Even "TIME" Blasts USA Political Correctness

Time Magazine is bold enough to rise above the political correctness epidemic which is infecting US policy and administration -- and criticizes the official US military report on the Ft. Hood massacre.

The U.S. military's just-released report into the Fort Hood shootings spends 86 pages detailing various slipups by Army officers but not once mentions Major Nidal Hasan by name or even discusses whether the killings may have had anything to do with the suspect's view of his Muslim faith. And as Congress opens two days of hearings on Wednesday into the Pentagon probe of the Nov. 5 attack that left 13 dead, lawmakers want explanations for that omission.

John Lehman, a member of the 9/11 commission and Navy Secretary during the Reagan Administration, says a reluctance to cause offense by citing Hasan's view of his Muslim faith and the U.S. military's activities in Muslim countries as a possible trigger for his alleged rampage reflects a problem that has gotten worse in the 40 years that Lehman has spent in and around the U.S. military. The Pentagon report's silence on Islamic extremism "shows you how deeply entrenched the values of political correctness have become," he told TIME on Tuesday. "It's definitely getting worse, and is now so ingrained that people no longer smirk when it happens."

Its about time -- and this isn't rocket science.

PS, totally unrelated:

Remember all the flak Israel got for shooting up the laptop of a "peace activist?" Ever wonder why Israel's security might do such a thing?

FoxNews has a story from just a few hours ago:

BERLIN — Part of Munich airport was closed for hours Wednesday as officials searched for a man whose laptop had triggered an alert for possible explosives at a security checkpoint, police said.

Federal police said they ordered part of the airport's Terminal 2 closed to look for the man following the incident at 3:30 p.m.

An airport security instrument alerted officials to possible explosives as the man's laptop was being checked, police said. He then hastily left the scene carrying the computer into the terminal.

The alert "doesn't necessary have to mean that there were explosives inside," federal police spokesman Albert Poerschke told the German news agency DAPD.

Officials wanted to check the computer again, but the man left. "We believe that the man didn't realize there was more to come," Poerschke said.

Several hundred people were evacuated.

Munich airport said the terminal reopened shortly after 6:40 p.m. and that more than 100 departures were affected by the scare. Air traffic was expected gradually to return to normal during the evening.

Reminder: Profiling works.





Going to Israel?
Now get 2 phones for the price of 1 (and free calls too) with Talk'n'Save.

Wherever I am, my blog turns towards Eretz Yisrael טובה הארץ מאד מאד

The Audacity of Aliyah

A guest post by Lurker:

The other day, JoeSettler posted an ad for Nefesh B'Nefesh, noting (with his tongue planted in his cheek, by my reading) that there are some American Jews who will be looking to make aliyah now that Barack Obama has been elected President.

This prompted a spate of indignant comments. One commenter declared that any American Jew who wishes to make aliyah for such a reason (or perhaps any Jew who disagrees with Obama at all) is simply a racist. Another one acknowledged that there are some opponents of Obama who are not motivated by racism, but insisted that because some Orthodox Jews are racist, the entire Orthodox community has "no credibility" regarding an election where one of the candidates happens to be black. Here are some excerpts:

• "Sorry, but racist right-wing was the first explanation that came to mind after the opening line - that Obama winning would be a big push for aliyah.
  Why otherwise would anyone flee America just as we're finally starting to get hope again?"

Note that this commenter states flat out that she didn't imagine any possible reason why anybody might want to get away from Obama, other than racism. Even more frightening than this knee-jerk reaction is the reasoning she gives for it: Now that Barack Obama has been elected, it is unimaginable that anybody would not want to stay, since, as we've all been told, "we're finally starting to get hope again". (One is reminded of the famous Soviet question to refuseniks: "Why would you possibly want to leave this worker's paradise?") Clearly, it has not occurred to this commenter that there might be some people who don't feel this "hope". Or, if such people do exist, then the only possible excuse for their lack of "hope" is that they are "racist".

From another comment:

• "The point is, a substantial number of Orthodox Jews are racists. That is undeniable. Therefore, the Orthodox Jewish community as a whole has no credibility on the question of an election between a white man and a black man."

Now, it is true that there are many Orthodox Jews who are racists (more on this below) -- just as every ethnic group in America has its racists. But does this justify the blanket delegitimization of the entire OJ community, as this commenter declares? What would he say to the following copy-and-replace job:

"The point is, a substantial number of blacks are racists. That is undeniable. Therefore, the black community as a whole has no credibility on the question of an election between a white man and a black man."

Or perhaps even this:

"The point is, a substantial number of Americans are racists. That is undeniable. Therefore, the American people as a whole has no credibility on the question of an election between a white man and a black man."

Would our commenter agree with this statement as well? And if so, then what does this say about the election of Barack Obama?

This same commenter goes on to tell us that even though not every Obama supporter is necessarily a racist, anybody who criticizes Obama in a manner that he regards as "inaccurate" probably is a racist:

Simply claiming not to be a racist does little to reassure skeptics, especially if you follow your reassurance with some inflammatory and inaccurate statement like that Obama is a "socialist."

Now, I'm not going to address the question here of whether Obama's policies can be regarded as "socialist" in nature. (See the comments if you're interested in that.) What's really incredible is how, according to this commenter, "socialist" has now become an ethnic slur! Someone should tell that to the government of Sweden. (One can't help but wonder -- if someone refers to a white person as a "socialist", does that mean the speaker is racist against whites? Or does it mean that the speaker thinks the person in question is black?)

Finally, this commenter provides a long quote from conservative columnist and Orthodox Jew David Klinghoffer, in which Klinghoffer descibes his disturbing encounters with racism in the OJ community. In fact, I agree with, and strongly identify with, every word that Klinghoffer says on this subject. Yes, there is a lot of ugly racism in certain streams of American Orthodoxy. I have run up against quite a bit of it myself, and I am saddened and offended by it.

However: There are plenty of OJ Jews who are not racist at all. (I daresay most, but I don't have figures to prove it.) And knowing both Joe and Jameel personally, I am absolutely confident that their critical opinions of President Elect Obama are based upon their own (entirely legitimate) political views, and have nothing whatsoever to do with any sort of racist bias.

To suggest or imply that their criticisms of Obama are are based upon racism is completely unfounded, and nothing short of slanderous. It is also presumptuous in the extreme. And it is no less presumptuous to assume that a Jew who chooses to make aliyah because of Obama (as misguided as that may be; see afterthought below) is doing it because of "racism".

Furthermore, and most importantly: The attitude expressed by these commenters, and many others like them, represents nothing less than a frightening, illegitimate attempt to stifle political debate that is critical to our future as a free society. For many years, there have been those who attempted to paint any and all criticism of people who happened to be from racial minorities as "racism". This notion has become a powerful weapon in the hands of those who would curtail the free and open exchange of ideas and opinions, particularly on university campuses. But today, as never before, we cannot possibly afford to allow such an attitude to hold sway in America -- for one simple reason: The man who will be President of the United States for the next four years (at least) happens to be black. Now, regardless of one's political views, this is a historic first for a nation with a history of racism, and an achievement for which all Americans can rightfully be proud.

But along with that achievement, and because of it, comes new responsibility: It demands of us a new level of maturity and fair play in our public discourse: It is now completely unacceptable to play the race card on the American political field. People must be completely and unreservedly free to criticize President Obama and his Administration, just as they have been free to criticize President Bush and his. True democracy -- which America strives to exemplify -- thrives on free and unfettered debate, and open criticism -- sometimes harsh -- of our leaders. If people become intimidated against doing so for fear of being called "racists", then the fundamental underpinning of our free society will be gone. And that would be a tragedy for all of us who cherish liberty.

Afterthought:

Having said everything I said above, I feel it necessary to point out the following reservations regarding the idea of making aliyah to "run away" from Obama: I believe strongly that Jews should make aliyah -- but they ought to do it for the right reasons: They should come because Israel is our homeland, and it is where a Jew belongs. But if an American Jew makes aliyah on account of Obama's election as President, then he is a fool:

• If the issue of concern is the expectation that Obama will be pressuring Israel into making dangerous concessions to her enemies, then I would point out that those policies -- even in the worst-case-scenarios predicted by some -- are more likely to endanger the lives and security of Jews in Israel, than those in the U.S. So that would be a reason for Israelis to make yerida, not for Americans to make aliyah. Of course, I would also point out (as I have in the past) that in the end, Obama's policies are unlikely to be a major factor in this arena: The self-destructive policies of Israeli governments since the onset of Oslo in 1993 have been primarily due to the irresponsiblity and foolishness of our own Israeli leaders right here, and not because of American pressure. And there's no reason to expect this to change significantly in the near future.



• And if the issue of concern is fear of Obama's expected fiscal policies, then making aliyah on this account is even more foolish. During the election campaign, there was much heated debate over whether Obama's plan for the American economy -- which he said would be characterized by a program that would "spread the wealth" -- should be properly labelled as "socialism". Well, I don't know whether Obama's plans are radical enough to qualify as "socialism", but I can definitely tell you this: Israel's economy already is socialist! After all, the country was founded by a group of true-blue, ideologically orthodox, diehard European socialists and communists. And the economy remained solidly socialist for decades after its founding. Now, it is true that Israel has come a long way in the direction of privatization and capitalist reform (particular during Netanyahu's terms as Prime Minister and Finance Minister), but Israel is still worlds away from having a true free-market economy. The point is simply this: Israel is far more socialist right now that America can possibly become, even under eight years of an Obama Administration. So anyone making aliyah from America because they think they're running away from "socialism" is in for one heck of a shock when he gets here...
  

Wherever I am, my blog turns towards Eretz Yisrael טובה הארץ מאד מאד

Painful Reality - The Banned Poem

Ahmed's Bunker

Ahmed's bunker has surprises galore: Grenades, rifles are hung on the wall.

Ahmed is planning another bomb! What a bunker Ahmed has, who causes daily harm. Ahmed knows how to make a bomb.

Ahmed is Ahmed, that's who he is, so don't forget to be careful of him.

We get blasted while they have a blast!

Ahmed and his friends could be wealthy and sunny, if only they wouldn't buy rockets with all their money.

The above poem was penned by a 10 year old boy from the Israeli town of Ness Tziona, yet banned at the order of Israel's Education Ministry.

The poem was written as part of a poetry competition and was included in a booklet printed by the Ness Tziyona municipality.

However, the YNET publication and Israeli Arabs found the poem racist and offensive; they claim it would lead to incitement and ill-will towards Arabs.

YNET and Arabs decided that the blame for such an offensive poem lies not at the feet of those who are in fact, creating bunkers of weapons and shooting rockets at Israelis. Instead of honestly facing the painful daily reality of Israel -- YNET condemns the poem for its accurate portrayal of reality by an innocent 10 year old Israeli. In fact, one should commend the 10 year old for his non-racist observations:

"Ahmed and his friends could be wealthy and sunny, if only they wouldn't buy rockets with all their money"

The child clearly doesn't hate Arabs and he plainly admits that they could live a much better life (and could we) if they wouldn't lob rockets at us daily. They would have plenty of fuel in the Gaza strip if they didn't try to constantly bomb the crossing terminals. They would have continuous electricity if they weren't actively trying to kidnap IDF soldiers, infiltrate into Israeli communities, smuggle thousands of weapons into Gaza from Egypt and Iran...and of course, releasing kidnapped IDF soldier Gilad Shalit wouldn't hurt.

YNET even brought this issue to the attention of Israel's Education Ministry...so who does YNET and the Israeli Arab community blame?

Ibrahim Abu-Shindi, who manages the Arab community center in Jaffa, said the blame lies squarely on the shoulders of the State and its leaders. "I'm not surprised by this story because all that Jewish children know from television is the Hamas man as a terrorist and a murderer."

According to Abu-Shindi, "the Education Ministry does not invest in bringing people together at all. There used to be a department for democracy and co-existence that did much to bring Arabs and Jews together, but it was canceled. They send Jews to meet their Jewish friends from America through the 'Taglit' project, but they never get to know the Arabs that live only a few meters away."

The poem, in his opinion, creates a problematic state of events. "Placing this poem in a booklet is very serious, and encourages other children who think like this boy. If you want to bring people together you need stories about encounters and hope, otherwise you encourage hatred."

Ah yes. It's the poem that encourages children to think that Ahmed and friends are trying to kill us. You wouldn't get that idea from watching TV, listening to the radio, or G-d forbid, speaking to residents of Sederot, Ashkelon, or the surrounding Israeli communities.

In fact, kudos to this child for even being aware of the problem.

The booklet's editor and poetry competition director Marika Berkowitz was surprised at the protests. "This is the boy's creation and this is what he wanted to express. Of course there should be a limit, but I think the there is no racism here. 'Ahmed' is a general term for the enemy. These are the murmurings of an innocent child.

"There has been no intention of harming the Arab sector, but rather a specific terrorist – Ahmed. We didn't want to offend a specific population and I don't see anything out of order in this poem. We have had Arab students compete in the competition in previous years."

Of course, the best line of all comes from the Education Ministry, "the local authority that published the booklet should have guided the students in a more correct manner through the schools. The district will investigate the issue with the local authorities."

Why let reality get in the way of Yuli Tamir's Re-Education Ministry's agenda?

(Poster's History)

hat-tip: Lurker.

Wherever I am, my blog turns towards Eretz Yisrael טובה הארץ מאד מאד