Sunday, 02 January 2011


Ken Berwitz

I am very surprised to have to write this blog entry.  But things are as they are, so here it is.

I was driving from Queens to New Jersey this morning, and put the radio on for "noise".  I surfed around and found "The Ric Edelman Show" on WABC-770AM, which bills itself as "News Talk Radio 77 WABC New York".  It featured two hosts (one of whom may or may not have been Edelman himself, there may have been a substitute this morning). 

The first call I heard was from someone calling himself "Scott from Cape Cod".  He was incensed because he lost a lot of money when Lehman went under.  "Scott" ranted for a while about how the depression (his characterization) was caused by Lehman, and Goldman Sachs and Bear Stearns......and then assured us that it was all orchestrated by "Jewish Bankers". 

"Scott" was abruptly cut off.  But, instead of saying even one word about his disgusting reference to Jews, these two geniuses did nothing but dispassionately answer "Scott's" financial points. 

I was furious.  Had either of them mentioned the call-in number I would have used it and given them hell for simply accepting such raw anti-Semitism without any condemnation of any kind.  But, possibly because the show was almost over, I didn't hear it mentioned.

After the news, the Bob Grant show started.  Bob Grant has been around for a very long time, and I do not know him to be anti-Semitic at all.  But one of his first callers attacked newly installed New York Governor Andrew Cuomo for letting Steven Rattner, a financier accused of raping New York's pension fund, off with only a $10 million fine and no jail time.  The caller made a point of attacking Rattner as "a Jewish billionaire". 

And, as with the Edelman show, the caller was cut off and Grant answered his point about Cuomo - without any condemnation of the reference to Rattner's being Jewish.  In fact, Grant made a Jewish reference himself (albeit not an anti-Semitic one) in his answer.

What the hell is going on at WABC?  Why is it attracting anti-Semites?  And why aren't its hosts saying something about it when one of these scumbags gets air time?

I myself am Jewish.  I have never cheated anyone out of anything.   And I assure you that I can absolutely, positively live without some hate-filled moron lumping me together with Jews who do. 

I resent it every bit as much as an honest, hard-working Black person would resent someone lumping him together with a Black murderer, or an Italian would resent being lumped together with the Mafia, or an Iriah person would resent someone assuming he was a heavy drinker.

It is no surprise to me that there are haters out there.  I don't need a radio station to teach me that.

But it is a major surprise to me that a radio station - especially one as large and important as "News Talk Radio 77 WABC New York" - has hosts who accept such hatred with complete equanimity.

Maybe someone over there better start thinking about this.  Fast.

free` I wonder if the hosts assumed the calls were cut off before the antisemitic parts aired? --- I know the Mark Levin show cuts off callers that swear, before the swear word is said on air. But then again Mark Levin usually explains why the caller was cut off. --- Most left wing people I argue with on IRC are anti-semites that blame the Jews for damn near everything that is wrong. All muslim and many european articles are filled with it as well. (01/02/11)


Ken Berwitz

Is Katie Couric an idiot?  Or is she just so hopelessly politically correct that she comes out sounding like one?

Read this excerpt of Doug Powers' blog at, and decide for yourself:

Katie Couric: Maybe We Need a Muslim Version of the Cosby Show

By Doug Powers  


If you happen to be among those who oppose a mosque near Ground Zero, you might not be so biased if only some enterprising television producer would create a sitcom about an upper middle class Muslim family.


In Katie Courics CBSNews.coms 2010 in Review, the so-called perky one suggested something like that in her regular segment entitled, There are two sides to every story: The side I agree with, and the racist/Islamophobic/bigoted side:


Id think Couric would be more interested in a sitcom that might help dispel the perception that network news anchors are biased, elitist, wildly overpaid, semi-dimwitted impartiality imposters. Shes really earning that looming pay cut.


Not surprisingly, Couric didnt feel it necessary to mention the surge in hate crimes against Jews. Sounds like another sitcom is in order.

I wonder if Ms. Politically-Couric has ever bothered to check the statistics - which would tell her that there are damn few anti-Muslim bias crimes in this country. 

Ironically, if you count killing Muslims for their beliefs (the way Sunnis and Shi'ites kill each other), and blowing up mosques, and blowing up places that Muslims congregate  -- dozens and dozens of primarily Muslim countries have a far more severe Islamophobia problem than the USA has.  I mean this dead-seriously.

I think maybe it is time for Katie to rev up her perkometer and go back to the morning lite genre.  That's what she is good at, and that is what she is good for.

Ms. Politically-Couric is to serious news what Dancing With The Stars is to a Hadj.

Zeke .... .... I disagree ...... ..... I find Ms Couric not to be "perky", in her personality, her insight to events ... .... nor in her pectoral anatomy (01/02/11)


Ken Berwitz

Is Islam a "religion of peace"?  A "religion of love"?  A "religion of equality"? 

Amil Imani is an Iranian by birth, an Islamic by birth, a U.S. citizen by choice, and a strong advocate for exposing how Islamic fundamentalists want us to live.

In his latest column, Mr. Imani lays out many (though far from all) the specifics regarding Islam's view of women.  Here is a key excerpt:

Muslims, by belief and practice, are the most blatant violators of human rights. We hardly need to detail here Muslims' systemic cruel treatment of the unbelievers, women of all persuasions, and any and all minorities across the board. To Muslims, human rights have a different meaning, and its protective provisions are reserved strictly for Muslims -- primarily for Muslim men. Just a couple of examples should suffice for now.


Oppression of women, for one, is so systemic in Islam that to this day women are, at best, second-class citizens under Islamic law. Saudi Arabia, the custodian of Islamdom, denies women the right to drive, vote or hold elective office -- the most basic rights of citizens in democratic societies. Arabs and Muslims are masters of double-acts. They do all things in private, yet the public display of morality, decorum, and even piety is something you wear as you would your Keffiyeh even under the sizzling sun.


In model Islamic states such as Saudi Arabia and Iran, for instance, women do not dare complain about their Allah-decreed chattel status. If they protest in the least, they are beaten by their husbands. And if they dare to demonstrate in public for equal family rights with men, they get severe beatings by the police and are hauled to jails for additional indignities and violence.

One may wonder then why is it that millions of Muslim women meekly submit to their subservient rank and thank Allah for it. These women are virtually imprinted by their parents and the clergy from birth to adopt the gender inequality as well as the entire pathological Islamic ethos.


Islam can be a "forgiving" religion, specifically for the male. If you neglect to say your prayers or you simply don't want to, you can hire someone, preferably an imam or a mullah, to pray on your behalf. Going to the Hajj is too onerous and takes you away from the pleasures and comforts of your life? You can deputize someone else to go in your stead. You have a few drinks of the forbidden brew and it is time to say your prayer? Simply rinse your mouth and go ahead with praying. But, always remember the will of Allah and serve him. Do your duties to vanquish the unbelievers, promote the rule of the Sharia, and make the earth Allah's.

In Islamic societies, freedom of expression, worship, and assembly are taken away. Women are indeed treated as chattel. Young girls are subjected to barbaric genital mutilation to make them sex slaves and birth channels without the ability to enjoy intercourse. Minors are executed, adulterers are stoned to death, thieves have their limbs amputated, and much, much more. Isn't that everyone's idea of paradise?


Women, by the very nature of their second-class status expressly stipulated in the Quran, are occasionally allowed a token high position in government, while non-Muslim minority citizens are virtually barred from securing any positions at all.


"Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the others and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them. Then if they obey you take no further action against them. Allah is high, supreme." Quran 4.34

There is a segment of the U.S. population - a far-left segment - which, among its other contortions of logic, simultaneously hates Chrstianity and defends Islam.  If you ask why, you are most likely to hear that (incredibly) it does so on the basis of equal rights. 


If you come across such people (and they aren't hard to find - most of the leftward web sites I link to from this blog have plenty of them), it might be worthwhile to ask if the fundamentalist Islamic approach to women is what they had in mind.


Ken Berwitz

Somalia is a country -- in that there is a putative government, a couple of government buildings, and it gets a vote in the United Nation's general assembly (the same vote we do). 

And, in the immortal words of Porky Pig, that's all, folks.  There is nothing else.

Beyond those barest of bare bones, Somalia is nothing but a foliated version of rural Afghanistan:  absolute nothingness, ungovernable, and "ruled" by whoever is more brutal and murderous than the competition.

Here is some of the latest news about the land area of Somalia, from

At least 19 people were killed during heavy clashes on Saturday, with government forces staging a violent mutiny in a separate incident, Radio Garowe reports.

The fighting sparked overnight Friday after Al Shabaab insurgents attacked bases of Somali government forces and their African Union (AMISOM) allies in Hodan district.

Witnesses reported that many civilians including children were killed during the nighttime fighting. At least 25 wounded persons were admitted to Mogadishu's Medina Hospital.

Al Shabaab military spokesman, Sheikh Abdiaziz Abu Musab, claimed that the insurgents killed 15 AMISOM peacekeepers and 30 Somali soldiers.

The fighting among soldiers sparked after a group of mutinying soldiers prevented Cabinet ministers, parliamentarians and military officers of Somalia's UN-recognized Transitional Federal Government (TFG) from entering the Villa Somalia presidential palace.

The 30-minute gun battle near Villa Somalia ended after senior military officials intervened to stop the bloodshed.

TFG forces are extremely disorganized and often engage in criminal activities, including robberies of civilians to compensate for nonpayment of salaries.

The TFG, led by President Sheikh Sharif Ahmed, is the 15th attempt by the international community to restore national order in Somalia for the first time since the outbreak of civil war in 1991.


 Have you read a thing about this in mainstream media?   The answer is almost certainly "no".  But, then again, you might ask why it would be news in the USA. 

Well, here's some more recent news about Somalia that you have either not seen at all or seen minimal coverage of:

--September 15th (

NAIROBI, Kenya It was already light by 5 a.m. when two squads of U.S. Marines launched a daring raid on a container ship occupied by pirates off the coast of Somalia.

The 8,000-ton MV Magellan Star, a German-owned vessel, had been boarded by Somali pirates last Wednesday but they did not control it. The Magellan Star's 11-man crew signaled for help and disabled the engine before locking themselves in a safe room.

Jurgen Salamon, managing director of Dr. Peters Group, the ship's owners, said that he had received an angry phone call from the pirates when they found the ship disabled and, apparently, abandoned.

The pirates were told the crew was on holiday, said Salamon.

--November 10, 2010 (Al-Jazeera):  Pirates off the coast of Somalia are keeping ahead of attempts by international authorities to stop them, capturing ever more hostages and bounty, a UN official has said.

B Lynn Pascoe, the UN undersecretary-general for political affairs, said on Tuesday that more viable economic alternatives are needed to prevent the migration of young Somalis into piracy.

More than 438 crew and passengers and 20 ships are currently being held hostage at sea near Somalia, according to latest International Maritime Organization figures.

--January 1, 2011 (  NAIROBI, Kenya The European Union anti-piracy force says that a Mozambican-flagged fishing vessel has been hijacked by suspected Somali pirates.

So why is this our concern?

Le me answer with a question:  How long before another attempt is made on a USA ship?  How long before we have US citizens held hostage by these "people" - who clearly are operating without a worry in the world about anyone stopping them?

Here is what I wrote in April, 2009, after Somali pirates captured a US ship:  

Another day has passed without the USA acting against Somalian thugs/terrorists/pirates. 

But the thugs/terrorists/pirates remain in full operation. How long before they take another one of our ships?  And what do you think they will do with a US crew?


Every day this is allowed to continue is a day that every American crew member on every ship is at mortal risk.


Are we planning to act against them where it counts - i.e. where their boats are docked?  Or are we waiting for Americans to join the nationals of so many other countries and become hostages - or be killed outright, which is specifically what is being threatened?


Are we waiting for the rest of the world to act?  Are we waiting for the UN?  What have they done through all the Somalian hijackings so far, besides nothing?  What will they do if an American crew is taken, besides nothing?


The time is now.  Right now. 


Send in our planes.  Send in our troops.  Not to the cities, but to the ports and contiguous areas around them.


Wipe these bastards out.  blow up every ship that cannot 100% prove it is not engaged in the pirate/thug/terrorism trade.  Put them the hell out of business.


And when the countries whose people are being held hostage tell us that we're doing the wrong thing?  Respond, firmly and decisively, that it is their unwillingness to act which caused the hostage situation, not our actions to protect US interests.  Tell them that if we don't stop this right now, there will be more hostages, not less.  It has to stop, and the sooner the better.


Then let them cry and moan about it.  That, apparently, is the extent of what they are willing to do.


This cannot go on any longer.  Period.

That was 100% true then.  And it is 100% true now.

What are we waiting for?  The Somali "government" to do something about it - a government that can't even pay its troops?  Or the United Nations, which is laughed at by these pirates?

It is time to act.  It is long past time to act. 

Where are you, President Obama?

Buy Our Book Here!

Return to Current Blog
We're Hopelessly Partisan, 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!!