Displaying the most recent of 90914 posts written by

Ruth King

POLITICS Comments turned off

Allah over America By Eileen F. Toplansky

By on January 7th, 2019

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/01/allah_over_america.html

The smirk by Chuck Schumer spoke volumes, and the full-blown identity politicians showing their true colors remind one of Abraham Lincoln’s potent lines when on March 4, 1865 he penned the following:

While the inaugural address was being delivered … devoted altogether to saving the Union without war, insurgent agents were in the city seeking to destroy it without war – seeking to dissolve the Union and divide effects by negotiation. Both parties deprecated war, but one of them would make war rather than let the nation survive, and the other would accept war rather than let it perish, and the war came.

We are not in a hot civil war at this time, but, as Charles R. Kelser has written, “cold civil war is better than a hot civil war, but it is not a good situation for a country to be in. Underlying our cold civil war is the fact that America is torn increasingly between two rival constitutions, two cultures, two ways of life.”

Consider Nikki Randhawa, a Sikh who represented the very best of America when she was the United States ambassador to the United Nations. Most of us know her as Nikki Haley. Her marriage to Michael Haley was a “measure of respect for their individual backgrounds – the colorful Sikh ritual was followed by the Methodist ceremony.” Her husband is an officer in the South Carolina National Guard. She was a governor of South Carolina – clearly two proud Americans who serve their country with distinction.

Reflect now on the newly elected Democratic Muslim women who embody the creeping sharia that is enveloping the world. Ilhan Omar (Minnesota) used American immigration law to her advantage by marrying her brother in 2009. The “motivation for the marriage points to possible immigration fraud and student loan fraud. What’s more she swore to apparent falsehoods in court.”

Tashida Tlaib (Michigan) has vociferously called for the impeachment of Donald Trump. According to Tlaib “President Donald Trump is a direct and serious threat to our country.” She asserts that “[o]n an almost daily basis, he attacks our Constitution, our democracy, the rule of law and the people who are in this country. His conduct has created a constitutional crisis that we must confront now.”

Continue reading →
WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Will Netanyahu Go to Riyadh? A meeting between Israel’s prime minister and Saudi Arabia’s crown prince would make sense.By Karen Elliott House

By on January 7th, 2019

https://www.wsj.com/articles/will-netanyahu-go-to-riyadh-11546804745

Don’t be surprised if Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu soon visits Saudi Arabia to meet with Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.

The Trump administration has worked for nearly two years to get Riyadh and Jerusalem openly working together. Crown Prince Mohammed loves risk and is eager to turn the page from the Jamal Khashoggi murder. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s Mideast trip this week seems choreographed for a dramatic finale starring the crown prince.

The U.S. stage managers are in place: National security adviser John Bolton landed in Israel Saturday, and Mr. Pompeo arrives Wednesday in Amman, Jordan, the first of eight Arab capitals he’ll visit in as many days. He plans to deliver a major speech in Cairo and to visit Riyadh early next week.

Mr. Pompeo’s trip is intended to underscore that far from fading out of the Middle East, the U.S. is leading a broad coalition against Iran. The linchpins of the effort are Israel and Saudi Arabia, which share a fear of Iranian expansionism and are the closest U.S. allies in the region. They have maintained informal but not-so-secret contacts, sharing intelligence on their common nemesis. Why not make it official?

Continue reading →
HISTORY, ISRAEL Comments turned off

Chaim of Arabia: The First Arab-Zionist Alliance Rick Richman

By on January 7th, 2019

https://jewishreviewofbooks.com/articles/4992/chaim-of-arabia-the-first-arab-zionis

On January 3, 1919, a few weeks after World War I ended, the Zionist leader Chaim Weizmann met with Emir Faisal, the commander-in-chief of the Arab uprising against the Ottoman Empire, at a London hotel. Faisal’s father, King Hussein of Hedjaz, ruled the two holiest sites of Islam—Mecca and Medina—and the family traced its lineage to the prophet Muhammad. Faisal was accompanied to the meeting by his adviser, friend, and translator, T. E. Lawrence, who had helped him lead the Arab Revolt.

At the meeting, Weizmann and Faisal signed an agreement, brokered over the preceding month by Lawrence, exchanging Arab acceptance of the Balfour Declaration for Zionist support of an Arab state in the rest of the Ottoman lands. In February, they traveled to the Paris Peace Conference, where the victorious Allies would remap Europe and the Middle East, and made complementary presentations about the future of the region.

In the famous 1962 film Lawrence of Arabia, Lawrence would be played by Peter O’Toole, and Faisal by Alec Guinness. Weizmann was not portrayed at all, but perhaps he should have been. His arduous wartime trip, in June 1918, from Palestine to Faisal’s remote desert military camp—a five-day journey by train, boat, car, camel, and foot—led to their January agreement.

The Balfour Declaration, issued on November 2, 1917, had pledged support for a Jewish national home in Palestine, in part to generate support in America and Russia for Britain’s war effort. The British believed that both countries had influential Jewish populations and that the declaration would help keep Russia and America in the war against Germany and the Ottoman Turks. It was also, however, part of a broader British war strategy—one designed to bring the Jewish, Arab, and Armenian national movements into an informal alliance to defeat the Ottoman Empire.

Continue reading →
WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

The European Union’s Massive Brexit Self-Harming Exercise by Malcolm Lowe

By on January 7th, 2019

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13501/eu-brexit-self-harm

Irish PM Varadkar has made an Irish joke out of Ireland by his own opposition to changing the “backstop.” To claim that an easily removable obstacle that will gravely harm Ireland provides essential protection to Ireland may not be the funniest joke in Irish history, but it is a good candidate for becoming the most expensive one.

As the resumption of the Brexit debate looms in the House of Commons, it is reported that the European Commission is haughtily retaining its refusal to consider any revision to the Withdrawal Agreement (WA); this attitude is also backed by the numerous leaders of European Union countries whom UK PM Theresa May has contacted. Those leaders assume that, like most of them themselves, the UK will eventually grovel before the Commission and accept its dictate.

The European leaders are too young, perhaps, to remember that most of their countries would have become German dominions and satellites if the UK had not refused to grovel to Hitler in July 1940 after the Fall of France, fighting on alone in Europe and North Africa. As Germany discovered later that its misjudgment of the UK would end with the devastation of Germany, today the UK is preparing resolutely for a no-deal Brexit that will cost it dearly, but the EU more dearly.

For one thing, the European Commissioner for Budget and Human Resources, Günther Oettinger, warned on December 27 in an interview with the Westfälische Rundschau that EU members will have to pay up if the UK saves itself the estimated €42 billion that it would owe the EU according to the provisions of the WA. Merely in 2019, Germany itself would have to pay about half a billion euros extra (“ein mittlerer dreistelliger Millionenbetrag”). As for himself, he is planning to leave the European Commission for the private sector in the spring, that is, about the time when the UK is scheduled to leave the EU (March 29).

The source of the trouble (if anyone still does not know) lies in one part of the WA, the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland, the so-called “backstop.” It provides for a “temporary” customs union between the UK and the EU in the case that negotiations between the two parties on the Future Relationship have not finished by the end of 2020 (the date specified in the WA). The purpose of the “backstop” is allegedly to guarantee a fundamental interest of the Irish Republic: that there should not be a “hard border” between it and Northern Ireland, when the latter leaves the EU along with the rest of the UK.

Continue reading →
ISRAEL Comments turned off

The Palestinians’ Uncivil War by Khaled Abu Toameh

By on January 7th, 2019

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13502/palestinians-hamas-fatah-conflict

The biggest losers from this internal bloodletting are the Palestinians living under these leaders in the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas-ruled Gaza.

The dispute between Hamas and Fatah is not over who will bring democracy and a better economy to the Palestinians. They are not fighting over who will improve the living conditions of the Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza Strip by building new schools and hospitals. They are not fighting over who will introduce major reforms to the Palestinian government and end financial and administrative corruption. They are not fighting over the need for freedom of expression and a free media.

Mahmoud Abbas, the Hamas leaders correctly argue, is not a rightful or legitimate president. If Abbas were to sign a deal with Israel, people could come along later and say that he lacked the legal authority to do so; they would be right.

In order for any peace process to move forward, the Palestinians first need to stop attacking each other. Then, they need to come up with new leaders who actually give a damn about their people.

The Palestinians’ major ruling groups, Fatah and Hamas, are now saying they are done with each other: that the divorce is final.

Recent days and weeks have witnessed the two groups maligning each other beyond anything previously seen. Fatah and Hamas have reached a new level of mutual loathing. At times, it even seems as if Fatah and Hamas hate each other more than they hate Israel.

Many in the West say they would like to see Israel and the Palestinians return to the negotiating table. They want Israelis and Palestinians to resume the so-called peace process. They are hoping that Israel and the Palestinians will manage to reach a historic agreement that would end the Israeli-Arab conflict and bring real peace to the Middle East.

The region, however, does not need a “peace process” between Israel and the Palestinians. It needs one of a different type. The “peace process” that the Middle East is crying out for is one between Palestinians and Palestinians, one that would end their bloody, internecine war.

Continue reading →
BOOKS Comments turned off

How the Self-Esteem Myth Has Damaged Society and Us—An Interview with Will Storr written by Clay Routledge

By on January 6th, 2019

https://quillette.com/2019/01/05/how-the-self-esteem-

Will Storr is an award-winning journalist and novelist. His work has appeared in outlets such as the Guardian, the Sunday Times, the New Yorker, and Esquire. His latest book is Selfie: How We Became so Self-Obsessed and What it’s Doing to Us. As a psychologist who studies the self and related topics, I was excited to read the book and was not disappointed. I highly recommend it. Below is an interview I conducted with Mr. Storr about Selfie.

Clay Routledge: What made you interested in researching and writing a book focused on the self?

Will Storr: My previous book, The Unpersaudables, was an investigation into how intelligent people come to believe crazy things. It focused on the ways we become intellectually stuck. I concluded that we don’t really choose the things we believe—at least not those things that are core to our worldview. What we believe is just part of the accident of who we are. In an important way, our core beliefs and our self are indivisible.

But this was also a slightly unsatisfying answer, because clearly people do change. I became curious about how this happens and began focusing, in my journalism, on people who’d changed their minds. One of these people was the eminent psychologist Professor Roy Baumeister who used to be a believer in the self-esteem myth. Not only did he change his mind, he was an important figure in proving to the world that the idea, which was dominant at the time, was wrong.

CR: What is the self-esteem movement and how did it come about?

WS: Its proponents believed self-esteem was a “social vaccine” that could cure us of a vast array of problems, and to make us more successful and competitive in our working lives. At its simplest, it said that in order to become amazing we must believe we’re amazing. It helped change the way we raised and taught our children.

At the heart of Selfie is a deep investigation into one of its main proponents, a politician named John Vasconcellos, and his government mandated task force to look into self-esteem. He told the world that the scientific part of his investigation confirmed that high self-esteem was, indeed, a social vaccine. I tracked down former members and spent weeks pouring through their archives and found that he’d deliberately lied and attempted to cover up about what the science really showed—which was no causative link between self-esteem and good outcomes.

Unfortunately, Vasconcellos’s lie went around the world. Journalists bought it, powerful influencers such as Oprah Winfrey embraced it and the idea took over. It was hugely consequential. It was in this era of self-esteem parenting and teaching that we began to see the rise of narcissism in young people, that leads right into this “selfie” era. I believe that Vasconcellos and his task force played a part in that story.

Continue reading →
IMMIGRATION Comments turned off

Trump Veers Off Message on the Border Wall By John Fund

By on January 6th, 2019

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/01/trump-border-wall-construction-pentagon/

He should ditch the “military version of eminent domain” and order the Pentagon to start building.

Donald Trump spent much of his 2016 campaign railing against President Obama’s misuse of executive power, especially Obama’s decision to extend legal protection to underage children who were brought to the U.S. by their foreign parents.

But now President Trump, frustrated by Congress’s failure to deliver $5 billion in funding for the border wall, is proposing to bend the Constitution to get what he wants. Trump told reporters that he may be willing to declare a state of national emergency to build the wall “very quickly” without congressional backing, and that he may even use “the military version of eminent domain” to seize the property such a structure might need. “I can do it if I want,” he declared.

Trump can certainly declare a national emergency, but the courts would probably look askance on any rash actions. In 1952, President Harry Truman cited a state of emergency when he ordered the government to seize the steel mills during a strike. He claimed it was the only way to guarantee that the mills would continue to produce weapons for the Korean War. The Supreme Court — packed with justices appointed by New Deal presidents — nonetheless concluded by a 6 to 3 vote that he didn’t have the authority to nationalize private businesses. Few legal scholars believe that the current Supreme Court — the conservative portion of which is steeped in Federalist Society principles of limited government — would give Trump the benefit of the doubt in a non-war situation.

But many legal scholars say there is a way Trump could act legally. Current law allows the Defense Department to use “un-obligated” money to fund construction projects during war or emergencies. “The Department of Defense has funds in its account that are not specifically designated for anything,” Harvard Law School professor Mark Tushnet told NBC News. “My instinct is to say that if he declares a national emergency and uses this pot of unappropriated money for the wall, he’s on very solid legal ground.”

Continue reading →
ISRAEL Comments turned off

DR. REUVEN BERKO: THEIR WILDEST FANTASIES

By on January 6th, 2019

http://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/in-their-wildest-fantasies/

“The Palestinians are selling a combination of illusions, historical fiction and Israel hatred. Among Arab states, there are those who are now waking up from the brainwashing they’ve endured. It is only here in Israel that we continue to cooperate with the fraudulent ploy.”

The High Court of Justice is set to deliberate in the coming days whether the nation-state law should be changed so that “the right of return” will serve as a counterweight to the Law of Return, thereby allowing the Palestinians to drown Israel in hordes of “refugees” with knowledge of murder and rape that will “return” from the killing fields in Syria, Lebanon and Iraq to realize a peaceful state from the river to the sea. Funnily enough, that river of which they speak is located right here in Israel. While Arab countries maintain a partnership of interests with us against Iran and abandon the Palestinians’ illusions of a “return and a Palestinian capital in Jerusalem,” the Palestinians can take comfort in the Israel hatred popular in those countries of peace, where they stomp on our flag and defiantly oppose their dictatorial governments.

In the meantime, the Palestinians continue to engage in a collective battle against Israel’s survival. In the racist trial of Issam Akel, sentenced to life in prison and heavy labor, the Palestinians declared it forbidden to sell land to Jews.

This is absurd. All the man did was sell the land back to its legal owners. These are properties the Muslims conquered from the Byzantines in 638 C.E. and which were returned to their Jewish owners in 1967. But from the Islamists’ point of view, the rights of the owners of these forcibly conquered lands have expired. Now the Palestinian raiders pretend to be the landowners in our country.

Did the descendants of the Arab feudalists from Lebanon, who sold lands to Jews in the 19tth century, also put their parents on trial?

Continue reading →
EDUCATION Comments turned off

Using ‘anti-racism’ to avoid teaching students proper English By Thomas Lifson

By on January 6th, 2019

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/01/using_antiracism_to_avoid_teaching_students_proper_english.html

It’s almost as if some universities are trying to convince parents that it’s not worth spending more than a quarter of a million dollars on a degree. If you don’t learn how to write standard English and go from campus out on the job market, your will find your career opportunities limited. If not right away, then later on.

But the racial frenzy gripping higher education seems to insist that any standard that minorities have disproportionate difficulty meeting must be discarded. Even if it sabotages those students’ chances of future success.

Jeremiah Poff of The College Fix explains:

American University is hosting a seminar next month to teach faculty how to assess writing without judging its quality. In the seminar’s own words: “grading ain’t just grading.”

It’s led by Asao Inoue, a University of Washington-Tacoma professor, and the purpose is to pursue “antiracist ends” through writing assessments.

A national scholarly organization that preaches its “commitment” to academic excellence came out swinging against the seminar, telling The College Fix that Inoue’s ideas are “destroying the very idea that composition classes should teach all students to write well.”

In an email, National Association of Scholars spokesperson Chance Layton said Inoue is “substituting social justice ideologues’ bigotry for instruction in composition”:

The national dominance of social justice educators such as Prof. Inoue indoctrinates college graduates nationwide into social justice ideology and bigotry–but fails to teach them how to write a coherent sentence.

Continue reading →
NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

Tish James’ duty: The new attorney general must be more circumspect in her anti-Trump statements

By on January 6th, 2019

https://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-edit-james-duty-20190104-story.html

The state’s new top legal officer, Attorney General Tish James, is well equipped for the job in many ways. She will protect consumers from getting scammed and workers from being cheated out of pay. She will defend New York’s interests when they collide with Washington’s on the environment, immigration and more.

The Empire State also happens to be home to President Trump’s family business and (dissolving) foundation, making it fertile terrain for civil and criminal investigations. Here, James may have made her own job harder.

Prosecutors are often also politicians, but they owe it to their potential targets, and to the public’s trust in justice, not to let their leanings cloud or seem to cloud their judgment as they flex the long arm of the law.

As a candidate, James called Trump an “illegitimate President.” She characterized foreign governments’ payments to Trump family holdings as constituting a “pattern and practice of money laundering.”

After winning election, she said “We will use every area of the law to investigate President Trump and his business transactions and that of his family as well.”

Of Robert Mueller, she said, “I think he’s closing in on this President, and his days are going to be coming to an end shortly.”

In a 2013 ruling, New York’s highest court wrote that in rare situations, “the appearance of impropriety itself is a ground for disqualification” of a prosecutor from a case, “when the appearance is such as to ‘discourage public confidence in our government and the system of law to which it is dedicated.’ ”

Unable to read tea leaves, we do not know whether courts would consider James’ statements as candidate or as AG-elect sufficient to force her recusal. (There’s no risk a case would be dismissed solely on such grounds.)

Going forward, however, she must demonstrate that rhetorical discretion is the better part of effective law enforcement.

Continue reading →