Friday, May 20, 2022

Iran Trying to Force the US to Meet All Its Demands - Khaled Abu Toameh

 

by Khaled Abu Toameh

"[T]here is no sane person in the region willing to take seriously any reassuring words issued by [US Special Envoy for Iran] Robert Malley and other officials in the US administration concerned with the Iranian file."

  • Iraqi writer Farouk Yousef pointed out that after the US gave Iran $90 billion following the signing of the nuclear agreement with the Obama administration in 2015... the bulk of the money... was spent on terrorist groups run by Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) in Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon, and Syria, as well as terrorist groups run covertly in other Arab countries.

  • [Iran is] trying to delay the signing of the nuclear agreement so that the mullahs succeed in forcing the Biden administration to accept all their demands, especially the removal of the IRGC from the list of foreign terrorist organizations.

  • "Biden was not ignorant of the wrong way he started [dealing with Iran]. All the countries in the region were telling him that the resumption of talks with Iran must include Iran's missile program and its destabilizing activities in the region, including the activities of its militias that threaten stability in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen. Biden chose not to listen...." — Ali Al-Sarraf, Iraqi writer, Al-Ain, May 10, 2022.

  • "Biden could have told the mullahs that a return to the nuclear agreement would take place on the basis of three conditions: abandoning violations of the commitments in that agreement, curbing the missile program... and stopping the actions of militias that threaten the security and stability of the countries of the region.... The Revolutionary Guard is directly involved in the civil war and violence in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.... Iran's own actions will prove to him that he took the wrong path." — Ali Al-Sarraf, Al-Ain, May 10, 2022.

  • Like many Arabs, Al-Sarraf asked why the Biden administration was not defending the interests of America's allies.

  • "[T]here is no sane person in the region willing to take seriously any reassuring words issued by [US Special Envoy for Iran] Robert Malley and other officials in the US administration concerned with the Iranian file. Every child now knows that these American officials have nothing but flattery for Iran, especially in light of the cold American reaction to the attacks it carried out against the Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates....If anything has changed, it is for the worse." — Kheirallah Kheirallah, Lebanese journalist, Elaph, March 30, 2022.

  • "How can a US administration gain the trust of its allies despite its refusal to take note that northern Yemen has become a base for Iranian missiles and drones? These missiles and drones are directed at the Arab Gulf states and are now threatening navigation in the Red Sea as well." — Kheirallah Kheirallah, Elaph, March 30, 2022.

  • [T]he removal of the IRGC from the list of terrorist organizations would cause massive damage to the interests of the US. It will lose all its Arab friends, who will stop working with the Americans in a number of fields, including the war on terrorism.

  • It now remains to be seen whether the Biden administration will continue with its benighted policy of appeasing the mullahs or heed the insistent wake-up calls of America's real allies.

Iran is trying to delay the signing of the nuclear agreement so that the mullahs succeed in forcing the Biden administration to accept all their demands, especially the removal of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) from the list of foreign terrorist organizations. Pictured: Members of the IRGC march during the annual military parade marking the anniversary of the 1980-1988 war with Iraq, in Tehran, on September 22, 2018. (Photo by STR/AFP via Getty Images)

As the European Union is trying to revive the stalled talks on restoring Iran's nuclear deal with world powers, many Arabs are again warning the Biden administration against rushing to strike a deal with the mullahs, saying this could jeopardize Washington's relations with its Arab allies in the Middle East.

The Arabs are saying that they cannot understand why Biden is prepared to allow Iran's mullahs to "humiliate" the US by setting their own conditions for restoring the nuclear agreement, including the demand to remove the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) from the list of terrorist organizations.

The Arabs are also reminding the Biden administration and the other world powers that Iran's mullahs have not changed their dangerous policies that threaten the security and stability of a number of Arab countries.

Iraqi writer Farouk Yousef pointed out that after the US gave Iran $90 billion following the signing of the nuclear agreement with the Obama administration in 2015, the mullahs continued to support, finance and sponsor the activities of "evil forces" in the Middle East.

The "evil forces" refers to Iran's terrorist proxies, including Hezbollah in Lebanon, Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad in the Gaza Strip, and the Houthi militia in Yemen.

Yousef noted that the bulk of the money Iran received from the Obama administration was spent on terrorist groups run by the IRGC in Iraq, Yemen, Lebanon, and Syria, as well as terrorist groups run covertly in other Arab countries.

"It's clear that the administration of Joe Biden wants to sign the nuclear agreement with Iran at any cost," Yousef said.

"However, Iran, which is the beneficiary of that agreement in all cases, has been procrastinating and extending time in an attempt to impose new conditions to get more gains. The question is: Don't the Americans realize that Iran, with its current ideological system, can only be a state outside international law in all its manifestations and meanings? Iran, which has supported terrorism in the region, will not abandon its militias. Iran cannot accept being a normal country. It will always be a source of chaos and damage to the stability and security of many countries in the region through its direct intervention in the internal affairs of these countries."

Yousef warned that submission to the mullahs and appeasing them would mean that the US has given up its friendship with America's traditional allies in the Arab world. It would also plunge the entire Middle East into more anarchy and instability, he cautioned.

"Reviving the nuclear agreement without imposing conditions on Iran that limit its expansionist and aggressive policy and its permanent interference in the internal affairs of the countries of the region would mean that the US has decided to forfeit the friendship of those countries... It also means pushing the region towards chaos."

Yousef expressed concern that Iran seems to be dictating its conditions to the US administration, "which appears to be submissive to all Iranian conditions, including those related to its continued hegemony over four Arab countries [Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen] and its interference in the affairs of other Arab countries."

Iran, he added, is "humiliating" the US administration by trying to delay the signing of the nuclear agreement so that the mullahs succeed in forcing the Biden administration to accept all their demands, especially the removal of the IRGC from the list of foreign terrorist organizations.

Another prominent Iraqi writer, Ali Al-Sarraf, pointed out that there is a clear majority in Congress that tells Biden that he took the wrong path in dealing with Iran.

"This majority has reminded Biden of what he should have paid attention to, but decided to ignore," Al-Sarraf wrote.

"A false beginning cannot lead to a correct ending. Biden was not ignorant of the wrong way he started [dealing with Iran]. All the countries in the region were telling him that the resumption of talks with Iran must include Iran's missile program and its destabilizing activities in the region, including the activities of its militias that threaten stability in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen. Biden chose not to listen to his country's allies, including Israel. He refused to take the reservations of America's allies into consideration. That is why America's allies don't trust him. They don't trust Biden because he is committing a serious strategic mistake that threatens the interests and influence of the US and the interests and security of its allies."

Al-Sarraf added that Biden could have told the mullahs that a return to the nuclear agreement would take place on the basis of three conditions: abandoning violations of the commitments in that agreement, curbing Iran's ballistic missile program because it is an integral part of the threat, and stopping the actions of militias that threaten the security and stability of the countries of the region.

He, too, expressed concern over the possibility that the Biden administration would remove Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps from the list of terrorist organizations.

The IRGC, Al-Sarraf noted, is directly involved in the civil war and violence in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen.

"Worse, the Revolutionary Guard has turned these countries into victims of corruption and economic and security failure... They have also made tens of millions of the people in these countries who face the hardships of daily life in its most extreme forms and fall victim to the emergence of terrorist organizations."

Like many Arabs, Al-Sarraf asked why the Biden administration was not defending the interests of America's allies.

"The US, while looking after its interests in the region and maintaining a large military presence there, should take the Iranian threats into consideration, and even make these threats the most important issue... But Biden's administration chose, from the outset, to ignore the Iranian threats and embark on the path of negotiating with Iran over the nuclear deal. Even if Biden chooses to ignore everyone and sign the agreement, he cannot later claim that he did not know the price. Biden will not be able to convince his allies in the region that he has reached a good deal. Iran's own actions will prove to him that he took the wrong path."

Lebanese writer Rajeh El Khoury said that he shared the view that the mullahs were trying to gain more time before returning to the negotiations over the signing of a new nuclear agreement.

He also noted that Biden appears to be in a hurry to strike a deal with the mullahs because of the growing opposition he is facing at home. "It's strange that the Biden administration is rushing to reach a deal with the Iranians at any cost," he said.

El Khoury pointed out that even as the nuclear talks were underway in Vienna over the past year, Iran continued to meddle in the internal affairs of the Arab countries and endanger the security and stability of America's allies in the Middle East.

Veteran Lebanese journalist Kheirallah Kheirallah described the current US policy in the Middle East as "defective."

This policy, he wrote, "has encouraged Iran to go far in threatening the countries of the region and their security with the help of the Revolutionary Guards."

"To put it more clearly, there is no sane person in the region willing to take seriously any reassuring words issued by [US Special Envoy for Iran] Robert Malley and other officials in the US administration concerned with the Iranian file. Every child now knows that these American officials have nothing but flattery for Iran, especially in light of the cold American reaction to the attacks it carried out against the Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates."

From Barack Obama to Joe Biden, Kheirallah wrote, nothing has changed in Washington. "If anything has changed, it is for the worse."

"The slogan raised in Washington remains that the Iranian nuclear file overshadows all crises in the Middle East and the Gulf, and that this file has nothing to do with the practices of the Islamic Republic in Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen. How can such an administration, which has abandoned its allies, including Saudi Arabia, succeed in responding to Vladimir Putin in Ukraine? How can a US administration gain the trust of its allies despite its refusal to take note that northern Yemen has become a base for Iranian missiles and drones? These missiles and drones are directed at the Arab Gulf states and are now threatening navigation in the Red Sea as well. The Biden administration failed the Ukrainian test. The tragedy is that it does not want to admit this and does not want to know why its allies do not trust it anymore."

Emirati political analyst Salem Alketbi wrote that he, also, was worried about the collapse of the strategic partnership between the US and its Arab allies.

Alketbi pointed out that the Biden administration made a mistake when it removed the Houthis from the list of terrorist organizations because that only increased tensions in Yemen and the rest of the region.

"The decision did not serve the interests of the US... It would be a mistake to remove the Revolutionary Guard from the list of terrorist organizations because it will lead to the same catastrophic results, will be costly for the Americans and lead to the collapse of US relations with strategic partners in the Gulf."

Alketbi advised the Biden administration to conduct a "comprehensive review" of its role and policies in the Middle East in order to address the mistakes and not to add to them by committing new ones. "What is needed is not a step that deepens the dispute with the allies, but steps to restore confidence and bridge the gaps."

The concerns expressed by the Arabs over the policies of the Biden administration towards Iran and Washington's Arab allies should sound a loud alarm bell in the US.

The Arabs are saying that they have lost confidence in the Biden administration because its policies will lead to disastrous results and endanger the security and stability of several Arab countries.

It is clear that the Arabs see Iran as the main threat, by far, to their security.

It is also clear that a return to the nuclear agreement and the removal of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps from the list of terrorist organizations would cause massive damage to the interests of the US. It will lose all its Arab friends, who will stop working with the Americans in a number of fields, including the war on terrorism.

It now remains to be seen whether the Biden administration will continue with its benighted policy of appeasing the mullahs or heed the insistent wake-up calls of America's real allies.

  • Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on Twitter

 

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

Source:https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18543/iran-us-demands

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The New Racial Hatred - D. F. Mulder

 

by D. F. Mulder

The official lines on the most important subjects of the day are not just inconsistent with reality, they are the complete inversion of it.

America has truly reached Soviet levels of mass delusion and absurdity. The official lines on the most important subjects of the day are not just inconsistent with reality, they are the complete inversion of it.

Last week, NPR published an article titled, “Has Tucker Carlson created the most racist show in the history of cable news?” The article is not your everyday propaganda piece; it is almost humorous in its mendacity. Tucker Carlson diligently avoids anything that can be intrepreted as "racist." He repeatedly denounces racism on his show and repeatedly affirms that he judges individuals as individuals, by their character and its content, and not by their skin color or their membership in any particular demographic group.

But can we say the same about America’s leftist ruling class? Hardly. These are people brainwashing white elementary schoolchildren to hate themselves, their own skin, and their own history. These are people who believe blatant racist discrimination against whites is necessary and good, and is in fact “anti-racist.” These folks truly believe white people are ineluctably racist, on account of being ensnared in a culture of white racism. Whites cannot help being immoral! They are an irredeemably awful race! These people want whites to literally kneel before non-whites on account of history or something. That is the price whites must pay for so unceremoniously existing. They have given white people the Sophie’s Choice of hating non-whites or themselves. There appears to be no other option. Whites must either loudly and aggressively denounce themselves or do violence against black and brown bodies through silence. These people call themselves “anti-racists”, but they are not “anti-racists” so much as deranged white-hating zealots. Their unmistakable racism is not racism, whereas Tucker Carlson’s non-racism is racism to the nth. Confused yet?

The regime’s opposition to Carlson is not actually due to Carlson being a racist, it is that Carlson, subconsciously or by implication, stands athwart their diabolical plans. Its incessant condemnations and attempted cancellations of the man are also not the result of Carlson stating anything evidently or provably untrue. Indeed, the regime’s own propaganda makes plain that truth matters not at all to it. Many media outlets label “replacement theory” a conspiracy theory even as they acknowledge its occurrence, indeed celebrate the ongoing replacement/cleansing of whites throughout America. But why would one celebrate what is a crazed conspiracy theory? Something does not compute here.

The power structure’s opposition to Carlson, its disdain for him, is not about the truth. It cannot be. The truth is with Carlson after all. That opposition is about the effects of his words and the words of other honest dissidents on the right. Our elites fear that such words might inspire young whites to resist their own dispossession and/or extirpation. The regime wants white people to disappear, but most importantly, it wants us to disappear quietly.

One common refrain uttered by educators and others against rightist critics of Critical Race Theory is that CRT is “just the teaching of American history,” nothing more. This is another complete lie. Critical Race Theory is a Marxist academic “discipline” (undisciplined as it is), like all “critical theories.” It is the telling of American history through the lens of the relentless racial exploitation and maltreatment of non-whites by wicked white oppressors. It is myth, but it is a popular myth on the Left. White people are uniquely evil, white people are uniquely racist, white people oppressed and continue to oppress us all. Well, that is not “just the teaching of history”, which is to say facts and the like. That is a highly ideological teaching of history. It is the teaching of history from a very specific, quintessentially Cultural Marxist viewpoint.

The Left claims Critical Race Theory is not actually being taught anywhere. It claims this even as it shrieks that legislatures are banning the teaching of the theory in many of our public schools. But why would you be outraged by a prohibition on something you are not doing? That makes about as much sense as celebrating a great replacement which is not really occurring.

Black-on-white racist attacks occur all the time in America. Yet the U.S. power structure treats the hatred behind many of those acts as something mostly, if not fully, justified. If white people are oppressing you, surely some amount of violent resistance is due. The problem is, white people are not oppressing anyone. White supremacy was a spent force in America a full century ago. The U.S. power structure is not only not white supremacist today, it is viciously and committedly anti-white. The treatment of interracial violence in this country demonstrates this definitively.

White victims in mass-killing events committed by black mass murderers are never given the same level of sympathy or support as black victims of white mass murderers. And black perpetrators of mass murders against whites are never given the same kind of infamy or odium as white perpetrators of mass murders against blacks. The disparity is glaring. Black-on-White acts of violence are given a fraction of the media coverage given to events like the Buffalo shooting involving Peyton Gendron, or the Charleston shooting involving Dylann Roof, despite Black-on-White violence, including murder, being significantly more common. Furthermore, the racial and ideological motives behind those crimes are systematically ignored and/or downplayed, and not just by the media, but by law enforcement as well. The opposite would be true in a genuinely white supremacist nation. Again, reality is being inverted.

It goes on and on. In America today, either you believe the most brazen of lies, or you are a dangerous radical, which means anyone with any sense or integrity is now a “dangerous radical.” The Cultural Marxist power class aggressively peddles narratives that are the complete inversion of the truth, and it demonizes, slanders, banishes, and cancels anyone willing to speak the truth. Lies on such a scale are deeply destabilizing to any society.

Violence and radicalism are increasingly inevitable given the dishonesty of our bottomlessly corrupt ruling class. Resistance is inevitable. It seems everyone intelligent knows something is horribly amiss in America today. After all, how much nonsense can a people really tolerate?

Image: Tim Pierce

 

D. F. Mulder

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/05/the_new_racial_hatred.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Leftist media want to convince you that you're obsessed with 'replacement theory' - D. Parker

 

by D. Parker

But how can you stop talking about something you never talk about?

Anti-liberty leftists are always projecting their true national agenda, and they are currently doing it at full volume. 

Do you find it extraordinarily odd that one extremist side of the political spectrum has been driven to distraction with one topic of discussion?  Has everyone taken notice that just one far end of the spectrum can't stop its fixation with this subject matter?

These are some of the more disturbing examples that show the anti-liberty left has lost the plot: 

That should be enough to make the point.  Anti-liberty leftists and the nation's socialist media (but we repeat ourselves) have positively gone off the rails in projecting this.  You shouldn't be surprised, since the Buffalo chumbucket (following the example of the Zelman Partisans) also was obsessed with this issue.

For the pro-freedom right, this is a nonexistent talking point, contrasted with the liberticidal left that can't stop talking about it.  We aren't saying much about this, but that doesn't stop the anti-liberty left from lying and claiming we are.  Even if you haven't used that particular word, it has a bunch of synonyms that mean the same thing, and failing that, you've no doubt used all the letters in "that" word.

So why did the admitted former communist and left authoritarian chumbucket bring it up?  Because as soon as it struck a chord, the nation's socialist media took up the tune. 

How do we resolve this dilemma?  The obvious answer was sitting out in the open all along.  Those who keep going on and on and on and on about this "issue" are the ones who are serious about it, because it is part and parcel of their true agenda.  They are simply screaming about it to try and silence any opposition. 

In his opening monologue from May 17, Tucker Carlson noted that the alleged mass murderer displayed many indications of mental illness, as has been the case with far too many mass murder suspects. 

But instead of taking the intelligent approach to saving lives in addressing the cause of these all too common mental health issues with these mass murderers, anti-liberty leftists employ their flash-card psychoanalysis and first look at how they can exploit other people's pain for their political gain.  Instead of looking at the fact that these criminals and chumbuckets always tend to display real signs of mental illness and are usually well known to law enforcement and the mental health system, ambulance-chaser "Democrats" forget about what could make a difference and try to use tragedy to again restrict our liberty and sensible civil rights.    

You have to consider that for those of us on the pro-freedom right, it's been very confusing for the past few days.  We never actually discuss something that is supposedly mainstream in the freedom community.  But that is supposed to be the case according to the liberticidal left, and goodness knows these leftists spend so much time in their echo chamber that they should be aware of everything about us.

As Tucker Carlson explains in the video, anti-liberty leftists can't stop obsessing over this, making their agenda bloody obvious.  He also cited more examples of them boasting of their agenda, but as he stated, he will no doubt catch some flak for doing so.

In a commentary entitled "The Media's Big Lie About the 'Great Replacement Theory' and Conservatism," Ben Shapiro echoed many of these sentiments.

[I]n 2012, Greg Sargent of The Washington Post observed, "The story of this election will be all about demographics[.] ... [R]ather than reverting to the older, whiter, more male version [of America's electorate] Republicans had hoped for, it continues to be defined by what Ron Brownstein has called the 'coalition of the ascendant' — minorities, young voters, and college educated whites, particularly women"; in 2013, the Center for American Progress stated, "Supporting real immigration reform that contains a pathway to citizenship for our nation's 11 million undocumented immigrants [sic] is the only way to maintain electoral strength in the future."

All of this is designed to falsely conflate Republican positions with an admitted former communist "left authoritarian" who made several other statements that prove he's not a conservative.  In his own words, he described himself as an ethnonationalist and eco-fascist national socialist.

What does all of this mean?  Sometimes the nation's anti-liberty, socialist left makes it all too easy to determine its true national agenda.  Keep in mind all the basic rules of the regressive behavior of the anti-liberty left.  Leftists label themselves the opposite of what they are.

While they label themselves "liberals," they are out to destroy liberty.  Supposedly "progressive," they want to go back to the ancient ideology of collectivism, and they want to rule by an oligarchy instead of democracy.

They always project their tactics on others, so it should be clear that what many of them stated in the Tucker Carlson video is correct, and they are simply screaming at the top of their lungs to suppress the truth of what they are doing.  It's almost as if they think drowning out all discussion of what they are doing will let them have free rein.

 

D. Parker is an engineer, inventor, wordsmith, and student of history and the director of communications for a Bill of Rights organization and a longtime contributor to conservative websites.  Find him on Substack.

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2022/05/leftist_media_want_to_convince_you_that_youre_obsessed_with_replacement_theory.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Why Tucker Carlson and the Isolationist Right Are Wrong - David Horowitz and Daniel Greenfield

 

by David Horowitz and Daniel Greenfield

A Russian defeat in Ukraine makes America safer.

 


In April 1941 Germany had conquered all of Europe except England, while its Axis partner Japan had conquered most of Southeast Asia. At this historical moment, the Gallup Company took a poll of Americans on this question: Should America – until then a non-combatant – get involved in the war. 81% of Americans said no. But all that changed with the attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7 in that same year. If the United States had not entered World War II, we would have faced a world united under Nazi rule ready to attack us.

It's important to remember this history because ever since George Washington’s farewell warning to “avoid foreign entanglements,” isolationism has been deeply embedded in the American soul. This is a tribute to America’s prosperity, bounteous freedoms, and endless diversions. America is a happy country and the last thing its people want to do is go to war.

So it’s not surprising that there is a movement among conservatives that takes the position that America’s effort to support the resistance to Russian savagery and imperialism in Ukraine is a dangerous distraction and a threat to American security. The leading voice of this movement is not some fringe right-winger but rather Tucker Carlson, arguably the most articulate and courageous defender of the American values, institutions and freedoms which are under attack by the Biden administration, which has belatedly come to the aid of Ukraine - most recently with a $40 billion package of military and humanitarian support.

Tucker and the conservative patriots who have joined him are wrong – wrong in their analyses, wrong in their priorities, and wrong in their opposition to a war that the West, led by the United States, must win.

Tucker has argued that Ukraine is a remote European country, and the United States has no security interest there that is worth the cost or the risks involved in defending it. But in today’s world there are no remote countries. According to the U.S. Air Force, Russia’s new hypersonic missile can travel 1,000 miles in 12 minutes, which means it can deliver a nuclear payload to American cities from Russia in little over an hour, and from a conquered Ukraine in even less time.

The question the isolationists should be asking – but don’t – is this: What would happen if Putin got away with committing his genocide of Ukrainians, and was rewarded for his war crimes and aggression? This is a question the isolationists never seem to address. Is Poland next? Would Europe fold under Putin’s threats if his Ukrainian genocide succeeded? If a madman can get away with crimes like this, what could he not get away with? International aggressions and genocides would no longer be unthinkable. What impact would a Putin victory have on China’s determination to swallow Taiwan, and who knows what other countries the Communists covet?

Xi Jinping has already killed a million Americans and many millions more around the globe, and gotten away with it. What would be unthinkable for a dictator like this if his Kremlin ally walks away from the Ukrainian atrocity intact?

It's obvious that Obama’s feckless surrender of Crimea, and Biden’s disastrous desertion of Afghanistan and hands-off policy while Putin massed his troops on Ukraine’s border emboldened the psychopath to attempt the unthinkable. If he gets away with it, what then?

Equally important: How would a Putin victory and American acquiescence in the face of this atrocity affect America’s sense of itself, its national pride as a beacon of freedom, a keeper of the peace and a defender of the defenseless in an increasingly dangerous world? What is happening in Ukraine is like forty Guernicas or Coventrys rolled into one; it is also a spectacle of inspiring human heroism and courage with few parallels in our time or any other. What would we feel like if we turned our backs on the ordinary people who have risen so nobly to defend their homes? How would it affect our ability to defend ourselves?

Revulsion against the shame Americans felt at Biden’s cowardly debacle in Afghanistan undoubtedly lies at the root of Americans’ widespread support for the aid packages to Ukraine.

The weakness of the isolationist argument – the way it misses the forest for the trees - is evident in the way its proponents decry the $40 billion package “to defend Ukraine’s borders,” while America’s remain undefended.  This economic argument is spurious. The defense of America’s borders first and foremost requires the stroke of a pen restoring the border security measures that Trump put in place and that his successor who has contempt for his country destroyed. It’s not an economic problem jeopardized by the aid to Ukraine. It’s a political problem caused by a damaged man who should never have been president in the first place.

Here is the reality the isolationists miss. Last year, - Biden’s year in office - there were more Russian aircraft incursions in the Alaska Air Defense Identification Zone than at any time since the fall of the Soviet Union. The upsurge in Russian incursions led to a “strain” on Alaska Command air crews who were repeatedly forced to respond by intercepting and escorting Russian bombers, intelligence aircraft, and other planes. A year earlier, the Russian navy staged major war games near Alaska, launching cruise missiles at practice targets and surfacing at least one sub near its border.

While Putin has complained that the American presence in Eastern Europe is a threat to Russian national security, he hasn’t been shy about aggressive moves near American territory, testing our defense capabilities and looking for any vulnerabilities. Democrats ridiculed Sarah Palin for telling an interviewer, “They’re our next-door neighbors, and you can actually see Russia from land here in Alaska”. But you can. The incursions and threats are a reminder that Russia is not just a problem for the Europeans.

Russia’s leaders believe that they have the right to reclaim Ukraine, Poland, and every territory once ruled by the Czarist and Soviet empires. They believe that Alaska belongs to Russia.

“Nicholas II played democracy, in the end we lost Alaska, we lost our empire," complained Sergey Aksyonov, Putin's appointed head of the conquered territory of Crimea. "If Russia had Alaska today, it would change the geopolitical situation around the world.” Aksyonov is not alone. During the current conflict in Ukraine, a Russian parliamentarian went so far as to demand the return of Alaska as “reparations.”

Russia is not just a problem for Ukraine, or for Poland, which was recently invaded by a mob of Iraqi Muslim migrants flown in through Belarus. Georgia has already been invaded and partially occupied. Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania are now concerned about Russian invasions. Finland and Sweden, are abandoning their longstanding neutrality to join NATO to defend themselves.

An aggressive Russia is also a problem for us. There are plenty of good reasons to criticize NATO and European nations. And to be skeptical of the culture of corruption in Ukraine, along with much of the region and the world. President Trump rightly pointed out that the United States has wrongly been doing most of the work and paying most of the bill for an organization that defends wealthy European countries like Germany. Those are also some of the points that Tucker makes, but President Trump also understood that Americans could not just ignore Russia or Ukraine. That’s why he was the first to provide real military aid to Ukraine.

"Why do I care what's going on in the conflict between Ukraine and Russia?” Tucker has asked. The answer is that it’s not really about Ukraine. Much as China threatening Taiwan isn’t just about an island, and the last world war wasn’t just about Czechoslovakia and Poland. Russia is aggressively expanding. That’s a problem and one way or the other we’re going to have to deal with it.

We’re part of a world market in food and energy. Even if we did achieve energy and food independence (which we urgently need to do) the impact of the invasion of Ukraine on world markets would still hurt us financially. Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait dragged us into two wars in Iraq. But that’s nothing compared to being dragged into two world wars in Europe.

Tucker has expressed concern that America and Russia will go to war over Ukraine. “What we're watching is the beginning of a war between the United States and Russia,” he argued. “If that sounds jarring, what else would you call it?”

But the United States and Russia didn’t go to war over Vietnam, where Russia supported its Vietnamese proxy in Hanoi with military equipment. That’s the whole point of a proxy war. Russia’s proxy wars weakened America in Asia and the Middle East. Now this proxy war is weakening Russia in Eastern Europe. And the weaker Russia becomes, the less likely it is to drag us into a war. Let alone to directly go to war against us.

There are compelling moral reasons to supply people who are fighting for their freedom with the weapons they need to do the job. But there are even more compelling realpolitik reasons. China is closely watching the outcome of this conflict. And if Russia loses, that makes it much less likely that the Communist dictatorship will go through with its plans to invade Taiwan. And that would keep Americans out of a truly devastating military and economic conflict.

This is not just a proxy war between Russia and America, but also China. If America can demonstrate that supplying weapons is enough to hold off an invasion by a major power without our military involvement, China will have to consider that it could invade Taiwan and lose.

Tucker is right to be suspicious of the woke and feeble Pentagon brass, multinational institutions and the political establishment. Under President Trump, this crisis would not have occurred. There’s a reason that both of Putin’s invasions of Ukraine took place under White House Democrats. That’s also why Russia’s Alaska incursions flared up under Obama and Biden. Weakness is much more likely to bring on a war. Abandoning the Ukrainians would be a sign of crippling weakness.

Biden badly mishandled the Ukraine crisis. But we should not let the corruption in the White House or other political institutions, here and abroad, blind us to the human suffering or the bigger issues at stake for our national security. If Russia’s efforts in Ukraine fall apart, it will not be due to Biden or the European Union, but the resilience of ordinary people in the face of war.

Ordinary Ukrainians may end up saving Biden from the consequences of his incompetence. But if they do, they will have averted wars in Europe and Asia at a fraction of the cost of a world war. Even the Iraq War cost over $2 trillion. Preventing a war for a few billion and not a single American soldier wounded or killed in action would be a bargain. And maybe Alaska Command will be seeing fewer Tu-95 Bears in the skies. That is as real as realpolitik gets.

 

David Horowitz is the founder of the David Horowitz Freedom Center and the bestselling author of I Can't Breathe: How a Racial Hoax is Killing America.

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

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/05/why-tucker-carlson-and-isolationist-right-are-david-horowitz-and-daniel-greenfield/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Rush to Demonize Israel After Fatal Shooting of Al Jazeera Journalist - Joseph Klein

 

by Joseph Klein

The haters declare Israel guilty -- without evidence or investigation.

 


Al Jazeera’s Palestinian-American correspondent Shirin Abu Akleh, 51, was shot to death on May 11th during clashes between armed Palestinians and Israel Defense Forces (IDF) in the West Bank city of Jenin. Hamas, the Palestinian Authority, and their enablers have exploited the journalist’s tragic death as fodder for a malicious propaganda campaign against Israel. They have charged, without a shred of evidence, that Israel deliberately targeted Ms. Akleh for assassination.

The Qatar-owned Al Jazeera itself blamed Israeli forces for its correspondent’s killing, labeling it "a blatant murder, violating international laws and norms." Al Jazeera accused Israeli soldiers of assassinating Ms. Akleh in “cold blood” and “targeting her with live fire,” prior to the completion of any credible, transparent investigation.

It is one thing for the media outlet to mourn the loss of one its own and demand such an investigation. It is quite another for Al Jazeera, which claims in its Code of Ethics that it endeavors “to get to the truth,” to immediately convict Israeli soldiers in the court of public opinion with no established basis in fact.

Israeli authorities want to get to the truth of what happened during Israel’s counter-terrorism operation. They are considering the possibility that one of IDF’s own soldiers could have accidentally shot Ms. Akleh while trying to target one of the Palestinian gunmen who were firing barrages of bullets at the Israel Defense Forces. But Israeli authorities are also considering the alternative possibility that one of the Palestinian shooters might have killed Ms. Akleh, who was nearby and caught in the crossfire.

IDF soldiers were in Benin in the first place to root out dangerous Palestinian terrorists from their home bases. Palestinian terrorists have murdered multiple Israeli civilians in recent weeks. It defies common sense to suppose that the IDF would have diverted their attention for even a second to deliberately target an unarmed journalist when the Israeli soldiers were under constant attack by armed Palestinian militants.

Israel offered to conduct a joint investigation with Palestinian authorities in the presence of impartial observers. However, the Palestinians refused the offer and are also withholding key evidence such as the bullet recovered from Ms. Akleh’s body.

Avichai Edrei, the Arabic-speaking spokesman for the IDF, said, "We call on the Palestinians to investigate the issue in a joint pathological investigation. The State of Israel is in favor of the truth. Until now, they are refusing, perhaps in order to hide the truth. We express regret over the journalist's death."

A spokesman of the Palestinian Authority, Ibrahim Milhim, was dismissive of Israel’s offer of cooperation in trying to find out what truly happened. “Let me ask, when does the criminal have the right to take part in the investigation against his victim?” he said sarcastically.

Palestinian leaders are not interested in finding out the truth. They are weaponizing the death of Ms. Akleh in their never-ending battle to demonize and delegitimize the Jewish State of Israel.

The Palestinian Foreign Ministry, for example, issued the following incendiary statement: “We condemn the execution of journalist Shireen Abu Akleh and hold the extremist Israeli Prime Minister [Naftali] Bennett fully and directly responsible for this heinous crime.”

Hamas added its own fuel to the fire: “The assassination of the occupation media, Shireen Abu Akleh, is premeditated murder and is condemned in the strongest terms. It will not obscure the reality of the occupation’s terrorism and brutality.”

The latter statement comes from the same terrorist organization that has committed brutal crimes against journalists who deviated from Hamas’s party line.

For example, Hamas detained and tortured Palestinian journalist Hani Al-Agha, according to the International Federation of Journalists. He was ultimately released only after suffering what has been described as life-threatening injuries.

Even the Palestinian Journalists Syndicate said that it “considered the brutal torture of Al Agha a crime against him and the right to freedom of information and an attempt to intimidate journalists in Gaza Strip, who are subject to repressive police authority.”

Hamas is the repressive police authority in Gaza intimidating journalists there.

The Palestinian Center for Development and Media Freedoms (MADA) reported that Hani Al-Agha was among 19 journalists and media workers detained during just a three day period in 2019, most of whom were assaulted. Hamas security forces assaulted other journalists as well.

Iranian Government Spokesman Ali Bahadori Jahromi used the unsolved killing of Abu Akleh to shamelessly accuse Israel of attacking the freedom of the media.

Iran’s foreign ministry spokesman, Saeed Khatibzadeh, brazenly declared: “The Israeli propaganda machine and its affiliated media outlets, contrary to the ongoing false claims, are afraid of dissemination of truth and accurate news reports and they go as far as to even kill journalists.”

This is a perfect case of the pot calling the kettle black.

The Committee to Protect Journalists (CPJ) reported a fairly recent example of how the Iranian regime kidnapped and killed a journalist who was critical of the regime and its leaders.

“Iranian authorities executed journalist Roohollah Zam by hanging on December 12, 2020 after sentencing him to death on anti-state charges for his coverage of protests in 2017,” according to CPJ. “Intelligence agents of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) lured Zam to Iraq, where he was abducted on October 14, 2019, and taken to Iran, according to news reports.”

The Iranian regime’s terrorist proxy, Hezbollah, joined the chorus condemning Israel with no evidence for allegedly murdering Ms. Akleh. Hezbollah described Ms. Akleh as a “resistance journalist who had been pioneer in covering the Zionist crimes against her people throughout twenty years.”

Hezbollah has done everything it can to cover up its own crimes against the Lebanese people, including journalists.

In early 2021, for example, a prominent Lebanese publisher and fierce critic of Hezbollah, Lokman Slim, was found shot dead in his car in southern Lebanon. Members of Hezbollah had threatened Mr. Slim’s life on multiple occasions for months prior to his murder.

Despite Hezbollah’s denial of involvement in Mr. Slim’s murder and its call for an “investigation,” Hezbollah is almost certainly the culprit, according to most Lebanese media outlets that are not Hezbollah affiliates or boosters.

Jawad Nasrallah, the son of Hezbollah leader Hasan Nasrallah, tweeted the following right after Mr. Slim’s murder was confirmed, as reported by The Guardian: “The loss of some people is in fact an unplanned gain #notsorry.” He later deleted the tweet and denied that he had meant to refer to Mr. Slim.

Hezbollah does not have to worry about any serious investigation by the Lebanese government into Hezbollah’s likely involvement in the murder of Mr. Slim, as well as murders, assaults and intimidation of other journalists who have dared to challenge Hezbollah. The well-armed terrorist organization, whose claws reach into Lebanon’s governmental, military, and security institutions, can count on continued impunity from accountability for its crimes.

The anti-Israel contingent in the U.S. House of Representatives has also exploited the killing of Shirin Abu Akleh.

On the day that the shooting occurred, prior to any investigation and with no evidence, Palestinian-American Rep. Rashida Tlaib, one of the progressive House Democrat Squad leaders, posted an outrageous accusatory tweet. Dripping with her hatred of Israel, the tweet was so typical of Tlaib:

 "When will the world and those who stand by Apartheid Israel that continues to murder, torture and commit war crimes finally say: 'Enough'?  Shireen Abu Akleh was murdered by a government that receives unconditional funding by our country with zero accountability."

Kudos to Aviva Klompas for her pointed reply to Tlaib, which should apply to all those haters so eager to engage in blood-libels against the Jewish State of Israel.

Ms. Klompas, a former director of speech writing for Israel’s Permanent Mission to the United Nations and co-founder of the nonprofit think-action tank known as Boundless, noted that Tlaib had made her accusation before any investigation was even underway.

Ms. Klompas tweeted:

“There is ZERO evidence that Shireen Abu Akleh was killed by an Israeli bullet. Verify before you vilify. Demand an investigation instead of demonizing Israel.”

So true!

 

Joseph Klein

Source:https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/05/rush-demonize-israel-after-fatal-shooting-al-joseph-klein/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Rewarding and Valorizing Jew Hatred at CUNY Law - Richard L. Cravatts

 

by Richard L. Cravatts

The anti-Semitic crybully becomes the whining victim.

 


As if to further confirm how CUNY Law School has become a cesspool of anti-Israel activism masked as social justice, its most radical and toxic student, Nerdeen Kiswani, was chosen to give one of the school’s commencement addresses on May 13th.

Kiswani is the perfect example of the radical who whines about being victimized for her aggressive activism, what The New Criterion’s Roger Kimball, has defined as a “crybully,” someone “who has weaponized his coveted status as a victim.”  

That behavior was on full display during Kiswani’s activist speech when she began by complaining about “facing a campaign of Zionist harassment by well-funded organizations with ties to the Israeli government and military on the basis of my Palestinian identity and organizing,” apparently oblivious to the fact that these organizations may have had good reason to respond to her unrelenting vitriol against Israel, Zionism, and Jews.

Kiswani, it will be remembered, was featured in a provocative 2020 TikTok video when she was a second-year student at CUNY law school, one of the many examples of her long record of toxic activism.

In the video, Kiswani is seen attempting to light on fire an IDF-emblazoned sweatshirt worn by an individual sitting with her, expressing her hatred for the IDF and the nation it defends—a loathing that apparently animates Ms. Kiswani’s life, since she was fully engaged as the former vice president and president of the virulent student group Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) at Hunter College and at the College of Staten Island (CSI), City of New York University (CUNY). She is also the chairperson of Within Our Lifetime (WOL), an anti-Israel activist group in New York City, where, at one repellant rally, she called on supporters to “globalize the Intifada, from New York to Palestine;” in other words, to murder Jews everywhere in the name of Palestinian self-determination.

Canary Mission, a website that tracks and catalogs the anti-Semitism and anti-Israel activism of individuals and organizations and compiles online dossiers on them, has a voluminous file on Kiswani, an individual, it notes, who has “spread hatred of America, incited hatred against pro-Israel donors, promoted hatred of Israel and demonized Zionism,” “glorified intifada, honored leaders of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) terror group and expressed support for other terrorists in her WOL activism.” Kiswani, the Canary Mission dossier also notes, “has opposed the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance (IHRA) definition of anti-Semitism and is a supporter of the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions (BDS) movement.”

And, as evidenced by the TikTok video clip, Kiswani is perfectly willing to use and celebrate violence against Israeli Jews. In fact, when in 2017 Palestinian terrorists killed four people and injured 17 others by ramming them with a vehicle on a Jerusalem promenade, Kiswani lauded and encouraged the celebration of the murders, ghoulishly noting that “Palestinians in Palestine are giving out sweets in celebration. I will not hide from this. I will not be ashamed or embarrassed by this. These celebratory actions are what keep the resistance moving forward, they are what keep it alive.”

No university, and certainly not an institution like CUNY, engulfed as it is in woke activism, would tolerate a white supremacist student group that purported to exist only to promote pride in being white but whose activities wholly involved agitating against minorities, staging Black Racism Week events, inviting white racist speakers to campus to trumpet the moral defects of minorities in America, and regularly yelling out at rallies and elsewhere such charming chants as, “send them back to Africa” or “string them up, string them up,” a call to lynch and murder blacks. No anti-gay or anti-Muslim group would ever be allowed on an American campus either. And that same university would never compound the moral harm of this group’s activism by inviting its leader to speak as the representative of its student body at graduation events.

But the woke anti-Semites in the audience for Kiswani’s speech regularly interrupted her talk with cheers and applause, obviously in thrall with her lofty, but empty, nod to social justice. Kiswani trumpeted that she embraced all her CUNY fellow travelers who are “fighting for black, Latin X. indigenous. Palestinian liberation and for the freedom of all people living under colonial domination, imperialism, and white supremacist structures both around the world and here in the U.S.,” signaling that only oppressed victims are worthy of support, but clearly not Jews.

And since Kiswani has repeatedly called for the “liberation” of Palestine (which, not coincidentally, includes present-day Israel), the continuation of an Intifada, and the eventual extirpation of the Jewish state, it is clear that any Jewish student at CUNY or anyone who supports Israel is not part of this high-minded progressive coalition of woke social justice warriors.

The issue here is not whether or not Kiswani has the freedom of speech to utter her calumnies against Israel Zionism and Jews. The fact that she has done so, publicly and promiscuously, for years and has never been censured or censored for it by the CUNY administration is evidence that, at least on her campus, she enjoys unrestricted First Amendment rights. But it is one thing to allow the toxic rants of a student activist in her role as a member of different groups and organizations on and off campus and another thing altogether to allow her to promote her toxic ideology as a featured speaker at that institution’s graduation exercise. No one from CUNY’s administration or faculty seems to have vocally denounced the choice of Kiswani or her speech itself. No one in the audience tried to shout her down, heckle her, or disrupt the speech.

That was not the case, however, in 2018, when legal scholar Josh Blackman was invited by the Law School’s Federalist Society to lecture on free speech, and the woke law students, claiming Blackman was a racist and white supremacist based on some of his writings, discourteously and in violation of CUNY’s own code of conduct, tried to shut down and aggressively disrupted his event. No such opposition from fellow law students or faculty was evident at Kiswani’s speech.

Most troubling, of course, is that Kiswani was chosen, not in spite of her radical speech and behavior—much of it blatantly anti-Semitic--but precisely because of it. CUNY Law School has collectively enlisted itself in an anti-Israel campaign, complete with the incessant slanders, libels, and lies about the Jewish state. Kiswani acknowledged as much when she noted that “we've been able to pass a BDS resolution through student government which CUNY faculty just officially endorsed yesterday,” not to mention the School’s “statement standing with the freedom of speech of those fighting for Palestinian liberation.”

One has to wonder if the CUNY community fully comprehends what “Palestinian liberation” means and how such a catastrophic and genocidal event would affect the 6.8 million Israeli Jews who live there now were the delusional fantasies of BDS proponents realized and “Palestine” was purged of its pesky Jews as part of Palestinian self-determination.

On this single global issue and for this one group of perceived victims—the Palestinians—the entire law school has committed itself to stand in solidarity? That it supports “resistance” by the Palestinians, a euphemistic term for terrorism against Jews? That it deems Zionism to be racism? That Israel is an illegitimate, colonial outpost created by imperialism and maintained through apartheid and the oppression of a wholly innocent indigenous people who only seek peace? Those notions comprise the ideology of the BDS movement and certainly WOL’s tenets are just as extreme and lethal.

That CUNY stands by and thinks that Kiswani and her fellow students are somehow reflecting well on the institution because they purport to be acting on behalf of the downtrodden does not erase the fact that their ideology is based on one in which the well-being of Jews is inconsequential and the continued existence of the Jewish state is an irritating detail that can be cured by a “globalized Intifada” in which Israelis are slaughtered and their state eliminated once and for all.

When you allow a speaker at a graduation ceremony to bray about being victimized by those who have a problem with this incendiary and anti-Semitic rhetoric and behavior, you have stopped being a place where true debate and reason prevail. You have created, instead, an echo chamber in which like-minded, misguided radical activists have corrupted the purpose on which a university is based. That is not what a university should do or be. And that is not a place where the country’s future lawyers should be taught.

A university should, and must, have the right and responsibility to its respective community to decide which student groups have a legitimate and valid mission and which are animated by extremist ideology and a penchant for spreading bigotry, ethnic hatred, and misreading of history and facts.

And by allowing a bigoted, anti-Semitic activist to speak on behalf of an entire professional school at a public university is a profound betrayal of higher education’s values and purpose.

 

Richard L. Cravatts, Ph.D., a Freedom Center Journalism Fellow in Academic Free Speech and President Emeritus of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, is the author of Jew-Hatred Rising: The Perversities of the Campus War Against Israel and Jews.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/05/rewarding-and-valorizing-jew-hatred-cuny-law-richard-l-cravatts/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Michele Bachmann Video: Secretive WHO Vote Threatens American Sovereignty - Frontpage Editors

 

by Frontpage Editors

Americans never thought this could happen.

 


The Biden administration appears to be prepared to hand control of America’s national sovereignty over to the World Health Organization (WHO), as Michelle Bachmann explains on Steve Bannon’s War Room podcast.

Check out the short must-watch video below:

 

 

Frontpage Editors

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2022/05/michele-bachmann-video-secretive-who-vote-frontpage-editors/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Tackling Islamic Supremacy - Tarek Fatah

 

by Tarek Fatah

Originally published under the title "Tackling Islamic Supremacy in India."


President Joe Biden has condemned the "poison" of white supremacy in the "body politic" of the United States after an 18-year-old white gunman killed 10 people on Saturday at a market in a predominantly Black neighbourhood of Buffalo in New York State.

Here was a white man, president of the most powerful country in the world condemning the act of mass murder committed by someone of his own race.

European settlers who enslaved Black Africans to build an economy on land stolen from the aboriginal and indigenous people of America have come to recognize their forefather's crimes and have moved to make white supremacy an evil that should be eradicated.

We may have miles to go, but we are on the path that will lead to the goal of equality for all humans in our pursuit of liberty, equality and fraternity first espoused during the French Revolution as well as the U.S. Constitution.

What about those Muslims who condemn white supremacist ideas but believe in Islamic supremacy?

But what about those among the nearly two billion Muslims of this world who, while condemning white supremacist ideas, continue to believe in Islamic supremacy and claim that Islam is the only true religion, the only path towards salvation?

Such Muslims may or may not be admirers of ISIS, Al-Qaeda or the various versions of the Muslim Brotherhood that today not only justify the conquering of non-Muslim peoples and lands but who celebrate tyrants and plunderers and unashamedly justify the destruction of churches and temples.

While Boko Haram in Nigeria and Al-Shabab in Somalia compete with the Taliban of Afghanistan and the ruling Ayatollahs of Iran, we have the likes of President Erdogan in Turkey and the ousted Prime Minister of Pakistan, Imran Khan, who calls for a return to a 7th century Arabia.

Even in the tiny island country of the Maldives in the Indian Ocean, Islamists have killed liberal Muslims who challenged the bearded clergy.

The most visible form of Islamic supremacy today is in India, where Mullahs leading a mere 14% of the population bully the rest of India.

However, the most visible form of arrogant Islamic supremacy is today visible in India where Mullahs leading present-day Muslims—a mere 14% of the population — are bullying the rest of India.

The Kashi Vishwanath Temple in the city of Varanasi, Uttar Pradesh, in India is dedicated to Lord Shiva. It stands on the bank of the river Ganga (Ganges). Since the temple was considered a central and essential part of worship in Hindu scriptures, Muslim attackers had it demolished as an act of putting the majority Hindu population in its proper place.

The original Vishwanath temple was destroyed by the invading army of Qutb al-Din Aibak in 1194 CE, whose other claims to fame include constructing the Qutb Minar (Tower) that still exists. It was built after the destruction of 26 temples of the indigenous Jain community.

During the rule of Mughal Emperor Akbar in 1585, the Kashi Temple was re-built at its original site. But in 1669, the last of the Moghul Emperors, the hated Aurangzeb, not just destroyed the temple again but also its lingam (a votary object symbolizing the Hindu god Shiva). Aurangzeb delivered the ultimate insult to Hindus by building the Gyanvapi Mosque over the ruins of the ancient Hindu temple.

There is not one Muslim public figure in India who acknowledges the crimes committed by their forefathers.

Now the local Hindu community wants to prove their claim to their ancient temple, but there is not one Muslim public figure in India who acknowledges the wrongs of the past. They will not show grace and recognize the crimes committed by their forefathers.

Instead, they rely on the Indian Constitution itself to lay claim to the mosque and deny the resurrection of the Kashi Hindu Temple. This thumbing of their noses at India's Hindus reflects the tragic attitude of some Indian Muslims who are driven by hatred of Hanood wa Yahood (Hindus and Jews).

Perhaps one day a Muslim figure will rise in India to lead thanks to Hindustan for the hospitality of Hindus who welcomed many a Muslim fleeing persecution in places as far apart as Egypt and the Persian Gulf.

Until then the 'kaafirs' of this world and liberal Muslims themselves will have to remain victims of Islamic supremacy. This could be our fear long after white supremacy has died.

 

Tarek Fatah is a Robert J. and Abby B. Levine Fellow at the Middle East Forum, a founder of the Muslim Canadian Congress, and a columnist at the Toronto Sun.

Source: https://www.meforum.org/63244/tackling-islamic-supremacy

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

How can Bennett's government still be saved? - analysis - Gil Hoffman

 

by Gil Hoffman

Rinawie Zoabi wrote in her letter to Bennett and Lapid that she is leaving the coalition, not that she is joining the opposition.

 

 MK Ghaida Rinawie Zoabi attends Meretz Party meeting in the Knesset, the Israeli parliament in Jerusalem on February 21, 2022. (photo credit: YONATAN SINDEL/FLASH90)
MK Ghaida Rinawie Zoabi attends Meretz Party meeting in the Knesset, the Israeli parliament in Jerusalem on February 21, 2022.
(photo credit: YONATAN SINDEL/FLASH90)

In the movie The Princess Bride, Miracle Max, played by Billy Crystal, pronounces one of the protagonists not dead but “mostly dead.”

“There’s a big difference between all dead and mostly dead,” he says. “Mostly dead is slightly alive. All dead, well there’s only one thing you can do: go through his pockets and look for loose change.”

The same can be said about Prime Minister Naftali Bennett’s governing coalition, which after the departure of defectors Idit Silman and Ghaida Rinawie Zoabi is on the way to political death but not quite there yet.

So how can the coalition still be saved and an election avoided?

The best way would be to flip-flop Rinawie Zoabi in one way or another. She wrote in her letter to Bennett and Alternate Prime Minister Yair Lapid that she is leaving the coalition, not that she is joining the opposition.

 Finance Minister Avigdor Liberman, Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, Alternate Prime Minister Yair Lapid at the security cabinet, May 8, 2022.  (credit: HAIM ZACH/GPO) Finance Minister Avigdor Liberman, Prime Minister Naftali Bennett, Alternate Prime Minister Yair Lapid at the security cabinet, May 8, 2022. (credit: HAIM ZACH/GPO)

She clearly expressed her discontent, but she did not say that she would cast the deciding vote to dissolve the Knesset, initiate an election and lose her job.

The second way is to keep a minority government going for as long as possible, at least until the next Knesset recess begins on July 27.

Justice Minister Gideon Sa’ar said that even a handicapped government is better than a caretaker government that reigns between the Knesset’s dissolution and the formation of a new coalition. The former can accomplish almost nothing; the latter nothing at all.

Just like mostly dead is better than dead, doing almost nothing is better than nothing.

Dr. Assaf Shapira, director of the political reform program at the Israel Democracy Institute, examined the three instances in which a minority government of 59 MKs served in Israel.

The 24th government, led by prime minister Yitzhak Shamir, was formed after the “stinking maneuver” in June 1990, when Shimon Peres attempted and failed to form an alternate government with the haredi Orthodox parties. The coalition factions initially included 59 MKs, with the outside support of two MKs from the Moledet party. But that July, MK Ephraim Gur joined the coalition, and then in November, Agudat Israel joined, and the government once again held a majority in the Knesset.

The 25th government, led by prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, was established with the support of 62 MKs. After Shas quit the coalition in the summer of 1993, it became a minority government of 56 MKs, with the support of five MKs from the factions representing Arab parties. In January 1995, three MKs from the Yi’ud faction, which had split from the right-wing Tzomet Party, joined the coalition. At that time, the government became a minority government of 59, with outside support from the Arab factions.

The 30th government, prime minister Ariel Sharon’s second, became over a period of time a minority government of 59 MKs. This occurred after the right-wing factions quit the coalition due to the Gaza Disengagement plan, and when the Shinui party quit due to matters of religion and state. At that point the coalition consisted of 19 MKs from the Likud and 19 from the Labor-Meimad party.

This was the reality from January 2005 until March 2005, when Degel HaTorah and Agudat Yisrael joined the coalition.

The final way to keep the current government going and avoid an election is to seek a counter-defector from the opposition to the coalition. It is not likely, but it cannot be ruled out.

Bennett has no Miracle Max to give him a magic pill, but he cannot be politically eulogized just yet. 

 

Gil Hoffman

Source: https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/politics-and-diplomacy/article-707218

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter