Thursday, October 26, 2017

Buddhists Fighting Back Against Muslim Killers


Ahinamo Kurasawa From Tokyo.
Its Not Buddhists Killing Muslims In Myanmar, Its Rohingya Muslims Killing Buddhists From 1947
There’s a big misconception about the violence in Burma that has caused severe casualties to both Rohingya Muslims and Burmese Buddhists. Therefore it is important that a fair assessment to this issue is done to shed light on the grey areas and enlighten those who are clueless on the subject.
The Rohingyas are a Muslim minority who migrated from Bangladesh and reside in Myanmar. The community procreated in large numbers within a very short period of time without any family planning and considerations to limited resources, because of which the native community in the area has became a minority and deprived of their own lands that were grabbed by increased population of Rohingyans.
According to Rohingyas, they are indigenous to Rakhine State, while the Burmese historians claim that they migrated to Burma from Bengal primarily during the period of British rule in Burma, and to a lesser extent, after the Burmese independence in 1948 and Bangladesh Liberation War in 1971.
General Ne Win’s government, in 1982, enacted the Burmese nationality law, which denied citizenship to the Rohingyas honoring the opinion of vast majority of Burmese. (96%) The decision also came as a result as the Rohingyas were rebelling the government for several decades with the support of external forces, mainly from separatists movements and extremist groups including Al Qaeda.
The Rohingya insurgency in Western Myanmar was an insurgency in northern Rakhine State (also known as Arakan), waged by insurgents belonging to the Rohingya ethnic minority. Most clashes have occurred in the Maungdaw District, which borders Bangladesh.
Local mujahideen groups were rebelling government forces From 1947 to 1961, in an attempt to have the mostly Rohingya populated Mayu peninsula in northern Rakhine State secede from Myanmar, and have it be annexed by East Pakistan (present-day Bangladesh). In late 1950s they lost most of their support and surrendered to government forces.
The modern Rohingya insurgency in northern Rakhine began in 2001 although Shwe Maung, the then MP of the Rohingya-majority, rejected claims that new Islamist insurgent groups had begun operating along the Bangladeshi border.
Latest incident that got reported was in October 2016, where clashes have erupted on the Myanmar-Bangladesh border, with Rohingya insurgents linked to foreign Islamists suspected of being the perpetrators.
However Rohingyas have stayed in Burma for several generations and account for nearly 4% of Myanmar’s population.
On the other hand the incident where brutal rape and murder of a Rakhine Buddhist woman by Muslim men, followed by the killing of Rohingya Muslims (as retaliation) sparked the communal riots between Rakhine Buddhists and Rohingya Muslims. This was not exactly a one sided massacre, but a communal riot with victims from both sides.
The issue became more severe when Rohingyas started killing monks too. Often by beheading them. At least 19 such monk killings were reported within a couple of months where monks started to take the side of the native groups who were fighting the Rohingyas.
Now the question every one of us must be asking is, why do Muslims kill Christians? Why do Muslims kill Muslims? pretty much everywhere in the world. None of the Buddhists we know did/ does / wants to kill Muslims, at least not because of any religious reasons. But in Myanmar we find low tolerance towards proselytism, this means there’s no problem with any religion you may have, as long as you stick to it and don’t attempt to convert others. The Christians have learned their lesson a long time ago although they continue to do it without being aggressive about it, the Hindus never had such ambitions, the Buddhists never engage in that, but the Muslims…Well…Well…Well
On the other hand Rohingyas communities tend to be highly conservative of inter-faith marriages where they punish and sometimes kills their women in case they marry someone outside Rohingyas. While they are ready to marry Buddhist women and convert them to Islam. This doesn’t sit well with some conservative factions of the Buddhist majority, for obvious reasons.
Christians and hindus, the 2nd and 4th largest communities, by population, are integrating just fine despite many Christian ethnicities engaging against the Buddhist Bamar (Kachin, Chin, Karen, etc), the disputes are historical, territorial and resource-based, never religious. Also, insulting religion, ANY religion, for whatever reason, is illegal in Myanmar and would land you in jail in a matter of hours. And that’s actively enforced, probably for good reason.
Rohingyas Muslims were welcomed as guests in the beginning according to historians. There was little or no problem at the beginning. Problems such as rebelling did happen later but an agreement was reached and they disarmed in early 60s. Although minor conflicts occurred among both communities, nothing serious occurred until about 5 years ago where Muslims gathered in numbers and walked the streets killing the minority natives in their areas. Which is why Burmese Buddhists started counter attacking the Muslims who were killing their brothers and sisters in Rohingyas lands.
Therefore, it is critical that one needs to understand that Buddhists do not kill Muslims but the natives are responding to the rebels who are virtually on a ethnic cleansing mission is Rakhine State. If Buddhists were at fault, they should probably be attacking Christians too. At least some type of discrimination against Christians which is the 2nd largest religious community in Burma which has never happened.
It must also be noted that no one should be linking the unrest to religious war. Its a political war where natives trying to protect their life from insurgents belonging to a migrated community. Who are not only trying to procreate at a disturbing rate but also trying to convert natives to their faith forcibly by direct and indirect means. To make it worst, they are promoting Rohingyas men to marry Buddhists but has banned Rohingyas women to marry Buddhists. Its a riot the Rohingyas started by attacking Buddhists and other way round as it is evidently true to anywhere else in the world. It is Rohingyas who kill people Chanting Allahu Akbar and not a single Buddhist because Buddhists can’t possibly justify killing according to their teachings. But their survival has become a priority which compel them to fight back.
Buddhists in Burma have seen Rohingyas rioting against them for more than half a century for no apparent reason except the need to create a separate Islamic region in Burma with the funding that comes from extremist organizations and middle east in addition to the support they have from neighboring Pakistan and Bangladesh. Its as the last resort they have opted to deal with the obvious problem they have at hand. It was simply a question for Buddhists whether they were willing to die at the Hands of Muslim separatists or try to prevail by fighting back.  
 Thanks to Raquel Gooch for alertimg us to this article.

Wednesday, October 25, 2017

Trump, At Long Last, Have You No Decency

Perhaps, like a man realizing he has a serious problem,
The GOP has to hit bottom before the change....

Sunday, October 22, 2017

If Israel disappears, others will too By Mudar Zahran

Since 1948, we Arabs have been taught that all we need to do is get rid of the Jewish state, and ‎everything else will go well after that. Our dictators took full advantage of this idea. Egyptian President Gamal Abdel Nasser locked up and executed his opposition members ‎using his famous excuse: “No voices are to be allowed except for those for the war with ‎Israel.” Iraqi President Saddam Hussein adopted the Palestinian flag and had it ‎printed, distributed and flown alongside his own flag, and even said, “Palestine and Iraq share the same ‎identical cause.” In short, we Arabs have put 70 years of our existence on hold while awaiting that ‎‎”glorious day” when we defeat Israel and “feed the Jews to the fish.”
But that day did not come, nor does ‎it seem to be coming, as Jordanian opposition figure Emad Tarifi once told me: “It seems the fish in ‎the sea are not betting on us feeding them Jews.” ‎
In addition, we Arabs have given our dictators carte blanche to impoverish, terrorize, oppress and ‎destroy us all in the name of “the great Arab struggle to end the Zionist entity.” The outcome of this has ‎been clear: While Israel made 10 new breakthroughs in cancer and cardiac treatments in the last two years ‎alone, we Arabs developed new execution methods. The latest is death by drowning in a cage, as ‎shown in an Islamic State group video two weeks ago.‎
We Arabs have wasted seven decades of our existence awaiting Israel’s demise. It is time to think of the future, and whether Israel’s “disappearance” should be our ‎ultimate wish.‎
Being the son of two Palestinian-Jordanian refugees, I find myself inclined to fear for the future. Regardless of my stance toward Israel, I have to think: What would happen if, one day, Israel were to disappear? While it does not seem feasible, it is the day around which entire Arab political, social and economic systems revolve. ‎
It is not only Arabs who want Israel gone. There are others who seek the same, for ‎example anti-Semites in the West. Just last week, neo-Nazis marched in London with swastikas and the Palestinian flag. The organizer of the march claimed it was a protest “by all of those ‎who have suffered because of Israel.” There are groups calling for a boycott of Israel “for ‎the sake of the Palestinian people.” There are countries whose entire foreign policy seems to revolve around opposition to Israel. We ‎Palestinians might have believed that these groups and countries actually care about us, but they take no interest in the fate of the ‎‎150,000 Palestinians being starved to death in Syria’s Yarmouk refugee camp, nor in an estimated ‎‎5.8 million Palestinians in Jordan (as indicated by a U.S. Embassy cable) who live as second-‎class citizens and are banned from government jobs and any form of state benefits while paying full taxes.‎
If these Israel-haters got their wish to see Israel disappear, what would ‎happen?‎
First, Israel is the only reason Iran does not yet have nuclear weapons. Iran could buy the ‎technology to produce them, or could learn it quickly the way Pakistan did. Why has Iran been slow in ‎doing so? Because it learned a lesson from the experience of Saddam’s Osirak reactor, which Israeli jets reduced to rubble in 1981.‎
Then, almost everyone, including George H. W. Bush who was vice president of the United States at that time, were furious ‎with Israel’s move. But 10 years later, when the U.S. fought to liberate Kuwait, ‎the situation would have been totally different if Saddam had kept his nuclear program — and the only reason ‎he did not was Israel.‎
Further, Iran already controls at least a third of Iraq and its resources through a pro-Iranian ‎regime. If Israel were to disappear, Iran would extend its influence into Jordan, Kuwait and Bahrain ‎the next day, as it would not have to fear an Israeli reaction. Iran could then bring the world to its knees by reducing oil ‎production.
Iran is not the only evil power in the Middle East: We also have Islamic State, which has now spread across ‎Iraq, Syria, Sinai and Libya, with clear ambitions to enter Jordan. Islamic State has not entered Jordan yet, and this is not ‎because of any fear of the Jordanian army. After all, the Global Firepower website ranks Jordan’s army at ‎the same level as the Iraqi army, which Islamic State has defeated many times. Islamic State does not dare enter Jordan for one reason only — its fear that Israeli jets would catch up with it 15 minutes later.‎
If Israel were to disappear and be replaced by a Palestinian state, the Palestinians would most likely end up ‎with another Arab dictatorship that oppresses them and reduces them to poverty. We have partially ‎seen that with the Palestinian Authority and the “liberated” areas it rules. I regularly visit the West ‎Bank and have interviewed scores of Palestinians there. I can confirm that, as much as they hate ‎Israel, they still openly yearn for the days when it administered the West Bank. As one Palestinian told me, ‎‎”We prayed to God to give us mercy and rid us of Israel; later, we found out that God had ‎given us mercy when Israel was here.”‎
To those Arabs, Muslims, Westerners and others insisting that Israel must be erased from face of the ‎planet, I say: Don’t bet on it, as Israel is becoming stronger every day through its democracy and ‎innovation, while Arab countries are getting weaker through dictatorship and chaos. And be careful ‎what you wish for, because if you were to get it, you too would most likely disappear, unless you ‎yearn to be ruled by Iran or Islamic State.‎
In short, if the day were to come when Israel falls, Jordan, Egypt and many others would fall, too, and ‎Westerners would be begging Iran for oil.‎
We can hate Israel as much as we like, but we must realize that without it, we too would be ‎gone.‎

The Lies of Jimmy Carter

It is not particularly surprising that Jimmy Carter, former US president and author of “Palestine: Peace not Apartheid,” chose to commemorate the UN’s official Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People (November 29), to launch another attack on Israel. Carter did this through lies and half-truths in a New York Times Op-Ed (printed below).

Here are some lying lowlights:

Lie: Israel cannot take control of any of the “West Bank” which it seized during a war. Carter wrote that Israel and Egypt concluded a peace deal because it was based on UN resolution 242 which included the clause “the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war.” The peace agreement with Egypt has nothing to do with the Palestinian Arabs.

The “West Bank” was taken during a DEFENSIVE war. While it is a matter of debate whether Israel’s 1967 preemptive attack on Egypt which was ready to attack Israel was offensive or defensive, there is no debate that the Jordanians (and Palestinian Arabs who had taken Jordanian citizenship) attacked Israel first. The laws about the inadmissibility of taking land have to do with a “belligerent party,” not the defensive party.
The international community recognizes Israel’s taking land in a defensive war. After the Arab armies attacked Israel in 1948-9, Israel seized much more land than was granted to it under UN Resolution 181, known as the 1947 Partition Plan. The dynamic of taking more of the “West Bank” in yet another defensive war follows the same principle.
The Sinai peninsula was never part of the Palestine Mandate.  Israel returned land to Egypt that it took in the 1967 war, land that was never part of the Palestine Mandate which sought to reestablish a Jewish homeland. However, the “West Bank” is part-and-parcel of the Palestine Mandate, just as the land west of the 1949 Green Line was part of the Jewish homeland.
Lie: The Palestinians seek “a just and lasting peace in the Middle East in which every state in the area can live in security.”Carter continued to recite language from UN resolution 242, but failed to connect Palestinians to the clause.

The Palestinian Arabs have voted for war, not peace. The Palestinian Arabs voted Hamas, a recognized terrorist group that seeks the destruction of Israel, to 58% of the parliament in 2006. Palestinian polls show Palestinian Arabs favoring the group in every poll. This is a group that has the most anti-Semitic charter in the world, which specifically calls for killing Jews and destroying all of Israel. The Hamas leadership continues to incite violence against Israelis.
Lie: Carter implied that “withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict,” meant withdrawal from the West Bank.It does not.

A withdrawal from “territories” but not “all of the territories.”  The language in the UN resolution was approved with specific amendments in the final text. It specifically did not call for Israel to remove troops from all of the new lands, as the 1949 Armistice Agreements with Egypt and with Jordan specifically stated that the Armistice Lines / the Green Line was NOT to be considered a new border.
Lie: Carter stated that Jewish homes in the West Bank were “constructed illegally by Israel on Palestinian territory.” Carter has adopted the anti-Israel United Nations language in describing “settlements” as illegal. He might as well also state that “Zionism is racism,” as stated in UN Resolution 3379 which was passed in 1975 under his watch.

Jews living throughout the West Bank is LEGAL. International law in 1920 (San Remo Agreement) and 1922 (Mandate of Palestine) specifically stated that Jewish immigration was to be encouraged throughout Palestine and that “No person shall be excluded from Palestine on the sole ground of his religious belief” (Mandate Article 15). You cannot bar Jews from living in the West Bank as a matter of moral and legal principle.
Lie: Carter wrote that Obama declared that the border between Israel and Palestine “should be based on the 1967 lines.”   This is a half-truth that is a complete lie.

Obama stated that borders should be negotiated between the two parties and include land swaps to account for current realities. Carter deliberately misled his liberal fans and Israel-bashers by only using half of Obama’s suggested course to peace. Obama stated that the borders would NOT look like the 1967 borders, but Carter piecemealed Obama’s quote into a distortion, a lie.  It should be further noted that Obama’s language was much softer than theassurances that President George W. Bush gave Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon in 2004 that “it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949.”
Lie: Carter implied that the Israelis’ “commitment to peace is in danger of abrogation,” and said nothing about Palestinian Arabs lack of desire for peace.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has stated repeatedly he seeks to commence negotiations immediately to resolve the conflict. It is Palestinian Authority Mahmoud Abbas that refuses to engage with Israel. It is Mahmoud Abbas that incites terror against Israelis and seeks to deny Jewish rights and history in Jerusalem. Only Israeli leadership has declared the goal of two states for two peoples, while Abbas has called for an Arab state of Palestine devoid of Jews, and Israel, which should be a bi-national state.
Lie: Carter calls all of the West Bank “Palestinian Land,” which are “occupied.”

The West Bank includes “Palestinian Authority territory” which is administered by the PA, and Israeli territory, administered by Israel – according to the Oslo Accords, agreed to by both parties. The Oslo I and Oslo II Accords signed in 1993 and 1995 by the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority handed over certain lands to the PA. Those areas, known as Area A, are where the vast majority of Arabs in the West Bank live. They are not under Israeli military control. Area C, which is under Israeli military control, is where the vast majority of Israelis live in the West Bank, and include a minimal number of Arabs.
Lie: Carter claims that the world condemns Israel since Arabs east of the Green Line cannot vote, while Israeli Jews living in EGL can. That is wild distortion of reality.

Arabs in Jerusalem can become citizens and vote in Israeli elections. Israel reunited the city of Jerusalem in 1967, and expanded the borders of the city in 1980. Israel gave ALL people living in the city the option to become Israeli citizens, just as the other million-plus non-Jews in Israel enjoy Israeli citizenship. Thousands of Arabs from Jerusalem have become citizens of Israel.
People in territories around the world don’t vote. Puerto Ricans, Guam and other US territories, are not eligible to vote in US elections. Does the world condemn the US for this structure? No. Citizens are entitled to vote – regardless of where they live. An American living in Germany for 20 years still gets to vote in US elections, while a Puerto Rican will not. Similar for Israeli citizens that opt to live in EGL/ the West Bank.
Lie: Carter calls the Palestinian Authority a “moderate Palestinian leadership.”

The Palestinian Authority is RELATIVELY moderate compared to Hamas, but far from moderate. Liberals state that Israel is run by right-wing extremists, without any basis for such comments. At the same time they excuse any and all incitement to violence by Palestinians as a “natural reaction to occupation” and are only “resorting to violence.” Really? Read the Hamas Charter. Read the PLO Charter. The Fatah Constitution. Look at the ADL anti-Semitism poll which showed that almost every single Palestinian Arab is an anti-Semite.
After laying out a package of outright lies and half-truths, Carter calls on President Obama to act quickly and: 1) recognize a Palestinian State; and 2) passing a UN Security Council Resolution that all Israeli “settlements” are illegal.  He added “Recognition of Palestine and a new Security Council resolution are not radical new measures, but a natural outgrowth of America’s support for a two-state solution.”

It is beyond “radical.” It is wrong and dangerous.

To this day, Carter remains the only US president to call Israelis living in EGL/West Bank “illegal.” Obama, Bush and others used terms like “illegitimate” (Obama) or “unhelpful” (Bush) or even an “obstacle to peace,” but no other president claimed that settlements in disputed territory are “illegal.” Such a declaration is radical, and the left-wing extremist was the only president to use such terminology.

Further, recognizing a Palestinian State completely ends the Oslo Accords and a negotiated solution. It doesn’t “restart” talks, but puts both parties on the course for unilateral actions, such as annexation of additional lands. It will most likely lead to war.

Carter (like the anti-Israel UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon) has urged Hamas and Fatah to reconcile. They seek to insert agenocidal Nazi party into the Palestinian government as a pathway to peace. These are the same people that recommend these two radical actions.

While Carter and Ban are correct in recognizing that it is unsustainable to have a Palestinian state with distinct governments controlling different parts of the country, that just underscores why there cannot be recognition of a Palestinian state today. It doesn’t mean rewarding a dysfunctional and anti-Semitic government with recognition.

Seeing Jimmy Carter write again is a reminder of the far left fringe’s inability to see or grasp the truth of the Middle East.  Carter’s adoration of Hamas, underlines his insanity. He imagines and hopes for a world that doesn’t exist, and makes suggestions that are dangerous for civil society.

Tuesday, October 17, 2017

Trump is the White House Harvey Weinstein

Trump boasts about his history of sexual assault
" You can do anything you want to them. I don't ask, I just kiss them. You can grab them by the P###y"
One of his victims is seeking proof of his sick behavior by supoenaing records around the time she was assaulted.
it's time for this disgraceful person to pay the piper.
Watch this video, a strong case that compares trump to his Democratic friend, Harvey Weinstein.

Sunday, October 15, 2017

The Nightmare of trump's Failed Administration

It feels strange sitting in Tel Aviv writing this article.

For so many years, Americans have looked towards Israel and Israelis and wondered how they manage. Americans commonly inquire — “How are you able to deal with the many threats that surround you?”

Now, as I sit here, I worry less about my friends and children locally, and more about my friends, children, and grandchild in the US.

I live in a city with an operational missile defense system in place. I live in a country in which an armed Nazi sympathizer could not march down the street.

While our country does have enemies who attempt to use vehicles as weapons, my prime minister, whatever I may think of his deficits, does personally visit the victims of any attack and ensures them that that the state will bring the “terrorist” to justice.

I have been writing about American history for most of my life. Never has there been a period when circumstances have gone wrong so quickly. I'm not referring to any unexpected acts, like a sudden crash of the stock market, but to self-inflicted wounds.

The decline started in the first minutes of the Trump administration, at his inaugural address. Instead of conveying a speech that tried to inspire, sought to bring the country together, President Donald J. Trump delivered a dark address, depicting an America I did not recognize.

It was a speech seemingly designed to spark the anger instead of extinguishing the ambers of division and bring the country together.

On his first full day in office, President Trump took the US out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the treaty created to balance the economic growth of China. This one action, taken without any consultation, began a rapid slide of American standing in the world. As an Israeli, that makes me worry.

Israel’s second biggest strategic asset — after its military — is its friendship with the United States. While that friendship remains strong, anything that diminishes America's standing in the world weakens Israel.

During his short tenure, the list of actions taken by President Trump that weaken the US is long. The soft power developed and harnessed by the United States over the course of many decades and administrations has swiftly and suddenly been eliminated, as the official policy of the US government abruptly moved away from supporting democracy and democratic values to supporting what are considered “American interests.”

People across the globe no longer have confidence in the United States. People no longer trust the word of an American President who has been proven, again and again, to make up his own facts. From a local perspective here in the Middle East, the US under Trump seemingly ignored Israel’s concerns as it negotiated a ceasefire with Russia on Syria.

For reasons no one has been able to explain, the Trump administration appears to believe American and Russian interests are aligned. And, while Israel and Russia have good relations, Russian actions in the Middle East these past five years have been antithetical to Israel's interests.

Israelis' biggest concern is that Trump has reversed the dictum of one of America’s most successful Presidents, Teddy Roosevelt — “Speak softly, but carry a big stick.”

Trump speaks loudly, without necessarily having a big stick prepared.

While there is a chance, albeit very small, that Trump's policy on North Korea will be successful, the two more likely outcomes are either a failure to deter North Korea's nuclear ambitions — in a scenario that will turn the US into a paper tiger — or a devastating war with unknown consequences.

Events this past weekend took America to an even darker place. The site of gun-toting Nazis chanting “Jews will not replace us” is enough to put a chill in the body of any Jew with a glimmer of historical memory.

No one thinks America is about to turn into Nazi Germany. But Jews always fear that anti-semitism lurks just below the surface — and recent events certainly increase that fear.

The “Trump effect” on American politics has led to a strengthening of the extremes, and a hollowing out of the middle. Jewish history has shown us that when the extremes get stronger the danger to Jews and minorities increase.

While the most overt anti-semitic statements and actions seem to be wielded by those on extreme Right. (Even with my low journalistic profile, I have been the subject of numerous anti-semitic attacks.)

That being said, we must not completely ignore the anti-semitism that appears to have developed in the extreme Left as well. Though we must be careful not to create a false equivalency, as the most dangerous anti-semitism emanates from the Right (and most cases of political violence have been executed by Right-sympathizing loyalists), it is important to note that extremists on either side are dangerous.

Jews (and the Jewish state) often end up as the target. And President Trump continues to fuel the flames of extremism. The fact that the current White House includes advisors such as Steve Bannon and Sebastian Gorka makes it near impossible for the White House to credibly claim its hands are clean, given their clear connections to the alt-Right.

Of course, Trump still has his supporters in Israel, who, like many on the Right in America, have managed to ignore his failings and continue to believe in their leader. While the Trump administration's promise to move the US embassy to Jerusalem has been proven to be just talk, his faithful still seem to prefer a president who continues to demonstrate his incompetence and indirectly stokes the fires of anti-semitism to a President who might show any sympathy to the Palestinians.

For many, the election of Trump felt like a nightmare. A little over six months into his presidency, that nightmare just seems to be getting worse. The Trump Presidency may be at an inflection point from which it may never be able to recover. If there is any hope for change, the administration must take clear and decisive action.

In the wake of the recent violence in Charlottesville, Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League, stated on Sunday:

We call on the White House to terminate all staff with any ties to these extremists. There is no rationale for employing people who excuse hateful rhetoric and ugly incitement. They do not serve the values embodied in our Constitution nor the interests of the American people.

Listening to Greenblatt would be a first step towards a new direction.

Marc Schulman is a multimedia historian.

Saturday, October 14, 2017

Donald Trump Doesn’t Know Basic Things About Our Government or The Economy

He doesn't know that HE is the President of the U.S. Virgin Islands.
He announced yesterday that he had a phone conversation with the President of the Virgin Islands..which is Trump himself.
With the help of Russia and his "uneducated voters" trump was able to get enough votes to have the electoral college appoint him President, even though Clinton received several million more votes.
In this video trump exposes his lack of knowledge of how our country works and his complete lack of comprehension about economics.

Zamir Etzioni with MFBSR

Saturday, October 7, 2017

Is trump a Moron, or Just Stupid?

The law allowed, in the past,  authorities to detain the mentally impaired and to intern them in homes, camps or so-called colonies: over 65,000 were interned in Britain and a similar number in the United States, although America also instituted mass sterilization of the mentally impaired, which the British did not. The United States had a similar, though not identical, classification of the mentally impaired, which was heavily influenced by the advent of IQ tests. “Idiots” were those with IQs lower than 25, “imbeciles” had IQs lower than 50, but the term “feeble-minded,” which was used in Britain, was replaced by another term coined in 1910 by psychologist Henry Goddard. Those with IQs from 51 to 70 would henceforth be known as “morons.”

All of these terms were eventually deemed to be derogatory and were removed from professional lexicons by the early 1970s, along with the general change in society’s attitude toward the intellectually disabled, as they are called today. The term “moron,” along with “idiot” and “imbecile,” joined the ever-growing stock of insults that include “stupid,” “dumb,” “cretin,” “ignoramus,” “nitwit,” “simpleton,” “numbskull” and the like. But the word “moron” is still pejorative enough that if forced U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson to humiliate himself in front of the country on Wednesday after NBC reported that he had used it over the summer to depict U.S. President Donald Trump. In a rare appearance before television cameras, Tillerson praised Trump’s diplomatic wisdom with superlatives worthy of Bismarck, Metternich and Kissinger put together, though he noticeably refrained from denying that he had called Trump a “moron.” That task was left to U.S. State Department Spokesperson Heather Nauert, who asserted that Tillerson wouldn’t use such language. Stephanie Ruhl, one of the NBC reporters with the scoop, admitted that Nauert was right: According to her sources, Tillerson hadn’t called Trump a “moron” but a “fucking moron.” True to the principle that one can always find an embarrassing Trump tweet for just about everything, New York Magazine promptly located the 2014 tweet in which Trump showcased a caricature of a Founding Father telling colleagues: “I keep thinking we should include something in the constitution in case the people elect a fucking moron.” Trump probably meant it as a dig at former U.S. President Barack Obama.

Ruhl maintained that not only had Tillerson used the offensive term to describe Trump, but that U.S. Vice President Pence, U.S. Secretary of Defense Mattis and then-Homeland Security chief John Kelly had to dissuade the secretary of state from resigning. Ruhl, whose report was published as Trump was making his way to a Las Vegas still reeling from the horrific shoot-out last Sunday night, said that Tillerson’s tirade came after Trump’s monumentally offensive speech in July to thousands of boy scouts, in which he dissed Obama, praised himself and seemed to be using sexual innuendo to describe the lives of wealthy people with yachts. Tillerson, who devoted many years of his life to the scouts movement as he was climbing to the top of Exxon’s corporate ladder, blew his top and called Trump a “moron” – and probably nastier things as well.

He wasn’t the first and won’t be the last, of course. Stupidity is one of the more easily accessible and widespread explanations for Trump’s behavior. It’s no coincidence, of course, that his election resurrected the futuristic cult classic “Idiocracy’ about a dumbed down America that chooses a loutish porn actor as president. It’s true that Trump has claimed in the past that his IQ is much higher than that of Obama or of comedian John Stewart, but in that case, he’s doing an excellent job of concealing his intelligence, as his visit this week to Puerto Rico showed.
Trump came to the island under a cloud of criticism over the federal government’s allegedly slow response to the destruction wrought by Hurricane Maria as well his own dismissive attitude toward Puerto Ricans and their leaders, which stood in stark contrast to the tone of his message in the hurricane-hit states of Florida and Texas. But rather than trying to cheer up Puerto Ricans, as he did in Texas, or console them, as he would later do in Las Vegas, Trump insulted the island’s residents on their own home turf. He told them they should be grateful they weren’t hit with a “real catastrophe” like Hurricane Katrina, which devastated New Orleans in 2005. He didn’t stop complaining about the drain of Puerto Rican recovery on the federal budget, which he didn’t even mention in Texas or Florida. And to cap it all off, Trump was filmed tossing out paper towels to his audience in a scene deemed by one broadcaster as “the least presidential ever.”

Some people ascribe Trump’s behavior in such events to obnoxious racism rather than stupidity. Prejudice and racial stereotypes are such a prominent feature of his personality, they maintain, that he just can’t keep them under lock. He has described himself as ‘the least racist person ever,” but since he launched his presidential run by describing Mexican immigrants as rapists and murderers, Trump has described Puerto Ricans as lazy, Muslims as wannabe terrorists, African-Americans as thugs, Jews as proficient with money and women as inferior sexual objects. It’s only among neo-Nazis, apparently, that Trump has found “some fine people.”
Others cite Trump’s sensational victory in the elections – which was the result of a Russian sting operation – as proof of his political smarts. According to this view, all of Trump’s scandals, controversies, insults and inanities are but a ploy aimed at rallying his base, first to win the elections and then as leverage against the unruly Republican Party. Like a wolf in sheep’s clothing, Trump is a smart guy pretending to be a dunce. If that’s true, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu should be worried by Barak Ravid’s report on Wednesday that Trump told the United Nations' secretary general that the prime minister is more problematic that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas. If Trump is a “moron,” on the other hand, as Tillerson testified, then his words  should be taken as seriously as his assertions about Obama’s birth certificate, his support for Marine Le Pen in the French elections and his praise for the homicidal Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte, who will have the privilege of hosting Trump next month.

The problem with the Trump-is-actually-clever theory is that his outlandish statements and unfounded assertions don’t just harm America’s international image or divide its own population – they often do the most damage to Trump himself. The U.S. president has shot himself in the foot so regularly that it is only natural to assume he may not be the sharpest pencil in the box. He fired FBI Director James Comey, a move which Steve Bannon described as the worst presidential mistake ever, but then made things much worse for himself by admitting, contrary to the official line, that he did so because of the investigation of his ties to Russia. Trump made sure that even if Special Counsel Robert Mueller didn’t collect enough evidence on the alleged collusion, he would always be able to nail Trump on obstruction of justice. The same is true of Trump’s ham-handed effort to concoct a cover story for his son Donald’s hitherto unreported meeting with a Russian lawyer with close ties to the Kremlin, which fell apart within hours.

In short,Trump is indeed a moron, a racist and a loser.

The Chomsky Hoax

The Chomsky Hoax
Exposing the Dishonesty of Noam Chomsky