Displaying the most recent of 90908 posts written by

Ruth King

UMass Chancellor Applauded Over BDS Criticism, University President Urged to Act

https://www.algemeiner.com/2019/12/03/umass-chancellor-applauded-over-bds-criticism-university-president-urged-to-act/

The president of the University of Massachusetts system is being urged to condemn academic boycotts of Israeli universities, after the chancellor of the Amherst campus faced criticism for acknowledging that such boycotts damage academic freedom.

In a letter sent to President Martin Meehan last month, the heads of the Academic Engagement Network and the AMCHA Initiative — both of which oppose the Palestinian-led boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) campaign in academia — applauded Chancellor Kumble Subbaswamy of UMass Amherst for an October 21 statement condemning a “one-dimensional” and “polarizing” BDS panel that was set to take place on campus on November 12.

The event, which came on the heels of another major pro-BDS panel on the Amherst campus in May, exclusively featured supporters of the BDS campaign, which has been criticized by Jewish groups worldwide for denying the Jewish people’s right to self-determination and advancing antisemitic tropes. Among the participants was BDS co-founder Omar Barghouti, who has rejected the notion that Jewish people have a right to self-determination by claiming that they are not a nation, as well as activist Linda Sarsour, who has spoken at a rally hosted by antisemitic Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan and recently claimed that Israel “is built on the idea that Jews are supreme to everyone else.”

The lack of ideological diversity on the panel, Subbaswamy noted at the time, would do “little to increase the understanding of such a complex topic like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”

Rewriting the History of Israel’s 1948 War by Moshe Phillips

https://www.algemeiner.com/2019/12/03/rewriting-the-history-of-israels-1948-war/

Arthur Szyk (1894-1951) was a great artist. But that doesn’t mean that every world leader he painted deserves our admiration — nor should we assume that Syzk admired every one of them, either.

In a recent essay in The Algemeiner, Samantha Lyons and Irvin Ungar presented Syzk’s 1941 portrait of King Abdullah I of Transjordan. Lyons and Ungar hailed Abdullah as an “Arab peacemaker.” But Abdullah was nothing of the sort.

Lyons and Ungar also claimed that Syzk’s portrait “reveals his admiration for a moderate Middle Eastern leader.” But they present no convincing evidence that Syzk felt that way. The fact that the painting was a “dignified rendering” of Abdullah says nothing about what Szyk thought of him.

Let’s remember that Szyk was an active member of the Bergson Group, which was created and led by activists from the Jabotinsky movement. They regarded Transjordan as a part of historic Eretz Yisrael, which had been illegally and immorally torn from the rest of Mandatory Palestine by the British authorities in 1922.

As the unelected leader of Transjordan, Abdullah was the fascist dictator of a country that was little more than a work of fiction. There were no “Transjordanians.” Their “nation” was concocted by the British in order to give Abdullah a “country” to rule over, after they disappointed him by giving the throne of Iraq to his brother. So they severed the eastern 78 percent of the Palestine Mandate and handed it to him on a silver platter as a consolation prize.

It hardly seems likely that Syzk “admired” the illegal Arab occupier of 78 percent of Israel.

Journalists Against Free Speech A strange new world. John Tierney

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2019/12/journalists-against-free-speech-john-tierney/

Reprinted from City Journal.

Suppose you’re the editorial-page editor of a college newspaper, contemplating the big news on campus: protesters have silenced an invited speaker and gone on a violent rampage. Should you, as a journalist whose profession depends on the First Amendment, write an editorial reaffirming the right to free speech?

If that seems like a no-brainer, you’re behind the times. The question stumped the staff of the Middlebury Campus after protesters silenced conservative social thinker Charles Murray and injured the professor who’d invited him. The prospect of taking a stand on the First Amendment was so daunting that the paper dispensed with its usual weekly editorial, devoting the space instead to a range of opinions from others—most of whom defended the protesters. When a larger and more violent mob at the University of California at Berkeley prevented Milo Yiannopoulos from speaking on campus, students at the Daily Californian did write a forceful editorial—but not in favor of his right to speak. Instead, they reviled Yiannopoulos and denounced those who “invited chaos” by offering a platform to “someone who never belonged here.”

Free speech is no longer sacred among young journalists who have absorbed the campus lessons about “hate speech”—defined more and more broadly—and they’re breaking long-standing taboos as they bring “cancel culture” into professional newsrooms. They’re not yet in charge, but many of their editors are reacting like beleaguered college presidents, terrified of seeming insufficiently “woke.” Most professional journalists, young and old, still pay lip service to the First Amendment, and they certainly believe that it protects their work, but they’re increasingly eager for others to be “de-platformed” or “no-platformed,” as today’s censors like to put it—effectively silenced.

These mostly younger progressive journalists lead campaigns to get conservative journalists fired, banned from Twitter, and “de-monetized” on YouTube. They don’t burn books, but they’ve successfully pressured Amazon to stop selling titles that they deem offensive. They encourage advertising boycotts designed to put ideological rivals out of business. They’re loath to report forthrightly on left-wing censorship and violence, even when fellow journalists get attacked. They equate conservatives’ speech with violence and rationalize leftists’ actual violence as . . . speech.

A Divisive, Historically Dubious Curriculum Teachers should reject the 1619 Project. Max Eden

https://www.city-journal.org/1619-project

In 1858, Stephen Douglas and Abraham Lincoln debated the nature of America’s soul. Douglas argued that the Founders believed that the claim in the Declaration of Independence—“all men are created equal”—applied only to whites. They were indifferent to the perpetuation of slavery, he said. Lincoln argued that the Founders foresaw an end to slavery, that the words in the Declaration meant what they said, and that no one before Douglas had ever suggested otherwise.

After a bloody civil war and a decades-long civil rights struggle were fought to vindicate Lincoln’s position, the New York Times and the Pulitzer Center are urging teachers, with the 1619 Project and attendant K-12 curriculum, to take Douglas’s side of the argument.

In her lead essay announcing the project, Nikole Hannah-Jones argues, per Douglas, that the “white men who drafted those words [in the Declaration] did not believe them to be true for the hundreds of thousands of black people in their midst.” Hannah-Jones’s essay has come under withering attack from eminent historians such as Gordon Wood and James McPherson for its historical distortions. But the 1619 Project’s curriculum does more than encourage teachers to ignore key elements of the historical record; it asks students to blot them out.

One recommended “activity to extend student engagement” asks teachers to lead students in transforming historical documents through “erasure poetry,” which, the curriculum explains, “can be a way of reclaiming and reshaping historical documents; they can lay bare the real purpose of the document or transform it into something wholly new. How will you highlight inequity—or envision liberation—through your erasure poem?” Students could, the guide suggests, erase parts of the Declaration in order to make it fit Hannah-Jones’s essay or amend the Thirteenth Amendment to make it harmonize with an essay arguing that “mass incarceration and excessive punishment is the legacy of slavery.”

Global warming, global cooling, climate change, climate emergency, climate catastrophe, climate collapse or existential threat? By Jack Hellner

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/12/global_warming_global_cooling_climate_change_climate_emergency_climate_catastrophe_climate_collapse_or_existential_threat.html

What wets your whistle? It’s another day and another dire warning from the UN. Of course, almost 100% of the media repeats these dire warnings in order to indoctrinate the public, especially the young, with no questions asked as the media pretends they are fact checkers. 

What is always missing from these articles and warnings is factual historical data. There are no statistics to show how little the temperature has changed the last 140 years, only made up numbers about the future. There are no statistics to show how little the sea levels have changed the last 140 years, only threats about the future. There are also no statistics on hurricanes, tornadoes, blizzards or drought the last 149 years, only made up numbers about the supposed threat. 

Somehow, these supposedly educated journalists never point out how wrong previous predictions have been, but the solution is always to transfer freedom and trillions of dollars to bureaucrats and politicians throughout the World. 

Today we only have a few years left and the cost has gone up substantially. Is it any wonder that the birth rate is so low when most of the people pushing the climate catastrophe crap also support abortion on demand at any stage of the pregnancy and we are told that humans are destroying the Earth and they are going to die soon anyway so why bring children into the World?

U.N. Chief Warns “Point of No Return” on Climate Change “Is in Sight”

U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres isn’t mincing words when it comes to issuing a dire warning about the global climate crisis, saying that the effort to stop climate change has been “utterly inadequate.”

No one should want their children to live in this ‘bleak’ future

Mr. Schiff’s Impeachment Opus His overstatements reveal the weakness of the Democratic case.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/mr-schiffs-impeachment-opus-11575418600?mod=opinion_lead_pos1

These columns warned that once the machinery of impeachment was up and running, it would be impossible to stop. And so on Tuesday Adam Schiff released his House Intelligence Committee report on Ukraine that finds President Trump guilty of playing domestic politics with foreign policy. But it’s clear the President’s real sin is being the willful, undisciplined Donald Trump voters elected.

The bulk of Mr. Schiff’s 300-page opus is a prosecutorial account of Mr. Trump’s four-month attempt to persuade new Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky to announce investigations into corruption and Ukraine’s role in the 2016 election. It is not a flattering tale, and it would make a compelling plank in a 2020 campaign indictment of Mr. Trump’s character and poor judgment.

But Mr. Schiff’s report casts himself and his cause as much grander. He is Adam at the bridge of our republic, heroic defender of American democracy. His introduction is worth quoting at length to capture his pretensions to nonpartisan statesmanship.

“The decision to move forward with an impeachment inquiry is not one we took lightly. Under the best of circumstances, impeachment is a wrenching process for the nation. I resisted calls to undertake an impeachment investigation for many months on that basis, notwithstanding the existence of presidential misconduct that I believed to be deeply unethical and damaging to our democracy,” he writes.

Hollywood Socialism By John Stossel

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/hollywood-socialism/

Hollywood is now obsessing about increasing ethnic and gender diversity. Good. There’s been nasty racial and gender discrimination in the movie business.

Unfortunately, Hollywood has no interest in one type of diversity: diversity of thought.

In most every movie, capitalism is evil.

Greedy miners want to kill nature-loving aliens in “Avatar.” Director James Cameron says: “The mining company boss will be the villain again in several sequels… Same guy. Same mother—-er through all four movies.”

One reviewer calls a scene in the recent “Star Wars” movie “a beautiful critique of unregulated capitalism.”

“Unregulated capitalism” is such a stupid cliche. Markets are regulated by customers, who have choices; we routinely abandon suppliers who don’t serve us well.

In the movie “In Time,” rich people live forever by buying more time, which they hoard while arranging for higher prices so poor people die.

I guess rich movie people feel guilty about being rich.

In the new Amazon series “Jack Ryan,” the hero asks a good question about Venezuela: “Why is this country in the midst of one of the greatest humanitarian crises in history?”

Because socialism ruined the country’s economy! But no, that’s not the answer Jack Ryan gives.

“Nationalist pride,” not socialism, is named as the culprit — and the politician who will fix things is an activist running “on a social justice platform.”

The producers reversed reality, portraying leftists as Venezuela’s saviors rather than as the people who destroyed it.

An Ambulance with Your Pot Order? Gatestone Institute moving ahead with yearlong review of legalized marijuana

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15242/marijuana-accidents-michigan

During the new year… Gatestone will be empaneling experts to examine this emerging threat to motorists, pedestrians, those in the workplace, and young people.

We need to understand the implications of that on public health….

Marijuana has been listed as the most common drug involved in fatal car accidents, contributing to 12 percent of 2010 crashes compared with 4 percent in 1999, the last time such data was available.

Within hours of Michigan permitting the legalized sale of recreational marijuana this weekend, state police reported a driver found to be under the influence of marijuana crashed his truck into a police cruiser. The driver was arrested after admitting he had been smoking pot before the accident, and the state trooper was treated for minor injuries.

That incident is just a single snapshot of what the nation may be facing as more and more states move forward the legalization of recreational marijuana sales, underscoring the reason why Gatestone Institute will be conducting a series of symposiums in the coming year that will closely examine the potential impact of legalized pot on the wellbeing of our nation’s children, occupational safety, transportation, and the enormous potential for substance abuse.

Gatestone stated: “In 2020, we expect the momentum to legalize recreational marijuana will only increase. What deeply concerns us is that there has not been a thoughtful and comprehensive review of what this means. Should we have specific safeguards in place that will protect our society? Have states put the anticipated tax revenue from pot sales ahead of the safety of their constituents?”

During the new year, Gatestone will be empaneling experts to examine this emerging threat to motorists, pedestrians, those in the workplace, and young people. “In truth, there is not a segment of our nation’s population that will not be impacted by the arrival of legalized marijuana. We need to understand the implications of that on public health,” Gatestone added.

Marijuana has been listed as the most common drug involved in fatal car accidents, contributing to 12 percent of 2010 crashes compared with 4 percent in 1999, the last time such data was available. “Based on these statistics, that number will most likely increase exponentially in the coming year.”

In the wake of the Michigan accident state police were quick to remind the public in a tweet:

“This [accident] is a reminder that on the day legal marijuana can be purchased, do not smoke and drive. Just like alcohol use a ride service, designated driver or stay home.”

‘Why do they hate us?’ Ruthie Blum

https://www.jns.org/opinion/why-do-they-hate-us/

Europeans, specifically those in the United Kingdom as they approach elections, “are reluctant to accept and admit that, despite all the Holocaust education and commemoration that’s taking place—and all the solemn declarations about having thoroughly learned the lessons of the past—anti-Semitism has returned in such strength.”

As part of an evening news segment on Dec. 2, Israel’s Channel 12 examined the panic among British Jews over the prospect that Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn could become the next prime minister of the United Kingdom. The broadcast focused on a small meeting of anti-Corbyn activists at the London home of a woman named Ida Simmons. Simmons had participated the previous week in a demonstration against Labour’s “Race and Faith Manifesto,” which denounces all forms of ethnic or religious discrimination, except those behind the very specific verbal and physical battery of Jews.

No surprise there.

In the first place, Corbyn—like his fellow anti-Semites the world over—denies that anti-Semitism is a particular, rather than general, form of hatred, deserving of a category all its own. Secondly, he uses his antipathy towards Israel as an excuse to enable what has become a shocking revival of the kind of anti-Semitism that had been taboo in Europe for decades after the Holocaust.

His self-described “friends” in Hamas and Hezbollah skip the pretense, boasting that their efforts to eliminate the Jewish state and to kill Jews everywhere derive from the same Divine commandment.

A woman’s murder reignites visions of France’s anti-Semitism By Abraham H. Miller

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/12/a_womans_murder_reignites_visions_of_frances_antisemitism.html

Kobili Traore, 29, a Muslim immigrant to France, killed Sarah Halim, 65, his Jewish neighbor, while armed French police stood outside her door, listened to her anguished screams, and did not respond until she was thrown off her balcony to her death.

Sarah Halim was the mother of three, a physician, and a kindergarten teacher.  She had long feared Traore.  Her death was a minor item in the French media.

The French government is refusing to prosecute Traore for his crime because he was high on cannabis and deemed not responsible for his actions.

If Traore had run over someone while drinking, he most certainly would be held responsible, for France has some of the strictest drunk driving laws in Europe.  Drinking does not mitigate one’s responsibility for vehicular homicide.

Whether that would apply if the driver were Muslim and the victim were Jewish, however, now seems a fair question.  Since 2003, twelve Jews have been killed in France for being Jews.  Their assailants were Muslims.