MartiniPundit

Random thoughts and insights – always shaken, never stirred

Archive for the ‘Israel’ Category

Democrats and Ground Zero

leave a comment »

This one has been hard for my liberal friends. They simply don’t get it. It certainly won’t help their understanding when cogent analysis of Bill Clinton’s views weigh in:

Bill Clinton is beneath contempt. He was in Egypt and said in defense of the ground zero mosque, that it should be built and dedicated to the 60 muslim victims of 9/11. What about the non-muslim victims? What a disgusting display of pandering. I’m so sick of our political leaders excessive pandering to muslims. If they are going to speak before muslim audiences, why not at least have the courage to condemn the oppression and violence in the name of islam? Why couldn’t Clinton have condemned the persecution of Coptic Christians in Egypt while he was there?

MartiniPundit fully associates himself with this notion, and wonders the same about Bill Clinton. I’d also like to add my amazement that the Dems continue to control the voting of American Jews despite their manifest anti-Semitism.

Written by martinipundit

October 6, 2010 at 1:46 am

Time Surrenders

with one comment

Time Magazine has surrendered. Apparently, it can no longer keep up the pretense that it’s an objective, professional reporter of the news. Time Magazine, once respected, is just a hack – at best.

But not just any kind of hack – a hack who has made common cause with the enemies of freedom. I thought it was bad enough a couple of weeks ago to see this cover slandering the American people:

But then this week, there was this anti-Semitic trash:

Sure, one cover is posed as a question and the other has flowers, which makes them oh so reasonable. Right? Who can object to an innocent question? No one, unless the questions are loaded to start. Americans are racists and Israelis are warmongers. One can’t even call that the subtext – that’s the lead. I can only conclude that Time has surrendered, and no longer has any pretense of objectivity. Time is on the side of the Islamofascists and just ought to admit it. Certainly there’s no reason to actually read this rag anymore.

Update: Henry Oliner over at American Thinker has more.

Written by martinipundit

September 7, 2010 at 12:44 am

Distress in Gaza

leave a comment »

It is more than a little chilling to see images of Jews being pulled from their homes and synogogues. Especially by other Jews.

Israeli security forces on Thursday were dragging Jewish activists out of Gaza’s largest synagogue in Neve Dekalim after protestors refused to come out of the building.

A standoff with about 1,500 teenage extremists continued at the synagogue into a second day. Men inside were lying on the floor with arms linked to make it harder for troops to carry them out. Some were throwing water on the faces of the security forces and hitting the soldiers who were trying to remove the protestors with as little force as possible.

True, many were not even Gaza settlers, and quite a few Americans are there to protest. The policy of settling the occupied territories was always fraught with danger, as it was fairly clear even then that the Palestinians would have none of it. Peace needed to be achieved before coexistence. That Sharon – an architect of the settlements – has recognized this is a Nixon goes to China moment. Walling off Gaza and the West Bank and pulling out basically means that Israel is unilaterally imposing the Oslo Accords rejected by Arafat. Israel has always had the ability to move more decisively, but as a civilized people they have shown remarkable restraint. They finally realized that they simply can’t live cheek-by-jowl with savages. In the end, this pullout will save Israeli lives. Whether it saves Palestinian lives is up to the Palestinians. They can murder each other in an orgy of blood, or they can stop blaming the Jews for their own problems and set about the difficult business of governing. Perhaps one day becoming civilized themselves.

Either way, it’s not Israel’s problem any more. Or the settlers’.

Written by martinipundit

August 18, 2005 at 8:28 am

Posted in GWOT, Israel

Whither Profiling?

leave a comment »

It is an article of faith amongst some that the use of profiling in screening for terrorists is not only wrong, but ineffective. I personally think this view more informed by the heart than by the brain, but it is certainly parroted at every opportunity by the officialdom. In my own travels, I’ve seen security checks at airports that pulled over for extra screening a nun, a pilot, and an old lady in a wheelchair. I’ve also seen scrupulous avoidance of those who fit a certain visual profile that most terrorists to date fit. At the same time, I’ve been through Israeli airport security both in NYC and at Ben Gurion in Tel Aviv (before 9/11). The Israeli security was light years ahead of what the TSA does, and it was faster too. (Parenthetically, I might note that the use of young, beautiful screeners may have contributed to my willingness to have those ladies thoroughly search my bags – all day if necessary.)

Yishai Ha’etzni writes in the New York Post on Israeli profiling techniques, and their effectiveness. Well worth your time, and here’s a taste:

Following a spate of terrorist hijackings and other attacks on civilian aircraft and airports in the late 1960s and ’70s, Israel developed a security system that utilized sociological profiles of those seeking to harm Israelis, among other factors.

The American system developed at the same time relied primarily on technology like scanning devices, which checked people and baggage uniformly.

Facing a less benign threat, Israelis found this system insufficient: Explosives and other weapons could slip through too easily. Since it wasn’t feasible to perform extensive security searches on every passenger, Israel used sociological profiles in addition to screening devices: Each passenger is questioned briefly and then airport security personnel use their judgment to identify suspect would-be passengers, who are then questioned at greater length and their bags searched more thoroughly. It is targeted and far more effective than random searches, which end up being nearly cosmetic.

Written by martinipundit

July 26, 2005 at 9:02 am

Rice Stands Tall

leave a comment »

Unlike the Eurolemmings who bow before all things Palestinian in their rush to blame Israel, Condi Rice is showing the world the US will have none of that. From the Jersalem Post:

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice made no acknowledgement of Yasser Arafat’s grave when she met the Palestinian Authority leadership in Ramallah on Monday before concluding a whirlwind trip to Israel and the PA. Unlike a long line of other leaders who paid some kind of homage to Arafat’s grave at the entrance to the Mukata, when visiting PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), Rice’s car simply pulled into the compound, passed the grave and Rice got out and walked into the building.

On the way out, she also made no acknowledgment of the grave, unlike other leaders, like EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana who laid a wreath or British Prime Minister Tony Blair who walked by and nodded. One US official said that the question of how Rice would comport herself around the grave did not come up in preparatory meetings for the visit.

“It was not an issue,” he said. The PA decided not to make a fuss about the issue to avoid marring relations with the US.

Indeed, there is a range of options, but apart from the fact that Dr. Rice is a classy lady, it’s easier for a guy to do that. In other news, Yasser Arafat is still dead after dying from unknown causes in Paris.

Written by martinipundit

February 8, 2005 at 3:40 pm

Anniversary of the UN Vote on Resolution 181

leave a comment »

This BlogBurst piece is cross-posted by participating websites, to commemorate a milestone in Israel’s history. The list of the participating sites is appended at the end of this post.

November 29, 2004:

Anniversary of the UN vote on Resolution 181

Today is the anniversary of the UN vote on resolution 181, which approved the partition of the western part Palestine into a predominately Jewish state and a predominately Arab state. (It is vital to recall that the UN partition plan referred to western Palestine, to underscore that in 1921 the eastern part was ripped off the Jewish National Home by the British Government and handed over to the then Emir Abdullah.)

The partition plan was approved by 33 to 13, with 10 abstentions.

The 33 countries that cast the — Yes” vote were: Australia, Belgium, Bolivia, Brazil, Byelorussia, Canada, Costa Rica, Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, France, Guatemala, Haiti, Iceland, Liberia, Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Nicaragua, Norway, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Sweden, Ukraine, Union of South Africa, USSR, USA, Uruguay, Venezuela. (Among other countries, the list includes the US, the three British Dominions, all the European countries except for Greece and the UK, but including all the Soviet-block countries.)

The 13 countries that chose the Hall of Shame and voted — No” were: Afghanistan, Cuba, Egypt, Greece, India, Iran, Iraq, Lebanon, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Turkey, Yemen. (Ten of these are Moslem countries; Greece has the special distinction of being the only European country to have joined the Hall of Shame.)

The ten countries that abstained are: Argentina, Chile, China, Colombia, El Salvador, Ethiopia, Honduras, Mexico, United Kingdom, Yugoslavia.

On November 30, 1947, the day following the vote, the Palestinian Arabs murdered six Jews in a bus making its way to Jerusalem, and proceeded to murder another Jew in the Tel-Aviv – Jaffa area. This was a prelude to a war that claimed the lives of 6,000 Jews, or 1% of the total Jewish population in 1948. This toll is the per capita equivalent of today’s Canada losing 300,000 lives, or the US losing 3,000,000.

The object of the war, launched by the Arabs in the former Palestine and the armies of Egypt, Tansjordan, Syria and Lebanon (with help from other Arab countries), was to “throw the Jews into the sea”. As the partition map indicates, however, rather than annihilate the Jewish population, the Arabs ended up with less territory than they would have gained by peaceful means.

In addition to the bloodshed in nascent Israel, immediately after the UN vote, Arabs attacks their Jewish neighbours in a number of Arab countries, the murders in Syria’s Aleppo being the best known.

Bruised and bleeding, Israel prevailed nonetheless. May our sister-democracy thrive and flourish.

List of participating sites, in alphabetical order of site name

 

Written by martinipundit

November 29, 2004 at 10:21 am

Posted in Anti-Semitism, Israel, UN

Israel, Palestinians, and Peace

leave a comment »

In the long course of the Israeli conflict with the PLO and other more recent manifestations of terrorism, there has been a tension between those of us on the outside who feel that the Israelis need to make concessions and those of us who feel that it’s the terrorists who need to make concessions.

In the wake of Yasser Arafat’s long overdue demise (still dead apparently as of this writing) many are openly speaking of the possibility of peace if Israel will back down. This is pretty amusing in its way. Before he stiffed Bush after 9/11, Arafat was continually hailed as the man to make peace with – did he not win a Nobel Peace Prize to the everlasting degradation of that award? Did he not reject the Oslo accords? Did not the Europeans (as if) continually insist that Arafat had to be accommodated? Indeed, was not Israel’s hand stayed from dispatching the demon back to his master by the very international community which insisted that Israel needed to make concessions? How many anti-Israel resolutions has the UN passed anyway?

In listening to Fox News last night, I heard something which astounded me. In the course of the conversation, Jeff Birnbaum and Juan Williams took the position that Powell had been sent to the Middle East at this time because incoming SecState Rice would not put sufficient pressure on Israel to come to the peace table. At one point the argument was made that it was Israel occupying territory, not the other way around.

Stuff and nonsense. Pray tell, why did Israel occupy those territories? Could it be because the Arabs invaded and the Israelis beat them like gongs? Hasn’t Israel handed back Gaza and the West Bank and aren’t the Palestinians making a complete mess of both places? Wasn’t Arafat the leader who brought the Palestinians to this sorry state?

There is a chance for peace. If the Palestinians can overcome a generation of hate-filled propaganda and indoctrination, if the PLO leadership rejects terrorism – not just in word but in deed – if the PLO explicitly in English, Arabic, and even Hebrew avows Israel’s right to exist in peace behind secure borders, and if the PLO immediately begins to assist in suppressing Hamas, Hezbollah, and all the others, then there may be a chance. Meanwhile, there is no onus on Israel to change her policies one bit. Target terrorists, defend citizens, finish the wall.

In this spring of the post-Arafat era, the opportunity for peace exists. But not by putting pressure on Israel – flowers will bloom only if the Palestinians take this opportunity to renounce Arafat’s poisoned legacy and set aside their hatred. It’s a nice fantasy, but I’m not holding my breath.

Written by martinipundit

November 23, 2004 at 11:27 pm

Posted in Anti-Semitism, GWOT, Israel

%d bloggers like this: