The Corner

The one and only.

The Latest Tweets from Team NRO . . .

MSNBC Cuts Off Dem. Congressman to Report on LeBron James


What’s the only thing more important to MSNBC’s business model than Democratic politicians? Celebrity news.

When news of LeBron James’s decision to return to the Cleveland Cavaliers broke this afternoon, Luke Russert abruptly cut off New York representative Steve Israel, the chairman of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee, to report on the NBA star.

“I’m sorry, though — King James is making his decision known, so that bumps you out,” Russert said.

He said Israel, who had been on for only one minute, would return later in the show, but never went back to the congressman.

Earlier this year, MSNBC cut away from former representative Jane Harman of California to pop star Justin Bieber’s appearance before a judge:

Abortion Supporter Assaults Young Pro-Lifers


A woman in Columbus, Ohio, is facing charges of assault and criminal damaging after going on a verbal and physical tirade against members of the pro-life organization Created Equal. The entire episode was captured on camera.

In the video, Victoria Duran is shown aggressively confronting young Created Equal members and interns, destroying their signs, and repeatedly hurling expletive-laced pejoratives towards them. “You’re just a white f*cking privileged racist f*cking male that doesn’t stand for women’s rights,” she said at one point before kicking a sign and attacking one of the men with a camera.

She told the demonstrators that their signs “deserved to get f*cked up.”

Duran then tried to elude the Created Equal members by hopping on to a nearby bus — but the bus stayed put until authorities arrived on the scene. She dramatically told police, “Go ahead, take me.”

She has since been charged with assault and criminal damaging, according to Created Equal. Duran says she has no regrets about her behavior.

“Assault?” she told a local news station, “I wouldn’t necessarily say shoving them aside and telling them to keep the camera out of my face [is] assault.”

Via Hot Air.


L’Oréal Terminates Contract with Belgian Supporter after Hunting Photos Emerge


French cosmetics company L’Oréal has severed ties with a soccer fan to whom it had offered a modeling contract after photos of her hunting sparked anger online.

Last week, a photo of Axelle Despiegelaere, a 17-year-old from Belgium cheering on her team on at the World Cup tournament in Brazil, went viral on Twitter, earning her the unofficial title as the “most beautiful World Cup supporter.” 

When she returned to Belgium, she set up a Facebook page that quickly gained tens of thousands of followers. She became such a sensation that L’Oréal offered her a contract to star in the company’s latest social-media campaign in Belgium. She had already filmed her first “beauty tutorial” for the brand, which had received two million views as of Friday morning. 

The gig, however, was short-lived. When Facebook photos emerged of Despiegelaere posing with a rifle next to a dead animal on a hunting trip, L’Oréal announced it was terminating the contract.

“L’Oréal Professionnel Belgium collaborated with her on an ad hoc basis to produce a video for social media use in Belgium, a L’Oréal spokesperson told the British newspaper the Independent. “The contract has now been completed.”

The caption of the Facebook photo, which shows Despiegelaere posing with an elk, reads:

Hunting is not a matter of life or death. It’s much more than that . . this was about 1 year ago . . . ready to hunt americans today haha 

The last reference is to the U.S. vs. Belgium soccer game. 

The L’Oréal spokesperson would not comment on whether the photos were behind the decision to cut ties with Despiegelaere, but did say that the company was aware of the photo. L’Oréal stressed to the Independent that the company “no longer tests on animals, anywhere in the world, and does not delegate this task to others.”


Web Briefing: July 24, 2014

McCarthy: IRS Investigation ‘Looks Like a Sham, It Feels Like a Sham’



Pushing Suicide for Suffering


I had some requests for a response to Diane Rehm’s new campaign to legalize assisted suicide in the wake of her husband’s suicide by starvation (VSED), an approach to becoming dead pushed by Compassion and Choices among others. I do today in First Things.

I point out that the media stories never give any opposing view to assisted suicide in these kinds of stories anymore. (I guess it’s a “fact” that doctor-prescribed death should be legal.) From, “Pushing Suicide for Suffering:”

Rehm has responded by promoting the legalization of doctor-prescribed death. A recent profile of her by NBC focused solely on the pro assisted suicide side, giving no voice to those who warn against legalization. In the story’s telling, John’s suicide was necessary. The only question should be how best to get it done.

It is a profound disservice to the gravity of this issue that the media give scandalously short shrift to the many stories of people who find meaning and hope in life even as they grapple with the anguish of profound disabilities. But the stories are not hard to find—if only journalists were as interested in promoting hope as they are assisted suicide.

I segue into true stories of people suffering as terribly as John Rehm, who became suicidal, but were then so glad they didn’t do the deed.

One is Mark Pickup, the Canadian disability rights activist and Christian apologist. The other was my late friend Robert Salamanca who lived with ALS until dying naturally and peacefully in his sleep.

I conclude:

By focusing so intensely on promoting suicide among those suffering from illness and disability—while mostly ignoring powerful and uplifting stories of people who manage to thrive in the midst of great pain—the media does society and the suffering a terrible disservice. As Salamanca wrote, “Reporting in the media too often makes us feel like token presences, burdens who are better off dead.”

Today’s media are suicide pushers. There is no other way to describe it.

Christian College May Lose Federal Funding over Letter to Obama


The accreditors who control what schools have access to federal funding are reviewing a Christian college whose president signed a letter to President Obama pertaining to religious freedom and an executive order about gay rights.

“[The commission] will talk about the issues and decide if the issues, that are raised and what is publicly available, is at odds in any way with standards and policies,” New England Association of Schools and Colleges president Barbara Brittingham said, per Boston Business Journal, in response to a letter signed by Gordon College president D. Michael Lindsay.

Lindsay signed a letter to Obama requesting an exemption from an imminent executive order “forbidding companies that do business with the federal government from discriminating against employees on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity,” according to the Los Angeles Times.

About 150 religious leaders also signed the letter. “We believe that all persons are created in the divine image of the creator, and are worthy of respect and love, without exception. Even so, it still may not be possible for all sides to reach a consensus on every issue,” they wrote, according to the Boston Globe. “That is why we are asking that an extension of protection for one group not come at the expense of faith communities whose religious identity and beliefs motivate them to serve those in need.”

The federal government relies on accrediting agencies to decide which colleges qualify for the $157 billion of federal funding provided annually to colleges and universities, so the meeting that Brittingham described could have dire consequences for the school.

“That $157 billion a year is the oxygen that keeps higher ed alive,” as Southern New Hampshire University president Paul LeBlanc put it.

The expected executive order is modeled on the Employee Non-Discrimination Act, which gay-rights groups have long supported. That unity among activists is fracturing, though, as some gay-rights activists want to remove the religious-freedom exemption from the bill.

“ENDA’s discriminatory provision, unprecedented in federal laws prohibiting employment discrimination, could provide religiously affiliated organizations — including hospitals, nursing homes and universities — a blank check to engage in workplace discrimination against LGBT people,” the ACLU says.

Re: So Many Choices


Global warming causes infidelity? I’d love to see how well that excuse works.

Obama Goes Rogue: Is He Having His ‘Katrina Moment’?


Members of the White House press corps are rarely puzzled the way they are about President Obama right now. As Juliet Eilperin of the Washington Post put it: “What exactly is going on with the leader of the free world?”  

To all appearances, Obama has gone rogue. For example, his speeches have become snappish and undignified. “So sue me,” was Obama’s response to congressional complaints that he has exceeded his executive power, even though the Supreme Court has unanimously slapped him down on that front a total of 13 times in the last two years. 

​Obama’s frustration with Congress also isn’t designed to win him any leverage on Capitol Hill: “Sometimes I feel like saying to these guys, ‘I’m the guy doing my job. You must be the other guy.’”

At the same time that Obama is lashing out at his critics, he is appearing increasingly detached when it comes to the crisis on the Mexican border. During a visit to Denver for a political fundraiser last week, he was captured in photo ops shooting pool, having a beer with strangers, and shaking hands with a guy wearing a horse mask. The next day he visited Texas, where he dismissed calls for him to visit the border by claiming he didn’t do photo ops.

Democratic Representative Henry Cuellar, who represents the border city of Laredo, was withering in his criticism. “If he had time, with all due respect, to have a beer and play pool like he did in Colorado last night, then I think after the fundraisers he should make time to go down [to the border],” he told CNN. He openly worried that Obama’s refusal to visit the border could become a “Katrina moment,” like the one that saddled George W. Bush with the image of a president oblivious to reality.

Obama aides are putting a happy face on their boss going “rogue.” Senior adviser Dan Pfeiffer insists the president “just wants to get out” around the country and influence “our overall political conversation” by connecting with ordinary Americans. He claims the White House is willing to endure “some short-term press turbulence” for the larger goal of letting the president roam where he wishes.

But as Eilperin notes, “to some, breaking free can also look like running away.” The last thing Democrats need right now in the run-up to the 2014 elections are split images on television of chaos at the border combined with shots of President Obama playing golf or roaming the streets of an American city before yet another fundraiser.

Reince Priebus, chair of the Republican National Committee, snarks that “the only way we’ll ever get President Obama to visit the border is to have the Democratic National Committee hold a fundraiser there.”

President Obama’s behavior and verbal petulance is now opening him up to ridicule. That’s always a dangerous place for a president to be — especially one with an approval rating already hovering at 40 percent.

Two Videos, Two Different Universes


The first is from Israel. A teacher composed a little song to help children cope with rocket attacks.

The second is from Hamas

Two tunes. Two different universes.

So Many Choices


Only last month, I wrote the following:

For many years, when I wanted to illustrate the nuttiness of global-warming passion, I mentioned an article in The Journal of Affective Disorders: “Global warming possibly linked to an enhanced risk of suicide: Data from Italy, 1974–2003.” I think I have a new illustration. Did you see this article? “Global Warming Makes Couples Cheat, Says Dating Website.”

And now this: “Redheads could become extinct as Scotland gets sunnier, experts have claimed.”

They’re spoiling me for choice.

I sometimes think that the climate movement (for lack of a better term) is filled with moles — saboteurs — who say or write nutty things in order to make the movement look bad.

But this could be said of most every movement, I suppose.

Friday links


Great Behind-the-Scenes Look at the Visual Effects From Game of Thrones Season 4.

How to give a giant blue whale a bath.

How many snowflakes would it take to cover the entire world in six feet of snow?

How to cook bacon with a machine gun.

Terry Gilliam Reveals the Secrets of Monty Python Animations: A 1974 How-To Guide.

How fast do you have to run if you want to walk on water?

13 Questions Answered About The Simpsons (they’re yellow, says series creator Matt Groening, “to attract the attention of channel hoppers.”) Related (from the archives), Funny Signs From The Simpsons.

If you grew up in the Eighties (or have kids who did), you’ve probably seen Last Starfighter at least a dozen times: here’s Everything You Never Knew About The Making Of Last Starfighter.

Tired of sitting around in airports?  One City, Five Hours: An Illustrated Guide to Layovers.

ICYMIWednesday’s links are here, and include lots of Tesla information, vampire slaying ethical questions, jaywalking origins, and the sad story of Domino’s Pizza’s “Avoid the Noid” campaign.

Krauthammer’s Take: Stalling on IRS Scandal ‘Caused by Administration’s Contempt of Congress’


Charles Krauthammer commented on recently released emails from Lois Lerner’s email account on Thursday evening’s Special Report. Filling in for Bret Baier, Doug McKelway posed to Krauthammer, “The interesting thing is that the courts seem to be making much more progress than Congress is,” regarding the scandal. Krauthammer agreed. He posed that the reason is not because of partisanship, but because of the administration’s contempt for Congress. He explained, “the administration, the IRS…doesn’t answer, waits a year, waits two years, and then reports stuff that is incomplete and has to be learned through a lawsuit.”

Krauthammer continues on to outline the suspicious nature of the emails. He explains, “[Lerner] is obviously instructing people by code to be careful of what’s in your email,” showing that the IRS and Lerner were clearly trying to cover up certain details. “[The IRS] is the most powerful agency in government after the military,” Krauthammer asserts, “and they are hiding things from oversight, from Congress, which is a required bylaw, clearly trying to undermine any attempt to reign in [their power].”

Grimes Strikes Out on Whether She Would Support WH Border Proposal


​Alison Lundergan Grimes either completely deflected on whether she would support the White House’s request for supplemental funding to address the border, or she appears to not realize the difference between that proposal and the Senate’s immigration bill in a recent appearance.

The Kentucky Democratic senate candidate was caught on camera failing to provide an answer about the $3.7 billion request on at least four occasions. In her first answer, she criticized Mitch McConnell for not voting for last year’s immigration bill. She was then asked a second time about the president’s request.

“I’m going to assess everything when I’m in the United States senate in light of is it good for Kentucky,” Grimes replied.

“Is this good for Kentucky?” a reporter asked.

“In terms of immigration reform, I think it is an earned pathway to citizenship and a secure border is much needed, not just for Kentucky, but for the entire nation,” she said.

“What about the supplemental that the president is asking for now? Would you support it?” another reporter asked.

“Again, the bill that came out of the senate, I strongly support it, and I will continue to monitor the legislation that is before Congress, ” she said, before blaming McConnell again.

Boehner to Sue Obama over Employer-Mandate Delay


The House of Representatives will pass a resolution authorizing itself to sue President Obama, and will then file suit against the president over his delay of the implementation of the Affordable Care Act’s employer mandate, Speaker John Boehner announced Thursday afternoon. A statement from the speaker’s office explains:

In 2013, the president changed the health care law without a vote of Congress, effectively creating his own law by literally waiving the employer mandate and the penalties for failing to comply with it.  That’s not the way our system of government was designed to work.  No president should have the power to make laws on his or her own.

As I’ve said, this isn’t about Republicans versus Democrats; it’s about the Legislative Branch versus the Executive Branch, and above all protecting the Constitution.  The Constitution states that the president must faithfully execute the laws, and spells out that only the Legislative Branch has the power to legislate.  The current president believes he has the power to make his own laws – at times even boasting about it.  He has said that if Congress won’t make the laws he wants, he’ll go ahead and make them himself, and in the case of the employer mandate in his health care law, that’s exactly what he did.

The resolution is here.

Last summer, President Obama announced that the employer mandate — the requirement that employers with over 50 workers must offer affordable insurance — would be delayed one year, when it had been scheduled to be implemented in 2014. Now it will apply to businesses with 100 or more employees starting in 2015, and to firms with more than 50 employees starting in 2016.

Trump: Illegal Immigrants Are Getting Treated Better than Vets


The thousands of unaccompanied immigrant children are being treated better than American veterans and a Marine stuck in Mexico, Donald Trump said on Laura Ingraham’s radio show.

“You know, the only one we can’t get back into the country is our Marine,” Trump said on Thursday, referring to U.S. Marine reservist Andrew Tahmooressi, who mistakenly crossed in to Mexico with firearms and is being held there by the Mexican government. “I mean, everyone else is flowing in from Mexico and the Marine is stuck in prison.”

Additionally, needy veterans continue to suffer from through the widespread mismanagement at the Department of Veterans Affairs, he said, “but I guarantee we’ll take care of these [immigrants] if they come.”

Trump warned of the consequences of allowing recently arrived illegal-immigrant children to stay in the country while top-notch students from other countries are denied entrance to the U.S. or must go through the legal process.

“This influx is killing the country,” he said. “It’s killing the country.”

1215 and All That


Given that I don’t think that David Cameron has much of a chance of hanging on to his job after the general election next year, there’s a sense in which spending too much time discussing his thoroughly implausible “renegotiation” of Britain’s role within the EU is a pointless exercise. Then again, as the implausibility of this much-vaunted renegotiation may well play a not insignificant part in his defeat (by helping ensure that enough former Tories stay with UKIP) it’s worth understanding why no one should take Cameron’s claims very seriously.

The most important reason is that the very essence of the EU is that once a competence has been transferred to Brussels it becomes part of, to use the shorthand, the “acquis communautaire,” and cannot be handed back. To persuade every other EU nation to agree (because that’s what it would take) to somehow exempt the U.K. in any significant way from this would truly be a mission impossible.

And even if it were not, there is no reason to think that Mr. Cameron has the inclination, the toughness, or the attention to detail necessary to see it through.

A case in point is the European Arrest Warrant.

Writing in the Daily Telegraph, Conservative MP Douglas Carswell explains:

Ministers might like to talk Eurosceptic, but officials seem to be carrying on as before. Consider the decision, debated in Parliament today, to opt back into giving the European Commission and Court of Justice oversight over dozens of policing, justice and home affairs measures in the UK. Europol – the nascent pan European police force – will be given a greater role. Customs officials around the EU will cooperate more. The European Arrest Warrant (EAW) will mean that people in this country will continue to face arrest and extradition, without a British court being required to see if there is proper evidence against them.

European Arrest Warrants have, of course, been with us for a decade. Yet thanks to how the Lisbon Treaty was drafted, the UK government needs to sign us up again to the system. For all the talk of change in our relations with Europe, it has chosen to do so.

Why? If you listen to the Home Office, the EAW has been a vital weapon in the fight against terror. The 7/7 bombers, they like to remind us, were extradited from Italy under an EAW.

But are we to seriously believe that had there not been an EAW, the 7/7 bombers would still be in Italy? Of course, not. It is perfectly possible to extradite people against whom there is clear evidence without an EAW. Each week, over a dozen Brits are arrested in the UK because they are subject to EAWs issued elsewhere. What percentage of these are terror suspects? 1 per cent? Half of one per cent? A minuscule fraction of those extradited under the EAW have been terror suspects, and I doubt a single one of them could not have been extradited without an EAW.

One of my constituents – let’s call him Mr Essex – faces extradition to France under an EAW and certainly isn’t a terror suspect. Instead, he has been accused to tax evasion because someone using his name and identity has not been paying taxes in France as they should have. Or so he says. I am all in favour of suspects being extradited from one jurisdiction to another. But only if a prosecutor in one can show a court that there is at least some credible evidence against them.

That basic due process would allow my constituent the opportunity to tell the court a couple of things in his defence. Like that he did not, apparently, have a passport at the time of the alleged crime, so could not have been in France. Or like the fact that he has only ever set foot in France once before, on a day trip to Calais. Thanks to the EAW, there is no need for anything quite so tiresome. The French prosecutors simply fill in an application form, and the British police have to nab him. No British court can stop the process. Off he must go.

Is this really what we want?

The answer, of course, is no. By signing off on this, the British government would not only be walking away from its fundamental responsibility to its own people, but it would also be handing UKIP a very big stick with which to beat the Tories at election time. If Cameron cannot get something fairly simple like this right, can he be trusted to handle a renegotiation that will actually mean something? The answer is, again, no.

And here, also via the Daily Telegraph, is another part of the Cameron legacy in the making (my emphasis added):

British tax authorities have been accused of attempting to ride roughshod over Magna Carta in pursuit of new powers that will allow them to raid the bank accounts of those who fail to pay their dues. MPs on the Treasury Select Committee said they were “horrified” by the proposals which HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) says it needs to recover tax from 17,000 “recalcitrant debtors”.

Lin Homer, chief executive of HMRC, insisted that the powers would only be used in extreme circumstances and would never leave taxpayers short of “enough money to live.” However, she caused alarm by explaining that HMRC would be able to judge whether a debtor could afford to pay up because they would have access to 12 months of the target’s personal spending habits. The proposals are currently out for consultation until the end of July.

In a marathon session lasting more than three hours, John Thurso, Liberal Democrat member of the Committee, said HMRC was asking for power to over-ride Magna Carta which sought to protect citizens’ rights from plundering kings 800 years ago. “We are talking about the ability of one organ of the state to have the unique right to go against the Magna Carta charter and go in and seize – without judicial process or review – a bank account,” he said.  Steve Baker, Tory MP for Wycombe, told Ms Homer that HMRC was pleading “necessity” for new powers when in fact it was just “frustrated with a small number” of taxpayers. He said it reminded him of William Pitt’s famous view. The former prime minster said that “necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom.”

And yes, this is another gift to UKIP too.

Felon, Former Black Panther Party Leader Hosts Fundraiser for Democratic Senate Candidate Michelle Nunn


The suggested contribution amounts for entry to a Capitol Hill fundraiser held Tuesday evening for Democratic Senate candidate Michelle Nunn rose to $2,600 a head. The special guest advertised on the invitation was former Democratic senator Sam Nunn, the candidate’s father, who represented Georgia in Washington for over two decades.

There was another guest, however, who probably turned more heads. Among the co-hosts of the of the event was Virtual Murrell, an early leader of the Black Panther Party during its militant phase and later a political consultant who, in the mid 1990s, spent time in jail for using his perch in city government to extort local businesses.

“Our campaign was unaware of Mr. Murrell’s criminal history and disagrees with his comments,” Nunn communications director Nathan Click tells National Review Online. As a member of the Black Panther Party, Murrell embraced the organization’s racially incendiary platform, calling the United States government racist and threatening to retaliate against the police and the military “by whatever means necessary.”

In a year that has shaped up as a promising one for Republicans, Democrats have rallied around Nunn’s candidacy. She is not only a political legacy, but also has some bipartisan credibility in a state that favors the GOP: She is the former CEO of George H. W. Bush’s Points of Light Foundation, the nonprofit organization he founded to spearhead his charitable activities. Furthermore, Nunn faces a still-fractured Republican field. While Democrats have united behind Nunn, the GOP won’t have a candidate until after a July 22 runoff between businessman David Perdue and Republican congressman Jack Kingston.

Nunn has looked to be the strongest challenger of 2014 midterm cycle, but the sloppiness of a campaign operation that sent her off to fundraise with an ex-felon may cause Democrats to start asking questions: for starters, whether the rookie candidate and her team can get through a competitive battle this fall without further slip-ups.

They will have to start by strengthening their vetting operation.

Murrell was indicted in 1994 by a federal grand jury on charges that he solicited and received over $37,000 in bribes from businesses in San Francisco while serving as an aide to an Oakland city councilman. The indictment found him guilty of violating the Hobbs Act, a federal statute that prohibits elected and appointed officials from using their public positions for personal gain. Murrell pleaded guilty and, in 1995, was sentenced to a year in prison.

His brush with the law was not his first time in the spotlight. In the late 1960s, as distribution manager for the Blank Panthers, Murrell was a vocal proponent of the party’s ten-point platform. Archival news footage from the local San Francisco station KRON-TV shows him arguing, on the eve of his draft date in 1968, that African Americans should be exempt from military service because blacks are “victimized by the white racist government of America.”

“I’m due to report for induction tomorrow morning for the purposes of being drafted into the United States Army,” Murrell says. “If this racist, ethnocentric, imperialistic dog forces me to go, I have no other choice other than to sabotage your arsenal and to arm black people to use [arms] against this racist power structure to defend themselves.”

Nunn is not the first candidate who has had to distance herself from Murrell after her association with him became public.

In 1994, the Oakland mayoral candidate Ted Dang appeared and delivered a speech at a fundraiser to help cover Murrell’s legal expenses. When the news became public, he claimed to have stumbled on the event by accident.

Abbas Has a Genocide Problem, but It’s Not Israeli Retaliation


When Israel launched a retaliatory attack against Hamas targets in Gaza, killing about 50 people, Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas described the attack as “genocide against the Palestinian people.” The comment prompted swift denunciation by the Anti-Defamation League.

It’s not hard to see why.

The word “genocide” came about because no existing vocabulary could describe the crime perpetrated by the Nazi during the holocaust. Raphael Lemkin, a Jewish lawyer of Polish nationality, coined the word in 1944 and used it in the Nuremburg trials. It means the deliberate, systematic extermination of an entire race of people.

Moral philosophers disagree as to whether genocide is morally worse than indiscriminate mass murder on the same scale, just as they disagree over whether hate crimes targeting marginalized groups are categorically worse than indiscriminate murders. However that debate is decided, the word clearly should be reserved for murder carried out on a horrifying scale.

By using the word “genocide” to describe a few scores of deaths of a defensive military campaign, Abbas dilutes the significance of the word, trivializing the Holocaust and the suffering of those it victimized. Compare using the word “rape” to describe an unwelcome sexual advance of a purely verbal nature.

Nor is this the first time Abbas has made a dubious statement on the subject of genocide. His doctoral dissertation claimed that only about 890,000 Jews were killed in the Holocaust. He also laid much of the blame on Zionists who collaborated with the Nazis in order to encourage Jewish immigration to Palestine. The New York Times reported that Abbas had shifted in his position on the Holocaust when he denounced it “the most heinous crime of the modern era,” but the Jewish publication Tablet noted that he never repudiated his claim about Jewish responsibility.

Now Abbas is partnered with Hamas, whose 1988 charter looks forward to future, divinely aided killing of Jews:

Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah’s promise whatever time it might take. The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him! This will not apply to the Gharqad, which is a Jewish tree (cited by Bukhari and Muslim).

One must admit that, by Hamas standards, the exception for the Jewish tree is pretty considerate.

By calling the Israeli response “genocide” Abbas doing more than misstating facts. He is using moral outrage over the Holocaust as a tool to bring about what could turn into a real genocide, worthy of the name.

End of Civilization Part 4 Trillion


Wow, this is depressing:

Jada, a 16-year-old junior in Houston, claims she was drugged and raped at a high school party after accepting a drink from a friend of a friend.

But as truly disturbing as those allegations are, the aftermath is almost worse: Photos and videos of the assault circled on social media. Jada’s accused rapist mocked her repeatedly on Twitter. And at some point in the whole soulless spectacle, a meme was born: It’s called #jadapose — and it consists of lying prone and half-clothed on the floor.

Per Topsy, a Twitter analytics tool, the hashtag has been used 3,000 times since it was coined Tuesday night, apparently in response to the 11 p.m. local news broadcast on which Jada went public.

Follow the link for all the ugly details. 

Obamacare the Law vs. Obamacare the Cause



Sign up for free NRO e-mails today:

NRO Polls on LockerDome

Subscribe to National Review