Two positive developments pertaining to January 6 - David Zukerman

 

by David Zukerman

"pre-trial inmates related to January 6 are treated more harshly than other inmates in the D.C. jail, even though they have yet to be convicted of any crime."

More than eleven months have elapsed since the events at the Capitol, January 6, 2021 — and many people arrested in connection with that physical intrusion into the Capitol building are still held in pre-trial confinement.  Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) has published a report on her visit to the D.C. jail, with Rep. Louis Gohmert (R-Texas) on November 4.

The Greene Report points out that the tour was hastily arranged by the office of the mayor after previous attempts by the representatives to visit the January 6 detainees — held for months without trial — had been denied.

On November 4, Representatives Greene and Gohmert were invited to join the tour of members of the D.C. City Council, a tour scheduled after the U.S. Marshals' Service found that the jail did not meet minimum standards for confinement and had arranged for the transfer of 400 detainees to a prison in Pennsylvania.  The finding by the Marshals' Service is appended to the Greene Report.  And even on the evening of November 4, after visiting other areas of the facility, it took a threat of seeking a court order before Reps. Gohmert and Greene ware permitted into the area of the jail, where some 40 January 6 detainees were confined, restricted to their cells for 19 hours a day, one detainee held since last February 4.

The following is taken from the Conclusion to the Greene Report: "pre-trial inmates related to January 6 are treated more harshly than other inmates in the D.C. jail, even though they have yet to be convicted of any crime."  The Greene Report suggested that four members, Reps. Gaetz and Gosar, in addition to Ms. Greene and Mr. Gohmert, have expressed interest in the well-being of the January 6 detainees. Where, one wonders, are the other members of the House Republican Conference?  And where are the social organizations concerned about the treatment of prison inmates?  Ms. Greene noted in her conclusion that there is a "two-track justice system in the United States, but it is based on politics, not race."  One cannot help but believe that if the detainees were members of Antifa and BLM, The New York Times would be screaming from the top of its building at 62 Eighth Avenue for the immediate release of leftist radicals held for nearly a year in pre-trial confinement.  Although with respect to the January 6 detainees, one cannot dismiss the thought that such indefinite and harsh pre-trial confinement for Trump supporters is what the Times had in mind when it suggested, in an August 2016 editorial, that after Hillary Clinton wins the presidential election, "The toxic effects of Trumpism will have to be addressed."

The New York Times, to no one's surprise, ignored the Greene Report.  The paper did print news that Mark Meadows, former chief of staff to President Trump, was suing to quash the subpoena issued to him by the House Select Committee on January 6, 2021.  But the Times account, December 9, by Luke Broadwater gave no information whatsoever as to the substance of the complaint.

As to the substance of the complaint brought by Mr. Meadows, against Speaker Pelosi, the individual members of her puppet panel, and the committee as a whole, well, the complaint expresses what, I believe, all House GOP members, save two, should have protested when the speaker refused the House Republican leader's nominees to the panel.  And, as it happens, Pelosi's refusal to permit House minority leader Kevin McCarthy's nominees to sit on the select committee provided Mr. Meadows with the grounds to challenge the committee's existence.

The Meadows complaint alleges that the subpoenas issued against him, and Verizon, his cell phone carrier, are invalid because Pelosi violated the terms of House Resolution 503, which provided, among other things, that the minority members would be appointed in consultation with the minority leader.  The complaint cited a judicial opinion holding that Congress cannot violate its own rules.  The Meadows complaint also points out that the select committee itself has no legislative purpose; rather, it is acting more like an investigative law enforcement body, and a partisan one at that.  House committees must have a legislative purpose.  The resolution establishing the select committee prejudges the people who invaded the Capitol on January 6 as "domestic terrorists."  Isn't this "Queen of Hearts" justice?

Media reports that I have seen online make more of the executive privilege issue raised in the complaint, but I see a more essential decision throwing out the committee and its subpoenas — as a landmark case — on the nature of our tripartite government. A correct decision, holding that a congressional committee cannot function absent legitimate legislative purpose and must abide by the terms of the resolution authorizing its existence, would be a dagger in the heart of the unconstitutional attempt to transform congressional committees into inquisitorial bodies, which could only lead to tyrannical government.

Why didn't Republican congressmen raise a hue and cry once Pelosi turned the inquisitorial corner?  I can't say.  They don't return my emails or phone calls.  Maybe I should lie and say I'm with The New York Times or The Washington Post?

The Meadows complaint seeks injunctive relief.  If granted, and it should be, that would mean the subpoena against him (and all others served by this irregular, unconstitutional select committee?) would be quashed, with the select committee itself left to...what?  Utter incantations against Trump and Trumpism?  Mr. Meadows also seeks reasonable costs and attorneys' fees — and he richly deserves such compensation, even if the sums would be derived from the taxpayers, as the committee members are sued only in their official capacities.  (But if, as alleged, they acted in an ultra vires manner, they ought to pay costs and fees out of their personal pockets — or, if permissible, their PACs?)

Seems to this observer that all individuals plagued by the Pelosi puppet panel should join the Meadows lawsuit against Pelosi —and, finally, the House GOP conference ousting the vice chair of the Pelosi cabal, plus the member who plans to resign with the expiration of his current term — if for no other reason than to deny Pelosi the change to yell, "But Meadows is a liar!  I did appoint minority members to my select committee!"

By the way, she can't get around the fact that while her select panel has a vice chair, it lacks a ranking member — and House Res. 503 also called for a ranking member.  How do you like them apples, Ms. Cheney?

Image: Gage Skidmore via Flickr, CC BY-SA 2.0.

 

David Zukerman

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/12/two_positive_developments_pertaining_to_january_6.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Iran Nuclear Deal: Biden Administration's Fatal Mistakes - Majid Rafizadeh

 

by Majid Rafizadeh

This is the same dangerous mistake that the Obama administration made.... All four rounds of UN sanctions that were putting pressure on Iran -- which had taken decades and a significant amount of political capital to put in place -- were lifted on day one.

• [T]he Biden administration's objective is not to halt Iran's deeply flawed nuclear program permanently -- the biggest flaw being that in a few years Iran is permitted in its "sunset period" to have as many nuclear weapons as it likes -- but just to limit Iran's program for a period of time while removing the sanctions that hurt it economically.

• The Biden administration has suggested a new sunset period of 25 years -- assuming the Iranian regime does not lower it to 10 or 5 years. This will allow the Islamic Republic to resume enriching uranium at any level they desire, spin as many advanced centrifuges as they want, make its reactors fully operational, build new heavy water reactors, produce as much fuel as they desire for the reactors, and maintain higher uranium enrichment capability with no restriction after the period of the agreement.

• All that is really needed is for Iran to stop enriching uranium. Totally. No enriched uranium, no nukes. But the realistic chances of Iran complying with anything even resembling that are less than zero.

• [T]he Biden administration is also planning to lift the remaining sanctions against Iran's regime on the first day of agreement -- before Iran has even complied with anything. Washington will then have no actual leverage against the regime.

• This is the same dangerous mistake that the Obama administration made.... All four rounds of UN sanctions that were putting pressure on Iran -- which had taken decades and a significant amount of political capital to put in place -- were lifted on day one.

• Finally, the Biden administration has not so much as mentioned curbing Iran's intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) program. A report by Iran's... Afkar News... stated: "The same type of ballistic missile technology used to launch the satellite could carry nuclear, chemical or even biological weapons to wipe Israel off the map, hit US bases and allies in the region and US facilities, and target NATO even in the far west of Europe."

• Why would the Biden administration want to propose a nuclear deal with the Iranian regime that will only empower and embolden the malign actions of the ruling mullahs?

The Biden administration, in an attempt to revive the nuclear deal, is continuing to forge ahead by negotiating with the government of Ebrahim Raisi (pictured), known -- for his crimes against humanity and his involvement in a massacre of nearly 30,000 political prisoners -- as the "Butcher of Tehran." (Photo by Atta Kenare/AFP via Getty Images)

The Biden administration, in an attempt to revive the nuclear deal, is continuing to forge ahead by negotiating with the government of Ebrahim Raisi, known -- for his crimes against humanity and his involvement in a massacre of nearly 30,000 political prisoners -- as the "Butcher of Tehran."

First of all, the Biden administration's objective is not to halt Iran's deeply flawed nuclear program permanently -- the biggest flaw being that in a few years, Iran is permitted in its "sunset period" to have as many nuclear weapons as it likes -- but just to limit Iran's program for a period of time while removing the sanctions that hurt it economically.

The Biden administration has suggested a new sunset period of 25 years -- assuming the Iranian regime does not lower it to 10 or 5 years. This will allow the Islamic Republic to resume enriching uranium at any level they desire, spin as many advanced centrifuges as they want, make its reactors fully operational, build new heavy water reactors, produce as much fuel as they desire for the reactors, and maintain higher uranium enrichment capability with no restriction after the period of the agreement. All that is really needed is for Iran to stop enriching uranium. Totally. No enriched uranium, no nukes. But the realistic chances of Iran complying with anything even resembling that are less than zero.

In short, the sunset period terms will most likely ensure that after the pause detailed in any agreement, Iran will be a nuclear state. It is also pretty safe to assume, from Iran's track record, that during any agreement, Iran will covertly violate the rules.

Technologically speaking, after Iran becomes a nuclear threshold state, it is just a matter of weeks to convert the materials into weapons grade material.

In addition, after having lifted some of the sanctions, the Biden administration is also planning to lift the remaining sanctions against Iran's regime on the first day of agreement -- before Iran has even complied with anything. Washington will then effectively have no actual leverage against the regime. Iran will immediately join the international community, increase its oil sales and trade, and the ruling clerics will ensure their hold on power, eliminating at least the economic danger that accompanies massive domestic unrest and threatens even further the mullahs' repressive hold on power.

This is the same dangerous mistake that the Obama administration made. In 2015, the Iranian regime received an extremely favorable deal from the "P5+1": China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom and the United States, plus Germany. All four rounds of UN sanctions that were putting pressure on Iran -- which had taken decades and a significant amount of political capital to put in place -- were lifted on day one.

If all sanctions again are lifted immediately upon the revival of the nuclear deal, and Iran later decides to breach the terms of the nuclear deal, the West will no longer find a consensus in the UN Security Council to reimpose sanctions on Iran: China and Russia will vote no. This scenario already took place in 2020. When the International Atomic Energy Agency announced that Iran was violating all restrictions of the nuclear pact, the US could not get the backing of Russia and China, or even the consent of the EU3 (France, the UK and Germany), to reimpose sanctions on Iran.

Finally, the Biden administration has not so much as mentioned curbing Iran's intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) program. Iran's ICBM program is linked to the regime's nuclear program. A report by Iran's state-controlled Afkar News, with the headline "American soil is now within the range of Iranian bombs," stated:

"The same type of ballistic missile technology used to launch the satellite could carry nuclear, chemical or even biological weapons to wipe Israel off the map, hit US bases and allies in the region and US facilities, and target NATO even in the far west of Europe."

The report also boasted about the damage the Iranian regime could inflict on the US:

"By sending a military satellite into space, Iran now has shown that it can target all American territory; the Iranian parliament had previously warned that an electromagnetic nuclear attack on the United States would likely kill 90 percent of Americans."

The international community also witnessed how the Iranian regime expanded and launched more ballistic missiles after the 2015 nuclear deal despite the UN Security Council resolution that states:

"Iran shall not undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using ballistic missile technology, and that States shall take all necessary measures to prevent the transfer of technology or technical assistance to Iran related to such activities."

Why would the Biden administration want to propose a nuclear deal with the Iranian regime that will only empower and embolden the malign actions of the ruling mullahs?

• Follow Majid Rafizadeh on Twitter

 

Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a business strategist and advisor, Harvard-educated scholar, political scientist, board member of Harvard International Review, and president of the International American Council on the Middle East. He has authored several books on Islam and US foreign policy. He can be reached at Dr.Rafizadeh@Post.Harvard.Edu

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18023/iran-nuclear-deal-biden

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Ron DeSantis comes out with a five-point workable plan to get around Biden on illegal immigation - Monica Showalter

 

by Monica Showalter

Five points to cut illegal immigration all the way past its 'root causes.'

The more you look at Florida's governor, Ron DeSantis, the more you like him.

Here's his new plan on how to deal with Joe Biden's open borders policies that have brought the surge of illegal immigrants into the country, in a neatly presented, effectively communicated Twitter summary:

The failure to secure our nation’s border is affecting communities across our state & nation. Today, I outlined additional proposals for consideration in the next legislative session that will protect Florida from the Biden Admin's reckless border policies https://t.co/1yRVgUtoym pic.twitter.com/8KZkxNfUcb

— Ron DeSantis (@GovRonDeSantis) December 10, 2021

It's impressive, frankly for multiple reasons.

First, as noted above, it's effective Twitter communication, fearlessly getting the word out and summing up the precise details for all to read quickly.

Second, it's well in tune with what Americans are most thinking about in these days of Joe Biden's failed presidency.

 

According to the Washington Times last Dec. 7:

The survey, conducted by OnMessage Inc. from Nov. 19 to Dec. 3, tested a wide range of hot-button issues among more than 4,000 registered voters and found surprising areas of consensus.

Some 80% see rising inflation and supply chain issues as a “crisis.” That notion spans party lines.

About 70% of voters say the southern border, which is experiencing an unprecedented surge of illegal immigrants, is in “crisis.” That, too, spanned party lines.

That percentage is huge.

It's a poll result that echos what's been seen elsewhere: According to the University of Texas in one of its public sentiment polls last June, (illegal) immigration rated number two, behind political corruption/U.S. leadership as the top issue to voters.

Laura Ingraham had this excellent monologue yesterday on the top three issues bothering Americans now -- inflation, violent crime, and illegal immigration, all of which affect Americans directly in ways they can see with their own eyes. The video is here, or try this experimental link in non-typical format below here, I'll delete if it does not work:

 

Third, it's action at a time when action needs to be taken. There are a lot of red-state governors out there doing some work on the ongoing border surge -- Texas, Arizona -- but none have come up with as strong a plan of action for disincentivizing illegal immigration from the start as this program has. Texas, for instance, has cleverly erected barriers from shipping containers. However, that's triage, albeit fast triage. This deSantis plan hits at the root causes of the illegal immigration by targeting the wealthy enablers of illegal immigration - the NGOs, the activists, the open-borders lobby, the church groups, in a way that's designed to end the incentives and profit motives that these groups operate on.

Fourth, It's fascinatingly tailored to actions that a governor, as opposed to a president, can effectively do. 

DeSantis, for instance, can't shut down the border or build the wall or re-negotiate the treaties with Latin American partners in the way a good president could do, but he can target the NGOs who profit from dumping illegals into communities and then wash their hands of the costs they impose on others, through special taxations. The first three points of his five point plan do just that, target the NGOs, and others who profit from enabling the cartels and human smugglers from sponsoring more illegal immigration. It would bee nice to include Facebook, too, but that may be part of the plan. That's forcing these organizations to act responsibly, wiping those dollar-signs right out of their eyes and returning to their original missions.

The fourth point restores jails and courts as collection points for illegals -- the ones who break U.S. laws in ways that are so violent that they actually get charged for their crimes. Those characters need to be off the streets immediately with all due data collected on them, same as it's done with vaccines from ordinary Americans. A state can do that even if it can't force a deportation. That's important.

DeSantis's fifth point is important, too: E-Verify. Why isn't that the law of the land? Illegals are getting in left and right on phony work papers and working, taking away jobs from Americans or else depressing wages for those at the bottom of the economic ladder. The main reason they come is for work, but the identifications requirements in place lend to easy forging and corner-cutting. Why not e-Verify? Politicians have been talking about this for years, even Republican ones, but nothing has been done. Making it impossible for an illegal to find work is as great a deportation device as a court order and takes a lot less time and money, too. DeSantis hit a bullesye with this one. Shutting off Florida to illegal immigrants, one of the most economically booming of states that amounts to a job magnet, is going to have an impact.

DeSantis has done a yeoman's job on identifying what a governor can do on illegal immigration -- and doing it. He must have extremely good people, given the well-considered nature of these doable proposals.

All of this undercuts badly Joe Biden's plan for open borders and unlimited illegal immigration. That's what Americans want.

We can add another hashmark-scratchmark into the 'presidential' column for Ron DeSantis for this one. 

Image: Twitter screen shot

 

Monica Showalter

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2021/12/ron_desantis_comes_out_with_a_fivepoint_workable_plan_to_get_around_biden_on_illegal_immigation.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Senior source reveals PM Bennett's true position on construction in Judea, Samaria - Ido Ben Porat

 

by Ido Ben Porat

Senior source who accompanied Defense Min. Gantz to Washington says Israel 'wants a diplomatic solution with supremacy on security issues.'

 

PM Bennett at a government meeting                                                                    Yoni Kempinski

A senior security source who accompanied Defense Minister Benny Gantz (Blue and White) on his trip to Washington has revealed the Israeli government's true position on construction in Judea and Samaria.

According to the source, the issue came up in conversations Gantz had with American officials, but "less than in the past." The source added that, "There is mostly an American desire not to block the two-state solution."

With regards to the position Gantz presented in Washington, the source said, "Israel wants a diplomatic solution with supremacy on issues of security. The Israeli position is that we can build in the blocs, and also in the towns which need construction."

Gantz also told the US that he had ordered the IDF to prepare for an attack on Iran. Washington still sees a direct attack on Iran as a last resort, to be used only if the diplomatic efforts fail.

A senior Israeli security source said that "the Americans are with us, and at the same time, we as Israelis need to understand that the US is looking at the world in a broad fashion, and they have a different order to their priorities. The Americans understand well that Iran is playing for time, and that they don't have good cards."

"Alongside the relationship with the US, Israel needs to be strong on its own merits. We are not yet in a place where we can use force, it could be that the public opinion will change. Specifically, increasing the pressure by means of economic sanctions may cause the Iranians to backtrack on nuclear issues, and this is the time to do that."

On Thursday, Interior Minister Ayelet Shaked (Yamina) said that she is working to connect the young settlements in Judea and Samaria to basic water and electricity infrastructure.

In an interview with Reshet Bet, Shaked said, "We can connect the young settlements to electricity by means of a Commander's Order which will allow the Defense Minister to connect them to electricity. We are working on that, and I hope that it will happen in the coming months."

About the coalition itself, she said, "If the government functions well, it will live out its days. As long as we work well."

She also said that Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett intends to make his diplomatic visits abroad using the plane purchased by the previous government for the former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and President Reuven Rivlin.

"Bennett intends to use the plane, and he instructed that it be made ready. There is no reason it should stand unused in the Israel Aerospace Industries storehouse, and there's no reason to put out money on commercial flights," she said.

Shaked was also asked if she regrets the appointment of Avichai Mandelblit to the position of Attorney General. To this she responded, "There was a full partner to that appointment, and his name is Benjamin Netanyahu. We did it together."

 

Ido Ben Porat

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/318464

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Palestinian Authority Crackdown on Hamas and PIJ in the West Bank - Hugh Fitzgerald

 

by Hugh Fitzgerald

Jihadist thuggery and contests over power and money.

 

In the West Bank, Mahmoud Abbas’ Palestinian Authority has been cracking down on Hamas, the PIJ, and the PFLP, in what has become a ruthless campaign to suppress his political rivals, by shutting down their events, and preventing them from appearing in the public square. Some have been hauled in for interrogation, others have been detained. The PA is now enduring an avalanche of criticism both from those groups, and from Palestinian human rights organizations, over its crackdown.

A report on this internecine Palestinian warfare is here: “PA steps up crackdown on Hamas, Islamic Jihad members,” by Khaled Abu Toameh, Jerusalem Post, November 27, 2021:

The Palestinian Authority has stepped up its security crackdown on members of Hamas and other Palestinian factions in the West Bank, drawing sharp criticism from the groups, political activists and human rights organizations.

In separate statements, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) and the popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), whose members are the prime targets of the ongoing clampdown, called for an end to the measures taken by the PA security forces.

A PA official in Ramallah said that the security measures were designed to “enforce law and order” and “prevent attempts by thugs and armed gangs to undermine the Palestinian Authority and disturb the peace.”

It is not “law and order” that the PA is enforcing but the iron rule of Mahmoud Abbas, who brooks no opposition. The PA violates “law and order” whenever it feels like, in order to suppress even non-violent protests, or even just the public showing of Hamas or PIJ flags or banners, or to rid itself of dangerous dissidents, as Abbas recently did when he had his goons murder Nizar Banat, the activist who, on social media, had been the most damaging critic of Abbas’ corruption. That murder led to waves of protest in the PA-controlled parts of the West Bank.

Abbas was particularly intent on keeping funerals from turning into political rallies against him. At a recent funeral for Wasfi Kahaba, a Hamas member who had died of Covid, armed members of both Hamas and the PIJ showed up in force, in a direct challenge to Abbas that embarrassed and infuriated him. Ever since then, his men have been monitoring high-profile funerals, to make sure there is no repeat of that symbolic challenge to his rule by members of Hamas or the PIJ. .

The PA official dismissed accusations that the PA leadership was exploiting the security crackdown to target political rivals and silence critics….

This PA crackdown was precisely intended to “target political rivals and silence critics.” Abbas knows how deeply unpopular he is. In a recent poll, 80% of Palestinians said they wanted him to resign because of his mismanagement and, especially, his massive corruption. He is deeply resented.

The participation of Hamas and PIJ masked gunmen in the funeral was seen as a huge embarrassment for, and a direct challenge to, the PA’s leadership.

In response, PA President Mahmoud Abbas decided to replace the commanders of the various branches of the Palestinian security forces in the Jenin area.

Furious at the public show of force by both Hamas and the PIJ, Abbas chose to replace his local commanders with others, presumably chosen for their ruthlessness in clamping down on Hamas and PIJ.

Abbas is also reported to have issued strict instructions to the PA security forces to ban all public events held by Hamas, PIJ and other groups that are not affiliated with his ruling Fatah faction.

Abbas Is now in take-no-prisoners mode with Hamas and PIJ. No public gatherings, protests, speeches, welcome-home events for just-released prisoners, or funerals, will be allowed if they are tin any way connected to a group other than his own Fatah. He is trying to squeeze Hamas and the PIJ out of the public square altogether. His security services have now been engaging in proleptic arrests of Hamas and PIJ members, taken into custody not for anything they have done but for what they are deemed likely to do.

According to Palestinian sources, at least 65 Palestinians have been detained by the PA security forces in the past two weeks. Most of the detainees are suspected of being affiliated with Hamas and PIJ, the sources said.

In addition, more than 50 Palestinians were summoned for interrogation by the PA security forces, especially in the northern West Bank.

Hamas condemned the PA crackdown, dubbing it a “national and moral crime.”

Mahmoud Abbas will do whatever it takes in order to stay in power. He’s having people hauled in for questioning, in order to scare them, and to make them understand that they are under observation and must not deviate into dissidence. He’s detained others, and held them in prison — without trials — not for any act they’ve carried out, but only because they are affiliated with, or deemed sympathetic to, Hamas and the PIJ.

Referring to the PA ban on public events, Hamas spokesperson Hazem Qassem said that such actions by the Palestinian security forces “only serve the occupation.” He pointed out that the PA crackdown coincided with an increase in “the Zionist aggression against Palestinians” in the West Bank. “Instead of targeting Palestinian factions and preventing them from holding activities, the Palestinian Authority should be defending Palestinians,” Qassem said in a statement.

Qassem’s charge could be turned on its head: it is the terror groups Hamas and the PIJ whose murders of Israeli civilians have sullied the image of the Palestinian cause and thereby “serve the occupation” (that is, the state of Israel). The PA’s Fatah faction has been “defending Palestinians” who are loyal to it, just as Hamas and the PIJ have defended their own members. And at the same time the P.A. tries ferociously to suppress its political rivals within the Palestinian camp. Hazem Qassem has some gall in denouncing the PA crackdown on Hamas, when he knows perfectly well that the greatest internecine bloodletting among the Palestinians has been that let loose by Hamas on members of Fatah in 2006-2007.

Hussein Abu Kweik, a senior Hamas official from Ramallah, condemned the PA for targeting events to celebrate the release of Palestinians from Israeli prison. “This behavior violates Palestinian values that respect the prisoners and glorify their struggle,” he said.

The targeting of Hamas members and its banners will not “discourage the movement from continuing with its honorable path of resistance and pursuit of national unity,” Abu Kwiek added.

The PA is not against celebrating the release of all prisoners from Israeli prisons. But it will not allow an event celebrating their release if they belong to Hamas or the PIJ, when it is likely these events will turn into celebrations not only of the individual prisoner, but of the group to which he belongs. It thus can become a vehicle for the public display of anti-PA sentiments, and this is something that Abbas will not permit.

PIJ said in a statement that the “abduction of our activists by the Palestinian security forces in Jenin is an unpatriotic and immoral act.” The group claimed that the PA crackdown was intended “to serve the occupation.”

The PA is not interested in “serving the occupation.” It remains an implacable enemy of Israel, as its “Pay-For-Slay” program, providing generous monthly subsidies to imprisoned terrorists and to the families of terrorists killed in action, demonstrates. It even goes beyond dispensing money to reward past, and incentivize future, acts of terrorism. The PA also names schools, streets, squares, sports teams, and much more, after terrorists, including such people as Dalia Moghrabi, responsible for the Coastal Road Massacre in which 38 Israeli civilians, 13 of them children, were murdered. Naming public places for these terrorist murderers keeps them fresh in the Palestinians’ pantheon, and encourages young Palestinians to emulate those whose names have been memorialized in such a fashion.

The PA crackdown has nothing to do with “the occupation” and everything to do with maintaining the PA’s continued despotic rule over West Bank Palestinians, by forcibly suppressing any public demonstrations of support for the PA’s rivals Hamas and PIJ.

But for the PA there is only one legitimate Palestinian group – its own – and those who, in Hamas and PIJ, challenge the PA’s authority, and the rule of Mahmoud Abbas, must be suppressed.

Commenting on the incident during the funeral in Bethlehem, the PFLP accused the PA security forces of carrying out a “brutal assault” on the mourners.

“What happened confirms that the [PA] security forces have not learned lessons from their assaults on public freedoms and that they insist on proceeding with their repressive measures,” the PFLP said in a statement. “The attack on the funeral represents a dangerous shift in the practices of the Palestinian security services, which requires the prosecution of those involved in it and of those who gave the orders.”…

The Palestinian security services are being told by the PFLP that they should investigate the practices of the Palestinian security services. I can believe six impossible things before breakfast, but that scenario is not among them.

Referring to the PA ban on public events, Hamas spokesperson Hazem Qassem said that such actions by the Palestinian security forces “only serve the occupation.” He pointed out that the PA crackdown coincided with an increase in “the Zionist aggression against Palestinians” in the West Bank. “Instead of targeting Palestinian factions and preventing them from holding activities, the Palestinian Authority should be defending Palestinians,” Qassem said in a statement….

Hazem Qassem denounces the PA’s attack on other factions – that is, Hamas, the PIJ, and the PLP – insisting that Palestinians should always “defend” and never “target” other Palestinians. Has he forgotten the bloodbath carried out by Hamas in Gaza in 2006-2007, when it attacked Fatah members, murdering many hundreds and causing many more to flee the Strip? A total of 616 Palestinians were killed in internecine warfare in Gaza between 2006 and 2007, most of them members of Fatah murdered by Hamas. 

Mahmoud Abbas is engaged in a full-scale crackdown on his Palestinian political rivals, Hamas and the PIJ, and cannot now back down. It’s a case of what the Soviets used to call “Kto kovo” – “Who (does it to) Whom.” Among the Palestinians in the West Bank, this rivalry has become a zero-sum game. Abbas knows perfectly well that those rivals – Hamas, the PIJ — would gladly do to him what he is now doing to them. He remembers how Hamas murdered hundreds of Fatah members in Gaza in 2006-2007. He’s determined to squeeze Hamas and PIJ out of the public square, by closing down all their events in the West Bank, including funerals of their members, and welcome-homes to released prisoners who belong to Hamas or the PIJ. He’s had some of their members rounded up for interrogations, and detained still others. He’s even banned the public display of their flags and banners.

There is no grand principle at stake here. It’s purely a contest over power and money: who is to prevail among the Palestinians — the Slow Jihadists of the PA, or the Fast Jihadists of Hamas and the PIJ? It’s nothing like the political rivalries in the advanced West, between Tories and Labor, or Democrats and Republicans. No, these Palestinians at daggers drawn should make us think only of the Crips and the Bloods.

 

Hugh Fitzgerald

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2021/12/palestinian-authority-crackdown-hamas-and-pij-west-hugh-fitzgerald/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Chaos and the Threat to Democracy - Abraham H. Miller

 

by Abraham H. Miller

[F]or those committed to an ideological view of the world where chaos is the paving stone to revolution, means are significant.

Among politics’ strangest alliances are those between the elite and the mob. They don’t happen often. The few times they have occurred produced devastating effects. The most notable of them was the rise of the Nazi party, which recruited its original and most loyal adherents from the outcasts of society.

When the Nazis became mainstream, Hitler himself remarked how he missed the passionate street fighters of old who had been replaced by political opportunists and office seekers.

There is a method to this odd partnership. It is built on mobilizing the periphery, creating chaos, and enhancing chaos where it already exists.

The Nazi example finds its parallel much earlier in the coup of Louis Bonaparte, the nephew and pretender, who overthrew the French Republic in 1852 and became the last emperor of France. Bonaparte created, from the dregs of the socio-economic system, the foundation of a mass movement. He called it the Society of December the 10^th. He just as well could have called it the Brownshirts. Hitler would have easily recognized it.

Revolutionary mobilization of the periphery does not occur in a day. And, in a legitimate democratic society, it will most likely bring chaos, dislocation, and division, but it will not bring about major political change. Nonetheless, for those committed to an ideological view of the world where chaos is the paving stone to revolution, means are significant.

The political nihilists who wrought chaos on Western Europe in the 1980s believed they were the foundation of a revolutionary movement that would take a hundred years.

No revolution takes place without elites. The men and women running through the streets with guns are only instruments. Somewhere an out elite provided the ideological justification and weapons for revolt, and before that they sowed chaos in various ways.

And this, oddly enough, brings us to a shootout in broad daylight in Chicago between two gangs. When the shooting stopped, one person was dead and two were wounded. Five gang members allegedly involved in the shootout were arrested. Yet Chicago’s controversial states attorney, Kim Foxx, refused to prosecute them. “Mutual combatants was cited as the reason for the rejection,” according to a Chicago Police Department report.

As long as both sides willingly participated in combat on Chicago’s streets, no crime was committed, was the CPD’s interpretation of Foxx’s decision.  Seeing this as a promotion of violence in a city already deluged with violence, Chicago’s mayor Lori Lightfoot spoke of the city falling into chaos and sought intervention by federal prosecutors. So far, that hasn’t happened.

Foxx was one of several high-profile and controversial prosecutors funded by organizations related to George Soros. The refusal to prosecute the alleged gang shooters is only one of several similar decisions. Soros’ organization also donated to PACs that support Los Angeles district attorney George Gascón and Philadelphia district attorney Larry Krasner, both known for their liberal views on crime.

Apart from Kim Foxx, the most controversial district attorney to receive aid from a Soros’ operation is San Francisco’s Chesa Boudin. Boudin is a big supporter of redistributive justice, which calls for behavioral changes rather than punishment. He pushed for shoplifting below 950 dollars to be treated as a misdemeanor, which set off a tidal wave of organized shoplifting. One Safeway store had to limit its hours in response and set up obstacles for exit. Walgreens closed some 22 stores for both economic and loss control reasons. Most controversial was a brutal attack on an elderly Asian man where the attacker was released on probation. Boudin’s office argued that the victim agreed to the decision. But the victim, who speaks no English, said he never agreed, and various community leaders have taken to the streets to make their opposition known.  Boudin is facing a recall election.

There is an alliance between prosecutors who have embraced redistributive justice and criminals who have found crime to be a revolving door. Redistributive justice, however, is part of a larger system that views criminal activity as a result of social forces and not individual decision making. It is part of a system that calls the very legitimacy of the polity into question.

Crime rates in these cities has risen. Chicago is seeing one of the highest crime rates in decades. Mayor Lightfoot is correct when she says the city is descending into chaos. But that is the plan.

For a strong, vibrant, economically sound democracy, such events are problematic but not a threat to the system. But change the equation, question the legitimacy, and such perturbations

Image: Montecruz foto

 

Abraham H. Miller is an emeritus professor of political science, University of Cincinnati, and a distinguished fellow with the Hyam Salomon Center.

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2021/12/chaos_and_the_threat_to_democracy_.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Dozens of IAF warplanes to take part in simulated attack on Iran - Israel National News

by Israel National News

Exercise will take place over Mediterranean Sea. "The aim is to prepare for every eventuality; we will not allow Iran to go nuclear."

The Israeli Air Force is currently in the midst of preparations for a broad-ranging exercise in which dozens of airplanes will participate, in preparation for a possible attack on Iran.

According to a report on Channel 11, the exercise will take place in the coming spring over the Mediterranean Sea, and will be held openly. Enhanced budgets have been allotted toward this exercise, which involves, among other things, flights of over 1000 kilometers in length, similar to what pilots would be traveling if they were headed to Iran.

Three months ago, IDF Chief of Staff Aviv Kochavi announced that the IDF was accelerating its plans for scenarios involving attacks on Iran – the announcement was made partly as a message to the world in order to convey Israel’s intentions and the seriousness with which it regards the current situation.

Meanwhile, on Wednesday night Defense Minister Benny Gantz departed for Washington D.C., where he will be holding talks with U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin on possible military options for destroying Iran’s nuclear facilities, in the event that diplomacy fails. The talks between Gantz and Austin follow an October 25 briefing by Pentagon leaders to White House National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, on the full set of military options available to ensure Iran does not become capable of producing a nuclear weapon.

Gantz is expected to request of the United States that it continue to exert pressure on Iran – via retaining substantial armed forces in the Middle East, as well as taking steps to display its might against the Islamic regime. Israel is working under the assumption that such steps will be seen as more significant if they occur within the timeframe of the nuclear talks in Vienna which are set to resume on Thursday, and that with the talks appearing to have stalled, a show of force could prove effective.

Gantz has also assessed that now is the right time to advance what in the United States is known as “Plan B” – that is, sanctions along with a credible military threat. Prior to leaving for Washington, Gantz met with Kochavi and also with the head of IDF Military Intelligence, in order to be updated on the latest developments with regard to the Iran issue.

Commenting on the aerial exercise, Housing and Construction Minister Zeev Elkin (New Hope) told KanNews, “The aim is for us to prepare for every eventuality. Israel needs to be ready for any scenario; we will not allow Iran to go nuclear. Unfortunately, Israel has shown weakness in the past, and it’s vital that we address the situation alertly now.

“Anyone with eyes in his head can see that the Iranians are trying to entrench themselves in Syria,” Elkin added. “We are doing everything that we can and so far, we have had a large number of successes. I’m not going to relate to anything specific, but Israel has red lines,” he concluded.

 

Israel National News

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/318342

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Arabs to Biden: Do Not Let Iran Play You for a Fool - Khaled Abu Toameh

 

​ by Khaled Abu Toameh

The message these Arabs are sending to the Biden administration: take a tough stance towards Iran before it is too late. Far from being a danger to Israel alone, Iran is terrorizing Arab countries and threatening world peace and security.

• Iran has been insisting on its conditions and demands, including that Washington and the Western powers release frozen Iranian funds before reaching an agreement, according to Tariq Alhomayed, a Saudi journalist and former editor-in-chief of the Arabic-language newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat. He added that Iran was refusing to discuss ballistic missiles, drones and its terrorist militias in the Middle East as the mullahs continue their alarming rate of uranium enrichment.

• "It is evident that Washington has been begging Iran to return to the negotiating table," he said. "Washington did not threaten Iran with the use of force. It is true that we hear statements from Washington about impatience, but they are neither serious nor real. The Americans did not convey any serious message to the Iranians." — Tariq Alhomayed, Asharq Al-Awsat, November 24, 2021.

• Iraqi writer Ali Alsarraf believes that by seeking guarantees that the US will not reimpose sanctions on Iran in the future, the mullahs in Tehran are hoping that they will become immune from anything that their militias do in the Middle East, including striking American bases and forcing them to leave Iraq and Syria.

• "As with North Korea, the world would be forced to grapple with Iranian aggression very cautiously because of the likelihood that it could rain down ballistic and nuclear weapons upon neighbors. Unlike North Korea, Iran has proxy forces deployed throughout the region which henceforth could act with impunity, shielded by Iran's nuclear umbrella." — Baria Alamuddin, award-winning Lebanese journalist and broadcaster, Arab News, November 28, 2021.

• It is impressive to see that a growing number of Arabs, especially those... whose countries are occupied by Iranian-backed militias, share Israeli fears of the mullahs' evil plans.

• The message these Arabs are sending to the Biden administration: take a tough stance towards Iran before it is too late. Far from being a danger to Israel alone, Iran is terrorizing Arab countries and threatening world peace and security.

On the eve of the resumption of the Iran nuclear talks in Vienna, Arabs have again warned the Biden administration against being duped by the mullahs of Tehran. (Image source: iStock)

On the eve of the resumption of the Iran nuclear talks in Vienna, Arabs have again warned the Biden administration against being duped by the mullahs of Tehran.

The Arabs, who share Israel's concern over Iran's accelerated efforts (and deceptive tactics) to achieve nuclear weapons, also warned the Biden administration against reaching a temporary deal that would give Iran more time to proceed with its disastrous and dangerous plans.

"Undoubtedly, a temporary nuclear agreement, if it is implemented, reflects the failure of the policy of President Biden's administration, which announced that it would seek a wider, stronger and more comprehensive agreement," wrote Saudi writer and political analyst Yahya Talidi.

Talidi pointed out that the US administration seems confused because of its changing policy priorities and objectives in the Middle East, "which reflects a lack of interest in strengthening and factors of stability and security in the region." The previous nuclear agreement in 2015, he added, was a failure.

"The failure has logical and realistic causes, most notably that it was limited to a specific time period (it expires in 2025) and did not address the ambitions of hegemony and expansion of the Iranian regime and its ballistic missiles.

"This failure may be repeated today in Vienna. A temporary agreement could become permanent, allowing Iran to maintain its nuclear infrastructure and supply it with uranium, with which it has doubled its stockpile, and then the region will become mired in an uncontrollable nuclear arms race."

Tariq Alhomayed, a Saudi journalist and former editor-in-chief of the Arabic-language newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat, warned the Biden administration that Iran was only trying to buy more time by returning to the negotiations with the US and other world powers:

"The Vienna negotiations aimed at reaching a final agreement on the Iranian nuclear file are supposed to resume next week, and all indications are that we are facing time-wasting negotiations...

"It is clear that the Iranian [leaders] are not seeking to seriously revive these negotiations, and therefore are not keen on the completion of the agreement, especially since the achievement of the agreement may weaken them at home."

Alhomayed pointed out that Iran has been insisting on its conditions and demands, including that Washington and the Western powers release frozen Iranian funds before reaching an agreement. He added that Iran was refusing to discuss ballistic missiles, drones and its terrorist militias in the Middle East as the mullahs continue their alarming rate of uranium enrichment.

"Iran is doing all of this to take advantage of the time factor... If a nuclear agreement is not achieved, Tehran will have reached levels of enrichment that would allow it to implement its nuclear project by imposing a fait accompli and declaring victory."

According to Alhomayed, the Biden administration has failed to send a tough message to Iran ahead of the resumption of the Vienna talks.

"It is evident that Washington has been begging Iran to return to the negotiating table... Washington did not threaten Iran with the use of force. It is true that we hear statements from Washington about impatience, but they are neither serious nor real. The Americans did not convey any serious message to the Iranians."

Iraqi writer Ali Alsarraf expressed concern that Biden might commit with Iran the same "sin" he committed with Afghanistan.

Iran, he said, cannot make any concessions on its demands because other parties, including Russia, are encouraging the mullahs to endorse a hardline approach in its dealings with the Biden administration:

"The current situation is that Iran and Russia are speaking with one voice, saying that there is no way to reach an agreement unless the original agreement is preserved without any additions to it...

"This position says, in other words, that all the previous six rounds were meaningless. Iran also wants all sanctions to be lifted at once, and on top of that, it wants guarantees that the US will not reimpose sanctions after the full return of the agreement. Returning to the original version of the nuclear agreement means refraining from adding any issues related to Iran's destabilizing activities in the region, including the activities of its terrorist militias in Iraq, Lebanon and Yemen."

Alsarraf believes that by seeking guarantees that the US will not reimpose sanctions on Iran in the future, the mullahs in Tehran are hoping that they will become immune from anything that their militias do in the Middle East, including striking American bases and forcing them to leave Iraq and Syria.

"With Iran's recent announcement that it has produced 25 kilograms of 60% enriched uranium, postponing the talks for an unknown period does not appear to be an acceptable option... Because 90% of the enrichment required to produce a nuclear weapon is very close. There is no doubt that Iran is using this for blackmail purposes."

Baria Alamuddin, an award-winning Lebanese journalist and broadcaster in the Middle East, said she supported the use of military force to stop Iran from gaining nuclear weapons.

Iran's attainment of nuclear capacity, Alamuddin wrote, has immediate implications for global security.

"As with North Korea, the world would be forced to grapple with Iranian aggression very cautiously because of the likelihood that it could rain down ballistic and nuclear weapons upon neighbors... Unlike North Korea, Iran has proxy forces deployed throughout the region which henceforth could act with impunity, shielded by Iran's nuclear umbrella."

She pointed out that despite spectacular Israeli acts of sabotage, Iranian scientists have gone to extraordinary lengths to rebuild and keep nuclear development on schedule, even at a time when thousands of impoverished citizens are dying from never-ending COVID-19 outbreaks and much of the country is running out of water.

"According to intelligence officials, Tehran replaced damaged equipment with new technology that operates faster and at higher volumes... Hence, reliance on cyberattacks and pin-prick sabotage has only made Iran double down on its efforts. The US dilemma is simple: If Iran is hellbent on developing nuclear weapons, and the world is serious about stopping Iran, then ultimately there may be no alternative to some form of military force, such as surgical strikes for permanently eliminating nuclear sites. There is no sugaring this pill. The ayatollahs must be under no illusion that they can stealthily filibuster their way toward nuclear breakout capacity".

Alamuddin warned that Western ambivalence and naivety have only made matters worse: "Iran must be bluntly and forcefully told: If you proceed down this path, we will stop you!"

Rafik Khoury, another Lebanese writer and political analyst, also expressed concern over the Biden administration's soft approach towards Iran.

"Washington seems to be begging Tehran to return to the indirect negotiations," Khoury noted.

"The men of the first row in the Biden administration were the men of the second row in the administration of President Barack Obama. Biden's men learned the lesson of driving from the back seat, despite Biden's statement that 'America is back in command.'"

Khoury advised the Biden administration to avoid making the same mistake Obama did by relying on empty and false promises by Iran.

He noted that Biden, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan initially insisted on a broader and more permanent agreement that would be linked to a halt to missile development and "destabilizing" activities by Tehran in the Middle East.

"When Tehran refused to discuss any issue outside of returning to the nuclear agreement and the lifting of sanctions, the US administration backed down," Khoury added.

The views expressed by these Arab writers and journalists are not uncommon in the Arab world, where many continue to regard Iran as a major threat to security and stability in the Middle East.

It is impressive to see that a growing number of Arabs, especially those living in the Gulf states or those whose countries are occupied by Iranian-backed militias, share Israeli fears of the mullahs' evil plans.

The message these Arabs are sending to the Biden administration: take a tough stance towards Iran before it is too late. Far from being a danger to Israel alone, Iran is terrorizing Arab countries and threatening world peace and security.

• Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on Twitter

 

Khaled Abu Toameh is an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17995/arabs-biden-iran

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Federal judge grants Project Veritas' request for third party to review James O'Keefe's phones seized by FBI - Joseph A. Wulfsohn

 

​ by Joseph A. Wulfsohn

The FBI raided the Project Veritas founder's home as part of its investigation into the 'stolen' diary of Ashley Biden

Project Veritas' James O'Keefe speaks out in an exclusive 'Hannity' interview

Project Veritas founder describes the FBI raid on his New York home on 'Hannity.'

A federal judge is siding with Project Veritas over its request for an independent party to review the cellphones the FBI seized from the group's founder James O'Keefe. 

On Wednesday, District Court Judge Analisa Torres from the Southern District of New York is ordering a "special master" to be appointed to oversee the review of O'Keefe's devices, citing "potential First Amendment concerns." 

FEDERAL JUDGE ORDERS DOJ TO HALT DATA EXTRACTION FROM JAMES O'KEEFE'S PHONES FOLLOWING FBI RAID

"The Court recognizes, as other courts in this district have concluded, that ‘the Southern District prosecutors have integrity and decency,' and the filter team alone could conduct the review ‘with utmost integrity,’" Torres wrote. "However, the Court determines that the appointment of a special master is warranted here because ‘it is important that the procedure adopted… not only be fair but also appear to be fair.’ … In light of the potential First Amendment concerns that may be implicated by the review of the materials seized from Petitioners, the Court finds that the appointment of a special master will ‘help to protect the public’s confidence in the administration of justice.'" 

BOOM!!! Federal court orders the appointment of a special master to review materials seized from Project Veritas in the DOJ’s Ashley Biden Diary case… despite DOJ objections, court rules First Amendment protections support our client’s request. Great work by Paul Calli and team! pic.twitter.com/mEreTL9OwM

— Harmeet K. Dhillon (@pnjaban) December 8, 2021

"The appointment of a Special Master over the objections of the Department of Justice is further evidence of Government overreach in their heavy-handed violation of the First Amendment and journalistic privilege during the investigation of the purported theft of a diary belonging to the daughter of the President," a representative for Project Veritas told Fox News in a statement. 

"Project Veritas appreciates the ruling but continues to insist that the Government show the public why they conducted these raids and return legally privileged material immediately," the representative added. 

The judge previously ordered the Department of Justice to halt its review of O'Keefe's phones pending Project Veritas' request for a special master. 

PROJECT VERITAS' JAMES O'KEEFE SPEAKS OUT AFTER FBI RAIDED HOME: ‘THIS IS AN ATTACK ON THE FIRST AMENDMENT’

The counsel for Project Veritas sent a letter to chairmen and ranking members of congressional committees urging them to investigate the DOJ's actions. 

"These raids were not justified by any legitimate law enforcement concern. Project Veritas acted lawfully and within its First Amendment right to investigate a potential source of information relevant to the public interest," attorney Mark Paoletta wrote to lawmakers on Wednesday. "The FBI and DOJ try to justify their targeting of Project Veritas by arguing that it isn’t a real news organization, and its reporters aren’t real journalists… This is absurd. Project Veritas is a news gathering organization that engages in undercover journalism, which has long been a form of investigative journalism used to hold the government, corporations, and other organizations accountable. And as a news organization, it is entitled to the protection the Attorney General promised in his memo. But more importantly, the First Amendment’s protection is not limited to those the government or other legacy media deign to call ‘real’ journalists. It belongs to all the people of the United States who engage in reporting and 'press' activities, whether formally or informally."

Project Veritas founder James O'Keefe speaks during the Conservative Political Action Conference CPAC held at the Hilton Anatole on July 09, 2021 in Dallas, Texas.  (Photo by Brandon Bell/Getty Images) ( (Photo by Brandon Bell/Getty Images))

Last month, the homes of O'Keefe and two other Project Veritas associates were raided by the FBI as part of an investigation into the alleged "theft" of a diary belonging to President Biden's daughter, Ashley Biden. 

"I woke up to a pre-dawn raid," O'Keefe told Fox News' Sean Hannity in an interview. "Banging on my door, I went to my door to answer the door and there were ten FBI agents with a battering ram, white blinding lights, they turned me around, handcuffed me and threw me against the hallway. I was partially clothed in front of my neighbors. They confiscated my phone. They raided my apartment. On my phone were many of my reporters' notes. A lot of my sources unrelated to this story and a lot of confidential donor information to our news organization." 

FBI RAIDS HOME OF PROJECT VERITAS' JAMES O'KEEFE AS PART OF INVESTIGATION INTO ASHLEY BIDEN'S ‘STOLEN’ DIARY

"I've heard 'the process is the punishment.' I didn't really understand what that meant until this weekend. And Sean, I wouldn't wish this on any journalist," O'Keefe said. 

O'Keefe said he was "in a state of shock" as FBI agents spent over two hours searching his apartment, telling Hannity they took two of his iPhones.  

Ashley Biden speaks by video feed during the 4th and final night of the 2020 Democratic National Convention in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, U.S. August 20, 2020. 2020 Democratic National Convention/Pool via REUTERS

The investigation, which is also being conducted by the Southern District of New York, surrounds a "stolen" diary belonging to Ashley Biden that went missing just days before the 2020 presidential election.

O'Keefe alleged in a video statement that "within an hour" of the FBI's raid of the home of a Project Veritas reporter, The New York Times contacted that reporter for comment. 

NYT MEDIA COLUMNIST ON FBI RAID OF JAMES O'KEEFE: ‘I DON’T THINK JOURNALISTS SHOULD BE CHEERLEADING THIS ONE'

"We do not know how the New York Times was aware of the execution of a search warrant at our reporter's home or the subject matter of the search warrant as a grand jury investigation is secret," O'Keefe said. "The FBI took materials of current, former Project Veritas journalists despite the fact that our legal team previously contacted the Department of Justice and voluntarily conveyed unassailable facts that demonstrate Project Veritas' lack of involvement in criminal activity, and or criminal intent."

"Our efforts were the stuff of responsible ethical journalism, and we are in no doubt that Project Veritas acted properly at each and every step," O'Keefe asserted. 

Conservative political activist James O'Keefe speaks during the annual Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC) in National Harbor, Maryland, on March 1, 2019. (Photo by MANDEL NGAN / AFP) (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images) ( (Photo by MANDEL NGAN/AFP via Getty Images))

The Project Veritas founder then explained that "tipsters" approached his group late last year alleging to have Ashley Biden's diary containing "explosive allegations" about her father, then the Democratic nominee, and that the diary was allegedly abandoned in a room that she had stayed at and that they stayed after. 

The "tipsters," who O'Keefe said he had never met prior, were apparently negotiating with media outlets to sell Biden's diary and that ultimately, Project Veritas did not publish the book's contents because his group was not able to independently verify its authenticity. 

"Project Veritas gave the diary to law enforcement to ensure it could be returned to its rightful owner. We never published it," O'Keefe said. "Now, Ms. Biden's father's Department of Justice, specifically the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, appears to be investigating the situation, claiming the diary was stolen. We don't know if it was but it begs the question: In what world is the alleged theft of a diary investigated by the President's FBI and his Department of Justice? A diary?"

O'Keefe went on to claim the investigation "smacks of politics" but that Project Veritas will "not back down." 

 

Joseph A. Wulfsohn is a media reporter for Fox News. Follow him on Twitter @JosephWulfsohn.

Source:https://www.foxnews.com/media/judge-project-veritas-special-master-james-okeefe-phones

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Turn - Liel Liebovitz

 

​ by Liel Liebovitz

Hat tip: Dr. Jena-Charles Bensoussan 

When I saw the left give up everything I believe in, I changed politically. You can, too.

or many years—most of my politically cognizant life, in fact—I felt secure in my politics. Truth and justice, I believed, leaned leftward. If you were some version of a decent human being, you cared about those less fortunate than you, which meant that you supported a whole host of measures designed to even the playing field a little. Sometimes, these measures had unintended consequences (see under: Stalin, Josef), but that wasn’t reason enough to despair of the long march to equality. Besides, there was hardly an alternative: On the other end of the political transom lurked despicable creeps, right-wing orcs who either cared for nothing but their own petty financial interests or, worse, pined for benighted isms that preached prejudice and hate. We were on the right side of history. We were the people. We were the ones giving peace a chance. And, no matter the present, we were always the future.

This belief carried me through high school, and a brief stint in a socialist youth movement. It accelerated me in college, sending me anywhere from joint marches with Palestinians to a two-week hunger strike in Jerusalem trying (and failing) to lower tuition for underprivileged students. It pulled me to New York, to Columbia University, to more left-wing politics and activism and raging against Republicans whose agenda, especially in the 2000s, seemed like nothing more than greed and war.

And it wasn’t just an ideology, some abstract set of convictions that were accessible only through cracking open dusty old books. It was the animating spirit of life itself: The dinner parties I attended on the Upper West Side required dismissive comments on President Bush just as much as they did a bit of wine to make the evening bright, and there was no faster or surer way to signal to a new acquaintance that you were a kindred spirit than praising the latest Times editorial. It wasn’t performative, exactly. At least, it felt real enough, the reverent rites of a good group of people protecting itself against the bad guys.

I embraced my people, and my people embraced me. They gave me everything I had always imagined I wanted: a Ph.D. from an Ivy League university; a professorship at NYU, complete with a roomy office overlooking Washington Square Park; book deals; columns in smart little publications; invitations to the sort of soirees where you could find yourself seated next to Salman Rushdie or Susan Sontag or any number of the men and women you grew up reading and admiring. The list goes on. Life was good. I was grateful.

And then came The Turn. If you’ve lived through it yourself, you know that The Turn doesn’t happen overnight, that it isn’t easily distilled into one dramatic breakdown moment, that it happens hazily and over time—first a twitch, then a few more, stretching into a gnawing discomfort and then, eventually, a sense of panic.

You may be among the increasing numbers of people going through The Turn right now. Having lived through the turmoil of the last half decade—through the years of MAGA and antifa and rampant identity politics and, most dramatically, the global turmoil caused by COVID-19—more and more of us feel absolutely and irreparably politically homeless. Instinctively, we looked to the Democratic Party, the only home we and our parents and their parents before them had ever known or seriously considered. But what we saw there—and in the newspapers we used to read, and in the schools whose admission letters once made us so proud—was terrifying. However we tried to explain what was happening on “the left,” it was hard to convince ourselves that it was right, or that it was something we still truly believed in. That is what The Turn is about.

You might be living through The Turn if you ever found yourself feeling like free speech should stay free even if it offended some group or individual but now can’t admit it at dinner with friends because you are afraid of being thought a bigot. You are living through The Turn if you have questions about public health policies—including the effects of lockdowns and school closures on the poor and most vulnerable in our society—but can’t ask them out loud because you know you’ll be labeled an anti-vaxxer. You are living through The Turn if you think that burning down towns and looting stores isn’t the best way to promote social justice, but feel you can’t say so because you know you’ll be called a white supremacist. You are living through The Turn if you seethed watching a terrorist organization attack the world’s only Jewish state, but seethed silently because your colleagues were all on Twitter and Facebook sharing celebrity memes about ending Israeli apartheid while having little interest in American kids dying on the streets because of failed policies. If you’ve felt yourself unable to speak your mind, if you have a queasy feeling that your friends might disown you if you shared your most intimately held concerns, if you are feeling a bit breathless and a bit hopeless and entirely unsure what on earth is going on, I am sorry to inform you that The Turn is upon you.

The Turn hit me just a beat before it did you, so I know just how awful it feels. It’s been years now, but I still remember the time a dear friend and mentor took me to lunch and warned me, sternly and without any of the warmth you’d extend to someone you truly loved, to watch what I said about Israel. I still remember how confusing and painful it felt to know that my beliefs—beliefs, mind you, that, until very recently, were so obvious and banal and widely held on the left that they were hardly considered beliefs at all—now labeled me an outcast. The Turn brings with it the sort of pain most of us don’t feel as adults; you’d have to go all the way back to junior high, maybe, to recall a stabbing sensation quite as deep and confounding as watching your friends all turn on you and decide that you’re not worthy of their affection any more. It’s the kind of primal rejection that is devastating precisely because it forces you to rethink everything, not only your convictions about the world but also your idea of yourself, your values, and your priorities. We all want to be embraced. We all want the men and women we consider most swell to approve of us and confirm that we, too, are good and great. We all want the love and the laurels; The Turn takes both away.

But, having been there before, I have one important thing to tell you: If the left is going to make it “right wing” to simply be decent, then it’s OK to be right.

Why? Because, after 225 long and fruitful years of this terminology, “right” and “left” are now empty categories, meaning little more than “the blue team” and “the green team” in your summer camp’s color war. You don’t get to be “against the rich” if the richest people in the country fund your party in order to preserve their government-sponsored monopolies. You are not “a supporter of free speech” if you oppose free speech for people who disagree with you. You are not “for the people” if you pit most of them against each other based on the color of their skin, or force them out of their jobs because of personal choices related to their bodies. You are not “serious about economic inequality” when you happily order from Amazon without caring much for the devastating impact your purchases have on the small businesses that increasingly are either subjugated by Jeff Bezos’ behemoth or crushed by it altogether. You are not “for science” if you refuse to consider hypotheses that don’t conform to your political convictions and then try to ban critical thought and inquiry from the internet. You are not an “anti-racist” if you label—and sort!—people by race. You are not “against conformism” when you scare people out of voicing dissenting opinions.

When “the left” becomes the party of wealthy elites and state security agencies who preach racial division, state censorship, contempt for ordinary citizens and for the U.S. Constitution, and telling people what to do and think at every turn, then that’s the side you are on, if you are “on the left”—those are the policies and beliefs you stand for and have to defend. It doesn’t matter what good people “on the left” believed and did 60 or 70 years ago. Those people are dead now, mostly. They don’t define “the left” anymore than Abraham Lincoln defines the modern-day Republican Party or Jimi Hendrix defines Nickelback.

So look at the list of things supported by the left and ask yourself: Is that me? If the answer is yes, great. You’ve found a home. If the answer is no, don’t let yourself be defined by an empty word. Get out. And once you’re out, don’t let anyone else define you, either. Not being a left-wing racist or police state fan doesn’t make you a white supremacist or a Trump worshipper, either. Only small children, machines, and religious fanatics think in binaries.

Which isn’t to diminish the anger, hurt, and confusion you’re feeling just now. But it’s worth understanding that your story has a happy ending. The freedom you feel on the other side is so real it’s physical, like emerging from a long stretch underwater and taking that first deep breath in the cool afternoon air. None of it makes the lost friends or the lost career opportunities any less painful; but there’s no more potent source of renewable energy than liberty, and your capacity to reinvent—yourself, your group, your life—is greater than you realize.

So welcome to the right side, friend, and join us in laughing at all the idiotic name-calling that is applied, with increasing hysteria, to try and stop more and more normal Americans from joining our ranks. Fascists? Conspiracy theorists? Anti-science racist TERFs? Whatever. We have a better word to describe ourselves: free.

 

Liel Liebovitz is a senior writer for Tablet Magazine and a host of the Unorthodox podcast.

Source: https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/the-turn-liel-leibovitz

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter