<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>FrontPage Magazine &#187; Nichole Hungerford</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/author/nichole-hungerford/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 31 Dec 2014 07:56:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	
	<item>
		<title>UC Irvine Hillel Forces Cancellation of Pro-Israel Speaker</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/nichole-hungerford/uc-irvine-hillel-forces-cancellation-of-pro-israel-speaker/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=uc-irvine-hillel-forces-cancellation-of-pro-israel-speaker</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/nichole-hungerford/uc-irvine-hillel-forces-cancellation-of-pro-israel-speaker/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 06 May 2014 04:56:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cancel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Hillel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jewish Federation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nonie Darwish]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Orange County]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Speaker]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[uc irvine]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.frontpagemag.com/?p=224843</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[No place for conservative Jewish students -- or their speakers. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/index8.jpg"><img class="alignleft  wp-image-224844" alt="index8" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/index8-450x317.jpg" width="315" height="222" /></a>On the heels of Brandeis University’s controversial decision to rescind an honorary degree to women’s rights activist Ayaan Hirsi Ali, organizers of a week-long pro-Israel event called iFest, which is currently underway at the University of California, Irvine, say they have been forced to cancel a scheduled speech by Nonie Darwish, a prominent pro-Israel speaker. Lead iFest organizer Daniel Narvy, president of the campus group Anteaters for Israel (AFI), who will be joining the Israeli Defense Forces this summer, says Orange County Hillel was primarily responsible for the cancellation and that the incident is another example of Hillel’s marginalization of Narvy due to his conservative and traditional views. </span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Nonie Darwish is the founder and president of </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://formermuslimsunited.org">FormerMuslimsUnited</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">, an advocacy group for Islamic apostates, and </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://arabsforisrael.blogspot.com">Arabs for Israel</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">, an organization that promotes a positive outlook among Arabs toward the Jewish State and advocates for peace in the region. Darwish was born and raised in Egypt during the most tumultuous period of the Arab-Israeli conflict and is the daughter of Col. Mustafa Hafez, former head of Egyptian intelligence in the Sinai and Gaza, who led multiple operations against Israel during the 1950s. Due to his activities, Darwish’s father was killed by the Israeli military in 1956 by a mail bomb when she was 8 years old, which greatly impacted her negative views toward the Jewish State. </span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Darwish, understanding firsthand the extreme anti-Semitism fueling the Arab world’s decades-long war of annihilation against Israel — the remnants of which are still seen in much of the Middle East’s disposition toward Israel today — was slated to speak about her journey from anti-Zionist to ardent Zionist and what propelled her to become such a vocal advocate for Israel despite both her father’s death and her anti-Jewish upbringing in Egypt. Darwish believes that being pro-Israel does not mean being anti-Arab and vice versa, and that Israelis and Arabs should strive for mutual respect and inclusiveness. </span></p>
<p>IFest is a week-long celebration of Israel portraying the country in a positive light following the UCI Muslim Student Union’s “<a href="http://www.ucimsu.com/2014/04/26/msu-uci-presents-anti-zionism-week-2014/">Anti-Zionism Week</a>,” which concluded May 1st. Anti-Zionism Week promoted themes reminiscent of Iran’s 2005 “<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/30/weekinreview/30iran.html?pagewanted=all&amp;_r=1&amp;">A World Without Zionism&#8221; conference</a> and the United Nations’ 1975 resolution declaring that “Zionism is a form of racism,” which was part of the Arab-Soviet strategy to delegitimize and expel Israel from the United Nations. In the same vein, the MSU event discussed such topics as “borders and racism” and featured a standing wall displaying panels reading “<a href="http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2014/04/comments-on-apartheid-wall-at-uc-irvine.html">Zionism=Racism</a>” and declaring the whole of Israel to be “<a href="http://garyfouse.blogspot.com/2014/04/comments-on-apartheid-wall-at-uc-irvine.html">occupied territory</a>.”</p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">A number of university groups and off-campus organizations agreed to co-sponsor or participate in iFest, including CAMERA, Hasbara Fellowships, Stand With Us, ZOA, and the Jewish Federation of Orange County. On-campus participants included chapters of AEPi, AEPhi, Chabad and Hillel. Darwish’s speech was scheduled to take place Tuesday, May 6, as part of a Yom Ha’atzmaut festival, which commemorates Israel Independence Day. </span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">However, according to Narvy, a meeting was convened last week, which he was not invited to, between representatives from Hillel, representatives from the Jewish Federation and campus police. Police were seeking to resolve security management issues due to a simultaneous campus visit from new University of California President and former Homeland Security Secretary </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://news.uci.edu/media_advisories/uc-president-janet-napolitano-to-speak-at-uc-irvine/">Janet Napolitano</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">. Officers believed that both Napolitano and Darwish would attract protesters and careful planning would be required to accommodate both events.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">After the meeting, AFI was told that Hillel and the Jewish Federation did not want to sponsor iFest and that funds for a Shabbat dinner would be withdrawn if Darwish’s speech would be a part of iFest activities. Narvy also alleges that Hillel cast Darwish as a divisive speaker, an Islamophobe and an extremist and urged Hillel board members and on-campus organizations in the Jewish community to oppose the talk and withdraw affiliation. “The clubs who were told about Nonie as a speaker told us they would join Hillel’s boycott and withdraw from any participation in a week-long celebration of Israel if Nonie was invited to speak on campus,” Narvy said. In the process, Narvy says, AFI was smeared for promoting extremist programming. </span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">In a response to a request for comment, Hillel leadership stated:</span></p>
<blockquote><p><i style="line-height: 1.5em;">The decision by several Jewish campus organizations and their community partners not to endorse Ms. Darwish&#8217;s talk resulted from concerns over the time, place and manner of her proposed presentation in light of another event scheduled to take place on campus that day.  Those concerns were shared with AFI, along with the suggestion that Ms. Darwish speak either that same day in a different venue, or on another day.  I received an e-mail from Daniel Narvy that stated, “The AFI board decided that Nonie Darwish will NOT be speaking during iFest because we do not want to have any events that cause a division in our community.”</i></p>
<p><i style="line-height: 1.5em;">Jewish campus organizations and their community partners, in partnership with the UCI administration, have worked hard to improve the campus climate for Israel and Jewish students.  We will continue to take actions that serve the long-term best interests of the campus community. </i></p></blockquote>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Narvy, however, says he was told by campus police that they would help accommodate security at both Napolitano’s and Darwish’s speeches. Hillel did not respond to follow-up questions on what the specific concerns were regarding the time, place and manner of Darwish’s presentation or whether Hillel encouraged opposition to Darwish over her alleged Islamophobia and extremism. Neither did Hillel explain to AFI, when pressed, exactly why it did not want Darwish to speak, Narvy reports.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The UCI Hillel chapter and the Orange County Jewish Federation have their own history of controversy with extremists, particularly virulently anti-Israel individuals. In </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/a-chapter-that-should-be-expelled-from-hillel-3/">2010</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> the UCI Hillel student president was criticized for promoting a campus talk by a co-founder of the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), a group that has </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/ismstandforfacts25.html">endorsed </a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">violence and “armed resistance” against Israel and whose activists have been photographed with </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=2601">assault weapons</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> in the company of Palestinian operatives. </span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">The OC Jewish Federation has provided </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.ha-emet.com/oti_funding.html">funding</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> for a campus group called the </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.ha-emet.com">Olive Tree Initiative</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> (OTI), which organized a secret </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford-and-richard-baehr/uc-irvine-students-secret-meeting-with-hamas-official/">meeting</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;"> between students and Hamas leader Aziz Duwaik in 2009. The OTI offers trips to Israel for students to meet with pro-Israel speakers as well as major leaders in the anti-Israel movement, such as </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://archive.adl.org/israel/qumsiyeh/#.U2fyBV60bwI">Mazin Qumsiyeh</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">, a BDS movement co-founder who likens Israel to Nazi Germany and Apartheid South Africa, and </span><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://www.ha-emet.com/oti.html">George Rishmawi</a><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">, a co-founder of the ISM and tour guide for the OTI.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Although disappointed, Narvy is not surprised by the turn of events. He says that throughout his time at UC Irvine, Hillel administrators have blocked his attempts to obtain leadership positions. When Narvy wanted to run for president of AFI, which was taken over by Hillel from 2011-13, Narvy says Hillel deviated from the club’s protocol and that Hillel staff and select students decided on leadership without formally holding elections in which he could run.</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Narvy said Hillel expressed concerns about the direction he would lead clubs as a politically conservative and traditional Jewish student. “Hillel has [its own] political and religious agenda and, as we have seen, Hillel will censor and in this case sanction people who deviate from Hillel’s narrow-minded political agenda.” </span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">While Narvy says the tactics and financial strong-arming used to quash the Darwish talk are reprehensible, he is less frustrated by Orange County Hillel than he is with Hillel International and “their liberal political agenda and their deviations from Torah-based Judaism.”  These problems are becoming widespread. At the University of Calgary in Canada, Hillel also blocked Darwish from coming to campus. As Calgary student Samantha Hamilton stated, “Hillel no longer represents the Zionist students on campus. It intimidates the students who do not agree with not saying anything or doing anything in the face of anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism.”</span></p>
<p><span style="line-height: 1.5em;">Despite his problems with Hillel, Narvy thinks it is important to note that UC Irvine’s Jewish and pro-Israel community have drastically improved since he has been on campus. He also appreciates the UCI Hillel program director’s work with students and does not believe the director played a role in the decision to block Darwish’s talk. Higher levels of Hillel, however, are another matter. “It is extremely unfortunate that, rather than enabling and empowering the Jewish students on campus who want to make a difference, Hillel’s stance is to fight against them and attempt to control their decisions,” Narvy said. “Hillel claims to be the Jewish student union on campus; with these type of actions, clearly it is not.”</span></p>
<p><em>Nichole Hungerford is associate editor of FrontPage Magazine. </em></p>
<p><b>Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: </b><a href="http://www.amazon.com/s/ref%3dnb_sb_noss?url=search-alias%3Ddigital-text&amp;field-keywords=david+horowitz&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;ajr=0#/ref=sr_st?keywords=david+horowitz&amp;qid=1316459840&amp;rh=n:133140011%2ck:david+horowitz&amp;sort=daterank" target="_blank"><b>Click here</b></a><b>. </b></p>
<p><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="http://horowitzfreedomcenter.us1.list-manage.com/subscribe?u=caa6f67f1482e6214d83be62d&amp;id=c761755bdf" target="_blank"><b>Subscribe</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> to Frontpage&#8217;s TV show, <i>The Glazov Gang</i>, and </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>LIKE</b></a><strong style="line-height: 1.5em;"> it on </strong><a style="line-height: 1.5em;" href="https://www.facebook.com/glazovgang" target="_blank"><b>Facebook.</b></a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2014/nichole-hungerford/uc-irvine-hillel-forces-cancellation-of-pro-israel-speaker/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>34</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>&#8216;Justice Tourism&#8217;s&#8217; Dangerous Agenda</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/nichole-hungerford/justice-tourisms-dangerous-agenda/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=justice-tourisms-dangerous-agenda</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/nichole-hungerford/justice-tourisms-dangerous-agenda/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2012 04:02:13 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alternative travel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Israel]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[olive tree initiative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Palestine]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=118127</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The anti-Israel tourism industry is much more extensive than most realize. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/090716-westbank-tourism.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-118152" title="090716-westbank-tourism" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/090716-westbank-tourism.gif" alt="" width="375" height="250" /></a></p>
<p>Many were disturbed at a recent <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jyp-3ulZmQI">video</a> of young Jews &#8212; the hope of the next generation &#8212; &#8220;occupying&#8221; a Birthright event and spewing noxious anti-Israel rhetoric in and outside the gathering. But considering the competition Birthright is up against, it&#8217;s not difficult to see how such a scene was produced. The fact is, not only have anti-Israel activist made 21st century blood libels fashionable, but they have found a way to turn a profit from them in the process. More and more, sojourners to the Holy Land are falling into the orbit of the growing “alternative travel” or &#8220;justice tourism&#8221; industry, which specializes in politicized tourism to Israel and adjacent territories. As the name indicates, alternative travel is entirely focused on exposing tourists, not with mainstream, commonly accepted information on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but with an “alternative” account predicated on needless Palestinian suffering at the hands of their brutal Israeli oppressors.</p>
<p>The alternative tourism industry in and around Israel is a multifarious, interconnected web, whose many avenues invariably lead back to terrorists and their supporters. One of the trailblazers of the alternative tourism industry in Israel is the Alternative Tourism Group (ATG), which is located in Beit Sahour, a hotbed of Palestinian activism, including during the murderous First and Second Intifadas. According to the ATG, the organization was formed as a “non-profit tourist agency” in 1995. Tours focus on a number of lies, including insinuations that “Palestine” was and is a “country”; that Israelis “<a href="http://www.atg.ps/index.php?lang=en&amp;page=faqs">steal</a>” land and commit war crimes, and that Israel has erected a “segregation wall” for racist purposes. What the ATG refers to as the “segregation wall” is, of course, the defensive wall put into construction to stop terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians &#8212; which have been reduced by <a href="http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/fence.html">90%</a> since the construction of the wall began. Anti-Israel activists commonly demonize this barrier, despite its obvious necessity and effectiveness, deviously twisting the situation into a race issue, so that the killing spree may resume.</p>
<p>The ATG collaborates with a number of groups who are loosely joined in the <a href="http://www.pirt.ps/resources/file/code_of_conduct.pdf">Palestinian Initiative for Responsible Tourism</a> (PIRT). PIRT, for which ATG is listed as a sponsor, is a consortium of local tourism entities joined together to help Palestinians benefit from the lucrative Holy Land travel industry. The purported objective of the initiative is to branch the tourism market into local Palestinian communities so that they may economically benefit from it, while at the same time cultivating an interest in Palestinian culture and building awareness among pilgrims of political problems in the area. Other groups in the initiative include the Arab Hotel Association, Bethlehem University, the Holy Land Incoming Tour Operator Association, the Holy Land Trust, the International Center of Bethlehem, the Jerusalem Inter-Church Center, the Joint Advocacy Initiative, the Network of Christian Organizations in Bethlehem and the Siraj Center for Holy Land Studies.</p>
<p>Another initiative member is the Palestinian Ministry of Tourism and Antiquities, which has reported a huge <a href="http://www.travelujah.com/blogs/entry/Burgeoning-Tourism-Has-Palestinians-Scrambling-to-Add-Hotel-Rooms-">increase</a> in tourism to the Holy Land. This translates to an increase in capital to the Palestinian territories and into the hands of “justice tourism” activists, not to mention an increase in the sheer number of travelers exposed to their propaganda. Honing in on the allure of travel to the Holy Land, it’s no surprise ATG and other PIRT members <a href="http://www.pirt.ps/index.php?lang=en&amp;page=news&amp;news_item=12747823284">consort</a> with the more virulently anti-Israel (and borderline anti-Jewish) Christian organizations like the <a href="http://www.adl.org/PresRele/IslME_62/5086_62.htm">World Council of Churches</a> and the <a href="http://www.adl.org/ADL_Opinions/Interfaith/Huff_Post_071510.htm">Kairos Palestine</a> movement, which are connected to an enormous pipeline of Christian pilgrims.</p>
<p>Another prominent organization in PIRT is the Holy Land Trust. Based in Bethlehem, the Holy Land Trust (HLT) is a virulently anti-Israel organization that supports Palestinian terrorism. The organization&#8217;s executive director, Sami Awad, <a href="http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/_little_town_of_bethlehem_film_holy_land_trust_s_anti_israel_activism_with_a_theological_backdrop">believes</a> that non-violent demonstrations are &#8220;not a substitute for armed struggle.&#8221; HLT has also <a href="http://www.holylandtrust.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=536&amp;Itemid=90">worked</a> with the International Solidarity Movement (ISM), which <a href="http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/international_solidarity_movement_ism_">endorses</a> and <a href="http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Government/Communiques/2003/Senior%2520Islamic%2520Jihad%2520terrorist%2520arrested%2520while%2520hidi">abets</a> Palestinian terrorism. One of the board members of the HLT, <a href="http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=118243">Abu Aita</a>, was a former member of a terrorist organization, the Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades (serving from 2000-2003) and was incarcerated in an Israeli prison on accusations that he was involved with shooting Israeli soldiers. The HLT offers a number of traveling programs, some of which are marketed specifically to <a href="http://www.holylandtrust.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=456&amp;Itemid=305">students</a> and Christian <a href="http://www.holylandtrust.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=247&amp;Itemid=187">pilgrims</a>.</p>
<p>Of particular note, the HLT features a travel program centered around indigenous olive cultivation called the Olive Harvest and Cuisine Tour. This is significant for the following reason: There are two well-known Palestinian activists, both named George Rishmawi, who have worked in the Palestinian alternative travel industry for many years. Both men are co-founders of the ISM. In the mid-2000s, one of the Rishmawis was involved in a HLT program similar in theme to the Olive Harvest and Cuisine Tour called the <a href="http://triptopalestine.com/cgi-bin/main/tourism/index.py">Olive Harvest</a> encounter. This encounter offered tours of the Holy Land, which showcased alleged Palestinian suffering at the hands of the Israelis. Currently, one of the Rishmawis is a <a href="http://www.sirajcenter.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=129&amp;Itemid=60">coordinator</a> for the Siraj Center for Holy Land Studies, based, like the ATG, in Beit Sahour. As coordinator, Rishmawi plays a large role in the alternative tourism functions of the Siraj Center, whose trips particularly appeal to Christian travelers.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2012/nichole-hungerford/justice-tourisms-dangerous-agenda/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>14</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The &#8216;Flytilla&#8217;: Brought to You by Friends of the Olive Tree Initiative</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/the-flytilla-brought-to-you-by-friends-of-the-olive-tree-initiative/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-flytilla-brought-to-you-by-friends-of-the-olive-tree-initiative</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/the-flytilla-brought-to-you-by-friends-of-the-olive-tree-initiative/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Jul 2011 04:00:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=98390</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The controversial UC Irvine program continues to discredit itself. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Picture-1a.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-98418" title="Picture-1a" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/07/Picture-1a.gif" alt="" width="375" height="339" /></a></p>
<p>Evidence continues to mount over the nefarious nature of the Olive Tree Initiative (OTI), a controversial student program that originated at the University of California, Irvine and is rapidly spreading to other campuses. Radical anti-Israel activists with long-standing involvement in the program have been identified as lead organizers of what has been dubbed the “flytilla,” a recent stunt aimed at putting the Israel delegitimization campaign back in the headlines. Sending young college students to meet with such Israel-hating extremists &#8212; including a leader of the terrorist organization Hamas &#8212; is what the OTI’s powerful patrons consider &#8220;holistic&#8221; education.</p>
<p>Of the numerous parties involved in the “flytilla,” more technically known as the “Welcome to Palestine” campaign, two of them are associated with the OTI. The campaign’s purported objective was to inundate the Ben Gurion International Airport in Tel Aviv with foreign activists ultimately destined for a week-long agitation event in Palestinian territory. The spectacle was also intended to coincide with the unsuccessful effort to sail a multi-national flotilla to the Gaza Strip. However, Israel refused entry to hundreds of known flytilla activists, achieving cooperation from airport personnel in other countries, who disallowed identified activists from boarding flights to Israel. Regardless, a deluge of activists were able to travel to Tel Aviv, some of whom were permitted entry into Israel upon arrival, although many were detained or sent back.</p>
<p>One of the <a href="http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4092857,00.html">key</a> campaign organizers was the radical anti-Israel activist Mazin <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vslTf-jStuA">Qumsiyeh</a>. Qumsiyeh, a PhD who previously taught at Yale, has served for the past three years as a speaker for the OTI. He travels the globe giving presentations against Israel, and commonly <a href="http://salem-news.com/articles/may292011/german-palestinian-mq.php">accuses</a> the country’s government of being a Nazi regime, which previously collaborated with the Third Reich and killed twice as many Palestinians as are estimated to have died in the Holocaust. Nonetheless, he is a highly-esteemed figure among OTI participants.</p>
<p>Qumsiyeh’s involvement is perhaps best chronicled by the numerous mass emails he has sent out to his followers regarding the Welcome to Palestine campaign. For instance, on June 12, in reference to Welcome to Palestine, Qumsiyeh assured his acolytes in the “Palestinian American Congress” that he was “back in Palestine and busily working with dozens of volunteers (but we need more) on the July and other actions to challenge the system of [Israeli] apartheid.” Illustrative of his typical dementia, Qumsiyeh also told followers that a young Jewish American was “attacked by apartheid state mercenaries” for speaking out, presumably against Israel.  Qumsiyeh, it should be pointed out, works tirelessly to popularize the defamatory notion that Israel, the only non-apartheid, democratic country in the Middle East, is an “apartheid state.”</p>
<p>In a July 7th email, while again extolling the Welcome to Palestine campaign, Qumsiyeh promised that afterward, “We will plan bigger and more dramatic events in the months to come.” And in response to Israel’s largely successful attempt to thwart Welcome to Palestine, Qumsiyeh told followers that “Israeli policies towards anything or anyone relating to ‘Palestinians’” are “dictatorial, racist, and criminal and not complying with basic elements of democracy or human rights.” He also accused Israel of attempting to “isolate and imprison Palestinians.”</p>
<p>These diatribes are typical of Mazin Qumsiyeh. He is not neutral, nor does he pretend to be. He is a man working night and day to bring about an end to Israel through a worldwide public relations program to paint Israel as a racist, militant, and colonialist state. That mission is clearly being fulfilled through his work with the OTI. For example, in a 2009 OTI program booklet titled “Expressions/Impressions,” one student recorded the valuable message he learned from Qumsiyeh (emphasis added):</p>
<blockquote><p>Rhetoric, [Qumsiyeh] explains, is key to framing the conflict, and <em>regardless of the truth behind the terms</em>, what matters is how we invoke a response and convey our message.</p></blockquote>
<p>What is meant by “rhetoric,” of course, is maliciously contrived, thoroughly invented demonizing propaganda, the truth behind which this particular student observer was not interested in ascertaining. Instead, the student wrote, he learned to “respect that rhetoric” and that “emotions and suffering becomes more important than fact[.]”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/the-flytilla-brought-to-you-by-friends-of-the-olive-tree-initiative/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>5</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Patrons of Anti-Israelism</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/the-patrons-of-anti-israelism-3/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-patrons-of-anti-israelism-3</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/the-patrons-of-anti-israelism-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Jun 2011 04:31:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=96787</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Media reports whitewash the facts behind the Olive Tree Initiative -- and its powerful supporters. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/OTI-logo-new.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-96789" title="OTI-logo-new" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/OTI-logo-new.gif" alt="" width="375" height="338" /></a></p>
<p>Last week, a troubling <a href="http://www.jpost.com/Features/InThespotlight/Article.aspx?ID=225167&amp;R=R1">article</a> appeared in <em>The Jerusalem Post</em> on the Olive Tree Initiative (OTI), a shady student organization run primarily through the University of California, Irvine that is rapidly spreading. The subject of intense criticism, the OTI has been infiltrated by (among others) activists from the terrorism-supporting <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6233">International Solidarity Movement</a> (ISM) and has sent students to meet with a leader of Hamas. Even so, what appeared in the <em>Post</em> does little to hold the organization accountable &#8212; or its powerful supporters in the Jewish Federation of Orange County (JFOC).</p>
<p>The OTI has been covered extensively at <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2011/01/25/dialogue-and-deceit/">FrontPage</a>, most recently in an article detailing a 2009 student trip to Israel and the West Bank on which students met with one of the foremost leaders of Hamas, <a href="http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3735809,00.html">Aziz Duwaik</a> (trips to Israel to meet with “dialogue partners” are a central function of the program). The meeting occurred just months after Duwaik’s release from Israeli custody. Afterward, students were told to coverup the meeting and to essentially <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/oti_students_meet_hamas.html">deceive</a> officials in order to avoid trouble crossing borders and leaving the country. A spokeswoman from UC Irvine told FrontPage that there was no investigation into the incident that she knew of, nor has there been any evidence of an investigation subsequently. That is to say, neither the university nor the OTI’s funders have shown any interest in understanding the OTI’s dealings with Hamas, and in particular, how it is possible that the OTI arranged this meeting and what internal connections brought it about. (Duwaik, incidentally, was detained again in May by the Israeli Defense Force.)</p>
<p>The fact that there was no investigation is most puzzling, as JFOC sent a <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/oti_students_meet_hamas.html">letter</a> to Irvine Chancellor Michael Drake ostensibly insisting that an investigation be preformed. Yet with no investigation conducted, the federation continues its support.</p>
<p>Also in the absence of an investigation, only a matter of weeks after the Hamas meeting was made known to Drake, University of California President Mark Yudof donated <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/mark_yudof_funds_for_oti.html">$5000</a> to the OTI via the Lumina Foundation for Education. This was followed in May 2010 with a $2000 award to the OTI by Yudof for the university’s Presidential Leadership Award. For such generous support, the university has been woefully remiss.</p>
<p>But OTI students typically meet with an abundance of radical anti-Israel activist who are just as objectionable as Duwaik. Explaining the JFOC’s enduring support, federation president and CEO Shalom Elcott told the <em>Post</em>, “We could all agree that we don’t love all the speakers, but we have to work with American Jews to develop a greater understanding <em>about how important that diversity of opinions in Israel is</em>. Our job is to work with OTI and <em>open the door to the best possible teachers and people who know the facts on the ground</em> and make sure they’re engaged on the trip” (emphasis added).</p>
<p>To be clear, Elcott’s definition of the “best possible teachers and people who know the facts on the ground” includes: George S. and George N. Rishmawi, both co-founders of the ISM, a group that openly endorses Palestinian terrorism; <a href="http://www.adl.org/israel/qumsiyeh/in_his_own_word.asp">Mazim Qumsiyeh</a>, a leading figure and co-founder of the economic warfare movement against Israel (BDS), who also promotes the anti-Semitic lie that Israel, the only non-apartheid nation in the Middle East, is an apartheid state comparable to Nazi Germany (which also causes all wars in the region); UN Gaza refugee director <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/06/world/middleeast/06nationsweb.html">John Ging</a>, who has accused Israel of creating a humanitarian crisis and supports the foreign flotilla assaults on the Gaza blockade; representatives from organizations such as Ir Amim, which has accused Israel of pursing policies of “<a href="http://www.ir-amim.org.il/Eng/_Uploads/dbsAttachedFiles/Octupdate.pdf">Judaization</a>;” representatives from Human Rights Watch, which accuses Israel of committing <a href="http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/03/25/israel-white-phosphorus-use-evidence-war-crimes">war crimes</a> and various human rights abuses; and numerous others.</p>
<p>What about these impeccable “facts on the ground” that Elcott extolls? In 2010, George S. Rishmawi outrageously told students that “Israeli soldiers would fire and spray bullets randomly at Palestinian civilians in their homes,” one OTI participant recorded. The participant, who is in fact supportive of the OTI, then caught Rishmawi in another lie. Rishmawi, fumbling for an explanation, claimed that Palestinians sometimes fire guns “into the air&#8230;as a sign of resistance.” Actually &#8212; the student cornered Rishmawi into admitting &#8212; Palestinians sometimes fire <em>directly at</em> IDF officers, to which the provocateurs receive the appropriate response. There is simply no positive way to spin these facts: what Elcott and the JFOC consider “diverse opinions” are repulsive lies meant to incite hatred and justify Palestinian violence toward Israelis.</p>
<p>This same OTI participant, on the same 2010 trip, was also left with the distinct impression that George S. Rishmawi promotes violence. The young sojourner wrote (emphasis added):</p>
<blockquote><p>[M]y biggest problem with individuals like George is their emphasis on being a “peace” activist.  George, for instance, claims that he is a non-violent peace activist, however in the same breath he maintains that <em>if his peace is not realized within a year (mentioned above) there is no point in peace and drastic steps must – no – will be taken</em>.</p></blockquote>
<p>The extent of the Rishmawis’ involvement in the OTI program and its development is immensely curious and disconcerting (remember, these are ISM, <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/ismstandforfacts25.html">Palestinian-terrorism supporting</a> activists). The Centre for New Diplomacy (CFND), a Swedish NGO that does work in Israel, lists the OTI as one of its programs, asserting that it began as a “<a href="http://www.cfnd.eu/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=90&amp;Itemid=236">partnership programme</a>” in 2007 with UC Irvine. One of the George Rishmawis works &#8212; or did, at least &#8212; as a CFND “<a href="http://www.cfnd.eu/index.php?option=com_content&amp;view=article&amp;id=92&amp;Itemid=237">coordinator for Palestine</a>.” Most compellingly, George S. Rishmawi previously did work for the Holy Land Trust circa 2004 on what was called the “<a href="http://www.triptopalestine.com/cgi-bin/main/tourism/index.py">Olive Harvest Encounter</a>.” As you can probably guess, the Olive Harvest Encounter was another fellow-traveller “dialogue” program that distinguished itself by focusing on the “persecution” and land confiscation of Palestinians by the Israeli government. The group even alleged that members of a particular family faced threats to their lives. Both Rishmawis have been involved in OTI programming every year from at least 2008-2010, and George S. was brought to UC Irvine in November of 2010 by the OTI as a speaker. The Rishmawis’ role in the development of the OTI must be investigated. Considering what we already know of them, it is obscene that they are a part of the program at all.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/the-patrons-of-anti-israelism-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>10</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Suppressing Speech at UC Santa Barbara</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/suppressing-speech-at-uc-santa-barbara/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=suppressing-speech-at-uc-santa-barbara</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/suppressing-speech-at-uc-santa-barbara/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 18 May 2011 04:55:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=93523</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[May 26: Round II of the battle between David Horowitz and campus apologists for Islamic extremism. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/A5450881229_14e438ce25.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-93527" title="A5450881229_14e438ce25" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/A5450881229_14e438ce25.gif" alt="" width="375" height="304" /></a></p>
<p>When David Horowitz speaks about campus anti-Semitism and appeasement of radical Islam at the University of California, Santa Barbara on May 26, it will be against a backdrop of soft censorship and suppression of free speech that has come to characterize the UCSB public square.</p>
<p>The school’s Associated Students (AS) financial board, heavily influenced by the UCSB Muslim Students Association acting in concert with left-wing groups, illegally refused a funding request last week by the College Republicans to fund the event. After a protest by students anxious to hear Horowitz, the AS granted a part of the sum initially requested by College Republicans, but only after encouraging a campaign portraying Horowitz as a racist, Islamophobe, and practitioner of hate speech.</p>
<p>The May 26 speech will touch on themes similar those in a previous Horowitz lecture at Santa Barbara three years ago in which he challenged &#8212; without success &#8212; students heckling from the audience to denounce the terror group Hamas and its intention to wipe Israel, and all Jews, off the face of the map.</p>
