Displaying posts published in

May 2017

Daryl McCann: Comey Fired, Hypocrisy Promoted

Politicians and media outlets have forfeited any semblance of trustworthiness in their manic efforts to bring down President Trump. Consider, for example, how Mrs Clinton’s supporters demanded the FBI chief be fired only to immediately reverse themselves when news of his dismissal broke.

Much of the response to President Trump’s sacking of James B. Comey, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, has been patently hypocritical and partisan. This is not hard to demonstrate. More challenging, and perhaps much more important, is to understand the wider context of the latest outburst of Trump Derangement Syndrome. What might be the real reasons, the ideological circumstances, which explain the determination of the mainstream media, the Democratic Party, bureaucratic executives, CEOs, Hollywood activists, educators, the professoriate and so on – the whole Left Power Elite, in other words – to damage and defame the Trump presidency at every turn.

The charge of hypocrisy almost goes without saying. Ever since Comey informed the Senate Judiciary Committee, on October 28, that the FBI was re-opening its investigation of presidential candidate Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified information during her time as US secretary of state (2009-13), the anti-Trump forces having been baying for Comey’s blood. Their indignation, given the announcement came just 11 days before Election Day, is understandable.

Not even the fact that, on November 6, two days before the election, he once again closed the FBI’s probe into Hillary Clinton’s use of a private email server during her tenure at the Department of State, could he assuage their outrage. On May 3 this year, in front of Senate Judiciary Committee, the FBI Director claimed to feel “” at idea that he could have played any role in effecting the outcome of the election. No mainstream journalist, no Hollywood activist, no Democratic Party spokesman is on record respecting James Comey’s insistence he did right thing: “Lordy, has this been painful. I’ve gotten all kinds of rocks thrown at me and this has been hard, but I think I’ve done the right thing at every turn.”

Certainly Clinton has never forgiven Comey. As recently as two weeks ago she was still blaming Comey’s October 28, 2016, letter to Congress – along with “Russian WikiLeaks” and, of course, misogyny – for her electoral defeat. Perhaps the pretence of Rep. Maxine Waters (D-California), once considered something of an outlier in the Democratic Party but these days no more unbalanced or outrageous than her colleagues, encapsulates up the situation best. President Trump’s dismissal of Comely cannot be supported because it does not meet the “smell test”, and yet were Hillary Clinton the occupant of the Oval Office, Waters would now be supporting Comey’s sacking: “If she had won the White House, I believe that given what he did to her, and what he tried to do, she should have fired him.”

The partisanship of the media against President Trump is obvious to anyone who is not, well, hyper-partisan against Donald J. Trump. For the mainstream media – in not only America but also the UK and Australia – the White House dismissal of FBI Chief Comey smacks of President Nixon’s Watergate cover-up and, more specifically, the “Saturday Night Massacre” of October 20, 1973, in which special prosecutor Archibald Cox was sacked and, nine months later, Richard M. Nixon departed 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue by helicopter in disgrace. This, surely, is to confuse adolescent fantasy with political commentary. The sacking of James Comey, as a number of wags wryly observed, constitutes a cover-up in search of a crime. The Democratic Party’s “tin foil hat” conspiracy that President Trump happens to be an agent of Putin’sRussiaisonlypuerile but, once and for all, allows the Republicans to clean the slate on the so-called McCarthy-era witch-hunts of the 1950s. The moral high ground occupied by American-style liberals, at any rate on the question of guilt-by-association, is over.

Obstruction of the Executive Democrats peddle an absurd standard of FBI accountability.

Progressives have been lamenting the erosion of “democratic norms” in the Trump era, but they’d have more credibility if they didn’t trample constitutional norms in their own rush to run President Trump out of town.

Start with Democratic Senator Mark Warner’s assertion on Fox News Sunday that Attorney General Jeff Sessions should play no role in vetting the next director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

“I think it’s inappropriate that the attorney general, who was supposed to recuse himself for anything dealing with the Russian investigation, and clearly the Russian investigation is tied into who the next FBI director is going to be because the President fired [FBI director James] Comey because of his ties to the Russian investigation,” Mr. Warner said Sunday.

Fox’s Chris Wallace : “You don’t believe he [Mr. Sessions] could be part of this?”

Senator Warner: “I don’t believe he should be part of this review process if he can have a true recusal.”

Mr. Wallace didn’t follow-up, so we will. Mr. Sessions has recused himself from the Russia probe, but the FBI director reports to the Attorney General on hundreds of other matters beyond that one investigation. The AG has not recused himself from those matters. Mr. Warner seems to be saying that Mr. Sessions’s narrow recusal disqualifies him from supervising the FBI director at all.

Rosenstein’s Compelling Case Against Comey Demands for a special prosecutor are way off base. The guardrails of our republic are secure. Kenneth Starr

The long knives are out. The ultimate doomsday scenario for a constitutional republic in peacetime—calls for impeachment of the president—has now been augmented by a growing chorus of voices demanding a far less dramatic but nonetheless profoundly serious step: appointment of a special prosecutor. Even for this less drastic move, the calls are way off base. At a minimum, the suggestion is premature.

The developing narrative, trumpeted on the weekend talk shows, is that Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein must appoint a special prosecutor to restore his long-established reputation for integrity and professionalism. Attorney General Jeff Sessions has recused himself from the entire matter.

The basic complaint is that the newly appointed second-in-command at the Justice Department lost public confidence by crafting a three-page memorandum to the attorney general that severely criticized then-FBI Director James Comey, whom President Trump quickly fired. At least one senator has already mocked Mr. Rosenstein’s May 9 memorandum as “laughable.” They are wrong.

Let’s see what the Rosenstein memorandum actually says. It is titled “Restoring Public Confidence in the FBI.” Mr. Rosenstein rightly praises the bureau as “our nation’s premier investigative agency.” Mr. Rosenstein singles out Mr. Comey for high praise as “an articulate and persuasive speaker about leadership and the immutable principles of the Department of Justice.” The memorandum goes on to praise the FBI chief for his long and distinguished public service.

Mr. Rosenstein then turns to the director’s profound failures during his stewardship of the FBI. Above all, the new deputy attorney general states: “I cannot defend the Director’s handling of the conclusion of the investigation of Secretary [Hillary] Clinton’s emails.” In this Mr. Rosenstein echoes the vehement complaints by Democrats during the 2016 campaign, and indeed comments only last week by Mrs. Clinton herself. Even Republicans had raised an arched eyebrow at what the director did and when he chose to do it. The deputy attorney general goes on to express befuddlement that Mr. Comey still refuses “to accept the nearly universal judgment that he was mistaken.”

The memorandum then identifies the fatal offense of any FBI leader—the usurpation of the authority of the Justice Department itself. In a power grab, Mr. Comey had announced the ultimate prosecutorial decision, namely that Mrs. Clinton would not be prosecuted. The FBI director had no authority to do that. That was not all. Mr. Comey, the memo went on, “compounded the error” by holding a press conference releasing “derogatory information about the subject of a declined criminal investigation.” This was all way outside the foul lines of Justice Department professionalism.

Succinctly, but with devastating effectiveness, the Rosenstein memorandum demonstrates Mr. Comey’s egregious violations of long-settled Justice Department practice and policy. Mr. Rosenstein draws from the director’s testimony before Congress and his unprecedented letter to Congress days before the election. He addresses Mr. Comey’s argument that had he failed to insert himself once again into the presidential campaign—as voting was already under way in many states—it would have constituted “concealment.”

Balderdash, the deputy attorney general concludes, albeit in more polite language. Prosecutors, to say nothing of FBI directors, are not to set out a confidence-shattering bill of particulars with respect to any potential defendant’s conduct, and certainly not a presidential candidate in the heat of a national campaign.

Finally, the Rosenstein memorandum sets forth paragraph after paragraph recounting the scathing criticism of the director’s woefully timed election interference. The deputy attorney general demonstrates that his own conclusions are shared by a wide range of respected former officials of the Justice Department in both Democratic and Republican administrations. One example: President Clinton’s deputy attorney general, Jamie Gorelick, is quoted as condemning Mr. Comey for having “chosen personally to restrike the balance between transparency and fairness, departing from the department’s traditions.” CONTINUE AT SITE

Sebastian Gorka and The Rising Madness of the Jewish Left By Bruce Abramson and Jeff Ballabon

“I have spent my life fighting totalitarian ideologies,” blared the banner headline of the May 8 Jerusalem Post. The Post’s editors chose that single line, and a photo of its speaker, as the highlight of the annual conference it had hosted the previous day in New York. The speaker was Dr. Sebastian Gorka, Deputy Assistant to President Trump, specializing in national security and counterterrorism.

Gorka’s brief time on stage was indeed the highlight of the conference. It was also – at least outside the conference itself – the most controversial. So much so that the Post’s Editor-in-Chief, Yaakov Katz, felt the need to introduce the controversy before calling Dr. Gorka to the stage. He referenced the campaign, spearheaded by Jewish leftists, to brand Gorka as the worst type of anti-Semite: a Neo-Nazi – or, at the least, a neo-Nazi sympathizer and collaborator. Katz then asked his audience to be respectful, shook Gorka’s hand, and invited him to address the allegations directly. Gorka responded with a bold and unequivocal denial. He spoke about his life’s work fighting totalitarian ideologies, explicitly grouping Islamism with fascism and communism. And he talked passionately about the strong bonds and commonality of interest that President Trump shares with Israel.

Katz’s request for decorum proved unnecessary. The crowd was identifiably Jewish and pro-Israel, not a room full of progressives. The habit of disrupting, threatening, and attacking speakers presenting diverse or dissenting views—particularly if they are Israeli or pro-Israel—is a phenomenon of the left. The largely centrist crowd in attendance welcomed Dr. Gorka warmly, rising in a spontaneous standing ovation even before he began to speak. Time and again the throng of 1500 rewarded Dr. Gorka’s pro-America, Jewish and pro-Israel passion, and his references to President Trump, with cheers and applause–and another standing ovation when he concluded. It was about as close to a communal embrace as the notoriously fractious American Jewish community can offer. The crowd understood that the extreme Jewish left had targeted Dr. Gorka because he is a visible player in the Trump White House and precisely because of his passionate commitment to protecting Jews, Israel, and American interests.

Fake news indeed. As controversial as the issue may have seemed to those on the outside, to Jews other than Islamist-apologists and Israel-slanderers of the progressive camp, Gorka himself isn’t actually controversial. His attackers, however, are – from the political operative brazenly hijacking Anne Frank’s good name to attack political opponents to the newspaper editor frantically betraying 120 years of the Forward’s opinionated but legitimate journalism by turning it into a hack political propaganda tabloid.

Indeed, columnist Caroline Glick closed the conference speaking about the real issue of l’affaire Gorka: the danger—and the shame—of members of the Jewish community having slandered a good man.

Russia Recognizes Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital. Why Can’t the U.S.? – Eugene Kontorovich

Russia Recognizes Jerusalem as Israel’s Capital. Why Can’t the U.S.? – WSJ

President Trump’s visit to Israel next week is expected to lead to some announcement about his Jerusalem policy. The trip will coincide with celebrations of the 50th anniversary of the city’s reunification after the Six Day War. Only days after the visit, the president will have to decide between waiving an act of Congress or letting it take effect and moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv—as he promised last year to do if elected.

Jerusalem is the only world capital whose status is denied by the international community. To change that, in 1995 Congress passed the Jerusalem Embassy Act, which mandates moving the U.S. Embassy to a “unified” Jerusalem. The law has been held in abeyance due to semiannual presidential waivers for “national security” reasons. President Obama’s final waiver will expire June 1.

There’s no good reason to maintain the charade that Jerusalem is not Israeli, and every reason for Mr. Trump to honor his campaign promise. The main arguments against moving the embassy—embraced by the foreign-policy establishment—is that it would lead to terrorism against American targets and undermine U.S. diplomacy. But the basis of those warnings has been undermined by the massive changes in the region since 1995.

While the Palestinian issue was once at the forefront of Arab politics, today Israel’s neighbors are preoccupied with a nuclear Iran and radical Islamic groups. For the Sunni Arab states, the Trump administration’s harder line against Iran is far more important than Jerusalem. To be sure, a decision to move the embassy could serve as a pretext for attacks by groups like al Qaeda. But they are already fully motivated against the U.S.

Another oft-heard admonition is that America would be going out on a limb if it “unilaterally” recognized Jerusalem when no other country did. An extraordinary recent development has rendered that warning moot. Last month Russia suddenly announced that it recognized Jerusalem as the capital of Israel.

Note what happened next: No explosions of anger at the Arab world. No end to Russia’s diplomatic role in the Middle East. No terror attacks against Russian targets. Moscow’s dramatic Jerusalem reversal has largely been ignored by the foreign-policy establishment because it disproves their predictions of mayhem.

To be sure, Russia limited its recognition to “western Jerusalem.” Even so, it shifted the parameters of the discussion. Recognizing west Jerusalem as Israeli is now the position of a staunchly pro-Palestinian power. To maintain the distinctive U.S. role in Middle East diplomacy—and to do something historic—Mr. Trump must go further. Does the U.S. want to wind up with a less pro-Israel position than Vladimir Putin’s ?

The American response to real attacks against U.S. embassies has always been to send a clear message of strength. After the 1998 al Qaeda bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, Washington did not shut down those missions. Instead it invested in heavily fortified new facilities—and in hunting down the perpetrators.

Moving the embassy to Jerusalem would also improve the prospect of peace between Israel and the Palestinians. It would end the perverse dynamic that has prevented such negotiations from succeeding: Every time the Palestinians say “no” to an offer, the international community demands a better deal on their behalf. No wonder no resolution has been reached. Only last week, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas insisted that new negotiations “start” with the generous offer made by Israel’s Prime Minister Ehud Olmert in 2008. Relocating the embassy would demonstrate to the Palestinian Authority that rejectionism has costs.

If Mr. Trump nonetheless signs the waiver, he could do two things to maintain his credibility in the peace process. First, formally recognize Jerusalem—the whole city—as the capital of Israel, and reflect that status in official documents. Second, make clear that unless the Palestinians get serious about peace within six months, his first waiver will be his last. He should set concrete benchmarks for the Palestinians to demonstrate their commitment to negotiations. These would include ending their campaign against Israel in international organizations and cutting off payments to terrorists and their relatives.

This is Mr. Trump’s moment to show strength. It cannot be American policy to choose to recognize a capital, or not, based on how terrorists will react—especially when they likely won’t.

Mr. Kontorovich is a department head at the Kohelet Policy Forum and a law professor at Northwestern University.

Germany Confiscating Homes to Use for Migrants “A massive attack on the property rights” by Soeren Kern

In an unprecedented move, Hamburg authorities confiscated six residential units in the Hamm district near the city center. A trustee appointed by the city is now renovating the properties and will rent them — against the will of the owner — to tenants chosen by the city. District spokeswoman Sorina Weiland said that all renovation costs will be billed to the owner of the properties.

Similar expropriation measures have been proposed in Berlin, the German capital, but abandoned because they were deemed unconstitutional.

Some Germans are asking what is next: Will authorities now limit the maximum amount of living space per person, and force those with large apartments to share them with strangers?

Authorities in Hamburg, the second-largest city in Germany, have begun confiscating private dwellings to ease a housing shortage — one that has been acutely exacerbated by Chancellor Angela Merkel’s decision to allow more than two million migrants into the country in recent years.

City officials have been seizing commercial properties and converting them into migrant shelters since late 2015, when Merkel opened German borders to hundreds of thousands of migrants from Africa, Asia and the Middle East. Now, however, the city is expropriating residential property units owned by private citizens.

In an unprecedented move, Hamburg authorities recently confiscated six residential units in the Hamm district near the city center. The units, which are owned by a private landlord, are in need of repair and have been vacant since 2012. A trustee appointed by the city is now renovating the properties and will rent them — against the will of the owner — to tenants chosen by the city. District spokeswoman Sorina Weiland said that all renovation costs will be billed to the owner of the properties.

The expropriation is authorized by the Hamburg Housing Protection Act (Hamburger Wohnraumschutzgesetz), a 1982 law that was updated by the city’s Socialist government in May 2013 to enable the city to seize any residential property unit that has been vacant for more than four months.

The forced lease, the first of its kind in Germany, is said to be aimed at pressuring the owners of other vacant residences in the city to make them available for rent. Of the 700,000 rental units in Hamburg, somewhere between 1,000 and 5,000 (less than one percent) are believed to be vacant, according an estimate by the Hamburg Senate.

Hamburg, Germany. (Images source: Morris MacMatzen/Getty Images)

Socialists and Greens in Hamburg recently established a “hotline” where local residents can report vacant properties. Activists have also created a website — Leerstandsmelder (Vacancy Detector) — to identify unoccupied real estate in Hamburg and other German cities.

It remains unclear why the landlord in Hamm left his apartments vacant for more than five years. Some have posited that, given the location of the properties, the renovation costs may have been too high and probably would not have been offset by the rental income.

Others are blaming city officials for not approving more building permits to allow for the construction of new residential units. A study conducted in 2012 — well before the migrant crisis reached epic proportions — forecast that by 2017, Hamburg would have a deficit of at least 50,000 rental properties.

In 2016, however, only 2,433 new residential units came onto the market, while only 2,290 new building permits were approved, according to statistics provided by the City of Hamburg. These numbers were up slightly from 2,192 new units and 2,041 new permit approvals in 2015.

The Great Price of “Blaspheming” against Muhammad by Raymond Ibrahim

Because the word of a Christian “infidel” is not valid against the word of a Muslim, accusations of blasphemy, often with little or no evidence, routinely lead to the beating, imprisonment, and possible killing of Christians and other minorities every month in Pakistan.

“The available evidence in all these cases suggests that charges were brought as a measure to intimidate and punish members of minority religious communities… hostility towards religious minority groups appeared in many cases to be compounded by personal enmity, professional or economic rivalry or a desire to gain political advantage.” — Amnesty International.

“Iran sentences a 21-year-old man to death for ‘insulting Islam’ … after confessing when police promised he would be pardoned if he came clean.” — Daily Mail.

A few days ago in Pakistan, a Christian pastor who has been “tortured every day in prison” since 2012 when he was first incarcerated, was sentenced to life in prison. Zafar Bhatti, 51, is accused of sending “blasphemous” text messages from his mobile phone; but human rights activists contend that the charge “was fabricated to remove him from his role as a Pastor.” His wife, Nawab Bibi, says:

“Many Muslim people hated how quickly his church was growing; they have taken this action to undermine his work. Yet despite their actions the church grows. I wish our persecutors would see that Christians are not evil creatures. We are human beings created by God the same God that created them although they do not know this yet.”

She adds, “There have been numerous attempts to kill my husband — he is bullied everyday and he is not safe from inmates and prison staff alike.” In 2014, he “narrowly escaped assassination after a rogue prison officer,” Muhammad Yousaf, went on a shooting spree “to kill all inmates accused of blasphemy against Islam.”

Bhatti is one of countless Christian minorities to suffer under Pakistan’s blasphemy law, which has helped make that country the fourth-worst nation in the world in which to be Christian.

Asia Bibi, a Christian wife and mother, has been on death row since 2010 on the accusation that she insulted the Islamic prophet Muhammad. According to Section 295-C of Pakistan’s penal code:

“Whoever by words, either spoken or written or by visible representation, or by any imputation, innuendo, or insinuation, directly or indirectly, defiles the sacred name of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) shall be punished with death, or imprisonment for life, and shall also be liable to fine.”

Because the word of a Christian “infidel” is not valid against the word of a Muslim, accusations of blasphemy, often with little or no evidence, routinely lead to the beating, imprisonment or killing of Christians and other minorities every month in Pakistan.[1] An Amnesty International report from 1994 summarizes the situation:

Several dozen people have been charged with blasphemy in Pakistan over the last few years; in all the cases known to Amnesty International, the charges of blasphemy appear to have been arbitrarily brought, founded solely on the individuals’ minority religious beliefs… The available evidence in all these cases suggests that charges were brought as a measure to intimidate and punish members of minority religious communities… hostility towards religious minority groups appeared in many cases to be compounded by personal enmity, professional or economic rivalry or a desire to gain political advantage. As a consequence, Amnesty International has concluded that most of the individuals now facing charges of blasphemy, or convicted on such charges, are prisoners of conscience, detained solely for their real or imputed religious beliefs in violation of their right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

Other Christians accused of blasphemy never get the chance for even a mock trial and are dealt “justice” at the hands of angry mobs — such as the young Christian couple burned alive on a spurious accusation of blasphemy in November 2014. A report from 2012 found that “Since 1990 alone, fifty-two people have been extra-judicially murdered on charges of blasphemy” in Pakistan.

The Pro-Israel Arab-Speaking Marine Veteran in Congress Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-Wisconsin-District 8)

WASHINGTON – Although many members of Congress frequently analyze or write legislation pertaining to the Middle East, few have the hands-on experience and rigorous background of Representative Mike Gallagher (R-WI). After studying Arabic at Princeton University, the Green Bay native enlisted in the US military and served seven years on active duty including multiple tours in Iraq where he used his language skills to both interpret and interrogate Iraqis. Gallagher served as a counterintelligence officer under H.R. McMaster, currently the White House National Security Advisor, for a year. After leaving the military, Gallagher worked as the lead Republican staffer on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee covering the Middle East. Somehow at the young age of 33, he also found time to earn a PhD from Georgetown University in international relations. http://jewishinsider.com/11577/the-pro-israel-arabic-speaking-marine-veteran-in-congress/

Gallagher served in the Anbar province, which had been struck by some of the most horrific violence after the 2003 American invasion. However, after the surge of US military presence across Iraq, the situation calmed dramatically. “We were just walking around without our protective gear without our helmets passing out school supplies and soccer balls to kids that couldn’t even walk to that school a year before because it was too dangerous,” Gallagher told Jewish Insider. “That to me was tangible evidence for all the progress that had been made.” Yet, while Gallagher’s service ended on an optimistic point, only a few years later after the US military fully withdrew, the Islamic State expanded its control over much of Syria and Iraq including the same Anbar province where the Congressman served.

The Wisconsin lawmaker’s deep knowledge of the Arab world has not diminished his commitment to Israel. While President Donald Trump has repeatedly called for securing the “ultimate deal” between Israelis and Palestinians, Gallagher has urged an alternative policy. America should “Invest heavily in a bottom-up approach. We have seen how a top-down solution has failed on multiple occasions, particularly one that has been driven by the UN,” he explained. “Instead, let’s focus on how we can improve the lives of the Palestinians particularly for the next generation and over time build up the trust necessary for the parties to come to an agreement.”

Republican and Democratic Presidents have continuously over-emphasized the importance of Israeli-Palestinian peace, Gallagher contended. It’s necessary to “recognize that Iranian destabilization of the region as well as ISIS are far more important issues than Israeli-Palestinian peace. If Netanyahu and Abbas were on the White House lawn tomorrow with an agreement, we could live with — it might help — but the broader strategic picture in the Middle East would probably remain largely unchanged,” he explained.

Unlike some in his party who have recently defended the decision to go to war in Iraq, Gallagher was quite critical of the Republican administration that led the operations and made a point to list for us the various failures. “It was not only a failure of intelligence, it was a failure to plan for phase three and four of the operations. It was a failure to understand how our action in Iraq would upend the balance of power with Iran in the region. Subsequent decisions to de-Bathasize the Iraqi army was a failure of planning as well,” he emphasized.



Protein protects brain against DNA damage. (TY Eli) Scientists at Israel’s Ben Gurion University have discovered that the protein SIRT6 is key to repairing DNA damage that causes neurodegenerative brain diseases. SIRT6 was almost completely absent in Alzheimer’s disease patients. http://www.jpost.com/Business-and-Innovation/Health-and-Science/Israeli-scientists-find-likely-cause-of-neurodegenerative-diseases-490134

New understanding about Parkinson’s. Researchers from Israel’s Technion and Harvard have a new theory on how Parkinson’s disease develops. The responsible toxic protein alpha-synuclein doesn’t spread like an infection but accumulates throughout the body. It could change the way the neurological disease is treated.

Removing lung tumors using AR. Israel’s Body Vision Medical has integrated CT scans with X-rays to help surgeons remove small, early-stage lung-cancer tumors. Pre-surgery 3D CT images are overlaid with 2D X-ray images during the operation to produce high-resolution Augmented Reality maps of the tumors in real-time.

Easier removal of colon polyps. Israel’s Tandem Technologies has developed Tandem Snare – a device for precise removal and retrieval of polyps in the colon. Tandem’s CEO Noam Hassidov described the device on ILTV. https://www.youtube.com/embed#3IRkVWCVwYA?rel=0

Safe stitches. I reported previously (Jan 29) about Israel’s Gordian Surgical and its safe suturing (stitching) system to assist minimally-invasive surgery. Gordian’s Doni Mayerfield was interviewed recently on ILTV.

Another cure for pelvic prolapse. Israel’s Escala Medical has developed what it describes as “the only non-surgical, incision-free 20-minute solution for patients suffering pelvic prolapse.” It is targeting FDA approval by the end of 2017. (I reported on a similar solution previously.)
https://www.youtube.com/embed/r_livY0vlIQ?rel=0 http://trendlines.com/portfolio/escala-medical/

Cartilage regeneration aims for FDA approval. Israeli bone regeneration biotech CartiHeal has raised $18.3 million to fund a trial that will help it achieve US FDA approval for its cartilage regeneration technology. CartiHeal already has CE (European) marketing approval.

Cancer biotech launches on NASDAQ. Israel’s UroGen has three treatments for the treatment of cancers of the urinary system (bladder and kidneys). It has just raised $58.2 million on NASDAQ. UroGen’s MitoGel treatment for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma has received Orphan status from the US FDA.

UK medical magazine publicizes Israeli achievements. Newsletter readers may remember (Oct 2014) when UK Lancet editor Professor Richard Horton visited Rambam hospital after writing an anti-Israel article. In his latest publication, Horton has made a complete turnaround, publishing 15 positive Israeli medical articles.

Israel’s first “green” hospital. (TY Eli) Jerusalem’s Herzog Medical Center, Israel’s foremost center for geriatric, respiratory, mental health and psycho-trauma treatment, is opening Israel’s first environmentally-friendly pavilion. The 270-bed 8-floor facility includes a 200-bed underground emergency hospital.

Personalized cancer treatment. Israel’s GeneSort detects specific genetic mutations linked to various types of cancer. Oncologists can then adapt treatments to the patient’s specific genetic mutations, dramatically improving outcomes. GeneSort has just been acquired by Hong Kong investment fund AID Partners for $23 million. http://www.globes.co.il/en/article-aid-partners-buys-israels-genesort-for-23m-1001187888

Iraqi boy gets bovine heart valve. Israeli surgeon Sagi Assa from Save A Child’s Heart worked together with his former mentor Dr Stephan Schubert from Germany to implant an artificial heart valve into 11-year-old Iraqi-Kurdish boy Marwan Ghazi Ali. The valve was made from the jugular vein of an Australian cow.

Ayn Rand, Altruism, and Jihad By Eileen F. Toplansky

In fathoming the failure of Europeans to protect their own interests against the onslaught of Islamic jihadism, one is reminded of Ayn Rand’s quotation that “[r]eason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it. Do not count on them[.]”

Bruce Bawer, an astute observer of the European scene, wonders how “Marine Le Pen lost in a landslide” given all the jihadist assaults against the French people and the very culture of France. Bawer offers three possibilities that include:

European guilt about past imperial histories and a “need to atone.”
the postmodern belief that “no culture is better than any other – and it’s racist to say otherwise.”
the influence of the mainstream media, which routinely “soft pedals the Islamic roots of terror”
the fact that “some people don’t want to learn the truth”

In the Autumn 2004 issue of the Wilson Quarterly, Christopher Clausen writes that “for many Europeans in the past 20 years, now-distant memories of both world wars have hardened into a self-righteous conviction that peace outweighs any value that might conflict with it, almost regardless of the threat or provocation.”

Consequently, there is an exquisite disregard in deliberately ignoring the “grim possibility that their children and grandchildren might end up by living under shariah law, if, in fact, they are allowed to live at all.” Consider that London presently has 100 sharia courts that are “based on the rejection of the inviolability of human rights: the values of freedom and equality that are the basis of English Common Law.” Moreover, “a third of UK Muslims do not feel ‘part of British culture.'”

As further evidence of the ultimate intent of Islamists, Saudi religious scholars include the following in the nine-volume English translation of the Quran.

[D]iscard (all) the obligations (covenants, etc.) … to fight against all the Mushrikun as well as against the people of the Scriptures (Jews and Christians) if they do not embrace Islam, till they pay the Jizya (a tax levied on the non-Muslims who do not embrace Islam and are under the protection of an Islamic government) with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.

As Nonie Darwish has pointed out, 64% of the Quran is devoted to denigrating commentary about kafirs, or non-Muslims.

And yet, while the above quoted words of the Quran should “forever silence any fantasies regarding Islam’s peaceful disposition toward the non-Muslim,” the West continues to avoid the obvious. But as Ayn Rand has noted, “[y]ou can avoid reality, but you cannot avoid the consequences of avoiding reality.”

Hence, France continues to decompose in front of our eyes. Yves Mamou writes that “everything that represents state institutions … is now subjected to violence based on essentially sectarian and sometimes ethnic excesses, fueled by an incredible hatred of our country[.]” Ultimately, France “and all of European society must assimilate Islamic social norms, not the other way around.”

Newly elected President Macron symbolizes the multicultural manifesto when he maintains that “French culture doesn’t exist in and of itself; there is no such thing as a single French culture. There is culture in France and it is diverse and multiple.” Is it then inevitable that “France is going to have to live with terrorism,” as former prime minister Manuel Valls proclaimed?

Coupled with the ongoing Islamic push is the leftist destructive bent. Thus, “Belgium is unique” in that it is the “first nation blending appeasement to Islam and a suicidal form of nihilism[.]” It is not coincidental that in Belgium, “euthanasia is out of control.” With a record number of people killed by lethal injection, it is equally disturbing that “Belgium is the country with the highest per capita number of volunteers for the Caliphate.”