Wednesday, December 15, 2021

Denial is a River That Runs Through the Left - Don Feder

 

by Don Feder

Progressives reshape reality to fit their ideology.

 


What do the following have in common: tornadoes which wreaked havoc in the Midwest, the Smollett and Rittenhouse verdicts, the crime wave inundating our cities, chaos at the border and the highest inflation rate in 39 years? Each is relevant only if it serves the left’s worldview.

Biden says the twisters which devastated parts of four states are further evidence of what he calls the ‘climate crisis.” Tornadoes in the Midwest? What’s next, hurricanes in Louisiana, blizzards in North Dakota and a heat wave in July?

As her Kansas farmhouse was swept up in a dust cloud, Dorothy Gale was heard to remark: “Damn those Republicans for opposing the Green New Deal!”

Jussie Smollett concocted a hate crime story so preposterous that it strained credulity –white men in MAGA hats wandering around Chicago at 2 AM in the dead of winter looking for minorities to victimize.

But Biden, Harris and most of the left swallowed it to the last absurd detail. Last week, Smollett was convicted on five charges related to the hoax, including lying to the police.

When Kyle Rittenhouse was charged with fatally shooting two people and wounding a third in the course of a 2020 riot in Kenosha, Wisconsin, Biden said it was because of Trump’s alleged refusal to “disavow white supremacy.” At trial, Rittenhouse was found not guilty on all charges.

The difference? Rittenhouse was a white man with a gun protecting property and himself during a BLM riot, so he had to be guilty. Smollett is a gay, black actor, (and a friend of Maxine Waters), so his allegations had to be believable, no matter how fantastic.

A few days ago, Larry Krasner, Philadelphia’s radical DA said there’s no crime crisis in the City of Cain and Able — no crisis of “crime,” “lawlessness” or “violence.”

With three weeks left in the year, as of December 7, Philly had 523 murders, exceeding its previous record of 500 in 1990 and surpassing New York City (approximately six times larger) with 447 on the same date.

Krasner has become a hero of the criminal class for getting them back on the streets almost as soon as they’re booked.

As 2021 comes to a close, 12 big cities (all with Democrat mayors and lefty prosecutors) had record murder rates.

The lame-stream media either pays no notice of this or finds a way to rationalize it. To acknowledge the bloodbath would call into question liberal crime policies, like allowing racial mobs free rein, defunding the police, emptying the jails, reducing many felonies to misdemeanors, and eliminating cash bail.

To evade reality, the excuses become increasingly more implausible.

At a press conference, White House mouthpiece Jen Psaki (a stalwart root-causer) attributed the smash-and-grab crime wave to hit retail districts coast to coast to COVID-19. “Oh, I’m so afraid of contracting the dread virus that I’ll rush right over to Nordstrom and grab a lot of high-end stuff.”

For progressives, there’s no crime wave in the cities and no crisis on the border.

In the fiscal year that ended on September 30, 1.7 million “migrants” were stopped, nearly quadruple the number last year, when you-know who was in office. The number of deportations has fallen to record lows.

Where could the blame lie? Construction of the border wall stopped, bringing back catch-and-release, ending remain-in-Mexico (only recently reinstated by the courts) are a few of the possibilities.

The media will have none of it.  A headline in the October 22 New York Times revealed the woke truth – “Illegal Border Crossings, Driven by Pandemic and Natural Disasters, Soar to Record High.” Remember, the same pandemic that sends Nicaraguans to the Rio Grande causes criminal gangs to loot Louis Vuitton stores.

Soaring inflation is generally ignored.

The Consumer Price Index rose 6.8% in November, approaching the previous monthly record of 7.1% in June 1982. The year will close with inflation at 39-year high – energy up 33%, gas 58% and beef up 20%.

But Washington has found a way to fight what isn’t happening (and, if it is, it’s all Trump’s fault anyway) – spend trillions more and build the mountain of debt even higher. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that Good Time Joe’s Build Back Redder Plan will add $3 trillion to the National Debt over the next 10 years.

Better buy hamburger meat while you can still afford it.

The supply chain crisis couldn’t be connected to the rising price of gas or people being paid not to work, could it?

Indeed not. MSNBC host Tiffany Cross has a novel if bizarre explanation: It’s because the trucking industry is “populated by a lot of white men over the age of 55,” a group of people that “overwhelmingly voted for Trump.” Cross babbles on, “Some people have talked about aggressive truck drivers cutting them off and (oh, no) not being helpful.” I think Biden has found his next Secretary of Transportation.

Progressives really believe that they can wish away reality. All they have to do is shut their eyes tightly, click their heels together three times, and keep repeating: “There’s no place like Venezuela.”

Denial is a river – wide and deep (with a fast-moving current) -- that runs through the left.

 

Don Feder

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/12/denial-river-runs-through-left-don-feder/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Can an Ex-President Claim Privilege for Communications While He Was President? - Alan M. Dershowitz

 

by Alan M. Dershowitz

The relevant issue is whether the communication was privileged at the time it was made.

  • A former spouse, a lawyer's former client, and a penitent's former priest can claim privilege -- and so could a former member of Congress and a former judge. The relevant issue is whether the communication was privileged at the time it was made. If so, it should be an enduring privilege that encourages confidential communications during their incumbency.

  • According to The New York Times, this is what [the House's lawyer] said: "The Constitution does draw a clear line between a president and an ex-president. An ex-president is somebody who rejoins the great unwashed" -- by which he apparently means you and me, who never had any executive privilege.

  • The issue is an open one that will likely be decided by the Supreme Court. I doubt that justices who are now retired or intend someday to retire -- and join the "unwashed" -- would be thrilled if Congress were to subpoena their former law clerks to disclose their confidential discussions about decisions they wrote while they were still among the washed.

  • They [the January 6th Committee] should seek to have the courts rule first on the constitutional issue, and if Meadows then refuses to comply with a judicial order, they can seek criminal penalties. This chronology is especially required because Meadows has said that he would comply with court orders.

  • Seeking a court order first is also required by the constitutionally mandated separation of powers.

  • Finally, criminal indictments should never be used to determine what the law is. It should only be used against individuals who know that they are violating existing law that is already clear.

Douglas Letter, the lawyer for the January 6th Congressional Committee, has argued that former President Donald J. Trump can no longer claim executive privilege, including over communications with Mark Meadows, his former chief of staff, when they were both in office. The relevant issue, however, is whether the communication was privileged at the time it was made. If so, it should be an enduring privilege that encourages confidential communications during their incumbency. Pictured: Trump and Meadows at the White House, on July 29, 2020. (Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

The Constitution provides no clear answer to whether a former president can claim executive privilege over communications that occurred while he was president. Both policy and analogy to other privileges would suggest an affirmative answer. A former spouse, a lawyer's former client, and a penitent's former priest can claim privilege -- and so could a former member of Congress and a former judge. The relevant issue is whether the communication was privileged at the time it was made. If so, it should be an enduring privilege that encourages confidential communications during their incumbency.

The lawyer for the January 6th Congressional Committee, Douglas Letter, however, has argued that former President Donald J. Trump can no longer claim executive privilege, including over communications with his former chief of staff when they were both in office. According to The New York Times, this is what he said: "The Constitution does draw a clear line between a president and an ex-president. An ex-president is somebody who rejoins the great unwashed" -- by which he apparently means you and me, who never had any executive privilege.

Where in the Constitution he or the committee find the "clear line" that supports his cramped interpretation of privilege is unclear. The issue is an open one that will likely be decided by the Supreme Court. I doubt that justices who are now retired or intend someday to retire -- and join the "unwashed" -- would be thrilled if Congress were to subpoena their former law clerks to disclose their confidential discussions about decisions they wrote while they were still among the washed.

In the absence of a definitive judicial decision to the contrary, former chief of staff Mark Meadows would seem to be required to accept former President Trump's claim of executive privilege. Were he now to divulge communications that the courts ultimately held were privileged, the damage would be irremediable. The cat could not be returned to the constitutional bag. On the other hand, if he does not now disclose and the courts ruled that he must, the only harm would be some delay. The balance of harms clearly favors non-disclosure at this time.

That is precisely why it is so outrageous for the committee now to be seeking the criminal indictment of Meadows for refusing to disclose material that may well be constitutionally privileged. They should seek to have the courts rule first on the constitutional issue, and if Meadows then refuses to comply with a judicial order, they can seek criminal penalties. This chronology is especially required because Meadows has said that he would comply with court orders.

Seeking a court order first is also required by the constitutionally mandated separation of powers. Congress cannot simply compel the executive to bow to its will when there is a conflict between the two elected branches, the third branch -- the judiciary -- decide who is correct under the constitution.

Finally, criminal indictments should never be used to determine what the law is. It should only be used against individuals who know that they are violating existing law that is already clear.

The Justice Department should therefore refuse any congressional demand to indict Meadows. If the Justice Department improperly secures an indictment from a grand jury -- which they can easily do because, as one judge put it, grand juries would "indict a ham sandwich" if asked to do so -- the courts should immediately dismiss it and demand that the Justice Department first get a judicial ruling on the constitutional issue.

The precedent that would be established by allowing an indictment of a former chief of staff to the president for the "crime" of seeking a judicial ruling before irretrievably disclosing information that may well be constitutionally privileged would do great harm to our constitutional structure. Its victims would not only be the president and its former incumbent, but all of us "unwashed" who depend on the courts to guarantee our constitutional rights.

 

Alan M. Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus at Harvard Law School and served on the legal team representing President Donald Trump for the first Senate impeachment trial. He is the author of numerous books, including his latest, The Case for Color-Blind Equality in an Age of Identity Politics. His podcast, "The Dershow," is available on Spotify and YouTube. He is the Jack Roth Charitable Foundation Fellow at Gatestone Institute.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18033/president-privilege

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Ugly Truth Comes Out About Netanyahu’s Trial - Caroline Glick

 

by Caroline Glick

Israel’s unelected legal fraternity, which in the name of “democracy” accepts no limits on its power, will stop at nothing to preserve that power.

 


The corruption trial of former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in the Jerusalem District Court has been ongoing for the past two months. Things are not going well for the prosecutors.

Israel’s state prosecution submitted a list of 333 witnesses. It frontloaded its best ones. So far, eight have taken the stand. And all of them have obliterated the prosecution’s case. Long-time Israeli jurists and former prosecutors attest that this is the worst presentation of evidence they have ever seen.

For the past three years, Israeli Attorney General Avichai Mandelblit and his colleagues built their case for indicting Netanyahu—a long-serving, successful and popular prime minister—by claiming their star witnesses had given them proof that Netanyahu is corrupt and dangerous.

Through illegal, selective leaks from investigation rooms and prime-time press conferences, the state prosecution insisted that the witnesses had given them incontrovertible evidence that Netanyahu received a bribe, in the form of positive coverage from a news website. Mandelblit claimed that in exchange for the bribe of positive coverage, Netanyahu compelled regulators to provide the owner of the website with a sweetheart deal worth hundreds of millions of dollars.

But over the past two months, as one allegedly “star” witness after another took the stand, each rejected Mandelblit’s contention. Netanyahu, in fact, received hostile coverage from the website in question; his political rivals received supportive coverage.

As for the regulatory favors Netanyahu supposedly afforded the owner of the website in exchange for positive coverage, here too, the witnesses have shattered the narrative. The alleged whistleblower, who purportedly made the claim, testified that Netanyahu had no role in the regulatory apparatus in question. Netanyahu, in short, never asked for anything.

Last week, Netanyahu’s former spokesman and one of his most intimate advisors, Nir Hefetz, took the stand to testify against Netanyahu. When Hefetz signed a deal to become a state witness against Netanyahu in March 2018, Mandelblit and his associates presented the development as nothing short of an earthquake. With Hefetz’s decision to turn on his former boss, they had Netanyahu dead to rights.

After Hefetz turned against Netanyahu, the prosecution’s public campaign against the premier went into high gear. Leaks from interrogation rooms turned into geysers. Friendly journalists were briefed, and they duly reported on Netanyahu’s criminal mindset. The police inspector general weirdly alleged that Netanyahu hired private detectives to tail his police investigators.

As Netanyahu appeared increasingly vulnerable, his government also gradually destabilized.

Hefetz’s testimony last week was a watershed event in the trial for two reasons. First, he laid bare the prosecution’s obsession with “getting” Netanyahu. Under oath, Hefetz described the ill-treatment he received from police investigators at the direction of state prosecutors. Hefetz were arrested in the middle of the night in a Hollywood-type scene, with armed officers nearly breaking down his door. He was held in harsh conditions for two weeks. He was denied food, medicine and sleep. He was placed in a flea-ridden cell. He was housed with violent, convicted criminals and terrorists. Investigators threatened to destroy his family and coerced him into firing his attorney and hiring one they chose for him.

All observers of Hefetz’s testimony have agreed that the treatment he received was illegal. Some have alleged that it was torture. Notably, the prosecutors did not dispute Hefetz’s claims, which he made while he was under direct examination by the very prosecutors his testimony was supposed to assist.

Second, in glaring contrast to the hype that surrounded his testimony, like his fellow “star” witnesses, Hefetz shattered the prosecution’s case. Hefetz said Netanyahu did not intervene with the regulators on behalf of the website owner; that he received hostile coverage from the website; and that he didn’t even consider the website important.

Hefetz’s revelation of his treatment at the hands of the prosecutors showed the public that the prosecutors would stop at nothing to incriminate Netanyahu. Hefetz committed no crime whatsoever, yet prosecutors had him locked up and treated like a terrorist until they broke him. And for their efforts, Hefetz didn’t deliver Netanyahu—he exonerated him.

Even before the prosecution began making its case in court, the legal foundations of the indictments were already flimsy. Mandelblit indicted Netanyahu on four counts in three charges. The most serious count is bribery. As top U.S. attorneys argued in a pre-indictment hearing Mandelblit held for Netanyahu, there is no basis in Israeli law, or in the laws of any other Western democratic legal system, for asserting that positive coverage of a politician by a media outlet is a “bribe.” The assertion itself serves to criminalize both politics and journalism. By defining media coverage as bribery, Israel’s prosecutors arrogated to themselves the power to indict any politician and any journalist whose underlying positions they oppose.

Netanyahu is also charged with breach of trust for allegedly discussing a deal for positive coverage with the owner of Israel’s second-largest circulation newspaper, Yediot Ahronot. Yediot has led public campaigns against Netanyahu since he first entered politics in the 1980s. On the other hand, it has provided lavish coverage to Netanyahu’s political rivals in its long-standing effort to oust him from power.

The deal the two discussed was one in which Yediot would provide Netanyahu with more positive coverage and, in exchange, Netanyahu would appeal to the owner of Israel’s largest circulation newspaper, Israel Hayom, which was supportive of Netanyahu, and convince him to limit his circulation for the benefit of Yediot. (Disclosure: In addition to Newsweek, I also write regularly for Israel Hayom.) But Netanyahu never agreed to the deal. And nothing ever came of it. In the meantime, in 2013, Bennett and 42 other members of the Knesset voted in favor of a bill, prepared by Yediot‘s lawyers, that would force the outright closure of Israel Hayom. All 43 lawmakers received positive coverage from Yediot. In the wake of the vote, Netanyahu dissolved his government and the Knesset, precipitating new elections, in order to block the bill from advancing through the legislative process.

Whereas the prosecution indicted Netanyahu for breach of trust for speaking to Yediot‘s owner, it refused to even open an investigation against the 43 Knesset members.

Finally, Netanyahu was indicted for breach of trust for accepting gifts from his friends. This, despite the fact that Israeli law permits politicians to receive gifts from friends, and simply requires politicians to return the gifts or pay a fine if the attorney general determines that they weren’t actually “gifts” from “friends” under relevant law.

The problem with Mandelblit’s determination of Netanyahu’s relations with his friends, like his other determinations in relation to the criminal probes he ordered against Netanyahu, is that his motives were always suspect. His obsessive hounding of Netanyahu reeked of ulterior motives.

Last Tuesday, Mandelblit revealed his motives to the public with the broadcast on Israeli television of the transcript of a conversation he had a month ago regarding the Netanyahu trial.

Mandelblit maintained that Netanyahu had to be ousted from power because he was “a danger to democracy.”

Netanyahu endangered Israeli democracy, in Mandelblit’s view, because he sought to impose checks and balances on Israel’s legal fraternity—the Supreme Court justices, the attorney general and the state prosecution office. For the past generation, all three arms of the legal fraternity have arrogated to themselves the powers of the executive and the legislature. Through fiat, they effectively canceled all legislative and executive checks on their power. The most powerful means that the justices and lawyers have used to effectuate their power grab has been their seizure of power from the government to appoint themselves.

Netanyahu posed a threat to “democracy,” by Mandelblit’s telling, because he intended to restore the government’s power to appoint justices and the attorney general, and to impose limits on the powers of the state prosecutors.

Mandelblit referred to the legal fraternity’s fight with Netanyahu as a “war”—indeed, as an existential conflict. His decision to indict Netanyahu was necessitated by the exigencies of that war.

In his words, “This [indicting Netanyahu] is a decision I had a difficult time with…we suddenly found ourselves in a war over the legitimacy of the attorney general, the DNA of the Jewish people and the State of Israel.”

By Mandelblit’s telling, in this fateful struggle, God almighty himself carried the day. “The grace of Heaven saved us from Netanyahu.”

Mandelblit’s shocking statement proved that his case against Netanyahu has nothing to do with the law. It is entirely political. Israel’s attorney general led a coup of lawless attorneys whose single-minded goal was to oust a democratically elected prime minister to preserve the extra-legal powers the legal fraternity has seized over the decades.

Perhaps the most notable aspect of Mandelblit’s statement is that outside of Netanyahu’s Likud party, it elicited no meaningful protest. By and large, the politicians received Mandelblit’s statement in silence. The reason for that is clear enough. Hefetz’s testimony laid bare the brutal truth: Israel’s unelected legal fraternity, which in the name of “democracy” accepts no limits on its power, will stop at nothing to preserve that power. Challenge it, even in a limited manner, and it will destroy you and everyone you love.

Originally published at Newsweek.com.

 

Caroline Glick

Source: https://carolineglick.com/the-ugly-truth-comes-out-about-netanyahus-trial/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Word Games and Fake Diversity of the Left - Bruce Thornton

 

by Bruce Thornton

Woke ideology is losing support even among its own constituency.

 


Years ago at a block party in my old neighborhood, my next-door neighbor, a Mexican-American named Lawrence, introduced himself to a new resident, a white self-proclaimed activist lawyer. “No, no!” she scolded him. “Lorenzo!”

The chutzpah of a white woman telling a Mexican-American man how to say his own name still epitomizes for me the white elite Left’s obtuseness about their own patronizing arrogance, particularly when it comes to the ethnic “other” they supposedly champion. And it also reveals the way identity politics uses language to encode its reduction of complex, unique individuals into crude political caricatures that they label “diversity.”

I remembered this encounter last week when I read about a poll that found only 2% of Hispanics/Latinos used the clunky neologism “Latinx,” and 40% are offended by it.  Invented by mostly white, university educated “woke” activists and race-mongers, the word is a virtue-signaling totem for the Left’s exquisite sensitivity to how language allegedly reinforces sexism in order to further the nefarious designs of the “patriarchy” that, as the cliché goes, wants to keep women, especially women “of color,” “pregnant, barefoot, and in the kitchen.”

In the case of “Latinx,” the “woke” complaint is that “Latino” is a masculine noun, and so its use to describe people of both sexes is demeaning and exclusive of Latina women. But this pretext assumes that native speakers of Spanish, or any other European gendered dialect of Latin, will hear the word and immediately think of males and notice the exclusion of females.

Similarly, grammatical usage such as defaulting to the masculine when describing mixed-sex groups has been so common for so many centuries that most native speakers won’t even notice a word’s gender, any more than they think about biological males and females when they hear masculine or feminine nouns that have nothing to do with biological sex. It’s doubtful that a Spanish-speaker thinks the word for song, “canción,” which is feminine, has some meaningful connection to women or is exclusive of males.

The politico-linguistic dynamic behind “Latinx” was started by feminism over half a century ago in the case of the English suffix “-man” to describe a non sex specific activity or profession. Until feminist activists started complaining, most speakers of English would hear a word like “chairman,” “spokesman,” or “Congressman,” and would not notice its biological sex implications any more than they would other suffixes like “-ing” or “-ed.” Moreover, the same tenacity of usage, the power of linguistic habit that makes grammatical gender unexceptional, explains why words in English like “human” and “woman,” despite the efforts of feminist language commissars, are still in common use.

But more broadly, after decades of feminist agitation and charges of sexism, now the official style in public writing––which is to say, the style that reflects not grammar and standard usage, but an illiberal ideology that reduces individuals to categories––is to eschew such insults and so avoid retaliatory attack. Hence the silly substitutes like “chair-person” or “Congress-person.”

The whole thing reminds me of the old gag about the woman who calls the cops on a man indecently exposing himself. The officer comes to her second-story apartment, looks out the window, and says, “I don’t see anything.” The woman responds, “Of course not! You’re not using the binoculars!”

This use of words to reinforce ideology, then, is especially important for the identity politics and the various victim-lobbies whose numbers have expanded over the years. The therapeutic cult that has attended the rise of protected victim groups, the notion that people who’s been victimized should never, ever get their feelings hurt, has helped to multiply protective euphemisms, what historian Russell Jacoby years ago called “linguistic smile buttons.”

Again feminism has been at the forefront of such efforts, so that no woman hearing a word like “craftsman” will be traumatized by the heinous implication that her sex is unable to “craft” anything.  Likewise, people who used to be called “crippled” or “handicapped” are now “differently abled,” as though the inability to walk or hear or see is just an alternative lifestyle. Even cliched expressions like “fell on deaf ears” is verboten.

Perhaps the most duplicitous of these euphemisms is “homeless person.” We know that the genuinely homeless, those who through no fault of their own have no place to live, are a tiny part of the hordes of bums, tramps, panhandlers, addicts, and crazies turning cities into unlivable, filthy, and dangerous hellholes. Yet the euphemism is useful camouflage for the government agencies and private charities who redistribute taxpayer dollars to the political and professional enablers of such chaos.

And that’s the point of all this linguistic innovation and surveillance. Politics is about power, the power to make people do what you want them to do so that you can gain leverage. Language is particularly useful for getting such influence, for it is the public, common possession of millions of speakers. Changing the standards of accepted speech for all these people is a force-multiplier for one faction to achieve its political aims at the expense of another.

But a tactic that for decades has worked with guilty whites, especially the cognitive elites that control the culture and media, is becoming less effective with our largest ethnic minority, immigrants from Mexico and Latin America who comprise 18.7% of the population. The permanent Democrat majority that increasing numbers of such immigrants would help to create isn’t looking like such a sure thing these days. Indeed, a recent Wall Street Journal poll showed that Hispanics are split evenly between Democrats and Republicans, an improvement on Donald Trump’s already higher than usual numbers of Hispanic voters in 2020.

The dislike of Latinx is one sign that many self-identified Hispanics who are not college educated professionals or activists are tiring of the radical, antitraditional rhetoric and politics of the “woke” Democrats. On issues like same-sex marriage, abortion, or transgenderism, many Hispanics have more traditional views. They also are more concerned with the economy and jobs than they are with tony causes like Climate Change or policies to steer people into driving more- expensive electric cars. Finally, one of the most important signifiers of ethnic identity is language, and native speakers don’t like outsiders fiddling around with their language. Seeing and hearing the word Latinx, one that serves a tiny minority of national Hispanics, reminds the majority that their interests aren’t as important as those of a small cohort in progressives’ “diversity” club.

More important, Hispanics––who prefer that term only as the least objectionable choice foisted on them by the larger culture––also chafe against the way that their particular ethnicities and national origins are homogenized into one reductive category in order to facilitate the Dems’ efforts to create a super-majority. Writing at the Spectator World, Alex Perez emphasizes the true diversity camouflaged by words like “Hispanic,” let alone the preposterous “Latinx”:

If Democrats, or Republicans for that matter, truly want to understand Hispanics, a successful poll wouldn’t frame the demographic question along the Latinx/Hispanic dichotomy. It would simply ask: where are you from? A Cuban would say he’s from Cuba, and a Mexican, unsurprisingly, would say he’s from Mexico. A Puerto Rican — you guessed it — is from Puerto Rico. In all these polls, Hispanics choose Hispanic over Latinx only because it is the least distasteful of the two words, though this choice betrays a deeper truth that all Hispanics know: disparate Hispanic groups, more often than not, merely tolerate each other.

Working class Hispanics in particular aren’t happy with the way Democrats reflexively assume that their positions on, say, illegal immigration are by default those of all “Hispanics.” Their dislike of “Latinx” is a sign of that discontent.

Finally, these trends against progressives’ identity politics are a hopeful sign that this divisive, illiberal ideology is losing support among some of their constituency. The whole focus on the crude stereotypes that derive from the age of Darwinian “scientific racism,” is more and more obviously the antithesis of true diversity, which comprises ethnic identity and, more important, individual character and minds.

Maybe then we will return to the foundational principle of our political order: that every human being is created equal and possesses unalienable rights like life, liberty, and the pursuit happiness––which includes the right to identify yourself and your ethnicity according to your own beliefs and traditions.

 

Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/12/word-games-and-fake-diversity-left-bruce-thornton/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Artifacts seized in Jerusalem may have been from Bar Kokhba rebels' hiding place - Israel National News

 

by Israel National News

Remarkable ancient artifacts seized from antiquities dealers were spoils taken in battle by Bar Kokhba rebels fighting Roman soldiers, Israel Antiquities Authority says.

 

The retrieved artifacts
The retrieved artifacts                                                    Yoli Schwartz, Israel Antiquities Authority

What were ornamental bronze incense burners and a wine server doing in a hiding complex dating from the Bar Kokhba Revolt in the Judean foothills?

Israel Antiquities Authority (IAA) investigators suspect that the remarkable archaeological finds seized by Lev Habira police from antiquities dealers last week are actually battle spoils captured from Roman soldiers by Bar Kokhba rebels.

During a routine patrol in the Musrara neighborhood last week, detectives from the Lev Habira police station in Jerusalem noticed a vehicle driving in the wrong direction up a one-way street. The vehicle looked suspicious, so the detectives stopped and searched it. They were amazed to find a box in the trunk containing amazing and unusual archaeological finds.

Inspectors from the Israel Antiquities Authority’s Antiquities Robbery Prevention Unit were called to the police station and immediately realized that the remarkably well-preserved finds date from the Roman period. They include two ornate 2,000-year-old bronze censers that were used to burn ritual incense and probably belonged to affluent Roman houses and temples. A bronze jug for serving wine was also recovered. The vessel bears a depiction of a Roman banqueting scene showing a reclining figure holding a jug of wine. Other illicit finds include an ornate stone tripod bowl, Roman clay lamps, and hundreds of coins dating from the Late Roman period (second–third centuries CE).

Bronze artifacts are relatively rare finds in Israel since then, as now, metal was an expensive commodity and was usually melted down for reuse. Such finds are generally recovered from archaeological sites where they were deliberately concealed, or in hiding complexes where they were left after being taken in battle during the Bar Kokhba Revolt.

The discovery of the finds prompted the Israel Antiquities Authority to launch a criminal investigation against the three suspects from the vehicle. The inquiry reinforced suspicions that the items were brought to Jerusalem with the aim of selling them to an antiquities dealer. The Robbery Prevention Unit believes that the ancient items were taken from a hiding complex dating from the Bar Kokhba Revolt that has been under surveillance in recent months.

The unit explains that the items were spoils seized by Bar Kokhba rebels, but they were not used by the Jewish fighters themselves since they are typical Roman cult artifacts and are decorated with figures and pagan symbols (thus violating the Jewish prohibition of idolatry). Furthermore, by the time of the Bar Kokhba Revolt, the Temple had been destroyed and the Jewish rites of offering sacrifices and burning incense were no longer practiced. If the Jewish fighters wanted to use such artifacts, they would deface the figures to prevent idolatry.

According to Amir Ganor, director of the Israel Antiquities Authority Robbery Prevention Unit, “We recently identified unauthorized archaeological excavations at a site from the time of the Bar Kokhba Revolt located near the Tarqumiya border crossing. The information was passed on to the IDF and the Archaeology Department of the Civil Administration in Judea and Samaria. They launched an operation in an attempt to capture suspects, but unfortunately the robbers managed to escape. When they fled, they left behind ancient finds that are similar to those now recovered in the suspects’ possession. We believe that the finds that were recently recovered in Jerusalem were taken from this site.”

Ganor added, “I would like to commend the actions of the detectives from Lev Habira police station in Jerusalem, whose vigilance led to the finds’ recovery and the success of the investigation, thus thwarting the attempted sale of unique antiquities in this instance.”

The director of the Israel Antiquities Authority, Eli Eskozido, said “The Israel Antiquities Authority is working day and night to combat illicit excavations at antiquities sites around the country, in cooperation with the Israel Police and other law enforcement agencies.”

“These ancient finds embody the country’s history, but for robbers and dealers they are merely a commodity, sold to the highest bidder for pure greed.“It is tremendously important to prevent any attempts to deal in illegal antiquities, to recover valuable finds, and to return them to the public and the State. When legal proceedings against the suspects are complete, the Israel Antiquities Authority will ask the court to confiscate the finds and hand them to us for conservation and further research.”

 

Israel National News

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/318683

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Tuesday, December 14, 2021

ADL report: Anti-Israel student groups top drivers of anti-Semitism on campus - JNS

 

by JNS

Seventeen colleges brought BDS measures up for a vote by the student government in 2020-21, and 11 have passed them.

 

 Jewish Voice for Peace. Photo courtesy of NGO Monitor.

In the last academic year, pro-Israel college students have felt vilified and ostracized as anti-Israel and anti-Zionism sentiment proliferates at schools nationwide, according to a report by the Anti-Defamation League.

Findings included in “The Anti-Israel Movement on U.S. Campuses, 2020-2021,” identify the campus anti-Israel movement as being led by student groups and certain professors. Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP) continue to be two of the most influential anti-Israel campus groups, allied often with like-minded organizations such as Young Democratic Socialists of America, Palestinian Youth Movement and American Muslims for Palestine.

SJP, which has 180 chapters and organizes protests, BDS resolutions and “disseminates propaganda” through social media and other outlets—is by far the “most active” anti-Israel group on university campuses in the United States and Canada. Also very active in spreading anti-Israel and anti-Zionist sentiment on campus, the report said, is the group Jewish Voice for Peace.

Seventeen colleges brought BDS measures up for a vote by the student government in 2020-21, and 11 have passed them, adding to the ongoing rise of anti-Israel activism on campuses.

The report noted that some of the most strident anti-Israel activists called for Israel to be dismantled or denied its right to exist; expressed support for violent resistance to Israel; and called for Zionists and pro-Israel students to be excluded from campus life.

Among anti-Semitic tropes the ADL found repeated by anti-Israel college activists were those alleging Jewish or Zionist power and control over the media and political affairs. “Such language,” the report said, “can create a corrosive climate for many Jewish students on campus.”

Israel’s 11-day conflict in May with Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip, which launched more than 4,000 rockets at population centers in Israel, proved a flashpoint in the uptick of anti-Semitic activity.

Jonathan A. Greenblatt, ADL’s national director and CEO, said his organization documented how “the anti-Israel movement’s drumbeat of rhetorical attacks on Zionism and Zionists can truly hurt and offend many Jewish students, leaving them feeling ostracized and alienated. Freedom of speech does not mean freedom to harass and intimidate. While all students have a right to express their views about Israel openly, expressions of anti-Semitism under the guise of Israel criticism are unacceptable.”

 

JNS

Source: https://www.jns.org/adl-report-students-for-justice-in-palestine-jewish-voice-for-peace-top-drivers-of-anti-israel-sentiment-on-campus/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Poll: Israeli Arabs in Jerusalem prefer Israeli rule to PA rule - Israel National News

 

by Israel National News

Poll of 1,200 Israeli Arabs in J'lem finds 1,116 prefer Israeli rule. Of the remaining 84, 79 are unwilling to give up Israeli citizenship.

 

Jerusalem
Jerusalem                                                                                                                         istock

A poll by the SHFA "Palestine News Agency" found that a vast majority of Israeli Arabs in Jerusalem prefer Israeli rule to PA rule.

The sample included 1,200 Arab residents of Jerusalem with an Israeli ID. 1,116 of respondents said they would prefer to live under Israeli rule, while only 84 people answered that they prefer the transfer of power to the Palestinian Authority.

In addition, among the 84 who favored PA rule, 79 said they would be unwilling to give up their Israeli citizenship.

Pro-Israel activist Yoseph Haddad commented on Facebook on the findings, pushing back against claims Israel is an "apartheid" state.

"Amazing how people prefer to continue living under an 'apartheid' regime," he wrote.

 

Israel National News

Source:https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/318634

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Terrorist cell uncovered by IDF, Shin Bet at largest PA university - Michael Starr

 

by Michael Starr

11 Islamic bloc activists involved in Hamas operations in Judea and Samaria were arrested at An-Najah University.

 

Hamas supporters wearing veils and gloves take part in an anti-Israel rally in Jenin.  (photo credit: MOHAMAD TOROKMAN/REUTERS)
Hamas supporters wearing veils and gloves take part in an anti-Israel rally in Jenin.
(photo credit: MOHAMAD TOROKMAN/REUTERS)

Terrorist infrastructure at the largest Palestinian university, An-Najah National University was uncovered by a joint IDF and Shin Bet operation, IDF Spokesperson for Arab Media Avichay Adraee announced on Tuesday.
 
11 Islamic Bloc student activists involved in Hamas operations in Judea and Samaria were arrested on campus in Nablus.

According to Adraee's tweets, the suspects were involved in the "transfer of funds and organizing rallies in support of Hamas, in addition to incitement campaigns under the supervision and direction of senior Hamas officials."
 
Adraee warned of students being recruited to Hamas through the Islamic Bloc, which indoctrinated students into adopting Hamas's ideology. The Islamic Bloc demonstrated a "readiness to work" with the terrorist group, which covered students' university tuition fees. 
 
A picture taken with a drone shows Hamas supporters taking part in a protest against Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' decision to postpone planned parliamentary elections, in the northern Gaza Strip April 30, 2021. (credit: REUTERS/MOHAMMED SALEM) A picture taken with a drone shows Hamas supporters taking part in a protest against Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' decision to postpone planned parliamentary elections, in the northern Gaza Strip April 30, 2021. (credit: REUTERS/MOHAMMED SALEM)

Adraee added that in recent years, a number of terrorist cells that had planned operations had members that belonged to the Islamic Bloc at An-Najah University.

With 23,000 students and 11 faculties, An-Najah National University is the largest Palestinian higher learning institution in the West Bank.An-Najah University ranked 1st among Palestinian institutions, 11th in Arab World, and among the top 100 in the Times Higher Education Emerging Economies Ranking for 2022.

 

Michael Starr

Source: https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/terrorist-cell-uncovered-by-idf-and-shin-bet-at-largest-pa-university-688701

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Groundbreaking Win Against Palestinian Anti-Semitic Propaganda - Christine Douglass-Williams

 

by Christine Douglass-Williams

Played out at Canada's largest school board.

 


Antisemitism at the Toronto District School Board has led to a backlash that the Board undoubtedly did not expect. It was high time that the largest school Board in Canada, and the fourth largest in North America, faced accountability regarding its use of public funds to promote a pro-Palestinian agenda as part of its “equity” and “diversity” program. The Board’s actions go back to Operation Guardian of the Walls in May, and climaxed with the targeting of a Jewish school board trustee who was taken to the woodshed by the Board for pointing out a disturbing incident of antisemitism displayed by the TDSB’s equity advisor.

The backlash has been unprecedented, involving virtually every Jewish group and supporter of democracy in the Toronto area, and includes a rare statement by the Toronto Board of Rabbis. It ultimately resulted in a victory, in a groundbreaking, precedent-setting vote put to the TDSB Trustees to strike down an antisemitic motion. The battle was intense, and demonstrated what collective determination for the good could accomplish.

Enter Black Lives Matter, Pro-Palestinian Activist 

The complicated series of events that led to the storm began in late September, when author and activist Desmond Cole was hired by the Toronto District School Board to give a talk about anti-black racism. Cole veered off course to lecture teachers and administrators about “Palestine.” He claimed that “those troubled by the phrase ‘Free Palestine’ have a vested interest in the continued oppression of Palestinian people.”

He went on to interrupt and talk over superintendent Lorraine Linton and executive superintendent Shirley Chan, stating:

“If people interpret ‘Free Palestine’ as being violent, it is because they are benefitting from Palestinians being unfree…In the same way if you answer ‘Black Lives Matter’ with ‘All Lives Matter,’ you must have some investment in Black lives being undervalued.”

Cole does not accept the idea that one could advocate for black lives and all lives at the same time. Under Canada’s constitution, of course, all are equal.

Cole should also be questioned about the Islamic State’s genocide against black Christians in Africa, and the countless blacks who are being murdered by blacks in inner cities; this would reveal how much he really cares about black lives. Nor does he address the issue of blacks being held slaves in Mauritania, Sudan and Algeria by Arabs.

It doesn’t take a genius to recognize an agenda behind Black Lives Matter, and gaping holes in that organization’s stated concern for black lives. The group’s co-founder, Patrisse Cullors, has also made clear the group’s support for the Palestinian jihad; she has “called for the ‘end’ of Israel at a 2015 panel hosted a Harvard Law School. Anything white is deemed as  ‘the imperialist project.’”

Cole likewise ignores Palestinian history and Palestinian Charters that call for Israel’s obliteration. It is reprehensible that the TDSB would spend taxpayer money to subject staffers to Cole’s propagandist, discriminatory tirade. And this was the thanks the TDSP got in return: in a tweet, Cole “accused TDSB brass of directing Chan and Linton to derail his talk”:

The Board took at least some responsibility after the bad publicity and upheaval that ensued after Cole’s speech:

“Spokesperson Ryan Bird said it’s incumbent upon participants to interrupt and question speakers when content veers towards potentially problematic or inappropriate topics….‘it is clear that we should have done a better job in challenging any assertions that were hurtful or discriminatory’, he said.”

The BDS-supporting Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East subsequently launched a campaign of support for Cole, claiming that “Free Palestine” is about human rights, not hate.” This point was later addressed by the TDSB in a letter to a concerned citizen about the repeated incitement by pro-Palestinian groups to “free Palestine from the River to the Sea.”

Fast forward to the second week in November to a pro-Palestinian high school student classroom walkout and demonstration at Marc Garneau Collegiate Institute in Toronto. Over 200 students rallied to “Free Palestine”. The demonstration was organized in support of  Desmond Cole and Javier Davila (discussed further down). Students reportedly chanted “anti-Israel slogans” and carried signs with the slogan “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free.” In a letter forwarded to be by email, the TDSB attempted to address a complaint about a disturbing pattern of Antisemitism within its domain….

Re: Visitor [XXX]’s Inquiry from [Toronto District School Board] Regarding [General Comment / Question]
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2021 16:18:08 +0000
From:
GeneralInquiries <GeneralInquiries@tdsb.on.ca>
To: XXX

Hello XXX

Thank you for your email.

The Toronto District School Board is committed to developing students’ critical thinking skills so they can understand complex issues from many different perspectives. Conversations about Israeli-Palestinian relationships and geopolitical issues have arisen in classrooms, between staff, students, and in professional development sessions. As a board, we have been grappling with how to honour multiple lived experiences and identities (e.g. Palestinian and Israeli) in ways that do not further exclude or cause harm.

As educators, we understand that language and context matter. The phrases “Free Palestine” and “From the River to the Sea” have been in contention. These expressions mean different things to different people because of the diversity of lived experiences in the TDSB community and beyond. Some members of the Jewish community have experienced these phrases as antisemitic, calling for the eradication of Israel, and hateful. Some Palestinians use these phrases as a statement of their human and land rights as people.

Discussions about human rights are often complex and include an examination of competing rights….

Competing rights? No other country struggles to maintain its existence on a daily basis, as does Israel. In a working definition of antisemitism, evidently not considered by the TDSB, the International Holocaust Memorial Alliance states:

Manifestations might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. However, criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.

Palestinian Media Watch captures the full Palestinian agenda in Palestinian leaders’ own words. See HERE.

“From the River to the Sea” and the Influence of Javier Dávila, the TDSB’s Student Equity Program Advisor

Phrases such as “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free” originated in the Palestinian territories. The words explicitly refer to an imperative to obliterate Israel entirely, “from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea.” The phrase has a long history behind it. Fatah Commissioner and Central Committee member Tawfiq Tirawi declared:

Our Palestinian land is from the [Jordan] River to the [Mediterranean] Sea. I dare any Palestinian, any senior Palestinian official, or any Palestinian leader to reduce the Palestinian map to the West Bank and Gaza! He would not be able to walk one meter in the streets of our Palestinian cities among our people! … Arab brothers… Be with the Palestinian people, the people that lives on land that is all holy and that is all waqf land (i.e., land that is an inalienable religious endowment in Islamic law.)

The words “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free” do not mean “different things to different people.” They are an open incitement for Palestinians to destroy Israel. This quest manifests itself in, among other things, the Pay-for Slay program, which pays Palestinians to kill Jews, as well as in the launching of rockets against Israeli citizens and the celebration of martyrdom, which is actively promoted in Palestinian culture. PA TV also routinely indoctrinates and encourages Palestinian adults and children alike to murder Jews.

The pro-Palestinian agenda is supported by the Muslim Brotherhood, and its offshoots like Hamas. For the Muslim Brotherhood, “Jihad is the way.“ Many Islamic authorities state that it is the highest calling and duty for Muslims everywhere to take up the cause of jihad.

The Muslim Brotherhood vision has for quite some time spread on campuses throughout North America.

More followed at the TDSB: In mid-July, B’nai Brith Canada expressed outrage over “the apparent reinstatement without discipline of a Toronto school employee who sent materials to teachers justifying the murder of Israeli civilians.” B’nai Brith noted:

Javier Dávila, a Student Equity Program Advisor with the Toronto District School Board (TDSB), sent two emails to a list comprised of TDSB educators in May, as fighting between the Hamas terrorist group and Israel raged. The emails are filled with virulently anti-Israel teaching material, repeatedly describing Israelis as  “colonizers” in their indigenous homeland.

Dávila announced that he has been reinstated without discipline.

Some of the materials go even further. Dávila’s emails contain writings by Laila Khaled and Ghassan Kanafani, prominent members of the Popular Front for Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), another designated terrorist entity in Canada. One flyer promoted by Dávila, prepared by the “New England Committee to Defend Palestine,” even justifies Palestinian suicide bombings and accuses “Zionists” of plotting genocide against Palestinians.

Davila’s antisemitic messages resemble the propaganda that is routinely disseminated in the Palestinian territories. Yet in a sympathetic Washington Post article, Davila was presented as a hero of the oppressed who are suffering under “settler colonial violence’”.

TDSB Bans Former Yazidi Sex Slave and Nobel Prize Laureate and Censors Trustee for Raising an Antisemitism Problem

The TDSB even banned former Yazidi Islamic State sex slave survivor Nadia Murad, a Nobel laureate, to avoid appearing to be “Islamophobic.” The National Post stated:

From that pit of hell, she incredibly found the personal resources to escape, champion the cause of brutalized young women everywhere, and ascend to the heights of the world’s high honour, the Nobel Prize…. The equity department was concerned she would stoke Islamophobia!

Yes, that very same “equity” department in which Javier Dávila is a Student Equity Program Advisor.

In the latest incident, a TDSB Board Member Code of Conduct Complaint Investigation released a 50-page report after an investigation into Jewish school board Trustee Alexandra Lulka. The report stemmed from complaints launched against Lulka, who discovered in May that Javier Dávila had used “an opt-in email distribution list on gender-based violence to send out an information package for teachers about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.” Some of Dávila’s content has already been discussed above.

Lulka posted a statement on Twitter and Facebook:

“I was deeply disturbed to recently discover that virulently anti-Israel and even antisemitic materials were distributed to TDSB teachers through an opt-in list by a TDSB employee,” she wrote.

“I was outraged to discover that some of this material justifies suicide bombings and other forms of terrorism. This is reprehensible. These materials were provided by an employee from the TDSB equity department, the very department that should be countering antisemitism and violence, not fanning the flames.”

She said she would work “to ensure that none of these hateful materials ever see the inside of a TDSB classroom.”

Lulka demanded an investigation, but the investigation turned on her instead. Following the “formal complaints” for her post, the integrity commissioner “hired an independent human rights investigator to carry out a month-long probe.”

The integrity commissioner subsequently found that Lulka’s Twitter statement “fell within the TDSB definition of being discriminatory” because it might “perpetuate harmful anti-Muslim and anti-Palestinian tropes by tying generally pro-Palestinian discourse to antisemitism and violence.”

The Commissioner’s report thus recommended that the Board censure Lulka.

The investigator reasoned that “equating pro-Palestinian materials with support or justification for suicide bombings and terrorism similarly may perpetuate the dangerous and harmful stereotype which views Muslims, and particularly Palestinian Muslims, ‘as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism and engaged in a ‘clash of civilizations.’”

The investigator was hardly impartial. According to B’nai Brith, lawyer Morgan Sim, who has repeatedly referred to Jews as “white,” implying that supporting them is “white supremacist,” was the “independent investigator.” Canada’s largest Jewish lobby, the Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA), tweeted a concerning screenshot of a telling statement from Morgan Sim:

 

For a better look at Sim’s Tweet:

The National Council of Canadian Muslims Lobby and the TDSB

Meanwhile, the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM, formerly CAIR-CAN) openly encouraged a public lobbying of other trustees to censure Lulka, stating that the report’s findings “raise a number of serious concerns about anti-Palestinian racism and Islamophobia.”

Jihad Watch has covered the NCCM a great deal. See HERE.

The NCCM was a recipient of an undisclosed amount of Liberal government funding (that is, taxpayer money) to help implement Canada’s big mistake: anti-Islamophobia motion M-103, a prelude to wide-ranging censorship of anything offensive to Islam. The M-103 outcome included government plans to monitor citizens for compliance and training law enforcement to identify online and offline “hate.” The implementation of M-103 was enabled by a taxpayer-funded 23-million-dollar package. Another recipient along with the NCCM to assist the Liberal government’s implementation of its M-103 strategy was Islamic Relief Canada (IRFAN), which was outlawed by the previous Conservative government as a terrorist entity.

The NCCM also backed the Toronto District School Board’s definition of “Islamophobia” for Islamic Heritage Month in 2017. The definition labeled “fear, prejudice, hatred or dislike directed against Islam or Muslims, or towards Islamic politics or culture” as “Islamophobia.”

The National Council of Canadian Muslims also called on its supporters “and fellow Canadians to write to the leadership and trustees of the Toronto District School Board (TDSB) to thank them for supporting Islamic Heritage Month and for taking a principled stand against Islamophobia.”

But as B’nai Brith Canada noted:

The Guidebook was designed by TDSB project co-chairs Nazerah Shaikh and Haniya Sheikh, with support from the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM). The TDSB definition, if enforced, could lead to punishment for students or teachers who display “dislike” toward the persecution of LGTBQ people in the Islamic Republic of Iran, harsh restrictions on women in Saudi Arabia, and Palestinian terrorism against Israelis, all of which are examples of “Islamic politics”.

After an outcry, the definition was scaled back to exclude reference to politics.

Still, most parents have no idea of what their children are being taught in schools; all too often, the content of that teaching is decided upon by special interest political lobbyists.

Stopping Antisemitism at TDSB

In the latest TDSB hoopla, even the usually silent Toronto Board of Rabbis weighed in:

We must take issue when unvetted information that is clearly antisemitic is distributed within the school system and a trustee is taken to task for bringing attention to this.

A Provincial Member of Parliament, Gila Martow, also launched a Working Group Against Jew Hatred, which included incidents at the TDSB and other troubling trends.

The fever-pitch levels of antisemitism being brought to school children, which increasingly look like lessons taken from the Palestinian Authority, are deeply disturbing, yet were inevitable given the history of Palestinian propaganda incursions on university campuses across the continent. Now this initiative is expanding. The showdown with the TDSB will make it tough for the Board to continue to justify its habitual antisemitic stance, which up to now it has disguised as “conversations” about “equity,” “creating safe spaces” and an interest in “Palestinian human rights,” while censoring discussion about the Palestinian jihad against Israel, a practice to which Trustee Lulka alluded.

During a TDSB Board meeting Wednesday evening, a few members  attempted to create a “safe space” for all students as they processed the issue through Western lenses. Some members genuinely expressed being torn, and not understanding the complex issue of the Middle East, but what was missing was a recognition of what the Palestinian agenda is really all about, or of the decades of attempts to delegitimize Israel and ultimately destroy it.

Finally, a motion was presented “that the Integrity Commissioner’s recommendation as presented in the report that Trustee Lulka breached rule 6.10 of the TDSB Code of Conduct, be rejected.” The TDSB vote after much deliberation, was 10-7 against the antisemitic move to censure Lulka.

Is the Board now prepared to stop open incitement of violence against the Jewish state and antisemitism in its schools? Or will it continue to try to censor speech that is offensive to pro-Palestinian sensibilities and some Muslim lobbies? This was a close win. Let’s hope that the TDSB has learned a lesson in this groundbreaking battle that managed to defeat the pro-Palestinian and NCCM agenda at the TDSB. For now, at least.

 

Christine Douglass-Williams 

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/12/groundbreaking-win-battle-against-palestinian-christine-douglass-williams/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter