Friday, June 8, 2018

Obama’s Treason: Even Worse Than We Thought - Robert Spencer




by Robert Spencer

But Leftist Privilege will prevent him from ever being held accountable.




The Washington Free Beacon reported Wednesday that “the Obama administration skirted key U.S. sanctions to grant Iran access to billions in hard currency despite public assurances the administration was engaged in no such action, according to a new congressional investigation.”

And it gets even worse: “The investigation, published Wednesday by the House Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, further discloses secret efforts by top Obama administration officials to assure European countries they would receive a pass from U.S. sanctions if they engaged in business with Iran.”

This revelation comes after the news that came to light in February, that, according to Bill Gertz in the Washington Times, “the U.S. government has traced some of the $1.7 billion released to Iran by the Obama administration to Iranian-backed terrorists in the two years since the cash was transferred.”

There is a law that applies to this situation. U.S. Code 2381 says: “Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.”

In a sane political environment, Barack Obama would be tried for treason.

Barack Hussein Obama has planted seeds that will be bearing bitter fruit for years, and probably decades, to come. He is, without any doubt, the worst President in American history. Fillmore, Pierce, Buchanan? Yes, the doughface Presidents made the Civil War inevitable, but worse came later. Grant? Blind to corruption and out of his depth, but there have been worse than he as well. Wilson? That black-hearted Presbyterian bigot arguably gave the world Hitler and World War II, so he is definitely in the Final Four. Harding? Nah: his tax cuts and return to “normalcy” got the American economy, and the Twenties, roaring. FDR and LBJ gave us the modern welfare state and dependent classes automatically voting Democrat; the full bill on the damage they did hasn’t yet been presented. Nixon? A crook and an economic Leftist, who betrayed Taiwan for the People’s Republic; his record certainly isn’t good. Carter? Nothing good can be said about his four years of sanctimony and incompetence.

But there is one thing Barack Obama has on all competitors: treason.

He showered hundreds of billions of dollars on the Islamic Republic of Iran. There are those who say, “It was their money. It belonged to the Iranian government but was frozen and not paid since 1979.” Indeed, and there was a reason for that: not even Jimmy Carter, who made the Islamic Republic of Iran possible, thought that money, which had been paid by the Shah’s government in a canceled arms deal, belonged to the mullahs who overthrew the Shah. Likewise Reagan, George H. W. Bush, Clinton, and George W. Bush all thought that the Islamic Republic was not due money that was owed to the Shah.

Only Barack Obama did.

The definition of treason is giving aid and comfort to the enemy. The leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran order their people to chant “Death to America” in mosques every Friday, and repeatedly vow that they will ultimately destroy the United States of America and the state of Israel. How was giving them billions and helping them skirt sanctions applied by the U.S. government not treason?

Other Presidents have been incompetent, corrupt, dishonest, but which has committed treason on a scale to rival the treason of Barack Obama?

The Iranians also operate a global network of jihad terror organizations, one of which, Hizballah, is quite active in Mexico now, with the obvious ultimate intention of crossing the border and committing jihad massacres of Americans. Obama has given a tremendous boost to these initiatives, as well as to Iran’s nuclear program, with his nuclear deal that has given the Iranians hundreds of billions of dollars and essentially a green light to manufacture nuclear weapons, in exchange for absolutely nothing.

There is no telling when the worst consequences of Obama’s aid and comfort to the Islamic Republic of Iran will be felt. But they likely will be felt in one way or another. Even as President Trump moves swiftly to restore sanctions and put Iran on notice that its nuclear activity and global adventurism will not be tolerated, those billions cannot be recovered, and the Iranians have already spent a great deal for their jihad cause.

However this catastrophe plays out, there is one man who will suffer no consequences whatsoever: Barack Obama. That’s Leftist Privilege. It’s good to be a powerful Leftist in Washington nowadays. Laws? Pah! Laws are for conservatives.


Robert Spencer

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270378/obamas-treason-even-worse-we-thought-robert-spencer

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Prager U Video: The Dark Secret Behind the Iran Deal - Prager University




by Prager University

Iran's nuclear secrets unveiled.




Ami Horowitz breaks down the details of Iran's nuclear secrets in the aftermath of America's withdrawal from the Iran Nuclear Deal.




Prager University

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270373/prager-u-video-dark-secret-behind-iran-deal-prager-university

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Trade Deficits Paying for China Military Buildup - Daniel John Sobieski




by Daniel John Sobieski

Simply put, Americans are funding China's military.


One little detail largely escaped media notice when Chinese president Xi Jinping met with North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un on May 8. The visit coincided with China's launch of its first indigenous aircraft carrier in the town where the two met, perhaps sending a message to friend and foes of both China and North Korea:
The pair reportedly met in Dalian, where Xi will attend a ceremony launching the country's first domestically-built aircraft carrier.
To North Korea, the message was, don't worry, because China has your back. To the U.S., the message was, you'd better start worrying about more than the price of soybeans.

China has global ambitions, and those ambitions, like that new carrier, are being paid for in large part by the vast transfer of wealth via our huge trade deficits with Beijing.

Agreeing with that assessment is former Wall Street Journal editor and Asia expert Brett M. Decker, who warns that those who worry that tariffs will increase the price of consumer goods and provoke a trade war are missing the big picture: that China is using its trade surplus us to prepare perhaps for a real war.
America's trade deficit with China serves the authoritarian state's global ascendance and regional power ambitions, said Decker.
"What are our dollars doing?" asked Decker. "We're building, paying for, and underwriting [China's] military buildup. We're building their infrastructure. We're making their country stronger for the future, sort of at the long-term expense of our own. We're not making the investments in our own infrastructure."
"Every three years, we're at a rate of $1.2 trillion in trade deficit with China," said Decker. "That's money they're just using to build a deepwater fleet so they can project force in the Pacific. It's a national security issue, as well." ...
The trade deficit "is not only a consumer question," said Decker, inviting political observers to contemplate "the bigger picture" of geopolitics.
For those who cheerfully chirp that they personally have a trade deficit with K-Mart to neither's disadvantage and both getting what they want, consider that K-Mart is not taking your money and building aircraft carriers, anti-satellite weapons, and ballistic missiles with multiple and maneuverable warheads. Those militarized islands in the South China Sea are there not for tourists, but to militarily support China's territorial and resource theft in the region as it pursues its global ambitions.

Peter Navarro, assistant to President Trump and White House Office of Trade and Manufacturing policy director, writing in the February 9, 2016 National Interest, uses America's F-22 Raptor as an example of how China's intellectual property theft in combination with our huge trade deficits has placed us in mortal peril:
Let's see, however, if we can put the size of the U.S. trade deficit with China into some perspective; and let's start with the F-22 – the only U.S. fighter jet with the agility, speed and stealth to overcome the latest Russian air defense systems and newest Chinese and Russian fighters[.] ...
America can deploy only 187 F-22s because Congress, with President Obama's veto gun to its head, cancelled further construction due to high costs: about $360 million a plane[.] ...
In contrast, China surely will have the capability to churn out record numbers of its F-22 clone known as the Chengdu J-20 Mighty Dragon. The sad irony here is that even as Congress was voting to halt F-22 construction, Chinese cyber hackers were brazenly stealing the F-22's blueprints.
Now here's the relevant trade deficit math: Assuming that it costs about half the price for China to build its F-22 clone because of cheap labor and no need to pay for the R&D that went into developing the F-22, China can use a little more than one month of its trade surplus to replicate the entire U.S. F-22 air wing – and pay for 1,000 of these planes with American consumer dollars in less than six months.
There's clearly a lot more going on here than the price of a refrigerator at Home Depot. While we wring our hands over how China boycotting our soybeans might affect the midterm elections, China is figuring out how to allocate our gift in the financing of its major weapons systems:
[Y]ou can do the (admittedly) rough numbers for any of a number of other Chinese weapons systems. For example, one day's worth of China's trade surplus with the United States buys 1,000 new cruise missiles that Beijing can point at Taipei or one hundred anti-ship ballistic missiles to target American carriers.
Similarly, just one week's worth of China's trade surplus finances the construction of at least three new Chinese aircraft carriers to patrol the South China Sea and Indian Ocean or twenty new Yuan class diesel electric submarines to lay [sic] in wait for Japanese destroyers or American aircraft carrier strike groups. And Beijing can pay for its entire annual defense budget with a mere five months of what American consumers contribute to Beijing's imperial fisc.
American consumers are quite simply financing China's war machine. They financed China's new aircraft carrier. And they are financing China's long-term territorial ambitions in the East and South China Seas:
Beijing has long declared the South China Sea to be its territorial waters and has laid claim to two disputed chains: the Paracel Islands, about 200 miles from the coast of Vietnam, and the Spratly Islands in the southeastern part of the South China Sea. China's territorial ambitions include the Senkakus in the East China Sea, part of what Chinese military doctrine refers to as the "first island chain" that surrounds China.
China's claim to the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea involves islands under Japanese administration and that Tokyo claims as Japanese territory. In the South China Sea, as of February, according to Reuters, China had finished construction on no fewer than six different island reefs from which to project its power in the South China Sea. Included in its military effort is the construction of a 3,000-meter (9,842 feet)-long runway on the artificially expanded Fiery Cross Reef as a base for Chinese fighter aircraft.

The Chinese know the nexus between national wealth and national strength. While we struggle to find a way to get Mexico to pay for the border wall, China has found the easy way to get America to pay for its military.


Daniel John Sobieski is a freelance writer whose pieces have appeared in Investor's Business Daily, Human Events, Reason Magazine, and the Chicago Sun-Times among other publications.

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/06/trade_deficits_paying_for_china_military_buildup.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Palestinians: "Burn the Jews!" - Bassam Tawil




by Bassam Tawil

"We want to set fire to Israel so that the Jews will be burned or forced to leave their country." -- Abu Al-Majd, terrorist.

  • There are two important factors that the international community needs to notice regarding the fire kites that the Palestinians are sending to Israel from the Gaza Strip. First: those who are launching the kites are making it clear that their ultimate goal is to kill as many Jews as possible and bring about the obliteration of Israel. Second: the Palestinians see all Jews living in Israel as "settlers.
  • The Palestinians are now also telling us that the terror kites they are sending to Israel accord with what the Quran orders Muslims to do in the fight against the "infidels." They apparently see the flaming kites as part of the jihad (holy war) against the enemies of Allah and Islam.
  • "We want to set fire to Israel so that the Jews will be burned or forced to leave their country." -- Abu Al-Majd, terrorist.
  • The jihad of the Palestinians against Israel is the same jihad that ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic jihadi groups have also been waging on the "infidels" and "enemies of Islam" in the US, EU and other non-Muslim countries. We are witnessing a well-organized campaign of terror orchestrated by terrorists and activists belonging to Hamas and other Palestinian groups in the Gaza Strip.
The Palestinians, who have been sending flaming kites from the Gaza Strip into Israel the past few weeks, say that their real goal is to "burn the Jews" and destroy Israel. They see the kites as a new weapon to achieve their goal. They are disappointed, they say, that no Jew has been hurt yet as a result of the fires triggered by the flaming kites.

The kites have ignited dozens of fires in Israeli fields and forests adjacent to the border with the Gaza Strip, much to the satisfaction of the Palestinians and their supporters in the Arab and Islamic countries, who took to various social media platforms to celebrate the "success" of the Palestinian terror kites.


Firefighters and soldiers attempt to extinguish a fire in a wheat field in Nahal Oz, Israel, after it was set alight by Palestinians who sent firebombs attached to kites across the border from Gaza, on May 15, 2018. (Photo by Lior Mizrahi/Getty Images)

The same Palestinians who are openly stating that the flaming kites are aimed at "burning the Jews" and eliminating Israel are also arguing that this new form of terrorism is in the context a "peaceful and nonviolent protest" by the residents of the Gaza Strip.

The international community, together with mainstream media in the West, appears to have fallen for this deception by the Palestinians and keep endorsing the bogus claim that the residents of the Gaza Strip are engaging in a peaceful and popular "resistance" against Israel.

All that the foreign journalists and governments around the world need to do to understand the true intentions of the Palestinians behind this latest wave of terrorism is to listen carefully to what is being said in the Gaza Strip, even if it does not fit in with their "narrative."

There are two important factors that the international community needs to notice regarding the flaming kites that the Palestinians are sending to Israel from the Gaza Strip. First: those who are launching the kites are making it clear that their ultimate goal is to kill as many Jews as possible and bring about the obliteration of Israel. Second: the Palestinians see all Jews living in Israel as "settlers."

The reports in various Palestinian media outlets on the fires in Israel refer to Israeli towns as "settlements." Even media outlets that are affiliated with the "moderate" Palestinian Authority, which has ostensibly recognized Israel's right to exist, are referring to the Israeli communities near the border with the Gaza Strip as "settlements." Even two Israeli agricultural communities, such as Sderot, which have been targeted by the flaming kites, are described as "settlements."

What does this show? The Palestinians do not distinguish between a Jew living in the West Bank and a Jew living in Israel proper. For the Palestinians, all Jews are "settlers." It does not matter whether they live in a settlement in the West Bank, or in Tel Aviv, Haifa or Jerusalem. For the Palestinians, there is no difference between a Jewish settlement in the West Bank and any city in Israel, including Tel Aviv.

Israel actually evacuated all Jewish settlements in the Gaza Strip in 2005 and withdrew totally to the international border. No Jews live inside the Gaza Strip. There are no "settlements" inside the Gaza Strip. Prior to the Israeli unilateral disengagement from the Gaza Strip, the Palestinians used to launch almost daily terror attacks on the Jews living inside the Gaza Strip. In 2005, the Palestinians got what they wanted: Israel left the entire Gaza Strip after often forcibly evacuating more than 8,000 Jews from their homes and lands.

The events of the past few weeks along the border between the Gaza Strip and Israel show that the Palestinians' true goal is not to "liberate" the Gaza Strip, but to eliminate Israel and replace it with an Islamic state. Until 13 years ago, the Palestinians told everyone that all they wanted was to drive the Jewish settlers out of the Gaza Strip. All the settlers did leave the Gaza Strip. Now, the Palestinians are telling us that they want to drive the "remaining settlers" out of Israel. To them, all Jews in the area are legitimate targets, no matter where they live.

The Palestinians are now also telling us that the terror kites they are sending to Israel accord with what the Quran orders Muslims to do in the fight against the "infidels." They apparently see the flaming kites as part of the jihad (holy war) against the enemies of Allah and Islam. To back up their argument, the Palestinians are quoting the verse from the Quran that states:
"And prepare against them whatever you are able of power and of steeds of war by which you may terrify the enemy of Allah and your enemy and others besides them whom you do not know [but] whom Allah knows. And whatever you spend in the cause of Allah will be fully repaid to you, and you will not be wronged." (Al-Anfaal Sura, 8:60).
The jubilant reactions of Palestinians and other Arabs and Muslims to the reports about the kite fires that have destroyed thousands of acres of fields and agricultural lands in Israel also leave no doubt that this tactic is a violent jihad waged with the goal of destroying Israel and killing Jews. Each time a report about another blaze surfaces, many Palestinians take to Facebook and Twitter to shout the Islamic battle cry "Allahu Akbar!" ["Allah is Greatest"], echoing calls from ISIS, Al-Qaeda and other jihadi terror groups when they launch terror attacks against non-Muslims. The Arabs and Muslims are now referring to the kite launchers as "mujahideen" (warriors) - a sign that these terrorists are soldiers of Islam engaged in a jihad against the infidels, including, of course, the Jews.

In case anyone had doubts as to why the flaming kites are being sent to Israel, here is what one of the terrorists, Abu Al-Majd, had to say: "We are sending these kites because we want to tell the world that we are determined to return to the homes we lost 70 years ago." In other words, what Abu Al-Majd is saying is, "We want to set fire to Israel so that the Jews will be burned or forced to leave their country."

The jihad of the Palestinians against Israel is the same jihad that ISIS, the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic jihadi groups have also been waging on the "infidels" and "enemies of Islam" in the US, EU and other non-Muslim countries. Jihad is a religious duty imposed on Muslims to spread their religion by waging war. The word "jihad" is mentioned several times in the Qur'an, where Muslims are told that they must do their utmost to spread Islam and fight the non-Muslims.

Consider, for example, this reference to jihad in the Quran (Al-Mumtahanah S 60:1):
"O you who believe! Do not take My enemy and your enemy for close friends, offering them love while they disbelieve what has come to you of the truth, [and] rive out the Messenger and yourself because you believe in Allah - your Lord - if you have gone forth waging jihad in My name and seeing My pleasure."
Or another verse from the Quran (Al-Maidah Sura 5:54):
"O you who believe! Whoever from among you turns back from his religion, then Allah will bring a people whom He loves and who love Him; who are humble toward the believers, are proud toward the disbelievers, do jihad in the way of Allah, and do not fear the blame of any blamer."
When talking about this latest attempt to set Israel on fire and burn Jews, we are not talking about children who are playing with kites. We are witnessing a well-organized campaign of terror orchestrated by terrorists and activists belonging to Hamas and other Palestinian groups in the Gaza Strip. The terrorists have even attached explosive devices to some of the kites. They have also formed a terror cell called the Kites Unit, similar to the gangs that fire mortars and rockets at Israel every now and then. This is the real jihad where the Palestinians are fulfilling their duty as Muslims to wage war on Jews.

The flaming kites should be seen in the context of the ongoing Palestinian terror campaign that began decades ago and the goal of which is to kill Jews and eliminate Israel. There is no difference between the kites and rockets and mortars. There is no difference between the kites, suicide bombings, stabbing and car-ramming attacks. There is no difference between the kites and drive-by shootings. There is no difference between the kites and the slaughtering of a Jewish family during a meal. The techniques may vary, but the goal remains one: to see Israel wiped off the face of the earth.

The flaming kites flying from the Gaza Strip are another act of war, another phase of the jihad launched by Palestinians and their Arab and Muslim brothers against Israel and Jews on two fronts. While the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip are trying to set all of Israel on fire, the Palestinian Authority and its president, Mahmoud Abbas, are continuing to wage another type of war on Israel: that one in international forums to delegitimize Israel and demonize Jews.

Bassam Tawil is a Muslim Arab based in the Middle East.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12467/palestinians-burn-the-jews

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Palestine- failing the test of history - Dr. Martin Sherman




by Dr. Martin Sherman

Hat tip: Dr. Jean-Charles Bensoussan

[A] strong claim can be made that, in the history of post WW-II national independence movements, none have enjoyed conditions more conducive to success, and yet achieved such miserably meager results, than that of the Palestinians.

Merit is no qualification for freedom…. Freedom is enjoyed when you are so well armed, or so turbulent, or inhabit a country so thorny that the expense of your neighbour's occupying you is greater than the profit. -From  a letter by T.E. Lawrence (a.k.a.”Lawrence of Arabia”) published July 22, 1920, in The Times of London setting out a case for the political independence for the Arabs in the Middle East.   
  
Despite being written almost a century ago Lawrence’s diagnosis is still extremely pertinent in assessing the validity of the frequently aired view that "the Palestinians deserve a state of their own."

Indeed, such views have been explicitly expounded by US Administrations for well over a decade from George W. Bush   to Barack Obama ,who both incorporated the idea into their "visions" for the Middle East.

Cannot condition national sovereignty on regime type

In the past, several pro-Israeli pundits have tried to dispute the widely accepted contention that "the Palestinians do indeed deserve a state" Some, like author Naomi Ragen, have warned of the unsavory nature that such a state would take – devoid of any semblance of law and order and due process, tolerance of religious diversity, right of political dissidence, freedom of expression, or regard for the status of women. Others, like former Israeli government minister Natan Sharansky, have argued  that Palestinian statehood should be conditioned on the emergence of Palestinian democratization.


Regrettably, despite factual accuracy and moral validity, objections of this ilk cannot  serve as a binding political criterion for national independence.

After all, if tolerant pluralistic polities, in which the rule of law and civil equality flourished, were the sine-qua-non for recognition of national sovereignty, such recognition would have to be denied a slew of states across the globe – from authoritarian monarchies through military dictatorships, and tyrannical theocracies. Indeed, many of the states in the international system, and the Middle East, would not qualify – including several that Israel recognizes as having a major role to play in the region, such as Saudi Arabia and Jordan, where the sovereigns are not elected at all, and Egypt, where the elections are hardly free and fair.


To adopt these positions would be to demand from the Palestinians criteria for national independence that are demanded from no other people. Moreover, are the advocates of democratic governance as a precondition for national sovereignty really proposing that Israel could accept Palestinian statehood if its government were democratic but revoke that acceptance as a result of regime change?

Palestinian failure undeniably staggering 

However, the Palestinians have indeed undermined – even invalidated – their claim to statehood by the eminently less stringent and clearly measurable empirical criterion set out by Lawrence above. For the Palestinians' ongoing failure to achieve statehood reflects the converse – but necessary - corollary of the simple practical yardstick he stipulates.

After all, if success in achieving statehood is the sole criterion by which to judge whether such statehood is indeed merited, then surely it follows that the reverse is true: Failure to achieve statehood is the ultimate indicator in determining that it is not.

Clearly, the Palestinian failure has been undeniably staggering.

In fact, a strong claim can be made that, in the history of post WW-II national independence movements, none have enjoyed conditions more conducive to success, and yet achieved such miserably meager results, than that of the Palestinians. Accordingly, the proponents of Palestinian statehood must be compelled to respond to a simple but trenchant question: Why hasn't it happed up to now?

Despite highly favorable conditions for success


After all, as a purported “national liberation” movement, the Palestinians have enjoyed hugely favorable conditions:
  • Decades of unmitigated support and patronage of the USSR, one of the world's two post-WW II superpowers
  • Almost universal international endorsement of their claims
  • Highly supportive coverage in nearly all major international media
  • Massive financial backing making the Palestinians the highest per capita recipients of international aid on the face of the globe
  • From the early 1990’s almost two decades of highly accommodative Israeli administrations that not only acknowledged, but often even identified with, their claims to statehood
Yet in spite of these highly conducive circumstances, the Palestinians have been utterly unable to produce any semblance of a sustainable productive society.

Quite the reverse! The Palestinian leadership has done nothing but bring about a repressive and regressive regime that produced little but the pillage of the Palestinian people and the squandering of the vast resources provided by donor nations.

Clearly then, a quarter-century after the Oslo Agreements, the Palestinians have shown the world that they simply cannot "cut it."

Tyrannical theocracy and corrupt kleptocracy

All they have been able to establish has proven both tenuous and dysfunctional, from a corrupt kleptocracy under Fatah to a tyrannical theocracy under Hamas. Indeed, the Palestinian state has perhaps the unique, if dubious, distinction of attaining "failed state" status before it was in fact established.

So today, decades after other movements for national liberation across Africa and Asia, with far less financial and political support, managed to throw off mighty empires, the Palestinians, with all the weight of the Muslim world and its vast petro-riches behind them, have been unable to wrest independence from the tiny micro-state, Israel – not only when it opposed such independence, but even when it did not!

Clearly then, the time has come for the international community to recognize that rather than a coherent, cohesive national entity, the Palestinians comprise an amorphous amalgam of clans, gangs and bands whose overriding aspiration is not to establish a state for their own people but to dismantle a state of another people – the Jews.

Failing the test of history

Accordingly, the time has come to remove the issue of Palestinian statehood from the international agenda – for the Palestinians themselves have shown that they are patently incapable of attaining or maintaining such statehood. Indeed, while "(moral) merit" may not, as Lawrence points out, be a "qualification" for self-determination, continual and chronic failure to attain it, even under the most benevolent conditions, must surely be clear grounds for disqualification.

The time has, therefore, come to challenge the tenets of conventional wisdom which unquestioningly hold that "the Palestinians deserve a state of their own” –not because of any objections raised by the opponents of such a state, but because the Palestinians themselves have failed the test of history—and have done so resoundingly.


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/22260

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Video: Antifa Public School Teachers - FrontPageMag.com




by FrontPageMag.com

Indoctrinating -- and recruiting -- in America's classrooms.




FrontPageMag Editor's note: Below is Sean Fitzgerald's new video exposing Antifa radicals in America's public schools and their efforts to indoctrinate students with their violent ideology. The video was produced in conjunction with the David Horowitz Freedom Center's Stop K-12 Indoctrination campaign. To order the Freedom Center's new pamphlet, "Leftist Indoctrination in Our K-12 Public Schools," CLICK HERE.




FrontPageMag.com

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270382/video-antifa-public-school-teachers-frontpagemagcom

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Candidate to Replace Keith Ellison May Be Even More Hostile to Israel - IPT News




by IPT News

[G]iven what she says on social media, including comments before she ran for office, [Ilhan ] Omar appears explicitly and openly hostile toward Israel.

Within three short hours of U.S. Rep. Keith Ellison's announcement that he would leave Congress to run for Minnesota Attorney General, Minneapolis state Rep. Ilhan Omar became a candidate to replace him in Washington. Omar became the first Somali Muslim legislator in 2016, defeating 22-term state Rep. Phyllis Kahn.

Ellison's tenure has been marked by concerns he is hostile to Israel, something compounded by the Investigative Project on Terrorism obtaining a 2010 recording in which Ellison complains that Israel enjoys disproportionate influence over U.S. foreign policy.

But given what she says on social media, including comments before she ran for office, Omar appears explicitly and openly hostile toward Israel.

In the wake of last month's violence at the Israel-Gaza border, Omar blasted what she called "Israeli crimes" and called Israel's response a massacre. Palestinians and their advocates tried to cast the violence as unprovoked, and coming amid peaceful protests. In fact, a senior Hamas official admits the Palestinian border protests were "not peaceful resistance" and another Hamas leader bragged that the overwhelming majority of casualties were part of the terrorist group.

Omar has not commented on those facts or lamented the damage Hamas does to everyday life in Gaza in order to invest in future terrorist operations. Instead, she lets stand claims that Israel alone is to blame.

She also has worked with people and groups which share her enmity toward Israel. Omar served on the advisory board for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) Minnesota chapter and has spoken at numerous CAIR events with Zahra Billoo and Linda Sarsour.


Internal records seized by the FBI show that CAIR was formed by Muslim Brotherhood officials in the United States to serve a broader Hamas-support network called the Palestine Committee. Billoo has repeatedly argued that there is no moral distinction between ISIS and the Israeli army. Sarsour is a rabid anti-Zionist who literally embraced convicted Palestinian terrorist bomber Rasmieh Odeh and hails ultra-conservative clerics.

Omar also appears in a new video by the pop music act Maroon 5. That prompted a Twitter exchange in which a writer called her a "Jew hater."

"Drawing attention to the apartheid Israeli regime is far from hating Jews," Omar shot back.

The video always features Israeli actress and "Wonder Woman" star Gal Gadot, an Israeli citizen and veteran of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).

During the last round of Gaza violence in 2014, Gadot shared a picture of her with her daughter lighting Shabbat candles. "I am sending my love and prayers to my fellow Israeli citizens," she wrote. "Especially to all the boys and girls who are risking their lives protecting my country against the horrific acts conducted by Hamas, who are hiding like cowards behind women and children...We shall overcome!!! Shabbat Shalom!"

It's not clear whether Omar knew she would share the screen with Gadot, or whether that might have caused her to reconsider participating. As this new campaign begins, we might soon find out.


IPT News

Source: https://www.investigativeproject.org/7476/candidate-to-replace-keith-ellison-may-be-even

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Palestinian Authority Supreme Shari'a Judge Mahmoud Al-Habbash: The Jews Have No Connection To Jerusalem - MEMRI




by MEMRI

The Jews Have No Connection To Jerusalem; This Is An Imperialist Myth And Distortion Of History

Mahmoud Al-Habbash, the PA Supreme Shari'a Judge and President Mahmoud 'Abbas's advisor for religious affairs, said at a June 4, 2018 conference that the struggle in Jerusalem is between the rightful owners of the city – the Muslims and Christians – and "some foreign Western imperialists that have no connection to this soil." He added that the state of Israel is an imperialist Western enterprise whose purpose is to weaken and divide the Arab world, and that the claim that the Jews have a historical connection to Jerusalem is nothing but a distortion of history.

The conference at which Al-Habbash spoke, organized by "the Muslim-Christian Council for the Salvation of Jerusalem and the Holy Places" and the Organization for Muslim Cooperation (OIC) under the title "The Monotheistic Religions against the Judaization of Jerusalem and Its Holy Places," was also attended by other PA officials, including the Palestinian Mufti, as well as other Christian and Muslim religious leaders, and ambassadors.


Mahmoud Al-Habbash (image: Palsawa.com, June 4, 2018)


Al-Habbash (second from right) at the conference with other participants (image: Alquds-online.org, June 5, 2018)


The following are translated excerpts fromn Al-Habbash's statements at the confrence: [1]
"The battle for Jerusalem is not a religious one; it a political battle between the rightful owners [of the city] and the imperialists. This obligates us to raise the Arab and Muslim world's awareness of the Arab, Muslim and Christian identity of Jerusalem...

"We must be careful when using a particular term or word in connection with Jerusalem, for this is not a conflict with the Jews, but a struggle between the [real] residents and owners of Jerusalem, who are Muslim, Christian and Arab, and some foreign Western imperialists that have no connection to this soil. The catastrophe of Jerusalem did not begin in 1967 or 1948, or with the Balfour Declaration. It began much earlier, about 450 years ago, when imperialist calls began to be heard in the West.

"Palestine is not the [Jewish] Promised Land or the land of the [Jewish] forefathers – for if it is, why did they consider it as [only] one of several options when they started looking for a place for their state?...

"There is a difference between faith and claiming territory based on a false Jewish or Biblical pretext whose sole purpose is to take over the land. The Al-Burak Wall [i.e., the Western Wall] has nothing to do with a [Jewish] temple, and [the Jews] have no right over its stones. This is an imperialist myth that exploited and distorted history and the holy sites in order to advance and justify imperialist projects.

"U.S. President Trump's step [of recognizing Jerusalem as Israel's capital and moving the embassy there]... is nothing but a consolidation of the imperialist plan to plant a state [in the region] that will drive a wedge between the Asian and African parts of the Arab world, so as to keep [the Arabs] divided, backward and easily controlled...

"[The U.S. embassy in Jerusalem] is an American settlement in Jerusalem, and an emblem of imperialism. We, 13 million Palestinians, say that Jerusalem will not be Judaized and its identity and culture will not be altered. It will remain the eternal capital of the Palestinian state..."
 

[1] Palsawa.com, June 4, 2018.


MEMRI

Source: https://www.memri.org/reports/palestinian-authority-supreme-sharia-judge-and-abbas-advisor-mahmoud-al-habbash-jews-have-no

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

The Swamp Strikes Back - J. Christian Adams




by J. Christian Adams

The Russian collusion investigation is about a clash of cultures, with one culture being the culture of D.C. insiders, and the other being the folks who pay their salaries.

  • The culture of the D.C. metropolitan area is one of wealth, privilege and self-proclaimed sophistication. The bureaucrats and insiders know what is best for you, best for your business, best for themselves, and they can make a nice living without being disrupted. Trump campaigned on disrupting this comfortable power perch; that is what they most hate about him.
  • The Russian collusion investigation has not found any collusion because the investigation was never about collusion. It was always about an out-of-control federal government, emboldened by the lawless age of Obama, and flexing its newfound muscle. The Russian collusion investigation is about a clash of cultures, with one culture being the culture of D.C. insiders, and the other being the folks who pay their salaries.
Each week, Robert Mueller's Wonderlandian investigation into "Russian Collusion" appears "curiouser and curiouser". Each week, it appears that the entire investigation never really had anything to do with Russian collusion, at least in the Trump campaign; only in the Hillary Clinton campaign, where all the investigators have been conscientiously not looking.

First, Mueller indicted General Michael Flynn for not telling the truth to an FBI squad that appeared unexpectedly at the White House to question him, when now it turns out that Peter Strzok, who interrogated him, said he had not lied. It also now turns out that former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe may later have altered Strzok's interrogation notes, and then destroyed the evidence.

Mueller then indicted Paul Manafort for allegedly laundering money through an Alexandria, Virginia, oriental rug store -- a "process crime". Notably absent from it in any indictment was mention of Russia, collusion or even elections.

Moreover, the order from the Department of Justice, signed by Rod Rosenstein, stipulated one more directive:
"(ii) any matters that arose or may arise directly om the investigation; and
(iii) any other matters within the scope of 28 C.F.R. § 600.4(a).
As well as:
"(d) Sections 600.4 through 600. l 0 of Title 28 of the Code of Federal Regulations"
As Judge T.S. Ellis said to Mueller on May 4:
"You don't really care about Mr. Manafort's bank fraud. You really care about getting information that Mr. Manafort can give you that would reflect on Mr. Trump and lead to his prosecution or impeachment or whatever."
Mueller's only indictments that did relate to Russia were directed at a nest of Russian sock-puppets who, in an apparent effort to influence public opinion, pushed pro-Trump tweets during the 2016 election. The crimes alleged were that the sock-puppets were foreign agents trying to influence American elections through social media. In other words, the Russians were doing what they have internationally for decades -- attempting to influence domestic American politics through fronts and propaganda. When the sock puppets, incidentally, had the nerve to ask for proof, Mueller asked for a delay, which the judge refused to grant. As Andrew McCarthy, former Assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York, noted, "as all prosecutors are taught from their first day on the job: Never indict a case unless you are prepared to try the case."


Robert Mueller III. (Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images)

If the Democrats seem suddenly concerned about foreigners influencing an election, that is what the previous administration did as recently as 2015 -- to Israel. Then, the Obama State Department funneled $350 thousand U.S. taxpayer dollars to OneVoice, an anti-Netanyahu political operation during Israel's parliamentary elections. OneVoice used American tax dollars to build a political voter database, train activists, and hire a political consulting firm with ties to President Obama's campaign apparatus.

American tax dollars were funneled through Netanyahu's foes and eventually ended up back in the pockets of Obama's political machine. Now the same gang that used American power to try to bring down the Israeli Prime Minister is sanctimoniously objecting to Russian interference-by-tweeting.

The frenzy about the Russian tweets also has a sinister side.

The singular lesson for history of the seemingly widespread corruption at the senior levels of the FBI, Department of Justice, and the State Department is that a phony "dossier" about then-presidential candidate Donald Trump was used to obtain -- by misrepresenting its contents to a judge -- Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants against private citizens. The dossier was cooked up and paid for by Democrat political operatives with ties to the presidential campaign of former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and the Democratic National Committee.

When Representative Devin Nunes (R-CA) suspected that the admittedly "unverified" phony dossier was used to obtain wiretap warrants of American citizens, he was right. But it gets worse.

After the warrants were obtained and telephone calls of private citizens were tapped by the FBI, Obama Department of Justice officials, and some people yet unnamed inside the Obama White House, authorized the unmasking of the content of those conversations. Unmasking means that the transcripts and identities of Americans were revealed, violating their Fourth Amendment right to privacy. For good measure, Obama officials even changed the rules about how widely those unmasked transcripts could be distributed inside the DOJ, thus expanding the universe of potential leakers.

And leak they did.

In short, Democrats produced a phony document to make candidate Trump look creepy, then Obama DOJ officials working with sympathetic FBI staff and outside political operatives, obtained FISA search warrants by lying to FISA judges four times in order to target the Trump campaign in an apparently unlimited fishing expedition for a crime -- none ever having been specified as is required by law -- even after the president was duly elected.

If all of this were not enough, a small core of powerful FBI senior staffers -- as opposed to the FBI's remarkable rank and file -- was steering this entire affair, while simultaneously texting each other about their hatred for candidate Donald Trump.

The central item to understand is that Swamp actors inside the DOJ and FBI used their powers first to do what could be done to exonerate at least 13 possible crimes committed by Hillary Clinton. That, at least was the number committed before information emerged that her campaign and the DNC had funded the dossier; later findings must have added a few more.

The Swamp actors' other objective was apparently to sabotage Trump's presidency if Trump won. Peter Strzok wrote, "I want to believe the path you threw out for consideration in Andy's office—that there's no way he gets elected—but I'm afraid we can't take that risk. It's like an insurance policy in the unlikely event you die before you're 40..." by using their powers in the Russia probe to destroy the president politically.

It is precisely the sort of subversion that takes place in banana republics -- where political differences are criminalized and weaponized -- and is fundamentally anti-Constitutional. It appears to be -- on the part of some of the heads of the FBI, the Department of Justice, the State Department and President Obama's White House -- part of a criminal conspiracy to obstruct justice and abuse power in order -- as former U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia Joseph diGenova put it, "to illegally exonerate Hillary Clinton and, if she didn't win the election, to then frame Donald Trump with a falsely created crime."

The fraud on the court, and by extension, on the American people, appears an attempt to convert power over the ministerial state into political power.

Instead of graciously allowing his successor to get his sea legs and govern -- a courtesy traditionally extended by Presidents of both parties -- former President Barack Obama lingers and supports the "Resistance" movement.

What you see happening when Rep. Nunes threatens to hold Justice Department officials in contempt for hiding the basis for the FBI to obtain FISA warrants, when you read indictments about Russian sock puppets, it is something more than the good old-fashioned Beltway scandal.

What you are seeing is Constitutional political warfare unleashed by the bureaucracy against a President the bureaucracy apparently loathes.

The bureaucracy seems now to believe that it is in charge, not the president. The bureaucrats make a good living, have comfy retirement plans, can buy life insurance at rates more reasonable than a private sector employee can, and likely think that Trump is a threat to their power. The bureaucrats have created a culture in Washington D.C. that extends beyond the hallways of their Departments.

The culture of the D.C. metropolitan area is one of wealth, privilege and self-proclaimed sophistication. The bureaucrats and insiders know what is best for you, best for your business, best for themselves, and they can make a nice living without being disrupted. Trump campaigned on disrupting this comfortable power perch; that is what they most hate about him.

The Russian collusion investigation has not found any collusion because the investigation was never about collusion. It was always about an out-of-control federal government, emboldened by the lawless age of Obama, and flexing its newfound muscle. The Russian collusion investigation is about a clash of cultures, with one culture being the culture of D.C. insiders, and the other being the folks who pay their salaries.

J. Christian Adams is the President of the Public Interest Legal Foundation, a 501(c)(3) public interest law firm dedicated to election integrity and preserving the Constitutional structure of American elections.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12033/swamp-strikes-back

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Good Times Return, but Not Babies - John Horvat II




by John Horvat II

There should be a baby boom that reflects prosperity. However, the delivery room is ominously quieter.


There is an unwritten rule among those who watch the economy. When times are good, families have more babies. Across the board, the fertility rate of women of all ages goes up and the population is replenished. Young populations and prosperity are co-related and desired in healthy economies.

However, that is not happening today. The Great Recession of 2008 is over, and the economy is booming. There is no lack of jobs for those who want them. There should be a baby boom that reflects this prosperity. However, the delivery room is ominously quieter. Not even roaring markets can bring them back to life. 

The 2017 fertility rates from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) report a dismal scenario. Last year marked a forty-year low in women’s fertility, which now stands at 1.76 lifetime births per women. This is the second year in a row that the rate has dropped to a record low.
The drop is dramatic. Women in 2017 are having nearly 500,000 fewer babies than in 2007. This is happening despite the fact that there are seven percent more women of prime-childbearing age. The decline also reflects a deep decline for all racial groups with the deepest drops among minority women. With the exception of women forty or over, the rate has declined for all age groups including women in their thirties that normally has risen as those who delay childbearing start to have children.

The new statistics reflect a larger trend in Italy, Spain, Japan, and other industrialized countries that can no longer replenish their populations. Even baby-unfriendly China is dying as its population ages. Demographers speak of a demographic winter, in which incoming new generations will be overburdened and unable to support their elders.

America has long thought itself exempt from such a winter. When fertility rates went down, it was usually attributed to deferred childbearing due to economic hardships. When business picked up, demographers confidently predicted a corresponding rebound in births.

However, many non-economic factors have long eroded vibrant birthrates. The contraceptive and abortion mentalities facilitated promiscuous and childless lifestyles that undermined the family.

The new trend suggests something different from past models. It suggests a distorted vision of the individual, family, and life. It signals an extreme individualism that is reorienting people’s priorities.

Millennials are coming of age… or perhaps that is the problem: they are not coming of age. Some youths used to defer babies in the past, but increasing numbers of youth are now deferring adulthood. The verb “to adult,” meaning doing something adult-like while remaining childish, is a sign of the times for those who do not wish to grow up.

Younger generations also have different expectations for hobbies and personal interest. They do not want to be tied down in their youth and look for adventures and new experiences as major goals in their lives. Some have student debt that needs to be paid down. Others prefer to remain single.

Many women are waiting to become established firmly their careers before venturing into childbearing. In fact, the prime childbearing years coincide with the prime time for career advancement. This postponement has resulted in the rise in births to women in their late forties. Nearly one in five births now occurs to women 35 or older, when childbirth is riskier.

A second factor is the concept of the family is changing radically. Those youths who do marry will often postpone marriage even into their thirties. In many households, the principal breadwinner might be the woman who cannot afford to take time off for children. Millennials also have changing attitudes toward motherhood. They want to have children on their own terms. Thus, children will often not be an immediate priority. They tend to have fewer children and use long-term contraception.

The hedonistic culture is also a factor making America less baby-friendly. People are more self-centered and individualistic. That is why this present period of prosperity is not resulting in more children. People are spending more on themselves and are reluctant to make sacrifices to increase their responsibilities. When life is considered a big party, the desire to keep the party going will always override a concern for the future. 

Those studying the problem are perplexed by the downward trend. Usually the natural desire to form a family is strong enough to insure that populations maintain themselves. Despite all the cultural forces that have undermined the family over the years, there have always been those who have carried society forward by welcoming babies in good times and bad.

Now it appears that not even prosperity, which normally makes people more generous, is having its effect. Many of those in the most recent generations have realigned their priorities. And babies, the nation’s future, are not a on the list. 


John Horvat II is a scholar, researcher, educator, international speaker, and author of the book Return to Order, as well as the author of hundreds of published articles. He lives in Spring Grove, Pennsylvania where he is the vice president of the American Society for the Defense of Tradition, Family and Property

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/06/good_times_return_but_not_babies.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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