Friday, November 9, 2018

Black Nazis Terrorize Jews in New York - Daniel Greenfield


by Daniel Greenfield

9 attacks on synagogues, 7 fires, 1 broken window and 9 black male perpetrators.




Last November, Jews For Racial & Economic Justice (JFREJ) released Understanding Antisemitism. The bizarre tract had as much in common with the reality of anti-Semitism as Marxism does with economics.

JFREJ, a radical leftist group, claimed that “white Christians” in Europe had “invented anti-Semitism”. That would have come as news to Pharaoh, Haman and Mohammed: in JFREJ’s parlance, “people of color” who had innovated and spread anti-Semitic ideas, while seeking to exterminate the Jews.

“Antisemitism was something European Christians created and brought to the Middle East within the last 150 years,” JFREJ insisted. There was no such thing as Muslim anti-Semitism, the leftist group, which collaborates with Linda Sarsour, a Farrakhan supporter who had urged dehumanizing Jews, insisted.

Black and Muslim anti-Semitism are occasionally justified as a response to white Jewish oppression. But mostly their existence is denied. Racial anti-Semitism, JFREJ insisted, only existed as white supremacy.

JFREJ’s tract whitewashing black and Muslim anti-Semitism was partly funded by Jenny Levison.

This November, Levison’s black leftist foster son, James Polite, was arrested for setting 7 fires in Hasidic Jewish schools and synagogues in Brooklyn. He also scribbled, “Kill All Jews” inside a lefty congregation.

Polite’s anti-Semitic vandalism broke up an appearance by Ilana Glazer, an obnoxiously unfunny leftist comedian, to rally turnout before the election. Polite scrawling, “Jew Better Be Ready” and “Insert Oven Here” got far more attention than the actual fires he set in more conservative religious institutions.

It was the fire he set in a Yeshiva school coat closet early in the morning that finally got him caught.

Glazer went on Democracy Now, notorious for defending the anti-Semitic Hamas terrorists who murder Jews, to whine that, “we lived through a safe, you know, physically benign version of a white supremacist act.”

Except the surveillance footage had made it clear that the vandal was a black man. But there was no room for acknowledging the reality of black anti-Semitism on the Left.

Last year, Juan Thompson, a former writer for the anti-Semitic and pro-terrorist site, The Intercept, was arrested for sending bomb threats to a number of Jewish targets, including the ADL. Like Polite, there were efforts to paint Juan as suffering from mental illness. JFREJ went even further, declaring, “We reject attempts to explain away anti-Semitism by laying the blame on Black men.”

Its guide to distorting anti-Semitism had insisted that, “singling out Black people and other People of Color as especially anti-Jewish is racist.”

If “white Christians” invented anti-Semitism, white American Christians appear to be terrible at it. The ADL’s own surveys show black anti-Semitism as being 2 to 3 times higher than average. A statistical analysis in the Washington Post suggested that the majority of Americans who hold deeply  entrenched anti-Semitic views are minorities.

Higher rates of anti-Semitic attitudes are bound to lead to higher rates of anti-Semitic hate crimes within the black community. And in the aftermath of the Pittsburgh mass shooting, all the anti-Semitic incidents in New York City appeared to be perpetrated by black men.

Two days before James Polite disproved the myths about black anti-Semitism that his foster mother had helped spread, swastikas were spray painted on houses in Brooklyn Heights. Surveillance footage showed that two black men were responsible. The two, Jarrick Wiltshire and Daul Moultrie, turned themselves in.

Closing out the week, six black teens hurled a pipe through the window of the Volkan synagogue in Brooklyn during Sabbath prayers. Prior to that they had allegedly accosted a girl in the area.

In 1 week: 9 attacks on Jewish institutions, 7 fires, 1 broken window and 9 black male perpetrators.

And little interest by the national media which was too busy claiming that the essence of anti-Semitism was saying anything negative about a career collaborator with anti-Semites, George Soros.

These anti-Semitic attacks probably had nothing to do with Pittsburgh. They are instead typical of the everyday, ordinary anti-Semitism that Jews living in urban neighborhoods regularly experience.

This October, a Jewish man in Brooklyn was beaten so severely with a stick that it broke. In April, in that same neighborhood, a Jewish man suffered a cracked rib in an anti-Semitic assault by a black man screaming, “I hate Jews.” Both incidents were only notable because they were caught on camera.


Yeshiva Beth Hillel of Williamsburg, where Polite set his final fire, had previously come under attack from lefty activists with Yaffed whose smears of Jewish schools are unquestioningly recirculated by the media, (without ever reporting on who is behind the group) than it has reporting on the school arson.

The Volkan synagogue, which was attacked on the Sabbath, and Yeshiva Beth Hillel, are less than a mile apart. And yet these two attacks on Jewish institutions so close together in time and space were never assembled into a pattern by the mainstream media. Because it didn’t like what the pattern would show.

A week later, the mainstream media which broadcast Polite’s magic marker scrawls to the world, hasn’t even bothered to report the names of all the Jewish institutions where the black leftist started his fires.

A recent New York Times piece noted, “there have been four times as many crimes motivated by bias against Jews — 142 in all — as there have against blacks.” It also addressed the bias and disinterest in these crimes, much of which target the city’s working class religious Jewish population in urban areas.

“When a ḥasidic man or woman is attacked by anyone in New York City, mainstream progressive advocacy groups do not typically send out emails calling for concern and fellowship and candlelight vigils in Union Square, as they often do when individuals are harmed in New York because of their race or ethnicity or how they identify in terms of sex or sexual orientation,” it noted.

But it awkwardly elided the issue of who is behind the violence. The attackers have "varied backgrounds" and their identity "presents complexities" for liberals.

There’s only so much ideological heresy that can be tolerated in the pages of the New York Times.

The media assumes that swastikas and Holocaust imagery are the work of white supremacists. But, as James Polite, Jarrick Wiltshire and Daul Moultrie remind us, that isn’t at all the case.

Black nationalists often believe that there is much to admire about Hitler and the Nazis. They identify with Nazi racial supremacism and the calls for the mass murder of the Jews.

Louis Farrakhan had said, “The Jews don’t like Farrakhan, so they call me Hitler. Well, that’s a good name. Hitler was a very great man.”

The Nation of Islam had an extensive history of collaborating with the KKK and the American Nazi Party.

Stokely Carmichael had dubbed “the greatest white man”. And he had declared, "The only good Zionist is a dead Zionist we must take a lesson from Hitler”.

“What the Negro needs is a Hitler,” Marcus Garvey had said admiringly.

"I got the extermination blues, jewboys / I got the Hitler syndrome figured," Amiri Baraka, the black nationalist poet, had hatefully scribbled.

This black nationalist rhetoric easily translates into swastikas and Hitler sloganeering by street thugs.

During the pogrom in Crown Heights, black marchers shouted, “Heil Hitler”. At the funeral at which Al Sharpton delivered an anti-Semitic eulogy, a banner read, "Hitler did not do the job."

Last year, three black men scrawled a swastika on the door of the Sutton Place Synagogue in Manhattan. No media accounts mentioned the race of the suspects. While synagogue clergy later announced that two arrests were made, the media never bothered following up with a story on their identities.

Also last year there was outrage when an Arizona family’s menorah was twisted into a swastika. The police arrested Clive Jamar Wilson, a black man whose father, like James Polite, had attended Brandeis.

Conflating anti-Semitism with white supremacism, as the Left does, is misleading. And even when it comes to neo-Nazi signage and slogans, the perpetrators are just as likely to be black Nazis.

The Left claims that it wants to fight Nazis. But it quickly changes its mind when the Nazis are black.

Insisting on fighting Nazis only when they’re white isn’t opposition to either Nazism or anti-Semitism. It’s an endorsement of both as long as they are being practiced by the racial supremacists of the Left.


Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271871/black-nazis-terrorize-jews-new-york-daniel-greenfield

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



Sessions Out -- and CNN’s Acosta Locked Out - Matthew Vadum


by Matthew Vadum

A nation’s tumultuous day.




The day after the midterm elections, President Trump forced Jeff Sessions out as attorney general, revoked the White House media credentials of CNN’s most obnoxious correspondent, Jim Acosta, after a spirited presser, and offered his reflections on his party retaining control of the Senate but losing control of the House to Democrats.

In the new Congress that will be meet in the new year, Republicans will control at least 54 of the Senate’s 100 seats, a net gain of three. Democrats were poised to have around a 12-member majority in the House of Representatives though that figure could change.

But Sessions, who was Trump’s first endorser in the Senate in early 2016 and who gave up his safe Senate seat in Alabama to become his attorney general, won’t be around to run the Department of Justice and deal with the flood of subpoenas congressional committees controlled by House Democrats are expected to issue in a variety of new, vexatious congressional probes of the president.

One of those investigations will come out of the House Judiciary Committee that deranged leftist Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) is expected to take over. Nadler vows to launch, among other things, impeachment proceedings against the newly-installed Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. When they take control of the House of Representatives Jan. 3, Democrats plan to investigate President Trump’s tax filings, financial dealings, and their bizarre electoral collusion conspiracy theory.

President Trump announced Sessions’ departure at 2:44 p.m. on Wednesday in two tweets after a White House press conference wrapped up.

“We are pleased to announce that Matthew G. Whitaker, Chief of Staff to Attorney General Jeff Sessions at the Department of Justice, will become our new Acting Attorney General of the United States. He will serve our Country well....”

A few seconds later he tweeted:
....We thank Attorney General Jeff Sessions for his service, and wish him well! A permanent replacement will be nominated at a later date.
It is unclear if Sessions knew he was going to be ousted yesterday but President Trump hasn’t made a secret of his displeasure with the nation’s top law enforcement officer. The fact that Sessions has done a fine job on cracking down on illegal immigration, so-called sanctuary cities, and international crime organizations such as MS-13, didn’t save him.

“Sessions is almost certainly the single most effective implementer of Trump’s vision in the entire administration,” ACLU national legal director David Cole grudgingly acknowledged previously. “No cabinet member has been more diligent and single-minded in pursuing Trump’s policies.”

Trump has never forgiven Sessions for recusing himself from an investigation into the still-uncorroborated Russian electoral collusion conspiracy theory pushed by unbalanced, dishonest leftists. This recusal led to Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein launching Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s Russia-Trump probe that has never produced even a scintilla of evidence demonstrating Trump campaign collusion – which isn’t actually a crime – with Russians over the 2016 election.

Trump’s appointment of Whitaker prompted horrified left-wingers to protest he might oversee the out-of-control Mueller investigation, as an attorney general is supposed to do.

Prominent Democrats including Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), who, in January will be presiding over an even smaller minority, tried to intimidate Whitaker into not doing his job.

"Given his previous comments advocating defunding and imposing limitations on the [Special Counsel Robert] Mueller investigation, Mr. Whitaker should recuse himself from its oversight for the duration of his time as acting attorney general," Schumer said.

Attempts by Whitaker or Trump to tamper with the Mueller probe would cause a "constitutional crisis," he added.

Before he joined the Justice Department, Whitaker wrote in an op-ed at CNN’s website that "investigating the finances of Trump and his family" and business conducted by the Trump Organization, "goes beyond the scope" of Mueller's appointment.

Whitaker wrote that Mueller should be limited to looking into "matters that involved any potential links to and coordination between two entities -- the Trump campaign and the Russian government," and that Trump family finances fall outside the special counsel’s jurisdiction.

After an unusually lively press conference at the White House Wednesday, CNN correspondent Jim Acosta had his White House media credentials suspended for interfering with a female White House staffer who was trying to retrieve a microphone from him at a press conference. Acosta was ousted for "placing his hands on a young woman just trying to do her job as a White House intern," said White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders.

She called the behavior "absolutely unacceptable."

Acosta had been accosting Trump over immigration issues and the caravans of would-be immigrants moving toward the U.S. border from Central America.

Trump called on Acosta who challenged him over his characterization of one of the caravans as an “invasion.”

“As you know, Mr. President, the caravan was not an invasion. It’s a group of migrants moving up from Central America towards the border with the U.S.,” Acosta said.

Trump said, he considered it “an invasion,” adding that, “you and I have a difference of opinion.”

Acosta continued pressing, asking Trump if he “demonized immigrants in this election.” Trump rejected the claim and said, “I want them to come into the country, but they have to come in legally. You know, they have to come in, Jim, through a process. I want it to be a process.”

