Please step away from the edge of the cliff…

I WROTE IN in my last post about the serious danger posed if the US and European leader nations were to get sucked into the Palestinian plan for a unilateral declaration of statehood. I am somewhat relieved at this point to observe that the world has so far responded with an admirable measure of sanity in this matter.

Rather than offer a lot of comments here (especially considering that these things are still in a major state of flux), I’ll just make a few remarks on some of the more recent news items in this regard.

First, I applaud the government of Israel for publicly stating a warning that  an attempt to circumvent commitments made by all sides since 1967 will jeopardize what little stability currently exists in the region.  Several responsible media have reported this; here is a link to the Jerusalem Post: PM warns PA against unilateral moves.

Following that statement up with some particulars (they may only be a beginning, but they do give you some idea that Israel is not just blowing smoke), Jerusalem has indicated a willingness to annex some areas if need be, and to proceed with building in others.

Members of the US Congress and even the Obama administration have also wisely begun to speak out against this insanity.  Here are two of several articles reporting this: Palestinians under world pressure not to declare state unilaterally (Haartez); US senator: Palestinian declaration will lead to chaos (Ynet).

And, most recently, even the European Union appears to be coming to its senses.

At least for now.  The whole scene is constantly changing, and Abu Mazen has already tried to make a comeback statement (as indeed he must), but at least it looks for the moment that the world at large is not quite ready to hitch a ride in the hand basket to hell. Literally.

Maybe we can breathe a little, but that doesn’t mean we can quit watching. And, not to spoil the fun, but we still need to keep a keen eye on Iran.

As Scarlett said – tomorrow is another day.

 

lineman

Secret deal for a Palestinian state? Run up the flag if you wish – but be prepared to run for cover.

NOT EVERYONE IS AWARE of this, but there has been a plan at work since August of this year to build a de facto Palestinian state in areas currently controlled by Israel. 

When I first read of this, I thought it was just somebody’s odd idea, and we’ll see how it goes. Many of the particulars – building infrastructure, making improvements in the economy, supporting civil institutions – have been part of the Israeli plan for creating a viable Palestinian society from the “bottom up”  for quite some time now.  I would be getting off the track of this post to list the details here on how the Israeli administration of the West Bank has already created a significantly higher standard of living for the Arab population, partly due to the basic altruism inherent in the Jewish culture, but also largely out of the practical sense that building a good next door neighbor is really the surest path to peace. (Come to think of it, that topic alone needs to be addressed more fully than I am allowing myself space to do here. As with most of Israel’s efforts to achieve peace, the international media have done their best to obscure the facts. I encourage the reader to look into some of the details in places like this, or here.  Alongside of this is the observation I made earlier  that a recent Harvard study found a majority of Arabs who are currently living within Israel’s boundaries would, if given the choice, prefer to remain under Israeli authority, thank you very much.)

But enough of all that.  I’m writing this post now because an article in Ha’aretz caught my eye a few days ago that mentioned a “secret understanding” between Palestinian Authority PM Salam Fayyad and the Obama administration to grant diplomatic recognition to this new state whenever Fayyad should give the signal, and for the UN and possibly several European nations (not to mention the 57 Arab States) to follow suit.

Now that would create a whole new ball game.  Under the previously presented scenario, you have what on the surface appears to be a useful plan to build up the Palestinian society to the point where they could at some point actually be ready for statehood, but according to this new revelation, we may be witnessing an end run around every diplomatic principle having to do with the validity of the State of Israel up until now, including UN Security Council Resolution 242 and the Oslo Accords – agreements to which Israel has diligently adhered, often to its own disadvantage.  Even the jurisdictional authority of Mr. Fayyad rests under the auspices of Oslo, which he is simultaneously violating and undermining through his efforts.  Sounds like a hair-brained scheme, doesn’t it? Yes – except that it already has substantial backing, financial and otherwise, from the UN as well as from the US, the Quartet, and other European leaders.  (If it sounds like I’m making all this up – and don’t I wish I were! – I refer the reader to the thoroughly documented analysis by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs which can be seen here.)

So, where would this scheme leave Israel if it is brought to completion? Well, for one thing, it would effectively release Israel from the obligations and commitments it has honorably kept since 1967. It would leave Israel free and unconstrained to defend itself against all comers, hell or high water.  Does Israel really have nukes? I don’t suppose there would be any reason not to pull out all the stops if it comes to this. This is a scary thought, but perhaps we’ll soon see the playing out of what the prophet Joel said:

“I will also gather all nations, and will bring them down into the valley of Jehoshaphat. And I will enter into judgment with them there, for my people and my inheritance, Israel, whom they have scattered among the nations; and they shared out my land.”

