Celebrating #Brexit: Why the EU doesn't deserve to exist
It's the morning after the #Brexit vote, and President Obama is giving (worthless) assurances that the US will maintain its 'special relationship' with Britain, even if Britain just slapped him and his internationalism in the face. If nothing else, #Brexit is proof positive that nationalism is alive and well in the 21st century. Two of the three guys in this picture are happy this morning. The other is President of the United States.
Like many Americans who have had it with Obama's immigration policies (and celebrated Thursday's Supreme Court decision upholding the State of Texas' defiance of Obama's open borders edict), many Brits have had it with Angela Merkel's allowing unfettered access to Europe for Muslim terrorists by way of Germany and the Schengen visa.
But if you want a reason for the wrath of God to be brought down on Europe, watch the European Parliament's reaction to 'moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen claiming that unnamed 'rabbis' had called for poisoning 'Palestinian' water. Yes, that's a blood libel worthy of the Middle Ages, but it brought the anti-Semitic Euroweenies lots of cheer on the day of the #Brexit vote.
Let's go to the videotape.
Here's the 30-second standing ovation the EU parliament gave to Palestinian President Abbas's anti-Semitic speech: pic.twitter.com/rYMHRG5Tld
— (((Yair Rosenberg))) (@Yair_Rosenberg) June 24, 2016
If the EU ceases to exist, there will be one less anti-Semitic body in the world and that's a good thing.
One of President Hussein Obama's first acts in office was to return to England a bust of Winston Churchill that had adorned the Oval Office during the Bush administration. Churchill was the anti-Obama.
President Obama has described himself as a 'citizen of the world.' In
doing so, he is characterizing himself as what we would call a
multi-culturalist. But he's not just someone who is tolerant of other
cultures - he's a dogmatic multi-culturalist and his 'tolerance' extends
to different forms of government. In Obama's world, all forms of
government and all governments are equal. None is any better than the
others.
Winston Churchill (Obama's anti-hero in more ways than
one) is known to have quipped that liberal democracy is the worst form
of government except for all the others. Obama disagrees with that
statement. He would argue that democracy is a form of government that is
no better nor worse than the others. Once one accepts that statement,
there is no advantage to be gained by promoting democracy. Each form of
government is to be treated as equally meitorious and is to be dealt
with on its own terms.
President Obama is as wrong about American history as he is about
policy. Many foreign leaders have tried to influence US foreign policy
when their national interests are involved. Lafayette tried to get the
United States involved in the French Revolution, as the early colonists
sought support from France in their own revolution. Winston Churchill
appeared in front of Congress and lobbied heavily to have America change
its isolationist policy during the run up to the Second World War. Nor
can President Obama claim ignorance about recent events, when he himself
sent David Cameron, the prime minister of the United Kingdom, to lobby
Congress in favor of the Iran deal. Recently, Shinzo Abe, the prime
minister of Japan, lobbied us with regard to the Trans-Pacific
Partnership.
Prime Minister Netanyahu's nation has a far greater stake in the Iran
deal than most of the countries that negotiated it. But Israel was
excluded from the negotiations. Any leader of Israel would and should
try to exercise whatever influence he might have in the ongoing debate
over the deal.
There can be no question that Israel is the primary intended target
of Iran's quest for a nuclear arsenal. Recall that Hashemi Rafsanjani,
the former president of Iran, has described Israel as a one-bomb state
that could be destroyed instantaneously, and that even if Israel
retaliated, it would not destroy Iran or Islam. No similar threats have
been made against Great Britain, France, Germany, Russia or China.
Although the United States is still regarded by Iran as the "Great
Satan", the U.S. has less to fear from an Iranian nuclear arsenal than
does Israel.
Does President Obama really believe that Israeli leaders are required
to remain silent and simply accept the consequences of a deal that puts
its population at risk? As Prime Minister Netanyahu has repeatedly
said, Israel is not Czechoslovakia. In 1938, Czechoslovakia too was
excluded from the negotiations that led to its dismemberment, but it had
no ability to influence the policies of the negotiating nations. Nor
did it have the ability to defend itself militarily, as Israel does.
The United States would surely not accept a deal negotiated by other
nations that put its citizens at risk. No American leader would remain
silent in the face of such a deal. Israel has every right to express its
concern about a deal that has crossed not only its own red lines, but
the red lines originally proposed by President Obama.
A frelichen (happy) Purim to all of you - here in Jerusalem the holiday does not start until tomorrow night.
Imagine, if you would, that on December 26 or 27, 1941, the New York Times had given equal time to Adolph Hitler to respond to British Prime Minister Winston Churchill's speech before the a joint session of the United States Congress. What do you think would have happened?
Would Hitler have explained how Germany needed lebensraum because its then-current size was insufficient for its growing population?
Would he have explained how the 'real issue' was the Jewish 'leeches' who were sucking Germany's resources dry?
Would he have justified that month's Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor as a 'necessary response' to American 'aggression'?
We'll never know, because in those days the Times had not yet heard the words 'politically correct.' But today is different, and the Times has - incredibly - given op-ed space to Iran's ambassador to the United Nations to respond to Prime Minister Netanyahu. No, this is not a Purim joke.
Despite extensive inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency,
no evidence has ever been presented to contradict the clear commitment
by Iran’s leaders that they would under no circumstances engage in
manufacturing, stockpiling and using nuclear weapons. In 2013, for example, only Japan, which has many more nuclear facilities than Iran, was subject to greater agency scrutiny.
As one side of the talks that continue in Geneva, Iran can also bear
testimony to the campaign of misinformation by Mr. Netanyahu to mislead
the global public about the details of those nuclear negotiations. When
the parties were finalizing the interim agreement in 2013, Mr. Netanyahu claimed that it would involve Iran’s receiving $50 billion in sanctions relief; the actual amount was about $7 billion.
And as for his prediction that Iran would never abide by the terms of
the accord, Iran has dutifully stood by every commitment — as the
International Atomic Energy Agency has reported.
In our view, Mr. Netanyahu has consistently used these false alarms and
outlandish claims both to serve his domestic political maneuvering and
to create a smoke screen that relegates the Palestinian
question to the margins. We have noted how his rhetoric has intensified
in proportion to the international pressure on Israel to stop the
settlement activity and end the occupation of the Palestinian territory.
Oh, of course. And Britain was using its cries of alarm over Nazi Germany in 1941 to cover 'mass Jewish immigration' to Palestine under its auspices.
Have we moved from 1939 to 1941? Are we now seeing what the Times would have looked like had it been sufficiently politically correct back then? Who will protest?
This is rich: Boehner to give Netanyahu bust of Churchill
House Speaker John Boehner plans to present Prime Minister Netanyahu with a gift when Netanyahu speaks to a joint session of Congress on Tuesday. The gift is a bust of a politician whom Netanyahu greatly admires: Winston Churchill.
House Speaker John Boehner plans to give Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a bust of Winston Churchill when he speaks to a joint meeting of Congress about the danger of a nuclear-armed Iran.
The gift was chosen because Netanyahu and the
former prime minister of Britain are the only foreign leaders who have
addressed Congress three separate times.
...
Boehner also has invited former House Speaker Newt Gingrich and Holocaust survivor Elie Wiesel.
President Obama has described himself as a 'citizen of the world.' In
doing so, he is characterizing himself as what we would call a
multi-culturalist. But he's not just someone who is tolerant of other
cultures - he's a dogmatic multi-culturalist and his 'tolerance' extends
to different forms of government. In Obama's world, all forms of
government and all governments are equal. None is any better than the
others.
Winston Churchill (Obama's anti-hero in more ways than
one) is known to have quipped that liberal democracy is the worst form
of government except for all the others. Obama disagrees with that
statement. He would argue that democracy is a form of government that is
no better nor worse than the others. Once one accepts that statement,
there is no advantage to be gained by promoting democracy. Each form of
government is to be treated as equally meitorious and is to be dealt
with on its own terms.
Maybe this has something to do with Obama's disdain for Churchill.
Who said the words below and what was (s)he talking about?
I will begin by saying what
everybody would like to ignore or forget but which must nevertheless be
stated, namely, that we have sustained a total and unmitigated defeat.
...
It is the most grievous consequence of
what we have done and of what we have left undone in the last five years
- five years of futile good intentions, five years of eager search for
the line of least resistance, five years of uninterrupted retreat ...
five years of neglect of our defences....
Our loyal, brave people...should know the
truth. They should know that there has been gross neglect and
deficiency in our defences; they should know that we have sustained a
defeat without a war, the consequences of which will travel far with us
along our road; they should know that we have passed an awful milestone
in our history ... and that the terrible words have for the time being
been pronounced against the Western democracies:
"Thou art weighed in the balance and found wanting."
And do not suppose that this is the end.
This is only the beginning of the reckoning. This is only the first sip,
the first foretaste of a bitter cup which will be proffered to us year
by year unless by a supreme recovery of moral health and martial vigour,
we arise again and take our stand for freedom as in the olden time.
Here's a picture of the man who said it:
The date was October 5, 1938. Winston Churchill was talking about Neville Chamberlain's Munich agreement. But the same words could have applied to Hussein Obama's Iran deal. Scary, isn't it?
You can find the full text of Winston Churchill's speech in the House of Commons after Chamberlain's return from Munich here (Hat Tip: William Kristol).
We can always count on the Americans to do the right thing, after they have exhausted all the other possibilities
The quote in the title of this post is a quip of Winston Churchill's, and honestly I don't think it's true in this administration. Obama won't do the right thing until it's too late, if at all. Here's Caroline Glick.
The US and Europe are not taken in by Iran because Iran is good at hiding its true intentions.
They
are taken in by Iran because they want to be taken in. They want to
believe that they don’t have to attack Iran and overthrow the regime to
prevent it from becoming a nuclear power. They want to believe they can
appease Iran by pretending it isn’t a danger, just as they believe they
can end the threat of terror by jihadists in the US military and
Benghazi by pretending they don’t exist.
They want to believe
these threats can be ignored, or appeased away. And just as Obama and
his followers are willing to pretend away Hasan’s actions to protect
“diversity,” and to pretend away the September 11, 2012, attack in
Benghazi to protect the myth of the Arab Spring, so they are willing to
permit Iran to go nuclear to protect the sanctity of appeasement.
The
only thing they are willing to put their foot down about is the
prospect of an Israeli strike. And they have put their foot down on this
issue for the past decade. It isn’t that the US is deliberately
enabling Iran to acquire a nuclear arsenal. It is just that the US elite
in government and the media care more about protecting their faith in
diversity and appeasement than they do about preventing Iran from
becoming a nuclear power.
They have convinced themselves that the
prospect of appeasing Iran will evaporate if Israel attacks Iran’s
nuclear installations. And so we have seen a parade of senior US defense
officials descending on Israel every time it appears that Israel is
planning to attack Iran. We have seen a parade of former Israeli
military and security chiefs with close ties to the US defense
establishment declaring before every available microphone that Israel
must not strike Iran and that we can count on Obama to protect us.
But
we mustn’t believe their assurances or succumb to their pressure. Obama
will not change course. He doesn’t have to. So long as he maintains
faith with the god of appeasement, the US media will protect him. And so
long as they protect him, he will pay no price for his failures. So he
will repeat them.
Unlike Obama, we're thrilled to have a bust of Winston Churchill
One of President Obama's first actions as President was to rid the White House of a bust of Winston Churchill, which had been a gift from Tony Blair to George W. Bush. Here in Jerusalem, we've just gotten our own bust of Sir Winston, who was a strong supporter of Zionism and a Jewish state.
According to Uri Dromi, the director general
of Mishkenot Shaananim, there was no more appropriate place in Israel for a bust
of Sir Winston than the first Jewish neighborhood built outside the walls of the
old city at the initiative of Sir Moses Montefiore, who also secured financial
support for the project.
The dedication ceremony took place in Yael
Garden, a plaza outside the original houses – refurbished and updated, but
retaining an old world charm, and now part of the Mishkenot Guest
House.
The bust, cast from an original by sculptor Oscar Nemon – who
found sanctuary in Britain after fleeing Nazi Germany – was the brainchild of
Labor MK Isaac Herzog and of Anthony Rosenfelder, a trustee of the Jerusalem
Foundation.
They were both inspired by the book Churchill and the Jews
written by Winston Churchill’s biographer, the noted historian Sir Martin
Gilbert.
On the morning prior to the ceremony, Randolph Churchill
received a message from Lady Esther Gilbert telling him how thrilled she and her
husband were to have Jerusalem as a permanent home for Winston Churchill’s bust,
because he had been such a steadfast supporter of the Zionist
cause.
British Consul General in Jerusalem, Sir Vincent Fean remarked
that Churchill “knew and loved Jerusalem the Golden” and had even written that
no two cities counted more with mankind than Jerusalem and Athens, which had
each given so much to civilization.
Maybe one of Churchill's descendants would consider running for Prime Minister of Britain? It would be nice to have someone friendly in that position.
British PM Cameron doesn't support military action now
In an interview with NBC’s Brian Williams, Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain expressed the need to continue placing ‘massive pressure’ on Iran without resorting to military action.
Winston Churchill visited 'Palestine' in 1921, where he met with the former mayor of Jerusalem and Arab leader, Musa Kazim el Husseini. El Husseini complained about Jewish immigration to 'Palestine.' And Churchill responded.
Churchill chided el Husseini and dispelled any notion of an Arab Palestinian sovereignty. "I thought, when listening to your statements, that it seemed that the Arabs of Palestine had overthrown the Turkish Government. That is the reverse of the true facts. It has been the armies of Britain which have liberated these regions."
Indeed, a year earlier, in 1920, the Arabs of Palestine identified themselves as residents of "southern Syria" and demonstrated in Jerusalem against the British Mandate, in favor of inclusion as part of Syria, and in opposition to Jewish immigration.
Churchill went on to press el Husseini to accept the opportunity to work with the Jews who were building the land -- for their own benefit. "You can see with your own eyes," Churchill said, " in many parts of this country the work which has already been done by Jewish colonies; how sandy wastes have been reclaimed and thriving farms and orangeries planted in their stead. It is quite true that they have been helped by money from outside, whereas your people have not had a similar advantage, but surely these funds of money largely coming from outside and being devoted to the increase of the general prosperity of Palestine is one of the very reasons which should lead you to take a wise and tolerant view of the Zionist movement."
Should. But it would never precedence over anti-Semitism and jihad.
Giulio Meotti describes a court appearance last week by Hakim Awad, one of the two young 'Palestinians' who confessed to, and was convicted of, the murder of five members of the Fogel family in Itamar last March.
In court, Awad always smiled at the camera, just like [9/11 hijacker Mohamed] Atta did. Awad said he has “no regrets” and flashed the "V" sign for victory while he was leaving the courthouse. “I am a person like you, I have no mental condition, I never had a serious illness,” Awad said to the judges. His smile was sincere.
The Fogels’ massacre in Itamar, where two Palestinians murdered babies as deliberately and unabashedly as very few other than the Nazis and Khmer Rouge ever had, has not been deciphered by our writers and intellectuals. It's because we have been told that “they hate us” is the language of xenophobes, the illiberal, the intolerant; that genocidal anti-Semitism was buried in the ashes of Auschwitz; that we have to be polite, sanitized and self-critical.
...
A seductive combination of post-colonial white guilt mixed with liberal condescension has dulled our moral senses and made us blind to Awad’s smile; a smirk that conveys unleashed hatred, contempt, physical aggression, the desire to expel, to destroy, and to eliminate the Jews.
Meotti goes on to compare Awad to the Nazis.
It's also the smile of Klaus Barbie, the Gestapo chief in southeastern France from 1942 to 1944, who laughed all the time when the Jewish victims described the torture at court in 1997. In 2007, a photo album containing 116 rare photographs of senior Nazi officials at the Auschwitz concentration camp was made public by the US Holocaust Memorial Museum. Josef Mengele, the camp doctor notorious for his medical experiments, is smiling while the gas chambers are operating in Birkenau.
Germany perpetrated the Holocaust not because it had the means to do so, but because its leaders engendered the will to do so. This totalitarian, robotic willingness also lies in Hakim Awad’s smile.
Did anyone suggest making peace with the Nazis? Here's what Winston Churchill had to say on that subject.
The problems of victory are more agreeable than those of defeat, but they are no less difficult.
If you will not fight for right when you can easily win without blood shed; if you will not fight when your victory is sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance of survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.
You ask, What is our policy? I will say; “It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us: to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy.” You ask, What is our aim? I can answer with one word: Victory—victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory however long and hard the road may be; for without victory there is no survival.
We shall not flag or fail. We shall go on to the end. We shall fight in France, we shall fight on the seas and the oceans, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength in the air, we shall defend our island, whatever the cost may be. We shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender.
Hitler knows that he will have to break us in this island or lose the war. If we can stand up to him, all Europe may be free and life of the world may move forward into broad, sunlit uplands. But if we fall, then the whole world, including the United States, including all that we have known and cared for, will sink into the abyss of a new Dark Age made more sinister, and perhaps more protracted, by the lights of perverted science.
Let us therefore brace ourselves to our duties, and so bear ourselves that, if the British Empire and its Commonwealth lasts for a thousand years, men will still say, “This was their finest hour!”
If Churchill were Prime Minister of Israel today, you can bet that he would not be negotiating with the leaders of a society that produces the likes of Hakim Awad.
Why Winston Churchill won’t be getting an honorary degree from CUNY
Reader Sunlight has been after me for quite some time to read The River War, a book written in 1899 by Winston Churchill. Like so many other things I’d like to do, I haven’t gotten around to it….
When you see this video, which includes quotes from that book, you will understand why Sunlight wants me to read it. And you will also understand why Winston Churchill won’t be getting any honorary degrees from the City University of New York anytime soon.
The documents in the article included nicknames for a number of world leaders. Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was referred to as "Hitler," French President Nicolas Sarkozy as a "naked emperor," the German Chancellor was called Angela "Teflon" Merkel and Afghan President Hamid Karzai as "driven by paranoia." Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, an "Alpha Male," while President Dmitry Medvedev is "afraid, hesitant."
There was a candidate for the German parliament last year who did much better on Merkel.
The documents also say that North Korean leader Kim Jong Il suffers from epilepsy, Libyan leader Muammar Gaddhafi's full-time nurse is a "hot blond," and Italian Premier Silvio Berlusconi loves "wild parties."
I didn't need cables to tell me about Berlusconi. This has been widely publicized.
The article also quotes the State Department as saying that US President Barack Obama "prefers to look East rather than West," and "has no feelings for Europe."
Well, the Brits certainly knew that. I wonder where that Churchill bust is these days.
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
