Sunday, March 18, 2018

The New Palestinian Jihad to Obliterate Israel - Bassam Tawil

by Bassam Tawil

The PIJ views the Muslim Brotherhood as being too "pragmatic," largely because of the latter's failure to engage in a worldwide jihad against Jews and all infidels.

  • If and when Hamas is ever removed from power in the Gaza Strip, Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) will most likely seize control of the coastal enclave, where nearly two million Palestinians live.
  • PIJ's new "political document" exposes the Palestinian terror group's plan for "real peace" in the Middle East. This "real peace," according to the jihadi group, can be achieved by eliminating Israel after "liberating Palestine, from the river to the sea, and after the original owners of the land return to their homes."
  • This genocidal "peace" plan appears to be shared by other Palestinian terror groups, such as Hamas, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine and even certain parts of Mahmoud Abbas's ruling Fatah faction.
The Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) group is the second-largest terror group in the Gaza Strip after Hamas. Like Hamas, PIJ does not recognize Israel's right to exist and believes that violence and terrorism are the only way to "liberate all Palestine, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River."

Like Hamas, in the past three decades PIJ has carried out thousands of terror attacks against Israel, including suicide bombings.

Recently, the PIJ wished to remind us again of its dangerous and poisonous ideology. This reminder came in the form of a new "political document" published by the Iranian-backed terror group in the Gaza Strip.

The document contains important information about the group's strategy to destroy Israel and provides insight into the role Islam plays in the Israeli-Arab conflict.

Some may argue that there is nothing new in the PIJ document. However, PIJ is not just another Palestinian "resistance" faction, as some Middle East experts tend to describe it. Rather, it is one of the most dangerous Palestinian terror groups. It aspires to eliminate Israel and kill as many Jews as possible.

If and when Hamas is ever removed from power in the Gaza Strip, PIJ will most likely seize control of the coastal enclave, where nearly two million Palestinians live.

Western journalists often ignore the power and threat of PIJ, mainly because the representatives of the terror group rarely give interviews to the foreign media.

Besides, it is easier for Western journalists to take the short trip from Jerusalem to Ramallah to interview a Palestinian Authority official, who uses his or her fluent English to lie about the Palestinians' desire for peace and coexistence with Israel.

Western journalists rarely, if ever, present to their readers and viewers what the terrorists preach to their own people.

That is precisely why there is a need to bring the main points of the PIJ document to the attention of the international media and decision-makers around the world. The PIJ is a major player in the Palestinian arena, and its political and military power can be ignored only at great peril.

Pictured: Members of Palestinian Islamic Jihad hold a parade in Gaza City. (Photo by Spencer Platt/Getty Images)

Here is what the preface to the terror group's document states:
"Palestine is the homeland of the Palestinian people, from the early days of history. Palestine is an integral part of the Arab and Islamic homeland, and it was usurped by the Zionist Jews with the support and encouragement of Western colonialist powers."
Explaining the timing of the publication of its document, PIJ said:
"To maintain a clear vision and the unity of our goals, away from intellectual chaos dominating the Palestinian landscape, Palestinian Islamic Jihad saw the need to formulate this document to explain and affirm the intellectual basis and features governing its jihad and policies."
Translation: the PIJ fears that it has fallen off the world's radar. It worries that its ideology and plans to destroy Israel may be lost amid the "intellectual chaos" plaguing the Palestinian arena.

Defining its ultimate mission, PIJ says in its new document:
"Our number-one priority and main task is to carry out the duty of jihad and resistance to liberate Palestine. We are an Islamic national liberation movement and part of the Palestinian people's and Muslim's jihad against invaders and colonialists. We see ourselves as being part of the general Islamic trend in the world, which regards Islam as the source of our power and pride."
Which "Islamic trend" the Palestinian terror group is talking about is not clear. Does it referring to the Islamic State terror group, ISIS, which has slaughtered tens of thousands of innocent civilians, mostly Muslims, in the past few years? Or perhaps the PIJ is referring to Al Qaeda, the murderous terror group founded by Osama bin Laden?

What is certain, however, is that PIJ is not referring to the Muslim Brotherhood organization. Why? Because PIJ believes that Muslim Brotherhood's ideology and policies are too "moderate" compared with its genocidal agenda. Ironically, the PIJ views the Muslim Brotherhood as being too "pragmatic," largely because of the latter's failure to engage in a worldwide jihad against Jews and all infidels.

The PIJ document, which the Western media is doing a fine job ignoring, states:
"Palestine is an Arab, Islamic land, where the Arabs and Muslims possess natural religious and historic rights. It is forbidden to give it up or compromise it under any pretext."
The Jews, the document emphasizes, "have no right in the land of Palestine." It says that the fact that some Arabs and Muslims have recognized Israel does not give the Jews any right to the land.
"The Palestinian people's right to all their lands and homeland, Palestine, is a comprehensive right that can't be fragmented. This includes our right to own the land, our right to resist and liberate it, and our right to return to it and live in it. No one is entitled to give up the right of the Palestinians to return to their homeland. This is a non-negotiable issue."
The PIJ document views Israel as a Zionist colonialist project imposed on Arabs and Muslims by Western powers. Revealingly, these are the same words that Israel's secular peace partner and the darling of the West, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, recently used in a speech he delivered in Ramallah, during a conference of the Palestine Liberation Organization's Central Council:
"The Europeans wanted to bring the Jews here to preserve their interests in the region. They asked Holland, which has the world's largest fleet, to move the Jews. Israel is a colonial project that has nothing to do with the Jews."
Abbas and PIJ also share more of the same views. In its document, the Palestinian terror group states:
"The Zionist entity is a functional colonialist entity and a tool of the [Western] project to seize control and dominance over Palestine. The source of this entity's power lies with Western parties, especially the US."
The PIJ document defines the conflict with Israel as an "existential conflict, and not a border conflict." The Palestinian cause, it says,
"is not about the Palestinian territories occupied in 1967, or parts of them. Rather, it is the issue of the occupation of the entire land of Palestine, from the river to the sea. It is the central cause of all Arabs and Muslims, and not the Palestinians alone."
In its document, PIJ outlines its plan to achieve its goal through "jihad and resistance against the Zionist enemy, with all means and methods, first and foremost the armed struggle." The armed struggle, it adds, is the "main method and strategy in our struggle."

For those who do not know, "armed struggle" is the euphemism for all forms terrorism, including rocket attacks and suicide bombings. The "armed struggle" also means that a Palestinian terrorist can storm the home of a Jewish family and murder women and children as they prepare dinner.

The PIJ document, which has been distributed among the group's followers in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, also praises suicide bombings against Israel by describing them as the "most noble acts of self-defense."

The document also warns Arabs and Muslims against recognizing Israel's right to exist or establishing any ties with it. "We reject all forms of normalization with the Israeli enemy by any Arab or Muslim," it stresses.

Finally, the document exposes the Palestinian terror group's plan for "real peace" in the Middle East. This "real peace," according to the jihadi group, can be achieved by eliminating Israel after "liberating Palestine, from the river to the sea, and after the original owners of the land return to their homes."

This genocidal "peace" plan appears to be shared by other Palestinian terror groups, such as Hamas, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine and even certain parts of Mahmoud Abbas's ruling Fatah faction.

The peace they seek is one that would result in the total destruction of Israel and the expulsion of all Jews from the Middle East. As the remarks of Abbas and PIJ show, Palestinians see Israel only as an alien body that was imposed upon Arabs and Muslims by imperialist Westerners, and not as people who have lived on that land for more than 3,000 years.

The PIJ document, which serves as the group's "national charter," is a valuable text. Every word in the document reflects the true sentiments on the Arab and Islamic street, especially with regards to recognizing Jews' rights and history.

This is a document that is currently being taught in Islamic Jihad training bases, and schools and mosques. It is a document that will help raise another generation of Palestinians on the glorification of terrorism and anti-Semitism.

This is a document that deserves to be placed on the desks of all those Westerners who continue to tell us that peace is possible and that Israel just needs to make more concessions to achieve that goal.

Bassam Tawil is a Muslim based in the Middle East.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

German Interior Minister: "Islam Does Not Belong to Germany" - Soeren Kern

by Soeren Kern

"Islam is at base a political ideology that is not compatible with the German Constitution." — Beatrix von Storch, Alternative for Germany (AfD)

  • "Islam does not belong to Germany. Germany is shaped by Christianity. This tradition includes work-free Sundays and church holidays and rituals such as Easter, Pentecost and Christmas.... My message is that Muslims have to live with us, not next to or against us." — Horst Seehofer, Germany's new interior minister
  • "Many Muslims belong to Germany, but Islam does not belong to Germany. Islam is at base a political ideology that is not compatible with the German Constitution." — Beatrix von Storch, Alternative for Germany (AfD)
  • "The state must ensure that people feel safe whenever they are in the public realm. People have a right to security. This is our top responsibility. It means that there should not be any no-go areas — areas where no one dares to go. Such areas do exist. We must call them by name. We must do something about it." — German Chancellor Angela Merkel, RTL television, February 26, 2018
Germany's new interior minister, Horst Seehofer, in his first interview since being sworn in on March 14, has said that "Islam does not belong to Germany." He has also vowed to pursue hardline immigration policies, including the implementation of a "master plan" for speedier deportations.

Seehofer's remarks prompted an immediate firestorm of criticism from the self-appointed guardians of German multiculturalism, including from Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has repeatedly insisted that "Islam belongs to Germany."

The backlash will raise questions about how much Seehofer — a former minister-president of Bavaria and a vocal critic of Merkel's open-door migration policies — will be able to accomplish during his tenure.

Germany's new interior minister, Horst Seehofer, whose hardline remarks about immigration elicited harsh criticism from the country's multiculturalists, as well as from Chancellor Angela Merkel. Photo: Wikipedia.

In a March 16 interview with Bild, Germany's largest daily newspaper, Seehofer was asked if Islam belongs to Germany. He responded: "No. Islam does not belong to Germany. Germany is shaped by Christianity. This tradition includes work-free Sundays and church holidays and rituals such as Easter, Pentecost and Christmas."

Seehofer added that Muslims living in Germany are "of course" part of Germany. But that does not mean, he said, "that we therefore, out of false deference, give up our country's traditions and customs." He added: "My message is that Muslims have to live with us, not next to or against us. To achieve that, we need mutual understanding and consideration, which is only achieved by talking to one another."

Seehofer's commonsensical remarks opened yet another chapter in the decade-long debate over the phrase, "Islam belongs to Germany." The words were first uttered in September 2006 — at the time there were 3.5 million Muslims in Germany, compared to more than six million today — by then Interior Minister Wolfgang Schäuble.

Speaking ahead of the first-ever German-Islam Conference, an institutionalized dialogue between representatives of the German government and of Muslims in Germany, Schäuble said:

"Islam is a part of Germany and a part of Europe. Islam is a part of our present and a part of our future. Muslims are welcome in Germany."

The phrase was repeated in October 2010 by Germany's then president, Christian Wulff, during a keynote speech to mark the 20th anniversary of German reunification. Wulff proclaimed that "Islam belongs to Germany" because millions of Muslims now live there:

"Christianity doubtless belongs to Germany. Judaism belongs unequivocally to Germany. This is our Judeo-Christian history. But now Islam also belongs to Germany (Der Islam gehört inzwischen auch zu Deutschland)."

Wulff then quoted the German poet Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, who in his West-Eastern Divan (West–östlicher Diwan, 1819) wrote: "He who knows himself and others will understand: East and West are no longer separable."

Since then, Merkel has repeatedly stressed that "Islam belongs to Germany." During a January 2015 meeting in Berlin with Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, she declared: "Former German President Christian Wulff said: 'Islam belongs to Germany.' That is true. This is also my opinion." Six months later, during Ramadan, Merkel said: "It is indisputably obvious that Islam now belongs to Germany."

The same day that Bild published Seehofer's comments, Merkel, through her spokesman, Steffen Seibert, distanced herself from the new interior minister: "Muslims belong to Germany, their religion also belongs to Germany, Islam too. We must do everything we can to ensure good relations between different religions."

By contrast, the AfD parliamentary leader in Saxony-Anhalt, André Poggenburg, said that Seehofer's statement that well integrated and loyal Muslims belonged to Germany, but that Islam does not, was a "core message" of his party. He said that Seehofer's comments "affirm how right we are."

The deputy leader of the anti-immigration Alternative for Germany (AfD), Beatrix von Storch, has said: "Many Muslims belong to Germany, but Islam does not belong to Germany. Islam is at base a political ideology that is not compatible with the German Constitution."

Alexander Gauland, another deputy leader of the AfD, elaborated: "Islam is not a religion like Catholicism or Protestantism. Intellectually, Islam is always linked to the overthrow of the state. Therefore, the Islamization of Germany poses a threat."

Seehofer has also promised to crack down on criminal migrants and speed up the deportation of migrants whose asylum applications have been rejected. He added: "There must be a consensus throughout Germany that we will no longer tolerate lawless zones."

On February 26, Merkel publicly admitted, for the first time, the existence of no-go zones — lawless areas in German cities where the state has effectively lost control to migrant gangs and where native Germans, including the police, increasingly fear to go. In an interview with RTL television, Merkel said:

"Naturally, the arrival of so many refugees has raised many questions regarding internal security. The state has the monopoly on the legitimate use of physical force (Gewaltmonopol). The state must ensure that people feel safe whenever they are in the public realm. People have a right to security. This is our top responsibility. It means that there should not be any no-go areas — areas where no one dares to go. Such areas do exist. We must call them by name. We must do something about it."

Merkel made the comments after pledging earlier in the day that her new coalition government would adopt a "zero tolerance" policy on homeland security. "Security is not negotiable," she said at a conference of her Christian Democratic Union (CDU) in Berlin. "Security is one of the core tasks of a strong state," she added. "Zero tolerance is our motto."

Some commentators quickly dismissed Merkel's comments as mere empty words — a belated attempt to win back angry CDU voters who have defected en masse to the AfD over her 2015 decision to allow into the country more than a million migrants from Africa, Asia and the Middle East.

Other commentators noted that Merkel's comments on no-go areas reflects of the growing power and influence of the AfD, which, according to a recent INSA poll, has overtaken the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) as the second-largest party in Germany. In fact, Merkel's decision to form a coalition government with the SPD has thrust the AfD into the role of being the main opposition party in the German parliament. The AfD's presence there will almost certainly ensure that migration and security remain top public policy issues.

Arguably the greatest consequence of Merkel's admission is that it has pierced the veil of silence over no-go zones. European political and media elites have long tried to stop discussion of the negative consequences of mass migration by branding opposing voices as racist and xenophobic. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, who has been relentlessly disparaged by Europe's self-appointed guardians of multiculturalism for his politically incorrect stance on mass migration, hailed Merkel's comments as a victory. A blog post on the Hungarian government's website stated:

"Remember that time back in the autumn of 2016 when the government of Hungary had the audacity to talk about 'no-go zones'?

"In voicing our opposition to the EU's compulsory migrant resettlement quotas and policies that would continue to encourage further immigration to Europe, we pointed to the 'no-go zones' found in certain urban areas of western Europe. Inhabited by significant numbers of immigrants, these areas suffer from notoriously high crime rates and are called 'no-go' because local police and authorities are no longer able to maintain public order and security.

"Critics dismissed it as fiction and denounced us as intolerant or worse. How dare that Prime Minister Viktor Orbán draw a link between immigration and a decline in public security....

"Today, it seems this taboo has been broken. Guess who is talking about 'no-go zones'? Chancellor Angela Merkel. In an interview with the daily news program RTL Aktuell, the German chancellor referred specifically to 'no-go zones.' And she also said this: 'Freedom can only prevail if security is guaranteed.'

"Prime Minister Orbán has been saying virtually the same thing for years now when urging Europe to make border security the first priority. If we cannot defend our borders and maintain our security, he has said, then our hard-won liberties — like the freedom of movement in the EU — will be in jeopardy.

"In addition to calling them by name, Chancellor Merkel pledged to adopt a policy of 'zero tolerance' for no-go zones to get to a place where 'there are no public spaces where no one dares to go.'

"That we're finally calling them by name signals a step in the right direction."

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

The sewer of left-wing antisemitism - Melanie Phillips

by Melanie Phillips

David Collier exposed a secret, pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel Facebook group called Palestine Live,  created in 2013. Its members included politicians and other members of the Labour party and the left.

There was only one thing worse than the remarkable revelation of institutionalised antisemitism on the left revealed by David Collier on his website last week. It was the reaction. 

Collier is an indefatigable blogger who spends much of his life immersed in the cesspools of anti-Jewish and Israel-bashing bigotry in British institutions. His aim is to bring the epidemic of open antisemitism to the attention of the wider public. He is positively heroic in subjecting himself to the traumatic effects of wading through all this filth. But last week he took his investigations onto a different level altogether.

His 280-page two-part report, here and here, exposed a secret, pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel Facebook group called Palestine Live, which was created in 2013. Its members included politicians and other members of the Labour party and the left. 

Secret forum

Secrecy was paramount: when one member asked “how safe is this group?” its creator, Elleanne Green, replied: “Very…no one is allowed in who is not trusted…I am very very careful…and it is a Secret Group…so it really is as safe as you will be able to find anywhere…”

The reason for such secrecy immediately becomes apparent from Collier’s expose. One of the first posts – and it was typical – referred to the “barbarian part of that [Jewish] tribe that is lording it over every single government in the word and using their untold wealth to control the agenda for all of us in order to further their nefarious aims for the Jewish state and to wipe out the Palestinians in the process”. Another referred to Jews as a “cancer” who “murder Palestinians” so they can “harvest their organs”. Others claimed that the Jew were behind 9/11 and the 2015 Paris terror attacks.

Group members referenced rabid white supremacists, Holocaust deniers and other far-right sites. They claimed that the blood libel and Protocols of the Elders of Zion were true, that the Rothschilds were a world conspiracy stealing people’s money, that the Jews were behind the two world wars and so on. As Collier asks: “At what point did the British Labour party suddenly develop a fetish for white supremacy?

Mavi Marmara

Floating in the ordure is this little gem of a revelation. Remember the Mavi Marmara affair in 2010, when a boat load of pro-Palestinian activists tried to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza at that time? Israeli commandos boarded the vessel to enforce the blockade. They met resistance and in the ensuing struggle nine passengers were killed and several commandos injured. 

Israel of course was blamed for attacking the activists. But Collier unearthed a post on Palestine Live by Greta Berlin, co-founder and spokesperson for the Free Gaza Movement. Immediately after the incident in 2010, she had told the New York Times that the Israeli commandos dropped onto the deck and “opened fire on sleeping civilians at four in the morning”. 

Yet on this secret Facebook forum, she posted a series of adverse comments about an activist on the boat including this: “He was responsible for some of the deaths on board the Mavi Marmara. Had he not disarmed an Israeli terrorist soldier, they would not have started to fire.”

A good story? Fresh light on what became a serious diplomatic spat between Turkey and Israel? Worthy of being followed up by national media? You think? It’s been ignored, of course.

Anti-Zionist Jews

Collier also unearths the participation in this secret forum of six named Jewish anti-Zionists who provide their services to several anti-Israel groups. Writes Collier: “ SIX Jewish members, wearing approximately SEVENTEEN different hats, in FIVE separate groups. And all members of highly antisemitic secret Facebook Group Palestine Live.” And all there to deflect accusations of antisemitism simply because they are Jews.

Collier writes: “Some call them ‘self-haters’, I never have, and I will not now. They are racists. They have disassociated themselves from the community, and they demonise Jews, just as Jews have always been demonised by antisemites. For the last few years they have embarked on a strategy of public antisemitism denial, using their Jewish identity to legitimise raw anti-Jewish hatred. Standing alongside them are Holocaust Deniers, anti-Jewish conspiracy theorists, and a long list of journalists, politicians and commentators, ready to support them. All of whom place their own political ideology over and above the safety of British Jews. It is shocking, disgraceful and scary”.

Meetings involving some Palestine Live members have been held on the parliamentary estate. Some of these were reported on by Collier himself and other bloggers such as Richard Millett. They attend such events to report on the antisemitism and Israel-hate on display. They have been treated with hostility and even barred altogether.

Collier comments: “For the Jewish attendee who recognises the numerous faces of those who share hard-core antisemitic and neo-Nazi ideology, it is little different than a black man walking into a KKK event in Westminster and being escorted out because he becomes agitated by the level of racism. That the antisemitism is protected by the law, rather than challenged by it, suggests the problem is institutionalised”.


Among this secret forum’s members, Collier found that in addition to assorted Labour and LibDem politicians who had been accused of anti-Israel or anti-Jewish attitudes, the Labour party leader Jeremy Corbyn had also belonged to it – from either 2013 or 2014 until 2015.

The group’s creator, Elleanne Green, posted her thanks to Corbyn for his help in arranging a meeting at the House of Commons addressed by the notorious Israel-basher Max Blumenthal. 

After that meeting, Corbyn posted on the forum: “Sadly I was at the funeral of a very old friend Ron Blanchard so missed the event”. Collier observes: “There is no suggestion Jeremy Corbyn shares the views of many inside the group. What this provides is evidence he knows he is a member.”

In February 2106 Elleanne Green posted: “Jeremy was a member of this group for several years until a few weeks after his election as Labour leader… such a friend to Palestine”. Collier writes: “Which suggests Corbyn was still a member of ‘Palestine Live’ when he became leader of the Labour Party, and for a ‘few weeks’ beyond that date. A central member of his team, Jack Bond, remained inside the group. He is still a member as this report is published.”

Corbyn has said he was “joined” to the group without his knowledge, had “never trawled through the whole group” and had never seen the antisemitic postings there. But that really won’t do. 


The Labour party has now suspended several party members who posted on Palestine Live and is reportedly continuing to investigate the Collier dossier. But shouldn’t it be suspending or investigating its own leader?

As Collier writes: “Palestine Live is little more than an antisemitic sewer of NeoNazi and Communist antisemitism… The concentration levels (amongst active posters) is higher than I have found elsewhere. Once the Jewish contingent are removed from the equation, three out of every four posts are placed on the site by someone who shares hard-core antisemitic conspiracy theories. Even with the Jewish members included, that number is almost six in ten. 

“Yet it is a group with MPs and with a sitting member of the House of Lords. It is a group where self-declared ‘anti-racists’ gather from across the globe. Everybody involved in this group needs to ask themselves how it came to be, that they were comfortable, at home, with white supremacy, antisemitism and Holocaust Denial?”

How indeed. For this doesn’t just involve members of the Labour party and a few fringe activists. Much of the broad left is in this sewer too, averting their fastidious gaze from the vile company they are keeping.

Closed thought circle

It’s an article of faith for the left that it stands only for good things like conscience and human rights. Everything not the left is damned as “the right”. Since the left stands only for good things, “the right” must be entirely bad. Accordingly, only the “right” can be antisemitic. Committed to “anti-racism”, the left believes that it is itself utterly incapable of antisemitism. So it is blind to both its own behaviour and the company it keeps.

It supports the Palestinians because it believes that, like the rest of the developing world, they are victims of the west and so their terrorism and rejection of Israel must be excused or condoned as “resistance”. Yet the Palestinians, along with much of the Arab and Muslim world, constantly pump out grotesque, Nazi-style antisemitic libels against Israel and the Jewish people. 

The left cannot admit that the people it is supporting as victims are in fact profound antisemites. So those who say antisemitism hides under the camouflage of anti-Zionism are accused of trying to sanitise the “crimes” of Israel. Which is why the left will not, cannot admit to the Jew-hatred within its own ranks. And why, with the exception of stories about Labour’s investigation and Corbyn’s membership of this group, Collier’s devastating and important revelations have been all but ignored.

In the second part of his report I discovered a picture of myself and David Collier sharing a panel. The picture was used to illustrate a typically venomous travesty by Electronic Intifada which I hadn’t previously seen. This attacked Collier whom it libelled as a “racist blogger”. Elleanne Green linked to it on Palestine Live and referred to Collier and myself as “peas in a pod”.

I can’t think of a greater compliment. David Collier: bravo.

Melanie Phillips


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

'Jerusalem is not holy to Muslims, enough with this lie!' - Arutz Sheva Staff

by Arutz Sheva Staff

Hat tip: Dr. Carolyn Tal

ZOA President Klein debunks the myth that Jerusalem is holy to Muslims, calls on listeners to spread the truth.

Zionist Organization of America President Morton Klein spoke on Thursday night at the National Council of Young Israel's annual dinner, debunking the myth that Jerusalem is holy to Muslims.

"Jerusalem was the capital of Israel, under King David, 3,000 years ago," Klein said. "It was never, ever, the capital of any other nation except Israel. When the Arabs conquered Palestine in 716, they made Ramla their capital, not Jerusalem."

"The Jewish holy books mention Jerusalem 700 times. it is never, ever mentioned in the Quran. Even about Mohammed allegedly going from Jerusalem to heaven, in the Quran...this is described as a dream. He simply has a dream, and it says he went 'from the farthest place to heaven.' ... And the nearest place, in the Quran, is Palestine. So clearly, it was not from Jerusalem."

Klein also noted that the Arabs, historically, have not cared enough to invest in Jerusalem.

"When the Arabs controlled Jerusalem from 1948-1967, when Jordan controlled it, they built everything of importance in Amman, not in Jerusalem," he said. "They allowed it to be a slum. There was no water, no electricity, no plumbing there. They destroyed the 58 synagogues in eastern Jerusalem."

Calling on his listeners to help debunk the lies, Klein said, "We must now tell everyone: It is not holy to Muslims, enough with this lie! Enough with the lie of occupation, there is no occupation, this is Jewish land, enough of the lie that settlements are the reason we have no peace. Settlements comprise 2% of all Judea and Samaria, there hasn't been a single new settlement built since 1993."

Slamming both the media and world leaders, he added, "All we get from the media, and even from leaders around the world, are lies, lies, and lies about Israel."

"Unlike politicians, G-d keeps His promises. And with the help of Almighty G-d and with the help of the Israel Defense Forces, the Jewish people in Eretz Yisrael (the Land of Israel) will prevail and will survive forever," he concluded.

Arutz Sheva Staff


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

New Israel Fund: Stand with Israel, not Hamas! - Ronn Torossian

by Ronn Torossian

The planned March to the Israel-Gaza border by Gaza residents is not an innocent event to be supported as "freedom of movement." So why is the NIF behind it?

On or around March 30, 2018 to commemorate what they call “Land Day”, Palestinian Arabs in the Gaza Strip are preparing for “the great return march” where more than 100,000 people are expected to march to the Israeli border to raise awareness about the so-called right of the Palestinian refugees to "return" to what they call their homes. Of course, even if some of their great grandparents were refugees, a doubtful possibility at best, they certainly are not - and the only reason they have not built fruitful lives in Gaza is the corruption of their terrorist leaders who use the billions granted them by a naive world to create terrorist infrastructure instead of jobs.

The organizers of the march reported that they intend to recruit about a hundred thousand participants and Hamas and other terrorist organizations have announced their support for the march and called on their followers to participate.

As Arab media outlets have reported, “Palestinian refugees will hold peaceful marches towards Israel in a mass movement to force a return to their homeland.”

In a previous March of Return, “more than a hundred Palestinians from Syria managed to breach the Israeli border fence and enter Israel,” posing a danger to the IDF soldiers who will have to turn them back - and who knows whether they will be carrying explosives, such as those they have been placing on the border fence recently?  The purpose of this march is to “promote a one-state solution.”

Let  me say it again:  Terrorist organizations and their supporters plan to march to the borders of Israel with 100,000 people who intend to storm the borders of Israel as they proclaim that the Jewish state should cease to exist.

Against this backdrop, organizations funded by the radical New Israel Fund are shamefully assisting the organizers of this march and sympathizing with them. Incomprehensible.

In the past, Adalah, an NIF funded organziation said in response to the fact that a permit for the march was not granted by Israeli police that they would appeal to Israel’s Supreme Court, noting, “The police decision is very strange and raises concerns that the refusal to approve the event is politically motivated.” +972 Magazine, which is funded in part by the New Israel Fund wrote in support of the previous "March of Return" with a columnist effusively talking about the importance of the hallucinatory Palestinian "right of return".

GISHA, another NIF-funded organization, is very active in promoting this rally, issuing a recent press release which noted that First and foremost, Israel must respect Gaza residents’ right to freedom of movement

It gets worse. An urgent letter was sent yesterday to Prime Minister Netanyahu, Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman, and Transportation Minister Yisrael Katz, demanding that they take immediate action to advance the opening of a commercial crossing in the north of the Gaza Strip.

Is this the purpose of the New Israel Fund, an organization which claims to be Pro-Israel? This organization must tell the organizations it funds to not stand with Hamas affiliated protests, but instead, to stand with the State of Israel, and the IDF soldiers who will protect the border from 100,000 people who want to come and destroy Israel. 

Stand with the IDF, not with Hamas or else change the name of your organization to reflect your activities.

Ronn Torossian is a public relations executive.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

McCabe waiting for his indictment now - Thomas Lifson

by Thomas Lifson

Two key words from A.G. Sessions reveal that prison, not his pension, is McCabe's real worry now.

The odds are high that an indictment will be forthcoming for Andrew McCabe. As the ever alert Sundance of Conservative Treehouse points out, the statement on his firing by A.G. Sessions specifically noted that he "lacked candor" (the FBI's expression for lying) "under oath."
After an extensive and fair investigation and according to Department of Justice procedure, the Department's Office of the Inspector General (OIG) provided its report on allegations of misconduct by Andrew McCabe to the FBI's Office of Professional Responsibility (OPR).
The FBI's OPR then reviewed the report and underlying documents and issued a disciplinary proposal recommending the dismissal of Mr. McCabe. Both the OIG and FBI OPR reports concluded that Mr. McCabe had made an unauthorized disclosure to the news media and lacked candor − including under oath − on multiple occasions.
The FBI expects every employee to adhere to the highest standards of honesty, integrity, and accountability. As the OPR proposal stated, 'all FBI employees know that lacking candor under oath results in dismissal and that our integrity is our brand.'
Pursuant to Department Order 1202, and based on the report of the Inspector General, the findings of the FBI Office of Professional Responsibility, and the recommendation of the Department's senior career official, I have terminated the employment of Andrew McCabe effective immediately." [Emphasis added.]
This finding came from the nonpartisan Office of Professional Responsibility, acting on the basis of a referral from the nonpartisan inspector general.

We already know that a U.S. attorney in Little Rock is on the case, thanks to a comment from Sessions. We don't know if a grand jury has been empaneled, but that is how U.S. attorneys get subpoenas, so my guess is that one is sitting, and has or soon will get to consider an indictment that could remain sealed until it is needed.

Meanwhile, McCabe's defenders in the media are planting the seeds of their own credibility destruction.

Jonathan Turley made the point yesterday that an indictment should follow in the course of forthcoming events. Indicting and getting a pleas deal from General Michael Flynn for an inconsequential lie, but not indicting McCabe for lies that covered up misbehavior is not really intellectually or morally defensible.

McCabe should be worrying about prison, not his pension.

I doubt very much that McCabe would negotiate a plea deal to implicate higher-ups (that would be Comey, Lynch, and Obama) in return for leniency, but I have no direct experience of the man. However, the still employed subordinates Peter Strzok, Lisa Page, and Bruce Ohr may not be such hard cases.

This may be the most interesting political season ahead in living memory. I certainly hope so.

Thomas Lifson


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Trump’s CIA Pick is the Great Feminist Moment the Left Hates - Daniel Greenfield

by Daniel Greenfield

Does real feminism look like Linda Sarsour, Hillary Clinton or the first female CIA head?

“2018 will be the year of women,” CNN declared last year.

What was the greatest achievement of women in ’17 and ’18? Ask the media and they’ll tell you that it’s Hillary Clinton running on her husband’s name and losing an election before blaming it on sexism. Or the #MeToo movement’s transformation from fighting abuse to #TimesUp calls for Hollywood quotas. Or the Women’s March, whose leader was caught cheering on a Farrakhan speech in which the racist leader told black women that their husbands were fat because they were too lazy to cook.

“You lazy woman," the man whom a leftist activist behind the Women’s March praised as the greatest, ranted. "Who the hell wants a woman with a good shape and a fat behind that don’t know how to prepare no food for her husband and her children?"

There’s the media’s official feminism.

Hillary Clinton blaming her defeat on white women listening to their husbands, Harvey Weinstein’s pals exploiting the crimes that they kept quiet about for special #TimesUp privileges and a Women’s March in thrall to a man who had declared, “Allah says in the Qur’an that men are a degree above women.”

While the media was chasing fake feminism, President Trump nominated Gina Haspel as the first female head of the CIA. And instead of celebrating this amazing milestone, the media wasted no time before smearing an accomplished woman who had succeeded in one of the country’s most dangerous fields.

The media fed the myth that Valerie Plame, an anti-Semitic socialite who was key to a leftist campaign against the Bush administration, was a covert operative who faced danger every day.  Unlike Plame, last seen pushing the Iran Deal and ranting about the Jews, Haspel is the real thing. She joined the CIA in ’85 and received the Intelligence Medal of Merit.

Gina Haspel was on the ground around the world, including in the Thai jungle where captured Al Qaeda terrorists were interrogated. And Haspel proved to be much tougher than some of the male politicians back in Washington D.C. who wanted to fight the terrorists who had murdered thousands of people in this country, but expected them to give up their secrets without any inconvenience or pressure.

Haspel and the people under her did the difficult and unrewarding job they had to do for their country. And, like the Vietnam veterans of a previous generation, they returned from Asia to jeers and smears. The women and men who had gone into the heart of darkness had their names dragged through the mud and their careers destroyed by the Democrats and their radical leftist media allies.

Senator Dick Durbin compared them to the “Nazis, Soviets in their gulags” and “Pol Pot”. CNN's Anderson Cooper echoed him, "if you envision Nazis doing this, and I even hate to say this, if you envision the Khmer Rouge doing this." And Senator McCain, who is already attacking Haspel, sleazily compared it to Pol Pot, the Spanish Inquisition and the Japanese torture of Americans during WW2.

Now many of the same activists who originally took credit for stopping Haspel in ’13 are back at it again. And some turncoat Republicans like McCain have joined them. Senator McCain has accused Gina Haspel of being involved in “one of the darkest chapters in American history”.

One of the darkest chapters of American history came when we stopped fighting Islamic terrorists and instead turned on those who did. We have nothing to atone for when it comes to our treatment of terrorists. We have something to atone for when it comes to how we treated the men and women who put their lives and careers on the line from Afghanistan to Benghazi to fight Durbin and McCain’s pals.

The same media that feigned outrage at the myth of Valerie Plame were eager to leak the names and destroy the reputations of those intelligence personnel who had been in the trenches of terror. And the media never tired of its weepy depictions of suffering Islamic terrorists being tortured by Americans.

Despite Obama Inc’s obsession with diversity, Gina Haspel was not allowed to serve as National Clandestine Service director because of her work fighting terrorists. John Brennan, Obama’s CIA boss, and Senator Dianne Feinstein, blocked her in ’13. And so a talented woman was demoted instead.

"CIA director John Brennan apparently has decided to postpone and reverse the appointment of the first woman to head the CIA directorate of operations (which controls all covert operations and spying)," John Yoo wrote. "This is a lot more serious than the hypocrisy of the diversity-crazed Obama administration’s blocking the first woman for this most sensitive and important of intelligence positions. This is the very politicization of the CIA that conservatives feared when Brennan was nominated."

To maintain diversity, Brennan’s CIA elevated two other women instead. Diversity says that all women are interchangeable elements in a gender quota. It doesn’t matter which woman you pick, as long as it’s a woman. Romney was mocked for his “binders full of women” remark, but it was Obama who actually treated women as an interchangeable bunch of names, rather than as individuals with talent and ability.

