How Hamas uses Temple Mount

How Hamas uses Temple Mount

The desire of Hamas leaders to ignite the West Bank and fan the flames of the uprising in East Jerusalem is no secret. The calls on the Palestinians to launch a third intifada are openly made during prayers in the mosques, as well as by media channels affiliated with Hamas. In addition, intensive activity has been going on in the field. While, so far, it has apparently not been aimed at setting up terrorist cells designed to carry out attacks, the Palestinians are encouraged and urged to clash with the Israeli security forces and set out on independent terrorist attacks.

The Hamas methods of operation were anticipated by the Palestinian security apparatuses a year ago already. According to a report submitted in December 2013 to PA President Mahmoud Abbas by the PA adviser for security affairs, Gen. Tawfiq Tirawi, officials in the Palestinian security apparatuses warned that the failure of the peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians would push Hamas into trying to ignite the area. The authors of the report evaluated that Hamas would seek to reorganize its military wing in the West Bank and lead to a third intifada. Officials in the Palestinian security apparatuses anticipated that, rather than sending out suicide terrorists — the way Hamas operated during the second intifada — Hamas members would opt for shooting attacks and other independently launched terrorist attacks by individuals acting on their own.

Read More

EBOLA DOC’S CONDITION DOWNGRADED TO ‘IDIOTIC’


I wonder how the Ebola doctor feels now that his humanitarian trip has cost a Christian charity much more than any services he rendered.

What was the point?

Whatever good Dr. Kent Brantly did in Liberia has now been overwhelmed by the more than $2 million already paid by the Christian charities Samaritan’s Purse and SIM USA just to fly him and his nurse home in separate Gulfstream jets, specially equipped with medical tents, and to care for them at one of America’s premier hospitals. (This trip may be the first real-world demonstration of the economics of Obamacare.)

There’s little danger of an Ebola plague breaking loose from the treatment of these two Americans at the Emory University Hospital. But why do we have to deal with this at all?

Why did Dr. Brantly have to go to Africa? The very first “risk factor” listed by the Mayo Clinic for Ebola — an incurable disease with a 90 percent fatality rate — is: “Travel to Africa.”

—-

About 15,000 people are murdered in the U.S. every year. More than 38,000 die of drug overdoses, half of them from prescription drugs. More than 40 percent of babies are born out of wedlock. Despite the runaway success of “midnight basketball,” a healthy chunk of those children go on to murder other children, rape grandmothers, bury little girls alive — and then eat a sandwich. A power-mad president has thrown approximately 10 percent of all Americans off their health insurance — the rest of you to come! All our elite cultural institutions laugh at virginity and celebrate promiscuity.

Ann Coulter Column

War what is it good for


Usually it’s a kind of population control method, rats are way smarter they just absorb fetuses in the womb in case of too high population pressure. More humane you might say.

Since the human race isn’t humane in any sense, it resorts to more violent methods of population reduction. War. Very effective, since it mostly takes out the youngest most virile men and women thus reducing not only the population by dying themselves but also by reducing re-population efficiency.

Personally i’d be more of the opinion rats have the most logical and harmless method, and the human race the most vicious and harmful method. It just doesn’t make any sense on any level.
What makes even less sense is the Geneva Convention.

It’s totally counterintuitive and inhumane. It’s beyond absurd to set up rules of war. It stems from ye olden days where people in direct man to man combat slaughtered each other in a time where honor was the moral guidance. Nowadays wars are fought to reach a goal, extermination of the opposing force. It’s done from a distance, people hardly see their targets or are thousands of miles far from the battleground.

Instituting ‘rules’ on how you can exterminate your opponent are silly. They’re even more silly if you fight an opponent who has never even heard of it and for sure doesn’t behave like it. Of course you have to descent to their level of fighting, of course you behave as they do. It’s their language, it’s what they understand. Behave otherwise and you’ll be laughed at, taken for a weakling.

You don’t take prisoners of war, why should you? They cost a fortune in upkeep and one day you’ll have to set them free after which they’ll merrily continue to do their thing, only now with the knowledge they don’t risk very much expect for a good meal, medical care and some leisure time to recuperate tot level even better then before and with an even greater disdain for you.

The Geneva Convention needs to be rewritten to take into account that only those who have signed it have the right to be treated according to it. Those who didn’t evidently don’t care so why should you?

A Study of Higher Education and Unemployment as Predictors of Terrorism

A Study of Higher Education and Unemployment as Predictors of Terrorism

Clare Richardson

What country conditions breed terrorism? Relative deprivation theory holds that instead of an absolute standard of deprivation, a gap between expected and achieved welfare leads men to political violence. My research examines whether levels of unemployment and higher education that reflect relative deprivation correspond with an increase in terrorist attacks. A recent surge in empirical studies of terrorism has shown that, contrary to popular belief, terrorists tend to be highly educated and from wealthier families than average. This study models relative deprivation by examining the effect of unemployment and tertiary education on levels of terrorism. I examine terrorist attacks from 1980-2008 across 56 countries to see whether the interaction effect of unemployment and higher education is positively correlated with an increase in the number of terrorist attacks. The results of my multivariate regression suggest that this interaction
may be somewhat significant in countries where there have been previous attacks. Additionally, while unemployment and population size are strongly correlated with increased instances of terrorism, higher education alone has no significant relationship with a nation’s levels of terrorism. I discuss possible reasons for the significance of these indicators and the policy implications of my findings.

PDF file.

BBC R4 promotes unchallenged anti-Israel propaganda and warped histories of Jerusalem


BBC is nowadays a spokesperson for the Islamic State it seems. Their uniquely warped view of reality mostly fits in with the viewpoints professed by the more radical of the ideology

BBC Watch

On September 3rd BBC Radio 4 aired an edition of a programme called ‘Agree to Differ’ which will be repeated on the evening of September 6th and is available here. The title of the edition is “Jerusalem” and the programme is presented by Matthew Taylor – today the chief executive of the RSA and formerly Chief Adviser on Political Strategy to Tony Blair during his premiership.R4 Agree to Differ

At the beginning of the programme Taylor informs listeners:

“…we’re going to give you a completely new way to understand a controversial issue and to decide where you stand.”

“We’re looking at a dispute that’s almost as old as civilization itself. We’re exploring the respective claims of Palestinians and Israelis over the city of Jerusalem.”

That historical illiteracy unfortunately continues throughout the programme with Taylor promoting a variety of bizarre and inaccurate interpretations of historic, political and legal issues as we…

View original post 1,885 more words

Feminism Flounders


Dedicated to my muze: @EsthervanFenema

It’s a common misunderstanding that men and women are equal, a myth perpetuated by generations of idealists fed by the declaration of human rights. Lofty as that declaration is, it holds quite a few misconceptions. Next to the misconception that humanity is one big family of entities who strive all for the common good and thereby gain common rights, there is also the misconception about the equality of the male and female of the species.

Biologically, mentally and spiritually they are not equal, they are completely different. They have different bodies, brains, minds, capacities etc. These are biologically predefined. Ages of evolution caused the two genders to be good at some tasks, worse at others but not at the same. Whole neural networks are setup at birth to make that so, environmental feedback only serves to train them.

Along comes feminism. At first for good reason. Women didn’t have the same rights as men, and where treated as second rate humans. Which was a wholly one sided view perpetuated by religious doctrine and completely false. So that got corrected, women got the same rights as men.
Strangely enough nobody thought to attach also the duties which came with privileges leaving the balance somewhat in favor of women. Worse still, to make up for the millennia of female maltreatment even positive discrimination was introduced.

Which left women with a strong feeling of entitlement but overall without the capacity to take part in the acquired rights. Which created a new wave of feminism, the feminism of complaint. Every time women didn’t make the grade this was due to those awful men not giving them their just dues. Fervently the followers of the doctrine of female entitlement battled against the perceived injustice creating a whole new world where us versus them took over.

Men should come down a notch or two so women could more easily take their entitled places. Over the years this resulted in a society where the born with capacities were disconnected from daily life, men had to behave more like women and women started to behave more like men.

The direct result of this are generations of men and women who lost their footing due to the forced roles they had to assume and for which both were not exactly fit. Now none was feeling well in their roles as unisex beings.

Man/women kind should return to what they are good at, instead of desperately trying to deny that nature has reserved different roles for both. Denying your true self can only lead to insecurity, anxiety and various mental issues.

Stop floundering feminists. Start taking yourself seriously as a woman. Accept both genders are unequal, but not thereby more or less worth. Stop bitching about what the world does to you and take control of your own life. Stop trying to level the playing field by forcing men and women into some lowest common denominator, but go and prove yourself by just doing your thing.