Displaying posts published in

January 2022

Samuel Hayek’s Message Will Remain, Hanging in the Air Haunting those Jews who refused to listen. Hugh Fitzgerald

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/01/samuel-hayeks-message-will-remain-hanging-air-hugh-fitzgerald/

When Samuel Hayek, the head of the Jewish National Fund in the U.K., gave an interview to the Jewish News in December, he said that within ten years, the situation of British Jewry might become intolerable because of the increase in the Muslim population. These are his exact words:

“The process is that maybe in 10 years, maybe less, who knows, Jews will not be able to live in the UK. I don’t think anybody can stop it.” ”It” refers to that burgeoning Muslim presence.

All hell then broke loose. Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis denounced him, and 46 members of the Jewish Board of Deputies called for Hayek to be fired. “Chief Rabbi condemns JNF UK chair Samuel Hayek’s ‘no future for Jews’ claim,” by Lee Harpin, Jewish News, January 7, 2022:

In denouncing Samuel Hayek for expressing alarm about the Jewish future in the U.K., Mirvis also praised the support of the Muslim community, alongside that of “countless non-Jewish partners” in the fight against the “scourge of antisemitism” which he said sadly “continues to be an appalling blight upon British society.”

Mirvis claims that everything is copacetic for British Jews, “a vibrant, confident, and contented community,” but at the same time, he admits that “the scourge of antisemitism continues to be an appalling blight upon British society.” So which is it? The “scourge” is there, but at the same time, there is nothing to worry about? And would the Chief Rabbi care to tell us where he thinks that “appalling blight” of antisemitism is coming from? Lager louts, is it, or possibly aging admirers of Oswald Mosley? C’mon, Chief Rabbi, admit that the current antisemitism in the U.K. is coming almost entirely from Muslims who have taken to heart the many antisemitic passages to be found in the Qur’an, which I included in my post yesterday.

China Wins Gold . . . for Tyranny Why the CCP should never be allowed to host another international event. Terence P. Jeffrey

ttps://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/01/china-wins-gold-tyranny-terence-p-jeffrey/

When Ohio State played Utah at the Rose Bowl on New Year’s Day, 87,842 people packed into that stadium to watch the game.

On New Year’s Eve, 66,839 attended the Orange Bowl to watch Georgia take on Michigan, and 76,313 attended the Cotton Bowl to watch Alabama take on Cincinnati.

COVID-19 did not stop them.

When the 2022 Winter Olympics start in Beijing in a little more than two weeks, the various venues for that event will hold only those who the Communist government of the People’s Republic of China allows to be there.

No one will be allowed to buy a ticket for any contest at the Beijing Olympics.

Over the past month, the People’s Republic of China has repeatedly escalated the restrictions it will impose on who can attend the Olympic games and what they will be allowed to do there.

On Sept. 29, the International Olympic Committee announced that people from outside mainland China would not be admitted as spectators to the games.

The Crime Wave Nobody Sees: Yet Another Muslim Rape Gang in the UK The British political and media elites continue to ignore why this keeps happening. Robert Spencer

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/01/crime-wave-nobody-sees-yet-another-muslim-rape-robert-spencer/

If you thought that the Muslim rape gangs that plagued Britain for years while authorities did nothing for fear of being called “racists” or “Islamophobes” were a thing of the past, think again. A gang of six Muslims is in court now over charges that the forced eight underage girls into sexual activity multiple times between 2013 and 2017. There is no indication that this will be the last Muslim rape gang in shattered, staggering, dhimmi Britain, either. Yet still no one in Britain dares speak of the root causes of this appallingly recurring phenomenon.

The details are about as revolting as you might expect. The MailOnline reported Tuesday that the men “sexually exploited and abused vulnerable young girls after luring them over Facebook with the promise of drink and drugs.” They “committed the offences against eight girls under the age of 16 in the Redditch area of Worcestershire.”

Abdul Hussain, 21, Usmaan Asghar, 22, Arslan Tazarab, 25, Ethashan Tazarab, 21, Usman Ali, 28 and Numan Mohammed, 23, “are charged with a total of 24 sex offences going back almost ten years – including sexual assault and sexual activity with a child.”

Prosecutor Mark Heywood QC said: “This case is about eight girls in their early to middle teens and from 2013 to 2017 they were sexually abused by these defendants. Some were crudely groped simply because they were in reach. Some were lonely and wanted attention. Others had made poor lifestyle choices which made them vulnerable. This included drinking, taking drugs, and being sexually available – they were easily taken advantage of. One was faced with demands for oral sex, she gave up resisting. When she did resist and saying no, she was grabbed and forced to comply.”

The Absurdity of National Public Radio How can one stand behind a story without knowing what the story is?James Freeman

https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-absurdity-of-national-public-radio-11643064887?mod=opinion_lead_pos11

In an age of media abundance, U.S. taxpayers are for some reason being forced to fund a news outlet that’s at least as irresponsible as its private competitors. National Public Radio has spent much of the last week trying to overturn traditional standards of journalism in the service of a politically correct narrative. For the purpose of smearing a conservative Supreme Court Justice, the state-sponsored broadcaster now maintains that anonymous sources trump the subjects of a story speaking on the record—even when the anonymous sources don’t even appear to have witnessed any relevant events.

Last Tuesday, NPR’s Nina Totenberg claimed that Justice Neil Gorsuch was “prickly” in an account that began with the following story:

It was pretty jarring earlier this month when the justices of the U.S. Supreme Court took the bench for the first time since the omicron surge over the holidays. All were now wearing masks. All, that is, except Justice Neil Gorsuch. What’s more, Justice Sonia Sotomayor was not there at all, choosing instead to participate through a microphone setup in her chambers.
Sotomayor has diabetes, a condition that puts her at high risk for serious illness, or even death, from COVID-19. She has been the only justice to wear a mask on the bench since last fall when, amid a marked decline in COVID-19 cases, the justices resumed in-person arguments for the first time since the onset of the pandemic.

Race, Harvard and the Supreme Court The Justices will get a chance to vindicate the 14th Amendment.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/race-harvard-and-the-supreme-court-students-for-fair-admissions-colleges-quotas-11643063228?mod=opinion_lead_pos2

The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to hear two cases challenging racial preferences in admissions at Harvard and the University of North Carolina. Kudos to the Justices for taking this opportunity to vindicate equal treatment under the law regardless of race, especially when the left is pushing racial calculations into policies far beyond campus.

This also is a chance for the Court to correct its own mistakes. Racial quotas are forbidden, but in Grutter v. Bollinger (2003), a 5-4 majority endorsed the idea that race could be a “plus” factor to help colleges seek “the educational benefits that flow from a diverse student body.” Yet there was an expiration date: “We expect that 25 years from now, the use of racial preferences will no longer be necessary to further the interest approved today.”

That deadline is almost here. But two decades later the progressive zeal for divvying up people by race, ethnicity and sexuality has increased. Colleges have begun hosting specific graduation events for black, “Latinx” or LGBT students. Some dorms provide optional “affinity housing.” States and hospitals lately have written race into their policies for allocating scarce Covid-19 treatments. The old goal of “equality” is now passe on the left, which wants “equity,” which means unequal treatment in an attempt to achieve equal results.

Also, what is the limit on a racial plus factor? Students for Fair Admissions, the petitioner in both cases, says Harvard admits 56.1% of black applicants in the top academic decile, compared with 31.3% of Hispanics, 15.3% of whites, and 12.7% of Asians. A black applicant who’s in the fourth-lowest decile, it adds, “has a higher chance of admission (12.8%) than an Asian American in the top decile.”

A Covid Origin Conspiracy? Newly released emails make more plausible the contention that Anthony Fauci and Francis Collins presided over the suppression of the lab-leak theory for political reasons. Nicholas Wade

https://www.city-journal.org/covid-origin-conspiracy

From almost the moment the Covid-19 pandemic broke out in the city of Wuhan, the medical-research establishment in Washington and London insisted that the virus had emerged naturally. Only conspiracy theorists, they said, would give credence to the idea that the virus had escaped from the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Now a string of unearthed emails—the most recent being a batch viewed by the House Oversight and Reform Committee and referred to in its January 11, 2022 letter—is making it seem increasingly likely that there was, in fact, a conspiracy, its aim being to suppress the notion that the virus had emerged from research funded by the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), headed by Anthony Fauci. The latest emails don’t prove such a conspiracy, but they make it more plausible, for two reasons: because the expert virologists therein present such a strong case for thinking that the virus had lab-made features and because of the wholly political reaction to this bombshell on the part of Francis Collins, then-director of the National Institutes of Health.

The story begins with a January 31, 2020, email to Fauci from a group of four virologists led by Kristian G. Andersen of the Scripps Research Institute. The genome sequence of SARS-CoV-2 had been published three weeks before, giving virologists their first look at the virus’s structure and possible origin.

Andersen reported to Fauci that “after discussions earlier today, Eddie, Bob, Mike and myself all find the genome inconsistent with expectations from evolutionary theory.” Eddie is Edward C. Holmes of the University of Sydney; Bob is Robert F. Garry of Tulane University; Mike is Michael Farzan at Scripps Research. In their unanimous view, the virus didn’t come from nature and may instead have escaped from a lab.

We knew this much already from emails obtained in June 2021 by a Freedom of Information Act request, as well as from the fact that a teleconference took place the following day (February 1, 2020) to discuss the virologists’ conclusion. But something remarkable happened at the conference, because within three days Andersen was singing a different tune. In a February 4, 2020 email, he derided ideas about a lab leak as “crackpot theories” that “relate to this virus being somehow engineered with intent and that is demonstrably not the case.”

TREASON’S SIBLING

https://www.nysun.com/editorials/treasons-sibling/91966/

If we were President Trump’s lawyers — a stretch to be sure — we would be reading up on a Supreme Court case called Ex Parte Bollman. It centers on a conspiracy of treason in respect of Aaron Burr. A United States magistrate will today weigh whether to deny bail to the leader of the Oath Keepers, Elmer Stewart Rhodes III, on a charge — seditious conspiracy — that Harvard’s Laurence Tribe calls “treason’s sibling.”

Which is where Bollman comes in. It was the first treason ruling by the Supreme Court. Sedition is a lesser crime than treason, which the Constitution confines to levying war against the United States or adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. Yet if Mr. Rhodes et al are convicted, they could spend decades in prison. And so, Bollman warns, could Mr. Trump.

Prosecutors’ intentions to ensnare Mr. Trump in seditious conspiracy charges emerged in court filings for a defendant named Brandon Straka. In Justice Department interviews with Mr. Straka, his lawyer says, “the government was focused on establishing an organized conspiracy” between Mr. Straka, “President Donald J. Trump, and allies of the former president to disrupt the joint session of Congress on Jan. 6.”

This suggests the intention of prosecutors to “reach beyond those who took part in the melee on Jan. 6 and seek to build a case against Mr. Trump,” along with “his allies who helped inspire the violence that day,” the New York Times last week observed. If so, prosecutorial efforts to prove that Mr. Rhodes committed seditious conspiracy will serve as a preview of coming attractions for Mr. Trump.

Biden Calls Fox News Reporter a ‘Stupid Son of a B****’ for Asking about Inflation Impact on Midterms By Brittany Bernstein

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/biden-calls-fox-news-reporter-a-stupid-son-of-a-b-for-asking-about-inflation-impact-on-midterms/

President Biden was caught insulting Fox News reporter Peter Doocy on Monday for asking if he believes inflation is a “political liability” in the midterms.

“That’s a great asset — more inflation,” Biden responded on a hot mic. “What a stupid son of a b****.”

Biden’s comment comes weeks after a Labor Department report showed inflation increased at the fastest rate in 40 years over the last twelve months. The report showed that the consumer price index, a major inflation gauge, for all items surged 0.5 percent in December and 7.0 percent for the last twelve months ending in December, representing the largest annual spike since June 1982, when inflation hit 7.1 percent.

I&I/TIPP Poll: Americans Agree —McConnell, Pelosi, Fauci And Breyer Should Ride Off Into The Sunset Terry Jones

https://issuesinsights.com/2022/01/24/ii-tipp-poll-americans-agree-mcconnell-pelosi-fauci-and-breyer-should-ride-off-into-the-sunset/

In a time marked by widening political differences across the country and growing ideological acrimony, it’s probably no surprise to anyone that politicians and other government officials have come under increasing critical scrutiny.

In a new I&I/TIPP Poll, we asked Americans which of four prominent public officials now making headlines should retire or leave office. Turns out, it’s all of them.

Poll respondents were asked the following question: “Should the following officials retire soon or continue?” People were then given the names of four major public officials: Republican Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, Democratic House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Chief Presidential Medical Advisor Anthony Fauci, and Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer.

All of those named, it should be noted, have come under intense public pressure from both political interest groups, activists and media pundits to either retire or resign.

Do ordinary Americans agree?

Russia-Ukraine conflict puts Biden administration’s weakness on full display A competent administration’s efforts to deter a Russian invasion of Ukraine would have started a long time ago: Mike Pompeo

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/russia-ukraine-biden-weakness-mike-pompeo

From negotiating with the malign Iranian regime while they have threatened former President Trump, or allowing the Taliban to sweep through Afghanistan and directly imperil American lives, or refusing to hold the Chinese Communist Party accountable for its central role in the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic or for its aggression towards Taiwan, the Biden administration’s record after one year in office is marked by abject weakness.

But his weakness has been unmatched in attempting to deter Russia’s imminent invasion of Ukraine.

For months now, Vladimir Putin has massed Russian military forces on the Ukrainian border. Last month, on December 17, the Kremlin unveiled two draft agreements that essentially acted as ultimatums for NATO and the Biden administration.

The demands? For the United States and NATO to guarantee that NATO would not expand further east, that the United States would withdraw its nuclear missiles from Europe, and that no NATO country would cooperate militarily with former Soviet countries.  In effect, Vladimir Putin wants to reestablish Russian dominance over Eastern Europe by recapturing old Soviet bloc countries.

Of course, this would be disastrous for Europe and American national security.  President Putin made no offers or concessions in exchange for these demands.  He included no guarantees to withdraw the mass of Russian troops in the Donbass region of Ukraine, and proposed no plan to end Russia’s illegal occupation of Crimea.

All he ‘promised’ was to no longer threaten America.  Any competent team in the White House, any capable American president, would have responded to such threats with immediate and tangible costs to the Russians.

They would have responded to the massive military build-up on Ukraine’s border with preemptive, crushing economic sanctions and an ironclad guarantee to help Ukraine defend itself should Russia invade.  President Biden should be rallying European allies to commit themselves to standing against Putin and his lawless, authoritarian actions.  But deterrence was lost with Biden’s weakness.