Displaying posts published in

January 2017

The “Fake News” Censorship Industry by Robbie Travers

Name a single person or organisation you trust to control your speech. Whom would you trust to control what you can read, or make decisions on what is true and what is false for you? Whom do you trust to police what you think?

The German government thinks it knows exactly who should be the arbiter of truth and what articles you should be allowed to post. Itself!

This would lead to a monopolisation of the media industry. One or two large platforms would dominate the public debate; fringe voices would be ignored or cast aside.

Who is to police the police? Facebook, caught out, already had to dismiss those compiling their trending stories, when it was revealed that they had a runaway political bias and were routinely suppressing (conservative) material with which they did not agree.

The whole censorship industry is open to abuse; presumably, that is what censorship is for in the first place.

Name a single person or organisation you trust to control your speech. Whom would you trust to control what you can read, or make decisions on what is true and what is false for you? Whom do you trust to police what you think?

The German government thinks it knows exactly who should be the arbiter of truth and what articles you should be allowed to post. Itself!

After a bill was proposed by German lawmakers, which threatened fines of up to 500,000 euros ($522,000) for publishing “fake news,” Facebook decided to use an organisation called Correctiv, described as a German fact-checking non-profit organisation, to decide whether reported stories are “real” or “fake.”

This system would then encourage individual Facebook users to report other users’ posts to Correctiv. Facebook would then have Correctiv label any of the articles “fake news,” as they see fit.

Even then, this proposed response by Facebook was not harsh enough for some German lawmakers, who want articles deemed to be fake by the government to be removed within 24 hours, or else fine Facebook 500,000 euros. That move would undoubtedly lead to individuals abandoning Facebook for other social networks, or more probably, Facebook abandoning them. German attempts to police the Facebook could end up useless; to many, the plan looks suspiciously like a money-making stratagem.

Europe’s Jihad against Israel by Salim Mansur

Resolution 2334 was as sickening a surrender to the Arab-Muslim jihad in the name of “peace,” as was the surrender of UK Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain to Adolf Hitler at Munich in September 1938.

The UN before 1967 did not refer to the West Bank and Gaza as “occupied” territories when they were “occupied” by Egypt and Jordan after the 1948-49 war, which the Arab states launched against Israel. The Arab states then were the “occupiers” of parts of Palestine west of Jordan until 1967, and rejected any notion of Jews having a historic connection with Palestine, which they claimed was an integral part of Arab lands.

From the time of the Balfour Declaration and the League’s Mandate for Palestine until the UN Resolution 181 (1947), reference to Palestine meant land with historic connection to the Jewish people. It was on this basis that the Jews’ (Zionist) claim to reconstitute their national home was given legal recognition by the League, which the UN, as its successor, was legally bound to protect.

From the Arab perspective of religion and politics there never was a “Palestinian” people, or nation, distinct and separate from Arabs as a people or nation. The jihad called by the Mufti Haj Amin el-Husseini against Jews in Palestine after 1921 was in the name of “Arabs” and Islam, and it has so remained since. According to the Hamas charter, “the land of Palestine is an Islamic Waqf [Trust] upon all Muslim generations till the day of Resurrection.”

Jerusalem, its principal city, was built by King David, a Jew, some ten centuries earlier.

For the past nine decades and more, however, Arabs and Muslims, with 56 Muslim states in the OIC, have been waging jihad to destroy the one and only state of the Jews. And Christendom, as if oblivious of its own shameful past history of anti-Semitism, has even more shamefully supported the falsification of history. Now, with Security Council Resolution 2334, the UN, with the enthusiastic the backing of Europeans and the prodding of U.S. President Barack Obama, is complicit in this jihad against Israel.

UN Security Council Resolution 2334, adopted as a result of the United States abstention, on the instructions of outgoing President Barack Obama, confirmed the historic bigotry against Jews and Israel entrenched within the United Nations, just as it was within its predecessor, the League of Nations. As previously indicated, Arab and Muslim states could not move a single anti-Israel resolution in the Security Council without the complicity of the Western powers, representing the historically Christian nations.

The collusion of the Western powers and the Islamic countries against Jews and Israel is now ostentatious, without any subterfuge. Resolution 2334 was as sickening a surrender to the Arab-Muslim jihad in the name of “peace,” as was the surrender of UK Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain to the Adolf Hitler at Munich in September 1938.

The gathering in Paris on January 15, at the invitation of French President François Hollande, was further evidence of appeasing the Arab-Muslim world’s jihad against Israel.

The timing of the Paris gathering – five days short of the 75th anniversary of the notorious Wannsee Conference of 20 January 1942, held in the suburbs of Berlin, in which top-ranking Nazi officials finalized the preparation for the “Final solution to the Jewish problem” in Europe – could not have been more overtly insulting to Israel. Members of the European Union plotted shafting the Jewish state in accordance with the wishes of their Arab and Muslim friends of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) – 56 Muslim states, plus “Palestine,” and the biggest bloc at the UN.

Who really won the Cold War? Today’s politics create doubt. Herbert London

In 1989 the Berlin wall tumbled like Humpty Dumpty amid a joyous celebration in Germany and across the West. The symbol of the Russian Communist dictatorship was blasted into bits of concrete. In the subsequent couple of years those states caught in the grip of the Soviet orbit seceded reducing the Russian population by about 150 million people.

NATO expanded to embrace many of these former states including the Baltic nations contiguous to Mother Russia. While the West viewed this new reality with promise liberal democracy would spread, former KGB officials regarded this defeat as humiliation, a humiliation that had to be redressed.
The accession of Vladimir Putin into a leadership position was a clear signal KGB operatives were intent on reclaiming the so-called “Near-Abroad” and extending Russian influence into areas from which it was formerly ousted.

This plan, transparent from the outset was assisted inadvertently or perhaps directly by the Obama administration that “reset” policy towards Russia by remaining “flexible,” another word for accepting Russian goals.

In fact, when President Obama refused to act on his own “red line” over Bashar al Assad’s use of poison gas, he invited the Russians to adjudicate the matter handing Putin a diplomatic victory and a legitimate pathway into Middle East politics.

Putin seized every opportunity. Signs of U.S. withdrawal from the region, offered Russia the chance to align itself with Iran and Hezbollah and fill the U.S. created vacuum, including naval dominance in the Eastern Mediterranean.

In the ensuing months, Russian air superiority over Syria gained one victory after another for pro-Assad forces until the final blow – the bombing of Aleppo, a massacre as noteworthy as the killing fields in Cambodia.

EDWARD CLINE: DO BLACK LIVES MATTER?

Do black lives matter?

Hispanic lives? Muslim lives? Gay lives? Women’s lives?

Black lives matter – to me, at least – if blacks adhere to reason, lead productive, non-parasitical lives, do not demand the unearned, and, to paraphrase Martin Luther King, Jr., if blacks judge others, blacks, whites, Asians, Arabs, Hispanics, Muslims (not actually a “race,” just as Islam is not a “race,” either), Mexicans, Cubans, and so on, that is, judge an individual by the content of his character. This is how I expect to be judged, and how I judge others. I otherwise place no importance on a person’s color.

But this is not what Black Lives Matter (BLM) means. BLM is grounded on race and a hatred for whites and the police. The hatred is so severe that BLM has declared war on the police. It is a terrorist organization, whether or not the government recognizes it as one. It has declared war on the police to effect “change” in how the police handle blacks in their encounters. Often it is black policemen who shoot or “mistreat” violent blacks in the course of self-defense, and these policemen have also been deemed “fair targets” by BLM for murder and harassment. Their “blackness” does not exempt them from murder.

It is a black subculture, perpetuated by the government and the welfare state, which rejects civilization, which BLM perceives as an oppressor. Although what blacks as a “collective” would replace it with has never been answered except for a “racial supremacy of blacks.” In that respect it is similar to Islam’s goal of dominating every country in the world.

Readers should be reminded that nothing like Locke’s Two Treatises of Government ever came out of the Congo or Egypt or the Sub-Sahara. Whatever there is to value in the West that serves as a benchmark of life-affirming progress was produced in the “lily-white” north – across the Mediterranean.

Some historians and cultural writers contend that climate played a big role in the development or Western civilization, so that blacks living in deserts or in fetid, smothering jungles were at a disadvantage to improve agriculture or invent steam engines and even to study the skies.

This is not an endorsement of the racist notion (advanced by creatures like the Aryan Nation and others) that whites are genetically superior to blacks or any other race.

Left out of the narrative is the role of reason.

This will not be the central subject of this column, but I am repelled by today’s black subculture. It is anti-reason, anti-esthetics, anti-everything that comports with a civilized society, and is a belligerent expression of self-hatred projected onto the “white race.” Today’s black “entertainers” are not of the caliber of past black singers and musicians as Cab Calloway and Louis
Armstrong and Billy Holiday.

Islamic State Destroys More of Ancient Palmyra Islamist militants blow up Roman monument, vandalize parts of theater see note please

This appalling disregard for shrines and historical monuments was routine when the Arabs(Jordan) controlled Jerusalem and occurs continually in those ancient cities of Judea and Samaria now controlled by the Palarabs….but nary a word from mainstream press….rsk

BEIRUT—Islamic State group militants destroyed a landmark ancient Roman monument and parts of the theater in Syria’s historic town of Palmyra, the government and opposition monitoring groups said Friday.

Maamoun Abdulkarim, the head of Syria’s antiquities department, said the militants destroyed the facade of the second-century theater along with the Tetrapylon, a cubic-shaped ancient Roman monument that sits in the middle of the colonnade road that leads to the theater.

Mr. Abdulkarim told the Associated Press that reports of the destruction first trickled out of Islamic State-held town late in December. But satellite images of the damage were only available late Thursday, confirming the destruction.

The imagery, provided by the US-based American Schools of Oriental Research, show significant damage to the Tetrapylon and the theater. The ASOR said the damage is likely caused by intentional destruction but they were unable to verify the exact cause.

Abdulkarim said only two of the 16 columns of the Tetrapylon remain standing. The stage backdrop has sustained damage, according to ASOR.

State-run news agency SAN’A reported the damage Friday and Syrian opposition monitors also confirmed but gave no immediate details.

The extremists recaptured the ancient town in December from government troops, nine months after IS was expelled in a Russia-backed offensive. During their first stay, from May 2015 until May 2016, Islamic State destroyed ancient temples including the Temple of Bel, which dated back to A.D. 32, and the Temple of Baalshamin, a structure of stone blocks several stories high fronted by six towering columns.

The militants also blew up the Arch of Triumph, which had been built under Roman emperor Septimius Severus between A.D. 193 and A.D. 211.

A Unesco World Heritage site, Palmyra boasts 2,000-year-old towering Roman-era colonnades and priceless artifacts. Syrians affectionately refer to it as the “Bride of the Desert.”

‘Third World’ U.S. Airports? That Insults the Third World Private managers make terminals sparkle and hum the world over. Here we’re stuck with LaGuardia. By John Tierney

For once, Donald Trump was guilty of understatement. “Our airports are like from a Third World country,” he said during a debate year. It’s a common complaint but inaccurate: Comparing America’s airports with the Third World’s is unfair to the Third World.

Even in the poorest countries, a traveler can expect to reach the terminal by car. At New York’s LaGuardia Airport, traffic is so nightmarish that passengers jump from cabs along the highway and schlep their bags on foot. In the Third World, people typically fly out of their home city. At Newark Airport, the landing fees are so high that New Jerseyans often drive hours to Philadelphia to find affordable fares.

The highest-ranked American airport on the list of the world’s top 100, as determined by the Passengers Choice Awards, is Denver—at 28. Atlanta comes in at 43, Dallas at 58, Los Angeles at 91.

Why do American passengers pay so much to get so little? Because their airports, by global standards, are terribly managed.

Cities from London to Buenos Aires have sold or leased their airports to private companies. To make a profit, these firms must hold down costs while enticing customers with lots of flights, competitive fares and appealing terminals. The firm that manages London’s Heathrow, currently eighth in the international ranking, was so intent on attracting passengers that it built a nonstop express train to the city’s center. It’s also seeking to add another runway, as is the rival firm running Gatwick Airport.

American airports are typically run by politicians in conjunction with the dominant airlines, which help finance the terminals in return for long-term leases on gates and facilities. The airlines use their control to keep out competitors; the politicians use their share of the revenue to reward unionized airport workers. No one puts the passenger first.

New York City’s problems are even worse. All three of the major airports serving the city are under the control of a single agency, the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. Because the governors of those two states appoint the Port Authority’s executives and board, no single politician ever gets blamed.

Freed of competition, the Port Authority spends $156,000 in wages and benefits per worker. It also diverts profits from the airports to other projects, meaning passengers’ money isn’t reinvested in better terminals or additional runways. Federal law generally requires that airport revenues be spent on aviation, but that statute, passed in 1982, contains a grandfather provision excluding the Port Authority.

Trump’s Good First Move The Trump team sends a message to a big lobby.

That was fast. Less than an hour after President Trump’s swearing in, his Department of Housing and Urban Development suspended the Obama Administration’s last-minute gift to the housing lobby to cut mortgage insurance rates.

Former Secretary Julian Castro announced last week that HUD would lower by 0.25% what the Federal Housing Administration charges on a risky mortgage backed by taxpayers. On loans exceeding $625,000, the premium cut would have been 0.45%. The reductions were scheduled to take effect next Friday.

Mr. Castro promoted the reductions as a way to lower costs for homeowners as he went out the door, but the move was a classic example of the clout of the housing lobby. Realtors, home builders and “fair-housing” advocates have been lobbying for the cut as interest rates begin to rise. They hoped the lower cost of this government subsidy would help them originate more mortgages. Mr. Castro, who has future political ambitions, also didn’t mind doing a favor for potential campaign donors.

The suspension of the premium cut is good government and good for taxpayers. HUD said the suspension is indefinite, which will give the new Trump team time to inspect the FHA’s books and make its own decision. Mr. Trump’s nominee as HUD Secretary, Ben Carson, isn’t even on the job and might not be for a while if Democrats continue to stonewall confirmation votes.

FHA has become a giant guarantor of mortgages with too little scrutiny. Homeowners can score FHA mortgage insurance with a credit rating as low as 580 and a mere 3.5% down payment. When home prices are rising, too few people pay attention when politicians put taxpayers more at risk. But we learned from hard experience in the previous decade that these policies can come back to haunt.

Washington’s housing-industrial complex may squawk, but the new Administration has sent the right message in reversing a bad Obama decision.

BRAVO! PRESIDENT TRUMP’S SPEECH

Chief Justice Roberts, President Carter, President Clinton, President Bush, President Obama, fellow Americans and people of the world, thank you.

We, the citizens of America, are now joined in a great national effort to rebuild our country and restore its promise for all of our people.

Together, we will determine the course of America and the world for many, many years to come. We will face challenges, we will confront hardships, but we will get the job done.

Every four years, we gather on these steps to carry out the orderly and peaceful transfer of power, and we are grateful to President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama for their gracious aid throughout this transition. They have been magnificent. Thank you.

Today’s ceremony, however, has very special meaning because today, we are not merely transferring power from one administration to another or from one party to another, but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C. and giving it back to you, the people.

For too long, a small group in our nation’s capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have borne the cost. Washington flourished, but the people did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered, but the jobs left and the factories closed. The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country. Their victories have not been your victories. Their triumphs have not been your triumphs. And while they celebrated in our nation’s capital, there was little to celebrate for struggling families all across our land.

That all changes starting right here and right now because this moment is your moment, it belongs to you.

It belongs to everyone gathered here today and everyone watching all across America. This is your day. This is your celebration. And this, the United States of America, is your country.

What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people.

January 20th, 2017 will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again.

The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer.

Everyone is listening to you now. You came by the tens of millions to become part of a historic movement, the likes of which the world has never seen before.

At the center of this movement is a crucial conviction, that a nation exists to serve its citizens. Americans want great schools for their children, safe neighborhoods for their families, and good jobs for themselves. These are just and reasonable demands of righteous people and a righteous public.

But for too many of our citizens, a different reality exists: mothers and children trapped in poverty in our inner cities; rusted out factories scattered like tombstones across the landscape of our nation; an education system flush with cash, but which leaves our young and beautiful students deprived of all knowledge; and the crime and the gangs and the drugs that have stolen too many lives and robbed our country of so much unrealized potential.

This American carnage stops right here and stops right now.

Unseemly Smears By Marilyn Penn

The snarky article profiling Stephanie Winston Wolkoff’s association with the Trump transition team appears on the front page of the NYTimes Style section on Jan 19th It skewers Ms Wolkoff’s very expensive clothing, her upbringing in the Catskills when she had a more Jewish name than Winston and forebears who were chicken farmers, her un-classy education at Fordham and Loyola and most obviously, her chutzpah in her choice of friend and political bedfellow. This comes to you from the poisoned-pen of Jacob Bernstein, son of journalistic and movie royalty – Carl Bernstein and Nora Ephron – grandson of noted screenwriters Phoebe and Henry Ephron, young man of privilege whose divorced parents respectively lived at a townhouse on East 74th street between Madison and Fifth and the legendary Apthorp on the fashionable west side. Despite this affluent lifestyle and gifted genetic endowment, young Jacob attend Vassar College, a no-more prestigious school for boys than the choices of young Stephanie who traced her endowments to hardworking farmers instead of Hollywood glitterati with serious alcohol afflictions. Though the Times pretends to care about such issues as immigrants and nepotism – those don’t apply to Jewish snobs like Bernstein or the Sulzberger family. Jacob’s outstanding contribution to the Times so far is his launching of the “What I Love” column for the Real Estate section, in which celebrities discuss their most essential possessions and how they like to spend Sundays. Apparently it’s not offensive to advertise exorbitantly priced clothing and accessories (as the Times does), nor to wear an expensive handbag as long as you’re not on the Trump team. (See Anna Wintour of the Hillary team along with all the other super-rich sore losers who are immune from such ad-hominem attacks).

In line with the Times determination to malign as many Trump-ettes as possible, there is the trashing of Rebekah Mercer, another transition team member, on the front page of the Arts Section (NYT 1/19), questioning her suitability to be a trustee of the Museum of Natural History. Why has this woman who has a scientific background with two degrees earned at Stanford University and has donated 3 million dollars to the museum been deemed a target by the Times? It seems that her family foundation has also generously donated to “right-wing” institutes which are automatically guilty of anti-science by virtue of not subscribing to the party line on climate change. And to add to Mercer’s culpability, she hosted a fund-raiser for Ted Cruz at her triplex apartment in a Trump building!!! Robin Pogrebin, the reporter who wrote this scurrilous piece, failed to mention the price of the apartment or the cost of the designer glasses Ms. Mercer is pictured wearing but she did include other irrelevant information such as where her husband works and how many children they have. Ms. Pogrebin and her twin sister Abigail who is also a writer, have two children apiece and they themselves are the daughters of the feminist writer Letty Cottin Pogrebin and Bertrand Pogrebin, senior partner of a law firm in Mineola – not at Wachtel Lipton or Skadden Arps. Robin’s husband, Edward Klaris was another boy who went to Vassar and got his law degree from Yeshiva U. – not from Harvard or Yale. Both twins graduated from Yale but Abigail managed that summa cum laude and has also written several books, something that must sting her less accomplished sister. Speaking of twins at Yale – that’s a very expensive proposition, particularly for someone who is now busy casting aspersions at a wealthy Republican whose position on global warming is only circumstantially insinuated but nowhere stated by the subject herself.

Both of the preceding articles – filled with venom and inuendo – would never have been published in the NYTimes years ago. They are part of the reason for the newspaper’s diminishing subscription list and a pathetic response to the Times’ loss of credibility since the Trump election Rather than take a lesson from how out of touch their columnists are with most of America, they are frantically trying to tar and feather Trump and everyone associated with him. It’s a good bet that the closed-minded staff, marching in lockstep to yesterday’s news while nursing a bitter grudge against all those deplorables who voted for the wrong candidate may not be around as long as this president will.

MICHAEL CUTLER MOMENT: IMMIGRATION FAILURES VS. AMERICANS.

This special edition of the Glazov Gang presents The Michael Cutler Moment with Michael Cutler, a former Senior INS Special Agent.

Michael discusses Immigration Failures vs. Americans, unveilinghow law enforcement failures undermine our citizens’ civil rights.

Don’t miss it!

And make sure to watch Anne Marie Waters focus on The Islamic Darkness Descends on Europe, revealing that the horror is here and that now is the time to stand up and reclaim our civilization: