by | BLOG, FREEDOM, Israel
It has become abundantly clear that there is a big problem with the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) community. DEI has labored to push the narrative that you are either an oppressor or oppressed. The problem for them is that this idea doesn’t work when it comes to Israel. There is absolutely no more oppressed minority in the history of the world than the Jews. And yet the same DEI folks make them out to be the oppressor — and try to do so with a straight face.
Anyone who calls Israel an occupier or oppressor is either lying or grossly ignorant. The Jews were in what is now Israel 4000 years ago until they were kicked out during the Jewish-Roman wars of the 1st century. The subsequent rulers/inhabitants of the land included Romans, Byzantine Christians, Muslims, Crusaders, Mongols, Mamluks, Ottomans, and Brits. It was not only Arabs despite what others tell you. Not until the post-Ottoman empire were Jews really able to return home, and the 1948 Israeli Declaration of Independence provided protection for Jews that was sorely needed in a post-Holocaust world. The Oslo Accords of 1993 saw the PLO formally recognize the state of Israel and the right of Israel to exist, but it still was not recognized by many in the Arab world. As for Gaza, the Israelis withdrew from the region in 2005 and it has been under the control of Hamas since 2006. Israel is hardly the “oppressors.” I would agree that the Palestinians in Gaza are oppressed – but the oppressor is Hamas, not the Israelis, who have been gone for almost 20 years.
DEI’s absurd ideology is exposed for what it is: a ridiculous and feeble attempt to see the world through a biased lens in order to push false narratives that don’t hold up to reality.
by | ARTICLES, BLOG, Israel
Front Page Magazine put together a nice list of twelve things you can do to support Israel. I’m reprinting it here below and encourage you to do some of the things on the list.
[1] Be informed – Learn the history of the conflict. Do background reading. Good places to start include: “The Clash of Civilizations and Remaking of World Order” (1996) by Samuel P. Huntington, “The Case for Israel” (2004) by Alan Dershowitz and “Stealth Jihad: How Radical Islam is Subverting America without Guns or Bombs” (2008) by Robert Spencer.
[2] Follow news of the war – reliable sources include The Washington Times (especially its commentary pages), FOX News, The Wall Street Journal (editorial pages), The New York Post and websites like Frontpage Mag.
[3] Put up an “I support Israel” yard sign — weather-resistant vinyl with metal frame, around $15 to $20, plus shipping.
[4] Wear an Israel lapel pin — Available for under $10.
[5] Go to a rally — Check with your closest Israeli consulate, synagogue or local Jewish Community Relations Council for dates and locations near you.
[6] Donate to Magen David Adom – Israel’s emergency medical services. They’re needed more than ever now. You can donate HERE.
[7] Plant a tree in Israel – Through the Jewish National Fund, for only $18 each.
[8] Become an Internet warrior – When you find a particularly useful news story, commentary or website, pass it on to your contact list.
[9] Write letters to the editor of your local newspaper – in response to a news story, editorial or commentary. You can find out how at the paper’s website. Remember, letters in support are as important as letters in opposition.
[10] Support pro-Israel groups – like Students United for Israel, Christians United for Israel Zionist Organization of America and American for a Safe Israel.
[11] Contact your local state legislators – requesting that your state legislature pass a resolution supporting Israel and denouncing Hamas terrorism. They might get help drafting from the American Legislative Exchange Council.
[12] Pray for the peace of Jerusalem.
by | BLOG, EDUCATION, HYPOCRISY, Israel
The latest attempt by Liz Magill to smooth over Jewish donors and save her job is absolutely pathetic. She purports to condemn hateful acts and claims they have no place at Penn, but has done nothing to actually ensure they have no place by removing antisemitism from the campus. There is no expulsion of students who actually engaged in antisemitism — even though she even described those acts! There is no removal of faculty or administration who have downplayed antisemitism and allowed its ideas to take root and grow. Penn indeed “has work to do”, and it can start there. But it won’t. And here’s why.
Liz Magill doesn’t actually believe what she says. It is apparent on the front page of her plan. She writes, “As we move forward with this important work, we will ensure that our programmatic efforts consider the interconnectedness between antisemitism and other forms of hate, including Islamophobia, so that we are fostering a welcoming community for all.”
Right there, Magill can’t help but include Islamophobia alongside antisemitism; this means she is fearful of actually taking a unilateral stand solely against antisemitism on behalf of her Jewish students, faculty, and donors. She is equivocating here by including what she calls “other forms of hate” in her statement, because she is more worried about upsetting other members of the community than she is clear about defending Jews.
Even more alarming is the fact that she calls “Islamophobia” a form of hate, but it is not. The very definition of antisemitism is hatred against Jewish, a form of racism and outright hostility toward the Jewish people. In contrast, Islamophobia is a fear (phobia), often irrational, toward Islam or Muslims. Fear and hatred are two very different things and to conflate the two is disingenuous.
But she doesn’t end there. She repeats the sentence in her Education plan, again lumping antisemitism with Islamophobia. And then further along as a Medium Term Action, she announces the commitment to hire “an experienced leader with expertise in preventing and responding to antisemitism, Islamophobia, and other forms of hate.”
If this was actually about antisemitism, it would be about antisemitism. And that’s why it’s not. The need to throw “Islamophobia” in there three times (and no specific mention of any other forms of hate, mind you) is ridiculous and it cheapens anything she says. Magill is merely pandering to the Jewish community because she is actually terrified of offending the larger UPenn community as well as losing millions in donations to her school. Her action plan to combat anti semitism should start with her own resignation.
by | BLOG, Israel, MEDIA
The major media outlets in the United States, notably the NYTimes and the Washington Post, are once again complicit in the perpetuating misinformation. The latest example is the rush to blame Israel for a hospital bombing in Gaza that purportedly killed five hundred people. When it later became apparent that it was a misguided missile from Islamic Jihad, that the hospital was not severely damaged, and far fewer people died, there was no major recantation from the newspapers.
Even when the actual evidence continued to pile up and contradict the initial reports, they just merely resorted to stating that there is “evidence on both sides.” They couldn’t even admit that they were incorrect. They don’t even seem to want to restore their credibility. And that’s the problem. How stupid can these media groups be to even believe any news from Hamas? In the rush to downplay the atrocities or equivocate Israel’s response for the Hamas slaughter, they perpetuate the lies and don’t even seem to really care that they do.
by | BLOG, FREEDOM, Israel
The atrocity of the October 7 Hamas invasion in Israel has recently been compared to our 9/11 attack. While the situation is similar — an Islamic terrorist group struck against a sovereign nation — the assault on Israel was far worse. To put it in perspective, consider this: on 9/11, 3,000 American citizens died and during the Hamas attack, 1,300 Israeli citizens died. But when you consider those terrible numbers in reference to the total population of each country, the 1,300 deaths out of an Israeli population of 9.55 million would be comparable to a loss of roughly 45,000 Americans. That is 15 times higher than our losses from 9/11. Similarly, the initial injuries incurred by Israelis are 3,227. That would be equivalent to 113,000 injuries to Americans on 9/11, while in actuality that number for us was roughly 6,000.
As a lifelong New Yorker, I am in no way downplaying the monstrosity of 9/11. Yet as an American, it is imperative to show others how wide and cruel the Hamas slaughter really and truly was.
by | ARTICLES, BLOG, ELECTIONS, NEWS
Over at the Wall Street Journal, columnist Andy Kessler came up with a list of what he dubbed “15 Ways to Win a Presidential Primary.” Essentially, Kessler eschews style for content as a winning strategy for the crowded Republican primary field. Here is Kessler’s 15 point fix-it plan:
TSA reform
Tackle prescription drug pricing
End hidden fees
End the post office monopoly
Aviation and air-traffic control reform
End the public school monopoly
Offer a 20 year plan for school modernization
End housing price controls
End price fixing
End geographic monopolies
End train subsidies
Outlaw ethanol use
Tighten the border
Put expiration dates on legislation
Nix public-sector collective bargaining
This list is a good start, but I can also think of a few of my own, such as ending the capital gains tax and reforming estate taxes. What are some action items you would like to see?
by | BLOG, LAW, NEWS, POLITICS
The government interference in the Hunter Biden tax case is simply astounding. Looking beyond the “sweetheart” (misdemeanor) deal that Hunter Biden received is something just as egregious; namely, the actions of the Justice Department in the entire ordeal. Here’s a sampling of their odious behavior:
1) Probable cause had been established by prosecutors to search a) Hunter Biden’s guest house in Delaware at President Biden’s home; and b) the Hunter Biden’s storage unit in Virginia, where it was likely important records had been kept. Instead, the Justice Department denied permission for the search warrants.
2) Whereas the Justice Department traditionally declines to investigate or indict serious matters within 60 days of an election, they did so for six months.
3) They warned Hunter’s attorneys about an forthcoming search warrant that was intended to gather evidence
4) They declined the ability to have key witnesses interviewed on important issues involving potentially Hunter and his father.
Indeed, it seems rational to conclude if the Justice Department had made different choices than the ones above, those might have led to unearthing tangible connections with Hunter and Joe Biden. Furthermore, the Special Agent report recommended six felonies and five misdemeanors for Hunter’s tax problems. And yet, the federal government allowed the statute of limitations for 2014 and 2015 charges to expire, something that is practically unheard of. Moreover, allowing the misdemeanor charges to proceed in lieu of felony charges violates the Tax Division Manual.
The irregular actions of the Justice Department have tipped the scales in favor of Hunter Biden for reasons that are specifically unclear, but easy to speculate about (i.e. Joe). It’s incredible how brazen the government has been able to be.
by | BLOG, ECONOMY
Maritime unions have a long history of lobbying for rules and regulations, stifling innovation, and sabotaging operations, all in the name of benefiting their members. The most recent example of this is the tension between employers and the International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU) at the West Coast ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, which serve as the busiest gateways for imported consumer goods in the United States. The ILWU’s impact is particularly strong because it controls virtually all longshore labor for all West Coast ports. Maritime unions are the reason why, despite being the number one global superpower, America consistently ranks like third world countries, behind Asian nations and other Western countries in terms of shipping efficiency on a global scale.
Maritime unions have a unique history that continues to contribute to their strength today. In the past, life on a ship was unlike any other form of private employment. Captains held significant power, acting as legal judges, juries, and executioners while at sea. They had the authority to administer corporal punishment until the 1890s. However, as the old adage goes, power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Now, maritime unions have the nation’s economy in a devastating stranglehold.
Unionized dockworkers in U.S. ports are open for fewer hours per week than virtually every other port around the world, due to labor contracts. Secondly, the cost is significantly prohibitive, a west coast union dock worker makes an average $171,000/year plus free healthcare. Lastly, and arguably the most damning is unions have fought for decades to stop automation and modernization. They’re also fighting automation on ships too, refusing to service vessels that reduce crew size and increase efficiency via automation.
Maritime unions’ have killed the shipping industry. The 2020 World Bank/IHS Markit “Container Port Performance Index” revealed that none of the U.S. ports made it into the top 50 global ports for efficient ship handling. Among U.S. ports, Philadelphia ranked the highest statistically at 83, followed by Virginia at 85 and NY/NJ at 89. Oakland secured the 332nd position, while LA/LB disappointingly ranked at 328 and 333, respectively.
These negotiation issues are further exacerbated by the current Biden administration’s refusal to acknowledge the crippling monopoly power granted to maritime unions. Allowing maritime unions to continue holding America’s shipping industry hostage will only widen the growing gap between us and the rest of the world.
by | ARTICLES, BLOG, ECONOMY, NEWS
Robert Poole, Director of Transportation Policy over at the Reason Foundation, does as decent job laying out “the case for changing the way air traffic control is provided in the United States.” He points out that many major countries have changed the way air traffic control systems are funded in recent years, and the United States should consider adopting some form of their models. This is a thoughtful piece and well worth the read. I have included it below as well as his full pdf report.
“This report provides an overview of the case for changing the way air traffic control is provided in the United States. While this country still has the world’s largest air traffic control system, it is no longer the world’s most advanced. Over the past three decades, more than 60 developed countries have converted their air traffic control systems from tax-funded government agencies to some form of public utility. These countries include Australia, Canada, Germany, Italy, New Zealand, and the United Kingdom.
This idea has been proposed many times in the United States, dating back to the 1970s. The Clinton administration made several large-scale attempts that led to only minor reforms in how the Federal Aviation Administration operates the air traffic control system. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) attempted funding reform during the George W. Bush administration but was unsuccessful.
Research papers and several book-length studies find that the utility model, in which the air traffic control provider is paid directly by its customers and is able to issue long-term revenue bonds for large-scale facility and equipment modernization, works better than tax-supported systems operated as government agencies.
A much larger effort began during the Obama administration and continued in the Trump administration, driven largely by the business community and various aviation stakeholder groups. It led to the House Transportation & Infrastructure Committee twice approving enabling legislation for an air traffic control utility corporation, but neither bill reached the House floor.
Recent air traffic problems—the NOTAM fiasco, a spate of close-call runway incursions, and FAA’s inability to implement digital/remote control towers as air traffic control utilities in other countries are doing—have raised new interest in air traffic control reform in this year when FAA must be reauthorized by Congress.
The 2018 defeat appeared to foreclose further attempts at creating a U.S. air traffic control utility for the duration of the five-year FAA reauthorization period. With so many topics on its agenda and very limited floor time, any stand-alone air traffic control bill apart from the next FAA reauthorization bill would have been highly unlikely.
The 2013–2018 air traffic control reform effort garnered much greater support than any previous effort. Openly supporting the bill were all the major passenger and cargo airlines, controllers’ union Nair traffic controlA, unions representing pilots and flight attendants, six former U.S. Department of Transportation secretaries, all three former chief operating officers of the Air Traffic Organization, 13 former senior Clinton administration officials, transportation experts from a long list of noted think tanks, taxpayer and consumer groups, and the editorial boards of many leading newspapers,including the Chicago Tribune, Miami Herald, Orlando Sentinel, The Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, and USA Today.
Unfortunately, there was never a real, substantive debate on the case for an air traffic control utility corporation. Instead, a propaganda war largely bankrolled by business jet organization the National Business Aviation Association (NBAA) made untrue allegations and stepped up its opposition efforts after the bill had been revised to reflect legitimate concerns of general aviation, small airports, and rural America. Thus, while the United States retains the world’s largest air traffic control system, it also remains an outlier as:
- The only developed country that is not charging airspace users for air traffic control services;
- One of the few that still has not separated safety regulation from air traffic control service provision; and,
- A major nation whose air traffic control provider still has difficulty developing and implementing new technology and procedures in a timely and cost-effective manner.
Nevertheless, the debate has moved significantly in the direction of corporatization. In the 1970s and 1980s, it was widely assumed that the provision of air traffic control services was inherently governmental, since this service was provided by national governments in nearly all countries during those decades. The idea of separating aviation safety regulation from the provision of air traffic control services was unheard of.
Today, the inherent conflict of interest in having the same agency do both is recognized by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and has become non-standard in practice world wide.
Second, the importance of a self-supporting utility model for air traffic control is now widely understood and in operation in more than 60 countries. Prior to the emergence of air traffic control utilities beginning in 1987, most governments already charged air traffic control fees, mostly in accord with ICAO charging principles, but the revenues went into the national government’s coffers, to be allocated to whatever purposes the national legislative body decided upon.
The move toward self-supporting air traffic control utilities has created a worthwhile customer/provider relationship that replaces the air traffic control provider’s dependence on politically determined funding. The self-supporting model also permits the issuance of revenue bonds to finance long-lived capital modernization efforts, which was not possible prior to self- support, since the air traffic control user fee revenues belonged to the national government, not the air traffic control provider.
Third, we have seen empirical evidence of a changed organizational culture in many of the ATC corporations. They are generally able to hire and retain experienced managers, engineers, and software experts, thereby regaining control of technology development from aerospace companies on whom they were formerly overly dependent. This is leading to reductions in overhead costs, more cost-effective technology improvements, and increases in productivity.
Governance is still a work in progress, with many of the government corporations being dependent on one or two government shareholders. By contrast, the stakeholder board concept has proved workable and effective for more than two decades at Nav Canada, the world’s second-largest air traffic control provider and widely considered one of the best. A governing board representing all the principal aviation stakeholders gives the air traffic control provider a governance model much like the user cooperative model well-known in the rural utilities sector in the United States. It is a model that may offer governance improvements to many air traffic control providers currently organized as government corporations.
To sum up, the world of air traffic control has changed markedly in the decades since the corporatization of Airways New Zealand in 1987. The United States is the last major country that stands apart from this reform. It is conceivable that the growing track record of self-supporting air traffic control corporations will lead to some version of this model being adopted in the United States within the next decade.”
Get the report here
by | ARTICLES, BIDEN, BLOG, SOCIAL SECURITY
President Biden is cutting Social Security by 23% for every single recipient across the board. This is the inevitable effect of his continued demand that there will be no entitlement reform. This should terrify absolutely everyone. Within the next 8-10 years, when the Social Security trust fund is depleted, Social Security recipients will look at their bank account and see that their benefits have been slashed. This is a mathematical fact.
President Biden is lying to each and every last one of us, by denying the inevitability of his idiotic refusal to make any meaningful changes to fix Social Security. Currently, the Social Security Administration (SSA) estimates that of the over 46 million Americans receiving Social Security retirement benefits… 21% of married couples and 45% of single persons rely on Social Security for 90% or more of their income. That number is only going to continue rising as life expectancy rises and more people begin to rely on social security. You should be angry; President Biden’s actions will cause significant harm to every American.
