Bragg’s Double Standards Persecutes Trump – but drops all charges against . . . guess who? by Joseph Klein

https://www.frontpagemag.com/braggs-double-standards/

Left-wing progressive Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg decided to drop all charges against thirty-one of the forty-six pro-Hamas agitators who were arrested after breaking into and seizing Hamilton Hall at Columbia University’s campus on April 30th. Fourteen of the remaining agitators still facing charges were offered “Adjournments in Contemplation of Dismissal,” which would have resulted in dismissal of their cases if they did not engage in additional criminal conduct during the next six months. They refused the offer. The fifteenth defendant is James Carlson, a forty-year-old privileged scion of a wealthy family who is considered a “possible leader” of the Columbia University rioters who broke into Hamilton Hall and barricaded themselves inside. He has been charged with criminal trespassing, on top of additional charges for other crimes he allegedly committed.

The thirty-one rioters who invaded Hamilton Hall and got off scot-free were initially charged with trespassing in the third degree, which is a misdemeanor. They would have received no jail time in any event with let-the criminals-go District Attorney Bragg still in office. But even a slap on the wrist for the rioters was too much for Bragg to consider.

One of DA Bragg’s prosecutors cited a lack of evidence as justification for the decision to drop the charges against the thirty-one pro-Hamas rioters. He claimed there was no proof sufficient to tie each specific hooligan who was arrested to illegally taking part in the invasion of Hamilton Hall and in the destruction of property or injury of anyone during the course of the building’s seizure and occupation. The prosecutor blamed the problem in part on the absence of security-camera video, thus rewarding the rioters who had disabled or covered the cameras in the first place while wearing masks to hide their identities.

Judge Kevin McGrath went along with the charade by announcing in court that “All these matters are dismissed and sealed in the interest of justice.”

Judge McGrath has it backwards. Dismissing even the mildest of charges against the pro-Hamas thugs is a gross miscarriage of justice. But what else can we expect from DA Bragg’s office, backed up by cooperative criminal judges?

West Wing worry about Bibi’s upcoming speech Ruthie Blum

https://www.jns.org/west-wing-worry-about-bibis-upcoming-speech/

An article published in Politico on Saturday claims that the administration in Washington is worried about Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address next month to a joint session of the U.S. Congress.

The reason for the anxiety—say the outlet’s White House bureau chief, Jonathan Lemire, and national-security reporter Alexander Ward, citing “senior officials” whom they “granted anonymity to speak candidly about internal deliberations”—is that “no one knows what he is going to say.”

According to the authors and their nameless contacts, the White House fears that Bibi might take the opportunity of the podium on Capitol Hill to (gasp!) criticize President Joe Biden for not sufficiently supporting Israel’s war effort.

Terrifying indeed.

That ship sailed, of course, as the piece makes sure to stress by referring to Netanyahu’s by-now infamous video urging Biden not to uphold arms shipments—you know, the ammo needed for an Israel Defense Forces victory over Hamas. Naturally, no mention of the Israeli premier’s invoking Winston Churchill’s 1941 request of Franklin Roosevelt to give Britain the tools to “finish the job” against Nazi Germany.

Calling the clip “unhelpful,” the op-ed disguised as a news story quotes one of the unspecified inner-circle denizens as saying that Bibi could make things “far worse up there in front of Congress.”

The clarification for those curious about what this actually means is void of information, but rife with partisan speculation.

“Frictions have deepened between Biden and Netanyahu since the start of the Israel-Hamas war, with Biden aides increasingly believing that the Israeli leader is prolonging the conflict to stay in power,” it asserts. “And that he would prefer Donald Trump return to the White House.”

Beauty contest winners and the death of standards Merit and individual achievement are under attack Don Feder

https://www.washingtontimes.com/staff/don-feder/

Plus-sized beauty queens are another aspect of the war on standards.

Sara Milliken, who has been described as “morbidly obese,” was crowned Miss Alabama 2024 in the National American Miss pageant. The virtue-signaling crowd was ecstatic. “Finally, we have a pageant winner who doesn’t look like Barbie,” they cheered, as if this marked a milestone of tolerance and understanding. Ms. Milliken may have many fine qualities. Getting up from the table isn’t one of them.

Our culture is now dedicated to eradicating standards. 

On June 1, Bailey Anne Kennedy became the first transgender “woman” to win the Miss Maryland USA contest. Why should a contest for women be limited to real women? 

Should academic competitions be open to those with low IQs? What’s wrong with a cooking show including contestants whose idea of fine cuisine is a can of Chef Boyardee ravioli?

The German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche wrote of “the hatred directed against the privileged in body and spirit: the revolt of the ugly and bungled souls against the beautiful, the proud and the cheerful. The weapons used: contempt of beauty, of pride, of happiness.”

Where Are the Celebrities After Public Assault on Jews in Los Angeles?by Ronn Torossian

https://www.algemeiner.com/2024/06/24/where-are-the-celebrities-after-public-assault-on-jews-in-los-angeles/

On Sunday, we saw pro-Hamas protestors physically attack Jews in front of a Los Angeles synagogue, as they called for genocide and violence.

We have long heard that Jews control Hollywood, but many Jewish celebrities have been completely silent about the growing attacks against Jews, not to mention the situation in Israel.

I wish Jewish celebrities had half the courage to speak out for Jews and Israel as random influencers do, with posts about “All Eyes on Rafah” and other supposed injustices.

Furthermore, when Jews do speak out, they often do so in a half-hearted way, in order to protect their fan base.Ben Stiller recently came out in public saying that all wars should end, and that he wants peace. Stiller continued, “Antisemitism must be condemned whenever it happens and wherever it exists. As should Islamophobia and bigotry of all kinds.”

It seems like Stiller is apologizing for even speaking out. He can’t just oppose hatred against Jews and Israelis, without implying that attacks on Muslims are happening at a similar level (they are not; almost every domestic act of violence about Israel has been Muslims and other people attacking Jews).

Douglas Murray :All eyes should be on Al Jazeera for being founded, funded — and directed — by terrorists All eyes should be on Al Jazeera for being founded, funded — and directed — by terrorists

https://nypost.com/2024/06/20/opinion/all-eyes-should-be-on-al-jazeera-for-being-founded-funded-and-directed-by-terrorists/

Considering how much attention the American media get, it’s amazing that one piece of actual, unbelievable subversion keeps going on.That is the Al Jazeera network — founded, funded and directed by the terrorist-supporting state of Qatar.

Last month, The Washington Post reported darkly that the Israeli government had shut down the Al Jazeera network’s operations in Israel because of its coverage from Gaza. WaPo portrayed this as a “dark day” for press freedom.

In fact, there were a lot of good reasons for the Israelis to stop the network from operating inside Israel.

Just one being that a number of Al Jazeera journalists reporting on Israel’s war against terrorists in Gaza were — er — terrorists.

Take Muhammad Washah, whom Al Jazeera presented as a stellar part of the press corps merely reporting the truth.Unfortunately for them, their man is also a senior commander in Hamas.

He used to be in Hamas’ anti-tank missile unit, but since 2022 he has been in charge of research and development for aerial weapons.Known to you and me as “rockets.”

What I Saw at a Terrorist Rally Outside a Synagogue “Billions of us will come and kill you.”

https://www.frontpagemag.com/what-i-saw-at-a-terrorist-rally-outside-a-synagogue/

Thirty minutes after Hamas supporters first set up their operation outside a Los Angeles synagogue, they maced their first Jew. And the Los Angeles police did nothing.

Not until an hour into the terrorist rally outside a synagogue, did the LAPD finally step in, pushing back masked Jihad supporters in keffiyeh terror scarves from the entrance of Congregation Adas Torah (Congregation of the Bible) which they had occupied.

And then the mob, chanting calls for “intifada” and the destruction of Israel, moved outward to target two smaller synagogues attended by Persian Jewish refugees from Islamic terror in Iran.

“Billions of us will come and kill you,” a heavily accented Middle Eastern man in a keffiyeh unprompted rasped at me as I walked up. Only dozens had actually shown up, but they made up for it with bullhorns, robotic chants, and assaults in the middle of a Jewish neighborhood.

The Jewish counterprotesters had come waving American and Israeli flags while the other side was a sea of terrorist flags. A man wore an Antifa cap, another had come in ski goggles during 90-degree heat, while others toted bear spray, metal bottles, and other implements of violence.

The Jewish community members included older men and women, as well as families, while the Hamas contingent was mostly young and many were masked. A pair of rabbis led a melodic song that could hardly be heard over the harsh clatter of the hateful terror chants.

Despite knowing that a terrorist rally was planned outside a synagogue, the LAPD had allowed the terrorist supporters to take over the entire sidewalk leaving only a thin lane for attendees to walk through to get inside. The LAPD did little to interfere with the terrorist supporters, but did block Jewish counterprotesters from reaching their own synagogue. The police also did nothing as clumps of masked Hamas supporters broke away from the synagogue and began confronting, threatening, and attacking Jewish community members on the street.

Google Doesn’t Want You To Know The Truth About Heat Waves And ‘Climate Change’Just as We Predicted

https://issuesinsights.com/2024/06/25/google-labels-govt-weather-data-unreliable-and-harmful/

Earlier this week, we published an editorial arguing that government data didn’t support various claims about climate change. And we predicted Google would demonetize it. We were right. (See: Heat Wave Sets Off New Round Of ‘Climate Crisis’ Lies.)

Shortly after that article was published, Google’s AdSense informed us that it had “disabled ad serving” on that page because the article contained “unreliable and harmful claims.” (We have one spot on our pages for AdSense ads, mostly to track Google’s efforts to demonetize content. See the list of related editorials below.)

So what was “unreliable” or “harmful” about that editorial? Google doesn’t say. It just says we have to “fix” it if we want their ads to run on that page.

What we can say is that Google has effectively labeled official government data as “unreliable and harmful,” since all the evidence we provided was from official sources.

The editorial pointed out that claims about more frequent heat waves, tornadoes, hurricanes, and wildfires – claims that get repeated ad nauseam by the mainstream press and by climate activists – are not supported by the official data.

We included charts and cited the sources of the data – sources such as the Environmental Protection Agency, the National Interagency Fire Center, the government-run GlobalChange.gov, etc.

Here’s how Google defines “unreliable and harmful.”

Power is Their Goal Sydney Williams

“Their final objective toward which all their deceit is directed is to capture political power so that, using the power of the state and the power of the market simultaneously, they may keep the common man in eternal subjection.”                                                                                                                    Essay, The New York Times
                                                                                                                                                  Henry Wallace
                                                                                                                                              “The Danger of American Fascism”

                                                                                                                                                          April 9, 1944

While Wallace, then Vice President of the United States, was writing of the dangers of Fascism, his words apply today to extremists on both sides of the political aisle – Progressive/Marxists on the left and Neo-Fascists on the right – those who campaign under the mantle of service but who, in reality, seek power for themselves and the state. Keep in mind, at the time Wallace wrote, the Soviet Union, with its Communist ideology and its totalitarian practices, was our ally in the fight against Germany’s Nazis. Because his socialist leanings were not broadly popular, Wallace was dropped by FDR as his choice for Vice President in favor of Harry Truman in the 1944 election. In 1946, in the early days of the Cold War, Wallace left the Democrat Party over Truman’s hard line with the Soviet Union and joined the Progressive P

Power is an aphrodisiac, whether exercised by an individual, a cabal, or a mob. It has always existed in politics, in varying degrees. In a letter to Anglican bishop Mandell Creighton on April 5, 1887, Lord Acton (1835-1902) wrote: “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely.” High political office carries enormous influence – the ability to financially reward backers (as well as oneself) – that many find irresistible. While there are principled individuals who run for office for the purpose of “giving back,” we live in a time of career politicians, those who have spent their careers either in elected or appointed office. We also live in a time of polarization where slogans substitute for reason and violent protests for debate.

Power and the corruption that often accompanies it are not limited to one party. But single party states and cities, with an absence of competition, are more likely to attract corrupt individuals. A Wikipedia map of the U.S. shows twenty red states, twenty blue states, with seven others either leaning red or blue, and three that are purple. Of the five most populous states, three are blue – California, New York and Pennsylvania – one is red – Texas – and one is purple – Florida. BallotPedia notes that seventeen of the country’s twenty largest cities are Democrat-run. Corporate monopolies are not good for consumers, and government monopolies are not good for citizens.

Hamas is the enemy of the Palestinian people This reactionary religious movement has never had any interest in national liberation. James Heartfield

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/06/23/hamas-is-the-enemy-of-the-palestinian-people/

On 7 October last year, Hamas’s Al-Qassam Brigades attacked southern Israel, killing around 1,200 people and taking another 250 hostage. Despite this demonstration of anti-Semitic barbarism, many Western anti-Israel activists continue to see Hamas as some sort of ‘resistance’ movement, fighting for Palestinian nationhood.

This view couldn’t be more wrong. As Italian journalist Paola Caridi shows in her largely sympathetic account of the group, Hamas: From Resistance to Government (originally published in 2009 but updated last year), Hamas is not and never has been a national-independence movement. It is above all an intransigent, religious movement set on the destruction of Israel.

The exhaustion of Palestinian nationalism

To get to grips with the nature and development of Hamas, it’s important to understand the broader historical background. The central problem here for Palestinians and Israelis is that their national aspirations are irreconcilable.

Israel was founded in 1948, after Jewish people revolted against Palestine’s British rulers. (With a mandate from the League of Nations, the British took over from the Ottoman Empire, which had ruled Palestine for over four centuries, at the end of the First World War.) During the 1920s and especially the 1930s, Palestine’s indigenous Jewish population was supplemented by refugees from Eastern Europe and later Nazi Germany. This growing and increasingly restive populace rebelled against British occupation, just as neighbouring Iraqis did in the 1920s and 1940s, and Egyptians did in the late 1910s and early 1920s. In doing so, these rebellions laid claim to new nations, which claimed descent from ancient civilisations.

Many Arabs, caught in the crossfire of the often violent Jewish struggle for an Israeli state in the late 1940s, fled to the neighbouring territories of the Egyptian-governed Gaza Strip and the Jordanian West Bank. In 1967, Israel defeated the Arab coalition of Egypt, Jordan and Syria in the Six-Day War. Through this war, Israel conquered the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, complete with their Arab populations. These became the ‘occupied territories’.

As the Six-Day War demonstrated, the Arab world refused to accept Israel’s existence. Arab nations took Israel as an affront to their own independence. Yasser Arafat, born to Palestinian parents in Cairo in 1929, co-founded the paramilitary organisation, Fatah, in the late 1950s. Its object was to fight for a Palestinian state. In 1967, Fatah joined and became the dominant faction in the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), which was then a national-independence movement. Arafat became PLO leader in 1969.

Israel’s leaders always understood that the national aspirations of Palestinians were irreconcilable with the existence of Israel. Hence, Israeli prime minister Golda Meir insisted in a 1976 New York Times op-ed that there were no ‘Palestinians’, only Arabs, living in Egypt, Jordan and Israel itself.

Christopher F. Rufo How DEI Corrupts America’s Universities The ideology of “diversity, equity, and inclusion” is not what it purports to be.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/how-dei-corrupts-americas-universities

The idea of public universities in the United States originally rested on a compact between the citizen and the republic. The agreement was that the citizen would provide funding for the university in order to train young people to advance the public interest and the common good. In recent years, however, this compact has shattered, and considerable efforts will be needed to rebuild it.

The clearest expression of what has gone wrong is DEI. At first glance, a commitment to “diversity, equity, and inclusion” might seem laudable. But DEI employs a propagandistic language to conceal its real intentions. It is, in fact, the opposite of what it appears to be.

We can review the acronym in parts. First, “diversity.” The initial connotation of the word suggests a variety of people, experiences, and knowledge. But in practice, universities use diversity to justify a policy of sometimes explicit, sometimes implicit, racial discrimination: a total inversion of the principles of colorblind equality and individual merit.

Second, “inclusion.” In kindergarten, teaching kids to be inclusive means encouraging them to share and be polite to classmates. But in the context of a university, inclusion is used as justification for excluding people and ideas that are seen as a threat to prevailing ideologies and sentiments. 

Finally, “equity.” The immediate association is with the principle of equality. But equity is actually a radically opposed idea. Equality is the principle that every man or woman should be judged as an individual, neither punished nor rewarded based on ancestry. Equity demands the opposite: categorizing individuals into group identities and assigning disparate treatment to members of those groups, seeking to “equalize” what would otherwise be considered unjust outcomes.

What this means in practice is that members of certain groups get favored, others disfavored: in short, inequality justified under the ideology of “equity.”

You see this hiding in plain sight. Universities publish in their own materials prima facie evidence of their commitments to racial discrimination, quotas, and disparate treatment on the basis of identity in hiring, admissions, promotions, and in other programs.