Europe: Choosing Suicide?

by Judith Bergman • June 10, 2017 at 5:00 am

"We need urgent, wholesale reform of human rights laws in this country to make sure they cannot be twisted to serve the interests of those who would harm our society." — UK Justice Secretary, Chris Grayling, January 2015.
Swedish intelligence deemed him too dangerous to stay in Sweden, so the immigration authorities sought to have him deported to Syria. They did not succeed: the law does not permit his deportation to Syria, as he risks being arrested or executed there. Instead, he was released and is freely walking around in Malmö.
"It would simply never in a million years have occurred to the authors of the original Convention on Human Rights that it would one day end up in some form being used as a justification to stay here by individuals who are a danger to our country and our way of life..." — UK Justice Secretary, Chris Grayling, January 2015.

As UK Justice Secretary in 2015, Chris Grayling said: "We need urgent, wholesale reform of human rights laws in this country to make sure they cannot be twisted to serve the interests of those who would harm our society." (Photo by Dan Kitwood/Getty Images)

After the Manchester terrorist attack, it was revealed that there are not "just" 3,000 jihadists on the loose in the UK, as the public had previously been informed, but rather a dismaying 23,000 jihadists. According to The Times:

"About 3,000 people from the total group are judged to pose a threat and are under investigation or active monitoring in 500 operations being run by police and intelligence services. The 20,000 others have featured in previous inquiries and are categorised as posing a 'residual risk"'.

Why was the public informed of this only now?

Notably, among those who apparently posed only "a residual risk" and were therefore no longer under surveillance, were Salman Abedi, the Manchester bomber, and Khalid Masood, the Westminster killer.

Continue Reading Article

Bernie Sanders: Knave or Fool?

by Alan M. Dershowitz • June 10, 2017 at 1:33 am

It is clear that if Corbyn were anti-black, anti-women, anti-Muslim or anti-gay, Sanders would not have campaigned for him.... Yet he is comfortable campaigning for Jeremy Corbyn who has made a career out of condemning Zionists by which he means Jews.
Those who consider themselves "progressives" – but who are actually repressives – tolerate anti-Semitism as long as it comes from those who espouse other views they approve of. This form of "identity politics" has forced artificial coalitions between causes that have nothing to do with each other except a hatred for those who are "privileged" because they are white, heterosexual, male and especially Jewish.
Sanders then had the "chutzpah" to condemn political groups on the right for being "intolerant" and "authoritarian," without condemning the equally intolerant, authoritarian and often anti-Semitic, tendencies of the hard Left.

Shame on Bernie Sanders. He campaigned for the British anti-Semite Jeremy Corbyn, who received millions of votes from British citizens who care more about their pocketbooks than about combatting anti-Semitism. As exit polls trickled in, Sanders tweeted: "I am delighted to see Labour do so well. I congratulate @jeremycorbyn for running a very effective campaign." There is no doubt that Corbyn and his Labour Party are at the very least tolerant of anti-Semitic rhetoric, if not peddlers of it. (See my recent op-ed on the British Labour Party and Corbyn's association with some of the most rancid anti-Semites.)

Continue Reading Article