Time for a reality check for China’s wishful US trade war thinkers, Chinese professor warns | SCMP

How about this, in the South China Morning Post?
Isn't it annoyong that the government in the Motherland (China) treats its residents like children?

Time for a reality check for China's wishful US trade war thinkers, Chinese professor warns

China has risen within the US dollar system but also been weakened by it, academic says

Sidney LengTuesday, 3 Jul 2018, 10:53PM

A leading Chinese finance professor has warned against overblown claims about China's ability to take on the United States in a trade war, adding that it could be the start of a bigger rivalry lasting more than half a century.

Free Speech Now! | The European assault on freedom of speech | Spiked

This I did not know, from Spiked.  Legislation in the works that will severely restrict free speech rights in Europe.
And scary stuff that may just sneak up on Europeans without it's being noticed until too late.

Video from France: Muslims building mosque at the site of the Battle of Tours in 732

Goodness: Battle of Tours! On again today 1,300 years later....
Link also here.

US and China: who tried to avert a trade war and who forced it? | SCMP

/Snip:

In a nutshell, the Xi government proceeded with sincerity to fulfil its side of the May 19 bargain.

The same cannot be said of the Trump administration. Barely 10 days after the ink had dried – and with no perceptible negative shift at the Chinese end – Trump reversed course and announced the US would go ahead and impose the Section 301 tariffs on China. A final list of covered imports was announced on June 15 with tariffs set to go into effect three weeks later.

So what to make of this article by Sourabh Gupta in today's South China Morning Post?

Trump flip-flops, inconsistency and bad faith? (the Left) Or some form of "master manipulation"? (Scott Adams).

Donald Trump is a master manipulator of bias. The trouble is, we go along with it | SCMP

LATER: They published this in 13th July
LETTER TO THE SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST (354 Words)
David Dodwell writes about Trump's manipulation of bias. (Going with the bias, SCMP, 7 July).
Ironically, Dodwell appears oblivious to his own bias.

He quotes Daniel Kahneman "We can be blind to the obvious, and we are also blind to our blindness." And so it is that Dodwell is blind to his own blindness.
Consider the media he quotes: The Financial Times, the Washington Post, the Scientific American. Each is left of centre and each avowedly anti-Trump. Nothing from the conservative side. That's bias, right there. In all major democracies the split between Left and Right is around 50:50. By ignoring conservative media Dodwell ignores half of these electorates. Surely this biases his own comments on bias. Or is it only Hillary's "deplorables" who are "blind to their own blindness"?
Dodwell claims "The howler from the "Leave" campaigners in the UK's Brexit campaign that Britain sent the EU £350 million (US$409 million) a week ... was manifestly false." [my emphasis]
But it was not manifestly false. The UK Treasury reports that £17 billion year is sent to the EU, about £327 million each week. This makes the Brexiteers' figure of £350 million a rounding up rather than a "manifest" lie.
Dodwell calls Trump's policies "venal". Really? When writing about bias you use a word like "venal"? Trump made his policy intentions clear in the election campaign and is now in the process of implementing them. It seems the Left hates that Trump is implementing his stated policies. [Even the New York Times admits Trump won against ISIS]
To be clear, I'm no Trump supporter and never was. I would have voted Hillary, if I were American. But I'm tired of Trump Derangement Syndrome, as manifested by Dodwell.
Moreover, Dodwell is late to the "Trump as master manipulator" trope. Scott Adams (of Dilbert fame) identified it way back in 2011 and predicted Trump's victory early 2016, precisely because of Trump's manipulation skills.
Dodwell would do well to heed Matthew 7:5 :

First remove the beam out of your own eye,
and then you can see clearly to remove the speck out of your brother's eye.

Homicide, Happiness and Equality

For a counter argument to my discussion below, see Equality Trust.
I don't buy their line, because the stats I've looked at don't support it 

A few days ago someone on BBC radio claimed that there's an inverse relationship between Homicide rates and Equality in any given society. The more Equality, the lower the Homicide rate. The BBC did not challenge this assertion.
But it reminded me that I'd heard something similar about "Happiness" some time ago. "Studies showed", we were told, that the more Equality in society the greater the Happiness in that society.
Sounds right, right?  Well, no; it's not so right. At least according to me...
I did my own study of that proposition a while back and found it wanting.
These days, with the wonder of Mr Google and Excel spreadsheets, one can do one's own fact-checking of such studies. Rough and ready perhaps, but studies which purport to show a correlation ought to be borne out by readily available and authoritative statistics.
In both these cases, Happiness and Homicide as functions of Equality, that's not the case.  At least according to the stats I found....

Is there a relationship between Happiness and Equality?  

NO, not really.

Here is the PDF of my own results.
The Correlation between "Happiness" and "Equality" is 0.419, which is "not significant", but "weak" to "moderate".
The "coefficient of determination" -- the percent of the variation in Happiness that can be explained by variation in Equality -- is 17.5%.  So equality determines happiness a bit, but not much.  Money really doesn't buy happiness.
Sources:
For "Happiness" -- a pretty slippery concept -- I use as a proxy the Legatum index, which considers a range of factors to come up with an overall "happiness" score per country: economic performance; entrepreneurship & opportunity; governance; education; health; security; personal freedom; and social capital.  One might argue these don't comprise, or necessarily make for, "Happiness", but I can't find a better proxy and would be happy to hear of suggestions if there is one. Meantime, Legatum seems pretty comprehensive to me.
For "Equality": I use the widely accepted and widely used GINI index. This is an index from 0 (best) to 1 (worst).  Good, ie very equal, countries are around 0.25.  Bad, very unequal countries, are around 0.5 to 0.6.

Is there a relationship between Homicide rates and Equality?

NO, not really.

Here is the PDF of my own results: it's ranked by Happiness. Then correlated to GINI.
The Correlation between Homicide and Equality is 0.532.  A bit more than for Happiness, but still "not significant".
The "coefficient of determination", the percent of the variation in Homicides that can be explained by a variation in Equality is 28.3%.  More than for Happiness, but still not significant.  This makes sense as we know there's been a major drop in homicides, in, for example, the United States in recent decades, while inequality has become (slightly) worse.
Sources:
For" Homicide rates", I use the statistics of the United Nations Global Study on Homicide, collated in Wikipedia.
For "Equality": I use the widely accepted and widely used GINI index. This is an index from 0 (best) to 1 (worst).  Good, ie very equal, countries are around 0.25.  Bad, very unequal countries, are around 0.5 to 0.6.

Something else about GINI (the equality index)

A couple of things come out of the GINI figures (PDF which is sorted by GINI, best to worst):
Overall, equality worldwide has improved slightly in the recent decades (that's the "Previous" column in the PDF).
That corresponds to Stephen Pinker's observation (and YouTube) that country-vs-country equality (wealth and income) around the globe has improved. That is, poorer countries have become richer, in income and wealth more quickly than rich countries have become richer.
Indeed if you look at the "top 50" and "bottom 50" (in my PDF) you see that the top (ie the most equal) countries have become very slightly less equal, while the bottom 50 (the least equal) have become more equal.

So, there we have it: Equality (or lack thereof) doesn't seem to have (much of) a direct impact on either Homicide rates or Happiness, despite what those (mainly on the Left) would have one believe.
AND... equality overall has improved in the world, despite what those (mainly on the Left) would have you believe.
The Left doesn't like this, because it pulls the rug from under one of its main tenets: we must have more equality, no matter what the costs. And the costs of that shibboleth can be high: witness every country from Albania to Venezuela which has tried out socialism, the main route to equality, or so Marxists think.

Final disclaimer: I wouldn't want my comments to be seen as suggesting that there's something wrong with Equality or striving for Equality. I mean, it's a good thing if a society can be more equal in income and wealth.  But being obsessed with it doesn't do us any good in working out how to improve our lives (Happiness) or how to avoid its downsides (Murder).
There are other factors at work here that make us happier or make us kill people less.  Capitalism and freedom, perhaps?
I'm all for Equality, and the figures do show that there is "some" correlation between it and the Happiness/Homicides.  So, for sure, let's strive for it.  But let's not be obsessed by it.  Especially not if it involves socialist redistribution, because I've lived in such a society (China of the seventies) and there's no way it was either happy or safe.

Trump’s War on the WTO - WSJ

Now, I've seen with mine own eyes the benefits of WTO and GATT before it. To claim, as Trump does, that WTO has been "a disaster" for the US, is complete, absolute and dangerous nonsense.

What Trump Doesn’t Get About Conservatism| Roger Scruton| The New York Times

I think you'll find this article in the New York Times interesting. 

Headline aside, Roger Scruton does acknowledge that there are some things Trump does get. 

And then some he doesn't. 

Like trade. It's not zero-sum ($US500 billion deficit with China is not a "loss"to America), protectionism is not "good", as Trump claims, and trade wars are not "easy to win". Free trade used to be a key Republican plank. 

Pulling out of TPP remains, in my view, a major strategic mistake by Trump and if he goes after WTO, heaven help us....

Specifically, quoting Adam Smith, Scruton notes:

In another of conservatism's founding documents, "The Wealth of Nations," Adam Smith argued that trade barriers and protections offered to dying industries will not, in the long run, serve the interests of the people. On the contrary, they will lead to an ossified economy that will splinter in the face of competition. President Trump seems not to have grasped this point. His protectionist policies resemble those of postwar socialist governments in Europe, which insulated dysfunctional industries from competition and led not merely to economic stagnation but also to a kind of cultural pessimism that surely goes entirely against the American grain.

From Singapore to the US, overseas Chinese are increasingly fearful of criticising Beijing. Is this what China wants? | SCMP

But what is more intimidating now is that, even overseas, no matter how far away, you feel you are still being watched. Educators and speakers in the West have been confronted by a growing number of Chinese students over discussions on China-related topics that do not fit China's official narrative.

To avoid upsetting the nationalistic sentiments of some in their Chinese audience, more and more foreign schools, publishers and commercial companies are choosing to self-censor.  

From South China Morning Post. 

Will New York’s Mayor Erase Real Diversity? - WSJ

A good article in the Wall Street Journal on Bill De Blasio's inane moves to lower academic standards at some elite public schools in New York. 

Fareed Zakaria's also did a great take on the meritocracy for CNN. Now on YouTube (above). Zakaria being for the meritocracy, unlike many on the Left who see it as a path for white supremacism. 

You Graduated Cum Laude? So Did Everyone Else - WSJ

Grade inflation in the US, in this article from the WSJ.

Anti-Islam statements should disqualify Trump’s pick for U.N. migration post - The Washington Post

Quote, from The Washington Post: [this colour/indented, from Wapo.  My comments black]

Ken Isaacs, has an unfortunate record of bigoted statements against Islam.

Really?  Let's see

HARDTALK with Ben Rhodes

LETTER TO BBC:
1.  Rhodes has admitted to manipulation of the press and the public in getting the Iran nuclear deal through.

2.  He claims Trump supporters are all racists (!), mainly from the US South.  But many were from the North and had been Obama voters.

And no questions to him about these views of his??

What sort of “Hardtalk” is that??

Pf / HK

From China trade to North Korea and immigration, Trump’s poker player diplomacy leaves the US with many aces up its sleeve | South China Morning Post

I'm sure you'll like this, in the South China Morning Post. Chugani is usually somewhat to the left and a bit anti American. So this take is surprising. 

Comments interesting. Mostly anti Chugani's view, but mostly ad. hominem. 

By the way I'm not sure I buy Scott's take on NOK that it's all just part of negotiations. Maybe just more of the same old same old. 

And Bolton appears in cloud cuckoo land...

Confession of An Anti-GMO Activist - The Wall Street Journal - Blendle

I know these arguments well because, in those early years of GMO development, I was also an outspoken activist against the new technology. Along with greenminded British colleagues, I trespassed to destroy test fields of GMO crops, lobbied to have foods containing genetically modified ingredients banned in supermarkets, helped to organize the world's first campaign targeting Monsanto, and even participated in an unsuccessful attempt to steal the world's first cloned farm animal, Dolly the Sheep.

I have since reversed my views on GMOs, as the evidence debunking almost all of these claims has accumulated over the years, but there's no denying the remarkable world-wide success of our campaign. Numerous countries, from Peru to Russia, now entirely ban genetically modified crops from being cultivated. Only one GMO food crop, an insect-resistant corn, has ever been approved for use in Europe, and most European countries ban it anyway.

China and Trump’s Tariffis: Stop, or I’ll Shoot Myself Too

Tom Holland is a spot-on commenter on regional issues, especially China.
In this article he shows how difficult it will be for China to retaliate to the Trump tariffs without also hurting itself.
Good corrrective to all those simply reporting that China will go tit-for-tat.
I noted the other day that one of the ways China is thinking of retaliating is restricting Chinese tourists and students going to America. That's only going to hurt -- maybe infuriate -- individual Chinese.
/Snip:

When last week US President Donald Trump threatened to slap tariffs on an additional US$200 billion of imports from China, on top of the US$50 billion already targeted, the Chinese government immediately promised to retaliate in full proportion. The trouble is that retaliating will be a lot more difficult and painful than Beijing’s counter-threats make it sound.
So far, responding to the US trade actions hasn’t been a great problem. The first round of US tariffs targeted specifically at China is due to go into effect on July 6. On that day, the US will begin to levy a 25 per cent tariff on 818 imports from China, worth US$34 billion annually. When it does, Beijing will immediately impose equivalent tariffs on US$34 billion of goods imported from the US.
And when the US follows up with tariffs on another US$16 billion of imports from China, Beijing will again respond in kind.

If link doesn't work, a pdf file here. 

City not county: : a lesson in Pinyin

[This is not a letter TO the editor. It's for the information of your sub-editors and headline writers].

The city = Xi'an. 西安

A county = Xian. 縣

The apostrophe is important as it shows the word is to be read as two characters (西安) and not one character (縣). 

This  relates to a recent headline I saw in the Post which mistakenly was "Xian" when it should have been Xi'an. 

From your pedantic reader....

Pf

Lawsuit by young immigrants detained in Virginia centre alleges abuse by guards | South China Morning Post

Does this look like a cage or a nice suburban house?

LETTER TO SCMP:

This story does good service in reporting the abuse of young illegal immigrants in US detention centres.

However it is misleading.  The clear impression is that the abuse is carried out under Trump's watch.* They were not.

Careful reading reveals that all these abuses began under Obama's watch. (one has to read it carefully, for this fact is hidden, presumably wilfully by AP).

I'm no fan of Trump, but it's this sort of dissimulation that supports his claims of "fake news".

Your editors really ought to be more diligent and neutral.

PF

* e. g., paras 8 and 9:

"Many of the teenagers were sent to the Shenandoah facility after US immigration authorities accused them of belonging to violent gangs, including MS-13.[arrests under Obama administration].
"President Donald Trump has repeatedly cited gang activity as justification for his crackdown on illegal immigration."

Isn't that a clear implication that it's Trump that's imprisoned them in Shenandoah, having (falsely?) accused them of gang membership?  Where’s they were all arrested and detained by Obama. 

Kim Jong-Un's Singapore Summit: North Korea Wins | National Review

I'm making no predictions about Korea, just flagging interesting articles, like this one.  Noone, least of all me, has a good record at predicting what's what on the peninsula.

One thing I'd add, based on personal experience: that they, the North lie, lie and lie again. That was our experience when we did coking coal deals with them in the 80s.  Every official, every trader, every single one, lied at some stage.  If we'd believed some of what they told us, we'd have been bankrupted.  I don't think that's changed.

The only hope we have is that Kim aspires to be a Korean X.P. Deng….

Cheers

P

A reply to my critics: Don’t fight racism with racism

I remember that Lionel Shriver was attacked by the Aussie Muslim activist Yassmin Abdul-Magied at the 2016 Brisbane writers festival, for the nonsense crime of "cultural appropriation".
I remember that Shriver gave a dashing and effective rebuttal to that attack from the luny Left.

As she does here, in response to an article attacking her for having her own thoughts.

Viva la difference and viva non-racism. 

European chamber warns China may lose appeal for investors if it doesn’t act | South China Morning Post

Back in the 80s I was a China consultant working for Australian companies wanting to do business in China. Many were trying to establish joint ventures in the People's Republic. One case I was in charge of was trying to do the opposite. It was IXL Ltd from Melbourne and it was trying to get out of an agricultural joint venture it had got into in Yunnan province and which it had decided was a mistake.

The joint venture agreement had a clause dealing with what happens when one partner wants to leave. But the Chinese sides first impulse was to tell us to take a hike. We made the point that they should not do this as it would impact badly on China's reputation. End of the day that worked and we got some money to get out. 

Just a few years later, let alone thirty plus years later, that approach would not work. The desperation of international companies not to miss out on the "world's largest market"that they didn't give two hoots about an argument about China's reputation. 

An old Aussie mate of mine has been working in China for over thirty years. Also dealing mainly with Australian companies wanting to do business in China. Every now and then I ask him how business is. And every time the answer is "worse". Chinese partners more arrogant, more self-interested, more screw you jack, if you want to do business with us you do it our way or it's the highway for you. 

For that reason, I agree with the get-tough-on-China policy. I don't agree with the way Trump is going about it, but going about it is the correct and necessary move. And as Mao Tse-Tung said, you have to break some eggs to make an omelette. 

All those talking about who will hurt most or benefit most miss the main point. China is in the wrong. It's a serial offender, a serial cheat. Complaining to the WTO has failed. It's time to get tough, even if that involves hurt all around. And phooey to those who suggest that China is somehow right in retaliating (though of course it must be expected in the context of a negotiation). 

Here the European Chamber of Commerce in China makes the case..

Another long-standing concern of many foreign companies operating in China is forced technology transfers. The chamber said 19 per cent of the companies surveyed – in sectors such as aviation, cars, chemicals and engineering – felt compelled to transfer technology.

Meanwhile, 43 per cent said they had found it more difficult getting access to the sectors listed under the Made in China 2025 policy, although access had improved for larger European firms, particularly in cars and machinery.

Companies surveyed identified the top regulatory obstacles as unfavourable treatment in dealing with administrative issues, discrimination in enforcement of rules, market access barriers and licensing requirements. Legal services, pharmaceutical and medical devices were among the sectors that reported the most cases of unfair treatment.

What Trump Gets Right About Europe | New York Times

The president's anger, however crude, gets at a core problem with the Western alliance.
From the New York Times:

HAMBURG, Germany — Most people can agree that international affairs should not be conducted by tweet — especially when the tweeter in question is Donald Trump. Among other reasons, it's easy to dismiss the president's mercurial rage and flagrant insults as little more than temper tantrums.

But that's a mistake. Mr. Trump's anger at America's allies embodies, however unpleasantly, a not unreasonable point of view, and one that the rest of the world ignores at its peril: The global world order is unbalanced and inequitable. And unless something is done to correct it soon, it will collapse, with or without the president's tweets.

While the West happily built the liberal order over the past 70 years, with Europe at its center, the Americans had the continent's back. In turn, as it unravels, America feels this loss of balance the hardest — it has always spent the most money and manpower to keep the system working.

The Europeans have basically been free riders on the voyage, spending almost nothing on defense, and instead building vast social welfare systems at home and robust, well-protected export industries abroad. Rather than lash back at Mr. Trump, they would do better to ask how we got to this place, and how to get out.

Gee, Chinese folk are going to *love* this....

....bit of retaliation that their government will take against America's increased tariffs on imports from China.
Namely: the Chinese government says it could restrict America's service exports to China. And what are these?
Two big ones are Chinese tourists to the US and Chinese students to US colleges.
Imagine who that's going to hurt worse!!

Why so much Western disdain for the Trump-Kim summit’s successes in Singapore? | South China Morning Post

Tom Plate says positive outcomes for North Korea and China in the 'Peninsula Cup' don't make the US and South Korea losers, and the Western media's reaction betrays a cold-war world view that is out of step with the geopolitical reality.

Good observations from the reliable professor Tom Plate...

Immigrant overload, not Brexit, heralds the end of the European Union | South China Morning Post

This is a disturbing analysis and dire prediction from professor Niall Ferguson, a man of the Left. A liberal, not some knuckle dragging xenophobic far rightist.

Highlighting a couple of points:

1. The clash between Islam's norms and those of mostly secular Christian Europe, especially on the rights of women. "... making assimilation difficult".  
2. You can't have both open borders and welfare states. You can have one of the other.  The welfare state requires people to contribute to the system, with more people contributing over time than taking out. By definition, recent arrivals have not contributed to the system. And so more is taken out of the welfare state than is going in. Result: bankruptcy. 
3. Mad Mutti Merkel. She believes that Europe cannot survive without free movement of people. In that she's wrong. I've lived in Europe when it had free movement of goods but borders for people. It was fine. Merkel has done more to destroy modern Europe than anyone since her infamous moustachioed countryman.

Italy won no ‘victory’ in turning away desperate migrants | South China Morning Post

LETTER TO SCMP:
[LATER: PUBLISHED ON 19th JUNE]

A couple of points virtually ignored in reporting on the 630 "migrants" recently arrived in Spain. (Italy won no victory in turning away desperate migrants. 17 June)

1.  They were rescued close to the coast of Libya. They were barely out of sight of the coast before the NGO ship "Aquarius" was on hand to pick them up. We know from ex-crew members of similar NGO ships that they are in regular contact with the North African traffickers who have pushed off their "clients" in unseaworthy craft. In doing so the NGOs are participating in human trafficking, pure and simple. They were called out on this years ago, they committed to stop doing so, but are back at it again. 

These illegal acts by NGOs, as well-meaning as they may be, only serve to encourage ever more illegal migration. 

2. No one — no government or NGO — is calling these 630 migrants "refugees". They are labelled "migrants", and sometimes termed, more precisely and more correctly, "illegal migrants" or "undocumented migrants". 

They are not, however, refugees. 

In paying human traffickers to cross the Mediterranean, these "migrants" are trying to jump the queue of other would-be migrants to Europe. There are laws on migration to Europe. These laws can either be enforced or simply done away with. If abrogated, we must ask: is Europe to be the destination of every poor person in the world?  Maybe so, but only when that's been agreed by the existing population in Europe, the resident population whose human rights must also be protected. Such abrogation must not be done as the unilateral decision by NGOs no matter how well-meaning and self-righteous. 

Pf

Why row over Chinese characters when simplified to traditional is one easy step | SCMP

The comments divided over my letter.
Re the one saying that characters are pictograms: sure. I do know that. And learning simplified doesn't do away with learning that.
I also learnt calligraphy and doing so one learns and appreciates the history of characters and also learns cursive.
One asks how can simplified “hou" 后 be cursive of the non-simplified 後. Well, I didn't say all simplified characters were based on cursive just that most were.
Also and by the way I do understand that there's a "cultural" aspect to the issue, more properly a "political" one in that some Hongkongers think it's communist hegemony to have simplified characters.

Exiled in the U.S., a Lawyer Warns of ‘China’s Long Arm’ - The New York Times

Australia is getting into a spat with China affecting our exports exactly because of this issue. Australia has called out the Chinese government's efforts to stifle criticisms in Australia of China's  policies, especially by ethnic Chinese and Chinese-Australians. 

There's no doubt this is going in. There's simply too much evidence, including officially out of our government. 

But taking China on is like taking on the schoolyard bully: freighted with danger. 

Just yesterday there was an article (WSJ IIRC), on how Australian wine exports to China are being impacted because Australia has dared to call out the malign influence of China's communist government on Australians. 

NOK. Trump and Kim In Singapore

My own sense of the outcome of Singapore is that only one thing changed: namely that a US president met with a NOK Chairman.
Everything else — the one-page LOI and ... and ...and ... (actually I can't think of anything more) — is *less* than has been achieved before.
Yet Trump seems to think it's a fine deal ("you can sleep easy tonight"). It's not. Arguably we're backward in that China will feel enabled to ease its own sanctions on NOK even if the rest of the world doesn't.
The only thing that would change this is if NOK does indeed denuclearise. Pompeo has give himself till 2020 to do get that done.
I hope he does and I hope I'm wrong. World peace aside I'd like to see the Left wriggle in discomfort, as they've been sneeringly subject to major TDS so far.
EG: they take seriously T's comment that "I want my people to do the same" (sit up straight when he talks, like Kim's subjects). This was so clearly a joke that one wonders at their sanity...
And the Left's dismissal of "that" video. Wrong. It was a good idea implemented well. Recall that Kim is a film buff like his father. Kim can't unsee it. Could he be NOK's Deng Xiaoping? I doubt it but hope so.

Islam's Oldest University Says ISIS Are Not Heretics to Islam | Daily Wire

Jesus and Mo

There are plenty of knowledgeable observers who confirm that the likes of ISIS are indeed Islamic. But there are also plenty of Islam apologists, especially on the Left, who claim they have "nothing to do with Islam", that they have "hijacked the religion of peace" and so on.

Now we have Al-Azhar university in Cairo affirming that ISIS are indeed Islamic. Al-Azhat is the oldest and most authoritative university in the Islamic world. It's pronouncement (a fatwa) should be the last word on the subject. Murderers who shout "Allahu Akbar" as they go about their bloody business are genuine Muslims.


Or is Al-Azhar islamophobic?  Kidding. So what does a Leftie do? 

Ignore it I suppose.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/2161/islams-oldest-university-says-isis-are-not-james-barrett