Political correctness on American college campuses is manifest anti-Semitism, but can it be fought?
Nearly thirty years ago, I had a business trip to San Francisco that required me to spend the Sabbath in the Bay Area. I only knew one Orthodox Jew in the area: Someone from the class behind me in both high school and college (Columbia) was at the time the rabbi in Berkeley. He arranged for me to stay with one of his congregants - he was in the process of leaving the community to move on to 'bigger' things. I won't mention his name because I'm still friends with many of his relatives, but that Sabbath was a real eye-opener. My friend had become what we would today term 'anti-Israel' and a 'Jewish anti-Semite.' I was floored.
What I'm about to describe was probably inevitable. The fight for 'safe spaces,' BDS and political correctness on American college campuses has morphed into blatant anti-Semitism. The role that prominent Leftist Jews has played in making this happen will not shield them from the monster they created. See Germany (which will be insulted if you say so, but remains anti-Semitic more than 70 years after Hitler's death) and Stalinist Russia. Different campuses are at different stages, but most American college campuses appear to be heading inexorably toward anti-Semitic group think.
This report that I saw on Facebook comes from a current student at my alma mater, Bir Zeit on the Hudson.
Rochman is describing a university course calling for the 'elimination' of Israel taught by what we would call an 'as a Jew' (someone who uses the accident of his birth to permit him to blatantly incite to anti-Semitism) using terms not much different from the terms that Hitler used to describe the elimination of Jews 70 years ago. As I have mentioned several times in the past couple of months, the role of Germany in financing the continued prominence of the 'Palestinians' in world affairs reflects the continued anti-Semitism in Germany (I am now reading an earlier book by Tuvia Tenenboim about anti-Semitism in Germany today - that book's publication was nearly blocked!).
Let's start with what should be obvious: Being 'anti-Israel' or subjecting Israel to double standards in 2016 is no different than being anti-Semitic in the 1940's. Saying you're 'only against Israel' but 'not against Jews' is putting a politically correct cover on an ancient hatred.
At Berkeley, the cradle of the false distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, things have only gotten worse. This article discusses a 'for credit' course on the Berkeley college campus.
According to Tammi Rossman-Benjamin,
co-founder of the AMCHA Initiative — which combats, monitors and
documents antisemitism at institutions of higher education in America —
the course in question, titled “Palestine: A Settler Colonial Analysis,” is a “classic example of antisemitic anti-Zionism.”
“Based upon the syllabus, the class
treats Israel as a settler colonial state and Zionism and Israel as
illegitimate,” Rossman-Benjamin told The Algemeiner,
adding that “a goal of the class appears to be talking about ways to
decolonize Palestine, which essentially means to eliminate the Jewish
state.”
“This is clear eliminationist
anti-Zionism, which is not just criticism of Israel, but opposition
to the existence of the Jewish state with efforts to eliminate that
state,” she said.
Lily Greenberg Call, a Jewish UC
Berkeley student who serves as a CAMERA Fellow and is the co-vice
president of the campus group Bears for Israel, told The Algemeiner that she became “very upset” after seeing posters advertising the class.
“It’s one thing to have a political
group like Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) on campus, but
teaching material that is so biased and factually inaccurate in a
classroom setting violates academic integrity,” she said.
“Palestine: A Settler Colonial Analysis” is being offered as a “DeCal” course,
which is part of a program of student-run classes that falls under the
jurisdiction of UC Berkeley’s Academic Senate. According to a
description of the course — which acknowledges “contentious” material
will be taught — the class will:
…[E]xamine key historical developments that have taken
place in Palestine, from the 1880s to the present, through the lens of
settler colonialism…we will explore the connection between Zionism and
settler colonialism, and the ways in which it has manifested, and
continues to manifest, in Palestine. Lastly, drawing upon literature on
decolonization, we will explore the possibilities of a decolonized
Palestine, one in which justice is realized for all its peoples and
equality is not only espoused, but practiced.
Students are also required to attend at least one event, on or off campus, “relating to Palestine.”
The faculty sponsor of the course, Dr. Hatem Bazian,
is the co-founder of SJP and a major supporter of the US Campaign for
the Academic & Cultural Boycott of Israel (USACBI). Bazian is a
former fundraising speaker for the anti-Israel organization KindHearts,
which was shut down by the US government in 2006 for its alleged ties to
Hamas.
You might think there's nothing wrong with that because college campuses are supposed to facilitate 'the free exchange of ideas.' But that's not what's going on here.
According to Rossman-Benjamin, “You
just need to take a look at the instructor, facilitator, authors of the
reading materials and listed guest speakers to see that the course is
biased and presents an egregious framework against Israel.” Furthermore,
she noted, “Not one reading or guest lecturer isn’t a virulent
anti-Zionist, absolutely opposed to the existence of the state of Israel
and supporter of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement.”
Reading material includes selections
from works by anti-Zionist Israeli historian Ilan Pappe; the late Edward
Said, a fierce Israel critic; and Saree Makdisi, an advocate of the
elimination of Israel as a Jewish state. Also, there are testimonies
from the controversial and widely debunked Israeli group Breaking the Silence.
“As seen from the syllabus, the class
doesn’t look at Israel and ask if it is a settler colonial state or if
Zionism is a legitimate ideology,” Rossman-Benjamin said. “The starting
point is that it is illegitimate. This is completely one-sided and has a
clear anti-Zionist bent, to the extent that it opposes the existence of
the Jewish state.”
And if you still think this course is anything other than a 'safe space' for anti-Semitic rants....
She also told The Algemeiner
that she finds it “concerning” that the course has “a strict
no-technology policy — no phones, voice recordings or photographs —
which makes me worried that some of the content will be inherently
anti-Israel and as such, the facilitators don’t want to make it public
in any way.”
By the way, if you pay taxes to the State of California, you're supporting this.
Is there any way to fight back? Here's one promising story from Miriam Elman, an Associate Professor at Syracuse University.
A brief recap: [Israeli Filmmaker Shimon] Dotan [of New York University's Graduate School of Journalism] was invited by a University of Nebraska colleague to screen the film at SU. A tenured professor in SU’s Religion Department, M. Gail Hamner, then rescinded the invitation on account of warnings from colleagues that the “BDS faction on campus will make matters very unpleasant” for her and Dotan if he came. Bottom line: Hamner was reluctant to bring Dotan to the conference because she felt intimidated by a faculty caucus who wouldn’t be happy about the screening of a well-received Israeli film.
SU responded admirably by reasserting the university’s commitment to free speech and its opposition to “any boycott of Israeli academic institutions or faculty.” An invitation to Dotan to present his film at a later time this year was also extended. On her part, Hamner issued an apology and reaffirmed her own support for academic freedom. To my mind, this rings hollow. A true defender of campus free speech actively solicits diverse viewpoints, and doesn’t surrender to peer pressure to conform. Still, Hamner’s expression of regret seems sincere and heartfelt.
All’s well that ends well? Not quite. Lingering questions remain: did Hamner have to “vouch” in the same way for other films in the conference – or was it just the product of an Israeli national that required special scrutiny? Are a group of anti-Israel colleagues exercising subtle veto power when it comes to academic programming related to Israel?
To get answers to these questions, and assess the magnitude of the problem, I and other SU faculty are now urging the administration to undertake a comprehensive and transparent investigation. Supported by the Academic Engagement Network, a new national organization committed to opposing BDS on campuses and to preserving academic freedom and free speech, we believe that only a full exploration as to why Dotan’s invitation was withdrawn will both lay this incident to rest and ensure that something like it won’t happen again.
This inquiry shouldn’t be construed as a witch hunt, nor is it likely to reveal a campus awash in anti-Israel animus. SU is generally a welcoming place for Israeli scholars and students. An exploration of the matter may also show that Hamner panicked unnecessarily and that her fears of the “BDS faction” were overblown. But it’s possible too that the inquiry will uncover more evidence of stealth boycotting.
Three lessons about these silent boycotts and how to defeat them can be learned from my university’s “Dotan Affair.”
First, administrators need to recognize that just because their schools are on record opposing academic boycotts of Israel doesn’t mean that individual faculty members are adhering to that institutional policy in their personal instructional practices. Administrators must make school policy crystal clear, but they also have to institute mechanisms to ensure that faculty members comply with it.
Second, the case highlights that successfully confronting silent boycotting ultimately depends on whether individual faculty are willing to take a stand. Like all bullies, stealth boycotters get away with their bigotry and intimidation because most faculty aren’t as honest and forthright as Hamner was about the pressures they’re facing, and because the vast majority of professors prefer to do their research and teaching and hesitate getting involved in "campus politics." The now multiplying anti-BDS organizations operating on campus are going to have to figure out a way to incentivize more faculty to engage proactively – and get those feeling cowed by BDS harassment to go public.
Lastly, the “Dotan Affair” shows that BDS, which bills itself as a human rights movement aimed at ending the Israeli "occupation," is in fact pure racist hatred, from which even famous anti-occupation, progressives Israelis – like Shimon Dotan – aren’t immune. To put a stop to stealth boycotting on campus and prevent more Israeli scholars from being privately shut out of academia, Zionists from across the political spectrum – left, center, and right – will need to fight together to ensure that all their voices can be heard on campus.
This battle is far from over. But I sure would not want my children or grandchildren on an American college campus today.
I'm about three quarters of the way through Tuvia Tenenboim's Catch the Jew, in which, among other things, he uncovers anti-Israel activity by Europeans - especially by Germans - in Israel. Because of what I have read about the Germans, I was especially pleased to read this article by Benny Weinthal about an anti-BDS group operating in Germany.
Israelis along with Germans launched the Action Forum group, which
included a protest against BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions)
activists targeting Jewish state products in front of a Berlin
department store on Thursday.
The
group’s goals are to counter “one-sided and wrong information” about
Israel in the German media, as well as to combat BDS, Gaby Spronz, an
Israeli engineer working in Germany and one of the founders of Action
Forum, told The Jerusalem Post on Saturday The group has 1,500 members,
most of whom are in Germany, Spronz said.
Action Forum (Aktionsforum Israel) jump-started its
activity with 20 activists distributing flyers against BDS at Alexander
Square in front of the Galeria Kaufhof department store on Thursday.
“BDS is against Israel’s right to exist and for a Jew-free
Palestine from Jordan to the Mediterranean Sea,” the Action Forum flyer
read.
“They are anti-Semites who are calling for a ban of Jewish
products,” activist Jan Zimmermann told the Post at the
demonstration.
Zimmermann was referencing a group of roughly 20
BDS supporters who circulated flyers in front of Galeria Kaufhof
calling for people to boycott the Israeli carbonated drink maker
SodaStream.
SodaStream has moved its plant from Mishor Adumim to the Negev, costing over 500 'Palestinians' their jobs. But that's not enough for the BDS movement. If any of you think the Action Forum is exaggerating the threat, please consider this from an editorial in the New Jersey Jewish News (New Jersey outlawed BDS last week).
Like the World Conference Against Racism in 2001, aka Durban I, from
which BDS originated, rather than fulfilling its stated goal of fighting
racism, the movement itself is peddling lies and racist ideology masked
as the good fight. Though supporters have been led to believe that they
are advocating for the peaceful coexistence of Israelis and
Palestinians living side-by-side, that’s not what BDS leaders appear to
have in mind. By including the “Right of Return” — an often-invoked
misnomer, as the language in UN General Assembly Resolution 194,
established in 1948, states that Arab refugees “should” be allowed to
return to their homes, not “must” — as one of their objectives, they’ve
made it clear that they envision Palestinians living by themselves. Just
listen to BDS founder Omar Barghouti:
“If the refugees were to return, you would not have a two-state
solution. You would have a Palestine next to a Palestine,” he once said.
He also wrote, “A return for refugees would end Israel’s existence as a
Jewish state.”
The obvious conclusion: BDS is not about human rights, and Barghouti
has acknowledged as much by saying the movement would continue even if
the “occupation” were to end. BDS is rather a shrewd public relations
strategy designed to draw intelligent, honorable individuals into the
movement’s racially motivated struggle to forcibly dissolve the Jewish
state.
Meanwhile, ordinary Germans are wising up to what's really behind BDS. This is from Weinthal's article:
The Action Forum equates anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. BDS is widely
considered to be anti-Semitic in Germany among experts on modern
anti-Semitism. The prominent German political scientist Samuel Salzborn
said BDS is “an influential anti-Semitic campaign against Israel.”
The
student council at Leipzig University approved an anti-BDS resolution
in early August. The resolution states: BDS “connects seamlessly to the
anti-Semitic boycott campaigns of decades past and explicitly to the
National Socialism” and to “the Nazi slogan ‘Don’t buy from Jews.”’ The
student council document noted: “In light of the Hamas, Hezbollah and
Iranian regime’s open and relentlessly expressed threats to destroy not
only Israel, but Jews worldwide, the BDS campaign presents an
existential threat to the Jews.”
Having experienced anti-Semitism, ordinary Germans are probably better able to identify it than anyone else. Too bad their government buries its head in the sand.
NGO Monitor reports that the German government spent millions of dollars between 2012 and 2015 supporting Israeli groups that support boycotting Israel and negating the Jewish state.
The NGO Monitor watchdog group has found that between 2012 and 2015,
Germany funneled at least $4.4 million to some 15 Israeli organizations,
and 42 percent of the donations went to groups supporting an
international boycott against Israel and policies negating Israel’s
existence as a Jewish state.
The report found that the German Economic Cooperation and Development
Ministry operates a Civil Peace Service (Ziviler Friedensdienst)
project in Israel, but in fact, on the ground the project is headed by a
different German group, KURVE Wustrow, which has partnered with two
local organizations—the Israeli Coalition of Women for Peace and the
Palestinian Popular Struggle Coordination Committee.
NGO Monitor argues that the Coalition of Women for Peace actively
supports the BDS movement, including heading a project titled “Who
Profits from the Occupation,” a database of potential boycott “targets.”
The Popular Struggle Coordination Committee promotes violent riots
across Judea and Samaria, and its Twitter account often features posts
encouraging violence, the report said.
The German Embassy in Israel said that Germany “remains committed to
the two-state solution and devising sustainable peace in the Middle
East. The German government opposes any boycott of Israel, including BDS
activities, as such action undermines the peace process. The German
government’s funding policy seeks to support selected projects via
earmarked funds. Germany will continue to invest in projects and
initiatives that can promote and increase awareness to the two-state
solution.”
Still reading Catch the Jew, and this is totally consistent with it. Hitler must be feeling proud.
And then there's the European Union, which despite all its problems still focuses hatred on Israel.
Yes, that's an EU sponsored caravan for 'Palestinians' in Area C (which under the Oslo accords is totally controlled by Israel) and yes, it's illegal. This one is right next to the Jewish town of Carmel in the Mount Hebron region.
Can the decline be stopped? Yes, but that would require a great
unlearning of the political mythologies on which modern Europe was
built.
Among those mythologies: that the European Union is the
result of a postwar moral commitment to peace; that Christianity is of
merely historical importance to European identity; that there’s no such
thing as a military solution; that one’s country isn’t worth fighting
for; that honor is atavistic and tolerance is the supreme value. People
who believe in nothing, including themselves, will ultimately submit to
anything.
The alternative is a recognition that Europe’s long
peace depended on the presence of American military power, and that the
retreat of that power will require Europeans to defend themselves.
Europe will also have to figure out how to apply power not symbolically,
as it now does, but strategically, in pursuit of difficult objectives.
That could start with the destruction of ISIS in Libya.
More
important, Europeans will have to learn that powerlessness can be as
corrupting as power—and much more dangerous. The storm of terror that is
descending on Europe will not end in some new politics of inclusion,
community outreach, more foreign aid or one of Mrs. Merkel’s diplomatic Rube Goldbergs. It will end in rivers of blood. Theirs or yours?
In
all this, the best guide to how Europe can find its way to safety is
the country it has spent the best part of the last 50 years lecturing
and vilifying: Israel. For now, it’s the only country in the West that
refuses to risk the safety of its citizens on someone else’s notion of
human rights or altar of peace.
Europeans will no doubt look to
Israel for tactical tips in the battle against terrorism—crowd
management techniques and so on—but what they really need to learn from
the Jewish state is the moral lesson. Namely, that identity can be a
great preserver of liberty, and that free societies cannot survive
through progressive accommodations to barbarians.
Of course for Europe to learn anything from Israel it will first have to overcome its longstanding and visceral hatred of Jews. Is it capable of doing so? If the past is any guide, we may have a Muslim-controlled Europe in the next 50 years.
Taharrush - the Arab rape 'game' that's been exported to Europe
What happened in Cologne and other cities in Europe on New Year's Eve is known in the Arab world as Taharrush. It's a rape 'game' and it's particularly unpleasant for the women caught up in it (Hat Tip: Ellen S).
The "rape game" Taharrush is about a large group of Arab men surrounding
their victim, usually a Western woman or a woman wearing Western-style
clothing, and then the women are subjected to sexual abuse.
They
surround the victim in circles. The men in the inner circle are the
ones who physically abuse the woman, the next circle are the spectators,
while the mission of the third circle is to distract and divert
attention to what's going on.
If there is enough men, the woman
is dragged along by the mob, while the men take turns ripping her
clothes off, grope her, and inserting fingers in her various body
orifices.
I have a mercifully short video of it to show you (safe for work, but parental discretion advised - I did not turn on this video with my kids in the room).
Let's go to the videotape. More after the video.
Sounds like what happened to CBS reporter Lara Logan in Cairo's Tahrir Square five years ago, doesn't it? More reading here.
And now thanks to Frau Merkel, it's been exported to Europe. Will the US be next?
Settlement activity is “illegitimate and counterproductive to the cause
of peace. Continued settlement activity and expansion raises honest
questions about Israel’s long-term intentions and will only make
achieving a two-state solution that much more difficult,” Kirby told
reporters in Washington on Friday.
He spoke days after Defense
Minister Moshe Ya’alon agreed to expand the Gush Etzion bloc to include a
4-hectare site with eight stone buildings that is located off of Route
60 between the Gush Etzion junction and the Kiryat Arba settlement.
Settlers
want to operate a tourist center on the property geared to helping
visitors take advantage of Jewish tourist sites in the area, including
the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron.
The property was owned by
the US Presbyterian Church until 2008 where it ran a tuberculosis
hospital and then a hostel on the site. Inclusion of the site within the
Gush Etzion boundaries would make it easier for settlers to further
develop the property.
When queried about the compound by a
reporter at the daily briefing, Kirby said the US was “deeply concerned”
about the move, “which effectively creates a new settlement on 10 acres
in the West Bank.”
He then spoke in general about Area C of the West Bank, which is under Israeli military and civil rule.
“It’s
important to note that some 70 percent of the West Bank’s Area C has
already been unilaterally designated as Israeli state land, or within
the boundaries of these regional settlement councils,” Kirby explained.
“The
new decision only expands this significant majority of the West Bank
that has already been claimed for exclusive Israeli use. “Along with the
regular retroactive legalization of unauthorized outposts and
construction of infrastructure in remote settlements, actions such as
this decision clearly undermine the possibility of a two-state
solution,” Kirby said.
He added that “continued settlement
activity and expansion raise honest questions about Israel’s long-term
intentions and will only make achieving a two-state solution that much
more difficult.”
The US has asked both the Israelis and Palestinians to demonstrate their commitment to a two-state solution, Kirby said.
“Actions such as [the Gush Etzion] decision, we believe, does just the opposite,” he stressed.
Barack Obama’s
repeated insistence that Bashar al-Assad must leave office – and that
there are ‘moderate’ rebel groups in Syria capable of defeating him –
has in recent years provoked quiet dissent, and even overt opposition,
among some of the most senior officers on the Pentagon’s Joint Staff.
Their criticism has focused on what they see as the administration’s
fixation on Assad’s primary ally, Vladimir Putin. In their view, Obama
is captive to Cold War thinking about Russia and China, and hasn’t
adjusted his stance on Syria to the fact both countries share
Washington’s anxiety about the spread of terrorism in and beyond Syria;
like Washington, they believe that Islamic State must be stopped.
The military’s resistance dates back to the summer of 2013, when a
highly classified assessment, put together by the Defense Intelligence
Agency (DIA) and the Joint Chiefs of Staff, then led by General Martin
Dempsey, forecast that the fall of the Assad regime would lead to chaos
and, potentially, to Syria’s takeover by jihadi extremists, much as was
then happening in Libya. A former senior adviser to the Joint Chiefs
told me that the document was an ‘all-source’ appraisal, drawing on
information from signals, satellite and human intelligence, and took a
dim view of the Obama administration’s insistence on continuing to
finance and arm the so-called moderate rebel groups. By then, the CIA
had been conspiring for more than a year with allies in the UK, Saudi
Arabia and Qatar to ship guns and goods – to be used for the overthrow
of Assad – from Libya, via Turkey, into Syria. The new intelligence
estimate singled out Turkey as a major impediment to Obama’s Syria
policy. The document showed, the adviser said, ‘that what was started as
a covert US programme to arm and support the moderate rebels fighting
Assad had been co-opted by Turkey, and had morphed into an
across-the-board technical, arms and logistical programme for all of the
opposition, including Jabhat al-Nusra and Islamic State. The so-called
moderates had evaporated and the Free Syrian Army was a rump group
stationed at an airbase in Turkey.’ The assessment was bleak: there was
no viable ‘moderate’ opposition to Assad, and the US was arming
extremists.
Lieutenant General Michael Flynn, director of the DIA
between 2012 and 2014, confirmed that his agency had sent a constant
stream of classified warnings to the civilian leadership about the dire
consequences of toppling Assad. The jihadists, he said, were in control
of the opposition. Turkey wasn’t doing enough to stop the smuggling of
foreign fighters and weapons across the border. ‘If the American public
saw the intelligence we were producing daily, at the most sensitive
level, they would go ballistic,’ Flynn told me. ‘We understood Isis’s
long-term strategy and its campaign plans, and we also discussed the
fact that Turkey was looking the other way when it came to the growth of
the Islamic State inside Syria.’ The DIA’s reporting, he said, ‘got
enormous pushback’ from the Obama administration. ‘I felt that they did
not want to hear the truth.’
‘Our policy of arming the opposition
to Assad was unsuccessful and actually having a negative impact,’ the
former JCS adviser said. ‘The Joint Chiefs believed that Assad should
not be replaced by fundamentalists. The administration’s policy was
contradictory. They wanted Assad to go but the opposition was dominated
by extremists. So who was going to replace him? To say Assad’s got to go
is fine, but if you follow that through – therefore anyone is better.
It’s the “anybody else is better” issue that the JCS had with Obama’s
policy.’
But what's more shocking is what the Joint Chiefs decided to do about it.
The Joint Chiefs felt that a direct challenge to Obama’s policy would
have ‘had a zero chance of success’. So in the autumn of 2013 they
decided to take steps against the extremists without going through
political channels, by providing US intelligence to the militaries of
other nations, on the understanding that it would be passed on to the
Syrian army and used against the common enemy, Jabhat al-Nusra and
Islamic State.
Germany, Israel and Russia were in contact with the
Syrian army, and able to exercise some influence over Assad’s decisions
– it was through them that US intelligence would be shared. Each had
its reasons for co-operating with Assad: Germany feared what might
happen among its own population of six million Muslims if Islamic State
expanded; Israel was concerned with border security; Russia had an
alliance of very long standing with Syria, and was worried by the threat
to its only naval base on the Mediterranean, at Tartus. ‘We weren’t
intent on deviating from Obama’s stated policies,’ the adviser said.
‘But sharing our assessments via the military-to-military relationships
with other countries could prove productive. It was clear that Assad
needed better tactical intelligence and operational advice. The JCS
concluded that if those needs were met, the overall fight against
Islamist terrorism would be enhanced. Obama didn’t know, but Obama
doesn’t know what the JCS does in every circumstance and that’s true of
all presidents.’
Once the flow of US intelligence began, Germany,
Israel and Russia started passing on information about the whereabouts
and intent of radical jihadist groups to the Syrian army; in return,
Syria provided information about its own capabilities and intentions.
There was no direct contact between the US and the Syrian military;
instead, the adviser said, ‘we provided the information – including
long-range analyses on Syria’s future put together by contractors or one
of our war colleges – and these countries could do with it what they
chose, including sharing it with Assad. We were saying to the Germans
and the others: “Here’s some information that’s pretty interesting and
our interest is mutual.” End of conversation. The JCS could conclude
that something beneficial would arise from it – but it was a military to
military thing, and not some sort of a sinister Joint Chiefs’ plot to
go around Obama and support Assad. It was a lot cleverer than that. If
Assad remains in power, it will not be because we did it. It’s because
he was smart enough to use the intelligence and sound tactical advice we
provided to others.’
In Jewish law there's a phrase that describes when two similar things find each other. The phrase - which comes from the laws prohibiting the mixing of milk and meat is מצא מין את מינו (the type found its own type). Europe's BDS movement and their Israeli supporters have found their own type: The neo-Nazi movement. Benjamin Weinthal reports.
If labeling Jewish goods sounds darkly reminiscent, it does as well
to Germany’s neo-Nazi groups, who have recently co-opted the country’s
BDS movement.
But the neo-Nazis shouldn’t get all the attention — labeling goods
from East Jerusalem is a brazen act of economic warfare from Europe, and
one that violates the principles of the very peace process Europe
claims to promote.
The 1993 Oslo Accords between Israel and the Palestinians said merely
that Jerusalem is a subject for final-status negotiations, not a
“settlement.”
The European Union itself defines Jerusalem as a corpus separatum — a
“separate body” whose status is subject to negotiation — rather than
occupied territory.
More broadly, the drive to label Israeli merchandise has allowed
Germany’s resurgent far-right to push its way to the front of the
anti-Israel movement.
In 2009, Jürgen Rieger, a Holocaust denier and then-deputy chairman
of the neo-Nazi National Democratic Party of Germany, called on Germans
to boycott Israel.
In 2012, the party submitted a legislative initiative in the state
parliament of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania to mark Israeli products.
Udo Pastörs, the NPD’s leader in the state, has declared Germany a “Jew
Republic.”
To its credit, the German government did not join the 16 out of 28 European foreign ministers who signed on a letter calling for labeling of Israeli products from the 'occupied territories.' But among those who did sign on was Austria, the birthplace of Nazism, which is still trying to portray itself as a victim of Nazism 80 years later. Here's Weinthal again:
To its credit, Germany did not sign a European foreign ministers’
letter calling for product labeling. German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s
administration has demonstrated it has learned from its nation’s
history: The first phase of the Holocaust, after all, started with
targeting Jewish businesses with the crude Nazi slogan “Kauf nicht bei
Juden” (Don’t buy from Jews).
While visiting Israel in 2014, Merkel said flatly that boycotting Israel “is not an option for Germany.”
Nevertheless, 16 of the 28 EU foreign ministers did sign the
sanctions letter, including regional leaders France and Britain, and
Germany’s neighbor (and Hitler’s birthplace) Austria.
The similarities between the BDS movement and the beginnings of Nazism are stunning and too obvious to miss. Obviously, that's of no concern to Europe.
Report: Lubitz tweeted "A Germany in which religious feelings have more rights than the meaning of freedom - is not my Germany"
Andreas Lubitz, the co-pilot of the Germanwings plane who deliberately crashed in the Alps on Tuesday killing 150 people, retweeted (actually looks more like shared on Facebook) the photo above, with the caption "A Germany in which religious feelings have more rights than the meaning of freedom - is not my Germany." (Hat Tip: Mike K).
And the New York Times reported on Friday that Lubitz "lived, at least part time, with his parents. Mr. Lubitz’s mother was an organist at a Protestant church near the town center.”
Mike K adds:
Here is the sad, but probably true story.
He is not a murderer or Muslim.
He took medications which overcame him as he flew. The
Pharmaceuticals do not tell the public all the
side-effects of their meds. They put people into murderous, zombie
like states. Most school shooters were on anti-depressants.
There is every reason to believe that this guy may have been overcome by
his medications. Medications
which are legal for pilots to take. The FAA allows pilots to fly on
SSRI anti-deressants (Click
Here)
SSRI medications are chemically similar to LSD-25. He could
have had a flash back without warning.
He did not say Allahu Aqbar. Those are the magic words required to
get 72 virgins. So he was probably
NOT Muslim.
His heart rate remained steady. Not something one would expect from a
man soon expecting death.
His medication probably did this to him, or a medical condition.
Morally, his culpability may be minor or non-existent.
German media: Germanwings co-pilot did it for Allah
German media is confirming that Germanwings co-pilot Andreas Gunter Lubitz had converted to Islam. Lubitz was the co-pilot of the Germanwings Airbus A-320 who deliberately flew the plane into a mountain in the French Alps on Tuesday killing all 150 people on board, after locking the pilot out of the cockpit cabin.
A German news website claims Andreas Lubitz was a Muslim convert. Speisa.com reported:
According to Michael Mannheimer, a writer for German
PI-News, Germany now has its own 9/11, thanks to the convert to Islam,
Andreas Lubitz.
Translation from German: All evidence indicates that the copilot of Airbus machine in
his six-months break during his training as a pilot in Germanwings,
converted to Islam and subsequently either by the order of
“radical”, ie. devout Muslims , or received the order from the book of
terror, the Quran, on his own accord decided to carry out this mass
murder. As a radical mosque in Bremen is in the center of the investigation, in which the convert was staying often,
it can be assumed that he – as Mohammed Atta, in the attack against New
York – received his instructions directly from the immediate vicinity
of the mosque. Converts are the most important weapon of Islam.
Because their resume do not suggests that they often are particularly
violent Muslims. Thus Germany now has its own 9/11, but in a reduced
form. And so it is clear that Islam is a terrorist organization that are
in accordance with §129a of the Criminal Code to prohibit it and to
investigate its followers. But nothing will happen. One can bet that the
apologists (media, politics, “Islamic Scholars”) will agree to assign
this an act of a “mentally unstable” man, and you can bet that now, once
again the mantra of how supposedly peaceful Islam is will continue. And
worse still, the attacks by the left against those who have always
warned against Islam, will be angrier and merciless.
For now the German Islam supporters like never before have their backs against the wall.
Michael Mannheimer, 26.3.2015
Apparently from the comments at German PI – Andreas Lubitz was Muslim convert from his Facebook page.
Of course, in much of the West it remains politically incorrect to mention these facts. And there is little hope that the airlines will screen their pilots for religious beliefs. Until they get hit with a huge lawsuit because they should have known something like this.
Airlines are changing procedures to ensure two crew are in the cockpit at all times following the Germanwings tragedy that killed 150 people.
...
Now budget carrier EasyJet has announced the move will come into force tomorrow - and aviation insiders say there are moves to make it 'mandatory' across airlines.
The move comes after the Civil Aviation Authority urged airlines to review their policies to avoid the pilot or co-pilot being alone at the controls.
An easyJet spokeswoman said: 'easyJet can confirm that, with effect from Friday 27 March, it will change its procedure which will mean that two crew members will be in the cockpit at all times.
'This decision has been taken in consultation with the Civil Aviation Authority. The safety and security and of its passengers and crew is the airline's highest priority.'
EasyJet said a cabin crew member will temporarily enter the cockpit if the pilot or co-pilot needs the toilet. The airline will not have a third trained pilot on board.
And a spokesman for Virgin Atlantic said: 'We always ensure we have the highest safety standards and, while it is our common practise to have two members of our crew in the flight deck at all times, in light of recent events we are now in the process of formalising this to be policy.'
So now commercial air travel will be safe so long as both pilots are not Muslims... and so long as a flight attendant is willing and able to overpower a suicidal pilot.
Questions about the religious background of Andreas Lubitz, the
Germanwings pilot who investigators said deliberately crashed a plane in
the French Alps this week, killing all on board, have sparked outrage
and debate about whether such information is relevant to the
investigation. When a reporter asked French Prosecutor Brice Robin of
Marseille, during a news conference Thursday, whether he knew Lubitz’s
religion, Robin said he did not know and added, “I don’t think that’s
where the answer to this lies.”
The question suggested that Lubitz’s religious background was
relevant to the investigation behind the pilot’s alleged deliberate
downing of Germanwings Flight 9525 on Tuesday. Robin said the crash did
not show any signs of terrorism. Some were appalled by the reporter’s
inquiry.
“This line of questioning makes no sense to me whatsoever,” said
Elizabeth Shakman Hurd, an associate professor of political science with
a courtesy appointment in religious studies at Northwestern University
in Illinois. “I find it disturbing and depressing that at a time like
this some people feel compelled to search desperately for explanations
that presume religious causation.”
Really, Professor Hurd? NO SENSE? It's all just a coincidence?
In 1999, the pilot of a Boeing 767 intentionally plunged the fully
loaded plane into the Atlantic Ocean 30 minutes after takeoff from New
York City on a nonstop flight to Cairo. An investigation found the
pilot, Gamal al-Batouti, had said several times in
Arabic, “I rely on God,” as the plane's autopilot function was
disconnected and Egypt Air 999 plunged. The phrase is often associated
with the moments before death.
The U.S. National Transportation Safety Board concluded that no
mechanical event could have caused the plane to dive. But Egyptian
officials never accepted the conclusion that al-Batouti had
intentionally crashed, and conspiracy theories spread.
Investigators are now telling the London Telegraph that Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 was taken on a suicide mission.
The team investigating the Boeing 777’s disappearance believe no malfunction
or fire was capable of causing the aircraft’s unusual flight or the
disabling of its communications system before it veered wildly off course on
a seven-hour silent flight into the sea. An analysis of the flight’s
routing, signalling and communications shows that it was flown “in a
rational way”.
An official source told The Telegraph that investigators believe “this has
been a deliberate act by someone on board who had to have had the detailed
knowledge to do what was done ... Nothing is emerging that points to
motive.”
Asked about the possibility of a plane malfunction or an on-board fire, the
source said: “It just does not hinge together... [The investigators] have
gone through processes you do to get the plane where it flew to for eight
hours. They point to it being flown in a rational way.”
...
The flight remains shrouded in mystery and misinformation. Malaysia Airlines
revealed for the first time yesterday that Fariq Abdul Hamid, the
27-year-old co-pilot, was on his first flight aboard a Boeing 777 as a
fully-approved pilot. Fariq joined the airline seven years ago and had flown
2,763 hours but was only on his sixth flight in the cockpit of a 777 – and
his first without a check pilot overseeing him.
But analysts said the co-pilot’s inexperience in a 777 cockpit would probably
not have posed a risk.
Somewhat surprisingly, Malaysia Airlines said last night its “prayers go out
to all the loved ones of the 226 passengers and of our 13 friends and
colleagues” – even though the passenger manifest shows 227 passengers and 12
crew. The airline has not yet explained the discrepancy.
Would not have posed a risk, but would have made it much more likely
that it took him a while to figure out what was going on. And most of
the passengers probably never knew what happened. Unless someone had a
transponder (unlikely), most passengers on a flight like that would just
go to sleep. The crew probably served dinner without realizing what
their captain had done. From the families' perspective, they might take
some solace in the fact that the passengers probably died peacefully -
many of them in their sleep.
The captain - distraught over a divorce and over his political idol
being jailed, and devout in his Muslim religion (that which must never
be mentioned) - took them all down with him.
It was said that Lubitz had a Muslim girlfriend. It is unclear if she
was still dating Lubitz at the time of the crash. It is unclear if he
met the woman through his Muslims friends.
One said that Lubitz had broken off the relationship after he pledged to commit Jihad for Allah.
We do know that Lubitz trained at the Lufthansa Flight Training School in Bremen, Germany.
Bremen is home to the Mosque Masjidu-l-Furqan Mosque:
This Mosque was raided by the police in December 2014
BERLIN, Dec 5 (KUNA) — German authorities have closed a mosque in the
northern city of Bremen, after it was accused of encouraging youth to
join the extremist Islamic State group (known as ISIL), which is
carrying out violent killings across Syria and Iraq.
In unprecedented circumstances, more than 100 German police personnel
carried out a search of Masjidu-l-Furqan and its accompanying cultural
office, which had both been under police radar since 2007.
The decision comes amid the fight against ISIL ideology, Bremen Interior
Secretary Ulrich Maurer said, accusing the mosque’s management of
promoting ISIL values and encouraging young Muslims in the city to
travel to Syria and Iraq, and join the ranks of the group, along with
Al-Nusra Front – another extremist group in Syria.
The centre have so far succeeded in inspiring a total eight men, seven
women and 11 juveniles to travel to Syria and join ISIL, according to
the official.
Lubitz did his time in Bremen when the Mosque was under surveillance.
...
Lubitz converted to Islam during his break.
Reason that pushed Lubitz over the edge? The raid on the Mosque in Breman this past December?
The Police say they found a significant discovery in his home - not a suicide note:
Police investigating the Germanwings crash said they had made a
'significant discovery' at the home of co-pilot Andreas Lubitz, who
deliberately ploughed the Airbus A320 into the French Alps. Officers
refused to reveal details of the potential breakthrough but said it was
not a suicide note. Speaking outside the flat on the outskirts of
Dusseldorf, police said they had 'found something' that would now be
taken for tests, adding it may be a 'clue' as to what happened to the
doomed jet. Daily Mail Read More>>>
Is the significant discovery something Islamic? Something on his computer? A Koran? A Muslim prayer rug?
And for those of you who - like me - have the choice of flying Israeli, European or American airlines, here is a sobering thought:
The A320 is designed with safeguards to allow emergency entry if a
pilot inside is unresponsive, but the override code known to the crew
does not go into effect — and indeed goes into a lockdown — if the
person inside the cockpit specifically denies entry, according to an
Airbus training video and a pilot who has six years of experience with
the jets.
Airlines in Europe are not required to have two people
in the cockpit at all times, unlike the standard U.S. operating
procedure after the 9/11 attacks changed to require a flight attendant
to take the spot of a briefly departing pilot.
Sounds like the US procedure is a good idea. I don't know what the Israeli procedure is, but I would guess there is some kind of safeguard to keep a lone pilot from crashing a plane.
What a sad commentary on our times that these things are necessary.
The co-pilot of the doomed Germanwings jet locked his captain out of the cockpit before deliberately crashing into a mountain to 'destroy the plane', it was sensationally revealed today.
French prosecutor Brice Robin gave further chilling details of the final ten minutes in the cockpit before the Airbus A320 plunged into the French Alps killing 150 people.
Revealing data extracted from the black box voice recorder, he said the co-pilot - 28-year-old German Andreas Lubitz - locked his captain out after the senior officer left the cockpit.
At that point, Lubitz used the flight managing system to put the plane into a descent, something that can only be done manually - and deliberately.
He said: 'The intention was to destroy the plane. Death was instant. The plane hit the mountain at 700kmh (430mph).
'I don't think that the passengers realised what was happening until the last moments because on the recording you only hear the screams in the final seconds'.
Earlier in the flight, Mr Robin said Lubitz's responses were initially courteous, but became 'curt' when the captain began the mid-flight briefing on the planned landing of the plane.
The captain - named by local media as German father-of-two Patrick Sonderheimer - then left the cockpit but found himself locked out when he tried to re-enter.
Mr Robin said: 'We hear the pilot asking the co-pilot to take over and we hear the sound of a chair being pushed back and a door closing so we assume that the captain went to the toilet or something.
'So the co-pilot is on his own, and it is while he's on his own that the co-pilot is in charge of the plane and uses the flight management system to start the descent of the plane.
'At this altitude, this can only be done voluntarily. We hear several shouts from the captain asking to get in, speaking through the intercom system, but there's no answer from the cockpit.'
Audio from the recording captures Mr Sonderheimer furiously pounding on the door to no avail.
Russia Today has published a list of the nationalities of the passengers and crew of Germanwings 9525, which crashed on Wednesday in the French Alps. The list is not just Spaniards and Germans. It includes two Iranians, two Venezuelans, an Israeli and two Americans.
12:47 GMT:
AFP reports that these are the
nationalities of the A320 victims, which have been confirmed by either
Germanwings or the country’s governments:
72 Germans
35 Spaniards; Spain says there may be up to 39
3 British, confirmed by the government, which says there may be more.
3 Kazakhs
2 Americans
2 Argentines
2 Australians
2 Colombians
2 Iranians
2 Japanese
2 Venezuelans
1 Belgian
1 Dane
1 Dutch
1 Israeli
1 Mexican
1 Moroccan
1 Turk
Obviously, the nationalities could be totally innocent and I would not suspect that, for example, the Israeli and the Americans were involved in any foul play. Or the nationalities could be less than innocent.
Here's a report from the Guardian's website on the ongoing search and rescue operations for Germanwings flight 9525, which crashed on Tuesday in the French Alps.
In Washington, the White House said the crash did not appear to have
been caused by a terrorist attack. Lufthansa said it was working on the
assumption that the tragedy had been an accident, adding that any other
theory would be speculation. French president Francois Hollande will
visit the area on Wednesday along with German chancellor Angela Merkel
and Spanish prime minister Mariano Rajoy.
Germanwings said the plane started descending one minute after
reaching its cruising height and continued losing altitude for eight
minutes.
“The aircraft’s contact with French radar, French air traffic
controllers, ended at 10.53 am at an altitude of about 6,000 feet. The
plane then crashed,” Germanwings’ Managing Director Thomas Winkelmann
told a news conference.
Winkelmann later said some Germanwings crew members had declared
themselves unfit to fly, leading to some cancellations. “We understand
that on a day like today, they wouldn’t feel able to fly,” he told
German broadcaster ZDF.
Experts said that while the Airbus had descended rapidly, it did not seem to have simply fallen out of the sky.
A Lufthansa flight from Bilbao to Munich on Nov. 5 lost altitude
after sensors iced over and the onboard computer, fearing the plane was
about to stall, put the nose down. As a result, the European Aviation
Safety Agency ordered a change in procedure for all A320 jets.
Asked whether something similar could have occurred on Tuesday,
Winkelmann said, “At this time this evening, we are ruling out a
possible cause in this area.”
France’s interior minister, Bernard Cazeneuve, has told RTL radio all
options must be looked into to explain why the Airbus A320 ploughed into
an Alpine mountainside on Tuesday but a terrorist attack is not the
most likely scenario.
A journalist, speaking with a Spanish accent, asked during a press
conference: “Germanwings this morning explained something about this
flight, what do you think of that?”
It’s not clear to what she was referring but the Lufthansa representative seemed to understand.
Heike Birlenbach, Lufthansa vice-president for Europe initially
blocked the question with a fairly standard ‘No Comment’ but then turned
to her advisors and added in German.
“That was what he was not supposed to say.”
What was the question and why was it (apparently) not to be brought up at the press conference? Let's look at the press conference first.
Let's go to the videotape.
I watched the press conferences given by Germanwings' CEO and by the Deputy Interior Minister of France, and I didn't find anything suspicious. Hmmm.
Egypt Air 990, Malaysia Air 370 and... Germanwings 9525?
Am I the only one with the sickening feeling that the unexplained loss of Germanwings 9525 may be yet another pilot suicide? (I know I'm not because someone already emailed me with the same suspicion).
French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve
said a black box had been found, but did not say whether it was a data
recorder or a cockpit voice recorder.
“A black box was found and will be delivered to investigators,” Cazeneuve told reporters.
The crew of the Germanwings flight did not send a distress signal, civil aviation authorities told AFP.
“The crew did not send a Mayday. It was air
traffic control that decided to declare the plane was in distress
because there was no contact with the crew of the plane,” the source
said.
France’s junior transport minister said there were no survivors from the crash.
Photos of crash site from the La Provence
newspaper showed scattered black flecks across a mountain and several
larger airplane body sections with windows, five in one chunk and four
in another. French officials said a helicopter crew that landed briefly
in the area saw no signs of life.
“Everything is pulverized. The largest pieces
of debris are the size of a small car. No one can access the site from
the ground,” Gilbert Sauvan, president of the general council,
Alpes-de-Haute-Provence, told The Associated Press.
Germanwings said Flight 9525 carried 144
passengers, including two babies, and six crew members. Officials
believe 67 German nationals were on board, including 16 high school
students on an exchange program from the German town of Haltern. Dutch
officials said one citizen was killed.
And apparently one Israeli according to the article linked above. His name, like the pilot's, has not yet been released.
At 0147:55, the relief first officer stated, "Look, here's the new first officer's pen. Give it to him please. God spare you,"9
and, at 0147:58, someone responded, "yeah." At 0148:03, the command
captain stated, "Excuse me, [nickname for relief first officer], while I
take a quick trip to the toilet...before it gets crowded. While they
are eating, and I'll be back to you." While the command captain was
speaking, the relief first officer responded, "Go ahead please," and the
CVR recorded the sound of an electric seat motor as the captain
maneuvered to leave his seat and the cockpit. At 0148:18.55, the CVR
recorded a sound similar to the cockpit door operating. At 0148:30, about 11 seconds after the captain left the cockpit, the CVR recorded an unintelligible comment.10 Ten seconds later (about 0148:40), the relief first officer stated quietly, "I rely on God."11
There were no sounds or events recorded by the flight recorders that
would indicate that an airplane anomaly or other unusual circumstance
preceded the relief first officer's statement, "I rely on God."
At
0149:18, the CVR recorded the sound of an electric seat motor. FDR data
indicated that, at 0149:45 (27 seconds later), the autopilot was
disconnected.12
Aside from the very slight movement of both elevators (the left
elevator moved from about a 0.7° to about a 0.5° nose-up deflection, and
the right elevator moved from about a 0.35° nose-up to about a 0.3°
nose-down deflection)13
and the airplane's corresponding slight nose-down pitch change, which
were recorded within the first second after autopilot disconnect, and a
very slow (0.5° per second) left roll rate, the airplane remained
essentially in level flight about FL 330 for about 8 seconds after the
autopilot was disconnected. At 0149:48, the relief first officer again
stated quietly, "I rely on God." At 0149:53, the throttle levers were
moved from their cruise power setting to idle, and, at 0149:54, the FDR
recorded an abrupt nose-down elevator movement and a very slight
movement of the inboard ailerons. Subsequently, the airplane began to
rapidly pitch nose down and descend.
Between 0149:57 and 0150:05, the relief first officer quietly repeated, "I rely on God," seven additional times.14 During this time, as a result of the nose-down elevator movement, the airplane's load factor15 decreased from about 1 to about 0.2 G.16
Between 0150:04 and 0150:05 (about 10 to 11 seconds after the initial
nose-down movement of the elevators), the FDR recorded additional,
slightly larger inboard aileron movements, and the elevators started
moving further in the nose-down direction. Immediately after the FDR
recorded the increased nose-down elevator movement, the CVR recorded the
sounds of the captain asking loudly (beginning at 0150:06), "What's
happening? What's happening?," as he returned to the cockpit.
The
airplane's load factor decreased further as a result of the increased
nose-down elevator deflection, reaching negative G loads (about -0.2 G)
between 0150:06 and 0150:07. During this time (and while the captain was
still speaking [at 0150:07]), the relief first officer stated for the
tenth time, "I rely on God." Additionally, the CVR transcript indicated
that beginning at 0150:07, the CVR recorded the "sound of numerous
thumps and clinks," which continued for about 15 seconds.
According
to the CVR and FDR data, at 0150:08, as the airplane exceeded its
maximum operating airspeed (0.86 Mach), a master warning alarm began to
sound. (The warning continued until the FDR and CVR stopped recording at
0150:36.64 and 0150:38.47, respectively.)17
Also at 0150:08, the relief first officer stated quietly for the
eleventh and final time, "I rely on God," and the captain repeated his
question, "What's happening?" At 0150:15, the captain again asked,
"What's happening, [relief first officer's first name]? What's
happening?" At this time, as the airplane was descending through about
27,300 feet msl, the FDR recorded both elevator surfaces beginning to
move in the nose-up direction. Shortly thereafter, the airplane's rate
of descent began to decrease.18
At 0150:21, about 6 seconds after the airplane's rate of descent began
to decrease, the left and right elevator surfaces began to move in
opposite directions; the left surface continued to move in the nose-up
direction, and the right surface reversed its motion and moved in the
nose-down direction.
The FDR data
indicated that the engine start lever switches for both engines moved
from the run to the cutoff position between 0150:21 and 0150:23.19
Between 0150:24 and 0150:27, the throttle levers moved from their idle
position to full throttle, the speedbrake handle moved to its fully
deployed position, and the left elevator surface moved from a 3º nose-up
to a 1º nose-up position, then back to a 3º nose-up position.20
During this time, the CVR recorded the captain asking, "What is this?
What is this? Did you shut the engine(s)?" Also, at 0150:26.55, the
captain stated, "Get away in the engines,"21 and, at 0150:28.85, the captain stated, "shut the engines." At 0150:29.66, the relief first officer stated, "It's shut." Between
0150:31 and 0150:37, the captain repeatedly stated, "Pull with me."
However, the FDR data indicated that the elevator surfaces remained in a
split condition (with the left surface commanding nose up and the right
surface commanding nose down) until the FDR and CVR stopped recording
at 0150:36.64 and 0150:38.47, respectively. (The last transponder
[secondary radar] return from the accident airplane was received at the
radar site at Nantucket, Massachusetts, at 0150:34.)22[Footnote links may not work. CiJ]
As
some of you may recall, after the NTSB investigation, the Egyptians
continued to deny that the co-pilot had committed suicide and would not
accept the NTSB report.
As the video reports, the pilots apparently turned the jet at the
perfect spot - at the point where the jet was handed off from Malaysian
to Vietnamese controllers. But if the Malaysian authorities found
anything in their homes, they're not saying.
The Malaysian government
had been looking for a reason to search the home of the pilot and the
co-pilot for several days. But it was only in the last 24 to 36 hours,
when radar and satellite data came to light, that authorities believed
they had sufficient reason to go through the residences, according to
the U.S. official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.
"The Malaysians don't do
this lightly," the official said. It's not clear whether the Malaysian
government believes one or both the men could be responsible for what
happened when the Boeing 777-200 ER disappeared March 8 en route from
Kuala Lumpur to Beijing.
The officials emphasize that they don't know yet what really happened to
the plane. But here's the best theory. To those of you who have been
following it should sound familiar. It's the southern corridor theory.
Flight 370 took off from
Kuala Lumpur at 12:41 a.m. on March 8. The last satellite communication
from the plane occurred at 8:11 a.m., Najib said, well past the
scheduled arrival time in Beijing.
That last communication,
Najib said, was in one of two possible traffic corridors shown on a map
released to the press. A northern arc stretches from the border of
Kazakhstan and Turkmenistan to northern Thailand, and a southern arc
spans from Indonesia to the southern Indian Ocean.
"Due to the type of
satellite data, we are unable to confirm the precise location of the
plane when it last made contact with the satellite," Najib said.
Because the northern
parts of the traffic corridor include some tightly guarded airspace over
India, Pakistan, and even some U.S. installations in Afghanistan, U.S.
authorities believe it more likely the aircraft crashed into waters
outside of the reach of radar south of India, a U.S. official told CNN.
If it had flown farther north, it's likely it would have been detected
by radar.
Nonetheless for the last
36 hours, the U.S. military and intelligence community has been
reviewing all satellite imagery and electronic data it collects from the
region for any sign of an explosion or crash, according to another U.S.
official directly familiar with that effort.
Najib said authorities were ending search operations in the South China Sea and reassessing the deployment of assets.
"This new satellite information has a significant impact on the nature and scope of the search operation," he said.
Investigators, he said,
have confirmed by looking at the raw satellite data that the plane in
question was the Malaysia Airlines jet.
The same conclusion was
reached by the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration, the U.S. National
Transportation Safety Board, the British Air Accidents Investigation
Branch and the Malaysian authorities, all of whom were working
separately with the same data, he said.
Well, if it didn't crash it landed on some abandoned island somewhere in
the middle of the Indian Ocean and we'll hear a ransom demand sometime
soon. That appears unlikely. Given the level of satellite information
available today, it seems really unlikely that there would be an
airstrip in the middle of nowhere that could land a 777 that hasn't
shown up on the satellite data.
If you're wondering how they flew out of the corridor undetected, this might have had something to do with it.
Hours before Najib's
announcement, U.S. officials told CNN the flight had made drastic
changes in altitude and direction after disappearing from civilian
radar.
Malaysian military radar
showed the plane climbing to 45,000 feet -- which is above its approved
altitude limit -- soon after disappearing from civilian radar screens
and then dropping to 23,000 feet before climbing again, a U.S. official
familiar with the investigation said.
The jetliner was flying "a strange path," the official said on condition of anonymity. The details of the radar readings were first reported by The New York Times on Friday.
What's unsaid in all this is that Malaysia is - you guessed it - a Muslimcountry. As is Egypt.
Here's betting that the pilot is not Amish, Baptist, Catholic, Jewish.... Hmmm.
PS My travel agent talked me out of that flight a few months ago. She hates double connections.
German Left party official taking legal action to get herself off list of anti-Semites
German Left party official Claudia Haydt is bringing a lawsuit to force the Simon Wiesenthal Center to remove her from a list of anti-Semites.
In a December 30 email obtained exclusively by The Jerusalem Post,
Hadyt, who is a member of the Left Party’s executive board, writes, “I
am at the moment initiating legal action against whose have started the
slanderous rumors about my so called ‘involvement’ in ‘Toiletgate,’
but I hope that this will not be necessary in your case.”
The
Toiletgate incident is a reference to an anti-Semitic scandal that
engulfed the German Left Party in November. According to the Wiesenthal
list, Haydt – along with the German Left MPs Annette Groth, Inge
Höger, and Heike Hänsel – played a key role in inviting and organizing
an event with two fringe anti-Israel extremists. The two extremists
chased the party’s fraction leader in the Bundestag, Gregor Gysi, into a
parliamentary bathroom while yelling at him as he sought to protect
himself from apparently pending bodily harm and verbal abuse.
Haydt
is an employee in Höger’s office. She said her job is to cover “German
military policies.” The subject of the email read “urgent. please
change mistakes. top ten.” Höger and Groth were on the Turkish vessel
Marvi Marmara,which sought to break Israel’s legal blockade of the
Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip in 2010.
In Haydt’s email, which was
filled with examples of broken English, she wrote “I was only involved
in the unbearable scene in front of Gregors Gysis office after I was
asked for help to escort the Journalist and other guest to the exits of
the Bundestag. I can nor see that this merits the label
‘Antisemitism.”’ Haydt refused to answer multiple Post emails and
telephone press queries. An employee in Höger’s office told the Post
she would not comment. She denied in her email inviting the anti-Israeli
radicals.
It is unclear whether Haydt plans to file a lawsuit
against other Left Party members and politicians. In November, some
leading Left Party MPs, regional politicians and members launched a
petition entitled, “You don’t speak in our name,” calling for Groth,
Höger, Hänsel, and Haydt to be disciplined for enabling the two
anti-Zionist assailants – a Canadian-Israeli and an American – to
confront Gysi.
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for thirty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 13 to 33 years and nine grandchildren. Four of our children are married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