I must admit that I find that idea scary mostly because I belong to one of those nations that will be severely judged according to this prophecy.

Oh, and there is one other factor which, astoundingly enough, is naively ignored by the Palestinian plan: the very real and serious threat of a nuclear Iran.  Iran has said many times that (in effect) it doesn’t give a flip about what happens to itself or any other nations, as long as it can make an Israel-sized hole in the crust of the earth.

Be careful, gentlemen, be very careful – you’re getting awfully close to the edge of the cliff.

 

lineman, awaiting the snap.

Why is the world afflicted with Israel Derangement Syndrome?

Or maybe instead we should call it Obsessive Compulsive Israel Disorder, OCID, a form of Compulsive Disorder (OCD),  as  FreeMiddleEast.Com suggests.  Whatever name we wish to give it, it is apparent that:

For a country that is thousands of miles away, has a population of just 7 million and speaks a completely different language, the world is obsessively and compulsively focused on Israel…

Witness the extensive (and intensive) coverage early this year of Operation Cast Lead – a military endeavor much smaller, with far fewer casualties (on either side) than ongoing conflicts such as those in Africa (Ethiopia, Sudan, Somalia) or India (Kashmir and Sri Lanka), or the Philippines, or… just go ahead and take a look at this list in Wikipedia.  Did you know that the sustained armed conflict in Colombia, South America has taken tens of thousands, or possibly hundreds of thousands of lives? Or that the drug wars (and they are wars) in Mexico have claimed over ten thousand lives in the past three years?

Yes, these matters are covered in the news – every once in a while. But we were treated to a day by day view of Operation Cast Lead, which by the way was tailored by the “mainstream” media to make it look like Big, Bad, Old Israel was so unfairly picking on poor, downtrodden Gaza.  Never mind that Gaza isn’t actually a country, just a terrorist enclave seized in a bloody takeover eighteen months prior.

Never mind also that the Israeli response followed months and months of seeing its civilian population bombarded by thousands of rocket attacks.  But that really is another topic. The perfectly valid question raised here is, why? Why is the entire world so hung up on what happens every day in such a tiny country? Seven million people live there; what other nation that size gets any attention at all, let alone as much as Israel gets?  Chicago has more people than Israel, and more people are killed there every year than we want to know, so why isn’t that in our every day news?  Why do we watch with baited breath every move Israel makes, and hang on every word spoken by Israeli officials, or by the terrorist chieftains?

Also, you’d think the free world would wholeheartedly support the most prosperous nation in the Middle East, and the only Western style democracy in the area.  So then, why does Israel have so few, if any, friends in the international community? And why has the United Nations itself condemned Israel dozens of times, while letting many blatantly oppressive regimes skate? 

The FreeMiddleEast post wound up without an answer, but I have one – a very simple one: God. Not just any old god, but the God of the Bible. The God of Israel. I had determined when I began this blog to, for the most part, keep away from discussing ‘religious’ matters, but the question of why the civilized world is so pervasively preoccupied with little ol’ Israel is not a religious question – it affects all of us. It truly appears that the way it affects us is a life-and-death matter. Right now, there is a real possibility that, if allowed to develop nuclear weapons, Iran will destroy most of the Middle East, and perhaps the rest of civilization. That’s their stated goal, anyway. And, why? Israel. That’s not just my take on it – that’s what Iran says.

So, if I may indulge myself in a little old-fashioned Book thumping, without getting completely theological over it, let’s just say that God, the God of Israel, created a nation that was to be the crucible of all nations, the place where all men’s intentions would be tried.  Love God, love Israel. Hate God, hate Israel. I saw it put rather well in a book by Sandra Teplinsky:

Why does Israel draw out the best and the worst in us? The Jewish nation is designed to test and expose the hearts of humanity. Like a threshing floor, she sifts our souls… [Israel] could be called Spiritual Testing Ground Zero…

I don’t plan from here on to go into all the chapters and verses on the subject, or even discuss with you whether you should believe in the Bible or not.  But the big question deserves a big answer.  And I thought I owed it to you just to let you know. Will I see you at Ground Zero?

But I thought you said you didn’t want to talk to me?

This is a hoot! 

According to a report last week in Israel Today, US president Barack Obama  recently demanded that Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu commit to a massive expulsion of Jews from their homes in Judea and Samaria before peace negotiations can be resumed. Never mind that Mr. Netanyahu has stated over and over again his willingness to engage in peace talks as long as the other side will just be willing to recognize Israel for what it is, the legitimate homeland of the Jews.

I know it’s hard to imagine that a US President would be so out of touch with reality, but apparently Mr. Obama suffers from knee jerk reactions every time the Palestinian Authority makes any sort of demand, no matter how preposterous.

But I had to laugh aloud when I read this article in Ynet news today:  “Washington caught off guard by Netanyahu visit.”  Apparently Bibi took Barry’s words at face value, and did not go out of his way to inform the White House that he’d be coming to the US in a couple of weeks.  And for some reason the White House is in a complete snit about it. The purpose of the Prime Minister’s visit does not involve speaking with the President, and the President just got done telling the Prime Minister, in effect, “I don’t want to talk to you until you do what I say.” So why is there a problem if Mr. Netanyahu is not paying a call on Mr. Obama?

Oh Barry, oh Barry O., you are so far out of your league, I don’t suppose you’ll ever know…

Ok – I’ll stop laughing and get back to work.

 

lineman

Moral Failure of Human Rights Watch Organization Condemned by Founder

I’VE COMMENTED BEFORE on the depraved anti-Semitism characterizing the work of the non-governmental organization Human Rights Watch.  What I did not know until today is that the founder of the group  resigned eleven years ago, and it has been since that time that HRW has taken such a wrong turn.

Mr. Robert. L. Bernstein has just published a strongly worded criticism of HRW — and a call for the organization he founded to return to its original humanitarian mission — in a New York Times op-ed column, explaining why he has concluded that HRW has lost the credibility it once had.  It is obviously difficult for Mr. Bernstein to expose in this way the dismal shortcomings of the institution which he helped birth, and upon which he lavished twenty years of his life.  He is to commended for taking this public step.  Read more here.

Fool’s Gold

I’VE BEEN CONSIDERING lately what to say about the Goldstone Report, the recent package of false accusations against the people and the state of Israel, presented to a world all too ready to latch on to whatever excuses they can find to condemn the one nation which by its very existence and place in history stands as testing ground for the thoughts and hearts of men and women over the entire planet.

I’ve been wondering if I can add anything to what has already been said exposing the false pretext of the report (look here), its anti-Semitic source (and here), or the complete farce of its supposed objectivity (take a look at this!).

But after today’s appallingly hypocritical endorsement by the misnamed “Human Rights Council” of the United Nations, I thought I could do no better than to have you read the text of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech before the UN on September 24th of this year:

President, Ladies and Gentlemen…

Nearly 62 years ago, the United Nations recognized the right of the Jews, an ancient people 3,500 years-old, to a state of their own in their ancestral homeland. I stand here today as the Prime Minister of Israel, the Jewish state, and I speak to you on behalf of my country and my people.

The United Nations was founded after the carnage of World War II and the horrors of the Holocaust. It was charged with preventing the recurrence of such horrendous events. Nothing has undermined that central mission more than the systematic assault on the truth.

Yesterday the President of Iran stood at this very podium, spewing his latest anti-Semitic rants. Just a few days earlier, he again claimed that the Holocaust is a lie.

Last month, I went to a villa in a suburb of Berlin called Wannsee. There, on January 20, 1942, after a hearty meal, senior Nazi officials met and decided how to exterminate the Jewish people. The detailed minutes of that meeting have been preserved by successive German governments.

Here is a copy of those minutes, in which the Nazis issued precise instructions on how to carry out the extermination of the Jews. Is this a lie?

A day before I was in Wannsee, I was given in Berlin the original construction plans for the Auschwitz-Birkenau concentration camp. Those plans are signed by Hitler’s deputy, Heinrich Himmler himself. Here is a copy of the plans for Auschwitz-Birkenau, where one million Jews were murdered. Is this too a lie?

This June, President Obama visited the Buchenwald concentration camp. Did President Obama pay tribute to a lie? And what of the Auschwitz survivors whose arms still bear the tattooed numbers branded on them by the Nazis? Are those tattoos a lie?

One-third of all Jews perished in the conflagration. Nearly every Jewish family was affected, including my own. My wife’s grandparents, her father’s two sisters and three brothers, and all the aunts, uncles and cousins were all murdered by the Nazis. Is that also a lie?

Yesterday, the man who calls the Holocaust a lie spoke from this podium. To those who refused to come here and to those who left this room in protest, I commend you. You stood up for moral clarity and you brought honor to your countries.

But to those who gave this Holocaust-denier a hearing, I say on behalf of my people, the Jewish people, and decent people everywhere: Have you no shame? Have you no decency? A mere six decades after the Holocaust, you give legitimacy to a man who denies that the murder of six million Jews took place and pledges to wipe out the Jewish state. What a disgrace! What a mockery of the charter of the United Nations!

Perhaps some of you think that this man and his odious regime threaten only the Jews. You’re wrong. History has shown us time and again that what starts with attacks on the Jews eventually ends up engulfing many others.

This Iranian regime is fueled by an extreme fundamentalism that burst onto the world scene three decades ago after lying dormant for centuries.

In the past thirty years, this fanaticism has swept the globe with a murderous violence and cold-blooded impartiality in its choice of victims. It has callously slaughtered Moslems and Christians, Jews and Hindus, and many others. Though it is comprised of different offshoots, the adherents of this unforgiving creed seek to return humanity to medieval times. Wherever they can, they impose a backward regimented society where women, minorities, gays or anyone not deemed to be a true believer is brutally subjugated.

The struggle against this fanaticism does not pit faith against faith nor civilization against civilization. It pits civilization against barbarism, the 21st century against the 9th century, those who sanctify life against those who glorify death. The primitivism of the 9th century ought to be no match for the progress of the 21st century. The allure of freedom, the power of technology, the reach of communications should surely win the day.

Ultimately, the past cannot triumph over the future. And the future offers all nations magnificent bounties of hope. The pace of progress is growing exponentially. It took us centuries to get from the printing press to the telephone, decades to get from the telephone to the personal computer, and only a few years to get from the personal computer to the internet.

What seemed impossible a few years ago is already outdated, and we can scarcely fathom the changes that are yet to come. We will crack the genetic code. We will cure the incurable. We will lengthen our lives. We will find a cheap alternative to fossil fuels and clean up the planet.

I am proud that my country Israel is at the forefront of these advances – by leading innovations in science and technology, medicine and biology, agriculture and water, energy and the environment. These innovations the world over offer humanity a sunlit future of unimagined promise.

But if the most primitive fanaticism can acquire the most deadly weapons, the march of history could be reversed for a time. And like the belated victory over the Nazis, the forces of progress and freedom will prevail only after a horrific toll of blood and fortune has been exacted from mankind.

That is why the greatest threat facing the world today is the marriage between religious fanaticism and the weapons of mass destruction, and the most urgent challenge facing this body is to prevent the tyrants of Tehran from acquiring nuclear weapons.

Are the member states of the United Nations up to that challenge? Will the international community confront a despotism that terrorizes its own people as they bravely stand up for freedom?

Will it take action against the dictators who stole an election in broad daylight and gunned down Iranian protesters who died in the streets choking in their own blood? Will the international community thwart the world’s most pernicious sponsors and practitioners of terrorism? Above all, will the international community stop the terrorist regime of Iran from developing atomic weapons, thereby endangering the peace of the entire world?

The people of Iran are courageously standing up to this regime. People of goodwill around the world stand with them, as do the thousands who have been protesting outside this hall. Will the United Nations stand by their side?

Ladies and Gentlemen, the jury is still out on the United Nations, and recent signs are not encouraging. Rather than condemning the terrorists and their Iranian patrons, some here have condemned their victims. That is exactly what a recent UN report on Gaza did, falsely equating the terrorists with those they targeted.

For eight long years, Hamas fired from Gaza thousands of missiles, mortars and rockets on nearby Israeli cities. Year after year, as these missiles were deliberately hurled at our civilians, not a single UN resolution was passed condemning those criminal attacks.

We heard nothing – absolutely nothing – from the UN Human Rights Council, a misnamed institution if there ever was one. In 2005, hoping to advance peace, Israel unilaterally withdrew from every inch of Gaza. It dismantled 21 settlements and uprooted over 8,000 Israelis. We didn’t get peace. Instead we got an Iranian backed terror base fifty miles from Tel Aviv. Life in Israeli towns and cities next to Gaza became a nightmare.

You see, the Hamas rocket attacks not only continued, they increased tenfold. Again, the UN was silent. Finally, after eight years of this unremitting assault, Israel was finally forced to respond. But how should we have responded? Well, there is only one example in history of thousands of rockets being fired on a country’s civilian population. It happened when the Nazis rocketed British cities during World War II.

During that war, the allies leveled German cities, causing hundreds of thousands of casualties. Israel chose to respond differently. Faced with an enemy committing a double war crime of firing on civilians while hiding behind civilians – Israel sought to conduct surgical strikes against the rocket launchers.

That was no easy task because the terrorists were firing missiles from homes and schools, using mosques as weapons depots and ferreting explosives in ambulances. Israel, by contrast, tried to minimize casualties by urging Palestinian civilians to vacate the targeted areas. We dropped countless flyers over their homes, sent thousands of text messages and called thousands of cell phones asking people to leave.

Never has a country gone to such extraordinary lengths to remove the enemy’s civilian population from harm’s way. Yet faced with such a clear case of aggressor and victim, who did the UN Human Rights Council decide to condemn? Israel. A democracy legitimately defending itself against terror is morally hanged, drawn and quartered, and given an unfair trial to boot.

By these twisted standards, the UN Human Rights Council would have dragged Roosevelt and Churchill to the dock as war criminals. What a perversion of truth! What a perversion of justice!

Delegates of the United Nations, will you accept this farce? Because if you do, the United Nations would revert to its darkest days, when the worst violators of human rights sat in judgment against the law-abiding democracies, when Zionism was equated with racism and when an automatic majority could declare that the earth is flat.

If this body does not reject this report, it would send a message to terrorists everywhere: Terror pays; if you launch your attacks from densely populated areas, you will win immunity. And in condemning Israel, this body would also deal a mortal blow to peace. Here’s why. When Israel left Gaza, many hoped that the missile attacks would stop. Others believed that at the very least, Israel would have international legitimacy to exercise its right of self-defense.

What legitimacy? What self-defense?

The same UN that cheered Israel as it left Gaza and promised to back our right of self-defense now accuses us –my people, my country – of war crimes? And for what? For acting responsibly in self-defense. What a travesty!

Israel justly defended itself against terror. This biased and unjust report is a clear-cut test for all governments. Will you stand with Israel or will you stand with the terrorists? We must know the answer to that question now. Now and not later. Because if Israel is again asked to take more risks for peace, we must know today that you will stand with us tomorrow. Only if we have the confidence that we can defend ourselves can we take further risks for peace.

Ladies and Gentlemen, all of Israel wants peace. Any time an Arab leader genuinely wanted peace with us, we made peace. We made peace with Egypt led by Anwar Sadat. We made peace with Jordan led by King Hussein. And if the Palestinians truly want peace, I and my government, and the people of Israel, will make peace. But we want a genuine peace, a defensible peace, a permanent peace.

In 1947, this body voted to establish two states for two peoples – a Jewish state and an Arab state. The Jews accepted that resolution. The Arabs rejected it. We ask the Palestinians to finally do what they have refused to do for 62 years: Say yes to a Jewish state.

Just as we are asked to recognize a nation-state for the Palestinian people, the Palestinians must be asked to recognize the nation state of the Jewish people. The Jewish people are not foreign conquerors in the Land of Israel. This is the land of our forefathers.

Inscribed on the walls outside this building is the great Biblical vision of peace: "Nation shall not lift up sword against nation. They shall learn war no more." These words were spoken by the Jewish prophet Isaiah 2,800 years ago as he walked in my country, in my city – in the hills of Judea and in the streets of Jerusalem. We are not strangers to this land. It is our homeland.

As deeply connected as we are to this land, we recognize that the Palestinians also live there and want a home of their own. We want to live side by side with them, two free peoples living in peace, prosperity and dignity. But we must have security. The Palestinians should have all the powers to govern themselves except those handful of powers that could endanger Israel.

That is why a Palestinian state must be effectively demilitarized. We don’t want another Gaza, another Iranian backed terror base abutting Jerusalem and perched on the hills a few kilometers from Tel Aviv.

We want peace.

I believe such a peace can be achieved. But only if we roll back the forces of terror, led by Iran, that seek to destroy peace, eliminate Israel and overthrow the world order. The question facing the international community is whether it is prepared to confront those forces or accommodate them.

Over seventy years ago, Winston Churchill lamented what he called the "confirmed unteachability of mankind," the unfortunate habit of civilized societies to sleep until danger nearly overtakes them.

Churchill bemoaned what he called the "want of foresight, the unwillingness to act when action will be simple and effective, the lack of clear thinking, the confusion of counsel until emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong.”

I speak here today in the hope that Churchill’s assessment of the "unteachability of mankind" is for once proven wrong. I speak here today in the hope that we can learn from history — that we can prevent danger in time.

In the spirit of the timeless words spoken to Joshua over 3,000 years ago, let us be strong and of good courage. Let us confront this peril, secure our future and, God willing, forge an enduring peace for generations to come.

Thank you, Mr. Prime Minister.  Would to God that we had someone of your caliber to lead on this side of the Atlantic!

“I know you have the videos proving we did it, but that doesn’t mean we did it.”

Huh!? Run that run by me again?

Southern Lebanon was rocked by an explosion Monday  which appears to have  killed at least five Hezbollah terrorists.  Hostile activity?  No.  It looks like they blew themselves up while attempting to hide rockets intended for use against Israel.  Again.  I mean, blew themselves up again.  This was the second time this year.  Lebanese officials and Hezbollah claim it was "a garage accident"  (gee, oops – sorry!), but the Israeli Defense Forces released a video (watch it here) showing Hezbollah operatives loading weapons from the “garage” onto a transport truck.  Try not to do things like that under the IDF’s noses, fellas; you know they’re watching you.

So what it boils down to is that Hezbollah was secretly moving some weaponry around – weaponry they aren’t allowed to have under the cease fire agreement negotiated through the United Nations to end of the Second Lebanon War – and, in magnificent gang-who-couldn’t-shoot-straight flair, dropped the, uh, ball, and blew themselves up.  Yep, garage accident, that’s what it was.

OK, but the reason I’m writing this post today is that when confronted with the video evidence Hezbollah said that the evidence is wrong.  Well, they’re not saying the evidence was falsified or anything, but that the map is wrong. That is, the incident didn’t take place where it did.  The map is lying, you see.  The Litani River isn’t where it is.  Oh, and it was really Israel’s fault. The explosion was actually from an Israeli shell left over from the war.  A shell that had been sitting there for three years, not noticed, obviously, until the Hezbollah stalwarts were doing, uh, they were doing stuff in their “garage,” and, well, uh, this shell just blew up, you see.

No, frankly, my dear, I don’t see.  I don’t have a clue as to how you guys can get away with such bull. Maps lie? Hey, Nasr, maps don’t do anything, they are just tools, like anything else. And the Litani didn’t move over 10 miles just because you say so.

It would be really easy for me to say right now that y’all are just bald-faced lying.  But maybe you’re just nuts. Naw – you’re lying.

Now, please, dear world, try not to swallow everything they dish up. It only encourages them. And we don’t want them to blow themselves up any more than they have already, do we?

The roots of the anti-Israel bias at “Human Rights Watch” go deep.

"The leather SS jacket makes my blood go cold it is so cool!"

Hardly something we wanted to hear from a senior military analyst at a prestigious human rights organization.

Yet this was expressed in a blog post by Human Rights Watch senior analyst Marc Garlasco, as cited in ICEJ News for Sept. 15.  It turns out Garlasco is an avid collector of WWII Nazi memorabilia.  Very avid.

Now at this point, a normal reaction might be something like, “Uh, so what?” 

But, aye, there’s the rub, as Prince of Denmark might say.  A person’s off duty proclivities to collect memorabilia of whatever sort shouldn’t affect his day job, should they?  But they might offer insight into his personality.  If the guy were an accountant at Bear Stearns, I don’t see what difference it would make what he does in his off hours, but when he works as a senior analyst at an organization whose stated purpose is a dedication to “defending and protecting human rights” (HRW About Us page), and when said organization self-righteously asserts an adherence to "rigorous, objective investigations,” and (this is the critical part) when said organization has regularly blazed new trails in anti-Semitism, then you just have to stop and wonder if maybe there is a connection.

Now I’m not going to say that HRW hired Garlasco in order to make use of his apparent fascination with the Third Reich, or even that HRW had given any thought at all to his unusual interests.  But I am saying that, given their task, they really should have taken into consideration whether such a mind set could cloud his judgment, particularly with regard to writing reports concerning the modern Jewish nation of Israel. 

The Human Rights Watch organization really, really should have taken these things into consideration, if they were at all concerned with objectivity, as they say they are.

But you see, that’s the problem.  HRW has consistently demonstrated a strong – I would even say vindictive – bias against the Jewish state.  NGO Monitor  (a truth seeking organization which I consider a true ball carrier, if I may use my football analogy), puts the matter rather nicely in their detailed report Experts or Ideologues? A Systematic Analysis of Human Rights Watch’s Focus on Israel:

Our investigation shows a consistent pattern of ideological bias, lack of professional qualifications, and unsupported claims based on faulty evidence and analysis on the part of HRW.

So, back to Mr. Garlasco.  Do you think maybe his fondness for the legacy of Adolf, Herrmann, Heinrich & company were somehow missed by an employer which regularly attacks the modern state that grew out of the ashes of that legacy?  I think that’s a bit of a stretch.

I’m trying to keep this simple, so anyone can see through the fog and notice there is something seriously wrong here.  The controversy surrounding Garlasco’s work at HRW, the organization’s tepid response, and a more detailed discussion of the whole sordid affair can be found at NGO Monitor and in several fine blogs better than this one. I particularly suggest Omri Ceren’s Mere Rhetoric blog; also Elder of Ziyon is an excellent source for information of this sort.

I’m just trying to add one more shoulder to the push.  If we keep pressing for the truth, something is going to move.

lineman

Speaking of Obama being ‘way too busy to fend off Netanyahu…

This is an email I received today from a rather, ahem, conservative relative.  There is quite a lot being said lately about the way Glenn Beck has been taking on Obama and the Czars on radio and television and in print, and I won’t try to add to it or elucidate here, but I thought this writer had a great sense of humor.  Enjoy!

Glenn Beck Has Brass Gonads

Doug Giles

Don’t you know Obama and his ilk wish to God (or whoever the heck they wish to) that Glenn Beck would fall into adultery with an Argentinean newswoman, or cut his jugular vein while shaving, or show up drunk, high and naked to his FOX show and forever be publically vilified, marginalized and thus muzzled?

Beck has formally joined Rush as an Official Pain in Barack Obama’s Backside (OPIBOB). (Are you an OPIBOB yet?) Yep, not only has Obama’s administration called Rush out, but the White House has now phoned Beck during his TV show in an attempt to get him to dial the heck down.

Glenn said this past week that Barack’s minions were actually calling his show while he was on air because he was being a meany. When I heard this I was sitting there eating pretzels and drinking a martini thinking: Are you kidding me? Is Perez Hilton running the White House? The White House is actually calling Beck during his program in an attempt to get him to cease and desist his digs? Wow . . . sounds, pretty gay to me. No offense to gay people, of course.

So, what’s next, Whine House? Are you gonna post an angry note on Beck’s Facebook wall? Are you going to place Glenn’s picture on the White House website and draw naughty stuff on his forehead? Unbelievable. Not only do we have to contend with and check a radical Socialist-in-Chief at every point, but we also have to a field a cheeky, paranoid, oversensitive staff that makes Nixon look like Andy Griffith’s Aunt Bee.

So, what’s all the hubbub about? Why is Beck under their epidermis? Well, it’s principally because he asks questions. And if there is one thing that derails the Hope and Change Train, it’s questions. Oh, I almost forgot: Facts also get them purty PO’ed. Questions and facts . . . can’t have that. Yep, both of those little damnable ditties are detrimental to Obama’s oligarchical grasp.

For those who missed Beck’s week of must-see TV, he boldly parleyed into the President’s court questions several million of us want to ask but don’t have a top-ranked TV show on the most watched cable news channel to get the proper respect and response. Here’s a little sample of Beck’s mischievous queries. On Monday he inquired:

- We are in so much debt, why spend more borrowed money on cap-and-trade and healthcare programs before we stop the flow of red-ink?

- The stimulus package funneled billions of dollars to ACORN. How does giving billions of dollars to ACORN stimulate the economy?

- If it was so important for congress to pass the stimulus bill before they even had time to read it, why has only a fraction of the stimulus money been spent 6 months later?

- Why won’t members of Congress read the bills before they vote on them?

- Why are citizens mocked and laughed at when they ask their congressman to read the bills before they vote on them?

- How did Van Jones, a self-proclaimed communist, become a special advisor to the president?

- Did President Obama know of Van Jones’ radical political beliefs when he named him special advisor?

- The Apollo Alliance claimed credit for writing the stimulus bill—why was this group allowed to write any portion of this bill?

- If politicians aren’t writing the bills and aren’t reading the bills, do they have any idea what these 1,000-page plus bills actually impose on the American people?

- If the “public option” health care plan is so good, why won’t politicians agree to have that as their plan?

- If town hall meetings are intended for the politicians to learn what’s on our mind—why do they spend so much time talking instead of listening?

- Is using the economic crises to rush legislation through congress what Rahm Emanuel meant when he talked about “not letting a crisis go to waste”?

- What are the czars paid? What is the budget for their staffs/offices?

On Tuesday Beck wondered aloud:

- Who is “surrounding” the President in the White House?

- Do any of the President’s advisers have criminal records?

- Are the President’s advisers working to better the country or their own ideals?

- Who are the anti-capitalists in Washington?

- What roles do they have in crafting bills?

- What was “STORM”? What happened to the founders, and where are they now?

- What qualifications must one have to be a Presidential adviser?

- Should a communist have the ear of the President of the United States?

- What role did the Apollo Alliance play in crafting bills?

- Does the President know the co-founder of the Weather Underground is a board member of the Apollo Alliance?

On Wednesday Glenn wanted to know:

- Why does the FCC have a diversity “czar”?

- Who is Mark Lloyd, and how does he plan to “balance” the airwaves?

- Will he bring back the Fairness Doctrine, or worse?

- Cass Sunstein once said he wants to balance the Internet; is that next?

- Will broadcasters who leave the airwaves be allowed to go to satellite or Internet without government regulation?

- Is there any place (that has a mass audience) where the government won’t regulate free speech?

- Why does it seem every member of the Obama advisory team hates capitalism, unless those companies (like G.E.) are in bed with the administration?

If Lloyd has his way, stations that don’t comply with the government’s definition of the “public interest” will have to pay a massive fine—which helps support public broadcasting:

- What will be the definition of “public interest”?

- Who defines “public interest”?

- Why should it be balanced? Because it’s public airwaves? (Well, there are public roads that go by my house, and I don’t count how many Republicans and Democrats are driving on them.)

On Thursday GB thought:

- Why do we need a civilian force?

- Who is posing a threat to us?

- Who will this “force” be made up of?

- Who is the real enemy?

- Does the president know of a coming event? If not, who builds an army against an unrecognized enemy?

- Why won’t the media get off their butts and look into these radicals in the White House? And into this civilian army?

(*For the full list visit:http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/29631/) You see, Beck was just asking questions. Hey, White House . . . Can we not ask questions anymore? Is that verboten? Can we not ask our elected officials to explain themselves, elucidate a bit about their odd buddies and make clear their policies and proposals?

Can we not question you boys with boldness, hold to the truth, and speak without fear of reprisal? Huh?

In the words of my redneck hunting buddy, better known as the West Texas Warrior, “Why, hell we can!” Not only can we, ladies and gents, but we must.

Uh, correct me if I’m wrong, but this is our nation; this ain’t Cuba or Venezuela yet. We pay the government’s bills, and therefore they answer to us, they represent us—and if they don’t then we take their airplanes, limos, mistresses and five-star hotels away from them. Yeah, I believe that’s how it’s supposed to work.

Keep asking the hard questions, boys and girls. Don’t let them tread on you.

Great job, Mr. Beck.

---

---

If I ever quit my job as a lineman, can I sign up to be an OPIBOB?

Will he, won’t he, or when will he?

Headline Monday: Peres confirms Obama to mediate Netanyahu-Abbas talks.

US President Barack Obama is expected to moderate a meeting on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly in September between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, President Shimon Peres said in an interview with Fox News on Monday.

But, come to find out Wednesday:  No meeting agenda between Abbas, Netanyahu

A senior Palestinian official said on Monday that no meeting was decided to be held soon between Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli premier Benjamin Netanyahu… The Palestinian National Authority (PNA) and president Abbas ruled out holding any meeting with Netanyahu or any renewal of the peace talks unless Israeli authorities announce a total freeze of settlement activities in the West Bank.

When the news came out Monday that Benjamin Netanyahu was supposed to meet with Mahmoud Abbas under Barack Obama’s auspices next month, it made a few people unhappy.

Not that these people don’t want peace, nor especially that Mr. Netanyahu isn’t continually reaching out to both the US and the PA.  But consistent with those efforts, he has been doing a good job of maintaining a position of strength, while Mr. Abbas rejects each new overture from Israel, always demanding just a little more than what is being offered to him, and all the while Mr. Obama is trying less and less successfully to keep his balance in all this.  Besides being much too busy at home.  And then there’s poor Mr. Mitchell; he is actually a skilled diplomat and negotiator, but he can’t fire his own boss.

If you’ve been following these things, you may realize that ‘Bama wants so badly to pull a Carter or maybe at least a Clinton.   Not that I’m an admirer of either of those two.  God forbid!  But like it or not, they were achievers to whatever extent, and poor Barry would like to be, but just isn’t.  (As an aside at this point, Clarice Feldman over at American Thinker has done a wonderful job of analyzing just how smart Barack Obama is. Seriously.)

Enter  Shimon Peres.  Now I’m not really as knowledgeable about Israeli politics as y’all think I am, but it has been my understanding that the office of the President of Israel is more ceremonial than substantial, and that he is actually prohibited from  political intervention or even expressing potentially divisive personal views on major issues.  So how come he gets to make a major news announcement that Obama is going to supervise a get together for Netanyahu and Abbas next month?  Well, simply put, he doesn’t.  Not to mention that Mr. Peres’ politics have been somewhat to the left of the present government, and of a few others.

And so I told someone last night that, not to worry, Bibi is not betraying anybody or jumping into bed with the baddies any time soon.  He is making forward progress; he’s just smart enough to do it at a pace of his own choosing.  Israel could do worse.

Addendum:  since these two items were published, there has been a late development.  It was disclosed today that, yes indeed, talks have begun at a higher level than they have been up until now.  And I also noticed two important points. For one thing, the discussion today was along the lines which have been proposed by Netanyahu all along, of first focusing on bringing increased economic benefits to the PA ruled areas.  Secondly, and not to be downplayed, is the report that the PA is at the moment having enough sense to back down from its refusal to talk until Israel has met all of its demands.

Or, in the words of the Israeli representative, Minister for Regional Development Silvan Shalom,

“I’m glad that the Palestinians understand that boycotting talks with the Israeli government was harmful primarily to them,” he said. “As I’ve said, our goal is economic peace, and that does not impede political dialogue, but rather helps it along.”

Hardly anything is ever a done deal in life, and all the less so in the Middle East.  But I have a better feeling about today’s meeting than I have had about some others.  We’ll see.  Sometimes it’s much easier just being a lineman.