Tag Archives: Israel

BrotherWatch Endorses Ted Cruz

BrotherWatch is delighted to endorse Sen. Ted Cruz for President of the United States!

BW Endorses Ted Cruz

Sen. Cruz has proven his love for God and country.

His lifelong love of, and fidelity to, the Constitution puts most of Congress to shame. The humble senator from Texas has courageously fought the good fight against the establishment from within the halls of Congress.

Sen. Cruz is a warrior for the Constitution and Liberty, the perfect antidote to a lawless regime which wields a pen and a phone to circumvent both the Constitution and the will of the People.

Sen. Cruz, a faithful Christian, is also a friend and vocal supporter of Israel.

Sen. Cruz is Reaganesque in principles and perspective, prompting Rush Limbaugh to call him “the closest in our lifetimes we have ever been to Ronald Reagan!”

If we want a bright Morning in America again, elect Ted Cruz!

Obama Snubs Paris, Disses War on Terror

President Obama snubbed Paris – and the world – by refusing to participate in a truly historic gathering of world leaders who met in Paris to show solidarity against Islamic terrorism.



The world united against terrorism!

And the President watches a football game while history is in the making!

A headline highlighting this truly global event proclaimed, “Paris Is the Capital of the World Today.” But Obama missed the memo.

Obama refuses to even admit that we are at war with terrorists of any kind, let alone to identify their source and motivation. Indeed, Obama defends the perpetrators of evil around the world. Failing to identify and name the enemy, Obama fails to offer a strategy. Indeed, we see this administration giving lip service to the defense of the nation while failing to act.

Obama would rather appease and negotiate with terrorists than fight them. Obama and his Kumbaya comrades think we can live in peace with people who want to destroy us. He, and they, prefer to empathize with and accommodate the enemy.

At the same time, Obama is vociferously opposed to Israel. What he should be doing, instead, is learning from the Israelis how to fight terrorists! Instead, Obama makes war on global warming.

Millions of people participated in this astonishing global rally, representing a sea change in world opinion, but Obama fears giving his imprimatur to the movement. He does not want to validate what he opposes.

Obama certainly does not oppose Islamic terrorism. At another time, in a different war, Obama would be called a fifth columnist.

Need a Strategy? Learn from the Experts!

Last week, President Obama placed a Wanted Ad through the international media.

WANTED: A Strategy!


This essay addresses proven models for success.

Islamic jihadists have targeted the United States for destruction since the 1970s. Al-Qaeda shocked America on 9/11 – a wakeup call to the world. George W. Bush listened and responded.

Barack Hussein Obama denied the existential terrorist threat, relinquished victories gained in the “war on terror” (the war that dare not even be named) and nurtured the growth of Al-Qaeda’s offspring: ISIS.

ISIS is a product of Obama’s policies.

ISIS is a terrorist nation state with imperialist designs, one which seeks a worldwide caliphate and the destruction of all in its path. Including (especially) the United States.

But just yesterday, the State Department refused to admit the self-evident truth that we are at war.

Obama lives in a fantasy world where he believes that America is stronger than ever. He holds America in such low esteem and so highly regards the rest of the world that he swapped five terrorist leaders for one deserter.

Clearly, this man’s view of the world and of America’s place in that world differs markedly from most Americans. But Obama didn’t ask for a new worldview, he asked for a strategy.

WANTED: A Strategy!

Let’s give Obama a strategy.

Overwhelming Force

Gen. Colin Powell was a hero in the first Gulf War which was decisively won by using overwhelming force to win. (Powell’s failure to actually remove Hussein when he had the chance paved the way for future hostilities.)

The typical mantra from the far left demands “proportional response.” If you’re going to fight, fight to win. Do you recall that memorable Sean Connery line in the Untouchables? About bringing a knife to a gunfight?

Perhaps you were looking for something more nuanced?

Look to Cameron

British Prime Minister David Cameron has begun taking decisive action against the existential threat posed by ISIS.

First, Cameron recognized the threat facing his people (and civilization itself), clearing identifying it as “Islamist extremism.”

Second, Cameron has warned the public, raising the threat level to “severe.”

Third, Cameron announced that military action is an option (in contrast to the White House, which likes to announce what is not on the table), preparing his citizens for a potentially long conflict (as Churchill did prior to and during World War II).

Fourth, Cameron increased border security by tightening control over passports to ensure ISIS fighters cannot return to the U.K.

Fifth, Cameron tightened and improved existing anti-terrorism measures.

Look to Bibi

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been combating terrorists longer than Millennials have been alive. Indeed, Israel has been fighting for its survival from the day of its birth.

Israelis live under the threat of terrorist attacks on a daily basis. They know they are in a war and that their enemies pose an existential threat.

As part of his comprehensive strategy, Netanyahu has secured the border. By doing so, the enemy is deprived of one means of invading Israel and logistical lines of support are thwarted.

Although ever willing to live in peace with its neighbors, Israel forcefully defends itself against aggression, militarily when warranted. Netanyahu knows that appeasement never works.

Netanyahu – using every form of media available to himclearly articulates his strategy, explaining the threats his nation faces and why he is responding as he does. Netanyahu effectively expresses his views and counters the propaganda of his enemies.

It would behoove President Obama to emulate the attitudes and actions of Cameron and Netanyahu, but before he can do that he must take the terrorist threat seriously. That will require a paradigm shift in his thinking, something which, I suspect, he does not have the courage to contemplate.

Update: In a joint press conference (1/16/15), David Cameron and Barack Obama displayed a dramatic divergence of views regarding the recent Islamic terrorist attack in Paris and the threat posed by Islamic jihad worldwide.

As reported by the Daily Mail, “Obama pointedly refused to call ISIS terrorists Muslims” while “Cameron warned of a global ‘Islamist extremist terrorist threat,’ condemning the perversion of Islam in the strongest possible terms three times and using the word ‘poisonous’ to describe the radicalized ideology five times.”

“Obama would not refer to the religion of ISIS militants during the White House news conference but at one point called them ‘fanatics.’”

Cameron spoke with passionate zeal, saying “The world is sickened by this terrorism,” and denouncing “this poisonous, radical death cult of a narrative.”

Cameron added, “We face a poisonous and fanatical ideology that wants to pervert one of the world’s major religions, Islam, and create conflict, terror and death.” He expressly warned of the global existential threat posed by Islamic jihad: “We do face a very serious Islamist extremist terrorist threat in Europe, in America, across the world. And we have to be incredibly vigilant in terms of that threat.”

In contrast, Obama spoke with measured caution, almost disinterested in the subject at hand, refusing to admit the religious nature of these terrorist attacks.

Papal Fallibility on “Palestine”

Catholicism’s doctrine of papal infallibility certainly does not extend to politics, with Pope Francis’ recent remarks in Israel proof positive.

As the New York Times reported, “Pope Francis inserted himself directly into the collapsed Middle East peace process…” In doing so, the Pope displayed a glaring misunderstanding of the political and religious history of the region and the dynamics of the conflict in Israel.

Joseph Farah wrote that Pope Francis is “on the wrong side of history and truth, at least when it comes to the well-being of Israel.” Farah noted, “There’s nothing Christian about appeasing evil. And that’s what support of the Palestinian state pledged to ethnic cleansing, violence and bigotry is and always will be.”

In a follow-up column, Farah explained why there is no Palestinian state and how the Palestinians intend to ethnically cleanse any territory they possess. The Pope, however, engaged in moral equivalency, even suggesting that the Israelis are to blame for the absence of peace in the region.

In “The ‘People’s Pope’ tries to appease the unappeasable,” Diane Sori observed:

“Repeatedly saying he backed the Palestinians statehood goal, Pope Frances, who could have prayed anywhere during his visit to the West Bank, calculatingly chose to pray at Israel’s rightfully placed and so needed separation wall … the one that keeps the barbarians from blowing up innocent people in Israel … chose to pray at a section where ‘Free Palestine’ was scribbled on the wall … and also chose to call the recent halt in the peace talks ‘unacceptable.’”

As Sori well knows, the Palestinians seek not peace with Israel but the death of Israel. Sori continued:

“Pope Frances, on the final stop of this trip, arrived in Israel where he pulled out the best of the accepted politically correct words and called for a ‘just and lasting solution’ so that Israelis and Palestinians may live in peace. Saying Israel deserves peace and security ‘within internationally recognized borders,’ while the Palestinians have a ‘right to live with dignity and with freedom of movement’ in their own homeland.”

The erroneous notion that Israel is the “homeland” of Palestinians and not Israelis stems from the Pope’s flawed grasp of Mideast history and geography (as Farah explained in his second column). From that false premise, the Pope has constructed a final solution to violence in Israel.

But the “just and lasting solution” Pope Francis seeks cannot emerge under the constraints he constructs. Those alleged “internationally recognized borders” would require Israel to – again – give up land for peace. The “freedom of movement” he proposes for Palestinians would give Palestinian terrorists free reign to terrorize and destroy Israelis – which is exactly what they have dedicated themselves to doing.


To achieve peace, the Palestinians must first utterly and irrevocably renounce violence and accept the right of Israel to exist. Anything less is an existential threat to every Jew living in Israel.