RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.newsweek.com/antisemitism-bds-natan-sharansky-3d-test-1461305

The global resurgence of anti-Semitism that we are experiencing today began almost 20 year ago, mainly in Europe. At the time, I was serving as Israel’s Minister for Diaspora Affairs and was grappling with the question of how to distinguish between legitimate criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism.

That is when I came up with what I call “the 3D test for anti-Semitism”—the three Ds are demonization, delegitimization and double standards.

If we watch a 3D movie without 3D glasses, we see a blurred, partial picture. But when we put on our 3D glasses everything becomes clear—and when we use the 3D test for anti-Semitism we can easily distinguish between legitimate criticism and anti-Semitism.

These 3Ds—demonization, delegitimization and double standards—are the three main tools that anti-Semites employed against Jews throughout history. For thousands of years, Jews were demonized, they were charged with blood libels, with poisoning wells, and, later, with controlling the global banking system. The Jewish faith and the Jewish claim to nationhood was delegitimized. And double standards were applied to Jews, either through the imposition of special laws—from the Middle Ages in Europe, to the Russian Empire and Nazi Germany— or through de -facto government policy discriminating against Jews, as I experienced in the Soviet Union.

Throughout history, demonization of Jewish people, delegitimization of their faith or nationhood, and double standards applied to Jews created fertile soil for pogroms, expulsions and genocide.

In observance of Yom Kippur there will be no posting on October 9.  Ruthfully yours will return on Thursday October 10.  rsk

https://amgreatness.com/2019/10/07/patriot-trump-vs-the-leninist-impeachment-pushers/

Unlike Schiff’s fiction, Trump’s reality has defied the evisceration the Constitution has suffered over the decades and challenged progressives in ways not seen in the Republican Party for over a century.

Should President Obama have been impeached for giving cash and assets worth as much as $150 billion to Iran by executive order? Or for lying about Obamacare? No, because that kind of punishment even for these injustices would have trivialized the grave constitutional purpose of impeachment and conviction. Clearly, it would have fulfilled a legitimate partisan purpose, though one which is more appropriately resolved through elections.

If the current impeachment fever materializes into reality, virtually any executive action with which the opposition party disagrees can be made an impeachable offense.

The Trump impeachment inquiry seeks to besmirch President Trump, fundraise for Democrat House and Senate candidates, destabilize the markets, knock Joe Biden out of the race, and mock presiding Chief Justice Roberts at the Senate trial. These are nothing but crude partisan appeals and clearly not constitutional purposes. Demagoguery is too gentle a word. Whatever else these political aims are, they are not affirmations of constitutional government. Once the dust settles all of these motives may well have backfired, but the Democrats have powerful enablers.

amgreatness.com/2019/10/07/time-to-reassess-crowdstrikes-credibility/

Trump foes dismiss any scrutiny of CrowdStrike as part of a “conspiracy theory.” But the tangled web between CrowdStrike, Democratic operatives, the Trump-hating media and the Obama Justice Department isn’t a theory, it is fact.

Days before the Senate voted to confirm Brett Kavanaugh last year, a former FBI assistant director appeared on MSNBC to suggest the Supreme Court nominee had a major credibility problem. “This is not…an investigation about the sexual allegations, I think it really has moved toward credibility,” Shawn Henry, an NBC News analyst, told Nicolle Wallace on October 1, 2018. “At this point now, there are very clear allegations, and subsequent to the judge’s testimony, people have come out who appear to be credible who…appear to be contradicting his testimony sworn before the United States Senate.”

Henry, clearly reciting Democratic talking points to imply Kavanaugh perjured himself before the Senate Judiciary Committee during his September showdown with Christine Blasey Ford, also referred to Ford as a “victim” and claimed that the FBI’s investigation into Kavanaugh’s testimony had “fallen short.”

Henry was presented to viewers as the channel’s “national security analyst,” but there was one title the network overlooked: Shawn Henry is a top executive for CrowdStrike, the cybersecurity firm hired by the Democratic National Committee to investigate the infamous hack of its email system in early 2016. Perhaps not coincidentally, the firm determined that the Russians were behind the intrusion. CrowdStrike’s June 2016 assessment remains the sole source of evidence to supply the pretext of the government’s Russian election interference claim; later, it would help bolster the Trump-Russia collusion fable.

The president, according to a transcript released by the White House, mentioned CrowdStrike during a phone call with the new Ukranian president over the summer. Now, the California-based company is facing renewed scrutiny both about the handling of the DNC email hack and the firm’s political affiliations. Last month, in response to questions about the firm’s clear connections to Democrats, CrowdStrike rejected accusations of bias in an FAQ posted on its website:

“CrowdStrike is not affiliated with any political party. We are a public cybersecurity company, and are non-partisan. We have done cybersecurity work for, and currently protect, both Republican and Democratic political organizations at the state, local, and federal level.”