Monday, November 18, 2019

Academic Hypocrisy in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

This article first appeared in the Times of Israel Blogs.

Like many US universities, New York University is having to deal with anti-Semitism on its campus, thanks as always, to the actions of the pro-Palestinian forces and their academic enablers. It has just been announced that there will be a federal investigation into allegations of campus anti-Semitism at NYU. Recently, a university department sponsored a speech at NYU by Noura Erakat, a well-known anti-Israel activist. In response, some Jewish students asked the department of Asian American Studies when they would host a speaker with pro-Israel views in order to balance the discussion. The answer was “Never”. I am cross-posting an article on the issue by United with Israel.

This, of course, reminds me of similar experiences I have had in attending such events, which are all the rage on American university campuses. Not only groups like the Muslim Student Association and Students for Justice in Palestine routinely sponsor speakers like Erakat, they are often invited by university departments lending their imprimatur to the Palestinian narrative. As a part-time teacher at the UC Irvine Extension from 1998-2016, I became involved in following such events on that campus as well as others.

In September of this year, I attended an event at UC Irvine in which the featured speaker was Lila Adib Sharif of the University of Illinois. Her apperance was sponsored by the Department of International and Global Studies, School of Social Sciences. You can read above what happened during the q and a when I asked the sponosors when and if they might hold an event featuring a pro-Israel speaker.
This was also similar to an event I attended at UC Riverside in 2014 sponsored by the Humanities Department and Ethnic Studies featuring BDS co-founder Omar Barghouti. I asked the same question. Only this time, departmental chair David Lloyd, a prominent BDS activist, told me my question was “preposterous”.
This points to an important point. If pro-Israel speakers expect to be invited to a university campus to defend the Jewish state, it pretty much has to be at the invitation of student groups like Students Supporting Israel or the College Republicans. Even then they can expect to be disrupted by SJP/MSA students or off-campus radicals. University departments prefer to expose their students and the public to anti-Israel speakers like Erakat and Barghouti.
In fairness, I should point out that in 2010, the UC Irvine Law School and Political Science Department joined with Jewish groups to host Michael Oren, the then-Israeli ambassador to the US. The results were disasterous as the speech was repeatedly disrupted by the campus Muslim Student Union. Eleven arrests were made. I was present and reported on it.
Perhaps that incident set the template for universities all over the nation as to why they think they should avoid pro-Israel events since they are going to be disrupted. If that is even part of the rationale, then universities are guilty of cowardice in caving in to the mobs. I suspect, however, that the real reason is that these departments tend to be sympathetic to the Palestinian narrative. That means they are guilty of betraying the fundamental purpose of the university-to expose students to differing points of view on topics. New York University has failed the test. Putting together an event dedicated to the study of anti-Semitism (and Islamophobia) hardly corrects the problem. Perhaps, they might look at their own role in helping to create an atmosphere of anti-Semitism on their own campus.

Sunday, November 17, 2019

Whistle Blower Won't Testify: Hitler Reacts

Fousesquawk's latest Hitler rant masterpiece.

The New Netherlands

Editing by Gates of Vienna. Sub-titling by Vlad Tepes. Translation by C.

Just another day in the new Europe. Two days, in the Netherlands, actually, as reported by Dutch news and the police who are seeking the public's help in locating violent attackers. Here are two recent videos.

Saturday, November 16, 2019

Sex Education in Spain

Viewer warning: Explicit sexual (cartoon) images.

Editing by Gates of Vienna, sub-titling by Vlad Tepes, and translation by Fousesquawk.

Apparently, sex education in Spain is getting out of hand, and many parents are up in arms. The below video was posted on Twitter by an angry parent in the Catalonian town of Sabatell when he discovered sexually graphic cartoon images on a sex education poster on a door in a local secondary school.

Note: The terms, colegio and instituto, used by the speaker to refer to the school in question, are used somewhat interchangeably in Spain. In the overall Spanish-speaking world, a colegio is a secondary school with a range of children's ages depending on the country.

The video was picked up by a Polish site that says they are fighting to keep this kind of display out of their own schools. Some readers chimed in from Brazil that they are fighting the same battles in that country and that President Bolsonaro is on their side.

Marie Yovanovitch's Testimony

This article first appeared in New English Review.

I  did not watch all of Marie Yovanovitch's testimony Friday, but I watched much of it. In what I saw, she was an excellent and credible witness. (Being retired from law enforcement, it is something I pay attention to.) It is not my purpose to attack her or her political bent, but the important thing today is that she had no direct information as to the central question: That was President Trump's July 25 phone conversation with the Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskyy.

It appears that the Republicans did not confront her with allegations that have been made about a couple of things she might have done politically while serving as ambassador to Ukraine. For all I know, it is possible these allegations have been debunked, so I won't bring them up here. As for Trump's tweet attacking her today, I think it was uncalled for, but it doesn't change the issue of whether he deserves to be impeached for his actions in Ukraine.

There was much discussion as to the reasons for her dismissal. As stated many times today, a president can change ambassadors at any time for virtually any reason. Ambassadorships are political positions, rightfully or wrongfully. If a president had a friend, political ally, or big contributor, they could be given an ambassadorship. And this brings up another point, which I learned serving overseas in Thailand and Italy with DEA. Certain posts tend to be filled by political appointees, and certain posts tend to be filled by career foreign service officers of the State Department. Obviously, the more desirable ones, like Paris, Rome, Tokyo, London, and others go to the political appointees. By and large, they are not interested in going to places like Africa and other places where life is not so plush. Kiev is one of those posts. I know because I went there twice in 1994 with DEA International training.  Kiev is anything but a desirable post-though it is an important post.

Another lesser known reason why the disparity in ambassadorships is the representational costs. Life as a foreign service officer and ambassador is filled with official events, dinners, and cocktail parties. Places like Paris, Rome and others literally require someone who has the money. I don't know how it is now, but when I was in DEA and involved in similar events, we were not allowed to spend US taxpayer money on things like booze for parties and such. I'm not sure what the State regs were or are now, but I think they had similar restrictions. They literally needed an ambassador who could do some of that out of pocket. Thus, the lesser and more undesirable ambassadorial posts could and can be filled by career State employees as was the case in Ukraine with Yovanovitch.

But what is important is that a president can remove an ambassador at any time. In fact, when administrations change, especially with a president of a different party, ambassadors expect to be replaced. If a president deems that a current ambassador is not in agreement with administration policy, a change can be expected. It is important to underline that US foreign police at any time is not the policy of the State Department; it is the policy of the current administration, and the State Department is expected to carry it out. If Trump deemed that Yovanovitch was working contrary to his foreign policy, he had every right to replace her. It has been reported that there was a problem between her and President Zelenskyy. It should also be recalled that her replacement was none other than William Taylor, a career State employee who testified earlier this week. That somewhat undercuts the argument that Trump was acting personally so he could pursue the Biden investigation.

As to the issue of Rudy Giuliani, whose role in Yovanovitch's replacement is under scrutiny; Giuliani is Trump's personal lawyer and has no official portfolio in government, and much is being made of that. The fact is that the president can send a person of trust to another country to carry out some aspect of policy even if that person has no official portfolio in government. Perhaps, a famous example is Harry Hopkins, a very influential figure during the presidency of Franklin Roosevelt. While Hopkins held various domestic posts during FDR's presidency, Roosevelt made him an important part of our liaison with Britain and Soviet Union during World War II. He was also instrumental in the Lend Lease Act. During those years, Hopkins virtually lived in the White House. Hopkins was not secretary of State, Defense, national security advisor, or anything of the sort. FDR chose to use him in foreign policy areas during the war, and that was his prerogative.

So is Yovanovitch a victim because she was replaced? I don't think so. She is still in the State Department teaching at Georgetown University. She was not demoted, at least in terms of salary. Maybe she was treated unfairly, but when it comes to government employment, sometimes that's what happens in terms of one's career path, promotions etc.

Friday, November 15, 2019

Kurdish-Turkish Love Fest in the Hague

Hat tip Jeroen, Gates of Vienna, Vlad Tepes and C. for translation

-Kurds in white, Turks in brown

Well, it wasn't as good as the end of last night's Browns-Steelers game, but here is a Dutch video report of what happened last month in the Hague when a group of Turkish counter-protesters showed up at a Kurdish demonstration. Needless to say, things got out of hand. The video appeared in De Telegraaf.

Thursday, November 14, 2019

Juan Cole and the "Landmark" Decision by the European Court of Justice

Hold on to your hats because the European Court of Justice, which is the latest version of the Soviet Supreme Court, has come out with a "landmark" ruling that Israeli products produced in the West Bank must be labeled as such before being imported into the EU as opposed to being labeled "Made in Israel".

According to University of Michigan comedian Juan Cole, this is the biggest thing since Roe v Wade.

Where to begin? One would think that the EU Court would have better things to do, like deciding the size of beer glasses used in EU restaurants or how cucumbers must be sliced before being sold in European markets. (Don't laugfh.)

For Cole, who is, as always, a stooge for the Arab world against Israel, this is a historic step for human rights, which it is really isn't.

"The Court of Justice is made up of a justice from each of the countries in the European Union (28 until Britain leaves) plus 11 advocates general. It strives to ensure that European laws are applied equally throughout the EU. It represents the aspirations for a rule of law and social justice of 500 million people. It is arguably a more important, a far less corrupt, and a much more representative body than the US Supreme Court."

What a laughable statement. One court makes rules that apply to 28 countries, and Cole thinks that it represents the aspirations of 500 million people. It is more like a court in Moscow making decisions that apply to the people of Azerbaijan in the old  USSR. A sizable chunk of those 500 million people Cole refers to are sick and tired of having their lives ruled by the bureaucrats of the EU, in this case, 28 judges sitting in Luxembourg of all places.

Naturally, Cole drags out his usual rhetoric about "squatters" and "occupation" forgetting that the West Bank is not a country called Palestine illegally occupied by Israelis. In all of recorded history, there never has been a nation called Palestine. The so-called "Palestinian people" only began referring to themselves by that name in the 1960s. The land  is actually disputed territory yet to be decided by that long hoped for peace treaty between Israelis and Palestinians.

"The ruling is unlikely to deter ongoing Israeli dispossession of Palestinians, which is enabled by strong US support for virtually any violation of human rights or international law the far right wing Israeli government wishes to undertake."

Such as Israel responding against Gaza after rockets were (yet again) launched into Israel this week?

Germany: Terror Attack Thwarted

Hat tip Vlad Tepes and Gates of Vienna. Translation by MIss Piggy.

German police in Offenbach have arrested three ISIS jihadists, one Macerdonian and two Turks, who were allegedly preparing to carry out terror attacks.

Wednesday, November 13, 2019

The Impeachment Hearings

This article first appeared in New English Review.

On Wednesday, public hearings begin in the Trump impeachment process. The Democrats, under the leadership of Adam Schiff (D-CA), will take those witnesses whom they feel were strongest against President Trump in the infamous closed door hearings and put them before the public. We will hear from the former US ambassador to Ukraine, the former acting US ambassador to Ukraine, and an army lt. colonel who was assigned to the White House.  Maybe we will hear from their famous anonymous whistle blower. (His name is already out there, but some are reluctant to use his name in public.) He is a partisan Democrat with links to Joe Biden. It seems the Dems are balking at using him because he can only testify to hearsay and as stated, he is a known partisan. It is more the Republicans who want him to come forward.

Make no mistake: This is an attempted coup designed to bring down the president. The ex ambassador, Marie Yovanovitch, was removed for good reason. She had reportedly directed members of her embassy staff-in Ukraine- to monitor the activities and statements of people like Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, and other private citizens, mostly conservative. That is unheard of.

The crux of the matter is that in July, Trump spoke on the phone with the current president of Ukraine, Volodyrmyr Zelenskyy, and (in Adam Schiff's words) ordered him to make up dirt-anything- on his presidential opponent, Joe Biden. US military aid to Ukraine depended on it. It was an effort to use US aid to force a foreign  government to investigate and dig up dirt on the man most believe will be the Democrat candidate for president.

Except that is not the accurate scenario according to the official transcript of the call as taken down by those in the White House monitoring the call. It is true that Trump asked Zelenskyy to look into the matter of Crowdstrike, a US cybersecurity firm hired by the DNC to investigate the hacking into their computers during the 2016 campaign) as it pertained to Ukraine. What is wrong with a US president requesting that Ukrainians investigate it? Ukraine and its supreme court have already gone on the record as saying that Ukrainian interests attempted to meddle in the US election to the benefit of Hillary Clinton.

More importantly, it is true that Trump mentioned Joe and Hunter Biden in that call in connection with the firing by the previous president of the prosecutor investigating Burisma Holdings, Ukraine's largest non-governmental energy company. Burisma, during the Obama administration, had placed Hunter Biden on its board of directors. The question begs: Why? Hunter Biden had no expertise in Ukraine or natural energy. He spoke no Ukrainian. He had no qualifications to sit on that board-other than the fact that he was the son of Joe Biden-who had been appointed by Obama to be the point man in Ukrainian affairs. As a result Hunter was being paid money in the amounts of $50,000-80,000 a month according to which source you are relying on. Burisma was under investigation for corrupt practices by Ukraine's chief prosecutor, and one of the things he wanted to look into was the role of Hunter Biden with Burisma Holdings.

Then then-Vice President Biden paid a visit to Ukraine and told the then-Ukrainian president in no uncertain terms that he wanted the prosecutor fired. Biden stated that he was leaving the country in 6 hours, and that if the prosecutor wasn't fired by then, Ukraine would not receive some one billion dollars in US loan guarantees.

How do we know all that? Is it hearsay, similar to what Mr Whistle Blower heard about the Trump-Zelenskyy call? Hardly. We get it right from the mouth of Joe Biden, who bragged about it on video during an appearance before the Council on Foreign Relations. He tells the whole story-without mentioning Hunter, his son, of course.

But the Democrats and the press don't care a whit about all that. To them, the real impeachable offense is what Trump did in his phone call to Zelenskyy. In reality, if the transcript is accurate, what Trump did was perfectly reasonable and lawful. He did what US officials do every day in their interactions with other governments. He requested they investigate possible wrongdoing-both in the Crowdstrike issue as well as Joe Biden's truly improper demand to fire the Ukrainian prosecutor. If you think it is illegal for an American official to ask a foreign government to investigate an American, you are wrong. It happens every day. When I was a DEA agent stationed in Thailand in the 1970s and Italy in the 1980s, I asked those police counterparts on many occasions to help us investigate Americans who were in their respective countries engaging in drug trafficking. We have international agreements that cover all that.

This Ukrainian flap, just the latest attempt to remove Trump from office, is similar to the failed Russian collusion scandal. The Democrats and the press could care less that the whole story was started with the Clinton campaign and the DNC enlisting Fusion GPS to dig up dirt on Trump. Fusion then turned to Christopher Steele, the ex-British intelligence agent, who somehow produced the infamous Russian dossier, which led to the FBI wiretap of Carter Page among other questionable investigative endeavors. Much to the consternation of the Democrats and the press, Attorney General William Barr and his appointed counsel, John Durham, are investigating this whole mess in great detail. But the Democrats would rather believe that Trump colluded with the Russians to steal the election from Her Nibs (Hillary). Nor did they care that the FBI and Obama Justice Department essentially whitewashed the "investigation" into Clinton's emails, in which a ton of real evidence was gathered all for nought.

In short, the Democrats in Congress, led by Schiff and cheered on by the media, are ignoring the improper acts by Biden just as they all did in the case of Hillary's emails in order to focus on acts by Trump which were well within his power as president. But there is good news. The Democrats may control the witnesses who appear, but the Republican members of the committee will be able to ask them hard questions in public view. Already Schiff has stated that he will not permit the issue of Ukrainian election meddling or the Bidens to be brought up. In turn, the Republicans want both the Bidens to testify. Americans are going to hear the Republican members raise the issue of Hunter Biden, Burisma, and Joe Biden's successful demand that the prosecutor be fired. Schiff may try to stop it, but there surely will be much argument and Republican references to the issue. One way or another, the American people are going to hear about the Bidens. When the phrase quid pro quo is raised, viewers will have to consider what Joe Biden did and which was worse-the actions of the former vice president or President Trump? This is going to blow up in the Democrats faces, just as the Russian hoax did and just as the testimony of Robert Mueller did.

Tuesday, November 12, 2019

UC Irvine: Gender Fluid Queers and Bad Grammar

Hat tip Anonymous,

Below is the text from an anonymous reader comment received today regarding an event that took place 
today at UC Irvine.

Anonymous said...
Professor Fouse:
Wasn't quite sure where to insert this, but here goes. Have a look at this event (today!) at UC Irvine:

I have a couple of questions: what is a Gender Fluid Queer? Sounds messy. Any need for Kleenex?

You are/were an ESL teacher. At the link I notice of number of noun / verb conjugation errors. "They are a survivor ...." & a few others. Are these ideological changes? Would you take your red to these mistakes?

Last question: is there any resistance to this nonsense on campus? It's sad to think that this agenda is gaining traction on campuses. The end of critical thinking?

ENGENDERING RESISTANCE: An Art Installation & Dialogue on Gender Identity in Childhood

DepartmentGender and Sexuality Studies
Date and Time: November 12, 2019 | 3:30 PM-6:00 PM
Event Location: Humanities Gateway 1010 & 1030
Event Details

An Art Installation & Dialogue on Gender Identity in Childhood

3:30-6:00 Humanities Gateway 1010: ART INSTALLATION by Sé Sullivan
(Ab) NORMAL & (Un) NATURAL: Performing Identity & Engendering Resistance

The story of one child’s experience at UCLA’s Gender Research Clinic and their resistance to the enforced practices of conversion therapy. Dr. Sé Sullivan began this project as an autoethnographic exploration that developed into a Ph.D. thesis in the Social and Cultural Anthropology. During their research they made a ground-breaking discovery: In the restricted boxes of the Robert Stoller Papers at UCLA was the 1970 file that included a transcribed 68-page oral interrogation of Sé as an eight-year-old being seen at the school’s Gender Identity Research Clinic (1963-1994). “This file, file number 24,” Sé writes, “is a historical document and record of my body as a site of data collection.”


This dialogue will bring together Sé Sullivan, Ph.D. and Karl Bryant, Ph.D. for the first time in a formal setting to discuss the relationship between their respective experiences as childhood research subjects in the UCLA Gender Identity Research Clinic and their subsequent interventions as adult scholars who turn the lens of analysis on the doctors and researchers who studied them as children.

SÉ SULLIVAN is an independent scholar, journeyperson carpenter, and performance artist—with a Ph.D. from California Institute of Integral Studies. A self identified Gender Fluid Queer, they are a survivor of the UCLA Gender Identity Research Clinic (1963-1994) who now hopes to shape conversations about the medicalized construction of gender.

KARL BRYANT is an associate professor of Sociology and Women’s, Gender, and Sexuality Studies at the State University of New York at New Paltz and was a research subject for 15+ years while growing up as part of the UCLA “Feminine Boy Project.”

Moderated by Dr. Jeanne Scheper, associate professor of gender & sexuality studies at the University of California, Irvine. 

Co-sponsored by the Department of Art, School of Humanities, UCI Humanities Center: Borders & Belonging, School of Social Sciences, Womxn's Hub

 I have placed certain words in bold for emphasis.

Here is my response to Anonymous:


Thanks for the heads-up. Obviously, I did not attend it.

Actually, I am not a professor since I only have a masters degree.

I have no idea what a gender fluid queer is. It is apparently one of the 50 or so new genders invented by the maniacs who run our colleges these days.

As for the errors, they are an embarrassment for a university announcement. I am guessing that the use of "they" and "their" represent their preferred pronouns which are non gender specific-total nonsense if that was their intent. I would absolutely take my red to these errors. These people don't get to re-invent English grammar.

Resistance to this on campus? I suppose very little on campus. This is the state of our universities these days. I recommend you check out a couple of blogs called "Campus Reform" and "The College Fix". They are dedicated to reporting this kind of nonsense. I will post this myself and pass it on to them as well.


Nuff said.

Austria: Children's Games in Linz

Hat tip Gates of Vienna and Vlad Tepes. Translation by Miss Piggy.

Linz is a city in Austria where a kid named Adolf Hitler grew up. Today, the town has a different problem with some of its adolescents. In this report, we learn that certain kids are honing their skills playing cut the head off the infidel.

Give those kids about 5 years and they'll be doing it for real.

Human Smuggling from South Asia to US via Brazil and Mexico

Hat tip Gates of Vienna and Vlad Tepes. Translation by Jose Atento.

It is not just Mexicans and Central Americans sneaking across our southern border. In this latest report out of Brazil, cops in that South American country have broken up a ring of human smugglers transporting people from South Asia (principlally Pakistan and Bangladesh) to the US. The route involves Brazil and Mexico.

I don't think you will see these folks working in construction, gardening or fast food. That suggests to me that there may very well be jihad going on here. Just another reason to secure our border.