FOREIGN POLICY Comments turned off

Trump’s State of the Union bolsters allies’ confidence Ambassador (Ret.) Yoram Ettinger

Posted By on February 3rd, 2018

President Trump’s first State of the Union aimed at bolstering the US posture of deterrence, reassuring allies and putting enemies and adversaries on notice.

The more reinforced the US posture of deterrence, the more restrained is the offensive conduct of Iran’s Ayatollahs and Islamic terror organizations – as well as the global activism of Russia and China – and the more secure are US allies, such as Israel, the Arab Gulf States, Jordan and Egypt.

The post-Reagan years have yielded a systematic erosion of the US posture of deterrence, adrenalizing the megalomaniacal veins of the rogue Ayatollahs and Muslim Brotherhood terrorists, whose machetes are at the throat of every US ally in the Middle East.

President Trump’s critical and urgent challenge is to reconnect the US national and homeland security policy with the 1,400-year-old unpredictable, violent, treacherous and threatening Middle East reality, and disconnect from former President Obama’s worldview, which window-dressed the volcanic, anti-Western Middle East reality to accord the principles of peaceful-coexistence and the struggle for human rights and economic prosperity.

The confidence of US allies in the Middle East – facing lethal threats internally and externally – was undermined by President Obama’s worldview, which subordinated the US independence of unilateral military action to multilateralism; accorded the UN and Europe central roles in shaping the international arena; considered any war as immoral, and aspired to advance peace at, almost, any price; assessed Islam as a religion of peace, not a threat; viewed Islamic terrorism as “workplace violence and the horrific outburst of violence” (as erupted in Ft. Hood, Texas in November 2009); determined that the triggers of terrorism were poverty, despair, erroneous US policy and US troops on Muslim lands; assumed that the means of combatting terrorism were law-enforcement, diplomacy, economic support, reasoning with rogue regimes and a very limited military commitment; embraced the worldview of the State Department, which opposed the establishment of Israel in 1948, and perceives the Jewish State a strategic liability in 2018.

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Islam in Global Politics: A Civilizational Crisis? By Clive Kessler

Posted By on February 3rd, 2018

“Islam in Global Politics.” How one addresses this issue depends not just on the meaning of those four words —— “Islam,” “Global” “politics,” and also “in” —— both individually and together. It also depends on how you see and approach the question that they together pose. On the attitude or approach that you adopt. Is it one of:

Islam and Muslims asserting themselves in, imposing themselves and their agenda upon, global politics? or of
Islam and Muslims within, and finding their world-historical place within, and engaging with —— respectfully engaging with —— diverse, plural and (in significant measure non-Muslim) global humankind: in and as part of a sincere effort by all to find, negotiate, establish a way, or ways, of “sharing the world”? Decently and constructively sharing the world?

These are two radically, different and contrasting attitudes and approaches.

One is egotistic, immature, narcissistic (akin to an infantile “Me! Me! Me!” tantrum); it rests upon a childish notion that sees only oneself as real, and others as merely the sociocultural backdrop, the historical context, of one’s own needs, agenda and “narrative”;

The other, alone, is mature, humane, constructive, exceeds the bounds and framework of infantile wish-fulfillment drives.

To be specific. “Islam in Global Politics”: there is today no more high-profile and urgent instance than “The Jerusalem Question.”

There are two parts to this problem —— and they are not the same. They are related, but not one and the same thing. Both must be understood, and they must both be resolved.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

House Memo Details Use of Steele Dossier to Spy on Trump Campaign Adviser The memo appears to confirm suspicions that a FISA court warrant targeted Carter Page based on information in the dossier funded by Hillary Clinton’s campaign. By Andrew C. McCarthy

Posted By on February 3rd, 2018

What we have long suspected (see, e.g., here and here) has now been confirmed: The Obama Justice Department and the FBI used the unverified Steele dossier to convince a federal court to issue a warrant authorizing surveillance of a Trump campaign adviser. Confirmation came in the much-anticipated memorandum released today by the Republican-controlled House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.

The memo states that the Obama administration concealed from the court that the dossier was commissioned and paid for by the political campaign of Donald Trump’s Democratic opponent, Hillary Clinton. Nor was the court informed that the dossier’s author, former British spy Christopher Steele, told a senior Justice Department official that he was “desperate” to prevent Trump from being elected president.

Moreover, despite presenting dossier information as probable cause on four separate occasions — for the initial FISA warrant in October 2016, and three times in the ensuing months — the FBI failed to verify the dossier’s explosive allegations and failed to inform the court that its efforts to corroborate the allegations had been unavailing. Indeed, the memo relates that the government once presented a news story to the court as corroboration for Steele’s claims, apparently unaware that Steele himself was the source for the news story.

