The Atrocious Scandal of the UNESCO Vote on Jerusalem by Salim Mansur

It was over the ruins of these sacred Jewish sites, left behind by the Romans, that Arab conquerors of Jerusalem in the seventh century built two mosques, the Dome of the Rock and Al-Aqsa, to lay claim on the City of David for Islam.

There can be no dispute about Jewish links with Jerusalem, and Jewish rights to their sacred sites that long pre-date the arrival of Arabs bearing Islam to the City of David. This latest effort by the UNESCO, however to deny the Jewish nature of Jerusalem is much more than a scandal; it is a Stalinist measure to airbrush history by an organization which, according to its own charter, is supposed to be devoted without prejudice to the preservation of historical records.

There is precedent for such a resolution to nullify the recent UNESCO resolution on Jerusalem. In December 1991 the UN General Assembly voted to repeal the UN resolution passed in 1975 that declared, “Zionism is a form of racism.”

When Arabs and Muslims deny Jewish links to Jerusalem they are also then in denial of their own history. Their claim on Jerusalem, or the holy land, on the basis of Islam is simply not found in the Quran.

Their claim on Jerusalem, or the holy land, on the basis of Islam is simply not found in the Quran. On the contrary, the Quran is explicit in addressing Jews as “children of Israel” and speaking of them, as in “Remember those blessings of Mine with which I graced you, and how I favoured you above all other people” (2:47).

Indeed, Muslim denial of the Jewish links to the City of David and their ancestral rights over Judea and Samaria, or Palestine, is ironically contrary to the Word of God in their own sacred scripture.

Gulag, Western Style By David Solway

There are various ways of quashing social and political dissent, some more effective than others. The “Soviet method” practiced in stringently repressive regimes—torture, imprisonment, the ever-expanding Gulag, summary execution—works extremely well in the shorter historical timeframe, until a people rise up in revolt or such demonic societies collapse from their own internal contradictions. Of course, the truly Stygian regimes, closed to the world, indifferent to economic pressures, and under the heavy boot of unbroken military control, such as North Korea, may persist indefinitely or until defeated in war. But generally speaking, the tried-and-true methods of political oppression are sufficient to the task of keeping a population in a state of enslavement for a prolonged historical period.

In the sphere of the liberal West, however, there are other means of subjection to the will of increasingly centralized governments. Because they tend to function gradually and under the radar, these tactics are enormously efficient in their deadening effects, going unrecognized until it is often too late to mount significant resistance. They operate through a process of curricular distortions, social pressure and incremental legislation targeting speech habits, facets of normal behavior, assumptions of what counts as morally legitimate, and financial and job security.

A useful technique for anaesthetizing the individual citizen and rendering him compliant is the erasure of authentic historical knowledge. We’ve remarked the success of this approach in the U.S. with the “history from below” or “people’s history” movement, associated with Howard Zinn, and the foregrounding of a bowdlerized version of Islamic history in American schools. Canada is no different. Eric McGeer, author of Words of Valediction and Remembrance: Canadian Epitaphs of the Second World War, writes: “In my last years of high school teaching I was increasingly infuriated and disgusted at the portrayal of Canada in the history textbooks assigned for use in our courses. There was no sense of gratitude in the textbooks, no empathy with the people of the past or an attempt to see them in their own terms, no sense of the effort people made to create one of the few truly liveable societies on earth. You would have thought that this country was nothing more than a racist, bigoted, this or that-phobic hotbed. My first lesson involved taking the book and dropping it into the waste paper basket and advising the students to do the same.” (personal communication). The study of history, McGeer concludes, is nothing now but a progressive morality tale and a mechanism of social engineering. Sounds a lot like Title IX. Pride in one’s nation, its accomplishments and sacrifices, is contra-indicated. There is more than one way of burning the flag.

Analysts Tally at Least 52 Uses of Chemical Weapons by ISIS “High risk” of ISIS unleashing agents — even potentially a dirty bomb from looted radiological materials — as Mosul falls. By Bridget Johnson,

A threat-monitoring firm in London tallied at least 52 incidents of chemical weapons use by the Islamic State since 2014 and warned of a high possibility that more could be unleashed as Mosul starts to fall.

IHS Markit’s Conflict Monitor said chemical weapons were used around ISIS’ largest occupied city in Iraq, currently under attack by Iraqi and Kurdish forces with U.S. support, at least 19 of those times.

Most of the threat is posed by chlorine and mustard agents, but analysts said ISIS could use a “dirty bomb” — radiological dispersion through a conventional explosive device.

“Medical and industrial sources of radioactive material are present within territory held by the Islamic State, for example, at the Hazim al-Hafid Hospital, a specialist oncology and nuclear medicine facility in Mosul,” said Karl Dewey, a chemical, biological and radiological weapons analyst at IHS Jane’s.

ISIS acquired nearly 90 pounds of low-grade nuclear material from the University of Mosul soon after sacking the city in 2014, the company noted.

“Although the uranium compounds would only be of very limited utility for [radiological dispersal device] fabrication, comments made by Islamic State supporters suggest that members have at least thought about the idea,” Dewey said.

There has been a noted decline in chemical weapons use by ISIS in the run-up to the Mosul offensive, now in its sixth week.

But Columb Strack, senior analyst and leader of IHS Conflict Monitor, warned that as ISIS loses ground “there is a high risk of the group using chemical weapons to slow down and demoralize advancing enemy forces, and to potentially make an example of — and take revenge on — civilian dissidents within the city.”

Pentagon press secretary Peter Cook told reporters Tuesday that Iraqi forces “continue to make progress while exercising commendable care to avoid civilian casualties” as “they’ve been dealing, among other things, with vehicle-borne IEDs and the use of human shields by ISIL.” Defense officials have refused to say whether American advisers are in Mosul.

Strack noted that Mosul had been the home base for ISIS’ chemical weapons production, “but most of the equipment and experts were probably evacuated to Syria in the weeks and months leading up to the Mosul offensive, along with convoys of other senior members and their families.”

isis chemical weapons

Asked about the report at Tuesday’s State Department briefing, press secretary John Kirby said he couldn’t “confirm the veracity” of the findings.

“What I can tell you, though, is that we have, ourselves, talked about our view that in the past Daesh has proven capable of trying to use chemical agents, whether it’s mustard and/or chlorine,” Kirby said. “And DoD has spoken to their view that they have at least attempted to do that in the past. So this is very much in keeping with a methodology we’ve seen out of these terrorists.”

The United Nations has also presented evidence of ISIS chemical weapons use. Kirby called the State Department’s refusal to confirm any ISIS chemical weapons usage yet an abundance of caution “because you don’t want to levy such a charge unless you know you’re 100 percent sure about it.”

“It’s not about reticence. I mean, clearly this is a group we’re not afraid to talk strongly about it and to act strongly against. I think it’s really about information and wanting to be careful,” he added. “But obviously, I mean, if they did, it would certainly be in keeping with their methodology. I think we’re just — we’re telling you what we think we know when we know it.”

The State Department’s travel alert for Europe issued Monday warned that “credible information indicates the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL or Da’esh), al-Qa’ida, and their affiliates continue to plan terrorist attacks in Europe, with a focus on the upcoming holiday season and associated events” and “terrorists may employ a wide variety of tactics, using both conventional and non-conventional weapons and targeting both official and private interests.”

Trump changes mind on waterboarding, global warming By Ed Straker

Donald Trump, after stating that he was going to reinstate waterboarding “and worse” for terrorists, now says he is against waterboarding. He also says global warming, which he once said was a hoax created by the Chinese to make U.S. manufacturing uncompetitive, may be caused by man-made activities.

Donald Trump seemed to acknowledge that humans contribute to climate change Tuesday in a meeting with New York Times reporters, moving closer to widely held scientific opinion but away from the Republican Party line.

He is keeping an “open mind” when it comes to climate issues, he said.

“I think there is some connectivity” between human activity and climate change, Trump said[.]

There is no way any person who is informed about the “theory” of global warming can believe that. The theory of global warming is that human-produced carbon dioxide traps heat in the atmosphere. But human-produced CO2 is only 3% of all CO2 (most is produced naturally), which in turn is only 3% of all the chemicals in the atmosphere. Common sense would tell anyone that human CO2 production has no bearing on so-called global warming.

It’s sad that Donald Trump believes this, and worrisome. Will he reverse Obama’s Clean Power Plan rule, which is shutting down important power plants because of the myth of CO2 production?

As for the “climate change” treaty Obama agreed to in Paris, Trump said:

On climate change, he refused to repeat his promise to abandon the international climate accord reached last year in Paris, saying that, “I’m looking at it very closely.” But he said “I have an open mind to it[.]”

An open mind to it? To locking the U.S. into mandatory CO2 reductions, which, like Obama’s Clean Power Plan, will also shut down power plants, make electricity much more expensive, and kill jobs?

Hassan Rouhani: Iran’s Executioner By Heshmat Alavi

As we begin to wind down to the end of Hassan Rouhani’s term as president of the regime in Iran, it is time to take a look back at the past four years. We all remember how the West joyfully welcomed his election — read selection — as a change of gear in Iran aimed at moderation. However, what the world witnessed ever since has been anything but. An atrocious rise in executions, continued public punishments and an escalating trend of oppression has been Rouhani’s report card during his tenure. With a new administration coming into town, Washington must make it crystal clear to Tehran that human rights violations will no longer be tolerated.

Unprecedented executions

Despite pledging to hold the “key” to Iran’s problems, Rouhani has failed to provide even an iota of the freedoms the Iranian people crave and deserve. His record has revealed an unrelenting loyalty to the regime establishment in regards to social oppression and continued crackdowns. Iran sent 18 to the gallows last week alone, according to official reports.

As the international community continued its policy of appeasement, Rouhani and the entire regime used this opportunity to launch an execution rampage. Over 2,500 people have been sent to the gallows ever since Rouhani came to power, shattering all records held by this regime itself in over two decades.

In 2015 alone, Iran was executing an individual every eight hours, as reported by Dr. Ahmed Shaheed, former United Nations special rapporteur on human rights in Iran.

Vast social crackdown

Rouhani’s commitment to regime supreme leader Ali Khamenei and the ruling elite has rendered a wide-ranging, escalating crackdown. In addition to the executions mentioned above, state-sponsored social oppression has resulted in horrific scenes of public hangings, floggings, and even limb amputations.

The prisons are overwhelmed with inmates, leading to intolerable and inhumane conditions. Political prisoners, specifically, are subject to horrendous treatment by the authorities. Renowned human rights organization Amnesty International has recently issued an Urgent Action call expressing major concerns over the case of Maryam Akbari Monfared, a Green Movement organizer still in prison two years after her family put up her bail.

James Allan :Trump, Turnbull and the Turning Tide

The pundits were wrong, so wrong, in predicting that Hillary Clinton’s ascent to the White House was an inevitability. No surprise there, though, as the same homegrown solons and star columnists were no less convinced that Tony Abbott was ballot-box poison and had to go

The exit poll that caught my eye from the US election was the one in which those who ticked ‘we detest both candidates’ then went on to break 69% for Trump. That would be me too. I think the US voters got this right. Each party nominated the only person who could have lost to the other party’s candidate, but Hillary was worse by far. As for talk of ‘role model’ deficiencies with the Donald, well Hillary attacked the women who accused hubby Bill not of lewd talk but of actual rape. On what planet is that better role-modelling?

And here’s another surprise: it turns out that when East Coast comics insult Midwest voters, as they have done for decades, those voters couldn’t give a fig what comedians and chat-show hosts think about the election. Same with Hollywood stars such as Robert DeNiro ( as per below) and all the other Tinseltown tossers who condemn Trump for his attitude to women.

Regular voters can see that these people are hypocritical morons, the sort who denounce the president-elect in one breath and gush with praise for fugitive molester Roman Polanski or Woody Allen, who couldn’t keep his aged hands of his stepdaughter. Give me the last 30 years of phone and email records for JayZ, Charlie Sheen, DeNiro and the rest and I will personally guarantee that there will be comments a lot worse than Trump’s. So maybe they should have the self-awareness to butt out. Every time some Hollywood halfwit supported Clinton, Trump got more votes. The post-election ‘sore loser’ protests have been enough to make me puke, such are the hypocrisies of the Left these days.

And, just by the way, it’s worth noting that Trump got more of the black vote than Romney or McCain. He got less (yes, LESS) of the white vote than Romney. So the whiny left should shut up about “racism” — except it wouldn’t have anything else to say, so it won’t. Trump also got more of the Latino vote than Romney (who speaks Spanish) or McCain (who has a child married to a Latino). Turns out wide open immigration is not popular with all sorts of groups, including some Latinos.

On substance I hate Trump’s attitude to free trade. I hope Paul Ryan blocks that in the House, though much of this sits in the realm of executive power. Meanwhile, I think Trump will be miles and miles and miles better on appointing Supreme Court judges, given Hillary’s pledge to nominate candidates who are, once you cut through her rhetoric, left-wing pseudo-politicians, much like all of Canada’s top Supreme Court judges and more than a few here in Australia. I like Trump on seeing that if China and Russia do nothing on carbon emissions — and the reality is that they’re not — then carbon taxes and trading schemes and massive subsidies of renewables are idiocy. If we now don’t change direction here in Australia we are going to go from comparatively low cost energy to some of the world’s most expensive, with all of the massive renewables subsidies driving low cost production into the ground. Those disconcerting sounds you hear are jobs, lots of jobs, leaving the country.

America’s Fourth Estate has become America’s Fifth Column Victor Sharpe

At one time, perhaps before the Vietnam War, the media was considered a respectable and trusted purveyor of objective news. But for too long much of the mainstream media in America has shed that belief and become instead organs of state propaganda.

The dread examples of such disinformation as was seen in the Fascist, Nazi, and Communist authoritarian regimes has, it now seems, increasingly polluted our own mainstream media (MSM).

The general election has exposed the alphabet houses – ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, PBS, CNN as no better than unapologetic shills for the Democrat party and for the Clinton machine. Newspapers share the same guilt with the New York Times and the Washington Post leading the baleful and deplorable charge.

It was President Thomas Jefferson who presciently saw the peril a future America might face in what has now become its present demise of a free and vital press when he said: “If it were left to me to decide whether we should have a government without a free press or a free press without a government, I would prefer the latter.”

We have seen the dismal and bleak spectacle of an endless procession of print and broadcasting reporters, journalists and talking heads taking unabashed leftwing, pro-Obama and pro-Clinton positions to the point of dropping all pretense at objectivity or impartiality.

In that same 18th century, when Jefferson uttered his warning about the press, Edmund Burke in England looked at what he called the three estates within the British political system. He saw the King, the House of Lords and the House of Commons. However pre-eminent above them all was the press, which he called the Fourth Estate.

“Rights” as perceived by Islam are privileges conferred on Muslims exclusively by Sharia and Islamic doctrine, and on no one else. “What is inside Sharia is good and permissible, what is outside Sharia is evil and prohibited.” Ed Cline

What are “rights”?

A right is an existential condition that permits an individual to live, act, and speak in ways that promote his existence and happiness as a rational being.

“Rights” as perceived by Islam are privileges conferred on Muslims exclusively by Sharia and Islamic doctrine, and on no one else. “What is inside Sharia is good and permissible, what is outside Sharia is evil and prohibited.”

“Rationality” and “Reason” do not even have the same meanings in Islam that Westerners subscribe to.

The bases of Shariah are four: two are revelatory, coming from Allah, and include the two core sources, the Qur’ān, Islam’s holy book, and the Sunnah (the practice and teachings of the Prophet Muhammad (s)); and two are based in rational endeavor, consensus (ijma) and analogical juristic reasoning (qiyās).

All other quotations are from The Ayn Rand Lexicon, found on http://aynrandlexicon.com/, according to subject.

Rand on reason and logic:

The distinguishing characteristic of logic (the art of non-contradictory identification) indicates the nature of the actions (actions of consciousness required to achieve a correct identification) and their goal (knowledge…..

“It’s logical, but logic has nothing to do with reality.” Logic is the art or skill of non-contradictory identification. Logic has a single law, the Law of Identity, and its various corollaries. If logic has nothing to do with reality, it means that the Law of Identity is inapplicable to reality. If so, then: a.) things are not what they are; b.) things can be and not be at the same time, in the same respect, i.e., reality is made up of contradictions. If so, by what means did anyone discover it? By illogical means…..

Reason is man’s only means of grasping reality and of acquiring knowledge—and, therefore, the rejection of reason means that men should act regardless of and/or in contradiction to the facts of reality.

The method which reason employs in this process is logic—and logic is the art of non-contradictory identification.

Sharia and Islam, as a “unified” package of ethics, is based, primarily, on those three old hoary diseases of man’s existence: superstition (the purported existence of a supreme being, in this case, Allah), consensus (so many people believe in Allah, he must exist, beginning with Mohammad), and, emotions or feelings. The latter are not tools of cognition; they are responses to what one observes, that is, when one employs one’s cognitive faculties.

Trumping the Media: Donald Continually Confounds the MSM By Roger Kimball

Looking back on it now, who do you think provided the best commentary on the run-up to the election?

And a related question: who has provided the most insightful commentary on the aftermath, i.e. “Why Trump Happened,” “What His Victory Means,” “What the Protesters and Crybullies Want”?

It’s amusing now to replay the scenes of those Important People who assured us that Trump, the clown, could never win. My favorite headline was from The Nation: “Relax, Donald Trump Can’t Win.”

My favorite election clip was provided by Bret Stephens (who was joined in his folly by many others). And if you just want to listen to ten minutes of fatuousness, here’s an audio clip of the Wall Street Journal’s national politics editor Aaron Zitner speaking on Election Day. Zitner was 100% wrong, but what’s amusing is the supreme if casual confidence with which he delivers his dicta: “Of course Hillary will win. Any fool knows that. All the best polls show that she is a shoo-in. All the most perceptive people (like moi, A. Zitner) agree.” Et cetera.

But if the MSM was almost exclusively a source of schadenfreude, who was out there telling the truth?

There were several percipient commentators. But I want to mention one who may be overlooked because the public regards him as an entertainer, not a sage. I mean Scott Adams, the creator of the Dilbert comic strip. Adams, at his blog, has been providing some of the most original and most penetrating commentary on the whole Trump phenomenon.

I was, I admit, a little taken aback when I first encountered his description of Trump as a “Master Persuader” (see here, for example, or here), but the more I think about it, the more right I think he is. Trump on the stump was not articulate in any traditional sense. He was repetitious, digressive, given to stumbling about in sentence fragments. But he honed a message that resonated deeply with the voters.

Adams noted the following in a column posted yesterday:

If you believe Trump’s skill for persuasion wasn’t the key variable in his win, you have to imagine some other candidate beating Clinton with the same set of policies as Trump. Personally, I can’t imagine it.

I commend Adams’ blog to you: among other things, he shows that the people who are protesting against Trump are not really protesting against Trump.

They’re protesting against a hallucination they call “Trump” that has almost nothing to do with the man who is now the president-elect.

Columbia University Plans to Provide Sanctuary, Financial Help for Undocumented Students By Debra Heine

Fearing a “crack-down” on illegal immigration in the wake of the election of Donald Trump, Columbia University has declared itself to be a safe space for undocumented students.

According to the Columbia Daily Spectator, the university plans “to provide sanctuary and financial support for undocumented students as many face concerns about immigration policy under President-elect Donald Trump.”

Via The Hill:

Provost John Coatsworth said in an email sent to students and teachers Monday that the university would not let immigration officials onto its campus without a warrant or provide the information of undocumented students to authorities without a court-ordered subpoena.

If the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) is terminated — as Trump has threatened to do — the university said it would increase financial aid and other support to undocumented students who lose the right to work.

Trump’s victory has “prompted intense concern for the values we hold dear and for members of our community who are apprehensive about what the future holds,” the provost said in the email.

“The experience of undocumented students at the College and Columbia Engineering, from the time they first seek admission through their graduation, will not be burdened in any way by their undocumented status,” he said.

University President Lee Bollinger said the university is in a period where it doesn’t know what will happen to “a lot of students and faculty and staff with respect to immigration policy.

“There are lots of areas that are uncertain and it’s a deeply puzzling and concerning time,” he said in a statement.