Gaddafi Declares Jihad Against Switzerland

Jihad News

Gaddafi calls for jihad against Switzerland over minaret ban

Of course. Because resisting Islam causes wars and infidels are responsible for them.

Because Muhammad said, “I have been ordered to fight against people until they say that “there is no god but Allah”, that “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah”, they pray, and pay zakat (religious taxes.)  If they do that, their lives and property are safe.”

Dawn.com

BENGAZI: Libyan leader Moamer Kadhafi turned up the heat in his country’s dispute with Switzerland on Thursday, calling for jihad against it over a ban adopted last year on the construction of minarets, reports AFP.

“It is against unbelieving and apostate Switzerland that jihad (holy war) ought to be proclaimed by all means,” Kadhafi said in a speech in the Mediterranean coastal city of Bengazi to mark the birthday of the Muslim Prophet Mohammed.

“Jihad against Switzerland, against Zionism, against foreign aggression is not terrorism,” Kadhafi said.

“Any Muslim around the world who has dealings with Switzerland is an infidel (and is) against Islam, against Mohammed, against God, against the Koran,” the leader told a crowd of thousands in a speech broadcast live on television.

But hey, not to worry: deep down they all want peace. Anyway, isn’t a caliph needed to call a jihad?  Think we can pacify him with another 5 billion jiziya?

In a November 29 referendum, Swiss voters approved by a margin of 57.5 percent a ban on the construction in their country of minarets, the towers that are a signature part of mosques.

Relations between Libya and Switzerland have been strained since July 2008 when Kadhafi’s son Hannibal and his wife were arrested and briefly held in Geneva after two domestic workers complained he had mistreated them.

The row escalated when Libya swiftly detained and confiscated the passports of two Swiss businessmen, Rashid Hamdani and Max Goeldi. It deepened again last year when a tentative deal between the two countries fell apart.

Both men were convicted of overstaying their visas and of engaging in illegal business activities. Hamdani’s conviction was overturned in January, and he has now returned home, while Goeldi surrendered to authorities this week and is now serving a reduced sentence of four months.

Adoption of the minaret ban was opposed by the Swiss government, the bulk of Switzerland’s political parties and the economic establishment and was an unexpected outcome.

The move drew widespread criticism, with UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Navi Pillay calling the ban “deeply discriminatory, deeply divisive and a thoroughly unfortunate step for Switzerland to take.”

The Swiss government sought to assure the country’s 400,000 Muslims, who are mainly of Balkan and Turkish origin, that the outcome was “not a rejection of the Muslim community, religion or culture.”

Switzerland has around 200 mosques, with just four minarets among them.

via sheikyermami.com

Posted via web from noahdavidsimon's posterous

Israel Matzav: Dubai's comeuppance?

Dubai has reacted with a lot of righteous indignation to the death of Hamas murderer and arms dealer Mahmoud al-Mabhouh on its territory. With the Mossad being blamed for Mabhouh's death, there's been a lot of talk about how the heretofore secret relations between Israel and the UAE have been damaged.

But if you insist on playing both sides off against the middle, you are going to get stung once in a while. Dubai may have had secret relations with Israel, but that hasn't stopped them from being the major trading port for Iran or from hosting terrorists on its territory and protecting them. In fact, as this article points out, when Mabhouh's body was first found, a top police official in Dubai said that Mabhouh need not have traveled under a false passport because Dubai would have been happy to protect him. And he was not the only one.

Iran is the principal destination of goods re-exported from the United Arab Emirates (UAE), of which Dubai is a member. The bulk of these goods go by sea -- the major Iranian port of Bandar Abbas is a mere 100 miles away from Dubai. The emirate boasts a busy dhow port for smaller vessels as well as a modern container port at Jebel Ali. It also offers numerous daily flights to and from several Iranian cities. Annual trade between the two jurisdictions has reportedly tripled to $12 billion over the past five years, and an estimated 8,000 Iranian businesses and 1,200 trading companies are currently based in Dubai.

UAE efforts to clamp down on illicit Iranian trade have grown in the face of U.S. pressure but are still a work in progress. The UAE passed its first national security export control law in 2007, and authorities have seized several illicit shipments destined for Iran. UAE officials say they are making it more difficult for Iranian businessmen to obtain and renew visas and commercial licenses. Similarly, Iranians are reportedly having trouble finding UAE banks to handle their transactions. In addition, plans have been announced to more closely regulate the dhow port on Dubai Creek, where customs supervision is currently nonexistent.

UAE initiatives do not necessarily mean cooperation from Dubai, however. Although the leading emirate, Abu Dhabi, holds nearly 8 percent of global oil reserves and often bankrolls the other six sheikhdoms, each emirate proudly preserves its independent status. Thus, while Abu Dhabi is clearly apprehensive about the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iran, Dubai appears less so. In 2008, Sheikha Lubna al-Qasimi, the UAE's minister of economy and planning, explained why its authority and ability to act might be limited: "At the end of the day, Iran is still a neighbor."

...

Dubai also has experience with violent death. In 2008, an Egyptian politician paid a hit-man to kill Lebanese singer Suzanne Tamim, who was living there in an exclusive apartment block. The hit man was tracked down and arrested because, reportedly, bloodstained footprints marked his escape. The Egyptian authorities imposed gag orders on reporting of the case.

Just weeks before the Mahbouh killing, the magazine Vanity Fair claimed that the CIA had tracked A. Q. Khan during his frequent visits to Dubai and had planned to assassinate him there. The magazine's source said the hit didn't happen "because of lack of political will" in Washington. A CIA spokesperson refused to discuss the question with the magazine.

Read the whole thing. Dubai has been trying to play both sides against the middle for too long. They need to decide if they want to be in the Western orbit or aligned with the likes of Tehran and Damascus.

via israelmatzav.blogspot.com

Posted via web from noahdavidsimon's posterous

SK Foods at Center of Bribe Scheme to Sell Tainted Tomatoes - NYTimes.com

best to not buy processed foods because you simply don't know what you are getting:

Robert Watson, a top ingredient buyer for Kraft Foods, needed $20,000 to pay his taxes. So he called a broker for a California tomato processor that for years had been paying him bribes to get its products into Kraft’s plants.

The check would soon be in the mail, the broker promised. “We’ll have to deduct it out of your commissions as we move forward,” he said, using a euphemism for bribes.

Days later, federal agents descended on Kraft’s offices near Chicago and confronted Mr. Watson. He admitted his role in a bribery scheme that has laid bare a startling vein of corruption in the food industry. And because the scheme also involved millions of pounds of tomato products with high levels of mold or other defects, the case has raised serious questions about how well food manufacturers safeguard the quality of their ingredients.

Over the last 14 months, Mr. Watson and three other purchasing managers, at Frito-Lay, Safeway and B&G Foods, have pleaded guilty to taking bribes. Five people connected to one of the nation’s largest tomato processors, SK Foods, have also admitted taking part in the scheme.

Now, federal prosecutors in California have taken aim at the owner of SK Foods, who they say spearheaded the far-reaching plot. The man, Frederick Scott Salyer, was arrested at Kennedy Airport in New York City on Feb. 4 after getting off a flight from Switzerland. He was indicted last week on racketeering, fraud and obstruction of justice charges.

read the rest via nytimes.com

Israeli Ambassador Oren wants to push Gender Engineering to appease the Judenhass

...This type of thinking assumes that men and women are different then they were for thousands of years. Can anyone find any evidence that women don't tease and gossip any less the they did one hundred years ago? Can anyone find any argument that men are any less distracted by these Divas? I suggest before we ask for change because of people that simply hate us for being Jews that we take a look at ourselves in relation to our codes and see for certain if these boundaries do or do not have a purpose. If these traditions do have a function then I suspect that we should respect them. That said I appreciate the great job Oren is doing representing the Jewish people, but I don't think being pressured into failure is prudent.

Michael Oren, Israel's Ambassador to the United States, seeks to use his position -- which is designed to maintain good relations with the U.S. government -- as a base for pushing for a revolutionary change at the Western Wall (Kotel) that may challenge Orthodox tradition.

Oren told the Jewish Council for Public Affairs in Dallas this week that the recent disruption at the Western Wall by a woman wearing a prayer shawl and demanding a Torah scroll for prayers will require compromise. Women and men traditonally pray separately to maintain modesty and prevent unnecessary mingling that could interfere with the sanctity of prayers. Limits in Jewish law also exist concerning the use of Torah scrolls by women.

Responding to a question about the woman's arrest for causing a disturbance by trying to change long-standing Orthodox tradition at the Western Wall, Oren stated, "I will only assure you that I think there are good solutions for the problems at the Kotel. They are at the top of my agenda. And that at the end of the day, it will require compromise on everyone's behalf."

The report was carried by the Jewish Telegraph Agency, heavily funded by the Jewish Agency and which often promotes the agenda of Conservative Jews. Oren grew up in the United States, was active in the Conservative movement and also attended Reform temples.

The JTA added that Steven Wernick, the president of the Conservative movement’s congregational arm, stated that Oren’s remarks “show he understands that the status quo isn’t working and that some changes and compromises need to be made."

Israel National News asked the Foreign Ministry why the ambassador to a foreign country made public comments on religious practices at the Western Wall, but no one was available to speak.

Oren (pictured) recently stated that he wants to involve all elements of American Jews. He told the Los Angeles Jewish Journal earlier this month, “I want to reach out to those parts of the Jewish community, especially the young American Jewish community, that have grown distant from Israel.”

He also specifically included the controversial New Israel Fund, a liberal group that has funded several pro-Arab groups that are blatantly anti-Israel and provided biased information for the Goldstone Report that accused Israel of committing war crimes in the war against Hamas terrorism.

“One of the first things I did when I took office is meet with New Israel Fund,” Oren told the Journal. “They were in my office. I want to be as inclusive as possible. With that, I also have to uphold what I see as Israel’s essential security interests. It’s a bit of a balancing act."

“And I thought coming myself from an American Jewish background, having gone to a Conservative synagogue and a Reform synagogue, that I would be a natural nexus between Israel and the American Jewish community…With the American Jewish community, I’ve been surprised by the complexity of it.”

via israelnationalnews.com

Mothers Abuse Children 3 Times more than Dads – Federal HHS Statistics

The Left, The Progressives and their social state are looking to give more money to single mothers. We need to stop this!
Why are dads kept away from their children?
Perhaps it is time we realize that father’s protect children more than moms. It is a fact. The statistic prove this.
But apparently the agenda of feminists who created the draconian laws that kill and maim children are only interested in one thing: the maternal legalization of child abuse.

Biological mothers are 3 times more like to commit abuse against a child over a biological father. Child Maltreatment (2001)

Then why the hell do mothers wind up with custody 72.8 percent of the time after divorce? Why are fathers only seen as a paycheck to divorced moms, and welfare checks to single moms?

How Common is Child Abuse?

In the US, an estimated 903,000 children (1.2% of all children) were victims of abuse and neglect in 2001.

• 57.2 percent of victims suffered neglect (including medical neglect),
• 18.6 percent were physically abused
• 9.6 percent were sexually abused;
• 26.6 percent of victims were associated with additional types of maltreatment.

Percentages of victims are similar for males and females (48.0% and 51.5% respectively).

Children in the age group of birth to 3 years account for 27.7% of victims. Victimization percentages decline as age increases.

In the US, more than half of all child abuse victims are White (50.2%); one-quarter (25.0%) are African American; and one-sixth (14.5%) are Hispanic. American Indians and Alaska Natives account for 2% of victims, and Asian-Pacific Islanders accounted for 1.3% of victims.

19% of reported and substantiated child abuse cases result in the child being removed from the home.

Source: US Department of Health and Human Services Child Maltreatment Report 2001

---

Who Is Abusing the Kids?

The answer may surprise you. It is most commonly not the proverbial “stranger” that most children are warned to avoid – it is more likely to be someone much closer to home:

See Larger Chart

• 40.5% of all child abuse is committed solely by biological mothers
• 17.7% of all child abuse is committed solely by biological fathers
• 19.3% of child abuse is committed by both the mother and the father
• 6.4% of child abuse is committed by the mother and some other individual
• 1.0% of child abuse is committed by the father and some other individual
• 11.9% is committed by someone other than the parents
• 3.1% is committed by an unknown or missing perpetrator.

Source: US Department of Health and Human Services Child Maltreatment Report 2001

---

Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome (MBPS)

Definition:

Munchausen By Proxy Syndrome (MBPS) or Munchausen’s Syndrome By Proxy (MSBP) is a form of child abuse in which a parent systematically manufactures, fabricates or exaggerates the appearance of illness in a child in order to draw attention to themselves, elevate their own importance and manipulate the attentions of caregivers and medical professionals. Click Here for More Info on Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome

Description:

In Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome (MBPS), an individual – typically a mother – deliberately makes another person (most often his or her own preschool child) sick or convinces others that the person is sick. The parent or caregiver misleads others into thinking that the child has medical problems by reporting fictitious episodes. He or she may exaggerate, fabricate, or induce symptoms. As a result, doctors commonly order tests, experiment with medications and, in severe cases, may hospitalize the child or perform surgery to determine the cause.

Typically, the perpetrator feels satisfied when he or she has the attention and sympathy of doctors, nurses, and others.

It should be noted that there is strong controversy over the existence of Munchausen By Proxy Syndrome. The originator of the term, British Pediatrician Roy Meadow was discredited for misrepresenting statistical data in his expert witness testimony in the conviciton of mothers of children who died from cot deaths (also known as Sudden Infant Death Syndrome – or SIDS). In a nutshell, he testified that the likelihood of more than one incidence of SIDS in a single family was so remote as to warrant a conviction. Several cases in which he testified have since been overturned in British Courts. Crirics of the MBPS theory correctly point out that child abuse is child abuse and the burden of proof must be to reveal objective evidence of abuse prior to removing children from parental custody. For more information regarding the MBPS controversy see the links at the bottom of this page.

In some MBPS cases, since the parent or caregiver appears concerned, wrongdoing is not suspected. Frequently, the perpetrator is familiar with the medical profession and is skilled at fooling medical staff. It is not unusual for medical personnel to overlook the possibility of Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome because of the controversy srrounding it or because it goes against the commonly held belief that a parent or caregiver would never deliberately hurt his or her own child.

Children who are subject to Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome are typically preschool age, although there have been reported cases in children up to 16 years old. There are equal numbers of boy and girl victims of MBPS.

Statistically, 98% of the perpetrators of MBPS are female. Source: http://kidshealth.org/parent/general/sick/munchausen.html

Examples:

• A parent observes symptoms of illness in a child that nobody else can detect, and insists that a battery of tests be performed.
• A child contracts a common virus and the mother attributes the symptoms to an undiagnosed chronic condition.
• A child is developing normally, but the mother insists she can detect symptoms of a mental disorder.

What it feels like:

For a child of a parent who is exposing them to MPBS – they may be made to feel alarm or discomfort as a series of strangers intrusively examine and interrogate them looking for things that might be wrong. They are frequently receiving the message from grown-ups that something is wrong with them. This can lead to developmental delay, fear of strangers – especially doctors and a distorted world-view .

For third parties – spouses or relatives of people exhibiting MBPS-like behaviors this can be a confusing and frightening experience. You may not have all the facts you need to judge what is really going on. On the one hand – you do not want to keep a child away from critical medical care when they need. On the other hand, you do not want the child to be exposed to unnecessary and intrusive investigations and diagnoses, not to mention the associated psychological and physical damage.

For doctors and health care professionals – it can be disturbing and frightening when confronted with a parent who is possibly manifesting MBPS. There is the underlying fear of a malpractice accusation when facing a parent who will not take “no” for an answer. There can also be the confusion of having to deal other family members who vehemently disagree on what the facts are. Many doctors ultimately err on the side of caution – referring to specialists and ordering additional tests and over-medicating and over-diagnosing just to protect themselves. This succeeds in protecting the doctor but is often not in the best interests of the child.

What NOT to Do:

When dealing with a possible MBPS problem:

• Don’t get into arguments with the perpetrator.
• Don’t go it alone or try to solve the problem yourself.
• Don’t interrogate the child or share with them your disapproval of their parent.
• Don’t ignore the problem. Don’t abdicate the problem to others. A child is possibly being abused. You must act.

What TO Do:

• Seek COMPETENT advice from a well qualified attorney, Guardian ad litem or children’s advocate.
• Document all that you have observed as thoroughly and candidly as you can.
• Report what you have seen. Be honest about what you know AND what you don’t know (it will be uncovered anyway). Be objective and sincere – remember – it is a child you are representing and you must put the best interests of the child ahead of your own.
• If you have regular contact with the child, assure them of their value, and praise their positive qualities.

For more Information on Munchausen by Proxy Syndrome (MBPS)…

Dr. Marc Feldman’s Munchausen Syndrome, Malingering, Factitious Disorder, & Munchausen by Proxy Page – Information Site about Munchausen Syndrome and Munchausen by Proxy

http://www.msbp.com UK Site questioning the validity of MBPS/MSBP syndrome with links to news articles and cases where the theory has been discredited.

http://www.ashermeadow.com MBPS education & information site.

Site by MBP consultant & author Louisa Lasher

http://kidshealth.org/parent/general/sick/munchausen.htm

---

US Child Custody Statistics

Many people believe that mothers are naturally better caregivers than fathers. And the US courts seem to agree. US Divorce Statistics show that a divorcing mother is 7 times more likely to retain sole custody of her children than a father:

USA 1990 Custody Statistics (19 States reporting)	Percentage
Sole possession granted to mother	72.5%
Sole possession granted to father	10.3%
Joint possession	15.7%
Possession granted to other person(s)	1.4%

Source: http://www.divorcepeers.com/stats17.htm

Fathers, who want to protect their children from an abusive mother, are sometimes afraid to take legal action because they fear:

• Facing ridicule or disbelief from police or social services.
• Losing all contact with their children at the hands of a gender-biased legal system
• Facing steep legal costs.
• Facing abuse themselves at the hands of the perpetrator
• Being judged by their communities, families and friends.

---

Who Pays Child Support?

When it comes to child support, US census data indicates that:

• 79.6% of custodial mothers receive a child support award
• 29.9% of custodial fathers receive a child support award

US census data also indicates that fathers are more likely to fulfil their child support obligations than mothers:

• 43% of moms required to pay child support are “deadbeat moms” – i.e. they default on 100% of the money they owe,
• 32% of dads required to pay child support are “deadbeat dads” – i.e. they default on 100% of the money they owe.

One of the reasons that “deadbeat dads” get most of the bad press in the popular media is that there are a lot more of them – primarily for 2 reasons:

• There are 7 times more fathers than mothers who do not have primary custody of the children.
• Fathers are 3 times more likely than mothers to be ordered to pay child support than their female counterparts.

Source: 2002 Fox News Article

---

Qualifications for becoming a Mother

So who really does know best?

In the US, there are laws to protect all sorts of individuals from reckless behavior of others. For example, you must pass an exam before you may:

• Drive a car,
• Fly a plane
• Operate a crane
• Run a restaurant
• Educate school children
• Become a social worker or any kind of therapist
• Diagnose an ailment or prescribe, dispense or administer any kind of medicine or medical treatment

But there is no qualification for becoming a Mother other than being female. Nor is there any review of your performance except in the most severe cases of physical violence and neglect.
When it comes to your treatment of strangers you may be prosecuted for:

• hitting
• slandering
• harassing
• stalking
• invading their privacy
• confiscating their property

When it comes to treatment of minors, parents are held almost completely unaccountable. Minor children of abusive parents are completely trapped in their environment – dependent totally on an overwhelmed legal system to take action – after the abuse has been witnessed and reported by a neighbor, teacher, doctor or social worker. Many cases go unreported.

---

The Role of Religion In Child Abuse

Children are repeatedly told that they are never supposed to hate, resent, criticize, disregard or abandon their parents. Instead they are reminded to honor them, obey them, cherish them, be loyal to them and take care of them in their old age.

This sends a confusing mixed-message to children who grow up in abusive homes. They can see the contradictions for themselves in the actions of an abusive parent – and often know that something is wrong about that. However, they will often be afraid to speak out to another adult, say anything negative about their parent or seek help for fear that they will be seen as “bad”.
It’s common for these children to reject their childhood religion in adulthood which they judge to have failed them, sustained the abusive parent and perpetuated the cycle of abuse.
By emphasizing the sanctity of marriage and traditional family roles, many religions discourage spouses of abusers – many of whom are victims themselves – from taking action to remove their children.

---

What Happens When the Children Grow Up?

What is surprising to many is that child abuse often extends long into adulthood although it often takes a more emotional,psychological or subtle form as children become physically stronger and more economically independent.
Adult children of abusive parents often feel trapped between maintaining an unhealthy relationship with an aging, yet disrespectful, stalking, slandering, harassing parent and being judged by extended family, friends and acquaintances if they choose to cut off all contact with the abusive parent.
Adult children of abusive parents are at increased risk of making poor personal, relationship and career choices in adulthood.
Abusive parents sometimes see things like relationships, career and outside interests of their young adult children as threats and may seek to undermine them.
Adult survivors of child abuse ultimately suffer in three distinct ways:

1. They suffer the abuse itself
2. They suffer the loss of knowing what should have been – the loss of a supportive parent, of a loving home and a safe refuge.
3. They suffer the consequences of protecting themselves from that abuse. They are often left feeling guilty, judged, condemned by society, religion, their communities and their families.

via mkg4583.wordpress.com

Although this federal government report is the year 2001, there is NO REASON to believe the statistics have not changed with regard to who commits child abuse more against a child or children.

Child Custody for fathers, Children and Domestic Violence,Childrens Rights,Domestic Abuse,Domestic Violence,Father Custody, Human Rights

In Alienation of Affection, Best Interest of the Child, Child Custody, Childrens Rights,Divorce, Domestic Relations,Marriage, Parental Alienation Syndrome, Parental Kidnapping, Parents rights,Sociopath, child abuse,children's behaviour, custody,family court, kidnapped children, parental alienation,parental rights on September 1, 2009 at 12:19 am

Support for Israel in U.S. at 63%, Near Record High

PRINCETON, NJ -- For the first time since 1991, more than 6 in 10 Americans -- 63% -- say their sympathies in the Middle East situation lie more with the Israelis than with the Palestinians. Fifteen percent side more with the Palestinians, down slightly from recent years, while a combined 23% favor both sides, favor neither side, or have no opinion.

The 63% sympathizing with Israel today is statistically unchanged from the 58% to 59% seen from 2006 to 2009; however, it is considerably higher than most of the previous readings on this Gallup measure since 1993. The trend includes two 38% readings in 1996 and 1997.

Only in January 1991 -- shortly after Israel was hit by Iraqi Scud missiles during the Gulf War -- did U.S. support for Israel register as high as it does today.

"Americans' attitudes about the prospects for peace are little changed from last year, but are among the more pessimistic Gallup has found since initiating the question in 1997."

Over the last five years, support for Israel has increased slightly among Republicans (rising from about 77% for each of the past several years to 85% today) and independents, but has stayed roughly the same among Democrats. Since 2001, however, there has been a more dramatic shift in partisan attitudes: a 25-point increase in sympathy for Israel among Republicans and an 18-point increase among independents. Even on this longer-term basis, support for Israel among Democrats has been relatively flat.

The latest findings come from Gallup's annual World Affairs survey, updated Feb. 1-3, 2010. In the same poll, Americans were asked to give their opinions of 20 countries, including Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Israel's 67% favorable rating ranks among the highest and the Palestinian Authority's 20% among the lowest. However, current favorability toward Israel is similar to where it has been for the last several years, and favorability toward the Palestinians is on the high end of the range since 2000.

Outlook for Peace

Additionally, the poll asked Americans about the chances that peace will eventually come to the Middle East. Currently, 30% think "there will come a time" when "Israel and the Arab nations will be able to settle their differences and live in peace"; 67% are doubtful.

Americans' attitudes about the prospects for peace are little changed from last year, but are among the more pessimistic Gallup has found since initiating the question in 1997. The only time fewer Americans were optimistic about Arab-Israeli peace (27%) was in July 2006, during the Israeli-Hezbollah war in southern Lebanon. While public optimism has since remained low, it has shown longer-term variations, and has a history of rebounding -- particularly after U.S.-brokered peace talks in 1999, 2003, and 2005.

With 39% of Democrats saying peace will come about, this group is more optimistic than either Republicans (25%) or independents (26%) are about Arab-Israeli peace. This has been the general pattern for the past decade; however, the gap between Democrats and others has expanded in recent years.

Independents have become significantly less optimistic about the chances of peace since President Obama took office: the percentage believing peace will come about fell from 41% during the last year of the Bush administration (in February 2008) to 30% in May 2009, and stands at 26% today. Optimism among Republicans fell below 30% in 2007 and has since remained low. Democrats' views have been fairly steady since 2001, except for a brief spurt of optimism in 2005 -- seen among all three party groups (a major Israeli-Palestinian peace summit that resulted in a truce agreement was underway at the time of that survey).

Bottom Line

In the ongoing Israel-Palestinian conflict, a striking 63% of Americans currently say their sympathies lie more with the Israelis, the highest level in nearly 20 years. Support for the Palestinians, at 15%, is about average for the same period. At the same time, Gallup finds Americans' fundamental views of Israel no more favorable than they have been for the past several years. Israel does continue to enjoy a substantial advantage over the Palestinian Authority in its general image, a fact that clearly colors the ways Americans view the conflict.

Americans are no more optimistic today than they were last year that peace can be reached between Israel and the Palestinians -- and they are, in fact, less optimistic than they were toward the end of the Bush administration. This is largely owing to a drop in optimism among independents.

Survey Methods

Results are based on telephone interviews with a random sample of 1,025 national adults, aged 18 and older, conducted Feb. 1-3, 2010. For results based on the total sample of national adults, one can say with 95% confidence that the maximum margin of sampling error is ±4 percentage points.

Interviews are conducted with respondents on land-line telephones (for respondents with a land-line telephone) and cellular phones (for respondents who are cell-phone only).

In addition to sampling error, question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of public opinion polls.

via gallup.com

Posted via web from noahdavidsimon's posterous

Ignorant progressives think FOX NEWS is a RIGHT WING conspiracy? we've been had

It already was like this. all along the so called http://xrl.us/FOXNEWS was controlled by the Saudis. Don't buy the Conservative and Liberal line in politics.

It's like this :

"They drink your Milshake" as the movie based on Upton Sinclair's novel ....yes Upton Sinclair wrote.

The Conservatives might say take tiny sips and Conserve and the Liberals might want to gulp that milkshake down, but in the end.... honey they "DRANK YOUR MILKSHAKE".

We need to stop it with the Left and Right. We need to close those trade borders down.

Stop saying Ron Paul is an isolationist. He isn't. If he was then I would like him. He wants free trade with Iran as well. you can't have internationalist free trade without backing that up with a military. Paul knows this. That is how you know he is a hypocrite. let those Persians eat their own Pistachio nuts and let the Saudis use their own oil.

Internationalist Corporate Anarchy is not the answer. We need to protect the sovereignty of the Republic. That is what real Republicans would do. Not these idiots that live on economic Capitalistic theory.

WAKE UP AMERICA. it is pointless to be all about free trade if your workers are going to be undercut by Chinese labor. If the so called Conservatives really were Conserving then they would be protecting more then just a fiction of Capitalism. Without checks and balances there is no American Republic.

Both political parties are in bed outside of our country. not just the Democrats that ran our tax dollars outside of our fiscal ecosystem through federal buyouts.

FOX NEWS is just the tip of the ice berg.

via debbieschlussel.com

Now more than ever, we need an independent media. In the "information battle space," the playing field is heavily weighted in favor of the enemy.

A few people sent me a Financial Times headline they read, today, on the Drudge Report, regarding Rupert Murdoch’s and FOX News Channel owner News Corp’s purchase of a large stake in Saudi Prince Al-Waleed Bin Talal’s Rotana Media. But to readers who’ve been here since, at least, September, it is old news. I covered it here before FT and Drudge, back in the beginning of September. Read the details. And as I reminded you then, there’s a reason I call FOX News Channel, “PAWNN,” the Prince AlWaleed News Network.

FLASHBACK – DebbieSchlussel.com, September 3, 2009: Rupert Murdoch, FOX News Parent Co Increase Ties w/ Extremist Saudi Prince, Seeking Arab Street Viewers

Remember: read it here first, or get it from Drudge and FT (without my in-depth info and analysis), half a year later.

read the rest at debbieschlussel.com

Prince Alwaleed, chairman of Kingdom Holding Company, addresses a news conference in Riyadh on Tuesday. (AN photo)

By MICHEL COUSINS | ARAB NEWS

Published: Feb 23, 2010 11:45 PM Updated: Feb 24, 2010 12:12 AM

RIYADH: News Corp, the media empire owned by Rupert Murdoch, is to buy a 9.09-percent stake in Rotana, the Saudi-based Middle Eastern music and entertainment group wholly owned by Prince Alwaleed bin Talal.

The $70 million deal, announced at a news conference by the prince at his Kingdom Tower headquarters in Riyadh on Tuesday, deepens the burgeoning partnership between the two media moguls. Prince Alwaleed already holds a seven-percent stake in News Corp, whose stable includes 20th Century Fox, Fox News, the New York Post, the London Times and Sky TV.

Under the agreement, News Corp has an option to acquire a further 9.09-percent stake in Rotana. The option will run for 18 months after the deal is signed.

New Corp has been seeking to expand its presence in the growing Middle Eastern entertainment market for some time and has been considering a number of ventures in partnership with the prince's Kingdom Holding Company (KHC). Five months ago it was reported in the Wall Street Journal that the Murdoch group was looking at a 20-percent stake in Rotana.

Prince Alwaleed told Arab News that the deal was not cash-driven. It went "way beyond finance." Rotana, which owns the largest record label in the Arab world and 11 television channels, was "fully financed" he said. The deal was about News Corp's confidence in Rotana and commitment to it. It will enable the media group to gain from News Corp's experience in movie production, television, the news media and technology. He spoke of its providing a "qualitative leap" not just for Rotana but for the Arab world.

The prince said that the deal would strengthen the existing relationship with News Corp — "building Rotana's presence across the region and expanding its reach to the Arab diaspora around the world."

In a prepared statement, Rupert Murdoch's son James, who heads News Corp's European and Asian arm, said that the newly acquired stake would help his company expand its presence in "a region with a young and growing population where GDP is set to outstrip that of more developed economies in the years ahead."

Prince Alwaleed also announced that shares in Rotana will be floated on the stock market. Advisers will be appointed within the next two months in order to prepare an initial public offering (IPO). Decisions still need to be made as to the number of shares to be issued, where they would be traded and what changes in business and management were required prior to an IPO, the prince said. The deal values Rotana at just over $770m.

Alwaleed also has significant stakes in a number of other media and entertainment corporations including LBC, Time Warner (owner of CNN, HBO and Fortune Magazine as well as Warner Bros and Time Magazine) and Euro Disney. KHC has a 29.9 percent stake in Saudi Research and Marketing Group, the parent company of Arab News.

via arabnews.com

tell the ignorant progressives to shut up about http://xrl.us/FOXNEWS being RIGHT WING.