Displaying posts categorized under

BOOKS

The Gangster Who Reigns Over the Kremlin Daryl McCann (JUNE 2012)

https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2012/06/deluded-tyrant-in-the-kremlin/

In December 1564, Ivan IV took himself off into exile. From the remoteness of Aleksandrova Sloboda he wrote two letters to officials in Moscow, one announcing his abdication, the other stipulating that he would return to the throne only on condition he be granted absolute power. There were positive aspects to Ivan’s rule, especially in the earlier years, and “Fearsome” rather than “Terrible” might be a better rendering of his popular designation, and yet there is something wretchedly Russian about those obtuse boyars pleading, in the end, for Ivan’s royal restitution. Masha Gessen’s The Man Without a Face and even more so David Satter’s It Was a Long Time Ago, and It Never Happened Anyway do nothing to disabuse us of the notion that Russia as a whole remains clueless when it comes to addressing the most basic principles of democracy and the rights of the individual.

In August 1999, Boris Yeltsin announced that Vladimir Putin, Head of the Federal Security Service (FSB), was to be the new prime minister of Democratic Russia. Shortly thereafter, contends Gessen, the FSB made Yeltsin an offer he could not refuse. If Yeltsin allowed Putin to replace him as the president of the Russian Federation, Yeltsin could expect to enjoy the full protection of the intelligence service for the rest of his days, along with immunity from prosecution for any transgressions committed during a decade in office. The ailing and politically vulnerable Yeltsin assented. For almost seventy years the Chekists had been the sword and shield of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Now, thanks to the demise of the USSR and Yeltsin’s instinct for self-preservation, a criminal cabal with a lineage dating back to Felix Dzerzhinsky’s Cheka commenced ruling Russia in its own right.

As a consequence, argues Gessen, Vladimir Putin has spent the past twelve years effectively transforming Russia “into a supersize model of the KGB”, the world’s first bona fide mafia state.

Robert Spencer’s ‘The Critical Qur’an’ A must-read, essential book. Danusha V. Goska

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/02/robert-spencers-critical-quran-explained-key-danusha-v-goska/

If I were queen, I would reward every reader who completed Robert Spencer’s new book, The Critical Qur’an: Explained from Key Islamic Commentaries and Contemporary Historical Research. The Critical Qur’an is an essential book that every thinking person would benefit from reading. About one in four humans is a Muslim. Given child marriage, polygyny, and women’s low status, Muslims have high fertility rates and the percentage of the world’s population that is Muslim is predicted to increase till Islam is the world’s majority religion in 2075. While it is true that the Qur’an is often not read or understand by most Muslims, Muslims do revere the Qur’an. Muslims may have little idea what the book contains, but they are ready to kill over it. When, in 2005, Newsweek circulated false rumors that Americans were flushing Qur’ans down toilets – which is of course impossible – at least seventeen people were killed in ensuing violence and “a council of more than 300 mullahs …threatened to declare holy war.”

In the past, reading the Qur’an was difficult. Some translations used pseudo-King-James English, for example archaic forms like “thee, thou, thine,” in an attempt to make the Qur’an sound Biblical, and, therefore, holy. Some translations attempt to paper over the Qur’an’s lack of clarity by adding parenthetical fixes. For example, Qur’an 2:1 begins “Alif Lam Meem.” No one knows what this means. One translation tries to “help” the reader with a parenthetical explanation: “Alif-Lam-Mim. [These letters are one of the miracles of the Quran and none but Allah (Alone) knows their meanings].” The reader is left to wonder how the incoherent equals the miraculous. Translators try to draw a smiley face over darker Qur’anic passages. “Jihad,” which clearly means actual warfare to claim territory, booty, corpses, and slaves for Allah, is translated as “struggle.” Spencer’s new translation avoids these pitfalls, and, on the sentence level, it is easy to read.

Podcast: The ‘Cry-Bully’ Phenomenon on College Campuses Author Richard Cravatts discusses his new ebook, “Jew Hatred Rising.”

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/02/podcast-cry-bully-phenomenon-college-campuses-stop-jew-hatred-campus/

https://americasvoice.news/video/VAqiiCevv1WSHeY/

Freedom Center Journalism Fellow and author Richard L. Cravatts, Ph.D., recently made an appearance on The Water Cooler podcast, which is hosted by journalist David Brody, to promote his new ebook, Jew Hatred Rising: The Perversities of the Campus War Against Israel and the Jews, which was published by the Freedom Center this month.

Host David Brody began the show by discussing the recent incident with actress and commentator Whoopi Goldberg, who was suspended from The View for two weeks after she inexcusably declared that the Holocaust was not about racism.

“The controversy with Whoopi Goldberg illuminates part of the problem that on university campuses there’s an obsession about race, and in Whoopi’s mind the Jews were white people,” Cravatts explained. “And on University campuses now, Jews are not considered to be a minority group that’s worthy or deserving of protection in the way that blacks, gays, Muslims, Hispanics and other minority and ethnic groups and identity groups are protected.”

Cravatts lays the blame for much of modern anti-Semitism squarely on anti-Israel hate groups like the Hamas-funded Students for Justice in Palestine. Instead of attacking Jews directly, Cravatts explained, SJP relies on “the substitution of Israel for the Jew so that people that authentically hate Jews or don’t like the idea of a Jewish sovereign nation are able to express their animus towards Jews by heaping criticism and obsessing about the many long and egregious list of faults about Israel.”

The Odyssey of Roosevelt Montás By M. D. Aeschliman

https://www.nationalreview.com/2022/02/the-odyssey-of-roosevelt-montas/

His education in the ‘Great Books’ and in the purpose of the humanities has enabled him to write a valuable and persuasive book.

Rescuing Socrates: How the Great Books Changed My Life and Why They Matter for a New Generation, by Roosevelt Montás (Princeton University Press, 248 pages, $24.95)

Roosevelt Montás was born very poor in a remote rural village in the Dominican Republic in 1973 and managed to immigrate with family members to the United States in 1985, living in impoverished circumstances and broken homes in New York City. He has now written a poignant and edifying book about how he emerged from such circumstances and ended up getting bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degrees in English and comparative literature from Columbia University and becoming a key instructor and administrator in the famous Columbia undergraduate liberal-arts program generally known as the Core Curriculum, now a century in operation. Rescuing Socrates is a valuable and thoughtful book both sociologically and educationally, making a contribution to the ongoing debate over the past, present, and future of liberal-arts education in the United States.

It is temptingly easy to see Montás’s success story in assimilating to Anglophone, elite Western intellectual culture as in fact the rare exception that proves the general rule that for poor, immigrant, racial- and ethnic-minority students the very structure of Western high culture and institutions is essentially irrelevant, useless, exclusive, humiliating, and destructive. What about the other 95 percent of such students who did not happen to encounter a passionately committed high-school teacher who encouraged a bookish young man’s accidental discovery of a discarded copy of some of Plato’s dialogues?

Yet Montás’s book is sufficiently complex and deep in its treatment of large-scale cultural and curricular issues to warrant wide and careful reading about our current educational condition. Though he has indeed become a vigorous spokesman for “Great Books” education, his own upward path is not unduly idealistic or unrealistic about ethnic, linguistic, and class dynamics: Only on the surface is it a story of “making it.”

Living in socially anarchic urban circumstances, Montás went to a nonselective, multiethnic high school in the New York City borough of Queens, and a dedicated teacher mentored him and suggested he enroll in an intensive summer program, at Columbia University, sponsored by New York State for able lower-income and socially disadvantaged students, HEOP: the Higher Education Opportunity Program. The social and emotional costs of this program were wounding but were ultimately outweighed by the benefits of induction into the middle-class Anglophone educational milieu that enabled him subsequently to get admitted on scholarship to Columbia.

The discredited doctor hailed by the anti-vaccine movement Riveting biography of Andrew Wakefield is a cautionary lesson in the legacy of hubris. Saad Omer

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-020-02989-9

The Doctor Who Fooled the World: Andrew Wakefield’s War on Vaccines Brian Deer Scribe UK (2020)

Since Edward Jenner’s first scientific description of vaccination in 1798 — using cowpox pus to protect against smallpox — there has been push back. Throughout the nineteenth century, in the United States and the United Kingdom, there were cycles of increased smallpox vaccination, rising opposition, drops in immunization coverage, outbreaks, better appreciation of vaccination, more of it, and more protests. This stand-off eased around the start of the twentieth century when, with sanitation and medical care improving, public health placed less emphasis on compulsory vaccination. Probably the last time the world waited with bated breath for a vaccine — against polio in the 1950s — it was welcomed with open arms.

The modern wave of vaccine scepticism has its origins in the 1970s. That was when concerns (later determined to be unfounded) about the safety of a whole-cell vaccine against pertussis, or whooping cough, came to the fore in many high-income countries. In the 1980s and 1990s, a few organized groups opposed to vaccines emerged in many countries, including the United Kingdom.

It was in this context that, in 1998, Andrew Wakefield and his colleagues published a now-infamous and retracted paper in The Lancet, following which, in 2010, Wakefield was struck off the UK medical register for misconduct by the country’s General Medical Council. The fraudulent work on 12 children promoted a non-existent connection between autism and the MMR vaccine, used against measles, mumps and rubella. It propelled Wakefield to notoriety and turbocharged the anti-vaccine movement. He remains a headliner on the international vaccine-sceptic circuit as diseases once vanquished return because of falling rates of immunization. Many large epidemiological studies have found no difference in risk of developmental delays between children who receive the MMR vaccine and those who don’t1.

Do Race Academics Matter? Timothy Cootes

https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2022/01/do-race-academics-matter/

Brittney Cooper, a Professor of Gender and Africana Studies at Rutgers University in New Jersey, recently introduced herself via podcast to an audience much greater than your usual academic conference. The conversation topic, one that is always a bit short on cheer, was the depravity of white people, whom she described as “villains”. Her preferred method of dealing with these antagonists, and she expressed this with a good deal of vim, was “to take these motherf***ers out”. She sadly acknowledged the logistical constraints of this approach, but became noticeably chirpier when relaying the declining rates of white births in America, largely due, I understand, to poverty, addiction and other social maladies.

If Professor Cooper would like to shake off her lingering reticence towards the violent extirpation of whites, she should listen to the insights of Dr Aruna Khilanani, a psychiatrist recently invited to give a lecture at Yale University’s Child Study Center. The title of her speech, which handily calls for little elucidation, was “The Psychopathic Problem of the White Mind”. It’s difficult to select a favourite quote, but I would go with this one: “I had fantasies of unloading a revolver into the head of any white person that got in my way, burying their body, and wiping my bloody hands as I walked away relatively guiltless with a bounce in my step.”

Thomas Lipscomb: Hidden In Plain Sight The Key To The Kennedy Assassination Is On Public Display In The National Archives Emerald Robinson

https://emeralddb3.substack.com/p/thomas-lipscomb-hidden-in-plain-sight?fbclid=IwAR3VbolyoXybZeWYUNhIb9PeUNfl9BwbjTtQtZaUnhB9mLmkhpUlLGllwVg

NOTE: The renowned journalist Thomas Lipscomb has just completed a new manuscript (with Jerome Kroth) titled The Oswald Letter and it contains a number of staggering claims based on these federally released documents as well as fresh accounts from new eyewitnesses who have never before been interviewed. This is the third excerpt from The Oswald Letter to appear here on my Substack.

According to the catalog listing of the National Archives in Washington, this is the “Windshield Removed from the Presidential Limousine that Carried President John F. Kennedy During the Assassination.” It is still carrying its FBI evidence tab.

But is it?

The Secret Service had the Presidential limousine shipped from Dallas to the White House garage the night of the assassination. Then they sent it to the Ford Factory at River Rouge in Detroit, where it was built, for refitting.

When a senior manager there, George S. Whitaker, came to work two days after the assassination, he was ordered to immediately report to the glass plant lab. He was let in through locked doors and found two of his men had already removed the limousine windshield.

Are the JFK assassination lies finally coming apart? By Thomas Lifson

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/02/are_the_jfk_assassination_lies_finally_coming_apart.html

We are closing in on 60 years since the assassination of John F. Kennedy in Dallas, and in that time, there have been endless independent investigations disputing, or occasionally endorsing, the conclusions of the Warren Commission.  If I were reading instead of writing this blog post, at this point, I would be worrying that yet another boring recitation of arcana from the mountains of evidence was about to be presented to me.

But excerpts from a new book about to be published on the assassination blew my socks off.  It contains what looks like solid evidence that Lee Harvey Oswald did not act alone and that Kennedy was killed by a bullet fired from in front of his limousine, one that entered the car through the windshield.  Lee Harvey Oswald’s purported location in the Texas School Book Depository was to the side of and behind the car, so he could not have fired a bullet that entered the car through the windshield.

I am so old that I watched the assassination of Oswald on live television and heard him say, “I’m just a patsy” right before he died, words that have haunted me ever since.  Those are not the words of an entirely innocent man, who would have said, “I didn’t do it,” or similar words of denial.  No, Oswald’s words suggested knowledge of larger forces that participated and his realization that he had been played.  And a desire to tell his story.  A desire that Jack Ruby thwarted seconds later.

Emerald Robinson has published on Substack a fascinating excerpt from a book manuscript titled The Oswald Letter, written by Thomas Lipscomb with Jerome Koch. 

Race Crazy: BLM, 1619, and the Progressive Racism Movement By Charles Love

The progressive left has gone Race Crazy—and they want to take America down the same path of insanity.

When did America become obsessed with racial differences? After decades of progress healing real-world prejudices and anger, we suddenly live in an America where we’re expected to view every single thing through the lens of race.

Children are taught the politics of racial resentment and fear in schools. Films, novels, and even comic books are judged by the color of their protagonists—and their adherence to the latest “woke” messaging. Corporate America has universally adopted the slogan “Black Lives Matter” in every piece of marketing, those words serving as a talisman to protect them from Twitter mobs and outraged activists. And the 1619 Project and similar pieces of academic propaganda seek to redefine and undermine the very notion of America as a unified and great nation.

Meanwhile, organized BLM advances a radical and dangerous political agenda which, if enacted, would mean the end of the American experiment as we know it. The nation faces a pivotal moment: will we reject the Race Crazies, or let them destroy us?

The Misrepresentation Of The Scientific Consensus On Climate Change Iain Aitken

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2022/02/10/the-misrepresentation-of-the-scientific-consensus-on-climate-change/

[Note: This essay is abstracted from my eBook Myths: Widely Held But False Beliefs In The Climate Change Crisis, available on Amazon]

In their Fifth Assessment Report the IPCC, the ‘internationally accepted scientific authority on climate change’, gave their opinion of how much of the recent global warming was caused by human activity: ‘It is extremely likely [95-100 percent confidence] more than half of the observed increase in global mean surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic [i.e. man-made] increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together’. Reflecting that opinion Wikipedia states that the ‘Scientific consensus on climate change’ is that ‘the Earth is warming and… this warming is mainly caused by human activities’. It claims that 97-100% of actively publishing climate scientists endorse this opinion. Similarly, NASA claim that, ‘A consensus on climate change and its human cause exists… human activities are the primary cause of the observed climate-warming trend over the past century.’ And in an October 2020 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes climatologist Dr Michael Mann said, ‘There’s about as much scientific consensus about human-caused climate change as there is about gravity.’ So is it actually true that 97-100% of climate scientists explicitly or implicitly endorse this key IPCC opinion?

Although science is not remotely democratic (it only needs one scientist to prove that the ‘consensus view’ is wrong and it is wrong) the fact remains that if this 97-100% consensus assertion is true then it is indeed very powerful. If the ‘internationally accepted scientific authority on climate change’ says something is almost certainly true and almost all climate scientists in the world agree then it almost certainly must be true – mustn’t it? Whilst there is undoubtedly almost total scientific consensus amongst the scientific authorities (literally dozens of scientific academies from around the world explicitly or implicitly endorse the IPCC’s opinions) that does not necessarily reflect the consensus view amongst climate scientists themselves. So what exactly is it that climate scientists agree on?