Archive for August 2017

Left-Wing Extremism Feeds an Extremist Reaction

August 13, 2017

Left-Wing Extremism Feeds an Extremist Reaction, The Point (Front Page Magazine), Daniel Greenfield, August 13, 2017

(Violence in Charlottesville, Virginia. Racist supremacists, of all races, are properly disparaged. So are those who seek to eliminate artifacts of our history. Please see also, We are losing America. Here are some reasons and possible solutions. — DM)

The Confederate memorial crisis was an utterly unnecessary confrontation pushed by Black Nationalists and exploited by Neo-Nazis.

For all the self-righteousness in the media, it was the media which recently glorified the leftist street violence of Antifa, which glamorizes and promotes Black Lives Matter, which pushes narratives and agendas that promote extremism on both sides. There are consequences to that. And we’re seeing some of them now.

*****************************

A functioning society requires a middle ground. There has to be someplace where different sides can meet and negotiate their differences. Extremism happens when one or both sides eliminate that middle ground. And then all that’s left is a brutal fight for power.

The left is up on its high horse after the latest violence. But it’s the Democrats who allowed themselves to be taken over by the left. The extremism boosted Black Nationalist racist groups which were quickly mainstreamed.

Democrats demand that Republicans condemn Neo-Nazis. And certainly everyone should make their disgust clear. But Democrats have publicly endorsed Black Lives Matter. And Black Nationalists are just another racist hate group. Who operate with the support of the Democrats.

The Confederate memorial crisis was an utterly unnecessary confrontation pushed by Black Nationalists and exploited by Neo-Nazis.

After the Civil War, Americans achieved a modus vivendi. The Union was preserved, but the South was allowed to honor its dead and its leaders. The campaign against Confederate memorials was the best possible present that the Neo-Nazis of the Alt-Right could have received. And so both sets of extremists fed on each other. That’s how it works. And the blame goes to the left which lit the spark.

For all the self-righteousness in the media, it was the media which recently glorified the leftist street violence of Antifa, which glamorizes and promotes Black Lives Matter, which pushes narratives and agendas that promote extremism on both sides. There are consequences to that. And we’re seeing some of them now.

If the left wants a functioning society with a middle ground, then it must restrain its extremists. If it wants to unleash its extremists and then decry the violence, it’s the source of the problem.

World View: China and India Prepare for Border War at Doklam Plateau

August 13, 2017

 

World View: China and India Prepare for Border War at Doklam Plateau, BreitbartJohn J. Xenakis, August 12, 2017

(Please see also, China and India on brink of armed conflict as hopes of resolution to border dispute fade. — DM)

This morning’s key headlines from GenerationalDynamics.com

  • India reinforces its military in preparation for war
  • Bhutan makes it clear to China that its ally is India
  • SCMP: China and India on brink of war that could spread to the Indian Ocean

India reinforces its military in preparation for war

Chinese soldier stands guard on the Chinese side of the border crossing between India and China. (AFP)

India’s military have raised the alert level in the region surrounding the Doklam Plateau, along the Line of Actual Control (LAC) the forms the border between India and China.

For almost two months, China and India have each had 300 soldiers just 100 meters apart on the plateau, 3,000 meters above sea level. India is not increasing its troop strength on the plateau itself, but is bringing troops into bases nearby, and is raising the alert level in preparation for war.

The border dispute involving China, India, and Bhutan over the Doklam Plateau continues to be unresolved and, in fact, appears to be escalating. As we have been reporting, a standoff between India’s army and China’s army on Doklam plateau in the tiny country of Bhutan. China is attempting to annex the region, and on June 16 sent Chinese troops and construction workers to begin road construction. Bhutan troops tried to prevent the Chinese troop incursion, but they were overrun. India sent in its own troops, saying that it did so when Bhutan invoked a treaty with India and asked for help, resulting in a standoff.

No bullets have been fired yet but, as we recently reported, China appears to have set an August 19 deadline for India to withdraw its troops from the Doklam Plateau.

Even if August 19 passes with no military action, there’s another hard deadline: The Communist People’s Congress in Beijing in November. If the standoff has not been resolved in time for that meeting, it could be a major humiliation for China’s president Xi Jinping.

In addition to setting deadlines, China has been using every possible form of psychological warfare on India to try to force them to withdraw their soldiers, and allow the Chinese military to invade and annex Doklam Plateau. Some of the techniques used by China include the following:

  • Claim that India has invaded Chinese territory, even though India’s troops are on the Doklam Plateau, which belongs to Bhutan.
  • Warn India to avoid a repeat of their loss in a 1962 border war, without mentioning China’s loss in a 1967 border war.
  • Warn India that if it doesn’t back down, then China will invade Jammu and Kashmir.

India has moved its army to a state of “no war, no peace,” which is an alert state where soldiers take up positions that are earmarked for them in the event of a war. Reuters and Indian Express and India Times and Financial Express and International Business Times (India).

