Saturday, October 31, 2020

In conversation with a shy Trump voter - Rajan Laad

 

​ by Rajan Laad

A writer in India connects with one of his old African-American friends in the States and is surprised at what he hears.

It's always a joy to reconnect with former colleagues and reminisce about the "good times," especially during the smothering lockdowns.  Copious memories were instantly refreshed as my former work colleague's name appeared "calling" on my phone.

I have lived in India for most of my life, while she has lived in the U.S.  But high-speed internet enabled us to work on many projects at a software firm with branches located in our respective countries.  We became friendly owing to our mutual fondness for noir cinema, Sir Roger Moore's portrayal of 007, and U.S. politics.

A fervent Democrat, she voted for Obama twice and even traveled to Washington for his inaugurations.  She ardently campaigned for Hillary Clinton and was devastated when Hillary lost. 

She thought Trump's "abominable lack of restraint" made him a force of chaos.  Trump's "vile" tweets didn't curb her fears.  When I predicted a Trump victory in August 2015, she prayed I would be wrong.

We talked about former colleagues, COVID-19, movies, finally presidential elections.  Here is an approximation of how our actual conversation went as I remember it.

"Are you excited about Joe?" I asked.

"They tell me I should be," she said.

"I expected an unequivocal and prompt 'yes,'" said I. 

"Much water has flowed under the bridge," she said, sounding sullen.

For me, this was nothing short of an astounding "breaking news" moment.

"What happened?" I inquired.

"You can't breathe a word about this to our U.S. folks," she said.

"I solemnly swear to secrecy," said I. 

"I live in a state overseen by Democrats.  My governor, senator, and representative are Democrats," she said. 

"Left-wing loons?" I asked.

"That ceases to be an overstatement.  When George Floyd was killed, I was gutted.  Nobody deserves to die like that.  I marched in a peaceful protest, not because I'm African-American, but because it was the humane thing to do," she said.

"The reverberations of the Floyd killing were heard all over the world, even here in India," I said.

"Right!  The movement began with calls for police reforms, something I support.  I was disturbed when they demanded to defund the police.  Calls for more improvements are always welcome, but to abolish the police is preposterous.  Who was making these ludicrous demands?  The Democrats," she said. 

There was a time when she always referred to them as "my dear Democrats."

"My cousin is a policeman.  I know of the lives the police save, from arresting drug-peddlers to rescuing battered housewives.  They are deterrents and protectors of society.  There will be the occasional rogue cop, but generally, they are a boon, especially in impoverished neighborhoods," she said

"When I was young, the police were usually scary people whom you feared.  These days, I see policemen joking around with kids, giving talks at schools.  Times have changed.  They undergo lots of sensitive training.  I've seen the impact that the training has had on my cousin; he is much kinder and gentler since joining the force.  Do you know the 'protesters' called him a traitor because he is a black policeman?" she said.

"The protests devolved into riots.  I feared for my safety.  Many shops near my home were vandalized and looted.  The purveyors of some establishments, most of whom are black, were attacked.  The damage they did to the infrastructure will take years to fix.  But not a syllable of condemnation from the Democrats.  In fact, they supported it, calling it peaceful.  Never before have I witnessed anything this disgraceful," she said.

"The news media are sympathetic to the 'protesters.'  They refused to acknowledge that anything wrong had occurred even when rioters stormed their studios.  The only ones condemning this were President Trump, Republicans, Fox News pundits, and conservatives commentators.  Never did I think I would gravitate toward this group," she said. 

"Life's full of surprises," I said, attempting to lighten the mood.

"Only when Trump deployed federal forces in another state did our authorities wake up.  But their reaction was perfunctory and delayed.  There was nothing more left to destroy.  The Democrats failed to protect us and our property, which is the primary function of government," she said.

"During the pandemic, the Democrats behaved like tyrants as they shut down businesses.  People were denied their right to earn a living, despite promising to wear masks and be socially distant.  Many businesses couldn't sustain the losses and shut down.  The goal clearly was to undo the economic progress and hurt Trump's re-election prospects.  We supporters are collateral damage in the quest for power," she said.

"The Democrats were not concerned about COVID-19 when demonstrators marched closely in groups.  I read about Democrat leaders living without any restrictions privately, ordering the opening of salons when needed.  The restrictions are only for regular citizens," she said.

"Blatant hypocrisy," I said.

"Biden says those having a hard time 'figuring out' whether to support him or Trump means they 'ain't black' made me angry. I have long suspected this, but it became clear the Democrats have taken African-Americans for granted. They just don't say it out loud like Biden," she said.

"I began to study President Trump's record objectively. The undeniable facts are, he built a strong economy. My acquaintances who previously struggled to earn a decent living now have full-time jobs because of this growth. My friends who run a small businesses are doing extremely well. I realized that Trump has empowered minorities economically like no other president. Trump is also among the few insisting that we reopen." she said. 

"Trump is the only modern president who has not caused new wars. He has actually led peace treaties in the Middle East. He fervently supports the police. He values tradition and faith. He is taking on China. I do not always like his style, I'm beginning to get his humor though. But on substance, he is a huge success. Why should I not vote for him?" she asked.

I was taken aback and almost rendered speechless.

"It is not just me, my friends and relatives are all for Trump. But we are not doing a song and dance about it. Some among us have a 'Biden-Harris' banners outside our houses. They attend anti-Trump protests and joke about later. I see myriad similar disgruntled Democrats on social media. We feel like a secret society" said she.

"America is one of the greatest democracies in the world, but the left has curbed your freedom of expression. Ironically they claim to be saving democracy," I said.

"People being targeted and brutalized for supporting Trump. You can even lose your job for a social media post. The leaders of this detestable practice of 'canceling' non-conformists are Democrats. So no MAGA hats for me any time soon," she said.

"Very wise," I said, laughter making a remarkable comeback.

"What do the Democrats stand for today? High taxes, the Green New Deal, appeasement without the empowerment of minorities, defunding the police, hatred for tradition, disdain for regular folks, citizenship, and benefits for illegal aliens, conformism, cancel culture, and faux political correctness. I'm not only voting for Trump, but I'm going to quit the party soon," she replied.

 

Rajan Laad  

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/10/in_conversation_with_a_shy_trump_voter.html 

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Joe Biden’s Hand in Corruption, Subversion and Crime in Guatemala - James Simpson

 

​ by James Simpson

What do you get when you combine Joe Biden, a UN agency accountable to no one, and leftists intent on establishing a communist regime in Central America?

In 2014 and 2015, then-Vice President Joe Biden traveled to Guatemala three times to pressure the government to maintain a United Nations body known as the International Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG). CICIG was established in Guatemala in 2006 under the pretext of prosecuting "crimes committed by members of illegal security forces and clandestine security structures," during Guatemala's long civil war. Instead, CICIG -- an international body unaccountable to Guatemalan law, worked with Guatemala's Justice Ministry to arrest and jail the left's opponents. Many remain illegally detained to this day without trial. Two prominent doctors and a Guatemalan congressman died in jail. All suffered ill health, did not receive proper treatment and were detained much longer than legally allowed. None got a trial. All were absolved following their deaths.

Biden met with then-Guatemalan President Otto Pérez Molina, who did not want to renew CICIG's charter. The Obama administration had promised a $1 billion aid package to Northern Triangle countries (Guatemala, Honduras and El Salvador), but Biden made the aid and upcoming trade agreements contingent upon renewing CICIG's contract. First cajoling then threatening, Biden finally announced, "The CICIG is staying, period." Biden used this same tactic in Ukraine, where he bragged about threatening to withhold loan guarantees until the Ukrainian government fired the prosecutor investigating Hunter Biden. Biden also sought Pérez's help in extending CICIG's rule to El Salvador and Honduras.

Pérez reluctantly agreed to renew CICIG's charter. He was then pressured to resign under accusations of corruption and stripped by the Guatemalan Congress of legal immunity. The day after he resigned he was arrested and thrown in jail. He has remained there ever since, without trial. In a Daily Caller interview from jail, Pérez called these efforts, "a coup without bullets."

Pérez said that, "CICIG amounts to a new form of U.S. interference in Guatemala's affairs and that his country has surrendered its sovereignty over its justice system by allowing the unit to operate."

CICIG's litany of abuses includes arbitrary arrest, detention and interrogation without charges or trial, fabricated evidence, illegal break-ins and denial of due process, pretrial detention for years longer than allowed by Guatemalan law and many other abuses. Some of the charges it has brought are valid, given endemic corruption in Guatemala. But CICIG's goal was not to stem corruption, rather to use it as a pretext to dispatch the left's enemies and install vastly more corrupt individuals who will advance the Communist cause in Guatemala.

CICIG's leader from 2013 forward was Ivan Velásquez Gómez, a former judge from Colombia with close ties to the Colombian narco-terrorist group, FARC. Former Colombian President Alvaro Uribe has said that as a judge, Velásquez battled to absolve the Colombian narcoterrorists of their decades of crime and terrorist atrocities.

In addition to Velásquez Another key player has been Claudia Paz y Paz, chosen to be Guatemala's Attorney General in 2010 under pressure from CICIG and Obama's Ambassador to Guatemala, Stephen McFarland. Paz y Paz is a Communist guerrilla sympathizer. Her father was a member of the Castro-supported Rebel Armed Forces (FAR) that assassinated U.S. Ambassador John Gordon Mein in 1968 and Germany's ambassador to Guatemala, Karl von Spreti, two years later.

Paz y Paz oversaw numerous extra-judicial arrests and confinement of political opponents. She was accused of giving illegal orders to judges and her own prosecutors, and shielding from legal action bands of armed leftist militias who roam rural areas terrorizing the indigenous peoples. The militias are remnants from Guatemala's civil war, in truth a Castro-supported Communist insurgency (1960-1996).

She particularly targeted the military, which defeated the communist insurgency with help from the rural population. Military men have received multiple life sentences for "crimes against humanity" while judges disbar evidence proving their innocence and guilt of the guerrillas.

In 2012, a young prosecutor named Gilda Aguilar attempted to arrest members of one of these militias. Paz y Paz dropped the charges, calling the militia a "human-rights group." She threw Aguilar off the case and launched an investigation of her. Three weeks later Aguilar narrowly escaped an assassination attempt by the same group. Instead of investigating, the prosecutor asked the court to dismiss the case -- as though it had never happened. Aguilar quit and brought dereliction of duty charges against Paz y Paz.

The Obama administration pressured President Pérez to assure Paz y Paz's reappointment when her term was up in 2014, knowing full well the allegations against her. They similarly supported appointment and advancement of many other radicals, and the State Department continues to do so.

The indigenous populations of Guatemala have faced the brunt of the Communist offensive in Guatemala since the beginning of the civil war. With the Obama administration's full knowledge, armed leftist militias, Paz y Paz's "human rights groups" control rural areas, sabotage or block desperately needed economic development and engage in terrorism and crime. The 20-minute video embedded below shares moving testimony from people terrorized by these groups:

 

The militias' spread was enthusiastically supported by the Obama administration. Their activities dramatically increased with the administration's promotion of leftists like Judge Gloria Porras and Attorney General Paz y Paz to influential positions in Guatemala's legal system. The increase in crime over this period is shown in the colored areas of the map below. They are referred to charitably as "Social Conflict Zones."

The Obama administration responded with the DACA (Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals) program in 2012. This caused a massive exodus of minors from Northern Triangle nations illegally entering the U.S.  In 2011, the Border Patrol apprehended only 4,321 minors. That number increased to 68,541 in 2014. Most came from Guatemala. The migrant caravans that have since swamped our borders were instigated by Central American leftists with assistance from tax-exempt and taxpayer-funded, open borders groups in America. This entire effort was a premeditated campaign by the Obama administration.

More Biden pay to play?

Former President Pérez claimed in a Mexican Newsweek article that Biden pressured him to support a Guatemalan contract with the pharmaceutical firm Baxter International. He said, "We had pressure from Vice President Biden, not only when he came to Guatemala, but when I visited Washington, to grant a contract to Baxter…" Pérez asserted that:

Biden is a partner of Baxter Pharmaceuticals and [he] mentioned that even the U.S. Embassy in the country requested the meeting with his private secretary and his general secretary so they could influence Baxter to win the bid. "They were accompanied by embassy staff, Baxter representatives, to ask us and tell us that Baxter had that contract and that Baxter should win it back," he said.

Pérez's claims were repeated by Julia Amparo Lotán Garzona, the former labor sector representative of the Executive Board of the Guatemalan Institute for Social Security. In testimony before the Guatemalan Truth Commission investigating CICIG, she said:

What we can confirm is that not only this closeness between Baxter and Biden, but we can also confirm that the embassy asked for the meeting with the secretary, but that Otto Pérez Molina, my private secretary and the secretary general were able to influence Baxter to win the bid. "Isn't that influence peddling? - Otto Pérez Molina pointed out, it is influence peddling….  (Translated with DeepL Translator)

According to Truth Commission testimony, CICIG jailed employees of Guatemala's social security system, including Garzona, a nurse and union representative, without trial, on the pretext that all took bribes to replace a contract for Baxter medical equipment with equipment made in Mexico. This action was widely viewed as yet another abuse of power by CICIG, and included some people close to President  Pérez. Was it coincidental that this occurred at the same time Biden was lobbying  Pérez  to extend CICIG's contract, while also lobbying him on behalf of Baxter?  Pérez  ultimately agreed to both.

We have been unable to confirm a Biden financial interest in Baxter, but In his book, Promise Me, Dad, Biden stated: "The President asked me to take over the job of repairing our wobbly relations across the entirety of the Americas -- the Northern Triangle, Brazil, the Caribbean, everything."[1]

According to Peter Schweizer's new book Profiles in Corruption, Joe Biden met with the President of Costa Rica in 2009 and a few months later news broke of a "new multilateral partnership, 'to reform real estate in Latin America.'" Biden's brother, Frank, envisioned a huge development project with "thousands of homes, a world-class golf course, casinos, and an anti-aging center," in the Costa Rican jungle.[2]

To support the project's energy needs, the Costa Rica National Power and Light Company would build the Guanacaste Solar Park, the largest solar farm in the nation -- with Frank's company Sun Fund Americas as a partner, even though Frank had no experience in the energy field.[3] The U.S. government provided a $6.5 million loan for the project, and $47.5 for another Sun Fund solar project in Jamaica.[4]

Given the Biden family's other pay-to-play schemes in Russia, China, Kazakhstan, the Ukraine, and who knows where else, it would seem reasonable that Biden might expect something in return for pushing Baxter. In fact, with Biden, it would be surprising if there were not some quid pro quo.

Guatemala is now on the cusp of becoming a Communist state thanks to Joe Biden, Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and their minions. This has also been in the works for decades in America, but has come out of the closet since President Trump's election.

If Joe Biden is elected president, this agenda will be turbocharged. Biden's "Build Back Better" slogan comes directly from the U.N. -- which not coincidentally calls for socialist redistribution in Latin America -- and the World Economic Forum, which envisions using the Chinese Communist COVID-19 "pandemic" to "reinvent capitalism." Biden will impose smothering taxes and regulations, fling open the doors to Red China and other enemy nations, and open the border to an unprecedented flow of migrants from Central America and nations from across the globe. Amnesty for illegals will create the "permanent Progressive majority" Democrats seek. Joe Biden will line his pockets without restraint and we will lose our country. Forever. This is the most important election in our nation's history.

Vote.

James Simpson is an economist, businessman and investigative journalist. His latest book is The Red Green Axis 2.0: An Existential Threat to America and the World. Follow Jim on Twitter & Facebook.


[1] As quoted in Peter Schweizer, Profiles in Corruption, Abuse of Power by America's Progressive Elite, New York: Harper Collins, 2020, p. 81.

[2] Ibid, p. 80.

[3] Ibid, pp. 80-81.

[4] Ibid, pp. 82-83.

 

 James Simpson  

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/10/joe_bidens_hand_in_corruption_subversion_and_crime_in_guatemala.html 

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Real Netanyahu (and Trump) Dilemma - Caroline Glick

 

​ by Caroline Glick

What is it about the Abraham Accords that makes the foreign policy “experts” so upset?

 


The Nobel Peace Prize Committee’s decision to award the prize to the World Food Program this year assuaged the fears of elitists from New York to Paris and Berlin. The Abraham Accords, which include bilateral peace treaties between the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and most recently Sudan, and Israel have fundamentally changed the Middle East. They have upended fifty years of failed peace processing on the part of Western foreign policy elites who seem to fall into deeper and deeper funks with word of each new peace deal.

Newsweek’s cover story on Oct. 2 nicely encapsulated their distress. The cover featured a leering black and white photo of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and a red and white headline, The Netanyahu Dilemma: Can The Nobel Prize Say No to Bibi?

By giving the prize to the World Food Program, the committee kicked the can down the road. Maybe President Donald Trump will be defeated next week. Maybe Netanyahu will be ousted from power. And then things can return to normal, they console themselves. They will be able to forget all about the unpleasantness.

What is it about the Abraham Accords that makes the foreign policy “experts” so upset?

Three aspects of the deals really get their goat. The first is their authors. For the likes of the British Foreign Office and the Council on Foreign Relations, few are held in greater contempt than Netanyahu and Trump. The Newsweek article, which dealt with Netanyahu specifically, called him “widely loathed.” And of course, there hasn’t been a US President as despised by “the smart set” as Trump since Andrew Jackson.

The second aspect of the Abraham Accords that drives the peace processors to distraction is the fact that they were done at all. The Arab-Israel conflict isn’t supposed to end this way. For 50 years, the “experts” have all agreed that the road to peace goes through the PLO. So long as Israel doesn’t make peace with the Palestinians, it cannot make peace with the Arabs. And in the two instances where Israel was able to sidestep the Palestinians – its 1979 peace treaty with Egypt and its 1994 peace treaty with Jordan – both the Jordanians and the Egyptians refused to implement the normalization clauses of the deals so long as Israel didn’t make peace with the Palestinians.

The absence of normalization reduced the deals from actual peace to little more than long-term ceasefires. The same hostility and anti-Semitism that fueled the Arab wars against Israel which Egypt and Jordan led, remained and even grew within their societies in the years and decades after they signed the peace agreements.

As Newsweek put it, with barely disguised fury, “The agreements that Netanyahu has wrangled with Arab states of the Persian Gulf fail to resolve, or even address the situation of the Palestinians – a cause with passionate supporters in Europe, on US college campuses and with many US liberals.”

The fruits of this widely held passion are the most powerful reason for the elites’ heartbreak over the news that peace is finally arriving.

For decades the foreign policy establishments in the US and Europe have held as sacred the notion that peace between Israel and the Arab world can be forged only after the Palestinians. Two strategic assumptions that have guided Western Middle East peace policies have been founded on this sacrosanct idea.

The first is that the Palestinians will only make peace with Israel in exchange for a Palestinian state encompassing all or virtually all of Judea and Samaria, northern, southern, and eastern Jerusalem, and the Gaza Strip.

The second assumption flows naturally from the first. Since the experts all agree that the only way to achieve peace between Israel and the Arabs if for a Palestinian state to be established on lands Israel controls, and indeed, has the sovereign right to control, settle and govern, Israel is to blame for the absence of peace.

These twin assumptions have been the foundations of all international peace efforts since the 1970s. They are also the way that European governments, the UN, and much of the American left (which comingles with large swathes of the American foreign policy establishment) justify their ever-increasing hostility towards Israel.

They are used to justify discriminatory treatment of Israelis and of Israel in everything from arms sales to cultural cooperation to free trade deals. The EU uses them to justify their anti-Semitic labeling rules for Jewish products from Jerusalem, Judea, Samaria and the Golan Heights and their finance of anti-Israel political pressure groups in Israel and around the world. These assumptions – that peace goes through the Palestinians and Israel is to blame for the absence of peace with the Palestinians – are also used to justify campaigns that demonize Israel and its supporters and reject Israel’s very right to exist.

And this brings us back to the Abraham Accords.

Events of the past week make clear just how completely the Abraham Accords repudiate the foreign policy establishment’s core convictions.

Monday, the top leadership of the UAE’s Dubai Ports World, one of the largest maritime logistics companies in the world, travelled to Israel’s Red Sea port in Eilat to discuss the prospect of opening a shipping line from Eilat to the Saudi port of Jeddah. The initial purpose of the line would be to transport Israeli Muslims to Mecca for the Haj. Jeddah is a mere 70 kilometers from Mecca and the idea is to sail to Jeddah and then travel by bus to Mecca. Until now, Israeli Muslims have been compelled to travel overland through Jordan to get to Saudi Arabia.

DP World’s leadership expressed enthusiasm at the project and plans have been put in motion to implement it very quickly. According to Gideon Gulliver, the CEO of the Port of Eilat, over time the Eilat-Jeddah line has the potential to bring 2 million visitors to Eilat.

The meeting in Eilat came fast on the heels of DP World’s deal last month with an Israeli firm to bid on a tender to rebuild and operate the old port in Haifa. The first cargo ship from the UAE docked at the Port of Haifa last week.

Tuesday, the UAE Pro Football League signed a memorandum of understanding Israel’s Professional Soccer Association pledging to cooperate to further develop the sport in both countries. The UAE Pro League referred to the MOU as an “historic agreement.”

Also on Tuesday, A&E, the largest wine distributor in the UAE announced it will begin distributing wines from Israel’s Golan Winery in the UAE.

Bahrain, for its part continues to astonish Israelis with its enthusiasm over its the newly opened peaceful ties with Israel. Last weekend, Sheikh Khaled bin Khalifa al Khalifa, a member of Bahrain’s royal family who serves as the Chairman of the King Hamad Global Center for Co-Existence and Peace signed an agreement in Washington with Elan Carr, the US anti-Semitism monitor where both sides committed to work together to fight anti-Semitism. The Bahraini center adopted the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s definition of anti-Semitism. The IHRA definition defines anti-Zionism as a form of anti-Semitism.

In the MOU, the Bahraini institute and the State Department committed “to work together to share and promote best practices for combating all forms of anti-Semitism, including anti-Zionism and the delegitimization of the State of Israel.”

When last week, Israel approved new housing construction in Israeli towns and cities in Judea and Samaria, the UN, the EU, Germany, the UK, France, Spain and Italy were quick to condemn the move. The UAE and Bahrain joined the US in ignoring the internal Israel decision.

These steps alone serve as a total repudiation of the West’s foreign policy establishment’s anti-Israel Rosetta Stone.

Consider the following. Six years ago, “peace activists” in San Francisco convinced the longshoreman union in Oakland to refuse to offload cargo from an Israeli merchant ship because it was from Israel. The ship was forced to sail to the Port of Los Angeles. The “peace activists” declared victory.

In 2015, the Palestinian Authority nearly caused the Israeli Football Association to be expelled from FIFA. The idea was that if the PA was able to get FIFA members to vote on such a move, they would support it because as is the case in the UN, there would be an automatic majority in favor of jettisoning Israel from the international soccer league. It took hard maneuvering by Israel to block the measure from going to a vote, no thanks to Europe.

Golan Wineries and its Mt. Hermon, Gamla and Yarden labels which will now be proudly sold at wine stores, hotels and restaurants in the UAE have long been targeted for boycott by “peace” activists.

Bahrain’s adoption of IHRA’s definition of anti-Semitism is a sword in the heart of the foreign policy establishments. It’s not that the presidents of Harvard and Columbia and University of Michigan necessarily disagree that anti-Zionism is a form of anti-Zionism. But their students do. And Bahrain has called their hand.

How are the university administrators going to be able to continue enabling their students to hold “Israel Apartheid Month” and harass pro-Israel students, faculty and invited speakers in the name of “free speech” when Bahrain says it’s anti-Semitic to delegitimize Israel or hold it to a standard to which no other state is held?

The BDS campaigns will no doubt continue. The likes of Jewish Voice for Peace, Students for Justice in Palestine and their comrades don’t care what Bahrain, Sudan and the UAE say about Israel. Like the Iranian regime and the Muslim Brotherhood, they want the Jewish state gone. But the institutions that have enabled their anti-Semitism to run rampant in their campuses and corporations will be hard pressed to defend them without being judged anti-Semitic themselves.

And this brings us back to Newsweek and the agony of the elites its cover story described.

The Nobel Committee’s decision to give the peace prize to the World Food Program rather than to Netanyahu, Trump, Bahrain’s King Hamad and the UAE’s Prince Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan was a play for time. But even if Trump and Netanyahu are forced off the stage, the Abraham Accords will not go away. The peace that is bursting out from all quarters is real. It reflects the real desires of the people who live in the region. And it turns out their desires are far different from the sacrosanct anti-Israel catechisms taught and internalized by the peace processors of the West.

And this brings us to the real “Netanyahu Dilemma.” The real dilemma embittering the lives of the foreign policy elites is not whether to give the Nobel Peace Prize to men they hate. It is how to react to the peace these men have achieved.

For 50 years, the elites have insisted that ending the Arab-Israel conflict their greatest goal. Should them embrace and celebrate the peace that is now emerging? Or can they ignore it and continue condemning Israel, and so risk being exposed along with their false peace predicates as phonies and far worse.

Originally published in Israel Hayom.

 

Caroline Glick  

Source: http://carolineglick.com/the-real-netanyahu-and-trump-dilemma/ 

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Shame on the Girl Scouts: Thin Skin instead of Thin Mints - Alan M. Dershowitz

 

​ by Alan M. Dershowitz

The reason I am so angry at the Girl Scouts' decision to withdraw their original Tweet is that it is a reflection of the divisive nature of our nation and the growing intolerance, particularly by the hard left, of dissenting speech that is seen as supporting the other side.

  • The Tweet was anything but partisan or political. It was a girl's organization dedicated to educating young women about their unlimited possibilities in life. The Tweet itself was innocuous. Here is what it said: "Congratulations Amy Coney Barrett on becoming the 5th woman appointed to the Supreme Court since its inception in 1789."

  • When the Girl Scouts can't even congratulate a woman for helping to break a longstanding glass ceiling, we know that we are in trouble.

  • The reason I am so angry at the Girl Scouts' decision to withdraw their original Tweet is that it is a reflection of the divisive nature of our nation and the growing intolerance, particularly by the hard left, of dissenting speech that is seen as supporting the other side.

The Girl Scouts' decision to withdraw their original Tweet...is a reflection of...the growing intolerance, particularly by the hard left, of dissenting speech that is seen as supporting the other side. (Photo by NOVA SAFO/AFP via Getty Images)

I don't know why I am so mad at the Girl Scouts for having withdrawn their Tweet congratulating Justice Amy Coney Barrett for being the fifth woman nominated to the Supreme Court in its long history. The Tweet was anything but partisan or political. It was a girl's organization dedicated to educating young women about their unlimited possibilities in life. The Tweet itself was innocuous. Here is what it said: ""Congratulations Amy Coney Barrett on becoming the 5th woman appointed to the Supreme Court since its inception in 1789."

It was accompanied by a collage of photographs of the five women who have served on the high court – three of them liberals and two conservatives. But when a few angry leftists led by Cambridge U.S. Rep. Ayanna Pressley and actor Amber Tamblyn complained, the Girl scouts quickly removed the Tweet and apologized for doing something that could be "viewed as a political and a partisan statement."

Megyn Kelly responded quite appropriately to that absurd claim saying:

"This is pathetic. It's not 'partisan' to generically congratulate the 5th woman ever to join the High Court. It's patriotic. Taking your tweet down is partisan, however, and a real disappointment.

In reporting the story, the USA Today said that: "The retreat by the Girl Scouts was quickly assailed by many of Barrett's conservative supporters." That entirely missed the point. I am neither conservative, nor a Barratt supporter. I was opposed to the Republican Senate rushing this nomination through after denying an earlier one from President Obama when he nominated the highly qualified Merrick Garland, and the Republicans refused to process the nomination. I believe that Barrett is also highly qualified but the Senate should have waited until after the election and allowed the winner to make the nomination.

Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska may have gotten it right when she voted against allowing the Senate to consider the nomination, but after that view was rejected, she then voted to confirm Justice Barrett, arguing that the process issues should not be used against a highly qualified nominee.

The reason I am so angry at the Girl Scouts' decision to withdraw their original Tweet is that it is a reflection of the divisive nature of our nation and the growing intolerance, particularly by the hard left, of dissenting speech that is seen as supporting the other side.

When the Girl Scouts can't even congratulate a woman for helping to break a longstanding glass ceiling , we know that we are in trouble. I was a Boy Scout and had many friends who were Girl Scouts. We loved scouting. We never considered it political or partisan. My family and I always buy the thin mints that are our favorite Girl Scout cookies. I will continue to enjoy the thin mints, but from now on they will cause a bitter taste in my mouth because of the thin skin manifested by the Girl Scout leadership in submitting to censorial pressures from intolerant hard left activists.

 

Alan M. Dershowitz is the Felix Frankfurter Professor of Law, Emeritus at Harvard Law School and author of the book, Guilt by Accusation: The Challenge of Proving Innocence in the Age of #MeToo, Skyhorse Publishing, 2019. His new podcast, "The Dershow," can be seen on Spotify, Apple and YouTube. He is the Jack Roth Charitable Foundation Fellow at Gatestone Institute. 

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16708/shame-on-the-girl-scouts-thin-skin-instead 

 Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Thursday, October 29, 2020

An Election Between Love and Hate - Daniel Greenfield

 

​ by Daniel Greenfield

Why are President Trump’s rallies packed while Biden’s rallies are deserted?

 


Why are President Trump’s rallies packed while Biden’s rallies are deserted? Where were all the Democrats who joined in the Black Lives Matter riots, who packed the streets of D.C. for the Women’s March, who are wailing in front of the Supreme Court and burning down Portland?

The Democrats aren’t campaigning for Joe Biden, but against Donald J. Trump.

The Biden-Harris ticket is a placeholder, two candidates picked by Wall Street and Hollywood, by corporate donors looking for the best angle, bringing together a friend of segregationists and the woman who accused him of racism, and then negotiated with the party’s socialist wing to split the difference between the prospective administration’s crony capitalism and socialism.

Nobody’s going to a rally for that.

The 2020 election can be boiled down to love against hate. It pits MAGA against the 1619 Project, those who love this country against those who want to destroy it. At Republican rallies, American flags are waved, at Democrat riots flags, churches, and shops are burned. The active part of the Democrat base won’t show up to a Biden rally because they won’t be allowed to destroy things, and because they’re not animated by the positive, but by the negative.

The Left’s radical change agenda isn’t born out of idealism, but cynicism. To get to the point where it can gather in mobs, topple statues, and tear down the United States, its followers have to believe that this country is fundamentally evil. Critical race theory is so popular because, like the more conventional Marxism before it, it resonates with what the mobs already believe.

Inside all the theories, articles, and plans to remake society is a great emptiness. The members of the mob are moved more by what they oppose than what they support. They can articulate hatred of the police, but not a serious proposal to replace them, they rage against America, but when they erect their CHAZ and CHOP replacements, they boil down into anarchy and violence.

All the plans to build a better world are only sanctimonious pretexts for destroying this one.

Biden isn’t really on the ticket. The destruction of America is the only candidate that the Democrats can put up anymore. When that candidate viscerally embodies the destruction, as only Biden’s boss ever truly did, then the rallies take off and the crowds faint at his word. But when, like Biden, the candidate is a Potemkin village putting up a facade of normalcy for the destroyers, then the crowds stay home, tweet furiously, or knock over a convenience store.

What enrages the radical mob isn’t oppression or injustice. That’s just what they call normalcy, stability, or any attempt to preserve the United States, a neighborhood, or a corner store.

They’re not voting for Biden. Or for anything. They’re not capable of being for things, only against them. The only thing their principles ever amount to is self-righteous outrage.

This election will test if their hate is stronger than the love Americans have for their nation.

Do Americans want to preserve their nation or destroy it in a furious tantrum while insisting that with their superior moral sensibilities they can build something better out of the rubble. The 1619 Project, critical race theory, the cancellation of everyone from Christopher Columbus to George Washington to Abraham Lincoln is an expression of profound disgust and contempt for America.

Make America Great Again is an expression of love for what America was and can be again.

MAGA rallies are filled with bright colors, while the mobs rampaging through American cities wear black. The clashing iconographies of red, white, and blue flags, and black power fists, starkly convey the choice between light and darkness, life and death, and love and hate.

Can hate drive more people to the polls than love? Is the lust to destroy more powerful than the drive to create? That’s the true question on the ballot.

This election isn’t just about the candidates. It’s about us.

The Democrats, like the rest of their leftist brethren, are at their most impassioned when they are running against something they truly hate. Each notable burst of political derangement aimed at a Republican, whether it was Nixon, Reagan, Bush, or Trump, led to an outpouring of ideological ferment, tactical innovation, explosive violence, and artistic creativity. When they lack an object for their hatred, then they recede into political mediocrity and impotent fuming.

The Left is at its best when it is also at its worst. It derives its sense of purpose and meaning not from within, but from hating its enemies. When it has purged all its enemies, its regimes decline into a state of mediocre misery until the great utopian system rots and falls. When there is nothing to fight against, no wars to make or lives to take, it is swallowed up by its emptiness.

Republicans are at their best when they sense an opportunity for national rebirth. Their high points, and there have been few, come when they sense that a sleeping giant is awakening. And then the scattered members of the silent majority who lack the organization and ideological consolidation of their enemies, rise with the tide, ready to rebuild the nation's greatness.

Republicans and Democrats both need Trump for very different reasons. The Left needs him because it needs someone to hate. Its raptures of hatred inspire it to new extremes. The rage that animates it at the presence of someone like President Trump makes it feel truly alive.

The Left needs to destroy President Trump, but it also needs him to give it a sense of meaning.

And it is in the nature of the Left to destroy those things which give it meaning. Its drive to destroy Trump, like its drive to destroy America, is a manic obsession. After four years, it has the opportunity to truly live out its death wish because it is not only out to destroy America. Deep down, the Left also wants to destroy itself. Its ideologies have always been suicide notes. The sum total of them, from anti-capitalism to environmentalism to critical race theory to degenderization, is a compelling argument for why nothing should be allowed to exist.

Or, as David Benatar, the anti-natalist philosopher and author of Better Never to Have Been: The Harm of Coming into Existence, wrote, "Although it is obviously too late to prevent our own existence, it is not too late to prevent the existence of future possible people.”

That is what is at stake in this election. To call this hate understates the case. The other side of utopia is despair. If the world can’t be perfected, and it can’t, it must be destroyed. And since no amount of perfection can overcome the rage and unhappiness behind the feigned idealism, all the utopian deconstruction of what is eventually ends in barren lands and mass graves.

That is the dark heart that MAGA is running against. It asks Americans not to hope, but to build.

As the days of the calendar take us toward Election Day, a nation must decide between love and hate. Democrats will strive to win an election on the empty dregs of hate. They are running on nothing but antipathy, to President Trump and to America. Republicans must remember that they are not only running against something, but that they are running for their country.

America has had its dark hours, but it rose, grew, and thrived because our drive to build was stronger than our drive to destroy. That is why we came out of every war, no matter how devastating, stronger than ever as long as we believed in the future. When the time came that we no longer believed, even the lightest wars became hopeless affairs we couldn’t recover from.

The Democrats are still caught in that hopeless hate. They have nothing to love. The past is evil. History is a morass of crimes. The nation was stolen through genocide and built on slavery. Every historical hero is soon exposed as a monster. And the future holds more of the same.

The oceans are rising. Global warming will soon turn the parts of the world that aren’t underwater into desert. Mankind and all life on the planet is on the verge of extinction. And human greed is to blame. Wouldn’t it be better if the human race does indeed disappear?

Republicans have a nation and a storied history to love. The heroes of the nation are at their backs. And the future is one of promise or plenty, not misery and extinction. All they have to do is claim it. Hate is strong, but love, when it taps into the wellsprings of nationhood, family, and faith, is far stronger. Rage is powerful, but hollow. It is no match for the great love of a nation.

 

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

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/election-between-love-and-hate-daniel-greenfield/ 

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Polls Shift Toward Trump - John Kudla

 

​ by John Kudla 

The silent Trump vote is beginning to stir.

 

You can call me Pollyannish, but I am beginning to believe I may have underestimated the silent Trump vote in my previous posts.  This is why.

I mentioned the 2020 Cato Institute poll before, which discusses the high percentage of conservatives who are afraid to express their political views.  Something I failed to consider was:

Nearly two‐​thirds of Latino Americans (65%) and White Americans (64%) and nearly half of African Americans (49%) have political views they are afraid to share.

Why would 65% of Latin voters and 49% of Black voters be afraid to express their political views, especially if 70-90% of them, respectively, are voting for Biden?  Are they afraid of the bad orange man, or is a significant portion of these two minority groups part of the silent Trump vote?  The answer may be the latter.

A Zogby poll from late August indicated 36% of Black voters approved of President Trump’s job performance, along with 37% of Hispanic voters.

The Rasmussen Tracking poll showed a surge in approval for the President by likely Black voters between October 19-23 of 21 points, from 25% to 46%.

Ditto a Zia poll, taken in Michigan and released October 20, which showed Trump getting the support of 46% of Black voters and almost 40% of Hispanics.

Is this support for Trump real?  Lenard McKelvey, a.k.a. Charlamagne tha God, discussing Trump’s pursuit of black voters on CNN, said, “Trump is targeting young black males in promos and marketing. It works.”  Even CNN personality and dyed-in-the-wool socialist Van Jones praised Trump for the good things he has done for the black community.

Will minority support actually show up at this level in the vote count on Election Day?  That is anybody’s guess.  Considering Trump won only 8% of the Black vote and 28% of the Hispanic vote in 2016, this has to be considered a major plus.

Word in the news media and in the polls is Trump is losing suburban women.  To quote Lee Corso, “Not so fast!”

You may have heard of the Granite State poll that found 68% of Trump supporters in New Hampshire were reluctant to place Trump signs in their yards for fear their homes may get vandalized.  In addition, the poll also found 45% of Trump supporters would not discuss their approval of the President for fear of alienating friends or co-workers, and nearly 70% of women would not discuss their support of Trump with anyone for the same reason.

That last bit about the 70% of women who support Trump may be the key element to the silent Trump vote and the entire election.  Why?  The answer is social pressure.

Men and women operate differently in the sphere of social interaction.  Men are more hierarchical, that is they tend to follow or listen to a leader or those with seniority.  Women are more collectivist or consensus driven, meaning the overall attitudes and opinions of the group matter more than that of any individual.  For a woman to challenge the consensus of her social circle is to risk being bad-mouthed or, at worst, ostracized.  Group social conformity may explain why women who support Trump are reluctant to say so, and this may be carrying over to the polls.

Then, there is something I mentioned in a previous post called social desirability bias.  This means people who respond to polls may change their answers in order to appear more likable.

An Axios SurveyMonkey poll taken in September found 52% of white suburban men, who do not feel safe in their communities, backed Trump, while only 42% of white suburban women did.  If I remember correctly, Trump supports the police while Biden’s team is just the opposite.  On a commonsense level, that poll number does not compute.

If you factor in the hate speech and the anti-Trump propaganda the media and the Democrat Party have brought to bear against Trump, it makes more sense.  Are you going to support evil lying Trump or sweet lovable Joe?  Women are not stupid.  They are not going to risk trading peace and prosperity for higher taxes, fewer police, and more unemployment.  They are simply less willing to tell the pollster they are voting for Trump.

If you look at the Real Clear Politics national polling average, Biden is up by 7.4 points.  However, if you average just the three most recent polls, the national average drops to Biden +4.3.

The RCP averages for the battleground states have also improved in Trump’s favor. Ohio’s RCP average now has Trump ahead by a margin of +0.6 points.

Georgia is Trump +0.4. The average of the three latest polls is Trump +1.

In Florida, the current RCP average is Biden +1.2.  The average of the four most recent polls is Biden +0.5.

The Pennsylvania RCP average is Biden by roughly +4.  If you average the six most recent polls, it drops to Biden +2.2.

In North Carolina, the average is Biden +1.2.  The average of the latest three polls is even.

Iowa is Biden +0.8, which is within the margin of error for all the Iowa polls.  The average of the three latest polls is Biden +0.3.

The RCP average in Michigan is Biden +9.  However, the average does not include the above mentioned Zia poll, at Trump +4, nor a recent Trafalgar poll at Trump +1.8.  Include these polls and the average drops to Biden +5.6.

Arizona’s RCP average is Biden +2.2.  The average of the last three polls is Biden +1.

Wisconsin is Biden +5.5, Minnesota is Biden +6, and Nevada is Biden +5.2.  All are still winnable but not necessary.

Texas is red and Colorado is blue.  They were never battleground states to start with.  The rest of the supposed battleground states do not matter.

In my personal opinion, Donald Trump is a combination of the best and the worst New York has to offer.  On the minus side, he is a brash, vain, egotistical, loudmouthed, a billionaire.  On the plus side, he is a compassionate, sincere, loving individual and a bold, risk-taking, successful businessman and entrepreneur.

As President, Trump’s record of accomplishment is virtually unparalleled.  Look at all the new America-friendly trade deals.  Look at all the new factories, homes, and warehouses being built.  He is fighting terrorism and keeping us out of foreign wars.  Peace is happening in the Middle East!  And there is much more.

Frankly, I do not care what CNN or the New York Times think, and I do not care about Trump’s personality flaws.  Any president who can solve problems, deal effectively with our friends and competitors, keep the peace, and bring the juice to our economy deserves our support.

My prediction is the silent Trump vote will be the difference in the election.  Polls are clearly shifting in his direction.  If we assume the polls are accurate, and I still have my doubts, at this moment all Trump needs is a +2% shift in the battleground states and it is game over.  It may be close in the Electoral College, but I truly believe Trump will win.

Finally, some friendly advice for Bruce Springsteen.  Australia is a great country and an excellent choice.  I think Qantas is a great airline, too, except they fly Airbuses, which vibrate a lot and bounce around in turbulence like a kite on a string.  So, when you leave for Australia, I would fly United.  The food is a bit better, and those big solid Boeing planes will make you feel much safer.

Image: Pixabay

 

John Kudla  

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/10/the_polls_shift_toward_trump.html 

 Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Israel Battles to Save Life of Chief Palestinian Authority Diplomat - Ari Lieberman

 

​ by Ari Lieberman

Notorious inciter turns to the people he demonizes to save his life.

 


On October 18, Israel’s Hadassah Medical Center in Jerusalem admitted senior Palestinian diplomat, Saeb Erekat, for emergency treatment relating to complications resulting from contracting Covid-19. At 65-years-old, Erekat suffers from a number of high-risk, co-morbidity factors including a heart condition and a 2017 lung transplant. He is currently connected to an extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) machine and his prognosis is not good. Israeli doctors, who are battling to save his life, said that Erekat is beginning to exhibit signs of multiple organ failure.

Erekat is no ordinary Palestinian Authority diplomat. He is the Palestine Liberation Organization’s secretary general, is part of the PA elite, and is one of President Mahmoud Abbas’s closest advisers. With his polished English and custom-tailored suits, Erekat has endeared himself to the useful idiots of the radical left. This upcoming year, he was slated to mentor students at Harvard’s Kennedy School. Unfortunately, Erekat is also a congenital liar, a spreader of conspiracy theories, a rabid anti-Semite and one of Israel’s harshest critics, bordering on pathological.

The notion of Erekat being admitted to an Israeli hospital for life-saving treatment presents double ironies and exposes the PA’s naked hypocrisy. In 2019, Abbas prohibited ordinary Palestinians from seeking medical treatment in Israel. The move was ostensibly prompted by the false charge of Israeli overcharging. In reality, Abbas acted because he was angry over Israel’s decision to withhold Palestinian tax remittances in proportion to amounts the PA channeled to Palestinian terrorists – an insidious PA practice macabrely referred to as, “pay for slay.”

But Abbas’s petty and counterproductive action applied exclusively to the ordinary Palestinian but exempted the Palestinian elite. Those who belonged to Abbas’s inner circle, including Erekat, were permitted treatment. The Palestinian leader was essentially telling his people, “do as I say, not as I do.”

Moreover, Erekat is among the PLO's most notorious spreaders of blood libels and assorted conspiracy theories against the Jewish people and Israel. It is more than Ironic that he would be seeking life-saving treatment from the nation he demonizes most.

In 2002, Erekat claimed that Israel had committed a massacre in the Palestinian city of Jenin and killed 500 noncombatants. A UN commission of inquiry assigned to investigate the matter determined that the allegation was completely false. In fact, during the course of an immensely difficult counterinsurgency operation, the Israel Defense Forces killed between 52 and 56 Palestinians, nearly all of whom were combatants belonging to various Palestinian terrorist groups.

In 2014, Erekat alleged that Israel had killed 12,000 Palestinians in Gaza, and that ninety-six percent were civilians. In fact, during Israel’s 2014 Operation Protective Edge, about 2,000 Gazans were killed and more than half of these fatalities were combatants. Of the remainder, many were killed by errant Hamas rockets or defective terrorist ordinance meant for Israel.

Erekat’s prevarications are just the tip of the iceberg. In the past, he’s defended random car ramming and knife attacks, portraying these acts of terrorism as legitimate acts of self-defense against what he termed “summary executions” perpetrated by the “occupation.” One such attack led to the passage of the Taylor Force Act, named after Taylor Force, a West Point graduate and veteran who served in Iraq and Afghanistan and was killed in Tel Aviv by a knife wielding Palestinian. The Act, which was signed into law by President Donald Trump in 2018, prohibits disbursement of economic aid to the PA until it ceases its practice of providing stipends to Palestinian terrorists and families of deceased terrorists.  

Erekat also falsely pushed the anti-Semitic canard that Israel systematically burns down mosques and churches. In 2014, he compared Israel’s democratically elected leader to ISIS. He opposes normalization with the Israel, stating that he would never recognize Israel as a Jewish state. He’s vehemently condemned recent Arab rapprochement efforts with Israel, referring to those efforts as a “stab in the back.”

In sum, Erekat has molded himself into an anti-Semitic, rejectionist who has attempted to harm Israel’s image internationally. Despite the proven absurdity of many of his outrageous accusations and baseless allegations, he is still hailed as a “moderate” in some circles.

Notwithstanding Erekat’s pernicious history, Israeli doctors are waging a valiant effort to save his life, and that just about sums up the difference between Israel and its genocidal enemy.

 

Ari Lieberman  

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/israel-battles-save-life-chief-palestinian-ari-lieberman/ 

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Getting Out of China - Michael Ledeen

 

​ by Michael Ledeen

For millions of Chinese, the Party's over.

 


The Federal Government has ordered U.S. Customs and Border Protection to seize all shipments of stevia, a plant extract used to sweeten beverages and other foods:

After an investigation, CBP said it had determined that Inner Mongolia Hengzheng Group Baoanzhao Agriculture, Industry and Trade Co. (Baoanzhao) used convict, forced, or indentured labor to produce stevia extracts and derivatives, the agency said in a statement on Oct. 20. It added that those products are being, or are likely to be, imported to the United States.

I love stevia, and this may hurt, especially early in the morning. But Customs seems quite certain that its evidence is good, and they will not permit stevia produced by forced labor to be imported.

It is all part of the intensifying struggle between the United States and the People’s Republic of China.

The move against Chinese stevia is part of a broad American campaign against Chinese exports in violation of U.S. regulations, much of which goes to American universities… According to a front page story in Wednesday’s Epoch Times, there is $6.5 billion in unreported funding to U.S. universities from foreign sources. The largest amount reported was $1.61 billion to Carnegie Mellon University, and Harvard tops the list of recipients of Chinese funds at $116 million. 

“The vast majority of the foreign funds went to America’s largest and most prestigious universities,” the newspaper reported.  The money was transmitted through “a bevy of intermediaries,” according to a report from the Department of Education. In the first six months of 2020, American universities reported $2 billion of foreign donations. One unidentified school failed to report $760 in foreign gifts; another unidentified school failed to report $1.2 billion in gifts and contracts. 

The DOE report arrives at a time when the [Trump Administration] is taking an aggressive stance against the influence of the CCP in the United States. The [DOJ]  is conducting thousands of investigations across every state.

Evidence of Chinese spying in the U.S. university system is abundant, and goes hand-in-hand with defections from the Party, to which many millions of young Chinese have lent their names. In all likelihood, the U.S. Government is getting help from large numbers of Chinese who are leaving the Communist Party of China. 

From July to September, the number of people who renounced their ties with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its affiliate organizations was over 4 million. Since 2004, a total of more than 365 million have done so, according to the Tuidang Center’s records.

“Tuidang” means “leaving the Party,” and there are more than 100 offices around the world. Motives for joining, and for obtaining certificates attesting to their departure from the Party, vary widely. Some view the certificates as a method of obtaining permission to migrate to the United States, others as a way of cleansing their records of unwanted Communist Party membership in youth organizations. Membership is mandatory for students in the Young Pioneers and the Youth League, which signs up young people through high school.

Some fear that their Party membership may pose a potential hurdle on their path to immigration, as U.S. laws prohibit members of communist parties from obtaining an immigrant visa. The Tuidang Center’s certificates are recognized by U.S. immigration officers, Yi said.

Yi recalled one person who recently flew from mainland China to New York specifically for the certificate…

The recent uptick has corresponded with the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services issuing an alert reiterating its policy of barring Communist Party members.

Many of those obtaining the certificates are studying in the United States, and they hope that the documentation will permit them to remain here. Others, in Iran, fear that if they do not change their biographies, they will not be allowed to apply for exit visas or American entries. Hence there is a mad scramble to rewrite one’s life story.

In late May, as Beijing’s rubber-stamp legislature convened its annual plenary sessions, a delegate called and asked to withdraw from the Party, saying that he has “seen enough of the regime’s evil deeds.” Choking back tears, he shared about the time he led a team of medics to assist Wuhan during the COVID-19 outbreak’s early stages, and the deaths he saw there. He said he met with whistleblower doctor Li Wenliang there, who was punished for sharing the news about the virus. Li told Yang he “regretted being a Party member.”

It's wild. The Chinese regime is not ready for an all-out struggle with Donald Trump’s America. If he is reelected, the regime will have some difficult choices to make.

 

Michael Ledeen  

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/10/getting-out-china-michael-ledeen/ 

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter