Cruz missed a chance to be a mensch. He failed
the opportunity to be gracious.
He probably also blew a potential chance to be
appointed to The Supreme Court and certainly his
chance to be a Republican presidential nominee.
He showed his sore loser stripes last night.
Cruz defended his action by stating the vicious
attacks on his wife and father by Trump during the
nomination process cannot be ignored and run deep.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Tonight is Trump's opportunity to prove he is credible and worthy of a chance at being elected president. There are many who are willing to be convinced because of their discomfort with his opponent.
His daughter has a lot on her shoulders as she introduces her father and seeks to humanize him and win over reluctant women. Stay tuned!
+++
I expect to hear from my friend, Kim Strassel, today, in regard to my invitation to her coming to Savannah to talk about her new book regarding the erosion of our First Amendment and the politicization of free speech. Kim is at the convention and e mailed she has been working 19 hours a day.
For those who wish, you can catch her on a podcast with Paul Gigot about the first two days of The RN Convention.
+++
Bernard Lewis turned 100, May 31. (See 1 below.)
===
Democrats want to spend big to make big government bigger so when it fails the failures will also be huge.
===
More information regarding The Iran Deal and new threats to peace and stability. Obama and his crooked State Department remain in denial. (See 3 and 3a below.)
===
Obama's outreach to radical Islamists has resulted in his own hand being bitten and the loss of thousands of peaceful Muslim limbs. More to come.
Weak dreamers never seem to learn the lesson of weakness - that it breeds increased danger and death, (See 4 below.)
+++
Dick
========================================================================
1) A Middle East Studies Legend Turns 100
by Daniel Pipes
The historian Bernard Lewis celebrates his 100th birthday today.
Three quotes establish his career.Martin Kramer, a former student of Lewis, sums up his teacher's accomplishments:
Bernard Lewis emerged as the most influential postwar historian of Islam and the Middle East. His elegant syntheses made Islamic history accessible to a broad public in Europe and America. In his more specialized studies, he pioneered social and economic history and the use of the vast Ottoman archives. His work on the premodern Muslim world conveyed both its splendid richness and its smug self-satisfaction. His studies in modern history rendered intelligible the inner dialogues of Muslim peoples in their encounter with the values and power of the West.
The University of California's R. Stephen Humphreys notes "the extraordinary range of his scholarship [and] his capacity to command the totality of Islamic and Middle Eastern history from Muhammad down to the present day." And, as the late Fouad Ajami of Johns Hopkins University put it on Lewis' 90th birthday, he is "the oracle of this new age of the Americans in the lands of the Arab and Islamic worlds."
Lewis' career spanned a monumental 75 years, from his first article ("The Islamic Guilds") in 1937 to his autobiography in 2012. Midway, in 1969, he entered my life. In Israel the summer between my sophomore and junior years in college, with my aspirations to become a mathematician in doubt, I thought of switching to Middle East studies. To sample this new field, I visited Ludwig Mayer's renowned bookstore in Jerusalem and purchased The Arabs in History, Lewis' 1950 book.
Left: Bernard Lewis (right) with the author's father, Richard Pipes, in London, May 1974. Right: Lewis (left) with the author in New York City, May 2008.
|
It launched my career. Over the next 47 years, Lewis continued to exert a profound influence on my studies. Although never his formal student, I absorbed his views, reading nearly all his writings and favorably reviewing seven of his books (in 1982, 1986,1988, 1989, 1994, 1996, and2000), far more than those of any other author. His name appears on 508 pages of my website. Beyond numbers, he more than anyone else influenced my understanding of the Middle East and Islam.
That said, he and I argued strenuously during the George W. Bush years, narrowly on Iraq policy (I was more skeptical of U.S. efforts) and broadly on the matter of bringing freedom to the Middle East(ditto).
Bernard Lewis more than ever is an inspiration to his many self-identified disciples.
|
I first met Professor Lewis in 1973 in London, when he generously invited me to his house and offered advice on my Ph.D. studies. I saw him most recently, twice, at his small apartment in the Philadelphia suburbs.
He's impressively fit in body and mind, spending time on the computer, ever the raconteur ("What's a Jewish joke? One which non-Jews can't understand and Jews have heard a better version of"), and conjuring up anecdotes from a time before the rest of us were born (his 1946 discussion with Abba Eban about the latter's career choices). It's wonderful to see him doing well even if it's sadly understandable that he no longer engages in scholarship nor opines on current events.
Born a mere 15 days after the Sykes-Picot agreement that defined the modern Middle East, their common May centennial finds Syria and Iraq in shreds but Bernard Lewis more than ever is an inspiration to his many self-identified disciples, including this one.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2) The Democrats Want To 'Invest' Big In Big Government
The Democrats' draft party platform uses the word "invest" more than 45 times, when what they mean is "more government spending."
2016 Elections: Democrats recently outlined what their party stands for in a draft platform, in which the party places all its bets on government.
In the 35-page draft Democratic Party platform, the word "invest" shows up more than 45 times. Democrats aren't talking about private investors putting their own money into startups, or companies investing in breakthrough technologies, or families investing for their own retirement.
Nope. In this case, the Democrats writing the platform took a page from Orwell and changed the word "spend" to "invest." After all, who could be opposed to the government making investments?
So, the Democrats promise to make "the most ambitious investment in American infrastructure since President Eisenhower created the interstate highway system." (Which, by the way, is what President Obama said this trillion-dollar stimulus would do.)
They promise "bold new investments by the federal government" to make college education "affordable." (Just like that Obama Care investment made health care more affordable?)
Democrats want to increase investments in child care, "green and resilient infrastructure," politically correct police training, still more federal job training programs, and immigration integration services. They want to invest in "housing near good jobs and good schools" and in public health programs. The list goes on and on and on and on.
As far as we can tell, there is one part of government where Democrats want to cut "investments" -- prisons.
Tellingly, the platform uses the word "spending" only three times, only one of which refers to federal spending. The others involve complaints about too much spending by the drug industry on advertisements and too much private spending on political campaigns.
And who will pay for all these bold and beautiful new "investments"? Businesses and private investors.
"We believe," the draft platform says, "that we can pay for ambitious progressive investments ... without adding to the debt by making those at the top and the largest corporations pay their fair share."
In other words, today's Democratic Party firmly believes that the only way to grow the economy is to forcibly remove still more money from the pockets of private investors, and put it into the hands of unaccountable government bureaucrats, political hacks and politically connected businesses.
This is just the Tax-and-Spend-Liberalism (with a Soft-on-Crime chaser) that wrecked the Democratic Party before and that has failed every time and everywhere it's been tried. Slapping new labels on these dusty old policies won't make them any more effective.
Everyone knows that the parties' platforms aren't binding on anyone. But they are an expression of the parties' core beliefs. If Republicans can't take advantage -- starting at the GOP convention this week -- of the Democrats' lurch to the extreme left, it will be a lost opportunity of historic proportions.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3)
Iran Deal Was Worse Than We Thought
By JONATHAN S. TOBIN
One year after the conclusion of the negotiations with Iran, the nuclear deal touted by President Obama as his signature foreign policy achievement is looking even flimsier than it did then. Since July 2015, Iran has not only disappointed President Obama’s hopes that it would use this opportunity to “get right with the world.” It has also illegally tested ballistic missiles and continued activities that caused Obama’s State Department to again name it as the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism. Even worse, German intelligence revealed earlier this month that Iran is not only violating, as the administration concedes, the spirit of the agreement but also its letter, too, by seeking to illicitly purchase nuclear material that can be used to build a weapon.
That latter revelation apparently wasn’t enough to make it into the New York Times’ article on the anniversary of the deal. But for those who are actually paying attention to reality rather than administration spin, it turns out the pact was even worse than we thought. While even many critics have conceded that, if Iran keeps to the terms of the deal, it will prevent it from getting a bomb until it completely expired in 15 years, the Iranian foreign minister contradicted the assurances of the Obama administration yesterday when he said his Islamist state would be able to fully resume its enrichment of uranium after ten years.
According to the Associated Press, the Iranian state news agency Fars, Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif said his announcement was justified by a document linked to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action that is to be submitted to the International Atomic Energy Agency. The document may be a side agreement that has not yet been published by the United States, but the AP says two diplomats, speaking anonymously, have confirmed its authenticity. It states that after the 10-year period has passed since the deal’s announcement, Iran will be able to start replacing its dismantled centrifuges with the most advanced machines. This will be in addition to the many centrifuges Iran was already permitted to keep in operation now. According to the AP, those new centrifuges will be five to ten times as efficient as the 5,060 that it currently operates.
This is not a minor issue since it likely cuts the “breakout” time Iran needs to race to a bomb in half. Given the nuclear research Iran is also permitted to conduct in the interim period and the fact that the West has no firm idea of just how much the Iranian achieved its work on military applications of its nuclear program, that makes it more or less a certainty that an Iranian bomb will be a reality within 11-15 years from now.
That this aspect of the deal was not publicized during the debate about its ratification last year is shocking but very much in line with the dishonesty that Deputy National Security Director Ben Rhodes boasted of to the New York Times in May. But the fact that the Iranians are willing to publicize this document now shows the depth of contempt for its negotiating partner it is willing to display. Throughout the talks leading up to the creation of the JCOPA, the U.S. made concession after concession, shredding the commitments about Iran that President Obama made to the country four years ago when he was running for re-election. He sacrificed virtually all of America’s concerns about Iran in order to get an agreement at any price because he viewed a rapprochement with Iran to be his foreign policy priority. The result was a weak deal that could be easily evaded but would likely result in a bomb even if it were strictly observed while leaving Iran free to pursue its goals of regional hegemony and support for terrorists who seek Israel’s destruction while also immeasurably enriching Tehran.
But if this is indeed an essential part of the president’s legacy, he will have bequeathed to the world a record of deceit and reckless appeasement that moved the prospect of an Iranian bomb from a question mark to a near certainty. That’s a problem that will complicate the ability of either Donald Trump or Hillary Clinton to conduct U.S. foreign policy in the next four to eight years.
4)
In New Threats to West, Iran Prepares Plans to Build Uranium-Enrichment Plant, Boasts Increased War Games
Iranian officials issued new threats against the West on Wednesday, warning that failure to uphold the nuclear deal will result in harsh consequences, Iranian state media reported.
In an address to the country’s parliament — the Majlis — Speaker Ali Larijani called on the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) to prepare plans to build a nuclear plant with the express purpose of enriching uranium, the semi-official state news agency Fars reported.
According to Larijani, “disruptive moves” by the UN and the US, coupled with what he claimed to be America’s disloyalty to the year-old Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), are sufficient cause for Tehran to take defiant measures.
Also on Wednesday, the commander of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Major General Mohammad Ali Jafari, announced that Iran will hold various war games across the country, which will last through the end of the year, Fars reported. The war games are intended to flex Iran’s military muscles and test its advanced missile systems, the IRGC commander said.
“This year, we have so many exercises that I can’t remember their exact number,” Jafari said. “God willing, these drills will be staged to enhance readiness for burying the enemy in the Persian Gulf waters and annihilating them on the Iranian soil.”
Jafari’s comments echo similar remarks made by the commander of the IRGC Aerospace Force, Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh in May, who warned that Iran will hold more exercises should the US meddle in its affairs.
“We will not cancel any drills and will improve them and make them more frequent,” he said.
In March, the IRGC carried out a ballistic-missile exercise, launching missiles capable of carrying a nuclear payload. The move was widely condemned and seen as a violation of Security Council Resolution 2231, which implements the JCPOA. Western officials claimed that the launch did not violate the core terms of the nuclear deal.
The uptick in threatening rhetoric from Iran comes amid an explosive report this week by the Associated Press, which exposed the existence of a secret JCPOA side agreement that would begin easing nuclear restrictions on Iran before the deal reaches its 15-year expiration. According to the report:
As of January 2027 — 11 years after the deal was implemented — Iran can start replacing its mainstay centrifuges with thousands of advanced machines. From year 11 to 13, says the document, Iran can install centrifuges up to five times as efficient as the 5,060 machines it is now restricted to using. Those new models will number less than those being used now, ranging between 2,500 and 3,500, depending on their efficiency…Because they are more effective, they will allow Iran to enrich at more than twice the rate it is doing now.
As reported by The Algemeiner, Iran announced this month that the country’s nuclear experts have already begun testing a new generation of centrifuges, which are reportedly 15 times more powerful than the ones already in its possession.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4)The Dream Of Muslim Outreach Has Become A Nightmare
By Victor Davis Hanson
When President Obama entered office, he dreamed that his hope-and-change messaging and his references to his familial Islamic roots would win over the Muslim world. The soon-to-be Nobel Peace Prize laureate would make the U.S. liked in the Middle East. Then, terrorism would decrease.
But, as with his approach to racial relations, Obama's remedies proved worse than the original illness.
Obama gave his first presidential interview to Al Arabiya, noting that he has Muslims in his family. He implicitly blamed America's strained relations with many Middle Eastern countries on his supposedly insensitive predecessor, George W. Bush.
The new message of the Obama administration was that the Islamic world was understandably hostile because of what America had done rather than what it represented.
Accordingly, all mention of radical Islam, and even the word "terrorism," was airbrushed from the new administration's vocabulary. Words to describe terrorism or the fight against it were replaced by embarrassing euphemisms like "overseas contingency operations," "man-caused disaster" and "workplace violence."
In apology tours and mythological speeches, Obama exaggerated Islamic history as often as he critiqued America. He backed the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. He pushed America away from Israel, appeased Iran, and tried to piggyback on the Arab Spring by bombing Libya. He even lectured Christians on their past pathologies dating back to the Crusades.
Yet Obama's outreach was still interpreted by Islamists as guilt and weakness to be exploited rather than magnanimity to be reciprocated. Terrorist attacks increased. Obama blamed them on a lack of gun control or generic "violent extremism."
Careerist toadies in government parroted the party-line message and even tried to outdo their politically correct boss.
Former Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano focused on returning veterans as terrorist risks. Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry said that global warming, not the Islamic State, was the real threat. NASA Administrator Charles Bolden said the president asked him to make Muslim outreach a top priority for the agency. CIA Director John Brennan said that jihad "is a holy struggle, a legitimate tenet of Islam." Director of National Intelligence James Clapper opined that the Muslim Brotherhood was largely secular.
The president often blamed the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay for needlessly provoking Islam. Obama said that terrorist dangers were no more deadly than falls in bathtubs. He wrote off the Islamic State as an inept jayvee squad, assuring that they posed no existential threat. He campaigned on the premise that al-Qaida was on the run. Obama pulled all troops out of Iraq, which instantly degenerated into chaos.+
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment