Friday, February 18, 2022

Mark Levin: 'No accident' Trudeau instituting 'totalitarianism' after speaking with Joe Biden - Charles Creitz

 

by Charles Creitz

The conservative radio host said, 'They have tasted raw rogue power -- like a domesticated dog tasting blood'

 

Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau enacted a tougher crackdown on peaceful protests and Canadians' civil liberties after his formal call with President Biden, conservative radio host Mark Levin noted on "The Mark Levin Show on Westwood One."

Levin, host of "Life, Liberty & Levin" on Fox News Channel, said on Wednesday that both the United States and Canada were supposed to be the freest countries on the planet but are now seeing "totalitarianism" spread. 

"Look at the spread of totalitarianism, look at it," Levin added. "This has to be taken seriously."

On Friday, Biden and Trudeau spoke over the phone about the Freedom Convoy and how the truckers were blocking a key international crossing between Michigan and Ontario, which reports said was stymieing auto production in both countries. 

TUCKER: HOW LONG UNTIL CANADA-STYLE TYRANNY COMES TO UNITED STATES

Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (R) shakes hands with U.S. Vice President Joe Biden during a meeting in Trudeau's office on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, December 9, 2016. REUTERS/Chris Wattie
Canada's Prime Minister Justin Trudeau (R) shakes hands with U.S. Vice President Joe Biden during a meeting in Trudeau's office on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, December 9, 2016. REUTERS/Chris Wattie

Levin said that his book, "American Marxism" is no longer a warning, but an explanation for what has already arrived in North America.

"Thomas Jefferson talked about the tyranny of the legislature -- and I don’t think it’s any accident that Trudeau is instituting all these things after he spoke with Joe Biden," he said.

He said Biden showed his hand when he had his Justice Department targeted parents protesting at school board meetings last year.

Attorney General Merrick Garland essentially initiated the targeting of peaceful protesters with his memo seeking law enforcement intervention against parents who were concerned about their children being taught Marxist critical race theory, according to Levin.

  (Photo by Mohamed Kadri/NurPhoto via Getty Images  |  Adrian Wyld/The Canadian Press/Bloomberg via Getty Images)

HOW TO WATCH FOX NEWS CHANNEL IN CANADA

Levin said Garland and Biden first tried to silence dissent, and now have paved the way for it to happen in Canada.

"Trying to threaten --more than threaten people who dared to truly exercise their rights peacefully - They go after the parents, not the thugs that run these unions, not that thugs that run the school systems, the parents who dare to organize who dare to speak out on behalf of their own flesh and blood against this American Marxist movement, which takes many forms," Levin said.

Levin pointed out that, amid Trudeau's crackdown on dissent, the prime minister has become noticeably silent on his push to force citizens to get vaccinated, which is one of the main reasons for the protests. 

"I notice they don’t even talk about the vaccine anymore and yet are mandating it and trying to impose their well, whether in our country or in Canada," he said. "Where’s all that talk about the vaccines? – where's all the numbers of the dead on the screens? – Well there aren't all the numbers of that dead on their screens. There isn't a push on the vaccines anymore. Why is that?"

Levin argued that many people already got infected by COVID and recovered and now have natural immunity. 

Transport trucks pass under a "Bridge To USA" at the entrance to the Ambassador Bridge, US-Canada border crossing. (Windsor, ON)
Transport trucks pass under a "Bridge To USA" at the entrance to the Ambassador Bridge, US-Canada border crossing. (Windsor, ON) (iStock)

Levin added that the reason why Trudeau continues to push mandates on his citizens is because e he intends to make them "bend" to his will.

"You will bend do our demand, you will wear a mask. You will send your kids to school.," he said, adding that the same is happening in the United States.

"If we tell them wear a mask – then dammit they will wear a mask, or we are going to put them in a closet, or we’re going to suspend them," Levin said. "You will do what we tell you to do. They have tasted raw rogue power – it’s, like a domesticated dog, tasting blood – they can't get it off their tongue."

 

Charles Creitz is a reporter for Fox News Digital.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/media/trudeau-trucker-crackdown-biden-call-left-wing-democrats-mark-levin-show

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

State Department hits back at Russia 'propaganda,' says troops moving 'into fighting positions' - Caitlin McFall

 

by Caitlin McFall

State Department says it is concerned Russian propaganda could spark a war

The State Department on Wednesday hit back on Russian claims that it is reducing its troop size along the Ukrainian border and said the U.S. is concerned by the "great deal of propaganda and disinformation."

Earlier this week Russian officials claimed that it would be reducing its force size along Ukraine’s border after amassing roughly 150,000 troops and deploying 30,000 soldiers into neighboring Belarus.

A convoy of Russian armored vehicles moves along a highway in Crimea, Tuesday, Jan. 18, 2022.
A convoy of Russian armored vehicles moves along a highway in Crimea, Tuesday, Jan. 18, 2022. (AP Photo/File)

MOSCOW LOOKS TO SEVER MINSK AGREEMENTS AS RUSSIA, UKRAINE CONFLICT PERSISTS

But despite claims that Russian President Vladimir Putin echoed Tuesday, the U.S. and NATO have said they have seen no such efforts. 

"We have seen the opposite," State Department press secretary Ned Price told reporters Wednesday. "In recent days more Russian forces — not fewer — are at the border, and they are moving … into fighting positions."

"This is cause for profound concern," he said. 

Russia on Tuesday released images depicting trailers being loaded up with tanks and military equipment, but Price said these images are just one element in the Kremlin’s disinformation campaign. 

"Over the past several weeks, we’ve also seen Russian officials and Russian media plant numerous stories in the press — any one of which could be elevated to serve as a pretext for an invasion," Price said. 

The press secretary laid out a litany of falsified stories that have made their way into the news cycle, as well as stories that security officials are worried Russia could use.

"It could involve claims about Ukrainian military activity in the Donbas, false claims of U.S. or NATO activities on land, at sea or air — even claims of Ukrainian or NATO incursions into Russian territory," Price said.

In this photo taken from video and released by the Russian Defense Ministry Press Service on Friday, Feb. 4, 2022, tanks move during the Belarusian and Russian joint military drills at Brestsky firing range, Belarus.
In this photo taken from video and released by the Russian Defense Ministry Press Service on Friday, Feb. 4, 2022, tanks move during the Belarusian and Russian joint military drills at Brestsky firing range, Belarus.  (Russian Defense Ministry Press Service via AP)

NATO CHIEF CONTRADICTS RUSSIA WITHDRAWAL CLAIMS, SAYS NO PROOF OF PULLING BACK

Putin baselessly alleged on Tuesday that "genocide" was being committed against ethnic Russians in the Donbas region in Ukraine, an area that Russia invaded in 2014 and has since backed militarily

Moscow on Wednesday then claimed to have found mass graves in Donbas. 

"These allegations are entirely, completely false," Price said. "There is no basis of truth in any of these allegations."

The Kremlin’s attention this week has shifted to the Donbas region, located in Ukraine’s most eastern flank, and Putin is set to consider severing the international Minsk agreements by recognizing two breakaway regions in Donbas as "independent."

The State Department warned Putin this would prompt a "firm response" from the U.S. and NATO and would "constitute a gross violation of international law."

A child copies the position of Ukrainian servicemen standing at attention during the national anthem during an event marking a Day of Unity in Sievierodonetsk, the Luhansk region, eastern Ukraine, Wednesday, Feb. 16, 2022.
A child copies the position of Ukrainian servicemen standing at attention during the national anthem during an event marking a Day of Unity in Sievierodonetsk, the Luhansk region, eastern Ukraine, Wednesday, Feb. 16, 2022.  (AP Photo/Vadim Ghirda)

"There are Russian words and then there are Russian actions," Price said. "This is the Russian playbook."

"They seek to obscure and to hide," he added.

 

Caitlin McFall 

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/state-department-hits-back-russia-propaganda-says-troops-moving-fighting-positions

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Is the Canadian Government Starting a Civil War? - Cliff Nichols

 

by Cliff Nichols

Trudeau to protesters: If you don’t let our government make your health decisions, we’re willing to shoot you.

 

The Premier of Ontario has declared what he calls a “state of emergency” to justify the Canadian government’s removal of the truckers and their trucks from Ottawa.

Others, however, could view his statement to more closely resemble a Declaration of War

You decide. I urge you to watch the video of the Premier’s statement for yourself.

According to the Premier, each trucker they arrest will face up to one year in prison, have to pay fines up to $100,000 and may likely forfeit their trucks to the Crown!  

The Premier’s position is that the truckers protesting Canada’s mandate requiring truckers to be vaccinated have no “right” to block the roads of Ontario.

He does not, however, satisfactorily address the truckers’ other “rights,” like their right to protest wrongful and immoral actions of their government or even to make their own healthcare decisions. 

Moreover, the Premier completely overlooks the reality that the Canadian government could alleviate the “emergency” in the blink of an eye, if it were willing to remove its tyrannical mandate dictating that all truck drivers shall either receive a vaccine shot or forfeit their “right” to make a living.

In essence, it appears the government of Canada has chosen to declare war on its own people instead of restoring to its citizens their “unalienable” rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.  

Civil wars -- i.e. revolutions – have been started for far lesser reasons.

And for what?

What are Trudeau and his minions thinking? Why are they willing to unleash possibly lethal force to enforce a diktat on unwilling people that, by all reports is, at best, an ineffective medical experiment. As such, their mandate should more likely be found not only immoral, but unlawful. On this point, Trudeau’s government need go no further than a consideration of the moral, ethical and legal predicates underlying the Nuremburg Code that, in reference to medical experimentation on humans -- like the Covid vaccinations -- provides, in pertinent part: The voluntary consent of the human subject -- i.e. each individual trucker -- is absolutely essential. (emphasis added)

By contrast, however, what people like Trudeau are telling the people of Canada is: If you don’t let our government make your health decisions, we’re willing to shoot you.

How is that for the good of public health?

That said, please pray for our Canadian brothers and sisters. Tragically -- based on the Premier's statement -- it seems highly foreseeable that at least some Canadians are about to suffer harshly for trying to protect their rights... which appears to be what always happens whenever a totalitarian regime is allowed to seize and retain control of any nation.

Of course, the gaping question this leaves for the world to reflect upon yet again is how should the people of any nation be able to define what it is to properly “protest” against the evils of such a regime in defense of one’s unalienable rights?

Specifically, are protests to be constrained only to such actions that the regime exclusively decides are both “lawful” and “peaceful?”

Some would say, it must be both. Otherwise, they say, some Canadians could quickly find themselves being accused of things like treason, insurrection and/or sedition by a “regime” such as Trudeau’s. But, the problem with this is that many laws such a regime may consider “lawful” may not necessarily always be “moral,” which makes a citizen’s opposition even to those laws that are immoral to be unlawful -- i.e. to violate even a law considered immoral is still, technically, unlawful

For example, consider our cherished Declaration of Independence here in America. In large part, it was written for the exact purpose of protesting King George’s immoral laws and procedures. However, under the King’s laws on the books in 1776, that Declaration presented the King with nothing less than clear evidence of a criminal conspiracy to commit crimes against the Crown – which, of course, made the proclamations of our founding fathers “unlawful.” At a minimum, this requires one to conclude that our founding fathers at some point must have decided that trying to remain “lawful” in the course of protesting an evil regime is most assuredly not always possible. That is, if those protesting the laws issued by the Crown ever hope to succeed.

Logic and reason also present similar problems with respect to the concept of protestors only having recourse to “peaceful” means when attempting to resist the evil of a tyrannical regime.

If tyrannies throughout history have proven anything, it is that sometimes to achieve success, actions must be taken by those on the side of “good” that necessarily must often fall far short of what may be considered “peaceful.” For instance, consider World War II. To successfully protest the evils of Hitler’s Nazi regime required actions to be taken by U.S. forces that were about as “peaceful” as those that were taken by George Washington to successfully protest the evils practices of the British Crown. Clearly, neither of these stands taken by Americans to “protest” the evil of their day were remotely even “mostly peaceful.” Yet, both are undeniable instances where violence was absolutely necessary and appropriate to defeat the evils presented at those moments in our nation’s history.

Which, of course, then leaves us with the question of whether the rights of the Canadian truckers that are presently at stake are of such fundamental importance that the merits of the protest warrant an escalation to acts of resistance that are either or both unlawful or unpeaceful?

No doubt, most of us would sincerely hope to conclude they are not yet at that place. And, in fact, anyone with any sanity would most certainly want to cling to the hope as long as possible that they never will be drawn to such a place where bloodshed results almost invariably.

Nor is this analysis of the Ontario Premier’s state of emergency a call for such a civil war – or, if you prefer, revolution -- to transpire in Canada!

But, with that said, it is equally important to note, that’s not to say by this discourse that such a civil war in Canada’s immediate future is not possible.

The truth is somewhere in between – consequent to the Ontario Premier’s declaration this week, some form of civil war in Canada seems far more likely to happen – and now even more foreseeable -- in the days to come than appeared to be the case even the day before the Premier of Ontario issued his government’s threat to the truckers. And, for all concerned, that trend is not a good thing.

 

Cliff Nichols

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/02/canadian-government-starting-civil-war-cliff-n/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Amnesty International’s ‘woke’ racism towards Palestinians - Adam Levick

 

by Adam Levick

 Hat tip: Jenny Grigg

Their report is so riddled with errors of omission, fact, law and basic logic that not even the New York Times – which routinely attacks Israel’s very legitimacy – has deemed it ‘fit to print’.

 


If the 280-page report published by Amnesty International accusing Israel of ‘apartheid’ was a person, we’d say that he doesn’t have an honest bone in his body.

Whilst both the Economist and Freedom House have assessed the Jewish state as a liberal democracy, with the former ranking Israel’s democracy score higher than even the United States, Amnesty, like other so-called human rights organizations which have embraced the radical left’s malign obsession with Israel, offered what can fairly be described as a conclusion in search of evidence.

Their report is so riddled with errors of omission, fact, law and basic logic that not even the New York Times – which routinely attacks Israel’s very legitimacy – has deemed it ‘fit to print’.

To cite just a few errors:

Amnesty charges that Arab citizens of Israel can’t access state land in Israel. The charge is false – Israeli-Arabs have the same access to state land as any other Israelis.

Amnesty claims that Palestinians, and their millions of descendants, possess a legal “Right of Return” to Israel. In fact, there is no such right in international law.

Amnesty portrays Palestinian residents of the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in east Jerusalem as being “ethnically cleansed”.  However, all that’s happening is that several dozen Palestinian families face possible eviction due to their failure to pay rent for decades.

Amnesty claims that “2.5 million Palestinians live in Israel and East Jerusalem, restricted to enclaves that make up 3% of the entire area”.  Again, this claim has been shown to be a fabrication.

Amnesty even questions the legitimacy of Israel’s security measures designed to prevent the flow of weapons into Hamas-controlled Gaza, when even a United Nations investigation, for instance, declared its naval blockade “legal”.

But, arguably, even more egregious than its counter-factual allegations against Israel is the near absence of any context on the Arab wars, Palestinian terrorism and Palestinian leadership’s repeated rejection of peace offers which have led to the current territorial, political and security situation.

In fact, as CAMERA has noted, searching for the words “terror” or “bombing” or “suicide” or “stab” or “stabbing” reveals that in the entire 280-page report there is not a single mention of any particular Palestinian terrorist attack against Israelis. The 1377 Israeli victims of Palestinian terrorism since Sept. 2000 are erased from the moral and political equation.

And, this is illustrative of a problem with Amnesty’s report few have explored – a denial of agency to Palestinians.  Their document seems predicated on a view of the Palestinians and Israelis in a manner that Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff characterized as “The Untruth of Us Versus Them: Life is a battle between good people and evil people”.  Such a Manichean framing invariably leads to a patronizing view of the Palestinians, treating them as eternal victims – a dynamic described by John McWhorter as “woke racism”.

Tellingly, at the end of Amnesty’s report there are dozens of bullet point recommendations for ameliorating the problems they outlined, almost all of which are directed towards what Israel should do to solve the “human rights violations” they outlined.  Some of these recommendations, such as allowing for the unlimited Palestinian right of return, would, for all intents and purposes, mean the end of the Jewish state. 

So, what’s asked of the Palestinians? As you can see below, essentially nothing. The only thing demanded of Palestinians is that they assist Amnesty in their delegitimization campaign and smear of Israel.

Amnesty’s recommendations for Palestinian leaders, page 276 of their report.

There are no demands that Hamas, the terrorist group that rules Gaza, disarm and accept Israel existence.  There are no calls for the Palestinian Authority to, for the first time in 16 years, hold elections and begin the process of building functioning and transparent democratic institutions in preparation for statehood. There’s no admonishment of Palestinian leaders for their promotion and glorification of terrorism, or their culture of antisemitism. Nor is there the suggestion that they should pursue peace and co-existence with Israel.

In the 200,000 plus word report, the word “coexistence” isn’t used once (except to cite an NGO named Negev Coexistence Forum for Civil Equality).  The word “peace” is only used either to reference the NGO ‘Peace Now’, or in contexts unrelated to the word’s meaning as it relates to the Israeli-Palestinian quest for “peace” or a “peace agreement”.  The term “two-states” isn’t used at all.

Of course, making peace with Israel is the only effective way to end the conflict and improve the lives of both Palestinians and Israelis.  But, to acknowledge such an intuitive truth would require ceasing to infantilize Palestinians, and treating them instead as we treat all adults – as moral actors whose bad decisions inevitably lead to bad outcomes.

 

Adam Levick serves as co-editor of CAMERA UK. He has published reports on antisemitism at the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, and op-eds at publications such as The Guardian, The Independent, The Irish Examiner, The Algemeiner, JNS and The Jewish Chronicle. Adam made Aliyah from Philadelphia in 2009.

Source: https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/amnesty-internationals-woke-racism-towards-palestinians/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Palestinian Leaders' Five-Star Jihad - Khaled Abu Toameh

 

by Khaled Abu Toameh

The leaders of Hamas and PIJ left scorched earth behind them and chose to lead luxurious lives in Doha, Istanbul and Beirut. Strangely, however, instead of hiding their faces in shame, they are calling from their gyms, jets, and jacuzzis for the Palestinians to pursue the fight against Israel.

  • Hamas leaders are not sitting among their people in the Gaza Strip or the West Bank. It is easier and safer for them to call on the Palestinians to send their children to carry out terrorist attacks against Israel while they are relaxing in the comfort of their hotel rooms, villas and gyms in the Qatari capital of Doha. The Hamas leaders are not going to send their own sons and daughters to engage in the jihad against Israel.

  • The Iranian-backed Hamas and PIJ are the two largest groups in the Gaza Strip. Instead of investing their resources and efforts in improving the living conditions of their people, the Hamas and PIJ leaders have brought on them one disaster after the other. They have brought war and destruction on the people of the Gaza Strip by firing thousands of rockets towards Israel, forcing Israel to fire back to defend itself.

  • Instead of building schools and hospitals, the Hamas and PIJ leaders have chosen to invest tens of millions of dollars in a network of tunnels along Gaza's border with Israel, to attack and kill Jews.

  • The leaders of Hamas and PIJ left scorched earth behind them and chose to lead luxurious lives in Doha, Istanbul and Beirut. Strangely, however, instead of hiding their faces in shame, they are calling from their gyms, jets, and jacuzzis for the Palestinians to pursue the fight against Israel.

  • Some Palestinians, it seems, refuse to be duped by the deception of the Hamas and PIJ leaders. These Palestinians have finally realized that their leaders care only about their personal interest and the well-being of their families and are enjoying the good life in Doha and Istanbul.

  • Above all, the Palestinians need to boot out the thieves who masquerade as their leaders, the butchers responsible for the deaths of the young men and women in the Hamas-incited jihad against Israel. The Palestinians will never move forward with their lives as long as their leaders are relaxing in hot tubs in Qatar and Turkey while sending them orders to bathe themselves in yet more Jewish blood.

Hamas leaders are not sitting among their people in the Gaza Strip or the West Bank. It is easier and safer for them to call on the Palestinians to send their children to carry out terrorist attacks against Israel while they relax in the comfort of their hotel rooms, villas and gyms in Qatar. The Hamas leaders are not going to send their own sons and daughters to engage in the jihad against Israel. Pictured: Hamas leaders Khaled Mashaal (left) and Ismail Haniyeh share some laughs on December 7, 2012. (Photo by Mohammed Abed/AFP via Getty Images)

The leaders of the Palestinian terror groups Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad are continuing to urge Palestinians to take to the streets to engage in the jihad (holy war) against Israel.

These leaders are telling the Palestinians that those who are killed while carrying out attacks against Israel will be considered "heroes" and "martyrs." They are also telling them that the Palestinians must continue the jihad "until the liberation of Palestine," a euphemism for the elimination of Israel.

These are the messages that were recently sent to the Palestinians by Hamas leaders Khaled Mashaal and Ismail Haniyeh. Mashaal and Haniyeh are sending the messages from their five-star hotels and luxurious villas in Qatar.

Hamas leaders are not sitting among their people in the Gaza Strip or the West Bank. It is easier and safer for them to call on the Palestinians to send their children to carry out terrorist attacks against Israel while they are relaxing in the comfort of their hotel rooms, villas and gyms in the Qatari capital of Doha. The Hamas leaders are not going to send their own sons and daughters to engage in the jihad against Israel.

In the past, Arab journalists have criticized and ridiculed the Hamas leaders for choosing to live in luxury hotels in Qatar instead of being amongst their people in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Ahmed Musa, an Egyptian journalist, presented a photo of Mashaal working out in Qatar, and reminded the Hamas leader that "the jihad is in Gaza." Musa challenged the Hamas leader:

"If you're a man and a hero, get on the first plane tomorrow and enter the Gaza Strip through the Rafah border crossing. Your followers in Gaza will greet you."

A report published last month by the Ynet news website revealed that at least eight senior leaders of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) left the Gaza Strip over the past two years in favor of the good life abroad.

The first to leave was Ismail Haniyeh, the head of Hamas in the Gaza Strip, who left this home in the Shati refugee camp in favor of luxury hotels in Qatar. Haniyeh justified his departure due to his candidacy for the overall leadership of Hamas. Although the Hamas internal elections ended several months ago, Haniyeh has not returned to the Gaza Strip. Instead, he put pressure on the Egyptian authorities to allow his wife and children to leave the Gaza Strip so that they could join him in the wealthy Gulf state.

Another senior Hamas figure who left the Gaza Strip is Khalil al-Hayya, who until recently served as deputy head of the terrorist group in the Hamas-ruled coastal enclave. Al-Hayya decided to leave for Qatar after he was appointed as head of the Hamas bureau that manages the group's relations with Arab and Islamic countries.

Salah Bardaweel, Sami Abu Zuhri, Fathi Hammad and Taher a-Nunu, also senior and veteran Hamas officials, have also left the Gaza Strip together with their families. They are shuttling between Qatar, Lebanon, Turkey and other Arab and Islamic countries.

In addition to the Hamas leaders, senior representatives of Palestinian Islamic Jihad have left the Gaza Strip. They include Nafez Azzam and Mohammed al-Hindi, who are spending their time in Syria, Lebanon and Turkey.

It is not clear if these Hamas and PIJ leaders are planning to return to their homes in the Gaza Strip. In fact, there is good reason to believe that these spoiled leaders are not in a hurry to return to Gaza, where two million Palestinian residents continue to live in harsh economic conditions, where unemployment is estimated at more than 50% and, where the rate of poverty is extremely high.

The Iranian-backed Hamas and PIJ are the two largest groups in the Gaza Strip. Instead of investing their resources and efforts in improving the living conditions of their people, the Hamas and PIJ leaders have brought on them one disaster after the other. They have brought war and destruction on the people of the Gaza Strip by firing thousands of rockets towards Israel, forcing Israel to fire back to defend itself.

Instead of building schools and hospitals, the Hamas and PIJ leaders have chosen to invest tens of millions of dollars in a network of tunnels along Gaza's border with Israel, to attack and kill Jews.

The leaders of Hamas and PIJ left scorched earth behind them and chose to lead luxurious lives in Doha, Istanbul and Beirut. Strangely, however, instead of hiding their faces in shame, they are calling from their gyms, private jets and jacuzzis for the Palestinians to pursue the fight against Israel.

Just last week, from Qatar, Mashaal renewed the call to the Palestinians to continue sacrificing their children in the jihad against Israel. Mashaal boasted that the number of terrorist attacks against Israel in the West Bank and Jerusalem doubled in 2021 compared to 2020.

"The upcoming phase will witness an accumulation of the resistance and the development of its capabilities," Mashaal said. When Hamas talks about "resistance," it is referring to the use of various terrorist attacks against Israel, including suicide bombings, rocket launchings, stabbings, shootings and car-ramming attacks. "We want everyone to be involved in the growing resistance."

Everyone, of course, expect the children of Mashaal, Haniyeh and other Hamas leaders who are now enjoying the life in a number of Arab and Islamic countries while the Palestinians they left behind in the Gaza Strip struggle to feed their children. Some have become real beggars who are now knocking on Israel's door for help.

Thousands of Palestinians from the Gaza Strip are applying to work in Israel. The rate of unemployment in the Gaza Strip exceeded 50% in 2021, according to Maher al-Taba'a, director of Gaza's Chamber of Commerce. The unemployment rate has soared to even 78% among graduates aged between 20 to 29 years who have a certificate with an intermediate diploma or a bachelor's degree, he added.

Some Palestinians, it seems, refuse to be duped by the deception of the Hamas and PIJ leaders. These Palestinians have finally realized that their leaders care only about their personal interest and the well-being of their families and are enjoying the good life in Doha and Istanbul.

This is encouraging news, which shows that there are Palestinians who are fed up with the corruption of their leaders and their five-star jihad from luxury hotels around the world. Recently, these Palestinians took to social media to launch a campaign called "They (Hamas) Hijacked Gaza." For now, this campaign has enlisted only a limited number of people.

Unless more Palestinians join such campaigns and start speaking out against the corruption of their leaders, there is zero chance that their lives will improve -- not even if the international community continues to shower hundreds of millions of dollars on them.

Above all, the Palestinians need to boot out the thieves who masquerade as their leaders, the butchers responsible for the deaths of the young men and women in the Hamas-incited jihad against Israel. The Palestinians will never move forward with their lives as long as their leaders are relaxing in hot tubs in Qatar and Turkey while sending them orders to bathe themselves in yet more Jewish blood.

  • Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on Twitter

 

Khaled Abu Toameh is an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18237/palestinians-five-star-jihad

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Israel's Peace With Some Arab Neighbors? - Joseph Puder

 

by Joseph Puder

Intriguing developments with the UAE and Bahrain.

 


The Jewish state’s dream of warm peace with its Arab neighbors has eluded it for more than 72 years. In September 2020, President Donald Trump helped engineer the Abraham Accords between Israel, Bahrain, and the United Arab Emirates. The very treaty signing on the White House lawn projected human warmth, and signaled a warm peace. Subsequently, Sudan and Morocco joined the normalization of relations with Israel.

It is true that peace, as opposed to war, came much earlier than September 2020. Israel signed a peace treaty with Egypt in 1979 and with Jordan in 1994. These peace treaties, however, were essentially between governments, coldly exchanging territory for peace. Israel gave up the entire Sinai Peninsula; it received a cold peace in return. The late Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak avoided visiting Israel. In his 30-year reign as Egypt’s dictator, he visited Israel only once, and only for three hours, to attend the funeral of the assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995. He did not encourage Israeli-Egyptian trade or tourism. 

Although Mubarak fulfilled the security commitments under the Camp David Accords, he deliberately perpetuated the cold peace. Mubarak was motivated by the desire to reduce Egypt’s massive military burden, and cement Egypt’s relationship with the US. He also sought to return Egypt to the bosom of the Arab world that expelled Egypt from the Arab League and leadership in the Arab world following Anwar Sadat’s Camp David Peace Accords with Israel. Israelis were not welcomed in Cairo, and the majority of the Egyptian population has been hostile to Israel and peace. The Egyptian media in particular has displayed frequent bursts of anti-Semitism. Israel’s consolation was that it didn’t have to allocate burdensome resources in manpower and treasure.

King Hussein of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan, unlike Mubarak, was well disposed toward peace with Israel. The strong presence of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan, and the majority Palestinian population in the country, placed Hussein in an odd position. As part of the peace treaty with Jordan, Israel recognized Jordan’s sovereignty over the Naharayim/Baqura area including the Peace Island, and the Tzofar/Al Ghamr area. Once again, Israelis rushed to visit Jordan, especially the majestic Petra, while Jordan sent workers to earn money in Israel (mostly in Eilat).

The passing of King Hussein brought to power his son Abdullah II, whose mother was English. It compelled Abdullah to display a lukewarm attitude toward Israel, and oftentimes to be critical of Israel and supportive of the West Bank Palestinians. Ironically, Israel’s military prowess safeguards Jordan’s monarchy’s survival.

In Egypt, Mubarak’s departure in February 2011 (as a result of the so-called Arab Spring) brought to power Mohammad Morsi in June 2012, the candidate of the Muslim Brotherhood, and an ally of Hamas in Gaza. He was deposed by General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who was elected President in May 2014. According to Haisam Hassanein, an Associate Fellow at the Washington Institute, “Despite broadening official cooperation between Egypt and Israel, he (al-Sisi) is increasingly  embracing the old approach of telling Egyptians that Israel is the enemy.” This tendency of vilifying Israel domestically, and allowing the Egyptian media to demonize Israel, is contrasted by increased cooperation between Egypt and Israel on combating terrorism in the Sinai Peninsula and handling Hamas in the Gaza Strip. In short, there has been no people-to-people relationship between Egyptians and Israelis.

Until September 2020, the relationship between the Emiratis and Israel was concealed. Now, the open and warm interaction between Emiratis, Bahrainis, and Israelis is exceptional. Data shows that trade between the UAE and Israel jumped from $51 million in the seven months of 2020, to $614 million over the same period in 2021. According to figures cited by Israel’s Central Bureau of Statistics, trade between Israel and Arab countries in the Middle East and North Africa has dramatically accelerated in 2021, following normalization, and grew in the first seven months of 2021 by 234%.

On September 13, 2021, UAE Economy Minister Abdulla Bin Touq said that the UAE was projecting to grow economic ties with Israel to the tune of $1 trillion over the next decade. He pointed out that since normalization the UAE has signed over 60 Memorandums of Understanding with Israel, and is expecting an influx of trade over the next couple of years, primarily in defense, energy, and food security. He added,
"We have $500 to $700 million dollars in bilateral trade happening, we have funds of billions of dollars that have been announced jointly between the two countries. We are moving into so many areas of economic opportunities."

Abu Dhabi’s Mubadala Investment Company is inking a $1billion purchase of 22 percent stake in Israel’s Delek Drilling’s East Mediterranean Tamar natural gas field. It will thus become the largest deal between the UAE and Israel. Turkey’s TRT World reported that, “Both countries have had high-level trade delegations explore opportunities for investment in technology, aviation, education, telecom, and tourism over the past year.” And, in March 2021, the UAE announced a $12 billion investment fund for strategic sectors in Israel, including energy manufacturing, water, space, healthcare, and agri-tech. In addition, Emirati and Israeli ministers pledged military and defense cooperation.

The relationship between Israel and the UAE isn’t limited to trade, tourism, and defense (Iran being a common threat to both countries as well as to Bahrain). There have been ongoing cultural exchanges. The Emirati and Bahraini governments are cultivating and supporting their growing Jewish communities. The Israeli pavilion in the Dubai Expo is a major attraction, and getting lots of Emirati visitors.

In an opinion piece by Dr. Ali al-Nuaimi, Chairman of the Defense Affairs, Interior, and Foreign Relations Committee of the UAE Federal National Council, in Israel’s Ynet-News, writes: “Normalization agreements are a bridge to a future where we find common solutions, not divisive wars, and it is time to take the narrative beyond the headlines in order to bring peace not only to the signatories, but to the entire region.” Dr. al-Nuaimi who brought with him a delegation of UAE parliamentarians as guests of the Knesset, added, “I am excited to meet my fellow parliamentarians in the Knesset and build on the key role we have in regional and global diplomacy, far beyond the limitations of national borders and internal politics. True diplomacy is found in people-to-people interactions…”  

On February 3, 2022, Israel and Bahrain signed a security cooperation agreement, the first between Israel and a Gulf state. Israel’s Defense Minister Benny Gantz signed on behalf of Israel in Manama, Bahrain’s capital. He also held talks with King Hamed bin Isa al-Khalifa. Again, as with the UAE, cultural and inter-personal ties are very much part of the normalization with Bahrain. King Hamed Global Center is promoting religious freedom, interfaith dialogue, and peaceful co-existence, as it works with Israeli institutions. Bahrain has a small and historic Jewish community, and its former ambassador to the US, Houda Nonoo, is Jewish.

The Bahraini foreign Minister and the Undersecretary for International Relations visited Israel. The latter’s four-day visit included visiting civil society organizations, universities and research institutes, as well as joining Israel’s Foreign Ministry director-general in scuba diving. Reuters reported that Israel expects $220 million in non-defense trade with Bahrain in 2021.

Unlike Egypt and Jordan, whose wars with Israel created bad blood and mistrust on both sides, the UAE and Bahrain have never engaged in military action against Israel. Hence interpersonal relations are more natural. For Israel, that just might mean - on these realms - the kind of peace Israelis have prayed for. Time will tell.

 

Joseph Puder

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/02/has-israel-finally-secured-peace-its-arab-joseph-puder/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

IDF shot down Hezbollah, Hamas drones at Lebanon, Gaza borders - Jerusalem Post Staff

 

by Jerusalem Post Staff

Two Iranian drones were shot down in Iraq by US forces on Wednesday.

 

Hezbollah drone shot down by IDF, January 7, 2022 (photo credit: IDF SPOKESPERSON'S UNIT)
Hezbollah drone shot down by IDF, January 7, 2022
(photo credit: IDF SPOKESPERSON'S UNIT)

The IDF shot down a Hezbollah drone that crossed the border with Lebanon on Thursday, the IDF Spokesperson Unit reported.

The drone was under the surveillance of the air control unit throughout the incident.

The IDF Spokesperson Unit said that they would continue to thwart any breach of the Israeli government.

Later that evening, the IDF announced that they had also shot down a Hamas drone that had entered the border area of the southern Gaza strip. The drone crashed in Gazan territory. 

Kan reported on Wednesday that the defense system was preparing for a possible drone attack from Iran after US forces shot down two Iranian drones in Iraq. There was a concern that the drones were meant to reach Israel and explode.

The remains of the wreckage of a drone that was shot down are seen at Ain al-Asad air base in Anbar province, Iraq January 4, 2022.  (credit: IRAQI MEDIA SECURITY CELL/HANDOUT VIA REUTERS) The remains of the wreckage of a drone that was shot down are seen at Ain al-Asad air base in Anbar province, Iraq January 4, 2022. (credit: IRAQI MEDIA SECURITY CELL/HANDOUT VIA REUTERS)

Another Hezbollah drone shot down at the beginning of January revealed the faces of the Hezbollah operatives and images of their vehicles. 

 

Jerusalem Post Staff

Source: https://www.jpost.com/breaking-news/article-696841

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Justin Trudeau: Fidel Castro’s Son - Robert Spencer

 

by Robert Spencer

If not biologically, then ideologically.

 


The rumors have been circulating for years: it’s easy to find side-by-side photographic comparisons of Fidel Castro and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, showing the strong physical resemblance between the two. This rattles the establishment media to the extent that they “debunk” it regularly. Last Saturday, the New York Times ran a piece entitled: “An old falsehood resurfaces: that Justin Trudeau is Fidel Castro’s son.” On Tuesday, the Daily Beast chimed in with “Truckers Resurrect Bananas Theory About Trudeau’s Real Dad.” True to form for the establishment media, neither addressed the points journalist Karen Leibowitcz made in favor of the claim in 2020, but while the question is interesting, what is far more important is that whatever the true story of his parentage may be, in bringing authoritarian rule to Canada, Justin Trudeau has now shown himself to be the ideological son of Fidel Castro.

No one should be surprised by this. Trudeau has a long record of affinity for authoritarian governments. In 2013, before he was prime minister, he was asked what country he admired most. Trudeau answered, “You know, there’s a level of admiration I actually have for China because their basic dictatorship is allowing them to actually turn their economy around on a dime and say ‘we need to go green fastest…we need to start investing in solar.’ I mean, there is a flexibility that I know Stephen Harper must dream about, of having a dictatorship that he can do everything he wanted, that I find quite interesting.”

And when Fidel Castro died in 2016, Trudeau’s statement gave no hint of the bloodthirstiness and repression of the Communist regime in Cuba. Instead, Trudeau was fairly gushing with praise for “Cuba’s longest-serving President.” He declared that “Fidel Castro was a larger than life leader who served his people for almost half a century. A legendary revolutionary and orator, Mr. Castro made significant improvements to the education and healthcare of his island nation.”

Trudeau acknowledged that Castro was a “controversial figure,” but insisted that “both Mr. Castro’s supporters and detractors recognized his tremendous dedication and love for the Cuban people, who had a deep and lasting affection for ‘el Comandante.’” He said that his family was joining “the people of Cuba today in mourning the loss of this remarkable leader.”

Now we can see that this was not just an ill-considered outpouring of grief for a man Trudeau obviously loved dearly. His praise for China and for Castro have in common an admiration for the authoritarian’s ability to get things done with no regard for the opposition or the give-and-take of the democratic process. China was able to go green and Castro was able to make significant improvements to education and healthcare (in Trudeau’s view, not in real life) because they didn’t have to deal with all the carping and compromise that working with parliaments and voters entails.

And now Trudeau can rid himself of the Freedom Convoy, and seize the protesters’ bank accounts, without having to wait for court orders and worry about due process. If old Fidel can look up from his fiery grave and see what Trudeau is doing, he must be pleased. What’s even worse, however, is the silence of the world. One of the world’s foremost free republics is turning into a police state before our very eyes, and Trudeau has not been denounced by anyone. Old Joe Biden’s handlers, of course, aren’t going to say anything, because they would do the same thing to dissidents here if they thought they could get away with it. But none of the other leaders of ostensibly free societies seem to care either. Maybe they’re all Leftists who, in the indelible words of David Horowitz, harbor within themselves a totalitarian who is screaming to get out.

In a sane world, the Canadian opposition would already have secured a no-confidence vote against Trudeau, with significant assistance from members of Trudeau’s own party who oppose authoritarian overreach and the denial of civil rights to Canadian citizens. Trudeau would also be up for condemnation at the United Nations and by international human rights organizations. Ironically, if he were a prime minister in Africa or Asia and did exactly the same thing that he did in setting aside the civil liberties of his political opponents, those condemnations would be raining down. But for some reason, Justin Trudeau doesn’t appear to be in political trouble either domestically or internationally, at least thus far. It’s a sign that other countries in the once-free West are almost as bad off as Canada is.

Justin Trudeau is a tyrant. He is the sort of tyrant that the United States of America was founded to oppose. Canada, of course, is the country of the North Americans who opposed the American Revolution, so perhaps it is fitting that it would be the first of the two countries to fall into tyranny. But Canada also has a proud tradition of freedom and respect for human rights and the rule of law. May it prevail now, against the ideological son and heir of Fidel Castro, Justin Trudeau.

 

Robert Spencer is the director of Jihad Watch and a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He is author of 23 books including many bestsellers, such as The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam (and the Crusades)The Truth About Muhammad and The History of Jihad. His latest book is The Critical Qur’an. Follow him on Twitter here. Like him on Facebook here.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/02/justin-trudeau-fidel-castros-son-robert-spencer/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Boris Johnson’s Foreign Policy Magical Thinking - Bruce Thornton

 

by Bruce Thornton

Meeting aggression with bluster and sermonettes only produces more aggression.

 


Last week British Prime Minister Boris Johnson published an op-ed about the brewing conflict between Ukraine and Russia. And, no surprise, it comprised a catalogue of “new world order” idealism of the sort we’ve watched crash and burn for the last three decades. Vladimir Putin would not be impressed were he to read it, any more than he’s worried about the modest increases in NATO forces near his borders, since the U.S. Commander-in-Chief already announced that we will not go to war over Ukraine. Plus the NATO countries are still disunited over how to respond should Putin go kinetic.

Once again, the hard questions of what threatens our interests and how to meet those threats are ignored in favor of bankrupt idealism and magical thinking.

Amidst all the virtue-signaling and braggadocios rhetoric, Johnson offers this strange sentence that epitomizes that idealism: “If I may adapt some famous words: All nations are created equal, they are endowed by international law with certain inalienable rights, and first among these is the right not to have their territory seized, or their foreign policy dictated at gunpoint, by a powerful neighbor.”

Talk about a false analogy. No, nations are not all “created equal” and  do not have “unalienable rights,” but only such rights as are created by treaties with other nations, not by shared universal “norms” or “values.” Nor, as Johnson implies, is “international law” like “nature and nature’s God” that the Founder believed make certain human rights unalienable, a feature of our inherent humanity, not a gift of earthly power. International law, in contrast, is the contingent product of treaties negotiated by sovereign nations that enter into such agreements in order to further their national interests. They do not reflect universal morality or values, and so are regularly violated, or simply abandoned, as those interests shift.

It’s ironic, and historically obtuse, that Johnson makes this claim in the context of Russia’s current designs on Ukraine. Back in 2014 Putin annexed Crimea and virtually occupied southeast Ukraine. At the time Barack Obama pontificated in very similar idealistic terms, also including an echo of the Declaration of Independence: “Russia’s leadership is challenging truths that only a few weeks ago seemed self-evident––that in the 21st century, the borders of Europe cannot be redrawn with force, that international law matters, that people and nations can make their own decisions about their future,” for such aggression “is not how international law and international norms are observed in the 21st century.”

The same naive clich├ęs characterized the foreign policy establishment as well: Fareed Zakaria of The Washington Post referred to “broader global norms––for example, against annexations by force. These have not always been honored, but, compared with the past, they have helped shape a more peaceful and prosperous world.” So too David Rivkin and Lee Casey in The Wall Street Journal evoked “the three basic principles of international law, reflected in the United Nations Charter and long-standing custom,” which “are the equality of all states, the sanctity of their territorial integrity, and noninterference of outsiders in their international affairs.”

Well, here we are eight years later, and Crimea is still part of Russia. So is a fifth of Georgia seized in 2008. The rule against changing borders by force is clearly not a “self-evident truth,” a “global norm” that has “helped shaped a more peaceful and prosperous world,” nor are there “long-standing customs” like “the sanctity of territorial integrity.”

Rather, these all are the provisions of international laws created by treaties signed by sovereign nations that are definitely not all “equal,” and that determine for themselves when, or how much any treaty binds them. This sacrifice of principle to national interest is why Northern Cyprus, invaded, occupied, and ethnically cleansed by Turkey in 1974, is still part of Turkey; or why Tibet, invaded and occupied by China in 1951-52, is still part of China.

And when a nation does use force to change national borders or pursue some other aim, only on rare occasions, such as Saddam Hussein’s invasion of Kuwait in 1991, have the nations comprising the “rules-based international order” enforced those “global norms” with military action. But no one stepped up to honor those norms by stopping the genocides in Rwanda in 1993, or Darfur in 2003. And as we speak the great Western nations of the “rules-based international order” are enjoying the Winter Olympics in China, even as the Muslim Uyghurs in Xinjiang are brainwashed, brutalized, tortured, raped, and penned up in forced-labor camps.

The fact is, despite its lofty rhetoric, the “rules-based international order” based on international laws has rarely been willing or able to enforce this “self-evident truth” that borders should not be changed by force, because no nations have not found it in their own interests to do so.

The permanence of diverse national interests exposes the central fallacy of this foreign policy idealism––the notion that there is an international “harmony of interests” among the large, complex diversity of nations with their distinct cultures, mores, languages, religions, histories, and numerous other “self-evident” features of national identity––which include different views on the legitimacy of violence for pursuing national interests.

This fact of diversity, then, contradicts the West’s claims that “long-standing custom” contributes to “self-evident truths” like the imperative to respect national boundaries and not to alter them with force. On the contrary, as Robert Bork writes in Coercing Virtue, “There is nothing that can be called law in any meaningful sense established by custom. If there were, it would not restrain international aggression; it is more likely to unleash it . . . if custom is what counts, it favors aggression.” The melancholy fact is, the West’s proscription of force as a tool for pursuing national interests remains a historical anomaly.

Hence the problem for the West in confronting Putin’s designs. If Europe, Great Britain, and the U.S. truly believe that stopping Putin is in their national interests, they wouldn’t be making symbolic NATO deployments to the region, but mobilizing their militaries in the numbers necessary to counter an invasion, which of course would pose an exorbitant risk. If they were serious about real deterrence, they wouldn’t, as Biden has done, threaten sanctions after an invasion starts and people are dying. They’d impose them now.

So why don’t these nations act? Because their political leaders are calculating their political risks and their own national interests. The West, besotted by the net-zero-carbon moonshine into weakening its energy resources, now faces inflated fuel costs, making the West, especially Europe, dependent on Russian oil. Nor are the citizens of the Western nations in the mood for a war whose reasons have not been made clear to them. They don’t see an immediate threat that requires spending lives and money to stop­­––especially in the U.S., just coming off of two decades of feckless idealism in the Middle East culminating in the humiliating retreat from Kabul.

Nor should we be surprised, since this short-sighted vision has bedeviled democracy since its creation. In 1835 Alexis de Tocqueville warned, a “clear perception of the future, founded upon judgment and experience . . . is frequently wanting in democracies. The people are more apt to feel than to reason; and if their present sufferings are great, it is to be feared that the still greater sufferings attendant upon defeat will be forgotten.” This reality means that national leaders must explain specifically to the voters why, in our case, Putin’s annexation of eastern Ukraine, poses a long-term threat to our security and interests.

But so far all we hear about is how evil Putin is, and how anyone who questions taking action is a crypto-fascist admirer of autocrats. Or we get empty, feel-good rhetoric like Boris Johnson’s about common “norms” and the “rules-based international order,” or paeans to “patient and principled diplomacy,” as Johnson calls the time-honored tactic for leaders to avoid doing something meaningful and camouflaging their inactions with the theater of “diplomatic engagement.”

If Putin seriously threatens our interests and security, then make the case to the people. Start taking action now. Don’t just threaten serious sanctions, impose them now, not after the cannon start roaring. Don’t hide behind piecemeal NATO deployments, but mobilize forces and materiel adequate to meet Putin’s challenge. Shame allies like Germany who put GDP ahead of those principles they continually lecture us about. And go before Congress and seek an authorization to use military force.

Finally, we all need to acknowledge the obvious truth that meeting aggression with bluster and foreign policy sermonettes only produces more aggression. We are where we are in Ukraine because in 2014 the annexation of Crimea was allowed to stand.

Most important, if we truly believe in the “rules-based international order,” then we must defend it and enforce its rules with mind-concentrating force. That means spending the money necessary for playing that role­­––and it means acting, not just talking about acting.

 

Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/02/boris-johnsons-foreign-policy-magical-thinking-bruce-thornton/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Thursday, February 17, 2022

Durham probe: Media suddenly develops 'laryngitis' after years of pushing Trump-Russia collusion, critics say - Brian Flood , Joseph A. Wulfsohn

 

by Brian Flood, Joseph A. Wulfsohn

'It seems some media outlets were so interested in perpetuating a lie they can’t now say they were wrong,' Jason Chaffetz said

The mainstream media spent years fixated on alleged collusion between Donald Trump and Russia but have largely downplayed or otherwise ignored the court filing from Special Counsel John Durham as part of his investigation into the origins of the sprawling Russia probe

"The traditional media is more interested in whisper campaigns and rumors than filings from U.S. attorneys," former chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee and Fox News contributor Jason Chaffetz told Fox News Digital. 

"If they got it wrong, and they did, then cover the truth with the same vigor," Chaffetz continued. "It seems some media outlets were so interested in perpetuating a lie they can’t now say they were wrong." 

CLINTON CAMPAIGN LAWYER SUSSMANN ASKS COURT TO 'STRIKE' DURHAM'S 'FACTUAL BACKGROUND' FROM LATEST FILING

The media has largely downplayed or otherwise ignored the court filing from Special Counsel John Durham as part of his investigation into the origins of the Russia probe.

The media has largely downplayed or otherwise ignored the court filing from Special Counsel John Durham as part of his investigation into the origins of the Russia probe. 

The Media Research Center found that ABC, CBS and NBC evening newscasts alone spent a whopping 2,634 minutes covering the investigations into alleged Russia collusion through July 20, 2019. "That’s nearly one-fifth (19.5%) of all of these broadcasts’ Trump coverage, a huge shadow on his presidency," analyst Rich Noyes wrote. 

The heavy-handed coverage from ABC, CBS and NBC was in addition to the dedicated airtime from both CNN and MSNBC, which focused relentlessly on the investigation's developments. The New York Times and Washington Post even shared the Pulitzer Prize for in 2018 "for deeply sourced, relentlessly reported coverage" of alleged Russian interference.

A court filing made late Friday by Durham, who was appointed during the Trump administration to investigate the origins of the Russia probe, revealed that a tech firm mined internet data from Trump Tower during the 2016 election and later the White House in order to "establish 'an inference' and 'narrative' tying then-candidate Trump to Russia" and that, "In doing so, Tech Executive-1 indicated that he was seeking to please certain 'VIPs,' referring to individuals at Law Firm-1 and the Clinton campaign."

Durham’s filing hasn’t received the same frenzied coverage and critics have taken notice. Nor have other indictments that further discredited the Christopher Steele dossier alleging Trump-Russia collusion.

"The networks and major papers avoided touching this news like Durham was a leper," NewsBusters executive editor Tim Graham wrote. 

Sen. Ted Cruz scolded the press for failing to cover the story. 

"The corrupt corporate media is trying to ignore it & hide the truth," Cruz tweeted. 

The Media Research Center found that ABC, CBS and NBC evening newscasts alone spent a whopping 2,634 minutes covering the investigations into alleged Russia collusion through July 20, 2019.
The Media Research Center found that ABC, CBS and NBC evening newscasts alone spent a whopping 2,634 minutes covering the investigations into alleged Russia collusion through July 20, 2019.  (Reuters)

FORMER DNI RATCLIFFE TOLD DURHAM INTELLIGENCE SUPPORTS ‘MULTIPLE’ INDICTMENTS IN PROBE: SOURCES

MSNBC, which made the Russian investigation the most dominant topic on the network for years under President Trump, completely ignored the revelations Durham made in the court filing late Friday night through Monday. "Morning Joe" finally addressed it on Tuesday but mocked Durham in the process. 

CNN dedicated less than three minutes to the subject during the same period with only one mention on Monday's installment of "The Lead with Jake Tapper." 

None of MSNBC nor CNN's primetime shows, typically regarded as the most-watched programming on the networks, touched the subject through Monday. 

ABC, CBS and NBC similarly made no mention of the new developments on their morning and evening newscasts through Monday, though NBC News published a report online on Monday night.

The New York Times skipped running a report and went with a "news analysis," slamming "right-wing outlets" for pushing a narrative that is "off track."

Like the Times, Washington Post initially refrained from publishing a report on the matter but rather an "analysis" piece attempting to downplay the significance of the court filing, framing it with the headline, "Why Trump is once again claiming that he was spied upon in 2016," and telling readers, "Durham’s filing ties the campaign to Sussman [sic] and Sussman [sic] to the executive, but it’s not explicitly argued that the probe flowed down from Clinton’s team — or up to it." It has since posted other opinion pieces on the matter, as well as a fact-check again rejecting Trump's claim of being spied on.

Other outlets including Associated Press, Reuters, USA Today, Axios, NPR and The Daily Beast all avoided the subject through Monday, according to search results.

The MRC put together a montage of previous coverage dismissing allegations of wrongdoing during the Russia probe: 

The recent Durham probe developments stem from the indictment of former Clinton campaign attorney Michael Sussmann, who's been accused of lying to the FBI when claiming he wasn't working on behalf of the Democratic nominee when he approached the DOJ pushing a Russian collusion narrative between Trump Tower and a Kremlin-linked bank. 

HILLARY CLINTON 2016 TWEETS PUSHED NOW-DEBUNKED CLAIM OF TRUMP USE OF 'COVERT SERVER' LINKED TO RUSSIA

Andy McCarthy, a senior fellow at the National Review Institute and Fox News contributor, feels it’s important to maintain perspective but said it's "breathtaking" to watch the media downplay the filing. 

"For all the strident claims about how the Clinton campaign pushed the government's law-enforcement and intelligence apparatus into spying on President Trump, Special Counsel Durham has thus far charged no crimes along those lines. The indictment of Democratic Party lawyer Michael Sussmann merely alleges that he lied to the FBI to conceal that he was working for the Clinton campaign and tech executive Rodney Joffe," McCarthy told Fox News Digital. 

"That said, though, it is just breathtaking to watch the media-Democrat complex, which hyped Robert Mueller’s every move in the bogus Trump-Russia ‘collusion’ caper, suddenly develop laryngitis in the matter of Durham’s probe -- that is, when it is not outright hostile," McCarthy said. "You would almost be convinced that journalists do not want a close examination of what thin gruel they turned into a three-year scandal, seeking to destroy the Trump administration’s capacity to govern." 

Former President Trump reacted to the filing on Saturday evening, saying Durham’s filing "provides indisputable evidence that my campaign and presidency were spied on by operatives paid by the Hillary Clinton Campaign in an effort to develop a completely fabricated connection to Russia."
Former President Trump reacted to the filing on Saturday evening, saying Durham’s filing "provides indisputable evidence that my campaign and presidency were spied on by operatives paid by the Hillary Clinton Campaign in an effort to develop a completely fabricated connection to Russia." (AP Photo/Sue Ogrocki)

Sussmann has pleaded not guilty. 

Former President Trump reacted to the filing on Saturday evening, saying Durham’s filing "provides indisputable evidence that my campaign and presidency were spied on by operatives paid by the Hillary Clinton Campaign in an effort to develop a completely fabricated connection to Russia."

The Durham investigation has "accelerated" and more people are "cooperating" and coming before the federal grand jury than has previously been reported, a source familiar with the probe told Fox News.

It remains to be seen if the mainstream media will pay attention to further developments, but the lack of coverage has surprised even seasoned observers. 

"It’s absolutely stunning that virtually all the major newspapers and the other networks are absolutely determined to ignore this story," Fox News’ Howie Kurtz said Monday. 

"They cover every throat clearing by the January 6 committee and all the coverage of Russiagate… but this is an actual federal prosecutor delivering actual evidence in a court filing, not some anonymously sourced story," Kurtz said. "Yet, these other places are just magically declaring it to be non-news."

Fox News' Brooke Singman contributed to this report.

Brian Flood is a media reporter for Fox News Digital. Story tips can be sent to brian.flood@fox.com and on Twitter: @briansflood. 


Brian Flood, Joseph A. Wulfsohn 

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/media/media-ignores-durham-after-years-of-pushing-russiagate

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter