North Korea tries to prevent more defections, CNN via YouTube, November 25, 2017
North Korea tries to prevent more defections, CNN via YouTube, November 25, 2017
Report: Hundreds of Islamic State Sex Slaves Face Honor Killings if They Escape, Breitbart, Edwin Mora, November 24, 2017
AFP/File DELIL SOULEIMAN
Akram reportedly indicated that Turkmen “families are so deeply ashamed that they often don’t want their abducted girls to come back for fear they were violated. If they do escape and return, they face being honor killed.”
The Iraqi Turkmen community, the third-largest ethnoreligious group in Iraq after Arabs and Kurds, identifies with either Shiite or Sunni Muslim traditions.
“Many girls won’t return,” Hasan Turan, an Iraqi lawmaker from the Turkmen Front Party, told Fox News. “Many girls were held as slaves. … I can only hope families accept them if they return. They are the victims.”
While the ISIS kidnapping of thousands of women and girls from Iraq’s ethnoreligious minority group known as Yazidis (or Yezidis) has been well-documented, the abduction of females from other ethnic minorities has been underreported by members of their community out of shame, reports Fox News.
According to the news outlet, an estimated 640 Turkmen girls and at least another 59 women and children from the Shabak minority group remain missing after ISIS swept them into sexual brutality.
******************************
The estimated 640 young girls from Iraq’s Turkmen minority community who remain under the shackles of sexual slavery at the hands of the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) face honor killings if they escape and return to their families, a former Iraqi lawmaker representing the ethnic group told Fox News.
“We are very conservative. If our wife or sister was raped, we cannot talk about it,” Fawzi Akram, the former Iraqi member of parliament (MP) who now serves as a prominent aid and community leader, told Fox News.
He revealed that “640 of our girls—some younger than 12—are missing by ISIS.”
Last year, the Knights of Columbus, the world’s largest Catholic fraternal organization, and the nonprofit In Defense of Christians unveiled a detailed store-like price list maintained by ISIS for selling sexual slaves as young as 1-year-old “in the name of Allah.”
Honor killings across the globe often involve Muslim males murdering or mutilating a female family member accused of bringing shame and dishonor to their families and Islam.
Akram reportedly indicated that Turkmen “families are so deeply ashamed that they often don’t want their abducted girls to come back for fear they were violated. If they do escape and return, they face being honor killed.”
The Iraqi Turkmen community, the third-largest ethnoreligious group in Iraq after Arabs and Kurds, identifies with either Shiite or Sunni Muslim traditions.
“Many girls won’t return,” Hasan Turan, an Iraqi lawmaker from the Turkmen Front Party, told Fox News. “Many girls were held as slaves. … I can only hope families accept them if they return. They are the victims.”
While the ISIS kidnapping of thousands of women and girls from Iraq’s ethnoreligious minority group known as Yazidis (or Yezidis) has been well-documented, the abduction of females from other ethnic minorities has been underreported by members of their community out of shame, reports Fox News.
According to the news outlet, an estimated 640 Turkmen girls and at least another 59 women and children from the Shabak minority group remain missing after ISIS swept them into sexual brutality.
About 2,900 Yazidi women and girls remain missing, Vian Dakhil, a female representative for Yazidis in the Iraqi Parliament, told Fox News, echoing testimony from Yazidi survivor and human rights activist Nadia Murad before a congressional panel in June 2016.
“The scale of the sexual violence extends far broader than many Iraqis previously documented,” notes Fox News. “The minority Shabak—who reside mostly in villages east of Mosul, their faith and rituals centered on Christian, Yazidi and Islamic adherences—are also suffering in silence.”
Hunien Kaddo, an Iraqi MP who represents the estimated 35,000-strong Shabak community, revealed that ISIS raped at least 28 Shabak women and subsequently poured gasoline on them in cages before setting them ablaze in Mosul.
As ISIS lost Mosul to the U.S.-led coalition and its allies late last year, the jihadist group abducted an additional “59 Shabak women and children” from the surrounding villages, revealed Kaddo.
“I have been visiting displaced and devastated families in recent weeks,” he told Fox News. “They’re daughters are missing. Sadly, there is a lot of shame.”
He pointed out that many Christian women and girls remain in captivity as ISIS sex slaves.
The Yazidis requested help in recovering their missing women and children, Fox News learned from northern Iraq’s autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG).
Meanwhile, the other minority groups stayed silent.
The United Nations and the United States have determined that ISIS committed genocide against minority groups in Iraq and Syria, including Christians, Yazidis, Turkmen, and Shabak.
The U.S. State Department has courted controversy by announcing it will plough $700,000 into Hungarian media, angering the country’s anti-globalist, conservative government
This shocking report makes no sense given the commonalities between President Trump in “making America great again” and Victor Orban’s similar stance.
Orban has proved to be a rare strong figure in standing against unvetted mass Muslim migration that has seen Europe spiral into chaos. He has also opposed EU quotas in the face of threats of sanctions. In July, Orban stated that migrants were “poison” and “not needed.” Orban has also praised the victory of Donald Trump in putting America first, and declared 2017 “the year of rebellion” for Hungary.
Orban also upholds the cornerstone of democracy: free speech, which every brand of fascism has vehemently opposed. In a ground-breaking speech, Orban declared that “freedom begins with speaking the truth” and that “we must therefore drag the ancient virtue of courage out from under the silt of oblivion. First of all we must put steel in our spines.”
A message to take from the US State Department’s hostile move against Orban is that Trump still does not have control of the departments working under him. The many calls to “drain the swamp” still have not been heeded. As the article below points out:
The obvious subtext to all of this is that the State Department funding effort is intended to bolster anti-government and opposition media. This suggests it is still pursuing Obama era, anti-conservative policy objectives
It also suggests an undermining of the Trump Presidency. If not addressed, this will invite more such anti-Trump, anti-conservative initiatives which will have a negative impact upon Trump’s support base.
A month ago, Hungarian MP István Hollik expressed fears that “George Soros would use his organisation, now the second largest political activist charity in the world, to influence Hungary’s 2018 general election” and “remove Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s Fidesz party from power, tear down the border fence, and implement the ‘Soros Plan’ to flood Europe with one million third-world migrants annually.”
Given the catastrophe that Europe has faced with its Hijra invasion, the move to undermine Victor Orban’s government demands immediate attention and intervention by Trump, as questions mount: who is really controlling America?
“U.S. State Dept Puts $700,000 into Hungarian Media, Demands ‘Programming’ Against Orban, Patriots,” by Jack Montgomery Breitbart, November 22, 2017 (thanks to Inexion):
The U.S. State Department has courted controversy by announcing it will plough $700,000 into Hungarian media, angering the country’s anti-globalist, conservative government.
The funding was announced by U.S. Chargé d‘Affaires David Kostelancik, who has previously appeared to openly criticise the Trump administration by alluding to “apparent inconsistencies in [U.S.] foreign policy” and remarking that “not every criticism of the government is ‘fake news’.”
Breitbart London spoke to a State Department official who confirmed it supports what it calls “democracy and human rights programming” in many countries, and that its intentions in Hungary — a NATO ally — are to “support media outlets operating outside the capital … to produce fact-based reporting and increase their audience and economic sustainability”.
The State Department also echoed Kostelancik’s claim that too many Hungarian news outlets are sympathetic to Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s popular conservative government — which has earned powerful enemies by opposing the European Union on mass migration, building a highly effective border wall, and exposing the network of European politicians deemed “reliable allies” by billionaire open borders campaigner George Soros.
The obvious subtext to all of this is that the State Department funding effort is intended to bolster anti-government and opposition media. This suggests it is still pursuing Obama era, anti-conservative policy objectives internationally in defiance of President Trump, who has praised Prime Minister Orbán — the first European leader to back him — as “strong and brave”.
The Hungarian leader has maintained a position of strong opposition to “globalist elites, the bureaucrats who serve them, the politicians in their pay, and the agents of the Soros-type networks that embody their interests” despite fierce opposition from Brussels, pro-mass immigration NGOs, and left-liberal U.S. media, believing he is standing up for a “silent majority” of hard-pressed families across the West, who wish to preserve their Christian heritage and national identity.
For its part, the Hungarian government has denounced the State Department for what it regards as blatant interference in its internal affairs ahead of national elections in Spring 2018.
“What is this if not an intervention in the election campaign and the domestic politics of Hungary? Which Washington office can judge the applications of media organisations from a Hungarian county and what kind of balanced service they would like to offer?” asked Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó, who said it was shocking that American taxpayers’ money was being used to — to quote the State Department — “educate journalists on how to practice their trade” in an allied democracy.
“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade has summoned the U.S. Chargé d‘Affaires, asking for an explanation, and told him that we consider this a political intervention by the U.S. Department of State ahead of the elections,” a spokesman added.
The Hungarians have also robustly rejected the State Department’s accusations that there is no press freedom in their country.
For example, Prime Minister Orbán’s Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy, Dr. Zoltán Kovács, has highlighted the following exchange between journalists at Hungarian outlets 168óra and RTL Klub — neither of which “would ever be described as linked to the Orbán Government”, in his estimation:
168óra: Is there press freedom in Hungary?
Péter Kolosi: There is. If there weren’t, then there wouldn’t be an RTL Klub either.
