Category Archives: Palestinian Authority

Modern, Standing Armies Commandeered by Cowards

Israel, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Just War, Palestinian Authority, Terrorism, War

Although Hillary Clinton would like the world to think of her as indispensable in negotiating an Israeli-Palestinian ceasefire, she arrived in the region well after rumors had spread that an agreement was being brokered by Egyptian President Mohamed Morsy.

If regional players know they will ultimately have to face one another, only, they are more likely to reconcile.

Hamas is a rib of the Muslim Brotherhood’s ribcage. Let Morsy assume a lead in the negotiations between Hamas and Israel.

CNN: “Hamas listens to Mohamed Morsy,” Gerges said. “Hamas looks up to Egypt now, at this particular stage, and that is why Egypt has emerged as the most important state vis-a-vis Hamas and Gaza.”

Yes, let Morsy man up.

If I understand the events of the last few days, Hamas aggressed from Gaza, which it now controls. Israel responded with disproportionate force. The result: Gazan civilians are dying in disproportionate numbers. These people have no siren systems to warn them of an impending attack, no bomb shelters, no nothing. They just die. Or their meager homes are destroyed.

The abiding problem for the libertarian is justifying killing of innocents. One cannot.

Yes, Hamas started the fight. Hamas hides among unwitting civilians. But this does not give Israel the right to kill these innocent non-combatants, not even unintentionally.

Where are Israel’s precision pac men? What’s wrong with their Special Operations capabilities?

After the Lebanon fiasco, I proposed that “the state of Israel should consider stationing on the borders the best of its special-operations units such as the ‘Sayeret.’ It’s trained in surgical strikes, including modern urban counterterrorism operations.”

“Sayeret” soldiers can go door-to-door to trace the source of the attacks on Israeli civilians and take them out.

But no, modern, standing armies are commandeered by cowards. It used to be that generals led their men into battle. Now they issue orders to bomb innocents from above. And the soldiers sit in armored cars and fire away indiscriminately.

Beautiful BAGS Inc.

Business, Free Markets, Homeland Security, Human Accomplishment, Palestinian Authority

Stop and smell the … private economy. It is a rose by any other name. Everywhere you go, an individual, or many individuals in cooperation, are working their hearts out to fulfill niches and needs for profit.

If you cannot appreciate that 100% of the bounty and plenty you enjoy is a result of the voluntary cooperation between men, then you deserve to be transported back to a mud hut in a far-away land, where your wives and daughters wear grass skirts and carry groceries on their heads, and where no man dares to or is capable of dreaming-up businesses like Costco,, or BAGS Inc..

Just as you thought that the Gulag created at the nation’s airports by the Transportation Security Administration was impenetrable—there comes a company to prove you wrong and improve your life.

That business is BAGS Inc.

At a time when airlines are charging customers for seemingly everything from preferred seats to food, it was just a matter of time before the industry started a delivery service. Now luggage-checking passengers on American Airlines can do what the carry-on travelers do. They can get off a plane without stopping or trying to figure out which black suitcase is theirs in the baggage claim area.
“I thought I’d give it a try,” said Sebion, who scheduled a noon tee time at the Army Navy Country Club in Virginia. “It’s ideal for my scenario. I have to go to a meeting. I don’t want to lug the clubs with me.”
Two hours later, Sebion was reunited with his golf clubs at the country club located about 10 miles away.
The service, run by BAGS Inc., is offered at about 200 airports around the country. Other airlines are expected to follow.
In addition to the normal baggage fees, it will cost a passenger $29.95 to have one bag delivered, $39.95 for two bags and $49.95 for three to 10 bags. …BAGS Inc. decided to start the new service after it noticed airlines were getting better at, well, not losing luggage. The company had already partnered with most of the major U.S. airlines to deliver luggage lost or sent to the wrong destination. BAGS Inc. developed the service as another source of revenue, according to Chief Operating Officer Scott Fasano.

For fear of theft by TSA pimps and criminals, I carry a single bag on board with my best garments and shoes. To the rescue comes a flying FedEx or UPS service. Glory!

Israel Can Do Without Thief-In-Chief

Barack Obama, Elections, Foreign Aid, Foreign Policy, Military, Palestinian Authority

A transfer of funds via wire is faster than a good-will state visit. So brazen is Barack Hussein Obama about using the people’s purse to feather his own nest—that he doesn’t even bother with appearances. To upstage Mitt Romney’s campaign stop in Israel,

Obama is authorizing an additional $70 million in military assistance to [that country].
The official says the funds will go to help Israel expand production of a short-range rocket defense system. The system, called Iron Dome, helps Israel defend itself against rocket attacks.


Chicago politics? Make that DC as usual.

The American Founding Fathers believed that politicians had no right to be benevolent with funds belonging to the people.

From “Is Ron Paul Good For Israel?”:

HE WHO PAYS THE PIPER CALLS THE TUNE. For foreign aid, Israeli leaders have been forced to subordinate their country’s national interests to Washington’s whims. This is bad for both allies. Those of us who want the U.S. to stay solvent—and out of the affairs of others—recognize that sovereign nation-states that resist, not enable, our imperial impulses, are the best hindrance to hegemonic overreach. Patriots for a sane U.S. foreign policy ought to encourage all America’s friends, especially Israel, to push back and do what is in their national interest, not ours.

There’s something else that might surprise Americans, who’ve been convinced that unless they intervene to assist, Israel won’t make it. Israel’s doing alright. Relatively speaking, its economy is better than that of the US.

The crazies are threatening it on the north (Lebanon & Syria), the south (the lovely Egyptian revolutionaries), and the east (the Palestinian Authority, Jordan and beyond), but, as the US and most of Europe decline, Israel’s economy flourishes. Here are Israel’s fiscal fundamentals, courtesy of

GDP growth of 4.8 percent this year
A raised credit rating of A+
Very low unemployment
“60 companies traded on the Nasdaq Stock Market, the most of any nation outside North America after China.”
“The largest number of startup companies per capita in the world.”
A ranking of “third in terms of projected growth this year among MSCI’s list of 24 developed economies, after 6 percent for Hong Kong and 5.3 percent for Singapore, according to the IMF.”
“Israel’s exports are high-added value exports like informatics and technology”: This means the stuff the Israelis make adds real value and jobs, unlike Obama’s state-manufactured jobs, which result from moving money around.

SADLY, that thing we in the US celebrate and anticipate—the Arab spring—threatens commence, innovation and economic prosperity in the region’s most productive oasis.

On the military front, Israel doesn’t need American assistance with rocket-deflection technology. The Israelis (a contractor called Rafael and the US-based Raytheon) vastly improved upon the American patriot missile system that misfired so badly at Dhahran.

At the time, the Israelis had already identified the problem and informed the US Army and the PATRIOT Project Office (the software manufacturer) on February 11, 1991, but no upgrade was present at the time.[citation needed] As a stopgap measure, the Israelis recommended rebooting the system’s computers regularly, however, Army officials did not understand how often they needed to do so. The manufacturer supplied updated software to the Army on February 26, the day after the Scud struck the Army barracks.


To remedy the problem, the Israelis developed,

David’s Sling, expected to have a longer range than the Patriot and also to one day replace the Hawk surface-to-air missile systems in air defense missions.

As for a system designed to stop short-range rockets; the Israelis have that covered too. They’ve had to. How else do you live (and prosper) near the oasis known as Gaza?

My in-house wireless expert tells me that to deflect short range, small, fast-moving rockets, the RF radar tracking system of the Iron Dome is already “impressive.”

Israel is good to go.

UPDATE II: Newt Pokes the Palestinians (Paul Brings It on ABC)

Elections, Individualism Vs. Collectivism, Intelligence, Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, Journalism, Left-Liberalism And Progressivisim, libertarianism, Objectivism, Palestinian Authority, Pop-Culture, Republicans

Newt poked at the Palestinians yesterday, and the matter was rehashed during another debate between the GOP candidates. That’s the only interesting thing there is to report about the ABC moderated debate in Des Moines. I mean, there might have been more, but since transcripts are unavailable, I can’t tell.

You must have noticed how these presidential candidates are tripping over themselves to make nice with Israel and distance themselves from the “plight (or is it the blight) that never shuts up.” (You already know my position on foreign aid to Israel and to all the rest: NADA.)

Gingrich defended the controversial comments he made Friday, when he said the Palestinian people were “invented.” He said tonight that his statements were “factually correct.”
“Is it historically correct? Yes. Are we in a situation where every day rockets are fired into Israel while the United States — the current administration, tries to pressure the Israelis into a peace process. Hamas does not admit the right of Israel to exist and says publicly not a single Jew will remain,” Gingrich said.
“It’s fundamentally time for somebody to stand up and say enough lying about the Middle East,” he said.

I will say that I am amazed at the love caucus goers are showing Newt and the disdain they’ve heaped on Romney. Leave aside politics and my own political philosophy; Mitt Romney is the better character (as in human being). But Americans hate success when it is combined with good looks, fidelity to family and faith—and when these traits belong to a man who is mild-mannered and contained and not given to Oprah-like abreaction.

A slimy statist slob like Newt; now that’s a candidate Americans can relate to. I’m sorry; I don’t get it.

Idiot alert: From the fact that I have mentioned Mitt’s character and carriage favorably, please do not deduce that I support his polices. The last does not follow from the first. If you are a newcomer to this space, do read my commentary before you implode at my impartiality.

I’m a paleolibertarian, not a Republican. I apologize in advance for offering a dispassionate opinion about Mitt’s character while not being a supporter of his policies. I know how confusing an impartial comment could be to many who’ve come of age in the “Age of the Idiot.”

UPDATE I (Dec. 11): “WHY COME YOU DON’T HAVE A TATTOO?” My apologies to all those who were offended by my comments above. However, I am sick of being forced into tribalism. Because I’m libertarian—with certain political allegiances and loyalties—I’m expected to refrain from offering an impartial analysis of the political and cultural landscape, if that assessment fails to favor “my side.”

This tribal logic (or rhythm rather) works as follows: If she supports Paul she must not say a good thing about Romney’s private persona.

Forget about it. Get used to being exposed to more that cheerleading for “our” side. You come here for analysis; get used to it. My assessment of the political and cultural landscape will be forthcoming irrespective of my political allegiances and loyalties.

People who can’t tolerate this remind me of the “tarded” doctor character in the film “Idiocracy,” when he discovers that his patient doesn’t have the tribe’s stamp of approval: a special tattoo.

Doctor: “And if you could just go ahead and, like, put your tattoo in that shit.”
Joe: “That’s weird. This thing has the same misprint as that magazine. What are the odds of–”
Doctor: “Where’s your tattoo? Tattoo? Why don’t you have this?”
Joe: “Oh, god!”
Doctor: “Where’s your tattoo?”
Joe: “Oh, my god.”
Doctor: “Why come you don’t have a tattoo?”

Next: Myron, are you on a liberal (of the leftist kind) binge today? With respect to your comments below: If the singular reason for political organization is pelf—the destruction, murder, robbery, and delegitimization of the relatively civilized entity adjacent to it—then, I would argue, a “people” does not have a right to organize. Or, at least, such “organization” should be disrupted by its victims.

Reality tells us that this is the reason for the Palestinian push for self-determination—the gains to themselves must always coincide with losses to their Israeli neighbors; loss of life, land, political legitimacy. By reality I mean their ACTIONS, political and other.

Second: The fact that Jews fought in the WW II, or on the South’s side during the War Between the States, for that matter—does nothing to invalidate or vaporize their biblical ties to Israel. Those ties are validated in reality, by the fact that certain Jews have revived Israel for the better, and at huge costs to individuals pioneers. The place was a no-man’s land before modern Jewish settlement commenced.

UPDATE II: PAUL BRINGS IT. Paul, who by the way agrees with me and called Romney “more diplomatic than Gingrich,” was presidential during the debate. I glean this from snippets the moron media screens. Here’s some script at last via The Liberty Tree:

It was Texas congressman Ron Paul who delivered the most substantive responses and drew the loudest applause.
Early in the debate Congressman Paul was asked to comment on Gingrich’s flip-flopping. “He’s been on so many positions on so many issues,” Paul responded, but drew attention to his own record, stating, “you might have a little bit of trouble competing with me on consistency.”
On the subject of Gingrich’s earnings from Freddie Mac, Paul said, “He was earning a lot of money from Freddie Mac while I was fighting over a decade to try to explain to people where the housing bubble was coming from,” In a rebuke of the former Speaker, Paul added, “I think you probably got some of our taxpayers’ money.”