Displaying posts published in

February 2016

Oberlin Professor Claims Israel Was Behind 9/11, ISIS, Charlie Hebdo Attack by David Gerstman

A professor at Oberlin College, one of the most prestigious institutes of higher education in the country, has written and shared a series of Facebook posts claiming that Jews or Israelis control much of the world and are responsible for the 9/11 and Charlie Hebdo attacks and the rise of ISIS.

Joy Karega, an assistant professor of Rhetoric and Composition, shared a graphic shortly after the Charlie Hebdo shooting last year of an ISIS terrorist pulling off a mask resembling Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. The terrorist has a tattoo with a Star of David and the acronym “JSIL” – presumably a Jewish version of ISIL/ISIS. The picture includes graphic text implying that the murder of cartoonists was a “false flag” conspiracy designed to stop French support for Palestinians. In the accompanying status, Karega wrote, “This ain’t even hard. They unleashed Mossad on France and it’s clear why.” The Mossad is Israel’s national intelligence agency.

She wrote the same day that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu went to the massive free-speech rally in Paris “uninvited and of course he went even when he was asked by Pres. Hollande (France) not to come. Netanyahu wanted to bend Hollande and French governmental officials over one more time in public just in case the message wasn’t received via Massod [sic] and the ‘attacks’ they orchestrated in Paris.” She neglected to mention that Netanayhu was in Paris to honor four Jews who were killed in a terror attack in a kosher supermarket that same week. Karega also wrote in November that ISIS was not really Islamic, but rather “a CIA and Mossad operation, and there’s too much information out here for the general public not to know this.”

UAlbany Students Facing Assault Charges after Reporting Fake Hate Crime By Debra Heine

Three SUNY Albany students are facing criminal charges after falsely claiming they were victims of a racially motivated attack on January 30. The three African American women, Ariel Agudio, Alexis Briggs, and Asha Burwell, all 20, will be charged with third-degree assault and with falsely reporting an incident.

Early Saturday morning on January 30, Agudio, Briggs, and Burwell claimed they were harassed and assaulted by a mob of white people while riding on a CDTA bus back to campus from the bars in Albany.

Their story involved 10-20 white students spewing racial epithets and punching and kicking them while on the bus.

After the alleged assault, at least two of the women took to Twitter and Instagram with their claims.

“I just got jumped on a bus while people hit us and called us the ‘n’ word and nobody helped us,” wrote one of the students.

“I got beat up by 20 people screaming racial slurs,” wrote another, later adding that “a whole bunch of guys started hitting me and my two friends.”

One of them also wrote on Twitter: “I begged people to help us and instead of help they told us to shut the (bleep) up and continuously hit us in the head.”

Asha Burwell tweeted: “I can’t believe I just experienced what it’s like to be beaten because of the color of my skin.”

Her brother, San Diego Chargers lineman Tyreek Burwell, tweeted a threatening message to a student he thought hurt his sister.

David Duke Supports Trump, Urges White Supremacists to Volunteer for Campaign “Voting against Donald Trump at this point is really treason to your heritage,” he says of Rubio, Cruz. By Bridget Johnson

White supremacist David Duke told his listeners the day after the Nevada caucuses that it was a “historic day… maybe the day that turned the tide” not only for the the GOP nomination as “things are more and more encouraging that Donald Trump could be the president.”

The onetime grand wizard of Louisiana’s Ku Klux Klan — who served in Louisiana’s legislature and mounted unsuccessful campaigns for other offices including Congress and the governor’s mansion — lauded Trump’s front-runner status as the “most insurgent campaign in recent history.”

“He’s gotten the same kind of votes that I’ve gotten… he’s gotten the same kind of votes as George Wallace,” Duke said in the audio first reported by Buzzfeed.

“When he takes on immigration, the open borders, he’s really taking on the Jewish establishment.”

Railing against “Jewish control of America,” Duke said Trump “doesn’t take this on straight, anyway,” but “he definitely came out” on related issues such as fair trade and “stop the immigration.”

“I was the first Republican to make an issue against affirmative action… that was one of my planks and platforms. Donald Trump hasn’t taken that on straightforwardly, but he’s done it peripherally by showing that Black Lives Matter is really about racism against whites. That’s the message that he’s saying,” he added.

Voting for Sens. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) or Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and “voting against Donald Trump at this point is really treason to your heritage,” Duke told his listeners. “Now, I’m not saying I endorse everything about Trump, in fact I haven’t formally endorsed him, but I do support his candidacy and I support voting for him as a strategic action. I hope he does everything we hope he will do.”

“I don’t know if he will or not, but we know his candidacy is an insurgency that is waking up millions of Americans and I’m telling you it’s your job now to get active. Get off your duff, get off your rear end that’s getting fatter and fatter for many of you every day … call Donald Trump’s headquarters, volunteer… you’re going to meet people there who have the same kind of mindset.”

Duke encouraged Trump volunteers to “educate” others, particularly telling evangelicals that supporting Jews is “absolutely like supporting the enemies of Jesus Christ.”

GOOD NEWS FROM MIZZOU-

Update: Mizzou uses its ultimate muscle against Melissa Click By Ethel C. Fenig

Using its ultimate muscle and getting her out of there, the University of Missouri at Columbia fired assistant professor of communications Melissa Click because, as the official statement bluntly stated:

The board believes that Dr. Click’s conduct was not compatible with university policies and did not meet expectations for a university faculty member. The circumstances surrounding Dr. Click’s behavior, both at a protest in October when she tried to interfere with police officers who were carrying out their duties, and at a rally in November, when she interfered with members of the media and students who were exercising their rights in a public space and called for intimidation against one of our students, we believe demands serious action.

The board respects Dr. Click’s right to express her views and does not base this decision on her support for students engaged in protest or their views. However, Dr. Click was not entitled to interfere with the rights of others, to confront members of law enforcement or to encourage potential physical intimidation against a student.

The photo of an angry Click, arms upraised, macro-aggressively shouting, “Hey who wants to help me get this reporter out of here? I need some muscle over here!” at the November rally mentioned in the statement above, quickly became a symbol of the protest at Mizzou, summarizing the out-of-control, intimidating behavior by some students and faculty on college campuses across the nation against those who do not agree with their world vision.

Oh, by the way, did you notice that Ms. Click, whose specialty is teaching communications, was attempting to halt communications and media people, whose opinions differed from hers, from communicating? And was communicating by force? Is this how she was teaching communications in class?

Three Simple Questions for Trump Supporters By Daren Jonescu

…..As I consider the rise of Donald Trump, and how he has sucked most of the air out of the constitutionalist movement, I can’t stop thinking about it. Trump’s supporters remind me of my eleven-year-old self, so excited about their incredible triumph that they have blinded themselves to the obvious. However, as the circumstances of their delusion are much more serious and less benign than my childhood touchdown, there is nothing kind about refraining from asking them an awkward question or three.

So today, addressing myself to any Trump supporters who are not already lost to the irrational anger he feeds on — please don’t scream about “righteous anger,” as if I don’t know the difference between justice and wrath — I pose three simple questions:

(1) Don’t you get the strange feeling that this has all been suspiciously easy?

Consider the fates of all previous GOP candidates to run against the party elite. Remember Herman Cain the creepy philanderer? Michele Bachmann the hysterical religious fanatic? Rick Santorum the Catholic extremist who was going to outlaw birth control and lock all women in the kitchen? And of course Ronald Reagan, the rare success story who taught the insiders a lesson they have never forgotten about the need for a unified strategy to nip all serious challenges in the bud?

But forget about the past; today we have Ted Cruz, the maniacal government-hating crusader and despicable liar whom everybody hates, who is owned by Goldman Sachs, and who may not even be an American!

In light of this consistent pattern of preemptive assault from the “left” and “right” against all anti-establishment GOP candidates, isn’t it odd that Trump, who has been the obvious frontrunner in the primaries since last summer, and who presents as inviting a target for a media takedown effort as any candidate has ever presented, has been given a pass? In fact, he’s been given much better than a pass. Aside from the nonstop free advertising he is getting as celebrity of the year, the most overtly leftist news network, MSNBC, has actively helped to create an aura of inevitability around him, and to demean his opponents. Meanwhile, has there been even one serious attempt on any twenty-four hour news network to dredge up and pursue any kind of scandal, ugly rumor, old girlfriends, shady business associates, anything at all that might undermine his campaign?

As for the “conservative media,” in the fall of 2011, Matt Drudge and Ann Coulter put all their weight behind the establishment’s preferred candidate, Mitt Romney. And over the past several months, those same two bigwigs have invested all their savings in Trump stock. Four years ago, Rush Limbaugh pussy-footed (that means walking like a kitten, by the way) around Romney throughout the primaries; this time he seems to be walking even more gingerly around his golf buddy Trump, defending him as an anti-establishment champion, and even half-excusing his “Bush allowed 9/11 to happen” bluster in South Carolina as “strategy.”

‘The Circus: Inside the Greatest Political Show on Earth’ Review: Winning Is What Matters From a trio of campaign-trail veterans comes a docuseries that follows the 2016 election. Dorothy Rabinowitz

http://www.wsj.com/articles/the-circus-inside-the-greatest-political-show-on-earth-review-winning-is-what-matters-1456439178

Rarely does a grandiose claim feel as apt as the one in the subtitle of this series. Undeniably, the current primaries and virtually everything else connected with the American presidential election of 2016 have made for the most riveting, not to mention embittering, political spectacle in memory, and we’re still only at the beginning stages. All the more reason to treasure an enterprise that preserves the small details as “The Circus” does—brief moments that capture the flavor of this race, the light as well as the dark, the faces of Americans rapturous with enthusiasm or etched with doubt as they listen to candidates come to ask for their vote in the crucial primaries.
The creators of “Circus”—veteran political strategist Mark McKinnon and Bloomberg Politics managing editors Mark Halperin and John Heilemann—focus their documentary efforts on what goes on backstage during the arduous primaries battles, but there’s no stinting on the extravaganzas taking place on the public stages themselves. At a Pensacola, Fla., rally packed with Donald Trump fans, where the candidate takes a shot at Ted Cruz—“You can’t win if you’re born in Canada’’—and alludes to “Crazy Bernie,” then predicts “I think I’m gonna win in Iowa” (he didn’t), the crowd roars its ecstasy, a tremendous din. The filmmakers, who deliver snippets of commentary, note Mr. Trump’s obvious rock-star appeal—a power, one says, that you can’t buy.

But there’s another rock star of sorts on the campaign trail: Bernie Sanders, whose wife, Jane, is a constant presence at his side and far more talkative than her husband, who isn’t prone to sharing much beyond his political message. He’s shown a noteworthy fastidiousness when questioned, for instance, about his religious heritage: American Jews whose parents emigrated from Poland don’t usually describe their parents, as Mr. Sanders tellingly does, as “Polish immigrants.” READ MORE AT SITE

America’s New Libyan War Obama orders a tepid fight against Islamic State in North Africa.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/americas-new-libyan-war-1456448403

President Obama has been learning the hard lesson that, in war, you can’t declare premature victory and go home. That’s the story of Iraq, where the U.S. has returned thousands of troops to fight Islamic State long after the President declared the Iraq War over and done. It’s also true in Afghanistan, where he has quietly abandoned plans to withdraw all U.S. forces in the face of major gains by the Taliban.

The same story now seems to be unfolding in Libya. On Tuesday the Italian government acknowledged that it had given permission for armed U.S. drones based in Sicily to carry out operations against Islamic State in Libya. The Italians will grant approval on a “case-by-case” basis, and then only for what they deem “defensive operations.” On Tuesday the Journal cited U.S. officials saying that the drones would be used “to protect U.S. special-operations forces in Libya and beyond.”

That’s the closest we’ve heard to official confirmation that the U.S. has special forces operating in Libya, though in December an undercover team conducting “key leader engagements” was accidentally outed on social media, leading to their hasty departure. What isn’t a secret is that the U.S. last week hit an Islamic State training camp near the city of Sabratha in western Libya, killing dozens of terrorists. That follows November’s U.S. air strike that killed Islamic State leader Abu Nabil. READ MORE AT SITE

Justice and Clinton’s Email Probe A ‘career’ official doesn’t guarantee an honest investigation.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/justice-and-clintons-email-probe-1456448102

Attorney General Loretta Lynch this week tried to assure House Republicans about the impartiality of her department’s investigation into Hillary Clinton’s State Department emails by noting that it would be handled by career government officials. This claim could stand a little parsing.

The probe into her possible mishandling of classified information “is being handled by career independent law enforcement agents—FBI agents—as well as the career independent attorneys in the Department of Justice,” Ms. Lynch said Wednesday. “They follow the evidence, they look at the law and they’ll make a recommendation to me when the time is appropriate,” adding that the probe is being “conducted as every other case.”

That’s what they always say, and it is nice to think so. But there’s reason to doubt given the example of Justice’s investigation into the IRS targeting of conservative groups before the 2012 election. To lead that probe, then Attorney General Eric Holder appointed Barbara Bosserman, a trial attorney in the department’s Civil Rights Division.

Ms. Bosserman’s appointment was curious given that her area of expertise is civil rights, not tax law. She had also donated $6,100 to President Obama’s campaigns and the Obama Victory Fund in 2008 and 2012. That’s no small donation on a career employee’s salary and suggests some serious political loyalty. READ MORE AT SITE

Under Pope Francis and President Xi, hopes rise for a thaw in ties By Jiang Jie Source By Jiang Jie Source

After decades of frozen ties, China and the Vatican seem to be witnessing a slow but significant change in relations. While divergences remain, including on the issue of who gets to appoint bishops, experts and religious leaders have seen progress in the overall tone of dialogue.

Over 8,000 kilometers away from each other, the Vatican City seems incompatible in many ways with Beijing, the hearts of the Catholic faith and the biggest Communist nation, the country with the smallest population in the world and the country with the largest.

Since 1951, the two sides have lacked official diplomatic connections. As the two countries welcomed new leaders in recent years, some have hoped for a thawing in ties.

These hopes have gained momentum since October 2015, when the Vatican Secretary of State, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, said that China and the Holy See were engaged in a “positive” dialogue. Cardinal Parolin also confirmed that a papal delegation would visit Beijing, adding that they would discuss normalization of relations.

Less than four months later, a Chinese delegation visited the Holy See in late January.

Early in February, American Cardinal Theodore McCarrick traveled to China – a trip in which the cardinal said he would visit some “old friends.” While the cardinal insisted in an exclusive interview with the Global Times that he was not visiting in his “official capacity,” his trip has shown that ties are growing more comfortable.

Cardinal McCarrick, former archbishop of Washington, DC, is the first cardinal from a Western country to visit the Chinese mainland since Sino-Vatican ties turned sour, South China Morning Post reported. He has reportedly visited China eight times since the 1990s.

Michael Copeman: The Obama Doctrine’s Final Act

After eight years of alienating allies, abrogating leadership, eschewing hard decisions and spuriously explaining away Islamic outrages, all that remains to be done is a final spectacle to capture the spirit of his administration: a Rose Garden reception and apology for Gitmo’s liberated inmates
A simple way for President Obama to belatedly fulfill his confident 2008 election promise to close Guantanamo Bay (Gitmo) would be to invite all current inmates to join the First Couple at the White House. That would be an act of reconciliation and forgiveness at its most spectacular, the crowning moment of a ground-breaking presidency. His eight years have seen rapprochements with US-hating Venezuela, Cuba and Iran, so why not Gitmo inmates?

Just picture the scene: In a ceremony televised from the Rose Garden, Obama could personally apologise to each detainee and present his honoured guests with large, appropriate sums by way of compensation. That would be small consolation for their abductions at gunpoint, prolonged incarceration, and extended time away from loved ones and their important work, which is the destruction of Western society in the name of radical Islam.

What is clear is that a significant body of inmates released from Gitmo is likely to return rapidly to the cause of terrorism. But not to worry! As Secretary of State John Kerry explains in the video below, there is nothing about the release of homicidal religious fanatics which needs concern reasonable people — the sort who believe Obama to have been a competent president, at any rate.

Gitmo was a vexed solution created by frustrated people in response to a terrible problem created by evil people. But, to the extent that it took likely leaders of global terrorism out of action, it has undoubtedly saved lives. Its existence may even have encouraged ordinary citizens in countries threatened daily by terrorism to go about their lives with just a little less fear.