The back-and-forth continued a few moments after which Trump called on another questioner from the media.

Acosta, who seems to think he can monopolize White House press conferences with question after question when others are waiting in line, refused to hand over the microphone to the intern.

“I think you should — honestly, I think you should let me run the country, you run CNN … and if you did it well, your ratings would be much better.”

Acosta said he wanted to “ask one other question,” but Trump insisted on moving on.

The rest is now history. CNN and the White House Correspondents’ Association are now portraying Acosta as a free speech martyr instead of an egomaniacal brat who doesn’t know when to shut up.

Also at the presser, President Trump said Democrats’ treatment of Justice Kavanaugh during his confirmation hearings led to Republicans’ gains in the Senate. (A transcript of the presser is available at the White House website.)

“By expanding our Senate majority, the voters have also clearly rebuked the Senate Democrats for their handling of the Kavanaugh hearings,” he said.

“That was a factor. I think maybe a very big factor. The way that was handled, I think, was — tremendous energy was given to the Republican Party by the way they treated then-Judge Kavanaugh, now Justice Kavanaugh. And expressed their support for confirming more great pro-Constitution judges.”

Incumbent Democrat senators who went down to defeat were Joe Donnelly (Indiana), Heidi Heitkamp (North Dakota), Claire McCaskill (Missouri), and Bill Nelson (Florida). Nelson was beaten by Gov. Rick Scott (R) by four-tenths of a percentage point and has requested a recount.

Trump slammed by name defeated GOP candidates whom he said failed to “embrace” him during the campaign. Some “decided to ‘let’s stay away,’” he said. “They did very poorly. I’m not sure that I should be happy or sad, but I feel just fine about it.”

He then named and shamed fallen House candidates Carlos Curbelo (Florida), Mike Coffman (Colorado), Peter Roskam (Illinois), Erik Paulsen (Minnesota), and defeated Senate candidate Bob Hugin (New Jersey).

He mocked defeated Rep. Mia Love of Utah: “I saw Mia Love. She’d call me all the time to help her with a hostage situation. Being held hostage in Venezuela. But Mia Love gave me no love, and she lost. Too bad. Sorry about that, Mia.”

He also mocked defeated Rep. Barbara Comstock of Virginia who had been the only Republican representing a district inside the Washington Beltway. Comstock was “another one.”

He added: “I mean, I think she could have run that race, but she didn’t want to have any embrace. For that, I don’t blame her. But she — she lost. Substantially lost.”

Trump praised those “candidates who embraced our message of low taxes, low regulations, low crime, strong borders, and great judges [who] excelled last night.”

He described successful House candidates Mike Bost and Rodney Davis of Illinois and Andy Barr of Kentucky as “fantastic” and called Pete Stauber of Minnesota a “great guy” who is “new and ran a fantastic race.”

After expressing his “warmest appreciation in regards to Majority Leader Mitch McConnell,” Trump was conciliatory toward incoming Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.).

“I give her a lot of credit. She works very hard, and she’s worked long and hard. I give her a great deal of credit for what she’s done and what she’s accomplished.

“Hopefully, we can all work together next year to continue delivering for the American people, including on economic growth, infrastructure, trade, lowering the cost of prescription drugs. These are some of things that the Democrats do want to work on, and I really believe we’ll be able to do that. I think we’re going to have a lot of reason to do it.”

Pelosi had reciprocated. As election results were coming in Tuesday night, she spoke by telephone with Trump, she said Wednesday.

“Last night I had a conversation with President Trump about how we could work together,” Pelosi said, suggesting the two may focus on an infrastructure package. “That issue has not been a partisan issue,” she said.

On Election Day she said she was disinclined to support impeaching the president.
It depends on what happens in the Mueller investigation, but that is not unifying and I get criticized in my own party for not being in support of it. But I'm not. If that happens, it would have to be bipartisan, and the evidence would have to be so conclusive.
Several races that went into overtime on Election Day were resolved, or at least closer to resolution, Wednesday.

In Montana, Sen. Jon Tester (D) was reelected, defeating state auditor Matt Rosendale (R).
In retiring RINO Sen. Jeff Flake’s (R) seat in Arizona, U.S. Rep. Martha McSally (R) was leading with 49.4 percent over radical left-winger and U.S. Rep. Kyrsten Sinema (D) who had 48.4 percent, with 99 percent of precincts reporting, at press time. Angela Green of the Green Party had 2.2 percent.

In California, it appeared the 15-term congressman, Dana Rohrabacher (R), had been defeated by businessman Harley Rouda (D). Rohrabacher is currently chairman of the Europe, Eurasia, and Emerging Threats Subcommittee of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

Democrats flipped a House seat in New Mexico. Lawyer Xochitl Torres Small (D) narrowly defeated state representative Yvette Herrell (R). The incumbent, Steve Pearce (R), resigned his seat to unsuccessfully run for governor.

In the race for governor of Alaska, former state senator Mike Dunleavy (R) soundly defeated U.S. Sen. Mark Begich (D).

In Wisconsin, conservative hero Gov. Scott Walker (R) was narrowly defeated in his reelection bid by superintendent of public instruction Tony Evers (D). A recount had been expected but on Wednesday Walker conceded the race to Evers.

In Nevada, conservative stalwart and state attorney general Adam Laxalt (R) was defeated in the gubernatorial race by Steve Sisolak (D), chairman of the Clark County Commission.

In Georgia, secretary of state Brian Kemp (R) declared victory Wednesday over left-wing extremist and former state house minority leader Stacey Abrams (D). With 100 percent of precincts reporting, Kemp received 50.33 percent (1,973,098 votes), compared to the 48.73 percent (1,910,388 votes) Abrams received and the 0.95 percent (37,088 votes) Libertarian Ted Metz received, according to exact figures on a state website. Abrams, a race-baiter who always has left-wing clichés at the ready, has not conceded the race.

Meanwhile, Antifa terrorists from the group Smash Racism DC tried to intimidate Fox News Channel host and fearless conservative Tucker Carlson Wednesday at his home in Washington, D.C. The same group previously chased Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) out of a restaurant during Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearings.

Smash Racism DC posted video on Twitter of its members shouting and chanting: "Tucker Carlson, we will fight! We know where you sleep at night!" He wasn’t home at the time.

Sore losers.


Matthew Vadum, senior vice president at the investigative think tank Capital Research Center, is an award-winning investigative reporter and author of the book, "Subversion Inc.: How Obama’s ACORN Red Shirts Are Still Terrorizing and Ripping Off American Taxpayers."

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271890/sessions-out-and-cnns-acosta-locked-out-matthew-vadum

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



A divided congress is an excellent opportunity for ‎Trump - Boaz Bismuth


by Boaz Bismuth 

Donald Trump is only the ‎fourth president in the past 104 years to increase ‎his party's hold on the Senate while losing seats in ‎the House, all but paving his path to victory in 2020



U.S. President Donald Trump speaks to reporters at the 
White House, Tuesday 
Screenshot: Youtube

The "anyone but Trump" camp celebrated a ‎political upset in the House of Representatives after the 2018 midterm elections on Tuesday, ‎eight years after former President Barack Obama lost the ‎House to the Republicans.‎ The Left, in the words of designated House speaker ‎Nancy Pelosi, hailed this change as "a new day for ‎America," in effect paraphrasing former President ‎Ronald Reagan's optimistic 1984 campaign slogan, ‎‎"It's morning in America again."‎

But the Democrats won by points alone – this was not a true victory. Yes, ‎they now have the majority in the House and will be ‎able to assign more special investigators to ‎challenge Trump and his administration and drag them ‎through various hearings, but that will be the sum ‎of their achievements.‎

They do not have the power to repeal any of the laws he ‎passed, to cancel his tax reform, to roll back his ‎deregulation policies or to reinstate the components of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care ‎Act, better known as Obamacare, that Trump discarded.

In their glee, the Democrats seem to be forgetting one important thing – the fact that the ‎Republicans have increased their power in the ‎Senate, which is more important than the House in ‎terms of Trump's presidential legacy.‎

It is the Senate that approves Trump's ‎nominees for the Supreme Court; it is the Senate ‎that approves international treaties; and it is the ‎Senate that wields power over a host of other ‎cardinal issues. In any event, the very fact that ‎the Republicans control the Senate means that any ‎legislative initiative that the Democrats pass in ‎the House can be thwarted when it reaches the ‎Senate.‎

Moreover, even if the Democrats, in their hubris, ‎decide to pursue impeachment proceedings against ‎Trump, they lack the authority to see it through, as ‎only the Senate can impeach a sitting president – ‎only after holding a special trial and only with a ‎two-thirds majority vote by the senators.

The 'blue tsunami' that wasn't

So what do the results of Tuesday's midterms mean? ‎The "blue wave" promised by mainstream American ‎media crashed onto Trump's red wall. Yes, the ‎Democrats secured the necessary narrow majority ‎needed to take the House of Representatives, but ‎they fell vastly short of rattling the Trump ‎administration.‎

There was no ‎"blue wave" ‎‎and certainly no "blue ‎‎tsunami." At most, this was a narrow loss by an ‎incumbent president two years into his term. George ‎W. Bush, Bill Clinton and Obama all experienced the ‎same thing, only on a much larger scale.‎

In fact, as Trump himself said, he is only the ‎fourth president in the past 104 years to increase ‎his party's hold on the Senate while losing seats in ‎the House. That previously happened only in 1970, ‎‎1962 and 1914.‎

Also, unless the final voter tally changes ‎dramatically, Trump has lost 25 seats in the House ‎while Obama lost 63 seats in 2010, Bush lost 30 ‎seats in 2006, and Clinton lost 54 seats in 1994.‎

Moreover, Clinton and Bush lost the majority in the ‎House and the Senate simultaneously, while Trump ‎increased the Republican's power there. One must ‎also remember that an increase in the number of senators ‎from the president's party is very unusual for ‎midterm elections.‎

It's no wonder that the 45th president of the ‎United States went to bed pleased. Judging by his ‎tweets, he woke up feisty, but then he appeared at his post-midterms press conference wearing a blue tie – the ‎color of the Democrats. His overall message during ‎the press conference was also conciliatory, but simultaneously urging the Democrats to understand that they have to ‎cooperate with the Republicans and that they do not ‎control the centers of power in the American ‎administration‏
.‏
The 2018 midterm elections have demonstrated that Trump ‎will most likely win the 2020 presidential race, if ‎only because now he can blame Pelosi for torpedoing his reforms. Pelosi is not exactly a ‎popular figure and even the Democrats are showing ‎signs they are fed up with her.‎

The Democrats had one dream: to take control of both ‎houses of Congress in order to overturn Trump's laws ‎and have the ability to threaten him with ‎impeachment, in the hope that Special Counsel Robert ‎Mueller's investigation into the Trump campaign's ‎ties with Russia gives them enough to go on. ‎Apparently, the Democrats have little faith in their ‎ability to replace presidents at the polls.‎

If I were a member of the Democratic Party I would ‎be very nervous right now, despite the narrow victory in ‎the House of Representatives, and especially when ‎looking at a state like Florida.‎

The Democrats were counting on Florida, where ‎according to polls Senator Bill Nelson was ‎supposed to win another term in office and the ‎Democratic candidate for governor, Tallahassee Mayor ‎Andrew Gillum, was supposed to make history and ‎become the first African American governor.‎ In the end, however, Nelson was ousted by his ‎Republican rival, outgoing Governor‎ Rick Scott, and ‎Gillum‎ lost to Ron DeSantis, a former U.S. ‎Representative for Florida's 6th congressional ‎district.‎

Florida voters like to surprise everyone. They tuned out ‎the liberals and elected DeSantis – a three-time ‎congressman, a military veteran with a Harvard law degree and a staunch supporter of Israel – over Gillum, a social activist and ‎radical leftist, who was endorsed by Bernie Sanders ‎and Obama.‎

DeSantis‎, for his part, is completely in line ‎‎with Trump, making his victory one that proves that ‎a Trump candidate is a winner and an Obama candidate ‎is a loser, if nothing than because the United ‎States is not ready for a radical leftists ‎candidate.‎

This may be a signal to the Democrats, should they ‎consider naming Sanders or Massachusetts Senator ‎Elizabeth Warren as their presidential candidates in ‎‎2020. It is highly uncertain that the American ‎people are interested in Obama's legacy.‎

Trump's critics should keep the ‎following in mind: All the main Democratic candidates ‎Obama endorsed lost this election. Gillum in Florida, Joe ‎Donnelly in Indiana, Sally Abrams in Georgia, and ‎Rich Cordray in Ohio. Trump, who crisscrossed the ‎U.S. to help Republican candidates, probably ‎influenced the results in the Senate.‎

This may be a message to the media and the Democrats ‎that Trump is not as reviled as they may think; that in fact, maybe ‎the opposite is true. Trump again proved that he is ‎a brand in American politics and the American people ‎do not like to change brands in politics.‎

The midterms were also influenced by the "Kavanaugh ‎effect," as the voters were still reeling from the ‎controversy that surrounded Brett Kavanaugh's ‎appointment to the Supreme Court.‎

Democratic Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia didn't go along with the Democrats' efforts to foil ‎Kavanaugh's ‎nomination and won another term in ‎office. Other Democratic senators in red states, ‎who fought against Kavanaugh's nomination, lost. This, too, proves that Trump's policies and ‎ideology do not fall on deaf ears among the American public, as the liberal media would have you ‎believe.‎

Administration 2.0

Meanwhile, Trump acted nobly on Tuesday and even ‎called Pelosi, who has been very hostile toward him, to congratulate ‎her.‎

Trump said he hoped the Democrats would not oust ‎Pelosi, and offered, if need be, to have some ‎Republicans support her nomination as speaker of the ‎House.‎

One way or another, the results of the midterm ‎elections can prove very beneficial for Trump. The ‎Democrats will undoubtedly try to disrupt the House ‎rather than legislate, while Trump will try to work ‎with them, as President Clinton did in his first ‎term with then-Republican Speaker Newt Gingrich. ‎Clinton and Gingrich were able to join forces and ‎work wonders for the American economy, and to this ‎day, Clinton is in debt to the Republicans in ‎Congress as it was their antics that eventually ‎earned him a second term in office.‎

If the Democrats prove they cannot do what Gingrich ‎did, Trump will present them as those who are trying ‎to undermine the U.S. rather than help it push ‎forward.‎

The 2018 midterms will be remembered as a ‎referendum on Trump, but mainly as one that turned ‎over a new leaf for both parties. For the first time ‎in the Trump era, as of January 2019, the ‎legislative branch will be divided.‎

Trump, who is widely perceived as the "first ‎independent president," may surprise everyone and strike important compromises with the Democrats. After ‎all, he was never a pure ideologue, and he never fully ‎subscribed to the Republican sentiment. Trump has ‎already proved that he is willing to do the ‎impossible, so it is quite possible that the 2018 ‎midterms will be the beginning of a new era. A new ‎Congress, a new Trump – administration 2.0.‎


Boaz Bismuth

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/2018/11/08/a-divided-congress-is-an-excellent-opportunity-for-%e2%80%8etrump/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



After Sessions, whither the Russia hoax witch hunt? - Mark Wauck


by Mark Wauck

Even at this stage, with an Acting AG, the legal landscape appears to have changed drastically. What's more, this drastic change takes effect immediately -- while the Republicans still control the House.

I had barely finished digesting the Midterm election news yesterday morning and begun wondering how the new lay of the land might affect the Russia Hoax when events began unfolding. President Trump has never been mistaken for someone who dithers when action is called for. He quickly requested and received the resignation of AG Jeff Sessions, then inserted Sessions's Chief of Staff, Matthew G. Whitaker, as Acting AG, pending the naming of a permanent replacement (rumors are already circulating that Janice Rogers Brown is under consideration).

The move had been anticipated since at least August, when key GOP senators gave Trump public backing for the change: Key Republicans Give Trump a Path to Fire Sessions After the Election. As Bloomberg reported, both Lindsey Graham and Chuck Grassley, both of whom had previously opposed firing Sessions, publicly approved removing Sessions and even provided a time frame for action:
The pivotal message on Thursday came from Senator Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who oscillates between criticizing many of the president’s policies and defending a president who sometimes invites him to go golfing at a Trump-branded resort.
“The president’s entitled to an attorney general he has faith in, somebody that’s qualified for the job, and I think there will come a time, sooner rather than later, where it will be time to have a new face and a fresh voice at the Department of Justice,” Graham told reporters.
But he added that forcing out Sessions before November “would create havoc” with efforts to confirm Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, as well as with the midterm elections on Nov. 6 that will determine whether Republicans keep control of Congress.
Senator Chuck Grassley of Iowa, the Judiciary Committee’s chairman, also changed his position on Thursday, saying in an interview that he’d be able to make time for hearings for a new attorney general after saying in the past that the panel was too busy to tackle that explosive possibility.
Even at this stage, with an Acting AG, the legal landscape appears to have changed drastically. What's more, this drastic change takes effect immediately -- while the Republicans still control the House.

Whitaker is considered (by the NYT) to be "Trump Loyalist," and in fact in August, 2017, authored an article that was sharply critical of Mueller: Mueller's investigation of Trump is going too far. It's a given that Whitaker won't be recusing himself, and that means that he'll replace DAG Rod Rosenstein as the official who will oversee Special Counsel Mueller's investigation. Rosenstein, at least as long as he remains Deputy AG, will continue to supervise FBI Director Christopher Wray, but Whitaker will be able to override any and every decision that Rosenstein or anyone else makes -- including Mueller. Production of documents to House committees, declassification of documents, expedited redactions, prosecutorial decisions, conflict of interest and other ethical issues, coordination with OIG -- pretty much everything will be within his purview and, given the several months long lead time that he's had, Whitaker should have an action plan ready.

Naturally, the usual suspects, Chuck Schumer and Jerrold Nadler, have already called for Whitaker to recuse himself from the Russia Hoax investigation because Whitaker previously suggested the possibility of restricting Mueller's funding if Mueller attempted to extend his investigations beyond the limits imposed by the Special Counsel law. The notion that an attorney should recuse himself from overseeing a case simply because he has views on the merits of the case or, especially, because he wants to ensure that that case is conducted within statutorily prescribed limits, is a pretty obvious bad faith proposition and a non-starter. An attorney, including the Attorney General, is not a judge. He is bound by canons of ethics, but he is not bound to have no opinion on any given matter that he may be called upon to supervise, so long as he has no conflict of interest. Schumer and Nadler didn't even attempt to demonstrate any conflict so I think we can rest assured that there is none.

Does Trump have anything to fear from the new Democrat House, come January, which will presumably be under the Speakership of Nancy Pelosi? While the House can certainly harass Trump and even make matters uncomfortable for him, it's open to doubt just how far they may wish to take that. Pelosi herself was quick to tweet yesterday evening, even before the polls had closed:
"For those who want impeachment, that's not what our caucus is about."
And Trump was almost equally quick to make his view abundantly clear on Twitter:
If the Democrats think they are going to waste Taxpayer Money investigating us at the House level, then we will likewise be forced to consider investigating them for all of the leaks of Classified Information, and much else, at the Senate level. Two can play that game!
That was not, I believe, an empty threat. Not only is there ample investigative material to work with, but Trump will have a strengthened GOP majority in the Senate backing him -- a majority that may prove eager to exact a pound or more of flesh from the Schumer Democrats who played fast and loose in their attacks on an honorable man, Brett Kavanaugh. Further, Trump himself may be eager to begin the runup to 2020 pretty much right away -- beginning with implementation of his declassification order. Trump has declared that he favors transparency sooner rather than later, and if there's one thing we've all learned it's that he tends to keep his word.

And then there's this: Exit Poll: Majority Sours on Robert Mueller's Russia Investigation.
A CNN exit poll shows that a clear majority of 54 percent of Americans see the Russian investigation as politically motivated, while only 41 percent disagree.
If the Democrats really want to spend the next two years chasing down that rabbit hole, instead of preparing a platform that might convince voters that they have something constructive to offer the country, Trump will probably want to encourage them.

Image credit: NBC screen grab via YouTube


Mark Wauck is a retired FBI Agent who blogs on religion, philosophy, and FISA at meaning in history.

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/11/after_sessions_whither_the_russia_hoax_witch_hunt.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



Can Sanctions Bring Regime Change in Iran? - Ari Lieberman


by Ari Lieberman

Why the Mullahs should be worried.




On November 5, the United States imposed a comprehensive set of sanctions on Iran, which were characterized by United States Secretary of State Mike Pompeo as the “toughest sanctions ever put in place on the Islamic Republic of Iran.” Some 700 Iranian entities and individuals were targeted. Particularly hard hit were the Islamic Republic’s energy, banking, shipping and air transport sectors. The action follows a preliminary set of sanctions imposed on entities affiliated with the Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its rogue ballistic missile program. Citing Iranian violations, the Trump administration withdrew from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in May.

In response to the U.S. action, Iran tried to put on a brave face. In a letter to United Nations Secretary General Antonio Guterres, Iran's UN ambassador, Gholamali Khoshroo, termed the measure “illegal.” Iran’s foreign minister and master dissembler, Mohammad Javad Zarif, stated the sanctions “will have no impact on determination of the great Iranian nation and the Americans will be obliged to change their policy.” Iran’s president, Hassan Rouhani, viewed by some in the West to be a “moderate,” vowed that his nation will continue to sell oil despite the sanctions.

In Iran, real power rests with “Supreme Leader” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei while the president is a mere figurehead who requires the Supreme Leader’s imprimatur before he can even run for the office of the president. Khamenei is a radical Shia Islamist who controls the IRGC as well as its auxiliary Basij militia. Nothing of major import in Iran occurs without the Supreme Leader’s approval

The U.S. has stated that its goal is to modify Iran’s behavior and not to institute regime change. The Trump administration is seeking to thwart Iran’s ballistic missile program and its overseas mischief making. The administration is also seeking to modify certain clauses within the JCPOA, particularly the JCPOA’s sunset clauses which will enable the Islamic Republic to enrich uranium beyond current limitations.

Despite Iran’s bluster, the sanctions are having a devastating impact on Iran’s economy. The Iranian rial currency has been freefalling and has already lost more than 70 percent of its value against the dollar since the beginning of 2018. Iranians are helplessly watching as their buying power and savings are whittling away all while their government finances proxy wars in far-flung places, invests in ballistic missiles and sets up front companies to purchase nuclear weapons-related contraband.

Aside from terrorism, Iran’s chief export is oil. If Iran can’t sell its oil, it loses its main source of revenue and the engine of its economy. In addition, while Iranians tout the fact that European parties to the JCPOA are abiding by it, major European companies like Peugeot, Citroen, Siemens, and Total are fleeing Iran like rats jumping from a sinking ship. Moreover, Iran’s banking sector will no longer have access to the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication, (SWIFT). That’s the mechanism that facilitates worldwide global financial transactions. As analyst Eli Lake notes, “SWIFT is a big deal. Isolating Iran from it compounds its financial crisis. Even if companies were willing to risk being cut off from the U.S. economy to purchase Iranian oil, it will be almost impossible for Iran to receive the payments if its banks aren’t part of SWIFT.”

Regime change in Iran represents the optimal solution to the Iranian problem. Aside from its rogue nuclear and ballistic missile programs, Iran is the world’s premier state-sponsor of international terrorism and is responsible for carrying out acts of international terror on five continents. The United States has not been immune from Iran’s malign activities. Iran supplied explosively formed penetrators to anti-American insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan, which claimed more than 500 American lives. Iranian-backed Hezbollah operatives blew up the U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut killing 241 U.S. service members. And the Iranians also tried to assassinate the Saudi ambassador to the U.S. on American soil.

Since the end of 2017, Iran has been wracked by series of widespread protests with some demonstrators chanting “Death to the dictator,” and “We don’t want the ayatollahs.” Other chants included “Death to Palestine,” “No to Gaza, no to Lebanon,” and “Leave Syria and think of us.” Predictably, the regime has dealt harshly with the demonstrators, arresting thousands and murdering scores. Some of those killed were murdered while in government custody.

The demonstrations are a product of the declining economic situation and frustration over the growing and accurate perception that the mullah elite are corrupt, venal and living in luxury while the common folk are struggling. Compounding the problem for the mullahs is a severe water shortage that has affected large swaths of the country. It should be noted that Syria’s deadly civil war was precipitated by a similar water crisis.

But can demonstrations by themselves lead to the regime’s downfall? That would largely depend on whether the demonstrations can gain traction and sympathy from elements within the Iran’s conventional army, known as the Artesh. Thus far, the demonstrations have been spasmodic, occurring in bursts and fits. That could change if the economy worsens, and as the rial continues to plummet and revenues dry up, it will worsen.

The Artesh is responsible for securing Iran’s borders from external threats while the IRGC is responsible for “guarding the Revolution and its achievements.” Naturally, the IRGC receives the lion’s share of the defense budget and controls several key sectors of Iran’s economy. The weaker Artesh is subordinate to the wishes of the IRGC. Moreover, over the past forty years, Iran’s theocratic dictatorship, utilizing the IRGC and its auxiliary Basij militia, has fashioned an effective apparatus created specifically for the purpose of suppressing internal dissent. Elements within the Artesh thought to be disloyal to the theocracy have been purged.

Another factor to consider when assessing regime change in Iran is the make-up of the Islamic Republic’s population. Some 40 to 50 percent of Iran’s populace is non-Persian, and their loyalty to the regime is questionable at best. Kurds, Balochs, Azeris and Arabs have long suffered from discriminatory practices instituted by the regime. Some of these groups have taken up arms against the mullahs. Two Kurdish groups, the PDKI and the PAK have instituted full-scale insurgencies; while an assortment of Sunni Islamist and Jihadist groups have also gone on the warpath. While these insurgencies do not pose an immediate threat to the regime, they represent added pressure at a time when the mullahs can ill afford it.
*
Photo by Khamenei.ir


Ari Lieberman is an attorney and former prosecutor who has authored numerous articles and publications on matters concerning the Middle East and is considered an authority on geo-political and military developments affecting the region.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/271879/can-sanctions-bring-regime-change-iran-ari-lieberman

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



The Midterms Were a Wake-up Call for Republicans - Sally Zelikovsky


by Sally Zelikovsky

This election, especially the close calls we managed to win, should be a wake-up call, not a sigh of relief to conservatives.

While conservatives are celebrating Tuesday’s election, caught up in the fantasy of “Whew, we really dodged a bullet with this midterm,” I’m a bit more somber. Well, downright disgusted and depressed, actually.

It’s true, it could have been worse and, as far as midterms go, this wasn’t the blue wave or bloodbath it could have been. That said, this was pretty grim, folks. We lost governorships in Illinois, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, New Mexico, Nevada, and, OMG, Wisconsin. As of this writing, we don’t know about Connecticut, which could be a slim Republican victory, and Georgia’s Ms. Abrams is holding out ‘til the bitter end, looking for more votes wherever she can find them to hold over that “black vote suppressor” Kemp’s head. Neither victory, however, can assuage the loss. 

And the Senate. Oh, yes, I know we won and picked up Missouri, Indiana, and North Dakota. These were admittedly big takebacks from the Democrats that help us considerably with judicial appointments, but perhaps the biggest plus is that this larger Senate majority insulates us from the stranglehold RINOs like Murkowski and Collins have often held over us being the one or two holdouts or sellouts on important votes. That said, who knows what kind of havoc RINO Romney will wreck with his holier than thou attitude, believing himself to be the white knight who will save Republicanism from the Dread Populist Trump? I can only pray Romney just keeps his mouth shut and supports Trump, unlike McCain. Really, this Republican self-criticism and self-flagellation, bowing to the media gods begging their forgiveness for every verbal transgression…just has to stop. 

Our RINOs and critics of Trump need to take a breath and take a lesson from the leftwing playbook: a united front and a united vote at all costs. In the politics of our day, the individual must yield to the party no matter how distasteful. I promise you that all of those moderate House Democrats who won last night won’t be so moderate when voting time comes. And here is the thing: this isn’t new for Pelosi. We shouldn’t be caught off guard by it. She has a history of finding moderate Democrats to run in red districts on a (surprise!) moderate platform. In exchange for their loyalty once elected, she rewards them with movement in the party hierarchy, coveted committee appointments, support and funding for their future campaigns. If anyone intimates her or she might vote against Pelosi, she browbeats them into compliance with that gavel under the threat of losing all of the above. Folks, she did this in 2008, remember? My, we conservatives have short memories. 

But the fact is, we barely eked out victories in Florida and Texas -- two races that should have been a piece of cake. If anyone has any place in its crosshairs, it is the Democrat ground game machine that is working diligently and systematically to turn these two states blue and using the template they used in Colorado in the early 2000s. This was laid out in gory detail by Rob Witwer and Adam Schrager in The Blueprint: How the Democrats Won Colorado (and Why Republicans Everywhere Should Care) -- required reading for any Republican strategist and candidate and a book and an approach I’ve highlighted over the years in numerous articles. Has anyone in the GOP ever read that? If so, you are way overdue for a re-read. The Democrat blueprint is even more high octane today versus in the early 2000’s because of enhanced technology, the ubiquity of technology, and the changing demographics in this country. Are we doing anything to combat this? Do we have our own blueprint?

And by the way, it’s not only Texas and Florida. Arizona and Nevada are too close for comfort and never should have been, but again, the Republican bases in these states have been systematically appropriated by OFA and MoveON and an entire host of new organizations whose names I don’t even know, to turn them blue -- working on union workers in Vegas, illegals, Hispanics, college students and women throughout both states. 

And there’s more good news. If you are worried about illegal aliens having the right to vote or just voting anyway because our registration systems are ridiculously porous and requiring ID to prove who you are is racist, just wait! Soon to be an initiative on your state’s future ballot, is the re-institution of voting privileges for millions of felons -- the types who’ll be thrilled to vote for all the lawyers, prosecutors, AGs, and military types who often run for office. As if it weren’t bad enough, as of last night the Democrats will likely add to their rosters the felon vote in Florida, putting the razor thin wins yesterday of Rick Scott for Senate and Ron De Santis for Governor in jeopardy for tomorrow. 

This election, especially the close calls we managed to win, should be a wake-up call, not a sigh of relief to conservatives. And let me tell you, the ones we lost we may never regain. It’s just the way things go especially in congressional elections which are more localized. How did the Democrats win? Not with superior candidates but with superior fighting power -- gobs of money, incredible organization and mobilization, registering voters everywhere they appeared, appeals to women, minorities and the youth, and, of course, characterizing Republican candidates as racist, rich, big corporate types who want conversion therapy for the gays and transgenders they hate -- and telling tall tales about evil Republicans who want to annihilate health insurance coverage for pre-existing conditions -- a lie that was easily refutable but was just kind of glossed over by our candidates, if not outright ignored. 

I’m not even going to get into the state legislatures that were flipped to the Democrats (at least four, at last count). 

Anyone who actually believes that the 46 or 50 Democrats who pledged they would not vote for Nancy Pelosi for Speaker, will in fact comply with this heartfelt pledge (asserted only to get elected by moderates who might swing right), is outta their cotton pickin’ minds. Her chits are in. She funneled millions to these elections with a wink and a nod. Remember her saying “I say to the candidates, do whatever you have to do, just win, baby….only then after the election will I ask people for their support.” That means, sure, take the pledge to vote for anyone but me for Speaker -- wink, wink -- as long as you win. We’ll reconcile matters after we get the House. Just watch -- she’ll have that gavel in her hand faster than you can say “Bob’s your uncle” and won’t let it out of her cold dead hands even when she is 6 feet under.

But voters have long memories. One silver lining to this entire Speaker Pelosi hullaballoo is the potential backlash in 2020 for any newly elected Democrats representative who breaks their pledges by voting for Pelosi in their very first House vote. You’d think voters would learn at some point and not be so gullible. I’m hanging onto that silver lining like it was my only lifeline.

Every Senate pick-up we had was because of Trump. Republicans and conservatives sat back while he did the work for us. What do I mean by that? We had such a lousy GOTV effort. Did we even have a ground game? What was our message? More Trump? Less Trump? Economic progress? The Caravan? Kavanaugh? Sure, all of that helped bring people to the polls and, I admit, had we not done that, the blue babbling brook might have indeed been a blue tsunami. But the only emails I got from Republicans were asking for money. The emails I was inundated with from the DNC, OFA and MoveOn were all about organizing and mobilizing. They told me where to meet, what to say, where and when to vote. The offered rides to the polls, help with registration. They were all over college campuses. They told me who to call, what to write, what to say. 

You might not tolerate ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN and MSNBC but you sure better watch them every once-in-a-while to be jolted out of your talk radio, Fox News, Drudge Report bubble. 

And you better be willing to give up that vacation or use your free time not for your hobbies, but to get involved in the elections where you can make a difference. Otherwise, this country is lost. Gone-zo. I’m not being alarmist. I am just, once again, sounding the alarm. You know, ringing the bell: The Democrats are Coming, The Democrats are Coming! Again, we cannot rely on Trump and only Trump to do the ground work for us. 

We can’t just show up to fabulous, energizing conventions and rallies and go home and think our vote is all that matters. While it is true that Democrats finance protesters and volunteers, bus them in and give then a sign and a snack, it is true we don’t do that. That’s a huge disadvantage to the GOP. But the Democrats also have people who volunteer every free moment they have for the cause. The might support progressives like Bernie Sanders but, in the end they coalesce, in unity, in lock-step, without uttering a peep in opposition, around a Hillary Clinton. We don’t have as many volunteers as the left and the few we have get burned out because it all falls on their shoulders. If you learned anything from the Tea Party it was about the value of participation and the empowerment that comes from it. 

If we don’t get it together soon, if someone doesn’t come out with a centralized strategy and a formula for people to follow in every state in every locality, a formula they can tweak to meet their local needs; if we don’t get Republicans to run as independents in some key states under secret promise to caucus with the GOP; if we don’t reach the youth and women and minorities even more than we have; if we do not have organizations that are prepared at a moment’s notice to do what they have to do in support of a candidate, to rally, to protest, to show up; if we don’t have a centralized website that serves as a portal for all information you could possibly need in organizing, getting out the vote, meeting with other people; if we don’t figure out how to utilize the net, YouTube, Instagram to reach the youth or those in remote areas; if we don’t support the President and our candidates in lock-step, and most importantly, if we don’t field excellent candidates around whom we swarm to protect them from leftwing invective, accusations, and lies…we will lose this country. I promise you that. 

Remember how good it felt to swarm around and fight for Brett Kavanaugh? To punch back against the media? We need to keep that backbone. Remember how it felt to watch or attend all of those Trump rallies this last month? That passion and energy has to be translated into grassroots action. 

This election wasn’t a fatal bullet to the head but it was shot to the femoral artery and we are bleeding out while the enemy is dancing on our heads. We won with some last minute work by the President and the work of some good people on the ground. But it wasn’t enough. We were lucky with some of the wins we did have, but the next time, we won’t be so lucky. Trump can win the presidency but he cannot win every race. 

It’s your country, if you can keep it.


Sally Zelikovsky

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/11/the_midterms_were_a_wakeup_call_for_republicans.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



Pakistan: Asia Bibi, Christian woman acquitted of blasphemy, flown out of the country - Robert Spencer


by Robert Spencer

But they keep insisting that Allah is merciful...

The Muslim mobs who have been baying for her blood will be newly enraged, and may try to vent their wrath against the Pakistani government.


“Asia Bibi case: Pakistani woman acquitted of blasphemy flown out of country,” by Tom Powell, Evening Standard, November 7, 2018:

A Pakistani Christian woman acquitted of blasphemy eight years after being sentenced to death has is being flown out of the country for security reasons.
Amid tight security, Asia Bibi left a detention facility in Punjab province for a flight to the capital city Islamabad, officials said. Troops guarded the roads leading to the airport from which she departed.
Her lawyer Saif ul Malook said that she was being flown out of Pakistan with her immediate family but he did not know where they were going.
Authorities last month said they arrested two prisoners for allegedly conspiring to strangle her and since then additional police and troops have been deployed to the facility in Punjab.
Antonio Tajani, the president of the European parliament, tweeted: “Asia Bibi has left the prison and has been transferred to a safe place! I thank the Pakistani authorities.
“I look forward meeting her and her family, in the European Parliament as soon as possible.”
Ms Bibi’s move comes a week after the high court in a landmark ruling acquitted her and ordered her released.
It triggered nationwide protests and Ms Bibi’s release was put on hold on Friday after authorities held talks with radical Islamists who want her publicly hanged….

Robert Spencer

Source: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2018/11/pakistan-asia-bibi-christian-woman-acquitted-of-blasphemy-flown-out-of-the-country

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter