Displaying posts published in

July 2024

Open Borders Subject Women and Girls in the US to Rapes and Wanton Violence How the Left spawns femicidal terror. by Betsy McCaughey

https://www.frontpagemag.com/open-borders-subject-women-and-girls-in-the-us-to-rapes-and-wanton-violence/

The United Nations calls it “femicide,” the wanton assault, rape and murder of girls and women. It’s a cultural epidemic in Latin America.

Femicide is visible every step of the way from South America and the Northern Triangle countries to the Mexico-U.S. border. Rape trees, where women’s panties hang from branches, and rape tents, where girls and women are dragged by smugglers, dot the route. Do you think the rapes stop when illegals cross into the U.S.? No.

Now women are being victimized by migrants bringing femicide to your neighborhood. Where are the women’s rights groups? Silent. They couldn’t care less. It’s politically incorrect to criticize Latin American culture — even its tolerance for violence against females.

Last week in Queens, an Ecuadoran illegal, Christian Geovanny Inga-Landi, allegedly attacked a 13-year-old girl walking home from school, held her at knife-point and raped her, recording the assault for his own future pleasure as he proceeded.

Yet “Squad” member Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) laughed off news coverage of the crime as “fear-mongering.”

Inga-Landi has a history of abusing females, including beating his pregnant wife, according to police reports. He crossed the border illegally in 2021 and was ordered to leave the country by a New York City immigration judge in Feb. 2022.

Anatomy of a Biden Disaster Who really is running America? by Victor Davis Hanson

https://www.frontpagemag.com/anatomy-of-a-biden-disaster/

There really was not a debate last Thursday night, merely a one-sided slugfest. The arguments over the issues, such as they were, were over in 30 minutes. The rest was unnecessary. In bullfighting terms, the end-stage tercio de muerte lasted an entire hour.

The back-and-forth invective was overshadowed by Biden thrashing about and the accompanying optics of a near comatose President of the United States.

One candidate was animated and alive; the other cognitively inert, despite apparently more than a week of rest and preparation and perhaps medications. No one believes Biden had a “cold,” given he seemed like the real Biden we’ve all seen over the last four years. He did not ever come out with a wild screaming fit as in his State of the Union address or the creepy Phantom of the Opera semi-fascist rant.

So, Biden was hoarse and almost impossible to understand. He slurred his words; his sentences were jumbled. Sometimes Biden closed his eyes during a brain freeze. Some of his repartee was unworldly, like beating Medicare or women raped by family members (including “sisters”?)

Most of the time, he simply looked down (were they notes?) for talking points, and then recited his prepped and formulaic canned replies, one … two … three….

Of course, some have pointed out that Trump could have been more detailed in his answers in the fashion De Santis dissected Newsom, but he was still vigorous—no notes, ad hoc, and did what he had to do in comparing his successful record to Biden’s failures. Trump stayed calm as Biden’s prepared slurs trailed off into never-never land.

Again, it took Trump about 10 minutes to explain his record on inflation, the border, taxes, foreign policy, and abortion.

And after that it was the story of an 82-year-old man forced to stand for an hour-and-a-half and in muddled efforts to remember all the things he was told to say and to follow the prompts on the rostrum.

No, Israel is not starving the people of Gaza It’s the latest piece of heinous propaganda used to denounce the Jewish State: Jake Wallis Simons

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/us/news/

This may come as some surprise, but only three per cent of the residents of Rafah, in Gaza, were poorly fed in May, according to the United Nations. In Khan Yunis and the central town of Deir al Balah, that figure stood at six per cent. The biggest challenges were faced by those who had failed to evacuate from the north at the start of the campaign. There, 13 per cent were found to be hungry. The overwhelming majority of Gazans had “acceptable” quantities of food.

Now consider the situation before Hamas brought catastrophe to Gaza. Despite billions of dollars of aid money pouring into the Strip, 14 per cent of the population faced hunger in 2022, according to a contemporaneous study by the World Food Programme. So it appears that provisions are better now than they were when Hamas was in charge.

Not that you’d know it from the reporting. In its analysis, the UN grudgingly concluded that it was “unable to endorse” the classification made by the likes of the head of the World Food Programme, who had claimed that Gaza had entered a “full-blown famine”. Was there an apology? Nope. The new line, spun by the UN and amplified by the BBC and fellow travellers, was that Gazans faced “catastrophic levels” of hunger.

Without wishing to minimise the deprivations of war, here was an object lesson in propaganda in the age of mass media. 

Step eagerly forward the Guardian, which on Tuesday published an article headlined “The starvation of Gaza is a perverse repudiation of Judaism’s values”. The author, John Oakes, is a radical American intellectual, whose authority appears to rest on his book about the history of fasting. Whether he knows anything about the conflict or Judaism, or has ever met anybody from Gaza, is unclear. According to his website, his second book will be about the nature of intelligence.

No auditory illusions about it : Ruthie Blum

https://www.jns.org/no-auditory-illusions-about-it/

The debate on Thursday evening between U.S. President Joe Biden and predecessor Donald Trump is a gift that keeps on giving. Every syllable spoken by the two presumptive nominees continues to be the focus of both serious and comedic discourse.

Only a handful of desperate straw-graspers are rejecting the consensus opinion that the incumbent’s performance revealed an unacceptable level of age-related brain fog. Even those of his ardent supporters in the media who’ve been telling us not to believe our lying eyes realized that the jig was up.

Fearing electoral defeat in November, especially to Trump, they instantly altered the narrative to one of sadness about the inescapable conclusion that Joe must go. Barack Obama’s feeble attempt at obfuscating the disaster—by posting on X, “Bad debate nights happen”—hasn’t made a dent in the Democrats’ scramble to persuade Biden to back out of the race and settle on a replacement.

And with good reason, from their standpoint. Indeed, Biden didn’t merely have a “bad debate night.” His whatever-stage dementia was on full display.

First Lady “Dr. Jill” hit home this reality particularly hard when, post-fiasco, she cheered in nursery-school-teacher singsong to her husband: “You answered every question! You knew all the facts!”

Cringeworthy doesn’t begin to describe the scene. Nor does it do justice to the entire exchange between the two senior citizens, one a few years younger than the other, but with all his faculties, as farcical as they often seem.

Who Should Get To ‘Finish The Job’? The Answer Was Clear Before The Debate

https://issuesinsights.com/2024/07/01/who-should-voters-let-finish-the-job-biden-or-trump/

Aside from repeatedly calling Donald Trump a liar, the only message President Joe Biden managed to convey during last week’s debate was that Trump left him a terrible mess to clean up.

The first words out of his mouth in the debate were: “You have to take a look at what I was left when I became president, what Mr. Trump left me. We had an economy that was in freefall.”

And his closing remarks began: “We’ve made significant progress from the debacle that was left by President Trump in his – in his last term.”

It’s clear why Biden’s debate prep team wanted those to be the first thing he said — before he wandered off into a maze of half-completed sentences. The Biden administration has seen the polls. It knows that the public doesn’t view things this way.

CBS News, for example, reported recently that: “Voters recall the economy under Trump more fondly than they rate the economy now. While neither gets great marks, voters today look back on Trump’s presidency with relatively better retrospective ratings than they’d rate Mr. Biden’s presidency so far.”

So who’s right? Whose policies did a better job of spurring growth, raising wages, keeping the country safe?

There is, thankfully, an objective way to answer this. Compare where things stood at comparable points in each presidency to see who was doing a better job – and whose policies are worth pursuing over the next four years.