New York Times Talking Turkey

Posted on August 11, 2014 by First.One.Through

Sometimes a contrast in coverage helps boldface the biases.

The New York Times (for some reason) wrote quite glowingly of Prime Minister Erdogan of Turkey during presidential elections in August 2014. Some of the choice language on August 9 before the election included:

“hoping to secure a legacy greater than that of the revered founder of modern Turkey”;
“broken down secular taboos”;
“economic policies have improved the lives of many”;
“long been a strategic ally of the United States”;
“In 2011, President Obama developed a close personal relationship with Mr. Erdogan, seeing Turkey as a model to emulate for countries upended by revolution’”

After the elections, on August 11 the Times continued to use positive expressions: “thousands massed…and erupted in applause” to Erdogan’s victory, while caveating later in the article that there were some concerns among the country’s “liberals” about an “authoritarian” streak in Erdogan.

In both articles, the New York Times neglected to remind readers of a few policies of Erdogan over the prior year that gave Turkish citizens pause about Erdogan:

But if the New York Times likes you, certain facts will fade to the background.

Consider the surprisingly low-turnout for this first-time Turkish presidential election: only 74% came out to vote compared to 87% in 2011 general elections. The NYT said that few people showed up to vote “presumably because many had assumed Erdogan would win”. Erdogan squeaked out a win with 52% of the vote compared to the second place winner at 38% – only 37% higher. However, the NYT said “the election felt like a coronation”.

By way of comparison, look at the way the Times covered the election of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in January 2013. The Times did not include any of the commentary used for Turkey about Israel: being a strong US ally; the strong economy of Israel; the island of stability in the sea of chaos of the Middle East. Instead, the headline read: “Tepid Vote for Netanyahu in Israel Is Seen as Rebuke”. In that “tepid vote”, Israelis came out in numbers greater than ever before – 67% voted for the cabinet, compared to the 2009 election turnout of 65% and of 63% in the 2003 election. Not only was the vote not “tepid”, but Netanyahu’s Likud party won the vast majority with 31 seats compared to the second place winner, Yesh Atid, with 19 votes – a margin of 63% (almost twice Erdogan’s clearance).

But the Times despises Netanyahu. The article had remarkable quotes for the victorious Prime Minister:

“weakened Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu”;
“the outcome was a humbling rebuke”;
“Mr. Netanyahu posted a panicky message on Facebook”;
“The results were a blow to the prime minister, whose aggressive push to expand Jewish settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank has led to international condemnation and strained relations with Washington.”

This last quote is a particularly embarrassing and revealing lie. Jodi Roduren (who wrote the piece from the fantasy of her head instead of based on facts) sought to lay out a scenario where the Israeli public disagreed with the “aggressive push to expand Jewish settlements”. In the real world, both the number two party, Yesh Atid (19 seats) and the number four party, Jewish Home (11 seats), were in favor of a united Jerusalem and continuing to build homes for Jews in Judea & Samaria. The Jewish Home party campaigned on the basis of annexing Judea & Samaria. The Times’ favorite parties, the left-wing parties of Hatnua and Meretz came in almost last place with 6 seats each. (If you’re counting at home, that’s 61 seats versus 12 seats for the parties that want to keep united Jerusalem- a margin so large and bold you would think Roduren’s handlers could have managed to edit her “news” article).

The Times ignored reality in both situations. In Turkey, it failed to report on Erdogan’s strong right-ward shift into deep Islamic camp and painted him as more of a moderate. His modest win as blown out of proportion.

For Israel, Netanyahu’s strong win was considered poor. The country’s support of his policies about the rights for Jews to live all parts of Judea and Samaria were not just dismissed, but painted in a way that was completely opposite of the facts.

I sometimes think of the Times the way I think about turkey: it tastes quite good but it puts a person to sleep. Oh, and of course, it is one of the dumbest animals on the planet.

Sources:

Turkey, most journalist jailed 2012 and 2013: http://cpj.org/reports/2013/12/second-worst-year-on-record-for-jailed-journalists.php

Erdogan banned twitter May 2013: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2014/03/21/turkey-bans-twitter-and-twitter-explodes/

Erdogan blocked Youtube: http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/27/world/europe/turkey-youtube-blocked/

Turkey ban kissing in public; late sale alcohol: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-22780773

Netanyahu headline “Tepid Vote for Netanyahu in Israel Is Seen as Rebuke”: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/23/world/middleeast/israel-votes-in-election-likely-to-retain-netanyahu.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Lapid, Yesh Atid: Jerusalem not for negotiation http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Lapid-Jerusalem-is-not-up-for-negotiation-because-the-city-will-never-be-divided-330680

Palestinian “Refugees” or “SAPs”?

Posted on August 8, 2014 by First.One.Through

Wards of the World The well-know secret (but not discussed, as honesty is considered impolite in politics) in the halls of governments around the world is that there are currently only 30,000 Palestinian refugees as defined by the United Nations. That definition states:

“Palestine refugees are defined as “persons whose normal place of residence was Palestine during the period 1 June 1946 to 15 May 1948, and who lost both home and means of livelihood as a result of the 1948 conflict.”

This generous definition of “refugee” ignores some basic points:

There were hundreds of thousands of “Palestinians” who moved to the region of Palestine from around the Arab world during the British Mandate prior to June 1946. They were newcomers, not indigenous people;
A “refugee” is defined as someone who is forced to flee a country, not a house or town. Palestine was not a country, but an administered region under the British Mandate;
Many of these “refugees” did not flee at all, but left on their own free will;
Many of the “refugees” were renters, not land-owners

Today, the United Nations refers to 5 million Palestinian “refugees”. These are not refugees, but descendants who voluntarily registered to receive aid from the “temporary” United Nations agency. UNRWA, the United Nations Relief and Works Agency, made these services available on a longer term basis when it appeared that the Israeli-Arab conflict would continue for many years:

“UNRWA services are available to all those living in its area of operations [Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, West Bank and Gaza] who meet this definition, who are registered with the Agency and who need assistance. The descendants of Palestine refugee males, including adopted children, are also eligible for registration.”

UNRWA enabled people to register for services, not to register as a “refugee”. A person can no more register to be a refugee than to register to be a different gender or race. A person is either a refugee or is not- but cannot volunteer to sign up as one. Today, there are roughly 11 million Arabs who claim to have Palestinian heritage. The majority (55%) of them are citizens in new countries such as Chile, the United States and Israel. They have productive lives like many families from around the world. They call themselves Arab Chileans, Arab-Americans or Israeli Arabs. There are roughly 5 million Arabs who live in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, West Bank and Gaza who have opted to take aid from UNRWA. Unlike relatives that made new lives and became citizens around the world, they decided to become SAPs, Stateless Arabs from Palestine. They accepted a beggar’s bargain which left them without a country in exchange for becoming wards of the world. In 2014, of the 11 million Palestinians:

0.3% are Palestinian refugees who can make a claim of actually being displaced 66 years ago;
55% have taken citizenship around the world;
45% have elected to be SAPs, to live on the world’s charity and complain about their lack of dignity. 2.16 million people in Gaza and the West Bank currently receive aid from UNRWA, and another 3.1 million in Lebanon, Syria and Jordan

Source: http://www.unrwa.org/palestine-refugees Refugee definition, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/refugee

“someone who has been forced to leave a country because of war or for religious or political reasons” (not a descendant)

US Senate defining 30,000 Palestinian refugees http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/30000-or-5-million-real-number-palestinian-refugees

UNRWA statistics: http://www.unrwa.org/userfiles/2013042435340.pdf

“Please Sir, May I have Some More?”

Posted on August 8, 2014 by First.One.Through

As the 2014 Operation Protective Edge (hopefully) draws to a close, one can expect the same histrionics that have become well-known and well-worn to emanate from the Arab world. The video below of Queen Rania of Jordan, is of her appeal to the United Nations five years ago, which can serve as the outline for the Arab textbook on UNRWA. In summation, we are pathetic and we want to ask the world for money again.

(As further background/amusement, Queen Rania of JORDAN was born in KUWAIT and considers herself Palestinian, when convenient).

“Life half-lived” – Palestinian Quality of Life. The Arabs will bemoan their treatment by Israel and ignore their treatment by their Arab brethren.

Palestinians in Lebanon and Syria are denied citizenship by their host countries. They are denied the ability to own property and obtain white color jobs. The Jordanians gave Palestinians citizenship in 1954, only to revoke it in 1988. Egypt has totally shut down Hamas which runs Gaza, as it is a part of the banned Muslim Brotherhood.

The reason why Palestinians have a bad quality of life (beyond the discrimination from their Arab “brothers”) is because of UNRWA. UNRWA has given millions of second and third generation Arabs a life “half-lived” because of a promise that they will get to go to a house that no longer exists, in a country that their grandparents sought to destroy at its infancy. The Arabs in Israel have twice the life of Palestinians in Arab countries.

Regardless, all protests about quality of life will be directed at Israel, and not at UNRWA, Lebanon, Syria or Egypt.

“Hours wasted at checkpoints” – Border control. The Palestinians will complain about the restrictions of movement out of Gaza and the West Bank. The fact that those territories have amassed over 10,000 rockets, have a charter calling for the death of Jews and destruction of Israel, have fired over 10,000 rockets at Israeli towns over the past 13 years, and killed hundreds of Israeli civilians does not seem to factor into their concern about Israel’s need for border controls.

Regardless, Arab nations will press Israel to alleviate travel restrictions.

“UNRWA has delivered sanctuary.” – Charge of War Crimes. The vast majority of UNRWA employees are Palestinians. These employees were caught not only storing missiles in their schools, but handing them over to Hamas to launch against Israel. Those same members of Hamas launched missiles in and around the UNRWA schools. UNRWA teachers have been caught building rockets for Hamas.

Regardless, the histrionics of Israel firing at the missile launching sites will continue.

“Reconstruction”. – Appeal for Money to Gaza. The historic blame for the limited re-building homes and schools in Gaza was laid squarely on Israel’s restriction on allowing building materials into Gaza. As Operation Protective Edge made clear, the fault was not the lack of cement in Gaza, but which projects the Palestinians sought to develop. Hamas used the materials to build terror tunnels instead of schools and roads above ground.

Regardless, the Arabs will argue for the ease of more materials into Gaza without oversight.

“School provides a comforting routine.” The schools in Gaza may fly an UNRWA flag, but the curricula are determined by the ruling authority – Hamas. The Hamas education is complete with demonization of Jews and Holocaust denial.

Regardless, Palestinians will demand a rebuilding of schools under the Hamas watch.

“Hell on Earth”. Queen Rania described Gaza as “Hell on Earth” for many years. She used this statement even though people in Gaza had: longer life expectancy; better immunization rates and higher literacy rates than Jordanians.

“If we let UNRWA collapse… we risk destabilizing the entire region.” Queen Rania should hand back her prophesy credentials. The Arab and Muslim world is in total chaos in Syria, Iraq, Libya, Nigeria and other places, with no connection to Israel or UNRWA. UNRWA itself is a destabilizing force to the Israeli-Palestinian peace process, in its current configuration.

Regardless, the Arabs will shout that the organization should not be overhauled.

“All of us depend on UNRWA.” The appeal that the world needs UNRWA will continue even though it is blatantly false. It is a cheap attempt to get the world to continue to fund salaries for 30,000 Palestinians.

The amazing hypocrisy, is that the Arab world funds only 10% of the UNRWA budget, while they are the ones who claim it is necessary.

Regardless, Palestinians will once again have their hands out asking the world for more money.

Source:

“First of its kind” missile discovery: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jul/17/unrwa-investigating-20-rockets-empty-gaza-school-palestinian

“Second time” http://www.unrwa.org/newsroom/press-releases/unrwa-condemns-placement-rockets-second-time-one-its-schools

Third time a trend? http://www.timesofisrael.com/rockets-found-in-unrwa-school-for-third-time/

“Vast Majority” of UNRWA employees are Palestinians: http://www.unrwa.org/userfiles/20100118153142.pdf

UNRWA teacher and terrorist: http://www.globaljihad.net/view_news.asp?id=409

Frontpage article on UNRWA: http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/dgreenfield/defund-the-unrwa/

Protesting the Victor, not the Victims

Posted on August 5, 2014 by First.One.Through

Brett Stephens of the Wall Street Journal wrote an editorial on August 5, 2014 about the seeming hypocrisy of parts of the world protesting against Israel in the current Israel-Hamas war but barely making a peep about wars in Pakistan, Iraq, Nigeria, Libya, etc. He doubted the sincerity of people’s stated concern about Arab victims, and considered the protestors motivation of racism, since they only show up when the counter-party is Israel.

As posted in FirstOneThrough on July 21, wars involving Israel account for a very small portion of all Muslim deaths in wars. Muslim-Muslim wars account for 90% of fatalities.

That should not come as a surprise. Most wars are between neighboring countries or are civil wars. (The United States is the exception which seems to only go to war with countries that are not neighbors). As most Muslim countries neighbor other Muslim countries, it would stand to reason that most Muslim wars and fatalities would be at the hands of other Muslim countries.

However, the expected number of fatalities in wars involving Israel is out-of-proportion. Israel’s neighbors account for 7% of the world’s Muslim population (117 million people), but the fatalities account for only 1% of the deaths in wars.

The reason that so few deaths happen in wars with Israel has a lot to do with the length of the wars.

Israel’s wars tend to be much shorter than wars between Muslim countries. The Iran-Iraq war went on for 8 years. The civil war in Angola- 27 years; Somalia- 15 years; and the wars of Sudan (which included Christians) went on for 17 and 22 years. Those Muslim wars killed millions of people. Compare that to the 6-Day War of 1967, and the Israeli wars in 2006, 2008 and 2012 which were 34, 22 and 7 days long, respectively. Those four wars plus the current 2014 war killed 20,000 people combined.

The Israeli wars were short – when they were winning/won. The longest Israeli wars had heavy casualties. The 1948 Israeli War of Independence against five invading armies lasted 300 days, when Israel fought for its very existence. The First Lebanon War lasted three years and did not have a clear victor. Each of those wars had as many fatalities as the five short wars combined. Those battles where Israel was the decisive victor were typically under one month and consequently, the death tolls much smaller.

These facts lead to some interesting questions about the protests:

Were the wars short because Israel achieved its near-term security objectives and did not factor in global protests?
Did the protests help shorten the war?

More specifically to the question raised by Brett Stephens about the motivation of the protestors during these short battles with Israel:

Were the protestors actually concerned that Israel would wipe the opponents off the map, as their Muslim adversaries would certainly have done if they were the winner?
Would they protest a quick end to the wars if Israel were losing?

The answers to those questions would demonstrate that the motivation has little to do with victims, and everything to do with the victor. As the Arabs lost the wars, the protests masked their hatred for Israel as a call for the victims. If the Arabs had been winning, the protests would have been chants of support for the Muslim armies, and the “victims” would have been hailed as “martyrs” for the cause.

These anti-Israel protests occur in places with significant Muslim immigrants. If they protest a Muslim-Muslim war in their new host countries, it could lead to local street battles between Sunnis and Shiites, essentially importing their religious war to Europe. However, protesting against a common adversary in Israel is not only easier, but serves as a way of uniting Muslims that are in the middle of a large global war with themselves.

Sources:

Brett Stephens, Palestine and Double Standards: http://online.wsj.com/articles/bret-stephens-palestine-and-double-standards-1407194971?mod=trending_now_8

FirstOneThrough, Israel and Wars: https://firstonethrough.wordpress.com/2014/07/21/israel-and-wars/

The Iron Lady of Syria

Posted on August 3, 2014 by First.One.Through

In January 2009, Asma al-Assad, the first lady of Syria, gave an interview on CNN criticizing Israel’s first war against Hamas in Gaza. The FirstOneThrough review with an overlay of news stories went viral and is below.

The irony of the interview can be viewed on different levels in August 2014:

Death toll: In August 2014, the death toll in the Syrian Civil War approached 175,000, of which 57,000 were civilians. The 175,000 total dead would surpass the 174,000 civilians killed in the United States War on Terror in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The 57,000 civilians would amount to 46 Syrian civilians killed on average per day for over three years since March 2011, compared to 37 civilians killed on average in Iraq and Afghanistan for 13 years. In the four weeks of the current Gaza fighting, an estimated 50-70% of the deaths were civilians or 29 to 41 civilians killed on average over four weeks.

Muslim Brotherhood: The Hamas party that rules Gaza is a part of the Muslim Brotherhood. As specified in Article 2 of the Hamas charter: “The Islamic Resistance Movement is one of the wings of the Muslim Brothers in Palestine. The Muslim Brotherhood Movement is a world organization, the largest Islamic Movement in the modern era.”

The Muslim Brotherhood was a banned political party in Syria. Asma al-Assad’s father-in-law, Hafez al-Assad banned the party and imposed the death penalty on its members in 1980. In 1982, Hafez al-Assad sought to crush the Brotherhood in Hama, where he slaughtered over 20,000 people – over 740 Syrians per day on average for 27 days – and then leveled the city.

Palestinians: The Palestinians who reside in Syria are treated as illegals – even though they have been there since 1948. They are denied citizenship. The are not given the rights to own property or hold white-color jobs.

Since the Syrian Civil War began, Palestinian Arabs have been pushed from their homes to Jordan and have been shelled repeatedly by al-Assad’s Syrian army.

Youth: Asma al-Assad talks about the significant youth population in the Middle East and Syria who have hopes for a brighter future. Over 10,000 children have been killed in her husband’s civil war, or over 8 children per day for over three and one-half years.

Sources:

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/02/20122232155715210.html

http://carnegie-mec.org/publications/?fa=48370

http://www.dailystar.com.lb/News/Middle-East/2014/Jul-10/263416-syria-war-toll-tops-170000-one-third-civilians.ashx#axzz39IXDSkpF

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/middle-east-unrest/gaza-death-toll-nears-1-500-72-hour-truce-israel-n170236

http://syrianfreepress.wordpress.com/2014/05/06/martyrs-day-asma-al-assad-syrian-womens-sacrifices-unlimited-media-martyrs-honored-on-martyrs-day-and-arab-press-day/

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-02-06/102c000-children-killed-in-syrian-civil-war3a-un-report/5241448

http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=47662#.U92-VaNeLi8

Murderous Governments of the Middle East

Posted on August 1, 2014 by First.One.Through

Many countries in the Middle East have legal systems that enforce the death penalty in non-violent crimes and matters that have no victim at all such as apostasy (conversion from Islam) and homosexuality. Many of those countries have public executions, condemn minors and encourage the public to view and participate in the murder (in the case of stonings).

Israel is the only country in the region to not carry out the death penalty for any person in the past 50 years.

Number of people executed (2012):

Iran: 314+
Saudi Arabia: 82+
Iraq: 68+
Yemen 28+
Somalia 10
Sudan 7+
Palestinian Authority: 6
South Sudan 5
Syria 1 (thousands in Civil War not included)
UAE 1

80% of Iranian executions are for drug offenses

Executed Minors (under 18 years old):

Iran
Saudi Arabia

Most of the minors in Iran are killed for drug offenses

Judicial Method of Execution

Bahrain: Shooting
Egypt: Hanging
Ethiopia: Shooting
Iran: Hanging, often in public (floggings often before the hanging); stoning (women buried to the neck, men to the waist)
Iraq: Hanging; shooting
Jordan: Hanging.
Kuwait: Hanging; shooting
Lebanon: Hanging (civilian court); shooting (military court)
Libya: Shooting
Palestinian Authority: Hanging
Qatar: Stoning
Saudi Arabia: Beheading (often in public); hanging; stoning
Somalia: Shooting; stoning
Sudan: Hanging; stoning; crucifixion afterwards for armed robbery
Syria: Hanging (civilian court); shooting (military court)
UAE: Shooting; stoning
Yemen: Shooting (vast majority); stoning. Post execution public crucifixion allowed for three days

Stoning is used for cases of adultery

Man stoned in Somalia for adultery

Public Executions

Iran
Saudi Arabia
Somalia
Yemen

Saudi Arabia publicly beheads a nanny,
January 2013

Reason for Capital Punishment [last execution]

Bahrain: premeditated murder; treason [2010]
Egypt: rape; murder; treason; drug trafficking [2014]
Ethiopia: murder; treason; genocide [2007]
Iran: adultery; homosexuality; murder; armed robbery; drug trafficking; kidnapping;rape; paedophilia; apostasy [2014]
Iraq: drug dealing; rape; terrorism [2014]
Israel: Crimes against humanity [1962]
Jordan: Murder [2006]
Kuwait: drug trafficking; rape; murder [2013]
Lebanon: murder [2004]
Libya: treason; premeditated murder [2010]
Oman: murder; drug trafficking [2007]
Palestinian Authority: murder; collaboration [2014]
Qatar: treason; apostasy [2003]
Saudi Arabia: drug trafficking; homosexuality; atheism; apostasy; adultery; rape; armed robbery; witchcraft; murder [2014]
Somalia: homosexuality; murder; adultery [2014]
South Sudan: murder; treason; drug dealing [2013]
Sudan: Homosexuality; apostasy; prostitution; treason; murder; armed robbery; smuggling [2013]
Syria: speaking against the government; rape; membership in Muslim Brotherhood; drug trafficking [2014]
UAE: drug trafficking; rape; treason; armed robbery [2014]
Yemen: homosexuality; adultery; apostasy; murder [2013]

Sources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Use_of_capital_punishment_by_country

http://www.deathpenaltyworldwide.org/search.cfm

http://www.btselem.org/inter_palestinian_violations/death_penalty_statistics

http://www.atlantaprogressivenews.com/interspire/news/2011/08/31/%28ips%29-five-nations-execute-homosexuals-two-more-considering-it.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_execution

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/09/hamas-public-executions-gaza-amnesty

http://gulfnews.com/news/region/palestinian-territories/gaza-man-hanged-in-30th-palestinian-execution-1.1238693

The New York Times’ Buried Pictures

Posted on July 29, 2014 by First.One.Through

Operation Protective Edge was launched on July 8 after Palestinian terrorists infiltrated Israel through tunnels and launched missiles across Israel.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stated repeatedly that the goal of the operation was to destroy the extensive tunnel network that the terrorists had constructed. “We will not finish the mission, we will not finish the operation without neutralizing the tunnels, which have the sole purpose of destroying our citizens, killing our children,” Netanyahu said.

Remarkably, pictures of the terrorists who use the tunnels have yet to make an appearance to the New York Times. Although numerous pictures and images of terrorists penetrating Israel were made available to journalists, the NYT decided to not print any of them.

Even though dozens of tunnels were uncovered, it took until July 29 for the Times to publish it’s first picture of one – inside the paper on the bottom of page A6 (under a picture of Palestinians mourning). Jodi Rudoren referred to the Israeli military “propaganda push” which “invited a few journalists underground for a tour” as “Israelis exchange nightmare scenarios that are the stuff of action movies” – as if the tunnels were a backstage viewing at a Disneyland movieset.

In three weeks of covering the conflict, the Times featured pictures of Palestinians mourning on the front page seven times (July 11, 14, 17, 21, 22, 24 and 29^th). But the root cause of the conflict – Hamas terrorists attacking Israel through the tunnel network – never made it to the front page pictures. The Times actually had a story of the tunnels on the front page on July 29- but decided that a large color photograph of a Palestinian morgue was a more appropriate picture for that article.

It would appear that the underground war is being fought by Hamas and by the Times.

Sources:

Articles and pictures of Gaza tunnels in other papers:
http://online.wsj.com/articles/israel-strikes-30-houses-in-gaza-killing-islamic-jihad-official-1406286950

http://af.reuters.com/article/egyptNews/idAFL6N0Q34PG20140728

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-07-27/secret-tunnels-under-israel-reveal-intricate-threat-from-gaza

http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2014/7/23/gaza-undergroundhamastunnels.html

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.606903

Videos:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TlvnkECJkYc&list=UUawNWlihdgaycQpO3zi-jYg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_NBEixuQbYQ&list=UUawNWlihdgaycQpO3zi-jYg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-hH2026OnU&list=UUawNWlihdgaycQpO3zi-jYg

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mv8xR1FPakY&list=UUawNWlihdgaycQpO3zi-jYg

For Obama, Israeli security is not so time-sensitive

Posted on July 28, 2014 by First.One.Through

US President Barack Obama sought to “reset” the relationship between the US and Muslim world. He gave his famous address in Cairo in 2009 called the “New Beginning” which laid out his grand vision.

During the speech, while actively courting the Muslim world, he delivered a stern warning: “We will relentlessly confront violent extremists who pose a grave threat to our security.” Obama has made good on his promise, prolonging America’s 13-year war in Afghanistan against al-Qaeda.

Since Obama’s election, Israel has fought three wars against Hamas. Hamas is labeled a terrorist organization by the US, Canada, EU, Japan, Israel, and as of March, Egypt. The ruling-party of Gaza is sworn to the destruction of Israel. Since 2001, it has launched over 10,000 missiles, over 100 bombings in Israel and conducted several raids inside Israel to abduct civilians and soldiers. As such, Israel has been forced to fight the terrorists frequently.

Despite these facts, on July 27 Obama called Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to stress Gaza’s near-term needs, while delaying Israel’s real security needs for a later time.

“The President underscored the enduring importance of ensuring Israel’s security, protecting civilians, alleviating Gaza’s humanitarian crisis, and enacting a sustainable ceasefire that both allows Palestinians in Gaza to lead normal lives and addresses Gaza’s long-term development and economic needs, while strengthening the Palestinian Authority. The President stressed the U.S. view that, ultimately, any lasting solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict must ensure the disarmament of terrorist groups and the demilitarization of Gaza.“

What does Obama think “relentlessly” means? Something that you do every now and again? Should Israel’s real security needs take a back seat to Gaza’s “long-term development and economic needs”? Obama has continued a War on Terror – without pause – that has claimed the lives of 37 civilians a day on average for 13 years, while he hypocritically asked Israel to defer its security needs against an enemy sworn to its destruction until such enemy develops a sustainable economy.

Is “relentlessly” a policy exclusive to America?

Sources:

New Beginnings speech:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/NewBeginning/transcripts

July 27 Obama-Netanyahu call transcript:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/07/27/readout-president-s-call-prime-minister-netanyahu-israel

Egypt Hamas terrorist label:
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/03/04/Egyptian-Court-Bans-Hamas-as-a-Terror-Organization

“Tinge” Two. Idioms for Idiots

Posted on July 27, 2014 by First.One.Through

Do you have friends that use the same expressions over and again?

Some are cultural phenomena, such as “Oh my God!”, “Get real” or “Could you believe it?” Entire groups of friends or communities may be heard using the same sayings. You can be confident that the familiar phrase will be punctuated throughout a conversation.

Sometimes, an expression is an original. A person (or organization) develops a catch-phrase that captures their current thinking. The first time you hear it, you might think nothing of it or just consider the comment a strange choice of words. But when you hear the same bizarre expression used again by different people in the same organization, you can be sure that it reflects a conscious cultural mindset.

On July 24, Helene Cooper and Somini Sengupta wrote an article in the New York Times about what they considered the unusual support Americans give to Israel relative to the rest of the world. In describing the pro-Palestinian protests in various cities in Europe, they stated that the protests had “an anti-Semitic tinge.” As detailed in FirstOneThrough that day (link below), the phrase ignored the riots specifically against Jews. The choice of the word “tinge” was highly offensive to any civilized person who objects to racism.

Europe being Europe and the Times being the Times, the next few days saw more of the same.

Israeli soccer players from Maccabi Haifa were attacked in Austria.
In Paris, 4000 people – many with weapons – staged a protest in Place de la Republique; 70 were arrested.
A Facebook page was created with the faces of French Jews with an encouragement to attack them; one of the Jews was subsequently attacked by a mob.

But the New York Times continued to be unruffled and unperturbed. So much so, that the incendiary phrase “an anti-Semitic tinge” was used again in a July 27 article by Jodi Rudoren. Not only did she repeat the phrase verbatim, but she led that only Israelis were offended by these slight expressions of hatred (ignoring the strong condemnations of political leaders throughout the continent).

Perhaps other sections of the Times (which unlike the rest of the paper, still has a few remaining fans) will notice and react: the travel editor might highlight a nice tour of Mississippi that had “a sprinkle of lynchings”; a real estate article might describe a flat in Berlin as “airy, with a nice view of the genocide”; and the food and wine critic might describe a French liquor as “smoky, with a hint of Holocaust.”

One can expect to see other offensive and idiotic idioms in the Times in the weeks ahead.

Sources:

Recent European anti-semitism:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/10992886/Anti-Semitism-on-the-march-Europe-braces-for-violence.html

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4549072,00.html

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/183377#.U9Tm66NeLi8

http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/07/25/facebook-page-publishing-identities-of-french-jews-to-encourage-attackers-15-men-reportedly-assault-1-jew-in-paris-suburb-after-confirming-photo/

“An anti-Semitic Tinge” by FirstOneThrough:
https://firstonethrough.wordpress.com/2014/07/25/an-anti-semitic-tinge/

“An anti-Semitic Tinge”

Posted on July 25, 2014 by First.One.Through

Pulitzer Prize winner William Safire used to write for the New York Times “On Language.” His fascinating articles would describe the etymology of words; their usage and context. He spent years as a speechwriter for US President Nixon, followed by decades writing for the Times. He had a unique appreciation for words.

Safire would not appreciate the New York Times abuse of language today.

Some words are seldom used in daily speech. When heard or seen, we understand that there is a particular purpose and nuance for their application. Even in comedy.

The old TV sitcom “Seinfeld” had a funny skit about George being set up on a blind date by his friend Jerry. George had a long list of questions to qualify his interest. When asking about her face he said: “Is there a pinkish hue?” The question puzzled his friend Jerry who was setting him up: “A pinkish hue?” he replied. “Yes, a rosy glow.” Jerry: “There’s a hue”. The exchange gets roars of laughter – not only because it is an absurd question to qualify a date, but the word itself is peculiar. I doubt there was ever a time in the history of television that the word “hue” was used so frequently.

We all (think we) know what the word “hue” means – heck, there was even a setting on our TV sets after “brightness” and “contrast” (but being candid, no one ever used it). The word “hue” was replaced by “color” or “tint” on many sets as those words convey a wider spectrum of color. Hue seemed too subtle.

If “hue” is subtle, the word “tinge” is meaningless. While “tinge” may be a slightly more common word, it means a great deal less. Finding the TV’s hue setting and moving it a single notch, would be the equivalent of “tinge”. Only an expert could readily observe the slight change in color. A reasonable person could never be expected to notice a tinge without close and careful examination.

“An anti-Semitic tinge.”

It was curious (alarming?) to see the word “tinge” show up in an article about “The Confrontation in Gaza”, as the New York Times refers to current war in Gaza (avoiding using Israel’s terminology of “Operation Protective Edge” as that might make it appear that Israel was on the defensive).

On July 24, 2014, the New York Times ran an article called “As Much of the World Frowns on Israel, Americans Hold Out Support” about how angry the world is with Israel. Americans, according to the article, do not support Israel because they believe that Israel has a basic right to self defense in the face of missile attacks, but because “of the failures of the Arab Spring to spread democracy in the Middle East.” That NYT statement is beyond moronic and ignores the entire Pew report and decades of Pew Surveys which have always shown greater support for Israel than Palestinians.

The following paragraphs continued: “Pro-Palestinian demonstrations are continuing in Paris, Berlin, Vienna, Amsterdam and other European cities, some of them assuming an anti-Semitic tinge.” Quite a phrase “anti-Semitic tinge”.

So what happened in the protests the preceding weeks? On July 20 anti-Israel protestors firebombed a synagogue in the Parisian suburb of Sarcelles. Jewish shops were looted and 18 people were arrested. The French Prime Minister said: “What’s happened in Sarcelles is intolerable: attacking a synagogue or a kosher grocery, is quite simply anti-Semitism, racism.”

Just the week beforehand, a demonstration in Bastille Square in the center of Paris moved towards two synagogues which had hundreds of Jews trapped inside. The crowds chanted “death to the Jews” and “Hitler was right”. That demonstration was such a warning shock to the government that it banned further demonstrations, which took place anyway.

In Belgium, a store with a Palestinian flag and a crossed out Israeli flag in the window put up a sign in Turkish: “Dogs are allowed in this establishment but Jews are not under any circumstances.” The French text replaced “Jews” with “Zionists.”

In Berlin, Germany protestors were blocked by police in riot gear from bringing their demonstrations to the Holocaust Memorial. That week, an imam at one of Berlin’s mosques gave a sermon that Jews should be killed.

The Associated Press correspondent from Berlin wrote: “The foreign ministers of Germany, France and Italy on Tuesday condemned the rise in anti-Semitic protests and violence over the conflict in Gaza, saying they will do everything possible to combat it in their countries.”

“An anti-Semitic tinge.”

The New York Times deliberately chose to minimize the anti-Semitic motivation of the protestors as it would detract from what the Times considered an appropriate act of protesting against Israel (since the Times doesn’t believe the “confrontation” is truly about self defense). Even as riots broke out in the same cities that witnessed the Holocaust, and those governments called out against the rise in anti-Semitic protests and violence, the Times needed to bury that narrative.

For the Times, “an anti-Semitic tinge” means a few outliers; some bad seeds doing bad things. It ignores the lack of protests against: Russia in the Ukraine; Syria slaughtering its citizens; US in Iraq and Afghanistan; and other government actions in the world that have killed hundred of thousands of civilians over the past few years. Regrettably, the Times does not agree that when protestors only take to the streets when the Jewish State is in a “confrontation,” it brands the protest itself as anti-Semitic. How does it ignore firebombings of synagogues?

Those actions are from the disgraceful anti-Semitism of the protestors. Regarding the media, it is bad enough that it is passively complicit in not identifying the anti-Semitic root cause of the protests. However, to actively trivialize riots, firebombings and death threats against Jews in the streets where millions of innocent Jews were killed, is not merely being complicit- it is an act of anti-Semitism itself.

Let me change the conclusion of the opening paragraph: William Safire would not be upset by the Times use of language. He would be appalled by the New York Times abuse of Jews.

Sources:

http://www.jta.org/2014/07/20/news-opinion/world/anti-israel-rioters-torch-cars-throw-firebomb-at-paris-area-synagogue

http://www.algemeiner.com/2014/07/13/violent-anti-jewish-riots-rock-paris-activist-says-french-jews-are-in-serious-danger-video/

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28402882

http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/berlin-bans-anti-semitic-slogan-gaza-protests-24658551