RUTHFULLY YOURS

Mathias Döpfner is one of Europe’s staunchest defenders of Israel who describes himself as a “non-Jewish Zionist” In his words:” “Israel and Europe should have an understanding of absolutely common interests in the defense of democracy and the values of the free Western world. Israel is the bridgehead of democracy in the Middle East. So it is in the interests of Europe to support it and to strengthen it. We share the same cultural roots and we share the same security interests and foreign policy interests. Let’s bring it closer together.” rsk

BERLIN—Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s efforts to silence what his lawyers have called libelous mockery of his person in Germany suffered a blow on Tuesday when a court rebuffed a complaint he had filed against a prominent German media executive.

The higher court of Cologne ruled on appeal that Mathias Döpfner, chairman and chief executive of media group Axel Springer SE, expressed an opinion when defending a comedian’s vitriolic text about the president. This opinion, it said, was protected by freedom of expression.

The decision, which confirmed a judgment in first instance, marked a win for critics of the Turkish president and advocates of press freedom, who had accused Mr. Erdogan of seeking to extend a domestic crackdown on critics to other countries.

“The decision shows that the state of law functions in Germany,” said Frank Überall, chairman of the German Federation of Journalists DJV. “Maybe the Turkish president Erdogan will now concentrate again on a factual discourse rather than try and abuse of the German legal system to implement his crude censor fantasies.”

The decision is the latest episode in an unfolding dispute that originated in a poem that comedian Jan Böhmermann aired on a late-night comedy show at the end of March. The lengthy string of crude abuse aimed at the president was meant as an ironic response to Turkey’s prior criticism of another piece of satire and a self-avowed attempt to test the limits of free speech in Germany.

Mr. Döpfner, whose stables of publications include Germany’s mass-market Bild tabloid and the broadsheet Die Welt, had come out in defense of the comedian when it emerged that he was being sued by Mr. Erdogan for insulting the Turkish president. CONTINUE AT SITE

BRUSSELS—If the U.K. decides in Thursday’s referendum to leave the European Union, it would shake the continent to its political foundations. Even if it stays, the bloc may never be the same.

A decision to leave, which would be a first by a member nation, would deepen the crisis facing a continent already struggling with economic weakness, debt problems, large-scale migration and growing geopolitical instability to its south and east.

At a minimum, politicians and officials say, a British exit would transform the bloc’s balance of power. Negotiations over a new relationship would consume the EU’s energy at a time when European institutions are struggling to respond to the other problems. A U.K. exit also could disrupt financial markets and fire up anti-EU forces in other countries.

Whether or not the U.K. leaves, change is coming. In February, U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron struck a deal with the rest of the EU to restrict migrant benefits and detach Britain from the bloc’s push for an “ever closer union.” Mr. Cameron’s effort to claw back power from Brussels, coupled with the referendum at home, is an approach that other European politicians are promising to follow, potentially fragmenting the bloc further.
Known Unknowns of ‘Brexit’

On June 23 the U.K. votes on whether to stay in or leave the European Union. It’s difficult to know exactly what will happen if voters choose leave, but that hasn’t stopped both sides of the debate predicting the future. So, here are three things we definitely don’t know about Brexit. Photo: Getty Images.

The referendum, at a minimum, has delivered a shock to Europe’s political classes, calling into question what some had once regarded as an inevitable march toward a federal EU.

“Obsessed with the idea of instant and total integration, we failed to notice that ordinary people, the citizens of Europe, do not share our Euro-enthusiasm,” European Council President Donald Tusk observed in a speech in late May. “The specter of a breakup is haunting Europe, and a vision of a federation doesn’t seem to me like the best answer to it.”

Some see the U.K. referendum, no matter the outcome, as an opportunity to move toward a new EU treaty with a two-tier structure—core countries that are more integrated and peripheral counties that aren’t. Former French President Nicolas Sarkozy, who is seeking a return to office in next year’s presidential elections, advocates reinforcing the eurozone with a finance minister and a European monetary fund. At the same time, he wants to maintain a broader EU, at 28 nations, which focuses on a few areas such as research, energy and agriculture. CONTINUE AT SITE

In a lengthy J-TV interview, former London mayor again refuses to apologize for his ‘historical facts,’ which are refuted by leading Holocaust scholars.— The former mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, has again refused to apologize for his remarks about Hitler and Zionism, insisting he was “misquoted” after a radio show in the UK in April.

But Livingstone, in an hour-long interview late last week with the Jewish cable channel J-TV, was put on the spot by the interlocutor, historian Dr. Alan Mendoza, who systematically took the Labour politician’s thesis apart, forcing him to admit he had a hazy grasp of facts and that his source, the left-wing journalist Lenni Brenner, had been selective in his interpretation.

In April, Livingstone, a close ally of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn and himself a former MP, was suspended from the Labour Party after going on a BBC radio station and declaring that Hitler had supported Zionism. Livingstone was asked on the show to defend the party after a number of Labour members were suspended for social media posts deemed anti-Semitic.

But Livingstone was ultimately suspended himself after declaring, “Let’s remember, when Hitler won his election in 1932, his policy then was that Jews should be moved to Israel. He was supporting Zionism – this before he went mad and ended up killing six million Jews.”

The fall-out from Livingstone’s inflammatory remarks led to extraordinary scenes in Westminster as the Labour MP John Mann, who is the chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group Against Antisemitism, challenged Livingstone outside TV studios and called him “a Nazi apologist.”

Ken Livingstone appears before a parliamentary inquiry into anti-Semitism in London on June 14, 2016 (screen capture: YouTube)

Last week Livingstone was called before the Commons Home Affairs Select Committee to give evidence. Insisting that he had been right and was only re-stating “historical fact,” Livingstone claimed that London Jews were crossing streets to tell him he was correct.

‘If I had said something that was untrue and caused offense, I would have apologized, but what I said was true’

“Salah [prayer] is not done by animals. Those who do not do salah are animals.” — Turkish Professor Mustafa Askar, School of Divinity, Ankara University.

Intimidation by Muslim extremists against those who do not follow a strict, Islamist lifestyle does indeed produce “results.” Physical or verbal attacks against those who do not fast during Ramadan are commonplace all across Turkey. If you happen to find yourself there during Ramadan, stay indoors if you would like to eat, drink or smoke.

“If the faith of those who do not do salah is different from that of the professor, murdering them could even bring sawab [reward for Islamic good deeds]. Such are the views that feed the perverse faith and doctrinal background of Muslim terrorists. … Is this professor aware of the fact that with this claim of his, he could cause the murder of so many innocent people?” — Yasin Ceylan, professor of philosophy, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.

Many Muslims claim that the Islamic month of Ramadan is not simply an exercise in fasting during the day. It is, they say, a chance for “a spiritual boost’, “mental peace” or ” a moral awakening.

During Ramadan, however, it often seems as if hate speech and intolerance are as rampant as ever, possibly even more – especially with the “Ramadan TV programs” which are popular.

With the advent of Ramadan, Turkey has not opened only the season of fasting; it has also opened the season of “Ramadan Intolerance.

This frequently consists of statements which threaten or dehumanize those who do not fast.

During this season of “Ramadan Intolerance,” many national television channels or social media users in Turkey disgorge hatred against those who do not carry out the strictest Islamic requirements.

Turkish professor Mustafa Askar, at the School of Divinity, Ankara University, said on the program, “The Joy of Ramadan,” aired on state-funded channel, TRT: “Those who do not do Islamic daily prayers are animals.”

Askar proclaimed on June 12, that “no beings other than humans touch the ground with their foreheads (to do sujud, the position of worship in which the forehead, nose, both hands, knees and all toes touch the ground together). Human beings, he said, were created in a “salah [worship] ergonomic” way and that is why, humans do sujud.

“Let me put it straight,” the professor said. “Salah is not done by animals. Those who do not do salah are animals.”

When the so-called student revolution erupted in Paris in May 1968, President Charles de Gaulle was on a state visit in Romania, and Prime Minister Georges Pompidou on a parallel visit in Afghanistan. Both men were asserting France’s “grandeur” abroad and its “world role” as a champion of “national independence” against both “American and Soviet imperialism.”

Within days, they had to shorten their tours and return to Paris unceremoniously to face a chaotic situation at home.

Radical students had turned the Sorbonne University into a “liberated territory” ; there were barricades all over the Latin Quarter, in the very heart of the French capital; strikes were choking the economy to death; red and black flags were being waved on public buildings. So much for “grandeur.”

One cannot help but recall the 1968 precedent now, as France just convened an international conference in Paris to “restart the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.” Twenty-nine countries and international organizations attended the conference’s grand opening on June 3. However, very few of them did so at a significant level. Secretary of State John Kerry obliged. So did UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon and European Union foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini. That was it.

One reason why the conference’s opening failed to attract as much attention as the French sought is simply that France is — again — in a mess.

President Hollande’s popularity is down to 11%. Prime Minister Manuel Valls fares almost as miserably at 14%.

Although a state of emergency has been declared since the jihadist massacres in Paris last November, street riots are still rampant and demonstrations ubiquitous.

The socialist cabinet was unable to pass new labor legislation in a socialist-dominated parliament, and had to resort to Article 49-3: a constitutional provision similar to what is known in America as an executive order.

Earlier this month I reported here at PJ Media on growing incidents of terrorism by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. I noted the arrest of an IED terror cell composed of Muslim Brotherhood members in Alexandria who had been attacking government and military targets since January.

Now, Egypt is facing escalating threats in the Sinai from the Brotherhood’s affiliate in Gaza — Hamas. Multiple reports in recent weeks place Islamic State (ISIS) figures with Hamas officials in Gaza, and claim Hamas is training ISIS troops with heavy anti-tank weaponry.

The Washington, D.C. foreign policy “smart set” continues to describe Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood as “moderate” jihadists who serve as a firewall between “violent extremist” groups like ISIS.

News reports placed ISIS-Sinai leaders in Gaza meeting with Hamas officials on June 2nd:
Sa’ka @BTelawy

#Report: Top ISIS commander Shadi al-Menei met with Hamas officials in Gaza Thursday in order to discuss coop btw the 2 groups. #Sinai

#Egypt: According to Channel 2, Al-Menei’s group were to help Hamas to smuggle arms via tunnels in return for sophisticated weapons. #Sinai

The Times of Israel reports:

Top Islamic State commander in Sinai Shadi al-Menii met with Hamas officials in Gaza Thursday in order to discuss cooperation between the two terrorist groups, according to a Channel 2 report.

How very odd that the latest ALP candidate deemed unworthy of retaining preselection is a Muslim who goes by the name of “Christian”, but only in the company of non-believers and when presenting himself to voters. That would be Christian Kunde, who was bounced from contesting the NSW seat of Farrer when his association with the weird beard firebrands of Hizb ut-Tahrir came to light. Just by way of a reminder, it was Hizbee honcho Uthman Badar who prompted a you-can’t-be-serious outcry that saw him dropped from 2014’s Festival of Dangerous Ideas before he could lay out the case for murdering women who bring shame on their families. That’s the pair of them above, Badar to the fore, at a Hizbee gabfest in 2012.

Mr Kunde must be very unhappy that a political career has been scotched before it could begin, and so must the ABC, which did yeoman work to present him as the happy face of tolerance and multi-culti amity. A mere two weeks ago, Compass viewers were treated to an adoring profile of the now ex-candidate. It was, by ABC standards, a story that could not possibly go unreported, as it focused on his work as the coach of a women’s AFL team in Western Sydney. Talk about ticking every beluvvied box:

Women breaking gender barriers by playing footy
Muslim women playing footy in their hijabs
Muslim women accepting a lesbian teammate
An ALP candidate who could use some taxpayer-funded free publicity

The Compass episode was multiculturalism’s Potemkin Village, all smiles and falafels-with-tomato-sauce and nary a mention of the unfortunate sorts who give tolerance (and our latest PM’s office elves) a bad name by endorsing the Koranic defenestration of homosexuals. Viewers learned how Mr Kunde met a Muslim bus driver who set him to thinking Islamic values were no different to his own, how he found his way to Allah and “to make things easier” decided to go by two names — “Christian” in the wider world and “Abdullah” when in the company of his co-religionists.

“It’s difficult for Muslims, I guess, to use that name,” he said, referring to the Christian christian name that would have appeared on Farrer ballot papers, explaining that he was Coach Abdullah to his team.

kunde after shearingHow very inconsistent is this multiculturalism? “Christian” is an OK name for ballot papers and ABC promotions, but intolerable to those who themselves demand the tolerance of others.

JEDDAH, Saudi Arabia—Joudi al-Omeri drove in circles. And when cars came in her direction, she swerved. These were electric bumper cars, but in Saudi Arabia, the ride doesn’t always live up to its name.

“I come here to drive,” said Ms. al-Omeri, a 27-year-old homemaker still giddy from the roughly five-minute, mostly crash-free ride in her red-and-green two-seater. “It’s much better than bumping against others,” she adds.
At the weekly ladies-only night at the Al Shallal Theme Park in the coastal city of Jeddah, women discard head scarves and head-to-toe black gowns to reveal the latest trends—ripped jeans, tank tops, and tossed-to-the-side ’80s-style hair. For many of them, the biggest draw of the amusement park isn’t the few hours of fashion freedom. Instead, they go there to get behind the wheel—even a bumper-car wheel—in a country that bans female drivers.

There are no loud bangs or ferocious head-on crashes. There are a few slow-speed collisions, but also a lot of dodging, as many women are content with just gliding over the smooth surface. For some, the biggest risk of bumping into each other is while taking a selfie.

“They love driving the cars,” Aman al-Abadi, the ride attendant, said of the women who were getting back in line for another spin. “Men are always bumping.”

With the exception of remote corners of the desert kingdom—where Bedouin women sometimes get behind the wheel—the amusement park offers a rare, hassle-free environment for women to hone their driving skills. That is partly why, on ladies nights, there is a winding queue at the bumper cars. CONTINUE AT SITE

…….This is the fraying world in which Britain is making its Brexit choice. It may be that a “leave” vote will not have such dire consequences as the “remain” campaign predict, and that the U.K. will join the happy ranks of Switzerland and Norway as a rich, European, non-EU state. In normal eras, the benefits of disruption often outweigh the costs.
But this is not a normal era. If the U.K. leaves the EU, why shouldn’t Scotland secede from the former to rejoin the latter? If Britain jilts Brussels, why shouldn’t Brussels return the favor when Britain returns to Europe seeking new terms of trade? If the world is taking a protectionist turn, why would an island country dependent on trade abandon the economic security of the one immense free-trade bloc to which it already has access?

And if Britain leaves the Union, what guarantees that future governments will have a Thatcherite bent? It was Thatcher who in 1975 spearheaded the Conservative Party’s campaign to remain in Europe the last time the membership question was put to British voters. Rarely do nationalist politics not end in statist economic prescriptions.

Like every country, Britain has its share of cultural anxieties and economic problems, some of which are connected to Europe. But not all of them. Britain’s housing bubble is not Europe’s fault, nor is the poor quality of its health services, or its high taxes and cost of living. It’s always easier to blame a marriage’s difficulties on your spouse than on yourself. And as in many marriages, the temptations of a single life can sometimes seem irresistible. They’re worth resisting.

It may be that one day Britain will have another Thatcher, and the U.S. another Reagan, and another Brexit referendum could be a flight to safety and not a leap in the dark. Till then, Brexit would be that most un-British of acts: Imprudent.

The British people go to the polls Thursday in their most important vote since they elected Margaret Thatcher in 1979. While we hope Britain votes to remain in the European Union, the reasons have less to do with the sturdy British than with the damage an exit could do to a Europe that is failing to meet the challenges of the 21st century.

America’s interests lie in a free and prosperous Europe, and we’ve long thought this is best served with Britain as part of the European Union to balance France and Germany. The British look west across the Atlantic more than continentals, and the Brits have largely been a voice of reason in Europe’s councils.

This is especially valuable today given the manifest failures of Europe over the last decade. With rare exceptions like Spain and Ireland, the EU and eurozone have failed to restore the economic growth the Continent so desperately needs. Its leaders can’t, or won’t, ask their citizens to sacrifice to reform their creaky welfare states or solve the turmoil in the Middle East and North Africa. They have bungled the migrant crisis in a way that has undermined public confidence and increased support for nativist right-wing parties.

Many British watching this from across the Channel understandably think they can do better on their own. And in many respects they have. They never joined the euro, despite predictions of doom at the time, yet Britain has prospered. Its growth rate since the financial panic is among the strongest in Europe. The British are also exempt from the Schengen rules of passport-free travel, which has spared them from the migrant fiasco.

Yet the main arguments for Brexit are less persuasive on close examination. The first—near and dear to our heart—is the promise of freedom from regulation by Brussels. No one has mocked the EU’s diktats more than we have. Yet the Brexiteers aren’t exactly promising a return to Thatcherism. Boris Johnson, the most prominent Tory supporting Leave, is happy with the National Health Service and subsidies for British business. Nigel Farage’s UKIP is protectionist. CONTINUE AT SITE