Philip Haney: Whistleblower and Happy Warrior - Col. Joe Martin

​
by Col. Joe Martin

A tragic loss.

 
“You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.” –Winston Churchill

We met at a conference here in Washington DC several years ago, and I knew him from his reputation based on the national reporting after he had been a whistleblower to Congress about malfeasance in the Department of Homeland Security under the Obama Administration. He struck an appearance like Dr. Emmett Brown and his delivery was not unlike Ben Stein’s economics teacher in Ferris Bueller’s Day Off. His appearance, delivery, dry sense of humor and gaiety were disarming, making it deceptively easy to underestimate him. ­­­

An etymologist and self-proclaimed nerd, Phil was relentless in his pursuit of those who were infesting our country and attacking our way of life. Among the enemies this quirky bug hunter pursued were Osama Bin Laden, the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, the Holy Land Foundation and their offspring – the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT) as well as the subversive operatives in the Obama administration… many of whom are still working for the Department of Homeland Security.

 The leaders of those [Muslim Brotherhood] organizations were deliberately and intentionally brought into the [Obama] Administration to help promote and create both domestic and foreign policy and this status continues to this very day.

Phil was so bold as to put the derogatory information about these leaders into the law enforcement system. In response, the Obama Administration ordered Phil to remove all 852 records with the linking information from the law enforcement system. They went on to order several more rounds of purges of his information.

“They told me to delete the files”
 “But I wasn’t a very good employee.” He said with a sheepish grin.

Phil turned the information over to the appropriate oversight committees, triggering Congressional hearings into the Obama Administration’s pro-terrorist policies. And make no mistake this wasn’t some civil rights case.  It was about a law enforcement officer reporting established ties between members of formally designated terrorist organizations, their direct contacts immigrating, and ultimately their integration into the Obama Administration to implement a counter-Constitutional agenda. And he was repeatedly harassed and investigated for it.

Here’s one example. After reading Phil’s assessment of Hamas, the CIA wrongly assumed Phil had access to classified information and reported him to headquarters… rather than asking him what his methodology was and how he reached the conclusions he did. The investigation took 11 months before ultimately exonerating him. The investigator would later go one to work with Phil pursuing the very terrorist organization that would go on to facilitate and perpetrate the attack in San Bernardino.

“Obama was working with two front groups that were un-indicted co-conspirators in the Holy Land Foundation trial.” – Philip Haney

Phil took his oath of office to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies seriously – to the point where he re-administered the oath to himself at the start of his press conference about the launch of his book “SEE SOMETHING, SAY NOTHING.”

See Something, Say Nothing by Philip Haney exposed DHS malfeasance and counter-Constitutional agenda under the Obama Administration.

The press worked hard to ignore Phil and his book. His story didn’t jive with their pro-Obama “moderate Muslim Brotherhood” fairy tale narrative. Phil’s irrepressible intellectual and moral commitment to the meliorative counter jihad efforts made him a persona non grata to any mainstream media beyond FOX News.

Phil was on the trail of the terrorists behind the attacks in both San Bernardino and Orlando. But those cases were shut down by the Obama Administration. And Phil made the case there were several opportunities where their investigation could have prevented these attacks. And Like Phil, other counter jihad warriors including Stephen Coughlin, John Guandolo, Matthew Dooley, and others were all among those purged from the U.S. Government under the Obama Administration. Their work products excised from their respective agencies.

By the time I walked away from his presentation, there was no doubt that Phil had a solid understanding of the threat, both foreign and domestic. As I left the Act for America conference in Washington DC later that evening, I saw him, clutching his wife Francesca’s hand aglow as they posed for pictures with patriotic fans inspired by his work and personal integrity and bravery. I never saw him again.

We don’t know many of the specifics about how Phil died yet. It is our sincere hope that the publicity his loving fans and admirers generate will force an in-depth investigation into the circumstances surrounding Phil’s death.

Given the enemies he hunted – both foreign and domestic – there are plenty of people and groups who have a strong motive to kill him. And that’s a testament to his tremendous work and his meticulous defense of our country.

Antithetically, renowned counter-jihadist Robert Spencer mourned Phil’s passing by saying that:

Phil Haney was a man of singular courage and inspiring patriotism in a time of pandemic cowardice and the ascendancy of America-hatred on the Left. He will be as missed as much as he should be emulated.

And the unintimidatable Pamela Geller shared that:

Phil Haney was a patriot and a hero. His courage in the face of overwhelming adversity was rare. He was without peer. Haney stood up to the Obama administration and shook the DHS to its very foundation. Our country has lost a great American. I mourn this kind and gentle man. My thoughts and prayers go out to his loved ones. It is a great loss.

For me, and others who knew him, Phil had been the warning bell of an honest whistleblower. This little-known figure was a titan in the counter jihad effort. Truly, a hidden national treasure.

And we will miss this happy warrior.


Joe Martin is a retired U.S. Army Special Forces Colonel, a graduate of the National Defense University, and served with 7th Special Forces Group (Airborne), the Office of the Secretary of Defense, the Joint Staff, and as a Military Congressional Fellow to the United States Senate Majority Leader. His operational experience includes deployments to Afghanistan, Qatar, Kuwait, Colombia, Ecuador, Honduras, and Venezuela.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/02/philip-haney-whistleblower-and-happy-warrior-frontpagemagcom/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Wilders Calls Out The Islam-Fueled Western European Jew-Hatred - Andrew Bostom

​
by Andrew Bostom

Speaking the truth about anti-Semitism's cozy relationship with Islam’s defining text.

The Dutch CIDI (Centrum Informatie En Documentatie Israel) annual report for 2019 just released Monday 2/17/20, recorded 182 anti-Semitic incidents, its highest number ever registered since 1982, when monitoring began. This figure represented a 35% increase from 2018.

Even the CIDI’s full 99 page Dutch language report, however, provided only limited anecdotal information about a select sample of the perpetrators, rendering a quantitative determination of major (and/or relative) group responsibility impossible to assess. This glaring lacuna was “enlarged” by the report’s absence of background discussion of previously published comparative findings revealing disproportionate rates of extreme anti-Semitism, and anti-Semitic violence, or violent threats, among Western European Muslims, including confirmatory data on anti-Semitic attitudes within the Netherlands itself.

Dutch Parliamentarian Geert Wilders—the Netherland’s most informed and intellectually courageous politician on the subject of Islam—inveighed against the denial of what the report’s findings actually substantiated, during a floor debate, Tuesday 2/18/20. Eschewing the craven, vacuous platitudes of his colleagues, Wilders thundered,

[I]t is almost nauseating. We’ve been talking about anti-Semitism, here in the Lower House (of the Dutch Parliament) for ten minutes now. And nobody, really nobody has discussed the biggest cause of anti-Semitism, which is of course Islam, and Islamization. 

Observing that, “we have a million Muslims in the Netherlands right now,” and “Islam is synonymous with Jew-hatred,” Wilders demonstrated, accurately, how “intrinsic” Islamic anti-Semitism was redolent within Islam’s defining text, the Koran:

In the Koran its says that Jews are monkeys and pigs (Koran 5:60). That they are bad (5:79). That they cannot be trusted (5:13). That they are liars (2:100). That they are dishonest (3:78).

Wilders concluded by demanding that his colleagues acknowledge,

…there is a connection between mass immigration of people from Islamic countries, and anti-Semitism…If you do not, you are selling politically correct nonsense. 

Hard data on both anti-Semitic attitudes and non-lethal anti-Semitic violence, or violent threats provide irrefragable support for Wilders’ contention.

• Data collected during the 2008 “Six Countries Study” (i.e., The Netherlands, Germany, France, Belgium, Austria, and Sweden) from ~9000 participants (3373 native Christians; 3344 Turkish Muslim immigrants; 2204 Moroccan Muslim immigrants) revealed that 45% of the Muslim immigrants, vs. 9% of native Christians, believed “Jews cannot be trusted.” While such hostility to Jews among “fundamentalist” Christians doubled to ~18%, over 70% of fundamentalist Muslims were hostile to Jews.
   
• Belgian Professor of Sociology Mark Elchardus co-authored a 426 pp. study, “Anti-Semitism in Brussels’ Schools,” which included data on the views within the young Belgian Muslim community, primarily, 12-18 year-olds, during 2011. A 354pp. follow-up study of Antwerp-Ghent youth was published in 2013. Two thousand, eight hundred thirty-seven (2,837) students in thirty-two Dutch-speaking Brussels high schools were surveyed. Muslim respondents agreed with the following four statements—i.e., Antisemitic stereotypes—at disproportionate, 3.7-fold, to 7.0-fold, rates!: [I] “Jews want to dominate everything” (Muslims, 56.8%; non-Muslims, 10.5%); [II] “Most Jews think they’re better than others” (Muslims, 47.1%; non-Muslims, 12.9%); (III) “If you do business with Jews, you should be extra careful” (Muslims, 47.5%; non-Muslims, 12.9%); (IV) “Jews incite to war and blame others” (Muslims, 53.7%; non-Muslims, 7.7%). Antisemitic Muslim attitudes were unrelated to low educational level or social disadvantage. The 2013 study of 863 students from Ghent and Antwerp, including 346 Muslim students, confirmed these results. Forty-five to fifty (45-50%) of Muslim students evidenced Antisemitic attitudes, versus 10% of non-Muslims, consistent 4.5 to 5-fold excess rates.
   
• Researcher Gunther Jikeli’s 2011 study yielded concordant results (i.e., to those of Elchardus et al). Jikeli, a Muslim convert, conducted 117 interviews with Muslims from Berlin, Paris, and London, whose mean age was 19 years-old. He provided these critical observations which affirm the centrality of Islam in shaping the Antisemitic views of young Muslim adults in Western Europe: “References to the Koran or the Hadith may also be used with the implication that Allah agrees with this viewpoint…The majority of interviewees displayed resentments against Jews in at least one way or another. Negative attitudes toward Jews were often openly exhibited, at times aggressively so, including calls for violence against Jews and intentions to carry out antisemitic actions. Some even reported that they were involved in antisemitic acts. Negative views of Jews have become the norm in some young Muslims’ social circles. Some forms are specific to young European Muslims: anti-Jewish attitudes with direct reference to Islam, Muslim identity, or ethnic identity. In this sense, the use of the term ‘Muslim anti-Semitism’ is apt… The majority do not distance themselves from a literal interpretation of the Qur’an, and they are thus likely to take hostile passages in Islamic scripture literally”
   
• ADL (Anti-Defamation League) surveys conducted in Belgium, Spain, Germany, Italy, The United Kingdom, and France, during 2015 and repeated in 2019, assessed the prevalence of “extreme anti-Semitism”, defined as agreement with at least 6/11 Antisemitic stereotypes among Christians/non-Muslims, and Muslims. Both surveys revealed a nearly 3-fold increased rate of extreme anti-Semitism within the Muslim, relative to the non-Muslim populations—

(2015) Belgium: Muslims 68%, non-Muslims 21%; Spain: Muslims 62%; non-Muslims 29%; Germany: Muslims 56%, non-Muslims 16%; Italy: Muslims 56%, non-Muslims 29%; United Kingdom: Muslims 54%, non-Muslims 12%; France: Muslims 49%, non-Muslims 17%.

(2019) Belgium: Muslims 58%, non-Muslims 24%; Spain: Muslims 46%; non-Muslims 28%; Germany: Muslims 49%, non-Muslims 15%; Italy: Muslims 43%, non-Muslims 18%; United Kingdom: Muslims 54%, non-Muslims 11%; France: Muslims 45%, non-Muslims 17%.

• Finally, a lone study of its kind, assessing non-lethal violence and violent threats targeting Jews, was conducted by FRA – European Union for Fundamental Rights, in 2012. Uniquely, it queried Jewish victims about the identity of those who attacked them, or threatened them with violence, asking them to recall their past 5-year experiences: “Thinking about the incident where somebody attacked or threatened you in a way that frightened you because you are Jewish–who did this to you?” There was a gross excess occurrence of non-lethal violence, or violent threats against Western European Jews, by Muslims, relative to non-Muslims, collectively, who held designated, “right-wing”, “left-wing”, or “Christian” views: Belgium—Muslim 56%, Christian 2%, right-wing 0%, left-wing 0%; France—Muslim 53%, left-wing 18%, right-wing 4%, Christian 3%; Germany—Muslim 34%, right-wing 11%, left-wing 9%, Christian 0%; Sweden—Muslim 51%, left-wing 25%, right wing 5%, Christian 0%; United Kingdom—Muslim 36%, left-wing 14%, right-wing 7%, Christian 6%. Compared to those with “extremist right wing (or Christian) views”, the excess rate of Muslim non-lethal violence or violent threats ranged anywhere from 3- to 28-fold! Other than in Germany, where the percentages of left wing vs. right wing attacks were essentially equal, left wing Antisemitic non-lethal violence or threatened violence also exceeded right wing Antisemitic violence, or threatened violence.  Non-lethal violent acts or threats perpetrated by those with “Christian extremist” views were negligible, in absolute terms, and even more so relative to “Muslim extremists.”

Moreover, almost two decades of murderous jihadist attacks specifically targeting Western European Jews in France, Belgium, and Denmark independently validate of Geert Wilders’ jeremiad. Indeed, the Islamic atmospherics for 6-months preceding jihadist Hamid el-Hussein’s lethal attack on the Grand Synagogue of Copenhagen, in February 2015, were punctuated by mosque sermons from Denmark’s leading Muslim clerics belching forth the same canonical Islamic Jew-hating themes—including Jews as “apes and pigs”—Wilders identified, and denounced.

Current Al-Azhar University Grand Imam, and Sunni Muslim Papal equivalent, Ahmad al-Tayeb, during an October, 2013 interview, re-affirmed, authoritatively, the canonical Islamic animus which fuels the global orgy of Muslim Jew-hatred, and violence. Riveting on Koran 5:82, al-Tayeb stated brazenly:

A verse in the Koran explains the Muslims’ relations with the Jews…See how we suffer today from global Zionism and Judaism…Since the inception of Islam 1,400 years ago, we have been suffering from Jewish and Zionist interference in Muslim affairs. The Koran (5:82) said it and history has proven it: ‘You shall find the strongest among men in enmity to the believers to be the Jews…’

When no religious or political leader of stature spontaneously excoriated al-Tayeb for his public endorsement of “sacralized” Islamic Jew-hatred, I appealed to Geert Wilders. Alone, then as now, Wilders not only rebuked al-Tayeb’s statements, he extolled Pope Francis’ antithetical Evangelii Gaudium, which drew “the world’s attention to the indebtedness of Christianity to the Jews and their faith,” and contained a “sharp condemnation of the terrible persecutions which the Jews have endured from Christians in the past.” Wilders Agonistes ended his December, 2013 public letter with this admonition to Francis, which still rings true—and remains unheeded, by a Pope, and many other equally corrupted religious and political leaders recklessly pursuing “Abrahamic Dialogue” with al-Tayeb, and other Islamic supremacists:

I hope that the Holy Father will help us defend the West’s Judeo-Christian and humanistic civilization, to which even atheists and agnostics owe their freedom and democracy. Nothing will be gained by a refusal to face reality. We must speak the truth about Islam — the largest threat to mankind in this present age.

Andrew Bostom

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/02/wilders-calls-out-islam-fueled-western-european-andrew-bostom/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

David Horowitz Freedom Center to Sue Pomona, Pitzer - Erika Schwerdfeger

​
by Erika Schwerdfeger

For college-sponsored anti-Semitism.

Reprinted from The Student Life.

The David Horowitz Freedom Center, a controversial right-wing foundation, is planning to sue Pitzer College and Pomona College for “college-sponsored anti-Semitism,” the center’s lawyers said in a letter to the colleges Feb. 3. 

The letter, addressed to Pitzer President Melvin Oliver and Pomona President G. Gabrielle Starr, accused the colleges of violating Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act. 

Title VI “prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color and national origin in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance.” The letter also cites Executive Order 13899, controversially signed by President Donald Trump last December, which targets alleged anti-Semitism on college campuses.

The suit could be an early test of the new executive order.

The letter mentions a litany of alleged offenses by Pomona, Pitzer and the student group Students for Justice in Palestine, including Pitzer College Council’s vote to end the college’s study abroad program in Haifa, Israel — which Oliver vetoed — and SJP’s event last semester featuring speakers who have made controversial claims about Israel in the past — which was sponsored by several departments at Pomona, Pitzer and Scripps Colleges. 

“We write to inform you of your colleges’ liability under Title VI … arising from your institutions’ ambivalence toward — and even support and funding of — anti-Semitic hate group events and activities on your campus,” the letter states.

Both Pomona and Pitzer issued statements to TSL condemning anti-Semitism and denying the letter’s claims.

“We strongly dispute the letter’s portrayal of our campus and we are deeply committed to encouraging the open exchange of ideas with respect for all,” Pomona’s statement said. “The college upholds free speech, academic freedom and open dialogue. We aim to foster an atmosphere of respect for all members of our community and we seek a diversity of viewpoints.”

Pitzer responded similarly.

“Pitzer encourages the open exchange of ideas, protects the rights of all individuals in pursuit of their education and is committed to the exercise of inquiry, free speech and academic freedom,” the college’s statement said.

The center’s letter to the presidents requested action from the colleges by Feb. 14. Pitzer’s Oliver responded with a brief statement to the Horowitz Center’s attorneys disputing the letter’s claims, while Pomona did not respond to their request, according to David Horowitz, the center’s founder.

Individual members of SJP declined to respond to the claims in the Horowitz Center’s letter for this story.

The Horowitz Center was founded by Horowitz in 1988 and describes itself on its website as a “School for Political Warfare” that “sees its role as that of a battle tank, geared to fight a war that many still don’t recognize.”

It pursues “war” on “radical extremism,” including “leftist organizations and individuals … [and] their overarching sinister agendas.”

The Southern Poverty Law Center, a nonprofit that tracks extremists and hate groups, classifies Horowitz and others involved with the Horowitz Center as extremists, and describes him as “a driving force of the anti-Muslim, anti-immigrant and anti-black movements” since the 1980s.

“Under Horowitz’s direction, the Freedom Center has launched a network of projects giving anti-Muslim voices and radical ideologies a platform to project hate and misinformation,” the SPLC says.

Horowitz denied these charges, and called the SPLC “an utterly discredited hate group” that has “smeared me with … false and reputation-damaging lies,” in an email to TSL. He added that he is not anti-Muslim and “I have been a lifelong advocate for civil rights and have black great-grandchildren.”

Horowitz also told TSL in an email that the colleges’ responses to the center’s letter were “brief and disingenuous.” 

Although the letter says the Horowitz Center wants to protect Jewish students, some at the 5Cs don’t support its planned lawsuit.

“As a proud Jewish student, I have not felt targeted or offended by any recent speakers or events,” said Danny DeBare PO ’22, the president of JStreet U at the Claremont Colleges, a chapter of a primarily-Jewish national Israel/Palestine advocacy organization. “I believe the David Horowitz Freedom Center’s threatened lawsuit against Pitzer and Pomona has no grounds and is simply a platform to advance its Islamophobic and bigoted agenda.”

Horowitz did not comment when asked about DeBare’s comments.

This isn’t the Horowitz Center’s first clash with 5C administrations.

Horowitz Center fliers were distributed around campus at the end of the fall semester alleging that Pitzer promoted “Jew Hatred” and accusing the college of being intolerant of Jewish people and Israel, leading to a heated exchange of statements between Oliver and the center.

Erika Schwerdfeger

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/02/right-wing-foundation-sue-pomona-pitzer-erika-schwerdfeger/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The History of the Land Is Jewish, Not Palestinian - Dr. Yechiel Shabiy

​
by Dr. Yechiel Shabiy

The claim by the elected representatives of the Israeli Arab public that they are the original owners of the land while the Jewish citizens of Israel -- are “colonialist invaders” is a complete inversion of historical reality.

Ancient synagogue in Gamla in the Golan Heights, built during the Second Temple period in the first century CE, photo via Wikimedia Commons

BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 1,455, February 23, 2020

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The claim by the elected representatives of the Israeli Arab public that they are the original owners of the land while the Jewish citizens of Israel (and, by implication, the State of Israel itself) are “colonialist invaders” is a complete inversion of historical reality. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s declaration about the legality of the West Bank’s Jewish communities, along with President Trump’s peace plan based on that principle, offers a unique opportunity to correct that mistaken notion by applying sovereignty to all Israeli West Bank communities. 

The elected representatives of Israel’s Arab community claim that the Palestinians are the original owners of the land—an indigenous minority disinherited by foreign invaders. According to this notion, which is aimed at undermining the Zionist narrative about the Jewish people’s return to its historical homeland, the Arabs of the Land of Israel—like the Indians in America, the aborigines in Australia, and the Zulu tribes in South Africa—are victims of European imperialism/colonialism, which turned them into a disenfranchised and oppressed minority in their own land. From this standpoint, Zionism is a crude perversion of Judaism because the Jews do not constitute a people but only a religious community with no national attributes or aspirations, let alone any right to a state of their own in even a tiny part of the Islamic-Arab-Palestinian patrimony.

That thesis is not only baseless but a complete inversion of the historical truth.

It was Arab/Muslim invaders who came to the Land of Israel as an ascendant imperialist force in the decade after the Prophet Muhammad’s death and laid the groundwork for the colonization of this land by a long string of Muslim empires up to the fall of the Ottoman Empire at the end of WWI. During this lengthy era, the non-Jewish and non-Christian residents of the land identified themselves as Muslims—not as Arabs, and certainly not as Palestinians—until WWI, when the idea of Arab nationalism gathered steam with the help of British imperialism.

One need only look at common family names among the Palestinians to see their colonialist origins: Hijazi, from the Hijaz in the Arabian Peninsula, from which the original invaders came; Bosniak, from Bosnia; Turk, from Turkey; Halabi, from Syria; Hindi, from India; Yemeni, from Yemen; Masarwa/Masri, from Egypt; Mughrabi, from the Maghreb, and so on.

In contrast, countless place names in the Land of Israel testify to a Jewish presence over thousands of years. Take, for example, the Narbeta River in northern Samaria. Narbeta, which is the Aramaic pronunciation of Arubot, the biblical city in which one of King Solomon’s 12 governors lived, ruled the whole region of northern Samaria. In Narbeta, as Yosef ben Matityahu (Josephus) recounts, the Romans slaughtered thousands of Jews during the Great Revolt (66-73 CE). The area teems with archaeological relics from the Second Temple, Mishnaic, and Talmudic eras.

The Jewish population did not take to Roman-Byzantine rule and over the centuries rebelled against it repeatedly. The Great Revolt considerably depleted the Jewish population, but it was the Bar Kochba Revolt (132-35) and the subsequent religious and economic decrees that devastated the population, particularly in the Judea region. Harsh taxes were levied on the owners of Jewish estates and on farmers, and those who were struggling sought respite in nearby lands, especially Syria.

Concerned about the Jewish character and demography of the Land of Israel, the sages promised life in the next world to those who dwelt in the land and even for those who simply walked four cubits in it. In the words of Rabbi Meir: “Whoever raises his children in the Land of Israel is promised a place in the World to Come.” Settlement flourished, particularly in the Galilee, Samaria, and the South Hebron Hills. Dozens of communities developed, among them Tiberias, Baram, Gush Halav, Yota, Eshtemoa, Halhoul, Kfar Kanna, Arraba, and Sakhni.

With the Christian conquest of the Roman Empire, the Jews’ lot worsened. Whole populations of Jews and non-Jews converted to Christianity and the Jewish presence dwindled greatly. Not for nothing did the Jews of the Land of Israel play a major role in helping the Persian conquerors in 614.

In 628, Byzantine Emperor Heraclius defeated the Persians. Though he had promised the Jews and their leader Benjamin of Tiberias that if they laid down their arms nothing would befall them, he quickly broke his promise and murdered thousands of Jews.

Less than a decade later the Muslims conquered the land, with the help of the Jewish population. Although, during Muslim rule, the agricultural and urban Jewish population remained in good condition, it was hit hard by the Crusader conquest and the subsequent Mamluk conquest.

As evidenced by descriptions of Jewish and Christian pilgrims, Jews lived in Jewish villages in the Galilee such as Kfar Hanania, Parod, Baram, Alma, Ein Zeitim, Kfar Kanna, and others until the 18^th and 19^th centuries. It was the Ottoman Turks who forced the Jewish villagers to leave their homes, either by expelling them, discriminating against them, persecuting them, or increasing their taxes, causing Jews to migrate to the cities of Safed, Tiberias, Acre, Haifa, and even Tyre and Sidon.

In the northern Samaria region, Jews lived in Anin, near Umm al-Fahm, growing citrons for trade, until the Turks settled Yemenite Arabs there. In addition, the community of Bitra (Bitron in Aramaic) became Barta’a. In this village and its vicinity the large Kaba clan, a branch of the Banu-Hilal tribe of Saudi Arabia, came to settle, as did the Masarwa clan from Egypt.

The northern Samarian mountains are strewn with thousands of relics of winepresses and of terraces that served as vineyards for the Jewish and Samaritan residents of the region. As the Muslim population took over, the wine industry collapsed and was replaced by olive and carob cultivation.

The land speaks Hebrew. The names of the communities have a linguistic meaning in Hebrew: Jaffa = yafeh (beautiful), Haifa = hofa shel ihr (shore of a city), Shikmona = shkamim (sycamores), Nazareth = notzeret/shomeret (guardian), Beit Guvrin = ihr hag’varim/hat’kifim (city of the strong), and so on. When the Arabs conquered these places, they pronounced the names in their own way, distorting them and changing their meaning: thus Shfaram (meaning “a people whose luck has improved”) became Shfa’amr, Ganim became Jenin, Bitra became Barta’a, Ashdod became Isdud, Tur Karem (meaning “mountain of the vineyards”) became Tulkarem, and Jordan became Urdan—names with no linguistic meaning in Arabic.

As Israeli military and political leader Yigal Allon said, a people that does not know its past has a meager present and an unknown future. When Ahmed Tibi, an Israeli Arab member of Knesset, protested to President Reuven Rivlin that the Arabs of the Land of Israel are the land’s indigenous residents and hence its masters, the president should have answered him appropriately, as in the dictum of the Jewish sages: know how to answer an ignoramus.

Today the wineries and vineyards have returned to the mountains of Samaria, and on the holiday of Tu Bishvat more and more grapevines will be planted. US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo’s declaration about the legality of Jewish communities in the West Bank, along with President Trump’s peace plan based on that principle, offers a unique opportunity to apply sovereignty to all of the Israeli West Bank communities, including those in northern Samaria where the Narbeta River flows.

View PDF

Dr. Yechiel Shabiyis a researcher at the BESA Center and a political science lecturer at Bar-Ilan University.

Source: https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/israel-jewish-palestinian/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

UK textbook: “How could it be argued that the creation of Israel was a long-term cause of the 9/11 attacks?” - Robert Spencer

​
by Robert Spencer

Hodder Schools, like other textbook manufacturers, is apparently intent upon raising up a generation of hard-Left Jew-haters

It is no surprise that a textbook company in the shattered, staggering, dhimmi UK would be teaching this. The underlying assumption, of course, is that Israel’s existence is the cause of jihad violence, and if the U.S. abandoned Israel, it would not suffer any jihad attacks. Anyone who is familiar with the contents of the Qur’an and Sunnah, and [is] honest about those contents, knows this is nonsense, but those who spread it to schoolchildren are assuming they don’t know. Hodder Schools, like other textbook manufacturers, is apparently intent upon raising up a generation of hard-Left Jew-haters who will happily fall in line with the political and media elites’ agenda for their unhappy island.


Robert Spencer

Source: https://www.jihadwatch.org/2020/02/uk-textbook-how-could-it-be-argued-that-the-creation-of-israel-was-a-long-term-cause-of-the-9-11-attacks

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Anti-Jewish Hatred Is Alive and Well - Guy Millière

​
by Guy Millière

None of the countries represented at the ceremony to commemorate the Holocaust, except the United States, appeared interested in the threats to Israel or the genocidal intentions of its enemies.

• Just as in the 1930s, National Socialist anti-Semitism and far-right anti-Semitism -- and their consequences for the Jews -- were of no interest to anyone, the anti-Semitism growing today seems of no interest to anyone.
• None of the countries represented at the ceremony to commemorate the Holocaust, except the United States, appeared interested in the threats to Israel or the genocidal intentions of its enemies.
• If, seven decades ago, the existence of the new State of Israel had depended on the countries represented this year in Jerusalem... the war that resulted would effectively have been a second Holocaust.

Pictured: World leaders and foreign ministers gathered in Jerusalem on January 23, 2020 to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp. (Image source: Getty Images/Pool)

The ceremony held in Jerusalem on January 23 for the 75th anniversary of the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp created the opportunity to remind the world about the Holocaust. The commemoration of the only attempt totally to exterminate an entire people by industrial means, which was among the worst crimes in history, offered the international leaders who attended the opportunity to reaffirm the need to fight anti-Jewish hatred at a time when, throughout the world, it is rapidly gaining ground.

"The industrial mass murder of six million Jews, the worst crime in the history of humanity, was committed by my countrymen", German President Frank-Walter Steinmeier humbly said.
One nevertheless feels the need to ask whether those international leaders who attended are actually ready to align their actions with their words.

Almost all the speeches there defined anti-Semitism in a vague way, and when the words became more specific, they pointed only at National Socialism (Nazism) and the "far right".

People nostalgic for Nationalist Socialism still exist, as well as far-right political movements, of course; so the world, it seems, does need to remain vigilant. Today, however, in the West, political parties that openly supporting National Socialism, or right-wing movements that promote antisemitic ideas, do not, bluntly, exist. Since the end of World War II, there have been no anti-Semitic murders committed in Europe by people from the "right."

In the US, those who perpetrated the antisemitic attacks in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania on October 27, 2017 and April 30, 2019 in Poway, California, could be defined as "white supremacists", but they did not belong to right-wing political movements. Both men acted alone and appear to have mixed anti-Semitic ideas with weird assertions.

The murderer in Pittsburgh, Robert Bowers, quoted the Gospel of John to say that "Jews are the children of Satan" and wrote that the Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, a not-for-profit organization that provides humanitarian aid and assistance to immigrants, "bring[s] invaders in that kill our people".

The murderer in Poway, John Timothy Earnest, posted an open letter blaming Jews for a "genocide of the European race" and cited Martin Luther, Adolf Hitler, Ludwig van Beethoven, Saint Paul, Pink Guy and Jesus Christ.

David Anderson and Francine Graham, who murdered people at a kosher market in Jersey City on December 10, 2019, had ties to a Black Hebrew Israelite group.

Grafton E. Thomas, who stabbed several people in Monsey, New York, on December 28, 2019, left messages naming Hitler and the Black Hebrew Israelites.

In Europe, virtually all recent anti-Semitic attacks, threats and murders of Jews have, sadly, been carried out by Muslims. Malmö, the third largest city in Sweden, where the Jewish community had lived peacefully for over a century, has seen much of its Jewish population flee after Muslim immigrants arrived and acts of anti-Jewish harassment became widespread.

For 1,400 years, anti-Jewish incitement has been pervasive in much of the Muslim world. In 2002, the late scholar of antisemitism, Robert Wistrich, published "Muslim Anti-Semitism: A Clear and Present Danger". "Anti-Semitism in the Arab world's press and governments," he wrote, "has taken root in the body politic of Islam to an unprecedented degree". Later studies disclosed that in the last two decades, the situation has not improved. In a text published in 2019, "Rethinking the Role of Religion in Arab Antisemitic Discourses", Esther Webman, Senior Fellow at the Stephen Roth Institute for the Study of Antisemitism and Racism, provides chilling examples. Manfred Gerstenfeld, of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, noted that "The massive, non-selective immigration of Muslims into Western Europe has had a profound impact on European Jewry", and that "for Jews, the consequences of this influx are almost entirely adverse."

At the recent commemoration in Jerusalem, Muslim anti-Semitism was not mentioned.

"Anti-Zionism" -- the radical hostility to the existence of Israel, supported by leftists, all over the Western world, which has often led to anti-Semitic demonstrations where people shouted "Death to the Jews" as in Paris on July 13, 2014, or "You Zionist only death will come to you", as in London on November 13, 2019, was not mentioned either.

That the "anti-Zionist" Jeremy Corbyn appeared to be at the gates of power in the United Kingdom before its December 12 elections -- and that the British Jewish community was so anxious that the UK Chief Rabbi Ephraim Mirvis denounced the "poison" which "has taken root" in the Labour Party – already seemed totally forgotten.

At the ceremony in Jerusalem, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu requested that the world unite to confront Iran, the mullah regime he rightly described as "the most anti-Semitic regime on the planet", but his mention that "there will not be another Holocaust", seemed to fall on deaf ears. The only person who showed support was US Vice-President Mike Pence. All the other leaders at the ceremonies stayed silent or avoided the subject.

French President Emmanuel Macron, after looking at Netanyahu and Pence, said: "The Holocaust cannot be a story that we could manipulate or use". Macron also spoke of "the crazy story of people who thought that their future would be built in the negation of another", thus implying, falsely, that Israel and Israel's Jews have denied the existence of another people. In fact it has been the other way around: many Arabs, now called Palestinians, have denied the continual 3,000-year existence of the Jews on the biblical land.

Macron, by the way, a few hours before his speech, had paid a friendly visit to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, in Ramallah, thereby apparently ignoring Abbas's 1982 doctoral dissertation, "The Other Face: The Secret Connections Between Nazism and the Leadership of the Zionist Movement". The dissertation, based on the work of Adolf Eichmann, falsely alleged that the Zionists had collaborated with the Nazis to encourage more Jewish immigration to Palestine.

Britain's Prince Charles, who also visited Abbas, expressed "heartbrokenness" at "Palestinians' suffering" -- without pointing out that much of it has been caused not by Israel but by the Palestinians' own leaders who are feckless and corrupt.

Also ignored were several other issues: how the Palestinian Authority has never ceased to incite anti-Jewish hatred and how it still persists in financing and supporting terrorism against Jews; how every year Israeli Jews are murdered in Palestinian terrorist attacks and are victims of what the Italian journalist Giulio Meotti has called a "slow motion Shoah [Holocaust] "; how most of the Jews murdered in recent years have been killed by Palestinian terrorists, and how Palestinian, Iranian, and other religious extremists are the main architects of anti-Jewish hatred today.

Before World War II, anti-Semitism was not only pervasive throughout the Western world -- but widely tolerated. Germany's Nazi regime could unleash anti-Semitic persecution that led both to the Holocaust and general indifference. At the Evian Conference in July 1938, no country would agree to welcome German Jews seeking refuge. Two months later, British Prime Minster Neville Chamberlain and French Prime Minister Édouard Daladier met the German Führer Adolf Hitler in Munich -- and did not even mention the Jews. Kristallnacht, on November 9-10, 1938 although described worldwide in newspapers, did not cause even one official finger to be lifted. The idea of the Allied armies destroying the railways that led to Auschwitz and the other death camps was also totally dismissed.

After the fall of the Nazi regime in 1945, anti-Semitism, for a while at least, became shameful in the West. The Holocaust, however, was largely overlooked. When Primo Levi published If This Is a Man in 1947, only about a thousand copies were sold. In 1958, eleven years later, Elie Wiesel's Night suffered the same fate.

Holocaust remembrance emerged mainly in the late 1970s, when the American television series Holocaust was aired, and even more in 1985 when Claude Lanzmann's documentary film, Shoah, arrived. In Western countries, ceremonies in memory of the Holocaust were organized; Western political leaders spoke of a "duty to remember" and museums and monuments dedicated to the Holocaust were built. The United States Holocaust Memorial Museum opened in 1993. The Shoah Memorial in Paris and the Memorial to the Murdered Jews of Europe in Berlin were inaugurated as late as 2005, the same year as the United Nations instituted an International Holocaust Remembrance Day.

Since then, the anti-Semitism of the neo-Nazi and the far-right variety has been denounced, but other types of anti-Semitism have gained ground. Just as in the 1930s, National Socialist anti-Semitism and far-right antisemitism -- and their consequences for the Jews -- were of no interest to anyone, the anti-Semitism growing today seems of no interest to anyone.

Although the ceremonies in January were held in the capital of Israel, Jerusalem, none of the countries represented there, except the United States, appeared interested in current threats to Israel or the genocidal intentions of its enemies.

If, seven decades ago, the existence of the new State of Israel had depended on the countries represented this year in Jerusalem, the Jewish State would have been crushed in a huge massacre only three years after the fall of the Nazi regime in Germany; the war would effectively have been a second Holocaust.

On November 29, 1947 a majority of countries at the United Nations General Assembly voted in favor of the Partition Plan for Palestine but also supported the creation of an independent Jewish State. When, however, Israel proclaimed its independence on May 14, 1948 and five Arab countries launched a war to destroy the newborn country as well as its Jewish population of fewer than 800,000 people, no country would support it. Israel's Jews had to rely only on themselves. Only lightly armed, they fought heroically. Nearly 6,400 Jews were killed in that war.

The January ceremony to keep memory of the Holocaust alive signaled to the world that Israel will still defend itself. Nonetheless, by failing to denounce the most dangerous and deadly forms of current anti-Semitism, the words spoken at the commemoration will have absolutely no effect on the present worldwide rise of anti-Semitism. They most likely will not even translate into increased support for the Jewish state.

On January 28, 2020, US President Donald J. Trump presented what British journalist Melanie Phillips has described as the first peace plan that "puts the security of Israel first and foremost" and that "unequivocally supports Israel's future existence and sweeps aside the appeasement of evil". The French government reacted politely but negatively, saying that France still supports "the two-state solution and the creation of a Palestinian state in internationally recognized borders", meaning the indefensible armistice lines of 1949.

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said, similarly, that Germany supports "a two-state solution based on the internationally agreed parameters for Israeli-Palestinian peace".

Josep Borrell, the new EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, announced on February 4 that the EU was "distancing" itself from the US peace plan and that if Israel were to apply it, "it could not pass unchallenged." Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs noted that Borrell's choice to use "threatening language towards Israel" was "regrettable" and emphasized that Borrell had made his remarks shortly after a friendly meeting with the leaders of Iran.

"Much said but little will follow", wrote the journalist Nurit Greenger a few days after the event. "Reality has proven that all too often, world leaders' statements about fighting anti-Semitism are hollow".

So, there it is. Seventy-five years after Auschwitz, anti-Semitism is alive and well -- and most of the Western world remains indifferent to the fate of the Jews.

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

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15601/anti-jewish-hatred

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Socialism Makes People Do Strange Things - Bruce Thornton

​
by Bruce Thornton

What does the most troubling political phenomenon of postwar America portend for November and beyond?

Apart from the bizarrerie of Trumpophobia, the wide-spread Democrat  attraction to socialism is the strangest political phenomenon of postwar America. In 2016, the ascent of Bernie Sanders, the inconsequential senator from Vermont, bespoke a more limited audience comprising mainly millennials for whom politics is a marker of personal identity. Now we’re seeing a slate of primary candidates who all embrace socialist policies far to the left of Barack Obama’s public persona. What does this phenomenon portend for November and beyond?

Certainly the mainstream Democrats who rigged the 2016 primary on behalf of Hillary Clinton are nervous. Old Clinton wrangler James Carville is alarmed: He called Sanders’ supporters a “cult,” and prophesied that if Sanders runs against Trump, it would bring on “the end of days.” Sanders responded by calling Carville a “political hack,” a moniker Carville embraced as superior to being a political amateur and a “communist.”

For other Democrats, Sanders vs. Trump would reprise storied Democrat wipeouts like 1972 and 1980. Nor do polls suggest that socialism’s appeal has increased: 53% of those recently polled by Gallup said they would not support a “generally well-qualified socialist” for president, whereas 90% would support a black, Catholic, Hispanic, female, or Jewish one. The U.S.’s historical, and exceptional, resistance to socialism still seems to hold.

Moreover, the policies being bruited by the primary candidates are preposterously utopian and simply unaffordable. The bill just for the Green New Deal, forgiving $1.5 trillion in student debt, and Medicare For All tops $100 trillion. No proposal for financing the cost has passed the laugh test. Most are variations of the “make the rich pay their fair share” cliché, meaning various tax-hikes that would stop the current record-setting economic boom in its tracks. The reality is, the top 10% of earners just don’t have enough money. We could confiscate outright all the wealth of America’s 707 billionaires, $3 trillion, and still not be able even to fund the federal government’s FY 2020 budget estimate of $4.7 trillion.

Nor can those evil corporations that create jobs and wealth be tapped for more funds. The Fortune 500 wealthiest companies are worth $22.6 trillion, just about enough to cover the fed’s total debt of $22.7 trillion rising as we speak. And of course, then the economy would implode. Nor can raising the corporate tax rate generate the money socialists need to fund their proposals. After all, Trump’s reduction of corporate rates has contributed to economic growth, more jobs, higher tax revenues, and wage-gains for workers. Why would voters want to throw that all away to achieve some vague idea of “social justice”?

The only way to begin to cover the new socialists’ extravagant policies would require taxing more people than just the top half of earners, as we do now, and throwing in a regressive consumption tax at a rate comparable to the average European VAT tax rate of 23%. And it’s questionable even those Draconian, growth-killing levels of taxation could fund even a fraction of the current socialist proposals.

These policies, then, are obviously not the product of reason or mathematics or even common sense. They are instead a narcotic for those in thrall to the doctrine of income egalitarianism, an imagined paradise on earth of the sort found in millenarian cults, an ersatz faith, and a fashion accessory for the badly educated and angst-ridden. That’s why the historical record of socialism’s bloody failures cuts no ice with the true believers. Even if we set aside the most destructive manifestations of collectivist ideologies like Soviet and Maoist communism, the progressive version of socialism that has developed in the U.S. over the last century offers no evidence that supports expanding progressive policies even further.

Indeed, as historian Amity Shlaes has documented in two books, progressivism’s biggest political successes, FDR’s New Deal and LBJ’s Great Society, have been real-world failures. It’s not just the moral hazard of getting citizens hooked on benefits funded by redistributing wealth from the productive, memorably expressed in Kipling’s line “All men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins.” Worse, these programs are on track to bankrupt the country. Along with interest on the debt, for the time being serviced at atypically low interest rates, these programs are eating up more than two-thirds of the annual budget. An aging population that is living longer and taking the lion’s share of health-care spending guarantees that without reform current spending is unsustainable. It is the height of irrationalism, or a sign of political duplicity, that all the current Democrat primary candidates are proposing policies that will worsen this fiscal disaster.

Just as revealing of irrationalism or simple incoherence is the hypocrisy of millionaire candidates like Bernie Sanders, Joe Biden, and Elizabeth Warren, beneficiaries of free-market capitalism who bite the hand that feeds them. It doesn’t matter if they’re sincere but just poorly educated, or lacking in self-awareness, or fully aware of their hypocrisy and willing to promise anything to get power. The effect on the rest of us if one of them wins in November will still be devastating.

But establishment Democrats who are terrified of Bernie Sanders have ratcheted up the irrationalism by turning to billionaire Michael Bloomberg. They have already changed rules for participating in debates to accommodate him, and there are rumors that the DNC is attempting to fix the race as it did in 2016 to benefit Hillary Clinton. Their “moderates” Joe Biden and Elizabeth Warren having faltered, the goal now is to prevent an unapologetic, Soviet Union honeymooning, serial commie thug admirer, and in-your-face avowed socialist from sending Trump back to the White House.

This is an issue not of principle but of expediency. Smarter Democrats like James Carville know the nationwide antipathy to socialism requires a leader like Barack Obama who can lie smoothly on the campaign trail, and then once elected pursue a Fabian strategy of incremental change, just as Obamacare was the first step towards the full-blown government-run health care now being touted by the Democrat primary candidates.

But Michael Bloomberg? The guy who thinks the worst presidential candidate ever should be considered for his vice president? The eighth richest man in the U.S.? How well will that sit with the “woke” socialist class-warriors? Not even their skills at cognitive dissonance can rationalize that level of hypocrisy. This is the party that, with “maverick” John McCain’s help, passed the McCain-Feingold bill that violated the First Amendment by restricting donations to candidates, a bill that fortunately was overturned in the Citizens United case. Since then undoing that decision has been a staple of Democrat campaign rhetoric, ostensibly to keep plutocratic money from corrupting our elections.

Now some are turning to a plutocrat worth $62 billion who can literally buy if not the election, at least the candidacy. It’s no coincidence that eight mayors who have endorsed Bloomberg run cities that have received grants from Bloomberg philanthropies. And it doesn’t hurt that Bloomberg has been generous to Democrats, spending $110 million in 2019 on Democrat Congressional candidates. And that’s just a sample of his politicized charity––$2.3 billion in 2018 alone–– documented by the New York Times, which concludes that his philanthropy “has also secured the allegiance or cooperation of powerful institutions and leaders within the Democratic Party who might take issue with parts of his record were they not so reliant on his largess.” And don’t forget, with his $60 billion, Bloomberg can also afford to run slews of campaign ads night and day, like his $11 million Superbowl ad supporting gun control with a misleading statistic, or his latest calling out Bernie Sanders for his supporters’ thuggish tweets that threaten violence against the Berne’s opponents.

And it’s not as though Bloomberg is so eminently qualified to do anything other than make a whole bunch of money. As mayor of New York he was the beneficiary of Rudy Guliani’s policing tactics like stop-and-frisk that reduced violent crime and rescued the city from its Death Wish and Taxi Driver dystopian squalor. Bloomberg looks good only when he is compared to current mayor Bill de Blasio, he of the reverse Midas touch who is not smart or principled enough to stick with a policy that reduces murders of the mostly black and Latinos he claims to champion.

But that policy success, no matter how much a consequence of not squandering a political inheritance, has been repudiated by Bloomberg himself as “racist” during a groveling, cringe-inducing apology before well-heeled black “leaders.” He’s also had to disavow some crude and exaggerated, yet essentially true, statements about black crime and its black victims he made in a speech, and insulted black and Latino men by saying they “don’t know how to behave in the workplace.” Such displays of contrition are patently a tactic for attracting black votes, and bespeak a lack of integrity. If Bloomberg sincerely believed a policy that has saved thousands of black lives was “racist,” we would have heard about it long before he decided to run for president.

Instead, it has been Exhibit A in his res gestae that supposedly qualify him to be president. Without it, what else does he have? Regulating the size of soda portions? Hectoring citizens about their salt intake? Threatening to gut the Second Amendment? The “woke” base will like these technocratic intrusions on our freedom, and won’t be troubled by Bloomberg’s praise for China’s autocrat Xi Jinping, or his claim that Xi is “not a dictator” but is accountable to his people. But while their class envy might give a pass to a mere millionaire like Bernie, an entitled, multi-billionaire, ex-Republican, and obvious opportunist is beyond the pale.

Moreover, Bloomberg is now feeling the ire of “woke” women after the Washington Post last week published an exposé of his history of crude sexual jokes––so many that an employee put together and circulated a 34-page booklet including some of them–– and allegations of discrimination against women that has created a “hostile environment, artifacts of a workplace employees said was saturated with degrading comments,” the Times writes, and “a culture of sexual harassment and degradation.” He also told a female employee to “kill it” after learning she was pregnant. And yes, evangelical pro-abortion Dems will not be deterred by the hypocrisy of condemning Bloomberg for honestly saying what they have enthusiastically supported doing for years. If Bloomberg gains enough traction to threaten Bernie, will we see the Salemite MeToo# packs––whom Bloomberg has criticized in public–– swarm him as they did Brett Kavanaugh? Elizabeth Warren has already called on Bloomberg to release two women from non-disclosure agreements so she can learn the lurid details they are hiding.

It is a flashing neon sign of how irrational the Democrats have become that some are pinning their hopes on a billionaire with a long record of opportunism and crude, misogynist behavior that they’ve spent more than three years condemning Trump for. But the specter of a President Sanders frightens them with visions of just how much more socialism will be hated after it is inflicted on Americans, half of whom already despise progressivism, socialism lite.

But the really troubling issue is the continuing allure of a politico-economic system that fails on both counts: growing the economy and protecting individual freedom.  We can relish the discomfort of the Democrats who are being squeezed between a radical, noisy base and a more Fabian “moderate” strategy of inflicting socialism on us by the political equivalent of slowly raising the temperature of a pot of water with a frog in it.

Right now, no Democrat in the race poses a realistic challenge to Donald Trump. But anything can happen in this crazy political world, as Trump’s improbable election in 2016 proved. We shouldn’t let overconfidence fueled by the progressives’ egregious hypocrisy and buffoonery abet the party of socialism in duplicating that political earthquake.

* * *
Photo by Cop Paris


Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/02/socialism-makes-people-do-strange-things-bruce-thornton/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter