Saturday, September 24, 2011

Good God! He's back!

Grant Patel, bane of sensible readers everywhere, has finally posted another absurd screed.
In some ways, I suppose that's a good thing.

But it probably isn't.

There is NO mention of his usual perversities, instead he seems to be cheering the eventual bombing of his least favorite country in the whole wide world. It is, remarkably, the cleanest (but NOT sanest) thing he has ever written.

Please join me in welcoming back our differently-able friend, Grant Patel.
Now on new and improved medication.
Valium and saltpeter.

Wednesday, March 16, 2011

Vigil for victims of the Itamar terrorist attack

Time Wednesday, March 16 • 8:30pm - 9:30pm

Location Fountain at Bancroft and College

Created By Tikvah: Students for Israel, Brian Maissy


More Info
We will be holding a vigil on Wednesday night in memory of the five members of the Fogel family who were massacred in their beds last Shabbat in their home in Itamar.

The brutal murder of the mother, father, and three young children shocked the nation, sparked celebration in Gaza, and prompted Prime Minister Netanyahu to declaim the Palestinian Authority's incitement to violence and glorification of martyrdom which is perpetuating the conflict.

We will meet at the fountain at Bancroft and College at 8:00pm promptly, and walk together to our location on campus. Candles will be provided. There will be an opportunity for everyone to voice their thoughts, so you are welcome to prepare something to say if you are so inclined.

Co-sponsored with the Chabad Jewish Student Group

Thursday, December 16, 2010

Julain Assange, Wikileaks, and San Francisco morons

Right now there is a "flash mob" of protestors near the British consulate, demanding that Julian Assange be freed forthwith. They are furious at limitations on free speech, and also want the United States out of Afghanistan and nearly everywhere else.
They are ...... angry.

Problem is, they're also complete and utter idiots. Julian Assange was freed this morning.

See here:

" Mr Justice Ouseley ordered Mr Assange be released on payment of £240,000 in cash and sureties and on condition he resides at an address in East Anglia. Speaking on the steps of the High Court to dozens of journalists, Mr Assange said: "It's great to feel the fresh air of London again."

The son-of-abitch was let go. Admittedly, he might disappear into an unmarked pit somewhere in the woods, his rotting corpse to be discovered several months later - which would be a jolly good thing - but they let the bastard go.

Julian Assange is an attention-seeking egomaniac who should die a slow painful death, his fans around the world need medication or extermination. The members of the flash mob of traitors in San Francisco at this moment need to be rounded up and brutalized.

This is not about free speech. This is about intent to harm the United States, which is why so many Europeans support Wikileaks and Assange, as well as so many Berkeleyites.
They do not support free speech, they support deliberate damage and terrorism.

American "Radical" Poseurs

The flashmobbers down at Sansome and Sutter (near the Bart station), draw part of their inspiration from the protest in Spain (god rot the Spanish), and the majority of their inspiration from the Bader Meinhoff gang & the Rote Armee Fraktion, the FARC, and the Brigate Rosse.
They are not interested in free speech, but rather the complete destruction of the free world and the triumph of an antique form of Marxism last successfully practiced by Mao's red guards, and currently embodied by treacherous weasels and scum like Richard Becker and International ANSWER, Codepink, and Women in Black, as well as many member of the Berkeley faculty, who though comfortably bourgeois in their roles at the university wish to assert their dissident credentials.

What we really need around here is the sweet smell of teargas, the satisfying thwack of nightsticks on soft politically correct communist flesh, and the panic and moans of arm-chair revolutionaries.
Wikileaks needs to be taken down, and its supporters and enablers arrested - Guantanamo may yet serve a worthwhile purpose.
Julian Assange needs to be disappeared. With prejudice.
Which, the moment that spineless opportunist (and sexual pig) publishes Russian or Chinese secret documents, will undoubtedly happen.

Meanwhile, I'll settle for a good thunderstorm on their asses. It would no doubt make them stink like wet dogs, but someone needs to rain on their parade.

Tuesday, November 16, 2010


On Sunday night in Berkeley, members of Jewish Voice for Peace displayed all their worst character flaws, and ganged up on a middle-aged handicapped woman.
At least, that's the gist of it, from what I can gather.

On Monday they came out with a press release that clearly suggested narrative collusion after the fact. Possibly they were worried that if it became known that they were bullies and hypocrites, impressionable people might no longer flock to their standard.

A fellow blogger rips their press release here:
[Jewish Voice for Peace - lies, distortion, and spin]

The victim of their gangsterism speaks here:
[Jewish Voice for Peace and bully tactics]

I asked one of the other attendees of Jewish Voice for Peace's little public boastfest what happened.

She wrote:

"The chairs in the room were arranged in a big circle. We began by introducing ourselves and discussing our plans for Thanksgiving. Lots of JVP'ers are spending Thanksgiving day on Alcatraz. It was oh so very very Berkeley.

Someone (a pro-Israel person?) began taping. They actively tried to stop her. A spirited discussion ensued about if it was legal or not to tape in a public venue. Were they planning to engage in any illegal activity? Was that why they objected to taping?

Then JVP introduced the students who interrupted Netanyahu. Rae Abileah from Code Pink, Matthew Taylor, 3 others. Oh, they were so proud of their brave, brave, young people!

They set up the video from their disruption. And that is when a pro-Israel person started reading from Chaim Herzog's 1975 speech to the UN on Zionism. Someone else asked Matthew Taylor about the psycho-sexual nature of his (Matthew Taylor's) foreskin restoration crusade. Had he tried any of the do it yourself procedures?

Two loudly angry JVP'ers attempted to prevent someone else taping. I think they were waving their fists at her and trying to push her. It looked very threatening. The victim of the JVP bullying was shoved into a corner, a wiry blonde thing grabbed her wrist, and the camera fell to the group.
And at that point, the shit hit the fan. Chaos and screaming.

Cecilie Shuransky had brought her little boy to the meeting . The turmoil just fascinated him - I suspect he said to his mom on the way home "It wasn't as boring as it usually is".

Rae whined "it's not the same. We interrupted the head of a state. You are young people."

I really hate sinking to their depths.

End quote.

Well, the police were called. Seeing as this happened in Berkeley, you can probably guess which side they were on.

By the way, there appears to be a substantial overlap between IJAN, JVP, and several other groups. Why is it the same abrasively self-righteous "JVP" activists show up at so many events? Why do so many of them stand with people screaming approval of murder and support for ethnic cleansing?

Is it, perhaps, because like Matthew Taylor they have 'issues'?
Or like Rob, they have no social skills?
Maybe like Kate and her friends they wish to hurt their nearest and dearest.

Mr. Taylor, stop talking about your mythical prepuce. Rob, stop play-acting that you’re an old Jew-hating Presbyterian woman every Saturday. Kate, enjoy the remission, and stop blogging - you're a VERY silly writer.

All of you, get counseling.

Oh, and to the victim of Jewish Voice for Peace brutality, I could've told you that pepperspray wouldn't help. Those folks are rather like rabid animals, and the next time you should really use a Colt 45 long neck. Those things were developed to deal with violent Muslim fanatics, so they might actually stop a JVP activist too.
In any case, it's worth a shot.

Tuesday, August 24, 2010

Phillipines must apologize

For generations the Malayan world (Malaysia, Indonesia, Phillipines) took out its frustrations on the resident foreign population. Usually those frustrations were caused by the failures of Malayan types to actually achieve anything worthwhile. The "foreigners", for five centuries, were native-born Chinese - many of many of whom had parents and grandparents who were born there, and many of whom formed the civilized class in the societies of the Malayan world.

Anti-Chinese riots are part of Malaysian history, Indonesian history, and Phillipino history.

The brutal massacres of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries were followed by more polite massacres in the twentieth……

The Malays collaborated lock, stock, and barrel with the Japanese – and robbed and killed Chinese.
The Indonesians collaborated – to the same extent, and with the same result.
The Phillipinos didn’t collaborate so very much – but the results were identical.

In the nineteen sixties, Malays in Kuala Lumpur rioted and killed Chinese. Indonesians organized pogroms, and slaughtered over a million Chinese.
The Phillipinos didn’t riot so much – they were satisfied with merely extorting money and occasionally kidnapping and killing Chinese.


Yesterday a Phillipino policeman took out his anger and frustrations…… by killing eight Chinese tourists from Hong Kong.

They had nothing to do with his anger and frustration. They were just tourists. Wrong place, wrong time.
Still, typical reaction. He got rid of his anger and frustration. They died.

"Why did they do this to us?" said one of the survivors, identified as Mrs Leung. Her husband and two daughters were killed and her son is in intensive care.

It looks like the Phillipine government is, belatedly realizing, that they mismanaged this from start to finish. After all, only Chinese, right?
Except that there are thousands, tens of thousands, of Phillipinos who work in Hong Kong. And China is no longer the weak man of Asia.

The Hong Kong and Peking governments are justifiably furious. And demanding that the Phillipinos "conduct a detailed and comprehensive investigation on the incident".
[Source: BBC]

Dammit, they can demand more.
Demand an abject apology from the Phillipinos.
It's about time the Malayan nations realize that the shoe is on the other foot now.

Saturday, June 12, 2010


In a move of staggering audacity, Youtube has removed the song “We con the world” by the Israeli satirical team Latma, claiming that copyright issues were involved. We call bullpucky on this – the FAIR USE DOCTRINE (US Copyright Office) specifically allows use of copyrighted material in parody. And given that the song in question (‘we are the world’ – by a bunch of self-righteous putzes) has been parodied, copied, spoofed, and made fun of so many times, in ways too numerous to detail, the Youtube (Google) action can only raise the suspicion (meaning: darn well certain assertion) that this equates to censorship, possibly motivated by base motives.

“The truth will never find its way to your tv!”

Here is the LATMA statement about this foul move:

This video is no longer available due to a copyright claim by Warner/ Chappell Music, Inc. .

Copyright experts we advised with before posting the song told us in no uncertain terms that we were within our rights to use the song because we did so in accordance with the Fair Use Doctrine. The Fair Use Doctrine, copied and pasted below from the US Copyright Office stipulates that it is legal and permissible to use copyrighted material under the fair use doctrine for purposes of parody.

Copyright attorneys also warned us that given our clearly lawful use of the song We are the World, if anyone wished to silence our voices, they wouldn't target us. Instead they would target YouTube. It is YouTube's standard practice to remove any material that they receive even the flimsiest threat for because the company wishes to avoid all litigation.

At the same time, this is not YouTube's first move to silence Israeli voices. During Operation Cast Lead, the IDF Spokesman's Unit established a YouTube channel and began posting combat footage on its channel to bypass the anti-Israel media and go directly to news consumers.
Shortly after the IDF channel began making waves, YouTube - which is owned by Google - removed IDF videos from the website. After the move evoked a storm of protest, YouTube restored them but flagged the videos in the same manner it flags pornography. People trying to access the videos received a screen saying, "This video or group may contain content that is inappropriate for some users, as flagged by YouTube's user community. To view this video or group please verify that you are 18 or older by singing in and signing up."

Here's a link to the write-up of the YouTube move.

If YouTube didn't already have a track record for censoring pro-Israel material, I would say that despite the obviously frivolous and unsubstantiated nature of the copyright claim against We Con the World, the company was simply erring on the side of caution.

The fact that more than 3 million people have already seen the video and that it has been written up in major newspapers and featured on major television networks around the world since we first posted it last Thursday night however causes me to fear that something else is going on here.

Despite these obstacles, we at Latma have no intention of crying Uncle. By tomorrow, we will repost our song on blogs throughout the world. If you already downloaded the song, please post it on your website. If not, I will post a non-youtube version on my site tomorrow with instructions from my webmaster about how to download it.

Moreover, stay tuned for our next video next Thursday night.

If someone is in fact trying to silence our voices, they will soon discover that they are messing with the wrong Jews.

Here's that Fair Use Doctrine from the US Copyright Office

"One of the rights accorded to the owner of copyright is the right to reproduce or to authorize others to reproduce the work in copies or phonorecords. This right is subject to certain limitations found in sections 107 through 118 of the copyright law (title 17, U. S. Code). One of the more important limitations is the doctrine of "fair use." The doctrine of fair use has developed through a substantial number of court decisions over the years and has been codified in section 107 of the copyright law.

Section 107 contains a list of the various purposes for which the reproduction of a particular work may be considered fair, such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Section 107 also sets out four factors to be considered in determining whether or not a particular use is fair:

1. The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes

2. The nature of the copyrighted work

3. The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole

4. The effect of the use upon the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work

The distinction between fair use and infringement may be unclear and not easily defined. There is no specific number of words, lines, or notes that may safely be taken without permission.

Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission.

The 1961 Report of the Register of Copyrights on the General Revision of the U.S. Copyright Law cites examples of activities that courts have regarded as fair use: "quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration or comment; quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work, for illustration or clarification of the author's observations; use in a parody of some of the content of the work parodied; summary of an address or article, with brief quotations, in a news report;
reproduction by a library of a portion of a work to replace part of a damaged copy; reproduction by a teacher or student of a small part of a work to illustrate a lesson; reproduction of a work in legislative or judicial proceedings or reports; incidental and fortuitous reproduction, in a newsreel or broadcast, of a work located in the scene of an event being reported."

Copyright protects the particular way an author has expressed himself. It does not extend to any ideas, systems, or factual information conveyed in the work.
The safest course is always to get permission from the copyright owner before using copyrighted material. The Copyright Office cannot give this permission.

When it is impracticable to obtain permission, use of copyrighted material should be avoided unless the doctrine of fair use would clearly apply to the situation. The Copyright Office can neither determine if a certain use may be considered fair nor advise on possible copyright violations. If there is any doubt, it is advisable to consult an attorney.

FL-102, Revised May 2009


"We're waving our own knives......"

YouTube silences Latma, removes We Con the World
Caroline Glick June 12, 2010, 6:01 AM


The music video can still be found at:
As well as:

It is your democratic right, even your duty, to expose yourself to humor, satire, and strong opinions - particularly if a bunch of people wearing pinstripe suits object.

ESPECIALLY if the pinstripe brigade objects!

"The blogosphere and the new media are basically a war zone in a battle for world opinion"
------Major Avital Leibovich

Surely you can decide your own brain-content? Do you really need a bunch of corporate weasels telling you what you can or cannot hear? Do you really think that Silicon Valley types (yoga, wheat-germ, crystal healing, no dairy, and similar self-importance boosting fluff) are in any position to dictate your thoughts?

Watch the video!

Please note: all links above were included in the interest of both fairness and providing substantiation for the opinion(s) cited above. So also the half quotes around the word 'censors' - like all true-blue Americans, we quake at the prospect of our corporate leaders (Google, et al) being pissed at us, and sending a troupe of trained assassin-gibbons to whack us. Honestly. Content is the property of the respective copyright owners (Google, Youtube, Google, IHH, World Con, Google, Erdogan, Google, Caroline Glick, Google, Latma TV, Google, Violent Provocateurs, possibly also Turkey, plus Friends of Hamas, and the already mentioned SRP's - and Google), we're just here to let you form your own, corporate-approved, opinions.
Did I already mention the half-quotes around the word 'censors'?


From Wikipedia: "Fair use and fair dealing - Copyright does not prohibit all copying or replication. In the United States, the fair use doctrine, codified by the Copyright Act of 1976 as 17 U.S.C. § 107, permits some copying and distribution without permission of the copyright holder or payment to same. The statute does not clearly define fair use, but instead gives four non-exclusive factors to consider in a fair use analysis. Those factors are:
1.the purpose and character of the use;
2.the nature of the copyrighted work;
3.the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4.the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.


Please note again: the cited links are included in the interest of both fairness and providing substantiation. We would not want to be found wanting by pinstripers in any of this, as we respect and love them for their attempts to shield us, always, from opinions which might upset us. Or upset European socialists and 'Homicidal Middle-Eastern Religious Fanatics'™, who we have been lead to believe, ARE AN IMPORTANT DEMOGRAPHIC!!!
Until the Europeans declare bankruptcy, like all loyal drones, we will respect their purchasing power, and as for the 'Homicidal Middle-Eastern Religious Fanatics'™, we are keenly aware how important that market is, too.
Did I already mention the half-quotes thing?


Tuesday, June 8, 2010


Once again the sneering pustules of England have united to impose their twisted worldview.
Is there NO hatred to which they will not stoop?

England, which likes to bill itself as the birthplace of democracy, and a liberal tolerant nation besides, delights in taking the lead when it comes to bigotry, political correctness, and promoting an intolerance of which both Stalin and Hitler would approve. Gone are the days when England was the world's brightest light, a bastion against the European darkness. Now what remains is quislingism, pettiness, and a shallowness of vision utterly terrifying in its limitation of scope, depth, or intelligence.

Describing Israel as a “rogue state,” a “terror state way beyond apartheid” and a “war state” with “no appetite for peace or coexistence,” Unite, Britain’s biggest trade union, voted last Thursday for a complete boycott of Israeli goods and services at its annual conference in Manchester.
End quote.


Note this well: the one state which still maintains apartheid, Malaysia, has NEVER been condemned by the British - possibly because Malaysian Apartheid was engineered by the British, is still clothed in acceptable British legal phraseology, and is aimed at the two ethnicities which struggled against British hegemony: the Chinese and the Indians. Malaysia never fought the British; for their limpness and obsequium they are rewarded well, and they are a respected member of the Commonwealth.

The union, which has some two million members, will now “actively and vigorously” promote a boycott of Israeli goods and services “similar to the boycott of South Africa during the apartheid era,” as well as a policy of divestment from Israeli companies.
End quote.

British unions have always had traitors among their ranks. During the cold war, the spies and mercenaries of the East-Bloc were coddled, supported, nurtured by the British left. Many of the fancy boys who accepted vodka and affection from Moscow's secret agents posted to the Court of St. James came from the ranks of 'Labour'.

Raymond Morrell, from the London and Eastern region of Unite’s Aerospace and Shipbuilding sector, described Israel as a “terror state” that goes “way beyond” what South Africa once was.
End quote.

Raymond Morrell, who in a different world would probably be a bomb-throwing irredentist instead of merely a moral cripple, does not grasp the meaning of words.

In a region where terror is funded and encouraged by Arabs (ever a fetishistic fondness of British men), engineered by rabid religious fanatics, cheered by Pakistan, Turkey, and Iran, Israel is the only NON-TERROR state.

In a world where the Saudis still outlaw freedom of religion and import non-Muslims from Africa and Asia to work as domestics - in conditions often too horrible to detail - a world where Egypt semi-officially sanctions violence against Christians and Sudanese, a world where the whorehouses of the Gulf states and Lebanon are filled with the abused victims of Arab venality and sexism - Raymond Morrell shows his utter lack of a moral compass and his complete ethical deprivation by accusing the single country in the Middle East where women have equality and gays have rights of being worse than Britain's former favourite client, which even after the Boers took over bought arms and ammo from the English.

But then, what else could one expect from the British?

With no mention of rocket and mortar attacks on Israel, the motion called for an annulment of the European Union-Israel trade agreement and for sanctions to be imposed.
End quote.

How precisely a reflection of English displeasure at having been kicked out of the Holy Land at the end of World War Two. The English do not soon forget their humiliation.
It took until 1939 before they opportunistically forgave the United States for having rejected their colonial dictats, and even today the voices of anti-Americanism still ring loudest in the British Isles - despite their freedom being founded upon American resolve in the face of Hitler's fascism, Stalin's bombast, European hypocrisy and weakness, and Arab treachery.
The English, like the French, are at heart "surrender monkeys", as their largest trade union, once again, demonstrates.
Gentlemen! We really did not need another example! The history books are already filled with Albion's perfidy.

But it is remarkable how an upper-class distaste for Jews has translated into a virulent lower-class bigotry.
Truly they are a "united" kingdom.

Cross-posted here:

Wednesday, June 2, 2010

Malaysia, Indonesia, Bahrain, Kuwait, Pakistan, Ireland, Turkey, and Holland support terror

[Sarcasm alert] BECAUSE TERROR IS THE NEW 'DEMOCRACY'! [End sarcasm alert]

From the BBC:
About 120 activists arrived in Jordan via the Allenby crossing in the morning to cheers and applause from supporters.
The activists, from Arab and Muslim nations such as Malaysia, Indonesia, Bahrain, Kuwait and Pakistan, were due to travel on to Amman, from where they would travel to their respective countries.

End quote.


Malaysia still practices a vicious form of racism and apartheid against the Chinese who have been there for generations, in some cases longer than the 'original Malays', many of whom are descended from Sumatrans, Javans, and Bugis who immigrated during the British colonial period; Indonesia has Muslim fanatics who massacred Christians in Ambon and animists in Borneo, in Jihad campaigns that still fester - their alleged counter-terror operations concentrate mainly on preventing their Islamicists from destroying the tourist industry.

Bahrain, like many Gulf States, has business men and clerics who channel funds for AlQaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, and various other Jihadi causes; Kuwait presents the same scenario - they resent the Western World, even after having their char-siu saved during Saddam's day; Pakistan is filled with thieves and murderers with impeccable Muslim credentials, and remains the main source of Terrorism in the civilized world, aside from having an intelligence service that is heavily involved in Jihad and an intelligentsia which spews conspiracy theories, Islamic hatred of America, and venom against Christians, Jews, Buddhists, Hindus, and Ahmadis.

Ireland has replaced their love of Celto-Fascist thugs with a fanatical love of anti-Semites and revolutionaries in the third world; Turkey is hand in glove with Jihadi charities funding Hamas and Al-Qaeda in Iraq; and Holland so tolerates Islamic radicals that it supports them with state funds.

Note that the next terror-ship to attempt to break Israel's blockade comes from Ireland - a country which makes up for it's relatively short history of Jew-hate by being that much more enthusiastic and mis-informed.

The Turkish role in spreading Islamic radicalism is, by now, self-evident. That country should be expelled from NATO as soon as possible, though doing so would probably hasten the time when the Turks use our own weapons against us. Turkey is once again positioning itself as the head of the Islamic umma, and the Ghazi mentality has come back tenfold since the days when the Turks still paid lip-service to secularism and civilized values.

The Dutch harbor so many angry Muslims, mainly Arabs and Turks, that their entire nation is at risk - the Socialist Party ('Socialistische Partij') has already seen the light and collaborates at every opportunity with the future masters of Amsterdam and Rotterdam, while the old mainline Socialists (Dutch Labor Party - Partij van de Arbeid) still maintains a modest pretense at Dutch values, albeit only their own rather eccentric interpretation thereof.

For more on the Turks:

For more on the Dutch:

The role of the Malays, Indonesians, and Arabs in international terror and the perpetration of Islamic tyranny is already too well known, and you can find it on the internet with no trouble at all.

Friday, May 28, 2010


The Palestinian 'chief-obstacle' has finally made it clear:

That, at the very minimum, is the substance of a recent statement.

"Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas revealed Thursday that he does not intend to hold direct negotiations with Israeli leaders until Israel and the PA have reached a United States-mediated final agreement regarding the borders of a future PA state. Those borders must include Jerusalem as the capital, he added."
End quote.

[Article: Abbas: Agree on Borders First, then Hold Direct Talks]

This means that unless Israel gives up her capitol city - the focus of Jewish yearning for all the long years of exile and for several centuries overwhelmingly Jewish - the PLO will not even consider coming to terms with reality and the existence of the state which predates their own violent nationalism.

It will of course be remembered that until 1967, the people who now call themselves Palestinians considered themselves Jordanian, Syrian, and Egyptian. In point of fact, one could argue that there was no sense of differentiation from the Arab Umma before Hussein of Jordan wrested control of his kingdom back and expelled the PLO during Black September.

[Note: Not only Jordan was glad to see the backs of this group - Lebanon, Tunis, Kuwait, and Iraq were pleased by every "Palestinian" departure. Arafat, founder of this farce of a nation, managed to insult and injure every Arab government that ever extended the hand of friendship to his cutthroat clique. Arab support for the "Palestinian" cause can be seen as little more than a desire to be well rid of so unstable and volatile a bunch.]

"It is the aim of negotiations to lead to the establishment of an independent Palestinian state with Jerusalem as its capital," Abbas said at a press conference in Malaysia. The PA chairman is currently on a tour of Asia. "
End quote.

There is no doubt that the Malaysians lapped his words up. Malays have bitterly resented their own status as unimportant fringe players in the grand scheme of things, and their loathing for the values of Western Civilization has driven many of them into the arms of ethnic hate and Islamic Nationalism - since the eighties, their more extreme elements have sought to prove their worth to the Arabs.
Who, except for desperate gangsters and crooks like Abbas, persist in regarding them as little more than pathetic wannabees.

Much like the Pakistanis, in other words.

Isn't anyone getting tired of this bunch of idiots?

Sunday, May 16, 2010

Obama's foreign policy

Excerpts from a BBC article on Obama's foreign policy 051410

According to Professor Eliot Cohen of Johns Hopkins University in Washington, the apparent shifts in the US approach to both Israel and Afghanistan "reflect the encounter of preconceived notions with reality, or really with two realities, namely, that you don't make your allies behave better by slapping them around, and you don't win over serious enemies by attempting to ingratiate yourself with them".


US foreign policy watcher Charles Kupchan at the Council on Foreign Relations takes a rather different view.

"President Obama's foreign policy has actually been quite consistent. From the start, he has preferred engagement - interspersed with moments of tough talk - to isolation," he said.
"He has confronted President Karzai on corruption and governance failures, but continues to work with him; like it or not, Karzai is the only game in town.

"On balance, Obama has been pragmatic, not ideological. During his first year, he had trouble turning his visions into reality. But in the second year, implementation of policy has improved - less talk and more action."

Many have commented on the paucity of results so far. Iran's nuclear programme seems restricted more by its own technical limitations than anything else.

But Robin Niblett, director of the London-based think tank Chatham House, said there were some merits in the process itself.

"Engagement changes the dynamics for US foreign policy even if it does not achieve immediate and specific results," he said.
"Opening bilateral discussions with Iran has not changed Iran's behaviour as yet, but has increased the willingness of Europeans to back more serious sanctions.
"And 're-setting' with Russia has not stopped Russia from pursuing a policy of reasserting influence in Ukraine and the Caucasus, but has made discussions with them over Iran more constructive."


Critics have lambasted the president for what they see as a pointless attack on a good ally.
Others have argued strongly US pressure on Israel is long overdue and that it should be stepped up and maintained.

Nathan Brown of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace has chronicled and analysed the failings of the Middle East peace process for longer than he would probably care to admit.

He was less concerned about the pressure on Mr Netanyahu, but rather about the context in which it was being brought to bear.

"If the Obama administration is serious about pursuing Israeli-Palestinian peace, then some tension with the Israeli government is inevitable - its positions are simply quite far from US ideas about a settlement," he said. "The problem was not the toughness, but that the toughness seemed detached from any strategy. Now, after more than a year in office, the Obama administration finally seems to be piecing together a strategy."

Nonetheless, Mr Brown is far from convinced that this strategy is based upon a sound foundation.

"The basic problem is that it assumes that the conditions prevailing five or 10 years ago still hold," added Mr Brown. "They do not."
"The Palestinian side is split and weak. Israeli public opinion - and not just right-wing leaders - betrays signs of having checked out of the peace process.
"Pursuing peace talks as if Hamas does not exist, Gaza is irrelevant and the Israelis are on board is unrealistic."

Mr Niblett said: "The shifts reflect a willingness to adjust and not be didactic if things are not working. It is part of the pragmatism that permeates the Obama administration."

But he cautioned that there were clearly limits to the US policy of engagement.
"The test will be how the Obama administration adapts its policies through this second year," said Mr Niblett.

Indeed, the coming weeks and months will provide perhaps the greatest test of President Obama's whole approach to the world. If the Israel-Palestinian talks make little progress -as most experts expect - does the Obama team have an interim approach to prevent or contain any renewed outbreak of violence?
With US outreach efforts to Syria stalled, can another conflict on Israel's northern border with Lebanon be avoided?
And perhaps the biggest question of all, even if another round of sanctions against Iran can be agreed at the United Nations, what then?

If Iran's nuclear programme continues, will the Obama administration have to come to terms with at least a "nuclear-capable" Iran. Or might it seek to change the status quo by some other means?



Back in the fifties and sixties, no one thought that the United States bond with the free Chinese on Taiwan would ever be broken. Our loyalty to our friends, who had fought on our side against the Japanese during WWII, was utterly unshakeable.

Nixon, at that time the darling of the American rightwingers, and probably a closet John Bircher in addition to being a foul-mouthed bigot in his private life, dumped Taiwan into the garbage by recognizing the Peoples Republic, and reaffirming as a matter of government policy that in essence there was only one China.
Not two countries, not two valid systems and ideologies. Not two divergent branches of the same tree, one despotic and one democratic. Not two societies with a similar heritage and a formerly shared country. One.
That decision delegitimized Taiwan, and placed the burden of resolving the issue which divided the two sides on Taipei.

This is relevant for two reasons:
1. The United States has a track-record of allowing opportunity and pragmatism to triumph over historical friendship and alliance, irrespective of political commonality and shared values.
2. Being right is far less important to American foreign policy than being big business.

That second point explains why oil companies have more traction at Foggy Bottom and on American university campuses than any number of friends of Israel. It also indicates that, until we have entirely broken our reliance on the Arabs, the United States establishment must largely view Israel and the Jews with more than a little jaundice at best, or as an obstruction to the American Dream at worst.
This is especially plangent when our new "friends" of the Asian mainland dominate our supply lines and compete with us for that precious Arab commodity.

Note: It is natural (or in any case 'normal') that world powers allow practical considerations to shape their foreign policies; Britain and France, for example, have always acted thus. And both of those countries have by their subsequent policy formulations "justified" the rankest of stinking opportunisms.

In our own case, United States involvement in Latin America is a litany of brigandage, blackmail, and support for sadists, thugs, and criminals.
The bigger the rapist, the greater the chance that we supplied him with armaments and trained his thugs in the approved way of sowing terror.

Though there have been many exceptions, our past behavior somewhat diminishes our claim to moral leadership or the pretence that our foreign policy is based solely on our democratic ideals.

The betrayal of Taiwan can by no means be considered an isolated case - in 1949, the United States and Britain threw the Dutch under the bus in Indonesia. Not that the Dutch hegemony there had any remaining merit - as rulers they were morally bankrupt - but in that the Indonesian nationalist were brigands and murderers who had collaborated with the Japanese Imperial Army and intended to exploit their nation's wealth and human resources in a manner and to an extent which put all previous imperialist to shame, they could not be considered in any way "on the same page" as the Western World - as events in Indonesia throughout the fifties and sixties abundantly showed.
The late Suharto, along with Marcos of the Philippines a great friend of the United States, put even his predecessor Sukarno to shame, running a dictatorship more extortionate and more brutal than even many Eastern-European tyrants. It was very good for American business.

Nor can it be argued that the United States acted with any ethical consistency, as our support of the French in Indochina during that period makes clear: The French employed even more murderous tactics than the Dutch in their desperate attempt to hold onto empire, the VietMin clearly had both the people and the opinion of the world on their side - but France was a far more valuable asset to the United States than the Netherlands.

[That's why the French fought on our side in Irak, whereas the Dutch.... Oh wait! It was actually the other way around! My bad! The Dutch fought with us in Irak, but the French sniped from the sidelines and supported Saddam....... Oh well, vive la France anyhow.]

For nations, the burden of being small is eternal vigilance.

Friday, April 30, 2010


Speech by Spanish politician, journalist and activist Pilar Rahola.

Why don't we see demonstrations against Islamic dictatorships in London , Paris , Barcelona ? Or demonstrations against the Burmese dictatorship? Why aren't there demonstrations against the enslavement of millions of women who live without any legal protection? Why aren't there demonstrations against the use of children as human bombs where there is conflict with Islam? Why has there been no leadership in support of the victims of Islamic dictatorship in Sudan ? Why is there never any outrage against the acts of terrorism committed against Israel ? Why is there no outcry by the European left against Islamic fanaticism? Why don't they defend Israel 's right to exist? Why confuse support of the Palestinian cause with the defense of Palestinian terrorism? And finally, the million dollar question: Why is the left in Europe and around the world obsessed with the two most solid democracies, the United States and Israel, and not with the worst dictatorships on the planet? The two most solid democracies, who have suffered the bloodiest attacks of terrorism, and the left doesn't care.

And then, to the concept of freedom. In every pro Palestinian European forum I hear the left yelling with fervor: "We want freedom for the people!" Not true. They are never concerned with freedom for the people of Syria or Yemen or Iran or Sudan , or other such nations. And they are never preoccupied when Hammas destroys freedom for the Palestinians. They are only concerned with using the concept of Palestinian freedom as a weapon against Israeli freedom. The resulting consequence of these ideological pathologies is the manipulation of the press. The international press does major damage when reporting on the question of the Israeli-Palestinian issue. On this topic they don't inform, they propagandize. When reporting about Israel the majority of journalists forget the reporter code of ethics.
And so, any Israeli act of self-defense becomes a massacre, and any confrontation, genocide. So many stupid things have been written about Israel , that there aren't any accusations left to level against her.

At the same time, this press never discusses Syrian and Iranian interference in propagating violence against Israel ; the indoctrination of children and the corruption of the Palestinians. And when reporting about victims, every Palestinian casualty is reported as tragedy and every Israeli victim is camouflaged, hidden or reported about with disdain. And let me add on the topic of the Spanish left. Many are the examples that illustrate the anti-Americanism and anti-Israeli sentiments that define the Spanish left.

For example, one of the leftist parties in Spain has just expelled one of its members for creating a pro-Israel website. I quote from the expulsion document: "Our friends are the people of Iran , Libya and Venezuela , oppressed by imperialism, and not a Nazi state like Israel ." In another example, the socialist mayor of Campozuelos changed Shoah Day, commemorating the victims of the Holocaust, with Palestinian Nabka Day, which mourns the establishment of the State of Israel, thus showing contempt for the six million European Jews murdered in the Holocaust.
Or in my native city of Barcelona , the city council decided to commemorate the 60th anniversary of the creation of the State of Israel, by having a week of solidarity with the Palestinian people. Thus, they invited Leila Khaled, a noted terrorist from the 70's and current leader of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, a terrorist organization so described by the European Union, which promotes the use of bombs against Israel.

This politically correct way of thinking has even polluted the speeches of president Zapatero. His foreign policy falls within the lunatic left, and on issues of the Middle East he is unequivocally pro Arab. I can assure you that in private, Zapatero places on Israel the blame for the conflict in the Middle East , and the policies of foreign minister Moratinos reflect this. The fact that Zapatero chose to wear a kafiah in the midst of the Lebanon conflict is no coincidence; it's a symbol. Spain has suffered the worst terrorist attack in Europe and it is in the crosshairs of every Islamic terrorist organization.
As I wrote before, they kill us with cell phones hooked to satellites connected to the Middle Ages. An yet the Spanish left is the most anti Israeli in the world. And then it says it is anti Israeli because of solidarity. This is the madness I want to denounce in this conference.

Conclusion: I am not Jewish. Ideologically I am left and by profession a journalist. Why am I not anti Israeli like my colleagues? Because as a non-Jew I have the historical responsibility to fight against Jewish hatred and currently against the hatred for their historic homeland, Israel . To fight against anti-Semitism is not the duty of the Jews, it is the duty of the non-Jews. As a journalist it is my duty to search for the truth beyond prejudice, lies and manipulations. The truth about Israel is not told.
As a person from the left who loves progress, I am obligated to defend liberty, culture, civic education for children, coexistence and the laws that the Tablets of the Covenant made into universal principles. Principles that Islamic fundamentalism systematically destroys.
That is to say that as a non-Jew, journalist and lefty I have a triple moral duty with Israel, because if Israelis destroyed, liberty, modernity and culture will be destroyed too. The struggle of Israel , even if the world doesn't want to accept it, is the struggle of the world.

Pilar Rahola

Bravo, sister!

Saturday, April 17, 2010

But are they edible?

And the answer is, apparently, yes. Whales, that is. Now while SOME of my associates would argue that, because whales have neither hoofs nor cud, and can't be slaughtered (is that "schocheted"?) by a quick stroke to the neck that severs arteries and airpassages, they are by definition not edible, by reason of being not kosher ......................................

That argument doesn't work for me.

I don't keep kosher, and I lack the food neuroses of wasps.
Yes, I can deal with it. No hang ups.


The beasts vaunted intelligence is ALSO not an issue. Pigs are very intelligent - much more intelligent than cows or sheep (extremely stupid animals), and way way more intelligent than chickens (stupid, evil, and smelly), yet we eat those. Delicious!

Vegans are remarkably dull and stupid - but we do not eat them (they probably taste like crap anyway).

There is a Japanese site which advocates whale consumption:

Can't read what I think are recipes. But there's a classic SOUTHPARK episode.

Trigger and Dolly and Bubbles snuff it. You should have kissed them before they died.

"Thanks for the delicious whale! "
---------Sea Shepherd Japan Fanclub

Whale Sashimi
Whale Bacon
Canned Whale Meat Yamatoni
Canned Whale Meat Sunoko
Tatsuta Fried Whale

And here's a great FOOD movie!
It reminded me of such classics as 'Como Agua Para Chocolate' and 'Babette's Feast', as well as so very many Julia Child episodes! You will love it! Watch it again and again!

There. Wasn't that good?


Oh by the way, racist honky Australians and New Zealanders suck. Are you as tired as I am by the sneering whitey superiority of Greenpeace activists? Anyone wanna harpoon the bastards?
If so, I applaud you. Just make sure you do it in international waters. That way sharks have some fun too. Sharks are good.

All your cetacean are belong to us!!!
. . . . . . . .
. . . . . .
. . . .
. .