Friday, March 30, 2012

A lesson we must never forget


It doesn't take much imagination to extrapolate this message to the rest of Europe...and possibly to the rest of the world. 

The Jews are NOT promoting brain washing children in military training camps, teaching them how to blow themselves up and cause maximum deaths of Jews and other non Muslims. The Jews don't hijack planes, nor kill athletes at the Olympics, or blow themselves up in German restaurants. There is NOT one single Jew who has destroyed a church. There is NOT a single Jew who protests by killing people.

The Jews don't traffic slaves, nor have leaders calling for Jihad and death to all the Infidels.

Perhaps the world's Muslims should consider investing more in standard education and less in blaming the Jews for all their problems.

Muslims must ask 'what can they do for humankind' before they demand that humankind respects them.

Regardless of your feelings about the crisis between Israel, the so-called Palestinians, and their Arab neighbors, the following two sentences really say it all:

"If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more violence. If the Jews put down their weapons today, there would be no more Israel ." 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu

General Eisenhower warned us it is a matter of history that when the Supreme Commander of the Allied Forces, General Dwight Eisenhower, found the victims of the death camps he ordered all possible photographs to be taken, and for the German people from surrounding villages to be ushered through the camps and even made to bury the dead.

He did this because he said in words to this effect:

'Get it all on record now - get the films - get the witnesses - because somewhere down the road of history some bastard will get up and say that this never happened'

Recently, the UK debated whether to remove The Holocaust from its school curriculum because it 'offends' the Muslim population which claims it never occurred. It is not removed as yet. However, this is a frightening portent of the fear that is gripping the world and how easily each country is giving into it.

It is now more than 65 years after the Second World War in Europe ended. The war's death toll was 6 million Jews, 20 million Russians, 10 million Christians, and 1,900 Catholic priests who were 'murdered, raped, burned, starved, beaten, experimented on and humiliated' while the German people looked the other way.

Now, more than ever, with Iran, among others, claiming the Holocaust to be 'a myth,' it is imperative to make sure the world never forgets.

How many years will it be before the attack on the World Trade Center 'NEVER HAPPENED' because it offends some Muslim in the United States? 


Re-read this article, remember it always, because it should haunt us all.
 

All European Life Died at Auschwitz
By Sebastian Vilar Rodrigez 
Tue. 15 January 2008

I walked down the street in Barcelona , and suddenly discovered a terrible truth - Europe died in Auschwitz ... We killed six million Jews and replaced them with 20 million Muslims. In Auschwitz we burned a culture, thought, creativity, talent. We destroyed the chosen people, truly chosen, because they produced great and wonderful people who changed the world.

The contribution of this people is felt in all areas of life: science, art, international trade, and above all, as the conscience of the world. These are the people we burned.

And under the pretense of tolerance, and because we wanted to prove to ourselves that we were cured of the disease of racism, we opened our gates to 20 million Muslims, who brought us stupidity and ignorance, religious extremism and lack of tolerance, crime and poverty, due to an unwillingness to work and support their families with pride.

They have blown up our trains and turned our beautiful Spanish cities into the third world, drowning in filth and crime.

Shut up in the apartments they receive free from the government, they plan the murder and destruction of their naive hosts.

And thus, in our misery, we have exchanged culture for fanatical hatred, creative skill for destructive skill, intelligence for backwardness and superstition.

We have exchanged the pursuit of peace of the Jews of Europe and their talent for a better future for their children, their determined clinging to life because life is holy, for those who pursue death, for people consumed by the desire for death for themselves and others, for our children and theirs.

What a terrible mistake was made by miserable Europe .

The Global Islamic population is approximately 1,200,000,000; that is ONE BILLION TWO HUNDRED MILLION or 20% of the world's population. They have received the following NobelPrizes:
 
Literature:
1988 - Najib Mahfooz 

Peace:
1978 - Mohamed Anwar El-Sadat
1990 - Elias James Corey
1994 - Yaser Arafat:
1999 - Ahmed Zewai

Economics:

(zero)

Physics:

(zero)

Medicine:

1960 - Peter Brian Medawar
1998 - Ferid Mourad

TOTAL: 7 (SEVEN)

The Global Jewish population is approximately 14,000,000; that is FOURTEEN MILLION or about 0.02% of the world's population. They have received the following Nobel Prizes:

Literature:
1910 - Paul Heyse
1927 - Henri Bergson
1958 - Boris Pasternak
1966 - Shmuel Yosef Agnon
1966 - Nelly Sachs
1976 - Saul Bellow
1978 - Isaac Bashevis Singer
1981 - Elias Canetti
1987 - Joseph Brodsky
1991 - Nadine Gordimer World

Peace:

1911 - Alfred Fried
1911 - Tobias Michael Carel Asser
1968 - Rene Cassin
1973 - Henry Kissinger
1978 - Menachem Begin
1986 - Elie Wiesel
1994 - Shimon Peres
1994 - Yitzhak Rabin

Physics:
1905 - Adolph Von Baeyer
1906 - Henri Moissan
1907 - Albert Abraham Michelson
1908 - Gabriel Lippmann
1910 - Otto Wallach
1915 - Richard Willstaetter
1918 - Fritz Haber
1921 - Albert Einstein
1922 - Niels Bohr
1925 - James Franck
1925 - Gustav Hertz
1943 - Gustav Stern
1943 - George Charles de Hevesy
1944 - Isidor Issac Rabi
1952 - Felix Bloch
1954 - Max Born
1958 - Igor Tamm
1959 - Emilio Segre
1960 - Donald A. Glaser
1961 - Robert Hofstadter
1961 - Melvin Calvin
1962 - Lev Davidovich Landau
1962 - Max Ferdinand Perutz
1965 - Richard Phillips Feynman
1965 - Julian Schwinger
1969 - Murray Gell-Mann
1971 - Dennis Gabor
1972 - William Howard Stein
1973 - Brian David Josephson
1975 - Benjamin Mottleson
1976 - Burton Richter
1977 - Ilya Prigogine
1978 - Arno Allan Penzias
1978 - Peter L Kapitza
1979 - Stephen Weinberg
1979 - Sheldon Glashow
1979 - Herbert Charles Brown
1980 - Paul Berg
1980 - Walter Gilbert
1981 - Roald Hoffmann
1982 - Aaron Klug
1985 - Albert A. Hauptman
1985 - Jerome Karle
1986 - Dudley R. Herschbach
1988 - Robert Huber
1988 - Leon Lederman
1988 - Melvin Schwartz
1988 - Jack Steinberger
1989 - Sidney Altman
1990 - Jerome Friedman
1992 - Rudolph Marcus
1995 - Martin Perl
2000 - Alan J. Heeger

Economics:
1970 - Paul Anthony Samuelson
1971 - Simon Kuznets
1972 - Kenneth Joseph Arrow
1975 - Leonid Kantorovich
1976 - Milton Friedman
1978 - Herbert A. Simon
1980 - Lawrence Robert Klein
1985 - Franco Modigliani
1987 - Robert M. Solow
1990 - Harry Markowitz
1990 - Merton Miller
1992 - Gary Becker
1993 - Robert Fogel

Medicine:
1908 - Elie Metchnikoff
1908 - Paul Erlich
1914 - Robert Barany
1922 - Otto Meyerhof
1930 - Karl Landsteiner
1931 - Otto Warburg
1936 - Otto Loewi
1944 - Joseph Erlanger
1944 - Herbert Spencer Gasser
1945 - Ernst Boris Chain
1946 - Hermann Joseph Muller
1950 - Tadeus Reichstein
1952 - Selman Abraham Waksman
1953 - Hans Krebs
1953 - Fritz Albert Lipmann
1958 - Joshua Lederberg
1959 - Arthur Kornberg
1964 - Konrad Bloch
1965 - Francois Jacob
1965 - Andre Lwoff
1967 - George Wald
1968 - Marshall W. Nirenberg
1969 - Salvador Luria
1970 - Julius Axelrod
1970 - Sir Bernard Katz
1972 - Gerald Maurice Edelman
1975 - Howard Martin Temin
1976 - Baruch S. Blumberg
1977 - Roselyn Sussman Yalow
1978 - Daniel Nathans
1980 - Baruj Benacerraf
1984 - Cesar Milstein
1985 - Michael Stuart Brown
1985 - Joseph L. Goldstein
1986 - Stanley Cohen [& Rita Levi-Montalcini]
1988 - Gertrude Elion
1989 - Harold Varmus
1991 - Erwin Neher
1991 - Bert Sakmann
1993 - Richard J. Roberts
1993 - Phillip Sharp
1994 - Alfred Gilman
1995 - Edward B. Lewis
1996- Lu RoseIacovino

TOTAL: 129 














 


Op-ed:

“I, Diane Sori, do solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that as long as Barack Hussein Obama is usurping the office of Commander-in-Chief and President of the United States, I will NOT obey the orders of this Usurper nor the orders of his subordinate agencies.

In regards to the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice, as long as they are not in violation thereof nor in violation of the Constitution of the United States, I will bear true faith and allegiance without mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office upon which I am commissioned.”

Signed by Diane Sori, this 30th day of March, in the year of our Lord, 2012, Anno Domini

Amal Ahmed Abdel-Fatah Al Sada, Osama Bin Laden Widow, Reveals New Details On Al Qaeda Leader's Life On The Run

By MUNIR AHMED 03/30/12 10:28 AM ET AP
Osama Bin Laden 
 
ISLAMABAD -- Osama bin Laden lived in five safe houses while on the run in Pakistan and fathered four children – two of them born in government hospitals, his youngest widow has told investigators.

The details of bin Laden's life as a fugitive in Pakistan are contained in the interrogation report of Amal Ahmed Abdel-Fatah al-Sada, bin Laden's 30-year-old Yemeni widow.

They appear to raise fresh questions over how bin Laden was able to remain undetected for so long in Pakistan after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, despite being the subject of a massive international manhunt.

Details from the report were first published by the Pakistani newspaper Dawn.

The Associated Press obtained a copy on Friday.

Al-Sada is currently in Pakistani custody, along with bin Laden's two other wives and several children. They were arrested after the U.S raid that killed bin Laden in May in his final hideout in the Pakistani army town of Abbottabad. The U.S. Navy SEALs shot her in the leg during the operation.

Mohammed Amir Khalil, a lawyer for the three widows, said the women would be formally charged for illegally staying in Pakistan on April 2. That charge carries a maximum five-year prison sentence.

Since the raid that killed bin Laden, it has been known that he lived mostly in Pakistan since 2002.

Al-Sada's account says she flew to Pakistan in 2000 and traveled to Afghanistan where she married bin Laden before the Sept. 11 attacks.

After that, the family "scattered" and she traveled to Karachi in Pakistan. She later met up with bin Laden in Peshawar and then moved to the Swat Valley, where they lived in two houses. They moved one more time before settling in Abbottabad in 2005.

According to the report, al-Sada said that two of her children were born in government hospitals, but that she stayed only "two or three hours" in the clinics on both occasions. The charge sheet against the three women says that they gave officials fake identities.

During the manhunt for bin Laden, most U.S. and Pakistani officials said that bin Laden was likely living somewhere along the remote Afghanistan-Pakistan border, possibly in a cave.

The fact he was living in populated parts of Pakistan raised suspicions elements in the Pakistani security forces may have been hiding him. U.S. officials have said they have found no evidence this was the case.


A stroll around the 20-foot-tall, barbed wire led CNN's Nic Robertson to discover a crop of marijuana plants just yards from the home. But whether or not bin Laden and his family were growing the weed for recreational purposes remains a mystery, and it has long been speculated that the Al Qaeda leader suffered from kidney failure, which would allow him to get a prescription for medical marijuana in many U.S. states.

Paul Ryan endorses Mitt Romney

By Stephanie Condon / CBS News
Paul Ryan, budget (Credit: AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
 

House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan on Friday endorsed Mitt Romney for president, making him the latest high-profile Republican to get behind the frontrunner for the GOP nomination.

"I am convinced that Mitt Romney has the skills, the tenacity, principles, the courage and integrity to do what it takes to get America on track," Ryan said on Fox News. However, the congressman added there was more motivating his endorsement.

"I think this primary has been productive, I think it's been constructive, up 'til now," he said. But "I think we're entering a phase where it's counterproductive if it drags on much longer. We need to coalesce around Mitt Romney and focus on the task, which is defeating Barack Obama."

The Wisconsin lawmaker's endorsement comes just ahead of his state's primary on Tuesday. The latest poll out of Wisconsin, from NBC/ Marist, shows Romney with a solid, seven-point lead over his rivals. Romney takes 40 percent while Rick Santorum wins 33 percent support, Ron Paul wins 11 percent and Newt Gingrich takes 8 percent.

Romney has already accumulated 554 delegates, according to CBS News estimates, giving him a seemingly unsurpassable lead in the race to the 1,144 delegates needed to win the Republican presidential nomination outright. Santorum has only 241 delegates, Gingrich has 128 and Paul has 42.

In spite of that lead, Romney's GOP rivals don't appear ready to exit the race. As the contest drags on, a number of Republicans are saying publicly it's time for the party to get behind Romney. Florida Sen. Marco Rubio and former President George H.W. Bush also endorsed Romney this week.

When asked whether he's talked with Romney about serving as vice president should Romney win the nomination, Ryan said on Fox, "We've never discussed that at all" and insisted "my focus has been on the budget."

The Republican-led House on Thursday passed the proposed 2013 budget drafted by Ryan; the budget has no chance of becoming law but serves as a marker for the Republican agenda. It also makes Republicans vulnerable to attacks from Democrats who say Ryan's plan would dismantle Medicare and lead seniors "to the poorhouse."
Parents of murdered British students criticize Barack Obama

The parents of two British students murdered in Florida have criticized President Barack Obama for his lack of compassion over their sons' deaths.

Shawn Tyson

His failure to respond to three letters sent to the White House was because there was no "political value" and not worthy of a few minutes of his time.

They spoke out as teenager Shawn Tyson began a life sentence after being found guilty of the murder of James Cooper and James Kouzaris last April.

The 17 year old, who shot the men as they begged for their lives, will die in prison.

His conviction of first degree murder carries an mandatory life sentence without the chance of parole.

The powerfully built teen even looked bored as emotional DVD presentations about the dead men prepared by their grieving parents were shown in court.
Tyson, who has the word 'Savage' tattooed across his chest didn't show a flicker of emotion, slumping in his seat as he was forced to watch a montage of photos showing the victims from early childhood to young men.


Two close friends of the dead men who had attended the eight day trial in Sarasota, Florida. had also delivered highly emotional impact statements to the court prior to the sentencing.

Paul Davies and Joe Hallett spoke of the "living hell" they and others who knew the men had suffered since the murders.

During the eight day trial they had been shown graphic crime scene and autopsy photos shown in court.
Later speaking after Tyson was jailed Davies and Hallett lashed out at Mr Obama saying the deaths of their friends was "not worthy of ten minutes of his time."

Davies said:"We would like to publicly express our dissatisfaction at the lack of any public or private message of support or condolence from any American governing body or indeed, President Obama himself.

"Mr Kouzaris has written to President Obama on three separate occasions and is yet to even receive the courtesy of a reply.

"It would perhaps appear that Mr Obama sees no political value in facilitating such a request or that the lives of two British tourists are not worthy of ten minutes of his time."

The rebuke follows Mr Obama's personal intervention into the shooting in Florida of a young black teenager by a white-Hispanic neighbourhood watch captain.

The death of 17 year old Trayvon Martin has sparked nationwide protests with his supporters claiming he was victim of a racist attack.

Mr Obama entered the controversy last week by saying if he had a son he would have looked like Martin.

The alleged assailant in Martin's death has not been charged with any crime having claimed he was attacked first and used Florida's 'stand your ground' law to shoot in self defense.

The criticism of the US President was made on behalf of the Cooper's parents Stanley and Sandy, from Warwicks, and Peter and Hazel Kouzaris, from Northampton by Davies in a statement read outside the courtroom.

The parents of the two victims did not attend the trial but they had access to the proceedings from a live video feed.

The filmed interview of the Kouzaris's was played to the court while a message from Sandy Cooper was read out by the prosecutor.

The victims close friends delivered an emotional impact statement with Hallett telling Tyson he hoped he would be haunted by his actions.

He told him: "Imagine them being killed. Now try to imagine that they died because someone crept up on them and shot them numerous times for no good reason. Welcome to our world. Every night you go to sleep, every morning you wake up, I want you to think of my friends who you murdered. Their images will be imprinted on your conscience up until your very last breath in life."


Israel says peace crucial to nuke-free Mideast

By Edith M. Lederer Associated Press / March 30, 2012

UNITED NATIONS—Israel's U.N. ambassador indicated Friday his government is unlikely to attend a conference on turning the Middle East into a zone free of all weapons of mass destruction until there is peace throughout the region.

But Ambassador Ron Prosor later clarified that "Israel has not made a decision yet, either yes or no, on whether to participate in the conference."

In May 2010, the 189 nations that are parties to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty called for convening a conference in 2012 on the establishment of a Middle East zone free of nuclear weapons and "all other weapons of mass destruction." The conference is expected to take place later this year in Finland.

"Our position on that is we will be willing to attend something like that when there is comprehensive peace in the region," Prosor told a group of reporters. "Before that, we feel that this is something that is absolutely not relevant."

He said Israel has seen examples of nuclear programs in the region, citing Iraq where the Israeli air force destroyed an unfinished nuclear reactor in 1981, Syria where Israeli warplanes are believed to have destroyed a target in 2007 that foreign experts think was an unfinished nuclear reactor, and Iran's current nuclear program.

Israel is widely believed to have an arsenal of nuclear weapons but has avoided confirming or denying its existence. It is not a party to the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty.

The Arab proposal for a WMD-free zone in the Mideast, aimed at pressuring Israel to give up its undeclared nuclear arsenal, was initially endorsed by the 1995 conference reviewing the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, but never acted on.

Israel has long said a full Arab-Israeli peace must precede any weapons bans in the Mideast. But at the 2010 NPT review conference, the United States, Israel's most important ally, said it welcomed "practical measures" leading toward the goal of a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East.

Britain's Guardian newspaper reported this week that the conference will take place in December.
Prosor was asked, without peace by December, Israel won't attend?

"I'm saying what the Israeli stand is," he replied. "After a comprehensive peace, you will see me and my smiling face attending any conference."

Israel views Iran as an existential threat, citing frequent calls by President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad for Israel's destruction, Iran's support for violent anti-Israel militant groups and its nuclear and long-range missile programs.

Iran insists its nuclear program is purely peaceful and aimed at producing nuclear energy, not weapons. Israel, the U.S., and many European nations believe Iran's goal is to become a nuclear power.

"Iran's nuclear weapons program is moving forward at the velocity of this Eurostar train from London to Paris -- and the international community is like this local train stopping at each local station," Prosor said.

But he said the European Union's recent sanctions and the decision by the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication -- or SWIFT -- to block 30 Iranian banks from its global network, making it difficult for the country to make international money transfers, "have made at least clear to Tehran that there's a certain price tag for continuing" its nuclear program.

Economic action is "much more effective than people think, and hopefully it might change behavior patterns if we continue with it," Prosor said.

TOO IMPORTANT NOT TO POST!


Kelly Barham's Photos

This picture will stun you!


If each person sends this to a minimum of 20 people on their address list, in three days,
all people in The United States of America would have the message.

I believe this is one proposal that really should be passed around.

THIS WILL CURDLE YOUR BLOOD AND CURL YOUR HAIR!!!

The name of the book Obama is reading is called: The Post-American World, and it was written by a fellow Muslim.

"Post" America means the World After America!  Please forward this picture to everyone you know, conservative or liberal., Democrat, or Republican.  Folks we need to be aware of what our president is thinking...or planning,

We must expose Obama's radical ideas and his intent to bring down our beloved America!

Senator Rubio Joins Colleagues In Introducing Legislation To End The Death Tax

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) today joined several of his colleagues in introducing the Death Tax Repeal Permanency Act, legislation to completely end estate taxes and provide relief to Florida family farms and businesses. Under current law, the estate tax is scheduled to revert to 55% with a $1 million exemption next year unless Congress acts. The Death Tax Repeal Permanency Act would end the uncertainty that this unfair job-killing tax is imposing on job creators in Florida.

“I have long supported ending the death tax because it is unfair and bad for economic growth,” said Rubio.

“Floridians are already facing an onslaught of new tax increases from ObamaCare, and they should not be hit with another burdensome tax hike from the Obama Administration in a few short months. Under no circumstances should death be a taxable event, and I look forward to working to enact the Death Tax Repeal Permanency Act to make sure that this is the case.”

“Protecting small business owners from the estate tax is important to keeping Main Street family businesses operating for future generations,” said Bill Herrle, Florida Executive Director of the National Federation of Independent Business. “Many small businesses are family-owned or closely held, and the estate tax can often tax a family right out of business.  We thank Senator Rubio for his leadership on repealing this job-killing tax and his dedication to encouraging Congress to help Florida’s small-business owners.”

“The Associated Builders and Contractors of Florida applaud Senator Rubio for his effort to repeal the Estate Tax, also known as the Death Tax,” said Peter Dyga, President and CEO of the Associated Builders and Contractors Florida East Coast Chapter.  “As the largest commercial construction association in Florida, it is incredibly important to ABC and to many of our small business members that this tax be eliminated. The tremendous burden this tax places on future generations to keep these small business and family run operations afloat is sometimes so great that the company simply cannot afford to continue operations.  At a time when the commercial construction industry continues to suffer with 20 percent unemployment, we need to be supporting our small, family run businesses for the jobs that they create and for their support of this country.  ABC believes in these businesses and we thank Senator Rubio for his actions.”

BOYS IN THE HOODIES

It's all about race now

Pat Buchanan: Zimmerman is being 'crucified' in arena of public opinion

If it had been a white teenager who was shot, and a 28-year-old black guy who shot him, the black guy would have been arrested.

So assert those demanding the arrest of George Zimmerman, who shot and killed Trayvon Martin.
And they may be right.

Yet if Trayvon had been shot dead by a black neighborhood watch volunteer, Jesse Jackson would not have been in a pulpit in Sanford, Fla., howling that he had been “murdered and martyred.”
 
Maxine Waters would not be screaming “hate crime.”

Rep. Hank Johnson would not be raging that Trayvon had been “executed.” And ex-Black Panther Bobby Rush would not have been wearing a hoodie in the well of the House.

Which tells you what this whipped-up hysteria is all about.

It is not about finding the truth about what happened that night in Sanford when Zimmerman followed Trayvon in his SUV, and the two wound up in a fight, with Trayvon dead.

It is about the exacerbation of and the exploitation of racial conflict.

And it is about an irreconcilable conflict of visions about what the real America is in the year 2012.

Zimmerman “profiled” Trayvon, we are told. And perhaps he did.

But why? What did George Zimmerman, self-styled protector of his gated community, see that night from the wheel of his SUV?

He saw a male. And males are 90 percent of prison inmates. He saw a stranger over 6 feet tall. And he saw a black man or youth with a hood over his head.

Why would this raise Zimmerman’s antennae?

Perhaps because black males between 16 and 36, though only 2 to 3 percent of the population, are responsible for a third of all our crimes.

In some cities, 40 percent of all black males are in jail or prison, on probation or parole, or have criminal records. This is not a product of white racism but of prosecutions and convictions of criminal acts.

Had Zimmerman seen a black woman or older man in his neighborhood, he likely would never have tensed up or called in.

For all the abuse he has received, Geraldo Rivera had a point.

Whenever cable TV runs hidden-camera footage of a liquor or convenience store being held up and someone behind the counter being shot, the perp is often a black male wearing a hoodie.

Listening to the heated rhetoric coming from demonstrations around the country, from the Black Caucus and TV talkers – about how America is a terrifying place for young black males to grow up in because of the constant danger from white vigilantes – one wonders what country of the mind these people are living in.

The real America is a country where the black crime rate is seven times as high as the white rate. It is a country where white criminals choose black victims in 3 percent of their crimes, but black criminals choose white victims in 45 percent of their crimes.

Black journalists point to the racism manifest even in progressive cities, where cabs deliberately pass them by to pick up white folks down the block.

That this happens is undeniable. But, again, what is behind it?

As Heather Mac Donald of the Manhattan Institute has written, from January to June 2008 in New York City, 83 percent of all identified gun assailants were black and 15 percent were Hispanics.

Together, blacks and Hispanics accounted for 98 percent of gun assaults.

Translated: If a cabdriver is going to be mugged or murdered in New York City by a fare, 49 times out of 50 his assailant or killer will be black or Hispanic.

Fernando Mateo of the New York State Federation of Taxi Drivers has told his drivers, “Profile your passengers” for your own protection. “The God’s honest truth is that 99 percent of the people that are robbing, stealing, killing these guys are blacks and Hispanics.”

Fernando Mateo is himself black and Hispanic.

To much of America’s black leadership and its media auxiliaries, what happened in Sanford was, as Jesse put it, that an innocent kid was “shot down in cold blood by a vigilante.”

Yet, from police reports, witness statements, and the father and friends of Zimmerman, another picture emerges.

Zimmerman followed Trayvon, confronted him and was punched in the nose, knocked flat on his back and jumped on, getting his head pounded, when he pulled his gun and fired. That Trayvon’s body was found face down, not face up, would tend to support this.

But, to Florida Congresswoman Federica Wilson, “this sweet young boy … was hunted down like a dog, shot on the street, and his killer is still at large.”

Some Sanford police believed Zimmerman; others did not.

But now that it is being investigated by a special prosecutor, the FBI, the Justice Department and a coming grand jury, what is the purpose of this venomous portrayal of George Zimmerman?

As yet convicted of no crime, he is being crucified in the arena of public opinion as a hate-crime monster and murderer.

Is this our idea of justice?

No. But if the purpose here is to turn this into a national black-white face-off, instead of a mutual search for truth and justice, it is succeeding marvelously well.

If The Individual Mandate Is Struck Down By The Court…What Happens?

By Dick Morris on March 30, 2012

The core of Obamacare is obviously the requirement that everyone have health insurance. It is likely, given the nature of Justice Kennedy’s and Roberts’ questioning of the government attorneys defending the mandate, that it will be overturned by the Supreme Court.


But we all must remember that there are other parts of Obamacare which are equally – if not more – horrible but are likely to survive judicial scrutiny.

In Wednesday’s Lunch Alert! video, I discussed one of these – the Medicare Payment Advisory Commission – which sets up the basis for national rationing of senior medical care based on the number of “quality life years” remaining for each person. If the Commission decides the treatment that would save your life is too costly given your age and general health, you’re out of luck. Unfortunately, the Court is not likely to strike this down since it is well within the scope of what the government can do in its administration of Medicare.

So getting repeal through Congress is our only chance.

If you haven’t done so already, please sign a petition to your Senators and Congressman to repeal the Commission.


The House has done so already, but it’s pending in the Senate. (Even if Obama vetoes the repeal, it will send shock waves through the nation if the Senate repeals it. And with so many Senators facing re-election, it just might do so).

Then there’s the biggest cost of Obamacare, the expansion of Medicare to more than 35 million new people. Right now, states can decide who to cover. Texas, for example, covers people up to 25% of the poverty level. Florida covers up to 75%. The Obamacare law requires that every state cover up to 133% — or about $25,000 to $30,000 a year in income depending on their family size. That would probably force taxes way up in every state and might lead to the imposition of an income tax in states like Florida and Texas that don’t have one now.

Congress has an undisputed power to tax and to regulate Medicaid, so the Court won’t throw that one out either.

To stop these two terrible features of Obamacare, we have to get rid of Obama and elect a Republican Senate. The Supreme Court may well do us a favor on the individual mandate, but we’ve got to save ourselves on the rest.

On Wednesday night, O’Reilly asked me what the impact of a Court decision striking down the individual mandate would be. I said it would be “lethal.” Here we have a president who has two major legislative accomplishments: the Stimulus Package and the Individual Mandate. One didn’t work and the other is illegal! Quite a record to run on!
Op-ed:
The Jewish people did NOT kill Jesus
by: Diane Sori

As we near the Easter and Passover season some Christian sects will once again bring up the old hatreds that the Jewish people killed Jesus, when nothing could be further from the truth.  Before you discount this, please read what I have to say.

Simply, the Jews did not kill Jesus as it was the Romans that had him crucified and caused his mortal death. Pope Benedict XVI completely absolved and publicly apologized for wrongly charging the Jews with the death of Jesus, and most contemporary Christian theologians acknowledge that the Jews couldn't possibly have influenced the all-powerful Romans. 

The lie that the Jews had Jesus put to death or had any part in his death has been spread ever since the time of the Romans, and has caused more harm to the Jewish people over the centuries, and still does by anti-Semitic bigots who continue to perpetrate this lie.   

Simply, the Jewish people did NOT kill Jesus!  Jesus was put to death under the direct orders of Pontius Pilate.  Obviously some of his accusers were Jews, but so many others who accused him were NOT Jews, and it’s ridiculous to say ALL Jews in Judea were accusers of Jesus or that ALL Jews demanded his death.  Remember that many Jews followed Jesus and saw his miracles during his years of preaching (Matthew 15:29-31), many had been healed from incurable diseases, and some had even been brought back from the dead by him.  A lot of Jews felt nothing but gratitude, admiration, and love towards Jesus.

However, many religious leaders (Pharisees) didn't like Jesus because of his accusations and condemnations of them and, according to the Gospels, and wished to get rid of him in any way they could (Matthew 12:14).  For example, Jesus, on several occasions, called the Pharisees 'hypocrites, serpents, and a brood of vipers', and he described them as untrustworthy leaders in front of huge crowds (Matthew 23).  Their status within the Jewish people had been publicly undermined by someone the crowds looked up to and believed in.  This was an unacceptable humiliation to them, thus, the Pharisees were always on the lookout for opportunities that would allow them to accuse and kill Jesus.  The Pharisees wanted to kill Jesus NOT the Jewish people, I repeat, the Pharisees NOT the Jewish people!

Jesus was but one of many young Jewish preachers in Judea at that time.  He taught basic fundamental Judaism.  Even the tenet of 'love thy neighbor' first appeared in the Torah thousands of years before his birth.  Remember, too, that Jesus was born and died a Jew, that he was circumcised on the 7th day in the Temple according to Jewish Law, and thought of himself as nothing else, and because Judaism has always allowed for debate and discussion of Jewish Law, Jesus was no threat to Judaism as a whole.  And being that the Jews were a despised minority, they had no power to request, let alone demand, any man's death.   

The Jews were entirely at the mercy of the Romans, and to even think that the Jewish people pressured the Romans to kill Jesus, as some contend, is just ridiculous.  The Romans, however, did view Jesus as a threat because they viewed him as a political rebel and enemy of the state, and because Pontius Pilot was known for being an extremely ruthless and violent leader, he didn't need to take orders from Jews.  If he had wanted to spare Jesus' life he could have but he didn’t.  Pilate was not only a willing participant in Jesus' death but he was the man who ordered it!   And remember crucifixion has always been forbidden to Jews, because it's such a brutal method of ending a person's life and is considered paramount to murder in the Jewish religion.  So simply put, Pontius Pilate sentenced, ordered, and had carried out the sentence of killing Jesus the man.

Now I’ll share with you, my fellow patriots, what I believe, and this is my belief alone, to be the spiritual aspect of Jesus' death.   In ancient Israel, God's word called for a sacrificial system meant to emphasize the seriousness of sin and its demand for payment.  Capital sins, especially those related to disobeying most of the Ten Commandments, could not be paid for by any mere sacrifice, so the penalty was always death.  In fact, the Bible is quite specific that the penalty for sin is death with or without the Law (Romans 6:23).  To stop such an end for all mankind, there was a need for a sacrifice that would serve as payment for all our sins.  Only a ‘Divine Being’ per say, could be such a sacrifice, as Paul talked about in chapter ten of the Book of Hebrews.  So basically, the Son of God was the only sufficient payment for the sins of man.  Therefore, it's justifiable, at least to me, to say that our sins killed Jesus NOT the Jews!

God didn’t have to send Jesus to die for the sins of mankind.  He didn’t have to watch His ‘Beloved Son’ go through an unspeakably horrible flagellation and a horrific death on the cross nor did Jesus really have to offer himself for anyone.  Yet, he distanced himself from power and glory most would have welcomed, and came and lived as a man, only to die by the excruciating pain of flagellation, and agonized for hours hanging from a cross before his physical self passed away.

“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son that whomsoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life” (John 3:16).  So, I think it was actually God the Father who offered His Only Son to be nailed to a cross.  Jesus agreed to do God's will, fully aware of the serious ramifications that his decision would have for him.  Yet, he knew that his suffering would bring about salvation for mankind, as per his words, "I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live forever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world" (John 6: 51).

So the answer to who really killed Jesus I think is this: some Pharisees wanted him dead; Pontius Pilate did not prevent it, actually ordered it and had the sentence carried out; and our sins basically called for it.  Most of all, though, I believe it was God the Father who willed it, and it was Jesus Christ, the Son of God, who willingly offered himself to be sacrificed for all mankind.   

This is what I believe as I try to make sense of the unthinkable.
Op-ed:
Impeaching Obama is NOT the way to go
by: Diane Sori

Impeachment is NOT the way to go! Obama CAN be arrested for treason under Article I, Section 6, an elected official can be arrested while in office, for treason, felony, and breach of the peace, with treason being defined as levying war against America or giving aid and comfort to its enemies, which is what Obama does when he goes on his apology for America tours, when he sends monies to our enemies (like the mu*lim brotherhood and hamas), and when he defames, condemns and apologizes for our military by condemning the actions of those in uniform (especially BEFORE an investigation is completed, as in the recent taliban peeing, qur'an burning and Afghan incidents). Arresting him for treason is the way to go.....NOT impeachment!

And remember, impeachment gives credibility to his presidency and allows all his policies and laws to stay in place; arrest and conviction negates all, including his presidency, and that's what we want.

Remember, Billy-Boy was impeached in the House but it died in the Senate thus becoming no more than a slap on the wrist, never to be brought up again. This is NOT what we want for Obama! Also remember that once charges are brought for impeachment and they fail in the Democratic controlled Senate, it's over cannot be brought back again.

Trayvon Martin case: Is George Zimmerman being unfairly tried in media?

Conservative commentators decry a rush to judgement over George Zimmerman, but others say without the media attention there'd be no new investigation of Trayvon Martin's death.

By Peter Grier, Staff writer / March 30, 2012
In this image taken from video at the Sanford, Fla., Police Department, George Zimmerman, in red jacket, is escorted into the Sanford police station in handcuffs on Feb. 26, 2012, the night he fatally shot Trayvon Martin.

Sanford Police Department/AP
Is neighborhood watch captain George Zimmerman being unfairly tried on TV for shooting unarmed teen Trayvon Martin? That’s what some commentators are saying now, one month after the pair’s fatal encounter in Sanford, Fla.

Mr. Martin’s death was a shame, Fox News talk show host Bill O’Reilly said on the “O’Reilly Factor” Thursday, adding that circumstantial evidence indicates that Mr. Zimmerman may have jumped to conclusions and racially profiled Martin as someone up to no good.

But Florida special prosecutor Angela Corey is now investigating Martin’s death, Mr. O’Reilly said, and there’s no reason Oprah Winfrey and other celebrities should be demanding an arrest prior to the probe’s finish.

“When it comes to the pundits, I’m angry about the rush to judgment,” said O’Reilly. “When it comes to Trayvon’s parents, however, they should be cut some slack.”

O’Reilly’s fellow conservative William Bennett, the former secretary of Education, went further in an opinion piece for CNN Friday. Recent revelations have painted a more complicated picture of both Zimmerman and Martin, he wrote, with the former emerging as a part-Hispanic registered Democrat, and the latter as a teen who’d been suspended from school.

Jesse Jackson’s assertion that Martin’s death shows blacks are “under attack,” and Spike Lee’s tweeting of the wrong address for Zimmerman’s parents, forcing an innocent couple to flee their home, illustrate a deeper problem in dealing with the case, according to Mr. Bennett.

“Many people are not on an impartial hunt for justice but are exploiting this crisis for personal or political gain and claiming that it is representative of larger societal problems,” wrote Bennett.

This analysis ignores a central aspect of the Martin case, according to critics. If not for the national uproar over the manner in which Sanford police initially treated the killing, there would be no special prosecutor taking a hard look at the facts. Zimmerman might have walked away despite many inconsistencies between his story of the encounter and other evidence.

“It’s a tragedy and a shame, and justice needs to be served,” Ms. Winfrey said in a televised interview Thursday.

Charles M. Blow, an opinion columnist for The New York Times, on his Twitter feed Friday listed a number of ways in which the Zimmerman family account of what happened does not match up with what’s revealed on 911 calls and the physical layout of the scene.

Among other things, Zimmerman said Martin was walking behind houses, and coming toward him. Yet Zimmerman was in a car on the street and the houses were conjoined, making it almost impossible to see behind the houses, said Blow. Furthermore, if Zimmerman had turned to return to his car when family members say he did, he would have been inside it long before a fight could have started.

“Folks, this isn’t rocket science. This is common sense stuff. I’m not Perry Mason.... We need a jury,” tweeted Blow.

Zimmerman’s physical condition has also become an issue, as the police tape of his arrival at a station for questioning does not appear to show the broken nose and other injuries that Zimmerman’s attorney Craig Sonner says his client sustained in the encounter.

Mr. Sonner has said the video is “grainy”, and Zimmerman’s brother insisted on CNN Thursday that medical details will support Zimmerman’s story.

Yet the drip, drip of media revelations continued Friday, with the funeral director who handled Martin’s body telling CBS he saw no injuries consistent with a fight, and an anonymous source telling the New York Daily News that Zimmerman had lost a job as a security guard for being too aggressive.

Duke University

Duke News & Communications

Looking Back at the Duke Lacrosse Case

This website provides information about the "Duke Lacrosse Case" in which three Duke players were accused in 2006 of rape and other crimes they did not commit. It includes links to the following information from Duke:
Lacrosse goal

All of these links are imported directly from a "real-time" website that Duke's Office of News and Communications (ONC) maintained during the 13 months the case unfolded. Since ONC will not be posting regular updates to this new site, which was launched in May 2007, readers should view it as a historical record and expect some of the linked material to become inactive over time.
Additional sources of information about the case are available from multiple other sources. Readers looking for specific information from Duke might also try using the search box on the university home page.
The previous website, in its final May 2007 version, can be found here.
On April 11, 2007, North Carolina Attorney General Roy Cooper stepped before a crowded press conference and spoke the words that ended one of the most publicized legal stories in recent American history. “We believe these three individuals are innocent of these charges,” he said.

Cooper’s long-awaited decision ended a legal ordeal for three Duke University students who had been charged with first-degree sexual offense, kidnapping and, earlier, with rape. The allegations were made by one of two exotic dancers that members of the Duke men’s lacrosse team had hired to perform at an off-campus party in March 2006. Durham District Attorney Mike Nifong stated publicly that a rape had taken place and prosecuted the three students vigorously even as evidence mounted that raised serious questions about the accuser’s credibility and the veracity of the charges.

Cooper took over the case in January 2007 after the state bar association filed ethics charges against Nifong for withholding exculpatory evidence and making inflammatory statements about the case. In dismissing the charges and stating the attack never occurred, Cooper spoke of a “rush to accuse” and said “there were many points in this case where caution would have served justice better than bravado." In one of the many similar judgments made about how the news media covered the case, columnist David Broder described “a painful exercise in journalistic excess.”

The case changed the lives of the three young men and their families and deeply affected the broader Duke community, which found itself in the spotlight with major stories in The New York Times, Newsweek, The New Yorker, Rolling Stone, Sports Illustrated and thousands of other outlets. Five segments on “60 Minutes” were devoted to the case, as were extensive commentaries on blogs and tabloid television shows.

Faced with the case and its larger implications, Duke President Richard H. Brodhead moved to address broader university issues highlighted by the situation, forming a council of advisers and four committees to examine the lacrosse team, the administration's response to the incident, the student judicial process and Duke’s campus culture. In the weeks and months that followed, the committees issued their findings, all of which Duke made public immediately.

Independent of the legal case, given the standards expected of teams that represent Duke, the university forfeited two lacrosse games in the immediate aftermath of the incident as a response to admitted behaviors by team members, such as underage drinking. Brodhead later suspended the remaining games – not as punishment, but as a necessary action until the legal situation became clearer, based on concerns including the safety of Duke’s players. At the time, the district attorney was saying emphatically that as many as 46 of the players were still under suspicion for the alleged crimes. After the district attorney indicted three of the players, Duke placed on interim suspension the two who had not yet graduated – part of a routine protocol most U.S. universities follow when students are charged with violent felony crimes. Duke later modified the status of the two players to “administrative leave” and, soon after it became clear in court that Nifong’s statements were not credible, invited them to return in good standing, months before Cooper’s decision. In addition, in an effort to create a fresh start for the program, Duke replaced Coach Mike Pressler with an interim coach and, subsequently, with John Danowski, who previously coached the lacrosse team at Hofstra University.

Brodhead told “60 Minutes” in August 2006 that “the DA's case will be on trial just as much as our students will be.” After Nifong dropped the most serious of the charges – rape – in December 2006, Brodhead called on him to recuse himself from the case, saying, “Mr. Nifong has an obligation to explain to all of us his conduct in this matter.”

From the beginning of the affair, other observers voiced strong, often harsh, opinions about the players, the district attorney, the university and nearly every other aspect of the story. Initial criticism focused on the players, with protesters assembling outside the house where the party occurred, banging pots and shouting their concerns. As doubts grew about the charges, criticism shifted to Nifong and his team, as well as to some administrators, students, community members and others – including a group of faculty members who published an ad in The Chronicle – who were accused of prejudging the players or of using the case to promote their own agendas. The lacrosse team returned to the field in February 2007 before a cheering crowd that included Brodhead and much of the university’s senior leadership, as well as thousands of students and the largest group of reporters ever to attend a regular-season Duke lacrosse game. The team went on to win the league championship and to reach the national championship final game while also maintaining a strong record in the classroom and the community.

Meanwhile, Duke began responding to the concerns raised by the committee that had examined the campus culture. Approximately one year after the event, Duke’s fund raising hit record levels, applications for student admissions remained near record levels, new media guidelines were in place to enhance the privacy of students and campus life began to return to normal.

On the legal front, in June 2007 a N.C. State Bar disciplinary panel concluded after a trial that DA Nifong had made inflammatory and prejudicial comments about the case, intentionally withheld DNA evidence and lied to court officials. The panel called for his disbarment and Nifong resigned his office.

Also in June, university leaders announced a settlement with David Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann, noting in a statement how “these young men and their families have been the subject of intense scrutiny that has taken a heavy toll” and saying “it is in the best interests of the Duke community to eliminate the possibility of future litigation and move forward.” An accompanying statement from Evans, Finnerty and Seligmann said, “We hope that today’s resolution will begin to bring the Duke family back together again, and we look forward to working with the University to develop and implement initiatives that will prevent similar injustices and ensure that the lessons of the last year are never forgotten.”

Will Obama Defy Supreme Court If ObamaCare Is Ruled Unconstitutional?


Obama Remodels Supreme Court SC Will Obama Defy Supreme Court If ObamaCare Is Ruled Unconstitutional?
For 2 years, champions of ObamaCare have been careful to lay out the advantages of their federal dictatorship before handpicked audiences of organized labor and supportive media transcriptionists, at events where applause lines have been rehearsed and questions carefully pre-approved.

As a result, the Regime had little idea that anyone of importance might actually disapprove of their 3,000 page effort to separate Americans from their liberty.

So, much of the left entered the 3 day, oral argument phase of ObamaCare before the Supreme Court with the same arrogant exuberance which accompanied the passage of the law. After all, as they saw it, only the ruling of a couple of rogue jurists on the 11th Circuit had placed the left’s dream legislation in front of the 9 DC Justices anyhow. And as liberal CNN legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin put it in 2010, challenges against the law were STILL unlikely to succeed, even before the Supremes.

But apparently, no one warned liberals like Toobin that arguing on behalf of an unprecedented assault on freedom before honest Supreme Court justices might result in a glitch or two in the left’s plans.

And that glitch has now been described as a “trainwreck” as Toobin and other ObamaCare cheerleaders mourn the reportedly disastrous Tuesday and Wednesday sessions before the Court.

For each of the conservative Justices brought up the same question in his own way: “What is the limiting factor in the law?” That is, if the Federal Government has the power to force the American people to buy insurance, what can it NOT force them to buy? What can it NOT force them to do?

The answer is NOTHING! For ObamaCare was never about health insurance. It’s about POWER. Healthcare was chosen simply as the most effective means of implementing and controlling it.

With congressional super-majorities and a Manchurian Candidate in the White House, the radical left was at last in position to affect the most audacious and comprehensive power grab in the nation’s history. And make no mistake, these people will not let it go easily.

Should the Court find the mandate unconstitutional and perhaps take down the entirety of ObamaCare, an assault will be launched against the voting justices, the legitimacy of their ruling, and the credibility of the Court itself. Obama’s media advocates will claim the usual victim classes of women and minorities to have once again been oppressed by the Right.

And Obama himself will pledge to fight the Supreme Court ruling for the good of the people always most sorely abused by the politics of the Right—blacks! Claims of genocide and racism will be repeated by the White House and Democrats in Congress. And their media “echo chamber” will make certain that the phony message is received across the nation.

In short, a correct and necessary ruling by the Supreme Court will be shamelessly utilized for the same hypocritical purpose as the death of Trayvon Martin—the motivation of black voters for the November election.

And should Obama win in November, he will continue the assault on the ruling, hoping to force the notoriously weak-kneed Republican leadership into revamping the law just enough to pass Constitutional muster. The American people will remain the slaves of deliberately thuggish legislation.

Of course, should the election go to Willard, Americans will have nothing to fear. After all, he would NEVER institute a mandatory healthcare scheme now, would he?!

Photo credit: terrellaftermath

Widow’s Reaction to Terror: We Need More ‘LIGHT’…


: The young widow of Toulouse murder victim Rabbi Jonathan Sandler has issued a heartfelt plea asking Jewish parents to increase light in the world through Torah.
The rabbi and his two young sons, ages 3 and 6, were shot to death along with the 8-year-old daughter of the principal of Otzar HaTorah day school in southern France. The Al-Qaeda-linked terrorist who carried out the attack was killed Thursday after a 30-hour siege by French commandos who finally stormed the nearby apartment building in which they had him pinned him down.

The young widow’s message, issued originally in Hebrew in ‘A Heartfelt Plea for Increased Light by Mrs. Chava (Eva) Sandler of Toulouse’ was published late Thursday on the Chabad.org website.

In her grief, the young widow asked parents to find special love for their children, increase the study of Torah, to light the Sabbath candles before sunset each Friday, and invite guests to the Passover seder.
“My heart is broken,” she wrote. “I am unable to speak. There are no ways for me to be able to express the great and all-consuming pain resulting from the murder of my dear Rabbi Jonathan and our sons, Aryeh and Gavriel, and of Miriam Monsonego, daughter of the dedicated principal of Otzar HaTorah and his wife, Rabbi Yaakov and Mrs. Monsonego.

“May no one ever have to endure such pain and suffering.”

Because so many people in France and around the world have been asking what they can do on her behalf, however, Sandler said she has felt compelled to respond.
“My husband’s life was dedicated to teaching Torah,” the Chabad-Lubavitch emissary wrote. “We moved back to the country of his birth to help young people learn about the beauty of Torah.

“He was truly a good man, living, giving and selfless. He was sensitive to all of God’s creatures, always searching for ways to reveal the goodness in others. He and I raised Aryeh and Gavriel to live the ways of Torah. Who would have known how short would be their time on this Earth, how short would be the time I would be with them as their mother?”

Sandler went on to express her faith that regardless of the horrific manner in which her husband and the three little children died, she still knows that “the ways of G-d are good, and He will reveal the path and give us the strength to continue.”
To all those who have asked how to bring consolation to the family and contentment to the souls of the departed, therefore, Sandler said, “Let’s continue their lives on this Earth.

“Parents, please kiss your children,” she entreated. “Tell them how much you love them, and how dear it is to your heart that they be living examples of our Torah, imbued with the fear of Heaven and with love of their fellow man.

“Please increase your study of Torah, whether on your own or with your family and friends. Help others who may find study difficult to achieve alone.
“Please bring more light into the world by kindling the Sabbath candles this and every Friday night… a bit earlier than the published times as a way to add holiness to our world.

“The holiday of Passover is approaching. Please invite another person into your homes so that all have a place at a Seder to celebrate the holiday of our freedom.

“Along with our tearful remembrance of our trials in Egypt so many years ago, we still tell over how ‘in each and every generation, they have stood against us to destroy us.’ We all will announced in a loud and clear voice: ‘God saves us from their hands.’

“The spirit of the Jewish People can never be extinguished; its connection with Torah and its commandments can never be destroyed.

“May it be God’s will that from this moment on, we will all only know happiness.

“I send my heartfelt condolences to the Monsonego family for the loss of their daughter Miriam, and I pray for the speedy recovery of Aharon ben Leah, who was injured in the attack.

“Thank you for your support and love.”

 Source: www.israelnationalnews.com

'One killed, dozens wounded in Gaza Land Day protests'

By MELANIE LIDMAN, TOVAH LAZAROFF, JPOST.COM STAFF
LAST UPDATED: 03/30/2012 18:54

Medics say IDF fire killed Palestinian in Gaza; Police, border patrol arrest 34 pro-Palestinian activists during clashes at Kalandiya crossing, e. J'lem, Bethlehem; Amnesty condemns Israel for "excessive force."

Israeli forces in Kalandia By Marc Israel Sellem
One Palestinian was killed and dozens wounded when protests marking Land Day turned violent in the Gaza Strip on Friday, according to medical sources in Gaza.

Adham Abu Salmiya, a spokesperson for the emergency medical services in Gaza, said that the 20-year-old Mahmoud Muhammad Zaqout was shot dead by IDF forces stationed near the border with Gaza.

The IDF confirmed that dozens of Palestinians in Gaza were injured after confronting soldiers near the border with Israel, but did not comment on Zaqout's death.

IDF fire also wounded at least 37 people in protests that broke our in Beit Hanoun (Erez) and Khan Yunis, Salmiya said. Three of the wounded were in serious condition, he added, and were receiving medical attention.

Amnesty International issued a condemnation of what it termed Israel's "excessive use of force" on Land Day protesters.

The organization's deputy director of Middle East and North Africa program said in a press statement that the the human-rights group was "extremely worried" by reports that the IDF was using live ammunition on protesters, "particularly in the light of frequent and persistent use of excessive force against Palestinian protesters."

Amnesty also condemned the PA for preventing protests and Hamas for beating up protesters, calling on them both to respect freedom of assembly
.
Protesters clash with security forces in West Bank
Meanwhile, Israeli police and border patrol units arrested 34 activists on Friday in clashes that took place in the West Bank and east Jerusalem to commemorate the 36th annual Land Day. Palestinian activists and supporters held demonstrations in east Jerusalem and Bethlehem, while a demonstration at the Kalandiya checkpoint resulted in the injury of several of the activists.

Thousands of protesters assembled at Kalandiya near Jerusalem, with Palestinian youths hurling stones and Molotov cocktails at Israeli security forces, who responded by firing tear gas, stun grenades, sound weapons and foul-smelling water to disperse the protesters.

A large number of protesters arrived at the checkpoint from Ramallah. A number of protesters were injured and taken to local hospitals for treatment. Israel Radio reported that those taken to hospital were lightly injured. Among the injured was Palestinian lawmaker Mustafa Barghouti.

Lana Hamadeh, a Palestinian-Canadian from Ottawa, listed demands being made as part of the protest. One of nine delegates in the Canadian Global March to Jerusalem mission, Hamadeh said she and other protesters were demanding "the right of return for Palestinians and the protection of Jerusalem."

"Non-Jewish holy sites are at risk and the city itself is being ethnically cleansed," she told The Jerusalem Post. "We are asking for our right to re-enter Jerusalem and reclaim it for everyone, not just for Jews."

In Bethlehem, dozens of protesters threw stones at an IDF checkpoint after breaking through a line of Palestinian police. IDF troops responded to stone throwers at the Rachel Checkpoint outside Bethlehem with large quantities of tear gas.

Earlier, PA security forces had blocked the protesters from approaching the checkpoint. The protesters stopped in front of the Palestinian police and sat in the road, chanting: "To Jerusalem, we will march."  

Aharonovitch: Kalandia demonstration is "a show"
Public Security Minister Yitzhak Aharonovitch visited the Kalandiya checkpoint on Friday, calling a rowdy Palestinian demonstration taking place there a "show."

"They are throwing stones, and we are responding," Aharonovitch said.

Police Commissioner Insp.-Gen. Yochanan Danino arrived in the North Friday afternoon to inspect the deployment of officers. Police said no unusual incidents took place in the North.

Israel Police deployed large numbers of police and border police forces in and around Moshav Avivim near the Lebanese border Friday morning, ahead of the expected demonstrations. Security forces set up checkpoints to prevent protesters from encroaching on the Lebanese border, where at least 10 people were killed in clashes that erupted during last years Nakba Day commemorations.

Nida Tuma, Ben Hartman and Yaakov Lappin contributed to this report.