Displaying the most recent of 91920 posts written by

Ruth King

Death Toll Climbs From Boko Haram Massacre in Nigeria Residents of northeastern town describe horrors of attack, even as many around the country, inured to frequent terror strikes, focus on economic woes By Gbenga Akingbule

ABUJA, Nigeria—The death toll climbed from Boko Haram’s Saturday night rampage through a refugee camp in northeast Nigeria, as residents buried bodies and terrified survivors ferried wounded to nearby towns for treatment and refuge from another assault.

Government authorities on Monday said the number of dead in the town of Dalori had risen to 65. Another 136 wounded were taken to local hospitals, said Sani Gatti, spokesman for the National Emergency Management Agency.

The attack, which targeted those fleeing Boko Haram’s violence, was a gruesome reminder of how indiscriminately violent the Islamist insurgency has become in the two years since vigilantes helped push the jihadists from urban centers like Dalori, a suburb of Maiduguri, the largest city in northeast Nigeria. Witnesses described the militants burning down houses as children screamed inside.

Aisami Modu, a local resident who lost his wife and daughter in the attack, which involved suicide bombers and gunmen on motorcycles, said authorities recovered the remains of his 6-year-old daughter, which he immediately buried in accordance with Islamic rites.

“My daughter was found burned to death today.…I have lost my wife,” Mr. Modu said over the phone from Maiduguri, where he fled with other survivors.

Baba Kaka, a 45-year-old fish trader, escaped to join his wife and two daughters, who were attending a wedding in Maiduguri. “I was just running toward the outskirts of the town while gunshots cracked in the air. Before the military came to our rescue, I thought I would be killed.”

Saudi Court Overturns Death Sentence Against Palestinian Poet Ashraf Fayadh, convicted of apostasy, is sentenced to eight years in prison and 800 lashes instead By Ahmed Al Omran

RIYADH—A Saudi court on Tuesday overturned a death sentence against a Palestinian poet convicted of apostasy and imposed an eight-year prison term and 800 lashes instead.

A court in the southwestern city of Abha also ordered the poet, Ashraf Fayadh, to repent and renounce his poetry on official state media, his lawyer Abdulrahman al-Lahim said.

Mr. Lahim said his client, 35 years old, was innocent of the charges against him and would appeal the latest sentence. He also said he had asked the court to release Mr. Fayadh from jail on bail, pending the outcome of his appeal.

This was the latest Saudi freedom-of-expression case in recent months to be met with a harsh sentence. It has become a flashpoint for criticism from international free-speech and human-rights groups, which have called on the Gulf kingdom to free Mr. Fayadh since his detention in January 2014.

A Mosque as Extremist Megaphone Even in leading Islamic institutions like Al Aqsa in Jerusalem, praising Islamist radicalism is common.y Steven Stalinsky

President Obama on Wednesday will visit a U.S. mosque for the first time in his presidency. According to the White House, during this visit he will “celebrate the contributions Muslim Americans make to our nation and reaffirm the importance of religious freedom to our way of life.” Over the past two years, in the president’s efforts to counter violent extremism, he has emphasized the responsibility of Muslim “scholars and clerics” to help ensure that mosques are not used as a platform to preach Islamist extremism.

Such extremism isn’t limited to out-of-the-way mosques where radical clerics operate in the shadows. It is occurring in mainstream and leading mosques world-wide, including at one of the most important religious institutions in Islam, the Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem.

Consider a Jan. 16 sermon at Al Aqsa by Sheikh Abu Taqi Al-Din Al-Dari, a Palestinian cleric who called for jihad against the West and Europe, and for the burgeoning Islamic State to “conquer Rome, Washington and Paris.”

Behind Hillary’s Iowa Scare The state’s Democrats are significantly more liberal than they were when she ran in 2008.By William A. Galston

Hillary Clinton’s third-place finish in the 2008 Iowa caucuses upended her candidacy. By contrast, she scored a narrow victory Monday night. Beyond her having a much-improved campaign organization, what changed over those eight years, and what does it teach us about the current state of the Democratic Party?

Let’s begin with what didn’t change. Mrs. Clinton did better among women than men in both contests. She did 24 points better among Democrats than independents in 2008 against Barack Obama, and 30 points better among Democrats this year. She lost to Mr. Obama by 16 points among caucusgoers who regarded themselves as “very liberal”—and to Bernie Sanders by 19 points. She trailed Mr. Obama by 12 points among first-time caucus attendees, a group she lost to Sen. Sanders by 18 points.

And in both races she did much better among middle-aged and elderly voters. In 2008 she lost voters 17-29 years of age by 46 points, and those in the 30-44 bracket by 19 points. She ran even with Mr. Obama among voters 45 to 64 years old and trounced him by 27 points among voters 65 years and older. This time around she trailed Mr. Sanders among young adults by 70 points and by 21 points among voters 30-44. She did better among voters 45-64 than she did eight years ago, racking up a 23-point edge. And she garnered 69% of the elderly vote compared with just 26% for Mr. Sanders.

Rubio’s Rise Amid Trump’s Slump The Donald’s loss was more significant than Ted Cruz’s win as the GOP’s political world finally starts to make sense.By Jason L. Riley

So, it turns out that you can’t call Iowa voters “stupid,” skip a debate in Des Moines because you don’t like the moderators and still expect to prevail in the state’s caucuses. Who knew?

Donald Trump’s loss Monday night, which is far more consequential than Ted Cruz’s victory, could mean a return to Republican normalcy in an election year that has been almost freakish. Mr. Trump’s poll numbers have soared above his rivals’ for months—the Real Clear Politics average puts him at nearly 36%, while none of the other GOP candidates is above 20%—yet he lost handily in the state where the first votes were cast.

Thanks to the voters of Iowa, conservatives awoke Tuesday morning to a political world that made sense again for the first time since Mr. Trump’s rise began last summer. They learned that bluster and incivility have not become political virtues. Well-attended rallies are no substitute for traditional campaigning. Sarah Palin is no GOP kingmaker. And religious conservatives—real ones in the mold of Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum—still win the Iowa caucuses. Hawkeye voters find Mr. Trump entertaining but not very presidential. Many Republicans haven’t made up their minds, and among those tasked with casting the first votes, Donald Trump ranked closer to the third-place candidate, Marco Rubio, than the winner.

Sergeant Schultz at your service! Deaf to your screams, blind to your suffering, and mute on policy! Edward Cline

Sergeant Schultz Knows Everything

“I know nothing!”

That was Sergeant Hans Schultz’s favorite and well-known refrain in Hogan’s Heroes, which ran on CBS from 1965 to 1971. In the linked clip, he adds, “I was not here! I did not even get up this morning!”

Suppose you had a chance to chat with the real-life Sgt. Schultz’s in Germany, Sweden, Norway, Denmark. The “interfaith” dialogue would go something like this, after you’ve reported a crime committed by a Muslim.

Sgt. Schultz will claim that he knows everything, he was there, and that you should go back to sleep and pretend nothing ever happened. You were not raped by a Muslim or a gang of Muslims. You did not have your head kicked in by a gang of Muslims. You were not robbed by a Muslim. Or stabbed, or groped, or spit on by a Muslim on a train or on the street. Or even raped and then disfigured by a Muslim. Or by a “refugee,” or by an “immigrant.”

All right, Sgt. Schultz would concede. All or one of those things happened to you. There’s no denying the facts, is there? But if you fought back, and used illegal means such as pepper spray to deter your assailant, then you must be punished. Your fighting back is evidence of bigotry, or racism, of being anti-Muslim or anti-Islam or anti-immigrant. Of your lack of patriotism! Those states of mind are illegal, as well, and must be corrected.

You must allow yourself to be raped, robbed, and spit on. It’s your duty to submit to the diktats of Islam. You must submit to Sharia. Horridly primitive system, yes. But, who are we to judge? You may not survive the experience, but it’s an issue of sacrifice. Of self-sacrifice for the greater good. For the nation. Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Germany, even Italy – all of our lily-white societies, have a duty to be invaded and assaulted by Muslims and others. We have a duty to relieve the suffering they endured in the countries from which they came. We have no right to assert that our morals and our society are superior to the cultures of the immigrants. We have no right to impose them on immigrants, even here. That is the height of cultural hubris and civilizational imperialism. Okay, so the perpetrator was Somalian. And he hates whites, even though Sweden was not a party to the downfall of Somalia. Or Ethiopia. I’m a little foggy on the history of that part of the world. So what?

Iowa Strengthens Republicans, Weakens Democrats Bad news for the Left and good news for the GOP. Daniel Greenfield

Iowa taught two hard election lessons tonight. You can’t win without organization and you can’t win without enthusiasm.

Hillary Clinton came into Iowa with all the organization in the world, but none of the enthusiasm. It will take time to determine whether she managed to eke out a tiny victory against a senescent Socialist, but her shrill speech and deranged expression, eyes wild, draped in blood-red, were not those of a winner.

Bernie Sanders had poor organization, but plenty of enthusiasm. And that paid off. 43% of Iowa caucus goers identified as Socialists and 53% as politically correct. No matter how far to the left Hillary rushed, she couldn’t narrow that enthusiasm gap because she is fundamentally inauthentic.

Organization may have bought her a narrow win. Maybe. But it can’t buy her enthusiasm. And that will be a big problem for her in a general election.

On the Republican side of the dial, enthusiasm without organization also proved to be a disaster. Trump’s campaign had plenty of enthusiasm and was ahead in the polls, but it lacked the organization to capitalize on the enthusiasm and all the free publicity. Rubio had some organization and enthusiasm and came in third. Ted Cruz had the best combination of organization and enthusiasm and came in first.

U of Kentucky Offers ‘Taco Literacy’ Course Taco-identity politics! By Katherine Timpf

The University of Kentucky is offering a course titled “Taco Literacy: Public Advocacy and Mexican Food in the U.S. South ” where students will examine the social and racial issues surrounding tacos.

Or, as the course’s website puts it, “how food literacies situate different spaces, identities, and forms of knowledge.”

“This class allows our students to explore the issues of immigration, inequality, workers, intercultural communication, and literacy through the prism of food,” the course’s professor, Steven Alvarez, told Vice.

This existence of such a course isn’t surprising; tacos are a very controversial subject these days — and plenty of people have gotten into trouble for handling the (apparently) sensitive issue in an (apparently) insensitive way.

A few examples:

In 2013, Northwestern University’s Hispanic/Latino Alliance wrote a letter warning students not to eat tacos on Cinco de Mayo because that could make some students feel “unsafe.”

In 2014, California State University – Fullerton’s chapter of Alpha Delta Pi sorority faced “serious sanctions” from the school for hosting a Taco Tuesday event where students wore sombreros because that’s “culturally insensitive attire.”

Op-Ed: “Europe, learn from Israel!”: Exclusive interview with Ayaan Hirsi Ali Bravery is too mild a term for Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Giulio Meotti, himself a fighter for truth, talks to her about reforming Islam.

When Theo van Gogh was murdered by an Islamist on a street in Amsterdam, Ayaan Hirsi Ali could not even attend the funeral because she would have put the lives of others at risk. So the Dutch intelligence agreed to take her to the morgue. The next day, bodyguards accompanied her from her home and gave her three hours to pack and leave. From there she went to the air base at Valkenburg, near The Hague, where she would be embark on a plane. The portholes were closed, they told her not to approach them nor go near the door. The plane was full of soldiers. Hirsi Ali was leaving a country at war. They landed at a military base in Maine, in the United States. This is how the love affair between America and the first refugee from Western Europe since the Holocaust began. A story that continues to this very day.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is still a shadow. But her voice at the telephone is clear, tough, cool. It is that of a young Somali woman who has undergone genital mutilation, who has lived in Saudi Arabia, Ethiopia, Kenya, before being betrothed to a Canadian cousin she had never seen before. Hirsi Ali escaped from Germany to the Netherlands.

She worked as an interpreter in the Islamic Dutch ghettos, she graduated, became a Liberal MP, helped Van Gogh to make the film “Submission” and then disappeared. Now she talks with me about Europe from her think tank, the American Enterprise Institute. Hirsi Ali recently released her third book on Islam, “Heretic”, an optimistic book on the reform of Islam.

The Case Against Imposing Middle Class Values Robert Weissberg

A strange debate over policing is currently occurring in many large cities. On one side are defenders of “broken windows” policing—cracking down on “little things” like public urination, aggressive panhandling, graffiti, sleeping in doorways and multiple similar offenses which will ultimately reduce more serious offenses. Specifically, a would-be armed robber feels free to commit his crime when he sees a neighborhood rife with vandalism, garbage on the street etc. Moreover, arresting those who don’t pay their bus or subway fares or otherwise commit minor crimes helps apprehend miscreants wanted for more serious offenses.

Nevertheless, crime reduction successes aside, there is growing pressure to roll back broken windows, especially in poor black and Hispanic neighborhoods. In some instances the call is for less aggressive policing—cops should just ignore sleeping drunks in doorways and reduce “stop and frisk.” In New York City, however, the anti-broken windows sentiment focuses on the laws themselves. The police currently ignore those possessing 25 grams or less of marijuana. And further reductions are in the works as the City Council debates downgrading several “quality of life” laws, notably public urination, excessive noise and littering, into civil, not criminal offenses and with reduced penalties.

One argument against aggressive enforcement is that it over-burdens the courts while multiplying potentially troubling resident/police encounters. But more pressing is that “nuisance” law enforcement disproportionally penalizes blacks and Hispanics. After all, few rich whites deal pot in public parks or jump subway turnstiles. In a sense, enforcing broken windows policing is part of a larger effort to equalize an allegedly racially unfair judicial system, for example, reducing the stiff penalties for crack cocaine (favored by African Americans) versus lighter punishment for the powdered cocaine used by whites.

Why would anybody prefer a disorderly environment that breeds more serious criminal behavior? Who wants to stroll through a park filled with small-time drug dealers, snoozing drunks and confrontational beggars?

Let me suggest an awkward, almost unspeakable answer to this question: “quality of life” standards differ across American society and an insufferable public nuisance for some is tolerable for others. Arguing about broken windows is part of our ongoing culture war debate. In particular, critics of broken windows insist that the policy, as currently applied, rests on white middle-class values and they are correct. One only has to observe life in cities populated by large numbers of underclass African Americans, e.g., Detroit, Newark, and East St. Louis among others. Here there is no clamor for broken windows policing and it almost seems that resident want to live in an environment filled with low-level crime, graffiti, open drug dealing and all the rest targeted by broken windows policing. Conversely, enforcing broken windows is irrelevant in upscale largely white communities like Scarsdale NY.