Displaying the most recent of 90914 posts written by

Ruth King

The ‘Saudi Affair’ in Istanbul Unveils Sunni vs Sunni Rivalry by Burak Bekdil

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13176/turkey-khashoggi-affair

Turkey, pursuing its own Islamist agenda and trying to rival Saudi influence in the Sunni world, is just too happy to have discredited the Wahhabi royals.

Turkey’s message to the Western world was: See the difference between our peaceful Islamism and rogue-state Islamism? Stop discrediting us for our democratic deficit — also, presumably, for “only” imprisoning more than 100 journalists there.

It looked like a first-class spy thriller: A prominent writer enters the Saudi consulate in Istanbul but never leaves the building. Saudi officials said he left the building but could not offer footage from security cameras. When they did, the image was of a dark-haired body-double dressed in the writer’s clothes.

Turkish police and intelligence start leaking evidence of the man’s murder, drop by drop. The day before the Saudi journalist’s disappearance, two private Saudi jets had arrived in Istanbul, with 15 passengers aboard belonging to security agencies in Riyadh. Both jets left for Saudi Arabia shortly after the consulate incident. Unnamed Turkish officials fed (mostly foreign) media stories of how the man had been killed, how his body was dismembered and disposed of after the murder — all by the Saudi death squad. As the Saudi consul-general rushed to Riyadh, Turkish police searched the consulate. More unnamed Turkish officials tell the press that they found forensic evidence for the murder. Unsure if the Turkish police really have evidence, the House of Saud decides to admit that the man had been killed “in a brawl” at the consulate but Saudi officials claim to have no idea where his body was — not convincing anyone in the world’s more democratic parts.

Trump and Putin to Meet Next Month in Paris By Mairead McArdle

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/trump-and-putin-to-meet-next-month-in-paris/

President Trump will meet with Russian president Vladimir Putin in Paris next month, officials from the White House and Moscow have confirmed.

National-security adviser John Bolton met with Putin on Tuesday in Moscow, where the Russian leader suggested a meeting with Trump would be useful in the wake of “unprovoked moves that are hard to call friendly.”

“We will make the precise arrangements on that, but it will happen in connection with the 100th anniversary, the celebration of the armistice that the French are hosting on November the 11th,” Bolton later told reporters.

The meeting will reportedly focus on the war in Syria, America’s desire for Russia to enforce international sanctions on Iran and North Korea, and Trump’s decision to pull out of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, a Reagan-era nuclear-arms deal.

“Russia has violated the agreement. They’ve been violating it for many years,” Trump said. ” I don’t know why President Obama didn’t negotiate or pull out. And we’re not going to let them violate a nuclear agreement and go out and do weapons and we’re not allowed to.”

Bolton gave official notice to Russia on Tuesday that the U.S. is withdrawing from the agreement.

Caravan Jihad? Jihadis among the migrant caravan is not as ridiculous as CNN would have you believe. Robert Spencer

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271719/caravan-jihad-robert-spencer

CNN on Monday once again posed as the intrepid and impartial fact checker, correcting the falsehoods spread by our ridiculous and hateful President, with the headline: “Trump seizes on right-wing media reports to suggest migrant caravan has been infiltrated by ‘unknown Middle Easterners.’” And as usual, the President is in reality far closer to the mark than CNN ever is. CNN has once again proven itself to be, as Trump has so aptly and indelibly put it, very fake news.

CNN noted that “In a tweet, the President warned that ‘criminals and unknown Middle Easterners are mixed in’ the caravan of thousands of Central American migrants fleeing poverty and violence.” Note CNN’s thumb on the scale in its framing of the story: the hordes advancing toward the border are “Central American migrants fleeing poverty and violence,” not “A large cadre of military-age males being transported to the American border to flout immigration laws and create provocations designed to discredit Trump before the midterm elections.”

After that bit of legerdemain, CNN informs the Leftist marks who still take it seriously that Trump is, as expected, all wrong and going off half-cocked yet again: “The President did not support his claim with any evidence. Sarah Sanders, the White House press secretary, told reporters on Monday afternoon that Trump ‘absolutely’ had evidence to indicate there are Middle Easterners in the caravan. Sanders, however, did not provide specific information on the matter and it was still not clear what evidence Trump had to indicate the presence of such individuals in the caravan.”

The evidence is actually abundantly clear; CNN just doesn’t want you to know it exists. The Daily Caller reported Monday that Univision correspondent Francisco Santa Anna stated: “Yesterday when we were traveling through Guatemala, we noticed people from El Salvador and even people from Bangladesh. Can you imagine what they had to do to get here? They infiltrated themselves in this caravan and tried to cross with the crowd. That would have benefited them greatly.”

Rayyar Marron How I Became an Academic Pariah

https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2018/10/research-palestine-made-academic-pariah/
Rayyar Marron is author of Humanitarian Rackets and their Moral Hazards: The Case of the Palestinian Refugee Camps in Lebanon (Routledge, 2016).

When I suggested that aid incentivises rent-seeking and stasis among refugees in Lebanon, I was met with vituperation. The fact that I presented evidence harvested from on-the-ground inquiry was dismissed, as was my data. In academia, as I learned, ideology trumps evidence.

I wasn’t certain whether I should write this article. I watched from the sidelines the back-and-forth over the ANU’s rejection of Ramsay funding for a new centre for the study of Western civilisation. And I have a confidence problem. For the past few years I have suffered from academic ostracism, my research being treated as the intellectual equivalent of asbestos. When I dared suggest that some humanitarian programs to the Palestinians of Lebanon should be reconsidered if not stopped altogether because they are defrauded by refugees, and the competition to get hold of funds sparks violence in the camps, I received the most melodramatic objections from colleagues and friends. Their reactions ranged from a look of somebody encountering a bad smell to howls of offence and accusations that I was saying what I was saying because I come from Maronite Christian ancestry.

Nobody cared to ask about the data. And here I was, thinking I was working in an evidence-based discipline!

I now have pariah status amongst the cliques of leftist do-gooders, of which I once considered myself part, that inhabit social science departments at universities around the country and abroad. But I can be silent no longer. My heart is full and I must have my say.

In mid-2009 I returned to Australia after a year of field research in the Palestinian refugee camp of Shatila in Beirut with the most fantastic data. I lived in the camp for three months that year, witnessing disputes over the implementation of UN-funded humanitarian projects among the various armed Palestinian factions that run the camps as autonomous territories. On a number of occasions a clan of refugees stood in the way of earthmoving equipment and stopped the construction of a new sewer pipe until they were paid off. This incident was symptomatic of the racketeering that has plagued the camps of Lebanon for decades. When any aid comes to the camps, factions or even gangs of refugees threaten the projects and demand to be paid protection money to stop disrupting. Once paid, they become the projects’ protectors, so no other group can attempt the same racket. As the Palestinians have long insisted on the principle of self-rule in the Lebanon camps, no external security force can intervene in the racketeering. This means a lot of money is wasted on bribes, and group rivalry can erupt into shoot-outs that destroy camp stability.

Europe’s Growth Problem in Italian The mandarins of Brussels pick the wrong fight with Rome.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/europes-growth-problem-in-italian-1540336936

There’s little new in the budget battle roiling Rome—but when did that ever stop the European Commission? The mandarins of Brussels on Tuesday issued an unprecedented demand that Italy rewrite its bad budget in line with Brussels’ bad fiscal principles. The tangle contributed to a selloff in global equities.

The Commission wants Rome to deliver a budget deficit equal to no more than 0.8% of GDP next year, a commitment made by the previous Italian government. In theory that discipline should matter to an Italian government whose debt is more than 130% of GDP. But elections have consequences, and one result of the winning coalition of the right-wing League and vaguely left-wing 5-Star Movement is a new budget with a deficit of 2.4% of GDP annually for the next few years.

Other European governments and their taxpayers—and investors—have cause to be wary about parts of the Italian plan. Tens of billions of euros in new spending are slated for welfare handouts and public works that Italy can’t deliver without waste and corruption. None of this will boost economic growth, potentially leaving other eurozone countries to bail out an insolvent Italian state down the road.

Battle of the Statehouses The policy stakes are wider than ever with Democrats set to gain.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/battle-of-the-statehouses-1540336650

While the battle for Congress is the main event this election, the fight for control of 36 governorships may be as consequential for American politics. Opposition to Barack Obama’s policies galvanized conservatives during the 2010 midterms and ushered in GOP control of statehouses from Arkansas to Wisconsin. In 2010 Republicans held majorities in 15 legislatures and 24 governorships. Today the GOP controls 32 legislatures and 33 governorships.

The result has been a remarkable record of reform and economic revival in many states. Eight years of conservative governance have bolstered state budgets and economies. (See the nearby chart on job growth.) But this year Democrats are riding anti-Donald Trump sentiment in a bid to sweep most of the big state governorships and many legislative chambers and move in a far different policy direction. The stakes are worth highlighting.

Start with tax reform. In 2011 Michigan Republicans replaced the state’s onerous business tax with a flat 6% corporate rate while eliminating myriad carve-outs. The Wolverine State has led the Great Lakes region in GDP growth over the last seven years as business investment has surged, prompting other states in the Midwest to cut taxes to compete.

Indiana Republicans slashed the state’s corporate rate to 5.75% from 8.5% in 2011 and plan to reduce it to 4.9% by 2022. Republicans in Ohio have cut the state income tax by 16% across the board and reduced the top marginal rate to 4.997% from 5.925%.

Iowa has long been the New Jersey of the Midwest with the nation’s highest corporate rate and a punishing 8.98% top income rate. Republicans this year made the Hawkeye State more competitive by putting the top income tax rate on a path to 6.5% by 2023. Over the next three years, the state’s 12% corporate rate is set to decline to 9.8%—assuming GOP Gov. Kim Reynolds isn’t defeated. Her Democratic opponent Fred Hubbell has warned President Trump’s trade brawls may compel him to hit pause on the tax cuts.

Why I Turned Down Ivy League Acceptances And Don’t Regret It One Bit As affirmative action court cases and skyrocketing tuition rates reveal, today’s Ivy League institutions put their own biases ahead of their students’ advancement.By Adam Barsouk

http://thefederalist.com/2018/10/23/turned-ivy-league-acceptances-dont-regret-one-bit/

Adam Barsouk is a cancer researcher, medical student, and science, medicine, and policy author. His work has been featured in Fox News, Newsweek, The Daily Caller, Business Insider and Reason, among others.

With college application season in full swing, many applicants hope that getting into one of the nation’s highest-ranked universities means learning skills meant for the best and the brightest. They would be wrong. As affirmative action court cases and skyrocketing tuition rates reveal, today’s Ivy League institutions have unfortunately strayed from their sacred mission, putting their own biases ahead of their students’ advancement.

As a valedictorian with a perfect SAT score, I was accepted to several Ivy League schools. After careful consideration, I turned them down in favor of my state school, which saved me over $200,000. Today, as a medical student and researcher, I have no regrets.
Tuition Dollars Don’t Go Toward Education

This past year, Ivy League tuition costs have grown an average of 4percent, raising the average “sticker-price” cost of attendance to $70,000 a year. Most of this money is not actually spent on improving the quality of education. While the University of Pennsylvania raised its tuition by 4 percent, it increased its financial aid by 5.25 percent. In other words, in a wonky, catch-22 redistribution scheme, Penn raised the tuition for some in order to lower it for others.

As tuition goes up, the number of people paying the full cost actually goes down. Financial aid uses the tuition dollars of the well-off upper class (a quarter of the U.S. population) to cover the tuition of the poor.

Of course, society should strive to ensure equal opportunity for all. Merit scholarships do just that–they allow the brightest individuals to attend university regardless of their parents’ income. All the Ivy Leagues have abandoned merit scholarships in favor of financial aid. Financial aid rewards students not on their ability, but on their circumstance.

ELECTIONS ARE COMING: ARIZONA Martha McSally for Senate

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/martha-mcsally-for-senate/

Representative Martha McSally began her career in public service not as a politician but as a fighter pilot in the U.S. Air Force, serving in Iraq, Yugoslavia, and Afghanistan. In 2001 she fought a Department of Defense policy that required women in combat to wear body coverings while serving in Saudi Arabia, and she has remained an outspoken critic of the woeful state of women’s rights in that part of the world ever since. Since taking office in 2015, McSally has been an exponent of center-right positions on foreign policy, immigration, and social issues. Now Arizonans have the opportunity to elect her to fill Jeff Flake’s soon-to-be-empty Senate seat.

McSally is facing Congresswoman Kyrsten Sinema, and the contrast between their résumés is conspicuous. Sinema was a prominent anti-war activist in the 2000s, handing out material that criticized “U.S. terror” in the Middle East and appearing on radio shows with assorted crackpots. When one libertarian activist said that he ought to be permitted to join the Taliban if he so pleased, Sinema responded on air, “Fine. I don’t care if you want to do that, go ahead.” She passed out flyers that denounced President Bush as a “fascist” and an “imperialist” and once said the Bush administration was waging war for the purpose of expropriating oil.

That Sinema was once a left-wing activist is no secret. In the 2010s she said she had changed her mind about military intervention, and she has compiled a legitimately moderate voting record on many issues since taking office. She is one of a dwindling few Blue Dog Democrats and often votes with Republicans on issues pertaining to foreign policy and immigration. Coming to a new, more reasonable point of view shouldn’t be disqualifying; indeed, it is commendable if it is honestly accounted for and explained.

The White-Privilege Tedium By Victor Davis Hanson

https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/white-privilege-debate-elizabeth-warren/

It’s not a coincidence that many of the loudest critics decrying white privilege are . . . privileged whites.

“I’m a white woman. . . . And my job is to shut other white people down when they want to interrupt. My job is to shut other white people down when they want to say, ‘Oh no I’m not prejudiced, I’m a Democrat, I’m accepting.’”
— Sally Boynton Brown, erstwhile candidate to head the Democratic National Committee

“These white men, old by the way, are not protecting women. They’re protecting a man who is probably guilty.”
— Joy Behar, cohost, The View

“Are white people genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins? . . . Oh man it’s kind of sick how much joy I get out of being cruel to old white men.”
— Sarah Jeong, newly appointed editorial board member, the New York Times

Why are current monotonous slogans like “white privilege” and “old white men” finally losing their currency?

Who exactly is “white” in a multiracial, intermarried, and integrated society? How do we determine who is a purported victim of racial bias — relative degrees of nonwhite skin color, DNA badges, an ethnicized last name, or nomenclature with two or three accent marks?

The reason that Arab-, Greek-, or Italian-Americans are more likely to be branded or to self-identify as “white” than Brazilian-, Argentinian, Spanish-, or Mexican-Americans doesn’t necessarily have anything to do with appearance or their DNA or their ancestors’ or their own historical experience in America. It has everything to do with the perversities of the devolving diversity industry in which claims to victimization bring greater careerist advantage or at least psychological satisfaction.

The recent farce involving Elizabeth Warren’s “ancestry” has not only probably aborted her presidential aspirations, but — along with the Asian-American lawsuit against Harvard’s admission practices — also reminded us of the growing corruption of race-based set-asides. Warren’s desperate gambit was simply a response to the new reality that minority status often has little relation with appearance. (Many Latinos — a term never adequately defined — look “whiter” than Italian Americans or Greek Americans who have been absorbed as “white” long ago.)

Midterms: Sorry Democrats, voters reject your political correctness for good reason Glenn Harlan Reynolds

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/10/23/political-correctness-college-campuses-democrats-voters-midterms-progressive-activists-column/1726496002/
Democrats push for political correctness, Republicans mock them for it, and most Americans are uncomfortable with it. No one wins with PC culture.

Democrats are hoping to administer a tough midterm-election blow to the Republicans — akin to the “shellacking” President Barack Obama got from the Tea Party in 2010 — as a means of shutting down President Donald Trump. But it’s looking iffy now, post-Kavanaugh, and if they fail, they’ll have the politically correct culture that has moved from college campuses into the Democratic Party to blame.

As I wrote in these pages back before the 2016 election, opposition to PC culture was a major source of Trump’s appeal to voters. While most politicians, even Republican politicians, were afraid to challenge it head-on, Trump was unafraid, mocking the PC social justice warriors even on their own ground.

Since Trump’s election, the response among Democrats has been to double down. After all, if Trump’s against politically correct culture, then they have to be for it. But that puts them right where Trump wants them to be, because PC culture is highly unpopular.
Most Americans don’t want to be ‘woke’

Don’t just take my word for it. Here’s what a recent article in The Atlantic, with the title “Americans strongly dislike PC culture” says:

“Among the general population, a full 80 percent believe that ‘political correctness is a problem in our country.’ Even young people are uncomfortable with it, including 74 percent ages 24 to 29, and 79 percent under age 24. On this particular issue, the woke are in a clear minority across all ages. Youth isn’t a good proxy for support of political correctness — and it turns out race isn’t, either. Whites are ever so slightly less likely than average to believe that political correctness is a problem in the country: 79 percent of them share this sentiment. Instead, it is Asians (82 percent), Hispanics (87 percent) and American Indians (88 percent) who are most likely to oppose political correctness.