Sunday, November 29, 2015

Trump and Carson wrong about 911 celebrators

Paris - A time to love and a time to hate

Strong Mutually Antagonistic Governments Everywhere by Steve Sailer

In the spirit of Aristotelian moderation, allow me to suggest that an emerging danger of the 21st century is that the non-Western world could get overly right-wing. Ironically, a major cause would be that white Western liberals are focusing all of their firepower—using as cat’s paws flagrantly illiberal nonwhites such as Muslim immigrants—upon the second-most progressive group on earth, white Western conservatives.
In a world where Western whites are an increasingly tiny minority, falling from roughly 19 percent of the world’s population in 1950 to perhaps 9 percent today, this divide is dangerous. The internecine status war among the people who built the modern world looks increasingly likely to embolden the rest of the human race to regress into bad old habits, such as religious dogmatism and bellicose tribalism.
As Tom Wolfe entitled his last novel, the world seems to be headed Back to Blood.
For example, ever since the Paris massacres, American liberals have been engaged in a collective nervous breakdown over their insistence that their War on Islamophobia is the most important value imaginable. The respectable opinion has become that whites cannot morally allow themselves to recognize that Middle Eastern Muslims tend to be the most violently reactionary people. Noticing would be, we are lectured, “un-American.”
But that raises the question: Why should Muslims in the West bother to behave better if rewarding the bad behavior of Muslims with visas has become the acid test of gentility among Western whites? What’s the incentive?
Read More:

Turkey's links to Islamic State

Turkey's links to Islamic State. 56852.jpeg

Research carried out by a team of international experts has revealed nine pieces of evidence that Turkey has collaborated with Islamic State since 2014. This latest revelation, when added to the Armenian Genocide, the attempted genocide against the Kurds and the Alevi, when added to the repression, torture and atrocities carried out by Turkey even against its own people, underlines the notion that the State of Turkey is a pariah.

Authenticity of material confirmed

Recent research carried out by a team of experts from Columbia University, including researchers from the United States of America, Turkey and the European Union, led by David L. Phillips, Director of the Program of Peace-Building and Rights, Columbia University Institute for the Study of Human Rights, has raised allegations that Turkey has been collaborating with Islamic State. These are not empty allegations and before anyone raises accusations that the statements were unfounded chatter picked up from the Internet and clippings, I have not just copied and pasted this material from an Armenian website or the Huffington Post, I took the trouble to contact the authors to verify the authenticity of the material. The response was "confirmed".
While Turkish President Erdogan denies these allegations and speaks about a smear campaign in the media, let us see the allegations for ourselves, set out in the research paper "ISIS-Turkey links".

Read More:

Panic Spreads in Germany as Invaders Bring Diseases

Panic is starting to spread in Germany as it becomes ever more apparent that the swarm of nonwhite invaders who have poured into that country are bringing with them many serious infectious diseases and are quickly pushing that country’s medical system to the breaking point.
One dental practice in the city of Erfurt dared—and was quickly rebuked—for issuing a warning to their ordinary patients about the serious diseases that are being imported into that country.
The written warning to clients specified which diseases had been identified as being brought in by the invaders.
The warning poster read as follows:
“Valued residents!
We would like to inform you that we are obligated by law to treat asylum seekers in an emergency.
We were informed by the Robert Koch Institute and the Thuringian State Office for Consumer Protection, that asylum seekers have been diagnosed with, inter alia, the following communicable diseases:
Lice, scabies, tuberculosis, Lassa fever, Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever, bacterial meningitis, measles, typhoid fever, and EHEC [Enterohaemorrhagic E. coli].
Upon completion of the emergency service, we will carry out appropriate disinfection measures in the lower staircase and on doors. Of course, we will provide disinfectants when needed.”
Read More:

Free Speech and Equality on Campus by Mark Graber

To be a member of an historically disadvantaged group is to be a member of a group with a contested past, present and future.  Americans cannot stop talking about race, gender, sexual orientation and the like because we disagree on how past discriminations affect the present, we disagree on what policies are necessary to combat remaining discriminations, we disagree on what a future world without discrimination would look like and we think resolutions of these disagreements vital for a just society.  To be a member of an historically disadvantaged group, for these reasons, is to be talked about and scrutinized far more than members of groups whose status on campus and in society is far less contested.  The consequence is inevitable tensions between free speech and equality, particular for those of us who think of ourselves as left-center, committed to achieving a proper balance between values that are not entirely harmonious.

For persons on the moderate left, affirmative action programs and the latest pronouncements from the university diversity office are precisely the sort of matters that ought to be the subject of intense public debate.  They are not truths from which we allow the stupid to dissent only because, as John Stuart Mill suggested, responding their stupidity or bigotry keeps those truths vital.  Rather, numerous issues of race, gender, sexuality, ethnicity and the like are matters on which human reason has yet to resolve certain very fundamental issues.  We may favor affirmative action and think conservatives vastly underestimate the influence of past discriminations on present statuses.  Nevertheless, what might be called the squishy left thinks that reasoning people might disagree on issues as diverse as the use of race conscious measures in college admissions, the explanations for wage gaps between men and women and the proper etiquette for Halloween customs on campus.  Debate over what costumes students should wear is vital for the same reason debate over the best response to ISIS is vital.  Both are matters on which human capacities and policies are likely to be improved through the interchange of ideas.

Read More:

Syria's Assad says his enemies increasing support for insurgents

AMMAN: Syrian President Bashar Assad told a senior Iranian official Sunday that his adversaries had increased weapon supplies and financial support to insurgents since the start of a major offensive aided by his allies to regain lost territory.
Assad was quoted by state media as telling Ali Akbar Velayati, a top adviser to Iran's supreme leader, that the military support his country was getting from Iran and Russia had pushed the enemy states he did not name to "further escalate and increase financing and equipping of terrorists."
Read More:

Sunday, November 22, 2015

Israel Officially Aids 3rd World Invasion

The Israeli government is actively aiding the Third World invasion of Europe—while at the same time making sure that no Third World “refugees” enter Israel, and those who do, are locked up in camps without trial and deported.
The shocking Jewish hypocrisy is evident when two recent news reports are compared: one in the New York Times, titled “Israel’s Chilly Reception for Asylum Seekers” (October 31, 2015), and another in the Jewish news service Israel21c, titled “To the refugees it doesn’t matter that we’re Israeli” (September 20, 2015).
The Israel21c news service (set up by the former head of one of the most prominent Jewish lobbies in America, the American Israel Political Action Committee, AIPAC), article reveals that the official Israeli aid agency, IsraAID, has stationed “dozens” of full time paid staffers along the Greek coast and further inland.
Their only job is to provide material aid and support to the Third World invaders coming ashore, and to help them on into Germany, the article reveals.
Read More:

Should You Be Allowed to Invest in a Lawsuit? By MATTATHIAS SCHWARTZ

The Miller quick coupler comes in a few different sizes. The one I tried out has the proportions of a laundry bin and weighs nearly 700 pounds. It allows the operators of hydraulic digging machines to switch buckets without ever leaving the cab. Two flanges rise from its sides, supplying it with the Volks­wagen-like curves that inspired its nickname, the Bug. The flanges are drilled clean through with four holes set inside four bosses; beneath the front pair of holes are two upturned latches, like the open ends of two wrenches. Other than its poppy-red color, the device appears to be an ordinary specimen from the menagerie of heavy-duty construction equipment.

But in a Chicago courtroom on Oct. 26, the Bug will star in a multimillion-dollar dispute that represents a new frontier in the march of global capitalism. The nominal occasion is a paternity feud between two of the Bug’s corporate parents, Miller UK, the equipment manufacturer based in Cramlington, England, and Caterpillar, the American construction-equipment giant that was once Miller’s biggest customer. The themes of Miller UK v. Caterpillar are classics of the intellectual-property genre: greed, betrayal, bloodlines. But Miller’s method of funding its side of the production is something new. Rather than paying its lawyers out of pocket, Miller has turned to a private firm to front the money for its legal costs: the Illinois-based Arena Consulting, which is headed by two brothers, Herbert and Douglas Lichtman. If Miller loses, Arena gets nothing. If it wins, Arena will get a share of the proceeds, which could run well into the tens of millions of dollars.

Read More:

“Unrepentant Marxist” Eric Hobsbawm Still Celebrated as Britain’s Greatest Historian by Jack Sen

Marxist historian Eric Hobsbawm lamented, “To this day, I notice myself treating the memory and tradition of the USSR with indulgence and tenderness.”
I met up with a conservative former professor of mine, for a few rounds of drinks and some lively political conversation this past Thursday, as we do from time to time when he’s up north.
Although the good professor teaches Colonial History at a liberal British university and no doubt watches his P’s and Q’s around this particular former student, after several pints of ale and a few laughs, he’s typically quite forthright.
We touched on an array of topics over lunch, including Britain’s current immigration crisis, my ‘misguided decision’ to volunteer my services as spokesman for the British National Party, Nigel Farage’s being against maternity leave due to all the lasses he’s impregnated, and the All-Blacks incredible victory over the Aussies at last week’s Rugby World Cup Final.
As the third anniversary of Eric Hobsbawm’s death had just passed, I felt it befitting to introduce the man’s name into the conversation at some point.
After all, Marxist historian Hobsbawm had also read history at Cambridge, and in spite of his unrepentant Marxist views, is still widely regarded as Britain’s most influential historian.
“Were you aware that Eric Hobsbawm expired with almost two million quid to his name?” (1) I snickered, as I attempted to mop up wayward gravy with my third Yorkshire pudding. 
Read More:

New Details Surrounding Death of Amanda Blackburn and her Unborn Daughter... Her Murderer(s) Raped Her

High ranking members of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Police Department (IMPD) have gone on record as stating Amber Blackburn was raped. Others have refuted the charge. 

One thing is for sure: Blackburn, the white woman who was expecting her second child, was murdered by a black male. [#WhiteLivesDontMatter: Indianapolis Police Forced To Beg For Help To Solve Murder of Pastor’s Pregnant (White) Wife,, 11-20-15]:
Amanda Blackburn (pictured right) was perhaps the ultimate example of someone that a civilized society is supposed to cherish and protect—the mother of a one-year old son, the wife of a pastor, and 12 weekspregnant. But in the Indianapolis of 2015, Blackburn was murdered in her own home when her husband Davey was out for a morning workout. He returned to find his wife shot in the head (though his son was mercifully unharmed). And, rather than being besieged with tips from a grief-stricken community, Indianapolis police are being forced to beg for help from people more willing to protect the murderer of a woman whose White Life, apparently, Doesn’t Matter. 

Read More:

Today: The Zionist Devastating Treason Proven by the Israeli Pollard Spy Case!

Today: The Zionist Devastating Treason Proven by the Israeli Pollard Spy Case!
Dr. Duke  discussed the outrageous release of Israeli spy Jonathan Pollard from prison. Jonathan Pollard was a Jewish American intelligence analyst who sold national security secrets to Israel, which then sold the information to the Soviet Union. According to then Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger, himself half Jewish, Pollard caused more damage to American national security than any spy in history.
Pastor Mark Dankof joined the show and talked about the sources of Jewish power in America, which has been used for a number of nefarious objectives over the decades. He and Dr. Duke named the names of the Jewish individuals who buy and sell our politicians.
This show lays out all the easily verifiable basics regarding the take over of our republic by a tribal minority with a hostile agenda. Please share it widely.
Read More:

Wednesday, November 18, 2015

Pat Buchanan: Biography, Apartheid, Culture War, Foreign Policy, Free Tr...

Four Ways to Save Europe by Steve Sailer

Last week, America’s institutions of higher learning were in turmoil over Halloween costumes. How can minority students survive Yale if their diktats are ever subjected to skepticism from grown-ups?
This week, we are told to not get too excited over 129 people being slaughtered in the streets, concert halls, and cafés of Paris. In particular, we shouldn’t let minor inevitabilities such as mass carnage influence the West’s refugee and immigration policies.
In other words, while Yale students need their university converted into a Safe Space where they will never be allowed to lose an argument with a professor, making Paris safe for young lovers from Kalashnikov fire would be Islamophobic.
Read More:

What if the Cuban missile crisis had gone badly?

Dear Cecil:
What if the Cuban missile crisis had gone badly?
Cecil replies:
I’m confident human society would have survived, which I assume is your main concern. Even if things had gone off the rails, and the odd nuke popped off here and there, I think cooler heads would soon have prevailed. But that’s easy to say now. For a week in October 1962 the whole planet was wondering if Cold War antagonism was about to boil over into nuclear armageddon.
Everyone knows the story: U.S. spy-plane photos reveal Russian nuclear-missile bases under construction in Cuba; Kennedy orders a blockade of the island and demands the missiles’ removal; six tense days later, Khrushchev complies. What’s better understood now is how little Khrushchev had thought through the ways it might all play out. He needed more negotiating leverage than the USSR’s iffy intercontinental missiles could buy him, and he hoped he could rattle the Americans by placing medium-range missiles at their doorstep.

Read More:

Hillary's Appetite for War By Steve Chapman

The United States has been at war every day since October 2001, when we invaded Afghanistan after the 9/11 attacks. Never in our history have we engaged in hostilities abroad without interruption for so long. But if Americans are weary of it, you can't tell it from our politics.
If they were, Republicans would not be vying to show their willingness to use force against Russia or Syria or the Islamic State. More pertinent still, Hillary Clinton would not be the front-runner for the Democratic nomination. Democrats were proud to nominate Barack Obama in 2008 on the strength of his opposition to the Iraq War. But anti-war credentials no longer count for anything in Obama's party.
The president himself is partly to blame, having inured his followers to the notion that the United States can't extricate itself from foreign conflicts (see: Afghanistan). But Obama has also refused to be panicked into reckless military action against Syria, Russia or Iran. Compared with what his critics demand, his steps against the Islamic State have been cautious and small-scale.
Obama has been willing to brave criticism for alleged weakness, appeasement and isolationism. As Harvard scholar Stephen Walt wrote for Foreign Policy, he has shown "an appreciation not just of the limits of U.S. power, but also of the limited need to exercise it."
Read More:

France's Lonely Struggle

Since the United States’ withdrawal from Iraq, no European ally has contributedmore to the fight against global extremism than the French Republic. The French Army, which in its entirety remains smaller than the U.S. Marine Corps, has been forward-deployed in remote locales, ranging from the olive groves of Lebanon to the arid expanses of the Sahel. With its rapid intervention in Mali in 2013, Paris demonstrated how small, tailored expeditionary forces could prevail against well-armed Islamic militant groups, even when they occupied a vast,rugged territory larger than the entire state of Texas.
France has consistently demonstrated its willingness to fight alongside its American ally, even as its own society grapples with economic stagnation, high rates of unemployment and fiscal austerity. With a defense budget only a fraction of that of the United States, Paris maintains thousands of troops in Africa, leading the fight against groups such as Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, and providing vital support in the struggle against other similarly vicious outfits, such as Boko Haram. French military assets aided in the 2011 dismantling of the Qaddafi regime, and have been struggling to prevent the eruption of a newgenocide in Central Africa. In the summer of 2013, after clear evidence emerged that Assad had employed chemical weapons against his own populace, France emerged as the only nation willing to enforce the Obama administration’s self-stated red lines. As Rafale fighter pilots waited on the tarmac, their engines running and their weapon bays fully loaded, French officials received news of the White House’s sudden change of heart and reluctantly gave the order to stand down.
Read More:

Is Putin Our Ally in Syria? By Patrick J. Buchanan

Is Putin Our Ally in Syria?
Among the presidential candidates of the Republican Party and their foreign policy leaders on Capitol Hill the cry is almost universal:
Barack Obama has no strategy for winning the war on ISIS.
This criticism, however, sounds strange coming from a party that controls Congress but has yet to devise its own strategy, or even to authorize the use of U.S. military force in Syria.
Congress has punted. And compared to the cacophony from Republican ranks, Barack Obama sounds like Prince Bismarck.
The President’s strategy is to contain, degrade and defeat ISIS. While no one has provided the troops to defeat ISIS, the U.S. is using Kurdish and Yazidi forces, backed by U.S. air power, to degrade it.
And recent months have seen measured success.
The Kurds have run ISIS out of Kobani, captured much of the Turkish-Syrian border, and moved to within 30 miles of Raqqa, the ISIS capital. Yazidis and Kurds last week recaptured Sinjar in Iraq and cut the highway between Mosul and Raqqa.
The terrorist attacks in Paris, the downing of the Russian airliner in Sinai, the ISIS bomb that exploded in the Shiite sector of Beirut, are ISIS’s payback. But they could also be signs that the ISIS caliphate, imperiled in its base, is growing desperate and lashing out.
Read More:

Monday, November 16, 2015

Me, MySelfie and I Research is uncovering what your selfie says about you. By Susan Greenfield Ph.D.

In 2015, selfies resulted in the deaths of more people worldwide than those from shark attacks: to be precise, the victims were engaging in daring acts in order to get a good selfie.
Why are we so obsessed with broadcasting our grinning faces?
In part, advances in technology are responsible for the selfie phenomenon. In 2010, Apple released the iPhone with a forward facing camera- the same year that Instagram, arguably the social networking epicenter of the selfie, was born. In just a few short years, selfies became so eponymous that in 2013- just three years after the birth of Instagram- “selfie” was awarded the title of ‘Word of the Year’ by the Oxford dictionary. In 2015, over 80 million photos were posted to Instagram- per day – with a significant number of these being selfies.
But surely the opportunity alone afforded by technology cannot account for our selfie-culture. What is the real motivation? A scientific study published last month investigated the motives for using Instagram and found five major reasons: social interaction, archiving, escapism, peeking (on others), and self-expression - including the desire to be noticed by others and to “show-off”.1 Self-expression is an important facet of human identity – particularly for youth. Are selfies just a modern form of an age-old desire for self-expression, or are they symptomatic of an unprecedented narcissism? Perhaps the arrival of the selfie has blurred the line between these two possibilities…
Read More:

Europe Is On The Precipice by Roosh Valizadeh

europe7 copy
The European people do not deserve Europe. That’s the only conclusion I can draw after witnessing the reaction to Friday’s attacks in Paris that killed 136 people. Instead of fighting back, rescinding policies that allow millions of refugees to flood Europe, or devising concrete plans to expel an incompatible Muslim horde from their nations, the European elite are doubling down on a narrative that will surely lead to the end of Europe and the demise of their own people.
If a purple man comes up to you and punches you in the face, the suitable response is to punch him back or get aid from other individuals that help neutralize him. The wrong response is to yell “peace” and “solidarity” at the purple man, and then flood the internet with messages of “Not all purple men are violent” and “Will the brutal attack against myself increase racism and hate against purple men?” Yet in a shocking display of weakness and demoralization, the European people are doing just that. The elites controlling the show are urging prayers for peace and the commoners, in the face of their own annihilation, are going along for the ride, insisting that what Europe needs right now is moreMuslims and refugees.
Believe it or not, holding peace signs while crying will not stop future attacks…
Read More:

Conservative Scholarship and the Problem of Myth by Forrest McDonald

library_books historical scholarship
On the face of things, conservatism and historical scholarship would appear to be antithetical ideals. A viable social order seems to require, among its other adhesives, a set of fictions agreed upon as truths—myths and their corresponding symbols—to provide the sense of legitimacy and purpose which are necessary if people are to live together in harmony. The function of the historical scholar is to discover and expose the truth, and if he is fully committed to the scholarly ideal, he is indifferent to the social and political consequences of his findings. To the extent that he succeeds in his undertaking—and is read and believed—he undermines the social order, and to that extent he is ipso facto a destructive radical.
Let me elaborate the dilemma before I attempt to plumb it. The central importance of myth and symbol is most readily apparent in dealing with political societies. Obviously, the operative myths vary from one political society to another: Stalin’s Soviet Union, Hitler’s Third Reich, Churchill’s England, de Gaulle’s Fifth Republic, were founded on different fictive pasts. Obviously, too, different leaderships employ (or exploit) their nations’ myths in different fashions.
In the United States, until recent times, the principal operative myths have had to do with national origins and development—with Independence, with the Constitution, with the Federalist, Jeffersonian, and Jacksonian eras, and with the Civil War. Though the content of the fictive accounts of these historical phenomena has varied, it usually formed a general image of what Americans thought and preferred to think was the essence of their country, past and present. That essence could be expressed in symbolic shorthand: “one nation, indivisible,” “liberty and justice for all,” “the land of the free and the home of the brave,” “government of the people, by the people, and for the people,” “the last, best hope of earth.”
Now, in one sense it did not matter whether these things were true. As long as people believed they were true and acted as if they were true, Americans could live together with some harmony and sense of common purpose; and in fact so believing and so acting helped to make them true.
Enter the historian ruthlessly exposing the facts of the matter. “One nation indivisible?” Then how did ethnicity persist, why did the melting pot fail to melt, how did a section founded on racism endure? “Liberty and justice for all?” What about our historical treatment of the Indians, the Irish, the blacks, the Chicanos, the Orientals, women? “Home of the brave?” What about all those cowards and deserters and profiteers in the Revolutionary War, the War of 1812, the Civil War; and how much bravery was employed in plundering the hapless Indians, Mexicans, and Spaniards of their lands to satisfy our rapacious greed? “Government of the people?” What about the systematic exclusion of minorities from the political process, sell-outs to Special Interests, endemic venality in high places? An so on: Thus, did the historians do their duty?
Read More:

The College Kids Are Not All Right. A new book by a Stanford dean identifies the problems of millennials and their parents, but fails to grasp the moral nature of these generational failings.

The College Kids Are Not All Right
I suppose it’s something of a contradiction that microaggressions would lead to mass hysteria, but with the student protests currently engulfing campuses across the country, it’s hard to deny the current generation is infected with host of troubling ideas about who they are and their place in society.
Against this backdrop, the prospect of reading a book entitled How to Raise an Adult and written by a college administrator seems risible. But as a professor with years of experience as a college administrator myself, it’s only fair to point out the politically charged atmosphere at colleges is only part of the problem. A great many kids are dysfunctional before they even set foot on campus. Stanford Dean Julie Lythcott-Haims has ample reason to suggest that parents are part of the problem—in fact, the full title of her book is How to Raise an Adult: Break Free of the Overparenting Trap and Prepare Your Kid for Success.
So then, this is book for successful middle-class parents who use their children to bolster their own self-esteem. Sound too harsh? Yeah, the author would likely not want that as a blurb on the dust jacket. Okay, how about this: This book reveals that many of today’s wealthier parents have a difficult time separating their lives from their children’s lives, so much so that by trying to help their kids succeed in life they actually stunt their emotional and intellectual growth with grave consequences for the kids, the country, and even the parents. Sound better? Well, both versions are true, and however the thesis is worded, I hope a lot of the target audience will read this book.
Read More:


The Manhattan Institute’s City Journal is celebrating its twenty-fifth anniversary. The table of contents for the twenty-fifth anniversary issue is posted here.

City Journal is a fantastic and fantastically influential quarterly magazine that I have read regularly over the years (subscribe here).To salute the magazine’s milestone, and bring the magazine to the attention of readers who might not be familiar with it, I submitted a set of questions to long-time editor Myron Magnet (now retired) and his current editor Brian Anderson, his successor.

Below is my exchange with Mr. Magnet. Let me say myself right here at the top, it is worth reading.

Power Line: What has City Journal wrought? What do you think have been your biggest accomplishments of the past 25 years?

Myron Magnet: These first two questions are really one, so let me answer them together. First, because of the seriousness of our arguments, and the rigor, intellectual honesty, and talent of our writers, we made conservatism respectable in New York City–Moscow on the Hudson, it used to be called. We were in effect Rudy Giuliani’s ideas factory–he once held up a copy of City Journal during a speech and said, “I don’t know if it’s possible to plagiarize policies, but if it is, then this is where I plagiarize mine from.” And the truth is, that we would make suggestions–about quality-of-life policing, say, or how to deal with the homeless, or how to reform welfare–and, amazingly, he often would try them out. Equally amazing, they would work. So it was very exhilarating to run a quarterly magazine with that kind of influence, and very moving to have played a role in the breathtaking rebirth of New York.

Remember that when we started, New York was crumbling. People and companies were fleeing what they saw as a dying and ungovernable city; Times Square was a monument to degradation and squalor; the parks were dustbowls populated by muggers and dope dealers; the streets and subways swarmed with madmen, sometimes threatening and sometimes merely pitiable; and, with one murder every four hours every day, we all lived in fear, so no one wanted to go out at night to restaurants and theaters, which were withering away. People from out of town, or New Yorkers too young to remember the bad old days of just over two decades ago, see the glittering metropolis of today and have no idea of the immensity of effort it took on the part of so many to create that urban wonderland out of such threat and decay. To give you a sense of the magnitude of the change: The now-trendy Lower East Side, as well as hip Williamsburg (and much of Brooklyn), were abject slums in those days, very squalid and very, very dangerous. On the Upper East Side and the Upper West Side, houses and apartments that command millions today sold for under $100,000. No one wanted them.

When the planes hit the towers on 9/11, our Fall issue was just ready to go to the printer. We tore it up and started over, on the view that this was our city and we needed to address the question of how to rebuild it and keep its economy vibrant immediately, so we even got some architect friends of ours to redesign the street grid at the World Trade Center site, and we asked our friend the great Scottish sculptor, Alexander Stoddart, to design a memorial to the victims, infinitely more fitting and moving than the vacuous hole-in-the-ground, void of meaning, that ultimately took form there. We also needed to learn and explain who our enemies were and how to protect ourselves from them, so we were early to examine the nature of Islamism and to understand that, while we must protect the rights of Moslem-Americans, we must carefully screen future Moslem applicants for immigration for Islamist sympathies.

Read More:

Saturday, November 14, 2015

The Age of Despair: Reaping the Whirlwind of Western Support for Extremist Violence by CHRIS FLOYD

We, the West, overthrew Saddam by violence. We overthrew Gaddafi by violence. We are trying to overthrow Assad by violence. Harsh regimes all — but far less draconian than our Saudi allies, and other tyrannies around the world. What has been the result of these interventions? A hell on earth, one that grows wider and more virulent year after year.
Without the American crime of aggressive war against Iraq — which, by the measurements used by Western governments themselves, left more than a million innocent people dead — there would be no ISIS, no “Al Qaeda in Iraq.” Without the Saudi and Western funding and arming of an amalgam of extremist Sunni groups across the Middle East, used as proxies to strike at Iran and its allies, there would be no ISIS. Let’s go back further. Without the direct, extensive and deliberate creation by the United States and its Saudi ally of a world-wide movement of armed Sunni extremists during the Carter and Reagan administrations, there would have been no “War on Terror” — and no terrorist attacks in Paris tonight.
Again, let’s be as clear as possible: the hellish world we live in today is the result of deliberate policies and actions undertaken by the United States and its allies over the past decades. It was Washington that led and/or supported the quashing of secular political resistance across the Middle East, in order to bring recalcitrant leaders like Nasser to heel and to back corrupt and brutal dictators who would advance the US agenda of political domination and resource exploitation.
Read More:

Campus Activists Are Playing with Fire

Campus Activists Are Playing with Fire

Angela Merkel Plots To Overthrow Her People By Ilana Mercer

Angela Merkel, elected for life, or for what seems like an eternity, squints at ordinary Germans from behind the parapets of her usurped authority. The German chancellor has signaled her express intention to foist a new identity on the German people, whether they like it or not, and without the broad consent of her citizens (or subjects). This Merkel has done by absorbing “an unprecedented influx of immigrants who will fundamentally change the country.”
The quest to engineer a single European identity is at the heart of the European refugee crisis. (That, and the foreign policy of George W Bush, Barack Hussein Obama and Hillary Clinton, who elected to pulverize Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan and thus destabilized the region.) “It remains unmistakably true,” wrote British patriot and classical liberal philosopher David Conway, that “from its postwar beginnings to the present, the principal advocates and architects of European union have been uniformly animated by collectivist objectives that are deeply anti-liberal in spirit and form.”
Indeed, her tyrannical power to overthrow the German people and import another in their place, Merkel derives from the EU Constitution. To wit, “The EU already has rights to legislate over external trade and customs policy, the internal market, the monetary policy of countries in the Eurozone, agriculture and fisheries, many areas of domestic law including the environment and health and safety at work,” as has the supra-state extended its rights into what it calls “justice policy,” especially “asylum and immigration.”
Read More:

Western Intelligence scrambling for info on IS by JOSY JOSEPH

A member loyal to the Islamic State (IS) waves an IS flag in Raqqa. File photo.

Over 80 Indians have been monitored in the country for sharing and participating in discussions on IS.

Ever since the Islamic State burst into global stage in the summer of 2014, when it announced formal establishment of a caliphate, the western intelligence agencies have been scrambling for information on the group and its sympathisers.
Senior officials in the Indian security establishment say that they have been swamped with requests from western intelligence agencies on whatever information India can share on the IS, the deadliest and most global terror ideology in modern times that is giving sleepless nights to security establishments across the world.
“Because the group is far away from our countries, and operating in a secure area, we have very little credible real time information flowing in,” one official said.
However, the details available from Indian agencies of those who have been to IS and back is valuable. According to estimates, up to 20 Indians could still be with the IS. Various state polices have stopped at least 22 youngsters who were planning to travel to Syria-Iraq to join IS. And over 80 Indians have been monitored in the country for sharing and participating in discussions on IS.
Read More:

Far Left Center for American Progress Hosts Netanyahu, Leader of the Israeli Ethnonationalist Right by Kevin MacDonald

When Israeli PM Netanyahu visited the US at the invitation of then House Speaker John Boehner in March, the take-home message was that support for Israel had become a partisan issue, with strong Republican support and relatively weak, dwindling Democrat support. Indeed, the Democrats have an analogous split between the donor class and it base that we  see among the Republicans, but for different reasons.
The Democratic Party establishment and donor class are strongly supportive of the Jewish state and are seeking to find new ways to increase U.S. military aid for Israel following the Iran deal. But recent polling shows that support for Israel among rank-and-file Democrats has fallen by 10 points in one year. A Gallup poll released this year found that fewer than half of Democrats, 48 percent, report sympathizing more with Israelis than with Palestinians as it relates to the Middle East conflict, while 83 percent of Republicans sympathize more with Israel. (John Hudson, Foreign Policy: Netanyahu Visit Sparks Internal Backlash at Powerhouse D.C. Think Tank
The White Republican base is more supportive of Israel (at least partly because of a large, terribly misguided Evangelical component) and thus more in tune with the donors on that issue. But it is famously out of step with the donors on social issues—immigrationgay marriage, abortion, etc. On the other hand, the Democrat base is far less supportive of Israel than the donors but, as a coalition of the ascendant non-White majority, it is entirely in step with them on social issues.
Read More:

Wednesday, November 11, 2015

Big Mess on Campus by Steve Sailer

On Monday, America’s undergraduate college system melted down in three humiliating incidents.

At Yale, in a brouhaha over Halloween costumes that has been dragging on for a week and a half now, a distinguished professor apologized for defending freedom of speech and thereby triggering a black coed to screech obscenities at him. This sorry incident called to mind the struggle sessions of Mao’s Cultural Revolution, when the national leader encouraged self-righteous young nitwits to force scholars to wear dunce caps.

At the U. of Virginia, the fraternity libeled by Rolling Stone’s Sabrina Rubin Erdely last year in her wildly popular but demented fable about a fraternity-initiation gang rape on broken glass filed suit against the magazine and author for $25 million. The national excitement generated last November by this story that a teenage girl actually dreamed up to make another boy jealous may make for an interesting legal battle. Is it okay for Erdely to not notice that Jackie’s tale about her pretend boyfriend-rapist Haven Monahan was absurd because the reporter (and, evidently, millions of other people) really wished this Night of Broken Glass were true?

Read More:

Religious Freedom and the Vicissitudes of Power by PETER BERGER

The problem of balancing power and ethos is not new, but in the face of the unspeakable atrocities that confront us today it is especially anguished.

Read More:

Triumph of the Will? Bill O’Reilly & Snake-Oil Conservatism by Bradley J. Birzer

soul of conservatism
Few things reveal the degraded state of “conservatism” in America more than the recent, seven-minute exchange between Bill O’Reilly and George Will. What the two fought about really matters very little. To set the context, suffice it to state the debate had to do with the attempt on Ronald Reagan’s life and how well Mr. O’Reilly researched and interpreted the event in his seemingly ubiquitous book (which is featured at Costco and Wal-Mart as well as at bookstores), Killing Reagan.
Mr. Will, along with a number of other prominent conservatives, such as Steve Hayward (author of a two-volume biography of Ronald Reagan), have savaged Mr. O’Reilly’s book. In particular, those attacking Mr. O’Reilly despise his contention that Reagan’s dementia began soon after John Hinckley shot him. As someone who has spent a considerable amount of time studying the Reagan presidency, I can state without even a hint of equivocation that Reagan’s mental faculties did not decline after the attempt. If anything, Reagan’s physical, emotional, and mental abilities and faculties sharpened. He continued to read as much as he ever had (which was a lot), and he worked out so much after the attempt on his life that he added a full two inches to his chest.
Read More:

Tuesday, November 10, 2015

Only three states score higher than D+ in State Integrity Investigation; 11 flunk By Nicholas Kusnetz

In November 2014, Arkansas voters approved a ballot measure that, among other reforms, barred the state’s elected officials from accepting lobbyists’ gifts. But that hasn’t stopped influence peddlers from continuing to provide meals to lawmakers at the luxurious Capital Hotel or in top Little Rock eateries like the Brave New Restaurant; the prohibition does not apply to “food or drink available at a planned activity to which a specific governmental body is invited,” so lobbyists can buy meals so long as they invite an entire legislative committee.
Such loopholes are a common part of statehouse culture nationwide, according to the 2015 State Integrity Investigation, a data-driven assessment of state government by the Center for Public Integrity and Global Integrity. The comprehensive probe found that in state after state, open records laws are laced with exemptions and part-time legislators and agency officials engage in glaring conflicts of interests and cozy relationships with lobbyists. Meanwhile, feckless, understaffed watchdogs struggle to enforce laws as porous as honeycombs.
Read More:

Japan's Emerging Culture Of Innovation: The Invisible Things Can Be The Hardest To Change by Kevin Ready

Over the past 50 years, Japan has helped to shape the world’s technology landscape. Looking at the massive global impact made by companies like Sony, Toyota, and Toshiba, we can see an interesting comparison to the nature of technology developments in Silicon Valley and the United States. While Silicon Valley is populated by companies that have emerged from startups over the past decade or so, Japan’s technology landscape is still very top-heavy with little to show of ‘idea-to-company’ success stories. The large corporations command such an influence over the talent pool, legislation, market channels, and a thousand other aspects of the economy that what is less well seen and talked about is the Silicon Valley-style startups that could be changing and molding the technology and cultural landscape.
Change from the bottom up is not happening in Japan. Is it just a matter of time?
While startups like Facebook, Amazon, Tesla and Google are changing the way Americans live, and indeed how the American economy as a whole functions, this kind of disruptive innovation from upstart groups is not yet a common occurrence in Japan.
Why is this? Capital, talent, and a reliable legal framework are all present in Japan, so what is missing from the scene? What elements are still needed for Japan to begin to produce more of the generative, disruptive, and economically stimulating effects from a robust and active innovation ecosystem?

Read More: