Displaying posts published in

February 2017

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

Calling Off Obama’s Restroom Cops Trump may soon rescind the transgender bathroom ‘guidance.’

By on February 21st, 2017

As early as Tuesday, the Education Department may rescind the Obama Administration’s Title IX “guidance” on transgender restrooms. A federal judge blocked the policy last August, but that won’t mute the outcry among those who want the feds to dictate cultural norms nationwide.

Last May the Obama Administration issued a “Dear Colleague” letter asserting that a “school must treat the student consistent with the student’s gender identity” when it comes to transgender access to restrooms. School districts and colleges that didn’t comply risked being sued and losing federal funds.

Recall that in 2015 the Justice Department joined a lawsuit by Gavin Grimm, a transgender high-school student in Virginia, who wanted to use the boys’ bathroom. This contravened Gloucester County school district policy. While “students with gender identity issues” were allowed to use private bathrooms, the Obama Administration wasn’t satisfied.

A federal judge dismissed Mr. Grimm’s lawsuit but was overruled by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. The Gloucester County school board appealed but the Obama Administration then issued its “Dear Colleague” letter. Thirteen states sued to block enforcement on grounds that the restroom edict stretched the law and the Administration ducked a formal rule-making. Title IX rules require that schools provide restrooms that are comparable for both sexes, but the law says nothing about gender identity.

In August federal Judge Reed O’Connor issued a nationwide injunction. He said the guidance contradicted “the existing legislative and regulatory texts” and “bypassed the notice and comment process required” by the Administrative Procedure Act.

The judge also scored the Administration for not allowing a “safe harbor in providing transgender students individual-user facilities as an alternative accommodation.” Further, the Obama DOJ has not “offered evidence that Plaintiffs are not accommodating students who request an alternative arrangement.”

Transgender students deserve respect, but restroom policy should be determined by localities, not federal diktat. Public mores are changing, and many universities provide accommodations similar to those required in the “Dear Colleague.” The guidance has been enjoined for six months, so rescinding it will do no harm and would let the Education Department focus on higher priorities than serving as national bathroom monitors. It’s worth keeping in mind that public distaste for this kind of cultural imperialism helped Donald Trump win.

Continue reading →
NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

McMaster Named as Trump’s National Security Adviser Army officer takes job at a time when several foreign policy challenges are under review By Carol E. Lee and Paul Sonne

By on February 21st, 2017

President Donald Trump chose an active-duty Army general as his new national security adviser on Monday, bringing one of the U.S. military’s best-known strategists into the White House and adding to his team another warrior-scholar in the mold of Defense Secretary Jim Mattis.

Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster, whom Mr. Trump called “a man of tremendous talent and tremendous experience,” accepted the post, making him the first active-duty U.S. military officer to take the job since Colin Powell and John Poindexter held it under President Ronald Reagan.

“He is highly respected by everyone in the military, and we’re very honored to have him,” Mr. Trump said, with Gen. McMaster and acting National Security Adviser Keith Kellogg by his side.

Mr. Trump said Mr. Kellogg, a retired three-star Army general who was under consideration for the top job, would resume his role as chief of staff to the National Security Council. He made the announcement from his Mar-a-Lago home in Florida, where he interviewed at least four candidates for the job over the weekend, including Gen. McMaster and Mr. Kellogg.

The decision fills a top White House position one week after Mr. Trump asked his first national security adviser, Mike Flynn, to resign for misleading Vice President Mike Pence about the nature of his conversations with Russia’s ambassador to the U.S. Mr. Trump said Mr. Pence had a hand in choosing Gen. McMaster. Mr. Flynn hasn’t commented on his departure since his Feb. 13 resignation letter, in which he said he inadvertently gave colleagues “incomplete” information.
Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster

Age: 54
Most recent post: Director of the Army Capabilities Integration Center, Fort Eustis, Va.
Education: U.S. Military Academy, 1984
Experience: Commanded a tank troop in the 1991 Gulf War; in the second Iraq war served as a counterinsurgency expert and senior adviser to Gen. David Petraeus, then-commander of U.S. forces in Iraq

Gen. McMaster steps in to lead a National Security Council that has largely been in disarray, with many career staffers uncertain about their roles and concerned about a lack of input into the policy-making process on a host of issues, according to administration officials.

The anxiety was stoked in recent days after an NSC staffer who was brought in by the Trump administration was dismissed after he criticized Mr. Trump in a private discussion at a Washington, D.C., think tank. White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders said Sunday anyone who doesn’t support Mr. Trump’s agenda “shouldn’t be part of the administration.”

Continue reading →
NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

Democracy Can’t Function Without Secrecy ‘Loose lips sink ships,’ and the leakers who sank Mike Flynn weren’t acting on public-spirited principle. By Michael B. Mukasey

By on February 21st, 2017

The promiscuous release of classified information that preceded and accompanied the resignation of Mike Flynn as national security adviser makes it almost quaint to recall a time when the World War II slogan “loose lips sink ships” was taken seriously.

Much has happened to erode standards regarding national secrets. Oddly, those standards seem to have remained intact when it comes to giving sensitive information secretly to an adversary of the United States. The list runs from Benedict Arnold, whose frustrated ambition led him to offer defense plans to the British during the Revolution; to Julius Rosenberg, whose ideology drove him to provide details of atomic-bomb design to the Soviet Union; to Robert Hanssen,Aldrich Ames and John Walker, who betrayed their country for money and disclosed information that cost the lives of American spies. Whether or not their actions met the legal definition of treason (and only Arnold’s did), they generally are regarded as traitors.

Yet when secrets are released to the public under some claim of principle, outrage is muted to say the least. Sometimes, as with the Pentagon Papers leaked by Daniel Ellsberg in 1971, the potential damage might have been overstated and the secrecy unwarranted. But in other cases the damage was comparable to the injury inflicted by outright espionage.

Take the New York Times’s disclosure in 2006 that after 9/11 the U.S. government had been monitoring international funds transfers through the Swift system, used by banks world-wide. By tracking cash flows to terrorists, the program had helped frustrate numerous plots and catch their organizers. Its disclosure by the Times was a serious blow to counterterrorism efforts. Although this monitoring program was entirely lawful, the newspaper and its reporters justified the exposure with two assertions: that the public had a right to know about it, and the account was “above all else an interesting yarn,” as one of the reporters put it.

“The right to know” is a trope so often repeated, it may come as a surprise that the Constitution mentions no such right. That omission is hardly surprising given the circumstances in which the Constitution was drafted in 1787—with doors and windows closed even in the stifling summer heat to prevent deliberations from being overheard, and with the delegates sworn to secrecy. Although the Constitution directs the chambers of Congress to keep and publish a journal of their proceedings, it excepts from the publication requirement “such Parts as may in their Judgment require Secrecy.”

The choice to disclose matters that public officials have determined should remain secret is often a singularly antidemocratic act. Public officials are elected—or appointed by those elected—to pursue policies for which they answer to the voters at large. Those who disclose national secrets assert a right to override these democratic outcomes.

There are also criminal statutes that bear on such disclosures. Debate over high-profile missteps—David Petraeus and Hillary Clinton come to mind—has made those laws familiar. They range from the misdemeanor of putting classified information in a nonsecure location, to felony statutes carrying penalties up to 10 years for disclosing classified information about communications activities of the United States, such as surveillance of foreign diplomats.

Some violations of the law are hard to deter, given the asserted motive. Bradley (now Chelsea) Manning and Edward Snowden claim their systematic disclosures served a higher interest by promoting a necessary debate about the propriety of government conduct and secrecy.

The most recent leaks of confidential information, however, seem to come from decidedly different motives. Consider Mr. Flynn’s situation. It has been disclosed that U.S. intelligence agencies taped conversations last year between Mr. Flynn and the Russian ambassador. After Mr. Flynn falsely denied to the vice president and the FBI that he had discussed sanctions with the ambassador, Sally Yates, then acting attorney general, warned the White House that Mr. Flynn was opening himself up to Russian blackmail. Making all of this public seems designed principally to damage Mr. Flynn. CONTINUE AT SITE

Continue reading →
FOREIGN POLICY Comments turned off

Conservative Pundit Sebastian Gorka Brings ‘Global Jihadist Movement’ Theory Into White House Critics say policy addressing terrorism primarily as a religious problem reinforces notion that U.S. is at war with Islam By Shane Harris

By on February 21st, 2017

In the days before President Donald Trump signed the Jan. 27 executive order blocking immigrants and refugees from seven majority-Muslim countries, only a small circle of advisers reviewed the document.

One was Sebastian Gorka, a terrorism researcher and conservative pundit who has gone on to become the administration’s most visible and passionate defender of the ban and increasingly its go-to spokesman on national security issues.

“I’m not going to comment on whose hand was holding the pen,” Mr. Gorka said in an interview, declining to spell out whether he helped draft the immigration order. “I was asked to look at the executive order before it was signed by the president.”
The ban didn’t target Muslims, Mr. Gorka said in its defense, but focused on seven countries that “represent the hotbed of primary jihadi activity today.”

That jihadist activity has been the focus of Mr. Gorka’s work for more than two decades. In blog posts and articles on Breitbart News and elsewhere, in TV appearances and lectures, as well as in a book published last year, he has described a theory of terrorism that he calls the “global jihadist movement,” which he says takes its marching orders from the Quran and from manifestos by militants and terrorist leaders.

Mr. Gorka has now taken that view into the center of power at the White House, where he is part of the new White House Strategic Initiatives Group. He said he reports to Jared Kushner, Mr. Trump’s adviser and son-in-law; Reince Priebus, the White House chief of staff; and Steve Bannon, the president’s chief strategist.

The Strategic Initiatives Group has been described by some U.S. officials and experts as a parallel National Security Council, writing executive orders with relatively little input from policy officials and subject matter experts. This organization has posed an impediment to Mr. Trump’s efforts to fill the position of national security adviser, with at least two candidates turning down the job because the president wouldn’t give them control over staffing, according to current and former officials familiar with the matter.

Mr. Gorka is a rhetorical pugilist, and his eagerness to confront the Obama administration’s counterterrorism policies has made him a fixture on conservative talk shows and a frequent lecturer to law enforcement and military groups. He attracted the attention of the Trump campaign, which paid him $8,000 in 2015 for policy consulting, federal records show.

Continue reading →
WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Trump and the Rape of Sweden — on The Glazov Gang. Why the president is right to point to a European nation suffering a skyrocketing surge in violence.

By on February 21st, 2017

The media is now mocking President Trump for highlighting trouble in Sweden, and specifically for him using the words “last night” in referring to what, at first, seemed like a reference to a specific incident in that country. But as the president himself later explained, he was referring to an actual, accurate news report that was broadcast the night before on Fox News about Muslim immigration to Sweden. On Friday night, Tucker Carlson interviewed documentarian Ami Horowitz about his upcoming film about the surge in rape and violence that has accompanied the increase of immigration to Sweden.

While the president could have used better technical wording to make his point, his overall thesis was correct. There may not have been some single huge news-breaking incident the night before in Sweden, but Trump was referring to a news program that demonstrated that there is something very horrible happening in Sweden — and not just “last night”, but every night.

In response to President Trump’s legitimate reference to trouble in Sweden, and the media’s illegitimate mockery of him over it, TheGlazov Gang is running its special episode with journalist and authorIngrid Carlqvist on the Muslim Rape of Sweden, which unveils the horror Sweden is now facing.http://jamieglazov.com/2017/02/20/trump-and-the-rape-of-sweden-on-the-glazov-gang/

Don’t miss it!

Continue reading →
WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

What is a Killer Imam Doing in Public Libraries in Canada? by Saied Shoaaib

By on February 21st, 2017

How is it possible that books that advocate violence and extremism meet the “selection criteria” of the Ottawa Public Library, but those that speak out against violence and extremism do not?

The presence of these Islamic books, and these books alone, in Canada’s public libraries, without any others to contradict them, gives them legitimacy. They are seen to represent a certain form of Islam that the government of Canada and the City of Ottawa recognize.

This indicates that there is official support for the extremist and terrorist version of Islam, and at the same time no support for a humanist interpretation of Islam.

This surah [4:74] also indicates that if you are a Muslim living in a non-Muslim country, then you are in a state of war against your host country. If you are a Muslim living in a non-Muslim country, then you are living with the enemy.

If we are to reject this danger, it is important that libraries and other institutions have books that reject these Islamist views and confront their hatred, extremism and violence.

The Muslim Brotherhood classifies as one of their great intellectual leaders Imam Mohammed al-Ghazali (1917-1996). He famously decreed that the assassination of the Egyptian Muslim thinker, Farag Foda, was acceptable. In the views of al-Ghazali, Farag Foda was an apostate for defending secular values and human rights. Moreover, al-Ghazali went into an Egyptian court and defended the assassins: “Anyone who openly resisted the full imposition of Islamic law,” he said, “was an apostate who should be killed either by the government or by devout individuals.” He added: “There is no penalty in Islam to kill the apostate by yourself when the government fails to do so.”

In public libraries across Canada (and elsewhere), the books of Imam al-Ghazali are available, along with others that incite hatred, violence and terror, by authors such as Yusuf al-Qaradawi and Imam Nawawi. There is not a single Arabic language book in a library that I have visited in Ottawa that attacks or criticizes terrorism and violence and hatred.

Continue reading →
ISRAEL, WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

The Offer that Turns the Gaza Strip into Singapore by Bassam Tawil

By on February 21st, 2017

Last week, Hamas received an offer that no sane entity would turn down. The offer did not come from Hamas’s allies in Iran and the Islamic world. The offer, to turn the impoverished Gaza Strip into “the Singapore of the Middle East,” came from Israel.

“The Gazans must understand that Israel, which withdrew from the Gaza Strip to the last millimeter, is not the source of their suffering — it is the Hamas leadership, which doesn’t take their needs into consideration… The moment Hamas gives up its tunnels and rockets, we’ll be the first to invest.” — Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman.

Hamas does not want a new “Singapore” in the Middle East. Hamas wants Israel to disappear from the face of the earth. The welfare of the Palestinians living under its rule is the last thing on the mind of Hamas. The dispute is not about improving the living conditions of Palestinians, as far as Hamas is concerned. Instead, it is about the very existence of Israel.

Hamas deserves credit for one thing: its honesty concerning its intentions to destroy Israel and kill as many Jews as possible. Hamas does not want 40,000 new jobs for the unemployed poor Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. It would rather see these unemployed Palestinians join its ranks and become soldiers in the jihad to replace Israel with an Islamic empire.

The Palestinian Islamic movement Hamas has once again demonstrated its priorities: killing Jews. That clearly takes precedence over easing the plight of the two million Palestinians living under its rule in the Gaza Strip.

Since Hamas violently seized control of the Gaza Strip in the summer of 2007, the conditions of the Palestinians living there have gone from bad to worse. Crisis after crisis has hit those under the Hamas rule; electricity and water as well as lack of medicine and proper medical care are in dangerously short supply.

Disputes between Hamas and the Palestinian Authority have left the Gaza Strip dangerously short of fuel, resulting in massive power outages. Palestinians there consequently have had to resort to using wood for cooking and heating. Hamas, which has brought about three wars that wreaked havoc on its people, is unable to provide them with basic needs.

Last week, Hamas received an offer that no sane entity would turn down. It is to be noted that the offer did not come from Hamas’s friends and allies in Iran and the Arab and Islamic world. Rather, the offer, which promises to turn the Gaza Strip, where most residents live in the poverty of “refugee camps,” into “the Singapore of the Middle East,” came from Israel.

Specifically, the offer was made by Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman, who proposed building a seaport and an airport, as well as industrial zones that would help create 40,000 jobs in the Gaza Strip, if Hamas agreed to demilitarization and to dismantling the tunnels and rocket systems it has built up.

“The Gazans must understand that Israel, which withdrew from the Gaza Strip to the last millimeter, is not the source of their suffering — it is the Hamas leadership, which doesn’t take their needs into consideration,” Lieberman said in a televised message to the residents of the Gaza Strip. “The moment Hamas gives up its tunnels and rockets, we’ll be the first to invest.”

Only Israel has ever made such an offer to Hamas. Such a plan would vastly improve the living conditions of the Gaza Strip population. All Hamas is required to do is abandon its weapons and plans to kill Jews, and return the bodies of missing Israeli soldiers.

Continue reading →
WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Peter O’Brien: Muslim Boys, Shaken and Stirred

By on February 21st, 2017

A little backbone on the part of educators might go a long way toward promoting Islamic integration. Of course, before they do that, the initial step would be to recognise that gender equality is a rather more valuable concept than the fashionable exaltation of identity politics.
A few thoughts on the controversy surrounding the issue of Muslim schoolboys’ refusal to shake hands with women being endorsed by those responsible for supervising their educations.

Firstly, it is not clear that this is, per se, an expression of misogyny, as many are claiming. The specific hadith supposedly says:

The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: ‘If one of you were to be struck in the head with an iron needle, it would be better for him than if he were to touch a woman he is not allowed to’.

That reference goes on to say:

There is no doubt that for a man to touch a non-mahram woman is one of the causes of fitnah (turmoil, temptation), provocation of desire and committing haraam deeds.

So it is clear this is not about women being unclean but, rather, about the inability of Muslim men to control their baser urges. Surely, Muslim men (sensible ones, at any rate) should feel outraged at this slight. Sadly, this brings to mind the remarks of Sheik Hilaly, then Australia’s most senior Muslim cleric, who in 2006 infamously likened uncovered women to cat meat. “If you take out uncovered meat and place it outside on the street, or in the garden or in the park, or in the backyard without a cover, and the cats come and eat it … whose fault is it, the cats or the uncovered meat?” he asked his lakemba congregation.

“If she was in her room, in her home, in her hijab,” he continued, “no problem would have occurred.”

Secondly, if we look at the strict wording of the relevant hadith, might it not be argued that ‘touch’ in this context means rather more than a casual physical contact, such as shaking hands, but ‘touching’ in a sexual context?

My point is that this is just one more example of Islam’s inability to adapt to changing times and the mores of societies other than those of the Arabian Peninsula in seventh century. I wonder how vigorously this particular hadith is observed in countries such as Indonesia and Malaysia? How does it work in the case of paramedics, nurses, doctors, firemen? Are exceptions made in such cases and, if so, why not in this country to accommodate the host society’s cultural practices?

My curious tickled, I came across this advice detailing Islamic doctrine in regard to the medical treatment of Muslim women, who must first seek medical counsel and treatment from a female Muslim doctor. Should such not be available, a non-Muslim female medico is the second preference, followed by a Muslim male and, last of all, a non-Muslim man.

As to shaking hands with women, this source of Islamic guidance explains that Allah is against it

Some Muslims feel too embarrassed to refuse when a woman offers her hand to them. In addition to mixing with women, some of them claim that they are forced to shake hands with fellow-students and teachers in schools and universities, or with colleagues in the workplace, or in business meetings and so on, but this is not an acceptable excuse.

The Muslim should overcome his own feelings and the promptings of the Shaytaan, and be strong in his faith, because Allah is not ashamed of the truth. The Muslim could apologize politely and explain that the reason he does not want to shake hands is not to offend or hurt anybody’s feelings, but it is because he is following the teachings of his religion. In most cases this will earn him respect from others. There is no harm done if they find it strange at first, and it may even be a practical opportunity for da’wah. And Allaah knows best.

Continue reading →
ENVIRONMENT AND JUNK SCIENCE, WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Tony Thomas: The Climate Cult’s Blackout Brigade

By on February 21st, 2017

They perch and preen atop their grants, sinecures and self-regard, forever predicting planetary doom unless their addled sermons are heeded and the carbon-spewing sins of our modern world are expiated. When your lights next go out, blame them and the politicians on whose teats they suckle.
As Australia’s electricity systems slide towards unreliability and more blackouts – half a dozen so far, at last count – let’s pin the responsibility on the true culprits: activist climate “scientists” peddling their dodgy CO2 alarm and insane zero-emission targets.

At their forefront is the climate cabal within the Australian Academy of Science, our peak science organisation. In 2015, speaking for the Academy, they blithely recommended to the federal government that Australia embarks on “significant, urgent and sustained” emissions cuts. Their desired 2030 scenario — which remains the Academy’s policy — is for CO2 emission cuts 30-40% below 2000 levels, en route to the Academy’s desired zero- emissions regime by 2050.

I emailed the Academy the following questions about its submission:

1. I don’t see any costing of the Academy’s 2030 and 2050 targets. Can you provide me with best estimates or something on costings anyway — I assume the report authors did some work on that.

2. I don’t see any breakdown of Academy targets into solar, wind, coal, nuclear, hydro, whatever. Can you assist me by detailing such breakdowns?

3. The report has little/nothing to say about how a reliable base load electricity system will operate on your 2030 and 2050 scenarios. In light of recent events, does the Academy have any suggestions on how blackouts will be avoided as Australia moves to the desired RE [renewable energy] targets?

Th reply:

“The Academy has a broad brief across the sciences. Its Fellows step up in a voluntary capacity to write documents such as this… We don’t have the in-house expertise or resources to answer your detailed questions.”

This reply went on to list the contributors to the Academy’s submission, namely Dr John A Church FAA FTSE FAMS;

Dr Ian Allison AO; Professor Michael Bird FRSE; Professor Matthew England FAA; Professor David Karoly FAMS FAMOS; Professor Jean Palutikof; Professor Peter Rayner; and Professor Steven Sherwood.

The Academy of Science itself admits that it lacks the “in-house expertise or resources” to explain why it wants to destroy the country’s electricity security and raise the price of power to all Australians. But wow, it’s great at puffing itself. The same cabal that is clueless about the real-world impacts of its emissions recommendations bragged in their 2015 submission:

“The Academy promotes scientific excellence, disseminates scientific knowledge, and provides independent scientific advice for the benefit of Australia and the world… The Academy would be pleased to provide further information or explanation on any of the points made in this submission.” (My emphasis. But the Academy wimped out when I actually asked for such information).

The Academy has form in pandering to green nostrums.

Continue reading →
ISRAEL, WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Settlement obsession loses focus by Richard Baehr

By on February 21st, 2017

Most reporters for mainstream American news organizations were loathe to describe the obvious improvement in the atmosphere when Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Donald Trump held their joint press conference on Wednesday, compared to the frigid and tense poses when Netanyahu and former President Barack Obama held joint appearances in the preceding eight years.

It was not hard to understand why the Israeli prime minister was smiling during his interview with Sean Hannity on Fox News the next day. One reason is that both Trump and Netanyahu are aware they help their own political positions by strengthening the ties between the two countries.

But the reality is deeper: The two men get along because they actually see the world the same way. Obama had a very different world view. Although he saw a link between Israel and the United States, this was mainly as colonialist bullies. No American president before Obama, and hopefully none in the future, will ever be so equivocal about his own country’s history and values.

The improved special relationship between Israel and the United States is not entirely new. President George W. Bush had solid ties with Israel’s leaders and endorsed a 2004 letter ahead of Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza acknowledging that the 1949 borders were not permanent and that facts on the ground made it inevitable that many Jewish communities beyond the Green Line would not be uprooted in a future peace agreement. Obama ignored this letter, refused to give it any authority, and, along with others in the White House and State Department, attacked Israel after each and every bit of news of new Jewish housing in the West Bank, as if those were crimes against humanity. No supposed foe of the United States received such scorn and rebuke over eight years as Israel. And there was the coup de grace in Obama’s final months, the American abstention at the United Nations on Security Council Resolution 2334, which effectively resulted in awarding the entire territory to the Palestinians and treating any Israeli activity in the area as illegal.

American officials argued they needed to make it clear to Israel they were unhappy about the “stepped-up” pace of settlement activity, which represents an obstacle to achieving the two-state solution. The Obama action, forcefully defended by Secretary of State John Kerry (who seems to be contemplating a run for president in 2020), ignored pretty much all the other reasons for the failure. The Palestinians themselves are divided into two political entities, one run by Hamas, the other by the Palestinian Authority. Elections for PA president and parliament have not been held in over a decade. No Palestinian leader has ever been willing to acknowledge that Israel is a Jewish state and that there will be no “right of return” for Palestinians who never lived in or who left Israel and are falsely classified as refugees — more than 98% of the so-called Palestinian refugees. Only among Palestinians is refugee status conferred to endless descendants of the original refugees. The refugee issue was one of five mentioned by Max Singer in a Wall Street Journal column calling for telling the truth about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Continue reading →