Friday, September 23, 2016

Netanyahu: Change is coming to the UN - Arutz Sheva Staff

by Arutz Sheva Staff

'Lay down your arms - the war against Israel at the United nations has ended.' Prime Minister invites Abbas to address Israeli Knesset.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu addressed the United Nations General Assembly in Manhattan on Thursday, minutes after Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas spoke at the international body, accusing Israel of “executing” Arabs and undermining the peace process.

“What I’m about to say will shock you,” said Netanyahu, “Israel has a bright future in the UN.”
While offering this optimistic appraisal of Israel’s future in the United Nations, the Prime Minister also noted a litany of biases in the international body against the Jewish state.

"Now, I know that hearing that from me must surely come as a surprise, because year after year I've stood at this very podium and slammed the UN for its obsessive bias against Israel. And the UN deserved every scathing word. For the disgrace of the General Assembly, that last year passed 20 resolutions against the democratic State of Israel, and a grand total of three resolutions against all the other countries on the planet. Israel: 20, rest of the world: 3.

And what about the joke of the UN Human Rights Council, which each year condemns Israel more than all the countries of the world combined? As women are being systematically raped, murdered, and sold into slavery across the world, which is the only country that the UN's Commission chose to condemn this year? Yep, you guessed it, Israel. Israel, where women fly fighter jets, lead major corporations, head universities, preside - twice - over the Supreme Court, and have served as Speaker of the Knesset and Prime Mininster."

Nevertheless, Netanyahu emphasized that a change in the United Nations’ behavior towards Israel was inevitable, and would come in the near future.

"You probably think 'nothing will ever change, right?' Well think again. Everything will change, and a lot sooner than you think. The change will happen in this hall because back home your governments are rapidly changing their attitudes towards Israel. And sooner or later, that's going to change the way you vote on Israel at the UN."

“Lay down your arms - the war against Israel at the United nations has ended.”

Netanyahu also responded directly to claims made by Abbas just minutes prior to his own address, in which the Palestinian Authority leader accused Israel of “destroying” any chance for a peace agreement through the expansion of Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria.

“This conflict is not about the settlements, it never was,” Netanyahu said. “The issue of settlements is a real one, which must and can be resolved in final status negotiations.”

Arutz Sheva Staff


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Did Christie’s ‘Islam Problem’ Lead to the Ahmad Terrorist Attacks? - Lauri B. Regan

by Lauri B. Regan

One of the loudest critics of the undercover surveillance was New Jersey governor Chris Christie who, joined by then-Newark mayor Cory Booker, called the program “disturbing” and “deeply offensive.”

In a recent column, Bret Stephens recognized that one of the lessons from this past weekend’s terror attacks is that “there is [a]… benefit in the surveillance methods that allowed police in New York and New Jersey to swiftly identify and arrest Mr. Rahimi before his bombing spree took any lives.” A Wall Street Journal editorial that same day noted that “Since 9/11… the NYPD has made great progress in being able to track down terror suspects.” And while the New York and New Jersey police departments deserve high praise for their handling of these attacks and quick apprehension of those involved, I cannot help but wonder if the injuries to its 29 victims could have been prevented.

In the years following 9/11, the NYPD, under the leadership of Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, organized the Demographic Unit, a creation of CIA officer Lawrence Sanchez who established it in 2003 while working at the department. The unit was designed as a surveillance program in which undercover officers infiltrated New York and New Jersey Muslim-owned businesses, mosques, and Islamic schools in order to detect terror threats before they were executed. According to a New York Times article:
The goal was to identify the mundane locations where a would-be terrorist could blend into society. Plainclothes detectives looked for “hot spots” of radicalization that might give the police an early warning about terrorist plots. The squad, which typically consisted of about a dozen members, focused on 28 “ancestries of interest.”
Unfortunately, the program was discovered in 2009 and under public pressure from local Muslim communities as well as legal challenges to the program, Kelly’s successor, William Bratton, ultimately closed down the unit. One of the loudest critics of the undercover surveillance was New Jersey governor Chris Christie who, joined by then-Newark mayor Cory Booker, called the program “disturbing” and “deeply offensive.” Christie took issue with the fact that, notwithstanding the Newark police department’s involvement with the program, neither he nor the feds were informed. In 2012 Christie stated, "I know they think that their jurisdiction is the world. Their jurisdiction is New York City. My concern is this kind of affectation that the NYPD seems to have that they are the masters of the universe."

Christie also reportedly approached Attorney General Eric Holder with his concerns. However, after a three-month investigation, New Jersey attorney general Jeffrey Chiesa “concluded there was no evidence to show the NYPD’s activities in the state violated New Jersey’s civil or criminal laws.” Nonetheless, within several months of that finding, the NYPD caved to pressure and pulled out of New Jersey and by 2014, much to the delight of New York City mayor Bill de Blasio, the program was shuttered completely.

One has to wonder what universe Christie is living in in which he believes that terrorists abide by geographic and law enforcement jurisdictional lines. When this story broke, the Associate Press reported that the NYPD was also secretly monitoring the activities of campus Muslim student groups at over a dozen colleges in the Northeast. While not exactly the politically correct thing to do (as we all know from the degrading treatment every American receives going through TSA lines), PC behavior is not going to save us from radical Islam. An honest discussion about the indoctrination that occurs within local Muslim communities, and most especially their mosques, is warranted and necessary rather than the indefensible focus on offending a demographic that is taking no outward steps to help prevent terrorism.

Not surprisingly, the president of the American Arab Forum, expressed his disappointed in the AG’s conclusions about the legality of the NYPD program by saying, "We thought the AG was on our side.” Unfortunately, we should all be on the same side -- the side that fights terrorism -- but instead Christie seems to be on the wrong side of this war. Further evidence of that was seen when Christie, unsatisfied with the NYPD pulling out of his state, subsequently signed into law a bill that provides that out-of-state law enforcement must notify New Jersey officials before conducting counter-terrorism operations in that state. Christie stated:
As a former U.S. Attorney appointed in the aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001, I strongly believe we need to do everything in our power to prevent terrorist attacks on our country and keep our people safe. I also believe we must protect and maintain civil liberties, especially those of the citizens in New Jersey’s Muslim community.
So while Christie is busy protecting the civil rights of New Jersey’s Muslim community, one of those members planted bombs, not just in his state but in New York City, where 29 victims were lucky to survive the explosion. Thank you, Governor Christie.

In the face of a possible Romney/Christie ticket in 2012, terrorism experts, Daniel Pipes and Steve Emerson, documented what they called Christie’s “Islam problem.”  In addition to his stance regarding the Demographic Unit, their evidence included the following:
2008: When serving as U.S. attorney for New Jersey, Christie embraced and kissed Mohammed Qatanani, imam of the Islamic Center of Passaic County, and praised him as “a man of great goodwill.” He did this after Qatanani had publicly ranted against Jews and in support of funding Hamas, a U.S. government-designated terror organization, and on the eve of his deportation hearing for not hiding an Israeli conviction for membership in Hamas. In addition, Christie designated a top aide… to testify as a character witness for Qatanani…

2010: After Derek Fenton burned three pages of a Koran at a 9/11 memorial ceremony, his employer, New Jersey Transit, got Christie’s approval to fire him. Protecting Islam at the expense of the constitutional right to free speech, Christie endorsed Fenton’s termination: “That kind of intolerance is something I think is unacceptable. So I don’t have any problem with him being fired.”

2011: Christie appointed an Islamist, Sohail Mohammed, to the New Jersey state superior court. Mohammed’s record includes serving as general counsel to the American Muslim Union (which has stated that a “Zionist Commando Orchestrated The 9-11 Terrorist Attacks”), acting as spokesman for Muslim prisoners who went on a hunger strike after being jailed during Ramadan, defending Palestinian Islamic Jihad operative Sami Al-Arian (his indictment, Mohammed said, was “nothing but a witch-hunt”), and helping Qatanani’s legal defense…
Pipes and Emerson summarized:
In short, Christie has hugged a terrorist-organization member, abridged free-speech rights, scorned concern over Islamization, and opposed law-enforcement counterterrorism efforts. Whenever an issue touching on Islam arises, Christie takes the Islamist side against those -- the DHS, state senators, the NYPD, even the ACLU -- who worry about lawful Islamism eroding the fabric of American life.
Since failing to win the Republican nomination, Christie has figured out another way to further his political future and perhaps carry his Islam problem to the White House. He has joined himself at the hip with Donald Trump and endeared himself to the point of a huge reward. Trump has named Christie chair of his transition team -- a powerful and influential position if Trump wins the election. This poses a potentially serious national security issue that must be raised in the debates and by reporters covering the Trump campaign. How can Trump justify elevating the man whose policies arguably abetted the most recent terrorist attacks to such an important position and what on-going role will Christie have in a future Trump administration? What is Trump’s position on surveillance programs that involve undercover agents monitoring Muslim communities from which these terrorist attacks emanate? The king of anti-PC should feel comfortable answering these questions honestly and if he does, Christie should be fired immediately.

Christie’s legacy will not be Bridgegate and the dangerous situation in which his administration placed tristate residents with their politically motivated lane closures on the GW Bridge. With each new act of terrorism, many of us will be wondering if it could have been prevented had Christie taken the right stand and supported the efforts of the NYPD’s counterterrorism program. But one thing is clear, Christie’s Islam problem should not be permitted to move from New Jersey’s to DC where the entire country’s national security will be at risk. As Pipes and Emerson concluded, “Whatever his reasons, we conclude that Chris Christie lacks the moral compass and integrity needed to serve as vice president of the United States.” Trump needs to rethink his alliance with a man with an Islam problem.

Lauri B. Regan


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Vote fraud and the future of the republic - Thomas Lifson

by Thomas Lifson

The key is to import millions of Democrat voters from groups that reliably offer 90%+ support to the left and its promises of free stuff

The left is making a bet that its vote fraud efforts can be disguised from the public long enough to win this election, and then open the floodgates to ensure they permanently rule America (and complete the fundamental transformation Obama promised).  There is every reason to fear massive vote fraud targeted at ensuring a faltering Hillary Clinton takes the election.

The key is to import millions of Democrat voters from groups that reliably offer 90%+ support to the left and its promises of free stuff.  With Hillary in Oval Office and controlling the bureaucracy, citizenship can be accelerated. But as shocking studies show, noncitizens are already voting in large numbers and affecting elections. Fred Lucas reports at the Heritage Foundation’s Daily Signal:
The Obama administration opposes states verifying citizenship status of registered voters. Inquiries into voter fraud are typically met with derision from both government and the media—and in at least one instance with prosecution. Prosecutors don’t prioritize voter fraud, while convictions only garner light sentences.
These are among the voter fraud problems facing the United States, experts noted this week, even as prominent voices on the left say such fraud is a myth.
The left’s opposition to voter integrity laws or even inquiry can be simply explained, Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton said.
“Why on earth would you not want to make sure that only citizens are registered and voting?” Fitton, author of “Clean House: Exposing Our Government’s Secrets and Lies,” said at a forum at The Heritage Foundation Tuesday. “That to me shows that the Obama administration and the left generally, which is behind this, wants to be able to steal elections if necessary. To me, that’s a crisis.”
A 2014 study by Old Dominion University found that 6.4 percent of all noncitizens voted in the 2008 election and 2.2 percent voted in the 2010 midterm elections. The study concludes this likely put Minnesota Sen. Al Franken, a Democrat, over the top in the race in his 312-vote statewide victory over Republican Norm Coleman in 2008.
[If Franken had lost, Obamacare would not have been passed – ed.]
Fitton said this is approaching 15 percent of all noncitizens voting.
In the past, opponents have argued that ID requirements hurt minority participation. Meanwhile, studies have found minority voting has increased after voter ID was implemented.
So we are being sold two frauds. That fraud is a tiny problem, and that only citizens can vote. 
This week a New York Times editorial called voter fraud a “myth” and “fake”:
As study after study has shown, there is virtually no voter fraud anywhere in the country. The most comprehensive investigation to date found that out of one billion votes cast in all American elections between 2000 and 2014, there were 31 possible cases of impersonation fraud. Other violations—like absentee ballot fraud, multiple voting and registration fraud—are also exceedingly rare. So why do so many people continue to believe this falsehood?
Credit for this mass deception goes to Republican lawmakers, who have for years pushed a fake story about voter fraud, and thus the necessity of voter ID laws, in an effort to reduce voting among specific groups of Democratic-leaning voters.
Democrats know that the best defense is a good offense. That’s why in an effort to distract:
Rep. John Lewis, a pioneer in the civil rights movement, wants the Obama administration to appoint observers for the November election in certain states.
"We should ask for federal protection," the Georgia Democrat said Wednesday, warning "the election can be stolen on election day at polling places."
With (now-discredited by her private jet secret meeting with Bill Clinton) Loretta Lynch in charge of the DOJ, the feds cannot be counted upon to bust the fraud. This is classic misdirection.

Thomas Lifson


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Weaponized Immigration - Michael Cutler

by Michael Cutler

Suicide is not an act of compassion.

The United States is at war with international terrorists, who, as the 9/11 Commission noted, must first enter the United States in order to attack it.

Consider the preface of the official government report, “9/11 and Terrorist Travel: Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United Statesthat begins with the following paragraph:

It is perhaps obvious to state that terrorists cannot plan and carry out attacks in the United States if they are unable to enter the country. Yet prior to September 11, while there were efforts to enhance border security, no agency of the U.S. government thought of border security as a tool in the counterterrorism arsenal. Indeed, even after 19 hijackers demonstrated the relative ease of obtaining a U.S. visa and gaining admission into the United States, border security still is not considered a cornerstone of national security policy. We believe, for reasons we discuss in the following pages, that it must be made one.

Furthermore, although much has been made of the lack of integrity with respect to the U.S./Mexican border, the 9/11 Commission Staff Report on Terrorist Travel observed that most terrorists had entered the United States through international airports and then committed visa fraud and immigration benefit fraud to embed themselves in the country.

Page 54 of the report contained this excerpt under the title “3.2 Terrorist Travel Tactics by Plot,” which makes these issues crystal clear:

Although there is evidence that some land and sea border entries (of terrorists) without inspection occurred, these conspirators mainly subverted the legal entry system by entering at airports.
In doing so, they relied on a wide variety of fraudulent documents, on aliases, and on government corruption. Because terrorist operations were not suicide missions in the early to mid-1990s, once in the United States terrorists and their supporters tried to get legal immigration status that would permit them to remain here, primarily by committing serial, or repeated, immigration fraud, by claiming political asylum, and by marrying Americans. Many of these tactics would remain largely unchanged and undetected throughout the 1990s and up to the 9/11 attack.
Thus, abuse of the immigration system and a lack of interior immigration enforcement were unwittingly working together to support terrorist activity. It would remain largely unknown, since no agency of the United States government analyzed terrorist travel patterns until after 9/11. This lack of attention meant that critical opportunities to disrupt terrorist travel and, therefore, deadly terrorist operations were missed.
On Saturday September 17, 2016 terror attacks put international terrorism and immigration on the front page of newspapers across the United States and onto the “A Block” of television news programs.

On the morning of that last Saturday of summer, a bomb hidden in a garbage can detonated along the route of the “Seaside Semper Five,” a five-kilometer run and charity event along the South Jersey Shore waterfront to raise money for members of the United States Marine Corps and their families.  Fortunately, because the crowds were much greater than expected, the event was late in starting and so no one was injured.

On that Saturday evening, a bomb, constructed in part of a pressure-cooker, exploded in a dumpster in the Chelsea section of Manhattan where it had apparently been planted.  Shortly after the explosion rocked that trendy neighborhood of Manhattan a second bomb of similar construction was discovered just blocks away. 

Both of these bombings and that third, unexploded bomb have been attributed to Ahmad Khan Rahami, a naturalized United States citizen who legally immigrated to the United States from his native Afghanistan.

Meanwhile, on that same Saturday evening, in Minnesota, allegedly Dahir Adan, an immigrant from Kenya, went on a violent rampage in the Crossroads Center shopping mall in St. Cloud, stabbing 9 innocent people.  His rampage ended when a police officer, Jason Falconer, confronted him.  Adan lunged at Officer Falconer who fired in self-defense, undoubtedly preventing a far worse attack.

According to an article published on September 19, 2016 in a local newspaper, the Star Tribune, during the attack Adan was wearing a security guard uniform and asked at least one of the victims if he was a Muslim.  Additionally, Adan was reported to have referred to Allah during the attack.

News reports assert he was 22 years old and beginning his third year at St. Cloud State University and was a member of the tight-knit Somalian immigrant community.

Information about the identity of this apparent terrorist was not provided by law enforcement authorities, but by his father who claimed that his son came to the United States some 15 years ago.

Aliens who enter the United States surreptitiously without inspection could be said to have entered the United States through America's “back door.”  Most terrorists, however, enter the United States through America's front doors located at the 325 ports of entry that are operated by CBP (Customs and Border Protection).

Both Ahmad Khan Rahami and Dahir Adan were admitted into the United States through America's “front door.”

Given the severity of the threats America and Americans face and the findings and recommendations of the 9/11 Commission it is incomprehensible that the failures of the lawful entry system and the systems by which applications for lawful status are adjudicated would face extreme scrutiny with the goal of insuring that these systems have real integrity.  Yet nothing could be further from the truth.

Politicians from both political parties have repeatedly called for providing lawful status for unknown millions of illegal aliens whose true identities, backgrounds and possible affiliations with criminal or terrorist organizations are unknown and unknowable.  There would be no way to interview millions of such aliens and certainly no way to conduct any field investigations.  This would create an open invitation to massive levels of fraud.

Should any doubt remain about the abject lack of integrity in the adjudications process, consider that on September 19, 2016 Fox News reported, “Watchdog: Feds wrongly granted citizenship to hundreds facing deportation” that focused on the findings of the Office of Inspector General for the DHS concerning how hundreds of aliens facing removal deportation had, instead, been granted United States citizenship.  These aliens were originally from countries identified as being “Special Interest Countries”- that is to say that these countries are associated with terrorism.

The report noted that of those who were able to game the naturalization process, some went on to acquire jobs, including in law enforcement where U.S. citizenship is a pre-requisite.

Not long ago I wrote an article about a naturalized Somali immigrant who had “made it” to the FBI’s “Most Wanted Terrorists List.” The title of my piece was, "The Immigration Factor –Naturalized U.S. Citizen Added to FBI’s Most Wanted Terrorists List."

The FBI is greatly concerned about this individual who is charged with providing material support and resources to al Qaeda and al Shabaab, a Somali-based terrorist organization.  Additionally, he had worked as a cab driver in Washington, DC and has an intimate knowledge of DC's infrastructure and government buildings.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration continues to admit Syrian refugees who, according to FBI Director, James Comey, cannot be vetted.  Hillary Clinton wants to increase the number of such refugees admitted into the United States by more than 500%.

Clinton wants to provide unknown millions of illegal aliens with lawful status which would require that USCIS (United States Citizenship and Immigration Services) to adjudicate all of these applications.

USCIS is the division of the DHS that is charged with adjudicating all of those applications for various immigration benefits including granting political asylum and conferring United States citizenship upon aliens.  This is the very same inept and and incompetent agency that naturalized hundreds of deportable aliens.

Repeatedly Hillary and her open borders / anarchist accomplices have invoked the issue of “compassion” to justify admitting huge numbers of refugees who cannot be vetted and providing illegal aliens who entered the United States covertly with lawful status, even though there would be no way to verify their identities, backgrounds, affiliations with criminal or terrorist organizations or even determine when they actually entered the United States.

Terrorists have come to see in our compassion vulnerabilities they can exploit and use against us.

The report, “9/11 and  Terrorist Travel - Staff Report of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States.” included this paragraph:

“Once terrorists had entered the United States, their next challenge was to find a way to remain here. Their primary method was immigration fraud. For example, Yousef and Ajaj concocted bogus political asylum stories when they arrived in the United States. Mahmoud Abouhalima, involved in both the World Trade Center and landmarks plots, received temporary residence under the Seasonal Agricultural Workers (SAW) program, after falsely claiming that he picked beans in Florida.” Mohammed Salameh, who rented the truck used in the bombing, overstayed his tourist visa. He then applied for permanent residency under the agricultural workers program, but was rejected. Eyad Mahmoud Ismail, who drove the van containing the bomb, took English-language classes at Wichita State University in Kansas on a student visa; after he dropped out, he remained in the United States out of status.

It is time for our government to secure our borders, enforce our immigration laws and disarm the terrorists who would kill our citizens and destroy our nation by depriving them the opportunities to enter the United States and embed themselves throughout our country.

Michael Cutler is a retired Senior Special Agent of the former INS (Immigration and Naturalization Service) whose career spanned some 30 years. He served as an Immigration Inspector, Immigration Adjudications Officer and spent 26 years as an agent who rotated through all of the squads within the Investigations Branch. For half of his career he was assigned to the Drug Task Force. He has testified before well over a dozen congressional hearings, provided testimony to the 9/11 Commission as well as state legislative hearings around the United States and at trials where immigration is at issue. He hosts his radio show, “The Michael Cutler Hour,” on Friday evenings on BlogTalk Radio. His personal website is


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Obama’s Parting Shot at Israel - Ari Lieberman

by Ari Lieberman

An outrageous attack on the Jewish state before the world’s greatest purveyors of anti-Semitism.

Obama’s last address before the UN General Assembly was typically and predictably condescending, hypocritical, disingenuous and vainglorious. He used the opportunity to perform some electioneering and take a swipe at Donald Trump. “Today, a nation ringed by walls would only imprison itself,” he said in a not too subtle reference to Trump’s promised plans to secure the southern border with the construction of a wall and restrict immigration from high-risk countries.

France, a NATO ally that has partnered with the U.S. to combat the Taliban in Afghanistan and Islamic extremism in Mali, was also derided. Though he did not mention France by name, he criticized “liberal societies” for their “opposition to women who choose to cover themselves.” This of course was a veiled reference French laws banning Burkas and Burkinis, items of Islamic clothing that are oppressive to and denigrate women.

Of course, Obama made no mention of the Paris and Nice massacres. Nor did he note that as a result of Muslim violence, 70 percent of Europe’s Jews won’t be attending synagogue during the Jewish High-Holy Days. Obama did of course heap praise on Indonesia, a Muslim nation that discriminates against minorities and the LGBT community, still maintains so-called “blasphemy” laws, and imposes draconian Sharia law in some districts. This year, a 60-year old Christian-Indonesian woman was given 28 lashes for selling alcohol. This is the model nation that the president touts before the world community.

The vainglorious president also took the opportunity to tout his disastrous Iran deal, noting that the United States “resolved the Iranian nuclear issue through diplomacy.” Obama, however, failed to note that he inked the worst deal in U.S. diplomatic history and likely the worst deal since the 1938 Munich Accord. He also omitted the fact that the infusion of $150 billion into Iran’s anemic economy will enable the mullahs to continue to sow misery throughout the region.

Of course, no Obama speech would be complete without the perfunctory assault on Israel. What better place to attack the Jewish state than before a body that is today’s greatest purveyor of anti-Semitism, where anti-Israel invective flows like water and where the Jewish state is incessantly vilified?

Recognizing of course that referring to Jews as “apes and pigs” is a national Palestinian pastime, Obama reminded the Palestinians to play nicely before directing his invective against Israel.

“Surely, Israelis and Palestinians will be better off if Palestinians reject incitement and recognize the legitimacy of Israel, but Israel recognizes that it cannot permanently occupy and settle Palestinian land,” he said.

There are two egregious problems with Obama’s statement. First, it is insufficient for the Palestinian Authority to merely “recognize the legitimacy of Israel.” 

Israel has made clear that the PA must recognize Israel as a Jewish state. The PA has rejected this demand outright because they envision a future Palestinian state, exclusively for Palestinians, in Judea/Samaria and an entity that calls itself “Israel” composed of Jews as well as Palestinian Muslims, thereby negating the Jewish character of the state. 

That represents the crux of the problem. Palestinian Muslims will never recognize the indigenousness of Jews in their ancestral land [sic]. Any peace agreement without such recognition is inherently flawed and sets the stage for more bloody conflict. In terms of strategy, there is absolutely no difference between the PA and Hamas. Both aspire to the ultimate goal of establishing a Muslim Arab state from the River to the Sea. The only difference is tactics. The PA has adopted a more practical and deceitful approach toward achieving their ultimate objective (though every once in a while they slip and reveal their true colors) while Hamas is frighteningly and brutishly honest.

The second problem is that Judea and Samaria is neither “occupied” nor is it “Palestinian land.” It is a territory that is the subject of a bonafide dispute between two parties with competing claims.

From a legal perspective, Israel’s claim has more merit. In 1947, the UN General Assembly voted to partition Israel/Palestine into separate Jewish and Arab states. General Assembly resolutions have no binding legal authority. The Jews accepted partition, but the Arabs rejected it. Had they accepted it, the matter would have been settled and an agreement would have validated the GA resolution and made it legally binding under international law.

During the War of 1948 that followed, Jordan seized Judea and Samaria as well as the eastern portion of Jerusalem and annexed these territories. Only Pakistan fully recognized Jordan’s illegal annexation, while England’s recognition was limited to Judea and Samaria. The territory was occupied by Jordan for 19 years and during those 19 years, Jewish institutions were reduced to rubble while Jewish headstones in the Mount of Olives cemetery were used to build latrines for the Jordanian army.

In June 1967, Jordan’s monarch, fed on a steady diet of fantasy-like falsehoods of Israel’s impending demise, attacked Israel with Hawker Hunter jets and artillery. Israel responded to the provocation and liberated Jerusalem as well as Judea and Samaria in a matter of days.

The UN considers war and conquests therefrom to be illegal, but Article 52 of the UN Charter provides an exception to the illegality of war in cases involving self-defense. The Six-Day War was as clear as they come in terms of self-defense. Israel acquired these lands through defensive conquest. Never in the history of mankind has a nation been compelled to return territories -- acquired in the course of a defensive war -- to an aggressor entity.

Following the war and after many month of haggling, the UN Security Council, which has the power to establish international law, passed Resolution 242. The resolution called upon Israel to withdraw from “territories occupied in the recent conflict.” Notably, the word “all” was deliberately omitted thus giving implicit recognition to Israeli territorial conquests. One can reasonably argue that Israel has fully complied with Resolution 242 by virtue of its withdrawal from the Sinai Peninsula, Gaza, some 40 percent of Judea and Samaria and Quneitra on the Golan Heights, and that no further territorial withdrawals are required.

I would be remiss if I didn’t note that two Jewish commonwealths existed on territories now claimed as “occupied” hundreds of years before Mohammedan colonizers set foot on the land. It would be more precise to refer to the territories as “re-occupied,” in deference to the indigenous inhabitants of the land.

Obama likely knows all this but couldn’t resist taking a parting shot at Israel. That he would choose to do it in a forum that is infamous for its anti-Semitic vitriol speaks volumes of the man.  

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.

Fatah cartoon pushes anti-Semitic conspiracy theories - David Rosenberg

by David Rosenberg

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas' Fatah faction publishes cartoons drawing on classic anti-Semitic libels.

Anti-Semitic Fatah cartoon
Anti-Semitic Fatah cartoon
Palestinian Media Watch
While French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault and US President Barack Obama pushed for renewed negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority during their visits to the United Nations this week, PA President Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah party published new anti-Semitic propaganda material, drawing upon classic anti-Jewish canards.

On Tuesday, just one day after Ayrault held a closed-door meeting with foreign dignitaries in an effort to reboot final status talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, Fatah’s published a cartoon suggesting that Jews were secretly behind global terrorism and international military conflicts, the Palestinian Media Watch reported.

The cartoon shows a stereotypical Jewish caricature wearing a kippa and sitting in a chair with a Star of David. The man can be seen casually setting off explosions in a nearby town, using his remote control.

Ironically, the image was published on Fatah’s official website just hours before President Obama took to the podium at the UN, urging “Palestinians [to] reject incitement and recognize the legitimacy of Israel.” Obama continued by saying that Israel ought to withdraw from Judea and Samaria and enable the establishment of a Palestinian state.

The watchdog group Palestinian Media Watch noted that another cartoon published by Fatah made a similar implication, suggesting that Jews were to blame for Islamic terrorism.

The cartoon showed another stereotypical Jewish figure, wearing an armband with the Israeli flag, setting off a bomb containing two Muslim men, one labelled Sunni, the other Shia, each of whom is setting off their own explosives. The image draws upon classic anti-Semitic conspiracy theories that Jews are secretly masterminding world events and are responsible for international terrorism, wars, and other crises.

Anti-Semitic Fatah cartoon Palestinian Media Watch

David Rosenberg


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

IDF official: Hamas deterred but is gearing up for another conflict - Israel Hayom Staff

by Israel Hayom Staff

GOC Southern Command Maj. Gen. Eyal Zamir hails two years since Operation Protective Edge in Gaza as quietest in decades • The IDF will "act swiftly and with the considerable might at our disposal" if another round of fighting unfolds, he warns Hamas.

GOC Southern Command Maj. Gen. Eyal Zamir
Photo credit: Haim Hornstein

Israel Hayom Staff


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

France: Human Rights vs. The People - Yves Mamou

by Yves Mamou

Human rights, originally conceived of as an anti-discrimination tool, became a Trojan horse, a tool manipulated by Islamists and others to dismantle secularism, freedom of speech and freedom of religion in European countries.

  • French politicians seem to believe they are elected NOT to defend French people and the French nation, but to impose a "human rights ideology" on society.
  • The rule of law is there to protect citizens from the arbitrary actions of the State. When a group of French Muslims attacks the entire way society is constructed, the rule of law now protects only the perpetrators.
  • For Western leaders, "human rights" have become a kind of new religion. Like a disease, the human rights ideology has proliferated in all areas of life. The UN website shows a list of all the human rights that are now institutionalized: they range from "adequate housing" to "youth." At least 42 categories of human rights fields are determined, each of which are split into two or three subcategories.
  • With what result? More than 140 countries (out of 193 UN members) engage in torture. The number of authoritarian countries has increased. Women remain a subordinate class in nearly all countries.
  • "Saudi Arabia ratified the treaty banning discrimination against women in 2007, and yet by law subordinates women to men in all areas of life. Child labour exists in countries that have ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Powerful western countries, including the US, do business with grave human rights abusers." — Eric Posner, professor at the University of Chicago Law School.

On August 13, the Administrative Court in Nice, France, validated the decision of the Mayor of Cannes to prohibit wearing religious clothing on the beaches of Cannes. By "religious clothing," the judge clearly seemed to be pointing his finger at the burkini, a body-covering bathing suit worn by many Muslim women.

These "Muslim textile affairs" reveal two types of jihad attacking France: one hard, one soft. The hard jihad, internationally known, consists of assassinating journalists of Charlie Hebdo (January 2015), Jewish people at the Hypercacher supermarket (January 2015) and young people at the Bataclan Theater, restaurants and the Stade de France (November 2015). The hard jihad also included stabbing two policeman in Magnanville, a suburb of Paris, (June 2016); truck-ramming to death 84 people in Nice on Bastille Day (July 14), and murdering a priest in the church of Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray, among other incidents. The goal of hard jihad, led by ISIS, al-Qaeda, and others, is to impose sharia by terror.

The soft jihad is different. It does not involve murdering people, but its final goal is the same: to impose Islam on France by covering the country in Islamic symbols -- veils, burqas, burkinis and so on -- at all levels of the society: in schools, universities, hospitals, corporations, streets, beaches, swimming pools and public transportation. By imposing the veil everywhere, soft Islamists seem to want to kill secularism, which, since escaping the grip of the Catholic Church, has become the French way of "living together."

Scenes from the "hard jihad" against France; the November 2015 shootings in Paris, in which 130 people were murdered by Islamists.

No one can understand secularism in France without a bit of history.

"Secularism is essential if we want the 'people' be defined on a political basis" wrote the French historian, Jacques Sapir.
"Religious allegiance, when it turns into fundamentalism, is in conflict with the notion of sovereignty of the people. ... the Nation and State in France were built historically by fighting feudalism and the supranational ambition of the Pope and Christian religion. ... Secularism is the tool to return to the private sphere all matters that cannot be challenged comfortably .... Freedom for diversity among individuals implies a consensus in the common public sphere. The distinction between the public sphere and the private sphere is fundamental for democracy to exist."
And this distinction is secularism.

The Problem Now is Political

French politicians seem to believe they are elected NOT to defend French people and the French nation, but to impose a "human rights ideology" on society. They also seem unable to understand the challenges that common people in the streets are currently facing. They are also unable or unwilling to defend the country against either hard or soft jihad.

French Prime Minister Manuel Valls, for instance, said in a July 29 interview for Le Monde:
"We must focus on everything that is effective [to fight Islamism], but there is a line that may not be crossed: the rule of law. ... My government will not be the one to create a Guantanamo, French-style."
Only Yves Michaud, a French philosopher, dared to point out that the rule of law is there to protect citizens from the arbitrary actions of the State. When a group of French Muslims attacks the entire way society is constructed, the rule of law now protects only the perpetrators.

The same is true for French President François Hollande. After the murder by two Islamists of the Father Jacques Hamel in Saint-Étienne-du-Rouvray in July 2016, he said: "We must lead the war by all means in respect of the rule of law."

Elisabeth Levy, publisher of the French magazine, Causeur, wrote in response:
"We need to know: by all means? ... Or in respect of the rule of law? What is this rule of law that authorizes a judge to release an Islamist interested in waging jihad in Syria and, because he could not go to Syria, was free while wearing an electronic bracelet, to walk the streets to slit the throat of a priest?"
She concluded: "If we want to protect our liberties, it might be interesting to take some liberties with the rule of law."

The ideology of human rights is common to all European countries. Because authorities in European countries act, speak and legislate on the basis of human rights, they put themselves in a position of weakness when they have to name, apprehend and fight an Islamist threat.

In Sweden:
A 46-year-old Bosnian ISIS jihadi, considered extremely dangerous, was taken into custody by the Malmö police. The terrorist immediately applied for asylum, the Swedish Migration Agency stepped in, took over the case -- and prevented him from being deported. Inspector Leif Fransson of the Border Police told the local daily newspaper, HD/Sydsvenskan: "As soon as these people throw out their trump card and say 'Asylum', the gates of heaven open. Sweden has gotten a reputation as a safe haven for terrorists."
In Germany: Chancellor Angela Merkel said in a press conference, at the end of July 2016, that her mission was not to defend German people and German identity but "to fulfill humanitarian obligations [towards migrants]." She added it was "our historic task... a historic test in times of globalization."

For Western Leaders, Human Rights Has Become a New Religion

The human rights movement was born in 1948 with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, launched by Eleanor Roosevelt. For 70 years, nine major "core" human rights treaties were written and ratified by the vast majority of countries.

Like a disease, the "human rights ideology" has proliferated in all areas of life. The United Nations website shows a list of all the human rights that are now institutionalized: they range from "adequate housing" to "youth" and include "Food", "Freedom of Religion and Belief", "HIV/AIDS", "Mercenaries", "Migration", "Poverty", "Privacy", "Sexual orientation and gender identity", "Situations", " Sustainable Development", "Water and sanitation." At least 42 categories of human rights fields are determined, each of which are split into two or three subcategories.

With what result? More than 140 countries (out of 193 countries that belong to the UN) engage in torture. The number of authoritarian countries has increased: "105 countries have seen a net decline in terms of freedom, and only 61 have experienced a net improvement" reported the NGO, Freedom House, in 2016. Women remain a subordinate class in nearly all countries. Children continue to work in mines and factories in many countries.

Professor Eric Posner of the University of Chicago Law School, writes:
"Saudi Arabia ratified the treaty banning discrimination against women in 2007, and yet by law subordinates women to men in all areas of life. Child labour exists in countries that have ratified the Convention on the Rights of the Child: Uzbekistan, Tanzania and India, for example. Powerful western countries, including the US, do business with grave human rights abusers."
What is disturbing is not that the "religion" of "anti-discrimination" has become a joke. What is disturbing is that human rights, originally conceived of as an anti-discrimination tool, became a Trojan horse, a tool manipulated by Islamists and others to dismantle secularism, freedom of speech, and freedom of religion in European countries. What is disturbing is that human rights and anti-discrimination policies are dismantling nations, and placing States in a position of incapacity -- or perhaps just unwillingness -- to name Islamism as a problem and take measures against it.

The Religion of Human Rights as a Tool of Europe's Muslim Brotherhood

Jean-Louis Harouel, Professor of the History of Law at the Paris-Panthéon-Assas University, recently published a book entitled, Les Droits de l'homme contre le peuple (Humans Rights against the People). In an interview with Le Figaro, he said:
"Human rights, are what we call in France 'fundamental rights'. They were introduced in the 70's. The great beneficiaries of fundamental rights were foreigners. Islam took advantage of it to install in France, in the name of human rights and under its protection, Islamic civilization, mosques and minarets, the Islamic way of life, halal food prescriptions, clothing and cultural behavior -- Islamic laws even in violation of French law: religious marriage without civil marriage, polygamy, unilateral divorce of wife by husband, etc.
"Through the assertion of identity, Islamists and mainly UOIF [Union of Islamic Organizations of France -- the French branch of the Muslim Brotherhood] exploited human rights to install their progressive control on populations of Northern African descent, and coerce them to respect the Islamic order. In particular, they do all that they can to prevent young [Arab] people who are born in France from becoming French citizens."
The human rights and anti-discrimination "religion" also gave Islam and Islamists a comfortable position from which to declare war on France and all other European countries. It seems whatever crime they are committing today and will commit in the future, Muslims and Islamists remain the victim. For example, just after the November 13 terrorist attacks in France, in which more than 130 people were murdered by Islamists at the Bataclan Theater, the Stade de France, cafés and restaurants, Tariq Ramadan, an Islamist professor at Oxford University, tweeted:
"I am not Charlie, nor Paris: I am a warrant search suspect".
Ramadan meant that because of the emergency laws and because he was a Muslim, he was an automatic suspect, an automatic victim of racism and "Islamophobia."

In another example, just after the terrorist attack in Nice on July 14, when an Islamist rammed a truck into a crowd celebrating Bastille Day, killing at least 84 people, Abdelkader Sadouni, an imam in Nice, told the Italian newspaper Il Giornale: "French secularism is the main and only thing responsible for terror attacks."

Global Elites against the People

The question now is: have our leaders decided to cope with the real problems of the real people? In other words, are they motivated enough to throw the human rights ideology overboard, restore secularism in society and fight Islamists? The problem is that they do not even seem to understand the problem. What Peggy Noonan, of the Wall Street Journal, wrote about Angela Merkel can apply to all leaders of European countries:
"Ms. Merkel had put the entire burden of a huge cultural change not on herself and those like her but on regular people who live closer to the edge, who do not have the resources to meet the burden, who have no particular protection or money or connections. Ms. Merkel, her cabinet and government, the media and cultural apparatus that lauded her decision were not in the least affected by it and likely never would be.
Nothing in their lives will get worse. The challenge of integrating different cultures, negotiating daily tensions, dealing with crime and extremism and fearfulness on the street — that was put on those with comparatively little, whom I've called the unprotected. They were left to struggle, not gradually and over the years but suddenly and in an air of ongoing crisis that shows no signs of ending — because nobody cares about them enough to stop it.
The powerful show no particular sign of worrying about any of this. When the working and middle class pushed back in shocked indignation, the people on top called them "xenophobic," "narrow-minded," "racist." The detached, who made the decisions and bore none of the costs, got to be called "humanist," "compassionate," and "hero of human rights."
So the fight against Islamism might first consist of a fight against the caste that governs us.

Yves Mamou, based in France, worked for two decades as a journalist for Le Monde.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Former antisemitic Hungarian MP who discovered Jewish roots to make aliya - Arik Bender

by Arik Bender

Prior to discovering his Jewish roots, Csanad Szegedi was known for his extremist positions and antisemitic statements as a member of the Jobbik party.

Csanád Szegedi

Csanád Szegedi. (photo credit:Courtesy) 

A one-time MP for Hungary's extremist right-wing and antisemitic Jobbik party, who quit when he discovered he was Jewish, is now making aliya to Israel.

In an interview with The Jerusalem Post's Hebrew language sister newspaper, Ma'ariv, Csanad Szegedi said that he is waiting with bated breath for the moment that he becomes an Israeli citizen and can contribute from his wide experience to the fight against international antisemitism.

Szegedi, 34, revealed his intention to make aliya with his wife and two children at a World Zionist Organization conference that took place in Budapest over the weekend.

Prior to discovering his Jewish roots, Szegedi was known for his extremist positions and antisemitic statements as a member of Jobbik. He was one of the founders of the Hungarian Guard, an extreme nationalist group whose members don black uniforms and see themselves as the descendants of the Hungary's fascist Arrow Cross Party, which collaborated with the Nazis during World War II. Szegedi rose in the ranks of Jobbik through the years, becoming a senior member and even serving as the party's vice president until 2012, and as the party's representative to the European Parliament.

In June 2012, Szegedi stunned Hungary, particularly his fellow Jobbik members, when he revealed that his grandparents on his mother's side were Jewish. His grandmother survived Auschwitz and his grandfather was in forced-labor camps. Szegedi began to learn about Judaism, to observe the Sabbath, to keep kosher and to go to synagogue. He has since had the opportunity to visit Israel.

After discovering his roots, he quit all of his posts in Jobbik, which distanced itself from him, claiming that the reason for his leaving was not his Jewishness, but rather a corruption scandal. Since undergoing the transformation, he has become an activist against antisemitism in Europe as a whole, and in Hungary in particular. He is now completing the transformation by making aliya to Israel with his family.

Why did you decide to make aliya and live here with your family?

"Israel is an amazing country, and I believe that every Jew who lives in the Diaspora seriously considers making aliya to Israel, at least once in his life. There are many more positive elements than negative elements in being a Jew, and the biggest gift for any Jew is the existence of the State of Israel. After the nightmares that my relatives underwent in the Holocaust, my family and I very much want to be part of the positive dream that Israel constitutes for us."

Have you already signed up for aliya?

"I've begun the aliya process. I submitted the paperwork and am awaiting the approval of my documents. My family is very supportive."

Does the security situation in Israel deter you?

"No, not at all. I've visited Israel a number of times in recent years and I always felt safe. I know that the security in Israel is among the best in the world."

Where do you want to live in Israel?

"It is very difficult to make such an important decision because there is much uncertainty. Of course I have great love for the capital, Jerusalem, and that is a serious possibility for me, but I would like to also contribute to the community and strengthen a less central city, so I'm still thinking about it."

In Hungary you were a member of the Jobbik party. Do you want to be in politics in Israel as well?

"There is no doubt that I have the political bug. I closely follow politics in Israel, but I still have not considered joining a specific party. Right now, I am acting in the arena that I am familiar with, Hungary and Europe, in order to raise awareness on the issue of antisemitism and to work for the betterment of Israel, as a sort of compensation for the past. However, I have a lot of years of experience in politics and I would be happy to contribute my experience to Zionist organizations in Israel as well."

Would you like to get closure by serving as a Knesset member in Israel?

"As I said, I have a lot of political experience and I do not completely rule out entering politics, but in the initial stage I would like to continue to focus on my activities against antisemitism in Europe."

What is the first thing you will do when you officially become an Israeli?

"Professionally, I will immediately look for bodies and organizations with which I can coordinate in the fight against antisemitism, and I will of course seek to join the World Zionist Organization's extensive activities in Israel and abroad. Personally, I will visit Jerusalem and the Western Wall, and of course, I will go out to eat real Israeli food, falafel and hummus."

WZO vice chairman-acting chairman Yaakov Hagoel, who organized the conference in Hungary, welcomed Szegedi's announcement and said that the WZO will assist his aliya process and help his family's absorption in Israel.

"Recently, it has been reported that 35% of the Hungarian population is antisemitic," Hagoel said. "This should turn on a red light for the Jewish community in Hungary and for all Diaspora Jews. In light of the grave nature of the situation in Hungary, there is no doubt that the story of Szegedi, who took an active part in incitement against Israel from within the Hungarian Parliament and now actively promotes its image to the world, serves as an inspiration."

Arik Bender


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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