Please Help New English Review
For our donors from the UK:
New English Review
New English Review Facebook Group
Follow New English Review On Twitter
Recent Publications by New English Review Authors
As Far As The Eye Can See
by Moshe Dann
Threats of Pain and Ruin
by Theodore Dalrymple
The Oil Cringe of the West: The Collected Essays and Reviews of J.B. Kelly Vol. 2
edited by S.B. Kelly
The Impact of Islam
by Emmet Scott
Sir Walter Scott's Crusades and Other Fantasies
by Ibn Warraq
Fighting the Retreat from Arabia and the Gulf: The Collected Essays and Reviews of J.B. Kelly. Vol. 1
edited by S.B. Kelly
The Literary Culture of France
by J. E. G. Dixon
Hamlet Made Simple and Other Essays
by David P. Gontar
Farewell Fear
by Theodore Dalrymple
The Eagle and The Bible: Lessons in Liberty from Holy Writ
by Kenneth Hanson
The West Speaks
interviews by Jerry Gordon
Mohammed and Charlemagne Revisited: The History of a Controversy
Emmet Scott
Why the West is Best: A Muslim Apostate's Defense of Liberal Democracy
Ibn Warraq
Anything Goes
by Theodore Dalrymple
Karimi Hotel
De Nidra Poller
The Left is Seldom Right
by Norman Berdichevsky
Allah is Dead: Why Islam is Not a Religion
by Rebecca Bynum
Virgins? What Virgins?: And Other Essays
by Ibn Warraq
An Introduction to Danish Culture
by Norman Berdichevsky
The New Vichy Syndrome:
by Theodore Dalrymple
Jihad and Genocide
by Richard L. Rubenstein
Spanish Vignettes: An Offbeat Look Into Spain's Culture, Society & History
by Norman Berdichevsky














The Iconoclast

Monday, 20 October 2014
clear

College students should be able to answer some simple questions. Which country in the Middle East has been declared guilty of “ethnic cleansing?” Which country in the area has prevented the return of refugees to their homes and former properties? Which country has flouted Article 49 of the 4th Geneva Convention of August 1949 that prohibits an occupying power from deporting or transferring parts of its own civilian population into the territory it occupies? Which country is responsible for a unilateral declaration of independence?  Contrary to what they may hear from their professors, the correct answer is that all these things are performed by Turkey.

Turkey is not the flavor of the month. To say that Turkey is a disappointment in the fight against Islamist terrorism is to state, even understate, a truism. Turkey is a member of NATO, the only Muslim member of the organization, and President Barack Obama still regards it as a regional ally, and as a symbol of Islamic moderation and liberalism.  However, in view of its behavior in recent years, no one can view it as a helpful partner to the US and the other countries prepared to counter Islamic terrorism. In 2003, before the Second Gulf War, the invasion of Iraq against Saddam Hussein, Turkey refused to allow the US to use its bases in the country.  It is still refusing to support the US led coalition to deal with the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, and again has prevented US reconnaissance and bombing sorties over Syria from the US air base at Incirlik.

To this unhelpful and uncooperative policy has been added even more negative behavior, the direct and indirect help given by Turkey to terrorist groups, Hamas in the Gaza Strip, the Islamic State, and other terrorist groups.  Turkey provided logistical support and sheltered Hamas operatives. It helped the Nusra Front, the al-Qaeda affiliate in Syria. It helped the Islamic State (IS) by allowing arms, material, and personnel to pass through Turkish territory, and through black market transactions with Iran it enables IS to sell the oil from the 10 oil fields and refineries it has seized.  By these sales IS gains about $2 million a day. Erdogan denies this relationship with Iran, which is continuing, thus violating the policy of sanctions against that state.

All this is familiar and distressing. Equally well known and deplorable is the refusal of Turkish President Recep Yayyip Erdogan to allow the considerable Kurdish minority some form of autonomy or self-determination in Turkey.  He views and executes the fight by military attacks and fighter jets against Kurdish groups, especially the Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) that he regards as a terrorist group, as more important than the fight against the Islamic State.   Erdogan has even refused to allow US arms transfers to go to the Kurds who are really fighting the main threat to the world, the Islamic State.

What is less familiar or ignored is that Turkey is guilty of crimes as defined by international law because of its occupying of territory and encouraging settlements in a country to which it has no rightful claim. President Erdogan has been all too ready to criticize the State of Israel for occupation, its settlements, and its actions.  Sometimes this criticism is expressed mildly but more often it is in excessive and belligerent language. In May 2010 he accused Israel of “state terrorism” for preventing the flotilla organized from Turkey from sailing into Gaza.  He remarked of Israel’s Operation Protective Edge in Gaza in July 2014 that it was “worse than Nazi genocide…and (Israeli) barbarism has surpassed even Hitler’s.”

Erdogan’s rhetoric suggests he may be a believer in “Jewish world conspiracy or Jewish power,” and even in the blood libel, ritual murder accusations of Jews killing Christians for their blood to make matzos for Passover. Either consciously or unconsciously, this kind of rhetoric echoes antisemitism. He asserted that Israel was behind the ouster of President Mohamed Morsi in Egypt who was removed from power in July 2013 by Field Marshal el-Sisi. Erdogan also called on the world to stop Israel’s desire for genocide because its lust for blood would not end

Erdogan is eager to call on the world for action concerning Israel, but when the “world” speaks about his own misdeeds or those of his country he ignores it. He refuses to acknowledge the opposition of the world to Turkey’s illegal occupation of part of the island of Cyprus. The issue is a simple one. Cyprus, which had been under British administration since 1878 and had been a British Crown Colony since 1925, became an independent country, the Republic of Cyprus, in 1960, according to a Treaty of Guarantee signed by Britain, Greece, and Turkey. However, hostilities between Greek and Turkish Cypriots began in 1963. A UN force, the Peacekeeping Force in Cyprus (UNFICYP), was set up in March 1964 to help restore normal conditions following this violence. Fifty years later UNFICYP is still there, now under the leadership of a woman general from Norway, trying to maintain stability in the area.

On July 20, 1974, 30,000 Turkish troops invaded the island, and they seized and held about a third of it.  In what can be seen as Turkish ethnic cleansing, more than 180,000 Greek Cypriots were evicted from their homes in the north of the island, while 50,000 Turkish Cypriots moved to areas under the control of the Turkish forces.  Contrary to the Geneva and other international Conventions, Turkey has transferred some of its own population into the area.

On November 15, 1983 Turkish Cypriot authorities unilaterally declared the establishment of an independent state, the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus (TRNC). The United Nations Security Council immediately considered this declaration legally invalid and called for its withdrawal. The European Union also condemned this unilateral declaration of independence. Nevertheless, Turkey has ignored this “call on the world for action,” even though no country except Turkey has recognized the legitimacy of the TRNC state.

Those concerned with Middle East issues should not be oblivious, as many have been, to the improper nature and significance of Turkish behavior in Cyprus, the illegal occupation of part of a country, the establishment of Turkish settlements in the area, the continuing presence of Turkish troops, and even the imposition of a Green Line that separates the two political entities in Cyprus. For some years the UN Security Council has been passing resolutions about this situation, the most recent one being Resolution UNSC Res. 2135 of January 30, 2014, commenting on the degree of stability along the Green Line.

But Turkey has not only defied the UN regarding its illegal occupation and settlement policies. It has blatantly denied political reality and threatened hostilities against the legitimate Republic of Cyprus. On October 13, 2014, President Erdogan reprimanded a Greek Cypriot member of the European Parliament who referred to Turkish troops in North Cyprus as “invaders.” He also refused to listen to proposals for withdrawal of Turkish troops.  When the EU admitted Cyprus as a member, Erdogan commented that it should have been admitted as “southern Cyprus….there was no country named Cyprus.” In fact the whole island had been admitted as a member, but EU common rights and obligations refer only to the part under the internationally recognized government, the Republic of Cyprus. In January 2014 Turkey refused to implement fully the customs agreement with the EU because it would include Cyprus.

Erdogan, an authoritarian and belligerent ruler, who has been accused of corruption and of undermining the independence of the judiciary, had already in September 2011 threatened to attack the Republic of Cyprus if it allowed the US based Noble Energy Company to drill for gas in the large Leviathan natural gas field that Israel is exploring. The international community, to which Erdogan so often appeals regarding the actions of Israel, should now condemn Turkey for its displacement of persons, ethnic cleansing, deprivation of the rights of individuals, and racist and ethnic discrimination against minorities that are not Muslim or Sunnis.

First published in the American Thinker.

clear
Posted on 10/20/2014 12:28 PM by Michael Curtis
clear

Monday, 20 October 2014
clear

 

Protest of The Met Opera’s production of The Death of Klinghoffer, Sept. 22, 2014 Source Getty Images

The Metropolitan Opera’s production of the controversial opera, The Death of Klinghoffer,  has stirred passionate debates about the limits of free speech and artistic freedom. It has launched protests at the Lincoln Center home of America’s premier opera company by both Jewish and Christian activists and supporters of Israel.  Tonight is Met’s  inaugural production of Klinghoffer. The Zionist Organization of America, Americans for a Safe Israel and JCC Watch have  launched protests.  The JCCWatch will roll out a 100 wheelchairs  to protest this evening,  sending a message that “we are all Klinghoffers”.   Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani and US  Rep. Peter King  will be speaking at the JCC Watch .org protest at Lincoln Center at 5PM  this evening.   Those protesters are concerned about the ill-famed messages of the opera’s libretto by Alice Goodman set to the music by 2003 Pulitzer Prize winning American composer John AdamsThe New York Times in an article on the controversy surrounding  the  production of The Death of Klinghoffer,  “With New ‘Death of Klinghoffer,’ Furor Only Grows”,  exemplified the accusations of the libretto’s moral equivalency  with  comments from  the Met Opera  director, Tom Morris, who said, “that while it dramatizes terrorism, it doesn’t endorse it any more than Verdi’s “Macbeth” endorses killing kings.”   The librettist Alice Goodman, a former  American  Jew is an Anglican  convert  and rector living in the UK. She tweeted:

 

 That simply stoked the moral outrage of protesters.

 Dr. Phyllis Chesler in a New York Post op-ed said,   “The Death of Klinghoffer demonizes Israel … [and] beatifies terrorism, both musically and in the libretto.”

This  ill-timed production of Klinghoffer  comes when  Israel is being condemned for defending itself  during the  recent  50 day  rocket and terror tunnel war  by Hamas in Gaza. Then there  is also  the spike in Anti-Semitism  in  the West and the rise of the Jihadist Salafist  Islamic State,  beheading an , Israeli American Jew , the late Steven Sotloff.  

Tonight’s protesters in Manhattan  will be condemning   the opera’s  libretto  they claim  it lionizes  the four Palestinian terrorists who boarded the Italian cruise ship  the  Achille  Lauro in Egypt.  After  terrorizing the passengers and crew , they hot and killed  the wheel chair  bound  Leon Klinghoffer, a stroke victim,  on October 8, 1985 forcing  the crew  to dump his body overboard. His remains were  retrieved  a few days later off the coast of Syria.  Klinghoffer, his wife Marilyn and friends from summers spent on the New Jersey shore were on a  cruise celebrating their 36th Anniversary.   The  Met Opera production has spawned  published commentary by  Klinghoffer’s surviving daughters, American  feminist Dr. Phyllis Chesler and a leading member of the First Amendment , Floyd Abrams.

The Klinghoffer  surviving daughters, Ilse and  Lisa  published  an JTA exclusive column today,” Op-Ed: ‘The Death of Klinghoffer’ an injustice to our father’s memory”.

The Klinghoffer daughters had established a foundation with their late mother Marilyn to inform Americans about the hatred and terrorism that took their father’s life.   They commented:

Since the Met Opera’s decision to stage “The Death of Klinghoffer” by composer John Adams became public several months ago, much has been said and written about our father. Those opposed to the opera’s appearance in New York have elevated his murder at the hands of terrorists into a form of martyrdom. To cultural arbiters and music critics, meanwhile, his tragic story has been seen merely as a vehicle for what they perceive to be artistic brilliance.

For us, the impact and message of the opera is much more deeply felt and tragically personal.

Neither Mr. Adams nor librettist Alice Goodman reached out to us when creating the opera, so we didn’t know what to expect when we attended the American debut at the Brooklyn Academy of Music in 1991. We were devastated by what we saw: the exploitation of the murder of our father as a vehicle for political commentary.

Over the years we have been deeply distressed with each new production of “Klinghoffer.” Critical views of Israel permeate the opera, and the staging and props of various productions have only amplified that bias. To have it now produced in New York — in our own backyard — by the country’s most prestigious opera company is incredibly painful.

                […]

Terrorism is irrational . It should never be explained away or justified. Nor should the death of innocent persons be misunderstood as an acceptable means for drawing attention to perceived political grievances. Unfortunately, The Death of Klinghoffer does all of this and sullies the memory of our father in the process.

Dr. Phyllis Chesler, noted American feminist, and like this writer an opera aficionado, published her condemnation of the Met’s production of Klinghoffer in today’s New York Post, “Opera v. Truth, the Fetid Fouls of the Death of Klinghoffer”. The Post  also published  an editorial  excerpting lines from Chesler’s opinion piece.  Chesler knows Islamic doctrine towards Jews and other unbelievers illustrated in  her acclaimed personal memoir, An American Bride in Kabul.  Here are excerpts from Dr.Chesler’s New York Post, op-ed column.

Met Opera General Manager Peter Gelb has a constitutional and artistic right to produce whatever he wants. Yet showcasing this opera is equivalent to a college president’s inviting a member of ISIS, Hamas, or the Taliban to speak on campus because “all sides must be heard” and “all points of view are equally valid.”

                […]

Klinghoffer begs us to sympathize with the villains — terrorists. This is something new.

The Death of Klinghoffer also demonizes Israel — which is what anti-Semitism is partly about today. It incorporates lethal Islamic (and now universal) pseudo-histories about Israel and Jews. It beatifies terrorism, both musically and in the libretto.

[…]

Choosing to stage  The Death of Klinghoffer at the Met automatically confers upon it a prestige it does not deserve. The opera betrays the truth entirely and, in effect, joins the low-brow ranks of propagandists against Jewish survival.

Floyd Abrams is a senior partner and member of the Executive Committee at the New York law firm of Cahill ,Gordon and Reindle, LLP.  He is a noted First Amendment legal scholar.  His briefs before the US Supreme and federal appellate levels are frequently cited in legal journals.  As a defender of free speech and artistic freedom, he entered the fray in opposition to former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani over a controversial exhibit at the Brooklyn Academy of Art in 1999. The Irony now is they are allies in objecting to the Met Opera’s production of The Death of Klinghoffer.  He wrote about this in a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) opinion piece, “Klinghoffer and the ‘Two Sides’ of Terrorism.”

The controversy over the Adams opera cannot be dealt with by simple reference to the First Amendment or artistic freedom. Those who direct the Metropolitan Opera made a choice when they decided to offer Mr. Adams’s opera, and it is altogether fitting that they be publicly judged by that choice.

Suppose the opera had been about a different murder and the Met offered an intense, two-sided operatic discussion of the desirability of the murder of, say, President Kennedy in a work called “The Death of JFK.” Or a production about the murder of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. in which singers on the “side” of that assassination offer racist views in support of the murder. Or how about one on the death of one of the thousands of victims of the 9/11 attack that contained an extended operatic debate between her killers and herself about whether her death was justified.

Surely we recoil at all of these. They all would be protected by the First Amendment. The First Amendment is basically—and gloriously—content-neutral. It protects not only enduring works of art but also the dregs of human imagination, ranging from films of animals being tortured and killed to the publication of “Mein Kampf.” But it is inconceivable that the Metropolitan Opera would have chosen to offer the public any of the operas I have just hypothesized.

Why then offer one that equates—sympathetically, no less—the murderers of Leon Klinghoffer with their victim? “Grievances” there may be on both sides in the Middle East conflict, but there was no moral justification for the murder of Klinghoffer. John Adams has defended his focus on the motivation of the killers by saying that it helps to explain “what in the mythology that they grew up with, forced them or dared them to take this action.”

But the killers were not “forced” to murder Klinghoffer. Nor were they dared to do so. They chose to commit their crime. So did Lee Harvey Oswald, James Earl Ray and Osama bin Laden. We can expect no arias to be sung in their defense at the Metropolitan Opera, and there is no justification for any to be sung for the Klinghoffer killers.

           

 

 

 

 

 

clear
Posted on 10/20/2014 10:44 AM by Jerry Gordon
clear

Monday, 20 October 2014
clear

Here.

He would like you to forget, or never learn, what the League of Nations' Mandates Commission was intended to create: a series of states, out of the remains of the Ottoman Empire in the Middle East, and not only for the Muslim Arabs, but also for Jews, and Kurds and, impliedly, in The Lebanon and Syria, a refuge, if not a state for, the Christians. He's a type, well known and their follies dissected, by Elie Kedourie, and J.B. Kelly, and others too. Whether he began as an antisemite (many of those who enter the diplomatic corps to specialize in Arab affairs already exhibit, in subdued form, such a pathology) or, like the dyer's hand that is colored by what it works in, in that semi-demented if deceptively luxurious Arab world, so comfortable for the ambassadorial likes of a soigne pleaser like Alan Duncan, whose brand of going native had nothing to do with donning a dishdasha, but was far deeper and more dangerous for the West which, putatively, he was supposed to represent and defend.

He, and all his tribe,in their utter failure to understand Islam and the menace of Muslims now deep inside those borders which they are taught to regard as enemy lines,  the lines of Dar Al-Harb, cannot allow themselves to understand such matters because it would get in the way of a another, deep, pathological animosity to Israel, and which requires them not only to overlook the legal, historic, and moral claim of Israel to the land the Israelis currently control,, and to believe in this "Palestinian people" fiction, and to deplore, bien entendu, the "settlements"
 (that is, Jewish villages built, amazingly, on land that was assigned to the Mandate for Palestine long ago, and that Israel, by coming into possession of by force of arms in the Six-Day War, could at last exercise its rights under that Mandate --- with Great Britain, Alan Duncan may need to be reminded, as the mandatory authority that fulfilled so few, and betrayed so many, of its solemn undertakings to the League of Nations and the Mandates Commission under the Swiss professor William Rappard.

Alan Duncan, and all his tribe, in their ignoring of Islam (for it is Islam that explains the war without end, the Jihad that cannot be appeased, against the Infidel nation-state of Israel) are not only a vicious threat to Israel, but constitute a security risk for the entire non-Muslim world, just as the antisemitic appeasers of Hitler and the Nazis were in 1938..

Tags:
clear
Posted on 10/20/2014 9:18 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Monday, 20 October 2014
clear

From AFP via Russia Today and Aquila Style

PARIS, October 19, 2014 (AFP) – France’s government is drawing up a new set of rules for theatres after Paris Opera ejected woman for wearing a veil during a performance, the institution’s deputy director said Sunday. The incident took place when a veiled woman was spotted on the front row of a performance of La Traviata at the Opera Bastille, Jean-Philippe Thiellay told AFP, confirming a media report.

The woman was sitting just behind the conductor, visible to monitors, wearing a scarf covering her hair and a veil over her mouth and nose during the performance on October 3. “I was alerted in the second act,” said Thiellay, adding that “some performers said they did not want to sing” if something was not done. They didn’t like performing for a faceless audience member, reported Metronews, citing Thiellay. 

The spectator and her companion — tourists from the Gulf, according to MetroNews — were asked to leave by an inspector during the interval. Their seats were reportedly the most expensive in the opera, costing 231 euros ($294) each. 

“He told her that in France there is a ban of this nature, asked her to either uncover her face or leave the room. The man asked the woman to get up, they left,” Thiellay said. “It’s never nice to ask someone to leave… But there was a misunderstanding of the law and the lady either had to respect it or leave,” he said.

According to a source from Opera Bastille, the couple didn’t demand compensation. 

 

clear
Posted on 10/20/2014 8:38 AM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
clear

Monday, 20 October 2014
clear

Here.

He's a Shiite cleric and former Iraqi MP. He insists on telling as much of the truth about Islam as he can without beijng accused of apostasy (for all I know, by now he may well have given up Islam, but for many reasons, he chooses to present himself still as a Muslim, trying to save not Islam, but the Muslim peoples from Islam itself). He focusses on "fiqh" - his synecoche for Islam. And he makes clear the world-wide support for ISIS, from Muslims who from every country where there are large numbers of them clamor to join, and he mentions the "thousands" or "perhaps many more" mosques that actively encourage Believers to support ISIS. He repeatedly says that both the Sunni and the Shiite fiqh support the killing of the Yazidis; both the Sunni and the Shiite fiqh support violence. Only at one point, when the fearful moderator of the program, needing to make sure the program does not get out of hand by too much truth-telling, asks him if he believes Islam itself is a religion of "tolerance and peace" does Ayad Jamal Al-Din say, with deep insincerity, yes, he does, but for 1400 years, it is not the true Islam but the distorting and dangerous fiqh that has manipulated and directed Muslim minds.

This is one of the most instructive of the videos that MEMRI, that indispensable organization and website, has recorded, translated, disseminated. Would that many see it.
 

clear
Posted on 10/20/2014 8:12 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Monday, 20 October 2014
clear

[First posted on December 22, 2005]

It has become a peculiar sort of conventional wisdom among those of a particular intellectual and ideological bent — the idea that each generation of Americans seems to identify a particular enemy, contrived to fit ideologies or economic necessities. Americans must always find “The Other” whom they can then hate and fear.

“The Other” was, of course, Edward Said’s favorite topic. He kept talking about the need of the West to create the Islamic “Other,” but said nothing about the fact that the Original, the Ur, the Other of All Others, was the one that was created by Islam to sustain Believers. The most perduring “Other” is the Infidel, who must be hated no matter what good he “appears” to do, what kindness he “appears” to offer — such as those hapless American soldiers in Iraq who wonder why everyone wishes to kill them as they build schools, hospitals, electricity grids, and roads.

But no one is concerned about that. Everyone know that the real “Other”-constructor, the real villain of the “Other” piece here, is not the Islamic world but the West — the need for white, European, racist, colonialist Europe/America to “construct” that “Other” that it can then despise. For without that “Other” to hate, that miserable, racist, dysfunctional, poverty-stricken, ruinous, chaotic, violent, worthless bunch of countries and peoples who ridiculously call themselves the West, or, even more absurdly, “Western civilization,” and who have given the world absolutely nothing of value, would scarcely be able to justify its own chaotic and confused existence. After all, just compare its ridiculous accomplishments with the scientific achievements and immortal works of art produced over 1350 years everywhere that Islam has planted itself.

 

It was not enough for the West to have constructed “the Other” of Hitler and the Nazis, and to have caused World War II thereby, with all the enormous suffering that could have been avoided. It was not enough for that West to have constructed “the Other” of Lenin and Stalin and the Politburo, and to have deliberately inveigled the Red Army into Eastern Europe to seize control for local Communists so that, all over the West, people would be filled with quite unnecessary alarm and dread.

 

No, now they are at it again, having somehow tricked a few misguided people, a handful of extremists who were putty in the hands of the C.I.A. and the Mossad, to here and there plan their pathetic little attacks (with, admittedly, one or two actually succeeding — to the great delight, you can be sure, of the master puppeteers in Langley and Tel Aviv). And what about all these so-called “plots” that they discover, with all that fanfare, all over Europe, or all these people picked up and charged with “terrorism” all over the United States? What is that if not a sustained effort at scaring people, all cooked up to make them think there is a problem with Islam?

Yes, I know what you are going to argue. You will say — but they never actually mention Islam. All they talk about is the “war on terror.” Exactly. Exactly the point I was trying to make. It is precisely the refusal of Western governments to blame the teachings of Islam in any way, to even go out of their way even to mention Islam, that is the most diabolical part of it.

It’s the old “don’t put beans up your nose” strategy. By failing so noticeably and so obviously to mention Islam, the government is actually doing everything it can to make people focus on precisely that — Islam. For people are not fools. Or rather, you can only fool those people in some ways, and not in others. By now everyone in the West knows that their own governments are not to be trusted, that they are run often by the very foolish people who foolishly try to fool them. But they can’t do it. The fools who rule are even bigger fools than the fools they rule over, who cannot be so easily fooled as the ruling fools think.

And that is why, you see, when the ruling fools engaged, for the third time in less than a century (the Nazis, the Communists, and now the helpless, innocent so-called “Muslims”), in constructing “the Other” (oh, don’t believe me — read Gil Anidjar, professor at Columbia University, on the “construction of the Other” — i.e., Jews and Arabs, peas in a pod, identical victims of European hatred, and for exactly the same reasons), with that “Other” today being “Muslims,” they realized that the very best way to construct that Other was — not to construct it! By not naming Islam or Muslims, everyone who had grown to distrust the leaders would focus manically on the subject of Islam and Muslims.

Have I made it clear?

Good. I thought I would.

clear
Posted on 10/20/2014 7:22 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Monday, 20 October 2014
clear

The threat was not to a country, as the title of this report in YaLibnan suggests, but to a family, the Al-Saud. Israel's relentlessness on the subject of Iran's danger must be looking better and better to more than a few in Saudi Arabia; without Israel, Iran would by now have several nuclear weapons; with Israel remaining strong (and that means strong enought to defend itself, which means holding on to those parts of Judea and Samaria known as the "West Bank"), there's a chance that the worst threats will be removed, or held in check. This is something intelligent members of the Al-Saud, those not consumed by inculcated hatred of Jews and Israel, must be beginning, dimly at first, to recognize. And certainly in the Emirates, and also in Egypt, among the most advanced there must be --hesitantly, reluctantly -- a similar understanding.

clear
Posted on 10/20/2014 7:12 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Monday, 20 October 2014
clear
clear
Posted on 10/20/2014 7:01 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Monday, 20 October 2014
clear

Federal Prosecutor Alleges Boss Pressured Him To Engage in 'Unethical Conduct'; Judge Calls Abuses 'Egregious,' 'Pervasive,” and “Reprehensible.”  Story here.
 

clear
Posted on 10/20/2014 6:21 AM by Rebecca Bynum
clear

Sunday, 19 October 2014
clear

The latest n choose k possibility for conflict, here. 

clear
Posted on 10/19/2014 9:19 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Sunday, 19 October 2014
clear

How often does he have to say this, before the American government decides to read him the riot act, and articles about kicking Turkey out of NATO appear everywhere, and begin to be taken seriously by the big shots?

Story here.

clear
Posted on 10/19/2014 5:01 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Sunday, 19 October 2014
clear

This won't make the Al-Saud more inclined to cut their oil production in order to support oil prices and keep Iran's current account deficit from ballooning.

The story here.

clear
Posted on 10/19/2014 4:49 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Sunday, 19 October 2014
clear

They've been paying their respects, here.

clear
Posted on 10/19/2014 4:18 PM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Sunday, 19 October 2014
clear

From the Sunday Telegraph

Teachers sacked, suspended or banned for their roles in the Trojan Horse plot have set up a private academy and are continuing to teach children.

It can also be disclosed that Nicky Morgan, the Education Secretary, has written to one of the five school at the heart of the plot, expressing regret at the publication last week of highly critical Ofsted reinspection reports saying the schools had done little to fix their problems. Mrs Morgan questioned the timing of the reinspections, which were done early in the new term, saying they were only a "snapshot" of the position at that time and claiming that "a great deal of progress" had been made in the month or so since. The developments come amid growing impatience with Mrs Morgan’s handling of Trojan Horse scandal,

Last week, the government commissioner who investigated the issue, Peter Clarke, said the revelations so far were merely the “tip of the iceberg” and disputed Mrs Morgan’s claim that the Government had “got to the bottom of the problem”. Mrs Morgan was also criticised last week by MPs on the education select committee for her “complete lack of urgency” amid indications that the plot was flaring up again and key individuals were still active in education

Monzoor “Mozz” Hussain, the former head of Park View, the school at the centre of the scandal, was handed an interim order in August banning him from the profession for his role in the plot. . . 

However, last month Mr Hussain helped to set up the Aim-High Private Tuition and Education Centre in Wolverhampton. It offers “specialised intensive courses” for children at “all levels from Key Stage 1 to A-level” and was advertised on his Facebook page. Companies House records show that Mr Hussain’s wife, Salma, also known as Salma Akhtar, is Aim-High’s sole director.

Another person involved with Aim-High is Mr Hussain’s brother, Maz, another former teacher at Park View who handed pupils a worksheet stating that women “must obey their husbands”. . . He has since been suspended for his role in the Trojan Horse plot. The new centre’s premises are owned by a third Hussain brother, Akhmed, a former deputy head at a school in Bradford where a plot to force out head teachers has also been alleged.

The banning regulations do not apply to private tuition colleges not registered with the Department for Education, but MPs last night said that they should. DfE sources said that the Disclosure and Barring Service, which prevents unsuitable people working with children, could be used to ban Mr Hussain from involvement in any kind of unsupervised teaching, training or instruction of young people. 

clear
Posted on 10/19/2014 11:08 AM by Esmerelda Weatherwax
clear

Sunday, 19 October 2014
clear

Turkey, under the Erdogan re-islamizing regime, is an enemy, an enemy that in Washington everyone pretends is still a friend. It should be threatened with expulsion from NATO if it continues to fail to live up to its NATO obligations. The Islamic State is clearly at war with the West; NATO members, save for Turkey, make up that West; it is the duty of NATO members to come to the aid of other members who have been subject to attack, and the killing of NATO nationals on camera, and the threats to conduct terrorist attacks all over the West, certainly constitute an attack on the West. Turkey has not allowed, pace Susan Rice, the Americans to make use of their own air base at Incirlik, have refused to allow Kurds in Turkey to fight the Islamic State, have refused entry to wounded Kurdish fighters from Kobani. Why is Turkey in NATO? Think of how salutary it would be for the rest of the world to see that the West means business, and that it is perfectly willing to throw Turkey out of NATO. By allowing it to stay in, the responsiblities of NATO membership are mocked, and the West perceived as unwilling to take decisive action to defend itself. Dropping Turkey from membership would get the attention not only of the Turks and weaken the prestige and power of Erdogan within his country (though he will attempt, and perhaps temporarily succeed, at rallying support through inflaming resentment at this treatment to be presented as unfair), but of other countries that are our enemies but that we keep calling allies and frends. And among them, first on the listen-up list ought to be Qatar, which assumes that because the United States has a base there, it needs Qatari support. It doesn't need the base, and it doesn't need Qatar which, even more than Turkey, is our enemy.
 

clear
Posted on 10/19/2014 8:23 AM by Hugh Fitzgerald
clear

Sunday, 19 October 2014