One more time that "urban studies professor" on Oreilly uses the offensive term "typical white person", and "white America".
Typical? Am I Typical white?! Maybe I'm typical black guy?! Typical Jew?! Typical!!!
In a country that has 70% whites, who is typical? What do you mean by that? All people who aren't black? If there's one thing for sure - there's no such thing. There's no commonality between white people - there is no typical, unless you only see race.
I'm sick of racists and their typical whites or blacks.
Monday, March 31, 2008
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
March Qassam Calendar
March Qassam Calendar
Ban - why do you not condemn?! Anyone? Hellooo... ... Echo ... Echo ... Echo...
Ban - why do you not condemn?! Anyone? Hellooo... ... Echo ... Echo ... Echo...
Ban Ki-moon, the Media’s sock puppet
Camera has an interesting analysis on how Ban’s remarks regarding Gaza a month ago where distorted to create the impression that Israel was condemned and at fault for violence and must stop attacking.
Let me quote it, again:
“In light of these deeply disturbing developments, I would like to make the following clear:
I condemn Palestinian rocket attacks and call for the immediate cessation of such acts of terrorism, which serve no purpose, endanger Israeli civilians and bring misery to the Palestinian people. I call for an end to these attacks.
While recognizing Israel’s right to defend itself, I condemn the disproportionate and excessive use of force that has killed and injured so many civilians, including children. I call on Israel to cease such attacks. Israel must fully comply with international humanitarian law and exercise the utmost restraint. Incidents in which civilians have been killed or injured must be investigated and accountability must be ensured.”
While the media misrepresented his words, I still find them offensive simply due to the fact that a statement was made only after Israel retaliated, and only in order to stop Israel from retaliating. Therefore, while not wording it as a condemnation of Israel, the words given by Ban were a tool to do so.
The intensive preoccupation of international diplomats with keeping Israel’s hands tied while it takes physical beatings from Arab Nazis continues these days, as Israel again does nothing to retaliate for a daily bombardment of Jewish civilians and is forced instead to sit silently and allow rearming and regrouping of the “moderate Nazis” at Judea, Samaria and Gaza. In one word: Disgrace. I choose not to criticize Bush’s lame duck presidency – but I’m finding it harder and harder to do.
So a month has passed. Israel is not responding to missiles upon homes and farms. Where is the UN’s outcry? Ban – any final words? Well I guess he’s waiting for Israel’s “disproportionate response” before condemning terror against Jews.
I just sneezed, or in Ban’s way of phrasing it:
I just disproportionally dispersed nasal fluids on my desk. My nose should fully comply with international nasal fluids humanitarian laws and exercise the utmost restraint. Incidents in which mice and keyboards get sprayed must be investigated and accountability must be ensured.
P.S. How come he didn’t call for accountability on the Arab side? How come he didn’t call for accountability on the side of the missiles suppliers? I believe the only disproportion in play here was and remains the disproportional focus on blaming the Jews.
Let me quote it, again:
“In light of these deeply disturbing developments, I would like to make the following clear:
I condemn Palestinian rocket attacks and call for the immediate cessation of such acts of terrorism, which serve no purpose, endanger Israeli civilians and bring misery to the Palestinian people. I call for an end to these attacks.
While recognizing Israel’s right to defend itself, I condemn the disproportionate and excessive use of force that has killed and injured so many civilians, including children. I call on Israel to cease such attacks. Israel must fully comply with international humanitarian law and exercise the utmost restraint. Incidents in which civilians have been killed or injured must be investigated and accountability must be ensured.”
While the media misrepresented his words, I still find them offensive simply due to the fact that a statement was made only after Israel retaliated, and only in order to stop Israel from retaliating. Therefore, while not wording it as a condemnation of Israel, the words given by Ban were a tool to do so.
The intensive preoccupation of international diplomats with keeping Israel’s hands tied while it takes physical beatings from Arab Nazis continues these days, as Israel again does nothing to retaliate for a daily bombardment of Jewish civilians and is forced instead to sit silently and allow rearming and regrouping of the “moderate Nazis” at Judea, Samaria and Gaza. In one word: Disgrace. I choose not to criticize Bush’s lame duck presidency – but I’m finding it harder and harder to do.
So a month has passed. Israel is not responding to missiles upon homes and farms. Where is the UN’s outcry? Ban – any final words? Well I guess he’s waiting for Israel’s “disproportionate response” before condemning terror against Jews.
I just sneezed, or in Ban’s way of phrasing it:
I just disproportionally dispersed nasal fluids on my desk. My nose should fully comply with international nasal fluids humanitarian laws and exercise the utmost restraint. Incidents in which mice and keyboards get sprayed must be investigated and accountability must be ensured.
P.S. How come he didn’t call for accountability on the Arab side? How come he didn’t call for accountability on the side of the missiles suppliers? I believe the only disproportion in play here was and remains the disproportional focus on blaming the Jews.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Friday, March 14, 2008
Why I cancelled Financial Times two weeks after subscribing.
One has to ask himself, what does one value?
For me, the first thing is life. Mine, and my family's. Then every other human being's life. Health and Happiness are next to follow. Somewhere along those list of values, my personal finance does have a place. At some point I decided to try Financial Times to add another venue of information regarding analysis of my investment options. I'm not rich, but I do try to keep informed.
During that period there were several incidents in Israel, that were reported on FT in a biased way. There were several op-ed and "atmosphere" stories giving only Palestinian perspective - and a lying deceitful one at that.
Assuming that I only tried that paper for its financial information value, having a biased/trumped up reporting regarding Israel should not have mattered much if at all. However I asked my self, if a paper which tries to claim some level of credibility publishes lies and besmirches the name of Israel, the IDF and the residents of Israel with no remorse, how can I evaluate its' accuracy and impartiality regarding financial news?
Of course, when I called to cancel all I had to say was that I did not like the paper. But it runs deeper. I distrust them! I find no reason to finance hypocrites and liars. They present propaganda as news, what exactly are they presenting as financial news? I know a chart and a quote can't be "biased" - however commentary regarding corporations can be. If you are a liar here - you are a liar there.
Investors Business Daily is for that matter the only honest paper when it comes to op-eds and generic news. Add to that some very educational items found in each edition, I can't Imagine I would ever choose a different publication for financial information.
For me, the first thing is life. Mine, and my family's. Then every other human being's life. Health and Happiness are next to follow. Somewhere along those list of values, my personal finance does have a place. At some point I decided to try Financial Times to add another venue of information regarding analysis of my investment options. I'm not rich, but I do try to keep informed.
During that period there were several incidents in Israel, that were reported on FT in a biased way. There were several op-ed and "atmosphere" stories giving only Palestinian perspective - and a lying deceitful one at that.
Assuming that I only tried that paper for its financial information value, having a biased/trumped up reporting regarding Israel should not have mattered much if at all. However I asked my self, if a paper which tries to claim some level of credibility publishes lies and besmirches the name of Israel, the IDF and the residents of Israel with no remorse, how can I evaluate its' accuracy and impartiality regarding financial news?
Of course, when I called to cancel all I had to say was that I did not like the paper. But it runs deeper. I distrust them! I find no reason to finance hypocrites and liars. They present propaganda as news, what exactly are they presenting as financial news? I know a chart and a quote can't be "biased" - however commentary regarding corporations can be. If you are a liar here - you are a liar there.
Investors Business Daily is for that matter the only honest paper when it comes to op-eds and generic news. Add to that some very educational items found in each edition, I can't Imagine I would ever choose a different publication for financial information.
Thursday, March 13, 2008
Impolite, lying, BBC broadcaster blames Sderot Mayor for his town's misfortune of being the target of Arab's rockets
BBC - What an enterprise!
She wouldn't let him finish a sentence, more than insinuated that Arabs are just to bomb civilians in Sderot because their economy stinks - because of those damn Jews.
She made up fabrications about moderate Hamas members wanting to make peace but because of the mean Jews they changed their minds.
She tried to ridicule him - asking if he is calling the European Unions liars, is the whole world wrong but you are right?!
She tried to tell a man living under a threat of daily rockets bombardment that Human rights activists are still blaming the Jews for the Arab's problems in Gaza.
He told her two important things:
1. She is lying. A liar.
2. He blames her - the media for not telling Sderot's story and focusing only on the story Hamas tells from Gaza.
BBC has no shame - and shame on them indeed!
She wouldn't let him finish a sentence, more than insinuated that Arabs are just to bomb civilians in Sderot because their economy stinks - because of those damn Jews.
She made up fabrications about moderate Hamas members wanting to make peace but because of the mean Jews they changed their minds.
She tried to ridicule him - asking if he is calling the European Unions liars, is the whole world wrong but you are right?!
She tried to tell a man living under a threat of daily rockets bombardment that Human rights activists are still blaming the Jews for the Arab's problems in Gaza.
He told her two important things:
1. She is lying. A liar.
2. He blames her - the media for not telling Sderot's story and focusing only on the story Hamas tells from Gaza.
BBC has no shame - and shame on them indeed!
Friday, March 07, 2008
Looking at how some newspapers reported about yeterday's massacre
Again, on the same Israeli forum, someone published a bunch of scans from leading newspapers, some Israeli, most American.
Another link - down the thread to more scans. The Sau Paulo Brazilian paper outdid themselves and showed the right pictures for a change, as well as appropriate usage of vocabulary: Terror.
You could say I'm too easily offended... I noticed something interesting. While many did give this heinous barbarism a front page spot, some did not mention that Arabs did it. Not Palestinians, no mention of Hezbollah, no mention of the parties in the streets of Gaza to celebrate the slaughter.
Many used the word "Gunman" - no identity or ideology is needed. Not Jihadist, Islamist, terrorist, could the gunman be just anyone?! According to the headlines it sure is.
Los Angeles Times - 8 killed. Not murdered nor slaughtered, killed - as if by accident. However the "Palestinian" (not terrorist) was "shot dead".
Here's a completely incomprehensible and detached headline: "Students slain at religious school". Indeed the San Diego Union Tribune did bother to elaborate a bit in the subtitle.
The San Francisco Chronicle did surprise me. They managed to use the non detached, some would say inflammatory word "Massacre". Good for them, if only they would manage to describe the perpetrator's ethnic identity as well.
Here's another question, while on every occasion when there are casualties on the Arab side, the media do their best to show the most horrific - even if staged - scenes. There were quite enough horrific scenes yesterday, and while the Israeli press do not publish them for fear of traumatizing the population (which has seen far too much first hand), the global media choses to hide those images as well. If it is worth a front page story, why not show the images? Why only show bystanders mourning?
I'm not that naive - that question was rhetorical.
BTW - another annoying thing is that most papers chose first mention that there is a risk to peace talks, before describing the incident. What peace talks? Who gives a crap? The newspapers continue to disburse misinformation creating a mystique cloud of some peace process that doesn't exist. See - the real fear is that peace might not come, not that more Jews would be murdered...
Another link - down the thread to more scans. The Sau Paulo Brazilian paper outdid themselves and showed the right pictures for a change, as well as appropriate usage of vocabulary: Terror.
You could say I'm too easily offended... I noticed something interesting. While many did give this heinous barbarism a front page spot, some did not mention that Arabs did it. Not Palestinians, no mention of Hezbollah, no mention of the parties in the streets of Gaza to celebrate the slaughter.
Many used the word "Gunman" - no identity or ideology is needed. Not Jihadist, Islamist, terrorist, could the gunman be just anyone?! According to the headlines it sure is.
Los Angeles Times - 8 killed. Not murdered nor slaughtered, killed - as if by accident. However the "Palestinian" (not terrorist) was "shot dead".
Here's a completely incomprehensible and detached headline: "Students slain at religious school". Indeed the San Diego Union Tribune did bother to elaborate a bit in the subtitle.
The San Francisco Chronicle did surprise me. They managed to use the non detached, some would say inflammatory word "Massacre". Good for them, if only they would manage to describe the perpetrator's ethnic identity as well.
Here's another question, while on every occasion when there are casualties on the Arab side, the media do their best to show the most horrific - even if staged - scenes. There were quite enough horrific scenes yesterday, and while the Israeli press do not publish them for fear of traumatizing the population (which has seen far too much first hand), the global media choses to hide those images as well. If it is worth a front page story, why not show the images? Why only show bystanders mourning?
I'm not that naive - that question was rhetorical.
BTW - another annoying thing is that most papers chose first mention that there is a risk to peace talks, before describing the incident. What peace talks? Who gives a crap? The newspapers continue to disburse misinformation creating a mystique cloud of some peace process that doesn't exist. See - the real fear is that peace might not come, not that more Jews would be murdered...
Leading lefty Israeli journalist calls murdered Jewish teens Fascists on Swiss Radio.
The page is in Hebrew. Do click to watch a picture of one of those "Fascists".
Here's a quick translation:
After expressing solidarity with Israel after the killing of 8 students and wounding of 7 by an extremist Palestinian (as described by the broadcaster), says the broadcaster:
"And now to understand what we might expect from this assassination, we called Gideon Levy, a journalist from the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. Mr. Levy, what would be in your opinion the consequences of this case?"
Levy: "First, we must remember that before the incident Israel killed 120 Palestinians in Gaza in the last week... People should also known that the Yeshiva is a strong hold of extremist Fascists in Israel, those that would never suffice with reactions from the government..."
Broadcaster: "So what is the solution now?"
Levy: "First a cease fire between all parties... of course the deep solution is an end to occupation..."
Now click on the link to see a 16 year old blond fascist called Abraham David Moses, a tenth grade student.
Here's a quick translation:
After expressing solidarity with Israel after the killing of 8 students and wounding of 7 by an extremist Palestinian (as described by the broadcaster), says the broadcaster:
"And now to understand what we might expect from this assassination, we called Gideon Levy, a journalist from the Israeli newspaper Haaretz. Mr. Levy, what would be in your opinion the consequences of this case?"
Levy: "First, we must remember that before the incident Israel killed 120 Palestinians in Gaza in the last week... People should also known that the Yeshiva is a strong hold of extremist Fascists in Israel, those that would never suffice with reactions from the government..."
Broadcaster: "So what is the solution now?"
Levy: "First a cease fire between all parties... of course the deep solution is an end to occupation..."
Now click on the link to see a 16 year old blond fascist called Abraham David Moses, a tenth grade student.
Thursday, March 06, 2008
Massacre!
On a day when unarmed civilians are slaughtered at a congregation, several are wounded from missiles in the south, and soldiers die at the Gaza border... Several things:
My heart goes to the families. A truly painful day. This is probably just an opening shot.
This will continue - until finally steps are taken to dismantle the Palestinian Authority and to take full control over every street in Gaza. F@@@@ the world's public opinion.
Murderous blood thirsty Arabs in the land of Israel need to be disarmed and restrained. Umm-El-Fahem should be put under curfew (Israeli civilian Arabs marched with terror flags calling for revenge a day ago).
My heart goes to the families. A truly painful day. This is probably just an opening shot.
This will continue - until finally steps are taken to dismantle the Palestinian Authority and to take full control over every street in Gaza. F@@@@ the world's public opinion.
Murderous blood thirsty Arabs in the land of Israel need to be disarmed and restrained. Umm-El-Fahem should be put under curfew (Israeli civilian Arabs marched with terror flags calling for revenge a day ago).
Wafa Sultan - and the deaf Muslims
A must watch
Pay attention how the members of that show refuse to acknowledge a single thing she says, but rather come up with a bag of lies about force conversion to Christianity, a so called holocaust in Gaza, US is demolishing Iraq - and whine they aren't allowed to deny the holocaust.
One more side note, Al Jazeera - the Jihad friendly - erase the Jews channel - APOLOGIZED FOR ALLOWING HER TO SPEAK!!!
That channel is a Nazi propaganda outlet. If the US does nothing to pressure Qatar into some kind of accountability - the future is very grim.
Pay attention how the members of that show refuse to acknowledge a single thing she says, but rather come up with a bag of lies about force conversion to Christianity, a so called holocaust in Gaza, US is demolishing Iraq - and whine they aren't allowed to deny the holocaust.
One more side note, Al Jazeera - the Jihad friendly - erase the Jews channel - APOLOGIZED FOR ALLOWING HER TO SPEAK!!!
That channel is a Nazi propaganda outlet. If the US does nothing to pressure Qatar into some kind of accountability - the future is very grim.
Monday, March 03, 2008
Random icky thoughts
* Word of the day - "Escalation". Since every day rockets are fired at Israel, what constitutes an "escalation"? How come some days the Israeli media is focused on reporting every injury and hit by those missiles, and another chooses to almost ignore it. Not news worthy anymore. A 7 story apartment building was hit by a rocket - which international media outlet reported that "escalation"? 7 minutes in the morning on the Israeli news websites that's that.
* Ban Ki Moon - is that how you spell Kofi Anan in reverse? He is outraged about disproportion. How about being outraged regarding the daily bombardment of Jews. Ha? Not a peep?! You double speaking A-Hole!
* On the day the UN security counsel votes on sanctions against Iran, Israel stops fighting terror - while the Israeli minister of Defense proclaims the operation will continue - the PM undercuts him and orders immediate withdrawal. What are the chances that Olmert takes orders (not friendly advisories) from someone who is not an Israeli?
* Shas - the ultra-orthodox, sometimes think themselves to be anti-zionist, while sometimes pretend to be ultra patriotic right wing, Their high ranking minister calls the disengagement the worst strategic move in the history of Israel, calls for an immediate unified government with Likud due to imminent threats to national existence. Now - weren't they part of the government that participated in expelling Jews out of their homes in Gaza? What "new" threats didn't the knuckle head see that he sees now?
* As I've said, this government criminally neglects its duties to guard Jewish Israeli Civilians. AFTER the short lived operation, they remembered to start debating the question: "Why don't we fire back to the sources of bombing regardless of civilian density?" Yes - why? Especially since you promised to do so prior to disengagement/expulsion of Jews.
* When "leaders" of Arabs in Israel outright support genocidal murder of Jews - what kind of a civil rule allow them to continue to walk free? Hasn't anyone heard of the word "Treason"? Providing Material and financial support to enemies of the state? See, Israel incarcerates people who throw pig's heads to a mosque, but fails to do a thing against those who operate in broad daylight to destroy the state and eliminate Jews.
* Ban Ki Moon - is that how you spell Kofi Anan in reverse? He is outraged about disproportion. How about being outraged regarding the daily bombardment of Jews. Ha? Not a peep?! You double speaking A-Hole!
* On the day the UN security counsel votes on sanctions against Iran, Israel stops fighting terror - while the Israeli minister of Defense proclaims the operation will continue - the PM undercuts him and orders immediate withdrawal. What are the chances that Olmert takes orders (not friendly advisories) from someone who is not an Israeli?
* Shas - the ultra-orthodox, sometimes think themselves to be anti-zionist, while sometimes pretend to be ultra patriotic right wing, Their high ranking minister calls the disengagement the worst strategic move in the history of Israel, calls for an immediate unified government with Likud due to imminent threats to national existence. Now - weren't they part of the government that participated in expelling Jews out of their homes in Gaza? What "new" threats didn't the knuckle head see that he sees now?
* As I've said, this government criminally neglects its duties to guard Jewish Israeli Civilians. AFTER the short lived operation, they remembered to start debating the question: "Why don't we fire back to the sources of bombing regardless of civilian density?" Yes - why? Especially since you promised to do so prior to disengagement/expulsion of Jews.
* When "leaders" of Arabs in Israel outright support genocidal murder of Jews - what kind of a civil rule allow them to continue to walk free? Hasn't anyone heard of the word "Treason"? Providing Material and financial support to enemies of the state? See, Israel incarcerates people who throw pig's heads to a mosque, but fails to do a thing against those who operate in broad daylight to destroy the state and eliminate Jews.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)