While Obama may have kept her down, Trump recognized her merit. Real feminism is not made with #TimesUp style gender quotas, but it is the right to have your individual achievements recognized.

Gina Haspel’s belated recognition is an important moment for her and for the people in our intelligence community, a group that the media has recently begun celebrating in the abstract while smearing them as individuals, who put their reputations on the line after 9/11. And it’s also a historical milestone.

Last year we were told that Hillary Clinton, a political hack who owed her entire career to her husband, represented a political milestone. But Gina Haspel is here because she put in the decades of work. She’s one of the many hardworking women who were given an opportunity to rise by this administration. And their authentically historical milestones are being overlooked by a media obsessed with hating them.

"The 'First Woman CIA Director' Is a Smokescreen," an Atlantic smear insists. "Gina Haspel's gender is the least important fact about her." Like so many other examples of the pro-terrorist genre, it treats us to piteous images of the poor terrorists and the cruel CIA people who made them feel very bad.

And yet there is something very powerful in the image of a woman standing up to Islamic terrorists.

Al Qaeda, the Taliban, the Muslim Brotherhood and the various strains of the Islamic movement envision a world in which women are segregated and enslaved. The female interrogators who turned the tables on captured Al Qaeda and Taliban prisoners were making a meaningful feminist statement. They were doing what the abused women in Iran, Pakistan and Afghanistan would never be able to do.

They fought back.

The media’s idea of a feminist heroine is Linda Sarsour. And Sarsour’s idea of feminism was protecting a sexual harasser, praising Saudi Arabia and Farrakhan. That’s also Tamika Mallory’s idea of feminism. Gina Haspel’s idea of feminism was going after the Islamic terrorists looking to realize Sarsour and Farrakhan’s idea of a perfect Islamic society where women and non-Muslims know their place.

Gina Haspel’s nomination sends a message to Islamic terrorists and their domestic collaborators. And it shows that real feminism looks nothing like the Women’s March. It looks like the new head of the CIA.

Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is a New York writer focusing on radical Islam.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

The Growing Iranian Cyber Security Threat - Ari Lieberman

by Ari Lieberman

The most underestimated weapon in Iran's arsenal.

When it comes to cyber security, much attention has been focused on Russia due to that nation’s recent cyber efforts to interfere with the 2016 general election. This includes the creation of bots to spread fake news as well as attempts to penetrate voter registration rolls. China too is active in this new realm of virtual warfare engaging in systematic efforts to steal Western technology. China’s J-20 and J-31 fifth generation jet fighters are said to be based on stealth technology stolen from the United States. China also hacked into U.S. Steel's computers and stole trade secrets for advanced, high-strength steel and then incorporated that technology in its own manufacturing processes. Other bad actors include North Korea which, in 2014, infamously hacked Sony Pictures Entertainment and also engaged in attempts to digitally loot banking institutions including an unsuccessful effort to loot the Federal Reserve to the tune of $1 billion.

But when it comes to mischief-making, it’s a sure bet that the Islamic Republic is lurking and cyber terrorism is no exception. While Iran’s cyber hacking operatives have not reached the level of sophistication and capability of their Russian and Chinese partners in crime, they are very active in this new area of virtual warfare and are learning quickly.

Iran first connected to the internet in 1992, and by 2000, most Iranians were connected to the information superhighway in some form. Iranian cyber terrorists operating at the behest of the regime initially focused their activities internally; spying on dissidents and those deemed to be headaches for the regime but soon exported their mischief globally.

In 2009, Iranian hackers, calling themselves “Iranian Cyber Army” forced Twitter to shut down for several hours after the hackers defaced the site. Twitter had been used by Green Revolution activists to spread the word about Iran’s rigged 2009 elections.

In the summer of 2011, Iranian hackers struck again, this time targeting the prestigious Dutch certificate authority security company DigiNotar. The hack, which sent shudders through the world of cyber security, enabled Iranian cyber operatives to compromise the Gmail accounts of some 300,000 Iranian citizens. Iranian internal spy agencies were then able access the contents of those accounts. The embarrassing but audacious security breach forced DigiNotar into bankruptcy and dissolution.

Iranian hackers graduated from defacing Twitter and compromising Gmail accounts to destroying critical infrastructure. On the morning of August 15, 2012 at precisely 11:08, an Iranian virus known as Shamoon infected the corporate PCs of one of the world’s largest oil companies, the Saudi firm Aramco. August 15 was a religious holiday in Saudi Arabia so most employees stayed home. When they returned to work the following morning and switched on their PCs, they discovered that their data vanished, replaced by a burning American flag. The attack, which destroyed data on some 35,000 computers, was regarded by cyber security experts as among one of the most destructive of its kind.

The following month, Iranian hackers struck again launching a series of denial-of-service attacks directed at U.S. banks. DoS attacks flood a website with volumes of traffic until the site crashes. Customers of Bank of America, Citigroup, HSBC, Wells Fargo, and Capital One among others were not able to access their accounts online.

Iranian cyber-attacks tapered off in 2015 following the signing of the catastrophic Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action but have since resumed. In November 2016 and January 2017, Saudi agencies and companies became targets of Shamoon 2, a variant of the virus that wreaked havoc on Aramco’s computers in 2012.

Iran has become adept in using proxies to carry out its dirty work in Syria, Lebanon, Yemen and other regions throughout the Mideast. By doing so, Iran limits its own casualties and can also deny direct involvement by claiming that these proxies are indigenous movements fighting against U.S.-backed imperialism. This strategy extends to hostile Iranian cyber activities. Hackers directed by the Islamic Republic have become proficient at hiding their tracks. Often, they will leave red herring clues designed to deflect suspicion away from the Iranian government.

In addition to its rogue nuclear activities (which have not ceased despite the signing of the JCPOA), its advanced ICBM program, its use of proxies to spread misery throughout the Mideast, its narco-terror and money laundering schemes, the West now has to contend with growing Iranian cyber security menace.

While the Iranians are lightyears behind their American and Israeli counterparts in the fields of cyber warfare and cyber security, the menace posed by the Islamic Republic in this relatively new area of warfare cannot be overstated. The only way to stop this Iranian sponsored aggression is by remaining vigilant and by informing the mullahs in no uncertain terms that attacks of this nature will be met by responses that are manifestly more destructive in size and scope. Iran may be expert at killing women and children and suppressing internal dissent with ruthless efficiency but this is one theater of warfare where Iran is at a distinct disadvantage and will remain so for decades to come.