<p>The memory of that confrontation was one factor that led the College Republicans’ request for $2000, for audiovisual and security expenses (and not including an honorarium) to be turned down by the Associated Students board on May 2.  Citing court decisions requiring viewpoint neutrality when student fees are allocated for speakers, College Republicans protested. At a raucous public forum on May 5, the AS approved $1100 for the event.  This amount was then reduced to $800 as a result of a campaign by Islamic and left groups, which also made it clear that they intended to disrupt the event. And then the AS further denigrated the College Republicans’ request by allocating comparable funding for a campus wide “<a href="http://www.dailynexus.com/2011-05-10/funds-counterhorowitz-event/">Anti-Hate Workshop</a>” to take place at the same time as Horowitz’s May 26 lecture.</p>
<p>Forcing some student groups to shoulder the burden of security costs when others threaten an event with violence is appropriately called the “heckler’s veto,” and in this case it has produced the same speech-suppression that the AS financial board initially tried to achieve by denying funding of the Horowitz event altogether.  The discriminatory actions of the student board caused the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), a non-profit dedicated to protecting free speech on campus, to send a <a href="http://thefire.org/article/13187.html">letter</a> warning UCSB chancellor Henry Yang that it was “prepared to use all of our resources to see this&#8230;through to a just and moral conclusion.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/suppressing-speech-at-uc-santa-barbara/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>53</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>A Chapter That Should Be Expelled from Hillel</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/a-chapter-that-should-be-expelled-from-hillel-3/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=a-chapter-that-should-be-expelled-from-hillel-3</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/a-chapter-that-should-be-expelled-from-hillel-3/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 04:20:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=90121</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Jewish leadership in Irvine helps a terrorist front group infiltrate the campus.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/uci3.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-90125" title="uci" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/uci3.gif" alt="" width="375" height="301" /></a></p>
<p>It is an open secret that university Hillel chapters often find themselves on the side of campus constituencies that support the agenda of Israel’s most vicious enemies. One particularly appalling example of this alliance comes to us from the University of California, Irvine (UCI), whose Hillel chapter has formed an incestuous association with the <a href="http://frontpagemag.com/2011/01/25/dialogue-and-deceit/">Olive Tree Initiative</a> (OTI), a controversial student program that emulates the model of the terrorist front group, the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2O5fBT7zwgA&amp;feature=player_embedded">International Solidarity Movement</a> (ISM), and indeed, even works with ISM leadership. In its most scandalous episode yet, the OTI has been exposed for arranging a meeting between students and a prominent leader of the genocidal terrorist organization Hamas. UCI Hillel’s on-going alliance with such an organization and its record of deceit demand that drastic measures be taken.</p>
<p>Controversy with UCI Hillel erupted in November 2010 when the organization’s president promoted a <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/oc_independent_task_force_anti-semitism_letter.html">speaking event</a> featuring a Palestinian activist named George Rishmawi. The event was arranged under the auspices of the Olive Tree Initiative (OTI), but was promoted over Facebook by Hillel leadership. Importantly, the original Facebook flier described Rishmawi as the “cofounder [of] the International Solidarity Movement” (ISM) and the “head of [the] Siraj Center for Holy Land Studies.” This is crucial to note, as the significance of Rishmawi’s affiliation with the ISM cannot be overstated. The ISM is a viciously anti-Israel organization that endorses Palestinian terrorism and is infamous for its abetment of terrorist operations in Israel through its facade of “nonviolent” activism. The group specializes in propagandizing Westerners, whom it uses as human shields to provide cover for terrorists.</p>
<p>Needless to say, when the Orange County Jewish community was alerted to the event, many were outraged. The Orange County Independent Task Force on Anti-Semitism publicized the event on its <a href="https://octaskforce.wordpress.com/2010/11/22/george-rishmawi-a-tale-of-two-people/">website</a>, but shortly thereafter, the event information, including biographical information on Rishmawi, had changed. Rishmawi was described as the “Coordinator for Siraj, Center For Holy Land Studies” and a “<em>former</em> <em>member</em> of the International Solidarity Movement” (emphasis added). Hillel UCI President Matan Lurey explained on the event’s page that there are, in fact, two George Rishmawis, and that there had been <a href="http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=171310602897452">confusion</a> about which one had been invited by OTI. Defenders of the talk claimed that it was George <em>S.</em> Rishmawi who was invited to speak, not George <em>N.</em> Rishmawi, a relative and colleague of the former, and notorious cofounder of the ISM.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, the controversy only escalated from there, much of which, is chronicled at <a href="http://www.ha-Emet.com/">www.ha-Emet.com</a> (Hebrew for “the truth”), a community response to events exposed in November. Numerous members of the Jewish community, led by Dee Sterling, were disturbed by the Rishmawi talk and dispatched a <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/dee_sterling_letter.html">letter</a> to Jordan Fruchtman, executive director of Orange County Hillel (which oversees the UCI Hillel). The letter was also sent to Shalom Elcott of the Jewish Federation of Orange County (JFOC) and Jay Feldman, coordinator of the JFOC’s Rose Project, which funds the OTI. More broadly, the letter objected to Hillel and the federation’s support for the OTI, which was being increasingly exposed for the radically anti-Israel student indoctrination program that it is. The letter read, in part:</p>
<p>“It is particularly disturbing that the UCI Hillel, under the guidance of Hillel Director Jordan Fruchtman has also contributed to supporting the OTI. A former Hillel Israel Fellow participated in an OTI trip and the current student leader of Hillel is actively promoting the event this coming Monday with George Rishmawi&#8230;.We also ask Jordan Fruchtman how Hillel which, &#8216;&#8230;provides opportunities for Jewish students to explore and celebrate their Jewish identity&#8230;’ can reconcile this noble work with the history and actions of the ISM.”</p>
<p>The response from the recipients of this letter, however, was truly disgraceful. With respect to Fruchtman in particular, rather than accept responsibility for the egregious lack of judgement, Fruchtman disseminated a <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/hillel_letter.html">letter</a> to the Orange County Jewish community personally attacking Sterling, claiming that she was maliciously spreading untruths and was mistaken about which Rishmawi was speaking. “Hillel does not support George N. Rishmawi or ISM, the organization with which he is affiliated,” Fruchtman said. “As a matter of principle, the values of ISM are in direct conflict with Hillel’s values and Hillel’s stance on Israel&#8230;[T]he person that has been invited by the Olive Tree Initiative to speak at UCI on November 22, 2010, is a different George Rishmawi, whose full name is George S. Rishmawi[.]” Fruchtman advised others to ignore Sterling’s “reprehensible” statement.</p>
<p>Beyond the extreme lack of decorum in terms of the letter’s personal attack against an active, upstanding member of the Irvine Jewish community (for the crime of voicing her objections to a malicious anti-Israel activist being brought on campus), the letter sent by Fruchtman was seriously factually challenged. First, it is incontrovertible that an event featuring the “cofounder of the ISM” had been promoted by Hillel leadership. In fact, the <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/simon_wiesenthal_letter_to_the_federation.html">Simon Wiesenthal Center</a> of Los Angeles issued a similar objection to the JFOC based on the same information. The alleged confusion was only “clarified” when public criticism was made of Hillel publicizing the event in the first place.</p>
<p>Secondly, George S. Rishmawi (the “good one”) also has a close relationship with the ISM. His <a href="http://www.sirajcenter.org/index.php?option=com_content&amp;task=view&amp;id=129&amp;Itemid=60">biography</a> at the Siraj Center also describes him as the “cofounder” of the ISM. Moreover, although Fruchtman in his letter claimed that George S. “was no longer involved” with the group, it is not as if organizations like the ISM offer membership cards or any other formal recognition of association. What it means to say that one has “cut ties” or dropped affiliation with the group is extremely ambiguous and practically impossible to verify.</p>
<p>But in fact, such verification is not even necessary. OTI itineraries from 2008-2010 identify two George Rishmawis giving talks and tours to students on OTI trips to Israel and the disputed territories (including Hillel members). These two individuals are clearly differentiated on the <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/uci_students_itinerary_in_israel.html">2008</a>, 2009, and <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/uci_stidents_itinerary_in_israel_2010.html">2010</a> itineraries as “George S. Rishmawi (Siraj Center)” and “George Rishmawi (cofounder ISM).” Clearly, both Rishmawis are involved in the program, unless, for some strange reason, George S. Rishmawi &#8212; the “good” ISM cofounder according to UCI Hillel &#8212; was identified two different ways on the same itinerary.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/a-chapter-that-should-be-expelled-from-hillel-3/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>33</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Take Action Against the Delegitimization of Israel Today</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/take-action-against-the-delegitimization-of-israel-today/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=take-action-against-the-delegitimization-of-israel-today</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/take-action-against-the-delegitimization-of-israel-today/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Mar 2011 04:01:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=88084</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Voice your objection to the boycott of the Jewish State. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a class="highslide" onclick="return vz.expand(this)" href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/bds-australia.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-88404" title="bds-australia" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/bds-australia.gif" alt="" width="375" height="288" /></a></p>
<p>In the wake of the tragic slaying of the Fogel family in Itamar, Israel, some have found renewed inspiration for the cause to protect the Jewish State and her people. This call to action is not merely in response to the heinous nature of the crime &#8212; in which an infant, two children and their parents were slaughtered in their sleep, their hearts stabbed and throats slit &#8212; but also to the reaction it has received in certain precincts. Activists for the BDS movement and segments of the popular culture that have been influenced by them, have not failed to diminish and obscure the unadulterated savagery of this event. Moreover, their insistence that Palestinians are genuine partners in peace is increasingly difficult to defend in light of the murders.  Now, more than ever, the BDS movement is losing credibility, and a new movement is underway to scale-back its influence. If you are affiliated with a Jewish Federation, you can be a part of this campaign now, with just a few moments of your time.</p>
<p>After news of the Fogel murders were publicized, Palestinians in the Gaza city of Rafah were <a href="http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4041106,00.html">reported</a> distributing candy and sweets in celebration. Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zuhri, responding to the arrest of several of Hamas’s “activists” said, &#8220;The report of five murdered Israelis is not enough to punish someone. However; we in Hamas completely support the resistance against settlers who murder and use crime and terror against the Palestinian people under the auspices of the Israeli occupation soldiers.&#8221;</p>
<p>Such cruel sentiments are unfortunately not restricted to terrorists and their sympathizers. After some heartfelt well-wishing for the victims of the disaster in Japan, well-know BDS activist and speaker Mazin Qumsiyeh <a href="http://proisraelbaybloggers.blogspot.com/2011/03/mazin-qumsiyehs-dog-and-pony-show.html">wrote</a> coldly to his followers about “settlers” in “the most extremist of settlements” who were killed by unknown assailants. He didn’t find it necessary to mention that it was a <em>family</em> of settlers, the brutal manner in which they were killed, or that the perpetrators were widely presumed to be Palestinian terrorists. Rather, what Qumsiyeh was more interested in was that the “apartheid state decided to build 500 more houses for more racist settlers on Palestinian lands” after the killing of these unsympathetic, nefarious settlers took place.</p>
<p>Qumsiyeh is a man who “considers ‘Zionism to be a disease,” observes Jerry Gordon in a <a href="http://www.newenglishreview.org/custpage.cfm/frm/85287/sec_id/85287">first-of-its-kind pledge</a> to establish uniform protocols in Jewish Federations across the country that would prohibit funding for BDS activities. Gordon, who is the senior editor at the New English Review, was instrumental in the crafting of the pledge, which he and others wish to carry out in the memory of the slain Fogel family. These concerned individuals have begun to recognize the insidious effects the BDS movement has had on the discourse surrounding Israel. The BDS narrative &#8212; that of Israeli apartheid, racism, oppression, occupation, etc. &#8212; is becoming increasingly influential, and certainly has pervaded much of the coverage of the Fogel family’s tragic end. Some think it&#8217;s time to strike back.</p>
<p>In 2010, the San Francisco Jewish Community Federation (SFJCF) adopted pioneering protocol into its funding guidelines to prohibit funding for BDS and BDS-related activities. The need for this protocol arose from the showing of a controversial independent film called &#8220;Rachel&#8221; that was partially sponsored by SFJCF funds (more precisely, funds in support the of San Francisco Jewish Film Festival). The film is about the accidental death of an International Solidarity Movement (ISM) activist named Rachel Corrie, who was inadvertently killed in 2003 in Gaza during an IDF operation to destroy underground tunnels used by Palestinian terrorists. The ISM is a known supporter of Palestinian terrorism, and the film greatly distorted the facts surrounding Corrie&#8217;s death, blaming and demonizing Israel.</p>
<p>Much outrage was expressed over the film, including by the San Francisco-based Taube Philanthropies and the Koret Foundation. The SFJCF resolved to adopt anti-BDS guidelines to avoid future incidents. Joining suit, the General Assembly of the Jewish Federations of North America has also urged that the momentum of the BDS movement be addressed more seriously.</p>
<p>At a time when the BDS debate is becoming more and more prominent, Gordon and other concerned individuals and activists, such as <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/">Dee Sterling</a> of Orange County, California, who is known for her opposition to Jewish funding for a student program known as the <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/oti.html">Olive Tree Initiative</a>, have worked to take the bold first steps of the SFJCF to the national level. With the talent of individuals like Rabbi Dov Fischer, esq. of Orange County and Debra Glazer, esq., a pledge has been devised for all Jewish Federations in the country to sign to ensure that communal funds do not go to BDS activity. By signing the pledge, the federation is not admitting to prior complicity in funding of BDS programming. Rather, the pledge provides simple, staight-forward guidelines for federations to sign to set a standard for the future.</p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p>Its makers hope that this unique pledge, which is printed on the following page, will provide the opportunity for many disparate groups in the Jewish community to come together to accept the minimum standard that is necessary to stop the demonization and delegitimization of Israel. It has already received support from the Orange County Independent Task Force on Anti-Semitism, the Zionist Organization of America, and the David Horowitz Freedom Center. In addition, an electronic <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/jewish_federation_petition.html?r=20110216093758" target="_blank">petition</a> is available at <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/jewish_federation_petition.html?r=20110216093758" target="_blank"></a><a href="http://www.ha-Emet.com/" target="_blank">www.ha-Emet.com</a> for all community members to <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/jewish_federation_petition.html">send to their federations</a> to encourage them to adopt the pledge. The pledge itself is a wealth of information on the details of BDS, and clearly elucidates why the time for individuals &#8212; and Jewish Federations everywhere &#8212; to take a stand on this issue is now.</p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p>&nbsp;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/take-action-against-the-delegitimization-of-israel-today/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Does Radical Muslim Malik Ali Speak for the Yorba Linda Islamic Community?</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/does-radical-muslim-malik-ali-speak-for-the-yorba-linda-islamic-community/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=does-radical-muslim-malik-ali-speak-for-the-yorba-linda-islamic-community</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/does-radical-muslim-malik-ali-speak-for-the-yorba-linda-islamic-community/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 Mar 2011 04:25:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=87862</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[CAIR is up to its usual tricks. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a class="highslide" onclick="return vz.expand(this)" href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/irv_malik.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-87864" title="irv_malik" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/irv_malik.gif" alt="" width="375" height="358" /></a></p>
<p>CAIR is out doing what it does best in Orange County, California &#8212; demonizing the people who expose radicalism in the Islamic community and obfuscating the facts so that this radicalism goes unchecked. A viral Internet <a href="http://ca.cair.com/dropbox/losangeles/ochate.mp4">video</a> produced by CAIR California twists what was a peaceful protest against two <a href="http://www.ocjewish.com/media/pdf/514/tgHi5140219.pdf">radical Islamic</a> speakers into a veritable hate rally, indicting many of the demonstration’s respected speakers and activists, including some politicians. While CAIR has spent an inordinate amount of time gathering and splicing video footage of the event and denouncing community activists in the press, the most telling aspect of this entire episode is that CAIR has failed to render one word of objection to the radical hate merchants who were invited to speak to the Yorba Linda, California Islamic community. If CAIR is really the bridge-building group it masquerades as, then it is <em>incumbent</em> on them to speak out against these individuals. Yet, they have chosen to protect the radicals and discredit opposition to them instead.</p>
<p>On Feb. 13, community members gathered in Yorba Linda, California to <a href="http://www.ocjewish.com/media/pdf/514/tgHi5140219.pdf">demonstrate</a> against the radical activists <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2102">Amir Abdel Malik Ali</a> and Siraj Wahaj, who were invited to speak at an Islamic Circle of North America Relief USA charity fundraiser. ICNA Relief is the <a href="http://ICNA%20Relief%E2%80%99s%20social%20services%20projects%20in%20Southern%20California">social services</a> arm of the Islamic Circle of North America and the charity event’s purpose was “to raise $350,000 to start social programs such as women&#8217;s shelters, fighting hunger and homelessness in the area,” spokesman <a href="http://www.ocregister.com/news/america-288163-fundraiser-wahhaj.html">Waqas Syed</a> told the OC Register. Although the protest, which drew an estimated 500 people, was peaceful and promoted the importance of free speech, patriotism, and the rejection of radical hate-speech, a much smaller group of protesters gathered at the entrance of the nearby Yorba Linda Community Center, where the fundraiser was taking place, and harassed Muslim attendees in a vicious manner. Some of the attendees were children, and were also subjected to the reprehensible invective. In response, the Council on America-Islamic Relations of California released a heavily edited video portraying the entire Yorba Linda protest as an anti-Muslim hate rally, and the video was widely circulated on the Internet and in the media.</p>
<p>However, community activists who organized the event did not authorize and did not see the ugly scene transpiring, as the protest was held too far away from the community center’s entrance for it to be visible. Event organizers like Steve Amundson informed all protest attendees that they were not to have hateful signs. Some individuals, in fact, were asked to put unacceptable signs away. “I remember it was about 1 o’clock and my friend Gary Fouse called me and said there were a few people with signs saying, ‘Go Back Home,’ and he said, ‘I can’t speak at an event where there are signs like that,’” recounted <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/">Dee Sterling</a>, an Irvine community activist who helped with the event. Sterling also spoke to the crowd about her youth in apartheid South Africa and the danger of people like Malik Ali, who inspire hatred and violence toward Israel by falsely claiming that it is an apartheid society.</p>
<p>“I told him that that’s not what the event was about and that I wouldn’t speak at an event with hateful signs either,” Sterling continued. Sterling suggested that Fouse ask that the offensive signs be removed, which they were, and the couple who brought them left the rally, she said. Sterling also said she personally reminded as many attendees as she could to respect the spirit of the demonstration. “Our purpose was to protest these two speakers who preach hate and radicalism and to celebrate our freedoms in America.”</p>
<p>Numerous other event organizers and speakers have also testified that they did not witness any of the protesters depicted on the CAIR video, nor did they know who they were. Rabbi Dov Fischer of Young Israel of Orange County, was the second speaker at the event. Rabbi Fischer, who is also a board certified attorney and professor of law, heard all of the speeches and affirmed that they comported with the protest&#8217;s theme. During his speech, the rabbi himself made many kind observations about the Muslim faith, but he agreed that the presence of Malik Ali at an “otherwise fine-sounding Muslim social-welfare charity” demanded response.</p>
<p>Chapman Law professor Karen Lugo, a constitutional law attorney and co-director of the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, also spoke at the event and was outraged over CAIR’s “hit video.” In a <a href="http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.8976/pub_detail.asp">piece</a> for Family Security Matters, Lugo said that these were “rogue hecklers gathered at a remote location.” One of the important facts Lugo points out is that, not only were these hecklers physically disassociated with the main event she was a part of, but that much of the harassment was done well after the rally had ended. As the CAIR video clearly shows, the anti-Muslim heckling took place while attendees were entering the evening fundraiser event and continued into the post-dusk hours. The protest attended by Lugo, Rabbi Fischer, Sterling, and others had ended well before the sun went down.</p>
<p>This is to say nothing of the <a href="http://www.ocjewish.com/templates/articlecco_cdo/aid/1454686/jewish/Statement-about-CAIR-Video.htm">politicians</a> present, like U.S. Reps. Ed Royce and Gary Miller, who spoke at the event, but who also have many Muslim constituents and certainly would never have participated in an anti-Muslim rally.</p>
<p>On the other hand, to say that the two Muslim speakers who caused the kerfuffle in the first place are &#8220;controversial&#8221; is to put it mildly.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-Mahw1RIhw">Malik Ali</a> is a well-known hate activist, who regularly visits college campuses to preach, in the clearest possible terms, violence against “Zionist” Jews, <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLvfX_SGcAA">support</a> for Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic jihad, violence against Israelis, and the destruction of Israel. For those readers who might not be aware of the racist, genocidal nature of the aforementioned groups, the following will be instructive. Hamas’s <a href="http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=56&#038;x_miscitem=20">charter</a> explicitly states that its goal is to fulfill Allah’s promise to kill every Jew. This time will come, the charter says, when “the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him! This will not apply to the Gharqad, which is a Jewish tree[.]” The document uses the <em>Protocols of the Elders of Zion</em>, an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory, as one of its justifications. The founder of Hamas, Mahmoud al-Zahar, is <a href="http://globalmbreport.org/?p=3605">quoted</a> as saying, “There is no place for you Jews among us, and you have no place among the nations of this world. You are headed to annihilation.” Just as condemnable, the leader of Hezbollah, Hassan Nasrallah, <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1257">opined</a> publicly that if the Jews all gather in Israel, it would save him the trouble of having to hunt them down globally. There simply are no better examples of genocidal, anti-Semitic organizations in the world than Hamas and Hezbollah.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/does-radical-muslim-malik-ali-speak-for-the-yorba-linda-islamic-community/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>8</slash:comments>
<enclosure url="http://ca.cair.com/dropbox/losangeles/ochate.mp4" length="30093977" type="video/mp4" />
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>What’s the Matter with Boycotting Israel?</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/what%e2%80%99s-the-matter-with-boycotting-israel/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=what%25e2%2580%2599s-the-matter-with-boycotting-israel</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/what%e2%80%99s-the-matter-with-boycotting-israel/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 11 Mar 2011 04:03:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=87364</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How terrorist propaganda became a humanitarian cause celebre. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a class="highslide" onclick="return vz.expand(this)" href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/5452020323_458f60be93_z.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-87366" title="5452020323_458f60be93_z" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/5452020323_458f60be93_z.gif" alt="" width="375" height="315" /></a></p>
<p>“How ironic — no, scratch that; how incredibly shortsighted — that just as Egypt starts to open up, an American Jewish community would start to clamp down.” This, <a href="http://www.jewishjournal.com/rob_eshman/article/just_say_yes_20110216/">Rob Eshman</a> penned February 16th in a piece for the Jewish Journal in which he argued against the removal of Jewish communal funds from organizations engaged in BDS (boycott, divestment, sanction) strategies against Israel. To do so, as Eshman intimates, would be to close the Jewish community; to stifle the freedom of thought and expression from within its ranks. Although it is a well-meaning call for openness, it is, nonetheless, a deeply misguided assessment of the danger posed by the BDS movement. To understand the true nature of the movement, is to understand why it cannot be countenanced by the Jewish community in any form &#8212; at least not a Jewish community interested in the preservation of Israel.</p>
<p>To be sure, many people view BDS in the same way that Mr. Eshman does &#8212; as an innocent expression of free speech by people concerned with the well-being of Palestinians. Many of these individuals are genuine supporters of Israel, and believe that, while BDS is extreme, it is also a “complex” issue, and is morally ambiguous for this reason. Rest assured, this ambiguity is very intentional.</p>
<p>The true nature of the BDS movement is really not complicated in the least. At its heart, it is a manifestation of the propaganda war against the Jewish State &#8212; the “soft war,” if you will. The soft war is itself supplemental to the armed conflict against Israel, and both work in tandem to effect the same terrible end. Furthermore, the entire program of the Israeli BDS movement is in fact predicated entirely upon vicious anti-Semitic mythology created by terrorists and terrorist sympathizers. Its purpose is to a) agitate against Jews and justify violence against them, and b) strip Israel of support in the international community, thereby making it easier to dismantle. These are the <em>only</em> purposes the BDS movement serves, whether it is being championed by singer <a href="http://www.newsrealblog.com/2011/01/24/macy-gray-calls-israel-disgusting-israelis-criticized-for-being-offended/">Macy Gray</a> or Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.</p>
<p>How do we know this? <a href="http://www.ngo-monitor.org/article/ngo_apartheid_state_campaign_deliberately_immoral_or_intellectually_lazy_">NGO Monitor</a> traces the “Israeli apartheid” canard, one of the central falsehoods of the BDS movement, to the <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/viewSubCategory.asp?id=780">PLO</a>’s <a href="http://www.nad-plo.org/inner.php?view=facts_others_f15p">Negotiations Affairs Department</a>, which also asserts that the Oslo peace accords instituted the apartheid system. Never mind that both Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas of the PLO evidently endorsed this dreadful apartheid document, since both agreed to the accords. In essence, the PLO’s apartheid claim is a manifestation of the UN’s “Zionism is racism” resolution passed in 1975. The resolution was advanced primarily by the <a href="http://www.jcpa.org/JCPA/Templates/ShowPage.asp?DBID=1&amp;LNGID=1&amp;TMID=111&amp;FID=624&amp;PID=0&amp;IID=3670">PLO and the Soviet Union</a>, which, at the time, was cracking down on Jewish “refuseniks” and trying to find a way to eschew a proposed UN condemnation of anti-Semitism. The PLO, for its part, was completing a barbaric series of terrorist attacks against Israeli civilians, some of them school children, in the years just before the resolution was passed. The resolution was also supported by such individuals as genocidal Ugandan dictator Idi Amin, who viewed it as path to expelling Israel from the UN and achieving “the extinction of Israel as a state[.]” Through the lens of this resolution, &#8220;Zionism&#8221; was equated with colonialism and imperialism, and is still used in much this same sense by BDS activists and terrorists alike today.</p>
<p>Beyond the mere historical background, we know that BDS is essentially a handmaiden of the violent war against Israel because this is what many of the practitioners and prime movers of the BDS movement themselves say. The International Solidarity Movement (ISM), for example, is very active in the BDS movement. It works tirelessly in the U.S., Israel, and other Western countries promoting the lie that Israel is an apartheid state and abuses the human rights of Palestinians as a matter of public policy. The group goes to great lengths to portrays itself as a nonviolent human rights organization dedicated to achieving peace between Israelis and Palestinians. However, the ISM is unequivocal in its support for Palestinian violence against Jews, which it believes is a legitimate form of “resistance” against Israel.</p>
<p>According to a <a href="http://www.terrorism-info.org.il/malam_multimedia/English/eng_n/html/ipc_e149.htm">study</a> conducted by the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, the ISM “not only rejects the policies of every Israeli government (&#8216;the Israeli apartheid in Palestine&#8217;), but also <strong>the existence of Israel as a national homeland for the Jews</strong>. Publications and statements of ISM activists stress the implementation of the Palestinian refugees&#8217; ‘right of return’ to Israel, <strong>reject the Oslo Accords, and make no mention of a two-state solution</strong>” (emphasis original).</p>
<p>The perniciousness of the ISM is notorious, and much is detailed in the Meir Amit report: ISM activists have been documented sheltering Palestinian terrorists, impeding Israeli counterterrorism measures, training other activists to break Israeli laws and deceive law enforcement, and, in at least one 2006 incident, ISM activists were photographed with weapons. During the the second intifada (Palestinian uprising), the ISM even found justification for the onslaught of fanatical Palestinian suicide bombings perpetrated against Israeli civilians.</p>
<p>The conjunction of soft warfare and terrorism in the case of the ISM is not difficult to understand: the ISM supports terrorism because it is no less than what an “apartheid state” deserves. This is why the group works so diligently to popularize this mythology worldwide. It is this group of terrorist sympathizers and abettors that is at the avant-guard of the propaganda campaign against Israel, from which supposedly peace-minded BDS supporters take their cues.</p>
<p>Just as the propaganda war has been so effective at demonizing and delegitimizing Israel, it has, correspondingly, been very good to Hamas, whose image has elevated remarkably in the eyes of many influential individuals. In 2008, Israeli apartheid-promoter and former president <a href="http://articles.cnn.com/2008-04-17/world/carter.hamas_1_hamas-militants-hamas-officials-gilad-shalit?_s=PM:WORLD">Jimmy Carter</a> met and physically embraced Hamas officials in a peace pilgrimage to Egypt. In a 2006 <a href="http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/05/american-linguist-noam-chomsky-hamas-policies-are-more-conducive-to-a-peaceful-settlement-than-those.html">interview</a>, revered  radical academic Noam Chomsky, who has met at least twice with the terrorist organization <a href="http://www.wnd.com/?pageId=36210">Hezbollah</a>, said that the policies of Hamas, while “unacceptable,” are “more conducive to a peaceful settlement [to the Palestinian-Israel conflict] than those of the United States or Israel.”</p>
<p>This trend of Hamas-sympathy is also abundantly apparent at most anti-Israel rallies. It is not uncommon for BDS protesters to promote the solidarity tropes, “<a href="http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5259/5452020323_458f60be93_z.jpg">We Are All Hamas</a>” and “We Are All Hezbollah,” which are designed to appeal to the mainstream of the nonviolent anti-Israel movement. Nonviolent Western protesters <a href="http://www.peoplespresscollective.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/dsc_0355.jpg">commonly</a> wear terrorist accoutrement &#8212; Hamas scarves (the Keffiyeh, technically, a headdress) and headbands &#8212; at their rallies to show support.</p>
<p>Hamas has also notably gained support among some members of Muslim Students Association (MSA) and Muslim Student Union (MSU) chapters in colleges and universities. When confronted, these students often refuse to condemn Hamas publicly, claiming that the issue is “complicated.” Conservative author and activist <a href="http://www.newsrealblog.com/2010/05/11/for-it-msa-student-confesses-she-wants-a-second-holocaust/">David Horowitz</a> has encountered these students many times in his talks on the university circuit. In the spring of 2010, one such student revealed obliquely to the audience that she supported Hamas, and also that she agreed with a Hezbollah leader’s <a href="http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9B0CEEDB1F3CF930A15756C0A9629C8B63&amp;sec=&amp;spon=&amp;pagewanted=1">statement</a> wishing all the Jews would gather in Israel so he didn’t have to hunt them down globally. The Muslim Student Association is the same group which hosts the radically anti-Israel propaganda campaign known as “Israel Apartheid Week,” which is designed to encourage BDS against Israel, and justify Palestinian terrorism.</p>
<p>For those readers who, at this juncture, may be wondering if there is in fact a “gray area” when it comes to Hamas, the answer is emphatically “no.” There is absolutely no defense for Hamas, for supporting it, or for adorning oneself in its signature attire to express “solidarity.” Hamas is an expressly genocidal, religiously fanatical organization with no redeeming qualities whatsoever.  Its founding charter draws heavily on the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which is an anti-Semitic conspiracy theory that blames Jews for most of the world’s wars and for the economic enslavement of humanity. Let us point out just a few of the lines of Hamas’s founding <a href="http://www.camera.org/index.asp?x_context=56&#038;x_miscitem=20">charter</a> to make this crystal clear (via the Jerusalem Fund, a pro-Palestinian organization):</p>
<blockquote><p>Israel will rise and will remain erect until Islam eliminates it as it had eliminated its predecessors</p>
<p>[...]</p>
<p>For our struggle against the Jews is extremely wide-ranging and grave, so much so that it will need all the loyal efforts we can wield, to be followed by further steps and reinforced by successive battalions from the multifarious Arab and Islamic world, until the enemies are defeated and Allah’s victory prevails</p>
<p>[...]</p>
<p>The Islamic Resistance Movement [Hamas] is a distinct Palestinian Movement which owes its loyalty to Allah, derives from Islam its way of life and strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine [present-day Israel].</p>
<p>[...]</p>
<p>[T]he Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah’s promise whatever time it might take. The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him! This will not apply to the Gharqad, which is a Jewish tree (cited by Bukhari and Muslim).</p>
<p>[...]</p>
<p>[T]he so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement.</p></blockquote>
<p>It is crucial to note that Hamas has also been at the forefront of popularizing the notion that the Israeli government is a Nazi regime, a comparison which is as <a href="http://www.peoplespresscollective.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/dsc_0355.jpg">ubiquitous</a> in terrorist group’s charter as it is at pro-Palestinian “peace protests” in Western countries.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/what%e2%80%99s-the-matter-with-boycotting-israel/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>27</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Live and Let Die</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/live-and-let-die/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=live-and-let-die</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/live-and-let-die/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 26 Feb 2011 10:09:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=86095</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The shamefulness of the Obama administration's inaction on Libya. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/obamamom.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-86105" title="APTOPIX Italy G8 Summit" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/obamamom.jpg" alt="" width="320" height="240" /></a></p>
<p>In his <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/24/us/politics/24obama-statement-libya.html">speech</a> on the turmoil in Libya, President Obama used the phrase “international community” three times. He did not say the name “Muammar Qaddafi” once. By the time it was obvious that the dictator was slaughtering his own people, vowing to “cleanse Libya house by house” and “die as a martyr,” President Obama could not muster the fortitude to denounce the Qaddafi regime by name or articulate any action that would prevent the loss of human life. With all that is at his disposal to influence the ending of this bloodshed, the president has opted to allow America to stand by silently on the sidelines and watch the massacre unfold.</p>
<p>The president’s response to Libya was so milquetoast, in fact, that even left-wing MSNBC host <a href="http://www.mediaite.com/tv/chris-matthews-on-obamas-libya-statement-it-doesnt-have-any-dignity/">Chris Matthews</a> was left longing for a Reagan-esque “evil empire” moment. Even liberal commentator <a href="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2011/02/25/give_gaddafi_a_real_message_109022.html">Eugene Robinson</a> was moved to call for U.S. action in his recent column. The tone of the president&#8217;s remarks exhibited a bizarre disconnect as well. Notwithstanding the president&#8217;s great faith in the opinion of the &#8220;international community,&#8221; a despot like Qaddafi, who speaks earnestly in terms of political cleansing and martyrdom, surely cannot be rhetorically coerced to end his rampage, and he clearly is not sensitive &#8212; to say the least &#8212; about the feelings of the “international community.”</p>
<p>But the Obama administration is in the grips of a teachable moment. Since taking office, Obama’s goal has been to demonstrate to the world that the U.S. is a team player. To the Arab world in particular, he has sought to prove that the U.S. is not interested in exerting influence in the region, which is considered the source of Islamist discontent by the Left. This, the administration believes, will assuage anti-American sentiment and Arab belligerence, as the president has intimated over and over again in his overtures to the Muslim world. Now, we are witnessing the catastrophic repercussions of such a destructive posture: America is willing to forsake its unrivaled ability to stop monstrous violations of human rights in order to avoid offending the sensibilities of Islamo-fascists.</p>
<p>To be sure, the U.S. has faced similar decisions before. When a freedom-seeking revolt broke out in Hungary in October of 1956 against the U.S.S.R., the anti-communist rebel forces were led to believed the U.S. would come to their aid. In fact, this is one of the reasons the rebel Hungarians fought so successfully for so long against the Soviets. At various points, victory seemed achievable for the uprising, which would have changed the face of the entire Cold War. But President Eisenhower ultimately abandoned and betrayed the Hungarian freedom fighters &#8212; and the rebellion was savagely squashed by the Soviets. It is a regrettable and tragic chapter in Cold War history in general and in American foreign policy in particular.</p>
<p>One exoneration of Eisenhower’s policy that could be pointed to is his fear that an international war could have broken out over Hungary, since a nuclear Soviet Russia was a dangerous reality. For Obama, however, there is no such excuse. Numerous Muslim leaders have themselves <a href="http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2011/02/muslim-brotherhood-leader-gaddafi-orders-libyan-leader-killed.html">denounced</a> Qaddafi for the express reason that he is killing Muslims. Certainly, it is in the interest of protesters across the region that Qaddafi be held accountable, lest other autocrats get the impression that dissent can be crushed with impunity. Furthermore, Qaddafi has virtually no credibility in the international community &#8212; the Arab League, the African Union, the European Union, and the Islamic Conference have condemned his actions.</p>
<p>Rather, the inaction toward Libya we are seeing today is more reminiscent of the Left’s shameless reaction (or non-reaction) to the mass slaughter of the Iranian people by the Ayatollah Khomeini during the Islamic Revolution. After the pro-Western Shah of Iran (the Left&#8217;s bete-noire) was deposed, the Islamic revolutionary forces oversaw a bloody transfer of power. The silence from the Left on this massacre, which was precipitated by the Carter administration’s unconscionable undermining of the Shah’s regime, was deafening.</p>
<p>But what more could one really expect from the political faith? According to the leftist worldview, the U.S. is largely a pernicious force on the world stage and is the cause for the disdain that it attracts worldwide. This is Obama&#8217;s view. At this very moment in Libya, the U.S. could be intervening to support internal pro-Western (and pro-democratic) secular forces, while marginalizing the Islamist faction. Instead, the U.S. will stand by while the Libyan government kills its people, and, therefore, help fertilize the soil in which a more brutal Islamist regime will grow and replace it. This is the historical record of what leftist American administrations do in foreign policy &#8212; and we are now witness to the tragic and morbid example in Libya.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/live-and-let-die/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>47</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Libya’s Bloody Monday</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/libya%e2%80%99s-bloody-monday/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=libya%25e2%2580%2599s-bloody-monday</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/libya%e2%80%99s-bloody-monday/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Feb 2011 04:45:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=85646</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A despot's brutal crackdown.]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/ShowImage.ashx_1.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-85662" title="ShowImage.ashx" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/ShowImage.ashx_1.gif" alt="" width="375" height="278" /></a></p>
<p>Far exceeding the retaliatory efforts of other besieged regimes across the Middle East, Libyan strongman Muammar el-Qaddafi responded to an internal uprising on Monday with deadly force. After the bloodbath, in trademark bizarreness, Qaddafi briefly appeared on state television via helicopter and, under the umbrage of an over-sized umbrella, told the people not to believe rumors that he had absconded to Venezuela. With unrest expected to continue and many regime officials siding with the protesters, the eccentric dictator’s days appear to be numbered. There is concern, however, that without a central leader, tribal and regional divisions will make it difficult for the country to remain cohesive, and will possibly lead to a civil war.</p>
<p>After more than 40 years in control of Libya and with a long history of brutal repression, measured restraint in the face of a popular uprising is the last thing one would expect from Colonel Muammar el-Qaddafi. Reports, in fact, paint a chilling picture. Sunday, after intense fighting in the east, a mass protest broke out in the western city of Tripoli, which is the nation’s capital. By all accounts, the response was swift and merciless. Special forces and mercenaries shot freely on the streets and at protesters. Witnesses <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/22/world/africa/22libya.html?pagewanted=2&amp;hp">reported</a> explosives being dropped from airplanes, while helicopters overhead sprayed protesters on the ground with bullets.</p>
<p>A Libyan official from the U.N., Omar al Dabashi, told the BBC, “The information that we are getting is that the regime is killing whomever goes out on the streets. He [Qaddafi] has clearly declared a genocide against his own people.” It is not the first time such an accusation has been made.</p>
<p>The death toll from the incident is difficult to determine given the chaos and the oppressiveness of the Libyan regime. Foreign journalists have not been allowed in the country, phone services have been disrupted, and the Internet has been largely inaccessible. Much of the information gathered comes from phone conversations and is difficult to corroborate. <em>The Wall Street Journal</em> <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703498804576157460505874944.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories">confirmed</a> with Human Rights Watch that at least 233 have been killed since protests began, but some believe the actual death toll is far higher. Countless others have been injured. A doctor at the Tripoli Central Hospital told the <em>Journal</em> that his facility was so overrun with patients, many with severe gunshot wounds, that newcomers had to be turned away.</p>
<p>Before the regime’s crackdown, momentum appeared to be on the Libyan people’s side. After protesters had overtaken most of Benghazi, the country’s second-largest city, the government withdrew into strategic locations. Benghazi is in the east of Libya, where much of the anti-Qaddafi movement was fomented and where large areas were taken over by anti-regime forces, before opposition manifested in Tripoli. Residents of Benghazi reported that regime forces fired rocket-propelled grenades and machine guns into the streets.</p>
<p>Scores of government and military officials resigned after the government’s brutal response to the uprising. Although regime forces (including, witnesses say, foreign mercenaries) did use deadly force, some elements have demonstrated a reluctance to fire on their compatriots. At least two fighter jet pilots abandoned their mission to bomb Benghazi and instead flew to Malta, local sources reported. The Libyan delegation to the UN, based in New York, also defected and called on Qaddafi to step down and leave the country. Libya’s representative to the Arab League resigned and a general was reportedly put under house arrest for defying Qaddafi’s orders. In the city of Baida, witnesses reported that the local police turned on military forces after the latter allegedly opened fire on protesters.</p>
<p>Monday night, Qaddafi’s son, Seif al-Islam el-Qaddafi, issued a conciliatory, but foreboding statement to the opposition on state television. Yes, the response was harsh, but if the Qaddafi regime was brought down, a civil war would ensue and “rivers of blood” would flow, he warned. Although this was certainly intended to frighten demonstrators into submission, the remark is not without a modicum of truth.</p>
<p>Libya, which is primarily a Sunni Muslim country, has a strong tribal tradition that has remained intact throughout the modern era. Qaddafi’s regime, which came to power in a military coup when Qaddafi was 27, has kept the country rather artificially unified for the last forty years. Before the overthrow of King Idris in 1969, power had been concentrated in the east, where the monarchy was located. Under Qaddafi, power shifted to the west. Tripoli was made the capital city, and spoils from Libya’s oil industry were circulated predominantly in the west, despite the fact that many of the major oil fields lie in the east. A strong rift deepened between the east and Qaddafi, and it is no surprise that the uprising emanated from this region.</p>
<p>But in the west, and in Tripoli, support is still palpable for Qaddafi. Pro-regime supporters, no doubt fond of Qaddafi&#8217;s oil-funded largess, were broadcast on state television waving flags and pictures of the dictator. Much of the military is also still loyal to the Qaddafi regime. If a civil war-type conflict does emerge in Libya, it will likely divide east and west, and control over the OPEC country&#8217;s oil resources, the country&#8217;s chief export, will be no inconsequential factor in that battle.</p>
<p>Not to be overlooked, like most countries in the region, Libya has an aggressive and troublesome Islamist movement. An outgrowth of the anti-Qaddafi east, the Islamist movement began to pose serious challenges to the Qaddafi regime in the 1990s. In 1996, the Libyan Islamic Fighting Group attempted to assassinate the autocrat. That same year, the government cracked down on the opposition movement by massacring over a thousand jailed protesters, many of whom were <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/2009/09/06/us-libya-massacre-sb-idUSTRE5850P820090906">Islamists</a> and eastern political prisoners, according to <a href="http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2006/06/27/libya-1996-prison-killings-need-independent-inquiry">information</a> obtained by Human Rights Watch.</p>
<p>Still, there is a glimmer of hope in the terrible scene. After anti-regime success in Benghazi, opposition leader Fathi Terbil called for a secular interim government to be instituted. Broadcasting over an online stream referred to as Free Libya Radio, Terbil also was keen to point out that protesters had “liberated” the city; they did not “overtake” it. If indeed a productive democracy can be erected in Libya, it would be a vast improvement for both the people of Libya and the international community. Although in recent years the Qaddafi regime has become less hostile and reclusive (it abandoned its nuclear weapons program after the 2003 invasion of Iraq and is no longer listed as a state sponsor of terror), it still provokes anti-Americanism and anti-Israelism.</p>
<p>Whatever the outcome, the U.S. does not appear remotely interested in influencing the situation in Libya. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, joining the compendium of Western wallflowers, released a short letter of condemnation on the regime’s use of deadly force, but did not demand that the dictator step down. Calls for protests continue, and the world can only hope Libyans are up to the task of creating a peaceful resolution alone.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/libya%e2%80%99s-bloody-monday/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>23</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>If We Lose Bahrain</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/if-we-lose-bahrain/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=if-we-lose-bahrain</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/if-we-lose-bahrain/#respond</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 Feb 2011 04:50:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=85357</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Why does democracy in the Middle East only benefit the Islamists? ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/bahrain-protest-afp-3-640x480.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-85358" title="bahrain-protest-afp-3-640x480" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/bahrain-protest-afp-3-640x480.gif" alt="" width="375" height="298" /></a></p>
<p>Obscure to most Americans, but vitally important to the American military, the tiny island nation of Bahrain has become the latest Middle Eastern country to be caught in the throes of destabilizing unrest. At least four Bahraini protesters are now dead from the military’s swift response to Thursday’s tumultuous political demonstrations. As with most imperiled states in the region, the political reality of Bahrain is extremely complicated, and the matter of which faction is worthy of support &#8212; the populace or the authoritarian government &#8212; is no simple question. In many ways, Bahrain is one of the best examples of the Mideast democracy paradox; one that, if lost to the winds of fortune, would be devastating for regional stability, and probably the people of Bahrain as well.</p>
<p>A coveted Archipelago, Bahrain has a long history of domination by world powers. This includes the Persians, the Arabs, the Ottomans, and to some extent, the British. For most of the modern area, Bahrain has been an Islamic country, with roughly 70% of the population identifying as Shia Muslims, and 30%, Sunni. For the last decade, Bahrain had been a parliamentary monarchy, whose al-Khalifa dynasty, which is Sunni, has <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/feb/17/riot-police-storm-bahrain-camp-4-reported-dead/?page=4">ruled</a> for more than 200 years.</p>
<p>The current monarch, King Hamad bin Isa al-Khalifa, has been a devoted ally to the U.S. and to its strategic interests in Middle East, especially with respect to Iran. In turn, the U.S. has been a military <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/18/world/middleeast/18diplomacy.html?hp">aegis</a> for the tiny Persian Gulf nation, installing the home base of the U.S. Navy’s Fifth Fleet in Jaffair, and actively preventing Iranian influence in the country and elsewhere in the region. This is important, as the Shia Iranian theocracy has often expressed <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/feb/17/riot-police-storm-bahrain-camp-4-reported-dead/?page=4">kinship</a> with the Bahraini Shia population, whom the minority-Sunnis frequently <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/feb/17/riot-police-storm-bahrain-camp-4-reported-dead/?page=4">accuse</a> of being clients of the Islamic Republic (although the Shiites adamantly deny this is the case). The American Fifth Fleet <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/18/world/middleeast/18fleet.html?hp">monitors</a> important strategic waterways in the Persian Gulf, the Red Sea, the Indian Ocean, the Suez Canal, the Strait of Hormuz, and others. It also oversees operations from Afghanistan and Iraq from the Bahraini base.</p>
<p>What is also important about Bahrain, is that the presiding monarchy would be supportive of military or other action against Iran, and, in fact, suggested as much to the U.S., according to a diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks. Neighboring Saudi Arabia, also a Sunni monarchy, is likewise supportive of this eventuality, and the two countries have maintained extremely close ties. In enabling the U.S. to monitor the area for malignant forces, such the Iranian Navy and piracy, the Bahrain-U.S.-Saudi trifecta, is a cornerstone of peace in the region.</p>
<p>But the significance of Bahrain is not merely strategic. Bahrain is a sliver of modernity in the Muslim world. It is a relatively open, prosperous society, and is a favored retreat for military personnel and Saudi playboys for this very reason. The country is home to <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/feb/17/riot-police-storm-bahrain-camp-4-reported-dead/?page=4">bars and resorts</a>, for instance, and it is the hub of the regional banking system, particularly for Saudi Arabia. Bahrain provides free or low-cost health care, and both its standard of living and literacy rate are high.  In 2010, the government reported its <a href="http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/bahrain/bahrain-s-unemployment-rate-down-to-3-7-per-cent-1.597366">unemployment</a> rate was enviously below 4%. After assuming power, King Hamad was favorable to the country’s women’s right movement, granting women the right to vote and to hold political office.</p>
<p>One wonders, then, why there would be an anti-government uprising in Bahrain in the first place. Generally, much of the restive atmosphere in the Middle East has to do with economic woes, felt most acutely among the poor, which has been exacerbated by the global economic downturn and the meteoric rise in food prices. These conditions also exists in Bahrain to some extent, but economic hardship is also stratified between Sunnis and Shiites, where the former tends to live a more comfortable, modern lifestyle. Not surprisingly, the anti-government opposition in Bahrain is primarily comprised of the less well-off majority-Shiite population. Sunnis, on the other hand, are supportive of the monarchy, and are skeptical about where blame for Shiite grievances truly lies.</p>
<p>In an <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/18/world/middleeast/18voices.html?hp">interview</a> with <em>The New York Times</em>, several Sunni Bahrainis, supportive of the monarchy, pointed to the Shiite culture, not the government, as the reason that Shia economic mobility was lacking. Having too many children, cutting short their education, and demanding handouts from the government, were cited as the sources of Shiite adversity. The interviewees also expressed fears that their freedoms would be taken away if Shiites were to come to power, and worried that they would align the country with Iran and impose harsh religious restrictions . “To me, it’s about preserving my freedoms,” one Sunni woman told the <em>Times</em>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/if-we-lose-bahrain/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Anatomy of a Revolution</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/anatomy-of-a-revolution/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=anatomy-of-a-revolution</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/anatomy-of-a-revolution/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 Feb 2011 04:50:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=84283</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[What the roots of the Egyptian revolution tell us about a post-Mubarak Egypt. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p style="text-align: center;"><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/egyptpr.jpg"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-84292" title="egyptpr" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/egyptpr.jpg" alt="" width="378" height="227" /></a></p>
<p>As the chaos in Egypt rages on, even the most ardent pro-democracy spectators are expressing skepticism with regard to the future of the country. Fellow traveler <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/06/opinion/06kristof.html?hp">Nicholas Kristof</a> pondered in The New York Times Saturday, “[I]f Egyptian protesters overcome the government, would this be 1979 or 1989?” In other words: are we witnessing the birth pangs of an Iranian-style theocracy or a vibrant free society? “No one can predict with certainty,” Kristof believes. But in fact, there are clear signs of where Egypt is headed, if we only look at the root of the current revolution. This evidence unfortunately shows that the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood stands to benefit handsomely from the turmoil. Even in the best case scenario, if the moderate wing assumes the seat of power, we can almost certainly expect the long-standing peace between Egypt and Israel, vital to regional stability, to disintegrate in short order. Perhaps worse.</p>
<p>What exactly do we know about the Egyptian revolution? Broadly speaking, the Egyptian opposition forces, those mobilizing against President Hosni Mubarak, are primarily a coalition of Islamists and socialists, and they have in fact been working together to undermine the Mubarak regime for quite some time. The principal opposition groups behind the uprising are: the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the largest; Mohamed ElBaradei and the National Association for Change; and the socialist youth movement, the foremost of which is the April 6th Movement.</p>
<p>Serious opposition to the 30-year Mubarak regime began to emerge during the second Palestinian Intifada in Israel’s Gaza Strip. The so-called “cold peace” between Egypt and Israel, which President Mubarak sustained, did not deter Egyptians from demonstrating in solidarity with warring Palestinians, creating a rift between the ostensibly pro-Israel president and the population. This only <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28523-2005Mar11.html">intensified</a> in the following years with the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq. Egyptians took to the streets to protest the Iraq war, again putting the people at odds with the American-allied regime.</p>
<p>Between 2003-2005, in pursuit of its “freedom agenda,” the Bush administration began to put pressure on the Mubarak regime to institute democratic reforms, including by allowing multiparty elections. According to a <a href="http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2008/RAND_MG778.pdf">report</a> from the Rand Corporation, what emerged in opposition to Mubarak and his ruling National Democratic Party was a loose coalition of Egyptian Islamist and socialist groups, who united under the moniker “<a href="http://egyptelections.carnegieendowment.org/2010/09/22/the-egyptian-movement-for-change-kifaya">Kefaya</a>” (“enough” in Arabic). While Kefaya constituencies were diverse, they coalesced around two related objectives: opposition to Israel, and opposition to Mubarak, who had maintained peace with Israel and who was bolstering his own executive authority (through, for instance, authoritarian revisions to the constitution and preparing his son Gamal to inherit the presidency). Kefaya, which eventually developed a strong youth wing, organized for non-NDP candidates in the 2005 election and protested for democratic reforms and against Mubarak and his maneuvers toward hereditary rule.</p>
<p>The results from this democratic movement were far from encouraging. It, in fact, acted as a catalyst for a huge Muslim Brotherhood power-grab. Out of the 444 seats in Egypt’s parliament, 88 seats went to Muslim Brotherhood members (running as independents), hundreds went to the NDP, while less than half the number of seats gained by the Brotherhood went to other reformers (neither Brotherhood nor NDP members). Thus, we have certainly seen in recent times what a more open democratic process looks like in Egypt. A well-organized, popular Islamist faction, working in conjunction with non-Islamist reformers, capably co-opted democratic momentum. It is these same actors &#8212; the same coalition &#8212; working to overthrow the Mubarak regime in Egypt today. What reason do we have to expect different electoral results?</p>
<p>Even in the best case scenario, one in which moderate reformers achieve perhaps equal gains with the Islamists, most of the anti-Mubarak opposition is nonetheless united with respect to its enmity toward the U.S. and Israel (in addition to its desire for genuine democratic reforms). The includes Kefaya’s socialist youth component. In fact, when Kefaya began to fall apart after the 2005 election, a youth group called Youth for Changed announced that it would withdraw because the coalition was not sufficiently anti-Israel and anti-American.</p>
<p>It was the socialist youth movement of Kefaya that spawned April 6th Movement, which is widely <a href="http://www.thenation.com/blog/158159/whos-behind-egypts-revolt">credited</a> with igniting the current Egyptian uprising and is responsible for much of its organization. One of the key figures behind the April 6th Movement is Ahmed Maher, who had previously worked with Kefaya. The April 6th Movement seeks political and socialist reforms, such as a minimum monthly wage, and one of its major independent enterprises (whence it derives its name) was a successful national labor strike, organized in the spring of 2008. Like other sectors of the Egyptian youth movement, the April 6th Movement has a strong an anti-Israel component. Among its political demands, the group calls for an end to gas exports to Israel, according to its <a href="http://6aprilmove.blogspot.com/2009/04/6-april-2009-general-strike-in-egypt.html">blog</a>. Gas from Egypt is exported to many countries around the world, although the group only demands a cessation of exports to the Jewish State.</p>
<p>In January 2009, the April 6th Youth Movement joined in vicious protests against Israel for its retaliation against Hamas rocket attacks. According to a New York Times <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/25/magazine/25bloggers-t.html">profile</a>, the protests were mostly led by the Muslim Brotherhood. In their anger over Israel’s attack on the Hamas-controlled Gaza Strip, demonstrators condemned Mubarak for maintaining relations with Israel, exporting natural gas to Israel, and for restricting movement through Egypt’s border into Gaza.</p>
<p>In addition to joining with the Muslim Brotherhood in the past and during the current unrest, the internet-savvy, socialist youth movement has been very <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/31/world/middleeast/31opposition.html?pagewanted=1&amp;partner=rss&amp;emc=rss">supportive</a> of Mohamed ElBaradei, leader of the Egyptian umbrella-group, National Association for Change (NAC). According to a <a href="http://egyptelections.carnegieendowment.org/2010/09/22/national-assocation-for-change">report</a> from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the NAC was formed in 2010 by ElBaradei to “rejuvenate the opposition scene,” presumably Kefaya. Other <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704775604576120443506757576.html">reports</a> have noted that, sensing instability in the Mubarak regime, NAC’s purpose was to facilitate the president’s ouster and to serve as a &#8220;shadow parliament.&#8221;</p>
<p>Not only has the Muslim Brotherhood recently endorsed ElBaradei to lead the anti-Mubarak opposition, but it has a history of working with ElBaradei and the NAC in the past. In a 2010 petition campaign, the NAC received crucial support from the Brotherhood. In a show of the Islamist group’s clout among the Egyptian people, the Brotherhood was responsible for collection 2/3 of the petition’s 300,000 plus signatures, the Washington Times <a href="http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2010/aug/1/muslim-brotherhood-supports-elbaradei/">reported</a>. ElBaradei himself is a controversial figure. Although it is true that he has had amicable relations with President Barack Obama in the past, as director general of the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency, ElBaradei was a vocal critic of the Bush administration, who accused ElBaradei of “muddying” the issue of nuclear deterrence to Iran’s advantage. ElBaradei was hostile to the international community’s position on nuclear non-proliferation, <a href="http://in.reuters.com/article/2009/02/16/idINIndia-38051120090216">claiming</a> that the double standard of allowing some nations to have a nuclear arsenal (i.e. Israel), while forbidding others, has lost credibility in the Arab world. The Israeli government at the time viewed him as <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7085213.stm">dangerous</a> and said that he threatened world peace.</p>
<p>Thus, the major players of the anti-Mubarak opposition should give us a great deal of pause. Another power-grab by the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist factions, as is certainly within the realm of possibilities, would be a catastrophic loss for U.S. interests, the region, and for the Egyptian people themselves. On the other hand, the prospect of non-Islamist opposition in the seat of power is cold comfort to a weary Israel, a crucial bulwark of peace in the region, which stands to lose its most reliable Arab ally to pervasive anti-Israelism. Whether Mubarak&#8217;s reign will terminate sooner than later is rather immaterial in light of these seemingly unalterable alternatives.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/anatomy-of-a-revolution/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>31</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Dialogue and Deceit</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/dialogue-and-deceit/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=dialogue-and-deceit</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/dialogue-and-deceit/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 Jan 2011 21:26:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=82783</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Anti-Israel terrorist supporters indoctrinate American college students -- and the Jewish community foots the bill. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/OTI-logo-new.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-82787" title="OTI-logo-new" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/OTI-logo-new.gif" alt="" width="375" height="338" /></a></p>
<p>The psychological war against Israel is silently securing a foothold in the U.S. before our very eyes.  The latest example is a controversial student program known as the Olive Tree Initiative (OTI), which has bamboozled many peace-minded individuals, even those in the usually vigilant Jewish community. While masquerading as a “bridge-building” enterprise, the OTI’s history and ongoing activities show it to be closely affiliated with virulently anti-Israel activists, who openly condone violence and are devoted to the delegitimization and demonization of the Jewish State. Controversy has mounted over the Jewish Federation of Orange County’s decision to give funding for Jewish students to participate in OTI programming, which, all reports suggest, it has no intention of discontinuing. This leaves many to worry about the inroads radical front groups have made into the mainstream, and the likelihood that such acceptance will spread.</p>
<p>Formed in 2007, the OTI claims to promote peace and a fair understanding of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict by providing a platform where both Israelis and Palestinians can engage in dialogue. It preforms information-sharing and awareness activities, often in the form of panel discussions and speaking events. It also organizes trips for students to visit Israel and disputed territories, one of its major “bridge-building” functions. Yet, many OTI speakers and organizers involved in the Israel trips show that the group’s interest in fairness and balance is extremely disingenuous.</p>
<p>In a December 2010 <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/tammi_rossman-benjamin_letter.html">letter</a> to the leadership of the Jewish Federation of Orange County and the Hillel Foundation, Dr. Tammi Rossman-Benjamin of the University of California &#8211; Santa Cruz provided an assessment of groups and speakers involved in the OTI’s student trips. Of these parties, Dr. Rossman-Benjamin explained, “an overwhelming majority have expressed an overt animus towards the Jewish state.” According to Dr. Rossman-Benjamin, over a third of the speakers representing the Palestinian side promote boycott, divestment, and sanction (BDS) strategies against Israel, while others call for Israel’s elimination or are allied with violent, anti-Semitic terrorist groups.</p>
<p>The preponderance of BDS supporters involved with the OTI should not be overlooked. Central to BDS campaigns is the assumption that the country being inveighed against, in this case Israel, is so fundamentally oppressive toward marginalized groups, that the ordinary political process is ineffective. This assumption serves to delegitimize the authority of the oppressive state (think disobeying an “unjust” law) and to justify extreme measures taken by the oppressed group. For instance, many of the advocates of BDS strategies against Israel liken the Jewish State to apartheid South Africa and Nazi Germany, a completely false imputation that recklessly demonizes the county. One such advocate and OTI speaker is <a href="http://collegelife.freedomblogging.com/official-itinerary-for-uci-olive-tree-initiative-student-trip-2008/">Diana Buttu</a>, a Canadian-Palestinian lawyer and former spokesperson for the Palestinian Liberation Organization. In 2008, following the outbreak of war in the Gaza Strip (initiated by Hamas rocket attacks against Israel) Buttu claimed in a Fox News <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dt1GnEbB8hc">interview</a> that Israel used the inauguration of President Barack Obama as an opportunity to “go into the Gaza Strip and kill Palestinians.” When the interviewer, Greg Jarrett, asked Buttu if the terrorist group Hamas shared any culpability in the war’s bloodshed, she responded, “Absolutely not. You are blaming the victim.” She then went on to accuse Israel of “war crimes,” for which it should be prosecuted.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, this is only the beginning of the OTI’s association with Palestinian extremism. Irvine community member Dee Sterling became embroiled in the situation when she discovered that the OTI had sponsored <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1461">George S. Rishmawi</a> to speak at the University of California &#8211; Irvine in November 2010 and that the event had been <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/pajamas_media.html">promoted</a> by the Jewish student president of the university’s Hillel group. Rishmawi has been very active in the OTI and is the cofounder of the <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6233">International Solidarity Movement</a> (ISM), a very controversial and notoriously anti-Israel organization. It has long been known that the ISM approves of violence against Israel and cooperates with anti-Semitic terrorist organizations. Two of its other cofounders, <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2066">Huwaida Arraf</a> and <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=1666">Adam Shapiro</a>, told the <em>Palestinian Chronicle</em> in 2002, “We accept that Palestinians have a right to resist with arms” and that resistance “must take on a variety of characteristics—both non-violent and violent.” The ISM’s own <a href="http://palsolidarity.org/about-ism/faq/">website</a> states, “We recognize the Palestinian right to resist Israeli violence and occupation via legitimate armed struggles.” The ISM has also admitted that it cooperates with terrorist groups such as Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, as affirmed by the <em>Washington Post</em> in <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/02/11/AR2006021101014.html">2006</a>.</p>
<p>Lee Kaplan, undercover investigative journalist with <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/lee_kaplan_letter.html">expertise</a> in the <a href="http://www.stoptheism.com/">ISM</a>, says that the group was founded under the guidance of a senior member of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine. Kaplan has reported much of his research to the Israeli government, which has used the information to help develop ways of counteracting the ISM’s support of terrorism. Kaplan was also appalled to discover Rishmawi’s involvement in the OTI and his presence at UC Irvine. He, too, has documented Rishmawi’s extensive involvement with organizations, such as Al-Awda, which are animated by a desire to dismantle the Jewish State through violence and to demonize it into de-legitimacy in the eyes of the international community. In essence, as Kaplan aptly described, groups like Rishmawi’s ISM are not at all interested in dialogue, but in conducting “economic and propaganda warfare” against Israel. Likewise, BDS strategies, which the OTI has a pronounced association with, is no less a form of economic warfare.</p>
<p>The list of OTI’s despicable speakers and other associations extend well beyond Rishmawi. Dr. Rossman-Benjamin’s original letter to the Jewish Federation of Orange County lists a <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/tammi_rossman-benjamin_letter.html">host</a> of others &#8212; and these are only from the OTI’s trip to Israel in <em>2010</em>. Sam Bahour, a well-known Palestinian activist, has accused Israel of “ethnic cleansing” and supports BDS; the group Breaking the Silence promotes the libelous Israeli “war crimes” meme and has been criticized by the Israeli police for “antagoniz[ing]&#8230;settlers in the hope that the settlers will attack them.”  <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=933">Mazin Qumsiyeh</a>, co-founder of <a href="http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6616">Al-Awda</a> (a Palestinian group that opposes Israel’s existence and supports the covert dismantling strategy known as the Palestinian “right of return”) and an early advocate of the BDS movement, is known for his interchangeable use of “Israel” with “apartheid South Africa” and “Nazi Germany.” He also promotes the well-worn anti-Semitic canard that “Zionists” control American foreign policy and he rejects the possibility of a two-state solution &#8212; extreme even in terms of extremists.</p>
<p>It is not uncommon for impressionable students who participate in OTI’s Israel trips to come back harboring radically negative views about the country because of the misinformation they have been exposed to. According to Dr. Rossman-Benjamin, after visiting a Palestinian refugee camp, one such student blogged: &#8220;I will never understand how Israel offers Jews from the diaspora a right of return from 4,000 years ago, and denies Palestinians the right of return from 60 years ago. The math feels racist.&#8221;  Dee Sterling, who has set up the website <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/">www.ha-emet.com</a> on the OTI controversy and has helped craft a <a href="http://www.ha-emet.com/petition.html">petition</a> demanding that the Jewish Federation stop supporting the OTI, has had similar experiences. One student related to Dee that he thought Mazin Qumsiyeh was a nice person and claimed Ms. Sterling would like Qumsiyeh if she knew him. Hearing this disturbed Dee a great deal, knowing the full extent of Qumsiyeh’s views; clearly something the student was not aware of.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/dialogue-and-deceit/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>13</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Anyone&#8217;s Game</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/anyones-game/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=anyones-game</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/anyones-game/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 24 Jan 2011 04:50:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=82676</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 2012 GOP presidential primary race begins to take shape. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/romney-palin-huckabee.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-82679" title="romney-palin-huckabee" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/romney-palin-huckabee.gif" alt="" width="375" height="298" /></a></p>
<p>As the Obama administration begins digging its campaign trenches for the 2012 presidential election, the matter of the president&#8217;s Republican challenger is becoming much more discernible. On Saturday, 2008 presidential-hopeful Mitt Romney earned an easy victory in the first New Hampshire straw poll of 2011. In many eyes, this has affirmed Romney’s status as front-runner for the Republican Party presidential nomination. However, this win is not necessarily predicative of Romney&#8217;s ultimate success and other dark horses are waiting in the wings &#8212; but who among them has the greatest likelihood of success?</p>
<p>Just over 21 months until the 2012 presidential election, Mitt Romney is in a very good position. Although a recent Public Policy Polling (PPP) <a href="http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_National_0120806.pdf">survey</a> shows Obama ahead of all leading GOP contenders nationwide, Romney rated the second highest in PPP’s Iowa <a href="http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/PPP_Release_IA_0112513.pdf">poll</a> and second highest in its national poll, trailing Mike Huckabee by only a few points in each. Romney consistently ranks as one of the highest (sometimes <a href="http://online.wsj.com/public/resources/documents/wsjnbcpoll-01192011.pdf">tying</a>) in polls of Republican and mixed Republican-Independent voters. In the New Hampshire <a href="http://politicalscoop.wmur.com/results-wmur-abc-news-nh-gop-2012-straw-poll">straw poll</a>, Romney came in with a 24-point advantage to the next most popular Republican, Ron Paul. As a primary candidate in 2008, Romney came in second in New Hampshire to John McCain, who went on to win the GOP presidential nomination.</p>
<p>One of Romney&#8217;s frequently cited <a href="http://swampland.blogs.time.com/2011/01/22/giuliani-inadvertently-defends-romney/">drawbacks</a> is his role in “RomneyCare,” Massachusetts’ state-administered health care system, which bears many resemblances to President Obama&#8217;s health care plan, including having an individual health insurance mandate. In addition, RomneyCare has been unsuccessful on many fronts, which is likely the reason the former Massachusetts governor said little during the national heath care debate that consumed much of the last two years. This is unlike other potential presidential candidates &#8212; Sarah Palin, Huckabee, Newt Gingrich, etc. &#8212; who led relatively vocal opposition to the program.</p>
<p>Doubtless, other GOP contenders who unequivocally opposed the heath care overhaul bill (virtually all of them) will exploit Romney’s baggage in this respect &#8212; which is certainly burdensome given the great animus conservative voters have toward the bill and its unpopularity among independents. After all, how could Romney possibly respond to this constituency’s clarion call if he is not, in principle, opposed to state intervention in the health care system? Two items are worth mentioning here:</p>
<p>First, although the Massachusetts health care debacle will surely be a sticking point in the presidential primary &#8212; just as it was during the 2008 primary when many voters were actually sympathetic to health care reform &#8212; it may not be as crucial a factor in the general election of 2012. Support for repeal of ObamaCare among the general public has steadily <a href="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law">waned</a> since the debate was as its zenith. As the majority of voters turn to the economy, jobs, and the deficit (which is implicative of, but not coextensive with, ObamaCare), the health care bill seems to influence voter opinion less and less.</p>
<p>Secondly, Romney’s role in Massachusetts’ health care system is regrettable, but not indefensible. The notion that what Romney oversaw in Massachusetts is somehow comparable to ObamaCare, a claim often touted by ObamaCare supporters, is fundamental misled. Although the bills share some functional similarities, it certainly comports with conservative federalist principles that states have the right to conduct their business according to the wishes of the public. But when these same policies are proposed on the national scale (and are clearly against the better judgement of most of the population), such a program becomes decidedly un-conservative. That is to say, there’s nothing inconsistent for a conservative to believe that state democracies ought to enact statist policies if the public sees fit, while also believing that these same policies would be unconstitutional on a national scale.</p>
<p>Although Romney is the apparent front-runner at this time, he has tough competition with former Arkansas governor and 2008 presidential hopeful Mike Huckabee. In another PPP <a href="http://publicpolicypolling.blogspot.com/2011/01/huckabee-ahead-nationally.html">poll</a> from the 21st, Huckabee had a 10-point lead ahead of Romney (and Palin), although he curiously achieved little more than 3% of the vote in the first New Hampshire straw poll. Huckabee also had a narrow victory in a recent ABC News/Washington Post <a href="http://voices.washingtonpost.com/thefix/morning-fix/a-three-way-tie-atop-2012-gop.html">poll</a>. After coming off the campaign trail, Huckabee has remained relatively visible as a part-time Fox News personality, hosting a show called “Huckabee,” and contributing political analysis at the network.</p>
<p>After his surprising win in the 2008 Iowa caucus, Huckabee’s star was on the rise until he lost subsequent caucuses and eventually bowed out altogether.Three years later, Huckabee still holds sway in in Iowa. In August 2010, he won the Iowa straw poll, just edging out Mitt Romney. Huckabee’s security among Iowa Republicans gives him a notable head start over other candidates, except, perhaps, for Romney.</p>
<p>Deference must be paid, of course, to Sarah Palin. As much as she is maligned, Palin enjoys the most devoted and enthusiastic group of supporters. In many respects, she is the Tea Party favorite, which cannot be said for front-runner Romney. In most every recent poll, Palin vacillates between the 2nd-4th most supported Republican &#8212; and this really says something for a woman so hated. Palin has much more support than many other well-qualified candidates, including Tim Pawlenty, the governor of Minnesota, who is widely predicted to make a run for the presidency. Palin polls significantly higher than Pawlenty, and also Newt Gingrich, and Reps. Ron Paul, and Michele Bachman. (Ron Paul did come in a distant second in the New Hampshire straw poll, but he generally polls below Palin.)</p>
<p>Palin’s serious deficit is in her marketability outside of conservative precincts. Her rating among liberals is usually in the single digits and she is only marginally more well-liked among Independents. In the national PPP poll cited above, Palin was viewed at least somewhat negatively by 49% of respondents. Furthermore, her general favorability falls far short of Obama (a third or fewer voters have a favorable view of her), while Mitt Romney’s is much closer to Obama’s favorability level and at one time, he was viewed <em>more</em> favorably. Will Palin take these figures to heart and decide to serve the party in another capacity? That is the crucial question.</p>
<p>In the end, the overriding issue for most of these candidates &#8212; whether he or she is a front-runner or an underdog &#8212; will be how they view the competitiveness of President Obama as an opponent. Obama will have an immediate advantage over any Republican candidate, not the least because the arduous primary process will drains candidate coffers. This is precisely what caused Mike Huckabee to recently quip that, although he was still considering running, he did not necessarily want to be the “sacrificial lamb.” However, with his positive figures and competitiveness against Romney, it is difficult to believe that he would pass up the opportunity. A struggle between Romney and Huckabee for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination seems to be in the making. In 2008, we saw them exchange some stinging barbs &#8212; are more indecorous aspersions in store?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/anyones-game/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>32</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Obama’s “Death Panel” Moment</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/obama%e2%80%99s-%e2%80%9cdeath-panel%e2%80%9d-moment-2/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=obama%25e2%2580%2599s-%25e2%2580%259cdeath-panel%25e2%2580%259d-moment-2</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/obama%e2%80%99s-%e2%80%9cdeath-panel%e2%80%9d-moment-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 19 Jan 2011 04:56:35 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=82291</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The president wildly exaggerates the consequences of the health care bill's repeal to scare the public. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Picture-9.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-82292" title="Picture-9" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Picture-9.gif" alt="" width="375" height="307" /></a></p>
<p>Between 2009-2010, the Obama administration incessantly bewailed conservative reliance on “fear-mongering” to forestall passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (&#8220;Obamacare&#8221;). Responding to criticism first incited by a rather infamous Sarah Palin quote, the president admonished critics for accusing Democrats of “want[ing] to set up death panels to pull the plug on grandma.” It was quite remarkable, then, when Obama-proxy Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health and Human Services, released a report yesterday claiming that repeal of Obamacare would jeopardize the coverage of <em>half</em> of all Americans because of latent pre-existing conditions. The falsity of this claim cannot be overstated, and it unfortunately represents the administration’s opening salvo in the upcoming battle to repeal Obamacare. And while the prospect of “death panels” is a dead issue these days, the administration seems to have acquired a new appreciation for the same empty scare-tactics it once derided during the health care debate. But will it be effective enough to save the bill?</p>
<p>The political function of the pre-existing conditions <a href="http://www.healthcare.gov/center/reports/preexisting.html">report</a> was captured transparently enough by its title and the title of its accompanying <a href="http://www.hhs.gov/news/press/2011pres/01/20110118a.html">press release</a>: “129 million Americans with a pre-existing condition could be denied coverage without new health reform law.” Hearing this dire pronouncement &#8212; adroitly crafted to imply that 1 in 2 Americans is in imminent danger of losing health care coverage &#8212; one is almost tempted to sign up for the death panels.</p>
<p>Never mind that the prohibition on coverage denial for pre-existing conditions doesn’t even begin until 2014. Why haven’t we noticed the urgency of the situation before Obama and Kathleen Sebelius rescued us from certain demise? A presentation of the facts is needed to explain the peculiar discrepancy. In the first place, the report lets slip that the number of people who <em>might</em> have problems with a pre-existing condition could be as low as 50 million people. That is, anywhere from 19 to 50 percent (129 million) of people under the age of 65 could have a pre-existing condition &#8212; a wildly uncertain figure, which should immediately give pause.</p>
<p>However, even if we concede that “up to 129 million” Americans “have some type of pre-existing condition,” as HHS nebulously explained, what makes this obscurantist report completely irrelevant is that scarcely a fraction of 129 million people &#8212; or even 50 million for that matter &#8212; will ever be denied coverage due to a pre-existing condition. As <a href="http://www.cato.org/people/michael-cannon">Michael Cannon</a>, director of health policy studies at the conservative Cato Institute rightly pointed out, only about 1% of Americans are ever denied health care coverage due to pre-existing conditions. In fact, a HHS <a href="http://www.meps.ahrq.gov/mepsweb/data_stats/download_data_files_codebook.jsp?PUFId=H60&amp;varName=DENYINSR">survey</a> administered in 2001 (yes, the same HHS) “found that&#8230;only 1 percent of Americans had ever been denied health insurance,” Cannon <a href="http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/hhs-wildly-overstates-the-problem-of-pre-existing-conditions-and-ignores-its-cause/">explained</a>. In a two year period (between 2007-2009), the four largest private insurance companies in the country (Aetna, Humana, UnitedHealth Group, and WellPoint) denied coverage for pre-existing conditions for about 300,000 people per year (about 600,000 total), less than .01% of all Americans. These figures come from a congressional <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/21271ade-d61b-11df-81f0-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1BTWhqIYm">investigation</a> commissioned by leftist Rep. Harry Waxman (D-CA), intended to demonize private insurance companies.</p>
<p>What possibly accounts for the stark differential between the administration’s warning and reality? First, the sense in which HHS uses of the term “pre-existing condition” is overly broad to the point of being meaningless. This is in contrast to what insurers are actually allowed to classify as pre-existing conditions, which is highly restrict by the federal government. The Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), enacted in 1997, introduced a number of regulations to address pre-existing conditions. For instance, if you change jobs and subsequently change insurance plans, the new insurance company is only allowed to review the last six months of your health history for a pre-existing condition. This is usually defined as something that was diagnosed or treated during the six months prior to a person&#8217;s enrollment in the new insurance company.</p>
<p>Even so, periods of coverage exclusion are restricted to 12 months in most cases, although some plans may have shorter or nonexistent exclusion periods, as the Department of Labor <a href="http://www.dol.gov/ebsa/faqs/faq_consumer_hipaa.html">explains</a>. Furthermore, the exclusion period is typically <em>waived</em> by the insurance company. This is because HIPAA also has a “creditable coverage” provision, which basically stipulates that if an individual has had coverage for 63 continuous days prior to switching insurance companies, the coverage carries over to his or her pre-existing conditions. Thus, there is a very limited number of ways insurers are legally permitted to deny coverage for pre-existing conditions.</p>
<p>Bearing this in mind, it is exceedingly difficult to not interpret the Obama administration’s claim that as much as half the population could be denied coverage for pre-existing conditions as a naked scare-tactic to diminish support for the repeal effort. It should be no surprise that the report was released on the same day as debate over Obamacare’s repeal geared up in the now Republican-led House.</p>
<p>The report’s purpose is clearly to mislead the public on the facts of pre-existing conditions &#8212; and it is frankly as wild a mischaracterization as anything that has come from the Right in the last two years. As deceptive as it is, this maneuver is of course prudent of the Obama team, as it capitalizes on one of the few advantages the administration has over the repeal effort. As is constantly pointed out by Obamacare’s proponents, there are select components of the bill that are very popular with the public. Regulations prohibiting coverage denial because of pre-existing conditions stand alongside other provisions, such as allowing children to remain on family plans until the age of 26, as measures the public will no give up readily. Exaggerating the consequences of repeal in terms of these provisions is obviously a winning strategy. It may be no more credible than Sarah Palin’s “death panels,” but as recent history has shown, even a dubious meme, if publicized enough, can have enormous consequences on the debate at large.</p>
<p>On the other hand, it is also clear enough that the administration’s first shot across the bow of the repeal effort is a sensational distraction from the more central issues of the debate. Obamacare, with its massive bureaucracy, regulation, and taxation, remains generally unpopular. The key pillar of the legislation &#8212; the universal insurance mandate &#8212; is even more disliked. A few demagogical stances may score cheap political points, but the overall success of Obamacare in seriously in dispute. If the legislation lives out the next two years more or less in tact, it will be a serious albatross around Obama&#8217;s neck as he struggles for re-election.</p>
<p>However, it is also true that the House repeal bill is little more than Republican bluster, as it is projected to die in the Senate after sailing through the lower chamber later this week. There is realistic hope, however, that piecemeal repeal will be successful, and it could very well be the case that the president’s stand on pre-existing conditions represents the first peg in a regulatory amalgam of both Republican and Democratic design. Would it weaken the president too much to accept this route of compromise? Perhaps it would help him.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/obama%e2%80%99s-%e2%80%9cdeath-panel%e2%80%9d-moment-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>20</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Quest for an Obamacare Martyr</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/the-quest-for-an-obamacare-martyr/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=the-quest-for-an-obamacare-martyr</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/the-quest-for-an-obamacare-martyr/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 11 Jan 2011 04:50:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=81575</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The Left seeks cheap political gains from the Arizona shooting. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/r.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-81577" title="r" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/r.gif" alt="" width="375" height="306" /></a></p>
<p>In 1995, a politically desperate President Clinton brazenly capitalized on the bombing in Oklahoma City, blaming his political opponents and their extreme right-wing rhetoric for the horrific incident. This was six months after Clinton suffered a stunning rebuke in the midterm elections, with the Democratic loss of both the House and the Senate to Republicans. In 2011, in the wake of the shooting of Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, President Obama has been unburdened of the task of blaming his critics for the national tragedy himself. Most of the dirty work is being carried out by the mainstream media, which immediately used the event as a cudgel against Obama’s political adversaries. This will be felt most strongly next week when the House votes to repeal the president’s controversial healthcare reform bill. The vote is expected to succeed, but any conservative victory over “Obamacare” is likely doomed to ambiguity &#8212; neither triumphant nor undeserved, but tainted by a fictive legacy of “extremist politics.”</p>
<p>To be clear, the allegation that Obamacare opponents are “extremists” or part of a “climate of hate,” as economist Paul Krugman described in <em>The New York Times</em> Monday, is baseless slander of the first order. Must we rebut the Krugman presumption? I suppose we must: There is no evidence that extremism is a prominent aspect of popular conservatism in any significant sense. Anecdotal evidence of such is thoroughly matched by “extremist” behavior on the other side, and is therefore not particular to right-wing activism. Even preceding Obamacare’s passage in March of 2010, left-wing rage was abundantly manifest. We could point out Kenneth Gladney, who, while selling miniature Gadsden flags, was beaten senseless by an unhinged member of the SEIU, a Marxist union closely allied with President Obama. Or we could recall the Tea Party protester whose finger was bitten off by a MoveOn.org sympathizer in 2009. Or former Congressman Alan Grayson, who accused Republicans of wanting Americans to &#8220;die quickly.&#8221; The examples proceed <em>ad infinitum</em>. The point is that, rather than being inveterate to the Republican or Democratic party, extremism is a cold fact of reality for both the Left and Right. What matters is that it is infrequent and openly condemned when it occurs.</p>
<p>Within hours of the news that Rep. Giffords had been shot and numerous others had been killed or wounded, <em>The New York Times</em> blamed “vitriol” in politics for the massacre and pointed to the conservative movement (the Tea Party, Sarah Palin, etc.) in particular. Numerous other contributions from the <em>Times</em> and other left-wing figures and publications have since echoed the same. What is unclear is why “vitriol” in politics is suddenly so foreign to the Left. It suggests a degree of sensitivity in discourse which, of all political precincts, it certainly does not possess. The Bush years constituted an incredibly heated period in American politics, especially when led by anti-war hysterics. Some will remember when Bill Maher publicly opined, in all seriousness, that the world would be a safer place if Dick Cheney were dead. This statement was met with applause from his <em>Real Time</em> audience. Again, the examples go on and on. But particular examples are not the point. No faction enjoys a kind of holy disassociation from political degenerates, and these incidents quickly accumulate.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/the-quest-for-an-obamacare-martyr/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>20</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Out With the Old</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/out-with-the-old/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=out-with-the-old</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/out-with-the-old/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 06 Jan 2011 04:50:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Daily Mailer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=81168</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Is the beginning of the 112th Congress the end of Obamacare? ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/110105_pelosi_boehner_gavel_shinkle_328.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-81174" title="110105_pelosi_boehner_gavel_shinkle_328" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/110105_pelosi_boehner_gavel_shinkle_328.gif" alt="" width="375" height="301" /></a></p>
<p>With trademark lachrymosity, Congressman John A. Boehner accepted the gavel of the House of Representatives Wednesday from outgoing Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Presiding over his maiden session in the “people’s House,” Boehner aptly expounded on “the people’s” will and the urgency of enacting it during the already-fleeting tenure of the 112th Congress. “The people voted to end business as usual,” the speaker said, “and today we begin carrying out their instructions.” More than empty rhetoric, Speaker Boehner leads an ambitious Republican constituency, which has already seized both horns of the national dilemma: the looming prospect of the unpopular healthcare legislation passed by President Obama and the previous Congress, and the unmanageability of federal spending. Both pit Republicans directly against the agenda President Obama has aggressively led for the past two years. This time around, however, no single party holds many trump cards.</p>
<p>A few hours after representatives were sworn into office, the now Republican-led House enacted a number of new rules to address spending and taxation. A Democratically-controlled House in 2007 instituted the “pay-go” policy, essentially requiring that new spending be offset by spending cuts or tax increases. Today’s Republicans have replaced this policy with what they call “cut-go,” or requiring spending cuts and <em>prohibiting</em> tax increases for new spending. Taxes, on the other hand, can be cut even without an offset in spending reductions elsewhere. This maneuver has prompted many on the Left to accuse Republicans of hypocrisy with respect to their seriousness toward reducing the deficit. This criticism, however, ignores the potential for diverting revenue to the deficit from desperately-needed government downsizing. As GOP leaders have frequently argued, “We don’t have a revenue problem. We have a spending problem.”</p>
<p>The talk of the town as of late has been the need to raise the federal debt ceiling, which proponents argue is needed to preserve America’s AAA credit rating. House Republicans are divided on this issue, with some staunch conservatives absolutely committed to voting “no” on an increase, while some suggest they will vote for the increase if it is accompanied by austerity measures. In any case, new House rules have mandated that the debt ceiling increase must be approved through an on-the-record vote, rather than through the annual budget process. This will make the increase more difficult to pass, or at least the subject of closer public scrutiny. Another House rule will require the bill (and all bills) to be posted on the Internet 72 hours before being brought to the floor for debate. This will be a sharp distinction to the secrecy of Pelosi’s House, where legislation was not uncommonly fashioned in the early morning hours and brought to the floor for a vote the following day.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/out-with-the-old/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>7</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Jihad Strikes a Blow in Pakistan</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/jihad-strikes-a-blow-in-pakistan/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=jihad-strikes-a-blow-in-pakistan</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/jihad-strikes-a-blow-in-pakistan/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jan 2011 04:46:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=81058</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[How the assassination of Salman Taseer threatens U.S. success in Afghanistan. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Picture-1.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-81070" title="Picture-1" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/Picture-1.gif" alt="" width="375" height="307" /></a></p>
<p>For the second time in three years, the beleaguered nation of Pakistan has lost one of its most prominent secular reformers to Islamic radicalism. Salman Taseer, governor of Pakistan’s populous Punjab Province, was killed Tuesday in broad daylight by Malik Mumtaz Qadri, a member of the governor&#8217;s own security detail. The assassination was expressly political, with Qadri citing Taseer’s opposition to Pakistan’s Islamic blasphemy laws as the motivation behind the killing. The tragedy leaves much uncertainty and turmoil in its wake, especially with respect to Pakistan&#8217;s willingness to help pacify anti-American forces in neighboring Afghanistan. The event also puts into question the viability of the fragile Pakistani secularist movement in the face of burgeoning violent fundamentalism.</p>
<p>Taseer was a member of the ruling Pakistan People’s Party, a secular reformist party once represented by former Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto. Bhutto, a champion of modernity in Pakistan, was also murdered in a fundamentalist gun-and-bomb attack in 2007. In fact, Taseer’s death comes within days of the anniversary of his compatriot’s assassination, a grim commemoration of the event. Like Bhutto, Taseer vocally advocated for women and minority rights. Ms. Bhutto’s husband, Asif Ali Zardari, is Pakistan’s current president and was close to Taseer.</p>
<p>Taseer had aggressively carried on Bhutto’s legacy, becoming one of Pakistan’s foremost opponents of Islamic extremism. In the weeks preceding his death, Teseer faced intense opposition from Islamist elements over his objection to the country’s draconian blasphemy laws, which carry the penalty of death. In a highly publicized case, a Christian woman named Asia Bibi, who lived in Punjab, was sentenced to death for a blasphemy offense. She is currently in prison and is appealing her sentence. Taseer publicly supported Bibi and railed against the blasphemy laws, which prompted Islamist factions to call for his ouster. Some groups issued an edict of blasphemy for his involvement in the case.</p>
<p>Qadir&#8217;s intention was to fulfill this decree. He was led away from the scene smiling over his instrumentality in Allah&#8217;s divine justice. “I am a slave of the Prophet,” he told a television crew, “and the punishment for one who commits blasphemy is death.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2011/nichole-hungerford/jihad-strikes-a-blow-in-pakistan/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>27</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>FrontPage&#8217;s Person of the Year: The Tea Party</title>
		<link>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/nichole-hungerford/frontpages-person-of-the-year-the-tea-party-movement/?utm_source=rss&#038;utm_medium=rss&#038;utm_campaign=frontpages-person-of-the-year-the-tea-party-movement</link>
		<comments>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/nichole-hungerford/frontpages-person-of-the-year-the-tea-party-movement/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2010 04:50:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Nichole Hungerford]]></dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[FrontPage]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://frontpagemag.com/?p=80657</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Too momentous a year for one individual to carry the honor alone. ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/crowd.gif"><img class="aligncenter size-full wp-image-80660" title="crowd" src="http://cdn.frontpagemag.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/crowd.gif" alt="" width="375" height="289" /></a></p>
<p>Over the past few years, while atrophy of the welfare state system has spurred violent protests in Western Europe, the United States has experienced a parallel, but remarkably distinct phenomenon. In early 2009, desperate Greeks rioted in the streets to demand that their overextended government do more for them in the face of financial crisis. Americans, at the same time, rallied across the nation for their government to do <em>less</em>. More than any one individual alone in 2010, this movement, the Tea Party movement, wrought tremendous change over the political landscape, realizing a historic election and revitalizing the American zeitgeist. The title of FrontPage Magazine’s Person of the Year, therefore, must be bestowed collectively on these individuals, the formidable torchbearers of our beloved liberty and prosperity.</p>
<p>Two days after the newly-elected President Obama signed the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (the stimulus bill) into law February 19th, the Tea Party movement found its voice &#8212; in the unlikeliest of places. A little-known CNBC analyst, Rick Santelli, embarked on a spontaneous rant while delivering a market forecast live on air. His harangue was precipitated by the federal government&#8217;s decision to stem the 2009 housing and financial crisis with a series of unprecedented “bailouts” for Wall Street and the banking industry, financed by taxpayer revenue. “How many of you people want to pay for your neighbor’s mortgage, that has an extra bathroom and can’t pay their bills?” Santelli wailed, turning to the gallery of traders on the floor of the Chicago Board of Trade. The crowd jeered. “President Obama, are you listening?” Apparently, he was not. Santelli proceeded to flippantly claim he was considering organizing a “Chicago Tea Party” to protest government spending and the apparent collectivization of wealth.</p>
<p>The clip was immediately picked up by the Drudge Report, a highly influential driver of conservative discourse. (For nostalgia’s sake, Santelli’s video clip is <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zp-Jw-5Kx8k&amp;NR=1">here</a>.) Prior to this incident, there had been several large conservative-oriented rallies held around the country, some of which were publicized by conservative journalist and blogger Michelle Malkin. To our best reckoning, however, the “Tea Party” moniker had not been applied to this growing brand of conservative activism until after the Santelli clip &#8220;went viral.” Within hours of the rant&#8217;s debut, a number of &#8220;Tea Party&#8221; websites went live.</p>
<p>The notion of a Tea Party protest following the 2008-2009 financial crisis was completely felicitous at the time. It encapsulated at just the right moment, in just the right way, an ambient sense of unease, not just among steadfast Republicans, but among individuals erstwhile unengaged in the political process. By the time the Obama administration incestuously “bailed out” the auto-industry in March of the president&#8217;s inaugural year &#8212; or more precisely, bailed out the his union patrons &#8212; followed by the effective ousting of the presiding General Motors president, the political die had already been cast. President Obama&#8217;s throng of support quickly evaporate into a haze of resentment from the now not-so-silent majority.</p>
<p>The rancid reaction of the Left to the Tea Party is well known and not worth treatment here. What is important is setting the record straight on what the Tea Party really is. This is no straightforward task, to be sure, as the term “Tea Party” is essentially an umbrella label for numerous regional and national conservative activism groups. Members are predominately Republican voters, many of whom are disaffected and work largely outside the GOP establishment. Only 54% of Tea Party supporters had a favorable view of the Republican Party, according to an April 2010 New York Times/CBS News <a href="http://documents.nytimes.com/new-york-timescbs-news-poll-national-survey-of-tea-party-supporters?ref=politics">poll</a>. Polls consistently show the movement’s single greatest unifying principle is fiscal conservatism, including a desire for a smaller government and a concern over the federal deficit.  Social issues are mixed and far less uniform. According to the same poll, slightly more people favored civil unions for homosexuals compared to those who believed gay couples should receive no legal recognition (41% to 40%) and 45% are pro-choice (believing abortion should be available, but with restrictions), while only 35% believe abortion should not be available.</p>
<p>The movement’s focus on the virtues of fiscal conservatism in an atmosphere of immense economic uncertainty proved to be a political powder keg. In the afterglow of Barack Obama’s presidential victory, with both chambers of Congress controlled by the Democratic Party and headed by far-left leadership, many left-wing commentators believed the Republican Party was on the wane. And in fact, perhaps they were right. A large portion of Tea Party supporters, almost 40%, did not like McCain and slightly more had an unfavorable view of the Republican Party. Glenn Beck was more well-liked than both McCain and President George W. Bush. The Left’s pronouncements may have been accurate with respect to the political clout of the Republican Party, but conservatism was &#8212; and is &#8212; still very much alive. As the Democratic Party moved farther and farther away from economic matters after the stimulus bill was passed, and as beleaguered Republicans stood by impotently, worried fiscal conservatives took the only avenue left.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.frontpagemag.com/2010/nichole-hungerford/frontpages-person-of-the-year-the-tea-party-movement/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>21</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Object Caching 1170/1275 objects using disk
Content Delivery Network via cdn.frontpagemag.com

 Served from: www.frontpagemag.com @ 2014-12-31 06:48:30 by W3 Total Cache -->