Iran’s Return “Handshake” to President Trump

An attack on Saudi oil production shows John Bolton was right.

By The Editorial Board  Wall Street Journal

Sept. 15, 2019

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo stated on Twitter that Iran ‘launched an unprecedented attack on the world’s energy supply’ after attacks on Saudi Arabian oil facilities on September 14, 2019. I

Since President Trump withdrew from the 2015 Iran nuclear deal, the Islamic Republic has tested U.S. resolve with military escalation across the Middle East. Likely Iranian involvement in attacks on Saudi oil production over the weekend marks a new phase in this destabilizing campaign, and it’s no coincidence this happened as Mr. Trump is considering a softer approach to Tehran.

www.israel-commentary.org

This is more than a local dispute between two regional powers. The attacks have caused a roughly 5% reduction in global daily oil production. The Saudis have promised to dip into reserves to offset the losses, but oil prices could rise and harm an already fragile global economy if the Kingdom isn’t able to restore production fast enough.

American shale oil production can take up some of the slack but that would take time. Long-term damage to oil supplies would increase the pressure on the U.S. to ease sanctions on Iranian oil exports, which Mr. Trump has been considering.

The attack continues what is already a hot proxy war between Iran and Saudi Arabia, an important U.S. ally. The extent of the damage raises doubts about how well the Saudis can defend against future drone assaults. Saudi intelligence and air defenses don’t seem up to the job. Saudi revenues would be hurt by a reduction in oil output, and uncertainty will complicate an initial public offering of the country’s national oil company, Aramco.

Even if the Houthis didn’t carry out this attack, Iran is backing their war against an Arab coalition in Yemen. The Houthis have become increasingly aggressive in attacking sites in Saudi Arabia and oil tankers in the Red Sea. If the Saudis cede Yemen to the Houthis, Iran will have won another proxy war, this one on the Arabian peninsula. 

The Saudis are far from ideal allies, but U.S. Senators who want to end U.S. support for Riyadh should consider the alternative of Iranian regional dominance. The White House says Mr. Trump spoke with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman and pledged U.S. support. But the White House should be contemplating more than words.

The Iranians are probing Mr. Trump as much as the Saudis. They are testing his resolve to carry out his “maximum pressure” campaign, and they sense weakness. Iran shot down an American drone this summer, and Mr. Trump rejected advice for a military response. Qassem Soleimani, commander of Iran’s overseas Quds Force, has historically interpreted such restraint as a signal that he’s winning and can safely escalate.

Mr. Trump is also eager for direct talks with Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, and Mr. Pompeo floated a handshake meeting between the two at the coming United Nations General Assembly. Mr. Trump has even contemplated support for French President Emmanuel Macron ’s idea of paying the mullahs a $15 billion bribe for better behavior. The weekend attack is Iran’s return handshake.

U.S. sanctions have hurt Iran’s crude oil exports, but Tehran still earns hundreds of millions of dollars a month from other petroleum products. Senator Lindsey Graham says direct attacks on Iranian oil production should be considered, and the Islamic Republic needs to know that is not off the table.

pastedGraphic.pngThe Saudi coalition also needs more help interdicting Iranian arms shipments to the Houthis. Americans are understandably wary of deeper involvement in Yemen, but a victory for Iran and the rise of a Hezbollah-like regime in Sana’a will harm U.S. security interests. Think another Syria and Lebanon.

Mr. Trump might also apologize to John Bolton, who warned repeatedly that Iran would take advantage of perceived weakness in the White House. Mr. Bolton resigned last week over policy differences, notably on Iran. The weekend’s events proved the former adviser right. The Trump Administration’s pressure campaign has been working, and abandoning it now would encourage Tehran to take more military risks.

Big Tech’s Big Secret (perpetrated upon American public)

Big Tech’s Big Secret

Redacted from earlier more pertinent than ever article 

By David Kupelian, Editor

WhistleBlower Magazine 

World Net Daily  2019

Democratic presidential primary debates highlight one of the great paradoxes of our time: The Democratic Party has gone completely mad, embracing wildly radical policies from mass gun confiscation to socialism to late-term abortion to allowing convicted, incarcerated terrorists to vote. Yet the party could see its candidate elected president in 2020.

www.israel-commentary.org

Lords of the internet mean to defeat Trump – then reshape America and the world

How is that possible?

Consider, after all, the degree of lunacy now championed by Democrat presidential candidates: America is being negatively transformed by a full-scale, never-ending invasion across its southern border, but all the Democrat candidates love, enable and encourage it. Their “Green New Deal” schemes would cost untold trillions of taxpayer dollars while destroying America’s fossil fuel industries, thereby putting millions out of work. 

They celebrate full-term abortion (aka infanticide) and cheer the epidemic of delusional men invading women’s locker rooms and showers and dominating the world of women’s sports. One Democrat candidate, Julian Castro, announced from the debate stage that he even wants taxpayer-funded abortions for men who get pregnant.

Add to this insanity never-ending calls to impeach President Donald Trump, part of a rolling coup attempt that has severely traumatized America with most outrageous political hoax in U.S. history – the allegation, utterly without evidence, that the president of the US is secretly a traitorous Russian double agent.

Of course, the fake news media serve as the grand enablers of all this, modern alchemists magically transmuting leftwing insanity into fools’ gold, forever portraying Democrats as moral and caring, and Republicans as selfish and evil.

And therein lies the answer to our question of how a wildly unhinged political party like the Democrats of 2019 could actually retake the White House – and Congress – and therefore the courts – in 2020.

Imagine some unseen yet immensely powerful entity existed, one capable of influencing the minds of hundreds of millions of people, shaping their perceptions in such a profound way to steer them toward voting for a certain party or candidate. 

Suppose, further, that this influence was virtually undetectable, that the entity was one we had come to admire, consulting it on a daily basis, tapping freely into its vast, almost god-like reservoir of universal knowledge and understanding.

Suppose further that, though imperceptible to us, this great and all-knowing something had a secret plan for our lives and our society, an overriding will to guide and shape us and our world in its benevolent image.

This, in essence, is what America – indeed the whole world – is dealing with in the Age of Big Tech.

As the June issue of Whistleblower magazine documents, citing hard evidence including multiple peer-reviewed studies, Google is already determining the results of elections around the world. And, contends Google researcher Robert Epstein, Ph.D., former editor-in-chief of Psychology Today (and a Democrat who voted for Hillary Clinton in 2016), Google likely swung as many as 3 million votes toward Hillary in the 2016 presidential contest. It just turned out not to be quite enough.

“I’m guessing that these companies held back in 2016, because they were overconfident,” Epstein said later. Recently, Epstein predicted, based on his half-decade of peer-reviewed research, that Big Tech could swing 15 million votes toward the Democrat presidential candidate in 2020, without leaving any paper trail and without those so influenced realizing it.

In widely read Wired article headlined, “Is Big Tech Merging with Big Brother” journalist David Samuels writes,  “the threat of government surveillance systems being integrated with the existing corporate surveillance capacities of big-data companies like Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Amazon into one gigantic all-seeing eye appears to trouble very few people.”

Indeed, with the growing presence of Big Tech in Washington, D.C. – from Google’s huge corporate lobbying expenditures, to Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos’ purchase of the Washington Post, to major high-tech contracts being awarded by the CIA, Pentagon and other federal agencies to companies like Amazon, Microsoft and Google – the merger of Big Tech and Big Government appears to be happening.

Let’s say it straight: Big Tech – overwhelmingly far-leftist progressive in worldview and therefore, by definition totalitarian – is attempting to transform the world in its image.

Big Tech – first and foremost Google, which accounts for 90 percent of all search inquiries worldwide – has become almost like a god to billions of people. But that god is attempting to reshape errant and wayward humanity in its image.

Its most urgent task right now? Defeat Trump in the 2020 election. Big Tech is still kicking itself for having failed in 2016. It doesn’t intend to make the same mistake again.

*****

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  www.israelcommentary.org 

“Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

Twitter: @israelcomment and @schmice

18 YEARS AFTER 9/11 THE THREAT OF TERROR ATTACKS CONTINUES

18 YEARS AFTER 9/11 THE THREAT OF TERROR ATTACKS CONTINUES

By Michael Cutler 

Frontpage Magazine

My article today was predicated on the the fact that here we are, 18 years after the horrific terror attacks of September 11, 2001 which killed many more than the often stated “3,000 victims” considering that tens of thousands of people were sickened by their exposure to the toxins released as a direct consequence of the the terror attacks.  Thousands of additional victims have already died while more are terribly ill and are dying.

The 9/11 Commission, to which I provided testimony was convened to determine what went wrong so that we could protect America and Americans from future barbaric terror attacks.  While the 9/11 Commission made it crystal clear that the terror attacks of 9/11 and others that preceded that attack were only possible because of multiple failures of the immigration system.

Subsequent terror attacks have occurred throughout the United States since 9/11 that were also perpetrated or attempted to be perpetrated by aliens who easily gamed the immigration system.

Yet neither political party have the integrity to properly fund immigration law enforcement, construct a wall to secure our porous borders.

The Democrats have, beyond all comprehension, created “Sanctuary Cities” and “Sanctuary States” that harbor and shield illegal aliens including transnational criminals, international terrorists and foreign fugitives from detection by DHS.

