TIME: Money-Grubbing Joooooos Don't Care If People Die as Long as They're Getting Rich

TIME Magazine explains "Why Israel Doesn't Care About Peace":

... Quote unquote:

The truth? In the week that three Presidents, a King and their own Prime Minister gather at the White House to begin a fresh round of talks on peace between Israel and the Palestinians, the truth is, Israelis are no longer preoccupied with the matter. They’re otherwise engaged; they’re making money; they’re enjoying the rays of late summer. A watching world may still define their country by the blood feud with the Arabs whose families used to live on this land and whether that conflict can be negotiated away, but Israelis say they have moved on… Asked in a March poll to name the “most urgent problem” facing Israel, just 8% of Israeli Jews cited the conflict with Palestinians, putting it fifth behind education, crime, national security and poverty. Israeli Arabs placed peace first.

Obviously that poll actually shows that Israelis are preoccupied with educating their children, keeping their families safe from crime, and not getting killed by neighboring countries. Ergo listing those as priorities one, two, and three. But why let mere numbers get in the way of “Jews are too busy ‘making money’ to embrace negotiations?” ...

(emphasis added by Mere Rhetoric)

Helen Thomas Tells Jews to "Get the Hell Out of Palestine" and "Go Back to Poland and Germany" ... [UPDATED]

... presumably, where the unfinished business of 1933-45 can commence. (See, e.g., Auschwitz, Treblinka, etc.)

Here's proof that Yassir Arafat isn't dead; he's just dressed in drag and disguised as a 109-year-old White House press correspondent:



Bless her heart. She's just waiting around on Willard Scott to call out her name one morning.


UPDATE
If the words of the Grand Dame sound eerily familiar, that's because they echo something we've heard before:

Iran's Ahmadinejad says Israel should be moved to Europe

Iran's hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad said that if Germany and Austria feel responsible for massacring Jews during World War II, a state of Israel should be established on their soil.

Ahmadinejad, who sparked an international outcry in October when he said Israel "must be wiped off the map", also repeated his view Thursday that the Jewish state was a "tumour".

"Now that you believe the Jews were oppressed, why should the Palestinian Muslims have to pay the price?" the hardline president asked in an interview with Iran's Arabic-language satellite channel, Al-Alam.

"Why did you come to give a piece of Islamic land and the territory of the Palestinian people to them?

"You oppressed them, so give a part of Europe to the Zionist regime so they can establish any government they want. We would support it," he said, according to a transcript of his original Farsi-language comments given to AFP.

"So, Germany and Austria, come and give one, two or any number of your provinces to the Zionist regime so they can create a country there which all of Europe will support and the problem will be solved at its root," he said.

Helen, too, wants the "tumor" excised.

Israeli Grievance Hustlers Manage to Alienate Even Pro-Israel Catholics

This is the Speaker of the Israeli Knesset, among others, who is expressing anti-Catholic sentiments and demanding an "apology" for something for which the Church (1) was not responsible, (2) was itself a victim, and (3) took an active role in opposing:

"We're talking about the pope, who is also a representative of the Holy See, which has a lot to ask forgiveness from our people for," Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin said during an interview on Israel Radio on Tuesday. "And he is also a German, whose country and people have asked forgiveness. But he himself comes and speaks to us like a historian, as an observer, as a man who expresses his opinion about things that should never happen, and he was - what can you do? - a part of them."

"An Appalling Level of Cultural Tone-Deafness and Insensitivity"

Rich Leonardi thinks that

[t]he time has come for Pope Benedict to summon Cardinal Martino to the papal apartments, thank him for his service to Mother Church, and reward him with a quiet parish in the Italian countryside.

At the very least, an apology by Cardinal Martino is warranted. As I noted over at Rich's blog:

... it takes an appalling level of cultural tone-deafness and insensitivity for a Cardinal of the Church to invoke Godwin's Law and hurl the concentration camp analogy at a Jewish state.

Previous Pro Ecclesia posts on this subject:
German Bishops' Offensive Remarks Hit Jews Hard

John McCain's "Profiles in Courage": A Couple of Examples of Why I Have Not Backed McCain ...

... both from Creative Minority Report:

McCain's Vociferous Defense of Marriage - NOT!

Call Catholics Satan? Yawn. But Don't Mention the Jews

Throw in McCain's support for ESCR and we have a trifecta.


UPDATE
McCain must REALLY NOT want my vote, if what Feddie reports is true:

. . . this, this, or this, simply will not do.

Even if he doesn't follow through on these things, the mere fact that McCain is considering them makes him completely untrustworthy in my estimation.

I suppose I'd prefer McCain over Obama, but it looks like the "maverick" is going to have to accomplish that feat without my vote.

"... You Prob'ly Think This [Speech] is About You, Don't You, Don't You, Don't You?"

(Hat tip: Kathryn Jean Lopez)

Obama says Bush falsely accuses him of appeasement:

WASHINGTON - Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama accused President Bush on Thursday of launching a "false political attack" with a comment about appeasing terrorists and radicals.

The Illinois senator interpreted the remark as a slam against him but the White House denied that Bush's words were in any way directed at Obama, who has said as president he would be willing to personally meet with Iran's leaders and those of other regimes the United States has deemed rogue.

In a speech to Israel's Knesset, Bush said: "Some seem to believe that we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along.

"We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: 'Lord, if I could only have talked to Hitler, all this might have been avoided.' We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history."

Obama responded with a statement, seizing on Bush's remarks even as it was unclear to whom the president was referring.

"It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel's independence to launch a false political attack," Obama said in the statement his aides distributed. "George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the president's extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel."

White House press secretary Dana Perino flatly rejected the idea that the Knesset remark was aimed in any way at Obama. The remark is fairly typical for Bush speeches, and Gordon Johndroe, a national security spokesman for the president, said the president was referring to "a wide range of people who have talked to or suggested we talk to Hamas, Hezbollah or their state sponsors" over a long period of time.

One such person most recently was former President Carter, who held talks with Hamas leaders, prompting criticism from Bush officials.

Still, even as the White House said Bush meant no dig at the Democrat, Perino couldn't resist the opportunity to get in a small one.

"I understand when you're running for office you sometimes think the world revolves around you. That is not always true. And it is not true in this case," she said...

(emphasis added)

My Comments:
LOL! What a self-important dolt Obama is. Not ready for prime time.

As Lopez notes:

... I think that the senator's response is telling: "It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel's independence to launch a false political attack." Senator, what he said is about much more than an election. The president knows that, do you?

(emphasis added)

National Review Online Officially Jumps the Shark

(Hat tip: Dave Hartline at Catholic Report)

People who read this blog regularly know that I am a strong supporter of Israel. But I do not believe everything done in the name of Israel is above reproach. And when an ad promoting Israel tourism resorts to T & A and outright blasphemy, I draw the line.

In contrast, National Review's Mike Potemra (a self-described "evangelical") apparently believes that ANY criticism of Israel for ANY reason is tantamount to a treasonous betrayal of the War on Terror:

Anti-Iraq War blogger Mark Shea is trying to drive a wedge between U.S. evangelicals and Israel, by posting a video on his website that he hopes will shock us into realizing that Israel is just another “secular nation-state.” The video contains a TV commercial for Israel tourism in which a couple of guys on a beach see a beautiful woman in a bikini, and one of them says, “Holy Mother of God.” The end caption says, “ISRAEL No wonder they call it The Holy Land.”

... As an Evangelical, I have emotional and religious reasons to support the Jewish believers who live in Israel; as a believer in secular freedom—America, too, is a secular (i.e., non-confessional) state, and long may it remain so—I support the people of Israel, believers and non-believers alike, who are just trying to live normal lives in the face of enemies who want to (first) put their women in burkas and (second) exterminate them. I can’t, of course speak for all evangelicals; but from what I know, many of us have a sense of humor and will not let the Sex Police of the Blogosphere turn us against a brave ally fighting a just war.

(emphasis added)

What crap! Is there ANYTHING the neocon brigade (and I genuinely HATE resorting to the overused and often meaningless "neocon" epithet, but here it seems to apply) won't justify or defend in the name of Israel and/or the War on Terror?

And it is interesting that Potemra is more worried about the fact that Israel could be offended by Mark's protest than he is that Catholics are genuinely offended by the disrespect shown to the Blessed Virgin Mary by the ad's use of "Holy Mother of God" as one man's exclamation after he gets a boob shot from a bikini-clad young woman bending over to pick up a ball on the beach.

Finally, check out the description of Mark Shea: "Anti-Iraq War blogger"? Certainly Mark has been vocal in criticising the Bush Administration in its prosecution of the Iraq War, even calling into question whether it meets just war standards. But that is hardly the be-all-and-end-all of someone who is among the top 2 or 3 Catholic bloggers in the blogosphere. This commenter at Mark's blog had the same thought:

The most interesting thing to me is that Potemra characterizes Mark as "anti Iraq War blogger Mark Shea." Most of us I think would first describe Mark as "Catholic blogger" or even "conservative Catholic blogger" -- the fact that Potemra chooses otherwise may indicate what's really bugging him.

Indeed.

Mark responds here:

... Now the amazing thing to me is that, of all the things NRO could be doing, they chose to go to bat for *this*. And not just go to bat for it, but claim that criticism of it is an attempt to "turn us against a brave ally". Because, of course, anything less than uncritical acceptance of anything the Israelis might choose to do--right down to a blasphemous jiggle ad--is endorsement of the idea of pushing Israel into the sea.

***
Had that ad been, say, something broadcast on Saturday Night Live or Bill Maher, K Lo would be linking the latest press release from Shoutin' Bill Donohue and NRO would be lamenting the tacky way in which the media was trashing religion and trying to make Israel look bad. But since it was some chucklehead Israeli put the ad together, then NRO is going to bat for it in accord with the dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the State of Israel. I didn't point out the blasphemous jiggle ad because I think blasphemous jiggle ads are tacky. Nope, I did it to turn people against a brave ally. Likewise, when I criticized the plan to give contraceptives to 11 year olds up in New England, that's not because I think that's a bad idea. It's because I hate America and I'm trying to foster treason. It's all or nothing at all in the weird new world of Millennial Conservatism.

Here's the deal: there's no need to defend the ad. It doesn't just offend Christians (and presumably Hindus). It offends religious Jews: religious Jews who believe (as I do not) that Israel *is* the fulfilment of prophecy. It's a tacky, blasphemous, gratuitously insulting ad.

The bizarre notion that whatever Israel chooses to do merits uncritical acceptance on pain of being declared an anti-semite or an enemy of Israel is on a collision course with itself if Israel decides that doing a Bill Maher imitation is the best way to market its tourism industry. The American conservative dogma of the Immaculate Conception of the State of Israel is also unlikely to survive its self-collision if it is so brittle that it cannot abide even the teensiest criticism of a blasphemous jiggle ad without hauling out the "enemy of Israel" sledgehammers.

Bingo.


UPDATE (22 October)
Victor points out that I was wrong to refer to Potemra as an "alleged evangelical" in my comments above. He is correct, and I have excised the word "alleged" from my original remarks. I apologize to Potemra for calling the authenticity of his faith into question.


UPDATE #2 (22 October)
Thanks to Paul Zummo who posted this in comments:

As usual, Ramesh Ponnuru has the most level-headed take on the situaton.

"To drum up tourism, Israel is running an ad that is both tacky and offensive. Mark Shea criticized the ad, and pointed out that Israel is a secular nation-state that Christians should not invest with special theological significance. Mike Potemra, in this space, then criticized Shea as an anti-Israeli prude. Shea can't believe that "NRO is going to bat" for the ad. No: Mike Potemra is. (As it happens, I think Shea's initial comments were correct.)"

76-Year-Old Professor Who Survived Holocaust Heroically Sacrifices Life to Save Students

He survived Hitler's death camps, but Israeli citizen and Virginia Tech professor Liviu Librescu gave his life on Monday to save his engineering students from another mass murderer. Amy Welborn has the details.


Previous Pro Ecclesia posts on this subject:
Prayers for the Commonwealth of Virginia

German Bishops' Offensive Remarks Hit Jews Hard

German Bishop # 1: Let's see, what is the most inane, insensitive, and patently offensive thing we can say today?

German Bishop # 2: Gee, we could compare Israel to the Nazis and conditions in Palestine to those in the Warsaw Ghetto during the Third Reich.

German Bishops All Together: Great idea!

From Catholic World News:

Cardinal Meisner criticizes Israeli wall, Cardinal Lehmann deplores bishops' ghetto simile; Israeli envoy, ADL, Al-Jazeerah weigh in (7 articles)

Mar. 8, 2007 -

Cardinal Lehmann deplores 'ghetto' simile by bishops (DPA)

Cardinal Meisner slams inhuman Israeli wall (IRNA)

Israelis denounce bishops' Nazi comparisons (The Telegraph)

Israeli envoy slams German bishops (JTA)

ADL calls on German bishops' conference to publicly repudiate comparison of Ramallah to Warsaw Ghetto (ADL)

Bishops' statements incense German Jews (JTA)

German bishops see racist Israel firsthand (Al-Jazeerah)