Get PJ Media on your Apple

The PJ Tatler

“Angry Black Woman” Schools Students for Justice in Palestine

Monday, July 28th, 2014 - by Susan L.M. Goldberg


Chloe Valdary, the self-titled “Lioness of Zion” wrote a public letter to the Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) movement, published today in Tablet magazine. Valdary addresses the letter “from an Angry Black Woman” and delineates the student group’s hypocrisies, noting their nefarious misappropriation of African American history:

You do not get to pretend as though you and Rosa Parks would have been great buddies in the 1960s. Rosa Parks was a real Freedom Fighter. Rosa Parks was a Zionist.

Coretta Scott King was a Zionist.

A. Phillip Randolph was a Zionist.

Bayard Rustin was a Zionist.

Count Basie was a Zionist.

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. was a Zionist.

Indeed, they and many more men and women signed a letter in 1975 that stated: “We condemn the anti-Jewish blacklist. We have fought too long and too hard to root out discrimination from our land to sit idly while foreign interests import bigotry to America. Having suffered so greatly from such prejudice, we consider most repugnant the efforts by Arab states to use the economic power of their newly-acquired oil wealth to boycott business firms that deal with Israel or that have Jewish owners, directors, or executives, and to impose anti-Jewish preconditions for investments in this country.”

You see, my people have always been Zionists because my people have always stood for the freedom of the oppressed. So, you most certainly do not get to culturally appropriate my people’s history for your own. You do not have the right to invoke my people’s struggle for your shoddy purposes and you do not get to feign victimhood in our name. You do not have the right to slander my people’s good name and link your cause to that of Dr. King’s. Our two causes are diametrically opposed to each other.

Known for going against the grain, Valdary’s statement cuts to the core of the Pro-Palestinian movement’s attempts to draw a correlation between the Israeli/Palestinian conflict and America’s civil rights movement. The US Campaign to End the Israeli Occupation, whose member groups include chapters of national organizations CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) and Jewish Voice for Peace, as well as SJP, devotes an entire section of their website to “Black America and Palestine Resources“. A quote from Palestinian American academic Edward Said motivates their campaign:

The late Edward Said wrote in the year 2000 that, to understand US policy towards the Middle East, “one must pay close attention to an aspect of America’s history mostly ignored by or unknown to educated Arabs … the contemporary treatment of the African American people, who constitute roughly 20 per cent of the population, a not insignificant number”.

Said co-founded the field of critical theory known as postcolonialism, a racist school of thought “…that interprets history, politics, and culture in the context of [white] Western domination and oppression.” The roots of postcolonial theory influenced the racist and anti-Semitic Black Nationalism of the 1960′s. Instead of campaigning for civil rights, the movement focused on “elevat[ing] racial separatism into a religious doctrine and declar[ing] that whites were doomed to destruction.”

Postcolonialism is a defense of human shields, of schools and hospitals being used as terrorist launching pads, of children growing up only to strap bombs to their chest in order to destroy the “white” menace. Valdary’s letter is a clarion call to renew the civil rights movement championed by both blacks and Jews that was so grossly distorted by racist theorists like Malcolm X and Edward Said. All those who “stand for the freedom of the oppressed” must confront and correct the racist lie that defends slaveholders like Hamas based on the color of their skin.

Read bullet | 5 Comments »

Thanks, Bill Gates: How to Keep Dictatorships Alive, Squelching Liberty on a Global Scale

Monday, July 21st, 2014 - by Scott Ott

Sounds like a simple enough way to cure poverty: Form a partnership between donors and leaders of government. Get a set of measurable goals and diligently track progress toward those goals. There’s nothing we can’t do when we put our minds to it.

It’s a technocratic solution to a human problem that plays to our sense of confidence as scientific problem solvers.

That’s been the basic approach to economic development of the so-called “third world” by the “first world” since the middle of the last century.

But not only is it a failure, it actually props up dictators and stomps the rights of the poor, while allowing wealthy donors, like Bill Gates, to feel good about themselves as they monitor the “measurable” progress.

I love the [United Nations'] Millennium Development Goals. I think they’re the best idea for focusing the world on fighting global poverty that I’ve ever seen….Thanks to these goals…the world at large knows the key measures of poverty, hunger, health and education. Some of the numbers are good and some are not. But the fact that the world is focusing on these numbers is excellent….The Millennium Development Goals can guide the search for new discoveries by showing us where innovation can bring the biggest returns. This is their genius.
– Bill Gates, speech to U.N. General Assembly, September 2008  (video below)

Sounds great. But is it true?

The Tyranny of ExpertsThe Tyranny of Experts: Economists, Dictators and the Forgotten Rights of the Poor, by William Easterly, demonstrates how a toxic stew of arrogance, altruism and racism has led “the West” to positively hinder “the Rest” from achieving the very thing we value most — equality under law. Easterly has produced a rarity among serious books — page-turning readability, with even-handed scholarship and careful documentation.

Easterly says the problem with well-meaning fellows like Bill Gates is multi-pronged.

1) We don’t have accurate data, we ignore contrary evidence, and we misinterpret the faulty data, attributing apparent growth to the activities of autocrats and bureaucrats when the evidence points to factors beyond their control.

2) We ignore history and the actual needs of the people, as if we could write our own solutions upon a blank slate, that we decide is framed by modern national boundaries.

3) We idolize strong leaders who can implement programs funded by donors, but ignore their autocratic repression of individual rights, and so we often use charity dollars to pay for pogroms via programs.

4) We think of innovation as something a few elite scholars and captains of industry bring to the poor, rather than something that springs from decentralized problem-solving by people who have freedom, property rights, equal justice under law and profit motive.

In the video below, Bill Gates speaks to the UN General Assembly — history’s greatest congregation of thugs and tyrants. For more than six minutes Gates praises the Millennium Development Goals (MDG), without even hinting that people might need more than food, medicine and education. He never mentions self-governance, liberty, or capitalism.

The best spin on this is that Gates think if we take care of health, learning and economic survival, then republican governance and its protection of person and property will come later.

The vector of history collides with, and obliterates, that notion.

The worst-case scenario is that Gates cravenly kowtows to the world’s oppressors because he needs their cooperation to reach his beloved development goals. Like a geek with an MS-Excel spreadsheet, he has lost sight of the human impact behind the columns, rows and formulae. All that matters is the data, not how you get there.

Read bullet | 63 Comments »

How Israel is Winning the PR Battle Against Hamas

Monday, July 21st, 2014 - by Susan L.M. Goldberg

YouTube Preview Image

Moral equivalence is dead. When Bill Clinton, the “international community”-blessed architect of Oslo, can blatantly declare

In the short and medium term Hamas can inflict terrible public relations damage by forcing (Israel) to kill Palestinian civilians to counter Hamas. But it’s a crass strategy that takes all of our eyes off the real objective which is a peace that gets Israel security and recognition and a peace that gets the Palestinians their state.

it is obvious that Hamas has finally shot themselves in the foot with the terrorists’ ideological weapon of choice. So, why do news agencies insist on reporting nothing more than body counts in evening news reports, as if the latest conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians is nothing more than a sports game?

Clinton may be a pervert, but he isn’t stupid. He acknowledged the “public relations” battle because he knows that the press follows the cues given by Hamas, the terrorist organization that holds reporters in Gaza against their will. Unless they have the intellect of toddlers, these reporters cannot be blind to the brainwashing from birth that turns children into human shields. Nor can they be so totally blind to the rocket launchers hiding behind schools and mosques in residential neighborhoods. Yet, the best they can muster is a body count followed by sarcastic commentary like that of CNN’s Ben Wedeman: “There is no Iron Dome in Gaza to protect civilians.” Amazing. Toddler Ben gets a gold star for that stellar observation.

As my PJMedia colleague Ron Radosh so excellently pointed out, the intellectuals also have no problem fettering mainstream media with arguments of moral equivalence. All they need is the right costume and a little bathtub gin and they could easily chatter the night away as if they were on the porch of Gatsby’s mansion. That is how comfortable they are turning an international war against Islamic terrorism into the banal “one person’s terrorist is another person’s freedom fighter” claim. Like America’s “restless” President, these politicos prefer the comforts of today’s Weimar. No doubt they are taking fiddling lessons so they can be fully prepared when Rome begins to burn.

There is a reality on the ground that escapes the Hamas-controlled media: Israel loves life. Israel’s policy is to warn Palestinian civilians (or, as Hamas calls them, weapons in Operation Human Shield) to get out of the way before they drop bombs or conduct ground invasions. Israel sets up field hospitals to treat wounded Gazans. We know about these things because, much to the chagrin of the death-loving Hamas, they cannot control the Internet. Just as Israelis are winning the ground offensive, Israel-supporters are winning the ideological offensive through alternative news sources and, most importantly, social media.

This past Saturday, 200 anti-Israel protesters fell to the ground in Boston in a “die-in” meant to demonstrate the number of Palestinians who have been killed thus far in Operation Protective Edge. A number of Israel supporters attended the event and were cornered by the anti-Israel crowd. One Zionist, Chloe Valdary told the Times of Israel:

We really do manage to disrupt them and distract them when we show up. We show up and it’s in the media, so the public sees how hate-filled and incredibly deluded these Hamas supporters are.

We’ve caught onto the PR game and we play to win. Now it is our turn to Tweet with a smile and watch as the death-obsessed Hamas-brainwashed fools fall and take their wretched canard of moral equivalency down with them.

Read bullet | 6 Comments »

Obama Jokes That He’s Like a Circus Bear Off Its Chain

Friday, July 18th, 2014 - by Paula Bolyard
YouTube Preview Image

Politico reported this week that President Obama has been pushing at the constraints of the Oval Office, leaving the White House to go on unscheduled walks in the middle of the day.  ”Forgoing the motorcade on the way to an event at the Interior Department, he joked that he was like a circus bear off its chain, and ‘the bear is loose,’” Politico reported.

Obama repeated the line again on Monday when he seemed to bristle at Secret Service agents scrambling to clear the sidewalk for his unscheduled walk, complaining that they were defeating the purpose of his trip away from the White House.

“Let’s test your wrangling skills,” he said to Secret Service agents at one point, as he shook hands with gawkers he met on the street.

Alright. So now we know that it’s not the most funnest thing in the world to be President Barack Obama. Like, he wants us all to walk a mile in his custom-made Johnston and Murphy shoes. Dude, imagine what it’s like be stuck in the White House, day in and day out, surrounded by Secret Service agents with scary weapons, snipers on the roof, that evil War Room and the big, scary Glenn Beck-ish underground bunker where who-knows-what goes on — not to mention dealing with Michelle and her yammering about the latest twigs and acorn diet. Sure, there are toney vacations, hobnobbing with Hollywood elites, and the 176 rounds of golf, but life is hard when you’re President Barack Obama. Pity the poor man, who is suffering every bit as much the chained animals you see in those horrible late night TV commercials, for crying out loud. (Is there somewhere we can send a donation? Can we sponsor the poor, tortured president and get a card for the refrigerator along with a monthly update?) It’s like we’re some Third World county. Or something.

Thirty years ago we had a very different man in the White House. Ronald Reagan — a grown up by any measure —  spent his eight year tenure as president maintaining a laser-like focus on the threat posed by the spread of Communism (while also managing to turning around the flailing economy, by the way).

In a 1984 campaign ad, Reagan compared the Soviets to a dangerous bear lumbering around in the woods — in the world — seeking to devour some unsuspecting victim. During the campaign, Walter Mondale had tried to attack Reagan on defense spending and arms control, suggesting his policies would escalate the rush to nuclear war. Without naming the Soviets in the ad, Reagan responded by suggesting that taking the threat seriously was preferable to pretending it didn’t’ exist. It was the only sensible course of action.

There is a bear in the woods. For some people, the bear is easy to see. Others don’t see it at all. Some people say the bear is tame. Others say it’s vicious and dangerous. Since no one can really be sure who’s right, isn’t it smart to be as strong as the bear? If there is a bear?

The text at the end of the ad read, “President Reagan. Prepared for Peace.”

Thirty years later President Obama (apparently self-unaware) parodies himself as a submissive, pliant circus animal who occasionally works up the courage to bolt from his captors for a short jaunt around the neighborhood. While the president was perhaps only referring to the shackles of the Secret Service when he spoke of his chains, the larger subtext of the mental image he presented to the world is of a man chained to an ideology — not unlike Mondale in 1984 — that makes the world less safe with each passing day. Like one of Pavlov’s dogs, Obama responds to every crisis on the world stage with predictable leftist pablum about “unacceptable behavior,” warning that he’s going to count to three and send the next evil totalitarian leader to his room if he shoots down another plane.

