Ventura, miffed by court, says he's off to Mexico

Wait till he realizes what it is like to get extorted by the police in Mexico. I agree that our airports need some changes, but I would take the flaws in our legal system over the mafia they have there in Mexico... then again I suppose he is rich, so he can afford to buy the right people in Mexico. He disgusts me the way Jesse said, "I will never stand for a national anthem again. I will turn my back and I will raise a fist." There is a limit to how much leniency we should give any veteran when he humiliates our country... I don't care if he risked his life when he was younger. He's off the wall. When that titanium hip sets off metal detectors in Mexico he's going to need more money to buy the legal system and the Mexicans will be happy to take the Loco Gringos dinero. Ventura's a nut bar. He should of stuck to wrestling.

Former Minnesota Governor Jesse Ventura speaks to the media about the court dismissing his suit against the TSA for the pat downs at the airport, outside the St. Paul Federal Courthouse on Friday, Nov. 4, 2011 in St. Paul. Ventura sued the federal government in January, alleging that airport scans and pat-downs amounted to unreasonable search and seizure. A district judge in St. Paul threw out his lawsuit Thursday, ruling it should have been filed in a Circuit Court of Appeals. (AP Photo/The Star Tribune, Bruce Bisping)(boston.com)

Delegitimizing the delegitimizers

(Caroline Glick) In 1974, UNESCO voted to boycott Israel and to "withhold assistance from Israel in the fields of education, science and culture because of Israel's persistent alteration of historic features in Jerusalem." UNESCO's moves to deny Jewish ties to Jerusalem and the rest of historic Israel have continued unabated ever since. For instance, in 1989, UNESCO condemned "Israel's occupation of Jerusalem," claiming it was destroying the city through "acts of interference, destruction and transformation." In 1996, UNESCO held a symposium on Jerusalem at its Paris headquarters. No Jewish or Israeli groups were invited to participate. Beginning in 1996, the Arab Wakf on the Temple Mount began systematically destroying artifacts of the Second Temple. The destruction was undertaken during illegal excavations under the Temple Mount carried out to construct an illegal, unlicensed mosque at Solomon's Stables.

UNESCO never bothered to condemn this act. It was silent despite the fact that the Wakf's actions constituted a grave breach of the very international laws related to antiquities and sacred sites that UNESCO is charter bound to protect. Similarly, UNESCO never condemned Palestinian desecration of Rachel's Tomb, of Joesph's Tomb or of any of the ancient synagogues in Gaza and Jericho which they razed to the ground.

The reason for UNESCO's miscarriage of its responsibilities is clear. Far from fulfilling its mission of protecting world heritage sites, since 1974 UNESCO has been a partner in one of the greatest cultural crimes in human history - the Palestinian and pan-Arab attempt to wipe Jewish history in the Land of Israel off the historical record.

And UNESCO's crimes in this area are unending. In 2009 it designated Jerusalem a "capital of Arab culture." In 2010, it designated Rachel's Tomb and the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron as "Muslim mosques."

UNESCO's campaign against Jewish history is not limited to Israel. In 1995, it passed a resolution marking the 50th anniversary of the end of World War II. Despite requests from Israel, the resolution made no mention of the Holocaust.

In December 2010, UNESCO published a report on the history of science in the Arab world. Its report listed the great Jewish doctor and rabbinic scholar Rabbi Moshe Ben Maimon - Maimonides - as a Muslim renamed "Moussa ben Maimoun."

In light of UNESCO's virulently anti-Jewish policies and actions, it is not surprising that it cooperated with the PLO/PA's bid to achieve recognition of a state that is in a state of war with Israel.

(MORE PAIN)

Navy intercepts Irish-Canadian flotilla

(YNET) Navy forces take over Gaza-bound vessels after activists refuse to turn back or sail to port in Egypt; leads ships to Ashdod port

According to the IDF statement, the Navy informed the activists they can turn back and avoid breaking the blockade. They were also offered to sail to a port in Egypt.
The two vessels approached the Gaza Strip and were in close proximity to Israeli territorial waters. The Navy made initial contact with the ships, the IDF Spokesperson's Unit said. IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz has ordered the Navy to stop the ships, but the takeover has yet to begin.
"The activists did not heed the Navy's calls and refused to act according to the legal possibilities that stand before them. The vessels continue to make their way towards the blockade area," the IDF said earlier on Friday.

One activist said that the Israeli ships were12 nautical miles from the flotilla ships, which is 45 NM from the Gaza coast.



Photo of Palestinian flag taken by Iranian journalist on board ship

Asked what their final destination was, the activists replied "the human compass" and later changed their answer to "betterment of humanity."


One of the flotilla organizers said that the activists pledged in writing not to resist or confront Israeli naval forces.

"The two ships are close to Israel's waters and their crew has been instructed not to resist naval forces who will attempt to stop them," Denis Kosseim told AFP. "Our representatives have signed a document where they pledged not to resist in case Israeli forces board the ship. We hope they will be able to return unharmed," Kosseim added.

 
The flotilla consists of one Canadian ship called Tahrir and an Irish yacht. On board the vessels are 27 activists, crewmen and journalists, including one Iranian reporter.



Vessels approach Gaza Strip

According to the organizers, the ships carry $30,000 worth of medical equipment for the people of Gaza.

Defense officials believe that the activists' main aim is to cause provocation rather than help the Palestinians. Naval forces are planning to offer them to dock in Egypt or in the Ashdod Port and transfer the equipment to Gaza for them.
On Thursday, the ships were forced to slow down mainly due to stormy weather. "The last message we received from them was that they slowed down," an activist in the West Bank told Ynet.

"They said they prefer reaching Gaza in the daytime, to maximize their media exposure," they said.

French paper reprints Mohammad cartoon after fire-bomb

Time’s Paris bureau chief Bruce Crumley blamed the “insolent” newspaper for the bombing. The headline was “Firebombed French Paper Is No Free Speech Martyr.”
Don’t try telling Crumley that an omnidirectional print equivalent of South Park defines free speech: “As such, Charlie Hebdo has cultivated its insolence proudly as a kind of public duty—pushing the limits of freedom of speech, come what may. But that seems more self-indulgent and willfully injurious when it amounts to defending the right to scream ‘fire’ in an increasingly over-heated theater.” (Newsbusters)

So Time Magazine blamed the free speech victim. What would you expect from a Magazine that pushed the fraudulent claim that Israel was Apartheid? It is sad that Time Mag has become so predictable... Reuters was less predictable and kept with the story, but then slyly tried to spin the news item... I suppose they think doubting if Muslims were behind this makes intrigue or something. spare us all the fake skepticism Reuters. About as fake as a Peter Jennings snear from the afterlife.

(Reuters) - A French satirical weekly whose office was fire bombed after it printed a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammad has reproduced the image with other caricatures in a special supplement distributed with one of the country's leading newspapers.

The weekly Charlie Hebdo defended "the freedom to poke fun" in the four-page supplement, which was wrapped around copies of the left-wing daily Liberation on Thursday, a day after an arson attack gutted Charlie Hebdo's Paris headquarters.

No one has claimed responsibility for the attack, which took place hours before an edition of Charlie Hebdo hit news stands featuring a cover-page cartoon of Mohammad and a speech bubble with the words: "100 lashes if you don't die of laughter."

The weekly, known for its irreverent treatment of the political establishment and religious figures, bore the headline "Charia Hebdo," in a reference to Muslim sharia law, and said that week's issue had been guest-edited by Mohammad.

The incident pits Europe's tradition of free speech and secularism against Islam's injunction barring any depictions seen as mocking the prophet. The publication of cartoons of Mohammad in a Danish newspaper in 2005 sparked unrest in the Muslim world in which at least 50 people were killed.

While French Muslim groups criticized Charlie Hebdo's work, they also condemned the fire-bomb attack. The head of the Paris Mosque, Dalil Boubakeur, told a news conference on Thursday: "I am extremely attached to freedom of the press, even if the press is not always tender with Muslims, Islam or the Paris Mosque."

"French Muslims have nothing to do with political Islam," he said.

Abderrahmane Dahmane, a Muslim former presidential adviser on religious diversity, said he was not shocked by the Charlie Hebdo front-page and joked himself about the matter.

"We have a sense of humor in the world of Islam ... what we sometimes say about Islam and the prophet, among ourselves and in the presence of Imams, is worse than what Charlie Hebdo wrote," he quipped.

So then the next question an impartial news agency would ask is if Dahmane is for criminalizing critics of Islam... but wait this is Reuters so they won't ask that question.

Following the fire bombing, Charlie Hebdo staff moved temporarily into the offices of Liberation. The two publications jointly produced Thursday's supplement, which reproduced the Charlie Hebdo cartoon in an article on the back page.

One headline in the supplement said: "After their office blaze, this team defends the 'freedom to poke fun'."

"We thought the lines had moved and that maybe there would be more respect for our satirical work, our right to mock. Freedom to have a good laugh is as important as freedom of speech," Charlie Hebdo editor Stephane Charbonnier said in the supplement.

The supplement included several new drawings by Charlie Hebdo cartoonists. In one, a prophet-like figure tries to restrain his billowing robes in a pose reminiscent of Marilyn Monroe as a draft blows up from Charlie Hebdo newspapers below him. Another shows an airborne fire-bomb with a face in the flames and the caption, "So, is this how you see the prophet?"

France has Europe's largest Muslim community, numbering about five million out of an overall population of 65 million. The country has a deep tradition of official secularism and adopted a ban this year on women wearing face-covering veils in public.

Charbonnier told Reuters his newspaper planned to print another 175,000 copies of this week's edition in the coming days after the first print run of 75,000 copies sold out fast.

Luz, the cartoonist who drew the cover cartoon at the center of the controversy, said it was still unclear who had carried out the attack.

"Let's be cautious. There's every reason to believe it's the work of fundamentalists but it could just as well be the work of two drunks," he said in the Thursday supplement.

Drunks? Really? Now I admit it could be a setup, but at the very least say it is unlikely.

Burka Mermaids

(EOZ (h/t jzaik)) From ANSAMed: The shapes of the mermaids that embellish the fountain of Zeus in the centre of Alexandria have been deemed "inappropriate" by the Salafist Al Nour (Light) party, which decided to "veil" them completely with a sheet during a meeting yesterday evening. The incident, which was reported by the website of the Al Masri Al Youm newspaper, has unleashed a wave of comment and disbelief on Twitter, where the paper posted pictures "before and after the niqab" of the fountain of the sirens, upon which an enormous placard carries the words: "Egyptian women devote themselves to their husbands and their nation". Political leaders of the party, which is at the head of a coalition of Islamist parties that will stand in the forthcoming Egyptian elections from November 28, had recently announced that they were against the statues, deeming them contrary to Islamic tradition, the newspaper reports. "Covering a statue of sirens will certainly lead us to Paradise. I can't wait," was the ironic reaction of one Twitter user.

Here's the before and after picture (right to left :) )

State of Israel funded commendations for Mavi Marmara passengers

(israelmatzav.blogspot.com)

In his annual report, State Comptroller Micha Lindenstrauss says that the State of Israel financed commendations to six Israeli Arab passengers on the Mavi Marmara terror ship in 2010. The commendations, which cost a total of NIS 5,000 ($1380), were presented by the Israeli Arab Ta'al party, and were purchased with moneys received from the State of Israel.

A week after the flotilla, United Arab List-Ta'al Chairman MK Ibrahim Sarsur granted six commemorative plaques worth a total of NIS 5,000 ($1,380) to MK Hanin Zoabi (Balad), Islamic Movement leader Sheikh Ra'ad Salah and others.

That's Salah in the picture at the top (second from left).

According to the report, which examined the state's political party funding, the faction paid NIS 5,000 to buy the brass plaques, for the activists who took part in the flotilla on which IDF soldiers were brutally attacked and nine Turks were killed.
They listed the plaques as an expense aimed at keeping in touch with the party's supporters, as they were given out to well known people who represent an extensive section of the Arab Israeli sector.
The Comptroller noted in the report that the funds should never have been used to purchase the plaques and that their purchase could not be included in the "keeping in touch with the voters" clause as they were given as personal gifts directly to a small number of people. He added that their purchase from the public was illegitimate.
This is a case in which not only were public funds misappropriated, they were also uses to honor a group of people who took part in a flotilla against Israel.
...
MK Sarsur said he was summoned to the State Comptroller's office where he was told that he used the funds contrary to state procedure. "I told them that there was no clause forbidding what we did," the MK told Ynet.
He added that "the flotilla participants took steps in line with social and political activity and their stance is justified, a kind of defense of values." Sarsur stressed that he did not regret his actions.

As long as Israel's Arab community continues to elect the likes of Sarsur and Hanin Zoabi as its representatives to the Knesset, Israeli Jews will continue to be suspicious about which side Israel's Arab take and whether they'd rather live with the 'Palestinians.'

Man charged for phone threats against Rep. Eric Cantor's family

By Daniel Straus (The Hill) The FBI charged a man on Thursday for allegedly threatening House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.).

The FBI said that Glendon Swift was charged for leaving threatening messages on Cantor's work voicemail in Richmond, Va. According to the FBI, Swift threatened to assault or murder a member of Cantor's family.
"Threatening to harm the family of a public official is a very serious charge, and we are grateful to the FBI and their law enforcement partners for their quick action in this case," U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of Virginia Neil H. MacBride said in a statement.
The profanity-laced messages, according to the FBI, included threats of rape and murder on Cantor's immediate family.
Swift was linked to the phone number from which the calls were made. He faces up to 10 years in prison if he's found guilty.
Asked by The Hill about the threat, Cantor declined to comment.
"I'm really not going to comment on that. It’s up to the law enforcement. I just want to thank the law enforcement for all they do everyday," he said.

Iran vs. Saudi Arabia: War on the Horizon?

(by Anna Mahjar-Barducci/HudsonNY) Saudi Arabia was not surprised when U.S. authorities uncovered the Iranian plot to kill the Saudi ambassador to the United States, Abdel al-Jubair. According to Saudi intelligence, Teheran in the last months has started a campaign of chain murders targeting Saudi diplomats to destabilize the Royal family.
In May 2011, gunmen on motorcycles shot and killed Hassan al-Qahtani, a Saudi diplomat working in the consulate in the Pakistani city of Karachi. The murder came after a previous attack on the Karachi Consulate with Russian-made HE-36 hand grenades. At first the media linked the assassination to Al-Qaeda groups trying to revenge the killing of Osama bin Laden, but further investigation revealed that the murder was planned by the Iran's Quds Force. Pakistani intelligence identified the Saudi diplomat's killer as a member of a Shi'ite terrorist organization, Sipah-e-Muhammad [the Army of Muhammad], which maintains close links to the Quds Force. The link to the killing was allegedly proven by recorded messages between Iranian officials in Islamabad and members of the terrorist group.
In September 2011, the Saudi online newspaper Elaph revealed that the Saudi Ambassador to Cairo, Ahmad Abdel-Aziz Kattan, survived an attempted assassination by poison, allegedly staged by Iran.
Elaph states that the Saudi diplomats, al-Jubair included, are all linked to prince Bandar bin Sultan, Secretary-General of the National Security Council, and former Ambassador to the U.S., 1983-2005. Prince Bandar, a strong opponent of Iranian influence in the Middle East, is at the center of an Iranian smear campaign to discredit him and tarnish his image. Recently, Iranian media have gone so far as to circulate fake "news" according to which Prince Bandar would have been arrested by Syrian security forces at Damascus Airport and would have confessed that he was involved in the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri - for which, instead, the Syrian government has been indicated by international investigators.
Saudi Arabia: The Obstacle to Iran's Ambitions in the Middle East
Sunni Saudi Arabia is generally perceived by Iran as possibly the greatest obstacle to its ambitions in the Middle East, in that Iran has been trying to export its Shi'te Islamic revolution both culturally and militarily throughout the Middle East, according to Ahmed Jarallah, editor-in-chief of the Kuwaiti paper, Al-Seyassah.
Saudi Arabia tried to do everything it could, both politically and militarily, to stop a recent Shi'ite uprisings in Bahrain -- an island off the coast of Saudi Arabia that is predominately Shi'ite but ruled by Sunnis -- which Iran has been claiming belongs to Iran, and which is separated from Saudi Arabia by only a small causeway a few miles long. The Saudis were concerned that the Shi'ite uprising in Bahrain might embolden Saudi Arabia's own minority Shi'ite population -- located by the oil fields, far from Riyadh, Mecca and Medina -- thereby increasing Iran's influence over the Arabian Peninsula.
Saudi Arabia must therefore have been alarmed by the announcement that the U.S. would be leaving Iraq. Saudi Arabia might well assume that even though it managed to thwart Iran's influence in Bahrain, Iran will nevertheless manage to try to take control of the oil-rich region by way of Iraq. The Saudis have desperately been trying to find strategic ways to prevent such a scenario, including probably hoping for a change in the U.S. administration in next year's election.
"The facts on the ground say that Tehran's influence in Iraq has increased under the eyes of the current US administration," writes Tareq Al-Homayed, editor-in-chief of the Saudi newspaper, Asharq Al-Awsat, "whilst Iranian influence [in Iraq] also benefited from the mistakes made by the previous US administration. This is not all, for now we see Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad […] appear in an interview on CNN saying that he does not expect any change in his country's relations with Iraq following the withdrawal of US forces. Indeed Ahmadinejad went on to confidently state – and this is the crux of the matter – that 'the government of Iraq, the parliament, we have a very good relationship with all of them…and we have deepened our ties day by day.'" Al-Homayed adds, "This 'day by day' is true, and it has happened before the eyes of the Americans, therefore the extent of Iran's influence in Iraq is no surprise, nor is Tehran's support for the Shiite militias there. It is enough to listen to the complaints of the honorable people of Iraq – Sunnis and Shii'tes and others – who do not accept their country becoming a proxy in Iranian hands or ruled by Qassem Suleimani and his Qods Force."
Iran Would Like a War in the Middle East
As the Kuwaiti paper Al-Seyassah pointed out, Iran might soon start a war in Middle East as the only way to show that Tehran still has influence in region and can threaten whoever opposes its plans. If Bashar al-Assad is removed from power in Syria, Iran could be concerned that the world might perceive Iran as isolated; it could therefore want to make the point that even if Syria might be lost for now, Iran can still take control of Iraq, and fight proxy wars by means of its proxy group, Hezbollah. To Iran, the main enemy that stands in its way is Saudi Arabia, which has already fought Iran's influence in Lebanon, Syria, Bahrain and Iraq.
As Saudi Arabia is the first new superpower in the Arab world, Iran might well have designs on replacing it. Al Seyassah's editor in chief recently noted that Iran's conspiracies necessitated constant caution and that Teheran is trying to make a conflict zone out of the Middle East. He then differentiated between the Shi'ite faith in the Arab world, which does not pose any threat, and what he labeled "Persian Safavi Shi'ism" --- referring to the most significant Persian dynasty that controlled "Greater Iran," when it stretched from the Caucasus to the Indus River, and represented Iran's aims and ideologies to exercise its influence throughout the Arab world.

Get Up, Stand Up: New Study Links Prolonged Sitting With Cancer

(matzav.com)Don’t just sit there. Get up and do something! Canadian researchers say that prolonged sitting may be responsible for a 173,000 cases of cancer in the United States each year, including breast, colon, lung, prostate and ovarian cancers.1010 WINS’ Medical Corespondent Dr. Brian McDonough said more people need to be cutting calories and keep the blood flowing.

No Brainer!

Carrie Fisher: 'I was fresh bait' for Ted Kennedy

................................................(American Thinker/ht @NatalieDuvalNY) The headline of a Fox411 celebrity interview with Carrie Fisher announced that she has undergone electric shock treatments for her depression. The story wasn't much of a blockbuster confession, but the interview continues with some truly interesting revelations:

FOX411: You went on a blind date with Chris Dodd and then had a double date with Ted Kennedy?
Fisher:  The first part of the evening [Kennedy] was what he was, which was a prince, a brilliant man, a great ambassador of good will. But then he relaxed. Look everybody is going to have a little side to them lurking somewhere, and I was the likely victim I think. I was fresh bait.
FOX411:  And he asked you...
Fisher:  If I was going to have sex with Chris. I said, 'No, not tonight. I've just gotten sober recently,' and I don't even know what I said. What I did was I out-answered his inappropriate questions. If the question was inappropriate the answer was worse and that's what we got into. That's what he was like and that aspect of him is partly what made him great. He never gave up. He was going to take control of that evening or establish that he could if he wanted to and I was newly sober and super alert. (MORE)

I think I'm going to puke

57% of Israelis want to attack Hamas in Gaza

( h/t Israel Matzav)An awful lot of Israelis think that the time has come to wipe out Hamas.

Telephone poll carried out by New Wave for Yisrael Hayom 1 November 2011 of a representative sample of 500 adult Hebrew speaking Israeli Jews and published on 4 November, 2011:
Should Israel launch a military operation in Gaza?
Yes 56.9% No 28.7% Don't know 14.4%

Note that this poll doesn't include Israeli Arabs - only Jews.

The question is not should Israel attack, the question is how. On what level does Israel want to be involved in it's occupation. There is no doubt that the present situation of repeated rocket attacks is unsustainable, but does Israel need to absorb Gaza completely to control it enough so she can protect it's citizens from rockets? I would not be so hasty to answer the question in the way this poll is framed

An example of how "Palestine" will act at UNESCO

(EOZ) Compare this actual stamp, with the UNESCO textbook image on the right. Elder of Ziyon: Israel gave over $9 million annually to UNESCO The New York Times, in its UNESCO story yesterday, revealed something interesting: Palestine became the 195th full member of Unesco on Monday, as the United Nations organization defied a mandated cutoff of American funds under federal legislation from the 1990s. The step will cost the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization one-quarter of its yearly budget — the 22 percent contributed by the United States (about $70 million) plus another 3 percent contributed by Israel...

What is missing in the textbook image? (MORE PAIN)(h/t Yaacov Lozowick tweet)

That means that Israel contributed some $9 million annually to the agency! Ha'aretz reporter tweets that Israel contributes only $2 million annually. (h/t CHA) Israel has been cooperating with UNESCO for well over a decade in various international projects, helping out in places as far flung as Jamaica.  But now that UNESCO has become a virtual subsidiary of ISESCO, most likely the  Islamic countries will make up for the shortfall in cash and cooperation. You will have to look long and hard to find any Palestinian Arab textbook that includes, say, this stamp from the same time period:

Worldwide 'Caravan' Set to 'Liberate Jerusalem' for Assholes

March on Majdal Shams, May 15 (israel National News h/t Sarah Leah Lawent) Israeli security officials are keeping a wary eye out on several groups that are planning mass marches on Jerusalem. One march is scheduled for November 25, and is being organized by the group that tried to conduct a mass march to Jerusalem last September.
This time, however, organizers – and Israeli security officials – believe that the group may attract larger numbers. The group is set out from three locations – Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon – on November 25, with the objective of reaching Jerusalem on November 29, the anniversary of the adoption of the UN partition plan for Mandatory Palestine. Officials said that the group was encouraged by the recent attempt – and temporary success – of Syrian Druze who “invaded” the Golan Heights for several hours, tearing down a border fence to enter the country. Several sources claimed that some of the Syrian Druze were able to enter the interior of Israel, with several claiming to have reached Tel Aviv.
But even more worrisome is another march is scheduled for March 2012, Israeli officials said. That march is being organized by Indian activist Feroze Mithiborwala, who said in a recent press conference in Pakistan that the march will unite people from all over the world, and of all faiths - including Muslims, Hindus, Christians, Sikhs and Jews - "to participate in the march towards the Jerusalem and liberate it from the Zionists.” The march would be in the form of a “caravan” which would start from three directions – Asia, Europe, and Africa, originating in India, Turkey and Morocco respectively. The caravans would stop in all the countries on the way and pick up more participants. The objective is to gather hundreds of thousands, if not millions of people at the borders of Israel who would simply push their way through, reaching Jerusalem and “liberating” it.
A group helping to organize the March event, the International Committee of the Global March towards Al-Quds, said in a statement this week that “since the Zionist occupation of 78% of Palestine in 1948, and the subsequent occupation of Jerusalem and the rest of Palestine in 1967, we have witnessed growing efforts to Judaize Jerusalem and colonize Palestine. These crimes against humanity are done under the political protection and full support of successive American administrations and enforced by its veto at the United Nations.
“Jerusalem and all of Palestine need to be liberated, redeemed and restored as a land of freedom and coexistence by people of the world from all religious and cultural backgrounds. As part of this movement and at the invitation of Palestinians, we decided to organize a Global March to Jerusalem (GMJ) aimed at raising awareness of the mortal threat to Jerusalem and all of Palestine by the hands of Zionists and helping us move closer to the day of freedom.”
Mithiborwala is the head of Indian radical political group Awami Bharat, which bills itself as conducting “an international struggle against imperialism, Zionism, and Brahmanism.”

If it were shear numbers that were the issue then Israel would of fallen a long time ago. I suppose it might be a public relations nightmare to shoot a million people, but Israel has little to lose in that forum. Sounds less like a peace march and more like Night of the Living dead.

Thomas Friedman Calls Rabbi 'Stupid

(Israel National News h/t Sarah Leah Lawent) New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman recently faced a silent protest to which he could only respond with: “That’s stupid.” At the conclusion of his talk at Yale University last week, Friedman was faced with a banner which read: “With friends like Chomsky, Soros, Mearsheimer and Thomas Friedman, does Israel need enemies?” In the past, Friedman has called in his columns for Tahrir Square-style marches by Palestinian Authority Arabs on Israel. He has also called to re-adopt the United Nations 1947 Partition Plan, which the Arab world rejected at the time and instead tried to annihilate Israel. He was recently the subject of a Facebook campaign launched by the grassroots Zionist group Israel Online Ambassadors. The campaign was entitled “Tom Friedman, Get Out of Our Lives!” In the Yale incident, when Friedman dismissed Rabbi Hecht as stupid, the rabbi then held up the back of the banner, which read: “Jews don’t need solutions from your 11,000 square foot Ivory tower.”

“Thomas Friedman has no right and no basis for telling the leadership of a democratically elected government of a sovereign nation what to do regarding its delicate and hard won security,” Rabbi Hecht explained his resistance to the Friedman lecture. “Friedman asks the Israelis to make concessions when there is no credible partner for them to conduct a lasting settlement,” he added. “And yet, the Chomskys and the Mearsheimers are easier to deal with, because their hostility is naked. Friedman comes to the subject cloaked in the language of moderation, neutrality and respectability.” He added, “The road to peace may look straight from Thomas Friedman’s very privileged worldview in his mansion on his huge estate, but for Israelis everywhere, especially Judea and Samaria, every decision is one that literally tilts the State and her citizens towards either life or death. In the real world, Jews don't need ‘solutions,’ Jews need safety and security in their historic homeland and reborn refuge.” Despite Friedman’s insult, Rabbi Hecht said he invites him to join the many writers and intellectuals of all backgrounds and opinions who have lectured at Eliezer. “I have devoted my life to dialogue,” he said. “I would welcome the chance to discuss these important issues with Thomas Friedman.”

More Violence From The Obama-Supported Occupy Wall Street

(Yid with Lid) Maybe its the cold weather, or the fact that the protesters are worried they will be missing Thanksgiving turkey and football because they will be stuck in their combination tent cities/public toilets because these Occupy Wall Street folks are getting more hateful and violent by the day. What is really amazing is many of our leaders responsible for public safety (from mayors to congress people to the POTUS-mostly progressive Democrats) are supporting these OWS protesters. And these protesters are attacking police.
Take for example this protester from Occupy Portland who shoved a cop in front of a bus:

These folks from Occupy Toledo were arrested for assaulting police officers. I wonder if OWS supporters such as Barack Obama and DNCC Chair Steve Israel support these attacks on police.

If they don't support the attacks on police maybe our Democratic Party leaders support the way occupy Oakland turned their little slice of the city into a war zone


Heck, things have gotten so bad that even the Occupy Wall Street folks are beginning to complain about the violence.


But it's not only complaints from the OWS people, these NY protesters want to shut the city down.


These Occupy Seattle protesters didn't attack the police, they tried to be the police by making a citizens arrest of the CEO of JP Morgan

Wed Nov 02 16:10:58 PDT 2011

6 arrested and pepper spray deployed in Occupy Seattle protests

Bottles were thrown and more pepper spray was deployed Wednesday night as Seattle police and Occupy Seattle protesters clashed outside the downtown Sheraton Hotel. view full article

More than just a simple protest against corporate-greed the occupy protests have become an outlet for some pretty violent people.  It is just strange that these violent elements have the support of the President of the US aand Democratic partly leaders.
When he was campaigning for President, some pundits said Obama would have a post-partisan presidency, other said it would be a post racial presidency. Based on his support of the hateful,violent Occupy protests, what we ended up with is a post common sense presidency.

Ellison challenger Gary Boisclair is telling the truth about Islam….

Gary Boisclair:
“It is “ludicrous” to swear an oath to uphold the Constitution on a book that promotes unconstitutional Sharia law….”

Herman Cain and the sexual harrassment allegations

A man who spent 40 years in business, including as CEO of a major company, has only had three sexual harassment complaints against him. Many CEOs have had far more such complaints filed against them by unethical employees. Why are all the accusations from his tenure at the National Restaurant Association? There should of been examples at Coca Cola, Pillsbury and Godfather’s Pizza for anyone to take the accusation seriously. Also why don't we know the names of his accusers who have made money off their claims and asked to remain silent... only to attack him again in a politically important time.

So, Politico has dug up some dirt on Herman Cain.
And it’s dirt of a sort so common in our modern PC world: allegations of sexual misconduct of an unspecified nature that ended with a payout (from the National Restaurant Association).
Such charges are, quite literally, indefensible—it’s “he said she said” in the modern age, in which the victim is always right. Unfortunately, a payoff means nothing except that the organization has decided it’s cheaper to pay than to fight in a game where the deck is stacked against an alleged perpetrator.
That’s true whether the supposed perpetrator is Democrat or Republican, liberal or conservative, white or black. What’s more, the system encourages false claims, because the name of the accuser is protected. Even now, in the case of Cain, Politico is not releasing the accusers’ names for “privacy” reasons—although perhaps the names will leak out over time, as these things often do.
Starting way back in the 80s or even earlier, I became skeptical of all such allegations since I saw firsthand (mostly through an incident I witnessed at a university) how unfair they can be and how the deck is stacked against the accused. In the case I knew best, it shocked me to learn that all that was necessary for the charge to stick was nothing more than an assertion by the accuser that the accused had done something that made her uncomfortable. The locus of the offense was in the definition/reaction of the hearer, not any objective standard of right or wrong.
How far we’ve come from the bad old days when sexual harassment in the workplace was winked at (literally). Now the worm has turned so decisively that the accused pretty much calls the shots. This does not mean that sexual harassment doesn’t occur, or that’s it’s okay when it does. But it does mean that we should regard all such allegations with automatic suspicion (as I did with those against President Clinton, until a certain blue dress appeared).
Let’s see what has been alleged about Cain’s behavior [emphasis mine]:

During Herman Cain’s tenure as the head of the National Restaurant Association in the 1990s, at least two female employees complained to colleagues and senior association officials about inappropriate behavior by Cain, ultimately leaving their jobs at the trade group, multiple sources confirm to POLITICO.
The women complained of sexually suggestive behavior by Cain that made them angry and uncomfortable, the sources said, and they signed agreements with the restaurant group that gave them financial payouts to leave the association…
The sources — including the recollections of close associates and other documentation — describe episodes that left the women upset and offended. These incidents include conversations allegedly filled with innuendo or personal questions of a sexually suggestive nature, taking place at hotels during conferences, at other officially sanctioned restaurant association events and at the association’s offices. There were also descriptions of physical gestures that were not overtly sexual but that made women who experienced or witnessed them uncomfortable and that they regarded as improper in a professional relationship.

Notice that the locus of the offense appears to have been in the perception of the accusers.
It occurs to me that, although the exact date of the Cain allegations and settlement is not specified except that it was “in the 90s,” we know it had to have been after 1996 because that was the year Cain became affiliated with the restaurant organization. So if the charges were trumped up, it would have been possible for the accusers to have gotten the idea from the Anita Hill hearings against Clarence Thomas, which had such high visibility in 1991.
Cain alleges that he didn’t even know about the payments:

“If the restaurant association did a settlement, I wasn’t even aware of it,” [Cain] claimed, “and I hope it wasn’t for much. If there was a settlement, it was handled by some of the other officers at the restaurant association.”

That is certainly possible as well.
Which enemies of Cain’s might be responsible for pushing this story? There are a host of possibilities on either side, way too many to choose from. And isn’t it interesting that Politico is refusing to go into more of the details of the allegations?:

Politico’s Jonathan Martin: “And also, what actually happened to these women as well, we want to be sensitive to that, too. It includes both verbal and physical gestures.
“These women felt uncomfortable, and they were unhappy about their treatment, and they complained to both colleagues and senior officials. In one case it involved, I think, inviting a woman up to a hotel room of Cain’s on the road … We’re just not going to get into the details of exactly what happened with these women beside what’s in the story.”

How very “sensitive” of Politico.
I imagine we’ll be hearing more about this story.

via neoneocon.com