Monday, August 19, 2019

How the British Mandate Manipulated Arab demographics in the Land of Israel - The Sovereignty Movement

by Shimon Cohen

New research reveals the way the British Mandate allowed hundreds of thousands of Arabs to immigrate to the Land of Israel while the gates to the Land were closed to Jews. Today, those Arabs claim that they have been here since time immemorial…

One of the most commonly repeated claims made by spokesmen of Arabs from Judea and Samaria is the claim that they have been connected to the Land for many generations, but new research by Dr. Rivka Shpak-Lissak shows that this is not true at all.

The research, which is included in its totality in her book When and How did the Arabs and Muslims Immigrate to the Land of Israel (Yediot Aharonot Press), reveals how the regime of the British Mandate brought about the flow of hundreds of thousands of Arabs to the Land of Israel. This occurred despite the fact that the purpose of the Mandate was to establish a national home for the Jewish People in the Land of Israel. 

Dr. Shpak-Lissak states that the British Mandate betrayed its function and acted in a manner totally opposite to its avowed purpose. In an interview with Arutz 7, she described the main point of her research, which is that “the Transjordanian Border Control Corps, whose function was to patrol the Jordanian borders with Lebanon and Syria until Akaba, received orders directly from the Mandate to ignore the entry of Arabs to the Land but not to allow entry to Jews to the Land, because there had been attempts of Jews trying to enter via Syria”.

Shpak-Lissak also says: “The border was totally open and anyone who wanted to enter could have done it. Sinai also was open, without oversight, and anyone could have passed through. In this way, many Arabs and Muslims took advantage of the possibility to enter”.

“They wanted to enter because the conditions in the Land were much better, Jews as well as Christian organizations such as the Templars and the Mandate government were investing money here. As a result, there was development, the standard of living rose and wages were higher than in the Arab countries, so it is no wonder that they wanted to enter”.

Research data shows that “the British did not want the Jews to establish a Jewish state. They forsook and betrayed the role that was assigned to them by the League of Nations and then by the UN to establish a national home for the Jewish People”. 

The dimensions of Arab immigration that occurred under the British Mandate and under their protection cannot be stated exactly, but it is possible to get an idea from the words of a Muslim Sheikh at the a national assemble that was held in Jaffa on the 9th of April, 1940. “He said at that time, ‘Thanks to the British Mandate, we have grown from a half million to a million’. He said that in 1940, but by ’47, there were already a million and two hundred thousand”.

During the interview, Shpak-Lissak also said, relating to her research: “I examined documents of the Hagana, the Zionist archives and the state archives and I discovered how it happened that in Arab settlements the population increased not from natural growth and how, throughout the Land, new settlements were established or joined already existing settlements. There is research by Prof. David Grossman and Prof. Moshe Breuer that relates to the southern part of the Land and shows that at least 25,000 Egyptians settled in these villages”.

Regarding the Egyptian immigration into the Land of Israel Shpak-Lissak stated that “Most of the refugees in Gaza are Egyptian and the best proof of this is that in an interview in 2012, a Fatah representative plainly stated that ‘Half of us are Egyptian’. They have relatives in Egypt and other Arab countries. There is another proof that fifty thousand Houranis from southern Syria entered the Land freely and told Eliyahu Eilat, a Jewish Agency representative, that they can pass freely by way of the Yarmouk River. This is how the British increased the number of Muslims in the Land, all with the aim of preventing a Jewish majority and establishing a Jewish state”.

Regarding British interests, she explained: “The Arab states have oil, so it is very important to maintain good relations with the Arab countries, who do not want a Jewish state. Moreover, there is also the Suez Canal, which is controlled by Egypt and it is important to have good relations with Egypt. British imperialist interests dictated that she would support the Arabs and not the Jews”.

Dr. Shpak-Lissak also said that “During the First World War, the British army brought in Egyptian workers to work in the Egyptian military camps. They were brought here [to the Land of Israel] and remained, and in the Second World War, instead of using local residents they brought in Egyptian and Syrian workers. They brought laborers in trucks from Syria and Lebanon to work for the British army”.

Shpak-Lissak’s book is a continuation of the first part of her research in which she examined the era that preceded the Mandate period, on the events regarding the Muslim presence in the Land of Israel beginning in the year 640, when they came from the Arab Peninsula and conquered the Land. “All of the research, which includes testimonies by Muslim tourists, shows that in the entire period of the Arab occupation there was a Christian majority here. The Arabs did not settle in the Land. The Bedouins, who were the conquering army, proceeded southward and those who remained preferred to camp on the border of the desert. In the large cities in the Land there were approximately thirty thousand Arabs who served the regime and for the entire period until the middle of the 14th century, the Christians were the largest group. It was the Mamluks who destroyed the Christian majority, which had begun to shrink even prior; during the four hundred years of Arab rule, the population had decreased from three million to a half million. The Arabs destroyed the economy and the security of the Land. In addition to the massacres and slaughter, there was a gradual Islamization, which ended around the middle of the 14th century when the Christians were eliminated as the majority group”.

“The Jews have a history of at least a thousand years before the Arab conquest. We never left the Land by our free will. The first holocaust of the Jewish People was here. Anyone who knows history knows that we were here, and the Palestinians are trying to erase this. They used to claim that they are the Jebusites, another time it was that they are the Canaanites and then they were actually of Jewish extraction but there is no proof for this in the research. The fact that the Jews are not the most beloved of peoples has helped them. Goebbels said that if you tell a lie a thousand times it will be accepted. Indeed, the Arab and Palestinian propaganda has achieved this; they have told a total lie and anti-Semitism helped them along. The Europeans played no small part in this”.

In all of her interviews, Dr. Shpak-Lissak emphasizes that does not identify with the Israeli Right, however, she presents her research in Israel and abroad because she is disgusted with the lies and demonization of Israel.

Published by The Sovereignty Movement, translated from Hebrew by Sally Zahav

Shimon Cohen

Source: (Hebrew)

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Why Israel Made the Right Move with Omar and Tlaib - Steve Postal

by Steve Postal

Israel has every right to deny entry to anyone that seeks to do it harm.

We all now know that Representatives Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib will not be going to Israel. Did Israel exercise good judgment in denying them entry? Absolutely. Omar's and Tlaib's support for the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) movement reveal that they in fact do not view Israel as an ally of the United States, do not want to promote true peace, and were seeking to use their trip as a Trojan horse to promote an anti-Israel agenda. Their failed trip stood in direct opposition to America's best interest.

Omar and Tlaib Support BDS, Which Supports the Destruction of Israel

Omar and Tlaib both support the BDS movement and voted against a bill, passed in the House of Representatives 398-17, that condemned BDS. The BDS movement is anti-Semitic as it applies a double standard to Israel, the only state for the Jews. BDS activists, including cofounder Omar Barghouti, have frequently asserted that the intention of the BDS movement is not to force Israel to leave Judea and Samaria (commonly referred to as the "West Bank"), nor is it to promote a two-state solution, but to bring about the destruction of Israel itself.

True, after Israel's initial refusal to let Omar and Tlaib into the country, Tlaib later promised not to promote the boycott of Israel if she were allowed to see her grandmother. Israel approved her request. But Tlaib flipped, calling the terms "oppressive" and intended to "humiliate" her. This duplicity further highlighted Tlaib's true malicious intentions toward the Jewish state.

The Tour, like Its Attendees, Would Have Likely Demonized Israel 

Omar and Tlaib would have likely used their trip to weaponize hatred against Israel. For one, the trip was organized by PLO Executive Committee member Hanan Ashrawi's group Miftah. As I have stated before, the PLO/P.A. has a jihadist, anti-Semitic hatred for Israel that continues to this day. Ashrawi holds similarly hostile views and is a supporter of the BDS movement. Miftah's website supported Wafa Idress, a suicide bomber, and propagated the blood libel against the Jews. According to U.S. ambassador to Israel David Friedman, the tour was "organized by the most strident of BDS activists ... [and] is nothing more than an effort to fuel the BDS engine that Congresswomen Tlaib and Omar so vigorously support."

The congresswomen were slated to visit Jerusalem (including the Temple Mount), Hebron, Bethlehem and Ramallah in their itinerary. Tlaib and Omar, either explicitly or implicitly through association, would have likely supported the following messages on this trip:
  • Arabs and the world entire should boycott Israel à la BDS.
  • The PLO/P.A.'s presence in Jerusalem is legitimate (given that the tour was sponsored by Ashrawi).
  • Israel economically oppresses the Arabs of Hebron (a canard debunked here).
  • Israeli "settlers" are occupiers of Judea and Samaria, despite the fact that they aren't and that they have an inalienable right to build there.
  • Arabs should build in Area C of Judea and Samaria, despite the P.A. and Israel agreeing under the Oslo Accords that Area C is solely under Israeli civil and military control.
  • The security barrier is immoral, despite its success in reducing Arab terror attacks in Israel by over 90 percent.
  • All descendants of Arabs fleeing Israel during Israel's War of Independence have a right to return to Israel. If realized, this would destroy Israel through demography.
  • Arab violence against Israel is justified, as both Tlaib and Omar have insinuated in the past.
Each of the above is an intransigent position that demonizes Israel, does not promote peace, and is not in America's best interest.

Not a Muslim Ban, but a Bigot Ban

Contrary to what Omar would like you to believe, Israel's decision to deny entry to Omar and Tlaib is not a "Muslim ban." Over 72,000 Muslims visited Israel last year, most of which are from countries that have no diplomatic relations with the Jewish State. Given the incessant diplomatic, trade, and cultural boycott of Israel from most of the Muslim world, this number is quite impressive and shows a growing number of Muslims willing to break from the hatred of their co-religionists. Some of the higher profile Muslim visits to Israel included:
  • Mohammad Saud and five other Saudi diplomats visited Israel on invitation of Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs in July. Israel welcomed them with open arms, while Palestinians assaulted Mr. Saud in the streets of Jerusalem.
  • Forty Muslim leaders and activists from France and Belgium visited Samaria on invitation of the Samaria Regional Council (i.e., "the settlers") in June. Included in the group was French imam Hassen Chalghoumi and Sheikh Nasr Abu Khalil Al-Tamimi from Ramallah, both opponents of BDS.
  • Italian imam Yahya Sergio Yahe Pallavicini visited Jerusalem in March 2018 to attend a conference on anti-Semitism.
Israel would no doubt host any of its Muslim supporters and has done so in the past. But those Muslims support Israel's right to exist and do not wish it harm. Rather than a Muslim ban, Israel's decision was a "bigot ban."


Israel has every right to deny entry to anyone that seeks to do it harm. The United States has similarly barred several people from entering its borders based on ideology, including BDS-supporters Omar Barghouti and Hanan Ashrawi, both this year. Such is the right of any democracy. Israel made the right move in denying Omar and Tlaib their platform, and also by calling Tlaib's bluff by offering her a humanitarian visa to enter Israel. Omar's and Tlaib's opinions are nothing short of anti-Semitic and will only hurt prospects for peace in the region.

Steve Postal


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Hamas is playing with fire on two fronts - Yoav Limor

by Yoav Limor

For the first time in a long while, Israel must contend with heightened tensions in Judea and Samaria and Gaza. The recent terrorist attacks in Judea and Samaria can be tied to Hamas' efforts to fan the flames but the Palestinian street in Gaza is still largely apathetic, and Israel must choose its responses wisely.

The string of recent events leaves no room for doubt: The Palestinian arena is trending in a clear and dangerous direction, and for the first time in a while, Israel must cope with combustible situations in both Gaza and Judea and Samaria.

In theory, the two sectors are unrelated. The terrorist who carried out the car-ramming attack in Gush Etzion on Friday acted alone and without direction from any terrorist organization. It's possible he was inspired by the terrorists who a week earlier murdered IDF soldier Dvir Sorek in the same area, and took the opportunity to run over the young hitchhikers standing on the side of the road.

Nevertheless, the ramming attack (like the one before it) can still be traced back to Hamas. The terrorist organization was quick to hail the attack, stating it was the result of the struggle for the Temple Mount. These two words – Temple Mount – are a proven recipe for incitement, certainly during the Muslim week of Eid al-Adha, which traditionally sparks regional tensions anyway.

Thus far these terrorist attacks haven't roused the Palestinian public from its general state of apathy. Judea and Samaria hasn't seen riots or a rise in violent activities (stone-throwing, fire bombings), but Israel cannot ignore the rise in serious terrorist attacks, and especially their contagious effect. For now, decision-makers are still refraining from bolstering forces stationed in Judea and Samaria, but increased vigilance is indeed required to prevent additional attacks.

In Gaza, too, the general public remains largely disengaged from recent events. The border demonstration on Friday was "normal," without an unusual number of participants, but the rocket fire on Friday and Saturday is already a different story. While Friday's rocket (which was intercepted) was dismissed within the defense establishment as "yet another act by recalcitrant and disillusioned jihadists" – similar to the infiltration attempts that were foiled in recent weeks – then Saturday's rocket barrage cannot merely be attributed to the neighborhood nut job: There was a guiding hand behind it, or at the very least a blind eye was intentionally turned.

For numerous reasons, Israel doesn’t want another war in Gaza. Hamas understands this, and similar to election-day eve in April, it wants to exploit the situation. It is simultaneously stirring the pot in Judea and Samaria – calling on the masses to take to the streets and carry out attacks, while funding and directing its cells to take immediate action – while continuing to play its familiar game of raising and lowering the flames in Gaza.

Israel will not restrain itself from responding to the rocket attack on Sderot, just as it didn't restrain itself on Friday. However, the game it now has to play is more complex than simple tit-for-tat use of force. If it responds too softly, Hamas will perceive weakness and continue applying pressure in order to win concessions (from more money to easing restrictions at the border crossings, and other matters that can help it improve Gaza's dire economic and humanitarian situation). If Israel responds too harshly, it could become enmeshed in another undesired military campaign, which considering the recent uptick in tensions could also spark a serious escalation in Judea and Samaria.

Regardless, the government and IDF's first and foremost obligation is to the residents of the south. A reality of intermittent rocket attacks on Gaza-adjacent communities is intolerable; it needs to be extinguished immediately, even at the cost of an escalation – with all its inherent risks. If Israel is indeed forced to fight another war in Gaza, better for it to happen while schoolchildren are on summer vacation and residents can be easily relocated to other parts of the country; and when operational conditions are relatively convenient from the army's perspective (just two weeks ago, the Gaza Division concluded a large exercise and declared it was more ready than ever for a fight).

It's desirable, of course, for Israel to calm the situation in the south before it boils over into a broad conflagration – as it has done several times in the past 18 months. To this end, Israel can also grant additional leeway to Egyptian mediators and United Nations envoys. But all this must result in one clear stipulation: Hamas won't be able to play with fire all by itself anymore. If it continues to play with fire (in Judea and Samaria, Gaza, or both) it will be engulfed by a flame that is far worse.

Yoav Limor


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Drug Trafficking Feeds the Ayatollah's Power - Aynaz Anni Cyrus and Kaveh Taheri

by Aynaz Anni Cyrus and Kaveh Taheri

For the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, the drug trade is just another weapon of choice which they take as legitimate, as it helps to advance the cause of Islam.

Global drug trafficking generates at least $426 billion to $652 billion per year, making it one of the most lucrative illicit markets in the world. So of course, those profits tempt the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) thugs to use the drug trade to fund the terror activities that got them recently designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the United States.

Demand for drugs has become global. The market for cocaine in Asia and Africa has increased, as their economies have grown. The civil wars in the Middle East now provide an extraordinary opportunity for drug dealers, who find smuggling drugs to be easy through shattered controls at the borders.

Drug trafficking is a serious challenge for the world, and directly involves the IRGC, as even a former IRGC chief affirmed. Iranian officials have been silent on such testimony, neither confirming nor denying it. While quite boldly last year, the regime-proclaimed “moderate” President Rouhani implicitly threatened that if sanctions were to intensify, they would use terrorism and drugs.

International drug dealers collaborate with the IRGC. The IRGC passes narcotics (often opium) from Afghanistan through Iran and out to the rest of the world. On a wider scale, it ships heroin and cocaine to and from South America and East Asian countries.

The history of the IRGC's drug trafficking dates back to the Iran-Iraq war of 1980 to 1989. Soon after taking power, the corrupt Islamic regime in Tehran had begun to move foreign currency in pursuit of profits through illicit trade deals. These included the narcotics business. During the early 1980s, it quickly ramped up the drug trade, as its need to finance the war became urgent.
The IRGC gets billions of dollars by drug trafficking. It now holds the monopoly of narcotics trafficking in Iran. The Revolutionary Guard and its foreign branch Quds Force are involved in collusion with major drug cartels in South America and East Asia. Drug trafficking has become a normal operation among Guard Corps commanders, and many of them are directly involved in the illicit trade. That involvement was exposed as far back as 2012, with the United States Treasury Department press release, “Treasury Designates Iranian Quds Force General Overseeing Afghan Heroin Trafficking Through Iran.”

The IRGC produces heroin and morphine in Iran from imported Afghan opium, much of it from Taliban-controlled areas, and smuggles it around the world by both air and sea routes. The terrorist organization uses its unlimited logistics powers within its shipping companies and airlines to transport illegal goods, including drugs. The IRGC also uses buses and trucks to export drugs through neighboring countries, under the guise of sending supplies for ritual ceremonies abroad.

The IRGC operates drug flow pipelines through its wide control of transit routes, ports, air-sea borders, as well as illegal networks, and fictitious companies set up for doing business to Europe, Asia, and Southeast Asia.

Its proxies, like Hezb’allah, also engage in the trade, taking the business as far as South America. Hezb’allah sends cocaine from South America to the EU, which brings significant profits in that hard-foreign currency back to the Islamic regime’s war chest.

It also uses Iran’s “diplomatic immunity” to transport narcotics around the world.

Reports are that the IRGC even hauls drugs around in vehicles with diplomatic immunity. Or, they rely on bribes to security agents at the customs ports. Shipments are sent in bulk to Albania, Romania, and Bulgaria via airways, and then broken down into smaller packages in trucks, for transfer and distribution to the west.

The terrorist organization also produces opium by cultivating poppy plants in Iran. The Islamic regime’s ICT minister, Mohammad-Javad Azari Jahromi recently announced that “a 70-hectare farm was found in Iran, where Poppy is cultivated." So in the same way that neighboring Afghanistan has become infamous as a source for the drug, the IRGC has transformed Iran from a transit country into a producer country.

The IRGC also feeds massive levels of drug addiction inside Iran. By import, production, and distribution, drugs in Iran are weaponized against society by the IRGC. The addictions reduce motivation for protest among the huge youth segment especially and the constant flow of money is a steady income source for its regional militaristic goals.

So while the repressive regime is losing foreign currency inflows after the Trump administration’s tightening of oil-waivers, the mullahs increasingly must rely on drug trafficking to fund their weapons and terror programs.

The regime poisons the world and uses the profits to kill global villagers, including its own citizens. As an international criminal network, the IRGC also involves itself in human trafficking, smuggling weapons, fuel, and other illicit goods to gain money for Tehran, to continue its malicious ambitions.

Publicly, the regime postures against the drug trade. It releases news of drugs seizures and lies to the UN Office on Drugs and Crime and the EU that it is preventing transmission of drugs to the West. But local sources confirm that the officials return confiscated drugs back into the consumption cycle for both the internal market and abroad.

In service to the Islamic agenda of domination, they recognize no limits on what they might do, no matter how awful the results become for either the Iranian people or for humanity as a whole. For the IRGC, the drug trade is just another weapon of choice which they take as legitimate, as it helps to advance the cause of Islam. And in that end, it is destabilizing the region and the rest of the globe.

Aynaz Anni Cyrus, an Iranian-American human rights activist, National Director of American Truth Project, founder of Live up to Freedom and producer of The Glazov Gang .. Anni was sold for $50 as a child bride in Iran. Rebelling against a life of sex slavery, she escaped to America. Now an American citizen, she is a leading spokeswoman against the evils of Islam.

Kaveh Taheri (Twitter: @TaheriKaveh), co-founder and chairman of the ICBHR.Com, and American Truth Project contributor, is a Turkey-based Iranian Human Rights researcher and journalist who has worked exclusively on Middle East. Kaveh, who was a former political prisoner in Shiraz, had been sent to prison for his writings and statements on his Websites and Weblogs in Iran and fled the country through Turkey to save his life.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Amazon’s CEO Owns a Terror-Linked Paper - Daniel Greenfield

by Daniel Greenfield

The Washington Post’s ties to Islamic terrorists are a national security risk.

Millions of Americans brought Alexa into their homes only to learn, belatedly, that not only software, but human beings, were listening in on them. Amazon employees and contractors from Costa Rica to India were caught reviewing thousands of recordings, of casual requests, private conversations and intimate moments, and sharing clips that they thought were funny in chat sessions with each other.

The Amazon product is always listening and maintains recordings of your conversations indefinitely.

But now there’s something bigger at stake than privacy violations. Amazon expects a $10 billion cloud contract for the military. The $10 billion contract was a sweetheart deal for a politically influential company that seemed unstoppable until President Trump suddenly slammed the brakes on JEDI.

The deal had always been dubious and many critics had questioned how or why a single company could expect to have a monopoly on the JEDI cloud for the United States military. Amazon’s cloud business is huge, but the Capital One breach of 100 million credit card applications by a former Amazon employee highlighted the company’s security and workforce issues. Capital One kept its data in the cloud through AWS or Amazon Web Services and the hacker was a former AWS employee with specialized knowledge.

In the Obama era, Amazon had received a $600 million cloud contract that covers all 17 intelligence agencies. The secret deal was met with protests especially since Amazon’s wasn’t even the lowest bid.

Just as with JEDI, all the national security eggs were being put into one very fragile basket.
Amazon’s federal cloud contracts took off in the Obama era. Many of the biggest contracts are classified making it difficult to measure how much taxpayer money is being sucked into the Bezos business. But Amazon is winning contracts in the usual Washington D.C. way, by spending millions a year on lobbying.

The dot com titan began lobbying the Pentagon in 2016. That was the year Amazon’s lobbying expenditures hit a whopping $11 million, up from $1.62 million during the Bush administration. Amazon’s PAC, which the company strongly encourages employees to donate to, accounted for $515,200 in donations to members of Congress.

Amazon was the fourth biggest contributor to Senator Mark Warner. And when President Trump put Amazon’s JEDI deal on hold, Warner was among the first to protest the move. In his letter, Warner urged the Secretary of Defense to “resist political pressures” that might scuttle $10 billion for Amazon.

Senator Warner, who was applying political pressure to the Secretary of Defense, to protect a contract that would benefit his contributors, appeared to be unaware of the irony of his message.

But Amazon’s lobbying millions were only the tip of the iceberg of its dubious political influence.

Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos is not only the richest person in the world, with an estimated $156 billion, but is a heavyweight political donor who has outspent other S&P 500 CEOs by a factor of 10. Bezos was the 12th biggest political donor of the 2018 cycle, coming in behind Bloomberg and Soros.

And, even more importantly, Bezos owns the Washington Post. The powerful political tabloid sets the agenda in the government city, but it’s also raising questions about whether Amazon is a security risk for reasons that go far beyond the flaws in AWS or whatever influence it might have used to grab JEDI.

In its story on the JEDI contract, the Washington Post claimed that, “Trump on several occasions has spoken out against Amazon and its chief executive, Jeff Bezos. And he has attacked the Bezos-owned Washington Post for its coverage of him by conflating it with Amazon’s interests.”

Then the Washington Post went on to complain that, “The president has called the news organization the ‘Amazon Washington Post,’ while accusing it of publishing ‘fake news’ and being a ‘lobbyist newspaper’ for the company.” A rumor that the Washington Post helpfully put to bed by doing just that.

But the real problem with the intersection between the Washington Post and Amazon isn’t its left-wing politics: it’s Jamal Khashoggi. A year after Amazon began lobbying the Pentagon, the Washington Post began publishing propaganda screeds in support of the Muslim Brotherhood, shaped by the Qatar Foundation, under the name of Jamal Khashoggi.

The Washington Post was aware that Khashoggi, an old friend of Osama bin Laden and longtime supporter of Islamic terrorism, was operating under Qatari influence. It was also aware that Qatar was the region’s biggest backer of Sunni Islamic terrorism and regime change influence operations. Its publication of Qatari propaganda under Khashoggi’s name and its subsequent insistence on transforming him into a martyr as part of the Qatari influence operation against Saudi Arabia, was an active attempt to influence United States foreign policy on behalf of an enemy government.

It’s behavior properly associated with registered foreign agents. Not an American media outlet.

A company that appears to be operating as an unregistered foreign agent for an enemy government cannot then turn around and have its owner’s company be trusted with the military’s JEDI cloud.

Why the Washington Post chose to participate in the Qatari influence operation is an open question. Until it’s resolved, allowing another company controlled by its owner to have sole dominion over the military cloud, as it already possesses over our intelligence cloud, is an unacceptable security risk.

The issue at stake is about more than whether Amazon or Microsoft get a $10 billion contract.

Our national security has already been badly compromised by the radical employees of contractors, Edward Snowden and Reality Winner. Snowden and Winner both compromised national security through the auspices of The Intercept, a site funded by Franco-Iranian dot com billionaire Pierre Omidyar. The Intercept has also been a notorious vehicle for Qatari influence operations.

Putting the military cloud in the hands of a compromised company could be truly devastating.

The Washington Post has an unfortunate history of acting as an advocate for Qatar and for Islamic terrorists in general. It has run countless pieces in support of the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood has multiple terrorist affiliates and is dedicated to subverting our political system.  

The Post was criticized for running an op-ed by Mohammed Ali al-Houthi, the leader of Yemen’s Houthi terrorists, who are backed by Iran, who have attacked Americans, and who chant, “Death to America”.

Earlier it had been condemned for publishing an op-ed from Ahrar al-Sham, an Islamic guerrilla group that had worked with Al Qaeda. One of the founding members of the armed jihadist group went on to head the Al Qaeda affiliate in Syria. Even Secretary of State John Kerry had condemned it, saying, “From Orlando to San Bernardino to the Philippines and Bali, we’ve seen pictures and we’ve heard testimony of shocking crimes committed by al-Qaida, by Boko Haram, by Jaysh al-Islam, by Ahrar al-Sham, by al-Shabaab, Daesh, other groups against innocent civilians, against journalists, and against teachers.”

But the Washington Post didn’t just offer op-ed space to brutal terrorists, it whitewashed them.

It ran a glowing profile of Salah Badi, a Libyan Islamist terrorist who had been sanctioned by the Treasury Department and the UN Security Council for rocket attacks that had killed civilians.

The Washington Post described the brutal Islamist killer as "one of Tripoli's defenders".

Even when it came to ISIS, the Washington Post ran an article headlined, "ISIS kidnapped my best friend. But when I met its fighters, I couldn’t hate them."

The Post ran an article touting Ismail Royer, who had been caught with weapons on September 2001, and had been convicted as part of the Virginia Jihad Network.

Last year, even the Taliban praised the Washington Post for giving the terror group credibility.

The Washington Post provides terrorists with a forum, whitewashes them and maintains an inappropriate relationship with state sponsors of Islamic terror. A company that shares a common leader with an organization with troubling terror ties should not control the military’s JEDI cloud.

The risks to our national security and the lives of our soldiers would be incalculable.

While American soldiers battle the Taliban in Afghanistan, the military’s JEDI cloud should not belong to a company that shares a leader with a paper that was praised by the Taliban.

While American sailors battle the Houthis in Yemen, the JEDI cloud should not be exposed to a company that shares a leader with an organization that provided the Houthis with a forum.

While American pilots go after Al Qaeda, ISIS and its allies in Syria, they should not be relying on JEDI cloud that shares a leader with an outlet that opened its doors to Al Qaeda’s allies.

Amazon’s JEDI bid is a threat to national security as long as its CEO is involved with a propaganda outlet for foreign terrorist groups and foreign governments that are waging a war against the United States.

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Trump's tough China diplomacy extends also to supporting Taiwan - Tiberiu Dianu

by Tiberiu Dianu

President Trump is not letting China push Taiwan around on his watch.

Taiwan-mainland China relations (also known as Cross-Strait relations) have been always complex and controversial. As Hong Kong unrest and China trade ties dominate the news, how the U.S. is dealing with Taiwan is worth a close look, too, given President Trump's muscular stance with China. And the news is good.

In 1949, as a result of a civil war, China was split into two entities: mainland China (People’s Republic of China/PRC) and Taiwan (Republic of China/ROC). The civil war merely stopped without the formal signing of any peace treaty and the two sides are technically still in a state of war. Since then, relations between Beijing and Taipei have been characterized by limited contact, tension, and instability.

During these years, communist China has used its traditional “panda diplomacy” with Taiwan (offering panda bears as gifts). The gifts of pandas were attempts by the administration in Beijing to draw the Taiwanese government into its “united front” in spite of the fact that the administrations in Taipei often have supported Taiwanese independence and opposed unification with the People’s Republic of China. 

By comparing Taiwan to China in international policy, the idea of underdog comes naturally in our mind. But in American culture, underdogs are highly regarded. They appear in the Judeo-Christian parable of David and Goliath and also reflect the ideal behind the American dream, where the poor and weak can use hard work to achieve victory. 

That is why Taiwan-United States relations have always been strong and durable, in spite of some ups and downs.

In 1979, during the Democratic administration (1977-1981) of President Jimmy Carter, the United States normalized diplomatic relations with the Beijing government under the Communist Party of China. Under the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979, the Taiwan-United State relations became unofficial and informal.

In 1982, during the Republican administration (1981-1989) of President Ronald Reagan, United States-Taiwan relations were further informally grounded in the Six Assurances in response to the third communiqué on the establishment of U.S.-PRC relations. The Assurances were intended to reassure both Taiwan and the United States Congress that the United States would continue to support Taiwan even if it had earlier cut formal diplomatic relations. 

Donald Trump took rapid steps to make the U.S. relations with Taiwan even more robust, starting before his January 2017 presidential inauguration. On Dec. 2, 2016, President-elect Trump accepted a congratulatory call from Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-Wen, which was the first time since 1979 that a president-elect has publicly spoken to a leader of Taiwan. Trump stated the call was regarding “the close economic, political and security ties between Taiwan and the U.S.” 

On March 16, 2018, President Trump signed the Taiwan Travel Act, under which relations between the United States and Taiwan have since maneuvered to an official and high-level basis. 

In June 2018, a new $250 million compound for the American Institute in Taiwan was unveiled. The Chinese authorities considered this action as violation of “one China” policy statement and insisted the United States to stop any relations with Taiwan without the approbation of China.

On July 17, 2018, Taiwan’s army officially commissioned all of its Apache attack helicopters purchased from the United States, at cost of $1.94 billion, having completed the necessary pilot training and verification on the fleet’s combat capability. Taiwanese President Tsai said the commissioning of the Apaches were “an important milestone” in meeting the island’s “multiple deterrence” strategy to counter an invasion and to resist Beijing’s pressure with support from Washington, which has been concerned about Beijing’s growing military expansion in the South China Sea and beyond. 

In September 2018, the United States approved the sale of $330 million worth of spare parts and other equipment to sustain the Taiwan air force.

In July 2019, the U.S. State department approved the sale of M1A2T Abrams tanks, Stinger missiles and related equipment to Taiwan, at an approximate value of $2.2 billion. 
More recently, the Trump administration, which China has been verbally attacking for weeks, now has plans to sell $8 billion worth of new F-16 fighter jets to Taiwan. The F-16V is the most advanced version of a plane that already forms the backbone of Taiwan’s air forces. Taiwan is expected to use the F-16V to replace the Northrop F-5E/Fs that are being retired in the next couple of years. 

On August 16, 2019, the State Department submitted the package to Congress for informal review, and it is not expected to meet opposition. It would be the largest and most significant sale of weaponry to Taiwan in decades. There is a mandatory 30-calendar day formal review process before state can issue a letter of offer and acceptance to Taiwan for the sale. Taiwan is under increasing pressure from the People’s Republic of China, so the sale is critical to improving the country’s ability to defend its sovereign air space. Also, the sale sends a strong message about the U.S. commitment to security and democracy in the entire Indo-Pacific region.

China is expected to vehemently object this last deal, since China never likes U.S. arms sales to Taiwan. In May 2019, the Beijing communist regime already threatened to retaliate against the United States for limiting the federal dollars spent on Chinese products. The People’s Daily, the Chinese Communist Party’s official journal, intimated that China would stop exporting “rare earth” minerals to the United States, writing: “Don’t say we didn’t warn you!” That phrase has been historically used by the Chinese Communist Party to threaten armed warfare. The reply was not long in coming. On August 5, 2019, the U.S. Treasury Department announced that it had declared China a currency manipulator. 

Recently, according to a spokesman for the United States Pacific Fleet, China banned two U.S. warships from visiting Hong Kong and accused members of Congress from both parties of being “the black hand” behind the protesters in Hong Kong rallying against the government of communist China.

Over the years tiny Taiwan has managed not only to survive, but to give enough headaches to the behemoth which is China. What they say about “small leaks sink great ships” or “little strokes fell great oaks” applies perfectly to the Taiwan-China relationship.

It’s a sign that Chinese “panda diplomacy” is not that infallible any more.

Tiberiu Dianu has published several books and a host of articles on law, politics, and post-communist societies. He currently lives and works in Washington, DC and can be followed on MEDIUM.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Watch: Gaza terrorists infiltrate Israel - Ido Ben Porat

by Ido Ben Porat

IDF publishes footage of armed Gaza terrorists attempting to cross into Israel Saturday night.

The IDF on Sunday published footage showing terrorists attempting to infiltrate Israel Saturday night.

The five armed terrorists, who attempted to enter Israel from northern Gaza, were spotted by IDF observers.

IDF forces shot at the terrorists, eliminating three of them.

According to the IDF, five terrorists were involved in the infiltration attempt.
No Israeli troops were injured.

Gaza terrorists attempt to infiltrate Israel IDF spokesperson

Gaza terrorists attempt to infiltrate Israel IDF spokesperson

Ido Ben Porat


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Hezbollah and Iran taking over southern Syria - Mendi Safadi

by Mendi Safadi

In retaliation for US sanctions on Iran, Hezbollah has increased its presence along the Israeli border so that it can attack the Jewish state at Tehran’s bidding.

One year after the Syrian government and its allies took over southern Syria, there has been increased infiltration of the area by Iranian-supported militias along the border with Israel, an area of great geopolitical importance. In retaliation for US sanctions on Iran, Hezbollah has adopted new methods and ways in order to exercise its influence in the area. These include increasing its presence along the Israeli border so it can attack the Jewish attack at Tehran’s bidding. However, the manner in which it is increasing its presence along Israel’s border is very complicated and cunning. In order to expose Iran and its proxies, such as Hezbollah, human intelligence on the ground is needed to expose the degree to which these proxies are approaching the Israeli border.

Four Lebanese Hezbollah militia bases were established in southern Syria over the past year – three in the Daraa Governorate and one in the Quneitra Governorate. These bases train new volunteers for the militias and are among the main armament facilities for the militia in southern Syria.
  1. In early 2019, a big Hezbollah airbase was established in Daraa, similar to the military airbase next to Kraiym, north of Lajat. The militia dug many tunnels and facilities inside of bases, using them as special training bases for new fighters. Two of the officers in the camp, Adel and Rashid, have Lebanese citizenship. In addition, a number of trainers have Lebanese citizenship. There are eight trainers, who cooperate with officers that are part of the ninth company of Syria's military and with officers from the National Security Division, who ensure transport and supply routes.
  2. A general base was established in early September after the Al-Namar militia forces expelled the population from a number of villages in the area of Lajat. They emptied these villages of their residents under the pretext that they included ISIS elements, and then Hezbollah transformed the civilian homes into military barracks.
    The ninth and fifth companies of Syria's army are under the direct control of El Haj Abu Hadi, one of the most prominent Hezbollah members in southern Syria. In addition, Hezbollah uses this base as a weapons and ammunition facility for short- and medium-range rocket launchers. These weapons were stored in Iraq and then transferred with the assistance of the Asaib Ahl Al Haq militia from Al-Dumayr Military Airport on the outskirts of Damascus to the area of Lajat.
  3. The 52nd Brigade was established in January 2019 after the withdrawal of Hezbollah forces from Al-Zabadani and the Rima farms that surround it. They transformed the retreating forces into the 52nd Brigade near the town of Al-Hrak, northeast of Daraa, under the command of Yad Kassem, a Lebanese citizen living in Kirak. He is guarded by a soldier who is part of the Syrian Air Force Intelligence Unit.
  4. Sabir Base was established in late 2018 under the direct supervision of Mustafa Mughniyeh, an officer in charge of the Hezbollah's Golan Heights portfolio, whose father Imad and brother Jihad were both Hezbollah leaders killed in attacks attributed to Israel. This base is under the command of the Golan Unit, which belongs to the 90th Brigade of the Syrian Army and is located between the villages of Hader and Harfa, north of Quneitra.
Hezbollah established these bases in order to obtain widespread control over the region. They seek to obtain regional domination on behalf of the Iranian regime with the assistance of families who utilize child soldiers. In recent months, Hezbollah has recruited hundreds of residents of the Quneitra region. Hezbollah also supplied spy equipment and listening devices at the beginning of this year to locals so that they could observe their enemies and also has a number of Hezbollah fighters with Lebanese citizenship based in the area. The Sokor Al Quneitra Division, which is close to Hezbollah, guarantees a supply route from the Set Zaynab area on the outskirts of Damascus and from the Erneh region south of Mount Hermon. A table showing these groups spreading along the border with the Golan Heights is in the possession of the Safadi Center but we chose not to publish it for security reasons.

In any event, Israel’s struggle to repel these groups from the Golan Heights border is of critical importance. The presence of these groups in the region poses an existential threat. It is of great importance that Israel nip this threat in the bud and defend its security interests along the Israeli border. Failure to do so will strengthen Iranian hegemony in the Middle East. This is why Israel has been attacking Iran in Syria and must continue to do so.

Mendi Safadi


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Govt. to increase funding for Western Wall excavations - Arutz Sheva Staff

by Arutz Sheva Staff

NIS 16 million to be added to budget for 5 Year Plan to upgrade infrastructure, encourage tourism at Western Wall Plaza.

Wilson's Arch excavations
Wilson's Arch excavations
Yaniv Berman, Israel Antiquities Authority

The Cabinet Ministers will approve a call today (Sunday) to further increase the budget of the Five Year Plan to upgrade infrastructure and encourage visits to the Western Wall plaza.

The original budget of the plan, approved by the government in 2015, stood at NIS 100 million for the 5 years between 2016 and 2020, which is the second addition to this budget.

The current addition, of NIS 16 million, will come from the Ministry of Finance's budget (NIS 4 million in 2019) and the Ministry of Tourism's budget (NIS 6 million in 2019 and NIS 6 million in 2020).

According to the resolution, the budget addition is intended "for the construction and development of the Western Wall and the Western Wall tunnels, including the exposure and preservation of archaeological finds and other issues as decided."

The proposal also makes it clear that the budget that the Ministry of Tourism, NIS 12 million, will be used to finance works to expose the Western Wall's restaurant blocks at the foot of Wilson's Arch.

Arutz Sheva Staff


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Ex-Muslim to ‘Post’: Trying to teach ‘naive West’ about true nature of Islam - Hannah Gal

by Hannah Gal

“In Muslim communities, the word for Jew is not only used as a pejorative, it is used as a curse word. It is a hate that permeates so much so that it is invisible: It is just accepted."

Yasmine Mohammed
Yasmine Mohammed. (photo credit: Courtesy)

Yasmine Mohammed has a story that sounds like an adventure novel. The ex-Muslim, as she calls herself, escaped a forced marriage to an Al Qaeda operative, who was bailed out of prison by Osama bin Laden himself.

Now, the author of Confessions of an Ex-Muslim is open about her past so she can help others, she told The Jerusalem Post. Mohammed says that she is on a mission to help closeted apostates living in Muslim-majority countries, and to teach the “naive West” about the true nature of Islam. 

The educator and author has become a prominent voice within the growing global ex-Muslim community, speaking extensively to audiences worldwide.

It all started when she was a child.

Mohammed grew up in Canada. Her typical Western childhood was interrupted when her mother married a devout Muslim; the little girl went from riding her bike and going swimming to wearing a hijab and enduring beatings for not memorizing the Quran.

Years later, under the torment of a horrific forced marriage, she would risk her life braving an escape in a bid to rescue her daughter from the threat of female genital mutilation.

“I lived every aspect of Islam up to actually being a jihadi,” said Mohammed. “I was the embodiment of an extremist Muslim. To see someone like me change so resolutely to a person who is in many ways the complete antithesis of who I was, speaks to the power of human resilience.”

Hannah Gal


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter