"Since 2000, there have been 17 cases of herpes simplex virus infection in baby boys who had undergone a circumcision practice observed in some ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities. In these instances, parents may be aware of the risk associated with their decisions, but when it is a matter of life or death or there is potential for severe illness, society has an obligation to stand up on behalf of children who do not yet have their own informed voice...."

At some Orthodox Jewish circumcisions, the blood from the cut is sucked away, a practice that, in some cases, has been linked to infection. Seth Wenig/Associated Press

Parents’ Beliefs vs. Their Children’s Health

INTRODUCTION

The spread of measles has called attention to parents who don’t vaccinate children because of religious beliefs. New York City is accommodating an Orthodox Jewish circumcision practice that can infect babies with herpes. Some states even let believers in faith healing deny life-saving medical care to their children.

Should parents’ religious beliefs allow them to refuse medical care for their children or avoid standard medical practices?

Religious Freedom Balanced With Responsibility

Kristen A. Feemster is a pediatric infectious diseases physician and health services researcher at the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.

As a nation, we value freedom of speech and religion, but we also have a responsibility to ensure that decisions based upon this freedom do not bring harm to others, especially those who are not able to make decisions themselves.

Parental autonomy gives parents the primary responsibility for deciding how to raise their children and keep them from harm’s way. Parents decide what their children eat, where they go to school, whether and when they watch television. Most important, parents impart values. But this private realm lies within a public sphere that also has a responsibility to ensure that children are safe and healthy.

The private realm lies within a public sphere that also has a responsibility to ensure that children are safe and healthy.

As a pediatric health care provider, I am often confronted with the difficult question of whether the religious beliefs of parents should guide the treatment of their children, even if it means harm to the child. I know that our courts have found that the Constitution leaves room for society to protect children. “Parents may be free to become martyrs themselves, but it does not follow they are free … to make martyrs of their children,” the Supreme Courtruled in 1944, finding that religious freedom did not justify letting parents violate child labor laws. That decision was cited in 1990 by a Philadelphia court that permitted the imposition of compulsory vaccination during a measles outbreak in which five children associated with a faith healing religious group died. The same rationale applied in the 2013 prosecution of a Philadelphia couple practicing faith healing after two of their children died from untreated pneumonia.

These deaths were all preventable.

I see continued examples of preventable harm to children associated with the practice of religious beliefs. Since 2000, there have been 17 cases of herpes simplex virus infection in baby boys who had undergone a circumcision practice observed in some ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities. In these instances, parents may be aware of the risk associated with their decisions, but when it is a matter of life or death or there is potential for severe illness, society has an obligation to stand up on behalf of children who do not yet have their own informed voice.

This does not mean that it is impossible to respect the practice of religious beliefs while preventing harm. While religious belief systems may vary significantly, most share the general principles of respect for life and caring for others, especially for those who are most vulnerable. Our Constitution protects these practices. But that same Constitution has recognized that we are all responsible for ensuring that children have an opportunity for a safe and healthy life.

Join Room for Debate on Facebook and follow updates

ontwitter.com/roomfordebate. 

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/03/10/parents-beliefs-vs-their-childrens-health/religious-freedom-balanced-with-responsibility

So, what is a closet anti-Semite to do? Blame everything on Israel and explain that you don’t have a problem with the Jewish People – – just the policies of the Israeli Government. Some of my best friends are Jews.

Are you an Anti-Semite or Just Anti-Israel? Finally, the Difference Revealed

ARI WEISBROT

I  have remained largely silent in recent months as Israel-Haters continue to hate-hate-hate.   Israel-defenders flood social media with their staunch defense of the Jewish State, and break indignant at the insinuation that Israel is ever wrong.  I giggle a little when someone posts on Facebook expressions of shock that the world seems unreasonably hostile to Jews,  Israel.

I don’t get it. A majority of the world has hated the Jewish people since creation and/or the Big Bang.    Ancient (and modern) Egyptians,  Babylonians, Greeks,  Romans, crusading Christians,  non-crusading Christians, Muslims, Spanish Inquisitors,  French, German, and Portuguese expellers,  Torah Burning Frenchmen, European Progromers,  British Massacres, Italian Ghettos, Nazis, Arabs, the KKK, the Congressional Black Caucus, Walt Disney, Henry Ford, Roger Waters.  If it’s beginning to sound like a Billy Joel song, there is a reason.  The list is never-ending.

Each of those Anti-Semites believed in their cause.  The Jews aren’t a mere annoyance.  They are the cause of everything wrong about the world.   In the old days, you could also count on some mitigating hatred of black, gays, gypsies, the physically or mentally challenged,  and any random minority who could be readily labeled as an enemy.     Not anymore.   As liberalism and political correctness have drastically reduced the list of targets, it’s much harder to find a good scapegoat for the problems of the world.

In some circles, it is even considered taboo to outwardly hate the Jews.  So, what is a closet anti-Semite to do?    Blame everything on Israel and explain that you don’t have a problem with the Jewish People – – just the policies of the Israeli Government.   Some of my best friends are Jews.

But, because the three categories are so similar and often indistinguishable, I have developed a quick test to help you decide whether you are:  (1) Anti-Semitic;  (2) Anti-Israel, or (3) Just an idiot.

Please answer the Following Questions (there are no right answers):

For the purposes of this test, “Terrorism” is defined exclusively as the intentional targeting of civilians and non-combatants for murder.

1.  If you are a woman, would you rather live in Israel or Saudi Arabia (or any Muslim country)?
2. If you are gay, would you rather live in Israel or Egypt  (or any Muslim country)?
3. If you are a practicing Christian, would you rather live in Israel or in Iran (or any Muslin Country)?
4. If you are a terrorist, would you rather live in Israel or in Syria (or any Muslim Country)?
5. If you wanted to join an approved or, at least state facilitated, Terror organization, where would you have the best luck? Israel or Pakistan (or any Muslim country)?
6. If you invented a high-tech product worth millions, would you rather live in Israel or in Afghanistan (or any Muslim Country)?
7. If you wanted to start a successful business, would you rather live in Israel or in Yemen (or any Muslim Country)?
8. Extra credit,  If you wanted to start a successful business, and you are a woman, homosexual, or minority, would you rather live in Israel or in Iraq (or any Muslim Country)?
9. If you were a Jewish citizen of any Muslim Country, what would be your odds of becoming a Supreme Court Judge, High Army Commander, Miss-Universe representative, a member of the Parliament, owning your own land, openly practicing your religion, or starting as the captain of your national soccer team?
10. If you were a Muslim citizen of Israel, what would be your odds of becoming a Supreme Court Judge, High Army Commander, Miss-Universe representative, a member of the Parliament, owning your own land, openly practicing your religion, or starting as the captain of your national soccer team?
11. When I list these countries, what do you think of?   Afghanistan, Pakistan, Lebanon, Syria, Algeria, Bosnia, Somalia, Sudan, Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Croatia,  Yemen,  and Libya.

Please Choose 4 of the following answers:

1. Hatred of America
2. Sectarian violence
3. Internal strife leading to (or close to) Civil War or open oppression
4. Mayhem, War, and Death
5. Woman’s rights
6. High-Tech advancements and innovation
7. Democracy
8. Freedom of press, religion, and speech

12. When I list this Country, what do you think of?   Israel

Please Choose 4 of the following answers:

1. Hatred of America
2. Sectarian violence
3. Internal strife leading to (or close to) Civil War or open oppression
4. Mayhem, War, and Death
5. Woman’s rights
6. High-Tech advancements and innovation
7. Democracy
8. Freedom of press, religion, and speech

13.  How many active Muslim terror organizations can you name?

Choose 4:   Al Qeada, Boku Harem, Hamas, Hezbollah, ISIS, ISIL,   al-Aqsa Martyrs’ Brigades,  Taliban, Islamic Jihad,  Muslim Brotherhood, Armed Islamic Group of Algeria,  Lybian Islamic Finghting Group,  P.L.F., P.F.L.P. , Izz ad-Din al-Qassam Brigades; Harakat-Ul-Mujahideen,  Alami, Harakat Sham al-Islam, Hezb-e Islami Gulbuddin; Ansar al-Sharia (Libya) Ansar al-Sharia (Tunisia)

14.   How many active Jewish terror organizations can you name?  Note:  If you named Israel, you either ignored the instructions above, or you are an Anti-Semite.

15.  What is the cause of terrorism targeting Jews in Israel/Palestine?

If you answered “because of the 1948 Creation of the State of Israel within Muslim Lands,” Proceed to Question 16.

16.  What about the terror attack in Tel Haithat killed 8 Jews (1920), or the Nebi Musa Riots that killed 5 Jews (1920) or the Jaffa Riots that killed 47 Jews (1921), or the Jerusalem Stabbing attack that killed 5 Jews (1921), or the Riots that killed 133 Jews (1929), or the Hebron Massacre that killed 67 Jews (1929) or the Sefad Massacre that killed 20 Jews (1929) or “Bloody Jaffa Day” that killed 9 Jews (1936) or the murder of a Jewish family of 4 (including 3 young children) (1937) or the murder of 5 Keren Kayemet workers (1937) or 6 Jews killed in Haifa (1938);  the Bombing in northern Palestine that killed 3 Jews (1938) or the Tiberius Pogroms that killed 19 Jews (1938)?  (just to name a few).

17.  What is the cause of terror acts targeting Jews in recent years?

If you answered “the occupation,” proceed to question 18.

18.  Is Gaza occupied by a single Jew?  If your answer is no, proceed to question 19.

19.  Where do 99% of all terror/missile attacks against Israeli citizens currently originate?

20.  What is the cause of Muslim terror activity outside Palestine?

If you answered:  Israeli occupation and the Palestinian conflict, proceed to Question 21.

21.  What group attacked the USS Cole and why?  The World Trade Center? The Charlie Hebdo offices? The Krudttonden Café in Denmark?  The Madrid train?  The train station in Russia?  Pan Am-Lockerbie?  The attack on Mecca killing 240 Muslim worshipers?  The Mumbai train?  Russian Theatre attack (killing 170 Russians)?  The massacres in Somalia, Rwanda, Croatia, and Sudan?

22.  Do you contend that the above attacks, all undertaken by Muslim groups, would not have happened if the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was resolved?

23. True or False:   The Jews control the media, the world’s finances, Hollywood, and the US Congress?  (Basically everything that impacts your life).   If you answered true, proceed to Question 23.

24.   How did they amass such power over everyone and everything?

25.  With respect to Iran’s nuclear program, do you advocate cutting a deal and hoping it prevents Iran from making good on its promise to annihilate Israel, or do you think Israel should do everything in its power, even if it insults the President of the United States, to prevent its own destruction?

26.    Speaking of which, what lesson did you learn, if any, when Israel was told that its withdrawal from Gaza would be the only way to stop terror attacks emanating from that territory and that everything would be fine.

27. How did that work out?

Ari Weisbrot’s Award-Winning and Internationally Acclaimed Blog can be found at ariweisbrot.com.  

Read more: Are you an Anti-Semite or Just Anti-Israel? Finally, the Difference Revealed | Ari Weisbrot | The Blogs | The Times of Israel http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/are-you-an-anti-semite-or-just-anti-israel-finally-the-difference-revealed/#ixzz3TwEsO0VM
Follow us: @timesofisrael on Twitter | timesofisrael on Facebook

The Truth About Vaccines: A Conversation with Dr. Nina L. Shapiro - A Footnote To The Ignorant!

The Truth About Vaccines: A Conversation with Dr. Nina L. Shapiro

  Dr. Nina L. Shapiro is the director of pediatric otolaryngology and a professor at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA. A graduate of Harvard Medical School and Cornell University, Shapiro has been honored with several prestigious awards, including the American Society of Pediatric Otolaryngology Awards for Clinical and Basic Science Research, the UCLA Head and Neck Surgery Faculty Teaching Award, and the American Academy of Pediatrics Young Investigators Award, among others. In 2008 and 2012–2014, she was named a “Super Doctor” by Los Angeles Magazine; she is a Castle and Connolly 2014 “Top Doctor” and is listed in Who’s Who in America. She has given over 200 national and international scientific lectures, and written over 80 peer-reviewed journal articles, two medical books, and 16 academic book chapters. Dr. Shapiro is an editor of “50 Studies Every Pediatrician Should Know” (Oxford University Press, 2016), and she is working on a book about hype in popular health advice. Her work and expert commentary have been featured in the Los Angeles Times, The Hollywood Reporter, Time, BBC World, Salon, and on NPR.

*  *  *

Harris: Thanks for taking the time to speak with me, Nina. There are a few background issues I should mention so that our readers understand the context of our conversation. An article in the Hollywood Reporter attracted a tremendous amount of attention because it revealed that some private schools in Los Angeles and Orange County have vaccination rates similar to those of countries in sub-Saharan Africa. This is true of affluent areas in northern California as well, such as Marin County. Then there was an outbreak of measles, a disease that had once been declared eradicated in the US, which came courtesy of a happy congregation of unimmunized people at Disneyland. This story also became national news, and measles has now spread to at least 17 states.

So my first question is, why aren’t people getting their children vaccinated against preventable and often very serious illness in the year 2015? I have my own thoughts on the topic, but I was wondering if you could comment as a pediatric ENT and surgeon.

Shapiro: I think there are several reasons why people have chosen—and I use the word “chosen” specifically because I think most people now have a luxury of choice when it comes to their medical care—not to vaccinate their children. One is that they haven’t seen these illnesses. Most people with young children have never seen a case of measles; they’ve never seen mumps, rubella, polio, or whooping cough; so these illnesses are just abstractions to them. Their families are healthy, so why should they worry about something they’ve never seen?

And there’s the concern that these vaccines cause autism. No matter how many studies are done to show in hundreds of thousands of children that there is no association between immunizations and the development of autism, there’s still that inkling of fear. Because most people know what autism looks like. They don’t know what measles looks like, but they understandably want to do everything they can to prevent autism.

Another issue—especially in what one would call “health-conscious” communities in California and parts of Colorado—is this notion that vaccines have what people call “toxins” in them. This is a very tricky word, because most non-scientists don’t really know what a toxin is. Vaccines are not toxic. The air we breathe is much more toxic than the vaccines that children receive. They receive more viral and bacterial exposure just by being outside for a few hours than they would from vaccines. But there’s this pseudoscientific idea, “I’m going to keep my children natural and healthy and feed them organic food and protect them from any unnecessary toxic exposure,” that seems to stand in opposition to vaccines.

Harris: I think the fact that most people are totally unfamiliar with the consequences of contracting one of these illnesses plays a huge role here. No current parent of school-age children knows what it’s like to fear that his or her child may come down with polio and have to be placed in an iron lung. The carefree attitude we now enjoy is the result of the success of vaccines. This is why people are no longer dying of smallpox. So we live in a world that has been more or less purged of terrifying, preventable illness because we have used vaccines for generations. Bliss leads to ignorance. People have the luxury of ignoring “herd immunity” (a concept we will talk about) once it has been provided by their neighbors.

I think a few more things are working in the background here. I get the sense, through my personal interactions with people and from what I’ve read in the media, that more or less everyone has lost trust in public institutions. We’ve lost our faith in government in general and bodies like the CDC and the FDA in particular, and we don’t trust the pharmaceutical companies or the media either. In some respects this erosion of trust is understandable, even warranted, because most of us now have a sense that the incentives in these institutions are often misaligned. A pharmaceutical company that spends $1 billion to develop a new drug will often be tempted to ignore any data that suggests the drug shouldn’t be used, whether for reasons of efficacy or for reasons of safety. There’s been enough evidence of corporate malfeasance on this front to suggest that these concerns are often justified. We also have good reason to believe that the government is not competent to police this space effectively, owing to both lack of funding and bad incentives. So the prospect of corruption and just sheer incompetence on this front is galling to everyone.

Another factor is that people are often confused about scientific and statistical reasoning. Even doctors can fail to reason scientifically, and a few prominent pediatricians are failing egregiously to give their patients rational advice about vaccines.

Finally, there may be something at work here that I’m less sure about: the idea that in the very act of trying to protect one’s child—by injecting a substance into her body in the hope of protecting her, and causing pain in the process—one might actually be poisoning her. It’s no fun watching your toddler writhe under the pediatrician’s needle and then howl with pain, and the idea that you might be imposing a risk of injury or death on her in the process is horrible to contemplate. Even when, in reality, you’re imposing much less risk than you often do just for fun. Which is more of a hazard to your child’s health—all the potentially life-saving vaccines she’ll ever receive, or that ski trip you take as a family each year? The time on skis, clearly. But it doesn’t feel that way.

Read the rest athttp://www.samharris.org/blog/item/the-truth-about-vaccines

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/11/books/review-bad-faith-a-dr-paul-a-offit-book-on-religion-and-modern-medicine.html?emc=edit_tnt_20150310&nlid=32999454&tntemail0=y

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/videos/2015-03-10/melinda-gates-crazy-not-to-vaccinate-kids

http://mynorthwest.com/995/2724023/Ben-Shapiro-begs-people-to-vaccinate-kids-after-daughter-gets-whooping-cough

To prevent certain types of cancer, a vegetarian diet with some fish might be the best protection, according to a new study

Vegetarian Diet Lowers Risk for Some Cancers, Study Finds

Vegetarians who also eat fish have even greater protection against colorectal cancers

ENLARGE

Vegetarians had a 22% lower risk for colorectal cancers than nonvegetarians, according to the results of a seven-year study that followed more than 77,000 people. PHOTO: GETTY IMAGES

By 

ANGELA CHEN

March 9, 2015 11:00 a.m. ET

2 COMMENTS

To prevent certain types of cancer, a vegetarian diet with some fish might be the best protection, according to a new study.

A new study, published online Monday in the Journal of the American Medical Association, found that fish-eating vegetarians, or pescovegetarians, had a 43% lower risk of colorectal cancers than nonvegetarians. This beat out the results for vegans, who had a 16% lower risk, and lacto-ovo vegetarians, who eat milk and eggs and who had an 18% lower chance. Combined, all types of vegetarians had a 22% reduced risk for colorectal cancers than nonvegetarians.

According to the researchers, the additional benefit from fish probably comes from omega-3 fatty acids. However, they note that even the nonvegetarian group in the study consumed less meat than the average American.

Colorectal cancer is the second most deadly cancer in the U.S., after lung cancer, and previous studies have suggested that meat-heavy diets, especially processed meat, can elevate risk for the condition. This latest research is led by Michael Orlich, an assistant professor of preventive medicine at Loma Linda University, a Seventh-day Adventist institution in California.

ENLARGE

Vegetarians who also ate fish had even greater protection against colorectal cancers than other vegetarians, the study found. So-called pescovegetarians had a 43% reduced risk for the cancers compared with people who ate meat. PHOTO: CORBIS

Dr. Orlich’s team tracked the food questionnaires and medical records of 77,659 Seventh-day Adventists over a mean period of 7.3 years. Seventh-day Adventists were chosen in part because the religion encourages a healthy lifestyle and previous studies on the population found that their diet is associated with lower rates of obesity, diabetes and high blood pressure.

The benefits of eating fish are more difficult to interpret, since the pescovegetarians ate about as much fish as did the nonvegetarians, Dr. Orlich says. Pescovegetarians’ extra protection against cancer may not be only from the fish itself, but perhaps from a combination of fish and increased consumption of plants, he says.

“There’s a history going back to the 1950s of studies on Seventh-day Adventists, and most have found that they’re healthy, long-lived populations, so it’s interesting to probe and see why,” says Dr. Orlich.

The researchers sent detailed food questionnaires and follow-up surveys every other year. They sorted the participants into categories based on their reported food intake, rather than simply asking them if they were vegetarian. Among the participants, 52% were vegetarians of various types, including 29% lacto-ovo vegetarians, 10% pescovegetarians and 8% vegans.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/vegetarian-diet-lowers-risk-for-some-cancers-study-finds-1425913215?tesla=y

"A searing indictment of putative religious Jews – from Modern Orthodox Jews to chasidic and the black hat, yeshivish community – who have in effect reintroduced a system of child sacrifice, sacrificing the interests of children (young boys and girls are overwhelmingly the victims of Orthodox Judaism’s sexual abusers) to those of the accused abusers and to the Orthodox community’s perceived image in wider society...."

http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00M7CH5ES/ref=rdr_kindle_ext_tmb

Sexual Abuse, Shonda and Concealment in Orthodox Jewish Communities: Michael Lesher, McFarland & Company, 287 pps. $45. 

Kindle Price:	$22.32
You Save:	$22.68 (50%)

The disgrace of sexual abusers (nearly entirely men) who identify themselves as Orthodox Jews is a well-known subject, covered extensively in recent decades in the Jewish and general media.

Lesher, an attorney whose specializes in this part of family law, is a longtime community activist on behalf of the victims of sexual abuse. He is an outspoken critic of what he sees as a failing of the Orthodox community he came to as an adult. His book concentrates on one disturbing aspect of the phenomenon – the propensity of Orthodox Judaism’s leaders and rank-and-file members, in the United States and Israel, to defend and support the abusers, at the expense of the victims and the victims’ families.

He writes, as he summarizes in the book’s introduction, about “how influential rabbis and community leaders have sided with the alleged abusers against their victims; how victims and witnesses of sexual abuse have been pressured, even threatened, not to turn to secular law enforcement for help; how autonomous Jewish ‘patrols,’ displacing the role of official police in some large and heavily religious Jewish neighborhoods, have played an inglorious part in the history of cover-ups; … how some Jewish communities have even succeeded in manipulating law enforcement officials to protect suspected abusers.”

This makes for a hard read, a searing indictment of putative religious Jews – from Modern Orthodox Jews to chasidic and the black hat, yeshivish community – who have in effect reintroduced a system of child sacrifice, sacrificing the interests of children (young boys and girls are overwhelmingly the victims of Orthodox Judaism’s sexual abusers) to those of the accused abusers and to the Orthodox community’s perceived image in wider society. According to Lesher, the children and their family members who take steps against abusers are usually regarded as traitors who unfairly harm the lives of the abusers and the abusers’ families; it’s “blame the victim” to an unconscionable degree.

Lesher painstakingly documents case after case of a communal mentality of Shah! What will the goyim think? It’s a mentality that bullies and ostracizes and often silences the victims who dare bring the crimes of Orthodox Jews to the secular criminal justice system and to any type of media. He writes of the indifference and hostility that the victims encounter. He covers the familiar territory of a corrupt beit din (rabbinic court) system and cites the self-serving misuse of Jewish law and of Jewish history to justify Orthodox Jews turning their backs on the victims. He describes, in the words of one chapter’s title, a “culture of denial,” an Orthodox community in which accusations against victims have become orthodox behavior.

Lesher names names – among them, the revered leaders of the Orthodox community – who, he claims, almost without exception help foster a cover-up of sexual abuse committed by ostensibly Orthodox Jews.

“’Cover-up’ is the only appropriate name for the deliberate evasion of a highly topical reality,” he writes. “I must add, sadly, that few in Orthodoxy have broken this code of silence.”

The Jewish media are culpable, Lesher writes. He is critical of Jewish newspapers that steer clear of these stories or publish them sparingly.  The book has mostly praise for this newspaper, which broke the story of the Orthodox Union’s Rabbi Baruch Lanner 15 years ago, but Lesher also takes issue with what he sees as undue caution in some instances. (Full disclosure: I, an Orthodox Jew, formerly lived in Passaic, N.J., Lesher’s home community. I have known him for several years and have written about sexual abuse many times in these pages.)

Lesher writes about a few maverick Orthodox Jewish leaders who have challenged “the toleration of abusive sexuality,” but he finds far more villains than heroes.

Not surprisingly, Lesher has come under frequent criticism in parts of the Orthodox community for bringing the subject of sexual abuse, and its cover-up, to light. “Writing this book is, among other things, an act of faith on my part,” he writes. “Call it the concrete expression of a belief – that I will yet have some sort of answer from those who, like me, see religion as a way to strengthen the innocent, and perhaps also as an aid to giving some of the world’s ugliest crimes against the most defenseless victims their true names.”

steve@jewishweek.org

http://www.thejewishweek.com/arts/books/sexual-abuse-shonda-and-concealment-orthodox-jewish-communities-michael-lesher-mcfarland

“Obama is speaking in Israel, right before elections, without even telling the head of state?” a source close to Netanyahu asked. “What kind of shmuck does that ?”

Obama Set to Address Knesset on Comptroller Report Criticizing Netanyahus’ Spending

Following Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s speech to Congress blasting the White House for concessions to Iran in nuclear negotiations, President Barack Obama announced Wednesday he would address the Israeli Knesset on the recent comptroller’s report on the Netanyahus’ wasteful use of public funds on personal expenses.

Insisting the move was neither personal nor political, Obama said he felt it was his duty as the American leader to offer a critique of what he called a “very bad comptroller’s report.”

“Honorable MKs, I not only respect but deeply love Prime Minister Netanyahu and am grateful for his support and friendship over the past six years,” Obama is set to say in his speech, according to an advance copy obtained by The Israeli Daily. “But Bibi, we’ve been sending you $3 billion a year in aid, and you still need to go around stealing empty bottles for the rebate? And how do you spend $250,000 on cleaning? How much does a Swiffer cost?”

Netanyahu responded that Obama was not offering any viable alternatives to his profligate spending, “Am I supposed to spend my days cleaning the residence myself while I’m supposed to be working, or switch to an generic brand of pistachio ice cream? Neither of these alternatives seems reasonable. And let’s not forget, the only real issue here is Iran.”

Officials in Netanyahu’s administration were also dismayed to learn of the speech through media reports, as Obama coordinated the speech with the office of Israeli President Reuven Rivlin without notifying the Prime Minister’s Office. “Obama is speaking in Israel, right before elections, without even telling the head of state?” a source close to Netanyahu asked. “What kind of shmuck does that ?”

http://www.theisraelidaily.com/obama-set-to-address-knesset-on-comptroller-report-criticizing-netanyahus-spending/

Netanyahu, Not Obama, Speaks for Us

While under fierce attack from President Obama, the Israeli prime minister defends Western values and speaks the truth about Iran. The leader of the free world will be addressing Congress on Tuesday. The American president is doing everything possible to undermine him. Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu leads a nation surrounded by enemies, a nation so small that it narrows at one point to just 9.3 miles.

 Yet, in a world where the Oval Office is manned by someone openly apologetic for most American exercises of power; and where Western Europe’s economy is enervated, its people largely faithless, and its leadership feckless; and where Freedom House has found “an overall drop in [global] freedom for the ninth consecutive year,” the safeguarding of our civilization might rely more on leaders who possess uncommon moral courage than on those who possess the most nukes or biggest armies. 

Right now, nobody on the world stage speaks for civilization the way Netanyahu does. While Barack Obama babbles about the supposedly “legitimate grievances” of those who turn to jihad, Netanyahu talks like this (from his speech to the United Nations on September 27, 2012): The clash between modernity and medievalism need not be a clash between progress and tradition. The traditions of the Jewish people go back thousands of years. They are the source of our collective values and the foundation of our national strength. At the same time, the Jewish people have always looked towards the future. Throughout history, we have been at the forefront of efforts to expand liberty, promote equality, and advance human rights. We champion these principles not despite of our traditions but because of them. 

We heed the words of the Jewish prophets Isaiah, Amos, and Jeremiah to treat all with dignity and compassion, to pursue justice and cherish life and to pray and strive for peace. These are the timeless values of my people and these are the Jewish people’s greatest gift to mankind. Let us commit ourselves today to defend these values so that we can defend our freedom and protect our common civilization. When Hamas fired thousands of rockets into Israel last year, Netanyahu, in his necessary military response, did something almost unprecedented in the history of warfare. As he accurately described in his U.N. speech last year, on September 29: Israel was doing everything to minimize Palestinian civilian casualties. Hamas was doing everything to maximize Israeli civilian casualties and Palestinian civilian casualties. Israel dropped flyers, made phone calls, sent text messages, broadcast warnings in Arabic on Palestinian television, always to enable Palestinian civilians to evacuate targeted areas.

 No other country and no other army in history have gone to greater lengths to avoid casualties among the civilian population of their enemies As Barack Obama complains (with scant grasp of the historical context) about how Christians were such gosh-darn meanies a thousand years ago in the Crusades, Netanyahu protects the ability of Muslims today to have free access to the Old City of Jerusalem, even as Jews and Christians are prohibited from visiting the Temple Mount. At the beginning of his first term, in his first trip overseas as president, Obama delivered a speech to Turkey’s parliament, under the thumb of the repressive Tayyip Erdogan. “The United States is still working through some of our own darker periods in our history,” he confessed, sounding like America’s therapist-in-chief. “Our country still struggles with the legacies of slavery and segregation, the past treatment of Native Americans.” Netanyahu, in contrast, in a 2011 Meet the Press interview, offered unabashed words of praise for the United States: “Israel is the one country in which everyone is pro-American, opposition and coalition alike. And I represent the entire people of Israel who say, ‘Thank you, America.’ And we’re friends of America, and we’re the only reliable allies of America in the Middle East.” (Netanyahu was accurate in his description of how much Israelis appreciate Americans, as I saw last summer during a visit to the country.) 

In thanking America, Netanyahu was not posturing for political advantage. Netanyahu — who spent far more of his formative years on the American mainland than Obama did, and who took enemy fire at the age when Obama was openly pushing Marxist theory, and who learned and practiced free enterprise at the same age when Obama was practicing and teaching Alinskyism — has spoken eloquently for decades in praise of the Western heritage of freedom and human rights. He also speaks and acts, quite obviously, to preserve security — for Israel, of course, but more broadly for the civilized world. On Tuesday, as he has done for more than 30 years, Netanyahu will talk about the threat to humanity posed by Iran. It’s mind-boggling to imagine that any national leader in the free world would fail to understand the danger. The ayatollahs have never backed down from their stated aim of destroying Christendom. 

They have never wavered from their depiction of the United States as the “Great Satan.” Just last week, Iran bragged about its recent test-firing of “new strategic weapons” that it says will “play a key role” in any future battle against the “Great Satan U.S.” Iran also continues developing, while trying to keep them secret, new missiles and launch sites with devastatingly long-range capability. It continues to enrich uranium, including an allegedly secret program, to a level that’s a short jump-step from bomb strength. It has a lengthy record of lying and cheating about its military activities, its compliance with U.N. mandates (not that the U.N. is worth much anyway), and its protections of even the limited human rights it actually recognizes as such.

 About the only thing Iran never lies about is its absolute, unyielding determination to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. It was only a few months ago, for example, that the “revolutionary” regime’s “Supreme Leader,” the Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, released a nine-point plan for how to “annihilate” the Jewish state. Yet Obama not only begrudges the Israeli prime minister the opportunity to make his case against this existential threat to his nation, but he conducts a diplomatic and political assault against Netanyahu of a ferocity rarely seen in the annals of American foreign policy. Obama’s actions aren’t just wrongheaded; they are malignant. They pervert American tradition and American interests, and they attempt to deprive the entire free world of its single most clarion voice for enlightenment values. Benjamin Netanyahu of course speaks first for Israel, but he speaks also for you and for me, for decency and humaneness, and for vigilance and strength against truly evil adversaries. Congress, by inviting him, is wise. Obama, by opposing him, is horribly wrong. And the civilized world, if it ignores him, will be well-nigh suicidal.

 — Quin Hillyer is a contributing editor for National Review Online. Follow him on Twitter: @QuinHillyer.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/414636/netanyahu-not-obama-speaks-us-quin-hillyer