Displaying posts published in

June 2016

Leader of Ontario’s Progressive Conservatives linked to controversial Islamic charity By Sierra Rayne

There is bound to be tension in any political party with the contradictory name “Progressive Conservative,” but it appears that in Ontario – Canada’s largest province and home of nearly 14 million people having a largely undefended border with the United States – there is little evidence of the “conservative” wing.

Party leader Patrick Brown is actively campaigning against the proposed cuts to socialized medicine by the governing Liberal Party, led by Kathleen Wynne. The party that is supposed to be to the political right of the radical left-wing Liberals is now working with health care unions to oppose a reduction in public health care spending. Under Brown’s leadership, the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario is also a keen supporter of carbon taxation.

Even more troubling is that Brown is apparently supporting a highly controversial Islamic charity. On May 30, he spoke at Islamic Relief Canada’s Ramadan Launch Event. This doesn’t appear to be Brown’s first connection to Islamic Relief Canada. According to the charity, he also participated in the 2015 Nazem Kadri Golf Classic.

In December 2014, the Financial Post removed Islamic Relief Canada from its list of recommended “Charities of the Year” because “its international arm has been banned elsewhere for allegedly funneling funds to the terrorist organization Hamas.” The issues appear unresolved, as the charity was apparently not added back into the 2015 list.

In mid-2014, Israel banned Islamic Relief Worldwide (IRW) because of its linkages to Hamas. According to Israeli Defence Minister Moshe Yaalon, “[t]he IRW is one of the sources of Hamas’s funding and a means for raising funds from various countries in the world[.] … We do not intend to allow it to function and abet terrorist activity against Israel.”

In January of this year, banking giant HSBC revealed that it had cut ties with Islamic Relief because of “concerns that cash for aid could end up with terrorist groups abroad.”

If Brown wasn’t aware of these connections and potential problems, he should have been.

Europe Braces for More Jihadist Attacks “Another attempted attack is almost certain.” by Soeren Kern

Sports stadiums and big music events are especially vulnerable: “This is where you put a small town into a small area for a couple of hours.” — Neil Basu, deputy assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, London.

“We know that the Islamic State has the European Championship in its sights.” — Hans-Georg Maaßen, head of Germany’s domestic intelligence agency.

According to Patrick Calvar, head of the France’s domestic intelligence agency, at least 645 French nationals or residents, including 245 women, are currently with the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. Another 200 individuals are “in transit,” either on their way to Syria or returning to France. Around 244 jihadists have already returned to France.

British police chiefs are struggling to recruit enough officers who are willing to carry a firearm, because many fear they will be treated as criminal suspects if they use their weapon in the line of duty.

European security officials are bracing for potential jihadist attacks at public venues across Europe this summer.

In France, officials are preparing for possible attacks against the European Football Championships. The games, which start on June 10, comprise 51 matches involving 24 teams playing in 10 host cities across the country.

Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said that more than 90,000 security personnel will be on hand to protect the 2.5 million spectators expected to attend the games, as well as the hundreds of thousands more who will watch the matches on big screens in so-called “fan zones” in major cities.

Britain’s National Students Union in Crisis by Robbie Travers

Britain’s National Union of Students (NUS) is in crisis. Three major university student associations — Newcastle, Lincoln and Hull — have disaffiliated themselves from the organization.

Bouattia’s role is meant to entail representing the best interests of students in the UK. How does endorsing and legitimizing terrorist attacks in Israel the best way to improve conditions for students in the UK? Is Bouattia trying to radicalise students in the UK?

When students need representation, the voice often heard is that of the NUS. Is it any wonder that when this voice has a history of endorsing terrorism, including sharing platforms with convicted terrorists, that students may want a different voice?

The United Kingdom’s National Union of Students (NUS) is in crisis. Three major university student associations — Newcastle, Lincoln and Hull — have disaffiliated themselves from the organization, and more are set to follow. NUS is struggling even to retain its previous strongholds, such as Exeter’s Student Association.

The Exeter University campaign to leave the NUS managed to increase the number of votes to defect from roughly 200 to 2546. This stampede occurred despite the massive protests by the “stay” campaign, including text messages to thousands of students and visits to the school by more than 10 senior NUS officials, including two Vice Presidents-elect and the President-elect.

Why are students from so many British universities fighting to leave the NUS? Well, take for example statements by its new president-elect, Malia Bouattia.

Tony Thomas The Cream of Our Climate Croppers

The Australian Academy of Science has just honoured a fresh draft of boffins, including a pair whose names will be instantly familiar to all who marvel at Big Climate’s high-volume alarmism. Professors Neville Nicholls and Ian Allison, step forward and take a bow.
At Quadrant we respect winners, so hats off to newly-elected Australian Academy of Science Fellows, Professors Neville Nicholls and Ian Allison. Both are climate catastrophists, each seemingly oblivious to the empirical research which has downgraded the CO2 climate-sensitivity guesstimate (i.e. positive feedback number) from the IPCC’s 1.5-4.5 times to barely more than unity.

These real-world observations suggest that a doubling of atmospheric CO2 from pre-industrial levels would generate, all things being equal, a beneficial increase of about 1degC in warming, not the supposed life-frying 4-6deg rise by 2100 on which the whole multi-trillion-dollar climate scare is based.

The IPCC’s fantasy figure for sensitivity to CO2 is one of the reasons why 111 of its 114 climate model runs over-estimated the negligible warming in the 15 years to 2013. However, the main reason why the climate models are duds is that the very notion of complex and chaotic climate forces being controlled by a simple CO2-emissions dial is laughable.[1]

As for the new Academy Fellows[2], I’m not even sure I’d accept a Fellowship, if beseeched. Who would want to be a co-Fellow with Tim “Desal Plant” Flannery FAA, for example,[3] or the ABC’s Robyn Williams FAA, the latter supporting the writing of horror fiction about global warming killing off families’ beloved kittens and spaniels in 2023?

State Department Intentionally Deleted Video of Iran Back-and-ForthBy Felicia Schwartz

The Obama administration had many tense exchanges with reporters as it pursued diplomatic talks with Iran on its nuclear program. But it revealed on Wednesday that at least one of those exchanges, from 2013, had been deliberately deleted from the State Department’s public online video archives.

A State Department editor erased a portion of the Dec. 2, 2013 briefing before posting the footage online, State Department spokesman John Kirby told reporters on Wednesday.

The editor did so after receiving a phone call from another employee in the State Department’s public affairs bureau transmitting the request, Mr. Kirby said, adding that the deletion probably happened on the same day as the briefing and he didn’t know who specifically requested the footage be erased. Earlier this month, a different State Department official had attributed the deletion to a “glitch.”

In the tape, which has since been restored, a Fox News reporter asked then-State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki whether her predecessor had been truthful when responding to questions in 2013 about secret contacts with Iran.

The backstory: In February 2013, the reporter, James Rosen, had asked previous State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland whether the U.S. was holding secret bilateral talks with Iran outside of the formal channel between Iran and six world powers. She said the U.S. wasn’t.

It was later reported that the U.S. had done just that. CONTINUE AT SITE

Trump Makes Sense on Energy From the mouth of The Donald comes wisdom on America’s climate dissonance. By Holman W. Jenkins, Jr.

Political markets are weird: They cry out for something and yet politicians, with their enslavement to conventional wisdom and careerist caution, are unwilling to supply it.

Then along comes Donald Trump.

Mr. Trump, in his set-piece energy speech on Thursday, did something that might outlast his presidential hopes. In his anti-intellectual way, he made an intellectual contribution. For decades, poorly justified scientific fears of future warming have hovered as an incubus over U.S. energy development. These fears, you’ll notice, have not actually blocked much of anything: Fracking happened. The U.S. continues to export coal to China. But these fears fill America’s leadership class with guilt and cognitive dissonance.

Give Mr. Trump credit for trying to break the spell.

In a speech the media has done its best to ignore or debunk, he said, “From an environmental standpoint, my priorities are very simple: clean air and clean water.” With these words, he relegated back to the land of abstraction the abstraction known as climate change.

His was a model political speech, one that Hillary Clinton might learn from. It set an agenda, with a minimum of windy rationalization, that voters can assess. Mr. Trump, as all politicians do, offered a prayer to the false deity of energy independence but he also offered a perfectly serviceable vision of Americans freely competing in global energy markets based on our own natural and (note) renewable resources and technology.

Mr. Trump hit the climate moment squarely. CONTINUE AT SITE

The Army Corps of Abuse The Supremes rebuke another misuse of the Clean Water Act.

The Supreme Court is divided 4-4 on many issues, but the good news is that all eight Justices can still agree that Americans deserve their day in court to challenge intrusive government. That’s the essence of Tuesday’s unanimous ruling that the Obama Administration’s expansive interpretation of the Clean Water Act can be challenged in court.

In February 2012, the Army Corps of Engineers told the Hawkes peat-mining company that marshy land it owns in Minnesota had a “significant nexus” to the Red River 120 miles away and thus could be regulated under the Clean Water Act. Hawkes tried to challenge this determination in federal court. But the Corps said the company couldn’t do so until it had finished the Corps’s permitting process, which the Corps said would be very expensive and take years (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers v. Hawkes).

This amounts to a pre-emptive veto of private land use. The Army Corps said the company must wait to challenge the Corps’ decision. But if Hawkes develops the land on the assumption it would win its challenge many years hence, the company runs the risk of major penalties if it loses in the end. Heads the Army Corps wins; tails Hawkes loses. CONTINUE AT SITE

Judge unseals Trump University docs, accidentally unleashes Clinton bombshell | Tom Tillison

When a federal judge ruled against Donald Trump this week in a lawsuit against Trump University, he inadvertently unleashed a bombshell involving Democratic rival Hillary Clinton.

U.S. District Court Judge Gonzalo Curiel unsealed documentsrelating to the Trump U for-profit real estate program. The documents include information used by the school to convince prospective students to join the program.

Curiel is the same judge the presumptive GOP nominee has called “hostile” and biased against him.

“I have a judge who is a hater of Donald Trump, a hater,” Trump said Friday at a campaign rally in San Diego. “He’s a hater. His name is Gonzalo Curiel.”

And a bombshell report from American Spectator seems to lend credence to that claim.

The conservative magazine said that one of the firms picked by Judge Curiel to represent plaintiffs in the class action lawsuit against Trump University have financial ties to Hillary and Bill Clinton.

Financial ties to the tune of half a million dollars.

Dangerous ‘Safe Spaces’ on College Campuses are Un-American by Michael Cutler

America and its citizens are under attack from outside forces – from terror and criminal organizations seeking to enter the country, wreak havoc and ply their violent and criminal “trades” – and from forces within the United States.

Examples of forces from within are globalists, including organizations such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and, in fact, all who advocate for open borders and other dangerous and wrong-headed goals, including massive legalization programs for unknown millions of illegal aliens.

In the wake of the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, I have testified before numerous Congressional hearings and appeared on various television and radio news programs and college campuses to discuss and debate issues relating to the nexus between immigration and national security. Included in what I share is how immigration system failures have enabled criminals to enter the U.S., along with massive – indeed, unprecedented – numbers of foreign workers to displace hardworking American workers.

Within the past several years, however, many television networks no longer provide the opportunities for open and honest discussions about immigration. Increasing numbers of television networks have developed and grown their multilingual subsidiary programming that has proven to provide huge revenue streams. Broadcast networks are focused on profits which are determined by the size of the audience that their programming reaches. Network executives are eager to do whatever they need to do to grow their audience – even if their audience is comprised of illegal aliens.

The Israel That Arabs Don’t Know by Ramy Aziz

When the Israeli Ministry of Exterior invited me to visit Israel as part of a delegation of European-based Arab journalists and media representatives, I accepted without hesitation. The goal of the invitation was to provide us with an opportunity to freely explore the different dimensions to life inside the state of Israel. Located in the heart of the Middle East and one of the region’s central and enduring conflicts, Israel receives a large amount of attention from neighboring peoples curious about the state itself and its management. Although major developments in international communication and accessibility of knowledge have transformed the world into a connected community that now sometimes resembles a small village, Arab media coverage of Israel continues to be characterized by a lack of clarity and misrepresentation, making it difficult for Arab citizens to truly understand the country. The persistent and recurring problems in the West Bank and Gaza are of major concern to many Arabs, but media sources often conflate the State’s controversial foreign policy with life inside the the country itself and produce dystopian visions of life inside its borders.

While not an article or analysis, the following is an honest testimony of what I saw during my visit, without influence by any person or institution. I hope to present an alternative perspective from other Arab media outlets that I have found to exaggerate and mischaracterize the realities of Israeli life.

On my flight from Rome to Tel Aviv on Israel’s El Al airlines, I thought about what awaited me and what I would see. Although I had an idea of what Israel was like and friends who have told me of their experiences working there, memories of the accumulated assumptions about the place that I had gained throughout my childhood in Egypt presented a conflicting counter narrative. I wondered which was the truth: what I now knew, or what had been instilled in us Egyptians as children. Do the “Jews” in Israel actually hate Arabs? If they found out I was Egyptian, would treat me poorly? Would I be verbally or physically abused if Israelis heard me speaking Arabic?

Halting my train of thought, a man sitting next to me with his wife asked me something in Hebrew. In English, I explained that I didn’t understand the language. The man then apologized and asked in English, “Where are you from?” When I answered that I was from Egypt, he and his wife smiled genuinely and welcomingly. These were not the fake smiles our schools, society, television, and film had attributed to Israelis and Jews.

When I arrived in Israel’s financial capital, Tel Aviv, the airport’s clean atmosphere and facilities left me wondering whether I had left Europe. Its modernity left little doubt that I had entered a developed country.