Sunday, December 08, 2019

Blaming Christians for Islamic crimes

NY Times Jewish columnist Bari Weiss has another column about her weirdo Jewish persecution complex, and a Jewish atheist professor responds:
I don’t think we’re on the way to another Holocaust, but I am concerned at how readily the Left, traditionally champions of the underdog, now demonizes and dismisses Jews.

And that concerns Bari Weiss as well, as she explains in her New York Times editorial today (click on screenshot below). Weiss, of course, has alienated many of her colleagues at the paper not only by her attacks on anti-Semitism (the NYT is full of young woke reporters), but also by her criticisms of the Left in general. Yet she’s still a liberal, and I feel a kinship with her even though I think she may actually believe in God.
This is just lunacy to describe Jews as underdogs. Jews are the most privileged ethnic group on Earth.

The NY Times also has a full-page ad asking Jews for donations to fight the Christian theocracy of the Trump administration.

A comment:
If there was ever an administration that supports the aspirations and concerns of the Israeli government, it would be the “far right” Trump Administration.

As far as “conservative Christians”, Christians United for Israel is a large and influential Evangelical Christian organization that lobbies for policies that benefit Israel.

I don’t see any evidence that any mainstream member of the GOP or the American Conservative Establishment supports anything remotely like “Anti-Semitism”. Any person who remotely promoted anything approaching such an attitude was immediately purged (like Joe Sobran’s departure from the National Review in 1993). Right-wing “Anti-Semitism” is the exclusive domain of the internet Nazis basement dwellers.

To the extent that there is institutional Anti-Semitism, it is on the Left entirely. Sharpton has national voice despite his involvement in Crown Heights (and other venues). Farrakhan is alive and well on Twitter, and is even pictured in a close meeting with a former Democratic President.

On the other hand, the emergence and influence of a group like J Street suggests that the traditional Israel Lobby (groups like APAIC) are out of step with the concerns of many American Jews, not to mention non-Jews. I’m not sure why there can’t be a political discussion around American foreign policy and Israel without name-calling. Granted, there are plenty of extremists on both sides which would have a voice in that discussion, but when isn’t that the case.

Last, the article talks about “American” Anti-Semitism and then refers to events in France, Italy and the UK, which last time I checked were not in America.
Weiss complains that a Paris murder of a Jew should have been prosecuted more vigorously as a hate crime, because the killer shouted “Allahu akbar”.

Okay, Moslems hate Jews. That is not news. But of course these Jews are all in favor of Moslem immigration.

Weiss says "perhaps you haven’t being paying much attention to what by now can be described as a moral calamity sweeping the West". No, she does not mean Moslem immigration is a moral calamity. Just the opposite.

Yet Jews blame Christians, and Christians foolishly accept it:
Even today, Daniel Rossing, a former advisor on Christian affairs to Israel’s religious Affairs Ministry, has commented on anti-Christian violence in Israel, which peaks during Purim. “I know Christians who lock themselves indoors during the entire Purim holiday,” he says. And yet, while Christians are spat upon and assaulted in Israel, and mocked and obscenely treated in the Diaspora, the majority of Christians remain among the most guilt-ridden and philosemitic of Europeans, applauding Zionist wars that kill their sons, and lauding a people that has done more than any other to overturn traditional Christian moral values. It is one of the most glaring contradictions in this age of contradictions.

The latest chapter in this sorry state of affairs is that the Church of England has, in its latest official treatise, decided to announce formal repentance to the Jews for centuries of putative injustices, as well as the Church’s unconditional adoption of Zionism.
The article goes on the explain how Jews have pressure the Church of England into subservience.

How is it that one religion gets to dictates the beliefs of another religion?

It is amazing to see Jews complain about being underdogs, when they have the power and influence to impeach an American President, and to dictate the doctrinal teachings of a rival religion.

Saturday, December 07, 2019

American families are separated every day

Reason reports:
A mother from Michigan lost custody of her children after a pediatrician decided that red splotches on her 6-week-old's skin were signs of deliberate physical abuse.

Another mother, from Washington state, was separated from her children for more than a year because a child abuse specialist said she was exaggerating her 5-year-old's health problems.

A Florida mother took her 4-month-old son to the hospital after he suffered a seizure. A doctor contacted child services, claiming the child must have been shaken or beaten. The boy's father was charged with the crime. Charges were eventually dropped after other medical experts disputed the initial claims.

These are all examples from a terrific NBC/Houston Chronicle report on mistakes made by child protective services (CPS) agencies around the country: "Hundreds of parents say kids wrongly taken from them after doctors misdiagnosed abuse."

Lenore Skenazy and I have covered many of these cases of wrongful family separation for Reason. They are heartbreaking. They generally follow a pattern: Parents behave in a manner that is completely normal, some authority figure becomes suspicious anyway, the cops are called, and CPS takes the kids away on some slim suspicion that they are being abused. The enraged, confused, often traumatized parents must then scrape together a strong enough case to regain custody of their children from foster care. They often go weeks without even knowing what has become of their kids.
This is why it is annoying to hear some leftist open-borders freak throw a tantrum about family separation at the border. Our government separates kids from families every day in family courts and CPS courts. You can visit your local courthouse to see it for yourself. And the families are not even illegal aliens.

Friday, December 06, 2019

Muhammad is now a popular name in USA

The San Fran paper announces:
Revealing a rise in Arabic names, Muhammad and Aaliyah made the top 10 for the first time, replacing Mason and Layla.
Someday historians will try to figure out how Islam conquered the West. They will be puzzled.

Why did America decide to import millions of Mohammedans? Why did America fight numerous wars in support of Islamic causes?

Thursday, December 05, 2019

The four impeachment experts

The four testifying impeachment experts were unbearable:
Here’s a look at all four:
Noah Feldman

Feldman is Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law at Harvard Law School, where he’s also the director of the Julis-Rabinowitz Program on Jewish and Israeli Law.
Really? Couldn't they find some non-Jew who studies American law?

All four were Trump-hater Democrats.

Then there was Pamela S. Karlan. She is an obnoxious Jewish lesbian.

They had nothing, except hatred for Trump, and a smug know-it-all attitude. The Nadler hearings are even worse than the Schiff hearings.

Update: The Jewish Daily Forward confirms that all three anti-Trump witnesses are Jewish. So is chairman Nadler, and most of the other key players.

YouTube has banned a video calling it a Jew coup.

Danish immigrant wants multi-ethnic Denmark

From a NY Times op-ed:
I would be contacted shortly by the Danish police; the university had just learned I was facing criminal charges for violating my work and residence permit. ...

A month before, I’d been on top of the world and ready to apply for permanent residence in Denmark, the country that had been my home for nearly eight years.
It is amazing how this guy can think that he can move to Denmark and violate its laws.
Long before the Trump administration, the populist Danish People’s Party formed a bloc in Parliament in the early 2000s and influenced a shift in the laws of a country formerly known for its warm welcome to outsiders. The party didn’t want to just eliminate immigration; it sought to return Denmark to an imaginary past of racial and ethnic “purity.” As the party platform states: “Denmark is not an immigrant country and never has been. Thus we will not accept transformation to a multiethnic society.”

This is more or less what Mr. Trump’s immigration adviser, Stephen Miller, wants for the United States, which is why it is important for Americans to understand where such policies lead.
It makes sense to me that Denmark would not want to be transformed into something else.
The kind of xenophobia that afflicted Denmark appeared last month, during impeachment hearings, in commentary questioning the loyalty of public servants like Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman and Fiona Hill because they are immigrants. Their contributions — including a willingness to risk death in the name of duty — don’t matter to their critics, who saw and heard only one thing: not one of us.
Yes, I thought "not one of us", and that was because of they disloyality. They wanted to carry our their own foreign policy, based on what they thought was good for Ukraine, instead of following their elected superiors.
On top of the staggering moral failure this represents — alongside the Muslim travel ban and the horrors of caged Central American children — this is just unfathomably self-defeating. Immigrants helped Americans win World War II and put Americans on the moon; ...
So becaue Werner von Braun helped us design rockets, we need to take Muslim terrorists and Honduran child traffickers? This is crazy.

This is nutty. Maybe Denmark should have jailed him for teaching stupidity to his students.

Wednesday, December 04, 2019

The Left is destructive

Dennis Prager writes:
Yet, leftists -- most especially LGBTQ groups, which spread a remarkable amount of hate in the name of "love" -- seek to crush The Salvation Army. They threaten and pressure whoever supports The Salvation Army. ...

One of the great puzzles in contemporary American life is whether there is anything the left could do to make Americans understand how destructive it is. If suppressing free speech at colleges and on the internet, fomenting interracial anger, supporting those who wish to annihilate Israel, allowing (and even encouraging) teenage girls to have their healthy breasts surgically removed if they think they are a boy and trying to crush The Salvation Army don't do it, probably nothing will.
Prager is an Orthodox Jew, and not a leftist. The Salvation Army is Christian. Prager doesn't want to say it, but his enemies are really the secular Jews.

Tuesday, December 03, 2019

Subjective motivations should be irrelevant

A law professor attacks this Bill Barr opinion:
The Supreme Court has traditionally refused, across a wide variety of contexts, to inquire into the subjective motivation behind governmental action. To take the classic example, if a police officer has probable cause to initiate a traffic stop, his subjective motivations are irrelevant. And just last term, the Supreme Court appropriately shut the door to claims that otherwise-lawful redistricting can violate the Constitution if the legislators who drew the lines were actually motivated by political partisanship.

What is true of police officers and gerrymanderers is equally true of the President and senior Executive officials. With very few exceptions, neither the Constitution, nor the Administrative Procedure Act or any other relevant statute, calls for judicial review of executive motive. They apply only to executive action. Attempts by courts to act like amateur psychiatrists attempting to discern an Executive official's "real motive" — often after ordering invasive discovery into the Executive Branch's privileged decision-making process — have no more foundation in the law than a subpoena to a court to try to determine a judge's real motive for issuing its decision. And courts' indulgence of such claims, even if they are ultimately rejected, represents a serious intrusion on the President's constitutional prerogatives.

Monday, December 02, 2019

Reframing history as slavery and DNA

The World Socialist Web Site posts this essay:
“The 1619 Project,” published by the New York Times as a special 100-page edition of its Sunday magazine on August 19, presents and interprets American history entirely through the prism of race and racial conflict. The occasion for this publication is the 400th anniversary of the initial arrival of 20 African slaves at Port Comfort in Virginia, a British colony in North America. On the very next day, the slaves were traded for food.

The Project, according to the Times, intends to “reframe the country’s history, understanding 1619 as our true founding, and placing the consequences of slavery and the contributions of black Americans at the very center of the story we tell ourselves about who we are.”

Despite the pretense of establishing the United States’ “true” foundation, the 1619 Project is a politically motivated falsification of history. Its aim is to create a historical narrative that legitimizes the effort of the Democratic Party to construct an electoral coalition based on the prioritizing of personal “identities” — i.e., gender, sexual preference, ethnicity, and, above all, race.

The Times is promoting the Project with an unprecedented and lavishly financed publicity blitz. It is working with the Pulitzer Center on Crisis Reporting, which has developed a proposed teaching curriculum that will be sent to schools for teachers to use in their classes. Hundreds of thousands of extra copies of the magazine and a special supplement have been printed for free distribution at schools, libraries and museums across the country. Nikole Hannah-Jones, the staff writer and New America Foundation fellow who first pitched the idea for the Project, oversaw its production and authored the introduction, will be sent on a national lecture tour of schools.

The essays featured in the magazine are organized around the central premise that all of American history is rooted in race hatred — specifically, the uncontrollable hatred of “black people” by “white people.” Hannah-Jones writes in the series’ introduction: “Anti-black racism runs in the very DNA of this country.
Glad to see that even some leftists see what absurd propaganda the NY Times is peddling. The NY Times will do anything to promote racial antagonisms.
In yet another article, published in the current edition of Foreign Affairs, the neurologist Robert Sapolsky argues that the antagonism between human groups is rooted in biology. Extrapolating from bloody territorial conflicts between chimpanzees, with whom humans “share more than 98 percent of their DNA,” Sapolsky asserts that understanding “the dynamics of human group identity, including the resurgence of nationalism — that potentially most destructive form of in-group bias — requires grasping the biological and cognitive underpinnings that shape them.”

Sapolsky’s simplistic dissolution of history into biology recalls not only the reactionary invocation of “Social Darwinism” to legitimize imperialist conquest by the late nineteen and early twentieth century imperialists, but also the efforts of German geneticists to provide a pseudo-scientific justification for Nazi anti-Semitism and racism.

Dangerous and reactionary ideas are wafting about in bourgeois academic and political circles. No doubt, the authors of the Project 1619 essays would deny that they are predicting race war, let alone justifying fascism. But ideas have a logic; and authors bear responsibility for the political conclusions and consequences of their false and misguided arguments.
I guess that he is trying to say that if racial groups have an innate hatred of each other, then we would be led to policies that separate those groups.

The essay goes on to give some interesting historical info, from a leftist perspective.