Sunday, October 28, 2018

Synagogue shooting victims identified - David Rosenberg


by David Rosenberg

11 victims of Pittsburgh synagogue shooting - 8 men and 3 women - released day after gunman attacked circumcision ceremony.


Scene of Pittsburgh shooting
Scene of Pittsburgh shooting
Reuters

Eight men and three women were among the dead, authorities announced Sunday, including 71-year-old Dan Stein, 75-year-old Joyce Feinberg, 65-year-old Richard Gotfried, 97-year-old Rose Malinger, 66-year-old Jerry Rabinowitz, 59-year-old Cecil Rosenthal and his 54-year-old brother David Rosenthal, 84-year-old Bernice Simon, Bernice’s 86-year-old husband Sylvan Simon, 88-year-old Melvin Wax, and 69-year-old Irving Youngner.

The gunman, 46-year-old Robert Bowers, was reportedly inside the synagogue for roughly 20 minutes, shooting congregants and guests who had arrived for a circumcision ceremony held in the Tree of Life synagogue.

Bowers was armed with an AR-15 semi-automatic rifle and several handguns.

After 11 people were killed and 2 others wounded, Bowers exited the synagogue, but was confronted by police officers, who opened fire on him.

During an exchange of fire with officers, Bowers wounded four officers on the scene, before he was shot and wounded. Bowers then surrendered himself to police and was placed under arrest.

Investigators said they were treating the mass-shooting as a hate crime, and confirmed Sunday that Bowers had made anti-Semitic statements and expressed a desire to massacre Jews during the 20-minute shooting attack.

"During the course of his deadly assault on the people of the synagogue, Bowers made statements regarding genocide and his desire to kill Jewish people," US Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania Scott Brady said Sunday.


David Rosenberg

Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/253893

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



Where is the IDF finesse? - Brig. Gen. (res.) Zvika Fogel


by Brig. Gen. (res.) Zvika Fogel

Just because Israel doesn't want to invade Gaza, it doesn't have to be helpless in the face of the ongoing attacks by Hamas and the other terrorist groups there.

That's it, enough! I have realized that none of the defense establishment leaders sitting in the situation assessment with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu wants a war. No one is recommending an operation, nothing. The defense minister, the chief of staff, the head of the Mossad, the head of the Shin Bet security agency, and the head of the National Security Council apparently think that victory is impossible, that we can't defeat the enemy in the Gaza Strip.
They are certainly telling themselves, "With our luck, and Iron Dome to protect us, why get dragged into a war? We have excellent pilots and unmanned aircraft that know how to make noise, frighten, and destroy. If we can't create deterrence, let's at least show them that we have more weapons than they do. … So for now, it's better to let the guys in Gaza use up their stocks of rockets and mortars."
Soon, the fires in our fields will be put out because they'll no longer have balloons and condoms to which to attach fuses and send over the fence, and we'll stop inhaling smoke because they won't have any more tires to burn. Pretty soon we'll block the underground tunnel and undersea threats so we can keep sending them fuel that will be used strictly to produce electricity and construction materials to build homes because that will create employment for the Palestinians of Gaza.
I realize that everyone in charge of our security is recommending to the prime minister that we not fall for the Islamist provocation, because we have the strength to withstand it after 70 years of this stuff.
Other than that, who will we be fighting against – the lightning that happened to cause a rocket that happened to be aimed at Beersheba to be fired? Or against the Islamic Jihad, which is merely an organization supported by Iran and is trying to stir up discord between us and our friends in Hamas, and also ease the pressure in Syria? In short, our defense and security leaders are pushing a strategy of leaving things as they are?
I understand the difficulty of making the decision to go to war. But I don't understand the lack of creative ideas and initiative. I get the feeling that security officials don't believe in our capabilities and, maybe worse, don't believe in the righteousness of our path and in our right to not only defend ourselves but also to launch an attack to ensure our continued existence and quality of life.
For example, why was no decision taken that starting tonight, we launch an operation to take out the entire leadership of Hamas, the Islamic Jihad, and the rest of the terrorist groups in Gaza, from their field commanders to the "civilian" operatives? There is no need to reoccupy Gaza, merely to hunt the commanders and soldiers who do their utmost day after day to kill us. Hunt them from the air, the sea, and on land. We have the capabilities and the brave, well-trained soldiers to do so.
We just need courageous leadership that knows how to direct them. Where have our shrewdness and finesse gone? Why haven't we distributed fliers promising the residents of Gaza $1,000 for every piece of reliable, confirmed information about where terrorist commanders and operatives are hiding? I have no doubt about the deterrent effect that would have, not only in Gaza but also in the clash we expect with Hezbollah in the north.
We don't need to live under this reality for another 70 years. We have to move to a strategy of coexistence from a position of strength. The winner sets the terms of any peace agreement!

Brig. Gen. (res.) Zvika Fogel

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/where-is-the-idf-finesse/?redirected=310959

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



Israel should revise its policy on Syria - Prof. Eyal Zisser


by Prof. Eyal Zisser

As the Syrian civil war wanes and Iran's presence seems invariable, a prudent change of direction is in order. Israeli strikes should exact a price not only from Iran but also from President Assad.

The decision to prevent Iran from establishing ‎itself militarily in Syria required bold ‎determination, and intelligence and operational ‎capabilities, alongside prudence, so as not to ‎provoke an escalation that would drag the region ‎into an overall armed conflict. ‎

Now, however, it seems that this campaign has ‎exhausted itself. Israeli officials continue to ‎claim that the IDF's operational leeway in Syria has ‎not been compromised in the wake of the Sept. 17 ‎downing of a Russian plane by Syrian air defenses ‎trying to counter an Israeli airstrike and the ‎ensuing crisis with Russia, with Defense Minister ‎Avigdor Lieberman and Prime Minister Benjamin ‎Netanyahu both asserting that Israel will do ‎whatever it takes to prevent Iran from realizing its ‎ambitions in Syria, but reality on the ground proves otherwise. ‎

A review of the situation reveals a gap between ‎Israeli rhetoric and reality. Rather than reports of ‎Israeli strikes in Syria, we see reports of the ‎deployment of Russian S-300 air defense batteries in ‎Syria, and reports on how Mustafa Mughniyeh,‎ son of ‎Hezbollah archterrorist Imad Mughniyeh, is setting ‎up terrorist infrastructure along the Israel-Syria ‎border.‎

It is safe to assume that the window of opportunity ‎for Israel to truly operate freely in Syria would ‎have closed regardless of the downing of the Russian ‎plane. After all, Russia wants to ensure peace and ‎stability in Syria so it can capitalize on its ‎investment in the war-torn country. Moreover, ‎Moscow does not perceive Iran as a threat, nor does ‎it see the presence of Iranian forces in Syria as a ‎Russian problem. ‎

But even without the Russian indifference, it is ‎hard to imagine that the Israeli airstrikes would be ‎enough to make the Iranians rethink their plans for ‎Syria. ‎

Such attacks can perhaps foil an Iranian hold on one ‎site or another, and possibly the deployment of ‎advanced weapons systems, which are easy to ‎identify, but all this is a drop in the bucket given the presence of thousands of Iranian soldiers ‎and Hezbollah operatives and tens of thousands of ‎Shiite militia fighters imported into Syria. ‎

In light of this reality, Israel must think outside ‎the box and recalibrate its course of action. One ‎possible policy shift is to return to tried and ‎true policies, namely exacting a price not only from ‎Iran but also from its host, namely Syrian ‎President Bashar Assad.‎

The Israeli defense establishment mistakenly sees ‎Assad as an Iranian puppet but in ‎reality, he is bolstering his position. It is ‎possible that if he – and his Russian patrons – are ‎made to understand that the Iranian presence on Syrian ‎soil has a price, he will act to restrict it.‎

Israel missed its chance by allowing Assad's forces ‎to simply regain control of southern Syria without ‎exacting a price, as this also made way for Iranian ‎and Hezbollah presence near the Israeli border. But ‎it is not too late: A change of direction is still ‎possible and it must be made very carefully so as ‎not to provoke an overall confrontation. There is no ‎better time to pursue this than now, as a new IDF ‎chief of staff is about to take office. ‎



Prof. Eyal Zisser is a lecturer in the Middle East History Department at Tel Aviv University.

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/israel-should-revise-its-policy-on-syria/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



PM: Israel will not accept any ultimatum posed by Hamas - Israel Hayom Staff


by Israel Hayom Staff

Hamas military leader Yahya ‎Sinwar reportedly demands Israel pay Gaza's rulers $15 million ‎a month or face increased border violence and ‎arson terrorism


Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz, Prime Minister Benjamin 
Netanyahu and Cabinet Secretary Tzachi Braverman observe 
a moment of silence for the victims of a synagogue shooting in Pittsburgh
Photo: Reuters 

Israel will not accept any ultimatums from Hamas and ‎its policy in Gaza will be dictated solely by its security ‎interests, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told his cabinet on Sunday.

