Summer Reading

Chuck Morse Amazon Kindle Page

 http://t.co/oxZNlr94Fw

The Nazi Connection to Islamic Terrorism: Adolf Hitler and Haj Amin Al-Husseini by Chuck Morse(Aug 10, 2010)

This is the story of the founder of the Palestinian movement and his close coCHUCK MORSE SPEAKS: http://www.blogtalkradio.com chuckmorsespeaks 

call in Mon-Fri Noon - 2pm ET: 1-347-327-9849

chuckmorse4@gmail.com

llaboration with Hitler. The career of Haj Amin-al Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, and his activities in Berlin during the war put the present day Israel-Arab conflict in its proper context.

A Whig Manifesto: A Short History of the Whig Movement with Modern Whig Party Perspectives on Current Political and Social Controversies by Chuck Morse and Andrew Evans (Apr 15, 2012)

This is a manifesto for the Modern Whig Party and is a history of the American Whig political movement. The Whig's are neither left or right. They stand for American political and economic nationalism, policies that are in the best interest of America.

Barney Frank and the Law of Unintended Consequences: How the Frank Amendment Helped Terrorists get Legal Visas by Chuck Morse (Jun 9, 2005)

Congressman Barney Frank sponsored a series of laws that made it easier for terrorists, including the 9/11 terrorists, to enter the United States with legal visas. Understanding the strange and demented political career of Barney Frank offers insights into the more extreme element that continues to influence the thinking and actions of the  Democratic Party.

BLOG: http://awhigmanifesto.blogspot.com/ 

Liberal Democrats be forewarned - Elizabeth Warren is a Fraud

Chuck Morse Amazon Kindle Page

 http://t.co/oxZNlr94Fw

The professor and bankruptcy lawyer is not who she claims to be. Even die-hard liberals are beginning to question the cult of Elizabeth Warren. Mounting evidence suggests that the Harvard professor and Democratic senatorial challenger of Massachusetts Republican Senator Scott Brown is nothing more than a first-rate phony and a political hack. Her candidacy might even prove to be too much for the stomachs of liberal Massachusetts voters.

While boring us with insufferable and empty critiques of the mortgage banking industry, Warren made a fortune flipping twelve mortgages in her home town of Oklahoma City. Between 1993 and 1997 the crusader against ‘a deregulated credit industry (that) squeezed families harder, hawking dangerous mortgages’ was buying and selling foreclosed properties at a substantial markup. The Boston Herald reported that Warren bought one property for $30,000 and flipped it five months later for $145,000, a 383 per cent markup. According to the Herald, Warren typically gained between 10 and 73 per cent on her sales, netting hefty profits.

The champion of Obamacare and the scourge of private sector health insurance was paid $212,000 by Travelers Insurance, a health insurance corporation, to screw the little guy, the employees of the manufacturing giant Johns-Manville, employees who thought that they were insured for asbestos poisoning. Warren immunized the bankrupt Travelers, which was facing thousands of claims, by crafting an agreement that allowed the company to set up a separate fund which would allegedly pay the sick employees with paltry sums. Travelers never even made good on the fund. The Boston Globe refered to Warren's involvement in the affair as "murky." While fixing a deal for Travelers Warren was also picking up a tidy $3,500 per week in taxpayers money to create the “Consumer Financial Protection Bureau” for the Obama Administration. President Obama wisely passed over Warren for a recess appointment as head of the agency.

The biggest controversy swirling around Warren, however, and the starkest example of her fundamental dishonesty was her claim to minority status in various professional situations where such a claim would stand to benefit her career. The speciousness of her claim to having Native American ancestry was amplified by the fact that in selected professional situations she claimed to be white. The mediocre professor denied claiming to be Native American at Harvard while seeking tenure. She later had to admit to the Boston Globe that he lied about this when confronted by a Globe reporter who interviewed Harvard. It apparently had never occurred to the shameless Warren that she might have to answer to this. Perhaps she assumed that her liberal advocacy would protect her. Meanwhile, from an affirmative action standpoint, she cheated the system, she stole opportunities from genuine minority applicants.

Finally, the New York Times has reported that Elizabeth Warren stands to become one of the top Congressional fund-raisers of all time as fat cat liberal one percenters and corporate CEO’s pony up large sums of cash for her candidacy. FEC filings reflect large corporate support for Warren who has taken credit for starting the Occupy Wall Street movement. When asked by the Boston Herald how she squared her incessant criticism of corporations with her acceptance of substantial corporate support for her candidacy, she responded by noting that “corporations want to be regulated too.”

Meanwhile, apparently the Democratic National Convention has floated Warren as a potential speaker to deliver the keynote address. Warren is still generating swoons in some quarters when she hypocritically rails against the mortgage industry and the big corporations and when she claims to champion regular people who want to get ahead through honest effort. Perhaps Warrens appeal is based on a desire for revenge against Scott Brown for winning Ted Kennedy’s seat. Revenge, it should be recalled, can backfire. Remember Scott Walker and the Wisconsin recall.  

NYT: Israel's Settlers Are Here to Stay

Chuck Morse Amazon Kindle Page

 http://t.co/oxZNlr94Fw 

---

Israel's Settlers Are Here to Stay
DANI DAYAN, Chairman Jewish Communities in Judea & Samaria
July 25, 2012

WHATEVER word you use to describe Israel's 1967 acquisition of Judea and Samaria — commonly referred to as the West Bank in these pages — will not change the historical facts. Arabs called for Israel's annihilation in 1967, and Israel legitimately seized the disputed territories of Judea and Samaria in self-defense. Israel's moral claim to these territories, and the right of Israelis to call them home today, is therefore unassailable. Giving up this land in the name of a hallowed two-state solution would mean rewarding those who've historically sought to destroy Israel, a manifestly immoral outcome.
Of course, just because a policy is morally justified doesn't mean it's wise. However, our four-decade-long settlement endeavor is both. The insertion of an independent Palestinian state between Israel and Jordan would be a recipe for disaster.
The influx of hundreds of thousands of Palestinian refugees from Syria, Lebanon, Jordan and elsewhere would convert the new state into a hotbed of extremism. And any peace agreement would collapse the moment Hamas inevitably took power by ballot or by gun. Israel would then be forced to recapture the area, only to find a much larger Arab population living there.
Moreover, the Palestinians have repeatedly refused to implement a negotiated two-state solution. The American government and its European allies should abandon this failed formula once and for all and accept that the Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria are not going anywhere.
On the contrary, we aim to expand the existing Jewish settlements in Judea and Samaria, and create new ones. This is not — as it is often portrayed — a theological adventure but is rather a combination of inalienable rights and realpolitik.
Even now, and despite the severe constraints imposed by international pressure,more than 350,000 Israelis live in Judea and Samaria. With an annual growth rate of 5 percent, we can expect to reach 400,000 by 2014 — and that excludes the almost 200,000 Israelis living in Jerusalem's newer neighborhoods. Taking Jerusalem into account, about 1 in every 10 Israeli Jews resides beyond the 1967 border. Approximately 160,000 Jews live in communities outside the settlement blocs that proponents of the two-state solution believe could be easily incorporated into Israel. But uprooting them would be exponentially more difficult than the evacuation of the Gaza Strip's 8,000 settlers in 2005.
The attempts by members of the Israeli left to induce Israelis to abandon their homes in Judea and Samaria by offering them monetary compensation are pathetic. This checkbook policy has failed in the past, as it will in the future. In the areas targeted for evacuation most of us are ideologically motivated and do not live here for economic reasons. Property prices in the area are steep and settlers who want to relocate could sell their property on the free market. But they do not.
Our presence in all of Judea and Samaria — not just in the so-called settlement blocs — is an irreversible fact. Trying to stop settlement expansion is futile, and neglecting this fact in diplomatic talks will not change the reality on the ground; it only makes the negotiations more likely to fail.
Given the irreversibility of the huge Israeli civilian presence in Judea and Samaria and continuing Palestinian rejectionism, Western governments must reassess their approach to resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. They should acknowledge that no final-status solution is imminent. And consequently, instead of lamenting that the status quo is not sustainable, the international community should work together with the parties to improve it where possible and make it more viable.
Today, security — the ultimate precondition for everything — prevails. Neither Jews nor Palestinians are threatened by en masse eviction; the economies are thriving; a new Palestinian city, Rawabi, is being built north of Ramallah; Jewish communities are growing; checkpoints are being removed; and tourists of all nationalities are again visiting Bethlehem and Shiloh.
While the status quo is not anyone's ideal, it is immeasurably better than any other feasible alternative. And there is room for improvement. Checkpoints are a necessity only if terror exists; otherwise, there should be full freedom of movement. And the fact that the great-grandchildren of the original Palestinian refugees still live in squalid camps after 64 years is a disgrace that should be corrected by improving their living conditions.
Yossi Beilin, a left-wing former Israeli minister, wrote a telling article a few months ago. A veteran American diplomat touring the area had told Mr. Beilin he'd left frightened because he found everyone — Israel, the Palestinian Authority, Jordan and Saudi Arabia — content with the current situation. Mr. Beilin finds this widespread satisfaction disturbing, too.
I think it is wonderful news. If the international community relinquished its vain attempts to attain the unattainable two-state solution, and replaced them with intense efforts to improve and maintain the current reality on the ground, it would be even better. 
The settlements of Judea and Samaria are not the problem — they are part of the solution.

Israel and Destiny

Chuck Morse Amazon Kindle Page

 http://t.co/oxZNlr94Fw 

It has been over 60 years since David Ben Gurion had the courage to stand up amongst an assembly of his fellow Jews and declare the re-establishment of Jewish sovereignty in the Jewish homeland. Acting in the modern tradition of nations that achieve independence from their colonial masters, Ben Gurion declared that the new state would drop it's British colonial name of Palestine and call itself Israel. Up until that historic moment, the term Palestinian referred to Jews in the region and, historically, the term Palestinian was often used to describe Arab Jews living in the Middle East and North Africa. Other recent examples of new nations that assumed historic names upon independence include Shri Lanka, formally known as Ceylon, Myanmar, formally known as Burma, and Zimbabwe, formally known as Rhodesia.

Yet, unlike the aformentioned nations, not to mention Cathay, which became China, Nippon, which became Japan, and Persia, which became Iran, Israel has not yet fully asserted it's political and religious identity and mission. That mission is the assumption of sovereignty amongst the nations of the world of the Jewish people and the fulfillment of the scriptures of the Jewish faith. That political and religious mission, the Jewish nature of Israel, should be understood and respected by all citizens of Israel regardless of their religion.


Indeed, the Jewish mission of Israel was recognized by Muhammad, the founder of Islam, in several passages in the Koran. The Muslim citizens of Israel, both Israeli Arabs and those living in the region called the West Bank, should embrace the Jewish mission of Israel for both political and religious reasons. It should be recalled that both Israelis and Phonecians in ancient times worked together to build the Temple in Jerusalem. Faisal al-Hussein, the Hashemite descendent of Muhammad and the King of Syria and Iraq, understood this when he signed the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement in 1919 which recognized Jewish sovereignty in Palestine to emerge alongside Arab sovereignty in the Middle East and North Africa.


While the non-Jewish citizens of the West Bank ought to achieve local autonomy if they choose that route, they ought to be encouraged to express loyalty to their Jewish Homeland. Indeed, this is the bare minimum expected of minorities in other lands. While the non-Jewish citizens of Israel ought to have the same right to their beliefs as do the Jewish citizens of Israel, no citizen of Israel, or for that matter no citizen of any sovereign nation has a right to engage in subversion, espionage, sabotage, or terrorism. Any nation, in the interest of protecting the lives of its citizens, has a natural right to respond vigorously against such provocations. This is a principle of international law and custom.


Israel is not the United States where the Federal Government is separated from any specific denomination of religion. Israel as a Jewish State is similar to Great Britain as an Anglican State. By law, for example, the Monarch of Britain and the commonwealth of nations including Canada and Australia, is the head of the Church of England and the Prime Minister of Britain must by law be Anglican. Virtually every nation with a Muslim majority, including those considered to be secular, holds Islam as the state religion.


A stipulation of the Faisal-Weizmann Agreement was that Israel would respect the Islamic holy sites and would allow freedom of religion and Israel, while not perfectly, has lived up to those principles. The two monotheistic faiths of Judiasm and Islam, as well as Christianity, have a spiritual interest in the establishment of the Jewish State in the land promised to the children of Israel by the God that we all worship. Indeed the world has a stake in the success of the Jewish State fulfilling it's spiritual destiny.