For all of OUR people

Diverse — Drokles on January 21, 2017 at 5:55 am

Det må være herligt for amerikanerne med en præsident, der forstår at skelne mellem hvad der er vigtigt og hvad der er udenlandsk.  Det gjorde Trump i sin indtrædelsestale og lovede at give noget af Washingtons magt tilbage til dets rette ejere, nemlig Folket. Det er chokerende tale for alle eksperter, journalister, politikere og despoter. Charles Krauthammer fortæller hvorledes Trump henvender sig til mere end et publikum

Jyllands-Posten skriver at “talen har fået alarmklokkerne til at bimle højere” i “et i forvejen kriseramt EU” fordi den “modarbejder det hele den ide, som Den Europæiske Union er bygget på“. Jeg vidste at der var en grund til at jeg holdt af den. Og man kan jo kun være enig, når Trump konstaterer; “through our loyalty to our country, we will rediscover our loyalty to each other“.

Det uapologetiske er Trump og hans regerings største kvalitet. ”If everybody plays by the rules of the Cathedral of Political Correctness, then everybody gets paid, nobody ever loses” skriver Charles Hurt i Breitbart og tilføjer “And absolutely nothing ever actually gets done”. Trump mener hvad han siger - ifølge en ekspert i kropssprog - og det er hans mandat

Mr. Trump’s mandate is not a partisan one. He owes very little to the Republican Party and absolutely nothing to the Democratic Party. He handily defeated partisans on both sides of the political aisle.

He also owes nothing to any industry or special interest group except the voters who elected him and the free market system that made him a billionaire. He is owned by no one.

As a result, Mr. Trump stands poised to reinvent the entire federal government in favor of the American people alone. He is a tireless agent of disruption and an unbending force for creative destruction.

The fabulous, entertaining, funny, unpredictable and daring real estate tycoon achieved this historic political realignment using one very simple strategy: attack political correctness and all its vestiges and all its purveyors at every turn.

After all, what is Washington and the Leviathan federal bureaucracy and all of American politics today but a Cathedral of Political Correctness? Here there are protocols for everything. Everyone has titles, dress codes. Everybody knows their pew and if they sit in the wrong one there will be consequences.

Og Hurt giver et par eksempler på “A face-off between a grandstanding politician who just wanted to make a point and a strategic-thinking pragmatist who wants to accomplish something very concrete and vital to America’s existence” fra ministerhøringerne

During Rex Tillerson’s hearing to become secretary of State, Sen. Marco Rubio, Florida Republican, demanded that the globe-trotting dealmaker denounce Russian President Vladimir Putin as a “war criminal.” Mr. Tillerson declined. Instead, he highlighted his desire to work with Russia to eliminate ISIS around the world.

It was a telling moment. .

(…)

Retired Gen. Jim Mattis vowed to be Defense secretary over the most lethal fighting force possible. And all Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, New York Democrat, cared about was how to make the military better accommodate people who are lesbian, bisexual, gay, transgender or questioning.

“Frankly, Senator, I’ve never cared much about two consenting adults and who they go to bed with,” Gen. Mattis replied.

Not since Rhett Butler has the word “frankly” been so skillfully used to silence the pleadings of a desperate and delusional woman.

Her er præsident Donald John Trumps indsættelsestale i sin helhed

We, the citizens of America, are now joined in a great national effort to rebuild our country and restore its promise for all of our people. Together we will determine the course of America and the world for many, many years to come. We will face challenges. We will confront hardships, but we will get the job done. Every four years we gather on these steps to carry out the orderly and peaceful transfer of power and we are grateful to President Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama for their gracious aid throughout this transition. They have been magnificent. Thank you.

Today’s ceremony, however, has very special meaning because, today, we are not merely transferring power from one administration to another or from one party to another, but we are transferring power from Washington, D.C., and giving it back to you, the people.

For too long, a small group in our nation’s capital has reaped the rewards of government while the people have born the cost. Washington flourished, but the people did not share in its wealth. Politicians prospered, but the jobs left and the factories closed. The establishment protected itself, but not the citizens of our country. Their victories have not been your victories. Their triumphs have not been your triumphs and, while they celebrated in our nation’s capital, there was little to celebrate for struggling families all across our land.

That all changes starting right here and right now because this moment is your moment. It belongs to you. It belongs to everyone gathered here today and everyone watching all across America. This is your day. This is your celebration, and this, the United States of America, is your country.

What truly matters is not which party controls our government, but whether our government is controlled by the people. January 20th, 2017, will be remembered as the day the people became the rulers of this nation again. The forgotten men and women of our country will be forgotten no longer.

Everyone is listening to you now. You came by the tens of millions to become part of an historic movement, the likes of which the world has never seen before. At the center of this movement is a crucial conviction that a nation exists to serve its citizens. Americans want great schools for their children, safe neighborhoods for their families, and good jobs for themselves. These are just and reasonable demands of righteous people and a righteous public, but for too many of our citizens, a different reality exists.

Mothers and children trapped in poverty in our inner cities, rusted out factories scattered like tombstones across the landscape of our nation, an education system flush with cash, but which leaves our young and beautiful students deprived of all knowledge and the crime and the gangs and the drugs that have stolen too many lives and robbed our country of so much unrealized potential. This American carnage stops right here and stops right now.

We are one nation and their pain is our pain. Their dreams are our dreams and their success will be our success. We share one heart, one home and one glorious destiny. The oath of office I take today is an oath of allegiance to all Americans. For many decades, we’ve enriched foreign industry at the expense of American industry, subsidized the armies of other countries, while allowing for the very sad depletion of our military.

We’ve defended other nations’ borders, while refusing to defend our own, and spent trillions and trillions of dollars overseas, while America’s infrastructure has fallen into disrepair and decay. We’ve made other countries rich while the wealth, strength and confidence of our country has dissipated over the horizon. One by one, the factories shuttered and left our shores with not even a thought about the millions and millions of American workers that were left behind. The wealth of our middle class has been ripped from their homes and then redistributed all across the world.

But, that is the past and now we are looking only to the future. We assembled here today, are issuing a new decree to be heard in every city, in every foreign capital, and in every hall of power. From this day forward, a new vision will govern our land. From this day forward, it’s going to be only America first. America first. Every decision on trade, on taxes, on immigration, on foreign affairs will be made to benefit American workers and American families.

We must protect our borders from the ravages of other countries making our products, stealing our companies and destroying our jobs. Protection will lead to great prosperity and strength. I will fight for you with every breath in my body and I will never, ever let you down.

America will start winning again. Winning like never before. We will bring back our jobs. We will bring back our borders. We will bring back our wealth. And we will bring back our dreams. We will build new roads and highways and bridges and airports and tunnels and railways all across our wonderful nation. We will get our people off of welfare and back to work rebuilding our country with American hands and American labor. We will follow two simple rules: buy American and hire American. We will seek friendship and goodwill with the nations of the world, but we do so with the understanding that it is the right of all nations to put their own interests first.

We do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example. We will shine for everyone to follow. We will reinforce old alliances and form new ones and unite the civilized world against radical Islamic terrorism, which we will eradicate completely from the face of the earth. At the bedrock of our politics will be a total allegiance to the United States of America and, through our loyalty to our country, we will rediscover our loyalty to each other. When you open your heart to patriotism, there is no room for prejudice.

The bible tells us how good and pleasant it is when god’s people live together in unity. We must speak our minds openly, debate our disagreements honestly, but always pursue solidarity. When America is united, America is totally unstoppable. There should be no fear. We are protected and we will always be protected. We will be protected by the great men and women of our military and law enforcement and most importantly, we will be protected by God.

Finally, we must think big and dream even bigger. In America, we understand that a nation is only living as long as it is striving. We will no longer accept politicians who are all talk and no action constantly complaining, but never doing anything about it. The time for empty talk is over. Now arrives the hour of action. Do not allow anyone to tell you that it cannot be done. No challenge can match the heart and fight and spirit of America. We will not fail. Our country will thrive and prosper again.

We stand at the birth of a new millennium ready to unlock the histories of space, to free the earth from the miseries of disease and to harness the energies, industries, and technologies of tomorrow. A new national pride will lift our sights and heal our divisions. It’s time to remember that old wisdom our soldiers will never forget, that whether we are black or brown or white, we all bleed the same red blood of patriots. We all enjoy the same glorious freedoms, and we all salute the same great American flag.

And whether a child is born in the urban sprawl of Detroit or the windswept plains of Nebraska, they look up at the same night sky. They fill their heart with the same dreams and they are infused with the breath of life by the same almighty creator. So, to all Americans in every city near and far, small and large, from mountain to mountain, from ocean to ocean, hear these words: You will never be ignored again. Your voice, your hopes and your dreams will define our American destiny. And your courage and goodness and love will forever guide us along the way.

Together we will make America strong again. We will make America wealthy again. We will make America proud again. We will make America safe again. And, yes, together, we will make America great again. Thank you. God bless you and god bless America. Thank you. God bless America.”

Og til venstrefløjens, pressens, politikernes og alles de desillusionerede hystaders krænkede følelser: Well, Frankly, my dear

USAs yderste venstrefløj planlægger at sabotere Trumps indsættelsesceremoni II

Diverse — Drokles on January 19, 2017 at 10:59 am

Forleden linkede jeg til første del af Veritas dokumentation af, hvorledes den yderste venstrefløj i USA planlægger at sabotere Trumps indsættelsesceremoni på fredag. Her er anden del

This lady is for turning

Diverse — Drokles on January 18, 2017 at 11:26 am

Vindbøjtler er værd at holde øje når man skal forvisse sig om at vinden vender. Theresa islamisk-stat-har-intet-hjemmel-i-koranen May, var en afdæmpet fortaler for at Storbritanien skulle blive i EU, som hun samtidig kritiserede for mangel på aktuelle reformer - så var det lettere at manøvrere politisk uanset udfaldet. Det blev Brexit, Cameron gik af og den kritiske EU tilhænger May blev premierminister, som et kompromis mellem de forbitrede etablerede tabere i White Hall og de vindende oprørske politiske randeksistenser.

Efter således at have vundet magten brugte Theresa May tiden med at beslutte sig for, hvad den så skulle bruges til.

Med amerikanernes valg af Donald Trump som præsident har Theresa May nu klogt valgt det indlysende som hendes mandat også tilskrev, at gøre Britain great again med et ‘hårdt’ exit fra EU. Ingen mellemløsning, men en ren udmeldelse og en genforhandling om handelsbetingelser, mellem de to parter. Obama havde ellers truet med at England ville ryge bagerst i køen uden EU medlemskab, men Trump vil have en handelsaftale mellem Storbritanien og USA hurtigst muligt og fortalte en journalist: “I love the UK“.

Tilbage sidder Eurozonen forladt, forsmået og forbitret. Realiteterne kan de ikke gøre noget ved, England har meldt sig ud og træder ind i en større og mere lukrativ verden, EU sidder tilbage med sig selv, sin gæld og sine bøssede idealer. Men følelserne har man da lov at have og Trumps ærlige udtalelser om det skrantende EU og Merkels katastrofale indvandringspolitik kunne bruges til at stive sin impotens af

The question in Brussels is whether Mr Trump’s agitation for more “great” Brexit moments will amplify the EU’s divisions and challenges, or galvanise the union against a perceived common threat. “Donald Trump is calling for Europe’s dislocation: that is not acceptable!” said Manuel Valls, France’s former prime minister and a centre-left candidate in its presidential elections. “We Europeans must be united and say who we are.”

Should member states rally round, it could have far-reaching implications, not just in rekindling a willingness to integrate in areas such as defence, but also in reinforcing the EU’s resolve to ensure Brexit is a warning to those who may consider leaving.

“The more they will see the UK looking to the US the more they will want to stick together,” said one senior EU diplomat closely involved in Brexit talks. “The premium on EU unity for the German chancellor is now greater than ever. She is aware of Germany’s special responsibility.”

Der er argumentationen for Fredens Projekt endt. Fra vidtløftige visioner om Europæisk fred ved evig stabil økonomisk vækst gennem stadigt tættere samarbejde og samhandel, til nu, et negativt sammenhold af overstatslig bureaukratisk forfængelighed, som dække over den kroniske økonomiske stagnation.

Og Lady May aner altså, hvad der kan holde sig stående i de nye vinde.

Obama efterlader sig et parti i krise

Diverse — Drokles on January 17, 2017 at 5:34 am

#nevertrump kampagnen, som især det konservative National Review støttede, var baseret på en frygt for at Trump ikke blot ikke var konservativ, men ville være en så dårlig kandidat for republikanerne at det ville skade partiet i årtier fremover og muligvis betyde enden på den konservative tankes tradition i USA. Det sidste var en besynderlig frygt, men det første var ganske reelt og vi får snart syn for sagn.

Hvad man især frygtede var, hvad venstrefløjen, det demokratiske parti og Hillary Clinton, sammen med medier og eksperter tog for givet; at USA qua indvandring af stadigt flere ikke-hvide ikke-protestanter og det moderne opgør med kristendom og vestlige værdier ville være det naturlige flertal. Fremtiden var multikulturel og progressiv. Den tanke har vundet indpas i det Demokratiske parti, der er blevet overtaget af den yderste venstrefløj, mens moderate demokrater forlader partiet.

Demokraterne står med nederlaget til Trump og de mange mistede sæder i begge kamre i en krise. Hillary blev valgt frem for Socialisten Bernie Sanders, fordi partiets ledelse foretrak de store donationer, Hillary kunne samle. Men valget af Hillary var svindel, et sår som partiet kommer til at forholde sig til. Og de progressive, der blev snydt for at deres kandidat kunne få en fair chance, er de samme, der under Obama har kørt partiets troværdighed ned, i endeløs identitetspolitik og gadeterror. Barbera Kay anmelder David Horowitzs ‘The Left In Power: Clinton to Obama’, der absolut er værd at læse i sin helhed på Frontpage Magazine

In a word, the party shifted from classic liberalism to progressivism, a benign locution to deodorize the uncomfortably redolent Marxism that greases the wheels of the party’s mission. Under the aegis of Bill and Hillary Clinton (it was never less than a presidential partnership) and Barack Obama, the administration became stacked with far leftists.

Outgoing President Obama (“outgoing”: it dances trippingly off the tongue) marinated his entire pre-presidential life in Islam apologism and the politics of progressivism. Mentored by communists, he came to power with a negative view of America’s history and distrust of the nation-state as a vehicle for human progress. Conversely he held an exaggerated and largely uncritical respect for America’s enemies, like Cuba and Hamas, but Iran especially.

Both Obama and Hillary Clinton took lifelong inspiration from the writings of political guru Saul Alinksy (1909-72), whom students of left-wing radicalism in the U.S. will remember as the American version of Machiavelli. Horowitz devotes a long essay, “Rules for Revolution” in Part III of this book (the original pamphlet form of this essay has been distributed and sold to more than three million people).

Alinsky wrote the book Rules for Radicals, a how-to manual for revolutionaries, which emphasized strategies of deception rather than open confrontation as the best way to advance a Marxist revolution in the U.S. Don’t sell your agenda as socialism, he urged, sell it as “progressivism” and “social justice.”

Alinsky’s strategy was to work within the system while accruing the power to destroy it. Many of the student radicals who went on to influential political careers were well-versed Alinsky acolytes. In fact, in 1969, a certain Wellesley College student named Hillary Rodham wrote an admiring 92-page senior thesis on Alinsky, likening him in cultural stature to Walt Whitman and Martin Luther King Jr. Barack Obama followed Alinsky’s rules with assiduous attention when he worked for ACORN as a community organizer.

In his column, “Candidate of the Left,” Horowitz reminds us of Obama’s lies that were swallowed uncritically by his starry-eyed followers. Who were they? “[E]very anti-Israel, anti-American, pro-Iranian communist in America is supporting Barack Obama; every pro-Palestinian leftist, every Weatherman terrorist…all Sexties leftists and their disciples…every black racist follower of Louis Farrakhan…every ‘antiwar’ activist who wanted us to leave Saddam in power and then lose the war in Iraq; everyone who believes that America is the bad guy and that our enemies are justly aggrieved; every member of ACORN, the most potent survivor of the Sixties left…along with al-Jazeera and Vladimir Putin and the religious fanatics of Hamas and the PLO.”

Examples of Obama’s lies? One was that he really had no idea who Jeremiah Wright, his pastor of 20 years, was, because the optics of friendship with “a racist, Jew-hating, terrorist-loving acolyte of Minister Farrakhan” didn’t look so good. Another was that unrepentant Weatherman Bill Ayers was not just “a guy in the neighborhood” as Obama claimed. Obama launched his campaign for a senate seat in Ayers’s living room, it was Ayers’s father who was responsible for Obama’s job at the Sidley Austin law firm, and it was Ayers who “hired Obama to spend the $50 million Ayers had raised to finance an army of anti-American radicals drawn from ACORN and other nihilistic groups to recruit Chicago school children to their political causes.”

But the lie that will never lose traction as the others did, because it affected so many Americans, was “If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor.” Obama lied about his healthcare plan, because, as Horowitz has often stated, “[t]he first truth about progressive missionaries is that the issues they fight for are not the issues. What drives all their agendas is the fantasy of a social transformation that will lead to a paradise of social justice.”

Venstrefløjen  har intet samlende projekt og kan ikke tilbyde lighed for Loke som for Thor, da dette er hvidt, postkolonialistisk tankegods, der udøver sin supremascisme gennem udefinerbare mikroaggressioner. Istedet står den på et evigt intellektuelt vræng af alt bestående og kamp mod fjender defineret af gamle vaner

Den hårde identitetspolitik, der lovede at samle minoriteter og progressive til en samlet majoritet, har vist sig fremmedgørende på et stort flertal af vælgerne. Langt fra alle kvinder, negre og indvandre vil være ofre og identificeret som andet end deres person. Og ironisk nok, har den hysteriske optagethed af appropriation - at majoritetskulturen, den hvide heteronormative hegemoni, ikke måtte overtage minoriteters kulturelle udtryk, thi dette ville udslette eller forfladige deres særegenhed - vist sig netop at konsolidere majoritetskulturen, som det eneste fælles udtryk, hvor man kan mødes på tværs af identiteter.

Tissekandidaten fra Manchuriet

Diverse — Drokles on January 12, 2017 at 2:42 pm

Ifølge en rapport samlet af en tidligere engelsk efterretningsofficer, skulle kommende amerikansk præsident Donald Trump være dybt kompromiteret og i lommen på russerne. Trump skulle nemlig i en blanding af grådighed, idioti, perversion og had til familien Obama, have lejet sig ind på et hotelværels i Moskva, hvor Barak og Michelle Obama engang havde overnattet. Her skulle Trump i selskab med et par russiske glædespiger han selv havde finansieret have leve sex-tisse lege på den seng, hvor d’herrer Obamas engang havde wrestlet.

Men, men, men, KG… FSB havde filmet hele seancen og afpressede derefter Donald Trump til at blive præsident for USA og derpå ødelægge alt, der er godt og anstændigt.

Men det er blot det kinky af historien, der fortæller om et otte årigt samarbejde mellem Trump og Kreml, hvor efterretninger og informationer er blevet delt, lyssky handler indgået, undergravning af det Demokratiske Parti og demokratiet som sådan. Og det hele kunne forklare Trumps sære forkærlighed for Rusland, som intet har kunnet forklare Obamas sære forkærlighed for islam.

Det var CNN, der løftede sløret tirsdag aften, med historien om rygterne i den endnu ikke verificerede rapport, som cirkulerede på mindst tredie uge blandt journalister, højtstående embedsfolk og efterretningstjenester. Både siddende præsident Obama og kommende præsident Trump var blevet underrettet af en efterretningstjenesten FBI, så der var grangiveligt noget om snakken.

CNNs timing dagen inden Trumps første pressekonference siden han blev valgt til den næste amerikanske præsident og det kunne let se ud som om tanken var at få Trump til at bruge dette, sit første pressemøde på at forsvare sig mod anklager om at være en perverteret sengevædende landsforrædder af en kupmager og marionet for en fremmed magt, der bestak embedsfolk som ludere.

Men Buzz-feed underløb ufrivilligt CNNs plan ved at frigive hele den famøse rapport, med den besynderlige argumentation, at siden journalisterne ikke kunne finde hoved og hale på hvad der var rigtigt og forkert så kunne det amerikanske folk bedre selv gøre det. Og det viste sig at være rigtigt, for som alle kastede sig over rapporten faldt dens kulørte indhold fra hinanden. Senest er det kommet frem at efterretningsvæsnet IKKE har underrettet nogen, hverken siddende eller kommende præsident om rapporten, hvilket ellers hvad der gav Trumps korrupte tisselege troværdighed.

Og Trump kunne derfor bruge sin pressekonference til at tæske løs på CNN

På en måde er det kedeligt at denne historie ikke ser ud til at være sand, for den kunne forklare Trumps let orange teint.

Kodeord for kodeord

Danmarks Radio kan man læse at Trump måske endelig accepterer at russerne har hacket (DR skriver også at der sidste år blev “registreret over 100.000 hackerangreb mod Sverige fra fremmede magter“) det amerikanske valg, men at han stadig “kritiseres af både demokrater og republikanere for ikke klart at støtte efterretningstjenesternes konklusioner“. Men der er ikke gode grunde til klart at stole på de amerikanske efterretningstjenester, som Andrew McCarthy skriver på National Review,

Here, we are talking about a community whose own analysts have complained that their superiors distort their reports for political purposes. In just the past few years, they have told us that they had “high confidence” that Iran suspended its nuclear weapons programs in 2003; that the NSA was not collecting metadata on millions of Americans; and that the Muslim Brotherhood is a moderate, “largely secular” organization. We have learned that the Obama administration intentionally perpetrated a disinformation campaign — complete with a compliant media “echo chamber” — to sell the public on the Iran nuclear deal (and the fiction that Iran’s regime was moderating). We have seen U.S. intelligence and law enforcement complicit in the Obama administration’s schemes to convince the public that “violent extremism,” not radical Islam, is the explanation for terrorist attacks; that a jihadist mass-murder attack targeting soldiers about to deploy to Afghanistan was “workplace violence”; that al-Qaeda had been “decimated”; that the threat of the ISIS “jayvee” team was exaggerated; and that the Benghazi massacre was not really a terrorist attack but a “protest” gone awry over an anti-Muslim video.

Overfor dette står Julian Assanges ord om at Wikileaks ikke fik nogle emails fra russerne, men fra utilfredse medarbejde blandt Demokraterne. Hvis Assange taler sandt har russerne ingen indflydelse haft på det amerikanske valg af præsident, da alle historier i medierne ikke tog udgangspunkt i hvad russerne angiveligt havde fundet ud af, men hvad Wikileaks afslørede. Og Det var altså ikke løgne eller fake news, men afsløringer.

Og, som McCarthy videre skriver, så nævnes formanden for Demokraterne, John Podesta ikke med et ord i hverken rapporten fra CIA, FBI eller NSA. Det var ellers hans emails der blev ‘phished’, dvs at han blev lokket til selv at afsløre at hans password var “password” til uvedkommende. Og det var i Podestas emails, at man kunne læse, hvorledes Demokraternes ledelse snød Bernie Sanders til fordel for Hillary Clinton i primærvalget og hvorledes Clintons stab arbejdede tæt sammen med store dele af medierne.

Som Charles Krauthammer mindede om i National Review, så er russernes påståede indblanding sket på Obamas vagt, mens han belærte alle om, hvor sikkert det amerikanske system var og at 80erne gerne ville beholde deres udenrigspolitik. Så hvorledes kunne det ske? Ronald Deibart, der mener at Obamas forsøg på at skabe en diplomatisk krise mellem USA og Rusland “may be an admirable motive“, forklarer på Just Security, hvad der er galt med FBIs analyse

The DHS/FBI Joint Analysis Report on Russian information operations, which the administration refers to as “Grizzly Steppe,” is a disappointing and counterproductive document. The problems with the report are numerous and have been well documented by professionals in the computer security area. But the culture of secrecy and the lack of independent sources of verification that gave rise to it are far more pervasive.

Among the problems in the report: Instead of clearly mapping out the evidence linking the cyber espionage operations to Russia, the report provides generic charts on tradecraft and phishing techniques that apply to just about every cyber espionage campaign I and others have ever studied.

At the centre of the report (page 4) is a table that unhelpfully lumps together, without explanation, several different names attributed to Russian-associated cyber espionage campaigns alongside names of malicious software and exploits that have little or no direct link to Russia.

An appendix includes a spreadsheet meant to provide “Indicators of Compromise,” long lists of technical details supposedly associated with the espionage campaign. These include IP addresses, malware signatures, and command and control infrastructure, which network defenders are supposed to use to ward off Russian-backed espionage, and which would ostensibly be used to “fingerprint” Russia as the culprit. Unfortunately, many of these are out of date or irrelevant, or are used by multiple cyber espionage campaigns and not ones exclusively associated with Russia. To give just one example, journalist Micah Lee analyzed the IP addresses contained in the appendix, and found over 40 percent of them are exit nodes of the anonymizer Tor (meaning anyone in the world using Tor could be associated with these IP addresses). It is a disservice to both the general public and expert researchers to not clarify the degrees of confidence associated with each indicator. Without proper categorization or context, the indicators satisfy neither aim of helping network defenders or proving attribution.

Herunder forklarer John McAfee (!) til russisk TV (!) at “hacket” ligner amatørarbejde

Man husker nok valgkampen, hvor det vakte stor forargelse at Trump ikke ville forhåndsgodkende valgresultatet, skulle det gå imod ham. Antidemokratisk, blev det kaldt og en trussel imod demokratiet. Nu fyger der beskyldninger om at Trumps valg ikke blot ikke er legitimt, men at han er en russisk marionet, indsat ved noget der ligner et statskup. Helvede kender ingen vrede som en vraget venstrefløj.

“An insult to the intelligence of the world”

Diverse — Drokles on January 6, 2017 at 5:43 am

Det kaldte Charles Krauthammer Obamas medvirken til at FNs Sikkerhedsråd vedtog at Judæa og Samaria inklusiv Jerusalems gamle jødiske kvarter med jødernes største helligdom faktisk tilhører araberne. “It’s as if the UN passed a resolution declaring Mecca and Medina to be sovereign Jewish or Christian territory,” fortsatte han og i National Review perspektiverede han, at alle jøder, der bor eller arbejder i Øst-Jerusalem nu er internationale pariaer og han mindede om at Abbas allerede har truet enhver israelsk soldat med blive stævnet til den internationale krigsforbryderdomstol i Haag. Og så spørger Krauthammer:

What becomes of “land for peace” if the territories Israel was to have traded for peace are, in advance, declared to be Palestinian land to which Israel has no claim?

Medlem af PLOs styregruppe Mustafa Barghouti sagde ærligt “Recognition of Israel as a Jewish state would deny the right of the Palestinian people who are citizens of Israel and that is totally unacceptable. Israel cannot be a Jewish and a democratic state at the same time” ifølge Jerusalem Post. Jerusalem Post citerer også Abbas for bramfrit at love et jødefrit Palæstina: “In a final resolution, we would not see the presence of a single Israeli - civilian or soldier - on our lands“.

Med det in mente kunne man læse at den amerikanske udenrigsminister John Kerry (der selv tjener på besat land) mente ligesom at Israel kunne være både jødisk og demokratisk - man måtte opgive en af delene.

Andrew C McCarty undrede sig da også over, at USA selv har været med til at formulere både Afghnaistans og Iraks forfatninger. I den afghanske slås det fast at “Afghanistan shall be an Islamic Republic, independent, unitary and indivisible state” og “No law shall contravene the tenets and provisions of the holy religion of Islam in Afghanistan“. Og i Iraks forfatning er “Islam is the official religion of the State and it is a fundamental source of legislation” 0g “No law that contradicts the established provisions of Islam may be established”. Begge disse forfatninger indeholder ligeledes paragraffer, der udtrykkeligt stipulerer at ingen antidemokratisk lov må vedtages.

Så islam går hånd i hånd med demokrati, mens jødedommen er dens modsætning. På den præmis virker det jo selvfølgelig logisk, at man ingen skrupler støtter palæstinensernes ambitioner om etnisk udrensning, mens Israel skal opgive land og enten demokrati eller identitet.

munir

Herover ansvarlig for Fatahs medier Munir Aljagub, med en tegning der viser hvorledes fred mellem Fatah og Hamas er et våben til at likvidere Israel (Elder Of Ziyon).

På selveste CNN kaldte Mark Goldfeder Obamas inddirekte støtte til FNs ‘landgrab in Israel‘ for “a cowardly move of a lame-duck politician” og hyklerisk da Obama selv overfor FN havde sagt at “Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the United Nations”. Og så minder Goldfeder om at Sikkerhedsrådets resolutioner ikke er det samme som international lov og fortæller historien om Israels juridiske tilblivelse

In 1922 the League of Nations Mandate for Palestine established an area (which included the West Bank) to be a national home for the Jewish people. Article 6 of the mandate explicitly encouraged “close settlement by Jews on the land.” (”The Administration of Palestine, while ensuring that the rights and position of other sections of the population are not prejudiced, shall facilitate Jewish immigration under suitable conditions and shall encourage, in co-operation with the Jewish agency referred to in Article 4, close settlement by Jews on the land, including State lands and waste lands not required for public purposes.”)

When the United Nations was formed it affirmed existing arrangements of this nature, and after Britain announced that it would leave the area, the United Nations proposed a partition plan that was not accepted by the relevant sovereign parties, (because the Arab world rejected it) leaving the Mandate lines unrevised.

Scholars such as Eugene Kontorovich and Abraham Bell have noted that under the international legal principle of Uti possidetis juris, “widely acknowledged as the doctrine of customary international law that is central to determining territorial sovereignty in the era of decolonization,” emerging states presumptively inherit their pre-independence administrative boundaries, and thus international law clearly dictates that Israel inherit the boundaries of the Mandate of Palestine as they existed in May, 1948. Israel thus has title to the land.

When Israel declared independence in 1948 it was immediately attacked by five Arab nations. The United Nations blamed the Arabs for the violence and aggression meant to undermine the Resolution and forcefully take land, and the Spokesman for the Arab Higher Committee readily agreed.

If there was ever an occupation of Palestinian territory under international law, it happened between 1948 and 1967, when two of the invading Arab armies, Jordan (West Bank) and Egypt (Gaza Strip) occupied territory that they had taken through aggressive action — the kind of aggressive action that the new Resolution explicitly reminds us is forbidden under international law.

This was, of course, territory that was part of the Mandate for Palestine and therefore rightfully under Israeli title: from 1949 to 1967, Jordan and Egypt literally occupied Palestine. The Green Line was drawn for no other reason than to mark off on a map how far the two invading armies had managed to get. The armistice agreements themselves state that these were not ever meant to be actual borders. Thus to give meaning under international law to these ‘pre-67 lines’ is, ironically, to retroactively ratify aggression against the mandate and support occupation.

Dette land fik israelerne tilbage da de ved “defensive re-conquest” vandt over araberne i 6-Dages Krigen. En mere udførlig gennemgang af Artikel 80 leverer Daniel Horowitz, der kalder ideen om et besat Palæstina for fake news og råder den kommende præsident Donald Trump til at stoppe med forfølge ambitionen om endnu en arabisk-palæstinensisk stat.

“Stay strong Israel. January 20th is fast approaching”!

Nytår med de nye

Diverse — Drokles on January 3, 2017 at 3:37 am

I Danmark holdt man nytårstraditionen i hævd og fremhævede, her fra BT, at gerningsmændene var muslimer

muslimer-rydder-op-efter-nytarsaften

I Sverige er der flere muslimer

I Berlin er der endnu flere muslimer

Og i Tyrkiet er der rigtig mange muslimer

Pas på muslimerne!

Danmarks Radio, Demografi, Forbrydelse og straf, Multikultur, Muslimer, Politik, Pressen, Terror, islam — Drokles on December 30, 2016 at 9:02 am

“Mosque attacker dead” kan man læse på SUN. 35 årig Kevin Crehan var en del af en racistisk gruppe, der havde angrebet en Tamia moskeen i Bristol, England med en baconsandwich: “The gang left rashers of bacon on the door handles of the mosque, and put bacon sandwiches on the doorstep”. 12 måneders fængsel koster en sådan forbrydelse, men Crehan nåeed kun at afsone de 6. Endnu er omstændighederne for hans død ukendte.

Det er den slags had vi virkeligt vi skal værne os imod. Radikale Venstres formand på Vesterbro Jacob Sabir advarer i Point Of View International

Efter angrebet på moskeen i Zürich, der “blot” var en gal mands værk, er det værd at overveje, om det samme kan ske i Danmark og i Tyskland. Vreden er stor og det er langt fra umuligt, at der tænkes i voldelige baner i højreorienterede ekstremistiske terrorgrupper. Det kan heller ikke afvises, at der vil blive gennemført hævntogter mod muslimske miljøer efter Berlin-angrebet.

Men der er normalt ingen vagter eller politibevogtning hverken udenfor eller indenfor i de danske moskeer. Og i øvrigt: hvad kan en ubevæbnet vagt i det hele taget stille op mod en bevæbnet terrorist?

Der er uforståeligt for mig, at der intet er gjort for at beskytte de muslimske moskeer og forhindre et terrorangreb. Terroren i Berlin kan være den hændelse, der kan sætte  voldelige og dødelige tanker i gang hos ekstremister.

(…)

Mange glemmer sandsynligvis i vrede over den terror, der begås af islamistiske ekstremister, at der også er grupperinger blandt muslimer og lande der gerne vil angribe hinandens bedesteder.

Sabir spørger, som et ekko af Omar; “hvad kan en ubevæbnet vagt i det hele taget stille op mod en bevæbnet terrorist?”. I sandhed, islam er en udsat religion og muslimerne er en udsat minoritet. Ikke nok med at de kan blive ofre for gale mænd og uønskede ingredienser, så kan de så resultaterne af deres trosfællers massakrer OVENI muslimernes iboende indre vold. Det er op til os kuffar, at træde i karakter - og der er heldigvis noget DU kan gøre!

Og Danmarks Radio giver dobbelt sul, og lader muslimerne redde din jul

Mentalitet

Medier, fagfolk og politikere har gjort det til en vane af affærdige ensomme ulve, der næsten altid synes at være godt assisteret, som værende psykisk ustabile socialt udsatte eksistenser. Belgisk politi har netop arresteret en 14 årig af slagsen og det er oveni de 29 andre ensomme jule-ulve.

Psykisk ustabile mennesker er fanget i deres egne unikke indre universer. Grupper opstår om noget medlemmerne deler. Selv hvis man som læser af Politiken skulle finde trøst i forklaringen om terroristens forvrængede virkelighed, kan man vanskeligt komme udenom at stille spørgsmålet; hvorfor er så mange muslimer, med de traditionelt grænsende over til det rent morderiske tætte sociale bånd, så udstødte psykofanter. For empirien løber ingen om hjørner med i sidste ende - man kan ikke skrive islam ud af ligningen for islamisk terrorisme.

For nyligt offentliggjorde Islamisk Stat en særligt grusom video i HD. To unge mænd, angiveligt tyrkiske soldater, bliver lukket ud af deres jern-bur i et goldt stenlandskab i Levanten, tvunget ned på alle fire og må kravle, ført som hunde, hen til eksekutions-stedet. Her blev de rejst op og via et langt bånd antændt og brændt ihjel i et roligt tempo, der tillader minutters dødskamp.

Deres dødsskrig akkompagnerer den hoverende islamiske messen, der danner det gennemgående lydspor, som det altid gør. Aldrig en pause for at tænke synes der at være i islamiske videoer. Det var en tilfredsstillende forestilling for jihad-krigerne, der som selve videoen svælgede i de grusomheder, man udsatte en i forvejen besejret og ydmyget fjende for.

Når eksperter og medier beflitter sig med Islamisk Stats propaganda videoer hæfter de sig ved at de er i HD kvalitet med en billedside, der mestrer både den lækre belysning, flere kamerastillinger og bevægelser, der fanger en koreograferet opsætning. Dette sættes i modsætning til Osama Bin Ladens grynede VHS bånd af ham selv, der holder monotone monologer i en hule i Bore Bora eller fra hans sidste bosted med den store pornosamling. Men, som jeg har skrevet før, så undgår eksperterne altid videoernes smertelige indhold, måske fordi konklusionen ikke er til at bære.

Propaganda skal lokke nye krigere til og islamisk stat lokker med grusomheder mod en slagen og ydmyget fjende. Kom og vær med, hug hoveder af, se dem vride sig i smerte, som flammerne fortærer dem, hør deres skrig, vær med til at nære angsten. Og deres målgruppe, muslimerne, lader sig lokke af de smukke billeder med det hellige indhold - skønt alt vi synes vores velfærdsregimer har gjort for at få dem inkluderet.

Julen er tid for religiøs krig, skriver Michael Finch i American Thinker og Syv migranter forsøgte at sætte ild på en hjemløs mand i Berlins undergrundsbane.  ‘Nogen andre’ forsøgte at brænde Emanuelskirken i Hamborg ned til grunden og i Sverige lykkedes det med et indkøbscenter. Og så er der nogen der bare synes det er sjovt at sparke en ældre hjemløs mand i asfalten.

Trumps ‘big stick’!

“Occasional perceived craziness is a plus in both poker and high-stakes geostrategic diplomacy” siger Victor Davis Hanson i en afklædning af Obama-doktrinen på National Review.

hold-on-israel

Det meste af pressen er bekymrede over Donald Trumps manglende politiske erfaring og hans påståede ukendskab til Verden udenfor amerikanske realityshows tegner en udenrigspolitik der vil krabbe ubehjælpsomt mod krig og kaos. I den virkelige store Verden er der ikke plads til store armbevægelser og spontane Twitterkommentarer. Hans forgænger, Verdensmanden med de mange oprindelser, som han ikke helt ville vide af alligevel, forstod den fine balance på den internationale scene. Trump er elefanten i glasbutikken og allerede i overgangen mellem de to regeringer skaber Trumps ‘kontraordrer’ da også problemer, skiver bl.a Wall Street Journal.

De tog også anstød af at Trump passer sin twitter-konto og sin takke-turne og kun sparsomt deltager i de sikkerhedspolitiske møder. “I don’t have to be told the same thing in the same words every single day for the next eight years” forklarede han Fox News sin ‘efter-behov’ tilgang.

Trump er ikke en mad-man, men han har en rem af huden - og der lyttes til Trump.  Af alt, hvad der kommer ud af munden på ham så ved man det er alvor når han trækker en rød streg. Alan Dershowitz skriver i Algemeiner at Trump havde ret i at blande sig i Obamas svigt af Israel, da FNs sikkerhedsråd besluttede at gøre bl.a Østjerusalem til palæstinensisk territorium

The effect, therefore of the Obama decision to push for, and abstain from, a vote on this resolution is to deliberately tie the hands of the president’s successors, in particular President-elect Trump. That is why Trump did the right thing in reaction to Obama’s provocation. Had the lame-duck president not tried to tie the incoming president’s hands, Trump would not have intervened at this time. But if Trump had not urged the Egyptians to withdraw the resolution, he would have made it far more difficult for himself to try to bring about a negotiated resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The reason for this is that a Security Council resolution declaring the 1967 border to be sacrosanct, and any building behind those boarders to be illegal, would make it impossible for Palestinian leaders to accept less in a negotiation. Moreover, the passage of such a resolution would disincentivize the Palestinians from accepting Israel Prime Minister Netanyahu’s invitation to sit down and negotiate with no preconditions. Any such negotiations would require painful sacrifices on both sides if a resolution were to be reached. And a Security Council resolution siding with the Palestinians would give the Palestinians the false hope that they could get a state through the United Nations without having to make painful sacrifices.

Det har han gjort siden valget til kommende præsident og med god effekt. Eric Fernstrohm, der har været rådgiver for Mitt Romney, skriver om Trumps ‘can-do’ tilgang i Boston Globe

Trump has turned out to be the most energetic president-elect America has seen in a long time, intervening to save jobs and contain federal spending. Like Teddy Roosevelt, Trump is using the megaphone of his bully pulpit to get results.

He rescued 1,000 jobs by dangling tax incentives and the threat of retaliatory tariffs to convince air conditioning company Carrier not to move production from Indiana to Mexico. Democrats quibble over the number of jobs saved, but there’s no escaping the symbolism: Trump is on the side of workers, not big corporations.

Now there’s talk of a Trump effect, as more companies fearful of Trump’s “big stick” think twice about outsourcing American jobs.

Bill Ford, the chairman at Ford Motor Co., called Trump after the election to say the automaker changed its mind about moving some vehicle production offshore. Trump also said he lobbied Apple CEO Tim Cook about bringing manufacturing back to the United States.

“One of the things that will be a real achievement for me is when I get Apple to build a big plant in the United States, or many big plants in the United States, where instead of going to China, and going to Vietnam, and going to the places that you go to, you’re making your product right here,” Trump said he told Cook, according to a post-election interview with The New York Times.

Trump’s preinaugural swagger goes beyond the jobs front.

After Trump complained about the price tag for building the next Air Force One, the CEO of Boeing promised to limit costs. Trump put health care companies on notice that he wants drug prices, a major factor in exploding Medicare costs, to come down. His targeting of “out of control” overruns in the construction of F-35 fighter jets suggests defense contractors will feel the lash.

Trump may not get everything he wants, but if the transition is any indication, he seems to understand what his opponents do not. His success will hinge on jobs and bringing change to Washington, not how often he meets with intelligence briefers.

Og han ser ud til at få europæerne til at tage mere ansvar for eget forsvar. Den store kæp er mere end blot en sjofel reference til et af primærvalgenes lavpandede disputter, det er sikkerhedspolitik på det mest basale plan.

Derfor var hans nonchalante omtale af atomvåben under valgkampen også god sikkerhedspolitik og som skabt til en tid, hvor Verden ikke længere hviler nogenlunde trygt i at USA er den store hegemon. Ja, han var villig til at bruge atomvåben, hvis det lignede en god løsning - hvad ellers havde man dem for? Chokeret prøvede journalisten at finde en undtagelse i Trumps vanvid og spurgte om han også ville bruge atomvåben mod problemer i Europa

“Europe is a big place!” konstaterede Trump uden omsorg for pæne menneskers blodtryk og ængstelser - han talte heller ikke til dem.
Oliver og Obama, med sin fejlslagne (jeg lader tvivlen komme ham til gode) politik, kan gøre sig lystige alt det de vil. De er ikke relevante, de tabte valget og Trump bruger ikke deres medier til at tale med sine tilhængere. Trump talte til alle despoter og røvhuller ude den store verden, der har lært at grine ad Obamas svaghed og USA fald fra tronen. trump fortalte at når han kommer til, så har han allerede mandat i det amerikanske folk til at slå på gummen hvor han finder det for godt.
Det vidner om stor politisk indsigt at føre stormagtspolitik allerede inden man er valgt. Hillary gjorde det modsatte. Hun pustede sig op overfor vælgerne, mens hun legede med tanken om at gå i krig med Rusland.

Den lange march gennem FNs institutioner

Tidligere kortavarig  Knessetmedlem for Arbejderpartiet Einat Wilf forsøgte med lidt optimisme ovenpå FNs resolution 2334, der delegitimerer alt israelsk udenfor 1967 ‘grænsen’, inklusiv Øst-Jerusalem med Grædemuren og det gamle jødiske kvarter. Wilf påpegede at resolutionen ved sin skelnen mellem bosættelser og selve Israel “essentially clarifying the absolute legality of the territory of Israel within the 1949 ceasefire lines, including west Jerusalem”. Optimismen slutter vi af med, men først til Caroline Glieck der i Jerusalem Post skriver om de palæstinensiske araberes diplomatiske svikmølle

In 1989, following her tenure as President Ronald Reagan’s ambassador to the United Nations, Jeane Kirkpatrick described how the Palestinians have used the UN to destroy Israel.

Following outgoing US President Barack Obama’s assault on Israel at the UN Security Council last Friday, longtime UN observer Claudia Rossett wrote an important article at PJMedia where she recalled Kirkpatrick’s words.

In “How the PLO was legitimized,” published in Commentary, Kirkpatrick said that Yasser Arafat and the PLO worked “to come to power through international diplomacy – reinforced by murder.”

Kirkpatrick explained, “The long march through the UN has produced many benefits for the PLO. It has created a people where there was none; a claim where there was none. Now the PLO is seeking to create a state where there already is one. That will take more than resolutions and more than an ‘international peace conference.’ But having succeeded so well over the years in its campaign to delegitimize Israel, the PLO might yet also succeed in bringing the campaign to a triumphant conclusion, with consequences for the Jewish state that would be nothing short of catastrophic.”

As Rossett noted, in falsely arguing that Obama’s support for Friday’s UN Security Council Resolution 2334 is in line with Reagan’s policies, Obama’s UN Ambassador Samantha Power deliberately distorted the historical record of US policy toward Israel and the PLO-led UN onslaught against the Jewish state.

Anne Bayefsky, der tidligere så glimrende har beskrevet FNs konstante krig mod Israel, skriver på Fox News

The Palestinians have completed the hijacking of every major UN institution. The 2016 General Assembly has adopted nineteen resolutions condemning Israel and nine critical of all other UN states combined. The 2016 Commission on the Status of Women adopted one resolution condemning Israel and zero on any other state. The 2016 UN Human Rights Council celebrated ten years of adopting more resolutions and decisions condemning Israel than any other place on earth. And now – to the applause of the assembled – the Palestinians can add the UN Security Council to their list.

Resolution sponsors Malaysia and New Zealand explained UN-think to the Council this way: Israeli settlements are “the single biggest threat to peace” and the “primary threat to the viability of the two-state solution.” Not seven decades of unremitting Arab terror and violent rejection of Jewish self-determination in the historic homeland of the Jewish people.

Abbas ser frem til at kunne stille israelske sikkerhedsstyrker for den International Krigsforbryderdomstol i Haag. Elder Of Ziyon mindede med et par gamle avisudklip om arabernes jødefri ønske for ‘Palæstina’. Men videre og måske mere foruroligende skriver Bayefsky

At its core, this UN move is a head-on assault on American democracy. President Obama knew full well he did not have Congressional support for the Iran deal, so he went straight to the Security Council first. Likewise, he knew that there would have been overwhelming Congressional opposition to this resolution, so he carefully planned his stealth attack.

He waited until Congress was not in session. Members of his administration made periodic suggestions that nothing had been decided. There were occasional head fakes that he was “leaning” against it. He produced smiling photo-ops from a Hawaiian golf course with no obvious major foreign policy moves minutes away. Holiday time-outs were in full-swing across the country. And then he pounced, giving Israel virtually no notice of his intent not to veto.

Profound betrayal of a true democratic friend of the United States is the only possible description.

FN taler ikke om Yemen og den slags får Charles Krauthammer at foreslå at USA burde stoppe med at være vært for FN og omdanne FN-bygningen til ejerlejligheder. Og netop Trump er optimismen

Jøderne stjæler Julen - ifølge Danmarks Radio

Diverse — Drokles on December 25, 2016 at 9:23 am

jc3b8derne-stjc3a6ler-julen

NGO Monitor ser nærmere på det besynderlige fænomen man ser i medierne med gode kristne, der undertrykkes af Israels besættelsesmagt, som var de gemene arabere

As in previous years (see NGO Monitor reports for 201520142013, 2012), non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and well-known charities have been exploiting the Christmas season to demonize Israel and work against peace.

Groups such as the World Council of ChurchesSabeel, Kairos Palestine, PAX ChristiWi’amChrist at the Checkpoint, and Amos Trust are again using religious and holiday themes to demonize Israel. These groups draw comparisons between the historic times of Jesus and current times, in attempts to equate the actions of the Israeli government and evil regimes of the past.

These holiday messages and “Christmas alerts” generally omit any reference to Palestinian violence against Israeli citizens, placing sole blame on Israel for the ongoing conflict. These groups condemn the security barrier near Bethlehem, while omitting the wave of Palestinian terror originating from this area.

The abuse of Christmas messages is part of a broad international campaign of political warfare targeting Israel in some churches and related charities. Many of these groups promote theological “supersessionism,” which claims that “the church has permanently replaced Israel in God’s plan.”

With this abuse of holiday and religious symbols, these NGOs and charities that claim to promote moral agendas are not offering messages of peace and good cheer. Rather, their messages of intolerance exacerbate an already polarized and violent conflict.

Jeg ved ikke om følgende DR indslag viser World Council of ChurchesSabeel, Kairos Palestine, PAX ChristiWi’amChrist at the CheckpointAmos Trust eller noget andet, men det lugter ikke som nogle fisk Jesus ville bespise nogen med

Dine licenspenge “omit any reference to Palestinian violence against Israeli citizens, placing sole blame on Israel for the ongoing conflict (…) omitting the wave of Palestinian terror originating from this area”.

Glædelig Hannukah til jøderne - I får brug for det

Jeg troede Julens absurditet var Prins Charles, der vil have at englænderne vil bruge Julen ikke til at tænke på “Lord our savior” men at tænke på Muhammed, fordi pædofeten var nødt til at emigrere til Medina for at finde sin frihed. Den frihed benyttede han, som bekendt for alle andre end Charles, til at etablere en intolerant stat, slagte de jøder han ikke solgte fra som slaver og alle sine kritikere, førend han vendte tilbage og erobrede Mekka. Ja, det er værd at tænke når man slipper hans følgere løs i Europa.

Men desværre er Charles afsindighed overgået af rigtig politik ved Obama, der har tilladt at FN definerer Tempelbjerget inklusiv Grædemuren som tilhørende araberne. Ben Shapiro skriver

Just in time for Chanukah, President Barack Obama has unleashed all the anti-Jewish fury of his administration on the state of Israel. According to a senior Israeli official, both Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry have been pushing a United Nations resolution behind the scenes that would essentially declare East Jerusalem, which includes the holiest site in Judaism, the Temple Mount, non-Jewish territory off limits to Israel, as well as labeling any Jew living outside the pre-1967 armistice lines illegitimate.

The draft resolution is an utter rejection of Judaism’s claims to Jerusalem – a historical absurdity, since the only reason anyone cares about the spot is because of Judaism’s claims to it, which predated any Muslim claims by well over a millennium. It rejects Israel’s ability to defend itself by maintaining territory outside the “Auschwitz borders” of pre-1967 Israel. It ignores international law – the resolution says that Israel is occupying “Palestinian territory,” which makes no historical sense given the fact that there was never any sovereign Palestine, that the Palestine Liberation Organization was founded prior to 1967 and called for the full destruction of the state of Israel (as indeed, the Palestinian governing organizations continue to do), and that Israel’s enemies never agreed to any international agreement granting them sovereignty over the territory. Essentially, the UN calls for all areas outside the pre-1967 lines, which would include East Jerusalem, to become Judenrein.

This isn’t a major shock from the Obama administration, which has a long, inglorious history of Jew-hating activity when it comes to Israel. This is the same administration that signed an Iran deal that puts Israel’s very existence in jeopardy, that forced Israel to apologize for attempting to blockade arms shipments to the terrorist group Hamas, that tried to stymie Israel’s ability to defend herself during a rocket war with Hamas, that pressures Israel consistently to make concessions to would-be Jew-murderers, that goes silent when American Jews are killed in Israel, that funds a terrorist unity government.

Mark Levin tweetedeIt appears anti-Semite Obama is working with the extremist Palestinians, and using the Israel-hating UN, to undermine our ally Israel“. Og i The Weely Standard skriver Elliot Abrams at Obama har tilladt FN at vedtage “a nasty and harmful anti-Israel resolution

Just weeks before leaving office, he could not resist the opportunity to take one more swipe at Israel—and to do real harm. So he will leave with his record on Israel in ruins, and he will leave Democrats even worse off.

It’s pretty clear that he does not care. Obama has gotten himself elected twice, the second time by a decreased margin (the only time a president has been reelected by fewer votes than in his first term), but he has laid waste to his party. In the House, the Senate, the state governorships, and the state legislatures, the Democrats have suffered loss after loss. Today’s anti-Israel action will further damage the Democratic party, by driving some Jews if not toward the Republicans then at least away from the Democrats and toward neutrality. Donald Trump’s clear statement on Thursday that he favored a veto, Netanyahu’s fervent pleas for one, and the Egyptian action in postponing the vote show where Obama stood: not with Israel, not even with Egypt, but with the Palestinians. Pleas for a veto from Democrats in Congress were ignored by the White House.

Does the resolution matter? It does. The text declares that “the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law.” This may turn both settlers—even those in major blocs like Maale Adumim, that everyone knows Israel will keep in any peace deal—and Israeli officials into criminals in some countries, subject to prosecution there or in the International Criminal Court. The text demands “that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem.” Now add this wording to the previous line and it means that even construction in the Jewish Quarter of the Old City is “a flagrant violation under international law.” The resolution also “calls upon all States, to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967.” This is a call to boycott products of the Golan, the West Bank, and parts of Jerusalem, and support for the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement.

Yet Barack Obama thought this was all fine and refused to veto.

National Review forsøger at forstå omfanget af resolutionen og spørger “If an Israeli lives in a suburb of Jerusalem, is he or she now a criminal? Can he be arrested and tried in activist courts in Europe or in international legal tribunals?“. Abrams spørger “The remaining question is whether Jewish leaders and Democratic politicians who vouched for Obama and defended him for eight years will now tell the truth”. Jonah Goldberg skriver i samme ånd at “Obama has just thrown [liberal Jews and other supporters of Israel] under the bus” med sit forræderi og blandt Obamas egne partikammerater er der også vrede, skriver The Tower. I det venstreorienterede jødiske Tablet Magazine skriver Lee Smith at “The lame-duck president is dismantling the alliance system that has kept America and much of the rest of the world secure

In a sense, the UN vote is a perfect bookend to Obama’s Presidency. A man who came to office promising to put “daylight” between the United States and Israel, has done exactly that by breaking with decades of American policy. It is also seeking—contrary to established tradition and practice, which strictly prohibit such lame-duck actions—to tie the hands of the next White House, which has already made its pro-Israel posture clear.

No doubt that many of those critical of the U.S.-Israel relationship will defend and applaud the administration’s action, even as the effects of the resolution are obscene. So what if it enshrines in international law the fact that Jews can’t build homes or have sovereign access to their holy sites in Jerusalem, the capital of the Jewish people for more than 3000 years? Israel, as Kerry said, is too prosperous to care about peace with the Palestinians. Maybe some hardship will shake some sense into the Jewish State—which after all, could easily have made a just and secure peace with the Palestinian leadership at any time over the past two decades, if that’s what it wanted to do. Accounts to the contrary, from Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, say, or left-wing Israeli politicians like former Prime Minister Ehud Barak and the late Shimon Peres, are simply propaganda generated by the pro-Israel Lobby, whose wings the President has thankfully clipped.

But the Obama Administration’s abstention isn’t just about Israel or bilateral relations with a vital partner in a key region. It’s also about the prestige of the United States and its power—the power, for instance, undergirding international institutions like the United Nations. Consider how the Obama Administration has used the UN the last several years—to legalize the nuclear program of Iran, a state sponsor of terror, and make it illegal for Jews to build in their historical homeland. In Turtle Bay, the White House partners with sclerotic socialist kleptocracies like Venezuela in order to punish allies, like Israel. Is this American moral leadership? For Sean Penn, maybe.

Det er Jul og der er håb. Om mindre end en måned træder en mand ind som ny amerikansk præsident

trump-forsvarer-israel

Within a couple of hours, Egypt withdrew the resolution, at least temporarily, and its president, Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, called Mr. Trump to discuss how “to establish true peace in the Middle East,” according to an aide to the president-elect.

Skrev New York Times og selv Charles Krauthammer var imponeret. Resolution blev kørt igennem alligevel da alle, med Tom Lehrers ord, hader jøderne.

Gør det bedre

Jeg vil anbefale at man udstår at se nedenstående video (bare rolig, der er en sund modgift til slut på denne post). Den er på sin egen måde morsom.

Selv om du har sorte venner, kan du sagtens være racist og i Politiken forklarer en farmor til en 22 årigt barnebarn, hvorledes hun er blevet et bedre hvidt menneske da hun indså at hun var “så dum som de (…) dumme, uvidende, ubehøvlede mennesker, som man ikke behøver at tage sig af” og den smerte de forvolder. Farmoderens barnebarn, der “over sine hvide gener () også [har] nogle afrikanske” og “er derfor brun i huden og har dreadlocks” var nemlig kommet hjem fra USA, hvor sorte liv betyder noget, og blev i en række situationer konfronteret med racismen i Danmark

Situation 1:
Barnebarnet køber ind hos den lokale grønthandler, men kan ikke få lov at betale, før hun svarer på, hvordan hun kan have så langt hår, om det er hendes eget, hvilket betvivles.
Der røres ved håret, både med hænderne og kuglepennen. Herefter slipper hun væk. Hun slår beskrivelsen af sin oplevelse op på Facebook og giver klart udtryk for, at det hændte er et udslag af racisme.
Jeg læser hendes opslag og afviser racismeteorien, men mener, at det handler om dårlig opførsel og dårlig opdragelse.

Ja, mange tyrkere har sikkert ikke set en neger, men lige netop de grønthandlende tyrkere er blandt dem der ikke opfører sig dårligt.
I situation 2 spørger en “nydelig ældre bedstemor” det yngste barnebarn “om hun har fået sit hår i Afrika!“, hvilket gør barnebarnet “tydeligt rystet“. Ja, det var grusom blot at læse om det. Men det er kun indtil det rene Holocaust i situation 3

Min mands nevø og hans kone har været til kaffe og julebag, og da vi står i entréen og tager afsked, griber nevøen (som er over 60 år) fat i barnebarnets hår og siger: »Det er godt nok blevet langt, det er meget flottere end det der kunstige hår, nogle af de danske piger får sat på«.
Han har kendt pigen, siden hun var helt lille, og hans handling er bestemt kærligt og anerkendende ment, men jeg kan se, at hun stivner, og hun får fremstammet: »Rør aldrig mit hår«.
Hun går ind på sit værelse, vi vinker farvel, og jeg går i gang med forberedelserne til aftensmaden.

Det skal her siges at barnebarnet stadig er i live og i god behold - en af de få onkel-overlevende. Farmoderen forsøgte nemlig at forstå barnebarnet, der udsøgt trak “linjer til den tid, hvor afrikanere blev indfanget, bragt til Europa og vist frem som mærkværdigheder”

Det er det samme som, hvis du bliver taget på brysterne og bliver spurgt, om de er ægte. Håret er også en del af min krop. Ingen kan bare ud af det blå røre det eller tage fat i det. Du har aldrig prøvet det, farmor, du ved ikke, hvad det vil sige.
(…)
Hun siger: »Vi (underforstået mennesker med afrikanske gener) er nødt til at have hjælp fra den hvide del af befolkningen for at forklare alle dem, der overskrider grænserne, at det føles som at være degraderet til et dyr, når de bare går hen og befamler vores hår. Det svarer til, at man går hen og klapper en hund, men her spørger man jo ofte om lov hos ejeren, for måske bider den?«.

Først og fremmest, hvis du er farmor og bliver taget på brysterne og spurgt om de er ægte, så er din dag reddet. Og hvis man ikke er bange for at negre bider når man klapper deres ikke-gyldne hår er det måske netop fordi, man ikke ser dem som hunde? Med en tåre i mit øje, vender jeg mig istedet mod den ovenfor lovede modgift fra både Paul Joseph Watson og Gavin McInnes, begge i hopla

Uriasposten fortæller om en kampagne hvor “sorte amerikanere boykotter produkter produceret af hvide amerikanere” og fremkommer med “den ret så interessante oplysning, at initiativtageren for ‘We Buy Black’-bevægelsen er en imam tilknyttet ekstremistiske Nation of Islam”. Interessant bliver det også, hvorledes de vil holde deres imponerende mordrate kørende uden deres guns.

Pseudofjenden

Diverse — Drokles on December 17, 2016 at 6:46 am

Russerne skal have skyld for meget. I Sverige er man begyndt at forberede sig til borgerkrig, som følge af den muslimske indvandring, men man siger, at det frygt for at russerne invaderer. I USA har russerne allerede foretaget et kup med rigmanden Trump, som marionet.

Clinton, der har et velfortjent ry som dårlig taber og aldrig indrømmer egne fejl skyder skylden på alt andet end at hun blot blev vejet og fundet korrupt - og Dr Drew er stadig bekymret for hendes helbred. Men resten af den amerikanske venstrefløj i USA har ligeledes haft mere end svært ved at acceptere at middle America har sat dagsordenen udenom mediernes orden og valgt Donald Trump. Og de svinger med alle Clintons dårlige undskyldninger.

Nobelprismodtageren Paul Krugman er en af dem, der med henvisning til rygterne om russisk indblanding, mener at valget af Trump ikke er legitimt og i den akademiske verden kan professorer i så nødvendige studier som menneskets sexualitet belære de studerende om at valget af Trump er at sammenligne med terrorisme. Og Keith Olberman, der engang var et navn på venstrefløjen, mente direkte at der var en krig igang med russerne, skriver Scott Greer i Daily Caller

While Olbermann’s descent into madness may have been the most unhinged of responses by a major figure to the Russian hack report, its spirit is in keeping with the preference for revolutionary rhetoric among the urban elite.

Liberal D.C.-based non-profits, such as Think Progress, have created “Resist” efforts to thwart the incoming Trump administration. Former presidential candidate Evan McMullin has emerged as the favorite conservative of liberals for his daily Twitter insinuations that Trump is a traitor in bed with the Russians, which usually earn thousands of retweets and likes from his new fans. On Saturday, McMullin said citizens should view Trump as a disloyal American and act accordingly.

The White House publicly declared on Wednesday that Trump knew Russia was helping him out in the election, which casts a pretty big shadow on the next president. (RELATED: White House: ‘Ample Evidence’ Trump Knew About And Encouraged Russian Election Hacking)

Additionally, there’s the massive push — both through intimidation and polite persuasion — to get members of the Electoral College to change their votes to stop Trump’s inauguration. Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne endorsed the idea Wednesday of electors refusing to vote for Trump and instead pick someone who did not win the election — because the president-elect threatens our institutions. And a bunch of random celebrities made a video plea to electors to “vote their conscience” and stop the Trump menace. (RELATED: Angry Celebrities Call For Electoral College Coup Against Donald Trump)

All this rhetoric certainly sows serious doubt about American institutions and American democracy. Before he won the election, liberals were quick to scream how Trump was undermining our country’s valued institutions with talks of a rigged election.

Now liberals claim they are defending American democracy… by spouting statements that undermine those very same institutions.

Of course people were going to be greatly disappointed no matter who won the election, but the insane rhetoric coming from many prominent liberals — tinged with the implications for the necessity of a coup — is unprecedented in recent American history.

(…)

Unless a miracle happens, the Left is going to spend the next four years attacking America’s institutions as inherently tainted by Putin/Trump/white supremacy/toxic masculinity/etc. The Left is going to become radicalized to the point of viewing the government like the John Birch Society once did, in that its controlled by the sinister leaders of Russia. This gives the opportunity to secessionist movements, like Calexit, to gain followers among disenchanted progressives, as well for those who advocate for violence to achieve political goals.

If we had a sensible elite, the calls for coups and Bircher accusations of Russian would be denounced just as strongly by the press as the “pizzagate” conspiracy theory. Instead, they encourage these crackpot fantasies at the risk of ripping apart our national fabric.

Julian Assange står fast på at Wikileaks afsløringer er lækkede af utilfredse medarbejdere blandt Demokraterne. Det er ikke svært at forestille sig en hvis bitterhed, når Demokraternes Nationale Kongres snød Bernie Sanders så Hillary kunne vinde nomineringen. Forræderi finder alle afskyeligt.

Venstrefløjens hysteriske reaktion på at de næste 4 år ikke er med deres kandidat som præsident er et tegn på at deres ideologiske sammenrend er i en alvorlig krise. Så alvorlig at når muslimske ofre for Trump tilhængeres vold viser sig at være fabrikerede historier, så er disse løgne for venstrefløjen også et tegn på, hvor meget muslimer er under pres, især i disse Trumptider, skriver Breitbart. Hukommelsen er i øvrigt kort, Obama greb aktivt ind i det israelske valg fordi han ville vælte Banjamin Netanyahus regering.

—————————-

NB: National Review er nærmest ved at varmes ved Trump (hvis man ser bort fra den engang så fremragende Jonah Goldberg) og skriver ikke uden en sund fascination, at Trump med nogle få tweets havde redefineret republikanernes forhold til storkapitalen “In his frenetic way, he is forcing a reorientation of the Republican party’s economics, a change that is welcome in its broad contours, even if his methods are dubious and the potential pitfalls considerable.”

Obviously, we want the GDP to grow, but it can be an empty metric for average workers. In fact, it’s possible to pursue policies that increase the GDP — for instance, growing the labor force through higher immigration — while harming the interests of workers.

Sammenlign den omsorg for den arbejdende amerikaners hverdag med det opkast National Review tillod PPP da tidsskriftet havde besluttet sig for at se Trump som enden på konservatismen i USA, her i uddrag fra Breitbart

Williamson, a long-time critic of The Donald, essentially agrees that he doesn’t support any policies or rhetoric directly tailored to the working-class — particularly about jobs being taken by outsourcing and immigration — because it would be wrong to do so.

“It is immoral because it perpetuates a lie: that the white working class that finds itself attracted to Trump has been victimized by outside forces,” the NR roving correspondent writes. “[N]obody did this to them. They failed themselves.”

He then goes on to make the conclusion that it’s great these communities are dying out because they have a warped morality and are a dead weight on the economy.

“The truth about these dysfunctional, downscale communities is that they deserve to die. Economically, they are negative assets. Morally, they are indefensible,” the conservative writer says. “The white American under-class is in thrall to a vicious, selfish culture whose main products are misery and used heroin needles. Donald Trump’s speeches make them feel good. So does OxyContin. What they need isn’t analgesics, literal or political. They need real opportunity, which means that they need real change, which means that they need U-Haul. If you want to live, get out of Garbutt [a blue-collar town in New York.]”

Når man kun har to partier er fløjene indenfor hvert parti selvfølgelig langt fra hinanden. For Republikanerne siges det at den grundlæggende brudlinje går mellem Wall Street og manin street. Wall Street tabte eftertrykkeligt med valget af Trump og ingen gider sidde på taberens hold så National Review er, efter en vederstyggelig afstikker, vendt tilbage til ædruelige analyser.

Indtil da skal vi overstå nogle forfærdelige violiner, som Charles W Cooke, der skriver at Trumps ministervalg “mostly, they’ve been good” og “he’s being less vindictive than we feared” og så ellers forbeholder sig retten til at kritisere eller rose Trump efter fortjeneste. Hvad ellers? Og hvorfor det hysteriske leje, Jorden gik ikke under, konservatismen er ikke død, Trump er præsident og nu skal amerikanerne se om det er godt.

Alfa-hannerne skaber bekymring og stress

Det er svært for Politiken, der i lørdagens udgave af Debat sektionen leger med tanken om Trump som Hitler, i form af Chaplins Anton Hynkel.

img_00121

Og hans stab klar til krig

img_00211

Politiken har næsten ret. Alfahannerne er kommet igen. Breitbarts sikkerhedsredaktør Sebastian Gorka om Trumps udnævnelse af flere generaler i sin kommende regering

“I’d like to recognize the fact that after eight years of Pajama Boys, it’s time for the alpha males to come back,” he added. “How appropriate that we’ve got three Marines from the same division, legendary figures in uniform, to represent three of the key posts in the new administration! The fact is, having met Donald Trump a long time ago, and talking about national security issues, one of the first things that was clear to me from this businessman, this very special businessman, is that he understands we are at war, Raheem. He gets it. And he wants to win that war. He knows he’s not going to do it with limp-wristed Pajama Boys. Who better than a bunch of legendary Devil Dogs to do it? So yeah, it’s baloney, and it’s very cool in my opinion.”

Kassam turned to a discussion posted at The Gorka Briefing, in which Dr. Gorka argued that “Europe is collapsing.”

“I think it’s patently obvious that the Trump Train was the result, in part, a reflection of, the general rejection of centralized federative bureaucracy, and as a result, we have Brexit foreshadow the future of what used to be called Project Europe,” Gorka elucidated. “And the fact is, people are waking up. They’re rejecting faceless bureaucracy. We see it all across the continent. Brexit isn’t a uniquely British phenomena. As a result, we will see more and more people say, ‘Enough is enough. We want national sovereignty. We want national security most important of all.’ And as a result, I think Project Europe is on the ropes.”

Den mest markante alfahan er tidligere general i det amerikanske marinekorps James Matthis, en mand der selvfølgeligt erkender, at “there are some assholes in the world that just need to be shot”. National Reviews Tom Rogan kalder Matthis “at once a scholar and a warrior” og begynder sin beskrivelse med citatet “I don’t have worry and stress. I cause worry and stress!”, bl.a fordi sin “…annihilation upon al-Qaeda in Iraq”

Iran has particular reason for concern. Commanding CENTCOM, Mattis pushed for tough realism in constraining the Islamic Republic’s revolutionary expansionism. He recognizes that Iran’s leaders are rational actors, but he also knows that their revolutionary impulses must be checked. For this, he earned the ire of President Obama, who was so intent on kowtowing to the Iranian regime. But now he is set to take over the Pentagon, and Khamenei and the Qassem-crew have much to fear.

First, Mattis is likely to push Trump to focus on fixing the Iran nuclear deal. This will likely entail reducing Iranian cheating on inspections protocols and Iranian ballistic-missile research. If Trump and Mattis work with U.S. allies (notably the French) who are concerned about President Obama’s failure to enforce the deal, Iran could face rougher waters next year. Mattis has suggested blockading the country if the regime tries to play hard ball. It’s a good idea.

Second, a Mattis Pentagon will likely take tougher action against Iranian aggression in the Middle East. As I’ve noted, President Obama has largely ignored Iranian malevolence in states such as Lebanon and Iraq. That needs to be remedied, and quickly.

Third, Mattis will deter Iranian terrorism against America. That imperative is real. In 2011, the Iranian Revolutionary Guards — as Mattis himself explains — tried to murder the then-Saudi ambassador to the United States. The plan involved blowing up a Washington D.C. restaurant and everyone in it. He’s the incarnation of the First Marine Division motto, ‘No better friend, no worse enemy.’

Fourth, Mattis’s realism will be useful in helping the U.S. to confront Sunni extremism more effectively. As I’ve explained before, thanks to his supplication to Iran, President Obama has alienated America’s Sunni-Arab allies. Mattis, who is adored by the Sunni-Arab monarchies for his honest courage, offers the Trump administration a chance to renew those bonds. That means new potential for a Sunni-Arab crackdown on Sunni fundraising for groups such as ISIS and al-Qaeda. It also means we might see more special forces on the ground in Iraq and Syria.

“Who knows? American red lines might even make a comeback.” slutter Rogan.

Breitbart har samlet 15 Matthis citater, hvor mange er skønne. Jeg vil dog trække et andet citat frem, hvor kampen mod islam og anden fjendskab, ikke blot skal overlades til alfahannerne

I think it’s very clear that this enemy has decided that the war, the real war for them, will be fought in the narrative, in the media. This is not a place where we’re going to take the enemy’s capital and run up our flag and drink their coffee and that sort of thing.

Politiken er Hitler-forskrækket over generaler i regeringen Trump, fordi Alfahanner ikke hører til i fredstid - men det er Politiken ikke hører efter, hvad der foregår uden for deres bombesluse. Vi er ikke i en fredstid.

Det er min overbevisning, at demokratier ikke kan kæmpe for sin frihed uden konsensus om en nødvendighed og hvem der er fjenden. Vietnamkrigen blev tabt i de amerikanske hjerter og  ikke på slagmarken. Vi danskere, der anerkender vores nationalisme, Danmark først kunne man kalde det, kan ikke nedkæmpe truslen fra islam, uden et konsensus bag os.

Og det betyder at vi er forpligtet til at nedbryde det narrativ, den fortælling, der dominerer medierne. Sammen med venstrefløjen og bureakraterne enabler de islams angreb på vores frihed og kultur ved at fortrænge realiteterne for det stor tavse flertal. Det er en kamp for definitionsretten og den frie debat, som alle os betahanner og -hunner, kan tage på alle niveauer.

Og fordi vi i den kamp har brug for friheden til at ytre os, reagerer bureaukraterne og venstrefløjen og medierne med allehånde forsøg på at sikre kontrol med ytringer og nyheder. Racismeparagraffer ikke blot opretholdes, men søges udvidet til forbud mod hadtale, hadprædikanter bliver løst defineret som både de der spreder had som de der advarer og nægtet indrejse, sociale medier indskrænker rammerne og venstrefløjen og dens medier opfinder nye begreber, som post-faktualitet til fake news for at retfærdiggøre et offentligt meningsmonopol.

Vi kan skal alle sammen kæmpe for den frihed, der er blevet os skænket. Og der er lyspunkter i den kamp, fra store sejre som Brexit og Trump til små sprækker i mediernes selvfølgelige forståelse af ofre og skurke i det store og modige arbejde For Frihed bedriver. Og vi vil vinde - yyyuge!

Nogen må gøre noget! Og det haster! Nu!

Diverse — Drokles on December 15, 2016 at 10:01 am

“Jeg sidder i bussen og begynder at tude, fordi jeg ser billeder fra Aleppo og har den der magtesløshed, hvor jeg ikke aner, hvad jeg skal stille op”

Det kan være mageløst at betragte venstrefløjen befamle deres egne følelser. At kun ven vestlige verden er civiliseret vil de ikke vide af og den nøgterne konstatering af at det meste at resten af verden klynger sig til tyranni for ikke at henfalde i ‘barbarisk vanvid’ betragter de som en racistisk tanke. Derfor hadede de også USA som politimand og vestlig indblanding.

Nu blander Vesten sig ikke, lige dele desillusioneret og impotent, og det er også galt. Hvorfor gribes der ikke ind? Det spørger de om til en demonstration med fakler og taler foran Christiansborg.

Information har selvfølgelig en rapportage hvor man kan læse små vox-pops af afmagt stoppet ud med skinhellighed og selvhenførsel og ingen nævner Obama…  heller ikke i Informations leder. Sjovt nok, da hans vægelsind ellers har givet allehånde grotesker blod på tænderne fordi en streg der trækkes skal bakkes op med vold. Nøjagtig som en grænse skal forsvares om nødvendigt med dræbende skud.

Grænsen blev ikke forsvaret, end ikke med spyttemænd, så Information kan tale med Salehah Malik på 23, som fortæller

»Vi er kommet for at vise vores støtte til vores medmennesker i Syrien. Der er ingen i Vesten eller nogen andre steder, der gør noget. Vi taler om tusinder af uskyldige mennesker, der er blevet dræbt inden for kort tid, og det skal vi virkelig have sat en stopper for,« siger Salehah Malik.

Ja, jeres medmennesker Saleha, dem ser der ud til at være en del af på billederne. Vi danskere derimod kan intet stille op, andet end at græde i bussen for at få det bedre med os selv. Selv nyder jeg en kold øl, det går godt til min sildemad. Sådan har vi forskellige måder, at gøre noget godt for os selv.

Mellemfolkeligt Samvirke skammede sig ikke og skrev på deres FB-side

Mogens Lykketofts opsang til alle med magt i og uden for Danmark:

“Nu må I tage jer sammen og lægge det størst mulige pres for at stoppe dette barbariske vanvid.”

Og det var så analysen og løsning, kort og diffust. Men intet er så godt, som at paradere medfølelse og solidaritet for fremmede, man kun ser i TV og folk skrev

Hanne Børsen: Tak, Mogens. Du er en af dem, der bliver lyttet til internationalt. ????

Mehmet Kacar: Du har alle dage haft hjertet det rette sted Mogens. Den største respekt herfra!

Merete Skov-Hansen: Hvis nu så mange som mulig sender en mail til Anders Samuelsen og forlanger han må gøre noget ved denne forfærdelige situation . Hans arrogance er uanstændig. Send en hver dag indtil jul

Merete Skov-Hansen: Skriv til um@um.dk

Rikke Keller: Det er hermed gjort! Og han bliver tæppebombet med mails indtil der sker noget…. ????????

Duygu Ngotho: Han gjorde det godt ham Lykketoft mon der nogen der lytter? Det massakre må stoppe nu!

Annali Wingård: Det var en fantastisk vigtig og smuk tale Mogens. Tak for de kloge ord.

Hanne Rørth: tak????????????det trængtes.. bare det var sket før

Susanne Spengler: Tak Lykketoft <3

Lone Rind: Endelig…tak ?

Rebekka Gertz Andersson: Hørt!!!

Marianne List: Hørt !!

Luna Kira Rud-Petersen: Hørt !!

Louise Lage: Jeg havde slukket alt elektrisk lys og stilt tændte stearin lys i vinduerne, for at vise sympati med ofrene i Aleppo og resten af verden, hvor de er ramte af krig.

Der var enkelte kritiske bemærkninger, som en der mente at ord var letkøbte uden konkrete forslag eller handling, en syntes at Lykketoft var “dum at høre på” fordi han ikke vidste nok om Syrien og en mindede om at Lykketoft havde kaldt Rusland nøglen til en varig løsning. Men generelt havde folk, som Louise Lage slukket lyset.

Det vi alle mener

Begrebet post-faktualitet er venstrefløjens seneste offensiv mod dissens i offentligheden. Beskyldningerne mod alle nye og højredrejede medier for at sprede fake-news hviler på en antagelse om de etablerede medier ikke gør det samme. På Liveleak, Youtube og de sociale medier kunne vi alle konstatere det postfaktuelle i mediernes mange historier og kolporteringer om hvorledes der var tale om hele familier, udledsagede flygtningerbørn og/eller højt specialiseret arbejdskraft, især som læger og ingenører. Det var surrealistisk.

Vi burde ellers være godt vant når indvandring, åbne grænser og multikulturalitet stadigt beskrives som et gode og en økonomisk bæredygtig fremtid når virkeligheden er stik modsat. Vi kan se at de multietniske samfund ofte kollapser i borgerkrig og hvor umuligt det er at smide en herboende vaneforbryder hjem til den møgbunke han rejstre fra fordi de sekteriske forhold i snart sagt hele resten af verden gør at alle er forfulgt af alle.

Det er helt naturligt for medierne i samklang med venstrefløjen at kaste sig over det lille medie Den Korte Avis. Da en vært på en af Danmarks Radios ungdomskanaler opfordrede til boykot, rammede DR’s nyhedschef Naja Nielsen ganske rigtigt hovedproblemet ind, da hun i NEWS-magasinet Presselogen sagde “at hele indslaget er problematisk, for det har tonen af, at det er noget, som vi alle sammen mener.” Den pointe kan man roligt strække ud til en generel beskrivelse af medierne i Danmark og tærske langhalm på til køerne kommer ind med de nye kartofler.

At være direkte imod venstrefløjens dagsorden er så odiøst blandt medierne at man problematiserer at DKA er holdningsjournalistik, skønt Dagbladet Arbejderen får tifold i medistøtte og Modkraft det dobbelte. Det må man til Uriasposten for at få at vide og den får nada i støttekroner. Kim Møller skriver videre og rigtigt om reaktionerne på Dansk Folkepartis Kenneth Kristensen Berths nøgterne betragtninger om grænsekontrol

Alt imens statsstøttede dagblade fører kampagne mod uafhængige højrefløjsmedier, kører de nyhedshistorier der burde være omfattet af ‘fake news’-begrebet.

Mediestormen mod Kenneth Kristensen Berth er et godt eksempel, og det er værd at gengive professor Emeritus Uffe Østergaards ord, som de faldt i gårsdagens Reporterne på Radio24syv.

Jeg er bange for at han er kommet til at begå den for en politiker, så ubehagelige ting, at sige sandheden. … det er ikke rart at høre på, men grænser kræver altså faktisk en magtanvendelse.

… det er ubehageligt, men det er altså det man logisk set siger, når man siger man vil have grænser og grænsebevogtninger.

Det ligger i vores almindelige offentlighed. Vi kan ikke lide at høre sandheden.”

Information havde en hel kavalkade af sandheder fra Dansk Folkeparti, som de rubricerede som kontroversielle. Som Morten Messerschmidt, der har sagt at “muslimer, der bekender sig til den islamiske ideologi, er tabere eller bliver tabere. De ønsker jo ikke en samfundsmodel, som kan skabe tålelige forhold for mennesker“. Kontroversielt for medierne fordi beviserne på det modsatte bare er så overvældende. Af samme grund bliver Krarups sammenstilling af hagekors og islamisk hovedbeklædning skræmmende, som medierne også skræmmes over Pia Kjæsgaards Kemal Atatürk citat “Der er kun én civilisation, og det er vores” og Martin Henriksens logiske påpegning af “at skilte på arabisk signalerer (..), at hvis man ikke gider lære dansk, så indretter Danmark sig efter dem – og ikke omvendt“.

Og Danmarks Radio syntes også Geert Wilders er vildt kontroversiel for at udtale at koranen er fascistisk, at man burde lade “hovedtørklæderne blafre i parken“, at “Der er absolut en sammenhæng mellem islam og kriminalitet” og at der er en kamp igang mellem os og muslimerne. På TV2 kan man endda gøre julehilsen til noget kontroversielt, hvis det falder ud af Trumps mund: “Trump med kontroversiel erklæring: - Nu må I sige ‘glædelig jul’ igen” Gys! Og Trump kan virkeligt godt lide julen.  Alt er kontroversielt når det kommer fra folk, der ikke er venstredrejede. Fordi “det er noget, som vi alle sammen mener”

Det er en af venstrefløjens metoder til at styre debatten og venstrefløjen synes at der er for meget fokus på islam. Men medierne fokuserer faktisk ikke så meget på islam, som islam bringer sig selv i fokus og i dag har islam haft en travl dag. I Tyrkiet har kurderne myrdet 38, deraf 30 betjente, i et kombineret angreb med en bilbombe og en selvmordsbomber. I Aden/Yemen har Islamisk Stat dræbt 48 soldater i et selvmordsangreb, da soldaterne skulle have løn udbetalt. I Egypten har terrorister (IS eller aQ) dræbt 25 i et angreb på en kirke…. og så har Islamisk Stat også lige erobret den syriske by Palmyra ved et overraskelsesangreb, og har i den forbindelse erobret bl.a. 30 af Assads kampvogne.

Trump og debatten

Diverse — Drokles on December 11, 2016 at 2:20 am

trump-meltdovn

En læser mindede klogt om at “klappe hesten lidt” når det kom til eventuel begejstring over Donald Trumps sejr over Hillary Clinton. For, argumenterede læseren, hvis Trump viser sig at blive “en politisk katastrofe, så vil det kaste modstanden mod det etablerede politiske korrekthed ud i en dødelig tomhed og give “globalisterne” ny og kraftigere styrke.” Dette er rigtigt og jeg er helt enig. Jeg har selv flere gange betegnet Trump som en mulig charlatan, men har foretrukket ham til trods, fordi han stod for et opgør med en politisk retorik eller et paradigme om man vil, som har underdrejet den vestlige verden.

Det er en retorik, hvor den siddende præsident ikke har villet kalde fjenden islam ved sit rette navn ud fra en perverteret ide om at fortrængning fører til forløsning. I stedet fortalte præsidenten til klapsalver i FNs hovedkvarter, at fremtiden ikke må tilhøre de, der gør grin med islams profet Muhammed. Det er de samme ord, som muslimske trerrorister råbte i gaderne efter at have massakreret redaktionen på Charlie Hebdo få måneder senere. De samme ord som gjalder hver gang vi ser et terrorangreb.

Venstrefløjen så ikke problemet i at være på ideologisk linje med en morderisk fjende og morede sig istedet over Obamas underdrejede humor, da han under præsident valgkampen heller ikke ville nævne Hillarys modkandidat Donald Trump ved rette navn. Trump blev  fortrængt til samme bås som aktiv islam i håbet om at også han ville forsvinde. Men fortrængning øger kun frygten, for at parafrasere en kendt børnebogsfigur. Og Trump forsvandt ikke, han vandt. Og det vil muslimerne også, hvis vi følger Obamas og venstrefløjens realitetsfornægtelse.

Trump har åbnet posen helt op og amerikanerne kan diskutere de emner, de selv mener er alvorlige, som de ser dem. Indvandring, islam og skattetryk frem for fake og postfaktuelle emner som menneskeskabt global opvarmning, racisme, transkønnedes rettigheder og anden identitetspolitik.

Joel Pollack mener i Breitbart at Donald Trump “is already re-framing the debate” og at Trumps tilsyneladende mindre velovervejede udtalelser, såsom stik imod Forfatningens ord om ytringsfrihed, at ville forbyde afbrænding af Stars And Stripes eller straffe virksomheder for at flytte produktion udenlands skal ses i det lys

On the left, Trump wants Democrats to keep doing what they have done for the past several months, and years — namely, obsessing over shiny objects and embracing identity politics. He wants to avoid them re-discovering some kind of ideological foundation, or popular constituency, for opposition. He wants them to stay inside their media bubble, talking to themselves.

By the looks of things, Trump is succeeding. Democrats re-elected Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), rewarding her failure again. They also elevated Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY) to Senate Minority Leader, affirming the popular caricature of Democrats as a “bi-coastal” party. The only leader they have found from “flyover country” happens to be Minnesota’s Rep. Keith Ellison, formerly of the Nation of Islam. That triumvirate can only take Democrats further into the political wilderness.

On the right, Trump wants conservatives to be agitated. Yes, he is courting Mitt Romney. But he is also is poking the smoky coals of NeverTrump to stir their fire. He wants them — not, say, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) — to be the loudest voices.

Trump prefers conservatives as adversaries at the negotiating table for two reasons. First, unlike left-liberal Democrats, who are already vowing to say “no” to almost everything Trump proposes, conservative Republicans actually want to make deals.

Second, conservatives already agree with Trump on the fundamental issues — the Supreme Court, for example. As Democrats learned over decades of “negotiating” with public sector unions, it’s easier when the other side is also on your side.

So when Trump adviser Stephen K. Bannon (on leave as Breitbart News Executive Chairman) gives his first interview to the Hollywood Reporter and says, “The conservatives are going to go crazy. I’m the guy pushing a trillion-dollar infrastructure plan,” there is a method to the madness.

Det er i sig selv et gode, men det forudsætter selvfølgelig at Trump ikke er en skandale som præsident - og det tror jeg ikke han bliver.

« Previous PageNext Page »

Monokultur kører på WordPress