Displaying posts published in

May 2018

Human Rights: Other Views – Part II by Denis MacEoin

Palestinian human rights organizations such as Al-Mezan, along with their many supporters abroad and even within a substantial part of the Jewish diaspora, have turned the very concept of human rights on its head.

Although genuine and widely praised for their advocacy of human rights internationally, even Amnesty, Human Rights Watch, the International Federation for Human Rights and the humanitarian relief body Oxfam International have reputations of extreme bias against Israel.

What are any of these people doing actually to help the Palestinians — such as creating jobs, assuring good governance, establishing schools, hospitals, health care and dental clinics, safeguarding legal standards, stopping the arrests of journalists or others who dare to criticize the current governments and so on? Rather, the issues they address seem more a rationalization to destroy Israel.

We have seen in Part One of this article how far Western standards of human rights differ from those guaranteed by Islam. One obvious outcome of this disparity is, of course, that citizens of Muslim countries are accorded fewer rights than their counterparts in liberal democracies. Thus, women, girls, gays, members of religious minorities, “blasphemers”, bloggers (notably in Bangladesh and Saudi Arabia) reformers and others may be subjected to partial or total deprival of what the rest of the world considers to be unquestionable or God-given rights. Women may be forced to dress in all-encompassing clothing or hijabs. Minorities may be imprisoned or killed. Women even alleged to have committed adultery – but often just the victims of rape – may be flogged or else stoned to death. LGBT individuals may imprisoned or killed, while bloggers, reformist intellectuals, moderate Qur’an interpreters face flogging and murder by mobs.

Target of NBC smear, Gatestone Institute responds brilliantly By Rick Moran

In a classic smear, NBC News “investigated” the Gatestone Institute and found that it is an “anti-Muslim think-tank” with ties to the same Russians who interfered in the 2016 election.

NBC’s report begins with an iteration of the Russia-Trump collusion story: that Gatestone’s former chairman, Ambassador John Bolton, now U.S. National Security Advisor, who has described Russia’s attempts to undermine the U.S. election as an act of war, was affiliated with “a nonprofit that has promoted misleading and false anti-Muslim news, some of which was amplified by a Russian troll factory,” implying that he was somehow colluding with Russia to spread anti-Muslim propaganda. NBC initially provides no evidence for this claim, but buried deep inside the article it asserts that, according to its “exclusive database,” Russian trolls tweeted a total of four Gatestone articles – out of more than 200,000 tweets identified by Twitter as being linked to Russian accounts. Bolton, on the contrary, is usually criticized for having hawkish views on Russia. …

NBC News also provides no evidence for its insinuation that White House attorneys are “potential[ly]” investigating Bolton’s affiliation with Gatestone. Moreover, after first implying that Bolton is “anti-Muslim,” NBC undercuts its own claims by admitting that his name cannot be found on “the anti-Muslim articles at issue.” NBC also acknowledges that Bolton was opposed to Trump’s so-called Muslim ban.

The NBC report, written by political reporter Heidi Przybyla, appears to be based almost entirely on a series of deceptive reports about Gatestone by The Intercept, a left-leaning digital news site which itself has admitted to fabricating stories and quotes and is listed as one of “The Best Websites to Follow If You’re Plotting the Left-Wing Resistance”. The NBC report, which fails to cite The Intercept, is also intriguingly similar to false allegations in Wikipedia, which also parrots numerous false, but published, claims about Gatestone, such as that Gatestone incorrectly writes about the existence of no-go zones.

Are Google and YouTube Blocking Searches for Red Pill Videos? By Karin McQuillan

A year or so ago, there were a spate of articles about the red pill videos on YouTube – millennials turning off to the bullying by feminists and race hustlers, thinking for themselves, becoming conservative, and posting a video of their personal journey from blue to red online. I googled ‘red pill’ and had a cheerful time following links. I learned about Candace Owens at that time, and a lot of other black and white millennials who had posted articulate, heartfelt, intimate, sometimes funny YouTubes explaining why they’d become conservative.

For months afterward, when I was sick of all the bad news about millennials becoming little fascists, I would turn to the red pill videos and cheer myself up. And then I found I could no longer find them. When I went to YouTube and searched for red pill, all I got was the documentary by that name (worth seeing) available for $3.99.

The most famous videos are still there. But even they are hard to find. Laci Green got 1.9 million hits on a video called ‘Taking the Red Pill?” which is a defense of free speech. But when I clicked her name, not a single red pill video comes up, even though I have just done 24 searches in a row containing the phrase ‘red pill.” Her video on her personal journey to being ‘red pilled’ received 700,000 hits. Why wouldn’t the search engine pull it up for me?

The week Candace Owens was headline news, thanks to Kanye West tweeting she should be listened to, I confidently did a google search for ‘YouTube Candace.’ Google did not fill in the rest of her name, although I have watched many of her videos. Instead I was treating to page after page of links to a yoga instructor. I have never searched for anything yoga in my life. That seemed odd.

Does the ‘Final Solution’ Live On by Proxy? By Janet Levy

How committed is the German government to protecting its Jewish citizens?

Last month’s anti-Semitic beating in Berlin of a yarmulke-wearing, 21-year-old Arab-Israeli student who was testing for himself whether hatred of Jews was rising in Germany prompts questions. Namely, 75 years after the Holocaust, are Jews safe in Deutschland, and how committed is the German government to protecting its Jewish citizens?

When Hitler rose to power in 1933, 500,000 Jews lived in Germany. Today, only 100,000 reside there, and Jewish leaders have warned Jews not to wear kippot to avoid being attacked. Felix Klein, recently appointed by Chancellor Angela Merkel to deal with the surge in anti-Semitism, admits that “Germany has a problem with hatred of Jews.” He adds that regardless of the refugee influx, “around 20% of Germans hold anti-Semitic views, a statistic that has remained stable for years and has never gone.”

Germany’s modern-day incarnation of anti-Semitism exists primarily, but not exclusively, in the demonization and delegitimization of the Jewish state. German organizations support the boycott, divestment, and sanctions (BDS) of Israel despite official statements that condemn BDS as Jew-hatred. In November, NGO Monitor, a watchdog organization that analyzes and reports on NGO activities, discovered that the German government was donating millions of euros to groups promoting BDS, including some groups with ties to a designated terrorist group, the Palestinian Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP). Meanwhile, at the same time, the German organizations were providing generous entitlements to Muslim refugees, even though the refugees include ISIS-supporters and 13% of them believe that suicide bombings are justified, according to a Pew Research poll.

Democrats Disgrace Themselves Interrogating Trump’s CIA Nominee By Elise Cooper

Anyone who watched the confirmation hearings of Gina Haspel should be astonished at the way most of the Democrats treated her. KSM, the mastermind of the 9-11 attacks, and the Senate intelligence panel”s Democrats both agree that they are against the nomination of Gina Haspel to lead the CIA. He has written a letter to them giving information about Haspel, who in 2002 was a chief of base at a black-site prison in Thailand, where detainees were subjected to enhanced interrogation. Waterboarding was a big issue, but none thought to mention that it happened to only three terrorists. Maybe the Democrats should call KSM as a witness, since they appear to be singing the same tune of Kumbaya.

At best, these Democrats were playing Monday-morning quarterback, but more likely, the takeaway is that they are politically correct, while appearing to sympathize with the terrorists. New Mexico senator Martin Heinrich asked her, “Do you think that a transcript that says the detainees continued to scream has the same gravity, the same reality of an actual video?”

Is he kidding, or does he believe that Americans will ever feel sorry for these jihadist extremists who brutally killed 3,000 Americans? This just shows how out of touch the Democrats are with reality. Maybe Heinrich should think about the screams of those 3,000 people on 9-11 as they plunged to their deaths, were burned alive, or were dismembered. After all, KSM said how his brothers would relentlessly continue their attacks: “[e]ventually America will expose her neck to us for slaughter.”