“Palestine” - The perils in pictures - Dr. Martin Sherman

by Dr. Martin Sherman

As the coming Paris conference looms close, avid two-state proponents should understand what the prescription they advocate really means: Israel through the binoculars of a Palestinian “intelligence officer.”

If a Palestinian state is established, it will be armed to the teeth. Within it there will be bases of the most  extreme terrorist forces, equipped with anti-tank and anti-aircraft shoulder-launched rockets, which will endanger not only random passers-by, but every airplane and helicopter taking off in the  skies of Israel and every vehicle traveling along the major traffic routes in the coastal plain...[T]he frontiers  of the Palestinian state will constitute an excellent staging point for mobile forces to mount attacks on  infrastructure installations vital for Israel’s existence, to impede the freedom of action of the Israeli  air-force in the skies over Israel, and to cause bloodshed among the population...in areas adjacent to the  frontier-line... - Shimon Peres, “Tomorrow is Now” (Keter publishers),  pp. 232, 255.
…Israel, small and exposed, will neither be able to exist nor to prosper if its urban centers, its vulnerable airport and its narrow winding roads, are shelled.  This is the fundamental difference between them and us, this is the terrible danger involved in the establishment of a third independent sovereign state between us and the Jordan River. - Amnon Rubinstein, ‘The Pitfall of a Third State’, Haaretz, Aug 8, 1976.

These two citations encapsulate, with chilling accuracy, the deadly dangers to which Israel would be exposed if a Palestinian state were to be established on the commanding hills overlooking the country’s heavily populated coastal plain, in which about 80% of the country’s civilian population and commercial activity, are located.

As the upcoming Paris conference, designed to foist a two-state reality on Israel, draws closer, it is vital that the public, both in Israel and abroad, understand just how precarious Israel’s situation is liable to be if such a perilous prescription be adopted. These dire dangers are graphically conveyed by the following series of photographs taken from sites inside the territory designated for any future Palestinian state. They demonstrate dramatically how vulnerable and exposed Israel would appear through the binoculars of a Palestinian “intelligence officer” (a.k.a. terrorist).

Greater Tel Aviv sky-line – as seen from “Palestine”

Photo Credit: Hagai Nativ

The clearly visible Azrieli Towers complex, an iconic feature of the central Tel Aviv skyline, houses a three-story shopping mall and recreation area, a thirteen-floor luxury hotel, and numerous prestigious commercial companies, including many of the country’s leading law firms.  And, oh yes, it is adjacent to the compound (known as “Camp Rabin”, named after the late Yitzhak Rabin) that comprises Israel’s Defense Ministry and the headquarters of the IDF General Staff…

Aviv Tower from "Palestine" Photo Credit: Hagai Nativ

The Aviv Tower, located in the bustling vicinity of the Ramat Gan Diamond Exchange, is the tallest building in Israel, surrounded by popular restaurants, cafes, commercial enterprises and recreational facilities. The Akirov Towers houses the former apartment of Ehud Barak, underscoring the stunning fact that there is a line of sight between the residence of the then-Defense Minister and …“Palestine”!

Ben Gurion Airport—through binoculars of a Palestinian “intelligence officer”

 Photo Credit: Hagai Nativ

          
Main terminal & runway at Ben Gurion Airport - as seen from “Palestine”: This shot underscores just how utterly exposed Israel’s only international airport would be to any hostile elements (renegade or otherwise), deployed on the hills overlooking the main terminal and runway.

Terminal Photo Credit: Hagai Nativ

For those familiar with Ben Gurion airport, the long inclined corridor connecting the passport control stations with the large duty free area is clearly visible from well within “Palestine”.

A tempting target: The unnerving sight of a plane clearly visible taking off on the main runway—hopelessly exposed to any nefarious forces in the nearby hills inside “Palestine”.  

Ben Gurion runway Photo Credit: Hagai Nativ

Israel’s vulnerable power generating facilities – as seen from “Palestine”

Hadera Photo Credit Yohar Gal

The Orot-Rabin power station, near Hadera (named after the late Yitzhak Rabin): The plant is currently Israel's largest power station with almost 20% of the Israel Electric Corporation's total generating capacity.  It is adjacent to Caesarea, a very upmarket locality, home to many of Israel’s rich and famous, including current PM Benjamin Netanyahu. Taken from the site of Homesh, one of the four communities destroyed in Ariel Sharon’s 2005 disengagement from Northern Samaria (which took place at the same time as the Gaza disengagement).

 The Orot-Rabin Power station at sunset Photo Credit: Hagai Nativ

 

Reading power station Photo Credit: Hagai Nativ

The Reading power station supplies electricity to the Greater Tel Aviv district. The plant is located close to Tel Aviv port, Sde Dov airport and the upmarket neighborhoods of North Tel Aviv and Ramat Aviv, where Tel Aviv University is located.  Taken from the vicinity of the Palestinian village of Rantis.

Terror Tunnels and Transportation 

Route 6  Photo Credit: Israel Institute of Strategic Studies

Taken near the Palestinian-Arab city of Qalquilaya, a hot bed of terror in the past, this drone shot underscores the grave danger to traffic on the Trans-Israel highway (Route 6), connecting the North of the country with the South. In light of the threat of terror tunnels, mortar fire and rocket attacks emanating from Gaza, little imagination is required to visualize the consequences of evacuating areas abutting one of Israel’s major transportation arteries.

Pictures worth thousands of words

These photos convey the stark truths, expressed in the introductory excerpts above, as to the dire dangers a Palestinian state would pose to Israel’s “urban centers, its vulnerable airport… and traffic routes in the coastal plain … as well as to infrastructure installations vital for Israel’s existence…”
 
So, if you still support the two-state formula—beware! You just might get what you wish for!


Dr. Martin Sherman served for seven years in operational capacities in the Israeli Defense establishment, was ministerial adviser to Yitzhak Shamir's government and lectured for 20 years at Tel Aviv University in Political Science, International Relations and Strategic Studies. He has a B.Sc. (Physics and Geology), MBA (Finance), and PhD in political science and international relations, was the first academic director of the Herzliya Conference and is the author of two books and numerous articles and policy papers on a wide range of political, diplomatic and security issues. He is founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies (www.strategicisrael.org). Born in South Africa,he has lived in Israel since 1971.

Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/20040

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Obama's Betrayal of Israel - Guy Millière

by Guy Millière

The next act is the Orwellian-named "peace conference," to be held in Paris on January 15. It has but one objective: to set the stage to eradicate Israel.

• President Obama's decision not to use the US veto in the UN Security Council and to let pass Resolution 2334, effectively sets the boundaries of a future Palestinian state. The resolution declares all of Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem -- home to the Old City, the Western Wall and the Temple Mount -- the most sacred place in Judaism -- "occupied Palestinian territory," and is a declaration of war against Israel.
• Resolution 2334 nullified any possibility of further negotiations by giving the Palestinians everything in exchange for nothing -- not even an insincere promise of peace.
• The next act is the Orwellian-named "peace conference," to be held in Paris on January 15. It has but one objective: to set the stage to eradicate Israel.
• In this new "Dreyfus trial," the accused will be the only Jewish state and the accusers will be the OIC and officials from Islamized, dhimmified, anti-Israel Western states. As in the Dreyfus trial, the verdict has been decided before it even starts. Israel will be considered guilty of all charges and condemned. A draft of the declaration to be published at the end of the conference is already available.
• The declaration rejects any Jewish presence beyond the 1949 armistice lines -- thereby instituting apartheid. It also praises the "Arab Peace Initiative," which calls for returning of millions of so-called "refugees" to Israel, thus transforming Israel into an Arab Muslim state where a massacre of Jews could conveniently be organized.
• The declaration is most likely meant serve as the basis for a new Security Council resolution on January 17 that would recognize a Palestinian state inside the "1967 borders," and be adopted, thanks to a second US abstention, three days before Obama leaves office. The betrayal of Israel by the Obama administration and by Obama himself would then be complete.
• The US Congress is already discussing bills to defund the UN and the Palestinian Authority. If Europeans think that the incoming Trump administration is as spineless as the Obama administration, they are in for a shock.
• Khaled Abu Toameh noted that the Palestinian Authority sees Resolution 2334 as a green light for more murders and violence.
• Daniel Pipes recently wrote that it is time to acknowledge the failure of a "peace process" that is really a war process. He stresses that peace can only come when an enemy is defeated.
• Resolution 2334 and the Paris conference, both promoted by Obama, are, as the great historian Bat Ye'or wrote, simply a victory for jihad.

The Middle East is in chaos. More than half a million people have been killed in the Syrian war and the number is rising. Bashar al-Assad's army used chemical weapons and barrel bombs against civilians; Russia has bombed schools and hospitals.

Syrians, Christians, Yazidis, Libyans, Yemenis and Egyptians all face lethal treats. Iranian leaders still shout "Death to Israel" and "Death to America" while buying nuclear equipment with money from lifted sanctions. Turkey is sliding toward an Islamist dictatorship, and unable to stem attacks against it.

The only democratic and stable country in the region is Israel, and that is the country U.S. President Barack Obama, in the final weeks of his term, chooses to incriminate. His decision not to use the US veto in the UN Security Council, to let pass Resolution 2334, effectively sets the boundaries of a future Palestinian state. The resolution also declares all of Judea, Samaria and East Jerusalem, home to the Old City, the Western Wall and the Temple Mount -- the most sacred place in Judaism -- "occupied Palestinian territory," and is a declaration of war against Israel.

UNSC Resolution 2334 nullified any possibility of further negotiations, by giving the Palestinians everything in exchange for nothing -- not even an insincere promise of peace. US Secretary of State John Kerry's speech five days later confirmed Obama's support for the resolution. Kerry, like US Ambassador to the UN Samantha Power, used the existence of Jewish towns and villages in Judea and Samaria as a pretext to endorse the position of Palestinian leaders, who want to ethnically cleanse Jews from these areas. But this was just a prelude.

The next act is the Orwellian-named "peace conference," to be held in Paris on January 15. It has but one objective: to set the stage to eradicate Israel.

Organized by François Hollande, a failed French President who will leave power in four months, it was supported from the start by the Obama administration. Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman called it "the new Dreyfus trial." The accused will be the only Jewish state and the accusers will be the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and officials from Islamized, dhimmified, anti-Israel Western states. As in the Dreyfus trial, the verdict is known before it starts. Israel will be considered guilty of all charges and condemned to what its accusers hope will be the beginning of its end.

Is Barack Obama planning another betrayal of Israel at next week's Paris "peace conference," organized by French President François Hollande? Pictured: Obama and Hollande in Washington, May 18, 2012. (Image source: White House)

Some commentators have compared what will happen in Paris to the 1942 Wannsee Conference in Nazi Germany, because the aim seems clearly to be the "final solution" of the "Jewish problem" in the Middle East. A draft of the declaration to be published at the end of the conference is already available. It affirms unreserved support for the "Palestinian Statehood strategy" and the principle of intangibility (that the borders cannot be modified) of the "1967 borders," including East Jerusalem, the Old City and the Western Wall.

The draft declaration rejects any Jewish presence beyond these borders -- thereby instituting apartheid -- and praises the "Arab Peace Initiative," which calls for returning millions of so-called "refugees" to Israel, and thus the transforming of Israel into an Arab Muslim state -- where a massacre of the Jews could conveniently be organized.

The declaration is most likely meant to be the basis for a new UN Security Council resolution that would endorse the recognition of a Palestinian state in the "1967 borders" as defined in the declaration. The new resolution could be adopted by a second US abstention at the Security Council on January 17, three days before Obama leaves office. The betrayal of Israel by the Obama administration and by Obama himself would then be complete.

On January 20, however, Donald J. Trump is to take office as President of the United States. Trump sent a message on December 23: "Stay strong Israel, January 20th is fast approaching!" He added explicitly that the U.S. "cannot continue to let Israel be treated with such total disdain and disrespect."

On January 5, the US House of Representatives approved a text harshly criticizing Resolution 2334. Congress is already discussing defunding the UN and the Palestinian Authority. If Europeans and members of UN think the incoming Trump administration is as spineless as the Obama administration, they are in for a shock.

Wall Street Journal columnist Bret Stephens recently wondered if the creation of a Palestinian state would alleviate the current Middle East chaos. His answer was that it would not, and that the creation of a Palestinian state would be seen as a victory for jihadists. He also noted that the Palestinian Authority still behaves like a terrorist entity; that an Israeli withdrawal from Judea and Samaria would encourage Hamas and lead to the creation of another terrorist Islamic state in the West Bank, and that an Israeli withdrawal is something that most Palestinians do not even want:

"[A] telling figure came in a June 2015 poll conducted by the Palestinian Center for Public Opinion, which found that a majority of Arab residents in East Jerusalem would rather live as citizens with equal rights in Israel than in a Palestinian state."

Khaled Abu Toameh, an Arab journalist who has never yet been wrong, noted that the Palestinian Authority sees Resolution 2334 as a green light for more violence, murders and confrontation. He added that if presidential elections by the PA were held today, Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh would win by a comfortable margin.

In another important article, Middle East scholar Daniel Pipes writes that it is time to acknowledge the failure of a "peace process" that is really a war process. He stressed that peace can only come when an enemy is defeated. He predicts that for peace to come, Israel must win unambiguously, and the Palestinians pass through "the bitter crucible of defeat, with all its deprivation, destruction, and despair."

Jihadi indoctrination, as well as the financial aid given to Palestinian terrorists, have been paid for by the United States, France, and other Western European nations. That too should stop.

Resolution 2334 and the Paris peace conference, both promoted by Obama, are, as the great historian Bat Ye'or wrote, simply victories for jihad.

Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, is the author of 27 books on France and Europe.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9755/obama-betrayal-israel

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Immigration Failures vs. Americans - Michael Cutler

by Michael Cutler

How law enforcement failures undermine our citizen’s civil rights.

Immigration anarchists have repeatedly drawn false analogies between their efforts to block the enforcement of immigration laws and the heroic action of those whose hard-fought efforts for decades provided black Americans with civil rights, but at great cost.

These anarchists emulate Jimmy Carter, creator of the Orwellian term 'Undocumented Immigrant' by referring to advocates for fair and effective immigration law enforcement as being “Anti-Immigrant.”  This despicable tactic is now being used to falsely attack Senator Jeff Sessions, the nominee for Attorney General, accuse his support for such effective enforcement of our immigration laws as running contrary to civil rights and being against immigrants.

These anarchists refuse to concede what should be obvious, while aliens illegally present in the United States are entitled to human rights and due process, they are not entitled to broad civil rights protections.  It is an outrageous contradiction in concepts to claim that aliens whose mere presence represents a violation of law should be provided with opportunities equal to those provided to American citizens and lawful immigrants.

In reality, immigration anarchists are, themselves, responsible for undermining the civil rights of Americans, particularly American minorities who suffer the greatest harm because of the failures of our government to enforce the immigration laws.  Those immigration anarchists also are responsible for undermining the civil rights of lawful immigrants.

For the sake of clarity and to prevent any potential misunderstandings, illegal aliens, not unlike others, are entitled to human rights and are properly entitled to due process when accused of committing crimes.  There are two reasons why due process must be devoid of consideration as to the immigration status of the accused.  First of all, it is a matter of fairness and justice.

Creating a lower standard for convicting illegal aliens for committing crimes would undermine the judicial system.

Additionally, unscrupulous prosecutors who simply wanted a “quick kill” would be encouraged to seek the conviction of illegal aliens who did not actually commit the crime.  This is immoral and unjust.  Secondly, under such circumstances, law enforcement authorities would stop looking for the actual criminal who would therefore remain at large and continue to pose a threat.

Civil rights laws were initially enacted to address the wrongs visited upon black Americans beginning with slavery and then segregation.

Today those laws are focused on providing citizens, irrespective of race, religion, ethnicity, gender or sexual identity or orientation, with equal protection under our laws and equal opportunities, thereby enabling them to be full participants in the communities where they live and throughout our nation.

Sanctimonious and hypocritical mayors of “Sanctuary Cities” portray themselves as heroic figures, perhaps on par with the “Freedom Riders” who, decades ago, at great personal risk, fought to end racial discrimination and segregation in the South.

Make no mistake, those Freedom Riders were heroes who should be lauded and remembered for their morality, courage and achievements.

Mayors of Sanctuary Cities, however, are anything but heroes.  They are betrayers.  Betrayers of the Constitution, betrayers of their oaths of office, betrayers of national security and public safety and betrayers of their constituents.

Such rogue politicians act against the best interests of their constituents and those who reside in, or visit their cities by turning their jurisdictions into magnets for aliens who are illegally present in the United States.  Among those illegal aliens are those who have serious criminal histories, have outstanding arrest warrants in the United States or in other countries or may be international terrorists or supporters of terrorism.  These aliens may have entered the United States without inspection or entered through ports of entry but went on to otherwise violate our immigration laws that, it must be noted, are completely and utterly blind as to race, religion or ethnicity.

Such rogue politicians act against the best interests of those who reside in, or visit their cities, because they are turning their jurisdictions into magnets for aliens who are illegally present in the United States.  Among those illegal aliens are those who have serious criminal histories, have outstanding arrest warrants in the United States or in other countries or may be international terrorists or supporters of terrorism.  These aliens may have entered the United States without inspection or entered through ports of entry but went on to otherwise violate our immigration laws that, it must be noted, are completely and utterly blind as to race, religion or ethnicity.

The ultimate “hate crime” involves acts of violence committed against members of a community because of factors such as race, religion, ethnicity or sexual orientation.  Transnational gangs often target their victims because of such factors.  Failures of immigration law enforcement have enabled such violent gangs to flourish across the United States.

Beyond undermining national security and public safety, Sanctuary Cities additionally attract massive numbers of illegal aliens who have no legal authority to work in the United States yet are able to secure illegal employment, thereby displacing American workers.

This includes American teenagers - often American minority teenagers, who find themselves unable to find a job, creating for them the conundrum of not being able to get a job without a resume but not being able to assemble a resume without first getting a job.

Furthermore, labor is a commodity.  Flooding the labor pool with foreign workers, suppresses the value of labor.  Consequently, even Americans and lawful immigrants who don’t lose their jobs to illegal aliens likely face wage suppression because of them.

It is more than mere coincidence that the division of the Civil Rights Commission that deals with discriminatory employment practices is referred to as the Equal Employment Opportunities Commission.

Employment, in point of fact, provides opportunities to those who are able to work.

Opportunities to be self-sufficient, opportunities to succeed and advance and prosper all revolve around the ability to be gainfully employed.

Blocking qualified workers from job opportunities deprives them essential and fundamental opportunities to be successful.

Politicians who comply with the demands of campaign contributors and others who exert pressure on them to flood America with cheap and compliant foreign labor to displace American workers and suppress wages.

The destruction of the middle class is not an “unintended consequence” but the goal of their duplicitous conduct.

A news report on how job losses create multiple stresses quoted Michael McKee, a psychologist at the Center for Integrative Medicine at the Cleveland Clinic who articulated his concerns about how the possible loss of financial ability to support oneself and family my lead to a loss of self-respect and the respect of others.  Thus leading to the loss of identity, security and daily structure, ultimately leading to people who lose meaning and hope.

A study published a couple of years ago found that poverty stresses the brain so much that it’s like losing 13 IQ points.

Prior to the Second World War the enforcement of our nation’s immigration laws was vested primarily within the Labor Department to make certain that Americans would not have to compete with foreign workers for jobs.  This is how America created the largest and most upwardly mobile middle class of all countries on this planet at the time, thus creating the “American Dream.”

Civil rights laws also enforced in conjunction with our immigration laws to make certain that employers treat all employees equally including aliens provided that the aliens in question are authorized by law to be employed in the United States.  Indeed, even where the employer sanctions provisions of the Immigration Reform and Control Act.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 ended segregation and under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, discriminatory employment practices were prohibited to insure, equal employment opportunities.  Over time these laws were amended to protect additional groups of protected workers and even include aliens who are authorized to work in the United States.

In fact, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has posted the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 (IRCA) on its website.  Among the provisions of IRCA was a massive amnesty program for millions of illegal aliens and the provision that, for the very first time, deemed the knowing employment of illegal aliens to be a violation of law.

The EEOC has a vested interest and, indeed, jurisdiction, in cases involving allegations of Employment Discrimination.

Not only does the EEOC have jurisdiction when Americans claim employment discrimination, but it also has jurisdiction if an allegation is made that an alien, authorized to work in the United States seeking employment, suffered discrimination during the hiring process by an overly zealous employer who went beyond the requirements of preparing the Form I-9 to verify the identity and eligibility of an alien applying for a job or if an alien, authorized to work in the United States, faced discriminatory policies by his/her employer.

However, all of the laws and regulations that have been promulgated to end workplace discrimination are undone by the veritable army of foreign workers who have displaced beleaguered American workers.

Think of how many politicians running for office promise to help “create jobs” and to “bring back jobs to America.”

Whether politicians are running for political office on the local, state or federal level.  Whether they seek to become a member of the city council, mayors or governors.  Even if they are candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives and U.S. Senate or even the Presidency of the United States, they all make that same  promise about jobs and “getting Americans back to work.”

Failures of the immigration system make those promises largely meaningless when American workers are displaced by aliens.

For open borders/immigration anarchists, failures of the immigration system are to be engineered and then celebrated.

In reality, those failures are devastating to America and Americans and undermine the letter and spirit of our civl rights laws.

If immigration anarchists want to point to those responsible for undermining civil rights, they should stand in front of a mirror and point at themselves.

Michael Cutler is a retired Senior Special Agent of the former INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) whose career spanned some 30 years. He served as an Immigration Inspector, Immigration Adjudications Officer and spent 26 years as an agent who rotated through all of the squads within the Investigations Branch. For half of his career he was assigned to the Drug Task Force. He has testified before well over a dozen congressional hearings, provided testimony to the 9/11 Commission as well as state legislative hearings around the United States and at trials where immigration is at issue. He hosts his radio show, “The Michael Cutler Hour,” on Friday evenings on BlogTalk Radio. His personal website is http://michaelcutler.net/.

Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/265438/immigration-failures-vs-americans-michael-cutler

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Palestinians: A Strategy of Lies and Deception - Bassam Tawil

by Bassam Tawil

The Palestinian terrorist who rammed his truck into a group of young Israeli soldiers last week was doing exactly what his president urged Palestinians to do.

• Abbas here lied twice. First, it is a lie that he is prepared to return to the negotiating table with Israel. In the past few years, Abbas has repeatedly rejected Israeli offers to resume the stalled peace negotiations.
• Abbas's chief negotiator, Saeb Erekat, claimed this week that his boss was ready to resume the peace talks with Israel in Moscow....Indeed, Abbas had "earlier" voiced his readiness to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Moscow. But Abbas once again outlined his preconditions for such a summit... This means that Abbas has not abandoned his preconditions for resuming the peace talks with Israel. The timing of Erekat's announcement in Moscow is clearly linked to the Paris peace conference. It is part of the Palestinian strategy to depict Israel as the party opposed to the resumption of the peace talks.
• Abbas has in the past reluctantly condemned some of the terror attacks against Israel. But these statements were made under duress, after being pressured by the US or EU.
• In fact, his "condemnations" are nothing but political pablum, a sop to the West.
• The Palestinian terrorist who rammed his truck into a group of young Israeli soldiers last week was doing exactly what his president urged Palestinians to do.
• The Germans and French should not believe Abbas when he says that he condemns truck terror attacks in their countries. The scenes of Palestinians celebrating carnage in Jerusalem should serve as a wake-up call to the international community. The message of the call? That the overall Palestinian strategy – like the jihad strategy - is built on lies. Both continue to feature terror as one their main pillars.
• What members of the international community do not seem to understand is that... [t]he terrorist who rammed his truck into a German Christmas market did not carry out his attack in outrage at a German settlement or a checkpoint. The terrorist who mowed down French people celebrating Bastille day was not protesting French "occupation." Abbas and his cohorts, like the terrorists in Europe, are part of just one big global jihad against all "infidels" – including them.

The Palestinian Authority and its leader, Mahmoud Abbas, still believe that they can fool all of the people all of the time. This has always been the Palestinian strategy: nothing new here. Yet one likes to think that world leaders and decision-makers in the West will eventually - perhaps today? – wake up to the fact that the Palestinians are playing them for fools.

Last week's terror attack in Jerusalem, where a Palestinian tourist rammed his truck into a group of soldiers, killing four and wounding scores of others, rips the mask off of Abbas and his PA leadership in Ramallah. By either failing or consciously refusing to condemn the terror attack, they expose their cowardice, but, equally importantly, that terrorism directed against Jews is just fine by them.

Palestinian Authority Leader Mahmoud Abbas

How differently Abbas plays his cards when the blood spilled is not Jewish: seldom has he missed an opportunity to condemn terrorist attacks around the world.

Only one week prior to the most recent Jewish bloodbath in Jerusalem, Abbas was a frontrunner for lamenting the New Year terror in Istanbul, Turkey, in which 40 people were killed and dozens wounded. In a letter to his Turkish counterpart, Abbas categorically condemned the attack and made it clear that he stood with the Turkish people against terrorism. http://www.alquds.com/articles/1483288088493838500/

When the Russian ambassador to Turkey was gunned down, Abbas was also quick to raise his voice, saying that the murderous act was in violation of international and human laws and values. He repeated his rejection of "all forms of terrorism and violence."
http://www.alhadath.ps/article/49770/index.php

Abbas also did not wait long to denounce last month's terror attack in Jordan against Jordanian policemen and tourists. He said that he and the Palestinians stood with Jordan against "this blind terrorism."
http://www.palsawa.com/news/2016/12/18/main/95843.html

Additionally, Abbas was among the first leaders to issue statements criticizing the truck-ramming attacks in Germany and France. Again, he told the leaders of France and Germany that he and the Palestinians were strongly opposed to this form of "black terrorism." http://www.palsawa.com/news/2016/12/21/main/96208.html

These are only a handful of the recent examples of Abbas's repudiation of terror attacks against Jordanian, French, German and Turkish nationals. Such statements are designed to win the sympathy of the international community and depict the Palestinians as a people opposed to terrorism and violence. Abbas has been saying – and lying - for a long time, that he and his people are partners in the war against terror.

Yet, when it comes to Jews, Abbas and his PA leadership sing a different song. For them, terrorism targeting Jews and Israelis is an "act of resistance" that, far from being denounced, ought to be praised.

Abbas's refusal or failure to condemn the Jerusalem terror attack should not come as a surprise. This is not the first time that he and his PA leadership signal to the Palestinians that terrorism is fine as long as it is directed against Israel. The failure to condemn the Jerusalem terror attack lays bare Abbas's true intentions and double-talk.

A few days before the attack in Jerusalem, Abbas met in his Ramallah office with dozens of Israeli "peace activists," including academics and politicians. Here's what Abbas had to say to his Israeli guests: "We want to achieve peace through negotiations. We reject other methods and won't allow anyone to resort to them. We always announce that we are opposed to terrorism, extremism and violence in any place in the world."
http://www.wafa.ps/ar_page.aspx?id=cygKgoa731156641413acygKgo

Abbas here lied twice. First, it is a lie that he is prepared to return to the negotiating table with Israel. In the past few years, Abbas has repeatedly rejected Israeli offers to resume the stalled peace negotiations. He has also turned down invitations made by Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu to discuss jumpstarting the peace process.
http://www.timesofisrael.com/abbas-rejected-us-call-to-meet-with-netanyahu-report/

Abbas's chief negotiator, Saeb Erekat, claimed this week that his boss was ready to resume the peace talks with Israel in Moscow. Erekat said that Abbas had "earlier declared his readiness to take part in these talks in Moscow."

Indeed, Abbas had "earlier" voiced his readiness to meet with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Moscow. But Abbas once again outlined his preconditions for such a summit: a cessation of settlement construction and an Israeli commitment to "abide by signed agreements."
http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Abbas-I-will-renew-negotiations-if-Israel-halts-settlements-abides-by-agreements-476870

This means that Abbas has not abandoned his preconditions for resuming the peace talks with Israel. The timing of Erekat's announcement in Moscow is clearly linked to the Paris peace conference. It is part of the Palestinian strategy to depict Israel as the party opposed to the resumption of the peace talks. Moreover, it is part of the strategy to get the Russians to replace the US as the main broker in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

If Abbas were sincere about resuming the peace talks with Israel, he does not need to travel to Moscow to meet with Netanyahu. The distance between Ramallah and Jerusalem is much shorter. But Abbas is not interested in direct talks with Israel. He wants the Russians and other international parties to be involved as part of his effort to isolate Israel and subject it to international pressure. In short, Abbas wants to impose a solution on Israel and not reach any agreement through direct negotiations.

Second, it is a lie that Abbas is opposed to violence and terrorism "in any place in the world". His refusal to condemn most of the terror attacks in Israel says it all. Apparently, for Abbas, "any place in the world" does not include Israel. Otherwise, he would have rushed to denounce the Jerusalem truck massacre just as he condemned the truck terror attacks in Germany and France. In Abbas's view, however, those truck attacks are different from the one used by a Palestinian to mow down Jews in Jerusalem. The latter had Jews in its murderous sights, and that is fine.

Abbas's meeting with the Israeli delegation is part and parcel of his strategy to bamboozle the public. In inviting Israelis and others to Ramallah, Abbas aims to incite them against their government and dupe them into thinking that he not what he really is: a wolf in sheep's clothing.

But how do we know that Abbas has not magically turned into a partner for peace? Just check the message he sends to his own people. One week before the Jerusalem terror attack, Abbas's ruling Fatah faction celebrated its 52nd anniversary by glorifying mass murderers and terrorists with Jewish blood on their hands. His supporters seized the occasion to remind Palestinians that Fatah was the first party to launch a terrorist attack against Israel, and that it remains committed to the option of an armed struggle against Israel.
http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2017/01/fatah-honors-terrorist-dalal-mughrabi.html

Perhaps this is the right time to remind the international community (and some Israelis) that it was Abbas who, two weeks before the current wave of terrorism against Israel, declared that he welcomes "every drop-off blood spilled in Jerusalem" and accused Jews of desecrating with heir "filthy feet" Islamic holy sites.
http://mfa.gov.il/MFA/ForeignPolicy/Issues/Pages/PA-Chairman-Abbas-incites-to-violence-in-Jerusalem.aspx

The Palestinian terrorist who rammed his truck into a group of young Israeli soldiers last week was doing exactly what his president urged Palestinians to do. Since Abbas made his inflammatory statement, his spokesmen, media and mosques have also stepped up their anti-Israel rhetoric in a way that has led to an upsurge in terror attacks against Jews.

Abbas has in the past reluctantly condemned some of the terror attacks against Israel. But these statements were made under duress, after being pressured by the US or EU. Even then, his "condemnations" have been vague and laconic, leaving plenty of room for ambiguity. Instead of referring specifically to a particular terror attack, Abbas would typically repeat his famous cliché that he is opposed to 'all forms of terrorism regardless of the identity of the perpetrators or victims." In fact, his "condemnations" are nothing but political pablum, a sop to the West
https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/4871/abbas-terror-attacks

Some would argue that Abbas is afraid of condemning anti-Israel terror attacks because he fears backlash from the Palestinian street. If so, Abbas can only blame himself: This is what happens when you condone terrorism, and glorify terrorists and financially reward their families. This is what happens when you conduct a decades-long campaign of poisonous incitement against Israel in the media and mosques. You can no longer condemn terrorism because you yourself will be condemned.

The Germans and French should not believe Abbas when he says that he condemns truck terror attacks in their countries. The scenes of Palestinians celebrating carnage in Jerusalem should serve as a wake-up call to the international community. The message of the call? That the overall Palestinian strategy – like the jihad strategy - is built on lies. Both continue to feature terror as one their main pillars.

What members of the international community do not seem to understand is that there is no "good terrorism" (against Jews) and "bad terrorism (against Europeans). The terrorist who rammed his truck into a German Christmas market did not carry out his attack in outrage at a German settlement or a checkpoint. The terrorist who mowed down French people celebrating Bastille day was not protesting French "occupation." Abbas and his cohorts, like the terrorists in Europe, are part of just one big global jihad against all "infidels" – including them.


Bassam Tawil is a scholar based in the Middle East

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9762/palestinians-a-strategy-of-lies-and-deception

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

The UN and Obama's Act of Aggression - Maria Polizoidou

by Maria Polizoidou

The US and the UN are not who determine what is historically true and what is not.

• UNSC Res. 2334 is an act of political aggression against foundation of the Judeo-Christian civilization and should be treated as such. The Jewish nation has every right to consider this attack as an act of war against it.
• President Obama sometimes seems to have an indifference to historical truth that often borders on antagonism. Obama has again tried to re-write history by claiming that Greece, with the help of the winners of World War I, was an aggressive and imperialistic state that cared only to re-build its Empire against the Turks.
• The notion that ancient non-Muslim nations are occupiers in their own lands, is repeated in the UN Resolution 2334.
• Historically, Muslim forces began invading Syria in 634, and ended by conquering Constantinople in 1453. They invaded not only all of Turkey -- obliterating the great Christian empire of Byzantium -- but then went on to conquer all of North Africa, Greece, southern Spain, parts of Portugal and eastern Europe.
• President Obama apparently did not learn about the Trojan War in school; he apparently never read Homer to know that the inhabitants of the Bosporus and much of Asia Minor were Greeks -- just as he apparently never read the Bible, or the Greek and Roman historic records of the Jewish people and their capital, Jerusalem.
• The US and the UN are not who determine what is historically true and what is not. These shameful votes should be reversed immediately; if not, all funding should be withdrawn from the United Nations. They are now, to paraphrase the words Vladimir Lenin, "paying for the rope with which members of the UN will hang them."

If US President Barack Obama were uneducated, if his staff consisted of people who had never been taught history at school, if the government consisted of savages who have just emerged from the Amazon jungle, we could somehow "justify" their ignorance about the history of the Mediterranean and the Middle Eastern people.

But that is not what is going on. This ambush against Israel in UN Security Council Resolution 2334, which considers the Jewish people "occupiers" in their own ancient capital and the holiest part of it, is an act of jihad and an act of political violence – perpetrated by governments to achieve political goals.

This resolution did not randomly emerge from a historical moment, or as the result of political choices based on reasonable criteria to provide peace and stability in the region. It does not help either the Arabs living in the disputed territories -- Judea, Samaria and the Gaza Strip - or the Israelis in any peace process. It is an act of vengeance against the foundations of Judeo-Christian civilization and should be treated as such. The Jewish nation has every right to consider this attack an act of war against it. It certainly is an act of war against the history of the Jews and the freedom, democracy, human rights, pluralism and rule of law that Israel represents in the Middle East.

President Obama and his government at the beginning of their service eight years ago turned against the history of the Greek nation with the same political aggression. Obama had a chance to do that when he went to the Turkish Parliament, on April 6, 2009.

Sadly, he did not acknowledge the genocide of the Greeks by the Turkish army under Mustafa Kemal Ataturk. Between 1913 and 1923, millions of Greeks who had lived in Turkey since before the great Christian Byzantine empire, were either slaughtered or driven out. According to some Greek historians, between 800,000 and 1,200,000 Greeks were slaughtered during this period; every year on September14, the State of Greece officially honors the memory of those who died in Asia Minor.

Instead, Obama gave political cover to what the Turks did by saying at the Turkish Parliament on April 6, 2009: "You freed yourself from foreign control, and you founded a republic that commands the respect of the United States and the wider world".

The "foreign control" to which President Obama refers is the Paris Peace Conference of 1919, where the League of Nations was established. [1]

President Obama, in evident his enthusiasm to flatter the ego of Turkey's current president, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, "forgot" to mention some important events of that era. President Obama "forgot" all about the genocide of Greeks and Christians in Asia Minor by Mustafa Kemal's Ataturk Turkish. Barack Obama methodically "murdered" historical truth, by ignoring the fact that the Greek army, after the end of World War I in 1918, was sent to Asia Minor under the instructions of the great powers and the winners of the war, to protect Christian populations from persecution, murders and rapes of Muslim Turkish. The Greek army did not go as an occupier but as a protector of human life and human rights.

President Obama sometimes seems to have an indifference to historical truth that often borders on antagonism.[2]

The Greek Ministry of Foreign Affairs immediately responded by saying that "history cannot be rewritten".

Now, this is what President Obama has tried to do again: to re-write history by claiming that Greece, with the winners' help of World War I, was an aggressive and imperialistic State that cared only to re-build its Empire against the Turks. In other words, President Obama seemed to mean that the winners of WW I were some Christian Countries who wanted through Greece to establish a Christian Empire, such as the Byzantine Empire, and that Muslim territories and the International Community should, as he was the leader of such a powerful nation, "adopt" his view of history.

The notion that ancient nations which are not Muslim are occupiers in their own lands, is repeated in the UN Resolution 2334.

Obama was complimenting Turkey on not returning to the Ottoman Empire, which officially ended in 1922.

Democracy in Turkey now -what is left of it, that is - consists of all the military and the judiciary purged of anyone who believed in government by the people. Just since August, Turkey has arrested more than 26,000 people, including 120 journalists and has closed 150 news outlets.

"There is no more critical journalism, 90 percent of the free press is destroyed directly or indirectly," according to Erol Onderoglu, the Turkish representative for Reporters Without Borders. "Investigative journalism is considered treason. Journalism has been stolen by the government."

Is that kind of clampdown what Europeans would eventually like to see happen here, too?

Historically, Muslim forces began invading Syria in 634, and ended by conquering Constantinople in 1453.

They invaded not only all of Turkey - obliterating the great Christian empire of Byzantium - but then went on to conquer all of North Africa, Greece, Southern Spain, parts of Portugal, and eastern Europe, including Hungary, Serbia and the Balkans.

Emperor Constantine the First had moved the capital of the Roman Empire from Rome to Constantinople and laid the foundation for Christianity to become the official religion of the Roman-Byzantine State and the Western world in general. Emperor Constantine had given the citizens of the Roman Empire the right of the religious tolerance, a liberal action 1700 years ago; today, many leaders in the Arab world say they cannot tolerate Christian Churches in their territories.

The Greeks wanted during the World War I to re-establish the Byzantine Empire, but the Turkish-Muslim world prevented it from happening. Instead, commencing in 1914-15, they conducted a genocide against both the Armenians, and the Greeks until 1923.

At present the Greek community in Turkey numbers around 3000 and are not allowed to attend Greek schools.

For President Obama, the Turkish "victory" seems to have been a sensational win against the Western-Christian world, even though it was this world that had made him President of the United States.

President Obama apparently "forgot" the American's testimonies who helped the Greeks to escape from Kemal's Turkish massacres. He "forgot" the 1.5 million Greek refugees who were expelled from their homes in Asia Minor by the Turkish army. The Turkish "democracy" which Mr. Obama so admires, built on seas of blood of other people who were living in those areas. Perhaps, refugees for President Obama and his government, are only those who are Muslims. All the others are "occupiers"...

But even if the Greek army went to Asia Minor as an occupier -- if we adopt the most distorted view of history, where exactly it would be an occupier? In the cities that were inhabited by Greeks from the beginning of recorded history?

President Obama apparently did not learn about the Trojan War in school; he apparently never read Homer to know that the inhabitants of the Bosporus and much of Asia Minor were Greeks - just as he apparently never read the Bible, or the Greek and Roman historic records of the Jewish people and their capital, Jerusalem.

The Obama administration, to cover the president's shameful ambush against the Jewish state, sought through Obama's Deputy National Security Advisor, Ben Rhodes, to shift the responsibility for the UN resolution onto the Israeli government of Benjamin Netanyahu. Where does the US Democratic party's downhill plummet end?

U.S. President Barack Obama addresses the UN General Assembly's seventy-first session, September 20, 2016. (Image source: United Nations)

The US and the UN – both the Security Council and UNESCO - are not who determine what is historically true and what is not. These shameful votes should be reversed immediately; if not, all funding should be withdrawn from the United Nations, by United States and all freedom-loving democracies. They are now, to paraphrase the words of the Soviet Union's Vladimir Lenin, "paying for the rope with which members of the UN will hang them."

Maria Polizoidou, a reporter, broadcast journalist, and consultant on international and foreign affairs, is based in Greece.

---

[1] President Obama also said in the same speech: "At the end of World War I, Turkey could have succumbed to the foreign powers that were trying to claim its territory, or sought to restore an ancient empire". The "ancient empire" that Obama refers to, is unclear – Ottoman or Byzantine - and the "foreign powers that were trying to claim its territory" were the winners of World War I, including the USA.
[2] Such as claiming for weeks that a video had caused the attacks on the US Embassy in Benghazi, Libya; his knowingly false promises to his own people about the effects of his Affordable Care Act; lies about the Internal Revenue Service; or his endless lies about the "Iran deal".

Maria Polizoidou

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/9759/un-obama-aggression

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Vatican opens Palestinian embassy ahead of critical summit in Paris - CUFI

by Christians United for Israel

 Hat tip: Dr. Jean-Charles Bensoussan

The Pope is set to open a Palestinian embassy at The Vatican this weekend, in what is a hugely significant move by the papacy.

The inauguration of the embassy on Friday, attended by Palestinian Authority leader, Mahmoud Abbas, takes place just two days before 70 nations gather in Paris to vote on an anti-Israel decree.

PA President Mahmoud Abbas will also meet with Pope Francis on Saturday. This will be the third time the two have met. When they met last year, Pope Francis referred to Abbas as “an angel of peace”. The Vatican later explained that the reference was mistranslated, and in fact was meant as encouragement for Abbas to pursue peace with Israel.

As head of the Palestinian Authority, Abbas has been accused of inciting violence against Jews. Abbas is also the chairman of the Palestinian Liberation Organization (PLO) which was recognised by Israel and the US as a terror organisation until 1991.

Israel does have an embassy in Vatican City, but the Vatican Embassy in Israel is in Tel Aviv, whilst the Vatican has an “embassy to Palestine” located in East Jerusalem. The Vatican officially recognised a Palestinian State almost two years ago.

Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad Maliki confirmed that Abbas will primarily be raising issue with incoming President-elect Donald Trump, who is set to take office next week, and his proposed plan to move the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

Just this past Friday, Abbas warned Trump against moving the American embassy, saying that such a move would be crossing a “red line” and could jeopardize peace prospects.

Earlier in the week the PA chairman warned of “serious implications” if the embassy is moved, saying, “Moving the embassy will have serious consequences not only for the Palestinian people, but also for the legitimacy of the entire international struggle against the occupation.”

On Tuesday it was reported that PA leaders had called protests at mosques across the Middle East this week to protest Trump’s plans to move the embassy.

Christians United for Israel (Breaking Israel News / Arutz Sheva sourced)


Christians United for Israel

Source: http://www.cufi.org.uk/news/breaking-vatican-opens-palestinian-embassy-ahead-of-critical-summit-in-paris/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Is Judith Butler the New Edward Said? - A.J. Caschetta

by A.J. Caschetta

-- her anti-Israel advocacy has made her a star, and a possible successor to the late Edward Said, another academic whose fame rests more on tendentious scholarship and agitprop than rigorous, objective research.

Of all the non-Middle East specialists writing on the Middle East, few have been as prolific or as indecipherable as Judith Butler. More than an academic, she has become a pop culture figure. In an age of identity politics, Butler’s identity as a Marxist, feminist, lesbian practitioner of critical theory who writes prolifically about gender and transgenderism have made her among the most interviewed active college professors. But her anti-Israel advocacy has made her a star, and a possible successor to the late Edward Said, another academic whose fame rests more on tendentious scholarship and agitprop than rigorous, objective research.

With a Ph.D. in philosophy and a professorship at UC Berkeley’s Comparative Literature department, Butler might have led a career as a big name academic, which is to say very well known by perhaps as much as one tenth of one percent of the American population. But as the face of academe’s Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement, she reaches and influences a much wider audience.

Her academic fame springs from her assertion that gender is performance, an idea lauded as “performative gender theory” or just “performativity.” At its core, this is a rendering of the postmodern obsession with “false binaries.” Butler refutes the biological binaries of male and female in the manner that deconstruction theory identifies the “unstable” cultural binaries located in all language (truth/falsehood, freedom/slavery, good/evil). Butler argues instead that “gender is in no way a stable identity or locus of agency from which various acts proceede [sic]; rather, it is an identity tenuously constituted in time – an identity instituted through a stylized repetition of acts.”

Depicting biological determinism as just another linguistic problem to be deconstructed and historicized, Butler’s prose is pompous, jargon-heavy, and probably indecipherable to those not immersed in language theory (and even for many who are). For instance, she writes that gender is “a construction that regularly conceals its genesis. The tacit collective agreement to perform, produce, and sustain discrete and polar genders as cultural fictions is obscured by the credibility of its own production.”

Even her book blurbs are turgid. Dispossession: The Performative in the Political (2013), announces: “This book interrogates the agonistic and open-ended corporeality and conviviality of the crowd as it assembles in cities to protest political and economic dispossession through a performative dispossession of the sovereign subject and its propriety.”

Butler’s turn away from literature and language theory in favor of Middle East politics, criticism of U.S. foreign policy, and demonization of Israel came in a collection of essays titled Precarious Life (2004) in which she focused on the effects of the 9/11 attacks on America. What many people would describe as an atrocity, Butler describes as a “dislocation from first-world privilege, however temporary.” Her condemnation of terrorism rings about as hollow as Kofi Annan’s or Yassir Arafat’s. Not only is Butler unwilling to condemn Hamas and Hizb’allah, her tepid equivocation contains more than a hint of comradery: “Understanding Hamas, Hizb’allah as social movements that are progressive, that are on the Left, that are part of a global Left, is extremely important. That does not stop us from being critical of certain dimensions of both movements.” Despite the great admiration that the Left has for Hamas and Hizb’allah, neither group shares any of the Left’s ideals and anyone claiming otherwise is delusional.

Butler’s version of the academic fad called “intersectionality” connects the victimization of homosexuals and various minority groups with the victimization of the Arab people who inhabit what she calls “Israel-Palestine.” This permits identifying Israel as the analog to the homophobic, white supremacist empire she finds so prevalent throughout the world.

A surprising condemnation of Judith Butler comes from Carey Nelson, former president of the American Association of University Professors, who recognized that “Butler’s and the BDS movement’s first goal is to maximize international hostility toward Israel, a project destined to harden positions, not move the peace process along.”

For someone who has made a career out of refuting the binary option, Butler is curiously blind to her own portrayals of a colonizing and marginalizing (bad) Israel, and the oppressed and innocent (good) Palestinians. Marginalization of “the other,” it seems, is only something Israelis and conservatives do, Palestinians and leftists being immune to bigotry.

Butler makes a point of criticizing the Geneva Conventions for their “selective criterion to the question of who merits protection and who does not.” This of course misses the point that the Conventions were crafted to exclude practitioners of illegal war from the protections granted to legal combatants. As John Yoo puts it, those who do not “operate under responsible command, wear uniforms, carry their arms openly, and obey the laws of war” operate illegally. Legal and illegal war is another binary that Butler rejects.

After the November 2015 massacres in Paris, Butler scolded the world for its inordinate, selective mourning of dead French people when so many Arabs were killed (50 in Beirut and 111 in “Palestine”) in the prior weeks. Implying that the Hamas and Hizb’allah fighters are innocent civilians arbitrarily killed by Israel, Butler urged everyone to “consider how the metrics of grievability work” and embrace what she calls “transversal grief” -- equal grief for all dead. But just as with her confusion over legal and illegal combatants, Butler fails to recognize that not every life is worthy of our grief, and not everyone deserves to be mourned.

Unique among leftists, Butler does not give lip service to the “two-state solution.” In a book titled Parting Ways: Jewishness and the Critique of Zionism (2012), she announces “a new ethos for a one-state solution.” It will be what she calls a “bi-national state” -- effacing all of Israel and forcing Jews to live as a minority in a Muslim-majority Palestine. In her characteristically confusing style, Butler explains that “only when bi-nationalism deconstructs the idea of a nation can we hope to think about what a state, what a polity might look like that would actually extend equality.” This is a dangerous fantasy, ignorant of history.

So what to do about an influential thinker who can’t distinguish between friend and foe, legal combatant and terrorist, innocent civilians killed sipping lattes in a Parisian café and Hamas operatives killed by the IDF? I suggest we preempt her ascension by boycotting her terminal cultural relativism, divesting ourselves from her gimmicky prose, and sanctioning with righteous opprobrium anyone who honors her political writing with the term “philosophy.” One Edward Said is quite enough.


A.J. Caschetta is a Shillman-Ginsburg fellow at the Middle East Forum and a senior lecturer at the Rochester Institute of Technology. This essay was sponsored by Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum.

A.J. Caschetta

Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/01/is_judith_butler_the_new_edward_said.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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