https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270501/prager-u-video-dangerous-people-are-teaching-your-prager-university
Dangerous people are filling the heads of young people with dangerous nonsense. Who are these people? They are what Jordan Peterson calls “the post-modernists:” neo-Marxist professors who dominate our colleges and universities. And here’s the worst part: we are financing these nihilists with tax dollars, alumni gifts and tuition payments. Time to wise up.
https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270500/new-faces-dutch-anti-islam-front-bruce-bawer
These days in Europe, when you meet a stranger and let slip that you’re an American, you know beyond any doubt what the next question is going to be.
“Who did you vote for in the presidential election?” he asked. It was the other day, and I was in Amsterdam, and I had just sat down next to him at the bar and ordered a gin and tonic.
“Donald John Trump,” I said amiably.
“I’m impressed,” he said.
“By what?”
“When I ask other Americans that question, they get emotional. They act like I’ve attacked them. You’re the first who didn’t react like that.”
We were in a gay bar. “So are you talking about gay guys that you meet here?”
“Yes.”
“And they voted for Trump?”
“Some of them. Not all. The Hillary voters are proud. The Trump voters….”
“They’re defensive.”
“Yes.”
“Well, that’s understandable,” I said. “They’re used to being told that they voted for the incarnation of evil. I find it interesting that so many gay guys you meet did vote for Trump.”
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12552/turkey-erdogan-holy-war-obsession
When non-Muslims deny Muslim minorities the rights that Muslim-majority countries systematically deny non-Muslim minorities, extremist Muslims in Turkey seem to have the habit of threatening non-Muslim lands with holy war.
President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who spoke of “a war between the cross and the crescent” because the Austrian government closed down seven mosques, does not seem to bother with any of those visible, documented cases of religious discrimination against non-Muslims and against Islam’s minority sects.
Muslim leaders complain of travel bans on some Muslim nations, but many Muslim countries have travel bans against other Muslims in addition to banning Israelis.
When non-Muslims deny Muslim minorities the rights that Muslim-majority countries systematically deny non-Muslim minorities, extremist Muslims in Turkey seem to have the habit of threatening non-Muslim lands with holy war.
“Soon religious wars will break out in Europe. You are taking Europe toward an abyss. That’s the way it’s going,” Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s foreign minister, Mevlüt Çavuşoğlu, predicted in a 2017 speech. The minister was angry with the European states that had banned Turkish Islamist political shows in their territories.
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12558/switzerland-islam-radicalization
There are approximately 250 mosques in Switzerland, but the authorities do not know who finances them. By rejecting the proposal compelling mosques to disclose who finances them, the Swiss authorities can now remain willfully blind.
The Muslim World League is behind “a whole network of radically-oriented mosques in Switzerland… with the clear intention of spreading Salafist thought here”. — Saïda Keller-Messahli, expert on Islam in Switzerland.
Above all, the Swiss government seems not to have considered the rights of Swiss non-Muslim citizens, who are the ones left to live with the consequences of the government’s ill-thought-out policies.
Switzerland has just rejected a proposed law preventing mosques from accepting money from abroad, and compelling them to declare where their financial backing comes from and for what purpose the money will be used. According to the proposal, imams also would have been obliged to preach in one of the Swiss national languages.
While the proposal narrowly passed in the lower house of parliament already in September 2017, the upper house recently rejected it. The proposal was modeled on regulations in Austria, where already in 2015, a law banning foreign funding of religious groups was passed. The Austrian law aims to counter extremism by requiring imams to speak German, prohibiting foreign funding for mosques, imams and Muslim organizations in Austria, and stressing the precedence of Austrian law over Islamic sharia law for Muslims living in the country.
The Federal Council, which constitutes the federal government of Switzerland, was also against the proposal, and claimed that it constituted ‘discrimination’: “We must not discriminate against Muslim communities and imams and put them under general suspicion,” Justice Minister Simonetta Sommaruga said. The Federal Council noted that in Austria, Islam is officially recognized, whereas it is not in Switzerland. According to the Swiss government, therefore, the model applied in Austria does not apply to Switzerland, as “One cannot demand obligations without rights”. Instead, the Federal Council evidently believes that the risks posed by extremist Islamist preachers and communities can be combated within existing law.
https://amgreatness.com/2018/06/20/a-feeble-pushback-against
For even the most cynical among us, there is a Baghdad Bob aura of unreality about the Justice Department Inspector General’s report absolving the FBI of partisan wrongdoing in the Clinton email investigation. The IG report follows in Comey’s footsteps: enumerating appalling and illegal behavior, and then concluding there is nothing to prosecute.
There’s no such thing as being too cynical when it comes to our government. Yet once again, Americans have had to suffer through the cycle: assurances that while the FBI investigation of Clinton was crooked, the honest Inspector General Michael Horowitz would bring us justice. This from the same press that assured us Robert Mueller is an honorable man.
The contrast with the treatment meted out to President Trump, former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn, and camp Carter Page, is turning people’s stomachs.
Alan Dershowitz, who has emerged as the only Democrat on the national stage with any principles, explained what should be plain to see, in an interview with Maria Bartiromo:
“We’ll stop him.” That is not an expression of bias . . . It’s a message to the American people that the FBI is going to interfere in an election . . . . How can Strzok remain an FBI agent? The red line was crossed . . . you’re not allowed to try to use your office to try and stop somebody from being elected president of the United States.
Horowitz’s report supports Dershowitz’s view that a red line was crossed:
The inspector general concluded that Strzok’s text, along with others disparaging Trump, “is not only indicative of a biased state of mind but, even more seriously, implies a willingness to take official action to impact the presidential candidate’s electoral prospects.
But the report exonerates Strzok anyway.
https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/border-politics-family-separation-debate-abuse-of-history/
Much has been written — some of it either inaccurate or designed to obfuscate the issue ahead of the midterms for political purposes — about the border fiasco and the unfortunate separation of children from parents. Rich Lowry’s brief analysis is the most insightful.
The media outrage usually does not include examination of why the Trump administration is enforcing existing laws that it inherited from the Bush and Obama administrations that at any time could have been changed by both Democratic and Republican majorities in Congress; of the use of often dubious asylum claims as a way of obtaining entry otherwise denied to those without legal authorization — a gambit that injures or at least hampers thousands with legitimate claims of political persecution; of the seeming unconcern for the safety of children by some would-be asylum seekers who illegally cross the border, rather than first applying legally at a U.S. consulate abroad; of the fact that many children are deliberately sent ahead, unescorted on such dangerous treks to help facilitate their own parents’ later entrance; of the cynicism of the cartels that urge and facilitate such mass rushes to the border to overwhelm general enforcement; and of the selective outrage of the media in 2018 in a fashion not known under similar policies and detentions of the past.
In 2014, during a similar rush, both Barack Obama (“Do not send your children to the borders. If they do make it, they’ll get sent back.”) and Hillary Clinton (“We have to send a clear message, just because your child gets across the border, that doesn’t mean the child gets to stay. So, we don’t want to send a message that is contrary to our laws or will encourage more children to make that dangerous journey.”) warned — again to current media silence — would-be asylum seekers not to use children as levers to enter the U.S.
Had Hillary Clinton won the 2016 election – by hook or crook, but mostly by crook – the country would have continued its decline and continued the cliff jumping leap begun by Barack Obama (2008-2016). This is the kind of thing you would be in store for.Exempli gratia:
There would have been no ClintonInvestigation. The country would not have learned about President Clinton’s secret email server. The Supreme Court of the U.S. would have found such an investigation a “blatant invasion and violation of privacy.” James Comey would have returned as Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, specially appointed by Clinton on the day of her inauguration in January 2017, some say in perpetuity, although this would be denied by both President Clinton and Director Comey.
Bill Clinton would have been appointed as an Assistant Secretary of the Treasury.
No special Inspector General Report would have been required.
Director Comey would not have ordered an investigation of voter fraud in all fifty states related to the count of the national election, taking the lead from a federal district judge, Comey declares that all state voter registrationlaws are illegal, except in connection to Republican candidates and voters.
https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/06/the_mullahs_and_hanging.html
The Iranian government is using execution as an instrument for spreading fear among its citizens.
“I am innocent and I had to confess under the torture.”
These are the last words of Mohammad Salas, who was executed by the Iranian regime authorities at dawn on June 18, 2018.
Mohammad Salas was a 51-year-old bus driver from one of Iran’s largest Sufi communities, the Nemattolah Gonabadi. He was arrested on February 19, 2018 while taking part in a protest against Sufi repression which turned violent after regime security forces resorted to beatings and the use of live ammunition, water cannons, and tear gas to disperse the crowd.
Accused of killing three policemen during the protests, Mohammad Salas’s attorney, Ms. Zaynab Taheri, stated several times that “We have many documents indicating Mohammad Salas is innocent.”
The sole piece of evidence used to convict him was a “confession” that Mohammad Salas said was forcibly extracted after he was severely beaten by police officers. He later retracted his “confession,” but the Supreme Court rejected his request for a judicial review.
In spite of an international campaign by human rights organizations, Amnesty International in particular, calling for Sala’s sentence to be dropped, it appears that the Iranian authorities have been more interested in vengeance at any cost than in justice.
There is an international organization whose members include the repressive regimes of Cuba, Venezuela and China.
This organization recently added the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which is obstructing an investigation into the murder within its borders of two United Nations human-rights experts.
In the past decade, this organization has passed more resolutions to condemn Israel specifically than to condemn Syria, Iran and North Korea combined.
Most people would not imagine that such an organization would be dedicated to protecting human rights. Yet all of these details describe the misnamed U.N. Human Rights Council. In truth, the council provides cover for governments with awful human-rights records, and it refuses to eliminate its Agenda Item 7, which targets Israel unfairly by mandating that each session include a discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
After more than a year of unsuccessful efforts to fix these fundamental defects, the U.S. delegation announced Tuesday our withdrawal from the council. Our country will no longer be party to this deeply flawed institution, which harms the cause of human rights more than it helps it.
There are two major reasons that so many countries have resisted U.S.-led reform efforts. The first is baked into the council’s composition. One look at this rogue’s gallery explains why the organization has such appalling disrespect for the rights Americans take for granted. A credible human-rights council would pose a threat to these countries, so they oppose the steps needed to create one. Instead they obstruct investigations and reports, while interfering with the council’s ability to name and shame the perpetrators of the world’s worst atrocities.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/gaza-strip-militants-fire-rockets-into-israel-1529474115
TEL AVIV—Militants early Wednesday fired a volley of rockets into Israel from the Gaza Strip, puncturing a tacit three-week cease-fire, in the latest flare-up in tensions between the two sides.
The rockets from Gaza began after Israel first struck three targets in the strip in what the military said was a response to repeated launches of flaming kites and balloons with explosives, low-tech weapons that have damaged thousands of acres of Israeli farmland.
Over several hours, Gaza militants fired 45 rockets into Israel and the Iron Dome system intercepted seven of them, the Israeli army said. The fresh barrage triggered sirens in several Israeli towns near the border. There were no immediate official reports of deaths or injuries from the attacks.
As of 6 a.m. local time, the Israeli military said it had targeted 25 targets in the Gaza strip overnight in response to what it described as a “severe rocket attack” from the 25-mile-long enclave, which is densely populated.
Hamas spokesman Fawzi Barhoum said Wednesday in a statement on Twitter that the large number of rockets was meant to “set the rules of the engagement” after the Israeli airstrikes.
The escalating tensions show how Israel’s high-tech military is grappling to respond to the basic incendiary balloons that have burned thousands of acres of Israeli farmland and damaged nature reserves. Israel said it targeted Hamas military compounds with airstrikes—including an underground training site—to pressure the group to halt the arson attacks.
Egypt has quietly mediated between Israel and Hamas during the surge in violence that stems from clashes between Palestinian protesters and Israeli military forces at the border fence separating the Gaza Strip and Israel. Since March 30, more than 120 Palestinians have been killed by Israeli forces at the border. CONTINUE AT SITE
Top Stories @ Fox News