Thursday, June 27, 2024

New evidence turned over to Congress disputes Hunter Biden testimony about controversial firm - Steven Richards and John Solomon

 

​ by Steven Richards and John Solomon

In his interview with impeachment investigators, Hunter Biden claimed he was not an active participant in the Burnham Asset Management venture. That turns out to be not true, evidence shows.

 

Already accused of lying to Congress about other issues, Hunter Biden's February impeachment inquiry testimony distancing himself from a controversial securities firm directly conflicts with evidence the FBI seized years ago, including his signature on an employment contract that made him the firm's vice chairman.

The documents were gathered by FBI and SEC agents back in 2016 and were recently obtained by Congress and shared with Just the News, but not until after Hunter Biden had already given his deposition in February to the U.S. House as part of his father's impeachment inquiry.

The growing conflicts between evidence now in lawmakers' possession and the stories the Biden camp continually gives to America and Congress are becoming of increasing interest to lawmakers.

This is especially true regarding the Burnham Asset Management firm that was embroiled in a criminal securities fraud case back in 2016 and also was used by Hunter Biden's business partners to help a controversial Russian oligarch a decade ago.

Hunter Biden testified to Congress in February that he never became part of the Burnham investment. “And did you have any active participation in Burnham, either as an equity holder, director, or officer?” Rep. Andy Biggs, R-Ariz., asked Biden in his impeachment inquiry deposition earlier this year.

“No. I don't think that ever came to fruition. I think that there was a proposal that I'd be a part of that, but it all fell apart in all of this,” Biden replied, referring to the federal securities fraud charges against his partners, Devon Archer and Jason Galanis. The two partners were convicted but Hunter Biden was never charged.

Yet, the newly obtained documents show Hunter Biden was in fact working for Burnham during the same time period. An employment agreement signed by Hunter Biden shows he was named the Vice Chairman of Burnham Asset Management and was to be awarded an $800,000 salary, according to the document, which was also signed by then-CEO Jon Burnham in April 2015.

“Burnham hereby hires the Employee, as Vice Chairman and Senior Managing Director, of Burnham,” the agreement reads.

The FBI's longtime signature expert reviewed the employment document at the request of Just the News and confirmed the signature was indeed Hunter Biden's, matching it to numerous other public documents he signed over the years that included his Social Security card. 

"Selecting from those samples, all of them bore similarity with the signature on the Burnham Access Management Employment Agreement," retired Agent Wayne Barnes reported to Just the News. "But there is one which is so close to the current questioned signature that it is all that is needed for today’s conclusion. It is the signature Hunter Biden wrote on his Social Security card dated 9/20/12."

You can read Barnes' analysis here. 

Other documents in the FBI collection also show Hunter Biden's direct involvement in Burnham's matters,

For instance, a contemporaneous "Letter of Intent" shows that Hunter Biden’s employment at Burnham was part of a deal that also acquired two of his firms, Rosemont Seneca Advisors and RSP Investments. The plan was to roll Rosemont’s business into the wider Burnham umbrella under Burnham Asset Management or Burnham Securities. The letter confirms Biden’s salary and promised an “earned/buy-in equity plan for each employee” of his old firms, the documents show.

Emails also show that on occasion Hunter Biden responded to business deals involving Burnham. For example, Hunter Biden emailed a Chinese businessman named Henry Zhao about the partnership with Burnham and implied that he was now officially a part of the venture.

“Henry-I am so glad to hear that we have concluded our joint venture between Harvest and Burnham,” Biden wrote. “This is an exciting milestone and I look forward to helping building a cross border institution that helps investors in our respective countries across the globe.”

In another instance in June 2015, Biden received a welcome communication from Burnham, instructing him how to set up his company email, phone, and computer, according to a record obtained by Just the News.

And in November 2015, just months after his official onboarding as vice chairman, Biden was copied on an email chain where partners discussed the visit of Zhao and his partners to the Burnham offices in New York City. In this email, the partners used Biden's new Burnham email address.

The new evidence has caught the attention of lawmakers, including Biggs who told Just the News he thinks Congress should refer Hunter Biden to the DOJ for additional prosecution.

"It's no longer a surprise when one finds out that Hunter Biden has lied to you," Biggs said. "It's not even a surprise that he would lie during a formal congressional interview. Truth seems to be a stranger to him," Biggs said.

"I'm hoping that Congress takes further action on the Biden family and their propensity to abuse power and lie to members of Congress," he added,

Abbe Lowell, lawyer for Hunter Biden, did not respond to a request for comment from Just the News.

The efforts to obscure Hunter Biden's involvement with Burnham and its controversies go back years, well before his testimony.

Archer and Galanis were charged in May 2016 in a $60 million bonds fraud scheme while they were working at Burnham. According to the Justice Department, the pair, along with several other co-defendants, defrauded an Oglala Sioux Native American tribal entity by inducing it to issue bonds, but then failed to invest them as they promised.

The fraud was carried out from March 2014 to April 2016, according to the Justice Department. Archer and Galanis were ultimately convicted, though a judge recently ruled that Archer should be re-sentenced.

In the wake of their arrests, Hunter Biden's then-lawyer George Mesires said in a statement that his client immediately moved to distance himself from the firm, claiming the pair had used Biden's name without his knowledge.

“The defendants...invoked and used Hunter’s name—without his knowledge—to lend their business venture more credibility,” Mesires said, according to the Wall Street Journal. “As soon as Hunter learned of the illegal conduct, and that his name was being used in this unauthorized and inappropriate manner, Hunter took immediate steps to ensure that his business interests would not be associated with the Burnham Group or with any of the defendants." 

Despite that, The Wall Street Journal also reported that Archer’s attorney, Matthew L. Schwartz, said during the trial that Hunter Biden “was part of this deal."

More than a year before Hunter Biden officially became a part of Burnham, Biden's partners, including Archer and Galanis, sought to overcome a federal watch list that was preventing a potential investor, Russian oligarch Yelena Baturina, from pouring resources into the new Burnham venture. Emails show that Archer and Galanis worked with contacts at Morgan Stanley in order to help Baturina secure a U.S.-based bank account in January of 2014, Just the News previously reported. 

Later that year, Baturina would wire $3.5 million to Rosemont Realty --another project tied to Hunter Biden's partners --just weeks before she dined with then-Vice President Joe Biden at the Cafe Milano restaurant in Georgetown, Just the News reported. Despite this, the president insisted on national television that he never met any of his son's business partners or discussed business with him.

Other foreign business partners of Hunter Biden, including oligarchs from Kazakhstan, were also in attendance with the president. Galanis told Congress that he worked through Burnham to secure a U.S. account for Baturina precisely so she could invest further in the group's "new projects," that is, Burnham.  

"I previously met Ms. Baturina in February 2014 when Devon Archer asked me to help open her a U.S. bank account. She had invested at least $105 million from Rosemont Realty by that time, which was a Devon Archer investment vehicle. She was having trouble opening a U.S. bank account based on reports of her ties to criminal figures in Russia and corruption allegations related to her politician husband," Galanis said in his deposition. 

"Our efforts were to help her open a bank account, done with the understanding that she would provide more funding to our new projects," he added. 

Later in 2014, and still months before Hunter Biden officially signed his employment agreement, Burnham appeared eager to broadcast the future first son’s association with the company. One December 2014 Burnham pitch book outlining the group’s plans identified Biden as part of the “highly experienced” team the company was trying to assemble. This was not the last time that trading on the Biden name would become the go-to business model.

The presentation highlighted the benefits of acquiring Biden’s firms including access to his financially powerful Chinese connections through Bohai Harvest RST and enjoying “more day to day engagement by our Chairman and Biden.”

The slide deck was set to be presented to Harvest Global Investments which was headed by Zhao, the Chinese business executive. Emails from Hunter Biden’s laptop and witness testimony at the impeachment inquiry show Zhao was keen on partnering with Burnham and Biden because of the value of the Biden family name and the access it would provide, Just the News previously reported.

Another email first reported by investigative author Peter Schweizer in his book, "Red-Handed: How American Elites Get Rich Helping China Win" show that Zhao was primarily interested in partnering with Burnham because of Hunter Biden’s proposed involvement.

“Henry we believe, is still interested in doing the JV deal if a fair evaluation of Burnham can be agreed to and if YOU as a deal maker are inside Burnham,” one partner wrote to Hunter Biden in October 2014. “Henry holds you in very high regard.”

Biden and Archer also planned to form another Burnham-connected entity, this time a joint venture with controversial Burisma Holdings founder Mykola Zlochevsky, which would be headquartered in Liechtenstein and serve as Burisma’s expansion vehicle abroad, Just the News reported last week.

The venture was set to be capitalized by Zlochevsky with $120 million investment and the new Burnham entity—Burnham Energy Security LLC—was slated to get a quarter of the new venture's net revenues without putting up any cash.

When the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) began to investigate the tribal bond transactions in 2016, the agency was also aware of Hunter Biden’s apparent affiliation because it subpoenaed him for documents related to his involvement with Rosemont Seneca Bohai, according to a letter from congressional investigators to the SEC. Rosemont Seneca Bohai was a firm jointly utilized by Biden and Archer via a “handshake 50-50 ownership” agreement, Archer testified earlier this year. According to investigators, the firm carried out at least one transaction of tribal bonds related to the scheme.

Hunter Biden’s lawyers responded to the subpoena by producing more than 1,700 responsive documents, Congress says. But, the lawyers also reportedly invoked his father’s name to urge the agency to keep his association with the partners and companies at the center of the investigation private.

“The confidential nature of this investigation is very important to our client and it would be unfair, not just to our client, but also to his father, the Vice President of the United States, if his involvement in an SEC investigation and parallel criminal probe were to become the subject of any media attention,” Biden’s lawyers wrote the SEC after turning over documents, according to records on file with the committee. Indeed, Biden’s affiliation with Burnham was never addressed by prosecutors publicly.

 
Steven Richards and John Solomon

Source: https://justthenews.com/accountability/political-ethics/hunter-biden-signed-employment-agreement-firm-he-distanced-himself

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The “Gaza Famine” Myth - Melanie Phillips

 

​ by Melanie Phillips

No facts can be allowed to disturb the blood libels against Israel.

 


[Order David Horowitz’s new book, America Betrayed, HERE.]

It’s now quite clear that there are simply no facts at all — none — that will alter the fixed narrative of lies, distortions and blood libels with which the liberal internationalist order is demonising and delegitimising Israel.

The claim that Israel is starving the civilians of Gaza and causing an imminent famine has been pumped out incessantly since soon after the beginning of the Israel-Hamas war.

In February, the United Nations said that more than a quarter of Gaza’s 2.3 million people were “estimated to be facing catastrophic levels of deprivation and starvation” and that, without action, widespread famine was “almost inevitable”.

In March, Biden administration officials told Benny Gantz — then a member of Israel’s war cabinet who was visiting Washington DC — that the “food shortage crisis” impacting Palestinians in Gaza was “intolerable”.

At the end of that month, Janti Soeripto, president and chief executive of Save the Children US, declared that famine and starvation in Gaza were already happening.

In May, Director of the World Food Programme Cindy McCain said that parts of Gaza were experiencing a “full-blown famine” that was rapidly spreading throughout the territory.

Also last month, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court sought arrest warrants for Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defence Minister Yoav Gallant on the grounds that Israel was “causing starvation as a method of war including the denial of humanitarian relief supplies [and] deliberately targeting civilians in conflict”.s

The world has brushed aside Israel’s repeated protests that there has been no shortage of food trucks arriving with aid for Gaza and that the problem lay instead with distribution because Hamas was stealing the supplies.

Instead, the liberal international establishment has repeatedly demanded that Israel immediately stop the war, thus inescapably surrendering to Hamas and forfeiting the military leverage required to free the remaining hostages.

Yet now, the famine claims have been debunked.

The Famine Review Committee (FRC) conducts investigations into world hunger on behalf of a partnership formed between governments, international organisations and NGOs.

In March, the committee reported that “famine is now projected and imminent” in northern Gaza and was expected to take hold before the end of May. Preventing such a famine, it stated, required “an immediate political decision for a ceasefire together with a significant and immediate increase in humanitarian and commercial access to the entire population of Gaza”.

In April, the Famine Early Warning Systems Network (FEWS NET), a food security monitoring initiative founded in 1985 by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), went even further by stating there was “reasonable evidence” that, since April, northern Gaza had been experiencing a famine and this would persist at least until the end of July.

But on June 4, the Famine Review Committee published a report in which it rejected the FEWS NET analysis as not “plausible” and said it could not endorse its famine projection.

The committee said there was a lack of reliable evidence about the number of trucks entering Gaza and the level of humanitarian assistance that was arriving and being distributed around its various areas.

In order to compensate for these gaps in the data, it said, FEWS NET had relied on “multiple layers of assumptions and inference” about food availability and access as well as nutritional status and mortality, and had made “deliberate choices over assumptions, without the necessary supporting evidence”.

Such assumptions, said the committee, had ignored or underestimated the value of both commercial sources of food and certain forms of humanitarian aid.

Although this didn’t alter the fact that Gaza was experiencing “extreme human suffering” and that urgent measures were needed to boost humanitarian supplies, the committee concluded that flows of aid and the availability of food had increased significantly in March and April and “that nearly 100 percent of daily kilocalorie requirements were available for the estimated population of 300,000 people in April, even using conservative calculations”.

In other words, the committee reversed its own dire predictions and damned the famine early warning network for excluding evidence that gave the lie to its anti-Israel narrative. The categorical declarations of imminent famine being caused by wicked, heartless, war-criminal Israel just weren’t true.

It’s worth remembering that USAID, the parent body of FEWS NET, is run by Samantha Power, who served as US ambassador to the United Nations during the Obama administration.

In 2002, Power suggested in a “thought experiment” that America might have to invade Israel to prevent an Israeli genocide against the Palestinians. She also suggested that the only people who might be alienated by this would be American Jews, who she said exercised tremendous political and financial power over America.

Other research has also exploded the “Gaza famine” claims. At Columbia University, two professors have said the evidence shows that sufficient amounts of food are being supplied to Gaza.

They told The Jerusalem Post that it was “a myth that Israel is responsible for famine in Gaza” and suggested that the International Criminal Court and UN had joined Hamas in blaming Israel for a “famine that never was, hoping to stop the war”.

Yet there are no signs that these rebuttals of the “Gaza famine” claim are having any effect on the Israel-bashing crowd. A few days ago, The New York Times was still referring to “starving civilians” and blaming deaths from malnutrition on “restrictions on aid and commercial goods entering Gaza”.

BBC News reported this week that “warnings of famine are looming once again in northern Gaza,” broadcasting distressing footage of infants said to be suffering from dehydration and malnutrition caused by restrictions on aid at the Rafah and Kerem Shalom border crossings.

Other than Fox News, it seems that no mainstream media outlet has reported the Famine Review Committee’s findings that the claim of famine in Gaza cannot be justified. Nor have the anti-Israel humanitarian organisations, although the World Health Organisation’s Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus has now subtly adjusted his rhetoric by talking about “famine-like conditions”.

Famine is not the only anti-Israel falsehood whose debunking has been ignored. The mainstream media and humanitarian crowd are still using the Hamas figure of 37,000-plus civilians killed in Gaza, despite the fact that the UN itself revised its own casualty totals sharply downwards after it emerged that some of the claimed deaths had been drawn from media sources and were fabricated.

Some outlets such as The New York Times, the Australian Broadcasting Corporation and Time magazine are still claiming that the International Court of Justice said the Palestinians in Gaza faced a “plausible risk of genocide” even though the court said no such thing. As the ICJ President Joan Donoghue herself said, the court decided “that the Palestinians had a plausible right to be protected from genocide. … It didn’t decide that the claim of genocide was plausible”.

While Israel continues to be defamed by blood libels about famine and its war of self-defence in Gaza, some five million are facing actual famine in Sudan where up to 150,000 have been killed and up to 10 million displaced. Some 25 million are estimated to need humanitarian assistance as a result of a 14 month-long civil war.

Yet this vast and catastrophic scale of human suffering is being almost totally ignored. On Fox News, Hadeel Oueis, editor-in-chief of the pan-Arab media outlet Jusoor, said: “Sudanese [people] are asking why the world turns a blind eye as the third-largest country in Africa is laid to waste while at the same time fixating on the smaller conflict in Gaza.”

Good question. The answer is as obvious as it is brutal: the world only cares about suffering humanity when it can blame the Jews. That malevolent prism shapes a fixed and murderous narrative about Israel and the Jewish people that no actual facts can be allowed to disturb.


Melanie Phillips

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-gaza-famine-myth/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Iran Moves Into Somalia - Daniel Greenfield

 

​ by Daniel Greenfield

After six months of Iran using its Houthi Jihadis to impose a blockade near Yemen while defying Biden to do anything about it, the Islamic global terror state is moving on to a Somali blockade.

 

Current reports suggest that the Houthis, an Iranian Shiite terror group, is negotiating to provide weapons to Yemen's Al-Shabaab, a Sunni Jihadist group allied with Al Qaeda, to expand Iran's control over shipping. While Al-Shabaab has operated using the conventional Al Qaeda playbook of rifles and IEDs, the Houthis can offer upgraded drones and missile technology. Pictured: Houthi soldiers in Sanaa, Yemen on January 19, 2024 (Photo by Mohammed Huwais/AFP via Getty Images

After six months of Iran using its Houthi Jihadis to impose a blockade near Yemen while defying Biden to do anything about it, the Islamic global terror state is moving on to a Somali blockade.

Current reports suggest that the Houthis, an Iranian Shiite terror group, is negotiating to provide weapons to Yemen's Al-Shabaab, a Sunni Jihadist group allied with Al Qaeda, to expand Iran's control over shipping. While Al-Shabaab has operated using the conventional Al Qaeda playbook of rifles and IEDs, the Houthis can offer upgraded drones and missile technology.

And best of all, the Houthis can claim that the weapons were battle-tested on the US Navy.

When the Houthis began their naval blockade, the Biden administration had the opportunity to shut it down. Instead, a US Navy carrier group has been tied up for months with no results. The AP headlined its recent coverage as "US Navy faces its most intense combat since World War II against Yemen's Iran-backed Houthi rebels". But as Front Page Magazine already reported, the only reason the war keeps dragging on is that Biden has restricted the US Navy to responding to incoming attacks and only the occasional light bombing raids against the sources of the attacks.

The Houthis, whose motto, like that of their Iranian backers, includes, "Death to America", have been able to claim that they held off the world's greatest military for half a year, while imposing control over regional shipping and international trade. And now Iran is moving into Somalia.

One of the side-effects of Biden's refusal to go on the offensive against the Houthis was that the Somali pirates, who had been lying low during the Trump administration, decided to make a comeback. With Western naval operations diverted to the Yemeni blockade, it has fallen to the Indian Navy to protect shipping against the Somali pirates. But if the Yemen-Somali deal goes through, Al-Shabaab may displace the pirate gangs and impose its own naval blockade.

And with hundreds of US troops deployed in Somalia, the Al Qaeda affiliate armed by Iran would also have the opportunity to directly attack Americans with their new firepower. Previous local reports had already described a flow of weapons from Yemen to Somalia and pirates deploying anti-aircraft weapons aboard a hijacked vessel. So the arrangement may already be here.

When two US Navy SEALs died trying to intercept Iranian weapons shipments to the Houthis in the waters near Somalia, the terror pipeline was very briefly in the headlines. But the Biden administration, pro-terror think tanks and the media quickly diverted our attention away.

Some of the credit for this ought to go to Rep. Ilhan Omar who spent her time in Congress spreading the lie that attacks on the Houthis had caused a famine in Yemen. The campaign to end the Saudi embargo that blocked Iran from shipping in weapons allowed the Houthis to impose their own embargo. And Rep. Omar, a Somali nationalist with ties to the current regime, has also been a vocal critic of U.S. air strikes on the Al-Shabaab rebels fighting the government.

Under Trump, Rep. Omar accused the U.S. military of covering up 'civilian' casualties during air strikes against Al Qaeda, and next year argued that, "we are not going to simply drone the Al-Shabaab problem to death." She also complained that the United States had not made payments to 'civilians' killed in the air strikes including some possibly unrelated 'Omars' who had died in Somalia. Last year, Rep. Omar vigorously supported Rep. Gaetz's resolution to withdraw U.S. forces from Somalia. Now it looks like Iran will be providing military support in Somalia.

Last year, the Soros 'International Crisis Group', which has been accused of ties to the Iranian regime, had issued a report arguing that the threat from Al-Shabaab was overblown and urged that the Al Qaeda affiliate "cannot be defeated militarily is that, at some point, a settlement with the group may offer the best hope of stabilizing the country."

How better to stabilize a country than by cutting a deal with Al Qaeda?

The same dishonest rhetoric that had been previously used to bolster Hamas, Hezbollah and the Houthis was deployed to prop up Al-Shabaab. And it appears to be having the same results.

While a formal alliance between the Houthis and Al-Shabaab might be a new arrangement, Iran has been trying to court the Al Qaeda group for some time. The Iranians lost their base of operations in Somalia when the government shut down Shiite 'aid groups' linked to the regime in Tehran. But Somalia has too few Shiites to pose any real threat. Instead, Iran was building up its relationship with Al-Shabaab. Years ago there were reports that Iran was paying bounties for the Al Qaeda group to attack American targets and to smuggle weapons to the Houthis.

A relationship between Al-Shabaab and the Houthis is more troubling because Iran's MO is to carry out larger terror attacks through proxies, such as the Shiite PMUs attacking Americans in Iraq and Syria, and then build up relationships between its terror proxies for larger attacks. That is why Hezbollah was set up as the focal actor to back up Hamas against Israel.

A public relationship between the Houthis and Al-Shabaab prepares the way for more intense attacks on Americans in and around Somalia while Iran pretends that it was the Houthis acting unilaterally. The Iranian regime agents within the Biden administration and the intelligence community who spread these false claims about Hamas and Hezbollah acting independently of Iran have been spreading the same lies about the Houthis and eventually Al-Shabaab.

If the Biden administration follows the same failed strategy in Somalia as it is in Yemen, we will be enmeshed in another prolonged war with Islamic terrorists with our hands tied behind our backs. And Iran will expand its control of international trade while American prestige drops. Prices will continue going up and ransom payments will feed more terrorism against America.

After a brutal civil war in Syria, Iran appears to be succeeding in its efforts to integrate Sunni Islamists into its terror camp. While the idea of Iran and an Al Qaeda affiliate working together may appear unlikely, Iran had been courting Al Qaeda for some time and there are reports that it had provided some of the training that was used for the 9/11 attacks. We know that the 9/11 hijackers were able to pass through Iran and the IRGC was at best complicit in the operation.

Saif Al-Adel, the current Egyptian leader of Al Qaeda, is living in Iran under IRGC protection.

Al-Adel had gotten his early start in Somalia where he participated in the Battle of Mogadishu. The Islamist perpetrators who shot down three Black Hawk choppers had reportedly been trained by Adel. He went on to collaborate with Hezbollah and then on to Yemen. It may be no coincidence at all that these are the current theaters of the war we're in.

Americans associate Al Qaeda with Osama bin Laden, Afghanistan and Iraq, but its true origins lie in Egypt with the Egyptian Islamic Jihad. EIJ was a splinter group of the Muslim Brotherhood. Those are the bonds that unite Hamas, another Brotherhood arm, and Iran, as well as the Brotherhood Islamists in America that have been vocally campaigning for Al Qaeda and Iran.

The various strands of the Jihadist movement have been knitting together. The most obvious signs of this can be seen on our own streets and campuses where the Shiite flags of Hezbollah and the Houthis fly alongside the Sunni flags of Hamas at events overseen by Sunni Islamists. The Houthis could not have survived without the support of Sunni Islamists in the U.S.. Now they'll repay the favor by helping Al-Shabaab, formerly the Islamic Courts Union, in Somalia.

Al Qaeda first waged war on America in Africa. And Iran has been building up its presence there. Africa is the next frontier of Islamic colonialism, where tens of thousands of Christians have already been murdered with the complicity of the Obama and Biden administrations.

The Biden administration has allowed Iran to expand its terror territories, and that's not just bad news for Israel, it's also bad news for America and for the world. Two centuries after the United States Marines got their start fighting Islamic naval piracy, they're back and worse than ever.


Daniel Greenfield is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. This article previously appeared at the Center's Front Page Magazine.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20730/iran-moves-into-somalia

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

In a War with Hezbollah, What Will Happen to Israel’s Electrical Grid? - Hugh Fitzgerald

 

​ by Hugh Fitzgerald

How Israelis are preparing.

 


[Order David Horowitz’s new book, America Betrayed, HERE.]

A war with Hezbollah now looms, but perhaps, since both sides know that they will suffer terrible damage, it will continue to be avoided. Hezbollah has 130,000 rockets and missiles, some of which, through sheer numbers, managed to avoid interception by Israel’s three-layered anti-missile defense, consisting of Arrow-2 and Arrow-3, David’s Sling, and Iron Dome. Even now, the IDF must be calculating how many, in that vast array of rockets and missiles, can be destroyed on the ground, before they are launched, by Israeli airstrikes and missiles. And the IDF has to estimate, too, how many of Hezbollah’s rockets and missiles will get through those anti-missile defense systems and land on Israel’s cities, including Haifa and Tel Aviv.

More on one casualty of such a war — Israel’s electricity grid — and how soon that grid can be repaired, has been the subject of heated discussion, about which you can find more here: “‘If Nasrallah wants to take down Israel’s power grid, he only needs to make a call,’ Noga CEO says,” Jerusalem Post, June 20, 2024:

The CEO of Noga – Israel Independent System Operator Ltd., Shaul Goldstein, said there is no guarantee that there will be electricity in Israel in the event of a future war with Hezbollah on Thursday at the Institute for National Security Studies conference in Sderot.

“After 72 hours without electricity in Israel, living here will be impossible. We are not in a good state and unprepared for a real war,” Goldstein said. He added that Hezbollah could easily take down Israel’s power grid.

“If Nasrallah wants to take down Israel’s power grid, he only needs to make a phone call to the person in charge of Beirut’s power system, which looks exactly like Israel’s. He doesn’t even need a drone; he can call a second-year electrical engineering student and ask where the most critical points in Israel are – everything is on the internet. I won’t say it [exactly where] here, but anyone who goes on the internet can find it,” Goldstein said.

“Israel is an energy island, and we need to supply ourselves – this is also our advantage; we are trained to work in isolation. When I took the position [as CEO of Noga] and began researching what the real threat to the electricity sector is, I asked – let’s say a missile hits the electricity sector, and there’s a power outage for one hour, three hours, 24 hours, 48 hours, 72 hours, and beyond. What happens to Israel in such a situation? The bottom line is that after 72 hours – it is impossible to live in Israel,” Goldstein warned at the beginning of his remarks.

“He added, “People do not understand how much our lives here depend on electricity.”…

More and more Israelis have been buying home generators in preparation for the possibility of the country’s electric grid being brought down by missiles launched by Hezbollah.

Energy and Infrastructure Minister Eli Cohen commented, “The State of Israel will not be left alone. We are preparing for every scenario, holding discussions and assessing the situation, and spending billions of shekels to ensure a regular supply of energy to all Israeli citizens.”

He continued, “In recent months, we have increased our inventory and purchased a lot of equipment in order to have backups. The State of Israel has the ability to generate electricity from a large variety of sources – we have gas rigs, we have huge reserves of coal, and we also generate electricity from renewable energy. Many actions, which cannot be specified, have been taken to ensure a regular energy supply. The chance of a power outage for many days is very low.”

Israel has many sources of energy: vast coal deposits, natural gas from the Tamar and Leviathan fields in the eastern Mediterranean, an ever-expanding number of wind farms and solar energy collectors, can all be used to provide energy to restart a damaged electrical grid. I would like to believe the reassuring words of Energy and Infrastructure Minster Eli Cohen, about the preparations being made for every scenario, in case of attacks on the country’s electricity grid. Perhaps it will be possible to switch, within days, from energy sources that now power the electricity grid — natural gas and oil — to others, including coal, wind and solar. But the view of Shaul Goldstein, the CEO of Noga (the Israel Independent System Operator Ltd.,) which he just delivered to the Institute for National Security Studies conference in Sderot, is frightening, and while he has been denounced for revealing too much about the ease with which Israel’s electrical grid could be taken down, he has not been convincingly refuted. I hope he is wrong when he says that Israel would not be able to survive a 72-hour total takedown of its energy grid. I fear, however, that he is right, but few want to listen to such unnerving forecasts. It was the same way before October 7, when those who warned of an impending Hamas attack were right, but ignored by those higher up, who refused to believe the bad news — with the results we all see.


Hugh Fitzgerald

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/in-a-war-with-hezbollah-what-will-happen-to-israels-electrical-grid/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trump-era China sanctions ended by Biden may be revived under new House GOP bill - Elizabeth Elkind

 

​ by Elizabeth Elkind

The sanctions were levied in 2020 and reversed in 2023


 

FIRST ON FOX: Top House Republicans are leading a bill to reverse the Biden administration’s decision to lift sanctions on a Chinese entity linked to the persecution of Uyghurs.

The legislation targeting the Ministry of Public Security’s (MPS) Institute of Forensic Science of China was introduced Wednesday by Rep. Andy Ogles, R-Tenn., and is co-led by House China select committee Chairman John Moolenaar, R-Mich., and House GOP Conference Chairwoman Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y.

"It’s past time for the U.S. to confront the [Chinese Communist Party’s] human rights abusers, and Congress will have to lead in the absence of a strong commander in chief," Ogles told Fox News Digital.

HONG KONG LAWMAKERS UNANIMOUSLY PASS CONTROVERSIAL SECURITY LAW, GRANTING GOVERNMENT POWER TO CURB DISSENT

Split image of Xi Jinping and Donald Trump

House Republicans want to restore Trump-era sanctions on the Chinese government run by Xi Jinping. (Getty Images)

He accused China’s authoritarian government of "a long and sordid history of human rights abuses."

"Joe Biden has unacceptably chosen to reward a Communist Chinese company despite their genocidal crimes and human rights abuses against the Uyghur population and other ethnic minorities. This legislation to relist China’s Institute of Forensic Science on our Entity List will return us to President Trump’s peace through strength strategy and ensure no U.S. technology is benefiting Communist China’s human rights abuses," Stefanik said.

The bill has 10 more House GOP co-sponsors and is backed by conservative groups Heritage Action and America First Policy Institute.

NEW TEXT MESSAGE ALLEGEDLY REVEALS HUNTER BIDEN PROPOSED MEETING FOR DAD, UNCLE AND CHINESE EXEC IN NYC

President Biden

President Biden lifted the sanctions last year. (Hannah Beier/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

The CCP agency was one of nine entities sanctioned by the Trump administration in May 2020.

A press release at the time accused it of being "complicit in human rights violations and abuses committed in China’s campaign of repression, mass arbitrary detention, forced labor and high-technology surveillance against Uighurs, ethnic Kazakhs, and other members of Muslim minority groups in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region (XUAR)."

The sanctions were lifted in November 2023 while the U.S. was working to persuade China to take a more active role in cracking down on the flow of synthetic drugs and fentanyl precursors from within its borders into the U.S.

CHINA SILENT AS RUSSIA AND NORTH KOREA FORGE NEW DEFENSE PACT, RAISING REGIONAL POWER SHIFT CONCERNS

Fentanyl seizures

The Biden administration lifted the sanctions in a bid to boost cooperation on stopping the flow of synthetic drugs. (U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration)

State Department spokesman Matthew Miller told reporters at the time that the sanctions were "a barrier to achieving cooperation" on the flow of drugs.

"When we evaluated the issue and looked at all the merits of de-listing the IFS, ultimately we decided that given the steps China was willing to take to cut down on precursor trafficking, it was an appropriate step," he said.

 

Elizabeth Elkind is a politics reporter for Fox News Digital leading coverage of the House of Representatives. Previous digital bylines seen at Daily Mail and CBS News.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-era-china-sanctions-ended-biden-may-revived-under-new-house-gop-bill

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Losing the North: Damage from Hezbollah slams employment, industry - interview - Eve Young

 

​ by Eve Young

Polls have shown that some 40% of those evacuated are considering not returning to the North, said Bezek.

 

Smoke billows over northern Israel after rockets were fired from Lebanon, amid ongoing cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israeli forces, by Israel's border with Lebanon, May 17, 2024. (photo credit: Avi Ohayon/Reuters)
Smoke billows over northern Israel after rockets were fired from Lebanon, amid ongoing cross-border hostilities between Hezbollah and Israeli forces, by Israel's border with Lebanon, May 17, 2024.
(photo credit: Avi Ohayon/Reuters)

Months of rocket and drone attacks and the escalation in Israel’s North, which have led to the evacuation of all residents living up to 3.5 km. from the border, could have a lasting impact on employment in the area, which could drive and keep people away even after the war, according to Inbar Bezek, former MK and current CEO of the Galilee Economic Company.

The conflict in the North has severely damaged four of the industries that employ a significant portion of the area’s residents: tourism, construction, agriculture, and traditional industry.

Major challenges ahead

Bezek noted that industry employs around 20% of the area’s residents, with many factories in the North being partially or fully owned by foreigners. This means many may leave, taking jobs away, she explained. “When the owners are not Israeli, they start asking themselves, ‘Why do I need this headache?’” she said, adding that some factories are already exploring options to relocate. In the better case, they will stay in Israel, but in the worse case, many may leave the country.

These companies and factories are facing three significant challenges: Many of their workers are evacuated and therefore not working; suppliers are having a hard time delivering raw materials to factories near the border; and many workers are not showing up for work in areas where they do not feel safe, even if they have not been formally evacuated.

 Inbar Bezek  (credit: Nathan Yaakobovitz)Enlrage image
Inbar Bezek (credit: Nathan Yaakobovitz)

This problem is exacerbated by the government’s treatment of the evacuation line as the compensation line, said Bezek. “The Defense Ministry decided to evacuate people up until 3.5 kilometers from the border, so the finance ministry said, ‘OK, I will compensate whoever was evacuated, and for whoever was not evacuated, it is business as usual.’”

“It is a mistake to look at it this way,” she said, offering, for example, the situation in which an employee lives five kilometers from the border but is employed in an evacuated town where businesses are shuttered.

“As far as the state is concerned, you aren’t eligible for anything, but your workplace is closed,” said Bezek, explaining that these workers were offered unemployment benefits in the framework of unpaid leave, a solution offered to all Israelis during the war, with no special solution for residents of the North.

The opposite problem is also true, as Bezek explained, saying that for companies that are not located in evacuated areas but employ many people who have been evacuated, it is difficult to keep their businesses running. Bezek stated that while the government cannot fire these evacuees, it has yet to compensate the companies that employ them and continue to pay their wages.

THIS IS not the only government funding that has been late in coming, said Bezek. Grants that were meant to help cover the months of January and February were dealt with in May, and grants for March and April were discussed in the Knesset in June, she said.

“I hear heartbreaking stories,” she continued, mentioning, for example, a widowed mother with a small business who told her that the grants she gets go right into the minus in her bank account and that her account has almost been closed a number of times.

Bezek’s understanding is that these late payments are because the finance minister (delete who) wants to prevent businesses from understanding the criteria and then “cheating” or “playing the system.”

“This is nonsense, because logically speaking, the criteria [for who is eligible] will not be changed each month,” she said, adding that the government needs to give people the security and peace of mind that they will be taken care of when their employment or business is hurt by the war.

Businesses situated up to 9 km. from the border received some financial help, but individuals outside of the evacuation zone did not, and many businesses just outside the 9 km. areas are unable to function due to the war, said Bezek.

For example, she mentioned a rafting business located on the Jordan River, some 11 kilometers away from the border, but now, during the war, no one goes rafting that far north.

It’s critical to support employment in Israel’s North, especially high-quality employment, to ensure that young people and stronger populations stay in the region, she said.

DUE IN part to the incredibly diverse climate in the area, which enables research, the North has the potential to become a hub for food and agrotech, said Bezek, saying that much has been invested in this area in the past eight years.

After October 7, however, over 90% of the 81 food and agrotech companies have left the area, she said. If these companies do not return or are not replaced by tech companies or others offering quality jobs, the North will be cast 10 years back in terms of employment options and attractiveness to young people, she explained.

Polls have shown that some 40% of those evacuated are considering not returning to the North, said Bezek, adding that those who do not return are likely those with the option to relocate, leaving socioeconomically weaker populations in the North and exacerbating existing inequality.

The North and its well-being are central to Israel, Bezek said. “The fields of Metulla that separate the town’s houses from Lebanon; the fields of Misgav Am that separate the border from the houses – they are the border.” 


Eve Young

Source: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/article-808035

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Stop the Ukrainian Meatgrinder? - Victor Davis Hanson

 

​ by Victor Davis Hanson

The only practicable way to avoid another near-one million dead and wounded would be a settlement, however unpopular.

 

Nearly eleven months ago, in August 2023, the New York Times reported that U.S. officials had estimated that some 500,000 Russians and Ukrainians had been killed, wounded, or missing in the then 18-month Ukrainian War.

Both Russia and Ukraine underreport their losses. Hundreds of thousands of additional casualties have followed in the 28 months of fighting.

In the West, the mere mention of a negotiated settlement is considered a dangerous appeasement of Russia’s flagrant aggression. In Russia, anything short of victory would be seen as synonymous with the collapse of the Putin regime.

Yet as the war nears two and a half years this summer, some facts are no longer much in dispute.

Controversy still arises over the circumstances of the 2014 overthrow of Ukraine’s pro-Russian President Viktor Yanukovych.

Russia charges that the West engineered the “Revolution of Dignity”—an effort to westernize the former Soviet republic, to expand the borders of Europe right to the doorstep of Russia, and eventually to fully arm Ukraine as a member of NATO.

Westerners counter that most Ukrainians wished to be part of Europe and independent from Russian bullying—and they had a perfect right to ask to join either NATO or the EU or both despite anticipated escalating tensions.

After the heroic Ukrainian defeat of the 2022 Russian bid to take Kyiv, there have been few significant territorial gains by either side.

Like the seesaw bloodbath on the Western Front of World War I, neither side has developed the momentum to force the other to negotiate or grant concessions.

As nuclear Russian threats against Europe mount, NATO is seeking to regain deterrence capabilities by boosting defense budgets, incorporating robust frontline nations Sweden and Finland, and uniting over shared concerns about Russian aggression.

Many in the U.S. cheer on the conflict as a necessary proxy war to check Russian aggression and bolster NATO’s resistance.

But unlike third-party wars during the Cold War, now the Western client, Ukraine, is fighting directly against the chief antagonist of European NATO members.

Arming a proxy in a war waged against the homeland of a nuclear adversary is a new and dangerous phenomenon.

The West counts on supplying Ukraine with more and better weapons than a richer, larger, and more populous Russia.

But Ukraine’s problem is not so much weapons as manpower. Nearly a fourth of Ukraine’s population has fled the country.

Ukraine may have suffered some 300,000 causalities. The average age of its soldiers is over 40 years. It already lacks sufficient forces to replay the failed 2023 counter-offensive. The Russian plan of attrition is to wear down and bleed out the Ukrainian people.

In a geostrategic sense, the new alignment of Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea is starting to gain opportunistic support from illiberal Middle East regimes, Turkey, and the Islamic world in general.

The Biden administration’s respective approaches to the Ukraine and Gaza wars continue to be utterly incoherent.

It lectures our strongest ally Israel on the need for a ceasefire, proportionality, a coalition wartime cabinet, and the avoidance of collateral damage. The administration considers the terrorist Hamas almost a legitimate state.

However, Biden and the American diplomatic establishment urge Ukraine to keep fighting without negotiations. They urge Kyiv to seek critical disproportionality through superior weaponry, including hitting strategic targets inside Russia.

The U.S. has overlooked the cancellation of Ukrainian political parties and elections by the Zelensky administration. America does not seem to care about Ukrainian collateral damage to the borderlands. And it considers the Russian government a near-terrorist state.

No one in the West, at least prior to the Russian February 2022 invasion—neither the prior Obama, Trump, and current Biden administrations or the Ukrainian government itself—had considered it even possible to regain by force the Crimea and the Donbass absorbed by the Russian invasion of 2014.

Add up all these realities, and the only practicable way to avoid another near-one million dead and wounded would be a settlement, however unpopular.

It would entail the formalization of the 2014 Russian absorption of Crimea and Donbass.

Russia would then agree to withdraw all its forces to its pre-2022 borders. Ukraine would be fully armed but without NATO membership.

Both sides would agree to a demilitarized zone on both sides of the Russian-Ukrainian border. Russia would brag that it prevented its former province from joining NATO while finally institutionalizing its prior incorporation of the Donbass and Crimea.

Ukraine would be proud that, like heroic 1940 Finland, it miraculously stopped Russian aggression. It would remain far better armed than at any time in its history and soon enjoy a status similar to that of non-NATO Austria or Switzerland.

The deal would anger all parties. But it would make public what most concede privately—and stop the ongoing destruction of Ukraine and the further slaughter of an entire generation of Ukrainian and Russian youth.

 
Victor Davis Hanson

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2024/06/27/stop-the-ukrainian-meatgrinder/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

'Free speech is dead': SCOTUS pass on federal pressure to censor spurs political, legal scrambling - Greg Piper

 

​ by Greg Piper

The high court's decision was its second high-profile ruling this month decided on standing – a plaintiff's legal right to make a claim.

 

"Free speech in America, for the moment, is dead." But whose fault is it?

The Supreme Court's 6-3 reversal Wednesday of a preliminary injunction against several federal agencies and officials for "coerc[ing] or significantly encourag[ing] a platform’s content-moderation decisions" concluded that neither states nor censored users have legal standing to sue and is spurring political and legal maneuvering to protect Americans' online speech.

It's the second high-profile ruling this month decided on standing, after a unanimous SCOTUS shocked pro-life activists by suggesting courts were powerless to review the Food and Drug Administration's changes to abortion-pill access because no one could demonstrate legal injury.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, quickly promised to keep pushing for legislative reforms including the Censorship Accountability Act – which has not moved since committee passage in February – to stop the "unconstitutional censorship-industrial complex" as Murthy v. Missouri returns to trial court.

"Today’s ruling does not dispute" that the "deep state pressured and coerced social media companies to take down truthful speech simply because it was conservative," Missouri GOP Attorney General Andrew Bailey wrote on the social media platform X.

"We are going back to the district court to obtain more discovery in order to root out [President] Joe Biden’s vast censorship enterprise once and for all," he said. "We've only just begun."

Louisiana GOP Attorney General Liz Murrill blasted the majority for "wav[ing] off the worst government coercion scheme in history" but promised to "keep fighting to defend and protect our rights."

Stanford Medical School professor Jay Bhattacharya, one of three censored plaintiffs who are doctors, wrote on X: "Congress will now need to act to enforce the Constitution" since SCOTUS accepts the "near-monarchical" power President Biden's lawyers claim he has over social media."

"This now also becomes a key issue in the upcoming election," and "voters should ask every candidate for office down to dog catcher where they stand on the power of government to censor," he also said. "Let's make it a political liability to favor censorship."

He also wrote: "Free speech in America, for the the moment is dead."

Some critics of federal pressure to censor purported misinformation on COVID-19, elections, Hunter Biden's laptop and other hot-button issues suggested the case was a long shot to begin with or the ruling's damage to free speech has been vastly overstated.

Former New York Times drug industry reporter Alex Berenson said his lawsuit alleging the feds coerced Twitter to de-platform him over his COVID vaccine skepticism is the "last case left" and was actually strengthened by the high court's ruling.

"Standing is particularized, and I have the particulars," Berenson wrote on X, citing documents turned over by Twitter to settle his earlier lawsuit and files turned over by X owner Elon Musk, most recently Twitter's perception of backdoor White House threats through President Biden's former adviser Andy Slavitt and President Trump's former FDA Commissioner Scott Gottlieb.

He said what he's posted is "only part 1" of what Berenson calls "The Pfizer/White House Files," so named because Gottlieb omitted his Pfizer board membership while invoking his status as former FDA commissioner to Twitter.

"The answer to the Murthy problem is to reform the administrative state" because it's "tricky" to devise an injunction against such government behavior, veteran First Amendment lawyer Casey Mattox, known for litigating religious and academic freedom cases, wrote on X.

"But this kind of bureaucratic power shouldn't be in the executive branch in the first place," he wrote. "There's no substitute for ending the power of random bureaucrats to be the change they want to see in the world."

"We don't know much more than before about when government pressure becomes unconstitutionally coercive" or whether the First Amendment "forbids even noncoercive government 'entangle[ment],'" wrote UCLA law professor Eugene Volokh, himself a plaintiff in a First Amendment challenge to New York's now-blocked social media "hateful conduct" law.

The ruling gave "very little new about First Amendment law here," according to Volokh, who is also co-counsel to the National Rifle Association in the Vullo case, in which the unanimous high court reinstated a lawsuit against New York's former financial services superintendent for "encourag[ing]" regulated entities to stop providing NRA-endorsed insurance programs.

"The plaintiffs, without any concrete link between their injuries and the defendants’ conduct, ask us to conduct a review of the years-long communications between dozens of federal officials, across different agencies, with different social-media platforms, about different topics," Justice Amy Coney Barrett wrote for the majority, split between Republican and Democratic appointees.

"On this record, it appears that the frequent, intense communications that took place in 2021 had considerably subsided by 2022" and officials "only asked for information about the most popular vaccine-related posts" in the months before the suit, the opinion reads.

Barrett said the plaintiffs haven't shown a risk of future censorship "traceable" to the feds and "platforms remain free to enforce, or not to enforce," moderation policies "tainted by initial governmental coercion."

Missouri, Louisiana, Gateway Pundit publisher Jim Hoft and doctors Bhattacharya, Aaron Kheriaty and Martin Kulldorff have no case, while "most of the lines" drawn by Health Freedom Louisiana activist Jill Hines are "tenuous" because "Facebook was targeting her pages before almost all of its communications with the White House and the CDC," the opinion says.

Evidence shows platforms had "independent incentives to moderate content and often exercised their own judgment" even though the feds "played a role in at least some" of those choices, and they kept it up after federal pressure waned, Barrett wrote.

What's missing is that "a particular defendant pressured a particular platform to censor a particular topic before that platform suppressed a particular plaintiff ’s speech on that topic," the opinion says. "Heeding these conditions is critically important in a sprawling suit like this one."

Missing from Barrett's opinion, however, is any mention of the last month's ruling in the coercive-speech case, Vullo. Justice Samuel Alito, who focused on Hines as the key to Murthy in oral argument, emphasized that omission in his dissent.

"What the officials did in this case was more subtle than the ham-handed censorship" against the NRA by Maria Vullo "but it was no less coercive," Alito wrote, joined by justices Neil Gorsuch and Clarence Thomas.

"And because of the perpetrators’ high positions" in the federal government, "it was even more dangerous," the dissent says. Officials reading the two decisions together "will get the message. If a coercive campaign is carried out with enough sophistication, it may get by."

Referring 23 times to specific evidence, Alito argues Hines was "indisputably injured" when Facebook "repeatedly yielded" to officials who "continuously harried and implicitly threatened Facebook with potentially crippling consequences if it did not comply with their wishes," even for posts "they did not claim to be literally false but nevertheless wanted obscured."

The majority and dissent argue with each other over whether Hines' failure to be more specific in her allegations dooms the case. 

When told the dissent "draws links that Hines herself has not set forth, often based on injuries that Hines never claimed," Alito retorted "what theory makes more sense – that a user falling within Facebook’s amended policies was censored under those policies or that something else caused her injury?"

The majority "shirks" its duty to "tackle the free speech issue that the case presents," thus providing "an attractive model for future officials who want to control what the people say, hear, and think," Alito said.

"The Supreme Court, which is not a fact finder in these cases, just determined against all evidence that the Federal Government will not be held accountable for the natural consequences of its speech squelching actions," New Civil Liberties Alliance senior litigation counsel John Vecchione, who represents the censored doctors, wrote on X.

"The Government can press third parties to silence you, but the Supreme Court will not find you have standing to complain about it absent them referring to you by name apparently," he said.


Greg Piper

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/courts-law/free-speech-dead-scotus-pass-federal-pressure-censor-spurs-political-legal

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Vandalism campaign smashes, ransacks Israel-connected businesses in UK - Michael Starr

 

​ by Michael Starr

Elbit had logged 170 Palestine Action attacks against 37 companies since from July 2020 until November 2023.

 

Palestine Action activist in Buckinghamshire (photo credit: SCREENSHOT VIA X)
Palestine Action activist in Buckinghamshire
(photo credit: SCREENSHOT VIA X)

The ransacking and vandalism of a Buckinghamshire defense company on Thursday is the latest in a post-October 7 Massacre campaign of property damage and defacement by an anti-Israel activist group that has been operating in the United Kingdom for years. 

Palestine Action, an anti-Israel network with branches in the US and throughout Europe, has been engaged in "direct action" against Israeli defense firms and businesses accused of associating with them since 2020, but has escalated its operations during the Israel-Hamas war. Since inception its chief preoccupation has been the Israel defense contractor Elbit Systems.

So-called "actionists" claimed to have broken into Grid Defense Systems' Buckinghamshire building on Thursday. In a video in social media, activists defenestrated the contents of the office's rooms, casting it onto the grounds outside.

"From inside, arms components are dismantled and shipments destined for Elbit are completely shattered," said Palestine Action, claiming that they had discovered in a June 17 Kent raid on Elbit that suppliers for the company had been discovered. "Unless they cut ties with Elbit, we will shut down each one of them."  

Palestine Action has been targeting financial institutions for alleged investments or ties to Elbit. 

Activists smashed the windows and splashed paint on JP Morgan's Edinburgh offices on Wednesday. 

A Police Scotland spokesperson told The Jerusalem Post that "the building was found to have sustained significant damage" and that enquires were at an early stage.

Palestine Action claimed on Instagram that the investment bank had been targeted in Italy, Portugal, and Manchester in the last two weeks. 

On Monday Palestine Action said that it had smashed the windows of JP Morgan's office near Manchester's St. Peter's Square. 

"Evict JP Morgan," said graffiti according to photographs published by the group.

Activists allegedly simultaneously attacked Barclays' Altrincham branch, again breaking windows and spraying red paint. 

"Barclays holds shares in Israel’s biggest weapons firm, Elbit Systems — who arm the Zionist military and develop weapons during the ongoing Gaza genocide," Palestine Action said on social media on Monday. "Through economic disruption, dealing with Elbit is becoming an unattractive investment as it comes with the added risk of Palestine Action!"

According to its website, Barclays does not invest in defense companies or Elbit directly, it provides financial services for clients who invest, and therefor the company may hold shares for those clients.

“We provide vital financial services to US, UK and European public companies that supply defence products to NATO and its allies. Barclays does not directly invest in these companies,” a Barclays spokesperson told The Post. “The defence sector is fundamental to our national security and decisions on the implementation of arms embargos to other nations are the job of respective elected governments. While we support the right to protest, it is not acceptable to intimidate our people or cause criminal damage.”

The group claimed to have attacked 20 Barclays branches across England and Scotland two weeks prior.

A Chatham branch that according to Palestine Action had just reopened after previous attacks was targeted again Monday, with the group damaging the site with its usual modus operandi. North Kent Police said red paint had also been poured onto cash machines. Law enforcement is investigating the incident and is calling for witnesses and relevant private security footage. 

The group has directly targeted Elbit as well, on Monday allegedly having "actionists" placing a car filled with cement and laying down to try to prevent access to a Bristol site. All seven of the involved activists were reportedly released from the Patchway police station.

On June 17, activists posted footage of what they said was them breaking into Elbit's Kent facilities. They claimed to have cut through three fences to access the site. Once inside, they smashed machinery causing, according to a June 18 Instagram post, over £1million worth of damage. After 36 hours police reportedly released the seven activists, though they are still under investigation, Palestine Action said. 

According to UK Government  independent adviser on political violence and disruption Lord John Woodcock's May 21 report to the House of Commons on coercive threats to democracy, Elbit had logged 170 Palestine Action attacks against 37 companies since from July 2020 until November 2023.

Elbit UK is described in the report as frustrated with the kingdom's policing and criminal justice response, claiming that law enforcement has not developed specialized training or knowledge sharing between branches to deal with the problem.

"I agree with Elbit UK’s assessment that Palestine Action’s four-year criminal campaign has had a detrimental effect on the UK defense sector," the Woodcock wrote.

The Baron Walney said that since the October 7 Hamas attacks, Palestine action has vandalized the BBC headquarters, Arthur Balfour's statue in parliament, damaging Balfour's painting at Trinity College, and the Defense Ministry. 

Woodcock recommended that the government create a sanction to  prevent the group from fundraising and assembling, as it was one of the "most aggressively engaged in law breaking and business disruption" of anti-Israel radical organizations.

The group continues to operating recruitment and training for its vandalism campaign, advertising "direct action"  training days on Saturday in Manchester, Sunday in Leicester, and next Sunday in London.

"When our government continues to enable the Gaza genocide, it’s the responsibility of ordinary people to take direct action," said Palestine Action. "Ready to bring down the Zionist war machine? Join an upcoming training day."



Michael Starr

Source: https://www.jpost.com/bds-threat/article-808018

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter