Canadians Need to Complain Louder and More Often

If there's one thing that I can't stand about Canada, it's the "shut up and take it" mentality that many of us seem to have.  What do I mean by this?  I mean that whenever a government or private interest in this country tries to screw us, we usually take it lying down.  This is especially true when it comes to how often we get dinged in the wallet because a government or private company sees fit to make another cash grab.  But I'm not too surprised that we behave like this.  After all, Canada was created on the basis of not rising up in revolt like our American neighbours, who did so in part because they refused to pay taxes without representation in the British government.  "No taxation without representation!" was one of the slogans that America's founding fathers used to justify their revolt against the British.  Here in Canada, however, we're used to governments and private interests reaching for our wallets, no matter how unjust it may be.

Is it any wonder, for example, that Canadians pay some of the highest rates in the world for wireless services?  How about those ridiculous fees that the banks charge for you to get access to your own money?  Perhaps I should also mention the ludicrous charges that we have to pay whenever we need to fly somewhere - you know, the kind of fees that send thousands of would-be travellers in Toronto running to the airport in Buffalo so that they can avoid being gouged at Pearson Airport?  I could go on about how many dumb charges Canadians swallow every day, but I don't think I have to because those of you who are reading this and live in Canada know exactly what I'm talking about.  In fact, CBC's Marketplace has recently done a program on what Canadians believe to be Canada's Dumbest Charges.

Unfortunately, it is very likely that Canadians will continue to get dinged with dumb charges because most of us just grin and bear it.  But it doesn't have to be this way if we would simply start standing up for ourselves.

The Squeaky Wheel Gets the Grease

The truth is that some Canadians do complain louder and more often than others.  And it is these Canadians who ultimately pay less.  It often depends on the province you happen to live in.  In British Columbia, for example, when the government there tried to harmonize the GST and PST taxes to create a Harmonized Sales Tax (HST), residents of the province rose up in revolt because they didn't want extra taxes put on nearly everything.  Eventually, a referendum was held.  The people of the province resoundingly rejected the new tax and forced the government not to implement it.  Contrast this with what I like to call Status Quo Ontario, the province in which I reside.  Ontario's provincial government introduced the same HST tax that its counterpart in British Columbia tried to implement.  But there were no mass demonstrations, nor was there any referendum on the matter.  Instead, people in Ontario just shrugged, "oh well" and accepted the new tax.  As a result, nearly everything in this province is more expensive, including necessities like electricity and gas.  Yes, anyone who lives in Ontario knows how expensive powering their homes has become after the HST was smacked onto their hydro bills.  
 
Indeed, Ontario is the worst example of Canadian complacency when it comes to another important expense: university and college tuition.  Paying for post-secondary education has gotten a lot more expensive in most of Canada over the years, but especially in Ontario, where students pay the highest tuition fees in the country.  So what do students in Ontario do about it?  Well, almost nothing.  Maybe a demonstration at the provincial legislature once or twice a year that's so quite and orderly that you can still hear the birds chirping over the chants of heavily indebted students.  But don't expect the same lackluster response to tuition increases in Quebec.  Back in 2012, when Quebec's provincial government proposed allowing tuition fees in the province to rise to levels at which they would still be the lowest in Canada, Quebec's students poured onto the streets in loud and sometimes violent protests.  The efforts of these students not only delayed the planned tuition increase, but were also instrumental in the fall of then Premier Jean Charest's government.  If only Ontario's students would put in half the effort of their Quebec counterparts, then perhaps they wouldn't be paying the highest tuition fees in the country.

If anything, the British Columbians' revolt against the HST and the Quebec students' uprising against tuition fee increases should teach Canadians that they don't have to be sheep; they can be wolves.  So my message to all of my fellow Canadians, especially those living in Status Quo Ontario, where "shut up and take it" seems to be the provincial motto, is essentially this: Complain more often and louder than you ever have before, until you see the change you want to see. 

 

End the Arab Occupation

Ever since Israel became a state in 1948 and the Jews regained their independence after two thousand years, the Arabs and their allies have been crying about the so-called occupation of what they think is their land.  How hypocritical can people be!?  If there's any occupation that needs to end, it's the Arab occupation of all lands outside of the Arabian Peninsula, which as its name implies, is the original homeland of the Arab people.  Every piece of land outside of the Arabian Peninsula that is now controlled by Arabs is controlled by them, not as a result of gradual migration, but as a result of conquest - conquest that was often brutal and led to the destruction of many different cultural and religious communities throughout the Middle East and North Africa.  In fact, I shouldn't even be talking about this conquest in the past tense, because as many of my readers will know, non-Arab and non-Muslim cultures in what is now called the "Arab World" are still under siege and some are facing extinction.  The current campaign by the Islamic State to wipe out all non-Muslim populations in its midst is a prime example of this, but of course, there are other lesser-known examples.  For instance, the Coptic Christians of Egypt - the direct descendants of the pre-Arab Egyptian population - are now a minority in their own country; consistently and relentlessly persecuted by the Muslim Arab majority.  Similar persecutions are also taking place in other Arab majority states, such as Lebanon, Iraq and in territories now under the control of the Muslim-dominated Palestinian Authority and the terrorist group, Hamas.  Some of these non-Muslim populations are actually considered Arabs because their native tongue is Arabic.  But this assumption could not be further from the truth.  Just as the Coptic Christians of Egypt are direct descendants of the original Egyptian population before the Muslim Arab conquests, so to are the Christian populations of other Middle Eastern and North African states.  The Lebanese Christians are the descendants of the ancient Phoenicians, the Iraqi Christians are descendants of the ancient Assyrians and Babylonians, and so forth.  In fact, some of these populations, though speaking Arabic as their native language, reject being called Arabs.  Even amongst the Christian population in Israel, there is a growing movement to throw off the shackles of Arab occupation.  See, for example: Israeli-Arab Christians take to the streets of Haifa for an unusual protest.  Indeed, with the emergence of extremist groups like the Islamic State, who want to reinforce the Muslim Arab occupation and destroy the cultures of the remaining original inhabitants of the Middle East and North Africa, more and more members of the communities that preceded the Arab conquests of centuries past are seeing the need to fight back.  To date, Israel is the brightest example of a pre-Arab population fighting against the Arab occupation and winning.  Unfortunately, however, much of the world would rather support the Arab occupation instead of helping the persecuted original populations of North Africa and the Middle East fight to free themselves from it.


Aiding and Abetting in Arab Occupation and Conquest

Recently, the British House of Commons took a symbolic vote to recognize a Palestinian state.  At the same time, the European Union is working to de-legitimize the Jewish re-population of Judea and Samaria.  By recognizing a Palestinian state and attempting to prevent Jews from re-settling in their ancestral lands, the Europeans are basically aiding and abetting in the continued Arab occupation of lands outside of the Arabian Peninsula.  They are saying yes to continued Arab occupation, because  a Palestinian state would no doubt be just another country where Muslim Arab dominance reigns supreme and non-Muslims are relentlessly persecuted.  Coincidentally, the refusal on the part of leaders in the West and elsewhere to recognize the Kurds' right to an independent nation-state also perpetuates the Arab occupation.  To make a long story short, the continued Arab occupation of land belonging to Jews, Kurds and various other minorities is legitimized, while attempts by Jews, Kurds and other groups to regain their lands and their independence from the Arab conquerors is scorned.  How does this make sense?  Well, it doesn't, and for those of you who would rather support the Arab occupation instead of the people who are fighting against it, you do so at your own peril, because if the Arab conquerors can get away with wiping Jews, Kurds, Assyrians, Egyptian Copts, or any other non-Arab, non-Muslim population off the map, what's to stop them from wiping you off the map, too? 

Why I Will Support John Tory for Mayor of Toronto

In two weeks, Toronto will vote for a new mayor and council.  It's been a tumultuous four years in Toronto's municipal politics, to say the least.  Four years ago, Rob Ford coasted to victory on a platform of respect for taxpayers' dollars, using the slogan, "stop the gravy train".  I was one of the many people who voted for Ford because I was tired of the reckless spending, the pandering to unions and special interest groups, and the general inability of city politicians to solve the city's problems.  I continued to support him well into his mandate because he seemed to be doing good things for the city.  He contracted out garbage west of Yonge St.; he persuaded the province to declare the TTC an essential service so that riders would never again have to go through another transit strike; and perhaps most importantly, he didn't cave in to the relentless opposition of left-wing councillors, public sector unions and the myriad of special interest groups - you know, the folks that have been leading Toronto to ruin.  But then of course came the videos - clips of our mayor smoking crack, being drunk, spewing racist and homophobic comments, and basically acting like a complete idiot - not something we want in a mayor.  Eventually, Fords antics were too much for me and I decided that I would no longer support him.  At the end of the day, Rob Ford had simply replaced the leftists' gravy train with a giant circus tent that enveloped the whole of Toronto, making it a laughingstock both here in Canada and around the world.  Fortunately, the upcoming election gives us the chance to change this.

Olivia Chow and Doug Ford: Polar Opposites Who Will Both Steer Toronto in the Wrong Direction

Early on in the campaign, it seemed that leftist candidate Olivia Chow would win by a landslide.  Thank goodness Torontonians have been thinking differently lately.  Voting in Chow as mayor would basically mean a return to the gravy train - the train that Toronto voters sought to derail by voting in Rob Ford.  Chow represents the culture of reckless spending and pandering to unions and other special interest groups that prevailed during the dark days of David Miller's mayoralty.  Electing her would mean a return to those dark days, because the only thing Chow is good at is spending taxpayers' dollars.  How would she spend them, you might ask?  She would spend them on her friends of course - the unions, the starving artists, the unemployable professional protestors that frequent City Hall, and so forth.

In contrast, Doug Ford, who has recently taken Rob's place in the campaign after Rob was diagnosed with cancer, represents a continuation of the circus that has become Toronto politics.  Yes, I understand that it wasn't him in those clips smoking crack or being drunk, but he has been the mayor's staunchest defender.  He is the mayor's brother, after all.  Still, if your own flesh and blood can't tell you that the way you're behaving is wrong, then who can?  Moreover, Doug shares the same problem as his brother in being a very divisive politician who can't work with anyone who thinks differently than him.

John Tory - For Those Who Don't Want to Choose Between the Circus Tent or the Gravy Train



Toronto does not need a return to the gravy train, nor does it need to continue hosting the Ford brothers' circus act.  What Toronto needs is a mayor that is going to unite the city; someone who doesn't just serve downtown or the suburbs; someone who is not a die-hard leftist or a hardcore conservative; and someone who can work with the city's other politicians, left, right and centre.  I believe that John Tory is that someone - or at least, he's the closest person there is that has any chance of winning this election.

During the campaign, Tory has been the only candidate to win the support of politicians on both the right and the left, whereas only left-wing politicians have endorsed Chow and no major politicians that I can think of have publicly endorsed Ford.  More importantly, polls show that John Tory has strong support from voters in all parts of Toronto, as opposed to Chow and Ford whose support comes mainly from downtown and the suburbs respectively.  As Tory's campaign has gained momentum, so has criticism of him and his platform.  His two main rivals have pointed out, for example, that Tory has no experience in municipal office.  But I honestly think that's a good thing because many of the folks who do have experience in municipal office, like Chow and Ford, are not part of the solution; they're part of the problem.

My point is that Toronto needs someone new at the helm.  Someone who will move Toronto forward rather than to the right or to the left (I believe Tory himself used similar words to describe his platform).  I just hope that Tory can keep the momentum going for the last two weeks of the campaign.  Unfortunately, he has a history of losing.  He could have been our mayor in 2003, but Toronto voters rejected him in favour of David Miller.  He could have been Ontario's premier in 2007, but lost that election as well.  Poor John Tory has never been given a chance to lead.  Too bad, because I think if he were given that chance, he would do a decent job.  Fortunately, two weeks from now, we can give him that chance.  Let's make up for the mistakes of 2003 and 2007 and give John Tory the opportunity to move Toronto forward.  

  

         

My Message to Scotland: Vote Yes to Independence. Let the Sun Set on the British Empire

In just a few hours, Scots will have the chance to do what their ancestors at the Battle of Bannockburn did seven hundred years ago: Win their nation's independence.  Fortunately this time, bloodshed is highly unlikely.  In a great exercise in democracy, Scots have been granted the right to choose their country's fate.  It's a right that most peoples seeking self-determination around the world can only dream of.  The fight for Scotland's future is very reminiscent of a struggle that I know all too well about as a Canadian: the question of Quebec's status.  Quebec has twice voted against independence.  The last referendum was in 1995, when I was still a teenager.  I can still remember my parents and I going to a massive rally in Toronto calling on Quebec to stay in Canada.  In my high school, we were even asked by our homeroom teacher to sign a petition calling on Quebec to vote against separation.  I signed that petition, but if I had the chance to do it all over again, I would not have signed it, nor would I have attended the rally in Toronto in 1995.  Quite the opposite.  I would have joined the campaign in favour of an independent Quebec, and I feel that should there be another referendum on the question of the province's status, I will definitely be on the side of the sovereigntists, which is why I am now on the side of those in Scotland who seek to regain their country's independence.

I have listened to the predictable arguments of those against Scottish independence.  They are very similar to the ones always used by those who are against independence for Quebec and they are almost all about the economy.  I'm not going to say that the "No" campaigners in Scotland are wrong about the economic consequences of Scottish independence any more than I would try to contradict the similar arguments of the federalist camp in Canada.  The truth is that there probably will be significant economic consequences for Scotland if they choose independence, just as their would be for Quebec if they decided at some point to go it alone.  But since when has freedom ever been free?  Indeed, there is always a price to pay when a people seek freedom.  It is usually paid in blood rather than money, and I would say that any economic costs borne by Scots after a "Yes" vote pale in comparison to the sacrifice made by their ancestors who bled on the battlefield of Bannockburn and the many other battlefields on which Scots gave their lives for their country's freedom.  Moreover, I cannot think of too many examples in which a newly independent country did not struggle during its first years of sovereignty.  So yes, in the short run there probably will be consequences for Scots to bear after they have voted for independence.  But in the long run, they will find that they made the right decision.

The Tyranny of the English Majority

It is true that way back in 1707, the Scottish parliament at the time decided to dissolve itself and delegate legislative power over Scotland country to Westminster in what is now called the Union of the Parliaments, so there was a degree of choice involved when the country joined the emerging British Empire - but only to a limited extent.  The Union of the Parliaments occurred well before universal suffrage; well before legislatures were elected by the masses rather than just by white male land-owners.  Then again, Scotland's accession to the British Empire was much more legitimate than that of Wales or Ireland, both of which were countries conquered by the English.  By the early 20th century, after centuries of bloodshed, most of Ireland managed to free itself from the yoke of British imperialism.  But Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland remain part of the United Kingdom, and they are all politically and economically dominated by the English.  Indeed, English domination has always been at the core of the British Empire and continues to be today.

Whatever Scotland gained from its domination at the hands of England will never make up for what it lost.  Centuries of English hegemony have made Scotland's Gaelic language nearly extinct.  The country's culture has become little more than a sideshow in the British melting pot.  And although Scotland's economy has developed significantly since the emergence of the British Empire, the country remains poor compared to England, even as oil has been pumping out of the Shetland Islands.  But instead of enriching Scotland, this oil has largely gone to where most precious resources in the U.K. have gone over the centuries: into the hands of the English.  The fact that Scotland and the other countries in the U.K. have gotten the short end of the stick while England has taken the bulk of the wealth and power shouldn't be a surprise, however, because after all, the United Kingdom, though largely a product of conquest, is a democracy, and in a democracy the majority rules.  So who is the majority in the U.K.?  Why the English of course!  So just as Quebec has been historically dominated by Canada's English-speaking majority, so too have the Scots, Welsh and Irish been dominated by the U.K.'s English majority.  In fact, Scotland and the other smaller countries of the U.K. are in an even worse situation because even together, they don't make up a very large counter-weight against England, whereas Quebec is Canada's second-most populous province and has been able to use its population's voting power to force significant concessions from the English-speaking majority, giving the province more power over its affairs and allowing it to reaffirm its distinct French identity.  It's time that Scotland said no to this tyranny of the English majority by saying "Yes" to independence.

Multinational Empires Have no Place in This World

The United Kingdom is what I often call a multinational empire - a country composed of two or more large ethno-national groups, but usually dominated by just one of them.  The U.K. is composed of four main national groups, but controlled overwhelmingly by one - the English.  It's story is the story of most multinational empires.  It begins when one group of people become so powerful that they conquer the territories of other peoples to eventually form an empire.  Rome, which was the greatest empire of the ancient world, began with the small Roman republic.  But of course, that republic grew more powerful, swallowed the territory of its rivals, and became an empire that stretched across Europe, North Africa and the Middle East.  It contained countless ethnic, linguistic and religious groups, though control remained firmly in the hands of the empire's founders, the Latin speakers of the Italian peninsula.  But of course, all empires eventually come to an end, as did the Roman Empire, which slowly lost control over the territories it had conquered until Rome itself finally ceased to exist as a state.  Fast forward centuries later to when England began to grow in wealth and power until she took control of her neighbours to form the Kingdom of Great Britain, which in turn spread throughout the globe conquering other peoples and their territory to forge the British Empire.  By the mid-20th century, the British Empire was a shell of its former self.  The British no longer hold vast territories overseas.  They have lost their empire.  And now, just as Rome itself was erased as a state, I believe so too will the British state cease to exist.  Whether this happens as a result of the Scottish referendum, or happens later on, it will almost definitely happen.  In fact, I believe that eventually all multinational empires, be they Canada, the Russian Federation or even the great United States of America, will come to an end.  It's just a question of when.  

     

Official Bilingualism is Good for Israel

Last week, I happened to come across an opinion piece on ynetnews.com that argued against a law proposing the annulment of Arabic as an official language in Israel (see: Let Israel's Arabs and their language be).  Supposedly, this bill "…will contribute to the social cohesion in the State of Israel and to the construction of the collective identity necessary for forming mutual trust in the society and preserving the values of democracy."  But the author argues that such a measure, if taken, will do the exact opposite by imposing the Hebrew language on the country's Arab minority.  Personally, I have mixed feelings about this issue.

Part of me believes that it would be hypocrisy for Israeli Arabs to accuse the country's government of trying to impose Hebrew on them, because that's exactly what their ancestors did to most of the peoples of the Middle East and North Africa during the Muslim Arab conquests of centuries past.  If anything, the Israeli government would simply be taking a step towards restoring the country's Hebrew heritage by reaffirming the language's supremacy in the State of Israel.  Moreover, I am usually of the opinion that if someone intends to live in a country in which the majority speaks a language that is different from his or her own, he or she must learn that language, no questions asked.  This is philosophy that I apply to immigrants who come to live in Canada, where I reside.  In Canada, our official languages are English and French.  So when someone comes to live here, they should be expected to begin learning one of these languages from day one.  If they refuse to do this, then they should pack up and go back to wherever it is they came from.  But for me, applying the same principle to Arabic speakers in Israel that I apply to new immigrants who come to live in Canada just doesn't make sense.  Why?  Because for the most part, Israel's Arabic speakers are hardly immigrants.  Many if not most of them have lived in Israel for generations, well before Jews began returning to their ancestral homeland.  Yes, it's true that Israel's Arabs are mostly a foreign population - the result of the aforementioned Muslim Arab conquests.  However, if we the Jewish majority try to impose our Hebrew language on the country's Arab minority, then we will be no better than the conquerors of the past who tried to impose their languages on us.

Official Bilingualism in Israel Should be Strengthened, Not Weakened

I am opposed to any efforts by Israel's leaders to try to reduce the status of Arabic versus Hebrew.  In fact, I would advocate strengthening Israel's status as a bilingual country, using Canada as a model.  For those of you who are unfamiliar with Canada's official languages policy, you may be interested to know that our Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which resembles Israel's Basic Law on Human Dignity and Liberty, enshrines the equal status of English and French in all national affairs.  This linguistic equality is further enshrined in Canada's Official Languages Act.  Indeed, Canada's laws on the use of both official languages can be quite strict.  For instance, if a product is not packaged with both English and French present, it is not allowed to be sold in Canada - and this applies to everything from a high-definition TV to something as small as the bottle of water that you purchase at a convenience store.  

Anyone who has travelled around Israel, as I have, knows that the country has already made great strides towards bilingualism.  There are signs in both Hebrew and Arabic everywhere, and Arabic does appear alongside Hebrew on some products sold in Israel, including that bottle of water.  We're certainly well ahead of other countries in the Middle East when it comes to respecting the languages of minority populations.  However, Israel still lags well behind Canada and other bilingual and multilingual jurisdictions.  We don't have a comprehensive official languages act, like Canada does, nor is the equality of Hebrew and Arabic enshrined in our Basic Laws - and I believe that this has to change.

The Case for Bilingualism in Israel

Now some of you folks reading this might ask me, why should we do even more than we already do to accommodate the Arabs when all they want to do is kill us?  My short answer is that strengthening and enshrining official bilingualism in Israel is not really about accommodating the Arabs, but rather accepting reality - the reality that one fifth of Israel's population speak Arabic as their first language; the reality that Arabic is the lingua franca of almost the entire Middle Eastern region of which Israel is a part; and the reality that whether the Jewish majority in Israel likes it or not, the Arabs and their language are part of Israel's heritage.  If we ignore this reality, we are deluding ourselves.  

So I think it's time that Israel's leaders accepted this reality and do what is necessary to make the country as fully bilingual in Hebrew and Arabic as possible.  This means enshrining the equality of both languages in law, enacting new measures to ensure the right of all of Israel's citizens to receive government services in both Hebrew and Arabic wherever they may be, and perhaps most importantly, making sure that Israelis themselves are fluently bilingual in both languages.  Indeed, I have met many Arabs in Israel who have taken the time to become fluent in Hebrew, yet I don't seem to find too many Jews who have taken the time to learn Arabic, unless of course they or their parents immigrated to Israel from a country in which Arabic is the primary language.  As a Jew, I've always felt bad about this double standard, which is why I took it upon myself to study the Arabic language and why I believe that every Israeli Jew should strive to learn the language of our Arab citizens, just as they make the effort to learn the language of their Jewish fellow citizens.

In fact, I would argue that official bilingualism in Israel makes even more sense than it does in Canada, because Israel is such a small country where Hebrew and Arabic speakers are very close to each other, while Canada is incredibly large and English and French speakers tend to be concentrated in certain regions that are often far away from one another.  In other words, bilingualism is much more attainable in Israel than it is in Canada, because let's face it; Jews and Arabs run into each other in Israel all the time, whereas Anglophones and Francophones in Canada do not.              

Building Israel in Judea and Samaria is the Best Response to Continued Palestinian Terrorism

Earlier this week, Israel announced that around 400 hectares of land in the Gush Etzion area of Judea and Samaria, a.k.a the West Bank, would be nationalized (see: Israel recognizes 4,000 dunam in Gush Etzion as state land).  Predictably, members of the international community protested, because unfortunately, the international consensus is that Jews should not live in their ancestral homeland.  Today, word also got out in the press that Israel plans to build just under three hundred new homes in the community of Elkana, located in the northwest of the so-called West Bank (see: Israel issues tenders for 283 homes in West Bank settlement).  I am actually very happy with these announcements because I believe that continuing to build Israel's presence in its Biblical homeland is a proper, Zionist response to the Palestinians' continuing terrorism.

Palestinians Shoot, Israel Builds

The bias against Israel's growing communities in Judea and Samaria is clearly outlined in the second article cited above.  Indeed, the article calls Israel's decision to nationalize land in Gush Etzion the country's "biggest land grab on Palestinian territory in three decades".  Personally, the use of the term "land grab" really upsets me, as does the article's defining Biblical Jewish land as "Palestinian territory".  Just once, I would love to see one major press outlet or world leader mention the land grab that the Arabs made centuries ago when they marched out of their native Arabian peninsula to conquer nearly the entire Middle East and northern Africa.  But believe me, I'm not holding my breath for this.  If Israel is grabbing land, it is simply grabbing it back from Arab conquerors.  Jews have every right to live in their ancestral homeland.  They have every right to establish communities there and rebuild the Jewish presence in the land that has been gone for centuries.  Furthermore, it is only fitting that Israel nationalize the territory in Gush Etzion as it was on this very land that three innocent Jewish teenagers were kidnapped and subsequently murdered in cold blood by Hamas terrorists.  Let this reclamation of Jewish land be a lesson to these terrorists and let the people of Israel say to them: Every time you shoot at us, injure us, or kill us, we will respond by continuing to build up our communities in the land of our ancestors.

Forget World Opinion!

Shortly after Israel announced its nationalization of land in Gush Etzion, one of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's coalition partners, Yair Lapid, who now serves as Minister of Finance, protested the decision, implying that it made Israel look bad in the eyes of world, especially in regards to the country's relations with the U.S. (see: Lapid: West Bank land seizure harms Israel).  My response to such concerns is simply to forget about what the rest of the world thinks.  History has shown that whatever Israel does, it is condemned.  The most recent example of this is, of course, the latest conflict in the Gaza Strip, where Israel took great strides to prevent the deaths of Palestinian civilians, even as terrorists shot rockets at Israel from civilian structures, including private homes, schools and hospitals.  But regardless of Israel's efforts to protect Palestinian civilians, the country was still condemned time and time again by the international community, the world press and countless anti-Israel and antisemitic protestors.  Let's face it; people just hate Israel and hate Jews, and nothing Israel does or doesn't do will change that.      

Gaza Ceasefire: Did Netanyahu Make the Right Call?

The latest war in the Gaza Strip has finally ended, or so it would seem.  After nearly a dozen failed ceasefires, all of which were broken by the terrorists in Gaza firing rockets into Israel, this latest cessation of hostilities seems to be holding - much to the dismay of many Israelis, including myself, who wanted Netanyahu's government to finish off Hamas and the rest of the terrorist bunch in Gaza once and for all.  Immediately after the ceasefire was announced, polls showed that support for Netanyahu, who we Israelis sometimes call "Bibi", had taken a nosedive (see: Prime Minister's support plummets as fighting ends).  For those of you who have read my previous blogs regarding Israel's latest scuffle with terrorists in the Gaza Strip, you know that I favoured military action until every last vestige of terrorism in the coastal enclave was eliminated.

Gaza's Terrorists Choose Their Rockets Over Their People's Well-Being

Netanyahu: Don't Listen to Bleeding Heart Liberals Like Obama and Kerry.  Stay the Course

Hamas and All Other Terrorists in Israel's Midst Must be Exterminated

After hearing about Bibi's sudden loss of support, I think it's safe to say that many Israelis thought the same way that I did.  But even though I'm not happy that Netanyahu has allowed Hamas, Islamic Jihad and all the other terrorist scumbags in Gaza to survive, I still trust his judgement because he is the only person who can lead Israel in the current situation.

In Netanyahu I Trust

I've always thought of Bibi as Israel's own Winston Churchill, who also consistently and correctly warned the international community about the clear and present dangers of the time - and who was all too often ignored in very much the same way that leaders in the international community have ignored Netanyahu over the years.  People should know by now that they ignore Bibi at their own peril.  In fact, if we had heeded his warnings, Hamas and company wouldn't be in control of the Gaza Strip and Israel would not have lost many of its own civilians and soldiers trying to stop them from pelting the country with rockets up until now.  So even though I and many other Israelis may disagree with his decision to end our assault on Gaza's terrorists, we should nevertheless give him the benefit of the doubt.  I continue to place my trust in Netanyahu and I hope that my fellow Israelis will do so as well.  After all, he's been right so many times already, so it's very difficult not to trust in him.