FYI, I am not a conservative and from 1978 to 1980 I participated in 13 civil rights marches and was seriously injured four times. I bled for the cause.
I don’t share this information with you to brag but to justify what I am about to say.
For several decades, I was a member and ardent supporter of the SPLC. As a USDOJ instructor and adviser I would advise federal and state law enforcement agencies to use the SPLC data for investigations.
Then several years ago I noticed a disturbing trend, Southern Poverty Law Center was not covering leftist domestic terrorist organizations. And more importantly they began to move outside of white supremacy and adding other topics that were contrary to the focus of their original charter.
These topics aligned with the standard rhetoric of leftist groups in the U.S.
The foundational focus of the organization had blurred.
I made my concerns known to them and was politely responded to but nothing changed.
Several federal, state and regional police agencies that I work with also noticed the trend and mentioned their concerns to me.
SPLC was clearly not going to change.
Sadly, I had a similar experience in 1980 when I gave up my membership with the NAACP.
I have never been an arm-chair critic of racism, anti-government actions or extremist violence. I have been in the fight for decades personally and professionally and my body bears the scars of that fight.
So Stone “resorted to an age-old bigotry: blame the Jews — or, in its current incarnation, shift the blame” to Israel. As Page Six reported, Stone replied: “Israel had far more involvement in the US election than Russia” — an “absurd” claim Dershowitz says would be “laughable” if it didn’t reflect “a growing anti-Semitism by the intolerant hard left, of which Stone is a charter member.”
Says Dershowitz: “The essence of anti-Semitism is the bigoted claim that if there is a problem, then Jews must be its cause. This is the exact canard peddled by Stone — and is extremely dangerous if unrebutted.”
“Cultural appropriation” is the latest sin to be invented by leftist social justice warriors.
The basic premise is this: “white” people can’t appropriate anything at all from any culture that isn’t their own, especially from third world cultures.
This aggressive new sort of reverse racism has a peculiarly nasty totalitarian stealth-Nazi feel to it, for it aims to control behavior in extreme ways, through prohibitions of all sorts based on race and nationality.
Of course, those who invented this sin call those who disagree with them “Nazis,” but the ironic twist here is that the inventors of this sin are much more similar to Nazis than any white supremacist.
Anyone who has lived in Castrogonia or any totalitarian state knows exactly where this crap is coming from and to where it is leading us all.
Take, for instance, this latest bit of insanity in Portland, Oregon, where two “white women” were forced to close their Burrito restaurant simply because they were “white” instead of Mexican.
I suppose this means that some time soon my “white” wife could get arrested for cooking Cuban food….
… and that would be only the tip of the iceberg… er….forgive the cultural appropriation lodged in that metaphor, please… I don’t mean to usurp anything from Eskimos…er, forgive me…the Innuit People….er… Inupiat, Yupik, and Alutiit peoples, forgive me please…
Now, as for all those so-called Cuban Sandwiches now available everywhere….. including those on pumpernickel bread….. well, eeeexxxxcccuuuuuuuuuuuuuse me!
As S.J. Perelman once said, “De gustibus ain’t what dey used to be.”
Cancelled: Offensive “white” burrito
From the one and only Daily Mail, only a couple of headlines away from the Manchester terror bombing……
White women’s burrito shop is forced to close after being hounded with accusations it was ‘culturally appropriating Mexican food and jobs’
Two white women have been forced to close their pop-up burrito shop after they were accused of cultural appropriation.
Kali Wilgus and Liz ‘LC’ Connelly opened Kooks Burritos in Portland, Oregon, after taking a trip to Puerto Nuevo, Mexico, last December.
For the first few months, the weekend pop-up shop housed in an taco truck was a smash hit. It gained so much popularity, a local weekly newspaper decided to profile the entrepreneurial duo.
But that’s when the trouble started for Wilgus and Connelly, after quotes they gave to the Williamette Week led to them being accused of stealing their success.
Explaining their trip, Connelly told the newspaper: ‘I picked the brains of every tortilla lady there in the worst broken Spanish ever, and they showed me a little of what they did.
‘In Puerto Nuevo, you can eat $5 lobster on the beach, which they give you with this bucket of tortillas. They are handmade flour tortillas that are stretchy and a little buttery, and best of all, unlimited.
‘They wouldn’t tell us too much about technique, but we were peeking into the windows of every kitchen, totally fascinated by how easy they made it look. We learned quickly it isn’t quite that easy.’
Those comments were latched onto by a food blog in the Portland Mercury, which accused Wilgus and Connelly of ‘preying’ on the women they met in Mexico.
Continue reading HERE for shock after shock…. more insane statements crammed into one news article than any sane person could ever imagine
If you’re looking for something to get needlessly angry about this week, may I suggest salad names?
That’s what got Bonnie Tsui in a tizzy last week in the New York Times after she saw an “Asian salad” on a menu and felt micro-aggressed by the micro greens. She writes that the “Greek salad has some integrity” and can be found in Greece, but the Asian salad is a wholly American creation.
Six hundred words in, Tsui asks, “So what’s my problem with Asian salad?” The next line is not, as you may imagine, “I have too much time on my hands.”
Tsui also asks, “Am I taking this too seriously?” Uh, yes, ma’am, you are taking the name of a dish that exists in chain restaurants far too seriously.
That’s the nature of our current “everything is offensive” cultural moment. The week before that piece appeared, the music festival Coachella spawned dozens of think pieces, as it does every year, on whether various outfits at the show constituted “cultural appropriation.”
A girl who had posted a photo of herself in a Native American headdress actually felt forced to issue a public apology.
In a world where such a thing as “festival wear” exists (and the many emails I get from fashion houses trying to sell the ridiculous style to me suggests that it does), it’s not surprising that people may take things too far.
Then again, while teenage girls are shamed for such things on the internet, Elizabeth Warren literally, actually appropriated Native American heritage for herself, and benefited from this appropriation — yet remains a liberal star.
Culture is fluid, especially in a country like America. But what is American culture? It has long been a collection of other cultures. Some pieces of those cultures get co-opted, and others get discarded.
Yes, we take beautiful things from elsewhere without necessarily knowing the full weight of their significance. But it should be taken more as a sign of appreciation than appropriation. When Beyoncé wears a henna tattoo, she’s not discounting India’s rich history or proclaiming herself Indian; she’s just saying this is a pretty henna tattoo and I like it on my hands.
Everything we wear and eat began somewhere. Americans should consider if they still want the country to be a melting pot or if we’re going to go down this segregated, “everything is appropriation” path.
Critics are quick to make assumptions in judging cultural appropriators. Jessica Andrews in Teen Vogue, for example, urged people to avoid the “cultural appropriating epidemic at Coachella.” Andrews wrote, “For South Asian women, bindis are a cultural symbol that represents the third eye, a sacred site of wisdom and spiritual development. For some Coachella attendees, it’s just a pretty forehead accessory.”
Of course, Andrews has no way of knowing what the Coachella attendee with a bindi is thinking. Maybe she was raised in South Asia. Maybe she is South Asian.
When Kylie Jenner displayed cornrows in her hair, “Hunger Games” star Amandla Stenberg criticized her in a tweet for appropriating “black features and culture” but failing “to use ur position of power to help black Americans” and “directing attention towards ur wigs instead of [toward] police brutality or racism.”
So if Jenner were also using her celebrity to speak out, say, for #BlackLivesMatter, her white-girl cornrows would be OK? Is someone going to eventually write a manual to keep track of all this?
It’s damned if you do and damned if you don’t. In Tsui’s salad piece, she writes that “the casual racism of the Asian salad stems from the idea of the exotic — who is and isn’t American is caught up wholesale in its creation.” The joke, of course, is if someone presented this salad, with soy sauce, ginger and sesame, as an “American salad,” that would be cultural appropriation, too.
How dare we use traditionally Asian ingredients without at least a nod to the culture they came from.
I came to America as a child, born in a city that has since been renamed, and in a country that no longer exists. Even when the Soviet Union was around, my Jewish family wasn’t considered Russian or Ukrainian or Belarussian, despite having lived in those countries for generations.
Yet in America, I’m shorthanded to “Russian.” This doesn’t cause an existential crisis for me, and it doesn’t detract from my actual identity in any way. If you want to eat pelmeni (Russian meat dumplings) and have your kids play with matryoshkas (Russian nesting dolls), that’s fine by me.
Oh, and no one in Russia has ever heard of “Russian salad dressing.”
On this date in 1915, hundreds of Armenian intellectuals – Christians, for the most part – were forcibly deported from the Turkish capital of Constantinople. The number soon escalated into the thousands, and most were eventually murdered.
So kicked off the Armenian Genocide, the persecution of Christian Armenians by the Muslim Young Turks, who wanted to cleanse the country of the troublesome non-coreligionists in preparation for the new Turkey in the aftermath of the collapse of the Ottoman regime, and supposedly in order to ensure against the possibility of the Armenians siding against the Central Powers in World War I. By the time the genocide was over – and it lasted from 1915 to 1923 – hundreds of thousands of Armenians had been killed, with top-range estimates putting the total number at 1.5 million. Massive atrocities, from forced death marches to placing women and children aboard ships and then deliberately sinking them, were carried out by Turkish government-backed forces.
As CNN reports:
While the death toll is in dispute, photographs from the era document some mass killings. Some show Ottoman soldiers posing with severed heads, others with them standing amid skulls in the dirt. The victims are reported to have died in mass burnings and by drowning, torture, gas, poison, disease and starvation. Children were reported to have been loaded into boats, taken out to sea and thrown overboard. Rape, too, was frequently reported.
Politico last weekend published “a diatribe” against what it suggests were “a secret web of shadowy Jews” involved in a “highly funded conspiracy to put Donald Trump and Russia’s Vladimir Putin in power and keep them there,” reports Bethany Mandel at The Federalist.
The group is the well-known Chabad-Lubavitch, which is falsely portrayed as “a large, rich, tightly woven organization, a depiction straight out of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”
Maybe the alt-right really is as powerful as some contend, she notes, if it can “convince a mainstream American publication to publish 4,000 words of anti-Semitic garbage on the eve of a major Jewish holiday.”
When you hear about violence against women, the commonly used statistics are 1 in 2 have experienced physical violence in their lifetime while 1 in 6 have experienced rape or attempted rape, according to the Department of Justice and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. For indigenous women, the numbers are even more staggering. More than 60% of American Indian and Alaska Native women have been physically assaulted and 1 in 3 have experienced rape or attempted rape in their lifetime. Nearly all (97%) of these women have experienced at least one act of violence committed by a non-Indian, according to the DoJ’s National Institute of Justice.
Yet for decades, tribes did not have jurisdiction to punish non-Indians due to the 1978 Supreme Court case Oliphant v. Suquamish Indian Tribe.
“You had this void where women were victims of rape and violence by non-Indian men,” said Chrissi Nimmo, assistant attorney general for the Cherokee Nation. “No one was willing or able to prosecute them, leading to very high crime rates.”
In an attempt to fight this, the Special Domestic Violence Criminal Jurisdiction Statute was added to the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) when it was renewed in 2013. The statute grants tribes jurisdiction over non-Indians in instances of domestic violence, dating violence or violations of protection orders that occur within Indian Country if the victim identifies as American Indian and the non-Indian perpetrator works, lives or has an intimate relationship on tribal lands.
The U.S. Department of Justice, which oversees VAWA, said the tribal provisions addressed “significant legal gaps.” But it hasn’t been a silver bullet for justice.
The statute went into effect two years ago this month, yet only 13 of the 562 federally recognized tribes in the U.S. have become voluntarily compliant with its federal regulations, according to the National Congress of American Indians (NCAI).
The slow adoption rate can be attributed in part to regulations, such as providing court appointed council to defendants who cannot afford it at the tribe’s expense, a challenge for tribes with little money. The VAWA reauthorization appropriated $5 million annually to be distributed to assist tribes from 2014 to 2018; in fiscal year 2016, $2.5 million was appropriated.
Tribes must also have juries that are selected from a “fair cross-section” of the public, meaning they cannot exclude non-Indians. While this was practiced by some tribes even prior to the VAWA reauthorization, for others it means changing tribal law. The latter is the case for Cherokee Nation, which has otherwise met the regulations.
“We still have to pass legislation to include non-Indians on our jury,” Nimmo said. “How do we, as an Indian tribe, want to open up our court system to non-Indians? It’s always been Cherokees. How do we carve out this special seating? I don’t have a timeline but to say that we are working on it.”
Many in the tribal community cite the federal government’s concern over whether non-Indians will receive a fair trial in Indian Country as a barrier to full jurisdiction, though legal professionals like Nimmo believe the statute could ease those concerns before it again comes up for reauthorization in 2018.
“If tribes can show through VAWA that they do have a fair court system and non-Indian defendants can get fair trials in tribal court, the hope is that one day tribes can prosecute any non-Indian defendant that commits any crime on Indian Country.”
Though the statute gives participating tribes more jurisdictional authority, that power remains limited in cases of sexual assault against an Indian woman by a non-Indian that occurs outside of an intimate partner relationship.
According to The Confederated Tribes of the Umatilla Indian Reservation tribal attorney Brent Leonhard, the statute also does not allow tribes to prosecute some crimes seen in conjunction with domestic violence, including when children are victimized.
“Governments have a moral obligation to ensure the safety of their citizens and residents,” Leonhard said. “Tribal nations are no different. However, a government cannot ensure public safety if it is forced to be dependent on foreign governments to prosecute crimes.”
These major crimes would be handled predominantly by the FBI and U.S. Attorney’s offices.
“The law was tailored specifically to address issues of domestic violence involving spouses or intimate partners, giving the ability to local tribal law enforcement to address acts violence before they escalate to more serious crimes,” said DoJ spokesman Wyn Hornbuckle. “Under the Major Crimes Act and other federal statutes, rape, sexual assault, child molestation, and human trafficking involving non-Indians and Indians alike are prosecutable in federal court.”
“U.S. Attorney’s offices often work in partnership with tribal prosecutors and investigators to determine the best path for prosecuting and deterring crime on reservations,” he said.
According to a 2010 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, tribal governments referred 2,594 sexual abuse related cases to U.S. Attorneys’ offices between 2005 and 2009. Approximately 67% were declined for prosecution. Tribes also referred 2,922 assault-related cases, in which 46% were declined for prosecution. The report states that this may be the result of “weak or insufficient admissible evidence, no federal offense evidence and witness problems.”
Some tribal members point to these numbers as evidence that greater justice is needed for American Indian victims.
“The federal government doesn’t have to take cases,” said Sharon Jones Hayden, a tribal prosecutor that has worked closely with the Tulalip Tribes, one of those that has complied with the statute’s regulations since its initial pilot testing. “It’s up to their discretion. The choice may not be between tribal court, state court or federal court. The choice may be between tribal court and no court at all.”
For Umatilla member Taryn Minthorn, it was tribal court that brought her a sense of closure.
After months of verbal abuse, things turned physical at the hands of her former boyfriend in September 2016. Minthorn said that tribal police responded and the case was referred to the federal government, which ultimately declined it.
“I felt like I was seriously let down,” Minthorn said. “I felt like he could do all the crime in the world, and it was just a slap on the hand. I just wanted to give up.”
She chose to pursue the case in tribal court.
Earlier this month, her former boyfriend pleaded guilty. His sentence includes two years of incarceration, three years of probation, abstaining from drugs and alcohol, submitting to “anger management/batterers intervention” treatment and obeying a no contact order, according to court documents.
Though Minthorn and her children, who were witnesses, still suffer from anxiety and attend counseling, they are moving on.
“To hear him saying that he was pleading to these charges, I literally felt the load come off of me, off my shoulders, off my mind, off my heart,” Minthorn said. “It’s important for future generations to know that eventually there is justice.”
The Nat Turner story is a vitally important part of American history. Everyone should know it. That said, I’m skipping “The Birth of a Nation.”
Earlier this year, it came to light that director, writer and star Nate Parker and his co-writer, Jean Celestin, were accused of raping a fellow student at Penn State in 1999. Celestin was convicted of sexual assault, a charge that was overturned on appeal for a new trial in 2005 — which never happened because prosecutors said they wouldn’t be able to reassemble witnesses. Parker was acquitted, but the facts remain on the record: Both had sex, the same night, with a very intoxicated woman, who later dropped out of school. In 2012, she killed herself.
In an Ebony interview, Parker admitted he’d done some soul-searching, stopping short of apologizing to the woman’s family. He dialed it further back on “60 Minutes,” saying, “I was vindicated.” And in a more recent interview with Steve Harvey, he blamed the media for unearthing the rape case — then congratulated himself for bringing up the issue of sexual violence, which “no one is talking about.” (You need to get out more, Nate.)
Count me the hell out.
It’s not just Parker I can’t stomach. I haven’t seen a Woody Allen film since 2012’s “To Rome With Love.” Roman Polanski has been off my list for many years. After a video came out this summer showing a drunk Johnny Depp hurling verbal abuse at then-wife Amber Heard, I doubt I’ll see his next movie, either.
We live in a culture where rapists and abusers routinely get away with their crimes, or do next to no time. We don’t need to actively reward men who prey on women — and take no responsibility for it — by giving them lucrative Hollywood gigs. So I’ll wait for another take on the Nat Turner story. Who knows, maybe it’ll come from a female director next time.
The anti-Semitism of NYU students is unbelievable! The NYU chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine posted on their Facebook page that Israel is responsible for the recent police shootings of civilians because, “many police departments train with the Israeli Defense Forces.”
I am a Federal Law Enforcement instructor for HIDTA and the DOJ. This claim is ridicules.
Sad that in America a growing number of people are justifying their racism under the cloak of leftist politics. READ ON:
NYC Campus Bigots
by Seth Lipsky
Americans are mourning today the murder of one of their finest sons, Taylor Force, a West Point graduate. He made it through tours in Iraq and Afghanistan only to be stabbed to death by a Palestinian Arab terrorist on the streets of Tel Aviv.
It is a bitter moment, one that will be talked about at dinner tables in homes across America. The State Department was quick to issue a condemnation, declaring there is “no justification for terrorism.”
Could this kind of violence erupt at the City University of New York? That’s one of the questions being discussed by New Yorkers who are working on the problem of anti-Semitism at our city’s great public university.
They are alarmed at the pussyfooting by politicians as anti-Semitism on CUNY’S campuses grows more overt and edges closer to physical confrontation.
Anti-Semitic incidents are being reported at world-famous CUNY campuses.
There are reports of students being harassed and faculty intimidated in the name of “justice for Palestine.” Partisans of CUNY insist its administration is marshaling the right response.
Yet almost no public officials are standing up.
Mayor de Blasio is mum. The City Council hasn’t acted. The borough presidents are preoccupied. The state Legislature, except for Dov Hikind and one or two others, is cowering in silence.
Neither the Assembly nor Senate has called hearings, though they pay for much of CUNY. They have issued no subpoenas. No legislators or officials have offered to, say, escort Jewish undergraduates across campuses so hostile that some students fear showing a Star of David necklace.
The silence was broken by one of the most distinguished Jewish groups, the Zionist Organization of America. Last month it sent a horrifying bill of particulars to CUNY’s chancellor, James Milliken.
The details were promptly reported by The Post’s Carl Campanile under the headline “‘Jew-haters’ spread fear at CUNY colleges.” Campanile cited incidents at John Jay, Hunter, Brooklyn and Staten Island campuses.
“Jews out of CUNY” is the cry the ZOA says was heard at Hunter. At John Jay, ZOA reports, slurs were so frequent that three Jewish students transferred out. At a Brooklyn College faculty meeting, a yarmulke-wearing professor was called a “Zionist pig.”
The ZOA letter prompted one state senator, Jack Martins of Mineola, to write to Gov. Cuomo, demanding he take action. Martins cited reports blaming a group called Students for Justice in Palestine.
CUNY answered ZOA’s letter the next day. Its answer was signed by Milliken and CUNY Chairman Benno Schmidt.
High hopes had been placed on Schmidt, a former president of Yale, when he took over as chairman of CUNY.
Yet Schmidt and Milliken seem to have consulted the law firm of Milquetoast, Nervous & Dodge. Their letter confessed that they were aware of “many” of the incidents described in the ZOA’s 14-page letter but failed to satisfy the ZOA.
The disruption of the faculty meeting at Brooklyn is “still under active investigation,” they said. They insisted that in the other cases, the colleges responded “promptly,” including with “strong contemporaneous public condemnations.”
Milliken and Schmidt rattled on about free speech, which is not the issue. They also said they’d deploy a student-faculty “task force” and seek “additional perspective and advice” from outside counsel.
The outside counsel — Paul Shechtman and Barbara Jones, both partners at Zuckerman Spaeder — are regarded by one activist on this issue as serious figures. I hear that they were Milliken’s idea, but, separately, that they were essentially forced on CUNY by an angry Andrew Cuomo.
The Anti-Defamation League has praised CUNY’s response. ZOA’s president has suggested that had the events involved hostility to any other group, the response would have been stronger. There have been no warnings of expulsion or criminal charges.
Not that the anti-Semitism is limited to CUNY. Intimidation of Jewish students is taking place at campuses all across America. And not just America, as a column by The New York Times’ Roger Cohen marked this week.
Cohen wrote about his alma mater of Oxford. He made a point of calling this phenomenon what it is — “Anti-Semitism of the Left.” Good for him. Yet the Times itself has been silent on anti-Semitism at CUNY.
De Blasio has closed the NYPD’s demographics unit, which had allegedly surveilled campuses in and out of New York. So our guard has been reduced against what could become the kind of violence that cost the lives of Taylor Force and so many others.