Featured Post

Syria helped orchestrate 2006 Motoon riots

Tweet Orchestrated outrage

Read More

Sunday morning coming down

Posted by admin | Posted in The Capitol | Posted on 30-01-2011

Tags: , , ,

0

(Scott)

You may never have heard of the Boston-based sixties group Orpheus, but you may nevertheless recall its one hit — it only reached number 80 nationally, though it went to number one in some local markets — “Can’t Find the Time.” Written by singer Bruce Arnold, the song is representative of Arnold’s recordings with producer Alan Lorber. The song has been covered by a few other artists, most notably Hootie & The Blowfish for the soundtrack of “Me, Myself & Irene.”

Arnold’s voice puts me in mind of the Walker Brothers. The middle of the road pop tenor of the group’s work recalls the Association, another group I love. Orpheus’s best album was probably its self-titled debut, but its best-titled album was undoubtedly “Ascending.”

The video captures Orpheus at The Bitter End in Greenwich Village, probably in 1968. According to the information posted at YouTube, the performance aired locally in New York City on a show that also included Marvin Gaye, The Staple Singers, Woody Allen and The Mothers of Invention. The video leaves a lot to the imagination. Where did the crew put the amplifiers, the microphones, the strings? They couldn’t find the time to tell you. Don’t even try to get this one out of your head!




Power Line

Comrade Obama Coming After Guns

Posted by admin | Posted in The Capitol | Posted on 30-01-2011

Tags: , , , ,

0

Gun sales have been through the roof ever since America temporarily went off the rails and was duped into electing the Manchurian Moonbat, because our Second Amendment rights being the last line of defense against overreaching government, you had to know that the personification of statism would try to infringe on them. His teleprompter wisely refrained from milking the Tucson shootings at the State of the Union address…

But in the next two weeks, the White House will unveil a new gun-control effort in which it will urge Congress to strengthen current laws, which now allow some mentally unstable people, such as alleged Arizona shooter Jared Loughner, to obtain certain assault weapons, in some cases without even a background check.

Tuesday night after the speech, Obama adviser David Plouffe said to NBC News that the president would not let the moment after the Arizona shootings pass without pushing for some change in the law, to prevent another similar incident.

The only sure way to prevent a maniac from going berserk with a gun would be to make sure no one has any access to them. After that, Big Government will put an end to traffic fatalities by making sure no one has access to a car. We can deal with home invaders with conflict resolution techniques, and get around by government-approved high-speed rail.

free-people-own-guns-slaves-dont.jpg

On tips from Jimbo, Conan, and G. Fox.

Moonbattery

Chickens Coming Out Swinging

Posted by admin | Posted in The Capitol | Posted on 29-01-2011

Tags: , ,

0

And so it goes like this: Chick-fil-A is a restaurant where
franchises frequently donate to anti-gay organizations like the
Pennsylvania Family Institute, Focus on the Family and others. The
restaurant’s charitable arm, WinShape, holds conferences for opponents
of gay marriage and praises their work. And this charitable arm’s
Retreat program puts a blanket ban on gay couples using their
facilities, because they “do not accept homosexual couples.”

Yet the President of Chick-fil-A still says that all people,
including LGBT people, are treated with respect by the restaurant? Huh,
what a funny definition of respect.

I heard rumblings weeks ago, but I waited to see if a fuller picture developed.  Businesses have the right to donate and operate within the boundaries of the law.  It becomes hypocrisy only when they try to deny the left hand knows who the right hand is flipping off. It’s the same dilemma that challenges pharmacies whose owners don’t want to sell birth control: when you operate a business that serves the public, it isn’t wise to alienate your customers.  Especially by denying services or supporting charities that don’t actually enhance society but merely try to control it.


Zandar Versus The Stupid

Tax cuts coming to Wisconsin

Posted by admin | Posted in The Capitol | Posted on 28-01-2011

Tags: , ,

0

In addition to raising its personal income tax by 67 percent, Illinois’ corporate income tax rate is going up by 46 percent. Meanwhile, Wisconsin is cutting its corporate taxes.

From the Milwaukee Journal:

The bill is a key part of Walker’s special legislative session on boosting job creation and the state economy, but also will add to the state’s already substantial budget shortfall.

Under the bill, businesses with sales of up to $ 5 million annually would receive a tax deduction of $ 4,000 for each job they create. Businesses with sales of more than $ 5 million a year would receive a deduction of $ 2,000 for each job they create.

Overall, the proposal would save businesses an estimated $ 33.5 million a year in taxes and cost the state that amount in lost revenue. The actual state tax savings per job would amount to between $ 92 and $ 316, depending on how the business owner files and what tax rate applies to him or her, according to an analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau.

Sen. Terry Moulton (R-Chippewa Falls) said that he believed these modest decreases in taxes could lead some businesses to hire more workers.

As the 1980s tourism bumpersticker used to say, “Escape to Wisconsin.”

Related posts:

Saving money: Kansas konsolidation

Neighboring governors welcome Illinois’ income tax hike

Technorati tags:  

Marathon Pundit

Coming soon to Fox News …?

Posted by admin | Posted in The Capitol | Posted on 27-01-2011

Tags: , ,

0

Take the poll!


Ever since Keith Olbermann and MSNBC parted company last week, speculation has continued about whether Fox News might give a show to the former Countdown host as a sort of coup against its media critics who charge Fox with being too ideologically homogeneous.  It seems as though people haven’t credited Fox News chief Roger Ailes […]

Read this post »

Hot Air » Top Picks

Coming Soon, From Those Wonderful People Who Brought You The “Palestine Papers

Posted by admin | Posted in The Capitol | Posted on 26-01-2011

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

0

By Barry Rubin

“Avtalyon would say: Scholars, be careful with your words. For you may be exiled to a place inhabited by evil elements who will distort your words to achieve their bad goals. Those who come after you will then drink of these evil waters and be destroyed….” Pirkei Avot, Chapter One, Paragraph 11.

Do you really believe that suddenly, for no apparent reason, and no big Israeli concession the Palestinian negotiators tossed away their demand for a “Right of Return” for millions of Palestinians and accepted a mere 100,000 being let into Israel? And if you don’t believe it, how can you think that these papers are authentic?

Do you believe that this could have happened without the U.S. government knowing about it? And if so why didn’t it factor into U.S. policy at all? Indeed, anyone who understands Israeli politics would comprehend that if given such an offer Olmert and Livni-desperate to survive politically-would have made a deal.

Only someone who believes that Israel has no interest in peace-which is what the Guardian and al-Jazira think-could conceive that these leaders would just walk away after the PA made an offer that was light years’ better than anything ever hinted at before. Only those who demonize Israel could believe that Livni was advocating expelling Arab citizens of Israel as if she were no different from Meir Kahane.

Do you not realize that this is a disaster for hopes of peace since no Palestinian negotiator in future would dare to offer any concession at all? And that’s even if more radical forces don’t sweep away those held responsible for “treason.”?

In its defense the Guardian published an article by Jonathan Freedland entitled, “The Palestine papers have broken a taboo. Now the arguments for peace can be open. The papers show how much ground Palestinian negotiators were willing to concede. This isn’t craven. It’s admirable.”

You might admire it but how many Palestinians are admiring it? And doesn’t it matter more what they think about their own leadership? Does Hamas admire it? Does the Fatah leadership admire it? And of course, most of them will believe that this is what happened. I don’t.

Don’t justify this by saying it helps advance peace. It doesn’t. Quite the opposite.

Incidentally, the Guardian offers neither evidence for its claims nor a response to specific issues raised about problems with the text. This makes me even more suspicious

The situation demands satire:

From those wonderful people who brought you the “Palestine Papers!”:

Coming soon to a credulous, irresponsible, and/or malicious newspaper near you!

The Cold War Papers: Revealing that Stalin desperately wanted peace and offered to give up control of all the Eastern Europe countries but Roosevelt and Churchill refused. (Actually, the Guardian editors probably believe this one!)

The Iran Papers: Revealing that Iran was eager to give up its nuclear weapons project but the Obama Administration  refused because it wanted an excuse to go to war with Iran, take over the country, and steal its oil.  (Hm, they might believe that one also.)

The Bush Papers: “And then the president said, ‘Hey! Let’s pretend that Iraq is a threat so we can invade them and steal all their oil!’ Then Tony Blair responded, `Right, master! Whatever you say!” (Oh, no doubt they believe that one.)

The Obama Papers: “And then the president said, ‘Hey! Let’s seize control of the car and health industries so we can institute socialism and Death Panels!” (Okay, they don’t believe that one.)

The September 11 Papers: Al-Jazira has documents revealing that the U.S. government destroyed the World Trade Center and the whole al-Qaida thing was a hoax. In secret talks, Usama Bin Ladin really wanted peace but the United States rejected it.

OK, Funny, I hope. But this latest example of madness should teach a lesson. Not only the acceptance of obviously false claims but then actually making it worse than the original by “creating” new Palestinian “concessions” and slanders against Israel.

Here’s how a friend of mine summed up the recent period:

1) Reporters accepting as fact that a woman died of tear gas inhalation despite there being no recorded cases of such an occurrence ever happening.

2) Treating the Mavi Marmara incident as Israel said/Turkey said despite video evidence supporting Israel’s version. (Not to mention a hostile witness supporting Israel’s version.)

3) Taking the Palestine Papers at face value despite the fact that they came from al-Jazira, despite every bit of evidence about PA and Israeli negotiating positions. Despite, I might add, the fact that they include alleged statements like when the Israelis say they are going to return the Golan Heights to Syria, the Palestinians reply that they will compensate Israel with more concessions.

How can one not believe that by these standards, if properly presented in modern terms, much of the media would accept as genuine the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (Gaza’s government does), the claim that Jews grind up children to make Passover matzos or organ transplants (the Saudis and Sweden’s biggest newspaper do), that the Holocaust never happened (Iran), or that Israel doesn’t want peace and is responsible for all the Middle East’s problems (Oops! The Guardian, much of the New York Times, and the Fairfax newspapers in Australia, among many others, say that).

This debacle should be the last straw. Unfortunately, it won’t be.

Here’s how I would explain this issue:

1. Most of the routine material comes from actual documents but not the “interesting” parts that everyone is talking about.

2. That still does not mean that these documents accurately reflect what happened since they are the version of PA officials

3. On a number of specific points and on all the points being publicized the claims made are so ridculous that these diocuments must have been altered.  The texts read almost like a satire themselves in which someone set out to write a narrative in which the PA gave everything and got nothing in return. Indeed, the picture is so exaggerated that it should be obvious these claims are phony. But of course that assumes that people were going to use logic and know something about the issues.

There are about twenty reasons to believe this is essentially a hoax. Here’s one: Do you really believe that after demanding a “Right of Return” for all Palestinians over decades as the most passionately held position, the PA leaders would give it up in exchange for only 100,000 being allowed in and get absolutely nothing in return for that concession?

Hee’s another: If the Israeli government had such a great offer would Olmert and Livni-then desperate to save their government by making some progress-have just walked away from it?

4. In addition, the Guardian and al-Jazira often distort what is in the documents to exaggerate it even more. Some of the specifics are really absurd like the legalistic-minded Tsipi Livni saying she is against international law and even saying she planned to expel Palestinians from Israel after an agreement.

5. Yet almost all of the media uncritically quote these distortions.

6. Some even add new items that were neither in the documents nor in the original coverage. The most notorious example is the claim that the PA recognized Israel as a Jewish state.

I could go on for pages. Why isn’t anyone publishing-they don’t have to agree but at least report that the authenticity of this material cannot be taken for granted and that questionable interpretations are being put into them.

This, for example, is a case study showing how Tzipi Livni’s words are twisted in a way that nobody who didn’t read the original would know.

In other words, Islamist (al-Jazira) and radical pro-Islamist (Guardian) writers are being taken by the rest of the media as the definers of reality.

The Guardian has now defended itself by ridiculing the idea that this is a hoax or a forgery. Let me be clear: I have no doubt that real documents of the PA were purloined, but the text of these includes such nonsensical material that it looks as if the “editors” overdid it.

Finally, the statement of Nabil Shaath. As always, the Guardian’s claims don’t stand up to close inspection. He did say in passing they were authentic but gave no reason for this claim nor sign that he had read them. Shaath also was not involved in the talks during the time when the most sensationalist material supposedly happened. So he doesn’t actually know. Moreover, he made remarks that seem to imply that he doesn’t accept the idea that huge concessions were made at all. In other words he denies the content that is the subject of so much controversy.

From the coverage in other publications one can see that few journalists are actually reading the documents and none are seriously analyzing them. I don’t think I’ve seen a single reference in the mass media (but I’m happy to be corrected) showing the contradictions and inconsistencies involved in these papers.

Does this matter? The moderate Dutch newspaper Trouw, for example, says that the papers-whose authenticity with the additional Guardian and al-Jazira “improvements: it accepts completely-proves Israel is to blame for the absence of peace and thus European states should pressure Israel. Multiply this by scores of media outlets and, no doubt, politicians.

And if anything the madness is accelerating. As Christians are being driven out of the Muslim world, homosexuals are threatened with death, women are treated as property, and hate is incited there every day, the Los Angeles Times chooses to publish a long article on, well let’s quote from it:

“Israeli intolerance shows up on Internet, in Knesset, on the street….Racism, homophobia and religious discrimination seem to be more prevalent, taking the form of threats and even a government motion.”

I could answer this but why bother? I’d suggest that racism and homophobia, along with intolerance in general, are less present in Israel than in any European country or the United States. I repeat: there is no sense expecting fairness from a long list of media outlets and reporters any more.

Nor is that the fault with Israeli hasbara. I once heard the great journalist Eric Severaid say that nothing can protect one from a journalist who’s determined to distort your views or character.

If people in academic or journalism won’t listen, or report, what you have to say, how can anyone do a better job of getting them to understand the situation and report on it accurately? We are often dealing with willing participants in a propaganda campaign for whom professional ethics has no meaning.

Here is a brief biography of the Guardian editor who co-authored the Palestine Papers articles:

     Seumas Milne, who is the co-author of the scoop, and is likely to have been the conduit for the leaks is an interesting character. He is a Wykhamist, via Balliol, Oxford. Prior to joining the Guardian, he worked for “Straight Left”, which was the newspaper of the hard line, pro-USSR, “Tankie” faction in the Communist Party of Great Britain. These were the guys who applauded the suppression of bourgeois nationalist backsliding in Hungary and Czechoslovakia. If you want a taste of Milne’s current politics, try googling his articles in the Guardian along with the words “Iraq” and “resistance”. You’ll see pretty clearly where his sympathies lie.

Milne was appointed Comment Editor of the Guardian just prior to September 11. In its wake, he filled the Guardian comment pages with op eds by Hamas officials and spokesmen, and their British and Middle Eastern supporters. On one occasion, they even had an op-ed by Al Faqih, Osama Bin Laden’s man in Britain.

Milne also wrote articles basically calling Fatah a bunch of Israeli stooges and puppets. He knows very well what he is doing.

And that is his purpose here. Smearing Israel is a plus but destroying the current leadership of the PA and bringing Hamas to power is his main goal. This is the man, along with the Islamist-dominated al-Jazira whose reportage is now being taken at its word by the world media. Talk about ease in manipulating and fooling the world! This could be a new record.

Note also that the Goldstone Commission consistently based its conclusions on claims by Hamas, a group that publicly announces its goal of committing genocide against Israel’s Jews.

As a Muslim friend who has seen this happen in his own country on various issues puts it, “Words mean nothing to these people… as long as they get them the desired outcome. The end justifies the means. Period.”

Nor have I seen a single person in the mainstream media pointing out how disastrous this affair is for any chance of peace. Even if they were willing to make real concessions in the past-which I doubt-no PA official will ever do so in future. Granted, peace was unlikely any way but this makes the chances for a negotiated agreement pretty dead for a whole generation.

The most likely source of the material is increasingly appearing to be disgruntled hardline staffers in the PA’s Negotiations Support Unit who quit, rather than some foreign, Hamas, or factional conspiracy.

But the real problem is the insanity of our current era. We live at a time when the UN’s chief “expert” on the Israel-Palestine issue, the fanatical Israel-hater Prof. Richard Falk, can claim that by saying that the U.S. government is staging a cover-up on what really happened on September 11. And that’s the Obama Administration he’s talking about! This  is the man whose condemnations of Israel help determine the direction of UN reports.

Many people now understand that regarding Israel and a host of other issues we are simply not dealing with professors who have any care for logic and journalists who are interested in facts. Others don’t.
Here’s a story a reader sent me today:

“[A person I know] gets almost all his news from CNN. So today he gave the important news that he received from CNN that the “Palestinians said they were willing to give up most of Jerusalem for peace.” I tried to explain to him that the story was completely false. He just gave me a blank stare back. His mind could not comprehend how such an authority as Wolf Blitzer and CNN could report something as fact but that is in fact completely false.

“Do you ever just want to scream? I do. What can we do? What can the average person do? Does it have any effect at all if we write to the media, expressing our outrage. Does the truth matter if the official truth is all that people believe?”

Do I ever want to scream? What do you think! Does it have any effect when we complain to the media? No.

Does the truth matter if the official truth is all that people believe? Well, that’s different. Roughly two-thirds of the American people do not accept what the media tells them on this issue. In fact, support for Israel in the United States went up during the Gaza flotilla crisis. Every day, more people are waking up. New sources of information are expanding.

A lot of average people have common sense. A lot of government officials (not enough, for sure), have to deal with reality and sooner or later see through the illusions. Polls on media credibility show it to be quite low. Student sit through indoctrinating classes and don’t accept what they are told.

Basically, we have to wait it out. Meanwhile, we need to tell the truth, educate as many people as possible, help build an alternate elite to replace and repair the diseased segments of society.

Rabbi Tarfon said “It is not incumbent upon you to finish the task, but neither are you free to abstain  from it.” Pirkei Avot, Chapter 2, Paragraph 16.


Or here is the Enlightenment version of that principle from Edmund Burke: “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

ddle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are Lebanon: Liberation, Conflict, and Crisis (Palgrave Macmillan), Conflict and Insurgency in the Contemporary Middle Eastand editor of the (seventh edition) (Viking-Penguin), The Israel-Arab Reader the paperback edition of The Truth About Syria(Palgrave-Macmillan), A Chronological History of Terrorism (Sharpe), and The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley).  




YID With LID

Barry Rubin: Coming Soon, From Those Wonderful People Who Brought You The #PalestinePapers

Posted by admin | Posted in The Capitol | Posted on 26-01-2011

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

0

This post was written by Barry Rubin and is reposted here with permission.

By Barry Rubin

“Avtalyon would say: Scholars, be careful with your words. For you may be exiled to a place inhabited by evil elements who will distort your words to achieve their bad goals. Those who come after you will then drink of these evil waters and be destroyed….” Pirkei Avot, Chapter One, Paragraph 11.

Do you really believe that suddenly, for no apparent reason, and no big Israeli concession the Palestinian negotiators tossed away their demand for a “Right of Return” for millions of Palestinians and accepted a mere 100,000 being let into Israel? And if you don’t believe it, how can you think that these papers are authentic?

Do you believe that this could have happened without the U.S. government knowing about it? And if so why didn’t it factor into U.S. policy at all? Indeed, anyone who understands Israeli politics would comprehend that if given such an offer Olmert and Livni-desperate to survive politically-would have made a deal.

Only someone who believes that Israel has no interest in peace-which is what the Guardian and al-Jazira think-could conceive that these leaders would just walk away after the PA made an offer that was light years’ better than anything ever hinted at before. Only those who demonize Israel could believe that Livni was advocating expelling Arab citizens of Israel as if she were no different from Meir Kahane.

Do you not realize that this is a disaster for hopes of peace since no Palestinian negotiator in future would dare to offer any concession at all? And that’s even if more radical forces don’t sweep away those held responsible for “treason.”?

In its defense the Guardian published an article by Jonathan Freedland entitled, “The Palestine papers have broken a taboo. Now the arguments for peace can be open. The papers show how much ground Palestinian negotiators were willing to concede. This isn’t craven. It’s admirable.”

You might admire it but how many Palestinians are admiring it? And doesn’t it matter more what they think about their own leadership? Does Hamas admire it? Does the Fatah leadership admire it? And of course, most of them will believe that this is what happened. I don’t.

Don’t justify this by saying it helps advance peace. It doesn’t. Quite the opposite.

Incidentally, the Guardian offers neither evidence for its claims nor a response to specific issues raised about problems with the text. This makes me even more suspicious

The situation demands satire:

From those wonderful people who brought you the “Palestine Papers!”:

Coming soon to a credulous, irresponsible, and/or malicious newspaper near you!

The Cold War Papers: Revealing that Stalin desperately wanted peace and offered to give up control of all the Eastern Europe countries but Roosevelt and Churchill refused. (Actually, the Guardian editors probably believe this one!)

The Iran Papers: Revealing that Iran was eager to give up its nuclear weapons project but the Obama Administration refused because it wanted an excuse to go to war with Iran, take over the country, and steal its oil. (Hm, they might believe that one also.)

The Bush Papers: “And then the president said, ‘Hey! Let’s pretend that Iraq is a threat so we can invade them and steal all their oil!’ Then Tony Blair responded, `Right, master! Whatever you say!” (Oh, no doubt they believe that one.)

The Obama Papers: “And then the president said, ‘Hey! Let’s seize control of the car and health industries so we can institute socialism and Death Panels!” (Okay, they don’t believe that one.)

OK, Funny, I hope. But this latest example of madness should teach a lesson. Not only the acceptance of obviously false claims but then actually making it worse than the original by “creating” new Palestinian “concessions” and slanders against Israel.

Here’s how a friend of mine summed up the recent period:

1) Reporters accepting as fact that a woman died of tear gas inhalation despite there being no recorded cases of such an occurrence ever happening.

2) Treating the Mavi Marmara incident as Israel said/Turkey said despite video evidence supporting Israel’s version. (Not to mention a hostile witness supporting Israel’s version.)

3) Taking the Palestine Papers at face value despite the fact that they came from Al Jazeera, despite past Palestinian statements to the contrary. Despite, I might add, the fact that they include alleged statements like when the Israelis say they are going to return the Golan Heights to Syria, the Palestinians reply that they will compensate Israel with more concessions.

How can one not believe that by these standards, if properly presented in modern terms, much of the media would accept as genuine the Protocols of the Elders of Zion (Gaza’s government does), the claim that Jews grind up children to make Passover matzos or organ transplants (the Saudis and Sweden’s biggest newspaper do), that the Holocaust never happened (Iran), or that Israel doesn’t want peace and is responsible for all the Middle East’s problems (Oops! The Guardian, much of the New York Times, and the Fairfax newspapers in Australia, among many others, say that).

This debacle should be the last straw. Unfortunately, it won’t be.

Here’s how I would explain this issue:

1. Most of the routine material comes from actual documents but not the “interesting” parts that everyone is talking about.

2. That still does not mean that these documents accurately reflect what happened since they are the version of PA officials

3. On a number of specific points and on all the points being publicized the claims made are so ridculous that these documents must have been altered. The texts read almost like a satire themselves in which someone set out to write a narrative in which the PA gave everything and got nothing in return. Indeed, the picture is so exaggerated that it should be obvious these claims are phony. But of course that assumes that people were going to use logic and know something about the issues.

There are about twenty reasons to believe this is essentially a hoax. Here’s one: Do you really believe that after demanding a “Right of Return” for all Palestinians over decades as the most passionately held position, the PA leaders would give it up in exchange for only 100,000 being allowed in and get absolutely nothing in return for that concession?

4. In addition, the Guardian and al-Jazira often distort what is in the documents to exaggerate it even more. Some of the specifics are really absurd like the legalistic-minded Tsipi Livni saying she is against international law and even saying she planned to expel Palestinians from Israel after an agreement.

5. Yet almost all of the media uncritically quote these distortions.

6. Some even add new items that were neither in the documents nor in the original coverage. The most notorious example is the claim that the PA recognized Israel as a Jewish state.

This, for example, is a case study showing how Tzipi Livni’s words are twisted in a way that nobody who didn’t read the original would know.

In other words, Islamist (al-Jazira) and radical pro-Islamist (Guardian) writers are being taken by the rest of the media as the definers of reality.

The Guardian has now defended itself by ridiculing the idea that this is a hoax or a forgery. Let me be clear: I have no doubt that real documents of the PA were purloined, but the text of these includes such nonsensical material that it looks as if the “editors” overdid it.

Finally, the statement of Nabil Shaath. As always, the Guardian’s claims don’t stand up to close inspection. He did say in passing they were authentic but gave no reason for this claim nor sign that he had read them. Shaath also was not involved in the talks during the time when the most sensationalist material supposedly happened. So he doesn’t actually know. Moreover, he made remarks that seem to imply that he doesn’t accept the idea that huge concessions were made at all. In other words he denies the content that is the subject of so much controversy.

From the coverage in other publications one can see that few journalists are actually reading the documents and none are seriously analyzing them. I don’t think I’ve seen a single reference in the mass media (but I’m happy to be corrected) showing the contradictions and inconsistencies involved in these papers.

Does this matter? The moderate Dutch newspaper Trouw, for example, says that the papers-whose authenticity with the additional Guardian and al-Jazira “improvements: it accepts completely-proves Israel is to blame for the absence of peace and thus European states should pressure Israel. Multiply this by scores of media outlets and, no doubt, politicians.

And if anything the madness is accelerating. As Christians are being driven out of the Muslim world, homosexuals are threatened with death, women are treated as property, and hate is incited there every day, the Los Angeles Times chooses to publish a long article on, well let’s quote from it:

“Israeli intolerance shows up on Internet, in Knesset, on the street….Racism, homophobia and religious discrimination seem to be more prevalent, taking the form of threats and even a government motion.”

I could answer this but why bother? I’d suggest that racism and homophobia, along with intolerance in general, are less present in Israel than in any European country or the United States. I repeat: there is no sense expecting fairness from a long list of media outlets and reporters any more.

Nor is that the fault with Israeli hasbara. I once heard the great journalist Eric Severaid say that nothing can protect one from a journalist who’s determined to distort your views or character.

If people in academic or journalism won’t listen, or report, what you have to say, how can anyone do a better job of getting them to understand the situation and report on it accurately? We are often dealing with willing participants in a propaganda campaign for whom professional ethics has no meaning.

Here is a brief biography of the Guardian editor who co-authored the Palestine Papers articles:

Seumas Milne, who is the co-author of the scoop, and is likely to have been the conduit for the leaks is an interesting character. He is a Wykhamist, via Balliol, Oxford. Prior to joining the Guardian, he worked for “Straight Left”, which was the newspaper of the hard line, pro-USSR, “Tankie” faction in the Communist Party of Great Britain. These were the guys who applauded the suppression of bourgeois nationalist backsliding in Hungary and Czechoslovakia. If you want a taste of Milne’s current politics, try googling his articles in the Guardian along with the words “Iraq” and “resistance”. You’ll see pretty clearly where his sympathies lie.

Milne was appointed Comment Editor of the Guardian just prior to September 11. In its wake, he filled the Guardian comment pages with op eds by Hamas officials and spokesmen, and their British and Middle Eastern supporters. On one occasion, they even had an op-ed by Al Faqih, Osama Bin Laden’s man in Britain.

Milne also wrote articles basically calling Fatah a bunch of Israeli stooges and puppets. He knows very well what he is doing.

And that is his purpose here. Smearing Israel is a plus but destroying the current leadership of the PA and bringing Hamas to power is his main goal. This is the man, along with the Islamist-dominated al-Jazira whose reportage is now being taken at its word by the world media. Talk about ease in manipulating and fooling the world! This could be a new record.

Note also that the Goldstone Commission consistently based its conclusions on claims by Hamas, a group that publicly announces its goal of commiting genocide against Israel’s Jews.

As a Muslim friend who has seen this happen in his own country on various issues puts it, “Words mean nothing to these people… as long as they get them the desired outcome. The end justifies the means. Period.”

Nor have I seen a single person in the mainstream media pointing out how disastrous this affair is for any chance of peace. Even if they were willing to make real concessions in the past-which I doubt-no PA official will ever do so in future. Granted, peace was unlikely any way but this makes the chances for a negotiated agreement pretty dead for a whole generation.

The most likely source of the material is increasingly appearing to be disgruntled hardline staffers in the PA’s Negotiations Support Unit who quit, rather than some foreign, Hamas, or factional conspiracy.

But the real problem is the insanity of our current era. We live at a time when the UN’s chief “expert” on the Israel-Palestine issue, the fanatical Israel-hater Prof. Richard Falk, can claim that by saying that the U.S. government is staging a cover-up on what really happened on September 11. And that’s the Obama Administration he’s talking about! This is the man whose condemnations of Israel help determine the direction of UN reports.

Many people now understand that regarding Israel and a host of other issues we are simply not dealing with professors who have any care for logic and journalists who are interested in facts. Others don’t.

Here’s a story a reader sent me today:

“[A person I know] gets almost all his news from CNN. So today he gave the important news that he received from CNN that the “Palestinians said they were willing to give up most of Jerusalem for peace.” I tried to explain to him that the story was completely false. He just gave me a blank stare back. His mind could not comprehend how such an authority as Wolf Blitzer and CNN could report something as fact but that is in fact completely false.

“Do you ever just want to scream? I do. What can we do? What can the average person do? Does it have any effect at all if we write to the media, expressing our outrage. Does the truth matter if the official truth is all that people believe?”

Do I ever want to scream? What do you think! Does it have any effect when we complain to the media? No.

Does the truth matter if the official truth is all that people believe? Well, that’s different. Roughly two-thirds of the American people do not accept what the media tells them on this issue. In fact, support for Israel in the United States went up during the Gaza flotilla crisis. Every day, more people are waking up. New sources of information are expanding.

A lot of average people have common sense. A lot of government officials (not enough, for sure), have to deal with reality and sooner or later see through the illusions. Polls on media credibility show it to be quite low. Student sit through indoctrinating classes and don’t accept what they are told.

Basically, we have to wait it out. Meanwhile, we need to tell the truth, educate as many people as possible, help build an alternate elite to replace and repair the diseased segments of society.

Rabbi Tarfon said “It is not incumbent upon you to finish the task, but neither are you free to abstain from it.” Pirkei Avot, Chapter 2, Paragraph 16.

Or here is the Enlightenment version of that principle from Edmund Burke: “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

Barry Rubin is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. His latest books are The Israel-Arab Reader (seventh edition), The Long War for Freedom: The Arab Struggle for Democracy in the Middle East (Wiley), and The Truth About Syria (Palgrave-Macmillan). You can read more of Barry Rubin’s posts at Rubin Reports.

Technorati Tag: and and and .


Daled Amos

I Hear Trouble Coming

Posted by admin | Posted in The Capitol | Posted on 26-01-2011

Tags: , ,

0

Two strangers are profiled in a New York Times article.  They are both very different people, from different backgrounds.  They have nothing in common, really.  Except for one small thing:

About the only thing these strangers have in common is the prospect that
by spring, they could each be sent to prison for up to 15 years.  “That’s one step below attempted murder,” Mr. Drew said of their potential sentences.  The crime they are accused of is eavesdropping.

These two individuals recorded the officers who they spoke with, and did not get their permission.  There’s a few things I think are a little off about this, and the article itself makes many good points.  Police don’t have to tell us that we are being recorded, and their cars run video and often audio.  The article mentions that years ago when these laws were written, it wasn’t common for people to have recording devices available.  It is completely normal to carry a cell phone, so if the police were to argue that being recorded from the front of a cop car is common knowledge, these two can argue the same case.

Mark Donahue, president of the Fraternal Order of Police, said his
organization “absolutely supports” the eavesdropping act as is and was
relieved that the challenge had failed. Mr. Donahue added that allowing
the audio recording of police officers while performing their duty “can
affect how an officer does his job on the street.”

That’s sort of the point.  It’s hard to fake video, and this is a new level of accountability.  If officers are conducting themselves properly, then the tapes would just reveal that and offer backup for any cops who found themselves on the stand.  Because they are public officials, and the fact that their job is often done in public, it stands to reason that they shouldn’t have an expectation of privacy. 

Regardless of which way you fall on the topic, it makes sense that expectations of privacy should be redefined.  However, it shouldn’t be redefined by law enforcement.  I’m a little afraid of how it would go down, but at least we would know where we stand.


Zandar Versus The Stupid

The Coming Crackdown

Posted by admin | Posted in The Capitol | Posted on 26-01-2011

Tags: ,

0

108307708

by Patrick Appel

Babak Dehghanpisheh and Mandi Fahmy look ahead:

Will Mubarak soon be joining Tunisia’s Ben Ali in Saudi Arabia (as some protesters were chanting today)? For the moment, that seems unlikely. Egypt’s vast security apparatus is widely viewed as being much more brutal than its counterpart in Tunisia, and has managed to keep Mubarak in place for nearly 30 years. Wire agencies reported a handful of protesters being killed in today’s demonstrations. If the protests continue, the casualties will surely mount. “The regime is going to come back very strongly,” says Hamid, of Brookings. “Unlike their Tunisian counterparts, they’ll be more ruthless. They’re not going to simply sit back and let this protest movement grow.”

(Photo: Egyptian demonstrators protest near Egyptian police to demand the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak and calling for reforms on January 25, 2011. The protesters, carrying flags and chanting slogans against the government, rallied in a protest inspired by the uprising in Tunisia which led to the ouster of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali. By Mohammed Abed/AFP/Getty Images)





Email this Article
Add to digg
Add to Reddit
Add to Twitter
Add to del.icio.us
Add to StumbleUpon
Add to Facebook




The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan

Surprise Coming Tonight?

Posted by admin | Posted in The Capitol | Posted on 25-01-2011

Tags: , ,

0

As First Read notes, the White House has kept tonight’s State of the Union speech “more under wraps than the last three speeches the president has delivered in the House chamber. Is this a result of the new more disciplined Daley/Plouffe regime? Perhaps…”
Taegan Goddard’s Political Wire

Coming Soon

Posted by admin | Posted in The Capitol | Posted on 25-01-2011

Tags: ,

0

by Conor Friedersdorf

Aaron Sorkin news:

1) He is doing an HBO show on the subject of cable news – Sports Night meets West Wing.

2) He is writing and directing a movie about the John Edwards affair.

Suggested trailer copy for the latter project: "For John Edwards, there were always two Americas: the one where he was faithful to his terminally ill wife – and the one where he fathered a love child with his mistress."





Email this Article
Add to digg
Add to Reddit
Add to Twitter
Add to del.icio.us
Add to StumbleUpon
Add to Facebook




The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan

Cowboys’ old tormentors, Steelers, Pack, coming to Super Bowl – Dallas Morning News

Posted by admin | Posted in The Capitol | Posted on 24-01-2011

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

0


Fox News
Cowboys' old tormentors, Steelers, Pack, coming to Super Bowl
Dallas Morning News
No, it isn'ta ruse, Cowboys fans. Old tormentors Pittsburgh and Green Bay are in fact coming to Cowboys Stadium to play in North Texas' first Super Bowl. Nationally, Super Bowl XLV will be touted as a clash of
Super Bowl questions: Is Ben Roethlisberger back in good graces?USA Today
New York fan reaction: Steelers beat Jets, win AFC TitleYahoo! Sports
Green Bay has to steal running chances against PittsburghSportingNews.com
New York Times –ProFootballTalk –Boston Herald
all 7,768 news articles »

Sports – Google News

Are Unmanned Drones Coming To A Police Dept. Near You?

Posted by admin | Posted in The Capitol | Posted on 24-01-2011

Tags: , , , , ,

0

The Miami-Dade police department should soon be up and flying, while the Mayor of Ogden, Utah has floated a blimp idea. Still, unmanned drone use among U.S. law enforcement remains rare. That may soon change.

The Washington Post reports that by 2013, the FAA expects to have new rules in place to allow police departments to fly lightweight, unmanned drones up to 400 feet in the air.

For now, the few departments that own drones have to apply for emergency authorization to use them, and have only used them for training or in unpopulated areas. (Though, as TPM reported earlier this month, Miami-Dade is close to obtaining authorization to use their drones in city operations.) As of December 1, 2010, the FAA counted 270 active authorizations for drone use, about half of which were held by the Defense Department, NASA and the Department of Homeland Security, which flies Predator drones along the borders. Other drone users include the FBI, manufacturers, academic institutions and the Texas Department of Public Safety. In addition to Miami-Dade, police departments and sheriff’s offices in Queen Anne’s County, Maryland and Mesa County, Colorado have flown drones.

The Post reports that among state and local agencies, the Texas DPS has been “the most active user of drones for high-risk operations.” Since first using a small Wasp drone in a 2009 standoff outside Austin, the agency has used drones in six other operations, all near the Southern border. But because of regulatory issues stemming from the use of military frequencies by civilian agencies, Texas DPS drones have been grounded since August.

In Mesa County, Colorado, meanwhile, the sheriff’s office has used a drone called a Draganfly to search for missing persons. “Not since the Taser has a technology promised so much for law enforcement,” Sheriff’s Office official Ben Miller said.

In addition to operational considerations, drones could appeal to police departments because they offer a lower-cost way to get airborne. While helicopters cost up to $ 1 million, a drone can cost loss than $ 50,000. (Meanwhile, Matthew Godfrey, the mayor of Ogden, Utah, told TPM that unmanned blimps are even more cost-effective.)

Still, issues remain. A big one is safety. From the Post:

The FAA is reluctant to simply open up airspace, even to small drones. The agency said it is addressing two critical questions: How will unmanned aircraft “handle communication, command and control”? And how will they “sense and avoid” other aircraft, a basic safety element in manned aviation?

Over the summer, a Navy drone experiencing a “software problem” wandered into restricted Washington airspace. In December, a drone belonging to the Mexican government crashed into a backyard near El Paso, Texas.

Another consideration is privacy. Drones can be equipped with night-vision, infrared and thermal-imaging cameras. The Post reports that support for a pilot program in Houston collapsed after an official suggested drones could be used to record traffic violations.

“Drones raise the prospect of much more pervasive surveillance,” Jay Stanley, a senior policy analyst with the American Civil Liberties Union’s Speech, Privacy and Technology Project, said. “We are not against them, absolutely. They can be a valuable tool in certain kinds of operations. But what we don’t want to see is their pervasive use to watch over the American people.”







TPMMuckraker

“Now all trees are running towards you and tomorrow is coming”

Posted by admin | Posted in The Capitol | Posted on 24-01-2011

Tags: , , , ,

0

This just in from the Hate Mail Bag:

Run away from Home…

As I see you Spencer (Hate-sponsor),. after few years later you will fear from your Clothes even.

Now all trees are running towards you and tomorrow is coming

Say what? The nearest I can bring this to sense is that it is a reference to this hadith:

Abu Huraira reported Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: The last hour would not come unless the Muslims will fight against the Jews and the Muslims would kill them until the Jews would hide themselves behind a stone or a tree and a stone or a tree would say: Muslim, or the servant of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him; but the tree Gharqad would not say, for it is the tree of the Jews. (Sahih Muslim 6985)

But maybe not!

Jihad Watch

Sunday morning coming down

Posted by admin | Posted in The Capitol | Posted on 23-01-2011

Tags: , , ,

0

(Scott)

Tracy Nelson has been a favorite of mine for a long time. I heard her first as the vocalist for the San Francisco and Memphis based group Mother Earth in the late ’60s and early ’70s. Thanks to compact discs, the Mother Earth catalogue has been restored to print in its entirety. I highly recommend it. “Bring Me Home” and “Best of Tracy Nelson/Mother Earth” provide a good overview of her accomplishments with the group.

Tracy started out singing folk, blues, and gospel as an undergraduate at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. The long out of print “Deep are the Roots” documented her original interests. She was accompanied by the prominent blues harmonica player Charlie Musselwhite on the album, and one of my college friends wore out the grooves listening to it. I haven’t heard the album since college, but I can still hear Tracy’s version of “King Jesus Met the Woman at the Well” in my head forty years later.

Tracy went solo in the mid-70′s. Her 1974 duet with Willie Nelson (“After the Fire is Gone,” included on “Tracy Nelson”) had some chart success and was even nominated for a Grammy. However, Tracy has never had the popular success she deserves. She is a brilliant vocalist. The lady has pipes.

All of her solo material is worth checking out. Among her most recent recordings are “Live From Cell Block D,” with a set steeped in both country and blues, and “You’ll Never Be a Stranger at My Door,” in which she revisits her country favorites.

It took a while for her work to show up on YouTube, but she has finally turned up in some satisfying videos posted there. Tracy has a natural affinity for the blues; her performance of “Walk Away,” backed by the Chicago Blues Reunion, decries a “three-way love affair,” yet this performance represents a marriage made in heaven. It’s a song Tracy has recorded a couple of times, both times to great effect, though I don’t think it has ever sounded better than this.




Power Line