BOOKS Comments turned off

The U.S. and Israel: Shared Culture, Common Destiny by Senator Pat Toomey (R-PA)

Posted By on April 20th, 2016

The United States and Israel share a unique strategic partnership and friendship. This relationship started in the early years of the Jewish State when President Harry Truman proudly recognized the State of Israel. As Truman’s White House counsel Clark Clifford declared:

In an area as unstable as the Middle East, where there is not now and never has been any tradition of democratic government, it is important for the long-range security of our country, and indeed the world, that a nation committed to the democratic system be established there, one on which we can rely. The new Jewish state can be such a place. We should strengthen it in its infancy by prompt recognition.

This relationship blossomed during the Cold War, as the U.S. military relied on Israeli intelligence to gain the upper hand against the Soviet Union. And today, as the Middle East disintegrates into violent chaos, this relationship grows all the more important.

Today, the U.S. uses Israel’s expertise and ingenuity to help deter internal and external threats to our homeland. All levels of the U.S. military participate in joint exercises with Israel, from the Navy, to the Army, to the Air Force. U.S. police officers travel to Israel to train and learn new counter-terrorism techniques. Advanced military weaponry, such as the Iron Dome and the Arrow missile defense systems, benefit both countries. The U.S. repeatedly coordinates with Israel for intelligence support, advice on urban warfare and airport screening techniques, and the development of cutting-edge weaponry. It should come as no surprise that we employ many Israeli-made weapons, including unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), which have played a crucial role in America’s counter-terrorism activities.

The U.S.–Israel relationship goes beyond military cooperation. Israel may be a tiny country, but it is a leader in technology, medicine, business, agriculture, and many other fields. Every day, citizens of the globe benefit from Israeli inventions, including the cell phone, Internet phones, voicemail technology, the drip irrigation system, the first ingestible video camera, the most secure flight security system in the world, and countless other products and services. Israel has the second highest number of start-up companies in the world and the third largest number of NASDAQ companies listed.

U.S. companies manufacture many Israeli weapons, creating jobs here in America, while many major American companies have developed incubators in Israel to take advantage of its high-tech industry. Microsoft, Google, Apple, 3M, and GE all have research and development facilities in Israel.

BOOKS Comments turned off

U.S. Investment in – not Foreign Aid to – Israel by Yoram Ettinger

Posted By on April 20th, 2016

In 2016, Israel is a major contributor to – and a global co-leader with – the U.S. in the areas of research, development, manufacturing and launching of micro (100 kg), mini (300 kg) and medium (1,000 kg) sized satellites and unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), as well as joint space missions, space communications, and space exploration, sounding rocket and scientific balloon flights. According to NASA Administrator Charles Bolden, “Israel is known for its innovation. The October 15, 2015 joint agreement gives us the opportunity to cooperate with Israel on the journey to Mars, [highlighting Israel’s extremely lightweight technologies, which conserve energy]….”

Israel is no longer a supplicant – as it was in its early years of independence – transformed from a net-national security and economic consumer to a net-national security and economic producer, generating substantial military and commercial dividends to the U.S., which exceed the highly appreciated $3.1 billion annual investment in Israel by the U.S.

The annual U.S. investment in Israel – erroneously defined as “foreign aid” (Foreign Military Financing) – has yielded one of the highest rates of return on U.S. investments overseas. But, Israel is neither “foreign” nor does it receive “aid.”
A Partnership

From a one-way street relationship, the U.S.-Israel connection has evolved into an exceptionally productive two- way mutually beneficial alliance. The U.S. is the senior partner, and Israel the junior partner, in a win-win, geo-strategic partnership, which transcends the 68-year-old tension between all American presidents (from Truman through Obama) and Israeli prime ministers (from Ben Gurion through Netanyahu) over the Arab-Israeli conflict and the Palestinian issue.

According to the former Supreme Commander of NATO forces and Secretary of State, the late General Alexander Haig: “Israel constitutes the largest U.S. aircraft carrier, which does not require a single U.S. boot on board, cannot be sunk, deployed in a most critical region to the U.S. economy and national security. And, if there were no Israel in the eastern flank of the Mediterranean, the U.S. would have to deploy to the region a few more real aircraft carriers and tens of thousands of troops, which would have cost the U.S. taxpayer some $15 billion annually. All of which is spared by the existence of Israel.”

Israel has been the most cost-effective, battle-tested laboratory of U.S. defense industries; the most reliable and practical beachhead/outpost of the U.S. defense forces; sharing with the U.S. unique intelligence, battle experience, and battle tactics. Thus, Israel extends the U.S. strategic hand at a time when the Pentagon is experiencing draconian cuts in its defense budget, curtailing the size of its military force and the global deployment of troops, while facing tough international industrial-defense competition and dramatically intensified threats of Islamic terrorism overseas and on the U.S. mainland.

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Introducing ‘The President Erdogan Offensive Poetry Competition’ – £1000 prize to be won Douglas Murray

Posted By on April 20th, 2016

Nobody should be surprised that Turkey’s President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has instituted effective blasphemy laws to defend himself from criticism in Turkey. But many of us had assumed that these lèse-majesté laws would not yet be put in place inside Europe. At least not until David Cameron succeeds in his long-held ambition to bring Turkey fully into the EU. Yet here we are. Erdogan’s rule now already extends to Europe.

At the end of last month, during a late-night comedy programme, a young German comedian called Jan Böhmermann included a poem that was rude about Erdogan. Incidentally the point of Mr Böhmermann’s skit was to highlight the obscenity of Turkey already trying to censor satire in Germany.

What happened next happened in swift order. First of all the Turks complained to their German counterparts. Within a few days the programme had been pulled. A few more days and it was whitewashed out of existence altogether. In the meantime Mr Böhmermann himself was forced to go under police protection. The worst blow then came late last week when Chancellor Merkel allowed the prosecution of Mr Böhmermann to go ahead in Germany. Strangely enough, Chancellor Merkel is currently pretending that the trial of a German comedian in Germany for insulting a foreign despot is a liberal act. Don’t we all understand, she asks, that the courts will decide? Well no – the very possibility of putting someone on trial for being rude about Erdogan is as illiberal or rather anti-liberal as these things come. It will be hardly more of a relief if he is found ‘not guilty’ than if he is found ‘guilty’. The fact such a trial could even be contemplated demonstrates that Germany is becoming little more than a satrapy of Erdogan’s.

Well I’m a free-born British man, and we don’t live under the blasphemy laws of such despots. So in honour of this fact I have spent the weekend writing rude limericks about Mr Erdogan. And I would hereby like to invite all readers to join me in a grand Erdogan limerick competition. That isn’t to say that entries which come in the form of Iambic pentameters, or heroic couplets will be completely discounted. I think a work in the Homeric mode, for example, about the smallness of Erdogan’s manhood could (if suitably disgusting) stand some chance of winning. But I recommend limericks because almost everything insulting that is worth saying can usually be included within the five lines of that beautiful and delicate form.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

EDWARD CLINE: DEATH CULTS IN THE CULTURE

Posted By on April 20th, 2016

There is a growing obsession with death in what passes today for our culture. This would not be a disturbing trend were it simply a fringe phenomenon. But it is ubiquitous throughout the culture.

The first series I discuss here is “Dexter.” I have watched the whole series (seven seasons, from 2006 to 2013), but it was brought to my attention by Stephen Coughlin in his “Strategic Overview: Understanding the Threat & Strategic Incomprehension in the War on Terror,” p. 6, a synopsis of the salient points of Coughlin’s Catastrophic Failure: Blindfolding America in the Face of Jihad. Coughlin writes in “Strategic Overview”:

From Catastrophic Failure [p. 34], “The “Dexter Standard,” was written to highlight the ridiculousness of the constraints placed on counterterrorism efforts to understand the nature of the threat. It argues there should be no controversy regarding analysis of a self-declared enemy’s self-identified warfighting doctrine and explains this through reference to the Showtime series Dexter. In the fall 2011 season, the plot revolved around a serial killer who acts in furtherance of an idiosyncratic End-Times scenario based on the New Testament’s Book of Revelation. Upon recognizing this, inspectors used Revelation as an essential analytical tool. The necessity of using Revelation was never questioned even as some inspectors were either nominally religious or non-believers. No one suggested that only Christian inspectors were qualified to investigate.

(I review in part Coughlin’s book in “Interfaith Bridges to Islam” on Rule of Reason.)

“Dexter” is Dexter Morgan, a forensic specialist in blood spatter analysis working for a fictive Miami police department. On the surface he is a calm, likeable fellow and gets along with most of his police colleagues. But, in secret, he is a serial killer. In fact, he is a homicidal maniac. He is a kind of vigilante who kills serial killers, and causes them to vanish. The bodies of his victims, each of whom is responsible for horrendous crimes and is ritually murdered by Dexter, are wrapped in plastic and dumped into the ocean. The problem with this, at least with me, is that once the serial killers have been “stopped,” no one knows what has happened to them and whether or not they are still at large and will strike again after a puzzling hiatus. Early in the series some of the bodies are discovered by a diving class. The unknown killer is instantly dubbed “The Bay Harbor Butcher.”

Their crimes are rarely solved by the police. The public is left in the dark about the status or demise of the killers. The police are left with big question marks. Dexter chooses not to enlighten them. He continues to analyze crime scenes and eliminate the serial killers.

My second problem with the series is that Dexter admits that he is homicidal. He likes killing killers. But his killing is done within the parameters of a “code” established by his father, a former (and now dead) policeman. This figure appears occasionally in flashbacks as a real character in the series, but mostly as a ghostly embodiment of a “conscience” with whom Dexter has an ongoing internal dialogue. This device is in addition to the intermittent voice-over narrative of Dexter.

Dexter confesses to an overwhelming urge to kill. He began as a child with animals and graduated to killing men (and some women, particularly the nurse who allegedly poisoned his ill father). It is something he says he cannot control. He is only at peace when he has killed someone. His father taught him everything he knows about tracking killers, capturing them, and finally dispatching them without leaving a single trace of himself or of the victim behind. He adheres to the “code” but sometimes questions his father’s wisdom, and sometimes his ghostly father questions his adopted son’s contemplated actions.

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Erdogan: The World’s Most Insulted President by Burak Bekdil

Posted By on April 20th, 2016

Since Erdogan was elected president in August 2014 he has sued at least 1,845 Turks for insulting him. Now his judicial challenges have been exported to Europe.

Angela Merkel’s decision to allow Böhmermann’s prosecution hardly complies with the European culture of civil liberties.

“[N]ow the Turkish journalists and artists will even suffer more.” — Rebecca Harms, co-chair of the Group of the Greens/European Free Alliance at the European Parliament.

The trouble is, the more Erdogan realizes that his blackmailing works the more willing he will be to export his poor democratic culture into Europe. Merkel has set the wrong precedent and given the prickly sultan what he wants.

The always angry Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Turkey’s president, should have a moment of peace and wonder why is he probably the world’s most insulted president.

Since Erdogan was elected president in August 2014 he has sued at least 1,845 people for insulting him.

Now his judicial challenges have been exported to Europe.

An obscure German law, dating back to 1871, was used to silence Iranian dissidents critical of Iran’s Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlavi and Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet in the 1960s and 1970s. Now Erdogan has become the third foreign leader taking advantage of that law after a popular German comic satirized him in crude terms.

The law allows prosecution in Germany for insulting a foreign leader, but only with the consent of the government. German Chancellor Angela Merkel granted her consent for the prosecution of German comedian Jan Böhmermann, although she promised that the law allowing legal proceedings would be repealed in 2018.

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Turkey: Erdogan’s Thin-Skinned Government by Robbie Travers

Posted By on April 20th, 2016

Is there any other person you trust to decide which ideas and speech you are entitled to hear — or which are too dangerous for you to hear?

The thin-skinned government of Turkey’s President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, has in the past two years opened at least 1,845 cases over insults to the president.

Turkey’s World Press Freedom Index ranking has plummeted to 149 out of 180, below Zimbabwe (131) and Burundi (145).

Despite the ruling of Turkey’s judicial system that Erdogan could not eliminate access to Twitter, he nevertheless continues to advance his agenda of censorship. He pledges to “eradicate Twitter” which, according to him, encourages “blasphemy and criticism of the Turkish government.”

Is there any other person you trust to decide which ideas and speech you are entitled to hear — or which are too dangerous for you to hear?

Is there any other person you think should have the ability to decide what criticism of the Government is respectful enough?

Would you cede your autonomy to decide what you to hear to a Government? Probably not.

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Michael Galak The Veiled Fate of Europe

Posted By on April 20th, 2016

Police, ambulance and fire brigades are not game to enter Islamicised enclaves in France, Germany, Belgium – just about everywhere, in fact, where welfare payments and crime underwrite the aggressive separatism of communities openly contemptuous of their Western benefactors.
Croissant pouvre is a French term for the suburbs least likely to be settled by the European middle classes. Translated literally, it means ‘poor crescent’. This description has nothing to do with the perennial breakfast favourite — it is a word-play on the origin and favoured symbol of the majority of residents in these suburbs. Paris, Brussels, Copenhagen, Stockholm, Berlin – most large European cities have these ‘no-go’ areas, which also have another description – ‘zones sans-droit’: zones without law. Simply put, the law of the land does not apply. Instead, Sharia is firmly in control. France has about 30 zones sans-droit, all of which share three three characteristics.

all are largely populated by the unemployed, unemployable and un-integrated Muslim migrants from Africa and the Middle East and their descendants;
all are blighted by organised crime, with the narcotics trade, associated violence and prostitution dominate the civic landscape;
all have connections with, and supply, the recruits for jihadi activities overseas and terrorism at home, being a shelter, safe haven and breeding ground for organised crime and politically motivated terror.

The previous non-migrant, non-Muslim residents have mostly been squeezed out by threats, implied or real violence, intimidation, crime and plummeting property values. With few exceptions, shops operated by Jewish or Christian owners had closed their doors by 2013. Non-Muslim women, not wearing street clothes in accordance with the Sharia law, are routinely and openly accosted, insulted and manhandled by the self-proclaimed Sharia patrols or Islamic purity enthusiasts. The generous social security benefits paid to the residents of these suburbs are regarded as Jizziya – a head tax on dhimmis. These benefits are treated as an entitlement. This approach helps resolve the theological conundrum, which states that Muslims should not live in lands ruled by non-Muslims. Being paid Jizziya establishes the hierarchy of primacy and subjugation, justifies the contempt and disregard towards local laws and customs and supports the notion that the present situation is a transition towards full control.

POLITICS Comments turned off

Clinton’s Negative Majority She’s getting more unpopular the longer the campaign goes on.

Posted By on April 20th, 2016

Hillary Clinton won New York’s primary Tuesday, which means that barring an act of God or FBI director Jim Comey—they aren’t the same—she will be the Democratic nominee for President. So Democrats should be alarmed by the former first lady’s rising unpopularity.

The latest evidence comes in the new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll taken April 10-14. A regular feature of this survey asks voters about their “feelings toward” certain individuals or institutions—whether they are very positive, somewhat positive, neutral, somewhat negative or very negative. In April the poll found Mrs. Clinton hitting a dubious new record of 56% who have somewhat or very negative feelings toward her. Only 32% have a positive view.
ENLARGE

Opinion Journal Video

Editorial Page Editor Paul Gigot analyzes the latest WSJ / NBC News Poll on the New York state presidential primary. Photo credit: Getty Images.

As striking is the negative trend over the last three years. In Jan. 2013, not long after she left President Obama’s cabinet, her net negative was 25%. As the nearby chart shows, her unpopularity has since climbed with only occasional exceptions. She broke through negative 40% in the middle of last year, and she hit negative 50% in February. In April a remarkable 42% had a very negative view of the woman Democrats are counting on to hold the White House. CONTINUE AT SITE

POLITICS Comments turned off

Trump Avoids Being Obnoxious Boor in NY Victory Speech, Makes Headlines By Stephen Kruiser

Posted By on April 20th, 2016

#MakeAmericaGRATEAgain.

Donald Trump’s victory speech lacked a popular fixture of most of his boisterous campaign rallies–pejorative nicknames for his rivals.

The GOP front-runner, fresh off a victory in New York’s primary, traded in “Lyin’ Ted” for the more cordial “Senator Cruz.” He also referred to John Kasich with his “governor” honorific, despite having repeatedly chiding him in the campaign for sticking around in the race while he’s mathematically eliminated from winning the nomination before a contested convention.

But he still trumpeted his huge victory over both rivals.

“As you know, we’ve won millions of more votes than Sen. Cruz, millions and millions of more votes than Gov. Kasich,” Trump said at his victory rally at his Trump Tower in New York.

“We expect we are going to have an amazing number of weeks because these are places [with future primaries], they are in trouble.”

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Under Merkel, Germany Reverting to Its Fascist Roots By Michael Walsh

Posted By on April 20th, 2016

After the war, the new Federal Republic went to great lengths to make sure public campaigns of vilification against defenseless minorities would be difficult-to-illegal. But what began as a measure to protect the Jews has now morphed into a mechanism to defend Islamic supremacy:

One of the founders of the German anti-immigration group PEGIDA went on trial Tuesday, charged with incitement over Facebook posts in which he allegedly called foreigners “cattle” and “trash.”

Lutz Bachmann’s trial at the district court in the eastern city of Dresden is scheduled to last until May 10. Incitement can carry a prison sentence of up to five years. Bachmann is accused of trying to incite Germans against refugees with the social media posts in September 2014.

Bachmann expressed regret shortly after the postings – and photos of him posing as Adolf Hitler – surfaced. He described them as “ill-considered comments that I wouldn’t make in this way today” and apologized for harming PEGIDA. Bachmann has denied the charges, saying the trial is “purely politically motivated” and meant to discredit him and the group. His lawyer, Katja Reichel, rejected the charges in court Tuesday, saying he didn’t write the postings attributed to him.