Bhutan makes it clear to China that its ally is India

From the beginning of this crisis, China’s media have insisted that Bhutan and China have no dispute, implying that the two countries agree that the Doklam Plateau belongs to China, not Bhutan.

Furthermore, China’s media have insisted that Bhutan did not want India’s intervention and that Indian troops had entered the region in order to gain control of Bhutan.

Bhutan has, in fact, tried to avoid inflaming the situation, and has said little, hoping that India and China find a peaceful resolution.

However, on Thursday, the government of Bhutan issued a statement made its position very clear:

Our position on the border issue of Doklam is very clear. Please refer to our statement which has been published on the web site of Bhutan’s Foreign Ministry on June 29, 2017.

The referenced June 29 statement is as follows:

Press Release June 29, 2017

In view of the many queries raised recently in the media regarding the Bhutan – China boundary in the Doklam area the Ministry of Foreign Affairs would like to convey the following:

On 16th June 2017, the Chinese Army started constructing a motorable road from Dokola in the Doklam area towards the Bhutan Army camp at Zompelri. Boundary talks are ongoing between Bhutan and China and we have written agreements of 1988 and 1998 stating that the two sides agree to maintain peace and tranquility in their border areas pending a final settlement on the boundary question, and to maintain status quo on the boundary as before March 1959. The agreements also state that the two sides will refrain from taking unilateral action, or use of force, to change the status quo of the boundary.

Bhutan has conveyed to the Chinese side, both on the ground and through the diplomatic channel, that the construction of the road inside Bhutanese territory is a direct violation of the agreements and affects the process of demarcating the boundary between our two countries. Bhutan hopes that the status quo in the Doklam area will be maintained as before 16 June 2017.

Once again, we have a situation where China’s claims are simply lies. As usual, we have to point out that China has lied repeatedly and continuously about its claims and criminal activities in the South China Sea, and so there is no reason to believe any claims they make about Bhutan’s territory on the Doklam Plateau.

As we have said before, China is a highly militarized international criminal state, but at some point, they will go one step too far, and bring an enormous catastrophe on themselves and the world. India Times (8-Aug) and Kashmir Monitor and Bhutan Foreign Ministry

SCMP: China and India on brink of war that could spread to the Indian Ocean

Among Chinese media publications, we often quote China Daily and Global Times. Both are strictly controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, though Global Times is far more nationalistic.

The Hong-Kong based South China Morning Post (SCMP) is a bit more independent than the other two. That is not to say that they would directly confront and contradict Beijing policy – if they did, Beijing would probably have the editors abducted, thrown into a pit and tortured. But they are able to print analyses that are a bit more balanced than the pure propaganda of the other two.

According to an SCMP analysis, both China and India are preparing for an armed conflict in the event that negotiations fail.

The article quotes a Chinese military source:

The PLA [People’s Liberation Army] will not seek to fight a ground war with Indian troops early on. Instead it will deploy aircraft and strategic missiles to paralyse Indian mountain divisions stationed in the Himalayas on the border with China. [Indian troops will probably hold out for] no more than a week.

Chinese military sources believe that any conflict will be controlled, and not spill over into other disputed areas, of which there are currently three along the 2,000 km border.

However, an Indian defense expert, says that a conflict will not be limited, and could extend into the Indian Ocean.

China is vulnerable in the maritime area, because China is heavily reliant on imported fuel and, according to figures published by state media, more than 80 per cent of its oil imports travel via the Indian Ocean or Strait of Malacca.

Dr Rajeev Ranjan Chaturvedy of the National University of Singapore says:

Any Chinese military adventurism will get a fitting reply from the Indian military.

Certainly, it will be detrimental for both, but if Beijing escalates [the conflict], it will not be limited. Perhaps, it may extend to the maritime domain as well.

If China engages in a military offensive against India, New Delhi will take all necessary measures … [and will] respond to Chinese actions in its own way. Why only a border war? It could escalate to a full-scale India-China war. South China Morning Post (Hong Kong)

Mossad Chief warns: Iran is taking over the Middle East

August 13, 2017

Mossad Director Yossi Cohen warns Iran is moving to fill the void left by ISIS, become dominant power in the Middle East.

Tzvi Lev, Hezi Baruch, 13/08/17 15:17

Source: Mossad Chief warns: Iran is taking over the Middle East – Israel National News

Mossad chief Yossi Cohen ,Flash90

Mossad Director Yossi Cohen briefed the cabinet Sunday, warning that the Iranian regime is expanding its control across the Middle East through proxy forces in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, and Yemen.

“In places where Iran’s presence is limited, Iran is working to fill the void.” he said.

Cohen also said that Iran has not abandoned its aspirations to become a nuclear power, and that the nuclear agreement signed between the world powers and Iran only strengthens Iranian aggression in the region.

The Mossad head also told ministers that Iran’s economy has gotten stronger ever since signing the nuclear accords in 2015, a trend that has been reinforced by recent international agreements.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said during the discussion that Cohen’s assessment proves that the agreement between the major world powers and Iran was fundamentally unsound, and noted that Israel is not obligated in any way to the international agreements signed by Iran.

“Israel will continue to act determinedly and in a variety of ways to defend itself from these threats,” said the Prime Minister.

Netanyahu had been a major opponent of the Iran deal, lobbying members of the US Congress to vote against the plan, and warning that the accords would pave the way for Iran to become a nuclear power.

United States President Donald Trump has been significantly more hostile towards Iran then his predecessor Barack Obama, and blasted Iran in July for not “living up to the spirit” of the nuclear deal it reached in 2015 with world powers.

 “I don’t think Iran is in compliance. I don’t think they’re living up to the spirit of the agreement,” Trump had told reporters at his golf club retreat in New Jersey.

Trump wants to destabilize Latin America by threatening Caracas with force – Venezuelan FM

August 13, 2017

Source: Trump wants to destabilize Latin America by threatening Caracas with force – Venezuelan FM — RT News

© Goran Tomasevic / Reuters

Threats of a military operation against Venezuela are an attempt by US President Donald Trump to drag Latin America into a conflict and destabilize the continent, said Jorge Arreaza, the Venezuelan foreign minister.

“Venezuela rejects in the most categorical and convincing manner the unfriendly and hostile statements by US President Donald Trump… in which he threatens a military invasion against our homeland,” Arreaza told broadcaster Venezuelana de Televisión.

Read more

© Mario Tama

According to the minister, Trump’s real aim is not Venezuela, but the whole Latin American continent, which he wants to see in turmoil.

“The reckless threats of President Donald Trump are designed to draw Latin America and the Caribbean into a conflict that will irrevocably violate stability, peace and security in our region,” he said.

Despite its complicated relations with Caracas, the South American trade bloc Mercosur also said that it rejects the use of force against Venezuela, Reuters reported.

Mercosur members regard dialogue and diplomacy as the only possible option for achieving democracy in Venezuela, a statement by Argentina’s Foreign Ministry said.

The bloc’s founding members – Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay and Uruguay – opted to indefinitely suspend Venezuela’s participation last week, saying that Caracas had failed to include essential Mercosur’s trade and human rights norms into domestic legislation.

READ MORE: Venezuela’s chief prosecutor ousted & blocked from office amid ongoing protests (PHOTOS, VIDEOS)

On Friday, Trump blasted Venezuela’s leader, President Nicolas Maduro, as a “dictator,” saying that the crisis in the country could prompt a US military response.

“The people are suffering and they are dying. We have many options for Venezuela, including a possible military option if necessary,” Trump said.

However, the US Department of Defense said that “the Pentagon has received no orders” from the president regarding a Venezuela operation.

Read more

FILE PHOTO © Carlos Garcia Rawlins

The White House also claimed that it had declined Maduro’s request to have a phone call with Trump, saying the US leader “will gladly speak” with his Venezuelan counterpart “as soon as democracy is restored.”

Earlier this week, Washington imposed sanctions on eight Venezuelan officials, including President Maduro and the brother of late ex-President Hugo Chavez.

The restrictions were introduced after the US labeled as “illegitimate” the Constituent Assembly elections, which took place in Venezuela in June.

The opposition in the country also refused to recognize the vote, with the move adding even more tension to the unstable situation in the country.

READ MORE: Venezuela inaugurates Constituent Assembly amid street unrest

Venezuela has been gripped by violent protests since April, which have already led to around 120 deaths, according to Reuters.

Caroline Glick: McMaster’s Policies Completely Contradict Trump’s, Natural Continuation of Obama’s

August 13, 2017

Source: Caroline Glick: McMaster’s Policies Completely Contradict Trump’s, Natural Continuation of Obama’s

Glick said the problem with McMaster is that “in key issue after key issue, particularly in relation to the Middle East,” he “opposes the things that the president ran on and that he was elected on.”

She quoted Ayaan Hirsi Ali, one of the world’s leading activists against Islamic supremacism, writing in the Wall Street Journal that “President Trump, during the campaign, insisted that it was necessary to go after the political ideology of radical Islam, and he’s just completely stopped.”

“She called on Congress to pick it up and take it on since the president seems to have lost interest in it,” Glick said of Ali’s article. “Whether it’s Iran and countering Iranian influence and rising hegemony in Syria and in Iraq, Lebanon, Yemen, Bahrain, and, of course, Iran’s nuclear weapons program, these are very, very key issues for the United States and for all of its allies in the Middle East. And on all of these issues, in practice, we see that the policies that the National Security Adviser, H.R. McMaster, is pushing are at loggerheads with – completely contradict – the policies that President Trump ran on and continues to say that he wants.”

“For instance, I wrote in my column in the Jerusalem Post this morning, the United States special forces are fighting side-by-side with the Lebanese armed forces, which are controlled by Hezbollah, to the side of Hezbollah, which is a global terrorist organization, against ISIS,” she said.

“This is President Obama’s policy, was to try to get the United States to help Iran to take over Syria, without allowing the American people to know that, by saying, ‘Well, we’re fighting ISIS in Syria,’” she explained. “Allow Iran and Hezbollah to take over Syria and present an existential threat to Jordan and a massive strategic threat to Israel and to U.S. interests, in the name of fighting ISIS.”

“This, we see, is a policy that President Trump continues to implement,” Glick said with dismay. “It’s a very, very troubling thing.”

Glick was further troubled by the way Western media is allowing McMaster supporters, “from the Council on American Islamic Relations to the Anti-Defamation League” to frame coverage of his move away from President Trump’s policy agenda.

She further implicated “Soros-funded groups that are working day and night to undermine and subvert, with the hope of destroying this president.” These forces have conspired to forge a media narrative that claims people only oppose McMaster because they are “racist or Islamophobic or what have you.”

“In other words, they’re turning this into the same thing that the left always turns their policy disputes into, which is the good guys against the racists, and everyone who opposes them is essentially a non-person, and we mustn’t listen to them,” said Glick.

“It’s even worse in a way than just saying this is a partisan squabble and this is domestic politics,” she said. “What they’re trying to do is dehumanize the people who oppose McMaster, in order not to have a substantive discussion. That’s what we see the left doing everywhere, all the time, throughout the United States and throughout the Western world. You don’t win by substance because your substance is antithetical to what most people want, so what you do is you say that anyone who opposes you is a racist. Anybody who opposes you is the enemy of the good, and, therefore, all right-thinking people have to be on your side, against their side.”

 “It’s interesting that this is the dynamic that’s taking place around McMaster. It would seem to me that, particularly for the president himself, who knows these things, this should be just a glaring red light. The fact that yet again yesterday he embraced McMaster, sitting next to Vice President Pence at his golf club in Bedminster, is an indication that something is awry, and I don’t really know what it is,” she said.

“Again, it’s very troubling because the problem here is not whether H.R. McMaster has a temper or is just the nicest person in the whole world. The problem is that he is pushing and getting implemented a policy, in relation to Israel in particular – and Israel as an American ally in the Middle East, no less Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Jordan, Egypt, and so on and so forth – that is a natural continuation of Barack Obama’s policy of realigning the United States away from its allies in the United States and in favor of Iran and Hezbollah,” she charged.

 

China and India on brink of armed conflict as hopes of resolution to border dispute fade

August 13, 2017

China and India on brink of armed conflict as hopes of resolution to border dispute fade, South China Morning Post, Minnie Chan, August 11, 2017

(Due to China’s apparently increasing problems with India, might China be less aggressive in its support of the Kim regime in North Korea? — DM)

In July, India, the United States and Japan completed their 10-day Malabar 2017 naval exercise in the Bay of Bengal, while around the same time the US approved the US$365-million sale of military transport aircraft to India and a US$2-billion deal for surveillance drones.

As a result, the Indian navy now has eight Boeing P-8A Poseidon submarine hunters patrolling in the Indian Ocean.

******************************************

Chinese and Indian troops are readying themselves for a possible armed conflict in the event they fail in their efforts to achieve a peaceful resolution to their border dispute on the Doklam plateau in the Himalayas, observers said.

On Friday, India’s defence minister Arun Jaitley told parliament that the country’s armed forces are “prepared to take on any eventuality” of the stand-off, Indian Express reported the same day.

Sources close to the Chinese military, meanwhile, said that the People’s Liberation Army is increasingly aware of the possibility of war, but will aim to limit any conflict to the level of skirmishes, such as those contested by India and Pakistan in Kashmir.

“The PLA will not seek to fight a ground war with Indian troops early on. Instead it will deploy aircraft and strategic missiles to paralyse Indian mountain divisions stationed in the Himalayas on the border with China,” a military insider told the South China Morning Post on condition of anonymity, adding that he believes Indian troops will probably hold out for “no more than a week”.

Another military source said that officers and troops from the Western Theatre Command have already been told to prepare for war with India over the Doklam crisis.

“There is a voice within the army telling it to fight because it was Indian troops that intruded into Chinese territory in Donglang [Doklam],” the second source said. “Such a voice is supported by the public.”

Both sources said that China’s military believes any conflict will be controlled, and not spill over into other disputed areas, of which there are currently three along the 2,000km border between the two Asian giants.

However, Indian defence experts warned that once the first shot is fired, the conflict may escalate into full-scale war. That in turn could result in New Delhi blockading China’s maritime lifeline in the Indian Ocean.

“Any Chinese military adventurism will get a fitting reply from the Indian military,” Dr Rajeev Ranjan Chaturvedy, a research associate at the Institute of South Asian Studies at the National University of Singapore, told the Post.

“Certainly, it will be detrimental for both, but if Beijing escalates [the conflict], it will not be limited. Perhaps, it may extend to the maritime domain as well,” he said.

“If China engages in a military offensive against India, New Delhi will take all necessary measures … [and will] respond to Chinese actions in its own way. Why only a border war? It could escalate to a full-scale India-China war,” he said.

Rajeswari Rajagopalan, a defence analyst from the Observer Research Foundation think tank in New Delhi, said that “in the event of a full-scale war, definitely India’s navy will prevent the Chinese navy from moving into the Bay of Bengal or the Indian Ocean.”

China is heavily reliant on imported fuel and, according to figures published by state media, more than 80 per cent of its oil imports travel via the Indian Ocean or Strait of Malacca.

Beijing-based naval expert Li Jie said that India in 2010 established a naval base in the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, close to the Strait of Malacca, where the narrowest sea channel is just 1.7km wide.

“Since 2010, India has also upgraded two airstrips on the islands to serve fighters and reconnaissance aircraft,” he said.

“All these moves pave the way for India to be able to blockade Chinese military and commercial ships from entering the Indian Ocean in the event of a naval conflict between the two countries.”

In July, India, the United States and Japan completed their 10-day Malabar 2017 naval exercise in the Bay of Bengal, while around the same time the US approved the US$365-million sale of military transport aircraft to India and a US$2-billion deal for surveillance drones.

As a result, the Indian navy now has eight Boeing P-8A Poseidon submarine hunters patrolling in the Indian Ocean.

Chinese and Indian troops fought a war in 1962 after a series of skirmishes heightened tensions on the border. That conflict ended largely in a stalemate, despite China’s large military advantage.

However, Chaturvedy said that India has learnt lessons from its past mistakes and is now better prepared to defend itself against China.

Macau-based military expert Antony Wong Dong said that both sides have underestimated each other.

“If the border conflict expands to the sea, it will be very difficult for the PLA to defeat the Indian navy, whose capabilities are much stronger after the purchase of the P-8A Poseidon submarine hunters,” he said.

This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as:

Trump ‘fire and fury’ is justified; America won’t back down in the face of bullies like North Korea

August 12, 2017

Trump ‘fire and fury’ is justified; America won’t back down in the face of bullies like North Korea, Washington Times,, August 12, 2017

(Let’s give Kim Jong-un a lifetime supply of his favorite booze. A quart should be more than enough. –DM)

Participants carry an American flag during the 4th of July parade in Santa Monica, Calif. on Tuesday, July 4, 2017. Decked out in red, white and blue, Californians waved flags and sang patriotic songs at Independence Day parades

ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The hand-wringers were out in full force this past week, moaning and wailing about President Donald Trump’s rhetoric regarding North Korea.

But why? We are America. We don’t bow down; we don’t quiver in fear.

That the left, the weak-kneed and the RINOs have filled a week of media coverage with rants and dire pronouncements about the supposed dark effect of Trump’s bold message to the regime only shows how far down the progressive path Barack Obama managed to push the nation — how far away from the Founding Father we’ve strayed.

America is the nation that thrives against-all-odds, the country of the come-from-behind.

We’re the nation that took on the greatest sea power in the world, the British, and won; the nation that told a king to stand down — and he did; the nation that forged, on the backs of common people and colonists, with prayer and supplication, the greatest and most powerful country the world’s ever seen.

We’re George Washington on his knees in prayer. We’re George Patton, smashing with tanks across German enemy lines. We’re Desmond Doss, saving dozens of fellow soldiers, bodies and souls, during the bloody battle of Hacksaw Ridge, without even carrying a weapon.

And we’re this, as Trump put it, circa 2017: Able and willing to take on North Korea “with fire and fury and frankly, power, the likes of which this world has never seen before.”

The left, predictably perhaps, slammed Trump for that rhetoric.

“Trump is not helping the situation with his bombastic comments,” said California Sen. Dianne Feinstein.

This, from New York Rep. Eliot Engel: “[T]he president’s unhinged reaction suggest he might consider using American nuclear weapons in response to a nasty comment from a North Korean despot.”

This, from Maryland Sen. Ben Cardin: “Trump’s comments were not helpful and once again show that he lacks the temperament and judgment to deal with the serious crisis the United States confront.s”

This, from New York Sen. Chuck Schumer: “[R]eckless rhetoric is not a strategy to keep America safe.”

The Republican Party’s Sen. John McCain weighed in similarly, intimating Trump was foolish because “the great leaders I’ve seen don’t threaten unless they’re ready to act and I’m not sure President Trump is ready to act.”

But all this boo-hooing does is reinforce the fact that America, under the previous administration, had grown accustomed to a foreign policy that required talk at all costs — diplomacy as both offense and defense, as both wielded weapon and proffered shield.

Let’s remember the roots of our nation — the long-time historical wins of our military, the righteous fights of our citizens, the eleventh- and even twelfth-hour victories in the arenas that range from politics to sports, medicine to science. We are a nation of leaders, not followers, of innovators and triumphant victors, not copycats and red-faced back-of-the-liners.

Trump, who only responded in kind to the fiery rhetoric of North Korea’s bully leader, Kim Jong Un, hat tipped this recognition of America as the leader — as the best the world has to offer — with his response to the collective hand-wringing that went like this: “Maybe [my fire and fury comment] wasn’t tough enough.”

Bam. That’s what Americans do.

This isn’t to say North Korea is a cakewalk, or that Pyongyang’s threats to attack Guam should be taken lightly. But it is to say that when it comes to the war of words, Trump is hitting the nail on the head. North Korea has been shooting off its mouth against America for years, vowing destruction and demise, devastation and death.

Trump’s simple reminder of America’s historical greatness, and modern day strengths, is not a fueler of fire. It’s a tit-for-tat response, a long time in coming. And if this country hadn’t become so consumed by progressive ideology and socialist weakness and leftist and globalist calls for concession at all costs, then the media wouldn’t be so successful in slinging Trump as the bad guy here.

Remember that Kim’s the crazed aggressor. America, both historically and now, is the defender of freedom. We are America — standing tall in the face of adversity, unafraid to make a principled stand, fight a righteous fight, win either war of words or might.

It’s North Korea, not America, not Americans, who should be afraid, very afraid right now.

Humor | Political correctness gone too far? High school refuses to let ISIS recruit wear suicide vest at graduation

August 12, 2017

Political correctness gone too far? High school refuses to let ISIS recruit wear suicide vest at graduation, Duffel Blog, August 12, 2017

(Just one more example of academia’s Islamophobia. — DM)

YOUNGSTOWN, Ohio – Youngstown High School had been thrust into the spotlight after school administrators on Friday refused to let new recruit Martin Ostermule walk in his high school graduation after he arrived in his new uniform.

“We’re very proud of Martin and everything that he’s accomplished at Youngstown High School,” said principal Steven O’Riley. “But we have a strict rule that students must wear a cap and gown to walk in the processional.  It’s a long tradition at Youngstown High, and if we make an exception for Martin, the situation could really explode.”

O’Riley went on to explain that they try to make Youngstown High a place where all students feel welcome and accepted. “We have students with different backgrounds and experiences,” said O’Riley, “And seeing Martin in suicide vest could be a trigger.”

“Of course we understand that Islam is a religion of peace, and we respect Martin’s religious freedoms,” said O’Riley.  “But we stand firm on our policy. If we let Martin where his uniform, we’d have to allow the same of everyone.”

Ostermule looked at joining other services to include the US Army, Marine Corps, and Air Force, but decided on ISIS after he discovered they were more lenient about his ADHD medication.

“Joining ISIS is the greatest accomplishment of my life,” said Ostermule. “I wanted to serve my Caliphate, and be part of something bigger than myself. After attending ISIS basic training in Syria this summer, I came back to Youngstown stronger and more focused. Wearing my uniform at my high school graduation signals that I’m ready to make the ultimate sacrifice. I’m mad that my overly sensitive, politically correct high school doesn’t understand.”

“Martin knew so young that he wanted to be a fighter,” said Karen Ostermule, Martin’s mother. “I thought he was too young to go off to training, but he wanted it so badly that I would have signed the parental permission slip if ISIS had one. When he came back home, fit and trim in his new suicide vest, I teared up a little at the man my little boy had become. It’s mommy’s little jihadi! He’s so proud that he’s earned the title ISIS Fighter, and I can’t believe his high school is full of libtards that think he shouldn’t be within 200 meters of a public gathering in his uniform.”

Martin’s school counselor, Peggy Mason, said that she was “very proud of anyone from Youngstown who finds a job after graduation,” but she felt that “Martin was making the graduation ceremony about himself and not the group.”

School administrators allowed that Martin could wear his suicide vest under his gown, but Martin declined, saying that he thought this would be disrespectful to the uniform.

Ostermule will receive his diploma in the mail, but it’s too little too late for Karen who says that Martin is “in pieces” after his school rejected him.

Karen is now fighting to change the name on Martin’s diploma to Mohammad Gulab, which was his chosen, though not legally adopted, jihad name.

Korea and the Democrats’ Deep Psychological Fear that Trump Is Right

August 12, 2017

Korea and the Democrats’ Deep Psychological Fear that Trump Is Right, PJ MediaRoger L Simon, August 11, 2017

(When everything else fails, perhaps it’s time to try something different. That’s what President Trump is doing and will continue to do, unless McMaster et al find ways to make him stop. I hope that President Trump gets rid of McMaster, soon. Please see also, Sources: These McMaster Advisors Are Running the ‘Smear’ Campaign to Save His Job. — DM)

President Donald Trump gestures as he answers a question regarding the ongoing situation in North Korea, Friday, Aug. 11, 2017, at Trump National Golf Club in Bedminster, N.J. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)

One of the unspoken ‘indications’ in the medical sense of the ever-metastasizing Trump Derangement Syndrome is that the sufferers have a deep conscious/unconscious fear that Trump is right. What if the man they have excoriated unremittingly as a barbarian-racist-xenophobe-homophobe -misogynist-nitwit turns out to have been on the correct side of a fair number of issues on which they have failed, sometimes miserably, for decades?  Talk about personality disintegration — it would be hari-kari meets the Wicked Witch of the West. Well, emotionally anyway.

The current North Korea crisis is a perfect case in point. Susan Rice — has this woman no shame — took to the pages of The New York Times to inveigh against Trump for “bluster” regarding the NORKS.  The integrity-challenged former national security adviser was far from alone, however. Virtually all Democrats and their local media minions plus a good swatch of Republicans (including repellently vengeful John McCain) criticized the president for the same thing — using blunt language to counter the crazed dictator in Pyongyang when Trump should have been “diplomatic.”

This although almost any grown-up not comatose knows that “diplomatic” language has been employed by the U.S. ad nauseam for that purpose for the last twenty-five years through three administrations with no discernible impact whatsoever. Indeed, “abject failure” would be an accurate characterization of our diplomatic policy vis-a-vis the NORKS.  If you view this video of Bill Clinton extolling his administration’s “successful,” diplomatically-achieved nuclear deal with Pyongyang back in 2006, the word “nitwit” does come to mind, but it’s not about Trump. Here’s Madeleine Albright in another glorious moment of diplomatic achievement with Kim Jong-un’s dad Kim Jong-il laying on the splendor in Pyongyang Stadium before signing some meaningless agreement whose import is known only to Dennis Rodman.

How do you spell hornswoggled?

Of course, George W. Bush didn’t do much better and Barack Obama — who evidently hid the North Koreans’ development of mini-nuclear warheads for several years from the sensitive ears of the American public, only to leave us in the disastrous situation we are in today —  was considerably worse. This is the same Obama who pushed through the still mysterious Iran Deal handing the NORKs’ best friends the mullahs enough cash to run rampant in Syria. Soon thereafter Barack reneged on his pledge to prevent the use of chemical weapons by that very country’s leader. Sense a pattern?

And yet it’s the “blusterous” Trump who is supposed to be the problem.  Actually, he’s the one left to pick up the pieces of an American reputation in tatters.

Perhaps what we need is a little bluster. It’s an old technique and a sound one — good cop/bad cop. It was played out well by Nixon and Kissinger when Henry went to Beijing to negotiate with Mao and Chou. Kissinger threatened to let his “madman back home” (Nixon) loose unless the Chairman cooperated and made a deal. It worked.

Now we have Trump, Tillerson, Mattis and McMaster playing various levels of good cop/bad cop. They are even reportedly working the backchannels in the old diplomatic game. Let’s hope they learn from the past and do it better this time. Color me skeptical because without a serious military threat, I doubt the Chinese will listen.

Did I say Chinese? Of course, I did, because they are the true audience for what is going on. Mr. Kim is a whack job sideshow. The Chinese are the ones with the power to do something and stop a conflagration. And, like the Democrats and the Never Trumpers, they may be more afraid of Trump than they let on. Unlike Obama, he has shown he is not afraid to use force — and he did that while having dinner with Xi Jinping. Friday night he is supposed to be having a chat with Xi.

By now we may all know what happened — at least the part the leakers deign to tell us — but we do not know what will happen. The facts on the ground have yet to be revealed.

What has been revealed, however, is the psychology of those attacking Trump on this matter. They fear that they will be revealed as having been fools for the last twenty-five years — and indeed they were.

Palestinians Escalate War on Journalists

August 12, 2017

Palestinians Escalate War on Journalists, Gatestone Institute, Bassam Tawil, August 12, 2017

They said they did not know what “sensitive information” Mahmoud Abbas and the Palestinian Authority (PA) were trying to hide.

Today, it is safe to say that the situation of the freedom of the media under the PA and Hamas is not much different than that under Bashar Assad’s Syria or even North Korea.

Palestinian journalists’ hateful obsession with Israel brings them no dividends. Rather, such venomous bias diverts attention from the true challenges and threats they face from the PA and Hamas. By expending their efforts in this twisted fashion, the journalists aid and abet their leaders in building dictatorial regimes that suppress public freedoms.

As part of its overarching effort to silence critics, President Mahmoud Abbas’s Palestinian Authority (PA) has resumed its war against Palestinian journalists who refuse toe the line or are suspected of being insufficiently loyal to their leaders in Ramallah.

But this is nothing new: Abbas and his team have long been notoriously intolerant of news stories that reflect negatively on them in particular and on Palestinians in general.

In the past few days, PA security forces arrested six Palestinian journalists from Bethlehem, Nablus and Hebron. The journalists — Mamdouh Hamamreh, Qutaiba Kassem, Tarek Abu Zeid, Amer Abu Arafeh, Thaer Al-Fakhouri and Ahmed Al-Halaykeh — are suspected of “leaking sensitive information to hostile parties.”

This is the first time that Abbas’s PA has made such a ridiculous charge against Palestinian journalists. In an attempt to justify the latest crackdown on freedom of the media, Abbas’s news agency, Wafa, published a statement by an unnamed “senior security source” who said that the detained journalists were being interrogated about their role in “leaking sensitive information to hostile parties.” The detained journalists, meanwhile, have gone on hunger strike to protest their incarceration.

Upon hearing about the baseless charge, many Palestinian journalists said they did not know whether to laugh or cry. They said they did not know what “sensitive information” Abbas and the PA were trying to hide.

“We don’t have nuclear facilities,” remarked a Palestinian journalist from east Jerusalem sarcastically. “It’s clear that the Palestinian Authority leadership is using the security issue as an excuse to justify its punitive measures against journalists.”

Another Palestinian journalist from Ramallah scoffed at the charge against his colleagues. “This is the most ridiculous claim I’ve heard in years,” he commented. “It reminds us of Arab dictators who accuse their opponents and critics of revealing state secrets and consuming narcotics.”

That the PA leadership has refused to provide further details about the nature of the offense committed by the suspected journalists has only reinforced the belief that they were targeted as part of an ongoing campaign by Abbas and his lieutenants to silence critics and deter other journalists from doing their job or reporting any story that could reflect negatively on the Palestinian leaders.

Some Palestinian journalists take a different view of the matter. These reporters trace the arrest of the six journalists to a desire to pressure Hamas to release two journalists it is holding in the Gaza Strip: Amer Abu Shabab and Fuad Jaradeh.

In other words, the PA security forces are holding the six journalists hostage until Hamas frees the two newsmen it is holding. The journalists detained by the PA work for Hamas-affiliated media outlets in the West Bank.

Notably, the two Palestinian regimes – the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip — have hardly championed freedom of speech and freedom of the media. In fact, the two parties share the same values when it comes to silencing all forms of criticism. Dozens of Palestinian journalists have been targeted over the past two decades by both the PA and Hamas.

These regimes have their own special way of defining freedom of the press. That is, the press is utterly free to blacken the name of Israel. The name of Hamas or the PA, however, is sacrosanct: criticism of either would land a Palestinian reporter behind bars or in an interrogation room.

Hamas and the PA prefer that the press pound Israel. Short of that, they tolerate journalistic critique of municipal services or the shortage of medicine in hospitals.

Today, it is safe to say that the situation of the freedom of the media under the PA and Hamas is not much different than that under Bashar Assad’s Syria or even North Korea. The failure to achieve a free media for the Palestinians is yet another sign of the Palestinian failure to build proper and transparent state institutions.

The Palestinians have no functioning parliament, no open debate and no free media. In the West Bank, the media is controlled, directly and indirectly, by Abbas and his loyalists. In the Gaza Strip, the only “media” is that which is controlled by Hamas — again, directly and indirectly.

But there is an interesting twist to the latest story of Palestinian Authority and Hamas assaults on freedom of the media. Sadly, many Palestinian journalists do not seem to care much about the harassment and suppression of their colleagues at the hands of their leaders in Ramallah and the Gaza Strip.

Instead of organizing widespread protests to demand the release of their colleagues who are being tortured by PA and Hamas interrogators, Palestinian journalists are still scapegoating Israel. Incredibly, they continue to incite against Israel despite the fact that they are being detained and tortured by the PA and Hamas.

Instead of demanding the release of their six colleagues from PA prison, some Palestinian journalists are protesting because some Israeli (Jewish) journalists came to Ramallah last week to cover the visit of Jordan’s King Abdullah II.

The presence of the Israeli reporters in Ramallah enraged several Palestinian journalists, who took to social media to condemn the Palestinian Authority leadership that gave them permission to come and cover the monarch’s visit.

The presence of Israeli reporters in Ramallah last week, to cover the visit of Jordan’s King Abdullah II, enraged several Palestinian journalists, who took to social media to condemn the Palestinian Authority leadership that gave them permission to cover the visit. (Image source: Palestinian President’s Office)

In this cartoon by Palestinian cartoonist Mohammad Sabaaneh, an Israeli journalist, carrying a microphone dripping with blood, is interviewing a dog.

Such incitement was easy to find on Palestinian social media websites this week. The presence of several Israeli Arab journalists seemed to roll right over the racist, raging Palestinian journalists — it is the presence of Jewish journalists that they cannot stand.

This attack on Israeli journalists has been backed by the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate (PJS), a Fatah-affiliated group headed by Nasser Abu Baker, a correspondent of the evidently unprofessional Agence France-Press: Baker has also run for election in the Fatah Revolutionary Council.

In a statement published in Ramallah, the PJS strongly condemned the presence of Israeli (Jewish) journalists in Ramallah and urged Abbas to hold accountable whoever gave the Israeli journalists permission to come to the city to cover the Jordanian king’s visit.

It seems that for the PJS, the presence of Israeli (Jewish) reporters in Ramallah is more disturbing than the arrest of Palestinian journalists by the PA and Hamas.

For the record, in recent years the PJS has served as a mouthpiece for Abbas’s office; instead of defending the rights of Palestinian journalists, it devotes more than 95% of its words and actions to denouncing Israel and whipping up rage against Israeli journalists.

Palestinian journalists’ hateful obsession with Israel brings them no dividends. Rather, such venomous bias diverts attention from the true challenges and threats they face from the PA and Hamas. By expending their efforts in this twisted fashion, the reporters aid and abet their leaders in building dictatorial regimes that suppress public freedoms.

Bassam Tawil, an Arab Muslim, is based in the Middle East.