RUTHFULLY YOURS

Belgian police have concluded an investigation into a vicious anti-Semitic assault at a cafe in Brussels, in which a European Union official physically attacked a female co-worker, while verbally abusing her as a “dirty Jewess.”

The assault, in full view of other restaurant patrons, occurred on the patio of the “Italiano” cafe near European Union headquarters in the city, Haaretz reports.

A 50-year old Italian woman – a department head at the European Council – saw a man at the cafe holding a metal plaque engraved with “Mussolini” and praising the World War II-era Italian fascist leader.

She apparently infuriated the man by informing him that “he [Mussolini] was still a dictator,” to which the man replied: “Dirty Jewess … Hitler should have exterminated all Jews, just like Jews today are exterminating Palestinians.”

When Israeli Jews are murdered, often barbarically, nearly all European and American media blame Israel and find excuses for the killers.

Forgotten is that the “Palestinian people” and the “Palestinian cause” are a mythic narrative invented by the KGB and Nasser’s secret service propaganda machine in the 1960s.

Hamas has an even more genocidal goal: the destruction of Israel and all Jews. For many journalists, that is also a detail not worth mentioning.

The Iranian regime claims non-stop that its main objective is the elimination of Israel and Israeli Jews. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has just published a book, Palestine, detailing his plans to destroy Israel. For most commentators, the book is of no relevance. It does not matter. Leaders of Western countries adopt the same view.

What is at stake in enriching Iran and arming it with nuclear capability is more than the fate of Israel and Israeli Jews: it is also the fate of America — even if it does not wish to realize that goal yet –as well as values of Western civilization.

SEPTEMBER 2, 1945: General Douglas MacArthur presides over the formal surrender of Japan aboard the battleship USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay, a ceremony which brought an end to nearly four years of war. After a steady drumbeat of costly victories in the Pacific campaign, by the summer of 1945 the Japanese empire’s military might was largely smashed on sea and in the air, and American forces had captured Okinawa, from which a massive invasion of the Japanese home islands was to be launched. But the Japanese high command held fast, determined to preserve the power of the monarchy and defend the home islands at all costs. It was only with the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki that Emperor Hirohito assented to the term of the Potsdam Declaration to end the war. MacArthur would serve as Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers during the occupation of Japan.

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/slideshows/today-history-3

The ongoing migration crisis in Europe, with its drownings and other deaths, is forcing Europe’s post-borders elites into an uncomfortable position. Because they preside over polities that are still somewhat democratic — and the peoples of Europe do not choose to commit national suicide — governments there can’t abolish immigration limits altogether, much as they might want to. At the same time, Europe’s rulers are unwilling to take the steps needed to enforce the limits nominally on the books.

The result is hundreds of thousands of people from less happier lands calculating that it’s worth the relatively small risk of death to make it to Europe, where they will almost certainly be permitted to stay, whether they’re formally awarded refugee status or not.

Given the Middle East’s disintegration and sub-Saharan Africa’s general dysfunction, this means that Europe is at the mercy of the countries to its immediate south. So long as Qaddafi kept order in Libya and Turkey was willing to contain most of the Middle Easterners trying to pass through, a spineless Europe could maintain the façade of immigration limits. There was a lot of immigration even then, but the heat rose slowly enough that the frog, while increasingly restless, had not yet been induced to jump out of the pot.

Black lives matter — unless, apparently, you’re Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. The left is renewing its venomous, racist attacks on Thomas in the aftermath of his dissent in the Supreme Court’s 6-3 ruling in favor of gay marriage.

Actor George Takei smeared Thomas as a “clown in blackface.” The Huffington Post called his dissent “beyond ridiculous” and tarred him as a hypocrite for opposing a court-created “right” to gay marriage:

“Clarence Thomas is married to a white woman — something that would be illegal today, if it weren’t for the Supreme Court’s historic Loving v. Virginia ruling.” As if his personal life is fair game.

Last Friday, in another low blow, New York Times reporter Adam Liptak portrayed Thomas as a lightweight whose opinions are cut-and-paste jobs from briefs submitted to the court.

But in truth, all the justices refer liberally to briefs. Thomas borrows about 11.3 percent of his judicial prose from briefs, but Justice Sonia Sotomayor lifts 11 percent and Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg 10.5 percent. It’s not “cribbing” or plagiarism, as Liptak’s hatchet job implies, but simply the way decisions are written.

In fact, Thomas appears to be the most productive justice, having written 37 opinions this past term, more than any other justice. That fact’s enough to dispense with New Yorker writer Jeffrey Toobin’s bogus claim that Thomas has “checked out” and “is simply not doing his job.”

If the 2016 presidential election ends up a contest between 1992’s surnames — Bush vs. Clinton — we will have failed in some way as a republic.

The case for Jeb Bush is not exactly clear, though he enjoys an advantage vis-à-vis Mrs. Clinton in that the case against Herself is as clear as can be: She’s inept and dishonest.

Bush was a good governor of Florida — a long time ago, politically speaking. Things were different then: His time as governor coincided with a real-estate bubble that relieved him and other Florida leaders of the need to make a great many pressing financial decisions, and larger decisions about the structure of government.

Has Hillary Clinton been lying about her email system and did she violate the laws against mishandling classified material? Coverage of Clinton’s email scandal has been focused on those questions, but shouldn’t we be paying more attention to the nature and scale of the damage to American national security caused by Hillary’s carelessness with classified information? We’re not focused on the details of the security damage because it’s difficult to know whether and to what extent Hillary’s communications were intercepted, and more difficult still to make public whatever our intelligence agencies may have figured out on that score.

But maybe we already know enough to conclude that Hillary’s email scandal constitutes one of the most serious American national security disasters on record. The Daily Beast has a story out speculating that the email scandal may soon spread to the White House. Interesting as that question is, this passage seems more significant:

“There’s a widely held belief among American counterspies that foreign intelligence agencies had to be reading the emails on Hillary’s private server, particularly since it was wholly unencrypted for months….senior counterintelligence officials are assuming the worst about what the Russians and Chinese know.”

Hillary Clinton’s second race for the presidency is only about a quarter through, but she already seems to be causing general fatigue.

The lurid revelations about the Clinton Foundation proved that it was not so much a charity as a huge laundering operation. Quid pro quo donations from the global rich and powerful fueled the Clintons’ jet-setting networking.

In between political campaigns, the foundation provided sinecures for out-of-work Clinton politicos. This is hardly proof of Hillary’s grass-roots progressivism.

Then came Clinton’s e-mail fiasco. No one knows how the current investigation of her alleged misuse of e-mail accounts, servers, and classified information will end up. But most people accept that it was an unnecessary and self-induced scandal, brought on both by her paranoia and habitual expectation of being exempt from the law.

The overlooked source of the nation’s illegal immigration problems that people are finally talking about.

On August 31, 2015 Reuters reported on Governor Christie’s August 31, 2015 statement that if elected president, he would engage Fed-Ex to track illegal aliens to make certain that aliens who violate their terms of admission are located. The title of the Reuter’s article was, “Christie defends plan to monitor immigrants like FedEx tracks parcels.” The article began with the following excerpt:

Republican presidential candidate Chris Christie pushed back on Sunday against “ridiculous” criticism of his proposal to track foreign visitors the way FedEx Corp tracks packages, saying government needs private-sector expertise to tackle illegal immigration.

“I don’t mean people are packages, so let’s not be ridiculous,” the New Jersey governor told an interviewer on Fox News Sunday who pointed out that foreigners do not have labels on their wrists.

The notion that the private sector is intrinsically better than the government is wrong. As you will shortly see, more than ten years ago, a private corporation, Accenture, was given the contract to implement such a tracking system.

Governor Christie is certainly right that we must be able to find aliens who go missing in the United States. He is also absolutely correct that people are not packages. People who ship packages want those packages to get to their customers; customers want their packages to be delivered. Finally, packages are incapable of moving on their own. Packages do not hide or use false aliases or bogus addresses.

Democratic Senator Barbara Mikulski of Maryland has pushed President Obama’s nuclear appeasement deal with Iran over the top. With her decision to vote in favor of the deal, Obama now has the support of the 34 senators he needs to uphold his expected veto of a congressional resolution of disapproval. If enough craven Democrats back a planned filibuster to prevent a vote on the floor of the Senate, Obama will not even have to use his veto pen.

The nightmare of a financially secure nuclear armed Iran, legitimized by the Obama administration and its international partners, is about to envelop us.

Ironically, Obama warned in a speech he delivered on September 1st in Alaska that a potentially bleak future could lie ahead, in which “there’s not going to be a nation on this Earth that’s not impacted negatively.”