October 10, 2010



Sunday, 10 October 2010

Pallywood in Jerusalem / Video: Arab Rock-Throwing Boy Hurt by Victim's Car

Isn't it convenient how all those photographers were right there to film this?
Video: Arab Rock-Throwing Boy Hurt by Victim's Car
A Jewish man from Ir David in Jerusalem was detained Friday after he hit an Arab youth who ran in front of his car while pelting him with stones. The child suffered leg injuries.

The incident occurred as a group of Arab youth threw stones at passing Israeli cars in the neighborhood of Mei Shiloach (Silwan) outside the Old City in Jerusalem. The boys were surrounded by photographers, who eagerly recorded their activities.

As David Be'eri drove into the ambush, he began to swerve to the side. Video evidence shows he may have swerved to avoid hitting a young Arab boy in a blue shirt who was standing directly in his path.

Two Arab boys then ran toward him, and were hit.
Those present lifted the injured youth and put him in a private vehicle instead of calling an ambulance. The incident was caught on film and uploaded to YouTube, where it was titled, "Palestinian kids get run over by Jewish man."
Be'eri was detained by police for questioning. He told them that he was simply trying to escape the ambush, as he was afraid for his safety and that of his young son, who was in the car with him. He had not seen the boys running at his car, he said.
He was defended by nationalist activist Baruch Marzel, who serves as a parliamentary aide to MK Michael Ben-Ari.
Be'eri did the right thing in refusing to stop and make himself a target for attack, Marzel said. "A rock that hits its target can kill," he noted.
"The time has come for police to stop giving in to the anarchists and lawbreakers," and to crack down on those who attack Jewish motorists, he added.
The incident took place one day after a Jewish repairman was attacked by an Arab mob after fixing a washing machine in the northern Jerusalem neighborhood of Isawiya. The repairman escaped with the help of local elders.

A masked Palestinian protester is hit by a car while throwing rocks in the east Jerusalem neighborhood of Silwan, Friday, Oct. 8, 2010. On Friday clashes erupted in Silwan, a predominantly Palestinian neighborhood in east Jerusalem that is also home to families of Israeli settlers. One Palestinian boy throwing rocks at Israeli vehicles was lightly injured after being hit by a car he charged. The car was driven by the head of a settler organization that buys up property for Jews in Silwan, Israeli media reported. Police spokesman Micky Rosenfeld said he could not identify the man but said he was being questioned. (AP Photo/Moammar Awwad)

Here’s the video, via Breitbart TV and FOX News: (or http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZWSiA-nrjQ )

October 8, 2010 http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2010/10/how-photograph-lies.html
Dramatic images have emerged of the moment an Israeli motorist drove straight into a young Palestinian boy in East Jerusalem today.

The child had been part of a group throwing stones at Israeli cars following news the country's military had killed two Hamas militants in the West Bank city of Hebron earlier on Friday.

Amazingly the boy only sustained 'light injuries' after being thrown into the air by the vehicle and twisting over its roof.
Looks pretty bad, right? An Israeli heartlessly running his vehicle into a young boy?

The boy was running towards the car even during the impact. The car honked the horn to get him out of the way. Clearly the driver was worried about his safety and didn't want to stop, and for good reason - we see his back windshield smashed by the innocent, youthful rocks being thrown.

And there are a whole bunch of photographers there, whose presence makes the kids want to act with bravado and who might have actually been goading them into throwing rocks.

Notice that while the Daily Mail published a series of photos from the incident, it didn't bother to show the smashed rear windshield of the car.

The driver was David Be'eri, who has been trying to calm down the tension in Silwan, seen in this video.

Pallywood in Jerusalem
Pallywood came to Jerusalem on Friday. 'Palestinians' set up an ambush, complete with photographers, for David Be'eri, the director of Elad, which advocates for Jewish families to live throughout Jerusalem. Here's the 'news story' about Friday's incident.

Two Arab children from the Silwan neighborhood of Jerusalem were injured after they were hit by a car driven by Elad director David Be’eri. Be’eri, head of a group that advocates for Jewish families to live in the predominantly Arab neighborhood, claimed that the youths were throwing rocks at his car and he hit them accidentally in an attempt to flee from the area.

“His car was surrounded with tens of people with rocks,” Elad spokesman Udi Ragones told The Jerusalem Post. “When they started throwing them, and he hit them when he tried to flee from the area. It seems that they were lying in wait and the ambush was planned with rocks, it may have even been a lynch situation. He felt his life was in danger.”
Well, it was a 'lynch situation' and the kids weren't throwing rocks. But there weren't 'tens' of them unless you count the photographers.

Let's go to the videotape. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZWSiA-nrjQ
An Al-Jazeera video clip and AFP photos from the incident show just four youths with rocks surrounding Be’eri’s car, and then two youths getting hit. One was lightly injured, and one was in moderate condition. Both were evacuated to Moqassed Hospital in the area.

Be’eri lives in the area and was on his way home with his son at the time of the incident, Ragones said. Be’eri was taken by the police for an investigation, and later released on bail. An investigation is ongoing, lead by an examiner with the police’s traffic division. Police are using photos from the incident in their investigation.
But over at the Jawa Report (Hat Tip: Shy Guy), DMartyr posts video from Fox News and points out some things worth noting.

The mainstream media would like you to believe these kids were throwing pebbles and, at worst, were only going to scratch the car. That they were the victims, not the driver.

Watch the video again, but this time take special note at the end when the adults are physically forcing the boy into a waiting vehicle:
Let's go to the videotape. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZWSiA-nrjQ

So why is this kid fighting so hard to stay at the scene? The obvious answer is that he isn't hurt that badly (or doesn't think he is hurt) and wants to stay for more stoning fun.

But my conspiratorial mind came up with another theory.

We all know Palestinians love death more than they love their children. But even more than death, they love good propaganda to use against Israel. Now that the video clip above has made world headlines, this kid is suddenly worth more, propaganda-wise, dead than alive.

Note that the driver has no place to go. He can't go backward because of the car behind him. He tries to go up on the sidewalk and the stone throwers corner him. Note also as he drives away that his back window has been blown out by rocks. He had his own kid in the car with him.

What would you do? I would have panicked and hit the brakes and probably have gotten killed - which is why I try not to drive in places where this could happen to me. But that's exactly what the 'Palestinians' are hoping for, isn't it?
Rule by Decree to Begin in 2011?


here's another scenario...

Looking forward to those Shackles, America?

ACT or lose whatever is left of your "freedoms" -

How many times are we gong to read this and do nothing?

Our patriot-military has the right to remove this usurper/ arrest/ imprison, and try for treasonous acts.
No need for lengthy legal appeals - they can act immediately with all the facts already listed.
this guy has broken so many laws & bypassed our Constitution, the evidence abounds!
Use it!

Article II sec 4. The President, Vice President and all Civil Officers of the United States, shall be REMOVED from Office on IMPEACHMENT for, and CONVICTION of, TREASON, BRIBERY, or other High Crimes and Misdemeanors.

----- Forwarded Message -----

Obama Considering Rule by Executive Order in 2011 by Ben Johnson

This morning, political commentators are paying a great deal of attention to one of the Los Angeles Times’ stories about Barack Obama’s plans for a Republican takeover of Congress. Unfortunately, they are focusing on the wrong one. Most commentators spent the morning quoting the president’s remarks on a black radio program that a GOP-dominated Congress will result in ... Read More

Considering Rule by Executive Order in 2011

Obama’s Rule by Decree to Begin in 2011?Floyd Reports Ben Johnson

This morning, political commentators are paying a great deal of attention to one of the Los Angeles Times’ stories about Barack Obama’s plans for a Republican takeover of Congress. Unfortunately, they are focusing on the wrong one. Most commentators spent the morning quoting the president’s remarks on a black radio program that a GOP-dominated Congress will result in “hand-to-hand combat.” The reality is most of the action will take place behind their backs and over their heads. All indications are, if Obama cannot get his legislative agenda enacted by Congress, he will impose it by decree.

The evidence comes buried elsewhere in today’s L.A. Times in a piece by Peter Nicholas and Christi Parsons under the hum-drum headline, “Obama Reshapes Administration for a Fresh Strategy.” The story makes clear the “fresh strategy” borders on government by executive fiat. It begins, “As President Obama remakes his senior staff, he is also shaping a new approach for the second half of his term: to advance his agenda through executive actions he can take on his own, rather than pushing plans through an increasingly hostile Congress.” This rule by divine right of kings is confirmed by no less an Obama insider than David Axelrod, who said, “It’s fair to say that the next phase is going to be less about legislative action than it is about managing the change that we’ve brought.” The Times states candidly:

So the best arena for Obama to execute his plans may be his own branch of government. That means more executive orders, more use of the bully pulpit, and more deployment of his ample regulatory powers and the wide-ranging rulemaking authority of his Cabinet members. (Emphases added.)

Nicholas and Parsons note how the president has replaced the few appointees with ties to Capitol Hill in place of Chicago insiders. They specifically state the “the Environmental Protection Agency is determined to use its regulatory power…to begin lowering [carbon] emissions, in the absence of congressional action.” In 2007, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision that the EPA could regulate carbon dioxide emissions under the Clean Air Act, although the act did not have these “pollutants” in mind. Seizing on this ruling, an anonymous insider who “was not authorized to speak publicly” told the Times, “The ambition is to get a reasonable start” on implementing his extremist vision.

The plan fulfills a threat Obama made earlier this year. The Associated Press reported in June, “The Obama administration says it would prefer that Congress enact climate change legislation, but has used the threat of EPA regulations to goad lawmakers into action.” Within the last week, Congressional Republicans have called the regulations job-killers, and Democratic Senator Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia has sponsored a two-year freeze on certain EPA regulations. Now it looks as though the president will run roughshod over Rockefeller, the Republicans, and the will of the American people.

More concerning than the aims to which Obama plans to use unfettered executive fiat power is the circumvention of Congress, and the Constitution, in the first place. William Galston of the Brookings Institution took the LAT Obama will employ this strategy even if Republicans do not take back either House of Congress. “Whether or not the Republicans take over majorities in one or both houses, the margins will be so much narrower that the strategy of putting together a Democratic bill and picking off a handful of Republicans to push it over the top won’t be viable anymore,” he said.

Rather than triangulate, repackage his radicalism, or take an electoral chastening, Obama plans to ram his agenda down the American people’s throats “by any means necessary.”

What will this agenda look like? In part, it is already in place. On illegal immigration, the president has already excluded Congress, several states, and the overwhelming majority of the American people to aggressively promote an Open Borders agenda. A U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services draft memo that surfaced this summer contemplated ways to enact “meaningful immigration reform absent legislative action.” Shortly thereafter, an ICE draft memo appeared, instructing all law enforcement – including any “state, local, or tribal officer” – that no one “should not issue detainers against an alien charged only with a traffic-related misdemeanor.” Traffic stops have been one of the most fruitful ways of finding and deporting illegal aliens and make up the heart of Arizona’s S.B. 1070, allowing state and local law enforcement agencies to exercise their federally delegated power in arresting illegal immigrants.

When the Obama administration is not making law, it is busy ignoring it. The New York Times reported that the government simply stopped deporting young illegal aliens this summer – an exemption that applies to 726,000 people – because they may be eligible for the DREAM Act, which Congress has not yet passed (and probably never will). The administration began dismissing virtually all cases against illegals who had not committed any violent crime, letting a potential 17,000 illegals off-the-hook. Janet Napolitano’s Department of Homeland Security seems to have let a Congressionally mandated program to assure visa recipients leave the country slide – although overstays are the entry point for 40-45 percent of all illegal immigrants in the United States. That is how six of the 9/11 hijackers entered the country. Although Congress supports enforcement, the administration has simply shut down their requests.

Obama has unilaterally decided not to apply equal rights to disenfranchised white voters, dropping all such lawsuits targeting minority organizations. DoJ appointee Julie Fernandez said, “the Obama administration was only interested in bringing…cases that would provide political equality for racial and language minority voters.” Two former, high-ranking DoJ voting rights lawyers have testified the racist arrangement is an official government policy.

The Obama administration has already begun to entertain aspects of the Green Left’s agenda, a trend it will increase in the second half of its first (and, we hope, only) term. The EPA considered, then rejected, banning fishing gear and traditional bullets this summer. Obama has taken steps toward nationalizing millions of acres of land in the American West. In July, the president established the National Ocean Council, staffed with 27 members, by decree. Rep. Sam Farr boasted at the time, “We already have a Clean Air Act and a Clean Water Act. With today’s executive order, President Obama in effect creates a Clean Ocean Act.” Some have written this panel will implement the never-ratified UN Law of the Sea Treaty (LOST).

The danger is not merely that the president will enact legislation with the stroke of a pen, like Caesar. It appears likely he will accelerate his trend to pre-empt domestic political questions before the United Nations. I was the first reporter to discover that Obama hauled Arizona before the UN Human Rights Council this summer over the state’s aforementioned immigration law. Last week, the UN’s Global Migration Group issued a new report blasting opponents of Open Borders and welfare for illegal aliens as “xenophobes and racists.” Now, the Justice Department has solicited 11 Latin American nations to weigh in on its lawsuit stating the Arizona law violates the U.S. Constitution – as though any of the parties would know or care. Arizona Governor Jan Brewer called the foreign intervention “incredibly offensive,” adding, “American sovereignty begins in the U.S. Constitution and at the border.”

The Obama administration has already rendered one of these moot and is now working to undermine the other. He has appointed two Supreme Court justices who believe in supplanting the U.S. Constitution with foreign law.

Obama used the same UN report to push a far-Left agenda (including card-check union organization, bilingual ballots, universal preschool, and gays in the military) under the guise of “human rights.” He likewise extended benefits to the same-sex “partners” of some federal employees in advance of a Congressional bill to do the same.

Where does the president derive these dictatorial powers? Simple: he claims them. Article II of the U.S. Constitution delegates to the president only the powers to act as commander-in-chief of the military, grant pardons, make treaties (which must be approved by the Senate), appoint ambassadors and Supreme Court justices, and give the State of the Union address.

And, if necessary, the “right” to be impeached.

If a system of unelected, sometimes unconfirmed czars does not violate the Constitution, the assumption of imperial powers by the executive branch should.

Barack Obama is dedicated to use whatever time he has in office forcing as much of his agenda on the United States – and so transforming the economic and electoral make-up of our nation – that his radical vision can be foisted upon Americans as a fait accompli.

Many Americans believed the velvet words of hope and change during the 2008 campaign. If the thuggishness of the past two years has not convinced them of his disregard for popular will, the U.S. Constitution, and the rule of law, two years of radical, royal decrees may.

If Congressional Republicans do their jobs in 2011, Obama may not fill out two more years in office.


Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis