74 Democrats join radical group to force Israel into dangerous concessions…

Via Breitbart News:

In the midst of ongoing rocket terror attacks against Israel from Gaza and even Egypt, as civil war rages in Syria, and as the threat from Iran approaches the point of no return, 74 Democrats in the House of Representatives have joined the radical, George Soros-funded J Street pressure group in supporting the Obama administration’s attempt to force Israel into making risky concessions to the Palestinians.

J Street calls itself pro-Israel, but has frequently taken positions–from supporting the libelous Goldstone Report and opposing Iran sanctions–that are quite clearly anti-Israel. It has lied about its funding from Soros, given a platform to radicals pushing for boycotts of Israel, cheered confrontation between the U.S. and Israeli governments, and singled out Jewish charities for criticism (while leaving Islamic charities alone).

Over time, and given the cold shoulder from the Israeli government, J Street has attempted to moderate its positions somewhat. That led Israel to send an envoy to J Street’s annual conference this year, after refusing to do so in years past. Much to the surprise and chagrin of J Street’s leaders and members, Deputy Ambassador Barukh Bina delivered a rebuke to the organization:

In this spirit of democracy and openness, I have to broach an issue with you, for J Street is not just an NGO that publishes a magazine and states an opinion in the free market if ideas. It is an organization that lobbies congress. You practice not only free speech but a legislative agenda. You don’t only publish op-eds, you bring members of Congress to the region. I respectfully submit that this relatively new role lays responsibilities before you which I am not certain have always been adequately considered. Thus, when you bring lawmakers to Israel, please make sure that they come out with a full picture.You may be critical of settlements, but if you choose to show the most extreme, it behooves you to present the greater mass of moderates as well. If you show them negative aspects of checkpoints, please show as well the catastrophe and grief of terror victims. If you show them Israel’s failings, show them also our triumphs such as the aliyah of the Jewish community of Ethiopia.  I urge you to strive for balance, so that these lawmakers may become friends of Israel who might be critical, and not critics of Israel who are not friends.

I welcome the evolution in J-Street’s position, which brought about the recognition of the ultimate need to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear capabilities. I hope that this will be followed by adopting President Obama’s policy that all the options, including a military effort, are on the table.

Likewise, I welcome your position against one-sided resolutions on settlements, and I hope that you will never go back to opposing a veto cast by the Obama administration, like you did in January of 2011.

I would like to express our appreciation of J Street’s active repudiation of BDS, and of your activity on campus to help stem this insidious ideology. Our shared view is that BDS is not a form of criticism, but a blatant, though veiled attack. I hope that the leaders of the BDS movement will not be welcomed at J Street, and that all calls for boycott will continue to be refuted. They use such appearances as a means of gaining legitimacy, and whatever actually happens in your fora, they report to their supports that they were greeted at J Street with enthusiasm and consent. Please don’t let yourselves be used. They aren’t honest players.

J Street is a tax-exempt organization, but is quite obviously a Democrat front. In the 2008 election, the group helped engineer the un-inviting of Sarah Palin from an important rally against Iran’s nuclear program in New York. In 2012, the organization and its supporters are attempting to cover for President Barack Obama’s dismal record on Israel by attacking positions adopted by the Republican candidates.

The group’s latest effort is the so-called “Cohen-Yarmuth-Connolly Letter,” which calls on the Obama administration to keep pushing Israel towards accepting a two-state solution–as if Israel’s acceptance of, and enthusiasm for, that solution were ever in doubt. This week, a Palestinian official called for the rival Hamas and Fatah factions to unite to destroy Israel; Hillary Clinton’s response has been to give them more money.

J Street’s Cohen-Yarmuth Connolly letter also sets up a straw man, attacking “those calling for a ‘one-state solution’ under which Jews would soon become a minority in their own historic homeland.” Not only is that prediction based on faulty demographic data, but it also fails to identify a single one of “those” who are campaigning for a “one-state solution” (hint: they’re not pro-Israel).

New IRS Rules Prompting More to Give Up American Citizenship

Reuters:

“‘Truth, justice, and the American way’ – it’s not enough anymore,” the comic book superhero said, after both the Iranian and American governments criticized him for joining a peaceful anti-government protest in Tehran.

Last year, almost 1,800 people followed Superman’s lead, renouncing their U.S. citizenship or handing in their Green Cards. That’s a record number since the Internal Revenue Service began publishing a list of those who renounced in 1998. It’s also almost eight times more than the number of citizens who renounced in 2008, and more than the total for 2007, 2008 and 2009 combined.

But not everyone’s motivations are as lofty as Superman’s. Many say they parted ways with America for tax reasons.

The United States is one of the only countries to tax its citizens on income earned while they’re living abroad. And just as Americans stateside must file tax returns each April – this year, the deadline is Tuesday – an estimated 6.3 million U.S. citizens living abroad brace for what they describe as an even tougher process of reporting their income and foreign accounts to the IRS. For them, the deadline is June.

The National Taxpayer Advocate’s Office, part of the IRS, released a report in December that details the difficulties of filing taxes from overseas. It cites heavy paperwork, a lack of online filing options and a dearth of local and foreign-language resources.

For those wishing to legally escape the filing requirements, the only way is to formally renounce their U.S. citizenship. Last year, IRS records show that at least 1,788 people did, and that’s likely an underestimate. The IRS publishes in the Federal Register the names of those who give up their citizenship, and some who renounced say they haven’t seen their name on the list yet.

The State Department said records it keeps differ from those published by the IRS. They indicate that renunciations have remained steady, at about 1,100 each year, said an official.

The decision by the IRS to publish the names is referred to by lawyers as “name and shame.” That’s because those who renounce are seen as willing to give up their citizenship primarily for financial reasons.

There’s also an “exit tax” for the very rich who choose to leave. During the last 25 years, a number of millionaires and billionaires have renounced their citizenship. Among them: Ted Arison, the late founder of Carnival Cruises, and Michael Dingman, a former Ford Motor Co. director.

But those of more modest means renounce, too. They say leaving America is about more than money; it’s about privacy and red tape.

Read more HERE.

UPDATE – AllGov:

According to National Taxpayer Advocate Nina E. Olson, approximately 4,000 people gave up their citizenship from fiscal year 2005 to FY 2010. Renunciations increased sharply within the past three years, from 146 in FY 2008 to 1,534 in FY 2010. And during the first two quarters of FY 2011 alone, 1,024 Americans ditched their citizenship.

The advocate’s report cites two reasons for the renunciations. First, many taxpayers abroad say they are confused “by the complex legal and reporting requirements they face and are overwhelmed by the prospect of having to comply with them.”

Second, others have accused the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) of “bait and switch” tactics, telling Americans they can resolve their unpaid taxes under an “older voluntary disclosure programs with the promise of reduced penalties, only to find themselves subjected to steeper penalties.”
According to tax attorney Andrew Mitchel, another factor has been a change of law in 2008 that means “non-U.S. citizen, nonresidents can now annually visit the U.S. for 120 or more days without becoming taxed as U.S. residents (under the pre-2008 rules, visits to the U.S. for more than 30 days during any of the 10 years following expatriation caused the individual to be treated as a U.S. resident for that year).”

Afghan schoolgirls poisoned in anti-education attack

And on the “multi-culturalist” angle…..

Reuters:

(Reuters) – About 150 Afghan schoolgirls were poisoned on Tuesday after drinking contaminated water at a high school in the country’s north, officials said, blaming it on conservative radicals opposed to female education.

Since the 2001 toppling of the Taliban, which banned education for women and girls, females have returned to schools, especially in Kabul.

But periodic attacks still occur against girls, teachers and their school buildings, usually in the more conservative south and east of the country, from where the Taliban insurgency draws most support.

“We are 100 percent sure that the water they drunk inside their classes was poisoned. This is either the work of those who are against girls’ education or irresponsible armed individuals,” said Jan Mohammad Nabizada, a spokesman for education department in northern Takhar province.

Some of the 150 girls, who suffered from headaches and vomiting, were in critical condition, while others were able to go home after treatment in hospital, the officials said.

They said they knew the water had been poisoned because a larger tank used to fill the affected water jugs was not contaminated.

“This is not a natural illness. It’s an intentional act to poison schoolgirls,” said Haffizullah Safi, head of Takhar’s public health department.

None of the officials blamed any particular group for the attack, fearing retribution from anyone named.

Human Events: Top 10 miscarriages of the Justice Department

This is ten, but only a residue…..

Human Events:

Ask yourself this: In which administration have there been more egregious miscarriages of justice than the following list?

1. Challenges voter ID laws

The Justice Department has challenged state voter ID laws, first in South Carolina and more recently in Texas, the first such actions in 20 years. Apparently requiring a U.S. citizen to bring a driver’s license to the voting booth is an onerous infringement on their constitutional rights. Why would the chief law-enforcement office in the nation try to make it easier to engage in voter fraud? Could it be because Barack Hussein Obama is on the ballot this November?

2. Challenges immigration laws

The Justice Department is also challenging immigration laws enacted by states—most notably Arizona’s legislation (hasn’t Mr. Holder heard of the Constitution’s 10th Amendment?) In its brief challenging Arizona’s S.B. 1070, the Justice Department said the law interferes with the federal government’s authority to enforce immigration policy. We didn’t know that the federal government was doing much of anything to control illegal immigration.

3. Fast and Furious outrage

The Justice Department turned a blind-eye to the Fast and Furious gun-running operations, with the weaponry ending up in the hands of deadly Mexican drug gangs, and then obfuscated when Congress reviewed the operation. Allowing guns to cross the border resulted in the murder of Border Patrol agent Brian Terry and some 300 deaths in Mexico. New revelations are still coming, such as the news that one of the chief gun traffickers was questioned and released by Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agents.

4. New Black Panther Party dismissal

The Justice Department decided to dismiss charges of violating the Voting Rights Act against three members of the New Black Panther Party, who acted menacingly outside a polling station in Philadelphia in 2008, hurling threats, racial slurs, and brandishing a night stick. The action by the Justice Department prompted a probe by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which heard testimony by J. Christian Adams, who resigned from the department over the issue. Adams said he was instructed by his superiors to ignore cases involving black defendants and white victims.

5. Defense of marriage recusal

The Justice Department served notice last year that it would no long defend the Defense of Marriage Act, which states that the federal government defines marriage to be between one man and one woman. The action, in a letter from the attorney general to congressional leaders, said President Obama had decided that the act, signed into law in 1996 by President Clinton, was unconstitutional. Odd, we can’t seem to find the spot in the Constitution that allows the President to declare a law unconstitutional.

6. Sen. Ted Stevens case bungled

In its pursuit of Sen. Ted Stevens (R-Alaska) on charges he failed to report gifts on his financial disclosure forms, the Justice Department concealed evidence from the defense. A report by a special counsel said there was “systematic concealment of significant exculpatory evidence” by the Justice Department, “which would have independently corroborated Senator Stevens’ defense.” Stevens was found guilty and died in a plane crash before he could be exonerated. Imagine the howls from the mainstream media, if the senator in question had been Ted Kennedy, instead of Ted Stevens.

7. Civilian trials for terror detainees

The Justice Department sought to bring 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheikh Mohammed to trial in a civilian New York City courtroom, blocks from the World Trade Center site. The action would have afforded Mohammed all the constitutional guarantees of a fair trial, raising the possibility that Mohammed could go free on a technicality despite confessing to involvement in the 1993 and 2001World Trade Center attacks, the Bali, Indonesia, bombings, the murder of journalist Daniel Pearl, and other failed terror plots. The outcry against civilian trials forced Holder to back down, and Mohammed and four co-defendants will now face a military tribunal at Guantanamo Bay.

8. CIA probed

Attorney General Holder re-opened a probe of CIA officials involved in the use of enhanced interrogation techniques on terror detainees. Holder’s action came despite earlier rulings that the interrogations were legally authorized, despite seven former CIA directors asking the probe be shut down, and despite the fact that the interrogations provided valuable intelligence that led to Osama bin Laden’s Pakistani hideaway. Holder later admitted he hadn’t read Justice Department memos that concluded no laws were broken.

9. NYPD probed

When the New York Police Department conducted surveillance operations in the Muslim community—including monitoring members of the Muslim Student Association, which has connections to the Muslim Brotherhood—the Justice Department decided to review the police department. While the NYPD is trying to thwart another 9/11, the Justice Department is siding with Muslim apologists. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg had the right response to the Justice Department when he said, “To let our guard down would just be an outrage.”

10. Pool fiasco

Justice Department guidelines for compliance with the Americans for Disabilities Act included a requirement for public swimming pools to install a lift that could move the disabled from a wheelchair to the water. As 300,000 public pools faced a March 15 deadline to install the lifts—at a cost of up to $20,000 each—DOJ backed down and issued a 60-day stay of execution in March before allowing lawsuits over the matter. Considering there is not an available number of lifts or installers of the devices for every pool in America, “poolmagedon” will provide the nation’s trial lawyers—major supporters of the Democrats—with plenty of new business opportunities.

200 Jewish Students Receive Eviction Notices from Jihadist Student Activists at Florida University

Creating a hostile and intimidating environment on campus is not protected speech. It is intended to intimidate Jewish students, interfere with their education with such a threatening environment and is designed to infringe on their liberty interest. Florida should lower the boom on this behavior, but considering how antisemitsm is pushed by academia in general I am not hopeful.

The Blaze:

More than 200 Jewish students at Florida Atlantic University in Boca Raton, FL found “eviction” notices posted on their dormitory doors Friday, unaware that it was part of a publicity stunt by Students for Justice in Palestine.

The organization’s chapter president, Noor Fawzy, explained, “We want to raise awareness about the plight of the Palestinians…The intent is to expose Israel‘s illegal policies and give students a feel of what it’s like to live under occupation.  “The ”notice” explained that more than 25,000 homes have been demolished since the “occupation of Palestine” began in 1967.

While SJP appears to have gotten university approval for the stunt (some members may have even been escorted by an employee official as they were posting the signs), the school has since removed the postings after many expressed their disapproval.

Charles Brown, the school’s senior VP for student affairs, released a statement: “The recent mock eviction postings did not comply with the policies of University Housing and Residential Life or the Office of Student Involvement and Leadership concerning the distribution of printed material, and therefore the postings were removed.”

Jackie Klein, a student at the school, explained, “Free speech is good for everyone, but this is a bit intimidating…They should be able to promote their views, but in a respectful way.”

Rayna Exelbierd, who received one of the notices, said, “We’re taking it very seriously. We’re considering it a hate crime. The flier promotes hate; it doesn’t promote peace. People were scared by it. People felt threatened by it.”

More than 50 students gathered at Hillel Wednesday to discuss the flyers, but have chosen not to contact “Students for Justice in Palestine” because its members have chanted anti-Israel slogans at their events in the past.  Scott Brockman, Hillel’s executive director, commented: “While protecting and ensuring free speech on campus, the tactic used by Students for Justice in Palestine is unacceptable.”