RUTHFULLY YOURS

It was a political and historical anomaly for Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu to dispatch the historian Michael Oren to Washington D.C. to represent him and his country in 2009. Oren was not a member of Netanyahu’s Likud party; he had no political involvement inside Israel; he had no foreign-policy or diplomatic experience; and he was not an intimate of the prime minister’s.

In all these ways he differed from his predecessors. When Netanyahu first served as prime minister of Israel from 1996 to 1999, his ambassadors were Eliyahu Ben-Elissar and Zalman Shoval—both old hands of his Likud party and familiar diplomatic and political figures. Ben-Elissar had been chief of staff to Menachem Begin and then Israel’s ambassador to Egypt, and had chaired the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee of the Knesset. Shoval had been the country’s U.S. ambassador from 1990 to 1993. Later, Ariel Sharon sent his personal diplomatic adviser Daniel Ayalon to Washington; Sharon’s successor, Ehud Olmert, selected Sallai Meridor, a former chairman of the Jewish Agency and head of the World Zionist Organization. Today Netanyahu’s man in Washington is one of his closest advisers, Ron Dermer, who spent the first Obama term in an office 20 feet from Netanyahu’s.

This week’s Glazov Gang was guest-hosted by Ann-Marie Murrell, the CEO/Editor-in-Chief of PolitiChicks.com.

In this new episode, she was joined by Toni Bugle, the founder of M.A.R.I.A.S. (Mother’s against Radical Islam and Sharia).

She came on the show to discuss Why Are Muslims Entering a 14-Year-Old Girl’s Room? and she unveils how the Left is covering up the horror perpetrated by Muslim rape gangs in the U.K.

(See the 2-part-series with Toni Bugle on Victim of Muslim Grooming/Rape Gangs Speaks Out: Part I HERE and Part II HERE.)

Opponents of the Iran nuclear deal in Congress admit they can no longer kill the accord. Their focus now is making sure there will be a vote on the agreement at all, and salvaging some political benefit from their well-funded bid to stop it.

Lawmakers, Congressional staffers and lobbyists opposed to the deal reached in Vienna last month tell us they are now fighting to get more than 60 votes in the Senate for a resolution of disapproval to avoid a filibuster by Democrats supporting President Barack Obama. That is a far cry from the 67 votes in the Senate needed, along with two thirds of the House, to overturn an expected presidential veto of that resolution.

Yes, overturning an Obama veto was always a longshot. House Speaker John Boehner in April was privately warning Republicans that his party didn’t have the votes to stop the deal. Now Republican leaders are saying this out in the open.

IT IS now four years since David Cameron promised to reduce immigration into the UK from the hundreds of thousands to “tens of thousands” a year.

“No ifs, no buts”, was what the Prime Minister said. But the latest official figures, out yesterday, show he is nowhere near to fulfilling that promise.In fact in the last year immigration into our country reached record highs with net migration reaching a 10-year peak at 330,000 in the year up to March.

Thirteen per cent of people in this country now were born abroad.This is a colossal and significant blow to the Prime Minister.But it is also a reminder of a huge challenge to our nation’s sovereignty and way of life.

Most people, including me, know that Megyn Kelly is not only gorgeous, but also smart, sassy, incisive in her interviews, and genuinely funny. But the interview she conducted Wednesday night, August 26, with Jorge Ramos was disgraceful – the kind of toadying and biased interrogation that should be Exhibit #1 in journalism schools across the country about how not to be a legitimate journalist.

Ramos is a reporter for Univision, the company being sued by presidential candidate Donald Trump after they terminated their contractual relationship (including television broadcast obligations) with the Trump-backed Miss Universe Organization. The official charges include breach of contract and defamation, with the plaintiffs seeking more than $500 million in damages. Univision took its punitive action after Mr. Trump said that Mexican immigrants, including criminals and rapists, were teeming over our southern border – in other words, harmed him for exercising his constitutional right to free speech.

The Kelly interview was about Mr. Trump’s ousting of Ramos from a press conference the previous evening, after the candidate pointed to an audience member who had a question to ask. Interrupting, Ramos stood up and preempted the question, not with a question of his own, but with a virtual filibuster of grievances. And what did Ramos have the chutzpah to whine to Megyn Kelly about? That his free speech was being curtailed! Now that is rich!

So infectious is the boobery of the moment that the vector of contagion has penetrated even the high tower walls behind which dwells Hillary Rodham Clinton, into whose weedy enchanted kingdom few are admitted except discreet deliverymen with the usual weekly bulk shipments of eye-of-newt and toe-of-frog supplements. Herself frequently is banal, insipid, poorly informed, glib, contemptible, and almost always boring, but she’s usually not much of a genuine bomb-thrower, until she accuses her opponents of being genuine bomb-throwers, i.e., declaring that those in the pro-life camp who object to the vivisection of living human beings for commercial purposes are soul mates with “terrorists.”

Which terrorists, you ask? Herself won’t quite say, but these are terrorists who have nasty and atavistic ideas about the role of women in society. IRA? No . . . Sri Lanka’s Buddhist Power Force? Not quite . . . What’s left of the Euskadi Ta Askatasuna, Epanastatikos Agonas, or Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias De Colombia? I’d be surprised if the former secretary of state could correctly spell all three. The unnamed miscreants here are none other than the gentlemen of Derka Derka Muhammed Jihad (haka sherpa sherpa!), but Herself is too timid to name them even when she is libelously matching her Republican rivals with their theology.

In the present postmodern world, we are told that there is no such thing as a biologically distinct gender. Instead, gender is now socially constructed. It can be defined by the individual in almost any way he or she sees fit.

In the old days, many clinical psychologists would have believed that Caitlyn Jenner — who first came to fame as Olympian Bruce Jenner — is experiencing a well-chronicled psychological state known as transvestism, or the innate pleasure in wearing the clothes and assuming the manners and appearance of the opposite sex.

Jenner, however, identifies as transgendered. But even if the term is new, the condition is not. References to people acting or dressing as if they were members of the opposite sex — or somewhere in between — were commonly found in the works of ancient authors such as Catullus and Petronius. The difference is that the Greeks and Romans saw it as a psychosexual condition, while today’s postmoderns insist that the transgendered have assumed a self-constructed and genuinely new sexual identity.

Have they really?

Just another time-honored trick from the Clinton playbook.

Now that her presidential campaign is taking on water, a disingenuous former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said this week that she was accepting “responsibility” for illegally using an insecure private Internet server to transmit emails containing top-secret classified U.S. government documents.

Whatever that means in Clinton-speak.

Hillary claimed previously that she was taking responsibility for the Benghazi fiasco in 2012 that left four Americans dead. Nothing happened to her. We still don’t even have an official cause of death for Ambassador Chris Stevens who was initially reported to have been ritualistically sodomized and murdered by Islamic terrorists.

Why the Islamic Republic is readying for war not despite the Iran nuclear accord — but because of it.

Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) announced today that she would be voting in favor of a resolution of disapproval against the president’s Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action becoming the 14th Democratic congressional lawmaker to buck Obama. Two Senators, Chuck Schumer and Robert Menendez, also announced their intention to vote in favor of a resolution of disapproval.

In explaining her decision, Maloney quite accurately noted that even if Iran doesn’t cheat — an unlikely prospect given the Islamic Republic’s record of deceit and fabrication — the Iranians can legally become a threshold nuclear power once many of the restrictive provisions of the JCPOA expire in 8 to 10 years. In the best-case scenario, Obama has merely kicked the can down the road. Moreover, in 8 years, Iran will be a lot richer and infinitely more menacing thanks to sanctions relief as mandated by the JCPOA.

The Iran deal, by President Obama’s own admission, opens the path to Iran’s acquiring a nuclear arsenal, even as Iranian leaders continue to assert their determination to annihilate Israel. While the President has claimed at times that the agreement will prevent Iran from ever developing nuclear weapons, he has on other occasions acknowledged that, in fact, after fifteen years Iran will have a clear, short path to doing so.

Israelis across the political spectrum oppose the deal, fearful of the existential threat it represents, and most American Jews share their opposition. A significant majority of non-Jewish Americans do as well, both out of sympathy for Israel and out of fear of the apocalyptic Iranian theocrats gaining the ability to act on their threats against America as well as Israel.

But while objections to his Iran deal go far beyond Israel and elements of the American Jewish community, President Obama insists Israel’s is the only government opposing the agreement – an outright lie, given, for example, the clear if less publicly and forcefully articulated opposition of such countries as Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and the United Arab Emirates. He has also slandered American Jewish objectors with suggestions of dual loyalty, of mounting an expensive, unpatriotic campaign against the deal and in defiance of America’s best interests and of trying to push the nation to war. These hoary anti-Jewish canards have led many to call out the President for dabbling in anti-Semitism.