Ari Lieberman is an attorney and former prosecutor who has authored numerous articles and publications on matters concerning the Middle East and is considered an authority on geo-political and military developments affecting the region.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

The Halabja Genocide 30 Years After - Kenneth R. Timmerman

by Kenneth R. Timmerman

Kurdish victims now seek justice through the courts.

On March 16, 1988, after sustained shelling and aerial bombardments had driven most of the inhabitants of the Kurdish town of Halabja into their basements, Saddam Hussein ordered his air force to change munitions – and missions.

Instead of softening up the Kurdish town for an assault by Iraqi government troops, the air force now planned exterminate the population using chemical weapons.

One survivor, Kherwan, said he remembered smelling “an aroma that reminded me of apples” shortly before losing consciousness. “When I awoke, there were hundreds of bodies scattered around me.”

Mothers were later found lying in the streets, wrapped around their dead infants; some had died cradling their children to keep them from falling.

Today, thirty years later, the surviving victims continue to remember the horrors of that day and those they lost. 

Zimnako Mohammad Ahmed was just three months old when his mother tried to carry him to safety in the nearby mountains and fell unconscious in the darkness. Iranian soldiers found him the next morning and took him to Tehran for treatment, and ultimately, adoption.

“My whole family thought I was dead,” he told Radio Free Europe. Those who survived had even erected a tombstone for him in the family grave plot.

Zimnako was lucky. He managed to return to Halabja and convince local authorities to conduct DNA tests to find his family. But hundreds of others have not been so lucky.

While Saddam Hussein and “Chemical Ali” (aka Ali Hasan al-Majid) were tried and executed by the Iraq High Tribunal for their attempted genocide against the Kurds, many of their victims continue to suffer from the effects of chemical weapons and can ill afford expensive lung transplants and other treatments.

This week, a group of survivors filed a historic lawsuit in an Iraqi court, hoping to find some measure of justice – and potentially, compensation – from the companies and individuals who built Saddam’s chemical weapons.

For the most part, the defendants are Germans and German companies. And one of them – tourism giant, TUI, formerly known as Preussag – have deep pockets.

Chicago lawyer Gavi Mairone began working on the case eight years ago, at a time when neither Iraq nor Germany had laws that would permit such a suit.

Today that has changed, and Mairone is hoping that a liability judgment in Iraq will help the victims to collect against the companies in Germany and elsewhere in Europe.

“When warned by Western intelligence and the media about how these weapons were being used, rather than ceasing engagement, these companies allegedly chose to find alternatives to continue the conspiracy and ensure the chemical weapons plants could continue to operate,” Mairone told a press conference in Halabja yesterday.

The complaint alleges that TUI and others “knew” that building Saddam’s chemical weapons plants “would require each of them to conceal their activities, falsify documents, mislead and lie to government officials, intentionally violate laws in numerous countries, and fraudulently induce other companies and persons to unwittingly assist” their efforts.

The German government twice tried to prosecute the most notorious of the perpetrators, including Karl Kolb GmbH and Preussag. But German laws in force in the late 1980s were insufficient for a conviction.

It became the most notorious and best-documented case in history of Western companies enabling a dictator to commit genocide. And yet, the guilty suffered no consequences, and the victims continued to suffer.

I documented the German “poison gas connection” for the Simon Wiesenthal Center in 1990, and two years later in my book, The Death Lobby: How the West Armed Iraq, which included a map and detailed descriptions of scores of Iraqi WMD facilities, some of them unknown at the time.

Later, I worked with attorneys who sued some of the American companies of the poison gas connection on behalf of U.S. veterans poisoned by what became known as Gulf War Syndrome.

This body of work – which included extensive, proprietary data bases I maintained on suppliers of WMD technology – came to Mairone’s attention when he decided in 2013 to push his legal action on behalf of the Halabja victims into higher gear. 

I had the opportunity five years ago on this day to attend ceremonies in Halabja to commemorate the 25th anniversary of Saddam Hussein’s genocidal attack against Iraqi Kurds along with Mairone and his legal team.

Once again, it was a question of German companies aiding and abetting a genocide.

We sat for hours listening to the stories of survivors. We collected documents from the earlier trials against Saddam Hussein and Chemical Ali. We made contacts and laid the groundwork for a future lawsuit.

I was engaged to sift through documents and reports from German Customs, the United Nations Special Commission for the Disarmament of Iraq, and many other sources, to identify the biggest culprits whose guilt I felt Mairone and his team had a good chance of establishing in a fair court.

Now, five years later, that time has come. You can read the complaint here.

Dr. Gregory H. Stanton, founder of Genocide Watch, has identified ten stages of genocide, from the identification and stigmatizing of the future victims, to post murder denial and cover-up.

“Genocide is not an unpredictable phenomenon like a hurricane,” he told a conference to commemorate the Halabja genocide earlier this week. “By understanding the logic of genocide, people can recognize the early warnings signs,” he says.

Saddam’s genocide against the Kurds was many years in the making, just as were the genocides in Rwanda, and the Assyrian Christians in northern Iraq.

Dr. Stanton believes the signs of the next genocide – once again, against the Kurds – are already visible.

“In 1989, I predicted the genocide in Rwanda, five years before it happened,” he said this week. “In 2008, Genocide Watch predicted another genocide on its way in northern Iraq. The next genocide will come from Turkey, Iran, and Syrian and Iraqi government forces, and it will be directed against the Kurds.”

He believes these powers have gone way beyond the initial stages of discrimination and dehumanization, and are actively preparing for military operations to eradicate the Kurds, of which Afrin is perhaps the first step.

“The Ottoman, Persian, and Arab empires must never rise again,” he warned.

Genocide takes time. It requires planning, a great deal of preparation, and methodical execution.

But justice takes even longer. The Halabja victims have waited for thirty years already, and they haven’t yet had their day in court, while their victimizers remain free.

Kenneth R. Timmerman


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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