Displaying search results for

“Sol Sanders”

Doubt lingers about ADL’s ability to fight anti-Semitism in Brooklyn, despite the new push By Shiryn Ghermezian

https://www.jns.org/doubt-lingers-about-adls-ability-to-fight-anti-semitism-in-brooklyn-despite-the-new-push/

“The ADL has failed to call out any form of anti-Semitism that isn’t borne of white supremacy, and their curriculum is more about tolerance and racism in general than it is about the unique history of anti-Semitism,” said Bryan Leib, a board member of Americans Against Anti-Semitism.
Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt announcing an expansion for the “No Place for Hate Peer to Peer Program” in Brooklyn to combat rising anti-Semitism. Source: Anti-Defamation League via Twitter.

Standing alongside Brooklyn Borough president Eric L. Adams, local faith leaders, elected officials and community partners, ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt announced last week that the New York-based group will be doubling the number of Brooklyn schools involved in its “No Place for Hate Peer to Peer Program” for the 2019-20 school year. The ADL committed $250,000 to expanding the initiative, which has helped promote tolerance in more than 1,700 public and private schools nationwide since 1999.

The program has already been rolled out in 22 schools in Brooklyn, N.Y., and reached more than 8,200 students, according to ABC7. The number of schools administering the program will expand to up to 40 this academic year, with a focus on the neighborhoods of Crown Heights, Williamsburg and Borough Park, where most of the recent anti-Semitic incidents against Orthodox Jews have taken place.

SPARTACUS FLUNKS HONG KONG QUESTION IN DEBATE

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2019/11/debate_booker_gets_a_softball_question_on_hong_kong_and_weasels_out_of_answering.html
Debate: Booker gets a softball question on Hong Kong, weasels out of answering By Monica Showalter

Sen. Cory Booker got the easiest question of the evening at last night’s Democratic debate in Atlanta, a whiff, a puff ball, an easy opportunity to sound grand in the invitation to say a nice thing about Hong Kong.  He blew it.

Here’s the NBC transcript:

MADDOW: On the issue of China, Senator Booker, China is now using force against demonstrators in Hong Kong where millions have taken to the streets advocating for democratic reforms. Many of the demonstrators are asking the United States for help. If you were president, would the U.S. help their movement, and how?

BOOKER: Well, first of all, this is president who seems to want to go up against China in a trade war by pulling away from our allies and, in fact, attacking them, as well. We used a national security waiver to put tariffs on Canada. And so at the very time that China is breaking international rules, is practicing unfair practices, stealing technology, forcing technology transfer, and violating human rights, this nation is pulling away from critical allies we would need to show strength against China.

There’s a larger battle going on, on the planet Earth right now between totalitarian, dictatorial countries and free democracies. And we see the scorecard under this president not looking so good, with China actually shifting more towards an authoritarian government, with its leader now getting rid of even his — getting rid of term limits.

And so I believe we need a much stronger policy, one that’s not led, as President Trump seems to want to do, in a transactional way, but one that’s led by American values. So, yes, we will call China out for its human rights violations.

Malley in Wonderland How Obama’s ‘progressive’ foreign policy vision—to backpedal away from the Middle East, fast, while kicking our former allies in the region to the curb—became consensus in D.C. By Tony Badran

https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/293996/malley-in-wonderlandLast month, Robert Malley, the former senior White House official who served as point man for President Barack Obama’s realignment strategy, published an essay in Foreign Affairs titled “The Unwanted Wars: Why the Middle East Is More Combustible Than Ever,” in which he laid out what he sees as the future of Obama’s foreign policy legacy. The piece came out in the aftermath of Iran’s attack on Saudi oil facilities, and not long after the Iranians shot down a U.S. drone—two highly aggressive events that went without any visible military response from the Trump administration. Yet the main conceit of Malley’s essay is a warning against “war with Iran.” The only alternative to “war with Iran” is presented as diplomatic engagement, the apex of which is Obama’s Iran deal, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). By unwinding the deal that Obama struck with the Iranian mullahs, the piece contends, the Trump administration’s regional posture sets the U.S. on an inexorable course toward war—whether the U.S. itself takes any kind of military action or not. 

“As long as its regional posture remains as it is,” Malley wrote, “the United States will be just one poorly-timed or dangerously-aimed Houthi drone strike, or one particularly effective Israeli operation against a Shiite militia, away from its next costly regional entanglement.” 

What America should, and must, do when confronted with such a tinderbox is obvious: backpedal away, fast, while kicking our former allies in the region to the curb, hard. The sentence warning of the dangers of Houthi drone strikes and effective Israeli operations encapsulates an attitude perhaps best captured in former Vice President Joseph Biden’s famous line: “Our biggest problem was our allies.” 

America’s allies are a problem, Malley, Biden, and other Obama administration policy kingpins–starting with Obama himself—have publicly stated, because of their capacity to involve the U.S. in a costly regional entanglement with Iran. In other words, America’s allies are actually our enemies. In particular, Saudi Arabia, with its reckless war in Yemen, and Israel, with its aggression against Iranian assets in Syria, Iraq, and  throughout the region, represent the “war” side of the equation—while Iran, the enemy of our allies, represents “peace.” The U.S. has a set of choices for how to engage the region: “diplomatically or militarily, by exacerbating divides or mitigating them, and by aligning itself fully with one side or seeking to achieve a sort of balance.” 

In other words, if our allies are strong, then America should seek to weaken them until “balance” is achieved, which will help bring about more “peace.” If Iran were stronger, and Israel and Saudi Arabia were weaker, then peace would therefore be more likely. American policy, in the present moment at least, should therefore be to strengthen Iran at the expense of Israel and the Saudis. 

Resistance: Czechoslovakia and America By David Lanza

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/11/resistance_czechoslovakia_and_america.html

As we celebrate the 30th anniversary of the liberation of Eastern Europe, a growing portion of our own political system has become dedicated to totalitarianism. We can better understand our own socialist media culture when we revisit one Eastern Bloc country’s resistance to a notorious Soviet crackdown. In the Prague Spring of 1968, Soviet tanks invaded and reimposed full communist tyranny after Czechoslovakia had temporarily loosened the reins of Soviet control.  The Czechs responded heroically, practicing various forms of resistance and showing complete unity in a way that the United States of today could not match. (The full story of the Czech resistance has been famously recounted in Phil Kaufman’s film The Unbearable Lightness of Being.)

When the Soviet tanks suddenly rumbled through Prague and other Czech cities in August of 1968, the Czechs responded with unified action that would seem impossible in similar circumstances in the U.S. today. The Czech response of 1968 would put modern American institutions to shame.

Almost immediately, Czech radio and television stations began broadcasting unauthorized programs denouncing the invasion and presenting actual news to the Czechoslovakian people. These stations broadcast from undisclosed locations, moving around the country on a nightly basis to avoid detection. In today’s United States, could we count on our mainstream media to oppose a totalitarian crackdown? Would our media overcome their own totalitarian sympathies in order to transmit clandestine broadcasts?

As Czechoslovakian radio struggled to stay on the air, they used familiar voices to convey the news. The broadcasters could not identify themselves, but their voices were known to the listeners from years of service. The recognition of these trusted voices reassured the listeners that the broadcasts were authentic. Today in America, recognizable news anchor voices would have the opposite effect. Americans do not trust the network newscasts.  Instead, many Americans get their news from late night “comedians,” most of whom spend their airtime advocating the very policies that motivated the Soviet tanks in 1968.  Late-night comedians are expert at the kind of character assassination and “two minutes hate” that are used in countries where the law is enforced under the treads of tanks. They would not rally Americans in opposition to a totalitarian crackdown.

AK-47s and Bombings Turn Sweden Into War Zone “Those who depict our prophet, we’ll blow them up.” Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2019/11/muslim-ak-47s-and-bombings-turn-sweden-war-zone-daniel-greenfield/

This isn’t terrorism. It’s a war. And it’s going on every day in Sweden.

Sweden is reeling from a wave of shootings and bombings with 268 shootings just this year so far. And that’s in a country of 10 million people which has crime numbers on par with some American cities.

“Sweden may have the answer to America’s gun problem,” Vox declared in 2016. Or maybe not.

These shootings aren’t being carried out with handguns, but with AK-47s. The weapon so often used as a boogeyman by gun control advocates, but rarely featured in everyday gun violence, is a staple of Sweden’s gang war scene. Along with hand grenades and other explosives rarely seen in America.

A call by the police last year asking gang members to turn in their grenades worked as well as expected.

There have been 187 bomb attacks this year. In just 1 week in August, there were three major bombings. Much of the violence is concentrated in Malmo which experienced 58 bombings in 2017.

Malmo has a sizable immigrant and Muslim population. And it’s a center of gang violence.

Swedish authorities and its media rarely discuss or name the perpetrators, but the latest shooting left Jaffar Ibrahim, a 15-year-old boy, dead. Jaffar was shot in a Malmo pizzeria and had been part of a family of Syrian refugees who migrated to Sweden in 2016. Services for him were held in a mosque.

The shooting attack was preceded by a car bombing which was used as a diversion.

The Death Throes Of A Party: Is Pelosi Planning To Shaft Schiff? Tyler Durden

https://www.zerohedge.com/political/death-throes-party-pelosi-planning-shaft-schiff

Is it possible that Rep. Adam Schiff was hung out to dry by the devious Ms. Pelosi, feeding his vanity to be a one-man impeachment wrecking crew, knowing that the congressman from Hollywood would utterly blow it? Hmmmmm. Begins to look that way as Mr. Schiff’s House Intel Committee goes public this Wednesday with its soviet-style format on full display.

Well, first, why? Why allow this nitwit to stage an ersatz impeachment only to see it fail? Perhaps to cancel the Jacobin menace metastasizing in the Democratic Party and get on with the business of winning the 2020 elections — with old-school candidates hand-picked to end-run the gang of fantasists currently on display.

The House Speaker must sniff the odor of failure in the wind.

Joe Biden, smiling cretinously, blunders through the primary venues with a big red “L” plastered on his forehead, often uncertain of what state he’s landed in, or what direction to face the camera. Everybody over twelve in this land knows that his kid Hunter was on the grift in Ukraine, plain and simple, and that Joe assisted in the operation. Color him toast.

Elizabeth Warren has been caught lying very publicly twice now, first as a phony Cherokee Indian (for career advancement in academia), and lately claiming falsely that she was canned from a teaching job years ago for being pregnant (with a 2007 tape of her out telling a contradictory story). Of course, that’s just the cherry-on-top of her dazzlingly unsound policy proposals to bankrupt the nation. Doesn’t look like she can reel it all back in and pretend to be a credible person in time for a full-on campaign

Warren Promises to Divide Jerusalem, Fund Terrorists The hostility of the American Left to Israel goes back to Soviet policy during the Cold War years. This is one more blast from the past we could do without. Karin McQuillan

https://amgreatness.com/2019/11/10/warren-promises-to-divide-jerusalem-fund-terrorists/

Democrat presidential candidates Elizabeth Warren and Bernie Sanders were the star speakers at the national conference of J Street, a woke anti-Israel (verging on anti-Semitic) group, which met last week in Washington, D.C. Our two socialist candidates, sharing the podium with terrorists, are competing to see who can top the other in betraying our ally, Israel, and promoting Palestinian terrorism.

Warren addressed the audience by a video, in which she promised to divide Jerusalem. “Both parties should be able to have their capitals in Jerusalem,” she declared. 

For Warren to promise that as president she would carve out part of Israel’s capital city and hand it over to Israel’s mortal enemies is an ugly and dangerous plan. It wouldn’t be within her power or legal authority in any event. 

But bullying Israel plays well with her woke audience, stewed in campus anti-Semitism and anti-Israel propaganda for decades. It suits Warren’s Marxist anti-colonial voters to believe that as Caucasians, Israelis have no rights to their indigenous homeland, nor to its Jewish capital founded long before Christianity and Islam were born. 

Warren should know that dividing Jerusalem is terrible for American interests. She would create a terrorist enclave in the heart of Israel’s capital and destabilize our strongest ally in the fragile Middle East.

The Looming ‘1984’ Election Like it or not, 2020 is going to be a plebiscite on an American version of Orwell’s Nineteen-Eighty-Four. Victor Davis Hanson

https://amgreatness.com/2019/11/10/the-looming-1984-election/

For a variety of reasons, the 2020 election is going to be a referendum beyond Donald Trump’s record and his Democratic opposition.

The furor that Trump has incurred, and the radical antithesis to his agenda and first term, have redefined the looming election. It is becoming a stark choice between a revolutionary future versus American traditionalism.

The choice in reductionist terms will be one between a growing, statist Panopticon, fueled by social media, a media-progressive nexus, and an electronic posse. Online trolls and government bureaucrats seek to know everything about us, in Big Brother fashion to monitor our very thoughts to ferret out incorrect ideas, and then to regiment and indoctrinate us to ensure elite visions of mandated equality and correct behavior—or else!

In other words, the personality quirks of a Trump or an Elizabeth Warren or a Bernie Sanders will become mostly irrelevant given the existential choice between two quite antithetical ideas of future America. In 2020 we will witness the penultimate manifestation of what radical progressivism has in store for us all—and the furious, often desperate, and unfettered pushback against it.

Targeting Traditional America

We are also well beyond even the stark choices of 1972 and 1984 that remained within the parameters of the two parties. In contrast, the Democratic Party as we have known it, is extinct for now. It has been replaced since 2016 by a radical progressive revolutionary movement that serves as a touchstone for a variety of auxiliary extremist causes, agendas, and cliques—almost all of them radically leftwing and nihilistic, and largely without majority popular support.

The five big things you need to understand about the Democratic primary right now By Caitlin Huey-Burns

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/the-five-big-things-you-need-to-understand-about-the-democratic-primary-right-now/

Des Moines — Democratic presidential candidates are trading in kumbaya for combat. 

With three months to go before the Iowa caucuses, the 2020 campaigns are moving out of the introductory phase of the primary season and into the knife-sharpening phase, seeking to snuff out the competition as voters get closer to making up their minds. 

Candidates debuted new attack lines during major party cattle calls and campaign events across Iowa over the weekend and have continued to hone them throughout the week. In this phase of the campaign, it’s Vice President Joe Biden and Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren at center stage, with the surging South Bend Mayor Pete Buttigieg looking to portray himself as a “unity” candidate.

The new urgency of the campaign has forced several campaigns to reshuffle or reassess their respective standings in the race. The impeachment inquiry hanging over Washington and driving the daily news cycle has made it more difficult for lower-tier campaigns to break through. At the same time, few voters on the ground are asking about the latest moves in Washington, and are instead focused more on health care, the economy, and climate change.  

After spending the past several days on the ground in Iowa, attending presidential town halls and talking to lots of voters, here are five things we are learning about the state of the race. 

The passive-aggressive primary is over

Biden is attacking Warren. Buttigieg is attacking Warren. Warren is attacking Biden and Buttigieg. Julián Castro is attacking Buttigieg. 

In other words, this is the part of the campaign season when candidates stop being polite and start getting real. 

Reminder: National Presidential Polls Are Useless By David Harsanyi

https://www.nationalreview.com/2019/11/reminder-national-presidential-polls-are-useless/

They are useless in gauging congressional popularity. They are useless in determining presidential races.

Earlier this week, tremors of panic spread across left-wing Twitter after the New York Times dropped a Siena College poll showing that Donald Trump remains highly competitive among registered voters in battleground states such as Michigan, Arizona, Florida, North Carolina, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania. After gorging on the empty calories of national polls for months, it must have been somewhat shocking for Trump’s opponents to see so many competitive races.

Among “likely voters” the races are even tighter. On the Democratic side, Joe Biden, unsurprisingly, does better than either Bernie Sanders or Elizabeth Warren against Trump. Not everyone, apparently, is enamored with the idea of their health insurance being seized by a massive state bureaucracy.

Former candidate Hillary Clinton — always a keen political strategist — reacted to the news by calling on Democrats to nominate a person “who can win the Electoral College” rather than merely run up the totals in California. “I think several of our candidates could win the popular vote but as I know,” she added, “. . . that’s not enough.”

She’s right. It’s not enough. It’s not anything, actually, save a moral victory or a cudgel with which to try to delegitimize the president. And yet, political observers seem to lament that Democrats are weighed down by the process. Take, for instance, this extraordinarily weird framing of recent polls by the Washington Post: “One year out, Democrats’ margins over Trump point to a substantial popular-vote advantage, but the party still faces obstacles when it comes to the electoral college.”