Intellectual Conservative Politics and Philosophy » Cinnamon Stillwell

Bush’s Tough Talk on Immigration Falls Flat

Cinnamon Stillwell — Wed, 24 May 2006 11:21:14 +0000

Complete with rolled-up sleeves and an air of genuine concern, Bush applied his folksy populism to the illegal immigration disaster. But he has lost all credibility on the issue.

President Bush may have addressed the nation last week to assure Americans that his administration is doing something “comprehensive” about the growing illegal immigration crisis, [...]

Death by Machine: Israel’s Dangerous Precedent

Cinnamon Stillwell — Tue, 21 Feb 2006 13:45:40 +0000

While it is forbidden for a person to take another’s life under Jewish law, having a machine do it for you has apparently been deemed kosher.

After suffering a stroke last year, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon remains in a coma.� Where once the world followed Sharon’s every political move, medical details now dominate the news.� Few believe that Sharon will recover, but no effort has been spared to try and keep him alive.

Yet some would argue that prolonging life in such a manner is cruel.� That in fact, ending life in such circumstances would be the more compassionate alternative.� Such is the argument put forth by proponents of euthanasia and ironically, it is in Israel that they have had their most recent success.� �

Late last year, the Knesset signed a new bill into law that somehow manages to approve euthanasia according to Jewish law.� While it is forbidden for a person to take another’s life under Jewish law, having a machine do it for you has apparently been deemed kosher.� As a parliamentary spokesman put it, “The point was that it is wrong, under Jewish law, for a person’s life to be taken by a person but, for a machine, it is acceptable.”

The machine in question is a special timer attached to patients’ respirators.� After 12 hours it sounds an alarm and then at the end of a 24-hour cycle, it turns off the respirator.� The alarm would normally be overridden unless certain conditions are met, such as the consent of the (over 17) patient or legal guardian.� The patient or guardian can request an extension at any time and living wills are to be kept on file at all hospitals.

The device is similar to the special clocks used by orthodox Jews to turn off electrical devices during the Sabbath.� But where one application allows a bypassing of Jewish law that doesn’t harm another human being, the other delves into more troubling territory.� One might call it a death timer.�

According to Jewish law, suicide is forbidden and while one cannot hasten the death of another person, lessening their pain is encouraged.� Both active and passive euthanasia fall under the category of ending life, but there is some leeway in the stipulation that prolonging life through artificial means is discouraged.� However, the act of actually turning off respirators or unplugging feeding tubes would entail causing another’s death.� But now a machine can do the dirty work for you.

Israeli society has been heading towards legalized euthanasia for some time now.� Last year, a Tel Aviv court ruled that a 59-year-old terminally ill patient should be allowed to disconnect from life support machines. The disconnection was supervised by two doctors but the rest of the procedure had to be undertaken privately, in the presence of family members only.� The euthanasia device will allow doctors to circumvent such messy complications.

What’s astounding about the Israeli example is the emphasis placed on morality in pursuit of an amoral policy.� Israel’s health minister Danny Naveh provided a glimpse into this bizarre mindset when he described the law as “a great moral achievement for the dying and their families.”�

The fact that a committee composed of physicians, scientists, medical ethicists, social workers, philosophers, nurses, lawyers, judges and religious leaders somehow saw fit to recommend the bill is similarly disturbing.� The committee was headed by Prof. Avraham Steinberg, an Orthodox rabbi, pediatric neurologist, medical ethicist and, according to the Jerusalem Post, “winner of the Israel Prize for his work on Jewish medical ethics.”� That someone with this background would consent to such a law certainly does not bode well for the future of medical ethics in Israel.

If there’s any country that should heed the lessons of history when it comes to euthanasia, it’s Israel.� After all, Nazi Germany was a sinister example of what can happen to a seemingly civilized society that treads the path of euthanasia.� For the Nazis, euthanasia became an obsession, eventually resulting in the belief in eugenics or the achievement of a genetically superior race. Jews, gypsies, gays, communists, German dissenters, and others were experimented on and finally targeted for extermination under the rationale that they were inferior.

Of course, Israel is nothing like Nazi Germany, despite the oft-repeated claims of its enemies.� But as a modern society and a leader in the field of medicine, it is as susceptible as any to the ethical pitfalls of euthanasia.� If we look to other countries such as the Netherlands, where euthanasia is legal and extends to infants and children, the implications become clearer.� Belgium has followed suit, while France and Great Britain are not far behind.� In the United States, Oregon’s physician-assisted suicide law continues to be a test case for the rest of the country.

As far as religious leadership, one must turn mostly to Catholics and other Christians for the defense of “life issues” such as euthanasia.� Meanwhile, mainstream Jewish leaders in America act as if euthanasia and abortion are the pillars of Judaism.� Groups such as Jews for Life are one of the few exceptions to the rule, not to mention the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America, which has consistently lobbied against euthanasia and in favor of increased palliative care for the dying.

In legalizing machine-induced euthanasia, Israel is setting a worldwide precedent for the medical establishment.� Indeed, doctors in other countries are already expressing an interest in the euthanasia device because it alleviates them of the guilt they might feel in turning off dying patients’ respirators themselves.� Now that a machine can do it for them, doctors need no longer be encumbered by the “uncomfortable” feelings surrounding ending patients’ lives.�

Israelis have made many contributions to the fields of science, medicine and technology.� Do they really want death by machine to be part of this legacy?

The Left’s Vietnam Syndrome

Cinnamon Stillwell — Wed, 11 Jan 2006 12:00:12 +0000

Many of today’s journalists are victims of what’s been labeled the “Vietnam Syndrome.” Comparisons to the Vietnam War have been hovering over the conflict in Iraq since day one. The anti-war movement apparently decided that the war in Iraq would be a “quagmire” before it even began and naturally, they hearkened back to the glory [...]

The Wall Street Journal Goes Liberal on the Middle East

Cinnamon Stillwell — Tue, 03 Jan 2006 02:09:44 +0000

Instead of promoting the agenda of former World Bank Chief James� Wolfensohn, the Wall Street Journal might want to address the stumbling block of Palestinian terrorism.

A UCLA political scientist conducted a recent study on media bias and came to the conclusion that many of us reached a long time ago. The media tilts left. But the study did produce some unexpected results.

� It turns out that PBS’ NewsHour With Jim Lehrer is the most “centrist outlet,” while the Drudge Report “leans left.” Most readers find the Wall Street Journal’s editorial page to be conservative (with the exception of their stance on illegal immigration, which mirrors that of the far left), but the UCLA study found that the news pages are “even more liberal than The New York Times.” If the Wall Street Journal’s Middle East news coverage is any indication, UCLA knows what it’s talking about. A front page article in the news section of the December 28th issue demonstrates all the usual biases and blind spots of the liberal media when it comes to the Middle East. Written by Karby Leggett and titled, “Latest Answer To Mideast Crisis: Fix the Economy,”(subscribers only) the article follows the trials and tribulations of former World Bank Chief James Wolfensohn. It seems that Wolfensohn has been tasked with the unenviable job of trying to help the “beleaguered Palestinian economy.” Or in other words, trying to get the Palestinians to be productive instead of destructive for a change. Wolfensohn was appointed special envoy to the Quartet (United States, Russia, European Union, and United Nations) and has been scrambling to get the Gaza Strip� — recently vacated by Israelis via the Disengagement Plan� — in order ever since. For according to the entire thrust of the article, if it weren’t for the incalcitrance of those pesky security-minded Israelis, the Palestinians would have created a mini-Manhattan by now.

� All throughout Leggett’s article are references to the many barriers to Palestinian mobility and hence an improved economy, but nowhere does he reach the obvious conclusion. If not for Palestinian terrorism, these security measures wouldn’t exist. The “20-foot high digital scanning system to check shipments for weapons and explosives” that Wolfensohn urged the Israelis to install at the Karni border checkpoint between Gaza and Israel might not be necessary if Palestinian “farmers” didn’t insist on trying to sneak bombs in with their vegetables. Leggett simply concedes that, “In many ways, Israel’s desire for tight security is in conflict with Gaza’s economic requirements.” Gee, I wonder why?Leggett touts another one of Wolfensohn’s brilliant plans� — raising money from private donors such as Mortimer B. Zuckerman in order to purchase the vacated Gaza greenhouses for the Palestinians. Of course, we all know how that turned out. The few greenhouses that weren’t destroyed in the orgy of destruction following the disengagement were apparently too complex for the Palestinians to operate properly and now they’re trying to hire back the Jewish farmers they replaced. It would seem that the above information would be pertinent to the article, but alas, Leggett omits any mention whatsoever. But apparently some of Wolfensohn’s hard work has paid off. As Leggett cheerily tell us, “Palestinians can now travel to Egypt without passing Israeli checkpoints for the first time in nearly four decades.” So now Palestinians can smuggle in weapons directly from Egypt rather than having to use those annoying tunnels underneath their homes. This may explain why Gaza is being flooded with weapons as we speak, not to mention the al-Qaeda terrorists that have shown up for the party.� Even European Union “observers” got a glimpse of the growing anarchy when fighting broke out between Fatah gunmen and Palestinian Authority policemen at the Rafiah border crossing on December 30th.� Needless to say, they went running straight for the nearest Israeli military base.Instead of promoting the naïve “Wolfensohn Agenda,” the Wall Street Journal might want to address the stumbling block of Palestinian terrorism. After all, which came first, the chicken or the egg?�

�

Why Don’t Republicans Call for Investigations?

Cinnamon Stillwell — Fri, 23 Dec 2005 15:30:39 +0000

Leaks have become commonplace in recent years, with institutions such as the CIA, FBI, State Department, Justice Department, and even the Pentagon seemingly rife with turncoats.

In their desperation to somehow topple the Bush administration, the left is showing its true colors. The Internet is abuzz with feverish e-mails calling on subscribers to demand [...]

The Murder of Earl Krugel: Where’s the Outrage?

Cinnamon Stillwell — Wed, 14 Dec 2005 14:33:45 +0000

Despite all the questions surrounding the case, the silence from the American Jewish community regarding Earl Krugel’s murder has been deafening.

On November 4, 2005, Jewish Defense League (JDL) member Earl Krugel was murdered in an Arizona prison. It was only his third day into a 20-year sentence at the Federal Correction Institution in [...]

Prince Charles: Islam’s New Ambassador

Cinnamon Stillwell — Wed, 09 Nov 2005 07:03:26 +0000

When it comes to Europe, the Islamists are definitely winning.� Just ask Prince Charles.

Prince Charles of Wales and his new bride, Camilla Parker Bowles, the Duchess of Cornwall, have been in the United States, hobnobbing at the White House and imparting royal pearls of wisdom.� According to statements made prior to this visit, Prince Charles thinks the U.S. is “intolerant” towards Islam.� In Prince Charles’ view, it’s all gone downhill since 9/11 because of the Bush administration’s “confrontational” approach to Muslim countries.� In fact, he made these comments during a meeting with Muslim leaders soon after 9/11.

Of course, Great Britain’s “tolerance” for Islam is hardly the model to follow.� After allowing Islamic extremism to fester openly in Muslim mosques and neighborhoods (to the point where the nickname “Londonistan” became commonplace), the UK was attacked by homegrown terrorists on July 7, 2005.� The London bombings were the culmination of years of turning a blind eye to the cancer within.�

Initially, there was much talk about retaining a sense of “British identity” in lieu of the self-destructive multiculturalism that had engulfed English society, but that has since faded into obscurity.� The “stoic” British spirit in the face of terrorism and the country’s historical legacy of wartime endurance were also popular topics.� But instead of defiance, the British reacted more with resignation.� “We can take it,” was the mantra uttered by many an Englishman in the wake of the bombings, as if bearing terrorism rather than fighting it was their unavoidable fate.� �

But even after these brutal attacks, the British descent into dhimmitude continued. Radical groups such as Al Mahajiroun are still calling publicly for jihad against the West and the creation of an Islamic Caliphate to rule Britain.� Members of the British government such as Respect Party MP George Galloway openly side with Islamists against their own country, going so far as to aid in the propaganda battle with regular appearances on al-Jazeera and other Arab media outlets.�

Muslim voters and politicians are having an increasing influence on the British political landscape.� When Queen Elizabeth knighted the Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain, Iqbal Sacranie (now Sir Iqbal Sacranie), it was the epitome of this trend.� Although paying lip service to condemning violence against civilians (a word with multiple connotations among Muslims), Sacranie has also said of the July 7th terrorists: “Nothing is clear about what motivated them.”� In a country where knighthood is conferred upon such luminaries as Sir Mick Jagger and Sir Elton John, the honor bestowed upon Sacranie is hardly shocking.� But something tells me rock stars will have less of an impact on British politics in the years to come than will Islamists.

To cap all this off, British banks are now fazing out piggy banks because they “offend Muslims.”� It’s apparently not enough that Muslims abstain from eating pork, as do devout Jews.� The mere sight of a pig-like figurine is an affront to their purity.� At this rate, it’s just a matter of time before the sight of women’s uncovered heads will also be deemed offensive to Muslims and such freedoms will go the way of piggy banks.� The Islamic Caliphate is encroaching and England appears to be going down without a fight.�

Prince Charles certainly seems to be on board for the change over.� His recent visit to Georgetown University’s Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding was simply the icing on the cake.� It turns out his fascination with Islam, along with various New Age pursuits, has a long history.�

In 2000, Prince Charles made a point of visiting former singer Cat Stevens (turned Muslim convert Yusuf Islam) at his Islamia School in Britain, where he congratulated Cat a.k.a. Yusuf for his efforts to spread “peace and harmony through education.”� The fact that Stevens is an active sympathizer of terrorist groups and was deported back to Britain after appearing on a no-fly list in the U.S. would seem to belie such claims.� The Prince has also become a patron of the UK’s Center for Islamic Studies, along with the late King Fahd of Saudi Arabia, who once donated 33 million dollars to the school.

When Prince Charles became Supreme Governor of the Church of England in 1994 he opted to call himself not the traditional “defender of the faith,” but rather “defender of faiths” so as not to offend non-Christians.� A year earlier, he gave a speech in which he urged the West to overcome its “unthinkable prejudices” about Islam.� Of Islam’s unthinkable prejudices towards every other religion in the world, he had little to say. Prince Charles tends instead to employ the logic of moral relativism by equating Christian “extremism” with Islamic extremism, as if the two are comparable.�

With all of this mind, one has to wonder whether Prince Charles’ own conversion to Islam is eminent or if the royal family has simply made the change from symbolic rulers to proselytizers for Islam?

Amidst this backdrop, anti-Semitism in the UK is at an all-time high.� Whether it be the brainwashed leftists in academia calling for boycotts and divestment from Israel, or the Muslim Council of Britain (of Sir Ian Sacranie fame) insisting that commemorating Holocaust Day is somehow offensive to Muslims, things aren’t looking too good for Jews in England these days.� This may explain why British Jews are streaming out of the country and in some cases moving to Israel.� According to writer Barry Shaw, who sells real estate in Israel, sales have been booming as British Jews choose to settle in Israel instead of waiting around for things to get worse.� In truth, British society has always had an anti-Semitic streak along with a propensity for Arabism, and both are now reaching their logical conclusion.

Meanwhile over in France, Muslim mobs have been rioting for the past two weeks.� It began when two Muslim men (or “youths” as the media likes to call them) hiding from police in a power substation accidentally electrocuted themselves.� Riots ensued and quickly spread, resulting in roaming gangs attacking police, setting hundreds of vehicles on fire, firing guns into the street, hurling Molotov cocktails and stones at firehouses, and burning down stores.�

The violence ratcheted up a notch when rioters doused a disabled woman in gasoline and tossed a Molotov cocktail at the bus she was in, almost burning her to death.� Another man fared even worse, dying after being in a coma for a week thanks to the group of thugs that attacked him.� Meanwhile, France’s “leaders” dither on ineffectually.

France’s high unemployment rate and segregated ghettos have long been fertile ground for crime and extremism, but what we’re witnessing now is nothing less than societal collapse.� Much like England, multiculturalism has created an unassimilated population in which radicalism has been allowed to flourish.� Whether or not the latest generation of Muslims actually wishes to integrate into French society is another matter.�

This last question is also integral to the Muslim riots that have been occurring in Denmark.� They were spurred on by anger at the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten for running a series of cartoons based on the prophet Mohammed.� It appears the newspaper miscalculated in thinking that the Muslim community would welcome such freedom of speech.� As Imam Raed Hlayehel put it in a statement, “This type of democracy is worthless for Muslims.”� With both Denmark and France burning, a civil war seems to be brewing in Europe and it’s unlikely to end anytime soon.�

All of this so far is a far cry from the relatively integrated and prosperous Muslim population in the United States.� A drive through the largely Arab-American enclave of Dearborn, Michigan demonstrates not ghettoes or alienation, but well-maintained streets and a thriving business community. Statistics on Arab-Americans bear out similar results. According to the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau, people of Arab descent in the U.S. are actually “better educated and wealthier than average Americans.”� This population includes Christians along with Muslims, but the economic opportunities and institutions that benefit all Americans is the real key to Arab-American success.

Despite Prince Charles’ claims of American intolerance, incidents of anti-Islamic hate crimes in the U.S. numbered only 154 in 2004.� This is far below that of racially motivated hate crimes, not to mention those involving other religions.� Anti-Jewish hate crimes, for instance, were the highest of the bunch, numbering 954.� Yet for some mysterious reason, Prince Charles hasn’t commented on the “intolerance” of anti-Semitism in America.�

In addition, the Bush administration has gone out of its way to emphasize that the war on terrorism is not a war against Islam itself.� Some would say they’ve gone overboard in such pursuits, but the administration certainly can’t be faulted for lack of effort.� And if helping to rid Muslims of their despotic leaders is considered too “confrontational,” then so be it.� Perhaps Prince Charles needs reminding that his own Prime Minister Tony Blair has been along for the ride since day one.

It’s obvious that the problems of Great Britain and Europe with their Muslim population are far greater than that of the United States.� While the U.S. has its own extremist elements to contend with, the long-term prospects are fairly hopeful.� Commitment to religious freedom is still high among Americans and this may prove to be the ultimate savior.� � �

In contrast, Great Britain and Europe are foregoing their Christian heritage in favor of an Islamic future.� Whether or not everyone goes willingly, sheer population numbers will eventually engulf them.� Islamists are nothing if not patient, assigning centuries to these ongoing civilizational battles.� And when it comes to Europe, they are definitely winning.� Just ask Prince Charles.

Bay Area-based columnist Cinnamon Stillwell writes for SFGate.com, Frontpagemag.com, Jewish Press, and Israel National News. � Her website is CinnamonStillwell.com.

Email Cinnamon Stillwell

When Racism Fatigue Sets In

Cinnamon Stillwell — Wed, 02 Nov 2005 19:41:21 +0000

In the wake of all the racial demagoguery following Hurricane Katrina, white Americans could be forgiven for suffering from racism fatigue.

In the wake of all the racial demagoguery following Hurricane Katrina, white Americans could be forgiven for suffering from racism fatigue.� I say “white Americans” because according to many of the speakers at the Millions More March in Washington D.C. this past month, there are indeed two Americas, one white and one black.� Of all the shades in between, very little was said.� But “white America,” it seems, is to blame for every single malady that affects “black America.”� At least that’s what we’re told over and over again by the self-appointed czars of racism.

But what if that weren’t true?� What if racism, although still in existence in America as everywhere in the world, were not the root of the black community’s problems?� What if the failed liberal social policies that originated in the 1960s, coupled with a self-destructive culture within the black community itself, were to blame?� And what if black people are just as guilty of racism as anyone else?�

This is exactly the conclusion one might reach in the wake of the Millions More March, where black separatism was a common theme.� Organized by Nation of Islam minister Louis Farrakhan and captured in all its offensive glory by C-SPAN, the event centered more on blaming whites for the problems of the black community than the introspection so truly needed.�

For Farrakhan and his ilk, it always comes down to two often-overlapping villains — white people and, of course, the Jews.� Of the latter, Farrakhan applies all the usual stereotypes and libels associated with anti-Semitism.� The oft-repeated claim that Jewish slaveholders were a significant group, when in fact Islamic countries were and still are the primary dealers in slavery is typical of such propaganda.� Much like the Muslim World where blame for all internal problems is hoisted onto Jews, Christians, and the West in general, Farrakhan seeks to emulate this pattern for black Americans.

Farrakhan’s propensity for blaming whites is unending.� According to Farrakhan, black Americans are still suffering the effects of slavery and can’t be expected to function properly within such a “racist country” until they receive “reparations.”� Farrakhan and his lieutenants would have us believe that Hurricane Katrina and the ensuing flooding of New Orleans was all part of a plot to kill and disperse the black population.� Farrakhan in fact suggested that the levees were intentionally blown up to murder poor blacks in the region.� The delay in getting to some of the evacuees was chalked up not to the failings of the black Mayor Ray Nagin, nor even the white female Governor Kathleen Blanco, but instead to a federal government that was hell bent on genocide to hear the ravings of Farrakhan.�

Democratic Rep. Charlie Rangel joined in the racial outcry following Hurricane Katrina, accusing President Bush of being “our Bull Connor,” in reference to the Birmingham, Alabama police commissioner who resisted the Civil Rights Movement (and who just happened to be a Democrat).� Meanwhile, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and other such opportunists focused on the great injustice of the word “refugees” being applied (sympathetically) to displaced New Orleans residents by the media.� No accusation became too absurd in their attempts to get the most out of the disaster spotlight.

Somehow Farrakhan and his fellow demagogues managed to overlook the endless footage of the U.S. Coast Guard and Air National Guard (most of them white) rescuing black people stranded atop their roofs after the flood.� Also unmentioned by Farrakhan were the largely white communities all over the country that opened up their arms to evacuees with no regard to color or circumstances.� The multitude of white people who volunteered their time and efforts to help black people living in shelters also elicited no response.� In truth, the aftermath of Katrina demonstrated anything but the type of racism that has been claimed.

The fact is that it’s the race hustlers, both black and white, who are sowing the seeds of discord in America today by actively trying to create divisions among the races.� Stuck in the past and unable to grasp the gains that have been made since the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s, or the Civil War for that matter, these dinosaurs are simply incapable of coming up with a narrative that doesn’t involve black victimization.� Of course, they’d be out of a job or a political platform were they to do so.

To cap all this off, we now have so-called black activists calling for genocide against whites.� Dr. Kamau Kambon, who taught “Africana Studies” in the Spring 2005 semester at North Carolina State University, recently addressed a panel at Howard University Law School on “Hurricane Katrina Media Coverage.”� In discussing the issues facing the black community, Kambon claimed that “white people want to kill us” and then went on to make a startling statement: “We have to exterminate white people off the face of the planet to solve this problem.”

Broadcast on C-SPAN, Kambon’s outrageous comments seem to have ruffled few feathers among the usually racism-sensitive crowd.� As of yet, none of the calls for “sensitivity training” so popular among the political correct have been heard.� Apparently, it’s only hate speech when the speaker is white.� Similarly, hate crimes only seem to occur when the perpetrators are white.�

But such paranoia and conspiracy theories are hardly the exception in the black community. Claims that AIDS was created by the U.S. government to kill black people and that the CIA funneled crack cocaine into the black community in the 1980s are widely believed.� So why wouldn’t it be acceptable to bring up exterminating whites in retaliation for their alleged crimes?

The fact that the Nation of Islam comprises one of the most visible black political movements in America today certainly does not bode well for the future of race relations.� While hardly garnering millions, the Millions More March was attended by various black celebrities, clergy, intellectuals and business moguls, as well as Congressional Black Caucus chairman Rep. Mel Watts, thus lending it more credibility than it deserved.

The involvement of black Democrats makes sense considering their propensity for putting forth the same tired platitudes, offering blacks anything but self-empowerment.� With this in mind, the continued fealty of blacks to the Democratic Party is beginning to border on parody.� Despite the highly visible presence of black and other minority appointees among the Bush administration and the fact that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice is being discussed as a potential presidential candidate among Republicans, critics continue to insist that the Republican Party is somehow racist against blacks. Since the Republicans were in fact the first political party opposed to slavery, lynching, and racism in the 19th century while the Democratic Party was the polar opposite, the insistence of black Americans on ignoring their own history is beyond reason.

This may be changing as documentaries such as Emancipation, Revelation, Revolution come to the fore.� The film traces the Republican Party’s role in abolishing slavery and supporting the Civil Rights Movement, subjects long deemed taboo by the liberal film establishment.� The documentary recently screened at The Liberty Film Festival in Los Angeles, where it was introduced by conservative radio host and columnist Larry Elder and conservative activist Ted Hayes.� Elder and Hayes joined the many black intellectuals and activists interviewed in the film in pondering, “what happens when conservative blacks leave the liberal plantation?”

The answer to that question is unfolding as we speak.� For when it comes down to it, black moderates and conservatives offer forth the only real solutions for the problems afflicting their community.� Writers such as Thomas Sowell, John McWhorter, Star Parker and Walter Williams, among many others, and celebrities such as Bill Cosby bravely challenge conformity to try and put the spotlight where it belongs — on flawed federal policies, race hustlers, and the black community itself.�

For their troubles, they are routinely accused of being “Uncle Toms” and “house n**gers” by their fellow “brothers and sisters” who see any attempt at self-examination as tantamount to blasphemy.� The black media largely ignores these figures, preferring instead to focus on those who espouse a narrative with which they’re comfortable.� But despite all their efforts to silence such voices, black conservatism is growing, slowly but surely.� �

It’s a good thing because change is inevitable, no matter how much it’s resisted by the demagogues.� Our society has already been altered greatly, although you’d never know it to hear the hysterical claims since Hurricane Katrina.� Thanks to the gains made by the Civil Rights Movement and people like the late Rosa Parks, racism is no longer popular in America.� Rather than spreading, racism has, in fact, shrunk down to the lowest level in American history.

Perhaps the time has come for the American black community to start looking elsewhere for answers.

Bay Area-based columnist Cinnamon Stillwell writes for SFGate.com, Frontpagemag.com, Jewish Press, and Israel National News. � Her website is CinnamonStillwell.com.

Email Cinnamon Stillwell

What A Palestinian State Would Look Like

Cinnamon Stillwell — Fri, 21 Oct 2005 05:16:51 +0000

The skill at which elaborate effigies of Israeli and American symbols are constructed and later burned, displays a certain penchant for detail. Since Israel’s disengagement from the Gaza Strip, the Palestinians have basically been left to their own devices.� The world has gotten an eyeful of just what a much-anticipated Palestinian state might look like — and it’s not a pretty picture.

The dust hadn’t even settled after the last of the Jews had been removed from Gaza when Palestinians resorted to form.� Looting and demolishing buildings they might otherwise have been able to reside in, the Palestinians displayed the sort of destructive and dysfunctional behavior they’ve become known for.� They soon graduated to burning down synagogues, a time honored tradition from the days of Nazi Germany.� In a final orgy of idiocy, they tore apart the expensive greenhouses that altruistic Jews, among others, had foolishly purchased for them in the hopes that they would actually produce something.� Who needs food when you can destroy a greenhouse instead?

When reported at all, such actions were described by the mainstream media merely as harmless “celebrations” or chalked up to the frustrations of a long “oppressed” people.� Behavior that would be deemed unacceptable were it exhibited by any other group suddenly became fodder for touchy-feely news segments.� None of these “reporters” came to the obvious conclusion that had any unarmed Jews remained in the evacuated settlements they would certainly have been slaughtered by these peace-loving Palestinian mobs.

Facing a decrease in Jewish targets, the Palestinians have begun to eat their own.� Vigilante killings have gone up exponentially this year, while kidnapping, theft and lawlessness in general is also on the rise.� Hamas managed to blow up 16 Palestinians during a routine “work accident” at one of their famous kid-friendly rallies.� Yet another rally to “celebrate” the pullout was disrupted by shots fired into the air and crowds stoning the stage.� Honor killings, already a regular feature of Palestinian society, continued on unabated.� Then there was the small matter of an American and a British reporter being kidnapped by Palestinian terrorists.� Nothing to see here, folks.� Move along.

In a glimmer of what “Palestinian democracy” is likely to portend, the terrorist group Hamas appears to be heading for a takeover of government institutions.� Should they succeed, senior Hamas leader Mahmoud Zahar has promised to install Sharia or Islamic law under which both dancing and gays won’t be allowed.� I’m sure members of QUIT (Queers Undermining Israeli Terrorism) will be speaking out against this injustice any day now.

Anyone wondering what a Palestinian state might look like has only to observe the� behavior cited above to get an answer.� Palestinian culture, such as it is, has been mired in hatred for so long that they have little else to put forward.� The death cult that has subsumed their society is in fact what they offer the world.� While people all across the globe, including Jews, have survived upheaval and gone on to forge new lives and societies, the Palestinians seem to be incapable of creating anything. Without Israel providing them with water, food and jobs (before the Intifada) and the “international community” pumping them with money, they would simply die off in the desert or be subsumed by their more powerful Arab neighbors.� In fact, the latter outcome appears more likely by the day.

But it doesn’t have to be this way.� Long ago, I commented on the Palestinians’ potential for achievement should they ever choose to redirect their considerable energies toward more productive pursuits.� Indeed, the skill at which elaborate effigies of Israeli and American symbols are constructed and later burned, displays a certain penchant for detail.� If only effigy factories were a thriving industry, the Palestinians would be all set.

Another Palestinian talent is public relations, an essential component which consists of constant whining.� In fact, they have a whole film industry devoted to producing such propaganda and manipulating the gullible Western media.� Its called Pallywood.� A fascinating short documentary (available online) by that name exposes the sets, actors, props and dupes for the world to see.� Not that this will stop anyone from continuing to take part in the charade.� Like I said, when you’re good, you’re good.�

From its mythical beginnings to its continuing ability to attract followers, the “Palestinian cause” has taken on a life of its own.� It’s the third world “resistance movement” de jour and entire classes of Westerners would have no purpose in life if not for its existence.� The Palestinians can literally do or espouse anything and the world will willingly turn a blind eye.� What’s more, they’re falling all over themselves to offer these paragons of virtue their own state.� � �

For my own part, I’m ready to give the Palestinians their own homeland right now…on Mars, that is.� Come to think of it, I wouldn’t wish that on Mars.� Okay, Egypt, they’re all yours.

Bay Area-based columnist Cinnamon Stillwell writes for SFGate.com, Frontpagemag.com, Jewish Press, and Israel National News. � Her website is CinnamonStillwell.com.

Email Cinnamon Stillwell

A Day At The Zoo: San Francisco’s “Anti-War” Rally

Cinnamon Stillwell — Fri, 30 Sep 2005 23:28:48 +0000

There's nothing like a good old-fashioned anti-war rally to bring together leftists, anarchists, and haters of Israel to rail against the supposed evils of capitalism.

A crowd of around 10,000 protesters gathered in San Francisco on Saturday, September 24, allegedly to express their displeasure with the war in Iraq. But it wasn't Iraq this [...]