Watch the World Blame Israel

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk






At this point, the number of dead in the Israeli attack on the "Free Gaza" flotilla stands somewhere between 10-15 with dozens injured-including several IDF troops. The initial tweets from Free Gaza claimed that IDF troops boarded the ships guns blazing and that some passengers were shot to death as they slept in their bunks. (I seriously doubt that.) In contrast, Israel says that the soldiers were attacked by passengers and/or crew members with clubs, knives and other weapons as they boarded. In addition, the IDF claims that some troops had their weapons taken away, at which point, gunfire was exchanged.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE64U27020100531



At about the 20 second mark (above), you can see an IDF soldier landing on deck from a helicopter and immediately being attacked by three individuals (RT).


What is pretty obvious at this point is that no matter what details emerge, Israel will lose the world-wide public relations war. Forget that the Turkish aid organization, IHH, reportedly has ties to terrorist groups like al-Qaeda. Forget the IDF casualties. Forget whatever Israel discovers on board the ships. Israel's enemies are going to believe what they want to believe. The verdict of the UN is pre-ordained. The verdict of the Obama administration is pre-ordained. The verdict of the EU is pre-ordained. The verdict of the Arab world is pre-ordained. The verdict of western academia is pre-ordained. This will be interpreted as an unwarranted attack by the IDF on a humanitarian aid convoy consisting of peace activists and little old ladies like Hedy Epstein (who, two weeks ago, was speaking at UC-Irvine).

Here are some of those "peace activists" captured on Palestinian TV while en route to Gaza as they chant that old peace song, "Khaybar, Khaybar ah Yahud" (PalWatch.org):

That's not "Blowin' in the Wind" in Arabic, folks.

It is also noteworthy that Israel had offered to let the convoy sail into an Israeli port and after due inspection, allow legitimate relief supllies to enter Gaza. This was refused by the flotilla.

So I guess we can look forward to more "fun and games" on North American university campuses as the various Muslim Student Associations and their brethren in the anarchist groups, aided and abetted by all the radical professors, foment more unrest in "righteous indignation". More ominously, I shudder to think of what European Jews will be subjected to in the coming days and weeks.

Two Names on the Wall-A Re-posting

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk


I've been thinking about what kind of posting I would put up to mark Memorial Day. I finally decided to re-post an essay I originally put up in December 2007 in connection with the Viet Nam memorial in Washington DC. It will always be appropriate. I hope you appreciate it.



Dorian Jan Houser (1946-1967)
Michael G Vinassa (1946-1966)


The recent news that someone had defaced the Viet Nam War Memorial in Washington served to bring back my memories of two of my childhood friends whose names appear on that wall. Mike Vinassa and Dorian Houser were both from west Los Angeles, where I also grew up. We belonged to the same high school social club. All three of us entered military service after high school. I was assigned to Germany; they were sent to Viet Nam. I returned and went on with the rest of my life. They died in Viet Nam. Forty years later, with our country once again at war and American soldiers sacrificing their lives for America, we should also remember those that gave their lives in Viet Nam.

Dorian

I first knew Dorian in the 1950s. He and his brother, Lee, played on my little league team. Their father was our coach. Later, my relationship with Dory continued in school. In high school, we both belonged to a club called the Chancellors of Venice. As was common in west LA, there were many (off-campus) clubs formed for social purposes. We all had our club jackets, with the name of the club and locale (Venice or WLA) embroidered on the back. The colors of the clubs varied (ours was green). As we ended our high school days, these clubs disbanded as we went our separate ways-off to college, work or military service. In Dory's case, he entered the Marines in 1966, and after training, was sent to Viet Nam. On May 10, 1967, one month before his 21st birthday, he was killed in Quang Tin. He was hit in the chest by shrapnel and killed instantly.

I happened to be home on leave from Germany when we got the news that Dory was dead. I was able to attend his funeral before returning back to Germany. I'm a little embarrassed to admit it after all these years, but I chose not to wear my uniform to the funeral, simply because I was afraid his family might react emotionally to it. I have always regretted that decision.

Dory was the kind of guy that no one could dislike. He was friendly and unassuming. Needless to say, his funeral was a sad and emotional event. In the last couple of years, I have visited his grave a couple of times since my mother-in-law is interred in the same cemetery. About a year ago, I came across a posting about Dory by his sister. She described her brother and was looking for anyone who knew Dory and remembered him. I answered her post, but the email is no longer valid. As yet, I have not been able to contact her.

Mike

Mike Vinassa was also a member of the Chancellors. He was a stout, barrel-chested kid with a big tattoo on his shoulder, something unusual at the time for someone so young (still in high school). Needless to say, he was tough and didn't mind a good fight. Most other kids knew not to mess with him, but among his friends, he was well-liked. I remember one night we were at a party and he wanted to (playfully) roughhouse with me. We started slap-fighting and wrestling on the front yard of the house, and (somehow) I was able to throw him to the ground and fall on top of him. As you may know, innocent roughhousing among teenagers can easily turn into a real fight, and I remember thinking that Mike might suddenly get mad, so I rolled over and let him get on top, thus letting him win the match.

After high school, I went on to complete 2 years of college before I entered the Army. I basically lost touch with Mike and Dory at that time.

I had recently arrived at my post of duty in Germany when I came across Mike's name while reading the Viet Nam obituaries in the Army Times. It wasn't until several months ago that I learned the circumstances of Mike's death, which occurred on May
22, 1966.

Mike was a member of C Co, Ist Bn, 8th Cavalry, 1st Cav Division (US Army). Ironically, Mike was a short-timer, soon to return to the US, and, on that day, assigned to non-combat duties. Yet he insisted on accompanying his unit on a final combat mission in the Vinh Thanh Valley. It was on that final mission, that Mike lost his life-under heroic conditions. He personally led a group of his comrades in charging and taking out a machine gun nest that was pinning down his unit, but was fatally shot in the process. For his actions, Mike was posthumously awarded the Distinguished Service Cross. His sole survivor was his mother.

In subsequent years, I have been able to find both their names on the Viet Nam Memorial. (I was living in the Washington area at the time.) As stated, I have visited Dory's grave, but as yet, have not identified Mike's cemetery. When I look back at my life after the Army, I contemplate how I finished college, began my career, got married, had children, retired, and now find myself in my 60s. But as I looked down on Dory's grave, I realized that he and Mike are frozen in time-forever 20 years old. I wonder what became of their parents, the rest of the families.

In a sense, today's soldiers are more fortunate than those who went to Viet Nam. The overwhelming majority of the American people greatly respect them (with the notable exception of the usual mindless idiots who are not worth further mention in this essay). Soldiers returning from Viet Nam were often subject to despicable treatment from those of their own generation who did everything they could to avoid military service. Once the Viet Nam War ended, the country wanted to forget about it as quickly as possible-after all, it was just a tragic period in our history. We also forgot about our Viet Nam veterans who came back alive-in so many cases, as walking wounded. They deserved so much better from us. They are still among us, and in many cases, still wounded.

All of us who lost friends or family members in Viet Nam should try to keep their memories alive and honor them. God rest their souls.

Michael G Vinassa- Panel 07E, line 104
Dorian Jan Houser- Panel 19E, line 082

U.S. National Debt Passes $13 Trillion--90% of GDP

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

For the first time in our history, the U.S. National Debt has now reached $13 Trillion and there is no stopping in sight.

The Obama Administration and the crazies that control Washington D.C. have proven they do not care about the future of our country and only care about getting their wacko agenda passed through Congress. They brush aside the idea that the United States will bankrupt, and instead they fatten their check book from contributions that will keep them in office and retain their power hold over the American people.

This issue is the biggest issue we face as Americans, and it is now time for somebody to actually stand up and keep to their word that they will shrink the size of our government.

I am an American that loves my country and would like to be in this country in the future, but if we continue down this path then the United States will be no longer.

When will somebody stand up and stop this?

Fighting Campus Anti-Semitism-The Community Must Get Involved

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk


This month's Israel Apartheid Week at UC-Irvine proved one thing to me beyond all doubt. It cannot be left up to the university or the students (Jewish or non-Jewish) to counter the invective that flies around the campus during the anti-Israel events put on by Muslim Student Associations. Nor can one rely on the major national Jewish advocacy groups. It must come from the local community, both Jewish and non-Jewish to stand up and take a stand.

Let me explain why. UCI, fairly or unfairly, has acquired a reputation across the land as the worst campus in the country when it comes to harassment and intimidation of Jewish students arising out of the Israel-Palestinian conflict. That is the opinion of David Horowitz and other observers. Whether you agree or not, it is pretty obvious that Jewish students on many many campuses in the US and Canada are in for a stressful college experience if they choose to assert their Jewish identity and support for Israel. The situation is getting tenser and tenser on many campuses at least during Israel Apartheid Week, which is an international movement.

I have written many times about the situation at UCI. Of course, attitudes among Jewish students are varied because they come from a wide variety of backgrounds, with different levels of religious devotion and support for Israel. Therefore, at UCI you will hear different opinions from Jewish students on how bad the problem is. I will repeat again that 99% of the students at UCI are not anti-Semitic and play no role in the problem. Enough said about that.

I want to address the issue that surfaced during Israel Apartheid Week when large numbers of the community showed up on campus with American and Israeli flags and posters to counter the MSU and their speakers-peacefully. It was an enormous success. Yet,it must be said that many Jewish students were not comfortable with the community presence. In fact, the position of Hillel, the Jewish support organization on campus, was that "The students did not want them" (the community protesters). That may be true for many students for different reasons including fear that it would just escalate the tensions on campus between Jewish and Muslim students. I know that many Jewish students prefer to engage in civil dialogue with their Muslim counterparts.

First of all, I reject any statement from Hillel or anyone else that implies that they speak for every Jewish student on any campus. They cannot. As for the students themselves, I have met many Jewish students and heard many opinions. I respect each and every one I have met. They are fine young people, who will contribute much to this country in the future. With all due respect, I have to say that the issue is bigger than just them-though the community is vitally concerned with their well-being on campus. Students come to college for a few years and they leave-to be replaced by another generation who will have to deal with the same issues.

In addition, to quote two of my colleagues, if they see anti-Semitism at the corner dry cleaners, they will be there. If they see it on a university campus, they will be there. UCI is a public university supported by tax-payer money. We all have an interest.

In addition, this problem does not exist just at UCI. It is spreading to campuses all over North America. As we all know, it is a problem that affects every person in America even beyond the campuses.

It has become clear that the universities-with few exceptions- cannot or will not deal with the problem. They talk about free speech and the Constitution. They also know that organizations like CAIR, the ACLU and the National Lawyers Guild are itching to file lawsuits if the university takes action. UCI is in that position as we speak. Countless letters and meetings with university officials go on for years and result in nothing concrete.

In Orange County, the Jewish community has been awakened, at least to a large extent, by the disruption of the Israeli ambassador's speech at UCI on February 8th. Prior to that, they had been assured for years by the OC Jewish Federation that everything was ok at UCI and that there was no anti-Semitism. Hillel told everybody the same thing.

Two things about the Jewish Federation. This is a big umbrella group that receives big bucks from donors and funnels it out to other smaller groups for various purposes. The university also depends on large donations from major donors, many of whom like to see their names plastered on university buildings. It's a big deal.

In addition, Hillel as a national organization supporting Jewish students, works within the university infrastructure and depends on the university to support their functions. That makes it pretty hard to make waves.

Having said that, it is a fact that in the past several years, the Jewish Federation of Orange County and OC Hillel have been an obstacle to efforts to bring public attention to the problems at UCI. They have been too connected to the university, and in the case of the Federation, to donors to want the university to look bad. There are some Jewish students who will tell you that they were advised to stand down when they wanted to complain to the university about anti-Semitic words and deeds. They were told that if they made a ruckus, prospective Jewish students would not want to come to UCI. (Don't worry, I can produce those students in a heartbeat if if I have to.)

This resistance extended to last week, when the Federation and Hillel opposed the presence of the community at the events. On Thursday, the principal organizer of the community turnout was angrily berated by "someone very high up in Hillel". The same week, protesters were asked by Hillel to move several yards away from the speaking area to an area set up by Hillel. They refused.

On Wednesday, that same organizer was mocked by "someone very high up in the Jewish Federation" because on that particular day, there was a low turnout. (Alison Weir was the speaker, which explained the low turnout.)

So you see, all week people from the community turned out with American and Israeli flags and posters saying "Don't bring hate to UCI". They conducted themselves peacefully. And in return, they get mocked by the Federation and berated by Hillel.

Message learned? The OC Jewish Federation and Hillel are part of the problem.

Oh, they are making a pretense of standing up since February 8th. The CEO of the Federation is running around making strong statements to any reporter who will listen that the university must take strong action against the Muslim Student Union. Why now? Obviously, he is under a lot of pressure from people who want to know what the Hell is going on at UCI. So now they (Federation, Hillel, American Jewish Committee and Anti-Defamation League all sign a joint letter to the chancellor, publicize it and cry, "Stand with the Four".

Gimme a break!

Where were they when the Orange County Independent Jewish Task Force on Anti-Semitism and the Zionist Organization of America were going public with their complaints? Where was the support? Now they all want to look like they are doing something. They are protecting their little empires, that's all.

I repeat, the lesson learned at UCI is that it is up to the community to get involved. Whoever wants to join among faculty, students or organizations is welcome. Those that don't support the community-stand aside and stay out of the way.

After all, the issue is way more important than who gets their name on a building.

Obama and Daniel Pearl

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk


Last week, President Obama signed the Daniel Pearl Freedom of Press Act in the Oval Office in the presence of the family of Daniel Pearl, Wall Street Journal reporter who was murdered by beheading in Pakistan in 2002 by Islamic extremists.




Some have criticized Obama for refusing to take questions from the press immediately after signing the bill. Ironic as that is, there is another side of the story that the media is not addressing.

Daniel Pearl was not beheaded because he was a reporter. He was not beheaded by the government of Pakistan. He was beheaded by Muslim terrorists because he was an American Jew. In fact, those were the last words Pearl spoke before he was beheaded.

"I am an American Jew."

Regrettably, the President said nothing about that fact in his words. He said not one word about who the killers were or why they really did their foul deed. I can well understand his not wanting to speak too graphically with Pearl's young son next to him. However, not to state the true reason behind Pearl's murder and who the perpetrators were is shameful.

"I am an American Jew."

Phil Gordon-Phoenix's Sanctuary Mayor

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk


In the debate about the Arizona immigration law, you may have seen Phoenix mayor Phil Gordon opining about how unfair the law is. Gordon is the mayor of a city that has become the kidnap capital of the US. And we're not talking about the Lindburgh baby, folks. We are talking about kidnappings in relation to the smuggling of human beings (illegal aliens)from Mexico. Yet, here is what Gordon has to say (Hat tip to Kathy Shaidle and Frontpage Magazine Newsreal blog):

http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/05/22/phoenix-mayor-blames-new-immigration-law-on-talk-radio-lack-of-fairness-doctrine/

So you see, according to Mayor Gordon, the bad guys in this whole sordid mess are those right-wing hate mongers on talk radio.

In case you don't know the details about Phoenix's kidnapping problem, it works something like this; illegal aliens pay a few thousand dollars (in many cases, their life savings) to the coyotes to guide them across the border. Once in the US, many of them fall prey to other Mexican kidnappers, who then keep them under guard in homes until the victims' families can cough up a few more thousand dollars to get them released. Nice, huh? And that's not even talking about the kidnappings, murders and other violence associated with Mexican drug smuggling.

Yet, Gordon apparently is ok with the fact that his city is the capital of this evil enterprise. Hey, maybe he figures it's good for the economy. What he needs is a Fairness Doctrine so we will remain uninformed.

Here's another aspect of Arizona's illegal immigration situation you may not be aware of if you don't live there. I want you environmental activists out there to pay close attention. Here are some photos from the Sonora Desert area south of Tucson. They were forwarded to me by a friend whose wife is a (legal) Mexican immigrant and US citizen from Nogales, Sonora, Mexico. (I don't know the actual originator of the photos.)







These pictures were taken in a wash about 1.5 miles long along the smuggling route south of Tucson. Along with the clothes, bottles and other trash, you can imagine the human waste. It is an environmental disaster area. Have you seen these images in the news? Of course not. The media doesn't want you to see them. Our government doesn't want you to see them.

Phil Gordon doesn't want you to see them.

Ron Paul: The Founding Fathers Were Libertarians

The Antifederalists Were Right

Mises Daily: Wednesday, September 27, 2006 by Gary Galles

September 27 marks the anniversary of the publication of the first of the Antifederalist Papers in 1789. The Antifederalists were opponents of ratifying the US Constitution. They feared that it would create an overbearing central government, while the Constitution's proponents promised that this would not happen. As the losers in that debate, they are largely overlooked today. But that does not mean they were wrong or that we are not indebted to them.

In many ways, the group has been misnamed. Federalism refers to the system of decentralized government. This group defended states rights — the very essence of federalism — against the Federalists, who would have been more accurately described as Nationalists. Nonetheless, what the so-called Antifederalists predicted would be the results of the Constitution turned out to be true in most every respect.

The Antifederalists warned us that the cost Americans would bear in both liberty and resources for the government that would evolve under the Constitution would rise sharply. That is why their objections led to the Bill of Rights, to limit that tendency (though with far too little success that has survived to the present).

Antifederalists opposed the Constitution on the grounds that its checks on federal power would be undermined by expansive interpretations of promoting the "general welfare" (which would be claimed for every law) and the "all laws necessary and proper" clause (which would be used to override limits on delegated federal powers), creating a federal government with unwarranted and undelegated powers that were bound to be abused.

One could quibble with the mechanisms the Antifederalists predicted would lead to constitutional tyranny. For instance, they did not foresee that the Commerce Clause would come to be called "the everything clause" in law schools, used by centralizers to justify almost any conceivable federal intervention. The 20th-century distortion of the clause's original meaning was so great even the vigilant Antifederalists could never have imagined the government getting away with it.

And they could not have foreseen how the Fourteenth Amendment and its interpretation would extend federal domination over the states after the Civil War. But it is very difficult to argue with their conclusions from the current reach of our government, not just to forcibly intrude upon, but often to overwhelm Americans today.

Therefore, it merits remembering the Antifederalists' prescient arguments and how unfortunate is the virtual absence of modern Americans who share their concerns.

One of the most insightful of the Antifederalists was Robert Yates, a New York judge who, as a delegate to the Constitutional Convention, withdrew because the convention was exceeding its instructions. Yates wrote as Brutus in the debates over the Constitution. Given his experience as a judge, his claim that the Supreme Court would become a source of almost unlimited federal over-reaching was particularly insightful.

Brutus asserted that the Supreme Court envisioned under the Constitution would become a source of massive abuse because they were beyond the control "both of the people and the legislature," and not subject to being "corrected by any power above them." As a result, he objected to the fact that its provisions justifying the removal of judges didn't include making rulings that went beyond their constitutional authority, which would lead to judicial tyranny.

Brutus argued that when constitutional grounds for making rulings were absent, the Court would create grounds "by their own decisions." He thought that the power it would command would be so irresistible that the judiciary would use it to make law, manipulating the meanings of arguably vague clauses to justify it.

The Supreme Court would interpret the Constitution according to its alleged "spirit", rather than being restricted to just the "letter" of its written words (as the doctrine of enumerated rights, spelled out in the Tenth Amendment, would require).

Further, rulings derived from whatever the court decided its spirit was would effectively "have the force of law," due to the absence of constitutional means to "control their adjudications" and "correct their errors". This constitutional failing would compound over time in a "silent and imperceptible manner", through precedents that built on one another.

Expanded judicial power would empower justices to shape the federal government however they desired, because the Supreme Court's constitutional interpretations would control the effective power vested in government and its different branches. That would hand the Supreme Court ever-increasing power, in direct contradiction to Alexander Hamilton's argument in Federalist 78 that the Supreme Court would be "the least dangerous branch."

Brutus predicted that the Supreme Court would adopt "very liberal" principles of interpreting the Constitution. He argued that there had never in history been a court with such power and with so few checks upon it, giving the Supreme Court "immense powers" that were not only unprecedented, but perilous for a nation founded on the principle of consent of the governed. Given the extent to which citizens' power to effectively withhold their consent from federal actions has been eviscerated, it is hard to argue with Brutus's conclusion.

He further warned that the new government would not be restricted in its taxing power, and that the legislatures war power was highly dangerous: "the power in the federal legislative, to raise and support armies at pleasure, as well in peace as in war, and their controul over the militia, tend, not only to a consolidation of the government, but the destruction of liberty."

He also objected to the very notion that a republican form of government can work well over such a vast territory, even the relatively small terrority as compared with today's US:

History furnishes no example of a free republic, anything like the extent of the United States. The Grecian republics were of small extent; so also was that of the Romans. Both of these, it is true, in process of time, extended their conquests over large territories of country; and the consequence was, that their governments were changed from that of free governments to those of the most tyrannical that ever existed in the world.

Brutus accurately described both the cause (the absence of sufficient enforceable restraints on the size and scope of the federal government) and the consequences (expanding burdens and increasing invasions of liberty) of what would become the expansive federal powers we now see all around us.

But today, Brutus would conclude that he had been far too optimistic. The federal government has grown orders of magnitudes larger than he could ever have imagined (in part because he was writing when only indirect taxes and the small federal government they could finance were possible, before the 16th Amendment opened the way for a federal income tax in 1913), far exceeding its constitutionally enumerated powers, despite the constraints of the Bill of Rights. The result burdens citizens beyond his worst nightmare.

The judicial tyranny that was accurately and unambiguously predicted by Brutus and other Antifederalists shows that in essential ways, they were right and that modern Americans still have a lot to learn from them. We need to understand their arguments and take them seriously now, if there is to be any hope of restraining the federal government to the limited powers it was actually granted in the Constitution, or even anything close to them, given its current tendency to accelerate its growth beyond them.

The Attacks on Rand Paul Already Start

Two days after winning the Kentucky Senate Republican Primary, Rand Paul is already coming under fire from people who disagree with his beliefs to fix the country.

While appearing on the Rachel Maddow show on MSNBC, Rand Paul was asked about his views on civil rights. He dodged the questions from Maddow on whether the federal government had the power to legislate civil rights, and has recieved criticism for not answering a question that has relevance to his campaign for the United States Senate.

His popular father had to come out and defend him from these insane attacks:

Rep. Ron Paul defended his son on Thursday, insisting that the controversy over Rand Paul's civil rights beliefs were "overkill" and "unfair."


The elder Paul, a Republican from Texas and former presidential candidate, said his son, the Kentucky GOP Senate nominee, is being asked questions that are irrelevant to the campaign by interviewers with a partisan agenda.


"It's contrived because he's done so well," Ron Paul said outside the House chamber Thursday afternoon.


On Wednesday night, Rand Paul dodged questions from liberal MSNBC host Rachel Maddow about whether he believes the Civil Rights Act of 1964 should not have given the federal government power to enforce the integration of lunch counters and other privately owned businesses.


On Thursday, the younger Paul released a statement saying he would not support a hypothetical effort to repeal the law.


"I think it's overkill," Ron Paul said of the attention focused on his son's beliefs on the matter. "It's just not fair."

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37577.html#ixzz0oWhEIomD

Just goes to show you the extent that crazy liberals will go to bring down somebody that threatens their thought process.

Norman Finklestein Refuses to Sign Letter Against Anti-Semitism

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk


Last Tuesday at UC-Irvine, that great "Independent Scholar with a PHD from Princeton", Norman Finklestein, spoke on behalf of the Muslim Student Union during Israel Apartheid Week. During the Q&A, I asked him if he would add his name to a letter of about 40 Jewish faculty members asking for an end to anti-Semitism on the UCI campus. Below is the non-answer I got. (You will have to download the video).


http://rcpt.yousendit.com/875042031/49315488ea701047fcd87f24e688360e

Of course, Finklestein was referring to the MSU disclaimer about anti-Semitism that was read before every event last week including the tirade by Amir Abdel Malik Ali, which many of those present are calling anti-Semitic. For the life of me, I have no idea what Richard Goldstone had to do with any of this.

Rand Paul Wins Kentucky Primary!

Rand Paul, son of Congressmen Ron Paul, has defeated the establishment candidate in the Kentucky Republican Senate Primary. This is great news for the Libertarian movement and the tea party activists all around the country. It is a single that politicians on both sides of the aisle are huge targets for their out of control spending and reliance on the establishment to get things done in D.C.

From the Politico:

Insurgent Senate candidate Rand Paul claimed the Republican nomination for the seat of retiring Kentucky Sen. Jim Bunning Tuesday evening, easily besting establishment favorite Trey Grayson, the sitting secretary of State who won the endorsement of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

With nearly 50 percent of precincts reporting, Paul was drawing 59 percent of the vote to Grayson's 35 percent – a yawning lead over a candidate once viewed as a sure bet for his party's nomination.

On the Democratic side, state Attorney General Jack Conway had pulled into a double-digit lead over Lt. Gov. Dan Mongiardo, holding 48 percent of the vote to Mongiardo's 39 percent and likely giving national Democrats their preferred nominee for the fall campaign.

The final hours of the primary race brought accusations of “voter intimidation” from Grayson's campaign, as the establishment Republican's campaign manager charged Paul's supporters with "bullying" and called on Paul to "rein in his goon squad and follow the law.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0510/37414.html#ixzz0oKXsx8zF

It is now time to go out and claim the ultimate victory for Rand Paul and deliver him the United States Senate seat and bring a fresh new face to Washington D.C.

Kerry, Lieberman Ready to End Senate Careers

By Roger F. Gay

It's official. Senators John Kerry and Joe Lieberman have signaled the end of their political careers. The two have introduced what they've titled the “American Power Act.” Yep, it's a global warming bill – Cap-n-Trade, Cap-n-Tax, etc. The premise for this bill is that the industrial emissions of Carbon Dioxide (CO2) are causing global temperatures to rise and to prevent global catastrophe the industrialized world must reduce its emissions of CO2.

A pork and power bill based on global warming propaganda has been a priority for the Obama administration. Given that it has already been established, absolutely, that predictions of catastrophic man-made global warming are a scam, you might question the two senators' sanity for introducing one. But new benefits to Israel have recently been negotiated, which might be all it takes to make Joe Lieberman happy. And it's very easy to imagine a chat between John Kerry and Al Gore that ends with Al Gore saying, “Yah, but the money is good.”

Kerry's term isn't over until 2014, when he will be 71 years old, so retirement isn't an unreasonable choice anyway. Lieberman is about the same age with his current term ending two years earlier.

Investor's Business Daily describes the bill as “cap-and-trade meets pork-barrel spending.” It's about regulations, restrictions and research. The bill creates some 60 new agencies and projects to eat up our tax dollars and buy support.

According to a leaked draft summary, there is "$7 billion annually to improve our transportation infrastructure and efficiency" to be paid for by a gas tax that is not called a tax but a "linked fee." There is "$2 billion per year for researching and developing effective carbon capture and sequestration methods and devices." There is even "a new multibillion-dollar revenue stream for agriculture through a domestic offset program." Tilling the soil releases carbon dioxide, don't you know?

Ironically, the draft summary acknowledges the bill will cause energy prices to necessarily skyrocket by promising to "provide assistance to those Americans who may be disproportionately affected by potential increases in energy prices."

The proposed legislation mandates reductions in greenhouse gas emissions from fossil fuels via a cap-and-trade system for power plants and, eventually, factories — with strict curbs on the types of trading that could be done. It would require oil companies, for example, to obtain emission permits at a set price not determined by the trading market.

"This bill is a compilation of just about every bad idea that has emerged in the energy debate," said Patrick Creighton, spokesman for the Institute for Energy Research, a free-market think tank. "Two things are certain if this bill becomes law: Energy prices will skyrocket, and jobs will be shipped overseas."

I don't think anyone today can reasonably claim that America's political system is working. From hiring ACORN with public money in violation of campaign finance law, to destroying the nation's health care to increase kick-backs, to destroying the economy to steal money based on energy use; it simply doesn't matter any more how obvious the scam or how completely corruption is exposed. The American Political Class count themselves as the modern “untouchables.” They'll do it anyway, mock the American public and laugh in the face of protests while they do.

David Horowitz and Mark LeVine (UC-Irvine Professor) Go at it on Hannity

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk


Last night on Fox's Sean Hannity Show, David Horowitz and UC-Irvine Professer Mark LeVine were interviewed in regards to Horowitz's appearance this week at UC San Diego, in which a member of the Muslim Student Association made a controversial remark in answer to Horowitz's question. This led to an angry exchange between LeVine (a Palestinian supporter)and Horowitz, in which charges of dishonesty were thrown back and forth. At one point, Horowitz referred to a seized document purporting to show a connection between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Muslim Student Association. As one who also teaches at UC-Irvine, I watched the segment with more than passing interest.





On October 8, 2008, I attended a presentation at UC-Irvine, which was held in Mr LeVine's class (and open to the public)by Muslim Brotherhood spokesman Ibrahim Al-Houdaiby of Egypt. Mr Al-Houdaiby's theme was that the Muslim Brotherhood opposes violence, condemned 9-11, is trying to achieve understanding with the West, and is trying to bring democratic reform to Egypt. During the Q&A, I presented Al-Houdaiby with English and Arabic copies of a document seized by the FBI and presented as evidence in the Holy Land Foundation trial. In this document, a representative from the MB (Mohamed Akram)is writing to the "North American brothers" telling them that their role in North America is to work to destroy its "miserable house" from within. (It appears that this is the same document Horowitz was referring to last night on Hannity.)

Here is the link to the document, both in Arabic and English. On page 18, there is a list of affiliated organizations, which includes the Muslim Students Association (number 2).

http://www.investigativeproject.org/documents/misc/20.pdf


Mr Al Houdaiby denied the authenticity of the document and stated it must have been a forgery. In his remarks and subsequent comments to my below-linked article, he referred to Muslim Brotherhood founder Hasan al-Banna and Muslim Brotherhood scholar and writer, Yusef Al-Qaradawy, as being against terrorism. Here is my posting from October 8, 2008.

http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2008/10/muslim-brotherhood-speaker-appears-at.html

Subsequently, I wrote another post entitled, "Where is Ibrahim El Houdaiby?". That led to another exchange of comments (see below).

http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2008/10/where-is-ibrahim-el-houdaiby.html


Another previous posting of mine featured LeVine's written statement of defense of the Muslim Student Union members who were arrested for disrupting the speech by the Israeli ambassador on February 8, 2010.

http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2010/02/professor-mark-levine-comments-on-uci.html


I write this because much of the exchange between Horowitz and LeVine last night revolved around alleged connections between the MB and the Muslim Students Association and anti-Israel events on college campuses. (Israel Apartheid Week just concluded Thursday at UC-Irvine.)

UC-Irvine Hate Fest-A Post-Mortem

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk






Now that the 2010 Israel Apartheid Week at UC-Irvine is behind us, I think it is time to pass on a few comments about the past week. I believe-and I hope- that this week marked a seminal event in the history of these hateful events. Those of us who support Israel, love our own country and stand up to anti-Semitism have learned a few lessons this week, which I will expand on in an upcoming posting. I strongly believe, however, no matter how much the UCI Muslim Student Union, their supporters, the New University campus newspaper and the local Orange County Register try to interpret or spin this, the forces of Israel Apartheid Week took a whipping this week at UCI.

The major story to come out of this week's events is that after the outrage of the disruption of the Israeli ambassador's speech on February 8th, many segments-not all-of the Jewish community have awakened from their slumber. Thus, members of the local Jewish community determined at the grass roots level that if another hate week was to go forward, their voices were going to be heard.It was not going to be just another one-sided bashing of Israel, America and American Jews. Not without a response.

When I say grass roots, I mean individuals from the community-both Jewish and Christian- who decided enough was enough. They realized that, with only a couple of exceptions, they could not pin their hopes on the national Jewish organizations to fight for them. Right now, from my viewpoint as a Christian, the major two Jewish organizations at the national level who have stepped up to the plate at UCI are the Zionist Organization of America and Stand With Us. Add to that, at the local level, the Orange County Independent Task Force on Anti-Semitism and Act for America.

The largest draws that the MSU brought to our campus were Norman Finklestein, who even the MSU could only advertise on their fliers as "independent scholar with a PHD from Princeton University", Professor William Robinson of UC Santa Barbara and old stand-by Amir Abdel Malik Ali. They all flopped.

Finklestein was showed up for what he is in the Q&A. First, yours truly came to the mike and asked him to add his signature to that of 40 mostly-Jewish professors at UCI who had issued a letter pleading to an end to anti-Semitic words and actions on the UCI campus. It took the great independent scholar about 5 minutes of a winding answer, mostly talking about Richard Goldstone, to essentially decline-without saying so (see my posting). Then, when a Jewish student called him "Norm", Finklestein threw another one of his famous temper tantrums showing everybody that he is nothing but a bully.



William Robinson gave a lecture basically recounting the Radical's Handbook from memory and putting even the MSU members to sleep. When it was over, I told him I considered him neither a professional nor an educator, but an indoctrinator. Have a nice trip back to Santa Barbara, Dr Robinson.

(Just follow the coastline due north.)

Then yesterday, Amir Abdel Malik Ali came and gave his standard thunder and lightening speech as some one hundred pro-Israel (and pro-America) folks walked around with Israeli and American flags. In the Q&A, Roz Rothstein, Director of Stand With Us drew some interesting admissions out of Ali that will make a lasting sound-bite. Ali admitted that he was pro-Hamas, pro-Hezbollah, and pro-Islamic Jihad. As to the question of whether he was pro-Jihad on (the UCI) campus, he answered insofar as it pertains to "speaking truth to power". He then called (the Jews in the audience) "Nazis". Sweet.



Thank you, Mr Ali. Welcome to your YouTube moment.

If one can read body language, and I can, the MSU was taken aback by the presence of so many pro-Israel demonstrators. (So were a few folks who one would think would be on our side, which I discussed in a previous article-and will discuss again).

As I said before, the pro-Israel folks were boisterous but observed the proper rules of behavior. There were two exceptions, a married couple who showed up independently and acted like jerks in spite of our requests to act civilly.

As I remarked earlier, I regret that two earlier speakers Hedy Epstein and Alison Weir had stayed to hear Ali yesterday. It might have given them pause. In addition, it must now be publicly asked; where were Chancellor Michael Drake, who has the weight of the university crashing down on him-from both sides- all because of this controversy? Is is incredible that he would not see and hear for himself. Same for Erwin Chemerinsky, our law dean, who has repeatedly denied anti-Semitism at UCI-both before and after he came here.

Initially, I was encouraged that the Orange County Register showed up. Reporter Ian Hamilton briefly interviewed me earlier in the week. It is obvious, however, from his writing, that the Register is not going to take a stand one way or another.

Or is it? Hamilton was reportedly overheard this week telling MSU members that he was going to get "their story to the world". If that is incorrect, Mr Hamilton, please feel free to correct the record, as they say in the media.

In addition, OC Register reporter Mary Jo Fisher, who used to cover the beat at UCI, has just requested the Independent Task Force to remove her from their e-mail list. Strange behavior from a reporter who is supposed to strive to get all sides of a story, wouldn't you say, Ms Fisher? Personally, I think she is much better suited in her present role as a columnist writing articles about washing dishes as the "Frumpy Old Mom".

All in all, this week was a victory for the good guys, one that can be duplicated in other places.

Day 4 of Hate Week at UC-Irvine

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk



Amir Abdel Malik Ali




Amir Abdel Malik Ali and I sharing a laugh at the expense of Norman Finklestein and William Robinson's speaking styles.


Today, Hate Week at UC-Irvine came to a crashing thud of an end. Today's speaker was firebrand Amir Abdel Malik Ali. I only wish the nice ladies Hedy Epstein and Alison Weir, who spoke earlier this week, had stayed around to hear Ali. It might have given them pause.

I was happy to note that today, we had the largest turnout of community Jewish protesters who came with posters, Israeli and American flags. They were orderly as we expected them to be.

(OC Register)

Overheard from one Muslim Student Union guy as the protesters came marching over the bridge and onto campus,

"What the F---?"

Ali, as expected, was quite in contrast to the style of Weir and Epstein as he excoriated Israel and made his usual implications about the coming end of said state. In contrast to the ridiculous statements of the Great Independent Scholar with a PHD from Princeton (Norman "don't call me Norm") Finklestein, who told us that every Arab and Palestinian entity wanted to reach a peace deal with Israel, Ali took a different tone, as expected. Ali is not interested in peace.

In addition, Ali went off on his customary rant about prominent American figures whom he identifies as "Zionist Jews".

"Alan Greenspan-Zionist Jew!"
"Timothy Geithner-Zionist Jew!"
"Larry Summers- Zionist Jew!"

Thank you, Mr Ali.

In the Q&A, I complemented Ali by saying that after having to listen to William Robinson and Norman Finklestein, he was a "breath of fresh" air, which he knew was a left-handed compliment. I told him that we had heard Epstein and Weir, both nice ladies with a passion for the Palestinian cause; we then heard "that great independent scholar with a PHD from Princeton, Finklestein tells us that everybody in the Middle East wanted peace except Israel, backed by the US and a couple of atolls in the Pacific. Now comes Ali, who doesn't speak of peace but wants an end to the Jewish state.

"Zionist state", he corrected me.

I also reminded him that, once again, he had ranted about Americans whom he calls, "Zionist Jews", which I consider anti-Semitic. I said that to me, there had been mixed signals from the week's speakers. My question was "What is it you guys want-is it a peaceful solution or the end of the Jewish state?

Usually, in my exchanges with Ali, he quietly gives me an answer, which I have respected. This time, he went back into speech mode and started talking about "oppressors and the oppressed" with references to the Israeli Defense Forces. If there was an answer in there, I missed it.

Then there was this question from Roz Rothstein, Director of Stand With Us:
(Hat tip to Rabbi Drew and Orange County Independent Task Force on Anti-Semitism)




After the event, Jewish school pupils (I don't know from which school they were from) participated in a lively series of Jewish dances and song. It was my impression that the MSU folks were, what's the word....discombobulated. (Is that right?)

Oh yeah. There was one other event in the early evening. Some graduate student named Omar Shakir from Georgetown was speaking. I decided enough was enough. Why should I give up my happy hour to go listen to and argue with some grad student from Georgetown? Small potatoes.

I am very disappointed that Chancellor Michael Drake did not come out-especially today-and see and hear for himself what is going on on his campus especially in light of all the contoversy that has given his university a very negative reputation when it comes to this issue. I would have hoped that Law School Dean Erwin Chemerinsky, who continues to deny anti-Semitism at UCI, would have come out and listened to Ali. Ditto for Vice Chancellor Manuel Gomez-wherever he was.




In my view, this week was a victory for the friends of Israel, those who love America, and those who wish to stand up to anti-Semitism on university campuses. I hope it will spread to other campuses in the US and Canada. I know many of UCI's Jewish students would have preferred that the demonstrators not come to campus, but with all due respect, this issue is bigger than just them. This concerns everybody.

Norman Finklestein Has a Bad Day at UC Irvine

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk



Norman Finklestein Comes to UC-Irvine



Norm Finklestein-He's the one standing at the podium.)


Today, on day 2 of the Israel Apartheid Week, we found ourselves in the presence of a Great Man at UC-Irvine. Yes, folks, none other than that legendary "independent scholar" with a PHD from Princeton, ex-DePaul University professor (he was canned)Norman Finklestein spoke at UC-Irvine. (At least that is how he is advertised on the Muslim Student Union flyers.)

What was his topic? Israel is evil or something like that.

First of all, to listen to a speech by Finklestein is like listening to a sleeping bull snoring in the meadow. The man takes pedantic to a whole new level. Even his worshipers are bored to tears. Fortunately, I brought a newspaper along.

That's me in the red jacket as Finklestein speaks.


So what did the vaunted independent scholar say? The usual stuff about how every entity in the world is trying to find a peaceful solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict except Israel, backed by the US and a couple of south sea islands in the Pacific.



So who, according to Finklestein, is seeking peace? Why the whole Arab world, plus the UN and their famous Human Rights Commission-you know, comprised of countries like Sudan and Iran. In addition, every Palestinian entity is fervently seeking peace (forget about that pesky Hamas charter that talks about eschewing negotiations as a waste of time and calling for the complete destruction of Israel and removal of all Jews from "Palestine".) But we can forgive Norm for not knowing about the Hamas Charter; after all, old Helen Thomas doesn't know about it either.

And how about that Organization of the Islamic Conference-you know, the ones who are trying to get the UN to pass that international law against defaming Islam? Yeah, according to Norm, they are calling for peace too.



And not to neglect what Norm calls the most respected international justice body in the world-the International Court or whatever it is in The Hague.



It should be noted that not all of the audience was so enamored of the great "independent scholar". The local Orange County community, not to mention the Jewish community, has awakened since the February 8th disruption of the Israeli ambassador's speech at UCI Irvine. Local members of Act for America, Stand With Us and Anteaters for Israel turned out to support Israel, America and UCI Jewish students.



At this point, I need to get serious a bit and mention one problem. It needs to be pointed out that in the past two days, a woman has turned up at the events who, to put it mildly, is out of control. Yesterday, she showed up with a bullhorn, and it was obvious she was looking for trouble. I approached her, introduced myself and implored her not to cause any disruptions so as not to discredit all of the counter-protesters. I pointed out that it was imperative that we not send a negative message to the UCI students who would be passing by. Unfortunately, after Jewish peace activist Hedy Epstein's talk yesterday, this woman yelled out and called her a "self-hating Jew". Disgusting.

Back to Finklestein. During the Q&A, he offered to take the first three questions from the opposing side. Since I was perched on the front steps in front of the podium, once again, I got chosen first. Since it was an outdoor event, I was asked to come to the podium and use his microphone. My question was (I am going from memory):


Me and the "Great Independent Scholar with a PHD from Princeton"


"This week, some 40 Jewish professors at UCI have signed a letter asking for a stop to anti-Semitic hate speech on campus that has been fomented for years by these events. Hopefully, the letter will be published in next week's campus newspaper. I have signed the letter, and I am not even Jewish. Will you join me in signing this letter?"

Yes or no?

What I got was a 10 minute dissertation beginning with the statement that the MSU moderator had already announced that these events were not anti-Semitic. Then Finklestein incredibaly launched into a long monologue about none other than Richard Goldstone, the "respected Jewish, Zionist South African judge" who had led the Goldstone Report-the one-sided report on the Gaza fighting that relied solely on the words of Hamas and their supporters. During the apartheid era in South Africa, Goldstone also sent some 28 black rebels to the gallows....

But I digress.

Anyway, as I sat there waiting for my yes or no answer, Norm droned on about Richard Goldstone, as if Richard Goldstone were going to appear out of nowhere and sign the letter. At one point, I asked, "yes or no. Will you sign?"

".....Goldstone, Goldstone, Goldstone....". Finally, I got up walked up the steps saying that I would go find Goldstone and ask HIM to sign the letter. Finklestein was still talking about Goldstone.

Exasperated, I go looking for Richard Goldstone to see if HE will sign the letter, as Finklestein drones on.


Well, anyway, this gets better. A young student introduced himself as a Jew and began to ask a question, calling him "Norm".

At this point, Norm blew up objecting to being addressed by his first name.

"Don't address me by my first name (paraphrased). I am not your friend" (not paraphrased), bellowed Norm.

Then, as every flower on campus died, the aforementioned nutty woman, seated on the front steps, jumped up and began screaming at poor Norm. Eventually, she was restrained. I don't know what she said as I was in the back at the time. It was an embarrassment.

I have noticed that Norm likes to bully young college students who have a point of view opposite of his. He has done it previously at UCI. Most recently, he did it a month or so back in Canada, when a tearful coed objected to his references to Nazis. Finklestein humiliated her in front of the audience then sat down laughing at the girl. In short, Finklestein is a bully.

Anyway, Norm is doing a repeat performance tonight at UCI, which is supposed to be "in more detail".


I'll pass. One hour of Finklestein is all I can take. It wouldn't surprise me if even the MSU takes a pass tonight.

I'll post some video when I get it. I recommend you watch it late at night when you're trying to get to sleep.

Ron Paul: Euro Bailout Will Lead To Currency Collapse

No Bail-outs: Rand Paul on Economic Freedom vs. Corporate Subsidy mania

UC Berkeley Professor Objects to Campus Protest Against Anti-Semitism

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk


Below pictures by Arab Lesbians Against Hate



Andrew Gutierrez, Professor at UC Berkeley
(Hat tip to Fatima at Arab Lesbians Against Hate)


Yesterday, I posted an article about swastikas being discovered on the UC Berserkley campus last week and a resultant student demonstration protesting against anti-Semitism. Who could object to that?

Meet Professor Andrew Gutierrez




(hat tip to an anonymous commenter for sending me the link to this video)

What people like Gutierrez (an anti-Israel professor and Israel divestment petition signer) don't get is that there is a rise in anti-Semitism which should be opposed by everyone no matter where one stands on the Israel-Palestinian issue. So a group of students protest against swastikas on campus and this guy comes out to heckle them while they are speaking?

Well, what can you expect?

And a special salute to Fatima at Arab Lesbians Against Hate, which I have linked to this site.

Hate Week Returns to UC-Irvine

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk







Norman Finklestein-"Independent Scholar"


The Muslim Student Union at UC-Irvine has released its schedule of events for the week of May 10 plus a couple of warm-up events for the week of May 3. Yes, folks, it's the same group that is supposedly under investigation by the university for its George Galloway event of last May, when money was collected to deliver to Gaza. The MSU is also still under investigation by the university for its role in disrupting the speech of the Israeli ambassador on February 8th. Nevertheless, the show must go on. So here comes "Israel Apartheid Week-A Call to Boycott, Divest and Sanction Israel."

This coming week, the MSU in concert with several other unhappy student groups*, will host a couple of events under the title:

Roots of Pain: Oppression-Spreading Awareness for Issues of Injustice and Oppression. You get the message. On Monday (May 3) some former gang member will talk about the gang situation in Los Angeles. (I wonder who he will blame that on.) On Wednesday evening, there will be some sort of round table discussion of oppression under the guidance of a poet and rap artist named Amir Sulaiman.

The purpose of these two events is to draw in as many other "victim groups" as possible to establish a theme of various groups united in opposition to "oppression in Amerika". Hopefully (to the MSU), they will then all come together with the MSU during the week of May 10 when Israel, the US and those "Zionist Jews" will be singled out for blame for all the world's ills.

On Monday, May 10 at 2 pm, a Holocaust survivor named Hedy Epstein, will come in and talk about how bad Israel is. At seven that evening, Hatem Bazian will speak. Bazian teaches at UC Berkeley and has a number of interesting quotes attributed to him including the infamous hadith of hate-you know, the one about Jews hiding behind rocks and trees (which he denies). He also reportedly told a cheering crowd in San Francisco that it was time we had an intifada in this country (according to Steven Emerson in his book, American Jihad).

Then on Tuesday at noon (in front of the flagpoles), it's the incomparable Norman Finklestein, now an "independent scholar" since he was canned by DePaul University. Finklestein is a grumpy man who hates everything and everyone who disagrees with him. Yet, academics swoon when he comes to speak (at least at UC-Irvine). They love to listen as Finklestein throws in insults at someone every two or three sentences. They laugh at his sarcasm directed towards his opponents. Finklestein is guaranteed to go over his allotted time because he loves to listen to himself talk as he bashes Israel and America. Then at 5 pm, after resting his vocal cords, the esteemed "independent scholar" will do it all over again.

Der Fink has a number of interesting conspiracy theories including the idea that the Jews have exploited the Holocaust to blackmail the world, Israel attacked Hamas last year because they (Hamas) had become too moderate and represented a reliable partner for peace-and in answer to a question by me on January 31, 2009 at UCI that all those pro-Palestinian protesters in Ft Lauderdale, LA, and San Francisco yelling "Jews back to the ovens", "long live Hitler and "Hitler rest in peace" (videos can be seen on Fousesquawk) either didn't exist, were greatly exaggerated, or were Zionists masquerading as Arabs.

This is a really smart guy, folks.

On Wednesday at 12 and again at 2, film maker Alison Weir ("If They Only Knew") will bash Israel. Ms Weir is just one of so many who are absorbed with so-called human rights abuses in Israel but don't have a lot to say about human rights abuses in all those nations that surround Israel as well as the Palestinian territories.

In the evening (7:30), it's UC Santa Barbara sociology professor and indoctrinator William Robinson, the one who was involved in sending e-mails to his students comparing Israel to Nazi Germany. The topic of his talk will be "UC Israel", whatever that means.

On Thursday at noon, it's none other than old stand-by Amir Abdel Malik Ali on "Death to Apartheid". To Ali, that means wiping out Israel, one Palestinian state, and whatever it takes-including suicide bombers who blow up Israeli buses and pizza parlors-"heroes" and martyrs" according to him. No doubt, he'll identify a few more "Zionist Jews" for our benefit as he has in the past, folks like "David Axelrod, Rahm Israel Emanuel and Rupert Murdoch".

At 5 pm, it will be Omar Shakir, a young "scholar" in Middle East Studies at Georgetown and anti-Israel activist. As a student at Stanford, he led an attempt to get a divestment from Israel resolution passed.

So there it is, folks. While the entire UC system is turned upside down over recent hateful incidents on several of its campuses, trying to devise ways of patching up ethnic and religious divisions, and UCI is trying to figure out what to do about the aforementioned events involving George Galloway and the Israeli ambassador's disrupted speech, get ready for another round of bashing of Israel, the US and those "Zionist Jews". And for all those folks who have been denying there is a problem at UCI, come out and see it for yourselves.

BTW, where is George Galloway?

Ah, there he is (in red).

* Groups supporting May 3 week events:

American Indian Student Association
Black Student Union
Hip Hop Congress
Pakistani Students Ass.
Radical Student Union
Society of Arab Students
Uncultivated Rabbitts
UCI Cross Cultural Center ( I may be wrong, but isn't that a UCI entity?)

Michigan Passes Tough New Immigration Law-Protests Erupt

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk



Can you tell who the Canadian is?


Last week, Michigan Governor John Conyers signed a draconian new anti-illegal immigration law into effect designed to combat the wave of crimes by Canadians crossing the border illegally (chiefly by swimming across the river from Windsor, Ontario into Detroit).

The reaction was immediate.

While most Michiganders support the law saying that the situation in the state had become intolerable, white groups condemned the action calling it racist and a prelude to racial profiling.



In Washington, President Yogi Berra called the law, "unconstitutional" and directed his attorney general, Joe Arpaio, to have the Justice Department look into the law to see if it was constitutional.




Director of Homeland Security and former Michigan Governor, Jenifer Granholm, was also sharply critical of the new law predicting it would run the state into the ground (again). The Canadian prime minister has issued a travel advisory for Canadians planning travel into Michigan. However, bill supporters point out the hypocrisy of Canada's complaints by referring to that country's tough immigration measures on its own northern border, which make it virtually impossible to enter.

Canadian Coast Guard intercepts vessel carrying illegal aliens into Canada from Arctic Circle

In related developments, the on-going drug war rages on in the Canadian border regions between the French-speaking Montreal Cartel and the English-speaking Toronto Cartel. Just yesterday, gunmen from the Toronto-based "The Jerks" shot down five members of the Montreal-based, "Les Folles" on the outskirts of the disputed region of Ottawa.







Meanwhile, "Sheriff Al" Sharpton, in an interview on "Larry King on Life Support", defended the new measure calling for the government to "enforce the law".


Jesse Jackson, traveling on the north side of Chicago, could not be reached for comment. Back on the south side, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright proclaimed,

"God bless America! If there's one thing this country doesn't need, it's more RICH WHITE PEOPLE!"

In other states, some politicians are calling for a boycott of Michigan even extending to the purchase of Detroit Lions gear-which nobody buys anyway.

"Sir, please remove your head covering."

Others are not so enthusiastic. When interviewed by a cute female TV reporter, LA Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa said only,

"It's none of our business".

Meanwhile, the ACLU issued a statement saying,

"We support our law enforcement."

Today, some 100 Canadians and Canadian-Americans are expected to march in downtown Detroit to protest the law. The Detroit Minutemen had this to say,

"We'll be ready for them."


But there is good news. Mexico has agreed to put tough controls on its nuclear enrichment program.