“The bear” is indeed loose in the world and Circus Bear POTUS can’t seem to see out from under the Big Top of the White House.


Read bullet | 6 Comments »

Challenge or Pre-Existing Condition?

Thursday, July 17th, 2014 - by Nathan D. Lichtman

It’s been 45 years since the moon landing. And it’s been 52 years since President Kennedy challenged the nation to go there and to formulate the NASA program, “Not because they are easy, but because they are hard.”

Watch Bill Whittle’s new Afterburner, ‘Apogee,’ on PJTV. He outlines how America has suffered from hypo-challenge for too long now. We tamed a continent, explored the skies, and went to the moon—all based on challenges that became existential to who we are as a people.

But, as he highlights, what challenges have we faced lately? The biggest push under Obama has been to discuss healthcare at the dinner table.

Where’s the spirit, the drive, of American greatness?

I want to go one step further, and point out that, not only has Obama not been pushing us to achieve more, to achieve higher things, but he has actually been rhetorically casting these pursuits aside.

What is the natural next big challenge? What is the next thing we can achieve that would have people stop in the tracks, and remember exactly where they were when they heard we had achieved it?

I saw an advertisement a few years ago for cancer research, in which they depicted that everyone would stop in the street and look at the news when a cure had been discovered. I think this is accurate. The next great challenge is to cure the diseases that have ailed us for too long—cancer, diabetes, heart conditions, etc.

I know that research is being done on these fronts, and I know that, while substantial progress has been made, ‘cures’ are still a long way off.

While President Obama, and his signature healthcare law, by no means limit the research being done literally. But symbolically is another story.

One of the big pushes under Obamacare is that pre-existing conditions are welcome. Figuratively, this says that ending the pre-existing condition, eliminating the need for treatment, isn’t the goal.

That’s like putting the Civil Rights movement before the Abolitionist movement. Requiring water fountains to permit both slaves and non-slaves to drink is not the primary goal; the primary goal was to end slavery, and then to also fully embody rights for all.

The goal shouldn’t be to allow people with cancer to get insurance cheaper…it should be to cure cancer.

Again, let me be very clear. I am not insinuating that Obama has, in some way, delayed the cure for cancer or other diseases.

But, I am saying that, far from challenging the American people, the way that Kennedy did, Obama has asked us to accept the status quo.

I’m asking that we not settle, that we continue to push for something besides the status quo. Let’s cure cancer in the next decade, and let’s do it because it is very hard to do. Let’s make pre-existing conditions obsolete. Let us do these things because we are Americans, and because we will always astoundingly rise up to meet challenges.

Read bullet | Comments »

Liberty Island: Liberal’s Newest, Greatest Threat

Thursday, July 17th, 2014 - by Susan L.M. Goldberg


Apparently, it takes the declaration of a culture war for most human beings to acknowledge how dreadfully sad liberalism truly is.

Not classical liberalism, of course. The political philosophy guiding America’s founding fathers espouses an incredibly positive attitude built on, above all things, faith in the success of the individual against all odds. The liberalism I am referring to is the darker ethos that currently masquerades as Liberal, despite the fact that it is anything but. One need look no further for proof of this truth than Adam Kirsch’s response to Adam Bellow‘s call for a counterculture conservative establishment via Liberty Island.

…why does Adam Bellow continue to believe that conservative writers are a persecuted minority? The reason may have something to do with the description of the kind of work he seeks at his Liberty Island website: “At Liberty Island, good still triumphs over evil, hope still overcomes despair, and America is still a noble experiment and a beacon to the rest of the world.” The problem is not that these are conservative ideas, but that they are simpleminded ideological dogmas, and so by their very nature hostile to literature, which lives or dies by its sense of reality. If you are not allowed to say that life in America can be bad, that Americans can be guilty as well as innocent, that good sometimes (most of the time?) loses out to evil—in short, that life in America is like human life in any other time or place—then you cannot be a literary writer, because you have censored your impressions of reality in advance.

In this one paragraph Kirsch clearly defines the Liberal view of reality. According to Kirsch, Liberals view America as a “bad” place where good is defeated ”most of the time” by evil. Bellow’s desire to publish positive, hopeful literature illustrates his biased impression of reality, an implied trait among conservatives. According to Kirsch, Bellow is both deficient and needy: “…he wants reassurance, the certainty that reality—of which literature is the perceiver and guardian—is always on the side of his political beliefs.” He accuses Bellow of seeking succor through “Tea Party”-esque revenge tactics.

These accusations stand in stark contradiction to Kirsch’s conclusion in which he blatantly accepts the fact that Liberals have abused the arts, turning what used to be pleasurable cultural outlets into forums for intense, almost religious levels of political brainwashing. According to Kirsch, true writers understand that politics “must be corrected by literature” and not vice-versa. Hence, so many writers are Liberals. Liberals who busy themselves using their screeds to “correct” the political landscape. Thus, is his own grand conclusion he ends up convicting Liberals for Bellow’s supposed crimes.

In creating Liberty Island, Adam Bellow did one better than scare the Liberal literary establishment: He annoyed them. In his conservative counterculture manifesto Bellow named the sins that have turned the world of American fiction into nothing more than a finely written dystopia. It is what Bellow proposes, marketing hope to the hopeless, that is the greatest cause for alarm. Kirsch and his ilk can attempt to disinform the public by accusing conservative writers of being “out of touch” with reality. This has and will only continue to act as a public airing of their own hopeless despair. When challenged with a positive alternative, Liberal literati will ultimately fail, because in a world rife with rockets and bomb shelters, riots and dictators, wars and rumors of wars, there is nothing the public craves more than a future and a hope.




Read bullet | Comments »

Even if Obama’s Apparatchik Regime Were Constitutional It Would Be Bad for America

Wednesday, July 16th, 2014 - by Scott Ott

It’s the Constitution, Stupid!

That’s the de facto cry as Republicans, conservatives, libertarians, Tea Partisans and others slam President Obama for ruling by executive order and bureaucratic regulation, bypassing the legislature and accruing unchecked power to the executive branch and its apparatchiks in the bureaucracy.

But this alarm falls on deaf ears, because the average American attended Democrat-union-run schools and all he knows of the Constitution consists of a jingle of the Preamble from Schoolhouse Rock.

The sum total of all living Americans who have both read, and understood the purport of the Constitution, could meet today in the room where Freedom’s Charter was drafted and hold a Pilates class without rubbing elbows or bumping exercise balls.

In any case, in this postmodern era, the argument from principles (argumentum super capita sua) has been supplanted by the argument from emotion (ifita fils güd du itum). So, my readers in ye olde tricorne hattef, might want to attempt a different tactic.

Listen, we could get all lathered (rinse & repeat) about the yawning ignorance of our founding documents, lamenting that the Constitution lies dormant among the dust-bunnies of history under the futon, or we could face reality and figure out a way to communicate that connects with who people are, what they feel, and even what they think, when the rare occasion arises.

Read bullet | Comments »

There is No Such Thing as “Black Female Culture”

Tuesday, July 15th, 2014 - by Susan L.M. Goldberg

YouTube Preview Image

Last week Sierra Mannie, a liberal arts major at The University of Mississippi, nervously stepped up to the mic on CNN to explain the angry op-ed she wrote for her student newspaper that wound up getting published in Time magazine. Entitled “Dear White Gays: Stop Stealing Black Female Culture“, Mannie’s fury turned her thinly-veiled export of classroom-based critical theory into a hot-button pop culture issue. Written in typical college-quality prose, the rage-fueled piece that begins with the line “I need some of you to cut it the hell out,” is unremarkable except for the fact that the author attempts to name a non-existent entity known as “black female culture.”

“There is no such thing as black female culture,” artist April Bey explains. What Mannie was actually referring to, according to Bey, is “ghetto culture,” a destructive ideology that has been appropriated by celebrities and is the subject of pop culture idolization.

According to The Urban Countercultureghetto culture is:

Characterized by escapism and materialism, this culture calls irresponsibility freedom, glorifies crime, violence, and hypersexuality, defies all authority, and acts as a coping mechanism for those who feel rejected by mainstream society and economy.

Ghetto culture doesn’t require an address in the ghetto, nor does it appeal solely to blacks:

…you clearly don’t have to live in the ghetto to ‘be’ ghetto; thanks to the entertainment industry, the gospel of the ghetto has been spread far and wide, promising fleshy satisfaction to all who would exchange civility for vulgarity and rebellion, and who will live for today instead of planning for tomorrow.

Most disturbingly, especially in light of Mannie’s rant, is the way ghetto culture treats women:

Because  prostitution is one major aspect of the criminal economy of inner cities, the relative degradation and abuse of women is a part of the culture that members of every walk of life can participate in.

Perhaps that is why Beyonce, cited within the article and pictured by Time, is used to bespeak the “black female culture” Mannie claims to defend. As Bey illustrated in her most recent exhibit #WhoDoYouWorship, Beyonce, often a subject of feminism’s own racial double standard, exemplifies ghetto culture’s “black female culture” disinformation campaign.

This is how ghetto culture’s “black female culture” disinformation campaign works:

Seed of Truth: Ghetto culture sexually objectifies black women.

Pack of Lies:  As Mannie’s argument illustrates, it is acceptable for black women and their audience to embrace and celebrate this objectification. They may even feel free to legitimize the abuse through the use of the term “black female culture”.

The Ultimate Goal is the glasnost (a strategy of glorification): The glorification of the ghetto culture’s “Ideal Black Woman”. The purveyors of ghetto culture market “black female culture” via the glorification of the Beyonce, the “Ideal Black Woman”. Hence Mannie took such offense at “outsiders” mocking the glorified identity.

When Mannie hammers away at the idea that “black people can’t have anything” therefore they need to hold tightly to “black female culture” she ends up defending the ghetto culture that hides its abuse and subjugation of black women behind a shield of Beyonces. In “breathing fire behind ugly stereotypes” spouted in college classrooms, Mannie became another Beyonce-worshipper. The most her article did was illustrate the fact that many American universities have become propaganda outlets for ghetto culture’s disinformation campaign against black women. The only reason this college student was published in Time magazine is because she obviously excels at being duped.

Read bullet | 13 Comments »

Pro-Palestinian Rioters Corner Jews in Paris Synagogues

Sunday, July 13th, 2014 - by Susan L.M. Goldberg

YouTube Preview Image

The Times of Israel reports:

Several thousand demonstrators walked calmly through the streets of Paris behind a large banner that read “Total Support for the Struggle of the Palestinian People”.

But clashes erupted at the end of the march on Bastille Square, with people throwing projectiles onto a cordon of police who responded with tear gas. The unrest was continuing early Sunday evening.

Media reports said that hundreds of Jews were trapped inside a synagogue in the area and police units were sent to rescue them.

A person in the synagogue told Israel’s Channel 2 news that protesters hurled stones and bricks at the building, “like it was an intifada.”

The event comes after a firebomb was hurled at a synagogue in the suburbs of Paris this past Friday night. Despite it being Shabbat, there were no injuries and only minor damage occurred. 

On July 8, the day Israel launched Operation Protective Edge, a teenage girl in Paris was physically assaulted by a man with a “Middle Eastern appearance” who pepper sprayed her while shouting, “Dirty Jewess, inshallah you will die.”

France, home to one of the largest Jewish populations in Europe, is second only to Russia in terms of Jewish immigration to Israel. According to Israeli politician and former Soviet political prisoner Natan Sharansky, “Something historic is happening. It may be the beginning of the end of European Jewry.”

According to Israel’s Channel 2 news, Anne Hidalgo, the mayor of Paris, has confirmed that anti-Israel rioters attempted to enter two synagogues in central Paris. The rioters were stopped by French police.

Instagram user Jean-Baptiste Soufron posted a video from the Synagogue de la Roquette where pro-Palestinian activists were in the midst of a standoff with French police. One French Instagram user commented, “A shame for France ….far from the land of my childhood.” Another wrote, “The French media are responsible for inciting strong hatred and misinformation.”

Read bullet | 31 Comments »

Americans Also Targets in Hamas Attacks

Sunday, July 13th, 2014 - by Susan L.M. Goldberg

YouTube Preview Image

The above news clip represents what the average American hears on a daily basis regarding Operation Protective Edge, the latest military spate in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that has been going on (officially) since 1948. In the span of the 2 minute report, the Palestinian civilian casualties in Gaza were mentioned 3 times. What was not mentioned: These civilians have been instructed by their Hamas government to ignore the flyers and phone calls from the Israeli Defense Forces warning citizens to get out of the way of impending rocket attacks in their areas.