The dossier was a compilation of Steele’s reports, based on anonymous Russian sources. His informants provided information based on accounts that were multiple levels of hearsay removed from the events they purported to describe.

The FISA court warrant targeted Carter Page, who had volunteered to serve as a Trump campaign foreign-policy adviser. The memo relates that the warrant was originally issued on October 21, 2016, and re-authorized three times thereafter. Under FISA, warrants targeting American citizens lapse after 90 days. If you’re keeping score, that means a warrant based on claims that Trump was corruptly aligned with the Kremlin was renewed twice after Donald Trump became president.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

Trump Triumphs with Release of House Intel Memo BY DAVID P. GOLDMAN

Posted By on February 3rd, 2018

The House Intelligence Committee memo on abuse of power by the Federal Bureau of Investigation appeared just after 12:00 p.m. Eastern time, and American political life never will be the same. The House Republicans make a persuasive if not prima facie case that senior FBI officials used a fake dossier paid for by the Democrats to get a court order for electronic surveillance of the Trump campaign. If the charge sticks, America will have a real-life instance of the sort of scenario found in pulp thrillers—a rogue intelligence agency operating in the darkness and abusing its power to manipulate elections.

Senior FBI and CIA officials (as well as a number of prominent Democrats) accused Trump of endangering national security by releasing the memo. This recalls the old Soviet-era joke about the Radio Yerevan listener who calls in to ask whether it’s a crime to call Brezhnev an idiot. The answer: “Yes, because it’s a state secret.”

This is political plutonium.

Here are the basic facts:

Under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA), the U.S. counterintelligence service cannot surveil American citizens without a court order. The FBI obtained such a warrant in October 2016 to eavesdrop on Trump campaign volunteer Carter Page.

ISRAEL Comments turned off

Palestinians: Arbitrary Arrests, Administrative Detentions and World Silence by Khaled Abu Toameh

Posted By on February 2nd, 2018

While Israel uses “administrative detention” as a tool to thwart terrorism, the Palestinian Authority (PA) leadership holds people without trial as a means to silence them and prevent them from voicing any form of criticism against Mahmoud Abbas and other Palestinian leaders.

While administrative detainees in Israel are entitled to see a lawyer, receive family visits and appeal against their incarceration, the Palestinians detained by the PA are denied basic rights. Yet, Israel-obsessed human rights organizations seem uninterested in this fact.

Particularly disturbing, however, is not that the PA leadership is acting as a tyrannical regime, but the abiding silence and indifference of the international community and human rights organizations. Those who scream bloody murder about Israel’s security measures against terrorism would do the Palestinians a better service by opening their mouths about how human rights are ravaged under the PA.

For many years, Palestinians and their supporters around the world have been condemning Israel for arresting suspected terrorists without trial.

It turns out, however, that the Palestinian Authority (PA) also has a similar policy that permits one of its senior officials to order the arrest of any Palestinian, regardless of the nature of the offense he or she commits.

Israel holds suspected terrorists in “administrative detention” on the basis of laws such as: Israeli Military Order regarding no. 1651 Security Provisions, Incarceration of Unlawful Combatants Law and Defense (Emergency) Regulations, a law that replaces the emergency laws from the period of the British Mandate of Palestine (1920-1948).

It is worth noting that Israeli citizens, and not only Palestinians, have also been held in “administrative detention” over the past few decades. This means that Israel does not distinguish between a Palestinian and an Israeli when it comes to combatting terrorism.

While the campaign against Israel’s “administrative detentions” has been going on, the Palestinian Authority has been, according to Palestinian human rights activists and lawyers, conducting unlawful and arbitrary arrests against its own constituents.

Once again, the double standards of the Palestinians and their international supporters have been exposed.

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Polish Holocaust Bill Raises Concerns Over Free Speech, Anti-Semitism Senate backs bill that would impose jail sentences for accusing Polish population of collaborating during World War II By Drew Hinshaw and Rory Jones

Posted By on February 2nd, 2018

Poland’s parliament passed a libel bill Thursday imposing jail sentences for accusing the Polish population of collaborating in the Holocaust or other war crimes, sparking concerns from Israel and the U.S. that a close ally was limiting free expression and flirting with anti-Semitism.

American and Israeli diplomats condemned the legislation, passed by the upper house of the country’s legislature, which would set up to three years’ imprisonment for blaming the wartime murder of roughly six million Jews on the Polish state or people.

The vote comes against a wider backdrop of rising nationalism and increasing state control over democratic institutions, including the media and the courts. Critics accused the government of turning a blind eye to a rising tide of xenophobia late last year after a march organized by a movement that seeks an ethnically pure Poland drew some 60,000 people.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called his Polish counterpart earlier this week to lobby against the law, according to Polish media, and Mr. Netanyahu’s government has likened the law to state denial of the Holocaust.

“Israel opposes categorically the Polish Senate decision,” Emmanuel Nahshon, spokesman for Israel’s foreign ministry said in a statement. “Israel views with utmost gravity any attempt to challenge historical truth. No law will change the facts.”

U.S. diplomats said it would impinge on free speech and called for Poland to reconsider the bill: “We all must be careful not to inhibit discussion and commentary on the Holocaust,” a statement from the U.S. State Department said.

The bill, which requires the signature of President Andrzej Duda to become law, touches on a bedrock emotional and historical subject for both Poland and Israel. It doesn’t mention the Holocaust, or World War II. But it criminalizes accusing the Polish state or population for responsibility or complicity in any crime against humanity, at any point in history.

The subtext was widely understood to be the Nazi-led genocide that took place largely on Polish soil in the 1940s. Nearly 90% of Poland’s three million Jews—along with about three million non-Polish Jews and another three million non-Jewish Poles—were killed after Germany’s 1939 invasion of its eastern neighbor.

Poland’s government was in exile or hiding throughout the war. Unlike France, Belgium, or Norway, there was no organized state effort by Polish people to deport Jews. As many as 400,000 Poles fought the Nazi soldiers occupying their country. CONTINUE AT SITE

WORLD NEWS Comments turned off

Joshua Wong, a Young Democracy Icon, Is Nominated for Nobel Prize The move risks triggering a reproach from China By Natasha Khan

Posted By on February 2nd, 2018

HONG KONG— Joshua Wong, the university student who became the face of Hong Kong’s democracy movement, has been nominated along with other local activists for the Nobel Peace Prize by a group of U.S. lawmakers, a move that risks a rebuke from China.

The 12 politicians, led by Sen. Marco Rubio (R., Fla.) and Rep. Christopher Smith (R., N.J.), wrote in a letter to the Norwegian Nobel Committee that the entire pro-democracy movement should receive the honor “in recognition of their peaceful efforts to bring political reform” to Hong Kong, where many have decried Beijing’s increasing control.

The nomination threatens to anger the Chinese government, which has insisted that Hong Kong’s affairs are a domestic matter because the former British colony is a special administrative region of China. The House of Representatives passed a resolution on Nov. 1 urging Beijing to stick to the “one country, two systems” agreement, made before Hong Kong’s return to Chinese rule in 1997, that affords the city a high degree of autonomy and its residents greater liberties than those on the mainland.

Sen. Rubio and Rep. Smith are the chair and cochair, respectively, of the bipartisan Congressional-Executive Commission on China.

Mr. Wong and fellow activists Nathan Law and Alex Chow led pro-democracy protests in 2014 that became known as the Umbrella Movement. Tens of thousands of demonstrators, seeking freer elections without Beijing’s interference, blocked highways for three months — but ultimately failed to extract democratic concessions from the Chinese government.

The movement is credited with birthing a new political class in the Asian financial hub, including the political party Demosisto, which Messrs. Wong and Law founded with others.

Their efforts have faced setbacks in recent months.​ Mr. Wong, who is 21 years old, was jailed for his role in the protests—and in a separate case for contempt of court—with the sentence length rendering him ineligible for office for five years. He is appealing both sentences. CONTINUE AT SITE

ENVIRONMENT AND JUNK SCIENCE Comments turned off

Drilled, Baby, Drilled A decade ago Barack Obama mocked Sarah Palin. Who was right?

Posted By on February 2nd, 2018

Readers of pre-millennial vintage may recall the 2008 presidential campaign when Republicans and especially Sarah Palin picked up the chant “drill, baby, drill” as a response to soaring oil prices. The theme was much derided, not least by Barack Obama, who as late as 2012 called it “a slogan, a gimmick, and a bumper sticker” but “not a strategy.” Ten years later, who was right?

The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) reported Thursday that U.S. crude oil production exceeded 10 million barrels a day for the first time since 1970. That’s double the five million barrels produced in 2008, thanks to the boom in, well, drilling, baby.

The EIA summary puts it this way: “U.S. crude oil production has increased significantly over the past 10 years, driven mainly by production from tighter rock formations including shale and other fine-grained rock using horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing to improve efficiency.” This is the “fracking” boom our readers know well that has been driven by innovation in the private oil and gas industry.

The magnitude of the boom is remarkable. The gusher has pushed the U.S. close to overtaking Saudi Arabia and Russia as the world’s leading oil producer. In 2006 the U.S. imported 12.9 million barrels a day of crude and petroleum products. By last October that was down to 2.5 million a day. Some gimmick.
American Oil BoomU.S. monthly crude oil production, in millionsof barrels per day, January 1950-November2017Source: U.S. Energy Information Administration,Petroleum Supply Monthly
.million1960’80200034567891011

This translates into greater energy security as the U.S. is less dependent on foreign oil sources. Donald Trump calls it “energy dominance,” which implies that the U.S. wants to husband its supplies like gold at Fort Knox. The reality is we want to produce and sell what the market will bear, including exports to willing buyers around the world.

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

Memo Reading for Nonpartisans Ignore the spin. When the document goes public, here’s what to look for. By Kimberley A. Strassel

Posted By on February 2nd, 2018

The White House looks set to release the House Intelligence Committee memo on 2016 government surveillance abuses, which means the attacks on the document by Democrats, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the media are going to get wilder. To help navigate through the spin, here’s a handy guide for what to look for, and what to ignore:

• Rationale. Did the FBI have cause to open a full-blown counterintelligence probe into an active presidential campaign? That’s a breathtakingly consequential and unprecedented action and surely could not be justified without much more than an overheard drunken conversation or an unsourced dossier. What hard evidence did the FBI have?

• Tools and evidence. Government possesses few counterintelligence tools more powerful or frightening than the ability to spy on American citizens. If the FBI obtained permission from the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to monitor Trump aide Carter Page based on information from the Christopher Steele dossier, that in itself is a monumental scandal. It means the FBI used a document commissioned by one presidential campaign as a justification to spy on another. Ignore any arguments that the dossier was not a “basis” for the warrant or only used “in part.” If the FBI had to use it in its application, it means it didn’t have enough other evidence to justify surveillance.

Look to see what else the FBI presented to the court as a justification for monitoring, and whether it was manufactured. Mr. Steele and his client, Fusion GPS, ginned up breathless news stories about the dossier’s unverified accusations in September 2016 in order to influence the election. The FBI sometimes presents news articles to the court, but primarily for corroboration of other facts. If the FBI used the conspiracy stories Mr. Steele was spinning as actual justification—evidence—to the court, that’s out of bounds.

• Omissions and misdirection. What else did the FBI tell the court? One would presume the bureau did its due diligence and knew Mr. Steele ultimately worked for the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. The FISA court puts considerable emphasis on the credibility of sources. Did the FBI inform the court of the Clinton connection? Or did it lean on the claim that the Fusion project was originally funded by Republicans? Such a claim might diminish the partisan stench. But it would also be a falsehood, since the dossier portion of the project was purely funded by Clinton allies. And if the FBI didn’t bother to ask who hired Mr. Steele or Fusion, that’s a scandal all its own.

Also, look to see whether the FBI informed the court that Mr. Steele was blabbing to the press. When he first approached the bureau in July, he hadn’t yet briefed the media. But by September he and Fusion were publicly spinning the dossier for their Democratic client, and the FBI would have known who was generating the stories. Did the FBI continue to attest something that clearly was no longer true?

• Duration of surveillance. The FBI may argue it had good cause to look into Mr. Page. But if months of wiretaps didn’t turn up anything (and surely we’d have heard if they did), the FBI also had a duty to cease such a liberty-busting intrusion. Ask how long this probe went on and whether it was justified, or if the FBI was simply giving itself an open-ended license to spy on a campaign.

Expect Trump critics to renew their effort to turn Mr. Page into a Manchurian aide, seizing on his every action or word while ignoring the small role he played in the campaign, not to mention his obvious oddness. This will be designed to make people forget that for all the focus on Mr. Page, he was and remains a private citizen, who apparently was subject to months of government monitoring based on what may prove nothing more than the gossip of a rival campaign. CONTINUE AT SITE

NATIONAL NEWS & OPINION Comments turned off

Malice Aforethought, an Exercise in Impotence : Edward Cline

Posted By on February 2nd, 2018

It was educational to watch the audience during President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address in Congress the night of January 30th. The Democratic side of the House played dead.

The #Resistance is a hate group. It refuses to acknowledge the election of Donald Trump, even to the point of questioning his physical and mental fitness to be President, and includes in that mantra the implied accusation that Dr. Ronny Jackson, who examined Trump, is lying. It is willing to say anything to damage Trump, no matter how irrational outrageous and unproven. The “Resistance” goes further by attacking anyone associated by Trump, such as Nikki Haley, whom they suggested, was having an affair with him. It was prime meat for the Dems but the rumor went nowhere. You can’t grow rain forest trees in the Gobi Desert.

Overall, the Dems during the SOTUS behaved so predictably anti-Trump that it was a foregone conclusion that they would put on anguished or sour faces when he listed his achievements over the last year:

Reduced black and Hispanic unemployment figures

Two-point-four million new jobs

The Border wall

Merit –based immigration (and doing away with chain and visa immigration policies)

The ubiquity of bonuses for American employees (“crumbs” said Nancy Pelosi)

The decision to make Jerusalem the capital of Israel.

Ridding bureaucracies of unnecessary employees (an indirect assault on the Deep State)

Standing for the National Anthem (an assault on football’s “knee” stunts)