Monday, August 6, 2012


My FB friend, Daniel, posted this photo this morning.  Of course, we're all having a little fun with the picture, deciding who should be the first group from earth to land on Mars.  Here's my suggestion:

It would be a great place, with lots of room, for the new Palestinian state - problem solved.

The topography looks the same as most ME states - lots of sand, no water - maybe they will strike oil. 

Look at the Martians sign.  It's is as friendly as the Muslim countries welcoming Christians, Jews, and all non-Muslims. The Palestinians should feel right at home!  And, that will not only settle all wars on earth, the Arab nations will no longer need to refuse to allow these Palestinians a piece of land in one of their 21 countries surrounding Israel.  

We give one half of Mars to Hamas, the other half to Fatah.  

Who knows?  Maybe by living on Mars for the next 2,000 years, the Palestinians will actually learn to go it alone, quit their in-fighting, and be free of having to depend upon aid from every nation on earth!  They can either fight it out among themselves, or learn to live in peace and harmony.

I doubt it, but you never know ..... 

Israel is losing the battle for public opinion in America

U.S. commentators are talking more loudly in the media about Israel's failure to engage with a two-state peace process – which could leave Israel out in the cold when it comes to fateful decisions on Iran as well as disconnecting Israel itself from a democratic future.

By Rabbi Eric H. Yoffie Aug.06, 2012 | 2:25 PM

The government of Israel wants to talk about Iran, but a lot of people did not get the memo.
For an important group of public intellectuals, the occupation of the West Bank is becoming more rather than less important. And we are not talking here about the usual cast of anti-Israel characters, but of mainstream journalists, scholars, and opinion makers – those who write in middle-of-the-road, general publications with a broad readership.
Something is happening—a turning point, I suspect. No matter how much Israel’s leaders want to change the subject, it’s not working.
Exhibit A, of course, is New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman, whose already-famous column of August 1 ripped into Mitt Romney’s visit to Israel and, in the process, castigated Israel for its building of settlements and its less-than-aggressive advocacy for a two-state solution. Friedman has made these arguments before, although rarely with such vehemence. In the last week, efforts have been made yet again to dismiss Friedman as an Israel hater, and yet again, they have failed; Friedman is a centrist, a moderate, and, by the way, the most important foreign policy columnist in the world.
Bee's Note:
It is not appropriate to disagree with a Rabbi's opinions, but in this case I must do just that - disagree wholeheartedly.
 How many remember Israel's brief Operation Cast Lead war with Gaza?  After 8 years of constant terrorist attacks and bombings into Israel's towns by Hamas/Palestinians/Gaza, Israel finally responded in defense of her citizens.  (How long did it take America to respond to 9/11's attack and how long have we been fighting this war on terror?)  I would say Israel's patience is that of Job.
And how many remember Justice Richard Goldstone's "investigative report into so-called war crimes committed by Israel?  Do you think the UN will insist on a "fact-finding mission" of USA war crimes once our troops leave Afghanistan?  Of course not - how silly!  Do you now see a double standard when it comes to Israel defending itself  and its citizens?
Who can measure America's public opinion when using the Main Stream Media (MSM) as its measuring stick, knowing that the MSM is liberal, its journalists in the tank for Obama, and so biased that Israel hasn't a chance of a fair hearing (much like Goldstone's report).
During Operation Cast Lead, I supported Israel (along with many Americans) on one of USA's international newspapers online.  We wanted Israel to end the terror, but world leaders, including the West, insisted Israel back down before the job was completed.  Israel complied and since then, Hamas Palestinians (off shoot of the Muslim Brotherhood) continues to attack and shoot off missiles into the Israeli population (how soon they forget!  Or, is it that Hamas knows it can get away with their terror, depending on the world leaders to condemn Israel if she responds in kind to the bombings?).  The world is silent to every attack upon Israel - silent until Israel's patience runs out again and finds it necessary to eliminate the problem once and for all.  I guarantee that when that day comes, it won't take 10 years.
As for the defense of Israel's right to defend herself, the newspaper I posted on continued to print biased reports against Israel and those supporting Israel had numerous comments removed, while those comments bashing Israel were allowed to "stand".  How frustrating!  I decided to open a blog supporting America's ally Israel after the war ended, because there is no fear of liberal moderators removing comments and expressions of dismay over the treatment of Israel from Obama's disdain towards Israel on a blog.
There are far more competent writers and blogs supporting Israel; and I enjoy reading the commentaries from the Israeli blogs, for they open a window into the history and background of the Middle East that one will never be exposed to by the MSM, nor are the facts and truth a characteristic of journalism in the MSM.
In closing, I would like to say to Israel's leaders that it is not America's "public opinion" spreading propaganda to harm you; it is America's present administration and its "leaks" that harm your ability to defend your citizens properly!  But, in your wisdom, you already understand this thorn in your side.  
American supporters of Israel ask, "How long?  How long before you take the bull by the horns and do whatever is necessary to end the threats of annihilation by Iran?"  Our present administration will insist on "talks" with madmen until the cows come home, or until Iran obtains it ability to use that nuclear bomb.  
Israel, as in every war since 1948, you will have to go it alone.  But, when you make your decision, I look up to the sky and know, as do you, that you are never alone.  

'Don't Ask, Don't Tell' For Muslim Brotherhood



"Who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of man?" So began the introduction to one of the most popular radio dramas of the early 20th century. Later featured as a masked film hero dressed in black, "The Shadow" used his villainous traits to fight evil.

The plot to each story played out to an announcer's sinister voice and ominous laugh. It was an eerie mix for listeners -- for while the hero fought for good, his character gave rise to a lingering air of being sinister. Nonetheless, listeners came to understand the hero sought to eliminate a hidden evil lurking within.

The June 13 request to U.S. inspectors general of various federal agencies for an inquiry of the Muslim Brotherhood's reach into the halls of U.S. government, signed by U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., and four other members of Congress, gives rise to a similar sinister air -- initially, at least.

One person of concern identified by Bachmann is Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's Muslim top aide, Huma Abedin. Abedin isn't accused of being a Muslim Brotherhood spy but a U.S. law compliance question is raised in granting her high level security access without fully investigating family members' linkage to the Muslim Brotherhood as she "has three family members -- her late father, her mother and her brother -- connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations."

The inquiry generated criticism from Democrats and Republicans alike in Abedin's defense.

It is a shame the letter and responses have put the focus on Abedin -- for doing so only clouds the real issue of primary concern: Is the U.S. government under Muslim Brotherhood influence?

To walk through the issue, we need ask and answer the following:

1. Is it of concern to U.S. citizens Muslim Brotherhood may be exercising influence over their government?

2. If yes, is it important to understand how the Muslim Brotherhood may be doing it?

3. If yes, isn't the best way to do so to examine Muslim Brotherhood's own statements concerning Muslim Brotherhood intentions concerning U.S. interests?

An analysis of the third question answers the first two.

A 1987 document in Arabic found hidden post-9/11 in a secret room of a Muslim Brotherhood member suspected of planning terrorist activity clearly set out the organization's blueprint for destroying America: "The process of settlement is a 'civilization-jihadist process' with all the word means. The Ikhwan (brothers of an Islamic religious militia) must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions."

Deception is to be used to replace U.S. law with Islamic (Shariah) law -- including the right, Muslim Brotherhood believes, to lie to enemies as to their true intentions.

This document was cited in September 2010 by a non-partisan panel of national security experts in a report entitled "Shariah: The Threat to America." It stated the Islamist strategy "for destroying the United States is to get us, specifically our leadership, to do the bidding of the Muslim Brotherhood for them.

"The Muslim Brotherhood intends to conduct Civilization Jihad by co-opting our leadership into believing a counterfactual understanding of Islam and the nature of the Muslim Brotherhood, thereby coercing these leaders to enforce the Muslim Brotherhood narrative on their subordinates."

The Islamist document calls for their strategic plan to be implemented slowly, in phases that enable Shariah to "creep" into U.S. culture.

To work, it requires Muslims gain influence in various ways including: expanding Muslims' physical presence here via high birth rates, immigration and refusing to assimilate; keeping locals "in the dark" over human rights infringement by ensuring they don't study Shariah doctrine and its impact; controlling the language Muslims use to describe non-Muslims as "the enemy" lest it raise concern; forcing compliance with Shariah at local levels; employing the offensive use of lawsuits and threats of lawsuits to silence critics of Islam; claiming Muslim victimization; subverting the U.S. education system through the introduction of dominant U.S. Middle East studies programs; demanding the right to practice Shariah in segregated Muslim enclaves and demanding its recognition in non-Muslim spheres; and, ultimately, demanding Shariah replace Western law.

Following this plan, Islamists vow the flag of Islam will one day fly over the White House.

Every single one of these tactics has been employed to date by members of the Muslim community to implement Muslim Brotherhood's agenda. Islamists recognize, to maintain a low profile for Shariah's forward "creep," they must move quickly to criticize or intimidate those who disrupt their efforts. This is done via a complex network of "benign-appearing" Muslim organizations, such as an unindicted co-conspirator in a 2007 U.S. criminal case -- the Council on American-Islamic Relations. Its mission is to spread militant propaganda, raise money and criticize U.S. domestic criticism.

CAIR was among 50 such organizations that have become political "gunslingers," rushing to attack criticism and claim Muslim victimization, as it did with Bachmann's letter.

© 2012 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Lt. Colonel James G. Zumwalt, USMC (Ret.), is a retired Marine infantry officer who served in the Vietnam war, the U.S. invasion of Panama and the first Gulf war. He is the author of "Bare Feet, Iron Will--Stories from the Other Side of Vietnam's Battlefields" and the e-book "Living the Juche Lie: North Korea's Kim Dynasty." He frequently writes on foreign policy and defense issues.

Read more: Family Security Matters
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution

The Wechsler Family: Formerly Of Neve Dekalim; Now Of Nitzan


What do all the medal award ceremonies at the London 2012 Olympics have in common?

Bee's Note:  Before reading Bare Naked Islam's commentary on London's Olympic photo-op's, I would also like to demonstrate another appeasement of the OIC, posted on IsraeliCool's blog, about the Hijab Girl Floored Remember the female Saudi judoka allowed to compete with a hijab?

I find it very interesting that the OIC refused to allow ONE MINUTE to honor the victim's families on the 40th anniversary of the Munich massacre at the "Opening Ceremonies", last week, not wanting to turn the Olympic games into anything "political".  And yet, everything about the Londonstan Olympics is most certainly POLITICAL: from its photos and dress codes to appease Muslim countries, unqualified and dishonest athletes allowed to compete, right down to the USA's volleyball team "covering up", in order to appease the hypocritical standards of Islam. 
Thanks, London, for demonstrating the political power of Islam in non-Islamic nations.  How much were the Arabs willing to pay to force their ill-equipped, untrained and unqualified  athletes into the games - a few buckets of oil?  Islam cannot take away the efforts of the qualified athletes; can't take away the medals of the true athletes; but the Arab world sure has turned the "games" into a farce for Islam. 
And to the USA media, I have another observation:  why haven't you given a minute's time to the Israeli athletes?  I have had the TV on 24-7 throughout the games, to see if there would be a moment's time given Israel's athletes - nope, nothing!  Way to go WORLD - your anti-Semitic, Islam-loving slip is showing, once again!
Let's go to BNI's observations of the "Games" - photos that remind me of "Where's Waldo?".

What do all the medal award ceremonies at the London 2012 Olympics have in common?

They all feature a Muslim woman wearing a headbag.

It’s bad enough the Saudis entered a totally unqualified woman Judo wrestler in the games just so she could cause a stink by demanding (and getting) a change in the dress code rules to allow her to wear a hijab (headbag). Now, bowing to multiculti madness, Olympic officials feature a Muslim headbagged woman in  the medal presentation ceremonies.  Notice how she appears in every photo. Why?  (H/T Paulo)

How comforting, a devout Muslim security guard at the Games.

Saturday, August 4, 2012

The Anticipation is Killing Me...


The Lunatic's Asylum

I hate waiting. I am the most impatient man, I think, the world has ever known. Particularly when it comes to having to wait in order to rid myself of a nuisance.

Why is it that time flies when we're having fun, but absolutely crawls when it comes to getting rid of  bad presidents?

This agonizing wait is reminiscent of those days of early childhood, when Christmas couldn't come soon enough, and when an afternoon was sometimes spent in anticipation of a visit from the Ice Cream truck. The bells and tinny music would be audible for miles before the truck actually arrived, and you wondered if the truck would ever get here so that you could buy your Bomb Pop and a Yoo-Hoo

You know, if there's one advantage to a European-style Parliamentary system, it is this: when you finally get sick and tired of your leadership, you can at least declare "No Confidence" in your government and hold immediate elections. Not that I'm advocating for a change in our system (with the possible exception that it should be okay to spay or neuter democrats, small 'd' intentional).

So, yeah, I figure Election Day can't come too goddamned soon. I reckon this is exactly how someone must feel while waiting on a transplant list, knowing their time is running out while fervently praying that someone, anyone, would just fucking die already, so that they may be saved.

Alas, we have three months to go, still, and that means three more months of Barack Obama's excuses, and if there's anything we've learned over the last three-plus years it is that none makes excuses like Barack Obama. After he's out of office, he could make a very lucrative living writing fake excuse notes on the Q.T. for high schoolers who need to skip gym class. Or maybe he could make some dough writing for Saturday Night Live with his fellow Libtards, because when you stop to think about it, the Obama Experience has been nothing if not laughable.

Barack Obama needs to be kicked to the curb. ASAP. Pronto. Immediately. These next three months are going to be like watching a beached whale, great slabs of blubber torn from it's sides by sharks and killer whales, slowly expire. Shrinking and drying out in the sun, smelling to high heaven as the carcass rots, the last vestiges of lifeblood staining the sand while we wait for the inevitable last breath. In the meantime, some bunch of pathetic assholes from Greenpeace or something try desperately, and futilely (you know who you are, Bob Beckel, Rachel Maddow, et. al.) to push the damned thing back into the water in a desperate attempt to get it to float one last time without a thought that such action will only prolong the agony and subject the thing to the scavengers one last time.

Barack Obama promised so much, and it is a testament to the stupidity of about 52% of the American people that they believed him.

I'm still waiting for those lower sea levels.

I'm still waiting for Guantanamo Bay's prisons to close, and the War on Terror to be won. Sorry, but just because you ordered other people to shoot bin Laden in the fucking face doesn't mean victory has been assured, no more than GWB's assertion of "Mission Accomplished" and the Fall of Saddam did. The answer to Islamofascist terror is not targeted strikes, Special Forces, or limited war, but a fundamental destruction of what passes for Islamic culture that makes vast numbers of people suffer horribly to the point where they begin to agitate for an end to the stupidity within their own states.

I'm still waiting for that massive economic recovery to kick in. Oh sure, I know there's been all sorts of stumbling blocks: Japanese Tsunamis, European Debt Crises, quasi-FundaMENTAList Arab Springs, Droughts, Earthquakes, Lunar and Solar Eclipses, outbreaks of Ebola in the Congo, your dog got fleas, your cat ran away, the good 'ol standby of "Republicans", but politically-motivated Stimulus Plans, Government "investments" in your friends' and contributors' Green Energy startups, building Turtle Tunnels under the Interstates, all the Food Stamps in the World, haven't sparked a recovery. Go figure.It all looked so good in the Ivory Towers at Princeton and Harvard.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how someone who won a Nobel Peace Prize could authorize the use of force against Qaddafi, secretly plan to aid the Syrian Rebels, and execute drone strikes in Yemen and Pakistan, all the while having decried the "unnecessary" war in Iraq, whilst retreating in Afghanistan. Oh right: you got the Nobel Peace Prize not for your commitment to World Peace, but for simply being a (half-) black man from a nation which Europeans consider to have had something of a checkered racial past. So sayeth the people who wiped out the populations of entire continents with smallpox and syphilis.

I'm still waiting for Obama to heal the racial divide in America, and to put an end to all this partisan bickering. Then again, what could one have expected when The President of the United States surrounds himself with racial hucksters (Van Jones), people who have depended upon Affirmative Action to get where they are (Himself, His Wife, Valerie Jarret), the worst of the Chicago-style political criminal class (Emmanuel, Dailey),   screams "racist" at every criticism, engages in the sort of Class Warfare rhetoric that would have made Lenin proud and shocked at the same time, and which operates a machine that smears and threatens it opponents, of all stripes, at the drop of a hat? I'm waiting for Barack Obama to explain how it is that he earned $8 million last year, while the President of the United States is only, by law, paid some $400,000, and why this doesn't make him one of the dreaded "One Percent" he's always on about.

I'm still waiting for Unemployment to drop to that oh-so-cozy-sounding 6% or whatever it was that the Obamatard promised, instead of it continuing to hover at (officially, and if you believe this number, you're an idiot) 8.3%, and eagerly awaiting the day when someone, finally, explains what was meant by a job "Saved or Created" that didn't include the doofus who cleans the windshield wipers on the Electric Buses.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain how "saving" GM by caving into the UAW, shafting investors, and flouting the authority of bankruptcy courts was all "in the finest tradition of our Capitalist system". I'm still waiting for someone to tell me why it is a good idea to run GM so that it builds hybrid cars that no one wants, can't be supported by the current infrastructure, at prices few can afford without a government bribe (Cash-for-Clunkers), was a great thing that will "save" an American Icon.

I'm still waiting for all those highly-sought-after Green Energy Jobs paid for by taxpayer funds that mysteriously disappear, usually into the pockets of those who contributed the most to your campaigns. I want to know where all my windmill-supplied electricity went, where all those super-affordable solar farms were placed, why there isn't a goddamned tidal generator in every American household. I'm still waiting for someone to tell me how it was a good idea to waste billions of (borrowed) dollars on Green Energy for the 37 permanent jobs it's apparently created.

I'm still waiting for Barack Obama to fulfill his pledge to cut the Federal Deficit in half. Hell, I'll settle for a cut of one quarter, or even an eighth at this point. I'm still eagerly awaiting an explanation of how borrowing another $5 trillion dollars for "Stimulus" and Welfare is a positive boon to the American taxpayer, and how a tripling of the National Debt will be a economic boost.

I'm still waiting for Barack Obama to explain what the advantages of his signature Health Care plan will be to someone who isn't a welfare queen, a deadbeat, or an illegal alien. I'm still waiting for someone who knows to explain -- because even after we've passed it, no one has seemingly read it, still -- what sort of onerous government interference we can expect between us and our doctors, gynecologists, and dentists, and what makes some government bureaucrat so certain they can make my health decisions for me? I'm fairly certain that whatever phony number ObamaCare supporters threw out there as far as cost has already been proven to be a lie by a factor of at least three, so why should I believe any of the rhetoric about this positive Godsend lowering the cost of Health Care in America? Please explain to me why it is that half the program doesn't even begin until President Odouchebag (theoretically) would be in a Second term? I'm sure someone will be along shortly to explain that this curious feature wasn't intended to be used as a political device if Obama looked weak come election day 2012.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me why Joe Biden and Tim Geithner continue to insist to use the term "Recovery" in front of the word "Summer". We're on Recovery Summer 3 already, and the recovery is difficult, if not damned-near-impossible, to see.

I'm still waiting for that Transparent Administration we were promised. I want to know if Eric Holder deliberately sent guns to Mexico to advocate for Gun Control here in America, and managed to get a Border Patrol agent murdered by an ATF gun.I'm still waiting for someone to explain why the Black Panthers haven't been prosecuted for interfering with other people's Civil Rights. I'm all ears should someone come by and fill me in on all the details on Solyndra, SolarOne, Goldman-Sachs, MFGlobal, alleged illegal campaign contributions, and so on and so forth. I want to know how many times the AFl-CIO, SEIU, AFSCME, and Teamsters have been int he White House, and what was said. I figure hell will freeze over -- or someone might claim Executive Privilege -- before I find out. Oh well, we can at least console ourselves with the thought that the Obama Presidential Library will be the smallest in history, what with the shredders already in overdrive, and the revisionist history all-but-impossible to write.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain to me how paying your taxes is a patriotic duty, and somehow the Obama Administration managed to select so many tax cheats for it's cabinet. The hypocrisy is glaring, obvious, and inexcusable.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain the pathology behind the Obama attitude towards The Rich in this country. On the one hand, he makes remarks like "cutting taxes for 95% of America's working families" as if he believes The Rich don't work. That they sit around in some sort of scene from F. Scott Fitzgerald, with teacups delicately-balanced on one knee, reading ticker tape and ordering Jeeves to fetch the limo...the Blue One..for a quick jaunt to The Club for some badminton, post-afternoon sherry. Then Obama goes out and begs them for their money -- some 200 times since taking office -- while he himself makes more (20 times more!) than the average "American Working family" that he claims such affinity with. Where does all this stupidity, this hypocrisy, these seemingly bizarre contradictions come from?

Where is that man who railed against the evils of privilege and waste, and a lifestyle devoted only to the chasing of money and comfort, while our educational system flounders for "lack of funding" and conspicuous consumption threatens the planet? I guess he must be off on another vacation he doesn't pay for in Vail, Martha's Vineyard, Hawaii, or perhaps sending his children to a tony school that few others can afford, or maybe the First lady is busy taking 1,000 sycophants with her to Spain, or attending the opening ceremony of the Olympics in a $7,000 jacket, that is, of course, when she isn't sending the White House servants out to tend to "her" garden that she only uses as a photo prop, or the Obama's aren't giving Air Force One a royal workout -- and a tremendous carbon footprint -- for a date night in Manhattan.

I'm still waiting for Barack Obama's real Birth Certificate. I'm still waiting for Barack Obama's college transcripts. I'm still waiting for someone to produce a solitary article authored by Obama while editor of the Harvard Law Review.I'm still waiting to see the details of Obama's Chicago mortgage arrangement with Tony Reszko.

Speaking of mortgages, I'm also all a-twitter at the prospect of having someone explain just how it was that spending billions of taxpayer dollars to keep deadbeats, who would mostly re-default in a few months anyway,  in houses they couldn't afford was good for the economy and the banking system. I'm still awaiting an explanation on the logical contradiction of how millions of people who signed contracts without first reading them or obtaining legal representation are still victims of "predatory lenders", and not douchebags who thought they were getting something for nothing, or stupid excuses for human beings who should be culled from the herd in order to save the gene pool.

Barack Obama has been nothing but one long list of broken promises (none of which was realistic to begin with) and a treasure trove of poor excuses. If Obama served any purpose with his tenure as President, it was to illustrate that perhaps some segments of the American voting public should be taken out and shot, and that when you don't shop for quality in your candidates and simply fall for the shiny new packaging, you usually get something twice as expensive and three times as disappointing.

About the only promise Barack Obama did keep was that under his administration energy prices -- particularly gasoline prices -- would rise dramatically. That much he's done.

I tell you, I'm no fan of Mitt Romney, but anything up to an including a full-bore, high-pressure, sulfuric acid enema is preferable to waiting around for Obama to finally shove off.

And as I finish this, the ice cream truck has just arrived...I'm off for my well-deserved Bomb Pop and a Yoo-Hoo.

100 Years Ago An Angel Was Sent To Earth!


Raoul Wallenberg was a Swedish architect, businessman, diplomat, and humanitarian. He is widely celebrated for his successful efforts to rescue tens of thousands to about one hundred thousand Jews in Nazi-occupied Hungary during the Holocaust from Hungarian Fascists and the Nazis during the later stages of World War II. While serving as Sweden's special envoy in Budapest between July and December 1944, Wallenberg issued protective passports and sheltered Jews in buildings designated as Swedish territory saving tens of thousands of lives.
Using skill, legal maneuvering and  cunning, Raoul managed to out fox the Nazis and rescue over 100,000 Jewish men, women and children from the gas chambers of Auschwitz.  A feat no other rescuer was able to achieve.

After the war Raoul went to discuss reconstruction of Hungry with officers of the Soviet Army and was never seen again.  Rumors had flown out of the Soviet Union that Raoul was in a Soviet gulag.  Officially the Soviet Union claimed that he died in the Lubjanka prison infirmary.  The date of his death is not known to the West, but it is now certain that he is dead.

Raoul Wallenberg was given honorary citizenship by the United States (1981), Canada (1985) and Israel (1986).

In November 2000, Alexander Yakovlev, the head of a presidential commission investigating Wallenberg's fate, announced that the diplomat had been executed in 1947 in the KGB's Lubyanka Prison in Moscow. He said Vladimir Kryuchkov, the former Soviet secret police chief, told him of the shooting in a private conversation. The Russians released another statement in December admitting that Wallenberg was wrongfully arrested on espionage charges in 1945 and held in a Soviet prison for 2½ years until he died. The statement did not explain why Wallenberg was killed or why the government lied about his death for 55 years, claiming from 1957 to 1991 that he died of a heart attack while under Soviet protection (Washington Post, (December 23, 2000). Washington Post, (December 23, 2000).
Hungary paid tribute Friday to Swedish diplomat Raoul Wallenberg, who saved thousands of Jews during World War II, in a modest ceremony in Budapest's Holocaust museum marking 100 years since his birth.

"Evil must be rejected," Zoltan Balog, minister for human resources and social affairs, said at the event in the city where Wallenberg rescued Jews from the Nazi occupiers by issuing them protective passports in the final months of the war.

"Those who knew how to confront hate and who saved lives were perhaps unable to prevent the evil and the destruction, but their memories should be cherished as strongly as possible," Balog said.

Budapest, where Wallenberg was posted in July 1944, was also the city where he was last seen alive on January 17, 1945 as Soviet forces ousted German and pro-Nazi Hungarian troops.

Mystery surrounds his fate but according to the official Soviet account, he died in prison in Moscow in 1947.

The Hungarian government has declared 2012 "Wallenberg Year", but apart from a Swedish travelling exhibit called "To me there's no other choice", which made a brief stop in Budapest earlier this year, there have been few other activities.

Hungary has meanwhile seen a rise in anti-Semitic incidents in recent months, including pig's feet left on a statue of Wallenberg in May, and a Jewish graveyard was vandalised only last month.

Prime Minister Viktor Orban has meanwhile overseen a rehabilitation of sorts for wartime leader Miklos Horthy, a one-time ally of Hitler, with monuments erected in his honour and parks named after him.

The climate in Hungary prompted Nobel peace laureate and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel in June to return the country's top honour, slamming what he called the "whitewashing" of the past.

One hundred years ago G-d sent the soul of an angel to Raoul's parents.  That angel saved over 100,000 men, women and children.  That angel was murdered by the G-dless Soviets who saw the angel and destroyed it.  And yet the Soviets could not destroy the memory of the angel or the great deed he did.

Israel -- Obama's wedge issue

Romney in Israel.jpg

by Caroline Glick

Less than 100 days before the US presidential elections, the Obama administration is openly denying Israel's sovereignty over Jerusalem. Can this be a vote-getter? 

Last week, the Emergency Committee for Israel released an ad titled, "O, Jerusalem." The commercial showed administration officials squirming when asked to name the capital of Israel, and highlighted the recent refusals of White House and State Department spokespeople to acknowledge that Jerusalem is Israel's capital city. The underlying message of the ad was that the administration's policy is out of step with the views of the majority of Americans.

Barack Obama's position is certainly a political outlier. The 1995 Jerusalem Embassy Act, passed nearly unanimously by both houses of Congress, explicitly stated that it is the policy of the United States that Jerusalem should be recognized as the capital of Israel. The law granted the president a right to postpone the transfer of the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem on national security grounds. But the law's recognition of Jerusalem as Israel's capital was unconditional.

During his visit to Israel earlier this week, presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney highlighted the fact that he holds the consensus view of the American public on Jerusalem.

In his speech in Jerusalem on Sunday afternoon, Romney said simply, "It is a deeply moving experience to be in Jerusalem, the capital of Israel."

The Palestinians were predictably enraged.

Also predictably, the Palestinians chastised Romney for another statement he made that was equally rooted in America's bipartisan consensus.

Romney noted that other things being equal, cultures that uphold and protect political and economic freedoms are more prosperous than cultures that don't.

In a breakfast meeting with American supporters in Jerusalem on Monday, Romney noted that Israel's per capita income is significantly higher than the per capital income of Palestinians in areas governed by the Palestinian Authority, just as per capita income in the US is higher than per capita income in Mexico, and per capita income in Chile is higher than per capita income in Ecuador.

It is hard to think of a milder criticism of Palestinian society than Romney's comparison of the Palestinian economy to the economies of Mexico and Ecuador. Romney could easily have gone much further without ever leaving the confines of received wisdom. For instance, he could have mentioned - as Obama did in his speech in Cairo in June 2009 - that Muslim societies under-invest in education relative to non-Muslim societies.

Or he could have highlighted - as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton often did during her tenure in the US Senate - that official Palestinian institutions indoctrinate Palestinian children in a culture of death, teach them to hate Jews and aspire to become suicide bombers in a jihad aimed at Israel's physical eradication.

It was predictable that the Palestinians would condemn Romney for his run of the mill support for Israel and his milquetoast criticism of the Palestinians, because they reject every criticism of their behavior and take umbrage at every step anyone takes that suggests acceptance of the Jewish state or recognition of Jewish history.

This behavior is common to all groups in Palestinian society, from Hamas to Fatah to the so-called liberal reformers. In line with this, while Hamas condemned visits to Auschwitz as helping "Israel to spread the lie of the Holocaust... and garner international sympathy... at the expense of the Palestinians," the supposedly moderate, liberal Palestinian for Dignity organization condemned the EU for upgrading its trade ties with Israel.

The EU is the largest financial backer of the PA. Its policies towards Israel are in complete alignment with what the purportedly moderate Palestinians claim they want in a peace deal with Israel, including the partition of Jerusalem, and the expulsion of 600,000 Jews from Judea and Samaria and the neighborhoods built outside of the 1949 armistice lines in Jerusalem. And yet, as Shoshana Bryen from the Jewish Policy Center reported, for simply upgrading EU trade ties with Israel, Palestinian for Dignity announced its members "will organize to protest the latest manifestation of EU complicity and to challenge its presence and operations in Palestine."

Given the routine nature of Palestinian hysteria at Romney, and the bipartisan consensus upon which Romney's remarks were based, there was no reason either his remarks or the Palestinians' response to his remarks would spark any controversy in the US. Indeed, given the fact that both US law and the majority of Americans respect Israel's determination that Jerusalem is its capital city, it could have been taken for granted that Obama would keep his head down and hope to avoid further discussion of the issue.

Certainly, given that he had made statements similar to - indeed stronger than - Romney's statements about cultural causes for economic prosperity, it could have been assumed that Obama and his surrogates would have disregarded PA spokesman Saeb Erekat's ridiculous characterization of Romney's statement as "racist."

Given that it is election season, and then-candidate Obama's stated support for Jerusalem as Israel's capital in 2008, the Obama administration could reasonably have made its own endorsement of Jerusalem as Israel's capital city.

But amazingly, the Obama administration has taken the opposite tack. Obama and his media surrogates seized on the Palestinians' criticism of Romney as proof that by embracing the American consensus on Israel, Romney had committed an unforgivable diplomatic faux pas.

First there was the White House's statement Monday on Jerusalem. Rather than keeping quiet, Obama doubled down. In a press briefing, White House deputy spokesman Josh Earnest not only refused to acknowledge that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel. He drew attention to the difference between Romney's position and the administration's and denied that Israel has a capital.

In Earnest's words, "Our view is that [Romney's position that Jerusalem is Israel's capital] is a different position than this administration holds. It's the view of this administration that the capital should be determined in final-status negotiations between parties."

At the same time, Obama's media surrogates have focused their wrath on Romney's statement about the cultural sources of economic prosperity.

Foreign Policy's David Rothkopf condemned Romney's statement as racist.

The New York Times' Thomas Friedman accused Romney of "not knowing what he was talking about."

Both Rothkopf and Friedman - and a chorus of their colleagues on the even more hysterical Left - laced their broadsides against Romney with frontal assaults against top Republican donor Sheldon Adelson and other Jewish American supporters of Romney. These denunciations were - at a minimum - infused with anti-Semitic innuendo.

Rothkopf wrote that in embracing Israel, "at a fund-raiser to pander to big donors - including Sheldon Adelson," Romney displayed "a willingness to sacrifice US interests in exchange for political cash."

Friedman's entire column was a screed against pro-Israel American Jews who contribute to the campaigns of candidates that support Israel. He argued that in pursuit of these American Jewish dollars, Republican politicians have abandoned America's national interest. In other words, Friedman alleged that American Jewish money is causing Republicans to betray their country.

Friedman wrote, "the main Israel lobby, AIPAC, has made itself the feared arbiter of which lawmakers are 'pro' and which are 'anti-Israel,' and therefore who should get donations and who should not."

On their face, Obama's repeated assaults on Israeli sovereignty over Jerusalem, and his surrogates' attacks on pro-Israel politicians, make no sense. For the past two years, Democratic leaders have insisted that support for Israel is bipartisan.

Last year, Democratic National Committee chairwoman Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz demanded that her Republican colleagues avoid making Israel a "wedge issue," that would distinguish Democrats from Republicans.

But again, Romney's statements in Jerusalem did nothing of the sort. They were the embodiment of the bipartisan consensus. It is Obama who is distinguishing between the parties' positions on Israel.

Obama is making his hostility to Israel a wedge issue.

As Republicans repeat traditional positions, the Democrats are rendering conventional statements of amity with the Jewish state controversial. It is the Obama White House and its surrogates who are attacking those who recognize Israel's capital as diplomatic flamethrowers. It is the Democrats who are demonizing American supporters of Israel as disloyal.

Obama's assault on Romney is an extension and amplification of his Jewish proxy J Street's campaign against Congressmen Allen West of Florida and Joe Walsh of Illinois. Last month, J Street released ads attacking West and Walsh for being even more pro-Israel than most of their pro-Israel congressional colleagues. After Romney returned from Israel, J Street released a new ad attacking Romney for being nearly as pro-Israel as West and Walsh.

What has changed? Why are Obama and his surrogates now highlighting Obama's hostility? Why are they making opposition to Israel a partisan issue and attacking Republicans for being pro-Israel? 

Much of the answer was provided by by J Street president Jeremy Ben-Ami last week. In an interview with The New York Times, Ben-Ami explained, "Every single number indicates that there is simply no such thing as a Jewish problem for the president. The people who only vote on Israel didn't vote for Obama last time and know who they are voting for already."

In other words, Obama has given up on the pro- Israel vote. He's going for the anti-Israel vote and the indifferent-to-Israel vote. True, Obama outrageously markets his anti-Israel platform as pro- Israel. For instance, J Street attack ads on pro-Israel Congressmen West and Walsh present them preposterously as "anti-Israel."

So, too, Friedman and Rothkopf write that by supporting Israel, Romney is harming Israel, because it is Israel's vital interest to be diplomatically coerced into surrendering to its Palestinian enemies.

Although this seems merely ridiculous, it is actually insidious. These arguments are implicit messages to three groups. For out-and-out anti-Semites, they reinforce the paranoid belief that Jews and Israel are so powerful that even the president is afraid to openly say what he thinks about us.

For socially conscious Israel-haters, the messaging enables them to continue bashing Israel without fear that they will be accused of being anti-Semites.

And for American Jews who are indifferent to Israel, the messages give them cover to vote for Obama without having to admit that they couldn't care less about Israel.

Obama's reelection campaign strategy has mystified many observers. Why, they wonder, is he playing to his base instead of moving to the Center? Like his attacks on free enterprise and Catholics, his attacks on Israel seem to indicate that he doesn't care about getting reelected.

But this is not the case. Evidently, Obama's campaign strategy is to conduct multiple micro-campaigns rather than one national campaign. Apparently his data indicate that he will win or lose the election depending on how a few key districts in swing states vote. Based on these data, his campaign strategists have plainly concluded that some of these decisive districts are populated by anti- Semites, Israel-haters and indifferent Jews for whom his absurdly marketed anti-Israel positions resonate.

Aside from that, these positions clearly resonate with him. Consequently, they will certainly form the basis for his policy towards Israel if he wins a second term in office.

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.