ISRAEL, MEDIA Comments turned off

DISPATCHES FROM TOM GROSS

Posted By on May 5th, 2018

AFTER OVER 50 YEARS

It took over 50 years for the New York Times to apologize for deliberately not reporting on the Holocaust while it was happening.

As I have written before, in the days before TV and the Internet, the New York Times was by far the most important media outlet in America, and had they not covered up the Holocaust throughout the Second World War, public pressure might have grown on FDR to bomb the railway lines to Auschwitz and save hundreds of thousands of lives.

Now that they have finally acknowledged Abbas for the kind of man he is, the New York Times editorial board might ask themselves why for all these years they have been so soft on Abbas.

And even now, the Times editorial on Abbas (below) downplays the problem, as well as the massive level of corruption by him and his sons (who have filled their banks accounts with diverted western aid money) making it sound as if Palestinian corruption is merely result of insufficient oversight.

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

What Happens When ‘Most People’ Are Right About Iran? Shoshana Bryen

Posted By on May 5th, 2018

The Islamic Republic of Iran’s declared position is that it does not want nuclear weapons and never has. Which is good, because the 2015 Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) contains language declaring that “under no circumstances will Iran ever seek, develop, or acquire any nuclear weapons.”

Which is bad, because Iran cheats.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu laid out in detail how Iran dissembled to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the ostensible authority on Iranian compliance with the JCPOA. Iran had an active nuclear weapons program until 2003. Following the allied invasion of Iraq and fearful of its own future, Iran decided to take a multi-step approach to its nuclear ambitions. While it stopped most of the active weapons program, The New York Times reports that Iran was designing nuclear weapons until 2009. Furthermore, it worked on related capabilities including uranium enrichment and ballistic missile delivery systems (a violation of UN Resolution 2231, as acknowledged by French President Emmanuel Macron). And it kept an enormous “library” of nuclear-related programs and plans.

The JCPOA has not been much of an impediment to Iran’s progress. Despite the literal injunction against nuclear weapons for Iran, the deal (unsigned by anyone on any side) was not designed to end Iran’s pursuit of nuclear capability, military or civilian. The JCPOA called only for a “pause” in Iran’s enrichment of uranium and inspection of Iran’s self-declared nuclear facilities, plus self-inspection of the suspect Parchin plant. Iran proclaimed its military installations off-limits to inspectors. The restrictions were to sunset a few years down the road, making the “library” of great value to future Iranian scientists restarting the program.

ANTI-SEMITISM, WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

European mockery hides European hypocrisy Victor Sharpe

Posted By on May 5th, 2018

To paraphrase Benjamin Disraeli: “There are lies, damned lies and European Union hypocrisy in descending order.”

It is as clear as day follows night that the Europeans enjoy and luxuriate in their business dealings with Iran. So when they come, one after the other, to beg President Trump to keep in place – with some modifications – the execrable nuclear deal that Obama and Kerry contrived with the Iranian mullahs, it is in reality to maintain and retain their lucrative and morally reprehensible trade deals with the terror regime, which calls itself the Islamic Republic of Iran.

The Iranian mullahs and their armed thugs known as the Revolutionary Guard sought defensively to mock Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech because he exposed them as the dangerous terrorists and congenital liars that they are.

But the majority of the European Union leaders by benefiting from the nuclear deal with Iran have also willingly and covertly created a catastrophic threat to regional and world peace.

Unlike them, any reasonable person knows that Netanyahu’s speech did a great service to Judeo-Christian and Western civilization in proving that Iran’s nuclear weapons program allows Islamic fundamentalism to endanger the entire world.

So now, the fatally biased and left leaning mainstream media, which hates both President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu, again mocks, as they did when Bibi Netanyahu first warned the world several years ago against the appalling threat to the world from the atrocious Obama nuclear deal with Iran. A deal which both enriches with billions of dollars the terror sponsoring mullahs and helps speed the Iranian nuclear weapons program.

FOREIGN POLICY Comments turned off

Trump’s Three Conditions for Fixing the Iran Deal Are Now Imperative What the Mossad’s Amazing Coup Dictates by Malcolm Lowe

Posted By on May 4th, 2018

What the assorted apologists for the Iran nuclear deal have failed to grasp is a simple distinction: the difference between suspicions and confirmation. The IAEA based its assessments on “over a thousand pages” of documents; now we have a hundred thousand.

Moreover, these are in effect a hundred thousand signed confessions of the Iranian regime that it intended to create nuclear weapons and load them on missiles manufactured by itself. The miniature minds of the apologists are simply incapable of grasping the historic magnitude of the Mossad’s discovery.

The picture of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu standing before two displays, one of file folders and one of compact discs, symbolizes possibly the greatest coup in the history of espionage: the Mossad’s acquisition of the archive of Iran’s program to create nuclear weapons. A runner up for that title might be the advance information about Operation Overlord, the Allied landing in France at the end of World War II, supplied by Elyesa Bazna from Ankara and Paul Fidrmuc from Lisbon.

Nazi Germany failed to act on that information about the intended landing site on D-Day. Instead, it fell victim to false information provided by a supposed spy who was working for the Allies. The parallel to that failure is the present rush of politicians and so-called experts who pretend that the Mossad’s coup tells us nothing new and merely proves that the deal is more justified than ever. They claim, in particular, that before the deal was agreed the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) already knew the broad details of what the new information reveals.

What the assorted apologists for the Iran nuclear deal have failed to grasp is a simple distinction: the difference between suspicions and confirmation. The IAEA based its assessments on “over a thousand pages” of documents; now we have a hundred thousand.

EDUCATION Comments turned off

The Story Behind That Anti-Trump Textbook By Stanley Kurtz

Posted By on May 4th, 2018

The most underappreciated political story of our time is the changing content of K-12 textbooks in history, civics, social studies, and related subjects. Yes, I said political story. Why are Millennials so receptive to socialism? Why are today’s Democrats dominated by identity politics? Why have movements on the political right shifted from a constitutional conservatism symbolized by the Boston Tea Party to a populist nationalism? All these changes, and more, are connected to what today’s history textbooks are, and are not, teaching. Yet we’ve barely noticed the link.

Almost any Advanced Placement (AP) U.S. history textbook has more influence on American politics than 90 percent of the books reviewed in our leading newspapers and political magazines. Yet when was the last time you read a review of a high school history textbook? Never, I’ll bet. That’s partly because these thousand-page monstrosities are tough to read, and even tougher to judge for anyone but professional historians. And with growing academic specialization, even historians find it difficult to assess an entire text.

Liberals needn’t bother keeping track of history textbooks because they’re the ones who write them. But conservatives have dropped the ball on this issue so essential to their survival. Conservative politicians, institutions, and donors focus far more on short-term electoral politics and policy than culture. History textbooks don’t even register. Over the long haul, that’s a recipe for political exile and social ostracism.

Conservatives saw the tip of the enormous textbook iceberg earlier this April when a radio host tweeted out pictures a Minnesota student had sent her of an AP U.S. history (APUSH) textbook. The student had photographed pages of the not yet formally released update of James W. Fraser’s By the People, an APUSH textbook published by the international education giant Pearson. Those pages covered the 2016 election and the Black Lives Matter movement. Their blatantly partisan bias set off a conservative media firestorm. (I commented here, and Joy Pullman’s important take is here.)

Essentially, Fraser’s updated text portrayed conservatives as bigots, Trump as mentally unstable, and the Black Lives Matter movement as a reasonable response to a police force acting like an “occupying army” in a “mostly African-American town.”

It was hit job as history.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

What if Mueller Questioned Barack Obama? By Victor Davis Hanson

Posted By on May 4th, 2018

Imagine if a right-wing version of Robert Mueller, backed by a properly pro-Trump legal team, had sent former President Barack Obama the same sort of questions that Mueller allegedly delivered this week to President Trump. The special counsel might dress them up in legalese, innuendo, and with perjury-trap IEDs, thereby casting suspicion with the mere nature of the questions.

If so, the interrogatories might run like the following—

President Obama:

What did you mean when you were heard, by accident, on a hot mic, providing the following assurances to outgoing Russian Prime Minister Medvedev: “On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved, but it’s important for him to give me space . . . This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility”?

Did you and the Russian government have any private agreements to readjust Russian-American relations during your own 2012 reelection campaign? Were there other such discussions similar to your comments to Prime Minister Medvedev?

If so, do you believe such Russian collusion had any influence on the outcome of the 2012 election?

Did your subsequent reported suspension of, or reduction in, some planned missile defense programs, especially in Eastern Europe, have anything to do with the assurances that you gave to the Russian Prime Minister?

Did the subsequent Russian quietude during your 2012 reelection campaign have anything to do with your assurances of promised changes in U.S. foreign policy?

Did you adjudicate U.S. responses to Russian behavior on the basis of your own campaign re-election concerns?

More specifically, what exactly did you mean when you asked the Russian Prime Minister for “space”? And further what did you intend by suggesting that after your 2012 election you would have more “flexibility” with the Russian government?

Would you please define “flexibility” in this context?

What do you think Prime Minister Medvedev meant when he replied to your request for space, and your promise for flexibility after the election, with: “Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you . . . I understand . . . I will transmit this information to Vladimir.”

Did you hear subsequently from the Russians that Prime Medvedev had delivered the message that you had intended for Vladimir Putin?

EDUCATION Comments turned off

A Viral Video Featuring the N-Word Sparks Calls for More Black Campus Hires Black conservative authors suggest a different response. Danusha V. Goska

Posted By on May 4th, 2018

On April 22, 2018, Miki Cammarata, the Vice President for Student Development at William Paterson University in Wayne, New Jersey, released an email. Cammarata condemned a social media video featuring a William Paterson student, Jasmine Barkley. Cammarata called Barkley’s comments “abhorrent and racially charged.” “We are disgusted,” Cammarata wrote. Barkley’s statement “does not reflect our values.” “University staff are investigating.”

In the video, Jasmine Barkley asks, “Is it appropriate for me to say the word n—–, if it is in the lyrics of a song and I’m singing the lyrics, or is it not appropriate for me to say n—–? Let me know.” Barkley’s video is eleven seconds long.

A Twitter user who self-identifies as “Seun the Activist, Son of the Most High,” aka Seun Babalola, tweeted the video at 8:57 a.m. on April 22. Cammarata’s response appeared three hours later. Also on April 22, Nicole DeFeo, International Executive Director of Delta Phi Epsilon, Barkley’s sorority, promised “swift, decisive action.” In 1984-style language, Barkley was “disaffiliated immediately.”

On Monday, April 23, the Beacon, the William Paterson school newspaper, posted an open letter from Barkley. “I am not a racist. I believe in equality … I posed a controversial question.” Barkley quoted TV personality Lenard McKelvey, aka Charlamagne Tha God.

McKelvey, in a 2013 interview, said, “Until we stop using the word n—–, we can’t get mad at nobody else for using the word … If something’s bad, it’s bad, period. It can’t be good when I do it and bad when you do it … If you really want to make a stand against the n-word, stop using it. Teach people how to treat you. People are going to treat you how you treat yourself.” Protesting when whites use the n-word is hypocritical, he said. If Malcolm X or Martin Luther King returned, they would not be shocked at whites using the n-word; they’d be shocked at blacks using the n-word. “Is this what we died and marched for? Is this what we got beat with sticks and had dogs sicced and got sprayed with hoses for y’all to be walking around and carrying yourselves like this?”

“Freaky Friday,” the song Barkley’s friend was singing along to, does indeed contain the n-word, repeated eleven times. “Freaky Friday,” as do many popular rap and hip hop songs, refers to women as “bitch,” including the singer’s mother, and “hos,” or whores. It also refers to “pussies.” In the video, nearly naked white women advertise the black singer’s worth by writhing against him. “Freaky Friday” includes graphic references to male anatomy, for example, “his dick staying perched up on his balls.” The f-word is repeated ten times.

ISRAEL Comments turned off

The Great Deception March on Gaza’s Border The truth about the latest Palestinian assault on Israel.Noah Beck

Posted By on May 4th, 2018

What would the US do if 30,000 Mexicans, organized by a known terrorist group, marched towards the Texas border, demanding to return to their ancestors’ homes, with many of the protesters throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails, carrying fence cutters, launching burning kites that set ablaze US territory near the border, igniting tires, and even shooting guns at US agents across the border?

If the US used force to protect its border against such a “peaceful protest,” what percent of the 30,000 Mexicans would end up dead or injured? Would it be more or less than 40 (about .13%)? And how would the global media and human rights organizations cover these incidents?

Now consider the reaction to Israel’s defense against precisely this kind of assault on its sovereign border, dubbed the “Great Return March” and organized by Hamas, a US-State-Department-designated-terrorist organization. Hamas has acknowledged that at least five of its members were among those killed in the march. The number of terrorists involved in the related violence is likely much higher. According to the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center, “32 of the 40 Palestinians killed (80%) were terrorist operatives or individuals affiliated with them.”

If the “Great Return March” had any truth to it, the Hamas-organized propaganda offensive would have been called the “Great Deception March” because it is entirely founded upon deception. Incredibly, on April 6, an advisor to Mahmoud Abbas, leader of the Palestinian Authority (PA), himself highlighted the deceptive nature of the march, accusing Hamas of “only selling illusions, trading in suffering and blood.” Mahmoud Al-Habbash, Abbas’ Advisor on Islamic Affairs and Supreme Sharia Judge, delivered a sermon, broadcast on official PA TV, in the presence of Abbas, in which Al-Habbash accused Hamas of intentionally sending Palestinians in Gaza to “go and die,” only so that Hamas has stories of dead Palestinians for “the TV and media.”

IMMIGRATION Comments turned off

A Broken Immigration System And the “fix” that would make it much worse. Michael Cutler

Posted By on May 4th, 2018

While politicians from both the Democratic and Republican parties may have differences on some issues, you may be shocked to know that there is clear evidence that the leadership of both parties favor the continuation of the immigration crisis caused by the dysfunctional “broken” immigration system.

Americans have been duped into believing immigration is a “Left” vs “Right” issue when leadership of both parties essentially want the same thing.

Nancy Pelosi outrageously claimed that “DREAMERs are the best of the best of the best during a lengthy tirade. However, on April 17, 2018 Breitbart reported, ‘DREAMers Are Among Our Best and Brightest:’ Koch Brothers to Push Amnesty with Seven-Figure Ad Campaign.

That article began with the following statement:

Pro-mass immigration GOP megadonor billionaires the Koch brothers are set to release a seven-figure ad campaign to push amnesty for millions of illegal aliens in the United States, just months ahead of the 2018 midterm elections.

The Koch brothers are hardly they only “Conservative” campaign contributors who take this anti-American position.

As I have noted in previous articles, politicians are not unlike magicians who promise to cut their lovely assistants in half.

The magician knows that if they makes good on that promise, they will go to prison for a long, long time and, even if they are ever let out of jail, no one will ever work with them again.

FOREIGN POLICY Comments turned off

For Democrats, the Iran Deal is Becoming the Peace Process BY: Noah Pollak

Posted By on May 4th, 2018

For the American left, the Iran nuclear deal is becoming the peace process—that is, a landmark foreign policy project of a Democratic president reflecting the most cherished liberal beliefs about the world, that is failing at great cost to millions of people yet whose failure cannot be admitted.

The political beliefs that marched liberals down both of these diplomatic dead-ends were the same. Democratic administrations sought to turn anti-western enemies into friends, terrorists into decent citizens, through diplomatic engagement, concessions, and money. They were sympathetic to the Palestinian and Iranian Third Worldist rhetoric of resentment and accusation, and believed that by acknowledging grievances the United States could prove its good intentions, open dialogue, build trust, and transcend old misunderstandings and conflicts. Layered on all this is the rational materialist worldview; Clinton and Obama couldn’t seem to grasp that some people prefer their concept of honor or victory to a higher per-capita GDP.

President Obama articulated all this perfectly in late 2014, as he began selling the Iran deal:

[Iran has] a path to break through that isolation and they should seize it. Because if they do, there’s incredible talent and resources and sophistication inside of—inside of Iran, and it would be a very successful regional power that was also abiding by international norms and international rules, and that would be good for everybody.”

The peace process and the Iran deal are the two great liberal foreign policy projects of the past 30 years, neither of them has worked, the sources of their failure are identical, and in both cases the left is handling its failure the same way: by denying it exists, by relying on friends in the media and in Europe to cover it up, and by scapegoating those who point it out as warmongers.