Thursday, 03 June 2010

ENCOURAGING THE JIHADISTS

Ken Berwitz

Excerpted from a just-released Associated Press article:

WASHINGTON President Barack Obama said Thursday that the deadly Israeli raid on an aid flotilla bound for the Gaza Strip was "tragic", but he stopped short of condemning the actions of Israeli forces.

While Obama said the deaths of nine people were unnecessary, he said the U.S. wants to wait for "an investigation of international standards" to determine the facts. Israel, he said, should agree to such an investigation.

"They recognize that this can't be good for Israel's long-term security," Obama said in an interview with CNN's Larry King airing Thursday night.

Obama said the most recent incident presents an opportunity for all parties involved to break out of the current impasse and move toward a two-state solution in which Palestinians and Israelis can live peacefully side by side.

"We have been trying to do this piecemeal for decades now," Obama said. "It just doesn't work."

Amazing how the AP can quote President Obama as saying Israel's actions were "tragic and unnecessary" and then claim he wasn't condemning those actions.  What the hell do they think he was doing?  Testifying to how much he agrees with what Israel did?

In the interests of educating President Obama to reality as best I can, here is part of what I posted yesterday.  The repost is necessary because it directly addresses the President's dream-world concept of "an opportunity for all parties involved to break out of the current impasse and move toward a two-state solution in which Palestinians and Israelis can live peacefully side by side":

Straight from the hamas charter, word for word:

Article Thirteen: Peaceful Solutions, [Peace] Initiatives and International Conferences
[Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion; the nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its faith, the movement educates its members to adhere to its principles and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland as they fight their Jihad

What part of that is hard for Mr. Obama to understand?  What part of it indicates an opportunity "to break out of the current impasse and yada yada yada two state solution yada yada live peacefully side by side yada yada"?

Can he possibly be this dense? 

The answer is that a man who does not comprehend that his words today have encouraged the people who live by that charter, may be dense enough to believe anything at all..

Zeke .... .... .... free`, it's really quite simple: ... ... ... The arabs want a two state solution: ... ... One state for Hamas, and one state for the Palestinian Authority. (06/04/10)

free` That is the one component of a two state solution that I never see talked about. What are you going to do with hamas in this two state solution? (06/03/10)


WHEN HARD LEFT WOMEN ARE TERRIFIED OF SARAH PALIN

Ken Berwitz

This one doesn't need a lot of analysis (though each of the individual participants certainly could use some).

Here, from last night's joy behar show on Headline News, are three mindless, left wing robots going off on the woman who terrifies them more than any other:  Sarah Palin:

JOY BEHAR: You know, theres something other than Russia that Sarah Palin can see from her house. Its Joe McGinniss, the author who moved in next door to Palin while, while he writes a book about her. Shes calling foul claiming her privacy is being invaded. Now, a nasty war of words has erupted between the two. With me now are Ana Marie Cox, Washington correspondent for GQ magazine, and Lizz Winstead, comedian and co-creator of the Daily Show. Okay, Palin has made McGinniss a target of a national, of national harassment because he moved in next door to her. Okay, he`s renting a house. You know the story. Most people, I think, know it at this point. Shes tweeted and Facebooked about him. A conservative radio talk show host gave out his e-mail address which he had to shut down, and, after he moved in, she posted a Facebook, a picture of him on Facebook in the house. Now, is she now invading his privacy, Lizz?

LIZZ WINSTEAD, COMEDIAN: Heres the thing. If she does this in her personal life-

BEHAR: Yeah.

WINSTEAD: -you know, just the pre-emptive crazy, can you imagine if she was holding a high public office. Like, it would be horrible. This is how she reacts, shes just reactive and bizarre.

BEHAR: Yeah, she overreacts.

WINSTEAD: Yeah, and I think she is being a little bit weird. I mean, its, at first, I was like, its kind of weird he moved in next door-

BEHAR: Yeah.

WINSTEAD: -but then my second thought was, he made it very public he was doing this. So, because he knew she was going to react this way. I mean A, hell get press for it, but B, why not move in next door to her? Its an investigative journalists dream to have the subject that you are, living in the house next to you. How awesome is that?

BEHAR: Ana Marie, do you find it creepy at all that hes there?

ANA MARIE COX, GQ MAGAZINE: Well, yes, I mean, I think, as a feminist, you know, as a woman, the male gaze is a little unsettling, but, as a journalist, I find it really upsetting the way that shes reacting to him. And I have to agree with Lizz, I think the overreaction here and the escalation that shes done, can you imagine if she had at her disposal, you know, a private police force or a national police force? I mean, if she was actually holding office and had an investigative team that she could have working for her, if she had access to peoples records, if she could do whatever she wanted, imagine what kind of havoc she could wreak in this guys life, which, of course, makes me think, remember Troopergate? That all seems, this all seems really familiar now and even more unsettling.

WINSTEAD: Well, and it also, she feels like she deserves this power, and thats the part that freaks me out, is that she really feels like any amount of power that she is given, whether shes governor or just a, you know, a talking bot, it feels like shes just, the second she gets a moment of power, she just feels like she can do whatever she wants with it.

COX: And not that she can do whatever she wants with it, but use it against her enemies.

WINSTEAD: Yes.

COX: She is someone who definitely like, feels like she has enemies.

WINSTEAD: Right.

COX: And that they are personal enemies. Like, she cannot take this to the level of abstraction.

BEHAR: Paranoid.

COX: She cant think of this as like a journalist covering a subject, right?

BEHAR: Right.

COX: It is Joe McGinniss attacking her, her personally. And, you know, and she brought her kids into this, which I have to say I dont has anything-

BEHAR: Well, she implies in her Facebook thing that hes going to be staring at Piper through the window, which automatically makes him into some kind of pervert, which is not his intention at all. Okay, the fight escalated this morning when McGinniss went on NBCs Today Show. Watch.

JOE MCGINNISSS, AUTHOR/SARAH PALIN`S NEIGHBOR: Its probably a lesson for the American people of the power Palin has to incite hatred and her willingness and readiness to do it. She has pushed a button and unleashed the hounds of hell, and now theyre out there slobbering and barking and growling. And thats the same kind of tactic and Im not calling her a Nazi but thats the same kind of tactic that the Nazi troopers used in Germany in the `30s, and I dont think theres any place for it in America.

BEHAR: Okay, now she says in response, "When I say, all right, leave my kids alone, it means simply that. Let my kids have a fun summer without having a journalist 15 feet from their play area. How that equates me with the Nazis is quite beyond me." Okay, shes not, he didnt really equate her with the Nazis. Hes saying the tactic is very Nazi-like.

WINSTEAD: Well, I just think any time you know-

BEHAR: Which is, which is what? Which is unleashing the wrath of the Palinites out there on this guy.

WINSTEAD: Yes.

BEHAR: Thats where the Nazi tactic comes in because when she says theyre attacking or being a threat to my children, all of these little Palinites go berserk.

WINSTEAD: I know, but just Nazi thing kind of, like, he has (UNINTELLIGIBLE) the Nazi thing.

BEHAR: Over the edge.

WINSTEAD: Over the edge, you know what, I just find it boring. Now, heres the thing that I think is the biggest problem with Palin, is that why didnt Bravo find her two weeks before McCain did, and we could just had the real housewives-

BEHAR: I know, we have to blame him.

WINSTEAD: -of Alaska and have it begun because she is exactly like that crazy woman on the Housewives of New Jersey.

BEHAR: Yes, the other thing is that isnt she the one who put her kids in the spotlight in the first place? I mean, they-

WINSTEAD: Yes.

BEHAR: -at the convention, when they were passing that kid out more than a joint at a Grateful Dead concert.

WINSTEAD: Yeah.

BEHAR: Remember that?

WINSTEAD: She drags them out constantly.

BEHAR: I mean, she started it as far as I can tell.

WINSTEAD: She already wrote a book about her own dumb life anyway, and, as far as I can tell, when Joe McGinniss writes about Sarah Palin, he doesnt go into her personal life. Hes writing about whether or not she has a modicum of skill-

BEHAR: Yeah.

WINSTEAD: -to run anything.

BEHAR: Right. Now, do you think, Ana Marie, do you think-

COX: Shes certainly good at running her own branding.

WINSTEAD: Yes.

COX: I mean, I think, that, thats what she has a skill at. I mean, I dont think she has, she could be the CEO of anything other than, you know, Palinville, the Palin company. And shes branded herself really expertly, like even this, her outcry over McGinniss, puts her in this weird, non-threatening female position. I mean, we were sort of sold a bill of goods about her that shes a strong woman. But everything she does in the public eye makes me think shes actually very retrograde.

BEHAR: So isnt this, isnt it, the fence is up, shouldnt that be the end of the conversation? The fence is up.

WINSTEAD: Well, the fence is up, yeah. But you know what? I just feel, too, its not brave to attack through Facebook and Twitter. Youre a grown woman with a public platform. I mean, its really weird.

BEHAR: Okay. Thanks, ladies, very much. And you can catch the fabulous Lizz Winstead at the Flynn Center for the Performing Arts, in Burlington, Vermont on June 19th. Well be back in a minute with Alan Alda.


You know where this is going right from jump street, when behar's reaction to hard-left author joe mcginnis moving next door to Ms. Palin's home, with a terrace overlooking her property, apparently is that Palin is invading mcginnis's privacy.  Add the inference that Ms. Palin said she could see Russia from her house, which she never said (actually Tina Fey said that as part of a comedy routine) and it is not hard to understand the, er, quality of the segment.

Simply stated (and I do mean simply), you have three hall of fame twits playing "can you top this" with a nonstop cacophany of idiotic, ignorant, insulting comments about Sarah Palin, who obviously scares the excrement out of them.

Why is Ms. Palin so scary?  Maybe it is because she got as far as she did without money or friends in high places, but rather with her own levels of intelligence, persistence and guts.  No wonder these three would be intimidated.

FYI, after almost a year on this show, behar is dead last among cable news networks in her time slot.  By a ton, too; even what's left of Larry King blows her away. 

The latest numbers (as of last night):  Sean Hannity: 2,442,000 viewers, Rachel Maddow: 1,069,000, Larry King: 838,000 and joy behar: 593,000.  And that's with a lead-in of Nancy Grace, the network's single highest-rated prime time host.

So while the bad news is that behar, winstead and cox made complete fools of themselves, the good news (for them and the viewing public) is that almost no one saw them do it.


THE HOME TAX CREDIT: WHAT DID IT STIMULATE?

Ken Berwitz

When President Obama and his Democratic congress subsidized home sales with your tax money by giving sellers an $8000 tax credit, media were happy to report the resulting jump.

But did this actually stimulate home sales or was it just an artificial jump that disspated when the tax credit ended?

Here is your answer, excerpted from Diana Olick's article at cnbc.com:

Everybody take a nice long look at today's Pending Home Sales Index from the National Association of Realtors, because it's just about the last positive picture we're going to see for a while.

 

Yes, the index rose even more than expected, as buyers rushed in to take advantage of the home buyer tax credit.

 

And yes, those numbers will show up in Existing Home Sales in May and June, but then look out.

 

This index is based on contracts signed in August, and that's how the credit was set up; you had to sign your contract by April 30th and close by June 30th in order to get your $8000 if you're a first time buyer and $6500 if you're a move up buyer.

 

And then came May, traditionally the height of the spring housing season.

 

Mortgage applications to purchase a home began to sink. Now, four weeks later, mortgage purchase applications are down nearly 40 percent from a month ago to their lowest level since April of 1997. Yes, you can argue that a larger-than normal share of buyers today are all cash, but those are largely investors.

 

That means real organic buyers are exiting in droves.

Translation:  the giveaway didn't stimulate a thing except another increase in our crushing deficit burden.

That's a major story, wouldn't you say?  So let's see whether, and where, it is placed in major news venues tonight and tomorrow.

Wanna take bets?


THE HAMAS CHARTER

Ken Berwitz

The world - very much including the Obama administration - continues to rain vilification down on Israel for enforcing its blockade of ships going to Gaza -- ships loaded with Israel/Jew haters and funded by radical leftists and radical islam (which our wonderful "neutral" media barely mention in their reports).

To remind you, the ships set sail with the express intent of provoking an incident.  When they got to the blockade they were not attacked:  they were instead told to go to Israel's port of Ashdod, where - under the watchful eyes of the world - they would be inspected and whatever humanitarian supplies there were would then be transported to Gaza by land. 

But the ships didn't do that.  The Israel haters wanted an incident.  So they provoked it by ignoring those instructions, and then violently attacked the Israelis who attempted to inspect the ships' cargo. 

Israel's military response was a direct consequence of these actions.

But since the world seems intent on making sure that Israel is seen as the provocateur and that Gaza receives supplies without any inspection or oversight, I thought you might be interested in knowing the intentions of the people controlling that awful place.

hamas controls Gaza.  Every inch of it. 

You may recall that, years ago, hamas won a majority of seats in the more or less free elections held there.  But then they violently, murderously, removed every non-hamas office holder and took over the entire territory. 

That's what they do to their own people.  Now let's see what they think about Israel and Jews.

To accomplish this I have put together a group of excerpts, taken verbatim, from the hamas charter.  Please be advised that they comprise only a small portion of what should trouble you about this group - which is why I am providing this link so that you can read the entire document.  As always, I do not want you to take my word for it, I want you to see for yourself.

Here are the excerpts:

Article Eight: The Slogan of the Hamas
Allah is its goal, the Prophet its model, the Quran its Constitution, Jihad its path and death for the case of Allah its most sublime belief.

Article Eleven: The Strategy of Hamas: Palestine is an Islamic Waqf (Islamic property)
The Islamic Resistance Movement believes that the land of Palestine has been an Islamic Waqf throughout the generations and until the Day of Resurrection, no one can renounce it or part of it, or abandon it or part of it. No Arab country nor the aggregate of all Arab countries, and no Arab King or President nor all of them in the aggregate, have that right, nor has that right any organization or the aggregate of all organizations, be they Palestinian or Arab, because Palestine is an Islamic Waqf throughout all generations and to the Day of Resurrection.

 

Article Twelve: Hamas in Palestine, Its Views on Homeland and Nationalism
Hamas regards Nationalism (Wataniyya) as part and parcel of the religious faith. Nothing is loftier or deeper in Nationalism than waging Jihad against the enemy and confronting him when he sets foot on the land of the Muslims.

 

Article Thirteen: Peaceful Solutions, [Peace] Initiatives and International Conferences
[Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion; the nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its faith, the movement educates its members to adhere to its principles and to raise the banner of Allah over their homeland as they fight their Jihad

 

Article Fifteen: The Jihad for the Liberation of Palestine is an Individual Obligation
When our enemies usurp some Islamic lands, Jihad becomes a duty binding on all Muslims. In order to face the usurpation of Palestine by the Jews, we have no escape from raising the banner of Jihad.

Tell me:  If you were an Israeli, and this group was in charge of the territory next door with the support of most of its people (and the terror-stricken silence of everyone else), would you have reason to worry about what was being shipped to them?

A blockade is perfectly legal under international law when it is enforced against a hostile entity (country, territory, etc.). 

Would you say this is a hostile entity?  Would you blockade and inspect its incoming cargos if you could? 

These are some of the facts surrounding this incident that our media are not telling you.  I thought you should know -- and maybe even tell others, when they attack Israel by reciting half-information that they read in the New York Times or see on the network news.


BARNEY FRANK: YESTERDAY AND TODAY

Ken Berwitz

Barney Frank yesterday (from CBS News, among others):

Democratic Rep. Barney Frank of Massachusetts has broken ranks with many of his colleagues and criticized Israel following Monday's deadly raid on a flotilla attempting to break the blockade of the Gaza strip.

In an interview with the Boston Herald, Frank, who is Jewish, said Israel's treatment of Arabs around some West Bank settlements "makes me ashamed that there would be Jews that would engage in that kind of victimization of a minority."

Frank, in his comments to the Herald, reportedly referred to those killed in the raid as "innocent people," prompting anger from the leader of a Jewish group interviewed for the story.

"Once you have a combat situation and innocent people die, I mean, you know, look at our problems in Afghanistan, and we have an obligation to try and avoid it," he said.

Barney Frank today (from vosizneias.com, among others):

Washington - U.S. Rep. Barney Frank scrambled yesterday to backtrack from his criticisms of an Israeli raid on a pro-Palestinian flotilla that left nine dead - saying he never referred to those killed as innocent.

Frank, (D-Newton), came under fire from local Jewish groups after telling the Herald Tuesday he was as a Jew ... ashamed of some Israeli actions and saying there should be a genuinely impartial inquiry into the raid, (as was reported here on VIN News). Yesterday, Frank said a probe by an Israeli-commissioned group is best.

The record of the United Nations with regard to Israel is a badly biased one and clearly no inquiry by the U.N. would have the credibility it ought to have, Franks statement said.

In his Tuesday meeting with Herald reporters and editors, when asked how the United States should respond to the raid, Frank said he needed to review the incident. He then said, Once you have a combat situation and innocent people die, I mean, you know, look at our problems in Afghanistan, and we have an obligation to try and avoid it.

Franks statement yesterday said he was not referring to the slain pro-Palestinian activists as innocent, but was referring to the problems the American military has encountered in Afghanistan - and before that to a great extent Iraq, an apparent reference to accidental killings of civilians by the U.S. military.

Israeli officials have said their commandos acted in self-defense. Frank yesterday defended Israeli actions, saying, I have since learned more about the incident and I note the Israeli report that violent force in fact (was) initiated by those whose boat was boarded - entirely appropriately in my judgment - by the Israeli Navy.

What a reflexively hard-left, dishonest toad.


ROMANOFF (WITH SESTAK): THE CESSPOOL STINKS EVEN WORSE

Ken Berwitz

As we listen to the Obama administration dissemble and evade when it comes to the illegal offer of a job to Joe Sestak in return for him dropping his primary challenge to Arlen Specter (which he declined, and then won the primary), the offer of a job to Andrew Romanoff in Colorado - just as illegal - is stinking more and more.

The following is excerpted from Jeffrey Lord's article at americanthinker.com.  The illegality is the Obama administration's; the bold print is mine:

In a revelation that will send shock waves through the American political landscape, the Denver Post last night revealed that Colorado Senate candidate Andrew Romanoff has now reluctantly admitted he discussed "three possible jobs with the deputy chief of staff of the Obama administration -- all contingent upon a decision by Romanoff not to challenge U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet."

The White House Deputy Chief of Staff is Jim Messina, a Denver-born Obama aide who served as the chief of staff of the Obama presidential campaign. Messina serves under Rahm Emanuel, the former Illinois Congressman and current White House Chief of Staff.

The Post also published an e-mail from Messina to Romanoff dated September 11, 2009 at 3:24 pm. The e-mail discusses the jobs of Deputy Assistant Administrator for Latin America and Caribbean, and Director, Office of Democracy and Governance. Both of those positions are under the United States Agency for International Development. The third position mentioned was Director of the U.S. Trade and Development Agency.

The Romanoff admission -- which comes after months of silence, denials and evasions by the White House beginning in February -- comes on the heels of a letter to the White House from Congressman Darrell Issa and two congressional colleagues demanding access to e-mails and phone logs relevant to the Sestak Jobsgate affair -- the allegation first made by Pennsylvania Democratic Congressman Joe Sestak that the White House offered him a job if he would abandon his own Senate challenge to incumbent Democrat Arlen Specter.

This is a scandal.  A major scandal.  And - our wonderful "neutral" media being what it is - a scandal that so far has not been treated like one.

But how can they ignore it now?  Sestak got the two-day-and-out treatment when it was the only one, but this makes two - complete with an email specifically detailing the illegal offers.

Add in the Rod Blagojevich scandal - he is going to trial and will be invoking President Obama - and you've got a toxic brew that, if it were a Republican administration, would be front-page/lead story news every day.

Will mainstream media jump on it now?  Will they even treat it as a major story?

We'll see................


Buy Our Book Here!


Return to Current Blog
We're Hopelessly Partisan

hopelesslypartisan.com, is a web site which is dedicated to honest, blunt, debate on the issues of our time.


About Us



Privacy Notice: In conjunction with the ads on this site, third parties may be placing and reading cookies on your browser, or using web beacons to collect information.


At “Hopelessly Partisan” we discuss all issues, big and small. In here, nothing is sacred and nothing is out of bounds.

So settle back, preferably after laughing your way through a copy of “The Hopelessly Partisan Guide To American Politics”, and let the battle begin. In this blog, your opinion counts every bit as much as anyone else's, maybe even more.

And to show that my willingness to provide all sides of the issues is sincere, here are links to a variety of web sites, from the left, the middle (more or less) and the right. Read them and either smile in agreement or gnash your teeth in anger!!