It's Alive

Hat Tip to Israpundit

Just like the child with the fake illness being prevented from getting treatment by Israel, or the thousands of dead babies who actually were killed 2 years ago in Syria, we now have the "honored dead" fighters of Hamas.

Hamas puts the FUN in Funeral!



Click here if the video fails to load.

Hamas displays victims of Israeli "aggression" in white burial shrouds. If you look closely, you can see some of the bodies make themselves more comfortable while they think the camera is not on them.

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.

SOURCE

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.

"Five Things I Learned About Mohammad"

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com

Cross-posted from the Orange County Register

Tonight, PBS is broadcasting a 3-hour program entitled, The Life of Mohammad, hosted by Rageh Omar, a Somali-born British journalist. Yesterday, Cathleen Falsani wrote the below article advertising the program. The article is entitled, "Five Things I learned About Mohammad". It appears in the paper's Faith and Values section. The text is below.

Falsani: 5 things I learned about Muhammad

On Tuesday evening, PBS will air “The Life of Muhammad,” an exceptionally fine documentary series about the life and legacy of the founder of Islam.

Hosted by Rageh Omaar, a veteran Somali-born British journalist and war correspondent who is Muslim, the three-hour documentary paints a vivid picture not only of the Prophet Muhammad — who, according to prevailing Islamic custom, cannot be depicted in any fashion — but of the varied understandings of his life, teaching, and legacy.

Journalist and author Rageh Omaar, host and narrator of the three-part PBS series, "The Life of Muhammad," which airs Aug. 20 nation-wide.

Filmed on location in Saudi Arabia, Israel, Jordan, and elsewhere, the documentary, which was made for the BBC where it aired in 2011, succeeds where predecessors have failed by incorporating sweeping landscapes — physical and spiritual — with a breadth of knowledge from Muslim, Christian and Jewish scholars (more than a dozen by my count, including some of the preeminent names in their fields, including Karen Armstrong and Tariq Ramadan) whose own perspectives run the gamut from orthodox and mystic, to skeptic and even detractor.

Divided into three parts — “The Seeker,” “Holy War,” and “Holy Peace” — the film opens inside Omaar’s hotel room where he is preparing for the haj — the pilgrimage to Mecca that is one of the Five Pillars of Islam. Omaar tells us he made his first haj as a boy with his family 30 years earlier.

It is this human, personal touch from the host that helps make the documentary all the more compelling.

“Like most Muslims, the first human name I heard was not that of my mother or father,” Omaar says, “but of Muhammad.”

As is the Islamic custom, shortly after he was born in Somalia in 1967, someone whispered the words of the Shahada — the Muslim statement of faith that says, “There is no God but Allah. Muhammad is his messenger” — into Omaar’s ear.

“Fourteen-hundred years ago a man born here, in Mecca, in Saudi Arabia, changed the course of world history,” Omaar says, adding that he wants to explore the “many complexities” of Muhammad’s life and times and how they “still affect today’s world. I want to uncover the real Muhammad.”

Robustly researched and beautifully filmed, combined with Omaar’s inviting demeanor and assuring gravitas, “The Life of Muhammad” is well worth watching. It is a vivid corrective to the fear and misinformation that surrounds Islam and its 1.3 billion adherents worldwide.

Muslims are no more a monolith than Christians and Jews, and their understanding of their own doctrines and theology are as dynamic as any held by their Christian and Jewish cousins — all monotheistic “People of the Book,” whose stories overlap throughout history and continue to do so today.

Most viewers will learn a lot about the Prophet and Islam. And even those of us who have studied Islam likely will walk away with at least a few new gems of information and perspective.

Here are a few of mine:

1. Muhammad was an orphan.

His father died before he was born, and his mother (who had placed him with a Bedouin wet nurse as an infant and reunited with him several years later) died when he was about 6. He then went to live with a grandfather, who also died, before he finally came under the protection of his uncle, Abu Talib, who would be among Muhammad’s closest companions until his death.

Interestingly, while he was an ardent supporter of his nephew, according to the film, and despite Muhammad’s best efforts to persuade him, Abu Talib never converted to Islam. “The most direct, the most unequivocal statement in the Qur’an, is that there is no compulsion in religion — no ifs, ands or buts,” scholar Merryl Wyn Davies, director of London’s Muslim Institute, says in the film. “Unless you make a free, willing choice for faith, you cannot be held accountable for your actions thereafter. That is the essence of what Islam is about.”

2. Muhammad’s first wife, Khadijah, asked him to marry her.

When Muhammad was about 25, he agreed to work for Khadijah, a widow who was a successful merchant, accompanying some of her wares on a trade caravan. When he returned, she asked him to marry her. Even today it’s unusual for a woman to ask a man to marry her, but in 7th-century Arabia it would have been absolutely unheard of, according to the film.

Muhammad and Khadijah were married for nearly 25 years and together had four daughters. Although polygamy was the custom at the time, Muhammad didn’t take another wife until after Khadijah died. She was the love of his life, according to the film, his first convert and is considered the “mother of Islam.”

3. There are no memorials, statues or even plaques marking Muhammad’s birthplace.

Although historians and scholars believe they know precisely where Muhammad was born, in Mecca on June 6, 632 A.D., there are no markers celebrating the site as a sacred or even special place. According to the film, any signs or markers with Muhammad’s name have been removed over the years in an effort to ensure that Muhammad is not worshiped or venerated in any way. Muhammad was not the son of God or divine — he was just a man, a fact that he insisted be made clear in his lifetime and after.

Worshiping Muhammad or anyone other than Allah — the one true God — is considered the very worst kind of sin.

In accordance with the prevailing tradition in Islam against depicting Muhammad or any of the prophets before him (including Abraham, Moses, and Jesus), the film does not include any dramatic reenactments of Muhammad’s life or any historical artwork that shows the prophet without his face covered by a veil.

4. Muslims haven’t always prayed toward Mecca.

Among the many mosques and houses of worship Omaar visits in the film is the Masjid al-Qiblatain (or “Mosque of Two Qiblas”) in Medina, Saudi Arabia. Qibla is the Arabic term for the direction Muslims face when they pray five times daily (another of the Five Pillars of Islam.) The Mosque of Two Qiblas is so named because it has two arched alcoves indicating the direction of prayer — a large one facing in the direction of Mecca and a second, smaller one facing toward Jerusalem.

It was in this mosque that, while leading prayer, Muhammad is said to have received a revelation from God telling him to change the direction Muslims faced during prayer. According to the film, in the revelation, God told Muhammad to pray toward Mecca and the Kaaba — the large black cube that the Qur’an (the Muslim holy book) says was built as the first building for humans to worship Allah — rather than Jerusalem, as was the custom among Muhammad’s followers, as well as among Jews and Christians. From that day forward, no matter where they are in the world, Muslims face toward Mecca when they pray.

5. An “Islamic state” probably doesn’t mean what you think it means.

One of the most fascinating chapters in the film deals with the so-called “Constitution of Medina,” which is said to have been written by the Prophet Muhammad himself as the basis for the very first Islamic state in Medina. While there are varying historical and religious opinions about who wrote it, when and why — the film does an excellent job presenting various sides of the debate — the document was an agreement between the Muslims in Medina and the pagans, Jews, Christians and others who lived there at the time and made up what Muhammad described as the “ummah” or “community.

While “ummah” is often used today to describe an exclusively Muslim community, the film says that’s not what Muhammad intended. In fact, the constitution of the first “Islamic state” defined the rights given to non-Muslims as explicit members of the community, including a statement that said the “security of God” is equal for all groups, and that non-Muslims were not obligated to take part in “religious wars.”

One of the scholar-commentators in the film, Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali, the Pakistani-born Anglican bishop of Rochester, England and author of “Islam: A Christian Perspective,” has one of the best lines in the film. Commenting on the Medina constitution, he says, “When people today say to me, ‘We would like to create an Islamic state here or there,‘ I say to them, ‘Will it be like the first one? And if not, why not?”

Contact the writer: cfalsani@ocregister.com

Comment:

With all the superlative adjectives, looks like this will be one of the greatestcinematographic ventures since Technocolor was invented.

I would not expect the Orange County Register to run an article criticizing Islam or the prophet-even in the editorial section. Yet, at the same time, this article is so hagiographic in nature as to be historically misleading if not downright false. The timing could not have been more ironic with over 60 churches in Egypt having been attacked and burned to the ground-to say nothing of all the other attacks against Christians and on-Muslim minorities across the Islamic world.

"It is a vivid corrective to the fear and misinformation that surrounds Islam and its 1.3 billion adherents worldwide."

Really? Tell that to the Coptic Christians in Egypt who are huddled in fear as we speak. Are they so misinformed?

“The most direct, the most unequivocal statement in the Qur’an, is that there is no compulsion in religion — no ifs, ands or buts,” scholar Merryl Wyn Davies, director of London’s Muslim Institute, says in the film."

True, that statement does appear in the Koran, but so do others written later that call it into question. In many parts of the Islamic world, forced conversions are going on even today.

"Muhammad and Khadijah were married for nearly 25 years and together had four daughters. Although polygamy was the custom at the time, Muhammad didn’t take another wife until after Khadijah died. She was the love of his life, according to the film, his first convert and is considered the “mother of Islam.”

Misleading?

"While “ummah” is often used today to describe an exclusively Muslim community, the film says that’s not what Muhammad intended. In fact, the constitution of the first “Islamic state” defined the rights given to non-Muslims as explicit members of the community, including a statement that said the “security of God” is equal for all groups, and that non-Muslims were not obligated to take part in “religious wars.”

Too bad the writer did not go into detail about what the conditions of dhimmitude were, which includes the part that they must feel subjugated to Islam.

This is quite similar to the current textbook controversy in our schools as to how Islam is presented to our children. Again, in the interests of harmony and the sensitivities of Muslim schoolchildren.

I wouldn't expect schools to attack Islam or any other religion. Yet, if it is necessary to present such a misleading narrative in this area, perhaps, it would be better to leave the subject alone. If we want to be well-informed on this subject, it is certainly possible to read the Islamic texts, study the complete life of Mohammad, and follow world events. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

This will be a series that will gloss over the truth in favor of showing Muhammad (MHBIH) in a good light. They will ignore his murdering ways, his raping of captive women, his hypocrisy, his lies, his pedophilia, his plundering, etc... In fact it is a fairy tale that is being presented to the American people. A fairy tale to lull the American people into a slumber like they did in Europe. A slumber that the American People will awaken to the nightmare that is what the streets of Europe has become.

Syrian Pallywood

Stolen from Elder of Ziyon

Syrians describing the recent Israeli attack on Syrian weapons depots last night.





First we are told that the target was completely civilian, and held cows and chickens. We see acres of utter devastation. Not a dead cow or chicken in sight.  If it was a facility for cattle and chicken shouldn't there be blood and body parts every where?

But - surprise! - we see a rooster somehow managed to escape unscathed and is hopping around the rubble!

Egyptian Cleric Hisham Al-'Ashri: The Two Planes That Hit The World Trade Center On 9/11 Were Controlled By The U.S. Air Force; It Is The 'Dream Of My Life' To Wage War Against Israel; There Is No Such Thing As A 'Christian Religion'

Once again we are hearing the "truth" being put upon the Muslim world.  This time from Egypt.

Following are excerpts from an interview with Egyptian cleric Hisham Al-'Ashri, which aired on Al-Tahrir TV on January 10, 2013. Al-'Ashri, who recently returned to Egypt from the U.S., has established a committee for the promotion of virtue and prevention of vice.

Egyptian Cleric: War with Israel Is the Dream of My Life; No Such Thing as a Christian Religion



Click here if the video doesn't load.

Interviewer: "Does the attack on the World Trade Center on September 11 constitute Jihad?"

Hisham Al-'Ashri: "Well, it depends who did it. Jihad is only for Muslims. They even say 'Jihad' in English because they have no equivalent. [...]

"I call on everybody to type in Google '911,' and then click. You will get an incredible amount of videos, documents, and documentaries made by Americans – not Muslims, Arabs, or people of Arab origin – proving that the Islamists had nothing to do with 9/11, unless they were targeted.

"The two planes that hit the World Trade Center were military planes, not civilian ones."

Interviewer: "So, those who led this...

"They were controlled by..."

Hisham Al-'Ashri: "By the U.S. airforce. [...]

"Under Mubarak, Egypt did not have a war for 30 years. Israel, on the other hand, did not last for 30 days without a war. The U.S. did not last for three months without a war."

Interviewer: "That's true."

Hisham Al-'Ashri: "England and France did not last for three years without a war."

Interviewer: "But these were not direct wars..."

Hisham Al-'Ashri: "Yes, they were. America is fighting a direct war..."

Interviewer: "I was referring to England and France."

Hisham Al-'Ashri: "They joined America in the Iraq war..."

Interviewer: "They fought wars outside their borders."

Hisham Al-'Ashri: "They sent fighters to fight. Our concept of war is that it is great to live in peace, as long as you do not enter a war in which you will be defeated. Got it? When I do not engage in a war for 30 years, but I allow my enemy to have a war every 30 days – this is negligence."

Interviewer: "Does that mean you are calling us to wage a war against Israel?"

Hisham Al-'Ashri: "It is the dream of my life to wage war against Israel, under the command of the state, the president, the regime, and the army. I will not decide all by myself to start a war. [...]

"There is no such thing as a Christian religion. Did Jesus come to prophesy the Christian religion?"

Interviewer: "He came to prophesy his religion..."

Hisham Al-'Ashri: "The Christian religion?"

Interviewer: "Or did he come to call people to monotheism?" [...]

Hisham Al-'Ashri: "In Islam, we believe that our religion is the true religion, and that the Muslims will enter Paradise. Out of love for the Christians, I call upon them to enter Paradise with me." [...]

According to Christianity Jesus came to save the souls of believers.  He is not a prophet, but the Messiah.  But Islam has taken the Messiah Jesus, turned him into a prophet with no powers but to prepare the way for Muhammad (MHBIH).

Muslims will deny all of this but remember the idea of taqiyya:

Qur'an (3:54) - "And they (the disbelievers) schemed, and Allah schemed (against them): and Allah is the best of schemers."

The Arabic word used here for scheme (or plot) is makara, which literally means deceit.

There is no such religion called Chrislam.  It is Islam being marketed to Christians in a form that they will swallow in small doses.  Eventually they believe that the Christians will convert to Islam believing it is a form of Christianity and discover:

1.  The truth about Islam.

2.  Once your convert you cannot leave the faith.

I encourage everyone to read the Koran.  I suggest 5 pages a day.  Learn it, know it, understand the religion.  For you will have done what most Muslims never do.  In fact over 90% of Muslims have never read the Koran.  For if they did they would have left the faith.

Moses Led Muslims out of Egypt

Is the proclamation of Dr. Omar Ja’ara of Al-Najah University in Nablus.  The Arabs not content with teaching American University students lies about Israel, they are now stealing the Bible and Jewish history.  I can see the so-called Mainstream Churches (Methodist, Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Lutherians, etc...) now teaching this new doctrine as Gospel truth.  Why not?  They already teach the Koran as if it is the next New Testament.

Dr. Omar Ja’ara, lecturer at Al-Najah University in Nablus specializing in Israeli affairs, said on Fatah television on February 15 that Moses led the Muslims out of Egypt and that the Exodus was the first instance of ‘Palestinian’ liberation through armed struggle, reported the Palestinian Media Watch.



“We must make clear to the world that David in the Hebrew Bible is not connected to David in the Quran,” he said. “Solomon in the Hebrew Bible is not connected to the Solomon in the Quran and neither is Saul or Joshua son of Nun.

“We have a great leader, Saul, who defeated the nation of the giants and killed Goliath. This is a Muslim victory.

“The Muslims of the Children on Israel went out of Egypt under the leadership of Moses and unfortunately, many researchers deny the Exodus of these oppressed people who were liberated by a great leader like Moses the Muslim, the believing leader, the great Muslim, who was succeeded by Saul, the leader of these Muslims in liberating Palestine,” Ja’ara claimed.

“This was the first Palestinian liberation through armed struggle to liberate Palestine from the nation of giants led by Goliath,” he added. “This is our logic and this is our culture.“

Source

Muhammad the Pedophile was born in 570 CE and died 632 CE.  The events of the Exodus occurred in 1450 BCE.  Over 2000 years BEFORE Muhammad was born.  In fact everyone has the story wrong.  The true story of the Exodus Out Of Egypt is this:

A young boy returned home from Hebrew school, washed his hands and sat down to dinner.

His father asked him what he learned that day in school.

The boy replied that the Rabbi told his class the most amazing story of how the Jews were rescued from the Land of Egypt and brought to the Land of Israel.

His father smiled and asked his son to relate the story the Rabbi told them.

"Sure Dad," the boy said. "Now this story happened a long time ago, before the time of CNN. Before the time of computers, and cell phones. Before even TV. I think it was in the 1920s or so it happened.

"Egypt was ruled by this guy named Pharaoh. I think it means "Nasty Egyptian". And we Jews were his slaves. We didn't like being slaves and prayed to G-d to set us free. G-d heard our prayers and sent us a miracle.

"G-d sent the IDF back in time to rescue the Children of Israel (I think they rescued the parents too.). The Commandos diverted the Egyptian Army while the Children and their parents fled to the Red Sea (It was red because G-d turned the water to blood like in Zombie Killers 3.). There the IDF built Pontoon bridges across the Red Sea for the people to go across. When the Egypt Army tried to follow, the IDF blew up the bridges.

"Then this guy named Moshe Dayan (He is the head of the IDF, I think. Rabbi said he was G-d's greatest profits.) lead the Children of Israel (and their parents) to Mount Sinai where Moshe lays down the law, destroys the Golden Calf and leads them to Israel.

"But it took them 40 years because nobody had a GPS and Moshe would not ask for directions."

His father had a look upon his face that was a cross between total astonishment and WTF. "Is this what the Rabbi taught you?"

"No Dad," the boy said. "But you wouldn't believe the crazy story he did tell."

Source

The Miracle of the Exodus cannot be denied.  G-d rescued the People of Israel, not the Muslims (who did not exist), not the Canaanites, Moabites, or the Egyptians.  It was to Moses, the leader of the Hebrews, that G-d gave the Ten Commandments and Torah to.  If G-d had given the Torah to Muhammad, where is it?  Why is the Islamic faith so hateful, so violent?

The Passover narrative is a Jewish one.  Moses, with the help of G-d, brought the Children of Israel (and their parents) out of bondage in Egypt and into freedom in the Land of Israel.

If This Is A Best Friend Israel Has...

...Then Israel Doesn't Need An Enema


Barack Obama ran for president as a pro-Israel candidate -- but his record tells a different story.

Daylight: The Story of Obama and Israel



This was produced by The Emergency Committee for Israel


Senator Obama

Pro-Israel
An Undivided Jerusalem

President Obama

No Settlements
Deligitimizes Israel as a nation
Demands Israel gives into every demand of the Palestinians Fakistinians
The Palestinians Fakistinians need not do anything. Obama will force the evil Israelis Jews to cave in.

A RETURN TO THE 1949 BORDERS BY ISRAEL

The Democrats did produce a video of their own.


"The Facts"




DNC VIDEO: "The Facts" - The facts on Obama and Israel

Can you tell which side actually has the facts and which one is the Propaganda video?

The Kotel Is Not Jewish.

Part of the Arab/Fakistinian narrative that no Jew ever lived in Israel before 1920, they are now claiming that The Kotel (The Western Wall) is not a Jewish site, but a sacred Muslim site.

An Arab organization opposed to the Jewish presence in Jerusalem over the weekend proclaimed that Israel's plans to expand the prayer area for women at the Kotel was “very dangerous.” The Islamic-Christian Council for Support of Al-Quds and the Holy Places, as the organization is known, said that Jews did not have a right to expand the prayer area at the Kotel, or even to pray there at all, because the Kotel is a part of the Al-Aqsa Mosque on the Temple Mount.

According to Islamic lore, the Kotel is known as “Al-Buraq,” the place where Muhammad tied up his donkey when he ascended to heaven from the site of the Beit Hamikdash, the Jewish Temple on the Mount.

A statement by the organization said that archaeological work planned for the Kotel area endangered the physical integrity of the Temple Mount and the mosques on it. Israel's plan to rebuild a bridge to the Temple Mount is actually a cover to expand the prayer area for Jews, the organization said, warning against Israel's efforts to turn “Al-Buraq Plaza” into “a religious center for Jews.” The entire area of the Kotel Plaza, the group said, constitutes the entrance to the Mosque compound, and “is historically an important area of Al-Aqsa Mosque. The 'Judaization' of this area is a very dangerous development,” the group said.

The group said in its statement that the uprisings in the Arab world had made Israel more cautious in its policies in Jerusalem. “The occupiers are weighing their actions more carefully than in the past, including actions that could endanger mosques, especially Al-Aqsa, because they fear the wrath of the Arab public and officials. Despite this the occupiers have taught us that they readily break all rules and customs and are constantly looking for ways to enact their plans for Al-Aqsa,” the statement said.

Source

Muslims have already stolen:  Rachel's Tomb, Joseph's Tomb.  They are trying to steal the Tomb of the Patriarchs.  Now the Kotel.

Want a holy war?  Try it!

Defending Israel

Defending Israel Against Claims of Excessive Force

View more presentations from HonestReporting

Welcome to the new installment of Digital Diplomats.

With the media spotlight again focusing on the Arab-Israeli conflict as the top news story from the Middle East and around the world, the time is right to launch a new series of Digital Diplomats media-training initiatives.
Our first series of videos focused on teaching people how to be effective advocates for Israel. Feedback from the thousands who enrolled in the program convinced us to follow up by looking at several core issues with greater depth.
The new series will consist of slide shows that illustrate the problems and how we can all contribute to solving them. Slide shows allow us to present powerful information in an entertaining and visually stimulating way while giving the viewers complete control over the pace of the information. You can move backwards or forwards as you wish without losing the thread of the message.
Our first slide show examines Israel’s media image as an aggressor using excessive force against the Palestinians.
Too often, the media fails to distinguish between Palestinian aggression and Israeli self-defense. Media coverage often gives the impression that Israel initiated violence when in fact Israel was responding to a Palestinian provocation.
In the slide show, we identify three ways that the media makes Israel appear to be the aggressor in the conflict with the Palestinians:

1. Reporting on events out of order: News headlines often give the impression that Israel initiated violence when in reality, Israel was responding to violence against civilians initiated by Palestinian terrorists.
2. Leaving out context: The media often fails to report essential information that leaves people unable to understand the rationale behind Israel’s policy or actions.
3. Framing the news in terms of Israeli aggression: Reporters often speculate about how Israel will respond to violence, placing an aura of aggression around Israel even before Israel acts.

We hope that the information in our slide show will help Israel’s Digital Diplomats recognize how the media distorts the news and how to speak out against these distortions whenever they appear.
The Digital Diplomats program provides advocacy training and information to help people become effective advocates for Israel. Please share our materials with anyone who could benefit from them.

The Palestinian Wall of Lies

A video by David Horowitz that dispels the lies that the Arabs and their Liberal allies proclaim as "The Truth" but are in fact a Great Lie.

The Palestinian Wall of Lies




It is not a sin to lie in Islam. In fact, it is a blessing to do so:

The Koran:

Koran (2:225) - "Allah will not call you to account for thoughtlessness in your oaths, but for the intention in your hearts"

Koran (9:3) - "...Allah and His Messenger are free from liability to the idolaters..."

Koran (66:2) - "Allah has already ordained for you, (O men), the dissolution of your oaths"

From the Hadith:

Bukhari (49:857) - "He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar."

Don't be fooled by the lies, discover the truth for yourself here.

MEMRI Palestinian reasons for rejecting Peace.

From April 14, 2009

Chief Palestinian Negotiator Saeb Erekat: 'Abbas Rejected Israel's Proposal at Annapolis Like Arafat Rejected the Camp David 2000 Proposal

Following are excerpts from a television debate with chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat. The debate aired on Al-Jazeera TV on March 27, 2009.

To view this MEMRI TV clip, visit http://www.memritv.org/clip/en/2074.htm.

"Arafat Was Besieged at Camp David and Was Killed Unjustly, Only Because He Adhered to Jerusalem"

Saeb Erekat: "I am sitting in Jericho, in the house where I was born, four kilometers from the Jordan River, and there are Israeli flags from the Jordan River all the way to the Mediterranean Sea. Therefore, we are living under Israeli occupation. But let me say that Jerusalem has not been - and will not be - lost. Three hundred thousand Palestinian citizens live in Jerusalem.

[…]

"Jerusalem has not gone anywhere. Jerusalem is here to stay - in the same place throughout the ages. The important thing is for us to return and to liberate Jerusalem.

[…]

"It is true that the negotiations continued for many years, but don’t you know that President Yasser Arafat was besieged at Camp David and was killed unjustly, only because he adhered to Jerusalem, and because he refused to let the Israeli measures on the ground give rise to any [Israeli] right or any [Palestinian] obligation? The Palestinian negotiators could have given in in 1994, 1998, or 2000, and two months ago, brother Abu Mazen [i.e. Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud 'Abbas] could have accepted a proposal that talked about Jerusalem and almost 100% of the West Bank, but it is not our goal to score points against one another here.

"Our strategic goal, when we strive for peace, is not to do so at any price. We strive for peace on the basis of an Israeli withdrawal to the June 4, 1967 borders, the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, with East Jerusalem as its capital, and with the West Bank and the Gaza Strip geographically connected." […]

"An Independent Palestinian State Within the 1967 Borders, With East Jerusalem As Its Capital - This Is What We Can Achieve in Our Generation"

"There will be no peace whatsoever unless East Jerusalem - with every single stone in it - becomes the capital of Palestine.

[…]

"In my family, we are seven siblings. My six brothers and sisters are in the diaspora. But this does not deny them the right to inherit this land. Ten million Palestinians own Palestine, just like I do. Our survival and steadfastness on this land, our wresting of an independent Palestinian state within the 1967 borders, with East Jerusalem as its capital - this is what we can achieve in our generation."[…]

Arafat Told Clinton: "I Will Not Be a Traitor"; 'Abbas Told Olmert: "I Am Not At a Marketplace or a Bazaar - I Came to Demarcate the Borders of Palestine - The June 4, 1967 Borders"

"Let me recount two historical events, even if I am revealing a secret. On July 23, 2000, at his meeting with President Arafat in Camp David, President Clinton said: 'You will be the first president of a Palestinian state, within the 1967 borders - give or take, considering the land swap - and East Jerusalem will be the capital of the Palestinian state, but we want you, as a religious man, to acknowledge that the Temple of Solomon is located underneath the Haram Al-Sharif.'

"Yasser Arafat said to Clinton defiantly: 'I will not be a traitor. Someone will come to liberate it after 10, 50, or 100 years. Jerusalem will be nothing but the capital of the Palestinian state, and there is nothing underneath or above the Haram Al-Sharif except for Allah.' That is why Yasser Arafat was besieged, and that is why he was killed unjustly.

"In November 2008… Let me finish… [Israeli prime minister Ehud] Olmert, who talked today about his proposal to Abu Mazen, offered the 1967 borders, but said: 'We will take 6.5% of the West Bank, and give in return 5.8% from the 1948 lands, and the 0.7% will constitute the safe passage, and East Jerusalem will be the capital, but there is a problem with the Haram and with what they called the Holy Basin.' Abu Mazen too answered with defiance, saying: 'I am not in a marketplace or a bazaar. I came to demarcate the borders of Palestine - the June 4, 1967 borders - without detracting a single inch, and without detracting a single stone from Jerusalem, or from the holy Christian and Muslim places.' This is why the Palestinian negotiators did not sign…"

TV host: "Okay…"

"Any Arrangements Regarding East Jerusalem Are Categorically Unacceptable"

Saeb Erekat: "This is the Palestinian position."

TV host: "But let’s return to Camp David. When you were at the meetings with Shlomo Ben-Ami… After two weeks of meetings between Barak, Arafat, and Clinton, which led to nothing, there was a meeting at which you proposed that there be [Palestinian] sovereignty, with arrangements in the Old City, including the Haram Al-Sharif. In other words, you proposed Palestinian sovereignty, with Israel playing a role in the administrative aspects. In other words, Israel would participate in the administration of the Haram area - unlike the 'reduced sovereignty' demanded by Shlomo Ben-Ami at that meeting. In other words, you wanted to let [Israel] play a role, one way or another, with regard to the so-called Holy Basin."

Saeb Erekat: "They will never have this. Like President Abu Mazen said in front of President Bush and Prime Minister Olmert: I am not in a marketplace or a bazaar. East Jerusalem is an occupied area, just like Khan Yunis, Jericho, and Nablus were. Its status in international law will never be anything else. Therefore, any arrangements regarding East Jerusalem are categorically unacceptable."

For the record:

Yasser Arafat was offered everything including Jerusalem in 1999. What wasn't offered was The Law of Return. That has never been a condition that would ever be acceptable to Israel. Never, NO, Forget it exists.

Yasser Arafat rejected Camp David outright because of that.

Olmert offered the same deal to Abbas. He has rejected it outright and will only accept the Saudi Plan. Obama is trying to force the Saudi Plan down Israeli throats.

Needless to say it isn't going to work.

We Jews are a thick necked and stubborn people.

From April 6, 2009

Reformist Arab Writer: The Policy of Rejecting Normalization with Israel Is a Political Decision of Unmatched Stupidity

In an article posted March 26, 2009, in the Arab liberal e-journal Elaph, Jordanian-American author Dr. Shaker Al-Nabulsi criticized the Arab countries for rejecting normalization with Israel, in which, he argued they were motivated by negativism that is inculcated by self-serving political leaders into Arab mentality. Al-Nabulsi stated that it was Egypt and Jordan rather than Israel that benefited from their peace treaties with Israel, that Israel was disillusioned and disheartened by the Arabs' attitude towards it, and that it had no incentive to sign any more peace treaties with the Arabs.

Following are excerpts from Al-Nabulsi's article: [1]

If Not for the Arabs' "Brazen Negativism," a Solution to the Palestinian Problem Would Not Be So Long in Coming

"On March 26, 1979, Egypt and Israel signed a peace treaty. Thus Egypt - the biggest and most important state involved in the Arab-Israeli conflict - became the first country to have peaceful relations with Israel. This took the entire world by surprise, caused an upheaval in the Arab street, and shook the foundations of the Arab and Muslim world. This upheaval, however, was nothing but a commotion raised by a flock of cocks who fell into a puddle of water, scrambled out, and were now shaking their feathers dry. The Arabs, who are not used to abrupt rational turns of civilization, went berserk. They resisted the impending peace, embodied in the person of their courageous and rational leader, President [Anwar] Al-Sadat, who had restored to Egypt everything it had lost on account of Abd Al-Nasser's political and military adventures, which had [brought it] destruction and devastation.

"Although Sadat installed Egypt in a place it well deserved in both the Middle East and worldwide, the Arabs were engulfed by a mad rage that knew no bounds. Today, 30 years after Sadat's historic move, they have begun to come to their senses and regret everything they did to Egypt and rejecting peace [with Israel]. They are gnawing their knuckles in remorse over their past acts of lunacy: expelling Egypt from the Arab League (aka the Fools' Café) and transferring the Arab League headquarters from Cairo to Tunis; boycotting books by Naguib Mahfouz and films based on them; employing all sorts of ugly measures against Egypt and placing it on the same cup of the scales with their worst enemy, Israel.

"The Arabs rejected normalization [with Israel] because [accepting it would have been] a positive [move], while resisting it was a negative [move]. It is much easier to say 'No' in Arabic, [inasmuch as] the Arabs are a negative people. [Indeed,] if not for this brazen negativism, a solution to the Palestinian problem and the establishment of the Palestinian state would not have tarried these past 60 years. The Palestinians will never achieve anything as long as the Arabs persist in their fanaticism and negativism, [fail to gain] self-confidence, continue nurturing in their minds the culture of war, and are unable to form a correct and realistic view of the future."

"The Culture of Peace in the Arab Countries Is Nonexistent"

"Why did the Arabs act in this way in 1979 and thereafter - [as if] they were controlled by demons [destroying] peace and angels [instigating] war? The most obvious answer is that, in the Arab world, the culture of peace is virtually nonexistent, while the culture of war predominates, due to declarations by mendacious political leaders concerning [everyone's] obligation to support armed struggle. In their own countries, these politicians are plagued by social and political problems, as well as [the lack of] economic development - which [prompts them] to opt for supporting armed struggle, in order to divert their subjects' attention from the problems that keep piling up in their countries…

"Moreover, sponsoring resistance movements does these regimes a great service, in that it enhances their power and influence, and at the same time enables them to hang their various problems onto one hanger, which is Israel and America. This, [in turn,] desensitizes the masses and inculcates their minds with the notions that the West and Israel are weak, that Israel will disappear in the near future, and that a miraculous political figure is about to come and restore to the Palestinians their [occupied] lands. Thus, the culture of peace in these countries does not exist, nor can it be cultivated, due to a lack of education and free media that would instill into the citizens' minds humanistic values, which - as Lafif Lakhdar has shown - are the backbone of the culture of peace. Neither do these states teach the young generation to think independently, to reason realistically and rationally, or to free themselves from obsession with [political] affiliations and religious fighting.

"The policy of rejecting normalization with Israel pursued by the two Arab countries that signed peace treaties with it (Egypt and especially Jordan) is a hideous political crime against the Palestinians, which is being committed, [albeit] unwittingly, by the Arabs. This policy, which is promoted by Islamist and pan-Arabist streams and by the proponents of rejectionism and deception, is a political decision of unmatched stupidity and foolishness. This idiotic policy of rejecting normalization has proved of great benefit to Israel, which is manifested in a number of ways:

1. Israel has been able to convey to world public opinion the following message: We want peace, but the Arabs refuse it, even though the [Arab] rulers have accepted it.

2. Israel presents itself as a country which is harassed and in need of protection by the West and the U.S., since all the Arabs are against it. Therefore, [it claims,] the political, financial, and military support to it must grow rather than diminish or stop altogether.

3. Israel's extreme right, led by Likud and Israel Beiteinu, have proved to the world that they are right while the Labor party and those who signed the two peace treaties with the Arabs were deluded and made a grave mistake. This resulted in a greater number of declarations by Netanyahu to the effect that the idea of 'land for peace' no longer exists, and that if Israel agrees to peace today, it must do so in return for peace rather than land. What prompted Netanyahu to make this claim is Israel's experience over the past 30 years, i.e., since the 1979 Camp David treaty - namely, the rejection and reticence of the Arabs, which has not encouraged Israel to sign any more such treaties."

"Israel Has Realized that a Peace Treaty with the Arabs Is Not Worth a Fig"

"4. Israel - its government, its public opinion, its Knesset, and its media - has realized and become convinced that a peace [treaty] with the Arabs is not worth a fig, or the paper it is written on. Consider Egypt. It got back the entire Sinai desert and also Taba, without losing one penny or one soldier. Moreover, not only did it allocate the funds which it would otherwise have spent on the army and weapons to various development projects, but in the past 30 years it has also received [U.S.] aid amounting to hundreds of billions [of Egyptian liras] (approximately 50 billion U.S. dollars). Yet the only thing Israel got in return is an apartment in Cairo, which they turned into an embassy, and in which the [Israeli] ambassador and the staff are [effectively] imprisoned. [Indeed,] they can move around only under the protection of the [Egyptian] intelligence and security guards. Israel is forbidden to participate in Egyptian public life, even in book fairs. In fact, Israel has no part whatsoever in Egyptian public life, and the same holds for Jordan.

"So how can we expect Israel to sign more peace agreements with the rest of the Arab countries, and especially Syria, after its [disheartening and] bitter experience with Egypt and Jordan. And nevertheless, without a comprehensive peace and despite all the above, over the past 30 years, Israel has progressed politically, militarily, culturally, and economically - while the Arabs lagged behind. The Arab [policy of] isolating Israel has given it strength and triggered its advancement. Except for some Arab countries, Israel is recognized by the entire world. Israel's army has become the strongest army in the Middle East. Its annual per capita income has reached $18,000, which amounts to the total per capita income for all Arab countries put together, excepting the Gulf states. Culturally and scientifically, Israel is one of the top countries in the world… Three of its universities (the Hebrew University [of |Jerusalem], Tel Aviv University, and Haifa University) are ranked among the 20 best universities in the world, while no Arab university is listed among [even] 400 best universities in the world (Cairo university is ranked 401)."

"Israel's Success and Most of Its Achievements Can Be Attributed to Failures and Defeats of the Arabs and Palestinians"

"All this Israel has accomplished in the shadow of [Arab] hostility and the media war waged against it by the Arabs. So what interest does Israel have in peace with the Arabs, which is illusory and fragile, which it [must buy] with precious Arab lands, and which - I repeat - is not worth a fig, or the paper on which [peace treaties] are written. We can conclude, therefore, that Israel's success and most of its achievements can be attributed to failures and defeats of the Arabs and Palestinians. If Israel's opponent were not the Palestinians with their stupid cowardly leadership, but some other nation, it would have established an independent state a long time ago.

"[Who were these Palestinian leaders?] There was Haj Amin Al-Husseini (an Al-Azhar student, who was kicked out of the university during his first year), Ahmad Al-Shuqeiri (an mediocre lawyer), Yasser Arafat (a civil engineer working for the Kuwait Minucipality), and Isma'il Haniyya (an imam at a mosque) - while, on Israel's side, there was [Theodor] Herzl (doctor of law) and the Rothschild family (the world's gold coffer). It is noteworthy, [by the way,] that the Rothschilds gave Harry Truman two million dollars for his election campaign on condition that he recognize Israel immediately upon his election - and this is precisely what happened. Then there was Ben Gurion, the outstanding leader who ended the right-wing Zionist terrorism.

"Whoever reads my book Settlement Train - A study in the Palestinian compromise, published in 1986, will realize what a great number of golden opportunities to establish the Palestinian state have been missed by the Palestinian and Arab leadership. The Palestinian leadership put their stakes on the Cold War between two superpowers, the U.S. and the Soviet Union, and did not anticipate the sudden fall of the Eastern Bloc. [As a consequence,] in the 90s, they became dependent on the U.S. By that time, however, the U.S. had already been allied to Israel with a number of strategic treaties (beginning in 1967), on account of which it came to regarded as America's 51st state.

"In sum, as we have shown, it was the Arabs who benefited from the partial peace between Israel and Jordan, while Israel was the loser. Therefore, Israel will not sign any more peace agreements with the Arabs in the near future - and if it does, it will be with extreme caution and on demanding conditions. And peace be upon you all."

[1] www.elaph.com, March 26, 2009.

Even when a writer condemns his own, he has to interject some Anti-Semitism. The Rothschilds never donated one cent to Harry Truman's campaign. Or any other US Presidental campaign for that matter. It is inconceivable to the Arab mind that a leader will do something without taking a bribe.

It wasn't a Labour government that made peace with Egypt, but a Likud government under the leadership of Menachem Begin. People tend to forget that.

From the way the Palestinian negotiator spoke, unless Israel agrees or is force to accept all the
Palestinian demands, there will be no peace.

That is NOT Negotiation. That IS Coercion and Extortion.

Both cannot and will not lead to any settlement!

Lies, Lies, and More Lies!

Hamas and its supporters are becoming the Masters of Lies. In Islam lying is not a sin, but permissible:

In the Hadith, Mohammed emphasizes the same concept. From "Ehiaa Oloum al-Din," by the famous Islamic scholar al-Ghazali, Vol. 3: PP.284-287:

One of Mohammed's daughters, Umm Kalthoum, testified that she had never heard the Apostle of Allah condone lying, except in these three situations: 1) For reconciliation among people. 2) In war. 3) Amongst spouses, to keep peace in the family.

And Hamas claims it has been at war with Israel (whom they call the evil Zionist entity) since their foundation.

The Hamas Charter

So I shouldn't be surprised to see this story:

The Hamas terrorist organization announced Sunday that it had kidnapped two Israeli soldiers in the first stage of the ground invasion of IDF troops into Gaza.

The statement, made to foreign television stations, is totally untrue, according to the IDF Spokesperson's Unit, as was the statement Saturday night that 10 IDF soldiers had been killed in the first assault.

Propanganda and disinformation is an inherent part of the psychological warfare used by Hamas to weaken the Israeli resolve, said Israeli officials. It is gamble used in the hope that news services will pick up the report and disseminate it before the truth becomes known. The goal is to confuse and frighten the Israeli readers and break their determination to continue the operation.

The Reuters news agency apparently did not bother to check the facts before its initial publication of the Hamas statement, nor did it include a counter-statement from the IDF confirming or denying the veracity of the claim.

During the 2006 Second Lebanon War, a Reuters staffer was caught faking a photograph of damage from IDF bombing in a Beirut suburb to make it appear as though Israel has massacred the neighborhood instead of using pinpoint surgical strikes as it had. The staff member was reportedly dismissed.

Full Story

Why am I not surprised to see that Reuters not checking out a story. The once noble news agency has sullied itself down to a mockery of its earlier self. In 2006 it published a faked photograph by Lebanese freelancer Adnan Hajj. Not only was that photograph was faked, but it turned out that the majority of his photographs and stories were all faked.

The truth is vastly different in this case:

Golani troops and IAF helicopters foiled an attempt by Hamas to kidnap a solder in a tunnel near Gaza City Sunday morning. The IDF refused to comment on the report.

The incident was said to have occurred after Golani troops entered a Hamas command center in a house on the eastern outskirts of Gaza City and discovered smuggling tunnels underneath. A clash broke out between the troops and Hamas terrorists, who began to drag away one soldier, according to Israeli and foreign media.

Helicopter cover and efforts by his comrades forced the terrorists to release the solider. The IDF refused to discuss the incident, saying it would not comment on "rumors," but its spokesmen on Sunday denied a Hamas claim to the media that it had kidnapped two soldiers. The denial was issued after Reuters published the report, and the source of the claim may have been the clash that was not reported until Monday morning.

Full Story

But we should expect the lies. The lie of the Siege of Gaza. The lie of the starving children. The lie of thousands of civilians killed. 51 dead is not thousands. Pretty soon Hamas will be claiming that hundreds of thousands have died, they have captured a whole company (including their support personal), and that none of their fighters thugs have been killed.

I'll let the videos speak for themselves:

From Elder of Ziyon

Gettin' Mighty Crowded



View at YouTube


Save the Gazans



View at YouTube

You have the facts in front of you, make the right call.

Flip-flop Missile style

Hat tip to Stop the ACLU

During the Primaries Barack Hussein Obama came out flatly against any missile defense system. He would stop all funding of such programs and including space weapons and technology.

During the debate on Friday night he reversed himself flip-flopped again on this. Now he says he has always been in favor of the development of a missile defense system.

Let us go to the videotape.



View at YouTube

The strange thing about this system is that part of it is being developed in conjunction with the IDF. Now why would Barack Hussein Obama want to stop such development? Could it be he is afraid that his Muslim backers (Hamas, Hizbollah, Iran) might be stopped by this?

Another lie from Obama and just another reason not to vote for him.