Friday, August 18, 2017

The Palestinian Authority is a Genocidal Terrorist Entity and Should be Treated as Such - Guy Millière

by Guy Millière

Why not tell European leaders that the Palestinian Authority is still a genocidal terrorist organization? Why not ask them how they can agree to finance in the Middle East what they claim to reject with horror in Europe?

  • The PLO became the first terrorist organization to have a seat at the UN and diplomatic representation in a Western country.
  • Daniel Pipes suggested measures to move the conflict in a constructive direction without causing major conflagration: require the Palestinian Authority (PA) pay for all damages inflicted by terrorists, including a very high price for each stolen life; burying the dead terrorists without returning them to their families; severely limiting access to West Bank territories ruled by the PA; banning PA leaders from entering Israeli airports if they make inflammatory remarks and each time there is anti-Israeli violence, or even asking them to use Jordanian airports from now on.
  • Why not tell European leaders that the Palestinian Authority is still a genocidal terrorist organization? Why not ask them how they can agree to finance in the Middle East what they claim to reject with horror in Europe?
The latest slaughter in the land of Israel took place in Halamish, Samaria, on July 21. A Palestinian stabbed to death a Jewish grandfather and two of his children. The grandmother was injured seriously. Countless similar attacks occurred in Israel in the recent and not-so-recent past.

Once again, thousands of Palestinian Arabs joyfully celebrated the murders. Some handed out candy.

The murderer was praised by the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Hamas. If he had been shot to death, he would have instantly become a martyr of Islam. A street in Ramallah would be named after him. His picture would be posted in storefronts in the territories occupied by the Palestinian Authority and Hamas, and his family would be rewarded with a high "salary" for life. 

The killer explained his crime by his willingness to "defend the al-Aqsa mosque" -- which in fact was never attacked or even threatened by Israel. He did not hide his hatred for Jews. In his last Facebook post, he described them as monkeys and pigs.

His mother showed her pride for her son and his actions.

The murders followed Muslim riots after Israel installed metal detectors at the Temple Mount entrances, as exist in other mosques worldwide -- in response to the murder of two Israeli policemen by Muslim terrorists who succeeded in bringing weapons to the site. The Israeli government did not prohibit access to the al-Aqsa mosque; it only wished to prevent further attacks. That a mosque could be used as a base for terrorist attacks seems to have been considered normal by the rioters.

Since then, the Israeli government decided to remove the metal detectors, as well as surveillance cameras that had been added later.

Although the rioting subsided, Israelis reacted negatively to their government's decision: polls showed that 77% of them strongly disapproved of the removal of the metal detectors, and thought that the Israeli government should not yield to threats and intimidation.

The director of public affairs at the Bar-Ilan University's Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, David M. Weinberg, said that it is "urgent, through resolute Israeli action, to deprive the Palestinian leadership of its delusion that he can bully Israel into retreat."

For now, Palestinian leaders have every reason to believe that there is no delusion, that terrorism and violence pay off. It would be hard to prove them wrong.

When the Arab and Muslim world waged conventional wars to destroy the Jewish state, Israel, despite its smaller number of soldiers, won every time and acquired a reputation for courage and invincibility.

In 1964, the Arab and Muslim world adopted a new strategy. It created the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). The war became a terror war. Unpredictable attacks were launched against Jews in Israel, Europe, and North and South America.

The PLO presented itself as a "national liberation movement". A people was invented, the "Palestinians" -- actually ordinary Arabs -- that the PLO was supposed to "liberate". Attacks became more frequent. Soon, after intense propaganda, Israel was no longer perceived as a small country that the Arab world of 21 nations wanted to crush, but as a powerful country trying to annihilate a small people, deprived of everything. The world, believing this inversion of history, began to withdraw its sympathy from Israel.

Continuing to use terrorism and propaganda, the PLO also commenced a diplomatic offensive -- with the support of, the Arab world, the Soviet Union and Western countries, especially France. The PLO obtained an observer seat at the United Nations in 1972. A diplomatic delegation of the PLO opened in Paris in 1975. The PLO became the first terrorist organization to have a seat at the UN and diplomatic representation in a Western country.

After failing to overthrow the king of Jordan in September 1970 , the PLO retreated to Lebanon, led the country into a civil war, and used camps it built on Lebanese territory to carry out attacks against Israel. Israel intervened in Lebanon in March 1978, then in June 1982, and almost eliminated the PLO which, thanks to French President François Mitterrand, retreated to Tunisia. The Sabra and Shatila massacres in Lebanon, perpetrated by Christian militias, were falsely presented as if they had been Israel's fault. The PLO and the Palestinians were described as victims of the Israeli cruelty. Palestinian massacres such as the coastal road attack in March 1978 were completely forgotten.

The PLO continued to incite Jew-hate among Palestinian Arabs. The result was the "first intifada" (1987-1991). Israel won militarily, but lost the public-relations war: Palestinian terrorists used children as human shields so that the Israeli army could be portrayed as made of ruthless killers.

Concessions were demanded from Israel; Israel ended up succumbing to false hopes of peace. It agreed to participate in the Madrid Conference in 1991, and then, in 1993, entered the Oslo Accords. In them, Israel recognized the PLO and accepted the creation of the Palestinian Authority, a quasi-state ruled by the PLO, which promised to renounce terrorism.

Almost immediately, the Palestinian Authority launched innumerable, terrorist attacks. These decreased only when Israel began building a security fence in 2002. Terrorism, propaganda and especially lies had allowed the PLO to obtained a terrorist quasi-state accepted by Israel. Even though attacks never stopped, Israel was pushed to pursue the peace process as if there was no terrorism.

To this day, the Palestinian Authority launches relentless campaigns to spread murder and terrorism against Israelis. The most recent one began in September 2015, when PA President Mahmoud Abbas falsely claimed that the Jews' "filthy feet" were defiling the Temple Mount; he added that he welcomed "every drop of blood spilled in Jerusalem". Tourists of all religions visit the Temple Mount compound -- although not the mosque -- by agreement with the PA.

Every day, the PA uses the schools and the media it controls to incite genocidal Jew-hate.

The Palestinian Authority, a terrorist organization with anti-Jewish genocidal goals, is all the while being subsidized to the tune of millions of dollars annually from the West, which, unhelpfully, presents it as more "moderate" than Hamas, the equivalent of saying that al-Qaeda is more "moderate" than ISIS. That is still insufficient reason to bankroll al-Qaeda.

When the PA leaders speak in the Western world, they may sound moderate. When they speak to Palestinian Arabs, however, they speak like the leaders of Hamas.

The only peace they contemplate is the "liberation" of all Palestine, "from the river to the sea" – in other words, the total destruction of Israel and its replacement by themselves, as any map of "Palestine" clearly corroborates.

The murderers of Jews, who in turn are killed by the Israeli Defense Forces, are considered by the Palestinian Authority as shaheeds, jihadi fighters who died for Allah : "martyrs".

Since the days of the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin al-Husseini, before the state of Israel was founded in 1948, Palestinians have been using the lie that the Jews are trying to destroy the al-Aqsa mosque on the Temple Mount as a pretext to stir up Muslim Jew-hate and uprisings, and they continually repeat the slander.

The removal of the metal detectors from the Temple Mount entrances means that more attacks will almost certainly occur. It is perceived as a victory by the leaders of the PA and other Islamic leaders.

Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he understands those who criticized the government's decision, and added that he had to take into account broader security imperatives. It is probably true. The Palestinian Authority leaders may well have hoped to ignite the entire region and launch a regional war.

Many Israelis, however, viewed the move as terrorism having dictated a retreat yet again. They know that the PA is an enemy that wants them dead. They heard what many of the rioters in Jerusalem were shouting: "Jews, remember Kaybar, the army of Mohammed returns" -- a reference to the massacre of a Jewish community in Arabia by the Islamic Prophet Mohammed in 628. They see that the conflict is essentially religious as well as political. According to Islam, all belongs to Allah -- especially places that were once under the rule of Islam, as the land of Israel was during the Ottoman Empire, and must be retaken and held in trust forever for Allah.

Islamically speaking, Muslims must never fully accept the existence of Israel on a land once conquered by Islam, and therefore, in their minds, obligated to be Islamic for eternity. The thought that Jews control a land that once was ruled by Islam is particularly repellent.

Even if Israelis accepted years ago that Muslims could pray on the Temple Mount, what they accept less and less is that Jews have no right to pray there. They see the Israeli decision to leave the Temple Mount and its management in the hands of the Muslim Waqf when Jerusalem was reunited in June 1967 as a tragic mistake that ended up creating an Islamic enclave on Israel's territory. Israelis, understandably tired of being attacked, are, as Daniel Pipes emphasized a few months ago, ready for an absolute Israeli victory, and an absolute Palestinian defeat.

Daniel Pipes suggested measures to move the conflict in a constructive direction without causing major conflagration: requiring the Palestinian Authority to pay for all damages inflicted by terrorists, including an extremely high price for each stolen life; burying dead terrorists without returning them to their families; severely limiting access to West Bank territories ruled by the PA; banning the PA leaders from entering Israeli airports if they make inflammatory remarks and each time there is anti-Israeli violence, or even asking them to use Jordanian airports from now on.

Israeli leaders could also speak more frankly. Why not tell European leaders that the Palestinian Authority is still a genocidal terrorist organization? Why not ask them how they can agree to finance in the Middle East what they claim to reject with horror in Europe? Do they want Israeli Jews dead, too?

Why not say bluntly that offering a state to the Palestinian Authority would be rewarding terrorism and murder -- far beyond what Israelis can accept, a few decades after the Holocaust? Are they hoping it will spare Europe more Islamic terrorism?

Telling all this to the Trump administration's emissaries is not necessary. The American administration already knows it. President Donald J. Trump told Mahmoud Abbas what no other Western leader dared to say. He knows that there is nothing to expect from the Palestinian Authority and that Jason Greenblatt's mission is destined to fail.

Telling all this to European leaders, however, is critical.

President Donald Trump told Mahmoud Abbas what no other Western leader dared to say. He knows that there is nothing to expect from the Palestinian Authority and that Jason Greenblatt's mission is destined to fail. Pictured: Trump and Abbas give a joint statement on May 3, 2017 in Washington, DC. (Image source: Olivier Douliery-Pool/Getty Images)

That Mahmoud Abbas could use a blood libel in a speech he gave at the European Parliament -- and receive a standing ovation -- in 2016 is as revealing of Europe's deepest wishes as it is of Abbas's.

That French President Emmanuel Macron could warmly embrace Mahmoud Abbas and thank him for working for "non-violence", when precisely the opposite is demonstrably evident, is just as revealing.

When Macron welcomed Netanyahu in Paris to attend the annual commemoration for the Vel d'Hiv deportations a few days after he met Mahmoud Abbas, the new French president denounced French behavior towards Jews during the German occupation, but seized the opportunity to emphasize the "urgent need" to create a "Palestinian state" with Jerusalem as its capital. Netanyahu politely replied that the Palestinian Authority did not recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

Like many anti-Semites, French leaders, and many others in Europe, always seem ready commemorate Jews who are dead while contributing to the murder of Jews who are alive.

Guy Millière, a professor at the University of Paris, is the author of 27 books on France and Europe.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

The Real Race War - David Horowitz

by David Horowitz

(Not the fake one against "white supremacy.")

Reprinted from

The tragedy in Charlottesville could have been an occasion to stop and consider how the tolerance for politically correct violence and politically correct hatred is leading the nation towards civil war. Instead the media and the political left have turned this incident into the biggest fake news story of the summer, transforming its real lessons into a morality play that justifies war against the political right, and against white people generally.

The organizers of the “Unite the Right” demonstration in Charlottesville were repellent racists. But they came to defend a historic monument honoring a complex man and cause, and not to attack it or presumably anyone else. They applied for a permit and were denied. They re-applied successfully in a petition supported by the local ACLU. If they had come to precipitate violence, why would they have gone to the tedious trouble of applying for a permit? Who knows what – if anything – would have happened if that had been the end of the story and no one had showed up to oppose them.

What “Unite the Right” actually demonstrated was that the assortment of neo-Nazis, pro-Confederates and assorted yahoos gathered under the banner of the “Alt-Right” is actually a negligible group. This was a national show of strength that actually attracted only a few hundred people. Compare that to the tens of the thousands who can readily be marshalled by two violent groups of the left – Black Lives Matter and Antifa – and you get an idea of how marginal “white supremacists” are to America’s political and cultural life.

Yet “white supremacy” and its evils became the centerpiece of all the fake news reporting on the event, including all the ludicrous attacks on the president for not condemning enough a bogeyman the whole nation condemns, and that no one but a risible fringe supports. Talk about virtue signaling! Omitted from the media coverage were the other forces at work in precipitating the battle of Emancipation Park, specifically Black Lives Matter and Antifa, two violent leftwing groups with racial agendas who came to squelch the demonstration in defense of the monument.

Unlike the Unite the Right demonstrators, the leftist groups did not have a permit for Emancipation Park (they had permits for two nearby parks). But why should they need a permit, since the havoc they had previously wreaked in Ferguson, Berkeley, Sacramento, Portland and other cities, was accomplished without permits, while their criminality was presented by the media as “protests,” and their rioting went completely unpunished.

In short, there were two demonstrations in Charlottesville - a legal protest by “Unite the Right” and one protest by the vigilantes of Antifa and Black Lives Matter. Who started the fight is really immaterial. Both sides were prepared for violence because these conflicts are already a pattern of our deteriorating civic life. Once the two sides had gathered in the same place, the violence was totally predictable. Two parties, two culpabilities; but except for the initial statement of President Trump, condemning both sides, only one party has been held accountable, and that happens to be the one that was in the park legally.

What is taking place in the media accounts and political commentaries on this event is an effort by the left to turn the mayhem in Charlottesville into a template for their war against a mythical enemy – “white supremacy” – which is really a war on white people generally. The ideology that drives the left and divides our country is “identity politics” – the idea that the world consists of two groups – “people of color” who are guiltless and oppressed, and white people who are guilty and oppressors. This is the real race war. Its noxious themes inform the mindless, hysterical hatred for President Trump, and the equally mindless support for racist mobs like Black Lives Matter and Antifa. It is a war from which no good can come. But it won’t be stopped unless enough people have the courage to stand up and name it for what it is.

David Horowitz
[For Frontpage editor Jamie Glazov's essay on David Horowitz's life and work, click here.]
David Horowitz is the author of Big Agenda: President Trump's Plan to Save America, now in its tenth week on The New York Times’ best-seller list.
Horowitz was one of the founders of the New Left in the 1960s and an editor of its largest magazine, Ramparts. He is the author, with Peter Collier, of three best selling dynastic biographies: The Rockefellers: An American Dynasty (1976); The Kennedys: An American Dream (1984); and The Fords: An American Epic (1987). Looking back in anger at their days in the New Left, he and Collier wrote Destructive Generation (1989), a chronicle of their second thoughts about the 60s that has been compared to Whittaker Chambers’ Witness and other classic works documenting a break from totalitarianism. Horowitz examined this subject more closely in Radical Son (1996), a memoir tracing his odyssey from “red-diaper baby” to conservative activist that George Gilder described as “the first great autobiography of his generation.”


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Buyer Beware: “Kids 4 Peace” May Want Israel In Pieces - Micha Danzig

by Micha Danzig

The BSD movement sets its sights on child converts.

Recently, a well-known Jewish summer camp controversially decided to fly the PLO flag.
Adding to the controversy, the Camp raised the PLO flag shortly before the observance of the most solemn Jewish holiday of the year - Tisha B’Av and right after the slaughter of three members of an Israeli family, following days of PLO-incited rioting. 

In response to the uproar caused by the decision to raise the PLO flag, the camp decided to issue an apology -- actually, it issued a fake non-apology, in which they “apologized” to anyone who "may have been offended."

The camp also tried to explain why it decided to raise the flag of an organization committed to the genocidal call of “liberating Palestine from the river to the sea.”  The camp indicated it raised the PLO flag after their “guests” from the “Kids 4 Peace” group requested the PLO flag be raised alongside the U.S., Canadian and Israeli flags.

Which raises the questions: What is “Kids 4 Peace” (K4P) and why is this group asking a Jewish camp to raise the PLO flag?

According to its website, K4P is a “global movement of youth and families, dedicated to ending conflict and inspiring hope in divided societies around the world.”

Who could be against that?  No wonder the camp agreed to raise the flag of an organization committed to wipe Israel off the map. 

After all, if an organization named “Kids 4 Peace” with a mission to end global conflict and inspire “hope in divided societies around the world” asks you to put up a flag to welcome their kids, why not comply?

Of course, if K4P were really for “ending conflict and inspiring hope in divided societies around the world,” one would expect to see information about its programs regarding the world’s most violent conflicts.

But, according to the K4P website, the only conflict it appears to spend time on is the “Israeli-Palestinian conflict” – a conflict that has resulted in fewer fatalities over the last 50 years than those over the last 5 years in Syria, Iraq, South Sudan or Nigeria. 

Of course, it is not just K4P’s singular focus on the Arab-Israeli conflict that is inconsistent with its “global” mission. 

As Jonathan S. Tobin recently noted in "It's Not About Flags: The Real Problem With Jewish-Palestinian Dialogue," one of the main problems represented by programs, such as those put on by K4P, is the “blind faith that so many Jews have,” particularly in the American Jewish community, “in the value of dialogue programs.”

As Tobin, a “journalist who has covered dialogue programs for decades,” points out; it is “the lack of symmetry between the two sides” which makes these programs ill-suited for solving the Arab-Israeli conflict.  Tobin further observes that as part of these dialogue programs, “[f]ew if any Palestinian participants ever express doubt about the justice of their cause or feel obligated to temper their anger at what they consider to be the sins of Zionism. But even supporters of Israel who engage in these programs generally feel compelled to express criticisms of Israel or to show respect if not sympathy for the Palestinian [counterfactual] Nakba narrative.”

Another, however, potentially much bigger problem with K4P (than the asymmetry inherent in the programs it promotes) is that despite its sweet name and its even sweeter “mission,” there is much reason to doubt its good faith when it comes to achieving a just peace (for Israel).  In fact, given its background, and those of many of its directors and affiliates, it appears just as reasonable to conclude that K4P’s real mission is to destroy Israel.

On its website, K4P notes it is part of the Alliance for Middle East Peace (AllMEP). This, in and of itself, should cause any Jewish camp, particularly one which identifies itself as “unabashedly pro-Israel” to reconsider working with K4P.

According to NGO Monitor, AllMEP includes a number of organizations that are unabashedly hostile to Israel’s existence. 

Those organizations include such anti-Israel groups as: One Voice International, Combatants for Peace and The Holy Land Trust -- a major BDS supporter, whose Executive Director has bragged about the group providing training to Hamas. According to NGO Monitor, Huda Abu Arquob, one of only two AllMEPS staff members, claimed Hamas is “not a terrorist organization” and accused Israel of attacking Islam. At the 2014 and 2015 J Street conferences, Ms. Arquob advocated for BDS.  Despite all this, Fr. Josh Thomas, the Executive Director of Kids4Peace International, is an AllMEPS’ board member.

Another long-time K4P director, Dr. Yakir Englander, is the Director of "Dialogue to Action" in Kids4Peace International.  In a recent exchange of text messages with Sloan Rachmuth, an investigative researcher (who helped compile some of the research for this piece), Dr. Englander, in response to a question about K4P‘s work and its affiliation with pro-BDS groups, stated he did not “think BDS is the end of the world.”  In those same written communications, Dr. Englander referred to Holy Land Trust CEO, Sam Awad, as a person with “an amazing heart.”  Mr. Awad and HLT, however, regularly demonize Israel and encourage violence against Israelis.  Awad has claimed Israel engages in “apartheid;” accused Israel of “ethnic cleansing,” and has stated that non-violent demonstrations are “not a substitute for the armed struggle.”

Unfortunately, given the company Dr. Englander’s keeps, his glowing reference to Awad should not be surprising.

On the K4P “community portal” Dr. Englander is pictured arm in arm with Imam Siraj Wahhaj, who, according to The Clarion Project has preached that the first World Trade Center bombing was “a terrorist attack staged by the U.S. government and possibly Israel as a ‘conspiracy’ against Islam.” 

K4P, has claimed it is committed to “non-violent political change.”  Wahhaj is apparently also committed to “change,” though not one that most parents of Jewish campers would embrace.  Per the Clarion Project, the “change“ Wahhaj wants, includes Sharia’s implementation in the USA.  Wahhaj has been quoted as saying, “Islam is better than democracy.  Allah will cause his deen, to prevail over every kind of system, and you know what?  It will happen.”

In addition (and perhaps most concerning), K4P President, Reverend Diane Nancekivell is a regular donor to the Friends of Sabeel (Sabeel) whose mission is the destruction of Israel as a Jewish state; not “peace” between Israel and its neighbors.

The Sabeel North American Advisory Board includes such renowned Israel bashers as Rashid Khalidi and Cornel West.  And Dr. Naim Ateek, the Sabeel founder has mendaciously referred to Jesus as a “Palestinian” and regularly justifies terrorism against Israelis.  He has also invoked anti-Semitic imagery, referring to an “Israeli government crucifixion system” and to Jesus being “on the cross again with thousands of crucified Palestinians around him.”

According to both the ADL and NGO Monitor, one of Sabeel’s main goals is to delegitimize Israel and its existence in churches throughout North America. 

As a part of that effort, Sabeel promotes “Palestinian Liberation Theology.”  This “theology” is wielded by Sabeel like a sword to demonize Jews and to try and refute Jewish religious, historical and indigenous ties to Israel. 

In furtherance of their mission against Jewish self-determination, Sabeel regularly organizes “Witness Visit Tours,” which are endorsed and attended by representatives of such radically anti-Israel organizations as CodePink, JVP and ANSWER. 

Another tour fan appears to be the K4P President Reverend Diane Nancekivell, who also attended the Sabeel hate-fest tour, which may be part of the reason for her regular donations to Friends of Sabeel and its plainly anti-Israel mission.

At the end of the day, what does all of this mean?  It still may be the case that the majority of K4P employees mean well and truly want to bring about a just peace and end to the Arab-Israeli conflict.  But given the incredibly suspect, anti-Semitic, and/or anti-Israel company much of the K4P leadership keeps and their apparently proud affiliations with many anti-Israel groups, it is at least just as likely that despite the sweet name and even sweeter mission statement, that K4P’s mission is entirely consistent with the PLO flag and the mission it represents, Israel’s elimination.

That would certainly explain why at a recent Kids 4 Peace event Jewish high school kids were treated to an evening with Palestinian rapper Tamer Nafar, whose lyrics include: “Who's the Terrorist?” and where Nafar asserts Israel “raped the Arab soul,…“leading to the birth to terrorism.” Apparently, K4P thinks it is appropriate to promote the fiction that before 1948 Arabs in the Middle East were peaceful and didn’t regularly massacre Jews.  That is something all Jewish organizations should know is an outright lie. It is also something all Jewish organizations should be well aware of before they decide on whether to allow K4P to work with the Jewish leaders of tomorrow.

Micha Danzig served in the Israeli Army and is a former police officer with the NYPD. He is currently an attorney and is very active with numerous Jewish and pro-Israel organizations, including Stand With Us, T.E.A.M. and the FIDF. He is also a frequent guest on the One America News Network, including shows like The Tipping Point and The Daily Ledger, where he is called on to discuss matters related to Israel and the Middle East.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Netanyahu's Great Challenge - Caroline Glick

by Caroline Glick

What can Netanyahu do to mitigate the impact of the probes on his ability to do his job?

Originally published by the Jerusalem Post

Over the weekend, it was reported that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu supports legislation that would change the procedure for declaring war. The bill, supported by the government as well as by Netanyahu’s opponent and former finance minister Yair Lapid, involves implementing lessons learned from past experiences.

Under the suggested law, the government will provide the security cabinet with blanket authority to authorize military operations at the beginning of its tenure. By limiting the number of people involved in decision making regarding actual operations, leaks can be minimized and the element of surprise can be protected.

Given the wide support the bill enjoys, and its substance, the media could have been expected to cover the move in a sober-minded way.

But alas, there was no chance of that happening amid the media circus surrounding the criminal probes of Netanyahu. The desultory probes were recently fortified by the deal Netanyahu’s former chief of staff Ari Harow cut with the prosecution to incriminate his former boss in exchange for leniency in the ongoing corruption probe of Harow’s alleged influence peddling.

Now, with Netanyahu’s sworn enemies in the media and the political Left braying for his immediate resignation, the war powers bill, like everything else he is likely to initiate in the coming months and years, is being reported as nothing more than an attempt to change the subject.

None of the probes are expected to conclude any time soon. Legal experts assess they will stretch well into 2019. This means Netanyahu will be under a cloud of suspicion at least until the end of his current term of office. And that is not good for the country.

So what can Netanyahu do to mitigate the impact of the probes on his ability to do his job? The answer is complicated. On the one hand, it is fairly clear that he won’t be able to do anything to end the probes and not because he is accused of doing terrible things. To the contrary, he is accused of doing ridiculously stupid and harmless things.

The police are conducting two investigations of the prime minister. In the first, they are investigating whether he received too many gifts from his friends. Specifically, they want to know if he received too many cigars from his friend Arnon Milchen and whether he received other presents from other friends.

The second probe relates to a deal he discussed but never made with his arch-nemesis Yediot Aharonot publisher Arnon Mozes under which Mozes would give less hostile coverage of Netanyahu and in exchange, Netanyahu would get Yediot’s pro-Netanyahu competitor Israel Hayom to cut back its circulation. In the event, the talks went nowhere. In 2014 Netanyahu broke up his government and went to early elections in 2015 to prevent a bill – supported by 24 lawmakers in a preliminary vote – which would have bankrupted Israel Hayom from moving forward.

The 24 lawmakers that supported the bill received terrific coverage in Yediot. But none of them – including former justice minister Tzipi Livni – are under investigation. The police’s lack of interest in Livni is particularly notable. She advanced the bill despite the fact that then attorney general Yehuda Weinstein determined it was unconstitutional. She based her decision on a legal opinion produced for her by Yediot’s attorney.

FINALLY, THE third investigation doesn’t involve Netanyahu at all. Instead his attorney, confidante and cousin David Shimron is under investigation. And according to investigative reporter Yoav Yitzhak, the probe unraveled this week when the state’s witness was shown to have lied either to police investigators or to his own attorneys about Shimron’s role in brokering a deal for Israel to buy new submarines from Germany.

Netanyahu supported the purchase, indeed, he touted it. His media foes allege that he only supported the purchase, which was opposed by the Defense Ministry, because Shimron was involved.

This allegation itself makes clear the absurdity of the probe.

If the investigation goes forward despite the collapse of the investigation, and Netanyahu is implicated, there is simply no way to prove that he supported the deal for corrupt reasons when he insists that he supported it because he believes Israel needs a modernized submarine fleet.

In other words, the third investigation is incapable of implicating Netanyahu regardless of its relative merits.

It is important to understand the inherent weakness of the probes because it shows us two important things. First, the investigators and the prosecutors do not care what the public thinks of their investigations. In a damning interview with the online Hebrew-language journal Mida last week, former police investigator chief superintendent Boaz Gutman confirmed the long alleged claim that police and prosecutors are motivated to investigate right-wing politicians rather than left-wing politicians because they want the Left restored to power.

As far as police investigators and prosecutors are concerned, it is they, rather than the public, that should decide who gets to lead Israel.

And this brings us to the second aspect we need to understand about the weakness of the probes. To date, politicized investigators and prosecutors have felt comfortable probing and indicting politicians for political reasons because since 1993, the mere act of indicting a politician has been the professional equivalent of a felony conviction.

In 1993, the activist Supreme Court ruled that then interior minister Arye Deri had to resign due to his recent indictment on corruption charges. The ruling, which had no basis in law, has since enjoyed the status of law. Politicians, who are later exonerated of all criminal charges, have repeatedly been forced from office, their reputations in tatters.

The power to remove politicians from office simply by indicting them gives the prosecution absolute power over the political system. The fear of indictment, perhaps more than anything else, has been sufficient to stop every significant attempt to pass laws to reform the unchecked legal system.

In recent weeks, coalition chairman MK David Bitan has told the media that Netanyahu has pledged not to resign if indicted in light of the trivial nature of the probes. Netanyahu’s ability to remain in his position, in opposition to the non-binding norm dictated by the Supreme Court in 1993, will be a function of the public’s view of him and of the investigations against him. And if Netanyahu is strong enough to stay, then his intention not to fold will have a salutary impact on the fairness of the investigations against him.

If the prosecutors realize they will have to win a case against a sitting prime minister rather than one they have already forced from office in disgrace, their decision about whether or not to indict Netanyahu will be based far more on the investigations’ findings and far less on their political views than in the past.

Although prosecutors do not care what the public thinks of them, they do care what their colleagues think of them. And if they indict a sitting prime minister and then fail to convict him while he is still in office and popular, their colleagues will not think well of them.

So it all boils down to governing. But how should Netanyahu govern? If Netanyahu follows the lead set by prime minister Ariel Sharon when he and his sons were under investigation, and abandons his political base to appease the Left, he will harm his chances of remaining in power. Netanyahu will become as unpopular as Ehud Olmert was when he was indicted. He will not avoid indictment. And he will not be reelected.

If on the other hand Netanyahu is loyal to his voters and implements the Right’s policy on Judea and Samaria – namely, applying Israeli law to Area C of Judea and Samaria in anticipation of the era that will begin when 82-year-old PLO chief Mahmoud Abbas dies – then he will not only be able to stay in office if indicted, he will win the next elections even if he is still enmeshed in criminal probes.

Caroline Glick is the Director of the David Horowitz Freedom Center's Israel Security Project and the Senior Contributing Editor of The Jerusalem Post. For more information on Ms. Glick's work, visit


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Islamic Relief Chairman Seems to Hate Jews and Love Jihad - Sam Westrop

by Sam Westrop

Islamic Relief received $370,000 from the U.S. government in 2016.

Please click here to sign a petition calling on the Silicon Valley Community Foundation to end its financial support for Islamist Relief.

IR-USA Chairman Khaled Lamada displaying the Muslim Brotherhood's four-finger "R4BIA" sign.

Islamist Watch has uncovered further evidence of anti-Semitism promoted by senior officials of Islamic Relief, the largest Islamic charity in America.

Although Islamic Relief is a designated terrorist organization in the United Arab Emirates, it enjoys the support of governments and other charities all around the world, including $370,000 from the U.S. government in 2016, along with millions of dollars from the UN, European Union, Germany, Sweden and the United Kingdom.

As Islamist Watch has previously discussed, these public monies serve to subsidize Islamic Relief's funding of Hamas-linked organizations in the Gaza Strip. All across the globe, in fact, Islamic Relief branches are led by Islamists with close ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamist causes. Islamic Relief's U.S. branch (IR-USA) is no exception.

The current chairman of IR-USA is Khaled Lamada, a prominent Egyptian-American, who has a long history of involvement with Muslim Brotherhood organizations. He does not, in fact, shy away from publicly expressing his support for Islamist causes. His social media accounts are filled with Muslim Brotherhood insignia, including the notorious R4BIA sign – exhibited by Muslim Brotherhood supporters since 2013.

Islamic Relief received $370,000 from the U.S. government in 2016.

Worst of all, Lamada appears to hate Jews and admire violence against Israel. Writing and sharing posts mostly in Arabic, Lamada has circulated text praising the "jihad" of the "Mujahidin of Egypt" for "causing the Jews many defeats." He has republished claims on Facebook that praise Hamas for inflicting a "huge defeat" against the "Zionist entity."

Further, Lamada has circulated videos that claim the current leader of Egypt, President Sisi, is secretly Jewish, and that he opposes the Muslim Brotherhood on the orders of the Jews. The video further claims that Jews are sowing division among Egyptian Muslims by encouraging sexual activities. Lamada's only comment about these anti-Semitic conspiracies is: "I hope this is not true." Lamada has even disseminated claims that America is controlled by a Zionist lobby, which is working to demonize Muslims and plan an invasion of Sudan and the Nile Valley.

Lamada is not the only anti-Semitic conspiracy theorist running America's largest Islamic charity.

Yousef Abdallah, east coast operations manager for Islamic Relief.

Last month, Islamist Watch uncovered anti-Semitic social media posts by another senior official of IR-USA, Yousef Abdallah, who published a story romanticising "martyrs" who provided guns to "kill more than 20 jews" and "fire rockets at Tel Aviv."

Abdallah's other posts included references to Jews as "stinking," and claims that "the Jews put the outside wall of Al Aqsa [the mosque in Jerusalem] on fire." Abdallah also 'likes' a comment on his Facebook post that calls on God to wreak "revenge on the damned rapists Zionists. O God they are no challenge for you. Shake the Earth beneath their feet and destroy them as you destroyed the peoples of ʿĀd, Thamud and Lot."

Another (former) IR-USA staff member, Omar Shahin, preached in 2002: "You will keep on fighting with the Jews until the fight reaches the east of Jordan river then the stones and trees will say: oh Muslim, oh (servant) slaves of Allah, there is a Jew behind me; come and kill him."
That IR-USA's chairman and his staff appear to hate Jews is not particularly surprising. That this extremist, terrorism-linked, Jew-hating charity has enjoyed millions of taxpayers' dollars and dinners at the White House, however, is utterly perplexing. 

Sam Westrop is the director of Islamist Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Minimize Islamic Terrorism in America? Just Manipulate Statistics - A. Z. Mohamed

by A. Z. Mohamed

The attempt by the Left to minimize the dangers of the jihadists among us is not only counter-productive; it is immoral.

  • While Islamist terrorists have committed fewer attacks in America since 9/11 than "far-right-wing violent extremists," they have killed more victims. — United States Government Accountability Office report, released on April 6, 2017. Titled "Countering Violent Extremism: Actions Needed to Define Strategy and Assess Progress of Federal Efforts".
  • Both right-wing and Islamic extremists are the enemies of Western civilization; all must be investigated and penalized. The attempt by the Left to minimize the dangers of the jihadists among us is not only counter-productive; it is immoral.
Well before Donald J. Trump was elected to the U.S. presidency, many have been claiming that more Americans have been killed by "right-wing extremists" than by Islamic terrorists.

A study released in June 2015 by the New America Foundation on "Terrorism in America After 9/11" ostensibly gave credence to this assertion. Focusing on one graph in the study and the authors' summary of the statistics – that the "death toll [from attacks since September 11, 2001] has been quite similar to other forms of political, and even non-political, violence that Americans face today" -- a number of media outlets and progressive groups pounced on the data. 

Referring to the New America Foundation findings, Time magazine's Joanna Plucinska reported:
"Since 9/11, white right-wing terrorists have killed almost twice as many Americans in homegrown attacks than radical Islamists have... [During this period], 48 people were killed by white terrorists, while 26 were killed by radical Islamists."
In March 2017, the self-described "multi-media network for the latest Progressive news, commentary and analysis," The Ring of Fire, also referred to the New America Foundation study. In a program titled "Right Wing Extremist Have Killed More Americans than Terrorists," broadcaster Farron Cousins said:
"In terms of people from Muslim countries coming to the United States committing any kind of act of terror, 50 people have died in the United States since 9/11 attacks. 254 have died since the 9/11 attack from right-wing extremists violence and acts of terror here in the United States."
He went on to state that right-wing extremists "are killing five times more American citizens than anyone from any Muslim country... coming into the United States."

More recently, on August 14, 2017 -- two days after a deranged white supremacist killed a woman and wounded 19 other demonstrators in Charlottesville, Virginia -- MSNBC also pointed to the New American Foundation study. The network's Stephanie Ruhle announced, "Between 2001 and now, we have seen three times more deaths caused by right-wing extremists than Islamic terrorists."

This repeated assertion is both disingenuous and politically motivated. Far more reliable is the United States Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, released on April 6, 2017. Titled "Countering Violent Extremism: Actions Needed to Define Strategy and Assess Progress of Federal Efforts," the report illustrates that while Islamist terrorists have committed fewer attacks in America since 9/11 than "far-right-wing violent extremists," they have killed more victims.

Both right-wing and Islamic extremists are the enemies of Western civilization; all must be investigated and penalized. The attempt by the Left to minimize the dangers of the jihadists among us is not only counter-productive; it is immoral.

On April 15, 2013, Islamic terrorists detonated two bombs at the Boston Marathon, killing three people and injuring several hundred others. (Image source: Aaron Tang/Wikimedia Commons)

A. Z. Mohamed is a Muslim born and raised in the Middle East.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Nationwide anti-Google protests canceled due to antifa threats - Rick Moran

by Rick Moran

We are entering uncharted territory in American history

A nine city protest against Google and supporting free speech for Google employees was canceled after organizers said there were threats of violence from the "alt-left."

The media is trying very hard to connect the anti-Google demonstrations to the racists and Nazis who demonstrated in Charlottesville. In at least some respects, they were apparently successful.

Associated Press:
Protests planned at Google offices around the country over the firing of an employee who questioned company diversity efforts have been postponed.
A statement Wednesday on the "March on Google" website said Saturday's protests were being canceled because of threats from what it called "alt left terrorist groups."
The planned events in Pittsburgh and eight other locations were in reaction to Google's firing of a software engineer who argued that biological differences helped explain why women are underrepresented at the company.
Protest organizers didn't respond to requests for information about the alleged threats. A Pittsburgh public safety spokeswoman said organizers had informed them "of plans to cancel and why they were cancelling," but she wouldn't elaborate.
Police departments in Mountain View, California, where Google is headquartered, and Cambridge, Massachusetts, where the company has an office, said the organizers hadn't sought a permit after announcing planned events there.
Jeremy Warnick, a spokesman for the Cambridge Police Department, said the department knew of no possible threats. "Through our various public safety partners, there were no known threats made against the March on Google here in Cambridge," he said.
A couple of hundred nutcases in Charlottesville are being used as poster children for conservatism. Millions and millions of decent, moral Americans who find the ideology of the racists and Nazis as repugnant as anyone in America are being smeared by the left wing media because equating them with the right wing thugs will hurt Donald Trump and the Republican party.
So a demonstration against ideological group think at Google suddenly becomes an "alt-right" event put on by racists. The antifa and other violent leftist groups know they now have the entire right on the run and will continue to press their advantage, being enabled by a media as eager as they are to smear all supporters of President Trump as Nazis and kluxers. 
We are entering uncharted territory in American history - a time when the First Amendment is under unprecedented assault by those who seek to impose an ideological conformity on America as rigid and limited as that found in Google, Inc. The diversity freaks wish to turn the entire country into Googlebots - docile, compliant, fearful of nonconformity, and terrified of the cost of stepping out of line. 
And if opponents of this future want to fight against it, expect to be violently suppressed.

Rick Moran


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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