Bill has worked in a pickle factory for several years.
One day he confesses to his wife that he has a terrible urge to stick his penis into the pickle slicer.
His wife suggests that he see a therapist to talk about it, but Bill vows to overcome this rash desire on his own.
A few weeks later, Bill returns home absolutely ashen.
His wife asks, “What’s wrong, Bill?”
“Do you remember how I told you about my tremendous urge to put my penis into the pickle slicer?”
His wife gasps, “My God, Bill, what happened???”
“I got fired.”
“No, Bill I mean, what happened with the pickle slicer?”
“Oh, um, she got fired too.“
Lebanon is one of several Arab countries where Palestinians are subjected to discriminatory and apartheid laws and measures. The plight of Palestinians in Arab countries, however, is apparently of no interest to the international community, pro-Palestinian activists and groups around the world.
Recently, the Lebanese authorities placed electronic screening gates at all entrances to Ain Al-Hilweh, the largest Palestinian refugee camp in Lebanon. The move has sparked a wave of protests in Ain Al-Hilweh and among Palestinians living in other refugee camps in Lebanon, who are describing the installation of the electronic gates as collective punishment.
Until a few years ago, Ain Al-Hilweh had a population of 75,000. However, with the influx of refugees from Syria, which began in 2011, the camp’s population is now estimated at more than 160,000.
About two years ago, the Lebanese army began building a security fence around Ain Al-Hilweh as part of an effort to combat jihadi terror groups that were reported to have infiltrated the camp. With the completion of the fence, the Lebanese authorities, in a move that has surprised the Palestinians, decided to install electronic gates to screen all those entering and leaving the camp. The Lebanese authorities say the gates are critical to discovering explosives and other types of weapons.
via Palestinians: Victims of Arab Apartheid
On May 14, as United States officials ceremoniously relocated the American Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, tens of thousands of Palestinians in Gaza — many of them members of Hamas and Iran-linked Islamic Jihad, along with other residents paid to participate — engaged in violent demonstrations along the Gaza-Israel border fence. Dubbed the “Great March of Return,” these protests were launched on March 30 and timed to crescendo six weeks later, on the day of the U.S. Embassy move, which coincided with the 70th anniversary of the establishment of the state of Israel.
For weeks, rioters stormed the border, firing weapons and hurling Molotov cocktails and rocks at the Israeli soldiers who guard the area to prevent terrorist incursions into southern Israel.
The weeks of continuous rioting — planned by Hamas as part of its admitted campaign to destroy Israel through terrorism and delegitimization — has left dozens of Palestinians dead and hundreds wounded. The numbers were widely reported in the liberal media in Israel and abroad, and were accompanied by condemnations of Israel for its “excessive use of force” against “peaceful protesters.”
Although Hamas official Salah Bardawil announced that of the 62 people “martyred,” 50 were members of Hamas — while Islamic Jihad claimed another three — many journalists, opinion writers, international organizations and so-called human rights groups with a fixed idea about the Palestinian-Israeli conflict in general and the current unrest in Gaza in particular did not let such information permeate their articles or declarations. Those who did include the statistic downplayed the fact that Hamas was paying impoverished Gaza residents to descend on the border of a neighboring country with the purpose not only of killing or kidnapping its residents, but also to get killed or wounded by sniper fire. In so doing, Hamas would be able to accuse its neighbor of the very war crimes Hamas itself has been committing.
via Gaza Media Coverage: Snipers and Lies
Turkey’s elections last Sunday did not produce any surprise results. The vote saw President Recep Tayyip Erdogan reelected with an outright 52 percent majority, as expected.
Erdogan’s AKP Justice and Development Party retained control over the Turkish parliament (albeit in conjunction with the ultranationalist, anti-Kurdish MHP party).
The results will not change the trajectory that Erdogan launched Turkey upon some 15 years ago when he first rose to power. But what the election does mean is that the obvious trends in Turkey’s domestic and foreign policies will be reinforced and expanded in an unimpeded manner.
From the America’s perspective, all of these trends are uniformly negative. As a result, it is time for a serious reconsideration of U.S. strategic ties with its erstwhile, and increasingly antagonistic, fellow NATO member.
via Erdogan’s win means the U.S. must cancel F-35 sale to Turkey