Friday, February 28, 2014

Beavers Once Again Seen In Great Britain!

It has been 500 years since wild Beavers have been seen in any part of Great Britain.  But a family of Beavers have been seen in the River Otter in Devon.

Two beavers were caught on camera playing at night while a third one (in background) is gnawing a tree on the banks of the River Otter, Devon. Tom Buckley got the footage with a hidden infrared motion sensor camera. Photograph: Tom Buckley

A family of wild beavers has been seen in the England countryside in what is believed to be the first sighting of its kind in up to 500 years.

Three European beavers (Castor fiber), believed to be adults, have been filmed together on the River Otter in east Devon and can be seen gnawing at the base of trees, grooming themselves and playing together.

Experts said the sighting was "highly significant" as it strongly suggested a small breeding population of beavers now existed outside captivity.

European beavers were once widespread in the UK but were hunted to extinction by the 16th century in England and Wales for their fur, medicinal value and meat.

There have been successful reintroduction schemes in other parts of the UK. In 2009, three beaver families were released into forest lochs near the Sound of Jura in Argyll, while plans to release the species into the wild in Wales have also moved a step closer. The sighting in Devon would be the first time in centuries that European beavers have bred in the wild in England.

The footage was captured by local retired environmental scientist Tom Buckley, who noticed some trees had been felled in the area in late last year. Together with landowner David Lawrence, he installed three motion sensor cameras along a 400-500m stretch of the river. A lone beaver was spotted on the farm in January and last July a woman claimed she saw a beaver on the river.

"We'd seen bits of trees chewed and cut down and I was starting to think that it was a sign of beavers even though I couldn't believe it," Buckley said.

Beaver expert Derek Gow confirmed that one of the animals filmed by Buckley was a juvenile and the family may have been in the wild for years. Buckley does not know where they have come from or exactly where their home is.

"When I first saw that first beaver it was such a shock. When I saw three it was slightly different – we knew there was one around and we were tracking its activities. When we watched film and all of a sudden another appeared, and then another – I would not just say that was amazing – one was speechless realizing what was happening. We had no idea there was more than one, and they are all quite large and active as well."

Devon Wildlife Trust has been running its own Beaver Project since 2011, when an adult male and female were introduced to a securely fenced compound in the north-west of the county.

But the beavers remain in their compound and are not the source of the population now seen on the River Otter.

Steve Hussey from the Devon Wildlife Trust said he supported the reintroduction of beavers to England but that it had to be "properly planned".

"In principle, we would like to see the European beaver reintroduced to England but recognize that a great deal of work needs to be done before this can happen."

He said the beavers should be left alone and observed using a rigorous monitoring programme.

"This group of beavers provides us with a unique opportunity to learn lessons about their behavior and their impact on the local landscape … [the group] could contribute to this process if they are subjected to thorough scientific study.

Beavers are a "keystone species", meaning they provide more important ecosystem services than their numbers alone would suggest. Known as "ecological engineers", their dams, burrows and ditches and the branches they drag into the water create habitats for a host of other species. Their dams slow rivers down, reducing scouring and erosion, and improving water quality by holding back silt.

During the recent wet weather and flooding crisis, naturalists called for the reintroduction of beavers to control floods.

Otter tracks and spraint was found alongside the beaver prints, indicating they may have been interacting with wild otters too.

Hussey added: "There's evidence that otters, beavers are coming together here face to face perhaps for the first time in two or 300 years."

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) is investigating the sighting as it is against the law to release beavers in England. A spokeswoman said the department would "look into this case and will consider what action to take".

She said she could not comment on whether the beavers could be removed from the site or destroyed.

Buckley said: "This beaver family has been around for at least a couple of years and no one seems to have noticed them. They haven't caused any trouble for anybody and it's only because they've been caught on camera that people know they are here. To think about destroying them is totally out of order. This is an insight into what the potential impact is if they are already in a place and at the moment that impact would seem to be zero."

500 years without any beavers.  How did they keep their rivers clean?  Welcome back Mr. and Mrs. Beaver.

Thursday, February 27, 2014

The Israeli Solution

The Israeli Solution is the new book scheduled to be released on March 4 by Carolyn Glick.  The following is written by Ms. Glick and explains parts of the book.
In its annual survey of American Jewry published last October, the American Jewish Committee found that 75 percent of American Jews agree with the statement, “The goal of the Arabs is not a peaceful two-state agreement with Israel, but rather the destruction of Israel.”

And yet, American Jews supported the establishment of a Palestinian state 50% to 47%.

Next week over 10,000 predominantly Jewish Americansupporters of Israel will gather in Washington at AIPAC’s annual policy conference. Given their high commitment to Israel, probably most of those gathered belong to the 47% of American Jews who opposed Palestinian statehood.

Yet at the conference they will embrace the two-state formula. And on March 4 they will go up to Capitol Hill and tell their representatives that they support it.

They will do so not because they are addled. They will do so because for the past 20 years all they have heard is that Israel has no alternative to the two-state plan.

Israel’s fervent and committed supporters at AIPAC have been told that Israel needs a Palestinian state more than the PLO does. Only by bringing such a state into existence in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem can Israel get the Palestinian demographic albatross off its neck.

These committed supporters of the Jewish state have been sternly lectured that Israel is doomed if it doesn’t give the Palestinians an outlet for their political impulses outside of Israel, because within a year or two there will be more Palestinians than Israelis west of the Jordan.

The same day AIPAC’s delegates meet with members of both houses of Congress, my new book, The Israeli Solution: A One-State Plan for Peace in the Middle East will be released by Crown Forum, a division of Random House.

In my book, I show that the demographic time bomb is a dud, and a malicious one at that.

In 1997, the head of the Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics Hassan Abu Libdeh told The New York Times that he was carrying out a census which would serve as a “civil intifada,” that is, as a statistical terror assault.

And he was right. The goal of terrorism is to force a target population to take actions it otherwise would not have taken. The goal of statistical warfare is to manipulate numbers to coerce a target society into taking actions that it would otherwise not take.

The Palestinian census claimed that by 2015, Arabs would be the majority west of the Jordan River. And once Jews were the minority, the Arabs could destroy Israel just by demanding the vote.

The Clinton administration, the US Jewish leadership and the Israeli Left rushed to embrace the findings, even though they were totally inconsistent with annual Palestinian population surveys the Israeli military government conducted from 1967 through 1996.

All crowed that true, the PLO still supports terrorism, but if Israel didn’t cough up the territories, it would be demographically overwhelmed.

It took seven years until an independent group of Israeli and American researchers studied the PLO data and exposed the fraud at their foundation. The American- Israeli Demographic Research Group showed that the Palestinian data inflated the Arab population by a whopping 50 percent.

The news for Israel has only gotten better in the intervening years. The Jewish fertility rate has increased as the Palestinian rates have collapsed along with those of the Muslim world as a whole. Israeli Jews now have higher fertility rates than the Arabs of Judea and Samaria, (3.04 vs. 2.91 children per woman). Israel’s immigration rate is high and rising. Palestinian emigration rates have skyrocketed over the past decade.

The demographic good news has percolated throughout Israeli society. And with the news, more and more Israeli politicians have come to favor applying Israeli law to all or parts of Judea and Samaria, just as Israel successfully applied its laws to united Jerusalem and the Golan Heights in the past.

Most Likud members of Knesset and all members of the Bayit Yehudi party support partial or full implementation of Israeli law in the areas. 59% of Israeli Jews support such action as well and support doing so unilaterally.

Indeed, even leftist Israelis support Israel’s unilateral application of its laws to parts of Judea and Samaria. For instance, former ambassador to the US Michael Oren supports the unilateral withdrawal from parts of Judea and Samaria. But Oren foresees the retention of the major Israeli settlement blocs under Israeli law. In the absence of a peace deal, such a step can only be taken through the unilateral application of Israeli law to those areas.

In the current Knesset session, members have submitted two bills calling for the application of Israeli law to the large Israeli population centers in Judea and Samaria and to the Jordan Valley, respectively.

But while all of this is going on in Israel, Israel’s supporters in the US remain in the dark about the existence of a better – facts based – alternative path for Israel.

In The Israeli Solution, I fill in the blanks that plague the American discourse on Israel and the Palestinians.

I provide a 360-degree analysis of a policy that I call The Israeli One-State Plan. That plan involves applying Israeli law – and through it Israeli sovereignty – throughout all of Judea and Samaria.

I divide the discussion into three parts. Part One provides the 90-year history of failure that has attended the two-state model, from the end of World War I through the present day. I also show how the US’s embrace of the two-state model has worked to blind US policymakers from both parties to the realities of the region and so guaranteed the failure of US Middle East policies.

Part Two presents the case for Israeli sovereignty from the perspectives of demography, international law, history and civil liberties.

Far from transforming the areas into a race-based state, as Israel’s opponents threaten, such a move by Israel will free the Palestinians from life under the PLO’s terror supporting kleptocracy and provide them with full civil and legal rights as permanent residents of Israel.

They will also have the right to apply for Israeli citizenship.

Even if all the Arabs of Judea and Samaria were to become Israeli citizens, Israel would retain a strong two thirds Jewish majority. And it would avert the only real demographic threat. That is the threat posed by a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria which would permit millions of hostile, foreign-born Arabs from Lebanon, Jordan and Syria to immigrate to its territory.

In Part Three, I discuss the probable responses of the Palestinians, the larger Arab world and the EU to a decision by Israel to apply its laws to Judea and Samaria and abandon the two-state policy model.

I also discuss how such a move will impact Israel and the United States.

Most delegates at AIPAC do not realize that Israelis have moved on from the failed two-state formula. It is my hope that in the year between this AIPAC conference and next year’s conference, they will read my book, and understand that they needn’t support the establishment of a Palestinian terror state. There is a better option. It is better for Israel. It is better for the Palestinians. And it is better for America.

If they do read my book, I hope it will open a long-belated discussion about Israel’s true options. If they do, I can assure them that next year’s AIPAC conference will be more realistic, and more optimistic than next week’s conclave.

I personally do not support the 2 state solution.  The Fakistinians don't want a separate nation.  They want Israel.  They have vowed to destroy Israel and murder every Jew in the world.  Yet our President demands that the Jews commit suicide to appease his Muslim masters.

I plan to purchase and read this book.  Then share the message with everyone.  I suggest all of you do so too.

Wednesday, February 26, 2014

So Much for Foraging...

We are still having bitterly cold weather.  Snow is expected tonight, Saturday and Sunday.  This little fella must not only be hungry but cold.

Wednesday's Hero

This post was suggested by Michael

Lt. Col. Iceal Hambleton

Lt. Col. Iceal Hambleton
85 years old from Tucson, Arizona
42nd Tactical Electronic Warfare Squadron
November 16, 1918 - September 19, 2004

U.S. Air Force

Lt. Col. Iceal Hambleton was a navigator who was shot down over Vietnam in April of 1972. He was the only one of six crewmen to survive and was behind enemy lines for 11 days before being rescued.

You can read more about Lt. Col. Hambleton here

These brave men and women sacrifice so much in their lives just so others may get to enjoy freedom. For that I am proud to call them Hero.

Those Who Say That We're In A Time When There Are No Heroes, They Just Don't Know Where To Look.

This post is part of the Wednesday Hero Blogroll. For more information about Wednesday Hero, or if you would like to post it on your site, you can go here.

Wednesday Hero Logo

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

What is Behind the Israel Apartheid Weeks?

Gary Fouse

Hat tip JJ and Miggie

As March approaches, we can expect another wave of organized Israel-Apartheid weeks being held in Europe and North America-largely on university campuses. Once again, the pro-Palestinian forces will  erect mock apartheid walls, bring in radical speakers, wave Palestinian flags, and accuse Israel of apartheid and genocide against the  benighted Palestinian people, who in spite of the supposed genocide have seen their population numbers explode. Indeed, the Arabs who have deigned to call themselves Palestinians have increased in numbers (through high birth rates) since the creation of Israel. Where is the genocide? Where are the death camps? As for the charges of apartheid, anyone familiar with the apartheid system of South Africa can readily list the differences. In this 5-minute video published by Prager University, South African Parliament Member Kennith Meshoe explains the differences.

But anyone who studies or works on a university campus might ask him or herself why this issue, this conflict, has assumed so large a role on campus. It is because a well-organized worldwide Palestinian lobby has made it so. We  are not talking about a few Arab students standing on a soap box at some corner of a university yelling at uninterested  students who pass by. We are talking about university recognized student groups who have the ability to rent space and bring in invited speakers largely using university funds (from tuition fees) made available to such groups. We can begin with the various chapters of the Muslim Student Association (a creation, by the way of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt) and their sister organization, Students for Justice in Palestine. They are the ones who host the annual hate fests that come to so many campuses each year devoted to de-legitimizing the Jewish state.

Then you have the various university student governments who devote so much time and energy to repeated efforts to pass resolutions urging the university to boycott, sanction and divest from companies that do business with Israel. The University of California campuses have been especially active lately. One such resolution was narrowly voted down last week at UC Riverside after 4 hours of debate. (The universities uniformly issue statements rejecting such measures if they pass.) So  how is it that student governments allow themselves to get tied up with this issue when their efforts, time and resources could be better spent on other issues affecting the student body? It is because anti-Israel activists are getting themselves elected to student government positions and dominating said student governments.

Then there is the faculty, largely in the humanities, stuffed with left-wing radicals all too willing to use the issue as part of their bash America agenda. Burgeoning Middle East studies departments, funded by Saudi Arabia, are staffed with pan-Arab, anti-Israeli professors dedicated  to indoctrinating their students against Israel and the West.

Thus, what you have is the perfect marriage of convenience between the pro-Palestinians, Islamist forces, and the left.

But what is especially troubling is that the ultimate root cause of the Israel-Arab conflict is infecting our own campuses and our societies in the West. It is anti-Semitism-or if you prefer, pure Jew-hatred, plain and simple. At its source, the Arab world in the Middle East will never accept the idea of a Jewish state in its midst. The Palestinians are mere pawns. In the West, they have large armies of activists to do their bidding.

Of course, here in the US, it would be bad tactics to scream anti-Semitic insults on college campuses-though some speakers actually have (Amir Abdel Malik Ali, Alim Musa, Mohammed al Asi). For the most part, the speakers who come to campus will  insist that they are merely anti-Zionist-not anti-Jew. Indeed, the clever pro-Palestinian organizations on campuses have succeeded in bringing in a ready stable of Jewish activists who fervently hate Israel. From left-wing professors like (ex-professor) Norman Finkelstein and Judith Butler, to anarchist Israelis like Matan Cohen, to Neturei Karta rabbi Ysroel Dovid Cohen, to the Jewish Voice for Peace, these useful  pawns are all too ready to travel the university lecture circuit and denounce the Jewish state on behalf of forces that want to drive every last Jew from the Middle East.

Sadly, in the process of all this activity in the past several  years, our country has witnessed a revival of anti-Semitism, the oldest hatred in the history of our planet. It is just the most recent form of Jew hatred. From charges of killing Christ to the Blood Libel to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, to  being nationless, mercenary cheats, to being non-Aryan race defilers, to dominating Wall Street, Hollywood and the banks, it is the evil Zionist Israelis and their Jewish coreligionists in the West that are now the problem.  The modern anti-Semitism (or is it post-modern?) is now incorporating some of the old canards to gather public opinion against Israeli and Jews in general. Even the Blood Libel has been revived.

And the focal point for this resurgence in the US is on our university campuses.

Posted on "Apartheid Wall" at UC Irvine in May 2008 and personally witnessed by this writer

If you thought that  today's anti-Semitism in the West was something that was re-hatched by some neo-Nazi dropout types at punk rock concerts, think again. A recent study in Germany turned up some interesting results.

This is what our children are being exposed to when we send them off to college. These are the future leaders of our country, and their minds are being poisoned by rhetoric that often degenerates into out and out hate speech. Mix this up and throw it in with all the leftist race-conscious rhetoric that already predominates on our campuses, where "victimized and oppressed people of color" are aligned against "privileged whites", and what you have is a dangerous cocktail with the potential to explode some day in deadly violence on a US university campus.

But make no mistake: No matter how loud or how gentle the speakers words at these Israel Apartheid events; no matter whether the speaker is Arab, Jew or other; no matter how much the speaker sprinkles his/her words with phrases like "human rights", "justice", or "peace". It all boils down to one thing: For them, there is no room for Jews in the Middle East. And that is anti-Semitism or Jew-hatred, whichever you choose to call it.


Communists Announce Plans to Rescue Obama and The Democrats

Stolen from Faultline USA

A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet

How often have we told our readers that the Democratic Party is the party of Communism and Socialism? How many times have we noted the Marxist philosophy of Obama, of Hillary, et al?

Now, the Communist Party USA has stepped from the shadows and openly admitted their involvement with the American left including the Democratic Party and Obama.

They have announced their decision to aid the Democrats in holding on to the US Senate in the upcoming November election.

The Communist Party USA was formed in Chicago in 1919. Recently, Communist Party USA Chairman Sam Webb spoke to his fellow travelers by way of a web streaming event entitled: “Taking care of the future: from here to socialism.”

Mr. Webb said: “We can talk about shortening the work week, green jobs, restructuring the economy, we can talk about the de-militarization of the economy and putting those people back to work in jobs that are productive,” Webb said. “The starting point has to be this immediate engagement, but once we do that many things become possible such as more radical demands.”--SOURCE

Mr. Webb explained that since Obama had become President Americans were more willing to accept socialism and communism.

Mr. Webb went on to say the following: “The good news is the same hang-ups or stereotypes that people had 30 to 40 years ago are not so evident today,” he said. “Growing numbers of people are ready to have a conversation about socialism. There have been public opinion polls that indicate that substantial numbers have more confidence in socialism than capitalism.”

“We have to let people know what our vision is. The climate in the country is different. We can have a different conversation than we could have 30 to 40 years ago, even 20 years ago. Socialism is no longer a white-hot word, people are willing to talk about it.” SOURCE

Webb said Communists are planning an effort to unite left-wing groups to protect Democrats and President Obama from losing the US Senate to tea party candidates or, more precisely – conservative candidates.

We suggest you read the entire article at WND.COM.

It has not been that long ago when the democrats would refute the claim by conservatives that the Democratic Party was, in fact, a socialist party. No longer. The Democrats have gone from covert to overt. They have slithered out of the shadows into the light and their true colors, the hammer and sickle, can be clearly seen and they can no longer deny their embrace of the communist/socialist dogma.

Recently my teeth have been set on edge as I listened to Obama’s rhetoric about “fairness,” in this or that, and his use of the words “fair share” to drive a wedge between the American classes, and especially the words, or phrase, “income inequality” which seals the deal.

When a nation seeks income equality it is accepting socialism as its core philosophy. Income inequality is the clarion call for redistribution of a nation’s wealth. It is as simple and as basic as that.

Demonstrating his communist core belief, Obama has led the charge to teach the low/info voters to hate the “patricians” and the “plutocrats” – the very people who financed -- and continue to finance -- America’s success as the greatest nation in the history of mankind.

Our very own communist President believes -- and preaches -- that wealthy Americans must be brought low and their wealth confiscated and redistributed to the – ahem – less fortunate among us. We have now seen the President’s abuse of the power of the Executive Order. Obama is intent on diluting democratic freedom in America by infusing socialism/communism into every agency and administration under the control of the executive branch of the government.

Why wouldn’t the Communist Party be proud of their man in the White House? Why wouldn’t the Communist Party pull out all the stops to support him and his communist/socialist minions in the US Senate?

America is sinking ever deeper into the muck and mire of communism. If we are unable to extricate her she will die just as all the other nations that have cast their lot with socialism and communism.

So don’t be surprised that the Communist Party USA will be working to rescue the Democratic Party this November. The democrats are a part of the socialist/communist movement.

As soon as Americans stop fooling themselves into thinking and believing that America is NOT a communist/socialist nation, then we can begin to throw off the shackles of dictatorial government and the oppression of the new American police state we have become and return America to her constitutional government.

Monday, February 24, 2014

Good Riddance To Bad Rubbish!

For 3 years Americans have been subjected to the Liberal rantings of Piers Morgan.  A man who wants to live here in America but cannot stand our Constitution, Laws and way of life.  An advocate for strict gun control, strict knife control and a coddling of criminals.

He didn't become a big hit.  In fact his ratings were so low that he couldn't go any lower.

Dear Piers took over for Larry King.  A show that for 25 was high in the ratings.  A show that set the standards for Primetime talk.

But now he is out!
There have been times when the CNN host Piers Morgan didn’t seem to like America very much — and American audiences have been more than willing to return the favor. Three years after taking over for Larry King, Mr. Morgan has seen the ratings for “Piers Morgan Live” hit some new lows, drawing a fraction of viewers compared with competitors at Fox News and MSNBC.

It’s been an unhappy collision between a British television personality who refuses to assimilate — the only football he cares about is round and his lectures on guns were rife with contempt — and a CNN audience that is intrinsically provincial. After all, the people who tune into a cable news network are, by their nature, deeply interested in America.

CNN’s president, Jeffrey Zucker, has other problems, but none bigger than Mr. Morgan and his plum 9 p.m. time slot. Mr. Morgan said last week that he and Mr. Zucker had been talking about the show’s failure to connect and had decided to pull the plug, probably in March.

Crossing an ocean for a replacement for Larry King, who had ratings problems of his own near the end, was probably not a great idea to begin with. For a cable news station like CNN, major stories are like oxygen. When something important or scary happens in America, many of us have an immediate reflex to turn on CNN. When I find Mr. Morgan telling me what it all means, I have a similar reflex to dismiss what he is saying. It is difficult for him to speak credibly on significant American events because, after all, he just got here.

I received a return call from Mr. Morgan and was prepared for an endless argument over my assumptions. Not so. His show, he conceded, was not performing as he had hoped and was nearing its end.

“It’s been a painful period and lately we have taken a bath in the ratings,” he said, adding that although there had been times when the show connected in terms of audience, slow news days were problematic.

“Look, I am a British guy debating American cultural issues, including guns, which has been very polarizing, and there is no doubt that there are many in the audience who are tired of me banging on about it,” he said. “That’s run its course and Jeff and I have been talking for some time about different ways of using me.”

A bath in the ratings?!?  That is one of the understatements of the year.  He was trounced by FOX's Megan Kelly.  Americans don't want to hear a whiny Brit.  They don't want a FOREIGNER telling them how bad their way of life is, how bad their form of government is, how bad they are for not doing things the British way.

Piers Morgan is still under contract to CNN so be prepared to see on that network again.  Or maybe he will go to where his liberalism is excepted:  MSNBC.  He is perfect for them.  Another anti-Semite to join their anti-Semitic lineup of Sharpton, and gang.

Congratulation To The Russian Federation and Vladamir Putin!

For a spectacular Winter Olympics.  For 16 days of sports and fun.  For an Olympics without any terror, without any protests, without a hitch.

May all Olympics be like this in the future!

Sunday, February 23, 2014

Susan Rice Has No Regrets

Gary Fouse

In an administration filled with people who have no shame, Susan Rice stands out like a Texas-size turd blossom. In this interview with NBC's David Gregory on Meet the Press today, she continues the great Benghazi lie and says "she has no regrets".

Here is the text of the above Fox News article. My comments are interjected in bold print.

National Security Adviser Susan Rice said Sunday she has no regrets over what she told the American public about the 2012 Benghazi terror attacks in the immediate aftermath of the deadly strikes.
"Je ne regrette rien" as Edith Piaf sang
Rice did a round of Sunday TV interviews a few days after the attacks, in which some of the information she gave was later proven incorrect.
Not incorrect. Lies.
“What I said to you that morning, and what I did every day since, was to share the best information that we had at the time,” Rice told NBC's “Meet the Press” moderator David Gregory on Sunday. “The information I provided … was what we had at the moment.”
Nonsense. The people on the ground in Libya told their superiors in Washington that it was a coordinated terrorist attack and that there was no protest that went out of control. That information was provided to DOS before Rice appeared on the Sunday talk shows. Indeed, it has been shown that the Pentagon, General Martin Dempsey, and Leon Panetta were told a terrorist attack was happening just before they went to the White House to meet President Obama.
Rice said “No,” when Gregory asked whether she had any regrets about her statements.
She should tell that to the families of the four dead Americans and those that survived the attack and in some cases, are still recuperating from their wounds.
She also said nobody in the administration intended to mislead the public, but acknowledged some of her information was inaccurate.
Lies. Flat out lies. Not some of the information. All  of it.
“That information turned out, in some respects, not to be 100 percent correct," Rice said. "But the notion that somehow I or anybody else in the administration misled the American people is patently false. And I think that that's been amply demonstrated."
Note the equivocal choice of words (" some respects not to be 100 percent correct"). Amply demonstrated? What has been amply demonstrated is that the administration perpetrated a lie upon the public. The talking points memo was changed by people within the administration and State Department to fit their own narrative that what happened at Benghazi was a protest gone awry and to continue the myth that Libya was stable. The administration and State also knew that if it got out that al-Qaeda-linked terrorists were running loose all over Eastern Libya, the previous pleas for enhanced security from the post at Libya would surface and put the lie to the entire narrative.
She was, at the time, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and a top candidate to become secretary of state.
However, Rice withdrew herself from consideration in the wake of the attacks on the U.S. outpost in Benghazi, Libya, after the firestorm of criticism she received for her response.
Rice said Sunday she didn’t know whether her responses killed her chances of getting the top U.S. diplomatic post.
She  doesn't know. I know. Anybody with half a brain knows.
“I don’t know,” she said. “What I do know is that I [now] have a great job.”
She has a great job, and four Americans don't have a great job because they are dead.
Four Americans were killed in the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks, including U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens. Former Navy SEALs Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, and State Department information management officer Sean Smith, also died in the attack. 
Rice said the Benghazi attacks appeared to be a "spontaneous reaction” to an anti-Islamic video on the Internet.
The administration later said the attacks appeared pre-planned, but exactly who and what started them remains unclear, despite several investigations.
Pseudo investigations-like that DOS Accountability Review Board "investigation" that cleared Hillary Clinton without even interviewing her.

Ms Rice may have no regrets, but an entire nation has regrets over this tragedy that never should have happened. Rice may argue that as then-ambassador to the UN, she was not directly involved in the information flow, but she sure was in a position to find out what the facts were within the next five days when somebody handed her a doctored sheet of talking points and sent her of all people out to face the Sunday talk shows instead of Hillary Clinton, who was "too tired" to do her job (translation: answer hard questions about where she was and what she was doing on that fateful evening).

And isn't it interesting that Rice, instead of appearing on all five networks today as she did after the Benghazi attack, chose to appear only with a sympathetic David Gregory and the friendly confines of NBC?

Either Susan Rice knowingly lied on those Sunday talk shows, or she was incredibly derelict and naive in not asking the people around her for the facts before blindly going out and repeating those absurd talking points about a video. In either case, she "amply demonstrated", to  borrow a phrase,  that she is unfit to be either secretary of state or national security adviser.

Humor For A Sunday Morning

By James Shott of Observations

An Italian Golfer

An 80-year-old Italian goes to the doctor for a check-up. The doctor is amazed at what good shape the guy is in and asks, 'how do you stay in suchgreat physical condition?'

I'm Italian and I am a golfer,' says the old guy, 'and that's why I'm in such good shape. I'm up well before daylight and out golfing up and down the fairways. I have a glass of vino, and all is well.'

"'Well' says the doctor, 'I'm sure that helps, but there's got to be more toit. How old was your Father when he died?'

'Who said my Father's dead?'

The doctor is amazed. 'You mean you're 80 years old and your Father's still alive. How old is he?'

'He's 100 years old,' says the Old Italian golfer. 'In fact he golfed with me this morning, and then we went to the topless beach for a walk and had a little vino and that's why he's still alive. He's Italian and he's a golfer, too.'

'Well,' the doctor says, 'that's great, but I'm sure there's more to it than that. How about your Father's Father? How old was he when he died?'

'Who said my Nono's dead?'

Stunned, the doctor asks, 'you mean you're 80 years old and your grandfather's still living! Incredible, how old is he?'

'He's 118 years old,' says the Old Italian golfer.

The doctor is getting frustrated at this point, 'So, I guess he went golfing with you this morning too?'

'No, Nono couldn't go this morning because he's getting married today.'

At this point the doctor is close to losing it. 'Getting married? Why would a 118 year- old guy want to get married?'

'Who said he wanted to?'

Thursday, February 20, 2014

Amerika: Germany Over All

Stolen From Maggie's Notebook

These days I don’t know what to think. Everywhere I turn things are bad. Males and females have lost even their most profound identification — sexuality — under the barrage of propaganda from the creative freaks who dominate America. Our children are being wrested from our control while we blithely continue our day-to-day lives. We can’t seem to wake up. It’s a nightmare you can’t escape.

I’ve been searching the signs and portents everywhere and I can’t find anything to cheer about. The one issue, out of so many, that caught my greatest interest is the news that the US Supreme Court is considering whether to take on the case of the Romeike family who fled Germany to escape draconian State laws prohibiting home schooling. In the past and for Americans, the Romeike plight would have been merely a footnote in the annals of history, just another case of how twisted a value system the EU propagates. Unfortunately, it becomes not a footnote but a whole story unto itself when we consider that the only reason the Romeikes are still in the news is that the inaptly named US Department of Justice has decided they agree with the EU on home schooling. At least that is how I am interpreting the regime’s prosecutorial zeal in suing to overturn a lower court decision granting this family asylum on grounds of persecution and certainty of prosecution if returned to their home country.

Here is a recap of the battle so far: the Romeikes Sr. object to the social content of German education in public schools, inasmuch as portions of what is being taught or even propagated (i.e. homosexuality) go against their religious beliefs. They have given their children an excellent education in other mandated (scholastic) areas and the kids test very well. But here’s the problem: it seems that a Nazi law enacted in the 1930s to ensure the State absolute control of the minds of Germany’s youth prohibits home schooling. There was nothing more dangerous to the Nazis than some dissenting parent passing on ideas pernicious to the Third Reich. Unlike the Hitlerian dictates on racial purification, after the war the Nazi system of state thought control was left in place. First the post-war Germans used the law to eradicate from the young all Nazi sentiments and thoughts and then they used the public school system to indoctrinate children in socialist and progressivist philosophy. By forcing everybody into the same heavily policed political correctness, the State can avoid disruptive dissent. I can’t figure out what the difference is between those war-time Germans who pounded Nazi thoughts and values into the children’s heads and today’s modernists. It seems as if both generations supported the idea that the State must not merely educate, but indoctrinate.

Under the German law, parents who refuse to send their kids to public school can be fined, prosecuted and imprisoned, and they can lose custody of their kids, too. This is not a scare story. In December 2013, a German judge allowed a home-schooling couple’s children to be released from State custody with a warning to put them in a public school and not try fleeing to a country where home education is allowed. If they violated his orders, he vowed to chase them down and prosecute. Good old Germany. It may be enforcing a whole set of perverted values, but it is doing it to the full extent of the law. As the French say, the more things change, the more they remain the same.

After the Romeikes showed up in the US as visitors, they claimed asylum on grounds of persecution. And the original court of hearing agreed and granted asylum. Here is where our own Neo-Totalitarians come in. Eric Holder’s Justice Department decided perhaps for the first time ever in US history to sue to overturn the granting of asylum. The USG is using our tax dollars to fund a campaign of persecution against Christians who refuse to allow the brainwashing of their children into an alien ideology. The Justice Department says it agrees with the EU and that all the German officials were doing was following orders. Or maybe they said, “following the law.”  It doesn’t matter — it was the same excuse Nazis used to dodge responsibility for the death-camps, or sheriffs used in the US to persecute people for the color of their skin. Just because a law exists doesn’t mean it is just. Ask Eric Holder, who used force to take over a university building because of “political” objections to that administration. He didn’t care much for US law then, and between you and me, he doesn’t today, either.

Immigration (ICE) most recently has argued that the U.S. government, too, has the authority to simply prohibit homeschooling, and that this fact should disqualify the granting of asylum to the Romeikes.  ICE further noted that Judge Burman “did not address how under various state laws of the United States a person can be similarly prosecuted for not sending one’s children to school.” This is, of course, a red herring. A parent can be punished for not providing an education to his or her children, or not providing one that meets state academic standards, but not because they don’t go to a public school. And they cannot be prosecuted for teaching moral principles in line with their faith. That is the real issue in the Romeike case.

This is a case of violation of freedom of conscience as well as freedom of religion in its broadest sense. The Romeikes came to America legally as visitors but actually were escaping the false choice offered them by German authorities: turn over your responsibility for your children’s lives and minds, give up your religious convictions, or face the legal consequences. The authorities were not satisfied that the Romeike children were in fact being educated, in accordance with a 1918 law making education mandatory.

They relied instead on that much more convenient Nazi law. The difference between the two laws in question is that one encourages education and the other encourages State indoctrination. In resisting State indoctrination, the churning out of that one-mind mass that makes it easy for the State to rule, the Romeikes took on the foundations of modern European society. In today’s Europe, the one thing that is unforgivable is non-conformity. The State rules, the State forms the ideas, and the State makes all the choices. Sounds a lot like old Europe, doesn’t it, only the parameters by which one is judged have been turned on their head. Ambassador Thomas Schirrmacher, Director of the International Institute for Religious Freedom, points out that  [N]early a dozen major human rights documents and treaties, including the 1948 Universal Declaration on Human Rights, recognize how important the role of parental decision-making is in the education of children and that free governments must recognize and respect this important right. As Ambassador Schirrmacher points out, the actions of the EU violate that premise. But that isn’t a problem for modern government. In the EU, they celebrate territorial integrity and the right to self-determination side by side, but in reality they only support the right to self-determination. Same when it comes to parental rights — they stop where the State says “Stop,” which could be at the cradle or even in utero. Contradictions are not a problem in modern government; all you have to do is ignore them.

I don’t really care what they do in Europe. I care what happens here. Do we really have to create an underground society to live in freedom — or is there any hope left in this country that was once a beacon to freedom? I think there are many millions of Americans even now pondering what lies ahead and what our choices might be. But one thing is certain: as goes freedom of religion, so go all the freedoms our Constitution recognizes. We are either going to give them away under threat or in exchange for false freedoms, like the freedom of total sexual hedonism, or we are going to keep them, no matter what.

I know where I stand.

Wednesday, February 19, 2014

SecState Clinton Before, During and After Benghazi

Gary Fouse

Hat tip Family Security Matters and Squid

The below report in pdf format was compiled by a group of special ops veterans and former intelligence officers known as Opsecteam. The report is published by Frank Gaffney's Family Security Matters. The below report paints a damning picture of Hillary Clinton in the time before the Benghazi mission attack when the State Department was going full speed ahead with supporting the new Libyan government, setting up an expanding mission in Benghazi, and collecting surface to air missiles left over from the Libyan insurgency while ignoring warning signs of terrorist activity and pleas for more security in Benghazi. It then paints a picture of Clinton as basically missing in action with her whereabouts and actions unaccounted for in the hours of September 11 when the mission was under attack. Finally, it describes her actions and the actions of her underlings in the cover-up of the motive for the attack and the propagation that it was a protest over a video. The authors state that the information is derived from public source documents and reports.

Comment: Of course, detractors will say that the writers are anonymous, shadowy, right-wing activists with an ax to grind against Clinton and the Obama administration. The above FSM link has a link to a review by Reuters which pretty much implies that it is a Republican smear job.

"Thomas Pickering, who chaired the State Department's official inquiry, said his panel concluded Clinton's performance was appropriate: "We did look at her role. We thought that she conducted her meetings and activities responsibly and well."

Yet Reuters never informs its own readers that Thomas Pickering's Accountability Review Board investigators never interviewed Clinton! To be sure, Family Security Matters is a conservative site that focuses on the threat of Islamic terrorism. They have been critical of the Obama administration's handling of the threat. So evaluate it as you will. I assume, being former intelligence operatives,  that they also have inside contacts.

The fact does remain, however, that Hillary Clinton has never fully accounted for her actions and whereabouts on the night of September 11. For that matter, neither has Obama.

Wednesday's Hero

This post was suggested by Michael

Lt.Col. Jerry Coleman

Lt. Col. Jerry Coleman
89 years old from San Diego, Calif.
VMTB-341, VMA-323
September 14, 1924 - January 5, 2014
U.S. Marines

Jerry Coleman, a decorated war hero, Yankee World Series MVP and Hall of Fame San Diego Padres broadcaster, died January 5 at age 89 after a career of more than 70 years in baseball.

Coleman signed with the Yankees out of the San Francisco sandlots in 1942 only to spend the next three years as a Marine bomber pilot in the Pacific theater of World War II, flying 57 combat missions over the Solomon Islands. Upon his return from the war he rejoined the Yankees only to be called back to duty in '51. He flew another 120 missions in Korea and rose to the rank of lieutenant colonel.

You can read more about Lt. Col. Coleman here

These brave men and women sacrifice so much in their lives just so others may get to enjoy freedom. For that I am proud to call them Hero.

Those Who Say That We're In A Time When There Are No Heroes, They Just Don't Know Where To Look.

This post is part of the Wednesday Hero Blogroll. For more information about Wednesday Hero, or if you would like to post it on your site, you can go here.

Wednesday Hero Logo

Tuesday, February 18, 2014

Couple Stoned in Pakistan

Gary Fouse

Here's the latest from that area in Pakistan where the Taliban and al Qaeda reign supreme. A couple has been stoned to death for adultery. Reuters has the report.

This is what the concept of human rights is in Pakistan. But you say, "Fousesquawk, six people have been arrested." Yes, but the sad reality is that none of these people will be in jail say a year from now. If punished at all, it will be merely a slap on the wrist. This atrocity is considered an "honor killing". Adultery is punished by death-stoning.

And here is what is especially disturbing. A cleric ordered the stoning, and it was carried about by the immediate families of the victims.

So what is to be done? The  answer, as far as we are concerned, is nothing. There is nothing that we here in the West can do. This is Pakistan-to be exact- an area called Baluchistan, in which the central government has no control. This is the way things are done there and have been done for hundreds of years. We can't change it. I doubt the Pakistani government in Islamabad can change it. How can we educate these people that this is wrong and a violation of basic human rights? In truth, we cannot. That is the code they live by.

But if we want to maintain our concepts on human rights, we don't have to allow folks like this to immigrate to our country (ies). They can stay right where they are and practice their barbaric customs all they want and if the Pakistani authorities in Islamabad or Baluchistan want to intervene, arrest them, prosecute them, and put them in jail for 30 days, or do nothing, that is their business.

But I don't want to see that mentality here in the US. And that is where we can do something. You talk about immigration reform? This is an area where immigration reform is badly needed.

Monday, February 17, 2014

An Honest BDS Activist

Hat tip to Elder of Ziyon

Please remember this is satire!

Honest BDS Activist Lives Off Grid, Forages, Avoids Medicine

If you see a BDS activist using one of these, gently highlight the hypocrisy.
Somewhere near Beach Lake, Pennsylvania, February 15 – Oscar Thorpe is a rare specimen indeed: a political activist who completely practices what he preaches. In his case, his adherence to the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement against Israel has led him to renounce all computer and telecommunications technology and advanced medical care.

Unlike the leaders of the BDS movement, the 42-year-old former marketing consultant does not own a mobile device, as the technology necessary to manufacture and use one depends heavily on Israeli-engineered or Israeli-produced components. The same holds true for a computer of any sort, which Thorpe cannot use because he would have to connect it to a power source, and the power company employs Israeli computing technology to deliver its product to customers.

“I used to own a Tandy, which would be great for my purposes, since it uses nothing Israeli,” said Thorpe. “But it’s both obsolete and kind of useless for trying to stay in contact.”

In contrast, Omar Barghouti, a leader of the BDS movement, earned his philosophy degree at none other than Tel Aviv University. Thorpe disdainfully points out that Barghouti specifically studied ethics.
Unable to maintain consistent communications with his colleagues in the BDS movement, Thorpe found out only this week about the international scuffle over Scarlett Johansson, Oxfam, and SodaStream, but was unable to fully grasp the details, since he has no idea what SodaStream means or who the actress is. He heard mention of the news item on his old transistor radio, which can be used and powered by Blessedly Israel-free AA batteries.

“I haven’t seen the inside of a movie theater since, oh, maybe 2001,” said Thorpe. “I know what Oxfam is because they’ve been around a long time and I’ve heard of them, but ‘Scarlett Johansson’ to me is just a name. What is she, Swedish?” he wondered, unaware of Ms. Johansson’s Jewish American status. Thorpe could find out more, but the public libraries in the area – in both nearby Honesdale and slightly more distant Hawley – make heavy use of Israeli technology in the computers that manage their collections.

The New Hampshire native has fashioned a serviceable crossbow that he uses to hunt rabbit, deer, and other game, and lives in an abandoned stone hut overlooking a man-made lake. “I used to go fishing there, but then I found out there’s a Zionist summer camp on the other side, I couldn’t in good conscience benefit from their maintenance of the lake,” he explained, referring to Camp Moshava, which is run by the Tel-Aviv-headquartered religious Zionist youth movement Bnei Akiva.

Despite the hardships, Thorpe eschews all medical care except for basic first aid, since Israeli pharmaceutical companies produce vast amounts of the generic drugs employed by hospitals and health clinics all over the world. “Simply making an appointment to go see a doctor would mean endorsing their use of Israeli technology in the clinic management software, or the hardware in the terminals themselves,” said Thorpe. “And forget about all the imaging technology to detect abnormalities or growths.”

Thorpe hopes his principled stand will inspire others to be more consistent in their activism. “There’s nothing I’d like to see more than all my fellow BDS advocates dying of some treatable disease,” said Thorpe.

Sunday, February 16, 2014

Music For A Sunday Morning

Simple Gifts by Aaron Copland
Pictures by Ansel Adams
Scenery by God

Click here if the video fails to load.

Have A Wonderful Day!

Saturday, February 15, 2014

No Thank You!

Was the words coming from workers in Tennessee who work for Volkswagen to the United Auto Workers (UAW).
CHATTANOOGA, Tenn. – Workers at a Volkswagen factory in Tennessee have voted against union representation, a devastating loss that derails the United Auto Workers union's effort to organize Southern factories.

The 712-626 vote released late Friday stunned many labor experts who expected a UAW win because Volkswagen tacitly endorsed the union and even allowed organizers into the Chattanooga factory to make sales pitches.

But the union faced stern opposition from Republican politicians who warned that a union win would chase away other automakers who might come to the region. Sen. Bob Corker of Tennessee was the most vocal opponent, saying that he was told that VW would not build a new SUV in Chattanooga if workers approved the union. That was later denied by a VW executive in Tennessee.

The UAW for decades has tried without success to organize a foreign-owned plant in a region that's wary of organized labor. The loss now makes it even harder for the union to recruit members at another Southern factory, a key priority of outgoing UAW President Bob King. He has said in the past that the union has no long-term future if it can't organize the Southern plants.

"It is pretty devastating" for the union, said Kristin Dziczek, director of the labor and industry group at the Center for Automotive Research, an industry think tank in Michigan. "If this was going to work anywhere, this is where it was going to work."

Gary Casteel, a UAW regional director who headed organizing efforts at the plant, hinted that the union may challenge the election results with the National Labor Relations Board.

"We think that it's unfortunate that there was some outside influence exerted into this process," Casteel said Friday night. "There are still some issues that have to be sorted out about this election, and we'll let the people that do that evaluate the impact of others and whatnot further down the road."

Dziczek said the union may have to change its tactics in future organizing efforts, because King's strategy of the union and company working together to help each other did not work.

But she does not expect the well-funded union to give up on organizing Southern factories. "I think they will continue to push everywhere they were pushing and see if they get more traction," she said.

Many viewed VW as the union's only chance to gain a crucial foothold in the South because other automakers have not been as welcoming as Volkswagen. The vote means the union may be quarantined to its base with the Detroit Three automakers in the Industrial Midwest and Northeast.

King, however, stuck to statements he made earlier that the union would seek a vote and respect any decision made by workers. "While we certainly would have liked a victory for workers here, we deeply respect the Volkswagen Global Group Works Council, Volkswagen management and IG Metall for doing their best to create a free and open atmosphere for workers to exercise their basic human right to form a union," King said in a statement.

The truth is that American workers are seeing the truth about the modern union movement.  They don't see the friend of the worker as was seen in the 1920s and 1930s, but a corrupt entity that is only interested in how much dues they receive and how many Democrats they can support.

 The workers in Tennessee aren't dumb hicks.  They are educated patriots who see the harm that unions have caused this nation.  And have voted to remain free.

Friday, February 14, 2014

Thursday, February 13, 2014

Ten Reasons Why The BDS Movement Is Immoral And Hinders Peace ~~ By Alan M. Dershowitz

From The Gatestone Institute

As a strong supporter of the two state solution and a critic of Israel's settlement policies, I am particularly appalled at efforts to impose divestment, boycotts and sanctions against Israel, and Israel alone, because BDS makes it more difficult to achieve a peaceful resolution of the Mid-East conflict that requires compromise on all sides.

The BDS movement is highly immoral, threatens the peace process and discourages the Palestinians from agreeing to any reasonable peace offer. Here are ten compelling reasons why the BDS movement is immoral and incompatible with current efforts to arrive at a compromise peace.
1. The BDS movement immorally imposes the entire blame for the continuing Israeli occupation and settlement policy on the Israelis. It refuses to acknowledge the historical reality that on at least three occasions, Israel offered to end the occupation and on all three occasions, the Palestinian leadership, supported by its people, refused to accept these offers. In 1967, I played a small role in drafting UN Security Council Resolution 242 that set out the formula for ending the occupation in exchange for recognition of Israel's right to exist in peace. Israel accepted that Resolution, while the Palestinians, along with all the Arab nations, gathered in Khartoum and issued their three famous "nos:" No peace, no negotiation, no recognition. There were no efforts to boycott, sanction or divest from these Arab naysayers. In 2000-2001, Israel's liberal Prime Minister Ehud Barak, along with American President Bill Clinton, offered the Palestinians statehood, and the end of the occupation. Yasser Arafat rejected this offer—a rejection that many Arab leaders considered a crime against the Palestinian people. In 2007, Israel's Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered the Palestinians an even better deal, an offer to which they failed to respond. There were no BDS threats against those who rejected Israel's peace offers. Now there are ongoing peace negotiations in which both parties are making offers and imposing conditions. Under these circumstances, it is immoral to impose blame only on Israel and to direct a BDS movement only against the nation state of the Jewish people, that has thrice offered to end the occupation in exchange for peace.

2. The current BDS movement, especially in Europe and on some American university campuses, emboldens the Palestinians to reject compromise solutions to the conflict. Some within the Palestinian leadership have told me that the longer they hold out against making peace, the more powerful will be the BDS movement against Israel. Why not wait until the BDS strengthens their bargaining position so that they won't have to compromise by giving up the right of return, by agreeing to a demilitarized state and by making other concessions that are necessary to peace but difficult for some Palestinians to accept? The BDS movement is making a peaceful resolution harder.

3. The BDS movement is immoral because its leaders will never be satisfied with the kind of two state solution that is acceptable to Israel. Many of its leaders do not believe in the concept of Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people. (The major leader of the BDS movement, Marwan Barghouti, has repeatedly expressed his opposition to Israel's right to exist as the nation state of the Jewish people even within the 1967 borders.) At bottom, therefore, the leadership of the BDS movement is opposed not only to Israel's occupation and settlement policy but to its very existence.

4. The BDS movement is immoral because it violates the core principle of human rights: namely, "the worst first." Israel is among the freest and most democratic nations in the world. It is certainly the freest and most democratic nation in the Middle East. Its Arab citizens enjoy more rights than Arabs anywhere else in the world. They serve in the Knesset, in the Judiciary, in the Foreign Service, in the academy and in business. They are free to criticize Israel and to support its enemies. Israeli universities are hot beds of anti-Israel rhetoric, advocacy and even teaching. Israel has a superb record on women's rights, gay rights, environmental rights and other rights that barely exist in most parts of the world. Moreover, Israel's record of avoiding civilian casualties, while fighting enemies who hide their soldiers among civilians, is unparalleled in the world today. The situation on the West Bank is obviously different because of the occupation, but even the Arabs of Ramallah, Bethlehem and Tulkarim have more human and political rights than the vast majority of Arabs in the world today. Moreover, anyone—Jew, Muslim or Christian—dissatisfied with Israeli actions can express that dissatisfaction in the courts, and in the media, both at home and abroad. That freedom does not exist in any Arab country, nor in many non-Arab countries. Yet Israel is the only country in the world today being threatened with BDS. When a sanction is directed against only a state with one of the best records of human rights, and that nation happens to be the state of the Jewish people, the suspicion of bigotry must be considered.

5. The BDS movement is immoral because it would hurt the wrong people: it would hurt Palestinian workers who will lose their jobs if economic sanctions are directed against firms that employ them. It would hurt artists and academics, many of whom are the strongest voices for peace and an end to the occupation. It would hurt those suffering from illnesses all around the world who would be helped by Israeli medicine and the collaboration between Israeli scientists and other scientists. It would hurt the high tech industry around the world because Israel contributes disproportionally to the development of such life enhancing technology.

6. The BDS movement is immoral because it would encourage Iran—the world's leading facilitator of international terrorism—to unleash its surrogates, such as Hezbollah and Hamas, against Israel, in the expectation that if Israel were to respond to rocket attacks, the pressure for BDS against Israel would increase, as it did when Israel responded to thousands of rockets from Gaza in 2008-2009.

7. The BDS movement is immoral because it focuses the world's attention away from far greater injustices, including genocide. By focusing disproportionately on Israel, the human rights community pays disproportionately less attention to the other occupations, such as those by China, Russia and Turkey, and to other humanitarian disasters such as that occurring in Syria.

8. The BDS movement is immoral because it promotes false views regarding the nation state of the Jewish people, exaggerates its flaws and thereby promotes a new variation on the world's oldest prejudice, namely anti-Semitism. It is not surprising therefore that the BDS movement is featured on neo-Nazi, Holocaust denial and other overtly anti-Semitic websites and is promoted by some of the world's most notorious haters such as David Duke.

9. The BDS movement is immoral because it reflects and encourages a double standard of judgment and response regarding human rights violations. By demanding more of Israel, the nation state of the Jewish people, it expects less of other states, people, cultures and religions, thereby reifying a form of colonial racism and reverse bigotry that hurts the victims of human rights violations inflicted by others.

10. The BDS movement will never achieve its goals. Neither the Israeli government nor the Israeli people will ever capitulate to the extortionate means implicit in BDS. They will not and should not make important decisions regarding national security and the safety of their citizens on the basis of immoral threats. Moreover, were Israel to compromise its security in the face of such threats, the result would be more wars, more death and more suffering.
All decent people who seek peace in the Middle East should join together in opposing the immoral BDS movement. Use your moral voices to demand that both the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority accept a compromise peace that assures the security of Israel and the viability of a peaceful and democratic Palestinian state. The way forward is not by immoral extortionate threats that do more harm than good, but rather by negotiations, compromise and good will.