Displaying posts published in

September 2017

Harvard Takes Top Honors in WSJ/THE College Rankings Schools in the Northeast dominate the top 10, with six Ivies making the cut By Douglas Belkin and Melissa Korn See note please

Other rankings, although Harvard, Yale, Princeton still dominate, vary in their judgements. The fact is that you can go to any of the top colleges and graduate a functional illiterate, ignorant of history and literature, but replete with bogus social justice and “progressive”notions, and political opinions force fed by peer pressure and openly biased professors and political correctness and fashionable “socialism” without even having to read crib notes on the depredations of Marxism….rsk

Silicon Valley is rising. Mobile Americans are flocking to the Sunbelt. But most of the best colleges and universities in the U.S. remain rooted in the Northeast.

Harvard University topped this year’s Wall Street Journal/Times Higher Education College Rankings, and about a mile down the street in Cambridge, Mass., the Massachusetts Institute of Technology earned a tie for third place. Columbia, Yale, the University of Pennsylvania, Princeton and Cornell—all of which sit within 400 miles of Harvard Square—took five of the top 10 spots. Stanford, Duke and the California Institute of Technology rounded out the top 10.

“There are a lot of perceptions of Harvard you have before you arrive,” says Chris Cruz, who left his home in California to attend school there and graduated last year. “At least for me Harvard exceeded all of my expectations.”

Keep Students Safe From the Heckler’s Veto Colleges encourage more violence when they appease mobs. By Robert Shibley

Jeff Sessions has joined the debate over censorship on campus. At Georgetown Tuesday, the attorney general criticized institutions that capitulate to the heckler’s veto—when “administrators discourage or prohibit speech if there is even a threat that it will be met with protest.”

It’s been a banner year for hecklers, including violent ones. The University of North Carolina says that it “is not willing to risk anyone’s safety” to allow white nationalist Richard Spencer to speak on campus. He’s banned at Michigan State “due to significant concerns about public safety,” and at Texas A&M, though he spoke there last December.

At Evergreen State College in Olympia, Wash., professors had to hold classes off campus in a park while police politely asked radical students to stop arming themselves with bats and “patrolling” campus.

Social scientist Charles Murray was literally chased out of Middlebury College in Vermont, then disinvited from Assumption College in Massachusetts. Conservative provocateur Milo Yiannopoulos still hasn’t spoken at the University of California, Berkeley, where Antifa extremists rioted to stop his appearance in February. Neither has Ann Coulter, leading her would-be student hosts to sue.

A recent Associated Press report claims colleges are “grappling with how to balance students’ physical safety with free speech.” But the idea that free speech is in opposition with safety is nonsensical.

You are not safe if you are under threat of physical attack for expressing or listening to political views. Debate and dissent are normal parts of living in a free and diverse society, and that should be especially true at an educational institution. Silencing dissenters in the name of physical safety simply punishes the victims of wrongful, sometimes criminal behavior.

In no other situation do colleges simply throw up their hands and say that student safety is an unreachable goal. Campuses have vast bureaucracies dedicated to combating sexual assault, eliminating discriminatory harassment, and discouraging alcohol abuse. Emergency phones, designated drivers and safe-escort programs are thick on the ground. Colleges even attend to students’ “emotional safety” by setting up “bias response” teams that “intervene” when somebody says something hurtful.

Yet colleges have allowed the heckler’s veto to flourish, which only encourages more violence. Under its new chancellor, Berkeley reportedly spent up to $600,000 to ensure that commentator Ben Shapiro was able to speak on campus two weeks ago. Critics moan about the expense, dismissing such speeches as stunts unworthy of academia and not worth the price. But the cost of bowing to mob rule is far higher.

Making the statement that violence will not be allowed to substitute for debate will save far more in the long run—and, more important, teach the coming generation about how a free society resolves its differences.

Mr. Shibley is executive director of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education.

LIGHTS IN THE “DARK CONTINENT” BY RUTH KING

Africa, mysterious and mostly unknown to the West was called the “Dark Continent” in the late 1800s. In fact, many Jews found beacons of light in African nations.

Morocco, Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, Rhodesia, Nigeria, South Africa, Congo and Ivory Coast had Jewish populations, some dating back centuries, largely unknown in the diaspora but clinging to an ancient faith.

Some migrated from the really dark corners of entrenched anti-Semitism in Eastern Europe.

Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe, had a thriving Jewish population in Salisbury (now Harare) and Bulawayo where Jews from Lithuania migrated in the 1800s. A close friend of mine recently showed me a movie of children in the Bulawayo synagogue marching with stars of David embroidered on their shirts singing songs about Palestine in the 1940s.

I was in Morocco, Algeria and Tunisia in the 1950s where large cities like Meknes, Fez, Casablanca. Rabat, Marrakesh, Oran and Djerba, had prominent synagogues, attended by thousands and local shops sold menorahs, candelabras and religious clothing.

When the Arabs declared war on the nascent Jewish State, Arab governments in Africa sponsored harassment of their Jewish populations and a large exodus of Jews began. Most of the small number who remained fled after the Six Day War of 1967. In many non-Arab and non-Muslim countries, decolonization unfortunately heralded coups, revolutions and tribal wars, prompting a Jewish exodus from the continent.

In the early years of decolonization, Israel reached out with targeted aid programs to what became known as the “emerging continent.” But when in the wake of the 1973 war OPEC threatened African states with economic punishment if they did not follow orders to isolate Israel, most fell in line, severing or sharply curtailing relations with Israel. Indeed, African nations joined in the anti-Israel fulminations at the United Nations.

From 1984-1988 Benjamin Netanyahu, now Israel’s Prime Minister, was his nation’s Representative to the United Nations. During his tenure he met many representatives from Africa ex officio and established cordial relations with some. One of his goals was to reestablish relations with African nations by offering agricultural, technical, medical and scientific cooperation. And he has been overwhelmingly successful.

Israeli involvement in Africa has been transformational aiding in control of epidemics, treatments for infectious diseases, crop management with innovative irrigation, water purification, computer education–the list is endless. Israel has improved millions of lives in virtually every nation in Africa.

African students travel to Israel to learn new modalities and technology and Israeli experts assist on site in building and maintaining facilities.

If It Weren’t for Israel… By Elise Cooper

September marked the beginning of the Jewish New Year and ends with Yom Kippur, known as the “Ten Days of Awe,” a period of introspection. People throughout the world, not just Jews, need to consider: if it weren’t for Israel, the world would be a much less safe place.

No one should forget that in June 1981, a surprise Israeli air strike destroyed an Iraqi nuclear power plant. If not for this courageous attack, al-Qaeda could have gained control of a nuclear arsenal in 2014 when it asserted control over the western Iraqi city of Fallujah, as it raised its flag over government buildings and declared an Islamic state in this crucial area. Then, in 2007, it was déjà vu as Israel destroyed the Syrian nuclear plant. As Vice President Dick Cheney previously told American Thinker, after seeing the photographs taken by Israeli intelligence, he pushed for U.S. air strikes to destroy the Syrian reactor, the al-Kibar complex. But the Bush administration refused to act, forcing Israel to go it alone and destroy the reactor.

Consider that ISIS still controls large portions of eastern and central Syria. It seems that without Israel’s existence the world will have to deal with not only the nuclear rogue regime of North Korea, but also many countries in the Middle East.

As Nikki Haley, the U.N. ambassador, pointed out, the Iranian regime has twice exceeded the amount of heavy water (a form of water in nuclear reactors) it was allowed to have. Iran has refused to allow international inspectors to check all of its military facilities, and there are hundreds of undeclared sites that have suspicious activity that inspectors haven’t looked at. In addition, the Iranians have tested ballistic missiles, continue to support terrorism, and have engaged in smuggling arms.

Although America is known as the “policeman of the world,” Israel should be known as the “policeman of the Middle East.” The Gulf States are recognizing Israel’s role in deterring Iran. These states know they need to work closely with Israel to confront Iran and are stepping up their cooperation with the Jewish State. They are considering moving from mainly secret intelligence-sharing with Israel to steps that would include setting up direct telecommunications links over flight rights and the lifting of some restrictions on trade.

It is not just the Gulf States, but also the world that relies on Israel’s intelligence and sees this small country, the size of New Jersey, as a role model on how to deal with terrorism. In recent years, Israel has provided intelligence that has prevented dozens of major terrorist attacks around the world, saving countless lives. Governments are working closely with Israel to keep their countries and citizens safe.

Florida Islamist’s “Human Rights” Organization Needs to Be Investigated for Possible Terrorism Ties by Joe Kaufman

“WE WILL OVERTHROW them ALL. US WILL PAY FOR ITS CRIMES” — Nidal Mohamed Sakr.

Sakr is a prime example of a radical Islamist taking advantage of the freedoms that the United States has to offer all its citizens, in order to undermine its existence — in the name of “human rights.”

Although voicing his enmity is precisely one of those rights, membership in a terrorist group is not, particularly if he is using his March of Justice organization as a front. A serious investigation into Sakr and his operations needs be launched to determine whether and to what extent he is a threat to US national security.

On March 19, 2014, Nidal Mohamed Sakr, an American citizen from Providence, Rhode Island, was detained by Homeland Security upon his arrival in the United States from an extended stay in Egypt, the country of his mother’s birth. Although Sakr is an active member of the Muslim Brotherhood and former al-Qaeda associate, he was released and has been operating freely in the U.S., traveling back and forth between Florida and California as the head of a Miami-based, self-described “human rights” organization called The March for Justice.

This was not the first time that Sakr, who describes himself as “US born from Palestinian origin,” had been interrogated by American authorities. According to an account he posted on the March for Justice website, he was questioned by Palm Beach police in January 2002 about the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden. This occurred as he, Sakr, left an event held by a Jewish organization to express unity and solidarity in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, which had taken place less than four months earlier. At the time, he penned a letter to President George W. Bush complaining that he was being victimized by anti-Muslim Jews.

Prior to 2014, when he was temporarily detained at a US airport, Sakr had spent time in Egypt, where he actively participated in the eruption of the “Arab Spring” — which led to the ouster and imprisonment of then-President Hosni Mubarak and the rise of Muslim Brotherhood chief Mohammed Morsi as Egypt’s president. While in Egypt, Sakr gave a lecture in which he recounted how he was recruited by al-Qaeda co-founder and bin Laden mentor Abdullah Azzam to a Palestinian terrorist cell operating out of Jordan in the 1970s and ’80s. He also spoke about having gotten to know bin Laden and his family.

In the aftermath of the July 2013 military coup against Morsi, which led to the current presidency of General Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, the Muslim Brotherhood was outlawed and anyone associated with it became a target. Thousands of people were arrested and hundreds sentenced to death, including Morsi — whose sentence was later reversed, but recently reinstated for a term of 25 years in prison.

Sakr was allegedly among 529 Muslim Brotherhood members sentenced to death by an Egyptian court “for murder and other offenses.”

Islam in Switzerland: The Hills are Alive with the Sound of Jihad by Bruce Bawer

What you would never know, from all this hand-wringing about “Islamophobia,” is that only a few weeks before the conference, the country’s media had reported on a popular imam in Biel who, in his sermons, “asked Allah to destroy the enemies of Islam — Jews, Christians, Hindus, Russians, and Shiites.”

The imam in question, Abu Ramadan, preached that Muslims who befriended infidels were “cursed until the Day of Judgment” — which, of course, is not radical at all, but is straight out of the Koran.

The crisis is real. But, says Swiss Muslim author Saïda Keller-Messahli, Swiss politicians, “especially on the left,” refuse to address it. Instead of trying to defend their country from radicalism, they think their job is to “protect minorities and multiculturalism.”

Mosque kindergartens and youth groups, too, are “places of religious indoctrination” for Swiss Muslims. So are the German-speaking public schools, in which imams are permitted to teach classes in Islam using instructional materials from Saudi Arabia or Turkey.

If you listen to some of Switzerland’s pollsters and government officials, the country is suffering from a serious and ever-intensifying crisis — anti-Muslim bigotry.

In August, a study concluded that Swiss Muslims “are generally well integrated into Swiss society.” Their main problem? They face “Islamophobia.”

Another study the same month found that the percentage of Swiss non-Muslims who feel “threatened” by Islam had more than doubled since 2004, from 16% to 38%.

At a September 11 conference, Switzerland’s Federal Commission against Racism (FCR) issued an explicit alert: “hostility toward Muslims,” it warned, was rising – and was “fed by facts that have nothing to do with Muslims themselves.”

Conference organizers blamed this “hostility” on online “propaganda”; Interior Minister Alain Berset accused Swiss citizens of erroneously holding “Islam responsible for all the extremist acts committed in its name.”

What you would never know, from all this hand-wringing about “Islamophobia,” is that only a few weeks before the conference, the country’s media had reported on a popular imam in Biel who, in his sermons, “asked Allah to destroy the enemies of Islam — Jews, Christians, Hindus, Russians, and Shiites.” The imam in question, Abu Ramadan, preached that Muslims who befriended infidels were “cursed until the Day of Judgment” — which, of course, is not radical at all, but is straight out of the Koran.

Abu Ramadan has been living in Switzerland for almost two decades. In 1998, he came to the Alpine country from Libya as an asylum seeker, but over the years has returned home several times — in addition to visiting Saudi Arabia and other Muslim countries. This fact should have automatically negated his right to asylum and resulted in his expulsion. But the years went by, and the government, ignoring the evidence right there on his passport, did nothing.

On the contrary: over the years, in fact, the Swiss state had given Ramadan the equivalent of $620,000 in welfare payments.

Reportedly, some public officials were well aware of his hate sermons — but until the content of those sermons surfaced in the media, nobody in the government had made any effort to do anything about him. Instead, people such as Interior Minister Berset and the members of the FCR had kept busy going to conferences and tarring the general public as “Islamophobes”.

At least one high-profile individual in Switzerland has long rejected the official line about successful Muslim integration and unfounded infidel Islam-hatred: Saïda Keller-Messahli. Of Tunisian descent, living in Zurich, she has spent years investigating institutional Islam in Switzerland and urging politicians to take action against it. Asked in a recent interview whether Abu Ramadan is an isolated case, Keller-Messahli said no: such preaching, she explained, is common in Swiss mosques, part of an international strategy to plant a “discriminatory” and “violent” Islam in Switzerland and elsewhere in the West.

Keller-Messahli has just published a book entitled, Switzerland: An Islamist Hub (“Islamistische Drehscheibe Schweiz”). It is sort of a field guide to Islam in Switzerland. The country’s mosques belong to various networks based here and there in the Muslim world; many of the imams have been trained in Egypt or Saudi Arabia; many of the mosques receive funding — and take orders — from organizations in Turkey. In her book, Keller-Messahli draws all the connections, follows all the money trails, and spells out the poisonous articles of faith. And she prescribes strong medicine: monitor the mosques, cut off the foreign cash, and expel the preachers of jihad.