Subpoena Threatens liberty & Privacy of Comment Posters

I have added extra emphasis to a critical clause in the last sentence of the following quotation. Please concentrate on that and the other parts I have emphasized.

http://www.newmediajournal.us/the_fifth_column.htm#0616a

Newspaper Resists Subpoena for Names of Readers Who Posted Views
Joan Whitely, The Las Vegas Review-Journal
The Las Vegas Review-Journal readers who posted online their views about a federal criminal tax trial are the target of a sweeping federal grand jury subpoena asking for information so that authorities may identify who they are and where they live. The Review-Journal plans to file later this week a motion to quash the subpoena, and the American Civil Liberties Union has posted its own online solicitation asking those who posted whether they would like the ACLU to legally represent them...This past week the grand jury subpoena, which is separate from the ongoing trial but was signed by one of the prosecutors involved in the tax trial, was the topic of discussion between the trial judge and attorneys, revealing for the first time a possible motive for the subpoena. The newspaper's subpoena does not explain why the US attorney's office wants to know who commented on the case, but prosecutors told federal Judge David Ezra that they issued it out of concern for jurors' safety, because some comments hinted at acts of violence. Las Vegas business owner Robert Kahre and others face federal tax fraud charges for paying contractors with gold and silver US coins based on the precious metal value of the coins but using the much lower face value of the coins for tax purposes. As of 9pm Monday, 173 comments were listed below the May 26 Review-Journal article about the trial. Many comments deal with the trial and its principal players. Others were posted after the subpoena arrived...Mitchell said the paper is resisting the sweeping nature of the subpoena, noting that anonymous speech is "a fundamental and historic part of this country," citing the Federalist and Anti-Federalist Papers that argued for passage and against passage of the nation's Constitution as an example. All were written under pseudonyms. He said the paper would consider cooperating if specific crimes or real threats were presented...Many used the newspaper Web site to say the US government has turned socialist, the nation's monetary system encourages deficit spending and guarantees inflation, or the Internal Revenue Service has to be reformed or abolished. In addition to requesting the names of people who posted, the subpoena also tells the newspaper to supply the writers' gender, birth date, physical address, telephone number, Internet service provider, IP address, credit card numbers and more.

Assuming that one or more comentators made expressed or implied threats, does that justify casting a broad net for all commentators on the subject? What is the relevance of credit card numbers, and why would the newspaper have them? Perhaps those who posted comments are subscribers and paid by credit card, but I can tell you without reservation that I will not supply that number to sign up to post comments.

In my opinion, seeking identifying information for anyone who did not make threats of violence is overstepping the bounds of justice and casts a negative reflection on the prosecutor involved. Persecutor may be a better title for that officer of the court. This case is an early wake up call alerting us to be watchful lest our liberties be lost.

EPA comment period closes Tues

EPA's CO₂ comment period closes Tuesday, June 23, 2007. If you have not yet told them where to go with their egregious power and money grab, now is the time to do so. If CO₂ regulation is not nipped in the bud, we will be penalized for everything we do; for every breath we take.

The proposed regulation is related to the Waxman-Markey bill, which will bankrupt us jointly & severally. This is a case of fabricating and exploiting an artificial crisis for political & economic exploitation.

Consider this information from Green Watch America.

There is no convincing scientific evidence that human release of carbon dioxide, methane, or other greenhouse gases is causing or will, in the foreseeable future, cause catastrophic heating of the Earth's atmosphere and disruption of the Earth's climate. Moreover, there is substantial scientific evidence that increases in atmospheric carbon dioxide produce many beneficial effects upon the natural plant and animal environments of the Earth.''

31,478 scientists have signed the statement you just read. 9,029 of those scientists have PhD degrees. 3,803 of them have expertise in atmospheric, earth, and environmental science. Sound like a consensus to you?

http://errortheory.blogspot.com/2009/06/epa-comment-period-closes-tues-tell-em.html

EPA comment period closes Tues: tell ‘em no state-establishment of CO2-phobic religion

Only a couple more days to let the EPA know what you think of its proposed war against CO2. Just click on the little yellow “add comments” balloon. The following is a comment (ending at "sincerely") that you can copy and paste. (If you choose to roll your own, feel free to leave it here too.)

Dear EPA: There is overwhelming statistical evidence that the primary driver of natural temperature change is solar-magnetic activity, yet the solar flux is completely omitted as an influence on climate in all four IPCC assessments and in the Obama administration's new "Climate Change Impacts in the United Sates" report. This omission is rationalized on grounds that the existing theories of how solar activity affects climate are still formative. The scientific method rejects this rationalization. Observational evidence is supposed to trump theory, not vice versa, but the IPCC is using theory (its distrust of existing theories of the mechanism by which solar-magnetic activity drives global temperature), as an excuse for ignoring the overwhelming evidence that solar-magnetic DOES drive global temperature. Not all religions are anti-scientific, but the demonstrably anti-scientific nature of CO2 alarmism proves that it IS religion, not science. EPA regulations are supposed to be science based. Imposing restrictions based on an anti-scientific religious doctrine would not just violate the EPA's mandate, but would violate the constitutional prohibition on state establishment of religion. Solar-magnetic warming: theory and evidence The sunspot-temperature theory is actually looking pretty solid. It is known that a strong solar-magnetic flux shields the earth from high energy cosmic rays which otherwise, according to the theory of Henrik Svensmark and Friis-Christensen, would ionize the atmosphere, seeding cloud formation. Thus the solar wind in effect blows the clouds away, giving the earth a sunburn. Whatever the precise mechanism, researchers have found that solar-magnetic activity “explains” statistically about 60-80 percent of global temperature change on all time scales going back hundreds of millions of years. On the decadal time scale, see the seminal 1991 paper by Christensen and Lassen (“Length of the Solar Cycle: An Indicator of Solar Activity Closely Associated with Climate”) and the 2003 isotope study by Usoskin et al (“Solar activity over the last 1150 yrs: does it correlate with climate?”), which found: “a correlation coefficient of about .7 - .8 at a 94% - 98% confidence level.” For longer time scales, see the 2003 paper by Shaviv and Veiser (“Celestial driver of Phranerozoic climate?”), which found that found that the cosmic ray flux explains statistically about 75% of global temperature variation over the last 550 million years. Omitted variable fraud Solar activity was at “grand maximum” levels from 1940 and 2000 which, given the historical correlation between solar activity and temperature, could easily explain most or all late 20th century warming. When the IPCC and others omit the solar-magnetic variable from their models, any warming effect of solar activity gets misattributed to whatever correlated variables ARE included in their models. By sheer coincidence, CO2 reached its own “grand maximum” levels (at least compared to the rest of the Holocene) in the second half of the 20th century. Thus in the alarmist models, whatever warming effect the omitted solar-magnetic variable is responsible for gets misattributed to CO2. You can find rationalizations for this omitted-variable fraud in every IPCC report. For instance, section 6.11.2.2 of the Third Assessment Report does not question the correlation between solar activity and climate, but dismisses the cosmic-ray cloud THEORY as too speculative to include in their climate models:

At present there is insufficient evidence to confirm that cloud cover responds to solar variability.

But they don't just leave solar-magnetic activity out of their models. Because their forecasts are based entirely on their climate models, they also leave solar magnetic effects completely out of their climate forecasts, despite knowing that there is SOME mechanism (even if the cosmic-ray/cloud theory turns out to be wrong) by which solar-magnetic activity is the primary driver of global temperature. The only solar variable they do include is solar output or Total Solar Insolation (from long to short-wave radiation), which does not include the solar-magnetic flux. The Fourth Assessment Report does the same thing, looking only at TSI, as do all of the analyses that follow from these reports. For instance, if you look at he “Natural Influences” subsection of the Obama administration’s new report, you will see on page 16 that the only natural influence listed is “solar output’ (or TSI), which is why it is shown graphically to be so tiny. Solar output is close to constant over the solar cycle (less than 0.1% variation), which is why it is called “the solar constant." Because TSI is nearly constant, it cannot account for the many thousands of years of close correlation between solar activity and temperature. That must be coming from the one solar variable that DOES vary with solar activity: the solar magnetic flux. Every IPCC climate scientist knows this, yet they still omit the solar-magnetic variable. Proof of omission: page 16 graphic from the June 2009 report by U.S. Global Change Research Program (in effect, the NOAA). The only natural warming effect listed is total solar output, which does not include the solar-magnetic flux. Similar graphics can be found in each of the IPCC's assessment reports, where this analysis originates. Religion, not science When the alarmists omit solar-magnetic effects on the grounds that they are not satisfied with with existing theories of HOW these effects work, they are not just committing statistical fraud, but they are contradicting the very definition of science. Observation (the overwhelming correlation between solar activity and global temperature) is supposed to trump theory, not vice versa. Consider an analogy. Until Einstein developed his theory of general relativity there was no good theory of gravity. Newton had a description of the gravitational force (that it diminishes by the inverse of the square of the distance) but nobody had any sensible account for the mechanism by which massive objects were drawn to each other. Applying the standards of the IPCC, a pre-Einsteinian or pre-Newtonian scientist should have forecast that when a stone is released in the air, it would waft away on the breeze. After all, we understand the force that the breeze imparts on the stone, but we don't understand this thing called gravity, so we should not include it, even though we observe that heavy objects fall. That is not science, and neither is CO2 alarmism. Data is supposed to trump Theory. By using theory (the proclaimed insufficiency of solar-magnetic theory) as an excuse to ignore the evidence (where solar activity is known to somehow warm the climate), warming alarmism perverts the scientific method. That makes it religion in the constitutionally barred sense. Not only is this belief system embraced by millions of people WITHOUT EVIDENCE, but it is embraced in the face of overwhelming contrary evidence. Alarmism about CO2 is not just a religion, it is a demonstrably irrational religion, equivilant to believing that rocks will waft away on the breeze. EPA is supposed to make science-based rulings. If you regulate CO2 based on demonstrably anti-scientific ideology, it will be an unconstitutional state establishment of religion. The current cooling trend fits the solar-magnetic theory, not the CO2 theory All of the major temperature records show that the earth's average temperature has been falling for ten years now (with the 21 year smoothed temperature falling for five). In this period, CO2 has continued to increase, while the sun has descended into a prolonged solar minimum. This turn in the sun (breaking the coincidental correlation between solar activity and CO2 that existed for the previous 70 years), is rapidly unmasking the hoax of anthropogenic global warming. It should not take a rare astrological event to unmask an obvious statistical and scientific fraud. Will the EPA now destroy its reputation by codifying the "green" religion at the very moment when the heavens themselves are exposing its dishonesty? If you choose this course, you will be destroying the nation's economy and the lives of your countrymen in the service of your own anti-scientific religious beliefs, in violation of your oath of office.

Sincerely,

On the subject of state established religion This is also the subject of our blogbursts, trying to stop the Flight 93 Memorial Project from stamping a giant Mecca-oriented crescent on the graves our murdered heroes: A crescent that Muslims face into to face Mecca is called a mihrab, and is the central feature around which every mosque is built. (Some mihrabs are pointed arch shape, but the archetypical mihrab is crescent shaped.) The Crescent of Embrace memorial is actually a terrorist memorial mosque, replete with a full complement of typical mosque features, like the minaret-like Tower of Voices that has an Islamic shaped crescent on top and turns out to be a year-round accurate Islamic prayer-time sundial. Outcry over the apparent Islamic symbolism forced the Park Service to make changes. They promised that they would remove the Islamic symbol shapes, but they never did. They call it a broken circle now, but the circle is broken in the exact same places as before. The unbroken part of the circle, what symbolically remains standing in the wake of 9/11, is still a giant Islamic-shaped crescent, still pointing to Mecca. To join our blogbursts, just send your blog's url.

False AP report: Obama did NOT say that Iran must

http://www.errortheory.blogspot.com/
Obama's comments were mushy, yes, but at least he said the most important thing, according to AP:

He said it's up to Iran to determine its own leaders but that the country must respect voters' choice.

Why then have reputable people continued to pass harsh judgment? And why would AP paraphrase what would have been Obama’s key statement? Turns out Obama said no such thing. What he actually said is that the VOICES of the Iranian people should be heard and respected, not their votes:

And particularly to the youth of Iran, I want them to know that we in the United States do not want to make any decisions for the Iranians, but we do believe that the Iranian people and their voices should be heard and respected.

This is consistent with the rest of Obama's remarks. He never said a word about respecting votes. Obama did mention "the democratic process," but far from saying anything about this process having to meet any standards of integrity, he instead implied strongly that he will accept whatever result the "process" followed by the Mullahs produces:

I want to start off by being very clear that it is up to Iranians to make decisions about who Iran’s leaders will be; that we respect Iranian sovereignty and want to avoid the United States being the issue inside of Iran, which sometimes the United States can be a handy political football...

Democracy means that Iranian sovereignty lies with the Iranian people and that a regime that rigs an election is NOT sovereign. Yet Obama is explicit that he will continue to treat the mullahs as the Iranian sovereign no matter how they judge the election. He even goes so far as to suggest that the only reason he is bothering to comment on the competing claim to sovereignty at all is because it would be unseemly for him not to:

We will continue to pursue a tough, direct dialogue between our two countries, and we’ll see where it takes us. But even as we do so, I think it would be wrong for me to be silent about what we’ve seen on the television over the last few days.

The only operative concerns that he mentions are for: "free speech, the ability of people to peacefully dissent." When he talks about the "democratic process" going forward, all he urges is that the process be peaceful and that dissent be allowed. He says nothing about the process being honest:

...there appears to be a sense on the part of people who were so hopeful and so engaged and so committed to democracy who now feel betrayed. And I think it’s important that, moving forward, whatever investigations take place are done in a way that is not resulting in bloodshed and is not resulting in people being stifled in expressing their views.

It is no accident that Obama ended with the statement that AP paraphrased so egregiously (equating his call for bloodless suppression with a demand for legitimate elections). This was his theme throughout. He views the honesty of Iran's democratic process as something to be judged by the mullahs, who he clearly accepts to be the sovereign power, regardless of the merits of competing claims. AP covers its tracks, just like they did with the Flight 93 memorial AP's fraudulent report about Obama demanding respect for voters' choice was the primary print report on Obama's comments. Now that it has already misled millions of people, AP has covered its tracks by filing an update that overwrites the errant statement. This is what AP does when it gets caught putting out misinformation. To avoid issuing a correction, they flush the misleading story down the memory hole by using the same url for a completely different story. (Google only finds AP's original article still posted at Fox News.) AP did the same thing last year after it was taken to task for failing to check the most basic facts in a story about the controversy over possible Islamic symbolism in the Flight 93 memorial. Ramesh Santanam reported a number of conflicting factual assertions, like the 44 blocks:

Opponents also claim there is a plan to have 44 glass blocks, for the 40 victims and four hijackers, in the design. "That's an absolute, unequivocal fabrication that is being portrayed as fact," said Edward Felt's brother, Gordon Felt, president of Families of Flight 93. "It's misleading and helps drive the conspiracy theory."

When it was pointed out that Santanam could have found the four extra blocks just by opening up the design drawings and counting, AP quickly filed a completely different story (about fundraising for the memorial), under the same url. It's not that there is anything inherently wrong with AP using subject feeds that automatically update with their latest offering. It is that AP is systematically using this system to dodge corrections. This is actually their official policy:

For corrections on live, online stories, we overwrite the previous version. We send separate corrective stories online as warranted.

Except AP virtually never issue corrective stories, for the simple reason that AP has no established correction procedure. They just do the overwrite thing and say "too bad." Well this time the overwrite thing is not good enough. Demand a corrective story about AP's false paraphrase of Obama's words Associated Press obviously understands the importance of Obama saying that Iran must respect voters' choice or they wouldn't have bothered to pretend that he said it when he didn't. They don't just fail to mention Obama's glaring omission on this crucial point, but actually tell the public via false paraphrase that he did say what he glaringly omitted. This cannot stand. Faced with our new president's key statement on a historic crisis, AP reports a photo negative of what Obama actually said. There may be no established procedure for AP corrections, but anyone can still send a pre-written email to AP CEO Tom Curley, Chairman Burl Osborne, Editor Kathleen Carroll, the reporters who worked on the story (the egregious Jennifer Loven, along with Anne Gearan and Robert Burns), plus a smattering of other AP editors and bureaucrats. Who knows. There may even be a limit to how disingenuous some of these people are willing to be. To join our blogbursts, just send your blog's url.

Netanyahu's Security Speech

I received an unofficial transcript of P.M. Netanyahu's speech from the Israel Project. At the time of this writing, it was not yet available on their web site. Haaretz has posted a transcript. I have reproduced the TIP version below, in block quote format and Ariel font. My comments are interspersed with full margins in Times font.

This is an unofficial transcript of Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech of June 14, 2009 at Bar Ilan Univerasity, produced by The Israel Project

Honored guests, citizens of Israel.

Peace was always the desire of our people. Our prophets had a vision of peace, we greet each other with peace, our prayers end with the word peace. This evening we are in the center named for two leaders who were groundbreakers for peace -Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat - and we share their vision.

Two and a half months ago, I was sworn in at the Knesset as the Prime Minister of Israel. I promised that I would establish a unity government, and did so. I believed, and still believe, that we need unity now more than ever before.

We are currently facing three tremendous challenges: The Iranian threat, the financial crisis, and the promotion of peace.

The Iranian threat still is before us in full force, as it became quite clear yesterday. The greatest danger to Israel, to the Middle East, and to all of humanity, is the encounter between extremist Islam and nuclear weapons.

extremist Islam

The adjective implies the existence of a "moderate" Islam and an "extremist" deviation from the standard. In reality, genocidal, terrorist Jihad is the standard, not a deviation. Doubters & dissenters are directed to read Surah Al-Anfal & Surah At-Taubah. and follow up with Sahih Bukhari : Jihad. for a few retards, that may be insufficient proof. For them, I prescribe extra homework: Reliance of the Traveller, Book O, Chapter 9 and my blog post: ROPMA.

Islam is bound by a demonic mandate to conquer & subjugate the entire world. Nuclear weapons will increase their chances of success. We have good reason to doubt that Iran will hesitate to use them. Tons of prevention are worth megatons of cure.

I discussed this with President Obama on my visit to Washington, and will be discussing it next week on my visit with European leaders. I have been working tirelessly for many years to form an international front against Iran arming itself with nuclear armaments.

With the world financial crisis, we acted immediately to bring about stability to the Israeli economy. We passed a two-year budget in the government and will pass it through the Knesset very soon.

The second challenge, rather, the third, so very important challenge, facing us today, is promoting peace. I discussed this also with President Obama. I strongly support the idea of regional peace that he is advancing. I share the President of the USA’s desire to bring about a new era of reconciliation in our region.

reconciliation

Islam has never been conciliated; it can not be reconciled! Islam demands a total monopoly on faith & practice on a global scale. It can never be reconciled to Jewish irredentism because territory conquered by Muslims must remain in Islamic control forever, without exception.

I discussed this in my meetings with President Mubarak in Egypt and with King Abdullah in Jordan to obtain the assistance of these leaders in the effort to expand the circle of peace in our region.

I appeal tonight to the leaders of the Arab countries and say: Let us meet. Let us talk about peace. Let us make peace. I am willing to meet at any time, at any place, in Damascus, in Riyadh, in Beirut, and in Jerusalem as well. (Applause)

talk about peace

You can talk about peace until you are blue in the face, but you can't make peace. Only the aggressors can make peace, and they won't because their demon demands that they exterminate you. Moe set murdering the last Jew as a prerequisite for Judgment Day, when the Muslims will obtain their long awaited admission to the lush gardens of Paradise. This fatal fact is recorded among the compiled oral traditions in Sahih Muslim 41.6985.

I call upon the leaders of the Arab countries to join together with the Palestinians and with us to promote economic peace. Economic peace is not a substitute for peace, but it is a very important component in achieving it. Together we can advance projects that can overcome the problems facing our region. For example, water desalinization. And we can utilize the advantages of our region, such as maximizing the use of solar energy, or utilizing its geographical advantages to lay pipelines, pipelines to Africa and Europe

Economic peace

Jihad is fought with wealth as well as with the sword. Netanyahu knows that peace is impossible in the short term. He apparently hopes that increased economic interdependence would serve as a disincentive to Jihad.

To many left wingers and ignoramuses, Jihad is a function of poverty. In fact, Jihad is doctrine driven, not grievance driven. The economic angle in Jihad is to be found in the foundation of the system, which is the spoils mentioned in 8:1, 8:41, 33:27 & 48:15-21.

Together we can realize the initiatives that I see in the Persian Gulf, which amaze the entire world, and also amaze me. I call upon the talented entrepreneurs of the Arab world, to come and invest here, to assist the Palestinians and us, to give the economy a jump-start. Together we can develop industrial zones, we can create thousands of jobs, and foster tourism that will draw millions, people who want to walk in the footsteps of history, in Nazareth and Bethlehem, in the heights of Jericho and on the walls of Jerusalem, on the shore of the Sea of Galilee, and at the baptismal site of the Jordan. There is a huge potential for the development of tourism potential here. If you only agree to work together.

If you only

"If only there weren't any Jews here, we could have the profits all to ourselves." That is what the Arabs hear in this discussion. The beautiful dream of shared prosperity is exactly that, a dream which will never be realized.

I appeal to you, our Palestinian neighbors, and to the leadership of the Palestinian Authority. Let us begin peace negotiations immediately without prior conditions. Israel is committed to international agreements, and expects all sides to fulfill their obligations.

peace negotiations

Have negotiations with Muslims ever generated anything but escalating violence? Is not insanity exemplified by doing the same thing repeatedly, expecting different results? There is and will always be one essential pre-condition: you must surrender and submit to Islam before negotiations can begin.

I say to the Palestinians: We want to live with you in peace, quiet, and good neighborly relations. We want our children and your children to ‘know war no more.’

We want

Such sweet sentiment; you want to live in peace with Falestinians. Unfortunately your love is and will remain unrequited. They desire to defeat and destroy you, it is their demonic mission which they can not abandon upon pain of Hellfire.

We do not want parents and wives, sons and daughters, brothers and sisters, to know the sorrow of bereavement. We want our children to dream of a better future for humankind. We want us and our neighbors to devote our efforts to ‘plowshares and pruning hooks’ and not to ‘swords and spears…’ I know the terror of war, I participated in battles, I lost good friends who fell [in battle], I lost a brother. I saw the pain of bereaved families from up close – very many times. I do not want war. No one in Israel wants war. (Applause)

I do not want war

More sweet sentiments, which, to the ears of the Muslims, is the cry of injured prey calling them to renew their attack. Predators keenly seek such signs of weakness, which serve as their invitation to attack. War is imposed upon you, not your choice. Your choice is to be victorious or defeated. Victory is the total elimination of Islam; anything less is defeat.

Let us join hands and work together in peace, together with our neighbors. There is no limit to the flourishing growth that we can achieve for both peoples - in the economy, in agriculture, in commerce, tourism, education - but, above all, in the ability to give our younger generation hope to live in a place that’s good to live in, a life of creative work, a peaceful life with much of interest, with opportunity and hope.

hope to live

You hope to live, they hope to be 'martyred' and thereby to earn admission into gardens flowing with rivers of wine, honey and milk, with trees full of low hanging fruit, houris who grow new hymens every day and little boys who never bleed. Islam does not share your hierarchy of needs. To Islam, this world is a brief preface to an eternity in gardens of plenty & unending carnal pleasure. They sold this life for the hereafter. Read 9:111 and get a clue!

Friends, with the advantages of peace so clear, so obvious, we must ask ourselves why is peace still so far from us, even though our hands are extended for peace? Why has the conflict going on for over 60 years? To bring an end to it, there must be a sincere, genuine answer to the question: what is the root of the conflict? In his speech at the Zionist Congress in Basel, in speaking of his grand vision of a Jewish homeland for the Jewish People, Theodor Herzl, the visionary of the State of Israel, said: This is so big, we must talk about it only in the simplest words possible.

I now am asking that when we speak of the huge challenge of peace, we must use the simplest words possible, using person to person terms. Even with our eyes on the horizon, we must have our feet on the ground, firmly rooted in truth. The simple truth is that the root of the conflict has been – and remains - the refusal to recognize the right of the Jewish People to its own state in its historical homeland.

root of the conflict

Moe created Islam for the purpose of maintaining a constant state of war from which he would obtain wealth, income and sex slaves. He adopted stories from Hebrew pseudagraphia, expecting that Jews would accept him as a prophet and adopt his new cult. Instead they recognized him as a plagiarist & profiteer and rejected Islam. That is the foundation of Islam's hatred of Jews. You can't buy peace, you can rent it briefly. You can't buy their love; you can usher them into Hell. You will not obtain peace by any means short of ushering them into Hell.

In 1947 when the United Nations proposed the Partition Plan for a Jewish state and an Arab state, the entire Arab world rejected the proposal, while the Jewish community accepted it with great rejoicing and dancing. The Arabs refused any Jewish state whatsoever, with any borders whatsoever.

Arabs refused

That should be a clue to you. Why can't Jews comprehend the fatal facts of Islam? Muslims are commanded to fight Jews and Christians until we are humiliated, subjugated & extorted. They can't get into Paradise until they complete your genocide. Allah promised them victory; that he would give them your land to keep forever. He promised them that they would defeat armies twice as numerous as their own. The reconstituted state of Israel is living proof of the fact that Allah is an impotent idol. No Muslim can tolerate that blasphemy! You need a clue; obtain one by downloading EgregiousAyat.chm and reading the chapters on triumphalism & supremacism.

Whoever thinks that the continued hostility to Israel is a result of our forces in Judea, Samaria and Gaza is confusing cause and effect. The attacks on us began in the 1920s, became an overall attack in 1948 when the state was declared, continued in the 1950s with the fedaayyin attacks, and reached their climax in 1967 on the eve of the Six-Day War, with the attempt to strangle Israel. All this happened nearly 50 years before a single Israeli soldier went into Judea and Samaria.

confusing cause and effect.

That paragraph is a brilliant restatement of the obvious. Unfortunately, few people will comprehend it and take due notice.

To our joy, Egypt and Jordan left this circle of hostility. They signed peace agreements with us which ended their hostility to Israel. It brought about peace.

To our deep regret, this is not happening with the Palestinians. The closer we get to a peace agreement with them, the more they are distancing themselves from peace. They raise new demands. They are not showing us that they want to end the conflict.

they want to end the conflict

Sure they do! They reaffirm that fact every time they chant "from the river to the sea". They want victory, not peace! Islam makes peace by conquering the world. Get a clue!!

A great many people are telling us that withdrawal is the key to peace with the Palestinians. But the fact is that all our withdrawals were met by huge waves of suicide bombers.


We tried withdrawal by agreement, withdrawal without an agreement, we tried partial withdrawal and full withdrawal. In 2000, and once again last year, the government of Israel, based on good will, tried a nearly complete withdrawal, in exchange for the end of the conflict, and were twice refused.

We withdrew from the Gaza Strip to the last centimeter, we uprooted dozens of settlements and turned thousands of Israelis out of their homes. In exchange, what we received were missiles raining down on our cities, our towns and our children. The argument that withdrawal would bring peace closer did not stand up to the test of reality.

withdrawal is the key to peace

Blessed right it is! Not yours, theirs!! Israel can not make peace by withdrawing and the aggressors will never withdraw. If they would go home and stay there, without firing rockets and artillery, there would be peace. If you truly want peace, make them withdraw--all the way home--to Hell.

With Hamas in the south and Hizbullah in the north, they keep on saying that they want to ‘liberate’ Ashkelon in the south and Haifa and Tiberias.

Even the moderates among the Palestinians are not ready to say the most simplest things: The State of Israel is the national homeland of the Jewish People and will remain so. (Applause)

Friends, in order to achieve peace, we need courage and integrity on the part of the leaders of both sides. I am speaking today with courage and honesty. We need courage and sincerity not only on the Israeli side: we need the Palestinian leadership to rise and say, simply “We have had enough of this conflict. We recognize the right of the Jewish People to a state its own in this Land. We will live side by side in true peace.” I am looking forward to this moment.

We will live side by side in true peace

Don't hold your breath waiting, its never going to happen. The conflict continues until Judgment Day, when, according to their demonic prophecy, Jesus will return and lead them in killing the remaining Jews. Doubters & dissenters need to read and comprehend Sunan Abu Dawud 14.2526 & Eternal Humiliation placed on the Jews.

We want them to say the simplest things, to our people and to their people. This will then open the door to solving other problems, no matter how difficult. The fundamental condition for ending the conflict is the public, binding and sincere Palestinian recognition of Israel as the national homeland of the Jewish People. (Applause)

fundamental condition

Victory is the fundamental condition; there is no other path to peace, it leads through the Muslim cometary. Allah has cursed Muslims should they ever abandon Jihad as a way of life. Doubters & dissenters should read Sunan Abu Dawud 23.3455 until they fully comprehend its meaning: Jihad is their religion!

For this to have practical meaning, we need a clear agreement to solve the Palestinian refugee problem outside of the borders of the State of Israel. For it is clear to all that the demand to settle the Palestinian refugees inside of Israel, contradicts the continued existence of the State of Israel as the state of the Jewish People. We must solve the problem of the Arab refugees. And I believe that it is possible to solve it. Because we have proven that we ourselves solved a similar problem. Tiny Israel took in the hundreds of thousands of Jewish refugees from Arab countries who were uprooted from their homes.

Therefore, justice and logic dictates that the problem of the Palestinian refugees must be solved outside the borders of the State of Israel. There is broad national agreement on this. (Applause)

I believe that with good will and international investment of we can solve this humanitarian problem once and for all.

with good will

Israeli good will ain't sufficient; Muslim good will does not exist, its space is filled with Muslim hatred. The problem is insoluble for the duration of Islam's existence.

Friends, up to now, I have been talking about the need for the Palestinians to ecognize our rights. Now I will talk about the need for us to recognize their rights.

The connection of the Jewish People to the Land has been in existence for more than 3,500 years. Judea and Samaria, the places where our forefathers Abraham, Isaac and Jacob walked, our forefathers David, Solomon, Isaiah and Jeremiah – this is not a foreign land, this is the Land of our Forefathers. (Applause)

The right of the Jewish People to a state in the Land of Israel does not arise from the series of disasters that befell the Jewish People over 2,000 years -- persecutions, expulsions, pogroms, blood libels, murders, which reached its climax in the Holocaust, an unprecedented tragedy in the history of nations. There are those who say that without the Holocaust the State would not have been established, but I say that if the State of Israel had been established in time, the Holocaust would not have taken place. (Applause) The tragedies that arose from the Jewish People’s helplessness show very sharply that we need a protective state.

The right to establish our sovereign state here, in the Land of Israel, arises from one simple fact: Eretz Israel is the birthplace of the Jewish People. (Applause)

As the first PM David Ben Gurion in the declaration of the State, the State of Israel was established here in Eretz Israel, where the People of Israel created the Book of Books, and gave it to the world.

But, friends, we must state the whole truth here. The truth is that in the area of our homeland, in the heart of our Jewish Homeland, now lives a large population of Palestinians. We do not want to rule over them. We do not want to run their lives. We do not want to force our flag and our culture on them. In my vision of peace, there are two free peoples living side by side in this small land, with good neighborly relations and mutual respect, each with its flag, anthem and government, with neither one threatening its neighbor’s security and existence.

In my vision of peace

Ain't Bashir an Optometrist? Perhaps he can help you see straight. The Falestinian state already exists, on 75% of Eretz Israel, its called Jordan. They neither need nor deserve another state anywhere.

These two facts – our link to the Land of Israel, and the Palestinian population who live here, have created deep disagreements within Israeli society. But the truth is that we have much more unity than disagreement.

I came here tonight to talk about the agreement and security that are broad consensus within Israeli society. This is what guides our policy. This policy must take into account the international situation. We have to recognize international agreements but also principles important to the State of Israel. I spoke tonight about the first principle - recognition. Palestinians must truly recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people. The second principle is demilitarization. Any area in Palestinian hands has to be demilitarization, with solid security measures. Without this condition, there is a real fear that there will be an armed Palestinian state which will become a terrorist base against Israel, as happened in Gaza. We do not want missiles on Petah Tikva, or Grads on the Ben-Gurion international airport. We want peace. (Applause)

And, to ensure peace we don’t want them to bring in missiles or rockets or have an army, or control of airspace, or make treaties with countries like Iran, or Hizbullah. There is broad agreement on this in Israel. We cannot be expected to agree to a Palestinian state without ensuring that it is demilitarized. This is crucial to the existence of Israel – we must provide for our security needs.

This is why we are now asking our friends in the international community, headed by the USA, for what is necessary for our security, that in any peace agreement, the Palestinian area must be demilitarized. No army, no control of air space. Real effective measures to prevent arms coming in, not what’s going on now in Gaza. The Palestinians cannot make military treaties.

demilitarized

Does the PA have an army? Does it make military treaties? Does it have foreign military bases on its territory? Oh, yeah, how big an arsenal did Hamas have before you got pissed off last winter? And exactly how will that change if you officially make them a nation state? Will statehood collapse the smuggling tunnels? Nation states have sovereignty, you can't stop them from having armies & negotiating treaties. The essential conditions required for Israel's security are impossibilities.

Without this, sooner or later, we will have another Hamastan. We can’t agree to this. Israel must govern its own fate and security. I told President Obama in Washington, if we get a guarantee of demilitarization, and if the Palestinians recognize Israel as the Jewish state, we are ready to agree to a real peace agreement, a demilitarized Palestinian state side by side with the Jewish state. (Applause)

Whenever we discuss a permanent arrangement, Israel needs defensible borders with Jerusalem remaining the united capital of Israel. (Applause)

The territorial issues will be discussed in a permanent agreement. Till then we have no intention to build new settlements or set aside land for new settlements. But there is a need to have people live normal lives and let mothers and fathers raise their children like everyone in the world. The settlers are not enemies of peace. They are our brothers and sisters. (Applause)

Friends, unity among us is, to my view, vital, and unity will help with reconciliation with our neighbors. Reconciliation must begin now. A strong Palestinian government will strengthen peace. If they truly want peace, and educate their children for peace and stop incitement, we for our part will make every effort, allow them freedom of movement and accessibility, making their lives easier and this will help bring peace.

If they truly want peace

They do not want peace, they want policide & genocide. They also want martyrdom, the one thing you can give them.

stop incitement

Wasn't that part of the Oslo Accords? But they never stopped teaching their brats to hate Jews. They never stopped incitement in the Mosques, or state run media, and they never will. They name events and institutions in honor of 'martyrs' who died trying to kill Jews. Get a clue!

But above all, they must decide: the Palestinians must decide between path of peace and path of Hamas. They must overcome Hamas. Israel will not sit down at conference table with terrorist who seek to destroy it. (Applause)

overcome Hamas

Hamas and Islam are synonymous. Read their Charter. Where does it get its guidance? What does it consist of? What is its way of life? What is its goal? Who is its model? What is its constitution? What is its path? What is its most sublime belief? If you can't answer those questions, or your answers do not match the clear statements of the charter, then you are an ignorant fool. If you won't negotiate with terrorists who seek to destroy Israel, then you won't negotiate with Muslims. Get a clue!!!

Hamas are not willing to even let the Red Cross visit our abducted soldier Gilad Shalit who has been in captivity three years, cut off from his family and his country. We want to bring him back whole and well.

With help of the international community, there is no reason why we can’t have peace. With help of USA, we can do we can do the unbelievable. In 61 years, with constant threats to our existence we have achieved so much. Our microchips power the worlds computers unbelievable, we have found cures for incurable diseases. Israeli drip irrigation waters barren lands throughout the world. Israeli researchers are making worldwide breakthroughs. If our neighbors only work for peace, we can achieve peace. (Applause)

why we can’t have peace

Because Islam exists you can never have peace! Islam is permanent war. Get a clue!

I call upon Arab leaders and Palestinian leaders: Let’s go in the path of Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat, Yitzhak Rabin and King Hussein. Let’s go in the path of Prophet Isaiah, who spoke thousands of years ago, they shall beat their swords into plowshares and know war no more.

Let us know war no more. Let us know peace.

When I heard radio news reports about the speech, I thought that Netanyahu had caved in and surrendered to allow Obama to sell Israel down the river. After reading the transcript, it is obvious that Netanyahu has clearly stated minimal conditions which Islam will never meet. The Muslims won't be satisfied, nor will Obama. Netanyahu will be subjected to extreme heat and pressure. I pray that he will find the strength to tell his enemies to go to Hell.

Demand Obama's Resignation!

Time to Demand Obama's Resignation so says Alan Caruba, and I agree with him. Mr. Caruba cites the constitutional eligibility issue, appointment of czars who operate in the dark without Congressional approval or oversight, wasteful & ineffective stimulus spending and public speeches which distort history and falsify facts as good cause for demanding President Obama's resignation.

The problem is that if Obama resigns, Vice President Joe Biden will be elevated to the office of President and enabled to nominate another LibTard to replace him as V.P. That transition would be the equivalent of replacing a rabid fox with a rabid raccoon. The only benefit would be slightly reduced perceived authenticity & authority. Biden might have slightly less ability to ram his Socialist agenda through Congress.