Saturday, May 7, 2022

Happy Mother's Day!!!!!!! Disgraceful Jewish Institutions. Keeping Democrats Happy. Is Iran Being Made The Next Greatest Threat? Much More.

To all my girl friends who are mothers the best of Mother's Day. We cannot do without you. Stay Well, avoid stupid label people, You are the best.
Abby has come from a neophyte to a prize winning top real estate agent in the Orlando Market. So very proud of her and the family she and Brian are raising including their two rescue friends






++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
DESPICABLE!!!
++++++
ZOA Urges NY Museum of Jewish Heritage to Apologize/Retract Their Disgraceful Canceling Great Friend of Israel and the Jewish People, Governor Ron DeSantis
And

 The disgraceful politicization of Jewish institutions

By refusing to allow a conference to be held in their building where Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was a speaker, New York’s Museum of Jewish Heritage declared itself a partisan institution.

By JONATHAN S. TOBIN


(May 6, 2022 / JNS) At a time when partisan divisions are at an all-time high, there aren’t many places that are politics-free zones anymore. Many, if not most, of our cultural institutions and media outlets have lined up on one side or the other. That is just as true, if not truer, of the American Jewish world since the vast majority of Jews identify as politically liberal with a large plurality being among the most loyal and determinedly partisan supporters of the Democratic Party.

One has come to expect knee-jerk partisanship from many Jewish religious institutions, the major denominations, national organizations and even the formerly nonpartisan Anti-Defamation League—the one group specifically tasked with defending Jews against anti-Semitism. But it’s likely that few people thought this would also be true of one of the country’s leading Holocaust museums. Yet the Museum of Jewish Heritage–A Living Memorial to the Holocaust, has just made clear that it, too, is done with any pretense of nonpartisanship or openness to those who might dissent from left-wing orthodoxy.

By refusing to host a conference where Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis was one of the invited speakers, the museum hasn’t just indicated that it can no longer be considered a nonpartisan institution. Its decision also illustrates the way many on the Jewish left have come to view the Holocaust as only meaningful as a metaphor to be employed in backing a political agenda designed to label anyone they don’t like as a bigot.

The incident involves the Jewish Leadership Conference being hosted by the Tikvah Fund. Tikvah is a well-known nonprofit philanthropic organization focused on promoting Jewish programs in both Israel and the United States, as well as elsewhere. The Museum of Jewish Heritage had agreed to host its June 12 conference, as it has welcomed a wide variety of other events with a broad array of speakers. But as Tikvah Fund chairman Elliott Abrams and CEO Eric Cohen said in a Wall Street Journal article this week, they were told by museum staff that one of their scheduled speakers, Gov. DeSantis, “didn’t align with the museum’s values and its message of inclusivity.” They were given an ultimatum. Either ditch him or the conference would not longer be welcome at the museum.

Not unsurprisingly, Tikvah chose not to insult the Florida governor and quickly found another venue for its event. But the museum’s effort to silence DeSantis is noteworthy because it shows that the virus of cancel culture has spread from academia—where refusals of colleges and universities to allow speakers deemed controversial for one reason or another to be heard—to a leading Jewish institution.

In and of itself, that is deeply troubling since Jewish tradition has always been rooted in notions of open debate and a willingness to hear different points of view. Many leading secular institutions of higher learning have ditched the principle of free speech in favor of ideas in which some opinions—almost always those identified as conservative or at least opposed to the latest woke leftist trends—must be proscribed lest they cause those who disagree to feel “unsafe” or “triggered.” The museum seems to be reading from the same script.

That’s a disgrace wherever it occurs, and it’s symptomatic of the growing intolerance for open discourse that characterizes 21st-century American politics. But for this sort of behavior to find a foothold in a leading Jewish institution—much less one dedicated as a “living memorial to the Holocaust”—is a sign of the abandonment of its Jewish responsibilities in favor of a partisan cause.

The meaning behind the message given to Tikvah’s leaders by museum staff was crystal-clear.

DeSantis has been embroiled in a controversy over a parental rights bill he recently signed into law. It upholds the right of parents to be involved in public-school decisions regarding their children’s well-being and to limit discussions of gender and sexuality issues in classrooms from kindergarten to third grade. His leftist opponents in their bully media and pop culture pulpits mislabeled it as a “Don’t Say Gay” bill. Reasonable people may disagree about this law. However, the effort to characterize DeSantis as opposed to the Jewish values embodied by the museum’s mission or as an opponent of inclusion is nothing more than a partisan talking point aimed at smearing someone who is considered one of the leading figures in the Republican Party and a likely future presidential candidate.

DeSantis is one of the most ardent supporters of Israel within an already pro-Israel GOP. He was the founding chair of the “Israel Victory Caucus” in Congress organized by the Middle East Forum think tank. He is also close to conservative-leaning Jews.  His conference topic will be the flowering of the growing Jewish community in Florida and the policies he thinks have helped that happen.

You can agree or disagree with everything the governor does or stands for. But the notion that a Holocaust museum should be off-limits for any leading voice in mainstream American politics, let alone a figure that has been as closely aligned with the Jewish community on many important issues as DeSantis, isn’t so much ill-advised as it is absurd.

The museum’s decision only makes sense if one is prepared to view Jewish institutions as the moral equivalent of a cable news outlet like MSNBC, where only liberal or leftist voices are heard and conservatives are treated as not so much wrong as evil. That reflects the current atmosphere inside the Democratic Party, where even a supposedly moderate figure like President Joe Biden referred this week to supporters of former President Donald Trump by the term “MAGA world” and said they were “the most extreme political organization in American history.” In other words, Republicans like the Florida governor are not fellow citizens, neighbors or relatives, but extremist insurrectionists to be shunned if not targeted as bigots and potential terrorists.

Perhaps that’s not surprising to hear from anyone involved in today’s no-holds-barred political combat in which DeSantis is himself a notable pugilist.

But for a Holocaust museum to say, in effect, that anyone like him is to be treated as unfit to set foot in their building is both outrageous and an indication that such an institution is, like an MSNBC studio segment, a place where only a certain sort of person may be heard.

Subsequently, the museum claimed that it opposed DeSantis because it didn’t host political events. But as Abrams and Cohen pointed out, the same museum welcomed Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.)—the leading voice of the leftist “Squad” that is deeply hostile to Israel—in 2018. Equally controversial politicians like former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, Senate Majority Leader Charles Schumer and current U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Linda Thomas-Greenfield, who spearheaded the Biden administration’s re-entry into the anti-Semitic U.N. Human Rights Council, have also appeared there.

The museum’s hypocrisy in canceling DeSantis while welcoming controversial liberal or left-wing Democrats demonstrates its shameless embrace of partisanship. But it also shows that for those involved in this institution, remembering the Holocaust isn’t a sacred Jewish duty but just another way of manipulating history to back up the political agendas of its staff and funders.

This ought to be a wake-up call for those of this museum’s backers who don’t want an important Jewish institution exploited by woke ideologues. This should also be true for anyone else who wishes to hold the line against the toxic influence of cancel culture elsewhere in the Jewish world.

Jewish venues should remain places where open discourse is possible, and friends of Israel and the Jews are welcomed, even if some disagree with them. The alternative is to stand by and watch as Jewish interests are sacrificed on the altar of leftist dogma.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 

When Trump was giving money to black charities and causes he was loved by the likes of the two popular shake down reverends but when the Democrats said you must hate Trump they said OK.

When Roe v Wade became the law of the land, without any constitutional basis, Democrats were delighted Justices continued to be legislators and make laws out of thin air.

When Justice Alito seems to have concluded "we the people" had the right  to vote so states could be the arbiter of abortion laws, Democrats rushed out with their wet paint protest signs and decided it was time to destroy SCOTUS and now want to threaten individual justices.

Shortly thereafter, our president suggested those who believe in secure borders, energy independence, free speech and the right to vote where the constitution had nothing to legally say about an issue (10th Amendment) were  "Maga Hat" terrorists. Meanwhile, Democrats remained mute. Yet, they demand these "terrorist" citizens should be incarcerated and treated as they have for their Jan. 6 protests (in violation of Amendment 6.)

Biden also told his A.G when parents protest what is taught they too should be declared as terrorists.

Now fascist Democrats are attacking Musk for being a racist and suppressing free speech.

Hypocrisy seems to be the salad dressing Democrats love to apply to their fascist salads when they are asked to defend free speech, elect justices whose views they don't agree wit  and you know the rest.

Nothing has occurred saying women have no right to abortions but,  assume some states will eventually vary laws with respect to their final decisions regarding when life begins and when aborting such is wrong. 

Science has made enormous strides in neonatology and preemies are increasingly able to be born and live formidable/healthy lives and this cannot be ignored.

Perhaps restricting unrestrained abortions will result in less blatant promiscuity and less unwanted children being born  etc. Would that not be refreshing. A side benefit might also turn some women into having greater respect for the privilege of being mothers and restrain  rapacious males.

We have become an increasingly confused, coarse and hateful society. Not an encouraging trend but at least it seems to make  Democrats happy.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Biden Restrained By Federal Judge?
+++
Lawsuit Against Biden Stands

(TheRedAlertNews.com) – On Wednesday, Florida’s lawsuit against the Biden administration’s “catch-and-release” policy gained serious momentum when a federal judge noted that the policy made the Southern border “little more than a speedbump” for illegal immigrants.

The state of Florida filed suit against the Biden administration’s “illegal” catch-and-release policies in September 2021.

The state argued the policy causes harm to the state’s “quasi-sovereign interests,” adding that officials are either violating federal immigration law or abusing their authority.

The suit filed by Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody in partnership with Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis is intended to “uphold the rule of law despite the Biden administration’s decision to violate the law.”

On Wednesday, the suit got the go-ahead to move ahead after a ruling by the United States District Court for the Northern District of Florida threw out the Biden administration’s motion to dismiss the case.

Judge T. Kent Wetherell added a scathing opinion to the ruling, stating the court was “wholly unpersuaded” by the position of the Biden administration.

Wetherell also states in his order that the Biden administration “adopted” and implemented “policies that contravene explicit mandates and restrictions in the immigration statutes,” adding that “the policies have effectively turned the southern border into little more than a speedbump for the hundreds of thousands of aliens who have flooded across the border into the country since January 2021 and the thousands more who are arriving at the border daily.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 
Will Biden and Putin turn Iran into the next biggest threat facing the world?
+++
  • Russian forces abandon Syrian bases ready to fly to Ukraine - DEBKE
  • +++
  • Iran Mullahs Escalate Threats Against Jews, Biden Administration Appeases Mullahs Even More -
  • ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 
    • Fitton's comments (edited)
  • +++
  • A Dangerous Obstruction of Justice
  • By Tom Fitton Judicial Watch


  •  
  • The leak of the Supreme Court draft opinion in the Dobbs v Jackson case is a dangerous obstruction of justice. And, it could very well lead to intimidation and violence directed at Supreme Court justices. Indeed, leftwing protestors reportedly plan to appear at the homes of conservative justices.

  • This unprecedented leak fits with the Left’s continued assault against the Supreme Court. As soon as the news of the leaked opinion broke, leftwing protesters were at the Supreme Court.

  • There must be a full investigation, but I’m not holding my breath when it comes to the Biden administration upholding the rule of law – especially when administration allies, including Sen. Chuck Schumer, have threatened the justices in the past.

  • In the meantime, let's hope the rule of law prevails and the precious lives of unborn human beings can once again be protected under law.

  • We are directly involved in this case. In December 2021 we announced our amicus curiae brief with the Supreme Court in favor of overturning Roe v. Wade. Our brief, filed in support of the constitutionality of Mississippi’s Gestational Age Act, argues that states have the right under the Constitution to regulate abortion and protect unborn life (Dobbs v. Jackson (No. 19-1392)).

  • Our brief argues that the Supreme Court should overturn Roe and restore the regulation of abortion to the state:

  • Despite creative judicial legislating, it is crystal clear that abortion does not involve war, peace, negotiation, foreign commerce, or taxation. Abortion fits squarely into the states’ sphere of objects that concern the “lives, liberties, and properties of the people.” Not being an enumerated power, the Roe Court did not have the authority to overturn the abortion laws of the states.
  •  
  • Additionally, our brief notes that Roe v. Wade didn’t provide clarity, but instead muddied the waters:

  • Far from creating a national consensus, Roe threw the states into a 48-year contentious legal battle. Even some abortion advocates eschew the injudicious method of federalizing abortion as short-circuiting a naturally evolving jurisprudence under state laws. As federal and state judges attempt to apply this Court’s precedents, a national landscape of inconsistent, inconclusive, and untenable rules have emerged. As a national policy, abortion jurisprudence is, in a word, a mess. Stubbornly holding on to unconstitutional precedent will never have a positive outcome. It is time to return abortion policy to the states where it belongs and where the democratic process can effectively work.
  •  
  • I pray that the justices will remain steadfast in the fallout from this egregious crime.
  • +++
  • Court Orders FBI To Detail Officials Listed in Anti-Trump Memo

  • A federal court has ordered the FBI to disclose additional details about FBI and other officials copied on the memo used to justify launching the “Crossfire Hurricane” spy operation against President Trump and his 2016 presidential campaign. 

  • Judge Carl J. Nichols has given the FBI until June 16, 2022 to respond. The order comes in our September 2019 FOIA lawsuit filed after the FBI failed to respond to a request for the memo, known as an “Electronic Communication” or “EC.”  (Judicial Watch v. U.S. Department of Justice (No. 1:19-cv-02743)).

  • In May 2020, we obtained a redacted version of the previously secret memo, authored by former FBI agent Peter Strzok. The Biden Justice Department argued that there is no significant public interest in disclosing the names of officials copied on the memo.

  • We filed a motion countering that claim and arguing that the public had a significant interest in knowing who at the FBI had knowledge of the memo and presumably approved the investigation.

  • The court held a hearing on the dispute in September 2021, and on May 2, 2022 issued a minute order requiring the FBI to file a supplemental memorandum of up to 5 pages, supported by an affidavit or declaration, explaining the positions and seniority held by any persons whose names are redacted from the “CC:” section of the document.

  • In support of our position, we provided the Court with two declarations by Kevin Brock, former assistant director of the Directorate of Intelligence and former FBI principal deputy director of the National Counterterrorism Center. Brock testified that it is not standard procedure to have an EC drafted, approved, and sent to and from a single agent and that doing so violates FBI oversight protocols:

  • In the EC document here, the “From” line indicates the EC – and authorization to begin an investigation as required under FBI policy – is from a part of the FBI’s Counterintelligence Division. The contact listed is Peter Strzok. The EC was drafted by Peter Strzok. The EC was approved by Peter Strzok. On the face of the document produced, it appears the EC that initiated a criminal FARA investigation of unidentified members of the Trump presidential campaign was created by Peter Strzok, approved by Peter Strzok, and sent from Peter Strzok to Peter Strzok. This is not the usual procedure.

  • FBI policy prohibits an agent from initiating and approving his or her own case.  Such action violates FBI oversight protocols put in place to protect the American people from an FBI agent acting unilaterally.

  • In fact, the EC does not identify any individual by name as a target of the investigation.  It does not articulate any factors that address the elements of FARA as required by routine FBI policy and procedure and the Attorney General Guidelines and, therefore, does not contain sufficient justification for initiating an investigation into USPERs [U.S. persons].

  • Based upon my experience, no reasonable and experienced FBI counterintelligence squad supervisor in the field would have approved the EC at issue here – as released – which opened the Crossfire Hurricane investigation.

  • The unredacted information released in the EC document here offers no legitimate predication justifying the investigation of USPERs involved in a presidential campaign or subsequent FISA intercept of a U.S. citizen.
  •  
  • The Biden administration is still covering up who was involved in the Obama administration’s unprecedented and illicit spying on Donald J. Trump. This court decision is another step forward in accountability for the worst government corruption scandal in American history.
    • +++++++++++++++++++++
Liberals ,who are truly radical and so swept up in ideologue they are unable to discard the weight of such, eventually drown in their own stew. The problem is, the damage they do is often beyond repair and they are able to alter what confronts us in unalterable ways. We are going through such a period and every institution, we hold dear and what made America the greatest nation in the world, is under serious attack from which we may never recover.

The tactics of the radicals are many, are effective and nothing deters them.  They are totally dedicated to their cause and are willing to pay the price since anarchists/fascists have little to lose since they hate order.

As Hanson wrote recently, The Democrat Party o longer exists.  It has been replaced.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++




Posted by at

No comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)