++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
A married man was having an affair with his secretary.
One day they went to her place and made love all afternoon.
Exhausted, they fell asleep and woke up at 8 PM.
The man hurriedly dressed and told his lover to take his shoes outside and rub them in the grass and dirt.
He put on his shoes and drove home.
'Where have you been?' his wife demanded.
'I can't lie to you,' he replied,
'I'm having an affair with my secretary. We had sex all afternoon.'
She looked down at his shoes and said:
'You lying bastard! You've been playing golf!'
+++
Poor old Donald, he just can't get a square deal, but then, that is the risk a Republican Candidate takes whenever they enter a Black Church that is packed with Democrat sympathizers who prefer being enslaved than challenged. (See 1 below.)
===
There comes a time when a institution of higher learning reaches such a low point it needs to be shut down . Berkeley has always been an educational cancer where radicals congregated and is run by feckless administrators. (See 2 below.)
===
Truthful intentions are always revealed in the fine print details. AIPAC did its best but with Obama you always fall short because he is wily and distrustful and Congress allows itself to be end 'ruined.' (See 3 below.)
===
Selling Ambassadorships is nothing new. One of my former partners gave $300,000 to Bill Clinton's First Campaign and was appointed. Amb. To The Hague. (See 4 below.)
====
Last evening, Jimmy Fallon mussed up Trump's hair to see if it was real. Would have been better for the nation had he sought what is in his head than on top but then that is the level to which our nation seems to have sunk.
At least Trump proved to be a good sport.
===
Kim is right, Democrats have been masterful at hiding who they are and blaming Republicans who have not been able to figure it out until Trump came along and decided to stand up and give it back. (See 5 below.)
===
Our son attended The American University in Cairo many years ago. He was able to learn Arabic while there, inter act with many Middle Eastern students, some with whom he continues to be close to this day.
They in turn got to learn about America and to relate to him.
There was a time when America was good at communicating and 'propaganda.' We were excellent at telling the story of our nation and then we won the Cold War and slid back into our shell.
Our own education about who we are has been corrupted by PC'ism and the radical left who have taken over our university campuses. University administrators also welcomed millions in donations from Middle Eastern nations who have established Islamic Departments and funded radical professors who preach/teach falsehoods and hatred aimed at America. Young minds are being shaped to distrust their country,and eventually many wind up hating America.
Lamentably we have allowed our university campuses to become corrupted and cesspools of radicalization towards students who still wish to support and promote our nation but their voices are challenged, drowned out and thus, stilled.
America has a great story of freedom to tell and ironically we do it better on foreign shores than on our own. (See 6 below.)
+++
I hope everyone has a great weekend. Has begun cooling abit here in Savannah.
===
Dick
====================================================================
1)
Did Flint Preacher Set a Trap for Trump?
By Todd Starnes
The minister of a Methodist church made national headlines after she scolded Donald Trump for injecting politics into a campaign stop.
The Rev. Faith Green Timmons came on stage and stopped Trump in the middle of his remarks at Bethel United Methodist Church.
Click here to join Todd's American Dispatch: a must-read for Conservatives!
She told him to stay focused on the water crisis and not Hillary Clinton.
“I invited you here to thank us for what we’ve done in Flint, not give a political speech," the reverend told Mr. Trump.
Trump graciously complied with her demand.
But something doesn't pass the smell test. Consider this screen grab from the minister's Facebook page:
The minister of a Methodist church made national headlines after she scolded Donald Trump for injecting politics into a campaign stop.
The Rev. Faith Green Timmons came on stage and stopped Trump in the middle of his remarks at Bethel United Methodist Church.
Click here to join Todd's American Dispatch: a must-read for Conservatives!
She told him to stay focused on the water crisis and not Hillary Clinton.
“I invited you here to thank us for what we’ve done in Flint, not give a political speech," the reverend told Mr. Trump.
Trump graciously complied with her demand.
But something doesn't pass the smell test. Consider this screen grab from the minister's Facebook page:
Facebook
"We have our chance to show Donald Trump that this nation is filled with intelligent, wise black
citizens of integrity many of whom live right in Flint, Michigan," she wrote. "What he will see is
how we are braving a man-made catastrophe. HE WILL NOT USE US, WE will EDUCATE HIM!!!"
Well, I guess the Rev. Timmons showed Mr. Trump -- ambushing him in a House of Worship. I will
give her credit for hushing up a protester who kept interrupting his remarks.
By the way, the Rev. Timmons has since deleted that Facebook posting. Hmm.
Mr. Trump showed great restraint and class as he complied with her request. And he deserves credit
for at least trying to start a dialogue.
I wonder if Rev. Timmons "educated" President Obama like she did Mr. Trump?
citizens of integrity many of whom live right in Flint, Michigan," she wrote. "What he will see is
how we are braving a man-made catastrophe. HE WILL NOT USE US, WE will EDUCATE HIM!!!"
Well, I guess the Rev. Timmons showed Mr. Trump -- ambushing him in a House of Worship. I will
give her credit for hushing up a protester who kept interrupting his remarks.
By the way, the Rev. Timmons has since deleted that Facebook posting. Hmm.
Mr. Trump showed great restraint and class as he complied with her request. And he deserves credit
for at least trying to start a dialogue.
I wonder if Rev. Timmons "educated" President Obama like she did Mr. Trump?
Facebook
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
2)
In the safe spaces on campus, no Jews allowed
This article is excerpted from a longer piece in the Tower.
When Arielle Mokhtarzadeh arrived at University of California, Berkeley, to attend the annual Students of Color
Conference, she had no way of knowing that she would be leaving as a victim of anti-Semitism.
The conference has maintained a reputation for 27 years as being a “safe space” where students of color, as well
as white progressive allies, can discuss issues of structural and cultural inequality on college campuses.
For Mokhtarzadeh, an Iranian Jew at UCLA, her freshman year was punctuated by incidents of anti-Semitism that
were both personal and met with national controversy. She was shocked during her first quarter in school, when
students entered the Bruin Cafe to see the phrase “Hitler did nothing wrong” etched into a table. Months later,
Mokhtarzadeh’s friend Rachel Beyda was temporarily denied a student government leadership position based
solely on her Jewish identity, an event that made news nationwide.
The campus was supposed to be her new home, her new safe space — so why didn’t she feel that way? She
went to the conference hoping for some answers.[So you’re a Jew and you’re starting college? Prepare for anti-
But on the first day there, she was horrified when the discussion became an attack on Israel — and soon devolved
into attacks on the Jews.“Over the course of what was probably no longer than an hour, my history was denied,
the murder of my people was justified, and a movement whose sole purpose is the destruction of the Jewish
homeland was glorified. Statements were made justifying the ruthless murder of innocent Israeli civilians, blatantly
denying Jewish indigeneity in the land, and denying the Holocaust in which six million Jews were murdered,” she
said. “Why anyone in their right mind would accept these slanders as truths baffles me. But they did. These
statements, and others, were met with endless snaps and cheers. I was taken aback.”
Mokhtarzadeh walked out on the verge of tears. “It was in that moment, during that conference, that I realized that
every identity and every intersection of identity was to be welcomed and championed in progressive spaces —
The recent surge of progressive activism on college campuses across the country has led to many debates on the
merits of concepts such as “microaggressions” and “safe spaces” in educational settings that should respect free
speech and dialogue. Student uprisings against racial injustice and discrimination at Yale, the University of Missouri
and dozens of other universities have shown the power of students who have banded together against
institutionalized racism in academia and the student body.
But little has been said about how the idea of “intersectionality” — the idea that all struggles are connected and
must be combated by allies — has created a dubious bond between the progressive movement and pro-Palestinian activists who often engage in the same racist and discriminatory discourse they claim to fight. As a result of this alliance, progressive Jewish students are often subjected to a double standard not applied to their peers — an Israel litmus test to prove their
loyalties to social justice.[Jewish groups decry Black Lives Matter platform’s view on Israel]
Progressive Jewish students have said they feel like they have to hide their Jewish identity in order to belong in
these movements. Such was the case of Michael Stephenson, a Jewish sophomore at the University of Missouri
who participated in the racial justice protests last fall, and yet felt his Jewish identity undercut his “social justice”
credibility.
He told the Jewish Week newspaper that there were countless moments when his social justice cred was
questioned, including statements that “bordered on anti-Semitism.”While the effectiveness of campus protests is
worthy of debate, it should remain undeniable — and undeniably troubling — that the progressive college
movement, and specifically pro-Palestinian groups within it, have pushed anti-Semitic rhetoric in the name of
progressive values. For example, the Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) chapter at Northeastern University
likes to fashion itself a progressive organization, but in 2012 the school’s SJP adviser was recorded telling
members to be proud to be called an anti-Semite — to wear it as a “sign of distinction. This proves that I’m working
for the right side, the just cause.”
The ramifications of ignoring the normalization of anti-Semitism cannot be understated: The most recent FBI hate
crime report found that 58.2 percent of hate crimes motivated by religious bias were targeted at Jews. Jews make
up 2.2 percent of the American population, so the FBI’s statistics make it clear that Jews are the most
disproportionately attacked religious group in America. It should be troubling to everyone that an SJP member at
Temple University physically assaulted a pro-Israel Jewish student two years ago, calling him a “Zionist baby killer.
” But it should be far more troubling that the SJP chapter at Temple (like all SJP chapters) promotes itself as a
progressive organization, claiming solidarity with movements such as Black Lives Matter.[‘Jew.’ Why does the word
Another incident occurred at UC Santa Cruz, when Jewish student Daniel Bernstein, an elected representative on
his college council, received a message from the SJP-aligned chair of the student council instructing him to abstain
from a vote on divestment from Israel because he was elected with a “Jewish agenda.”
“I was literally in awe,” Bernstein said. “Just the phrase ‘Jewish agenda’ is so volatile and anti-Semitic. To think that
my own council members think that I am unable to uphold their beliefs and ideals in the greater student assembly
because I am Jewish is beyond anything I ever thought would be told to me.”
Northeastern University’s SJP chapter was so persistent in anti-Semitic harassment — from defacing the statue of
a Jewish donor to disrupting Holocaust awareness events — that the university was forced to temporarily suspend
the organization in 2014. The SJP chapter at Vassar College even tweeted Nazi propaganda from 1944.
When these events happen, there are no outcries from the progressive community. Tyler Fredricks, a student at
Duke, has noticed the variation in responses from the SJP-aligned progressive crowd when instances of anti-
Semitism occur.
“When someone wrote ‘No n—–s, whites only’ on a Black Lives Matter flyer, the Duke community held a march
where over a hundred students marched and rallied in support. They did the same thing when someone wrote a
homophobic slur in the dorms,” Fredricks said. “When someone wrote anti-Semitic comments on a Duke Friends
of Israel flyer, there was no march, rally or campus outrage.”
This pattern has made Jews of all ages question their place within higher education. “Jewish students and their
parents are intensely apprehensive and insecure about this movement,” Mark Yudof, the former president of the
University of California system, told the New York Times. “I hear it all the time: Where can I send my kids that will
be safe for them as Jews?”
Two more questions come to mind: If the progressives who have fought against racial injustice and bigotry for so
long eventually become the ones who perpetuate it, who will remain to call them out? At this rate, if anti-Semitism
is normalized through the efforts of the rising progressive movements on college campuses, what will the future
look like for Jewish college students?
Outreach is imperative now. This means making the progressive community understand the ramifications of anti-
Semitic speech. Engaging this audience — through trips to Israel, visits to Holocaust museums, and even simply
interacting with Jewish students — can help change the narrative.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
3) Obama’s Israel Sequester
He arm-twists an ally to do an end-run around Congress.
The Obama Administration has used various means to usurp Congress’s power of the purse, but
twisting the arm of an ally is a new low. That’s what the President in effect did this week by requiring
Israel to accept his spending limits in return for a modest boost in military aid.
As diplomats rolled into the U.S. for the U.N. General Assembly this week, the White House rolled out
a deal with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that would provide $38 billion in military assistance
to Israel over the next decade. The previous agreement, which ends in 2018, included $3.1 billion in
annual aid. While the Administration is advertising its “unshakeable commitment to Israel’s security,”
its real feelings are betrayed by the fine print.
Start with the fact that Congress typically tacked onto the $3.1 billion an additional $500 million each
year for missile defense.
Thus the new agreement represents a mere 5% increase amid growing Middle East threats, which will
likely proliferate over the next decade thanks to the Administration’s retreat from the region and
nuclear deal with Iran.
The aid is also less than the $4 billion annually that Mr. Netanyahu sought and the Senate wanted to
provide. After Lindsey Graham, who chairs the Senate appropriations subcommittee on foreign
operations, refused to sign off on the deal, the Administration impelled Israel to agree not to lobby for
more aid and to return any funds Congress appropriates in the future that exceed the agreement’s terms.
In other words, the Administration has pressured Israel to cut out Congress. While the deal isn’t
binding on Congress, Israel would be accused of bargaining in bad faith if it doesn’t keep its word. It’s
unclear why Mr. Netanyahu would agree to such self-abnegation, but he might be hedging his political
bets.
In March Donald Trump professed that he would make Israel repay U.S. military assistance. The
chance that Mr. Trump might win and keep that promise might have convinced Mr. Netanyahu to lock
in the Administration’s spending caps.
On the other hand, if Democrats take the Senate and House in a rout this November, they might also
want to pare back aid to Israel to pad domestic spending.
The deal also has a thinly veiled “buy American” provision that eliminates Israel’s ability in prior
agreements to use some military aid for defense research and development. While the U.S. has
benefited from Israel’s shared technology, the Administration wants the funds to flow to American
companies that have been hurt by cuts in U.S. defense spending.
So with one maneuver the Administration has managed to slap Congress and Israel, vindictive to the
end.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
4)
WikiLeaks’ Guccifer 2.0: Obama Sold Off Public Offices to Donors
Corruption doesn't start or end with Hillary
US President Barack Obama (L) bids farewell to US Ambassador to Britain Matthew Barzun at London’s Stansted airport on April 24, 2016. Photo: Jim Watson/AFP/Getty Images
On September 13, WikiLeaks lived up to its promise of releasing more Democratic
National Committee (DNC) documents. This time they were from hacker Guccifer
2.0, serving as a teaser for larger and likely more embarrassing leaks from the
DNC and Hillary Clinton campaign.
Both the Democratic Party and Clinton campaign have attempted to insulate
themselves from the content of the releases by alleging the hacks were organized
by the Russian government. The claims are a mix of paranoia and PR/damage
control, and will have enduring consequences. It may lead to what former
Secretary of Defense William Perry referred to as a drift back into Cold War
mentalities.
The leaks include more evidence of overt corruption within the DNC. Oneemail
dated May 18, 2016, from Jacquelyn Lopez, an attorney with the law firm Perkins
Coie, asked DNC staff if they could set up a brief call “to go over our process for
handling donations from donors who have given us pay to play letters.”
served as secretary of state. The largest donor listed at contributions totaling over
2011, served as President Obama’s National Finance Chair during his 2012
reelection campaign, and now serves as U.S. Ambassador to the United Kingdom.
The second largest donor, Julius Genachowski, donated just under $3.5 million to
the DNC and OFA, and in exchange was appointed chairman of the FCC by
Obamain 2009.
The third largest donor on the list, Frank Sanchez, donated just over $3.4 million
and exchange was appointed to Undersecretary of Commerce for International
Trade by Obama in 2010.
A 2013 article published by the Guardian corroborates the pay-to-play scheme this
list suggests. “Barack Obama has rewarded some of his most active campaign
donors with plum jobs in foreign embassies, with the average amount raised by
recent or imminent appointees soaring to $1.8m per post, according to a Guardian
analysis,” wrote Dan Roberts. “The practice is hardly a new feature of U.S. politics,
but career diplomats in Washington are increasingly alarmed at how it has grown.
One former ambassador described it as the selling of public office.”
A separate release from DC Leaks, an anonymous organization, revealed emails
between former Secretary of State Colin Powell and Democratic Party mega-donor
and Powell’s business partner, Jeffrey Leeds. In the exchange, Powell vents to
Leeds over the Clinton campaign trying to use him as a scapegoat regarding
investigation. “I warned her staff three times over the past two years not to try to
connect it to me. I am not sure HRC even knew or understood what was going on in the basement,” Powell wrote in one email, according to The Intercept.
Another major issue brought up by the latest leaks is the media blackout on the content of what was released. Politico, The New York Times, and several other news outlets opted to report solely on the fact that there was a new leak—citing a statement from DNC Chair
Donna Brazile, who claims the DNC is the victim of a Russian cyber-attack—without delving into the specifics of the content.
extensive and far back the documents obtained in the hacks go. While no emails
were released in this latest release, the documents to come will—at the very least—
shed further light as to the extent of corruption in the Democratic Party.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
5)
Democrats’ Deplorable Emails
How much to buy an ambassadorship? The answer is in the latest hacked
messages.
If the 2016 election is remembered for anything beyond its flawed candidates, it will be
recalled as the year of the Democratic email dump. Or rather, the year that the voting
public got an unvarnished view of the disturbing—nay, deplorable—inner workings of
the highest echelons of the Democratic Party.
What makes the continuing flood of emails instructive is that nobody was ever meant to
see these documents. Hillary Clinton set up a private server to shield her communications
as secretary of state from the public. She gave top aide Huma Abedin an account on that
server. She never envisioned that an FBI investigation and lawsuits would drag her
conversations into the light.
The Democratic National Committee and Colin Powell (an honorary Democrat) likewise
believed their correspondence secure. But both were successfully targeted by hackers,
who released the latest round of enlightening emails this week.
PHOTO: GETTY IMAGES
These emails provide what the public
always complains it doesn’t have:
unfiltered evidence of what top
politicians do and think. And what a
picture they collectively paint of the
party of the left. For years,
Democrats have steadfastly portrayed
Republicans as elitist fat cats who
buy elections, as backroom bosses
who rig the laws in their favor, as
brass-knuckle lobbyists and operators
who get special access. It turns out
that this is the precise description of the Democratic Party. They know of what they speak.
The latest hack of the DNC—courtesy of WikiLeaks via Guccifer 2.0—shows that Mrs.
Clinton wasn’t alone in steering favors to big donors. Among the documents leaked is
one that lists the party’s largest fundraisers/donors as of 2008. Of the top 57 cash cows
18 ended up with ambassadorships. The largest fundraiser listed, Matthew Barzun, who
drummed up $3.5 million for Mr. Obama’s first campaign, was named ambassador to
Sweden and then ambassador to the United Kingdom. The second-largest, Julius
Genachowski, was named the head of the Federal Communications Commission. The
third largest, Frank Sanchez,was named undersecretary of commerce.
Keep in mind what an earlier leak revealed: a May 18, 2016, email from an outside
lawyer to DNC staffers in which the attorney suggests a call to “go over our process for
handling donations from donors who have given us pay to play letters.” Add this to what
the Clinton and Abedin emails have shown to be a massive pay-to-play operation at the
Clinton Foundation, in which megadonors like the crown prince of Bahrain got special
access to the secretary of state.
And there are also all those Clinton speeches, for which they were paid millions. News
comes this week that despite the Clintons’ promises to distance themselves from their
foundation, they will first be holding what sounds like one last fire sale on future
presidential access: a belated birthday bash for Bill Clinton, with a glitzy party at the
Rainbow Room in Manhattan. A donation of $250,000 gets you listed as “chair” of the
party, while “co-chair” costs $100,000. Foundation officials are refusing to say who has donated, or how much.
So which political party is all about money, influence and special access? The Republican Party held a true, democratic primary. Seventeen candidates battled it out, and the voters choose a nominee
that much of the party establishment disliked.
Leaked emails show that the Democratic Party hierarchy retreated to a backroom to
anoint Hillary Clinton and then exercised its considerable power to subvert the primary
process and kill off the Bernie Sanders campaign. In one email, Chief Financial Officer
Brad Marshall suggested sliming Mr. Sanders on religion: “Can we get someone to ask
his belief. Does he believe in a God. He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I
think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My
Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist.”
How’s that for deplorable?
Perhaps most revealing are Mr. Powell’s emails, which show, undisguised, how Clinton
supporters think. Specifically, the emails demonstrate that this crowd recognizes the
Clintons as a menace—and yet they are willing to excuse away anything. “I would rather
not have to vote for her,” Mr. Powell wrote to a friend. “A 70-year person with a long
track record, unbridled ambition, greedy, not transformational, with a husband still
[sleeping with] bimbos at home.”
Unpack that. Mr. Powell is saying that Hillary is old; that she is a scandal factory; that she
will cut any corner to win and do anything for a buck; that she won’t help the country;
and that her husband remains a liability. And yet other emails suggest Mr. Powell
nonetheless was (is?) debating giving her a boost with a well-timed endorsement in the
fall.
This is the modern Democratic Party. The more it has struggled to sell its ideas to the
public, the more it has turned to rigging the system to its political benefit. Don’t take
Republicans’ word for it. Just read the emails.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
6)
Preserving a Powerful Weapon
Against Terror
The American University of Afghanistan gives young Afghans a
modern education and exposes them to U.S. values.
A guard tower of the American University of Afghanistan compound in Kabul after the Aug. 24 attacks there. PHOTO: AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES
As we commemorate the 15th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks this week, it
is worth reflecting on last month’s attack on the American University of
Afghanistan (AUAF) in Kabul.
AUAF is one of America’s most important legacies in Afghanistan. The
university, founded after the toppling of the Taliban with support from the
U.S. government and private donors, offers internationally accredited
bachelor’s and master’s degree programs. Its mission is to train a new
generation of leaders in Afghanistan’s development, giving them the tools
to help build a modern, productive and inclusive Afghanistan. Over the
past decade, AUAF has graduated more than 1,000 students. Many now
occupy senior roles in the country’s government and private sector.
The university thus represents a direct threat to the terrorists and their
poisonous ideology. That’s why on Aug. 24 terrorists stormed the
university’s campus, going room to room with guns and grenades, sowing
chaos and wreaking havoc. They murdered 14 students, professors and
guards. Another 40 were wounded before the attackers were killed by
security forces.
It was the deadliest attack in AUAF’s history, but not the first. Earlier this
summer, terrorists kidnapped two professors outside the university’s gates.
Their whereabouts remain unknown.
AUAF is a potent reminder that Muslim nations are a critical battleground
in the fight against terrorism. The students and professors killed in the
August attack were almost all Muslims. The university is full of Muslim
students who are proud to attend an “American” institution, where
American professors and visiting students mix with local Afghan faculty
and students, exchanging ideas and forging longstanding bonds.
A partnership between Stanford Law School and AUAF fostered many
such bonds over the past decade. Naqib Khpulwak, an Afghan law
professor at AUAF who spent time at Stanford, e-mailed his friends at
Stanford after an attack last year, reassuring them that everything was all
right: “We are all safe so far. Thanks for asking. The terrorists want to
terrorize us, we refuse to give in. . . . It did not stop us from our work not
for one minute. This tells me the terrorists will not succeed. Everyday
passing, people hate them more and keep on doing their work. I work 12
hours per day six days a week this summer. This is my response to them.”
Tragically, Naqib was among those killed in the Aug. 24 attack.
If the U.S. no longer wishes to undertake complex nation-building efforts
abroad, it is important that America equips the citizens of those countries to
do so. That means providing them with a modern education, helping them
develop local and international networks of like-minded individuals, and
providing them with exposure to U.S. values, norms and culture.
The U.S. needs more Naqibs, and more students trained by people like
Naqib, to make the changes needed to root out terror. Institutions such as
AUAF provide the necessary venue for this to take place.
Support for AUAF among Afghans has skyrocketed as a result of last
month’s terrorist attack, which was widely seen as an attack on the future
of Afghanistan. But AUAF needs more support. Today the university is
closed and is grappling with difficult questions about how to ensure
adequate safety on campus and prevent further attacks.
The U.S. must do everything it can to ensure that AUAF navigates this
challenging time and re-emerges stronger and more resolved to serve as a
beacon of hope in a troubled land.
Mr. Benard is the CEO of an investment firm focused on frontier markets
and the co-founder the Afghanistan Legal Education Project, which
established the partnership between Stanford Law School and the
American University of Afghanistan.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
