NY Times Finally Decides To Notice Rising Jew Hatred In Their Own Paper And Around The World

It only took them publishing multiple anti-Semitic cartoons and getting slammed

A Rising Tide of Anti-Semitism

The Times published an appalling political cartoon in the opinion pages of its international print edition late last week. It portrayed Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel as a dog wearing a Star of David on a collar. He was leading President Trump, drawn as a blind man wearing a skullcap.

The cartoon was chosen from a syndication service by a production editor who did not recognize its anti-Semitism. Yet however it came to be published, the appearance of such an obviously bigoted cartoon in a mainstream publication is evidence of a profound danger — not only of anti-Semitism but of numbness to its creep, to the insidious way this ancient, enduring prejudice is once again working itself into public view and common conversation.

Anti-Semitic imagery is particularly dangerous now. The number of assaults against American Jews more than doubled from 2017 to 2018, rising to 39, according to a report released Tuesday by the Anti-Defamation League. On Saturday, a gunman opened fire during Passover services at a synagogue in San Diego County, killing one person and injuring three, allegedly after he posted in an online manifesto that he wanted to murder Jews. For decades, most American Jews felt safe to practice their religion, but now they pass through metal detectors to enter synagogues and schools.

Interesting. There’s no mention of the 7,000 anti-Jew incidents while Obama was president (Vox of course tries to defend Obama and hurt Trump). This is not to blame them on Obama, just to show the incidents, which mainly occur from Obama’s unhinged base, especially on college campuses, in Dem run cities, and, yes, people who would be considered very far right and whom are unwanted by the Republican party and Conservatives in general.

Nor is there a mention of all the pieces, both in the “news” section and the opinion section, that protected Jew hater and sitting U.S. Representative Ilhan Omar. Nor that many Democrats were very upset that the Trump admin has been working hard to investigate incidences of anti-Semitism on the Democrat run college campuses. Also, the Times forgot to mention other big attacks that didn’t occur under Trump, such as the Holocaust Museum attack.

Jews face even greater hostility and danger in Europe, where the cartoonwas created. In Britain, one of several members of Parliament who resigned from the Labour Party in February said that the party had become “institutionally anti-Semitic.” In France and Belgium, Jews have been the targets of terrorist attacks by Muslim extremists. Across Europe, right-wing parties with long histories of anti-Semitic rhetoric are gaining political strength.

You can’t blame it all on “right wing parties”, unless you want to note that they have the same beliefs that Progressives, Socialists, and Marxists hold.

This is also a period of rising criticism of Israel, much of it directed at the rightward drift of its own government and some of it even questioning Israel’s very foundation as a Jewish state. We have been and remain stalwart supporters of Israel, and believe that good-faith criticism should work to strengthen it over the long term by helping it stay true to its democratic values. But anti-Zionism can clearly serve as a cover for anti-Semitism — and some criticism of Israel, as the cartoon demonstrated, is couched openly in anti-Semitic terms.

Criticism of Israel is not rising: it’s been high among the same groups for a long time, including many in the Democratic party, and in the opinion pages of liberal run newspapers. But, it is good to see the Times’ Editorial Board not that anti-Israel sentiment serves as cover for Jew hatred.

As anti-Semitism has surged from the internet into the streets, President Trump has done too little to rouse the national conscience against it. Though he condemned the cartoon in The Times, he has failed to speak out against anti-Semitic groups like the white nationalists who marched in Charlottesville, Va., in 2017 chanting, “Jews will not replace us.” He has practiced a politics of intolerance for diversity, and attacks on some minority groups threaten the safety of every minority group. The gunman who attacked the synagogue in San Diego claimed responsibility for setting a fire at a nearby mosque, and wrote that he was inspired by the deadly attack on mosques in New Zealand last month.

And now they attempt to shift the blame from themselves. Surprise? Funny how the NYT forgets that before Ilhan, whom they protected, Obama mainstreamed anti-Israel and anti-Jew sentiment. The same paper also backed Iran while Obama was making his deal, a nation that has a stated goal of wiping Israel off the map.

In the 1930s and the 1940s, The Times was largely silent as anti-Semitism rose up and bathed the world in blood. That failure still haunts this newspaper. Now, rightly, The Times has declared itself “deeply sorry” for the cartoon and called it “unacceptable.” Apologies are important, but the deeper obligation of The Times is to focus on leading through unblinking journalism and the clear editorial expression of its values. Society in recent years has shown healthy signs of increased sensitivity to other forms of bigotry, yet somehow anti-Semitism can often still be dismissed as a disease gnawing only at the fringes of society. That is a dangerous mistake. As recent events have shown, it is a very mainstream problem.

Yet, the Times will still look to protect those who are anti-Semites on their side. Where’s the condemnation of Omar? How about all the Democrats hobb-knobbing with Keith Ellison and Louis Farrakhan? Taking meetings with the Muslim Brotherhood linked CAIR, and taking their donations? Will they highlight the pro-Palestinian anti-Semitic college kids all over campuses run by Democrats?

It is interesting that only now does the NY Times take a stance, after a cartoonist felt perfectly fine in submitting an anti-Jew cartoon, thinking there would be no issues with this. And, as far as we know, the cartoonist has not had their contract terminated, nor has anyone else been terminated.

Read: NY Times Finally Decides To Notice Rising Jew Hatred In Their Own Paper And Around The World »

Surprise, No, Real Surprise: Trump And Dems Agree On Infrastructure Package

I don’t know about you, but, I really, really did not expect this

Trump agrees to spend $2 trillion on US infrastructure: Democrats

Democratic leaders emerged from White House talks with Donald Trump Tuesday saying they had reached agreement with the president to spend $2 trillion to improve America’s creaking infrastructure.

“We agreed on a number which was very, very good: $2 trillion for infrastructure,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said, in a sign the feuding sides are willing to work together on accomplishing a major bipartisan goal to upgrade the nation’s roads, bridges, airports, rail lines, waterways and broadband internet access.

“Even the president was eager to push it up to $2 trillion,” the Democrat added.

“There was goodwill in this meeting, and that was different than some of the other meetings that we’ve had, which is a very good thing.”

Of course, this is the Dems point of view, we haven’t heard from Trump yet. And, we’ve certainly seen where Democrats scuttle things that have been agree on. I guess we’ll see.

Read: Surprise, No, Real Surprise: Trump And Dems Agree On Infrastructure Package »

If All You See…

…is a wonderful park in the middle of a big city which Cares about climate change, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is This ain’t Hell…, with a post wondering if Dems will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

Yes, that is in Chile.

Read: If All You See… »

Democrats To Scuttle Infrastructure Talks With Silly Demands

President Donald Trump has been open to a big plan to fix America’s infrastructure, and has tried working with Democrats previously, but, they were pains in the behind and caused that push to die

(CNN) House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer will meet with President Donald Trump on Tuesday in an effort to find common ground on infrastructure policy even as tensions run high over ongoing Democratic-led investigations into the administration in the wake of the Mueller report.

The meeting will take place at 10:30 a.m. ET at the White House, a senior Democratic aide told CNN.

Rebuilding America’s infrastructure has long been talked about as an area of potential cooperation between Democrats and the President since both have described investing in infrastructure as a priority. That’s no guarantee, however, that the two sides will agree on an infrastructure plan, especially since congressional Democrats and Trump rarely agree on anything.

“Our message is: Let’s work together,” Pelosi told reporters on Monday, adding, “The American people understand the need to build the infrastructure of our country. Let’s find a solution.”

It’s pretty much DOA unless Dems are willing to drop their stupid ideas

Dems want climate change, tax hikes in infrastructure deal

The leaders laid out other Democratic priorities: Any deal must extend beyond traditional infrastructure projects, take into account climate change, include “Buy America” provisions and provide jobs for a broad swath of workers.

“A big and bold infrastructure package must be comprehensive and include clean energy and resiliency priorities,” Pelosi and Schumer wrote. “To truly be a gamechanger for the American people, we should go beyond transportation and into broadband, water, energy, schools, housing and other initiatives. We must also invest in resiliency and risk mitigation of our current infrastructure to deal with climate change.”

So, instead of just trying to fix infrastructure, they want to delve into all sorts of other things, including Hotcoldwetdry idiocy. This should be a short meeting. Because these demands are not opening requests which lead to negotiation, they want it all or they won’t cooperate.

Read: Democrats To Scuttle Infrastructure Talks With Silly Demands »

Beto Releases ‘Climate Change’ Plan, Says We Only Have Ten Years Left

Yes, guy who talks in the 3rd person of himself a lot is Concerned. So concerned he did this

Nothing like taking a long fossil fueled trip to yammer about ‘climate change’, eh? Remember, he’s from Texas (and he traveled around California after the Yosemite stunt)

Beto: We only have ’10 years’ left on Earth if we don’t address climate change

Democratic presidential candidate Beto O’Rourke sounded the alarms on Monday, saying that civilization has only “ten years” left on Earth if no action is taken on climate change.

The former Texas congressman unveiled the first major policy proposal of his candidacy, which is a climate change initiative that would cost $5 trillion in over 10 years in hopes of reaching zero carbon emissions by 2050.

Appearing on MSNBC, O’Rourke promoted his proposal but was asked about his prior support from the oil and gas industry, and whether the relationship would be a problem going forward.

“Do you see the oil and gas industry as an opponent in that? Won’t you have to declare yourself in opposition to their interests?” MSNBC host Chris Hayes asked.

O’Rourke responded “yes,” but said he is optimistic that the industry will take part in his initiative.

Guess who’s going to pay for it? The rich companies and people, of course! But

O’Rourke’s plan, which also includes a promise to use executive authority to curb the leakage of methane — a powerful greenhouse gas — from the oil and gas sector, may be an attempt to mute criticism the candidate is too cozy his home state’s oil and gas industry. His vote to end a 40-year ban on the export of crude oil in 2015 and other votes seen as fossil friendly have led some progressive activists to question his commitment to fighting climate change.

Is he a Believer, or just pandering to the Cult of Climastrology? One sect of Warmists is not buying

The Sunrise Movement, a progressive grassroots group aligned Ocasio-Cortez, criticized O’Rouke’s plan as not being aggressive enough. The Green New Deal calls for net-zero emission by 2030, 20 years sooner than O’Rourke’s climate vision.

“Beto claims to support the Green New Deal, but his plan is out of line with the timeline it lays out and the scale of action that scientists say is necessary to take here in the United States to give our generation a livable future,” Varshini Prakash, Sunrise’s executive director, said in a statement.

The Sunrise Movement was less then pleased, since these youths (including using pre-teen children as props) are big supporters of AOC’s Green New Deal, and are traveling around the country (in fossil fueled vehicles) to tell people about it.

Nice try, Beto. He’s not worth his own climate clown photoshop yet, though.

Read: Beto Releases ‘Climate Change’ Plan, Says We Only Have Ten Years Left »

NY Times Suspends All Political Cartoons In International Edition Over Internal Jew Hatred

Remember this from just a few days ago?

It says quite a bit about the people who work for the NY Times international edition and those who submit their work that the cartoonist felt perfectly fine creating a Jew and Israel hating cartoon and submitting it, then making it past editorial review to be published. The Times blamed some low level editor, but, no one has been fired. The cartoonist, who is syndicated, was not told that his work is no longer welcome. But, the Times sorta kinda apologized, and then

So…

(Breitbart) The New York Times has suspended the publication of all future syndicated political cartoons in its international print edition, the newspaper’s spokeswoman Eileen Murphy confirmed late Monday.

The Daily Beast’s Lloyd Grove spoke with Murphy in the wake of the newspaper’s publication of a second controversial cartoon that drew critical condemnation from the Jewish community–after a first cartoon, which the paper now admits was antisemitic, was retracted and then subsequently apologized for over the weekend.

The newspaper is in a full internal crisis on this matter, as executives and editors have launched a full-scale internal investigation into what happened, who is responsible, and what procedural and structural changes need to take place so the Times does not publish more antisemitic content.

The first cartoon was published Thursday. The second cartoon was actually published Saturday, right before the Times was forced to finally offer an apology after waffling for a few days. The blamed the publication of the 1st on “a faulty process” with “a single editor working without adequate oversight….” Again, what kind of company has employees/contractors who feel fine submitting these cartoons, and feel fine publishing them? The anti-Israel beliefs of those on the political left morph into Jew hatred, as we’ve seen on college campuses, and is being mainstreamed just like in 1930’s (and other periods) Europe.

Read: NY Times Suspends All Political Cartoons In International Edition Over Internal Jew Hatred »

Cult Of Climastrology Now Looking To Excuse And Mainstream Ecoterrorism

It’s to save the planet, you know

Climate Change Fiction Is Rethinking The Ecoterrorist

Toward the end of Paul Schrader’s most recent film, First Reformed, the main character straps on an explosive vest with the intention of blowing himself up — along with a church full of other people — driven by an inarticulate but intense desire to strike a blow on behalf of the environment.

The character’s name is Ernst Toller, he’s played by a dyspeptic Ethan Hawke, and he isn’t an ecological radical when the film starts. He’s a minister at a small church in upstate New York that’s more of a historical tourist attraction than a functional place of worship, and when we first meet him, he seems to think about climate change the way a lot of us do, or used to — as inexorably dire but also still distant enough a concept to not cast a shadow over our day-to-day lives.

That changes after he pays a visit to a troubled parishioner named Michael (Philip Ettinger), an activist for whom the effects of global warming are not abstract at all, and who’s in the grip of an existential crisis prompted by his wife Mary’s (Amanda Seyfried) pregnancy. How can it be justifiable, he demands of Ernst, to bring a child into a world you believe is going to crumble within their lifetime? He’s not being dramatic or alarmist. It’s a real question, one he shores up with all the data he’s accrued about sea levels rising and land mass shrinking, which he follows to logical conclusions about catastrophic change and civilization being shaken at its foundations. “The bad times will begin,” as he puts it. “This isn’t some distant future. You will live to see this.” (snip)

While Ernst goes into the meeting intending to talk Michael down from his hopelessness, he emerges, instead, infected with dread himself. And that dread begins blossoming, compounded by guilt, when he discovers Michael dead in the woods from a self-inflicted gunshot wound. By the time Ernst puts on that explosive vest, which he took from a box hidden in Michael’s garage, we understand his intentions as both extremist and an attempt at a logical response to an impossible problem: How are we supposed to behave in the face of the possibility that there is no future for us, because of our own choices as a species?

See? We can excuse the behavior because of the Dooming of our species. You really should read the whole story in full, which ends with

It’s interesting too to think of the young fandom that the Unabomber, Ted Kaczynski, has accrued, as profiled in New York magazine back in December. They’re kids who found themselves nodding along to his manifesto about how we need “a revolution against the industrial system,” creating “anti-civ” reading lists, and participating in open-air survivalist workshops in preparation for the end of civilization. The subjects of the article prefer the term “ecoextremism” and act cagey about their commitment to violence, but they do feel like real-world relations to all these fictional characters. The same feelings of quiet, constant panic in the face of an inevitable future that come through in this fiction are also bubbling up in our lives, and in these subcultures whose affiliations and actions may be beyond the pale, but whose desperation feels very familiar

Yes, kids are now extolling the virtues of the Unabomber.

Read: Cult Of Climastrology Now Looking To Excuse And Mainstream Ecoterrorism »

If All You See…

…is a horrible carbon polluting pool causing the seas to rise, you might just be a Warmist

The blog of the day is The First Street Journal, with a post on Jew Hatred at the NY Times.

Read: If All You See… »

Your Big Carbon Footprint Is To Blame For April Snow In Chicago

In case you missed it, Chicago, and the upper mid-west, has had a bit of a problem with snow this April

Chicago Shatters Record for Spring Snowfall

It’s not a record that the city of Chicago necessarily wanted to set, but history was made on Saturday as the area was hammered with a record snowfall.

According to the National Weather Service, O’Hare International Airport, the official reporting station for the city, received 2.5 inches of snow on Saturday, setting an all-time record for snowfall this late in the spring. The snow broke a record that was set all the way back in 1910, when Chicago received 2 inches of snow on April 26.

The snowstorm wasn’t limited to just Chicago, either. Numerous areas west of the city reported receiving over 5 inches of snow, and hazardous travel conditions continued into Sunday as slippery roads and icy surfaces were reported across the region.

Some springs can be cold and snowy. Nothing unusual. So, of course

https://twitter.com/QuestForApollo/status/1122493491169329152

Read More »

Read: Your Big Carbon Footprint Is To Blame For April Snow In Chicago »

Surprise: NYC’s Version Of Green New Deal Will Cause Massive Issues With Real Estate Industry

I wonder what Comrade de Blasio will do for the NYC government owned buildings? How about all those buildings with state and federal government tenants?

NYC’s Own Green New Deal May Be A Disaster For City’s Real Estate Business

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio recently signed the most ambitious climate overhaul plan enacted by any large city in the United States. The Climate Mobilization Act, a legislative package passed earlier this month by a 45-2 vote, is considered New York City’s very own Green New Deal.

During an Earth Day address, de Blasio announced the city government is poised to begin implementation of the plan immediately via the creation of a new initiative known as OneNYC 2050.

According to a press release from de Blasio, the city intends to implement “laws and actions [that] will drive a nearly 30% additional reduction in greenhouse emissions by 2030 and spur tens of thousands of good jobs.” He also says New York City intends to be “carbon neutral” by 2050 with the full implementation of zero and reduced-emissions energy sources.

The article itself is obviously focused on the requirements for buildings which are over 25,000 square feet (from what I’ve seen, this is over 57% of NYC buildings) to become all sorts of “green” or pay fines out the wazoo

The Real Estate Board of New York (REBNY) has announced its opposition to the Climate Mobilization Act with the board’s president, John H. Banks, stressing that the goals of these new building regulations are not attainable.

“There is no greater challenge to our city, state, and planet than climate change,” Banks said, but added that the new measures “will have a negative impact on our ability to attract and retain a broad range of industries, including technology, media, finance, and life sciences, that provide opportunity and continued economic growth that is so important for our city.” Banks also believes the new retrofitting requirements inhibit a building’s ability to grow and attract new tenants.

Surprise? Costs are already high in NYC: artificially increase them more and it makes business difficult, and could drive them elsewhere. Companies are not going to assume the costs, they’ll pass them on, but, they can only do that so much and stay viable. They leave, they take the jobs with them. Oh, and the tax revenue.

In addition, Crain’s New York Business reports that even “environmentally friendly” buildings could face fines. The Durst Organization, a family-run real estate management firm that co-developed One World Trade Center with the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and owns several skyscrapers that are part of the city’s iconic skyline, says their firm could be fined millions just for one building, according to the report.

Hey, most of the people in NYC voted for this garbage, so, they’ll get what they deserve. And, really, if people like Mr. Banks above think there is no greater challenge than Hotcoldwetdry, then they should be willing to see their businesses destroyed to Save The Planet, right?

Read: Surprise: NYC’s Version Of Green New Deal Will Cause Massive Issues With Real Estate Industry »

Pirate's Cove