moreadsense

Please Hit

There are MANY expenses associated with running this site, computers, wifi cards, travel to debates and conferences, purchase of research, etc.

Despite what the progressives say, I receive no funding from the Koch Brothers, Karl Rove, or the Worldwide Jewish Conspiracy.

The only way I offset my expenses is through the donations of my readers.

Folks PLEASE Consider Making a Donation to Keep This Site Going.

Hit the Tip Jar (it's on the left-hand column).

Monday, September 1, 2014

Polar Bears Celebrate -Arctic and Antarctic Ice Caps Showing Major Growth



Al Gore must be very sad but the polar bears are probably throwing a party. Seven years Gore predicted the Arctic ice cap would be gone in seven years, the Arctic ice cap has expanded for the second year in succession – with a surge, depending on how you measure it, of between 43 and 63 per cent since 2012. On the other side of the world, the Antarctic cap is at record or near record levels.

The UK Daily Mail is reporting that the daily satellite readings issued by the US National Snow and Ice Data Center, which is co-funded by Nasa reveal that – while the long-term trend still shows a decline – last Monday, August 25, the area of the Arctic Ocean with at least 15 per cent ice cover was 5.62 million square kilometres.
This was the highest level recorded on that date since 2006 (see graph, right), and represents an increase of 1.71 million square kilometres over the past two years – an impressive 43 per cent.

Other figures from the Danish Meteorological Institute suggest that the growth has been even more dramatic. Using a different measure, the area with at least 30 per cent ice cover, these reveal a 63 per cent rise – from 2.7 million to 4.4 million square kilometres.
Not only is the arctic ice cap getting bigger but it is getting thicker also.
The satellite images above are taken from a further authoritative source, the University of Illinois’s Cryosphere project.

They show that as well as becoming more extensive, the ice has grown more concentrated, with the purple areas – denoting regions where the ice pack is most dense – increasing markedly.

Crucially, the ice is also thicker, and therefore more resilient to future melting. Professor Andrew Shepherd, of Leeds University, an expert in climate satellite monitoring, said yesterday: ‘It is clear from the measurements we have collected that the Arctic sea ice has experienced a significant recovery in thickness over the past year.

‘It seems that an unusually cool summer in 2013 allowed more ice to survive through to last winter. This means that the Arctic sea ice pack is thicker and stronger than usual, and this should be taken into account when making predictions of its future extent.’
As of August 15th the Antarctic Sea Ice Extent is 1,354,000 sq km above the 1981-2010 mean-the 148th daily record of 2014.

Recently renowned Swedish sea level expert and climatologist Nils-Axel Mörner was interviewed via Email about the Antarctic sea ice expansion by website Notrickszone. According to Dr. Mörner
Whilst there is a general hysteria of global warming, increasing temperature and rising sea level, new records from Antarctica indicate the opposite: a significant increase in the extent of sea ice over the last 30 years (in the order of 1 million square km) and a decrease in sea surface temperature south of Lat. 60°S (in the order of 0.4 °C).
Why is this? First the global warming hysteria is just what it is: a large-scale hysteria, which is primarily based on disinformation:
- The warming during the 20th century seems primarily driven by the Sun.
- There is negative evidence of CO2-driven process.
- The cooling over the last 17 years and 11 months is predominantly driven by the Sun.
- Sea level is by no means rising at an alarming rate
No wonder why the polar bears are celebrating in the arctic.



Labor Day Special-->Union Violence Then And Now


Something not usually discussed on Labor Day is the violence and thuggery which has always been part of the union movement. And it still happens. One recent report counts almost 8,800 acts of union violence between 1975 and 2011.

Union leader demagoguery is a big reason for the violence the history of the labor movement is littered with extremists who used violence to get their their way.

 At the beginning of the movement the violence was outer directed; toward the government, management, or the police who were using violence themselves to destroy the labor movement. As the movement matured the violence became directed inward, targeted towards keeping the rank and file “in line,” going after replacement workers, or sabotaging the particular company under siege. Just like the fictional Johnny Friendly bullied Terry Malloy (Marlon Brando) in "On The Waterfront" (the image above) real live union bosses ruled with an iron fist.

Most recently however, union thuggery/violence has become a political weapon; attacking members of the public who may disagree with the progressive-socialist politics championed by union management.

To show the evolution of union violence, here are six examples of violence committed by Big Labor. Starting with.



6. The Haymarket Square Incident, May 1886

Led by the Knights of Labor(one of the first national unions), workers at the McCormick Harvesting Machine Co. in Chicago began a strike in the hope of gaining an 8-hour work day. Two days later, on May 3, police were used to protect strikebreakers and a scuffle broke out; one person was killed and several others injured. On Tuesday May 4, a mass meeting of workers was called to protest the police actions the previous day. A crowd of 20,000 had been expected but it was a cold rainy day, so only about 2,500 showed up to hear speeches by Albert Parsons, Samuel Fielden and August Spies.

Responding to pressure from businessmen, 600 police reserves were called in duty that night at the West Chicago, Harrison and Central stations near the site of the protests. An extra 100 officers were added to the Des Plains station, less than a half block from Haymarket Square.

The rally began at 8:30 pm and the crowd was calm (and wet from the rain). Chicago Mayor Harrison rode by on his horse a short time later and was satisfied that the protest was peaceful. He ordered the police inspector to send the reserve officers home. The police inspector refused and two hours later, he ordered his men to disperse the crowd. The speakers were approached by Police Captain William Ward, who commanded the meeting to end in the “name of the people of Illinois." Just then, a pipe bomb was thrown from a vestibule at Randolph and Des Plaines Streets. The bomb exploded in the middle of a column of police. One officer was killed instantly and six others were mortally wounded. The remaining officers quickly recovered and began shooting wildly into the fleeing crowd of laborers. The shooting continued for more than five minutes.

Looking for the person(s) who threw the bomb, officers began a reign of terror among working class citizens in Chicago. Hundreds of suspects were arrested, beaten and interrogated at all hours of the night. “Confessions” were beaten out of those thought to be “anarchists” or sympathizers of the labor unions. Despite the brutal response, the person responsible for the bombing was never caught. Nevertheless, in the end, eight anarchists were put on trial and seven were convicted of conspiracy to commit murder. Four were hanged in November 1887, one committed suicide and three were later pardoned by Illinois governor, John Peter Altgeld.

The Haymarket Massacre was an event that changed the direction of the American Labor movement. It delayed acceptance of the Knights of Labor’s key issue, the eight-hour work day, because people left the K.O.L. and moved toward the more moderate American Federation of Labor. For many years the police at Haymarket Square were regarded as martyrs and the workers as violent anarchists, a view that has moderated as history has discovered and revealed new information.

5. 1905 The Assassination of former Idaho Governor Frank Steunenberg


Due to strong support by the State’s union membership, Steunenberg, a Democrat and Populist was elected as the first non-Republican Governor of Idaho in 1896. He was reelected in 1898 (terms were for two years). The governor was seen as a very strong supporter of labor, particularly within the mining industry.

Fearful that that Steunenberg's government would not provide them with support if the workers striked, the mine owners increased wages for workers. Well, except for one the Bunker Hill Mining Company.

In 1899 the Western Federation of Miners launched an organizing drive at the Bunker Hill Mining Company. Mine Superintendent Albert Burch declaring that the company would rather "shut down and remain closed twenty years" than to recognize the union. Next, he fired seventeen suspected union members. He followed up by demanding that all other union men collect their back pay and quit. In other words he declared war.

On April 29, 1899, 250 striking union miners seized a train in Burke, Idaho and drove it to the site of a mill for the Bunker Hill mine. There, the union miners set off three thousand pounds of dynamite, destroying the mill. Two men were killed, one of them a non-union miner, another a union man accidentally shot by other union miners.

In response Governor Steunenberg, declared martial law and asked President William McKinley to send federal troops to quell the unrest. This action was seen as a betrayal by Steunenberg's union supporters. Martial law remained in place through the end of his term. This was seen as a horrible betrayal of the unions who got him elected.

Six years later at the end of 1905 professional hit man Harry Orchard, killed Steunenberg, via a bomb rigged to go off when the former governor opened the gate to his home.

In the early evening of December 30, 1905, Frank Steunenberg, returning from a walk in eight inches of freshly fallen snow, opened an in-swinging gate leading to the porch of his Caldwell, Idaho home, and was blown ten feet into the air by an explosion that "shook the earth and could be heard for miles around." Within an hour, Steunenberg, the former governor of Idaho, was dead.

When captured, Orchard admitted to the murder and identified the people who hired him as the officials of the Western Federation of Miners who wanted to get back at the governor for his 1899 “betrayal.”


Three Federation leaders, who Orchard said had commissioned the assassination, were arrested. “Big Bill" Haywood, the Federation's secretary-treasury (defended brilliantly by Clarence Darrow) was, put on trial first. At the time, it was the trial of the century. The closing argument by Darrow’s co-council Edmund Richardson appealed to the racism of the jury:
"They threw them in the dirty, vile-kept bullpens and they were subjected to all sorts of indignities and insults at the hands of those Negro soldiers. If you had been there...gentleman of the jury, it is certain that you would have attained in your breast a righteous hatred for every person who had anything to do with causing your humiliation and suffering."
Darrow followed and seemed to argue for what today would be called jury nullification, while not admitting to Haywood’s guilt, he arguing that the union violence is justified:
.. I don't care how many wrongs they committed, I don't care how many crimes these weak, rough, rugged, unlettered men who often know no other power but the brute force of their strong right arm, who find themselves bound and confined and impaired whichever way they turn, who look up and worship the god of might as the only god that they know--I don't care how often they fail, how many brutalities they are guilty of. I know their cause is just."
Haywood was found not guilty. A second union leader George Pettibone, was acquitted in 1908 and charges against the union president Charles Moyer were dropped.

Progressive President Theodore Roosevelt wrote in a letter to the British ambassador that the Haywood trial verdict was "a gross miscarriage of justice, concluding, "I suppose the jury was terrorized." He may have been right.

4. Pittston Coal strike April 5, 1989 to February 20, 1990


The strike against the Pittston, Tennessee mining company began when it ended health care benefits for approximately 1,500 retirees, widows, and disabled miners. The strikers also cited other reasons for the strike. The refusal of the company to contribute to the benefit trust established in 1950 for miners who retired before 1974, and the refusal of the company to bargain in good faith as grounds for their action. This long strike was declared by none other than Richard Trumka, who back then was the president of the United Mine Workers.

This strike was chocked full of violence and intimidation.

Walt Crickmer remembers the strike. He was in the lead coal truck when the rocks rained down, smashing every windshield in the convoy and setting the tone for an 11-month standoff.

Crickmer said that, despite the union’s message of nonviolence, violence by union supporters was ongoing – though mostly by those arriving from out of state [Using out of state workers to be the “bad guys” is a tactic being used today in Wisconson]

Fifteen tractor-trailer loads of coal escorted by 10 state police cruisers followed Crickmer on that first day of the strike, rolling down a mile-long road lined with picketers from the mine to the prep plant.
“The convoy did not go half a mile before every windshield of every vehicle, including the state police cruisers, was knocked out, and at least 50 percent of every tire on those trucks and cars were jackrocked and flat,” Crickmer said.

“There were at least 500 pickets in the woods, all in camo, and it was a constant rain of large rocks and jackrocks,” he said.

“I saw state police rolling out of their cars, hunkered down behind their cruisers as the rocks just pelted them, rocks the size of footballs taking out windshields and side glass,” he said. “It didn’t quit the rest of the strike. Every day was the same.”

….Every day was the same. It was like you were in a big giant battle, a war, and you became accustomed to the intensity of it, they came home with you and they came to your house. They knocked out the windows in your house, they destroyed the windows in your car,” he said.

“At home they blew up your garage at your house, they would jackrock your driveway, your kids would come out going to school, they’d step on the jackrocks,” he said. “These are the kinds of things we heard from our hourly people constantly. … It was just unbelievable harassment.”

Jackrocks are a welded knot of nails, thrown onto the road with their sharp points upright to puncture tires.

“Whatever else you want to say about the UMW, they’re incredibly good at public relations, and they adopted a public relations policy that they would just call this a nonviolent strike and talk about nonviolent civil disobedience, but the reality was very different,” Kindig said. “There’s no question about it: I spent a good part of a year going to court on a regular basis and documenting in some detail the incidents of violence that occurred during the strike.”
While there were many violent acts tactics carried out in name of this strike, and many people were injured, thankfully there were no deaths associated with it.

Circuit Court Judge Donald McGlothlin Jr, who imposed heavy fines on the union, declared that,
“the evidence shows beyond any shadow of a doubt that violent activities are being organized, orchestrated and encouraged by the leadership of this union.”


Looking back at the strike, Trumpka called it “fun times.” When you watch the video above you will see that many of the arguments of made in Pittston “the common folk vs. Corporate America and the Government” are being made by today's Union demagogues and their buddies in the Democratic Party.
 3. NY Daily News Strike, October 25th 1990



The Daily News is the paper that made the “tabloid” format famous. Through its use of "in your face" headlines and large pictures, the News earned the spot as the paper of record for most of New York City throughout the 20th century. Sure the New York Times was the paper of record for the progressive elite, but real New Yorkers read the Daily News. After months of labor tension, the violent strike against the newspaper was started by a dispute between a driver and a supervisor. The driver at the Brooklyn plant refused to abide by a supervisor's order to work while standing on both feet. The driver contended that a disability entitled him to perform the work sitting down. Calling a temporary work action, 60 union drivers refused to deliver the paper early that morning. The paper responded by calling the action a full blown strike and hired 60 replacement drivers. According to reports in the LA Times:
Seven of the newspaper's 10 unions followed the drivers' lead, said George McDonald, head of the Allied Printing Trades Council, the umbrella group for the unions. A ninth union, the Newspaper Guild, said it would honor the picket lines.The 10th union, the typographical union, had said it would not strike because it has lifetime-guaranteed jobs for its 200 members.
On the first day of The New York Daily News strike, trucks were attacked with stones and sticks. And things took off from there:
… News vendors have been intimidated, beaten, bombed, and shot. Newsstands and their inventories have been looted, bombed, and trashed. Delivery trucks have been bombed and torched, and their drivers have been beaten. Members of the general public who have been imprudent or unlucky enough to be close to acts of sabotage have been injured, and even more of them have been endangered. As Michael Gartner has aptly pointed out, this no-holds-barred attack against the newspaper amounts to thugs’ attempting to tell us what we can and cannot read.


While the strike was eventually settled the paper took a long time to recover. The year afterwards, the Tribune Company sold the paper to millionaire Robert Maxwell to help it stay in business. When Maxwell died shortly thereafter, the paper was held together in bankruptcy by existing management, led by Editor James Willse, who became interim publisher. After Mort Zuckerman bought the paper in 1993 it stabilized but never returned to its earlier glory. Today, the NY Daily News which once had a circulation of over one million and who, for most of the 20th century was the largest newspaper in the United States, has a daily circulation of a little more than five-hundred thousand.

2. The Murder of Eddie York

As head of the United Mine Workers, Trumka ordered a nationwide strike against Peabody Coal in 1993. On July 22, a non-union worker, Eddie York, was shot in the back of the head and killed as he attempted to pass striking coal workers. Picketers continued to throw rocks after York was shot, preventing his would-be rescuers from assisting. This is how the incident was described in court papers:
On July 22, 1993, heavy equipment was taken to the sediment pond to perform the legally-mandated environmental corrections. Two Deskins employees, Marion Hensley (Hensley) and John Edward York (York), were assigned to travel to the sediment pond in separate company trucks owned by Deskins and to remove sludge from the sediment pond. Hensley arrived at the sediment pond on the morning of July 22, 1993, and was later joined by York between 12:30 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. .. ..At approximately 5:00 p.m., a Ford Bronco driven by Larry Kopplin of Elite and a Chevrolet Club Cab driven by another employee of Elite, left the guard shack at the entrance of the Ruffner Mine to provide an escort through the picket line for Hensley and York. As the two-car convoy travelled up Slab Fork Hollow Road and passed the picket line, the Ford Bronco was hit by a steel ball shot from a wrist rocket launched by one of the pickets. The ball hit the Ford Bronco below the glass on the passenger side. As the security vehicles were proceeding up Slab Fork Hollow Road toward the sediment pond, the pickets heard a loud noise, which some pickets believed to be a backfire. Others believed the noise was a firecracker, and still others thought it was a gun shot resulting from one of the security guards firing into the air. As the vehicle driven by Kopplin approached the area where the pickets were waiting, his Ford Bronco was pelted by rocks, smashing the windshield. Hensley's vehicle suffered the same attack, with his windshield being broken. When York saw the rock attack, he initially slowed down and then sped up. As York was approaching the rock throwers, a bullet, fired from the creek side of Slab Fork Hollow Road from the area Lowe had positioned himself, entered the rear window of his pick-up truck, striking York in the head and killing him instantly. York's vehicle came to rest on the side of Slab Fork Hollow Road opposite the creek. The Chevrolet Club Cab's back passenger window was also struck by a bullet from the same area on the creek side of Slab Fork Hollow Road.
In a detailed account of the York murder and subsequent investigation, Reader’s Digest noted that “UMW President Richard Trumka did not publicly discipline or reprimand a single striker present when York was killed. In fact, all eight were helped out financially by the local.” Eventually, the union agreed to let the company “dismiss the eight original defendants if they were convicted,” but when the company “issued letters of dismissal to the seven pickets who pleaded guilty,” the union filed a grievance on their behalf.(Fitzgerald, Randy. “Murder in Logan County.” Reader’s Digest Feb. 1995) Trumka and other UMW officials were charged in a $27 million wrongful death suit by Eddie York’s widow. After fighting the suit intensely for four years, UMW lawyers settled suddenly in 1997, coincidentally it was just two days after the judge in the case ruled evidence in the criminal trial would be admitted.  


1. Tea Party Violence?? There was racial violence in St. Louis long before the Michael Brown shooting.  Sometimes it was even condoned by the government. On August 6, 2009 Kenneth Gladney went to a town-hall meeting hosted by Rep. Russ Carnahan, Missouri Democrat. While passing out "Don't Tread on Me" flags, he was viciously attacked by SEIU members. One even called him a "nigger." and that was just the start.
According to Gladney:
A group of people with purple t-shirts were leaving the rally. As the group walked past me, I offered one of the gentlemen a Gadsen flag and a button. The man turned and looked at my board and said, “who in the fuck is selling this shit?” I replied “I am Sir, would you like a flag or a button?" He shouted at me, “What kind of nigger are you?!” Then, he grabbed my board, so I quickly grabbed it back, then the man punched me in the face and charged at me . I put my hands up to block the second blow from the large man, when two other people from that group grabbed me and threw me to the ground and started punching and kicking me. I was kicked in the head and in the back, legs and buttocks. Then a white woman ran up to me while I was on the ground and began kicking me in my head as well. A few people came to my rescue for which I am forever grateful.
This time the union violence was celebrated by the government: 


St. Louis County officials waited until November 25 to press charges and then only after pressure from the public. Of course despite injuries to Gladney’s back, neck and legs the DA each were charged with the lightest possible version of assaulting a person and interfering with police. The NAACP protested the trial, not to support Gladney, but to get the charges against the SEIU thugs dropped. You see, Gladney deserved it because he was an Uncle Tom.
The attack on Kenneth Gladney was only the start. As we have seen since, the leadership of big labor has combined with the progressive federal government to attack and American middle class that has grown weary of high taxes and big government. The assault of Kenneth Gladney was the first act of violence at any tea party rally and there were others, none of which were initiated by the Tea Party. Unions spent much of the remainder of the Obamacare showing up at rallies and intimidating people who disagreed with Obamacare. 




And it wasn’t just Obamacare unions were supporting, members of the SEIU were shipped into Illinois protesting against budget cuts, demanding that the state raise taxes:



Why does the violence continue? One reason is that union violence is rarely prosecuted. The National Institute for Labor Relations collected press clippings reporting 8,799 separate incidents of union violence occurring in between 1975 and 2011. Only 1,963 arrests were made from those incidents and only 258 reports of convictions were found.

Using the strategy that Richard Trumka initiated in Pittston, many of the perpetrators of violence are shipped in from out of state. And learning from the attack on Tea Partiers, many of the attacks are directed toward members of the public whose only involvement is they disagree with the politics of the union leaders. Making matters worse, in many cases the violence is condoned by progressive politicians. Fox News Contributor Steven Crowder was sucker punched by a union thug this past December when he dared to support Michigan's Right to Work legislation. The progressives reacted by falsely accusing Crowder of faking the video.


What is different about the labor violence of the past, and that of today is that union members are no longer fighting for what they see as union rights, but are fighting for the agenda of the progressive movement such as immigration amnesty, higher taxes and Obamacare, while trying their best to silence those in the general public with whom they disagree. What makes their modern fight particularly disingenuous is that under this particular progressive administration it is the unions who get all the political rewards, they are the "haves" while the remaining 85+% of Americans are the "have nots."

The Truth About Israel's 1,000 Acre "Land Grab"

The mainstream media along with President Obama are practically apoplectic over Israel's civil administration declaring 988 acres of West Bank land as state land.  Most of what you may have heard is wrong, there are no Palestinians owning the land and under the Oslo Agreements the land is supposed to be zoned and developed by Israel.

As explained by Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, before the declaration of the land as state land, an investigation had to be undertaken by Israel’s civil administration that took several years in order to ascertain its exact status.
Those who oppose the recent declaration have 45 days to appeal the Israeli decision. When Palestinians have brought proof of ownership of contested territory to Israeli courts, including Israel’s Supreme Court, the courts have at times issued decisions calling on the Israeli government to restore the property in question to its Palestinian claimant, even if that requires dismantling the private homes of Israeli citizens. The determination of territory as state land as opposed to private land is a necessary action which helps avert errors in the future when these areas are developed.
So in the next month and a half if someone has a private claim to the land they can take it to court, and if there claim is correct they will win. Palestinians have brought lawsuits against the Israeli government and have won in court when they have been right. For example the route of West Bank security fence has been changed many times because of Palestinian law suits. 
But looking at the decision of Israel’s civil administration in a wider diplomatic context, it should be remembered that the Oslo II Interim Agreement, signed by Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat at the White House in 1995 (and witnessed by the EU), established a division of the West Bank into three areas: Area A, where the Palestinians had full control, Area B where there was mixed Israeli and Palestinian security control but full Palestinian civil control, and Area C, where Israel had full military and civilian control. Israeli responsibilities in Area C included the power of zoning and planning. The territory which Israel declared as state land is within Area C.
The architects of Oslo developed the agreement so that that Palestinians would develop areas under their jurisdiction while Israel would develop areas it controlled as well. That is why there was no settlement freeze in the original Oslo Agreements.
Over the years the Palestinians witnessed that what will determine Israel’s borders are negotiations and not construction; after all, Israel dismantled all its settlements in Sinai when it made peace with Egypt in 1979 and it withdrew all its settlements from the Gaza Strip as part of its Gaza Disengagement in 2005.
Not that the Gaza disengagement brought peace, nor did the withdrawal from Lebanon.
Moreover, looking to the future, the territory in question, at present, is part of a settlement bloc, south of Jerusalem, known as Gush Etzion, which was settled by Jews prior to 1948, but lost by Israel when it came under attack by Arab forces. During past negotiating rounds it became clear to Israelis and Palestinians alike that at the end of the day when a territorial compromise is reached, Israel will retain the settlement blocs (UN Security Council Resolution 242, drafted after the Six-Day War, never envisioned a full Israeli withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines in any case).

The determination that Israel will retain the settlement blocs is reflected in U.S. diplomatic communications like the 2004 letter by President Bush to former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and the statements made by President Obama in 2011 about demographic changes on the ground and changes in the 1967 lines. The least controversial of these settlement blocs in past negotiations is, in fact, Gush Etzion.
Finally, there is the question of legality which has been a point of disagreement for many years. The question of legality comes from Article 49 of the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention which prohibits moving the inhabitants in any occupied territory out of the occupied territory. The final section of the article also prohibits the transfer of the occupying power’s population into an occupied territory. The view of Israeli jurists, and important U.S. jurists as well (like Eugene Rostow, the former dean of Yale Law School), is that this section relates to the forcible movement of an occupier’s population into an occupied territory. This language was incorporated after World War II as a reaction to Nazi German policies of forcibly transferring German Jews to Occupied Poland for extermination. It is no wonder that the Israeli Supreme Court never ruled that settlements are illegal, despite the announcements of a number of foreign ministries around the world.
 The bottom line is that some could question the timing of the supposed land grab, but its legality even by treaties made with the Palestinian Authority is cannot be questioned. So The media and Obama reactions are not honest.

Sunday, August 31, 2014

Hamas Leader Urges: 'Repeat The Gaza Experience In The West Bank And Jerusalem'

Mahmoud Al-Zahhar is one of the co-founders of Hamas who now has the very important role of securing money from Iran and getting it to the group's terrorist fighters. Appearing on Al-Aqsa TV, the official Hamas TV station on August 26th Al-Zahhar delivered a message to the Palestinians living on the West Bank, "Dear brothers, we call upon you to repeat the Gaza experience in the West Bank and Jerusalem"

Al-Zahhar words have power in the Palestinian Territories; in fact now that the Gaza war is over, some expect an Al-Zahhar attempt to displace Khaled Meshaal from his leadership role as the Head of Hamas' political bureau' chief. In this televised address he explains that while Hamas is rebuilding Gaza, other Palestinians should escalate the violence.
Read what it says in the newspapers about the (Israeli) soldiers who were told that they were to enter Shuja'iyya. They vomited and wet their pants. Dear brothers, the true owners of the land have vanquished the foreign settlers. While the people of Gaza were emerging from the rubble, and sitting on (what was left) of their homes, more than half of occupied Palestine was evacuated. The (Israelis) were saying: We will not return before the Al-Qassam Brigades says so. Today, we have told them to return, because we know we are entering a phase of rebuilding the homes, rearming, and developing our capabilities, until we can liberate all of Palestine..."

(...)Dear brothers, what happened has serious implications not only for the Israeli entity, but also for the West Bank, the everlasting wellspring of the resistance. Dear brothers, we call upon you to repeat the Gaza experience in the West Bank and Jerusalem and then you can start counting the days until the liberation of all of Palestine..."

(...)We don't need to get permission from anybody. We will build our seaport and if anyone attacks our seaport, we will attack its seaport."

(...) We will build our airport, according to the unanimous Palestinian decision, and if anyone attacks our airport, we will attack their airports once again. Our pledge to our heroic prisoners, who are the best of our sons after the martyrs, is that we remain true to our vow to liberate you by all possible means. We will complete our path, and fulfill our pledge for reconstruction, for acquiring weapons, for bringing about unity, and for accomplishing the enterprise of the resistance in the West Bank, in Jerusalem, and everywhere abroad. Every Palestinian should reach an agreement with his country of residence on how to form brigades abroad for the Palestinian liberation army, without jeopardizing security in the country where he lives."



Source: MEMRI

Saturday, August 30, 2014

NY Times: Benghazi Special Committee A GOP Plot To Damage Hillary's 2016 Prospects

An article in Friday's New York Times discussed Democratic Party fear that the House Select Committee on Benghazi will end up being nothing more than a Republican attack on Hillary Clinton's 2016 run for president. The article is rich in quotes from Democrats explaining that there is nothing more to learn about the 9/11/12 attack on the U.S. compound in Benghazi, but the piece offers no response from Republicans nor does it attempt to state the many questions remaining about the terrorist attack which killed four Americans:
But concern is rising, both among Democrats and among those who note that most select committees tend to conclude far more quickly. For instance, the select bipartisan committee to investigate the response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005 took a year from its formation to complete a 361-page report. The bipartisan commission that examined the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, took a year and a half.

(...) After the midterm elections two months away, Republican attention is likely to shift sharply to Mrs. Clinton, the secretary of state at the time of the deadly assault and a possible Democratic presidential contender for 2016.

“If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it probably is a duck,” said Phil Singer, a former Clinton campaign aide. “It’s hard to look at the timing and think it’s simply a coincidence that it would wrap up in the heart of the presidential campaign.”

Mr. [Rep. Elijah] Cummings said the chairman had repeatedly assured him politics would play no part in the investigation. But, he noted, the House Intelligence Committee completed its own investigation of the attacks this month, the seventh inquiry into the matter.

“The question now is what is left to investigate, and I do not think we need until 2016 to answer it,” he said.
According to Committee Chairman Gowdy, the investigation should be finished before the beginning of 2016, depending on "cooperation from agencies, witnesses and the administration.” But an end date cannot be set, he asserted, saying, "I say ‘should’ because we cannot predict what witnesses will say, what documents may be produced, and whether either will lead to additional lines of appropriate inquiry.”
To Democrats, such deliberation is suspicious in light of what is already known. Representative C. A. Dutch Ruppersberger of Maryland, the ranking Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said a declassified version of his panel’s Benghazi report could be released in September. He said the committee found no intelligence failure ahead of the attack. Intelligence agents did warn of increased threats but “had no specific tactical threat” before the Sept. 11, 2012, attack, he said. And there was no “stand down” order issued to military officers to hold off a rescue.

There was no illegal activity, no illegal arms sales occurring, and no evidence the intelligence community assessments were politicized in any way,” he said. “If there are any more facts to be found, I’m all for it, but how much further can you go?

I am not sure what the committee can productively do that hasn’t been done already,” said Representative Adam B. Schiff, Democrat of California, a member of the select committee and the House Intelligence Committee. But, he added, “These committees tend to take on a life of their own"
There are plenty of open questions about Benghazi; Gowdy asked many of them back in May. If the Times had an interest in being non-partisan they could have transcribed Gowdy's comments in the video below and taken note of the one aspect of the affair that has changed in the months since May: one of the terrorists responsible for the attack has been arrested.