RUTHFULLY YOURS

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14605/open-letter-to-the-new-yorker-exposes-false

As I have previously written, The New Yorker has commissioned a hit piece that seems calculated to silence my voice on President Trump, Prime Minister Netanyahu and Israel.

Here below is a letter I sent to the editor, the writer and the fact checkers. I have received only a formal response assuring me that the article will be fair. I replied that this will be up to the readers and the courts to judge.

Having been contacted by your “fact” checkers, I now understand the thrust of Connie Bruck’s hit piece: You must know there is no actual evidence that I engaged in sexual misconduct or even met my false accusers — because I did not. So, you appear determined to concoct a false narrative of my life, going back more than 40 years to my first marriage, that falsely suggests that I am the kind of person who “could” or “might” have engaged in such misconduct.

To support your false narrative, you began your negative “research” – as you acknowledged to my son — by sourcing a Holocaust denial site that circulates false stories about prominent Jews, including me. You then interviewed my enemies, my critics, dissenting students and especially anti-Israel and, in some cases anti-Semitic, zealots. The original reporting, which took place over many months, did not include interviews with longtime friends and associates who know me well and can present a more balanced perspective. You agreed to speak to a handful of such people only at the last minute, after I complained to the editor. But even then when some people called you, you told them the story was closed. Let’s see if you include the positive comments that contradict your story, that some of these people relayed to you.

http://q4j-middle-east.com

Channel hopping, I usually can’t help but settle on Fox News for such programming…and at times I have problems with that choice too. So I turn to the wildlife or fishing channels instead.

Fox’s recent hiring of folks like the unscrupulous Democrat honcho (honcha?), Donna Brazile, is a case in point. She and her cohort  south Florida Congressional Democrat Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, would stop at nothing to get their guy or gal elected: in Brazile’s case, feeding at least one question to Hillary Clinton in a major debate. And that’s just what she got caught doing. So, CNN axes her–and then Fox hires her.

No other Lefties in town to choose from for “fair and balanced” reporting?

While there’s been some other problems, it’s the next one that painfully lingers, causing repeated bouts of severe indigestion…

I don’t know what Fox is paying Brazile for her irreplaceable wisdom, but I do know that, when a current co-host of  The Five and frequent participant on some other programs as well, Juan Williams, was hired, he came aboard with a three year, $2 million contract in 2010. I’m sure that has increased substantially since then.

Not only does he continue to be hard to stomach nowadays for anyone with neurons firing properly, but I can’t help remembering a particular day, years ago, when I was driving home from work and listening to National Public Radio.

https://thefederalist.com/2019/07/23/journalist-who-peddled-shoddy-kavanaugh-story-defends-al-franken/

Of all the people in the world who are in a position to write an article poo-poohing Al Franken’s problems or fretting about journalistic excesses, Jane Mayer may be the very worst choice.

A reporter known for slinging unsubstantiated allegations of improper behavior against conservatives has developed a sudden appreciation for due process and journalistic fact-checking. At least for Democrats. The New Yorker’s Jane Mayer published a robust defense of former U.S. senator Al Franken, who resigned under intense pressure in 2017 after eight women publicly detailed unwanted groping and kissing from him.

Mayer argues that the former Minnesota senator should not have resigned, since one of his accusers was conservative and was associated with political opponents of Franken. As for the other seven, Mayer suggests their complaints about unwanted kisses and groping didn’t rise to the level of seriousness that a Senate resignation would indicate. Yes, Mayer reports, he was known for the unsolicited kissing of women on the mouth, but, we’re assured, he is “a social—not a sexual—’lip-kisser.’” Well, there you go.

Mayer expresses concern that “in an era when women’s accusations of sexual discrimination and harassment are finally being taken seriously, after years of belittlement and dismissal, some see it as offensive to subject accusers to scrutiny. ‘Believe Women’ has become a credo of the #MeToo movement.” Franken learns that “being on the losing side of the #MeToo movement, which he fervently supports, has led him to spend time thinking about such matters as due process, proportionality of punishment, and the consequences of Internet-fuelled outrage.”

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/274384/washington-post-runs-glowing-profile-libyan-daniel-greenfield

Democracy dies in Islamist propaganda. 

Forget Jamal Khashoggi. The Washington Post, owned by Amazon boss Jeff Bezos, found an even worse Jihadist to rally behind.

(Reuters) – The U.S. Treasury Department said on Monday it had imposed sanctions on Libyan Islamist commander Salah Badi, accusing him of undermining security by directing attacks on groups aligned with Libya’s U.N.-backed Government of National Accord.

The U.S. State Department said Badi had also been placed under financial sanctions by the U.N. Security Council’s Libya Sanctions Committee, and the listing requires all U.N. members to impose an asset freeze and travel ban

The Treasury said in a statement that Badi’s militia forces had used highly destructive Grad rockets in densely populated areas in the latest round of fighting in the capital Tripoli in September.

Here are the UN sanctions. Here are the Treasury sanctions.

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2019/07

America Observed With an ABC Squint
America Observed With an ABC Squint
“The national broadcaster operates a very large Washington bureau and you have to wonder why, given that so much of its ‘reporting’ is the distilled essence of anti-Trump coverage from newspapers and other media which, were he to cure, cancer, would accuse him of putting nurses out of work. Correspondent Connor Duffy’s coverage of July 4 celebrations is sadly typical.”

The BBC is facing a citizens’ crowd-funded lawsuit against its left-biased reporting, while the ABC is still forgetful that half of its funders are centre-right taxpayers. The latest ABC annual report trumpets Leisa Bacon, director ABC audiences, on its second page proclaiming, “The ABC is unique in its ability to
 unite the nation … we are here for every Australian”.

The ABC’s online surveys and Roy Morgan polls show massive trust in the ABC, but why do fewer than 20 per cent of the polled actually tune in? For 2017-18, by the way, ABC 7pm News audience fell 5-8 per cent.

The most naked bias at the moment is in the ABC’s pro-Democrat US reporting, since few Australians cross-check the material. So let’s sample ABC bureau’s July 4 Independence Day coverage in Washington DC.[1] The reporter is Conor Duffy, mocker-in-chief of President Trump.

For his print piece, falsely labeled “analysis”, the ABC gave us a choice of three headlines. “Trump dreamed of pomp and ceremony. Instead he got soggy tanks”. Maybe that was too deranged, even for the ABC, so a second version went: “ANALYSIS: Wild weather, small crowds and protesters rain on Trump’s parade.” The third top read: “Donald Trump hoped for a parade to rival Bastille Day, instead he got small crowds and soggy tanks”.

For starters, there were no tanks on the Mall, especially not soggy ones. The 25mm chain gun on the two parked Bradley Fighting Vehicles is a pet compared to an Abrams tank’s 5.3m smoothbore of 120mm calibre.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/14556/alan-dershowitz-new-yorker-david-remnick

I recently learned, from a source close to The New Yorker magazine, that its editor, David Remnick, has commissioned a hit piece against me for the explicit purpose of silencing my defense of President Trump, Prime Minister Netanyahu, and the State of Israel. Remnick despises Trump and Netanyahu, and is well known for his strong anti-Israel bias. Remnick explicitly told people that I must be silenced because mine has been the most persuasive voice in favor of what Remnick feels pose dangers to values he holds dear, and that he will use the credibility of The New Yorker to accomplish this goal.

The New Yorker used to be a great literary magazine. I read it for its short stories, profiles of literary figures, film and drama reviews, humorous vignettes, and clever cartoons. But since David Remnick took over as editor, left wing politics have trumped non-partisan literature. Profiles have become personal attacks on Remnick’s political enemies and hagiographies of his political friends.

Among Remnick’s most persistent enemies are Benjamin Netanyahu and Donald Trump. Ad hominem attacks on the Israeli Prime Minister include mocking his name (“Netanyahoo”) and calling him a “mendacious mouse.” Remnick consistently singles out Israel for condemnation, while ignoring real violations of human rights.

An op-ed in the Jerusalem Post observed that “under Remnick’s reign, The New Yorker, and particularly Remnick himself, repeatedly and obsessively focuses on what Remnick perceives to be the failings of the state of Israel,” accusing it of “medievalism,” “apartheid” and “xenophobia.” Its one-sided views have been “posted prominently on the website of “Intifada – The Voice of Palestine.”

https://quadrant.org.au/opinion/qed/2019/07/social-media-the-damage-is-done/

Hi, my name’s John, and I’m an addict. Facebook is my main drug of choice, but I also dabble in a bit of Instagram and Twitter. Every now and then, when I need a real pick-me-up, I’ll turn to Snapchat.

Dramatic introductions aside, these algorithmically optimized systems of content distribution are excellent at two things: engaging the user and retaining the user. Notice that I chose the word user, not customer. That is how we are viewed by the tech-savvy alchemists. Billions of users, all hooked on a virtual high.

Isn’t it odd that only two groups — drug dealers and social media dealers — refer to their target audience as “users”? When one examines the algorithmic architecture of these platforms, a troubling pictures emerges: Facebook and the like are designed to keep us in a user state of mind: First, engage. Second, retain. Third, continue to drip-feed the addiction with notifications and reminders.

Is this an exaggeration? If you think so, go ahead and delete your social media accounts. See how long you can survive without Facebook or Twitter or Instagram. I recently told a friend of mine that I am no longer on Instagram. He looked at me like I had just told him I was thinking of relocating to Yemen. Utter bewilderment.

For those who chose to never ‘sign up,’ kudos to you. Chances are you have saved yourself days – no, weeks – of valuable lost time. According to a 2018 report published by the Global Web Index, the average person in the Western world spends 2.5 hours a day on social networking and messaging platforms. To put this figure in perspective, look at it this way: That’s 17.5 hours a week, or 70 hours a month. The average Westerner wastes close to three days every month on social media.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/274283/fake-news-begins-fake-language-michael-cutler

Human beings think with words.  We express our thoughts with words. 

What truly differentiates humans from all other creatures is our ability to use language and preserve our thoughts in writing, thereby enabling us to pass down our knowledge from one generation to the next.  This is why the study of history is so important, but it is not only history that is passed from generation to generation but knowledge in general.  

We often say that “There is no need to reinvent the wheel.”  Consider that if not for written language, each generation would, in effect, be forced to reinvent the wheel and all other forms of technology.

The study of history can help keep us from making the same tragic mistakes, but only if history is accurately written.

As George Orwell sagely observed, “Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past.”

The words that we use have real impact.

In 1974 an important psychological experiment was conducted that illustrated how altering words can not only have a significant impact on how the test subjects perceived the severity of a car crash but even ultimately impact how they remember the accident creating false memories.