Displaying posts published in

July 2018

Thousands Rally in South Africa’s Capital to Demand Full Resumption of Ties With Israel by Ben Cohen

https://www.algemeiner.com/2018/07/26/thousands-rally-in-south-africas-capital-to-demand-full-resumption-of-ties-with-israel/?utm_content=news1&utm_medium=daily_email&utm_campaign=email&utm_source=internal/

Thousands of South African supporters of Israel marched through the streets of Pretoria, the capital, on Wednesday, demanding the reinstatement of South Africa’s envoy to Israel, along with an end to the efforts of the ruling African National Congress (ANC) to further downgrade diplomatic ties with the Jewish state.

Rallying on Wednesday outside Union Buildings — the seat of the South African government — the predominantly Christian marchers, totaling around 5,000 in number, carried placards reading “SA Bless Israel” and “No Cutting Ties With Israel.” South Africa’s ambassador in Tel Aviv, Sisa Ngombane, was recalled to Pretoria on May 14 as a gesture of solidarity with the violent Palestinian demonstrations on the Israel-Gaza border.

Political party leaders at the rally included Mosiuoa Lekota of the Congress of the People (COPE) and Rev. Kenneth Meshoe of the African Democratic Christian Party (ADCP), South African news outlet IOL reported. A petition with 41,000 signatures urging the restoration of ties with Israel was presented to the South African presidency’s office.

Rev. Meshoe told the crowd that the ANC’s forthcoming bid in 2019 for the votes of South Africa’s professed Christians — more than 80 percent of the country’s population of 56 million — might be rebuffed if its political and diplomatic campaign against Israel continues.

At its special conference in December 2017 where members of Hamas were honored, the ANC voted to downgrade South Africa’s embassy in Israel to a “Liaison Office.” Over the last six months, the ruling party has stepped up its anti-Israel rhetoric amid the unrest on the Gaza border, further raising the profile of the country’s vocal boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement.

From Saving Species to Empowering Bureaucrats By Steven J. Allen

https://amgreatness.com/2018/07/27/from-saving-species-to-empowering

In 1973, the Endangered Species Act passed the U.S. Senate with at vote of 92-0 and the House by a vote of 394-4. It seemed like a good idea at the time.

Now, 45 years on, we know that, regardless of the good intentions of the act’s sponsors, the law can be abused by bureaucrats and their extreme environmentalist allies.

The ESA was born out of legitimate concern over occasional disappearances of lineages of living things. No one anticipated the ESA would play a major role in American life, destroying countless jobs and giving federal bureaucrats control over large swaths of the economy. It never occurred to politicians and activists that the law could be used to prevent activities that might indirectly harm obscure groups of plants and animals, even those that don’t qualify as species or even subspecies.

In the era in which the ESA was born, people were aware of the extinction of the passenger pigeon and the dodo and the near-extinction of the American buffalo, and threats to iconic animals such as American alligators and bald eagles. Activists and the media presented these cases as cautionary tales, magnifying extinction fears into threats to wide categories of life.

For example, to obtain a ban on DDT—a ban that, by promoting the spread of malaria, has killed tens of millions of people worldwide—environmentalists pushed the idea that the continued use of this pesticide would extinguish many bird species and result in the “Silent Spring” referenced in the title of Rachel Carson’s classic book. Critical to the debate was an Agriculture Department study seeming to show that DDT caused thin eggshells. The scientist behind the study later admitted that the birds had been fed a low-calcium diet.

Carson’s argument was one of a series of hoaxes that launched the modern environmental extremist movement. At the first Earth Day in 1970, participants complained that corporations poisoned people with sweeteners containing sodium cyclamate (which, in fact, is safe), that a U.S. Army nerve gas experiment had killed thousands of sheep in Utah in 1968 (it didn’t), and that pollution was rapidly pushing the world into a new Ice Age, as future feminist icon Betty Friedan had warned in Harper’s magazine.

Real environmental threats existed but were insufficient to spur the political actions environmentalists wanted. So they made stuff up.

How Far Will the Left Go? All the Way By Michael Walsh

https://amgreatness.com/2018/07/27/how-far-will-the-left-go

My colleague Victor Davis Hanson raised the question in these pages the other day: “Just how far will the Left go?” in its attempt to overthrow the government of Donald J. Trump? With his customary precision, Hanson laid out the catalog of enormities committed by the Left in its pursuit of Trump and of conservatives in general, among them the fatuous investigation led by Mr. Straight Arrow himself, the demonization of Trump-as-Hitler, their frustration over losing the 2016 election (which they thought would cement their hostile takeover of the American Republic) and their inability to mask their true anti-American natures any longer.

So let me provide an answer: As far as they can, for as long as it takes.

The Poison Behind “Youthful Idealism”
I first became aware of the deadly hostility of the American Left back in the early 1970s, during the height of the student protests against the Vietnam War (largely motivated by a fervent desire to avoid the draft), when they hitched their “youthful idealism” to two causes: anti-imperialism—you don’t hear much about that these days, but that was how the Vietnam War was mischaracterized—and anti-racism, a byproduct of the American civil rights movement. Since then, almost every cause the Left has espoused has combined some elements of America-as-predator (whether international or domestic) and America-as-racist-bastion.

Vietnam was ideal for both tropes. We were waging (in their eyes) and aggressive war against brown people, because we could. In their telling, the domino theory—a holdover from the aftermath of World War II—was merely a fictive fig leaf to conceal our country’s rapaciousness, belligerence, and innate hegemonistic tendencies. We had run out of Indians to kill, so now we had to venture abroad to find fresh victims. And we did it because they were brown. What happened to South Vietnam and Cambodia after the Communist victory was of no interest to them.

Saeed Shah and Bill Spindle:Pakistan’s New Leader Vows to Reset Relations With U.S. After sweeping to power in a disputed election, Imran Khan calls for a ‘mutually beneficial’ relationship, lays out an ambitious domestic agenda

https://www.wsj.com/articles/former-cricket-star-imran-khan-claims-victory-in-pakistan-election-1532609185

Former cricket star Imran Khan swept to power in a disputed Pakistani election, upending the political landscape in a fragile democracy that now stands to be led by a sharp critic of the U.S.

The scale of victory far exceeded expert predictions, based on near-final vote counts in much-delayed results from Wednesday’s election, which will likely allow his party to form a government on its own and to appoint him prime minister.

But his win, which many of his rivals denounced as being marred by irregularities and help from the powerful military, also involved political compromises that critics say could undercut his ambitious agenda.

“I will prove that we can fix our governance system,” Mr. Khan said in his victory speech on Thursday. “All our policies will be aimed to help the weakest members of our society.”

Mr. Khan called for a new, “mutually beneficial,” relationship with the U.S. that breaks with the antiterrorism partnership seen since 2001.

“Unfortunately up to now, our relationship has been one-way. America pays Pakistan for fighting its war, which has really damaged Pakistan,” he said.

Mr. Khan has said U.S. soldiers must leave Afghanistan as there is no military solution there. Washington may also be moving toward direct peace talks with the Taliban, and it will find Mr. Khan’s government helpful for exiting Afghanistan, the party says.

However, if the Trump administration continues with the policy, announced last year, of an enhanced military presence in Afghanistan, it could find Mr. Khan to be a stubborn thorn.

Washington considers Islamabad’s help vital in stabilizing Afghanistan, and U.S. military supply lines also pass through Pakistan. In addition, he is an implacable opponent of U.S. drone strikes inside Pakistan.

A U.S. official said it welcomes an opportunity to work with Pakistan’s new government “to advance our goals of security, stability, and prosperity in South Asia.”

McCaskill’s Intimidation Game The Missouri senator runs attack ads not on her opponent but one of his supporters. Kimberley Strassel

https://www.wsj.com/articles/mccaskills-intimidation-game-1532646222

If you’ve tuned in to this year’s midterms, chances are you know about that hot Senate race in Missouri: McCaskill vs. Humphreys. Oh, wait.

Democrat Claire McCaskill is indeed facing a tough re-election, trying for a third term. She’s had a particularly rough week, after the Kansas City Star reported that businesses tied to her husband had been awarded $131 million in federal contracts since she took office in 2007. Her putative opponent is the constitutional conservative Josh Hawley, the current attorney general and the strong favorite to win the GOP primary on Aug. 7.

Team McCaskill is already employing the Democratic Party’s go-to tactic this midterm: character assassination. There’s not much else. The economy is humming, the party’s centrist and liberal wings are fighting, and the drumbeat of impending Trump doom isn’t finding much accompaniment. So in Missouri as elsewhere, candidates are reverting to personal attacks. But the McCaskill forces are piling on a guy who isn’t even running.

Indeed, they are attacking a private citizen and donor, David Humphreys. Back in March, Chuck Schumer’s Senate Majority PAC began plowing millions into attacks on the businessman, who donated to Mr. Hawley’s campaign for attorney general. The pattern is the same: An ad makes a malicious accusation against Mr. Humphreys, then sidles over to tar Mr. Hawley with guilt by association. Just how invested are they in this strategy? Since airing their first spot, 70% of Democratic ads—amounting to $4.7 million—have been focused on Mr. Humphreys.

Ms. McCaskill’s pickle is that the GOP has upped its recruitment game. Her only prior re-election bid in 2012 had her face off against Todd Akin, who self-immolated after his blundering comments on abortion and rape. Mr. Hawley—a savvier, younger man and squeaky clean—hasn’t provided a similar opening. A native Missourian and onetime U.S. Supreme Court law clerk, he arrived on the political scene only in 2016, becoming the Show Me State’s first Republican attorney general in 24 years.

Endangered Species Scare A 1970s law gets a modest implementation review. Panic ensues.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/endangered-species-scare-1532646111

By now you may have seen the photos of baby owls that will ostensibly be extinct once Donald Trump finishes demolishing protections for endangered species. Such dystopian predictions warrant a more rational look at the Trump Administration’s efforts to update a 1970s law that isn’t accomplishing what its supporters claim.

The Interior and Commerce departments are accepting feedback on proposals to clarify regulations related to the Endangered Species Act, which Congress hasn’t updated in more than 25 years. The law is a golden idol of the environmental left, though its goal is species recovery and less than 2% of listed species are delisted.

Wyoming Governor Matt Mead noted recently that it “took five lawsuits and fifteen years to delist a recovered gray wolf population in Wyoming,” while the Canada lynx listed some 18 years ago still has “no discernible path to recovery.” Private land owners have little incentive to help because spotting an endangered species is a death sentence for the productive use of their property.

Interior’s sensible principle seems to be that the law should be more predictable, including harmonizing the standards for listing and delisting. The current process makes it easy to list a species but hard to remove it even when the evidence of recovery is compelling. Also welcome is a proposal that wildlife classified as “threatened” won’t receive full treatment as “endangered,” which has defeated the purpose of a distinction that is supposed to allow for proactive rehabilitation.

Dignity for the Palestinians by Denis MacEoin

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12762/dignity-for-the-palestinians

Given that all Palestinian leaderships have called for a Palestinian state that will encompass and obliterate the state of Israel, it is not surprising that they cannot bear to accept any proposal that will give them only one small state (or two small states) in the territory allotted to them by the United Nations in 1947.

Re-imposition of Islamic waqf law will not restore Spain, Portugal, Sicily, India, Greece and all the other states of the abandoned caliphal empires to Muslim rule, and it is futile to think that is nothing more than a fantasy.

A recent US report revealed that there are, it seems, actually no more than 20,000 Palestinian refugees in the world.

In the end, it is so-called pro-Palestinian activists such as Robert Fisk or writers for papers such as The Independent, The Guardian, or the New York Times who do their utmost to persuade the world to favour Palestinian intransigence over offers of upgrading lives and international law.

Anyone who cares for Israel, who aspires to peace, who has a good understanding of the historical, ethical, political, and legal facts that underpin the right of the Jewish people to a state of which they are the indigenous people, will be familiar with the name of Robert Fisk. But not in a good way.

For decades, Fisk has been one of the most unrelenting of Israel’s many haters and one of the most uncritical supporters of the rights of the Palestinians and their unending calls and actions aimed at the total destruction of Israel and the expulsion or massacre of the Jewish people living there.[1]

Fisk is a clever man. He took his PhD in 1983 from Trinity College, Dublin, an ancient and respected university. Although his doctorate was in political science on a topic related to Ireland and Britain, he has worked as the Middle East correspondent for the Times (1976-1988) and, since 1989, for the left-wing daily, The Independent.

Over the years, he has reported on many wars in many countries and has written and co-authored many books about them, all of them about their conflicts.[2]

Given his Jack-of-all trades character, it is not surprising that Fisk does not always get his facts straight, and for this he has often been criticized by people with deeper knowledge, as here or here: He is opinionated, often in an extreme way, functioning more as an activist than a reporter. According to UKMediaWatch:

Lies of the Soros-Backed Immigration Lobby Why Americans should worry about their dishonest agenda. Michael Cutler

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270859/lies-soros-backed-immigration-lobby-michael-cutler
The George Soros-backed American Immigration Council is the latest group hell-bent on “resisting” commonsense immigration enforcement in the U.S. Several in this group are, themselves, practicing immigration attorneys who should know the truth about the dangers of open borders policies in communities across the U.S. However, however, many lawyers at the American Immigration Council gloss over facts and, instead, promote dangerously false information about the legal aspects of the immigration issue.

One such example of the white-washing lawyers at the American Immigration Council is Joshua Breisblatt, the group’s Senior Policy Analyst and an immigration attorney with an extensive background in immigration law and the lobbying efforts mounted in the Halls of Congress to push the open borders agenda. His bio notes that he had worked for Former Congressman Harry Mitchell of Arizona. Breisblatt penned an outrageously deceitful article on the group’s website titled: “USCIS Is Slowly Being Morphed Into an Immigration Enforcement Agency.”

The article begins with these three paragraphs:

U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) issued new guidance to initiate deportation proceedings for thousands of applicants denied for any immigration benefit. This policy change will have far-reaching implications for many of those interacting with the agency, but also signals a major shift in how USCIS operates.

Ridicule, Not Reasoned Debate, Is the Best Medicine for Political Cults Time to take off the gloves. Bruce Thornton

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270858/ridicule-not-reasoned-debate-best-medicine-bruce-thornton

U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley recently told a high school audience that conservatives shouldn’t delight in “owning the libs” –– i.e. triggering a progressive into a hysterical response that you proceed to make fun of. Instead, we should be “persuading” progs with reasoned argument and “bringing people around to your point of view,” as Haley said.

In that way, we make a convert rather than energize partisans into clinging more tightly to their beliefs and voting to empower them.

Having spent more than 40 years in the incubators of today’s leftist nonsense, universities, I am skeptical about the power of reasoned argument among today’s ill-educated students. Most of their teachers, like most progressives, are pretty much immune to reason, evidence, and coherent argument, little of which makes it into their courses. As the old gag goes, arguing with a leftist is like playing chess with a pigeon: It knocks over the pieces, craps on the board, then struts around like it won the game. Reasoned argument cuts no ice when confronted with the irrational caprices and gratifying passions of human beings.

In fact, the assumption behind Haley’s plea is the old Socratic one that virtue is knowledge, that if one knows the good, one will do the good––one of the foundational bad ideas of modernity. When people believe wrong or dangerous ideas, the paradigm goes, that’s because they’re deficient in knowledge. They just need to be better informed of the facts, and better trained to spot incoherent and fallacious arguments.

Who Leaked the Trump Tape? by Alan M. Dershowitz

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12767/who-leaked-the-trump-tape

The reason this is important to all Americans, beyond the immediate parties to this taped conversation, is that it may well discourage clients, patients, penitents and others from confiding in their lawyers, doctors, priests and the professionals who promise them confidentiality.

Cohen promised confidentiality and yet the world heard what his client confided in him.

Obviously, people who are willing improperly to leak confidential material may also be willing to lie about it under oath, but the consequences of lying under oath are greater than leaking, since leaking is not a crime but perjury is.

Someone leaked the lawyer/client confidential tape containing a conversation between President Donald J. Trump and his lawyer Michael Cohen. A former judge, assigned by the presiding judge to evaluate the seized tapes, reportedly concluded that this conversation was privileged. Yet someone leaked their contents. The President Trump’s current lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, then waived the privilege as to that tape. He said he never would have waived it had its existence and content not been improperly leaked.

So, the question remains: Who leaked this privileged material? If it was anyone in the Trump camp, there would be no violation of confidentiality, as the privilege belongs to the client, namely Trump, who can waive it. But no one else, most especially his lawyer, may properly waive the privilege. And Giuliani has categorically denied that it was leaked by Trump or anyone on his behalf. Indeed, he has expressed outrage at the leak.

Whom does that leave? Cohen is an obvious suspect, although I am confident that his excellent and experienced lawyer, Lanny Davis, would not have done so. Perhaps Cohen himself, who ran into Michael Avenatti at a restaurant, told him about the tape. We simply do not know.