Pipes" Two State Solution for France! Tomahawk Versus Redskins! BBC Bias! President Freebie!

Exercising and eating go hand in hand.
===
Daniel Pipes has taken up my suggestion:

===
Melanie Phillips (See 1 below.)

More anti-Semitic crap from a BBC reporter! (See 1a below.)
===
Obama Political correctness:

The federal government, which has " Tomahawk" cruise missiles and "Apache," "Blackhawk," 'Kiowa" and "Lakota' helicopters - and used the code name "Geronimo" in the attack that killed Osama bin Laden, officially objects to the name of the Washington Redskins.

Really?

 ===

So what's new? (See 2 below.)
===
First Obama sought to destroy America's health care and now he wants to destroy its private colleges and universities all under the rubric of helping everyone get a free education.  More freebie burdens for tax payers.(See 3 and 3a below.)
===
Dick
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1)

A core western value, freedom of expression, was snuffed out with contemptuous ease along with 12 innocent lives in Paris this week. By Melanie Phillips Is this a tipping point? Has the West finally been shaken out of its complacency? The horrific massacre in Paris, in which al-Qaida terrorists systematically targeted and gunned down journalists, cartoonists, and policemen at the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo in revenge for its mockery of Islam, has shocked Europe by its barbarism and its symbolism. A core western value, freedom of expression, was snuffed out with contemptuous ease along with 12 innocent lives, among them some of France’s most iconic and beloved cartoonists. The emotion behind the “Je Suis Charlie” demonstrations, as an expression of solidarity with the murdered Charlie Hebdo staff, was very understandable. But did anyone actually mean it? For whatCharlie Hebdo did was what very few people have ever done. In continuing to publish its scurrilous images of Islam and Islamists, Charlie Hebdo had refused to be cowed by Islamist terrorism. Plainly, therefore, very few people indeed mean “Je Suis Charlie,” since the media response to the massacre has been carefully to obliterate the images Charlie Hebdo published that so offended al-Qaida. The French have also been declaring defiantly that free speech will never be surrendered. But there has been no free media expression about Islam ever since the 1989 Iranian fatwa calling for the murder of Salman Rushdie over his book, The Satanic Verses. That was when the West sold the pass. In Britain, people supporting Rushdie’s murder were never prosecuted. As his book was burned on British streets, establishment figures turned on the author for having offended Islam. In 2006, riots following the publication of the Prophet Muhammad cartoons left scores dead around the world. But virtually every media outlet – except for Charlie Hebdo – refused to republish them. In 2004, the Dutch filmmaker Theo van Gogh was murdered on a Netherlands street for making a film criticizing Islam. In 2012, Lars Hedegaard, who founded the Danish Free Press Society after the Muhammad cartoons affair, was shot point blank on his doorstep, although he miraculously survived. To all these outrages, the West responded by blaming the victims for provoking their attackers. After this week’s Paris massacre, commentators on CNN observed that Charlie Hebdo had been “provoking Muslims” for some time. On The Financial Times website, Tony Barber wrote that “some common sense would be useful at publications such as Charlie Hebdo... which purport to strike a blow for freedom when they provoke Muslims, but are actually just being stupid.” (That last clause was subsequently removed). The fact is that Islamic terrorism and intimidation against the West have been going on for decades, matched by displays of Western weakness which merely encourage an enemy it refuses properly to identify. Over and over again, the West denies that these attacks have anything to do with Islam. First it blamed poverty and exclusion among Muslims. Then it blamed grievances around the world – Bosnia, Chechnya, Kashmir, Palestine. Then it blamed isolated madmen whose Muslim identity was irrelevant. In France before Christmas, attacks in which cars were used as battering rams against crowds amid shouts of “Allahu akbar” were said by French authorities to be unconnected with each other. Yet Muslim violence in France has clearly been out of control for years. Just look at the repeated Islamic pogroms against French Jews, which have driven thousands of them to emigrate. Yet none of those attacks provoked the kind of outrage that followed this week’s atrocity. Is free speech more important than the lives of French Jews? But the West refuses to join up the dots. The Charlie Hebdoattackers shouted “Allahu akbar” and “We are avenging the Prophet Muhammad.” Yet Obama, Cameron, and Hollande condemned the attack as merely “terrorism,” carefully omitting to say what kind of terrorism this was. This follows their absurd statements that the Islamic State terrorist group has “nothing to do with Islam” and that “no religion” condones that kind of barbarism. Really? What links Islamic State, al-Qaida, Hamas, and Boko Haram? It’s a religion beginning with the letter I and ending with M. A very senior British civil servant once told me that Islamist terrorism couldn’t be about Islam, because that would “demonize” all Muslims. This absurd non-sequitur was like saying the Inquisition had nothing to do with Catholicism, in order not to demonize Catholics. For sure, many Muslims are not only opposed to Islamist terrorism but are its principal victims. But to pretend that it is not rooted in a legitimate interpretation of the religion, backed up by the historical evidence of centuries of aggressive and violent Islamic conquest, is ridiculous. If the West cannot even bring itself to acknowledge what it is up against, then it will surely be defeated by it. Both France and Britain in their different ways have given in to Muslim extremism. Multicultural Britain has allowed Islam uniquely privileged treatment: providing sharia banking, tolerating polygamy, converting school kitchens to halal. France, which pushed its Muslims out to peripheral housing estates to fester, has ceded control of those estates to Islamist radicals, thus creating in effect mini-states within a state. At same time, the West has shown weakness by giving in to terrorism abroad. Thus France voted for the recent Palestinian ultimatum at the UN, thereby rewarding terrorism and Jew-hatred. Obama, who in the wake of the Paris massacre intoned “Free expression and a free press are principles… that can never be eradicated,” is busily appeasing the Iranian terrorist regime, which jails, tortures, and executes political opponents and is pledged to the genocide of the Jews and an Islamic takeover of the West. What the West should be doing is drawing a very firm line in the sand to defend its own values. It should be fighting Muslim radicalization by establishing what should be considered totally unacceptable. At present, for example, it ignores the Jew-hatred coursing through the Muslim world. Yet this is a driving force behind Islamist terrorists, who believe not only that modernity and the West must be destroyed, but that the Jews are behind both of them. Europe has failed to learn the lesson of the Holocaust. This is that Jew-hatred is not some unpleasant but marginal aberration; it is not just a threat to Jews or to Israel. It is nothing less than a psychic derangement that drives the entire civilization show off the road. Muslims must confront the beliefs in their own religion and culture that swell the seas in which terrorism swims. And the non-Muslim West must start to teach Muslims the hard truths that will force them to do so. The problem is that another Western core value is the desire to compromise – even with those whose agenda brooks no compromise, and who see such a desire as a weakness to be exploited. With the slaughter at Charlie Hebdo, Europe stares into an abyss. But a tipping point? I fear not.

1a)  BBC Reporter at Paris Rally: “Palestinians Suffer at Jewish Hands”

Barely had the French Jewish community time to get their heads around the appalling terror attack on a Paris kosher supermarket when the BBC’s Tim Willcox interviewed a Jewish woman at the January 11 solidarity rally in Paris. Interrupting her, Willcox says * :

Many critics of Israel’s policy would suggest that the Palestinians suffer hugely at Jewish hands as well.

 Note that Willcox specifically says “Jewish” rather than “Israeli,” thus effectively holding French Jewry (and all Jews) responsible for the actions of Israel.

 “Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel” is included in the European Union’s Working Definition of Anti-Semitism while the U.S. State Departmentsays: “Accusing Jews as a people of being responsible for real or imagined wrongdoing committed by a single Jewish person or group, the state of Israel, or even for acts committed by non-Jews.“

And for good measure, Willcox, when he fails to get his interviewee to agree with his offensive logic, adds:

But you understand; everything is seen from different perspectives.

Tim Willcox

This isn’t the first time that Tim Willcox has demonstrated disturbing behavior when it comes to Jews. As BBC Watch explains, Willcox promoted the “Jewish lobby” trope on a BBC broadcast as recently as November 2014.

Tim Willcox’s inference that the Middle East conflict can in any way explain or justify an attack on Jews in France or anywhere else in the world is simply appalling.

Willcox’s specific reference to “Jewish hands” is abhorrent and unacceptable and suggests that Jews worldwide should be held responsible for the actions of Israel. This clearly falls under the European Union’s Working Definition of Anti-Semitism.

Willcox has since “apologized” on Twitter:

 Willcox’s apology is not enough. The issue is more than one of a “poorly phrased question” and goes to the heart of how the BBC deals with the subject of Israel and anti-Semitism. The BBC needs to openly acknowledge the seriousness of this incident at a time of growing anti-Semitism and physical attacks on Jews.

HonestReporting CEO Joe Hyams adds:

We’ve been calling for the media to adopt the EUMC Working Definition of Anti-Semitism in order to avoid this very situation involving Tim Willcox. It’s no longer good enough to feign ignorance and claim that crossing the line into anti-Semitism was unintentional. It’s high time that a widely accepted definition of anti-Semitism is added to the BBC’s editorial guidelines. The BBC and its journalists need to wake up to the incitement and harm that their shoddy reporting is doing.

Tim Willcox must be held accountable for his latest outrageous interview. The BBC must not be allowed to sweep this under the carpet. HonestReporting subscribers must make their voices heard by lodging complaints to the BBC.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

2)

Iranian official: West has abandoned the possibility of any military action against Iran By JPOST.COM STAFF General Sharif also confirmed massive domestic and foreign intelligence efforts on the part of Iran.

A senior Iranian official claimed Sunday that Tehran's enemies have abandoned the possibility of military action against the Iskamic Republic. Addressing a crowd in the northern city of Rasht, the Public Relations Department General of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, General Ramezan Sharif, declared that "the enemy has grown disappointed at military confrontation with the Islamic Republic and has now resorted to a clash of wills, views and insights to change the Iranian nation's behavior," Iran's semi-official Fars News Agency reported. Sharif went on to cite Western media outlets, their websites and satellites as being complicit in an insidious propaganda campaign to undermine the confidence of Iran's citizens and spread disinformation about its interests. These fierce claims from the IRGC's PR department come amid bilateral talks between the US and Iran concerning the latter's nuclear ambitions as well as  Iran's limited cooperation with Western forces against the Islamic State in Iraq, a joint military effort that US Secretary of State has described as "positive."  The head of the IRGC's PR Department also gave special attention to the British Broadcasting Channel. At another meeting in the Southern city of Bushehr, Sharif alleged that "The BBC carries out many acts against Iran behind the scenes."  In 2011 Iran's security services confirmed that they had arrested a network allegedly wiring sensitive information to the BBC and providing logistical support to the country's enemies. Iran's Public Relations office added that these arrests were made amid a massive intelligence gathering effort both inside and outside Iran in past months by its intelligence forces.  Despite these attempts to shake Iran's resolve, Sharif,in a refrain bizarrely similar to one often made by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu regarding Israel, said that Iran is "the island of stability in the region" amid threats and chaos.  ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------3)The Obama College Plan Punish for-profits, then subsidize inferior public competitors The State of the Union address is coming, which means it's time for  President Obama to propose new federal entitlements. His latest gift  horse from taxpayers comes under the pretext of improving America's  workforce: free community college. Community colleges are public state or local institutions, often two- or  three-year programs, that attempt to narrow the skills gap for  high-school graduates who don't attend four-year colleges. The schools  vary widely in quality, and in practice they often provide remedial  training in basic math and reading skills to kids who were promoted  through failing K-12 schools. The White House proposal would waive tuition for students who attend  community college at least half-time and maintain a 2.5 GPA (that's a  C+). You have to work hard not to get that grade. Washington would then  cover 75% of tuition on the condition that states pay the rest. The  Obama Administration calls this a federal-state "partnership." It's more  accurate to call it the education version of Medicaid without the fiscal  discipline. To be eligible, community colleges would have to offer academic credits  that transfer to four-year colleges or occupational programs that  produce high graduation rates and degrees in demand by employers. The  Administration doesn't specify how it would measure the latter, but you  can bet it would include nonprofit and government jobs. Colleges must also "adopt promising and evidence-based institutional  reforms to improve student outcomes," such as paying for books and  transit costs. President Obama is also proposing a new worker-training  fund whose objective is the same as Washington's 30 some other  job-training programs. White House officials are whispering to reporters that all of this will  cost federal taxpayers $60 billion over 10 years, and another $20  billion by the states, if you choose to believe them. The White House  predicted in 2010 that expanding its income-based repayment (i.e.,  student loan forgiveness) plans would cost $1.7 billion that year and  $7.4 billion over the following decade. By 2014 the Administration's  estimate had ballooned to $7.6 billion for 2015 alone. The bigger problem with the new entitlement is that there are already  plenty of training programs and financial assistance for students  attending community colleges. According to the College Board's annual  survey, tuition at public two-year colleges averages about $3,300, which  is less than the $5,090 in average student aid (i.e., grants and tax  benefits). Low-income students can also receive up to $5,730 in Pell  grants, which Mr. Obama has greatly expanded. The White House says its plan is based on a Tennessee program that pays  for two free years of community college for state residents. If that's  how states want to spend their tax dollars, at least voters are in a  position to hold local schools accountable. But by nationalizing the program, the feds are likely to make community  colleges more expensive and bureaucratic. States would have an incentive  to cut their own direct funding for community colleges and redirect  spending to student grants. For every dollar states spend on student  aid, they would reel in three more from Washington. Community colleges  would then raise tuition to pocket more federal cash. *** The new entitlement is best understood as an extension of the  Administration's ideological project to add higher education to the list  of entitlements that keep the federal government in charge of American  life from cradle to grave. First Mr. Obama nationalized the student-loan  market, adding $1 trillion in taxpayer liabilities. Then he made  forgiving those loans easier. This year he plans to propose a new rating  system for colleges that the feds will eventually use to determine which  schools receive federal aid. Meantime, the Administration has spent years harassing for-profit  colleges by trying to impose a "gainful employment" rule that ties  federal aid to student debt and incomes. The rule could shut down nearly  1,400 for-profit programs educating 840,000 students if it survives  another legal challenge, but the Administration won't apply the rule to  community colleges or nonprofit schools. Yet according to the National Center for Education Statistics, the  three-year college completion rate at community colleges is 21%,  compared to 62% at two-year nonprofits and 63% at for-profits. The  reason for the disparity is that many community colleges do a poor job  of meeting the needs of non-traditional students who tend to be older  and work while attending school. Enrollment at for-profit colleges  soared over the last decade in part because students and employers could  see that many community colleges weren't providing the skills they require. And now the Administration is proposing to give inferior community  colleges another competitive advantage with this new entitlement that  bribes students with "free" tuition. So: Punish private schools,  subsidize often inferior public schools, snatch regulatory control from  states, and add tens of billions in new taxpayer obligations: The  ObamaCollege plan is everything we've come to expect from this White House. 3a)  Here's a critique of the Obama college plan.  It hits on all the correct points as to why this is an awful idea.  Not the idea to educate more people to participate in the economy in a better way;  but the idea that the Federal gov't  should pay for it and provide another part of the economy where there is no accountability but plenty of gov't money.   REVIEW & OUTLOOK The ObamaCollege Plan Punish for-profits, then subsidize inferior public competitors President Barack Obama Associated Press The State of the Union address is coming, which means it’s time for President Obama to propose new federal entitlements. His latest gift horse from taxpayers comes under the pretext of improving America’s workforce: free community college.  Community colleges are public state or local institutions, often two- or three-year programs, that attempt to narrow the skills gap for high-school graduates who don’t attend four-year colleges. The schools vary widely in quality, and in practice they often provide remedial training in basic math and reading skills to kids who were promoted through failing K-12 schools. The White House proposal would waive tuition for students who attend community college at least half-time and maintain a 2.5 GPA (that’s a C+). You have to work hard not to get that grade. Washington would then cover 75% of tuition on the condition that states pay the rest. The Obama Administration calls this a federal-state “partnership.” It’s more accurate to call it the education version of Medicaid without the fiscal discipline. To be eligible, community colleges would have to offer academic credits that transfer to four-year colleges or occupational programs that produce high graduation rates and degrees in demand by employers. The Administration doesn’t specify how it would measure the latter, but you can bet it would include nonprofit and government jobs.  Colleges must also “adopt promising and evidence-based institutional reforms to improve student outcomes,” such as paying for books and transit costs. President Obama is also proposing a new worker-training fund whose objective is the same as Washington’s 30 some other job-training programs. White House officials are whispering to reporters that all of this will cost federal taxpayers $60 billion over 10 years, and another $20 billion by the states, if you choose to believe them. The White House predicted in 2010 that expanding its income-based repayment (i.e., student loan forgiveness) plans would cost $1.7 billion that year and $7.4 billion over the following decade. By 2014 the Administration’s estimate had ballooned to $7.6 billion for 2015 alone.  The bigger problem with the new entitlement is that there are already plenty of training programs and financial assistance for students attending community colleges. According to the College Board’s annual survey, tuition at public two-year colleges averages about $3,300, which is less than the $5,090 in average student aid (i.e., grants and tax benefits). Low-income students can also receive up to $5,730 in Pell grants, which Mr. Obama has greatly expanded. The White House says its plan is based on a Tennessee program that pays for two free years of community college for state residents. If that’s how states want to spend their tax dollars, at least voters are in a position to hold local schools accountable. But by nationalizing the program, the feds are likely to make community colleges more expensive and bureaucratic. States would have an incentive to cut their own direct funding for community colleges and redirect spending to student grants. For every dollar states spend on student aid, they would reel in three more from Washington. Community colleges would then raise tuition to pocket more federal cash.  *** The new entitlement is best understood as an extension of the Administration’s ideological project to add higher education to the list of entitlements that keep the federal government in charge of American life from cradle to grave. First Mr. Obama nationalized the student-loan market, adding $1 trillion in taxpayer liabilities. Then he made forgiving those loans easier. This year he plans to propose a new rating system for colleges that the feds will eventually use to determine which schools receive federal aid.  Meantime, the Administration has spent years harassing for-profit colleges by trying to impose a “gainful employment” rule that ties federal aid to student debt and incomes. The rule could shut down nearly 1,400 for-profit programs educating 840,000 students if it survives another legal challenge, but the Administration won’t apply the rule to community colleges or nonprofit schools.  Yet according to the National Center for Education Statistics, the three-year college completion rate at community colleges is 21%, compared to 62% at two-year nonprofits and 63% at for-profits. The reason for the disparity is that many community colleges do a poor job of meeting the needs of non-traditional students who tend to be older and work while attending school. Enrollment at for-profit colleges soared over the last decade in part because students and employers could see that many community colleges weren’t providing the skills they require. And now the Administration is proposing to give inferior community colleges another competitive advantage with this new entitlement that bribes students with “free” tuition. So: Punish private schools, subsidize often inferior public schools, snatch regulatory control from states, and add tens of billions in new taxpayer obligations: The Obama College plan is everything we’ve come to expect from this White House. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------