UC Beserkeley Is Still Beserkely-and Anti-Jewish

Gary Fouse

Checking out the latest news from UC Berkeley, we note that nothing has changed when it comes to anti-Israel and anti-Jewish agitation. In the first article running this week in the campus fishwrap, Daily Californian, we learn that the pro-Palestinian mob, specifically, the oddly named Jewish Voice for Peace, is upset over President Trump's executive order on campus anti-Semitism. I added a comment in the reader thread to the effect that JVP is a bunch of misfits who have linked up with those who would wipe Israel off the map and remove all Jews from the Holy Land if they could.


Next we have an op-ed by the president of the Cal Berkeley Democrats against hate speech. What the writer means is that conservative speakers should be banned from campus- as well as those menacing campus cops (who, in reality, just stand around while students disrupt conservative speaking events).


And from Algemeiner, we learn about a pro-Palestinian display honoring Palestinian murderers like Rasmea Odeh. And Bears for Palestine have the temerity to complain about the "constant fear" they feel on campus.


You talk about a place where the inmates run the institution.

The Europeans Keep Rejecting Liberty

by Robert Curry: Modern continental Europe keeps trying to solve its political problem — and then to impose its solution on everyone within reach. Recognizing this historical process can help us understand European anti-Americanism, strongest perhaps in Germany. America created the Europeans' political predicament, and we keep preventing them from adopting the solutions they come up with.

America created the Europeans' political problem by the magnificent example of the American Revolution and the astonishing, world-changing success of America. In an interesting version of the story of the emperor's new clothes, rule by hereditary monarchs, hereditary aristocracies, and established churches was suddenly revealed to be absurd and indefensible.

The only problem was that continental Europe was for the most part incapable of self-rule. The attempts, for example, by Germany, Italy, and France to achieve reasonably stable regimes of rule by their own people would be comical but for the terrible human consequences of their repeated failures.

With the exception of the Netherlands and a few other European countries that, like Britain, have achieved rule by their own people, the modern history of continental Europe is the story of people trying various experiments in an ongoing effort to relieve themselves of the burden of self-rule.

For a while, it seemed certain that fascism was going to be the European solution. The Germans and the Italians took the lead, but there were at the same time homegrown fascist movements throughout Europe, even in Britain. The French earned from Homer Simpson the sobriquet "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" because of their feeble resistance to the Nazi invaders and their swift adoption of a policy of collaboration with their Nazi rulers. If it weren't for America's military intervention, the Nazis would likely have defeated Britain, and fascist Europe would have reached from Ireland's western shore to Moscow and beyond.

The crushing military defeat of fascist Germany and fascist Japan took the fascist solution off the table. What were the Europeans to do? Next up: communism.

WWII resulted in only the western portion of Europe not being swallowed up by the Soviets. Once again, as with fascism, there were homegrown communist movements and sympathizers everywhere in Europe outside the Soviet-ruled zone. Communist Europe would likely have had that same western border in Ireland considered above — except once again for the United States. America kept a military presence in Europe after the war, preventing the Soviets from snapping up what remained of Europe not already under their control.

The Americans did not simply prevent a Soviet takeover of Europe. The American example destroyed communism's claim to legitimacy as surely as America's example had destroyed the European monarchs' claim to rule. The collapse of the Soviet Union robbed the Europeans of a communist future.

The Americans had done it to them again.

What now is next to be tried? Islam. Bernard Lewis, the great scholar of Islam and no enemy of Western civilization, predicted an Islamic Europe some time ago, and an Islamic Europe is now coming on much faster than when he made that prediction. Muhammad is the most common name given to baby boys in cities throughout Europe, even in Britain.

Once again, as in WWI and WWII, the Germans are taking the lead. Because Germany dominates the European Union, the open border policy imposed on Europe by Angela Merkel is responsible for a massive Muslim invasion of Europe — and this time the invaders don't need to brush past feeble military resistance or even use weapons. The invaders only need to show up and apply for welfare, leaving them with plenty of free time to plot the takeover of the West. An earlier generation of the French at least had feebly resisted the Nazi invasion before surrendering.

However, there are developments that raise the possibility that Europeans will yet save themselves by a sensible nationalism. There is, for example, Brexit, the important precursor to President Trump's election in 2016. The people of Britain voted to reclaim British national sovereignty and to restore the integrity of Britain's borders. In addition, there are nationalist stirrings in Germany that may turn out to be part of a broader European rejection of a future under the rule of Islam.

Perhaps the prospect of an Islamic Europe can yet rally Europeans to the defense of Western civilization. If nations in Europe can muster the spirited belief that their nations are worth defending, they may yet hold off the moral and intellectual corruption of radical Islam. It is very much the hope of lovers of liberty everywhere that they do so.
Robert Curry serves on the Board of Directors of the Claremont Institute. He is the author of Common Sense Nation: Unlocking the Forgotten Power of the American Idea and just released Reclaiming Common Sense: Finding Truth in a Post-Truth WorldAmerican Thinker.

Tags: Europeans, keep rejecting. Liberty, Robert Curry, American Thinker To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!

UC Santa Cruz Middle East Propaganda Center's New Head

Gary Fouse

Along with the various ethnic, gender, LGBQ, and women's studies departments on university campuses, the Middle East Studies departments tend to be the worst when it comes to propaganda and indoctrination. In recent years, many of them have been funded with Saudi money. In some cases, they have been established with Saudi money. They routinely specialize in anti-Western, anti-Israel, pro-Arab, pro-Islamic BS. They are one of the leading causes of the wave of anti-Semitism sweeping our campuses. In short, they are an embarrassment to the very concept of education and scholarship.

So it is hardly surprising that UC Santa Cruz (America's Wackiest University) would choose another dime-a-dozen anti-Israel, pro-BDS activist to head up their new Center for the Middle East and North Africa (MENA). Meet Jennifer Derr.


How refreshing it would be to see a Middle East studies department chaired by someone who is pro-Israel. For that matter, even a professor or two would be helpful.

As pointed out by Campus Watch, Derr taught a class in 2014 entitled, "The History of Palestine: From Colonialism to Occupation." Gee, where have I heard that before? She should been fired for plagiarism. What's next, a class on the History of the Lost City of Atlantis?

Or how about this?

"Jennifer Derr’s work explores the configuration and experience of the colonial state in Egypt through its construction of the agricultural environments that lined the banks of the Nile River. Derr traces the intersections of the colonial state in Egypt with the material experiences of environmental infrastructure, resource allocation, disease, and  the geographies of colonial capitalism."

Far be it from me to debate Middle East history with Derr (who has lived ten years in the region). Her area of expertise seems to be in disease outbreaks that occurred in Egypt in the 20th century, which she links to colonial agriculture (in this case, the Brits) and Nile dam construction. I am not arguing the history because I am not qualified, but do I sense a bit of post-colonial emphasis here on blaming all of the problems of the Middle East on the West, colonialism and capitalism? Just asking. After all, that is a large part of Middle East studies teaching in our universities. 

Of course, if Derr is such an expert on the Middle East, some wise guy like me (who is not) might ask the learned professor why she doesn't support a boycott of say, Syria, Sudan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia or virtually every other country in the region besides Israel. I would even throw in neighboring countries like Iran and Turkey.

UCSC's own announcement of the establishment of this center, which is also linked in the above CW article, also raised my eyebrows a bit. Particularly this item:

"In addition to the support of faculty in various divisions, this campaign had the full support of the Jewish Studies Program.
“One cannot have a complete understanding of the Jewish past without studying the Middle East and North Africa; likewise, one cannot have a complete understanding of the MENA without studying the region's Jews,” said Alma Heckman, assistant professor of history and Jewish Studies, and the Neufeld-Levin Chair of Holocaust Studies at UC Santa Cruz.
“Since the ancient past, Jews have lived across the MENA region, from Morocco to Iran and everywhere in between,” she added. “Jewish Studies and MENA Studies are inherently complementary. Working in tandem with the UCSC Center for Jewish Studies, the new MENA Center enriches the unique programmatic offerings at UCSC that connect across Jewish and MENA studies.” 

Working in tandem? I can't wait to see how that works out. I know nothing about Dr Heckman, and I agree with her words in the second paragraph. However, I seriously wonder how any Jewish studies department, given the current climate and state of Middle East studies departments in the US, could welcome the establishment of such a center at UCSC, especially when it is headed by a supporter of BDS.

This new center is new. Both it and its director deserve a chance to show how they will proceed. Perhaps, MENA and the Jewish studies department will work harmoniously together. Perhaps, MENA will teach serious scholarship and not just be a propaganda center against the West and Israel. I would be surprised if that turns out to be the case, but I am willing to wait and see. (What else can Little Ol' Me do?) If my suspicions are proved correct, maybe the Department of Education will take a close look at UCSC given President Trump's inclination to cut funding for universities that tolerate anti-Semitism.

Arrogance on Parade

Gary Fouse

Pamela Karlan

I watched much but not all of the impeachment hearings today, and to me, the Democrats did not help their case for impeachment. Not only did they not move the needle in terms of changing anybody's opinion, especially those in Congress who will be voting, they gave the American public a view of academic arrogance with their 4 law professors who testified about whether Trump legally deserved to be impeached. (At least, that's the case with at least 2 of them. Three were pro-impeachment, and one -called by the Republicans- was against impeachment.)

Stanford Law School Professor Pamela Karlan and Harvard Law School Professor Noah Feldman came across as highly partisan, impassioned and arrogant advocates for removing President Trump. Karlan was especially shrill-yes, shrill- with her rants against Trump, even going so far as to make a joke at the expense of the President's son, Barron. (She later apologized, but added that she wished Trump would apologize for things he has said.) She said she was insulted that a Republican member of the committee had commented that she and the other three witnesses were not fact witnesses since they had no personal knowledge of the facts of the case other than having read them. Several times, it seemed she was about to lose her composure.

In contrast, Jonathan Turley of the George Washington University Law School, a liberal himself who voted against Trump, but who was called as a witness by the Republicans because he opposes this impeachment, showed class. Having watched him on TV for years, I consider him articulate and intellectually honest. He made his points very effectively, quite the opposite from Karlan, who when she wasn't railing against Trump, seemed to spend half of her time telling us about the law in Merry Olde England and someone named the Sheriff of Windsor. In short, she embarrassed herself. Feldman reminded me of one of those "I'll fight for you" lawyer commercials we see on TV all the time.

Who's next, Michael Avenatti?

What If There Was a Quid Pro Quo?

Gary Fouse

Hat tip The Hill

Yesterday, Ambassador to the EU Gordon Sondland testified in his opening statement that there was a quid pro quo as to a presidential call with President Trump and a White House visit in exchange for Ukrainian President Zelenskyy committing to investigating Ukraine's alleged involvement in the 2016 US election and investigating the Bidens. He also presumed that military aid was tied to the above commitment by Zelenskyy. The testimony went back and forth with Democrats and Republicans making their own arguments about Sondland's presumptions and the one thing that Trump said directly to him over the phone. "I want nothing. No quid pro quo".

To the media, Sondland's testimony was a "bombshell" Last night on ABC Evening News, David Muir and his correspondents highlighted Sondland's presumptions while explaining away what Trump actually said to Sondland, pointing out that this conversation occurred after the White House had become aware of the whistle blower's complaint. The media concluded that Trump was covering his backside. Meanwhilke, the headline caption on the TV screen was "Bombshell testimony". It was anything but.

At this point, it is pretty clear that the House will vote to impeach Trump, and the Senate will vote not to remove him. The Democrats seem to be pinning their hopes on some smoking gun that will show up proving there was a quid pro quo.  So what if this is true? So what?

My own common sense tells me that in all likelihood, there was a quid pro quo. Trump did want Ukraine to investigate that country's alleged involvement in the 2016 election and he did want them to investigate the entire Burisma scandal, which includes having an unqualified Hunter Biden on its board of directors and Joe Biden's successful demand that the prosecutor investigating Burisma be fired if Ukraine wanted one billion dollars in aid.

In the case of Trump, Republicans point out that Ukraine got the aid, the phone call from Trump, and the meeting with Trump (at the UN) while no investigation was launched.

But let us assume that there was a quid pro quo. Is this not a common part of international diplomacy? For example, is there a quid pro quo when Trump conducts his diplomacy with North Korea? If Norea Korea halts its nuclear weapon program, the US will do this or that. Of course.

But Gary, you say: Trump wanted Ukraine to investigate Joe Biden, who is a front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2020. Biden is his political rival.

True. But does that change things?

US foreign aid is hinged to the receiving country not being engaged in corruption, however vague that condition is. Ukraine is corrupt, as are many other countries receiving US aid. In return for our aid, they are supposed to at least demonstrate they are taking steps to fight corruption in order that they may be "certified". Often, that is a sham because it is deemed in our interest to continue aid to a particular country. When I worked with DEA in Thailand in the 1970s, that country was riddled with corruption-and still is. They get plenty of US aid. I could go on and on.

Part of the corruption angle in Ukraine is that they allegedly improperly engaged in meddling in out 2016 election. The controversy over Crowdstrike and DNC hacking, and whether it was done by Ukraine or Russia is a matter of dispute. It is not a matter of dispute that during the election, the Ukrainian ambassador to the US wrote an op-ed criticizing then candidate Trump. The Ukrainian embassy in Washington has confirmed that they were approached by a DNC operative during the campaign who tried to enlist their help in digging up dirt on Trump and Paul Manafort. Rightfully or wrongfully, Trump likely feels that he was the victim of a lot of dirty tricks during the election, and that Ukraine had a role. After all, a Ukrainian court issued a statement that there had been meddling by their country. So is Trump justified in asking Ukraine to investigate that matter? I think he is.

As to the more important matter of the Bidens, that is also a legitimate issue, and if Joe Boden gets the nomination, expect to hear much more about it in those campaign ads. Then-Vice President Biden traveled to Ukraine and demanded that the president fire the chief prosecutor-who was investigating Burisma, a company accused of corruption, which had put Hunter Biden on its board of directors though he had no qualifications for the post. Biden told the president that if the prosecutor wasn't fired within 6 hours, Ukraine would not get the aid it had been promised-some one billion dollars. Within 6 hours, the prosecutor was fired. How do we know all this? Biden bragged about it on tape while speaking before the Council on Foreign Relations. Of course, he left out the information about his son being on the board of Burisma and that Burisma was under investigation.

Quid pro quo.

So let us assume the worst: Suppose Trump did have a quid pro quo that included an investigation of the Bidens, and let's assume he did it for purely political reasons. What is worse, the action of Trump in his phone call to Zelenskyy or Biden's demand to the previous Ukrainian president?

And here is another point: If Trump cannot ask for an investigation of Biden because he is a potential opponent in a future election, doesn't that give Biden-or anyone else in a similar position, literally, a license to steal? Is Biden immune from an investigation into his action simply because he is running for Trump's job? No.

$1.98 Beauty Show: UN Human Rights Council Election

Gary Fouse

The UN Human Rights Council has for years been little more than a perverse joke when you consider the number of shady countries that have sat as members of this absurd body. I mean what could be more perverse than having countries with horrible track records on human rights sitting on the UN Human Rights Council?

So today, the HRC, which stands for Human Rights Council (and Hillary Rodham Clinton too) has elected 14 new member nations. Much to the dismay of  most decent and sensible observers, Venezuela has won a seat on the HRC.


Not only has Venezuela been an abuser of the human rights of its own people for years under Hugo Chavez and his successor, Nicolas Maduro, just within the past year, they have been faced with a humanitarian disaster with thousands of its citizens fleeing across the border to escape starvation-a catastrophe of the government's own making. And this is the country now elected to sit on the HRC. Next thing you know, the HRC will select a nation that still practices slavery.

Oh wait! What's this?


Yes, indeed. Mauritania, the West African nation where slavery is still practiced, is also one of the lucky winners. (Technically, there is a law against slavery, passed in 2007 (!), but it is largely unenforced.)

Here is the new makeup of the UNHRC as of 1-1-20:

African States
Angola, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Democratic Republic of Congo, Eritrea, Libya, Mauritania, Namibia, Nigeria, Senegal, Somalia, Sudan, Togo
Afghanistan, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Fiji, India, Indonesia, Japan, Marshall Islands, Republic of Korea Nepal, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar
Eastern Europe
Armenia, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Poland, Slovakia, Ukraine        
Latin American and Caribbean States
Argentina, Bahamas, Brazil, Chile, Mexico, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela
Western Europe and other States
Australia, Austria, Denmark, Germany, Italy, Netherlands, Spain

Watching this "election" reminds me of that old $1.98  Beauty Show, Rip Taylor and all.

Image result for 1.98 beauty show

Somebody tell me it's all a  spoof.

In Defense of China, Nepotism, and Influence Peddling: Juan Cole Champions the Bidens and China

Gary Fouse

University of Michigan comedian/professor Juan Cole is rushing to the defense of Joe and Hunter Biden, at least when it comes to their shady dealings with China. As a matter of fact, it looks like Cole is a solid defender of China too. In his latest article in Informed Comment (his blog), Cole tells us there was nothing wrong with then-Vice President Biden taking son, Hunter, along on a official trip to China, which netted Hunter a one and a half billion dollar business deal with the Chinese. In fact, here is the title of Cole's post:

Trump, head of GOP, demands Chinese Communist Party Prosecute Businessman for Crime of Making Money


First of all, there is nothing wrong with making money. It's how you make it that counts.

Cole starts off his essay with a history lesson of how the capitalist USA, or to be more specific, the Republican party, has always had it in for communism going back to the Russian Revolution of 1917.

"The irony of Trump publicly asking China to investigate the Bidens should not be lost on us. The Republican Party has campaigned since the 1917 October Revolution against Communism, championing the business classes and the rights of Capital (i.e. the inviolable rights of those who come to monopolize capital)."

By the same token, the irony of Cole, who seems to favor socialism over capitalism, defending a capitalist like Hunter Biden, who enriched himself in China (and Ukraine) thanks to his father being vice president, should not be lost on us either. Even capitalists like myself think that nepotism, conflicts of interest, and influence peddling are wrong. 

"Note that Trump has been working on a China investigation of Hunter Biden for some time behind the scenes, and while he denies it, his slapping of tariffs on so many Chinese goods may in part be his way of pressuring Beijing to give up the goods. It is yet another impeachable offense."

I seem to recall that Trump early on decided to change the status quo of our trade relationship with the Chinese because we were getting screwed. Trump has been in office since January 2017, but now with the Hunter Biden issue front and center, Cole is accusing Trump of using tariffs to force China to look into the Biden issue-which, according to Cole is yet another impeachable offense, no less! (I have no idea what the others are.) In short, Cole's attempt to link Trump's tariff war with China to the Hunter/Joe Biden scandal is rather flimsy, to say the least.

But it gets better as Cole conjures up the ghosts of Joe McCarthy and George F. Kennan. 

"Cooler heads such as George F. Kennan did not view China as a strategic threat to the United States and very much doubted that Moscow could dominate it. Kennan was enough of a social scientist to recognize that the big agrarian countries of East Asia did not have the sort of political economy that was suited to American-style capitalism, and that they might go through a Communist phase. As long as it did not get in the way of American geopolitics, he felt, why should Washington care?"

George Kennan may have been a much respected, albeit controversial diplomat, but China has proved to be, indeed, a strategic threat to the US, which has gone much farther than simply choosing to go communist. In addition, one might think that Cole, who is supposed to be a historian, might mention Mao Zedong, the Great Leap Forward (1958-1962), and the millions of Chinese killed by the regime during their "Communist phase". He also seems to have overlooked China's intervention against the US and its UN allies in the Korean War!! Is he aware of what is happening in Hong Kong as we speak? The question I would pose to Cole is this: Perhaps you think China was not a strategic threat to the US back in the days of McCarthy and Kennan, but do you actually think they are not a strategic threat to the US (not to mention Asia in general) today?

More conspiracy:

"I think we know exactly what Republicans of the 1950s would think about Trump cozying up to Beijing in order to put a domestic political rival in a vise."

No, I don't think you do know. Actually, back in the 1950s, the gap between the Republicans and Democrats in terms of ideology was nowhere near as wide as it is today. As for Trump cozying up to China- in spite of the tariff war- tying it to this Joe/Hunter Biden issue is a stretch. Trump's China policy was much in evidence early in his administration, long before this Biden scandal came out.

"Never mind that Hunter Biden did not personally invest in a partially Chinese government-owned investment firm, BHR Equity Investment Fund Management Company, until 2017 after his father was out of office. He only put in some $400,000, a tenth of the company’s holdings, which then come out to $4 million; and Hunter Biden maintains that he hasn’t seen a dime in returns yet. So he hasn’t exactly taken $1.5 billion out of China, though he may be guilty of influence-peddling (on an extremely small scale in China)."

The trip in question, when then-Vice President Biden flew to China and took Hunter along with him was in 2013, while Joe still had another 3 years to go as Veep. I don't know the particulars of the deal Hunter brought back with him, but the fact remains, that Hunter used his father's official trip to gain a business deal with the Chinese. He had no business being on that trip, and it is up to Joe Biden to explain to the public what exactly happened with Hunter on that trip and why he was there in the first place.

Cole in fact, concedes that Hunter made some sort of business deal and was (maybe) engaging in influence peddling, but that it was on "an extremely small scale in China".

"To have a Republican administration characterize Hunter Biden’s tiny China investment, done after his father was a civilian, as some sort of massive criminal undertaking is another fantastic claim from the biggest liar-in-chief the United States has ever had."

So he made a "tiny" investment, and then Cole says it all happened after Joe left office!? Then the learned professor segues into a rather unscholarly description of Trump as the "biggest liar-in-chief the United States has ever had."

And then Cole adds the cherry to the whipped cream topping with this suggestion to the great unwashed out there who support Trump and his agenda.:

"Maybe the MAGA crowd should rethink its opposition to socialism. Many of them are white working class people with limited education, and they are the ones that would most benefit from it. And since Trump seems to think there’s something wrong with making money, it isn’t as though the old “free enterprise” mantra means much any more."

Yes, People, we are all a bunch of white goobers with limted education. I myself confess that I do not possess a PhD like Cole. I got my bachelors degree at the age of 25 after doing my Army hitch and got a masters degree at age 48.  Fortunately, I stopped there. I do have enough education and life experience to know that socialism/communism is a failure as evidenced everywhere it has been tried. It is an ecomomic failure and a political failure since it requires an authoritarian state to enforce its vision. Would it help me? Hardly, all it would do is raise my taxes through the ceiling and take away my liberties.

Cole is clearly an elitist. I immediately saw that when I saw him speak at California State University at Long Beach in 2014. He clearly favors a socialist form of government and possibly even more. That is his right as well as his right to say and write nonsense. I would never take that right away from him. If we disagree with him, we are free to express our views as well.

I will close with a question to Dr Cole: Had we been talking about Donald Trump Jr. or Eric Trump accompanying President Trump to China on an official mission and using the occasion and family relationship to Trump to make business deals with China, what would Cole be writing about that in Informed Comment? Here is the answer: He would say that it represents another impeachable offense.

Adam Schiff's Gross Mischaracterization of the Trump-Zelensky Call

Gary Fouse

Today, Adam Schiff (D-CA), chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, did something truly despicable. Already having seen the unredacted transcript of President Trump's July 25 conversation with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky, he then made up his own dialogue and read it into his opening statement. Below is what Schiff said today in opening the hearing with the testimony of National Intelligence Director Joseph McGuire.


Here is the transcript itself as turned over to Congress. Nowhere does it say things like Trump telling Zelensky, " I want you to make up dirt on my political opponent".


Schiff is now claiming that his words were meant as a parody of what Trump told Zelensky. It is true that in his remarks, Schiff used terms like, "in essence" in presenting his version. But Schiff is not a stupid man. Far from it. He structured his words very carefully as to give the viewer a certain impression while adding just enough language to give him his escape hatch when his mischaracterization was pointed out-as it quickly was.

In addition, Schiff is not a man who deals in parody. Humor is not in his bag.He presents himself as a serious, reasoned, and  moral voice. It is a facade. Schiff is a deeply partisan politician who deals in cleverly disguised dishonesty. This is a man who for months claimed to have the evidence that Trump colluded with the Russians-evidence that has never materialized on a narrative that has been discredited by none other than Robert Mueller himself.

Now come this latest rabbit hole about Ukraine and Schiff is leading the charge armed with false information. Did Schiff, in his opening remarks, make any mention of the underlying issue behind the Trump-Zelensky conversation-that then VP Biden threatened the then-Ukrainian president with cancellation of one billion dollars in US loan guarantees if he didn't fire the chief prosecutor investigating Burisma Holdings, who had mysteriously placed Joe's son, Hunter Biden, on its board of directors and paid him some 3 million dollars over the course of three years? Biden himself is on videotape telling an audience that he did exactly that and got the results he wanted. Should that not be investigated by both countries?

One can only pray that the vast majority of the American public will see this for what it is-the latest made up scandal in a never-ending quest to remove Trump from office.

Sweden: NIgerian Rapper Calls for Killing of Whites

Gary Fouse

"....shoot them"

Hat tip Samnytt and Gates of Vienna

A Nigerian-born rapper residing in Lund, Sweden has just come out with a statement about  killing white people. This showed up on his Instagram account which is open only for black people. The below report from Samnytt is translated from the Swedish by Fousesquawk. Editing and sub-titling by Vlad Tepes.


Rap artist from Lund calls for death for whites" "Shoot them".

A YouTube profile and rap artist well known among young people has started a closed account on social media in which he invites only black people. In several video postings, he calls for murder of white people in Sweden. Samhallsnytt has (gotten into) the account and can now reveal how an immigrant Nigerian propagates racism to hundreds of young people. "If some white guy or white girl tries to talk shit about you-shoot them."

The well-known YouTube profile is "JCBUZ", who has 280,000 subscribers on his two YouTube accounts, in which he reviews current hip hop records in Sweden and shares his own gangster-inspired rap music. JCBUZ, who is really named Jesse Ekene Nweke Conable, is 22 years old and registered (residence) in Lund. According to the tax police, he immigrated from Nigeria in 2008 and now has Swedish citizenship.

On a newly registered and locked Instagram account under the name "barasvarta" (black only)  several video clips with JCBUZ have been uploaded. In the presentation text for the account, which has 465 followers up to now, followers can read: "Black Power in Sweden" and "Only for Blacks".

Samhallsnytt  has gained access into the account, where it is clear that only blacks should get access to the content. Below is a photo update from his account where he states that he does not allow any white people to join the group.

On Tuesday several video clips were uploaded on the account where the rap artist propagated murder against white people in Sweden.

Text above video:

"Created our group so we get it together"

JCBUZ states in a  post that he has created "our group" so that blacks will get together in the fight. He means that blacks "must take over".

Below is JCBUZ speech and the video clip:

"My brothers and sisters, my black brothers and sisters, I have an important message for you. I only want to say to you, my black brothers and sisters out there.- You are special and nobody is like you. Continue the war.

We will take over- we will be number one- one beautiful day we will become number one. We will take over over those whites here. Just like these whites took us as slaves, we will take them as slaves and treat them even worse.

But right now we're just fighting (among ourselves), we're going to be smarter, we're going to be faster, we're going to be the best at everything. We'll take their bitches and we'll take their money. To be perfectly honest, we will be the best race ever. This is only the beginning; it is starting small but believe me, we will grow and grow bigger. We will be the strongest group in Sweden - no one will dare mess with us. Just wait, a beautiful day.

The whites try to mess with us- then you know what will come (gun sign with fingers). We will show them how we do it. We are warriors, do you understand? We are African warriors- They are not on our level. This here is just the beginning. Black power. Black power.

If any white guy or white girl is trying to talk shit about you - shoot them! If they talk shit about your family - shoot them!"

Text below the video:

"Created our group so we will stick together"

JCBUZ says in a post that he has created "our group" for blacks to stick together in the fight. He believes that blacks "must take over".

Text of comment thread ( red box 1): "Up to now whites have seen us as their slaves. Even if they don't say it straight out, it is what they think. I swear everything- that is why I created our group-so we can get ourselves together."  

Red box 2

"Therefore, we must take over."

Text below photo of JCBuz making shooting sign.

CBUZ makes pistol sign on social media. Facsimile Facebook.

In the comments, a "Chidde" writes out his/her hate toward whites as they are unsocial and the type who all talk behind your backs and are racist. Further says Chidde  that whites "always get better grades and jobs".

”Fuck White People”

In several posts, the artist expresses his hate against whites. In one post with a noose is "Fuck White People", and then, "We blacks are the best"

"What do you think about white people?"

Several posts call for hate toward people with white skin color. One person writes, "They think they are better than us, but it was we who build everything up here."

"If a white boy messes (with me) I would shoot him."

In one post, a picture is shown with text that one cannot be racist if he isn't white.  Followers are then asked if they agree.

One person named "Abdi" states that he will squeeze the trigger if a white boy  talks bad with him.

Shows video clip when a white boy is hit

The account also shows a video clip where a white boy is wrestled down by a black boy in a gym. During the video post, is "black power" and then follows several jubilant comments where he is happy that the white boy is knocked down. 

No response from gangster rapper

Samhallsnytt has sought out JCBUZ Conable without results, both by telephone and email for a comment.

Update: Conable has commented on Samhallsnytt's article via his Instagram account with the following comment:

(Laughing emojis)

It is not clear if someone has reported the artist for hate towards an ethnic group.

Update 2: Conable has taken note of our article and now writes that he wants to "eliminate the snitch" ('informer-" Editorial note) in an update in his closed Instagram group.

Image at bottom in black:

"We have a snitch among us. He or she must be eliminated."

By Simon Kristoffersson
Fousesquawk comment:  This is sick. Do I think it represents the thinking of all or even most black immigrants in Europe? No, I don't. But it should sound an alarm to Europe and their careless-reckless even - admission of migrants from the Middle East and Africa-largely Muslim nations, with scant or no attention paid to their backgrounds. So here you have in Sweden, an ungrateful Nigerian thug who advocates killing whites in the predominantly white nation that admitted him.

Sweden, you have a problem.

Congressman Adam Schiff Links Arms with MPAC

Gary Fouse

Hat tip Counter Jihad Coalition

The Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) is a creation and arm of the Muslim Brotherhood. It has consistently criticized and condemned virtually every law enforcement action against Islamic terrorism in the United States. They have accused the FBI of entrapping Muslims who have been charged with plotting to join ISIS and/or carry out terrorist attacks in the US.  Along with other organizations like CAIR, the Islamic Society of North America, the Islamic Circle of North America, the Muslim American Society, American Muslims for Palestine, and others, they are an insidious movement that pretends to be moderate, but in reality share the Muslim Brotherhood vision of an eventual world caliphate under sharia law.

So now, Democrat Congressman Adam Schiff, who represents part of the greater Los Angeles area, has joined with MPAC to go after all those white supremacists-while ignoring the multitude of Islamic terrorist attacks in the US and around the world. Schiff, who has most recently failed to produce an impeachable case against President Trump, has now aligned himself with  a despicable organization like MPAC.


 "MPAC joined a federall task force on the Prevention of Targeted Violence against houses of worship." 

Federal task force? When I think of a federal task force, I think of something like DEA, FBI, ATF, state and local police teaming up to fight a particular crime problem. I have been part of "federal task forces" when I was a DEA agent. I don't know what MPAC is talking about here. Them teaming up with characters like Adam Schiff, who has his own politcal agenda, is a joke. They are simply  making a political statement.

As Congressman Schiff said in his own words, “I think MPAC is doing some really important work. In fact, the white paper that MPAC put together analyzing this problem, talking about its roots, talking about the transnational character of this threat is something that every Member of Congress should read.” 

"Last week, Congressman Schiff took the legislative initiative to counter this threat against our community and country. He introduced a bill that would create a federal domestic terrorism crime and could be applied to attacks like mass shootings in El Paso, Texas; Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania; and Charleston, South Carolina." 

(And Dayton, San Bernardino, Orlando, Ft Hood, Boston, 9-11, etc?)

Truth is, terrorist attacks in the US are, indeed, handled by federal authorities, who now also prosecute for hate crimes. There are certain factors involved which would take the case out of the hands of state courts, who can still prosecute mass killings depending on the motivation. Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City bomber, was tried and executed by the federal courts. The Charleston killer, Dylan Roof, who killed out of his hate for black people, was also tried on federal charges related to hate crimes. He is awaiting execution.

Whether Schiff succeeds in tightening up federal legislation on hate crime murders is not the point here. State and federal authotires can and should work together to insure maximum punishment for these kinds of attacks. No one is trying to protect white nationalists who commit violent acts here. It is a problem and it is growing. And nobody is advocating for hate crimes against Muslims.

At the same time, groups like MPAC are merely trying to shift the spotlight from the threats of Islamic terror attacks for their own purposes. They cannot be trusted, and Schiff should know better.

But he doesn't.

How Germany Is Changing-A Cross-Post

Gary Fouse

Hat tip Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff and Gates of Vienna

Image result for elisabeth sabaditsch-wolff
Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff (L) with Geert Wilders of the Netherlands

Baron Bodissey, the editor of Gates of Vienna, is a on a short break, and the Austrian patriot Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff has filled in with this article from an anonymous German blogger about Germany and how it is changing. I am cross-posting it.

Elisabeth is one of Europe's leading voices agsinst the Islamization of Europe. For that, she is paying a heavy price, not only the physical threat from the jihadists, but efforts by her own government and courts to silence her.

The Baron has taken a well-deserved break to visit family and left his house to me. As your housekeeper, I am honored to introduce myself. My name is Elisabeth Sabaditsch-Wolff, and I reside in a crazy place called Central Europe, a place that I often no longer recognize. It pains me to watch my country, along with so many other countries, transformed into a resemblance of a Third World country.
The following words were originally penned in German, but the anonymous blog owner “Nicht mehr mein Deutschland” (No longer my Germany) kindly provides an excellent translation. What you are about to read epitomizes what I, along with millions of other native Europeans, see and feel every single day. The author adeptly describes a heavy and aching heart witnessing Germany’s transformation, the breakdown of public infrastructure, of society, of losing of free speech, and the rise of incapable politicians that magnify their capabilities.
Summer is waning; fall is just around the corner, not only for Germany, but for all of us. The change of season is inevitable, a part of life. Germany need not be waning. But  Germany believes its fall is inevitable.
How Germany Is Changing
When I was a child in Germany, some things were ugly on the outside, but pleasant on the inside. The houses they had built after the war were ugly, as were the hairstyles, the furniture and the fashion.
But what was pleasant and plentiful were the old houses in the cities, the winding streets, the bridges and rivers, the fortresses and castles. The rich nature everywhere, the well-kept parks and the large forests, the fields and the vineyards, the sea and the mountains.
And people were content. Most had a job. And almost no-one had to fear for their future, or their security, or that of their children. There was the cold war, but it seemed remote and didn’t affect us directly. Most of all, people were more alike. Most spoke the same language. They felt at home in the same culture. And they enjoyed the same, principal values. Those who had come here to work and who spoke a different language were viewed as guests, and if they wanted, they could usually stay. They were treated with respect, and the same was expected in return.
Times are changing
Today Germany has become a different place, and it is continuing to change, permanently. The houses built today are nicer than those constructed after the war, even if not as pleasant as those from one or two centuries ago. The furniture is nicer, and the fashion and hairstyles are, too.
But the streets are in need of repair. The schools are slowly falling apart. And on the pavements, in the cities, the homeless sleep at night. Many people have worse jobs than before, and they can afford less things that have a permanent value, like houses or flats. The streets are crowded with large, heavy lorries with foreign license plates, bringing goods in and out of the country, to be processed cheaper elsewhere, with traffic jams everywhere. The parks of yesterday are barely being tended. And outside the cities, in some forests, wolves are howling like they last did centuries ago.
Most of all, people have changed, they feel more rushed and under pressure. Many fear for their future and their safety, and that of their children, if they still have any. People are worried that they soon will be owning less, and perhaps that is why some have the urge to show even more that they do own something. Cars are larger than before, and the people in them more aggressive and reckless. Those making the most money take it from others unchallenged, keep some of it and hand the rest upwards.
Politicians and lobbyism
In politics, those who have increasingly attained power overestimate themselves and are more and more removed from the needs and opinions of those who voted for them, and who in a democracy they should naturally be representing. Instead, these people are often driven by simple and overrated ideologies, more than ever wittingly or unwittingly adhering to the wishes of those who, with a mixture of coddling and manipulation, have enforced this to the disadvantage of all others. In these times of lobbyism and one-sided medial distortion, with little balance, ethics or humanist values, the richest of the rich reign once again.
Through the shifting of political responsibilities towards European agencies, German parliamentarian democracy has been weakened. Through the introduction of the Euro, the possibility of a devaluation of national debt has been taken. Through the shouldering of debt of other European countries and private banks, every German citizen has been made responsible for the mistakes and greed of others. And through the introduction of an anti-debt regulation in the constitution, the path for further privatisation has been paved.
A changing society
And last of all, and again as a consequence of political decisions, many people on the streets and in the cities don’t speak my language anymore. They don’t live my culture. They don’t know my country. And many of them don’t even seem to want that. Many of them have come here because they wanted to worry less, and the rich beckoned them in because they demanded cheap labour and uncritical consumers, and the ideologists because they like to dream. But where all these new people should live, and where they should work, and who should pay for everything, till and if they ever earn their own money, no-one has ever clarified.
Some of these immigrated people seem less and less to respect my country, its people and its values, and they are changing the tone and the atmosphere in this society profoundly. They voice their demands loudly and take it as given that one supplies them with all of what other people in this country have worked hard for generations to attain. In their demands and ideas they are supported by some who are from Germany, but seemingly don’t like it very much.
Most of all, no one asks if all this change is actually deemed desirable by most of those who have been here longer. Instead, one has imposed a unified ideological mindset on the outside and an unrefrained neoliberalism on the inside. It is the worst of both worlds, and it destroys all that once made up our culture.
Freedom of opinion
At the same time, I have to worry about still being able to say or write something like this. Quickly and easily words like populism or agitation are used, and it supposedly always is about equality and tolerance. But curiously enough, it’s never about the tolerance towards those who adhere to the common rules and laws of this society and consistently demand that from others, too. Freedom of opinion has become a foreign word. Instead, those who make and impose the new moral rules are increasingly resorting to any means.
One has learned very little from the past in Germany. Under the fascists and in communist Eastern Germany, one neighbour denounced the other, some people their own partners, and sometimes even children their parents, because the children didn’t know better and one had told them in school that it was right that way. And always, afterwards, one shook ones head and allegedly asked how all this could have happened.
Prescribed intolerance
And now, in this country, once again generations of people are being raised, in schools, in universities, and by politics I don’t understand, and through media that either is owned by the state or again by the very rich. And the people today learn that intolerance against those who think differently, who voice criticism, and therefore are portrayed as intolerant, is totally alright. Denunciation, too. Defamation. Isolation. Or hate and violence. In fact, much is just like it was those times before. But today, people seem less educated, less informed and more manipulated than they have for a long time.
That scares me. Because again, most people are just learning off by heart what supposedly is right and what is wrong, instead of learning to think on their own. Is it in our genes? Is it our culture? Are we, on the whole, just too stupid? It may be of advantage to adapt and go with the crowd. But it can be really sad. And it makes life difficult for those who aren’t fooled by bread and circuses, who still have some education and the ability to think for themselves, who can hear the nuances and perhaps have a better feeling for the essence of things.
What I am sure of, is that the only people who really profit from all this madness are very few, very rich people, somewhere, in a very different world from mine and that of most others.
I love this country. But it is not my Germany anymore.