If a president will not protect our border when we are at war and being invaded then turn the job over to "gators."+++
In Case You Missed It:
Iran, Hezbollah, and other threats to our national security from Latin America.
Read Transcript Here.
Perhaps beginning with the 1994 bombing of the Jewish cultural center in Buenos Aires, the world was put on notice that Iran and its proxy Hezbollah had infiltrated the Western Hemisphere.
Unfortunately, their presence doesn’t begin and end in Argentina as Hezbollah has expanded its operations throughout Latin America from the tri-border area of Argentina, Brazil, and Paraguay to Columbia and beyond while Iran has formed a strategic alliance with Venezuela. Their presence south of our border poses a multitude of national security threats from terrorism to drug trafficking. Join us for an in-depth discussion with the Foundation for Defense of Democracies’ senior fellow, Emanuele Ottolenghi, who will discuss these and related issues.
About the Speaker: Dr. Emanuele Ottolenghi is a senior fellow at FDD and an expert at FDD’s Center on Economic and Financial Power (CEFP) focused on Hezbollah’s Latin America illicit threat networks and Iran’s history of sanctions evasion. His research has examined Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, including its links to the country’s energy sector and procurement networks. His areas of expertise also include the EU’s Middle East policymaking, transatlantic relations, the Arab-Israeli conflict, and Israel’s domestic politics. Prior to joining FDD, Emanuele headed the Transatlantic Institute in Brussels and taught Israel Studies at St. Antony’s College, Oxford University.
He is author of The Pasdaran: Inside Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, Iran: The Looming Crisis, and Under a Mushroom Cloud: Europe, Iran and the Bomb. Emanuele blogs at The Hill. His columns have also appeared in leading outlets including The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, and London’s The Sunday Times. He obtained his PhD in political theory at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, preceded by undergraduate studies in political science at the University of Bologna.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Maybe TARGET needs to employ "Gators."+++The Retail Theft Rampage Gets Worse
Target closes nine stores in four states because of crime, as looters run riot in Philadelphia.
The Editorial Board
You may have heard that a mob of teenagers looted stores in downtown Philadelphia on Tuesday night, and Target said the same day it is closing nine stores in four states because of rampant crime. Rack up more victories for progressive prosecutors.
The mobs in Philly hit Apple, Lululemon and Foot Locker stores in Center City, which ought to be a safe space for civilized commerce. The Foot Locker store was “ransacked in a coordinated attack,” said police. Police have made more than 50 arrests and are investigating property damage and theft elsewhere in the city. Some 76 incidents have been reported.
Interim Police Commissioner John Stanford said police are looking into whether “there was possibly a caravan of a number of different vehicles that were going from location to location.” He added, “Everyone in the city should be angry.”
Anger is justified in particular toward District Attorney Larry Krasner, who waves away property crime. His office reports 424 retail theft charges so far in 2023—compared to more than 1,500 by the same date in 2017, the year before he took office. Reports of retail theft in Philly have increased by more than 30%—to 13,330—compared to a year ago, according to the city’s latest weekly crime report.
Retail theft is a nationwide epidemic, according to a National Retail Federation (NRF) survey released Tuesday. For the 2022 fiscal year, retailers reported a “shrink” rate of 1.6%, mostly from theft, which as a percentage of all retail sales would be a $112.1 billion loss for the industry, says NRF.
“We cannot continue operating these stores because theft and organized retail crime are threatening the safety of our team and guests, and contributing to unsustainable business performance,” Target said in explaining its decision to close two stores in Seattle, three in Portland, Ore., three in San Francisco and Oakland, and one in New York. Target said the closures are despite efforts to prevent theft by “adding more security team members, using third-party guard services, and implementing theft-deterrent tools across our business.” CEO Brian Cornell said in May that Target could lose $500 million from shrink.
More than a quarter of retailers in the NRF survey reported closing stores because of violence and crime, and 45% reduced operating hours. Of the cities in Target’s closure list, all but Portland make the NRF survey’s top-10 cities for organized retail crime in 2022.
George Soros and the progressive DAs he finances claim to be helping the poor and minorities, but those communities are the main victim of rampaging theft. The Target store shutting down in New York is in Harlem, which staged a renaissance during the Rudy Giuliani and Mike Bloomberg mayoralties. It is now sliding back into crime and disorder.
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Sports: A Powerful Ally in the Battle Against Antisemitism
By Steve Rosenberg
In a world marked by diversity and the pursuit of equality, sports have emerged as an unexpected but effective battleground against prejudice and hatred. Antisemitism, the age-old bigotry that has plagued humanity for centuries, is no exception to this trend.
Sports, with its ability to unite people from all walks of life, has played a pivotal role in dismantling stereotypes and fostering understanding among Jews and non-Jews alike. While athletes can and should be better, it is important to understand why sports are crucial in the fight against antisemitism and to understand how certain individuals and organizations have leveraged their power to promote tolerance and unity.
Sports, at its core, transcends cultural, religious and racial boundaries. It provides a platform for individuals to showcase their talents and compete on a level playing field, regardless of their background. This inclusivity has the power to challenge and reshape deep-seated prejudices.
One example of this transformational power can be seen in the story of Benny Leonard, a Jewish boxer who dominated the lightweight division in the early 20th century. Leonard’s success in the ring helped break down stereotypes about Jewish physical prowess and resilience, thereby contributing to a shift in public perception.
Leonard’s story is just one among many where Jews have excelled in sports, countering negative stereotypes. From Mark Spitz, who won an astonishing seven gold medals in swimming at the 1972 Munich Olympics, to Aly Raisman, a Jewish gymnast who has represented the United States in multiple Olympics, these athletes have not only shattered records but also stereotypes about Jewish physical abilities.
Their accomplishments have shown the world that talent knows no religious or ethnic boundaries. The Philadelphia Jewish Sports Hall of Fame has dozens and dozens of these examples at our home inside the Kaiserman JCC in Wynnewood.
However, the fight against antisemitism in sports goes beyond individual achievements. It extends to the broader community and the powerful role that sports organizations can play.
An exemplary case is the collaboration between the Chelsea Football Club and the Anne Frank House. In 2019, Chelsea FC launched an initiative to raise awareness about the Holocaust and combat antisemitism. The club invited Holocaust survivor and Anne Frank’s stepsister, Eva Schloss, to share her story with players and staff. This initiative demonstrated the club’s commitment to using its global platform to educate and promote tolerance. We need more of these partnerships and collaborations.
I wish I could say the same about the International Olympic Committee, which has not been a friend to the Jewish community. From the time in 1972 when 11 of our brothers were murdered in Munich by the terrorist group Black September and Avery Brundage, the IOC chair couldn’t find it in his heart to cancel one event in their memory, to all of the following Olympiads until the summer games in 2021 (one year later due to COVID) in Japan when the 11 murdered Israelis were finally recognized.
However, the spirit of camaraderie in sports fosters relationships that defy prejudice. Take, for instance, the Peres Center for Peace and Innovation, an organization dedicated to building bridges between Israelis and Palestinians through sports. It organizes joint sporting events and initiatives that bring together Jewish and non-Jewish youth, fostering understanding and empathy. These initiatives are crucial in breaking down the barriers of mistrust and hatred that have existed for generations.
Furthermore, the fight against antisemitism in sports extends to the realm of fan behavior. In recent years, numerous sports organizations have taken proactive steps to combat antisemitic incidents in stadiums.
A number of Jewish organizations have been at the forefront of this effort, partnering with various sports leagues to educate fans about the consequences of hate speech and discriminatory behavior. Such initiatives aim to create a welcoming environment for all spectators, irrespective of their background.
Sports holds a unique and potent position in the battle against antisemitism. From iconic Jewish athletes who have defied stereotypes to sports organizations promoting tolerance and unity, the world of sports has made significant strides in dismantling prejudice. The stories of individuals and organizations we have read about demonstrate how sports can transcend cultural and religious boundaries, fostering understanding and empathy among people of all backgrounds.
As we continue to harness the power of sports to combat antisemitism, we are reminded that the pursuit of equality and tolerance knows no bounds, just like the spirit of competition on the field. Let’s continue to raise awareness of the world’s oldest (and most accepted) form of hatred — that of the Jews — through sports.
Steve Rosenberg is board chair of the Philadelphia Jewish Sports Hall of Fame and an author.
++++++++++++++++++++++
I have a dear friend and fellow memo reader who truly believes candidate Kennedy will be assassinated before the campaign is over. Why? Because the American Marxist Democrat Party does not tolerate resistance and we have plenty of evidence, such as his uncle, his father and a host of others.
Meanwhile, those who earn a living, but do not get reimbursed like federal bureaucrats, will notice:
+++
+++
What's News
By Daniel Henninger
Two related questions. If a tree falls in an empty forest, does it make a sound? Ergo, if the federal government shuts down this weekend, will anyone notice?
The phrase “government shutdown” describes what has become one of the most dramatic events in our politics, at least in Washington. House Speaker Kevin McCarthy has assumed the lead role in this year’s version, supported by the delightfully named House Republican “dysfunction caucus,” which calls to mind Aesop’s fable about the dog in the manger who can’t eat the hay but won’t let anyone else near it.
We understand the concern about paychecks not going out to Border Patrol agents and the like, but the government-shutdown scenario usually evokes images of Washington itself turning into a ghost town.
Guess what? It’s already empty.
Of the nearly 300,000 federal workers in Washington, most aren’t bothering to show up these days at those great stone buildings that people think of as “Washington.” A post-pandemic report this summer by the Government Accountability Office found that 17 of the federal headquarters buildings surveyed were at 25% or less capacity.
This is 21.5 million square feet of office space. The GAO report says government agencies spend about $2 billion annually to operate federal offices, “regardless of the buildings’ utilization.” The federal-worker no-show problem was enough of a concern to the Biden White House that in August chief of staff Jeff Zients sent a memo to cabinet secretaries saying that a return to normal attendance this fall “is a priority of the President.”
Good luck. The post-pandemic desire of employees to work from home is one of the stories of our time. The Journal reported this week that even economic boom towns like Atlanta are struggling with office vacancies.
Still, the spectacle of the nation’s capital devoid of workers revives an idea dear to conservatives: Move “Washington” out of Washington. Relocate some departments and agencies to the rest of the country.
Even the GAO report understatedly notes: “As the country emerges from the pandemic, the federal government has a unique opportunity to reconsider how much and what type of office space it needs.” Answer: less.
Republicans for years have believed that after decades of liberal inbreeding, the permanent Beltway establishment is determined to thwart, smother or sue any conservative policy initiative. They have introduced bills—called the SWAMP Act or Drain the Swamp Act—aimed at moving federal agencies and personnel out of the Washington area. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in February proposed moving some agencies from Washington. “Too much power has accumulated in D.C.,” Mr. DeSantis said, “and the result is a detached administrative state that rules over us and imposes its will on us.”
No doubt, but the idea of decentralizing Washington has also been considered beyond the offices of conservatives. The Brookings Institution took up the issue a few years ago in a piece titled “Moving federal jobs out of Washington could work, if it’s done properly.”
The article noted that many federal agencies have no evident reason to be near Washington itself. Their list included the Food and Drug Administration, the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Medicare and Medicaid agencies, the Census Bureau and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Vox co-founder Matthew Yglesias has suggested, as did Brookings, that the National Institutes of Health could be moved to Cleveland. Why not? The D.C.-centric Anthony Fauci is gone, and Cleveland is becoming a biotech hub linked to the Cleveland Clinic.
The right’s well-earned paranoia about Washington aside, a new reality has overtaken this debate: remote work, or working from home.
The controversy over office work vs. work at home will persist, but the fact is that 75% of federal Washington workers have abandoned their offices and don’t want to come back. If that’s just the way it is, why not start redistributing most of the capital’s federal workforce over time across the country?
Bureaucrats can fly in to stonewall Congress as needed. I like the idea of moving toward a federal mind-set that includes living in, say, Butte, Mont. Other than the attorney general and some deputies, what reason is there for all those Justice Department lawyers and clerks to be in Washington? It looks as if the U.S. Attorney’s Office in Delaware could use some help. Is the Central Intelligence Agency’s work product better or worse because of the office culture across the Potomac in Langley, Va.?
Washington, with its great monuments and museums, would remain a tourist destination. The FBI building could become an FBI museum. Now that the Hollywood writers’ strike is ending, maybe they could turn virtually empty federal buildings into film studios where they’d make dramas like “The West Wing” about people in politics and government pretending to work. Members of Congress could play themselves.
The idea of repurposing office buildings for housing could be extended to the unused buildings in Washington. Transform Constitution Avenue into a Condo Mile, full of food malls and Olympic-size swimming pools. Tourists who yearn to see the Federal Trade Commission could still do it—in Sioux City, Iowa.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
America Is Desperate for a New Beginning
Nearly two-thirds of voters believe the system is ‘broken’ if it’s Trump vs. Biden.
By William A. Galston
We don’t need polls to tell us that confidence in our political institutions is at a low ebb, but they do help clarify what Americans are feeling.
In a recent poll from the Pew Research Center, 10% of Americans reported that thinking about U.S. politics made them feel hopeful, and 4% were excited. By contrast, 55% said they were angry, and 65% were exhausted.
This isn’t the first poll to note a pervasive sense of exhaustion, and I suspect it won’t be the last. Americans are tired of partisan quarrels that rarely reach a resolution. Issues like immigration reform linger for decades, and the Supreme Court has brought new ones such as abortion back into the arena.
Joe Biden was elected, in part, to calm this turbulence. Historians will debate whether he could have done so had he pursued a different agenda, but clearly his administration hasn’t reduced division, whether over economics, culture or foreign policy.
Americans blame both parties about equally for this situation. According to Pew, 60% of Americans have an unfavorable view of the Democratic Party, and 61% have an unfavorable view of the Republican Party.
A recent CBS poll found that 54% of respondents regard the Republican Party as “extreme,” one of the favorite epithets of Democrats describing the GOP. But the same percentage also regards the Democrats as extreme, and only minorities think that either political party is “reasonable.”
It isn’t surprising that the share of Americans with unfavorable views of both parties has reached a record high (28%), up from only 6% three decades ago, or that 37% wish there were more parties from which to choose. Nor is it surprising that challenges to the major-party duopoly are proliferating—from Cornel West’s Green Party and a likely No Labels bipartisan centrist ticket to the insurgent candidacy of Robert F. Kennedy Jr., whose grievances against Democratic Party officials seem to multiply by the day.
Voters might be in a better mood if they believed that these third-party campaigns were likely to improve the political system. But two-thirds of the public think it’s unlikely that an independent candidate will win in the next 25 years, and only 26% say that having more political parties would make it easier to solve the nation’s problems. (About the same proportion believe that additional parties would make problem-solving harder.)
Until an insurgency even stronger than Ross Perot’s 1992 campaign challenges these beliefs, Americans seem resigned to the choices the major parties offer, even if they don’t like them. The prospect of a rematch between Mr. Biden and Donald Trump leaves large majorities deeply dissatisfied: According to CBS, 64% of registered voters regard this outcome of the primary process as evidence that the political system is “broken.”
The reservations about Mr. Biden are well-known. He is seen as lacking the mental sharpness and physical stamina to carry out the duties of the presidency for a second term. Only 34% of Americans believe that he would be able to complete a second term. Expect Republicans to begin arguing that a vote for Mr. Biden is a vote for President Kamala Harris.
The reservations about Mr. Trump’s return to the Oval Office are very different. More than half of all Americans believe that if he gets another term, he will try to gain more presidential power than he had during his first, and 75% think that is a bad thing. Expect Democrats to argue that a vote for Donald Trump is a vote for autocracy.
Public discontent with our national institutions goes well beyond the conduct of the political parties and their candidates. Only 27% of Americans think that our political system is working “very” or “somewhat” well, only 37% express confidence in its future, and trust in the federal government has declined to 16%, near the record low. Disapproval of Congress is nothing new, but disapproval of the Supreme Court is, with 54% of Americans now expressing an unfavorable view of the court. Whatever its jurisprudential merits, the Dobbs decision overturning Roe v. Wade has accelerated the decline in the court’s public standing.
The country needs a new beginning, a reordering of policy and rhetoric in both political parties. Instead, we have a frozen politics. Donald Trump seems likely to win his party’s nomination for the third consecutive time. Joe Biden first ran for national office more than half a century ago, and he first ran for president in 1988.
This is truly the winter of our discontent, with no sun of York to unfreeze our politics. Both parties need a generational turnover in 2028, but we will probably have to wait five years for it. I hope we make it.
And:
FAIR News: Open Letter Regarding Discriminatory Practices by Literary Journals Newsletter FAIR
Dear Friends of FAIR,
As promised, we have more information regarding last week’s newsletter, and we need your help. Information about discriminatory submission requirements was recently reported to FAIR about federally-funded literary journals. While many journals offer to waive submission fees in order to accommodate authors and artists facing economic hardships, many are unfortunately conflating economic need with race, skin color, or ancestry, thereby providing differential pricing to authors and artists based on their immutable traits. When entities receive Federal financial assistance, this discriminatory practice violates Title VI of the Civil Rights Act (and, as applicable, the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment, from which Title VI is derived).
Following the decision in Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard/UNC, the law is clear: “[e]liminating racial discrimination means eliminating all of it. And the Equal Protection Clause … applies ‘without regard to any differences of race, of color, or of nationality’ – it is ‘universal in [its] application.’”
We are proud to have sent formal legal letters to 17 literary journals to notify them of their violations and to ask them to amend their submission requirements in order to treat all authors and artists equally. But we are not stopping there.
Nearly all literary journals currently use Submittable.com to receive submissions for publication. Submittable.com’s Customer Terms of Service require its customers to adhere to the rights of third parties. So we are asking influential thought leaders to join us in signing an open letter to Submittable.com’s CEO, asking that the company notify its literary journal customers that they may not provide differential treatment to users based on race, skin color, or national origin. We hope that once the journals in question correct their submission requirements, they will continue to accept submissions via the Submittable.com platform freely.
We recognize the vital role that literary journals play in amplifying the voices and work of up-and-coming authors and artists. We hope you agree that all individuals should be treated equally and should not face discriminatory treatment based on their skin color or ancestry.
Please join us and so many influential thought leaders in signing our open letter below.
Warmly,
The Team at the Foundation Against Intolerance & Racism
++++++++++++++++++++++
Wait, That's Why the DOJ Dragged Its Feet on Charging Hunter Biden?
By Matt Vespa
++++
And:
Hunter RECEIVED $250K From Beijing - Beneficiary Address LISTED As Joe Biden's Home?
A new report from Fox News Digital has revealed that Hunter Biden received wire transfers for more than $250,000 originating from Beijing during the summer of 2019 — with the beneficiary address listed as President Joe Biden’s Delaware home.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++
No comments:
Post a Comment