Roger Waters of Pink Floyd raged when he testified to discredit and delegitimize the State of Israel, at the UN, aired on YouTube. He adamatly denied the Jews their only homeland, where they’ve been a steady presence since 1300 BCE, amid proof of their monarchy, culture, ethics, morality, and religion, established by 1000 BCE.

Waters comes by his biases naturally. He is from the England that blamed the Jews for the Black Plague and expelled them for 350 years; the England that established and then violated the British Mandate in capitulation to Arab pressure; the England that turned thousands of Jewish immigrants away from Palestine to their death; the England that the Manchester Guardian paper chastised for doing nothing to advance partition, and wrote, “has turned heavily against the Jews who cannot arm or train their soldiers as the Arabs have been able to do in the states bordering Palestine.”* Add to this, the Archbishop of Canterbury who welcomed oppressive Sharia to compromise English law.

Scheduled to speak on April 30^th in support of BDS (Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions) of Israel at Manhattan’s 92St Y, financially supported by the UJA Federation, Waters then cancelled. Did he or the Y fold to opposition, or is this a sign of conscience? Will this four-flusher actually reconsider his position that Israel is to blame for the stagnated peace process – and much more?

Unable to compete with modernity and modern warfare, the Muslim Brotherhood devised the strategy of keeping their brethren isolated to win global support – this is apartheid. “To the vanquished go the spoils!” Did the Brits welcome back the vanquished Nazis or the Argentineans to the Falklands? Yet Israel has often returned captured land with the hope of peace, but jihadists cannot acknowledge Israel as a Jewish State.

Well, I suppose that all friendships must come to an end sooner or later, Othello and Desdemona, Caesar and Brutus, but of this one I had nurtured higher hopes, mainly because both parties had so much in common and had mutually benefited from a very long association.

An Open Letter to the Members of the Teachers Union of Ireland:

In the words of Kevin O’Neill, “Kindliness combined with unique native wit and the courage to go and do business with the world have been the trademarks of the Irish character. The Irish have never been known, like so many other nations, to retire from the world, to withdraw, to hide.” Yet this is the process you have begun.

As the Teacher’s Union has relinquished its freedoms of thought, learning, research and growth in the interest of healing illusory Islamic wounds, are you aware that you are also a collaborator in the destruction of Ireland? While violent jihadists pursue the Koranic dictates to kill the unbelievers, stealth is facilely implemented within Europe and the Americas. Stealth, aka civilizational jihad, is a system of lies (taqiyyah), persuasion and incremental restrictions that the invading entity imposes on the host culture by claiming victimization. By insisting that words or expressions are offensive – the very vehicles of thought and ideas – freedom of speech is purloined and societies transformed.

By “ceasing all cultural and academic collaboration with Israel, including the exchange of scientists, students and academic personalities, and the cooperation in research programs,” you have taken a step backward in time to the 7^th century of Mohammed and the evil decrees set forth in their Koran. Perhaps you do bear a deep-seated desire to assist in the Islamic effort to destroy Israel with a fallacious “apartheid” label. Israel, the only Jewish homeland on the planet is, in point of fact, home to citizens of every race, religion, and national origin, yet no one addresses the Islamic regimes where Jews and Christians are either expelled, converted by force, enslaved or killed – or the communist regimes of China and Cuba where freedoms are considerably limited.

The Netanyahu-Obama press conference received a mixed press. Some cynics said the two polititians personify represents an Age of Mendacity, others an Age of Stupidity.

One octogenarian, reaching back into the past, said, “If you want to understand the twentieth century and its politicians and pundits, don’t read anything published after 1900.”

Now that Obama has affirmed Israel’s right to defend itself, the Jews in this country can ignore the lullabies of Netanyahu and go back to sleep. In fact, the worried editors of the Jerusalem Post put Obama’s reassurances in big headlines to encourage its readers to cease taking Prozac. Netanyahu’s ratings have soared.

Such has been the salutary impact of Obama’s recognition of Israel’s right of self-defense that Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called on Iran’s Revolutionary Guard to halt its nuclear weapons development program. Words count, especially in the world of Islam. Obama will win another Nobel Peace Prize. And Shimon Peres will cease discouraging Israelis from taking history seriously.

The Netanyahu-Obama press conference received a mixed press. Some cynics said the two polititians personify represents an Age of Mendacity, others an Age of Stupidity.

One octogenarian, reaching back into the past, said, “If you want to understand the twentieth century and its politicians and pundits, don’t read anything published after 1900.”

Now that Obama has affirmed Israel’s right to defend itself, the Jews in this country can ignore the lullabies of Netanyahu and go back to sleep. In fact, the worried editors of the Jerusalem Post put Obama’s reassurances in big headlines to encourage its readers to cease taking Prozac. Netanyahu’s ratings have soared.

Such has been the salutary impact of Obama’s recognition of Israel’s right of self-defense that Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has called on Iran’s Revolutionary Guard to halt its nuclear weapons development program. Words count, especially in the world of Islam. Obama will win another Nobel Peace Prize. And Shimon Peres will cease discouraging Israelis from taking history seriously.

By Prof. Paul Eidelberg, President
Israel-America Renaissance Institute (I-ARI)
Foundation for Constitutional Democracy
March 16, 2013

Political scientists say that people vote in terms of their own personal (or group) interests. This means there are no rational or objective criteria by which to judge whether the interests of one person (or group) are intrinsically preferable to those of another. From this it follows that there are no rational or objective standards for determining what ought to be the goals or policies of a nation. One person’s opinion on this matter is as valid as another’s. This egalitarianism or subjectivism is the foundation of the democratic principle of “one person, one vote.”

Now if we examine the democratic principle of “one person, one vote” more closely, it implies the corollary “one opinion, one vote.” But this means that contradictory opinions on political matters are (or may be) politically equal. This being the case, a practical consequence of the democratic principle of “one person, one vote” violates the laws of logic, specifically, the law of non-contradiction, which states that two contradictory assertions cannot both be true at the same time.

It follows that contemporary democracy is fundamentally irrational. To put it more vividly, insofar as contemporary democracy is based on egalitarianism—a doctrine that renders one person’s opinion theoretically equal to that of another, it follows that contemporary democracy fosters insanity. It is no accident that insanity is quite prevalent in the democratic world.

What seems like ages ago, this author presented a paper at the annual meeting of the American Political Science Association in Washington, D.C. Many people at the conference were amazed to learn that Israel did not have a written constitution, and they were no less disconcerted by the fact that despite Israel’s reputation as a democacy, members of its Knesset were not individully elected by and accountable to the voters in multi-district elections—the consequece of Israel’s system of Proportional Representation.

I learned a lot at that conference from various political scientists, some of whom were experts in electoral systems. This prompted me to undertake a comprehensive study of the world’s reputed democracies. The following abbreviates that study and remains relevant despite the passage of 12 years, especially for new immigrants who are confused by Israel’s virtually unique political system. It should be an eye-opener for new immigrants.to Israel.

*******

Many Israelis, including academics, believe that such is the smallness of this country, both in population and area, that multi-district or constituency elections is inappropriate. They are wedded to the existing parliamentary system whereby the entire country constitutes a single electoral district in which parties compete and win Knesset seats on the basis of Proportional Representation (PR). This, they believe, enables distinct groups, be they ideological, ethnic, religious, or otherwise to be represented by distinct parties in the Knesset regardless of whether the individuals composing these groups are dispersed throughout the country. They contend, moreover, that representation of geographical districts leads to disproportionate representation of diverse groups as well as gerrymandering. Let us distinguish facts from fictions.