RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.nysun.com/foreign/showdown-building-as-un-court-targets-us-gis/91042/

An international prosecutor, Fatou Bensuda, was advised Thursday by a panel at Hague that she should go ahead and investigate alleged war crimes committed by Americans in Afghanistan. It’s a shocking development.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called the International Criminal Court panel’s ruling “a truly breathtaking action by an unaccountable political institution masquerading as a legal body.” It is, but what to do?

In a little noticed address to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee last week, Senator Ted Cruz urged an American push at the United Nations Security Council to ban ICC investigations against Israelis, Americans, or citizens of any other non-member of the Hague-based court.

According to the Rome Statute, which governs the ICC — a global trial venue for war crimes and crimes against humanity — it has no jurisdiction over countries that have not joined its 123 member states. So non-members like America, Israel, China, Russia, and India are off limit. Or are they?

When the court started functioning in 2002, I made a bet with a friend, an avid universal jurisdiction supporter, that despite non-membership, Americans and Israelis would early on end up in the dock. I lost that bet, but only because I thought such ICC prosecutions would be launched right off the bat.

In the early days, the court went after alleged war criminals in places like Darfur, Congo, Burundi, and the Central African Republic. A few years ago, however, several African countries contended there’s a racist pattern against their continent and threatened to renounce their ICC membership. Political pressures grew on Ms. Bensouda, the Gambian-born ICC prosecutor, to land more visible non-African fish.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15682/europe-erdogan-blackmail

Turkey would apparently like to see more progress in the talks to grant it admission as a full member of the European Union…. Erdoğan would most certainly like the West overlook his massive democratic deficit, and to help Turkey secure even more dominance over the Greek islands off its coast, as well as its claims on the gas fields beneath the eastern Mediterranean.

Erdoğan needed to find a non-Russian adversary to attack, to distract Turkish anger away from him and toward a different chosen target. What better target than the EU, with which most Turks have a love-hate relationship? Opening Turkey’s border gates and flooding Europe with migrants would be sure to please the average Turk….

Europe, unfortunately, to protect its liberty and sovereignty, needs to fight back. It must refuse to accept Erdoğan’s hostages…. If the first groups in this mini-exodus from Turkey face a serious blockade rather than warm and welcoming locals, potential migrants would be discouraged from taking such a perilous trip. What Greece alone could achieve, without help from the EU, would be limited….

Turkey’s Islamist strongman, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, has threatened Europe several times with “sending millions of refugees your way.” Turkey would apparently like to see more progress in the talks to grant it admission as a full member of the European Union. At the moment, these membership negotiations have stalled. He may also wish for Western support — from the EU, the United States and all of NATO — for his ideal architecture to install Turkey in northwest Syria.

As Turkish servicemen were recently killed in Syria, with direct Russian military involvement, it is probably safe to assume that the support Erdoğan is seeking, both directly and indirectly, is “support for a NATO ally against Russian aggression”. In addition, Erdoğan would also most certainly like the West overlook his massive democratic deficit, and to help Turkey secure even more dominance over the Greek islands off its coast, as well as its claims on the gas fields beneath the eastern Mediterranean.

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/03/fighting_the_muslim_reconquest_of_europe_on_the_greeceturkey_border.html

As Americans remain riveted to the corona virus and the nauseating vicissitudes of the Democrats’ battle to choose a presidential nominee — a choice now apparently winnowed down to the Marxist or the moron — this writer’s thoughts once again are drawn to events in Europe. The critical situation now unfolding day by day on the Greek-Turkish border may at first seem of minor concern to America, but in fact it’s a critical part of the overall struggle by patriots on both sides of the Atlantic to preserve Western Civilization.

The same forces working here to dissolve American civilization through mass migration and deliberately inculcated cultural self-loathing are busy in Europe pursuing the same goal by identical means. And the same traditional, patriotic segment of the population, guilty of the crime of loving their civilization and wanting to preserve it, resists cultural dissolution in both Europe and America. The commonality of the struggle is striking.

European patriots, however, face worse odds. Their governments are more ruthless in condemning patriotism and love of country (who knew those feelings made one a Nazi?), and Europeans’ history of submission to authority, and consequent ingrained passivity, make them less inclined to risk social condemnation to save themselves.

Consider the events unfolding on Europe’s eastern border with Islam:  

Over the last week to ten days, the Islamist 21st century Sultan on the Bosporus, Recep Erdogan, has abrogated Turkey’s 2016 Agreement with the European Union, under which the Turks committed to preventing a repetition of the 2015 mass migration of Muslim migrants into Western Europe. During the 2015 fiasco, welcomed by German Chancellor Merkel, at least one million “refugees” (read “economic migrants”) from the Middle East and elsewhere streamed into Germany (hence, into all of Europe), following a route that crossed Turkey, the Greek-Turkish border, the Balkans and Austria. By today, the number in of Muslim newcomers in Germany has metastasized, through “family reunification” and continuing migration, to at least two million, with all the vast increases in criminality and sexual assaults, widespread overt loathing of European culture and traditions, and massive social welfare costs, all of which any even casual student of Islamic history would have predicted.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/notable-quotable-macron-on-islam-11583447996?mod=opinion_major_pos4

French President Emmanuel Macronspeaking on Feb. 18 (translation by Matthew King):

In the republic, it is not acceptable to refuse to shake hands with a woman because she is a woman. In the republic, we cannot accept that someone refuses to be cared for or educated by someone because she is a woman. In the republic, it is not acceptable to drop out of school for reasons of religion or belief. In the republic, one cannot demand virginity certificates to get married. In the republic, we must never accept that the laws of religion can be superior to the laws of the Republic. . . .

And now that I have said all this, this isn’t a question of stigmatizing any religion. And what we have to do is not, as I have sometimes heard from some people, a program against Islam. That would be a profound mistake. There are millions of fellow citizens, French citizens, who . . . believe in Islam and who live according to the laws of the republic and who want to live as French citizens. What we must fight is the separatism I have just mentioned and all the practices I have just mentioned with great calm, with great determination, with great respect. . . . The risk is that the whole society will say “the problem is our Muslim fellow citizens,” which would be a huge mistake. But this Islamist separatism is incompatible with freedom and equality, incompatible with the indivisibility of the republic and the necessary unity of the nation.

https://amgreatness.com/2020/03/04/the-lefts-politicization-of-coronavirus-backfires-bigly/

Even first year political science students know how difficult it is to beat an incumbent president and that it is nearly impossible to beat one leading a soaring economy; only five incumbent presidents have lost their re-election bids since 1900. No wonder the media and Democrats have linked arms to mislead the American people in yet another paranoia propaganda campaign.

It’s becoming fairly obvious that the media and Democrats are hyping the coronavirus outbreak to incite panic, harm the markets and economy, and score political points against President Trump. Of course, as with the Mueller investigation and impeachment, their efforts backfired as the president dealt with the outbreak forcefully and immediately.

There is one silver lining in this media circus surrounding the coronavirus epidemic. Their insistence on disseminating widespread fear and paranoia about it has allowed us, in turn, to diagnose our dangerous dependence on China.

It should be apparent to most by now that the corrupt and barbaric Communist Chinese regime has been enriched and empowered by the naïveté of the West. They have stolen intellectual property, used illegal subsidies, dumped their products, and now apparently are using slave labor to produce goods to sell to the West.

But the Chinese have been empowered as well by the greed of Chamber of Commerce corporate shills who were all for offshoring production to sell out the U.S. worker if it meant better bottom lines for themselves.

Let’s be candid: they don’t care about the small and medium-sized businesses and they don’t care about the American workers who don’t wear suits and work in offices. They have undercut this country for decades by offshoring production just to increase profits and sell cheaper goods, all to the detriment of American workers and communities.

Yes, there were short term benefits to consumers, but at what cost to American workers, industry, communities, small businesses, and even national security?

Consider the arguments in favor of globalism in light of what we now must see as a dangerous dependence on the corrupt Chinese regime. Take pharmaceuticals as an example.

A Department of Commerce study found that a staggering 97 percent of all antibiotics in the United States came from China. Add the startling statistic that 80 percent of the ingredients we use to make various drugs within the United States are also from China or outsourced from other nations and you have a recipe for disaster.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15528/released-jihadists

“We’re playing Russian roulette with people’s lives, letting convicted, known, radicalised jihadi criminals walk about our streets”. — Chris Phillips, former head of the UK National Counter Terrorism Security Office, The Guardian, December 1, 2019.

The hate literature was distributed to inmates by… chaplains, who themselves were appointed by the Ministry of Justice.

The prison staff lacked the training to confront and deter… extremist ideology, and “were often fearful they would be accused of racism if they did”. — Ian Acheson, former prison governor, Daily Mail, July 13, 2016.

It remains to be seen, whether releasing a terrorist after serving two-thirds of his sentence, rather than half, will make any difference.

“If there are people who are absolutely determined not to accept any intervention that will change that toxic mind-set, yes they should be in prison and if necessary, indefinitely.” — Ian Acheson, former prison governor, BBC News, February 3, 2020.

On February 3, 2020, Sudesh Amman, who had just been released from prison in England after serving half his prison term, stabbed two people in Streatham, south London, before he was shot dead at the scene by police. Later, ISIS took responsibility for the attack.

The attack again raised the issue of how Europe should deal with jihadist terrorism.

After Amman’s terrorist attack, the government announced that emergency legislation would be introduced to end the automatic early release from prison of terror offenders. Terror offenders would only be considered for release once they had served two-thirds of their sentence and with the approval of the parole board. Justice Secretary Robert Buckland said that the latest attack by Amman made the case “for immediate action”.

“We cannot have the situation, as we saw tragically in yesterday’s case, where an offender – a known risk to innocent members of the public – is released early by automatic process of law without any oversight by the Parole Board,” he said.

It remains to be seen, whether releasing a terrorist after serving two-thirds of his sentence, rather than half, will make any difference. “There will be some people for whom their ideology is bulletproof and there is no way we can get inside that,” said Ian Acheson, a former prison governor. “If there are people who are absolutely determined not to accept any intervention that will change that toxic mind-set, yes they should be in prison and if necessary, indefinitely.”

The attack last week follows the November 2019 terrorist attack on London Bridge — in which Usman Khan, a convicted terrorist, who also had been released on parole half-way into his prison term, murdered two people and wounded several others.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15681/erdogan-blackmail-europe

If the current crisis facing Turkey is entirely of Mr Erdogan’s own making, that has not prevented the Turkish president from trying to deflect attention away from his own mishandling of the conflict by seeking to provoke a new migrant crisis in Europe.

When Turkey took the controversial decision last year to purchase Russia’s state-of-the-art S-400 anti-aircraft missile system, Mr Erdogan calculated that it would herald new era of friendly cooperation with Ankara’s long-standing rival in Moscow even if, by pressing ahead with the deal, the Turks risked jeopardising their relationship with NATO, which bitterly opposed the deal.

Russians now find themselves in a direct confrontation with Turkish forces in Idlib province, where the Turks are trying to protect a number of Islamist militias committed to overthrowing the Assad regime… [A]s the recent escalation in fighting has demonstrated, the Russians’ main priority is to support the Assad regime.

Mr Erdogan is also about to discover that there has been a hardening of attitudes among European leaders about dealing with unwanted migrants since the Turkish leader last used his blackmail tactics five years ago…. These days, senior politicians in Mrs Merkel’s centre-right Christian Democrats take a more hard-nosed approach to the migrant issue, with one senior party member warning the migrants this week, “There is no point coming to Germany. We cannot take you in.”

If Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan believes he can bully European leaders by provoking a fresh migrant crisis in southern Europe, then he would be well-advised to think again.

Ankara’s announcement that it is once again opening the floodgates to allow millions of refugees from Syria’s brutal civil war to travel to south-eastern Europe in search of refuge has been taken to persuade European leaders to back Turkey’s increasingly desperate situation in Syria.

Having launched an ill-considered military offensive against the Assad regime in northern Syria, Mr Erdogan now finds himself facing the consequences of his action, with regime forces, backed by Russia and Iran, waging a highly effective campaign against the Turks, which has so far resulted in the deaths of scores of Turkish troops.

In addition, Turkey’s decision to deploy thousands of troops to Idlib province in northern Syria has resulted in a fresh wave of refugees fleeing across the border into southern Turkey, where Turkish officials are already struggling to cope with the estimated four million Syrian refugees that have already sought sanctuary in the sprawling refugee camps.

https://www.nysun.com/foreign/brexit-mr-johnson-disraeli-has-his-eye-on-your/91038/

Boris Johnson, in his latest riposte to Brussels, is the man who won the heart of Brexiteers. This is the Prime Minister who tells the European Union that, unless significant progress is made quickly toward reaching a trade deal, then Britain will spend its time until December 31 focusing on its global trade agenda, relegating its future relationship with Europe to a footnote.

This Boris is in stark contrast to his predecessor, Theresa May. She enters the history books as having been too willing to bow to Brussels bureaucrats, at the expense of Britons and despite a referendum that called for the contrary. The new, post-Brexit Boris is also tacking differently than pre-Brexit Boris, who stirred up unrest among Brexiteers for seemingly going limp on full British independence.

Now, per the London Sun, the Prime Minister, with a ruling majority in Parliament, is feeling his oats. Boris’s “radical reshaping” reminds one of Sixtus V. Cardinal Montalto accedes to the Chair of Peter in 1585 as a “caretaker” pope — infirm and hunchbacked, clearly not long for this world. Yet no sooner is he elected than he throws away his cane, stands bolt-upright, and cries: “Now I am Cæsar.”

The Prime Minister’s renewed vigor thus cheers Brexiteers intent on full independence. This, though, was not Boris’s only volte-face. Students of Benjamin Disraeli have seen in BoJo not a little of that wily Victorian statesman. Both leaders captured the popular appeal and exude a joyous political élan. No less significant, a reputation as a “chancer” clings to them.

https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2020/03/when-the-left-lies-conservatives-plead-guilty/

A distinguished journalist once confided to me what he admitted was a worrying thought: whenever he had appeared in a newspaper report as opposed to writing one, at least one fact in how he was reported turned out to be wrong. He didn’t think it was bias, since the errors were mostly about such pedestrian matters as his name or age. He had decided it was simply carelessness: standards were slipping. Maybe, though (he concluded sadly), it was just that he was getting older and grouchier.

Well, yes. And no. In the last week I’ve had good proof that my late friend was onto something, but something more complicated than carelessness. For I too was mentioned in the newspapers, this time as attending a conference in Rome at which “far right”, “hard right”, “anti-Semitic” and “homophobic” figures in European politics were speaking. And that came as a surprise.

The story began when the Guardian published a piece warning that a Tory MP, Daniel Kawczynski, was planning to attend a conference on national conservatism at which the leading speakers would include hard-right and anti-immigration figures such as the Hungarian prime minister “and a niece of Marine Le Pen”. In the Spectator Kawczysnki disputed this account and said he would go to Rome anyway. After which the story exploded with adjectives flying in all directions.

Marie van der Zyl, president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews, condemned Kawczynski for consorting with “some of Europe’s most notorious far-right politicians” and called on the Tories to suspend him. The BBC’s World at One repeated the “far right” slur. Labour front-bencher Andrew Gwynne said that Kawczynski would be sharing “a platform with anti-Semites, Islamophobes, and homophobes”.

The Rome conference took place despite this disapproval, and the Associated Press reported it here under the following headline: “Nationalists in Rome cheer Brexit, honour Pope John Paul II”. That headline was a good summary of the report, which was accurate about the facts, and not uncritical but fair-minded in its account of different speeches and opinions. It described the participants as “right-wing” and “conservative”, concluding with the information that “the conference was organised by the Edmund Burke Foundation based in the United States and other conservative intellectual and political groups”.

https://www.algemeiner.com/2020/03/03/un-nuclear-watchdog-admonishes-iran-for-denying-access-to-two-sites/

The UN watchdog policing Iran‘s troubled nuclear deal with major powers admonished Tehran on Tuesday for failing to answer its questions about past nuclear activities at three sites and for denying it access to two of them.

Reuters first reported on Monday that the IAEA planned to issue a second report in addition to its regular quarterly update on Iran‘s nuclear activities, rebuking Iran for less than full cooperation in general and for failing to grant UN inspectors access to one or more sites of interest.

The regular report showed Iran‘s stockpile of low-enriched uranium nearly tripling since November to more than a ton, as Tehran continues to breach key limits of its steadily eroding nuclear deal in response to renewed US sanctions against it since Washington pulled out of the accord in May 2018.

The extraordinary second report delved into the International Atomic Energy Agency’s open questions and Iran‘s denial of access to sites which a senior diplomat said are believed to have been active in the early 2000s.