On January 7, 2006, I wrote a blog entitled ISRAEL'S FUTURE SURVIVAL AFTER SHARON, in which I stated that most Palestinians really did not want two states existing side by side, one Jewish and the other Palestinian. Instead, the Palestinians were comitted to the destruction of Israel, no matter how long it took.
Yesterday, the Palestinians held a much heralded election for their Parliament and it appears that Hamas won by a huge majority. Hamas is a terrorist organization which has claimed responsibility for many attacks against Israeli civilians. While Hamas based a good part of its campaign issues on cleaning up the corruption within the Palestinian Authority. it is absolutely opposed to peace with Israel and strongly advocates the destruction of the "Zionist entity". Hamas - thank you very much! You have proven my point about the Palestinian's goal of wiping Israel off the map.
This election should make it clear to the United Nations, the European Union, Russia, and the peace advocates in the U.S. State Department, that their touted "Road Map to Peace", with two states existing side by side, is for the Palestinians, like Islamists throughout the world, merely a temporary detour on the road to Israel's destruction. Hamas, with its victory in the election for Parliament, has demonstrated that a permanent peace treaty with Israel will be nothing more than an illusion.
Israel should now unilaterally proceed to draw up a militarily secure boundary which will include a portion of the West Bank, including all of the well-established settlements, and all of Jerusalem. Once this boundary has been established, any attacks against the State of Israel can and should be met with a strong, but measured, military response.
As I stated in my previous blog, neither Amir Peretz, leader of the dovish left-wing Labor Party, nor Ehud Olmert, heir-apparent to Sharon's Kadima Party, will have the fortitude to stand up to the UN, to the EU, and to the U.S. in the unilateral establishment of a secure and defensible Jewish state. Only Benjamin Netanyahu of the Likud Party has the backbone to establish such a state, and the Israelis will be well avised to elect him Prime Minister in the March 28th election.
Thursday, January 26, 2006
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
MODERN KEYSTONE COPS
Those of us who have seen them, have had a belly-full of laughs watching silent movies with the keystone cops. While most police officers today are well trained and deserve the public's admiration and gratitude, there are still some boneheads in police uniforms and even some good officers making boneheaded mistakes. Believe it or not, the following OH SHIT situations actually ocurred.
GUNS. A police agency had not had any officer inspections for many years when they decided to hold a surprise line-up inspection. When the inspecting officer came to one of the men in his late 60s, the veteran cop was unable to draw his revolver from the holster. The inspector could not do so either. It was discovered that the gun had not been taken out of the holster for a number of years. The leather had become moldy, thus welding the revolver to the holster. It took several hours to peel and scrape the moldy leather off of the revolver.
A police agency which allowed its officers to carry their own guns conducted its annual firearms qualification exercises. One officer carried a .357 magnum revolver with a barrell so long that he was unable to draw his weapon from its holster because his armpit got in the way.
A police chief in his 70s accompanied his officers to the firearms range for their annual qualification exercises. During timed exercises, his officers consistently got off two or three shots before he even got his gun out of the holster. With only one more exercise remaining, he was determined to draw his gun as fast as his officers. When the whistle started the exercise, he actually got off the first shot. Unfortunately, his gun never left the holster and he shot himself in his right leg, from the thigh down to his knee. Oh yes, the old chief was a retired FBI firearms instructor.
After a short car chase, the crook bailed out and headed into the woods with an officer in hot pursuit. When the crook stopped and turned around, the officer quickly drew his gun from the holster. Unfortunately, the officer lost his grip and the gun flipped end over end right into the crook's hands. The amazed crook ended up pointing the gun at the officer, Fortunately though, the crook decided to surrender, returned the gun, and allowed the officer to take him into custody.
An officer, in a one-man unit, was in pursuit of a crook driving a stolen car. After a couple of near accidents, the officer got pissed off and drew his gun, held it out of the window, and fired a shot at the fleeing crook. Guess what? His round went right down along the top of the police car's fender, The resulting fender indentation cost about $700 to repair.
CARS. An officer was dispatched to flag down a moving freight train. The officer parked his unit on the railroad tracks, turned on his flashing light bar, got out of the police car, and frantically waved his arms back and forth in an effort to get the train to stop. The officer jumped aside at the very last moment. His unit was not as fortunate, ending up smashed into smithereens about a quarter of a mile down the track. Oh yes, the train did stop.
A couple of patrol officers, while on the midnight watch in a resort community, decided to park their patrol car on the beach and catch a few winks of sleep. When they awoke, they found themselves completely surrounded by a dozen or so cars. The people in the cars wanted to spend the night on the beach and parked by the police car because in doing so, they felt safe from predators.
A couple of officers, in the same beach community, also decided to "coop" on the beach one night. Being aware of what previously happened to the aforementioned officers, they found an isolated spot on the beach and went to sleep. They were awakened with the strange feeling that their feet were soaking wet. The high tide had come in and there were already several inches of water in the patrol car. They were forced to carefully wade ashore in knee deep water. By the time a wrecker arrived, the water was almost up to the window level.
A burglar was running down an alley pursued by two officers in a patrol car. Suddenly, he turned and jumped over a six foot fence. The driving officer, without hesitation (or thinking for that matter), opened the door and jumped out to chase the burglar. The problem was that he left the car in drive. His horrified partner was left trying to control the car from the passenger side. He barely avoided smashing into a telephone pole before bringing the unit to a stop. Did they catch the burlar? Nope.
A police officer in a one-man unit was dispatched to a neighborhood with a report that there were two great danes running loose. When he spotted the dogs, he was advised to see if he could pick them up because no animal control unit would be available. He got out of his unit, approached the two dogs, and found them to be friendly. He grabbed one by the collar and coaxed it into the back of his unit. He collared the second dog, but when he opened the door, the first one tried to get out. To keep the dog from getting out, he positioned himself between the two dogs and pulled the second one in with him. Holding on to the second dog, he pulled the door shut. OH SHIT! The rear doors had no door-openers in order to keep any prisoners from escaping. The officer was locked up in the back of the police car with his two new Gread Dane buddies. He did not have a hand-held radio and, because of the screen separating the front compartment from the rear, he could not reach the unit's rado. It was more than half an hour before someone came along to let him out.
BRAVE BUT STUPID. On a serious note, every day somewhere in the United States, one or more officers will try to stop a fleeing driver by jumping in front of his car, waving at him to stop. Usually the officers are able to jump out of the way without getting hurt. Sometimes they are hit by the car. Sometimes they shoot at the driver, either before he is about to hit them, or after the fleeing car has gone by. The driver, when caught, is usually charged with aggravated assault, or even attempted murder, for intentionally trying to run down the officer. While a few of these fleeing suspects do try to run down the officers, the overwhelming majority are only trying to avoid arrest and believe that the officers will get out of the way in time. The incidents of officers jumping in front of fleeing cars, and then shooting at them, were so frequent in Houston, Texas, that recently the police department in that city issued a written policy forbidding officers from trying to stop drivers by those means.
GUNS. A police agency had not had any officer inspections for many years when they decided to hold a surprise line-up inspection. When the inspecting officer came to one of the men in his late 60s, the veteran cop was unable to draw his revolver from the holster. The inspector could not do so either. It was discovered that the gun had not been taken out of the holster for a number of years. The leather had become moldy, thus welding the revolver to the holster. It took several hours to peel and scrape the moldy leather off of the revolver.
A police agency which allowed its officers to carry their own guns conducted its annual firearms qualification exercises. One officer carried a .357 magnum revolver with a barrell so long that he was unable to draw his weapon from its holster because his armpit got in the way.
A police chief in his 70s accompanied his officers to the firearms range for their annual qualification exercises. During timed exercises, his officers consistently got off two or three shots before he even got his gun out of the holster. With only one more exercise remaining, he was determined to draw his gun as fast as his officers. When the whistle started the exercise, he actually got off the first shot. Unfortunately, his gun never left the holster and he shot himself in his right leg, from the thigh down to his knee. Oh yes, the old chief was a retired FBI firearms instructor.
After a short car chase, the crook bailed out and headed into the woods with an officer in hot pursuit. When the crook stopped and turned around, the officer quickly drew his gun from the holster. Unfortunately, the officer lost his grip and the gun flipped end over end right into the crook's hands. The amazed crook ended up pointing the gun at the officer, Fortunately though, the crook decided to surrender, returned the gun, and allowed the officer to take him into custody.
An officer, in a one-man unit, was in pursuit of a crook driving a stolen car. After a couple of near accidents, the officer got pissed off and drew his gun, held it out of the window, and fired a shot at the fleeing crook. Guess what? His round went right down along the top of the police car's fender, The resulting fender indentation cost about $700 to repair.
CARS. An officer was dispatched to flag down a moving freight train. The officer parked his unit on the railroad tracks, turned on his flashing light bar, got out of the police car, and frantically waved his arms back and forth in an effort to get the train to stop. The officer jumped aside at the very last moment. His unit was not as fortunate, ending up smashed into smithereens about a quarter of a mile down the track. Oh yes, the train did stop.
A couple of patrol officers, while on the midnight watch in a resort community, decided to park their patrol car on the beach and catch a few winks of sleep. When they awoke, they found themselves completely surrounded by a dozen or so cars. The people in the cars wanted to spend the night on the beach and parked by the police car because in doing so, they felt safe from predators.
A couple of officers, in the same beach community, also decided to "coop" on the beach one night. Being aware of what previously happened to the aforementioned officers, they found an isolated spot on the beach and went to sleep. They were awakened with the strange feeling that their feet were soaking wet. The high tide had come in and there were already several inches of water in the patrol car. They were forced to carefully wade ashore in knee deep water. By the time a wrecker arrived, the water was almost up to the window level.
A burglar was running down an alley pursued by two officers in a patrol car. Suddenly, he turned and jumped over a six foot fence. The driving officer, without hesitation (or thinking for that matter), opened the door and jumped out to chase the burglar. The problem was that he left the car in drive. His horrified partner was left trying to control the car from the passenger side. He barely avoided smashing into a telephone pole before bringing the unit to a stop. Did they catch the burlar? Nope.
A police officer in a one-man unit was dispatched to a neighborhood with a report that there were two great danes running loose. When he spotted the dogs, he was advised to see if he could pick them up because no animal control unit would be available. He got out of his unit, approached the two dogs, and found them to be friendly. He grabbed one by the collar and coaxed it into the back of his unit. He collared the second dog, but when he opened the door, the first one tried to get out. To keep the dog from getting out, he positioned himself between the two dogs and pulled the second one in with him. Holding on to the second dog, he pulled the door shut. OH SHIT! The rear doors had no door-openers in order to keep any prisoners from escaping. The officer was locked up in the back of the police car with his two new Gread Dane buddies. He did not have a hand-held radio and, because of the screen separating the front compartment from the rear, he could not reach the unit's rado. It was more than half an hour before someone came along to let him out.
BRAVE BUT STUPID. On a serious note, every day somewhere in the United States, one or more officers will try to stop a fleeing driver by jumping in front of his car, waving at him to stop. Usually the officers are able to jump out of the way without getting hurt. Sometimes they are hit by the car. Sometimes they shoot at the driver, either before he is about to hit them, or after the fleeing car has gone by. The driver, when caught, is usually charged with aggravated assault, or even attempted murder, for intentionally trying to run down the officer. While a few of these fleeing suspects do try to run down the officers, the overwhelming majority are only trying to avoid arrest and believe that the officers will get out of the way in time. The incidents of officers jumping in front of fleeing cars, and then shooting at them, were so frequent in Houston, Texas, that recently the police department in that city issued a written policy forbidding officers from trying to stop drivers by those means.
Monday, January 16, 2006
EXECUTING A FEEBLE SEPTUAGENARIAN
Clarence Ray Allen, a septuagenarian who is legally blind and nearly deaf, is scheduled to be executed by the State of California on January 17, 2006. Allen will turn 76 on the eve of his execution and will have to be pushed to the execution chamber in a wheelchair. His attorneys are appealing his death sentence to the U.S. Supreme Court on the grounds that Allen is so feeble that his execution would constitute cruel and unusual punishment under the Eighth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
Why has this poor old blind man, who cannot even walk to the execution chamber,been sentenced to death? In 1980, while serving time in prison for another murder, a hit man hired by Allen killed three people. Thus, it can be said that Allen is not on death row for singing off key in the prison chapel choir.
Allen's execution has been delayed for more than 23 years by numerous appeals. At the time of the triple murder he was 50 years of age. It is not the fault of the State of California that he has become feeble while sitting on death row - that is his own fault and that of his attorneys. And, there is something wrong with a justice system that allows the filing of appeal after appeal for a period of over 23 years. After Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger denied Allen's request for clemency on Friday the 13th, his attorneys filed the latest appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
If Allen is executed as scheduled, he will become the second oldest inmate to be put to death since capital punishment was reinstated in this country. Last month, Mississippi executed John B. Nixon, Sr. at the age of 77. The oldest death row inmate, 90 year old Viva Leroy Nash, is awaiting execution in Arizona. It should be noted that all these old folks are awaiting execution as punishment for heinous crimes. They should not be rewarded for achieving feebleness while their attorneys extended the appeals process year after year.
Hey, where is Jesse Jackson? Oops, this guy is white. If the Supreme Court turns down Allen's last minute appeal, I will wish him a happy 76th birthday and adios!
Why has this poor old blind man, who cannot even walk to the execution chamber,been sentenced to death? In 1980, while serving time in prison for another murder, a hit man hired by Allen killed three people. Thus, it can be said that Allen is not on death row for singing off key in the prison chapel choir.
Allen's execution has been delayed for more than 23 years by numerous appeals. At the time of the triple murder he was 50 years of age. It is not the fault of the State of California that he has become feeble while sitting on death row - that is his own fault and that of his attorneys. And, there is something wrong with a justice system that allows the filing of appeal after appeal for a period of over 23 years. After Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger denied Allen's request for clemency on Friday the 13th, his attorneys filed the latest appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
If Allen is executed as scheduled, he will become the second oldest inmate to be put to death since capital punishment was reinstated in this country. Last month, Mississippi executed John B. Nixon, Sr. at the age of 77. The oldest death row inmate, 90 year old Viva Leroy Nash, is awaiting execution in Arizona. It should be noted that all these old folks are awaiting execution as punishment for heinous crimes. They should not be rewarded for achieving feebleness while their attorneys extended the appeals process year after year.
Hey, where is Jesse Jackson? Oops, this guy is white. If the Supreme Court turns down Allen's last minute appeal, I will wish him a happy 76th birthday and adios!
Saturday, January 14, 2006
IN PRAISE OF J. EDGAR HOOVER
Let me paraphrase Shakespeare: Friends, Americans, countrymen, lend me your ears. I come to praise J. Edgar Hoover, not to bury his name. The evil that men do lives after them. The good is oft interred with their bones. So DON'T let it be with J. Edgar Hoover.
According to a recent article in the Los Angeles Times, for the third straight year, Rep. Dan Burton of Indiana has introduced a bill in Congress to remove J. Edgar Hoover's name from the FBI headdquarters building. U.S. Circuit Judge Laurence H. Silberman supports this measure, stating that "this country - and the bureau - would be well-served if his name were removed from the bureau's building. It is as if the Defense Department were named for Aaron Burr." In 1998, Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada attempeted to have Hoover's name removed from the building, stating that "J. Edgar Hoover stands for what is bad about this country. This small man violated the rights of hundreds, if not thousands, of people, famous and not so famous."
Judge Silberman's Defense Department analogy is ridiculous. Burr was a traitor, Hoover a patriot. As for Sen. Reid, Hoover was a great man, not a small one. Compared to Hoover, the senator is the one who is a small man. Those who want to erase Hoover's name from the public mind, are doing so because he attempted to falsely discredit Martin Luther King, Jr. and other activists during the height of the civil rights movement. They also accuse Hoover of blackmailing government officials and members of Congress by accumulating information about any embarrassing misbehavior, thus intimidating them to the extent that they would not interfere with his operation of the FBI.
Hoover was clearly wrong in his efforts to discredit Martin Luther King, Jr. Planting stories about King's alleged womanizing was an act of evil. Imposing King's photo on a picture of the participants at a communist party camp meeting was an act of evil. There is no excuse for what Hoover did, even though he truly believed that King and other civil rights activists constituted a threat to law and order in this country.
What about collecting embarrassing information on government officials and prominent politicians? Hoover was not the only one to do this. Bill Parker, one of the greatest police chiefs ever, did so while he headed the Los Angeles Police Department. And so did a lot of other police chiefs throughout the country. In doing so, they prevented the petty political interference with law enforcement so prevalent in many police agencies.
While today's FBI is still one of our best law enforcement agencies, it is not as good as it was under Hoover. Today's agents have so much more modern technology at their disposal. In Hoover's time agents did a lot of "gumshooing", while now they spent much of their time seated behind their computers. When Hoover ran the FBI, he demanded the utmost integrity from his agents. (Of course that ran counter to his efforts at discrediting civil rights activists.) There were no scandals during his stewartship. Agents toed the line, both on duty and off duty. Since his death, the FBI has experienced scandals from the very top to the bottom. Even within the FBI's touted laboratory, there have been fabrications and other questionable practices.
Hoover has often been falsely and maliciously accused by his detractors. While there is little doubt that Hoover was a homosexual, one of the allegations was that he partied in Washington as a cross-dresser. That charge is absolutely absurd. He was uglier than sin, often being compared in looks to his pet bulldog. So who in the world would want to look at him dressed like a woman? Besides, he would have been easily recognized in public, no matter how he was dressed or what wig he may have been wearing. While Hoover was alive, no one ever alleged that he was a cross-dresser.
Hoover was truly a great man, serving his country to ensure its security and public safety. The above described acts of evil should not define the man. His good acts and his numerous contributions to law enforcement should not be interred with his bones. Hoover should continue to be honored with his name on the headquarters building of the agency he created and led so successfully for so many years.
According to a recent article in the Los Angeles Times, for the third straight year, Rep. Dan Burton of Indiana has introduced a bill in Congress to remove J. Edgar Hoover's name from the FBI headdquarters building. U.S. Circuit Judge Laurence H. Silberman supports this measure, stating that "this country - and the bureau - would be well-served if his name were removed from the bureau's building. It is as if the Defense Department were named for Aaron Burr." In 1998, Sen. Harry Reid of Nevada attempeted to have Hoover's name removed from the building, stating that "J. Edgar Hoover stands for what is bad about this country. This small man violated the rights of hundreds, if not thousands, of people, famous and not so famous."
Judge Silberman's Defense Department analogy is ridiculous. Burr was a traitor, Hoover a patriot. As for Sen. Reid, Hoover was a great man, not a small one. Compared to Hoover, the senator is the one who is a small man. Those who want to erase Hoover's name from the public mind, are doing so because he attempted to falsely discredit Martin Luther King, Jr. and other activists during the height of the civil rights movement. They also accuse Hoover of blackmailing government officials and members of Congress by accumulating information about any embarrassing misbehavior, thus intimidating them to the extent that they would not interfere with his operation of the FBI.
Hoover was clearly wrong in his efforts to discredit Martin Luther King, Jr. Planting stories about King's alleged womanizing was an act of evil. Imposing King's photo on a picture of the participants at a communist party camp meeting was an act of evil. There is no excuse for what Hoover did, even though he truly believed that King and other civil rights activists constituted a threat to law and order in this country.
What about collecting embarrassing information on government officials and prominent politicians? Hoover was not the only one to do this. Bill Parker, one of the greatest police chiefs ever, did so while he headed the Los Angeles Police Department. And so did a lot of other police chiefs throughout the country. In doing so, they prevented the petty political interference with law enforcement so prevalent in many police agencies.
While today's FBI is still one of our best law enforcement agencies, it is not as good as it was under Hoover. Today's agents have so much more modern technology at their disposal. In Hoover's time agents did a lot of "gumshooing", while now they spent much of their time seated behind their computers. When Hoover ran the FBI, he demanded the utmost integrity from his agents. (Of course that ran counter to his efforts at discrediting civil rights activists.) There were no scandals during his stewartship. Agents toed the line, both on duty and off duty. Since his death, the FBI has experienced scandals from the very top to the bottom. Even within the FBI's touted laboratory, there have been fabrications and other questionable practices.
Hoover has often been falsely and maliciously accused by his detractors. While there is little doubt that Hoover was a homosexual, one of the allegations was that he partied in Washington as a cross-dresser. That charge is absolutely absurd. He was uglier than sin, often being compared in looks to his pet bulldog. So who in the world would want to look at him dressed like a woman? Besides, he would have been easily recognized in public, no matter how he was dressed or what wig he may have been wearing. While Hoover was alive, no one ever alleged that he was a cross-dresser.
Hoover was truly a great man, serving his country to ensure its security and public safety. The above described acts of evil should not define the man. His good acts and his numerous contributions to law enforcement should not be interred with his bones. Hoover should continue to be honored with his name on the headquarters building of the agency he created and led so successfully for so many years.
Saturday, January 07, 2006
ISRAEL'S FUTURE SURVIVAL AFTER SHARON
Please allow me to regress from my usual police related blogs. Having arrived in the United States in 1936 as a refugee from Nazi Germany, I have always been a history buff, having minored in that subject during my undergraduate degree studies. Because I am jewish, I have a special interest in the State of Israel, the place of refuge for most of the holocaust survivors. And now, whether or not Ariel Sharon survives his massive stroke, it is quite obvious that his political career has come to an end. What happens now? The following background information concerns the future survival of Israel.
ISLAMISTS AND ISRAEL. Islamic true believers throughout the Middle East, in Pakistan, in Indonisia, in Malaysia, and in North Africa are firmly committed to the destruction of Israel and they do not, under any circumstances, accept the coexistence of two states - Israel and Palestine - side by side. The president of Iran has, during several recent public pronouncements, called for the desstruction of Israel. Textbooks used in Islamic schools are full of hatred for jews and for Israel. Newspapers throughout the Islamic world, including those of Egypt, are full of jew-hating cartoons. Hamas, Hezbolla, Islamic Jihad, and other Palestinian grooups proclaim that their objective is the destruction of Israel. I suspect that even those Palestinians who are seeking peace with Israel now, are doing so in the belief that they will be able to destroy Israel in the foreseeable future. At many mosques, including some in the western w orld, Islamic clergy preach hatred for jews and for Israel, calling for its destruction. Tlhese "men of God" glorify suicide bombings and advocate and applaud terrorist attacks against Israel and against "the great satan", which is their term for the United States.
THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE UNITED NATIONS. Ever since its inception, the EU has sided with the Palestinians against Israel. The EU wants to curry favor with the oil producing Arab states. They considered Arafat a hero and welcomed him like royalty. They condemned each and every Israeli settlement and insist that Israel give up all of the west bank and return to its pre-1948 boundaries. While they praised Sharon's withdrawal from Gaza and condemned the Iranian president's call for the destruction of Israel, their pronouncements leave no doubt that they are on the side of the Palestinians. The UN has always sided with the Palestinians. On many occasions in the Security Council, the United States had to come to Israel's aid by using its veto power. The UN General Assembly has always been overwhelmingly anti-Israel because most third-world countries have joined the Arab states in numerous condemnations of Israel. Both the EU and the UN keep calliing on Israel to make concessions to the Palestinians without calling for any concessions on the part of the Palestinians. Add Russia, China and India as major players on the world stage that have consistently sided with the Palestinians.
THE UNITED STATES. The United States has been Israel's chief supporter. It has given Israel billions of dollars in economic and military aid. The degree of support has varied during different administrations, but the United States has always been a friend of Israel. The first President Bush was considered one of the least friendly presidents. The current president has been the most friendly of all, but that may be due to Preesident Bush's pre-occupation with other matters, such as "9-11" and the war in Iraq. However, the United States has always pressured Israel to grant the Palestinians concessions, some of which could compromise Israel's security. It does this in order to curry favor with Saudi Arabia and other oil producing Arab countries. The United States has always maintained that it would come to the aid of Israel should it face extinction by its enemies, but it is highly doubtful that the American public would support the shedding of American blood in the defense of Israel. Christian conservatives have been Israel's stongest supporters. The radical left in the United States, which includes many jews, has consistently championed the cause of the Palestinans.
A DIVIDED ISRAEL. Religious jews believe that God created biblical Israel, which includes all of the west bank, as the homeland of the jews and they are unwilling to give up any of this land to the Palestinians. The settlements are made up largely of religious jews. Secular jews are willing to trade land for peace, as long as Israel's security is not compromised. The Peace Now movement consists of the radical left and youths of military age. It wants to dismantle all settlements and return to Israel's pre-1948 borders in return for peace with the Palestinians. The Peace Now movement is very simmilar to that of the anti-war movement in lthe United States during the Vietnam war conflict. It is conceivable that a civil war could break out in Israel over the "peace process" between the religious and secular jews.
ANTI-TERRORIST SECURITY BARRIER. Israeli civilians have been victimized by numerous terrorist bombings. To combat these attacks, Israel is building a high wall and fence to separate jews from Palestinian terrorists. The Palestinians fear that the wall will become the new border of the State of Israel and together with the rest of the world, including the United States, have condemned the construction of this barrier. However, there can be no quesstion that the wall has stopped almost all terrorist attacks against the Israeli civilian population. (The United States is considering constructing a similar barrier along its border with Mexico.)
DEFENSIBLE AND SECURE BORDERS. To a large extent, security for the State of Israel depends on defensible borders. At its narrowest, it is less than nine miles from the west bank to the Mediterranean Sea. There is absolutely no way that Israel can be secure were it to return all of the west bank as demanded by the Palestinians. While it can dismantle its outpost settlements, the new borders of Israel must include all of the established settlements, as well as access to the headwaters of the Jordan River.
EAST JERUSALEM. The Palestinians insist on a state with Jerusalem (not East Jerusalem) as its capitol. A Palestinian capitol in East Jerusalem would be a dagger pointed at the heart of Israel. All of Jerusalem must remain an indivisible part of the State of Israel. The 200,000 Palestinians living there should be offered Israeli citizenship. Those who refuse to become Israeli citizens should be expelled, but the government must compensate them for the loss of their property.
NUCLEAR WEAPONS. Israel is surrounded by millions of sworn ememies. Iran will probably develop nuclear weapons in the near future. It already has missles capable of striking Israel. America's nuclear weapons served as a deterrant to further expansion of the Soviet Union and deterred any nuclear attacks by the Soviets. Israel's nuclear arms have deterred Arab attacks and will continue to play a major role in that tiny nation's security.
PALESTINIAN SUFFERING. Do the Palesinians have some legitimate grievances? Of course they do. Is Israel blameless? Certainly not. The Palestinians have suffered the loss of land and lives in their conflict with Israel, but they have brought most of this suffering upon themselves. It is true that in 1948, when the Arabs attacked the newly formed State of Israel, its army drove out some of the Psalestinians living within its borders. However, the overwhelming majority of Palestinians fled at the urging of the Arabs who wanted to annihilate the jews without inflicting collateral casualties on the Palestinian population. When the Araqbs lost, the Palestinians were left to languish in refugee camps. The Arabs did not offer any assistance and refused to assimilate the refugees, which they easily could have done, preferring to use their suffering as a political pawn against Israel. In recent years, Arafat's intransigence and the intifada has brought on Israeli reprisals, thus furthering the suffering of the Palestinians. Thus, their grievances should be directed at the Arabs who kept them in refugee camps and at their own leaders and the militants who are responsible for much of their suffering.
ROADMAP TO PEACE OR ROADMAP TO DISASTER? The roadmap to peace, which is being pushed by President Bush, was plotted by the United States together with the UN, the EU and Russia, the latter three having a long history of siding with the Palestinians against Israel. If the roadmap requires the dismantlement of established settlements and a Palestinian capitol in East Jerusalem, it will be a roadmap to disaster for the State of Israel by compromising its security.
AFTER SHARON? ISRAEL NEEDS BENJAMIN NETANYAHU! Israel needs a strong leader who will remain resolute against pressure to make disasterous concessions to the Palestinians. The dovish Shimon Peres is not that man. Neither is Amir Peretz, the new leader of the dovish left-wing Labor Party. Ehud Olmert, the former mayor of Jerusalem who, together with Sharon and Peres formed the new Kadima party, is not that man either. It was Olmert who urged Sharon to abandon Gaza. Before Sharon suffered his latest stroke, Kadima was expected to win the March 28 election, but with Sharon unable to lead the new party, that outcome is now in doubt. Benjamin Netanyahu of the Likud party is the best man for the job. He is a strong leader who will not allow Israel's security to be compromised. Although it is said that he is against peace, he will make peace with the Palestinians, but it will be on terms that will ensure the security and survival of the State of Israel.
ISLAMISTS AND ISRAEL. Islamic true believers throughout the Middle East, in Pakistan, in Indonisia, in Malaysia, and in North Africa are firmly committed to the destruction of Israel and they do not, under any circumstances, accept the coexistence of two states - Israel and Palestine - side by side. The president of Iran has, during several recent public pronouncements, called for the desstruction of Israel. Textbooks used in Islamic schools are full of hatred for jews and for Israel. Newspapers throughout the Islamic world, including those of Egypt, are full of jew-hating cartoons. Hamas, Hezbolla, Islamic Jihad, and other Palestinian grooups proclaim that their objective is the destruction of Israel. I suspect that even those Palestinians who are seeking peace with Israel now, are doing so in the belief that they will be able to destroy Israel in the foreseeable future. At many mosques, including some in the western w orld, Islamic clergy preach hatred for jews and for Israel, calling for its destruction. Tlhese "men of God" glorify suicide bombings and advocate and applaud terrorist attacks against Israel and against "the great satan", which is their term for the United States.
THE EUROPEAN UNION AND THE UNITED NATIONS. Ever since its inception, the EU has sided with the Palestinians against Israel. The EU wants to curry favor with the oil producing Arab states. They considered Arafat a hero and welcomed him like royalty. They condemned each and every Israeli settlement and insist that Israel give up all of the west bank and return to its pre-1948 boundaries. While they praised Sharon's withdrawal from Gaza and condemned the Iranian president's call for the destruction of Israel, their pronouncements leave no doubt that they are on the side of the Palestinians. The UN has always sided with the Palestinians. On many occasions in the Security Council, the United States had to come to Israel's aid by using its veto power. The UN General Assembly has always been overwhelmingly anti-Israel because most third-world countries have joined the Arab states in numerous condemnations of Israel. Both the EU and the UN keep calliing on Israel to make concessions to the Palestinians without calling for any concessions on the part of the Palestinians. Add Russia, China and India as major players on the world stage that have consistently sided with the Palestinians.
THE UNITED STATES. The United States has been Israel's chief supporter. It has given Israel billions of dollars in economic and military aid. The degree of support has varied during different administrations, but the United States has always been a friend of Israel. The first President Bush was considered one of the least friendly presidents. The current president has been the most friendly of all, but that may be due to Preesident Bush's pre-occupation with other matters, such as "9-11" and the war in Iraq. However, the United States has always pressured Israel to grant the Palestinians concessions, some of which could compromise Israel's security. It does this in order to curry favor with Saudi Arabia and other oil producing Arab countries. The United States has always maintained that it would come to the aid of Israel should it face extinction by its enemies, but it is highly doubtful that the American public would support the shedding of American blood in the defense of Israel. Christian conservatives have been Israel's stongest supporters. The radical left in the United States, which includes many jews, has consistently championed the cause of the Palestinans.
A DIVIDED ISRAEL. Religious jews believe that God created biblical Israel, which includes all of the west bank, as the homeland of the jews and they are unwilling to give up any of this land to the Palestinians. The settlements are made up largely of religious jews. Secular jews are willing to trade land for peace, as long as Israel's security is not compromised. The Peace Now movement consists of the radical left and youths of military age. It wants to dismantle all settlements and return to Israel's pre-1948 borders in return for peace with the Palestinians. The Peace Now movement is very simmilar to that of the anti-war movement in lthe United States during the Vietnam war conflict. It is conceivable that a civil war could break out in Israel over the "peace process" between the religious and secular jews.
ANTI-TERRORIST SECURITY BARRIER. Israeli civilians have been victimized by numerous terrorist bombings. To combat these attacks, Israel is building a high wall and fence to separate jews from Palestinian terrorists. The Palestinians fear that the wall will become the new border of the State of Israel and together with the rest of the world, including the United States, have condemned the construction of this barrier. However, there can be no quesstion that the wall has stopped almost all terrorist attacks against the Israeli civilian population. (The United States is considering constructing a similar barrier along its border with Mexico.)
DEFENSIBLE AND SECURE BORDERS. To a large extent, security for the State of Israel depends on defensible borders. At its narrowest, it is less than nine miles from the west bank to the Mediterranean Sea. There is absolutely no way that Israel can be secure were it to return all of the west bank as demanded by the Palestinians. While it can dismantle its outpost settlements, the new borders of Israel must include all of the established settlements, as well as access to the headwaters of the Jordan River.
EAST JERUSALEM. The Palestinians insist on a state with Jerusalem (not East Jerusalem) as its capitol. A Palestinian capitol in East Jerusalem would be a dagger pointed at the heart of Israel. All of Jerusalem must remain an indivisible part of the State of Israel. The 200,000 Palestinians living there should be offered Israeli citizenship. Those who refuse to become Israeli citizens should be expelled, but the government must compensate them for the loss of their property.
NUCLEAR WEAPONS. Israel is surrounded by millions of sworn ememies. Iran will probably develop nuclear weapons in the near future. It already has missles capable of striking Israel. America's nuclear weapons served as a deterrant to further expansion of the Soviet Union and deterred any nuclear attacks by the Soviets. Israel's nuclear arms have deterred Arab attacks and will continue to play a major role in that tiny nation's security.
PALESTINIAN SUFFERING. Do the Palesinians have some legitimate grievances? Of course they do. Is Israel blameless? Certainly not. The Palestinians have suffered the loss of land and lives in their conflict with Israel, but they have brought most of this suffering upon themselves. It is true that in 1948, when the Arabs attacked the newly formed State of Israel, its army drove out some of the Psalestinians living within its borders. However, the overwhelming majority of Palestinians fled at the urging of the Arabs who wanted to annihilate the jews without inflicting collateral casualties on the Palestinian population. When the Araqbs lost, the Palestinians were left to languish in refugee camps. The Arabs did not offer any assistance and refused to assimilate the refugees, which they easily could have done, preferring to use their suffering as a political pawn against Israel. In recent years, Arafat's intransigence and the intifada has brought on Israeli reprisals, thus furthering the suffering of the Palestinians. Thus, their grievances should be directed at the Arabs who kept them in refugee camps and at their own leaders and the militants who are responsible for much of their suffering.
ROADMAP TO PEACE OR ROADMAP TO DISASTER? The roadmap to peace, which is being pushed by President Bush, was plotted by the United States together with the UN, the EU and Russia, the latter three having a long history of siding with the Palestinians against Israel. If the roadmap requires the dismantlement of established settlements and a Palestinian capitol in East Jerusalem, it will be a roadmap to disaster for the State of Israel by compromising its security.
AFTER SHARON? ISRAEL NEEDS BENJAMIN NETANYAHU! Israel needs a strong leader who will remain resolute against pressure to make disasterous concessions to the Palestinians. The dovish Shimon Peres is not that man. Neither is Amir Peretz, the new leader of the dovish left-wing Labor Party. Ehud Olmert, the former mayor of Jerusalem who, together with Sharon and Peres formed the new Kadima party, is not that man either. It was Olmert who urged Sharon to abandon Gaza. Before Sharon suffered his latest stroke, Kadima was expected to win the March 28 election, but with Sharon unable to lead the new party, that outcome is now in doubt. Benjamin Netanyahu of the Likud party is the best man for the job. He is a strong leader who will not allow Israel's security to be compromised. Although it is said that he is against peace, he will make peace with the Palestinians, but it will be on terms that will ensure the security and survival of the State of Israel.
Thursday, January 05, 2006
SHUT DOWN CLUB FED? - IT'S ABOUT TIME!
A group of federal inmates, mostly white collar criminals, are suing the Bureau of Prisons because the government has shut down minimum (non) security camps and sent them to low security prisons where they are forced to mingle with common criminals. They are demanding that the Club Fed camps be reopened for them. WHOA! - HOLD THE HORSES AND GIVE ME A MOMENT TO SHED SOME TEARS.
The minimum (non) security prison camps were established to house non-violent offenders who did not constitute a risk to society. I have seen some of these camps and they resemble summer vacation camps - hence the nickname "Club Fed". Most were located on or adjacent to military bases. There is little (if any) security since inmates are not likely to walk away from the camps, because if they leave, they will be charged with escape.
Lawrence Jay Levine, who is serving a 10-year sentence for dealing methamphetamines and has acted as a "jail house lawyer" for other immates, helped write the lawsuit. He had the assistance of Ginny Carter, whose 60-year old husband, Robert, is serving time for a $17 million insurance fraud scheme. Coincidentally, Mrs. Carter is a defendant in a criminal case related to her husband's crime.
The litigants claim that their dignity has been taken from them because now they are subjected to frequent searches and other security measures, the same as the common criminals who they now have to mingle with. They demand that the recommendation of judges, that they serve their time at a camp, be adhered to.
Gee whiz! It's just god awful that corporate executives, lawyers, doctors, and others from well-to-do families, who have been convicted of a crime, are forced to suffer the indignities of searches and of having to associate with low-life common criminals. And what about the recommendations of those sympathetic judges? Those are just recommendations and the prison authorities are not obligated to follow them.
The closure of these camps appears to be based ,mostly on budget restraints, Camp Fed should have been done away with long ago. When someone commits a crime which is too serious for a probated sentence, they shoould be punished by serving their time at a facility other than a summer vacation camp, regardless of their station in life.
The minimum (non) security prison camps were established to house non-violent offenders who did not constitute a risk to society. I have seen some of these camps and they resemble summer vacation camps - hence the nickname "Club Fed". Most were located on or adjacent to military bases. There is little (if any) security since inmates are not likely to walk away from the camps, because if they leave, they will be charged with escape.
Lawrence Jay Levine, who is serving a 10-year sentence for dealing methamphetamines and has acted as a "jail house lawyer" for other immates, helped write the lawsuit. He had the assistance of Ginny Carter, whose 60-year old husband, Robert, is serving time for a $17 million insurance fraud scheme. Coincidentally, Mrs. Carter is a defendant in a criminal case related to her husband's crime.
The litigants claim that their dignity has been taken from them because now they are subjected to frequent searches and other security measures, the same as the common criminals who they now have to mingle with. They demand that the recommendation of judges, that they serve their time at a camp, be adhered to.
Gee whiz! It's just god awful that corporate executives, lawyers, doctors, and others from well-to-do families, who have been convicted of a crime, are forced to suffer the indignities of searches and of having to associate with low-life common criminals. And what about the recommendations of those sympathetic judges? Those are just recommendations and the prison authorities are not obligated to follow them.
The closure of these camps appears to be based ,mostly on budget restraints, Camp Fed should have been done away with long ago. When someone commits a crime which is too serious for a probated sentence, they shoould be punished by serving their time at a facility other than a summer vacation camp, regardless of their station in life.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)