Tuesday, December 27, 2016

An Orange County Rabbi Sounds Off on the UN, Israel, J Street etc

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


Hat tip Arutz Sheva


Orange County Rabbi Dov Fischer is a friend and associate who does fabulous work in Orange County. In this op-ed with Arutz Sheva, Rabbi Fischer sounds off on the UN, our abstention in the Israel resolution, J Street and other issues.


http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/19954

Well stated, Rabbi. There is plenty of shame to go around. Hopefully, J Street is now exposed as an enemy of Israel. Any organization supported by George Soros cannot be anything else. As a gentile, I must say that American Jews who consider themselves supporters of Israel and President Obama must be examining themselves. It is clear that Obama has nothing but hostility for Israel. While there are some Democrats like Charles Schumer who support Israel, it is also clear that it is the Republican party that supports the Jewish state. Schumer himself must be wondering how much influence he has held with the Obama administration.

No doubt Donald Trump will be a much greater friend to Israel than this current administration. I also hope he will take a big first step toward the eventual demise of the UN by dramatically reducing our funding. This poisonous organization is not only dangerous to Israel but the US as well.

January 20 cannot come fast enough.

Saturday, December 17, 2016

UC Irvine's Disgusting Op-ed in Wall Street Journal

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com

UC Irvine Chancellor Howard Gillman and UCI law school dean Erwin Chemerinsky have written a joint op-ed in the Wall Street Journal criticizing the recent US Senate Anti-Semitism Awareness Act passed to address the problem of campus anti-Semitism. The authors feel that the bill violates freedom of speech. I am cross-posting the op-ed from the UCI web site since the WSJ posting requires sign in.

https://communications.uci.edu/in-the-news/pdf/Gillman%20Chemerinsky%20WSJ%2012-16-2016%20A%20Bill%20to%20Police%20Campus%20Speech.pdf

Where to begin? I should first note that both Gillman and Chemerinsky are of Jewish background, so let's rule out anti-Semitic intent. I have no idea what their attitudes toward Israel are. However, having recently concluded an 18-year career teaching part time in the UCI Extension, I strongly believe that neither man has done much if anything to counter the long-standing problem of anti-Semitic speech and activity at UCI. In fact, Chemerinsky went on record as stating that there was no anti-Semitism problem at UCI even before he arrived to inaugurate the new law school.

As for myself having preceded Chemerinsky at UCI, I can say there has been a problem going back well over a decade. The same must be said about other UC campuses as well as many universities all over the country. The cause? That is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which has been turned into a hot button topic not by neo-Nazis or skin heads, not by some "alt-right" Jew haters, rather by the pro-Palestinian factions, namely the Muslim Student Association and Students for Justice in Palestine.

The letter states that the problem of campus anti-Semitism is real and should be addressed. They state that attempts to disrupt Jewish events on campus will not be tolerated. Yet for the past two years, I have personally witnessed pro-Palestinian students loudly disrupt the annual May I(srael)-Fest with their protests a few yards away and loud chanting with a bullhorn. On both occasions, the protesters marched out of the Cross Cultural Center at the beginning and back to the CCC at the end of their protest.What did the university do about that? Nothing.

A worse example was last May 18, when Students Supporting Israel was holding a pro-Israeli Defense Forces film, "Beneath the Helmet". Their event was disrupted by SJP and other student groups who tried to force their way into the room as terrified (mostly female) audience members tried to block the door while calling campus police to come and restore order. One female audience member told of being chased from the room and to another building by protesters. After the "investigation", SJP got off with a letter of warning.

But it gets worse. Some of the protesters identified themselves as "legal observers" from the National Lawyers Guild, a left-wing organization that began in the 1930s as a legal arm of the Communist Party USA. Further that they were attached to the UCI Law School. When the incident became national news, the NLG sent out a statement that the incident was not disruptive, and that when it was over they "accompanied the protesters back to the CCC."

Two points. If Chancellor Gillman ever asked Chemerinsky for an explanation of this, it is not on record. I have publicly called on Chemerinsky to explain this involvement of people in his program with this incident. To date, I am unaware of any statement he has made.

Secondly, why has the CCC for years allowed the MSU and SJP to use its facility as a staging area when they disrupt pro-Israel events-as in 2010 when the MSU disrupted the speech of Israeli ambassador to the US, Michael Oren at UCI? I have protested this in writing to UCI and the CCC to no avail.

I also find it offensive when the letter states that "much to the consternation of groups now supporting the Anti-Semitsm Awareness Act", UCI was cleared of wrongdoing in 2013, when it was the subject of an investigation by the Office of Civil Rights, Department of Education because of complaints of harassment by Jewish students. That complaint died because of findings that complainants had not been filed (by students) in a timely manner and that there was no finding of discrimination due to national origin. (At the time, religion was not covered under Title VI. The Jewish students concerned were American as opposed to being Israelis.)  UCI has crowed ever since that it was innocent of allowing a hostile environment for Jews.

Yet, last March, due to continuing complaints by Jewish students system-wide, the UC Regents finally approved a new statement of principles against intolerance that specifically addressed anti-Semitism, an acknowledgment that there was a problem. Subsequently, Chancellor Gillman himself, formed a task force at UCI, headed by the director of the UCI Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, to investigate the problem. To my knowledge this group has not completed its work.

But what the writers complain about here is what they consider an infringement on free (political) speech. I agree that just because a speaker says something that may be deemed anti-Semitic, it is still protected speech. I have never advocated that the vile Oakland-based imam Amir Abdel Malik Ali, for example, who has spoken at UCI many times over the years and who has engaged in anti-Semitic speech, should be denied his right to speak. Even when another vile Jew-hater, Washington DC-based imam Mohammad al Asi, came to UCI and stated in 2001, "We have a psychosis in the Jewish community that is unable to co-exist equally and brotherly with other human beings. You can take the Jew out of the ghetto but you can't take the ghetto out of the Jew," it was free speech. Similarly, when the MSU in 2008 put up a caricature of Ariel Sharon on their mock "apartheid wall" drawn in the stereotypical style of the old Nazi publication,"Der Stuermer", it was free speech, but should have been condemned by the university. It wasn't. The only time UCI ever spoke out about one of these expressions was in 2010, when then-Chancellor Michael Drake reacted  to statements by Ali that he supported specific terror organizations (Hamas, Hizbollah and Islamic Jihad). Yet Drake  did not identify the speaker, the statement (other than referring to support of terrorist organizations), the offended group, the sponsoring group, or the event. Drake did not address Ali's statement calling Jews in the audience "the new Nazis".

All we have been able to do is document these things and condemn them, which is our right of free speech. We cannot stop speakers from coming to campus and making their statements, and I am not saying we should. But there is a problem here. Many universities are all too prepared to prevent speakers like Milo Yiannopolous or Ben Shapiro from speaking on their campuses because some students don't like their message and are prepared to disrupt or try to stop it themselves. They are willing to punish those who say things deemed offensive about other groups, namely blacks, Latinos, Muslims, women or gays. Why should the rules not be the same for all?

Chancellor Gillman and his officials at UCI should use their own right of free speech to condemn hate speech when directed against Jews just as they would when other groups are targeted. As it is they have abrogated their moral responsibility to support Jewish students to the same extent they protect other minorities. It is not  just a UCI problem. The same can be said of the rest of the UC system-as well as universities all over the country. The worst -ism that exists on college campuses is anti-Semitism. It is this -ism that university officials like Gillman and Chemerinsky will not confront. Shame on them.

Sunday, December 11, 2016

Hillary Decries "Fake News"

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


Hat tip Breitbart





Hillary Clinton figured her next speaking gig on Capitol Hill would be her inauguration speech. That didn't work out, so she did the next best thing this week on the occasion of the retirement of Harry Reid. What made news was that she used the occasion to decry what she calls "fake news" (on social media). And she wants it stopped, mind you. Of course, that opened the door for the obvious response.

Of course, what little folks like me say on social media, be it humble blogs like this or Facebook, is not news because it has a very limited readership. But when the New York Times, Washington Post, LA Times, CNN, ABC, CBS, or NBC, get it wrong and do it deliberately, that is fake news. More to the point, when Hillary herself tells us some lie, that is fake news. On that note, where do I begin?

When Hillary told Matt Lauer years ago that all the commotion about her husband's relationship with a White House intern was due to a "vast right-wing conspiracy", that was fake news.

When Hillary said that she landed in Sarajevo as first lady under sniper fire, that was fake news.

When Hillary told us that the terrorist attack at Benghazi that killed four Americans was a protest over a video that got out of hand, that was fake news.

When Hillary told us (for the first time) that she never sent or received classified information on a private server, that was fake news. Every time she subsequently said it, that was fake news.

So just what is it that Hillary is complaining about on social media? Is she saying that when blogs call her a liar, that is "fake news"? No, that is truthful news. Is it "fake news" when blogs refer to the Clinton Foundation as a corrupt enterprise? No, that is truthful news. Is it "fake news" when blogs refer to her use of as private server to conduct her State Department business as being against the law? No, that is truthful news. Is it "fake news" to term her rants against Wall Street hypocrisy when we know she has received hundreds of thousands of dollars in speaking fees from Wall Street companies? That is truthful news. Is it "fake news" to point out the hypocrisy in her rants against the top 1% when she has collected 6-figure speaking fees from universities and that her family has enriched itself by hundreds of millions of dollars with the Clinton Foundation? Is it "fake news" to point out the dangerous position of authority she placed Huma Abedin given the latter's past history with the Muslim Brotherhood? Is it "fake news" to report on her campaign receiving debate questions in advance from CNN?

Fake news is not only the numerous lies, Hillary Clinton has told us over the years, lies too numerous to recount here. Fake news is what we have been getting from the mainstream news outlets for years, which reached a crescendo in the past election-lies which all favored  the candidacy of Mrs. Clinton. Fake news is the news that the media ignored or swept under the rug, for example, the revelations about the pay for play of the Clinton Foundation.

This all makes Mrs. Clinton's remarks this week laughable and just one more example of how tone-deaf she is. She is a walking, talking caricature of herself, rich fodder for late night talk show hosts. Except that they are too busy telling jokes about Donald Trump while ignoring Hillary.

Thursday, December 1, 2016

Meet Keith Ellison

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


Hat tip Investigative Project on Terrorism and Truth Revolt


Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) is the frontrunner to become the next Democratic Party Chair. Nothing could signal the party's radical shift to the left more than this selection. This is not just because Ellison is a Muslim. He has ties to radical Islamists. There is also ample reason to conclude that he is anti-Semitic. Here is what Steve Emerson's Investigative Project on Terrorism reports on Ellison's troubling background.

http://www.investigativeproject.org/5708/ipt-exclusive-in-private-fundraiser-ellison

And here is what Truth Revolt has to say about Ellison, who apparently wanted a separate nation for blacks when he was a college student.

http://www.truthrevolt.org/news/top-pick-dnc-chair-wanted-separate-country-blacks-trump-racist

Please, Democrats. Pleeeease choose this man as your DNC chair.

Tuesday, November 22, 2016

Campus Anti-Semitism Surges After Trump Win

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


This article first appeared in New English Review (The Iconoclast)


Having learned much about Islam since 9-11, I have come to distrust the term, "moderate Muslim", especially here in the US. Many of the people who are regarded as moderate Muslim leaders are just trying to put a happy face on Islam for our benefit. I have visited several mosques over the last decade and listened to their presentations when they invite the public in.  They invariably say Islam is a religion of peace, and that the terrorists (whose acts they condemn), are not practicing true Islam. While I concede that the vast majority of Muslims worldwide are not terrorists and lead peaceful, lawful lives, that doesn't clear up the problems I find within Islamic doctrine. I am not so convinced that the terrorists are not actually practicing the true Islam as outlined in the Koran, the hadith, the Sunna, and the very life of the Prophet Mohammad.

I should point out at the outset that certain Islamic factions have a pretty good record in not being involved in terrorism and other forms of violence. I am referring to the Sufis and the Ahmadiya. The former practice a mystical version of Islam while the latter, formed in the 19th century in British Mandate India by a man known as Ahmed, believe that this person is a latter day prophet-after Mohammad. Because of this, the Ahmadiya are considered heretics by mainstream Muslims. They are persecuted in countries like Pakistan, where their numbers are greatest. The Sufi are also considered outside of mainstream Islam.

That has led me to searching for true Muslim reformers those who recognize there is a problem within the religion, and that young Muslims must be taught to be against violence and intolerance toward other religions. Perhaps, the best known reformer is Zuhdi Jasser, a Syrian-American based in Phoenix. Dr Jasser is a physician and former military officer. He is the head of an organization called American Islamic Forum for Democracy, which is dedicated to human rights (the American concept of human rights) and fighting what he terms, political Islam, that is Islam that seeks to dominate.

Another is a young Iranian-American woman named Shireen Qudosi (with whom I happen to be in email/Facebook contact). She recently testified before Congress, and she is someone to watch. I predict she will become quite prominent in the years to come. Her website is called, "The Qudosi Chronicles".

But here is my dilemma: Can Islam-The Perfect Religion- as Muslims are taught, really be reformed?

Islam, as we know, was not subjected to the Reformation as was Christianity. Nor was it subjected to the Enlightenment as were Christians and Jews in Europe. As to the Reformation, however, there are a couple of points to remember.

First of all, when Martin Luther began the Reformation, he was not rejecting Jesus Christ, nor was he rejecting the Bible. He was rejecting what he saw as the corruption of the Vatican. When the Reformation took hold and succeeded, the Bible and the figure of Jesus Christ were still sacred with Protestants.

In my view, for Islam to undergo a true reformation means they would have to reject those parts of the Koran which advocate hate, violence, and even death toward non-Muslims. That constitutes a lot of the Koran. The estimates I have read indicate that about 62% of the Koran refers to non-Muslims. And those references are not complimentary or respectful. Muslim leaders in the US love to recite the portions of the Koran that are peaceful, such as , "Let there be no compulsion in religion" (Sura 2 verse 256). They don't recite the verses that urge Muslims to commit violence against unbelievers.

The key to understanding the obvious contradictions in the Koran is the rule of abrogation, handed down by the top Islamic scholars over the centuries. The Koran is not written chronologically. The chapters (suras) are ordered (with tiny exceptions at the front and end) by longest to shortest. Therefore, there is no story that the reader can follow. When Mohammad first began preaching his revelations in Mecca, he was peaceful, but the powers that be drove him and his followers out of Mecca, at which time Mohammad settled in Medina. Once he consolidated his power in Medina, he began to spread Islam at the point of a sword. That process continued after his death, but what is important to note is that as his life changed, so did the revelations from God, which he claimed he was receiving through the archangel Gabriel. In other words, the revelations evolved from peaceful to hateful and violent.

Thus, the rule of abrogation tells us that in case of conflicting verses, that which was received or revealed later in time abrogates the one revealed earlier.

So much for the Koran and its hateful and violent passages (from Mohammad's Medina period). For a true reformation to take place within Islam, Muslims must also reexamine Mohammad himself, his deeds and his words, which have been passed on generation to generation via the Hadith and the Sunna. Muslims consider Mohammad as the man to emulate in every way. How can they reconcile his wars, the execution of prisoners, the taking of their wives and daughters into sexual slavery, his orders to have people murdered with the demands of a modern world that all religions should co-exist in peace? Is it reasonable to expect that such a meaningful reformation could take place?

I also take issue with those who say that the killers of ISIS, Al Qaeda etc are violating the teachings of Islam. If so, where is the theological debate that should be raging all over the Islamic world? Aside from certain national armies (Iraq, Syria), where are the armies of Muslims rushing to fight and kill those who are giving such a bad name to Islam?  There are tens of thousands of Western Muslims who have gone to Syria and Iraq to join ISIS. Others, mostly Somalis, have gone back to Somalia to join Al Shabaab. Many more in the US have been arrested attempting to leave. I don't mean to stigmatize all Western Muslims, but the numbers are alarming.

How many Western-based Muslims do we know of who have gone to those areas to fight against ISIS or Al Shabaab?

There are many reasons why Muslims have not risen up. For some it is fear. For some it is ambivalence or a degree of sympathy. However, I suspect that the biggest reason more don't confront the extremists is that they fear they cannot win the theological argument. After all, remember that 30 years ago, we were calling these killers fundamentalists.

Friday, November 18, 2016

Have Our Universities Bottomed Out Yet?




Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


This article first appeared in New English Review (The Iconoclast)


I have been teaching English as a second language part-time at the University of California (UCI) Extension (now Dept. of Continuing Education) since 1998. Since I am retired from the Drug Enforcement Administration, this has been a part-time endeavor only to keep me busy and provide a little beer money to boot. It has also given me a chance to observe the goings-on at UCI and other college campuses at least since I became involved as an activist around 2006.

I should note at the outset that as a conservative, I have had no issues with my co-workers. To teach ESL only requires a masters degree. My co-workers are people who almost all have either lived in other countries, married spouses of other nationalities, and have opinions across the political spectrum. Usually we tend not to discuss politics in the office anyway. My campus activism, which has no doubt alienated some within the UCI administration and faculty in the humanities sections, has not touched upon my work in the Extension. Furthermore, I have made it a personal policy never to bring my personal beliefs into the classroom. I have reserved them for on-campus events, seminars, and comments in the campus newspaper.

In recent years, UCI has gotten a black eye due to incidents on campus involving groups like the Muslim Student Union (MSU) and Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP). Generally speaking, however, UCI is a school with a rather small humanities department, concentrating mostly on departments like engineering, biology, and other hard sciences etc. The overwhelming majority of UCI students don't get involved in campus craziness as they do at UCLA, Berkeley, and so many other universities around the country. Slightly over half of the student body is Asian-American, and they pretty much concentrate on their studies and enjoying their university experience. Most of the damage to the school's reputation is thanks to the above two groups.

For years, however, the MSU has annually sponsored an ugly week of events dedicated to bashing Israel. Many of their invited speakers can only be described as radicals, who also bash America and in some cases, Jews as people. In 2010, MSU disrupted the speech of Michael Oren, the then Israeli ambassador to the US. Just this past May, SJP disrupted a film event sponsored by Students Supporting Israel necessitating the call for campus police to quell the disturbance. No arrests were made, and only a warning letter was issued to SJP. Like so many other universities, the UCI administration has been sorely lacking in standing up to groups like these as well as confronting campus anti-Semitism. For this, I have publicly criticized the UCI administration as well as University of California presidents-past and present.

Being conservative, I have been appalled by the politically-correct liberal dominance on college campuses in general. To me, this is the culmination of a process that began when I was a college student in the 1960s, and we were experiencing campus protests over the Viet Nam war and other causes. It is safe to say that many of the campus protesters of the 1960s went on to become the professors and administrators of our universities decades later. This is a culture that has been decades in the making, and it will not soon go away. To be sure, students need to get a variety of different viewpoints, but most conservatives, in my view, would prefer to stay in the real world rather than put up with all the nonsense.

Still, it is troubling to see how our young people are being indoctrinated by so many professors in the classroom and led to believe that their country is imperialistic, racist, and in need of a drastic overhaul. In my view, it is necessary to inform the public what is going on in academia. After all, it is we who are footing the bill-at least for public universities. Fortunately, I think the message has now gotten out.

The past couple of years have been really troubling, yet comic in a way. The Black Lives Matter movement, which arrived about 50 years too late, has gained a lot of traction on University campuses. In places like the University of Missouri, administrators have resigned under pressure because of complaints of racism, some real, some imagined. In one astounding videotape, we watched a University of Missouri professor of journalism actually try to stop a student reporter from videotaping a  Black Lives Matter protest in a public space on campus. She actually called for "some muscle" to remove the young man. The university, figuring it had no use for a journalism professor who didn't understand the First Amendment, rightly fired her. Not surprisingly, many parents have opted not to send their kids to Mizzou resulting in a sharp decline in enrollment. I applaud those decisions just as I applaud the decision of Jewish parents not to send their kids to the University of California until it gets serious about the problem of campus anti-Semitism.

Similarly, we are seeing one of the most absurd movements of all as universities fall all over themselves to be "inclusive". White students are being actually demonized for their "inherent racism" and "privilege".  To be a person of color is noble. To be white is to be privileged. Indeed, many white students are rushing to don sack cloth and ashes not because of what they have done or said, rather because of what they are.

Even more absurd is the effort to make students feel secure, included and protected from such things as "macro-aggressions", "micro-aggressions", "trigger warnings" and other boogie men. Universities now talk of "safe spaces", where the little snowflakes (our term) can even hold teddy bears, hold hands and express their fears.

Just in time for President Donald Trump.

With Trump's election, our universities have truly lost their collective minds. Fortunately for them (and unfortunately for the rest of us) they already have the safe space infra-structure in place. University administrators, aided by their departments of equity, diversity and inclusion, are offering students counseling and group therapy sessions in order to cope with the pending arrival of the Evil Donald. If students are too traumatized to attend class or take a test, preferring to attend a protest instead, faculty are all too accommodating. (After all, they are probably too traumatized themselves to teach a class.) In effect, our universities have put their imprimatur on rejecting the results of this election. When a university president sends a campus-wide email out stating that "the university understands how deeply sad you feel about this election and we are here to help you," they are stating that they are also sorry that Hillary Clinton was not elected. That may be OK for a private school, but it is not OK for a public one.

To be fair, universities also have science departments, foreign language departments, engineering departments, and others where real education is taking place. It is in the humanities and social sciences where you usually see the misfit professors and indoctrinated students.  Entire departmental chairs devoted to ethnic studies, gender studies, and gay and lesbian studies are of questionable value other than fostering group identity and separating our students into tribes. Now some schools are even instituting black dorms. Segregated water fountains can't be far off. New words-especially pronouns-are being invented for those students who feel our current vocabulary is too sexist. The University of California at Santa Cruz, which I call, "America's Wackiest University", actually has a Community Studies department (teaching the little rascals how to organize and protest) as well as  a History of Consciousness Department, in which the notorious Angela Davis was a faculty member.

This is what we are paying for in California.

It is tempting to say that it can't get any worse than this, and that from now on, it can only get better. Yet until these universities see their enrollment and funding drying up, they will not reform. Until then I cannot answer the question of whether they have truly hit rock bottom. I try to maintain a sense of humor about it all. It is easy to laugh at the utter stupidity exhibited by people who, with their advanced degrees, should know better. It isn't funny, however, when you consider that every future leader of this great country is walking on our college campuses today.

Friday, November 11, 2016

Hussam Ayloush (CAIR) Shows His True Colors With Trump Election

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


Hat tip Middle East Forum, National Review and Debra


Hussam Ayloush, CAIR's Southern California director, is a man who poses as a human rights activist. He is anything but. Here is what he had to say when America elected its new president, Donald Trump:

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2016/11/cair-leader-overthrow-the-us-government

Ayloush, a supporter of the Muslim Brotherhood,  may think that he is living in Egypt or his native Syria, but he is not. This is America. This campaign may have been messy and ugly, but the actual election Tuesday night was fair and orderly. That is what separates us from the region from which Ayloush came. The "revolution" came from millions of people who merely went to the polls and voted. They didn't grab a gun and storm the capitol. They didn't take hostages or blow off bombs. They voted. That is what Mr. Ayloush wants to overthrow.

One can only hope that with a new administration, attorney general, and Justice Department, these organizations like CAIR and others will be thoroughly investigated, which they have not been since Obama came into office.

Tuesday, November 1, 2016

Why Hasn't Huma Abedin Been an Issue in This Campaign?

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http:garyfouse.blogspot.com



Image result for huma abedin

Finally, the American public is learning who Huma Abedin is. The question is why only now?

As things stand now it may be that Antony Weiner's sexting and weird sexual communications with females, some of whom may have been minors, have been cross-posted with official Hillary Clinton communications with her aide Abedin when she was secretary of state. A revoltin' state of affairs to put it mildly. Even CNN is being forced to discuss this sordid mess albeit with their own spin.

Yet Huma Abedin has been written about for several years now on sites such as this. It's not just rumor and innuendo either. Abedin and her family have been involved with the Muslim Brotherhood up to their eyebrows. Why isn't anybody in the mainstream media reporting it?

As previously reported, Huma was an asst editor of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, a publication of the Brotherhood-linked Institute of Muslim  Minority Affairs.  A key figure here is Abdullah Omar Naseef, a MB figure reportedly linked to funding of Al Qaida. His own association with the journal coincided with Huma's employment there for at least seven years.

As has been previously pointed out, it is inconceivable how Abedin was ever allowed to become a State Department aide to Mrs Clinton give her obvious associations. Where was the background check?

Now the airwaves are filled with reporters of Abedin's laptop (with her husband) filled with messages involving Mrs Clinton and presumably State Department business. Everybody is shocked. However, this is what you get when you allow questionable people like  Huma Abdine into positions of power.

Even if it turns out that hackers into Secretary  Clinton's communications have been treated with images of Anthony Weiner in his now-famous locker room poses, this is the least of the problems involving Huma Abedin.







Friday, October 21, 2016

The Perversion of Academics

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


In the below-linked article, Richard Cravatts of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East describes how college course (principally, but not limited to) California have been perverted by political agenda on the part of the teachers. Many of the people named in this article I happen to be familiar with.


http://spme.org/campus-news-climate/perverting-college-coursework-conform-ideology/23291/?utm_source=wysija&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Latest-Hotspots-Campus

It is obvious on its surface that what is going on within the University of California violates its own UC Regents Policy on Course Content, which basically says that the classroom is not the appropriate place for teachers to advance political agendas. As exhibited by the one-credit, student taught course at UC Berkeley, that policy is being violated regularly.

But let's talk about some of the people mentioned in this article. I will highlight the ones with whom I have had personal experience at UC Irvine or other UC campuses.

First, Hatem Bazian. Any discussion of how the University of California at Berkeley has been perverted by personal political agendas must begin with Bazian. This character has two agendas; Islamophobia and Israel. In addition to being a co-founder of the brown shirt Students for Justice in Palestine, he has also co-founded American Muslims for Palestine, a dubious advocacy group if there ever was one. He is also co-founder of Zaytuna (Muslim) College, located in a non-descript brick building a couple of blocks off the campus and the Islamophobia Research and Documentation Center, which occupies a broom closet in Barrows Hall (Room 638). I have heard him speak three times, twice at UCI. On the first occasion (2010), I tried to get him to confirm the quote in the above article reciting the hadith about Jews hiding behind trees on the Day of Judgement. He skirted the question and never really answered it, kind of like Hillary Clinton might do in answer to a hostile question. I also asked him about the statement he reportedly made to a college crowd that they should go and count the number of campus buildings with Jewish names on them. Again, an evasive answer. Of course, his statement in 2004 about calling for an intifada in America is documented on videotape.

The University of California has many many left-wing professors teaching on its campuses, but I can think of not one who has brought more embarrassment to UC and UCB in particular than Hatem Bazian.

David Lloyd, an English professor at UC Riverside and leading BDS advocate, is also mentioned. I encountered Dr Lloyd in 2014 when he hosted BDS co-founder Omar Barghouti at UC Riverside. It was the second time I had seen Barghouti speak. The first time, 2013 at  UCI, he refused to answer my question of where he was  born saying it was "irrelevant". It was relevant because Barghouti claims to be a Palestinian (He resides in the West Bank) but was reportedly born in Qatar and raised in Egypt. He received his higher education at Tel Aviv University, which caused a lot of anger there since he works to destroy Israel. You can access the UCI video here.

When Barghouti spoke at Riverside, during the q and a, I commented that he was not born in the area he calls home and asked the organizers of his appearance if they would bring in any pro-Israel speakers  so that there students might get both perspectives of the Israeli-Palestinian issue. Lloyd termed the question, "preposterous". Barghouti asked in response, "Why shouldn't I get my education in my own country?" (which makes his birth and where he grew up a relevant question). You can access the 2014 video here.

It is Omar Barghouti and David Lloyd who are preposterous.

Then there is Jeff Halper, born in the US, an archaeologist who moved to Israel and travels the world trashing his adopted country. In 2011, this crackpot spoke twice in one day at UCI on behalf of Professor Chuck O'Connell, another academic warrior against Israel. I attended both sessions the afternoon session in O'Connell's class and the second in a meeting hall on campus.

By the way; who is Chuck O'Connell you ask?

You don't wanna know.

But back to Jeff Halper. Why do I call him a crackpot? Here is why: During the evening session (in which Dr O'Connell's students reportedly were given extra credit for attending), Halper told us about something called "spectral dust". You see, spectral dust is a substance possessed by the Israel Army (according to Halper) that when programmed with a specific person's DNA and spread out into a target area will seek out that person and kill him.

                                                                                                "That's right."


Imagine if that weapon were given to the US, Dr Halper asked his enthralled audience. In the q and a, I told him that sounded like a crackpot theory. That is why I call Halper a crackpot, and I am not talking behind his back.

So there you have a little more background on some of the characters mentioned in Dr Cravatt's article. It is for lack of a better phrase, a real cast of characters. And this is who is teaching our children.

Thursday, October 13, 2016

In Austria People Are Arming Themselves

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


Hat tip Gates of Vienna and Vlad Tepes


"Crime and burglaries"

Yes, Folks, that's what is causing Austrians to make a run on gun stores. As usual, the Austrian media will not specify just who it is that the Austrians are suddenly afraid of. (It's the migrants, refugees and asylum seekers.) Instead, in the second video featured below, the reporter refers to "Little Rambos" who are buying guns.

http://gatesofvienna.net/2016/10/little-rambos-in-austria-arm-themselves/

What has happened to peaceful little Austria? The answer is that it is the same thing that is happening all over western Europe. We have a situation where the locals are afraid to even go outside at night.




Wednesday, October 5, 2016

A Muslim Calls Out the American Islamists

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


Hat tip The Qudosi Chronicles


I am cross-posting an article written in July by Shireen Qudosi, an Iranian-American Sufi Muslim who is among those who call themselves reformers. In this article, Qudosi calls out the American Islamists, many of whom have been written about previously on this site (Siraj Wahhaj, the Islamic Society of Boston Cultural Center, and Zaid Shakir). She also calls out the left who have embraced and enabled these figures. I encourage you to read her article and consider her ideas. Her blog, The Qudosi Chronicles, is linked under "Blogs I read".

http://counterjihad.com/islamists-rising-scholars-community-leaders

We need to get behind Qudosi and others like Zuhdi Jasser. These are people who are willing to face the attacks of CAIR and other phony moderate organizations in order to try and bring Islam into the 21st century in a form where it can co-exist with other religions in a free and open society. Their task is daunting and perhaps impossible, but they deserve our support and, if necessary, protection.

Monday, September 26, 2016

Jew-Hating Posters at UC Berkeley

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com

Anti-Jewish Posters at UC Berkeley


Hat tip Algemeiner and Squid

An antisemitic poster at UC Berkeley. Photo: Nanette Asimov/Twitter.
The above poster appeared at UC Berkeley. Does it remind you of the below poster from the Nazi era in Germany?


Image result for nazi anti-jewish posters

Translation: "Behind the enemy powers-The Jew"
"The German Student- Fighter for Fuehrer and the (German) people"


UC Berkeley is now, in my opinion, the most anti-Jewish university in the country. If you need proof, read the below article which reports the presence of anti-Jewish posters on campus.


https://www.algemeiner.com/2016/09/25/posters-demonizing-jews-crop-up-on-uc-berkeley-campus-as-controversial-anti-zionism-course-reinstated/

Please don't bore me with your arguments that this only represents opposition to Israel or to Zionism. This is pure Jew hatred. With the active presence of Students for Justice in Palestine brown shirts at UCB, this should come as no surprise. The problem is that UCB not only has a multitude of radical students, but a feckless soon-to-be ex-chancellor named Nicholas Dirks, who has been too busy abusing his position to glorify himself and build escape routes from his office in case of protests-in addition to radical faculty who encourage and inspire this kind of ugliness.

To be sure, UCB put out a pro-forma condemnation of the posters, but do you think there will be a real investigation to find the culprits and remove them from the university? I seriously doubt it. With a little bit of effort, I am sure the culprit(s) can be found.

This, of course, all comes in the wake of an anti-Israel course now being offered at UCB which will be taught not by a professor or even an intern, rather by a Palestinian student and member of SJP. And you don't think this will be a biased course? We also know that the whole thing is sponsored by UCB Professor Hatem Bazian, a two-trick pony, who when he isn't railing against Israel is complaining about "Islamophobia". When news of this course prompted an avalanche of protests, the university briefly suspended it because it had not gone through the requisite authorizations (which were quickly granted and the course was reinstated). That is what the above poster is referring to. Do you think maybe-just maybe- the same people involved in the course might be responsible for the above poster?

"Uhhh....yeaaaah."


UC Berkeley is beyond redemption. It should be sued for tolerating this type of climate. In addition, no Jewish donor or organization should support this university, nor should any Jewish student be attending this institution.

Tuesday, September 13, 2016

Greg Hicks Speaks Out

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspoit.com


Greg Hicks was the deputy chief of mission in Tripoli at the time of the attack on Benghazi. He has recently retired from the State Department-and he is talking. Tonight he appeared on Megyn Kelly's show on Fox News. He does not think Hillary Clinton is fit to be president.

Hicks stated that in the months leading up to the attack, the mission was pleading for enhanced security (as we all know). Instead, their security detail was reduced and only two security officers were able to accompany Ambassador Chris Stevens to Benghazi when at least a dozen should have gone.

Hicks blames Clinton for delegating post security matters worldwide to her subordinates when it was the secretary of state who had the legal responsibility.

http://www.foxnews.com/shows/the-kelly-file.html

Hicks was also interviewed by ABC's George Stephanopoulos. He stated that he felt he was punished by the State Department for speaking out

http://insider.foxnews.com/2013/09/09/benghazi-whistleblower-greg-hicks-i-dont-know-why-cavalry-didnt-come

I have a feeling Hicks will be seen and heard a lot in the coming weeks leading up to the election. This man was the deputy chief of mission in Libya., When he speaks, people should listen.

Tuesday, September 6, 2016

Destruction of (Hillary Email) Evidence

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com









I remember during the Watergate scandal when it was found that a White House tape recording showed President Richard Nixon instructing his aides to use the CIA to make the FBI back off the investigation. It was the smoking gun that showed beyond doubt that Nixon was directing the cover-up. Within days, Nixon resigned.

That was then. Now it seems that every few days, another revelation comes forth that shows that Hillary Clinton and her aides violated every rule of security with her private emails or favors granted by the Clinton Foundation in return for large donations. Many of those favors involved some action by the State Department while Hillary was secretary of state.  Yet it seems to make no  difference. The main stream media ignores it and Hillary is still favored to win the presidency.

Now we learn that even after her emails were the subject of subpoena by Congress, the Platte River Company in Denver, where the emails and servers were stored, proceeded to delete said emails and destroy the devices-with a hammer no less-after being instructed to do so by Clinton aide Cheryl Mills.

"According to the FBI, Mills had instructed the engineer in December 2014 to delete all emails from the server older than 60 days old. But the engineer apparently forgot to delete the files and didn't realize his mistake until March 2015, the FBI said. That was three weeks after Clinton's email revelation and the House Benghazi committee's order that Clinton and her tech consultants retain all of her email records.
The report said that the engineer "was aware of the existence of the (Benghazi committee) preservation request and the fact that it meant he should not disturb Clinton's email data on the PRN server."


This revelation comes as a result of the FBI's document dump as they released the notes of their interview with Mrs Clinton using the Washington political tactic of releasing bad news on a Friday to help get the story buried over the Labor Day weekend.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/09/06/republicans-push-to-re-open-clinton-email-case-after-fbi-document-drop.html

I realize that the FBI went through some tough times under J. Edgar Hoover, but I am now shaking my head. Why was the interview with Mrs Clinton not taped? Why was she not given her Miranda warning? Why was Cheryl Mills, who was also under investigation and who had been interviewed herself, allowed to be present at the interview as some sort of counselor? She had a clear conflict of interest. James Comey told us that Hillary did not lie to agents during the interview. What he didn't tell us was that some 35 times, Clinton answered, "I don't recall." Why was there such a paucity (as has been reported) of follow up questions by the interviewing agents?

The information in the second paragraph above  is not just known to us now-they are known to the FBI. And they did not see any destruction of evidence here?

And this:

"Clinton and her longtime aide and lawyer, Cheryl Mills, told FBI investigators during questioning they had no knowledge of the technology company's deletions."

That would constitute a violation of 18 USC 1001, lying to a federal investigator conducting an investigation as to a material fact. 

I firmly believe that these revelations would have sunk any presidential aspirant or president  back in the days when Nixon resigned. That, alas, was a different time. I guess Nixon was just born too soon.


                                                                                   "Where do I go to get my job back?"

Wednesday, August 24, 2016

Another Jew Stabbed in France by a Muslim

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


....yelling, "Allahu Akhbar"

Hat tip Algemeiner


There has been yet another ugly hate crime in France committed by a Muslim against a Jew. A Jewish man in Strasbourg was stabbed by a Muslim man yelling, "Allahu Akhbar".

http://www.algemeiner.com/2016/08/24/daughter-of-strasbourg-stabbing-victim-my-father-is-emotionally-traumatized-but-we-wont-live-in-fear-interview/

I would like to take this opportunity to digress from the incident in France.

The defenders and apologists for Islam are running out of excuses. Aside from  all the terror in the Middle East and Africa, Al Qaeda, ISIS, Hamas, Hizbollah, the attacks in Europe and America, and the horrific civil war in Syria, there is just too much that is happening every day. There is just too  much evidence and documentation in the Koran, the hadith, and the life of Mohammad. It is just as obvious as the noses on our faces.

All of this violence is rooted in Islamic doctrine.

So I say to Muslims in general-and with all due respect to the millions of you who are peaceful and don't hate your fellow man:

You cannot explain this away. You cannot continue to tell your friends and neighbors in the West that Islam is a religion of peace. You cannot continue to tell us that Mohammad was a kind and forgiving man. You cannot continue to tell us that the Koran is being misinterpreted by Islam's critics. You cannot continue to tell us that ISIS and Al Qaeda are not real Muslims. You are being dishonest.

I also point out that while thousands of Muslims who live in Europe, the US, Canada and Australia have gone to Syria and Iraq to join ISIS, we know of not one case where a Western-based Muslim has gone to those countries to fight against ISIS. That is very telling.

Aside from a handful-and I mean a handful- of Muslim reformists like Zuhdi Jasser, the so-called "moderate Muslims" in the West keep telling us lies about Islam as they work to advance Islam and sharia law into our Western societies. Those who tell us that sharia law is perfectly compatible with the US Constitution are lying through their teeth.

It is not enough to condemn terrorism and say it has nothing to do with Islam. Most of those Western-based Muslim leaders are lying to us. People like CAIR and others try to silence the critics of Islam by lawsuits or defaming people as bigots and "Islamophobes".

I mean no harm to American Muslims who are law-abiding, but really- Muslims should be ashamed of what is going on and their inability or unwillingness to destroy the jihadists. There should be a mercenary army of young Western Muslim men or Arab men themselves going to Iraq and Syria to fight ISIS. There isn't. I don't advocate vigilantism, but when do you hear of Western Muslims taking out the jihadists in their midst in back alleys of the Western countries where they live? It doesn't happen, does it?

It is Islam itself-not "radical Islam" that is a direct threat to the world. There are 1.5 billion Muslims in the world, most of whom are not jihadists. Nobody is advocating that we go to war against the entire Islamic world. Yet, the jihadists must be destroyed by the armed forces of the civilized world and our Arab allies. As for the rest of the Muslim world, the message should be that the West will not become Islamic, and it is time to live in peace and respect all other religions.

Finally, a true Islamic reformation is in order. It is problematic given the wording in the Koran, the hadith, and the life of the Prophet. Yet, Muslims must find a way to live in harmony with others without regarding them as "infidels".

We have had enough of al Qaeda, ISIS, and all the other terror organizations around the world.

And we have had enough of religiously-inspired attacks against our Jewish fellow citizens in the West. The term, "Allahu Akhbar"(God is great)  is probably the most honored  expression in the Muslim world.

To the rest of us, it has become an obscenity.

Thursday, August 18, 2016

Would You Vote For This Lawyer?

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


Hat tip Squid, Daily Mail and Gateway Pundit




You know the old story: A sleazebag lawyer uses all the legal tricks to get a vicious criminal off easy. Here is one such example. The lawyer was Hillary Rodham Clinton while she was a lawyer in Arkansas in the 1970s. She later told an interviewer all about it back in the days she was first lady of that southern state with Bill sitting by her side. The 1975 rape victim was a 12-year-old girl. Chuckling in a fake southern drawl, Hillary told how she smeared the girl's reputation and wound up getting her client off with a time served sentence of a few months.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/BdNHf1g4ivA

Unfortunately for Clinton, there is an audio of that interview with Arkansas journalist Roy Reed. You can check it out below at  Gateway Pundit (and Daily Mail) along with an update on that 12-year-old girl.

The victim's name was Kathy Shelton, who is now in her 50s. She has come out publicly with the ordeal that Hillary Clinton put her through.

Hillary Clinton portrays herself as a lifelong advocate for women. Tell that to Kathy Shelton. Tell that to the mother of Sean Smith, whom Hillary lied to about how her son died in Benghazi "over a video". Tell that to the women her husband had affairs with and who were smeared by Hillary and her gang of operatives, who attacked them as "nuts and sluts".

So where are all you liberal feminists who support Hillary Clinton? Where are all you people who think Donald Trump has too many character flaws to be president? Where is the mainstream media asking Hillary Clinton to explain this?

Friday, August 5, 2016

Hillary Lies About Her Lies

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com





Poor old Hillary Clinton is insisting that FBI  Director James Comey cleared her of any and all lies when he gave that press conference ending the investigation into her emails.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/08/04/clinton-doubles-down-on-disputed-claim-fbi-found-her-email-remarks-truthful.html

The Washington Post Fact Checker has already given her four Pinocchios over this issue, but Hillary just keeps on lying. In his testimony before Congress, Comey was asked a series of questions by Trey Gowdy (R-SC) about specific assertions Clinton made during her sworn testimony. Comey refuted all of them. Gowdy, a trained prosecutor, knew the answers to each question before he asked them.

But alas, what does it matter? The latest polls show Clinton up by ten points.

Friday, July 29, 2016

Hillary's Speech

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


My main interest in watching Hillary Clinton's acceptance speech was not to hear what she had to say or how she would say it. I already knew. It would be the standard Hillary speech full of one-liners, harsh barbs aimed at Donald Trump, a laundry list of liberal goals, and lies all delivered with that Spade Cooley look that suggests she has lost her mind over the years. She didn't disappoint.

Hillary repeated the convention theme that is so contradictory. While heaping praise on President Obama, she talked about all the inequities, injustices and wrongs that she intends to fix. Why didn't Obama fix them? Which one is it?

Nor did I overlook those throw away lines in which she referred to our military as a "national treasure". This from the woman who as first lady didn't want the military aides attached to the White House to wear their uniforms. This from the woman who reportedly told a general who made the mistake of saying, "Good morning" to her one day in the White House  to "F-off". The rule in those days was that you did not speak to the first lady or even make eye contact with her unless she addressed you first. No amount of words from Chelsea Clinton telling us of how warm and fuzzy her mother is can wipe that away.

Nor can it wipe away the contempt she has for law enforcement. Hillary also threw out a line about appreciating the cops who protect us, but  the worst assignment a Secret Service agent can draw is guarding Hillary, who has always made it her habit to scream insults at them.

When it is all said and done, what is left is Hillary the liar. What is left is Hillary the corrupt, money grubbing woman who charged $200,000-300,000 a speech including from Wall Street groups like Goldman-Sachs, but who tells us she is going to clean up Wall Street. What is left is her email server scandal and the Justice Department white wash. What is left is a tenure at the State Department full of nothing but policy failures. What is left is the corrupt Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation, the biggest money laundering scheme in US political history. What is left is her non-performance at Benghazi and subsequent lies about a video and cover-up.

What is left is Hillary Clinton- the real person.

Sunday, July 24, 2016

Syrian Asylum Seeker Kills Woman in Germany With Machete

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


                                                          "We can make this work."


This is being reported in the Frankfurter Allgemeine. Today, in the southwestern town of Reutlingen in the German state of Baden Wuerttemberg, a 21-year-old Syrian asylum seeker has been arrested after killing a woman with a machete and wounding two others. The article says the man was known to police.


http://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/inland/reutlingen-mann-greift-menschen-mit-machete-an-14355784.html

Police say the motive is "not clear".

Friday, July 15, 2016

Nice: Have We Had Enough?

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com

As I write, the death toll in Nice is between 77 and 80 depending on which source you use. We don't have the age breakdown as yet, but surely there will be many children. I just watched French President Francois Hollande address the nation. It was a bunch of empty rhetoric. Here at home, it is reported that President Obama and DHS director Jeh Johnson have been briefed. Wonderful. Meanwhile, Hillary Clinton is calling for an "intelligence surge" as if the CIA has been on a 6-month vacation.

As I now regularly write, where is the next target? Will it be Marseille? Will it be Berlin? Possibly Chicago? Within a couple of weeks, we will know the answer.

It is time for the West to say, "Enough is enough".

First of all, let's drop this American government nonsense calling it "violent extremism". Even calling it "radical Islam" is too politically correct.

It is now time for the US, NATO and our Arab allies (the only ones I can confidently list are Egypt, Jordan and Iraq) to put the overwhelming number of soldiers on the ground in Iraq, Syria and Libya and wipe out the ISIS fighters both on the ground and from the air. Exterminate them like the vermin they are. Obama wants to close Gitmo. We need more Gitmos. As for Bashar Assad, the brutal president of Syria, overthrowing him is not a priority.

Then we (the West) must deal with those ISIS fighters, recruits, and sympathizers who are in Europe, the US, Australia and Canada.  They must be identified and either prosecuted if possible, deported or put into Gitmos. No, I am not calling for US Muslims to be interned as was done with Japanese and Japanese-Americans on the West Coast after Pearl Harbor. I am talking about targeting the radicals, the subversives, those who want to do us harm. This can be done in conformance with our laws and Constitution. I have never called for punishing innocent people. We don't do pogroms in this country and places of worship should not be attacked.

It is also time to close our doors. We can start with the Syrian refugees. We cannot vet them. We cannot even keep tabs on them when they arrive and are resettled by the various charities. In addition, Our visa policies must be changed. As things stand now, a Tunisian Muslim with a French passport doesn't need to apply for a visa. We need to able to scrutinize every last person who applies for a visa to come to the US-and everybody should have to have a visa. Other countries require it, so can we. Let other countries reciprocate against us if they don't like it. If I have to get a visa to go back to Germany, so be it.

Western civilization is in a war whether our feckless leaders know it or not. French people are dying on the streets of their own country. Americans are also dying on our own streets-in San Bernardino, New York City, Orlando and other places. As long as we continue to allow Muslims to flood into our countries, the body counts will rise.

In addition, the entire Muslim population needs to understand that if they subscribe to sharia law, they are not welcome here. If they are working, even peacefully, to advance a vision of an Islamic America in the future, they are not welcome here. We also need a government that will investigate organizations like CAIR, a subversive organization and shut it down. The same goes for ISNA, ICNA, MAS, MPAC and several others. I fully sympathize with peaceful Muslims who have no desire to live under sharia law here, have no designs of making Islam dominant in the US, and wish us no harm.  However, we cannot silence ourselves and regulate our language for fear of offending them. Besides, I don't see armies of Western Muslims going to Syria and  Iraq to fight against ISIS.

And let's stop the crap about profiling. We know who the terrorists are. We know what their motives are. We know the ideology that is driving them.

We must also acknowledge that far too many mosques in the West are radical breeding grounds. Saudi money has funded radical imams and radical teaching in many mosques in the US and the West. Saudi money has also funded the establishment of Middle East studies centers in our universities, staffed with leftist, anti-Israel, anti-West radicals. This must also stop. Our next president needs to have a heart-to-heart talk with the Saudis.

We are back to 1939-or in the case of the US, 1941. We are at war. Back then we had leaders like Churchill and Roosevelt. Today, we have Barack Obama, David Cameron Teresa May, Angela Merkel, Justin Trudeau,and Francois Hollande. It is a recipe for defeat. The West desperately needs new political leadership.

I hope voters will think very carefully about this in November.




Wednesday, July 6, 2016

The Somalis Next Door

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


Hat tip WND

I heard about this today while listening to an interview of Michele Bachmann on Sean Hannity's radio show. It is shocking and sickening, but it falls right into line with everything I have been saying about so many of the Somali immigrants for years. Now we have armies of them invading Minneapolis neighborhoods and threatening residents while police turn a blind eye. In the incident below, it took the police over an hour to respond to repeated 911 calls and no arrests were made.

http://www.wnd.com/2016/07/muslim-refugees-threaten-minnesota-community-with-rape/#!

I don't care how anybody reading this reacts. I just want to scream, "Get them out of our country!" I guess from reading the article most if not all of these delinquents are American citizens thanks to our government policy of bringing over 100,,000 Somalis to this country for whatever reason I can't explain. 

No doubt some are good citizens (Ayaan Hirsi Ali is one of my personal heroes, but she is in a  different category.) But this insane government policy of flooding the country with Muslims just because their own countries are dysfunctional is insane. Too many Somali men have either  gone to join Al Shabaab or ISIS or have been arrested trying. Just this week, three more pleaded guilty to trying to join ISIS, and according to Bachman, the judge hearing the case is considering whether to sentence them to some kind of therapy!

I'll tell you something else that bugs me about this incident. Where the Hell were the men? I'd like to see them try this in Bullsnuts, Texas.

But alas, get ready for even more under President Hillary Clinton.

Thursday, June 30, 2016

The House Benghazi Report: Nothing New?

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


Hillary Clinton's (public) reaction to the House Benghazi report was that there was nothing new and it was time to "move on" (a favorite saying of the Clintons over the years as they have moved on from one scandal to the next).

In a sense, she is correct. We already knew that the State Department under her tenure had refused some 600 requests for enhanced security from the diplomatic mission in Libya. We already knew that the attack had lasted some 13 hours from the mission to the CIA annex and that only an unmanned drone was sent to observe the attack, which enabled our leaders to watch the attack in real time. We already knew that the security men at the annex had been told by the CIA station chief to stand down when they wanted to respond to the mission, an order they eventually disobeyed. We already knew that no military help ever arrived other than other security elements who responded from Tripoli. We already knew that President Obama, Clinton, Leon Panetta and General Martin Dempsey were huddled together in Washington holding meetings and talking. We already knew that in spite of all that, no military units responded to Libya to assist against an attack that lasted 13 hours.

We already knew that Mrs Clinton had called her daughter that night to tell her a terrorist attack was underway in Benghazi. We already knew that she communicated with the president of Egypt and the prime minister of Libya within the following 24 hours and told them that it was a terrorist attack. We already knew that she told family survivors at Andrews Air Force  Base that they were going to prosecute the maker of "that video". We already knew that Susan Rice was sent on the Sunday talk shows where she told everybody that it was a protest over a video that caused the deaths in Benghazi.

Here is what is new:

We now know that the White House meeting lasted from 7:30-9:30 pm. A number of action items were discussed, half of which  dealt with the infamous video that the administration later blamed for the attack.

We now know that Leon Panetta, instead of being ordered to call and order a military response to Benghazi, was told to make calls to try and get the video removed from the Internet.

We now know that there was discussion and concern over sending in troops without permission of the Libyans, using military marked vehicles and whether the troops should wear uniforms. We also now know that troops who were preparing to deploy were ordered to change their clothing 4 times! But they never went to Benghazi.

What kind of military, diplomatic and presidential leadership is that? Does this jive with Hillary's famous 2008 presidential campaign ad about that phone ringing at 3 o'clock in the morning? The phone was ringing off the hook on September 11, 2102 and it was never answered.

And who made the decision that the security men in the CIA annex should not respond to the burning mission as it was under attack? In the opinion of committee members Jim Jordan (R-OH) and Mike Pompeo (R-KS) it was likely a certain somebody in Washington with whom the CIA man was on the telephone.

This report is damning not just to Hillary Clinton, but to the leaders under her at State, the President, Leon Panetta, and Martin Dempsey.

For months, Mrs Clinton and her underlings were negligent in ignoring requests for more security from the Libyan mission. During the attack, she and the above-mentioned officials failed to send the necessary help. It certainly would not have saved the lives of the two men killed in the initial attack, but it might have saved the lives of the two heroes killed while fighting off the attackers at the annex.

Subsequently, Mrs Clinton and the administration have been involved in a massive cover-up, initially claiming that the attack was a video protest gone awry, and since trying to conceal the details of the attack even trying to keep survivors from being interviewed.

Keep in mind that this attack happened two months before Obama's re-election as the administration was promoting the theme that "GM was alive, Bin Laden was dead and Al Qaeda was on the run".

Hillary Clinton is not fit to serve as our Commander-in-Chief. This report makes it as obvious as that smoking gun tape that resulted in Nixon having to resign the presidency. How times have changed.

Wednesday, June 22, 2016

UC Irvine Suspends College Republicans Over Yiannopoulos Event

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


Hat tip Breitbart




I just heard this, and it is outrageous. UC Irvine has suspended the College Republicans for a year over their sponsorship of the recent appearance by gay pundit Milo Yiannopoulos.

http://www.breitbart.com/milo/2016/06/21/irvine-republicans-suspended-punishment-milo-talk/

Amazing. I have not heard about any suspension for the Students for Justice in Palestine after their May disruption of a pro-Israel film. Aside from SJP, there were other student groups involved as well including people who identified themselves as "legal observers" from the National Lawyers Guild (established in the 1930s as a legal arm of the Communist party USA) affiliated with the the UCI Law School. Has anybody been suspended over that? Has Law School Dean Erwin Chemerinsky even made a statement over that incident?

I was outside the  Yiannopoulos event and videotaped the protest. A lot of ugly things were said. One young man, presumably a student, was yelling out to the people waiting to get into the event, "Go back home to Orange County, white boy!"

This suspension also stands in stark contrast to the one quarter suspension handed down to the Muslim Student Union after they tried to shout down and disrupt a speech by the Israeli ambassador to the US in 2010. (The suspension was originally one year. It was reduced to one quarter by then vice chancellor Manual Gomez on his last day in office before he retired.)

To me this smacks of a hypocritical smack down of conservative speech. I will have more to say as this story develops. I am fully in support of the College Republicans at UCI.

Tuesday, June 14, 2016

Obama's Response to Orlando: "It's the Guns"

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com


President Obama is once again refusing to even mention the words, "Islamic terror", a term which is banned in his administration. Once again, he is taking criticism for his reaction to yet another act of jihad. He just won't acknowledge Islamic terror. In the case of Orlando, he once again focuses his ire on guns.

To illustrate the fantasy world of the Obama administration, his action group, or whatever you call it, Organizing for Action, has for the last few years included me on their mailing list. For some reason, they think I am a big Obama supporter. In the wake of the latest Islamic attack against us, the worst shooting attack in American history, here is the message I received today from Organizing for Action:. There is a link where I am supposed to add my voice for "common sense solutions to gun violence".
From:Katie Hogan, BarackObama.com  Add to Addresses Block Sender
Date:Monday, June 13, 2016 12:43 PM
To:(deleted)
Subject:Orlando
Size:9 KB


Organizing for Action
Friend --

This weekend we saw the most deadly mass shooting in American history -- motivated by hate, and fueled by the easy availability of deadly weapons.

The tragic shooting in Orlando -- which specifically targeted the LGBT community -- is the latest example of the epidemic of gun violence in our country.

Love is love, and no act of hate will change that. Violence in our places of friendship and worship cannot become the status quo.

Add your name to say you agree that doing nothing is not an acceptable decision:

https://my.barackobama.com/Doing-Nothing-Is-Not-Acceptable 


Thanks,

Katie

Katie Hogan
Executive Director
Organizing for Action
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Incredible
This Katie Hogan, whoever she is, says doing nothing is not acceptable. Yet doing nothing is exactly what Obama proposes. He wants to admit tens of thousands of Syrian refugees into this country, whom we cannot adequately vet. Even if 100% of these people are good and peaceful people, what is to stop their children from being radicalized within a few years and doing what the Orlando shooter (who was born here) did?

So instead of doing nothing, Katie, just what is it you want us to do-love? Who are we supposed to love here besides the victims and their families? How about some common sense protection for our people from these Muslim fanatics who are on a jihad? How about some common sense protection of our borders and common sense policies to prevent these murderers from coming to our shores?

Final point: Wouldn't it have been better if a few of those people in the night club were licensed to carry firearms? I guarantee you there would not have been 49 innocent people killed were that the case.

Wednesday, June 1, 2016

Fighting Campus Anti-Semitism: It's a Three-Headed Monster

Gary Fouse
fousesquawk
http://garyfouse.blogspot.com




It matters not whether you are Jewish or not. If you are becoming alarmed at the rise of anti-Semitism on our university campuses, and you are thinking about becoming involved, you need to know exactly who it is you are fighting. It is not just the Jew haters.

I have been involved in this problem for almost ten years as a (Gentile) part-time teacher at UC Irvine. There have been times that UCI has become the object of national attention for this problem, for example, in 2010, when the speech of the Israeli ambassador to the US was loudly and repeatedly disrupted by members of the UCI Muslim Student Union. (One student was from UC Riverside.) To be fair, UCI is hardly alone because these problems are erupting on campuses across North America. Just recently, however, on May 18, Students for Justice in Palestine and other student groups disrupted the screening of a Pro-Israel military movie by Students Supporting Israel at UCI. Once again, UCI has a black eye over an ugly incident that has gathered national attention. To make matters worse, at least two of the people disrupting the event identified themselves as lawyers from the National Lawyers Guild at the UCI Law School. They reportedly told the terrified Jewish female students that the protesters had a right to be let in (apparently as they were trying to force their way through the door). Campus Police had to be called to protect the Jewish students, but no arrests were made.

So why are we having this problem?

The cause is not neo-nazis or skin heads. The cause of the problem is the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the agitation of pro-Palestinian students. Those students (and many professors and outside speakers) are not all Arabs. Nor are they all Muslims. While many Muslim Student Association chapters have been involved in the anti-Israel movement, a movement that has often spilled over into anti-Jewish expression, their "sister organization", Students for Justice in Palestine, is made up of Muslims and students of other faiths (or non-faiths) and even Jews. It is they who are increasingly in the front lines when unpleasant incidents take place on college campuses. They were co-founded by a Palestinian-born professor at UC Berkeley, Hatem Bazian, a man who once called for an intifada in America.

So those people are the ones we have to counter, right? We have to counter their lies about Israel and expose their actions on campus to the public, actions which sometimes can only be described as brown shirt tactics like shutting down any speech or event that is in support of Israel. We just saw it again at UCI on May 18. Those are the ones we have to counter, right?

So they are. Yes, but they are just one head of a three-headed monster.

The second head is the universities themselves. All but a few private colleges are solidly in the hands of the left. On the one hand, you have left-wing faculty members who dominate the humanities and social sciences. They are solidly on the side of the Palestinian narrative. For them, opposing Israel, the only democratic nation in the Middle East, is simply part and parcel of opposing their own country-part of the extreme left-wing agenda. It's like baseball and hot dogs.

On the other hand, you have the administrators-the chancellors and presidents- a  group of cowards so afraid of their own shadows and running afoul of political correctness that they make Bert Lahr look like the hero in  The Wizard of Oz. (He played the cowardly lion.) Up to this point, they have been unwilling to confront the perpetrators of anti-Semitic acts on campus. Why? Simple. Often the perpetrators are Muslim, which the universities consider a protected class-a marginalized minority, if you will. Jews on the other hand are lumped together with whites ("privileged whites" as they say in academia). Besides, nobody wants to offend the Muslims, right? That has consequences, legal and other. It is all about political correctness. That is why one university after another stands by while their student governments are forced to waste days and days and into the wee hours debating useless boycott resolutions against Israel and companies doing business with the Jewish state. They have to endure heated rhetoric, Jews being insulted and hooted-and in the recent case of UC Davis- swastikas painted on a Jewish fraternity wall. But it's all free speech, you see.

So we then stand up and write hundreds of letters to university presidents and demand that they confront anti-Semitism on campus. We line up the major Jewish organizations to stand with us and demand..........

Stop.

That. my friends, takes us to the third head of the three-headed monster, the major, national Jewish organizations. The problem is that they are missing in action, and worse still, in many cases are thwarting our efforts to put pressure on the universities to reform and protect Jewish students.

First, let me mention a few organizations that are doing the right thing. That would be the Zionist Organization of America, Stand With Us, the AMCHA Initiative, and CAMERA. There are some others including those that I omit simply because I am unaware of them.

On the other hand, the Anti-Defamation League, in my view, is missing in action. Their previous CEO, Abe Foxman denied any problem of anti-Semitism at UCI a few years ago in Newport Beach when he addressed a Jewish group. I was not present, but a close friend of mine from the Orange County Independent Task Force on Anti-Semitism was. He pointedly asked Foxman his opinion about the problems at UCI, to which Foxman replied that there were no problems-that the Jewish students and administrators had it under control. (They certainly didn't have it under control on May 18.)

In addition, every May, when the UCI-MSU brought their anti-Israel week of events to UCI, I would see the then head of ADL's Orange County branch watching, listening and saying not a peep. He could have been involved in the q and a when some of these vicious anti-Semites like Oakland imam Amir Abdel Malik Ali were spouting their venom. I spoke up and asked critical questions. I voiced my opposition. Why couldn't he?

Worse than ADL, however, are Hillel and the Jewish Federation. In these cases, I should note that both are national organizations with local chapters who operate somewhat autonomously. Out here in Orange County, the local chapters of these organizations have been an obstacle to all I and others have attempted to do to bring the problems of UCI to the attention of the community-particularly the Jewish community.  To hear them tell it, everything is just fine and dandy at UCI. "Jewish life is thriving" is their motto. (It wasn't thriving on May 18.)

The obvious question is - why ? The problem as I see it is that both organizations have a conflict of interest in these matters. Both are highly connected with UCI. Hillel is a national organization whose mission is to enhance the life of Jewish students in college and provide services and support for them. While the national organization claims strong support for Israel, there are many chapters around the country that want to have what they call an "open Hillel" that is open membership to Jewish students notwithstanding their support (or lack thereof-or even opposition ) of Israel. At UCI, Hillel's position has for years been to not make waves. They actively discourage students from speaking out about the problems or fighting back against the pro-Palestinians when they engage in bully-boy tactics. In my mind, Hillel is afraid that if UCI has a reputation for anti-Semitism, Jewish students will be reluctant to enroll there. Therefore, if there are no Jewish students, there is no need for Hillel on campus.

Note: I always say that 99% of UCI's students are not involved in the problem. But a small minority (MSU/SJP) has created a lot of bad headlines for UCI over the years.)

Similarly, the Orange County Jewish Federation and Family Services has the same conflict of interest in my opinion. The Jewish Federation's mission is to collect donations and parcel money out to various local Jewish interests and charities. Hillel is also a beneficiary of the Federation. They are basically joined at the hip. The leadership of the Federation has had over the years, in my view, too close a relationship with UCI. Both the Federation and Hillel have tried to downplay the problems at UCI. Both organizations have also cracked down on students who don't go along with the program. That includes not making waves over problems of anti-Semitism. I have known and spoken with several former Jewish students at UCI who have related stories about how Hillel and the Federation have put pressure on them-and their families- when they (the students) spoke out and fought back against the brown shirts on campus. (And I can bring them forward at any time.) Some have already gone on the record over the past several years.)

I should also mention the Rose Project, which is the money arm of the Federation. In recent years they have provided funding for Jewish students to participate on the much-vaunted Olive Tree Initiative. This program was founded at UCI and operates within the Department of Social Sciences. Ostensibly it takes Jewish, Muslim and other students to the Holy Land to expose them to both sides of the conflict. Students visit Israel proper and the West Bank. In reality (in my view) the program is tilted toward the Palestinian narrative. The tour guide operators in the West Bank are known operatives and even co-founders (George S Rishmawi) of the International Solidarity Movement,  In 2009, the group actually met with the highest ranking Hamas official in the West Bank, Aziz Dweik. The meeting did not appear on the official schedule, and students were allegedly instructed not to mention the meeting when they crossed back into Israel. To this day, the OTI has failed to furnish their financial expenditures  pursuant to a California Public Records Act request from a local private citizen.

Another aspect of the problem is that for Jewish students who go along with the Hillel/Federation program, there is support available for further study, grants, and so on. For those who don't-there is ostracizing.

Furthermore, what we have here is a symbiotic relationship between Hillel, the Federation and UCI. In the case of the recent SJP disruption of a Students Supporting Israel event (May 18), the administration is quick to deny anti-Semitism at UCI in spite of the history over the years and in spite of the necessity for the UC Regents to recently pass a statement of principles on intolerance that specifically addressed anti-Semitism on UC campuses. And what does UCI Chancellor Howard Gillman do this past week? He issues statements specifically referring to previous statements by Hillel and the Federation that deny the underlying problem of anti-Semitism. They are all using the same talking points. In other words, the Federation and Hillel give cover to UCI. In my opinion, the intention is for these three entities is to limit the investigation into the May 18 incident to within UCI. Students who were speaking to outside people  investigating the incident (specifically Campus Reform) have suddenly become silent. (For the record, I have not had any contact with any UCI students. Though I have a lot of questions, since I am a part-time teacher at UCI, I don't think I should involve myself in that regard.)

In regards to the current controversy over the May 18 incident, there is a suspicion that what I have described above is playing out again. Here is the big question: Have any Jewish students at UCI been told  by Hillel and/or the Jewish Federation not to talk to outside parties (like Campus Reform) about the May 18 incident? As for UC Irvine, much as they would like to defuse the situation, it is a question that they should be concerned with as well.

So welcome to the fight, Dear Reader (if you are so inclined). Just be aware that you will be fighting on three fronts.
<