Displaying the most recent of 89955 posts written by

Ruth King

Eight Countries Stand with U.S. as UN Condemns Recognition of Jerusalem By Bridget Johnson see note please

Even more important than the nations that voted with the United States, are those that abstained, which included many African nations that formerly voted against Israel in lock step with all Arab states-Togo voted no, and Rwanda, Malawi, Uganda, Lesotho, Equatorial Guinea and South Sudan abstained. Kenya was absent. Looking ahead it may be a nascent trend….rsk

The United Nations General Assembly today voted to condemn the Trump administration’s recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and demand that all member nations comply with UN Security Council resolutions on the status of the city.

The emergency special session vote was scheduled after the U.S. used its veto power to block a similar resolution at the Security Council on Monday. There is no veto power in the General Assembly.

U.S. Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley warned that America would be “taking names” of countries who voted against the United States. President Trump said Wednesday, “They take hundreds of millions of dollars and even billions of dollars, and then they vote against us. Well, we’re watching those votes. Let them vote against us. We’ll save a lot. We don’t care.”

The final vote was 128 in favor of the resolution, nine against and 35 abstentions. The “no” votes came from the U.S., Israel, Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, Palau, Togo, Honduras, and Guatemala. Britain voted in favor of the resolution, while Canada and Mexico abstained.

Explaining the UK’s stance at the Security Council earlier this week, UK Ambassador to the UN Matthew Rycroft said Washington’s move was “unhelpful to the prospects for peace in the region, an aim that all of us in this Council remain committed to — the British Embassy to Israel is based in Tel Aviv and we have no plans to move it.”

Unlike votes in the Security Council, General Assembly resolutions are non-binding. Today’s resolution calls on all states to “comply with Security Council resolutions regarding the Holy City of Jerusalem, and not recognize any actions or measures contrary to those resolutions.”

Haley said today at the General Assembly that she’s “often wondered why, in the face of such hostility, Israel has chosen to remain a member of this body.”

“And then I remember that Israel has chosen to remain in this institution because it’s important to stand up for yourself. Israel must stand up for its own survival as a nation, but it also stands up for the ideals of freedom and human dignity that the United Nations is supposed to be about,” she said. CONTINUE AT SITE

Former Obama Staffer Ben Rhodes Dreams of Ryan, McConnell, Pence Obituaries By Tyler O’Neil

On Thursday morning, a former staffer for President Obama infamous for the Iran Deal daydreamed about the deaths of House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), and Vice President Mike Pence. He joined the chorus of liberals attacking the tax reform bill President Donald Trump signed into law Wednesday.

“I hope this is the photo they use on the front page of the Times on the day Trump is indicted,” former Obama national security advisor and CNN contributor Dan Pfeiffer tweeted Tuesday night. Pfeiffer implied that Ryan, McConnell, and Pence would be remembered as willing accomplices to treason in the history books.As if this insult were not enough, Ben Rhodes chimed in, “And alongside the obits for Ryan, McConnell, and Pence.”
Ben Rhodes

✔ @brhodes

And alongside the obits for Ryan, McConnell, and Pence https://twitter.com/danpfeiffer/status/943708505491456005 …
12:10 AM – Dec 21, 2017

Rhodes is infamous for his role in propping up the Iran nuclear deal. A New York Times profile on Rhodes revealed that he was a speechwriter without any foreign policy educational experience, military experience, or international experience, and yet Obama tapped him to become deputy national security advisor for strategic communications and speechwriting.

In September of this year, The Washington Post published a fake news story at the top of the front page about President Obama allegedly prodding Facebook on Russia’s role during the 2016 election. After the story ran, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg corrected the report, pointing out that Russia was not discussed at the Obama meeting.

Rhodes traveled with Obama to Lima, Peru, at the time of the meeting. He did not attend the Obama-Zuckerberg meeting in person, but likely knew a great deal about it. This separation would give him plausible deniability if called out on leaking the false story to The Washington Post. CONTINUE AT SITE

Now, Tax Reform Gets Real The left and the press foretold disaster for the middle class. Such claims will be tested.By Kimberley A. Strassel

In the wake of last year’s election, a humiliated press corps was forced to reassess, to explain how it had gotten the presidential race so monumentally wrong. Conclusions: It had been too blinded by its own biases, too sheltered from Middle America. It apologized. It promised to do better.

Or not.

Yahoo News: “Meet some victims of the Trump tax bill.” Washington Post: “10 Reasons Democrats think the tax bill will be a political loser for Trump’s GOP.” New York Times: “In Tax Overhaul, Trump Tries to Defy Economic Odds.” Business Insider: “Americans have already made up their minds about the tax bill—and it looks brutal for the GOP.”

To read all this coverage, you’d be justified in believing that the entire Republican Party had been hit with a stupid stick. Its members united to jack up the taxes of millions of middle-income voters, throw the country into recession, and saddle today’s toddlers with a future debt crisis—all to enable the transfer of tax plunder to fat-cat donors. And not only did it pass this colossally idiotic policy, it did so enthusiastically, in full view of the public—guaranteeing a 2018 GOP midterm wipeout. What dimwits!

This is the Democratic line, and the media is embracing it. Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi bet that the GOP would fail to enact tax reform, so they pressed their members to boycott negotiations. Instead, Republicans are delivering bigger paychecks and the prospect of accelerated economic growth, and not a single Democrat can take credit. The Democratic Party’s only path is therefore to spin an obvious GOP victory into a disaster. The press, with all its biases and insularity, once again is all in, with another attack on reality.

Nearly every story quotes a variation of Mrs. Pelosi’s line that the bill is “wholesale robbery of the middle class.” Mr. Schumer continues to claim the reform helps “only the wealthiest few.” These are Trumpian-size whoppers, which the media eagerly repeats. Yet even the liberal Tax Policy Center has acknowledged that 90% of the middle class will get a tax cut in 2018, and that the average cut will be $1,600.

USA Today was so desperate to depict the bill as a tax hike that its analysis of “5 household situations” included a childless single renter earning $1 million a year, paying $50,000 in state and local taxes, and claiming $40,000 in charitable deductions. The paper triumphantly pointed out that this downtrodden soul would pay $1,887 more in taxes. And therefore have to forgo a bottle of Chateau Lafite-Rothschild.

Democrats spent months insisting that corporations would pocket their tax cuts rather than invest in their workers. The press continues to parrot this line—even as AT&T, Comcast, Wells Fargo and others immediately announced bonuses, pay hikes, higher starting wages, better benefits and plans for new hiring. Democrats call these PR stunts, but so what? Workers are benefiting. CONTINUE AT SITE

Israel Rejects U.N. Vote as Palestinians Hail It Netanyahu highlights absentions on vote rebuking U.S. for recognizing Jerusalem as Israel’s capital By Rory Jones

Thursday’s United Nations vote admonishing the U.S. move to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital underscored the overwhelming international support for the establishment of a Palestinian state, and dealt a blow to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

But the voting pattern on the resolution, with nine objections and 35 abstentions, also highlighted pockets of diplomatic support for Israel. The result was less unanimously against Israel than the vote on many other U.N. resolutions on Israel.

“Israel completely rejects this preposterous resolution,” Mr. Netanyahu said in a statement. “But I do appreciate the fact that a growing number of countries refused to participate in the theater of the absurd.”

Mr. Netanyahu has said countries around the world are changing their attitudes toward Israel due to its offers of intelligence sharing and technology cooperation. Even Arab states with which Israel has no diplomatic relations are willing to work with his government in private, Mr. Netanyahu has said.

Publicly, Arab states have indicated they will engage with Israel diplomatically only after the establishment of a Palestinian state. Thursday’s resolution, introduced by Turkey and Yemen, was co-sponsored by many other Arab and Muslim governments, underscoring their support for a two-state solution.

The vote proved a diplomatic coup for Palestinian officials after the U.S decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and announce a plan to move its embassy there from Tel Aviv. Palestinian officials have said they would boycott the Trump administration’s effort to launch peace talks and seek greater support for their own state from bodies such as the U.N. CONTINUE AT SITE

U.N. Vote Rebukes U.S. for Jerusalem Move General Assembly votes overwhelmingly in favor of resolution despite Trump’s threats of consequences By Farnaz Fassihi

UNITED NATIONS—The United Nations General Assembly voted overwhelmingly Thursday for a resolution effectively rebuking U.S. President Donald Trump for recognizing the disputed city of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital and pledging to move the U.S. embassy there.

The vote came despite threats by Mr. Trump and U.S. Ambassador Nikki Haley that the U.S. would take punitive measures, such as reducing foreign aid and cutting contributions to the U.N., against countries voting in favor of the resolution.

The General Assembly resolution didn’t explicitly refer to the U.S., instead asserting that unilateral decisions such as Mr. Trump’s have no legal effect and must be rescinded. In the vote, 128 countries voted in favor and 9 against, with 35 abstaining.

“The United States will remember this day in which it was singled out for attack in the General Assembly for the very act of exercising our right as a sovereign nation,” Ms. Haley said during the debate, adding Mr. Trump’s decision to move the embassy would not be affected.

“We will remember it when we are called upon to once again make the world’s largest contribution to the United Nations,” she said, appearing visibly angry and leaving the chamber after speaking.

President Trump’s plan to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem is a calculated gamble, running the risk of stirring up protests and violence. WSJ’s Gerald F. Seib explains why Mr. Trump thinks now is the time to act, when past administrations made similar promises but decided not to. Photo: AP

It remained unclear immediately after the vote precisely what the U.S. would do in retaliation for the vote. Neither Ms. Haley nor the White House spelled out specific responses.

Many U.N. diplomats said Thursday that while they valued their alliance with the U.S., their own longstanding policies on the status of Jerusalem are in line with international law and U.N. resolutions that don’t recognize the city as the capital of Israel in the absence of a peace deal.

Turkey’s Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu denounced the approach taken by Mr. Trump and Ms. Haley, who said in an email to representatives of more than 180 countries a day earlier that the U.S. would take down the names of those who vote against it. CONTINUE AT SITE

How Many Times Did You Beat Your Wife? by Linda Goudsmit

The essential element in the question, “How many times did you beat your wife?” is its presupposition that the husband beat his wife.

Perhaps the best way to understand the ongoing debate surrounding Net Neutrality is to consider Noam Chomsky’s incisive observations on presuppositions in his book The Common Good (1998).

“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum – even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there’s free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.” p43

Millennials have been indoctrinated with the presuppositions of the Leftist narrative for two decades. Climate change is a classic example. The climate change argument presupposes the validity of its foundational premise of global warming. When it became abundantly clear that the earth’s temperature always fluctuates and was in fact cooling the global warming enthusiasts disingenuously changed the name of their campaign from “global warming” to “climate change” without ever accepting the scientific facts of the earth’s cooling. Why? Because global warming/climate change was never about the weather – it was always about the redistribution of wealth from rich industrialized countries to poorer non-industrialized countries in the form of taxes, fees, fines, and non-compliance penalties.

Even testimony by Patrick Moore former co-founder of Greenpeace before the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, was not enough to convince millennials that global warming was a hoax because they had accepted the presupposition of the argument and were ideologically convinced they were saving the planet.

Oppositional views on climate change have actually been litigated. The court case against Mark Steyn attempted to silence Steyn’s oppositional views on climate change. Steyn argued that if courts can silence free and open debate on scientific inquiry then freedom of speech is functionally dead. The pressure to conform in climate science is very real and the viciousness and hostility toward people who disagree is overwhelming. Anyone in the science community who challenges the “settled” science of climate change is considered unhinged or a dissident to be silenced – not a respected scientist or a climatologist to be heard. Climate science is functionally political science because redistribution of wealth is a political matter unrelated to weather.

Outrageous UN Vote on Jerusalem an Opportunity to Stop Paying for the “Privilege” of Being “Disrespected” Anne Bayefsky

For decades, the United Nations has spit in the face of the United States. The demonization of the Jewish state – modern antisemitism – has been one of many UN policy priorities totally antithetical to American values and interests.

The General Assembly vote on December 21 condemning President Donald Trump’s implementation of American law recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel ought to be the last time America takes it lying down.

Let’s be clear about how we got here. Thursday’s meeting was the seventeenth time the UN General Assembly has convened the so-called “tenth” emergency special session on Israel since 1997. That’s because the “tenth” session is effectively permanent. At the end of the meeting, the President of the General Assembly stressed that the session was merely “adjourned.”

What such UN-eze means for real people is this: There has never been an emergency special session of the General Assembly on anything but Israel-bashing in twenty years. 500,000-plus dead and seven million displaced in Syria over seven years – and not one emergency special session. Neither a million dead in Rwanda, nor two million dead over two decades in Sudan, ever prompted a single emergency special session.

The issue Thursday was not about Jerusalem. It was about Jew-hatred. The resolution is the General Assembly’s twenty-first resolution in 2017 slamming Israel for violating “rights” and “law.” There was one resolution on North Korea. One on Iran. And one on the United States – criticizing U.S. Cuba policy. Altogether, there were nine resolutions critical of human rights records in specific states in the rest of the world combined.

The game is Jerusalem and 1967 borders. But the endgame is the 1948 borders and the legitimacy of a Jewish state.

The issue today was also not simply about President Trump. The State Department produces an annual report computing “coincidence of voting” in the General Assembly – or how often other countries vote the same way as the United States. In 2016, counting all the final draft resolutions of the full plenary of the General Assembly – that were adopted by a vote and on which the U.S. voted yes or no – “coincidence of voting” with the United States was a mere 37 percent.

Twilight over the “Palestinian Cause” by Guy Millière

Reports from the West Bank after the Six Day War show that the Arabs interviewed defined themselves as “Arabs” or “Jordanians”, and evidently did not yet know that they were “the Palestinian people”. Since then, they were taught it. They were also taught that it is their duty is to “liberate Palestine” by killing Jews. The Palestinians are the first people invented to serve as a weapon of mass destruction of another people.

“The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality, today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese.” — PLO leader Zuheir Mohsen, interview in the Dutch newspaper Trouw, March 1977.

Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, the European Union has become the main financier of the “Palestinian cause”, including its terrorism. They are also contributing to war.

Iran, strengthened enormously by the agreement passed in July 2015 and the massive US funding that accompanied it, has been showing its desire to become a hegemonic power in the Middle East.

The grand mufti of Saudi Arabia, Sheikh Abdulaziz ibn Abdullah Al ash-Sheikh, recently issued a fatwa saying that “fighting the Jews” is “against the will” of Allah and that Hamas is a terrorist organization.

For many years, “Palestine” has not stopped aspiring to new heights in the so called “international community”. “Palestine” has been present at the Olympic Games since 1996, and, later, became a permanent observer to UNESCO and the United Nations. The vast majority of the 95 “embassies” of “Palestine” are in the Muslim world; many others are in Asia, Africa, Latin America and Europe. In 2014, the Spanish Parliament voted in favor of full recognition of “Palestine.” A few weeks later, the French Parliament did the same.

There is no other instance in the history of the world where a state that does not exist can have missions and embassies presumed to function as if that state did exist.

Now the time has probably come for the “Palestinians” to realize that they have lost and fall back to earth, as noted by the scholar Daniel Pipes.

Have “Palestinian” leaders been showing by their speeches and actions that they are ready to rule a state living in peace with their neighbors and with the rest of the world? All “Palestinian” leaders have incessantly incited terrorism, and do not hide their wish to wipe Israel off the map.

Canada: Obsessed with “Islamophobia” by Judith Bergman

The current government seems not to believe that Islamic terrorism in Canada even exists.

The RCMP guide is premised on the belief that radicalization occurs because of perceptions of “injustice” (not because of perceptions of jihad). Islamic groups are not mentioned. The message is that terrorism is “diverse” and has nothing to do with Islam. However, Public Safety Canada’s list of terrorist entities contains 54 terrorist groups, 46 of which are Islamic terrorist groups.

Meanwhile, the war on free speech in Canada grinds on: Ottawa Public Library cancelled the screening of “Killing Europe”, a documentary about, ironically, among other things, the death of free speech in Europe. Ottawa Public Library deemed this content not suitable for Canadians — apparently snowflakes, not allowed to know about the rise of migrant rape crime, anti-Semitism, far-leftist violence and other irritants in Europe.

While worried about graffiti, Canadian authorities appear far less concerned about deterring Canadian imams from preaching jihad, Jew-hatred and the murder of Jews to their Muslim congregations, despite Jews being approximately twelve times more likely to be targeted for hate crimes than Muslims are. For anti-Muslim graffiti, you go to jail for five months, but inciting an entire congregation to kill Jewish citizens does not even merit prosecution.

In September, the Canadian parliament began its study on how to combat “Islamophobia” as decided upon in the M-103 motion. A parliamentary committee, the M-103 committee, was established for that very purpose. Although motion M-103 was not binding, Samer Majzoub, a Muslim Brotherhood affiliate of the Canadian Muslim Forum, tellingly advertised:

“Now that Islamophobia has been condemned, this is not the end, but rather the beginning… so that condemnation is followed by comprehensive policies.”

Majzoub’s statement presumably meant that the next steps would be to make M-103 binding.

Part of the problem, however, with any study of “Islamophobia”, as with any motions about it, is that it is never clearly defined.

Now fresh statistics released at the end of November 2017, showed that in Canada, hate crimes against Muslims actually fell in 2016, but those against Jews increased:

Hate crimes against Muslims:

2015, there were 159
2016, there were 139

Hate crimes against Jews:

2015, there were 178
2016, there were 221

In Canada, with a population of 36 million people, approximately 330,000 are Jews and slightly more than 1,000,000 are Muslims.

Egypt’s Paper-Peace with Israel by A. Z. Mohamed

“The greatest obstacle to the expansion of peace today is not found in the leaders of the countries around us. The obstacle is public opinion on the Arab street, public opinion that has been brainwashed for years by a distorted and misleading presentation of the State of Israel.” — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Today, in spite of the lasting peace treaty between Cairo and Jerusalem, much of the media in Egypt continues to demonize Israel. Even under President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, with whom Netanyahu has been developing mutually beneficial security relations, prominent figures in the state-run press disseminate anti-Israel conspiracy theories.

El-Sisi now has a genuine opportunity to spread to his populace his own increasingly positive relations with a neighbor that could significantly benefit his people and his country.

The 40th anniversary of Egyptian President Anwar Sadat’s historic visit to the Knesset took place on November 21. There, Sadat had announced:

“I have come to you so that together we might build a durable peace based on justice, to avoid the shedding of one single drop of blood from an Arab or an Israeli.”

To commemorate the occasion, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu delivered an address, saying:

“The greatest obstacle to the expansion of peace today is not found in the leaders of the countries around us. The obstacle is public opinion on the Arab street, public opinion that has been brainwashed for years by a distorted and misleading presentation of the State of Israel.”

Netanyahu had a point. Today, four decades later — in spite of the lasting peace treaty between Cairo and Jerusalem — much of the media in Egypt continues to demonize Israel. Even under President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, with whom Netanyahu has been developing mutually beneficial security relations, prominent figures in the state-run press disseminate anti-Israel conspiracy theories.

Former MP Mustafa Bakri, for instance, editor-in-chief of the newspaper Al-Osboa and the host of the “Facts and Secrets” talk show on Sada El Balad TV. told the Egyptian daily Al Youm 7, as recently as November 20th, that Egypt must force the “Israeli enemy,” the “Zionist entity,” to return antiquities that it had supposedly smuggled out of Egypt into Israel.

Earlier in the month, when it was announced that Lebanese Prime Minister Saad Hariri had resigned (he has since suspended his resignation), Bakri said on his talk show that Israel — which he referred to as the “State of Israeli Occupation” — was the only party that would benefit from a new war breaking out in the Middle East. He also alleged that Israel was conspiring against Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, Egypt and Lebanon.

During a different segment of his show in the beginning of November, Bakri denounced the 1917 Balfour Declaration as a sinister act — a crime committed by Britain that enabled Israel to extort Palestine (which did not exist in 1917) — and backed the Palestinian Authority’s threat to sue Britain in the International Criminal Court.

In a 2016 study — “Peace with Israel in Egyptian Textbooks: What Changed between the Mubarak and el-Sisi Eras?” — Ofir Winter, an Egypt specialist at the Tel Aviv-based Institute for National Security Studies, found that although the Egyptian government had revised the way in which the Egypt-Israel treaty was presented and taught to ninth-graders in the 2015-2016 academic year, the change had little effect on the Egyptian public. Winter writes: