Biden Administration “Surrenders” to Germany on Russian Gas Pipeline by Soeren Kern

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17603/germany-russia-nord-stream-biden-administration

“The willingness of the administration to make decisions of this magnitude without consulting the countries most exposed will not be lost on other parts of the world. Jerusalem and Riyadh, for example, are no doubt already strategizing around the potential of facing a surprise similar to the one that Washington just delivered to Warsaw and Kyiv.” — Kiron Skinner and Russell Berman, Foreign Policy, July 26, 2021.

“The lesson learned by Germany is that it can pursue its own inclinations of doing business with dictators regardless of principles and with no consequences from Washington. More dangerously, the lesson for Moscow and Beijing is that sanctions for international aggression will never be sustained for very long. The Biden administration has made the fragile international order even less secure.” — Kiron Skinner and Russell Berman, Foreign Policy, July 26, 2021.

“The project creates conditions for Russia’s escalation of military aggression against Ukraine, as well as the continuation of a hybrid war against the EU and NATO…. This Russian pipeline threatens the national security not only of Ukraine, but also of all of Europe.” — Ukrainian Parliament, July 21, 2021.

“The U.S.-German deal is embarrassingly weak. It relies on a vague assurance that after Putin ramps up the blackmail enabled by the deal, Germany will take unspecified actions in response…. Overall, Biden handed Putin the biggest gift he’s received in years. He also signaled to Putin that when push comes to shove, the American president is weak and will bow to political pressure.” — U.S. Senator Ted Cruz, Washington Examiner, July 22, 2021.

“Remarkably, Washington agreed to end its opposition to the project without any recognizable benefit in exchange: Merkel has neither promised increased engagement for NATO nor more clarity about China. The compromise between Biden and Merkel is not a compromise at all, but an American capitulation.” — Robin Alexander, Die Welt, July 21, 2021.

The Biden administration has reached an agreement with German Chancellor Angela Merkel that allows for the completion of a controversial natural gas pipeline between Russia and Germany.

The July 21 deal to complete the Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which would double shipments of Russian natural gas to Germany by transporting the gas under the Baltic Sea, has angered the leaders of many countries in Eastern and Western Europe; they argue that it will effectively give Moscow a stranglehold over European gas supplies and open the continent to Russian blackmail.

Both the Obama and Trump administrations steadfastly opposed the pipeline on the grounds that, once completed, it would strengthen Russian President Vladimir Putin’s economic and political influence over Europe.

The Trump administration was especially critical of the pipeline because it will funnel billions of dollars to Russia at a time that Germany is free-riding on the U.S. defense umbrella that protects Germany from that same Russia.

League of Appeasement: How the West Fails To Take Action on Iran Benny Avni

https://www.nysun.com/foreign/league-of-appeasement-how-the-west-fails-to-take/91603/

If ever there were a cause for “collective response,” Iran’s deadly attack on a commercial carrier navigating the busy shipping lanes of an oil-rich region is it — unless, of course, that phrase means no response at all.

On April 2, 1917, in a speech to Congress, President Wilson cited repeated German violations of the principle of “Freedom of the Seas” as casus belli, justifying America’s entry into the European blood-letting later known as World War I.

After that war was won, Wilson went on to promote the establishment of the League of Nations, an unconstitutional, ill-fated attempt to forge a collective global response to threats against world peace.

Zoom forward to last Thursday night, when a Romanian captain and a British security officer aboard the Mercer Street were killed in a drone attack in the Persian Gulf, off the shores of Oman. The Liberian-flagged tanker is operated by Zodiac, a company listed in Britain and owned by Eyal Offer, an Israeli billionaire.

An Iranian website initially reported the attack was retaliation for an Israeli air attack on Iranian targets in Syria, but officials in Iran later denied responsibility. Nevertheless, Prime Minister Naftali Bennett said Israel possesses irrefutable evidence of Iran’s culpability.

Soon after, Secretary of State Blinken and Britain’s foreign minister, Dominic Raab, also stated Iran was responsible. These allies will launch a “collective response,” Mr. Blinken ominously declared Monday.

Yet before the collective concluded its deliberations over what course of coordinated action it should take collectively, Iran seemed to unilaterally escalate. Earlier today the British navy reported a “potential hijacking” of a ship off the United Arab Emirates’ coast. Additionally, four oil tankers reported loss of control over their Automatic Identification System tracker.

The Iranian news agency IRNA immediately denied Tehran was involved in those attacks, and the country even offered its assistance.

Israel’s foreign and defense ministers reportedly plan to brief diplomats of the United Nations Security Council tomorrow on the Mercer Street evidence. That indicates a Security Council response. Expect Russia, China and others to demand an investigation by the world body before any collective action is taken.

Meanwhile, the White House press secretary, Jen Psaki, said Monday that Washington remains engaged in talks aimed at reviving the articles of appeasement on the nuclear deal. “Our view,” she said, “is that every single challenge and threat we face from Iran would be made more pronounced and dangerous by an unconstrained nuclear program.”

The Warped Vision of a Two-State Solution By Victor Sharpe

During eight baleful years, President Barack Hussein Obama made Israel’s life utterly miserable as he pursued relentlessly his warped vision of a ‘Two State Solution’ to the Israel-Palestinian conflict. But that vision, being imagined yet again, would remain national suicide for Israel.

Still pushed by too many in the international corridors of power, it is in reality an appalling euphemism not unlike the German Nazi’s ‘Final Solution’ which ushered in the Holocaust. And now, lo and behold, the Biden/Harris administration — which many see as Obama’s third term — is currently pushing yet again for the disinterment of that rotting corpse known as the ‘Two-State Solution.’

It will spell the destruction of the reconstituted Jewish state and the extermination of its people by a Muslim world that will never accept a non-Muslim nation and will wage eternal war against it — the Dar al-Harb — until it is utterly destroyed. The existing and proposed “Two-State-Solution” ushers in an eventual and guaranteed destruction of the Jewish state.

Of course, if Israel declared its justified rejection of the ‘Two-State-Solution’, such a statement of the truth would be considered inflammatory and assured to provoke another Palestinian Arab outburst of violence and barbarism (dignified by the Arabic term intifada).

But isn’t that what is happening throughout Judea and Samaria (the so-called West Bank) with almost daily atrocities committed by Arab thugs against Jewish civilians?

The over 3,500-year-old Hebrew and Biblical names, Yehuda and Shomron, (Judea and Samaria), refer to the heartland of both the ancient and modern Jewish homeland. But a malevolent world prefers to call the territory the West Bank; what was the mere 19-year-old Jordanian name applied to the land after it and much of Jerusalem was illegally invaded and occupied by Jordan from 1948 until 1967.

The Jordanian Arab Legion, after invading and occupying the territory, immediately began desecrating Jewish graves on the Mount of Olives, using the headstones to build latrines for their troops, destroying 57 ancient synagogues and holy sites, and forcibly expelling Jewish residents from their villages and ancient homes in Jerusalem’s Old City.

FDA Authorizes Antibody Cocktail as COVID-19 Prevention Treatment BY TOM OZIMEK

https://www.theepochtimes.com/mkt_morningbrief/fda-authorizes-antibody-cocktail-as-covid-19-prevention-treatment_

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has authorized a monoclonal antibody cocktail as a measure to prevent infection in some groups of people who were exposed to the CCP virus, the pathogen that causes COVID-19.

The FDA on Friday announced that it had revised its emergency use authorization (EUA) for REGEN-COV, a treatment consisting of jointly administered casirivimab and imdevimab, expanding its use beyond just the treatment of patients who test positive for the virus.

While the product remains authorized for treating confirmed COVID-19 patients over age 12 who are at high risk of severe illness, the agency said the drug combo can now be given to high-risk groups as a measure after exposure to prevent progression of the disease.

The antibody treatment is only authorized for use in people who have been exposed to the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) virus, not as a pre-exposure preventive measure, the FDA said.

The agency added that REGEN-COV should only be used as a post-exposure prophylaxis by people who are not fully vaccinated or whose immune systems are unlikely to mount an adequate response to the virus, like those who take immunosuppressive medications or who are otherwise immunocompromised.

Andrew Cuomo and the Tragedy of Politicized Feminism By Dominic Pino

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/andrew-cuomo-and-the-tragedy-of-politicized-feminism/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_medium=article&utm_campaign=river&utm_content=top-bar-latest&utm_term=fifth

The new report from New York State’s attorney general confirms what many have known for a long time: Andrew Cuomo is a man abusing his position of power to harass women.

Looking at this story from a feminist perspective, one would be completely unsurprised by it. In fact, it’s exactly what one would expect. Men have power and treat women unjustly; that’s the problem that feminism diagnoses and wants to solve.

Yet feminist groups don’t have a lot of credibility to speak out against Cuomo because many of them have endorsed him for public office over the years. The National Organization for Women–New York (NOW-NY) endorsed him for governor in 2018, and their president said, “This was an easy decision. . . . Year in and year out Governor Cuomo has put women’s rights front and center.” The organization’s endorsement says:

Governor Cuomo is building a legacy of real change for the women and girls of New York: raising the minimum wage of which women make up two-thirds of earners; enacting paid family leave; making it harder to discriminate against pregnant workers; and paving a path for young New Yorkers to earn tuition-free four-year degrees.

See the sleight of hand there? Cuomo’s “legacy of real change for the women and girls of New York” is really just progressivism. The minimum wage, paid family leave, and tuition-free college aren’t specific to women (and if you believe men can get pregnant too, as some progressives argue, neither is discriminating against pregnant workers).

There is reasoning behind feminists’ casting their lots with progressivism. They point to disparate-impact issues (such as the “women make up two-thirds of earners” part about the minimum wage) and say that since many progressive policies would benefit women more than men, they are feminist issues.

Conservatives, pretty generally, have been opposed to institutional feminism. Conservative hostility probably played a role in feminists’ believing that adopting progressivism was the best move for the success of their movement. It was enemy-of-my-enemy thinking combined with the simple fact that many feminists were sympathetic to the progressive agenda to begin with.

American immigrants who leave Israel don’t deserve disdain Ruthie blum

https://www.jns.org/opinion/ american-immigrants-who-leave- israel-dont-deserve-disdain/

On the occasion of the 40th anniversary of his parents’ aliyah from the United States, Haaretz political correspondent Chaim Levinson paid homage to his mother and father, who “left behind family, jobs that would have earned them much more money than they were paid [in Israel], more impressive careers and a house in the suburbs a few times the size of the stone building in Jerusalem where [they] settled.”

In an op-ed on Sunday, he pointed out that while their immigration was “traumatic,” it was also a privilege for them to have relocated to Israel.

“We were fortunate to come,” he wrote. “There’s no place more natural for a Jew to live. Israel is home. Israel is the place and the destination. … Israel is, first and foremost, a sense of belonging, of taking part in creating something. There’s no dual loyalty, no alienation. You don’t have to apologize for being Jewish. It’s the fulfillment of the vision of generation upon generation that my ancestors, unlike my parents, didn’t have the privilege to fulfill.”

He continued, “Israel is family. You feel a sense of closeness even with complete strangers. It’s oppressive, but also loving. … It stirs emotions. It causes joy in times of beauty and pain in times of darkness.”

As a former New Yorker who just celebrated 44 years in Israel, I couldn’t agree more with his description and sentiment. Sadly, the point of his piece—titled “Israelis Who Move Back to America Gain in Money and Lose in Soul”—was to criticize those who tried to make a go of it in the Holy Land, yet ended up returning from whence they came.

Rather than view them with empathy—or at least acknowledge their right as individuals to exercise personal choice—he adopts a disdainful attitude.

The Real Story of “The Central Park Karen” New evidence comes to light. And Amy Cooper breaks her silence. Megan Phelps-Roper

https://bariweiss.substack.com/p/the-real-story-of-the-central-park?token=

Amy Cooper was not the internet’s first “Karen” — the pejorative used for a demanding, entitled white woman. But as the Central Park dog walker who called the police on a black birdwatcher last year, she quickly became the paragon of the archetype.

In a video that went instantly viral, we watch as she summons law enforcement to protect her from the man, whose race she mentions three times in a matter of moments: “I’m going to tell them there’s an African-American man threatening my life.”

Just over a minute long, the video flooded social media alongside a second one filmed that same day: the horrifying footage of a Minneapolis police officer kneeling on the neck of a man named George Floyd.

The conflation of these two stories in the public imagination began almost immediately — and not without cause. The Central Park video looked really bad. 

Many accused Amy Cooper of “weaponizing white tears.” They said she was deliberately attempting to sic racist cops on the birdwatcher, Christian Cooper (no relation). Comparisons to Emmett Till were instant.

“It’s important for us to remember that what happened to George Floyd is what Amy Cooper would have wanted to happen to Christian Cooper,” as one YouTuber put it, reflecting a sentiment echoed broadly across Twitter and beyond.

The outcry was overwhelming, and it was supercharged by the mainstream press. The New York Times ran a dozen stories, letters, and Op-Eds in the first week alone. A rattled Gayle King said it felt like “open season” on black men, with Amy “nearly strangling her dog to falsely accuse another black man.” Trevor Noah said that Amy “blatantly knew how to use the power of her whiteness to threaten the life of another man and his blackness.”

By the next day, Amy Cooper had been doxxed, had surrendered her dog, had lost her job, and had issued a half-hearted defense followed by an abject apology. Christian Cooper would go on to become a minor celebrity, penning a story for D.C. Comics inspired by the incident, heralded across the media and even by Joe Biden. “You made an incredible contribution at a very important moment,” the future president said.

The west’s tsunami of antisemitism Diaspora Jews in Britain and America are paralysed by a fantasy of acceptance Melanie Phillips

https://melaniephillips.substack.com/p/the-wests-tsunami-of-antisemitism?token=

In this podcast with Allen Roth, president of Secure America Now, I discussed the “tsunami” of antisemitism in the west and the inadequacy of the responses to it. Forming an “axis of evil that spans continents,” an unholy alliance has developed between leftists and Islamists. Worse still, cultural and political leaders in both Britain and America have been paralysed into virtual silence by moral and cultural relativism, which prohibits any criticism of the developing world; while the campaign against “Islamophobia,” which is used to suppress any criticism of the Islamic world however well-founded, has further colonised the minds of untold thousands.

I also talked about the supine response of Jewish community leaders in both Britain and America. Some are too frightened to tell the truths that urgently need to be told to counter the demonisation and delegitimisation of Israel, including making known the unambiguous anti-Jewish incitement that is pumped out by the supposedly moderate Palestinian Authority. Many others have themselves signed up both to the false narrative about Israel and to the wider onslaught upon truth and morality in the west, which means that tragically they do the Jew-haters’ dirty-work for them.

These Jewish leaders are gripped by the perennial diaspora fantasy that if they only do this or that they will fit in and be accepted and will never again be the victims of prejudice. But bitter history tells us that “fitting in” is always made conditional on something — a lesson that today’s diaspora Jews still refuse to learn.

Please click on the arrow above the picture to listen to the podcast.

Gov. Cuomo sexually harassed multiple women, NY AG probe finds The investigation found that the governor fostered a toxic work environment. ByAaron Katersky andLucien Bruggeman

https://abcnews.go.com/US/ny-ag-probe-finds-cuomo-sexually-harassed-multiple/story?id=79240764

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo was found to have sexually harassed multiple women, including current and former state employees, New York State Attorney General Letitia James announced Tuesday morning after a four-month probe into the allegations.

In at least one instance, the investigation determined that the governor sought to retaliate against a woman who leveled accusations against him, identified in a report released by the AG’s office as Lindsay Boylan.

According to James, the probe found that Cuomo and his staff fostered a toxic work environment. Cuomo, in a statement released after James’ announcement, denied any wrongdoing.

The attorney general’s 168-page report, released during her press conference, determined that “the governor engaged in conduct constituting sexual harassment under federal and New York State law.”

“Specifically, we find that the Governor sexually harassed a number of current and former New York State employees by, among other things, engaging in unwelcome and nonconsensual touching, as well as making numerous offensive comments of a suggestive and sexual nature that created a hostile work environment for women,” the report said.

At Tuesday’s press conference, employment discrimination attorney Anne Clark, one of the investigators assigned to lead the probe, presented a litany of findings from the report, including specific examples of the governor making suggestive comments and engaging in unwanted touching that eleven women — some named, others anonymous — found “deeply humiliating and offensive.”

In an instance involving one of Cuomo’s unnamed executive assistants, the governor was found to have “reached under her blouse and grabbed her breast,” according to the report.

Democrats’ election bills ignore the Founders’ principles Jonathan Turley

https://thehill.com/opinion/judiciary/566044-democrats-election-bills-ignore-the-founders-principles

As the fight over election reform heats up in Congress, the White House is ramping up the rhetoric, declaring that President Biden and Vice President Harris are “incensed by the anti-voter laws that are trampling on our constitutional principles.” It is a mantra repeated on an array of liberal news sites, but the coverage tends to be selective in what constitutional principles are being abridged. “Our constitutional principles” include state power over elections.

While the president decries an “unprecedented attack on democracy,” the federalization of elections being pursued by Democrats actually would contravene what the Framers considered a core protection of democracy. By ignoring those countervailing principles, the Democrats are creating a dangerous blind spot in these proposed laws. The resulting litigation could leave core election rules in doubt heading into the next round of elections.

When the Constitution was written, the Framers expressly warned of the need to keep the federal government at bay in elections. South Carolina constitutional convention delegate Charles Pinckney noted that “great care was used to provide for the election of the president of the United States independently of Congress; to take the business as far as possible out of their hands.” It was done, he explained, because Congress “had no right to meddle with it at all.” Many Framers feared the power of the central government and wanted to prevent the abuses of Great Britain in the use of executive powers.

This view was reflected in the Electors Clause of Article II, Section 1, which confines the power of Congress to determining “the day on which [electors] give their votes; which day shall be the same throughout the United States.” Where Congress is left with the timing of such elections, states are left the manner in which those elections are held.

Not only did this state control over elections advance the purpose of decentralization of authority, it reflected the strong federalism principles in the Constitution. States were viewed as “laboratories of democracy,” with each pursuing different approaches to governmental functions, including elections. They also were closest to the voters, who could more readily change laws and policies on the state level.