“Ten Hours of Walking in Israel as a Woman in Hijab” (via Target Liberty) serves as a remarkable testament to the quality and tolerance of Israeli society. So conclusive and vivid is this video depiction that words pale by comparison. It is a rather long clip. My tolerance for text-less material taking time to get through is limited. But, here, a picture in time is indeed worth a thousand words.
Editor Robert Wenzel disagrees, writing this at TL:
In commerce, there is peace.
What Corey Gil-Shuster didn’t film is what occurs at Israeli government checkpoints.
Checkpoints? The reason there is “peace in commerce” is because those manning checkpoints care about the security of their Israeli countrymen, Jew and Muslim, to ensure that hijab-swaddled individuals do not have vests of explosives under their garb.
Would you feel at ease in a cinema or a supermarket where hijabs went unchecked?
I had imagined that Israel would grow a brain and would reconsider its antagonistic attitude to Bashar Hafez al-Assad. Syria’s embattled leader is currently fighting ISIS and losing. But no, things are as Bat Buchanan paints them:
America [is expected to] send her best and bravest back into Iraq to defeat ISIS, while Turkey, the Saudis, the Gulf Arabs and Israel are helping bring about the defeat of a Syrian army that has been battling ISIS for years.
Our “friends” in the Middle East have no problem with us fighting and dying to drive ISIS out of Iraq, while they try to bring about the fall of Assad in Syria, which would constitute a triumph for ISIS.
Our “friends” don’t mind this happening because it would be a defeat for Iran and the Shiite Crescent, their enemies, even if it meant a victory for ISIS and al-Qaida, our enemies.
Israel does not plan to recognize the Armenian genocide perpetrated by Turkey, Rafael Harpaz, Israel’s ambassador to Azerbaijan, told Azeri website Trend.
“Israel is a democratic country, everybody has two opinions, not one opinion,” Harpaz said. “The government has a very clear opinion.”
He said Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman had made Israel’s policy clear. Harpaz told Trend he hoped Israel’s troubled relations with Turkey would improve.
Vox correctly notes that “this decision makes sense from a geopolitical grand strategic point of view.”
I would go further and venture that Israel’s “willingness to throw away the moral high ground” on the Armenian genocide is indicative of the Jewish State’s sense of insecurity in a region that is rapidly forming new alliances. This, coupled with the alienation from the administration of Barack Obama has clearly made Israel a lot more cautious as to which Middle-Eastern potential partner it annoys with symbolic gestures.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Meet The Press’ Chuck Todd that the deal with Iran, the details of which are still unclear, is a deal with the “preeminent terrorist state of our time.” Iran, says Bibi, is “a militant, Islamic power, built on regional corporate domination. In fact, bent on world domination.” It has as its “explicit goal first” the annihilation of Israel, “but also ultimately” the conquest of the Middle East and the threatening [of the US].”
“[E]very territory that is vacated in the Middle East,” noted Netanyahu, is “taken over by the forces of militant Islam, either those led by Iran or those led by ISIS.”
Wait a sec, isn’t Iran fighting ISIS in the Middle East!? Isn’t that a good thing? Doesn’t it mean that Arabs are finally taking out their own trash, instead of expecting Americans do die trying?
Or perhaps Netanyahu is of the position that only Muslims approved by the world superpower (the US) and the region’s superpower (Israel) are fit to fight ISIS?
“Are we going to be frightened by words from an Iranian blowhard?” Pat Buchanan tries to school Sean Hannity on the insignificance of Iran’s military as compared to American and Israeli might (and Bibi’s 200 plus atom bombs). It has not dawned on Mr. Hannity that the Arab alliance forming in the Middle East against ISIS, our mortal enemy, is exactly what the US needs if she is to get the hell out of the business of meddling where we are hated.
I like Pat’s description of Britain ending up on US food stamps because of WWII.
What is so disconcerting is the blowhards of cable. In Pat Buchanan you have a learned man who partook in successive American administration, at crucial times in our history; who has so much too impart. And rather than let him teach you something, you scream him down.
Steve Sailer seconds Mercer on the “path to mutual respect” between the neoconservative and Zionist faction, on the one hand, and the American conservative (and paleolibertarian) faction, on the other hand. As Steve puts it:
The path to mutual respect is to insist upon reciprocity. The most reasonable bargain would be for conservatives to demand of neoconservatives that in return for American support for Zionism, Zionists must publicly support America deploying the same immigration policies as Israel currently enjoys.
The Mercer version (April 29, 2011) urged Israelis to recognize Americans’ right to deny a “global right of return to the US for the citizens of the world”:
“… Ask any left-liberal American Jew if he supports a ‘Right of Return’ to Israel proper for every self-styled Palestinian refugee, and he’ll recoil: ‘Are you mad? Never. That’s a euphemism for Israel’s demise.’ The very thing he opposes for Israel, the leftist Jew is inclined to champion for America: a global right of return to the US for the citizens of the world. When it comes to ‘returning’ to America only (but not Israel), humankind is said to possess a positive, manufactured right to venture wherever, whenever. (This view is common among American liberals of all religious persuasions.)
Israelis want the support of Americans in standing up for their national sovereignty. Fine. But they should respond in kind. … when liberty deprived peoples the world over support patriots stateside, I’ll return the favor. The same goes for Israel. …”