While an Israeli mother putting her baby to sleep in a bomb shelter is included in the report, what the reporter didn’t bother to tell you are the number of Israelis currently being hospitalized for shock. Nor did the report include the fact that this is just another day for the residents of Sderot, who’ve received a constant barrage of rockets since Israel relinquished Gaza back to the Palestinians in 2005. That’s nearly a decade of rocket fire, making the generation who grew up under these attacks old enough to train incoming school students in how not to suffer the inevitable PTSD associated with a lifetime of death threats flying through the air and landing in your back yard.

American audiences hear none of this because the majority of American and world media have fallen prey to Hamas’s most powerful ongoing terrorist operation: A disinformation and glasnost campaign designed to destroy western support for Israel through a constant barrage of media bias.

Here is how the disinformation and glasnost campaign has been executed in response to Operation Protective Edge :

Seed of Truth: Palestinian civilians are being killed by Israeli rocket fire in Gaza.

Pack of Lies: Israelis are safely protected in bomb shelters under the Iron Dome while their military targets innocent civilians in the impoverished Gaza Strip.

Ultimate Goal: Encourage American and worldwide support for the Hamas campaign to wipe Israel off the map and eliminate all evidence of the Zionist entity, including the Jewish people and their supporters, from the face of the earth.

The glasnost element is the most perverse. Hamas plays on the western disbelief in the idea of martyrs, portraying these women and children as “innocent civilian victims” of Israeli aggression. When speaking to the non-Western media, these dead are referred to in a term most recently used by Fatah leader Mahmoud Abbas, “the Gazan martyrs.” Glasnost is the term for glorifying the leader’s image abroad. In this case, Hamas is using the bodies of women and children to shield their missiles in life and glorify their reputations in death.

Some news agencies and opinion sites are catching onto this disinformation campaign, willing to call it “media bias against Israel.” This is more than media bias. This is a calculated effort on the part of Hamas to sway world opinion against the only nation willing to confront and fight against Islamic terror. Therefore, whether the mainstream media is a willing partner in this endeavor makes no matter. The bottom line is, the media is marketing this disinformation to audiences in America and worldwide that are watching blind, with no Iron Dome to protect them.

Read bullet | 19 Comments »

Democrat Says that If Corporations Are People, They Should ‘Suit Up’ to Fight Wars

Tuesday, July 8th, 2014 - by Bryan Preston

Alaska Democrat Sen. Mark Begich gave an interview to the Juneau Empire newspaper. The paper set him up with a question about corporate rights, in the wake of the Hobby Lobby decision.

In that Supreme Court decision, a 5-4 majority ruled that closely held corporations have some religious freedoms. Closely held corporations tend to be family owned, or owned by a small group of people. They are not publicly traded. The ruling essentially protects the rights of individuals who happen to own businesses from having to comply with some government mandates that violate their religious freedoms.

Sen. Begich doesn’t see it that way. He told the Empire, “At the rate we’re going, we’ll probably have corporations suit up and go fight wars. They consider corporations people, so my view is if you’re going to consider them people, suit up. Go overseas and fight these wars.”

Begich added that he believes that the Founders “never, you know, to believe corporations would be people would be unheard of. The Founding Fathers looked at individual rights to be people, not some entity created with laws that back then they had no clue would be in the future and how corporations are set up as they are today.”

The word corporation is Latin for “body of people.” Corporations existed long before the time of the American Founding Fathers. The colonial-era Dutch East India Company was a corporation. The definition of a corporation goes back to the 1500′s, and is:

“a group of people authorized by law to act as a legal personality and having its own powers, duties, and liabilities.”

So, the Founders were well aware of what corporations are. Several of the Founders were business owners themselves.

Sen. Begich is one of the most vulnerable Democrats in the Senate. Polls have him dead even with the Republican primary front-runner, military veteran Dan Sullivan.

Read bullet | Comments »

ISIS Caliph Emerges, Threatens Another Holocaust

Monday, July 7th, 2014 - by Bryan Preston

Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi used to live in the shadows. But as his ISIS terrorist army is taking over Iraq and President Obama isn’t doing anything about it, al-Baghdadi has come out of hiding to declare himself the caliph.

The State Department said today it has “no reason to doubt” that the shadowy leader of a powerful Iraqi terror group revealed himself before a crowded mosque over the weekend, providing the first clear picture of the violent extremist who now believes himself to be the prince of all Muslims.

For years the public only saw Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the leader of the Islamic State (IS) formerly known as ISIS or ISIL, in a couple grainy pictures, like the one posted on the U.S. Rewards for Justice program wanted poster offering $10 million for information leading to his capture. But Friday a man looking very much like al-Baghdadi stepped into the spotlight, giving a fiery sermon at a mosque in the Iraqi city of Mosul in which he called for all Muslims to follow him.

“I was cursed with this great endeavor,” a 21-minute video of the event shows the man saying in Arabic. “Obey me in my obedience to God, disobey me if I disobey God.”

Al-Baghdadi’s ISIS group is threatening to unleash a new Holocaust.

A Twitter post Thursday by supporters of the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS), now calling itself the Islamic State (IS), has promised a Holocaust against the Jews.

“The Real Zionist Holocaust is Predicted in the Hadiths! The Hour [resurrection] will not take place until the Muslims fight the Jews and the Muslims kill them, and the tree will say: “Oh, Muslim, servant of God, there is a Jew behind me, kill him! THE PROMISED Holocaust,” the terrorist group’s Islamic State Media a graphic posted on its @ISIS_Conquests’s Twitter account said.

This hadith has proven popular with Islamic extremists of all stripes, ranging from IS toHamas – and even on television in the Middle East.

Daniel Pipes, an expert on jihadism, said the hadith likely was a recruitment tool.

“​Yes, ​calling for a holocaust against Jews refers to a violently anti-Semitic strain among jihadis and will surely appeal to some of them,” Pipes said in an email to the Investigative Project on Terrorism.

Want some comfort in this dangerous world? Here’s the US Central Intelligence Agency, showing the world that they’re on this ISIS threat.

Read bullet | Comments »

Mohammed Abu Khdeir and Jewish Guilt’s Double Standard

Monday, July 7th, 2014 - by Susan L.M. Goldberg



We, the Jewish people, are good at guilt. Gilbert Gottfried jokes that, in the Jewish world, the fetus is only viable after its finished law school. I’d add to Gottfried’s joke by explaining the reason for the degree: So that we may continue to expertly condemn ourselves in the court of public opinion.

This past weekend, Jews across the political spectrum rushed to denounce the murderous crime committed by radical Jewish activists in Israel. The fact that we live in a world where one must proclaim their disgust of such a vile act is a crime in and of itself. However, it is not their condemnation of the act, but the tone and style of their condemnation that I call into question. We don’t expect all Palestinians, nor all Muslims to apologize for the acts of radicals. Why, then, should we expect the entire nation of Israel, and Jewry’s worldwide collective, to apologize for the crime of 6 Israeli Jews?

Of the murder of Mohammed Abu Khdeir, Ben Shapiro rightly observed:

The world will apply Western standards of morality to the Jewish nationalists, as they should – they will not ask about their “root causes” or ponder their anger. They will then ignore those same Western standards, as they always have, when dealing with the Palestinians… Because Jew hatred is all about double standards and ignoring the facts.

We are all too familiar with the world’s double standard when it comes to judging Israel’s every breath. The Zionist nation has become the brunt for the Jewish burden established on Mount Sinai. We were called out to be different, to be a “light”, an example for the nations to follow, and we have been paying for being the “good student” ever since. Despite what our detractors would lead you to believe, we take our Biblical responsibility very seriously, and have no problem holding it over our collective head when even one of us fails to achieve the group’s objective.  This is why Jewish accusations against our people’s moral fiber are running at an all-time high. It is also precisely why they shouldn’t be.

People of Israel, world Jewry at large, stop your self-flagellation. Your enemies will make the most of 6 bad decision makers the way any disinformation operative makes the most of a good crisis. In the meantime, you think your best defense is a self-inflicted finger in the wound before the bullies can poke at it for you? Neither you nor I are guilty for the bad choices of others. They should and will receive the full punishment that the law allows. That is our testimony to our God, ourselves and to the world of who we are: a nation of laws, not terror, or as one Jewish Press writer so eloquently put it:

We didn’t destroy trains and infrastructure, we didn’t hand out candies in celebration, we didn’t post photos of praise on Twitter and Facebook, we didn’t provide support and succor to the killers. We won’t be giving them salaries in jail, we won’t be naming streets and schools after them, we won’t be demanding their release for peace. Our mother’s won’t be saying they are proud of them, our leaders won’t have photo-ops with them, we won’t parade them through the streets as heroes, they won’t be portrayed as role models for our children, and we won’t be painting murals of them on the walls of our schools.

If you really want a sackcloth and ashes moment, take a tip from the families of Eyal, Gilad, Naftali and Mohammed, children who were murdered by the kind of insane radicals whose stripe transcends any and every national identity. Spare me your incessant, neurotic, hot-air attempts at obtaining the forgiveness you don’t need and the approval you so desperately seek. Want to be respected? Stop equating 13.8 million Jews worldwide, 6.1 million of them Israelis, with 6 murderous lunatics.

Read bullet | Comments »

July 4, 2014: Salon Crowns Obama Our Messiah

Sunday, July 6th, 2014 - by Susan L.M. Goldberg

YouTube Preview Image

In a long-winded, rambling essay (as its long-winded, rambling title indicates), Jim Sleeper used Salon to perform one of the most out-in-the-open disinformation and glasnost operations yet seen in the pages of the liberal press.

On the face of it, Sleeper’s complaint comes off as yet another intellectual bemoaning of the state of American culture dressed up for a hot night out in multi-syllabic tones, much akin to Julia Roberts’s whore of  a character in Pretty Woman. I’ll be the first to bemoan our declining literacy rate among adults, but really, Jim?

Our cure would also require reweaving a fabric of public candor and comity strong enough to resist the rise of ressentiment, a public psychopathology, once associated with the rise of fascism, in which insecurities, envy and hatreds that many have been nursing in private converge in scary public eruptions that diminish their participants even in seeming to make them big.

Working that hard to tart up your prose can blow even the best Mata Hari’s cover. And so it did, as I quickly sniffed out the disinformation in the works. Sleeper’s intense obsession with the politically correct “white boys with guns” myth, that has been carved into the shiv meant to take down the Second Amendment, acted as the sole defense of his thesis: We have no shared culture and it’s driving our young boys mad! A lack of shared culture is the grain of truth, blaming the guns is the disinformation that suits the bill.

Sleeper’s solution? Glasnost, of course: Obama as Messiah has come to save the day, embodying the best of shared American culture of years’ past only, somehow, in his mystical way, making it even better:

In 2008, Barack Obama seemed to incarnate so brilliantly the promise of weaving our diversity into a new republican discipline — he even invoked Puritan and biblical wellsprings in some of his speeches — that many people ’round the world considered him a prophet who would satisfy their hunger for new narratives. Probably no national political leader ever can do that.

Bow in praise of the political leader incarnate! A prophet! Our  promised Savior! That is the glasnost: not an “openness to the West” but opening to the best of the West in order to use it to glorify the leader. It should come as no surprise that two days after learning that Americans believe Obama to be the worst president since World War II, Jim Sleeper is running a glasnost campaign over at Salon for his Messiah-in-Chief.

That is how disinformation and glasnost work. These are no longer foreign nor ancient terms. These are 21st century strategies for political conquest. In his essay, Sleeper was also quick to criticize the “invisible hand of God” cited by America’s founders. He would have to, considering that invisible hand carried within its Divine reach the implication of human independence. And on July 4, Sleeper, so quick to crown his earthly messiah, was keen to have none of that.

Read bullet | 9 Comments »

[Audio] Hear The Declaration of Independence

Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 - by Scott Ott

Here’s what it’s all about. Gather the children around the iPad. Listen. Remember. Rejoice.

Read bullet | Comments »

NPR Celebrates the 4th, Recalling Those Who Don’t Celebrate the 4th, or Didn’t Use To Anyway

Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 - by Scott Ott

Well, after 238 years it’s tough to find a fresh angle on Independence Day.

That’s the best excuse I can make for NPR’s story noting that Jehovah’s Witnesses, “some American Indians” and the abolitionist Frederick Douglass, back in 1852, don’t/didn’t celebrate the Fourth of July like most of the rest of us do, here in this God-blessed America.

The second best excuse I can make is: What do you expect from NPR?

The 1852 Independence Day Douglass oration is a classic moment of speaking truth to power. In its time and context it must have shocked, and invigorated, the abolition movement.

But in our day, the Left likes to read it as if its message applies equally to 21st century America. See Danny Glover’s rendition of excerpts in the video below, just 11 months before the election of Barack Obama as president. Note the reaction of the crowd, as if Glover had dreamed up the speech yesterday.

The Left lives, so it seems, in an ante-bellum world.

Read bullet | 63 Comments »

This July 4th, Let’s Pick a New National Anthem

Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 - by Scott Ott

Face it, our National Anthem (“The Star Spangled Banner,” for those of you educated in government schools) is just hard to sing.

The range of notes spans 1.5 octaves, which is about all the average human can do. But even then, your ability to sing it well depends on the key, and the midpoint of your range.

For all practical purposes, nobody in America — not one person — can actually sing the national anthem in a way that others want to hear. That’s why we all sing it together — to drown out the horrid screeching and croaking, and to make ourselves feel better about our middling talents.

So rather than sustain this incessant assault on our self-esteem, I think it’s time we pick a new National Anthem. And before you protest about tradition or law, let me also suggest that the National Anthem has become a cultural anachronism.

Written by a white guy, held prisoner on a ship by other white guys, the words ramble on and on about a piece of fabric, and some war somewhere fought over something. But nobody knows what it means. Francis Scott Key’s poem, later put to music, isn’t even called “The Star Spangled Banner,” but “Defense of Fort McHenry.” I’m sure that’s in every Kindle at the Army War College.

There’s a difference between antique and vintage. The latter is cool. There’s a difference between old school and old timey. The former is cool. Our National Anthem is antique and old timey.

And one last thing. The song starts with a question (“O, say can you see?”) , and we never get the answer — at least not in the only verse that anyone has memorized. Everyone who’s ever watched a sit-com knows that you have to resolve the conflict in 22 minutes or less.

(SPOILER ALERT: Three additional verses of Key’s original poem all indicate that the flag still waved above the fort after sunrise. BTW, the British troops went back home and we got to keep our country. I’m sorry if you hadn’t heard about that yet. I warned you.)

For all of those reasons, and Roseanne Barr, I propose we change the National Anthem, and offer two possible alternatives.

First, I suggest James Brown’s “I Don’t Want Nobody to Give Me Nothing” (see video below). I think the dancin’ jam and sax solo in the middle will be particularly popular at ball parks and middle school classrooms. I recently read an article speculating on why there aren’t more Black libertarians. IMHO, it’s because folks haven’t heard this song enough. So, here’s my #1 option.

Read bullet | 13 Comments »

Video: Is the Jihad Islam’s ‘Reformation’?

Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 - by Raymond Ibrahim

Does Islam need a “Protestant Reformation?” What if the jihad is it?

I recently appeared on Sun News’ Byline with Brian Lilley, discussing my PJ Media article, “Islam’s Protest Reformation” (part 1, part 2)

YouTube Preview Image


Read bullet | Comments »

Is Obama Giving Up, or Going Soviet?

Thursday, July 3rd, 2014 - by Bryan Preston

If you listen to progressives these days, the Supreme Court has granted corporations the power to compel their employees to go to church. It has empowered corporations to tell women to throw away their contraceptives. Five of the men on the court have declared full jihad against all of the women of America. Next stop, subjugation, revocation of the right to vote, and the end of women’s rights in America.

All of that is absurd, of course. The Hobby Lobby case was a too-narrow win for religious freedom and private property rights. But it’s making for amusing theatrics around the country as Democrats grapple with the fact that the man atop their party is an incompetent buffoon, and the American people have figured that out, and the Democrats are stuck with him.

Two years ago, I coined a phrase that stuck. In June of 2012, President Obama suspended the federal government’s immigration law enforcement agreements with the state of Arizona. He did this to retaliate for that state passing a modest law with the aim of getting a handle on the growing chaos on its border with Mexico. Obama was “going Soviet” on Arizona, I wrote, and Rush Limbaugh and others quickly picked up the phrase to describe what was going on. What I meant by “going Soviet” was that Obama was clearly punishing Arizona and singling it out to make an example of it for other states, especially red states. The phrase reaches back into the history that they no longer teach in our schools, to a time when the Soviet Union existed and was as brutal to its own people as it attempted to be to the rest of the world. People who stepped out of line would find themselves subjected to abuse by their own government. On the extreme end, the USSR literally starved millions of Ukrainians to death. The American press, led by the New York Times, helped the Soviets cover up their ghastly crimes. The US media has served a similar function during Obama’s reign.

In June of 2012, Obama punished Arizona for its attempt to enforce immigration law. In those days, none of us had any idea that the Obama IRS was also systematically punishing Tea Party groups by dragging out their tax-exempt application processes and subjecting them to invasive and abusive questioning. Most of us had no idea that True the Vote’s Catherine Engelbrecht was being subjected to abuse from a litany of executive branch agencies. “Going Soviet” was more applicable than we knew, two years ago. We did not know that the IRS was criminally releasing conservative groups’ donor information to their leftwing enemies. AG Eric Holder’s refusal to investigate that was still in the future.

Fast forward two years, and Obama has been re-elected but he is already a lame duck when it comes to getting anything done in Congress. No one there trusts him. The Democrats have no relationship with him. The Republicans have been burned and, even if they wanted to strike a deal with him, sentient ones know that he will re-write whatever deal is crafted before the ink on his signature is dry. Pass a full immigration reform deal, and he will strip out all of the enforcement components and grant sweeping amnesty to millions of illegal aliens. He may even do what President Clinton did once, and speed up citizenship for millions of illegal aliens ahead of an election — so they can register and vote.

The polls show where Obama’s actions and untrustworthiness have led. He is rated the worst president since World War II. His personal popularity has crashed. Americans now say that we would all have been better off if Mitt Romney had been elected president in 2012. Obama has failed to help veterans, despite his explicit promises to reform the Veterans Administration. His foreign policy is a flop, and now Russia is on the march from one direction and the Islamic State, a new caliphate, is on the march in another. American influence is at such a low ebb that Russian pilots will soon be flying over Iraq to help that country and Iran push back against the Islamists. Either out of cluelessness or malice, Obama still wants to arm Syrian rebels, many of whom are Islamist radicals too.

And then there’s the Texas-Mexico border. Two years ago, Arizona’s border was in crisis mode, and Obama responded by punishing that state. Today, Texas is being flooded by illegal aliens.

Read bullet | 88 Comments »

Gary Oldman & the Right’s Latent Antisemitism

Monday, June 30th, 2014 - by Susan L.M. Goldberg

We all know by now that actor Gary Oldman denounced political correctness in his recent interview with Playboy magazine. However, if you’re only a reader of conservative news sources, you most likely aren’t aware of the fact that Oldman dropped the n-word repeatedly, used a grotesque and derogatory slang word for the female anatomy, and included one of the oldest and most offensive Jewish American stereotypes in his rant:

Mel Gibson is in a town that’s run by Jews and he said the wrong thing because he’s actually bitten the hand that I guess has fed him—and doesn’t need to feed him anymore because he’s got enough dough. He’s like an outcast, a leper, you know? But some Jewish guy in his office somewhere hasn’t turned and said, “That f***ing kraut” or “F*** those Germans,” whatever it is? We all hide and try to be so politically correct. That’s what gets me. It’s just the sheer hypocrisy of everyone, that we all stand on this thing going, “Isn’t that shocking?”

Conservative news readers couldn’t possibly be aware of these immoral platitudes because the story was covered in right-wing media with the following headlines:

Conservative Star Gary Oldman Denounces Liberal Hollywood, Hillary Clinton

Scott Whitlock, the senior news analyst for the Media Research Center, published a report in NewsBusters that focused on Oldman’s anti-Hillary comments and criticism of Obama. Whitlock prefaced Oldman’s quote about Pelosi being a “c**t” with the statement, “In the Playboy interview, Oldman used offensive and vulgar language to complain about political correctness.” The article was promoted on Facebook with the following statement: “What this Hollywood Star Just Said About Liberals Will Make You Stand and Cheer.”

Gary Oldman Rails Against PC “Crap,” Liberal Double Standards in Hollywood

Josh Feldman at Mediaite made Oldman’s grotesque comment regarding Nancy Pelosi the centerpiece of his short coverage of the now infamous Playboy interview. But when it came to the Hollywood Jews, he summarized Oldman’s antisemitic rant down to, “He said so many ‘f***ing hypocrites’ condemned Gibson, but they privately use words like he did.”

Gary Oldman Attacks Outrage Culture in Playboy, Gets Outraged Response

Mollie Hemingway at the Federalist crowed about reading “the entire interview” and quoted several excerpts, except for the ones about the Jews who run Hollywood, n*****s, and f*gs. Because those wouldn’t really help support her point that “people lost their everliving minds” over Oldman’s belief that “political correctness is crap,” a belief Hemingway and her editors at the Federalist wholeheartedly share.

Famous Actor’s Fiery Rant Against “Political Correctness,” Hollywood Double Standards — and His Theoretical Nancy Pelosi Joke Will Make Jaws Drop

Jason Howerton’s story from The Blaze did not originally include the comments. It was later “updated with additional comments from Oldman’s interview,” including the Hollywood comment that every other conservative-leaning news outlet I’ve found so far has failed to print.

When I confronted conservative friends over their defense of Oldman’s commentary, I was told that I was “getting my panties in a bunch” over being “noogie’d” for the greater good of the anti-PC campaign. When I asked what the dividing line was between being anti-PC and pro-antisemitism, I was told that I was insinuating that my friends were antisemitic, and therefore I should issue them an apology. Again, I pressed the question and, again, I received the same response: In essence, I was being a touchy, oversensitive Jew.

Read bullet | 129 Comments »

Why Does the Left Hate Native American Names?

Friday, June 27th, 2014 - by Scott Ott

The Left is apparently on the warpath to expunge all references to Native American peoples from our lexicon. And it’s not just the Washington Redskins, Cleveland Indians and other sports franchises under threat of this ethnic cleansing of our language.

Now, a Washington Post op-ed calls for scrubbing tribal names from U.S. military hardware — Apache, Chinook, Black Hawk helicopters, Tomahawk missiles and mission names like Operation Geronimo (which got bin Laden), for example.

If successful, the Left’s war on Native American words will remove practically all verbal evidence of the people who occupied these lands before the invasion of the English, Germans, Dutch, Irish, Mexicans and others. Their legacy will survive only in textbooks, museums and casinos — and most Americans completely ignore two out of three of those.

Call the White House today and tell President Obama that he can scrub the mention of Islam from reports on terrorism, but he can’t take away our Native American names.

Read bullet | 7 Comments »

I Hope You’re Sitting Down For This. Barack Obama is Re-Writing History on Iraq.

Friday, June 20th, 2014 - by Bryan Preston

During his statement on Iraq Thursday, President Obama took one of his 2012 bragging points off the table. He hopes no one notices.

During the 2008 election, Obama promised to withdraw all US troops from Iraq. By 2012, that had been done (and in 2014, terrorist group ISIS is taking over a huge swath of Iraq, challenging to overthrow the democratically elected government that US troops fought and died to give a chance of succeeding).

During the last presidential debate between Mitt Romney and Obama in 2012, the subject turned to Iraq. Romney brought up the fact that he supported leaving a residual American force in Iraq, under a status of forces agreement with the Iraqi government. Romney said that Obama had previously supported having such an agreement with Iraq.

But Obama said flatly that he did not support establishing a status of forces agreement with Iraq. Here is that exchange between Romney and Obama.

The Washington Post (!) noticed that Obama is now re-writing history.

“With regards to Iraq, you and I agreed, I believe, that there should be a status of forces agreement,” Romney told Obama as the two convened on the Lynn University campus in Boca Raton, Fla., that October evening. “That’s not true,” Obama interjected. “Oh, you didn’t want a status of forces agreement?” Romney asked as an argument ensued. “No,” Obama said. “What I would not have done is left 10,000 troops in Iraq that would tie us down. That certainly would not help us in the Middle East.”

On Thursday, Obama addressed reporters in the White House Briefing Room about Iraq’s latest crisis. “Do you wish you had left a residual force in Iraq? Any regrets about that decision in 2011?” a reporter asked. “Well, keep in mind that wasn’t a decision made by me,” Obama said. “That was a decision made by the Iraqi government.”

This is what immature people of low character do when confronted with facts.

Read bullet | 5 Comments »

Guess Who’s Responsible for the Sunni-Shiite Carnage in Iraq? (Hint: Starts with a ‘J’)

Tuesday, June 17th, 2014 - by Andrew G. Bostom

The jihadist butchers (see here, here, here) of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL)—supported by a much broader Sunni insurgency (see here, here, and here) against the Shiite-dominated, U.S. mid-wived al-Maliki government—continue their Baghdad-bound carnage.

Predictably—confirming obvious trends I documented 8-years ago—Maliki’s longstanding patron (and puppet-master) Iran, has committed (and pledged even more) military assets against the Sunni assault. Eli Lake of the The Daily Beast reported today (6/17/2014):

The offer to help us with everything we need has been made from the highest levels of the Iranian government,” a senior Iraqi official told The Daily Beast.

Lake added,

This official stressed that Iran’s offer to assist Iraq’s fight against the Islamic State of Iraq and the Sham (ISIS) [the Levant/ (ISIL)] was not conditional on Maliki making any immediate reforms or changes to his government.

An indelible, “unconditional” feature of the Iranian, and indeed the entire region’s “religiously” imbued Muslim mindset, which transcends the bitter, violent Shiite-Sunni divide, was simultaneously on display today: conspiratorial Islamic Jew-hatred. General Hassan Firouzabadi, Chief of Staff of the Iranian Armed Forces, insisted Tuesday (6/17/14, in Tehran) Israel—i.e., in regional parlance, Jews/“Zionists”—had created and supported ISIL, while further claiming,

The ISIL is Israel’s cover up for distancing the revolutionary forces from Israeli borders and creating a margin of security for the Zionists, and the Zionist media have also admitted this fact

One year ago, a Sunni cleric also blamed the Jews—from his own Jew-hating Islamic sectarian perspective—for the internecine Sunni-Shiite bloodshed taking place in Syria. The good cleric, preaching at the renowned Umayyad Mosque in Damascus, invoked conspiratorial Jew-hating themes from the Koran and traditions of Muhammad—i.e., Jews as prophet-killers (which includes being murderers of Muhammad himself), who allegedly violated their agreements with Muslims, driving Muslims astray (from Islam), and sowing “corruption” throughout the world—before inculpating them directly for the carnage in Syria.

Below are relevant extracts from his sermon, which aired on Syrian TV on June 28, 2013.

Let us take a look at the history of mankind, which has recorded the true nature of the Jews, the slayers of prophets and violators of agreements. It shows how they have tried, since pre-Islamic times, to fragment, divide, and rip apart the Arab and Islamic nation. In an effort to gain influence in the world and to realize their desires, the Jews have set two basic goals. Listen, oh Muslims, and beware of what is happening in Syria – in that land with steadfast people and leadership. They have two basic goals. The first is to divide the nations of the world, to pit them one against the other, and to spark war and civil strife among them. The second goal is to rip apart the nations of the world, destroying their notions, moral values, and codes, and making them stray from the path of Allah. That is what they did throughout the ages all over the world. Oh nation of Islam, the Jews have been tearing this nation apart for many years. […]What is happening today in this steadfast fortress [Syria], and in the Middle East in general, is nothing new. It was premeditated. We are a nation in slumber, a nation that does not study the books of history, and has not studied what its enemies are plotting and devising against it. They kindled the spark of civil strife in Palestine and in Afghanistan, and then in Iraq, then in Egypt, and after that, in Syria. […]

Sunnis and Shiites alike, come together, perversely, in blaming a Jew (see here, here) for either Sunni-Shiite sectarianism (the Sunni claim), or “heresies” within Shiism (the Shiite allegation).

Associated with “the birth pangs” of Islam is an unabashedly conspiratorial Jew-hating theme occurring after the events recorded in the traditions of Muhammad (hadith and sira), put forth in early Sunni Muslim historiography (for example, by Tabari): the story of Abdullah Ibn Saba, an alleged renegade Yemenite Jew, and founder of the heterodox Shiite sect. Sean Anthony’s extensive modern analysis of Abdullah Ibn Saba adds another pejorative characteristic conferred upon this ostensible Yemenite Jew in the Muslim literature: his mother was black. Anthony notes that a “favorite derisive handle for him,” was “son of the Black woman.”

According to Sunni dogma, Abdullah Ibn Saba is held responsible — identified as a Jew (and black) — for promoting the Shiite heresy and fomenting the rebellion and internal strife associated with this primary breach in Islam’s “political innocence,” culminating in the assassination of the third Rightly Guided Caliph Uthman, and the bitter, lasting legacy of Sunni-Shiite sectarian strife.

Here are key extracts from Tabari’s account:

Abd Allah b. Saba’ was a Yemenite Jew. . . . He later converted to Islam in the time of [Caliph] Uthman. Then he traveled through the lands of the Muslims trying to lead them into error. . . . [For example] in Egypt he promulgated to the people the [heterodox] doctrine of the Return [of Muhammad as Messiah]. So the Egyptians discussed this idea. Then, after that, he said that there were one thousand prophets, each of whom had an agent; and that Ali was Muhammad’s agent. Then he said, Muhammad was the Seal of the Prophets and Ali was the Seal of the Agents. Also, he asked: “Who is more evil than those who denied Muhammad’s designation of Ali as his agent-successor, pounced upon this successor- designate of Ali’s messenger and seized (illegitimately) the rulership of the Muslim community?” [In answer to this question as it were,] he told the Egyptians that Uthman had seized power illegitimately while Ali was, in fact, the agent-successor of Allah’s messenger. “Rebel against this illegitimate rule, provoke it, and challenge your rulers . . .” [said ‘Abd Allah b. Saba’].

Over a millennium later, the momentous international gathering of Muslim religious authorities, sponsored by Sunni Islam’s Vatican, Al-Azhar University, the Fourth Conference of the Academy of Islamic Research, September, 1968, included Al-Azhar Professor Muhammad El-Sayyed Husein Al-Dahabi’s paper, which declared,

Among the leading figures of heresy and sectarianism was Abdullah ibn Saba the Jew, who feigned to be a Muslim, disguising his unbelief, making a show of supporting the Prophet’s offspring (Alu-l-Bait), so as to deceive Muslims and to propagate among them his heretical and noxious views… [T]he earliest heresiarch, Abdullah ibn Saba, who was the foremost leader of sedition and heterodoxy. He, with his adherents,… feigned to be devout Muslim, and went to all lengths in their deceitfulness, by simulating to be the most fervent supporters of the offspring of the Prophet, so as to corrupt the beliefs of Muslims.

Circa 2008, a Hudson Institute Center for Religious Freedom review of Saudi Arabian textbooks, (“Update: Saudi Arabia’s Curriculum of Intolerance”), demonstrated that this traditionalist, mainstream example of Sunni Islam’s conspiratorial Jew-hatred was still being inculcated amongst Muslim youth:

The cause of the discord: The Jews conspired against Islam and its people. A sly, wicked person who sinfully and deceitfully professed Islam infiltrated (the Muslims). He was ‘Abd Allah b. Saba’ (from the Jews of Yemen) began spewing his malice and venom against the third of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, ‘Uthman (may God be pleased with him), and falsely accused him.” (Tawhid: Literature, Science, and Qur’an Memorization Section, Twelfth Grade. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Ministry of Education. Education Development, 1428-1429; 2007-2008, p. 78.)

But what is the Shiite position on Abdullah Ibn Saba? Is this literature “silent” on the subject, for example, conceding the discussion to Sunni polemicists? In fact authoritative Shiite authors claimed he was guilty of perverting and warping the message of Caliph Ali’s true (Shiite) followers. Mainstream Shiites thus designated Abdullah Ibn Saba an archetypal avatar of extreme, heretical beliefs, notably, the profession of Ali’s divinity. This profession was an egregious heresy for which Caliph Ali purportedly had Ibn Saba burned alive, as described in a Shiite hadith:

Muhammad b. Qūlawayh al-Qummī—Sa‘d b. ‘Abd Allāh b. Abī Khalaf al-Qummī—Muhammad b. ‘Uthmān al-‘Abdī—Yūnus b. ‘Abd al-Rahmān—‘Abd Allāh b. Sinān—his father (Sinān b. T{arīf)—Abū Ja‘far (Muhammad al-Bāqir) said: “‘Abd Allāh b. Saba’ made a claim to prophecy while asserting that the Commander of the Faithful (‘Alī) is God. This reached the Commander of the Faithful, and he called for him and questioned him. (Ibn Saba’) reaffirmed this and said, ‘Yes, you are he! It was cast into my heart that you indeed are God, and I am a prophet.’ The Commander of the Faithful said to him, ‘Woe to you, for Satan mocks you! Turn away from this, lest your mother be bereaved of you, and repent!’ (Ibn Saba’) refused. (‘Alī) imprisoned him and urged him to repent for three days, but he did not repent. Then ‘Alī burned him alive with fire and said, ‘Satan led him astray with false imaginings He would come to him and cast such things into his heart.’”

Caliph Ali is also claimed to have denounced Ibn Saba’s blackness, allegedly declaring,

What do I have to do with the vile, black man?

Both Iraq and Syria were ethnically-cleansed of their indigenous, pre-Islamic Jewish populations during earlier convulsions of jihadism and Islamic Jew-hatred, which punctuated the initial 25-years after the creation of Israel, and the liberation of a portion of the Jews’ ancient homeland from 13-centuries of Sharia-imposed dhimm­itude. Iran’s vestigial remnant population of dhimmi Jews—reduced in number by over 93% since the end of World War II—still suffers grinding persecution under the revitalized theocracy of Khomeini and his currently ruling heirs. Such brutal “recompense” notwithstanding, the warped, mea culpa-free, and eternally bigoted Middle East Muslim “ethos” still blames Jews for Islamdom’s own horrific present day internecine Sunni-Shiite carnage.

Given Islamdom’s ugly history, even if the devoutly cherished jihad genocide of Israel and its Jewish population transpired, Sunnis and Shiites would continue to slaughter each other with gusto. Hence, to help preclude not only Israel’s destruction, but larger, global cataclysmic outcomes for non-Muslims, I concur with Mike Konrad’s wise, cultural relativism-free prescription, “Let Them Kill Each Other”:

Iraq’s president, Maliki has asked for US assistance. Oh really? Iraq insisted on setting up its country with an Islamic constitution; against our advice, and now he wants American help.  For what?  So Iraq’s Shia can continue to run arms to Syria and Hezb’allah in Lebanon? If our State Department had men and women with intelligence instead of a love of the Qur’an, they would tell Maliki that our help would be predicated on four conditions: 1) Get rid of the Islamic constitution, and set up a secular state; 2) Recognize Israel; 3) Naturalize the Palestinians in your state; 4) Break off ties with Iran

[T]ell the Jordanians (and Saudis, too) [i]f they want our help:1) Saudis and Jordanians have to start naturalizing Palestinians; 2) Set up truly secular states; 3) protect their women;

Of course, they won’t agree.  So let them shoot it out. Heaven has offered the administration one last chance to redeem itself by doing nothing.  If it does intervene, it will be clearly seen as an attempt to prop up Islam, once again. Let the Shia and Sunni kill each other.  In the words of the late Mayor Ed Koch, “root for whoever is losing.”

Konrad’s conclusion at least may well be shared by the vast preponderance of Americans, 74% of whom now “oppose sending combat troops to Iraq.”



Read bullet | Comments »

Adherents to the Religion of Peace Continue Brutal War in Iraq, Go on Killing Spree in Kenya

Monday, June 16th, 2014 - by Bryan Preston

Another Iraqi city has fallen to the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS) as the US prepares to evacuate its embassy in Baghdad — the world’s largest embassy.

BAGHDAD – Islamic militant insurgents captured the northern Iraqi town of Tal Afar early Monday, its mayor and residents said, striking another blow to the nation’s Shiite-led government a week after it lost a vast swath of territory in the country’s north.

The town has a population of roughly 200,000 people, mostly ethnic Shiite and Sunni Turkomen, and was taken just before dawn, Mayor Abdulal Abdoul told the Associated Press.

A Tal Afar resident reached by phone confirmed the town’s fall and said militants in pickup trucks mounted with machineguns and flying black jihadi banners were roaming the streets as gunfire rang out.

The United States said Sunday it was evacuating some staff from its embassy and beefing up security as deadly explosions rocked the Iraqi capital and militants released graphic images appearing to show its fighters massacring captured Iraqi soldiers.

The U.S. State Department said in a statement that an undisclosed number of staffers will be moved to Amman, Jordan, or U.S. consulates elsewhere in Iraq not immediately threatened by the insurgent group, the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIL.

That’s sounding an awful lot like Libya in the weeks leading up to 9-11-12. Only, with a confirmed mass killing.

In Kenya, al-Shabaab Islamic terrorists have gone on a World Cup murder spree. They’re reportedly seeking Christians and shooting them.

Like the gunmen who attacked Nairobi’s Westgate Mall last year, the Mpeketoni attackers gave life-or-death religious assessment, a witness said, killing those who were not Muslim.

“They came to our house at around 8 p.m. and asked us in Swahili whether we were Muslims. My husband told them we were Christians and they shot him in the head and chest,” said Anne Gathigi.

Another resident, John Waweru, said his two brothers were killed because the attackers did not like that the brothers did not speak Somali.

“My brothers who stay next door to me were killed as I watched. I was peeping from my window and I clearly heard them speak to my brothers in Somali and it seems since my brothers did not meet their expectations, they sprayed them with bullets and moved on,” said Waweru.

NPR reports that 48 have been killed in the latest spate of violence carried out by adherents to the Religion of Peace.

The withdrawal of American forces from a war followed by epic murder campaigns feels a bit too familiar. The US withdrawal from Vietnam in 1973, agitated for for years by allegedly anti-war groups, saw the Communist regime there and the Khmer Rouge in nearby Cambodia go off on massive, largely unchallenged, campaigns of violence within a couple of years. Millions died, hundreds of thousands more became refugees.

President Obama is still determined to withdraw all American forces from Afghanistan as early as the end of this year.

Read bullet | Comments »

Caption Contest Winner: ‘Trading Private Bergdahl’ and Obama Chomps Down on D-Day

Monday, June 9th, 2014 - by Myra Adams

Credit: MAD Magazine

Thanks to all who participated in our latest successful contest based on a MAD Magazine “movie” poster.  The winning entries were judged on how well they improved upon the poster subtitle, “The Mission is a Disaster.”

There were numerous winning subtitles and one that blew us away with its subtle reminder that the Clinton’s might re-occupy the White House.

So without further adieu, the grand prize winner is JRSWINE for his R-rated subtitle, Trading Private Bergdahl: A Major Bowe Job

The second grand prize goes to Kuce for Trading Private Bergdahl: Because a bird in the hand is worth five in the Bush’s fault.

Here are the “rest of the best” in no particular order:

RockThisTown gave us –

Trading Private Bergdahl:

1. And granting him an Obamacare waiver, too!

2. “If I had  son, well, OK,  he wouldn’t look like Bergdahl…but the 5 terrorists I traded for him would!”

Allen Crowson won with – Trading Private Bergdahl: Maybe they will like us now.

Kuce cracked up the judges over and over with  –

Trading Private Bergdahl:

1. Losing one man is a tragedy, but releasing five is a voting block.

2. From the creators of Sleepless in Qatar, and You’ve Got Ca-Mail

3. An EXPLOSIVE new release starring Mohammad, Larry, Curly, Shemp & introducing Abdul as Bob the Bombmaker

Patjenn entered the winners circle with:

Trading Private Bergdahl:

1. “But we got an Afghani Falafel recipe too.”

2. “Terrorism? What, Me Worry?”

Cfbleachers our Caption King emeritus entertained with:

Trading Private Bergdahl:

1.The Mission is the Message

2. Hey, We Fallujahed You Again

3. Obama Is Dead And The Taliban Is Resurrected

4. Lyin, Triggers and Beards, Oh My

And before cfcleachers got the contest memo about writing a new subtitle, he gave us: Shaving Private Bergdahl.

There were many more highly rated “subtitles” left on the cutting room floor so go back and read them all.

Meanwhile, continuing our D-Day theme (and if you missed it, a pictorial about my visit to Omaha beach) here is what our brave Commander in Chief was doing during the 70th anniversary ceremony.

I just could not resist spitting this one out (as he should have!) See you all next time a photo is worthy of a Tatler Photo Caption Contest.

YouTube Preview Image

Read bullet | Comments »

British WWII Vet Bails on Nursing Home to Attend D-Day Ceremony

Friday, June 6th, 2014 - by Stephen Kruiser


An 89-year-old WW2 veteran disappeared from his nursing home without saying where he was going and went to France for the D-Day commemorations.

The former mayor of Hove, Bernard Jordan, left the home at 10:30 BST on Thursday, and was reported missing to Sussex Police that evening.

Staff later discovered he had joined other veterans in France and was safe and well at a hotel in Ouistreham.

Later it emerged that Mr Jordan was on a ferry back to the UK.

There is just a level of badassedness to these WWII guys that we are never going to see again. They are all very old now but the men who stopped Hitler aren’t going to let age stop them.

May God bless all of them.

Read bullet | Comments »

Walking the Sacred Sand of D-Day’s Omaha Beach

Friday, June 6th, 2014 - by Myra Adams


As a history buff, one of my lifetime travel goals was to visit the D-Day landing beaches.

Fortunately, in August of 2012 that goal was realized when my husband and I toured the Normandy region of France.

For two nights we stayed at the Hotel du Casino situated directly on the Omaha beachfront. Its prime location was the only reason we had chosen this small, rundown hotel built in the early 1950’s.

However, adding a touch of authenticity to the historic location was a long handwritten letter from General Eisenhower displayed in the reception area. During his first post-war visit to the D-Day beaches and years before he was president, Eisenhower had dined at the hotel’s restaurant and was friends with the owners.

Taking advantage of our room’s location, early one morning I stuck my camera out the bathroom window and took this photo of quiet, deserted Obama beach.


Credit: Myra Adams
Peaceful Omaha Beach in the early morning of August 19, 2012


The prominent concrete structure is a National Guard Memorial commemorating where U.S. forces suffered their greatest number of casualties immortalized in the opening scene of Saving Private Ryan.

Omaha Beach may look peaceful now, but on June 6, 1944 a major German defensive position occupied this very spot raining hell upon thousands of young American men, many of whom were seeing combat for the first time.

Within the first 24 hours of the invasion the Allies fought and won control of 50 miles of coastline divided into five landing sectors named Utah, Omaha, Gold, Juno and Sword. But victory came at a high price for it is estimated that 2,500 Americans along with 3,000 Allied troops died on D-Day and thousands more were wounded.

Hotel du Casino also has the distinction of sitting on the Mulberry Harbour beach landing.  The “Mulberries” were two portable harbours quickly built by the British immediately after the June 6 invasion to off-load an endless train of heavy equipment from the supply ships and to remove casualties from battle.


Mulberry Harbour at Omaha Beach was the highway to and from the supply ships in the American                     sector.  A second Mulberry was built off Gold Beach in the British sector.


The remains of Mulberry Harbour at Omaha Beach.     Credit: Myra Adams


A huge concrete block of Mulberry remains in front of the Hotel du Casino. Seen on the left are three National  Guard Memorial flag poles.   Credit: Myra Adams

A huge concrete block of Mulberry remains in front of the Hotel du Casino. Seen on the left are three National Guard Memorial flag poles. Credit: Myra Adams


From our hotel we walked about a half mile east to the middle of Omaha Beach and were stunned by what looked like deadly machetes’ protruding from the sand.

Les Braves Memorial on central Omaha Beach.        Credit: Myra Adams

Les Braves Memorial on central Omaha Beach. Credit: Myra Adams


The name of this huge metal memorial sculpture is Les Braves and the sculptor was a Frenchman named Anilore Banon. It was commissioned by the French government and dedicated in 2004 at the 60th anniversary of D-Day.

I guessed that it was supposed to be uncomfortable to look at, for I assumed it symbolized all the horrific death and destruction of the “longest day.” However, both my husband and I thought it was seriously awful, totally out of place and disrupted the now peaceful beach.

According to sculptor Anilore Banon here is the meaning of his masterpiece:

The Wings of Hope: So that the spirit which carried these men on 6th June 1944 continues to inspire us, reminding us that together it is always possible to change the future.

Rise of Freedom: So that the example of those who rose up against barbarity helps us remain standing strong against all forms on inhumanity.

The Wings of Fraternity: So that the surge of brotherhood always reminds us of our responsibility towards others as well as ourselves. On 6th June 1944, these men were more than soldiers, they were our brothers.

We were left wondering why there wasn’t a more visually satisfying beach sculpture to convey those same thoughts. But who are we to judge the French!

The emotional highlight of our visit was walking on Omaha Beach knowing with each step an American or Allied soldier had either died or was wounded. These thoughts haunted us as we walked.

Then over a week ago, totally out of the blue, a friend sent me this news piece from the U.K. Daily Mail.  It was about a September 23, 2013 International Peace Day event where participants hand etched 9,000 life-sized silhouettes into the sand of the D-Day landing beaches. That 9,000 number represented both Allied and German forces killed on June 6, 1944.

My friend Susan who sent me the article (a great American patriot by the way) had no idea I was planning on writing this D-Day piece and was unaware that we had ever visited the Normandy beaches.

So here, courtesy of the Daily Mail, is an artistic representation of what was inside the heads of both my husband and me while walking on Omaha Beach in August of 2012.

Dday figure 2


Dday beach figure


Every American who walks on this sacred sand is awestruck and eternally grateful for those who planned, led, participated and died in what is today the 70th anniversary of history’s largest and greatest seaborne invasion that forever changed the world.  Let us never forget!



One of the D-Day beaches in the late afternoon of June 6, 1944


Read bullet | Comments »

‘Operation Bodyguard’ a Key to Victory on D-Day

Wednesday, June 4th, 2014 - by Rick Moran

As the 70th anniversary of the D-Day landings at Normandy approaches, you will no doubt read stirring accounts of the bravery and heroism of Allied troops that were involved. You’ll read about the logistics miracle that made the landings possible as well as the subsequent thrust into France. There will be articles about the planning that went into the attack (out the window when so many units failed to land on their designated stretch of beach), and the turn of the weather upon which Operation Overlord depended.

But before the 5,000 ships, 13,000 aircraft, and 160,000 men steeled themselves for combat as they approached the Normandy coast, the battle — and probably the war — had already been won.

A gigantic deception was being perpetrated on the German army by the most colorful cast of characters ever tasked with winning a war. Double agents, con men, British noblemen, radio operators with a sense of humor, and, finally, the most colorful soldier of them all: General George S. Patton.

The deception — known as Operation Bodyguard — had a dozen different elements each designed to further the basic goal: confuse the Germans about where the landings would take place, keep them guessing about how many troops were engaged, and mask the actual date of the assault. “Bodyguard” was chosen as a name for the operation based on one of Winston Churchill’s most famous quotes: “In wartime, truth is so precious that she should always be attended by a bodyguard of lies.”

Deception had attended every major Allied landing up to that time, and we were getting very good at it. Part of the reason was that the British had broken some high-level German army codes and were able to read some of what the Nazi plans were. But for two years prior to D-Day, the British and American spymasters had come up with several gimmicks that were destined to flummox the Germans on the lead up to D-Day.

It all began with Operation Double Cross — the capture of most of the German spies in England and their transformation into the most effective double agents in Europe. The operation was run by MI5 and was overseen by the Twenty Committee chaired by Sir John Cecil Masterman, who would go on to become vice chancellor at Oxford. Masterman designed an intricate plan that had the double agents feeding disinformation to the German army intelligence organization known as the Abwehr. Most of it was useless — or even fanciful, like reporting that the British had developed electric canoes — but there was just enough truth in the reports to get the Abwehr to place great faith in their spies. By June 1944, that confidence in their intelligence would be their undoing.

Essentially, Operation Bodyguard was the overall designation for a series of smaller operations. The most important of these was Operation Fortitude South, where, with spectacular panache, British intelligence built an entire American army out of nothing — First Army Group South, or FUSAG. Using deception techniques honed in Sicily and North Africa, fake radio traffic was generated, dummy rubber landing craft, tanks, and planes were placed in plain view, “leaks” to diplomats were generated, and having General Patton, who the Germans were convinced would command FUSAG and lead the invasion, show up in a variety of locations to keep the Germans guessing about where the main thrust of the invasion would take place.

All of this disinformation was regularly “confirmed” by the Abwehr‘s trusted spies in England, who were following the orders of the Twenty Committee.

Perhaps Fortitude’s most notable success was convincing the German high command that the invasion would take place at Pas-de-Calais and not Normandy. Reading German wireless messages, the allies discovered that the German army believed that’s where the invasion would occur anyway, so it was easy to feed into their expectations.

Other elements of Bodyguard were designed to freeze German garrisons in Greece, the Adriatic, Norway, and the Bay of Biscay in France. The more troops they could pin down elsewhere, the fewer  could be rushed to Normandy in the days following the invasion. The Nazis already outnumbered Allied forces considerably in France and hiding the actual invasion site for as long as possible was paramount in order to give General Montgomery, the overall commander of the invasion forces, time to build a broad front.

Indeed, the plan worked to perfection. Fully seven weeks after the Normandy landings, Hitler and Reich Main Security Office  (who had destroyed the Abwehr in 1943) were insisting that the D-Day landings were a diversion and the blow would fall on Pas-de-Calais. By the time the German army realized their mistake, it was too late.

One final deception was carried out by the U.S. Army Air Force in the days leading up to the invasion….

Read bullet | 23 Comments »

Putin Actively Trolls Your Favorite Websites

Wednesday, June 4th, 2014 - by Susan L.M. Goldberg

BuzzFeed broke the news that the Kremlin has been actively operating a disinformation campaign targeted at readers of a number of American-based internet publications including, but not limited to, The Washington Post, The New York Times, and BuzzFeed. Additional reports name Fox News, Huffington Post, The Blaze and World Net Daily in the list of targets. Russian agents would act as trolls on these sites, filling comment sections with various forms of anti-American propaganda.

In a report dated May 21, Internet Research Agency commercial director Svetlana Boiko discussed the progress of the trolling project’s $75,000 trial period, which began April 10. The report says that during that period, the trolls left more than 2,500 comments on 30 different news websites, tweeted 1,220 times from 12 accounts, wrote 85 Facebook posts, posted 175 times in an unspecified number of forums, and made five bizarre YouTube videos attacking the U.S. government andHarry Potter star Daniel Radcliffe.

As with many previous disinformation campaigns, the goal of the trolling operation is to:

…turn public opinion against the U.S. government on 40 different subjects ranging from Russia’s role in the world and the Ukraine crisis to unrelated American domestic issues like gun rights, taxes, and religion. The trolls also campaigned heavily against U.S. President Barack Obama on Twitter, where they used the hashtag #Obama to promote the keywords “fuck obama,” “ass obama,” and “ObamaCare.” The most popular account, @I_am_ass_, has 3,363 followers.

Millions of dollars are being spent on the Kremlin’s latest disinformation campaign, meant to manipulate internet freedom abroad while simultaneously increasing control within Russian territory:

The bizarre hive of social media activity appears to be part of a two-pronged Kremlin campaign to claim control over the internet, launching a million-dollar army of trolls to mold American public opinion as it cracks down on internet freedom at home.

A new law that comes into effect in August also forces bloggers with more than 3,000 followers to register with the government. The move entails significant and cumbersome restrictions for bloggers, who previously wrote free of Russia’s complicated media law bureaucracy, while denying them anonymity and opening them up to political pressure.

“The internet has become the main threat — a sphere that isn’t controlled by the Kremlin,” said Pavel Chikov, a member of Russia’s presidential human rights council. “That’s why they’re going after it. Its very existence as we know it is being undermined by these measures.”

The trolls have also set up YouTube accounts to post anti-American and anti-LGBT propaganda videos.  Comments on these videos illustrate the poor English skills of some of the Kremlin’s trolls, one of the dead giveaways of the now defamed disinformation campaign.

Read bullet | Comments »

New Caption Contest: ‘Trading Private Bergdahl’

Wednesday, June 4th, 2014 - by Myra Adams
Credit: MAD Magazine

Credit: MAD Magazine


Another movie poster caption contest, what fun!

Credit to MAD Magazine for originating the poster but I saw it first on BizPac Review.

Just in time for the 70th anniversary of D-Day we can all celebrate by captioning Trading Private Bergdahl.

The subtitle is “The Mission is a Disaster” but I know all of you movie fans out there can do much better.

I just LOVE this contest for two reasons.

First, I swear my teen-age personality was partially shaped by reading MAD Magazine in the late 60′s and early 70′s.

Second, since the D-Day anniversary is days away, and having visited the landing beaches two years ago, I am currently writing a D-Day piece highlighting some of my photos. So watch this space!

Now, get crackin’ on captions and think how proud General Eisenhower would be of our current Commander in Chief.


Read bullet | 39 Comments »

12-Year-Old Girls Plotted Murder, Stabbed Girl Nearly Two-Dozen Times

Monday, June 2nd, 2014 - by Bryan Preston

This is so disturbing.

Police say two 12-year-old girls lured a friend into some woods in southeastern Wisconsin where one of them held her down as the other stabbed her 19 times.

The 12-year-old victim survived the attack on Saturday in Waukesha and police say her condition is stable.

Authorities say the suspects had planned to kill the victim for several months. Police say both girls were interested in a website containing stories of death and horror.

The victim survived and her attackers are expected to be in court today.

Lately we’ve all heard, and I’ve even written, stories focusing on the disturbing militarization of the police. It is disturbing. But this story is a flip side to that — the police should not be militarizing and buying up-armored tank-like vehicles and all that, but on the other hand, they are dealing with a less predictable environment than we’ve had in the past. Crime overall is down, but what might be called crazy crime is still out there and it’s likely that as the family weakens and society disintegrates at its foundation, and kids are less and less productively occupied in our post-agriculture economy, and kids grow up in a more and more coarse media environment with social media amplifying everything to maddening levels, there will be more crazy crime. Police don’t always know what they’re dealing with when they go into any environment. Could be a kid with a knife, or a barking dog that never deserved to be shot — or they could be facing a violent wacko looking to take out his whole neighborhood and commit suicide by cop. Or the cops could be in the wrong house, making deadly mistakes because they think they’re entitled to act like Marines in a war zone.

Life isn’t always as simple as we’d like it to be, where we can just denounce “bad militarized cop!” and never think about how things got to be the way they are. Sure, big government is feeling its oats. It’s also largely doing that because alternatives to its power — namely, the family, the church, private institutions generally — are falling prey to libertinism, and chaos increases as a result. Government is also to blame, to a great extent, for fostering the destruction of those institutions that challenge its hold on us.

Along these lines, there’s a push these days among some younger libertarian-flavored folks on the right to do away with things like mandatory minimum sentencing. But how did we get to the point where mandatory minimums became so prevalent? A millennial probably has no idea, as it’s certainly not taught in schools, but those of us who lived through the 1970s and 1980s remember well, or should.

It became a routine thing in those decades for a multiple murderer to get handed a light prison sentence by liberal lifer judges, judges who based their weak justice on leftwing arguments placing poverty or social injustice on trial instead of dealing with the crimes at hand. Parole boards also routinely freed violent criminals who had been sentenced to “life” but only actually spent a few short years in prison on conviction for heinous crimes. That judicial activism put dangerous rapists and killers back on the streets to terrorize the public, and provided little sense that violent criminals would face justice, and that their victims or victims’ families would ever get any sense of justice. Using prison as a deterrent to crime just about disappeared.

Mandatory minimum sentences became the answer, forcing through legislation what those lifer liberal judges had proven themselves untrustworthy to do. Mandatory minimums were a reaction to judges who had proven that they would misuse their power and leave us all exposed to terrible criminals. Crime is down over the last couple decades at least in part because we decided, as a society, to force the system to keep violent criminals locked up. And also, because state gun laws have opened up and allowed more Americans to arm ourselves, and state castle laws have tilted the balance in favor of the law-abiding property and gun owner. The law wasn’t always tilted in favor of the law-abiding. It was also a routine thing in the past to hear about the man or woman who shot a suspect breaking into their house in the middle of the night, only to have the suspect survive and sue them, and for the law-abiding person to find themselves facing charges from the local DA.

Maybe mandatory minimums aren’t the answer. But what is the answer to keeping liberal judges from abusing their positions to pervert justice and blame the innocent for the actions of the guilty? It’s easy to rail from a libertarian perspective that mandatory minimums are wrong. It’s much harder to come up with an alternative that stands a chance of getting through legislatures, and stands any chance of doing any good for law-abiding Americans.

Opinionated rants are so easy that everyone can do them, even people who would be wiser to close their mouths tight and open up their minds a bit.

Read bullet | Comments »

President Obama, More of an Islamic ‘Apostate’ Than Meriam Ibrahim, Must Demand Her Immediate Release From Sudan and Grant Her Asylum in The U.S.

Friday, May 30th, 2014 - by Andrew G. Bostom

Last night, interviewed by Fox News’ Megyn Kelly (video embedded below), Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council, drew attention to the organization’s petition on behalf of Sudanese Christian Meriam Ibrahim. I have described Meriam’s plight—a victim of the Sharia—previously (here, here, here, and here).

In brief, falsely accused of “apostasy” despite her lifelong Christian faith (see below), Meriam was convicted of this Sharia-based “crime” was well as “adultery”—her valid 2011 marriage to a Christian man—and naturalized U.S. citizen—having been “annulled.” Meriam, then near term pregnant, was sentenced to be hanged to death for apostasy, preceded by 100 lashes for adultery. The sentence was deferred until Meriam gave birth, which she did this week (albeit while apparently chained, and now appearing alarmingly thin), to a baby girl, Maya. Meriam and her toddler son Martin—almost certainly an American citizen by in-wedlock birth—have been imprisoned since February in a women’s penitentiary in Omdurman, and now Maya is incarcerated with them as well. Although Meriam’s execution may be deferred longer until Maya is weaned, crowded and unsanitary conditions in the prison acutely threaten the health of Meriam’s newborn and toddler—again, both children ostensibly U.S. citizens.

The Family Research Council (FRC) petition reads as follows:

We strongly urge the administration to take action in the case of Dr. Meriam Ibrahim, the Sudanese mother who with her toddler and newborn baby (who pending the proper documentation are American citizens) is languishing inside a prison in Khartoum. While Meriam awaits execution for the “crime” of converting to Christianity, her children are forced to be at her side in a prison that a 2008 U.N. document reported as having an infant mortality rate of one per day in the summer. No innocent child should be in this situation. We urge you to pressure the Sudanese government to release Meriam and her children so she can escape execution and possible death of her children and be rejoined with her husband in the U.S. Please grant her expedited safe haven in the U.S., where she could seek asylum.

Perkins, during last night’s interview, appealed directly to President Obama’s administration, specifically Secretary of Homeland Security Jeh Johnson, to unilaterally grant Meriam and her children refugee status.

What Perkins’/FRC’s noble campaign has declined to highlight is that per Sharia, Islamic law “criteria,” and Muslim societal mores, Meriam Ibrahim’s formal identification with Islam is relatively tenuous compared to President Obama’s.

I described Meriam Ibrahim’s flimsy “Islamic identity,” along with the objectively unjust, if Sharia-based “legal” effort to invalidate her forthright claims, two weeks ago (5/14/14):

Ibrahim’s Sudanese Muslim father abandoned the family when she was 6 years old, leaving her to be raised by her Ethiopian Orthodox Christian mother. During a March 4, 2014 “hearing” Ibrahim testified before the Public Order Court that she is a Christian, showing her marriage certificate—which designates her as Christian—as formal proof of her religion. Moreover, three potential witnesses from Western Sudan who traveled to the hearing to validate Ibrahim’s lifelong adherence to Christianity were denied the opportunity to provide evidence. Indeed the refusal to accept such witness testimony, and denying a priori the validity of Ibrahim’s own claims, would be entirely consistent with a Sharia Court’s rejection (or dismissal) of non-Muslim testimony because infidels are deemed to be of a lower order of truthfulness.

Back in September, 2008, I reviewed the evidence of then Senator Obama’s childhood experience with Islam, which was considerably more involved and intimate than Meriam Ibrahim’s. As I then noted then,

Sober, independent analyses by academics, including published essays in The Christian Science Monitor, and The New York Times, concur that Obama’s childhood experience of Islam—as perceived by Muslims from Islamic societies, in particular—has two critically important, and inter-related ramifications: his status as a Muslim; and more ominously, as an apostate from Islam.

These specific details emerged, in summary:

During his childhood years in Indonesia, Barack Obama was enrolled as a Muslim (see here, and here), at his primary schools (this is confirmed, conclusively, in a registration document–which the Associated Press photographed – made available on Jan. 24, 2007, by the Fransiskus Assisi school in Jakarta, Indonesia, demonstrating that his Muslim step-father listed Obama’s boyhood religion as Islam [and later confirmed, in 2012, here]), and also attended the mosque during that period. 

Tine Hahiyary, a former teacher at one of these schools, claimed that the young Obama actively took part in “mengaji” classes (consistent with devout Islamic education), which instruct students to read the Koran in Arabic. And the Indonesian daily Banjarmasin Post interviewed Rony Amir, a Muslim classmate  of the young Obama, who characterized Obama as “…previously quite religious in Islam” While disputing Obama’s childhood Muslim religiosity, a subsequent Chicago Tribune report still concedes that the young Obama was at least an irregularly practicing Muslim, who occasionally prayed with his step-father in a mosque.

I added that regardless of Obama’s childhood Muslim piety,

one must also bear in mind how contemporary (and classical) Islamic Law views the offspring of any marriage between a Muslim man (Obama’s birth father and step-father were both Muslims), and a non-Muslim woman. Sheikh ‘Abdus-Sattar Fathallah As-Sa`eed, professor of Koranic Exegesis and Koranic Sciences at Al-Azhar University — for more a thousand years, the pre-eminent center of Sunni Islamic religious education — in a fatwa issued a June 20, 2002, reiterated plainly the Islamic principle that paternity determines (Muslim) religious identity for a child born of a Muslim father, and a non-Muslim wife:  “There is nothing wrong, as far as Islam is concerned, that a Muslim man marries a Christian woman, but he should stipulate (in the marriage contract) that any children from the marriage will be Muslims.”

Not surprisingly then, I concluded the predominant understanding about Obama in Islamic societies, as of late 2008 was that,

the Democratic Presidential nominee, at minimum, has “Muslim origins” (as stated explicitly for example in the Egyptian newspaper, Al-Masri al-Youm). Libyan dictator Mu‘ammar al-Qaddafi has referred to Obama as “…a black citizen of Kenyan African origins, a Muslim, who had studied in an Islamic school in Indonesia.” Analyses by Al-Jazeera have called Obama a “non-Christian man,” made reference to his “Muslim Kenyan” father, and observed, tellingly, that “Obama may not want to be counted as a Muslim but Muslims are eager to count him as one of their own.”

Six years later the predicament of Meriam Ibrahim—whose husband, and likely two children as well, are bona fide U.S. citizens—should resonate in a profound and personal way with President Obama. What I admonished then Presidential candidate Senator Obama to do on September 11, 2008, is now more urgent, and should be tied to a formal grant of asylum to Meriam Ibrahim and her children by Mr. Obama as current U.S. President:

Mr. Obama has thus far squandered the unparalleled opportunity to highlight and extol a profoundly important virtue of this flawed, but still great country of ours, personified by his life story: America’s singular, unwavering support for true freedom of conscience.

Surely if Obama is to live up to his followers (and his own) pretensions of being a “transformative” figure, then he should be ready to elucidate, frankly, the utter lack of freedom of conscience in the Muslim world, relative to the US; why his own life trajectory demonstrates this difference; and how the fight against global jihadism is, at its core, about the protection of this most profoundly important Western ideal.

Meriam, with Martin to her right, holding new born baby girl Maya.



Read bullet | 7 Comments »

How Far Back Do the VA Scandals Go?

Thursday, May 29th, 2014 - by Paula Bolyard


Scandal and ineptitude at the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs are nothing new. In fact, the federal bureaucracy of the VA was birthed amid a massive backlog of claims from post-WWI veterans and corruption on an enormous scale during the scandal-plagued administration of President Warren G. Harding. Unfortunately, our national leaders failed to learn from the failures that were evident at the genesis of the behemoth government program that portends to care for the needs of our nation’s veterans. Instead, it has grown and become even more unwieldy over the last hundred years.

In 1921 Congress passed the Sweet Act, creating the Veterans’ Bureau, which consolidated several veterans programs into one federal agency. The number of backlogged claims from WWI veterans at the time was massive. An editorial in the American Legion Weekly presciently warned at the time that “The difficulty of inducing Congress to enact the Sweet Bill should clear any illusions from the minds of ex-servicemen. Congress is going to give veterans of the World War only such considerations as it finds inescapable.”

The American Legion Weekly reported that when the Sweet Act passed,

There were 248,411 veterans alleging disability with claims for disability rejected. There were, according to experts, between fifty and seventy-five thousand veterans suffering from tuberculosis and mental diseases receiving no hospital treatment, care, or rehabilitation. There were 41,339 disabled veterans declared eligible for vocational training and not taking it, 16,071 with claims for training pending, 15,776 with claims for training rejected. A grand total of 471,597 claims against the Government, a goodly portion of them at least just, deserving and needy ones, without action or results.

President Harding tasked Charles R. Forbes, a longtime friend and poker buddy, with running the new federal bureaucracy, giving him control of a $500 million budget the first year. A veteran himself, Forbes had previously served on the Bureau of War Risk Insurance.

Though he promised to “right many of the wrongs that have been done disabled veterans” and vowed there would be “speedy adjudication of claims,” Forbes instead used the position for his own personal financial gain and to benefit his cronies, leaving most of the veterans’ claims rejected or unaddressed, despite 30,000 new hires at the Veterans’ Bureau (many of them his friends and associates). Forbes also required bribes and kickbacks in return for contracts to build VA hospitals, many of the deals secured during “joy rides” with his contractor friends to inspect new hospital sites. During their nights of partying, drinking, and gambling, Forbes cut deals (sometimes spelled out in secret codes) with contractors who were willing to pay up. In one instance, Forbes demanded that contractor E.H. Mortimer pay him $5000 in return for a contract to build a $17 million hospital. Forbes was having an affair with Mortimer’s wife at the time.

Read bullet | 6 Comments »

Bus-ted: Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s Canonical Islamic Jew-Hatred

Wednesday, May 28th, 2014 - by Andrew G. Bostom

Kudos to Pamela Geller for her new bus advertisement campaign countering the relentless, defamatory propaganda jihad against Israel. Ms. Geller’s latest effort introduces the general public to the Islam in Islamic Jew-hatred via one of its major 20th century avatars: the ex-Mufti of Jerusalem, prototype Palestinian Muslim jihadist, and longstanding Nazi collaborator, Hajj Amin el-Husseini (b. 1895-97; d. 1974).


Just 6-months earlier, in November 2013, I released the first detailed, textual analysis of el-Husseini’s canonical Islamic Jew-hatred, The Mufti’s Islamic Jew-Hatred: What the Nazis Learned from the “Muslim Pope”.

Prior assessments focusing on el-Husseini’s World War II era collaboration with the Nazis have argued that the Mufti’s murderous, Jew-hating ideology was simply another manifestation of Nazi evil, transplanted to a local “nationalistic struggle” in the Middle East. A more recent and “nuanced,” if parallel negationist trend, which is now widely prevalent, claims that el-Husseini’s canonical Islamic Jew-hatred somehow represented a sui generis “Nazification” of Islam, which has “persisted” into our era. My study demonstrated that neither of these conventional, pseudo-academic tropes withstands any serious, objective scrutiny.

On June 30, 1922, a joint resolution of both Houses of Congress of the United States unanimously endorsed the “Mandate for Palestine,” confirming the irrevocable right of Jews to settle in the area of Palestine—anywhere between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. The Congressional record contains a statement of support from New York Rep. Walter Chandler which includes an observation, about “Turkish and Arab agitators . . . preaching a kind of holy war [jihad] against . . . the Jews” of Palestine.

During this same era within Palestine, a strong Arab Muslim irredentist current—epitomized by Hajj Amin el-Husseini—promulgated the forcible restoration of sharia-mandated dhimmitude for Jews via jihad. Indeed, two years before he orchestrated the murderous anti-Jewish riots of 1920, that is, in 1918, Hajj Amin el-Husseini stated plainly to a Jewish coworker (at the Jerusalem Governorate), I. A. Abbady, “This was and will remain an Arab land . . . the Zionists will be massacred to the last man. . . . Nothing but the sword will decide the future of this country.”

Despite his role in fomenting the1920 pogroms against Palestinian Jews, el-Husseini was pardoned and subsequently appointed mufti of Jerusalem by the British high commissioner, in May 1921, a title he retained, following the Ottoman practice, for the remainder of his life.

Throughout his public career, the mufti relied upon traditional Koranic anti-Jewish motifs to arouse the Arab street. For example, during the incitement which led to the 1929 Arab revolt in Palestine, he called for combating and slaughtering “the Jews.” not merely Zionists. In fact, most of the Jewish victims of the 1929 Arab revolt were Jews from the centuries-old dhimmi communities (for example, in Hebron), as opposed to recent settlers identified with the Zionist movement.

The mufti remained unrelenting in his espousal of a virulent, canonical Islamic Jew-hatred as the focal tenet of his ideology, before, during, and in the aftermath of World War II, and the creation of the State of Israel. He was also a committed supporter of global jihad movements, urging a “full struggle” against the Hindus of India (as well as the Jews of Israel) before delegates at the February 1951 World Muslim Congress: “We shall meet next with sword in hand on the soil of either Kashmir or Palestine.”

Declassified intelligence documents from 1942, 1947, 1952, and 1954 confirm the mufti’s own Caliphate desires in repeated references from contexts as diverse as Turkey, Egypt, Jerusalem, and Pakistan, and also include discussions of major Islamic conferences dominated by the mufti, which were attended by a broad spectrum of Muslim leaders literally representing the entire Islamic world (including Shia leaders from Iran), that is, in Karachi from February 16–19, 1952, and Jordanian-occupied Jerusalem, December 3–9, 1953. Viewed in their totality these data do not support the current standard assessment of the mufti as merely a Palestinian Arab nationalist, rife with a “transplanted” Jew-hatred.

Paul Berman articulated an unabashed formulation of the broadly held “Nazification of Islam” thesis, proclaiming, that abetted by the Nazis, el-Husseini “monstrously,” and “infernally,” “blurred Islam and Nazism,” achieving

A victory of Himmler’s Islam…A victory for the Islam of fanaticism and hatred over its arch-rival, the Islam of generosity and civilization.

During 1938, a booklet Muhammad Sabri edited, “Islam, Judentum, Bolschewismus (Islam, Jewry, Bolshevism)”, was published in Berlin by Junker-Duennhaupt [Dünnhaupt]. Sabri’s booklet included Hajj Amin el-Husseini’s 1937 declaration—also deemed by some as a “fatwa” (an Islamic religious ruling)—appealing to the worldwide Muslim umma. El-Husseini’s declaration was extracted and reprinted, separately, by the Nazi regime as “Islam und Judentum (Islam and Jewry),”and distributed to Muslim SS units in Bosnia, Croatia, and the Soviet Union.


Read bullet | Comments »

Putin’s Latest Silly Love Song

Wednesday, May 28th, 2014 - by Susan L.M. Goldberg


The President of Russia’s Twitter account is buzzing with the unveiling of a monument dedicated to Sergei Mikhalkov, the undercover KGB agent who penned the Soviet anthem for Stalin:

As a 29-year-old in 1942, Mikhalkov’s work drew the attention of the Soviet Union‘s leader Joseph Stalin, who commissioned him to write lyrics for a new national anthem. At the time, the country was deeply embroiled in World War II and Stalin wanted a Russian theme for the national anthem, to replace the Internationale.

Mikhalkov penned words to accompany a musical score by the composer Alexander Alexandrov (1883–1946) that became known as National Anthem of the Soviet Union. The new anthem was presented to Stalin in the summer of 1943 and was introduced as the country’s new anthem on January 1, 1944.

On the death of Stalin in 1953, the lyrics, which mentioned him by name, were discarded during the process of destalinization and the anthem continued to be used without words. Mikhalkov wrote new lyrics in 1970, but they were not submitted to the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet until May 27, 1977. The new lyrics, which removed any reference to Stalin, were approved on September 1 and were made official with the printing of the new Soviet Constitution in October 1977.

…Use of the Soviet anthem, with Mikhalkov’s lyrics, continued until 1991, when it was retired by President Boris Yeltsin after the USSR disintegrated. However, whenVladimir Putin took over from Yeltsin in 2000, he began to clamor for a restoration of Alexandrov’s music in place of Yeltsin’s choice.

Comments on the post were positive in nature, including this one, a possible Mikhalkov lyric, translated from the Russian via Google:

Sleeps Moscow. In the capital the night
At this late hour of
Only Stalin could not sleep
- Stalin thinks about us.

And for Putin, that anthem of disinformation is a peaceful thought, indeed. Perfect for the bucolic setting of one of the many Russian parks designed to placate the nation’s stifled intelligentsia.

Read bullet | Comments »