Displaying posts categorized under

ANTI-SEMITISM

Jews, Fight Back! Rabbi Aryeh Spero

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/…/jews_fight_back_.html

The rash of physical attacks against Jews in Brooklyn and even Manhattan began almost a year ago. We have cell phone and street camera footage of many of the attacks, and they are coming from assailants bellowing Alah Akbar and from younger Black and Hispanic men often yelling dirty Jew. They sneak up on Jewish-garbed citizens using bricks, stones, breaking bones, smashing eyes and do so, at times, as groups. There was no mainstream media discussion about any of this until a few weeks ago and the major Jewish establishment organizations were basically silent as well. Even now, none of these Jewish organizations are flexing their muscles or evincing anywhere near the type of outrage we should expect.

You can be sure that if the attackers were white or Jewish or if the victims were Black, Muslim or Hispanic, the establishment alphabet Jewish organizations (ADL, AJC, NYF, JCRC, Conference of Presidents, and Federations) would be the very first organizing protests against racism, accusing America of systemic racism, and pontificating about something rotten within American society. Thus far, their response has been tepid and without any passion or urgency.

My grievance is not why general society is doing little, since most American citizens have no clue about what is happening in places called Boro Park, Williamsburg or Crown Heights. But the major secular Jewish organizations do know! Nor am I perplexed about why this is not at the top of the bucket list of many office holders and politicians. After all, the “machers” from the Jewish organizations are not knocking down their doors nor raising Cain, something Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, CAIR, and Ocassio-Cortez would certainly do if their people were being assaulted by outsiders.

“Impeachment, Instead of Debate Over Capitalism and Sovereignty” Sydney Williams

In the case of the President Trump and impeachment, a verdict has been rendered without a trial. A visceral hatred for Mr. Trump, an outsider who campaigned on cleaning the swamp that was (and is) Washington, D.C., is all that Democrats need as prima facie evidence.

 

Outside this maelstrom of malice, the West faces stark alternatives. But instead of debating issues that will affect us, our children and grandchildren, specifically capitalism and sovereignty, politicians have chosen to throw up red herrings, like climate change, white supremacy, equality, gender identity, immigration, etc. Progressives have tried to undo the will of the people, i.e. to deny Brexit to the people of the UK and to declare fraudulent an election in the U.S. Debate is impossible when personal, venal hatred replaces deliberative and respectful disagreement. An intentional consequence has been unprecedented scrutiny of Mr. Trump and his appointees. With individuals vilified and high legal expenses incurred, lives have been destroyed for some and bankrupted for others. Is it any wonder so many have left the Administration?

This is not meant to trivialize these other issues. The constant effect of an ever-changing climate is something we must monitor and do what we can to alter and/or adapt, but we shouldn’t let emotions substitute for reason, or use children to score political points. No real conservative denies the existence of white oppression and privilege, but we question its ubiquity. Where it exists, it must be confronted and addressed. Equality is tricky and subject to interpretation – are we referring to equality of opportunities or equality of outcomes? Conservatives believe in the former, while progressives desire the latter. Conservatives are mindful that the favored should bear some responsibility for those less fortunate, but they believe that concern should be manifested in the actions of individuals, not diktats of the state, for morality and compassion are characteristics of people, not bureaucracies. Al genders deserve respect. As for immigration, politicians believe this crisis unresolved is better than were it resolved.

HOLIDAY BREAK FOR JEWISH NEW YEAR

Posting will resume tomorrow.

The Little Engine That Couldn’t : Roger Kimball

amgreatness.com/2019/09/28/the-little-engine-that-couldnt/

The Democrats think the very fact that a president is impeached is enough to tarnish his reputation and diminish his chances of success in the election. Don’t bet on it.

Those whom the gods would destroy, they first make ridiculous. Has it happened to the Democrats yet? I think so, yes. I think so.

“Whistleblower” is already being enrolled in the lexicon of political disasters, and not just on account of pictures of the priapic Bill Clinton with Monica Lewinsky and featuring a rude joke about “whistleblowers” (“You know how to whistle don’t you? You just put your lips together and blow”).

No, “whistleblower” has entered the joke book of American politics because of the wild discrepancy between aspiration and reality that it represents.

Just last week, an all-points bulletin was blaring from the Get Trump media and the assorted fantasists in the Democratic Party. “Now we’ve got him, lads. Impeachment is just around the corner.” The New York Times said so. So did CNN and MSNBC. So did Nancy Pelosi, soon-to-be-former speaker of the House. Representative Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) was so certain of it that he thought he could get away with pretending to read the transcript of Donald Trump’s call with the Ukrainian president while actually just making stuff up.

Really. There he was, piece of paper in hand, addressing the House Intelligence Committee (and millions of viewers at home), exuding his signature “the-President-is-not-above-the-law-deer-in-the-headlights-automaton” countenance. The whole thing, Schiff said, was a “mafia-like shakedown.”

“I want you,” he pretended to read, “to make up dirt on my political opponent, understand, lots of it, on this and on that. I’m going to put you in touch with people, not just any people, I’m going to put you in touch with the attorney general of the United States, my attorney general Bill Barr. He’s got the whole weight of the American law enforcement behind him.”

The Humanitarian Hoax of Impeachment: Killing America With Kindness – hoax 49 by Linda Goudsmit

The Humanitarian Hoax is a deliberate and deceitful tactic of presenting a destructive policy as altruistic. The humanitarian huckster presents himself as a compassionate advocate when in fact he is the disguised enemy.

The entire 2020 lineup of leftist Democrats and their Congressional sycophants have assured the nation that impeachment of President Trump is necessary to protect the nation. It is an odd assertion considering that President Trump has been wildly successful by pro-America standards. Let’s review.

In less than three years President Trump has added 6 million jobs to the workforce, unemployment is the lowest it has ever been for the black, Hispanic, and Asian communities. The United States is energy independent and we are now the leading exporter of energy in the world. So, what exactly do the Democrats mean when they say that YOU, the nation, will be safer without POTUS? Let’s find out.

It appears there is pervasive pronoun confusion in the Democrat assertion! The corrupt pay-to-play Democrats would definitely be safer without America-first President Trump in charge, but YOU, the American taxpaying voter, will definitely not be safer. Let me explain.

In 1994, ice skater Tonya Harding stunned the world with her participation in the unprecedented and shocking physical attack against competitor Nancy Kerrigan. Fans were familiar with anabolic steroid doping schemes in athletics, but a physical assault intended to break Nancy Kerrigan’s leg?? The attack was simply beyond the threshold of public tolerance. Fans want a fair fight – a fair competition between athletes who perform and compete fairly for the competition prize – no cheating or dirty tricks allowed.

So it is with politics. The radical leftist Democrat party has pushed the public past the threshold of tolerance. Americans voters want a fair fight – a fair competition between politicians who present their positions and compete fairly for the election prize – no cheating or dirty tricks allowed.

MARK STEYN ON BIDEN*****

https://www.steynonline.com/9755/hunted-biden

Joe Biden is not Bill Clinton in his artful prime; indeed, Hunter Biden does not even rise to Chelsea Clinton at her dopiest. The Dems can accuse Trump of trying to “dirty up” the Bidens, but it’s hard to dirty up an overflowing sewer:

The defense of Democrats is that Joe Biden may have said he got rid of this prosecutor, but all the governments, every government in Europe wanted this prosecutor gone. That may be true. But the foreign minister of Germany and the foreign minister of France didn’t go on TV and brag about how he gave a six-hour ultimatum to a foreign government to fire its prosecutor-general. The only politician on earth who did that is Joe Biden – and then you’re surprised that suddenly people are excited about why Hunter Biden is getting 50 grand a month in a country where the average wage at that time was $200 a month.

In April 2014, a sleazy Ukrainian oligarch called Mykola Zlochevsky put Hunter Biden and Hunter’s business partner, Devon Archer, on the board of Ukraine’s biggest oil-&-gas company, Burisma.

How did it get to be so big?

Well, Mr Zlochevsky and his business partner Nikolay Lysin were respectively Minister of Natural Resources and the chairman of the Natural Resources parliamentary committee for much of the previous twelve years. There is a rule in Kiev that no Member of Parliament should have any business beyond his parliamentary responsibilities – so, as Messrs Zlochevsky and Lysin’s parliamentary responsibilities included oil and gas, they happily spent their terms of office handing out oil and gas licenses to companies they personally controlled (for which Burisma is the overarching holding company).

Mr Lysin did not live to enjoy his oil-gotten gains. A healthy fortysomething, he swerved to avoid a rabbit in the road one night and ploughed his Lamborghini at 150mph into (appropriately) a set of gas pumps. That’s the official story. So now Mr Zlochevsky owns all of Burisma.

That said, it is not, technically, a Ukrainian company. It’s registered in Limmerssol, the second biggest city in Cyprus but one that the locals now call Limmerssolgrad, because it’s the preferred destination for Russian money-launderers. As to how preferred it is with Ukrainian launderers, by the time Hunter Biden joined Burisma’s board virtually the entire national economy was Cypriot: In 2014 92 per cent of Ukraine’s outward investment went to Cyprus.

Wake Up, Grow Up and Shut Up Until You Are Sure of the Facts Before Protesting……Unattributed but apposite

This from a Sky News Australia reporter who go it from an unknown source on Facebook!

To all the school kids going on “strike” for Climate Change.
You are the first generation who have required air-conditioning in every classroom.
You want TV in every room and your classes are all computerised.
You spend all day and night on electronic devices.
More than ever, you don’t walk or ride bikes to school but arrive in caravans of private cars that choke suburban roads and worsen rush hour traffic.
You are the biggest consumers of manufactured goods ever and update perfectly good expensive luxury items to stay trendy.
Your entertainment comes from electric devices.
Furthermore, the people driving your protests are the same people who insist on artificially inflating the population growth through immigration, which increases the need for energy, manufacturing and transport.
The more people we have, the more forest and bush land we clear and more of the environment is destroyed.
How about this…
Tell your teachers to switch off the air-con.
Walk or ride to school.
Switch off your devices and read a book.
Make a sandwich instead of buying manufactured fast food.
No, none of this will happen because you are selfish, badly educated, virtue signalling little turds, inspired by the adults around you who crave a feeling of having a “noble cause” while they indulge themselves in Western luxury and unprecedented quality of life.”
Wake up, grow up and shut up until you are sure of the facts before protesting.

Presidential Abuse of Power or Partisan Swamp Gas? Charles Lipson

https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2019/09/27/presidential_abuse_of_power_or

The impeachment furor is a purely political fight, not a legal one. The essential question, which the Democrats have raised continuously since Donald Trump was elected, is whether he is fit for office. Trump’s response has essentially been: “I was duly elected. I’ve done nothing wrong. You are using congressional committees, deep-state bureaucrats, a partisan special prosecutor, Democratic state attorneys general, nationwide injunctions from left-wing judges, and friendly media to prevent me from governing.”

Trump and his allies see the same basic strategy in play over the Ukrainian phone call. Where the Democrats see presidential abuse of power for personal and political gain, Trump and his supporters see zealots overreaching, trying to nullify a popular election.

This political fight boils down to four issues.

No. 1: Did President Trump abuse the U.S. Constitution so badly that he should be thrown out of office for asking “a favor” from his Ukrainian counterpart?

Career officials at the Department of Justice scrutinized the phone call transcript and determined that Trump violated no laws. Did he seek “something of value” from a foreign source, in violation of campaign laws? That is the “quid pro quo” issue, and 
DoJ rejected it.

Trump Urging Ukrainian Probe of Biden Breaks No Laws A Clinton-era U.S.-Ukraine treaty requires the two countries to provide mutual legal assistance. Matthew Vadum

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2019/09/trump-urging-ukrainian-probe-biden-breaks-no-laws-matthew-vadum/

A treaty from 2000 between the Ukraine and the United States requires the two countries to cooperate on law enforcement matters, a factor that may help to explain why President Donald Trump felt comfortable questioning the involvement of Joe Biden and his son, Hunter, in Ukrainian affairs, during a telephone conversation two months ago with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

The American and Ukrainian governments, it turns out, are legally required by treaty to render mutual legal assistance in criminal matters.

The treaty, signed at Kiev on July 22, 1998, provides in Article 1 that “[t]he Contracting States shall provide mutual assistance, in accordance with the provisions of this Treaty, in connection with the investigation, prosecution, and prevention of offenses, and in proceedings related to criminal matters.” As every schoolchild used to know before teachers’ unions, New Age thinking, and identity politics dumbed down the educational system, under the Supremacy Clause of the U.S. Constitution, properly ratified treaties are the supreme law of the land.

The document states that each “Contracting State shall have a Central Authority to make and receive requests pursuant to this Treaty.” For the U.S., it is “the Attorney General or a person designated by the Attorney General.” For Ukraine, it is “the Ministry of Justice and the Office of the Prosecutor General.”

During the presidency of Bill Clinton, the U.S. Senate approved the treaty on Oct. 18, 2000, on a division vote. This means that senators rose from their seats to vote and how each of them voted was not recorded. It is, therefore, unclear, how then-Sen. Joe Biden of Delaware voted.

Why the Impeachment Frenzy May Only Strengthen Trump By Victor Davis Hanson

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/why-impeachment-frenzy-may-strengthen-trump/https:

Contrary to suggestions by some, most Trump supporters are not automatons or blind supporters. What bothers them, and should bother others, about the latest Ukraine hysterias is the familiar monotony of this latest scripted psychodrama.

The whistleblower admits to hearsay (“I was not a direct witness to most of the events described”). His term-paper report is laden with anonymously sourced rumors, e.g., “According to multiple White House officials I spoke with,” “I was told by White House officials,” “Based on my understanding,” “I learned from multiple officials,” “I do not know whether similar measures were taken,” “I do not know whether those officials spoke with or met with . . . ”

Between references to Internet news accounts and “I heard from” and “I learned from” and “I do not know” anonymous officials, there is nothing here to launch an impeachment of any president.

In the complaint are all the now-familiar tell-tale signs of pseudo-exactness, in the form of Mueller-report-like footnotes and page references to liberal media outlets such as Bloomberg, ABC, and the New York Times. There is the accustomed Steele-dossier scare bullet points. We see again Comey-memo-like disputes over classification status with capital letters UNCLASSIFIED stamped as headers and footers and TOP SECRET lined out.

Scary references abound to the supposed laws that the legal-eagle whistleblower believes were violated. In sum, there is all the usual evidence of an administrative-state bureaucrat, likely to be some third-tier Brennan or Clapper-like intelligence operative, who is canvassing disgruntled White House staffers, writing a report that imitates intelligence-department formats, combing the Internet, in “dream-team” and “all-star” footnote fashion, for scare quotes and anti-Trump stories, and then likely having it dressed up in legalese by an activist lawyer. Take all that away, and one is left with “I heard.”