HISTORY Comments turned off

Ilhan Omar’s Anti-American, Pro-Islamic Polemic on the Armenian Genocide The implications of Omar’s “present” vote. Raymond Ibrahim

Posted By on November 4th, 2019

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2019/11/ilhan-omars-anti-american-pro-islamic-polemic-raymond-ibrahim/

Earlier this week the House voted overwhelmingly (405-11) in favor of formally recognizing the Armenian Genocide, which was perpetrated by Ottoman Turks.  Among those miniscule few to vote “present,” thereby abstaining from voting, was Minnesotan Democrat, Ilhan Omar.   Her logic was expressed in a tweet:

A true acknowledgement of historical crimes against humanity must include both the heinous genocides of the 20th century, along with earlier mass slaughters like the transatlantic slave trade and Native American genocide, which took the lives of hundreds of millions of indigenous people in this country.

Such a statement is disingenuous on several levels.  For starters, since when did resolutions that deal with specific events—in this case, the Armenian Genocide—need to chronicle “earlier mass slaughters” throughout history?

One also wonders if the resolution was about, say, condemning the transatlantic slave trade or treatment of Natives—or anything else that depicts Americans negatively—would Omar have then abstained, arguing that a “true acknowledgement of historical crimes against humanity must include” the Armenian Genocide? (This is a rhetorical question.)

Incidentally, whatever America did to African slaves and Natives in the past, it has at least since tried to make reparations to both—not to mention was part of the Western drive to abolish slavery altogether.  This is much more than can be said about the Muslim world: it still persecutes its natives (Christians)—those exposed in Omar’s Somalia are instantly slaughtered—and was forced by Western powers to (formally) abolish slavery.

But the main point is this: if, as Omar contends, “earlier mass slaughters” should be mentioned, surely it should be those that are connected to the one highlighted in the resolution—in this case, ones that may possibly show patterns and precedents concerning the events surrounding the Armenian Genocide.  What’s to be learned from a resolution that includes a myriad of unrelated atrocities throughout the millennia other than that “all people are equally guilty”? (Which, of course, is one of Omar’s objectives, to relativize Islamic atrocities.)

EDUCATION, MOVIES AND TELEVISION Comments turned off

In “No Safe Spaces” an Odd Couple Teams Up to Fight Free-Speech Bans By John Fund

Posted By on November 4th, 2019

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/11/documentary-no-safe-spaces-adam-carolla-dennis-prager-fight-free-speech-bans/

Adam Carolla and Dennis Prager join figures across the political spectrum to examine the plague of censorship and groupthink emanating from college campuses.

The pro-free-speech documentary No Safe Spaces doesn’t have its nationwide debut until November 15, but it’s already breaking box-office records in Phoenix and San Diego, where it rolled out early.

That’s because many Americans realize that efforts to muzzle free speech are spreading from college campuses into the wider world. In 2017, a national poll of 2,300 U.S. adults, conducted for the Cato Institute, found that 71 percent of Americans think political correctness has silenced important discussions our country needs to have. And an astonishing 58 percent of Americans say that the political climate prevents them from sharing their own political beliefs.

“Colleges don’t protect students from 90 percent of the professors who teach them the following: Your past was terrible, and your future is terrible. You are victims,” commentator Dennis Prager, who teamed up with comedian Adam Carolla to make the film, told me. The two make a bit of an odd couple. Prager is a highly trained Jewish religious scholar, and Carolla is a college dropout and atheist who was raised by a single mom on welfare. “Where we agree is that more debate is better, more diversity of opinion is helpful, and our First Amendment is a unique gift to America,” says Carolla.

Americans aren’t blind to the hurt that genuine “hate speech” can cause. The Cato survey found that eight out of ten Americans say it’s “morally unacceptable” to say hateful things about racial or religious groups. But a greater number than before want to go further. Cato found that 40 percent of adults believe that government should prevent hate speech in public.

POLITICS Comments turned off

Nancy Pelosi and Willie Brown Warning Democrats By Silvio Canto, Jr.

Posted By on November 4th, 2019

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/11/nancy_and_willie_warning_democrats.html

 A few days after witnessing “Democrats minus two” vote for some version of an “impeach but not impeach” resolution, we get these two warnings from the West Coast.

First, Willie Brown, retired Democrat, warned Democrats about impeachment.  He was brutally honest:    

If the goal was to damage President Trump by formalizing the impeachment inquiry, it’s Mission Unaccomplished for House Democrats.

If anything, the vote solidified Trump’s hold on power. There were zero GOP defections, meaning we have zero drama heading into the public phase of impeachment. Everyone is pretty much in the same lanes they’ve been in since the Russian-collusion investigation, the obstruction of justice investigation and every other investigation.

Unfortunately for the Democrats, that gives people little reason to be glued to their screens when House committees take public testimony. The basic story — Trump pressured Ukraine to announce investigations into Democrats that would help Trump — is out there already. People know how they feel about it, and if you believe the polls, they’re pretty evenly split on whether the president deserves to be thrown out of office.

Again, that was Willie Brown, not Rush Limbaugh.

CHARLOTTE'S NEWS WEB Comments turned off

The Ten Reasons I would Never, Ever vote for a Democrat — and it has nothing to do with Trump Dr. Rich Swier

Posted By on November 3rd, 2019

https://drrichswier.com/2019/11/01/the-ten-reasons-i-would-never-ever-vote-for-a-democrat-and-it-has-nothing-to-do-with-trump/

First let me begin my column with a confession: When I was in college I was a JFK Democrat!

President John Fitzgerald Kennedy was a decorated combat war veteran,charismatic, had a beautiful wife and family, was a hawk who hated Communism (remember the 13 days in October, 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis),was a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association and JFK was what would now be considered a conservative in economic and social policies. JFK was also wealthy, a Catholic, like me, and had affairs with various women including Marilyn Monroe. JFK was not a perfect man but he was the perfect man for the job of President during a difficult time.

Here are my ten reasons, all based upon personal experiences well before the election of Donald J. Trump, why I would never, ever vote for a Democrat:

1.   I served in the U.S. Army as an officer from 1967 until 1990. I served under Presidents Lyndon B. Johnston (D), Richard Nixon (R), Gerald Ford (R), Jimmy Carter (D), Ronald Reagan (R) and George H.W. Bush (R). I served under two Democrat presidents and four Republican presidents. The best years for the U.S. military were the years under a Republican president. The worst president during my time in service was Jimmy Carter, remember the Iran Hostage Crisis, failed Desert 1 rescue attempt and fuel shortages (even the Army felt the lack of fuel). I remember during the Carter years we had to tow our howitzers to firing points near our motor pool because we didn’t have the diesel fuel needed to move them any further.

2.   I was stationed in Augsburg, Germany in from 1970 to 1973 when the terrorist Black September Organization, Arabic Aylūl al-Aswad, a faction of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO), attacked the Olympic Village in Munich, Germany on September 5-6, 1972. My unit was called out to provide additional security at the Olympic Village after the attack. I learned a harsh lesson that day, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure when it comes to stopping the followers of Mohammed.

ANTI-SEMITISM Comments turned off

Why will no Democrat pull the plug on Schiff? By Patricia McCarthy

Posted By on November 3rd, 2019

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/11/why_will_no_democrat_pull_the_plug_on_schiff_.html

One would think that by now  that there would be one or two sentient Democrats who realize the terrible damage that Adam Schiff is doing to their party.  But, with the possible exception of the two Democrats who voted against Pelosi’s stupid “impeachment resolution,” Reps. Jeff Drew and Collin Peterson, they all seem to be captive to Nancy Pelosi’s and Adam Schiff’s pathological moonbattery.  Not one other of them has the courage to stand up for what is right and true; that Trump committed no impeachable crimes, not even close.  He’s the most transparent, most investigated president in U.S. history.  The Democrats all know this!  They know Trump is not guilty of any offense, let alone one that is impeachable.  They surely know that Schiff is certifiably insane and yet they stand by and let him make fools of their party.  They stand by and let him conduct his anti-democratic Star Chamber that is running roughshod over the Constitution.  And they all know that what he is doing is wrong, very, very wrong.  If this were being done to one of theirs, they would be screaming from the rooftops of their luxurious D.C. abodes. 

So what explains the cowardly reticence of the rest of the party?  Trump derangement?  Perhaps.  They all certainly suffer from that disorder.  Conservatives loathed what Obama did to the nation over his eight years in office. We did not engender the violence the left promotes such as that of Black Lives Matter or Antifa.  No one on the right hired thugs to foment chaos as the left did on the day of Trump’s inauguration and so many times since.  That brand of vicious intolerance is all on the left.  It is who they are, what they do.  They are proud of their contempt for those with whom they disagree.  They believe it proves their superiority, but it only proves that they are narrow-minded, discriminatory and contemptuous of millions of their fellow Americans.  To be a Democrat in Congress at this moment in time means that one is dismissive of our Constitution, despite their constant professed reverence for it, and willing to do everything in their power to overturn the results of the 2016 election.  They do so at their peril.  Americans are not nearly as ignorant and/or unengaged as they assume.  They are not fooled by the Democrats’ obsessive mission to remove Trump from office because a majority of Americans, the Americans they loathe, love him and are grateful for his America First agenda.  Unlike Obama, this president loves this country; Obama did everything in his power to diminish us and he succeeded wildly.  He wasted billions for a fake stimulus to his donors, more than a billion in cash to the terrorist nation of Iran, broken promises all around.  He was a foreign policy disaster.  Trump now has to try to clean up the mess. 

FOREIGN POLICY, POLITICS Comments turned off

Senators Sanders and Warren Offer ‘The Squad’ Squalid Middle East Peace Plans by Edward Alexander

Posted By on November 3rd, 2019

https://www.algemeiner.com/2019/10/31/senators-sanders-and-warren-offer-the-squ

“In the warmest of human hearts,” the socialist Irving Howe once wrote, “there is always a cold spot for the Jews.” The plans which socialist Bernie Sanders and more-than-socialist Elizabeth Warren have just set forth for resolving the Israel-Palestine “conflict” demonstrate that, in their view, Jews have not done enough dying in the past century.

The plans certainly give no evidence of compassion for the three generations of Israelis who have had to bury their own children. No, their compassion is reserved, in Sanders’ case, for the Arab residents of Gaza, ruled by the Hamas organization, whose written constitution pledges its votaries to “kill Jews wherever you find them,” and who use the billions of dollars sent them by charitable organizations to achieve that aim.

Sanders wants America to send funds intended for Israel to Gaza so its rulers will have money to pay for electricity and groceries, lest they be forced to divert the fabulous sums of money they now receive for more sanguine purposes, especially underground tunnels into Israel to perpetrate raw murder.

Warren, less patient than Sanders, would like to give the Palestinian Arabs joint control of the city of Jerusalem so that they can plant their “capital” city in Israel’s capital. The Arabs never, in their long history in the region, thought of making Jerusalem even the capital of a province. But when their war of 1948 against the nascent Jewish state gave the Jordanians half of the city, they showed, apparently unbeknownst to Warren, what happens in such an arrangement: they proceeded to destroy the synagogues, the cemeteries, the holy places, and the Jewish inhabitants of their half with a savagery that would have shamed animals.

Since in this enterprise of Middle East peacemaking, nothing succeeds like failure, the Palestinians were again, in later years, offered control of eastern Jerusalem by Ehud Barak and other Israeli doves, but to no avail.

It is no accident that Senators Sanders and Warren should offer their pro-Arab peace schemes, brimming with repudiation of their party’s long-standing political and spiritual bond with the Jewish people, at just this time.

ANTI-SEMITISM Comments turned off

Annals Of Presidential Elections, Latin American Edition Francis Menton

Posted By on November 3rd, 2019

https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2019-11-2-annals-of-presidential-election

Here in the U.S., our tradition has long been that we accept the results of our elections, and in particular our presidential elections. The machinery of a presidential election is run by the state governments, not the federal government, which means that the incumbent President and his party have very limited ability to manipulate the result. There is little to no doubt about who actually won under the established rules. Losing candidates concede on election night, or maybe, in the case of an extremely close election, a few days later. The losing side becomes a loyal opposition, free to express its disagreement with everything the winner does in office, but never contesting the right of the winner to exercise the powers of the office.

At least that was the way it worked for the first 57 presidential elections. The search for an exception only proves the truth of the proposition. Yes, there were those who called Bush 43 “illegitimate” after the very close result in 2000; but I don’t recall any systematic defiance of his authority by the bureaucracy, let alone constant attempts to find some pretext to initiate impeachment. And yes, there were three prior attempts to impeach a President. But all of those involved much more the question of whether identifiable violations of law rose to the level of “impeachable,” rather than our current situation of a desperate search for something, anything to get rid of the guy whose real sin is that he really did win the election. (Of the previous impeachments, the closest to pretextual was that of Andrew Johnson for violation of the Tenure of Office Act; however, note that Johnson did violate a specific statute, and moreover had not himself been elected President, but had succeeded to the office by the death of Lincoln.)

Anyway, that was then. Now, places like the New York Times and the Washington Post declare to be heroes the bureaucrats who defy any and all directions of the duly-elected President and who search for any grounds they can take to the press or to Congress to undermine the President’s authority and get him removed. In simple terms, elections only count when our side wins.

FOREIGN POLICY Comments turned off

Saudi Arabia and Israel – an overdue embrace Jonathan Honigman

Posted By on November 3rd, 2019

https://eur01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fforeignpolicynews.org%2F&data=02%7C01

With expanding competitors and severe domestic challenges, the time has come for Saudi Arabia to publicly engage Israel in order to confront shared opponents and protect mutual interests.
Iran and Turkey

Given its ancient history, large population, and leadership amongst the Shiite community that accounts for roughly two-thirds of Gulf-bordering states (including over 10% in Saudi Arabia), Iran sees itself as the area’s rightful leader[i].  While it has pursued nuclear capability and can potentially cutoff the Strait of Hormuz, Iran’s main regional power projection is through its support of fellow Shiites[ii].  After Saddam Hussein served as the principal Arab bulwark against it, Iran has since 2003 steadily consolidated its sway over Shiite-majority Iraq and is developing through it an uninterrupted gateway to the Mediterranean.  Iran’s Shiite ally Assad has emerged victorious in Syria and its Lebanese proxy Hezbollah outmatches Lebanon’s army and has more political power than ever[iii].  Iranian support for Yemeni Shiites (who make up at least one-third of the population) exacerbates the impoverished country’s civil war and exposes the narrow shipping lanes through the Bab el-Mandeb Strait heading into the Suez Canal[iv].  The Saudis have the world’s third-largest defense budget but have failed to thwart these Iranian inroads made with far less means at their disposal[v].

Iran has strong ties with China, Russia, and India, and Saudi Arabia cannot depend on a concerted Sunni effort against its aggression.  Egypt pulled out of the so-called Arab NATO in April, its defense budget no longer ranks even within the global top fifty, and it is preoccupied with feeding, employing, and quenching the thirst of its one hundred million people – a daunting task perhaps obstructed more by domestic Sunni extremism and Ethiopia’s newly-constructed dam on the Nile than it is by Iran[vi].  Energy-starved Turkey relies on imports from Iran, the two conduct twice as much trade as Turkey does with Saudi Arabia, and they are united in subduing Kurdish ambitions[vii].  Though Jordanian King Abdullah is credited with coining the term “Shia Crescent” when warning of Iran as early as 2004, his country’s $40-billion GDP provides limited military capability[viii].

Pakistan is the second-largest Sunni state and a recipient of considerable Saudi aid but its major concern is India[ix].  With Saudi Arabia having seven-times their population and nineteen-times their landmass, the four smaller Gulf States are hesitant to coordinate militarily with it as they fear lurking Saudi domination under the guise of containing Iran[x].  The UAE stands firm against it politically but remains Iran’s second-largest trading partner, tiny Bahrain’s Sunni government supports the Saudis but has its Shiite majority to contend with, and both Oman and Kuwait maintain cordial relations with Iran[xi].  After years of dissension over Al Jazeera, Iran, and the Muslim Brotherhood, Qatar lost its relations with Saudi Arabia in 2017 and renewed them with Iran[xii].

ANTI-SEMITISM Comments turned off

J Street’s Foul Formula David Weinberg

Posted By on November 3rd, 2019

https://www.jewishpress.com/indepth/opinions/j-streets-foul-formula/2019/11/03/

When it was founded some ten years ago, J Street claimed to be a “pro-Israel and pro-peace” organization. That was taken to mean partnering with the mainstream Israeli political left to build support in Washington for a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians.

Since then J Street has morphed into an anti-Israel mutant. The organization spends its time and money besmirching Israel, smearing AIPAC and other leading American Jewish organizations, boosting President Obama’s dangerous deal with Iran (and now trying to bring it back), and supporting political candidates for whom BDS is a badge of honor.

Its campus arm, J Street U, has become a primary vehicle for conveying the most poisonous messages about Israel to students, acting to block student participation in Birthright, and actively campaigning against support for Israel at American universities.

J Street also believes that it has the “moral responsibility” to get America to force Israel to change its policies on the Palestinian issue. Why? Because J Street knows what’s best for Israel. It knows better even than the Israeli political left – which generally doesn’t share J Street’s radical positions on unilateral withdrawals and mass settlement eradication.

J Street knows how to bring peace to the Mideast: Israel needs to be pressured. As if Israel is the party unwilling to compromise. As if Israel hasn’t already offered the Palestinians at Oslo, Camp David, Taba and Annapolis just about everything they want of post-67 Israel. As if the Palestinians have compromised on their demands one wit since the great handshake on the White House lawn. As if the Palestinians are currently willing to enter peace talks with Israel unconditionally.

Nevertheless, it is Israel that needs to be pressured and shamed, say the J Street moral oracles.

Of course, this is the same J Street that supported the anti-Israel UN Goldstone Report, supported the illegal Palestinian bid for unilateral statehood recognition at the UN, and supported talks with Hamas but not military action against it.

ANTI-SEMITISM Comments turned off

Europe Goes Right As Democrats Try Their Failed Ideas Benny Avni

Posted By on November 3rd, 2019

https://www.nysun.com/foreign/europe-goes-right-as-democrats-try-their-failed/90894/

“Yes, Europe’s left is trying new things: The Dutch, for one, want to shorten the workweek to four days to raise productivity. These ideas are yet to be tested. But if America’s contenders want to beat President Trump next year, they better develop new ideas of their own — or at least reexamine their stalest, oldest European ones. Like, you know, the Europeans are doing.”

As America’s Democratic presidential candidates promote programs borrowed from Europe’s traditional left, Europeans are increasingly pushing back against them.

Following an election last Sunday in Germany’s Thuringia state, members of Angela Merkel’s Christian Democratic party accused the chancellor (in power since 2005) of dragging the party too far leftward, blaming her for the loss to the far-right Alternative for Germany party. A top contender for the Christian Democratic leadership, Friedrich Merz, called on Frau Merkel to resign now, rather than wait for 2021, when she plans to retire.

In the European Parliament election in May, France’s National Rally party handsomely beat President Macron’s centrist faction. Formerly known as the National Front, the current right-most French party is dominated by Marine Le Pen, whose father and party founder, Jean-Marie, was a Holocaust denier. Now Madame Le Pen’s party concentrates on conservatism and retail politics, and its increasingly seen as a formidable challenger to Monsieur Macron, whose poll numbers, despite a recent uptick, remain low.

In Poland, Hungary and Italy, to name a few, politicians of various right-wing parties are now in power, while anti-leftists, including some ugly and racist ones, are on the rise. Meanwhile, in Canada, another perceived utopia among progressives, a former golden boy, Prime Minister Trudeau, is striving to stay in power after his Liberal party suffered parliamentary seat losses in the October 21 election.