Israel slams UNESCO's plan to declare Temple Mount 'Muslim' - Shlomo Cesana

by Shlomo Cesana

U.N. body's 21-member World Heritage Committee seeks to pass a resolution declaring holy Jerusalem site sacred to "Muslims only" as part of calls for a return to the "historic status quo" • Israel expresses concern over EU's backing of the move.

Israel on Thursday was outraged to learn that the U.N.'s heritage body was planning to adopt a resolution declaring the Temple Mount sacred to "Muslims only."

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization's 21-member World Heritage Committee is set to vote on the resolution, a joint Palestinian-Jordanian initiative, during its annual meeting in Istanbul, which began on Sunday and runs through next week. The resolution calls for a return to the "historic status quo" on the Temple Mount, which it sees as favoring Muslims.

In June, UNESCO adopted a resolution deciding to refer to the holy Jerusalem site only by its Muslim name -- Al-Aqsa mosque -- in all official documents. The current resolution is far more radical, and to Israel's surprise, it has received the EU's blessing.

Political sourced told Israel Hayom that Brussels' decision to back the move most likely stems from the ongoing crisis between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and the EU, which seems to be escalating into an actual rift.

"Israel is very concerned by the EU intent to propose a resolution negating the Jewish people's link to the Temple Mount. This would be an alternative proposal to the Palestinian draft currently being discussed by UNESCO's World Heritage Committee during its meeting in Istanbul," the Foreign Ministry said in a statement.

"The EU's proposal continues to deny the Jewish people's historic ties to Temple Mount, despite France's apology in April, admitting it was wrong to support UNESCO's decision to address the Temple Mount only as Al-Aqsa mosque."

Israeli Envoy to UNESCO Carmel Shama-Hacohen said, "It appears UNESCO seeks to Islamize the holy places in the Old City of Jerusalem. Instead of saying mea culpa over its April resolution to refer to the site only as 'Al-Aqsa mosque,' UNESCO has decided to add insult to injury and exacerbate this outrageous situation."

Shlomo Cesana

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=34981

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Muslims Celebrate Bastille Day: 80 Dead, 68 Injured - Robert Spencer

by Robert Spencer

“The worst tragedy in the history of Nice” – but many more are to come.

The truck was loaded with explosives and hand grenades as it plowed into a crowd celebrating Bastille Day in Nice, France, Thursday night. It was no accident: Nice authorities emphasized that it was a terror attack, which was fairly clear already from the fact that the driver exchanged gunfire with police after he rammed into the crowd.

At least eighty people are dead and 68 wounded, and Nice Mayor Christian Estrosi calls it “the worst tragedy in the history of Nice.” But given the harsh realities of the contemporary world, it probably won’t be the worst for long.

Jihadis have had their eyes on France for quite some time. The Islamic State issued this call in September 2014:

So O muwahhid, do not let this battle pass you by wherever you may be. You must strike the soldiers, patrons, and troops of the tawaghit. Strike their police, security, and intelligence members, as well as their treacherous agents. Destroy their beds. Embitter their lives for them and busy them with themselves. If you can kill a disbelieving American or European — especially the spiteful and filthy French — or an Australian, or a Canadian, or any other disbeliever from the disbelievers waging war, including the citizens of the countries that entered into a coalition against the Islamic State, then rely upon Allah, and kill him in any manner or way however it may be….If you are not able to find an IED or a bullet, then single out the disbelieving American, Frenchman, or any of their allies. Smash his head with a rock, or slaughter him with a knife, or run him over with your car, or throw him down from a high place, or choke him, or poison him….

Yes, “run him over with your car.”

Then again from the Islamic State in May 2016:

“The French must die by the thousands…. Towards paradise, that is the path….Come, brother, let’s go to paradise, our women are waiting for us there, with angels as servants. You will have a palace, a winged horse of gold and rubies….With a little rocket-launcher, you can easily get one of them… you do something like that in the name of Dawla (Islamic State), and France will be traumatised for a century.”

The French are already traumatized. The BBC reported last week that “more than 5,000 French police will be deployed at key venues in and around Paris ahead of the Euro 2016 football final between France and Portugal,” and that “there will be no victory parade if France win.” Why not? For fear of jihad terror attacks.

The Bastille Day jihad massacre demonstrates that the answer to jihad attacks is not to curtail one’s activities and cower in fear. Even if free people do that, the jihadis will strike anyway. Even without a victory parade, the jihadis struck yet again in France. The response should not be to cower in fear, but to recognize that this is a war and act accordingly. France has just suffered a fresh attack in a war that is being fought by people in service of an ideology that France, like other Western countries, refuses to acknowledge even exists.
France, even as it is under serious attack by the warriors of jihad, continues to pursue policies that will only result in the arrival of still more Muslims to France – and with them will come jihad terrorists, and many, many more jihad massacres like the one on Bastille Day in Nice. French curtailing their activities for fear of being struck by jihadis did not save them. The Bastille Day jihad attack should be the last to take place under the regime of politically correct fantasy that forces law enforcement and intelligence officials to pretend that the threat is other than what it is, and that the remedy is to apply, one more time, policies that have failed again and again and again.

Bastille Day should be a day for the releasing of prisoners. In the war against the global jihad, the truth has been prisoner for too long. It is time to set it free – before it, too, becomes irrevocably a casualty of this war against an enemy no one dares name.

“On behalf of the American people, I condemn in the strongest terms what appears to be a horrific terrorist attack in Nice, France, which killed and wounded dozens of innocent civilians,” Obama said.

Question: did Franklin Delano Roosevelt, on behalf of the American people, condemn in the strongest terms every German and Japanese strike during World War II? Did he add that the U.S. administration was in touch with Hawaiian or Polish or French or Midway etc. officials and was ready to offer any assistance in the investigation?

The answer is no, because there was no need to offer such condemnations. The world was at war, and the world knew it was at war. The fact was obvious, as was which side each combatant was on. Nor was there any need for an investigation after each battle. Everyone knew what was going on, and why.

The reason why Obama offers these condemnations now after each jihad massacre is because he treats each as if it were an isolated incident, not as if it were one more battle in a long war. And he offers help in an investigation for the same reason: if U.S. officials do end up helping the French with an investigation of this latest jihad massacre, they will like come back with a characteristically Obamoid conclusion: they're unable to determine the motive of the perpetrator.

In reality, there is no need for an investigation, because the jihadi’s motive is obvious. There needs to be an admission that we are in a full-scale war -- not just lip-service as French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve offers, but a genuine acknowledgment, followed by a genuine war footing, and an end to the weepy memorials, empty condemnations, and po-faced get-nowhere investigations. This is not crime. This is war.

Robert Spencer

Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/263520/muslims-celebrate-bastille-day-80-dead-68-injured-robert-spencer

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

France: The Coming Civil War - Yves Mamou

by Yves Mamou

So confronted with this failure of our elite who were elected to guide the country across nationals and internationals dangers, how astonishing is it if paramilitary groups are organizing themselves to retaliate?

• For French President François Hollande, the enemy is an abstraction: "terrorism" or "fanatics".
• Instead, the French president reaffirms his determination to military actions abroad: "We are going to reinforce our actions in Syria and Iraq," the president said after the Nice attack.
• In France, the global elites made a choice. They decided that the "bad" voters in France were unreasonable people too stupid to see the beauties of a society open to people who often who do not want to assimilate, who want you to assimilate to them, and who threaten to kill you if you do not. The elite took the side against their own old and poor because those people did not want to vote for them any longer. They also made a choice not to fight Islamism because Muslims vote collectively for this global elite.

"We are on the verge of a civil war." That quote did not come from a fanatic or a lunatic. No, it came from head of France's homeland security, the DGSI (Direction générale de la sécurité intérieure), Patrick Calvar. He has, in fact, spoken of the risk of a civil war many times. On July 12^th, he warned a commission of members of parliament, in charge of a survey about the terrorist attacks of 2015, about it.

French police shoot dead a Tunisian-born Islamist terrorist who murdered 84 people in Nice, France, July 14, 2016. (Image source: Sky News video screenshot)

In May 2016, he delivered almost the same message to another commission of members of parliament, this time in charge of national defense. "Europe," he said, "is in danger. Extremism is on the rise everywhere, and we are now turning our attention to some far-right movements who are preparing a confrontation".

What kind of confrontation? "Intercommunity confrontations," he said -- polite for "a war against Muslims." "One or two more terrorist attacks," he added, "and we may well see a civil war."

In February 2016, in front of a senate commission in charge of intelligence information, he said again: " We are looking now at far-right extremists who are just waiting for more terrorist attacks to engage in violent confrontation".

No one knows if the truck terrorist, who plowed into the July 14^th Bastille Day crowd in Nice and killed more than 80 people, will be the trigger for a French civil war, but it might help to look at what creates the risk of one in France and other countries, such as Germany or Sweden.

The main reason is the failure of the state.

1. France is at War but the Enemy is Never Named.

France is the main target of repeated Islamist attacks; the more important Islamist terrorist bloodbaths took place at the magazine Charlie Hebdo and the Hypercacher supermarket of Vincennes (2015); the Bataclan Theater, its nearby restaurants and the Stade de France stadium, (2015); the failed attack on the Thalys train; the beheading of Hervé Cornara (2015); the assassination of two policemen in Magnanville in June (2016), and now the truck-ramming in Nice, on the day commemorating the French Revolution of 1789.

Most of those attacks were committed by French Muslims: citizens on their way back from Syria (the Kouachi brothers at Charlie Hebdo), or by French Islamists (Larossi Abballa who killed a police family in Magnanville last June) who later claimed their allegiance to Islamic State (ISIS). The truck killer in Nice was Tunisian but married to a French woman, whith whom he had three children together, and lived quietly in Nice until he decided to murder more than 80 people and wound dozens more.

After each of these tragic episodes President François Hollande refused to name the enemy, refused to name Islamism -- and especially refused to name French Islamists -- as the enemy of French citizens.

For Hollande, the enemy is an abstraction: "terrorism" or "fanatics". Even when the president does dare to name "Islamism" the enemy, he refuses to say he will close all Salafist mosques, prohibit the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafist organizations in France, or ban veils for women in the street and at university. No, instead, the French president reaffirms his determination for military actions abroad: "We are going to reinforce our actions in Syria and Iraq," the president said after the Nice attack.

For France's president, the deployment of soldiers in the homeland is for defensive actions only: a deterrent policy, not an offensive rearmament of the Republic against an internal enemy.

So confronted with this failure by our elite -- who were elected to guide the country through national and international dangers -- how astonishing is it if paramilitary groups are organizing themselves to retaliate?
As Mathieu Bock-Côté, a sociologist in France and Canada, says in Le Figaro:

"Western elites, with a suicidal obstinacy, oppose naming the enemy. Confronted by attacks in Brussels or Paris, they prefer to imagine a philosophical fight between democracy and terrorism, between an open society and fanaticism, between civilization and barbarism".

2. The Civil War Has Already Begun and Nobody Wants to Name It.

The civil war began sixteen years ago, with the second Intifada. When Palestinians invented suicide attacks in Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, French Muslims began to terrorize Jews living peacefully in France. For sixteen years, Jews -- in France --were slaughtered, attacked, tortured and stabbed by French Muslim citizens supposedly to avenge Palestinian people in the West Bank.

When a group of French citizens who are Muslims declares war on another group of French citizens who are Jews, what do you call it?

For the French establishment, it is not a civil war, just a regrettable misunderstanding between two "ethnic" communities.

Until now, no one has wanted to establish a connection between these attacks and the murderous attack in Nice against people who were not necessarily Jews -- and name it as it should be named: a civil war.

For the very politically correct French establishment, the danger of a civil war will begin only if anyone retaliates against French Muslims; if everyone just submits to their demands, everything is all right. Until now, no one thinks that the terrorist attacks against Jews by French Muslims; against Charlie Hebdo's journalists by French Muslims; against an entrepreneur who was beheaded a year ago by a French Muslim; against young Ilan Halimi by a group of Muslims; against schoolchildren in Toulouse by a French Muslim; against the passengers on the Thalys train by a French Muslim, against the innocent people in Nice by an almost French Muslim were the symptoms of a civil war. These bloodbaths remain, still today something like a climatic catastrophe, a kind of tragic misunderstanding.

3. The French Establishment Considers the Enemy the Poor the Old and the Disappointed

In France, who most complains about Muslim immigration? Who most suffers from local Islamism? Who most likes to drink a glass of wine or eat a ham-and-butter sandwich? The poor and the old who live close to Muslim communities, because they do not have the money to move someplace else.

Today, as a result, millions of the poor and the old in France are ready to elect Marine Le Pen, president of the rightist Front National, as the next president of the Republic for the simple reason that the only party that wants to fight illegal immigration is the Front National.

Because, however, these French old and poor want to vote for the Front National, they have become the enemy of the French establishment, right and left. What is the Front National saying to these people? "We are going to restore France as a nation of French people". And the poor and the old believe it – because they have no choice.

Similarly, the poor and the old in Britain had no choice but to vote for Brexit. They took the first tool given them to express their disappointment at living in a society they did not like anymore. They did not vote to say, "Kill these Muslims who are transforming my country, stealing my job and soaking up my taxes". They were just protesting a society that a global elite had begun to transform without their consent.

In France, the global elites made a choice. They decided that the "bad" voters in France were unreasonable people too stupid, too racists to see the beauties of a society open to people who often who do not want to assimilate, who want you to assimilate to them, and who threaten to kill you if you do not.

The global elites made another choice: they took the side against their own old and poor because those people did not want to vote for them any longer. The global elites also chose not to fight Islamism, because Muslims vote globally for the global elite. Muslims in Europe also offer a big "carrot" to the global elite: they vote collectively.

In France, 93% of Muslims voted for the current president, François Hollande, in 2012. In Sweden, the Social Democrats reported that 75% of Swedish Muslims voted for them in the general election of 2006; and studies show that the "red-green" bloc gets 80-90% of the Muslim vote.

4. Is the Civil War Inevitable? Yes!

If the establishment does not want to see that civil war was already declared by extremist Muslims first -- if they do not want to see that the enemy is not the Front National in France, the AfD in Germany, or the Sweden Democrats -- but Islamism in France, in Belgium, in Great Britain, in Sweden -- then a civil war will happen.

France, like Germany and Sweden, has a military and police strong enough to fight against an internal Islamist enemy. But first, they have to name it and take measures against it. If they do not -- if they leave their native citizens in despair, with no other means than to arm themselves and retaliate – yes, civil war is inevitable.

Yves Mamou, based in France, worked for two decades as a journalist for Le Monde.

Source: http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8489/france-the-coming-civil-war

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Why the coup in Turkey failed and what comes next - Rick Moran

by Rick Moran

Erdoğan is likely to accelerate his plans to change the constitution from a parliamentary based government to a presidential one.  He will accumulate even more power and speed up his plan to make Islam the dominant force in government and culture

Nearly 200 people were killed in the failed coup attempt in Turkey yesterday, with hundreds wounded and nearly 3,000 military personnel arrested.  President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan has promised "retribution" against the coup participants who apparently never numbered more than a few thousand.

As bloody as the coup attempt was, the chances of success were slim.  The plotters gambled that once begun, a large part of the Turkish military would either remain on the sidelines or join them.

They lost.

Jerusalem Post:

Erdogan broadcast from his smart phone a statement to the people, tweeted to his supporters and relied on the media, even those whom he deathly hates, to spread his message in the critical first hours of the coup attempt when uncertainty gripped the country.

In this respect, the attempt was reminiscent of the failed coup by the national guard and the Greek military junta in 1974 against the rule of Cyprus President Archbishop Makarios III. Makarios succeeded in sending out a weak radio signal saying that he was alive. Voice of Israel radio monitor Miki Gordus received the signal and broadcast the message to the whole world. As a result of that failed coup, the Turkish army invaded and partitioned Cyprus into two parts.
In the case of Turkey, it seems that those involved - apparently relatively low-ranked officers - would not have succeeded in their operation even if Erdogan would not have been able to deliver his broadcast.
The rebellion initially appeared to be going by the book. The rebels gained control of the bridges over the Bosphorous Strait in Istanbul, which connect Europe and Asia, as well as major junctions. Pilots involved in the plot bombed the parliament building in Ankara, the MIT intelligence agency's headquarters and military forces, including tanks near the presidential palace. They even took control of the Turkish broadcasting authority and forced the newscasters to read their statement that they had taken over the government of the "traitor" Erdogan and were changing the Constitution.
However, it appears that the number of soldiers in their command - only a few thousand - was insufficient to complete the job. 
In Turkey's previous four military coups since 1960, tens of thousands of soldiers took part, if not the entire army. This time, the rebels kidnapped the chief of staff and a number of other senior commanders, who have since been freed, but most importantly they failed to capture Erdogan, who was vacationing at a Marble Lake resort. Capturing the Turkish leader was possibly the first thing they should have done.Erdogan succeeded in broadcasting his remarks to the people, calling on his supporters to take to the streets, and they answered his call. They blocked the rebel soldiers' path and together with the police, which remained loyal to Erdogan, fought them and took many of them prisoner. 

The rebels seized strategic points, temporarily captured key media centers, and surrounded parliament.  But in addition to their failure to grab Erdoğan, the plotters didn't have the manpower to hold their positions from even the police, who remained loyal to the government. 

It's hard to know what was in the minds of the rebel leaders.  In hindsight, the attempted coup looks amatuerish and not very well thought out.  That said, they sure put a scare into Erdoğan's Islamist government.  The coming purge of the military will be bloody, and the dragnet for coup sympathizers will almost certainly sweep up some who are innocent.

The instability comes at the absolute worst time for Turkey as they are beset by Kurdish and Islamic State terrorists while the government takes on a low level insurgency by the Kurds.  The coup attempt won't help Turkey's flagging tourist industry which has been severely damaged by several high profile terrorist attacks.

But it's the political ramifications that will be most significant.  Erdoğan is likely to accelerate his plans to change the constitution from a parliamentary based government to a presidential one.  He will accumulate even more power and speed up his plan to make Islam the dominant force in government and culture.

And with the military now in shambles, there will be no one to stop him.

Rick Moran

Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/07/why_the_coup_in_turkey_failed_and_what_comes_next.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

French government suppressing torture evidence of victims in Paris attacks - Rick Moran

by Rick Moran

Warning: Disturbing and explicit material on the torture of terror victims

French authorities are covering up evidence that many victims of the Paris terrorist attacks at the music hall were brutally tortured to death by the attackers.

The following is not a pleasant read.  Please be warned that the descriptions of torture are graphic.

Daily Caller:

An inquiry conducted by the French National Assembly has revealed that French authorities suppressed eye-witness reports that Islamic State terrorists brutally tortured and mutilated victims at the Bataclan music hall during last November’s attacks in Paris.
ISIS terrorists reportedly gouged out victim’s eyes, castrated men, disemboweled several people, and stabbed women in the genitals, among other horrific crimes.  To make matters worse, investigators told the assembly that they believe the torture and mutilation of bodies was recorded on video to potentially be used in ISIS propaganda videos. In response, French medical staff did not initially release the bodies of those who were tortured to their families. Additionally, the assembly committee in charge of the investigation found that some French authorities intentionally suppressed reports of torture.
The President of the committee, Georges Fenech, read out a letter he received from one of the torture victims for the record.
“On the causes of the death of my son A., at the forensic institute in Paris, I was told, and what a shock it was for me at that moment, they had cut off his testicles, had put them in his mouth, and he was disemboweled,” said the father’s letter. ” I found that he had no right eye. I made the remark; I was informed that they had punctured his eye and  sliced down the right side of his face, where there was a very large hematoma that we could all see.”
After reading the letter, Fenech interrogated Paris chief of police Michele Cadot and other officials  as to why some French authorities were denying the torture allegations despite eye-witness reports.
Cadot said that because police found no “knife or other sharp device” at the scene, that they could not assess the veracity of the claims. Another official claimed that some of the bodies were mutilated at the Bataclan due to explosions.
Fenech pushed authorities on the question, asking if automatic weapons and explosions would have the ability to put a man’s testicles in his own mouth. The authorities responded that they did not have any information on that question.

Yet another indication that Western governments do not trust their citizens with the truth about Islamic terrorism.  There is no reason for the French authorities to withhold this information.  Their excuses for not releasing the full story of what happened during the attacks are incredibly lame. 

It's reminiscent of the U.S. government's efforts to play down the "jumpers" from the World Trade Centers on 9/11.  Dozens of people leapt from the upper stories of the buildings, preferring that death to death by fire and smoke.  But the U.S. government quietly asked the networks to stop showing video depicting the jumpers, ostensibly because they believed that it would be too upsetting.

Stop treating us like cowering children.  There is no earthly reason to spoon-feed the public information about Islamic terrorist attacks.  Wanting to avoid arousing animosity toward Muslims is not a reason; it's an excuse. 

There are political reason to keep the public in the dark about the torture of victims, most notably it will arouse the public to put pressure on government to be more aggressive against ISIS.  The French don't want that, which is why they covered up the savagery of the attackers at the music hall.

Rick Moran

Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/07/french_government_suppressing_torture_evidence_of_victims_in_paris_attacks.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Where is the feminist outcry? - Ruthie Blum

by Ruthie Blum 

These women know that what awaits them is a painful, humiliating and often slow death at the hands of one or more male relatives -- fathers, brothers, uncles, cousins -- with no intervention on the part of their mothers or the Palestinian police

The recently appointed head of Israel's Shin Bet internal security agency gave his first presentation on Tuesday to the Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee of the Knesset. As part of his overview of the country's current situation, Nadav Argaman addressed the role of Arab women in the terror wave against Israelis that began last September.

More specifically, he talked about the way in which Palestinian girls and women are being forced by the norms of their society to become cannon fodder in the "lone-wolf intifada," characterized by stabbings, car-rammings, Molotov cocktail-hurling, pipe-bombing and rock-throwing.

According to Argaman, so far more than 40 girls and women have been wounded, killed or arrested for committing -- or attempting to commit -- terrorist attacks against Israeli soldiers and civilians. These acts are both homicidal and suicidal in nature: geared toward murder, on the one hand, but usually involve or result in self-sacrifice. Indeed, a teenage girl who runs up to a group of IDF soldiers while flailing a knife and shouting "Allahu akbar" knows she is not long for this world. Even those who go after unarmed passersby are aware that they are likely to be shot in the process.

The Shin Bet chief explained that in the vast majority of such cases, the girls or women had more pressing things on their minds than the politics of resistance that their leaders declare will bring about the elimination of the Jewish state, and that their imams say is a Muslim duty.

In fact, Argaman pointed out, most of these women had "shamed" their families in some way -- through what is considered to constitute sexual misconduct. This could include anything from flirting with the wrong boy -- a Christian, perhaps -- to engaging in actual or perceived adultery.

These women know that what awaits them is a painful, humiliating and often slow death at the hands of one or more male relatives -- fathers, brothers, uncles, cousins -- with no intervention on the part of their mothers or the Palestinian police. 

Yes, honor killing is alive and well in the Palestinian Authority, whose leaders traipse around the United Nations in Armani suits to bemoan Israeli injustices.

To "launder" their inevitable end, many Palestinian girls opt to go out with a literal bang and become "martyrs." Some, Argaman said, are encouraged to do so -- even driven to the site of the terrorist attacks they are told to commit -- by their parents. If the girls are put to death for dishonoring their families, the stain remains. If, on the other hand, they are killed in the process of maiming Jews, their parents are guaranteed adulation and a hefty monthly stipend from the coffers of the PA, filled regularly by the United States and Europe. You know, places where women are still yammering about glass ceilings at corporations and harassment by drunken boys on campus trying to cop a feel.

On the very day that Argaman gave his talk, and at the same location, female IDF soldiers were being saluted for their dedicated service through a series of events held in their honor. The main ceremony, called "Women of Valor," included speeches by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein and Supreme Court President Miriam Naor.

"The history of the Jewish people is full of female role models like yourselves," Netanyahu said, lauding the women soldiers and police officers who have risked, and sometimes lost, their lives confronting Palestinian terrorists. "I am thrilled to see the professionalism, determination and ability of female soldiers in the air, land and sea and in every part of the IDF."

As talk of renewing the "peace process" between Israel and the PA is back in the headlines, it is imperative to remember that there is a war going on. And, as George Orwell wrote in 1943, "There is hardly such a thing as a war in which it makes no difference who wins. Nearly always one side stands more or less for progress, the other side more or less for reaction."

There is no greater tool by which to measure which side in this case stands for progress: the one that honors its women, not slaughters them for dishonoring their men. Yet where is the outcry from Western feminists? Directed at Israel, of course.

Ruthie Blum is the managing editor of The Algemeiner.

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=16691

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

VIDEO -- Daniel Pipes: Jihad Awakens Europe - Gatestone

by Gatestone

Daniel Pipes talks about Europe's crossroads

At least 84 people were murdered yesterday in France's third major Islamist terrorist attack in less than a year. In our latest video, Daniel Pipes talks about Europe's crossroads: Will Europeans succumb to Islamization, or will they rise to fight radical Islam and hold onto Western values? How it looks so far...



Don't miss our next video -- subscribe free to the Gatestone Institute YouTube channel!

Gatestone

Source: http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8487/daniel-pipes-jihad-europe-video

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

An Award-Winning Documentary About Islamic Terrorists Becomes Hate Speech - Steven Emerson

by Steven Emerson

All that's changed over the past two decades is the ability of Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) to successfully exert their will on a very sensitive and politically correct media and cultural elite

At what point over the past 20 years did citing statements and literature by Islamic terrorists become banned "hate speech?"

A documentary that I produced in 1994 for PBS concerning civilizational jihad won numerous awards, yet YouTube in recent days removed a video posted by CounterJihad that covered the very same topic in much more limited scope.

Both my film, "Terrorists Among Us: Jihad in America," and CounterJihad's "Killing for a Cause: Sharia Law & Civilizational Jihad" expose the Islamification of the West waged by the Muslim Brotherhood and its front organizations in the U.S. The Brotherhood, born in Egypt in 1928, is the fountainhead of nearly every deadly Islamist organization on the planet today.

I quoted Abdullah Azzam, the Muslim leader most responsible for expanding the jihad into an international holy war, speaking in Brooklyn, N.Y.: "The jihad, the fighting, is obligatory on you wherever you can perform it. And just as when you are in America you must fast – unless you are ill or on a voyage – so, too, must you wage jihad. The word jihad means fighting only, fighting with the sword."

CounterJihad quotes from a Brotherhood governing document: "The (Muslim Brotherhood) must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and 'sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers."

YouTube in its "hate speech" policy explains that it refers "to content that promotes violence or hatred against individuals or groups based on certain attributes, such as: race or ethnic origin, religion, disability, gender, age, veteran status, sexual orientation/gender identity."

Neither project did any such thing.

All that's changed over the past two decades is the ability of Muslim Brotherhood front groups such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) to successfully exert their will on a very sensitive and politically correct media and cultural elite.

YouTube eventually reposted CounterJihad's video, but the exercise is telling.

CAIR and its cohorts -- including the Muslim Public Affairs Council and the Islamic Circle of North America -- spend millions to portray all Muslims as the real victims of every Islamic terrorist massacre against innocent Westerners.

After every Islamist terror attack, they rush to the microphones to blame U.S. foreign policy for inciting the sadistic killers, often before law enforcement confirms anything. They reinforce recruitment propaganda that says the West has engaged in a "war with Islam" and therefore deflect responsibility from the murderers themselves.

Their latest stunt is a report on the contrived term "Islamophobia," which suggests that those who fear Islamic terrorism are racist and behave irrationally toward Muslims.

They have become incredibly effective at inflaming tensions between Muslims and Westerners, who by and large harbor no ill will toward each other.

Their "war on Islam" and claims of Islamophobia distract from the underlying agenda of Islamic terrorists.

They intend to establish a global empire known as a Caliphate governed by Sharia law. They are engaged in a full-scale overt and covert war to cripple every Western ideal that stands in their way.

CAIR sabotages prospects of unification by telling Muslim Americans to not cooperate with law enforcement. They assist in raising money for radical mosques and their fiery imams in the U.S. through their actions. They preach solidarity with their Middle Eastern terrorist overseers.

CAIR's roots are firmly planted in a Hamas-support network in the U.S. created by the Muslim Brotherhood. Every statement it issues includes that asterisk at the end, although one would be hard-pressed to find anyone working in the media brave enough to cite it.

San Bernardino terrorist Syed Rizwan Farook and Orlando gunman Omar Mateen found resonance in the videos of the late al-Qaida ideologue Anwar al-Awlaki, which indoctrinated them with radical Islamist teachings and instructed them to become martyrs. The jihadists behind the carnage in Brussels and Paris were all directed and influenced by ISIS.

Let's stop the nonsense.

By portraying all non-Muslims as enemies, CAIR and its allies fail to educate anyone about the true nature of Islamic terrorism.

If CAIR and its fellow travelers were truly concerned about Muslims in the U.S., they should reject assaults on the values of Western culture and condemn those who exploit Islam as the inspiration for horrific murders.

That's not hate speech. It is a truth that was just as valid 20 years ago as it is today.


Steven Emerson is the Executive Director of the Investigative Project on Terrorism.

Source: http://www.investigativeproject.org/5509/an-award-winning-documentary-about-islamic

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Tantalizing hints of Saudi involvement in 9/11 found in redacted documents - Rick Moran

by Rick Moran

No doubt the Saudis are alarmed that their dirty laundry has been aired for all to see.

The 28 pages redacted from the Joint Congressional Committee report on 9/11 doesn't contain any "bombshells," as almost all the information relating to the Saudi government's potential involvement in the attack had been leaked earlier.

But the hints and whispers of the culpability of the Saudi government are not the whole story.  What emerges from the redacted documents is a picture of U.S. intelligence backing down from fully investigating Saudi links to the attacks as well as possible Saudi intelligence links to Osama bin Laden.

Daily Caller points out the highlights from the documents:

Perhaps most damning, the report found senior al-Qaida operative Abu Zubaida, who was captured in the U.S. in 2002, had phone numbers tied to the same company which managed a Colorado residence of the Saudi ambassador the U.S. Zubaida also had a phone number for a bodyguard at the Saudi Embassy in Washington, D.C.
The finding found the intelligence community did not adequately focus on the Saudi connection to al-Qaida and called this lapse “unacceptable, given the magnitude and immediacy of the potential risk to U.S. National Security.”
“While in the United States, some of the September 11 hijackers were in contact with, and received support or assistance from, individuals who may be connected to the Saudi government,” the report says. The report found two of the 9/11 hijackers, al-Midhar and al-Hazmi, received financial assistance from a man named Omar Al-Bayoumi.
The report found “the FBI received numerous reports from individuals in the Muslim community….alleging that al-Bayoumi may be a Saudi Intelligence officer.” Baymoumi was found to have received a salary from a company connected to the Saudi Ministry of Defense and that “reportedly had ties to Usama bin Laden and Al Qaida.”
Hazmi and Midar also reportedly received support from a man named Osama Bassan. Bassan lived across the street from the hijackers “and made a comment to an FBI asset that he did more than al-Bayoumi for the Hijackers.” Furthermore, “according to a CIA memo Bassan reportedly received funding and possibly a fake passport from Saudi Government officials.”
Beyond direct ties to the hijackers, the report also found that “individuals associated with the Saudi Government in the United States may have other ties to Al Qaida and other terrorist groups.” These connections included a mosque in Culver City that acted as a money laundering front for al-Qaida and the Saudi government.

No doubt the Saudis are alarmed that their dirty laundry has been aired for all to see.  At the very least, there is a faction in Saudi intelligence that supports al-Qaeda and is anti-American.  At worst, Saudi intel has been giving "plausible deniability" to the Saudi leadership to play both ends against the middle; working closely with the U.S. to eradicate extremism (which most intelligence sources say they have been doing since 9/11) while supporting terrorists out to damage U.S. interests and citizens.

It would be interesting to see if the Bush White House was involved in limiting the investigation into Saudi Arabia's role in 9/11.  There's history there that needs to be clarified.  So far, there's no evidence of any interference by administration officials.  But the speculation cannot be dismissed.

A slew of lawsuits against the Saudis are now expected from the families of 9/11 victims.  But it's hard to see how any information in these missing 28 pages of documents will lead to a successful prosecution of those suits.  There just isn't any definitive proof of Saudi government involvement in the 9/11 attacks – at least, proof that could stand up in court.

Rick Moran

Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2016/07/tantalizing_hints_of_saudi_involvement_in_911_found_in_redacted_documents.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

More proof of Breaking the Silence's lies - Benny Tucker

by Benny Tucker

Channel 10 survey found 2 of 10 BtS claims of 'war crimes' were completely false, 2 exaggerated and 4 impossible to verify.

Breaking the Silence

Tomer Neuberg/Flash 90

 

Admit Deri, the head of Reservists on the Front, is pleased with a study released by Channel 10, showing that most of Breaking the Silence's claims of war crimes are baseless or invented.

Speaking with Arutz Sheva, Deri explained that the research confirms what his group has been saying for the past six months.

"The material they published affirms what we put forward. This is very serious research that was conducted by journalists who previously stated their support for Breaking the Silence, like Raviv Drucker. In the end it came out that the group does lie. In a sample of ten Breaking the Silence testimonies, the project found that two claims of beating detainees and shooting innocents were complete lies, two were exaggerated and four were impossible to verify. Only two of the ten were accurate."

Deri feels that the message is clear: "We need to exclude this organization from all forums and not invite them to speak. I am happy that this is what's happening. In 2015 they didn't receive a single soldier's contribution, and this pulls the rug out from under them. We call on combat soldiers not to turn to them. This is the last place that should be resolving ethical issues. Today most combat soldiers understand their intentions and motivations."

He acknowledges that the group will continue receiving money from abroad and working. "They receive financial support from foreign countries and organizations. They won't stop, but they won't have testimony. Most of the group's activists abandoned Israel for other countries and this says a lot. The difference between Breaking the Silence and B'Tselem is that Breaking the Silence uses combat soldiers in a cynical manner and takes advantage of them in order to advance goals that interest foreign elements. In comparison, B'Tselem works with Palestinians but hides its true intentions."


Benny Tucker

Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/215019

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

'Gag' order: FBI confirms special secrecy agreements for agents in Clinton email probe - Catherine Herridge, Pamela K. Browne

by Catherine Herridge, Pamela K. Browne 

The measures show the extent to which the bureau has gone to keep additional details of the politically sensitive case from going public.

The FBI has confirmed to a senior Republican senator that agents were sworn to secrecy -- and subject to lie detector tests -- in the Hillary Clinton email probe, an extensive measure one former agent said could have a "chilling effect."

A July 1 letter sent by a senior deputy to FBI Director James Comey to Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, detailed the restrictions on agents. The letter, reviewed by Fox News, confirmed agents signed a "Case Briefing Acknowledgement" which says the disclosure of information is "strictly prohibited" without prior approval, and those who sign are subject to lie detector tests.

"The purpose of this form is to maintain an official record of persons knowledgeable of a highly sensitive Federal Bureau of Investigation counterintelligence investigation," the agreement attached to the Grassley letter reads, "....I (FBI agent) also understand that, due to the nature and sensitivity of this investigation, compliance with these restrictions may be subject to verification by polygraph examination."

The measures show the extent to which the bureau has gone to keep additional details of the politically sensitive case from going public. While Comey has provided some information ‎on why the FBI did not opt to pursue charges, Attorney General Loretta Lynch repeatedly ducked questions on specifics of the case at a House hearing Tuesday. 

A recently retired FBI agent, who declined to speak on the record, citing the sensitivity of the matter, said a "Case Briefing Acknowledgement" is reserved for "the most sensitive of sensitive cases," and can have a "chilling effect" on agents, who understand "it comes from the very top and that there has to be a tight lid on the case." 

The former agent said the agreements can also contribute to "group think" because investigators cannot bounce ideas off other agents, only those within a small circle.

 

Grassley first wrote to the FBI Director February 4 after a Fox News report that agents were asked to sign additional non-disclosure agreements. In his response to the senator, the FBI's Assistant Director, Office of Congressional Affairs, Stephen D. Kelly, said “this was not a unique circumstance” and agents "may from time to time be asked to sign similar forms.”

The July letter also says that the purpose of the agreement was two-fold: "to maintain an official record of all persons knowledgeable of this highly unusual investigation, and to remind individuals of their obligations to protect classified and sensitive information."  The letter states "no one refused to sign" or “raised any questions or concerns.”  

Comey said last week more than 100 classified emails were sent or received by Hillary Clinton, including some at the Top Secret level, which would require agents to have the necessary clearance to review and investigate.  Some of the intelligence came from the U.S. government's most closely held programs, known as Special Access Programs, or SAP and included human spying.

The "Case Briefing Acknowledgement" is more evidence that the probe was always a serious criminal investigation, and never a "security review" or "security inquiry" as described by Clinton and her campaign team.

Responding one day after the FBI director said he would not recommend criminal charges, Grassley pointed to Comey's conclusions that a limited number of emails had classified markings, thousands of work related emails were not turned over by Clinton to the State Department despite a sworn declaration to a federal court and her public assurances, as well as "potential violations of the statutes regarding the handling of classified information."  

"In light of all these inconsistencies, it is even more troubling that the FBI tried to gag its agents with a non-disclosure agreement on this matter, in violation of whistleblower protection statutes,"  Grassley said in the strongly worded letter.  "...you indicated that agents working on this case were required to sign a non-disclosure agreement that failed to exempt protected whistleblowing. Only after I wrote to you did you advise your FBI agents that they are still free to speak with Congress regarding waste, fraud, and abuse."

The "Case Briefing Acknowledgement Addendum" provided to Senator Grassley after the initial FBI response July 1 makes clear the agreement does not supersede or conflict with "communications to Congress" and "the reporting to an Inspector General of a violation, or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety, or….any other whistleblower protection."

Grassley also noted the timing of the FBI's response five months after his original request for information on the NDAs, with a partial response July 1, and full response on July 5 2016, the same day the FBI made a public recommendation at bureau headquarters against criminal charges.

The New York Post first reported that the "Case Briefing Acknowledgement" was signed by the Clinton email agents, citing anonymous sources, but the Grassley letter is believed to be the first public acknowledgement by the FBI, and includes a sample copy of the non-disclosure agreement.

Grassley’s letter is wide ranging, and beyond the non-disclosure agreements, requests a response by July 20 to questions including whether, after Bill Clinton and Lynch’s June 28 meeting on a Phoenix airport tarmac, there is no need for a special counsel. He also wanted to know about  the FBI’s reported agreement that some questions would be off limits for Clinton’s personal attorney Cheryl Mills, and whether the FBI or Justice Department raised concerns that several of Clinton’s associates used the same attorneys to represent them in the investigation.


Catherine Herridge is an award-winning Chief Intelligence correspondent for FOX News Channel (FNC) based in Washington, D.C. She covers intelligence, the Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security. Herridge joined FNC in 1996 as a London-based correspondent.
Pamela K. Browne is Senior Executive Producer at the FOX News Channel (FNC) and is Director of Long-Form Series and Specials. Her journalism has been recognized with several awards. Browne first joined FOX in 1997 to launch the news magazine “Fox Files” and later, “War Stories.”

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/07/14/gag-order-fbi-confirms-special-secrecy-agreements-for-agents-in-clinton-email-probe.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.