Saturday, June 24, 2017
Friday, June 23, 2017
Conrad Black: Palestinian terror and Israel boycotts aren't a form of 'dissent.' They're just evil and stupid
...The terrorists and Jew-hating leaders of the ostensible Palestinians are incongruously dusted off as dissenters in the same pristine virtuosity as the enemies of thalidomide and ecological pollution and unjust conviction of the innocent and hair-trigger war-making. It is a set-up; the narrative has built up a solid bank of appreciation of the positive role of those who dissent by nature (apart from the light-hearted apologia for the Occupy Wall Street foolishness). But suddenly the tenor and tempo change, and the horribly complicated problem of Jews and Arabs in Israel is rendered as apartheid, oppression, and the whitewashing of Palestinian terrorism and of their claim to a right to swamp the Jews demographically and reduce them, once again, to a minority, sure to be oppressed yet again, and this time in the country the world gave them as a Jewish homeland. It need hardly be emphasized that it is a complicated issue. The British sold the same real estate to both sides in 1917; the United Nations made Israel a Jewish state, and the Israelis have successfully defended and expanded it after Arab-initiated wars in 1948, 1967 and 1973.
The answer is not to give knee-jerk adherence to a campaign of boycott and disinvestment against Israel in favour of an Arab population that will not leave because it is better treated and more prosperous than in Arab countries, and that shelters suicide bombers, knife-assailants of the innocent, and other terrorists. The Palestinians could have their state next week if they acknowledged Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state...
Thursday, June 22, 2017
Ayaan Hirsi Ali & Asra Nomani testified before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, and this happened...
...what happened that day was emblematic of a deeply troubling trend among progressives when it comes to confronting the brutal reality of Islamist extremism and what it means for women in many Muslim communities here at home and around the world. When it comes to the pay gap, abortion access and workplace discrimination, progressives have much to say. But we’re still waiting for a march against honor killings, child marriages, polygamy, sex slavery or female genital mutilation.
Sitting before the senators that day were two women of color: Ayaan is from Somalia; Asra is from India. Both of us were born into deeply conservative Muslim families. Ayaan is a survivor of female genital mutilation and forced marriage. Asra defied Shariah by having a baby while unmarried. And we have both been threatened with death by jihadists for things we have said and done. Ayaan cannot appear in public without armed guards.
In other words, when we speak about Islamist oppression, we bring personal experience to the table in addition to our scholarly expertise. Yet the feminist mantra so popular when it comes to victims of sexual assault — believe women first — isn’t extended to us. Neither is the notion that the personal is political. Our political conclusions are dismissed as personal; our personal experiences dismissed as political.
That’s because in the rubric of identity politics, our status as women of color is canceled out by our ideas, which are labeled “conservative” — as if opposition to violent jihad, sex slavery, genital mutilation or child marriage were a matter of left or right. This not only silences us, it also puts beyond the pale of liberalism a basic concern for human rights and the individual rights of women abused in the name of Islam.
There is a real discomfort among progressives on the left with calling out Islamic extremism. Partly they fear offending members of a “minority” religion and being labeled racist, bigoted or Islamophobic. There is also the idea, which has tremendous strength on the left, that non-Western women don’t need “saving” — and that the suggestion that they do is patronizing at best. After all, the thinking goes, if women in America still earn less than men for equivalent work, who are we to criticize other cultures?
This is extreme moral relativism disguised as cultural sensitivity...
Tuesday, June 20, 2017
On a hospital bed at the Ziv Medical Center, high in the Upper Galilee Mountains, a Syrian rebel who goes by the name Ramadan was still wincing in pain from a bullet that had torn through his right shoulder only 10 days before. But he said there was something important he wanted to tell me. The gruff-voiced, barrel-chested fighter sat up on his hospital bed and began.
“All the world is killing us, all the world,” he said. “All my life I was told Israel is my enemy. I grew up like that, to believe that Israel is the devil. But all the world is against us, and only Israel is our friend. The world is killing us. Israel is saving us.”
How it came to pass that Ramadan ended up in an Israeli hospital in a picturesque mountaintop city said to have been founded by Shem, the son of Noah, is straightforward enough, even with some of the details necessarily left out—Ramadan’s real name, for instance, and the name of his home village, where his worried wife and two sons were waiting for him to come home.
“I am a fighter for the Free Syrian Army. I was in a battle to protect my village from soldiers of Bashar Assad. They were attacking us,” Ramadan said. In the fighting, he was hit by a round fired from an MG3 machine gun. It tore open his upper arm and shredded his shoulder. The FSA unit won the battle. “My village is still free,” Ramadan said. But he’d been severely wounded. He could have bled to death.
“One of my team had a friend from a village near the Israeli border, so they took me there right away. They put me on a donkey. The donkey carried me up to the Israeli border. And then the Israeli soldiers brought me here.”
What is not so straightforward is how it came to pass that more than 3,000 Syrians have been taken in by Israeli hospitals over the past four years...
As Canadian Ambassador to the United States and later as Secretary of State for External Affairs, Lester Pearson played an integral role in the founding and early development of the United Nations. Pearson, who would go on to become Canada's Prime Minister from 1963 to 1968, is credited with establishing the UN's peacekeeping force, commencing with the Suez Crisis of 1956. For that role, Pearson was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1957.
Consequentially, Canada's emotional, philosophical, and political investment in the prestige of the United Nations has become a virtual article of faith. Since the late 1950's, Canadian schoolchildren essentially have been conditioned to believe that the United Nations has moral authority and practical value beyond question.
However, like many religious beliefs, the United Nations' value does not stand up particularly well to reasoned scrutiny. Last Friday, at Idea City, the annual conference conducted in Toronto by Canadian media innovator and impresario Moses Znaimer, an organized exercise in heresy occurred in which the corruption, ineffectiveness, hypocrisy, and destructiveness of the current UN was laid bare.
An Idea City panel, which included University of Toronto's distinguished Professor of International Relations and Political Science, Aurel Braun, National Post columnist and University of Ottawa guest professor John Robson, and Geoffrey Clarfield, an anthropologist and author who has done consulting work with UN agencies, spent close to an hour dissecting and exposing the rot at the core of today's United Nations.
Professor Braun provided historical perspective that struck to the heart of the UN's central incompetency by delineating it as fraudulent in its core purpose for existence; to provide international security and deter unlawful aggression.
The United Nations, Braun noted, was as abject a failure as the League of Nations, whose paralysis allowed Mussolini to invade Abyssinia and thus lay the groundwork for Hitler to build the forces he used for his Blitzkrieg against Europe. Neville Chamberlain, the British Prime Minister whose "peace in our time" capitulation to Hitler made World War 2 inevitable, was also the principal apologist for the League of Nation's uselessness. He proposed that though the League had failed it its main purpose, perhaps by doing other good deeds through its agencies, it could eventually regain moral and actual authority.
The opposite has happened and the parallels between the League and the UN are stark. The UN had failed to prevent the genocides in Cambodia, Rwanda, and Sudan, Its many security failings, including the inability to prevent Russia's illegal takeover of the Crimea or China's conquest of Tibet, are too numerous to list here, whereas the UN's successes are too few and minor to bother noting.
In the case of the UN, the supposed good works of its peripheral agencies are in fact corrupt enterprises that undermine any moral authority the organization may claim. The UN is for the most part a dictators' club whose member governments lack the validity of being democratically chosen representatives of their people. It is those undemocratic values and institutions that the UN frequently fosters, and in so doing, according to Braun, make it irredeemable.
Panelist John Robson described the abysmal UN Human Rights Council, which is comprised of some of the worst human rights abusers on the planet, such as Saudi Arabia, Cuba and Venezuela. Its obsession with vilifying Israel, which has a vastly better human rights record than the UN nations which condemn it, has led to an absurd situation where Israel has more motions against it in the UNHRC than all the other countries of the world combined. Seeking justice at the UN is a futile exercise since its International Court of Justice is so hopelessly politicized that it is a court of injustice.
Geoffrey Clarfield described the corruption, waste, antisemitism, and ineptitude of a variety of UN agencies scattered across the world, like the WHO, the World Bank, and the Jew-hating UNESCO, which has tried to disclaim a connection between Israel and Jews. The UN had put billions into Saddam Hussein's bank account with its crooked oil-for-food program and the panelists didn't even get around to mentioning the rapes committed by forces under the UN banner or the cholera epidemic it introduced into Haiti that killed over 7000 people.
It was, for most, an enlightening session which shattered the blind, ignorant faith in the UN's immaculateness that Canadians have thrust upon them.
I had a personal interest in the panel in that it was I who first proposed the idea to Idea City and Znaimer, in that it was meant to be part of an ongoing discussion towards establishing alternatives to the UN which would be made up only of countries which are genuine democracies.
But there is a long way to go before something like that is achieved or even to convince Canadians to look at the facts about the United Nations. In the area outside the hall where the panel was delivered, I later ran into an acquaintance; a nice person who is a very successful marketing executive with one of Canada's best known companies. I asked him what he thought of the panel and he said he couldn't stand to listen "to that right-wing, fascist crap."
The panelists all criticized the UN for its acquiescence to authoritarianism and for not promoting democratic values, which would make what they said the precise opposite of "fascist crap." I doubt very much my acquaintance would have been able to explain what fascism is if he were asked. I disagreed, but didn't challenge him. After all, it's not his fault he was raised in a national cult of uncritical UN worship. But perhaps, with more discussions like that which occurred at this year's Idea City, enough fissures in the UN's facade will allow Canadians to see the truth about the organization in which they have placed such blind, unwarranted faith.
Monday, June 19, 2017
Meet the new ‘human rights’ — where you are forced by law to use ‘reasonable’ pronouns like ‘ze’ and ‘zer’
When University of Toronto professor Jordan Peterson posted his now notorious YouTube video spelling out his refusal to use non-gendered pronouns, activists expressed their outrage. Non-gendered people have the right to be accommodated and respected, the protests went, and Peterson must use language consistent with those rights. These objections illustrate what few activists or politicians will openly acknowledge: “Human rights” are now a zero-sum game. Giving rights to some means taking them from others.
On Thursday, the Senate passed Bill C-16, the Liberal government’s legislation that adds “gender identity or expression” to grounds of discrimination in the Canadian Human Rights Act. Bill C-16 was in part the motivation for Peterson’s video. The act applies to federal subjects (including airports, banks, the military and federally regulated industries), while equivalent provincial codes apply to remaining areas of personal and commercial activities (including most workplaces, schools, universities, hospitals and so on). Most provinces recently added the same or similar terms to their discrimination provisions.
Few Canadians realize how seriously these statutes infringe upon freedom of speech. The Ontario Human Rights Commission has stated, in the context of equivalent provisions in the Ontario Human Rights Code, that “refusing to refer to a trans person by their chosen name and a personal pronoun that matches their gender identity … will likely be discrimination when it takes place in a social area covered by the Code, including employment, housing and services like education.”
In other words, failure to use a person’s pronoun of choice — “ze,” “zir,” “they” or any one of a multitude of other potential non-words — will land you in hot water with the commission. That, in turn, can lead to orders for correction, apology, Soviet-like “re-education,” fines and, in cases of continued non-compliance, incarceration for contempt of court. This peril is exactly what Peterson warned of in his video, for which he was mocked for scaremongering...
Friday, June 16, 2017
Thursday, June 15, 2017
...As comic-book fans remember, Diana Prince married Steve Trevor back in the ’70s, and then he went into politics and spent decades banging every other woman in sight. Eventually he went all the way to the White House, where he carried on an affair with intern Etta Candy (“Blue Dress, Red Rage,” Wonder Woman #347). Diana stayed with Steve the whole time, strictly for political reasons. She even helped him malign the many, many women he left in his wake. Then she tried to ride Steve’s coattails and run for president herself, but she failed twice because she was a bad person and an even worse candidate. The only reason she could give voters to elect her was that she’d be the first POTUS with a vagina, and it just wasn’t enough. She was just that personally repellent.
Tuesday, June 13, 2017
Monday, June 12, 2017
...Pride Toronto has worked hard to create safe spaces for gay LGBTQ people of colour. For instance, for the last near-20 years, Pride has hosted "Blockorama" during the weekend of the parade — an area specifically for black artists, musicians, writers, singers, dancers and regular folk to celebrate black and African cultures. By contrast, there has never been an official program for LGBTQ people during the Toronto Caribbean Carnival, formerly (and colloquially) known as "Caribana."
Indeed, I can honestly say I feel uncomfortable at Caribana due to black homophobia, which Black Lives Matter casually ignores. I am constantly looking over my shoulder in fear of being attacked, simply because I am a gay man. In recent years, I have stayed away entirely. Yet there is virtually no dialogue about anti-LGBTQ prejudice within the black community.
Black Lives Matter could use their political and social power to actually raise awareness about this issue, but it is apparently easier for them to target the white gay community than it is to tackle black homophobia. And Pride Toronto yields to their requests, as if the black community is a monolithic entity represented by a single group...
Sunday, June 11, 2017
Saturday, June 10, 2017
Adam West was in on the joke, but he played Batman as if he didn’t know there was a joke. That was West’s genius.
West, who died Friday at 88 in Los Angeles after a struggle with leukemia, was initially frustrated by the way that his most famous role defined him; but in the end he embraced it. Born William West Anderson in Walla Walla, Washington—the sort of comic-bookish town name that showed up on suitcase stickers in Looney Tunes shorts—he built his resume in Eisenhower-era genre shows, including Perry Mason, The Outer Limits, Sugarfoot, Lawman and The Rifleman. He finally got his big break at 37 when ABC turned DC Comics’ defining superhero comic into a knowingly kitschy series.
Created by William Dozier and developed by Lorenzo Semple, Jr., the show made West and his costars, including the once and future Robin, Burt Ward, into international celebrities. Batman sent up comic book traditions via pun-saturated dialogue, primary colored costumes, outrageous tools and machines, hammy bad guys, and colorful fight captions (“Biff!” “Zlonk!” “Kpow!”) that exploded across the screen, accompanied by atonal horn blasts that suggested the noise Duke Ellington’s brass section might make if the ceiling collapsed on it...
To everyone’s surprise (including ABC’s), the series became a hit. Its audience included comic book loving adults and children, urban aesthetes, and counterculture-minded teens and twentysomethings. The latter would normally have sneered at anything appearing on a medium that Newton Minow once dubbed “the vast wasteland.” They made an exception for Batman, because the series seemed to gently mock the same conventions that powered everything else on TV, as well as the self-image of a nation that hyped a black hats-vs.-white hats view of morality after living in a grey zone for two centuries.
Friday, June 9, 2017
The woman accused of leaking classified information once wrote she wanted "to burn the White House Down...find somewhere in Kurdistan to live," prompting prosecutors on Thursday to argue she would flee the country if she was released on bond.
Reality Winner appeared before a judge in Augusta, Ga., on Thursday who ordered her to remain jailed until her trial. Prosecutors argued that the 25-year-old might try to flee the U.S. if she was released on bond. They added that Winner wrote in her notebook alleged plans to set the White House on fire, travel to Afghanistan and pledge her allegiance to the Taliban, WSB-TV reported.
Winner also called her mother while in jail and coached her on what tell the media, urging her to say that her daughter was "scared."
"Mom, those documents. I screwed up," Winner also reportedly confessed to her mom in the recorded jailhouse phone call.
Winner also allegedly told her sister she was "pretty, white and cute" and that Winner believed her bond hearing would play out in her favor, according to the news station...
Thursday, June 8, 2017
Tuesday, June 6, 2017
The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education is poisoning its students with radical Marxist indoctrination, and is then, in turn, sending those students out as teachers to poison the minds of public school students from the elementary level up. Their idolization of mass-murderers like Che Guevera and Mao Tze-Tung is as evil as if they were extolling the virtues of Hitler.
This is what OISE describes as "Social Justice." Mao called it the Cultural Revolution.
Monday, June 5, 2017
I've been writing about the neo-Marxist cesspool, The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, for quite some time.
Saturday, June 3, 2017
Bret Weinstein is a biology professor at Evergreen State College in Olympia, Wash., who supported Bernie Sanders, admiringly retweets Glenn Greenwald and was an outspoken supporter of the Occupy Wall Street movement.
You could be forgiven for thinking that Mr. Weinstein, who identifies himself as “deeply progressive,” is just the kind of teacher that students at one of the most left-wing colleges in the country would admire. Instead, he has become a victim of an increasingly widespread campaign by leftist students against anyone who dares challenge ideological orthodoxy on campus.
This professor’s crime? He had the gall to challenge a day of racial segregation.
A bit of background: The “Day of Absence” is an Evergreen tradition that stretches back to the 1970s. As Mr. Weinstein explained on Wednesday in The Wall Street Journal, “in previous years students and faculty of color organized a day on which they met off campus — a symbolic act based on the Douglas Turner Ward play in which all the black residents of a Southern town fail to show up one morning.” This year, the script was flipped: “White students, staff and faculty will be invited to leave campus for the day’s activities,” reported the student newspaper on the change. The decision was made after students of color “voiced concern over feeling as if they are unwelcome on campus, following the 2016 election.”
Mr. Weinstein thought this was wrong. The biology professor said as much in a letter to Rashida Love, the school’s Director of First Peoples Multicultural Advising Services. “There is a huge difference between a group or coalition deciding to voluntarily absent themselves from a shared space in order to highlight their vital and under-appreciated roles,” he wrote, “and a group or coalition encouraging another group to go away.”...
Friday, June 2, 2017
...Among the many difficulties in penning a memoir is picking a title, which Hillary says she still needs to do ahead of publication (which is expected to be in September). Luckily for her, when USA Today reported as much, the American public had a few ideas…