Sunday, July 13, 2014

Am Yisrael Chai

So proud to call Stephen Harper my Prime Minister.  Outstanding supporter of Israel once again, and always.  Bravo sir, bravo.

"Ottawa, Ontario13 July 2014

Prime Minister Stephen Harper today issued the following statement in response to the situation in Israel:

 “The indiscriminate rocket attacks from Gaza on Israel are terrorist acts, for which there is no justification. It is evident that Hamas is deliberately using human shields to further terror in the region. “Failure by the international community to condemn these reprehensible actions would encourage these terrorists to continue their appalling actions. Canada calls on its allies and partners to recognize that these terrorist acts are unacceptable and that solidarity with Israel is the best way of stopping the conflict. “Canada is unequivocally behind Israel. We support its right to defend itself, by itself, against these terror attacks, and urge Hamas to immediately cease their indiscriminate attacks on innocent Israeli civilians. “Canada reiterates its call for the Palestinian government to disarm Hamas and other Palestinian terrorist groups operating in Gaza, including the Iranian proxy, Palestinian Islamic Jihad.” "

Stand with Israel.  Pray for Israel.


  1. That is many, many times more realistic and straight-forward than the views of my government. Down here in Peru, the media makes it look like the Israelis are bombing the hell out of Palestinians as punishment. It's really amazing to me how screwy people get when the subject is Israel.

  2. Bad news is that Israel doesn't have many friends.

    Good news is that neither does Hamas.

    Watched CNBC Worldwide Exchange last night - my perfect business show; gives me 360 on global markets at 1AM Pacific time, and is a lot smarter and sophisticated than any other CNBC show.

    The anchor in London is a typical British journalist - she gravely intoned with her guest, a foreign policy analyst, about the "disproportionate" Israeli response - but the thing was, as they enumerated the various countries in the region, they couldn't name one which was supportive of Hamas. Neither could they really make a rational case - or any batty talking points, even - for Hamas rocket fire.

    It was funny to watch them talk themselves out of their initial reflexive attempt to Israel-bash - they started out there, but couldn't sustain it.

    The anchor - Julia Chatterly, who has an awesome name, an awesome delivery, and an awesome closet full of on-air dresses, each one bright red - is professional despite her biases. She'd interviewed one of Netanyahu's aids the previous evening, who had a simple message - Hamas can stop this any time, by stopping the rocket fire. She raised these points with her guest analyst, who was in basic agreement. Nobody seems to know what Hamas thinks it is gaining by bombarding Israel with rockets, not even the Israel bashing British journalist class.

    On the other hand, nobody knows how to stop this, either. My sense is that Hamas believes it has the capacity to continue to bombard Israel regardless of Israeli counter measures, and that eventually the "international community" will step in and restrain Israel, or Israel will become fatigued and accept a settlement. It will be a victory for them in the same sense that the 2006 war was a victory for Hezballah - IIRC, the rockets never really stopped.

    I hope Hamas is wrong and they are silenced forcibly.

    1. Actually this time round Israel seems to have much less official opposition, i.e. from governments, than in previous wars. I get the impression the world is totally fed up with Hamas who are so obviously, even cartoonishly, the villain in the piece. And for all their wailing about civilian casualties, the total number of Palestinians killed in Gaza till today is around 200. Of those more than half were combatants, probably more.

      In any similar campaign of massive aerial bombing onto a crowded urban area, by the US or NATO or any other western country, 200 would have been killed on the first day, not after a whole week.

      Now I'm not condoning wanton killing and I'm sorry for any innocent civilian killed or injured, but Israel has gone over and above what it needs to do to preserve civilian life. More than Hamas that's for sure!

      The only way to stop this whole thing is for the world to step aside and let Israel finish it properly, with a ground incursion, and to stop counting the casualties and putting Israel under a microscope. Until they stop doing that and pressurizing Israel it never will stop.

    2. Hamas seems to have fragmented. Nobody in the political leadership can control the Qassam Brigades.

      Egypt has cut off the tunnels. Hamas is, in addition to being decimated, quickly going broke.

      So it seems my fears about Hamas' ability to outlast the patience of the "world community" were unfounded. Time would appear, for once, to be on Israel's side.

      There seems to be an opportunity to destroy Hamas. Of course that raises the question of what who will replace them.

      If a Palestinian leadership in Gaza arises which accepts Israel as a Jewish state and is ready to negotiate in good faith - what then?

      (Yeah, I'm dreaming, but if Israel actually succeeds in decimating and discrediting the radicals to the degree that the moderates can actually take over...)

  3. I wish we had him running our govt. too, Fay.

    I'm also amazed (and sickened) to hear how people twist this. The only question that needs to be asked is "what event triggered it?". That would be the kidnapping and murder of 3 Israeli children. Period.

    No other country in the WORLD would stand for being bombarded day in and day out by these blood-thirsty muslim lunatics. NO ONE would. And it's not just Hamas in Gaza but Lebanon has also lobbed missles at them. But somehow Israel should be cautious or stand down? That is anti-Semitism, plain and simple.

    Personally, I think they should bomb the shyte out of Hamas, wherever they can be found, and take back Gaza in the process.

  4. Eh? The dog/computer ate my comment. Here it is again:

    We LOVE PM Harper in Israel. We love Canada altogether! Be assured that we really do appreciate the support we receive from you.

    We can't bear the two-faced support we get from the US Administration. "Israel has the right to defend itself BUT...". Any support with But in it is no support at all. It's a stab in the back. No surprise there then. But again, we Israelis do know and appreciate the support and warmth we receive from the American people.

    We just had our 4th air-raid siren in PT this week - after some wit set up a facebook page entitled "Petach Tikva, the socially shunned city that even Hamas missiles aren't interested in". :))

    Of course that was tempting fate! We've had either rockets or shrapnel falling all around the city. The closest was about 100 yards away while I was at work. It blew in a shop front. My building literally shook. It went up and down, I felt it as much as heard it.

    This morning I and hubby barely had time to make it to our corridor, forget the shelter downstairs, when the explosions started. We always know that the first 2 are Iron dome, and subsequent booms are the rockets being hit. It's really quite miraculous, though scary nevertheless.

    My sister is a nursery teacher and she had to usher 16 little children under age 3 into a corridor and sit them on the floor. She and her colleague invented a "happy birthday to the siren" song which they sing with the kids to keep them calm. They are the true heroes of this war.

    And all this is nothing compared to the south which has been undergoing these alerts and rockets for years, incessantly. But you never hear about them on your news I'll bet. They barely make the news in Israel as long as no one is hurt.

    I was absolutely FURIOUS yesterday when I heard about the ceasefire. I couldn't string a coherent sentence together to even blog about it. Thank goodness Hamas lived down to its reputation and back in we went. I still wonder whether it wasn't all a double bluff by Bibi to keep a good relationship with Egypt who initiated the ceasefire, while knowing that Hamas wouldn't keep to it. That puts Israel in a good light (even Kerry condemned Hamas in no uncertain terms) so a win-win situation all round.

    None of us want a ground invasion but it's the only thing that will root out the terrorists from their tunnels once and for all.

    1. Dear Annie - I am very sorry your family has to go through this. I can only hope and pray that you do and, in addition, that your government finds the strength inherent in Zionism--as in any nationalist movement-to develop itself to the point where it need not relay on U.S. support, political or otherwise.

    2. Jourdan, thank you for your good wishes and support. We don't feel sorry for ourselves, we're all in it together with the rest of Israel - south, north and center.

      I think our gov't are going to be fine now. After this morning's events (read my blog post for more) - an attempted infiltration by 13 terrorists, in order to kidnap and/or murder Israelis which thank G-d was foiled by the IDF, plus Hamas's huge barrage of missiles before and after the "humanitarian truce" (something like 150 missiles today), has both infuriated the nation and emboldened the gov't. They feel secure that they have the people's full support, and have now given the order to go in.

      I think the terror tunnel infiltration was the final straw. Although the IDF knew the terrorists were coming via their intel assets, the existence of the tunnel and its entrance in Israeli territory was unknown to them and has unnerved them. It has become crystal clear that the only way to stop the rockets and attacks is to destroy all the tunnels, and this cannot be done from the air.

      My sister in law said the country has warped its view of the army. We're so fond of "our boys" that they really feel like our sons, to the extent that the civilians have been absorbing the blows instead of the army. That's wrong. Sad as it is, it's the army's job to protect the civilians, and not the other way round.

      Please pray for the safety of our soldiers and civilians. May G-d go with all of us.

  5. That is harrowing, annie, I can't imagine it. I too was upset about a "cease-fire", we all know that Hamas wouldn't have honored it even had they accepted. Praying for your safety and that of your loved ones.

  6. I just heard that the IDF went into Gaza. G-d speed and I hope they can wipe out all staging areas of Hamas and take out the tunnels and weapons caches - wherever they may be.

    Stay safe, Anne, praying for all of you.

    1. Thank you florrie. Yes, they have gone in now. (And my son in law is home for a night's leave. We can breathe easy for a night). See my comment above in reply to Jourdan.

      Thanks for your prayers and good wishes. Even though none of us are delighted at the thought of the army going in, there really wasn't any more choice. There was a HUGE rocket barrage before. Today we got 2 air raids. one this morning, where the rocket landed in pieces outside my old house! It was a very big explosion overhead. Bit scary. And then again this evening, just as I was putting on my chicken soup. The chutzpah!

      But seriously, the south got a huge bombardment, it was incessant, and the citizens have now been instructed to just stay in their safe rooms permanently for the moment. We can't complain here in the center with the odd rocket. In between we just get on with our lives.

      I hope this incursion will put an end to the rocket fire. The sirens make me so jittery.

    2. Well, you can always go bowling :-) ...but whatever you do stay safe and in touch. We love you.

    3. Aridog is right, we do love you annie. So much so that Matt and I are coming for a visit next March. Be sure to tell Bibi we can live without the rockets:) But all joking aside, you and your family are foremost in my thoughts and prayers at this time. We stand with Israel and we pray for her always.

    4. annie - stay safe.

      The whole world is preoccupied right now with other issues.

      Israel has a window to crush Hamas here.

    5. @Aridog, LOL! Even my own family tease me about that. :)) I still stand by my decision at the time. The bowling alley was underground and a perfect bomb shelter.

      Thank you for your love and support. I really appreciate it.

      @Fay - Woohoo!! How wonderful! You MUST get in touch when you come so we can meet up.

      Thank you everyone here for your prayers and good wishes. May G-d protect the soldiers and people of Israel.

    6. @Lewy14 Thanks again. It's true that the world is preoccupied with other stuff, but that stupid cow Jen Psaki had the temerity to scold Israel that it had to do more to protect Gaza civilians. She thought the Gaza death toll was high - 200 people (most of whom are terrorists) is tiny considering the massive bombing that the IAF has carried out. Is she just a mouthpiece for the Administration or are these her own views? She comes across as stupid and disconnected and no friend of Israel.

      Interestingly it appears that Israel is aiming to sideline the US in any negotiations in favour of Egypt.

      I'm not sure that isn't going from the frying pan into the fire but it speaks volumes about the US-Israel relationship.

    7. annie, ignore America and the American administration. Everyone else does.

    8. Yes, we all love you annie, and I pray for Israel and her people every day. I'm so sorry that the Jug Eared Messiah and Ketchup Boy are making hash of America's foreign policy. Please know that the majority of Americans (in my estimation) support Israel with a passion.

  7. In the leading paper here in Lima today there are two large editorials, one by the Israeli ambassador, the other by the Palestinian ambassador. It was a rare instance of even handedness here in Latin America. It never ceases to amaze me that Muslims and, for that matter, Latinos, feel perfectly justified in putting their children in harm's way-- on Gaza beaches or at our border crossings in Texas--and then wailing on camera when the inevitible happens.

    Perhaps it's just very Anglo of me, but I find such behavior lower than that of dogs. It must be said, though, that for most of the world's people a news image of a hurt or killed child is decisive. It's astounding, but true.

  8. someone who has spent his lifetime with dogs and horses, I can say without equivocation, that dogs do not expose their young to harm's way intentionally. THAT is a uniquely HUMAN trait. I realize you meant it to be "less than" dogs, but I must say no dog ever would do such as thing. Just the two legged pigs called homo sapiens sapiens.

  9. Exactly right, Jordan and Aridog. I remember seeing a picture of elephants in a reserve in Israel surrounding the calves of the herd when the sirens for incoming missiles started sounding.

    I have seen a glimmer of encouragement in this way. For all the years I've been reading comments on threads relating to Israel vs the rest of the middle east, I've found the posts to be roughly 50-50. Recently, however, the comments are overwhelmingly pro-Israel/anti-Hamas, Palestinians. I believe the tide is turning in public perception, maybe it's anecdotal but I still think it's a positive sign.

    1. Sad for the Palestinians.

      That they are cursed with narcissistic and ineffectual leadership like Hamas.

      We know a bit about what that's like, even if ours is materially different in the modality of its toxicity.

    2. Jourdan and aridog, you guys nailed it. Florrie, your description of the elephants is incredibly sad, but telling.

    3. @florrie, that picture of the elephants protecting their young was actually a video - and I posted it on my blog here.

      Here's the direct link to the video:

  10. Fay, I envy you Canadians. You all have a sane, practical, and qualified leader. We have Urkel.

  11. Canada, it's not only your PM who is so proudly pro-Israel. The Canadian Ambassador to Israel has been tweeting up a pro-Israel storm

    n a somewhat unusual move for a foreign diplomat stationed in Israel, Canada’s ambassador in Tel Aviv, Vivian Bercovici, is flooding Twitter with pro-Israel messages and posts attacking pro-Palestinian activists who agitate against Operation Protective Edge.

    Read the link to see her incredible tweets. What a woman! What a country!

    I <3 Canada! :)

  12. While a piece of sh#t from the State Dept. tweets #UnitedforGaza. What a disgusting specimen.

    1. annie, fwiw I checked out the tweet - it is pretty clearly an error.

      How could it be an error? Good question. You use twitter - check it out - if you are composing a tweet, when you start the #UnitedFor... hash tag the first auto-complete is #UnitedForGaza. The second auto complete (right this second, and likely when @stengel composed his tweet was #UnitiedForUkraine.

      @stengel was tweeting about the Ukraine plane shoot-down, not the Gaza operation at all. It was a simple typo, as it were. He picked the wrong auto-complete option.

      That said, a State Dept employee ought to check their tweets. Odd that he's left it up for eight hours.

      Please note - it's not like it's impossible that a State Dept employee would tweet with the gaza hashtag - it's just in this case, the evidence suggests it was a careless error.

    2. I followed annie's link but couldn't find the tweet.I didn't think 8 hours had passed but maybe he had already taken it down by the time I looked for it.

      Either way, our state dept. is such a frickin' embarrassment. Especially those 2 spokeswomen. Thank goodness there are still some good people like Jourdan on board.

    3. I stand corrected Lewy. Meanwhile a "scum" reporter from CNN who tweeted that Israelis are "scum" found herself yanked from her job and transferred to Moscow Serves her right.

      Let her try and report from there what really happened to that Malaysian plane.

  13. Oh, and I see via Drudge that Paris is in flames over the Gaza ops tonight.

    Well, good. Less work for bigel. ;)

    1. You literally made me LOL - I laughed out loud at that one. :-D

  14. I tried to do it right, but it would not work, so:

  15. Let me give it a try for you, Dances.

    link here

  16. Let's pray that trend continues.

    1. The clock isn't quite accurate as of this writing. There were rockets about 10 minutes ago but the clock says 1 hour ago.

      At any rate the rockets are the least of our problems now. The tunnels are the worst challenge. The army just found a tunnel from Gaza that opened up underneath a kibbutz dining hall! The carnage that could have ensued is almost unimaginable. Almost - because we've seen what those bastards can do.

      The terrorists tried infiltrating in 2 groups into 2 further areas in Israel but were spotted by the Air Force and killed by ground troops.

      They are like a Hydra. You cut off their head and another one grows. They are evil incarnate. IMHO they are as bad as the Nazis. Similar ideology, similarly evil and nihilistic.

    2. Annie, I have no idea how they get the information they use to start the clock, but at least it gives people outside Israel a small idea of what goes on there, and the level at which the Hamas terrorists continue to attack

    3. Hi Dances, the clock is linked directly to the Israeli Home Front alarm system. Which is weird because we've just had another air raid siren and I've dashed to my safe space (the corridor outside the bathroom, how heroic is that? :p ) not 10 minutes ago. But the clock still shows a whole hour (gasp!) has gone by without rockets.

      But yes, I agree with you that it makes it starkly clear to people outside Israel what we're living with.

      My niece, her husband and baby were just caught out on the freeway between her inlaws and her home here in PT. They jumped out of the car and lay down on the side of the road.

      And her sister just gave birth this morning in Tel Hashomer hospital (Ramat Gan). They don't have a shelter within 90 seconds of the maternity unit. So my niece moved the baby's crib away from the exterior wall and I presume they just crouched near an internal wall. It's a crazy reality here.

    4. OK, it's reset now. It'll probably reset a dozen times before the morning.

  17. The latest fad amongst the youngsters now is to take selfies in the shelter. They're calling them shelties. My daughter's friends were just having a class reunion (my daughter wasn't there) and they posted a funny photo of them all making psuedo-scared faces.

    I guess if you don't laugh you cry. So we choose to laugh. Even if the news coming out of the south is not good. Too many soldiers have been killed already. :(

    1. Annie - This sort of grace under dangerous pressure speaks well of your people and your youth.

  18. It's amazing how the younger generation can make the best out of this dire situation. Kudos to them.

    G-d bless you all and watch over you, annie.

  19. I am very uncomfortable with the idea of U.S. citizens serving in the IDF. As someone who is a strong nationalist, I completely understand the idea of a young Jewish man or woman born in the U.S. moving to Israel, to support his people's state with his life and his life's work. I understand that and respect it.

    In making such a move, however, one should cut ties with one's former country. I understand that dual nationality is common now (I have three nationalities, technically, myself) and that U.S. law does not require such a move, unless the man or woman serves as an *officer* in the IDF, in which case they lose their U.S. citizenship by action of law.

    The issue seems to me to be two-fold: 1) a proper Zionist, like any nationalist, should be content with the nationality of his people and their state; and 2) by not renouncing U.S. citizenship, the United States is now seen my many to be a sort of belligerent in this conflict.

    If my people had their own state, their own government, their own army, I would move there and renounce all other ties immediately.

    1. Jourdan...that is all well and good if you never plan to leave the country you move to such as Israel. I'd suggest that traveling world wide on business on an Israeli passport would be dangerous or at least risky to some extent. Better to be on a Canadian, US or British or Netherlands passport, safer all round. The stand for righteousness has boundaries, and being foolish is one of them, just IMO...YMMV.

  20. Jourdan, I can sort of see where you're coming from, but I disagree. I think the case of Jews and Israel is a stand-alone case of its own. Certainly many young Jews (and not so young) move to Israel and serve in the IDF. Their retention of their US citizenship is as Aridog says, for ease and safety of travel. I myself still have British citizenship as do my children (but not my grandchildren).

    But there is also a growing movement of young Jews, from the US and Europe, who come to Israel solely to serve in the IDF and then go back to their original countries. They choose to serve as a form of identification with Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people; they feel that if the IDF is protecting Israel, and Israel protects the Jews of the Diaspora, then they too ought to take part in that duty.

    I think it is absolutely wonderful and can't see anything wrong with it as long as they are not breaking the law of their home country. It's not as if serving in the IDF is going to harm America's interests.

    When I see a law against young US Muslims going off to jihad in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan then I'll accept that it's wrong for young Jews to serve in the IDF.

  21. Annie, with respect, I must disagree. Young Jews from the U.S. and Europe who come to Israel to serve in the IDF and then returning home are sending a very clear message that their identity and loyalty is with Israel and not with the land in which they are choosing the make their home and their lives. That is a very dangerous signal to send in any context, but especially so in the context of Jews.

    Note that this is true regardless of the nationality in question. Here in Peru, for example, people may admire and even understand a Peruvian who has enlisted in the U.S. Army, but so far as they are concerned that young man is no true Peruvian. He may be of Peruvian heritage, he may be a son of the nation to be proud of, but he is no longer considered Peruvian.

    I also disagree that the case of Jews and Israel is a stand-alone case. (In fact, I plan to post on this very issue soon and would very much appreciate hearing your views). That so many Jews believe this to be true, and that so many argue that their people have a right to a nation-state with the maintenence of a Jewish majority an openly-stated goal while, at the same time, arguing that no other nationality has this right, especially if it infringes on Jews living in those nations, is also dangerous. It is counter-productive, contrary to logic, politicaly tone-deaf and, again, dangerous.

    Finally, it is very much against the law for any U.S. citizen to give aid or support, including fighting for, any terrorist group, and we have plenty--from Muslim "charity" organizers to young men who went off to fight--in jail for a very long time to prove it.

    1. Jourdan, I think we're going to have to agree to disagree.

      I think you misunderstand the nationhood part of being Jewish. Judaism is not just a religion. It is a nation too, whose homeland is Israel. So - at the risk of having the dual loyalty accusation being thrown at us - Jews do have a dual identity, whether they realise it or not.

      Those Jews who feel they should take part in defending their people will travel to Israel to serve in the IDF. Nearly all of them do end up staying in Israel but there are a fair number who return to the US. The difference between those young Jews and returning Jihadis is that Jews are always loyal to their host country. It is one of the laws of Judaism: "Dina de'malchuta dina" - the law of the land is the law, i.e you must not break your country's rules.

      As long as the US allows foreign military service, this phenomenon will not stop.

      I don't think though that you need to worry about millions of American Jews returning to the US waving rifles and shouting Shema Yisrael! Ain't gonna happen. :)

      I am puzzled by your statement: That so many Jews believe this to be true, and that so many argue that their people have a right to a nation-state with the maintenence of a Jewish majority an openly-stated goal while, at the same time, arguing that no other nationality has this right, especially if it infringes on Jews living in those nations, is also dangerous.

      Honestly, I'm not sure what you're getting at. Where do Jews deny other nations the right to their own majority-status nation? Jews usually stay out of such discussions precisely because it's so dangerous.

      Unless you're talking about liberal American Jews, in which case, you should know that while they're a majority in America they are not a majority anywhere else, certainly not in Europe and definitely not in Israel.

      Looking forward to your article.

    2. Yeah, and Catholics owe their allegiance to Rome.

  22. Matt - Your comment is off-base and a characature of what I said, and, in any case, if issues of dual identity/loyalty offend you, please note that Annie said quite clearly above "So - at the risk of having the dual loyalty accusation being thrown at us - Jews do have a dual identity, whether they realise it or not."

    My concerns were directed at the impact of that dual identity when it leads a young man or woman to serve in the IDF when they do not live in and have no intention of living in Israel. It's a bad idea, for the reasons I state above.

    Also, speaking as a Catholic, I also know personally that the allegiance to Rome thing is in fact an issue, if not in the way the usual anti-Catholics frame it. For example, many Catholic bishops and arch-bishops CLEARLY felt they had a higher duty to report sexual abuse to Church officials--that is to say, the Roman Catholic hierarchy--than they did their local police officials. That speaks volumes about who they think they answer to.

    We may not like these issues, they make us uncomfortable and for good reason. But they are there, they are real and they should be talked about.

    1. Jourdan, let me try to decode and unpack what you're saying here and above, and add some comments of my own...

      Let's consider some statements of the form "X for the X-ians", for different values of X:

      "Israel for the Jews" - problematic for either extremely principled anti-nationalists, or, more commonly, crypto (or not so crypto) anti-Semites.

      "Japan for the Japanese" - problematic for almost nobody. Some tsk tsking from the West from time to time regarding what they see as a self-defeating immigration policy in the face of demographic catastrophe, but almost nobody seriously challenges their sovereign right to determine their immigration policy.

      "Brazil for the Brazilians" - a tautology; so uncontroversial that nobody would know what you're even getting at if one were to utter this in conversation.

      "America for the Americans" - problematic in several aspects, reasonably and otherwise, and currently the basis for a multipolar cold cilil war. The American version of this formula is exceptional as our history is based on immigration. The main rift right now is that the powers that be have deemed that people against open borders are "anti-immigrant" and therefore "un-American". Some people who hold this view are Jews - IMHO they are wrong, but not hypocritical. The founding principles of Israel and America are sufficiently different, especially the fact that America is as you have observed a "propositional" state, not founded to provide a homeland for an people or a nation of common blood. You are correct in observing that this propositional nature has issues in that it lacks some stabilizing aspects of polities grounded in blood and soil; I happen to believe these issues can be transcended. (But not by ignoring them and denigrating those who raise them, as the Establishment is denigrating the majority of Americans now.) A Jewish American who embraces Israel as a Jewish state but effectively denies the sovereign legitimacy of our border with Mexico is not a hypocrite but a run of the mill establishment fuckwit. (Chuck Schumer comes to mind.) And plenty of American Jewish progressives - too many - are perfectly consistent, tendentiously and passive-aggressively denying American and Israeli legitimacy (the J-Street crew).

      "Denmark for the Danes". "Norway for the Norwegians." "England for the English." "Germany for the Germans."

      OK this is where I think Jourdan and I are in agreement - these statements ought to be tautologies along the lines of "Japan for the Japanese" and yet they are condemned as racist and dangerously backward. The cordon sanitaire surrounds those politicians who would embrace them.

      [continued below]


    2. My own riposte to those who would cast the United States as a homeland for white Europeans is that white Europeans have a homeland - it's called Europe. It's not my problem as an American if the European political establishment is hell bent on making their own native populations exiles in their own land. I cannot condemn, and in fact I support, the principles of those ("fringe" and "extreme") European politicians who embrace ethnic nationalism, even if I might not agree with the totality of their platforms or the policies they propound.

      Ethnic nationalism was deprecated politically in Europe for a reason; it became associated with totalitarian regimes which wrecked Europe.

      However, this proscription of ethnic nationalism was abused by the EU progressive establishment to institute their own totalitarian regime in Europe.

      Are Jews part of this European progressive establishment? Perhaps some; I'm not aware of any. If there are Jews who condemn "Israel for the Jews" but not "France for the French", then charges of inconsistency might be reasonably be leveled.

      Yet Jews were exceptional victims of European ethnic nationalism. Consistency is admirable, but I have to allow that a European Jew who embraced "Israel for the Jews" and "Germany for the Germans" with equal fervor would be a very principled and consistent thinker indeed.

  23. This comment has been removed by the author.

  24. I am very uncomfortable with this idea that a dual identity, especially one determined by fighting for another nation, one way or another, as destructive. To whom?

    I must ask because I have done precisely that, as an American for causes not my own, never the less, righteous. I am not ashamed of it at all.

    1. @Aridog, agreed. And again, if a country does not like it, they can outlaw it, and then the person enlisting can make a conscious choice which citizenship to choose.

      An extra point (at least it was so in the past) is that American citizens can keep their American citizenship if they didn't volunteer for the foreign army but were rather conscripted, which is anyway the norm in Israel.

    2. The biggest problem would be if you volunteered to serve a nation that the US then found itself at war with. There was an American who volunteered for Germany portrayed in Band of Brothers who met a pitiless end. Betting there was a kernel of truth there.

      It can get dicy and be problematic if you end up on the wrong side.

      The Flying Tigers were a quasi-covert-semi-official US formation, but formally they fought for Chiang Kai Shek's Chinese Nationalist army.

      British and French citizens volunteered to fight on the side of Franco in the Spanish Civil War; perhaps they fought (prematurely anti-fascist) Americans who volunteered for the Republicans.

      I can see how "most countries" would view volunteers for foreign armies with some suspicion, but then, America is an exceptional country. It depends on the Army.

      These days we have central bankers volunteering to serve abroad. Stanley Fischer ran the Israeli central bank, and is now vice chair of the US Fed; Goldman Sachs alum Marc Carney moved from the bank of Canada to the Bank of England.

    3. Lewy made the point I should have been clear about. That is that Americans have historically volunteered for military service under foreign flags, such as the Flying Tigers. A good example. Others include sundry "adviser" groups, which is what I was referring to above. IMO the term "adviser" was appropriated just for the purpose of bearding the effort as advisory only.

  25. There is a lot to be said here, but I wish to first say that I disagree strongly that Europe is the homeland of the European-American people. Over time, and due to separation, we have become a nation in the classic sense: we have our own sense of identity, language, history, mores, customs, laws, humor, literature, etc. That is to say, that those people called "Whites" in the American context are a nation, and as a nationalist I support the creation of a European-American state for that nation.

    As an American, the key element in our history is the presence from the Founding of a large group that clearly was a special case: the African-Americans.

    In my view, the civic and de-nationalized style of citizenship Lewy describes arises from this unfortunate history. When the matter, after decades of crisis and civil war, came finally to a head in the 1960s, the U.S. stood at a cross-roads. It could find no way to hang on to the unspoken but powerful sense that the American nationality was a new European-American people while reconciling what do do with African-Americans.

    Any attempt to hang on to the traditional understanding involved inherently placing African-Americans outside of the nation. Historically, Americans handled this problem by viewing their nationhood in one way and their citizenship in quite another, while encumbering the African-American’s citizenship with exceptions and special rules so as to prevent any confusion as to whose nation it was at the end of the day. (Similar rules applied to other non-European-Americans, most famously in the case of the WWII era Japanese-Americans. Unless one analyzes that era while keeping the largely unspoken but very powerful distinction between who the American people thought themselves to be and who carried American citizenship, the treatment of Japanese-Americans appears, as it does to the modern eye, bizarre and utterly unacceptable).

    By the height of the Civil Rights Era, not only were keeping legal distinctions between the two groups no longer possible, it also became impossible to keep the much-more-important unwritten and consensual distinction between the two. The two great traditions of American history reached the moment of final combat and, as usual, Massachusetts was the victor. Thus, American citizenship became fully reconciled with the PROPOSITIONAL concept of the American people.

    In such a situation, only civic definitions of citizenship could be supported. And, as time has passed since then, bringing it with it the obvious fact that the extention of a place in the American nation to African-Americans by European-Americans wasn’t understood as the world-historic event it was but, instead, as more evidence of the latter groups inherent racism, the American elite had no choice but to double-down yet again: the U.S. Government now insists that its version of civic citizenship is the ONLY justifiable and legitimate form. Thus, an Algerian celebrating an Algerian win in the World Cup while waving the Algerian flag on the Champs-Elysees is French, while the National Front’s view that the French people consistitute a nation in a sense that excludes our Algerian fan is a right wing extremist akin to a Nazi and, in fact, anti-French.

  26. (continued...)
    The “doubling-down” on an international scale has been accompanied by a program of massive immigration, so as to prove, once and for all, that what makes an American, and indeed a Canadian, Swede or German, is a bundle of dispassionate legal rights, properly documented and recorded, and not anything so out-dated as membership in an historic nation.

    It is in this way, for example, that Quebecois nationalists, in declaring fealty to the modern sense of civic citizenship, became mere advocates for some right to rule Administrative Region Seven and not, say, on the basis of their nationhood. The same goes for other mainstream “nationlist” parties, such as the Scottish Nationalist Party, which views Scotland purely as an administrative region.

    Which is why, in the long run, the only solution is the creation of a new nation as an experssion of the European-American people. One which, I would hope, the European-American people of Canada and those of the United States would realize they have much more in common with each other than the first do with the Chinese and the second with African-Americans.

  27. Jourdan, you've heard my views on the subject so I won't belabor them, but I'm puzzled - I don't think you've offered an explanation of why traditional nationalism has been deprecated outside the US (e.g. Quebec and Scotland.)

    Why has the EU in particular embraced the "propositional" notion of citizenship? Surely it's not because the US has forced it on them...

  28. Jourdan and Lewy14...there is a lot from both of you I agree with, and still I have questions. It just happens to be on a subject I am struggling with personally at this time that involves loyalty and integrity, both of which I sense is fading in our nation. I don't have it in me to respond intelligently just now, perhaps later. I am just angry.

    1. Ari, I hear you.

      I'm happy to have someone read what I have to say. If I make sense to anyone, that's awesome; and I try to honor carefully considered points made by others with equal consideration, which is why I write.

      That, and to filter out the cray cray in my own head.

      Do I ever write 4096+ characters, read it, edit it, and decide I'm barking mad and delete it before posting?

      All. The. Damn. Time.

      If you're not writing, you're not thinking, you only think you're thinking.
      [Ancient proverb I just read on the interwebs last tuesday.]

    2. I am no longer able to separate the rational from the crazy. I've deleted far more 4096 character pieces than I've posted. I am not barking mad, I am probably evil. I want to recover my ability to isolate my feelings from reality. I am no longer able to distinguish between them and I react to one or the other instantly. I do not know what to do now.
      But I need to learn soon.

    3. Why would you want to isolate your feelings from reality, Aridog? Your feelings are reality, aren't they?

      I am sorry to hear you are having such a struggle.

    4. Ari, at the risk of being presumptuous, you might want to read the Meditations of Marcus Aurelius.

      There's a free pdf here.