May 30, 2010

Al Gore, "Pure Bunk", Climategate and a possible landmark lawsuit.

Climategate scandal may be a crime

By Steve Malloy
Washington Times, May 17, 2010

Are academics some special sub-species of humans wtio are beyond suspicion and above the law? (Funny, how this just came up after, in the previous Israel Commentary article, I read the riot act on another "academic" - Peter Beinert) jsk

That's the question being played out in a drama between Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli and the dead-end defenders of scientist, Michael Mann. Mr. Cuccinelli is under assault by the climate-alarmist brigades for launching an investigation into whether any fraud against taxpayers occurred with respect to Mr. Mann's hiring by the University of Virginia and his receipt of government grants.

Mr. Cuccinelli recently sent the university a civil investigative demand requesting e-mails and other documents pertaining to Mr. Mann. Mr. Cuccmelli's rationale is simple too understand: Mr.Mann's claim to fame - the infamous "hockey stick" graph - is so bogus that one cannot help but wonder whether it is intentional fraud.

Developed in the late 1990s, while he was at the University of Massachusetts, Mr. Mann's hockey stick graph purports to show an average global temperature over the past millennium was stable until the 20th century, when it spiked up, presumably, because of human activity. The hockey stick was latched on to by the alarmist community, incorporated into government and United Nations assessments of climate science and held out to the public (particularly by Al Gore in "An Inconvenient Truth" as proof that humans were destroying the planet.

But, by the mid-2000s the hockey-stick graph was revealed for what if was, pure bunk. Skeptics first became suspicious because the hockey stick failed to show two well-known periods of dramatic swings in global temperature, the so-called Medieval Optimum and the Little Ice Age. Mr. Mann's indignant refusal to share his data and methods with skeptics only added fuel to the fire. Eventually, skeptics discovered that the hockey stick's computer model would produce a hockey stick graph regardless of what data was input. But it gets worse.

Mr. Mann apparently created the hockey stick by cherry-picking data he liked and deleting data he didn't like. While the vast majority of the hockey stick is based on temperature data extrapolated from tree rings going back hundreds of years, the tip of the blade (representing the late 20th century) was temperature data taken from thermometers.

Beyond the obvious apples-and-oranges problem, Mr. Mann appended thermometer data to the hockey stick at a point at which the tree-ring data actually shows cooling. This cooling trend data was then deleted. This is what is referred to by the now famous Climategate phrase, "Mike's Nature Trick to hide the decline".

There is however, nothing sophisticated, much less innocent, about it. Contrary to claims by Mr. Mann's defenders, the hockey stick has never been vindicated by anyone. If nothing else, proof of its discredit lies in the fact that no one, not even the ethically challenged UN, relies on it anymore.

Left-leaning academics, global-warming alarmists and the ACLU object to Mr. Cuccinelli's probe. They cast aspersions such as "witch hunt, "McCarthyism" and "abuse of office." In their less hysterical moments, they claim Cuccinelli threatens academic freedom. This is all so much rot.

Some scientists have actually been known to commit scientific misconduct tantamount to fraud. A Tulane researcher was found guilty of misconduct by the
Federal Office of Integrity in the late 1990s for fabricating data about pesticides being dangerous hormonal system disrupters. And, don't forget the South Korea researcher who was indicted for claiming false advances in stem cell research. Only political correctness saved a University of Pittsburgh researcher from conviction during the 1990s of manipulating data reportedly linking lead-based paint with lower IQs.

Mr. Mann's hockey stick is such bad science that it compels the question, why would the University of Virginia have hired Mann and would government grants have been awarded to him had the truth about the hockey stick been known by university and state decision-makers at the time? Were they intentionally deceived?

As the Climategate scandal has revealed, the climate alarmist mob is, at the very least, devious and unethical. It has conspired to silence its critics and dispense with the normal give-and-take of the scientific process - all the while trumpeting the junkiest of science in trying to frighten the public and politicians into keeping the grant money flowing.

Steve Milloy publishes

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 05:27 PM | Comments (0)

May 27, 2010

Commentary on Peter Beinert’s, The Failure of the American Jewish Establishment

By Jerome S. Kaufman

Once again an academic quotes factual material and then manages to re-interpret the facts to promote his own agenda. A fine example of this phenomenon is Peter Beinert’s article, The Failure of the American Jewish Establishment. Of course, the title itself is judgmental. By whose standard is something a failure?

Steven J. Rosen, former AIPAC foreign policy director, writing in the Middle East Forum May 23, 2010, in response to Beinart, and using his own standard of failure states, Mainstream pro-Israel organizations are in fact booming, thank you. AIPAC's income from donations is now five times what it was in 2000, and sixty times what it was when I joined the organization in 1982. It is growing commensurately in membership (including young people) and influence too. The Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee are also roaring tigers.

Beinert’s 4900 word tome appears in The New York Review of Books, ultra liberal supplement to the NY Times. The article presents Beinert’s so-called liberal agenda, using as a launching point the fact that in 2003, prominent Jewish philanthropists, tried to find out how to help Jewish students on college campuses. Jewish college students for years have had to deal with well-financed fanatical Arab students armed with professionally orchestrated anti-Semitic agendas and anti-Israel propaganda. The philanthropists hired well known pollster and political analyst Frank Luntz. Luntz’s task was to try and figure out what had gone wrong - why the Jewish students seemed unable to defend themselves against the onslaught.

In short order, Luntz found that most Jewish college students were simply not involved with Israel. Further inquiry re-enforced this indifference with the students mouthing the usual sophomorish, supposedly high-minded but, in fact, simply uninformed platitudes. The students stated that they: ‘Reserve the right to criticize Israel’, They ‘desperately want peace’ (as if the Israelis do not), They empathize with the plight of the downtrodden Palestinians and they have Muslim friends that are good people, etc. etc.”

Beinert jumped on this, concluding that the college students must be “liberals” Great! How many of us were not “liberals” in college days? It was long before any of us painfully learned that the world is not liberal. Russia, China, Iran. Cuba, Argentina, the Hamas in Gaza, the Hezbullah in Lebanon, the entire Islamic world are not liberals but rather in synch to destroy the power and well-being of this great country and its point man, Israel.

Beinart called Luntz’s findings a “damning indictment of the organized Jewish Community” because, with or without Luntz’s findings, establishment Jewish organizations continue to promote Israel and re-engage Jewish students in their heritage, trying to arm them morally, psychologically and factually with the justice of their cause. And, how did present college kids get so liberal? Is it the fact that all their classes are taught by far left academics like Beinert who have taken hostage the political science and Middle Eastern and Asian departments of virtually all American colleges and do not even allow academics in with opposing opinions?

But, all of the above begs the real problem that has created this state of affairs. The Israelis and Diaspora Jewry have allowed the Arabs to get away with gargantuan propaganda lies that Beinart vehemently re-enforces as if it were gospel truth - that the Jews stole Arab land and the Jews had no right to be there. Nothing is more aggravating to me then to hear Israeli leaders genuflecting - asking the Arabs, the world, the UN or whatever minuscule political entity currently in power, to accept Israel’s right to exist. Are you kidding me? Israel with over a 3000 year claim to the land 1600 years before Muhammad was even born plus unequivocal declarations by the League of Nations after WWI and the United Nations after WW II authorizing the Jews return to their biblical homeland, need to beg anyone for the right to exist!!

The other gross lie that grinds is the repeated claim by destructive Leftists like Beinart that the Arabs in Israel live as a persecuted minority. It so happens that Israeli Arabs have the highest standard of living of any in the entire Arab world. They have the longest life expectancy, the best education, 11 or 12 representatives in the Israel’s governing body, the Knesset plus enjoy all the other benefits of the only genuine democracy in the Middle East. By contrast, completely Ignored, is the fact that 99% of Jews living in Arab countries for 2000 years were murdered and driven out. About 600,000 were expelled after Israel was re-born in 1948, penniless, their considerable assets and properties absconded by the Arab state.

Historically, despite 2000 years in these Arab countries, Jews and Christians were never allowed full citizenship, let alone seats in some duly elected representative government. Israeli Arabs, by contrast, are encouraged to take full advantage of their new found freedom. They readily do, overwhelming free Israeli hospitals and all their social service agencies. In gratitude, these same Arabs show no loyalty whatever but instead constitute a Fifth Column ready to explode against the Israelis at the first opportunity.

Finally, Beinart bemoans the fact that the Orthodox continue to have large families, revel in their Jewish tradition and educate their children with great pride and respect for what the Jewish people have accomplished. It is only within this sort of environment that children understand the dire importance of Israel as a refuge for the Jewish people. Furhermore It inspires them to become willing volunteers for the most dangerous branches of the Israel Defense Forces.

Beinart and I do agree, but for different reasons, on his primary declaration - American Jewish establishment organizations are, in many ways, failures. If the members of these organizations had attended synagogues with their children regularly, and enrolled them in Hebrew day schools and summer camps, this would have instilled them with a sense of pride and knowledge of their own people, its glorious culture and the importance of the State of Israel.

Incidently, there are tens of millions of our non-Jewish friends who understand and believe in their heart of hearts in the vital importance of the Jewish State to the western world - a message that has somehow escaped many of our own children and the reason American Jewish establishment organizations are now. so belatedly, having to address the problem.

Hopefully, the next generation will have learned this uncomplicated lesson.

Jerome S. Kaufman

PS September 7, 2010
It is so pleasant to be confirmed and now read Andrew Ferguson's article in COMMENTARY, September 2010, some 4 months after the above piece was written. Mr. Ferguson analyzes Peter Beinart in some depth. His opening paragraph confirms much of what is written in the above article. Ferguson states,

"PETER Beinart is one of those journalists, common in Washington, who is less interesting for what he says than for who he is, or who he wants to be thought to be. He's an exemplar,
and when, this May, he published an essay in the New York Review of Books announcing that "morally, American Zionism is in a downward spiral;' he deserved the considerable notice that the article brought him.
As a piece of reasoned argument, or even as an anguished moral plea, "The Failure of the American Jewish Establishment" was a mess: a gollash of overstatement, baseless accusation, statistical sleight-of-hand, strategic omission, and wince-making self-regard. As a piece of attention-getting, however, it was a masterstroke, and it's on those terms, rather than its own, that the article and Beinart are best understood.
(Pity the great collateral damage done in the process) jsk

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 07:24 PM | Comments (0)

May 25, 2010

Rahm Emanuel attempts to sup at Israel's public trough, too!

Rahm Emanuel, White House Chief of Staff, stiffs Israel for private family meal at Eilat restaurant

By Gil Ronen May 23, 2010

White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and his family dined on seafood at an Eilat restaurant and left the bill for the Israeli Tourism Ministry, according to reports in Israeli media. The report was met with consternation by MK Dr. Michael Ben-Ari of the National Union, who wants the bill sent back to Emanuel.

Emanuel is in Israel on a private visit, not an official one, with his parents, wife, children and other family members, to make preparations for his son's upcoming Bar Mitzvah. Upon arrival in Israel Friday, the Emanuels headed for Eilat, where they dined on seafood at a restaurant. After the (unkosher) meal, which included cheviche (citrus marinaded seafood), calamari (fried squid), various fish, salads and hamburgers, the bill was handed over to a Ministry of Tourism representative who accompanied the Emanuels.

Ben-Ari fired off a letter to the Attorney General in which he said, "I was amazed to hear that following the sumptuous meal at the Boston restaurant
Emanuel handed the bill to a Ministry of Tourism representative who was present. In my humble legal opinion there is no possibility of making the State of Israel pay for such a meal, as part of a private visit by the White House Chief of Staff and his family."

"The public coffers are not up for grabs and the fact that the gentleman [Emanuel] sponsors anti-Semitic policies in the White House is certainly no
justification for digging into the public coffer at the expense of the old lady in the corridor of the hospital," Ben-Ari added in a reference to the shortage of hospital beds in Israel, which is attributed to budgetary problems. "I ask you, sir, to immediately cancel the debiting of the Ministry of Tourism's account and to promptly send the bill directly to Mr. Emanuel's private home," he added.

It is not known where the Bar Mitzvah ceremony will take place. Nationalists
have said that they will prevent Emanuel from celebrating at the Kotel (Western Wall). There have been reports that the ceremony will be held at the Robinson's Arch part of the Wall, which is slightly removed from the public area and which serves those of the Reform and Conservative communities who wish to hold prayer services that differ noticeably from traditional ones, as only traditional services are allowed at the public part of the Wall.

The media-savvy Emanuel made no attempt to keep his family's culinary experience in Eilat -- at the expense of the Israeli taxpayer -- from becoming known to the Israeli media and even posed for a picture with the restaurant's chef. The event might therefore be interpreted by some as a deliberate message by Emanuel, in keeping with a line of theatrically insulting messages to Israel delivered by the White House since it came under Emanuel's direction. The most notorious of these was the photograph released by the White House of President Barack Obama speaking to Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu with his feet propped up on his desk and the soles thrust at the camera.


Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 01:10 AM | Comments (0)

May 23, 2010


(How can one possibly use this combination of words without complete revulsion?)

Redacted from: Worldwide Trends in Honor Killings

By Phyllis Chesler

Middle East Quarterly
Spring 2010, Publisher - Daniel Pipes

...To combat the epidemic of honor killings requires understanding what makes these murders unique. They differ from plain and psychopathic homicides, killings, crimes of passion, revenge killings, and domestic violence. Their motivation is different and based on codes of morality and behavior that typify some cultures, often reinforced by fundamentalist religious dictates. In 2000, the United Nations estimated that there are 5,000 honor killings every year. That number might be reasonable for Pakistan alone, but worldwide the numbers are much greater. In 2002 and again in 2004, the U.N. brought a resolution to end honor killings and other honor-related crimes.

In 2004, at a meeting in The Hague about the rising tide of honor killings in Europe, law enforcement officers from the U.K. announced plans to begin re-opening old cases to see if certain murders were, indeed, honor murders. The number of honor killings is routinely underestimated, and most estimates are little more than guesses that vary widely. Definitive or reliable worldwide estimates of honor killing incidence do not exist.

Most honor killings are not classified as such, are rarely prosecuted, or when prosecuted in the Muslim world, result in relatively light sentences. When an honor killing occurs in the West, many people, including the police, still shy away from calling it an honor killing. In the West, both Islamist and feminist groups, including domestic violence activists, continue to insist that honor killings are a form of Westem-style domestic violence or femicide (killing of women). THEY ARE NOT!

... It is clear that Muslim girls and women are murdered for honor in both the West and the East when they refuse to wear the hijab or choose to wear it improperly; In addition, they are killed for behaving in accepted Western or modem ways, when they express a desire to attend college, have careers, live independent lives, have non-Muslim friends (including boyfriends with whom they may or may not be sexually involved), choose their own husbands, refuse to marry their first cousins, or want to leave an abusive husband. This "Westernization" trend also exists in Muslim countries but to a lesser extent.

Allegations of unacceptable "Westernization" accounted for 44 percent of honor murders in the Muslim world as compared to 71 percent in Europe and 91 percent in North America.Tempted by Western ideas, desiring to assimilate, and hoping to escape lives of subordination, those girls and women who exercise their option to be Western are killed—at early ages and m particularly gruesome ways. Frightening honor murders may constitute an object lesson to other Muslim girls and women about what may happen to them if they act on the temptation to do more than serve their fathers and brothers as domestic servants, many their first cousin and breed as many children as possible. The deaths of females already living in the West may also be intended as lessons for other female immigrants who are expected to lead subordinate and segregated lives amid the temptations and privileges of freedom. This is especially true in Europe where large Muslim ghettos have formed in the past few decades. It is particularly alarming to note that in Europe 96 percent of the honor killing perpetrators are Muslims.

The level of primal, sadistic, or barbaric savagery shown in honor killings towards a female family intimate more closely approximates some of the murders in the West perpetrated by serial killers against prostitutes or randomly selected women. It all suggests that gender separation, the devaluation of girls and women, normalize child abuse, including arranged child marriages of both boys and girls, sexual repression, misogyny (sometimes inspired by misogynist interpretations of the Qur'an), and the demands made by an increase in the violent ideology of Jihad all lead to murderous levels of aggression towards girls and women.

One only has to kill a few girls and women to keep the others m line. Honor killings are, in a sense, a form of domestic terrorism, meant to ensure that Muslim women wear the Islamic veil, have Muslim babies, and mingle only with other Muslims. Since Muslim immigration and, therefore, family networks are more restricted in North America than in Europe, honor-killing fathers may feel that the entire burden for upholding standards for female behavior falls heavily upon them and them alone. This may account for the fact that fathers are responsible 100% of the time for the honor murders of the youngest age victims, In Europe and in the Muslim world, that burden may more easily be shared by sons and brothers, grandfathers, uncles and male cousins.


How can this problem be addressed? Immigration, law enforcement, and religious authorities must all be included in education, prevention, and prosecution efforts in the matter of honor killings. In addition, shelters for battered Muslim girls and women should be established and multilingual staff appropriately trained in the facts about honor killings. For example, young Muslim girls are frequently lured back home by their mothers. When a shelter resident receives such a phone call, the staff must immediately go on high alert.

The equivalent of a federal witness protection program for the intended targets of honor killings should be created; England has already established such a program. Extended safe surrogate family networks must be created to replace existing family networks; the intended victims themselves, with enormous assistance, may become each other's "sisters." In addition, clear government warnings must be issued to Muslim, Sikh, and Hindu immigrants and citizens . Honor killings must be prosecuted in the West, and perpetrators, accomplices, and enablers must all be prosecuted. Participating families should be publicly shamed. Criminals must be deported after they have served their sentences.

Islamic gender apartheid is a human rights violation and cannot be justified in the name of cultural relativism, tolerance, anti-racism, diversity, or political correctness. As long as Islamist groups continue to deny, minimize, or obfuscate the problem, and government and police officials accept their inaccurate versions of reality, women will continue to be killed for honor in the West. The battle for women's rights is central to the battle for Europe and for Western values. It is a necessary part of true democracy, along with freedom of religion,tolerance for homosexuals, and freedom of dissent. Here, then, is exactly where the greatest battle of the twenty-first century is joined.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 04:53 AM | Comments (0)

May 20, 2010

Obama Shows No Interest in Ending Palestinian Incitement Against Israelis

THE JEWISH PRESS • May 14, 2010


Recent polls show that Americans, American Jews and Israelis all disapprove of President Obama's policies toward Israel. One reason for the disapproval that emerges in these polls is that the Obama administration pressures and criticizes Israel, while giving Mahmoud Abbas's Palestinian Authority a free pass. Such perceptions happen to be well founded. For example, the Obama administration has almost entirely ignored Palestinian incitement. On the few occasions it has paid it any account at all, it has finessed and whitewashed it.

On June 4, 2009, President Obama delivered an address in Cairo directed to a worldwide Muslim audience. While he criticized Holocaust denial and hatred of Jews in the Muslim world, Obama said nothing about these in relation to the Palestinian Authority. Indeed, the word "incitement" did not pass his lips. Criticized for ignoring this issue, Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton alluded to it by name it in some subsequent statements, but in none did the administration indicate the PA was responsible for the incitement - or if and how the PA might be penalized for its continuation.

On the contrary: when Obama referred to the problem of Palestinian incitement in his speech at Buchenwald on June 5, 2009, he even praised Abbas for having made some "progress" in dealing with it - implying that Abbas and the PA were part of solution rather than the problem. In August 2009, Fatah held a conference in Bethlehem which reaffirmed its refusal to accept Israel's existence as a Jewish State, glorified terrorists living and dead by name, praised the "armed struggle," insisted on the so-called right of return, and rejected an end of claims in any future peace agreement with Israel. Abbas himself declared, "We maintain the right to launch an armed resistance." How did the Obama administration react? With silence.

Later, urged by Senator Arlen Specter (D-PA) to take up the issue with Abbas, Secretary Clinton issued a flat-earth denial, saying that the Fatah Conference showed "a broad consensus supporting negotiations with Israel, and the two-state solution" and that contrary statements by unnamed "individuals" at the conference "did not represent Fatah's official positions." This blatant untruth was even more disturbing coming as it did from Clinton, who, as senator from New York, had once been outspoken about the need to end PA incitement.

In January of this year, when terrorists from Fatah's Al-Aqua Martyrs Brigades, a recognized terrorist group, murdered an Israeli, Rabbi Meir Chai,in a drive-by shooting, the PA did not condemn the murder but did condemn the subsequent killing of the terrorists by Israel. Abbas himself sent condolences to the families of the three terrorists; PA prime minister Salam Fayyad visited-the terrorists' families; and Mahmoud Al-Aloul, member of the Fatah Central Committee, also praised the dead terrorists as heroes. But the Obama administration said nothing, even when specifically informed of these events by the Israeli government.

Similarly, when PA TV broadcast a sermon from Nablus's Bourin Mosque on January 29, in which Jews were declared "the enemies of Allah and of His Messenger.... Enemies of humanity in general" and Muslims exhorted to murder them with the words "The Prophet says, "You shall fight the Jews and kill them," the administration continued to say nothing. In March, the Obama administration publicly condemned Israel for announcing a program of building Jewish homes in eastern Jerusalem during Vice President Joseph Biden's visit. It failed, however, to condemn — or indeed to say anything at all — about something else that occurred during Biden's visit: the PA's naming a public square in Ramallah after Dalal Mughrabi, the leader of the 1978 coastal road bus hijacking, in which 37 Israelis, including 12 children, were slaughtered.

When at last Secretary Clinton, several days later, provided the administration's first criticism of the obscene glorification of Mughrabi by Palestinians, it was only to whitewash and protect Abbas, Fayyad and the PA by incorrectly suggesting it was "a Hamas-controlled municipality'' that had initiated the event. Adding insult to injury, Clinton actually praised Abbas and Fayyad for their strengthening of "law and order."

At the time of these remarks, the PA was actively instigating violence in and around Jerusalem.Here, too, Clinton avoided any mention of the PA interfering to the disorders, speaking only of unidentified "instigators.'' The conclusion is inevitable: the Obama administration is not interested in Palestinian incitement and sees it as its brief to protect the PA from exposure as sponsors of violence and purveyors of hate. Assistant Secretary of State Phillip Crowley said last month that the administration "will continue to hold Palestinian leaders accountable for incitement." Abbas and Fayyad must be quaking in their boots.

Morton A. Klein is national president of the Zionist Organization of America.
Daniel Mandel is director of the ZOA's Center for Middle East Policy.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 02:55 PM | Comments (0)

May 17, 2010

Why the whole world flies EL AL

It was Monday, the eve of Israel's Independence Day and the fifth day in the world's largest aviation crisis that has paralyzed Europe, following a volcanic explosion in Iceland, which left the skies of 23 countries clouded in volcanic dust. 

I was left stranded in Holland, but after hearing that El Al had promised to send more Israeli jets to Europe to collect stranded Israelis, I found myself traveling to Rome, halfway across the European continent by train.

After 27 hours of a nerve-racking trip, I remained doggedly determined to join the rest of the people of Israel in celebration of Israel Independence Day.  I finally arrived at Terminal 5 in Rome at 23:30. 

Much to my amazement, I found a nearly empty terminal, deserted of passengers, aircrafts, and airline employees.  Only one ticket counter had a long line of people and that was of course El Al.  

Exhausted Israelis from all corners of Europe had arrived to board the jumbo plane decked with Israeli flags.  El Al specifically sent the plane to gather Israeli travelers and bring them back home to celebrate Independence Day with their families.  It was a sort of in gathering of the exiles sponsored and facilitated by El Al.

El Al, Israel's largest airline, privatized in 2003, serves as the national airline of Israel.  It was one of the first if not the only airline that was able to adjust to a state of emergency in less than 24 hours when airports across Europe were forced to shut down. 

It is amazing how every time there is a national disaster or international crisis, Israel, somehow, is always among the first countries to act and lend a hand.  

As such a tiny country, which since its establishment has existed under constant terror and threat, Israel is constantly in a state of preparedness as well. 

Zionism still here and kicking. 

On my way to Rome during the weekend on the train, I heard from many other Israelis that countless airlines on which they had flown did not open emergency centers in order to instruct passengers how to act during this emergency situation.

Israeli media did not stop broadcasting the news that El Al was operating to return stranded Israelis back to Israel and consequently the airline established an emergency information center to receive calls and share information on flight location points where Israelis could verify where to catch a flight back to Israel.

El Al sent 20 additional jets to transport 20,000 Israelis stuck across Europe in places including Munich, Madrid, Barcelona and Rome.  El Al also ensured that the same ticket could be used regardless of the country from which travelers were scheduled to fly from in Europe, even if the flight from that particular country had been cancelled to Israel.

In addition, the El-Al crews did an amazing job, working over 20 hours non-stop to provide the best quality of services in this time of emergency.

The flight from Rome to Tel Aviv on April 20, 2010, was the best way to begin celebrating 62 years to the state of Israel.  During the soft landing in Ben Gurion Airport at 7 am, I felt that there was something Biblical in the operation, something like "the wings of eagles.

As I traveled, I had much time to reflect on the country's current state and where we are today, after 2,000 years of dreaming of returning to our homeland.

 I can honestly say that my experience this past Israel Independence Day renewed my belief in our state.  I am back home in Sderot, the world "capital" of bomb shelters, with hope in my heart, that Zionism is still here and kicking, and that the Jewish state will continue to stand up for her citizens both around the world and at home.

Thanks to El Al, 20,000 Israelis made it back home in what was truly a reflection of the spirit that helped make Israel independent 62 years ago.

Noam Bedein is a photojournalist, lecturer and founder/director of Sderot Media Center . He has conducted briefings and tours for government officials, diplomats, foreign press, and students from around the world.



Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 05:16 PM | Comments (0)

May 15, 2010

I Gov. Sarah Palin Proudly Wears US-Israel Pin to Gala Occasions

II How Dare Obama Supervise Israeli Housing Construction!

Jewish Press May 14, 2010 from Combined News Sources

Former Alaska governor and Republican vice-presidential candidate Sarah Palin wore an American/Israeli flag pin to Time magazine's May 4 dinner honoring the "100 Most Influential People in the World." Palin wore the same pin when she addressed the National Tea Party Convention in Nashville this past February. Palin kept an Israeli flag in her office while serving as governor. In fact, when Palin was introduced to Israeli President Shimon Peres she told him, "The only flag at my office (besides the American) is an Israeli flag."

In an op-ed article that appeared in the March tissue of The Jewish Press, Gov. Palin criticized the Obama administration for "reaching out to some of the world's worst regimes in the name of its engagement policy." Palin then asked, "In the midst of all this embracing of enemies, with whom does the Obama administration choose to escalate a minor incident into a major diplomatic confrontation? With Iran? Cuba? Sudan? North Korea? Burma? No. With our treasured ally, Israel."

Noting that while "Israel makes concessions" (and is still criticized by the Obama administration), Arab leaders are just sitting back waiting for the White House to pressure Israel even further," Palin said Obama needed "to push the reset button on our relations with our ally, Israel."

II Report: U.S. Enforcing Jerusalem Construction Freeze

US officials in Israel have been enforcing a de facto ban on Jewish construction in Jerusalem according to the Israeli newspaper Makor Rishon Hatzofe. Last November, at the commencement of the 10 month freeze on Jewish construction in Judea and Samaria, several reports circulated that American inspectors answering directly to US Middle East Envoy George Mitchell were visiting Jewish towns and villages in the region, asking questions and taking photographs. Officials now suspect that the same thing is taking place in many parts of Jerusalem!

While Benjamin Netanyahu and senior cabinet ministers vehemently deny all reports of an agreement to freeze construction in most of Jerusalem, no Jewish construction is currently visible in any neighborhoods of the capital and no such construction seems to be planned for the foreseeable future; The de facto construction freeze in Jerusalem is widely believed to be the result of fear of a negative American reaction to Jewish building.

... MK Ariel, chairman of the parliamentary lobbying group for Jerusalem, sent a letter to Prime Minister Netanyahu in which he demanded the premier allow construction in the capitol despite American demands. ... Meanwhile, in a statement released late Sunday, Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat rejected reports that Prime Minister Netanyahu promised not to build in an eastern Jerusalem neighborhood for the next two years:

"The real test is the test of actions,'' Barkat said. "The Municipality of Jerusalem continues to promote planning and construction throughout the city for all its residents — Jews, Christians, and Muslims. We expect that the Israeli government will react to the public demand of both the Arab and Jewish sectors and enable the construction of housing for the young population that is leaving the city because of a shortage of affordable housing. We trust that the prime minister will not allow a freeze in Jerusalem — not in words and not in actions."

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 10:02 PM | Comments (0)

May 13, 2010

Obama’s Peace Partner for Netanyahu

By Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought”

YnetNews, April 27, 2010

Since 2007, US foreign aid to the Palestinian Authority and to PA-controlled NGOs reached nearly $2BN, in addition to $3.7BN contributed by the US to UNRWA since 1950. Has American foreign aid to Abu Mazen advanced moderation, the pursuit of peace and US national security interests?

On April 20, 2010, Abu Mazen named a Ramallah street in honor of Abu Jihad, the architect of PLO terrorism during 1965-1988. For example, Abu Jihad masterminded the March 11, 1978 Israeli Coastal Road Massacre, hijacking two civilian buses, murdering 38 civilians, including 13 children and wounding 71. He also orchestrated the March 1975 Tel Aviv Hotel Savoy Massacre, murdering 7 civilians. But, Abu Mazen is a man of peace…

On March 11, 2010, Abu Mazen-controlled TV and dailies (Al-Ayam and Al-Khayat Al-Jedida) praised Dalal Mughrabi - who commanded the Coastal Road Massacre - as a martyr. On January 16, 2010, Abu Mazen announced that a major square in El-Bireh shall be named in honor of Mughrabi. The PA also named a Hebron girls school, a computers center, a summer camp and a sport tournament in honor of Mughrabi. But, Abu Mazen is a man of peace…

Abu Mazen and Salam Fayyad authorize the transfer of monthly allowances to families of Palestinian “martyrs”/terrorists. They pay condolences visits to families of suicide bombers, acclaiming them as national heroes. But, Abu Mazen is a man of peace…

In 1994 Abu Mazen instituted – as Arafat’s Deputy - an unprecedented system of hate-education through the PA-controlled school, media and mosque systems. Since January 2005 – when he replaced Arafat – Abu Mazen has perpetuated the anti-Jewish, anti-Israel and anti-US hate education. Mein Kampf and the anti-Semitic “Protocols of the Elders of Zion” are best sellers. Hitler and suicide-bombers are folk heroes. Hate-education, and not a dialogue with Western policy-makers and public-opinion molders, reflects Abu Mazen’s ideology/strategy. Hate-education cements Palestinian national identity. It feeds the root cause of the Arab-Israeli conflict: the de-legitimization of the existence – and not the size – of the Jewish State. Hate-education has been the main manufacturing line of terrorists in general and suicide bombers in particular. Western indifference toward Hitler's hate-education facilitated unprecedented human calamity.  But, Abu Mazen is a man of peace…

Abu Mazen's education system de-humanizes the Jewish State, heralds a religious war against the Jewish State (10th grade "Islamic Education – part II, p.50), idolizes martyrs/suicide bombers who “live next to Allah” and “whose blood is pure,” (5th grade "Our Beautiful Language" pp.26, 31,36,70; 10th grade "Grammar" p.30, 146), denies Mideast roots of the Jewish State, fuels anti-Semitism, glorifies "the claim of return" (code name for Israel's destruction) and promotes Holocaust Denial (“Modern World History, p. 83). But, Abu Mazen is a man of peace…

On August 13, 2009, Abu Mazen ratified the resolutions of Fatah’s 6th General Conference. For instance, “Armed struggle is a strategy, not a tactic… for the elimination of the Zionist presence. The struggle shall not end until the Zionist entity is eliminated and Palestine is liberated (article 19)… Popular armed revolution is the only way to liberate Palestine…Opposing the recognition of Israel as a Jewish State…”

The US would not fund hate-education in America, but it funds a hate-education regime. Has the US examined the proposition that Abu Mazen is, supposedly, a man of peace?

Abu Mazen was Arafat’s top confidant and First Deputy for 50 years, partaking in the betrayal of Arab host countries: Egypt, Syria, Jordan, Lebanon and Kuwait. He enrolled in KGB courses and submitted a doctorate thesis - which reaffirmed Holocaust Denial - at the Moscow University. Abu Mazen coordinated PLO ties with ruthless Communist regimes, supervised the logistics of the 1972 Munich Massacre (11 Israeli athletes murdered), co-supervised the March 1973 murder of two US ambassadors in Sudan, was a key member of the Palestinian cell of the Muslim Brotherhood in Cairo and earned the nickname – “Mr. 20%” - due to his corruption. But, Abu Mazen is a man of peace…

Ignoring Abu Mazen’s horrific track record of the last 50 years, and applying moral equivalence and even-handedness, constitutes a victory to wishful-thinking, rewarding terrorism, adding fuel to the fire of terrorism and Middle East turbulence, at the expense of peace and vital US interests.

Heard in Texas: Be wary of deadly coral snake posing as harmless skipjack snake!



Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 08:01 PM | Comments (0)

May 12, 2010

Muslims to build Ground Zero Mosque where Americans Murdered!

By Madeline Brooks
Planting a mosque just two blocks from where Muslims murdered Americans on 9/11 is a huge slap in the face.   Why shouldn’t Muslims be sensitive enough to realize that a huge mosque planted right near the horrific wound to US created at Ground Zero by Muslims is outrageous to us?  They claim a right to be insulted by cartoons mocking their prophet, even to the point of beheading people.
The Imam of the Ground Zero Insult, Faisal Abdul Rauf, is not the nice guy he likes to hold himself out to be.  At his Friday afternoon khutbah services and in his book, “What’s Right With Islam,” Rauf states that he wants the mosque to be a place where inter-faith understanding is fostered.   His sonorous voice is smooth and almost hypnotic.  His writing style appears to be rational and unthreatening.
However, this does not jibe with aspects of him that are downright hostile and frightening. During a recent Friday sermon, this writer did due diligence as a mosque monitor and heard Rauf deny that Muslims perpetrated 9/11.  In an interview with CNN shortly after 9/11, Rauf said, “U.S. policies were an accessory to the crime that happened.  We (the US) have been an accessory to a lot of innocent lives dying in the world.  Osama bin Laden was made in the USA.”  Elsewhere, Rauf has stated that terrorism will only end when the West acknowledges the harm it has done to Muslims.  And that it was Christians who started mass attacks on civilians. 
Rauf has numerous ties to CAIR, an "unindicted co-conspirator" in the Department of Justice funding case brought against Hamas, an openly terrorist organization.  CAIR is also the initiator of numerous “law fare” cases designed to intimidate non-Muslims from criticizing aggressive Muslim behavior, and to use our own legal and democratic processes to undermine and dominate America, forcing it to become Islamic. 

Rauf calls himself a Sufi, evoking among non-Muslims a “peace and love image,” similar to hippies.  But that’s not the whole picture.  Sufism has many sides to it, including the Koranic injunction to spread Islam one way or another, and it has a rich history of waging war too. Could it be that one of the frequently used tools of war, lying to the enemy, would explain the contradiction between Rauf’s image as reconciler of religions and his sympathies and associations with terrorists?  This is known as “taquiyya” among Muslims.

A previous Rauf project, Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow, clearly shows on its website that it is headed and funded by individuals from Saudi Arabia, the country that spawned fifteen of the nineteen jihad jockeys who rode the 9/11 planes of destruction.  The funding for Cordoba House is much murkier, so far.  All that has been publicly disclosed is that the support comes from unidentified sources in Saudi Arabia and Muslim ruled Malaysia.  Rauf reportedly says he paid $4.85 million for the property — in cash.  Where exactly did this money come from?  Was it Wahhabist supporting Saudi sources, which have already funded many other mosques in New York City?

The mosque is called Cordoba House.  Muslims like to refer to Spain and especially the city of Cordoba as a place where Muslim rule reached a glorious peak. Contrary to the myth of a Golden Age of equality during the Muslim occupation of Spain and in particular in Cordoba, Spain and Cordoba were places where Christians and Jews suffered as social inferiors under Islam oppression. 

Equal civil rights never existed for non-Muslims under Sharia, or Islamic law.  Rauf even admits as much when he writes, “Jews and Christians living under Muslim rule simply had to pay a tax to finance their protection by their Muslim overlords.”   This is not equality!  Americans do not demand a special tax to protect Muslims from ourselves.  That would be extortion, not ‘protection.’
Through another organization Rauf started called the Cordoba Initiative, he created the “Sharia Index.”  This will measure how closely countries follow Sharia, or Islamic law.  While Sharia can cover such relatively innocuous aspects of Muslim life as religious weddings (hopefully not to twelve year old girls) it also demands that all Muslim life be governed by laws derived from the Koran, without the intervention of civic institutions, such as democracy.  And the Koran dictates that everyone, even non-Muslims, must ultimately live under Sharia.  Do you understand how that is in direct conflict with our Constitution and other aspects of our secular society? 
Rauf gets even trickier here. He states in his book, “What’s Right With Islam,” that a society that follows natural law, such as America, is already practicing Sharia.  However, he does not note that his peculiar definition of Sharia acceptance is shared by just about no other Imam.  So what prevents him from adjusting his singular idea of Sharia back to the norm of forced conversions, murdering non-Muslims and apostates who leave Islam, amputations of thieves’ hands, stoning of adulterous women, execution of homosexuals, etc.? 

Throughout his writing, Rauf floats an image of a harmonious, pleasant Islam – nice to everybody.  But this is totally disconnected from Islam’s actual history of bloody conquest, enslavement, and humiliation of other people — which he never acknowledges. 
Still another unsettling part of Rauf’s problem mosque is why the city has given the building a pass.  Records for the Department of Buildings have shown numerous complaints for illegal construction and no access, yet the issues were listed as ‘resolved.’ Community Board One’s financial district committee needs to reconsider its endorsement of this mosque. 

The "prestigious" American groups that are reportedly also financing the mosque, The Ford Foundation and The Rockefeller Brothers Fund, need to think again about what they are getting into.  The Department of Buildings needs to reassess its action.  The Mayor’s Office of Immigrant Affairs, which supports the project (What has a religious building got to do with Immigration?) needs to re-evaluate its approval. 
Mayor Bloomberg himself needs to withdraw his support for this mosque, especially in light of the recent Times Square car bomb attempt.  If not, he will be helping to provide a handy meeting place for future terrorists, those who understand Imam Rauf’s real message:  Speak sweetly, appear to be a well adjusted member of American society, while planning the destruction

Community Board One can be reached by phone: (212) 442 5050.  By fax: (212) 442 5055.  By email: Their street address is:  49-51 Chambers Street Room 715, New York, NY 10007-1209.

From: Madeline Brooks, Chapter head of in Manhattan

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 03:46 AM | Comments (0)

May 10, 2010

Ransoming Gilad Shalit - (At What Cost?) jsk


By Evelyn Gordon

IN MAY 1985, Israel traded 1,150 terrorists for three captive soldiers in what became known as the Jibril exchange. The freed Palestinians included mass murderers and other heavyweights like Ahmed Yassin, who, later founded Hamas. Deadly consequences swiftly ensued: the freed terrorists formed the backbone of the first intifada, which erupted in December 1987. A traumatized Israel vowed never again to make such a deal, and for almost 20 years it did not: it released thousands of Palestinian prisoners to bolster the peace process, but not as ransom payments. Thus when air force navigator Ron Arad was captured in 1986, the government negotiated but ultimately deemed the price too high (Arad's fate remains unknown). Soldiers Joseph Fink and Rahamim Alsheikh were captured and killed that same year, but a deal for their corpses was concluded only 10 years later, after Hezbollah finally agreed to a straight bodies-for-bodies swap. And in 1994, when Hamas kidnapped soldier Nachshon Wachsman, the government launched a commando raid to try to rescue him, in full knowledge that it could end in his death—which it did.

But recently, this consensus has collapsed, seemingly replaced by a new imperative: bring the boys home at any price. So in 2004, Israel freed 435 prisoners in exchange for one civilian (a colonel in the army reserves) and the remains of three soldiers.In 2008, it traded five prisoners, including the vicious killer Samir Kuntar, for the bodies of two soldiers — the first time Israel had ever traded live prisoners for dead bodies. And while a deal has not yet been finalized for Gilad Shalit, the soldier kidnapped m 2006 on the border with the Gaza Strip, it is already clear that any such arrangement will be the most lopsided in Israel's history.

According to a government affidavit to the High Court of Justice last November, Israel has agreed to trade 1,000 Palestinian prisoners (of whom 20 were al ready released in exchange for a video proving that Shalit is still alive) for this one soldier. Of these, 45 percent will be chosen by agreement with Hamas, which seeks to free all the worst murderers of the second intifada; the other 55 percent will be at Israel's discretion. The previous government agreed to 325 of the names on Hamas's list; Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has since approved several dozen more. The only unknown is how many. Some media reports say the gap is now about 50 names; others place it as low as 15 or even four.

What has changed over the past decade to make a deal that once would have seemed unacceptable win support from consistently strong majorities in opinion polls while producing what even the New York Times termed surprisingly little controversy? In truth, there have always been powerful factors impelling Israelis to support lopsided deals. But they used to be counterbalanced by concerns over the risks, which are far from trivial. First, by proving that terror pays, such deals encourage terrorism in general, Second, they undermine prospects for peace by proving that violence results in more concessions from Israel than do negotiations. Though Israel has often released prisoners to the Palestinian Authority as a goodwill gesture during talks, the scale of these releases (aside from the thousands freed under the 1993 Oslo Accords) has always been far more modest than what Israel is offering for Shalit-and never, despite repeated pleas from the Palestinians, have they included serial killers. Third,many freed prisoners would certainly resume terrorist activity, resulting in many more dead Israelis, as has happened after every previous deal. And finally, such lopsided deals project an image of weakness, reinforcing a growing Arab conviction that Israeli society is no stronger than a "spider web," as Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah has said. It would thereby encourage the Arabs to be believe that through continued pressure, they can achieve their decades-long dream of eradicating the Jewish State.

NO ONE should expect the Shalits, or any other family whose loved one is in the hands of Israel's enemies, to be as wise or self-sacrificing as Rabbi Meir of Rothenburg was in the Middle Ages. Weighing the deal's costs and benefits to the country as a whole is not the family's job but that of the government.The Yet so long as the only factors in the equation that determine Israeli thinking are love of their children and the imperative to ransom captives, no political leader is likely to have the courage to resist the overwhelming public pressure for a deal. So there will be more Gilad Shalits, and the price the country will pay for they freedom will go even higher.

If this calculus is ever to be altered, it is vital for Israelis and they leaders to grasp the way in which despair about the peace process has undermined certain traditional arguments against such deals—and why, viewed properly, this despair actually lends new weight to other key arguments. For only by utilizing the lessons of the past two decades rather than ignoring them can a new Israeli consensus be forged against ransom payments that expose countless others to death from released killers and perpetuate Arab fantasies of Israel's destruction.

EVELYN GORDON is a journalist living in Israel and the author of "The Deadly Price of Pursuing Peace,"which appeared in COMMENTARY'S January issue,

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 07:28 PM | Comments (0)

May 09, 2010

Should Israel be able to build residences in its capital city?


A great brouhaha has arisen about a mid-level bureaucrat in Israel's Ministry of the Interior releasing a routine notice that 1,600 residences were to be built in Jerusalem. To the surprise of many, this routine announcement was construed as an insult or worse to Vice President Biden, who was visiting in Israel at the time. Mrs. Clinton, the Secretary of State, also was "shocked" and sent a "stem message" of displeasure to Mr. Netanyahu, the Prime Minister of Israel.

What are the facts?

Jerusalem is the capital of Israel and will remain that whatever the final accommodation with the Palestinians may be and whatever the "world," including the United States, may desire. That has been understood and recognized by every US Administration since the very birth of Israel. Therefore, to be "shocked" by an announcement that Israel will build housing for its citizens in its capital is strange. This is a trumped-up situation and puts the relationship with Israel with one fell swoop on an entirely different level. It is strange because the President himself has stated that Jerusalem should remain undivided as Israel's capital. So has Mrs. Clinton, especially when she was senator of New York and felt dependent upon Jewish support. It almost appears as if somebody in the administration wanted to produce a "crisis" and was looking for an expedient way to accomplish that.

The Muslim Palestinians also claim Jerusalem, or at least its eastern part, as their capital. They want the city to be divided - as it was between 1948 when the Jordanians (illegally invaded and) occupied the eastern part of the city - until 1967, when the Israelis liberated it in the Six-Day War. The principal basis for the Muslim claim is that Jerusalem does indeed contain an Islamic holy site, namely the Temple Mount (sacred to both Muslims and Jews) with its two mosques - El Aksa and the Dome of the Rock. It is the place from which Mohammed, who never in his life set foot in the city, is believed to have ascended to heaven.

But Mohammed was aware that it was the holy city of Christians and Jews, and wishing to convert them to his new religion, he commanded his followers to build a mosque in Jerusalem over the ruins of the ancient biblical Jewish Holy Temple. But never in Muslim history did this mosque or this city compare in significance to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina - cities that no "infidel" may visit.

It is on the basis of this religious tradition that the Muslims designated the entire Jewish Temple Mount to be their holy site. The Israeli government, in its constant spirit of accommodation to Muslim sensibilities, has largely acceded to this tradition and has put the area in and around the two mosques entirely under Muslim control. But how would Christians feel if, instead of from the Temple Mount, Muslim tradition had that Mohammed ascended from the Church of the Holy Sepulcher and if the Muslim Arabs were to claim that site as their property?

The Christian world, often ready to consent to Muslim claims against Jews and Israelis, would be greatly astonished and would certainly resist such claim. But Muslim Arab assertiveness doesn't end there. On the tenuous claim of their right to the Temple Mount, they have construed a claim to the entire city of Jerusalem (or at the very least to its eastern part), which they have declared to be their "third holiest city." And, it would be an insult to all Muslims and all Arabs to leave the city in the hands of the "infidel Jews."

The facts are that Jerusalem was never an Arab capital. The city of Jerusalem - in contrast to Baghdad, Cairo or Damascus - has never played any major role in the political and religious lives of the Muslim Arabs. It was never a political center, never a national, or even a provincial or sub-provincial capital of any country, since Biblical times. It was the site of one Muslim holy place, but otherwise a backwater to the Arabs. The passion for Jerusalem was not discovered by the Muslim Arabs until most recent history (when it became politically expedient to do so in their attempt to conquer the Israelis, if not successful by the sword, by their far more effective propaganda of the Big Lie.) Jsk

But Jerusalem has stood at the center of the Jewish people's national life since King David made it his capital in 1000 BCE. (near 1600 years before Mohammed was even born!) jsk. After the return from Babylonian exile, Jerusalem again served as the capital of the Jewish people for the next five-and-a-half centuries. Jews are not the usurpers in Jerusalem. They have been living there since the biblical era and have been the majority of the population since the 19th century. Jews have synagogues and other holy sites in most cities of the world. But, do they claim sovereignty over those cities because of it? Of course not. It would be preposterous and people would not accept the idea. Jerusalem is the undivided capital of Israel and will remain so. That is why there is no reason the Israeli government could not plan building homes there for its citizens - Jews and Arabs - in any part of the city. Those that do not understand this basic well known history or refuse to accept it, are either misinformed or looking for a pretext to create a problem.

This message has been published and paid for by FLAME
Facts and Logic About the Middle East
P.O. Box 590359 • San Francisco, CA 94159
Gerardo Joffe, President

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 01:46 AM | Comments (0)

May 05, 2010

The Islamic Jihadists' Deadly Marital Path to Citizenship

Jewish World Review May 5, 2010

By Michelle Malkin

America's homeland security amnesia never ceases to amaze. In the aftermath of the botched Times Square terror attack over the weekend, Pakistani-born bombing suspect Faisal Shahzad's U.S. citizenship status caused a bit of shock and awe. The Atlantic magazine writer Jeffrey Goldberg's response was typical: "I am struck by the fact that he is a naturalized American citizen, not a recent or temporary visitor." Well, wake up and smell the deadly deception.

Shahzad's path to American citizenship: He reportedly married an American woman, Huma Mian, in 2008 after spending a decade in the country on foreign student and employment visas - is a tried-and-true terror formula. Jihadists have been gaming the sham marriage racket with impunity for years. And immigration benefit fraud has provided invaluable cover and aid for U.S.-based Islamic plotters, including many other operatives planning attacks on New York City. As I've reported previously:

Sayyid A. Nosair wed Karen Ann Mills Sweeney to avoid deportation for overstaying his visa. He acquired U.S. citizenship, allowing him to remain in the country, and was later convicted for conspiracy in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing that claimed six lives.

Ali Mohamed became an American citizen after marrying a woman he met on a plane trip from Egypt to New York. Recently divorced, Linda Lee Sanchez wed Mohamed in Reno, Nev., after a six-week "courtship." Mohamed became a top aide to Osama bin Laden and was later convicted for his role in the 1998 United States embassy bombings in Africa that killed 12 Americans and more than 200 others.

Embassy bombing plotter Khalid Abu al Dahab obtained citizenship after marrying three different American women.

Embassy bombing plotter Wadih el Hage, Osama bin Laden's personal secretary, married April Ray in 1985 and became a naturalized citizen in 1989. Ray knew of her husband's employment with bin Laden, but like many of these women in bogus marriages, she pleaded ignorance about the nature of her husband's work. El Hage, she says, was a sweet man, and bin Laden "was a great boss."

Lebanon-born Chawki Youssef Hammoud, convicted in a Hezbollah cigarette-smuggling operation based out of Charlotte, N.C., married American citizen Jessica Fortune for a green card to remain in the country.

Hammoud's brother, Mohammed Hammoud, married three different American women. After arriving in the United States on a counterfeit visa, being ordered deported and filing an appeal, he wed Sabina Edwards to gain a green card. Federal immigration officials refused to award him legal status after this first marriage was deemed bogus in 1994. Undaunted, he married Jessica Wedel in May 1997 and, while still wed to her, paid Angela Tsioumas (already married to someone else, too) to marry him in Detroit. The Tsioumas union netted Mohammed Hammoud temporary legal residence to operate the terror cash scam. He was later convicted on 16 counts that included providing material support to Hezbollah.

A total of eight Middle Eastern men who plotted to bomb New York landmarks in 1993 — Fadil Abdelgani, Amir Abdelgani, Siddig Ibrahim Siddig Ali, Tarig Elhassan, Abdo Mohammed Haggag, Fares Khallafalla, Mohammed Saleh, and Matarawy Mohammed Said Saleh — all obtained legal permanent residence by marrying American citizens.

A year after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, homeland security officials cracked a massive illegal alien Middle Eastern marriage fraud ring in a sting dubbed "Operation Broken Vows." Authorities were stunned by the scope of the operations, which stretched from Boston to South Carolina to California. But marriage fraud remains a treacherous path of least resistance. The waiting period for U.S. citizenship is cut by more than half for marriage visa beneficiaries. Sham marriage monitoring by backlogged homeland security investigators is practically nonexistent.
As former federal immigration official Michael Cutler warned years ago: "Immigration benefit fraud is certainly one of the major 'dots' that was not connected prior to the attacks of September 11, 2001, and remains a 'dot' that is not really being addressed the way it needs to be in order to secure our nation against criminals and terrorists who understand how important it is for them to 'game' the system as a part of the embedding process."

Jihadists have knowingly and deliberately exploited our lax immigration and entrance policies to secure the rights and benefits of American citizenship while they plot mass murder and we haven't done a thing to stop them.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 08:35 PM | Comments (0)

May 04, 2010

Previous Obama birth article refuted via the Occidental Tourist refutes the previous article with the following:

Origins: One of the avenues of approach taken by "birthers" in their quest to demonstrate that Barack Obama is not eligible to hold the office of President of the United States is to try to demonstrate that, even if he was born in the United States, he gave up his U.S. citizenship somewhere along the way ... and if he's not a U.S. citizen, then he can't legitimately be President of the United States. Therefore, many birthers have gleefully seized onto the above-cited news report from April 2009, which purports that Barack Obama attended Occidental College in Los Angeles under a scholarship granted only to students of "foreign citizenship." However, this item isn't a news report at all. It's a hoax whose elements are all demonstrably false:

The article is datelined "April 1, 2009" and tagged "AP," signifying it came from the Associated Press news agency. The date is a giveaway to the hoax (it's April Fool's Day), and the text of the article does not at all fit the standard Associated Press stylebook guidelines.

There was no such group as "Americans for Freedom of Information" at the time this article began circulating (although someone has since registered a site using that domain name); in fact, a web site for the then-faux organization was established to poke fun at those who believed it did: Read these tiny words very closely: the group Americans for Freedom of Information does not exist, just like the supposed "AP article" you keep cutting and pasting into e-mails to your irritated family does not exist, just like the "Daily Mail article" referenced in the fake "AP article" does not exist. They're all fabrications. Fakes. Hoaxes. Ask yourself why you're so eager to believe these obvious fakes. No, really. Really, really ask yourself.

Barack Obama attended Occidental College in California for two years as an undergraduate from 1979-81 under the name Obama, not Soetoro (the latter is the surname of his Indonesian stepfather, Lolo Soetoro): Jim Tranquada, Occidental's Director of Communications, said: "Contemporary public documents, such as the 1979-80 freshman 'Lookbook' [a guide distributed to incoming freshman] published at the beginning of President Obama's first year at Occidental, list him as Barack Obama. All of the Occidental alumni I have spoken to from that era (1979-81) who knew him, knew him as Barry Obama."
Fulbright scholarships for foreign students are coordinated through the American Indonesian Exchange Foundation (AMINEF), which does not not fund Indonesians for undergraduate study in the United States (only for master's or doctorate programs).

Barack Obama's student records from Occidental College remain unreleased. He has not chosen to make them public, nor has any court ordered the school to release them.

Searches of newspaper archives and electronic news databases shown that neither Britain's Daily Mail nor any other major UK newspaper published a front-page article entitled "Obama Eligibility Questioned" in 2009, nor did any such newspaper published an article consisting of the text reproduced above.

Leo Donofrio's lawsuit challenging Barack Obama's eligibility for the presidency was denied a hearing by the Supreme Court of New Jersey back in December 2008. It has not been taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court.

The web site of the United States Justice Foundation includes no report of an "investigation of Obama's campaign spending," and the executive director of that organization who is referenced in the e-mail, Gary Kreep, said in response to an inquiry that the e-mail was a hoax.
After her divorce from her first husband, Barack Obama's mother married an Indonesian student named Lolo Soetoro who was attending college in Hawaii; in 1967 the family moved to Indonesia, where Barack attended elementary school in Jakarta until 1971, when he returned to Hawaii to live with his maternal grandparents. Much has been made of the above-displayed registration from St. Francis of Assisi School in Jakarta, which ostensibly shows Barack Obama's stepfather having listed his stepson's nationality as "Indonesian" (thereby supposedly indicating that Barack Obama relinquished his U.S. citizenship at some point)

However, Lolo Soetoro's putatively listing his stepson's nationality as Indonesian on a school registration form does not in itself demonstrate that Barack Obama was officially regarded as an Indonesian citizen by the government of that country. In any case it's a moot point, since the same form shows that Barack Obama was born in Honolulu, Hawaii, thereby making him a U.S. citizen from birth, and U.S. law states that a foreign nationality acquired through an alien parent does not affect one's U.S. citizenship status, nor can a child's U.S. citizenship be renounced solely through the actions of his parents:

The automatic acquisition or retention of a foreign nationality, acquired, for example, by birth in a foreign country or through an alien parent, does not affect U.S. citizenship.

Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.
Last updated: 17 September 2009

The URL for this page is

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 10:57 AM | Comments (0)


In a move certain to fuel  the debate over Obama's qualifications for the presidency, the group  "Americans for Freedom of Information" has released copies of President Obama's college  transcripts from Occidental College . Released today, the transcript  school indicates that Obama, under the name Barry Soetoro, received financial aid as a foreign  student from Indonesia as an undergraduate. The transcript was  released by Occidental College in compliance with a court order in a suit brought by the group in the Superior Court of California. The transcript shows that Obama (Soetoro) applied for financial aid and was awarded a fellowship for  foreign students from the Fulbright Foundation Scholarship program. To qualify, for the scholarship, a student  must claim foreign citizenship.

This document would seem to provide the smoking gun that many of Obama's detractors have been seeking. Along with the evidence that he was first born in Kenya and there is no record of him ever applying for US citizenship, this is looking pretty grim. The news has created a firestorm at the White House as the release casts increasing doubt about Obama's legitimacy and qualification to serve as President article titled, "Obama Eligibility Questioned," leading some to speculate that the story may overshadow economic issues on Obama's first official visit to the U.K.

In a related matter, under growing pressure from several groups,   Justice Antonin Scalia announced that the Supreme Court agreed on Tuesday to hear arguments concerning Obama's legal eligibility to serve as President in a case brought by Leo Donofrio of New Jersey . This lawsuit claims Obama's dual citizenship disqualified him from serving as president. Donofrio's case is just one of 18 suits brought by citizens demanding proof of Obama's citizenship or qualification to serve as president.
Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation has released the results of their investigation of Obama's campaign spending. This study  estimates that Obama has spent upwards of $950,000 in campaign funds in the past  year with eleven law firms in 12 states for legal resources to  block  disclosure of any of his personal records. Mr. Kreep indicated that the investigation is still ongoing but that the final report will be provided to the U..S. Attorney general, Eric Holder.  Mr. Holder has refused to comment on  the matter...
Subject: Obama’s Passport as student between US, Jakarta, Karachi? 
While I've little interest in getting in the middle of the Obama birth issue, Paul Hollrah over at FSM did so  yesterday and believes the issue can be resolved by Obama answering one simple question: What passport did he use when he was shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi ?  How did a young man who arrived in New York in early June 1981, without the price of a hotel room in his pocket, suddenly come up with the price of a round-the-world trip just a month later? And once he was on a plane, shuttling between New York , Jakarta , and Karachi , what passport was he offering when he passed through Customs and Immigration?  The American people not only deserve to have answers to these questions, they must have answers. It makes the debate over Obama's citizenship a rather short and simple one.
Q: Did he travel to Pakistan in 1981, at age 20? 
A : Yes, by his own admission. 
Q: What passport did he travel under? 
A: There are only three possibilities. 
            1) He traveled with a U.S. Passport, 
            2) He traveled with a  British passport, or 
            3) He traveled with an Indonesia passport. 
Q: Is it possible that Obama traveled with a U.S. Passport in 1981? 
A: No. It is not possible. Pakistan was on the   U.S. State Department's "no travel" list  in 1981. 
Conclusion: When Obama went to Pakistan in 1981 he was traveling either with a British passport or an Indonesian passport.
If he were traveling with a British passport that would provide proof that he was born in Kenya on August 4, 1961, not in Hawaii as he claims. And if he were traveling with an Indonesian passport that would tend to prove that he relinquished whatever previous citizenship he held, British or American, prior to being adopted by his Indonesian step-father in 1967.
Whatever the truth of the matter, the American people need to know how he managed to become a "natural born" American citizen between 1981 and 2008..
Given the destructive nature of his plans for America, as illustrated by his speech before Congress and the disastrous spending plan he has presented to Congress, the sooner we learn the truth of all this, the better.
If you don't care that your President is not a  natural born Citizen and in Violation of the Constitution, then Delete  this, and then lower your American Flag to half-staff, because the U.S. Constitution is already on life-support, and won't survive much longer.  If you do care then Forward this to as many patriotic Americans as you can, because our country is being looted and ransacked!


Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 04:06 AM | Comments (0)

May 01, 2010

Israel's ship of state now sails without a true compass.

By Professor Louis Beres

The Jewish Press, April 23, 2010

Horace was born in 65 BCE and died in 8 BCE. His ode on the "ship of state" pertains to ancient Rome, but it might just as well refer to Israel after it concedes to "live with a nuclear Iran" and also to "live with Palestine" The more or less concurrent arrival of (1) Iranian nuclear weapons, and (2) an independent Palestinian state, could have an intolerable effect upon Israel. Indeed, this injurious interactive outcome,— known technically in science, medicine and engineering as asynergistic — would likely be far greater than the simple sum of these two discrete parts.

So, now essentially sailing without oars, the Jewish State flounders without any real strategic understandIng or determination. Although existential security issues are already serious enough for Israel without a nuclear Iran, and also without a 23rd enemy Arab state, the near-simultaneous appearance of these two developments would present Israel with a unique and literally unprecedented problem. The ship of Israel, though certainly built of noble timber, and from sturdy forests, may not hold together against such a probable dual assault. Its sails are already badly shredded. What, exactly, has brought Israel to this perilous point?

Ironically, in an inexplicable juxtaposition of counsel, Israel has regularly sought direction from misguided friends and sworn enemies. Soon, if Prime Minister Netanyahu should buy into the Mitchell 5-point plan, Israeli police and soldiers will prepare to evict thousands of Jews from Judea/Samaria in compliance with Washington's Road Map. Following extensive U.S. military training of Fatah security forces - a misguided process presently underway. Palestine could then become a locus of mega-terrorism against both Israeli and American cities. This hazard, of course would be substantially worsened by any subsequent Iranian nuclearization.

Israel's ship of state now sails without a true compass. Where once every Israeli understood an absolutely sacred post-Holocaust obligation to survive, this primary awareness has now given way in critical quarters to the twisted agendas of post-Zionism. In both government and in the universities, emerging Israeli architects of Palestine have no real acquaintance with seaworthiness. Instead, vainly seeking the approval of an international community, these unwitting planners of Jewish ruins-in-the-making will discover only the Jihadist "peace" of Fatah, Hamas and al-Qaeda.

Taking a page from the advanced theoretical economics of President Shimon Peres, Jewish supporters of a "Two-State Solution" still argue that enhanced Palestinian social and industrial development could somehow compel a true inter-communal harmony.What they still fail to recognize, however, is that the deepest explanations of Israel's growing existential predicament lies not in Plato or Marx, but in Nietzsche, Freud, Kierkegaard and Dostoyevsky. As always, the presumed imperatives of Reason will be thoroughly trumped by the inconsolable passions of Unreason.

For Israel, the true compass should be easy to read. With any further capitulations on Palestine, Prime Minister Netanyahu would push Israel toward a ludicrously squalid disappearance. For Israel, the Obama Road Map portends only a catastrophic and still-preventable shipwreck. Tills twisted cartography draws succor from the most basic and persisting expressions of incorrect reasoning. It lacks even a residual shred of Jewish dignity. Outside its borders, Israel's unchanging enemies, especially in Iran, Syria and Egypt, prepare stealthily but mightily for war.

Earlier, Israel's armed forces were sometimes allowed to take indispensable preemptive initiatives. But now the future of Israeli preemptions is at best uncertain. Should Iran proceed to final nuclear weapon status, the irreversible result of multiple Israeli and American failures to exercise "anticipatory self-defense," Israel would be threatened not only by the new terror state of Palestine. It would also be imperiled by an existing enemy state now harboring both the intention and capability of inflicting another Final Solution.

Fused together in an ominous synergy, a nuclear Iran and a Palestinian State could cause Israel's ship of state to break apart. Neither outcome should ever be allowed by the vessel's captain and crew.

LOUIS RENE BERES was educated at Princeton (Ph.D., 1971). He has published ten major books dealing with international relations and international law. Professor Beres' work is well-known to military and intelligence communities in Washington and Jerusalem. He is Professor of Political Science and International Law at Purdue, and also Strategic and Military Affairs columnist of the Jewish Press.

Posted by Jerome S. Kaufman at 10:19 PM | Comments (0)