Saturday, September 14, 2024

Dershowitz: ‘Serious questions’ about fairness of Newton’s response to shooting at pro-Israel rally - David Swindle

 

by David Swindle

The Boston-area city faces criticism for arresting the alleged shooter right away, but not the man who appeared to attack him before getting shot.

 

Marian Ryan, the district attorney of Middlesex County, speaks at a press conference on Sept. 12, 2024 as Ruthanne Fuller, the mayor of Newton, Mass., looks on. Source: YouTube/NBC10 Boston.
Marian Ryan, the district attorney of Middlesex County, speaks at a press conference on Sept. 12, 2024 as Ruthanne Fuller, the mayor of Newton, Mass., looks on. Source: YouTube/NBC10 Boston.


Scott Hayes, of Framingham, Mass., was charged with assault and battery with a dangerous weapon in Newton District Court on Friday and released on $5,000 bond, after the 47-year-old was arrested the night before at a pro-Israel rally in Newton, Mass.

Video footage, which the Daily Wire obtained, appeared to show a young man, who accused pro-Israel ralliers of committing “genocide,” run across a busy street in Newton, Mass., on Thursday and tackle one of the ralliers. At some point, the latter seemed to shoot the assailant.

At a press conference on Thursday night, Marian Ryan, the district attorney of Middlesex County, which includes the City of Newton, said that Hayes was charged with “assault and battery with a dangerous weapon and violation of a constitutional right causing injury.” The latter charge was apparently dropped on Friday.

“He looked terrible but he stood tall. They treated him like a criminal and kept referring to the ‘alleged victim,”” a source at the court room told Kassy Akiva, of Daily Wire, who first obtained and released the footage of the incident. (Akiva is a former JNS editor.)

“Regrettably, the answer to most of the questions you’re going to have is, ‘We are working on that,’” the county district attorney said at the Thursday evening press conference.

“What we do know at this point is that at approximately 6:40 tonight, the Newton Police responded to calls at Washington and Harvard Street, just a short distance from the station,” Ryan said. “There was a small group of individuals—pro-Israeli demonstrators, who were demonstrating on one side of the street. There was an individual, apparently completely randomly walking down the other side of the street. Words were exchanged back and forth across the street.”

The man across the street “at some point began crossing the street. Appears to have gone back to his side of the street. Ultimately came across and jumped upon one of the demonstrators,” the district attorney said. “A scuffle ensued. During that scuffle, the individual who had come across the street was shot by a member of the demonstrating group.”

The man who crossed the street “has sustained life-threatening injuries and is being treated at a local hospital,” she added.

In response to a question, she said that the attacker came “very rapidly” across the street and “tackled” the other man. “It’s our understanding that that was his gun and that he legally possessed that gun,” she said, of Hayes.

Newton
An incident at a pro-Israel rally in Newton, Mass., during which a man, who attacked a pro-Israel man, was shot on Sept. 12, 2024. Credit: Kassy Akiva/The Daily Wire.

Asked to characterize the man—who had reportedly called the pro-Israel ralliers “sick” and accused them of “genocide”—as either “anti-Israel” or “pro-Palestinian,” the district attorney said, “I think it’s too soon to to get into that.”

George McMains, acting chief of the Newton Police, said that the department “will be providing extra patrols at the houses of worship over the next several days as well as beyond if we feel that’s appropriate or necessary.”

Ruthanne Fuller, the Newton mayor, called the incident “frightening.”

“The Newton Police Department acted quickly and immediately took a person into custody,” she said. “I have two asks. First, let the Newton Police do their work and get the facts straight. Second, I ask everyone to remain calm.”

The New England branch of the Anti-Defamation League stated that police appeared to act too “immediately.”

“ADL is aware that an anti-Israel protester was shot after charging across traffic and violently tackling a pro-Israel demonstrator to the ground,” the ADL wrote. “Reports that charges were immediately filed prior to completion of the investigation are concerning.”

“We encourage Newton Police and the Middlesex district attorney to conduct a thorough investigation of the entire incident,” the ADL added. “We are concerned about escalating tensions and remain in contact with law enforcement and community officials.”

Alan Dershowitz, a professor emeritus at Harvard Law School, told JNS that there is no question that the man who crossed the street and tackled the pro-Israel rallier committed a crime.

“I think the first thing that’s clear is that the person who assaulted the veteran should be arrested as well,” Dershowitz said. “The fact that he hasn’t been arrested raises some serious questions.”

The legal scholar told JNS that the question whether the shooter acted in self-defense “will be determined based on all the evidence.”

“The shooting raises questions that require a deep investigation as to precisely when the shot was fired, what the circumstances were, what the feelings and beliefs of the person who shot were,” he said. “That requires an extensive investigation.”

Dershowitz told JNS that he is concerned that the alleged shooter was charged before the investigation was complete.

“It seemed to me that the first person to be arrested should have been the person who did the initial assault, because there’s no doubt about that. That’s on videotape. You can see it,” he said. “So the fact that the person was not arrested, charges were not filed against the person making the original charges, raises serious questions about the fairness of the entire process.”

The Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Boston stated on Friday that “last night, at a small demonstration in support of the Oct. 7 hostages in Newton, Mass., there was a violent altercation and an individual was hospitalized.”

“While the details of what happened are still being investigated, there should be no question that violence of any kind in our democratic society is abhorrent,” the JCRC said. “People’s right to gather in civil, non-violent public demonstrations must be sacrosanct.”

“We take this moment to note that over the last 11 months, across our region there have been hundreds, if not thousands, of standouts for the hostages taken on Oct. 7. These rallies, demonstrations, runs and walks for the victims, a ‘hostage tunnel’ exhibit at Boston City Hall Plaza, and other ways in which our community and allies have come together to demand the return of the hostages to their families have all been peaceful and without incident,” the JCRC said.

“Regardless of motive or his role in the initiation of the violence, we pray for the full recovery of the individual who was injured last night,” it said.

The Combined Jewish Philanthropies stated on Friday that there was an “altercation” that “turned violent.”

“We denounce and condemn all forms of violence and support the right to assemble in ways that are peaceful and uphold our values as a people and as a community,” the CJP said.

At press time, a fundraising page for Hayes—which called him “an American Iraq war veteran” and said that he is not Jewish—had raised more than $120,000 from some 1,600 donations.


David Swindle

Source: https://www.jns.org/dershowitz-serious-questions-about-fairness-of-newtons-response-to-shooting-at-pro-israel-rally/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

France at War with Itself - Drieu Godefridi

 

by Drieu Godefridi

[E]verything is used as a pretext for the hate-filled, agitprop vituperation of the minions of La France Insoumise, who, by stirring up hostilities and resentments, particularly anti-Semitic ones, appear to be whipping up violent -- even terrorist -- militancy, in the tradition of France's 18th-century terreur.

 

  • The French people, the plurality of whom voted "right-wing" in the first round, were astonished to discover, after the second round, a "left-of-center" National Assembly, a parliament that seemingly does not represent the real country.

  • The message seems to be the all-too-familiar Marxist concept of Volksrache ("the people's revenge"): arousing hatreds in order to channel them towards the "enemies of the regime", and, in the end, liquidate them. The murder of a policeman, the burning of a synagogue, the death of a delinquent, a war in the Middle East, elections, no elections: everything is used as a pretext for the hate-filled, agitprop vituperation of the minions of La France Insoumise, who, by stirring up hostilities and resentments, particularly anti-Semitic ones, appear to be whipping up violent -- even terrorist -- militancy, in the tradition of France's 18th-century terreur.

  • France appears to be sliding, slowly but surely, towards a version of chaos -- the ancestral breeding ground for the violence that would be the victory, the horizon and the ultimate goal not only of Mélenchon's phalanx, but of all those trying to take down the West.

France appears to be sliding, slowly but surely, towards a version of chaos -- the ancestral breeding ground for the violence that would be the victory, the horizon and the ultimate goal not only of La France Insoumise leader Jean-Luc Mélenchon's phalanx, but of all those trying to take down the West. Pictured: Mélenchon (C) gives a speech on June 30 while standing on stage next to an Islamist pro-Hamas activist, Rima Hassan (R). (Photo by Victoria Valdivia/Hans Lucas/AFP via Getty Images)

Since the results were announced of France's July 2024 legislative elections, President Emmanuel Macron has been unable to build a majority in the National Assembly, which appears more divided than at any time in the history of what the French call "the Fifth Republic".

The elections produced three blocs, all of which appear to hate each other: the left, coalescing around Jean-Luc Mélenchon's far-left La France Insoumise ("France Unbowed"), Macron's centrist Renaissance party, and Marine Le Pen's right-wing Rassemblement National (National Rally).

Three factors seem to favor France's slide towards an open or latent form of even greater internal conflict.

1. Non-democratic Republic

The purpose of any democratic or republican form of government is to keep its citizens secure from threats foreign and domestic, and to oversee the peaceful transfer of power. In France, the question is whether it is still possible to change the government peacefully through the ballot box.

By having many of his party's candidates stand down in favor of candidates from the New Popular Front (the hastily assembled coalition of left and far left parties led by Mélenchon's La France Insoumise) in the elections, Macron and part of the center-right held in check the democratic will of the French people to transfer legislative power to the forces of the right, which have a majority in the country.

The French people, the plurality of whom voted "right-wing" in the first round, were astonished to discover, after the second round, a "left-of-center" National Assembly, a parliament that seemingly does not represent the real country.

Between the two rounds of voting, we actually witnessed the surreal spectacle of "right-wing" candidates (including former Prime Minister Edouard Philippe) calling on people to vote for communists in order to "block" the "extreme right". Only in France!

2. The most anti-Western political "left" in the world

By maneuvering to save part of his parliamentary group, Macron offered a (relative) victory to the most anti-Western forces on the European political spectrum, the extreme left of La France Insoumise. The antithesis of a governing party, La France Insoumise is part of the Marxist tradition in the strict sense, which envisages violence as a means of acquiring power and as a technique of government.

Not a day goes by without La France Insoumise demanding to govern, demanding the appointment of this or that Prime Minister -- a prerogative of the president alone, according to the Constitution - calling for the impeachment of Macron and threatening to "march on the Elysée" if its multiple demands are not met. These extortionist demands seem to be more like those of insurrectionists attempting a coup d'état.

Mélenchon has been courting radical Muslim voters first and foremost, and is multiplying incendiary declarations in favor of Palestine, and hateful verbal arabesques about Jews. Le Monde, a left-leaning newspaper, wrote:

"Over the past ten years, the founder of La France Insoumise has made a series of remarks that borrow from anti-Semitic stereotypes. To the point of arousing incomprehension even in his own camp and, for the past three months, causing a large part of public opinion to tense up."

The message seems to be the all-too-familiar Marxist concept of Volksrache ("the people's revenge"): arousing hatreds in order to channel them towards the "enemies of the regime", and, in the end, liquidate them. The murder of a policeman, the burning of a synagogue, the death of a delinquent, a war in the Middle East, elections, no elections: everything is used as a pretext for the hate-filled, agitprop vituperation of the minions of La France Insoumise, who, by stirring up hostilities and resentments, particularly anti-Semitic ones, appear to be whipping up violent -- even terrorist -- militancy, in the tradition of France's 18th-century terreur. The demonstrators look as if they are trying to incite violence against the non-submissive segments of the population: Jews, Christians, secularists, secular and moderate Muslims, the "right," the so-called "far right", the "center," the "center-left," and the "bourgeoisie".

3. Is France presently ungovernable?

Through his maneuvers between the two electoral rounds, Macron may well have succeeded in making France ungovernable. While he did indeed block the popular will, he was unable to give the left enough of a majority to get anything accomplished. While countries with a federal system, such as Belgium, are able to survive and function without a central government, this is less true of France.

The problem is not so much the historically frequent divergence between the presidency and the National Assembly, as the parliament's inability to form a majority within itself. It is difficult to form a coalition government when the far-left and the center appear to hate each other, and the center and a part of the right label the right-wing National Rally as diabolical. Without a majority coalition, the National Assembly cannot function, and the French state apparatus becomes necrotic.

For these three reasons -- an inability to change the government through the ballot box, the over-representation offered by Macron to the most extreme party in Europe, and the inability to find a parliamentary majority -- France appears to be sliding, slowly but surely, towards a version of chaos -- the ancestral breeding ground for the violence that would be the victory, the horizon and the ultimate goal not only of Mélenchon's phalanx, but of all those trying to take down the West.


Drieu Godefridi is a jurist (University Saint-Louis, University of Louvain), philosopher (University Saint-Louis, University of Louvain) and PhD in legal theory (Paris IV-Sorbonne). He is an entrepreneur, CEO of a European private education group and director of PAN Medias Group. He is the author of The Green Reich (2020).

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20924/france-at-war-with-itself

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Thursday, September 12, 2024

Israel's often offered peace, always rejected by the Arab world - opinion - Mohamed Saad Khiralla

 

by Mohamed Saad Khiralla

A look into some of the many peace opportunities that were available and were shattered by absolute Arab rejection.

 

A MAN adjusts a billboard with pictures of former president Gamal Abdel Nasser, in Cairo, July 2002, the 50th anniversary of the revolution when the Free Officers, led by Nasser, seized power from the monarchy. (photo credit: Aladin Abdel Naby/Reuters)
A MAN adjusts a billboard with pictures of former president Gamal Abdel Nasser, in Cairo, July 2002, the 50th anniversary of the revolution when the Free Officers, led by Nasser, seized power from the monarchy.
(photo credit: Aladin Abdel Naby/Reuters)

I have been writing opinion articles for various Israeli websites and newspapers for quite some time, but never have I faced such accusations of betrayal and excommunication as I did after publishing my previous article, “Islamist Delusions: Hidden Truths Behind the Arab-Israeli Conflict,” I received dozens of threatening and intimidating messages privately right after sharing the article on my social media accounts.

But it doesn’t matter, and I won’t pay attention to it. I always keep in mind the words of the British philosopher John Stuart Mill about the burden of awareness: “The difficulty of awareness lies in its ability to expose the false convictions and mental biases we may have. It takes courage to face the facts and change perspectives.” From this standpoint, I continue what I started in my previous article.

In that article, I reviewed the actions of Amin al-Husseini, Mufti of Jerusalem and President of the Supreme Muslim Council, when he allied with Hitler after the Arab side rejected the British Peel Commission Report, one of the most significant peace opportunities that the Arabs deliberately squandered, leaving the conflict to continue.

Now, I will continue to outline some of the many peace opportunities that were available and were shattered by absolute Arab rejection.

 Ben-Gurion Peace Plan of 1946

This plan included three main ideas. The first idea proposed declaring the area under British control on the eastern side of the Jordan River – now the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan – as a neutral zone forever. The second and third ideas aimed at establishing two independent states and making the holy sites international properties, with Jerusalem being part of a comprehensive settlement concerning all the holy places.

Enlrage image
Knesset exhibit: David Ben-Gurion 1954 (credit: KNESSET)

 The 1947 Labor Party Proposal

In late April 1947, the Israeli Labor Party, as a Jewish opposition party, presented a proposal to resolve the Palestinian issue. It stated that the Jewish Agency is the official representative of the Jewish people and found that the ideal solution would be a binational state with shared institutions for both Arabs and Jews.

The Arab world also rejected the Partition Plan issued on November 29, 1947, demonizing it as if it were a grand conspiracy against them by the world’s nations, choosing war instead. This war indeed broke out on May 15, 1948, resulting in a devastating defeat for them. This defeat led to the forced expulsion of Jewish Arab citizens from their original countries. Mafia-like methods were employed to force them to leave. Describing this matter would require many volumes, not just a few books and articles.

They continued the cycle of rejection, as if it had become a chronic disease, and they refused the following peace initiatives:

Moshe Sharett’s Plan of 1956

During his visit to Washington in 1956 close to the end of his Israeli presidency, Moshe Sharett held talks with US secretary of state John Dulles, and presented a proposal to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict. His proposal included Israel’s approval of mutual adjustments, its readiness to raise the necessary funds to compensate Palestinian refugees, its acceptance of a US loan to help resettle and house the refugees, and Israel’s acceptance of the Jordan River development project. This excellent project was deliberately sabotaged by Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser, as detailed by the late writer and thinker Amin Mahdi in his book The Arab-Israeli Conflict: The Crisis of Democracy and Peace.

Moshe Dayan’s Plan of 1959

In this plan, Dayan, then the minister of agriculture under David Ben-Gurion, proposed the idea of a confederation with Jordan, suggesting that this union could eventually include Lebanon in a third stage.

Levi Eshkol’s Response to Tunisian President Bourguiba’s Initiative in 1965

 Prime Minister Levi Eshkol proposed a peaceful settlement of the Arab-Israeli conflict during a speech in the Israeli Knesset. His plan was based on the status quo of Israel, except for some minor adjustments at certain points along the borders. To be fair, President Bourguiba was a man of peace, but he was punished for this proposal by the majority of Arab leaders through a systematic campaign to tarnish his image for deviating from their inhumane approach.

Uri Avnery Plan of 1967

Nasser instigated the 1967 Six Day War to resolve the conflict he had with his defense minister, field marshal Abdel Hakim Amer, and his group. Nasser fabricated many lies to justify his desire to fight Israel. The biggest was his claim that Israel wanted to attack Syria, which was proven by undeniable evidence to be pure nonsense and fabrication.

As usual, the Arab states that participated in the war suffered a humiliating defeat (with Israel expanding its territory). Despite Israel’s sweeping victory, everyone was surprised by the “Uri Avnery Plan.”

On the fifth day of the war, Knesset member Avnery proposed this plan to the Israeli government, which called for a public referendum among the residents of the Gaza Strip and the West Bank regarding their future in a democratic manner. The referendum would revolve around the establishment of a Palestinian state comprising the West Bank and Gaza Strip or joining a federal union with Israel. The third option was to return the occupied territories to Jordan.

Yigal Allon’s Plan of 1967

On July 13, 1967, labor minister Yigal Allon proposed a plan to his government concerning the West Bank and Gaza Strip, insisting that Israel’s eastern boundary should be the Jordan River, with a line extending across the Dead Sea. He also proposed dividing the autonomous regions into three areas: Samaria, Judea, and Gaza, and resolving the refugee issue based on regional cooperation with international assistance.

Abba Eban’s Plan of 1968

On October 8, 1968, Abba Eban, then Israel’s foreign minister, presented a proposal before the United Nations General Assembly. In his proposal, he declared that his government intended to make new efforts to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict and establish peace in the region. His plan included nine points aimed at achieving a just and comprehensive peace. This remarkable man, who famously said, “The Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss a peace opportunity,” was indeed an extraordinary figure.

Mapam Peace Project of 1969

On December 11, 1969, the Mapam Party endorsed a new project, which included several provisions supporting Israel’s political solution based on two independent and sovereign states: Israel on one side and an Arab state on the other. The project called for a comprehensive political settlement.

Golda Meir’s Plan of 1971

On February 9, 1971, Israeli prime minister Golda Meir delivered a statement before the Israeli Knesset, in which she rejected the partial settlement proposal – Arab peace with Israel in exchange for Israel’s withdrawal from Sinai – put forth by Egyptian president Anwar Sadat. She subsequently presented a counter-proposal, published in the London Times.

THE EXAMPLES I mention leave no doubt about the desire for peace of Israel’s political leaders and their efforts to achieve it through all possible means.

What we are now reaping at the hands of Iran and its disruptive arms in the region (Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis, Islamic Jihad, and similar groups) has roots and is not the result of coincidence. To move beyond our current situation toward a more humane and peaceful future, we must understand and openly discuss everything that has happened in the past without any redlines or restrictions of any kind.

(I’ll conclude with this for now and continue in the third and final article of this series.)

 
Mohamed Saad Khiralla is a political analyst specializing in Middle East affairs and Islamic movements, an opinion writer and a member of the Swedish PEN Association. He lives in Lund, Sweden.

Source: https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-819959

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The New UK Government's Anti-Israel Policy Is a Disgrace - Con Coughlin

 

by Con Coughlin

It was during Corbyn's stint as Labour leader that his party faced constant accusations of anti-Semitism. A damning report produced by the Jewish Labour Movement in 2019 said the party harboured "endemic, institutional anti-Semitism" and that there was "overwhelming evidence that anti-Semitic conduct is pervasive at all levels of the party."

 

  • The pretence that the UK's new Labour government has moved away from the blatant anti-Semitism that was rife under its former leader, Jeremy Corbyn, has been brutally exposed by the actions of David Lammy, the party's new Foreign Secretary.

  • It was during Corbyn's stint as Labour leader that his party faced constant accusations of anti-Semitism. A damning report produced by the Jewish Labour Movement in 2019 said the party harboured "endemic, institutional anti-Semitism" and that there was "overwhelming evidence that anti-Semitic conduct is pervasive at all levels of the party."

  • Having been a close political ally of two prominent Labour politicians accused of anti-Semitism, it is hardly surprising therefore that two of Lammy's first initiatives since his appointment as Labour's new foreign secretary in July have been aimed at discrediting Israel.

  • His first act was to withdraw the British government's official objection to attempts to persuade the International Criminal Court to issue an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on war crimes charges.

  • At the same time, Lammy confirmed that the UK was to restore its funding to UNRWA, the UN agency responsible for supporting Palestinian refugees, after support for the organisation was withdrawn by a number of countries -- including the US -- over claims its staffers were directly involved in the October 7 attacks carried out by Iranian-backed Hamas terrorists against Israel.

  • Lammy has now added to his anti-Israel stance by suspending a number of UK arms contracts to Israel, a decision that was announced on the same day that Israel buried the latest group of hostages to be murdered by Hamas terrorists, a decision that was denounced by Netanyahu as "shameful".

  • As a junior minister in Tony Blair's government in 2006, for example, the Harvard-educated Lammy called for the British media to provide a platform for them to air their "poisonous" views.

  • His appeal came shortly after a cell of al-Qaeda terrorists had carried out their worst terrorist attack against the UK with the London bombings in July 2005, murdering 72 innocent commuters and wounding more than 700.

  • While Lammy's anti-Israel policies will undoubtedly appeal to the Labour's Party's hard-Left, they are also likely to place Starmer's government on a collision course with Washington, which has concluded there are no grounds for suspending arms deals with Israel, and that the creation of Palestinian state, as agreed in the Oslo Accords, is contingent on successful peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.

  • Lammy's blatant anti-Israel agenda will also place the UK's long-standing strategic alliance with Israel under intense strain. Having worked closely on a number of vital security issues, such as Iran's nuclear programme and the threat posed by Islamist terrorists, the Israeli government will be disinclined to maintain cooperation with the UK's new Labour government so long as Lammy remains foreign secretary.

The pretence that the UK's new Labour government has moved away from the blatant anti-Semitism that was rife under its former leader, Jeremy Corbyn, has been brutally exposed by the actions of David Lammy, the party's new Foreign Secretary. Pictured: Corbyn (L), then Labour Party leader, with Lammy at the Cardinal Heenen centre on June 20, 2019 in Ilford, England. (Photo by Leon Neal/Getty Images)

The pretence that the UK's new Labour government has moved away from the blatant anti-Semitism that was rife under its former leader, Jeremy Corbyn, has been brutally exposed by the actions of David Lammy, the party's new Foreign Secretary.

Prior to his appointment to one of the British government's key positions in Prime Minister Keir Starmer's new administration, Lammy had made his name as a Left-wing firebrand.

Having first come to prominence within the Labour movement for his campaigning on racial equality issues, he became closely associated with hard-Left members of the Labour Party, including both Corbyn and former London mayor Ken Livingstone.

It was during Corbyn's stint as Labour leader that his party faced constant accusations of anti-Semitism. A damning report produced by the Jewish Labour Movement in 2019 said the party harboured "endemic, institutional anti-Semitism" and that there was "overwhelming evidence that anti-Semitic conduct is pervasive at all levels of the party."

It stated that Corbyn himself "has repeatedly associated with, sympathised with and engaged in anti-Semitism."

The following year an investigation by the Equality and Human Rights Commission found Labour responsible for three breaches of the Equality Act: political interference in anti-Semitism complaints, failure to provide adequate training to those handling anti-Semitism complaints and harassment, including the use of anti-Semitic tropes and suggesting that complaints of anti-Semitism were fake or smears.

The commission concluded that the evidence pointed to a culture within the party which, at best, did not do enough to prevent anti-Semitism and, at worst, could be seen to accept it".

Corbyn's failure to accept the commission's findings led to his suspension from the Labour Party, and being banned from standing as a Labour candidate in July's general election. He instead contested and won his London seat as an independent, and has now formed a so-called "Independent Alliance" with four other pro-Gaza MPs elected in July's election.

Meanwhile, Ken Livingstone, another former ally of Britain's new Foreign Secretary, was banned from the Labour Party in 2016 for "bringing the party into disrepute" after arguing that Nazi leader Adolf Hitler supported Zionism.

Having been a close political ally of two prominent Labour politicians accused of anti-Semitism, it is hardly surprising therefore that two of Lammy's first initiatives since his appointment as Labour's new foreign secretary in July have been aimed at discrediting Israel.

His first act was to withdraw the British government's official objection to attempts to persuade the International Criminal Court to issue an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on war crimes charges.

Under the previous Conservative Party government of Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, the UK had opposed the move on the grounds that, as Sunak commented, it was "deeply unhelpful", and that "there was no moral equivalence between a democratic state exercising its lawful right to self defence and the terrorist group Hamas. It is wrong to conflate and equivocate between those two different entities."

In one of his first acts as Foreign Secretary, though, Lammy reversed Britain's stand, saying that it would now support the initiative to arrest the Israeli PM, a move that resulted in Netanyahu refusing to meet the British envoy when he visited Israel in August for an update on ceasefire negotiations.

At the same time, Lammy confirmed that the UK was to restore its funding to UNRWA, the UN agency responsible for supporting Palestinian refugees, after support for the organisation was withdrawn by a number of countries -- including the US -- over claims its staffers were directly involved in the October 7 attacks carried out by Iranian-backed Hamas terrorists against Israel.

Lammy has now added to his anti-Israel stance by suspending a number of UK arms contracts to Israel, a decision that was announced on the same day that Israel buried the latest group of hostages to be murdered by Hamas terrorists, a decision that was denounced by Netanyahu as "shameful".

Lammy's enthusiasm for targeting Israel should not come as a surprise, given his long-standing sympathy for Islamist extremists.

As a junior minister in Tony Blair's government in 2006, for example, the Harvard-educated Lammy called for the British media to provide a platform for them to air their "poisonous" views.

His appeal came shortly after a cell of al-Qaeda terrorists had carried out their worst terrorist attack against the UK with the London bombings in July 2005, murdering 72 innocent commuters and wounding more than 700.

More recently, at an event during the UK's recent general election campaign, Lammy confirmed that Labour would recognise Palestine as a state if they were to form the next government, presumably indifferent as to whether or not the state was still terrorist.

While Lammy's anti-Israel policies will undoubtedly appeal to the Labour's Party's hard-Left, they are also likely to place Starmer's government on a collision course with Washington, which has concluded there are no grounds for suspending arms deals with Israel, and that the creation of Palestinian state, as agreed in the Oslo Accords, is contingent on successful peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians.

Responding to Lammy's decision to suspend arms sales to Israel, State Department spokesman Matthew Miller confirmed that, despite exhaustive investigation, the US had not reached "any final determinations" about Israel's alleged violations of humanitarian law during the Gaza conflict -- Lammy's main argument for justifying his decision.

Lammy's blatant anti-Israel agenda will also place the UK's long-standing strategic alliance with Israel under intense strain. Having worked closely on a number of vital security issues, such as Iran's nuclear programme and the threat posed by Islamist terrorists, the Israeli government will be disinclined to maintain cooperation with the UK's new Labour government so long as Lammy remains foreign secretary.


Con Coughlin is the Telegraph's Defence and Foreign Affairs Editor and a Distinguished Senior Fellow at Gatestone Institute.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20926/uk-anti-israel-policy

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

A Forgettable Warped Debate - Victor Davis Hanson

 

by Victor Davis Hanson

The sappy Harris won the visuals; the grouchy Trump likely the issues. But the real losers were ABC and its two partisan moderators, Muir and Davis.

 

 

The September 10th presidential debate went down as expected. Summed up, it was Sappy and the Blob pile on Grouchy.

The swarmy and evasive Kamala Harris preened, posed, and proffered empty platitudes.

The ABC moderators proved they were predictably and shamelessly biased.

And an irate Donald Trump confirmed that he was too touchy and easily triggered.

Harris’s instructions were not to explain her agenda. She never defended disowning policies that she had embraced as a lifelong, self-confessed, “woke” “radical.”

Instead, Harris’s threefold strategy was simple enough—and it mostly worked.

One, goad Trump as a coward and racist. Then smile and call for unity, kindness, and an end to such name-calling.

Harris’s orders were to zero in on hair-trigger irrelevancies that would incite and sidetrack the thin-skinned Trump.

So, Harris claimed his massive rallies were failures, crackpot—and worst of all, boring!—as she falsely added that weary attendants left early.

All that was missing from her adolescent putdowns was Barack Obama’s earlier convention speech obscenity that Donald Trump supposedly suffered from undersized genitalia.

In Harris’s upside-down, projectionist world, ex-president Trump caused the Biden-Harris disastrous skedaddle from Afghanistan.

He was accused of being mostly responsible for the effects of the global COVID-19 plague that killed over 100 million.

And somehow Trump even appeased Vladimir Putin, who then oddly attacked his neighbors during the Bush, Obama, and Biden administrations but not Trump’s.

Harris mocked Trump’s businesses, claiming he was a failure. Those tactics succeeded, as a rattled Trump missed easy refutations of Harris’s naked mendacity.

The result was not an easy exposure of her lies but an off-topic defense of the size of his rallies and his wealth.

Two, Harris predictably once more reinvented herself.

She erased entirely her upper-middle class, privileged upbringing, as a child of two PhDs.

There was no mention that her radical political career was opportunistically gifted by her insider and paramour fixer, the married Bay-Area left-wing politico Wille Brown, over thirty years her senior.

Instead, Harris became a middle-class child of a struggling small businesswoman.

To cement that deception, Harris would now insist that she was always a border hawk, supported fracking, and was tough on crime. She claimed she never rallied the public to bail out violent rioters during the 2020 looting, arson, and violent demonstrations.

Harris promised to answer questions in detail but never did.

Instead, she recited scripted talking points to avoid explaining her opportune metamorphoses.

As the current vice president, Harris went mum on her apparent inability over the last three years—or in the next five months—to enact her “way forward” policies.

Three, everything else in the debate was outsourced to the ABC “moderators,” David Muir and Linsey Davis.

Both apparently calculated that if it was a question between blatantly helping Harris or appearing intellectually and professionally honest, then it was a no-brainer, partisan choice.

So, the two fact-checked Trump constantly, but never Harris once, and tried to warp the tempo of the debate.

Harris, without interruption or correction, recycled the old, discredited lies about Charlottesville, “bloodbath,” the 2025 project, and Trump’s supposed support for a federal ban on abortion.

When Trump frequently meandered off topic, the frowning moderators redirected him to answer the questions asked. Harris neither did nor was ever pressed to.

Debate rules supposedly outlawed hot-mic interruptions. But Harris was exempted.

Worse of all were the lopsided questions.

Muir and Davis fixated on the January 6 incitement. They ignored Harris’s national televised screed that the 2020 demonstrations that had proved violent neither would stop nor should stop, and as a “movement” would go on after Election Day.

When Harris lied that police on January 6 were killed by the protestors on a day apparently worse than September 11 (when 3,000 Americans were murdered), the two fact-checkers still kept mum.

Will the debate change the race?

Probably not.

Harris confirmed that she was slicker. But her habitual happy-face nodding has been seen over the last 90 days as facilitating her shallowness, stonewalling, and evasions.

Trump reestablished that he is fiery, quick-tempered, and easily provoked. But the country already knew all that from the last nine years.

Half the nation always felt Trump’s loose-cannon furor was well-directed against plastic politicians and the fusion media—and likely saw such confirmation in the debate.

The sappy Harris won the visuals; the grouchy Trump likely the issues.

But the real losers were ABC and its two partisan moderators, Muir and Davis.

Both managed to easily outdo CNN’s Candy Crowley’s infamous partisan sabotage of the 2012 debate between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama.

Just as we do not remember anything else about that spectacle other than Crowley’s career-ending interventions to aid Obama, so too did Muir and Davis confirm their shameless biases.

They sought to warp a debate, disgraced their network, and offered a good reminder why such media “moderators” should never be allowed anywhere near presidential debates.

 


Victor Davis Hanson

Source: https://amgreatness.com/2024/09/12/a-forgettable-warped-debate/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Netanyahu: World must demand hostages’ freedom - JNS

 

by JNS

"Hamas is trying to hide the fact that it continues to oppose a hostage release deal and is thwarting it," the Israeli premier said.

 

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks during a press conference in Jerusalem, Sept. 2, 2024. Photo by Chaim Goldberg/Flash90.
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks during a press conference in Jerusalem, Sept. 2, 2024. Photo by Chaim Goldberg/Flash90.

The international community must demand that Hamas free the remaining captives held in Gaza “immediately,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Thursday, accusing the terrorist group of frustrating the indirect talks towards a hostages-for-ceasefire-and-terrorists-release agreement.

“Hamas is trying to hide the fact that it continues to oppose a hostage release deal and is thwarting it,” Netanyahu’s office stated. “While Israel accepted the ‘final bridging proposal’ made by the U.S. on Aug. 16, 2024, Hamas rejected it and even murdered six of our hostages in cold blood.

“The world must demand that Hamas free our hostages immediately,” the prime minister reiterated in the statement.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken told reporters in London on Tuesday that the Biden administration is determined to achieve a truce in Gaza “as soon as possible,” stressing that “the quickest way to do so remains bringing the ceasefire agreement over the finish line.”

He added, “We are working with our Egyptian and Qatari counterparts to work together to bridge any remaining gaps, and in the coming time very soon we’ll put that before the parties and we’ll see what they say.”

The optimistic comments come amid pessimism expressed in recent days by American and Israeli mediators about the prospects of a deal.

The U.S. has publicly blamed Hamas for holding up the deal, with White House National Security Communications Adviser John Kirby saying on Monday that “Hamas is the main obstacle to this right now.”

The Washington Post cited a senior U.S. official as saying last week that while the two sides had agreed to the release of terrorist murderers in exchange for Hamas freeing Israel Defense Forces troops, Hamas last week decided that civilians would also need to be exchanged for these longtime prisoners, an idea the official described as a “poison pill.”

However, Israel’s Channel 12 News reported on Tuesday that Cairo and Doha “think the opposite” and accuse Jerusalem of dragging its feet.

Netanyahu on Sept. 5 dismissed reports suggesting that an agreement was close. “In fact, while we agreed in May, in July and in August to a deal, an American proposal, Hamas has consistently said no to every one of them,” he said on Thursday.

One hundred and one hostages—alive and dead—are still held captive, 342 days after the Oct. 7 attacks. Off-and-on talks have continued for months with the United States, Egypt and Qatar acting as mediators.


JNS

Source: https://www.jns.org/netanyahu-world-must-demand-hostages-freedom/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

‘Israeli forces raided Iranian weapons depot in Syria’ - JNS

 

by JNS

Troops reportedly entered an unspecified arms depot, removed equipment and documents and then set off explosives to destroy the facility.

 

Israeli reserve soldiers patrol on the border with Syria, in the Golan Heights, Jan. 25, 2022. Photo by Michael Giladi/Flash90.
Israeli reserve soldiers patrol on the border with Syria, in the Golan Heights, Jan. 25, 2022. Photo by Michael Giladi/Flash90.

Israel Defense Forces commandos raided a key Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps weapons facility in the Masyaf area of northwestern Syria on Sunday night, unconfirmed Arabic reports claimed on Thursday.

At least 14 people were killed and dozens wounded in a series of Israeli airstrikes in northwestern Syria late Sunday, according to state media.

Syria’s SANA news agency reported that the Israeli Air Force targeted several military sites around Masyaf.

According to Reuters, which cited two regional intelligence sources, among the sites hit was the Scientific Studies and Research Center, known as CERS or SSRC, a major military base that is believed to be responsible for research and development of nuclear, biological, chemical and missile technology and weapons.

The center is thought to house a team of Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps military experts and provides logistical support to Iran-backed Hezbollah terrorists.

Thursday’s reports claimed that Israeli forces had boots on the ground during the large-scale operation. According to the reports, the facility’s access roads were targeted by fighter jets to prevent the approach of Syrian troops before helicopters carrying IDF special forces operators arrived in the area, with air support from gunship helicopters and attack drones.

The troops reportedly entered an unspecified arms depot, removed equipment and sensitive documents and then set off explosives to destroy the facility. During the heavy fighting, two to four Iranian operatives were said to have been captured by the Israeli soldiers.

Jerusalem rarely admits to attacks on Syrian territory, although in February it revealed that it had attacked more than 50 targets belonging to Hezbollah and other Iran-backed terror groups in Syria since Oct. 7.

The same month, Reuters reported that Iran removed senior IRGC officers from Syria following a series of deadly aerial attacks by Israel.

Between Oct. 7 and May 15, Tehran’s Syrian proxies launched at least 40 projectiles across the border with Israel, according to official IDF data.

On April 1, seven members of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, including the leader responsible for Syria and Lebanon, were killed in an attack on a building adjacent to the Iranian embassy in Damascus.

Israel did not officially take responsibility for the attack, but four Israeli officials told The New York Times that the IAF carried out the strike.

Thirteen days later, the Islamic Republic launched an unprecedented combined attack on Israel involving more than 300 drones and missiles in what Tehran claimed was retaliation for the Damascus incident.


JNS

Source: https://www.jns.org/israeli-forces-raided-iranian-weapons-depot-in-syria-reports/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Election officials warn of Postal Service problems amid 2024 elections: 'Have not seen improvement' - Nicholas Ballasy

 

by Nicholas Ballasy

The officials wrote in the letter that the mail system issues were “not one-off mistakes or a problem with specific facilities. Instead, it demonstrates a pervasive lack of understanding and enforcement of USPS policies among its employees.”

 

Two groups representing top election administrators in all 50 states warned that widespread issues with the U.S. Postal Service could disrupt voting in the 2024 general election.

According to the letter sent to U.S. Postmaster General Louis DeJoy on Wednesday, valid ballots postmarked on time have been received after the deadline to be counted and the issue hasn't been corrected.

The officials also noted that there have been cases of election mail with valid addresses being returned as undeliverable.

“We have not seen improvement or concerted efforts to remediate our concerns,” the National Association of Secretaries of State and the National Association of State Election Directors wrote.

The officials also wrote in the letter that the issues were "not one-off mistakes or a problem with specific facilities" and it "demonstrates a pervasive lack of understanding and enforcement of USPS policies among its employees."

 
Nicholas Ballasy

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/local/election-officials-warn-problems-usps-2024-election-we-have-not-seen-improvement

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

PA antisemitic libel: “Rabbi said ‘kill children and women to enter Paradise’” - Nan Jacques Zilberdik

 

by Nan Jacques Zilberdik

Preacher calls for genocide of the “thieving Jews”: “Allah, kill them one by one”

 

  • PA antisemitic libels transform murder of Israelis/Jews into self-defense
  • PA libel: Rabbi said “to enter Paradise you need to kill [Palestinian] children and women”
  • Fatah official libels Israeli Jews: The Jewish state rules according to laws of killing, rabbis instruct to kill anyone who is not Jewish
  • Preacher calls for genocide of the “thieving Jews”: “Allah, kill them one by one”

Official PA TV recently broadcast yet another Muslim preacher calling for the genocide of the “thieving Jews”, asking Allah to "kill them one by one”:


Unnamed preacher: “O Allah, hand of power and might, support the Jihad fighters in the Gaza Strip, and grant them a decisive victory…

O Allah, strike the thieving Jews, O Master of the Universe. Allah, count them and kill them one by one, and do not leave even one of them. O Allah, divide them and scatter them in every direction, divide them and scatter them in every direction.”

[Official PA TV, Aug. 9, 2024]

Why would any sensible Palestinian follow such a call?

Because the Palestinian Authority and its ruling party Fatah continuously demonize Jews and Israelis! This antisemitic demonization turns the killing of Israelis into self-defense, and make the calls to murder Jews such as the one above legitimate.

For example, a PA TV commentator recently falsely claimed that Israeli rabbis have instructed soldiers to “kill” Palestinian “children and women” in order to “enter Paradise”:

Official PA TV political commentator Mahmoud Khalouf: “There has been incitement against the Palestinians… when rabbis issued religious rulings that encouraged [Israeli] soldiers in the Gaza Strip and elsewhere to massacre Palestinians. One of the rabbis when he would meet with soldiers in 2014 would say: ‘If you want to enter Paradise you need to kill children and women. This will bring you closer to Paradise.’”

[Official PA TV, Aug. 4, 2024]

This is a classic example of projection as it is the PA who teaches that terrorists who died while murdering Israelis and Jews are “Martyrs” for Allah and they go to Paradise where they marry 72 virgins.

Similarly, a Fatah official claimed that Israel is ruled according to “laws of killing” instructing to murder “whoever is not Jewish,”and that rabbis in particular teach to kill “infants, mothers, and children”:

Fatah Revolutionary Council member Younes Amr: “Israel has shown its true face: That it is a Jewish state that rules itself and rules others in a legal manner according to the secret system of laws, the laws of killing: Whoever is not Jewish needs to be killed. Especially according to the instructions of the rabbis who order to kill infants and their mothers, and children in general.”

[Official PA TV, Jan. 8, 2024]

Palestinian Media Watch has exposed this antisemitic demonization of Israelis and Jews for more than two decades. Recently a regular columnist of the official PA daily referred to Israeli PM Netanyahu and his cabinet as “vampires… who drink the blood of Palestinian children,” and who “have yet to satiate their thirst.” Earlier this year, the PA libeled Israel, claiming it is poisoning wells, murdering prisoners, and stealing body parts.

Neither Judaism nor the State of Israel call to kill non-Jews, and rabbis have not given such orders.

Younes Amr is the former President of Al-Quds Open University.


Nan Jacques Zilberdik

Source: https://palwatch.org/page/35490

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Pakistani national with Iran ties indicted in alleged 'murder for hire' plot on US politicians - Nicholas Ballasy

 

by Nicholas Ballasy

The person arrested, Asif Merchant, is being charged for allegedly attempting to commit an act of terrorism and for his alleged role in a murder-for-hire plot

 

The Justice Department has announced an indictment against a Pakistani national with ties to Iran in connection with an alleged Iranian plot to assassinate a U.S. politician or government official.

The department has identified the person as Asif Merchant, also known as Asif Raza Merchant, and said he is now in federal custody.

He was indicted Tuesday with attempting to commit an act of terrorism transcending national boundaries and murder-for-hire as part of a scheme to assassinate a U.S. politician or government official on American soil, the department said Wednesday.

"The Justice Department will not tolerate Iran’s efforts to target our country’s public officials and endanger our national security,” Attorney General Merrick Garland said in a statement.  

The foiled plot reportedly included GOP presidential nominee former President Donald Trump and other U.S. politicians, including President Biden.

Merchant was arrested and initially charged in July and remains in federal custody.

U.S. Attorney Breon Peace, for the Eastern District of New York, said Merchant "orchestrated" the plot.

He spent time this spring in Iran, then came from Pakistan to the U.S., where he allegedly contacted a person he believed could assist him with the plot. However,  that person reported Merchant’s conduct to law enforcement and became a confidential source, Peace also said.

In mid-June, Merchant met in New York with the purported hitmen, who were in fact undercover U.S. law enforcement officers. 

He then began arranging ways to get $5,000 in cash to pay the undercover officers, the Justice Department also said.

If convicted, Merchant faces a maximum penalty of life in prison.

 
Nicholas Ballasy

Source: https://justthenews.com/government/federal-agencies/pakistani-national-indicted-alleged-iranian-plot-assassinate-trump

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter