Displaying posts published in

October 2018

Would the American left suborn an invasion? By Robert Arvay

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/10/would_the_american_left_suborn_an_invasion.html

Sometime in the 1960s, as I recall, a prominent person in the news made the sarcastic statement that if an enemy invasion army were to land on our shores, the ACLU would meet the soldiers on the beaches to protect their rights. The ACLU quickly protested, averring that, patriots all, they would do no such thing. Being a parody writer myself, I once wrote a fictional piece about the Japanese air raid on Pearl Harbor (Dec. 7, 1941) in which an ACLU lawyer sought an injunction against American armed resistance. He stated, “As soon as those Japanese aircraft entered American airspace, their pilots were entitled to the full protections of the United States Constitution, including the presumption of innocence until proven guilty in a court of law.”

Today, we are living parody. A massive parade of foreign nationals is marching toward our border, its members openly proclaiming that they intend to illegally enter our country. They have already stormed and breached the southern border of Mexico in a glaring preview of their defiance of law, so they are clearly to be believed.

And where is the American political left? Are leftists decrying the violation of our national sovereignty? Are they demanding that our government protect its citizens from encroachment? Of course not. They are the parody. They of the left are seeking ways in which to prevent the administration from doing any of that.

This is President Trump’s PATCO moment. Remember that? Soon after President Ronald Reagan took office, in 1981, members of the unionized left organized a strike of the Professional Air Traffic Controllers Organization. They were adamant that their demands be met, or else PATCO would shut down all air traffic in the United States. Reagan gave the union members 48 hours in which to return to work or be irrevocably fired. You can’t do that, the striking controllers jeered. Twenty-four hours later, they were all fired, and not one of those who continued the illegal strike has been rehired. Shortly afterward, PATCO ceased to exist.

Don Lemon: ‘Biggest Terror Threat Is White Men on the Right’ By Tyler O’Neil

https://pjmedia.com/video/don-lemon-we-have-to-stop-demonizing-people-but-biggest-terror-threat-is-white-men-on-the-right/

On Tuesday night, CNN’s Don Lemon urged people to stop demonizing “any one group or any one ethnicity” and, in the very same breath, stigmatized “white men … radicalized to the right” as “the biggest terror threat in this country.” So, conservative white men are not “any one group or any one ethnicity”? Oh, right, according to “intersectionality,” we’re not people!

CNN’s Chris Cuomo was discussing the horrific shooting of two black people at a Kroger in Kentucky. The suspect reportedly targeted a black church first, but could not get in, thank God. Ironically, the same CNN commentators who would avoid rushing to judgment if a shooter were a different race or Muslim immediately rushed to stigmatize white men.

“I keep trying to point out to people not to demonize any one group or any one ethnicity, but we keep thinking that the biggest terror threat is something else, some people who are marching towards the border like it’s imminent,” Lemon said.

“So, we have to stop demonizing people and realize the biggest terror threat in this country is white men, most of them radicalized to the right,” Lemon declared.

“And we have to start doing something about them,” he added. “There is no travel ban on them. There is no ban — they had the Muslim ban — there is no ‘white guy’ ban.”

What exactly is Don Lemon suggesting? Should government go after conservative white men?

Furthermore, forcing both of the most heinous terrorism attempts in recent weeks into this narrative proves quite a strain. The man who killed 11 people at the Pittsburgh synagogue hated Donald Trump — because Trump is a friend to Jews. The man who attempted to send bombs to Democrats was half-Filipino and self-identified as a Native American. If liberals want to stigmatize “whiteness,” they’re going to run into the same problem white supremacists do — defining “white” is far from easy.

Montage: Liberals Call for Dialed Down Rhetoric, Then Brand Trump Evil, Nazi, Worse Than ISIS By Tyler O’Neil

https://pjmedia.com/video/montage-liberals-call-for-dialed-down-rhetoric-then-brand-trump-evil-nazi-worse-than-isis/

In the wake of the attempting bombing of various Democrats, liberal commentators have rightly called for the dialing down of divisive rhetoric. However, they have refused to lead by example, instead repeatedly demonizing President Donald Trump in the most radical terms.

Grabien put together a montage of the worst comments uttered by liberal commentators in recent days.

Among the highlights:

“This president has radicalized so many more people that ISIS ever did,” said Julia Ioffe (she later apologized, but went on to say “a silent majority” of Trump supporters think racism is okay).

“The biggest terror threat in this country is white men radicalized on the right,” said CNN’s Don Lemon.

“The same type of propaganda that you would have seen in Germany in 1938 [under Adolf Hitler], the dehumanization, turning people into infested vermin,” said former Republican strategist Steve Schmidt.

“Evil, nasty authoritarianism,” decried Howard Dean.

Steve Schmidt again: Trump’s “erratic behavior, his ignorance, could pose a profound danger to every single person in this country and literally every inhabitant of the planet earth.”

Yet more Schmidt: “This whole caravan in the last week of the election is a giant lie. This is Trump’s Reichstag fire,” a reference to Hitler’s disgusting tactic of blaming the Jews for setting the German parliament on fire when Nazis did it.

“We’re going to see if his reign lasts for 30 days or two years, or a thousand-year reich,” said legal analyst Elie Mystal, referencing Hitler’s propaganda that his would be a “thousand-year reich.”

“It’s not even a question of whether it’s presidential behavior or not, it’s not minimally human behavior,” said MSNBC analyst John Heilemann. CONTINUE AT SITE

Why Did Media And Democrats Abandon Their Investigation Into Brett Kavanaugh? If Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh is really a rapist and sexual assailant, as Democrats and media claimed, shouldn’t the story continue to be covered?By Mollie Hemingway

http://thefederalist.com/2018/10/31/why-did-media-and-democrats-abandon-their-investigation-into-brett-kavanaugh/

What happened to the multiple allegations of sexual misconduct levied against Brett Kavanaugh during his confirmation battle? The claims ranged from Christine Blasey Ford’s remotely plausible if unsubstantiated allegation of a violent attempted rape to Michael Avenatti’s completely outlandish and also unsubstantiated allegation of hosting serial gang rape parties.

From September 12 to October 6, the claims absolutely dominated all major media. They ran on the front pages of all major newspapers and filled the hours on cable and network news. Magazine journalists at The New Yorker ran with the claims, despite massive corroboration problems.

The claims were taken so seriously by the media and some U.S. senators it led to serious delays of the confirmation voting process. A hearing was held during and after which all the talking heads on cable asserted Blasey Ford was completely “credible.” Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Arizona, even maneuvered to reopen an FBI investigation to dig into the claims. Then they disappeared. Overnight.

The argument for delaying the confirmation process indefinitely was that everyone needed time to investigate the allegations. The argument underlying the media coverage was that these allegations were “credible” and needed to be investigated and reported on given the importance of the lifetime position for which Kavanaugh was nominated. The allegations were hitting in the midst of the Me Too movement, which claims to address sexual assault by powerful men. It should be noted that for a claim to be declared “credible,” it doesn’t need to be verified or have any substantiating evidence but merely that journalists and pundits “believe” it or find it possible.

Democrats Struggle to Confront Trump-Era Reality Jason L. Riley

https://www.wsj.com/articles/democrats-struggle-to-confront-trump-era-reality-1540937012

Come Tuesday, we’ll find out whether Democrats have learned anything from Hillary Clinton’s shocking defeat two Novembers ago. No, Donald Trump isn’t on the ballot this time, but that’s a technicality. There’s no doubt these midterm elections are about our current president.

Two years ago Mrs. Clinton focused to the max on her opponent’s character flaws and then famously extended those criticisms to his supporters, the “deplorables.” What the Clinton campaign missed is that voters in battleground states like Ohio, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin were well aware of Mr. Trump’s shortcomings but had different priorities. While she was harping on his behavior, he was harping on the issues they cared about most. Mrs. Clinton lost because millions of people who had supported Barack Obama refused to back her and swung to Mr. Trump.

There’s no shortage of liberals who remain in denial about why Mrs. Clinton lost and who refuse to accept the outcome. Instead, they credit Mr. Trump’s triumph to James Comey or Russian interference or white nationalists. The question is whether Democratic candidates in the current cycle have accepted political reality, and the answer is that it depends. Last Friday found Mr. Obama campaigning for Democrats in Detroit and Milwaukee, two places Mrs. Clinton gave short shrift in 2016. He seems to understand that it was the Democratic nominee’s flawed campaign strategy, not the alt-right, that cost her the election.

Similarly, Democrats running for Senate seats in states Mr. Trump carried have used the final weeks of the campaign to focus on issues rather than the president’s Twitter feed. In Arizona, Florida and Missouri Democratic candidates have been talking nonstop about health care, a top concern for voters in both parties. Four years ago, ObamaCare’s unpopularity helped to defeat incumbent Democrats in red states like Arkansas and Louisiana and deliver control of the Senate to Republicans. But support for the law has risen steadily since Mr. Obama left office, and Democrats now see an opening. The upshot is that voters in some parts of the country are being treated to a substantive debate about the costs and merits of single-payer health care and how best to insure people with pre-existing conditions. This is progress.

Pakistan: Asia Bibi Acquitted After Years Awaiting Death for “Blasphemy” by Giulio Meotti

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13208/pakistan-asia-bibi-acquitted

Asia Bibi was sentenced to death in 2010 because she is a Christian and because she was thirsty. Today, justice was served when her conviction was overturned.

Now, Bibi may be targeted for assassination when she is released. Islamists have placed a bounty on her head of 50 million rupees ($375,000). Salman Taseer, a brave Muslim who was governor of Pakistan’s Punjab province, was murdered just for expressing support for her. Pakistan’s federal Minister for Minorities, Shahbaz Bhatti, was also murdered for defending Bibi.

Lawyers defending Christians and others accused of blasphemy are sometimes murdered as well.

In the ultimate irony, just a few days ago, the so-called European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) upheld this same blasphemy law. The ECHR ruling is unspeakable. It is time to remove the unelected judges of that unaccountable and unappealable court.

After 3,422 days of cruel and unjustified imprisonment as “the first woman to be sentenced to death for blasphemy,” the death penalty verdict against Asia Noreen Bibi has finally been overturned.

Pakistan’s Supreme today set aside the death sentence against Bibi, a Roman Catholic mother of five. After being convicted in a trial in 2010 for false accusations of “blasphemy”, now justice has actually prevailed. Killing Bibi because her Muslim co-workers were offended that she, an “unclean” Christian, drank water from a communal well, was too much even for Pakistan, where Christians are habitually persecuted.

Bibi is now being “held at an undisclosed location for security reasons.” Islamist hardliners have already threatened the judges that if she is freed, those responsible would meet a “horrible” end.

On June 14, 2009, Asia Bibi drank water from a communal well on a hot day, while working in a field. Two Muslim women alleged that because she, a Christian, had touched the water from the well, the entire well was now haram (forbidden by Islamic law). Asia responded by saying “I think Jesus would see if differently from Mohammed,” that Jesus had “died on the cross for the sins of mankind,” and asked, “What did your Prophet Muhammad ever do to save mankind?” This enraged the other women, who pushed and spit on her.

Five days later, as she worked in another field, a crowd of “dozens of men and women,” calling for Bibi’s death, beat her savagely and carried her to the village, where police arrested her. Qari Muhammad Sallam, the village imam (who had not been present at the water dispute), and the women who said Bibi had defiled the well-water, told the police chief that Bibi had “insulted the Prophet Mohammed.”

On November 8, 2010, after just five minutes of deliberation, Asia Noreen Bibi, under Article 295 of Pakistan’s Penal Code, was sentenced to death by hanging.

Asia Bibi was sentenced to death because she is a Christian and because she was thirsty.

Islamists cheered the verdict. Asia Bibi was alone against an entire country ready to sacrifice its weak Christian minority to appease the Islamists. After Bibi’s arrest, her family moved houses 15 times in five years. In the last weeks there have been reports of Asia suffering dementia. Eight years of solitary confinement, with the daily risk of being murdered in prison, have been a brutal form of psychological torture. For fear of being poisoned in prison, Bibi was allowed even to prepare her own meals.

A few days ago, during the plenary meeting in Strasbourg, the president of the European Parliament, Antonio Tajani, said:

“Asia Bibi enraged some women for having drunk from a well. According to those women, such contact with Christian lips would have contaminated the water. After being attacked and reported for blasphemy, Asia Bibi risks being hanged. I ask the Pakistani authorities… to make sure that woman can have a fair trial and to avoid any form of discrimination or religious prejudice.”

Now, we must fear that when Bibi is released, she will be targeted for assassination. Islamists have placed a bounty on her head of 50 million rupees ($375,000).

Salman Taseer, a brave Muslim who was governor of Pakistan’s Punjab province, paid with his life just for expressing support for Asia; he was murdered by his own bodyguard, who said “he did this because Mr Taseer recently defended the proposed amendments to the blasphemy law.” In another example of justice prevailing, his murderer, Mumtaz Qadri, was executed.

However, lawyers defending Christians and others accused of blasphemy in Pakistan are sometimes murdered as well. Pakistan’s federal Minister for Minorities, Shahbaz Bhatti, was also murdered for defending Bibi. Although no one has even been officially executed in Pakistan for the crime of blasphemy, “many have been murdered purely on the basis of accusations against them”, Newsweek reported. According to Human Rights Watch, since 1990 at least 60 people accused of blasphemy have been murdered. Last year, a student was lynched by a mob for allegedly committing blasphemy.

Thousands of extremist Muslims rallied in Pakistan in the last few weeks in order to pressure judges to uphold the death sentence. They chanted “Hang infidel Asia” as they marched through the streets. Now Pakistani Islamists say that the judges who acquitted Asia Bibi “deserve death”. That is why Bibi now needs to flee the country. Several countries have already offered her asylum.

Since Asia Bibi was condemned to death, Christians in Pakistan have suffered a string of especially deadly terror attacks. An Islamist suicide bomber even targeted and slaughtered Christian children at a playground in a public park. Where was the West?

French priest Pierre-Hervé Grosjean asked in Le Figaro:

“How could the country of human rights be silent in the face of this injustice? … How can one want to save the Christians of Iraq from the barbarians of ISIS, if one is not able to save a Christian from the laws of an allied country?… Non-believing friends, her fate also concerns you: through her, it is the freedom and the dignity of each one that you defend. Your word is precious and courageous. Your silence would be terrible”.

But the silence has been terrible.

No one took the streets of Europe to protest Asia Bibi’s imprisonment. No major Western columnist penned articles proclaiming “Je Suis Asia Bibi.” Western secular human rights groups, always ready and willing to embrace any cause, largely remained missing in action. The campaigners to free terrorists from a relatively comfortable prison in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, had no time to ask for Asia Bibi’s release. No feminist organization supported this Christian mother. The United Nations, which just condemned France for its law banning the niqab, also stood silent. It was a conspiracy of cowardice.

After years in a windowless cell, Asia Bibi has triumphed over her would-be executioners. Injustice against Christians will continue, however, along with the West’s craven silence in the face of their persecution. Asia Bibi’s case is also the story of the West’s moral suicide.

Where have our philosophers, humanists and journalists been during these last nine years of injustice? It is this sad indifference that is devouring the West.

In the ultimate irony, just a few days ago, the so-called European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) upheld the same sort blasphemy law. The ECHR ruling is unspeakable. As Grégor Puppinck, head of the European Centre for Law and Justice, said, “the decision by the ECHR would have justified the conviction of Charlie Hebdo’s cartoons…” It is time to remove the unelected judges of that unaccountable and unappealable court.

Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and author.

© 2018 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Trump Connects the Dots on Dangers of Illegal Immigration But the Left attacks him for the picture it creates. Michael Cutler

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271766/trump-connects-dots-dangers-illegal-immigration-michael-cutler

President Trump has publicly expressed concerns about the nature and nationality of the individuals heading towards the U.S. in the supposed “Caravan of Migrants.” Consequently he ordered that the military provide active duty members of the Army to assist with efforts to secure the U.S./Mexican border.

Trump warned that embedded within that organized mob of foreign nationals are members of transnational gangs such as MS-13 and individuals from the Middle East who may be involved in terrorism.

The talking heads on the supposed “journalists” from the mainstream media, and such brilliant television personalities as the panel on the television program “The View” have derided the president, claiming that he had no justification for making those statements and, essentially accused him of lying to fire up his base of right wing conservatives.

In reality, President Trump is connecting the dots, but the globalists and the radical Left don’t like the picture that the connected dots create, so they attack him.

By now this tactic of attacking the President is not a surprise. If President Trump were to say that the sun rises in the east and sets in the west, it is likely that the Radical Left would trot out a supposed astrophysicist who would find a way to claim that the President was wrong.

Each day the President is given a security briefing where he is provided with intelligence from the intelligence community. It is entirely likely that during those briefings the issue of the nature of the foreign nationals heading to the United States was a topic.

Of course I am only speculating about whether or not the President’s Daily Briefing has provided President Trump with information about the nature of the members of the caravan. What is not speculation is the fact that the Border Patrol has been encountering and arresting illegal aliens from countries from around the world who attempted to enter the United States without inspection when they were apprehended.

Additionally, my article, Congressional Hearing: Iranian Sleeper Cells Threaten U.S. addresses a hearing that was conducted on April 17, 2018 by the House Counterterrorism and Intelligence Subcommittee, on the topic, “State Sponsors Of Terrorism: An Examination Of Iran’s Global Terrorism Network.”

When French Identity Died Emmanuel Macron, “True Frenchmen,” and the “Islam of France”. Hugh Fitzgerald

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271772/when-french-identity-died-hugh-fitzgerald

Emmanuel Macron, President of France, caused a stir some time ago during his three-day visit to Denmark and Finland. In Copenhagen on August 29, he declared that there is no such thing as “a true Dane,” no such thing as a “true Frenchman.” He was widely criticized for this remark at home. What could he possibly have meant?

But let’s back up. Macron began last February by talking grandly about his intention to create an “Islam of France.” He promised he would roll out his plans after Ramadan ended in mid-June. In early July, in the pages of Le Monde, the plan drawn up by Macron’s collaborator Hakim El Karaoui, was published. It provides for the creation of an association managed by French Muslims that will train and pay the imams in France (no longer would they be trained abroad or paid by foreign Muslim groups or states), pay for the building and maintenance of mosques (thus replacing foreign governments), and manage communication between organized Islam and the state.

The most important part of Macron’s plan was the proviso that the mosques and the imams’ salaries would be paid from taxes both on halal food products, and on pilgrimages to Mecca. This plan was hailed by a few Muslims, but denounced by many others as an unacceptable interference by the Infidel state in the practice of Islam. Several months later, the plan has still not been implemented in the slightest way. What is Macron waiting for, or has he simply gotten cold feet? Or have very deep-pocketed Muslim states, with tens of billions of dollars in properties and investments all over France, such as Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, and Qatar, managed to get to Macron and explain that they might sell off some of those investments if the French state arrogates to itself the training of imams, and the financing of mosques? Whatever has been said behind the curtains, it appears that Macron has put his ballyhooed plans on hold. Islam in France is not yet becoming an “Islam of France.”

There are as yet no taxes on halal products, nor on pilgrimages from France to Mecca. Macron’s sleight-of-word has so far led to exactly nothing, except furious outbursts from French Muslims who declared Macron had no business interfering in the foreign funding of French mosques and imams.

In late August, Macron began to show his frustration. On a trip to Denmark and Finland, he roundly declared in Copenhagen that “there is no such thing as a ‘true Dane,’” there is no such thing as a “true Frenchman.” It’s difficult to know what he meant. When asked by a Danish student about the future of national identities in Europe, Macron added a bit more to his original remark, that “the ‘true Dane’ does not exist — he is a European.”

“Even your language is not just Danish — it is European. The same is true for the French,” he added.

The Anti-Semitic Media Fights Anti-Semitism Jew-haters exploit a massacre of Jews. Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271794/anti-semitic-media-fights-anti-semitism-daniel-greenfield

The fake news media has made it official.

Criticizing George Soros, an anti-Semite and alleged Nazi collaborator, is anti-Semitic. The Washington Post alone ran two dishonest screeds, “Conspiracy Theories about Soros Aren’t Just False, They’re Anti-Semitic” and “A Conspiracy Theory about George Soros and a Migrant Caravan Inspired Horror.”

The former comes from Talia Lavin, a former New Yorker fact checker who had to resign after falsely claiming that a wheelchair bound ICE agent’s Afghanistan platoon tattoo was Nazi insignia. Seeing her potential for smearing people, Media Matters hired her as a “researcher” on “far-right extremism”.

What wasn’t good enough for the New Yorker was good enough for the Washington Post, which brought in a disgraced employee of Media Matters, an organization funded by George Soros, to accuse Soros critics of anti-Semitism. The Post did not see fit to inform readers of the fact that its pro-Soros screed was funded by a Soros group, only describing Lavin as “a writer and researcher based in Brooklyn”.

Also the Washington Post is a series of conflict of interest smears and lies based in Washington D.C.

To criticize Soros, according to Lavin and numerous carbon copy pieces being circulated by special interests across the media echo chamber, is to be linked to The Dearborn Independent, Father Coughlin, and the entire history of anti-Semitism in America. All of which, to Lavin, are associated with the right.

Except that Henry Ford’s anti-Semitism was spawned by his anti-war activism. And Coughlin was a socialist opponent of free markets, who started out as a passionate supporter of FDR, before turning on him for being too friendly to capitalism. Then he started the National Union for Social Justice whose credo was that, “that social justice should replace the practices of modern capitalism.”

Despite his anti-Semitism, Coughlin had far more in common with Bernie Sanders, than Trump.

Pittsburgh and the Press First rule of media club: do not talk about violence without blaming Republicans. By James Freeman

https://www.wsj.com/articles/pittsburgh-and-the-press-1540935634?mod=cx_picks&cx_navSource=cx_picks&cx_tag=collabctx&cx_artPos=1#cxrecs_s

How seriously should Americans take media folk who say the President’s press criticism is too harsh even as they blame him for murders he did not commit?

This column is not in the habit of labelling all shoddy reporting and commentary as “fake news.” The term should perhaps be reserved for discussions among non-doctors on cable news programs who purport to issue long-distance diagnoses of Donald Trump’s mental health. But who can defend the current widespread media effort to blame the President for a murderous rampage in Pittsburgh by a gunman who was explicitly anti-Trump?

Not that it’s fair to blame national political figures for all the acts committed by their supporters either. But Paul Krugman of the New York Times suggests that whatever the motivation, whatever the political affiliation of a particular criminal and regardless of the facts of each case, Mr. Trump is at fault:

In case you hadn’t noticed, we’re in the midst of a wave of hate crimes. Just in the past few days, bombs were mailed to a number of prominent Democrats, plus CNN. Then, a gunman massacred 11 people at a Pittsburgh synagogue. Meanwhile, another gunman killed two African-Americans at a Louisville supermarket, after first trying unsuccessfully to break into a black church — if he had gotten there an hour earlier, we would probably have had another mass murder.

All of these hate crimes seem clearly linked to the climate of paranoia and racism deliberately fostered by Donald Trump and his allies in Congress and the media.

This latest column in the Times is obviously compelling evidence that Mr. Krugman is no better at analyzing violent attacks than he is at predicting the pace of economic growth or forecasting stock market moves. But even a casual news consumer knows that such moral confusion has not been confined to Mr. Krugman since the Saturday massacre. And history has shown that it really has nothing in particular to do with Mr. Trump.

“Conservatives Don’t Get to Mourn,” is the headline on an insightful piece by Karol Markowicz, who writes in National Review today:

After every horrible mass shooting, when we should be mourning together, looking for solutions to stop future attacks, consoling the families of the victims, there’s an immediate rush to make sure conservatives know they do not belong to that wider American community feeling the pain. Worse, there’s a constant allusion to the fact that those on the right are responsible for the slaughter. Republicans spend the time following these attacks not in mourning like they should be but beating back the sickening idea that they inspired the shooter.