Friday, March 22, 2019

US should 'fully recognize' Israeli sovereignty in Golan Heights - Arutz Sheva Staff

by Arutz Sheva Staff

In unprecedented move, US Pres. Trump calls for recognition of Israel's sovereignty over Golan Heights.

US President Donald Trump
US President Donald Trump                                                                                                    Reuters

US President Donald Trump on Thursday made an unprecedented announcement, calling for the US to officially recognize Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights.

In a tweet, Trump wrote, "After 52 years it is time for the United States to fully recognize Israel’s Sovereignty over the Golan Heights, which is of critical strategic and security importance to the State of Israel and Regional Stability!"

Trump called the territory "of critical strategic and security importance to the State of Israel and Regional Stability!"

Earlier on Thursday, a report by Israel’s Channel 13 claimed that senior Israeli officials believed that Trump would formally recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights next week.

The move ends a decades-long US policy of non-recognition of Israel’s annexation of the strategic plateau.

Israel captured the Heights from Syria during the Six Day War in June, 1967, after the Syrian army used the strategic high ground overlooking the Galilee to attack Israeli towns and farms.

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu praised Trump's announcement.

"At a time when Iran seeks to use Syria as a platform to destroy Israel, President Trump boldly recognizes Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights," Netanyahu wrote on his personal Twitter account. "Thank you President Trump!"

Trump will host Netanyahu at the White House next Monday and Tuesday. The Israeli leader, who is running for reelection, will be in Washington for the annual conference of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) pro-Israel lobbying group.

The Golan Heights move was hinted at a week ago when the State Department changed its usual description of the area as "occupied" to "Israeli-controlled."

Arutz Sheva Staff


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Kiev Connection: Have the Democrats opened Pandora’s Box with successful demand for investigation of foreign influence on the 2016 election? - Thomas Lifson

by Thomas Lifson

A formal criminal investigation already is being launched overseas, making an American counterpart investigation awkward to suppress.

Democrats may regret their years of hyperventilation over allegations of foreign “collusion” to influence a presidential election. In what amounts to slow-motion political jujitsu, the very nefarious acts attributed to the Trump campaign may end up being applied to the Obama administration and Hillary campaign. A formal criminal investigation already is being launched overseas, making an American counterpart investigation awkward to suppress.

Anyone who has paid attention to the genesis of the Mueller investigation understands that it was opposition research paid for by the Democratic Party and Hillary presidential campaign and corrupt senior officials at the FBI that sparked the appointment of the Special Counsel. But new information developed by John Solomon of The Hill suggests that there was indeed an effort by a foreign government to influence the 2016 election, and that it was the government of Ukraine attempting to sway voters in Hillary’s favor.

Ukraine Prosecutor General Yurii Lutsenko (Hill TV screen grab)
Ukraine’s top prosecutor divulged in an interview aired Wednesday on Hill.TV that he has opened an investigation into whether his country’s law enforcement apparatus intentionally leaked financial records during the 2016 U.S. presidential campaign about then-Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort in an effort to sway the election in favor of Hillary Clinton.
The leak of the so-called “black ledger” files to U.S. media prompted Manafort’s resignation from the Trump campaign and gave rise to one of the key allegations in the Russia collusion probe that has dogged Trump for the last two and a half years.
Ukraine Prosecutor General Yurii Lutsenko’s probe was prompted by a Ukrainian parliamentarian's release of a tape recording purporting to quote a top law enforcement official as saying his agency leaked the Manafort financial records to help Clinton's campaign.
The parliamentarian also secured a court ruling that the leak amounted to “an illegal intrusion into the American election campaign,” Lutsenko told me. Lutsenko said the tape recording is a serious enough allegation to warrant opening a probe, and one of his concerns is that the Ukrainian law enforcement agency involved had frequent contact with the Obama administration’s U.S. embassy in Kiev at the time.
“Today we will launch a criminal investigation about this and we will give legal assessment of this information,” Lutsenko told me.
Solomon’s article is long and detailed, and includes disturbing information about the US embassy in Kiev, which has, at a minimum, a lot of explaining to do.

But a second version of Pandora’s Box related to Ukraine is also open at this moment, thanks to the prosecution of Paul Manafort for failing to register as an agent of the Ukraine government under FARA, the Foreign Agent Registration Act. That rarely-enforced law now may be turned against others in the Democrats’ camp, who also lobbied for Ukraine, including Clinton White House counsel and Washington, DC power lawyer Greg Craig. Greg Re of Fox News reports:
Former Obama White House Counsel and Clinton-linked attorney Greg Craig may soon be charged by the Justice Department for engaging in illegal unregistered overseas lobbying, in a case initially probed by Special Counsel Robert Mueller -- a development that would make him the first Democrat to face prosecution amid the long-running Russia investigation.
The case centers on lobbying work that Craig performed in 2012 for the Russian-backed president of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, while Craig was a partner at the law firm Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom. Craig allegedly never registered as a foreign agent under a U.S. law known as the Foreign Agents Registration Act, or FARA, which requires lobbyists to declare publicly if they represent foreign leaders, governments or their political parties.
FARA violations were only rarely prosecuted until Mueller took aim at Paul Manafort, President Trump's former campaign chairman, for his lobbying work in Ukraine
Keep in mind that there are many other potential sources of evidence for turning the Democrats’ efforts to rid themselves of President Trump by investigation against them. President Trump can de-classify and release the FISA warrants, that appear to have concealed relevant facts from the Court – a criminal offense – and other information about the corruption at the FBI.

My assumption all along has been that as the most successful reality TV producer in the history of the medium, Donald Trump is managing the “story arc” for maximum effect on the 2020 electorate. Finally, at long last we may be seeing the third act of this drama begin. 

Thomas Lifson


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

New Israel Fund stands with the United Nations against Israel - Ronn Torossian

by Ronn Torossian

Standing with the NIF is standing against Israel as well.

The investigative commission of the United Nations Human Rights Council that examined the most recent round of violence on the Israel-Gaza border presented its findings on Thursday,, saying it found "reasonable grounds" that Israeli security forces violated international law.

The panel recommended that UN members consider imposing individual sanctions, such as a travel ban or freezing the assets of those identified as responsible by the commission. The UN commission also recommended that materials it collected be transferred to the International Criminal Court in The Hague. The commission "recommends that states ([that are} parties to the Geneva Conventions and/or to the Rome Statute carry out their duty to exercise criminal jurisdiction and arrest persons alleged to have committed, or who ordered to have committed, the international crimes described in the present report, and either to try or to extradite them."

Said findings were rejected by Israeli officials across the political spectrum, including Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who said that Israel outright rejects the report: "The council has set new records of hypocrisy and lies out of an obsessive hatred for Israel."

Naturally, organizations funded by the New Israel Fund contributed to this report which damages the State of Israel and recommends the arrests of members of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF).  Shame on them.

The New Israel Fund has contributed more than $10 Million to the Association for Civil Rights in Israel – which called for the Israeli government to establish a commission of inquiry to examine the events that took place along the fence.

"It is impossible to ignore the death and injury of dozens of civilians, among them, women and children, by claiming self-defense," said ACRI, which petitioned the High Court against the open-fire orders of the Israel Defense Forces: "After the court refused to examine, as it should have, the army's open-fire orders and use of force on the ground, and in light of the difficult findings of the UN, the government of Israel must establish a commission of inquiry."

Among the other organizations which testified or submitted material to the United Nations were organizations funded by the New Israel Fund to the tune of tens of millions of dollars,  including Yesh Din, B’Tselem and Adalah, the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel.

Adalah - the Legal Center for Arab Minority Rights in Israel lauded the UN report, calling it "a harsh indictment of the Israeli government.”

"The commission adopted the stance of Adalah and other human rights organizations which rejected the High Court decision that allowed the continuation of fatal use of firepower against unarmed demonstrators in Gaza," said Adalah director Hassan Jabareen.

Attorney Michael Sfard, the legal adviser of Yesh Din, who testified before the commission told Haaretz that “my testimony was part of Yesh Din’s attempt to stop the illegal and immoral use of live fire against thousands of Gazan demonstrators.”

But B’Tselem wasn`t satisfied only with its testimony-  Ahead of the UN Human Rights Council meeting (March 18, 2019) on the findings of the UN commission of inquiry into the 2018 Gaza protests, B’Tselem issued a position paper explaining that Israel’s promise to “investigate” 11 incidents in which protesters were killed is mere propaganda.

In a letter, B’Tselem’s director, Hagai El-Ad called upon the head of the commission, Santiago Canton, to reject the lies Israel has woven while killing more unarmed protesters: “A real change in Israeli policy will only take place if the international community demands it clearly and unequivocally, and if it stops allowing Israel to do no more than offer hollow promises of ‘investigation’.”

In the position paper, B’Tselem explains why announcing investigations is a standard ploy that Israel employs to ease international pressure whenever its unlawful policy elicits criticism:
…"The “investigations” carried out by the military whitewashing mechanism, under the leadership of the Military Advocate General (MAG), are meaningless other than their role in aiding Israel’s effort to silence international criticism…The international community must stop buying into Israel’s propaganda ploys concerning so-called “investigations… Therefore, the international community must make the most of its power and influence to compel Israel to change its policy and immediately cease the gunfire at protesters who pose no danger".

It is clear that The New Israel Fund (NIF) harms the State of Israel – the organization actively supports a boycott of Israel, punitive measures against the Israel Defense Forces, and funds a litany of anti-Israel causes. To stand with the New Israel Fund is to stand against Israel. 

Ronn Torossian is one of the most well respected Public Relations professionals in the world, and founded 1 of the 15 largest PR firms in the U.S..


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Poland's Holocaust Complicity: Responding To Professor Radzilowski - Joseph Puder

by Joseph Puder

The barbarity would have been at a lower level without the collaboration of many Poles.

The article below is the continuation of a dialogue/debate Frontpage is hosting on the question of Polish Culpability in the Holocaust? -- the title of a recent Frontpage article by Joseph Puder. We have also run Danusha Goska's, Poland's New Law Criminalizing Speech about the Holocaust. Below, Joseph Puder counters John Radzilowski's recent critique of his viewpoint. Frontpage continues to welcome contributions to this dialogue and debate. 
Professor John Radzilowski’s fine piece titled Were the Poles Really 'Culpable' in the Holocaust? makes several good points, albeit, he overlooks the Polish-Catholic anti-Semitism of the pre-World War II years. Between 1921 and 1939, the Polish government employed numerus clauses, to limit the number of Jewish students in institutions of higher learning, i.e. law schools and medical schools. From approximately 1936-1939, Polish authorities instituted harsh discriminatory measures against Jewish students. A system of “Jewish Benches” was implemented, which allocated special benches at the back of the auditoriums to be used only by Jewish students (the future Prime Minister of Israel Menachem Begin was one such student at the University of Warsaw Law School). The Jewish students refused to sit on these benches, which then led to serious clashes, resulting in bloodshed. These discriminatory measures were somewhat reminiscent of, but not as drastic as the Nuremberg Laws instituted by Nazi Germany in the mid-1930s, that excluded Jews altogether from German higher education institutions. 

A clear unambiguous answer to Prof. Radzilowski’s question is that Nazi Germany carries the exclusive responsibility for the Holocaust. However, without the collaboration of native populations such as many Poles, the magnitude of the Holocaust would not have risen to the levels of barbarity and inhumanity that it did. 

There is no argument about the brutality and cynicism of the Stalinist communists of the Soviet Union in persecuting Poles (and Jews for that matter). We know about the murderers of the Katyn Forrest, carried out by Stalin’s secret service - the NKVD. They systematically killed thousands of captured Polish officers in April and May of 1940. I agree with Radzilowski that Poles, along with Jews, were victims.  They were butchered together during the 1648 massacre by Bohdan Khmelnytski, leader of the Ukrainian Cossacks. During WWII, Poles suffered, but were not the target of the Nazi total extermination plan. Jews were the target. Still, Polish history since the 18th century has been a sad one. In 1772, Poland was divided by Tsarist Russia; The Habsburg Empire, and Prussia. Unlike the Jews who were exiled from their homeland in the aftermath of the Revolt and the destruction of the Temple in Jerusalem in 70 CE, the Polish people remained in their homeland.

The tragic Polish history in recent centuries does not diminish the fact that many Catholic-Poles took advantage of Nazi genocide against Polish Jewry, by taking over Jewish homes and businesses, sometimes by turning in hiding Jews to the Nazis for monetary rewards. Anti-Semitism and greed played a huge role in the motivation of very many Poles. The Catholic Church too, played a large part in fueling anti-Semitism. This has changed in recent decades with the ascension to the papacy of Carol Wojtyla, better known as Pope John Paul II – the Polish Pope.  

Carol Wojtyla’s closest friend in his hometown of Wadowice (15 miles away from Auschwitz) was the son of the leader of the Wadowice Jewish community. Wojtyla witnessed the Nazi horrors in his native Poland. As Pope (1978-2005), he issued an unprecedented apology to groups that have been wronged by Catholics, notably Jews. He asserted that “Jews are our elder brothers in faith.” In 1986, he became the first known Pope to have entered the Great Synagogue in Rome. In 1990, he declared anti-Semitism to be “a sin against God and humanity.” And, in late 1993, he pushed the Vatican to recognize the Jewish state of Israel, overriding the objections of Vatican officials who worried about the consequences for Christian minorities in Arab countries.

There were certainly humanitarian Poles, people like Professor Yanek, who offered his friend and colleague, my own grandfather, (whom sadly, I have never met. I was born after the war) shelter during the Holocaust. Not willing to risk his friend’s family’s lives, my grandfather was grateful but declined the offer. He soon thereafter was caught up in a Nazi roundup, and together with 1,500 other Jews, was murdered in his hometown of Ulanow, buried in a common grave. In my previous articles, I did not in any way imply that Jan Karski was the only humanitarian Pole, contrary to Radzilowski’s assertion. There were thousands of Poles who risked their lives to save Jews and have been honored by Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial and Museum in Jerusalem. Many of these righteous Poles were persecuted after the War by their own fellow Catholic Poles, for hiding or saving Jews.

Unfortunately, there were many more Poles who betrayed their Jewish neighbors. My own cousin (whom I never met) Tzvi-Leib Feith, who was 10-years old, was left by his mother for safekeeping with a Polish farmer. The farmer was paid handsomely, while my Aunt Sarah was transported to and murdered with her 16-year old daughter at the Belzec Death Camp. The farmer cold-bloodedly murdered my cousin, so he would not have to feed him. Greed and anti-Semitic hate drove the farmer to commit this heinous and unpunished crime.

For Jews, memory is the 11th Commandment. We remember what the Amalekites did to our forefathers upon their exodus from Egypt. We also remember what the Nazi-Germans did to our people during the Holocaust. We likewise recall the collaborationist Vishy government in France that turned over Jews to the Nazi Gestapo. And, we cannot forget that many Polish Catholics aided and abetted the murder of 3 million Polish Jews, while simultaneously remembering the Polish-Catholic heroes who saved Jews. Yes, we remember the good and the bad.

No Israeli or Jew in his/her right mind would blame Poland for the death camps; it was a Nazi German enterprise. Nevertheless, the rabid anti-Semitism and greed that possessed many Poles, facilitated the murder of their Jewish neighbors. The Jedwabne pogrom in July 1941, was a case-in-point of anti-Semitism and greed. At least 340 Jewish neighbors, including men, women, the elderly and babies, were herded into a barn and burned alive. Books have been written about this ghastly episode. And then, after the War was over, in July 1946, when a few survivors made it to their home towns, in this case the city of Kielce, anti-Semitism and greed once again drove Poles to murder 42 holocaust survivors.  

While Jews cannot and must not forget the past, Israeli-Jews must deal with the present and the future.  Today, Poland has been a staunch ally of Israel within the European Union (EU). Poles and Jews share a thousand-year history in Poland. In Tel Aviv, you can still encounter members of the older generation speaking Polish, along with Polish food and mannerisms. There is great value in the warm relationship between Israel and Poland for both Israelis and Poles. For Poles it is in the form of economic benefits including Israeli know-how, and hi-tech investments in Poland. For Israel, an alliance with a nation of 39 million people in the heart of Europe means diplomatic support in the EU and the UN.

For Poles to figure out whether they are culpable in the Holocaust, it is vital for the two nations (Israel and Poland) to reach an agreement on an open and unbiased educational undertaking that examines the Holocaust. If Polish anti-Semitism is to be eradicated, the school curriculum must include an honest self-examination of Polish anti-Semitism, and a true and accurate account of the World War II years.

Joseph Puder


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Netanyahu, Pompeo talk energy with Cypriot, Greek leaders - JNS and Israel Hayom Staff

by JNS and Israel Hayom Staff

PM Benjamin Netanyahu: Israeli-Cypriot-Greek work on everything from firefighting to energy "one of the best regional associations in the world."

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Cyprus President Nicos Anastasiades, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras  
Photo: Amos Ben Gershom / GPO 

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with Cyprus President Nicos Anastasiades and Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras at the David Citadel Hotel in Jerusalem on Wednesday to discuss cooperation between the countries, including the upcoming East-Med pipeline connecting Israel and the European Union.

"This is the sixth summit meeting between Israel, Cyprus and Greece. We began this a few years ago, and it's blossomed into one of the best regional associations in the world," said Netanyahu.

"We cooperate in everything, from firefighting now to energy," Netanyahu said.

"We are planning to lay down a pipeline called the East-Med Pipeline, from Israel, through Cyprus, through Greece, to Europe, something that will benefit our economies greatly, provide stability for the region and prosperity to our peoples, but also we think would diversify the energy supplies to Europe," Netanyahu said.

Netanyahu added that Pompeo's participation "signifies the fact that the United States supports this regional effort, and it has many, many facets that we're going to discuss. And I think that it says that this is something for the long haul."

Earlier Wednesday, Pompeo met one-on-one with Netanyahu to discuss the Iranian threat.

JNS and Israel Hayom Staff


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Case for Jexodus - Daniel Greenfield

by Daniel Greenfield

It must be based on a fight to repair this country by restoring its values and its truths.

Zionism has always appealed to two kinds of Jews: those who are running to it and those who are running away from something. Jexodus, meaning a Jewish exit from under the shadow of the donkey, also has those who are running away from something, usually anti-Semitism, and those who are running toward something, a better vision for the country, for their community and for their families.

The negative Jexodus will be the aftermath of a radicalization that splits the Democrats, as it did Labour in the UK along dividing lines of militant socialism, Islamism, and anti-Semitism. These three ‘isms’ will split Jewish Democrats alone those same lines leaving the radicals on the inside and moderates outside. Those Jews who remain will be required to prove their loyalty by denouncing Jews and Israel. These demands will be put forward in the stridently anti-Semitic tones commonplace on the fringes of the Left.

The 2020 season is just getting started and the Sanders campaign’s deputy press secretary, an illegal alien, already accused Jews of being disloyal, and Elizabeth Warren issued a statement in defense of Rep. Omar accusing Jews of inventing anti-Semitism accusations to silence criticism of Israel. It’s no coincidence that these overt shows of anti-Semitism are coming from the leftiest figures in the race.

And it will only get worse.

Jewish lefties have a high degree of tolerance for anti-Semitism. But ultimately the only Jews who will be able to remain in the Dem ranks will have very thick skins and career ambitions, like Chuck Schumer, harbor a complicated mix of shame and hatred for Jewishness, like Bernie Sanders, or have no connection to anything Jewish beyond their last names, like your average millennial Obama official.

The Democrats have shown no ability to moderate their extremist drift. The movements pushing them leftward are, like the Democratic Socialists of America, openly supportive of anti-Semitism.

That’s the easiest case to make for Jexodus because the Democrats will be the ones to make it.

Jews will exit the Dems voluntarily or they will be forced out. What’s left will be the rabble that protests outside synagogues and sounds like the Soviet or Iranian spokespersons for the Jewish community.

But a negative case for Jexodus isn’t enough. 

Jewish Democrats have responded to the outbreak of anti-Semitism with the usual nebbish excuses, blaming Israel, Netanyahu, and the ‘politicization of anti-Semitism”. But socialist movements were anti-Semitic before Zionism and Jesse Jackson was slurring Jews as ‘hymies’ long before Netanyahu.

Israel is a convenient excuse for anti-Semitism, not only by anti-Semites, but by their Jewish apologists who are eager to exercise a sense of control over a hatred that cannot be controlled, by taking the blame. And then placing it as far away as possible, on another country thousands of miles away.

The anti-Semites blame the Jews. The Jews blame Israel. And nothing is learned from the experience.

The case for Jexodus, like the case for Zionism, must be built around a positive vision for what the country should be, and on a reasoned understanding of why everything fell apart around them.

The negative and the positive case for Zionism split the country between Jewish lefties, who fled the anti-Semitism of socialist movements in Russia, but wanted nothing more than to build a socialist system, and Jewish nationalists who wanted to build a nation based on their beliefs and heritage.

When their socialist project began to collapse, leftists turned on Israel and are trying to dismantle it.

The Democrats are not a political movement with good ideas that happens to be troubled by anti-Semitism. The anti-Semitism is the direct result of those ideas on the domestic and foreign policy front. Rep. Omar sits on the House Foreign Relations Committee spewing anti-Semitism because the Democrats believe that Islamic terrorism is justified. Anti-Semitism, in Omar’s case, is the symptom of an Islamist hostility that does not limit itself to Israel, but encloses America and much of the free world.

Anti-Semitism is only one of the prejudices and the destructive consequences resulting from that view. Otherwise why would Americans spend all this time debating Israel: a tiny country located far away?

The debates about Israel aren’t really about a country smaller than New Jersey. Israel is a symbol. The symbol represents what America should or shouldn’t be. Those who love Israel, Jewish or non-Jewish, are traditionalists, nationalists and liberals who believe that countries should have the right to maintain their identities and protect their values by defeating terrorists without having to apologize for it.

Islamists hate Israel because it’s a nation of ‘infidels’ that freed itself of the tyranny of Islamic law. They believe that non-Muslim societies are inherently wicked and must be brought under Sharia supremacy.

Rep. Omar's infamous tweet, “Israel has hypnotized the world, may Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel,” expressed a religious sentiment in a religious struggle. The Jews in the Koran are enemies of Allah. Their lack of obedience to Islamic law leads them to oppress Muslims. The solution is for Muslims to mobilize, with Allah’s guidance, and wage an apocalyptic war on Israel.

The Islamist final solution, in Israel or America, is to impose Islamic law on the infidels. By any means.

Leftists hate Israel because it is a microcosm of everything they hate about America. The Israel that they hate, a country of factories, tech stocks, religious fundamentalism, with babies and soldiers everywhere, embodies what they hate about America. Socialist anti-Semitism used to be anti-capitalism dressed up in medieval stereotypes. It’s now also anti-nationalism, hatred of religion, in anti-Semitic garb.

The distinction between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism has never mattered much. Leftist anti-Zionism and leftist anti-Semitism both use Jews as symbols in a debate about America and Europe. It was this sort of debate in the Dreyfuss case, where Jews were objects not subjects, a shorthand of stereotypes in an argument about what France should be, that motivated Theodore Herzl to support Zionism. 

Subtract Israel from the equation and the problem doesn’t go away.

Socialism was rife with anti-Semitism because Jews were a useful stereotype when inveighing against capitalism.

They still are.

"Zionist Jews," a man at a Bernie Sanders event asked the candidate. "They running the Federal Reserve, they running Wall Street, they’re running everything."

“What is your relationship with your Jewish community?” he demanded.

Bernie Sanders replied by condemning Israel. The anti-Semites blame the Jews. The Jews blame Israel.

Jews have done really well under meritocracy and capitalism. Any sustained attack on either one eventually devolves into anti-Semitism and conspiracy theories about Jewish influence.

When Jews defend themselves against anti-Semitism, they feed into those conspiracy theories. Rep. Omar revived the same trick that had been pulled on Jews throughout the twentieth century.

This is the negative case for Jexodus. It’s also the alternative to a free enterprise liberal meritocracy.

The case for Jexodus must be based on the inescapable fact that anti-Semitism isn’t something that accidentally happened to the Democrats. It was the inevitable outcome of their bad ideas.

The Democrats can’t be reformed with pleas and arguments about tolerance. Expecting them to disavow anti-Semitism is also a demand that they abandon their domestic and foreign policy ideas.

And that won’t happen.

The case for Jexodus must also be based on the positive vision of what America can be. Rising anti-Semitism isn’t the fault of any single politician, but of the abandonment of traditional American values.

Jexodus must be based on a fight to repair this country by restoring its values and its truths.

The anti-Semitism tearing apart the Democrats is a cautionary tale about what happens when America’s traditional commitments to individual freedom, religious liberty, free enterprise and tolerance are undermined by utopian extremists who want to save us by taking away our liberties and beliefs.

The easiest case for Jexodus will be made by the Democrats. The hardest case has to be made by Republicans.

Jexodus should not just be about what we are leaving behind. But where we are going.
* * *

Photo by Fibonacci Blue

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


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

'Progressive' = the New Nazi - Joseph Hippolito

by Joseph Hippolito

Editor: Though I object to the name-calling, since I think it only serves to shut down debate, the points the writer makes in the body of the article are still valid.

Before Donald Trump was elected President, and certainly since, self-described "progressives" or "democratic socialists" in the Democratic Party have denigrated anybody who opposes their agenda as Nazis. But are they engaging in psychological projection? Consider the following recent events.

Comments by Rep. Ilhan Omar, Rep. Jim Clyburn and Rep. Rashida Tlaib display contempt for Jews -- in Rep. Clyburn's case, for victims of the Holocaust. Heavily Democratic legislatures in New York, Illinois and Virginia perpetuate the wanton destruction of human life by passing laws allowing abortion to the moment of birth. In Virginia, Democratic Gov. Ralph Northam said a woman can choose whether a baby who survived a botched abortion should live. False flags are cynically organized to delude the unsuspecting and promote an agenda. Behind those developments is the pervasive identity politics that defines some groups as inherently better than others.

In those four areas -- anti-Semitism, genocide, false flags and identity politics -- do "democratic socialists" and Nazis share more than the former want to admit.

Contempt for Jews is not limited to Nazis or "democratic socialists." But by embracing Islam in their politics of "diversity" and "inclusion," the "democratic socialists" tolerate Islam's anti-Semitism. The Nazis understood the connection between Islam and anti-Semitism so well that they sought Islam as an ally in their politics of extermination.

Mohammed Amin al-Husseini, the grand mufti of Jerusalem, broadcast anti-Semitic messages from Berlin with Hitler's blessing from 1941 until the end of World War II. Al-Husseini -- a close ally of Hassan al-Banna, the Muslim Brotherhood's founder -- told Arabs in the British Mandate of Palestine to "kill the Jews wherever you find them," thereby continuing a personal campaign that lasted nearly 25 years.

The Waffen-SS also had a special Muslim division, the Handschar, named after the German word for scimitar. Comprised of Bosnian Muslims, the Handschar division perpetrated atrocities against Jewish civilians. Notably, it was the only division in the Waffen-SS allowed to have chaplains, with one imam presiding over each battalion.

Today, Hitler's "Mein Kampfcirculates widely in the Arab world, with no discouragement from Muslim clerics.

The House Democrats' flaccid response to its members' anti-Semitic remarks reflects the refusal to confront Islam's anti-Semitism. Their resolution condemning all forms of bigotry -- without mentioning Rep. Omar by name or Islamist terrorism -- reveals Rep. Nancy Pelosi, the speaker of the house, to be this century's Neville Chamberlain.

Promoting the wanton destruction of human life extends beyond abortion. Last March, Oregon Gov. Kate Brown -- a Democrat whom Planned Parenthood endorsed for re-election last year -- signed legislation allowing mentally ill patients to be denied food and water unless that patient issued an advanced directive to the contrary before becoming debilitated. Previously, only caregivers with power of attorney could make such a decision. The bill received unanimous support from the Democrats in the Oregon legislature's House of Representatives.

In January, Oregon's Democrats introduced another bill expanding the state's law governing medically assisted suicide to include any patient with an incurable disease or intolerable pain. Currently, only patients who are expected to live no more than six months because of a terminal disease qualify.

This March, Maryland's House of Delegates -- the lower chamber of that state's legislature, the General Assembly -- approved legislation allowing medically assisted suicide. The bill passed 74-66 on March 7 -- with 73 of the chamber's 99 Democrats supporting it. Within days, members of Minnesota's Democratic-Farmer Labor Party sponsored similar legislation in each house of the state legislature. Six states and the District of Columbia permit physician-assisted suicide.

Such laws follow the ultimate logic of the Nazis' euthanasia program, Aktion T4, which Hitler personally initiated in 1939 and which doctors administered. Designed to eliminate what the Nazis called "life unworthy of life," the program focused on the chronically ill, the elderly, the disabled, and the mentally incapacitated -- whether adults or children -- using mercy as one excuse for extermination.

During Aktion T4's two years of open operation, nearly 70,000 died from starvation, dehydration, lethal injection and gassing. The Nazis built six gas chambers designed as showers to fool the victims. Though public pressure forced the Nazis to discontinue the program in 1941, it provided the basis for the murderous methods used in death camps.

The utilitarian impulse governing the use of tissue from aborted fetuses for such bizarre experiments as creating humanized mice -- usage that has the Democrats' implied consent -- also governed the Nazis' use of prisoners for their own macabre experiments in concentration camps. In one example, camp doctors infected children with tuberculosis, removed their lymph nodes to determine the disease's progress, then executed their subjects.

The "democratic socialists" and the Nazis even share the propensity to promote their agendas by fabricating incidents. Eight decades after Jussie Smollett staged a hate crime supposedly perpetrated by Trump's supporters, the Nazis orchestrated a scenario that plunged the world into war.

On Aug. 31, 1939, with relations between Germany and Poland rapidly deteriorating, Polish troops attacked and briefly took over a German radio station near the Polish border to broadcast this message: "Attention! This is Gliwice. The broadcasting station is in Polish hands."

Gliwice was the Polish name for the then-German town of Gleiwitz. Gunfire could be heard during the broadcast. German police overpowered the troops and re-captured the radio station.

Only the Polish troops were not Polish troops. They were members of the SS, who not only carried out the attack but dressed concentration-camp inmates in Polish army uniforms and killed them as "proof." One of the "troops" was an unmarried German farmer who sympathized with the Poles. The SS arrested him a day earlier and murdered him.

German radio carried news of the faux attack within hours. It seemed that Hitler's assertions about the Poles oppressing and killing German nationals had merit. The next day, Sept. 1, Hitler declared war against Poland. World War II had begun.

The Gleiwitz "attack" belonged to a campaign of false flags orchestrated in late August 1939 by the SS and German military intelligence, the Abwehr. Attention to detail was so meticulous that the Abwehr also provided Polish military equipment and Polish military identification to the fake troops.

Nearly 80 years later, a swastika and the words, "Heil Trump" and "Fag Church" were found on the walls of St. David's Episcopal Church in Brown County, Ind. immediately after Trump's election. The graffiti was "among numerous incidents that have occurred in the wake of Trump’s Election Day win," wrote the Washington Post. Yet six months later, police arrested organist George Nathaniel Stang for vandalizing his own church.

"I suppose I wanted to give local people a reason to fight for good, even if it was a false flag," wrote Stang, who wanted to "mobilize a movement."

That movement reflects the "democratic socialists' " goal of arbitrarily favoring ostensibly oppressed groups at the expense of those in power. That goal varies from the Nazis' racial policies only in the nature of the groups. Otherwise, both narratives are fundamentally identical.

Just as the democratic socialists view women, African Americans, Latinos, Muslims and the sexually non-straight as needing special protection from powerful whites, Christians and capitalists, so did the Nazis view "Aryans" as needing special protection from Jews, socialists and capitalists. Just as the Nazis viewed "Aryans" as superior due to their race, so do "democratic socialists" view the marginalized as inherently superior due to their victimization.

If racism is the belief that ethnicity matters more than values, ideas and ethics, then "democratic socialists" and Nazis are identically racist. In both cases, individual rights and equality under the rule of law mean nothing.

Herbert Marcuse, a philosopher of the neo-Marxist Frankfurt School, rejected the American ideal of individual liberty under law in favor of preferences for designated groups at others' expense. Marcuse advocated a "policy of unequal treatment" that "would protect radicalism on the Left against that on the Right,” he wrote.

Such a policy, Marcuse wrote, would demand "the withdrawal of toleration of speech and assembly from groups and movements" that oppose Leftist goals, and "may necessitate new and rigid restrictions on teachings and practices in the educational institutions."

This was the Nazis' practice in service of their ideology. This is the democratic socialists' goal in service of theirs. 
Tucker Carlson discussed the applied consequences of Marcuse's approach March 11 during his Fox News show:

You sometimes hear modern progressives described as the new Puritans. That’s a slur on colonial Americans. Whatever their flaws, the Puritans cared about the fate of the human soul and the moral regeneration of their society. Those aren’t topics that interest progressives. They’re too busy pushing late-term abortion and cross-dressing on fifth graders. These are the people who write our movies and sitcoms.

The Left’s main goal, in case you haven’t noticed, is controlling what you think. In order to do that, they have to control the information you receive. Google and Facebook and Twitter are on board. They’re happy to ban unapproved thoughts without apology. They often do. So do the other cable channels, and virtually every major news outlet in this country. ... They demand total conformity.
Indeed, in issuing warnings about Nazis, the "democratic socialists" and their appeasers in the Democratic Party are issuing warnings about themselves. 

Joseph Hippolito


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Palestinians: The Other Peace Deal - Khaled Abu Toameh

by Khaled Abu Toameh

Perhaps it would be a good idea if the US administration came up with a plan to make peace between Palestinians and Palestinians before attempting to make peace between the Palestinians and Israel.

  • Hamas is now accusing the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Fatah of exploiting the economic crisis in the Gaza Strip to call on Palestinians to overthrow the Hamas regime. Fatah, for its part, is accusing the "dark forces" of Hamas of acting on orders from outside parties to establish a separate Palestinian state in the Gaza Strip.
  • The US administration says it will publish its long-awaited plan for peace in the Middle East, known as the "Deal of the Century," after the general elections in Israel on April 9. Perhaps it would be a good idea if the US administration came up with a plan to make peace between Palestinians and Palestinians before attempting to make peace between the Palestinians and Israel.
  • What is clear, meanwhile, is that the Fatah and Hamas leaders are more interested in warring with each other than improving the living conditions of their people. The two groups have already rejected the upcoming "Deal of the Century": for now, that is the only deal they seem ready to make.

Hamas and Fatah, the Palestinian parties ruling the Gaza Strip and West Bank respectively, have been at war with each other for the past 12 years. But when it comes to repressing and violating the human rights of their people, Hamas and Fatah are comrades-in-arms. Pictured: Palestinian Authority President and Fatah Chairman Mahmoud Abbas (right) meets with Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh on May 30, 2007 in Gaza. (Photo by Abu Askar/PPO via Getty Images)

Hamas and Fatah, the two major Palestinian parties ruling the Gaza Strip and West Bank respectively, have been at war with each other for the past 12 years. They disagree on many things, but when it comes to repressing and violating the human rights of their people, Hamas and Fatah have proven that they are comrades-in-arms.

In the past week, Fatah has been launching scathing attacks on Hamas for using excessive force to suppress Palestinians protesting economic hardship in the Gaza Strip. Fatah says that hundreds of Palestinians, including political activists and journalists, have been arrested or severely beaten by Hamas security forces.

The charges against Hamas are not baseless. Photos of wounded Palestinians have surfaced on social media. Some had black eyes and bruises over different parts of their bodies, while others appeared to have had their legs and arms broken by Hamas security officers.

The latest victim of Hamas's violent repression of the protests, which are being held under the banner, "We Want to Live!", is senior Fatah official Atef Abu Seif. Abu Seif, who is also a renowned novelist, was reportedly kidnapped from his home and badly beaten by Hamas militiamen on March 18. According to some Fatah officials, the assailants broke his arms and legs; Abu Seif is reported to be hospitalized, in serious condition.

Fatah has also published photos of dozens of Palestinian men, women and children who say they have been badly beaten by Hamas security forces during the recent protests organized by youth movements demanding a solution to the high cost of living, the high rate of unemployment and new taxes imposed by the rulers of Hamas on the two million residents of the Gaza Strip.

Several Palestinian journalists and human rights activists in the Gaza Strip have also fallen victim to Hamas's brutal measures, which seem aimed at crushing the protests and deterring Palestinians from speaking out against the rulers of the Hamas-controlled coastal enclave.

One of the human rights activists who was physically assaulted by Hamas security forces is Jamil Sarhan, director of the Palestinian Independent Commission for Human Rights. The human rights group said that the Hamas officers also confiscated Sarhan's mobile phone and arrested another one of its members, the attorney Baker Turkeman.

The Fatah-dominated Palestinian Journalists Syndicate says that at least 17 journalists in the Gaza Strip have been targeted by Hamas in the past week. Seven of the journalists were arrested for their role in covering the protests: Osama Kahlout, Ehab Fasfous, Ahmed Sahmoud, Majed Kdeih, Juma'a Daloul, Mustafa al-Dahdouh and Ahmed al-Shinbari. The syndicate said that several journalists were beaten and had their mobile phones confiscated by Hamas security officers, who tried to prevent them from covering the protests. Another four journalists have been placed under house arrest, the syndicate added.

Hamas's repressive and violent actions against Palestinians protesting poverty and unemployment is not something that should surprise anyone, particularly those familiar with the authoritarian regime of Hamas, an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood. The real shock would have been if Hamas had allowed Palestinians living under its rule in the Gaza Strip to take to the streets to demand an improvement in their living conditions.

Since its violent takeover of the Gaza Strip in 2007, the part of the Palestinian Authority (PA) that is Hamas, which rules the Gaza Strip, has employed an iron-fisted policy against its political opponents and anyone who dares to challenge its rule.

Yet, in the West Bank, the same Palestinian Authority and its ruling Fatah faction, who are now strongly criticizing Hamas for its oppressive measures against protesters, are hardly distinguishable from their rivals in the Gaza Strip.

Like Hamas, the PA security forces in the West Bank have also been engaging in systematic targeting of Palestinian journalists and political opponents. The most recent victims of the PA crackdown on journalists are Hazem Nasser and Amer Abu Arafeh. Since just the beginning of this year, the Palestinian Authority security forces have already arrested at least nine journalists in the West Bank, according to the Palestinian Committee for Supporting Journalists.

Like Hamas, the PA has also been using force on protesters. During 2018, PA security forces used force to disperse thousands of Palestinians who took to the streets in the West Bank to protest President Mahmoud Abbas's sanctions against the Gaza Strip. The sanctions include, among other restrictions, cutting salaries and welfare payments to thousands of Palestinian employees and families in the Gaza Strip.

Scenes of Palestinian Authority police officers beating men, women and children are not unfamiliar. As in the Gaza Strip, Palestinians in the West Bank have accused the PA security forces of using batons and tear gas against the protestors. The photos and videos documenting the recent Hamas violence against protestors in the Gaza Strip are similar to those from the West Bank, where PA security officers are seen assaulting demonstrators.

Like Hamas, the Palestinian Authority has also resorted to torture to crush political opponents and dissent. Human rights groups have documented dozens of cases of torture and harassment in PA prisons in recent years. According to a recent report published by Human Rights Watch:
"In the West Bank, some of the harshest treatment reported by detainees occurs at the Joint Security Committee detention facility in Jericho, where officers subject detainees to regular shabeh [in which a kneeling prisoner's hands are tied behind him to his ankles] and long stints in small solitary cells cut off from others."
The report concludes that when it comes to torture and human rights violations, there is no difference between the PA and Hamas:
"Both the Fatah-dominated PA in the West Bank and Hamas in Gaza have in recent years have carried out scores of arbitrary arrests for peaceful criticism of the authorities, particularly on social media, among independent journalists, on university campuses, and at demonstrations."
The recent economic protests in the Gaza Strip have further exacerbated tensions between Fatah and Hamas, making it absurd even to talk about the possibility of reconciliation between the two rival parties. Hamas is defending its right to beat women and children and to break the bones of its political rivals, while the Palestinian Authority and Fatah are continuing to employ similar tactics against Palestinians in the West Bank.

Hamas is now accusing the PA and Fatah of exploiting the economic crisis in the Gaza Strip to call on Palestinians to overthrow the Hamas regime. Fatah, for its part, is accusing the "dark forces" of Hamas of acting on orders from outside parties to establish a separate Palestinian state in the Gaza Strip.

The US administration says it will publish its long-awaited plan for peace in the Middle East, known as the "Deal of the Century," after the general elections in Israel on April 9. Perhaps it would be a good idea if the US administration came up with a plan to make peace between Palestinians and Palestinians before attempting to make peace between the Palestinians and Israel. What is clear, meanwhile, is that the Fatah and Hamas leaders are more interested in warring with each other than improving the living conditions of their people. The two groups have already rejected the upcoming "Deal of the Century": for now, that is the only deal they seem ready to make.
  • Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on Twitter

Khaled Abu Toameh, an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem, is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at Gatestone Institute.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter