Hat Tip: BB
Hat Tip: Citizen Scribe
By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media
Michael Hirsh is a Politico reporter who occasionally stumbles on the truth. In a piece on how the anti-NSA campaign has run out of gas, he says the critics of the intelligence agency have failed to come up with “actual instances of state abuse of surveillance” in the United States.
Wait a minute. You mean they have no hard evidence for their sensational claims of “domestic spying” on innocent Americans?
But Hirsh goes on: “Even the American Civil Liberties Union, which once called NSA surveillance ‘a stone’s throw away from an Orwellian state,’ admits it knows of no cases where anything even remotely Orwellian has happened.”
A separate Politico article makes it plain that Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) and his campaign against the agency are also at a crossroads, threatening his anticipated run for the presidency. A former National Security Agency (NSA) executive is calling him a clear threat to U.S. national security.
The Hirsh piece carries the ominous headline, “The Surveillance State Lives On,” but the article shows that innocent people are not at risk—terrorists are.
Throwing a lifeline to Glenn Greenwald, Edward Snowden’s main media mouthpiece, Hirsh said that Greenwald had “told me in an interview over the summer that five Muslim-Americans monitored by the NSA were ‘harassed by the government in different ways.’”
He may have said that, but that didn’t make it true. The allegations fizzled.
As we pointed out, Greenwald’s actual story on this “monitoring” and “harassment” fell flat because one of the most prominent activists allegedly under NSA surveillance was an official of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR).
Greenwald, who has spoken to conferences sponsored by CAIR and the International Socialist Organization, had insisted these Muslim-Americans were innocent victims of the NSA. Hirsh apparently bought into that.
But CAIR is an affiliate of the Muslim Brotherhood, a group banned in Egypt because of its terrorist ties. It was just designated an official terrorist group by the government of the United Arab Emirates (UAE).
(In the interests of full disclosure, this writer has been labeled one of many “Islamophobic Individuals” by CAIR, apparently because of my articles about CAIR’s links to terrorist groups.)
Hirsh notes that the anti-NSA movement is not over, and that Senator Rand Paul is prepared to carry its banner into the 2016 presidential campaign.
The Kentucky senator and CAIR collaborated on a “Restore the Fourth” rally against the NSA on July 4, 2013.
Left unsaid in the piece is how Senator Paul thinks an anti-NSA campaign will either win him more Republican votes or make the country safe.
Exit polls from the congressional elections found 59 percent of Republicans were either very or somewhat concerned about a major terrorist attack, but 78 percent of Republicans thought Rand Paul would make a good president.
This reflects ignorance among some Republicans about the nature of the Kentucky senator’s anti-NSA campaign—which has taken the form of a class action lawsuit against the agency—and how it could undermine counter-terrorism efforts.
The senator’s flip-flops may contribute to the confusion about his actual position.
He voted against the recent anti-NSA bill in the Senate because he said he didn’t think it went far enough in crippling the intelligence agency. The bill failed to pass.
In a David Nather article, Politico characterized this as “Rand Doesn’t Stand,” a play on words on one of the senator’s favorite slogans, “Stand with Rand.”
In this case, Rand was “standing” on both sides of the issue, sort of like former Senator John Kerry (D-MA) voting for a bill before opposing it. Now, Rand’s friends in the ACLU are upset with the GOP’s “most famous libertarian,” the article states.
However, Nather says the defeat of the bill means that Paul “can keep speaking out against intrusive surveillance practices, and maintain his unique brand within the Republican Party, without having to go through the kind of lengthy debate that would have highlighted his tensions with Republican national security hawks.”
In a 2016 Republican presidential primary, Nather argued, the issue would prove “divisive,” as “the purist libertarian beliefs that built the Paul brand are going to keep crashing into traditional Republican standards, especially on national security.” Rand Paul, he argued, will be pulled into a “drawn-out debate” with other Republican contenders.
All of this may be true. But how will the senator makes his case against the NSA if Snowden and his allies have failed to come up with one credible example of an innocent person being injured or damaged by the surveillance?
How will it go over with a Republican audience when Rand Paul repeats his comparison of Edward Snowden’s treason to the disobedience of Martin Luther King Jr.?
What will the senator say when a rival notes that Julian Assange of WikiLeaks fame had once declared he was “a big admirer of Ron Paul and Rand Paul?”
Former officials of the NSA have generally refused to comment on politicians by name. Some have spoken out regarding how Snowden’s disclosures have made it easier for our enemies and adversaries to wage war against us.
But former NSA executive Charlie Speight broke the mold when he published a blog post under the headline, “Rand Paul: Putin’s Best Friend.”
Speight lambasted Sen. Paul’s anti-NSA rhetoric and actions, saying, “Buying into the uneducated, no-deeper-than-headlines ‘scandal’ claiming NSA collecting everyone’s cell phone calls, texts and emails, Paul has decided to attack one of America’s greatest assets.”
He says the result of the anti-NSA campaign “has been to damage the reputation of the single most successful and important intelligence organization in the world. That means, the organization most feared by our adversaries, primarily Russia, China, North Korea, Iran and terrorists.”
He argues that Sen. Paul “is directly enhancing the fortunes of our adversaries, weakening the U.S.’s best interests and putting our country—and her troops—at risk. Rand Paul is becoming an accomplice of Edward Snowden and becoming Vladimir Putin’s and Xi Jinping’s, Kim Jung Un’s, Hassan Rouhani’s and Al Qaeda’s best friend.”
Some may consider these comments a natural defense of an agency that once employed Speight. But it appears that our enemies also acknowledge the damage Snowden has done.
Zhang Zhaozhong, professor at the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) National Defense University, is quoted in the pro-China Global Times as saying, “The damage to the U.S. of Edward Snowden’s flight equals the loss of 10 heavy armored divisions.”
Snowden’s “flight,” of course, was to Russia through Hong Kong, China.
Writer and researcher Nevin Gussack says the quote by the Red Chinese professor is “more of a statement on the impact of an NSA contract employee who posed as a whistleblower and human/civil rights campaigner,” one “who portrayed himself as a victim of the big, bad, evil national security state.”
Snowden’s campaign, Gussack argues, has diverted attention from “the very real threat of Sino-Russian cyber-warfare and other aggressive activities directed at the U.S. It also gives the U.S. a black eye internationally, as well as galvanizing the leftists and the ‘antiwar’ elements amongst the ‘conservatives’ and left-libertarians to cripple the functions of the national security organs.”
He says the professor’s use of the “ten divisions” term is meant to characterize “a knockout blow to an enemy,” a “well-placed, well-timed psychological attack” on the United States that would “cripple our resistance and contribute to our defeat as a power without firing a volley of bullets.”
Admiral Michael S. Rogers, Commander of the U.S. Cyber Command and Director of the National Security Agency, spoke about this possibility on Thursday, during testimony before the House Intelligence Committee.
The Reuters news agency account said Rogers’ testimony included a warning that China and “probably one or two” other countries have the ability through cyber-warfare to disrupt or possibly shut down computer systems of U.S. power utilities, aviation networks and financial companies.
So while our media—and politicians like Rand Paul—have been waging war on the NSA, our enemies have been figuring out how to exploit Snowden’s disclosures and destroy the United States.
By: Charles Ortel
The Washington Times
President Obama, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit on Nov. 11, 2014, in Beijing. (AP Photo/RIA Novosti, Presidential Press Service)
As Americans distract ourselves absorbing deeply troubling domestic implications of President Obama’s defiantly extra-Constitutional and economically illiterate actions on illegal immigrants, Russia and China may move swiftly in coming days to support Iran and then redraw spheres of influence over minimally-defended, energy-rich nations throughout the Middle East.
Backing Iran openly and aggressively now against America’s naive and feckless foreign policy team would, at minimum, strike justifiable fear into monarchs in Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Qatar, and Bahrain.
At worst, Russia and China might enable and facilitate the overthrow of these and other backward-looking states, all of which offer rich economic prizes that seem ripe for the plucking.
Looming trouble over Iran
This time of year, we remember that miracles do happen as we prepare to celebrate Thanksgiving and contemplate Christmas and Hanukkah. Is it reasonable to expect a miracle in America’s tortured relationship with Iran?
In a word, no.
For reasons we dumb American citizens cannot possibly fathom, the Obama administration presses theoretically tougher and tougher sanctions against Russia while it also relies upon the good offices of Russian counterparts to make progress with Iran — an implacable and unrepentent enemy of ally Israel — and with Syria, which descends toward the chaos America created in Libya.
However negotiations are described especially by Mr. Obama’s misnamed press spokesman Josh Earnest, utterly discredited National Security Adviser Susan Rice or other members of the surrender wing of the Democratic Party, you are not even smart enough to be “Grubered,” if you believe what you hear without checking the complete file on whatever historic deal may be coming into view.
Does our team truly know what is going on inside Iran with its nuclear program?
Of course not.
Why, then, did we cave in and lift sanctions this year, letting Iran spread money, military weapons and influence many places in ways that certainly are detrimental to America’s long-held national security interests?
Unless interminable negotiations with Iran are extended beyond Nov. 24, Mr. Obama and his shamelessly humiliated negotiating team will soon find themselves fumbling to explain why any outline agreement truly protects national security interests of America, Israel and our fraying Western alliance.
When harsh lights shine on bold lies
Starting Jan. 20, 2009, Americans too charitably and too willingly suspended our natural disbelief, so Mr. Obama benefited as Prince Hippolyte did in Leo Tolstoy’s “War and Peace”: “Because of the self-confidence with which he had spoken, no one could tell whether what he said was very clever or very stupid.”
Interestingly, until scant days ago, the media and the incurious general public surrendered to an unelected “clerisy” that ardently believes only they know best, despite widespread and wholly contradictory evidence.
Sadly today, Team Obama cannot even recognize cold truth when it stands alone in an empty room.
Mr. Obama never will corrupt America’s system of governance fast enough to gain absolute power at home, but he certainly may diminish our country’s stature and geopolitical influence abroad for decades if left unchecked for much longer.
And right now a gigantic power vacuum presents itself to Russia and to China as each wrestles at home with differing sets of vexing and unresolved economic and political problems.
Watching Mr. Obama repeatedly flout domestic and international law, energy-starved China and pugnacious Russia now have a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to reign in America while redrawing the global balance of power decidedly in their favor.
Protracted and inevitable domestic unrest caused first by Mr. Obama’s lawless catering to non-voters and non-citizens against the clear will of the American electorate, and second by fomenting discord over events in Ferguson, Missouri, certainly could push off front pages any further aggressive moves by Vladimir Putin and new best friend Xi Jinping to wrest erstwhile American allies into the Russo-Sino orbit.
As Mr. Obama flies above Earth with his entourage, concentrating on a reality that only he can appreciate, Americans must consider how different our lives will become should we permanently lose access to the energy resources upon which this economy still relies.
Do we truly wish to let a dwindling minority of progressives in the Democratic Party “date-rape” citizens in this country who deserve to inherit the American Dream?
Or should an endemic and unrepentant pattern of willful lying by too many who control levers of power inside the Obama administration finally and swiftly have meaningful consequences?
Russia and China must be sorely tempted now in America’s gathering weakness.
Will you go silently into the night or speak up and help push America back from the brink?
The Council has spoken, the votes have been cast and the results are in for this week’s Watcher’s Council match-up.
“This morning in Jerusalem Palestinians attacked Jews who were praying in a synagogue. To have this kind of act, which is a pure result of incitement, of calls for ‘days of rage,’ of just irresponsibility, is unacceptable.”
“People who have come to worship God in a sanctuary of a synagogue were/// murdered in a holy place in an act of pure terror and senseless brutality and murder.” – U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry
“There are two races of men in this world but only these two: the race of the decent man and the race of the indecent man.” – Victor Frankl, Auschwitz survivor, in ‘Man’s Search For Meaning’
“It’s not enough for us to say: ‘There are those carrying out Ribat’ (religious war over land claimed to be Islamic). We must all carry out Ribat in the Al-Aqsa [Mosque]. It’s not enough for us to say: ‘The settlers have arrived [at the Mosque]’. They have come, and we have to prevent them, by any means necessary, from entering the Sanctuary. They have no right to enter it. They have no right to defile it. – Mahmoud Abbas, inciting violence on Official Palestinian Authority TV
This week’s winning essay was Joshuapundit’s – The Blood Of Zion Cries Out. It was my reaction on the day four rabbis and a Druze traffic cop who tried to stop the killers were murdered with guns and meat cleavers in a Jerusalem synagogue. Here’s a slice:
Early this morning, four Jews at morning prayers were murdered in a synagogue in Jerusalem after two Palestinian broke in and assaulted the worshipers with gunfire and meat cleavers.
Many others were wounded and four are in critical condition.
The terrorist attack took place in Har Hof a predominantly Orthodox neighborhood at the Kehilat Yaakov synagogue on Agasi Street.
The Murder victims were identified as Rabbi Moshe Twersky, the head of the Torat Moshe yeshiva, 59; 40-year-old Rabbi Aryeh Kupinsky; 50-year-old Rabbi Kalman Levine; and 68-year-old Rabbi Avraham Shmuel Goldberg(HY”D). Rabbi Kupinsky, Rabbi Levine and Rabbi Twersky were all American citizens, while Rabbi Goldberg was a British subject. A Druze policeman, 30-year-old Master Sergeant Zidan Sif subsequently died of his wounds as well, and all Israel will mourn and honor him.
The killers stormed the synagogue at 7 AM local time. There was no warning and no way for the victims to defend themselves.The rabbis were murdered during the sacred prayer of Shimoneh Esrei, with siddurim (prayer books) in their hands and their tefillum on.
Eye witness Ya’akov Amos said: ‘The terrorist moved to within a metre of me then started shooting. One, two, three, bang, bang, bang. I immediately hit the ground and tried to protect myself with a prayer stand. He kept screaming ‘Allah hu’Akbar’.
There was blood everywhere, so much that one of the medical workers slipped in it and broke his leg.
The international reaction was interesting. Even U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry seemed shocked, with his voice quavering. He even used the “T” word and called for an end to incitement against Jews.
Phillip Hammond, Britain’s Foreign Secretary contented himself with a bloodless statement that ‘both sides’ should seek to ‘reduce tension.’ President Obama, of course, said much the same thing. Somehow, I doubt they would have merely talked about both sides reducing tension if four imams had been murdered by a Jew and Qu’rans profaned in this way.
Israel’s economics minister Naftali Bennett was interviewed by the BBC today, and provides us with another indication of exactly how sick and depraved Britain has become when it comes to Israel and the Jews.
(just a hint – when Bennett mentions Abu Mazen, he is using Mahmoud Abbas’s nom de guerre, the terrorist name he used as Arafat’s second-in-command.)
Notice how the interviewer doesn’t even address the issue of Abbas inciting terrorism, but pulls the case of an Arab bus driver who died yesterday, as though that made the savage murder of four Jews at prayer legitimate. That Arab driver, by the way, had a full investigation and an autopsy done on him and there is no doubt he committed suicide. Unlike the Palestinian Authority, Israel jails murderers no matter who they are.
I really felt like saying ‘Kol Hakavod’ when Bennett held up a picture of one of the victims, which the interviewer hastily told him to put down lest he upset the gentle sensibilities of her viewers. I think it is absolutely essential to do just that – to let the British public see what their government is funding and supporting. And I hope it upsets them to the point of utter shame.
At the end of the interview, Bennett says that Britain is going to have to make a choice of whether they support the Free World or not. As I’m sure Bennett knows, the British Government has already made that choice. Which is why, perhaps, they feel compelled to put up with soldiers being beheaded in broad daylight and no go areas for police and non-Muslims in London and other large British cities.
The murderers were both killed in a shootout with police at the scene. They were Ghassan and Oday Abu Jamal from the Jabal Mukaber neighborhood in east Jerusalem. Needless to say, they were acclaimed as heroes and martyrs by all the factions of the Arabs whom call themselves Palestinians.
“We responded with shouts of joy when we received the news about their deaths,” Ala’a Abu Jamal said of his cousins Ghassan and Uday Abu Jamal to Yedioth Aharonoth. “People here distributed candies to guests who visited us, and there was joy for the martyrs.”
In a message published on its official new website Al-Resalah, Hamas said the attack was “a quality development in fighting the occupation. We highly value the heroism of its operatives.” Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri praised the attack on Qatari news channel Al-Jazeera as “heroic,” calling for more attacks of the same kind.
Hamas MP Mushir Al-Masri happily wrote on Twitter that “Jerusalem has nothing but men who love martyrdom. The heroes of the knife are in Jerusalem. The heroes of the run-over [car attacks] are in Jerusalem. In Jerusalem men take revenge.”
And he posted this on his Facebook page:
The Arab killer is asking ‘Where are they hiding?” Needless to say, in spite of what this cartoon shows none of the worshipers were armed.
And Fatah? Mahmoud Abbas, AKA Abu Mazen issued a ‘condemnation’ that wasn’t one. In a statement (in English, not Arabic) it said that “The Palestinian presidency” condemns violence “from whatever source” and “demands an end to the invasions of Al-Aqsa Mosque and the provocations of the Settlers.”
In other words, ‘So sorry, but unless you surrender Jerusalem to us expect more of the same.’
This is the same Mahmoud Abbas who accused Jews of “contaminating” Al-Aqsa Mosque last week, who just a few days ago was telling his people, in Arabic, to ‘defend Jerusalem’ by any means necessary. This is the same Mahmoud Abbas who said nothing when Fatah published cartoons and Facebook posts encouraging terrorist attacks on Jews and “days of rage” to defend the ‘threatened’ Al-Aqsa.
Tawfik Tirawi, former chief of the Palestinian General Security in the West Bank and a member of Fatah’s Central Committee made it even plainer, and in Arabic. Today he told a radio station in Hebron that the attack was “nothing but a reaction to the recent crimes of the occupation and the settlers in occupied Jerusalem and across the nation. The threats of the occupation against our people and the Palestinian leadership, represented by the president, will only increase our efforts in safeguarding our rights.”
His remarks were reprinted on Fatah’s official Facebook page.
I should make something clear here. This is not the fault of Abbas, or Hamas, or any of the Arabs who identify themselves as Palestinians.
It is the fault of the Israeli government.
A significant number of the Palestinians are simply acting as they have always acted since the 1920′s, and these tendencies were unleashed even further once Arafat and the PLO were allowed in to take over after Oslo.
Israeli governments since Oslo have always allowed themselves to be pressured to ignore these instances of sheer horror… to release convicted murderers, to make concessions to the terrorist entities on Israel’s borders, and most of all to avoid finishing them off entirely when their violence and bloodshed mandated a response. This has been especially true since Barack Obama, who styles himself as the Palestinian’s very own community organizer entered the White House.
Is it any wonder that this sort of thing continues to happen? Is it really so puzzling that after allowing Hamas to continue in Gaza and maintaining any kind of relationship with Abbas and the PLO once they allied themselves openly with Hamas that they would resort back to Arafat’s tactics?
Yasser Arafat himself outlined for his followers what this war was really about. On Jordanian TV, right after signing the Oslo Accords he was criticized for signing a peace agreement with the Jews. He responded by reminding his audience of the Peace of Hubidiyeh, a treaty Mohammed made with the Quraysh tribe that he violated as soon as he was strong enough to massacre them, a story every Muslim knows. And then he outlined exactly what this war was about, saying that “either the Jews will push us into the sea or we will push them into the sea.”
Arafat, the leaders of Hamas and numerous members of Fatah have sung the same songs for years. Is it their fault that Israeli governments for years have refused to take them seriously?
More at the link.
In our non-Council category, the winner was Victor Davis Hanson – A Moral primer submitted by Joshuapundit. Hanson is an old classicist among his other virtues. In this essay, he looks at the state of America and the world, and especially the president who leads us and sees a lack of political and personal morality as a deadly problem, possibly a terminal one for our republic. Do read it.
Here are this week’s full results:
- *First place with 6 1/3 votes! – Joshuapundit – A Murder In Jerusalem… And What To Do About It
- Second place *t* with 1 2/3 votes – The Noisy Room – The Subjugation of Christianity and America to the Muslim Brotherhood and Allah
- Second place *t* with 1 2/3 votes – Bookworm Room – Found It On Facebook: Everything That’s Wrong With A Poster From The Left
- Third place *t* with 2/3 votes – The Razor – The Left’s War Against Rural America
- Third place *t* with 2/3 vote – The Right Planet – Common Core and Qatar – Sharia Education for All!
- Fourth place *t* with 1/3 vote – Simply Jews – The tortuous un-logic of Will Self, a Jewish un-Jew
- Fourth place *t* with 1/3 vote – The Independent Sentinel – Saving Some Wild Chickens With The Largest Federal land Grabs In Modern Times
- Fourth place *t* with 1/3 vote – Nice Deb – The Gruber Tapes 1 – 10
- *First place with 2 1/3 votes! – Victor Davis Hanson – A Moral primer submitted by Joshuapundit
- Second place *t* with 1 2/3 votes – John Bolton/NY Post – Iran’s nukes: Too desperate for a deal submitted by GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD
- Second place *t* with 1 2/3 votes – David Horovitz/Times Of Israel – Seize the day: A challenge to Netanyahu submitted by Simply Jews
- Third place *t* with 1 1/3 votes – Sultan Knish – Super-Amnesty Will Turn Every City into Detroit submitted by The Noisy Room
- Third place *t* with 1 1/3 votes – Mollie Hemingway/The Federalist – It’s Time To Push Back Against Feminist Bullies submitted by Nice Deb
- Fourth place *t* with 1 vote – Ace Of Spades-Gruber Truthers really need to shut the f*** up nowsubmitted by Bookworm Room
- Fourth place *t* with 1 vote – John Fund/NRO – Gruber’s Deception submitted by The Watcher
- Fifth place with 2/3 votes – The Wilderness – Real Genius: Feminism Leaves Science in the Dirt submitted by The Glittering Eye
- Sixth place *t* with 1/3 vote – Patterico’s Pontifications – Linda Greenhouse: I Am Horrified That the Supreme Court Took Up the Halbig Issue submitted by Rhymes with Right
- Sixth place *t* with 1/3 vote – Taki’s Mag/Gavin McInnes – 10 Black Things Liberals Just Don’t Understand submitted by The Razor
- Sixth place *t* with 1/3 vote – Sultan Knish – Life Under The Victimocracy submitted by The Independent Sentinel
See you next week!
Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum and every Tuesday morning, when we reveal the weeks’ nominees for Weasel of the Week!
>And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council and the results are posted on Friday morning.
It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere and you won’t want to miss it… or any of the other fantabulous Watcher’s Council content.
A bit more follow up and analysis before Shabbat…
Some of the recommended actions I wrote about yesterday, and more, have been put in place. Not because I wrote about them, obviously, but because the government in this regard is responding with some appropriate security and deterrence measures:
There is now a large police presence in Jerusalem bolstered by Navy commandos who are volunteers serving on their own time. Troops have been deployed outside of educational institutions and kindergartens, as well as outside some Arab neighborhoods – where checkpoints have been set up for searching people who might be suspect.
Observation balloons (with cameras) are being scattered about the city, controlled from a central command location. This seems to me a very good idea. Sometimes from above activity can be spotted that would not be caught by observers on the ground.
And the policy of demolition of terrorists’ homes is being enforced.
There has also been a report from Arutz Sheva – not confirmed elsewhere – that the bodies of the Har Nof terrorists will not be returned to their families. Great move, if it is so.
Is all of this sufficient? I would not go so far as to declare this definitively. But we are seeing some serious steps in the right direction.
What’s not serious is the number of “benefits” to the PA that will be put on hold or terminated. I had anticipated this. Today I’m reading that there were certain roads in Judea and Samaria that were closed to non-Israelis because of security risks. Just as over time checkpoints in Judea and Samaria have been removed, those road were scheduled to be opened to Palestinian Arabs soon. Well, says Bogie Ya’alon, they will not be. That’s it? Let’s get real here.
I had written recently about the fact that the men murdered in Har Nof were not settlers, were in western Jerusalem, were not agitators or radical activists, were not people who tend to go up on Har Habayit (The Temple Mount) – even though these various reasons – occupation, Temple Mount agitation, etc. – are provided as the rationale for why the terrorists acted.
The Elder of Zyion blog has carried these thoughts one step further and the analysis is so very important that I want to share it here:
After showing Arab cartoons celebrating the Har Nof massacre such as this one:
He writes (emphasis in the original):
”Images like these are celebrated by many, and condoned by the rest, with their silence.
“This is the fundamental story of the massacre. For once, the motives are crystal-clear.
”It cannot be about ‘occupation’ or ‘settlements’ because the attack was inside the Green Line.
”It cannot be about ‘Al Aqsa’ because the people who prayed there are not the types to ascend.
”It cannot be about ‘Israeli oppression’ because the victims were not soldiers or reservists.
”The facts are undeniable: the terrorists targeted the most Jewish looking people at a synagogue while they were at prayer.
”The cartoons illustrate nicely what the west wants to hide: the targets are Jews. Period.
”Palestinian Arab cartoons in general routinely depict “Israelis” as a Nazi-style caricatures of a bearded, black-clad men, even though no Israeli leader has ever resembled that person. These victims did. The cartoons taught generations of terrorists that their enemy is the Jews, not Israelis.
”The West wants to find excuses for Palestinian terror, to pretend that both sides are part of the problem. But this attack, and these cartoons, combined with the glaring absence of any Palestinians who object to this kind of incitement, reveal the ugly truth: that in the end it is about Jew-hatred. All the other reasons being given by pseudo-intellectuals of ‘occupation’ or ‘Al Aqsa’ or ‘Gaza’ or bus drivers who commit suicide are simply excuses to divert the world’s attention from the simple fact that this is really about the world’s oldest hate.
“Once you realize this you can start to understand the reality and not the spin that we’ve been fed for decades.”
Wow! Stunningly on the mark. Please share this. It deflates all of the arguments of Palestinian Arab “suffering.”
The mayor of Ashkelon, Itamar Shimoni, has taken a position that is not surprising, and is also not politically correct:
He announced yesterday that Arab workers will no longer be allowed on construction sites at kindergartens in the city where shelters are being built, and that security personnel will be placed at kindergartens near construction sites. He said he made this decision in consultation with the police.
The furor is all that we might expect The mayor is being attacked and accused of racism. It is being said that he is preventing Arabs from working, and tearing the fabric of good Jewish-Arab relations in the city. Netanyahu, for example, said that we have no desire to target all Israeli Arabs, 99.9% of whom are decent folk.
My response is also going to be not politically correct, for there are painful realities at work here. If 99.9% of Israeli Arabs are decent people, then – as there are approximately 1,700,000 Arabs in Israel – we have 1,700 who are not OK. And the awful truth is that they cannot always be readily identified. The terrorist who shot Yehuda Glick outside of the Begin Center worked in the restaurant in the Center. One of the terrorists who committed the Har Nof atrocities worked in a grocery store next to the synagogue.
Back in previous years, there have been instances of Arabs who were loyal employees of a business owner for years, and then murdered that business owner. What seems to have happened is that such employees were recruited by radicals. As long as we have a reasonable representation of such radicals within our society – radicals who endorse and encourage the killing of Jews – as well as others who are receptive to the messages of the radicals, we have a problem. What comes to mind most readily is the Islamic Movement of Israel, Northern Branch. Its leader and members are Israeli citizens. But they have been shown to have links with Hamas and the Brotherhood. Of course, there are others as well.
The mayor did not ban employment for Arabs everywhere in the city. He was concerned with the safety of children. An alternative to his decision might have been thorough security checks for any Arab who works near the kindergartens. But let us not pretend there is no problem.
To demonstrate how things can be, and what a positive attitude is possible, we need only look at the Druse community in Israel, about which so much has been written in the last days.
At the funeral of Zidan Saif yesterday, President Ruby Rivlin spoke, saying:
“He went first into the fire to protect the residents of Jerusalem. Without fear, he faced the terrorists and risked his life to protect the residents of Jerusalem. He acted on the values on which he was raised—courage, valor, self-sacrifice.”
While Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch declared:
“[Saif] is a source of pride for you, the Druse people, for the police, and for the people of Israel. The values that you instilled in him compelled him to protect, and he fell while defending the state of Israel. We have that shared fate. Together we will fight the murderers.” (Emphasis added)
Israeli Druse Naif Alian has written a guest column for Israel Hayom. In it he said:
“We, the Druze, are part of the people of Israel. I have never felt a difference between me, my relatives and my friends and the Jewish people. We are one family, always have been and always will be.
“The blood pact between Druze and Jews in the land of Israel began in the 1930s, and it will never be broken. When Haganah forces arrived in Shfaram, my late father Hussein joined them. During the War of Independence, he and 30 other local Druze enlisted in the Israel Defense Forces and took part in the liberation of the Galilee.
“In the 1950s, my father was one of the five sheikhs who signed the agreement making military service compulsory for the Druze. In 1957, I lost my brother Salim during his military service. Today, I am the proud father of three IDF officers. They have never felt different from anyone else and have always walked with their heads held high — as I taught them to do.”
Beautiful. As it can be, as it should be, with non-Jewish Israelis who feel connected and choose to be a part of the land and the people. The problem, of course, is that Palestinian Arabs who are Israeli citizens are conflicted in their loyalties in some (definitely not all!) instances, pulled in different directions.
Much to consider, on another day. Complexities and hard truths.
We end on this upbeat note:
“In a profound display of faith in the face of carnage, the family of a newborn infant on Wednesday held his circumcision ceremony at the Jerusalem synagogue where terrorists slaughtered worshipers and a police officer exactly 24-hours earlier, Israel’s Ch. 2 News reported.
“’This is Judaism – from tragedy to joy,’ said Mohel Association Chairman, Chaim Miller, who performed the festive ancient ritual – symbolizing the eight-day-old infant’s joining the Jewish people – at the B’nai Torah synagogue in the Har Nof neighborhood.”
(scroll down for the 40 second video)
By: Sher Zieve
What Obama is… effectively nullifying the General Election of 2 weeks ago, establishing himself as ruler and–once and for all–rendering Congress null and void. He is effectively legalizing new Democrat voters and nullifying the existing legal American population.
After the landslide elections on 4 November 2014, Obama was said to be even more furious with the “stupid American voters” than usual. And, with his now usual arrogant bravado he is–with his recently announced coming actions–saying to the American people “Your petty little elections mean nothing to me. I’m beyond your laws as well as your wants and needs. Once I’m fully ensconced in and with my dictatorship and can openly eliminate anyone and everyone I want to destroy…I will!”
In order to finish his destruction of the USA,. Obama plans to announce he will give Amnesty–and likely the path to or full citizenship–to millions of illegals who are still streaming across the US’ Southern Border, which is (by Obama’s command) wide open and no longer being protected by the US Border Patrol.
Recently, Obama’s lackeys have floated the line, “this is what President Reagan did.” No…it is not. When President Ronald Reagan gave what amounted to limited Amnesty (I opposed it at the time) he signed a bill that had been passed by Congress–the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (a.k.a., “Simpson-Mazzoli” bill). President Reagan signed the bill…he did not write or rewrite it! On the other hand, Obama is effectively rewriting existing law and placing himself now-firmly in the position of Dictator-in-Chief Barack Hussein Obama; a title I gave him years ago and which will now be evident to all. Obama does not have the legal authority to write or rewrite laws. But, he’s doing it, as no one has yet stopped him.
What Obama is doing is effectively nullifying the General Election of 2 weeks ago, establishing himself as ruler and–once and for all–rendering Congress null and void. He is effectively legalizing new Democrat voters and nullifying the existing legal American population.
Obama will, also, officially declare war against the legal American citizens–white, brown, black, Hispanic etc..–and announce he is replacing them with illegals. Obama recently announced that he will begin flying (via charter flights) children and their family members from Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador…more replacements for the now-awakened American voters. Illegal and treasonous. The flights will begin next month. Guess whose paying for them…you are!
Any way we slice it, this is in-your-face treason, folks. We did the right thing with our recent elections. But–as predicted–Obama will not recognize them. He and his criminal syndicate are–and have been–completely lawless. If we vote against Obama, he and his minions simply ignore us and seize more power. What do you want to do, America? We are now on the cliff and Obama is pushing us over. Do you still want to live? Do you?
“The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan,
with all power, signs, and lying wonders.”
– II Thessalonians 2:9 (NKJ)
Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986:
Obama State Dept. Creates New Program to Import Children from Latin America:
By: Wim Grommen
Every production phase or civilization or other human invention goes through a so called transformation process. Transitions are social transformation processes that cover at least one generation (= 25 years). In this article I will use one such transition to demonstrate the position of our present civilization and its possible effect on stock exchange rates.
When we consider the characteristics of the phases of a social transformation we may find ourselves at the end of what might be called the third industrial revolution. Transitions are social transformation processes that cover at least one generation (= 25 years). A transition has the following characteristics:
- it involves a structural change of civilization or a complex subsystem of our civilization
- it shows technological, economical, ecological, socio cultural and institutional changes at different levels that influence and enhance each other
- it is the result of slow changes (changes in supplies) and fast dynamics (flows)
Four transition phases
In general transitions can be seen to go through the S curve and we can distinguish four phases (see fig. 1):
- a pre development phase of a dynamic balance in which the present status does not visibly change
- a take off phase in which the process of change starts because of changes in the system
- an acceleration phase in which visible structural changes take place through an accumulation of socio cultural, economical, ecological and institutional changes influencing each other; in this phase we see collective learning processes, diffusion and processes of embedding
- a stabilization phase in which the speed of sociological change slows down and a new dynamic balance is achieved through learning
A product life cycle also goes through an S curve. In that case there is a fifth phase:
- the degeneration phase in which cost rises because of over capacity and the producer will finally withdraw from the market.
The S curve of a transition
Figure 1: Four phases in a transition best visualized by means of an S curve.
Examples of historical transitions are the demographical transition and the transition from coal to natural gas which caused transition in the use of energy. A transition process is not fixed from the start because during the transition processes will adapt to the new situation. A transition is not dogmatic.
Three drastic transitions
When we go back into the past three transitions took place with far-reaching effects.
- The first industrial revolution
The first industrial revolution lasted from around 1780 tot 1850. It was characterized by a transition from small scale handwork to mechanized production in factories. The great catalyst in the process was the steam engine which also caused a revolution in transport as it was used in railways and shipping. The first industrial revolution was centered around the cotton industry. Because steam engines were made of iron and ran on coal, both coal mining and iron industry also came to bloom.
This revolution ended in 1845 when Friedrich Engels, son of a German textile baron, described the living conditions of the English working class in “The condition of the working class in England“. The result of this revolution: an immense gap between rich and poor.
- The second industrial revolution
The second industrial revolution started around 1870 and ended around 1930. It was characterized by ongoing mechanization because of the introduction of the conveyer belt (? assembly line), the replacement of iron by steel and the development of the chemical industry. Furthermore coal and water were replaced by oil and electricity and the internal combustion engine was developed. Whereas the first industrial revolution was started through (chance) inventions by amateurs, companies invested a lot of money in professional research during the second revolution, looking for new products and production methods. In search of finances small companies merged into large scale enterprises which were headed by professional managers and shares were put on the market. These developments caused the transition from the traditional family business to Limited Liability companies and multinationals.
After the roaring twenties the revolution ended with the stock exchange crash of 1929. The consequences were disastrous culminating in the second world war.
- The third industrial revolution
The third industrial revolution started around 1940 and is nearing its end. The United States and Japan played a leading role in the development of computers. During the second world war great efforts were made to apply computer technology to military purposes. After the war the American space program increased the number of applications. Japan specialized in the use of computers for industrial purposes such as the robot. By now the computer and communication technology take up an irreplaceable role in all parts of the world. The acceleration phase of the third industrial revolution started around 1980 with the introduction of the micro processor. The third industrial revolution has clearly reached the saturation and degeneration phase. This phase is characterized by a saturated market and growing competition. Only the strongest companies can handle the competition or buy up their competitors (think of the takeovers by Oracle and Microsoft in the past few years). Essentially there is relatively little new technology in the IT world despite what the marketing machines from America would have us believe.
We can safely state that in some 25 years an industrial revolution has effectively dismantled a welfare state; the excesses of our society are visible everywhere (excessive salaries for executives, bookkeeping fraud, fraud with shares). There will be consequences for the stock exchanges. It is a matter of time but unavoidable.
Dow Jones exchange rates
Figure 2: Exchange rates of Dow Jones during the latest two industrial revolutions. During the last few years the rate increases have accelerated enormously.
What events could end the latest industrial revolution and cause another stock market crash?
1 Shortage of raw materials
The shortage of raw materials or water which enlarge the chances of war between groups of people? The changes in the climate taking place on mother earth which force mankind into a different kind of behavior? Everyone is convinced that we can not go on the way we are going now. The present course will eventually lead to a gradual decrease of economic activity which will make the indexes drop slowly. This transition will stretch over a longer period.
2 Natural disasters
Another phenomenon that can cause a stock market crash is formed by natural disasters. This scenario is not linked tot the present industrial revolution. History has taught us that earthquakes and tsunamis can make complete cultures suddenly disappear (like Atlantis). If this happens to an economic super power like Japan or the US the consequences for the stock market indexes will be obvious.
3 Man made changes
Or will human behavior itself, as so often in history, be the cause of the end of the third industrial revolution? What might happen when suddenly a counsel of wise men and women appears that wants to reform to a society of wisdom and convince the population that such a reform is much better for a lasting society?
The political leaders of our country have continued the privatization process over the past years. According to the politicians of our country more competition will lead to lower cost for our citizens. However, people have noticed that the cost of primary services has shown an enormous increase over the past few years and have lost their faith in politics. The government policies clash with the policy of the captains of industry who want an increase of scale to lower their cost. We can conclude that the process of privatization of elementary services in our society has failed completely.
Suppose this counsel of wise people were to start a sparkling campaign among the people called “From knowledge based economy to wisdom society”.
Having asked for an offer for all 17 million citizens, the counsel calls on the people to change to the same health care supplier and the same energy supplier. The effect of this call for an increase in scale will be: less housing cost, less personnel cost, less ict cost, less marketing cost, less accountancy cost. This will result in lower cost for health care and energy supplies for Dutch citizens.
After three years the counsel will call on the citizens to change to the same grocery store, the same bank and the same fuel supplier.
The effect of this call for scale increase will again be: less housing cost, less (outrageous) personnel cost, less ict cost, less marketing cost, less accountancy cost. The cost of bank and fuel cost for Dutch citizens will also decrease dramatically.
The effects of this call for increase in scale for the society as a whole will be enormous. There will be less work for the same number of people.
According to the counsel of the wise there will be immense advantages to this increase in scale:
- After retraining and redistribution of work more people will be available for education, health care, security and welfare so that our welfare state, which has been dismantled in 25 years, can slowly be restored.
- The citizens of the Netherlands will have more spare time
- Society will be less stressed, which will lower the cost of mental health care (and probably also lower the amount of senseless violence).
- Fewer people will be on the roads on their way to work thus automatically solving traffic problems and ending the need for new roads
- The Dutch citizens will have more time to teach their children the social values that everybody thinks are so important
- The Dutch citizens will have more time to make the integration process a success
- There will be less pressure on the environment, improving the durability of society.
“Every advantage got its disadvantage” is a saying by a well-known Dutchman. This increase in scale will cause an immense implosion of economic activity in a society. The effects on stock market indexes will be obvious.
According to the Mayan calendar described in “The Mayan calendar and the transformation of consciousness” by Carl Johan Calleman we live in a very special time. The Mayan calendar is a metaphysical map of the evolution of consciousness and records how spiritual time flows. The calendar presents nine cosmic cycles that represent nine phases of consciousness. In 2011 these nine cycles that the earth has gone through will end simultaneously. The book reveals that the Mayan calendar is a spiritual and prophetic device that enables a greater understanding of the evolution of consciousness driving human history. It predicts a phase of radical changes for the world and humanity. After the failure of communism in 1989 the calendar also predicts the imminent collapse of capitalism. The first hairline cracks in this system are already beginning to show.
This article was published in “Technische en Kwantitatieve Analyse van Beleggers Belangen” in November 2007.
Transities & transitiemanagement, casus van een emissiearme energievoorziening, Prof. dr. ir. Jan Rotmans) , Geschiedenis Werkplaatssite by Wolters-Noordhoff.
Wim Grommen worked as a mathematics and physics teacher. He has been an ict trainer in for 25 years. At the moment he is a trainer for Transfer Solutions, an ict company specialized in services for Oracle databases and applications and Java technology. For the past few years he has been studying social transformation processes and the S-curve.