Dr. Kovács then questioned whether Kostelancik — who is not the U.S. ambassador to Hungary, but only fulfilling that role temporarily while the Obama appointee he formerly served is in the process of being replaced — has any mandate to be attacking Hungary’s media landscape in the first place.
He also took the Chargé d‘Affaires to task for praising journalists of the “Communist old guard” who attended his speech for supposedly “striving to speak the truth” — a scene the Hungarian described as “stomach-turning”, given their history of collaboration with the Soviet-backed dictatorship.
Prime Minister Orbán, who opposed the Leftist regime at some personal risk as a younger man, has often chided Western leaders — and the European Union in particular — of “making excuses for the crimes of Communism”, and worked to make sure its victims are given due attention since his election.
Dr Kovács went on the publish a more extensive response to Kostelancik and the State Department, in which he lamented their actions as “astonishing and disappointing coming from an ally”.
Beyond the “clear interference in the domestic affairs of an ally”, he noted that “the media in the U.S. has its own issues. Criticisms related to concentration of media ownership, commercial relationships, and mainstream media bias – Harvey Weinstein, anyone? — are now the stuff of everyday in the U.S.”
He concluded by observing that one of Geroge Soros’s many so-called civil society organisations launched a media training operation in Hungary around the same time as Kostalencik announced the State Department funding scheme — leaving some suspicious as to who the “partner” the State Department intends to select to deliver its programme might turn out to be.
Hungary is in the midst of a fierce struggle with Soros and his EU backers over its opposition to his plan for the migrant crisis.
Hungary believes that the EU is implementing this plan on behalf of the convicted insider trader through the compulsory redistribution of migrants by a system quotas, among other measures, and is currently conducting a national consultation on it to demonstrate that its opposition to the plan has widespread public support…..
A Time for War, Amerian Thinker, David Prentice, November 24, 2017
(Please see also, Trump: The President at War. — DM)
“To everything, there is a season, and a time to every purpose under heaven.” That’s the beginning of a famous bible verse. It’s a litany of life’s times and wonders that are dropped in our laps; weeping, laughing, dancing, healing.
The last line purposely changes tone and says, “a time for war”.
Like it or not, this is that time.
Civil War.
It’s here. Now. Thankfully this is not yet the blood in the streets kind of war, but war it is. It’s a war for the soul of this country, it’s a war that will affect everyone; none will escape having to deal with it directly, or indirectly.
How did we get here? It’s complicated. But one thing for sure: what’s not complicated is who started this war, why, and who it is with. During our lives, it was started by the hard left, and it’s a war to achieve power for them, for them to change the entire workings of our country. They want to remake every institution they can, with themselves in control of as much as possible. Power to them, belongs in the hands of their brilliant ideas, and their overwhelming moral superiority. They believe this war is necessary in order to root out the injustice inherent in our country’s institutions and its tawdry citizenry.
The war in its current form began in the sixties. It was envisioned by the radicals in the SDS days, spurred by the luminaries of the Frankfurt School, furthered by the activities of Herbert Marcuse, Howard Zinn, Bill Ayers, and the leftist academic institutions we send our children to. They have taken over institution after institution in a long, calculated preparation for this war.
First the universities. Then Hollywood. They took over the major media outlets such as the NY Times, the Washington Post, most journalism schools, all the major television networks, and most cable news outlets. They took over our education system, down to kindergarten. They have infiltrated our political parties, our government institutions, and our bureaucracies. These already leaned left; now they fully took them over and want to force their ideas on us. And they hate us.
I am not suggesting everything and everyone that takes part in any of these institutions is a hard leftist; what I am suggesting is the left has wrested control, to one degree or another, of all of them. Some more than others, but all have been affected.
Examples of the current battles in the war:
Racialism, black lives matter, NFL kneeling, and the war on being white.
The new feminism, and the war on being male.
The new feminism, and the war on the unborn.
Turning sex into a cesspool. Weinstein, Hollywood, preying on children, rampant unfaithfulness, broken families, transgenderism.
Turning race baiting and sex allegation into weapons of mass destruction.
Environmental catastrophism.
Health care control.
Spending our grandchildren’s money.
Allowing immigration to strangle what’s left of our institutions.
Pretending radical Islam is okay, but Judeo-Christian culture is not.
Teaching that socialism is just another form of government and not a failure.
Teaching that our country is inherently evil, and must be changed throughout.
There are many others.
But the important thing to understand is every one of these major battles is going on simultaneously. Our nation’s military command used to pride itself on being capable of handling two major war fronts. As you can see, we aren’t fighting two fronts at home, it’s dozens and all at the same time. And they’re hot battles, many of them being fought with the other side spending our own money to prop themselves up.
It’s like watching old war films of the Nazi air raids on London, or the allies carpet bombing German cities. It’s designed to overwhelm, cause collateral damage, and overwhelm the opposition into giving up.
We on the right are the targets. We on the right are the opposition.
Unfortunately, we on the right haven’t had a good organization to counter the shock and awe tactics of the left. The party that is supposed to lead us doesn’t even know we’re in a war. They think it’s just the same old politics, and they can go to the pubs and parties of Washington in the evening and pal around with leftists, toasting their amusement as the country succumbs to poison. After all, they’re rich and powerful and having fun.
Oh, I forgot to mention the Republican Party in the list of battles. Unfortunately, it’s one of the larger battles in this hot war. Its leadership, or lack thereof, is what has allowed us to be on the losing side for so long. It’s filled with a combination of Benedict Arnolds (McCain, Flake, Corker, etc.), Wishy-washy General McClellans (Paul Ryan, Mitch McConnel, most of the GOP elite), with a lot of officers who are bought and corrupted by donors who don’t share the goals of winning any of these battles.
So here we are, and thankfully, with a few aces up our sleeves.
In our realignment, we fortunately found one excellent leader. He won the last great battle of 2016. Yes, he won it with us on the right; most of us fought with him. ‘Twas a major victory that has put many of the above-mentioned battles on pause for the left. They have all pivoted and are aiming for Trump, doing their best to take him out, doing their best to depress us by carpet bombing him. Regrettably for them, it’s a little like watching Yosemite Sam shoot off his own foot with guns a-blazing. Trump has their number so far, and it looks like he will continue to do so. Other than having to watch the insane dramas and psychotic breakdowns of the left’s generals (and foot-soldiers), it’s not been this much fun for us on the right since Reagan. Winning covers a lot.
For us on the right, we need to not get stuck watching shiny things (as the left has been doing since Trump won). We need to mobilize our forces alongside Trump. Now.
We need to know that in spite of recently winning, we can still lose this war. We need to recognize the consequences of losing this war. We need to continue to wake up the great coalition on the right in order to win against an enemy that will stoop to lying, cheating, stealing, slandering, and destroying anyone that is in their way.
That’s no exaggeration. Just a few examples:
The left has taught the next generation white guilt. Alongside Uncle Tom guilt. Both lies. Racialism is mental slavery.
The left has convinced the next generation that socialism is good. That free enterprise is evil. That we are destroying our environment. All destructive lies.
They are lying about their own sexual moral superiority. They created a depraved culture on the left, and then blamed it on the right and used it as a weapon against our candidates. Instead of a degree of shame for what they have done, they preen as if it’s the right that has ruined everything good about sex. Roy Moore is evil without any real evidence other than accusation. Al Franken and the Clintons are to be forgiven in spite of genuine, hard evidence of depravity.
You get the picture; each battle is filled with lies from the left. It’s their MO. Tokyo Rose is their model. Hillary is their face.
Ace number two. Our ships are burned. Alexander the Great used that tactic with his army, as did Cortez. Burn the possibility of retreat so your soldiers will fight harder and never give up. Well, I wish the GOP were that smart; instead, they simply let our ships drift out to sea, let them rot, and let them be corrupted. Now, we really do have to fight harder just to stay alive. And people are rising up to fight, and fight without reservation. It’s the great realignment, and it really exists. People will have to fight harder because of the stupidity of the GOP, and they are.
Ace number three. I label it the calling of Gideon’s Army.
Those who are fearful have gone, or are going home.
Those who are the best fighters have been called, and are being called right now. They are fervent, intense, trained, and desire victory. They keenly lap up the water. They see the stakes, they know their enemy, they know the cost.
Before there is bloodshed in the streets, we must beat them at their own game.
The left must be defeated before they can regroup. Bring. It. On.
Jamie Glazov: United in Hate: The Left’s Romance With Jihad via YouTube, November 22, 2017
(Please see also, ‘The Right to Maim’: Intersectionality and blood libels. — DM)
‘The Right to Maim’: Intersectionality and blood libels, Israel National News, Dr. Richard L. Cravatts, November 22, 2017
Professor Puar is a feminist and gender studies specialist, and one may wonder why she has invested so much of her academic energy in vilifying Israel. But her obsession with Israel and its various perceived modes of oppression and brutality toward a weak, innocent victim group is consistent with many academics in the humanities and social sciences who increasingly find a linkage as they seek to affirm the rights of the victimized and name the villains responsible for this oppression. The more that seemingly unrelated instances of oppression can be conflated, it is thought, the greater the ability to confront these oppressors and neutralize the negative effect they have on society at large.
This trend is called “intersectionality,” and it has meant that someone who is a gender studies professor, or queer theorist, or American studies expert can, with no actual knowledge or expertise about the Middle East, readily pontificate on the many social pathologies of Israel, based on its perceived role as a racist, colonial oppressor of an innocent indigenous population of Arab victims. For Professor Puar and her fellow academic travelers, to know one victim group is to know any victim group—with Israel being a tempting and habitual target of their opprobrium.
Supporters of the Palestinian cause have come to accept the fact that Israel will not be defeated through the use of traditional tools of warfare. Instead, the Jewish state’s enemies, abetted by the academic and media elites in the West, have begun to use different, but equally dangerous, tactics to delegitimize and eventually destroy Israel in a cognitive war. By dressing up old hatreds against Jews, as Puar has done in this new book, combined with a purported goal of seeking social justice for the oppressed, and repackaging ugly biases as seemingly pure scholarship, she and Israel’s other ideological foes have found an effective, but odious, way to ensure that the Jew of nations, Israel, is still accused of fostering social chaos and bringing harm and death to non-Jews.
******************************************
Jews have been accused of harming and murdering non-Jews since the twelfth century in England, when Jewish convert to Catholicism, Theobald of Cambridge, mendaciously announced that European Jews ritually slaughtered Christian children each year and drank their blood during Passover season.
That medieval blood libel, largely abandoned in the contemporary West, does, however, still appear as part of Arab world’s vilification of Jews—now transmogrified into a slander against Israel, the Jew of nations. But in the regular chorus of defamation against Israel by a world infected with Palestinianism, a new, more odious trend has shown itself: the blood libel has been revivified; however, to position Israel (and by extension Jews) as demonic agents in the community of nations, the primitive fantasies of the blood libel are now masked with a veneer of academic scholarship.
No more salient example of that type of mendacious academic output can be found than in a new book by Rutgers professor Jasbir K. Puar published by Duke University Press, The Right to Maim: Debility, Capacity, Disability. The thesis of Puar’s book is formed by her examination of “Israeli tactical calculations of settler colonial rule,” which, she asserts, is “that of creating injury and maintaining Palestinian populations as perpetually debilitated, and yet alive, in order to control them.”
In other words, Puar’s core notion is that Israeli military tactics—as an extension of its political policies—involve the deliberate “stunting, “maiming,” physical disabling, and scientific experimenting with Palestinian lives, an outrageous and grotesque resurrection of the classic anti-Semitic trope that Jews purposely, and sadistically, harm and kill non-Jews.
Puar, Professor of Women’s and Gender Studies, boasts that she regularly writes on a hodgepodge of currently fashionable academic fields of study, including “gay and lesbian tourism, queer theory, theories of intersectionality, affect, homonationalism, and pinkwashing,” the latter being the perverse theory that Israel trumpets its broad support of LGBT rights in its society to furtively obscure its long-standing mistreatment of the Palestinians.
Morally coherent people would normally look at Israel’s progressive policies towards gays and commend the Jewish state for treating members of the LGBT community humanely and in a manner they are not treated in most of the Muslim world, but not Puar and her fellow pinkwashing theorists. Nothing Israel does, in their minds, is done with good intentions, only motivated by dark impulses meant to deceive, including, according to Puar, the inclination to maim, not kill, Palestinians.
“The Israeli Defense Forces (idf) have [sic] shown a demonstrable pattern over decades of sparing life, of shooting to maim rather than to kill. This is ostensibly a humanitarian practice,” she admits, although it results in “leaving many civilians ‘permanently disabled’ in an occupied territory of destroyed hospitals, rationed medical supplies, and scarce resources.” So, while Puar reluctantly admits that Israel purposely limits the lethality of its self-defense through restraint and tactical control, she still accuses it of using violence and injury as a tactical tool of a settler state to maintain control of a vulnerable indigenous population. It is both sadistic and exploitative, she contends, because it maintains a purportedly unjust and illegal occupation and the oppression of a victim people.
“I am arguing that debilitation and the production of disability are in fact biopolitical ends unto themselves,” she explains, “ . . . what I call ‘the right to maim’: a right expressive of sovereign power that is linked to, but not the same as, ‘the right to kill.’”
“Maiming,” she contends, “. . . is a sanctioned tactic of settler colonial rule, without ever bothering to offer an explanation of why it is strategically more productive for Israel to permanently injure, as opposed to eliminate, a population which is perpetually an existential threat.
In a 2016 speech Puar delivered at Vassar College, which presaged the content of her book, she presented this same noxious theme, that Israel is intent on “Targeting youth, not for death but for stunting” as a “tactic that seeks to render impotent any future resistance.” “Maiming masquerades as let live when in fact it acts as will not let die,” she said, and that this technique, as part of a sadistic, imperialistic militancy on the part of Israel, “is used to achieve . . . tactical aims of settler colonialism.”
Of course, no acknowledgement from Puar is ever forthcoming as to the reasons “why the most intensive practice of the biopolitics of debilitation,” the use of force against the civilian Palestinian population, exists in the first place; that is, that Israel’s so-called brutal occupation and its military incursions are necessitated by Arab aggression and terrorism, and the use of force, the maiming of the Palestinians, are not random occurrences based on the whims of a sadistic Israeli military, but a reaction to and the result of unrelenting terroristic attacks in which psychopathic jihadists have attempted to murder Jews with knives, trucks, bombs, rockets, and rifles since the Israel’s founding.
Of course, for Puar and leftist academics who look at Israel as an illegitimate settler colonial regime, Palestinians attempting to murder Israelis are never thought of as terrorists; instead, they are part of a justified “resistance” to oppression and occupation. Unsurprisingly, Puar is also on the Advisory Board of the U.S. Campaign for the Academic and Cultural Boycott of Israel, a leading coordinator of Boycott, Divestment and Sanction (BDS) movement on campuses. And more alarming than her open support of the BDS movement is Puar’s explicit support for terrorism against Israeli citizens as a corollary aspect of the BDS movement. BDS “is such a minor piece of how Palestine is going to be liberated, [and] we need BDS as part of organized resistance and armed resistance in Palestine as well [emphasis added]” she has said. “There is no other way the situation is going to change.”
When pro-Palestinian activists and critics of Israel, such as Professor Puar, repeat the claim that Palestinians somehow have an internationally-recognized legal “right” to resist so-called occupation through violent means, they are both legitimizing that terror and helping to ensure that its lethal use by Israel’s enemies will continue unabated. Those who lend their moral support to terrorism, and who continually see the existence of “grievance-based violence” as a justifiable tool of the oppressed, have made themselves apologists for radical Islam and terrorism, not to mention questioning Israel’s legal right to protect its citizens from being slaughtered.
Puar also accuses Israel of randomly, and recklessly, targeting medical facilities and other infrastructure as a deadly way “to provide the bare minimum for survival, but minimal enough to attempt to defeat or strip resistance” where “. . . the target here is not just life itself but resistance itself.” But Puar’s view that Israel’s military operations are characterized by disproportionality and a disregard for human life—even of its mortal foes—was, in fact, totally contradicted by a report prepared by The High-Level International Military Group on the Gaza Conflict in 2014, which found that “during Operation Protective Edge . . . Israel not only met a reasonable international standard of observance of the laws of armed conflict, but in many cases significantly exceeded that standard.”
Professor Puar is a feminist and gender studies specialist, and one may wonder why she has invested so much of her academic energy in vilifying Israel. But her obsession with Israel and its various perceived modes of oppression and brutality toward a weak, innocent victim group is consistent with many academics in the humanities and social sciences who increasingly find a linkage as they seek to affirm the rights of the victimized and name the villains responsible for this oppression. The more that seemingly unrelated instances of oppression can be conflated, it is thought, the greater the ability to confront these oppressors and neutralize the negative effect they have on society at large.
This trend is called “intersectionality,” and it has meant that someone who is a gender studies professor, or queer theorist, or American studies expert can, with no actual knowledge or expertise about the Middle East, readily pontificate on the many social pathologies of Israel, based on its perceived role as a racist, colonial oppressor of an innocent indigenous population of Arab victims. For Professor Puar and her fellow academic travelers, to know one victim group is to know any victim group—with Israel being a tempting and habitual target of their opprobrium.
Thus, for instance, supporters of the Black Lives Matter movement have often linked racism and police violence “from Ferguson to Palestine,” as their placards have announced, making Israel somehow complicit in American racism and police brutality and creating a moral equivalency between Palestinian and black American victims of oppression. In The Right to Maim, Puar discusses the supposed linkage between Black Lives Matter and the Palestinian struggle for self-determination, seeing in both struggles a common theme of weak victim groups being oppressed by the forces of racism and colonialism, respectively.
“‘Hands up, don’t shoot!’ is not a catchy slogan that emerges from or announces able-bodied populations,” Puar suggests, assuming that black victims of police shootings are always innocent and their deaths are the result of police brutality as opposed to the consequences of criminal behavior. “Rather,” she continues, “this common Black Lives Matter chant is a revolutionary call for redressing the debilitating logics of racial capitalism. It is a compact sketch of the frozen black body, rendered immobile by systemic racism and the punishment doled out for not transcending it.”
And just as the black male is a perennial victim of “racial capitalism” and “systematic racism,” the Palestinian terrorist is also a victim, never a perpetrator. The Black Lives Matter story, for Puar, is analogous to and also “ . . . is the story of a Palestinian resister shot dead for wielding a knife (if that) against an idf [sic] solider who has the full backing of the world’s military might. ‘I can’t breathe!’ captures the suffocation of chokeholds on movement in Gaza and the West Bank as it does the violent forces of restraint meted out through police brutality. ‘Hands up, don’t shoot!’ and ‘I can’t breathe!’ are, in fact, disability justice rally cries.”
Supporters of the Palestinian cause have come to accept the fact that Israel will not be defeated through the use of traditional tools of warfare. Instead, the Jewish state’s enemies, abetted by the academic and media elites in the West, have begun to use different, but equally dangerous, tactics to delegitimize and eventually destroy Israel in a cognitive war. By dressing up old hatreds against Jews, as Puar has done in this new book, combined with a purported goal of seeking social justice for the oppressed, and repackaging ugly biases as seemingly pure scholarship, she and Israel’s other ideological foes have found an effective, but odious, way to ensure that the Jew of nations, Israel, is still accused of fostering social chaos and bringing harm and death to non-Jews.
It is a vicious and ugly trope in the centuries-old history of the world’s oldest hatred: that Jews still harbor murderous, sadistic, and inhuman impulses against non-Jews and wish to injure or murder them—in the current day with the Palestinian Arabs as long-suffering victims of the Jew of nations, Israel.
Richard L. Cravatts, President Emeritus of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, is the author of Dispatches From the Campus War Against Israel and Jews.
Moves by Michael Flynn’s legal team suggest he may be cooperating with special prosecutor: Report, Washington Times, , November 23, 2017
(Please see also, Special Counsel Mueller Probing Kushner’s Role in Blocking Obama’s Betrayal of Israel at UNSC (not satire) and Humor | Turkey pardoned by Trump had multiple contacts with Russian officials. — DM)
In this Feb. 1, 2017, file photo, then-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn speaks during the daily news briefing at the White House, in Washington. (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster, File)
The Times cautioned that the termination of information-sharing isn’t proof that Mr. Flynn either has cut a plea deal with prosecutors or is trying to do so — and presumably cooperating with them as a condition of the deal.
**********************
The legal team of former national security adviser Michael Flynn is reportedly no longer sharing information with attorneys for President Trump, a move that commonly happens when an investigation target starts cooperating with prosecutors.
In its report Thursday, The New York Times cited “four people involved in the case” as saying that Mr. Flynn’s attorneys had “notified the president’s legal team in recent days that they could no longer discuss” the investigation of Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller.
Mr. Mueller is probing the Trump team’s ties to Russian officials and its possible involvement in Kremlin efforts to influence the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Mr. Flynn, who resigned the NSC chief post just a couple months into Mr. Trump’s administration, is widely as the most legally vulnerable Trump insider.
The Times cautioned that the termination of information-sharing isn’t proof that Mr. Flynn either has cut a plea deal with prosecutors or is trying to do so — and presumably cooperating with them as a condition of the deal.
“Defense lawyers frequently share information during investigations, but they must stop when doing so would pose a conflict of interest. It is unethical for lawyers to work together when one client is cooperating with prosecutors and another is still under investigation,” wrote reporters Michael S. Schmidt, Matt Apuzzo and Maggie Haberman.
The Times had no official comment from either the Trump or Flynn legal teams.
As the End of Merkelism Nears, What Next for Germany? PJ Media, Michael Walsh, November 23, 2017
Der Untergang (Bernd von Jutrczenka/picture-alliance/dpa/AP Images)
The worst German chancellor since you-know-who — and one likely to prove almost as destructive to her own country and Europe as her predecessor — has finally worn out her welcome:
Angela Merkel’s worries continue as the latest polls reveal the majority of Germans did not want her to run as a candidate for Chancellor again. The survey, carried out in the coalition talks breakdown, makes worrying reading for Angela Merkel. While Mrs Merkel said yesterday she wanted to stand again in any new snap election the German people appear to be turned off by the prospect. Of those polled, 54 per cent said she should not run for office, according to the polling institute Civey for t-online.de. Only 38.5 percent of Germans would welcome a renewed candidacy of the chancellor.
If you’re wondering why Merkel — who just recently “won” her recent re-election — is thinking about running again so soon, here’s the reason: while her “conservative” party, the CDU/CSU (Christian Democratic Union and its Bavarian counterpart, the Christian Socialist Union), emerged again as the largest party in the Bundestag, she can’t form a functioning government without some sort of tactical alliance with one or more of the other parties. And that isn’t happening.
Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany faced the greatest crisis of her career on Monday after negotiations to form a new government collapsed, shaking a country that is Europe’s political and economic anchor. The breakdown abruptly raised the prospect of new elections in Germany. It came less than two months after the last elections seemed to assure that Ms. Merkel, an icon of Western democracy and values, would remain Germany’s leader for a fourth term.
The chancellor said she remained hopeful about forming a majority government. But if forced to choose, Ms. Merkel said, she would prefer to go through new elections rather than try to lead a minority government.
Of course she would: since allowing into Germany (and thus Europe) more than a million unwashed, unvetted Muslims, largely illiterate in Western languages, ways, and mores, Mutti Merkel and her stock have sunk among the German voting public, which made the anti-invasion fringe party, the AfD (Alternative for Deutschland), the third-largest party in parliament. The chancellor is now toxic, as long-repressed Germans finally cast off the last of their guilt over World War II and come to understand that foreign Muslims are in no way analogous to German Jews during the National Socialist period, and that laws meant to protect Jews and other peoples undergoing actual suffering do not apply to a horde of cultural aliens seeking “a better life” while trying to impose their savagery on the land of Luther.
The collapse of talks reflected the deep reluctance of Ms. Merkel’s conservative bloc and prospective coalition partners — the ecologist-minded Greens and pro-business Free Democrats — to compromise over key positions. The Free Democrats quit the talks late Sunday, citing what they called an atmosphere of insincerity and mistrust.
“There is no coalition of the willing to form a government,” said Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff, director of the Berlin office of the German Marshall Fund. “This is uncharted territory since 1949. We’re facing a protracted period of political immobility. Not only is this not going to go away soon, there is no clear path out.”
Welcome to reality, Germany. Since the end of the war — and certainly since reunification — the Germans have lived in a fool’s paradise in which their guilt morphed into a sense of social and moral superiority to the rest of the world, especially regarding their protector, the United States of America. Shielded by American troops and nuclear weapons from the Russian bear for half a century, they spent little or nothing on their own defense, and instead created a social democracy for themselves that worked just fine as long as a) worker productivity stayed sky-high and b) nobody cheated the system. But as the pernicious doctrine of multi-culturalism — called Multikulti in German — penetrated German society, the system could no longer hold.
Diversity proved to be its death.
As things turned out, the vaunted German superiority turned out to be helpless in the face of the “progressive” Left (Germany is inordinately fond of socialism — where do you think Marx came from?). Housebroken since the late 1940s to avoid “extremism,” German politics evolved as a revolving door between slightly right of center and a little further left of center — with “center” defined as democratic socialism. Now, in the face of hordes of Syrian doctors, Afghan basket-weavers, African drummers, Arab falafel-shop proprietors, and other cultural enrichers, the postwar political consensus is collapsing. “Wir shaffen das!” was Merkel’s slogan: “We can do it.” In fact, they couldn’t.
Some were quick to link Germany’s disorder to a broader crisis of democracy in the West. “The unthinkable has happened,” said Christiane Hoffmann, deputy head of the Berlin bureau of Der Spiegel, a German magazine. In that sense, she said, “This is Germany’s Brexit moment, its Trump moment.”
The East German Merkel’s reputation was always inordinately high among her fellow travelers in the West, who saw her as both a childless progressive and an unattractive woman, celebrated accordingly, and looked no farther. The media needed a symbol of European “resistance” to both Brexit and Trump, and they thought they had one with her. They relied on German passivity and pre-Muslim invasion social consensus to keep things stable, since it literally made no material difference whether the CDU or its main rival, the SPD (the Social Democratic Party), was in power, first in Bonn and now in Berlin.
Alas, it may still be that Germany’s version of the Permanent Bipartisan Fusion Party will yet come to her rescue:
The leader of Germany’s Social Democrats came under growing pressure on Thursday to drop his opposition to a new “grand coalition” with Angela Merkel’s conservatives, with senior politicians arguing the party had a duty to promote stability. Merkel is facing the biggest political crisis of her career since efforts to forge a three-way coalition with the pro-business Free Democrats (FDP) and Greens collapsed last weekend. That has raised worries across Europe of a prolonged leadership vacuum in the continent’s economic powerhouse.
The Social Democrats (SPD) have governed in coalition under Merkel since 2013. But leader Martin Schulz said the party must heed the will of voters by going into opposition after achieving its worst result of the postwar period in the Sept. 24 election. Pressure is growing on the party to revisit his decision, either by agreeing to prop up a conservative-led minority government by not voting against it, or by forming a renewed coalition.
As we all know, Leftists abhor a “power vaccum,” and will rush right in to fill it. And don’t underestimate how powerful those forces are: the entire American media will cheer any announcement of a new right-left coalition, and the entire European Union is praying for it. The peasants are revolting, and something simply must be done and quickly, until the next Muslim atrocity strikes and the electorate remembers exactly who visited this plague upon them.
But the rumblings of the Blond Beast can be heard in the distance, growing louder. From the battle of Teutoburg Forest to Stalingrad, nothing good has ever come of that.
Recent Comments