Displaying posts categorized under

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION

50 STATES AND DC, CONGRESS AND THE PRESIDENT

Muslim Leader Advertises that 9/11 was ‘Israeli-Jewish Job’ Hamas and David Duke supporter, Sofian Zakkout, once again finds way to target Jews. Joe Kaufman

Sofian Zakkout, President of the American Muslim Association of North America (AMANA), is always looking for new ways to promote hatred of Jews. Recently, he advertised on his Facebook page an article about how the Nazi Holocaust was “faked.” Now, he is targeting Jews by posting onto social media a claim that they perpetrated the September 11th attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon. Will any of the hate he is peddling do harm to the relationships he and his group have made, both financial and otherwise, with organizations associated with fighting crime?

Usually, anti-Semites — those rabid ones who are violently opposed to Jews — attach themselves to one of two categories, white supremacists or Muslim terrorists. Sofian Abdelaziz Zakkout, who is Muslim himself, strongly supports both.

When it comes to white supremacy, Zakkout is a fervent follower of former Ku Klux Klan leader David Duke. Zakkout has described Duke as “David Duke, a man to believe in!” and Zakkout has said of Duke, “I respect him for his honesty!” Zakkout’s Facebook page and the websites of his organization AMANA each have been used to promote Duke and his bigoted videos. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) has previously cited Zakkout and his group for posting what the ADL described as a “venomous” anti-Semitic Duke video onto AMANA’s official site.

This past February, Zakkout advertised on social media a report claiming that the horrors committed by Nazi Germany during the 1930s and 1940s were fabricated. Aptly titled ‘How the Holocaust was faked,’ it begins: “The alleged ‘Holocaust’ of ‘6 million Jews’ at the hands of Adolf Hitler and National Socialist Germany during WWII is the biggest lie ever foisted upon humanity.” It was produced by The Realist Report, an anti-Jew, anti-black, anti-gay independent media outlet, which describes Hitler as “the greatest leader in modern Western history.”

Zakkout is also very open about his strong support for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas. In August 2015, he wrote in Arabic on Facebook, “Hamas is in my heart and on my head.” In July 2014, Zakkout organized a pro-Hamas rally held outside the Israeli Consulate in downtown Miami. On video, Zakkout is shown smiling, as event goers repeatedly shout, “We are Hamas.” Following the rally, Zakkout wrote the following in Arabic, above photos from the event: “Thank God, every day we conquer the American Jews like our conquests over the Jews of Israel!”

Trump and Democratic Political Incorrectness If Democrats are truly outraged by Trump, they might want to try looking in a mirror. June 8, 2016 Daniel Greenfield

Remember the time a presidential candidate suggested that Gandhi used to run “a gas station down in St. Louis.” No it wasn’t Trump. That was Hillary Clinton. Had Trump said it, we would still be hearing about it. But since Hillary Clinton was responsible for it, it went down the memory hole.

Along with her more recent “Colored People Time” gag.

And who can forget the time that Trump said, “You cannot go to a 7-Eleven or a Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent.” But that wasn’t Trump. It was actually Vice President Joe Biden.

But still it was indisputably offensive when Trump told the Asian Chamber of Commerce, “I don’t think you’re smarter than anybody else, but you’ve convinced a lot of us you are.”

Then he followed that up by joking, “One problem that I’ve had today is keeping my Wongs straight.”

You would have to be ridiculously politically incorrect or an outright buffoon to say something like that to the Asian Chamber of Commerce. And this is exactly why Trump is… but wait, those lines actually came from Democratic Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid.

Reid recently popped up to call Trump’s comments racist. And he ought to know. Harry Reid believed that Obama was electable because he was “light-skinned” with ”no Negro dialect”.

Memories are short when it comes to Democratic racial and ethnic stereotypes. Not to mention slurs.

Trump is certainly not the only prominent politician who says wildly politically incorrect things. Democrats do it all the time. And they do it in more pointed ways.

Congresswoman Loretta Sanchez is running for the Senate. Sanchez is a racist who accused the “Vietnamese” of “trying to take this seat” when running against a Vietnamese-American candidate. Last year she managed to ridicule both Hindus and Native Americans with one slur.

There was the time that Bill Clinton suggested that, Obama “would have been getting us coffee”. Or when Biden described his future boss as the, “first sort of mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and nice-looking guy.” Despite two terms in which Republicans were accused of racially stereotyping Obama with secret dog whistles, nothing any major Republican figure said was anywhere as bad as what Obama’s Democratic predecessor and his own Senate ally had said about him.

Democrats actually say politically incorrect things all the time. Trump has become famous because he’s one of the few Republicans who talks like a Democrat and says the sort of things that Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton and Harry Reid have no problem saying in private and even in public speeches.

Regressive media applaud the San Jose violence By Bill D’Agostino

The far-left media are excusing the behavior of San Jose rioters, instead blaming the violence on Trump and rally attendees. Some journalists have gone so far as to encourage the attacks.

In the wake of the outrage over the violent protesters’ behavior, online leftist publications churned out a flurry of articles that stank of damage control. But unlike of the apologia they exhibited during the Baltimore and Ferguson riots, the authors of these pieces went a step farther than merely excusing the mob attacks in San Jose. They endorsed them.

On the night of the protests, Emmett Rensin, a deputy editor at Vox, tweeted, “Advice: If Trump comes to your town, start a riot.”

Rensin was temporarily suspended from his position for the tweet. But this did not stop him from engaging in a two-hour rant on Twitter the following day, attempting to further justify physical attacks against Trump supporters.

Meanwhile, writers at other far-left outlets were given passes for their support of the violence. On June 3, Salon author Chauncey Devega published an article openly condoning the protesters’ actions:

In a functioning democracy, political violence should almost always be condemned. However, we must not forget that Donald Trump and his supporters are on the wrong side of history.

In March, Salon published a series of opinion pieces in a similar vein, exalting Trump protesters as heroes and blaming any violence they engaged in on Trump’s own rhetoric.

Excusing otherwise unacceptable behavior, so long as it comes from the “right” people, is a new favorite tactic of the regressive left. However, in blaming the behavior of a violent mob on the very people it targeted, authors like Emmett Rensin have taken their invective mentality to a new low. Though this double standard has yet to make its way to large news networks like CNN and MSNBC, it nonetheless reflects a troubling shift in the tone of mainstream regressive rhetoric.

Absurdity Reigns: Of Want Ads and Counter-Radicalization Patrick Dunleavy

The theater of the absurd seems to have found a place to perform in the current atmosphere created by the threat of Islamic terrorism in both Europe and the United States.

Belgium, which has seen its deeply-rooted radical Islamic nature exposed by the attacks in Paris and Brussels, thinks it has the answer to the phenomenon of Islamic radicalization. The Muslim Executive of Belgium placed an ad seeking counselors to deradicalize inmates. The advertisement lists the following qualifications, looking for candidates with “sufficient religious knowledge” and a “resistance to stress.”

In essence, Belgium outsourced hiring for this experimental state-run deradicalization program to the country’s religious leaders.

It’s a bad idea that cannot work, and is especially untenable if Americans tried to follow suit.

Can you imagine if, after any terrorist attack or plot in the United States, instead of responding with force against the terrorist organizations that perpetrated those heinous acts, we simply placed an advertisement in the help wanted section of a newspaper announcing the job opening for someone who could “cure the problem”?

We’d call it what it is, naive foolishness.

Yet 15 years after 9/11, we find that some have actually taken that approach to the threat of Islamic radicalization and the acts of terrorism it produces.

In European city after city – Brussels, Copenhagen, Paris, Toulouse – we have seen innocent civilians – men, women, and children – maimed or killed by people who were radicalized. Now we know that many of the terrorists were radicalized while serving time in prison for petty offenses. It was in the cauldron of the penitentiary that they were exposed to radical Islamic terrorists as well as to literature and clergy that facilitated their transition from crook to jihadist.

The United States is not immune to this disease. In Chattanooga, Garland, Texas, New York City, Philadelphia, San Bernardino and elsewhere individuals who had become radicalized committed attacks and murder in the name of Allah.

Authorities know that the journey to Islamic radicalization may take many paths including social media, videos, literature, or a charismatic facilitator. But the end result is always the same. It produces people who are willing to kill anyone, including themselves, while thinking they are pleasing God. False promises of virgins and paradise spur them on.

Can Trump save our infrastructure? Clarence Schwab

I followed with excitement Congress’ efforts to pass legislation in 2008 and 2010 to maintain and upgrade the crumbling U.S. infrastructure. Such infrastructure investment would have generated needed jobs while assisting economic activity for many years to come. But Congress failed to pass that legislation. This greatly disappointed me and many others in the business and investing world, because such investments are critical to supporting a healthy and expanding economy.

Some may have objected to such funding because they equate it with “stimulus spending;” considering it to offer no sustainable benefit and to increase the federal deficit. But infrastructure investment—unlike stimulus spending, which gives benefits only during the time during which funds are spent—would generate, every year for decades, increased economic activity, higher incomes, and greater tax revenues. That revenue would be sufficient to not only pay back the debt initially incurred with interest, but to also generate profit. Once begun, long-lived projects can also create expectations of more economic activity and buoy business and consumer confidence.

Thus, maintaining and upgrading our country’s crumbling infrastructure should be among any candidate’s highest domestic priorities—but which candidate in this presidential election has the best chance to make this happen? So far, only Hillary Clinton has offered a comprehensive proposal to address this critical issue. Only Mrs. Clinton has committed to submitting that proposal to Congress within the first hundred days in office. But here’s the tougher question: which candidate is the best person to get the job done? Here are two key considerations to help us decide:

1) Which of the candidates would more likely fight against the wrongheaded Washington thinking that refuses to allow investment in maintaining our infrastructure, and insist on making such investment a cornerstone of domestic policy?

2) Which of the candidates, if president, would more likely work productively with Congress to enact legislation that supports infrastructure investment?

I do not yet support any candidate, and as a registered Independent in New York, I was not permitted to vote in either primary. However, I know that Mr. Trump has a successful track record building projects and that he mentions in speeches the need to upgrade our infrastructure even if he has not yet offered a written proposal.

June 6, 1944 – July 1944 The Normandy Invasion

World War II — D-Day, the Allied Invasion of Normandy – https://www.dday.org/history/d-day-the-invasion/overview.html
It is hard to conceive the epic scope of this decisive battle that foreshadowed the end of Hitlers dream of Nazi domination. Overlord was the largest air, land, and sea operation undertaken before or since June 6, 1944. The landing included over 5,000 ships, 11,000 airplanes, and over 150,000 service men.

 After years of meticulous planning and seemingly endless training, for the Allied Forces, it all came down to this: The boat ramp goes down, then jump, swim, run, and crawl to the cliffs. Many of the first young men (most not yet 20 years old) entered the surf carrying eighty pounds of equipment. They faced over 200 yards of beach before reaching the first natural feature offering any protection. Blanketed by small-arms fire and bracketed by artillery, they found themselves in hell.

When it was over, the Allied Forces had suffered nearly 10,000 casualties; more than 4,000 were dead. Yet somehow, due to planning and preparation, and due to the valor, fidelity, and sacrifice of the Allied Forces, Fortress Europe had been breached.

Obama’s Victims: Released Criminal Illegals Commit Rape, Murder, Molestation The astronomical re-offense rate of the predators the president sets loose in our communities. Michael Cutler

On June 4, 2016 The Boston Globe published a report, “Criminal immigrants reoffend at higher rates than ICE has suggested” that focused on information the newspaper was finally able to obtain by filing a lawsuit under the Freedom of Information Act that sought to obtain the database of criminal aliens who were released by ICE. The roughly five year odyssey finally yielded the information the administration attempted to conceal from the public- including, incredibly- even law enforcement agencies.

The article included the links to the Timeline of the Globe’s lawsuit – It’s nearly a five-year saga.

This eye-opening report began with this excerpt:

They were among the nation’s top priorities for deportation, criminals who were supposed to be sent back to their home countries. But instead they were released, one by one, in secret across the United States. Federal officials said that many of the criminals posed little threat to the public, but did little to verify whether that was true.

It wasn’t.

A Globe review of 323 criminals released in New England from 2008 to 2012 found that as many as 30 percent committed new offenses, including rape, attempted murder, and child molestation — a rate that is markedly higher than Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials have suggested to Congress in the past.

San Jose police chief who allowed mob attacks on Trump supporters is affiliated with La Raza By Thomas Lifson

San Jose, California disgraced itself last week, allowing rioters to attack people exiting a political rally for the presumptive Republican nominee for president. Now, thanks to Aleister of Gateway Pundit, we know that the police chief of that city, Eddie Garcia, who admitted that he instructed his officers not to intervene and arrest the attackers, is aligned with an extremist race-based group, La Raza (Spanish for “The Race”):

This is a screen-cap from his Twitter account:

The La Raza Roundtable of California celebrated when Garcia was sworn in.

This is how the Roundtable describes itself:

La Raza Roundtable brings together community organizations, community leaders, elected officials, private and public sector representatives in leadership capacities that can impact positive change for La Raza.

Garcia has released a laughable statement in which he suggests that the police didn’t arrest the violent thugs because it would have just made them angrier.

Trump and the judge – It’s not about race, but the rule of law By Brian C. Joondeph

Watch any cable new show panel discussing Donald Trump, including MSNBC this week, and quite predictably you will hear that Trump is a racist. The latest flap is over the judge overseeing the Trump University lawsuit. The judge is of Mexican heritage and Trump raised concerns as to whether the judge can be impartial based on Trump’s hard line stance against illegal immigration from Mexico.

“I’m building a wall. I’m trying to keep business out of Mexico.” Trump said. “He’s of Mexican heritage, and he’s very proud of it, as I am of where I come from.”

Is this about race? Or judicial fairness?

Regarding race, “Mexican” is not a race. In actuality, the federal government maintains five racial groupings – white, black, Hispanic, Asian, and American Indian/Hawaiian, completely divorced from any anthropological or scientific understanding of race. Mexican is counted by the feds as part of the Hispanic racial group, as are most residents of Central and South America, even though Mexicans racially are 60% Mestizo (mixed Amerindian/Spanish), 30% Amerindian, and 9% European in racial makeup. Trump made no mention of the judge being Hispanic or of any of the racial groups making up Mexico’s population, instead only of his Mexican ancestry. Perhaps a fine distinction, but a difference nonetheless.

Trump’s concern is instead about judicial impartiality. The judge in question, Gonzalo Curiel, is a member of the La Raza Lawyers of San Diego, a group that claims it is not affiliated with the National Council of La Raza, but which lists that group, strongly opposed to the Trump candidacy, on its website as part of its “community.” Even the US Supreme Court acknowledges selective justice based on race. The recently upended the death sentence of a black Georgia man convicted by an all-white jury. Meaning that race or ethnicity might prevent judicial fairness.

To be sure, Donald Trump could have spoken more carefully and clearly, instead of initially referring to Judge Curiel, born in the USA, as Mexican, and relying on his affiliations and his serving on a scholarship selection committee that chose an illegal alien to receive funding to attend law school. So why wouldn’t Donald Trump be concerned about the rule of law being applied fairly?

Because it often is not.

Angela Davis and Radical Chic 2016 Acquitted of murder, tenured in academia, feted by the mayor’s wife in a ritzy setting made possible by the system she loathes. Roger Kimball

Saturday marked the 44th anniversary of Angela Davis’s acquittal on charges of murder, kidnapping and conspiracy. Remember Angela Davis? I asked several of my younger colleagues: No one under 35 had heard of her. But the former Black Panther, recipient of the Soviet Union’s Lenin Peace Prize, and two-time vice-presidential candidate on the Communist Party ticket with Gus Hall, was once a household name. That was enough for the Elizabeth A. Sackler Center for Feminist Art at the Brooklyn Museum, which last Thursday bestowed on Ms. Davis the 2016 Sackler Center First Award, “honoring women who are first in their fields.”

Previous honorees include the novelist Toni Morrison, Miss Piggy and Anita Hill—pioneers all, no question. Ms. Davis is surely the first person to have parlayed an appearance on the FBI’s 10 most-wanted list into a tenured professorship at the University of California.

The Iris and B. Gerald Cantor Auditorium at the Brooklyn Museum was packed to overflowing for the ceremony. It began with a songfest. A couple dozen children from the Manhattan Country School, a boutique “progressive” institution, sang what seemed like 40 or 50 verses of “We Shall Overcome.” Elizabeth A. Sackler, chairwoman of the Brooklyn Museum and scion of Alfred M. Sackler, who made a large part of his considerable fortune marketing the painkiller OxyContin, introduced the evening. She noted proudly that she had grandchildren attending the school where singing “We Shall Overcome” is a daily ritual.

The evening also featured a welcome by Chirlane McCray, wife of Warren Wilhelm Jr., known to most New Yorkers as Mayor Bill de Blasio. The bulk of the evening was taken up with rituals of self-congratulation and a screening of a mercifully abridged “educational” version of “Free Angela and All Political Prisoners,” a 2012 documentary about the signal event in Ms. Davis’s career as a radical: her arrest, prosecution and exoneration. There followed a brief conversation between Ms. Davis and the prima donna Ms. of all Ms.’s, Gloria Steinem. Kathy Boudin, the former member of the Weather Underground who was convicted of murder in 1981, was also in attendance. It was old-home week for wizened radical chic. CONTINUE AT SITE