Speaking ahead of the weekly cabinet meeting, Netanyahu ‎dismissed a demand by Hamas military leader Yahya ‎Sinwar, who reportedly urged Israel to pay Gaza's rulers $15 million ‎in cash every month or face an escalation in border violence and ‎arson terrorism. "There is no way Israel will accept any ultimatum posed by Hamas," Netanyahu said.

The terrorist group further demanded that the first ‎payment be made by this Thursday, according to Channel 12 news.

According to the report, Sinwar said the funds would go toward paying Hamas functionaries' ‎wages. The demand seeks to circumvent the financial ‎sanctions imposed on Gaza by Palestinian Authority ‎President Mahmoud Abbas, whose Ramallah-based government has frozen ‎the transfer of funds used to pay Hamas' ‎wages as part of efforts to wrest control of ‎Gaza from Hamas. ‎

The cabinet was to discuss Hamas' threats, ‎as well as the recent border flare-up in its weekly session.

The Israeli Air Force bombed 80 terrorist targets in ‎Gaza over the weekend, after Islamic Jihad terrorist ‎fired some 40 rockets at southern Israel.‎

The Iranian-backed terrorist group later agreed to ‎an Egyptian-brokered truce with Israel. ‎

Sunday's cabinet meeting began with a moment of silence in ‎honor of the victims of Saturday's mass shooting at ‎a Pittsburgh synagogue, which left 11 people dead ‎and six wounded.‎

‎"Israel mourns with the families of the victims who ‎lost their lives in the horrendous Pittsburgh ‎massacre," Netanyahu said.‎

‎"On behalf of the Israeli public, I extend our ‎condolences to the families. We stand as one against ‎anti-Semitism and such barbaric violence," he said. ‎


Israel Hayom Staff

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/2018/10/28/pm-israel-will-not-accept-any-ultimatum-posed-by-hamas/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



Facebook removes fake, Iran-linked accounts that lured over million followers - News Agencies and Israel Hayom Staff


by News Agencies and Israel Hayom Staff

Social media giant purges 82 pages, accounts and groups tied to Iran's efforts to provoke social strife in the U.S. and U.K.

Facebook has purged 82 pages, accounts and groups tied to an Iranian effort to exploit its social network and Instagram service to provoke social strife in the U.S. and the U.K. The social media giant said Friday that the accounts had over 1 million British and American followers. 

The measure is part of the countermeasures that Facebook put in place in an attempt to prevent abuses similar to those Russian agents used two years ago to sway public opinion ahead of the 2016 U.S. presidential elections.

The fake Facebook accounts mostly targeted American liberals, according to the Atlantic Council's Digital Forensic Research Lab, a think tank that works with Facebook to study propaganda online.

The accounts featured posts on "politically charged" topics such as race relations, opposition to U.S. President Donald Trump and immigration, which were amplified through less than $100 in advertising on Facebook and Instagram, Facebook's head of cybersecurity policy, Nathaniel Gleicher, said in a blog post.

The action follows takedowns in August by Facebook, Twitter and Alphabet of hundreds of accounts linked to Iranian propaganda.

The latest operation was more sophisticated in some instances, making it difficult to identify, Gleicher said.

Although most of the accounts and pages had existed only since earlier this year, they attracted more followers than the accounts removed in August, some of which dated back to 2013. The previously suspended Iranian accounts garnered roughly 983,000 followers before being removed.

"It looks like the intention was to embed in highly active and engaged communities by posting inflammatory content, and then insert messaging on Saudi Arabia and Israel which amplified the Iranian government's narrative," said Ben Nimmo, an information defense fellow with the Digital Forensic Research Lab.

"Most of the posts concerned divisive issues in the U.S., and posted a liberal or progressive viewpoint, especially on race relations and police violence," he said.

Facebook has also set up a "war room" at its Menlo Park, California, headquarters ahead of key elections in Brazil on Sunday and in the U.S on Nov 6. It serves as a command center for more than 20,000 workers assigned to weed out fake accounts set up to distribute false information.

In this case, that war room began to detect a pattern of "inauthentic behavior" within the cluster of pages, accounts and groups that have now been kicked off its service. All were linked to Iran, although Facebook didn't find any ties to that country's government, Nathaniel Gleicher, Facebook's head of cybersecurity policy, wrote in a related blog post.

This activity was aimed at "sowing discord" by posting content focused on politically charged topics such as race relations, immigration, opposition to Trump and the polarizing Senate hearings that ended in Brett Kavanaugh's confirmation to the U.S. Supreme.

Preventing Facebook from becoming a cesspool of false information has become a top priority for CEO Mark Zuckerberg, who initially considered claims that fake news on his social network had swayed the 2016 election to be "pretty crazy."

Facebook critics still are not convinced the company is doing everything it can to keep malicious activity off its service. That is partly because sensational themes – even if they are bogus – can help keep people engaged on Facebook, helping it sell more of the ads that bring in virtually all of its profits.

In this case, some of the latest pages, accounts, and groups to be ousted were created as far back as mid-2016, Gleicher said. And they had been posting for the past year before a manual review by Facebook determined that they were malicious in nature.

"We continue to get better at finding and taking down accounts engaged in bad behavior," Gleicher said.

It is unclear how many people saw the content being circulated by the now-deleted accounts from Iran. About 1 million other accounts followed at least one of the offending pages. About 25,000 accounts joined at least one of the now-exiled groups and about 28,000 accounts followed at least one of the Instagram accounts that got booted.

Facebook's social network has more than 2 billion users and Instagram has more than 1 billion.


News Agencies and Israel Hayom Staff

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/2018/10/28/facebook-removes-fake-iran-linked-accounts-that-lured-over-1-million-followers/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



In Europe, Free Speech Bows to Sharia - Andrew C. McCarthy


by Andrew C. McCarthy

Hat tip: Darrell Simms

Europeans are free to say only what the courts let them.

 
Members of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France, October 2017. (Jean-Francois Badias/Pool/via Reuters)
hen he was 50, the prophet of Islam took as his wife Aisha, who was then six or seven. The marriage was consummated when Aisha was nine.

This is not a smear. It is an accurate account of authoritative Islamic scripture. (See, e.g., Sahih-Bukhari, Vol. 5, Book 58, Nos. 234–236.) Yet it can no longer safely be discussed in Europe, thanks to the extortionate threat of violence and intimidation — specifically, of jihadist terrorism and the Islamist grievance industry that slipstreams behind it. Under a ruling by the so-called European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), free speech has been supplanted by sharia blasphemy standards.

The case involves an Austrian woman (identified as “Mrs. S.” in court filings and believed to be Elisabeth Sabaditsch Wolff) who, in 2009, conducted two seminars entitled “Basic Information on Islam.” She included the account of Mohammed’s marriage to Aisha. Though this account is scripturally accurate, Mrs. S. was prosecuted on the rationale that her statements implied pedophilic tendencies on the part of the prophet. A fine (about $547) was imposed for disparaging religion.

Mrs. S. appealed, relying on Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights. That provision purports to safeguard “freedom of expression,” though it works about the same way the warranty on your used car does — it sounds like you’re covered, but the fine print eviscerates your protection.

Article 10 starts out benignly enough: Europeans are free “to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.” But then comes the legalese: One’s exercise of the right to impart information, you see, “carries with it duties and responsibilities.” Consequently, what is called “freedom” is actually “subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties” that the authorities decide “are necessary in a democratic society,” including for “public safety” and for “the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others.”

Translation: Europeans are free to say only what they are permitted to say by the unelected judges of the European courts. Truth is irrelevant. As the jurists reasoned in the case of Mrs. S., a person’s freedom to assert facts must be assessed in “the wider context” that balances “free” expression against — I kid you not — “the right of others to have their religious feelings protected,” as well as “the legitimate aim of preserving religious peace.”

It is thus verboten to say things that might upset Muslims. Particularly offensive is mention of Islam’s many doctrinal tenets that make us cringe in the 21st century — approbation of child marriage, violent jihad, the treatment of women as chattel, the duty to kill apostates, and so on. That these tenets are accurately stated, supported by undeniable scriptural grounding, is beside the point. Or as the ECHR put it, reliance on scripture could be classified as “an abusive attack on the Prophet of Islam, which could stir up prejudice and put at risk religious peace.”

What the vestiges of Western civilization are coming to: I say something that is true; it hurts your feelings, so — of course — you blow up a building; and it’s my fault.

Nearly four years ago, when Europe bowed to the mob and curbed its tongue following the jihadist massacre at the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, I tried to explain the stakes in a pamphlet called “Islam and Free Speech.” If a society is to be a functioning, flourishing, free society, it must safeguard the robust exchange of knowledge and ideas. Absent that, the rule of reason dies, and with it freedom of conscience, equality before the law, due process, property rights, and equality of opportunity.

Islamists and their transnational-progressive allies seek to redefine democracy as a guarantee of domestic tranquility, on the road to global tranquility in a post-Westphalian order. It is a sweet-sounding roadmap to tyranny, in which “tranquility” is enforced Soviet-style, with an official version of history and truth that is not open to question or debate. Your “freedom” to speak is strictly limited to those confines.

There is no free speech in Islam. Sharia states do not merely forbid speech that insults or denigrates Islam; they regard as blasphemy — and punish with cruelty — any form of expression that casts Islam in an unfavorable light.

That, of course, is the problem with Mohammed’s marriage to Aisha: The description of it is deemed a pedophilic slander. That owes to one of the worst aspects of the solipsism that passes for modern culture: the severe judgment of past events, including ancient history, based on current sensibilities — which the “arc of history” crowd so confidently assures us are just the best sensibilities ever.

In Mohammed’s time — a time of rampant infant mortality and low life expectancy — notions of adulthood and marriageability were conflated with puberty. The coupling of men and girls was not uncommon or considered condemnable. Indeed, as observed by Myriam Francois-Cerrah, a progressive scholar of Islam, five centuries after Mohammed married Aisha, King John of England, at age 33, married 12-year-old Isabella of Angoulême.

The problem is not that, in the seventh century, Mohammed married a young girl. It is that, while the West evolves because it venerates reason, much of Islamic culture regards Mohammed as the perfect role model, and this conception of the good is immutable. To fundamentalists, enacting laws against child marriage would be tantamount to saying Mohammed was in the wrong — unacceptable.

As a result, child marriage, like the abuse of women and girls in many other contexts, remains a major problem in Islamic countries. In Saudi Arabia, for example, efforts to establish the marriage age at 15 (and, some hope, to raise it to 18) have been flattened by sharia authorities. The ulema point to the example of Aisha, as well as scripture that marks the onset of puberty as the point of marriageability, and decree that no minimum age is appropriate. Even when governments enact a marriage age, fundamentalist communities flout it.

Speaking of fundamentalist communities, one objective of sharia supremacists is to establish Muslim enclaves in the West and then pressure the host governments to concede their right to govern themselves under Islamic law. That is not seen as a permanent arrangement. It is a transition on the path to imposition of sharia standards on all of society.

You think it can never happen? Okay, but then ask yourself, after the ECHR ruling, what is the state of free speech in Europe compared to a sharia society? And if free speech dies, how does reason survive? How does Europe survive?


Andrew C. McCarthy

Source: https://www.nationalreview.com/2018/10/free-speech-sharia-european-court-of-human-rights-ruling/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



Crazy Haters and the Twisted Press - Clarice Feldman


by Clarice Feldman

The meme about toning down political speech is one the press likes as a means of silencing the critics of its own partisan, slipshod work and the policies and character of its darlings on the left.

This Saturday eleven people were killed by a shooter in a Pittsburgh synagogue during morning services. The shooter appears to [be] someone who not only hates Jews, but hates President Trump as well

Julia Ioffe, a GQ correspondent, finds a way to blame Trump for this mayhem:
Julia Ioffe‏Verified account @juliaioffe
FollowFollow @juliaioffe
More
And a word to my fellow American Jews: This president makes this possible. Here. Where you live. I hope the embassy move over there, where you don’t live was worth it.
9:22 AM - 27 Oct 2018

It will be interesting to see how the rest of the mainstream media handles the background of the man responsible and contrasts it with this week’s perfervid reportage of the man who mailed dud nonfunctioning “bombs” to prominent Democrats and some media.

Without a serious look at the background of the dud bomber, much of the press leaped to blame the president. TheOtherMcCain dug deeper into it.

While described as a “Seminole Indian” and a fervent Trump supporter, the suspect, Cesar Sayoc is the son of a Puerto Rican immigrant with a long arrest record for making bomb threats, petty theft, grand theft, battery, drug possession, and domestic violence. Some of these offenses would appear to be felonies and yet until 2016, after years of being registered as a Democrat, he changed his registration to Republican -- something peculiar in a state that bars felons from voting. He had worked as a male stripper and likely was misusing steroids as he had been charged in 2004 with “felony possession of testosterone-based steroids” in a case which was dismissed.

So over the top was the press coverage of these fizzled devices that it inspired Twitter users to create their own versions of the dud bombs, some of the best of which Power Line blog reproduced in its regular week in pictures feature. 

At the same site, Paul Mirengoff departs from the press train emphasis on the political leanings of those who commit such crimes to endorse Daniel Horowitz’s contention that the real story is “the failure to put criminals behind bars and keep them there.”
This is a recurring but almost always ignored phenomenon. In one high-profile case after another, we learn that the criminal is a chronic offender with a rap sheet that, in a properly functioning society, would have mandated his incarceration at the time of his latest offense.
Yet, Democrats, and too many Republicans, including some in the White House, are dead set on increasing the number of convicted felons, including dealers of drugs like fentanyl, on the streets. They want shorter sentences for such offenders and they want them released from jail early -- an obvious recipe for more crime faster.
In short, the bipartisan leniency-for-felons crowd seeks to make our under-incarceration problem worse, even though doing so can only increase the occurrence of crime, including violent crime. The consequences of this perverse policy are there for all to see, but the leniency crowd averts its eyes.
There are approximately 327 million Americans. About 4.2% of them have serious mental illnesses. And while studies show that such persons are not more likely than others to become violent, once that person has, like Sayoc, demonstrated a pattern of violent behavior it is unconscionable not to remove him from the general population. I cannot help noticing, besides the general media avoidance of this issue (probably because they largely support this version of domestic “catch and release”), the shockingly disparate treatment in the coverage of this series of events with the shooting of Congressman Steve Scalise by a man who hoped to take out the Republican House leadership. The header that day in the Washington Post was “Lawmaker Steve Scalise is Critically Injured in GOP Baseball Shooting; James T. Hodgkinson is killed by police”. (Contrast that with this header from the same paper: “Trump’s words have nothing to do with the mail bombs? Spare us.”) It’s true that if you read down seven graphs in the front page Scalise article, you would have learned that Hodgkinson was opposed to Trump, or if you had a local version of the paper, you could see in the “Public Safety" section an article reporting that Hodgkinson was a fervent Bernie Sanders supporter. But you could easily miss the connection. 

The New York Times went one better on the Post, blaming Palin’s campaign mailer for the Scalise shooting.
The sniper, James Hodgkinson, who was killed by Capitol Police officers, was surely deranged, and his derangement had found its fuel in politics. Mr. Hodgkinson was a Bernie Sanders supporter and campaign volunteer virulently opposed to President Trump. He posted many anti-Trump messages on social media, including one in March that said, “Time to Destroy Trump & Co.”
Was this attack evidence of how vicious American politics has become? Probably. In 2011, Jared Lee Loughner opened fire in a supermarket parking lot, grievously wounding Representative Gabby Giffords and killing six people, including a 9-year-old girl. At the time, we and others were sharply critical of the heated political rhetoric on the right. Before the shooting, Sarah Palin’s political action committee circulated a map that showed the targeted electoral districts of Ms. Giffords and 19 other Democrats under stylized cross hairs. But in that case no connection to the shooting was ever established.
Two days later it published this correction online:
Correction: June 16, 2017
An editorial on Thursday about the shooting of Representative Steve Scalise incorrectly stated that a link existed between political rhetoric and the 2011 shooting of Representative Gabby Giffords. In fact, no such link was established. The editorial also incorrectly described a map distributed by a political action committee before that shooting. It depicted electoral districts, not individual Democratic lawmakers, beneath stylized cross hairs.
Did hard copy readers see this? Did the newspaper make any effort to disabuse readers it misled with long-discredited claims in the same way it repeated the lie in the hard copy?

I see a pattern here. Don’t you? Bury the background of the shooter if he’s on the left. When you can no longer bury it, blame it on mental illness and lack of sufficient gun control. When the shooter appears to be from the right, double down on even the provably false contentions made in past shootings that it was the intemperate rhetoric of the right to blame.

It seems to me that partisan scoring of points on twisted evidence is not good journalism. Nor does it seem to me that there’s much purchase to be had in blaming the right for violent rhetoric, when the most violent seems to be coming from the left. Numerous examples exist

They echo Democratic Congresswoman Maxine Waters's call for violence against their opponents.

And while she didn’t call for violence in the streets as did Waters, former Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and Hillary’s own running mate Tim Kaine, Hillary Clinton’s rhetoric can only be called inflammatory: “Hillary Clinton said on CNN, “You cannot be civil with a political party that wants to destroy what you stand for, what you care about.” Former president Obama’s intemperate remark bears repeating in this context of fiery political speech.
Mobster wisdom tells us never to bring a knife to a gun fight. But what does political wisdom say about bringing a gun to a knife fight?
That’s exactly what Barack Obama said he would do to counter Republican attacks “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraiser Friday night. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.”
Truly this meme about toning down political speech is one the press likes as a means of silencing the critics of its own partisan, slipshod work and the policies and character of its darlings on the left.

In any event it’s wise to remember that the press follows the “if it bleeds, it leads” by sensationalizing such things. As Seawriter sagely observes we’ve lived through far crazier times. 

Keep your perspective.

Clarice Feldman

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/10/crazy_haters_and_the_twisted_press.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



Out-of-state money pouring into losing Dem Senate candidates in ND, TX - Rick Moran


by Rick Moran

Democrats Beto O'Rourke and Heidi Heitkamp may be winning the fundraising battle, but are almost certain losers.

The Texas Senate race between incumbent Republican Ted Cruz and Democratic challenger Rep. Beto O'Rourke has now become the most expensive Senate race in US history.

Filings with the FEC show O'Rourke raising an astonishing $70 million. Cruz has not been idle either, pulling in more than $40 million since 2012. 

Meanwhile, in North Dakota, incumbent Senator Heidi Heitkamp pulled in an eye-popping $12.5 million in just the last 17 days. Analaysts credit her "no" vote on the Kavanaugh nomination - a no brainer for any Democratic senator seeing that the alternative was to have a a mob of screaming liberals calling for her head. 

But as the Washington Free Beacon reports, just 2% of it has come from donors in North Dakota.
Only 2 percent of Heitkamp's "eye-popping" haul, which has been credited to her decision to stick with her party and vote against Kavanaugh, came from within North Dakota, according to an analysis of her latest filing with the Federal Election Commission, which covers campaign activity from Oct. 1 through Oct. 17.
The campaign is only required to disclose sources of contributions over $200, which came to just under $4.9 million of the money raised. Only $105,568.17, or 2.15 percent, of the itemized contributions came from sources within North Dakota, where the incumbent Democrat is currently trailing by double-digits in the polls to Republican Kevin Cramer.
A far larger proportion of donations came from deep blue coastal states such as California, which was the source of $1.25 million, or 25.5 percent, of itemized contributions to Heitkamp. She received $732,625.54—or 15 percent—from donors in New York.
It is impossible to determine from the FEC report the geographic source of the unitemized contributions to Heitkamp, which are under $200 and accounted for $7.5 million of the fundraising.
Heitkamp's campaign did not respond to a request for information on the unitemized contributions.
Over the course of her current campaign, Heitkamp has received just 9 percent of her political contributions from within North Dakota, according to data collected by the Center for Responsive Politics.
It should be noted that Heitkamp is being slaughtered in the polls, trailing GOP challenger Rep. Ken Cramer by 16 points. (Can I say "slaughtered" without triggering anyone?)

As for O'Roruke, he too is benefitting hugely from donations originating outside of the state of Texas.

Dallas Morning News:
ActBlue has turbocharged the effort, allowing O'Rourke supporters in Texas and around the country to pour modest sums into the race, and set up recurring donations.
ActBlue announced Friday that 4.7 million donors who used the portal since January 2017 have sent $1.5 billion to Democratic candidates and groups nationwide, in 37 million transactions averaging about $40 each.
"Americans across the country are chipping in whatever they can to the races and groups they care about - whether it's for their next school board member or governor," said ActBlue executive director Erin Hill. "Small-dollar donors are leading the blue wave and making sure Democrats have the funds they need to win on Nov. 6."
Cruz and other Republicans accuse California liberals and other out-of-state Democrats of trying to buy the Texas seat.
But a Dallas Morning News analysis of itemized donations shows that a bigger share of Cruz donations comes from out-of-state: 43 percent, compared with 38 percent for O'Rourke. Cruz's out-of-state take is far higher when PAC donations are taken into account.
The difference is Cruz is winning. O'Rourke can spend as much as he wants but if he doesn't win, who cares? National Democrats aren't very happy. Out of state donors are pouring so much money into Texas, that some candidates are complaining that he's siphoning off support from more winnable races.

Indeed, that's the bottom line. These tens of millions of dollars might reflect a certain amount of enthusiasm for Heitkamp and O'Rourke, but it hardly helps either candidate in their respective races. Heitkamp is just about a gone goose and O'Rourke, for all the adoring press and celebrity coverage, is not getting any closer to Cruz who maintains a significant lead over the challenger.

Republicans are delighted that so much money is being given to probable losing candidates. It means less money for other candidates who might have a shot at defeating a GOP incumbent. And with the chances of Democratic takeover of the senate slipping away, that's the only thing that matters.

Rick Moran

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/10/outofstate_money_pouring_into_losing_dem_senate_candidates_in_nd_tx.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



A conspiracy of silence on Palestinian Arab torture - Giulio Meotti


by Giulio Meotti

If there ever is a Palestinian Arab state, here is a taste of what hapless Palestinian Arabs can expect.

Am I wrong or is there a blanket of terrible silence in the Western media about the Human Rights Watch new unprecedented report about the Palestinian torture?

Human Rights Watch has shed light on how the Palestinian Arabs are slaughtering each other: “Torture is the government policy of Hamas and the Palestinian Authority,” says the report. 

They reveal in detail what the Palestinian Arabs are doing to opponents and critics. “In the 25 years since Palesstinians gained a degree of self-rule over the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, their authorities have established machineries of repression to crush dissent, including through the use of torture” the report continues chillingly.

This report is the result of a two-year investigation by Human Rights Watch and it draws on 86 cases in the West Bank and Gaza. “The report shows that Palestinian authorities routinely arrest people whose peaceful speech displeases them and torture those in their custody.” In one case, “they slapped him (a prisoner, g.m.), slammed his body against the wall, and held him by the neck, threatening to hit him with a plastic hose, and putting him in painful stress positions and subjecting him to shabeh or positional torture”.

Where are the famous “Friends of Palestine”? Is this torture also the fault of Israel? Is it Israel that causes the Palestinian Arabs to torture each other?

And where is Europe, always ready to charge Israel of “human rights violations”? Where are the media, those claiming “Israel tortures Ahed Tamimi” and which run on their homepages any ridiculous story that puts Israel in a bad light? Where is the United Nations, which last week hosted a shameful discussion about imposing sanctions on Israel, with the help of an Israeli useful idiot from Betselem?

The Western media should not be surprised about this report. After Hamas took over Gaza in 2007, his henchemen executed the Fatah supporters by throwing them alive from the roofs of tall buildings and the Hamas' gunmen rode their motorcycles, dragging the bodies of these opponents behind them. 

Where were the media then?

After reading this report, I say that we are lucky that a “Palestinian State” has not yet been created. It would have been, as it is de facto, another Afghanistan.


Giulio Meotti, an Italian journalist with Il Foglio, writes a twice-weekly column for Arutz Sheva. He is the author of the book "A New Shoah", that researched the personal stories of Israel's terror victims, published by Encounter and of "J'Accuse: the Vatican Against Israel" published by Mantua Books.. His writing has appeared in publications, such as the Wall Street Journal, Frontpage and Commentary.

Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/22920

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



Saturday, October 27, 2018

10 killed in Pennsylvania synagogue shooting - Tzvi Lev


by Tzvi Lev


Gunman opens fire at Synagogue, kills at least 10 . Shooter is in custody.




At least 10 people were killed after a gunman opened fire at Pittsburgh's Tree of Life synagogue. According to the report, the gunman yelled "All these Jews need to die".

The gunman has been preliminarily identified as 46-year-old Robert Bowers. The shooting reportedly happened during a circumcision ceremony and over 12 people were shot. 80 people were in the Synagogue during the shooting. Bauer also shot three police officers.

The attack was condemned by President Trump, who tweeted that he is "Watching the events unfolding in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Law enforcement on the scene. People in the Squirrel Hill area should remain sheltered. Looks like multiple fatalities. Beware of active shooter. God Bless All!"

"I was heartbroken and appalled by the murderous attack on a Pittsburgh synagogue today," said Prime Minister Netanyahu.

"The entire people of Israel grieve with the families of the dead. We stand together with the Jewish community of Pittsburgh. We stand together with the American people in the face of this horrendous antisemitic brutality and we all pray for the speedy recovery of the wounded."

Diaspora Affairs Minister Naftali Bennett condemned Saturday's grisly shooting, tweeting that "The State of Israel and the Israeli government received with shock and pain the reports of the terrible attack on the Jewish community in Pittsburgh. We anxiously follow the reports and pray that the event will end soon."

"At the same time, I have now instructed the Ministry of Diaspora Affairs to prepare to assist the community in every possible way. Our hearts are with the families of those killed and injured. May the memory of the murdered be blessed. "

Israeli officials say that Prime Minister Netanyahu is closely following the situation in Pittsburgh. The shooting was also condemned by Jewish Agency Chairman Isaac Herzog.

"A terrible massacre during the Shabbat service at the Etz Hayyim Synagogue in Pittsburgh," said Herzog. "We at the Jewish Agency are sore and distressed by the disaster of the warm Jewish community of Pittsburgh. The Jewish Agency is ready to assist in any way to the Jewish community in Pittsburgh and expresses its deep sorrow over the loss of life and the injury to the wounded."


Tzvi Lev

Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/253844

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter