Displaying posts published in

January 2016

Racial bean counting at the Oscars By Thomas Lifson

A reader sent me some interesting data on the actual track record of blacks in the Best Actor category of the Academy Awards. He writes:

The black population in the US is about 13%.

So, apparently according to Spike Lee et al, blacks must be given 13% of awards.

In the last nine years black actors won once which was 11% of the Best Actor awards.

In the last eleven years black actors won twice which was 18% of the Best Actor awards.

In the last fourteen years black actors won three times which was 21% of the Best Actor awards.

2013 – 20% of the nominees were black
2012 – 20%
2009 – 20%
2006 – 20%
2004 – 20%
2001 – 20%
1999 – 20%

In the last four years there have been 20 nominees for Best Actor. Two were black. Ten percent.

Crybaby-Chic hits Oscar By Marion DS Dreyfus

That a growing number of non-Caucasians are protesting the current crop of Oscar nominees for the coveted acting statuette has hit the broadcast and print media.

Two whole years without a black nom? Omigosh.

How many Hispanic nominees are there? How many Asians? How many Baha’i? How many disabled?

What is evident, dependably endorsed by the loud wailing of the captain of charlatanry, Al Sharpton, is that in the face of campus protests over “microaggressions” making students “feel unsafe,” and in view of efforts to remove iconic statuary or flags from various southern venues and universities owing to rediscovered historical factoids of inconvenient realities, actors are picking up on the victimhood cavalcade. Recalling their pampered childhoods, or not, these role-model icons, so beloved in the crybaby era, are joining the fray.

Spike Lee, a director of middling specialty films that do not break the bank in audience appeal, along with Will Smith’s spiky wife, Jada Pinkett, have now been amalgamated with other complaint-mongers to post a scary warning: They will boycott the Oscars.

Shudder, gasp.

First, who cares? If they did not perform up to standard, they did not merit inclusion in the Oscar-nom club, which is a fiercely fought battle annually.

Iran Trade: The Deal on Balance By Shoshana Bryen

There is a pattern emerging on the Iran deal: we got and they got. That’s how it’s supposed to work — something for something — right? Okay.

We got:

Iranian ballistic missile tests in violation of UN resolutions;
Missiles fired near a U.S. aircraft carrier sailing in international waters; and
Ten American sailors illegally captured, whose rights under the Geneva Convention were violated when they were photographed for propaganda purposes.

Oh, wait – we’re probably supposed to look at the positive effects of the deal. Okay.

We got – and this is not to be minimized – although none of them should have been in Iranian prisons to begin with:

Jason Rezaian, a newspaper reporter;
Amir Hekmati, a former Marine visiting his grandmother;
Saeed Abedini, a Christian pastor;
Matthew Trevithick, a student in a language program at Tehran University; and
Nosratollah Khosravi-Roodsari, a businessman who opted to stay in Iran.

They got

Bahram Mechanic, Tooraj Faridi, and Khosrow Afghahi, pardoned before trial for violating U.S. export laws regarding shipping high tech equipment to Iran.
Matin Sadeghi’s charges dropped in the same case.

The Indelible Stain: Jew-Washing, Antisemitism, and Zionophobia By Andrew Pessin ****

[In the days just before the Messiah] a man’s enemies will be the members of his household …. —Sotah 49b (quoting Micah 7.6)

Among the many difficulties confronting Jews who are comfortable calling themselves Zionists is the phenomenon of Jew-washing.[1] Inspired by expressions such as “whitewashing” and “pinkwashing,” the idea is that if someone can count Jews among those endorsing his beliefs or behavior then his beliefs or behavior cannot be deemed antisemitic. Indeed if he can count Jews among his personal friends, if some of his “best friends” are Jews, then he cannot be deemed an antisemite. The problem for Zionists is clear: the fact that so many Jews are comfortable calling themselves anti-Zionists means that the underlying antisemitic nature of most forms of anti-Zionism is easily obscured.

The aim of this essay is to demonstrate what has sorely needed demonstrating for a long time: that Jew-washing simply doesn’t work. In fact it obviously doesn’t work, once you think about it even a little.

It’s commonly assumed that racism has a general nature: to be a racist is to display a certain negative attitude or behaviors toward all members of the targeted group. This assumption is reasonably grounded in the paradigmatic manifestations of racism throughout history. When medieval Christians hated Jews on the basis of religion, for example, they hated all Jews (we usually think), until they converted. When the Nazis hated Jews on the basis of race, they hated all Jews (we think) no matter what their creed, even those Jews who had converted and assimilated.

It makes sense: if you’re a Jew-hater, then you hate all Jews.

Except that it simply isn’t true.

Neither empirically, nor theoretically.

Heinrich Himmler, the head of the Nazi’s S.S., famously complained that the Nazis’ fatal efficiency was often compromised because everyone had his favorite “A-1 Jew.”[2] There were very dedicated Nazis, filled with Jew-hatred, who still found room in their hearts not to hate some particular Jew or another, for whatever the reason. Those exceptions didn’t mean they weren’t Jew-haters, of course. But sometimes other considerations overrode their general hatred.

The Madness of Frau Merkel By James Lewis

Quran (33:50) – “O Prophet! We have made lawful to … those (slaves) whom thy right hand possesses out of the prisoners of war whom Allah has assigned to thee”

Quran (23:5-6) – “..who abstain from sex, except … (the captives) whom their right hands possess…”

Quran (4:24) – “And all married women (are forbidden) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess.”

Quran (8:69) – “But (now) enjoy what ye took in war, lawful and good” (because) “Allah gave you mastery over them.”

If we’ve learned anything in the last eight years it’s that supposedly smart people can be suicidally stupid, and that idiot savants can easily rationalize sabotaging their own nations.

Obama isn’t the only elite messiah who favors national suicide for past sins, though he is certainly the blindest, most self-righteous and willfully destructive one in American history.

Then there is Frau Angela Merkel — the Chancellor and Chief Guilt-Tripper of Germany. Frau Merkel shares Obama’s fantasy world, where only the Good People rule and the rest follow orders. The EU even has a slogan for it: it’s called the “democracy deficit” — meaning that ordinary voters have no power whatsoever. Yes, the EU is spreading love and peace all over, but — shucks — there’s still a ways to go.

The EU’s seemingly suicidal policy deliberately aims to dilute the percentage of ethnic Europeans in their native countries, to empower the new Franco-German capital in Brussels. This is exactly what Otto von Bismarck did in the 1800s to destroy the provincial capitals of German-speaking Europe, and to centralize all power in one Reich in the Prussian capital of Berlin. Fanatical German nationalism, xenophobia and militarism in the 20th century were a direct product of Bismarck’s imperial unification policy.

Understanding media terminology for events in Israel :Edgar Davidson

http://edgar1981.blogspot.co.uk/2016/01/understanding-media-terminology-for.html?m=1 Thanks to  William Narvey

Geert Wilders Rallies Protests in Holland against Muslim Migrant Influx: “Islamic testosterone bombs”

The New York Times covered a protest rally Saturday by Geert Wilders, leader of the Freedom Party in The Hague Parliament in the Dutch community of Spijkenisse handing out cans of pepper spray. That was a send up on the Muslim male migrant misogyny in Cologne Germany and other German and European cities by what he calls: “Islamic testosterone bombs”. As if to verify this threat the Imam in Cologne, Germany said the women who suffered sexual assaults and worse on New Year’s Eve by upwards of 1,000 Muslim males gathered at the main railway station brought upon themselves: “they were half naked and wore perfume.” Absurd! They were attired in warm clothing. Doubtless, the Imam thought they should have been immured in tip to toe niqabs. We had posted on the threats facing Dutch and other European women when Wilders and a fellow PVV Hague parliamentarian raised questions of the ruling coalition led by PM Mark Rutte were doing to protect Dutch women.

The New York Times report chronicled this latest protest rally by Wilders, “Dutch Lawmaker Wilders Gaining Support Amid Migrant Crisis:”

Wilders, surrounded by bodyguards and police, visited a market in the largely blue-collar town of Spijkenisse on Saturday to hand out the sprays, which contained red paint. Amid stalls selling vegetables, fish, flowers and bicycle parts, Wilders got a rock-star welcome from dozens of supporters, while a small group of protesters chanted and waved placards including one that read, “Refugees are welcome, racism is not.”

The publicity stunt fits into Wilders’ uncompromising anti-immigrant, anti-Islam rhetoric that has propelled him to the top of Dutch opinion polls, just over a year away from parliamentary elections.

In between shaking hands and posing for selfies with supporters, the Freedom Party leader said that, if elected, he would, “close the borders immediately and have no more asylum seekers. We just cannot afford to have more. The Dutch people in a big majority don’t want it and we cannot afford it and it makes our people and women only more unsafe.”

DOCTORS WITHOUT BORDERS PRESIDENT: JEWS WEARING KIPPAS ARE FAIR GAME FOR MUSLIMS

Can we start calling the Hate Israel crowd anti-Semitic yet? Because between the boycotts of Jewish businesses, anti-Semitic conspiracy theories and overt justification for anti-Jewish violence, whatever distinction may have existed in the past is gone.

Case in point, Rony Brauman, the former president of Doctors Without Borders suggesting that Jews wearing Kippahs, a Jewish religious garment, are bringing violence on themselves by pledging allegiance to Israel.

Rony Brauman, a former president of Doctors Without Borders, made the statement last week during an interview on the Europe1 radio station about the Jan. 11stabbing of a devout Jew in Marseille, allegedly by a 15-year-old boy who told police he assaulted the victim as part of the jihad of the Islamic State terrorist group.

Pessin Affair Exposes Connecticut College Antisemitism Noah Beck

A pro-Israel professor won’t be on campus at Connecticut College when classes start Monday, missing the second straight semester since his 2014 Facebook post criticizing Hamas led to death threats and ostracism.

Andrew Pessin “requested and received a sabbatical for the Spring semester to continue his studies in Jewish philosophy and Israel studies,” Connecticut College spokeswoman Pamela Serfes said in an email last week. “He has been and continues to be a valued member of the Connecticut College faculty.”

The vague and misleading response glosses over the intensity of the campaign against Pessin — he first took a medical leave last spring as a smear campaign against him was at full throat. The controversy exposed an administration unwilling to enforce its own honor code to protect a professor against anti-Israel activists and a student journalist responsible for covering the very controversy she had joined.

Why the Justice Department Won’t Work with the FBI on Clinton’s E-mail Case By Andrew C. McCarthy

Another day, another double-take reading the New York Times.

The latest shoe in the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s scandalous mishandling of classified information dropped heavily this week. It had already been reported that, contrary to her denials, hundreds of secret intelligence communications were transmitted over the private, unsecured e-mail system on which the former secretary of state recklessly conducted government business. It is now clear that some of these contained “top secret/SAP” information. (SAP is “special access programs.”) This indicates defense secrets of the highest order, the compromise of which can destroy vital intelligence programs, get covert agents killed, and imperil national security.

Yet, in reporting the story, the Times’ Mark Mazzetti took pains to stress: “The government has said that Mrs. Clinton is not a subject of the investigation.”

Really? Well, to put it in Clintonian terms: It all depends on what the definition of “subject” is.

Though you wouldn’t know it from the Times, “subject” is a term of art in criminal investigations. It refers to one of the three categories into which prosecutors fit every relevant actor. Subjects are people whose conduct is being scrutinized and who, depending on what evidence turns up, may or may not be charged. This distinguishes them from targets, who are suspects virtually certain to be indicted for an obvious crime; and from mere witnesses, whose interaction with a suspect suggests no criminality on their part (e.g., the teller in a bank hold-up, or the neighbor awakened by a fatal gunshot next door).

For law enforcement, targets and mere witnesses are easy to deal with. Targets usually decline to be interviewed (as is their right under the Fifth Amendment). Even if they are not guilty, it is often prudent for them to wait to see what the government alleges before they answer questions. Witnesses tend to speak freely because there is no reason not to.