LA Times refuses to release a videotape of a dinner Obama attended in honor of PLO terrorist Rashid Khalidi.

Their excuses are beyond lame.

The truth is simple: the video is probably horribly damaging and if released would present a mortal wound to the Obama campaign. The LA Times is in the tank for Obama, hence they act as censors and neglect their primary duty: to educate the citizenry with a free, unfettered press. No wonder the LA Times is hemorrhaging readers and laying off more staffers.

Sarah Palin says it best: “If there's a Pulitzer Prize category for excelling in kow-towing, then the LA Times, you're winning,”

And gee, this is a shocker: Terrorists in Gaza are actively campaigning for Obama. They recognize a fellow traveler when they see one. As do the Holocaust denying/Holocaust yearning Persians.

Rest easy American Jews.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:00 PM | Comments (10)

October 27, 2008

Obama: Tragedy, Redistribution of Wealth Not Pursued

In this radio interview from 2001, Barack Obama laments the fact that “the Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth.”

This is the ideology of the former Soviet Union, Mao's China, Cuba and every Communist, Socialist sink hole on planet earth. It's a classic Socialist belief that government should control private property and wealth, that the haves should be compelled by big government to hand over what they have earned to the have-nots—above and beyond taxes.

We will also remind our readers that Obama's mentor for over 20-years, Jeremiah (“G-d damned America; Israel, that dirty word.”) Wright, advocated this economic ideology when preaching his Black Liberation Theology. And of course, American terrorists William Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn* were and are Communists who openly advocate the redistribution of wealth.

So if Obama is elected here's what we can expect almost immediately.

1. The Defense budget will be cut by at least 10% and as much as 25%. This will make the Islamic terrorists and Russia very happy.

2. Israel will not have a strong American partner in Obama. In fact, the opposite. And when it comes time to destroy the Iranian nuclear facilities, Obama will, most assuredly, want to sit down and chat with the Persians and then get the Europeans and the UN involved. Whenever that scenario unrolls, Israelis and Jews the world over end up getting murdered. And whatever is bad for Israel, is invariably bad for America. Remember: Israel is the canary in the coal mine for civilization.

3. Obama and his radical left friends in the Congress, Conyers, Dodd, Frank, Pelosi, Rangel, Reid, will impose tariffs against our most vital trading partners. Never forget that Obama and the Democrats are owned by the unions. There will be a trade war and domestic prices will shoot shy high.

4. At the same time, Obama will increase taxes for everyone except those who don't pay Federal taxes.

5. Obama has said he wants to hand over an extra 50 billion dollars to the UN. The Jew-haters who are in the majority of that odious institution can't wait. That money will buy plenty of weapons with which to kill Jews in Israel and Americans across the globe.

6. Jimmy Carter's wretched one-term presidency will seem like a stroll in the park.

Here's the good news:

1. An Obama presidency will be such a massive failure that after his term is over the country will flock back to the Republicans.

2. Hello President Sarah Palin.

*Bernardine Dohrn on the Tate-LaBianca murders: “Dig it. First they [the Manson gang] killed those pigs and then they put a fork in their bellies Wild!”

**********And from Melanie Philipps:

What’s happening in this terrifying, Orwellian US presidential race is the flip side of the madness that’s been on display since 9/11 itself, when swathes of the UK population decided that ‘America had it coming to it’ because it supported Israel, and that George W Bush was the most dangerous man on the planet. After the Iraq war started this irrationality swelled into pathological proportions on both sides of the Atlantic, when the ‘Bush lied, people died’ narrative fuelled a hatred of Bush and ‘the neocons’ exceeded in its hallucinatory and murderous venom only by the truly deranged way in which the media and intelligentsia systematically either ignored evidence that did not fit this narrative or, even more astoundingly, reported it in such a way that it delivered the opposite of what was actually happening or being said.

In this way not only has history been rewritten, not only have Britain and America been to a greater or lesser extent turned against themselves and demoralised by the propaganda of their mortal enemies recycled as truth by our fifth-column Big Media, but they have been incited to an ugly and dangerous level of irrationality, hatred and hysteria which history tells us presages the twilight of freedom. It is that media class which, in refusing to tell the public what it needs to know about Barack Obama, may now finally install in the White House the man who personifies the repudiation of the American power and western values that the media and left-wing intelligentsia (of which the media is the mouthpiece) have themselves spared no effort to destroy these past seven years.

Further down, deeply disturbing information about Obama and Palestinian terrorist Rashid Khalili:

Now look at this. Back in April, the LA Times ran this story reporting on the going-away party for Rashid Khalidi, Obama’s close friend, who justifies Palestinian violence against Israel and who was leaving for a job in New York. Khalidi is a deeply troubling individual, a former PLO operative and close friend of unreprentant former Weatherman terrorist William Ayers. As I have reported before, in 2000 Khalidi and his wife Mona held a fundraiser for Obama’s unsuccessful congressional bid. The next year, an Arab group whose board was headed by Mona Khalidi received a $40,000 grant from the Woods Fund of Chicago when Obama was on the fund’s board of directors.

Click here for the complete article:

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:03 AM | Comments (13)

October 20, 2008

Obama Campaign Against Free Speech in the Jewish Community

The Obama campaign is using every tool at its disposal to ban the Republican Jewish Coalition from speaking to the public. My friend Omri Ceren of Mere Rhetoric has posted an extensively researched and meticulously cited expose on how this tactic is part and parcel of the Obama campaign's attack on dissent and free speech.

Obama shill Mel Levine has never been shy about throwing around his AIPAC credentials. That's a good strategy given how his pro-Obama arguments are mindbogglingly stupid, but it does beg a question: given how the Obama campaign is on the attack against AIPAC, aren't Levine's credentials kind of a bad thing? Maybe someone should ask him about that. Not a Republican though, because they're not allowed:

What actually happened is that the Obama campaign demanded that the CIC [Council of Israeli Community in Los Angeles] ban Greenfield from the debate as a condition for their participation. They're doing the same thing all over the country: no preconditions for meeting Iran but thuggish demands before they'll sit down with American Jews. And they're getting really good at this game: have someone spend months organizing a non-partisan event, pull their people out right at the end, and then shriek about partisanship. The only thing left is for them to threaten legal action. Then it would be a perfect replay of how they detonated the anti-Ahmadinejad rally.

To read the complete article, please click here.

Meanwhile, the Democrats are busy trying to destroy Joe the Plumber. You see he had the chuitzpah to ask Obama a question.

Karen and I wish all our friends and relatives an inspiring Shemini Atzeret and a joyous Simchat Torah.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:07 AM | Comments (7)

October 07, 2008

McCain Hammers Obama—Finally

It's about time.

Hat Tip: Wolf Howling

Smoking Gun Alert! Read about Obama's attempts to destroy the Second Amendment.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 04:20 PM | Comments (5)

October 06, 2008

The Ad Obama is Trying to Ban

Barack Obama's handlers are desperately trying to get this ad banned. Good to know that liberals support free speech, but only when it's convenient.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:32 PM | Comments (6)

What Just Happened?

John McCain and Sarah Palin need to go on the offensive immediately about the sub-prime crisis. This crisis was engineered by the Democrats in order to make it possible for marginal borrowers to own homes. All in the name of, you know, social justice.

But when social justice leads to world-wide financial chaos, well, it's not justice, it's just destructive PC stupidity.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:06 AM | Comments (3)

October 02, 2008

...And the Financial Crisis is a Surprise Why?

Note that this is a New York Times article from Sept. 1999 about lowering credit standards, thanks to Bill Clinton, Franklin Raines—now Obama's financial advisor)—and Freddie / Fannie.

Barney Frank is also up to his neck in this crisis. Watching him and Chris Dodd pose before the cameras is infuriating. They should both be tarred and feathered.

And our friend Wolf Howling links to an excellent article detailing the history of the left's guilty hand in the current sub-prime crisis.

You see, if you voiced opposition to these sub-prime loans you were branded a rascist. And now, if you dare oppose the radical leftists policies of Barack Obama, well, you're also a rascist.

Fannie Mae Eases Credit To Aid Mortgage Lending

By STEVEN A. HOLMES
Published: September 30, 1999

In a move that could help increase home ownership rates among minorities and low-income consumers, the Fannie Mae Corporation is easing the credit requirements on loans that it will purchase from banks and other lenders.

The action, which will begin as a pilot program involving 24 banks in 15 markets -- including the New York metropolitan region -- will encourage those banks to extend home mortgages to individuals whose credit is generally not good enough to qualify for conventional loans. Fannie Mae officials say they hope to make it a nationwide program by next spring.

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, has been under increasing pressure from the Clinton Administration to expand mortgage loans among low and moderate income people and felt pressure from stock holders to maintain its phenomenal growth in profits.

In addition, banks, thrift institutions and mortgage companies have been pressing Fannie Mae to help them make more loans to so-called subprime borrowers. These borrowers whose incomes, credit ratings and savings are not good enough to qualify for conventional loans, can only get loans from finance companies that charge much higher interest rates -- anywhere from three to four percentage points higher than conventional loans.

''Fannie Mae has expanded home ownership for millions of families in the 1990's by reducing down payment requirements,'' said Franklin D. Raines, Fannie Mae's chairman and chief executive officer. ''Yet there remain too many borrowers whose credit is just a notch below what our underwriting has required who have been relegated to paying significantly higher mortgage rates in the so-called subprime market.''

Demographic information on these borrowers is sketchy. But at least one study indicates that 18 percent of the loans in the subprime market went to black borrowers, compared to 5 per cent of loans in the conventional loan market.

In moving, even tentatively, into this new area of lending, Fannie Mae is taking on significantly more risk, which may not pose any difficulties during flush economic times. But the government-subsidized corporation may run into trouble in an economic downturn, prompting a government rescue similar to that of the savings and loan industry in the 1980's.

''From the perspective of many people, including me, this is another thrift industry growing up around us,'' said Peter Wallison a resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute. ''If they fail, the government will have to step up and bail them out the way it stepped up and bailed out the thrift industry.''

(bold type by Seraphic Secret)

Under Fannie Mae's pilot program, consumers who qualify can secure a mortgage with an interest rate one percentage point above that of a conventional, 30-year fixed rate mortgage of less than $240,000 -- a rate that currently averages about 7.76 per cent. If the borrower makes his or her monthly payments on time for two years, the one percentage point premium is dropped.

Fannie Mae, the nation's biggest underwriter of home mortgages, does not lend money directly to consumers. Instead, it purchases loans that banks make on what is called the secondary market. By expanding the type of loans that it will buy, Fannie Mae is hoping to spur banks to make more loans to people with less-than-stellar credit ratings.

Fannie Mae officials stress that the new mortgages will be extended to all potential borrowers who can qualify for a mortgage. But they add that the move is intended in part to increase the number of minority and low income home owners who tend to have worse credit ratings than non-Hispanic whites.

Home ownership has, in fact, exploded among minorities during the economic boom of the 1990's. The number of mortgages extended to Hispanic applicants jumped by 87.2 per cent from 1993 to 1998, according to Harvard University 's Joint Center for Housing Studies.

During that same period the number of African Americans who got mortgages to buy a home increased by 71.9 per cent and the number of Asian Americans by 46.3 per cent.

In contrast, the number of non-Hispanic whites who received loans for homes increased by 31.2 per cent.

Despite these gains, home ownership rates for minorities continue to lag behind non-Hispanic whites, in part because blacks and Hispanics in particular tend to have on average worse credit ratings.

In July, the Department of Housing and Urban Development proposed that by the year 2001, 50 percent of Fannie Mae's and Freddie Mac's portfolio be made up of loans to low and moderate-income borrowers. Last year, 44 percent of the loans Fannie Mae purchased were from these groups.

The change in policy also comes at the same time that HUD is investigating allegations of racial discrimination in the automated underwriting systems used by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to determine the credit-worthiness of credit applicants.

Hat Tip: Dr. Peter Stevenson

Meanwhile more Weathermen terrorists declare support for Obama.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 03:48 AM | Comments (12)

September 28, 2008

Republican Yarmulkes: Sign of the Times

Who says our yarmulkes have to be yeshivish black velvet or the more modern knit jobs known as kepah s'ruga.

The new, must-have fashion items are cooly Conservative, colorful discsthat proudly stake out their side of the aisle with all the force of a shofar on steroids.

Here are four new designs that find inspiration in proud political slogans mixed with the joy of English and Yiddish.

These yarmulkes are also a sign of the times.

The days of Jews as default, lever-pulling, lobotomized Democrats are o-ver. Gone. Finished. End of the road.

Order your favorite yarmulkes at Vanity Kippah.

Hat Tip: Dr. Peter Stevenson

And from Jeff Jacoby via Wolf Howling, a few words of truth—in short supply these days—regarding the current financial crisis, Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank , and the liberal insistence on affirmative action housing. It all goes back to the most wretched president of these United States, Jimmy "Jihad" Carter.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:48 PM | Comments (13)

August 14, 2008

Seraphic Secret Rocks the Vote

“He said what to her?”

“Oh yeah, at least that's what I heard and it was like blah, blah, blah.”

Offspring #3 is sitting next to me on the couch. The MacBook is all snuggly in her lap as she and a Stern College friend chat via the built-in webcam.

Yenta that I am, I lean into the camera and wave hello to Offspring #3's girlfriend.

The girls giggle.

“Who was that?”

“My daddy.”

”Tell your father that I love Seraphic Secret.”

Like an anxious puppy, I sit up.

Offspring #3 cracks up and goes: “My friend is like obsessed with Seraphic Secret.”

I dive back to the computer. Oh joy, Offspring #3's friend now dons a Seraphic Press baseball cap. With such a hat she can conquer the known universe.

“What do you like best?”

Typical writer, I'm always looking for feedback, desperately seeking praise. Offspring #3's friend is single, female, 20-years old. Hmmm, she's going to tell me that she absolutely adores How I Married Karen. Easy call.

She goes: “I love when you write about Barack Obama, especially when you make fun of him. You've convinced me to vote for John McCain.”

“Really?”

“Absolutely.”

In a few days, Offspring #3's friend is flying from the east coast to visit and help hold down the fort while Karen and I are in Israel for the First International Jewish Bloggers Convention hosted by Nefesh B'nefesh.

Showered with such praise, I'm suddenly feeling all magnanimous: “You know what, I have decided not to set up the Nanny cam to spy on you guys while we're gone.”

Offspring #3 gives me an oh-sure-as-if look, but finally grins and laughs, and her pixallated friend joins in the raucous laughter.

They think I'm kidding.

“Have you girls registered to vote?”

Offspring #3 says: “I filled out the on-line form, now I have to print it out and mail it in.”

“Don't forget.”

Both girls assure me that they'll take care of the paper work.

I'm glowing like a moon, filled with a sense of my blog-power. I'm the Jewish P-Diddy, rocking the vote.

I lean back into the lens: “I'm gonna write about you on the blog.”

Offspring #3's friend shrieks: “Oh my gosh, I'd love a shout-out on Seraphic Secret.”

And here it is.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:01 AM | Comments (19)

August 10, 2008

Iranian Olympic Swimmers Flee from Jews

As I said, I could care less about the Olympics, but hey, there is some entertainment value in witnessing the Jew-hating Islamic Republic of Iran flee like cowards from the Jewish athletes in Beijing.

Let's explore why the Persians would act in such a dumb and insulting manner:

1. The Persians view all competition with non Muslims as a religious test: Islam over non-Islam. To lose to a Jew would be theologically indefensible. It's like admitting that our G-d is stronger than their G-d. Real sophisticated theologians in the Islamic Republic of Iran.

2. They're just a bunch of racist, Jew-hating Islamo Nazis.

3. All of the above.

Hey, I have an idea, let's get Barack Obama to fly on over to Beijing and engage the Iranians in, what does he call it? Oh yeah, “tough diplomacy.” I'm sure BO, with all his ivy league charm can, you know, get the genocidal-yearning Iranians to sing kumbaya and embrace the Israeli delegation.

I mean, two years in the trenches as a community organizer, AKA Socialist agitator, has definitely prepared BO for dealing with The Islamic Republic of Iran.

As for us, here at Seraphic Secret we just can't wait for Israel to bomb the crap out of those savages.

Politics reared its ugly head at the Olympic Games once more on Saturday after an Iranian swimmer refused to compete alongside Israeli Tom Be'eri.

Mohammad Alirezaei was due to race against Be'eri in the fourth heat of the 100 meter breaststroke, but pulled out, apparently under the orders of the chiefs of the Iranian delegation.

For the complete story, please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend from the Great North, A. Mark David, QC

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:41 PM | Comments (15)

August 08, 2008

Our Bestest Friends: John & Cindy McCain

I know, you're all kvelling. You want one too. Just click and make a campaign contribution. It takes money to win an election. Lots of money.

Karen and I wish all our friends a restful and miraculous Shabbat.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:10 PM | Comments (2)

July 18, 2008

Change in Iraq Obama Style

Watch Obama switch positions on Iraq, endlessly, for about eight minutes. It would be funny but for the fact that he aspires to be Commander-in-Chief.

Wolf Howling, one of the most perceptive bloggers in the known universe, masterfully Critiques Obama's New York Times Manifesto on Iraq. Bu-rutal.

And from my friend Dirty Harry, breaking news on a new film and an interview with Hollywood good guy D.B. Sweeney. What a relief for a Hollywood actor, writer, director to say the following:

There’s nothing on this planet like the feeling of watching 500 combat ready Marines come to attention for the playing of the Star Spangled banner before they screen your movie.

Nothing.

I can only dream of such a feeling and honor.

Karen and I wish all our friends a lovely Shabbos, and a meaningful fast on Sunday the 17th of Tammuz.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 03:27 PM | Comments (2)

July 15, 2008

Comrade Obama Purges Website

As in the old Soviet Union where history was constantly revised to suit the political ends of the Communist rulers, Barak Obama is trying to rewrite history in regard to his dead-wrong predictions about the surge in Iraq.

Not surprising when you consider that this is the candidate who spent over 20-years as an active member of a Jew-hating, black separatist church and then has the chutzpah to campaign as a "uniter."

Not surprising when you consider that this is a candidate who has learned a great deal from the Communist playbook.

Orwellian thought and language have reached new heights with Barack Obama and his politburo.

Barack Obama's campaign scrubbed his presidential Web site over the weekend to remove criticism of the U.S. troop "surge" in Iraq, the Daily News has learned.

The presumed Democratic nominee replaced his Iraq issue Web page, which had described the surge as a "problem" that had barely reduced violence. .

"The surge is not working," Obama's old plan stated, citing a lack of Iraqi political cooperation but crediting Sunni sheiks - not U.S. military muscle - for quelling violence in Anbar Province. .

The News reported Sunday that insurgent attacks have fallen to the fewest since March 2004. .

To read the complete story, please click here.

And here's John McCain on Iraq and Afghanistan.

An excerpt:

Over the last year, Senator Obama and I were part of a great debate about the war in Iraq. Both of us agreed the Bush administration had pursued a failed strategy there and that we had to change course. Where Senator Obama and I disagreed, fundamentally, was what course we should take. I called for a comprehensive new strategy -- a surge of troops and counterinsurgency to win the war. Senator Obama disagreed. He opposed the surge, predicted it would increase sectarian violence, and called for our troops to retreat as quickly as possible.

Today we know Senator Obama was wrong. The surge has succeeded. And because of its success, the next President will inherit a situation in Iraq in which America's enemies are on the run, and our soldiers are beginning to come home.

It's worth noting that John McCain spent more time being tortured in a North Vietnamese POW camp than Obama has spent in the Senate. To say that Obama's resume is thin is something of an understatement. Oh, but I forgot, Obama served in the trenches as a, ahem, community organizer. Tough gig.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:39 PM | Comments (2)

July 14, 2008

Obama AWOL

From Wolf Howling:

Obama is refusing to appear in a Town Hall debate with McCain before a crowd of military service members and their families. The debate was organized by Disabled American Veterans, Military Order of the Purple Heart and the Military Spouse Corporate Career Network, among others. This man is devoid of substance and character.

To read the complete article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:45 AM | Comments (12)

June 11, 2008

Obama: Without the Teleprompter

Obama is great when he's reading off a teleprompter. But when he has to think on his feet, he's a complete disaster, and these two clips are a pretty accurate indication of Obama's rambling cluelessness.

That's why his handlers will never allow Obama to accept McCain't invitation to a series of town meetings. McCain would chew him up and spit him out.

Behold, the shallowness that is Barack Obama. You have to laugh. Give the kid a breathalyzer? Completely incoherent. Obama's excuse? He's short on sleep. Really and truly.

This one is absolutely hysterical. Obama counts on his deep oboe voice to carry him through. But once again, without the teleprompter, Obama rambles, tries to make light and bluff his way out of obvious inoherence. But finally he confesses that he's, y'know, tired. For pity's sake, get the man some waffles.

Obama's rambling answers remind us of you know who.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend Kishke via Gateway Pundit.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:29 PM | Comments (21)

Jewish Democrats Defect to McCain

Who's the man in the blue shirt?
Obama's paymaster, arch-leftist George Soros.

Last week Obama pandered big-time to AIPAC—they claim to be non-partisan, but AIPAC's leadership is solidly Democratic, quietly shilling for Obama—and he hopes to erase all the blatantly anti-Israel and anti-Semitic material on his official Presidential website.

Yup, they're scrubbing the material now, But Charles Johnson over at Little Green Footballs has uncovered a sewer of Jew-hatred on Obama's site.

Listen if you spend over 20-years as a “proud member” of a racist, Jew-hating church, it means that Obama does not reject the vile theology of this church, it's leaders and its members.

When you proudly label Jeremiah Wright and Michael Pflagar as your “spiritual advisors” it means you're comfortable with their hatred of America, their paranoid conspiracy theories, and their vicious demagoguery.

When you associate with Bill Ayres and Bernardine Dorn, unrepentant Pentagon terrorists, it means that you're not averse to their radical message. In fact, Obama kicked off his Chicago political career with a fundraiser hosted by these two traitors.

When every major Middle East policy consultant on Obama's staff is solidly anti-Israel, well it means that Obama is in tune with their views.

Obama, like most liberals, wants America to trust his high-flying, utopian rhetoric.

But Judaism teaches that we judge people by their behavior.

And Obama's behavior is not to be trusted. Not in regard to Israel and America—and not as Iran stands on the threshold of acquiring nuclear weapons. The world is far too dangerous for an Obama presidency and his collectivist dreams.

America needs to pull the lever for McCain in November.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) is attracting elite Jewish Democratic donors who backed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) and are concerned about Sen. Barack Obama’s (D-Ill.) stance toward Israel, say McCain backers who are organizing the effort to court Democrats.

McCain has already had several fundraising events with Jewish Democrats in Washington and Florida, say his supporters.

He also has the backing of Democrat-turned-Independent Sen. Joe Lieberman (Conn.), who made history as the first Jewish vice presidential candidate and has recently raised questions about Obama’s foreign policy vision for the Middle East.

Stephen Muss, the Florida developer, is the biggest Democratic donor and fundraiser to pledge his support for McCain and the Republican National Committee, said a GOP official. Muss has given tens of thousands of dollars to help Democratic candidates in recent years, including $80,000 to the Democratic National Committee (DNC) in 2000, according to the Center for Responsive Politics and CQ MoneyLine.

Muss did not respond to a request for comment Tuesday afternoon.

“Many Jewish Democrats are sensing there is such an existential threat to Israel that you have to vote for an individual who strongly supports the U.S.-Israel relationship,” said Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.), chairman of the GOP’s Jewish Victory Coalition.

To read the complete story, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:10 AM | Comments (2)

June 05, 2008

Oil Prices

The other day I filled up the gas tank in my car and got hit with a whopping $67.00 bill. Ouch!

The Democrats self-righteously lecture that we have to exploit alternative sources of energy.

I'm all for it.

Problem is, like almost all Democratic policies, it's delusional.

The industrial world runs on oil, and creating reliable and cheap alternate sources of energy is a long way from bearing fruit.

The Democrats like to blame oil companies for the world-wide spike in prices, making believe that the laws of supply and demand do not exist. They prefer dopey conspiracy theories, accusing multinational corporations of artificially inflating oil prices in order to gouge higher profits.

Barack Obama makes a point of attacking big corporations as a source of America's ills.

It's very odd, he hates big business, but his entire platform relies on the promise of Big Government—huge government. His acceptance speech yesterday promised higher taxes, cradle to grave socialism, surrender in Iraq, an end to global warming, to make the oceans recede, provide jobs for all, universal health care—Viva Fidel!—and of course the world will love us.

And oh yeah, he promised to walk on water.

Most frightening, his audience believed him.

INTERPOLATION

Hey, have you noticed that no one is fainting at Obama rallies any more? He's not gliding forward, the calm hero, with a bottle of water for the swooning maidens suffering from the Vapors, the result, no doubt, of being so close to the Savior—a savior who spent over 20-years as a “proud member” of a racist Church.

I guess that act was a bit too transparent, even for his gullible believers.

END INTERPOLATION

Anywhoo.

The only people who hate America are leftists. Which is absolutely cool. Being scorned by America and Jew-hating leftists is something we should be proud of.

Big government: History teaches that unlimited government always yields economic ruin and personal misery. And these states inevitably evolve, by internal design, into a Big Brother rule.

As the clever cartoon points out, it's Democratic policies that enable and encourage such high oil prices. Remember that next time you fill up your tank, confront massive heating bills, pay higher prices on your airline ticket. In fact, high oil prices permeate almost every nook and cranny of our economic lives.

Alternate sources of energy will be exploited. Not by massive government programs, wasteful and inefficient, but by private entrepreneurs spurred on by the spirit of innovation and capitalism.

This Israeli company is making fine headway—with seaweed.

In the meantime, we should be exploiting the oil resources that are readily available to us. New methods of drilling now exist that do not harm the environment.

Unless we act sanely oil prices will continue to rise, and the tyrants of the Muslim world will strengthen their stranglehold on our lives, using their economic leverage to export to American and European shores the radical Islam of the Wahhabi, Salafi and Khomeinist strains—to metastasize like a deadly cancer into Western culture.

Cartoon Hat Tip: Peter Stevenson

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:18 AM | Comments (20)

June 03, 2008

Democratic Politics: The Haunted

Hizbullah terrorists give the Nazi salute. Obama wants
to talk, without preconditions, to their masters, Iran.

It's become clear that Barack Obama is not a liberal, nor a progressive, but a radical leftist. He's clueless about foreign policy, which is why he receives support from the radical Islamic world. They understand exactly who he is: a leaky American vessel who would be steam-rolled by every tin-pot dictator and Jew-hating Muslim tyrant on the face of the earth.

Any man who is comfortable, for over 20 years, as a "proud member" of a racist church has deep character flaws. Any man who draws consistent support and spiritual sustenance from America and Israel hating radicals such as Jeremiah Wright, Michael Pfleger (I keep wanting to say Father Flotsky, recalling the hysterical Lenny Bruce routine) Pentagon bombers Bernardine Dorn and husband, partner-in-terror, Bill Ayres, cannot be trusted with this country's highest office. Obama's judgement in matters of geo-politics and national defense is not just faulty, but warped by his radical ideology.

The Democrats have made their calculations. They know that Obama cannot win the general election. Hillary could have given McCain a run for his money. But she's female and Obama is black and race trumps gender in the, ahem, progressive mind.

Rather than alienate their black base, without whom they cannot win any elections, the Democratic leadership has opted to sacrifice the Presidency in favor of propping up a nominee for the most self-serving reasons: the superdelegates, AKA the party elite, will also be on the ballots in November, and though Obama will lose, they will secure the black vote and get to keep their jobs.

The superdelegates do have their priorities.

The Democrats boast that Obama's candidacy has prompted a record number of new Democratic voters. They argue that Obama has reactivated a new, untapped base that will be a signifigant factor in the elections.

Maybe yes, maybe no.

But keep in mind that the last time the Democrats made this claim was during the Presidential candidacy of George McGovern.

Republicans can be grateful that the Democrats, who have played the race card for so many years, will now down in flames as this insidious form of racism comes back to haunt them.

As Bobby Kennedy famously remarked: "Liberals are suicidal."

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:48 AM | Comments (17)

April 30, 2008

Black Religious Traditions?

Ida Kamisnka (right) ponders black theology: “Oy vey, what if Jeremiah
Wright does represent mainstream black churches?” Super stars of Yiddish
stage and film, mother Esther-Rochel Kaminska and her Oscar nominated
daughter Ida Kaminska in the Polish-Yiddish movie Tkies Kaf,
The Handshake, 1924.

Jeremiah Wright performs at the National Press Club:

“This is not an attack on Jeremiah Wright,” Jeremiah Wright said. “It is an attack on the black church.”

He goes on to appoint himself as the typical voice of Black American religious traditions.

Okay. Good to know.

Interpolation #1:

Seraphic Secret anxiously waits for hundreds if not thousands of black pastors and church lay leaders to deny Wright's outrageous libel. We look forward to a public denunciation of Wright's claim from members of the black Christian community.

So far:

Nothing.

Seraphic Secret suspects that Wright just might be right.

End Interpolation #1:

“Why am I speaking out now?” Wright challenges. “If you think I'm going to let you talk about my mama and her religious tradition, and my daddy and his religious tradition and my grandma, you got another thing coming.”

Wright goes on, once again, to justify the September 11 terrorist attacks by preaching: “America's chickens are coming home to roost.”

I claim no expertise in Christian scripture, but I do know that Jesus was Jewish—which might come as a surprise to Wright—and the quote below represents normative Rabbinic Judaism. Using this particular Torah to defend Islamic terrorism indicates a depth of cynicism that is stunning.

Thus, Obama's ex-mentor and ex-spiritual advisor is revealed as just another slick race hustler—hello Jesse Jackson, hello Al Sharpton—a greedy demagogue determined to keep American blacks down on the plantation where they can be exploited by the Democratic party and a cadre of self-appointed thugs, AKA Community Leaders, who feed off a mind-set of victimhood and a litany of historical despair.

Anyway, here's Wright—as racist and intellectually brutish as the slave holders who manipulated the Bible to justify the evil of slavery: “Jesus said, 'Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.' You cannot do terrorism on other people and expect it never to come back on you. Those are biblical principles, not Jeremiah Wright bombastic divisive principles.”

Biblical principles?

As channeled by Osama Bin Laden.

Wright moves on to his good buddy Louis Farrakhan, the black version of the Grand Dragon of the Ku Klux Klan.

“Louis said 20 years ago that Zionism, not Judaism, was a gutter religion. He was talking about the same thing United Nations resolutions say, the same thing now that President Carter's being vilified for and Bishop Tutu's being vilified for. And everybody wants to paint me as if I'm anti-Semitic because of what Louis Farrakhan said 20 years ago. He is one of the most important voices in the 20th and 21st century; that's what I think about him. . . . Louis Farrakhan is not my enemy. He did not put me in chains, he did not put me in slavery, and he didn't make me this color.”

Barack Obama claims that until now he was ignorant of Wright's Jew-hatred, of Wright's pathological hatred of America, of Wright's assertion that the American government has purposely injected AIDS into the Black population, of Wright's endless defense of the indefensible—including Hamas.

Obama would have us believe that for the past 20 years Jeremiah Wright has been all warm and cuddly whenever Barack Obama was in Church. But magically, whenever Obama was absent from Church the good Pastor went from Jekyll to Hyde. Yup, suddenly Barack no longer recognizes the man who brought him to Christ.

I guess Jeremiah Wright is now Barack Obama's ex-ex Pastor and ex-ex Spiritual Advisor.

Whoa. I thought Barack could no more disown his ex-ex Pastor than he could disown his white grandmother?

Oh wait, he did disown his white grandmother. The woman who raised and sacrificed for him. In fact, he threw her under the bus. I guess that makes her his ex-ex white grandmother.

As Edward G. Robinson confides to Fred MacMurray about his infallible instinct for detecting liars in Billy Wilder's towering movie Double Indemnity: “The little man in my stomach is acting up. And the little man is never wrong.”

I'm eating some awesome shmurah matzah left over from Pesach and I'm watching Barack Obama on TV and the little man in my stomach is not acting up—he's doing sumersaults!

Interpolation #2:

Seraphic Secret was disheartened to observe that the NAACP chose to honor Jeremiah Wright just the other night. Wright's supporters emphasize with tedious regularity that Wright has accomplished many good works during his career.

This is the “making the trains run on time” argument. It is beneath contempt. The issue is quite simple. Wright is mired in a political theology which, if espoused by a white man, would properly be denounced as ignorant, angry, racist, separatist, and utterly backward. A white man and his congregation would be shunned by any decent society, not honored nor excused.

End interpolation #2:

Obama has been attending Wright's church for 22 years.

Obama has already told us that Wright is like a member of his family.

Obama has already told us that Wright has been a central mentor and advisor in his life.

And we know that Obama has contributed $40,000 to Trinity Church, where Black Liberation Theology, a crackpot bigotry, is known to all members of the church—except for clueless Barack Obama. For the past 20 years as Jeremiah Wright ranted and raved the Harvard educated Senator was, y'know, snoozing.

We also know that Wright performed Barack's marriage ceremony to the not so proud of her country Michelle.

Wright baptized Obama's two daughters.

Barack Obama brings his two daughters to Wright's church to worship. Obviously, Obama sees nor hears nothing wrong in Wright's church.

There are two choices regarding Obama's relationship to Wright.

1. Barack Obama is lying about what he knows and when he knew about Wright's poisonous views.

2. Barack Obama has deeply flawed judgement, and the closest he should ever get to the White House is on a guided tour of the West Wing.

Interpolation #3:

Any Jew who supports Barack Obama is delusional.

Whoops! Just discovered a whole batch of seriously delusional Jews. Wanna guess which candidate they're supporting?

End Interpolation #3:

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:47 AM | Comments (32)

April 23, 2008

Just Let Me Eat My Waffle!

Obama prefers eating important waffles to discussing minor issues like
Jimmy Carter and Hamas.

Proving once again that he's a true leader and a fearless friend of Israel, Barack Obama was asked by a reporter what he thought about Jimmy “Jihad” Carter's meeting with Hamas last week, the Messiah of the the Democratic Party snapped: “Why can't I just eat my waffle?”

Pressed again for an answer Obama whined: “Just let me eat my waffle.”

As I said, I so hope the Democrats nominate Obama. He's in full melt-down mode. But the Dems have been playing racial politics for so long that they dare not back down. They cannot win a general election without the black vote, and so they can't throw Obama overboard. That might look, y'know, nasty. So, they have to go through with this demolition derby for the White House, even though Hillary is a far stronger candidate.

As Bobby Kennedy once said: “Liberals are suicidal.”

Oh, and check out the jihadist fundraiser for Obama. No wonder Barack just wants to chow down on his waffles.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:30 AM | Comments (18)

April 07, 2008

Black Liberation Theology AKA Bigotry 101

Joshuapundit analyzes the bigotry of Barack Obama's Pastor, Jeremiah Wright. This is the theology Obama imbibed for over 20 years, and this theology is, in fact, an uncompromising racist anti-Semitism that Obama's daughters have been exposed to all their lives.

If a Republican candidate were a member of a white supremacist church for over 20 years, his career would be annihilated in hours. And properly so.

But Obama gets a pass.

In fact, Hollywood, a bastion of, ahem, progressive thought, is all for Obama. Every conversation I've had in this town confirms that Hollywood and Hollywood Jews—not really supporters of Israel as it is—just adore this pretty boy socialist whose staff is bulging with anti-Zionists.

Movements like black liberation theology reject the idea of G-d's universal nature in favor of race based superiority. The largely secular Nazis used a similar logic to co-opt the German churches with the "Aryan Christianity" movement in Nazi Germany, which claimed that Jesus was not a Jew but an Aryan Galilean, and that the Aryan race was the "chosen people".

Substitute `black' or `Afro-American' for Aryan and that is exactly where the UCC Trinity Church and Jeremiah Wright are coming from.

And this is what Obama was referring to in his March 14 speech when he said: "I knew Reverend Wright as someone who served this nation with honor as a United States Marine, as a respected biblical scholar, and as someone who taught or lectured at seminaries across the country, from Union Theological Seminary to the University of Chicago."

Interesting the way the dots connect, isn't it?

Unfortunately for Barack Obama, leftist academia is by its very nature a lot more tolerant of racism and anti-Semitism when it comes from people like Cone, Hopkins and Wright than America as a whole.

To read the rest of the aricle, please click here.

Meanwhile, as liberal Jews shill for Obama, who is no friend to Israel, but is certainly a dear friend of a rabid Jew-hater, Pastor Hagee has raised 6 million dollars for Israel.

American Evangelist John Hagee on Sunday announced donations of $6 million to a number of Israeli causes and declared that Israel must remain in control of all of Jerusalem.

Hagee, who has been in the news lately for his endorsement of US Presidential candidate John McCain and his criticism of the Catholic Church, brought hundreds of backers on a solidarity trip to Israel.

Hagee's group, Christians United for Israel, held a colorful rally at Jerusalem's convention center. The mostly American audience waved Israeli flags and cheered as Hagee joined keynote speaker Benjamin Netanyahu, the leader of Israel's hardline opposition Likud party, to insist Jerusalem remain united and under Jewish control.

''Turning part or all of Jerusalem over to the Palestinians would be tantamount to turning it over to the Taliban,'' Hagee said. Palestinians claim the eastern part of the city, captured by Israel in the 1967 Mideast war, as the capital of their future state.

Among the 16 causes Hagee supported with the contributions he announced were divided the Magen David Adom emergency service and a conference center in the West Bank Jewish settlement of Ariel.

A Hollywood friend recently objected to Hagee's involvement with Israel. My buddy observed that Hagee just wants to convert Jews. That his motivations are suspect.

My buddy, a decent guy, a Democrat who does support Israel, is not ritually observant. I told him that Hagee and I had theological differences but I welcomed his support and the support of his church. Personally, I'm never threatened by Christians. I'm secure in my religious beliefs. In fact, in the years Karen and I have been blogging here at Seraphic Secret, we've discovered a deep and abiding kinship with conservative Christians that we do not have with liberal Jews.

Update: And of course we can always count on the leadership of the Reform movement to take the exact wrong position regarding Pastor Hagee and Israel.

Eric Yoffie Excommunicates Pastor Hagee.

As if Yoffie and the Reform movement (excluding some fine individuals, many who are friends of this blog) have done a fraction as much for Israel as Hagee and his fine congregation.

As I said, I'm far more comfortable with most conservative Christians than with arch leftists like Yoffie.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:51 AM | Comments (22)

March 18, 2008

Obama's Pastor: “Israel, That Dirty Word”

Here's Barack Obama's religious adviser, whoops, excuse me, former religious adviser, former pastor, on Israel.

Hey, when did Wright become Barack's former pastor?

Wow, that was fast.

And where's Wright?

In Africa.

That's convenient. Barack's handlers don't want the old bigot and anti-Semite shooting off his mouth. He might be quoted, ahem, out of context.

But Barack wasn't in Church when Wright made these comments. He was never in Church when Wright made any of his hateful racist, anti-white, anti-American, Jew-hating comments.

In 20-years he was never in Church when Wright was spouting his incandescent lies. As Jay Leno quipped: “Obama must have been in his Mosque.”

In fact, the great uniter was present during Wright's most hateful and bigoted speeches.

I'll bet he's going to tell us that he wasn't applauding.

Uh-huh.

Obama said in his speech this morning that some of Wright's comments were incendiary.

Hellooo, it's not incendiary. It's a series of blood libels, one crude lie after another. Cheap race hustling.

It's also clinically paranoid speech.

But Wright performed Obama's wedding ceremony to the patriotic Michelle.

Wright baptized Obama's children.

I'm pretty careful about which synagogue I join. I'm extremely cautious about which Rabbis I associate with. If ever I heard any Rabbi deliver a sermon with rhetoric like Wright's I'd head for the hills, and I'd report him to the FBI for seditious speech. I'd certainly resign my membership and I'd write a letter explaining why. I would not continue to sit in shul week after week—for 20 years.

And I certainly wouldn't remain in a shul if it honored, oh, let's say David Duke, the white equivalent of Louis Farrakhan.

I would not sit in a shul where a Rabbi screeched: “No, not G-d bless America, G-d damned America.”

I'd denounce such a Rabbi as a traitor. And anyone who cannot denounce such a man does not deserve to be President of the United States. Does not deserve to be in the U. S. Senate. Does not deserve to be local dog catcher.

There are two Rabbis in my own community who I avoid like the plague, their politics are toxic, politics of appeasement and surrender and I won't have anything to do with them.

Whom you associate with says a great deal about your character.

The New York Times spilled gallons of ink on a non-story about John McCain's non-relationship with a female lobbyist. The point of the non-story, I presume, was that McCain's character and judgment were in question because of this non-relationship.

Barack Obama has had an extremely close relationship with Reverend Wright for over 20-years. Thus, it is quite legitimate to question Senator Obama's character and judgment.

But I have no doubt that many liberal Jews will vote for Obama:

1. Because he transcends race.
2. Because he's a uniter.
3. Because he's beyond poliitcs.
4. Because he's good looking.
5. Because they are the people they have been waiting for.
6. Whatever that means, beyond the obvious narcissism.

Actually, Obama's just another liberal/leftist/progressive/greenie/whatever, who believes in the endless expansion of a crushing government bureaucracy, and who yearns to turn our health care systems into a massive and inefficient DMV.

Bobby Kennedy once characterized liberals as suicidal.

I sooooo hope the Dems nominate Obama.

I smell McGovern.

Check out Bookworm's fine analysis of Obama's deceitful speech.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:24 AM | Comments (31)

March 17, 2008

Crushing Tibet

Now that the Chinese are hosting the next Olympics and the Tibetans are starting to make some noise about the cultural genocide that the Chinese have committed in Tibet, maybe the Palestinian-obsessed media will start paying attention to the true horrrors in Tibet.

From Joshuapundit:

For those of you who don't know, Tibet was an independent country for centuries, until the Communist Chinese regime invaded and occupied them in 1950. The Dalai Lama was forced to flee the country, along with thousands of other Tibetans, many of whom settled in neighboring India and Nepal. The ones who stayed were subjected to harsh rule which was concentrated on dispersing the Tibetans, destroying their national and religious culture and subjecting them to what amounted to ethnic cleansing. Tibetans were forcibly removed from their homeland and settled in neighboring provinces while ethnic Chinese were brought in to settle in Tibet.

Due to the nature of Mao Tse-Tung's regime, the Tibetan's Buddhist religion was singled out for special repression. Something like 6,000 monasteries, nunneries and temples, and their contents were partially or fully destroyed from the period of the Chinese invasion and during the Cultural Revolution, and literally thousands of Buddhist monks were killed or driven out of the country. Human rights groups have confirmed the identities of over 700 Tibetan political prisoners in Tibet, although there are likely to be hundreds more whose names simply aren't known or confirmed. It's quite common for such people to be detained without charge or trial for up to four years through Chinese regulations calling for "re-education through labor."

It's interesting to compare the attention paid to the Tibetans, a truly oppressed and occupied people with the attention paid to the Palestinians, who are neither.

To read the complete article, please click here.

And this from the brilliant Yaakov Kirschen, Dry Bones:

Hat Tip: Soccer Dad

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:28 AM | Comments (11)

February 13, 2008

Obama's Legions of the Blissful

Leon Weseltier is a liberal. But he has a clear-eyed view of Barak Obama and the hard-left swing of the Democratic party. We disagree with Weseltier that Hillary Clinton would be a better President than John McCain. However, we do share the belief that Barak Obama is an empty suit, a slick bag of rhetorical tricks that add up to bumper-sticker, feel-good nothingness. Obama would be a threat to national security, a yoke around the State of Israel, and a profoundly immature Commander-in-Chief in a time of war against Islamofascism.

What you think of a presidential candidate is in large measure determined by what you think of the world. Different circumstances call for different talents, different sensibilities, different approaches to power. "Leadership" comes in many forms. A sterling individual may be historically inappropriate; and a person whom it is impossible to admire may accomplish significant things. The question of whether Barack Obama will make a fine commander-in-chief finally depends on your view of the direction of history in the coming years. I cannot escape the foreboding that we are heading into an era of conflict, not an era of conciliation. I do not mean that there will be many wars, though I cannot imagine that the threat to American security from Al Qaeda and its many associates can be met without a massive and sustained military operation in western Pakistan, and I cannot imagine any Pakistani government ordering such an operation. It is not "the politics of fear" to remind Obama's legions of the blissful that, while they are watching Scarlett Johansson sway to the beat, somewhere deep inside a quasi independent territory we might call Islamistan people are making plans to blow them to bits. (Yes, they can.)

To read the complete article, please click here.

Update: Howling Wolf reports on Obama's spineless Senate vote:

A major piece of anti-terror legislation was passed by the Senate with large bi-partisan support. One of the people voting against it was Barack Obama.

To read the complete article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:27 AM | Comments (23)

November 13, 2007

Mukasey: Early Chanukah Gift

A fine article about a good and brilliant man whose nomination was opposed by a politically correct block of liberals who care more about abstract theories than the harsh realities of the war being waged upon the West by uncompromising jihadists.

The confirmation of Michael Mukasey should have been a slam dunk. Instead, it rolled around the basket for eight weeks, teetered perilously on the rim (when it was almost not recommended out of the Judiciary Committee), and, happily, finally dropped through the hoop.

It should have been a slam dunk because of the quality of the nominee. Senator Whitehouse, a Democrat of Rhode Island, commended Judge Mukasey as "a brilliant lawyer, a distinguished jurist, and a good man." Moreover, his nomination was strongly endorsed by Senator Schumer of New York, a liberal Democrat and a ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who knew and respected Mr. Mukasey's qualities. The first hearing in the Judiciary Committee turned out to be something of a love fest with senators of both parties relating to the nominee with exceptional respect and admiration.

I was not surprised. I have known Michael Mukasey for almost 60 years, since he first entered the second grade at the Ramaz School. I was his teacher in a Jewish sociology course in his senior year of high school. I was his counselor at camp. In all of this growing period, he demonstrated the same qualities of dignity, integrity, refinement, brilliance, and modesty for which he is known today.

As his rabbi, I was approached by him for advice when, as a federal judge in the First District he was asked to be the presiding justice in the first World Trade Center bombing case in 1993 at the conclusion of which, he sentenced Sheikh Omar Abdel-Rahman to life in prison.

He was told in advance that if he took on the case, no matter what the conclusion would be, he and his wife would have to be guarded for the indefinite future by federal marshals, night and day, every place they went, including in their home. I listened to him, but I couldn't offer him advice except to say that if he declined the case I would certainly understand his reasons, but if he accepted, it would be a great service to our country. Personally, I had little doubt what his decision would be. Mr. Mukasey always was a patriot, a man of great principle, and a person of exceptional courage. That's why the president chose him, why Senator Schumer supported him, and why the Senate Judiciary Committee treated him in its first hearing with such respect. And that's why his confirmation should have been a slam dunk.

To read the complete article by Rabbi Haskell Lookstein, please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Lance Fogel

Seraphic Friend Shrink Wrapped comments on therapy, the New York Times, the Mukasey affair and The Suicidal Pursuit of Perfection.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:59 AM | Comments (0)

October 30, 2007

Laura Bush Embraces Tyranny

Caroline Glick observes the First Lady don the abaya and does not like what she sees.

And neither should we.

Laura Bush now speaks the poison language of multi-culturalism. For the Muslim/jihadist world, this is a huge symbolic victory. For America, for Israel, for Democracies inclined to fight for their freedom this is another nail in the coffin.

Due to the fact that the abayas convey a symbolic message of effective enslavement of women, Mrs. Bush's interaction with women clad in abayas was the aspect of her trip most scrutinized. In the United Arab Emirates, Mrs. Bush was photographed sitting between four women covered head to toe in abayas while she was wearing regular clothes. The image of Mrs. Bush sitting between four women who look like nothing more than black piles of fabric couldn't have been more viscerally evocative and consequently, symbolically meaningful.

The image told the world that she - and America - is free and humane while the hidden women of Arabia are enslaved and their society is inhumane.

But then Mrs. Bush went to Saudi Arabia and the symbolic message of the previous day was superseded and lost when she donned an abaya herself and had her picture taken with other abaya-clad women. The symbolic message of those photographs also couldn't have been clearer. By donning an abaya, Mrs. Bush symbolically accepted the legitimacy of the system of subjugating women that the garment embodies, (or disembodies). Understanding this, conservative media outlets in the US criticized her angrily.

Sunday morning, Mrs. Bush sought to answer her critics in an interview with Fox News. Unfortunately, her remarks compounded the damage. Mrs. Bush said, "These women do not see covering as some sort of subjugation of women, this group of women that I was with. That's their culture. That's their tradition. That's a religious choice of theirs."

To read Caroline Glick's entire article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:32 PM | Comments (3)

October 26, 2007

Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week: Columbia University

by Fern Sidman

On Wednesday evening, October 24th, the tension in the air was palpable on the campus of Columbia University. In a packed classroom in the mathematics building, a panel discussion was held as part of an ongoing series of lectures in a week long event being held on over one-hundred university and college campuses. This nationwide event is entitled Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week and is the brainchild of the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

David Horowitz is a former left-wing academic whose politics have now taken a giant step to the right. As one of the founders of the New Left in the 1960s, he was also the editor of its most influential magazine, Ramparts.

He is the author, with Peter Collier, of a number of best-selling dynastic biographies on the Rockefellers, the Kennedys, the Fords, and the Roosevelts. With Collier he also wrote Destructive Generation (1989), a chronicle of their break with the 1960's Left, that has been compared to Whittaker Chambers’ Witness and other classic works documenting a break from totalitarianism.

On his web site, www.frontpagemag.com, Mr. Horowitz champions an array of causes including the defense of the principles of individual freedom as well as defending free societies in the war against their enemies, and the reestablishment of academic freedom in American schools.

Because of the controversy that swirls around an event of this nature and magnitude, threats of protests and possible disruptions were made by a number of quintessential left-wing and pro-Muslim organizations including the Revolutionary Communist Party, United for Peace and Justice, Jewish Progressives and the Muslim Student Association, among others.

Several security guards, provided by the David Horowitz Freedom Center, who looked strikingly similar to stoic FBI agents or undercover cops ushered in the panelists and stood guard around the room. While the audience was quite diverse, outside the building stood a lone demonstrator, who held a sign reviling the event as racist. Inside, the story was a bit different.

A contingent from the Revolutionary Communist Party along with left wing representatives of the Women's Studies and Middle Eastern Studies departments got their printing presses rolling at top speed, churning out libelous propaganda aimed at discrediting the objectives of Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week and took aim at the panelists, namely Phyllis Chesler. They even resorted to passing out a sheet of pre-prepared questions for audience members that reeked of bellicosity, and surely did not promote open mindedness. So much for academic freedom and freedom of speech.

The student representative who helped organize this event asked the audience to curtail their predilection to disrupt the speakers and announced the rules for the Q&A, which followed.

Judging by the persons impaneled for the event at Columbia University, it would appear that Mr. Horowitz is not the only one whose political voice has made some major modifications. Dr. Phyllis Chesler, an Emerita Professor of Psychology at the College of Staten Island was a prominent voice and vanguard of the Second Wave feminist movement and a former political progressive. When she began challenging the feminist and left-wing camps for propounding a "multi-cultural relativism" which correctly charged the Muslim world for its pervasive and barbaric abuse of women, she was labeled as a "dangerous traitor" by her former colleagues and relegated to a persona non-grata status.

Her groundbreaking views on Islamic gender and religious apartheid have caused near riots on the many campuses where she has lectured. Chesler is a self-described "culture warrior" and is passionately committed to exposing the "Big Lies" of the left leaning, liberal Western academy. She is the author hundreds of articles and of 13 books, including, "The New Anti-Semitism - The Current Crisis and What We Must Do About It", (2003) which graphically illustrates the anti-Semitic agenda of intellectuals on the left, under the guise of anti-Zionism.

Ibn Warraq is a best-selling author, ex-Muslim intellectual, a dogmatic secularist, scholar and founder of the Institute for the Secularization of Islamic Society and a senior research fellow at the Center for Inquiry, specializing in Koranic criticism. Warraq gathered world notice through his controversial historiographies of the early centuries of the Islamic timeline and has published works which tend to challenge traditional conceptions of the period. He is the author of seven books, including Why I Am Not a Muslim (1995), The Origins of the Koran (1998),Quest for the Historical Muhammad, (2000), What the Koran Really Says (2002),Leaving Islam: Apostates Speak Out(2003), the just released - Defending the West: a Critique of Edward Said's Orientalism (2006) and Which Koran? (2007).

He has also spoken at the "Victims of Jihad" conference at the United Nations that was organized by the International Humanist and Ethical Union alongside speakers such as Bat Ye'or, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Simon Deng.

The name "Ibn Warraq" is a pseudonym, to protect the true identity of a man who is "most wanted" in Muslim circles. Having been highly critical of Islam he is now considered an apostate, a marked man for his "heretical" views and for "betraying" the faith he was born into. His detractors claim he engages in anti-Islamic polemics while others such as atheist author Richard Dawkins describe him as a "deeply knowledgeable scholar of Islam."

Christina Hoff-Sommers is a former professor of philosophy and ethics at Clark University in Worcester, MA and a resident scholar at a conservative think tank, the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research (AEI). She is an author of several books including her seminal work, Who Stole Feminism?: How Women Have Betrayed Women (1994), and The War Against Boys: How Misguided Feminism Is Harming Our Young Men (2001).

She suggests that feminist leaders are not only placing their political goals above academic honesty, but they are also indoctrinating impressionable university students not with grounded science, but rather with disingenuous, emotionally-charged pseudo information. Like her co-panelist, Phyllis Chesler, Hoff-Sommers accuses the Western feminist movement of losing its moral clarity and of abandoning the cause of spotlighting and protesting against the horrific abuse of women in the Muslim world.

The evening began with Ibn Warraq offering a refutation of the late Columbia University English and Comparative Literature professor, Edward Said's 1978 book entitled "Orientalism", which marked the beginnings of postcolonial studies.

According to the impeccable scholarly research done by Warraq, he asserts that the roots of late 20th century Islamo-Fascism began with Said's premise that "all of the woes of the Arabs in the Islamic world can be blamed on America and Israel".

He points to the intellectual dishonesty of Said's claims that all Europeans are racists, thereby creating "a western style for dominating the Orient." He also reminds us that there are gross historic inaccuracies in Said's manifesto and that Said was not a Muslim and was not a scholar of Islamic thought, yet did everything in his power to foster the spread of Islamic fundamentalism.

Warraq tells us that through his writings, Said created a climate in which self-pity infected the vast precincts of the Islamic world, in which the West also appeared as the colonialist aggressor while the East remained the passive victim.

Dr. Phyllis Chesler, despite an injury to her leg, literally rose to the occasion and delivered her stirring remarks with the aplomb of a veteran academic and professor. She addressed a number of important issues including the growing concern in the Western world of the rampant spread of Islamo-Fascism which threatens to bring with it to our shores its own inimitable version of gender and racial apartheid.

That translates into forced veiling of women, honor killings, female genital mutilation, stoning, wife-beating, forced marriages and purdah, not to mention executions of women, intellectuals, dissidents, homosexuals and other infidels.

She took issue with her former feminist colleagues when she said, "Western feminists and academics must end their unnatural obsession with the so-called "occupation" of Palestine and focus of the occupation of women's bodies throughout the Muslim world. If they care about women, they must confront the issues that characterize Islamic gender apartheid and affect at least half a billion women in the Islamic world."

She also attempted to debunk the myth that former colonialist powers and imperialist forces were to blame for Islamic barbarism. Said Dr. Chesler, "The Christian Crusades did not "cause" Arab or Muslim slavery, racism, polygamy, arranged child marriage, female genital mutilation, honor murders, forced face-veiling, capital punishment for apostates (Muslims who leave Islam), or the segregation of women. It did not cause Islamic jihad or Islamic imperialism which preceded the Crusades by centuries."

She also put forth the notion of a "new McCarthyism" being spearheaded by the left that imposes fear on academics who dare speak about Muslim on Muslim violence by pigeon-holing them as "racists" and "colonialists".

The last speaker of the evening was Christina Hoff-Sommers who also addressed the issue of Islamic misogyny and said that Osama bin Laden's worst nightmare would be the liberation of Islamic women. According to Hoff-Sommers the Islamic revolution set women back for at least a century, outlining the subjugation of Iranian women under a hideous male hegemony.

She spoke of a book entitled, The Girls of Riyadh which was described as "chic literature", an Eastern version of "Sex In The City", which caused Imams in Saudi Arabia to whip men into a violent frenzy against women. She called this, "a compelling indictment of Islamic incitement."

She praised heroic dissidents who are on a civilizing mission in Islamic countries, attempting to battle the forces of misogyny and patriarchal oppression of women. Hoff-Sommers posits that Islamic women are following the example of conservative women's rights activists such as Frances Willard, the second president of the Woman's Christian Temperance Union and are embracing a creative interpretation of the Koran.

She chided the major Western feminist movements and women's studies departments on college campuses for focusing on such issues as the shape of women's bodies, sexual repression and the philosophy of the "Vagina Monologues", rather than championing the cause of basic human rights for women in the Islamic world.

Roberts Rules of Order seemed to prevail during the question and answer segment of the program, as the audience was again advised to keep to the question only format and not engage in diatribes or lengthy speeches.

Most of the questions focused on American military involvement in Iraq and several questioners (mostly from the Revolutionary Communist Party) intimated that this event was just a clever subterfuge for promoting the Bush administration's "war on terror" strategy, which seeks to create a groundswell of support for the war in Iraq.

The questioners made little reference to the obvious threat of Islamo-Fascism that was so eloquently spoken about by the panelists, but rather they focused on their own anti-American agenda as they questioned the perceived hypocrisy of the Iraqi constitution that enshrined Islam as the state religion. The panelists remained nonplussed during the Q&A and answered the questions with alacrity, armed with a voluminous amount of facts and a plethora of knowledge.

The adversaries of truth and the purveyors of the Big Lies were outdone by the valiant truth tellers and protectors of the future of western civilization as we know it.

While history may or may not record this event at Columbia University, our kudos and accolades go to Ibn Warraq, Phyllis Chesler and Christina Hoff-Sommers for summoning the moral strength and courage to bear the slings and arrows of the totalitarian left, for exercising their right of freedom of speech in the name of truth and for their shining collective consciences. May they continue to lead us to a more peaceful, secure world, unfettered by fascism of any kind.

UPDATE: How's this for irony? Columbia University was nice and civilized, but things were quite different for David Horowitz at Emory University where the tyrants of the left refused to let him speak.

Seraphic Secret will say it once again: the most serious threats to our freedoms, especially freedom of speech, comes from the left in America, not from the right.

On Wednesday evening, the Emory University Chapter of the College Republicans hosted acclaimed author and activist David Horowitz for a lecture on radical Islam as part of Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week. From the beginning of Horowitz's speech, rowdy protesters continually interrupted him and less than half an hour into the event, the crowd became so disruptive that police were called in and Horowitz had to be escorted off stage.

To read the rest of the article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:34 AM | Comments (6)

October 19, 2007

See No Proliferation

Below, a fine editorial from, who else, The Wall Street journal.

Seraphic Secret would like to remind its readers that back in 1981, when Israel, in Operation Opera , bombed Iraq's Osirak nuclear facility, this necessary military action was condemned by ever major editorial page in America—except for the Wall Street Journal.

Of course, Israel's preemptive strike was rational and necessary for a nuclear Iraq posed
not only an existential threat to Israel, but in the hands of Saddam Hussein, a tyrant who never blinked at murdering hundreds of thousands of people, this weapon would have afforded him genocidal power over his other neighbors.

We are still waiting for the editorial staff of The New York Times, The Washington Post, etc. to admit that their screeds against Israel were not only wrong, but in hindsight truly foolish.

We will wait forever, for as Dennis Prager has said: “Being on the left means never having to say you're sorry.”

Israel's latest strike, deep into Syrian territory, presumably on a North Korean/Syrian nuclear facility has drawn a great heaving silence from the Arab world.

This indicates two things: The Arabs are relieved that the Syrian nuclear ambitions have been shut down. Certainly the Egyptians and the Saudis are thrilled. They have no love for Syria or Puppy Assad, the weak tyrant. But it also means that the Arab regimes are deeply intimidated by Israel's ability to shut down Syria's "advanced" ground defense systems.

Modern Russian systems.

In fact, the Israelis jammed the Russian radar so effectively that the Syrians did not even know that they were being jammed.

No doubt, the Syrians would like a refund from the Russians.

All this leads to Iran.

The Persians have vowed to eliminate Israel. The Persians are, by some estimates, about sixteen months from going hot. Israel cannot allow Iran to go nuclear.

America, stuck in a terrible repeat of Carter and Clinton's desperate peace-making attempts between Israel and her implacable Arab enemies—the Arabs have no desire for peace, no desire to build a state, only to destroy a state—seems incapable of dealing effectively with the Iranian threat. Diplomacy and sanctions are a dead issue. They have never worked against any tyrant ever.

Israel will have to do the job.

The silence from the Bush Administration over Israel's recent bombing of a site in Syria gets louder by the day. U.S. officials continue to look the other way, even as reports multiply that Israel and U.S. intelligence analysts believe the site was a partly constructed nuclear reactor modeled after a North Korean design.

The weekend was full of reports about these intelligence judgments, first in the U.S. media then picked up by the Israeli press. Israel's former chief of military intelligence, Major General Aharon Zeevi Farkash, called them "logical." That's the term of art people use to confirm things in Israel when they want to get around the military censors.

Meanwhile, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice visited Israel and offered her own non-confirmation confirmation. "We're very concerned about any evidence of, any indication of, proliferation," she said, according to the New York Times. "And we're handling those in appropriate diplomatic channels." Just what you need when your enemies are caught proliferating nuclear expertise--a little more diplomacy. The world is lucky Israel preferred to act against the threat, in what seems to have been a smaller version of its 1981 attack against Iraq's Osirak reactor.

To read the entire editorial, please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend and Fox Business Network Producer Jake Novak

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 05:52 AM | Comments (4)

October 02, 2007

The Jewish Enemy Within

From Melanie Phillips, a fine article about Hellenized Jews.

Thus Jewish nationalism is un-Jewish, apparently, because it promotes war rather than peace (ignoring, of course, the inconvenient truth that Israel is a militarised society only because it is the historic victim of an unremitting war waged against it); and Jews are said to have a duty to be hostile to Jewish nationalism because Jews were the victims of nationalism. This, of course, is so absurd as to be incredible to anyone outside the bizarre thought system of the extreme left; the equation of fascism with national self-determination not only suggests a form of cultural nihilism, since it would make it morally beyond the pale for any people to have its own nation, but is contradicted by the left’s own championing of Palestinian and other supposedly nationalist movements claiming the very same right to self-determination.

To read the entire article, please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Sue.

Here's a perfect example of a Jewish enemy within.

Here's another.

This group defines the term.

And here in Los Angeles, well, we have this guy. Is it any wonder Orthodox Jews keep away from UCLA?

And oh yeah, lest we forget, the 88% of American Jews who continue to vote, lemming-like, for the Democrats, a party that embraces the most vile Jew-hatred the far left dishes.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 03:07 PM | Comments (0)

September 10, 2007

MoveOn.org Calls General Patraeus a Traitor

...as General David Petraeus provides his Iraq assessment to Congress--the antiwar group MoveOn.org is running a full-page advertisement in the New York Times under the headline: "General Petraeus or General Betray us? Cooking the books for the White House."

Let's be clear: MoveOn.org is suggesting that General Petraeus has 'betrayed' his country. This is disgusting. To attack as a traitor an American general commanding forces in war because his 'on the ground' experience does not align with MoveOn.org's political objectives is utterly shameful. It shows contempt for America's military leadership, as well as for the troops who have confidence in him, as our fellow soldiers in Iraq certainly do.

General Petraeus has served this country for over 35 years with honor, distinction, and integrity. And this is not just about General Petraeus. After all, if General Petraeus is "cooking the books," then the entire military chain of command in Baghdad, and all the staff, military and civilian, who have been working with General Petraeus are complicit, since Petraeus did not write his report in isolation. They are all, apparently, 'betray[ing] us.'

MoveOn.org has been working closely with the Democratic congressional leadership --as an article in today's Sunday New York Times Magazine makes clear. And consider this comment by a Democratic senator from Friday's Politico: "'No one wants to call [Petraeus] a liar on national TV,' noted one Democratic senator, who spoke on the condition on anonymity. 'The expectation is that the outside groups will do this for us.'

To read the rest of this article, please click here.

Notice: Hillary Clinton and Barak Obama have not denounced Moveon.org. Why? Because they are in this gang's pocket, they need their money. Clinton and Obama have been bought and sold by these vile creatures.

These people have no shame. No shame at all.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 03:50 PM | Comments (16)

August 19, 2007

The Bumper Sticker Mind

Here's the latest in deeply progressive political thought.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend Yehudit, Kesher

And let's all wish Yehudit and Kesher a happy five year anniversary. Yehudit's blog is one of the oldest Jewish blogs on planet earth and one of the very finest. Yehudit's work is always thorough and incredibly articulate. The Jewish world is a richer and better place due to Yehudit's important work.

Read about Seraphic Secret's kesher, connection, with Yehudit: The Kesher with Kesher.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 06:07 PM | Comments (6)

August 17, 2007

Tibet: The Victims You Never Hear About

We are always hearing about the poor oppressed Palestinians. Lefties can't rush to their aid fast enough, and boy are they quick to condemn, ahem, Is-ra-eli a-ggression, while conveniently ignoring Arab on Arab slaughter. The Palis have cleverly positioned themselves as victims par excellence. In truth, they are victims of their own political thuggery.

And let's face it, those men and women who go about shilling for the so-called Palestinians—feeling all self-righteous and heroic—risk nothing from the Israelis. (Rachel Corrie's death was an accident) What they do risk is getting kidnapped and tortured by one of several Palestinian terror groups, made to convert to the religion of peace, and maybe even married off to the man or woman of their dreams. Mazal Tov!

Here's a true hero. A woman who knows good from evil. A woman who is risking all for the sake of Tibetan independence.

Approximately 1.2 million Tibetan Buddhists have been murdered by the Chinese Communists. Untold numbers of Tibetans have been condemned and lost in Chinese gulags. Thousands of Tibetan Buddhist monasteries have been destroyed by the Chinese. Click here for details.

Here's a Seraphic Secret: You never hear about the Tibetans for one simple reason: they are non-violent. They do not go about murdering innocent men, women and children. They do not revel in their victimhood. And of course their enemies are not Jews so of course, the oh-so-compassionate left completely ignore them. As does the U.N. and other NGO's. Much more fun to consort with genuine Jew-haters and terrorists. And besides, those checkered Arab kaffiyas are killer fashion items.

Karen and I wish all our Seraphic Friends a lovely and meaningful Shabbos.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:52 PM | Comments (4)

August 14, 2007

The Jew Hating Crunchy Granola Gang

University of Maryland student Mia Lazarus recently went to buy some chips and juice at the Maryland Food Collective. The clerk at this grocery and sandwich shop in the student union read her t-shirt’s “Baltimore Zionist District” and “I Stand for Israel” slogans and then declared, “Your shirt offends me. I won’t ring you up.”

Another coop cashier eventually sold Lazarus her chips and juice. But more instructive than Lazarus’s ability to finally buy her groceries has been the aftermath. After an hours-long, “teary” meeting between Lazarus, her friends, and the collective, the coop agreed that it would serve any customer who wasn’t physically or verbally abusive, but that workers offended by a customer’s politics could arrange for another clerk to serve a patron.

To read the entire article, please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Dr. Carol

A few observations:

1. Any serious threat to freedom of thought and freedom of speech comes from the left in America, not from the right.

2. Virulent Jew-hatred and anti-Zionism has found a comfortable home on our campuses, and it emanates from the left. It is always the left who shuts down speakers who represent pro-Israel, and pro-American speakers. Now the left has made common cause with radical Muslim student organizations. Speakers whose mission it is to support Israel and America and expose the jihadist threat are regularly threatened with physical violence, viciously intimidated.

3. Jew-hatred, under the guise of anti-Zionism, has found eager, and honey-tongued spokesmen among Professors in the groves of academia. They call themselves deconstructionists. Do not be fooled. This is just another label for Marxist/Lenninist. Another label for Jew-hater.

4. Gutless university administrators do nothing to stand up to leftists tyrants and Muslim demagogues. Many are former 60's radicals and have fond memories of the good ol' days. The fact that they are Jews and acting as kapos seems to make little impression. I have Christian friends who have a deeper connection to Judaism.

5. The problem is getting worse as Universities appease these leftist and Muslim thugs. Appeasement invites aggression. Soon, entire universities will become, like the 22 backward Arab/Muslim countries, Judenrein.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:50 AM | Comments (9)

August 05, 2007

Democrats Pander to the Daily Kossack

When, criticism of Israel is one-sided, slanted, or knowingly factually wrong, and far worse behavior by Palestinians is ignored, excused, or lies parroted, that IS anti-Semitism….

Appearing with or sharing a podium with such people, outside of civil debate, is to legitimize them. That IS anti-Semitism….

In short: The Democrats' inconsistency is anti-Semitism.

To read Bruce Kessler's entire article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:47 AM | Comments (2)

July 25, 2007

Save John Doe

The Democrats want to kill the John Doe Amendment. The Republicans want to save it.

Here's the roll-call. The Senate Democrats are on suicide watch for this nation.

Next time you get on a plane and you see someone suspicious, you'll hesitate to report it because of course if you're wrong, you'll get sued for hundreds of thousands of dollars and spend the rest of your life in court and in debt. And if you're right, well, you're dead.

If you watched the Democrats You Tube debate you'll notice they never mentioned Islamic terror. They never talked about the war on terror. It's not an issue for them. They see it as a criminal matter. That's why they want to close Gitmo. That's why they want to extend habeus corpus to non citizen terrorists who do not wear uniforms. It's the reason they concentrate on so-called global warming rather than Islamic terror; if they acknowledge world-wide terror then they have to do something about it, and the Democrats are incapable of waging an offensive war against such an evil ideology. It's too much for their multi-cultural brains to process. Thus, they make war on the weather.

The “John Doe” amendment still has a chance.

People need to be aware of this crucial amendment. Please send a message of support to your Congressman and Senators.

For a listing of Congressman and Senators and their contact information click here.

Some background information follows:

In Washington, a House-Senate conference committee on a homeland security bill is considering whether to include a measure to protect, from lawsuit, Americans who report suspicious behavior. The so-called "John Doe" measure comes in response to a lawsuit by six imams who were booted from a plane that was about to fly from Minneapolis late last year because they were acting very suspiciously, refusing to sit in their assigned seats, asking for metal seat belt extenders, and speaking loudly and disparagingly about the United States. The imams plan to sue not only the airline but the passengers who reported their behavior -- a step that, if successful, could have a chilling effect on whether other Americans come forward to report such behavior or whether they decide that doing so isn't worth the legal fees. Without this protection, Americans would have no reason to follow the motto of law enforcement agencies: "If you see something, say something."

Separately, the "John Doe" legislation passed both the House and Senate by overwhelming margins. But key Democrats are trying to drop it from the homeland security bill, which would kill it. House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie Thompson isn't enthused about it, and Senate Judiciary Chairman Pat Leahy spoke against it on the Senate floor. The conference committee is meeting and will make a final decision on this vital legislation in the coming days.

If you agree Americans should be encouraged to report suspicious behavior, if you agree they should not be intimidated by the threat of a lawsuit that could bankrupt them, now is the time to act. Call or e-mail your own Senator and your House member. Tell them to insist that the conference committee include "John Doe" protection in this bill. And after calling or e-mailing your own Senator and House member, contact Congressman Thompson and Senator Leahy. Also contact House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and Senate Assistant Majority Leader Richard Durbin.

Don't leave Americans who do the right thing by reporting suspicious behavior out in the cold. Don't let Americans be intimidated into keeping quiet. In the war on terror, there's too much at stake for all of us.

Click here for the complete article, or copy and paste this link into your web browser:
http://www.israelunitycoalition.org/news/article.php?id=1573

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:30 PM | Comments (17)

July 20, 2007

Anti-Israel Democrats

Joe Lieberman is no longer a Democrat. If you read John F. Kennedy's inaugural address, you'd swear it was being given by a Republican. Scoop Jackson, Hubert Humphrey, the old guard of the Democrats, are gone — and their ideas forgotten. The new Democrats are sliding deeper to the left. The George Soros wing are loud, and profoundly anti-Israel. There is no question that the Democrats cannot be trusted with national security, their priorities are clear: so-called global warming is their big issue. If you go to the websites of all the major Democratic candidates, the words "Islamic terror" simply do not appear. Jihad does not exist. Indeed, the Democrats prefer to label Syrian tyrant Bashar Assad a "peacemaker" (c/o useful idiot Nancy Pelosi) and heap abuse on George Bush and Dick Cheney.

Israel, in the past the province of the Democrats, has fallen into disfavor by the leftists who are growing in power and influence in the Democratic party.

History marches on and now it is the Republicans who value Israel as a bulwark of democracy, and as a strategic ally in the war against Islamic terror. Meanwhile, the Democrats dither, cozy up and play games of moral equivalence and appeasement to their very vocal left anti-Israel, some say Jew-hating wing.

Here's a fine article that articulates why those who love Israel, who care about freedom, should vote Republican.

Support for Israel has long been a tenet of both political parties. Major Democratic and Republican 2008 presidential contenders have demonstrated their support for Israel by, among other things, attending the annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee conference in Washington, touting their pro-Israel voting records and personally traveling to the region.

Yet pockets of anti-Israel sentiment are active in American politics and have found a home among a small group of Democratic lawmakers and leftist activists. While it's tempting to dismiss them as irrelevant, the left's views on Israel have in recent years seeped into mainstream politics.

A small but significant group of overwhelmingly Democratic members of Congress have consistently voted against efforts to support Israel in its continual struggle against terrorists and now an Islamist Hamas government in Gaza. These votes demonstrate that anti-Israel views are a minority in Congress — but a minority composed primarily of the most left-leaning members of the Democratic Caucus.

Read the full article by Jennifer Rubin, here.

Hat Tip: Republican Jewish Coalition

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:25 AM | Comments (4)

June 15, 2007

Waldheim: Nazi War Criminal

You have to admit, Waldheim found the perfect job: Secretary General of the U.N. Talk about typecasting.

Kurt Waldheim’s record of direct involvement in Nazi slaughter of Jews and of others who resisted or were deemed threats in the Balkans was ignored by both the Russians and the United States, who both had evidence in their possession immediately after the war.

By early 1948, the United Nations War Crimes Commission listed him as a suspected war criminal subject to trial. Yet no government pressed to bring Mr. Waldheim to account or even to disclose his history.

It was not until these and additional records were revealed in 1985, first by rival politicians in Austria and then further investigated and publicized by the World Jewish Congress, that the world woke up. But, On June 8, 1986, in a two-round election, Mr. Waldheim won the run-off for Austria’s presidency with 53.9 percent of the 4.7 million votes cast.

To read Bruce Kesler's entire article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:41 PM | Comments (5)

Tolerance in Indonesia

Karen and I are outraged, and saddened that this story has not received more play in the mainstream media. This is signifigant and timely, and it is a measure of the MSM's addiction to jihadist propaganda that they willfully ignore news of truly moderate Muslims. We should also add that Mr. Sol Teichman, the Holocaust survivor in this story is a close friend of the Avrech family and one of the finest people we have the honor of knowing. Mr. Teichman is a unbelievably generous Baa'l Chesed, a charitable man, and dedicates a good portion of his valuable time to educating people about the Shoah.

BALI, Indonesia (AP) - A Jewish Holocaust survivor made a plea for tolerance Tuesday at a conference in the world's most populous Muslim nation that also brought together religious leaders and victims of attacks by Islamic extremists.

One of the goals of the meeting was to counter a December conference hosted by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad that tried to cast doubt on the killing of an estimated 6 million Jews during World War II.

"I hope people will learn from the past," said Sol Teichman, 79, who was a teenager living in Czechoslovakia when his city was occupied first by the Hungarian army and then the Germans. "We should try to improve life instead of destroying it."

The daylong gathering on Bali island was attended by high-profile moderate Indonesian Muslim leaders, including former President Abdurraham Wahid, and Hindu spiritual head Sri Sri Ravi Shankar, as well as Buddhist teachers, a Jesuit priest and rabbis — a rarity in a country that does not recognize Israel or the Jewish faith.

"All too often, hatred and violence replace peace as religion is manipulated for political purposes," the conference wrote in a final statement.

It said religious leaders have a special obligation to reject such manipulation and to "mobilize their communities to not only respect, but also defend the rights of others to live and worship differently."

Indonesia earlier this week refused to sign a U.N. Security Council agreement condemning Iran's president for making statements that encouraged the destruction of Israel. But that did not stop Wahid, who was president from 1999 to 2001, from offering his own objections to claims the Holocaust was a myth.

"Although I'm a good friend of Ahmadinejad, I have to say that he is wrong," he said. "I visited Auschwitz's Museum of Holocaust and I saw many shoes of dead people. Because of this, I believe the Holocaust happened."

His daughter, Yenny Wahid, who is a prominent supporter of liberal Islam, said it was up to Muslims "to bring religion back to its original intention ... to underline the importance of finding shared values."

"We have to find ways to promote tolerance and understanding for mankind," she said. Also participating in the conference were victims of a terrorist attack in Israel and of suicide bombings by Muslim militants on Bali in 2005. More than 220 people have died from two attacks in Bali. "It has been difficult for me to excuse in my heart those who committed this act," said Tumini, a Balinese woman who was severely burned when al-Qaida-linked militants targeted two nightclubs in 2002. She said she still has not recovered emotionally, physically or financially.

Bali is a mostly Hindu enclave in Indonesia, which has some 190 million Muslims, more than any other nation in the world. Its government is secular and most people are moderate, although a vocal militant fringe has grown louder in recent years.

The conference was sponsored by the Libforall Foundation, a U.S. based non-governmental organization that seeks to counter Muslim extremism in the Islamic world by supporting religious moderates, and the Wiesenthal Center's Museum of Tolerance.

Teichman said he lost 70 family members to the Nazis, including his sister, brothers and grandparents, and was taken to Auschwitz, Warsaw, Dachau, Kaufering and Landsberg concentration camps before allied forces liberated them in 1945.

He said Ahmadinejad's decision to host a conference in December questioning whether the Holocaust took place made him want to "push a little harder to meet Muslim leaders."

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:01 AM | Comments (4)

May 10, 2007

Sarkozy: Past & Future

In an interview Nicolas Sarkozy gave in 2004, he expressed an extraordinary understanding of the plight of the Jewish people for a home: “Should I remind you the visceral attachment of every Jew to Israel, as a second mother homeland? There is nothing outrageous about it. Every Jew carries within him a fear passed down through generations, and he knows that if one day he will not feel safe in his country, there will always be a place that would welcome him. And this is Israel.”

To read the entire article, please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Tante Pearl Keiler.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:53 AM | Comments (5)

May 03, 2007

Boycott Citgo

Chavez is playing games with our country’s oil supply and, ultimately, American consumers. Chavez has made it clear he wants China to be Venezuela’s biggest oil customer, instead of the United States. Such a policy, artificial market manipulation when you think about it, would likely drive prices up. And such a shift would take time. In the meantime Venezuelan production, lacking full-bore overseas commercial help, will probably fall off. State-run outfits are notoriously bad at getting things done. So be it through design or incompetence, Chavez wants to drive our prices up.

A short, but eye-opening article about dictator Hugo Chavez; please click here to read the entire post.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Jake Novak

I just found out yesterday that Seraphic Secret was nominated for Best Series in the JIB Awards for my How I Married Karen Series. Two chapters are posted as samples: Backstory and Seraphic Duel.

The voting is open only until Sunday. I've sort of missed the boat, but even without asking for votes I'm now in second place.

Anywhoo!

I take a great deal of pride in this series, and would greatly appreciate your vote in this First Round, so , please click here to vote for Seraphic Secret's How I Married Karen.

Thanks so much.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:57 AM | Comments (7)

April 27, 2007

Presidential Power & Terrorists

America’s criminal justice system is actually intended to give each citizen the maximum opportunity to fight the government and return to the streets. That’s why we have Miranda warnings, bail, the right to a speedy trial, the right to counsel, evidentiary exclusion, the rules of evidence, etc. Everything is meant to give a citizen a fighting chance against the government. Sentencing for all but the most heinous crimes is limited and specific. And, of course, there is our generous appeals process, which ensures those convicted repeated bites at the apple. Lastly, after people have served their time, they are then, at least in theory, invited to rejoin society as fully functioning members.

All of the above is the exact opposite of our goals with a captured fighter. It’s entirely irrelevant whether he was a lowly foot soldier, a crack sniper, or a bomb maker, just as it’s irrelevant whether he actually succeeded in killing or wounding Americans as he carried out those tasks. When considering prisoners of war, what really matters is that, for the duration of the war, they cannot return to the battlefield. After all, even if a POW’s IEDs didn’t work before, they may work in the future. Civil rights cannot apply when your sole purpose is to decrease your enemy’s strength. And before you get all bent out of shape about how it is so not fair to imprison someone indefinitely just because he had the misfortune to be caught fighting for his beliefs, keep in mind that this is vastly more civilized than the old system of dealing with captured enemy combatants — summary execution.

A superb article by Bookworm, to read the entire post please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:09 PM | Comments (2)

The White Feather

For the first time in American history the House of Representatives has informed the military that it knows more than the Commander in Chief about conducting a war. In doing so this Congress also has notified the enemy in our ongoing war in Iraq when the enemy should expect us to begin pulling out troops and precisely how many months it will take for complete withdrawal.

If only the Congress had thought of this idea earlier - perhaps back in 1944 - we could have sent a telegram to the Germans that included the D-Day schedule. This certainly would have saved the United States Government a lot of money and saved the Nazis a lot of trouble!

To read the rest of Paul Weyrich's article, please click here.

And this via the Mighty Michelle Malkin:

The White Feather has been a symbol for cowardice. I suggest that white feathers be sent to the leaders of the Senate and House for the cowardly vote that abandons our soldiers around the world. I was in Vietnam the day that the 101st took "Hamburger Hill" -- the headline in the Stars and Stripes was Teddy Kennedy's statement to the effect that it was all such a waste. I am sure it raised the spirits of the folks on top of the hill -- I know it gave my morale a boost. Surely these leaders of our country will head out on a USO tour to encourage the troops further.

As far as I am concerned this is a Congress of Quislings.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:34 AM | Comments (6)

April 26, 2007

Romney in Yeshiva

"What Jimmy Carter fails to understand is what so many fail to understand: Whether it is Hamas or Hezbollah or al Qaeda, there is an overarching goal among the violent jihadists that transcends borders and boundaries," Romney says. "That goal is to replace all modern Islamic states with a caliphate, to destroy Israel, to cause the collapse of the West and the United States, and to conquer the world."

Mitt Romney at Yeshiva University, click here to read the entire article.

*******

We recently found out that Serapic Secret was nominated for Best Personal Blog for the Jewish Israeli Blog Awards. Thanks so much for the nomination. Anyway, the first round of voting is taking place right now and if you feel like voting for us, well, we'd greatly appreciate it.

Click here to vote for Seraphic Secret for Best Personal Blog.

There are great blogs out there and no matter what, it's lovely to be nominated once again.

Karen and I thank all of you have voted for Seraphic Secret. We are deeply touched.

We'd also like to know who nominated us so we can send you a peronal note of thanks.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 04:12 PM | Comments (2)

April 24, 2007

Bedlam Revisited

Why the Virginia Tech Shooter was not Committed

I was in graduate school, studying clinical psychology when they began shutting down the asylums. The place was California, the time was the early 1970s, and "they" were an unprecedented confederation of progressives, libertarians and fiscal conservatives.

To read the rest of this article by my friend Jonathan Kellerman, please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Kishke

On the same topic, an Orthodox shul in my neighborhood hands out food to homeless people once a week.

These unfortunate people are, for the most part, mentally ill. I see them wandering the streets of Pico-Robertson with their shopping carts, chattering away to invisible companions. They are deperately ill and should be given hospital care.

One day, and I can pretty much guarantee this, someone is going to get knifed at this shul.

The Rabbi and the members of this shul may get all warm and fuzzy about their lunch program, but in the end, their actions only add to the problem.

This is not a problem of the homeless, but of mental illness and caretaker irresponsibility.

Here's what our synagogue does with our surplus food: after every Shabbos we deliver boxes of delicious food to a local shelter.

This is how responsible and mature adults behave.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:27 AM | Comments (11)

April 19, 2007

A Culture of Passivity

The students at Virginia Tech were grown women and — if you’ll forgive the expression — men. They would be regarded as adults by any other society in the history of our planet. Granted, we live in a selectively infantilized culture where twentysomethings are “children” if they’re serving in the Third Infantry Division in Ramadi but grown-ups making rational choices if they drop to the broadloom in President Clinton’s Oval Office. Nonetheless, it’s deeply damaging to portray fit fully formed adults as children who need to be protected. We should be raising them to understand that there will be moments in life when you need to protect yourself — and, in a “horrible” world, there may come moments when you have to choose between protecting yourself or others. It is a poor reflection on us that, in those first critical seconds where one has to make a decision, only an elderly Holocaust survivor, Professor Librescu, understood instinctively the obligation to act.

To read Mark Steyn's eloquent defense of self-defense, please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Moishe 3rd

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:03 AM | Comments (0)

Worst Massacre?

So why use the phrase "worst massacre in U.S. history" if it isn't true?

Sensationalism is reason number one. But as I have said, I do not see that such sensationalism helps the nation at all, and it certainly does not help the families and friends, the wounded, or the dead. But it helps the Mainstream Media, I suppose, and that's their bottom line.

Laziness is reason number two. The sensationalist impulse, coupled with a reluctance to do any real research, results in a-historical statements like these.

Reason number three is the one upon which I wish to focus, however, and that is ignorance as a result of revisionism. The tragedy at Virginia Tech was a major massacre in U.S. history, but there have been many others, including ones in which even more people had their lives taken from them.

The problem for the Mainstream Media and the left is that in nearly all the cases of massacres from U.S. history in which more people died, the perpetrators were Democrats, and the victims were the two groups the Democrats have reviled most in history: recently freed blacks and Republicans.

To read the entire article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:07 AM | Comments (13)

April 17, 2007

How to Prevent the Next Massacre

As my friend Larry Pratt, executive director of Gun Owners of America, points out, "Isn't it interesting that Utah and Oregon are the only two states that allow faculty to carry guns on campus. And isn't it interesting that you haven't read about any school or university shootings in Utah or Oregon? Why not? Because criminals don't like having their victims shoot back at them."

To read Joseph Farah's entire column, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:45 AM | Comments (10)

April 13, 2007

The French They are a Funny Race: Not

The French presidential campaign officially opened this week.

As you can tell, the French truly have their priorities straight.

PARIS, April 10 — Nicolas Sarkozy, the conservative candidate for president, suggests that pedophilia is most likely a genetic flaw; Ségolène Royal, the Socialist, does not seem to know that Taliban extremists are no longer running the government of Afghanistan; and Jean-Marie Le Pen, the ultrarightist, recommends masturbation instead of free condoms to meet young people’s sexual needs.

With 12 days to go before the first round of France’s presidential election, the campaign has entered a phase of improvisation and even silliness that reflects the absence of any single defining issue and a frenzied competition to win over the country’s large bloc of undecided voters. .

Click here to read the entire article.

Yup, let's pay attention to those sophisticated French.

Let us be clear: France is not a world power. She is a world-class appeaser, a decadent and weak nation that plays no great role on the world stage. In fact, Israel is far greater world power, financially, culturally, and militarily. In twenty-five years France will probably be an Islamic Republic, and of course Judenrein. France's decline is easy to chart. The day DeGaulle refused to join NATO sealed France's fate as a third rate nation.

Meanwhile, we received this "Letter From a French Jew" via Bruce Kessler.

Once again, the real news in France is conveniently not being reported as it should. To give you an idea of what's going on in France where there are now between 5 and 6 million Muslims and about 600,000 Jews, here is an email that comes from a Jew living in France.

Nowhere have the flames of anti-Semitism burned more furiously than in France: In Lyon, a car was rammed into a synagogue and set on fire. In Montpellier, the Jewish religious center was firebombed; so were synagogues in Strasbourg and Marseilles; so was a Jewish school in Creteil - all recently.

A Jewish sports club in Toulouse was attacked with Molotov cocktails, and on the statue of Alfred Dreyfus in Paris , the words "Dirty Jew" were painted. In Bondy, 15 men beat up members of a Jewish football team with sticks and metal bars. The bus that takes Jewish children to school in Aubervilliers has been attacked three times in the last 14 months.

According to the Police, metropolitan Paris has seen 10 to 12 anti-Jewish incidents PER DAY in the past 30 days.

Walls in Jewish neighborhoods have been defaced with slogans proclaiming "Jews to the gas chambers" and "Death to the Jews."

A gunman opened fire on a kosher butcher's shop (and, of course, the butcher) in Toulouse, France; a Jewish couple in their 20s were beaten up by five men in Villeurbanne, France. The woman was pregnant; a Jewish school was broken into and vandalized in Sarcelles, France. This was just in the past week.

So I call on you, whether you are a fellow Jew, a friend, or merely a person with the capacity and desire to distinguish decency from depravity, to do, at least, these three simple things: First, care enough to stay informed. Don't ever let yourself become deluded into thinking that this is not your fight. I remind you of what Pastor Neimoller said in World War II: "First they came for the Communists, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Communist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak up, because I wasn't a Jew. Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak up, because I was a Protestant. Then they came for me, and by that time there was no one left to speak up for me".

Second, boycott France and French products. Only the Arab countries are more toxically anti-Semitic and, unlike them, France exports more than just oil and hatred. So boycott their wines and their perfumes. Boycott their clothes and their foodstuffs. Boycott their movies. [With pleasure! RJA] Definitely boycott their shores. If we are resolved, we can exert amazing pressure and, whatever else we may know about the French, we most certainly know that they are like a cobweb in a hurricane in the face of well-directed pressure.

Third, send this along to your family, your friends, and your co-workers. Think of all of the people of good conscience that you know and let them know that you and the people that you care about need their help.

The number one best selling book in France is: "September 11: The Frightening Fraud," which argues that no plane ever hit the Pentagon.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:18 PM | Comments (12)

April 11, 2007

The American Shallows

Don Imus is an idiot. He said something stupid, apologized, made a bigger ass of himself and apologized again. Unlike Al Sharpton or Jesse Jackson, he apologized immediately.

Al Sharpton made racist comments, defended them and made more racist comments. Al Sharpton has yet to apologize for the Tawana Brawley (now Maryam Muhammad) debacle, nor has apologized to Steven Pagones, a Duchess County Assistant District Attorney who Sharpton publicly accused or rape and assault. With no evidence to substantiate his claim, Sharpton accused the entire NYPD and NY Governor Mario Cuomo of being involved in the ‘coverup.’

Two of Sharpton’s advisers and associates quit, acknowledging that Sharpton knew all along that the case was a hoax. To this day, Sharpton has never apologized for his behavior in the Brawley case.

Nor has he apologized for the racial slurs he made against Jews.

To read the rest of Sigmund, Carl, & Alfred's fine essay, please click here.

For another POV on the Imus nonsense, check out If I Knew the Rules, at that great site Libertas.

Every once in a while I hear bits and pieces of rap music, and I cannot believe the filth. Is this acceptable to civilized people? Why pick on Imus? He's tame compared to the stuff spewed by black rappers.

I'm confused.

Michelle Malkin provides, um, "lyrics" and video to some top black rap music. Strong language and visual advisory. Iron stomach needed to digest this cultural poison. Whoops, excuse me as I switch into my chattering class mode here: to, ahem, deconstruct this deeply personal, yet cooly ironic, cultural expression.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:24 AM | Comments (21)

April 05, 2007

The Shadow President

"We came in friendship, hope, and determined that the road to Damascus is a road to peace," Ms. Pelosi grandly declared.

Never mind that that statement is ludicrous: As any diplomat with knowledge of the region could have told Ms. Pelosi, Mr. Assad is a corrupt thug whose overriding priority at the moment is not peace with Israel but heading off U.N. charges that he orchestrated the murder of former Lebanese prime minister Rafiq al-Hariri. The really striking development here is the attempt by a Democratic congressional leader to substitute her own foreign policy for that of a sitting Republican president. Two weeks ago Ms. Pelosi rammed legislation through the House of Representatives that would strip Mr. Bush of his authority as commander in chief to manage troop movements in Iraq. Now she is attempting to introduce a new Middle East policy that directly conflicts with that of the president. We have found much to criticize in Mr. Bush's military strategy and regional diplomacy. But Ms. Pelosi's attempt to establish a shadow presidency is not only counterproductive, it is foolish.

This editorial is from the liberal Washington Post, to read the entire article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:15 AM | Comments (3)

March 12, 2007

The Democrats Blacklist Fox

So let me get this straight. According to the Democrats, Israel is supposed to sit down and chat with Hamas, a terrorist gang dedicated to Israel's annihilation.

According to the Democrats Israel is also supposed to sit down and "dialogue with Iran," a country that denies the Holocaust, even as it promises a new Holocaust.

Also, according to the Democrats, America is supposed to shmooze with the North Koreans, a country that has systematically murdered over 3 million of its own citizens.

Why? Well, because you "talk to your enemies."

But the Democrats refuse to take part in a debate sponsored by Fox Cable Network because, y'know, Fox is too right wing.

Got that?

I'd like to thank the Democratic Presidential candidates: Edwards, Obama, & Clinton for being so publicly willing to reveal their cowardice. They're terrified of Fox journalists armed with Mont Blan pens. Imagine how they'd stand up to the surging jihadist threat.

Not a good scenario.

I'd especially like to thank Moveon.org and The Daily Kos who helped spearhead this blacklist, this anti-Democratic movement; by pushing the candidates to reject the Fox debate, they have revealed the Democratic Party for what it really is: a far left political organization afraid of true and open debate.

Ask yourselves, what would happen if Republican presidential candidates refused to appear on CBS, ABC, NBC or CNN because those networks are too left wing, what would happen?

You know what would happen.

They would be publicly lynched in the pages of every liberal newspaper in America.

But for liberals, this is is just business as usual.

But the American people are not gullible, and will not be fooled. They understand that the greatest threat to free speech in America comes from liberals, from progressives, whatever they are calling themselves this season—from the Democratic Party.

And it's no longer any use making believe that Moveon.org and The Daily Kos are just fringe elements—let's not forget all the Jew hatred, and venemous anti-Israel rhetoric that sprouts on their websites—these organizations are the grass roots of the Democratic Party, and growing more powerful every day.

So: I personally am glad for this tremendously revealing development. The mask is off. The Democrats are in full hysterical bloom. Americans understand that this is not a party of adults, a party that cannot be trusted in the White House, and especially a political party that cannot be trusted with National Security. All that remains is for the Republicans to organize, stay smart, debate respectfully—and let the Democrats commit political suicide—as their anti-Democratic impulses rise to the surface.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:39 AM | Comments (8)

March 07, 2007

The “Peace” Brigade vs. The Stryker Brigade

Yes, the same ilk that purport to care so much about the troops not having enough armor and protection stood and jeered at those deploying to bring more protection to their fellow soldiers in Iraq.

Such patriots, aren't they?

Members of the anti-military mob shouted condescendingly at our volunteer soldiers rolling past them: "Free the troops!" "No justice, no peace!" "You don't have to go!" One lunatic with a bullhorn urged Stryker Brigade members to disobey their commanding officers and sneered: "Your sergeant is a douchebag!"

Such patriots, aren't they?

To read the rest of the mighty Michelle Malkin's article, please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Yonasan Fisgus, M.D.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:43 AM | Comments (0)

February 28, 2007

Inconvenient Truth: Bush Greener than Gore

I think it’s an amusing double-standard. Gore gasses away about the environment while he and his friends use private jets to go from huge, air-conditioned home to home, and he is heaped with accolades and good press, while Bush says little about the environment but lives the green-creed in Midland and gets only negative press. On every issue.

So, while you hear nothing at all about President Bush successfully gaining international co-operation for a green initiative that does not destroy economies like the Kyoto treaty, and you read nothing about how the president is committed to helping the restoration of ancient Iraqi Marshlands, you hear rather too much about all the preening and moralizing going on by Green Al Gore…except when he cancels interviews that might make him address…inconvenient dissent.

To read the entire article by Anchoress, please click here. She needs the company as she lives in a sealed room inside a church.

Via: Libertas

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:02 AM | Comments (24)

February 20, 2007

Wisdom from John Edwards, Democrat

"Perhaps the greatest short-term threat to world peace is the possibility that Israel would bomb Iran's nuclear facilities"

— John Edwards, Democratic Presidential hopeful.

The subtext of Edward's statement, which Democrat apologists conveniently skate past, is that once again, Israel is painted as the ogre of the middle-East. Once again, for having the temerity of possibly exercising national self-defense, Israel is portrayed as the major regional threat. In short, the victims are blamed, not those who, on the one hand deny the Holocaust while at the same time promising a new one.

Hey John, you don't think that maybe bigger short-term threats to (world) peace are:

1. Iran nuking Israel — as they have promised to do.
2. Al Queda and their various terrorist free-lancers killing who knows how many people.
3. Hamas, vowing to "eliminate the Zionist entity." Thus unleashing a world of rockets from Gaza.
4. Hizbullah, trying to topple the Lebanese government. In short, a bloody sectarian war, with Syrian intervention.
5. Al Aksa Martyrs Brigade, see #3.

But on the plus side John, you just wrapped up the Daily Kossack vote. Mazal Tov!

Here's the original article from Variety by Peter Bart. The Real Hollywood Politics

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:24 PM | Comments (10)

February 07, 2007

The Dem's Imam

INTERIOR. DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS - DAY

Two young, bright Dem OPERATIVES are huddling in a cubicle. Empty PIZZA boxes are strewn about. STARBUCKS coffee cups are everywhere. PHONES ring off the hook. The place is jumping.

OP #1: I got hold of an Imam to, you know, to do the prayer thing.
OP#2: It's weird, we're Democrats, what're we doing chanting prayers. It's soooo retro.
OP #1: Look, it's politics. We gotta show the country that the Republicans don't own this G-d thing.
OP#1: Clever move, opening with a Muslim. Thing is, he's kind of, well...
OP#2: What, c'mon, spit it out?
OP#1: He has a history of supporting Hizbullah.
OP#2: Big deal, they all do.
OP#1: He also supported The Ayattolah Khomeini when he kidnapped our people in Tehran.
OP#2: Hey, who even remembers that bit of theatre?
OP#1: One more thing: He's like a real Jew-hater. I mean, big-time Islamic Nazi.

Pause.

OP #2 ponders a long moment, plays with the gold Magen David hanging from his neck, finally he breaks into a huge smile:

OP#2: Listen, who gives a crap? We got the Jews where we want 'em -- down on the plantation. They don't breed, so they don't really count, demographically -- not compared to the Muslims, who have what six, seven rug rats per family. Do the math. No, sign up the Imam. The Jews, they're like dogs, sloppily grateful, for our... rhetoric. All we have to do is keep talking about Global Warming. That's the real issue.

FADE to BLACK

Debbie Schlussel on the Dem's Imam.

The mighty Michelle Malkin provides a video of the Dems bowing their head piously as the Imam calls for the end of "oppression and occupation." It's nice to know whose side the Dems are really on.

Robert Spencer has a fine posting showing that the Dem's Imam was intoning Orthodox Islamic doctrine, nothing radical here at all. Just standard doctrine.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:31 AM | Comments (3)

February 01, 2007

An Evening With Dr. Charles Krauthammer

Exclusive to Seraphic Secret

By Jake Novak

Last night I was extremely lucky to be invited to spend a very stimulating evening with Dr. Charles Krauthammer, syndicated columnist for the Washington Post and frequently-quoted thinker on Seraphic Secret.

The event was arranged for the biggest donors to a very excellent charity called Shalva, which caters to children with mental and physical disabilities and their parents primarily in Jerusalem but also here in the United States. Please visit Shalva's web page at www.shalva.org and consider making a donation to this organization that performs incredible acts of kindness every hour of the day.

The evening began with a 20 minute talk by Dr. Krauthammer at the 5th Avenue home of James and Merryl Tisch. Later, I was lucky enough to enjoy a private dinner with Dr. Krauthammer and a just about 10 other people. The dinner did not end until well after 10pm.

For those of you who do not know, Dr. Krauthammer is wheelchair-bound, the result of a devastating car accident in 1972 while he was a first-year student at the Harvard medical college. It was clear to me during his remarks that he is in constant physical pain that he alleviates somewhat by frequently adjusting his mechanical chair. I mention this only to emphasize the fact that it is astounding that a person with such physical difficulties can speak so eloquently no matter what the setting. I also bring his disability up because he happens to be a general opponent of embryonic stem cell research, (although he does believe President Bush's policy against it is too harsh), and he stands as a strong example of why we should not assume that every American who is paralyzed or similarly incapacitated does not care about the ethical ramifications of unrestricted embryonic research.

Dr. Krauthammer touched on many topics during his remarks. Here are the highlights below, (I endeavor to use the exact words Dr. Krauthammer used as much as possible, but obviously there is some paraphrasing here):

On the War on Terrorism

"America is now facing a similar situation as it did in the early days of the Cold War. Eventually, we came to realize that we faced a menacing threat from two major centers, one in Moscow and the other in Beijing. Today we face a battle against radical Islam, with the Wahabist Sunni power center in Saudi Arabia and the other in the Shiite power center of Tehran.

"Both of these enemies are extremely dangerous and more akin to the Nazi and fascist threat we faced in the 1930's and 40's than they are like the slightly less menacing Communist threats of the next 50 years. But even worse than the Nazi menace, is the fact that these newer enemies are much closer to acquiring nuclear weapons than Hitler was at any time during his 1933-45 reign. More on this later…

"The Shiite enemy is more dangerous right now and if the Sunni-Shiite battles escalate beyond the current low-intensity conflict, the United States must back the Sunni powers in heart-wrenching, but necessary "choose Stalin instead of Hitler" kind of way.

"The Shia enemy axis is centered in Iran, with its satellites Hezbollah in Lebanon, and to a growing extent, its new clients in Syria and within Hamas. Syrian Muslims are not purely Shia or Sunni, but they are leaning toward full compliance with Iran in the absence of any other sponsor and protector at the moment. Hamas is 100% Sunni, but it too has decided to align with Iran. Recent protests by Fatah groups in Gaza have included the taunts "Shia! Shia!", as a way of accusing their Hamas opponents of surrendering their religion to Iran.

"The Sunni enemy is less organized and strong than Iran's Shia network, because of America's success in Afghanistan and the war in Iraq. Al Qaeda poses a much smaller threat than Hezbollah as it is on the run and Hezbollah is getting more entrenched in Lebanon every day, Syria has been unmolested, and Iran gets closer to nukes.

"But the focus on the weapons themselves is clouding the fact that we must be more concerned right now with the delivery systems. Even if Iran never gets a nuclear warhead, its missile-launching capacity is greater than ever before right now. The U.S. needs to have a good strategy to destroy those sites instead of trying to neutralize the nuclear program which is mostly underground and spread out all over the country.

"The recent report in the Sunday London Times that Israel has a plan in place to use tactical nukes to hit Iran is complete rubbish, as is everything else that appears in that newspaper. There are important reasons why striking Iran is problematic for Israel, and the biggest reason is that Israel would need somewhere to land and refuel to execute a strike and it is unlikely it could find such a place where it would be allowed to do so right now. Turkey and Iraq are possibilities, but not today. The recent decision to deploy an American aircraft carrier in the Persian Gulf was a welcome event and hopefully it will send a cautionary message to Iran.

"Some of the Sunni-Shia conflict can work to our benefit. Secretary of State Condi Rice is working with Egypt, Saudi Arabia and some other Sunni regimes on setting up some kind of "Sunni NATO" that will give them a stronger military card to play against Iran and possibly Syria in the years to come. It's not clear whether this idea will work, but it's worth trying.

"More importantly, the world must get serious with the radical Islamist threat and be ready for a prolonged war in the region. Europe is not only not a realistic ally militarily, but it along with Russia and China will make sure that all the non-military options like negotiations and sanctions will never work. President Bush's steadfast belief in facing the enemy threat militarily and trying to promote democracy in the region are our best hope. However, for the first time, I am seeing a weakening in the President's resolve vis a vis Iran and that is very disturbing. Even before the November elections, I spoke with the President and his response to my question about a possible military strike on Iran was met with a meeker answer than ever before."

On the Situation in Israel

"Israel is straddled with the worst government it's ever had in its 59-year history. Olmert and company are incompetent, but just competent enough to stay in power and avoid new elections.

"Olmert's biggest failure was last summer's war where he bungled a chance to destroy Hezbollah. Sharon had ignored many similar provocations from Hezbollah before, but he never struck back because he was not ready. Olmert struck back, but he too did not have a strategy and he tried to fight the war on the cheap.

"The right man to lead Israel now is Netanyahu. The problem is, and I say this as a strong personal friend of his, he is almost inept at building a coalition and has so many personal problems that he may not be able to win over the Israeli voters ever again. Netanyahu is too clever by half, as was evidenced by his resignation just before the Gaza pullout instead of months before when Sharansky resigned on principle, which is the way to do it. The result was that Olmert solidified his position as Sharon's successor and Netanyahu can now see that he would today be Prime Minister had he not quit the Sharon government. On the other hand, Netanyahu does have a strategy and is likely to act on it if he is put back in charge. He had one of the most successful terms of any Prime Minister in Israeli history and he was absolutely the best finance minister the country ever had.

"Speaking of Sharansky, he is my all-time hero. I've met many other people who came out of the gulag and situations like that. He is the only one who clearly became a better person in every facet of his life because of that experience. This is in contrast to someone like John McCain who is still quite wounded emotionally from his experiences as a prisoner in Hanoi and still struggles with these handicaps every day."

On the 2008 Presidential Elections

"This is the first time since 1952 that no President or Vice President is in the race, and that's why we are seeing so many candidates. However, it is nearly impossible to think of any plausible scenario other than Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee and John McCain for the GOP. This is encouraging because Hillary is running to the right of all the other Democrats and McCain is remaining steadfast in his support for the war in Iraq."

On Jews and American Politics

"The fact that 80% of Jews vote Democratic and vilify President Bush is not only puzzling, it is suicidal. While I differ with the President on many issues myself, most notably abortion that pales in comparison to his support of Israel. This also plays itself out in the way American Jews fear and loathe Evangelicals. This reminds me of Prime Minister Menachem Begin's visit to the U.S. in 1978 when he met with Jerry Falwell. Jewish groups attacked him and asked how he could meet with someone who 'only supports Israel because of some Christian belief in the second coming.' To that, Begin answered, "That does not bother me. But when the Messiah comes, I will ask him: 'Have you been here before?'

"I am a secular Jew, and I see that Reform Judaism serves a special role by keeping a lot of Jews within the community, but its priorities are way out of whack."

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:50 AM | Comments (25)

January 30, 2007

Talking Ourselves Into Defeat

By Daniel Henninger

From The Wall Street Journal

The United States is talking itself into defeat in Iraq. Its political
culture is now in a downward spiral of pessimism. In the halls of
Congress, across endless newspaper columns, amid the punditocracy and
on Sunday morning talk shows -- all emit a Stygian gloom about America.

Yes, on any given day on some discrete issue (Prime Minister Maliki's
bona fides, for example), the criticism of the American role is not
without justification. But the cumulative effect of this unremitting
ill wind is corrosive. We are not only on the way to talking ourselves
into defeat in Iraq but into a diminished international status that may
be harder to recover than the doom mob imagines. Self-criticism has its
role, but profligate self-doubt can exact a price.

Maine GOP Sen. Susan Collins wonders "whether the clock has already run
out." To U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton the new strategy
is "a dead end." For the Bush troop request, presidential candidate Joe
Biden predicted "overwhelming rejection." (His committee resolution to
that effect yesterday passed by three votes.) Presidential candidate
Chuck Hagel: "We have anarchy in Iraq. It's getting worse." And not
least, Sen. John Warner this week heaved his tenured eminence against
the war effort, proposing another "non-binding" resolution against more
troops.

To pick one amid scores of similar characterizations in the media, the
Associated Press wrote from Washington before the State of the Union
speech that "Democrats -- and even some Republicans -- scoffed at his
policy." "Scoff" is a strong word, suggesting eye-rolling ridicule.
(The line was so good that the AP ran it after the speech as well,
under another writer's byline, this time from Baghdad.) But of course
amid the giddy vapors of mass mockery, they all "support the troops."

Our slide to a national nervous breakdown because of Iraq is not going
unnoticed. Australia's foreign minister, Alexander Downer, has been
visiting across the U.S. this week. "I've been pretty worried about
what I've heard," Mr. Downer said in an interview. Walking on Santa
Monica beach Sunday before last, Mr. Downer said he encountered a
display of crosses in the sand, representing the American dead in Iraq.

"What concerns me about this," he said, "is that it's sort of an
isolationist sentiment, subconsciously, not consciously, and that would
be an enormous problem for the world. I hope the American people
understand the importance of not retreating and thinking the world's
problems aren't theirs."

Some of this is politics as usual, but even normal partisanship comes
dressed now in the language of apocalypse. In his SOTU rebuttal,
Democratic Sen. Jim Webb ripped into the current economy, saying it
reminded him of the early 1900s: "The dispossessed workers at the
bottom were threatening revolt." Ah, we've fallen to the level of
czarist Russia.

You know the pessimism has turned manic when no one is allowed to
depart the asylum. Sen. John McCain's support for Iraq and the new Bush
plan is now being described in press reports as not only costing him
support in the polls (the asylum's inkblot of reality) but worse, the
support of campaign contributors.

It is a phenomenon fascinating to behold. Its causes are multiple, but
here are several:

Bush schadenfreude. Partisan pleasure in George Bush's pain dates to
the anguish of the contested 2000 election loss. The Democrats have run
against something called "Bush" for so long that this sentiment is now
bound up in any act or policy remotely attached to the president.
Iraq's troubles, or Iran or North Korea, are merely an artifact of
crushing this one guy.

The Iraq Study Group. The ISG report wasn't defeatist, but it enabled
the vocabulary of defeat. Its warning of a "slide toward chaos" was
re-defined as the current Iraqi status quo. They called their
bipartisan solution "phased withdrawal," but it was a euphemism for
defeat. Momentum was already building in this direction, and the ISG
propelled it.

The leadership vacuum. The administration never rallied the nation
behind the war in a concrete way. A young Marine officer recently
returned from combat in Iraq told me this week he is taken aback at how
disassociated the American people seem from Iraq, no matter how
constantly it's in the news. He says it's as if the problem is not so
much what is actually happening in Iraq but that the war is "annoying"
to Americans, as if to say: Can't it just go away or not be on the
front page all the time? Rallying a nation at war is a president's job.

The opposition vacuum. One reason the negative mood in politics is so
disconcerting is that the opposition's alternative vision is
nonexistent. On joining the opposition recently, GOP Sen. Norm Coleman
announced, "I can't tell you what the path to success is." Joe Biden
says the "primary" Iraq strategy should be to force its leaders to make
the political compromises necessary to "end the violence."

As a political strategy, unremitting opposition has worked. Approval
for the president and the war is low. The GOP lost sight of its
ideological lodestars and so control of Congress. But the U.S. still
occupies a unique position of power in the world, and we are putting
that status at risk by playing politics without a net.

On the "Charlie Rose Show" this month, former Army vice chief of staff
Gen. Jack Keane, who supports the counterinsurgency plan being
undertaken by Gen. David Petraeus, said in exasperation: "My God, this
is the United States. We are the world's No. 1 superpower. This isn't
about arrogance. This is about capability and applying ourselves to a
problem that is at its essence a human problem."

At our current juncture, Gen. Keane's words probably rub many the wrong
way. But there's a Cassandra-like warning implicit in them. The mood of
mass resignation spreading through the body politic is toxic. It is
uncharacteristic of Americans under stress. Some might call it realism,
but it looks closer to the fatalism of elderly Europe, overwhelmed and
exhausted by its burdens, than to the American tradition.

In 1966, Sen. George Aiken delivered a speech on Vietnam famously
translated for history as "declare victory and go home.'" On current
course, it looks like we may declare defeat and go home.

Daniel Henninger is deputy editor of The Wall Street Journal's
editorial page.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, William Cochran, of Vintage Knives.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:42 AM | Comments (0)

January 26, 2007

Democrats Against Victory

In Tuesday’s State of the Union address, the President’s calls for victory in Iraq were met from the Democrat side of the aisle with intentional silence. Most Democrats would not applaud, much less stand, for victory in Iraq. Over the past months and years, those on the left have gone to great effort to paint the mission in Iraq as “failed,” “doomed” and a “disaster.” They have failed to acknowledge the accomplishments of the U.S. military in Iraq, but have been quick to talk about those in our armed forces as child victims of a failed policy or (worse) as bloodthirsty thugs engaging in torture and terror.

To read the entire articly by Lorie Byrd, please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Yonasan Fisgus, M.D.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:26 AM | Comments (3)

January 22, 2007

Give Petraeus a Chance

Republicans should not hesitate to point out how irresponsible their Democratic colleagues (and some Republicans) are being. Senator Clinton's troop cap is dangerously foolish. The nonbinding resolution of disapproval Senator Biden has proposed is irresponsible. The fact is that President Bush has, as he was widely and correctly urged to do, changed strategy. He's put a new commander, General Petraeus, in charge. Petraeus thinks the new plan can work, with the support of additional troops. He'll be confirmed by the Senate and sent out to the theater this week. Members of Congress should ask themselves, "What can we do to help Petraeus succeed?" Or would Senator Clinton and the Democrats just as soon lose?

To read the entire article by Frederick W. Kagan & William Kristol, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:24 AM | Comments (10)

January 21, 2007

A Trip to the DMZ

Anyway, it was time to enter the DMZ. We were once again not allowed to take photographs on this portion of the journey, but we had soon reached the JSA and Panmunjom. The first stop was the 'conference room', one of a number of huts that straddle the demarcation line, in which negotiations between north and south have taken place at various times over the decades. The line does go down the centre of not just the hut but the conference table in the centre of it, and indeed down the middle of the soldier who stands perfectly still at the end of the table.

Seraphic Secret readers know Michael Jennings as one of our most ferociously intelligent and funny commenters. He is a world traveler, a man-about-town, an acute observer of politics, movies and technology. On a recent journey to South Korea Michael also visited the delightful DMZ, and peeked into North Korea, the most hermetically sealed country in the world. This is by far, the best report on the DMZ you will ever read.

Click here to go to that fine blog Samizdata, to read Michael's entire story, and to view his (long-distance) pictures of the tyrannical North Korean kingdom.

Oh, and you've got to see what Michael bought at the DMZ Gift Shop. Absolutely priceless.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:46 AM | Comments (2)

January 16, 2007

1st Cav Medic Speaks Up

"I've been over here [in Iraq] a couple of months now, and I've learned more about this country than a year's worth of watching CNN. I've sat in mission briefs with Colonels, talked with village elders, had tea with Shieks, played with the kids. And I agree with the President. We need more troops and we need to take greater action."

Via the fine Military Blog Black Five. To read the rest of this article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:34 PM | Comments (2)

A Rifle in Every Pot

"It's a phenomenon that gives the term “gun control” a whole new meaning: community ordinances that encourage citizens to own guns.

"Last month, Greenleaf, Idaho, adopted Ordinance 208, calling for its citizens to own guns and keep them ready in their homes in case of emergency. It’s not a response to high crime rates. As The Associated Press reported, “Greenleaf doesn’t really have crime ... the most violent offense reported in the past two years was a fist fight.” Rather, it’s a statement about preparedness in the event of an emergency, and an effort to promote a culture of self-reliance."

To read the rest of Glenn Reynold's AKA Instapundit, Op-Ed piece from the NY Times, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:11 PM | Comments (0)

Know Your Enemy

"Why is it that so many who are against the Iraq War and demand that we allow/force the Iraqi government to stand on their own and stop the violent men among them are often the very same people who are always willing to insist that the Palestinian government can not be expected to control the violent men in their neighborhood?"

To read this fine article by Seraphic Friend, ShrinkWrapped, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:07 AM | Comments (0)

January 15, 2007

Charity: Who Really Gives

"My youthful equation of liberal politics and good character has long since been consigned to the dustbin. When the tax return of Al Gore Jr., multimillionaire avatar of the common man, revealed an annual charitable contribution of $250, I was not surprised. Every poor kollel student I know gives many times that to tzedaka [charity] in a year."

To read Jonathan Rosenblum's entire article, please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Mordechai Schiller

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:05 AM | Comments (2)

January 05, 2007

The Reluctant American Empire

"If the U.S. is guilty of any crime in its international relations, it is in the repeated attempts to evade its responsibility as the world's leading power. WW I dragged on for years due to U.S. refusal to join the fight against German reaction. A similar action guaranteed a near-total Allied collapse against the most sinister and powerful enemy ever faced by the civilized West during the first two years of WW II. We have already covered the 70s. The 90s were a similar period, when the United States decided to take the decade off under the impression that its job was done (of course, Bill Clinton has apologized for all that during one of his bongo-playing expeditions). Different names have been used for what was essentially the same policy: normalcy, isolationism, detente, the end of history. We don't yet know what the name for next hiatus will be.

"We do know that the impulse behind it is the hegemonist doctrine. No other force is keeping the U.S. from playing its international role. No outside element could possibly succeed in holding the country back. Only internal pressure from the media, the educational establishment, the universities, the Democrats. They call themselves idealists, and we can give them that. But American left-wing idealism is hollow, creating not the conditions for a global utopia, but for more wars, more brutality, more genocides, more bloodshed."

To read the entire article by J.R. Dunn in American Thinker, please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, David Paulin

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:55 AM | Comments (0)

December 22, 2006

I'm... dreaming... of a white... Chri -- ummm, holidays

I guess I'm in the group that shrugs and says, "What in the world is so wrong about your dry cleaner, and (gasp!) the evening news, and even (double gasp and grabbing of chest!) your senator saying "Merry Christmas?" I don't get it, I swear I don't. Ninety percent of the country is actively or inactively or nominally Christian, but they all celebrate Christmas. Does that make America a Christian country? Not officially, maybe, and it never has been, but doesn't it kind of make it one unofficially? The main thing is... who cares? I don't. In fact, it's fine with me. Look, folks, in case you didn't know, or went to public schools after 1970, the United States was started by Christians, thought up by Christians and grown by Christians, and I can't speak for you, but I'm glad they did.

To read Larry Miller's entire article, please click here.

Hat Tip: Long Time Seraphic Friend, Jake Novak

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:57 AM | Comments (8)

December 15, 2006

Jews, Muslims and the Democrats

"...one particularly active element has been the Congressional Black Caucus, whose membership in recent years has included such reliably radical firebrands as Ron Dellums and Maxine Waters of California, Cynthia McKinney of Georgia, and Earl Hilliard of Alabama. In addition to Keith Ellison, two members of the caucus—Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas and Albert Wynn of Maryland—addressed CAIR’s post-election celebratory banquet this past November.

"But the Black Caucus is not alone. Other Democrats (joined for this purpose by Republicans like former Congressmen Paul Findley and Pete McCloskey) have been similarly ill-disposed toward Israel and/or American Jews. One thinks of James Moran of Virginia, notorious for asserting that the U.S. would never have gone to war in Iraq but “for the strong support of the Jewish community.” (In fact, as opinion polls consistently showed, American Jews overwhelmingly opposed U.S. entry into the war.) In California, one newly elected Democratic Congressman, Gerald McNerney, accepted an endorsement this past fall from the Republican McCloskey, notwithstanding the latter’s links to the crackpot Holocaust deniers at the Institute for Historical Review. And so it goes."

To Gabriel Schoenfeld's entire article from Commentary Magazine, please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend: Maurice S.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:21 AM | Comments (0)

November 17, 2006

Exit Polls and the Jewish Vote

"Jews remain very loyal to the Democratic Party. No one is disputing that. But the numbers this year, as in 2004, are more on the order of 3 to 1 support for Democrats over Republicans, not the 7 or 8 to 1 ratio suggested by the exit poll survey. In a very difficult year for Republican candidates, Jewish voters may have even slightly increased their support for Republican candidates as compared to 2004."

To read the entire American Thinker article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:08 AM | Comments (0)

November 14, 2006

The Smugness of the War's Opponents

In this week's New York Times Book Review, a historian reviewing a major new work of 20th-century history, Oxford and Harvard Professor Niall Ferguson's "The War of the World," notes that "Ferguson argues that the Western powers should have gone to war in 1938, which would most likely have avoided much of the horror of World War II . . . . "

Imagine that. The New York Times publishes a favorable book review of a book arguing that a pre-emptive war in 1938 would have saved tens of millions of lives aside from preventing the Holocaust, "without parallel . . . the most wicked act in all history."

You have to wonder if the Times' editors and all their allies on the Left, who have spent the last four years mocking the very notion of pre-emptive war, read this review.

To read the rest of Dennis Prager's fine article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 07:45 AM | Comments (2)

November 10, 2006

Pelosi, Pro-Israel ?

The Dems are poised to get rid of one of Israel's and humanitie's best friends, U.N. Ambassador John Bolton. Now, Nancy Pelosi has set her sights on another good friend of Israel, and a Democrat who is actually serious about national security, Jane Harmon, who was in line to lead the House Intelligence Committee. As Yehudit at Kesher reports:

"As the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, Ms. Harman was expected to become chairman of the powerful committee. But Ms. Pelosi is expected to pass over Ms. Harman for either Rep. Alcee Hastings of Florida or Rep. Silvestre Reyes of Texas, the second- and third-ranking Democrats on the intelligence panel. . . . The sources said the 61-year-old Ms. Harman, regarded as the best informed House Democrat on intelligence and technology issues, angered the liberal Ms. Pelosi by supporting the Bush administration’s policies on defense issues, particularly the war in Iraq and the Patriot Act. They said Ms. Pelosi has rebuffed lobbyists in the pro-Israel community and defense industry that sought a chairmanship for Ms. Harman."

It will not be long before the Democrats gut the wiretapping program, and all other security programs that have been put into place by the Bush administration. It is clear that the Democrats view the War on Terror as just another law enforcement issue. They want to go back to Clinton years, to the days before 9-11.

This is wishful thinking, it is also delusional and childish.

Look for wide screen TV's to be delivered to the jihadists in Guantanomo. Oh wait, the Dems will do everything they can to close Gitmo. They'll want to imprison these terrorists on Rikers Island. After giving them due process, and habeus corpus, maybe even they'll offer them full citizenship and scholarships to Yale.

The jihadists must be heaving a huge sigh of relief. The Dems will be attacking and possibly dismantling Bush's security measures which have kept this country safe from attack since 9-11 -- and this will give the jihadists the opportunity to attack us.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 07:25 AM | Comments (2)

November 09, 2006

The Obsequious 88%

According to today's New York Times "Survey of Voters: Who They Were," Jews, who are 2% of the American voters, voted 88% for the Democrats.

Sheesh, talk about obsequious.

Even gay, lesbian and bisexuals didn't hit such numbers. They are 3% of the voters and they went a pretty moderate 75% for the Democrats. Compared to Jews gays, lesbians and bisexuals are independent thinkers.

Only Blacks, 10% of the voters, exceeded this servile Jewish vote -- by one percent.

Now, it doesn't take a genius to realize that when a group, year after year, slavishly hands it vote to one political party, that party is going to take that group for granted. Afterall, why work for that group when they will vote for you--no matter what?

What's even more amazing to me is the vitriol that is directed towards Jewish Republicans. We are a tiny but growing minority, especially among more observant Jews. Yet Jewish Democrats simply cannot bear the thought that there are those of us who think, analyze, and vote differently.

As I have said before, the impulse for tyranny comes from the left, not from the right.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:29 PM | Comments (22)

November 08, 2006

And Jewish Republicans?

According to exit polls conducted for the Republican Jewish Coalition by leading pollster Arthur Finkelstein, the Jewish vote for Republicans held steady compared to reported results from 1992 to 2004. At the same time, in a difficult political environment, the national vote for Republicans declined significantly, resulting in the loss of control of the House and possibly the Senate.

According to the RJC exit polls of 1000 voters (margin of error +/-3%) taken yesterday, support for the GOP among Jewish voters was 26.4%.

The RJC polls found that among those who saw the RJC ads in local Jewish newspapers, support for Republicans rose to 35.4%, a nine percent increase over the average of 26.4% support for the GOP found in the RJC polls. In addition, likely House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, along with several senior House Democrats, held a national townhall meeting with the Jewish community to defend their party’s record on Israel.

The RJC polls point to significant positive signs for Republicans in the Jewish community going forward. In keeping with previous election results, the RJC polls found that younger Jewish voters are more inclined to support Republican candidates. Among those under age 55, 30.7% voted Republican, compared to those age 55 and over, who voted 23.8% Republican. This is a good sign for the future, as Republicans continue to make inroads among younger voters.

The RJC polls confirmed that there is a gender gap among Jews -- men voting Republican: 30.6%; women voting Republican: 22.6%.

Just as in the larger population, the more a voter attends religious services, the more likely he or she is to vote Republican. Among those who attend synagogue almost every day, 35.2% voted Republican. Among those who attend once a week, 31.8% voted Republican. And among occasional attendees, 23.1% voted Republican.

Similarly, Reform Jews voted 23.0% Republican, Conservative 25.2%, and Orthodox 42%.

“The results of this survey validate the RJC advertising campaign,” said RJC Executive Director Matt Brooks. “Our aggressive advertising in Jewish newspapers in key markets challenged Jewish Democrats to examine their party’s support for Israel. We pledge to continue these efforts going forward."

“We congratulate the Democrats on this victory and call on the leaders of their party in Congress to stand up to the liberal elements in the grassroots of their party who advocate a policy of neutrality toward Israel,” Brooks said.

The RJC polls surveyed 1000 voters in Florida (22nd district), Pennsylvania (6th district), and the state of New Jersey. Margin of error: plus/minus 3%. These areas were chosen because of the highly competitive races taking place, as well as the fact that they were target areas of the RJC ad campaign.

Website: Republican Jewish Coalition

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 07:57 AM | Comments (7)

Uncomfortable Lessons

"The post-mortems are accumulating, but I think the obvious has to be stated: John McCain and his colleagues in the Gang of 14 cost the GOP its Senate majority while the conduct of a handful of corrupt House members gave that body's leadership the Democrats. "

Hugh Hewitt's post-mortem is thought-provoking and probably the most politically astute anaysis I have found. To read the rest, please click here.

"In the Republican Party, even those of us who are optimistic by nature and make it a point to try to see a half-empty glass as actually half-full, will find it difficult to put a smiling face on today’s election results."

To read the rest of Michael Medved's excellent political analysis, please click here.

And here's Seraphic Friend Yehudit's election day post-mortem at Kesher.

Seraphic Secret believes that the Republicans strayed from their basic principals and for this they were punished by their base. When a Republican administration expands big government, spends like drunks, well, the Conservative followers abandon and punishes their leaders. It is interesting to note that many of the Democrats who were elected are so Conservative. This is good. We are glad to see that Senator Joe Lieberman has been elected. He is a good man, an old Democrat in the mold of Scoop Jackson. His opponent, Ned Lamont, was absolutely toxic and represents everything wrong in the Democratic party and their radical leftist anti-Jewish, anti-Israel wing.

Israel Matzav says, quite convincingly, that once again, American Jews have voted against their own, and Israel's best interests.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 07:49 AM | Comments (27)

November 07, 2006

Election Day Blog Watch

Seraphic Friend Yehudit, of the invaluable blog Kesher, has a comprehensive round-up of blogs that are doing a fine job of covering today's elections.

When our children were younger, I would take them with me to vote. I always told them, "This is a great country, we choose our leaders by ballots, not by bullets or by machete."

If you have not voted, please go out and vote.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:13 PM | Comments (0)

Polls

Michelle Malkin has a nice wrap-up regarding the new breed of left-wing poll watchers.

Don't believe the polls, don't even listen to the polls, just get out and vote. And here's why you should vote for the Republicans.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:50 AM | Comments (2)

November 06, 2006

Terrorists Favor Which Party?

"Everybody has an opinion about Tuesday's midterm congressional election in the U.S. – including senior terrorist leaders interviewed by World Net Daily who say they hope Americans sweep the Democrats into power because of the party's position on withdrawing from Iraq, a move, as they see it, that ensures victory for the worldwide Islamic resistance."

To read the rest of this article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:45 AM | Comments (2)

November 03, 2006

Fear Itself

Neo-NeoCon posts a superb article about the differences between the Left and the Right in America. And this is the reason why I keep saying that the Democrats cannot be trusted with natiional security.

Karen and I wish you all a lovely and meaningful Shabbos.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:03 PM | Comments (2)

November 01, 2006

Deconstructing Kerry

John Kerry. The Democratic gift to Republicans who just keeps on giving.

This is what he said: You know education, if you make the most of it, you study hard, you do your homework and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. And if you don't, you get stuck in Iraq.

We all know what this means. It's not complicated. Nor is it open to multiple interpretations. Let the chattering classes "deconstruct" this one sentence as much as they want, but common sense will prevail -- especially for our friends in the military who are intelligent enough to know when they've been insulted.

Kerry further insults their and our intelligence by insisting that he was just making a joke about President Bush -- a joke "that was botched."

Uh-huh.

In fact, Kerry's statement is simply a logical extension of his deepest feelings and most public pronouncements about the American military. Since Viet Nam, John Kerry's views have been well documented. His belief that we have been an imperialist nation, that our soldiers have engaged in widespread war crimes, that our military is a dark machine that he is personally ashamed of are views John Kerry has proudly articulated for over thirty years.

To issue a simple and sincere apology should not be difficult, but for Senator Kerry, this option seems as far-a-way as the summit of Mount Everest.

And the reason that the mainstream media, even now, is desperately trying to downplay this flap is really quite simple:

Kerry's statement resonates; it shudders with a core truth.

His words point out once again that the Democrats have contempt for our Amerian soldiers...
That Democrats are uncomfortable in uniform and armed...
That Democrats, at heart, prefer to sing Kumbaya rather than The Halls of Montezuma.

And this is the reason Kerry's statement has rippled across the landscape and created panic in the Democratic voting precincts.

For in the end it comes down to this: the Democrats cannot be trusted with National Security. The only thing they can be counted on is this: they will raise taxes.

*******

Let us move on.

Here is a website that made me smile and sway in my seat, and I'm hoping it will do the same for you.

Ladies and gentlemen, The Beatles. Just click the individual frame and presto, you've got the original music video. Yes, here is rock and roll when it still rocked; when contemporary music still had lyrics, melody and, gasp, harmony.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:54 AM | Comments (14)

October 31, 2006

What Elephant? And Daisy May is Here!

Seraphic Friend Yehudit focuses our attention on the elephant in the room. This is something I wrote about just a little over one year ago, regarding an ugly and unrelenting bigotry in the film and television industries that is widespread and accepted.

Republicans, Conservatives, lovers of Israel, and Evangelical Christians, are forced to exist in the shadows and only come out at great peril to their careers. Most Hollywood Liberals are intolerant of any political opinions other than their own. The consequenses can be fatal to the careers of most Hollywood Republicans for they will find themselves quietly but most definitely blacklisted.

*******

Note to Seraphic readers: I'm not a tech guy. I type and hit enter. For the past few hours we've had, ahem, technical difficulties. Behind the scenes here at the vast Seraphic Secret empire (this is a vast joke) is our wonderful tech guy, Joseph.

Joseph and his lovely wife have just had a baby.
This happened at exactly the same moment that the Seraphic sidebar decided, all by itself, to disappear.

Here at Seraphic Secret we assumed that Joseph would be far too busy to attend to our little tech malfunction, and we perfectly understood. Afterall, what's a missing sidebar compared to a new baby?

But no sooner did we put things in proper perspective then, whoosh, like magic, the Seraphic sidebar reappeared.

Thank you Joseph!

Karen and I and all our readers would like to welcome baby Daisy May to the world, and most sincerely wish Joseph and his wife a huge MAZAL TOV!

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 07:55 AM | Comments (8)

October 26, 2006

Our President Speaks

Michael Barone's must-read interview with President Bush.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend: Jeremiah

President Bush is calm, reflective, and has a fine historical perspective on Iraq. Perhaps the most distressing issue to me about the current political discourse is the pure hatred directed at President Bush by members of the opposition. If only they hated the jihadists with as much ardor. President Bush is a man who does not carry out political policies based upon polls, but based on political and moral conviction. This should be supported and applauded. Instead our President is labeled a Hitler. This alone is a vile historical dimunition of true evil and should alone distance good people from the left.

I remain saddened, confused and alienated by this fast growing segment of the Democrats, the appeasement party.

In any case, I love the closing sentence of Baron's piece: "... I noticed the bust of Churchill as I was leaving the Oval Office."

Winston Churchill was the greatest man of the 20th Century.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:20 AM | Comments (0)

October 25, 2006

Blabbermouth Dems

"For all the White House's faults, however, there is no doubt in my mind that Republicans as a group are better informed, better equipped and better able to lead this country in a time of war than the Democrats. The donkey party is led by thumb-sucking demagogues in prominent positions who equate Bush with Hitler and Jim Crow, call him a liar in front of high school students and the world, fantasize about impeachment and fetishize the human rights of terrorists who want to kill me.

"Put simply: There are no grown-ups in the Democrat Party."

To read the mighty Michelle Malkin's entire article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 07:35 AM | Comments (2)

Voting Republican

"The fact is I don't trust the Democratic Party to lead this country in a time of uncertainty and war. While the Democrats say they want to refocus the nation's energy on the war on terror, they've demonstrated time and again that they oppose the most effective means of fighting terrorism.

"Democrats would interfere with the National Security Agency's ability to intercept communications between terrorists abroad and their agents in the United States. They would extend to terrorists being held overseas access to the U.S. civilian court system, which could jeopardize national security by making classified intelligence available to the terrorists and their attorneys. They would treat terrorists like common criminals rather than as combatants who are at war with us.

"Nor do I trust that Democrats would do the right thing in Iraq -- not that the current administration has had a stellar record there, either. I'm tired of debating whether we should or should not have gone into Iraq -- both Republicans and half the Democrats in the Senate voted to authorize the war in 2003. The question is what the United States should do now. It's clear the war is going very badly and that Iraq is on the verge of a civil war. Democrats have offered no clear plan except to leave Iraq as quickly as possible, regardless of the consequences."

To read Linda Chavez's entire article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 07:28 AM | Comments (2)

October 17, 2006

French Blood Libel

I just received this from Seraphic Friend Naomi Ragen.

Dear Robert:

Do you remember that article I sent you about the staging of the death of that little boy-Mohammed Al Durah -- at the beginning of the Intifada?

It was all a fake, a performance put on by Pallywood.

Well, Richard Landes who publicized this, is now testifying in a trial in France in a case brought by the journalists at French TV who faked the whole thing and now want to defend their "honor."

The only problem is, they are losing.

They didn't even show up for the trial they initiated, which continues next week.

Instead of defending themselves, they've become the defendants.

Below, Dr. Landes shares some insights about the trial and the Al Durah blood libel in an article in The New Republic.

Naomi

********

How French TV Fudged the Death of Mohammed Al Durah: Camera Obscura

by

Richard Landes

On September 30, 2000, images of 12-year-old Mohammed Al Durah and his father--cowering behind a barrel at Netzarim Junction, in the Gaza Strip--circulated globally, along with a claim that they had been the targeted victims of Israeli fire.

If Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount two days earlier had sparked riots, these images triggered all out war. The ensuing horror and outrage swept away any questions about its reliability. Indignant observers dismissed any Israeli attempt to deny responsibility as "blaming the victim."

Troubling Questions

But, by 2002, two documentaries--one German, one French--raised troubling questions. The raw footage from that day reveals pervasive staging; no evidence, certainly not the most widely circulated tape offers evidence of Israeli fire directed at the barrel, much less of Israelis targeting the pair; given the angles, the Israelis could scarcely have hit the pair at all, much less 12 times (indeed the only two bullets that hit the wall above them came from the Palestinian side, inexplicably 90 degrees off target); there was no sign of blood on the ground where the father and son reportedly bled for 20 minutes; there was no footage of an ambulance evacuation or arrival at the hospital; there was no autopsy; and none of the dozen cameraman present filmed anything that could substantiate the claim that the father and son had been hit, much less that the Israelis had targeted them.

These documentaries had limited exposure, in part thanks to France2's refusal to run the one by a sister station in Germany.

But they did spark a demonstration in Paris outside the France2 offices by citizens outraged to discover that so horrendous an image may well have been a fake.

Dreyfuss Affair Redux

The demonstrations apparently ruffled feathers. Some writers lambasted France2's coverage--most prominently Philippe Karsenty, who called for Al Durah beat chief Charles Enderlin and France2 chief Arlette Chabot to resign, and, in response, Enderlin and France2 itself--using the same law invoked against Emile Zola in the Dreyfus Affair--have accused three critics (including Arsenty) of "striking at their honor and respectability."

Now, four years later, the lawsuits are finally coming to trial in Room 17 of the Palais de Justice in Paris. The three suits (one for each defendant) come in rapid succession--September 14, October 26, and November 30--with judgments four weeks following each hearing. And, in at least two of the trials, I, a medieval historian, have been asked to testify.

Global Blood Libel

I have become involved for two reasons. First of all, I noted almost immediately that Palestinians and anti-Zionists, insisting that Israel killed the boy on purpose, used Al Durah in a way familiar to medievalists--as a blood libel.

This was the first blood libel of the twenty-first century, rendered global by cable and the Internet.

Indeed, within a week, crowds the world over shouted "We want Jewish blood!" and "Death to the Jews!".

For Europeans in particular, the libelous image came as balm to a troubled soul: "This death erases, annuls that of the little boy in the Warsaw Ghetto," intoned Europe1 editorialist Catherine Nay.

The Israelis were the new Nazis.

And second, when I saw the raw footage in the summer of 2003--especially when I saw the scene Enderlin had cut,wherein the boy (allegedly shot in the stomach, but holding his hand over his eyes) picks up his elbow and looks
around--I realized that this was not a film of a boy dying, but a clumsily staged scene.

On October 31, 2003, at the studios of France2 in Jerusalem in the company of Charles Enderlin and his Israeli cameraman, I saw the raw footage of Al Durah from the only Palestinian cameraman who actually captured the scene on film--footage France2 still refuses to release for public examination.

A Public Conspiracy

I was floored. The tapes feature a long succession of obviously faked injuries; brutal, hasty evacuation scenes; and people ducking for cover while others stand around.

One fellow grabbed his leg in agony, then, upon seeing that no one would come to carry him away, walked away without a limp.

It was stunning.

That was no cameraman's conspiracy: It was everyone--a public secret about which news consumers had no clue.

But the real shock came when I mentioned this to Enderlin, who said he trusted this cameraman.

"They always do that," he said. "It's a cultural style."

So why wouldn't they have faked Al Durah?

"They're not good enough," he said.

A year later, the higher-up at France2 made the same remark to three French journalists who also noted the pervasive staging:

"You know well that it's always like that," they said.

Mainly Useless Mainstream Press

I tried unsuccessfully to interest the mainstream press in this obvious fakery, but nobody was interested. "I don't know how much appetite there is for this material here," one person at a major studio told me.

So I made Pallywood (Palestinian Hollywood) a video essay showing the dishonesty and the still-more-astounding Western complicity in using this footage to inform us about the Middle East. Then I made a follow-up, Al Durah: The Making of an Icon (and soon, Icon of Hatred). I established a website, The Second Draft, where I posted the movies along with my evidence so that, unlike France2, people could check my sources. And now the accused have asked me to testify.

Why did they want me? In trying to dismiss my first testimony, the plaintiff's lawyer wondered, "what does he know about images? He's a medievalist." Well, I know about the power of images, of narratives, and of forgeries, and especially blood libels.

And, since my first book, Relics, Apocalypse, and the Deceits of History, was about a set of forgeries that continued to fool historians for decades even after a critic revealed them as fakes in the 1920s, I also know something about the difficulty of getting specialists to acknowledge they were duped.

A Call for Genocidal War

But this image goes beyond blood libel and anti-Semitism, beyond blackening Israel's image and white washing Palestinian violence. Al Durah became the icon not only of the Intifada, but of global jihad. Within months of the incident, bin Laden came out with a recruiting video that featured extensive Pallywood footage and highlighted Al Durah. Months later, Pakistani jihadis killed Daniel Pearl, interweaving Al Durah's image into their tape of the execution.

In 2000, anyone told of Muslim plans to Islamicize the West laughed with scorn. It was the least of Western worries. Today, some have already given up Europe for lost; others see it in the balance; and others are finally awakening with shock to the radical shift in the balance of forces.

Ultimately: France on Trial

And every aspect of l'affaire Al Durah is emblematic of why: from the Palestinian forces that staged it; to the Western mainstream press and the NGOs that presented it as news without asking hard questions (and that believed any subsequent Palestinian claims of Israelis killing children and resisted efforts at correction); to the Muslim world that turned it into an icon of hatred and a call to genocidal holy war; to the "leftist" revolutionaries who jumped on the jihad bandwagon in Durban, South Africa; to a public distressingly eager for "dirt" on Israel and unaware of the forces empowered by diffusing such poisons.

Three court trials, then--in which France2 seeks to bury any serious assessment of their coverage--are also trials of France's ability to defend her republican values against an Islamist onslaught that it seems ill-equipped to resist. And, as France goes, so goes Europe. Would France have it any other way?

The plaintiff at the first trial, on September 14, was Philippe Karsenty of Media-Ratings, the boldest of France2's critics. No one from France2 showed up. Its solitary lawyer had no witnesses, no questions for Karsenty's witnesses, and no comments about the evidence damning her clients. Her summation insisted on France2's honor and reputation, offered a letter of praise from President Jacques Chirac, and cast aspersions on the defense's witnesses.

Then the procureur de la republique (a court-appointed officer charged with assessing the case in the interests of civil society) gave her nonbinding opinion. She rebuked France2 for not addressing the evidence, for not showingtheir raw footage, and for not even showing up in court. She further admitted that, although Karsenty had impugned Enderlin's and France2's reputations, he had offered enough evidence to make such assertions a legitimate part of public discourse.

Judgment on Karsenty's case is Thursday. Next trial: October 26. So far, the best coverage--surprise!--comes from the blogosphere.

RICHARD LANDES medieval history professor at Boston University, established seconddraft.org and blogs at the augeanstables.com . He is the author of Heaven on Earth: The Varieties of the Millennial Experience (forthcoming).

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:10 PM | Comments (4)

October 16, 2006

Minutemen or the Mullahman

In the wake of the Minutemen riot, the Columbia administration responded to “security concerns” by barring the public from another College-Republican-sponsored lecture, by Whalid Shoebat, a former PLO terrorist.

To read the entire article by Mary Katherine Ham, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:49 AM | Comments (0)

October 10, 2006

The Banned GOP Ad

Recently Hollywood producer and writer David Zucker has come out as a Republican. Thank G-d another Dem has finally gone sane in Hollywood. Anyway, he produced a scathing ad for the GOP and what do they do with such gold, the dummies bury it.

Click here to watch it.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 03:52 PM | Comments (6)

Not a Nuke

From the always excellent Mil Blog Op For comes word that some sources, the ever reliable Michael Yon being one, are saying that the North Korean nuke was not a nuke at all.

Random Fact from the Hermit Kingdom: Did you know that The Dear and Beloved Leader Kim Jong Il scored six holes-in-one the very first time he played golf? Yup, that's what happened. You know how we know? He said so! And if anyone in North Korea says otherwise, well, they cease to exist. Slowly and horribly!

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:14 PM | Comments (5)

October 09, 2006

North Korean Suitcase Nuke?

North Korea is a Stalinist state, an entire country that is one huge gulag. The average citizen is five inches shorter than the South Korean. So far, this gangster regime has murdered over two-million of its own people through man-made famines.

It has been whispered that babies who are born with physical or mental defects are killed at birth.

The North Korean government, like the Iranian regime, is counterfeiting American currency; this state sponsored criminal enterprise must be shut down as quickly as possible.

Appeasement never works. Not with North Korea. Not with Iran. Not with the Palestinians. Appeasement only emboldens evil people and evil regimes.

This also underscores the fact that Iran must be dealt with now, before they have a nuclear device, and by this I do not mean sitting down and talking with them. Diplomacy can be fatal for it legitimizes rogue regimes and gives them endless and valuable time to build their machines for genocide.

This is extremely serious. RJA

Was North Korea testing a suitcase nuke?

The US has detected a second subkiloton nuclear blast on the Korean Peninsula, according to the Australian, in what is labed "breaking news".

From correspondents in Washington October 10, 2006 US intelligence has detected an explosion of less than one kilotonne in magnitude in North Korea but has not been able to determine whether it was nuclear or not, a senior intelligence official said.

The official, who asked not to be identified, said that first-time nuclear tests historically have been in the several kilotonne range.

“We are aware that there was a sub-kilotonne explosion in North Korea,” said the official. “We have not been able to determine at this point whether it was in fact nuclear.”

Read more here

It's also a good time to re-read Robert D. Kaplan's amazing article When North Korea Falls, which The Atlantic Monthly published in September.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 03:11 PM | Comments (11)

October 06, 2006

Riot at Columbia U

Ah, Columbia University. Where free speech is welcome--as long as it's PC and as far left as you can get. Check out this disgraceful story, where a bunch of fascist thugs started a riot when the founder of the Minutemen was attacked as he tried to speak at this most ivory of towers.

Click here for the link.

Do take note in the video of the banner in English and Arabic.

So, leftist tyrant brats and Islamic jihadist thugs have found common cause -- illegal immigration.

Hmm, I wonder why?

Do you think maybe it has something to do with the ease of getting jihadists across the Mexican border.
Or maybe a nasty dirty bomb that can vaporize most of Los Angeles.

Nah, that's way too creepy.

As the left keeps reassuring us, jihad really means, self-improvement.

Uh-huh.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:02 AM | Comments (12)

September 29, 2006

Democrats for Throat-Slitters

Yesterday, a majority of Senate Democrats voted against a measure on the interrogations and trials of terrorism suspects.

Only twelve Democrats crossed party lines to vote for the bill.

The position of the Democrats is clear. They see the war on terror as a conventional law enforcement matter, to be handled by the civil courts, with habeus corpus extended to non-citizens, to men who do not wear uniforms, men who do not wear dog-tags, men who do not have military serial numbers, men who are sworn to slaughter Jews and Christians, men who decapitate and slit the throats of their kidnapped victims.

The Republicans see the war on terror as a long struggle that will call for sacrifice and yes, ruthlessness.

The Democrats tell us that we are less safe since 9-11, yet the mainland has not been attacked in these five years so one can dismiss their charges as opportunistic political hyperbole.

Terrorism is here to stay, and like any evil it can only be stamped out when it is named, confronted and fought with unrelenting resolve.

The Republicans are by no means perfect. But at least they are willing to fight. Republicans understand that evil exists.

Democrats do not believe in evil, they believe in "seeking the root causes of terrorism," and inevitably the root cause, for the majority of Democrats, is American foreign policy.

Such a party cannot be trusted with national security.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:14 PM | Comments (1)

Breeding More Terrorists

The Democrats, cherry-picking form the NIE report, leaked by the ever reliably seditious NY Times, tell us over and over again that our presence in Iraq is creating more jihadists. I suppose the Democrats are saying that if we had not liberated Iraq from the Stalinist regime of Saddam Hussein, there would be far less jihadists.

This after 9-11.

But let's just say that there are more jihadists now. And that they are pouring into Iraq. Well, that's good. We've got them in one corner of the world where we can fight and annihilate them--and they are not in, say New York, Los Angeles, or Kansas.

But on a deeper lever, let me speak to this notion of us "creating terrorists."

This is a disgusting and sick ethical inversion. And it's the reason I despise most Liberals as moral fools.

By this very logic one would have to say that the existence of Israel has spawned the modern age of Arab terrorism, and all we have to do is abandon Israel, let genocide run its course, and then we will all sing Kumbaya with our peace loving jihadist brothers and sisters.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:08 AM | Comments (6)

September 26, 2006

Moral Confusion

"Take The New York Times editorial page, for example. It is written by people who condemn Pius for his alleged silence and now condemn Benedict for not being quiet. According to the Times, Benedict will only create more anti-Western Muslim violence. But that was exactly the excuse defenders of Pius XII so often offered for why Pius XII did not speak out more forcefully -- that he was afraid it would only engender more Nazi violence. Yet Pius's critics have (correctly) dismissed that excuse out of hand."

To read Dennis Prager's entire article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:41 AM | Comments (0)

September 22, 2006

The Democratic Party and Jews

"The Democratic Party has been a congenial political home for many American Jews since the era of FDR. The party welcomed them into its ranks (along with many blacks and urban dwellers) and its programs comported well with many values Jews cherish. The Party was also seen as one that had offered help to the doomed Jews of Europe, opposed prejudice, and supported the fledgling state of Israel from enemies that boasted of its plans to destroy the state.

"Conversely, the Republican Party was perceived to be a WASP enclave, isolationist in its outlook, and weak on support for Israel (though George C. Marshall under the Truman Administration advocated abandoning Israel to the tender mercies of its Arab neighbors).

"However, these views are now anachronistic and need to be revisited."

To read the rest of this important and timely article from The American Thinker, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:55 AM | Comments (2)

Intimidation

"How dare you say Islam is a violent religion? I'll kill you for it'' is not exactly the best way to go about refuting the charge. But of course, refuting is not the point here. The point is intimidation.

To read the rest of Charles Krauthammer's splendid article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:06 AM | Comments (0)

September 21, 2006

The Dysfunctional Thug from the Dysfunctional Country

"Hugo Chavez’s bizarre anti-American rant at the United Nations has got Americans asking, “What makes Chavez tick?”

"To understand him, stop thinking of oil-producing Venezuela as a Latin American country. Think of it as a dysfunctional Middle Eastern petro-state. Doing that is the key to understanding Chavez and Venezuela."

To read the rest of Seraphic Friend David Paulin's splendid analysis, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 07:59 AM | Comments (4)

September 20, 2006

When North Korea Falls

An extremely important article about the world's most repressive Stalinist style regime. A must read. RJA

The furor over Kim Jong Il’s missile tests and nuclear brinksmanship obscures the real threat: the prospect of North Korea’s catastrophic collapse. How the regime ends could determine the balance of power in Asia for decades. The likely winner? China

by Robert D. Kaplan

The abbreviation for North Korea used by American military officers says it all: KFR, the Kim Family Regime. It is a regime whose demonization by the American media and policy makers has obscured some vital facts. North Korea’s founder, Kim Il Sung, was not merely a dreary Stalinist tyrant. As defectors from his country will tell you, he was also a popular anti-Japanese guerrilla leader in the mold of Enver Hoxha, the Stalinist tyrant of Albania who led his countrymen in a successful insurgency against the Nazis. Nor is his son Kim Jong Il anything like the childish psychopath parodied in the film Team America: World Police. It’s true that Kim Jong Il was once a playboy. But he has evolved into a canny operator. Andrei Lankov, a professor of history at South Korea’s Kookmin University, in Seoul, says that under different circumstances Kim might have actually become the successful Hollywood film producer that regime propaganda claims he already is.

Kim Jong Il’s succession was aided by the link that his father had established in the North Korean mind between the Kim Family Regime and the Choson Dynasty, which ruled the Korean peninsula for 500 years, starting in the late fourteenth century. Expertly tutored by his father, Kim consolidated power and manipulated the Chinese, the Americans, and the South Koreans into subsidizing him throughout the 1990s. And Kim is hardly impulsive: he has the equivalent of think tanks studying how best to respond to potential attacks from the United States and South Korea—attacks that themselves would be reactions to crises cleverly instigated by the North Korean government in Pyongyang. “The regime constitutes an extremely rational bunch of killers,” Lankov says.

Yet for all Kim’s canniness, there is evidence that he may be losing his edge. And that may be reason to worry: totalitarian regimes close to demise are apt to get panicky and do rash things. The weaker North Korea gets, the more dangerous it becomes. The question that should be of greatest concern to the U.S. military in the Pacific—and the question that will likely determine the global balance of power in Asia for generations—is, What happens when North Korea collapses?

The Nightmare After Iraq

On the Korean peninsula, the Cold War has never ended. On the somber, seaweed-toned border dividing the two Koreas, amid the cries of egrets and Manchurian cranes, I observed South Korean soldiers standing frozen in tae kwon do ready positions, their fists clenched and forearms tightened, staring into the faces of their North Korean counterparts. Each side picks its tallest, most intimidating soldiers for the task (they are still short by American standards).

In the immediate aftermath of the Korean War, the South raised a 328-foot flagpole; the North responded with a 525-foot pole, then put a flag on it whose dry weight is 595 pounds. The North built a two-story building in the Joint Security Area at Panmunjom; the South built a three-story one. The North then added another story to its building. “The land of one-upmanship,” is how one U.S. Army sergeant describes the DMZ, or demilitarized zone. The two sides once held a meeting in Panmunjom that went on for eleven hours. Because there was no formal agreement about when to take a bathroom break, neither side budged. The meeting became known as the “Battle of the Bladders.”

In other divided countries of the twentieth century—Vietnam, Germany, Yemen—the forces of unity ultimately triumphed. But history suggests that unification does not happen through a calibrated political process in which the interests of all sides are respected. Rather, it tends to happen through a cataclysm of events that, piles of white papers and war-gaming exercises notwithstanding, catches experts by surprise.

Given that North Korea’s army of 1.2 million soldiers has been increasingly deployed toward the South Korean border, the Korean peninsula looms as potentially the next American military nightmare. In 1980, 40 percent of North Korean combat forces were deployed south of Pyongyang near the DMZ; by 2003, more than 70 percent were. As the saying goes among American soldiers, “There is no peacetime in the ROK.” (ROK, pronounced “rock,” is militaryspeak for the Republic of Korea.) One has merely to observe the Patriot missile batteries, the reinforced concrete hangars, and the blast barriers at the U.S. Air Force bases at Osan and Kunsan, south of Seoul—which are as heavily fortified as any bases in Iraq—to be aware of this. A marine in Okinawa told me, “North Korea is not some third-rate, Middle Eastern conventional army. These brainwashed Asians—as he crudely put it—”will stand and fight.” American soldiers in Korea refer to the fighting on the peninsula between 1950 and 1953 as “the first Korean War.” The implicit assumption is that there will be a second.

This helps explain why Korea may be the most dismal place in the world for U.S. troops to be deployed—worse, in some ways, than Iraq. While I traveled on the peninsula, numerous members of the combat-arms community, both air and infantry, told me that they would rather be in Iraq or Afghanistan than in Korea, which constitutes the worst of all military worlds. Soldiers and airmen often live on a grueling wartime schedule, with constant drills, and yet they also have to put up with the official folderol that is part of all peacetime bases—the saluting and inspections that fall by the wayside in war zones, where the only thing that matters is how well you fight. The weather on the peninsula is lousy, too: the winds charging down from Siberia make the winters unbearably frigid, and the monsoons coming off the Pacific Ocean make the summers hot and humid. The dust blowing in from the Gobi Desert doesn’t help.

The threat from north of the DMZ is formidable. North Korea boasts 100,000 well-trained special-operations forces and one of the world’s largest biological and chemical arsenals. It has stockpiles of anthrax, cholera, and plague, as well as eight industrial facilities for producing chemical agents—any of which could be launched at Seoul by the army’s conventional artillery. If the governing infrastructure in Pyongyang were to unravel, the result could be widespread lawlessness (compounded by the guerrilla mentality of the Kim Family Regime’s armed forces), as well as mass migration out of and within North Korea. In short, North Korea’s potential for anarchy is equal to that of Iraq, and the potential for the deployment of weapons of mass destruction—either during or after pre-collapse fighting—is far greater.

For a harbinger of the kind of chaos that looms on the peninsula consider Albania, which was for some years the most anarchic country in post-Communist Eastern Europe, save for war-torn Yugoslavia. On a visit to Albania before the Stalinist regime there finally collapsed, I saw vicious gangs of boys as young as eight harassing people. North Korea is reportedly plagued by the same phenomenon outside of its showcase capital. That may be an indication of what lies ahead. In fact, what terrifies South Koreans more than North Korean missiles is North Korean refugees pouring south. The Chinese, for their part, have nightmare visions of millions of North Korean refugees heading north over the Yalu River into Manchuria.

Obviously, it would be reckless not to worry about North Korea’s missile and WMD technologies. In August, there were reports yet again that Kim Jong Il was preparing an underground nuclear test. And the North test fired seven missiles in July. According to U.S. data, three of the missiles were Scud-Cs, and three were No-dong-As with ranges of 300 to 1,000 miles; all were capable of carrying a nuclear warhead. (Whether North Korea has such warheads is not definitively known, but it is widely believed to have in the neighborhood of ten—and the KFR certainly has the materials and technological know-how to build them.) The third type of missile, a Taep’o-dong-2, has a range of 2,300 to 9,300 miles, which means it could conceivably hit the continental United States. Though the Taep’o-dong-2 failed after takeoff during the recent testing, it did so at the point of maximum dynamic pressure—the same point where the space shuttle Challenger exploded, and the moment when things are most likely to go wrong. So this is likely not an insoluble problem for the KFR.

The Seven Stages of Collapse

Kim Jong Il’s compulsion to demonstrate his missile prowess is a sign of his weakness. Contrary to popular perception in the United States, Kim doesn’t stay up at night worrying about what the Americans might do to him; it’s not North Korea’s weakness relative to the United States that preoccupies him. Rather, if he does stay up late worrying, it’s about China. He knows the Chinese have always had a greater interest in North Korea’s geography—with its additional outlets to the sea close to Russia—than they have in the long-term survival of his regime. (Like us, even as they want the regime to survive, the Chinese have plans for the northern half of the Korean peninsula that do not include the “Dear Leader.”) One of Kim’s main goals in so aggressively displaying North Korea’s missile capacity is to compel the United States to deal directly with him, thereby making his otherwise weakening state seem stronger. And the stronger Pyongyang appears to be, the better off it is in its crucial dealings with Beijing, which are what really matter to Kim.

To Kim’s sure dismay, the American response to his recent missile tests was a shrug. President George W. Bush dispatched Christopher Hill, his assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific affairs, to the region rather than Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. I was in South Korea during the missile firings, and there were few signs of alert on any of the U.S. bases in Korea. Pilots in several fighter squadrons were told not to drink too much on their days off, in case they had to be called in, but that was about the extent of it.

What should concentrate the minds of American strategists is not Kim’s missiles per se but rather what his decision to launch them says about the stability of his regime. Middle- and upper-middle-level U.S. officers based in South Korea and Japan are planning for a meltdown of North Korea that, within days or even hours of its occurrence, could present the world—meaning, really, the American military—with the greatest stabilization operation since the end of World War II. “It could be the mother of all humanitarian relief operations,” Army Special Forces Colonel David Maxwell told me. On one day, a semi-starving population of 23 million people would be Kim Jong Il’s responsibility; on the next, it would be the U.S. military’s, which would have to work out an arrangement with the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (among others) about how to manage the crisis.

Fortunately, the demise of North Korea is more likely to be drawn out. Robert Collins, a retired Army master sergeant and now a civilian area expert for the American military in South Korea, outlined for me seven phases of collapse in the North:

Phase One: resource depletion;

Phase Two: the failure to maintain infrastructure around the country because of resource depletion;

Phase Three: the rise of independent fiefs informally controlled by local party apparatchiks or warlords, along with widespread corruption to circumvent a failing central government;

Phase Four: the attempted suppression of these fiefs by the KFR once it feels that they have become powerful enough;

Phase Five: active resistance against the central government;

Phase Six: the fracture of the regime; and

Phase Seven: the formation of new national leadership.

North Korea probably reached Phase Four in the mid-1990s, but was saved by subsidies from China and South Korea, as well as by famine aid from the United States. It has now gone back to Phase Three.

Kim Jong Il learned a powerful lesson by watching the fall of the Ceausescu Family Regime, in Romania: Take utter and complete control of the military. And so he has. The KFR now rules through the army. There have been only individual defections of North Korean soldiers to the South. Even small, unit-level defections—which would indicate that soldiers are talking to one another and are no longer afraid of exposure by comrades—have not yet occurred. One defector from the North’s special-operations forces told me that soldiers in the ranks are afraid to discuss politics with one another.

The North Korean People’s Army is simply too big to be kept happy and well fed, so the regime concentrates on keeping the elite units comfortable. The defector I spoke to—a scout swimmer—told me that while the special-operations forces live well, the extreme poverty of conventional soldiers would make their loyalty to Kim Jong Il in a difficult war questionable. Would they fight to defend the KFR if there were an unforeseen rebellion? The Romanian example suggests that it depends on the circumstances: when workers revolted in 1987 in Brasov, the Romanian military crushed them; when ethnic Hungarians did so two years later in Timisoara, the military deserted the regime.

How to Prevent Another Iraq

Stephen Bradner, a civilian expert on the region and an adviser to the military in South Korea, has thought a lot about the tactical and operational problems an unraveling North Korean state would present. So has Colonel Maxwell, the chief of staff of U.S. Special Operations in South Korea. “The regime in Pyongyang could collapse without necessarily its army corps and brigades collapsing,” Maxwell says. “So we might have to mount a relief operation at the same time that we’d be conducting combat ops. If there is anybody in the UN who thinks it will just be a matter of feeding people, they’re smoking dope.”

Maxwell has conducted similar operations before: he was the commander of a U.S. Army Special Forces battalion that landed on Basilan Island, in the southern Philippines, in early 2002, part of a mission that combined humanitarian assistance with counterinsurgency operations against Jemaah Islamiyah and the Abu Sayyaf Group, two terrorist organizations. But the Korean peninsula presents a far vaster and more difficult challenge. “The situation in the North could become so messy and ambiguous,” Maxwell says, “that the collapse of the chain of command of the KFR could be more dangerous than the preservation of it, particularly when one considers control over WMD.”

In order to prevent a debacle of the sort that occurred in Iraq—but with potentially deadlier consequences, because of the free-floating WMD—a successful relief operation would require making contacts with KFR generals and various factions of the former North Korean military, who would be vying for control in different regions. If the generals were not absorbed into the operational command structure of the occupying force, Maxwell says, they might form the basis of an insurgency. The Chinese, who have connections inside the North Korean military, would be best positioned to make these contacts—but the role of U.S. Army Special Forces in this effort might be substantial. Green Berets and the CIA would be among the first in, much like in Afghanistan in 2001.

Obviously, the United States could not unilaterally insert troops into a dissolved North Korea. It would likely be a four-power intervention force—the United States, China, South Korea, and Russia—officially sanctioned by the United Nations. Japan would be kept out (though all parties would gladly accept Japanese money for the endeavor).

Although Japan’s proximity to the peninsula gives it the most to fear from reunification, Korean hatred of the Japanese makes participation of Japanese troops in an intervention force unlikely. Between 1910 and 1945, Japan brutally occupied not only Korea but parts of China too, and it defeated Russia on land and at sea in the early twentieth century. Tokyo may have more reason than any other government for wanting to put boots on the ground in a collapsed North Korea, but it won’t be able to, because both China and South Korea would fight tooth and nail to prevent it from doing so.

Whereas Japan’s strategic position would be dramatically weakened by a collapsed North Korean state, China would eventually benefit. A post-KFR Korean peninsula could be more or less under Seoul’s control—and China is now South Korea’s biggest trading partner. Driving along the coast, all I saw at South Korean ports were Chinese ships.

Other factors also work in Beijing’s favor. China harbors thousands of North Korean defectors that it would send back after a collapse, in order to build a favorable political base for China’s gradual economic takeover of the Tumen River region—the northeast Asian river valley where China, Russia, and North Korea intersect, with good port facilities on the Pacific. De facto control of a future Tumen Prosperity Sphere would bolster China’s fiscal strength, helping it to do economic battle with the United States and Japan. If China’s troops could carve out a buffer zone in the part of North Korea near Manchuria—where China is now developing massive infrastructure projects, such as roads and ports—Beijing might then sanction the installation of an international coalition elsewhere in the North.

Russia’s weakness in the Far East is demonstrated by its failure to prevent the creeping demographic conquest of its eastern territories by ethnic Chinese. It will be truculent in guarding its interests on the Korean peninsula. And Russia does have a historical legacy here: North Korea was originally a Soviet creation and client state. Keeping Russian troops out of Korea would probably be more trouble for the other powers than letting some in.

Of course, South Korea would bear the brunt of the economic and social disruption in returning the peninsula to normalcy. No official will say this out loud, but South Korea—along with every other country in the region—has little interest in reunification, unless it were to happen gradually over years or decades. The best outcome would be a South Korean protectorate in much of the North, officially under an international trusteeship, that would keep the two Koreas functionally separate for a significant period of time. This would allow each country time to prepare for a unified Korean state, without the attendant chaos.

Following the Communist regime’s collapse, the early stabilization of the North could fall unofficially to the U.S. Pacific Command (PACOM) and U.S. Forces Korea (which is a semiautonomous subcommand of PACOM), also wearing blue UN helmets. But while the U.S. military would have operational responsibility, it would not have sole control. It would have to lead an unwieldy regional coalition that would need to deploy rapidly in order to stabilize the North and deliver humanitarian assistance. A successful relief operation in North Korea in the weeks following the regime’s collapse could mean the difference between anarchy and prosperity on the peninsula for years to come.

If North Korea Attacks

But what if rather than simply unraveling, the North launched a surprise attack on the South? This is probably less likely to happen now than it was, say, two decades ago, when Kim Il Sung commanded a stronger state and the South Korean armed forces were less mature. But Colonel Maxwell and others are preparing for this possibility.

Simply driving through Seoul, one of the world’s great and congested megacities, makes it clear that a conventional infantry attack on South Korea’s capital is something that not even a fool would contemplate. So if the North were to attack, it would likely resort instead to a low-grade demonstration of “shock and awe,” using its 13,000 artillery pieces and multiple-rocket launchers to fire more than 300,000 shells per hour on the South Korean capital, where close to half the nation’s 49 million people live. The widespread havoc this would cause would be amplified by North Korean special-operations forces, which would infiltrate the South to sabotage water plants and train and bus terminals. Meanwhile, the North Korean People’s Army would march on the city of Uijongbu, north of Seoul, from which it could cross over the Han River and bypass Seoul from the east.

But this strategy would fail. While American A-10 Warthogs, F-16 Vipers, and other aircraft would destroy enemy missile batteries and kill many North Korean troops inside South Korea, submarine-launched missiles and B-2 Spirit bombers sent from Guam and Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri would take out strategic assets inside North Korea. In the meantime, the South Korean army would quickly occupy the transport hubs, while unleashing its own divisions and special-operations forces on the marauding People’s Army. The KFR knows this; thus any such invasion would have to be the act of a regime in the latter phases of disintegration. North Korea’s lone hope would be that the hourly carnage it could produce—in the time between the first artillery barrage on Seoul and the beginning of a robust military response by South Korea and the United States—would lead the South Korean left, abetted by the United Nations and elements of the global media, to cry out for diplomacy and a negotiated settlement as an alternative to violence.

And there is no question: the violence would be horrific. Iraq and Afghanistan would look clean by comparison. A South Korea filled with North Korean troops would be (in military parlance) a “target-rich environment,” in which the good guys and the bad guys would always be close to each other. “Gnarly chaos,” is how one F-16 Viper pilot described it to me. “The ultimate fog of war.” The battlefield would be made more confusing by the serious language barrier that exists between American pilots and South Korean JTACs, or Joint Tactical Air Controllers, who would have to guide the Americans to many of their targets. A-10 and F-16 pilots in South Korea have complained to me that this weak link in the bilateral military relationship would drive up the instances of friendly-fire and collateral civilian deaths—on which the media undoubtedly would then concentrate. As part of a deal to halt the bloodbath, members of the KFR might be able to negotiate their own post-regime survival.

What Now, Lieutenant?

But middle and upper-middle levels of the American military worry less about an indiscriminate artillery attack on the South than about a very discriminate one. My sources feared that in the aftermath of the KFR’s missile launches in July, the Bush administration might actually have been foolish enough to react militarily—which might have been exactly what Kim Jong Il was hoping for, since it would have allowed him to achieve a primary strategic goal: splitting the alliance between South Korea and the United States. How would that happen? After the United States responded in a targeted fashion to the missile launches or some other future outrage, the North would initiate an intensive five- or ten- minute-long artillery barrage on Seoul, killing some Americans and South Koreans near Yongsan Garrison (”Dragon Mountain”), the American military’s Green Zone in the heart of the city. Then the North would simply stop. And after the shell fire halted, the proverbial question among American officers in a quandary would arise: What now, Lieutenant?

Politically speaking, we would be trumped. The South Korean left—which has been made powerful by an intrusively large American troop presence and by decades of manipulation by the North—would blame the United States for the carnage in Seoul, pointing out that it had been provoked by the Americans’ targeted strike against North Korea. The United Nations and the global media would subtly blame Washington for the crisis—and call not so subtly for peace talks. With that, the KFR would get a new lease on life, with more aid forthcoming from the international community to keep it afloat.

Which is why some of the military and civilian experts I spoke with argue for economic warfare against the North. Stop helping the regime with humanitarian aid, they say. The North Korean population has been on the brink of starvation for decades. The forests are denuded. People are eating tree bark. Stop prolonging the agony. Help the KFR collapse.

Of course, one problem with this strategy is that it could end up making North Korea’s direst military options more likely; as noted, regimes like this one, in the latter stages of collapse, are apt to behave irresponsibly, possibly resorting to WMD. Another problem is that we can’t do much to squeeze the North Koreans economically; it’s China, not the United States, that is really keeping the regime alive. The Chinese are already in the process of gaining operational control over anything in North Korea that has strategic economic and military value: mines, railways, and so on. Thus, any soft landing for the KFR would more likely be orchestrated by Beijing than by Washington, even though the Chinese might not mind saddling the Americans with the short-term military responsibility of stabilizing a collapsed North Korea.

After Reunification

I f the peninsula could be stabilized after the fall of the KFR, this Greater Korea would have an instant, undisputed enemy: Japan. Any Korean politician would be able to stand up in parliament and get political mileage out of an anti-Japanese tirade. The Japanese know this, and it’s helping fuel their remilitarization. (The Japanese navy, in particular, has been emphasizing the latest diesel submarines and Aegis destroyers.) In July, there was a saber-rattling contest between Tokyo and Seoul over disputed islets that South Koreans call Tokdo and the Japanese Takeshima, in what the Koreans refer to as the East Sea and the Japanese the Sea of Japan. Harsh words were exchanged after South Korea sent a survey ship to the area. The United States has a history of underestimating historical-ethnic disputes: in the 1980s, it paid insufficient attention to ethnic tensions in Yugoslavia; more recently, it mistakenly downplayed Sunni-Shiite tensions in Iraq. It should not make the same mistake in Asia.

Here it is useful to review Korean history. In the medieval era, the Koreans fought wars against Chinese dynasties like the Sui and the Tang. But later on, following the rise to power of Korea’s own Choson Dynasty, in 1392, Japan gradually caught up with China as Korea’s principal adversary. There was a brutal Japanese violation of the peninsula at the end of the sixteenth century, culminating in an orgy of rape and murder, and a savage occupation at the beginning of the twentieth, which ended only with the Soviet and American conquests. (The Japanese effect on the peninsula has not been all negative: South Koreans may have trouble admitting it, but Japanese colonialism in the early twentieth century nearly doubled the life expectancy of the average Korean.)

Reunification would provide at least one benefit to Japan. As Park Syung Je, an analyst at the Asia Strategy Institute in Seoul, explained to me, a unified Greater Korea might serve to balance against an even more significant threat to Japan: a rising China. But this Greater Korea would still be a linchpin of China’s twenty-first-century Asian economic-prosperity sphere, a more benign version of Imperial Japan’s Co- Prosperity Sphere of the 1940s. America could be pushed to the margins. Although Korean businessmen would resist economic domination by China, lingering anti-Americanism in South Korea might outweigh that resistance—especially once the generation that still remembers the sacrifices of American servicemen during the 1950s disappears entirely. America’s large troop presence will have granted Korea a free society, just as a similar American presence helped to make Germany a free society. But younger generations of South Koreans may remember U.S. troops only negatively—and what is more indelibly inscribed in the Korean national memory is America’s support for the Japanese occupation of Korea following the Russo-Japanese War of 1904 and 1905. (This was in exchange for Imperial Japan’s support of America’s occupation of the Philippines a few years earlier.)

Greater Korea’s troubled relationship with China may ultimately be determined by what America does, and specifically by the degree to which the United States can get Japan to recognize its war guilt. If Washington continues to maintain a military alliance with Tokyo without Japan’s publicly coming to terms with its past, Greater Korea will move psychologically toward China. President Bush’s recent love fest with Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi at Graceland may have played well in the United States, but it was seen as an insult in South Korea because of Koizumi’s earlier visit to the Yasukuni Shrine, which honors the Japanese war dead—including war criminals. If the United States continues to treat Japan as a golden stepchild, then China and its implicit ally, Greater Korea, will have a tense relationship with Japan and its implicit allies, the United States and India. But because of its own manifold business interests in China, America could only balance against China very delicately.

China Versus America

With so many complex and subtle interests to weigh here, what should the American strategy be over the long term? South Korean army Colonel Chung Kyung Yung, a professor at Seoul’s National Defense University, says that after the KFR collapses and the North is stabilized, the wisest thing for the United States to do would be to keep 10,000 troops or so on the peninsula. Such a contingent, he told me, would serve as a statement that the United States is not abandoning Korea to a militarily resurgent Japan. The best way to stabilize Asia, Chung emphasizes, would be to prevent Greater Korea—which would be fragile in the period after the North’s collapse—from becoming a source of contention between China and Japan. Peter Beck, the director of the International Crisis Group’s North East Asia Project, agrees. “Because the United States is the furthest away of all these powers,” he told me, “it should be perceived as the least dangerous—the one power without territorial ambitions.”

Unfortunately, South Korean politics might make it more difficult to keep American troops on the peninsula long term. Yes, it’s true that of the few prominent statues of foreigners in the country, two are of Americans (General Douglas MacArthur and General James Van Fleet, the father of the South Korean armed forces). And it is also true that, because of late-nineteenth-century missionary activity, American-style Protestantism is practically the dominant religion in South Korea. (If North Korea collapses, expect Christian evangelism to quickly replace the Communist regime’s Juche ethos of self-reliance: Pyongyang was once the “Jerusalem of Asia” for missionaries.) And yet despite all this, the South Koreans have largely convinced themselves that they need to be as worried about the Americans as they are about the Chinese—just as they have convinced themselves that they should be as afraid of the Japanese as they are of the North Koreans. The fact is that South Koreans may not want any American troops in their country.

Already the American air and ground troops who would defend the South if the KFR were to attack are facing increasing restrictions on their training, because of South Korean political pressures. The A-10 squadron that would be flying nonstop sorties near the DMZ in the event of a war had to train in Thailand this past winter, because of limitations Seoul placed on its flight patterns. This is all part of yet another frustration that U.S. troops in South Korea must endure: having to be on a war footing in order to defend a government that wants to be defended but publicly pretends otherwise.

The truth is, many South Koreans have an interest in the perpetuation of the Kim Family Regime, or something like it, since the KFR’s demise would usher in a period of economic sacrifice that nobody in South Korea is prepared for. A long-standing commitment by the American military has allowed the country to evolve into a materialistic society. Few South Koreans have any interest in the disruption the collapse of the KFR would produce.

Meanwhile, China’s infrastructure investments are already laying the groundwork for a Tibet-like buffer state in much of North Korea, to be ruled indirectly through Beijing’s Korean cronies once the KFR unravels. This buffer state will be less oppressive than the morbid, crushing tyranny it will replace. So from the point of view of the average South Korean, the Chinese look to be offering a better deal than the Americans, whose plan for a free and democratic unified peninsula would require South Korean taxpayers to pay much of the cost. The more that Washington thinks narrowly in terms of a democratic Korean peninsula, the more Beijing has the potential to lock the United States out of it. For there is a yawning distance between the Stalinist KFR tyranny and a stable, Western-style democracy: in between these extremes lie several categories of mixed regimes and benign dictatorships, any of which might offer the North Koreans far more stability as a transition mechanism than anything the United States might be able to provide. No one should forget that South Korea’s prosperity and state cohesion were achieved not under a purely democratic government but under Park Chung Hee’s benign dictatorship of the 1960s and ’70s. Furthermore, North Koreans, who were never ruled by the British, have even less historical experience with democracy than Iraqis. Ultimately, victory on the Korean peninsula will go to the side with the most indirect and nuanced strategy.

The long-term success of America’s basic policy on the peninsula hinges on the willingness of South Koreans to make a significant sacrifice, at some point, for the sake of freedom in the North. But sacrifice is not a word that voters in free and prosperous societies tend to like. If voters in Western-style democracies are good at anything, it’s rationalizing their own selfishness—and it may turn out that the authoritarian Chinese understand the voters of South Korea’s free and democratic society better than we do. If that’s the case, there may never actually be a Greater Korea in the way that we imagine it. Rather, the North’s demise will be carefully managed by Beijing in such a way that the country will go from being a rogue nation to a de facto satellite of the Middle Kingdom—but one with sufficient contact with the South that the Korean yearning for a measure of reunification will be satisfied.

Keep in mind that Asia—largely because it is so economically dynamic—is politically and militarily volatile. Its alliance structures are not nearly as developed as those in Europe, which has NATO and the European Union. Conflicting nationalisms are expressed in Asia through more than just soccer games. Thus, the question of whether it’s to be the American or the Chinese vision of North Korea’s future that gets realized may hinge on political-military decisions made in the midst of an opaque and confusing crisis.
North Korea and the Future of Asia

Before I left Seoul, I met with a local military legend. Retired General Paik Sun Yup, now eighty-six years old, was the 1st Infantry Division commander during the Korean War and worked hand in hand with General MacArthur. When we spoke, Paik insisted that crisis-driven political-military decisions here will ultimately determine the balance of power throughout Asia, the most important region for the world’s economy. “This peninsula is the pivot,” he said.

When I reflected on Paik’s words later, it occurred to me that while the United States is in its fourth year of a war in Iraq, it has been on a war footing in Korea for fifty-six years now. More than ten times as many Americans have been killed on the Korean peninsula as in Mesopotamia. Most Americans hope and expect that we will withdraw from Iraq within a few years—yet we still have 32,000 troops in South Korea, more than half a century after the armistice. Korea provides a sense of America’s daunting, imperial-like burdens.

But South Korea also provides a lesson in what can be accomplished with patience and dogged persistence. The drive from the airport at Inchon to downtown Seoul goes through the heart of a former urban war zone. South Korea’s capital was taken and retaken four times in some of the most intense fighting of the Korean War. Korean men and women who lived through that time will always be grateful for what retired U.S. Army Colonel Robert Killebrew has called American “stick-to-itiveness,” without which we would have little hope of remaining a great power.

In the heart of Seoul lies Yongsan Garrison, a leafy, fortified Little America, guarded and surrounded by high walls. Inside these 630 acres, which closely resemble the Panama Canal Zone before the Americans gave it up, are 8,000 American military and diplomatic personnel in manicured suburban homes surrounded by neatly clipped hedges and backyard barbecue grills. I drove by a high school, baseball and football fields, a driving range, a hospital, a massive commissary, a bowling alley, and restaurants. U.S. Forces Korea and its attendant bureaucracies are located in redbrick buildings that the Americans inherited in 1945 from the Japanese occupiers. Korea is so substantial a military commitment for us that it merits its own, semiautonomous subcommand of PACOM—just as Iraq, unofficially anyway, merits its own four-star subcommand of CENTCOM.

The United States hopes to complete a troop drawdown in South Korea in 2008. Having moved into Yongsan Garrison when Korea’s future seemed highly uncertain, American troops plan to give up this prime downtown real estate and relocate to Camp Humphreys, in Pyongtaek, thirty miles to the south. The number of ground troops will drop to 25,000, and will essentially comprise a skeleton of logistical support shops, which would be able to acquire muscles and tendons in the form of a large invasion force in the event of a war or a regime collapse that necessitated a military intervention.

Patience and dogged persistence are heroic attributes. But while military units can be expected to be heroic, one should not expect a home front to be forever so. And while in the fullness of time patience and dogged persistence can breed success, it is the kind of success that does not necessarily reward the victor but, rather, the player best able to take advantage of the new situation. It is far too early to tell who ultimately will benefit from a stable and prosperous Mesopotamia, if one should ever emerge. But in the case of Korea, it looks like it will be the Chinese.

Originally published in The Atlantic Monthly.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 04:54 PM | Comments (4)

Fear & Madness

Last night Karen told me that for the first time in her life she actually fears for the future of our children. I agreed with her.

After listening to the thug from Iran tell us that black is white and white is black, and then listening to the tyrants and appeasers in the UN applaud his double-talk, I literally felt sick. Many have said that this is 1938. But Hitler never addressed a UN.

This tyrant comes from an Islamic republic where if a woman is raped she stands a good chance of being stoned to death in public; an Islamic republic where liberal newspapers have been closed; an Islamic republic where television satellite dishes have been confiscated; an Islamic republic where religious minorities, especially Jews, are routinely persecuted; an Islamic republic where the jails are bursting with political and religious prisoners.

This liar who routinely denies the Holocaust, has the temerity to speak of justice, ethics, and common humanity. This fevered jihadist has perfected the use of Orwellian language.

In thinly veiled terms, the Iranian jihadist once again threatened the destruction of Israel, and no one, not one major newspaper takes him to task for his genocidal threats. No, liberal organs such as the NY Times are far too busy worrying about how terrorists and throat slitters are being treated and interrogated. Liberals are far too busy attacking President Bush -- for to attack true evil is beyond their moral compass.

Karen and I are afraid because the tyrants in the UN are labeled, "the international community" by liberals as if this automatically bestows upon them some divine legitimacy, when in fact most of these countries are nothing more than a collection of murdererous dictators and appeasers -- and this includes Russia, China, France and most of Europe.

This thug, this demagogue, this murderer, tyrant, anti-Jew, anti-Christian, anti-Buddhist, is an enemy of Western civilization and we in the West should have treated him as the Jihadist terrorist he is. Instead, he spoke on the same day as President Bush, from the very same platform, thereby boosting his status in the Muslim world, thus hammering another nail in our coffin.

This is madness.

If we cannot even recognize our enemies, how in G-d's name can we fight and defeat them?

P.S. It is time to move the UN to a country that truly represents the nations that sit in their chambers. My vote goes to Sudan. Let the UN representatives who so hate America live and work in an Islamic republic they so deeply yearn for.

Karen writes: The part you omitted from your quote was that the most dreadful aspect of my fear was that Israel would no longer protect us. I always felt that no matter what, that if anti-Semitism threatened our people again, we ultimately had a safe haven. But now it seems Israel does not protect its citizens. Their leaders have become shadow statesmen. Perhaps we used to be men without a country, now we are a country without men.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:48 AM | Comments (51)

September 19, 2006

How the Left Enables Nuclear Proliferation

I once wrote wrote an essay about Murderous Peacenicks and how they have brought so much death and destruction to this world. Well, these peaceniks are still with us doing their terrible work. This fine essay from The American Thinker does a nice job of analysing their genocidal work. RJS

"Not everyone may remember that Ellsberg famously leaked the Pentagon Papers to the New York Times, thereby disastrously undermining US support for the Vietnam War, leading the US Congress to withdraw funding for the American effort to put the South in charge of its own fate. The upshot was the scene of chaos and panic while desperate Vietnamese clung to US helicopters lifting up from the roof of the US Embassy. Those Vietnamese had everything to fear from the victorious North, and if they were lucky they only ended up in vast Stalinist concentration camps along with hundreds of thousands of others.

"We do not know exactly how many people died by execution, starvation, forced labor, collectivization, and all the usual horrors of Communist revolutionary regimes. Pathetic news photos followed in the years afterwards, showing Vietnamese “boat people” fleeing Ho Chi Minh’s paradise in their thousands on frail craft and often drowning in their desperation to get away. Next door in Cambodia, Pol Pot began his genocidal massacres free from any possible American interference. The Americans were gone.

"In the upshot, Ellsberg was imminently responsible for the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people in Vietnam and Cambodia. On the American Left this not considered a crime against humanity. Ellsberg is a celebrity well within the mainstream of the Left. They may not say so out loud, but the bottom line is that they want more of the same."

To read the rest of this essay, please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, David Paulin

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:30 AM | Comments (0)

Head-in-the-Sand Liberals

There are quite a few things I disagree with in this article. However, I am linking to it anyway because I believe its author, Sam Harris, a prominent Liberal, is saying things to his fellow liberals that need to be said. The question is: Will they hear what he is saying? RJA

"At its most extreme, liberal denial has found expression in a growing subculture of conspiracy theorists who believe that the atrocities of 9/11 were orchestrated by our own government. A nationwide poll conducted by the Scripps Survey Research Center at Ohio University found that more than a third of Americans suspect that the federal government "assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East;" 16% believe that the twin towers collapsed not because fully-fueled passenger jets smashed into them but because agents of the Bush administration had secretly rigged them to explode.

"Such an astonishing eruption of masochistic unreason could well mark the decline of liberalism, if not the decline of Western civilization."

To read Sam Harris' entire article, please click here.

Hat Tip, Seraphic Friend, David Paulin

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 07:57 AM | Comments (2)

September 18, 2006

The Jihad Against the Pope

"But it seems that we are fast getting to the point where people are being intimidated into silence about Islam, since it appears that no one can criticise it without violence and mayhem breaking out. This deadly process of intimidation started in the West in 1989 with the fatwa calling for the murder of Salman Rushdie, after he was held to have insulted Islam in his novel The Satanic Verses.

"Last year, the re-publication of Danish cartoons protesting at Islamic violence that included depictions of the Prophet Mohammed, which Muslims regarded as an insult, led to rioting, kidnap attempts, and the murder of some 140 people across the world.

"As with the Pope’s remarks, the trigger for the violence on each occasion was the claim that Islam had been insulted. But religion generally provokes strong passions, and one faith almost inevitably gives offence to another. If all such offence is to be prevented, vital debate will be stifled, too — and if violence is used to bring this about, freedom itself will be brutally stamped out."

To read the rest of Melanie Phillip's superb analysis, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:16 PM | Comments (17)

Al-Qaeda Threatens Jihad Over Pope's remarks

"Ali Khamenei, Iran’s supreme leader, said today that the Pontiff's remarks were the latest "links in the chain" of a US-Israeli conspiracy aimed at creating conflict between religions."

So, the Pope is controlled by an American Zionist conspiracy. These people are absolutely out of their collective minds.

Read the rest of the story here.

This is not complicated. The Islamic world is trying to intimidate us. We shouldn't let them. We should tell them that they are a bunch of savages and if they attack, we will fight back and destroy all those who seek to annihilate us.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:39 PM | Comments (2)

Somali Cleric Calls for Pope's Death

A hardline cleric linked to Somalia's powerful Islamist movement has called for Muslims to "hunt down" and kill Pope Benedict XVI for his controversial comments about Islam.

Sheikh Abubukar Hassan Malin urged Muslims to find the pontiff and punish him for insulting the Prophet Mohammed and Allah in a speech that he said was as offensive as author Salman Rushdie's novel The Satanic Verses.

"We urge you Muslims wherever you are to hunt down the Pope for his barbaric statements as you have pursued Salman Rushdie, the enemy of Allah who offended our religion," he said in Friday evening prayers.

"Whoever offends our Prophet Mohammed should be killed on the spot by the nearest Muslim," Malin, a prominent cleric in the Somali capital, told worshippers at a mosque in southern Mogadishu.

Read the rest of the story, here.

Will Al NY Times, run an editorial calling on this cleric to retract his call for the assassination of Pope Benedict?

Yeah, sure they will.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:25 PM | Comments (0)

Al Dura - The Trial

Meanwhile over in France, a momentous trial is in progress.

"Starting September 14, three Frenchmen go on trial in Paris for questioning the veracity of the 2000 videotape of the putative murder of Palestinian child Mohammed Al-Dura by Israeli soldiers. This tape - promulgated by the French state-run channel France 2 - is often credited with helping instigate the so-called “Al-Aqsa Intifada”. Now, six years later, in the shadow of revelations about media manipulation and “fauxtography” by Reuters and others, these trials take on extraordinary unexpected resonance. Not since the days of Alfred Dreyfus and Emile Zola has the French legal system been put to such a test on basic issues of racism and freedom of expression."

While the mainstream media largely ingnores this event, Pajamas Media is proud to present extensive coverage. They begin with a stage-setting report from their Paris Editor Nidra Poller who will be attending the trials on their behalf.

Click here to read further.

Here is Paris Editor Nidra Poller's Part Two of the trial.

Covering the trial in person is The fine blogger The Augean Stables.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friends, David Paulin, Jayne Jabore

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:56 AM | Comments (0)

Westminster Cathedral

You must appreciate the irony: the Pope in an aside, quotes a medieval text about the inhumanity and evil of Islam in a speech that is not about Islam but really about reason and faith, and the emptiness of Western values. Naturally the reaction of Muslims all over the world only proves the truth of his words. The Pope goes on to sort-of apologize, but Al NY Times in a feverishly stupid editorial demands the Pope's complete apology. Funny, never once have I seen Al NY Times call on Muslim religious leaders to stop calling Jews pigs and apes--oh and demanding all out genocide against Israel and Jews everywhere. I guess the Times considers this free speech.

Anyway, here's a Catholic Londoner trying to say Sunday Mass in Westminster Cathedral, but the adherents of the religion of peace are responding, ahem, disproportionately.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, David Paulin

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:33 AM | Comments (6)

I Wanna be an Illegal Alien

The Honorable Paul S. Sarbanes
309 Hart Senate Office Building
Washington DC , 20510

Dear Senator Sarbanes,

As a native Marylander and excellent customer of the Internal Revenue Service, I am writing to ask for your assistance. I have contacted the Department of Homeland Security in an effort to determine the process for becoming an illegal alien and they referred me to you.

My primary reason for wishing to change my status from U.S. Citizen to illegal alien stem from the bill which was recently passed by the Senate and for which you voted. If my understanding of this bill's provisions is accurate, as an illegal alien who has been in the United States for five years, all I need to do to become a citizen is to pay a $2,000 fine and income taxes for three of the last five years. I know a good deal when see one and I am anxious to get the process started before everyone figures it out.

Simply put, those of us who have been here legally have had to pay taxes every year so I'm excited about the prospect of avoiding two years of taxes in return for paying a $2,000 fine. Is there any way that I can apply to be illegal retroactively? This would yield an excellent result for me and my family because we paid heavy taxes in 2004 and 2005.

Additionally, as an illegal alien I could begin using the local emergency room as my primary health care provider. Once I have stopped paying premiums for medical insurance, my accountant figures I could save almost $10,000 a year. Another benefit in gaining illegal status would be that my daughter would receive preferential treatment relative to her law school applications, as well as "in-state" tuition rates for many colleges throughout the United States for my son.

Lastly, I understand that illegal status would relieve me of the burden of renewing my driver's license and making those burdensome car insurance premiums. This is very important to me given that I still have college age children driving my car.

If you would provide me with an outline of the process to become illegal (retroactively if possible) and copies of the necessary forms, I would be most appreciative. Thank you for your assistance.

Your Loyal Constituent,

Pete McGlaughlin

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Daniel Wohlgelernter

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:28 AM | Comments (0)

September 17, 2006

Failure of Imagination

Prior to 9/11, most Americans found the idea that international terrorists could mount an attack on their homeland and kill thousands of innocent citizens not just unlikely, but inconceivable. Psychologically, Americans imagined that they lived in a security bubble. Terrorist attacks, including those on U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, occurred elsewhere. These beliefs were reinforced by the conventional wisdom among terrorism experts, who argued that terrorists sought not mass casualties but rather mass sympathy through limited attacks that called attention to their cause.

As we approach the fifth year without a second successful terrorist attack upon U.S. soil, a chorus of skeptics now suggests that 9/11 was a 100-year flood. They conveniently forget the deadly explosions in Bali, Madrid, London, and Mumbai, and dismiss scores of attacks planned against the United States and others that have been disrupted. [1] The idea that terrorists are currently preparing even more deadly assaults seems as far-fetched to them as the possibility of terrorists crashing passenger jets into the World Trade Center did before that fateful Tuesday morning.

As one attempts to assess where we now stand, and what the risks are, the major conclusion of the bipartisan 9/11 Commission deserves repetition: The principal failure to act to prevent the September 11 attack was a "failure of imagination." [2] A similar failure of imagination leads many today to discount the risk of a nuclear 9/11.

To read the rest of this imortant paper by Graham Allison , please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, David Paulin

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:03 AM | Comments (0)

Daniel Pearl's Killer Released

Pakistan has released thousands of terrorists, among them one of Daniel Pearl's killers.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, David Paulin

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:53 AM | Comments (2)

September 15, 2006

Iran: Making a Decision

In his televised 9/11 address, President Bush said that we must not ``leave our children to face a Middle East overrun by terrorist states and radical dictators armed with nuclear weapons.'' There's only one such current candidate: Iran.

The next day, he responded thus (as reported by Rich Lowry and Kate O'Beirne of National Review) to a question on Iran: ``It's very important for the American people to see the president try to solve problems diplomatically before resorting to military force.''

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad arrives at Havana's Jose Marti airport to attend the Non-Aligned Movement summit hosted by Cuba September 14, 2006. REUTERS/Claudia Daut (CUBA)

``Before'' implies that the one follows the other. The signal is unmistakable. An aerial attack on Iran's nuclear facilities lies just beyond the horizon of diplomacy. With the crisis advancing and the moment of truth approaching, it is important to begin looking now with unflinching honesty at the military option.

The costs will be terrible:

To read the rest of Charles Krauthammer's informative article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:09 AM | Comments (0)

September 07, 2006

Espying the Jew

"Even the Nuremberg Laws would have cut me more slack than my Internet chastisers: “Article Five Section One: A Jew is an individual who is descended from at least three grandparents who were, racially, full Jews.” Under the 1935 German laws on race, I would have qualified as a bona fide citizen of the Reich. But the cyber-enforcers among my readers run a tighter ship than the Fuhrer. Half my mail reads like some ancient Woody Allen pick-up line: Have you got a little Jew in you? Would you like one?"

Is the mighty Mark Steyn Jewish? Does it matter? Click here to find out.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 03:20 PM | Comments (4)

It's Fascism — and it's Islamic

"The real problem is not that "Islamic fascism" is inaccurate or mean-spirited, but that this identification earns such vehement disdain in Europe and the United States. That hysteria may tell us as much about the state of a demoralized West as the term itself does about our increasingly emboldened enemies."

To read Victor Davis Hanson's entire article, please click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Mordechai Schiller

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:04 AM | Comments (0)

September 06, 2006

Post -- 9/11 Pop Quiz

"What have you learned since the Sept. 11 attacks five years ago? The mass murder of 2,996 innocent people on American soil forced open my eyes to the Islamic holy war against the West, freedom and modernity. The battle has raged not for years or decades, but for centuries -- well before the Crusades began.

"The indelible sight of workers plunging from the Twin Towers -- head first, feet first, solo, hand-in-hand -- roused me from slumber. The photos of children who were incinerated on United Airlines Flight 175 and American Airlines Flight 77 compelled me to start paying attention to the beliefs, goals, language and lies of those who would gladly kill my children the same way. The United Airlines Flight 93 hijackers' final exclamation as they drove the plane into the ground is a Muslim warrior leitmotif I will never again ignore: "Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar! Allahu Akbar!"

"So, how much do you know? Take a post-9/11 pop quiz. It's never too late to start pulling your head from the sand:"

To read the rest of the magnificent Michelle Malkin's article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:22 AM | Comments (6)

Democrats & Israel

Democrats Increasingly Turn Their Backs on Israel
A disturbing and dangerous trend is emerging

"We are seeing a disturbing trend in the Democratic Party today, one that the American Jewish community needs to take note of," said Republican Jewish Coalition Executive Director Matt Brooks. "Democrats are increasingly turning their backs on Israel, and have done so even in the midst of Israel's efforts to stop Hezbollah from bombing Israeli cities."

Brooks pointed to increasing evidence of a deep shift in the Democratic Party’s relationship with Israel and the Jewish community:

In an August 15th interview with Der Spiegel magazine, Democratic Party elder statesman and former President Jimmy Carter called Israel's actions against the Hezbollah terrorists in Lebanon "unjustified":

* "I don't think that Israel has any legal or moral justification for their massive bombing of the entire nation of Lebanon. What happened is that Israel is holding almost 10,000 prisoners, so when the militants in Lebanon or in Gaza take one or two soldiers, Israel looks upon this as a justification for an attack on the civilian population of Lebanon and Gaza. I do not think that's justified, no."

In the same interview, Carter said, "I think I represent the vast majority of Democrats in this country. I think there is a substantial portion of American people that completely agree with me."

Recent polling has shown a sharp disparity between Republicans' and Democrats' support for Israel. The Democrats have become the party of neutrality:

A NBC/Wall Street Journal poll in late July showed that there is a strong gap between Republicans and Democrats when it comes to support for Israel. The poll showed that among Republicans, an overwhelming 84% say they sympathize more with Israel (1% sympathize more with Arab states); by comparison, just 43% of Democrats do so (12% sympathize more with Arab states).

This is not an isolated instance.

* In a poll by the Los Angeles Times/Bloomberg at the very end of July, when asked whether the US should be more neutral in the conflict between Israel and Hezbollah or whether the US should align itself with Israel, Democrats supported neutrality over alignment, 54% to 39%. However, by comparison, Republicans strongly supported alignment with the Jewish state 64% to 29%.

These poll results follow several recent political developments:

* Seven Democratic members of the US House of Representatives voted, in the heat of Israel’s battle against Hezbollah, against a resolution passed on July 18 which expressed support for Israel’s right of self defense, called for the return of the kidnapped Israeli soldiers, condemned Iran and Syria for their support of terrorism, and condemned Hamas and Hezbollah for using civilians as shields. Those seven House members (and the committees or subcommittees they would likely chair in a Democrat-controlled House are: Neil Abercrombie of Hawaii, (Armed Services Committee's Tactical Air and Land Forces Subcommittee), John Conyers of Michigan (Judiciary Committee), John Dingell of Michigan (Energy and Commerce Committee), Carolyn Kilpatrick of Michigan,Jim McDermott of Washington, Nick Rahall of West Virginia (Resources Committee), "Pete" Stark of California (Ways and Means Committee's Health Subcommittee). In addition, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi removed her name as a co-sponsor of this important resolution.

* Democratic voters in Connecticut threw Senator Joe Lieberman out of the Democratic Party, effectively silencing one of the leading voices for Israel in their party.

* Instead, Democrats let stand remarks like those of Democratic Party activist Cindy Sheehan, who declared last year that America and Israel were to blame for terrorism, saying, "You get America out of Iraq and Israel out of Palestine and you'll stop the terrorism." (Dallas, 8/5/2005)

* Congressman John Dingell from Detroit made a shocking statement in late July when he told a local television interviewer on WDIV on July 30th, "I don't take sides for or against Hezbollah or for or against Israel." While he condemned Hezbollah for its "violence", he could draw no moral distinction between Hezbollah's random attacks on Israeli civilians and Israel's targeted self defense response.

Matt Brooks said, "Increasingly, the pro-Israel voices in the Democratic Party – Joe Lieberman, Harry Truman and Scoop Jackson – have been replaced by Michael Moore, Cindy Sheehan, Al Sharpton and Jimmy Carter. As President Carter's remarks in Der Spiegel highlighted, what was once the left wing of the Democratic Party is becoming its mainstream. The anti-Israel sentiment which was once the mark of the leftist fringe now appears in major Democratic forums. American Jews, who for decades supported the Democratic Party, need to take a fresh, objective look at the Democratic Party today and decide if it's the party for them."

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:14 AM | Comments (3)

September 05, 2006

The Effects of Religion

"The third monotheistic faith is Islam. There are many millions of decent and kind Muslims in the world. But there are also at least a hundred million Muslims (i.e., 10 percent) who support killing innocents in the name of Allah and Islam. And there are more than that who believe in the ideal of using force to spread Islam throughout the world.

"So the question is this: How many kind and decent Muslims are kind and decent because of Islam, and how many evil Muslims are evil because of Islam?"

To read Dennis Prager's entire article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:33 AM | Comments (4)

September 04, 2006

Adopting Jihadist Tactics

I have to admit that this does not surprise me, when citizens feel that their government is not protecting their lives, their homes, their very national existence, they rise to their own defense. The question is: will this movement rise in America?

"Far-right extremists have adopted the tactics of Islamic jihadis by posting videos on the internet in which they threaten to behead British Muslims.

"The films show balaclava-clad white British men brandishing guns, knives and clubs, calling on all Muslims to leave Britain or be killed. One appears to be a soldier who has served in the Gulf.

"In one film, a man tells Muslims to "go home" or risk being burned alive. He threatens, "I'll cut your head off", and claims to have "comrades" across Britain who have "had enough".

To read the rest of this story, please click here.

Hat Tip: Caerdroia

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:17 AM | Comments (7)

September 01, 2006

Profiling the Dead

"One of the biggest concerns for prospective airline passengers is the screening process of flight cargo. According to reports, only a small percentage of cargo that is loaded onto planes is screened for explosives. And of the cargo that is in fact screened, rarely does it include large containers. The question needs to be asked: What if, in our laxity, these containers became a preferred method of attack by terrorists? And what if the contents of the containers being used for the attacks were once living and breathing?

"Just like with any other religion, Muslim funerals have their own distinct customs and traditions. As stated in the ‘Muslim Funeral Guide for the residents of the Chicagoland,’ the funerals include: the preparation and washing of the deceased (Ghusl); the placing of a shroud (Kafan) over the body; transportation from the funeral home to the mosque for prayers; and transportation from the mosque back to the funeral home. It is the movement of the body to and from the mosque that is of concern."

To read the rest of this article by Joe Kaufman and Jeffrey Epstein, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:58 AM | Comments (0)

August 31, 2006

Fully English

A 12-year-old Jewish girl who was beaten unconscious and robbed by anti-Semitic yobs on a bus has spoken out at her disgust that no-one came to her aid.

The girl, who does not want to be identified, was stamped on several times in a racist attack lasting around five minutes while on board a 303 Metroline bus in Mill Hill, north London.

At 6.30pm on August 11, she and a friend were sitting at the back of the bus when a group of around four girls got on at the Concourse, Grahame Park estate, and asked them if they were English or Jewish.

They both replied they were "fully English".

To read the complete story, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 05:24 PM | Comments (8)

August 30, 2006

The Axis of Jihadism

Because for 11 years years, the American public wasn’t informed about the threat that lead to September 11 and because the classrooms and newsrooms of the United States were not educated enough about the global threat of “Jihadism,” we feel it is incumbent on individual citizens to educate themselves about this danger and mobilize to prevent a Future Jihad looming around the world and at home. It is important that American citizens understand who the “Jihadists” are, what they want to achieve, and how they are proceeding. Without this knowledge, the American public will be unable to be part of the political debate about national security and the War on Terror. And if deprived from the support of an informed public, the US Government, now and in the future, cannot sustain difficult decisions pertaining to the defeat of the Terrorist enemy.

To read the rest of this short but very important article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:38 AM | Comments (2)

August 29, 2006

Sounding Retreat

American voters are badly served by leaders who suggest that national security can be achieved on the cheap, especially in time of war. The reality is that abandoning Iraq will not save either lives or dollars in the long-run. Such a course will intensify the danger posed to our country and way of life from Islamofascists, their sponsors and friends.

The public must be told the truth. This war is not just about Iraq and will not be over if we retreat from the conflict there. It will likely get worse before it gets better. It will require greater sacrifice – indeed, a national mobilization – if we are to prevail. Those who suggest that the alternative is less painful and costly are at best disingenuous.

In fact, history tells us that confronting foes like ours later, rather than now, under circumstances of their choosing rather than ours, will entail a far higher price in lives and national treasure. Informed voters, given the choice, will reject the lemming-leap of defeatism and its inevitable high toll.

To read the rest of Frank Gaffney, Jr.'s article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:42 AM | Comments (7)

The Trouble with Democrats

Recently, the hotter Democratic activists have fastened onto a new issue, which they hope may have more traction with the average American voter. It is a demand that America pull out of Iraq. Sometimes it is presented delicately, as a proposal to "redeploy" our forces there to some other, unstated destination by a certain date. Sometimes it is put forward more baldly, as the only way to force the Iraqis to defend themselves.

Lots of Americans have their doubts about our presence in Iraq. But I doubt whether becoming known as "the bug-out party" is what the Democrats really need to add to their current reputation with the American people.

To read William Rusher's entire article, please click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:35 AM | Comments (0)

August 22, 2006

Our Covert Enemies

We have always had our covert enemies, but their numbers were few until the 1960s. But then the elite young men who declined to serve in the military during the Vietnam War set out to write a narrative in which they, rather than those who obeyed the call to duty, were the heroes. They have propagated their ideas through the universities, the schools and mainstream media to the point that they are the default assumptions of millions. Our covert enemies don't want the Islamo-fascists to win. But in some corner of their hearts, they would like us to lose.

To read the rest of Michael Barone's fine article, click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, David Paulin

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 07:46 AM | Comments (4)

August 14, 2006

The British Way

"Britain's successful pre-emption of an Islamicist plot to destroy up to 10 civilian airliners over the Atlantic Ocean proves that surveillance and other forms of information-gathering remain an essential weapon in prosecuting the war on terror. There was never any real doubt of this, of course. Al Qaeda's preferred targets are civilians, and civilians have a right to be protected from such deliberate and calculated attacks. Denying the terrorists funding, striking at their bases and training camps, holding accountable governments that promote terror and harbor terrorists, and building democracy around the world are all necessary measures in winning the war. None of these, however, can substitute for anticipating and thwarting terror operations as the British have done. This requires the development and exploitation of intelligence."

To read the rest of this article, click here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Elliot Ganz

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:11 AM | Comments (0)

August 10, 2006

Lamont: Color Me Pink

It seems that Ned Lamont is not just "a wealthy businessman" as the MSM have so blandly dubbed him. He's a "Pink diaper baby born with a silver spoon in his mouth." Go to our new friends at the Democracy Project for the full story

Correction/ Apology: I wrote previously that Lamont was elected Senator--which he, obviously was not. I thank my commenters for correcting this truly dumb mistake. This was just a primary. But it does look like a shoo-in for Pink Lamont. Lieberman, if he runs as in Independent, will not have acess to the Dems treasury. Clinton and all the rest of the Democratic high-flyers have already informed Joe that they will back Lamont. Slam, dunk. Sad. Very sad.

Hubert Humphrey. Scoop Jackson. Daniel P. Moynihan. JFK: spinning madly in their graves.

The New Democrats cannot be trusted with National Security.

The New Democrats cannot be trusted to be reliable allies of Israel.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:50 AM | Comments (12)

Taliban Democrats

"The narrow primary defeat of veteran senator Joe Lieberman in Connecticut's Democratic primary is more than a loss for one man. It is a loss for his party and for the country. It completes the capture of the Democratic Party by its Taliban wing.

"They used to be "San Francisco Democrats," a phrase coined by former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Jeane Kirkpatrick to describe the party's 1984 convention. But they have now morphed into Taliban Democrats because they are willing to "kill" one of their own, if he does not conform to the narrow and rigid agenda of the party's kook fringe."

To read the rest of the article by Cal Thomas click here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:35 AM | Comments (1)

July 28, 2006

Voting for Hizbollah or Hamas in a Free Election...

From the three most astute thinkers in the blogosphere: Sigmund, Carl & Alfred analyse the difference between free elections and tyranny.

Further, they go to the trouble of explaining to the weak-minded that there is no such thing as a disproportionate response to terror-- not because some animals took down the WTC, but rather, because there were far too many -- whole cultures and societies -- who rejoiced and celebrated evil and others that tried to excuse it. Read the rest of this fine piece here.

I'm not going to wish for Peace but for Victory.

Chazak V'Ematz.

And of course Karen and I wish you all a lovely and meaningful Shabbos.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 04:50 PM | Comments (1)

Europe, Thy Name is Cowardice

By Matthias Döpfner

Appeasement cost millions of Jews and non-Jews their lives as England and France, allies at the time, negotiated and hesitated too long before they noticed that Hitler had to be fought, not bound to agreements. Read the rest of this incredible article written by a German journalist here.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:13 AM | Comments (4)

July 25, 2006

Liberals: Born to Run

by Ann Coulter

I knew the events in the Middle East were big when The New York Times devoted
nearly as much space to them as it did to a New York court ruling last week
rejecting gay marriage.

Some have argued that Israel's response is disproportionate, which is actually
correct: It wasn't nearly strong enough. I know this because there are parts
of South Lebanon still standing.

Most Americans have been glued to their TV sets, transfixed by Israel's show
of power, wondering, "Gee, why can't we do that?"

Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean says that "what's going on in the Middle East today" wouldn't be happening if the Democrats were in
power. Yes, if the Democrats were running things, our cities would be ash
heaps and the state of Israel would have been wiped off the map by now.

But according to Dean, the Democrats would have the "moral authority that Bill
Clinton had" - no wait! keep reading - "when he brought together the Israelis
and Palestinians." Clinton really brokered a Peace in Our Time with that deal
"our time" being a reference to that five-minute span during which he
announced it. Yasser Arafat immediately backed out on all his promises and
launched the second intifada.

The fact that Israel is able to launch an attack on Hezbollah today without
instantly inciting a multination conflagration in the Middle East is proof of
what Bush has accomplished. He has begun to create a moderate block of Arab
leaders who are apparently not interested in becoming the next Saddam
Hussein.

There's been no stock market crash, showing that the markets have confidence
that Israel will deal appropriately with the problem and that it won't expand
into World War III.

But liberals can never abandon the idea that we must soothe savage beasts with
appeasement whether they're dealing with murderers like Willie Horton
or Islamic terrorists. Then the beast eats you.

There are only two choices with savages: Fight or run. Democrats always want
to run, but they dress it up in meaningless catchphrases like "diplomacy,"
"detente," "engagement," "multilateral engagement," "multilateral diplomacy,"
"containment" and "going to the U.N."

I guess they figure, "Hey, appeasement worked pretty well with ... uh ...
wait, I know this one ... ummm ... tip of my tongue ..."

Democrats like to talk tough, but you can never trap them into fighting.
There is always an obscure objection to be raised in this particular instance
but in some future war they would be intrepid! One simply can't imagine what
that war would be.

Democrats have never found a fight they couldn't run from.

On "Meet the Press" last month, Sen. Joe Biden was asked whether he would
support military action against Iran if the Iranians were to go
"full-speed-ahead with their program to build a nuclear bomb."

No, of course not. There is, Biden said, "no imminent threat at this point."

According to the Democrats, we can't attack Iran until we have signed
affidavits establishing that it has nuclear weapons, but we also can't attack
North Korea because it may already have nuclear weapons. The pattern that
seems to be emerging is: "Don't ever attack anyone, ever, for any reason.
Ever."

The Democrats are in a snit about North Korea having nukes, with Howard Dean
saying Democrats are tougher on defense than the Republicans because since
Bush has been president, North Korea has "quadrupled their nuclear weapons
stash."

It wasn't that difficult. Clinton gave the North Koreans $4 billion to
construct nuclear reactors in return for the savages promising not to use the
reactors to build bombs. But oddly, despite this masterful triumph of
"diplomacy," the savages did not respond with good behavior. Instead, they
immediately set to work feverishly building nuclear weapons.

But that's another threat the Democrats do not think is yet ripe for action.

On "Meet the Press" last Sunday, Sen. Biden lightly dismissed the North
Koreans, saying their "government's like an eighth-grader with a small bomb
looking for attention" and that we "don't even have the intelligence community
saying they're certain they have a nuclear weapon."

Is that the test? We need to have absolute certainty that the North Koreans
have a nuclear weapon capable of hitting California with Kim Jong Il making a
solemn promise to bomb the U.S. (and really giving us his word this time, no
funny business) before we - we what? If they have a nuclear weapon, what do we
do then? Is a worldwide thermonuclear war the one war Democrats would finally
be willing to fight?

Democrats won't acknowledge the existence of "an imminent threat" anyplace in
the world until a nuclear missile is 12 minutes from New York. And then we'll
never have the satisfaction of saying "I told you so" because we'll all be
dead.

COPYRIGHT 2006 ANN COULTER

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:31 PM | Comments (0)

July 24, 2006

The Crazy Bunch

Time out for a laugh. Remember The Brady Bunch, well now we've got The Crazy Bunch. Hilarious animation.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Jake Novak

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:00 AM | Comments (0)

Dems. vs. Bolton

You just feel like like weeping. John Bolton is doing such a magnificent job for Israel in the UN and now the Dems come along and promise a "bruising fight" for his renomination. Read the entire story here.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Lance

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:15 AM | Comments (1)

July 23, 2006

When Will They Ever Learn...

Why do so many American Jews hate the president who stands by Israel? Read here and find out.

Hat Tip: Seraphic Friend, Lance

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:22 PM | Comments (8)

July 04, 2006

The Anti Western Culture

Our good friend David Paulin sent us this fine article about the western elite who are determined to destroy our culture.

Today, July 4th, which celebrates the height of western culture, American life, I am reproducing the entire article. It's long, but I urge you to read it. It is magnificent and strips away the vile intellectual pretentions of the western academic elite, revealing them to be decadent liars, and an anti America, anti Democratic class intent on making common cause with Islamic Jihadists.

He even references Jane Austen. I love this guy.

********************************************************************************************************************************************

The Adversary Culture
The Perverse anti-Westernism of the Cultural Elite
by
Keith Windschuttle

Address to: Summer Sounds Symposium
Punga Cove, New Zealand
February 11, 2006

For the past three decades and more, many of the leading opinion makers in our universities, the media and the arts have regarded Western culture as, at best, something to be ashamed of, or at worst, something to be opposed. Before the 1960s, if Western intellectuals reflected on the long-term achievements of their culture, they explained it in terms of its own evolution: the inheritance of ancient Greece, Rome and Christianity, tempered by the Renaissance, the Reformation, the Enlightenment and the scientific and industrial revolutions. Even a radical critique like Marxism was primarily an internal affair, intent on fulfilling what it imagined to be the destiny of the West, taking its history to what it thought would be a higher level.

Today, however, such thinking is dismissed by the prevailing intelligentsia as triumphalist. Western political and economic dominance is more commonly explained not by its internal dynamics but by its external behaviour, especially its rivalry and aggression towards other cultures. Western success has purportedly been at their expense. Instead of pushing for internal reform or revolution, this new radicalism constitutes an overwhelmingly negative critique of Western civilization itself.

According to this ideology, instead of attempting to globalise its values, the West should stay in its own cultural backyard. Values like universal human rights, individualism and liberalism are regarded merely as ethnocentric products of Western history. The scientific knowledge that the West has produced is simply one of many “ways of knowing”. In place of Western universalism, this critique offers cultural relativism, a concept that regards the West not as the pinnacle of human achievement to date, but as simply one of many equally valid cultural systems.

Cultural relativism claims there are no absolute standards for assessing human culture. Hence all cultures should be regarded as equal, though different. It comes in two varieties: soft and hard.

The soft version now prevails in aesthetics. Take a university course in literary criticism or art theory and you will now find traditional standards no longer apply. Italian opera can no longer be regarded as superior to Chinese opera. The theatre of Shakespeare was not better than that of Kabuki, only different.

The hard version comes from the social sciences and from cultural studies. Cultural practices from which most Westerners instinctively shrink are now accorded their own integrity, lest the culture that produced them be demeaned.

For instance, although Western feminists once found the overt misogyny of many tribal cultures distasteful, in recent years they have come to respect practices they once condemned. Feminist academics now deny that suttee, the incineration of widows, is barbaric. The Indian-American cultural studies theorist, Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak gives suttee an honourable place in Indian culture by comparing it to the Christian tradition of martyrdom. Feminists once denounced the surgical removal of the clitoris of Muslim women as female genital mutilation. Lately, the procedure has been redefined as genital “cutting”, which the literary and art critic Germaine Greer now argues should be recognized as an authentic manifestation of the culture of the Muslim women concerned.

Similarly, the Parisian literary theorist, Tzvetan Todorov, in The Conquest of America (1985), compares Mexican cannibalism to the Christian Eucharist, and the Australian postmodern historian, Greg Dening, in Mr Bligh's Bad Language (1992), declares Polynesian human sacrifice to be the ritual equivalent of British capital punishment.

Something is obviously going terribly wrong here. The logic of relativism is taking Western academics into dark waters. They are now prepared to countenance practices that are obviously cruel, unnatural and life-denying, that is, practices that offend against all they claim to stand for.

To see how decadent these assumptions have become, compare today's relativism to the attitude that prevailed when the culture of the British people was in its ascendancy. Sir Charles Napier, the British Commander-in-chief in India from 1849 to 1851, signed an agreement with local Hindu leaders that he would respect all their customs, except for the practice of suttee. The Hindu leaders protested but Napier was unmoved:

"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."

The moral rationale of cultural relativism is a plea for tolerance and respect of other cultures, no matter how uncomfortable we might be with their beliefs and practices. However, there is one culture conspicuous by its absence from all this. The plea for acceptance and open-mindedness does not extend to Western culture itself, whose history is regarded as little more than a crime against the rest of humanity. The West cannot judge other cultures but must condemn its own.

Since the 1960s, academic historians on the left have worked to generate a widespread cynicism about the nature of Western democracies, with the aim of questioning their legitimacy and undermining their ability to command loyalty. Let me demonstrate some of the ways in which national and imperial histories are being used to denigrate Western culture and society and give the nations of the West, especially those descended from Britain, an historical identity of which they can only be ashamed.

Academic historians today argue that all the new white settler societies established under the British Empire in Africa, the Pacific and North America shared the same racist attitudes towards outsiders and dispensed the same degree of violence against indigenous peoples. Today, they often compare the European settler societies with Nazi Germany.

This form of moral equivalence originated in the 1960s in the work of the American political theorist Pierre van den Berghe and his book Race and Racism. He defined all the British settler societies as ‘ herrenvolk democracies'. Herrenvolk is German for “master race”. These societies were egalitarian democracies, van den Berghe conceded, but only for people of their own kind. To preserve egalitarian ideals in the face of their exploitation of the land and labour of the coloured races, the settler democracies defined the latter as less than human. Van den Berghe wrote, these are “regimes such as those of the United States or South Africa that are democratic for the master race but tyrannical for the subordinate groups.”

The attitude to the indigenous people in the colonies, academic historians now assure us, was genocidal. The Australian academic journal Aboriginal History in 2001 published a special “genocide” edition. In their introduction, the editors argued that European colonialism was an even more intrinsically genocidal process than that of Nazi Germany. Using evidence put forward by the American academic Ward Churchill, the editors argue that England was the most “overtly genocidal” of the European colonial powers.

Moreover, they assert, “settler-colonies around the world established during European expansion post-1492 in the United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa and Argentina are not only potentially but inherently genocidal.” [their emphasis]

The worst-case scenario in Australia is widely regarded as the island of Tasmania, where a Black War was supposedly fought in the 1820s and 1830s and where the last full-blood Aboriginal person died in 1888, though significant numbers of part Aboriginal descendants survive to this day. The historian Lyndall Ryan says in her 1981 book The Aboriginal Tasmanians that they were the victims of “a conscious policy of genocide”. This is the orthodox opinion among Australian academics.

In 2001 and 2002 I undertook the task of checking the footnotes of the major authors on Tasmania to verify their original sources, I found to my surprise that their interpretation of frontier warfare and genocide was based on invented incidents, concocted footnotes, altered documents and gross exaggeration of the Aboriginal death toll. I could find credible evidence that white settlers had killed a total of 121 Aborigines, mostly in self defence or in hot pursuit of Aborigines who had killed or assaulted white settlers. The rest of the population of about 2000 natives had died from diseases to which their long isolation on their island had given them no immunity, principally influenza, pneumonia and tuberculosis. On top of this, venereal disease rendered most of the women infertile.

The Tasmanian colony had been founded in 1803 in the middle of the British campaign to end the slave trade. Its longest-serving governor was George Arthur, a supporter of William Wilberforce, and who in his previous post in British Honduras had set the colony's indigenous slaves free. His sensitivity to the native question, in fact, was what got him the job in Australia. He wanted to civilize and modernize the Aborigines, not exterminate them. His intentions were not to foster violence towards the Aborigines but to prevent it. The charge of genocide is not only wrong, it is maliciously wrong — the defamation of a good man and a wilful misrepresentation of the truth.

What sort of ethical universe do the people who make this charge inhabit? As I noted, the assertion by the editors of Aboriginal History that the British settler societies were more intrinsically genocidal than Nazi Germany was based on an analysis of colonialism by Ward Churchill of the University of Colorado. Churchill is also treated as a citable authority by three separate authors in the recent anthology Genocide and Settler Society, edited by Dirk Moses of the University of Sydney, who describes Churchill as “a Native American activist and scholar.”

Their reverence for this person is revealing. In February last year, Churchill briefly became America 's most reviled university teacher for declaring that those who died in New York 's World Trade Centre on September 11 2001 had deserved their fate. Churchill wrote:

" If there was a better, more effective, or in fact any other way of visiting some penalty befitting their participation upon the little Eichmanns inhabiting the sterile sanctuary of the twin towers, I'd really be interested in hearing about it."

In the ensuing controversy, Churchill was exposed by real American Indians as a fake. The American Indian Grand Governing Council said “Ward Churchill has fraudulently represented himself as an Indian, and a member of the American Indian Movement and … has been masquerading as an Indian for years behind his dark glasses and beaded headband.”

More importantly, a University of New Mexico specialist in Indian law, John Lavelle, accused Churchill of fabricating evidence in no less than six books and eleven published academic articles.

That the work of such a moral bankrupt and scholarly charlatan could be paraded as weighty commentary by the editors of Australia 's leading journal in Aboriginal history is a good indication of what an intellectual shambles this subject has become.

The anti-colonialism of these historians is also highly selective in that it ignores empires other than those of Europe. The truth is that all great civilizations have absorbed other peoples, sometimes in harmony, sometimes by the sword. The Islamic world, so often portrayed today as victims of British or American or Israeli imperialism, is hardly innocent. The Ottoman Turks conquered and ruled most of the Middle East for a thousand years. The British and the French displaced them in the nineteenth and early twentieth century, with the approval of the Arabs who by then wanted liberation from Ottoman rule. In India, Muslims from Arabia and Persia were imperial overlords for eight centuries until the British arrived. The British overthrew Muslim rule, with the active co-operation and grateful applause of the Hindu population.

The Arabs themselves were not indigenous to most of the regions they now populate. Before the Turks, they were an imperial power who arose out of the Arabian Peninsula in the seventh century to conquer the Middle East, North Africa, South Asia and Southern Europe where they either subjugated or slaughtered the local population. None of this history provokes any censure from the critics of imperialism today, who reserve their reproaches exclusively for the European variety.

Until the 1960s, most people brought up within Western culture believed that its literature, its art and its music were among the glories of its civilization. Today, much of the academic debate about the Western literary heritage claims that it is politically contaminated. Some of these charges are well known because they offended against the ideological triumvirate of gender, race and class: Othello is ethnocentric, Paradise Lost is a feminist tragedy, Jane Eyre is both racist and sexist.

Western literature is today most severely rebuked for its alleged support of imperialism. The theorist making this accusation is the late Edward Said. He claims the flowering of European literature since the sixteenth century either directly endorsed or provided a supportive environment for the expansion of Europe in the same period.

In his book Culture and Imperialism Said claims that, of all modern literary forms, it is the novel that has been most culpable in reproducing and advocating the power relations of empire. His critique encompasses not only novels that are overtly about imperial affairs, such as those of Joseph Conrad and Rudyard Kipling, but even the work of such apparently domestic writers as Jane Austen and Charles Dickens. One of Jane Austen's characters in Mansfield Park, Sir Thomas Bertram, owns a sugar plantation in the Caribbean, so this implicates her in support of slavery, Said claims. In Great Expectations, Charles Dickens despatches one of his characters to Australia and another to Egypt, so the fact that he thinks like this makes him an imperialist author, too.

Said extends his critique to opera, which he describes as an art form “that belongs equally to the history of culture and the historical experience of overseas domination”. Because Giuseppe Verdi's Aida is set in ancient Egypt, Said claims it fosters military aggression towards the Orient. It contains “imperialist structures of attitude and reference” that act as an “anaesthetic” on European audiences, leading them to ignore the brutality that accompanied their conquest of other countries.

Equally culpable are European paintings of the Orient, even those of Delacroix and Ingres, which critics once thought portrayed the region in romantically admiring terms. Instead, art critics who follow Said now use them as examples of subtle and persistent Eurocentric prejudice against Islamic people and their culture. These paintings are purportedly a reflection of European arrogance and Western prejudices: “the idea of Oriental decay, the subjection of women, an unaccountable legal system — pictorial rhetoric that served a subtle imperialist agenda”.

Presented like this, stripped of their theoretical obfuscation, the ideas are transparently crude. They resemble the reductionism of one-time Marxist criticism, which invariably saw Western art and literature as expressions of “nothing but” the venal interests of the ruling class or the bourgeoisie. They also stretch interpretation beyond credulity.

The idea that, because Jane Austen presents one plantation-owning character, of whom heroine, plot and author all plainly disapprove, she thereby becomes a handmaiden of imperialism and slavery, is to misunderstand both the novel and the biography of its author, who was an ardent opponent of the slave trade. Similarly, to argue that because Charles Dickens uses some overseas locations as convenient off-stage sites to advance his plots, he thereby become an advocate of empire, is to give him attitudes he never expressed. To claim that the art form of opera or the romantic indulgence of the nineteenth century Orientalist school of painting derives from the European experience of overseas domination is to make an ideological misreading of them all.

Aida, for instance, is a story of star-crossed lovers set in 3000 BC amidst a war between the Egyptians and the Abyssinians, in which the Egyptians triumph. To claim that it sanctifies nineteenth century European imperialism against Egypt in which, this time, the Egyptians lose, is to abandon any sense of either perspective or logic.

As well as aesthetics, there is an economic dimension to this ideology. It believes Western prosperity is based on ill-gotten gains. We are rich because they are poor. Western imperialism exploited what is now the Third World and made the industrial revolution through the wealth it purloined.

One of the most celebrated authors in this genre is Andre Gunder Frank whose book ReOrient: Global Economy in the Asian Age (1998) denies that the industrial revolution was the product of European entrepreneurship, ingenuity and technological innovation. “ Europe did not pull itself up by its own economic bootstraps,” Frank writes. Instead, he claims: “Europe climbed up on the back of Asia, then stood on Asian shoulders — temporarily.”

Fortunately, we now have an analysis that convincingly demolishes claims of this kind. Niall Ferguson's 2003 book Empire is a history of British imperialism which demonstrates that Britain 's imperial record is not merely nothing to be ashamed of, but was a positive force that “made the modern world”. The history of the empire was characterized by the global spread of trade and wealth, technological and cultural modernization, and the growth of liberalism and democracy.

Imperialism encouraged investors to put their money in developing economies, places that would otherwise have been sites of great risk. The extension of the British empire into the less developed world had the effect of reducing this risk by imposing some form of British rule.

When the British Empire was at the peak of its influence, it was a much greater force for international investment in the underdeveloped world than any of today's institutions. In 1913, some 25 per cent of the world stock of capital was invested in poor countries. By 1997 that figure was only 5 per cent.

Britain exported to the world the systems of finance, transportation and manufacturing that it had developed at home. Rather than a form of plunder that depleted the economies that came under its influence, British imperialism injected many of the institutions of modernisation into the territories it controlled. British investment financed the development not only of white dominions in North America, Australasia and South America, but also India, Africa and east Asia. It provided the infrastructure of ports, roads, railways and communications that allowed these regions access to the modern world, plus a legal system to ensure that the commerce thereby generated was orderly.

European imperialism ended in the 1940s and 1950s. The non-West has now had half a century to try its own economic prescriptions. The fact that many of these countries have not progressed beyond the kick-start provided by European colonial investment can no longer be blamed on the West. Those who have chosen to emulate the Western model, such as South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore, have shown that it is possible to transform a backward Third World country into a prosperous, modern, liberal democratic nation in as little as two generations. Those countries that still wallow in destitution and underdevelopment do so not because of Western imperialism, racism or oppression, but because of policies they have largely chosen themselves by socialist planning or had forced upon them by civil war and revolution.

The anti-Westernism of which I am speaking is not only about the past but has as much to say about current affairs.

The aftermath to the assaults on New York and Washington on September 11 2001 provided a stark illustration of its values. Within days of the terrorist assault, a number of influential Western intellectuals, including Noam Chomsky, Susan Sontag and youthful counterparts such as Naomi Klein of the anti-globalisation protest movement, responded in ways that, morally and symbolically, were no different to the celebrations of the crowds on the streets of Palestine and Islamabad who cheered as they watched the towers of the World Trade Centre come crashing down. Stripped of its obligatory jargon, their argument was straightforward: America deserved what it got.

Perhaps the worst single response to September 11 was made, I am sorry to say, by an Australian. In his column in the London magazine New Statesman, John Pilger said the real terrorists were not Muslim radicals but the Americans themselves. Pilger wrote:

"If the attacks on America have their source in the Islamic world, who can be surprised? … Far from being the terrorists of the world, the Islamic peoples have been its victims — that is, the victims of American fundamentalism, whose power, in all its forms — military, strategic and economic — is the greatest source of terrorism on earth."

The English radical feminist Beatrix Campbell engaged in the same kind of blame shifting. She claimed “the victims of September 11 are also the architects of a mess of their own making”. In other words, those killed by the terrorists — including the women and children — brought their deaths upon themselves.

In fact, feminist authors were more prominent than most in blaming the United States for the attacks. One of the most publicised responses was made in Canada at a Women's Resistance Conference where a former president of the National Action Committee on the Status of Women, Sunera Thobani, directed her comments not at the Al Qaeda network but at the Bush administration. Thobani told a cheering audience that they should oppose the American war on terrorism. She said women must

" ...reject this kind of jingoistic militarism and recognise that as the most heinous form of patriarchal racist violence that we're seeing on the globe today… There will be no emancipation for women anywhere on this planet until the Western domination of this planet is ended."

September 11 also gave some feminists the opportunity to apply their theoretical assumptions to the symbolism of the events. A columnist for the London Times, Mary Ann Sieghart, said she was struck by how the attack left men much angrier and emotional than women. The reason, she said, was:

"The twin towers are two huge phallic symbols, populated with mainly men, most of whom are in the macho business of making money. They were then attacked by two more phallic symbols — jet airliners — and soon after are cut to their bases … How much more emasculating could a terrorist's action be?"

These comments derive, of course, from the well-known feminist insight that a phallic symbol is anything longer than it is wide.

Another female contributor was the Indian novelist Arundhati Roy, who used the attacks to allow all of her hitherto suppressed anti-American bile to come to the surface. She said Osama bin Laden and George W. Bush were moral equivalents. She denounced America 's

"...chilling disregard for non-American lives, its barbarous military interventions, its support for despotic and dictatorial regimes, its merciless economic agenda that has munched through the economies of poor countries like a cloud of locusts."

It was left to novelist Salman Rushdie to rescue the reputation of the subcontinent's literary community. Rushdie said:

"Let's be clear about why this anti-American onslaught is such appalling rubbish. Terrorism is the murder of the innocent; this time it was mass murder. To excuse such an atrocity by blaming US government policies is to deny the basic idea of all morality: that individuals are responsible for their actions. Furthermore, terrorism is not the pursuit of legitimate complaints by illegitimate means. The terrorist wraps himself in the world's grievances to cloak his true motives."

As no one should need reminding, Rushdie was the first target in the contemporary rise of Islamic radicalism. In 1989 he was the subject of a death edict by Iran 's Ayatollah Khomeini for satirising the prophet Mohammad in his novel The Satanic Verses. A number of Muslims living in the West declared they were willing to carry out the death sentence on behalf of their religion.

While a number of Western writers gave Rushdie vocal support and pointed out how such a fatwa offended the very core of Western culture, its right to free expression and free enquiry. But prominent politicians took a different line.

President George Bush Snr. adopted the moral equivalence and cultural relativism of the prevailing political class, declaring both the death edict and the novel equally “offensive”. Former president Jimmy Carter responded with a call for Americans to be “sensitive to the concern and anger” of Muslims.

Rushdie had to spend the next decade in disguise, living in secret locations, under police protection. He announced he had become a Muslim convert, but even this was not enough to have the fatwa withdrawn. No one else followed him by writing a novel criticising Mohammad.

More recently, when a Pakistani writer living in the West decided to write a book, Why I Am Not a Muslim, rejecting Islam and praising Western culture, he knew he had to adopt the pseudonym, Ibn Warraq, and keep his identity secret.

In Holland, the former Somali woman, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, wrote a book, The Son Factory, about the Muslim oppression of women. The book generated a spate of death threats. Although she subsequently became a member of parliament, the threats to her life mean she still lives under permanent armed guard in a secret government safe house.

The death threats Hirsi Ali received were genuine. Police later found she was at the top of a hit list of Dutch public figures. The assassin Mohammed Bouyeri had her as his preferred victim but, when he couldn't reach her, he went to the name second on the hit list, the filmmaker Theo van Gogh. Bouyeri shot, stabbed and almost beheaded van Gogh, whose offence had been to collaborate with Hirsi Ali on a film entitled Submission critical of Muslim violence towards women.

The tactic of targeting individuals who criticise Islam has been very effective in Holland. In early 2005, the Dutch law professor and newspaper columnist Paul Cliteur, who has openly criticised Islam on television, announced he would no longer do so because of the threat of violence. For similar reasons, the former Iranian academic and newspaper writer, Afshin Ellian, who lectures at the University of Leiden, now has a bodyguard accompanying him on campus at all times. Every morning the building where he teaches is swept by security services.

This personal terrorism affects not just those directly under threat, but all writers and intellectuals. Most are unable to afford the security costs and the state cannot protect them all. The result is that they are silenced by self-censorship.

This is why the debate over the Danish cartoons is so important. To date, the response has been mixed. Newspapers in Norway, Germany, France, New Zealand and Australia have reproduced the cartoons in defiance of the violence that has been perpetrated in Middle Eastern countries and threatened in many Western countries by crowds with signs such as: “Slay those who insult Islam.” “Butcher those who mock Islam.” and “Be prepared for the real holocaust.”

But many Western politicians have urged appeasement. British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said: “The republication of these cartoons has been unnecessary, it has been insensitive, it has been disrespectful and it has been wrong.” In New Zealand, Prime Minister Helen Clark accused the newspapers involved of “bad manners”. In Australia, Attorney-General Phillip Ruddock urged newspapers not to act “gratuitously with a view to try and provoke a response”.

The real problem here was not the Western newspapers who published the cartoons but the Islamic response to them. Our political leaders did not blame the latter but turned the responsibility onto ourselves. Enclosed by a mindset of cultural relativism, most Westerners are loath to censure Muslims who go on violent rampages, burn down embassies and threaten death to their fellow citizens. Many of us regard this as somehow understandable, even acceptable, since we have no right to judge another religion and culture.

The truth is that the riots, the arson, the death threats were not spontaneous outbursts from passionate religious believers but were carefully stage-managed by Muslim leaders. The imams of the Danish Muslim community consciously ignited the response some four months after the cartoons were published. They travelled to the Middle East where they generated support for a campaign quite deliberately targeted at Western culture's principle of freedom of expression.

Their real aim is not religious respect but cultural change in the West. They want to prevent criticism of its Muslim minority and accord that group special privilege not available to the faithful of other religions. Instead of them changing to integrate into our way of life, they want to force us to change to accept their way of life.

Muslim rage over the cartoons is not an isolated issue that would have been confined to Denmark and would have gone away if nobody had republished them. It is simply one more step in a campaign that has already included assassination, death threats and the curtailment of criticism. And our response, yet again, has been one more white flag in the surrender of Western cultural values that we have been making since Khomeini's fatwa against Rushdie in 1989.

The Western concept of freedom of speech is not an absolute. The limits that should be imposed by good taste, social responsibility and respect for others will always be a matter for debate. But this is a debate that needs to be conducted within Western culture, not imposed on it from outside by threats of death and violence by those who want to put an end to all free debate.

The concepts of free enquiry and free expression and the right to criticise entrenched beliefs are things we take so much for granted they are almost part of the air we breathe. We need to recognise them as distinctly Western phenomena. They were never produced by Confucian or Hindu culture. Under Islam, the idea of objective inquiry had a brief life in the fourteenth century but was never heard of again. In the twentieth century, the first thing that every single communist government in the world did was suppress it.

But without this concept, the world would not be as it is today. There would have been no Copernicus, Galileo, Newton or Darwin. All of these thinkers profoundly offended the conventional wisdom of their day, and at great personal risk, in some cases to their lives but in all cases to their reputations and careers. But because they inherited a culture that valued free inquiry and free expression, it gave them the strength to continue.

Today, we live in an age of barbarism and decadence. There are barbarians outside the walls who want to destroy us and there is a decadent culture within. We are only getting what we deserve. The relentless critique of the West which has engaged our academic left and cultural elite since the 1960s has emboldened our adversaries and at the same time sapped our will to resist.

The consequences of this adversary culture are all around us. The way to oppose it, however, is less clear. The survival of the Western principles of free inquiry and free expression now depend entirely on whether we have the intelligence to understand their true value and the will to face down their enemies.

© 2006 Keith Windschuttle

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:56 AM | Comments (14)

The Pursuit of Happiness

How long has it been since you've read the Declaration if Independence? High School? College? It is breathtaking in its beauty and rousing call for freedom.

For me, the most important words contained in this magnificent document are: "the pursuit of Happiness."

Never forget that we are surrounded by Islamic fanatics and their supporters who are not only intent on denying basic democratic freedoms but every form of happiness.

One of the first laws the Taliban instituted in Afghanistan was against kite flying.

And if you've ever spent any time in any of the so-called Palestinian Territories, um, Hamastan, you will discover yourself in a land ruled by roaming gunmen, gangs of thugs, grim killers who rule by intimidation and fear.

The fight for freedom and for happiness never ends.

Hat tip to Shrinkwrapped for the text of the Declaration.

IN CONGRESS, July 4, 1776.

The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen United States of America,

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.--Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.

He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them.
He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people.
He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected; whereby the Legislative powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
He has obstructed the Administration of Justice, by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary powers.
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
For Quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefits of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws, and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments:
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us.
He has plundered our seas, ravaged our Coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people.
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages, whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people.

Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our Brittish brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which, would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these United Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States; that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The 56 signatures on the Declaration appear in the positions indicated:

Column 1
Georgia:
Button Gwinnett
Lyman Hall
George Walton

Column 2
North Carolina:
William Hooper
Joseph Hewes
John Penn
South Carolina:
Edward Rutledge
Thomas Heyward, Jr.
Thomas Lynch, Jr.
Arthur Middleton

Column 3
Massachusetts:
John Hancock
Maryland:
Samuel Chase
William Paca
Thomas Stone
Charles Carroll of Carrollton
Virginia:
George Wythe
Richard Henry Lee
Thomas Jefferson
Benjamin Harrison
Thomas Nelson, Jr.
Francis Lightfoot Lee
Carter Braxton

Column 4
Pennsylvania:
Robert Morris
Benjamin Rush
Benjamin Franklin
John Morton
George Clymer
James Smith
George Taylor
James Wilson
George Ross
Delaware:
Caesar Rodney
George Read
Thomas McKean

Column 5
New York:
William Floyd
Philip Livingston
Francis Lewis
Lewis Morris
New Jersey:
Richard Stockton
John Witherspoon*
Francis Hopkinson
John Hart
Abraham Clark

Column 6
New Hampshire:
Josiah Bartlett
William Whipple
Massachusetts:
Samuel Adams
John Adams
Robert Treat Paine
Elbridge Gerry
Rhode Island:
Stephen Hopkins
William Ellery
Connecticut:
Roger Sherman
Samuel Huntington
William Williams
Oliver Wolcott
New Hampshire:
Matthew Thornton

*Reese Witherspoon's ancestor

Also, check out our Kesher, where our good friend Yehudit has posted a July 4th playlist. Good stuff.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 07:21 AM | Comments (11)

May 26, 2006

Romper Room: Saudi Style

After 9-11, our good friends the Saudis promised America that they would revise and reform their disgusting antiWestern, AntiSemitic textbooks and schools.

Sure.

Let us be clear. Saudi Arabia is not a country. It's a family corporation that was brought to power in the 1920's by the Al Saud tribe, fanatical Wahhabi Muslims who made ruthless war against all non-Wahhabi tribes. According to the historian Said K. Aburish in his book The Rise, Corruption and Coming Fall of the House of Saud no fewer than 400,000 people were slaughtered during the formative years of the Saudi State.

And these savages have the unmitigated gall to attack Israel in her war against terrorism. But what am I saying? It's okay when Muslims kill Muslims no matter how vast the carnage. Witness the genocide in Darfur. The only people who are protesting are westerners. The Muslim world is shamefully silent. Well, of course, they're too busy loudly defending homicide bombers in Israel. Or screaming about some silly cartoons in a Danish newspaper. Yup, they've got their priorities just right.

The Hijazis in the west, the Asiris in the south, and the Shiites in eastern Arabia all witnessed their Islamic monuments destroyed and, of course, suffered horrendous casualties. They were all eventually cowed into submission. Their loyalty has been bought, or promised, or compelled under threat of torture or that Saudi favorite: beheading. Though, it must be said that the Hijazis still despise the Al Sauds and there is always the fear that the Hijazis will foment a coup. Hence, the Hijazis are locked out of the National Guard, the most powerful branch of the Saudi Army.

The Saudi Arabian royal family are professional liars. They say one thing to the west, and the exact opposite to their people. Let us never forget that in the corrupt, upside down world of the Al Saud dynasty, rhetoric usually replaces reality.

The time will probably come when America will be forced to send these barbarians back into the desert from whence they came. They are friends to no one, not even their own subjects, for they have shamelessly plundered their land's resources in order to enrich their own private treasury.

Naturally they continue to educate their children to hate all non Muslims, and to revile Jews and Christians as less than human. Read on.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:09 PM | Comments (9)

May 25, 2006

The True Inconvenient Truth

Al Gore is all over the place flogging his inconvenient truth. The left loves global warming because it pulls focus from those nasty Islamofascists who really are evil and who really do threaten our way of life and who really did slaughter 3,000 innocent Americans, wish to slaughter many more, and who really do decapitate people they don't like--infidels, Jews, Americans, Christians, it's a long list.

Hollywood loves global warming because they don't have to deal with evil, which is like really nasty and complicated and goes against all their multi-cultural impulses. And besides, global warming makes corporations the bad guys again.Which is, for Hollywood, the natural order of things. They get to attack big auto, big oil, big utilities. Ignoring the rather inconvenient fact that they all work for massive multi-national corporations. Once again, they get to feel all warm and fuzzy about themselves by driving a little Prius even though they also own a Mercedes, a BMW, and who knows how many other gas guzzlers. These politically incorrect cars are in the garage , out of sight--for the moment. And best of all global warming is, well, global. They don't have to deal with any inconvenient nationalities. It's "We Are the World," all over again.

Global Warming lets the left ignore the Iranian nuclear threat to annihilate Israel and every Jew on the face of the planet. They get to ignore the growing problem of Islamofascism in Western Europe, Easten Europe, Asia, Scandinavia, and in America and Canada.

And our Mexican border? The Democrats are okay, I assume, with rules for baseball, but when it comes to rules for our borders or rules for citizenship, well, they become pliable as rubber.

By focusing on global warming the Democrats get to ignore the rising military threat from China, and the Stalinist state of North Korea.

You see, with global warming, the left have a bigger issue: the world is going to end.

BOOM!

Funny, this used to be what lunatics on streetcorners were always screaming about. You know, people desperately in need of very strong medication.

No, the real inconvenient truth is that Al Gore is the fool he always was; that he insists that global warming is the great threat to civilization is proof positive that he was never fit to be commander-in-chief.

Got to Shrinkwrapped for a fair and sober analysis of global warming.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 05:30 PM | Comments (8)

The Meathead Proposition

If you live in California it's important that you vote "No" on Proposition 82. The man behind this proposition is none other than Rob Reiner and it truly is a meathead piece of work. Head on over to Bookworm where he eloquently explains why this benign sounding piece of legislation is, in fact, a time bomb waiting to go off.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:48 AM | Comments (7)

May 22, 2006

Jews Ashamed to be Jews

Former terrorist Walid Shoebat is frustrated with the suicidal tendencies of the Jewish community. Thanks to our friend Yehudit for bringing this powerful article to our attention.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:37 AM | Comments (22)

May 19, 2006

IraniaNazis

It was only a matter of time. Iranian Jews, Christians and other religious minorities are going to be forced to wear colored badges identifying them as non-Muslims.

The world-wide Jihad marches on and we in the west are in complete denial.

The violent Jihadists attack because they sense weakness in the west. A liberal secularism that knows not who it is, and thus concludes that there is nothing worth fighting for.

Where are all the moderate peace-loving Muslims we always always hear so much about?

Why are they not protesting?

The answer is simple. They cannot protest because what the Iranians are doing is completely acceptable by any interpretation of the Koran and Sharia. Just go to Robert Spencer's website Jihadwatch for a complete explanation.

Let us not forget that it was not the Nazis nor the medieval Christians who came up with notion of forcing Jews to wear distinctive clothing or badges, but this was a Muslim innovation.

Wake up or your children will be wearing a yellow star.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:54 AM | Comments (21)

May 12, 2006

Sincerely, and Death to America!

James Lileks give his hysterical take on Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's nutty letter to President Bush.

Sometimes, we just have to laugh.

Karen and I wish everyone a lovely and meaningful Shabbo.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:12 PM | Comments (8)

May 11, 2006

Angry & Frustrated

Commenter and Seraphic friend Ari Kinsberg wrote this in the comments section.

Robert:

And you were worried about two Neture Karta meshugenes in Teheran? Apparently American Jewish groups like Americans for Peace Now and Israel Policy Forum are fighting AIPAC's efforts to push through the The Palestinian Anti Terrorism Act of 2006. See today's Jerusalem Post website.

My lengthy response:

There is no question that "Americans for Peace Now" and "Israel Policy Forum" are infinitely more dangerous than Neturei Karta.

The NK are few in numbers and have no political clout. And most people recognize that they are, desperately, in need of some powerful medication.

But "Americans for Peace Now" and other such dovish groups have an air of legitimacy. They speak in full sentences, sound reasonable, and have friends in high places. And they are probably on some pretty sophisticated medication already, which would explain their massive memory lapses.

Blame it on Israel

That the PLO unleashed a murderous offensive right after Oslo meant little and is already forgotten by the left. And whatever impression it did make, well, they just blamed it on Israel. Yup, Ariel Sharon provoked the infitada by, gasp!, taking a stroll on the Temple Mount. The chutzpah of a Jew to feel that he has the right to walk where the Holy Temple stood.

The fact that Prime Minister Barak, the most left wing PM in Israeli history, offered the Palis 96% of what they asked for--well, even that wasn't good enough for the left.

That's the beauty of being on the left: no matter what policies are carried out by those in power, the left smugly, self-righteously steps in and says, not enough. Or: it wasn't done correctly. Reminds me (how shocking!) of Communists who blithely excuse genocide in Russia, China, Cambodia, wherever, by chanting the empty mantra: "That wasn't real Communism."

When in fact, that's exactly what Communism was and is and always will be.

The Palestinians lied about Barak's offers, and the left swallowed those lies, or just ignored the historical record.

Killer Peace Movements

Peace movements always end up killing more people than the wars they work so diligently to avoid. Witness the aftermath of the Viet Nam war: close to a million Viet Namese, "American collaborators," were murdered and countless others sent to "reeducation camps."

But speak to an old Viet Nam protestor and odds are he/she will just smile at the golden memories:The March on Washington, Joan Baez, The Black Panthers, Kumbaya. Good times. Good times.

Now that Hamas is in power these same peace groups claim that Hamas was elected because the PLO was so corrupt that the Palistinians had no choice.

Funny, while the PLO were in power and people like me were denouncing the utter corruption and murderous tactics of the PLO, the left insisted that the PLO were the "sole and legitimate representatives of the Palestinian people."

You see, rational discourse is impossible when dealing with peaceniks. They insist on having it both ways.

It would be funny but for so many Jews murdered and maimed.

Hamas openly and proudly state that they want to destroy Israel, will not even recognize Israel's existence. Yet Hamas, and this is just priceless, demands money from this non-existent state.

Uh-huh.

And these peace groups demand that we moderate our views, recognize Hamas, release funds, and in the words of former President Jimmy Carter: "...not punish the Palestinian people."

Notice how the left infantalizes the Arabs. It's a not-so-subtle form of racism. We, on the right, have far more respect for Arab culture. It's our belief that when people make a national choice, electing Hamas say, well, you live with that choice, and you do not then spend 24/7 explaining why you had to make that choice--when the reasons are quite clear: they give the people what they want, i.e. a genocidal platform against Israel and Jews everywhere. It's worth noting that Hamas' covenent quotes The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Yep, the former President can always be counted on to be absolutely wrong.

Iran: we are now paying very heavily for Carter's treachery and abandonment of our ally, the Shah of Iran.

Carter's words are classic Orwellian double speak.

Let me explain:

1. We're not punishing anybody. As always, the Palestinians are doing what they do best: punishing themselves.
2. No matter how much money you send them, it never goes where it's supposed to go, say hospitals or schools.
3. The money always ends up around the waist of a homicidal Jihadist intent on killing Jewish men, women and children.

Gazanomics

Thirty-five percent of Gaza's 1.4 million people are on the Palestinian Authority payroll. You imagine teachers, doctors, nurses and accountants, right?

Hey, we're dealing with the Palestinians here.

What you're not told by the Mainstream Media about these "jobs" is that they are overwhelmingly in the twelve "security services" that were established by the terrorist leader Yassir Arafat.

Twelve security services. Your eyes are not seeing double.

And we're not talking about nice policemen here, no these are the Al Aqsa Homicide Brigade, and the other competeing terrorist organizations.

Makes you wonder if Palestinian society might be a bit, um, violent?

Hamas stands for a very precise religious and political ideology: the imposition of Sharia, an Islamic Theocracy, and the destruction of Israel, Judaism and Christianity.

The Palestinians adore the message and they voted that party in.

Now they must live with the results of that choice.

That's what mature people do.

And mature national entities do not demand that the western countries they despise and want to destroy -- financially support them.

And we are not obliged to feed murderers.

Arab (dis)Unity

Look, the Saudis share the Palestinians twisted values. Let them donate some bucks. Last time I looked those guys were swimming in money.

What about all the other Arabs countries who are always telling us how much they just love the poor oppressed Palestinians?

Let us examine Arab affection for the Palestinian cause.

After the 1948 Israeli War of Independence, there were close to a million Jewish refugees from Arab lands. These impoverished Jews were welcomed as citizens into Israel.

The Arab refugees from that same war who fled to surrounding Arab countries were not allowed to become citizens. They were shtupped into refugee camps and treated like garbage, made into professional UN welfare witches.

In the years since 1948, Palestinians have attempted to overthrow the governments of Jordan, and Lebanon, and in both countries, they have sparked bloody civil wars that resulted in casualties in the tens of thousands. Casualties that do not come close to those inflicted by Israel on the Palestinians. But those deaths seem to escape the notice of the mainstream media. The unspoken agreement is: if Muslims kill Muslims, well, who are we to intervene, they have their methods of conflict resolution, and tribal massacres are probably a time-honored cultural tradition.

That's what happens when you start speaking and thinking multi-cultural gibberish.

Well, this morning, Steven Erlanger, official spokesman for Hamas, informs us for maybe the tenth time this week through the NY Slime that the people in Gaza are "frustrated and angry."

Gee, you know what that means. When a group, especially Arabs, is angry and frustrated, well, anything goes. You know why? Because, well, they're, um, frustrated and angry.

I thought the people in Gaza were frustrated and angry because Israelis occupied their precious land?"

But wait, the mean Israelis pulled out a few months ago.

So how come Gaza is still frustrated and angry?

Maybe, just maybe it has nothing to do with so-called settlers.

Severe Disconnect

1. They are frustrated and angry because Israel exists.

2. They are frustrated and angry because a handful of poor Jews built a modern democratic state in a sea of backward Arab tyrannies.

3. They are frustrated and angry because the freedom afforded women--Arab, Christian, Druze and Jewish--in Israel, is a direct threat to the oppressive Caliphite they yearn for.

4. They are frustrated and angry because Israel, with the same (actually less) natural resources, has built a first class economy, and the only thing the Arabs manufacture is homicide belts. Heck, we make the all the componenets, they just assemble them.

5. They are frustrated and angry because Israel has an army which could crush them in a six-hour offensive, as any of their beloved Arab neighbors would, but Israelis are Jewish and compassionate, therefore they fight the most morally decent counter-terrorist campaign ever waged.

6. They are frustrated and angry because several million Jews are alive and thriving. Yet since the Seventh Century their religious leaders have promised to convert or destroy the Jews; there is, to put it mildly, a severe disconnect.

7. They are frustrated and angry because Israel is building a security wall and it's getting harder to send homicide bombers into Israel. How dare the Jews make it so difficult to kill them.

8. And finally, they are frustrated and angry because they have been conditioned in this Pavlovian response. Western liberals have enabled the Palestinians in the exact same way that they enabled generations of welfare cases and thus destroyed entire families, and turned neighborhoods into "inner cities."

P.S. I'm angry and frustrated. You know why? That I have to sit down and write this--which should be obvious to anyone with half-a-brain.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:23 AM | Comments (15)

May 10, 2006

Four Things About Iran

Seraphic Secret is blessed with many knowledgeable readers and commenters. Counted among their numbers are: a TV news producer, several incredibly talented free-lance writers and editors, a soap manufacturer who raises goats, several US Army and Marine Officers, a whole bunch of Israeli soldiers, three (that I know of) ER physicians, bunches of lawyers, a quite a few Orthodox Rebbeim (lurkers, they never comment), an expert on power tools, several psychologists and psychiatrists, software programmers, a computational physicist (whatever that is), various clever entrepreneurs, aspring screenwriters, a Ba'al Te'shuva ex-Communist, Beis Midrash students, Satmar Hasidic ladies who get all splooshy inside from "How I Married Karen," moderate Muslims who fear being murdered by Jihadists, my father and mother: Hi Dad! Hi Mom! -- and one cover girl model.

And every once in a while we're going to turn this blog over to one of our readers because he/she has somethinig valuable to contribute.

David Ribner has his BA from Columbia '06. He is about to leave for London where he will study at Kings College and get his MA in War Studies '07. He also studied at the Freie Universitaet Berlin Summer '05. He speaks Hebrew, French and German. I can also attest to the fact that David, a close friend of my new son-in-law danced up a storm at Offspring #2's wedding, is a fine and articulate young man with a great future. Seraphic Secret is proud to publish some of his first political musings.

I asked David a few questions about Iran.

1. How crazy is the Iranian government?

The sad truth is that the Iranian government is not crazy at all. First, they view it as their right to obtain nuclear weapons as an emerging power and are rightfully upset by the fact that other countries are impinging on their sovereign rights as a nation. And in all honesty, it must be admitted that the United States is doing exactly that. Second, they know that any military operation against them can only delay their nuclear program and not destroy it completely. Only an invasion would be able to do that and America is in no place to be doing that right now. Militarily, the army is bogged down in Iraq and politically, the Bush administration doesn’t have the political capital. Third, they know that Europe and America would be hard pressed to cut off the Iranian oil supply because their citizens would not stand for exceedingly higher gasoline prices. That being said, the Iranians know that they can probably get away with what they are doing, especially with Russia and China willing to veto any Security Council resolutions targeting them.

2. Are the Europeans clueless or are they just deferring to America?

The Europeans are not clueless about the threat; if anything, the French are even more anti-Iran than the US and they are also aware that Iranian missiles can reach the European continent. They are also not deferring to America. While they are negotiating with US support and could not act militarily alone, they have their own reasons to be scared of the Iranian bomb. A number of reasons can plausibly explain their faith in negotiation. First, they are afraid of a refugee problem that would potentially result from war in the region. Second, they have significant Muslim populations which would explode in a wave of rioting, a la France last fall, should their governments take part in any action against Iran. Third, as noted above, a heavy reliance on oil as well as increasing trade with Iran would make the Europeans hard pressed to support sanctions. Thus, I would not classify the Europeans as clueless, rather they are scared and their tenuous domestic situation leaves them impotent to respond to Iran except through negotiated settlement.

3. Are Russia and China playing the old cold war game here?

In short, Russia yes, and China no. Russia certainly sees this as an opportunity to retake the world stage as a major player and is thus using Iran to balance against the US. China is more concerned with the oil they get from Iran. China’s massive economy and infrastructure continue to grow by leaps and bounds and are heavily dependent on Middle East oil. Any disturbance to the current flow would hurt them accordingly and thus they are not anxious to have that cut off. Additionally, both Russia and China are also nuclear powers and significantly larger than Iran and thus any potential threat posed to them by Iranian nuclear weapons is looked upon as remote.

4. Who will bomb Iran: America or Israel? Or will it be the two countries working secretly?

I would first caution you not to take military action for granted. The situation is fluid because we don’t know when exactly Iran will have enough enriched uranium to actually produce a bomb. Estimates vary wildly in years; the most recent being Israel’s chief of military intelligence who put the date at 2010. The political situation in Washington is also a factor. Ample time must be given to both UN negotiations and EU 3 negotiations which may or may not be considered unsuccessful by the time the Bush administration fades from the political scene. Push comes to shove Israel may act alone, but the mission would be very difficult tactically and would run the risk of massive retaliation against Israeli and Jewish targets worldwide. Though the prospect of Iran becoming a nuclear capable country is a real and dangerous threat, the correct mix of political, military, and strategic environments coming together to actually allow action to be taken may never come about. It is important to separate fear and reality even if the alternative is potentially earth-shattering.

4. Finally, what do you make of Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's letter to President Bush?

An attempted publicity stunt to attract international support gone bad. The intention, I believe, was to attract people from the anti-American bandwagon. You should read the Wall Street Journal editorial from today's paper.

David welcomes any questions and comments from Seraphic Secret readers.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 12:27 PM | Comments (27)

May 09, 2006

Traffic & Transformations

Please take a moment to sign this important petition. That human traffic is big business across the globe is a hellish shame That a portion of this human slavery takes place on the Holy Land of Israel is an evil and a disgrace which is simply beyond words, beyond imagination.

We'd like to thank our good friend Sara for bringing this petition to our attention. We urge all our readers to sign and send it on to everyone you know.

Seraphic Secret would also like to take this opportunity to wish Sara and her lovely family a heartfelt Mazal Tov on the recent marriage of her daughter.

Initially, the common ground for our relationship with Sara was the tragic deaths of our beloved children: Ariel and Timmi, two holy and pure souls. Karen and I developed a cyber relationship with Sara. This deepened over time and finally was sealed when Sara visited us in Los Angeles a year ago.

As I have said many times, blogging is rapidly and transforming the political world; but blogging is also reshaping personal landscapes in ways never before possible -- or even imaginable. I see it everywhere I look, but most of all I see it most clearly when I glance in the mirror.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:56 AM | Comments (20)

May 05, 2006

Rough Childhood II

This is an excerpt from Daniel Heninger's opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal.

There is reason to believe that pre-9/11 thinking will in time return and prevail.
Defenders of Moussaoui's life sentence say he will "rot in prison." Perhaps in a better world Zacarias Moussaoui would share a cell with Hannibal Lecter. But if our moral betters aren't going to let Saddam's torturers rot in Abu Ghraib, if they aren't going to let the CIA's most important al Qaeda captives rot in "secret" foreign prisons, they certainly aren't going to let Moussaoui rot in Florence, Colo. He will be treated more than well.

Not to mention the Moussaoui trial itself. We arrive at the end of these interminable trial circuses of procedural delay and then claim "the system works" and "justice" has been done. No, it has done damage to the normal idea of justice. He saw the game early on and made a mockery of it. Moussaoui achieved a two-year delay in his trial by demanding to interview al Qaeda detainees. But our moral betters insist that the whole lot of Guantanamo detainees be given access to this same system of justice. They would diminish and crush it.

The odds were strong, as Moussaoui's lawyers knew and the government's should have known, that 9 of 12 jurors would vote that Moussaoui's childhood was "dysfunctional" and "mitigating." This is the therapeutic vocabulary that the West has developed to explain anything in the years from the postwar period to, say, September 11.

For quite awhile after September 11, we were a people united in the war on terror. By now we have let the adrenal pleasures of political fighting over the presidency dissipate the difficult emotions of staying united against a real enemy. The war in Iraq has contributed, but you can't lay it all off on Iraq. The ambiguity of the Moussaoui jury is a portent. See "United 93." It is very difficult. It should be.

***

Let me add this: ZM and all Jihadists should be tried by military tribunals. Our justice system is broken, it is under the thumb of the Democratic party and one of its biggest contributors, the Trial Lawyers of America. They have no interest in justice, only in advancing their liberal agenda--oh, and lining their pockets.

The Jihadists have declared war on western civilization; they target non combatants; they do not wear uniforms; they do not fight under any national flag but the bloody flag of Jihad. We are foolish and self destructive to give them civil rights they do not deserve and which they are so intent on destroying.

This trial was a shambles and our struggle against the barbarians at our gates has been made that much weaker for setting a terrible legal precedent.

Karen and I wish all our readers a lovely and meaningful Shabbos.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:06 AM | Comments (11)

May 04, 2006

Rough Childhood I

I can't say I'm surprised that the jury found Moussaoui guilty as charged, but gave him a life sentence instead of what he really deserves: death. They felt bad for him, afterall he had a rough childhood. In our culture that explains all, forgives all.

Funny, I don't remember any members of the KKK ever getting off because they had abusive fathers. I don't remember any historian excusing slavery because the South was a dysfunctional culture.

Hitler had a bad childhood too. So what? We made total war on him. And because we did, we won.

Plenty of good and fine people have bad childhoods. That is no excuse for lack of conscience.

ZM did what he did not because of what happened in his childhood, but because of a sick theology. ZM did what he did because he is evil.

End of story.

And to those who argue that putting him to death who have made him a martyr, let me say two things.

1. Since when do we hand out justice based on what our enemies want?
2. Besides, it's not even true. He would only be a martyr if he died in battle. Being put to death by infidel prison officials would, in fact, be a shameful, ignominious death.

To those who argue that life in prison is worse than death. Hogwash. How do you explain the years and years of appeals of death row inmates? No, they do not want to die.

Finally, let me say this. Many people are going to die because ZM is alive in our prison system. Americans on vacation in Europe and the Middle East are going to be kidnapped, and the kidnappers will demand that ZM be released. The innocent Americans will then be beheaded when ZM is not set free.

I am afraid that America simply does not understand that we are at war with a genocidal theology. When I hear the phrase, "We must bring these people to justice," I feel ill.

We must make total war on these human monsters.

Until Americans understand this simple fact, we lose.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:03 AM | Comments (35)

May 02, 2006

Jewish Traitors II

Apparently, a cherem, a legal shunning, was placed on the Neturei Karta back in 2002 when they met with the terrorist Arafat. It goes without saying that meeting with Iranian terrorists is more of the same and of course this cherem is still in effect.

Once again, I thank my friend Baruch Cohen for sending me this document.

URGENT MEDIA STATEMENT FROM UNITED ORTHODOX COMMUNITIES OF NEW YORK RE: NETUREI KARTA

Further to our public announcement dated 21 April 2002 [9th Iyar 5762], we hereby reiterate and declare that Charedi/Chassidic/Orthodox Jews everywhere absolutely reject the treacherous and contemptible conduct of that insignificant and irrelevant group of misfits and Mechalelei Hashem, desecraters of G-d’s Name, who have again raised their ugly heads and besmirched and blackened the reputations of observant Jews worldwide.

Their joining in vigils and ‘prayers’ for the arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat [may his name be blotted out] with Jew-haters of all manner, is an outrage that we cannot ignore and will not forgive. We again demand that rabbis and community leaders of all communities ensure that members of this group are refused entry to all houses of prayer.

These nefarious associates of Jewry’s enemies have unfortunately again succeeded in their crazed hunger for publicity and are being depicted in local and international media-outfitted in their religious attire-bewailing the impending demise of a mass-murderer-side-by side with Palestinian Jew-haters. The shame and embarrassment to decent religious Jews worldwide is unbearable.

We repeat: this contemptible and minuscule gang of traitors to Judaism, were decades ago barred from our Synagogues and communities. Their refusal to abide by the pronouncements of religious and lay leaders of our communities has made them persona non grata.

Under no circumstances should the media insinuate that ANY of their actions are associated with the Charedi or Chassidic community

We urgently request all media outlets to highlight this fact in any report on this group’s actions and to clearly state that the Neturei Karta and their advocates have been excommunicated by virtually the entire spectrum of Jewry.

THE UNITED ORTHODOX COMMUNITIES OF NEW YORK IS A COALITION OF MAJOR ORTHODOX JEWISH CONGREGATIONS IN BROOKLYN, NYC, UPSTATE NEW YORK and NEW JERSEY

Representing:

Anshei Sfard, Satmar, Bobov, Emunas Yisroel, Ger, Belz, Bnei Yehuda, Nitra, Viznitz, Munkacz, Vien, Klausenburg, Torah Vodaas, Novominsk, Torah Temimah, Chasan Sofer, Kiryas, Joel-Monroe, Pupa, Young Israel of Brooklyn, Cong. Shomrei Shabbos, United Lubavitch, Organizations of Crown Heights, Kamenitz, Agudath Israel 14th Avenue, United Jewish Organizations of Williamsburg, Boro Park Jewish Council, Debrecin, US Friends of the Edah Charedis, Lakewood Yeshiva

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 01:50 PM | Comments (14)

May 01, 2006

Jewish Traitors

Sadly there is no shortage of Jews who campaign against the State of Israel. Many of them are university professors in the US (and Israel!) whose skewed views are corrupting the minds of the next generation of leaders and policymakers. However objectionable, they do not collaborate with murderers. That kind of degeneracy is the preserve of the Neturei Karta.

Ordinarily they would be entitled to their point of view and to demonstrate opposition to Zionism in appropriate places, such as outside the Knesset or - if they felt so violated - at the European Court of Human Rights in the Hague. But no - these characters demonstrate alongside terrorists whose abiding policy is the wilful murder of Jews inside and outside of Israel. The NK pays homage to mullahs and clerics like Qadarawi who encourage suicide bombings. And they make solidarity visits to the new leaders in Iran whose avowed intention is to wipe another 6 million Jews off the face of the earth.

----
It is very important to know and remember the faces of Naturei Karta. Are they coming to your shul to daven? Are they soliciting charitable funds from you? You should know who they are and blacklist them.

We should put them in cherem, in halachic, legal isolation.

---
Open Letter To Neturei Karta
By: Steven Plaut

Neturei Karta is a small sect of ultra-Orthodox "Jewish" extremists, best known for marching arm in arm with Yasir Arafat and endorsing every anti-Israel terrorist and anti-Semite on the planet as part of its jihad against Israel.

Neturei Karta is a small sect of ultra-Orthodox "Jewish" extremists, best known for marching arm in arm with Yasir Arafat and endorsing every anti-Israel terrorist and anti-Semite on the planet as part of its jihad against Israel.

Neturei Karta ("Guardians of the City" in Aramaic) was created in 1938, mainly by Hungarian Jews, as a breakaway group from the more mainstream Agudath Israel movement.

The organization openly calls for Israel to be destroyed and openly supports the worst genocidal anti-Semites on the planet.

Recently, in response to one of my columns, I received a series of e-mails from someone associated with the Neturei Karta movement. He and I carried on a correspondence of sorts for quite a while. Below I have taken the essence of the notes I sent him and compiled them into an "open letter."

Dear Sir,

In the Amida prayer, which Jews recite three times every day, there is a section in which the minim are denounced. The minim were small groups of treasonous Jews who collaborated with the Roman enemies of the Jewish people, and the prayer explicitly mentions that these minim were tattlers, snitches, people who served the anti-Semites of their day as agents, and worked against Jewish existence and survival. Since then, of course, the segment in the daily prayer has been understood to be a curse in general upon anti-Semites, and especially Jewish anti-Semites working against their own people.

I mention all this because I can think of no more apt illustration of a cult of minim than Neturei Karta. Your cult is nothing more than a pseudo-Jewish pagan group working against Judaism and in collaboration with the worst enemies of the Jews. You would have no problems serving the Romans or Assyrians if they were still around.

You claim that you are simply opposed to Israel because it is full of people who trample upon Jewish observance. Well, let me tell you something. The most secularist pork-eater on any kibbutz in Israel is halachically more Jewish than the "rabbis" in the Neturei Karta cult. Why do I say this? Because, as you know, there is a clear halachic rule that says that living in the Land of Israel is equivalent to observing all 613 religious commandments or mitzvot. All of them — even the ones reserved for priests and even the ones that may only be performed in the Temple (and so may not be performed today).

No, I am not suggesting that living in Eretz Yisrael should be regarded as a blanket exemption from the observance of all other Jewish religious precepts. I am simply saying that even someone who observes nothing at all, but who lives in Israel, is on a very real level more Jewish than the "rabbis" of your minim cult.

When you march in anti-Israel demonstrations alongside anti-Semites, when you endorse Arafat and his stormtroopers and serve as their public relations agents, when you support terrorists and excuse mass murders of Jews, you are acting as followers of the evil Bil`am, not as sons of Jacob or disciples of Abraham.

You say you want Israel destroyed because it was not set up properly, because the Messiah has not yet come. Do you really think that Israel can be destroyed without there also transpiring a second Holocaust? Do you not realize this is the unavoidable consequence of what you are proposing, and what the people you are supporting seek?

A ketuba, or marriage contract, that is signed on the Sabbath is still a valid one and must be respected, even though signing it on the Sabbath is a violation of the day. A kohen who marries a divorcee has sinned, because such a marriage is prohibited by the Torah, but the marriage must be acknowledged and even accepted and honored. It stands.

Whether or not Israel was created properly or at the correct time, the fact that it exists changes how Jews must behave and requires a certain amount of responsibility and arvut ze l`ze, or mutual support and defense, even from the most smug, self-righteous pretenders at ultra-religiosity.

Whatever you think about the establishment of Israel, you have no right to endorse those who seek to destroy it and its Jewish population through violence. And if you do endorse such people and march with them, you are collaborators with Haman. You are worse than Dotan and Aviram.

Had you lived in Shushan in Persia in the days of Queen Esther and her Uncle Mordecai, you would have been marching arm in arm with Haman. After all, among those Persian Jews were no doubt many who violated the Sabbath and other religious principles. Neturei Karta would have supported Haman as a way to "punish" them.

In Elijah`s generation, all but a handful of Jews were acting as pagans. Strange, but I do not recall Elijah justifying anti-Semites murdering them. Indeed, Elijah enthusiastically endorsed the very worst pagan of all, King Ahab, when the king went on the warpath to kill the enemies of Israel.

The Neturei Karta "rabbis" are not recognized as Torah authorities by real Torah authorities outside the cult — not by Sephardic rabbis, not by Ashkenazic rabbis, not by misnagdim, not by chassidim. In essence, virtually all Jews see Neturei Karta as a pathetic minim cult. Can you name a single rabbi outside Neturei Karta who endorses the view of your own "rabbis"? Of course you can't.

So you think collaborating with the worst anti-Semites on the planet, people who openly endorse genocide of Jews, is better than collaborating with misguided Israeli secularists, people who perhaps need to be pulled back to the traditions of Israel? You believe that when a Jew sins, he ceases to be a Jew and should be murdered? I wonder what books you are reading as replacements for the Torah.

You insist the Zionists are the Devil, not the Palestinian terrorists. And of course, if the Palestinian terrorists are not the Devil, why should anyone think the German Nazis were? Since you defend the Palestinians' right to murder my family — and, as it happens, my family does not eat pork — then what is wrong with the Germans murdering my grandparents?

In the interest of consistency, why not march around in your pro-PLO parades wearing swastikas? Why not put one on your website?

The Neturei Karta cultists are inverted Bil`ams. Bil`am was ordered to curse Israel, yet ended up blessing the Tents of Jacob. You are the reverse. You are ordered by the Torah to bless Israel, but you curse the Jewish people. You have no concept of Jewish solidarity because you are, at best, a pseudo-Jewish minim cult.

Steven Plaut is a professor at Haifa University. His book "The Scout"
is available at Amazon.com. He can be reached at steven_plaut@yahoo.com.

And here are the NK appearing on Iranian TV, thanks to my friend Baruch Cohen for bringing this to my attention and suggeting that I post the whole sorry and surrealistic affair on Seraphic Secret.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:55 AM | Comments (14)

April 26, 2006

The Voices Behind the Generals

Much has been made in the media recently of the retired Generals and their call for Donald Rumsfeld to join them in retirement. From The American Thinker, a superb and to-the-point analysis of this tempest in a tea pot.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:59 AM | Comments (0)

April 24, 2006

Penn State Tyrant

It's always nice to know who is responsible for doing what. Well, in the case of the Penn State Outrage, we've got the man who shut down the Art exhibit that, horror of horrors, dares to display the faces of Palestinian Terrorism and anti-Semitism.

Take a moment and write the good Professor a note. Don't be rude. Don't threaten. Be firm and respectful and forthright. And pass this on to as many people as possible.

Do not let this man have a moment's peace.

Charles Garoian( E-mail: crg2@psu.edu) Professor and
Director of the School of Visual Arts.

Office: 814.865.0444
Fax: 814.865.1158

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 08:55 AM | Comments (8)

April 23, 2006

Penn State Tyranny II

Gather round folks: it's Islam Awareness Week at Penn State.

This story just gets more vile. Little Green Footballs informs us that a few years ago the Muslim students invited a Nazi to campus and guess what happened?

Nothing.

It's clear that a double standard exists at Penn State: one that favors radical Muslims over democratic Jews.

Time to divest from this vile institution that appears well on its way to dhimmihood.

Correction: Antisemite William Baker was invited to the University of Pennsylvania, not Penn State University.

Oh, gee, that's such a comfort.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 05:21 PM | Comments (8)

Penn State Tyranny I

We are constantly told that our universities are places where free speech thrives; where free speech is alive and respected.

Of course under this guise of "academic freedom" Israel and Judaism are under constant assault by apologists for Palestinian terrorism. Using Orwellian language, free speech is constantly invoked as if the Caliphite these savages wish to impose would ever tolerate any forms of freedom.

Make no mistake about it, the freedoms these enemies of Israel and Judaism use so bluntly will be used against Christianity and all forms of Democracy; against women, against homosexuals; against the very foundations of western civilization.

And so, what happens when a Jew invokes the same free speech rights on a campus in respect to an art exhibit?

Here's a shock.

Free speech disappears; free speech bows to the iron curtain of, you guessed it: cultural diversity.

Truth no longer matters. We've got to be sensitive, even to a culture that is by covenant: genocidal.

Read this and weep.

In America, our freedoms are clearly threatened from two tyrannical voices: the Jihadists and the radical left.

And where have these two groups met and formed their alliances? In the groves of academia.

If you are an alumni of Penn State, write them a letter and express your outrage.

Do not send this institution one more penny. In fact, divest from Penn State.

Two can play that game.

If you are a parent, do not send your child to this corrupt institution.

It is time for Jewish parents to stop paying the salaries of our enemies.

Hat tip to the always excellent blog Solomonia.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 03:15 PM | Comments (16)

April 18, 2006

Swedish Jews -- Your Turn

It's Open Season on Swedish Jews. Hat tip to Little Green Footballs.

Are the oh-so tolerant Swedes so dense as to believe that the Islamic Jihad taking root in their country will only be isolated to the land's 16,000 Jews?

Wait, I forgot, this is the "neutral" country that did business with Nazi Germany during World War II. The "neutral" country that allowed German troops to march through their lands.

Yup, it's just the Swedes being, well, Swedish.

What a shock.

Note to Seraphic Readers: When you read the full story prepare for your jaw to hit the floor. Hard.

Note to Jews in Sweden: Run like hell!

Note to self: Buy more ammo.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 04:27 PM | Comments (13)

The Last Helicopter

A fine post from Dean's World on American Credibility.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:07 PM | Comments (2)

The Day After

In planning the Yom Kippur War, the Egyptian high command made a list of Israeli weaknesses, which they proceeded to exploit in their surprise attack.

1. Arrogance.
2. Inability to sustain casualties.
3. Inability to sustain a prolonged war because of economic factors.
4. Sensitivity to world opinion.

In that check list, only #1 no longer exists. But the rest are still in full play and are being exploited to the fullest degree by the Palestinians. And the Israelis have not adjusted their war game one iota.

I am not suggesting that we become inured to the death of Jews, of course not. But what the Israelis must do is cease their tiny surgical strikes that do absolutely nothing. The Palestinian people have elected a terrorist government and they must suffer the consequences of their odious choice.

Only overhelming force, never used, can be effective. The Jews of Gaza were thrown out of their homes on the theory that their presence aggravated the situation. Jewish land and homes are now used as terrorist training camps. This is not even debatable. Hamas boasts of it, publishes pictures in their newspapers.

The disengagement was supposed to give the Palestinians the opportunity to build their own infastructure, but of course they are incapable of any such thing. They have no interest in building a state, only destroying a state--Israel.

Never has a national movement so clearly displayed their unworthiness to posess their own state; never have a people so clearly shown their inability to run a modern nation.

The Palis have squandered gazillions of dollars, and never even bothered to build their own electrical power grid.

Yup, you heard right.

All Israel has to do is flip a few switches and the Palis will be in the dark. Literally.

Which might be a good idea. Let those with a medieval mindset live a medieval lifestyle.

And damn world opinion for the world's nations hate Israel for her goodness and restraint. In the face of true evil, such as the tyrannies of Iran or Sudan there is perfect silence. If you can't see this, you are blind.

Let the terrorist Pali government know that every time a rocket is launched from Gaza or a homicide bomber tries to cross the border, the power in Gaza and the Arab towns in Judea and Samaria will be shut off for 48 hours, or even longer. And each time a Jew is murdered, well, there will be no power for a week. Hamas will be handing out candles to a very angry public.

As for the economic factors, the shoe is on the other foot now; the Palis are the greatest welfare witches the world has ever seen. And don't worry about all those pledges of big bucks from Quatar and Iran. That's just talk to preserve honor. Not one penny will ever appear in any Pali bank account. We've heard these pledges before and they are worthless rhetoric, as is Arab solidarity.

Meanwhile Prime Minister Olmert has bombed an empty factory in Gaza. Supposedly used to build bombs. No casualties.

That'll do it.

Hamas must be shaking in their boots.

Here's a quote from Olmert in 2005: "We are tired of fighting, we are tired of being courageous, we are tired of winning, we are tired of defeating our enemies, we want that we will be able to live in an entirely different environment with our enemies."

Here's a quote from Winston Churchill in 1940: "We shall not flag nor fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France and on the seas and oceans; we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air. We shall defend our Island whatever the cost; we shall fight on the beaches, landing grounds, in fields, in streets and on the hills. We shall never surrender..."

What more can one say?

Here's Michelle Malkin's round-up of internet links about this atrocity.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:27 AM | Comments (33)

April 17, 2006

Passover Atrocity

A homicide bomber has brought death and destruction to Tel Aviv in the midst of Passover. This is not just an attack on the people of Israel, it is a calculated assault on Judaism.

Hamas, the elected government of the Palestinian people, have applauded this atrocity.

In 1938, Hitler told the world exactly what he was planning on doing, and then the world was shocked, just shocked, when he went ahead and did it.

Hamas are a genocidal government supported openly by Iran, a government that gleefully calls for the destruction of the State of Israel and all Jews.

Hamas has an address as do the people who elected these barbarians. For too long the world has allowed the Palestinian people to escape the consequences of their deadly and stupid choices.

The Japanese lost heart when on April 1, 1942 Lieutenant Colonel James H. Doolittle's aviators bombed the Japanese mainland. The Japanese people realized that their army could not protect them from American power.

The damage actually inflicted by the raid was small, but its psychological effect on the Japanese was all that might have been desired. The army and navy had failed in their duty to safeguard the homeland and the Emperor from attack. Admiral Yamamoto regarded the raid as a mortifying personal defeat. Eagle Against the Sun by Ronald H. Spector, pg. 155.

It is a tragic truth of modern warfare that unless civilians pay a personal price they will never change their odious governments. The worst that Palestinians suffer from Israel is enduring long lines at check points. Lines they are ultimately responsible for because of their love of homicide bombers.

This is the second time that the Palestinians have struck on Passover. Four years ago they slaughtered 29 people in Netanya in the midst of their Passover Seder. This is no coincidence. During Passover we Jews celebrate "z'man cherutenu" our "time of freedom." The Arabs wish to show that they are our masters. In the Middle East, a tough neigborhood, Israel must show the Arabs that their fate will be like the ancient Egyptians; crushed under so many plagues that the ten plagues will seem like a blessing.

Read this by the always wonderful Mark Steyn.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:47 AM | Comments (16)

March 31, 2006

The Usual Suspects

And this just in from Seraphic Friend Jeremiah Duboff, who deconstructs a letter by Arab Militants that tries to dupe naive Americans into, oh gee-willikers, just read on. My first impulse was to laugh, but then I felt like weeping, realizing that this sort of propaganda plays well--especially on our Ivy League campuses.

Dear Friends:
The San Francisco Chapter of the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee is planning a protest next month to oppose American tax dollars that support oppression in other countries. They're asking concerned citizens -- like you and me -- for their support in the ongoing struggle against oppression and for peace and justice. Won't you please join me as I read between the lines of their tiresome efforts?

In solid hilarity,
Jeremiah


Tax Day Protest - Monday, April 17 th 12 PM

Come out on Tax Day and Palestinian Political Prisoners Day to demonstrate against the use of our taxes to fund occupation, imprisonment, and repression in Palestine, Iraq, and right here at home.
YES, we call for an end to all American funding to Hamas and the Palestinian Authority -- NOW!

We will also be delivering letters in support of the campaign to free Manal Ghannem and her two year old son Noor who are among the approximately 8000 Palestinian's currently being held in Israeli Prisons.
YES, write them and congratulate them on being incarcerated in an Israeli prison -- it's a step up from what their plight would be in a Palestinian one!

Protest US taxes for war, occupation and Incarceration
YES, we call for regime change in Iran, Syria, and North Korea -- for starters!

Monday, April 17th, 2006
12:00pm, Montgomery & Market in San Francisco
Someone TIP the IRS to this -- that'll be the place to start tracking down 2006 tax evaders!

-Press Conference: 11:30 Post & Market
-12:00 Rally in front of Dianne Feinstein's Office
-12:30 March to Israeli Consulate
HEY, Zombie -- You got that?
One Post St., San Francisco, CA (Near Montgomerey BART Station)

Sponsored by: SUSTAIN (Stop US Tax Aid to Israel Now) and ADC-SF

The usual suspects.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:06 AM | Comments (27)

Kartoonnacht

Credit: Seraphic Friend, Jeremiah Duboff for the brilliant title of this post.

This letter just in from another splendid Seraphic Friend, Antoine Clark:

The Western Standard, among other things, the only regular media
outlet for free-market views in Canada, is being sued by the Alberta
Human Rights Commission following what looks like a bogus complaint
about publishing the Danish cartoons.

Some of you can afford to donate money to the WS's defence fund. Some
of you have blogs that could expose the machinations of the AHRC. All
of you can email.

The best way to kill intimidation is for a lot of people to contact
the Alberta authorities and raise hell about press censorship,
intimidation by pursuing frivolous complaints etc. The
local police refused to take up the complaint on the grounds that
gagging the press is not its job.

I shall be posting something about this as soon as I get home this
evening. In the meantime, all of us could send an email to:
humanrights@gov.ab.ca and call the Canadian embassy (this tends to get
more attention than emails).
in the UK telephone Canadian High Commission: 020 7258 6600
in the USA telephone Candian Embassy: 202-682-1740
in France: 01.44.43.29.00

I suggest something along these lines:
You've heard that a complaint has been made. The police refused to
consider it on the grounds that it was frivolous. You understand that
the Western Standard will have to spend 75.000 Canadian dollars
defending themselves from what is obviously a bogus complaint. Why is
this agency advancing the cause of media intimidation and censorship?
This will reflect very badly on the reputation of the Alberta Human
Rights Commission, if it is seen to be an agency for crushing free
speech.

Best wishes,

Antoine Clarke

P.S. Here's the email I got from the Western Standard.

Dear Western Standard reader,

Our magazine has been sued for publishing the Danish cartoons, and I
need your help to fight back!
As you know, the Western Standard was the only mainstream media
organ in Canada to publish the Danish cartoons depicting the Muslim
prophet Mohammed.
We did so for a simple reason: the cartoons were the central fact in
one of the largest news stories of the year, and we're a news
magazine. We publish the facts and we let our readers make up their
minds.
Advertisers stood with us. Readers loved the fact that we treated
them like grown-ups. And we earned the respect of many other
journalists in Canada who envied our independence. In fact, according
to a COMPAS poll last month, fully 70% of Canada's working journalists
supported our decision to publish the cartoons.
But not Syed Soharwardy, a radical Calgary Muslim imam.
He asked the police to arrest me for publishing the cartoons. They
calmly explained to him that's not what police in Canada do.
So then he went to a far less liberal institution than the police:
the Alberta Human Rights Commission. Unlike the Calgary Police
Service, they didn't have the common sense to show him the door.
Earlier this month, I received a copy of Soharwardy's rambling,
hand-scrawled complaint. It is truly an embarrassing document. He
briefly complains that we published the Danish cartoons. But the bulk
of his complaint is that we dared to try to justify it - that we dared
to disagree with him.
Think about that: In Soharwardy's view, not only should the Canadian
media be banned from publishing the cartoons, but we should be banned
from defending our right to publish them. Perhaps the Charter of
Rights that guarantees our freedom of the press should be banned, too.
Soharwardy's complaint goes further than just the cartoons. It
refers to news articles we published about Hamas, a group labelled a
terrorist organization by the Canadian government. By including those
other articles, he shows his real agenda: censoring any criticism of
Muslim extremists.
Perhaps the most embarrassing thing about Soharwardy's complaint is
that he claims our cartoons caused him to receive hate mail. Indeed,
his complaint includes copies of a few e-mails from strangers to him.
Some of those e-mails even go so far as to call him "humourless" and
tell him to "lighten up". Perhaps that's hateful. But all of those
e-mails were sent to him before our magazine even published the
cartoons. Soharwardy isn't even pretending that this is a legitimate
complaint. He's not even trying to hide that this is a nuisance suit.
Soharwardy's complaint should have been thrown out immediately by
the Alberta Human Rights Commission, just like the police did. But it
wasn't. Which is why I'm writing to you today.
According to our lawyers, we will win this case. It's an infantile
complaint, without basis in facts or law. Frankly, it's an
embarrassment to the government of Alberta that their tribunal is open
to abuse like this.
Our lawyers tell us we're going to win. But not before we have to
spend hundreds of hours and up to $75,000 fighting this thing, at our
own expense. Soharwardy doesn't have to spend a dime - now that his
complaint has been filed, Alberta tax dollars will pay for the
prosecution of his complaint. We have to pay for this on our own.
Look, $75,000 isn't going to bankrupt us. But it will sting. We're a
small, independent magazine, not a huge company with deep pockets. All
of our money is needed to produce the best possible editorial product,
not to fight legal battles. This is clearly an abuse of process
designed to punish us and deter other media from daring to cross that
angry imam in the future.
One of the leaders in Canadian human rights law, Alan Borovoy, was
so disturbed by Soharwardy's abuse of the human rights commission that
he wrote a public letter about it in the Calgary Herald on March 16th.
"During the years when my colleagues and I were labouring to create
such commissions, we never imagined that they might ultimately be used
against freedom of speech," wrote Borovoy, who is general counsel for
the Canadian Civil Liberties Association. Censorship was "hardly the
role we had envisioned for human rights commissions. There should be
no question of the right to publish the impugned cartoons," he wrote.
Borovoy went even further - he said that the human rights laws
should be changed to avoid this sort of abuse in the future. "It would
be best, therefore, to change the provisions of the Human Rights Act
to remove any such ambiguities of interpretation," he wrote. That's an
amazing statement, coming from one of the fathers of the Canadian
human rights movement.
I agree with Borovoy: the law should be changed to stop future
abuses. But those changes will come too late for us - we're already
under attack. The human rights laws, designed as a shield, are being
used against us as a sword.
We will file our legal response to Soharwardy's shakedown this week.
And we will fight this battle to the end - not just for our own sake,
but to defend freedom of the press for all Canadians.
Do you believe that's important? If so, I'd ask you to help us
defray our costs. We're accepting donations through our website. It's
fast, easy and secure. Just click on
http://www.westernstandard.ca/freedom
You can donate any amount from $10 to $10,000. Please help the
Western Standard today - and protect freedom for all Canadians for
years to come.

Yours gratefully,
Ezra Levant
Publisher

P.S. Remember, Soharwardy's complaint will be prosecuted using tax
dollars and government lawyers. We have to rely on our own funds - and
the generous support of readers like you.

P.P.S. Please help us now, at Western Standard Legal Defence Fund.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 06:44 AM | Comments (15)

March 29, 2006

The Unhappy King

Kadima won, and naturally you might think that Bibi Netanyahu, leader of Israel's Likud Party, is the most unhappy man in the world about the election.

But you would be wrong.

It's King Abdullah of Jordan who's really the unhappy puppy here. Believe me, if he could have voted, he would not have voted for Kadima. That wall they're building, it's the last thing he wants. Israeli troops and communities in Judea and Samaria are just fine by him. Pay no attention to his rhetoric about occupation. In the Arab world, rhetoric is golden--and utterly meaningless.

The Jewish pull back from Judea and Samaria, for him, for his always shaky Kingdom, baaaad news.

Wow, talk about a man with problems, Poor King Abdullah.

Let's rewind a few years and explore the whacky history of what used to be called Transjordan.

After taking over Transjordan after World War I, Great Britain created a local militia called The Mobile Force. It was made up of 150 men. Thus was born the nation of Jordan.

Amir Abdullah ibn Hussein, a descendant of the Prophet and the son of the Hashemite Sheik of Mecca, arrived with British approval in 1921, with the idea of making himself king -- as Mel Brooks said: "It's good to be king" -- and he was not exactly welcomed by the other marauding Arabs tribes.

His main foe was, get this, religious fanatics under Abd al-Aziz Ibn-Saud, eager to spread his Wahhabi interpretation of Islam.

Yup, The house of Saud before they discovered oil. Just a bunch of fanatical, double-dealing, ruthless desert murderers.

Nothing's really changed except now they wear bespoke suits.

The RAF made short work of Ibn Saud and stopped the tide of Saudi expansion.

Let us thank the British colonials.

The Transjordan Army, under the command of "Glubb Pasha," Colonel John Bagot Glubb, was the most professional indigenous military in the middle east. Okay, they were led entirely by British officers, or Jordanian officers trained in the British manner. And over 50% of their army were illiterate Bedouin. But they were disciplined and not the usual rabble.

In 1948, when the current King's grandfather ordered the invasion of the new state of Israel, it is clear that he did not hope to eradicate the state, unlike his Palestinian, Syrian, Egyptian and Iraqi allies. Abdullah actually hoped to annex the West Bank and Jerusalem.

After all, the king had opened secret negotiations with the Israelis. Abdullah rightly never trusted his duplicitous Arab allies and suspected that his new Jewish neighbors would not be defeated so easily. The point of his secret negotiations was to get the Jews to cede him territory without bloodshed.

This did not happen. The fighting was fierce and his Arab Legion took extremely heavy casualties for every inch of land they siezed.

Let us now move forward to 1970-71 for these are the watershed years and the reason that the current King is probably in meltdown mode.

After the Six Day War, the PLO tried to set up a state within a state in Jordan. This situation was intolerable to King Hussein.

Moreover the humiliating defeat of the Arab Legion by the Israelis in 1967 emboldened the Palestinians, and they moved to overthrow King Hussein.

On 17 September 1970, The Jordanian General Staff commenced operations against the PLO. The Jordanians had nothing but contempt for the Palestinians and planned a "48 hour blitzkrieg."

The King was also worried about Syrian intervention for the Syrians were strong supporters of the PLO and sworn enemies of the Hashemites.

From the begining, the operation was a mess. For some inexplicable reason the Jordanian High Command assigned the 4th Mechanized and 60th Armored into Amman's Old City. The Old City is a typical Middle Eastern madinah of narrow streets, abutting houses, dead end alleyways, the worst place imaginable to operate tanks and APC's. To make matters even worse, the Jordanians sent their tanks forward with little or no infantry support.

Which is a big no-no.

To add to Jordan's problems, the operation against the PLO caused frictions in the army to explode. About 5,000 Palestinian soldiers and officers deserted and joined the PLO, bringing with them badly needed heavy weapons.

And then, total oy-vey for the Jordanians, the Syrians invaded, sending in the 5th Infantry Division reinforced with two armored brigades to bring its tank strength to nearly 300 T-55's.

The Jordanians sent the 25th Infantry Brigade of the 2nd Infantry Division and the two armored battalions, 100 improved Centurions, of the 40th Armored Brigade to stop the Syrian advance.

The battle that took place can only be described as something out of a Marx Brothers movie. Both sides blundered into each other. They employed no strategy or sophisticated tactics, but simply hunkered down and fired, or just bludgeoned their way forward in dumb frontal assaults.

By the end of the day, the Jordanians retreated. The King, in a panic that his kingdom was about to fall, called out his air force. This saved the monarchy.

The question rises, why did the Syrians not send in their Air Force to save their ground forces from destruction? The answer is simple. Israel made it quite clear that it would not stand idly by and allow the Hashemite Kingdom to fall. The Israeli Air Force was scrambled and if one Syrian plane took off, the entire Syrian Air Force would have been destroyed.

It took ten months for The Jordanians to destroy the PLO.

In the process they besieged several PLO strongholds, and indiscriminately shelled villages, in the process killing thousands upon thousands of civilians.

Thus was born Black September.

But of course, Jews were held responsible, at least publicly. Never mind that Jordanians killed more Palestinians than the Jews ever dreamed of.

Memories die hard in the middle east.

The current King of Jordan looks at the wall Israel is building, looks at the Jewish retreat from Judea and Samaria, and all he sees in his future is bloody payback.

The Palestinians will never forget what his father did to them.

The Syrians will never forget.

The Saudis will never forget.

You have to feel for the guy.

Hamas will almost certainly try and destabalize the Hashemite kingdom. The Syrians will help with assasinations. The Saudis will finance it. The Iranians are already meddling, anxious to bring about their vision of a world without Israel.

King Abdullah speaks lovely Cambridge English, and his wife wears nice Chanel suits, but make no mistake about it, he runs a vicious police state.

No, the Jordanians are not hampered by Western style ethics. Their security services are efficient and utterly ruthless

The usual suspects are rounded up, tortured, given speedy trials -- and then promptly hung.

Keep your eyes on Jordan. If the Hashemite Kingdom falls, it will not be good.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:10 AM | Comments (38)

March 24, 2006

One True Voice & Ten War Novels

Truth is hard to find when the fog of mainstream journalism mixes with the fog of war.

Loyal readers of Seraphic Secret know of our enormous respect and enthusiasm for the work of journalist Robert D. Kaplan. Mr. Kaplan is one of the few journalists who actually goes into the field and spends time with our brave troops.

Mr. Kaplan believes that our soldiers are thinking, feeling human beings whose opinions are legitimate and should be mined.

Mr. Kaplan does this without treating our soldiers like hillbillies. He does this without condescending to our troops for Mr. Kaplan, unlike the sneering N.Y. Times, L.A. Times, Chicago Sun Times--take-your-pick; for unlike the elite Mainstream Media, Mr. Kaplan well understands that a vast and (naturally) underreported revolution has taken place in our armed forces.

And so, whereas the civilian "best" ahem "and brightest" Vietnam generation has budged not one inch ideologically, politically, nor tactically; a whole new generation of soldiers and officers has arisen and they are -- and there is no other word for them: magnificent.

The American armed forces are the most professional, the most motivated, certainly the most lethal, as they should be, and the most highly educated army the world has ever beheld. And I have not even touched upon our elite small forces such as Green Berets.

And yet, viewed through the lens of the mainstream media, one would think that this proud army is still mired in the paddies of Viet Nam--when in fact it is the journalists and ivory-towered academics who have never dug themselves out.

And with their unwise reporting, which the Jihadists eagerly read and make no mistake about it, celebrate, I believe the mainstream media are gullible partners in the killing of innocent Iraqi civilians and yes, in the killing of our soldiers, our children.

And so, please read this fine dispatch by Robert D. Kaplan. He along with Michael Yon, is one of the few journalists in Iraq who is actually doing his job. This is one of the few dispatches you will read that tells you what is right and what is wrong with our effort.

Karen and I wish all our readers a lovely and meaningful Shabbos.

With G-d's help, we will continue our discussion of our favorite and maybe our not-so-favorite novels next week.

In fact, I'd like to suggest that we start by listing our favorite war novels, defining war quite broadly.

Here's my 10 of the moment:

1. "The Sharpe Series" by Bernard Cornwell, over a dozen novels that tell the story of a ruffian British soldier in the Peninsular War. This is not an anti-war series. In fact, these books love war and love soldiers. I have read each book several times.

2. "Gates of Fire" by Steven Pressfield

3. "The Killer Angels" - Michael Shaara

4. "A Soldier of the Great War" - Mark Helprin

5. "For Whom the Bell Tolls" Hemingway

6. "To the Last Man" by Jeff Shaara

7. "The Long Patrol: A Novel of Light Horsemen from Gallipoli to the Palestine Campaign of the First World War" by George Berrie.

8. "The Beardless Warriors" by Richard Matheson

9. "Lonesome Dove" by Larry McMurtry

10. "Bloody Season" by Loren D. Estleman -- The aftermath of the Gunfight at the OK Corral. In fact that's when the blood really started to flow. Low Intensity Conflict in the Wild West. An amazing and practically unknown masterpiece.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 11:44 AM | Comments (60)

March 20, 2006

Palestinians Bilked U.S. Taxpayers

This really deserves careful scrutiny.

The Palis have been stealing from the US taxpayer for years. And the money stolen has not been used for "humanitarian relief."

Previously, the money has disappeared into the private bank accounts of Yasir Arafat, his greedy wife Suha, and of course into the Swiss accounts of Arafat's "Tunisian" associates. The Tunisian's is the designation used for the PA old guard. The loyalists who followed Arafat into Tunisia after being expelled form Beirut. For this, they were paid off in endless graft. You can see their sea-side mansions in Gaza. Trump style villas that make Trump look like a man of refined taste.

Now, in Hollywood, there are several progeny of the Tunisians who strut around informing everyone who will listen that they are Muslim and Palestinians. Never mind that they were raised in France and Switzerland, attended expensive boarding schools, speak Arabic with European accents, never go to prayers, and live off stolen money. They wear their "victimization" like neon badges, and you better believe that they work the political angles to the nth degree. And secular Jewish executives move these people up the corporate ladder with lightning speed.

As one exec remarked to me privately: "Did you know the father rides around in a bullet-proof Mercedes?"

I did know. The father is a terrorist thug.

***

Study finds over $3 billion in aid based on 'fraudulent data'

By Aaron Klein
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

The United States government must conduct an inquiry into the almost $3 billion in taxpayer funds that may have been distributed as aid to the Palestinians in part based on fraudulent data provided by the Palestinian Authority, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., chairwoman of the House International Relations Subcommittee on the Middle East, told WorldNetDaily.

The subcommittee last week heard testimony from the leaders of a new study that documents the Palestinians have inflated their population numbers by over 50 percent, in some cases counting residents of certain cities twice.

"U.S. assistance to the Palestinians was based on the population numbers provided by the PA. Recent study shows that the PA numbers were grossly inaccurate. There should be an inquiry as to what happened to the extra funds," said Ros-Lehtinen.

"U.S. and United Nations future funding to the Palestinian territories should reflect the actual population numbers in the Palestinian territories and not the inflated data provided by the PA."

Since 1994, the United States has reportedly given nearly $1.8 billion in direct aid to the PA and nongovernmental organizations operating in the Palestinian territories, usually delineated through the U.S. Agency for International Development. America has also provided more than $1.1 billion to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, which oversees Palestinian refugee camps in the West Bank and Gaza, according to State Department records.

U.S. assistance to the Palestinians last year alone reportedly totaled $282 million.

American aid to the PA and Palestinian-related agencies, especially to refugee organizations, is devised largely based on Palestinian population figures, a State Department spokesperson said.

PA officials reported the Palestinian population for 2004 in West Bank and Gaza totaled 3.8 million. But an in-depth study led by American researchers Bennet Zimmerman, Roberta Seid and Michael Wise puts the current Palestinian-Arab population of the West Bank at 1.4 million and Gaza 1.1 million, for a total of 2.4 million.

"American tax dollars and other international humanitarian aid have been based on inflated population numbers which have been accepted without question by governments and aid agencies. Our researchers pointed out that money has been spent to help Palestinians who were double-counted, never born or not present in the West Bank and Gaza," Zimmerman told WND.

The study, titled "Arab Population in the West Bank and Gaza," compared the accepted PA data to Palestinian voting records, birth and death records published annually by the PA's Health Ministry, immigration and emigration data from Israel's Border Control, internal migration of Palestinians from the territories into Israel recorded by the Israeli Interior Ministry and others, Israeli Civil Administration population studies, U.N. population surveys, and surveys conducted by the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics and the World Bank.

Zimmerman's team found extreme faults in the methods used by the PA to determine its population, including counting the 230,000 Arab residents of Jerusalem twice and retroactively raising growth and birth rates, which the study contends have been declining.

The PA claims a population growth rate of 4 to 5 percent per year, among the highest in the world, but Palestinian Ministry of Health records published annually since 1996 contradict the PA's own claims by stating growth rates averaging around 3 percent.

Zimmerman's study documents the PA tampered with its own data, retroactively raising its growth numbers in 2002. The new study shows a steady pattern of growth decline leading to a natural growth rate in 2003 of just 2.6 percent.

The PA projected a net population increase of 1.5 percent per year as a result of immigration from surrounding countries. But Zimmerman's researchers found that except for 1994, when the bulk of the Palestinian leadership and their families entered the territories from Tunis, Palestinian emigration from the area has outweighed immigration by a net negative of about 10,000 to 20,000 per year.

"The U.S. and Europeans have for years accepted entirely exaggerated data," Zimmerman said. "Now Congress has some very tough questions to ask, including how its own State Department and the CIA could have been duped and what do to regarding future aid."

Ros-Lehtinen recently drafted legislation along with Rep. Tom Lantos, D-Calif., calling for a halt to U.S. assistance to the PA following Hamas' victory in January's Palestinian elections.

The United States and Israel have been leading an international push to politically and financially isolate the new Hamas government.

The PA has for years depended on U.S. and European aid to pay salaries for its nearly 150,000 employees, totaling about $90 million per month.

While most European countries have expressed support for isolating Hamas, Israeli officials fear substantial cracks in a united international front, particularly following the terror group's visit to Russia last week.

In response to international attempts to isolate his government, Hamas leader Mahmoud al-Zahar claimed last month his terror group doesn't need "satanic" American money.

"Those who built their structure on the basis of the Quran ... cannot budge because of promises from America or a dollar from Europe. I wish America would cut off its aid. We do not need this satanic money," al-Zahar said at a news conference in Cairo.

But al-Zahar took quite a different tone in a WND interview just prior to the Palestinian elections in which he outright lobbied for U.S. money.

"Without any condition we are accepting any money and we are ready to put these figures in the proper way and in a purified manner. Anybody can follow this money, can observe and account, do anything to be sure that we are running our system without corruption," al-Zahar said in response to a question about whether he would accept American aid.

Al-Zahar, whose group has openly funded and carried out over 60 suicide bombings and hundreds of rocket and shooting attacks against Israelis, said he would use American money to build "factories, agriculture and [other] real investments in the Palestinian people."

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 10:35 AM | Comments (35)

February 27, 2006

Tajikstan Synagogue... Gone

The world goes crazy when a mosque in Iraq is destroyed by Muslims. But when a synagogue is leveled by Muslims--silence.

Read this and weep.

And do read Mark Steyn's latest column.

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 02:31 PM | Comments (50)

February 21, 2006

What Was Sharon Thinking? IV

In the great Japanese movie The Seven Samurai, Kambei, the leader of Samurai swordsmen who are defending the villagers against the bandits, makes a battle plan, and draws little symbols for each enemy soldier.

Why?

Because he's going to kill them one by one and he wants to keep count.

It's instructive, this film from 1954. At no point does Kambei say, "Hey, let's try and negotiate with these murdererers and thieves." At no point does he try and understand what motivates them. He really doesn't care. He just knows one thing: some people have to be killed. Evil exists and has to be stamped out--not psychoanalyzed.

Fighting Terrorism

Ariel Sharon and most sane Israeli politicians and soldiers understand this simple fact. Now more than ever, Israel is involved in a life and death struggle with an Islamic pansurgency that will only be satisfied with the complete annihilation of the state of Israel, Christians, and all of Western civilization.

The Palestinian national movement has been entirely subsumed into this larger Islamic pansurgency. They have just elected Hamas, and you better believe that you must read the Hamas covenant which clearly calls for the death of every Jew everywhere. It is one of the most odious documents on record--ever.

So let's be honest, Israel can pull back to 1967 borders and it will not satisy the Arabs. Only the annihilation of the State of Israel will satisfy this genocidal movement.

Update: Just last week Olmert announced that Kadima's position is that it will cede about 88% of Judea and Samaria to the Arabs.

And many Jews are going to be expelled from their homes. This is going to be a horror.

But this series is about strategic and military thought behind this withdrawal, and so let us proceed.

Once a pullback occurs behind a properly constructed security wall, how is Israel to defend herself against the terrorists who will come to murder men, women and children?

The first problem is to gain intelligence concerning future terrorists attacks. How to do it besides the normal methods of human intelligence, and eavesdropping over cell phone conversations, which the terrorists are wise to, using messengers with handwritten notes. You see we go high-tech, they go low-tech.

Aerostats.

Think of them as balloons with antennae. Compared to conventional aircarft, they are cheap to run. No pilots to worry about and rescue if shot down, and currently Israel is using them in the Negev to look across the Sinai and watch the Egyptians, make sure that they're not attempting to remilitarize that area.

Aerostats can stay aloft for about two weeks, some can go as high as 70,000 feet, so they can't be shot down.

They can be modified to watch single cars, and even individuals.

Even now, American and Israeli, German and Japanese defense contractors are experimenting with "brain signatures."

Sounds like science fiction?

Not really. Think of an MRI. Each person has a unique brain signature. The idea being that targeted assasinations will be made that much easier and more precise when we have brain signatures of targets, and then the aerostats acquire these signatures, feed them into a main frame and a helicopter or missle is dispatched for the kill.

Even now this is being experimented with in a very serious way. It won't be long before it's perfected. Terrorists will have to lobotomize themselves to find safety.

Then the Israelis just have to kill the drooling guy with the Kalashnikov.

In any case, several new pilotless flying platforms are being developed in tandem by Israeli and American firms and they are very promising in terms of anti-terrorist warfare.

There is another intractable problem facing Israel and that is terrorists released from prison. Lots and lots of terrorists.

Currently, there is no "there" to send them to. They are released and swim in the ocean of Israel.

With a proper wall in place, these terrorists who have probably become even better terrorists behind bars, can be sent over the wall, where they can fall into endless squabbles among competing clans, competing terrorist groups. For if there is one thing we can count on it is that Arabs will descend into hopeless and violent sectarian warfare given half the chance.

Interpolation:

The Arabs are a lucky people. When the history of Sharon's campaign against the Palestinian terrorists is written, it will be studied as a model of the cleanest counter-insurgency campaign war ever waged.

Think of the French in Algeria. The Paras were brutal with a capital B. Entire villages were leveled, bombed out of existence. Hundreds of thousands were imprisoned, tortured, and mutilated. Casualties of about 1 million Muslims.

After the French left, naturally the Arabs fell into civil war. Throat slitting was the preferred method of killing. This went on for over 20 years. Casualties? Over one million.

But Israel is accused of being brutal.

I could talk about the British and the Mau-Mau uprising, South Africa, The Arab Janjaweed in Darfur, Assad the Elder of Syria wiping out the entire city of Hama with poison gas killing 40,000 civilians, and Saddam using gas against the Kurds, but no one seems to care when Arabs kill Arabs. Besides, the Arab world is awash in lies and the most virulent form of anti-Semitism the world has ever known.

End of Interpolation:

Conclusion

Frankly, the only reality is fighting terrorism the best way possible. And for this, we must gird ourselves for a hundred years war. No more negotiations, no more accords, no more murderous road maps, no more concessions, no more talks with genocidal Jihadists who hide behind double talk.

Professor Yisrael Aumann, Israel's Nobel Prize winner lectured recently on his idea of game theory. He pointed out that taking the long road more often than not brings results even quicker than playing for immediate short-term gain.

The Arabs believe that Israel is another Crusader kingdom; all they have to do is wait and Israel and the Jews will be gone.

They must be disabused of this fantasy.

We must wait them out. We must be steadfast, patient and no longer say: "Let's solve this problem now."

Instead we must say: "There is no solution as long as the Arabs act as they do. When they change their civilization, let them come and act like decent people. Until then, we are here and we will fight when we have to, and if it comes to it, we will destroy them."

Posted by Robert J. Avrech at 09:09 AM | Comments (39)

February 16, 2006

What Was Sharon Thinking? Part III

"Know the enemy and know yourself; in a hundred battles you will never be in peril." Sun Tzu, The Art of War

Security Wall

It is impossible to know when it happened, at what point Ariel Sharon realized that the conflict with the Palestinians no longer mattered.

Perhaps the moment came, as it did for so many, on that frightfully bright morning of 9/11, when Jihad hit American soil with a body count suited to a country at war.

America had been at war for years; The Black Hawk Down incident in Mogadishu, the bombing of The Marine Barracks in Beirut, the bombing of the USS Cole in Yemen, the bombing of the US Embassy in Tanzania, the first attack on the Twin Towers in NY, the underreported persecutions, kidnappings and beheadings of Christians by Muslims in the Philippines, Indonesia and East Timor.

But it took 3,000 American corpses and a resolute American President to finally recognize the evil spreading like a virus and finally, correctly, letting slip the dogs of war.

Which is why Ariel Sharon realized that the Arab-Israeli conflict had changed from a local terrorist movement, with ties to various other Arab terrorist groups such as The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, and Hizbullah in Iran, into something far more dangerous, something even more virulent.

This is a movement, Ariel Sharon must have realized, that has been growing for years and finally taken root in Palestinian society that is unique; this is an uncompromising fanatical religious movement that has absolutely no interest in establishing, much less building a Palestinian state.

In truth, its only interest is in destroying The Jewish State.

With the rock n'roll-like popularity of the homicide bombers and their proud, ululating mothers and boasting fathers, Sharon must have recognized a truly perverted new stage in this ancient war.

Pansurgency.

The concept of Pansurgency was pioneered by Dr. Ilana Kass from the National Defense University, for a briefing to the White House. Dr. Kass defines Pansurgency as the organized movement of transnational terrorists seeking to overthrow values, cultures, and societies on a global level through subversion and armed conflict with the ultimate goal of establishing a new world order.

No longer was Israel fighting a Palestinian national movement. Osama Bin Laden was in the asendancy in the Muslim world. His face was on T shirts everywhere in Gaza. The PA was a fiction, a kleptocracy; the old Tunisians lining their pockets, sending every penny of American and European aide to their Swiss Bank accounts. By the last reckoning of the Shin Bet, Arafat and his men had personally stolen over 280 billion dollars. Enough to have financed several Palestinian states.
To seal off Israel from the homicidal culture next door, Sharon understood, was the only way--short of a Carthaginian Peace.

This must be a high-tech wall, not a fence, let us be honest. The foundations must go deep into the earth so terrorists cannot dig tunnels. Whatever culverts are built under the foundations to allow for rainwater should be fitted with alarm systems, again, to guard against terrorist incursions.

Above ground, there must be death strips sown with anti personnel mines and guarded by automatic machine guns.

The wall must not be aesthetically pleasing. Citizens should be outraged by its appearance. It should be a blight on the landscape. A structure so fearful that just looking at it induces fear in the bravest of men. Yes, the wall should be as forbidding as possible. So tall that even clouds and birds will bump into it.

As a student of war, Ariel Sharon was aware that there is no such thing as an impregnable barrier. But, history shows that to prevent terrorists from crossing by using lethal force whenever necessary, walls can be amazingly effective.

History provides some fine models.

The Great Wall of China kept out barbarians for centuries, allowing the Chinese to develop sucessive layers of ever more refined civilization.

The same can be said of the Roman frontier or limes; had these two enormous edifices not been built, history would have been far different--or not at all.

In modern times, the Berlin Wall. Awful as it was, that wall provided breathing space for the Americans and the Soviet front line troops. Everybody knew how far they could go before being shot and killed.

The two Koreas are separated by heavily fortified fences, a situation that has been working for over fifty years.

The barrier that separated Greek Cypriots from Turkish Cypriots has been operable for thirty years, even though, on paper both sides refuse to recognize each other and, in fact, have sworn to destroy each other.

Even on Israel's volatile Northern border, the fence in place is working as well as can be expected. Though on the other side of the fence sit Hizbollah one of the most disciplined and belligerent terrorist organizations on the planet. Supported by Syria and Iran, Hizbollah wants nothing less than the death of every Jew and Christian in the world, the "burning of America and Europe" and the establishment of Islamic rule everywhere. How long this border will remain stable is anyone's guess, but stability allows the IDF to electronically penetrate Hizbollah's defences and war game future belligerencies.

From the years 2000-2003, 125 homicide bombers made their way from Judea and Samaria into Israel proper. Of these, a great number succeeded in achieveing their goals, murdering innocent Jewish men, women, children, and hooking up with the seventy willing virgins--which by the way, does not seem like such a great deal if you're talking about eternity--but hey, that's just me.

But I digress.

The fence that surrounds Gaza, during that very same period, worked very well in containing homicide bombers. That fence is marked on both sides by a strip of land 200-300 meters wide, fitted with ground radar and infra-red sensors that feed into a central control room.

The area is constantly patrolled by specially trained troops in vehicles and on foot. Crack Bedouin trackers who like nothing better than a good man-hunt are attached to each squad. As one of these trackers once quipped to me: "I can track a single ant from the desert, through the streets of Haifa, deep into anthills--right through this strip--then kill it."

And he was not lying.

Sharo