After the attacks of 9/11 a virtual mantra was created when a slew of politicians elbowed their way to podiums, preferably with television cameras capturing their statements, and demanded to know “Why did no one connect the dots?”

Today you will undoubtedly be shocked to know that those dots were well-connected years before 9/11, but then utterly ignored (As a result of constant, incessant, Arab and Muslim propaganda using the ploy of political correctness and blurring the language of Islamic Terrorism with vague euphemisms like Jihad, moral equivalency, and a compliant, supportive media) jsk

Being “Pro-Enforcement” is not “Anti-Immigrant.”  Indeed, advocates for immigration anarchy are actually taking an “Anti-Immigrant” position by obfuscating the line that separates lawful immigrants from illegal aliens.  

To provide a bit of clarity, while we are indeed a “Nation of immigrants” America is not a nation of trespassers.  The difference between an immigrant and an illegal alien is comparable to the difference between a houseguest and a burglar.

Americans must be willing to stand their ground and not be intimidated by the false accusations. Many people have come to complain that we have become too “Politically Correct” to speak the truth about important issues.  My view is that the artful use of language that has been described as examples of political correctness are in fact, examples of Orwellian “Newspeak.” 

Discussions about immigration almost invariably focus on the lack of integrity to the border that is supposed to separate the United States from America.  Clearly that border lacks integrity and represents little more than a speed bump to smugglers who transport illegal aliens and contraband including record quantities of dangerous drugs such as heroin and cocaine into the United States.

However, there are many more components to the immigration system including systems by which aliens are granted visas to enter the United States and various immigration benefits such as conferring employment authorization to aliens in the United States and also include the adjudications process by which aliens are granted lawful immigrant status and even United States citizenship.

All of these systems of the immigration system lack integrity.  Aliens who have gone on to commit crimes and even participate in terrorist attacks have often been dissevered to have successfully gamed the immigration benefits program in order to embed themselves in communities around the United States as they went about their deadly preparations.

Immigration is not a single issue but a singular issue that impacts nearly every challenge and threat confronting the United States today!  Simply stated, the immigration laws were enacted to save lives and protect the jobs of American workers.  In point of fact, our borders and our immigration laws are America’s first line of defense and last line of defense against international terrorists and transnational criminals.

Our armed forces are charged with securing America’s borders externally while the DHS (Department of Homeland Security) is supposed to secure those same borders from within.  The failures of the DHS to live up to its half of the equation are undermining the efforts, valor and incredible sacrifices of Americas men and women who serve in our military!

If our government’s failures to protect American jobs by securing our nation’s borders and effectively enforcing our immigration laws concerns you or especially if it angers you, I ask you to call your Senators and Congressional “Representative. This is not only your right- it is your obligation! 

We live in a perilous world and in a perilous era. The survival of our nation and the lives of our citizens hang in the balance.

USA Talk Radio Online Radio | BlogTalkRadio

https://www.blogtalkradio.com › usatalkradio

The Michael Cutler Hour. Happy Friday! There is much to consider this evening as we prepare to remember the 18th anniversary of the barbaric, horrific terror ..

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  www.israelcommentary.org 

“Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

Twitter: @israelcomment and @schmice

A Realistic Solution to the Never-ending Israeli/Arab Conflict

Redacted from a detailed  article by Dr. Martin Sherman

Arutz Sheva  –  Israel National News.com

November 1, 2019

Last week, Education Minister, Naftali Bennett, and Justice Minister, Ayalet Shaked, dropped a political bombshell when they announced that they were breaking away from their current party, “Jewish Home”—and were setting up a new party, with the (somewhat bland) name of the “New Right”.

www.israel-commentary.org

If the “New Right” is to advance “Right wing” causes, it must abandon schemes that lead to the creation of a never ending political strife with inevitable Lebanonizztion or Balkanization of Israeli society. They must  work towards legitimizing the idea of incentivized emigration of the Arab population of Judea-Samaria

According to this line of reasoning, they needed a new political vehicle, with a fresh image, unfettered with trappings of “excess” religiosity and political rejectionism. So the birth of “New Right” was announced, amid considerable drama in the media—and commensurate acrimony from the Jewish Home, who, understandably, felt betrayed by the unexpected, unilateral split.

It is, of course, still far too early to judge whether the abrupt break-away will yield positive results. However, two things can already be determined. The first is that by their decisive action, Bennett and Shaked have demonstrated that they have the necessary nerve and ruthlessness for taking high risk decisions—an indispensable requisite for the positions of leadership they seek. The second is that they have identified, at least partially, an important gap in Israel’s political landscape, which, almost inexplicably, has been left unfilled for decades and which, if suitably addressed, has the potential for considerable political rewards.

By explicitly opening the party ranks to religious and secular sectors of the electorate, while adopting a hardline (“Right” of Likud) approach to foreign policy and security affairs, they correctly challenge a widespread misconception. This is that when it comes to the Palestinian issue, rejection of political appeasement and territorial withdrawal is largely limited to the more observant portions of the population.

There is a sound secular rationale, backed by historical precedent, underscoring the folly of concessions to despotic adversaries. Moreover, historically, among the most hawkish opponents of territorial withdrawal was the hard-Left (i.e. socialist) Ahdut HaAvoda faction of the Labor Party, led by Yitzhak Tabenkin, one of the leading figures of the Kibbutz movement, who vehemently opposed any territorial withdrawal after the 1967 Six-Day Way.

Significantly, the Movement for Greater Israel, formed almost immediately after the Six-Day War to oppose any withdrawal from territory taken by the IDF, was founded mainly by prominent individuals with roots in the Labor Party, along with a few “Right-wing” revisionists.

Accordingly, it could well be that Bennett and Shaked have shrewdly diagnosed an inherent lacuna in Israel’s body politic and have identified a significant, yet untapped constituency of secular hawks.

This is the constituency comprised of those who recognize the folly and futility of persisting with a policy of ceaseless concessions to the Palestinian-Arabs, but find the Likud too equivocating on security and overly accommodative of the haredi demands for religious legislation.

Of course, it is still an open question whether the formula devised by Bennett and Shaked—of parity between secular and religious elements—is the right one to win over this constituency. For while I foresee little difficulty on some issues—such as reducing the tyranny of the judiciary, bolstering the Jewish settlement of Judea-Samaria and enhancing the emphasis on Zionist values and Jewish identity in the education system, other thorny and divisive issues may well arise.

But with all due respect to these domestic issues, the real litmus test of the New Right’s strategic value will be in the manner it impacts the discourse on the “Palestinian” problem.

Both Bennett and Glick have done an admirable job in pointing out the disastrous defects of the two-state formula. Regrettably however, they have advanced poorly thought-through alternatives to replace it—alternatives, which are no less detrimental to the ability of Israel to endure as the nation-state of the Jewish people! Perhaps even more so!

Thus, Bennett’s blueprint for annexing 60% of the area would, in all probability, involve the same “political pain” as annexing 100%. Moreover, it is unlikely to solve any of Israel’s prevailing security and diplomatic problems.

Quite the opposite, it is highly likely to exacerbate them. So, in the final analysis, it is an almost certain recipe for the Balkanization of Israel – i.e. dividing the territory up into disconnected autonomous enclaves, which will be recalcitrant, rivalrous and rejectionist, creating an ungovernable reality for Israel.

It would take considerable—and unsubstantiated—faith to entertain the belief that Israel could sustain itself as a Jewish nation-state with a massive Muslim minority of almost 40% – as the societal havoc, that far smaller proportions have wrought in Europe, indicate. Indeed, this is a clear recipe for the Lebanonization of Israeli society with all the inter-ethnic strife that tore Israel’s unfortunate northern neighbor apart.

Incentivized Arab emigration: A Zionist imperative

Accordingly, the only policy proposal that can address both these imperatives, without the use of considerable “kinetic” force, is to induce large-scale Arab emigration by means of a comprehensive system of material incentives to leave, and disincentives to stay. The details of how this policy is to be implemented are unimportant at this stage. What is important is to grasp is its underlying principle and the unavoidable necessity for it to be adopted.

By Dr. Martin Sherman, 11/01/19

The writer served for seven years in operational capacities in the Israeli Defense establishment, was ministerial adviser to Yitzhak Shamir’s government and lectured for 20 years at Tel Aviv University in Political Science, International Relations and Strategic Studies. He has a B.Sc. (Physics and Geology), MBA (Finance), and PhD in political science and international relations, was the first academic director of the Herzliya Conference and is the author of two books and numerous articles and policy papers on a wide range of political, diplomatic and security issues. He is founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies (www.strategicisrael.org). Born in South Africa, he has lived in Israel since 1971.

 

Global Warming Pseudo-religion once more exposed

A Famine of Fact at U.N. Climate Panel

The IPCC sounds an alarm about food production, but another U.N. agency’s data show it’s a false one.

By James Taylor

Wall Street Journal, Aug. 30, 2019

Global crop production sets new records virtually every year. That didn’t stop the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change from publishing an alarmist report Aug. 8 that suggests global warming has devastated crop production and threatens food shortages.

“Climate change . . . has adversely impacted food security and terrestrial ecosystems as well as contributed to desertification and land degradation in many regions,” the report asserts. “Warming compounded by drying has caused yield declines in parts of Southern Europe. Based on indigenous and local knowledge, climate change is affecting food security in drylands, particularly those in Africa, and high mountain regions of Asia and South America.”

At the same time, the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization reports that new records were set for global corn, wheat and rice production five years running through 2017, the most recent year for which data are available. How is that possible?

The IPCC report parses words and engages in semantic tricks to give readers a false impression of declining global crop production. Note the reference to declining yields in “parts” of Southern Europe. The report doesn’t mention that yields are increasing in Southern Europe as a whole. 

What sense does it make to blame declining yields in a small portion of the world on global warming without crediting global warming for global gains?

The IPCC claims that “indigenous and local knowledge”—as distinct from objectively quantifiable data—supports its claim of declining food production in “drylands” of Africa, Asia and South America. Yet data show crop yields are increasing throughout all three continents and in almost all the nations characterized by drylands.

Environmental activist groups, bureaucrats, socialists looking to transform Western society, and biased journalists continue to make climate claims that have no basis in fact. They hope a constant drumbeat of authoritative-sounding falsehoods will convince you we’re in a crisis only they can solve.

Mr. Taylor is director of the Heartland Institute’s Arthur B. Robinson Center on Climate and Environmental Policy.

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  www.israelcommentary.org 

“Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

Twitter: @israelcomment and @schmice

II  Comments from Isaac  Barr:    Sep 3, 2019

From EG   Climate changes is the biggest lie in human history because there is no transparency and raw data was refused to be shown in court. Climategate refers to the then hacked emails of the leading “climate researchers” that showed how the IPCC’s most influential “scientists” voted with each other on what “statistical adjustments”, what specially trimmed computer models and what other tricks the Data should be manipulated to get to the desired results. THINK Isaac Barr MD

https://www.epochtimes.de/umwelt/klima/climategate-rueckschlag-fuer-anhaenger-des-von-menschen-gemachten-klimawandels-nach-gerichtsurteil-in-kanada-a2988976.html?print=1

ClimateGate: Setback for the followers of man-made climate change after court ruling in Canada

He may well be familiar to insiders and savvy climate activists: US climate researcher Michael Mann, who launched the famous “hockey chart” on which the supporters of the theory of man-made climate change and the World Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are based.

This support should start after the judgment of a Canadian court now to crumble. Because after it became known that in the “hockey diagram” unempiric and result-related and thus not scientifically worked to get the desired results, the supporters of the theory of the wind is taken out of the sails. For Michael Mann it could mean a deep fall.

Thomas More Law Center Uncovers Taxpayer-funded Islamic Propaganda Forced on Teachers

Redacted from an in-depth SPECIAL INVESTIGATIVE REPORT

ANN ARBOR, MI – The Thomas More Law Center (TMLC), a national nonprofit public interest law firm based in Ann Arbor, Michigan, has uncovered evidence of a well-orchestrated Islamic propaganda campaign aimed at teachers in school systems throughout Michigan and several other states.

Concerned about a two-day mandatory teacher-training seminar on Islam conducted by a Muslim consultant hired by Michigan’s Novi Community Schools District, TMLC filed a Freedom of Information Act request for documents related to the workshop.

Richard Thompson, president and chief counsel of the Law Center, commented on the results of their investigation, “We found that the teachers were subjected to two days of Islamic propaganda, where Islam was glorified, Christianity disparaged, and America bashed—all funded by Novi taxpayers.”

Moreover, during the past five years the school district has presented no teacher-training seminars focusing on Christianity, Judaism or any other religion – only Islam.

The hired Muslim consultant was Huda Essa, a resident of the Dearborn area and of Arab descent. She appeared before the Novi teachers in a hijab, the Muslim headscarf, billing herself as an expert in “cultural competency” and “culturally responsive teaching.”

Most disappointing was the fact that of the more than 400 teachers attending the workshop, not one teacher challenged Essa’s denigration of Christianity or attacks on America.

TMLC inspected dozens of internal school documents, including audio recordings of Essa’s presentation.

The information on Islam she provided to Novi teachers was riddled with falsehoods and errors of omission that were clearly meant to deceive.

Essa provided no truthful information on Sharia law and jihad, two of the most important aspects of Islam. All references to terrorism were dismissed as having nothing to do with Islam. White Christian males, she suggested, are more dangerous than Islamic radicals.

Essa is the face behind Culture Links LLC, a Michigan-based consultancy. She describes herself on the Culture Links website as an advocate of social justice who encourages children to “take pride in their many identities.”

But, as TMLC discovered from the Novi documents, the one identity Essa does not celebrate is that of patriotic Americans who believe in our nation’s exceptionalism.

And her message extends far beyond Novi.

Essa’s client list reveals she has been spreading her “trash America first” philosophy to colleges, universities, schools and professional educator associations throughout Michigan, California, Georgia, Texas, Florida and beyond. In Michigan alone her website lists nine school districts as clients – Oakland County Schools, Ann Arbor Schools, L’Anse Creuse Public Schools, Plymouth-Canton Community Schools, Roseville Community Schools, Farmington Public Schools, Dearborn Public Schools, Birmingham Public Schools and Melvindale Public Schools.

Under the banner of promoting diversity, inclusion and a multicultural approach to education, Essa sets about comparing Islam to Christianity, calling them “mostly similar.” The one big difference, she claims, is that Islam is the world’s “only purely monotheistic religion.”

Islam’s holy book, the Koran, came straight from Allah to the prophet Muhammad and, unlike the Jewish and Christian scriptures, has never been altered or changed, she told the Novi teachers. Significantly, the Koran commands Muslims to “Fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them, lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.” (Koran 9:5)

Her message was clear: The Koran is superior to the Bible. But she did not address the fact that it calls for the extermination of Christian and Jews.

While quick to indict America as guilty of “cultural genocide,” Essa was silent on the 1400 years of actual genocides, also known as jihads, in which Muslims wiped out Jewish tribes on the Arabian Peninsula, and slaughtered millions of Christians throughout the Middle East, North Africa and the European Continent. Referring to Islam, Winston Churchill wrote, “No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.”

Novi’s Islamic teacher-training is just the latest example of professional Islamic indoctrinators infiltrating U.S. public schools even as Christianity has been forced out of the classroom.

“This type of infiltration amounts to an Islamic Trojan horse within our public-school systems,” Thompson said. “No other religion gets this kind of special treatment in our schools.”

Only action by patriotic American parents will put a stop to the indoctrination of teachers and students. They must attend school board meetings and call their board’s attention to the existence of unconstitutional Islamic propaganda whenever they find evidence of it in their children’s schools. And when their board is unresponsive, they must be willing to take legal action to stop it whenever the law permits.

TMLC has several active cases involving public schools bending over backwards to promote Islam while trashing Christianity.

In New Jersey, seventh-grade students at Chatham Middle School were taught “Islam is the true faith,” required to learn the Shahada, or Muslim creed, and forced to watch videos that sought to convert them.

TMLC is representing another student at La Plata High School in Maryland, where pupils in world-history classes were taught that “Most Muslims’ faith is stronger than the average Christian” and “Islam at heart is a peaceful religion.”

Jihad, meanwhile, was introduced to La Plata students as a “personal” spiritual struggle, having nothing to do with using violence to spread the faith. And, like in New Jersey, the Maryland students were forced to learn the Five Pillars of Islam and memorize the Shahada.

A SERIES OF DECEPTIONS

Essa spent a great deal of time in her Novi presentation talking about Muslim women, whom she described as victims of Islamophobia on the part of bigoted Americans.

She said her own mother’s decision to wear the hijab was met with “rage” from random Americans. Other hijab-wearing Muslim women have been spat upon, had hot liquids poured on them, been beaten and even killed because they wear the hijab, Essa said, without giving details of when or where these atrocities supposedly occurred.

Essa presented no statistics on hate crimes to back up her claims. FBI crime stats show that anti-Muslim attacks are relatively rare in America and actually fell by 17 percent in 2017. Anti-Jewish hate crimes that year out-numbered anti-Muslim offenses by nearly four to one.

Globally, Christians are the most persecuted of all religious groups, according to the watchdog Open Doors. Of the top-ten most dangerous countries to be a Christian, all but two of them are Muslim-majority nations, according to Open Doors’ 2019 World Watch List.

But Essa’s attempts to con Novi teachers into accepting her anti-American, pro-Islamic worldview didn’t stop with the idea that Muslims are the most persecuted and victimized people.

She said any poor treatment of women in Islamic countries should be attributed to “cultural” differences, not the religion of Islam.

She failed to mention that Muhammad, Islam’s prophet, is reported to have said that the majority of hell would be populated by women (Hadith by Sahih Bukhari Vol. 1:28, 301, Vol. 2:161, Vol. 7:124-126). Also absent from her presentation was the Koranic instruction for husbands to beat a disobedient wife (Sura 4:34).

Exercising the art of deception, Essa said Muslims love Jesus and refer to him as “messiah.”

But the word “messiah” has a different meaning for Muslims than for Christians. When Christians speak of Jesus their Messiah, they are referring to God’s “anointed One,” who has the power to forgive sin and grant salvation.

Muslims confer no such divine authority to their Jesus. Under Islam Jesus was only a man, a lower prophet under Muhammad, not the Son of God, and he did not die on a cross or rise from the dead as documented in the gospels.

Essa hammered Novi teachers with the Islamic teaching that the Jewish and Christian scriptures are not to be trusted. Although once pure, they were gradually “corrupted” by unscrupulous men. Only the Koran contains the final, “pure” words of God, she said.

Essa also schooled teachers in the proper use of the phrase “Allahu Akbar!” or “Allah is greatest!” While this is widely known as battle-cry of Muslim terrorists, Essa said it’s really just a refrain that Muslims use to convey feelings of happiness, sadness, anger, or thankfulness while praising Allah.

Essa said the word “Islam” is an offshoot of the Arabic term “Salaam,” which means peace. This is a common ploy used by Muslim apologists to deceive uninformed Westerners.

“Islam” is more accurately translated as “submission” and good Muslims know they must submit to Allah and his Sharia (Islamic law), above all other systems of law.

Essa noted Islam is the world’s fastest-growing religion without mentioning that Muslims are forbidden from leaving the faith. Considered apostates, those leaving the faith are subject to severe punishment, up to and including death. And forced conversions have been a well-documented fact of history.

The Middle East and North Africa, once overwhelmingly Christian, were Islamized by a series of jihads starting with Muhammad, his successor caliphs and later by the Ottoman Turks.

She completely ignored the jihadi terrorist attacks conducted on U.S. soil: The 9/11 attack that murdered nearly 3,000 people, the Fort Hood massacre of 12 U.S. soldiers, the Pulse Nightclub attack that killed 49 Americans in Orlando, the San Bernardino attack that killed 14 at a Christmas party, the Chattanooga shooting that killed five at a Navy recruitment and reserve center, the Boston Marathon bombing that killed three and left hundreds wounded, and the Chelsea, New York, pipe-bombing that injured 30 innocent Americans. Not to mention the countless terror attacks that have been foiled by the FBI.

Here are some other facts uncovered by TMLC’s Freedom of Information Act requests:

•     Novi school district has no guidelines for the selection of presenters for teacher-training events.

•    The school district did not fully vet Huda Essa before selecting her as a presenter and providing her with data about the school district and its students.

•     Essa was given access to data from student and teacher surveys.

•    The school district said it had no records that would indicate it ever conducted a factual analysis of Essa’s presentation.

•     The school district signed a contract on August 2, 2017, agreeing to pay Essa $5,000 for her two-day seminar on August 28 and 29, 2017.

Thank you for your continued support of the Thomas More Law Center. Your donations help us to be

Battle Ready to Defend America!

Thomas More Law Center <thomasmore@thomasmore.org>

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  Send your email address to: jkaufman253469@icloud.com  Web Page: www.israelcommentary.org “Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

Lest the Nations of the World forget …..

From this weeks Torah portion                                                                        

Fifth Book of Moses, D’VARIM (DEUTERONOMY) Parsha EIKEV  18-25

… 18 Therefore impress these, My words upon                                                            

your very heart: bind them as a sign on your                                                            

hand and let them serve as a symbol on your 

forehead, 

19  and teach them to your.children reciting them 

when you stay at home and when you are away,

when you lie down and when you get up; 

20 and inscribe them on the doorposts                                                           

of your house and on your gates  

21 to the end that you and your children may endure, 

in the land that the LORD swore to your fathers to assign

to them, as Iong as there is a heaven over the earth     

22  If, then, you faithfully keep all this Instruction 

that I command you, loving the Lord your                                                               

God, walking in all His ways, and holding fast to Him 

23 the Lord will dislodge before you these nations. 

you will dispossess nations greater and more numerous than you. 

24  Every spot on which your foot treads shall be yours;                                                        

your territory shall extend from the wilderness to the Lebanon

and from the River, the Euphrates, to the Western Sea. 

25 No man shall stand up to you: the Lord your God will put                                                            

the dread and the fear of you over the whole land in which 

you set foot, as He promised.

Additional Notes:

The original British Mandate that the League of Nations designated as the future Jewish homeland followed G0d’s exact description of the land as described above – from the Mediterranean Sea all the way to the Euphrates River in current Iraq.  And, north to south from the Lebanon to the wilderness of Arabia.

The British and French, with their overwhelming political ambitions following their defeat and dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire after WWI made short order of this map, dividing it up to suit themselves. And the world, including the Arabs, have suffered the consequences ever since. (Jerome S. Kaufman   www.israel-commentary.org) 

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  Send your email address to: jkaufman253469@icloud.com  Web Page: www.israelcommentary.org “Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

Islam (CAIR) speaks in one breath to the West and quite the other to Muslims

Ecumenical Islamism

by Josh Eibelman
American Spectator
July 26, 2019

https://www.meforum.org/islamist-watch/59023/ecumenical-islamism

On May 29, 2019, the Michigan chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Association for Spiritual Renewal co-hosted a “Know Your Rights” seminar on “civil rights at the border, at home, and when stopped by the police.”

Despite the ostensibly progressive causes championed by the seminar, one of the main speakers was Usama Abdulghani – head of the Association for Spiritual Renewal. A closer look at past lectures given by Abdulghani raises, once again, questions about CAIR’s ties to fundamentalists, and its commitment to women and minorities’ rights.

According to his website, Abdulghani, a Shia cleric in Dearborn, Michigan, was born in Washington DC but moved to Qom, Iran at 20, where he studied Islamic law. Abdulghani’s website contains numerous videos of his speeches, lectures, and sermons — many of which promote the Iranian regime and its Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei, as well as Hezbollah and the Iranian Revolutionary Guard. His videos also espouse vicious misogyny, anti-Americanism and anti-Semitism, often echoing Iranian regime calls for Israel’s annihilation.

In one video, titled “Accepting Husbands Leadership,” Abdulghani explains that women must be subservient to their husbands and submit to their sexual desires: “She’s not supposed to leave the house without his permission…. If he says ‘stay in the house’, no. You’re not supposed to go…. The other one is willing sexual surrender in the bedroom…. That she submits to him and presents herself for his desires…. The last area of accepting the husband’s leadership and respecting him and obeying him will be listening to him and following his instructions.”

In numerous other videos, Abdulghani accuses the United States and Israel – which he refers to as “enemies of Islam” – of creating ISIS. In a video called “ISIS United the Believers,” images of U.S. president Barack Obama and Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu are shown while Abdulghani narrates: “One of the things that the enemies were trying to do was they were trying to create a group called ISIS. And this savage, unthinking group would come in and they would cause Shias and Sunnis to fight one another. One of the things we need right now is to save Israel’s behind, right? We need to save Israel. How can we save Israel? Have Muslims go over and kill one another.”

In yet another video called “World Powers VS Imam Mahdi,” Abdulghani repeats the claim that the West supports ISIS. He then says, “If the people knew, the masses knew, the beauty of our words they would follow us. Does that mean the tyrants are going to be happy? When you say Quds Day, that’s the wrong expectation.”

The video then cuts to a clip of Netanyahu’s speech before a joint session of Congress: “Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, he tweets in English that Israel must be destroyed. Listen to Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah. He said: ‘if all the Jews gather in Israel, it will save us the trouble of chasing them down around the world.”

Abdulghani then continues: “When they hear that our prophet said the best type of jihad [is] telling the truth to a tyrant, in the face of a tyrant, not being afraid, explaining what Islam is.” The video then cuts to Ayatollah Khamenei, with translated subtitles quoting him saying: “If they [Israel] do a damn thing, the Islamic Republic will raze Tel Aviv and Haifa to the ground.”

Many more of Abdulghani’s videos promote the Iranian regime and the Revolutionary Guard, as well as Hezbollah, which is designated a terrorist organization by the U.S, E.U, Canada, Australia, the Arab League, among others. In a dramatic video called “Don’t Mess with Us, We’re Muslims,” Abdulghani narrates while clips of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Ayatollahs Khamenei and Khomeini are shown along with Iranian warplanes and missiles attacking targets. The video ends with words on the screen: “Israel is more fragile than a spider’s web. #Death_To_Israel.”

Although it is not clear whether Abdulghani has official ties with the Iranian government, his videos have been published by the Iranian news agency Rasa (which is “dedicated to promoting the discourse of the Islamic Revolution”) and Mehr News (which is controlled by the regime’s Islamic Ideology Dissemination Organization).

Abdulghani’s appearance at the CAIR Michigan event shows that for all of  This is despite the fact that CAIR was founded by members of the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood.

In 2007, CAIR was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in an enormous terror finance trial. And in 2008, the FBI decided to cut ties with CAIR, citing concerns about its involvement with terror finance organizations.

So why would an organization such as CAIR, which is so closely connected to Sunni Islamism, invite a Shia cleric who so openly supports the hardline regime in Iran and the terrorist group Hezbollah?

Part of the reason may lie in the complicated politics of the Middle East. Over the past few years, despite its institutional Wahabbi ideology, Qatar has increasingly served as a meeting point for both the Shia Iranian regime and Sunni Islamist networks. CAIR itself has received hundreds of thousands of dollars in funding from the Qatar government, which has enjoyed an increasingly friendly relationship with Iran.

More simply, however, extremists seek each other’s company. And in an effort to make fundamentalist Islam mainstream, Islamist groups such as CAIR work hard to convince others they are the spokespeople for all Muslim Americans, both Sunni and Shia.

By inviting hardline anti-American, anti-Semitic clerics and activists such as Abdulghani, CAIR aims to consolidate the varied strains of Islamism under its purview while also publicly positioning itself as the most representative forum for American Muslims.

Josh Eibelman is a writer for Islamist Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  Send your email address to: jkaufman253469@icloud.com  Web Page: www.israelcommentary.org  “Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

ZOA: American Israel Public Affairs Comm. (AIPAC’s) Demand that Antisemitic Israel-Haters Omar/Tlaib be Allowed to Enter Israel is Wrong

SHARE THIS WITH YOUR FRIENDS

Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI)

Zionist Organization of America (ZOA) President Morton A. Klein and Chairman Mark Levenson, Esq. released the following statement:

The ZOA respectfully urges AIPAC to retract its mistaken criticism of Israel’s just and proper decision to refuse to admit Jew-haters Rashida Tlaib and Ilhan Omar for their planned visit to incite hatred and boycotts against Israel, designed to destroy the Jewish state.

AIPAC’s unwarranted criticism of Israel did tremendous harm to Israel and to AIPAC’s repeated declaration that they support the policies of the democratically elected government of Israel, and whose mission is supporting the U.S.-Israel relationship and the security of Israel and the United States.

AIPAC’s mistaken criticism of Israel was widely quoted by the media, including major American networks and cable stations (including FoxCNNNBC and others); was retweeted over 6,200 times (far more than a typical AIPAC tweet); encouraged and gave a free pass to politicians to join in AIPAC’s criticism of Israel; and gave grist and succor to hostile-to-Israel groups, including J Street, to unfairly condemn Israel and Israeli officials.

AIPAC’s criticism moreover misstated the object and goals of the planned Tlaib/Omar trip. AIPAC’s July 15, 2019 tweet that “every member of Congress should be able to visit and experience our democratic ally Israel firsthand,” ignored the facts that (i) Tlaib and Omar refused to participate with their Congressional colleagues in the large Congressional mission that actually did experience Israel firsthand, and (ii) Tlaib’s and Omar’s itinerary had absolutely nothing to do with “experiencing our democratic ally Israel firsthand.”

The Tlaib/Omar itinerary included no meetings with Israeli officials, no meetings with ordinary Israelis, and no visits to Israeli sites. Tlaib and Omar didn’t even call their trip a visit to “Israel.” Instead, their itinerary touted a trip to non-existent “Palestine.” The Tlaib/Omar visit was arranged by a terror-supporting group, Miftah. Miftah has accused Jews of the antisemitic blood libel and has praised suicide bombers for murdering Jews. The itinerary was designed to defame and incite against Israel.

AIPAC’s tweet moreover ignored the necessity for Israel to follow its anti-BDS laws; the fact that Congresspersons are not above the law, and the fact that self-respecting nations do not need to admit avowed enemies that wish to destroy their people. ZOA provided examples of government officials from foreign nations and territories – including Austria’s president – whom the U.S. properly barred from admission to the U.S, and even a member of Israel’s Knesset, as well as a member of the Palestinian Parliament Hanan Ashrawi.

If there was a Congressmember who demanded that France or Italy or any other country must be boycotted and destroyed, no self-respecting lobby would condemn France or Italy for refusing admission to that member of Congress.

Moreover, while AIPAC merely tweeted its approval of Israel’s offer to Tlaib of a humanitarian visit to her grandmother the next day (on August 16), AIPAC failed to criticize or even mention the fact that Tlaib then turned around and rejected Israel’s approval of her request for a humanitarian visit. Tlaib’s rejection of the humanitarian visit, that Tlaib herself had requested, demonstrated Tlaib’s true nefarious intentions, and the wisdom of Israel’s initial refusal of admission.

Additional Potential Harmful Effects of AIPAC’s Tweet: Further, although we do not believe that this was AIPAC’s intent, AIPAC’s mistaken tweet is being viewed by many as overall support for Omar and Tlaib, is being used by hostile-to-Israel groups to malign Israel, and may have emboldened Tlaib and Omar to become even more outrageous in their hatefulness.

Tlaib is now calling for boycotts against Bill Maher, because Maher expressed opposition to anti-Israel boycotts. (See Tlaib Urges Boycott of Bill Maher After He Slams BDS Movement,” by Yaron Steinbuch, New York Post, Aug. 18, 2019.) Tlaib and Omar also just publicized a vicious antisemitic cartoon on their social media. And they’ve hurled their typical absurd false racism and Islamophobia accusations against Israel’s leaders – which AIPAC failed to respond to. (See Of Course: Ilhan Omar Plays the Victim After Israel Ban, Gaslights and Cries Racism,” by Katie Pavlich, Town Hall, Aug 15, 2019.)

Additional Reasons Why Israel Was Correct to Deny Tlaib and Omar Admission:  ZOA and others in the pro-Israel community and honest journalists have independently pointed out numerous reasons (in addition to those discussed above) why Israel was correct to not admit Tlaib and Omar for a visit designed to promote hatred and boycotts against the Jewish state, and Israel’s destruction.

See, e.g., “Omar and Tlaib Rightly Blocked From Visiting ‘Non-Existent’ Country Palestine”, by Michael Goodwin, New York Post, Aug. 17, 2019; “Israel’s Ban of Tlaib, Omar was a Tough Call — But Entirely Justifiable,” Post Editorial Board, Aug. 16, 2019; “ZOA Applauds Israel for Refusing Entry of Israelophobic Jew-Haters Tlaib and Omar,” Aug. 15, 2019; “Zionist Organization of America Defends Israel’s Decision to Block Tlaib and Omar from Visiting Israel,” Breitbart, Aug. 15, 2019; Tweet by philanthropist Adam Milstein; “RJC Supports Israel’s Decision to Bar Entry to Reps. Tlaib and Omar,” Aug. 15, 2019; “Nothing Good Can Come From Omar and Tlaib Visit to Israel,” Interview with Mark Zell, Land of Israel Network, July 23, 2019; “No Entry to Israel for Tlaib-Omar,” Americans for a Safe Israel, Aug. 15, 2019; “Brooke Goldstein: Israel Smart About Omar, Tlaib – They Are Enemies of the Jewish State,”Fox News, Aug. 16, 2019.

Further, the director of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs’ Program to Counter Political Warfare and BDS, Dan Diker, explained that Tlaib and Omar’s planned trip was nothing short of an “act of political warfare.” Former Israeli Ambassador Alan Baker noted that the blame lies with Omar and Tlaib and pre-existing hostile-to-Israel actors, and that: “Israel, like every other country, has the sovereign prerogative to deny entry to any person.” (“Why Israeli Ban on Two US Congresswomen’s Visit Won’t Drive a Wedge Between the Countries,” Aug. 18, 2019.)

AIPAC should retract or correct its demand that Israel allow Israelophobes Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) and Rashida Tlaib (D-MI) to come to Israel. 

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  Send your email address to: jkaufman253469@icloud.com  Web Page: www.israelcommentary.org “Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

How Al Sharpton Abandoned Africa’s Slaves

By Charles Jacobs

American Thinker

August 17, 2019

The eminent African-American economist Glenn Loury recently wondered in the New York Times why leading Democrats would defend Al Sharpton, a man who is a blatant anti-Semite, an anti-white racist and to many, a simple con man. 

www.israel-commentary.org

Joe Biden calls him “a champion in the fight for civil rights.” Elizabeth Warren says “he has dedicated his life to the fight for justice for all,” and Kamala Harris lauds him as a man who “has spent his life fighting for what’s right.” Records show that President Obama had Sharpton visit his White House 118 times.

This, after Sharpton’s many outrages: the Tawana Brawley rape hoax of 1987, the anti-Jewish Crown Heights riots of 1991, and the firebombing of a Jewish-owned Harlem fashion boutique in 1995.

Loury suggests that any one of these things should have disqualified Sharpton from national platforms, along with any praise by Democratic Party leaders. But there’s something else, something no less repugnant, and perhaps even more shocking, that should obliterate once and for all the perception of Al Sharpton as a tough guy who never buckles when it comes to defending his race.

Al Sharpton is betraying black people currently enslaved in Africa. He went there. He spoke to them. He promised the slaves he met that he would awaken American blacks to their plight, but then he abandoned them. He abandoned them, I believe, because they are enslaved by Arab Muslims.   

A review of just how this came about should be instructive.

In 2001, as Sharpton contemplated a run for president in the 2004 election, he made a trip to Sudan to verify reports of the ongoing enslavement of Christian blacks there by Arab Muslims.  Reports were emerging of Arabs from northern Sudan raiding black Christian villages in the south of Africa’s then-largest country, killing the men and enslaving the women and children. 

(Full disclosure: At the time, I headed a movement to educate the public about modern-day slavery. We worked with the human rights organization Christian Solidarity International, which over the years redeemed tens of thousands of slaves in Sudan who were returned to their villages.)

To be fair, Sharpton’s 2001 trip to Sudan required courage. He flew with CSI leaders into a war zone on one of CSI’s regular slave redemption missions to see and talk to the slaves. The mission was protected by the Sudan People’s Liberation Army (SPLA), a black militia defending southern villages against an onslaught that had over the years killed millions and enslaved tens of thousands, an onslaught that the Islamist rulers in Khartoum designated a jihad. 

Sharpton was appalled. He said it was “outrageous that no nationally known civil rights group has gone over to Africa to criticize what is happening there.” He met with slave women, who showed him their scars from being beaten and raped. One asked him if the world knew of her people’s suffering; Sharpton replied, “They don’t know now, but they will soon.”

There was speculation that Sharpton not only used this trip to launch his presidential campaign, but also to climb to the top ranks of black American leadership. Indeed, he took a subtle shot at Jesse Jackson, who had been silent about slavery in Sudan for years.

When Sharpton returned from Sudan he met with senior members of Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam. Farrakhan had been vigorously denying that Arabs were enslaving blacks. His mission is to convince American blacks that Islam is the path to authentic freedom; it would be damaged by living and breathing proof that blacks are enslaved and slaughtered in African countries like Sudan where Islam dominates. 

Equally damaging for Farrakhan is the case of Mauritania, where black Muslims, who had been converted to Islam centuries ago, are nevertheless enslaved by Muslim Arab-Berbers.

Indeed, the mounting reports of Arab Muslims owning, breeding, and torturing black Muslims with impunity may have pushed Farrakhan into an unforced error: As reported by the New York Times, when he was cornered at a televised press conference and pressed by a reporter about his silence on the current enslavement of blacks, Louis Farrakhan grew visibly angry and challenged the gathered reporters. “If slavery exists,” he shouted, “why don’t you go, as a member of the press? And you look inside of the Sudan, and if you find it, then you come back, and tell the American people what you have found!” 

The editors of the Baltimore Sun took him up on his challenge and sent two reporters to Sudan, where the reporters personally purchased the freedom of two black Christian slave boys. Three months later, the Sun published a Pulitzer Prize-nominated account of their trip. 

Clarence Page, the Chicago Tribune’s black editorialist, who had written about a billion-dollar “loan” to Farrakhan by Libyan dictator Qaddafi for purposes of fomenting a revolt among black soldiers in the U.S. armed forces, now taunted Farrakhan to respond to the Sun report. But the leader of the Nation of Islam fell silent.

One can imagine Sharpton, upon his return from the slave liberation trip in Sudan, being read the riot act by the Farrakhaners: “You want to divide the black community?!” In any event, Sharpton reneged on his promise to the freed slave woman that he would make sure black Americans learned about the plight of her people.  

In 2017, after ignoring Africa’s slaves for many years, Sharpton returned to the issue. The occasion was a CNN report on Arabs in Libya capturing and selling Africans as slaves which featured a video of an auction where a man was sold for $400. This raised eyebrows in the black community, and Sharpton announced his decision to lead a delegation of black clergy to Libya to learn more about the slave trade there. 

For whatever reason, Sharpton never actually went to Libya, but he did meet with Libya’s U.N. ambassador Elmahdi Elmajerbi to discuss the problem — and made sure to get the photo-op. Just as with his trip to Sudan, however, Sharpton’s ire quickly faded and once again the slaves went down the memory hole.

Today, in five Arab and Muslim African countries — Sudan, Mauritania, Libya, Nigeria, and Algeria — blacks are enslaved. These are known realities, easily documented.

Sharpton and Farrakhan have ignored or denied the current-day plight of black people who are taken as slaves  They do so for two primary reasons; first, so as not to denigrate Islam, and secondly, to keep “America’s racism” a singular and unique focus, the benefits of which would be lost to them if blacks here knew that today, sadly, in some parts of the Islamic world, African men, women, and children are still in bondage, captured, bought, and sold as chattel.

Al Sharpton had the chance to marshal the power of America’s black community to help free today’s slaves. That black power, political and moral, has been won with courage, persistence, and volumes of blood. It is evoked in the example of Harriet Tubman, a runaway slave who went back into the South to bring more of her people to freedom. She explained, “I have heard their groans and seen their tears, and I would give every drop of blood in my veins to free them.”

Al Sharpton heard the groans of enslaved black Africans, saw their tears, and then, seeing the way the wind was blowing, ran away.

Charles Jacobs is president of the American Anti-Slavery Group.

Al Sharpton, The Darling Of Democrats and their Presidential Candidates

We were dismayed but not surprised by the reactions of several Democratic presidential aspirants to President Trump’s critical remarks about Rev. Al Sharpton.

Sharpton had announced he would hold a press conference in Baltimore “to address Trump’s remarks & bi-partisan outrage in the black community” over the president’s description of Baltimore as a rat-infested, poverty-stricken area and of Congressman Elijah Cummings, its representative in Congress who is black, as negligent in not making sure it had the resources it needed. 

The president’s remarks had followed Cummings’s berating of the acting secretary of the Department of Homeland Security during a hearing regarding the way migrant children were being treated at the U.S.-Mexico border.

So, in response to the Sharpton announcement, Trump said he knew Sharpton for 25 years and that “Al is a con man, a troublemaker, always looking for a score.”

Of course we in New York are familiar with Sharpton and the persistent “racial arson” allegations against him and completely concur in Trump’s remarks – except hat we would go even further.

Sharpton first emerged on the public scene in the infamous 1987 Tawana Brawley affair in which he claimed that a black teenager had been abducted by a white gang, including a local assistant district attorney, Steven Pagones. A grand jury cleared Pagones and also found that the alleged incident never happened.

In 1991 he defended a New York City college professor who had slammed “rich Jews” for financing the slave trade and manipulating Hollywood in an effort to maintain “a system of destruction of black people.” In the midst of the ensuing controversy Sharpton announced, “If the Jews want to get it on, tell them to pin their yarmulkas back and come over to my house.”

In the 1991 Crown Heights tragedy, a Jewish driver accidentally ran over a 7-year-old African American, Gavin Cato. During the anti-Semitic riots that broke out, Sharpton reportedly led marches which featured chants of “Kill the Jews.” Of course, the riots culminated in the stabbing death of Yankel Rosenbaum. At the funeral for Cato, Sharpton made snide references to the presence of “diamond merchants” in Crown Heights.

In 1995, Sharpton got involved in a dispute in Harlem which pitted a Jewish tenant, who ran Freddy’s Fashion Mart, against his black subtenant, who ran a record store. Sharpton went on radio and declared, “We will not stand by and allow them to move this brother so that some white interloper can expand his business on 125th Street. Sharpton’s assistant said, “This street will burn. We are going to see to it that this cracker suffers.”

Sharpton’s National Action Network then led protestors in front of Freddy’s Mart, referring to Jews as “bloodsuckers” and threatening “to burn and loot the Jews.” After two months of this sort of thing, one of the demonstrators rushed into the store and burned it to the ground, killing seven people and shooting himself.

Yet this is how New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio’s responded to Trump calling out Sharpton: “I’ve known…[Sharpton] for decades and Trump’s characterization is not only disrespectful, it’s untrue. While [Sharpton] was pushing for justice in the teaching of Dr. King, Trump was calling for the execution of five innocent black boys [in the Central Park jogger case].”

(It should be noted that when the Central Park case was scheduled to go to trial in 1989, then private citizen Donald Trump took out full-page ads calling for the reinstatement of the death penalty in New York. He didn’t quite call for the execution of the five accused men. They had confessed to the attack on the jogger, but their convictions were later overturned when someone else confessed to the crime.)

For de Blasio, it seems, none of Sharpton’s antics is of any consideration. Indeed, since the Trump ad was placed in 1989, the mayor’s “decades” long period had to include the Crown Heights and Freddy’s Mart tragedies. This from the mayor of a city with the largest Jewish population outside of Israel is breathtaking.

Of course, de Blasio is not a serious player in Democratic presidential politics. But here are similar reactions from three, who at the time of this writing are:

Joe Biden called Sharpton “a champion in the fight for civil rights. The fact that President Trump continues to use the power of the presidency to unleash racist attacks on the people he serves is despicable.”

Elizabeth Warren said, “Rev. Sharpton has dedicated his life to the fight for justice for all. No amount of racist tweets from the man in the White House will erase that – and we must not let them divide us. I stand with my friend Al Sharpton in calling out these ongoing attacks on people of color. “

Kamala Harris chimed in with, “Rev. Sharpton has spent his life fighting for what’s right and working to improve our nation, even in the face of hate. It’s shameful, yet unsurprising that Trump would continue to attack those who have done so much of our country.”

Of course, lest we forget:  Al Sharpton was Barack Obama’s right hand man to the Black community and had more White House visits than any other leader or politician.

Democrats are not only  pandering to Sharpton but perpetrating the worst sort or Trump Derangement Syndrome running amok. Probably both. Come election time, readers are urged to remember who are our real friends.

www.israel-commentary.org

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  Send your email address to: jkaufman253469@icloud.com  Web Page: www.israelcommentary.org “Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

All you need to know about the Jews while standing on one foot.

This Shabbat we began the study of Deuteronomy (D’varim) – The Fifth Book of the Hebrew Bible (The Five Books of Moses)

From: ETZ HAYIM  Torah and Commentary

The Rabbinical Assembly, The United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism 

Parsha 1 – D’varim

Edited from the introduction by Jeffrey Tigay                                                                 

   …The book’s core is the second  discourse, in which Moses conveys laws that the people commissioned him to receive from God at Mount Sinai 40 years earlier.

Several themes in Deuteronomy stand out. Among the Torah’s books, it is the most vigorous and clear advocate of monotheism and of the ardent, exclusive loyalty that Israel owes God. It emphasizes God’s love justice and transcendence. He is near to Israel but in a spiritual not a physical sense. Only God’s name , not God himself. dwells in the sanctuary.

This book stresses the covenant between God and Israel,  summed up in 26:I619. Established with the patriarchs, affirmed at Sinai and in Moab, it is to be re-affirmed as soon as Israel enters its land (4:3l, S:2,28:69,27).   

Deuteronomy Iooks toward Israel’s life in the Land of Israel where a society pursuing justice and righteousness, living in harmony with God  and enjoying His bounty, can be established. (4:5-8, 7:12-13). 

The promise of this land is  conditional. Israel’s welfare depends on maintaining a society governed  by God’s social and religious law. These laws are a divine gift to Israel unparalleled in their  justice and their ability to secure God’s closeness. (4:5-8).

The Torah’s humanitarianism is most developed in Deuteronomy’s concern for the welfare of the poor and disadvantaged.  Deuteronomy proclaims the unique rule that sacrifice may take place only in the religious capital, in a single sanctuary. (chap. 12). 

Its aim is to spiritualize religion by freeing it from excessive dependence on sacrifice and priesthood. It urges instead God’s studying law and performing rituals that teach reverent love for Him. These teachings probably laid the groundwork for non-sacrificial, synagogue-based worship.     

Deuteronomy has a strong intellectual orientation. It urges all Israelites to study God’s laws.  Its style is didactic and sermonic, explaining  the meaning of events and the purpose of laws, to secure Israel’s willing, understanding assent.   

Deuteronomy strongly influenced later Jewish tradition. The core of Jewish worship is the recitation of the Sh’ma (6:4) and the public reading of the Torah. Also based on Deuteronomy are the duty of blessing God after meal,  Kiddush on Shabbat, affixing mezuzas to doorposts,  wearing tefillin and tzizzit and charity to the  poor (e.g., If:8). 

Deuteronomy is the source of the concept that religious life should be based on a sacred book and its study. As the biblical  book that deals most with beliefs and attitudes, it plays a major role in Jewish theology. 

In the theological-ethical introduction of  his digest of Jewish law, the Mishnei Torah, Maimonides cites Deuteronomy more than any other book, starting with the command to believe in God and Him alone.   

Deuteronomy’s effect on Jewish life cannot be overstated.   No idea has shaped Jewish history more than monotheism, which this book  asserts so passionately. And no verse has shaped Jewish consciousness and identity more than Deuteronomy’s classic expression of that idea – the Shema prayer.                                                             

 

Jeffrey Howard Tigay (born December 25, 1941) is a modern biblical scholar who is best known for the study of Deuteronomy and in his contributions to the Deuteronomy volume of the JPS Torah Commentary (1996). Educated at Columbia University and gaining his B.A. in 1963, he continued toward rabbinic ordination at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America (M.H.L., 1966). He earned his Ph.D. in Comparative Biblical and Ancient Near Eastern Studies from Yale University.

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  Send your email address to: jkaufman253469@icloud.com  Web Page: www.israelcommentary.org “Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

By the personal haters National Security Advisor John Bolton attracts, he must be one super military advisor for our side!

John Bolton’s Wars

By William McGurn

The Wall Street Journal  Aug. 6, 2019

What do the Iranian regime, the New York Times and Sen. Rand Paul have in common?

www.israel-commentary.org

(By the haters National Security Advisor John Bolton has attracted – Iran, Russia, China, Venezuela, the New York Times and Senator Rand Paul– John Bolton must be one super military advisor for our side!)

“I believe Mr. Trump does not seek war. But Mr. Bolton and Netanyahu have always sought war.” Thus spoke Iran’s foreign minister, Javad Zarif, at a Monday press conference in Tehran. 

It’s not the first time Mr. Zarif has tried to drive a wedge between President Trump and his national security adviser, John Bolton—or between the president and his most steadfast international ally, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.  But for Mr. Bolton, Mr. Zarif implies, we could have peace in the Middle East tomorrow.

Iran’s foreign minister has plenty of support for his argument. Scarcely a week goes by without some article warning the president that Mr. Bolton is leading him to war. The same folks who pound the president for being soft on the world’s worst thugs then oddly side with the thugs against the White House official who takes them on.

There can be no doubting Mr. Bolton’s unpopularity in Dictatorsville. The North Koreans blame Mr. Bolton (along with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo) for the “atmosphere of hostility and mistrust” that fouled the Hanoi summit in February. 

In Moscow last year, Vladimir Putin asked Mr. Bolton whether he’d removed the olive branches on the American seal.

Venezuela’s besieged dictator, Nicolás Maduro, charges Mr. Bolton with trying to have him assassinated. Cuba’s foreign minister calls Mr. Bolton a “pathological liar” for accusing the Communist island of fomenting revolution in South America. 

China denounces him for slander for saying Beijing’s behavior toward its Southeast Asian neighbors threatens peace. Along with the New York Times and the Rand Paul/Pat Buchanan axis of the Republican Party, the dictators would all love to see Mr. Bolton run out of the West Wing.

But if war isn’t what’s guiding Mr. Bolton, what is? At bottom it’s the conviction that diplomacy and multilateral organizations are fine—as long as they serve American interests. In the Bolton version, America First means the U.S. Constitution takes precedence over the U.N. Charter.

For all the talk about Mr. Bolton’s wish to go to war with Iran, the actual policy has been more limited: pulling out of a bad nuclear deal, applying economic sanctions, isolating Tehran diplomatically, designating the Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization and, more recently, building a coalition to protect oil tankers in the Persian Gulf from Iranian aggression. 

One way of interpreting Mr. Zarif’s increasing complaints is as an admission that Iran’s regime is feeling the pinch—and that it longs for the days when it was dealing with the malleable (read – “stupid” ) John Kerry.

Ditto for North Korea. Before joining the administration, Mr. Bolton wrote a piece on these pages called “The Legal Case for Striking North Korea First,” so naturally his critics assume that’s the game plan. But again the actual policy has been maximum pressure short of war, along with summits. 

Notwithstanding Mr. Trump’s skepticism about using massive military force, moreover, surely he would side with Mr. Bolton over Sen. Elizabeth Warren, who announced a no-first-use nuclear policy during the last Democratic debate. In practice this would entail a willingness to sacrifice Los Angeles or Chicago to a nuclear strike before responding in kind.

It’s true that the Trump-Bolton relationship has its bumps. A recent Axios profile relayed an anecdote from the Irish prime minister’s St. Patrick’s Day visit to the Oval Office. “John,” Mr. Trump asked his national security adviser, “is Ireland one of those countries you want to invade?”

But the article didn’t report Mr. Bolton’s rejoinder, which suggests a healthy give and take: “It’s still early in the day, Mr. President.”

Plainly Mr. Bolton is aware that he’s more hawkish than his president. But plainly, too, Mr. Trump finds his national security chief useful. One reason might be that—unlike so many others, even within the Trump administration—Mr. Bolton knows who makes the decisions and doesn’t regard the president as stupid.

In making his case to his boss, Mr. Bolton emphasizes both U.S. interests and Mr. Trump’s instincts. Sometimes it works, sometimes not.

pastedGraphic.pngBut the idea that a warmonger is leading an unsuspecting president around by the nose is ridiculous. Mr. Trump was elected on a platform that rejected both what he called the “endless wars” of the George W. Bush era and the pusillanimity of the Obama years. Could it be the president appreciates having around him a national security adviser who puts the fear of God into America’s enemies?

Meanwhile the critics carp, from the right as well as left. “I fear that he’s a malignancy, a malignant influence on the administration,” said Sen. Rand Paul, speaking for the right-wing claque of those who regard Mr. Bolton as a warmonger. While over on the left the New York Times publishes pieces such as “Yes, John Bolton Really Is That Dangerous.”

Which is pretty much the same complaint from the autocrats in Caracas, Moscow and Tehran (and all of the above).

Write to mcgurn@wsj.com.

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  Send your email address to:

jkaufman253469@icloud.com  

Web Page: www.israelcommentary.org 

“Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

The Exemplary Life of Muhammad, the Prophet

Affirming the article present below:

II  Courageous Brigette Gabriel presents 1400 years of Islam,  Religion of Peace, in 15 minutes – A fearless wake-up call to those who prefer denial

Muhammad is the founder of Islam. Born in Mecca (now within current Saudi Arabia) in 570 CE.  Most of his early life was spent as a merchant. At age 40, he began to have revelations from Allah that became the basis for the Koran and the foundation of Islam.

(He was originally not accepted as a prophet by the Arabs of Mecca and elected therefore to move to Medina which was populated by Jews and hopefully gain acceptance by them of his revelations. They did not accept him as a prophet. He then created a Treaty of Hudaybijjah with the Jews that was to have lasted 10 years. After only 2 years, Muhammad felt strong enough to defeat the Jews, abrogated the Treaty and slaughtered the Jews of Medina. 

You may remember the famous photo-op handshake on the White House lawn, Sep 13, 1993 between Yasir Arafat and Yitschak Rabin with Bill Clinton as witness. This was supposed to have been the beginning of a mutually acceptable peace process. Within hours, Yasir Arafat secretly advised his followers not to be concerned and told them, remember the Treaty of Hudaybijjah, mentioned above, wherein Muhammed killed all the Jews after two years.

This slaughter was quickly followed by Muhammed’s return in triumph to Mecca and the beginning if his reign of terror and conquest  that continued until his death in 632.  By 630 he had unified most of Arabia under a single religion – his. He died in 632 CE

His followers were amazingly successful in their ongoing conquests that continue in one form or another to this very day. As of 2015, there are over 1.8 billion Muslims in the world who profess, “There is no God but Allah, and Muhammad is his prophet.”  “Allah Akbar” remains  the universal battle cry the Islamic terrorists declare right before killing themselves and as many non-believers as possible. The Arab leaders seem to by-pass this particular part of the ceremonies.) jsk

A few examples of the peaceful nature of Muhammed’s conquests include the following:

Tortured & killed unbelievers – beginning in 628 AD

1. To find the treasure hidden by the Jewish Banu an- Nadir tribe, Muhammad personally ordered the torture of three Jews: Saʼyah ibn-ʻAmr (The Origins of the Islamic State, p. 43), Kinanah bin al-Rabi (The Life of Muhammad (Sirat Rasul Allah), p. 515), and Ibn Abi l- Huqayq (The Life of Muhammad: Al-Waqidi’s Kitab al- Maghazi, p. 331). Muhammad then personally ordered the killing Ibn Abi. 

2. After a raid on the settlement of Wadi al- Qura about 100 miles from Medina in 628, Zaid (Muhammadʼs adoptive son) by Muhammadʼs authority ordered that a “very old woman” Umm Qirfa be tied by her legs between two camels and ripped in two. (The Life of Muhammad, page 665) 

When Muhammad raided the Jewish town of Khaybar in 629, their treasure had been hidden. To extract its location, Muhammad ordered that a fire be kindled on the chest of the leader, Kinana bin al-Rabi. When he was nearly dead, Muhammad delivered the man to a fellow-raider who beheaded him. (The Life of Muhammad, page 515). 

What is Islam? 

Islam is defined by the holy texts of its religion – not by the beliefs, actions or virtues of a Muslim. 

Muhammad is Islam – Islam is Muhammad The importance of Muhammadʼs example in Islam cannot be over-stated. The Quran establishes in Surah 33:21, “There is a good example in Allahʼs apostle [Muhammad] for those of you who look to Allah and the Last Day and remember Allah always.” Sharia Law insists that the moral scale of good and evil is NOT what reason considers good or bad, but rather what Muhammad indicated by what he did or what he forbade or permitted. (Reliance of the Traveler, paragraph a1.4)

This is further emphasized by a reliable Hadith, Bukhari Book 9, Number 391, “If I [Muhammad] forbid you to do something keep away from it. And if I order you to do something, then do it as much as you can. 

Muhammad, at about age 50, married Aisha in 620, when she was six years old, and he consummated their marriage in 623, when she was nine.  She remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death). 

There are numerous authoritative reports in which Muhammad was personally involved in possessing, buying, selling, or giving away slaves: 

As we saw in the section dealing with slavery, Muhammad engaged in the slave trade and possessed slaves of his own. And after a Muslim victory, Muhammad was involved in distributing the captured non-Muslim women among his Muslim warriors, and taking some for himself. Islamic Doctrine is based on the Koran and the teachings of Muhammad. What did this Doctrine allow to happen to these non-Muslim women? 

Captured non-Muslim women then, and still today, fall under the category of those “whom your right hands possess.” Such a woman becomes a slave to her Muslim captor, has all previous marriages annulled (Reliance of the Traveller, o9.13) and it then becomes “legal” for him to have intercourse with her. This is authorized by 4:24 of the Koran, which begins by stating: 

Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (slaves) whom your right hands possess. Thus has Allah ordained for you… 

Who is a Muslim? 

A Muslim is one who is obedient to the commands of Allah and examples of Muhammad. 

Beheaded 600 Jews in one day 

For twenty-five nights in March 627, the Muslims besieged a Jewish enclave within Medina until they surrendered. Some within the enclave had been accused of aiding Muhammadʼs enemies. In an act of collective punishment, Muhammad ordered all of the men – some 600 to 900 in total – beheaded and the women and children sold off as slaves. The entire clan was disseminated.  As it was later described: 

The Messenger of God [Muhammad] breakfasted at the market and gave instructions for a furrow to be dug there [in which to bury those to be killed]…The Messenger of God sat with the distinguished among his companions. He called for the men of the Banu Qurayza, and they came out at a leisurely pace, and their heads were cut off. 

It is generally accepted that Muhammad consummated marriages with eleven women during his life. During the time of his first marriage, he had only one wife, Khadija. During the last three years of his life, he had nine wives at one time. Here are a few of  his eleven wives: 

Khadija bint Khuwaylid b. Asad – Married to Muhammad in 595. Died in 619. 

Sawdah bint Zam’ah b. Qays – Married to Muhammad in 619 after Khadija’s death. 

Aisha bint Abi Bakr al-Siddiq – Married to Muhammad in 620, when she was only six years old, and he consummated the marriage in 623, when she was nine. 

Hafsa bint ‘Umar b. al-Khattab – Married to Muhammad in March 625. 

And, this is only the beginning of the lurid tale of this “Perfect Man of Peace.”

From:  Jarvis Williams   * For a complete list of references 

http://perfectmantruth.com    The Perfect Man

CounterJihadCoalition.org

Article written in part and compiled by Jerome S. Kaufman

www.israel-commentary.org

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  Send your email address to: jkaufman253469@icloud.com  Web Page: www.israelcommentary.org “Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman

 

Your savings quickly becoming worthless with new budget leading the charge

The direct result of another runaway government collapsing under the weight of the gimme people – uncontrolled immigration, no work, more pay, more unearned  benefits and Voila — national  bankruptcy.   jsk

Budget Deal a Win for Everyone Except Taxpayers

Redacted from an article by Bob Adelmann

23 July 2019

The budget “deal” cobbled together over the last couple of weeks is a win for every vested interest but one: the U.S. taxpayer. It provides proof about what can be accomplished, even by Congress, when the motivation is sufficiently strong.

That motivation was provided by a letter from Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi on July 12 that his “extraordinary measures” being employed since the debt ceiling was reached in early March were about to be “exhausted.” This move allowed him to conduct budget negotiations directly with Pelosi, sidelining Trump’s budget director Mick Mulvaney and resulting in a deal that was a win for nearly every vested interest in Washington.

First and foremost it solves the number one problem politicians face when they leave Washington for their six week “recess”: unhappy constituents quizzing them on big spending Washington. It gives President Trump a victory: more spending for the military and “his” vets.

It gives Pelosi and her Democrat counterpart in the Senate, Chuck Schumer, a win by increasing domestic spending by even more than that granted the military.

It gives a win for Mnuchin who is now free to borrow without limit the sums increasingly needed to pay Congress’ bills. It provides a chance for establishment politicians to claim improved “stability” without the threat of another government shutdown, while touting the kind of pragmatism and compromise that Washington is famous for but largely missing until now.

It also funds Planned Parenthood, provides nothing for Trump’s wall, fails to loosen budgetary constraints on the Border Patrol, and, best of all for big spending politicians, it finally and completely obliterates any remainder of the highly touted but rarely followed Budget Control Act of 2011 and its “sequester” caps. 

As House Appropriations Chairwoman Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) celebrated: “I am proud that this agreement ends the senseless austerity imposed by the Budget Control Act.” (‘Senseless’ — Huh?)

The deal includes extending the budget ceiling until June 2021, a convenient eight months after the November 2020 elections.

It increases government spending by nearly a third of a trillion dollars over the next two years, part of which goes to the military and part to domestic spending. 

As Pelosi and Schumer chortled, the deal “will enhance our national security and invest in middle class priorities that advance the health, financial security and well-being of the American people.”   (Who the F are they kidding?)

It predictably engages in phony bookkeeping maneuvers to show an attempt at cutting spending. The White House sought $150 billion in faux “cuts.” The deal provides supposed cuts of $77 billion by — ready? — extending cuts to Medicare beyond fiscal year 2027(!), and by “extending” fees being collected by Customs and Border Protection. That $77 billion in cuts is less than two percent of the government’s total budget and just one quarter of the increased spending provided in the agreement.

This is the same stunt engaged in by Presidents Reagan and the elder Bush. In 1982, President Reagan was promised $3 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax hikes. The tax hikes went through, but the spending cuts did not materialize. President Reagan later said that signing onto this deal was the biggest mistake of his presidency.

In 1990, President George H.W. Bush agreed to $2 in spending cuts for every $1 in tax hikes. The tax hikes went through, and we are still paying them today. Not a single penny of the promised spending cuts actually happened.

At present the federal government borrows a quarter of every dollar that it spends, with that percentage increasing in the next few years thanks to this budget deal and as boomers retire and interest rates increase.

The “deal” — humorously being called a “compromise” — is expected to be voted on and passed by Congress on Thursday, a day before the summer recess begins. 

When it is signed into law by the president it might, as Maya MacGuineas, president of the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget said, “end up being the worst budget agreement in our nation’s history, proposed at a time when our fiscal conditions are already precarious.”

Author Bob Adelmann is an Ivy League graduate and former investment advisor, Bob is a regular contributor to The New American, primarily on economics and politics. He can be reached at badelmann@thenewamerican.com.

To subscribe to Israel Commentary:  Send your email address to:

jkaufman253469@icloud.com  Web Page: www.israelcommentary.org “Like” on Facebook @  1. Israel Commentary  2) Jerome S. Kaufman