A quiet affair - Ariel Kahana

​
by Ariel Kahana

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu knows that the Palestinians are a bigger problem for Jordan than for Israel, and is willing to help King Abdullah as much as he can, quietly

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, right, and King Abdullah 

of Jordan shake hands

Photo: Kobi Gideon / GPO

Israel handles its relations with the Arab world in the shadows, like a forbidden romance.

On Monday, King Abdullah of Jordan hosted Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Amman. The meeting included many participants. Abdullah and Netanyahu addressed several issues and even signed a general agreement of some kind.

Nevertheless, the Jordan royal house did not publicize the event. Unusually, the official photographer did not post any pictures on Facebook. Even the Jordanian press release characterized the meeting as a negative thing that had to be completed as quickly as possible, stating: "Prime Minister Netanyahu left Jordan after a short visit."

"Short" is apparently a relative term. The meeting included discussions of matters existential to Jordan and very important to Israel. Mossad head Yossi Cohen, Netanyahu's economic adviser Avi Simhon, military attache Brig. Gen. Eliezer Toledano, and other advisers were part of the prime minister's team. Cohen's Jordanian counterpart, Adnan Jundi, was also there, as was Jordanian Foreign Minister Ayman Safadi, and many others of the king's advisers. When a group like this meets, it is obvious that they are talking business, not merely making conversation.

The two leaders discussed Syrian President Bashar Assad's likely return to the Syrian Golan Heights, a development that could send another wave of refugees into Jordan and the Golan – to Israel's dismay – into the hands of Iranian militias. Abdullah and Netanyahu coordinated on the "deal of the century," which advisers to U.S. President Donald Trump are once again here to promote. They agreed that Jordan would retain its position of responsibility for the Temple Mount. If the king is a "mentsch" (a good guy), and people say he is, he would also have thanked Netanyahu for Israel's special help recently on a matter that is still under a censorship blackout.

Jordan is mired in a deep economic crisis. The two leaders agreed that Israel would lift a few restraints that have made it difficult for Jordan to sell produce in Judea and Samaria. This is not the only recent contribution to Jordan's economy, either: Two weeks ago, Saudi Arabia announced it would provide $2 billion in aid to the Jordanians. Rumor has it that Israel had a hand in that deal.

It is clear that after a brief attempt to move closer to the Syrian-Iranian axis, Abdullah has come back to the Sunni side these past few weeks. Israel has a common denominator with Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and the Gulf states, all staunch opponents of Iran. These are the deep currents flowing underneath the first meeting between the two leaders in four years.

But very little can be said about everything that went on behind the scenes. That's how it is when lovers meet in secret.

The Palestinian portfolio 

The immense gap between what the Israelis, the Arabs, and the Americans say to each other behind closed doors and the front they put up is the biggest challenge facing Trump's Middle East advisers Jared Kushner and Jason Greenblatt. This week, they both toured the region in an attempt to push "the deal of the century," "the ultimate deal," "historic peace," or whatever else they are calling their Israeli-Palestinian peace deal. The two envoys have already visited Cairo, Amman and Doha. They are slated to hold meetings in Jerusalem, but they will not be going to Ramallah – Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas refuses to meet with them.

Kushner and Greenblatt are identifying what anyone with clear vision can see: that the Israeli-Arab bloc is about to come out into the open, and that everyone is fed up with the Palestinians' tricks. Saudi Arabia, the heavyweight in the Sunni bloc, does not care what is said on the paper it will be submitting to the Americans. As a defense official told this reporter this week, the paper could be blank, for all the Saudis care. The main thing is to present a document that Abbas signs. The Saudis simply want to advance the regional struggle against Iran, under the auspices of the Americans. As far as they are concerned, the Palestinians can go to hell.

Jordan's current approach is not much different. If it were up to Abdullah and his advisers, they would strangle Palestinian nationalism with their bare hands. With Palestinians comprising two-thirds of the inhabitants of the kingdom, the Palestinian issue is a bigger threat to the Jordanians than it is to Israel.

And given Jordan's limping economy, the million Syrian refugees already in the country with more arriving and no end in sight, the Muslim Brotherhood breathing down the king's neck, neighboring Iraq bleeding and neighboring Syria falling apart, and especially the mass protests in Jordanian streets, Abdullah needs to be very careful. He must, or at least thinks he must, distance himself from Israel and swear allegiance to a Palestinian state three times a day, even though he wants it even less than Israel does. If he doesn't, his father's house is in trouble. Anyone who talks with the Jordanians hears that this is what is going on. Publicly, Israel is kept at arm's length, but the two countries are drawing closer privately. Exactly the opposite of what they are doing with the Palestinians.

Israel sees the potential collapse of the Hashemite kingdom as a nightmare. So it agrees to keep the bilateral ties quiet and give the king all the help it can, and is willing to accept the official line that "Netanyahu left after a short visit." For Netanyahu, pragmatism trumps honor.

This is not Korea 

Will Kushner and Greenblatt do the incredible and pull the curtain back on the silent alliance? With President Donald Trump over them, we can never say this will not happen.

But it appears that no matter what the "ultimate deal" entails, it will follow in the footsteps of the deals that came before it. Abbas is giving the Americans a cold shoulder, so the only possibility of a breakthrough is for the Sunni bloc to force the deal on him. Sadly, that scenario looks unlikely. If the king of Jordan is unwilling to publish a picture of himself and Netanyahu meeting at the royal palace, what chance is there that he will stand shoulder to shoulder with him at an international conference from which the dying Abbas is absent?

The prevailing assumption in Israel is that while Trump might have performed miracles in Korea, he will not succeed in the Middle East. Sooner or later, the deal will be read and the question will arise of what happens the day after it is signed. At least some cabinet ministers are already busy with that question. Everyone is assuming that Israel has a historic two-year window, from the time the deal dies until the end of Trump's first term.

At this stage, no one has an orderly plan. Behind closed doors, the same ideas are being floated that have been discussed since this government came into power: Israeli sovereignty in Judea and Samaria, widespread settlement construction, and so on.

Of course, at the end of the day everything depends on the laundry list Netanyahu presents to Trump at the beginning of 2019. For years, the prime minister hesitated over any suggestion of annexing territories. Will he change his mind this time?

Ariel Kahana

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/2018/06/22/a-quiet-affair/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Many Preaching Immigration Morality are Acting Unethically - Rabbi Aryeh Spero

​
by Rabbi Aryeh Spero

None of the hysteria and condemnation that went on this past week was necessary.

There is a never-ending blitzkrieg from the media to topple President Trump. Based on what we've observed during the last two years, there's no doubt that the "separation of families" barrage was an effort orchestrated by the media. It brought together the Four Horsemen for a Trump Apocalypse: the Democratic Party; the Deep State; the NeverTrumps; and left-wing organizations, especially those purporting to speak in the name of religion.

One: After the face of the Democratic Party, Nancy Pelosi, ridiculed Jeff Sessions for previously quoting the Bible, she then used the Bible for justifying her "special" brand of caring about "families" – in contrast, she asserted, to Jeff Sessions and others she considers "religious hypocrites" for not allowing open borders and easy and swift entry for all families and children wishing to reside in America. I have no doubt that Mr. Sessions and Mr. Trump do care about families, as much as Nancy Pelosi does. Indeed, as conservatives, they are far less inclined than liberals to take children from parents and place them in the custody of the "enlightened" state, as those on the left often propose.

What about families? Even Nancy Pelosi should know that government's first duty is to protect and defend America's existing families. Today, that means seriously checking, at the borders, all who may possibly be a member of MS-13, a jihadi terrorist, a criminal or drug dealer, or a carrier of infectious diseases, all of which have already threatened American families. We rely on the government to do this for us. Mr. Trump and Sessions are not "religious hypocrites," but men living up to their oath and doing their duty of keeping Americans safe. They are acting as those with responsibility.

In contrast to the prevailing liberal ideology, American families indeed count. That's all part of what we mean when we proclaim: America First. Compassion is not only for those outside, but those within, for those regular, law-abiding millions not part of any momentary preference group.

Instead of trying to find a solution to a national urgency inherently fraught with necessary albeit discomforting procedures, Pelosi, à la Rahm Emanuel, has exploited this crisis for her own personal ambition – namely, to regain the speaker's gavel. Worse, she overlooks the safety of our American families in her quest to import, on a grand scale, a new Democrat voting constituency. All of this is highly unethical.

Two: The Deep State was represented by former NSA and CIA director Michael Hayden. He compared the temporary separation of children from parents at our southern border to the Nazi Holocaust. Yes, he tweeted that. It is an abhorrent comparison. It is knowingly wrong; it minimizes the Holocaust, and it unfairly maligns our country. It is an unethical assertion, done by a Deep-Stater who loathes the president so much as to incinerate language ethics.

The Nazis separated families as part of a first phase of forced labor and murder of Jews, an entire race. We, in contrast, are taking care of these children – probably better than they're normally taken care of – during the days of necessary investigation. No animus is intended on our part, or on the part of President Trump, A.G. Sessions, or the Dept. of Homeland Security. Mr. Hayden's offense was not simply against Holocaust-survivors, but America itself. It's unethical to make accusations that are absolutely false and purposely degrading.

Three: The NeverTrump neo-cons, who for the first time since 1980 find themselves out of the loop, also gleefully pounced this weekend on the president and attorney general. They've been unable to accept that they're no longer setting the agenda within the Republican Party. Nor should they be. The neo-cons loathe everything we love. The majority of the party's constituency believes in nationalism, fair trade, and placing America first. They don't. Most of the party is no longer enamored of foreign nation-building, globalism, and sacrificing American jobs on the altar of international social engineering. The neo-cons are.

Most neo-cons are former Democrats from the East Coast and will forever feel more comfortable around academics and theoreticians than around blue-collar, hands-on regular Joes. They latch on to and advance anything that will smear and bring down the president in the hopes of restoring their big-shot status, as well as the perks, relevance, and power that go with it.

Four: Some left-wing organizations calling themselves religious, but who are more so socialist, condemned the president for not "welcoming the stranger." In fact, years back, Barack Obama quoted the Scripture passage "Thou shall not afflict the stranger" as justification for shooting down anyone who disagreed with his borders-as-sieve policy and granting a full basket of entitlements to all who come here, even illegally. But welcoming the stranger refers to individuals, not an invasion of millions...certainly not a calculated importation of millions to swell the voting ranks of the liberal party. It's about treating decently a stranger temporarily in the land, not about making it easy for would-be terrorists, gangs, and criminals to blithely enter. Nor is it about forgetting that newcomers can't come to feed and live off the sweat of others. It is not "affliction" to require standards.

Welcoming the stranger was not intended by the Bible to be a national suicide program. The Bible itself speaks of the blessing of impenetrable borders. Welcoming the stranger is a directive for not being cruel to people, or torturing them, as was the practice in many ancient societies and still practiced today against "infidels" in some modern ones.

In my own Jewish backyard, I witnessed a host of liberal Jewish organizations eagerly signing on to a letter condemning the president and the attorney general. They felt so good about themselves for doing so. They kept piling on, not taking the time to find out the facts. Forget the truth; it was a chance to show their "nobility" and, once again, demonize Trump. This frequently happens in today's Jewish organizational community. The vast majority of the non-Orthodox Jewish organizations in America are loudly anti-Trump, actually in the vanguard against him, pining for the return of Barack Obama. Their automatic assumption is that the average conservative and American is indifferent to the plight of children, the needy, strangers, or non-Americans. Self-righteousness, when used to dismiss the goodness in others, is unethical. 

None of the hysteria and condemnation that went on this past week was necessary. If there was goodwill and respect from the left, leftists would have realized we all want what is proper and responsible. Sit down with DHS and find solutions or improvements. That's the American way. Instead, they chose to demonize in the hopes of bringing down everything. But you don't measure morality by hysteria. Their hysteria does not reflect a higher morality – rather, it shows the ongoing project of low ethics.


Rabbi Aryeh Spero, a theologian and former pulpit rabbi, is author of Push Back (Evergreen) and president of Caucus for America.

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

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

California Democrats' Voting Scam - Lloyd Billingsley

​
by Lloyd Billingsley

The Golden State does favors for illegal immigrants -- who may return the favor at the voting booth.

“The California state budget on Gov. Jerry Brown’s desk puts tens of millions of dollars into programs that could help undocumented immigrants fight federal efforts to deport them,” the Sacramento Bee reports, “including opening up $10 million to hire lawyers for unaccompanied minors trying to stay in the U.S.” For that crowd, the Democrats’ $200 billion budget has even more to give.

The budget “expands funding for immigration legal services offered through the Department of Social Services and public colleges,” and “includes $1.6 million to build a team of eight attorneys and investigators in the Labor Commissioner's office at the Department of Industrial Relations.” This team will enforce AB 430, “a state law that requires businesses to tell their employees when they’re contacted by Immigration and Customs Enforcement.” As the report notes, “employers face penalties of $2,000 to $10,000 if they fail to notify their workers of a pending immigration action.”

Last year’s budget “put $45 million into providing legal services to immigrants,” which the Department of Social Services deploys to “hire nonprofit organizations that will work on immigration cases.” The new funding “steers some of that money directly to colleges. It gives $10 million to community colleges for immigration legal services, $7 million to the California State University system and $4 million to the University of California.” Still, it’s not done.

“The upcoming budget also more than triples legal funding for undocumented minors,” The Bee reports. “Last year, the Department of Social Services received $3 million for those cases. In the next budget, the department gets $10 million to help young undocumented immigrants.” 

David Chiu, the San Francisco Democrat who wrote AB 430, explains that “Donald Trump’s out-of-control deportation force is constant threat to our immigrant communities.” While Trump Derangement Syndrome is doubtless a factor, taxpayers might consider the upcoming mid-term elections. 

As the Los Angeles Times reported in 2015, California’s 2015 voter registration law “is intended to streamline the process of signing up to vote and encourage more participation in elections.” It kicks in “when people go to the DMV to obtain or renew a driver's license.” Politicians deny that anybody will be automatically registered to vote. 

“We’ve built the protocols and the firewalls to not register people that aren’t eligible,” secretary of state Alex Padilla told the Times. “At the latest, for the 2018 election cycle, I expect millions of new voters on the rolls in the state of California.” He got them. 

According to the DMV, as of March 2018, more than one million undocumented immigrants have received driver’s licenses. Did any vote in the 2016 presidential election? 

California Senator Dianne Feinstein denies that widespread voter fraud occurs and Alex Padilla refuses to release data from voter rolls. So legal residents and taxpayers have good reason to wonder what he is hiding. 

State legislators who take an oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution now reward the violation of immigration law, and punish those who approve and follow federal law. The largesse for illegals also violates state law, the 1996 Proposition 209, which bars ethnic preferences in state education, employment and contracting. 

California state universities privilege illegals with in-state tuition and as the budget shows, even pay their legal bills. Neither would apply to a legal African American or Asian American student from Michigan or Nevada. Senate boss Kevin de Leon also violated state law by giving preference to Mexican national Lizbeth Mateo, or whatever her real name is, for a post on the California Student Opportunity and Access Program Project Grant Advisory Committee. 

So California violates state law, defies federal law and budgets tens of millions of dollars for millions of illegals, the vast majority Mexican nationals. They get protection from the federal government, preference in education, and even payment of their legal bills. In return, they vote for California Democrats, in the style of Mexicans who vote for the dominant Partido Revolucionario Institucional (PRI)  party in return for favors. 

In effect, California Democrats are a branch of the PRI and form a Mexican occupational government (MOGO) serving the interests of false-documented Mexican nationals. 

Assembly speaker Anthony Rendon wants the state to “step up and work with Mexico” instead of the U.S. federal government. Normally those who represent the interests of foreign governments are required to register as agents of those governments. 

Meanwhile, California has given driver’s licenses to more than one million illegals. The federal government should verify how many of that group show up to vote this fall. As a State Department investigation confirms, false documented illegals do vote repeatedly in federal, state, and local elections. Illegal voting is a serious crime and so is human trafficking. 

The false-documented “unaccompanied minors” who get $10 million in the budget are those whose parents chose to break up their own families and put their own children into the hands of criminal smugglers. California’s MOGO regime is okay with that and even rewards it. 

Back in 1987, governor George Deukmejian returned $1.1 billion directly to the people “to protect this money for the taxpayers.” California now has a budget surplus of $9 billion but governor Jerry Brown returns nothing to the people and ignores crumbling infrastructure and fathomless pension debt. The three-time presidential loser would rather spend taxpayers’ money to protect people who aren’t supposed to be here.

Lloyd Billingsley is the author of the new crime book, Lethal Injections: Elizabeth Tracy Mae Wettlaufer, Canada’s Serial Killer Nurse, and the recently updated Barack ‘em Up: A Literary Investigation.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/270524/california-democrats-voting-scam-lloyd-billingsley

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Illegal invaders place children in harm's way - Monte Kuligowski

​
by Monte Kuligowski

Liberals should think carefully about who's really to blame for this border situation

Have the establishment news media ever been so disingenuous? Has the demagoguery ever been more pronounced? Time Magazine's Photoshopped cover of President Trump glaring down at an innocent child he heartlessly separated encapsulates in a single image the media's deceit and politicization of border security law.

With recent history in mind, the narrative that President Trump is separating children from parents because he is racist and mean-spirited is laughable on its face. Never mind that detained adults cannot be housed with children as a matter of law. It's common, but hidden knowledge that President Obama also separated children from their parents at the border when his administration chose to enforce the law. And if I recall, Mr. Obama's administration repeatedly made the dubious claim that it deported more illegal aliens than the previous administration.

We all know of an everyday occurrence in America. Thousands of U.S. citizen children are separated from their U.S. citizen parents because their parents broke the law. More people are locked up in the United States, per capita, than any other country in the world. Approximately 2.4 million people are housed in prisons and jails across the fruited plain. "As well as another 22,870 immigration detainees housed in local jails under contract with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)," the Economist noted in 2014.

Of all the incarcerations in the United States, no children are ever housed with adults.
Millions of traumatized, heartbroken, sobbing children have been separated from their parents in America due to no fault of their own.

When a judge sentences an offender parent to prison (and, alas, separates a crying child), no one claims that the judge is racist, heartless, and mean-spirited. People understand that the judge is just doing his job.

Another arm of the criminal justice system that daily separates U.S. citizen children from U.S. citizen parents is the various Departments of Child Protective Services of the 50 states.

Child Protective Services agents sometimes separate children from their parents arbitrarily and without due process of law. Oftentimes, the separation is warranted. In many instances, parents present a real danger to their children. Sometimes it's questionable. It happens every day in America.

There is a law that is applied by all 50 states, though its language various from state to state. In short, it is illegal to contribute to the delinquency of a minor or to act in an intentional or negligent way that renders a minor in need of state protective services.

That is precisely what is happening at our southern border. Not only are the illegal invaders breaking United States law and trampling U.S. sovereignty, but those who bring children with them are willfully breaking state law.

The illegal invaders, whom the American news media refer to as migrants or immigrants, are knowingly and intentionally putting children in great danger. It is morally reprehensible to break the law while exercising supervisory responsibility of an innocent child. A parent who shoplifts with a baby in a stroller. A person who drives drunk with children in the car. A foreigner who illegally trespasses across a sovereign border with a child in tow. All three examples are really, really bad. And the last has the added bonus of using a child as a political pawn to garner the sympathies of an irrational political party and its dishonest news media.

The question becomes whether illegal aliens who reject our immigration process and sovereignty and break our laws should be favored over U.S. citizens.

U.S. citizens who break our laws and put children in harm's way do not get passes. Neither do they get a politicized news media to disingenuously advocate on their behalf with a concerted campaign of deceit and gratuitous emotionalism.

Of course, citizen-wrongdoers are of no value to the radical left for political points and open border demagoguery.


Monte Kuligowski is a Virginia attorney.

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2018/06/illegal_invaders_place_children_in_harms_way.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Bishop Graham Tomlin and the Demonization of Israel - Denis MacEoin

​
by Denis MacEoin

Israel is the only country in the Middle East and beyond where the actual numbers of Christians have risen.

• If Israel plays a part in the persecution of Christians, it must be doing a very bad job indeed.
• "Shortly after the [1967] war, [Israeli Defense Minister] Dayan met with officials of the Muslim Wakf, who governed the holy site, and formally returned the Mount to their control.... the Wakf would determine who prayed at the site, an arrangement that would effectively bar non-Muslim prayer." — Yossi Klein Halevi, The Atlantic.
• It should be clear from the above that Israel is one of the least likely countries in the world to persecute the followers of any religion. A well-educated and thinking man, Bishop Tomlin ought to have known this or have been able to check the facts for himself. None of the above is remotely secret.
• "[A]re the world Christian bodies denouncing the Islamic forces for the ethnic cleansing, genocide and historic demographic-religious revolution their brethren are suffering? No. Christians these days are busy targeting the Israeli Jews." — Giulio Meotti, Italian journalist.

Anglican Bishop Graham Tomlin, heads the diocese of Kensington in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea, which has many of London's most expensive residential properties, is undoubtedly a man of brains and good works.[1]

On May 26, 2018, however, he published in The Times an article, entitled, "If this rich vein of wisdom disappears, a part of us dies". The "rich vein of wisdom" to which he refers is the long tradition of Christian thought and experience in the region where the religion first appeared, and was handed down through centuries of Islamic rule. For the most part, the article is a well-argued defence of Christians in the Middle East:

The systematic persecution of Christians in the Middle East is a serious threat. The number of Christians in Middle Eastern countries has fallen from about 20 per cent to 4 per cent in recent years and regular bomb attacks on Christians in Egypt are becoming part of a deadly pattern.

So far so good. Tomlin's heart is surely in the right place. But immediately after that he goes on:

Even in Jerusalem, new regulations are threatening to tax the Christian churches out of existence, prompting the recent unprecedented closure of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre as an act of protest. The buildings from ancient times will still stand, but if Christians are hounded out of the Middle East, driven to emigrate by radical Islam, or, in the case of many Palestinian Christians, by the lack of opportunities to thrive in Israel, this rich source of wisdom will disappear just like the ruins of Palmyra.

The "ruins of Palmyra" is, of course, a reference to the widespread destruction of the famous Syrian site, one of the wonders of the ancient world, by Islamic State in 2015 and again in 2017. Referring to this desecration, however vaguely, implies some sort of moral contiguity between ISIS and Israel.

Now, there is no question that ISIS at its height and even today has played a heavy-handed role in the persecution of Christians in the Middle East, notably in Iraq, where one of the oldest Christian communities in the world is under threat of extinction. In Mosul and elsewhere, Islamic State fighters painted the Arabic letter nun (n) on the doors and walls of Christian houses to indicate that the inhabitants were Christians (nasara, nasrani ­-- Nazarenes). Given that such Islamic persecution is overwhelmingly real, one has to ask what the bishop is doing by referring twice in this context to Israel. Does Israel really persecute Christians, "systematically" or any other way?

Tomlin is broadly correct in saying that "The number of Christians in Middle Eastern countries has fallen from about 20 per cent to 4 per cent in recent years". That is true across the board, but Israel is the only country in the Middle East and beyond where the actual numbers of Christians have risen. In 1947, when the UN General Assembly created Israel as a state, some 143,000 Christians lived in the Palestine region to the West of Transjordan. That was a percentage of 7% of the population. But of those 143,000, only 34,000 remained within the state of Israel, a mere 3%. Since then, the number of Christians in Israel proper has risen to 130,000 (just over 2%, given the growth in numbers of Jews and Muslims), while many have been leaving Gaza and the West Bank, largely because of Islamic persecution.

In Israel, Christians, like the followers of several other religions, are given the full protection of the law, their holy places, including churches, are guaranteed security under the 1967 "Protection of Holy Places Law". This protection applies, not just to the major denominations (Judaism, Islam, Christianity), but to numerous minority groups. For Christians, it applies broadly to the officially recognized churches (Catholic, Orthodox, Monophysite, and Protestant, which together make up around 20 very old institutions (many indigenous and reaching back to the earliest Christian years), with another 30 denominations. Outside of Israel, Muslim states across the Middle East ban, restrict or actively persecute indigenous churches, such as the Copts in Egypt or Christians in Turkey, where Pastor Andrew Brunson is currently facing 35 years in jail, seemingly for preaching Christianity. Christian churches are banned outright in countries such as Saudi Arabia, and conversion of Muslims to Christianity is forbidden. Muslims who do convert suffer severe consequences as apostates, sometimes death. Thirteen Muslim-majority countries sentence apostates to death. In the Maldives, just owning a Bible is punishable by death. In a list of the 25 most dangerous countries for Christians, 18 Muslim states are listed.

In 2014, Duane Andrew Miller published a long study of the status of Muslims who convert to Christianity in the Catholic St. Francis Magazine. Commenting on the situation in the West Bank, Gaza and Israel, he describes how converts in the West Bank may be banished or killed by their families and those in Gaza executed. Further down, he writes:

In Israel, the situation is different. Muslims in Israel have the freedom to convert, and Christians in Israel have the freedom to openly incorporate Muslim converts into their churches. I estimate that there are about 300 or so CMB's (Christians of Muslim Background) in Israel, and perhaps a few hundred more in the West Bank. Nonetheless, this rarely happens. In Israel, persecution will not originate from the state, but according to a Catholic priest in Jerusalem (where, independent of Occupation, citizens are under Israeli law) they can welcome Muslim converts, but they will often be persecuted and even killed by their families.

When such conversions are accepted by the church authorities, documents certifying this change of religion are submitted to the state of Israel to make the shift legal.

If Israel plays a part in the persecution of Christians, it must be doing a very bad job indeed when it even protects the rights of Muslim apostates -- something that could well lead to friction with the Arab-Israeli Muslim community. In other countries, Muslim mobs sometimes attack churches where converts worship, as in Egypt. But Israeli security forces have so far prevented such attacks.

Israel protects not just the rights of Jews, Muslims and Christians, but those of many other religious communities, including some who are bitterly opposed by Muslim fundamentalists or others. Two stand out: Ahmadi Muslims and members of the Baha'i faith.

Ahmadis are followers of a 19^th-century Indian leader (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad), who tried to reform Islam by, for example, abolishing the law of jihad and expressing tolerance for other faiths. They number around 10 million and are hated and persecuted in several Muslim countries such as Bangladesh, Indonesia, and, above all, Pakistan, where they number between 500,000 to 4 million. In 1974, under President Zia-ul-Haq's Islamization of the country, Ahmadis were declared non-Muslims and are still treated as the worst people, worse than Shi'I Muslims, Jews or Christians.

Ahmadis arrived in Mandate Palestine in the 1920s, and many settled there when Israel was established in 1948. Around 2,200 are concentrated in the Kababir District of Haifa, where they have a large mosque and other institutions. They play a small but significant role in social relations, emphasizing interfaith activity and ways of conflict resolution. Israel is the only country in the region which gives this inoffensive yet despised community the right to worship, preach, and go about its daily life without fear of molestation.

Just down the road from Kababir, along the front side of Mount Carmel going straight up from Haifa's famous harbour is an even more astonishing religious site – the world center of the Baha'is. The Baha'i faith is another religion that emerged (and broke away) from Islam in the mid-nineteenth century, in this instance from Shi'ism in Iran. Today, its followers, from almost every nationality and race, number around 5 million, with a presence in almost every country, literature in over 800 languages, and eight major Houses of Worship around the globe, the best-known of which is the astonishing Lotus Temple in New Delhi, which has been described as the most visited building in the world, more than the Taj Mahal. Baha'is in most Muslim countries keep their adherence secret. Their belief in two prophets after Muhammad, the truth of all major religions, and a religious law that has abolished the Islamic shari'a make them universally hated by Muslims.

This hatred is particularly fierce in Iran, where Baha'is are the largest religious minority, and where they are severely persecuted. Many have been executed, others killed by mobs, their leaders are in prison, Baha'is are forbidden to attend universities, and all the Baha'i holy sites and cemeteries have been razed to the ground. International calls by the UN (on numerous occasions), the United States, Human Rights Watch, large numbers of intellectuals, and other states to end the persecution have gone unheeded by Iran's regime.

In Israel, the Baha'is are supported fully by the state. They have built their two holiest shrines in Israel (one in Haifa, the holiest near Acco), and on the slopes of Mount Carmel their World Center: vast terraced gardens, an arc of white marble buildings, including the seat of their international governing body, the Universal House of Justice, central archives, and more. They have other sacred sites in Acco and its surroundings as well.

Protected by Israel's freedom of religion, Baha'is have built their two holiest shrines in Israel, and on the slopes of Mount Carmel their World Center (pictured): vast terraced gardens and white marble buildings, including the seat of their international governing body, the Universal House of Justice, and central archives. (Image source: US Embassy Israel/Wikimedia Commons)

Israel's openness to religious freedom is shown in many other ways, all of which portray a society in which even its enemies are treated well. When Israeli forces entered eastern Jerusalem in 1967, at the end of the Six Day War, a unit of Lt. Gen. Mordechai Gur's Brigade 55 took the Old City from the occupying Jordanian troops who had been based there but had slipped away the night before. What followed was, by any standards, one of the most profound moments in religious history.

For centuries, Jews had prayed to return to Jerusalem and to possess the Temple Mount, the site of the first and second Jewish temples. When Gur and his men took control of the Mount, centuries of longing came to a glorious end in this spectacular triumph over the latest effort to destroy the new Israeli state. With the Mount in Jewish hands, the Brigade's Communications Officer brought out an Israeli flag and was given permission to hoist it from the Dome of the Rock. The Dome and the nearby al-Aqsa Mosque are two of the most sacred Islamic sites and had rested on the Mount for centuries. Climbing with the Intelligence Officer onto the Dome itself, he attached the flag to a pole.

Within moments, an order came to lower the flag. Israel's Defense Minister, Moshe Dayan, watching through binoculars from Mount Scopus some distance away, urgently radioed Colonel Gur and demanded that the flag be removed.

Author and journalist Yossi Klein Halevi summarized the significance of this act and what followed shortly after:

It is, in retrospect, an astonishing moment of religious restraint. The Jewish people had just returned to its holiest site, from which it had been denied access for centuries, only to effectively yield sovereignty at its moment of triumph. Shortly after the war, Dayan met with officials of the Muslim Wakf, who governed the holy site, and formally returned the Mount to their control. While Israeli soldiers would determine security and stand at the gates, the Wakf would determine who prayed at the site, an arrangement that would effectively bar non-Muslim prayer. The Temple Mount was no longer in Gur's hands.

As an expression of religious tolerance and a gesture towards avoiding bloodshed, this concession to Israel's enemies must surely be unparalleled in history.

It should be clear from the above that Israel is one of the least likely countries in the world to persecute the followers of any religion. A well-educated and thinking man, Tomlin ought to have known this or have been able to check the facts for himself. None of the above is remotely secret. Yet he lumps Israel in with the Muslim states which carry out the "systematic persecution of Christians in the Middle East".

As for his statement that "even in Jerusalem, new regulations are threatening to tax the Christian churches out of existence", he is exaggerating the true story and is massively out of date: the taxation that was to have been introduced has been cancelled across the board.

By February 27, the Israeli government and Jerusalem's Mayor Nir Barkat agreed to suspend the taxation plan in its entirety, even though many Israeli citizens felt that this involved a concession too far. After all, this exempted Christian institutions from paying taxes on commercial enterprises such as hotels, shops and other businesses; and the same taxes were already made payable by synagogues. In April 2017, Tel Aviv's historic Great Synagogue was forced to close because it could not pay taxes for its financial activities. Yet Israeli authorities felt it important to forego an appreciable and legally justifiable sum of money rather than to dismay the country's Christians. Despite this gesture (which was not extended to Jewish places of worship), a full three months later, an Anglican bishop somehow felt the need to cite the abandoned tax plan as an example of Middle Eastern persecution of Christians.

Tomlin further compounded his antagonism by claiming that "Palestinian Christians" lack opportunities to "thrive in Israel" and that this is a further example of this "persecution". "Palestinian Christians" do not even live in Israel -- at all. They are based in the West Bank (in dwindling numbers), Gaza (also close to disappearance), and some in East Jerusalem. The rest, who live in Israel are Israeli citizens and, as such, entitled to exactly the same rights as Jews, Muslims, atheists and all other citizens. Arab Israelis are entitled, for example, to enter university (20% of students, to match the 20% of the general population), to enter parliament if elected, have their own political parties, serve as Supreme Court and lower court judges, and to enter any profession they wish for which they are qualified. Why, then, say they lack opportunities to thrive? There may be discrimination, which exists, as it does in every other country -- but not as a result of official mistreatment, and certainly not as a consequence of "persecution". In fact, the Israeli government has taken strong measures to punish anti-Arab actions and to improve the situation for both Israeli citizens and Palestinian Arabs in East Jerusalem.

There are indeed restrictions on Arabs living in East Jerusalem, including the Old City. Of the 300,000 Arabs living there, 20,000 are Israeli citizens -- but they are not by any means denied basic rights, and many of the limitations they face are self-imposed:

As permanent residents, east Jerusalemites are entitled to receive assistance from the National Insurance Institute and other welfare services that Israelis are entitled to, and the free education system is open to them. They also have freedom of movement, to move freely throughout the entire country (unlike West Bank Palestinians, who are required to obtain a permit to enter into Israel).
As permanent residents, east Jerusalemites are not eligible to vote in the national election for the Knesset. However, they have the option to vote and to run in the municipal election to the Jerusalem City Council. A very low percentage of the residents chose to exercise this right, as part of the ongoing ban on Israeli institutions. Among many of the east Jerusalem's Arabs, taking part in these sorts of activities was perceived as normalization of ties with Israel.

It is important to note that, although not in large numbers, many Arabs have achieved high office in Israel's government, judicial system, premier hospitals, universities and more. Salim Joubran was the first Arab to serve on Israel's Supreme Court. Oscar Abu Razeq served as deputy director of the Tax Authority and director general of the Interior Ministry. Khaled Kabub was recently nominated to serve on the Supreme Court but withdrew for personal reasons. George Karra, a Christian Arab, joined the Supreme Court in 2017. He had previously acted as the presiding judge in the trial for rape of Israeli President Moshe Katsav, sending him to jail. Even if the situation is not perfect, failure to note Israeli efforts to allow its Arab citizens to thrive is defamatory and far from helpful.

How does Tomlin not even mention the dire situation of religious persecution in Iran, one of the worst in the world, where Christians suffer alongside Baha'is, notably those who are converts from Islam, something that can incur the death penalty? Or Saudi Arabia, where Christians are denied most of their human rights, including the right to worship freely? In fact, why include Israel at all?

One can only conclude that Tomlin shares the negative attitudes to Israel -- often seen as anti-Semitism -- that are fostered in many Christian churches worldwide, including those in the West Bank. These attitudes have been recorded many times by the present writer, here, here, here, and here.

The problem Israel faces from churchmen who attack the Jewish state has never been better summed up than by the Italian journalist, Giulio Meotti:

Christianity is dying in Syria and Iraq. Christian churches are demolished, Christian crosses are burned and replaced with flags of the Islamic State, Christian houses are destroyed, entire Christian communities are displaced, Christian children are massacred, and everything is done in plain sight. Islamists proclaim on a daily basis that they will not stop until Christianity is wiped off the face of the earth. So, are the world Christian bodies denouncing the Islamic forces for the ethnic cleansing, genocide and historic demographic-religious revolution their brethren are suffering? No. Christians these days are busy targeting the Israeli Jews.

Denis MacEoin (PhD, Cambridge) has lectured in the Department of Religious Studies at Newcastle University. Among much other academic work, he has authored many books and articles on the Baha'i religion, which is a reference point in the present article. He lives in the UK and is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at New York's Gatestone Institute.

---

[1] Tomlin is the author of numerous articles and several mainstream theological texts. As well as his episcopal status, he is the president of one of the UK's leading theological colleges, St. Mellitus. He is a learned man with a reputation as an evangelical intellectual, yet also a man of principle and compassion. On June 14, 2017, for instance, occurred Britain's worst fire in over a century, a fire in which 72 people died when a 24-storey block of social housing, Grenfell Tower, burned rapidly. On the morning of the fire, Bishop Tomlin immediately set out to organize the churches in his diocese to provide help for firefighters, survivors, and others involved in the tragedy.

Denis MacEoin (PhD, Cambridge) has lectured in the Department of Religious Studies at Newcastle University. Among much other academic work, he has authored many books and articles on the Baha'i religion, which is a reference point in the present article. He lives in the UK and is a Distinguished Senior Fellow at New York's Gatestone Institute.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12560/bishop-graham-tomlin-israel

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Israel fires missile at Syrian drone approaching ‎border ‎- Israel Hayom Staff

​
by Israel Hayom Staff

"IDF will not tolerate any breach of Israeli ‎aerial sovereignty and will counter any attempt to ‎harm Israeli citizens," military says.

The smoke trail seen in Safed's sky, Sunday | Screenshot  

 

The Israeli military confirmed on Sunday that its ‎air defenses engaged a Syrian drone approaching the ‎northern border. ‎

The IDF said a Patriot missile was fired ‎at the ‎target while it was still in Syrian airspace. The ‎drone was not hit and turned away from the border, ‎the military said.‎

‎"The IDF will not tolerate any breach of Israeli ‎aerial sovereignty and will counter any attempt to ‎harm Israeli citizens," the IDF Spokesperson's Unit ‎said in a statement. ‎

Prior to the military's confirmation, residents of ‎Safed reported seeing the Patriot's smoke trail in the ‎northern Israeli city's skies. ‎

Taking to social media, eyewitnesses said the missile ‎was fired at a target launched from Syria toward the ‎Israeli side of the Golan Heights.‎

Last November, a Patriot missile intercepted a ‎surveillance drone that breached Israeli airspace ‎over the Golan Heights border. ‎

Israel Hayom Staff

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/2018/06/24/israel-fires-missile-at-syrian-drone-approaching-%e2%80%8eborder-%e2%80%8e/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan Warns Of 'War Between The Cross And The Crescent' Following Austria’s Plan To Deport Imams - MEMRI

​
by MEMRI

"Do you think that we will not do anything? We too will do something."

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan warned that Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz's move to shut down mosques and expel foreign-funded clerics would bring the world "toward a war between the cross and the crescent." "Do you think that we will not do something? We too will do something!" he said. Footage of his address, made on June 9, was posted on the Turkish Haberler.com media outlet.

Click here to view this clip on MEMRI TV

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan: "They [Austria] have all but declared war on worship, the azan, and the mosques. What is the difference between Austria's chancellor today and the mentality of old times? Now they are planning and calculating how to shut down our mosques in Austria. Where is this going? I fear that the measures taken by the chancellor of Austria are bringing the world toward a war between the cross and the crescent.

[...]

"So they are going to throw our clerics out of Austria. Do you think that we will not do anything? We too will do something."

View The Clip

MEMRI TV Clip No. 6631

Russian Expert Col. Konstantin Sivkov: If U.S. Fights Turkey, Russia Will Help Turkey; Russian Airbase, S-400 Systems Will Stay In Syria

To subscribe to the MEMRI Russian Media Studies Project, click here.   

Follow the MEMRI Russian Media Studies Project on Facebook and Twitter. 

Deputy President Russian Academy of Missile and Artillery Sciences Colonel Konstantin Sivkov said that the "stubbornness" of the U.S. Congress is sending Turkey into the arms of Russia. "Unfortunately – or rather, fortunately – the American political leadership lacks the brains to take the right decisions," he said. Speaking on the Russia Today Arabic channel on June 11, Colonel Sivkov said that if Turkey decides to buy the S-400 system, nobody would ask the U.S. for permission. "Would they fight Turkey?" he asked, adding that "in such a case, Russia will help Turkey." Colonel Sivkov further said that the Russian Hmeimim airbase, along with the S-400 systems, would remain in Syria.

Click here to view this clip on MEMRI TV

Host: "If I understand correctly, Turkey is keeping up its efforts to obtain the [S-400 missile] system. In other words, it is expected that the Russian aerospace missile system will cover what you called [NATO's] 'Southern Flank.' If we assume that Qatar would also like [to obtain the S-400] – although this is only a conjecture – then this would mean that this Russian system would cover the skies of the Middle East. Would the Americans allow this to happen?"

Konstantin Sivkov: "Who would ask the United States, if Turkey decides to buy this system? Would they fight Turkey? In such a case, Russia will help Turkey. Unfortunately – or rather, fortunately – the American political leadership lacks the brains to take the right decisions. Instead of giving Turkey what can win it over, they are employing a policy of sticks only, and no carrots. When Turkey decided to buy the Triumf [S-400] system from Russia, the U.S. refused to give [Turkey] any type of American weapon. As a result, when Turkey wanted the buy F-35 fighters from the U.S., the U.S. Congress opposed this. Turkey declared that if the U.S. does not allow it to buy these planes, it would buy its planes from Russia. Thus, the military technological cooperation between Russia and Turkey will increase, thanks to the stubbornness of the United States. Therefore, I would like to thank the U.S. Congress."

[…]

Host: "Will Syria get the S-400 system, when the Russian forces withdraw from Syria? We have less than 10 seconds left."

Konstantin Sivkov: "The S-400 system will stay in Syria, because the Russian air base at Hmeimim will stay in Syria."

View The Clip

MEMRI

Source: https://www.memri.org/tv/russian-expert-sivkov-russia-would-help-turkey-against-america

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Iraq: The Banker, the Mullah, the Militia and the Cook - Amir Taheri

​
by Amir Taheri

Iraq is, perhaps, the most diverse society in the region, something that caused it much grief under despots but could become an asset in the future.

• The young technocrats around Muqtada al-Sadr get their ideas, especially on economics, more from Milton Friedman's texts than Muhamad-Baqir al-Sadr's "Our Economy".
• The next step should be to also accept ideological and political diversity. I believe that in the past 15 years, Iraq has made significant progress in that direction.
• In a system of down-to-earth politics, Iraq would be liberated from utopian illusions that have caused it so much tragedy, and focus on bread-and-butter issues closer to the concerns of both our banker friend and his cook.

"How is Iraq?" we asked a friend just back from Baghdad the other day.

"Bad, very bad, my friend," was the reply. "Even my cook has an opinion about how to form the new government."

The Iraqi friend is a prominent banker who spent his youth in exile in the West and returned home only after the fall of Saddam Hussein. However, he seems to have retained the traditional mindset of many of us Middle Easterners, who see ourselves as victims of despotism and yet fear any system in which even the cook has an opinion.

To be fair to our friend, the current political scene in Baghdad isn't exactly reassuring. The general election failed to produce an outright majority and the formation of a new government could take weeks if not months.

We are used to seeing governments formed and reshuffled in hours, if not minutes, with narrow elite of "usual suspects" playing musical chairs in and out of ministerial posts. In that system, any hitch in forming a government could be dealt with by having some ministers shot, as did Saddam Hussein in his heyday, or exiled into ambassadorial posts with a golden handshake.

It is not only our friend's cook who has an opinion on shaping the next government. In a bigger slot are a number of figures whose political CV wouldn't fill half a page.

There is Muqtada al-Sadr, a maverick Shiite cleric who has recast himself as a talented political maneuverer, trying to captain a team that brings together antediluvian Communists on the one hand and shadowy Shiite militiamen on the other. Then there are a dozen or so other political and military baritones with American, Iranian and other song-masters inspiring their lyrics. In the background are tribal chiefs and grand ayatollahs who could nudge the field-players this way or that with a shaking of their beards.

Muqtada al-Sadr is a maverick Iraqi Shiite cleric who has recast himself as a talented political maneuverer, trying to captain a team that brings together antediluvian Communists on the one hand and shadowy Shiite militiamen on the other. (Image source: France24 video screenshot)

"What do the Communists have in common with al-Sadr?" our friend demanded. "And what do both of them have in common with militia chief Hadi al-Ameri?"

The answer is that they all have at least three things in common.

The first is that they are all Iraqis, just like the opinionated cook in question.

The second is that they all accept that Iraqi governments should be based on results of elections. The third is that they are all forced to acknowledge Iraq's ethnic, religious and sectarian diversity, which means that no single element should monopolize power in the name either of religion or ideology.

In its manifesto published back in the early 1960s, the Iraqi Communist Party, which had a mostly Shiite membership at the time, stated its objective to be the establishment of the dictatorship of proletariat and the elimination of religion from Iraqi politics. Today, the party, at least in its current epiphany, talks of power-sharing, pluralism, secularism and coalition, terms that didn't exist in the Iraqi lexicon before 2003.

To repay the compliment paid to them by the Communists, the Iraqi ulema frequently called for the imposition of total ban on Marxism in any form or shape and cheered when the despot of the moment launched a witch-hunt against the left.

Today, however, the ulema know that any attempt at banning parties that they don't like will not be tolerated by public opinion.

The thinking brain of al-Sadr's distinguished clerical family was his father-in-law Ayatollah Muhammad-Baqir al-Sadr, who founded the ad-Da'awa Party with a dream of putting Iraq under clerical rule inspired by the model of Ali Ibn Abi-Talib. And, yet, Muqtada's chief adversaries today are in ad-Da'awa, with former Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki the most vociferous. However, even al-Maliki dares not preach the old gospel for fear of being laughed out of the rostrum by our cheeky cook.

The young technocrats around Muqtada get their ideas, especially on economics, more from Milton Friedman's texts than Muhamad-Baqir al-Sadr's "Our Economy" (Eqtesadena).

Iraq is, perhaps, the most diverse society in the region, something that caused it much grief under despots but could become an asset in the future.

Substantial segments in each of the ethnic, religious and sectarian communities that together form Iraq know that none of them alone could claim and effectively exercise power. The next step should be to also accept ideological and political diversity. I believe that in the past 15 years, Iraq has made significant progress in that direction.

It is too early to guess the final outcome of the current coalition talks among the top vote-winners in the recent general election. Muqtada's decision to engage al-Ameri's faction in coalition talks may be a clever move. The future government, which is bound to face enormous problems, cannot allow al-Ameri to emerge as the leader of the opposition in the new parliament, thus exploiting whatever setback Iraq may suffer in its zigzag path to sustainable democratization.

Many Iraqis suspect al-Ameri of being "Iran's man" and a puppet for Iranian General Qassem Soleimani. Part of that view is due to Soleimani's propaganda. The general is a master of self-promotion; a savvy manipulator of the modern media. However, al-Ameri was also close to the Americans and acted as go-between for General David Petraeus, then US Commander in Iraq, and various Shiite factions. Even if keen on defending Tehran's interests in Baghdad, al-Ameri is intelligent enough to know that propagating an Iranian-style system in Iraq would mean political suicide. Bringing him into the tent could reduce Tehran's ability to do mischief from outside the tent.

In any case, even together, Muqtada and al-Ameri don't have the numbers needed to form a government. They would need to bring in a chunk of the Kurdish bloc plus at least elements of the Sunni Arab groups to form a credible coalition.

That would leave a bloc of Shiite, Sunni and Kurdish smaller parties to form the opposition. With the government coalition transcending ethnic and sectarian boundaries the opposition will also be freed from the same constraint. That would make it possible for Iraqi politics to become a forum for competing political programs not rival religious and ethnic identities or abstract ideological divides.

In a system of down-to-earth politics, Iraq would be liberated from utopian illusions that have caused it so much tragedy, and focus on bread-and-butter issues closer to the concerns of both our banker friend and his cook.

This article was originally published by Asharq al-Awsat

Amir Taheri was the executive editor-in-chief of the daily Kayhan in Iran from 1972 to 1979. He has worked at or written for innumerable publications, published eleven books, and has been a columnist for Asharq Al-Awsat since 1987.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12574/iraq-banker-mullah-militia-cook

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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