Displaying posts published in

2016

When the Fourth of July Embraced Latin America Too In the 1800s, Americans cheered their neighbors’ drive for independence, inspired by the cosmopolitan founding vision of the U.S. By Caitlin Fitz

The sun blazed down on Norfolk’s old-fashioned fife-and-drum parade on July Fourth of 1822, but the weather deteriorated for the afternoon picnic. The skies of coastal Virginia turned heavy and black; the rain fell in sheets. Some guests ran for cover, while the rest dined on soggy food, sang above the howling wind and drank a toast to…Latin America?

Before the party started, the hosts had carefully hung the flags of Peru, Argentina, Chile and Colombia alongside the Stars and Stripes. The Mexican flag was probably there too, whipping and snapping in the wind.

There was nothing unusual about this interest in our hemispheric neighbors. Newspapers of the era printed long transcripts of holiday toasts every summer in the weeks after Independence Day. A sample of several hundred indicates that well over half of July Fourth gatherings in the decade following the War of 1812 raised their glasses to Latin America.

Why, on their most patriotic of holidays, were so many Americans looking south of the border, speaking not of walls but of brotherhood?

The answer lies in the cosmopolitan vision of the American founding. The audacity of the Revolution lay not simply in the fact that 13 disparate colonies had defied the mighty British Empire but in the conviction of Americans that the rest of the world should care. When Parisians stormed the Bastille in the summer of 1789, Americans exulted, thrilled to think that such a powerful country was following in their footsteps. (The ardor soon cooled as bloodied heads toppled in the streets of Paris and a slave rebellion erupted in Haiti.)
When another wave of rebellion swept across Latin America from 1810 to 1825, Americans erupted with joy once again. By the 50th anniversary of the U.S., most of the western hemisphere was independent, from the U.S. and Mexico to Venezuela and Brazil. It was a “jubilee of nations,” a Kentucky congressman crowed, “the birth-day of a hemisphere redeemed.” U.S. patriots hailed Latin America’s wars of independence as thrilling equatorial reprises of 1776.

The international ardor rang loudest on July Fourth, but it reverberated year-round. Appalachian farmers read poetry about Andean independence. Sailors wore cockades for revolutionary Montevideo. Parents even named their sons Bolivar, after Simón Bolívar, the Venezuelan political and military leader sometimes called the “ George Washington of South America.”

Jihadists Trying to Dislodge Bangladesh’s Secular Government by Lawrence A. Franklin

It seems that either al-Qaeda, with or without the Islamic State, has been linking up with Bangladesh’s indigenous radical networks.

If the Hasina government cannot restore a sense of normalcy, the booming Bangladeshi economy is likely to stagnate, Western corporate investment may dry up, and liberal technocrats probably will seek security elsewhere. If this happens, Bangladesh’s minorities will feel even further isolated.

“They believe that we are all going to hell, and no matter how they treat us, that they will all go to heaven.” — Former Catholic seminarian.

Friday’s Islamic terrorist attack in the swankiest section of the Bangladesh’s capital of Dhaka, in which 20 people were murdered, had been expected by the country’s law enforcement services. When this attack took place, the government had been in the midst of a nationwide crackdown on known terrorist sympathizers. The police had made hundreds — some reports claim thousands — of arrests. They had also seized explosives, firearms, machetes and jihadi tracts. Most of the arrests consisted of members of indigenous, outlawed jihadist groups such as the Jamaatul Mujahedeen Bangladesh, Hizb ut-Tahrir, Harakat-ul Jihad-al Islami Bangladesh (HuJI-B), and Ansarullah Team.

MY SAY: IN PRAISE OF GEORGE WASHINGTON

Alexander Hamilton is all the rage now for the musical “Hamilton” which has deservedly won so many awards. I saw it and loved it and admire the book and author that inspired it.

“Alexander Hamilton” by Ron Chernow. 2005

Ron Chernow is an excellent writer and biographer. In 2011 Chernow wrote an inspiring biography of our magnificent first president George Washington who comes to mind as we celebrate Independence day. It is great reading in any season.
Washington: A Life by Ron Chernow

Product Details

General Washington’s Standard ‘To which the wise and honest can repair’ By Kevin D. Williamson

‘Does not, then, the Almighty clearly impress an awe of the persons and authority of Kings upon the minds of their subjects, hereby proving Government of Divine origin?” So asked the Reverend J. R. Walsh in a pamphlet printed in 1829. “For, otherwise, by what principle could any one mortal command subjection from so many millions of fellow creatures”?

That was a question very much upon the mind of King George IV, whose coronation provided the inspiration for the Reverend Walsh’s essay: That king’s father, George III, had been treated with a notable lack of awe by his American subjects, who gave him the shoe and set up their own republic, without any king at all. This experiment in awelessness, all the smart people of the late 18th century assured one another, was doomed to failure: Awelessness was next to lawlessness, they believed, and a people without a king to tell them how to behave or a king’s church to tell them why to behave were doomed to anarchy.

Here’s to 240 years of glorious anarchy.

Awe was very much on the minds of those early republicans. George Washington, whose name appears frequently in sentences containing the word “awe,” wrote that one of the purposes of our northern fortifications was to “awe the Indians.” Thomas Paine, who had no great awe of the state, wrote of the constitutional right to keep and bear arms: “Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property.” You’ll find a man’s heart where you find his awe: Walter Bagehot, founder of (that other) National Review and later editor of The Economist, lived to learn: “A schoolmaster should have an atmosphere of awe,” he wrote, “and walk wonderingly, as if he was amazed at being himself.” Edmund Burke believed that even when addressing the defects of the state, we should treat it “with pious awe and trembling solicitude,” hence his hesitancy about the American Revolution and his detestation of the French one. The libertarian theorist Murray Rothbard would later argue the opposite, that failed revolutions are valuable to the extent that they “decrease the awe in which the constituted authority is held by the populace, and in that way will increase the chance of a later revolt against tyranny.”

When the Reverend Walsh connected awe with divinity in government, he had in mind Paul’s letter to the Romans: “Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the power, resisteth the ordinance of God: and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation.” Burke had in mind a kind of holy terror, too, though one that less closely resembled the apostle’s fear of the Almighty than it did Thomas Hobbes’s fear of bellum omnium contra omnes. But in many ways those come down to the same thing: Without someone to keep them in line — to keep them in awe — what’s to keep the people from running amok?

The American Founders did not contemplate a world without awe of government, but they did intuit that a free, self-governing, democratic republic could get by with a good deal less of it. George Washington famously rejected an offer to make him king and thought that calling the president “Your Excellency” might be a bit much, too. We hear a great deal now about the “dignity of the office” and the need to have “respect for the presidency,” if not for the president himself, but nobody ever really says why. Why should we be awed at the chief bureaucrat of the federal administrative apparatus? Why should we hold in awe our employee? “Only I can fix” is Donald Trump’s illiterate shorthand for the idea that presidents are, like kings, products of divine election. George Washington never said anything like that; he didn’t need to convince anybody that he was the man for the job, and he knew that the job was governing, not ruling.

Stunning apparent conflict of interest as SecState Hillary Clinton sought information key to son-in-law’s hedge fund By Thomas Lifson

The opportunities for corruption – insider trading of the worst kind – were obvious and deeply disturbing when Hillary Clinton was secretary of state and her son-in-law went into a very specific kind of investing. And the fact that ne’er-do-well husband of Chelsea and father of two grandkids Mark Mezvinsky ended up botching his hedge fund and losing his investors’ money does not prove innocence.

In a long article at Foxnews.com, Peter Byrne lays out the tangled web of influence behind the big financial stakes swirling around Hillary’s actions as secretary of state in 2012.

Mezvinsky, who in earlier years had abandoned work and his wife to go be a ski bum for a number of months, returned to Wall Street and set up a hedge fund that was a kind of satellite operation for Goldman Sachs, the key player on Wall Street; supplier of many top executives to the Treasury Department; and, of course, mega-donor and speech honorarium payer to the Clintons.

In 2012, Mezvinski, the husband of Chelsea Clinton, created a $325 million basket of offshore funds under the Eaglevale Partners banner through a special arrangement with investment bank Goldman Sachs. The funds have lost tens of millions of dollars predicting that bailouts of the Greek banking system would pump up the value of the country’s distressed bonds. One fund, exclusively dedicated to Greek debt, suffered near-total losses.

Clinton stepped down as secretary of state in 2013 to run for president. But newly released emails from 2012 show that she and Clinton Foundation consultant, Sidney Blumenthal, shared classified information about how German leadership viewed the prospects for a Greek bailout. Clinton also shared “protected” State Department information about Greek bonds with her husband at the same time that her son-in-law aimed his hedge fund at Greece.

That America’s top diplomat kept a sharp eye on intelligence assessing the chances of a bailout of the Greek central bank is not a problem. However, sharing such sensitive information with friends and family would have been highly improper. Federal regulations prohibit the use of nonpublic information to further private interests or the interests of others. The mere perception of a conflict of interest is unacceptable.

Israeli Settlements: A Policy Worth Pursuing By Jacob Bernstein

Israel has recently decided to allocate millions of dollars to the construction of settlements in Judea and Samaria. Of course, this has produced anger among those who believe in the “two-state fantasy” of an Arab state and a Jewish state peacefully and cooperatively living side by side. As the fantasists see it, those darned Israelis are always such a nuisance — building homes in their ancestral land, shattering the dreams of a people who are not a people, and throwing the Middle East into chaos once again. If the Israeli right wing that governs the country was not so closeminded and would just give peace a chance and the Jews and the Palestinians could be the best of friends.

However, in the real world, people know, or should know, that none of these things are true. The Palestinians have been offered their own state at least three times, in 2000, 2001, and 2008, and each time it was the Palestinians who refused to take the offer of most of the land they claimed they wanted, and live in peace with Israel. Further, it is not Israel that has thrown the Middle East into chaos, but Islamist extremism in the region, especially from the Shia Islamists in Iran. Also, the much-vilified Israeli settlements are not an impediment to peace in the region, but are a necessity for Israel to provide security and protect its Jewish heritage and identity.

The idea that building homes is the cause of this conflict is ridiculous, because there was conflict even before there was any Israeli construction in Judea and Samaria. When the Arabs refer to “occupation,” most often they mean Jewish “occupation” of the entire land of Israel. The evidence lies in not just their words and chants of “from the river to the sea,” but also in their actions, especially pre-1967, before Israel took Judea and Samaria from the invading Jordanians. History has demonstrated that the Palestinian Arab population has never been willing to agree to peace as long as there would be a Jewish state next to the Arab state. When Israel was first created and allotted a sliver of land, it was attacked by five Arab armies vowing to drive its residents into the Mediterranean. And since then, whenever Israel offered generous peace proposals, meeting almost all of the Palestinian Arab demands, the offers were still rejected because they required recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.

Settlements in Judea and Samaria actually are vital to Israeli national security. If “Palestine” were created in Judea and Samaria, it would likely become another hotbed for terrorists, like in Gaza. This is incredibly dangerous, as there would be parts of Israel only nine miles wide but still containing the vast majority of the Israeli population which would be trapped between Arab terrorists and the sea. The settlements in Judea and Samaria were established to widen Israel’s narrowest width, which ensures Israel will have a route to the Jordan Valley if Israel is forced to fight a war to the east. Further, Judea and Samaria are positioned on a formidable mountain range, towering over central Israel. Without Israeli control or presence there the IDF would not be able to prevent Arab Katyusha rocket fire that has in range over 70% of Israel’s population and 80% of her industrial base.

Oxford men jailed for sexually abusing a teenage girl

Three men have been jailed for a string of sexual offences against a teenage girl in Oxford.

The victim was plied with drink and drugs between the ages of 13 and 15 and passed around “like a piece of meat”.

The offences included rape and indecent assault. On one occasion the girl was taken to woodland and told she would have her neck snapped.

She was in the care system when the abuse started and it continued between 1999 and 2007.

The defendants, charges, and sentences:

Assad Hussain, 35, was found guilty of five counts of rape, two counts of indecent assault, and one count of making a threat to kill – 12 years
Anjum Dogar, 33, was convicted of one count of rape and one count of indecent assault – 10 years
Akhtar Dogar, 35, was convicted of one count of indecent assault, two counts of rape, and one count of making a threat to kill – 10 years

Prosecutors said the crimes took place in wooded areas around Oxford and private addresses.

In sentencing, Judge Ian Pringle said: “This victim was perfect prey for those who wanted to sexually exploit her. There was clearly never any consent given.”

He said Akhtar Dogar had been the “principal player” in the “shocking” threats to kill, saying that he “used friendly companionship and turned it into an opportunity to serve his sexual desires”.

BUSY, BUSY MONTH FOR JIHAD

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

The Religion of Peace recently distinguished itself by hacking
a Buddhist leader to death, shooting a Christian priest in the
head, murdering a Hindu temple worker, and slaughtering
a 13-year-old Jewish girl… all in less than 24 hours!
Still think all religions are the same?

At Least 70 Killed in Blast at Busy Baghdad Shopping District Islamic State has claimed responsibility for the car bombing, which also injured at least 150 people By Ghassan Adnan in Baghdad and Karen Leigh in Dubai

Islamic State claimed responsibility for a massive car bomb that exploded overnight in the heart of one of Baghdad’s busiest commercial areas, killing 72 people and wounding at least 150 others, Iraq’s interior ministry said.

The explosion in the upscale central neighborhood of Karrada went off around 1:30 a.m. on Sunday morning, setting nearby buildings ablaze as young people and families packed the streets, reveling after sundown and the breaking of the Ramadan fast. It was the terror group’s first major attack on the heavily patrolled area since May 2015.

Islamic State, a Sunni militant group, said in a statement distributed online that it had targeted a gathering of Shiites. It and other Sunni extremists reject Shiism, calling it polytheism.

Civil defense teams worked through the night pulling bodies from the debris. Families of those missing gathered in the street, looking for their relatives and shouting and cursing at security forces they said had failed to keep the area safe.

Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi toured the site hours after the explosion, promising to punish those responsible, according to a statement from his office. Angry crowds there jeered him, calling him a thief.

“Leave, leave, don’t let him stay here,” they said.

Mr. Abadi has faced months of political uncertainty partly caused by frequent attacks on Baghdad and other cities that have exposed gaps in Iraq’s security infrastructure. A protest movement this year questioned his leadership and called for immediate government reform.

Minutes after the Karrada bombing, an improvised explosive device detonated in the crowded east Baghdad neighborhood Al Shaab, killing four people and wounding 16 others, the interior ministry said. It targeted young Iraqis who were out shopping for the Muslim holiday Eid al-Fitr, which begins this week.

No group has claimed responsibility for the second attack.

Islamic State in May claimed a series of bombings that left 88 people dead across Baghdad, one of the deadliest days of insurgent violence in the country’s history and a stark reminder that the government had failed to uproot the extremist group despite dealing it a number of recent setbacks on the battlefield.

The Iraqi army reclaimed full control of Fallujah from Islamic State on June 26. The Anbar province city some 40 miles west from Baghdad had served as a command center for the terror group, and was one of its last major strongholds in Iraq following losses in Ramadi and the northern city of Sinjar. CONTINUE AT SITE

Biafra: Where is the International Community? by Judith Bergman

A new generation of Biafrans is now peacefully advocating for an independent Biafra. Muhammadu Buhari, the Muslim president of Nigeria, is fighting the nascent independence movement with military force.

“I saw one boy trying to answer a question. He immediately raised his hands, but the soldiers opened fire …” — Witness to the shootings, to Amnesty International.

As for IPOB’s leader, Nnamdi Kanu, director of London-based Radio Biafra, he was arrested in October 2015 and has been held since, illegally, despite meeting bail conditions.

It is noteworthy that a peaceful situation, such as that of the pro-Biafra movement, apparently requires a “military option”, whereas a lethal terrorist group, such as the Muslim Fulani herdsmen, who murder innocent civilians, does not. This tactic furthermore brings into question whether Buhari’s efforts at curbing Boko Haram in the country are genuine or merely a play he puts on half-heartedly for the benefit of the international community.

On paper, the plight of Biafrans — whose state in what is today southeastern Nigeria, lasted for only three years, 1967-70, before the Nigerian authorities ended it with a genocide against them — should, for the international community, be an open-and-shut case.

Journalists, human rights activists, social justice warriors on campuses throughout the West, and organizations such as the United Nations and the European Union, all ostensibly claim to care deeply about human rights, especially for people whom the Europeans once colonized.

Biafra constitutes a textbook example of British colonization. The country’s brief existence was cut short by the Nigerian government’s genocide, which crushed all hopes for independence and self-determination. Biafrans, today, are denied their fundamental rights of assembly and free expression — rights that are guaranteed by the Nigerian constitution. The Nigerian government continues murderously to oppress them and their movement for sovereign freedom.

The international community, headed by the UN, which preaches the gospel of human rights and self-determination, persistently ignores their national aspirations.

The territories that constitute present-day Nigeria came under colonial occupation as British protectorates around 1903. Nigeria is essentially an artificial construct, created as a colony by Great Britain in 1914, when it merged the protectorates. The country is made up of a number of different indigenous African peoples, among them the Biafrans, who are ethnically predominantly Igbo.

After Nigeria’s independence from Great Britain in 1960, Biafra seceded from Nigeria, and in 1967 declared its own state. The Nigerian government refused to accept the secession and responded by launching a war on Biafra. The assault included a blockade of the nascent state, and resulted in the murder of more than two million Biafrans, many of whom were children who starved to death because of the blockade.

The Biafrans, watching the dissolution of their young state, surrendered to Nigeria in January 1970. They realized, perhaps, that the world’s abandonment of them did not warrant any future for their cause.

Unlike others at that time, such as the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), Biafrans did not engage in hijacking and bombing airplanes, taking hostages and other forms of terrorist attacks against innocent civilians to further their cause. The international community responds obediently to terrorism. Whereas the PLO has now become the Palestinian Authority (PA) and is among the world’s largest per capita recipients of international foreign aid, with a plethora of “human rights activists” championing its cause (as well as a UN body, UNRWA, exclusively for Palestinians), it would be hard to find a diplomat at the UN who even knows how to pronounce “Biafra”.

The question inevitably comes to mind, why the ostensibly anti-racist, pro-self-determination international community of opinion makers and human rights advocates has neither the political goodwill, nor the treasure to spare for the Biafrans.

Although the genocide effectively ended Biafran independence, a new generation of Biafrans is now peacefully pressing for an independent Biafra again. In an example of extreme hypocrisy, Muhammadu Buhari, the Muslim president of Nigeria, has declared himself fully committed to a Palestinian state, while his military fights the Biafran movement for self-determination with brutal force.

On May 30, Biafrans commemorated Biafra Heroes Remembrance Day. According to Amnesty International, the only major human rights organization that has interested itself in Biafra,