RUTHFULLY YOURS

Okay, the king is putting on a good show against Isis, but fawning and rewriting the history of Jordan is wrong…..Here is a column about the Hashemites from 2011, when the Arabs were “springing” …

The Hashemites in Palestine: A Royal Scam That Keeps On Scamming by Ruth King

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/the-hashemites-in-palestine-a-royal-scam-that-keeps-on-scamming

News from the Middle East is full of the threat of Arab revolts “springing” up in Jordan and challenging the rule of King Abdullah II, son of the late King Hussein. The throne in Amman is depicted as the “ancient” Hashemite Dynasty of Jordan. It’s a royal historical scam. There has never, repeat never, been an ancient Hashemite legacy in Palestine, unless 1922 is “ancient” history.

That year the British deeded 82% of Mandated Palestine to the Arabs. King Feisal got Iraq and his kid brother Abdullah Senior (great-grandpa to the present Abdullah) had to be mollified so they gave him Trans Jordan. He was assassinated and his grandson King Hussein, known as “Al-Malik Al-Insan (“The Humane King”), succeeded his father who was Talal the insane, who ruled only for a few months.

Again, check out the family tree which derails the spin of the ancient Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. Please note that the family tree is detailed in small print in Arabic, but the English translation has been removed. The Hashemite clan ruled over parts of the Hijaz region of Arabia from 967 to 1925 in unbroken succession. Moreover, the late King Hussein’s branch of the Hashemite family ruled the holy city of Mecca from 1201 until 1925. When Abdullah (the First) took over Jordan, the local nomadic Arab population was totally indifferent. Calvin Coolidge could have been made king and it would not have created much of a stir.

What is really amazing is the number of Jordanian and Hashemite sites that speak of the Arab “restoration” of Jerusalem. In fact, under Hashemite control east Jerusalem was restored to rubble. Jewish shrines and cemeteries were sacked, torched, and defiled and access to Jews was forbidden and severely restricted for Christians.

But there is no surprise here. The west swallowed the lie whole and the Israelis except for the now somnolent Ariel Sharon did not promote the truth. Some excuse this lapse as a way to accommodate what was the crypto friendship of Israel and the late King Hussein after his humiliating defeat in 1967, but the cover-up of history now comes back to bite them as Arabs and their enablers agitate for independence without recognizing that Jordan is a Palestinian Arab state, occupied and ruled by a Hashemite minority.

What do you call the two Islamic terrorists whom Jordan hanged on Wednesday? A good start.

Wherever legally possible, radical Islamic terrorists who currently are imprisoned should be dispatched. Henceforth, every country on earth should declare militant Islamic terrorism a capital crime and require prompt execution for anyone convicted of committing or enabling such butchery.

Radical Muslim terrorists should be killed in action. When they are captured, however, they should be interrogated. As soon as their intelligence value is depleted, they promptly should be tried. If convicted, they should be executed the next dawn.

One of the reasons that Romney lost is that he failed to take on the media. The ultimate lost opportunity came when CNN’s debate moderator Candy Crowley directly inserted herself into the argument between Obama and Romney to declare her favorite right and Romney wrong.

Romney had won the Republican primaries, but had failed to absorb the lesson of his most tenacious opponent. Newt Gingrich did not treat the media as a neutral moderator, but as a debate opponent, challenging its premises and agendas. And so Romney was left unprepared for Crowley’s attack.

On the road to 2016, the latest crop of candidates appears to have learned nothing from Romney’s failure. In response to the media blowing up his vaccine comment, Christie issued a sensible clarification that provided more fuel for the media narrative. And the media narrative is what most people know.

They know that Christie was behind Bridgegate even though the Democrats pushing the story provided zero evidence of it. They know that Congressman Steve Scalise spoke at a Neo-Nazi event even though that never actually happened. But what they know is the story that the media tells them. Not the facts.

The New York Times claims that the vaccine controversy we’re all talking about raises important questions about “how to approach matters that have largely been settled among scientists but are not widely accepted by conservatives.”

Well, here’s another question: How do we deal with the false perception that liberals are more inclined to trust science than conservatives? Also, how do we approach the media’s fondness for focusing on the unscientific views of some conservatives but ignoring the irrational — and oftentimes more consequential — beliefs of their fellow liberals?

Though outing GOP candidates as skeptics of science may confirm the secular liberal’s own sense of intellectual superiority, it usually has nothing to do with policy. However, if you walk around believing that pesticides are killing your children or that fracking will ignite your drinking water, or if you hyperventilate about the threat of the ocean’s consuming your city, you have a viewpoint that not only conflicts with science but undermines progress. So how do we approach matters that have been settled among scientists but are not widely accepted by liberals?

Departing attorney general Eric Holder’s claim this week in a press conference that there has “been no politicization” of the Justice Department under him makes it appear as if he is living in a Potemkin-like state of denial in the main Justice building. Holder went so far as to claim that he had been forced to clean up the department he took over from the Bush administration. “You want to look at a Justice Department that’s been politicized, you look at the one I inherited,” he claimed.

When we were researching our recent book on Holder’s six-year tenure at Justice, we talked to numerous career employees who were shocked at how much further Holder had gone than any previous administration in politicizing Justice. One longtime lawyer in the Civil Rights Division told us that Holder had

“racialized and radicalized the Division to the point of corruption. They embedded politically leftist extremists in the career ranks who have an agenda that does not comport with equal protection or the rule of law; who believe that the ends justify the means; and who behave unprofessionally and unethically. Their policy is to intimidate and threaten employees who do not agree with their politics, and even moderate Democrats have left the Department because they were treated as enemies by administration officials and their lackeys.”

“It’s also insipidly hypocritical. President Obama can’t bring himself to call the Islamic State “Islamic,” but he’s happy to offer a sermon about Christianity’s alleged crimes at the beginning of the last millennium.We are all descended from cavemen who broke the skulls of their enemies with rocks for fun or profit. But that hardly mitigates the crimes of a man who does the same thing today. I see no problem judging the behavior of the Islamic State and its apologists from the vantage point of the West’s high horse, because we’ve earned the right to sit in that saddle.”

On Tuesday, the so-called Islamic State released a slickly produced video showing a Jordanian pilot being burned alive in a steel cage. On Wednesday, the United Nations issued a report detailing various “mass executions of boys, as well as reports of beheadings, crucifixions of children, and burying children alive” at the hands of the Islamic State.

And on Thursday, President Obama seized the opportunity of the National Prayer Breakfast to forthrightly criticize the “terrible deeds” . . . committed “in the name of Christ.”

“Humanity has been grappling with these questions throughout human history,” Obama said, referring to the ennobling aspects of religion as well as the tendency of people to “hijack” religions for murderous ends.

And lest we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.

Obama’s right. Terrible things have been done in the name of Christianity. I have yet to meet a Christian who denies this.

But, as odd as it may sound for a guy named Goldberg to point it out, the Inquisition and the Crusades aren’t the indictments Obama thinks they are. For starters, the Crusades — despite their terrible organized cruelties — were a defensive war.

The major media, who are overwhelmingly supporters of the Democratic Party, believe that Republicans, by and large, are not as smart as Democrats. Republicans are more religious (hence less rational), and have resisted what the Democrats, the left, and the media believe is settled science on a most important subject: that the Earth is on its way to overheating, with catastrophic consequences to follow, due to high carbon dioxide emissions.

It matters not, of course, that the belief in “settled science,” new data be damned (virtually no temperature change in close to 20 years), has made the climate change camp appear in many ways to be behaving like an intolerant religious group themselves. How dare conservatives mock the God of global warming? In particular, the left likes to believe that science in general is a major dividing point between the two political parties.

Last week, 10 Senate Democrats who had persistently expressed concern over President Barack Obama’s concessionary policy to Iran over its nuclear weapons program, announced via a letter to the President that they would desist from seeking to pass new legislation to reimpose sanctions in the event of a failure in nuclear talks. Under reportedly enormous pressure from the White House, the senators said that they would await the March 24 deadline for a negotiated framework for an agreement with Tehran, despite their doubts that any such agreement would be forthcoming.

This delay is a serious mistake, because one of the few things that might induce Tehran to agree to terminating its nuclear weapons program would be the certainty of renewed tough sanctions if it didn’t. Now such pressure is absent and the chances of Iran agreeing correspondingly reduced.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/frontpagemag-com/inside-the-world-of-muslim-rape-gangs-on-the-glazov-gang-2-1/

A Sky News investigation has recently confirmed that hundreds of more Muslim rape gang cases have been discovered in the UK, while British authorities continue to do nothing in fear of being called “racist” and “Islamophobic.”

A survivor of child sexual exploitation in Rotherham has recently affirmed that she still sees her abusers “driving young girls in their car.”

In response to the disturbing findings of the new Sky News investigation, Frontpage is running The Glazov Gang’s special 2-part series with Gavin Boby of the Law and Freedom Foundation about the terrifying reality of Muslim rape gangs in the UK and how the Left facilitates their barbaric crimes against helpless young girls.

In Part I, Boby shares his battle against “Muslim Rape Gangs in the U.K.” and in Part II, he discusses his report on this horrifying phenomenon and takes us “Inside the World of Muslim Rape Gangs”:

There are a few of the usual patterns here in the outrageous attacks on Hussein Aboubakr at Swarthmore College.

1. Muslim activists are given a platform to attack Muslim and ex-Muslims who link Islam to violence as bigots. This is a perverse and irrational position that is not accorded to Christianity. Liberal Christians and atheists who grew up in a Christian family are not demonized as bigots.

This whole thing is yet another reminder that “Islamophobia” is not about protecting Muslims, but about protecting Islam from any criticism even by other Muslims.

2. Muslim activists have adopted the language of social justice to protect their own privilege. And so we see Muslim students claiming to be “triggered” when Hussein Aboubakr, a political refugee who survived torture, speaks on campus.

This same cynical game was used to force out Ayaan Hirsi Ali , who actually had to live in fear much of her life, by activists claiming that she made them feel “unsafe”.

Again this Muslim privilege is not accorded to anyone else. When Muslim Students Associations bring in speakers who attack Jews in the vilest ways, there are no stories or actions taken in response. Anti-Israel students are allowed to promote terrorism, use the signage of terrorist groups without being told to stop because they are making anyone feel unsafe.

Now here’s what happened when Hussein Aboubakr spoke at Swarthmore.