Pamela Geller: 'Because of organizations like ADL, Sarsour is where she is' - Mordechai Sones

by Mordechai Sones

'Their vicious attacks on my colleagues and me are used by Jew-haters the world over.'

ADL's Greenblatt

Flash 90

Reacting to a tweet by Anti-Defamation League (ADL) head Jonathan Greenblatt in which he compared "having Linda Sarsour leading a panel on anti-Semitism to Oscar Meyer leading a panel on vegetarianism", author of Fatwa: Hunted in America Pamela Geller called the ADL "an uber-left wing org who attacks proud, vocal Jews."

Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton addressing ADL meeting

Reuters

Jonathan Greenblatt is the sixth National Director and CEO of the ADL, following Director Abe Foxman's retirement. Prior to heading ADL, he served in the White House as Special Assistant to Barack Obama, and Director of the Office of Social Innovation and Civic Participation.

"Their vicious attacks on my colleagues and me are used by Jew-haters the world over. It's because of orgs like the ADL that Sarsour is where she is," Geller tweeted.

Israel critic John Kerry addressing ADL

Reuters

Former National director of the Anti-Defamation League Foxman hugs German Chancellor Merkel

Photo: Reuters

Mordechai Sones

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/238796

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

No Justice for Kate Steinle - Lloyd Billingsley

by Lloyd Billingsley

Illegal’s attorney says "not guilty" verdict is “all about immigrant rights.”

A San Francisco jury on Thursday found Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, also known as Juan Francisco Lopez Sanchez, not guilty of the murder of Kate Steinle on a San Francisco pier on July 1, 2015. The jury of six men and six women, including three immigrants, found the Mexican national not guilty of all murder and manslaughter charges and guilty only of felony possession of a firearm.

For Garcia’s Zarate’s attorney, Matt Gonzalez, Ralph Nader’s running mate in the 2008 presidential election, the trial was all about Donald Trump.

“For those who might criticize this verdict – there are a number of people who have commented on this case in the last couple of years,” Gonzalez said after the verdict, “the Attorney General of the United States and the President and Vice President of the United States. Let me just remind them, they are themselves under investigation by a special prosecutor in Washington D.C. and they may soon avail themselves of the presumption of innocence beyond a reasonable doubt, so I ask that they reflect on that before they comment or disparage the results of this case.”

“From day one this case was used as a means to foment hate, to foment division and to foment a program of mass deportation,” added defense attorney Francisco Ugarte. “It was used to catapult a presidency along that philosophy of hate of others. I believe today is a day of vindication for the rights of immigrants.”

Alex Bastian of the San Francisco prosecutor’s office told reporters the verdict “was not the one we were hoping for,” but the Steinle family could be forgiven for any reasonable doubts about the prosecution.

“We’re just shocked — saddened and shocked ... that’s about it,” Jim Steinle, Kate’s father, told the San Francisco Chronicle. “There’s no other way you can coin it. Justice was rendered, but it was not served.” Kate’s brother Brad was “stunned that they couldn’t even get him on using the weapon.”

Attorney David Wohl told Fox News that with negligent discharge of a firearm, the defendant’s action met every standard for involuntary manslaughter. The verdict, Wohl said, was “an utter and complete and total failure by the prosecutor.”

Conservative Ben Shapiro told Fox news the verdict was “horrifying. . . Politics trumps evidence in California once again.” For Jeff Sessions San Francisco’s sanctuary city policy “led to the preventable and heartbreaking death of Kate Steinle.” According to the Attorney General’s statement, the Justice Department “will continue to ensure that all jurisdictions place the safety and security of their communities above the convenience of criminal aliens.”

For his part, President Trump tweeted: “A disgraceful verdict in the Kate Steinle case! No wonder the people of our Country are so angry with Illegal Immigration.”

Mexican national Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, 54, is a seven-time felon and has been deported five times. In 2015 federal authorities sought to detain him for deportation. San Francisco Sheriff Ross Mirkarimi chose to defy the feds and release the Mexican national. On July 1, 2015, the criminal illegal picked up a Sig Sauer .40 caliber pistol, stolen from a Bureau of Land Management officer, and fired the shot that killed Kate Steinle, only 32 years old.

The Mexican nation and career criminal enjoyed all the rights of the American legal system, the presumption of innocence, and a high-profile defense attorney funded by American taxpayers. During the trial, former vice presidential candidate Matt Gonzalez claimed that Garcia Zarate’s background and nationality played a role in his prosecution. As Gonzalez argued, “If this was a college student or Swedish kid would he be charged with murder?”

That sort of politically correct nonsense plays well in San Francisco, so any observer of the case could be forgiven for believing that prosecution and defense both got the outcome they wanted, regardless of the tragedy for the Steinle family. The felony firearms charge, the only charge on which Garcia Zarate was found guilty, carries a sentence of 16 months to 3 years. Since Garcia Zarate has been languishing in jail, the authorities could commute any sentence to time served and he could walk free within weeks.

San Francisco is not likely to hand the felon over to ICE for deportation. Should that happen, Garcia Zarate has already proved five times that anybody can get away with violating U.S. immigration law. He has already proved that in the sanctuary state of California, false-documented illegals are a privileged class.

Jose Ines Garcia Zarate, or whatever his real name is, has also proved that a career criminal who is not even supposed to be in the country can literally get away with murder in broad daylight. When that happens, the killer’s public defender will call it a “vindication for the rights of immigrants.”

In San Francisco, and across California, this verdict will surely give new meaning to the cry of “no justice, no peace.”

Lloyd Billingsley

Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/268583/no-justice-kate-steinle-lloyd-billingsley

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

The Future of Israel's Peace Treaty with Egypt - Efraim Inbar

by Efraim Inbar

Hopes for peaceful relations with Arab countries – such as between the US and Canada – are fanciful dreams.

^{Originally published under the title "For How Long Will the Peace Treaty with Egypt Be Robust?"}

Israel's 40-year-old peace treaty with Egypt has proven more durable than contemporary cartoonists imagined.

Israel is celebrating the fortieth anniversary of the historic visit of Egyptian president Anwar Sadat to Jerusalem, that led to the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty. The move by Egypt, the largest and strongest Arab state, changed the dynamics of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Sadat violated the Arab taboo against good neighborly relations with the Jewish state and opened the way for additional peace agreements. The defection of Egypt from the Arab military coalition eliminated the option of a two-front conventional war against Israel and saved the Israeli taxpayer billions of dollars. The heavy price paid by Israel to Egypt was total withdrawal from the Sinai and removal of settlements. But, in retrospect, it worked out well, turning Israel into "the land had peace for forty years."

The peace treaty withstood many difficult tests: Israel's strike on the Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1982, the 1982 Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the 1987 Palestinian uprising, Israeli measures against the Palestinian terrorism campaign since 2000 and the Israel-Gaza wars. Even the Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt (2012-13) did not cancel the peace treaty.

Israeli expectations for normal inter-state and people-to-people interactions with Egypt were not realized.

Unfortunately, Israeli expectations for normal inter-state and people-to-people interactions were not realized. The rooted cultural and religious barriers to having good relations with the Jewish state have been too difficult to overcome. In the Arab world, Israel is mostly seen as an alien body. For Egypt, this has not changed after 40 years of formal peace. In the absence of drastic change in the Arab educational systems, these perceptions of Jews and their state will continue. Hopes for peaceful relations with Arab countries – such as between the US and Canada – are fanciful dreams. This insight should be taken into consideration when calculating the Israeli price for Arab peace offers.

Moreover, the robustness of the peace treaty is not self-evident. History teaches us that most wars break out in violation of a peace treaty.

The survival of the peace treaty seems threatened by several developments. We have to remember that the change in Egypt's position toward Israel was a result of Cairo gradually preferring the US to the Soviet Union.

Egypt's position toward Israel changed because it preferred the US to the Soviet Union.

Egypt realized that the US had greater leverage on Israel in its attempt to gain back the Sinai. However, its pro-American orientation is not a constant. Nowadays, the US seems to have become a less desirable ally. Its international standing has deteriorated and its Middle East policy, under presidents Barack Obama and Donald Trump, favors disengagement rather than involvement.

At the same time, Russia has become more influential in the region. Egypt seems to sense the change and now buys Russian weapons. It also purchased two Russian nuclear reactors, which has created a long-term dependency upon Moscow. A change in Egypt's foreign policy orientation also affects its relations with Israel.

The region, whose character is changing due to the ascendance of Iran, also provides reasons to worry.

Egypt's pro-American orientation is not a constant. With U.S. influence waning, Cairo has begun buying Russian weapons again.

States in the region are aware of a projected American weakness and are left with only two choices when facing an Iran that cooperates with Russia. They can form an alliance to curb Iranian influence (the choice of Saudi Arabia and most of the Gulf States) or get closer to Iran (the choice of Turkey and Qatar). Egypt is usually seen as part of the Sunni moderate camp that fears greater Iranian clout. Egypt is much more dependent upon financial support from Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states. Nevertheless, Egypt supported Bashar Assad in Syria – an Iranian ally. If the Gulf region falls under Iranian influence, Cairo might have to adopt a different posture and also look for support in Tehran. This might put an end to the peace treaty with Israel.

Finally, the large growth of the Egyptian military and its modernization is a source of concern. The growth of the Egyptian air force, navy and land forces remains a mystery, particularly with no enemy on Egyptian borders in sight. The investments in logistics infrastructure from Cairo eastwards and the building of tunnels under the Suez Canal seem to have no reasonable civilian rationale. Moreover, the demilitarization of Sinai, the most important stabilizing element in the peace treaty, has been eroded, as Israel agreed to the infusion of Egyptian units into the Sinai to fight the radical Islamic insurgency.

While an Egyptian-Israeli military confrontation is unlikely, we see the emergence of conditions that make an Egyptian attack easier.

Everything must be done by Jerusalem to preserve the peace treaty with Egypt, but Israel should still prepare itself for worst-case scenarios.

Efraim Inbar is president of the Jerusalem Institute for Strategic Studies, professor emeritus of political studies at Bar-Ilan University, and a Shillman-Ginsburg fellow at the Middle East Forum.

Source: http://www.meforum.org/7051/future-of-israel-egypt-peace-treaty

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Why is a Jewish group showing an anti-Semitic play? - Morton A. Klein

by Morton A. Klein

"The Jew of Malta" is to be shown at the Center for Jewish History. Would an African-American group show a racist film at one of their centers?

The ZOA has just learned that one of the most anti-Semitic plays of all time, Christopher Marlowe’s “The Jew of Malta” (written in 1565) is scheduled to be performed in a few days at the Center for Jewish History (CJH) headed by controversial Israel-basher David Myers.

Why is a Jewish group showing this anti-Jewish play? Would any African American group ever show the notorious racist film “The Birth of a Nation”?

The travesty of performing such an anti-Semitic play at CJH also reinforces ZOA’s previous exposé and demand that the CEO of the Center of Jewish History, David Myers, who has a long record of propagandizing against Israel, needs to be removed from his post.

The play’s protagonist, the Jewish merchant Barabas, is a money-obsessed, vulgar, traitorous mass murderer.  The play increased anti-Semitism in England, and contributed to the anti-Semitic atmosphere that led to the torture, conviction and execution of the Queen of England’s Portuguese Jewish physician, Rodrigo Lopez, in 1594, on likely false charges of conspiring to poison the Queen.  (One of the methods that “The Jew of Malta” play’s Jewish protagonist used to murder people was poisoning them; the Jewish character Barabas poisons a whole convent of nuns, including his daughter who has converted to Christianity, and other people.)  

Audiences seeing Marlowe’s play believed that Jews really were as evil as the play presents them to be.  The play also led to other anti-Semitic plays such as the Merchant of Venice, and the additional promulgation of blood libels against Jews.

The Jewish character Barabas’ lines in the play include:  “First, be thou void of these affections.”;  “Compassion, love, vain hope, and heartless fear.”;  “Be moved at nothing; see thou pity none.”

Barabas’s daughter’s lines include:  “There is no love on earth, pity in Jews, nor piety in Turks.“

In other words, both of them say that Jews are cold-hearted, and lack pity or compassion for anyone. Of course that’s the opposite of who Jews are.  

According to the play, Jews are damned. Malta’s governor tells Barabas that Jews, like infidels, live “hateful lives” and “stand accursed in the site of heaven.” 

ZOA has contacted the American Sephardi Federation (ASF), a Center for Jewish History member group involved with the play and was given the extremely misguided flawed excuses that “there will be a Note to the Audience about the horrifying history of The Jew of Malta” and that someone “will make mention of that history” and that “the production is a vehicle for exploring anti-Semitism, particularly against Sephardim.”

These excuses are contradicted by the advertisements for the play. The CJH advertisement for the play (posted on CJH’s website) says that the “American Sephardi Federation proudly presents the Jew of Malta,” and makes no mention of any supposed “educational” purpose.

Any educational purpose could be far better served by a lecture about the anti-Semitism in the play instead of showing it.

A mention of the play’s history does not justify performing a vicious blatantly anti-Semitic play.  And CJH and ASF’s performance of “The Jew of Malta” risks making this horrendous anti-Semitic play “kosher” for others to perform. 

ZOA demands that CJH and ASF cancel the performance of this play – or replace it with an educational discussion about the anti-Semitism in the play.

The travesty of performing such an anti-Semitic play at CJH also reinforces ZOA’s previous exposé and demand that the CEO of the Center of Jewish History, David Myers, who has a long record of propagandizing against Israel, needs to be removed from his post. (See “ZOA: Hostile-to-Israel Propagandist David Myers Should Not Lead Center for Jewish History,” Sept. 18, 2017.)


Morton A. Klein is the National President of the Zionist Organization of America.

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/21354

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Syria accuses Israel of strike on army base near Damascus - Daniel Siryoti, Shlomo Cesana, Erez Linn, News Agencies and Israel Hayom Staff

by Daniel Siryoti, Shlomo Cesana, Erez Linn, News Agencies and Israel Hayom Staff 

Base believed to have been earmarked for Iranian troops, local militias loyal to them

A satellite image of the alleged Iranian base near al-Kiswa in January Photo: Digital Globe, McKenze intelligence Services ,BBC  The alleged Iranian base in May Photo: Digital Globe, McKenze intelligence Services ,BBC   The alleged Iranian base in October   Photo: Digital Globe, McKenze intelligence Services ,BBC

The Israeli Air Force struck a military base near Damascus, Syrian state media reported Saturday. The site is believed to have been earmarked for use by Iranian forces in Syria and local militias loyal to them.

The report has not been corroborated by any Israeli source and an IDF official said the military does not comment on reports in Arab media.

The Syrian Arab News Agency said Syrian air defense had intercepted two of the Israeli missiles fired at a military base near the city of al-Kiswa, some 13 kilometers (8 miles) south of Damascus and 40 kilometers (25 miles) from the Israeli-Syrian border.

"The Israeli enemy launched several missiles toward a military position. There were no material losses at the site," SANA said.

The agency quoted a Syrian military official as saying that Israel fired surface-to-surface missiles at the base from an IDF base in the Golan Heights.

Saudi Arabia's Al Arabiya network and Lebanese TV channel Al Mustaqbal both reported that more than 10 people were killed in the strike, including Iranian troops.

The Hezbollah-affiliated Al Mayadeen network reported that it was a Russian-supervised defense system that intercepted one of the Israeli missiles.

The Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said missiles struck an arms depot shortly after midnight.

Other Arab media outlets reported that the strike was carried out from Lebanese airspace.

In a speech recorded on Thursday for the annual Saban Forum in New York this week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reiterated that Israel will not tolerate Iranian bases off its northern border.

"I want to reiterate our policy: We will not allow the Iranian regime, which declares it strives to destroy the Jewish state, to acquire nuclear weapons, and we will not allow this regime to establish itself militarily in Syria as it seems to be doing, with the explicit intention of annihilating Israel," he said.

Satellite images of the al-Kiswa area that aired on the BBC in November provided proof that Iran was setting up a military base at the site as part of its efforts to prop up Syrian President Bashar Assad's regime.

The BBC said construction on the site was progressing rapidly and that it was most likely designated as either barracks or hangars. A Western official quoted in the report said it was likely Iranian officials had visited the site.

Senior Israeli officials have made it clear in recent months that Israel will spare no effort to prevent Iran from cementing its military grip on Syria. Arab media reported that Israel used various diplomatic channels to stop Iran and its proxy Hezbollah, saying that Saturday's strike was most likely mounted after all diplomatic efforts were exhausted.

Daniel Siryoti, Shlomo Cesana, Erez Linn, News Agencies and Israel Hayom Staff

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/2017/12/03/syria-accuses-israel-of-strike-on-military-post-reportedly-used-by-iranians-near-damascus/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Making the Clintons Pay - Scott S. Powell

by Scott S. Powell

The inclination to give a pass to high-profile politicians once out of office is grounds for a grave mistake.

Few would deny that the ascendance of the United States from colonial poverty to the world’s top economic and military superpower in just 200 years is largely attributable to principles and rule of law in our founding documents enshrined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution. And so it should come as no surprise that America’s decline in the last 25 years has coincided with the erosion of the U.S. Constitution and the corruption of the nation’s law enforcement and judicial system.

What has most greased the skids of America’s decline toward the ways of a banana republic is the emergence and acceptance of two-tiered justice and attendant cronyism and political corruption. And nowhere is this more obvious than in the pass given to the Clintons, and particularly former First Lady and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

When the Clintons left the White House in 2001, taking with them over $190,000 worth of heirloom china, flatware, rugs, and furniture as they cleared out -- much of which they later had to return -- they claimed they were flat broke. Today their net worth exceeds $150 million, accumulated not by traditional means of work and investment, but rather by pay-for-play influence peddling through speeches and Clinton Foundation fundraising -- with the tacit understanding that the Clintons would be in a position to return favors to donors after Hillary won the 2016 presidential election.

A key function of our law enforcement and justice system is of course the punishment of lawbreakers. But perhaps more important is the judicial system’s function in preventing repeat or escalated lawbreaking and deterring other would-be copycat lawbreakers.

It is a felony, punishable by fine and imprisonment up to 20 years, according to 18 U.S. Code 1519, to destroy, conceal, cover up or falsify any record or document whether on paper or on any digital device with the intent to impede or obstruct the investigation of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States.

The pattern of deceit through withholding and destroying documents and records in order to obfuscate and facilitate self-dealing and political crime started early in Hillary’s career. While her husband would face impeachment, stiff monetary fines and a near million-dollar settlement as well as disbarment for five years, Hillary Clinton skated with no accountability for anything in her checkered career.

There were the missing records documenting the statistically impossible profits from cattle futures trading, the disappearance of Hillary Clinton’s billing records from the Rose Law Firm -- under subpoena by Federal and Congressional investigators (which were found some two years later in the First Family quarters of the White House) -- where she previously worked on matters related to the Whitewater real estate sham, the removal and destruction of a hard drive from the computer of her former Rose Law Firm partner and then White House Deputy Legal Counsel Vince Foster, whose death by gunshot wounds was ruled a suicide in the midst of the Whitewater investigation. And then there were the missing documents from the White House Travelgate firings -- documents that would also surface after the scandal passed -- showing Hillary’s duplicity and contradiction of her prior statements.  

As egregious, scandalous or unlawful as these were, it was small time and a warm-up for what was to come after Hillary became Secretary of State and insisted on using a private computer server and email address -- about which she was warned would be vulnerable to hacking and security breaches. Her purpose in so doing was ostensibly to evade Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests and Federal Government record-keeping laws and obfuscate conflicts of interest such as indirectly helping the Clinton Foundation raise enormous sums from governments and parties with whom she was also interfacing as Secretary of State.

But it all began to unravel after Hillary left office and was required to testify before a House committee on Benghazi in October 2015 and answer questions about the terrorist attacks on the U.S. Consulate on September 11, 2012. It was those hearings that brought to light the existence of Hillary Clinton’s secret, unsecured, do-it-yourself server. And then it was learned that she not only stored classified and top secret information in an unsecured location, but that she had also authorized the destruction of subpoenaed evidence -- some 33,000 emails -- after she was put on notice of the existence of the subpoena. These violations are felonies with stiff penalties and there were at least six other laws that appear violated for which Hillary could be indicted.

What is now waking up Americans about the seriousness of Clinton family self-dealing and the need for prosecution is the realization that the Clintons were at the center of what appears to be the biggest political corruption scandal in U.S. history. The fact that the Clinton Foundation’s single largest aggregate donation of some $145 million came from various parties linked to the Uranium One sale to the Russian government nuclear agency Rosatum makes this the mega-case of Russian influence and corruption.

Before the Declaration and the U.S. Constitution were even written, Samuel Adams observed that, “neither the wisest constitution nor the wisest laws will secure the liberty and happiness of a people whose manners are universally corrupt.” Political corruption in America has now become a cancer destroying people’s trust in government and their respect for the rule of law.

The inclination to give a pass to high profile politicians once out of office would be a grave mistake. Boldness is needed and there is simply no more important or cathartic action to take to restore equality before the law and bring an end to cronyism and double standards than the prosecution of the masters of political corruption -- the Clinton crime syndicate.


Scott Powell is senior fellow at the Discovery Institute in Seattle. Reach him at scottp@discovery.org.

Source: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2017/12/12_1_2017_17_29.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Preparing for Terrorist Attacks in Greece - Maria Polizoidou

by Maria Polizoidou

Appeasing radical Muslims through open-border policies -- and by surrendering national identity to multiculturalism -- has the opposite of the intended effect.

• These illegal immigrants "come to Europe looking for 'opportunities,' but do not accept any of the responsibilities of an open democracy. They usually engage in all kinds of smuggling: Drugs, trafficking, and even 'jihad.' We cannot allow that." — Former Greek Prime Minister Antonis Samaras.
• "Jihadists are ideologues... They see the world as a battle between believers and unbelievers." Therefore no one is "immune" to their agenda. — François Heisbourg, IISS Council Chair at the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies.
• Appeasing radical Muslims through open-border policies -- and by surrendering national identity to multiculturalism -- has the opposite of the intended effect. Allowing unfettered entry, rather than causing the immigrants to integrate and liberalize, and leading to friendly ties with Muslim-majority countries, has instead led to their further radicalization.

At a recent conference in Rome, held by the think tank European Ideas Network (EIN), former Greek Prime Minister Antonis Samaras, a member of the Hellenic Parliament, declared:

"European democracies in the Mediterranean are in danger of being swept away by a tsunami of uncontrolled immigration. We cannot allow this. Our societies cannot stand it. The European Union itself cannot stand it... [More than] one million 'foreigners' passed then [2015] through Greece and ended up in various countries of the European Union, mainly in Northern and Central Europe. Some of them were real refugees, from Syria and Iraq. But most of them were illegal immigrants from other countries of the world. Today it is estimated that the true refugees that are still coming are 20% of the total or fewer. The rest are illegal immigrants."

These illegal immigrants, he said, "come to Europe looking for 'opportunities,' but do not accept any of the responsibilities of an open democracy."

"They usually engage in all kinds of smuggling: Drugs, trafficking, and even 'jihad.' We cannot allow that. Freedom and the openness of our societies also entail responsibilities. And full respect to our laws, of course. 'Moochers' of our democratic system can destroy it."

During the month of September, when the conference took place, another 4,000 illegal immigrants and refugees arrived on the Greek islands, overwhelming local communities ill-equipped to receive them. Yet absorption is only one of the difficulties Greek authorities have been facing. Equally, if not more, problematic is the concern that terrorists posing as asylum-seekers may be among the masses flowing into the country.

In September 2017, another 4,000 illegal immigrants and refugees arrived on the Greek islands, overwhelming local communities ill-equipped to receive them. Pictured: Migrants arrive at a beach on the Greek island of Kos after crossing part of the Aegean sea from Turkey in a rubber dinghy, on August 15, 2015. (Photo by Milos Bicanski/Getty Images)

According to reports in the Greek press, they have good reason to suspect this is happening. Since the beginning of the migrant crisis in 2015, when it emerged that ISIS-trained terrorists were infiltrating Europe from Syria, Iraq, and elsewhere, Greek police have been monitoring some 80 makeshift mosques that have sprung up in the greater Athens area. Aside from the fact that none of these houses of worship is legal -- the first official mosque in Athens since the end of Ottoman rule 150 years ago is under construction and is expected to open its doors only in the coming months -- some are also affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood.

This infiltration of terrorists is undoubtedly among the reasons for a police drill being conducted throughout October in Athens. The drill, dubbed "Tyfonas (typhoon) II," involved members of Greece's elite special forces and anti-riot units simulating terrorist attacks, such as vehicular-rammings, shootings, stabbings and bombings in urban areas.

Nevertheless, in an interview with the Hellenic Broadcasting Corporation (ERT) -- in the aftermath of the August 17 terrorist attacks in Spain, where 14 people were killed and another 120 were wounded -- Greek Public Order Minister Nikos Toskas, from the Coalition of the Radical Left (Syriza), rejected the notion that Greece, which he reportedly referred to as a "pillar of stability in Europe and the Mediterranean," could become a target of ISIS. He said that terrorism could only be defeated through peace in the Middle East.

Toskas, like fellow members of the political echelon and intelligentsia in Greece, are making the same mistake as their European counterparts in relation to Islamic imperialism. As terrorist attacks across Western Europe have illustrated, appeasing radical Muslims through open-border policies -- and by surrendering national identity to multiculturalism -- has the opposite of the intended effect. Allowing unfettered entry, rather than causing the immigrants to integrate and liberalize, and leading to friendly ties with Muslim-majority countries, has instead led to their further radicalization.

Professor Manos Karagiannis of King's College London and the University of Macedonia said in a recent interview that Greece should stop being under the illusion that its good relations with the Arab world will shield it from jihadist attacks. "We shouldn't be complacent," he said. "The Islamic State no longer chooses its goals based on each country's foreign policy."

"Jihadists are ideologues," explained François Heisbourg, IISS Council Chair at the London-based International Institute of Strategic Studies. "They see the world as a battle between believers and unbelievers," and therefore no one is "immune" to their agenda.

Maria Polizoidou, a reporter, broadcast journalist, and consultant on international and foreign affairs, is based in Greece. She has a post-graduate degree in "Geopolitics and Security Issues in the Islamic complex of Turkey and Middle East" from the University of Athens.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11438/greece-terrorism

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Europe's Migrant Crisis: Millions Still to Come - Soeren Kern

by Soeren Kern

"In our digital age with the internet and mobile phones, everyone knows about our prosperity and lifestyle.... Eight to ten million migrants are still on the way." — Gerd Müller, Germany's Development Minister.

• More than six million migrants are waiting in countries around the Mediterranean to cross into Europe, according to a classified German government report leaked to Bild.
• "Young people all have cellphones and they can see what's happening in other parts of the world, and that acts as a magnet." — Michael Møller, Director of the United Nations office in Geneva.
• "The biggest migration movements are still ahead: Africa's population will double in the next decades... Nigeria [will grow] to 400 million. In our digital age with the internet and mobile phones, everyone knows about our prosperity and lifestyle.... Eight to ten million migrants are still on the way." — Gerd Müller, Germany's Development Minister.

The African Union-European Union (AU-EU) summit, held in in Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire, on November 29-30, 2017, has ended in abject failure after the 55 African and 28 European leaders attending the event were unable to agree on even basic measures to prevent potentially tens of millions of African migrants from flooding Europe.

Despite high expectations and grand statements, the only concrete decision to come out of Abidjan was the promise to evacuate 3,800 African migrants stranded in Libya.

More than six million migrants are waiting in countries around the Mediterranean to cross into Europe, according to a classified German government report leaked to Bild. The report said that one million people are waiting in Libya; another one million are waiting in Egypt, 720,000 in Jordan, 430,000 in Algeria, 160,000 in Tunisia, and 50,000 in Morocco. More than three million others who are waiting in Turkey are currently prevented from crossing into Europe by the EU's migrant deal with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Migrants crossing from Libya to Europe wait to be rescued from a boat by crew members from the Migrant Offshore Aid Station (MOAS) Phoenix vessel on May 18, 2017 off Lampedusa, Italy. (Photo by Chris McGrath/Getty Images)

The former head of the British embassy in Benghazi, Joe Walker-Cousins, warned that as many as a million migrants from countries across Africa are already on the way to Libya and Europe. The EU's efforts to train a Libyan coast guard was "too little and too late," he said. "My informants in the area tell me there are potentially one million migrants, if not more, already coming up through the pipeline from central Africa and the Horn of Africa."

The President of the European Parliament, Antonio Tajani, said that Europe is "underestimating" the scale and severity of the migration crisis and that "millions of Africans" will flood the continent in the next few years unless urgent action is taken.

In an interview with Il Messagero, Tajani said there would be an exodus "of biblical proportions that would be impossible to stop" if Europe failed to confront the problem now:

"Population growth, climate change, desertification, wars, famine in Somalia and Sudan. These are the factors that are forcing people to leave.
"When people lose hope, they risk crossing the Sahara and the Mediterranean because it is worse to stay at home, where they run enormous risks. If we don't confront this soon, we will find ourselves with millions of people on our doorstep within five years.
"Today we are trying to solve a problem of a few thousand people, but we need to have a strategy for millions of people."

Just days before the AU-EU summit, Tajani called for a "Marshall Plan for Africa" — a €40 billion ($48 billion) long-term investment plan to boost education and job opportunities on the continent to dissuade people from leaving. He warned that spiraling population growth in Africa will be a demographic "bomb" that could push millions of Africans to Europe. "Without a strategy we will have terrorism, illegal immigration, instability," he said.

More than half of the global population growth between now and 2050 will occur in Africa, according to a new UN report, "World Population Prospects: The 2017 Revision." Africa's population is expected to jump by 1.3 billion, from 1.2 billion in 2017 to 2.5 billion in 2050. Between 2017 and 2050, the populations of 26 African countries are projected to expand to at least double their current size.

Much of Africa's population increase will occur in Nigeria, currently the world's 7th most populous country, according to the UN. By 2050, Nigeria will surpass the United States to become the world's third-largest country by population, behind India and China (the population of India is expected to surpass that of China by 2024).

Beyond 2050, Africa is forecast to be the only region in the world still experiencing "substantial population growth" — the continent's share of the global population is forecast to increase from 17% in 2017 to 40% by 2100, according to the report.

Africa currently is the youngest continent in the world: 60% of Africa's population is under 25, compared to 32% in North America and 27% in Europe.

The EU's 28 states have a GDP of $18 trillion, nine times Africa's $2 trillion.

The director of the United Nations office in Geneva, Michael Møller, has warned that Europe must prepare for the arrival of millions more migrants from Africa, Asia and the Middle East. In an interview with The Times, Møller, a Dane, said:

"What we have been seeing is one of the biggest human migrations in history. And it's just going to accelerate. Young people all have cellphones and they can see what's happening in other parts of the world, and that acts as a magnet."

German Development Minister Gerd Müller has echoed that warning:

"The biggest migration movements are still ahead: Africa's population will double in the next decades. A country like Egypt will grow to 100 million people, Nigeria to 400 million. In our digital age with the internet and mobile phones, everyone knows about our prosperity and lifestyle."

Müller added that only 10% of those currently on the move have reached Europe: "Eight to ten million migrants are still on the way."

Writing for the Financial Times, Gideon Rachman explained Europe's predicament:

"One possible reaction for Europe is to accept that migration from the rest of the world is inevitable—and embrace it wholeheartedly. Europe's debt-ridden economies need an injection of youth and dynamism. Who will staff their old-age homes and building sites if not immigrants from the rest of the world?
"But even those Europeans who make the case for immigration tend to argue that, of course, newcomers to the continent must all accept 'European values.' That may be unrealistic... Many immigrants from the Middle East and Africa bring much more conservative and sexist attitudes with them. It will take more than a few civics classes to change that....
"It may be possible for island nations surrounded by the Pacific Ocean, such as Japan or Australia, to maintain strict controls on immigration. It will be all but impossible for an EU that is part of a Eurasian landmass and is separated from Africa only by narrow stretches of the Mediterranean."

Soeren Kern is a Senior Fellow at the New York-based Gatestone Institute.

• Follow Soeren Kern on Twitter and Facebook

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11480/europe-migrant-crisis-exodus

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Progress and History in Zigzag - Amir Taheri

by Amir Taheri

Isn't it possible that human history proceeds in zigzags with "lower" and "higher" points alternating according to mysterious laws?

One of the key ideas promoted by the European Enlightenment or the Age of Reason of the 18th century is that of progress, according to which human history develops across a curve from a low point to higher and higher points. One may debate and dispute the exact nature of "higher" and "lower" points in that context. But most students of the Enlightenment agree that "progress" has two facets: material and cultural.

Material progress could be measured by such yardsticks and life expectancy, average health of the people, and better living conditions in tangible terms such as housing and the ability to cope with natural disasters. On a cultural level, progress includes literary and artistic creation, scientific and technological discoveries, participative politics and the rule of law.

But is it possible to question the very existence of a curve indicating linear progress? Isn't it possible that human history proceeds in zigzags with "lower" and "higher" points alternating according to mysterious laws?

Applied to the "Muslim World", the theory of progress hardly resists the challenge of the rival theory of historic zigzag.

At material level, progress made by virtually all Muslim-majority countries in the past 100 years is amazing.

A century ago, Muslims accounted for less than four per cent of the world population. In 2017, that has risen to almost 25 per cent. Muslims have also benefited from progress in life expectancy, public health and material living standards beyond their wildest dreams even a century ago.

I remember how as a young reporter in 1970, I fell into depression after a visit to what was then East Pakistan. I had not imagined so much human misery in my worst nightmares.

Half a century later, Bangladesh, the state that emerged from East Pakistan, is still poor by most standards but, when it comes to absolute poverty, is no longer the hell-hole it was in 1970; it has benefited from economic development and material progress.

On a grander scale, I remember the Trucial States, which were to become the United Arab Emirates. Outside Dubai, which had one hotel-like establishment, none had any proper facilities. In the Sultanate of Oman, we had to bivouac in private homes with no electricity and/or running water, and eat boiled goat and half-cooked rice. Now, of course, both the UAE and Oman boast some of the most luxurious tourist establishments in the world.

Similar observations could be made about almost all other Muslim countries, including my own homeland of Iran, which began to emerge from medieval poverty only in the 1960s.

In 1973, Tehran hosted a conference on "modernization", co-sponsored by a United Nations agency in charge of Asia. The consensus was that material progress will lead to cultural and, eventually, political progress.

Six years later, Iran had fallen under a clerical tyranny built around a hodgepodge of pseudo-religious mumbo-jumbo and half-baked Marxist-Leninist methods. Suddenly, even classical Persian poets were censored or, in some cases, banned. Worse still, the Khomeinist sect that held power arrogated to itself the right to issue anathemas and interdicts, inventing its versions of the Inquisition and Excommunication, mechanisms that do not exist in Islam.

In 1960, when I arrived in Britain to go to school, I was surprised to find out that the Lord Chancellor had a blacklist of banned books at a time that no such abomination existed in Iran. Less than two decades later, there no longer was such a blacklist in the UK, while the Islamic Republic in Iran had worked out the longest blacklist in human history.

Even worse, the Khomeinist sect claims that anyone who does not blindly obey the current "Supreme Guide" is an "infidel". Of course, the incumbent himself is not immune against such anathema. One day, he, too, could be hit with the "mace of takfir," as he has happened to many leading figures of the Khomeinist regime, including four of the Islamic Republic's six presidents.

We need to go back to history to see how the zigzag works.

Muhammad Zafarullah Khan, Pakistan's second foreign minister, belonged to the Ahmadi minority, and even served as their Ameer (religious leader) for a while. And, yet, his religious affiliation never became an issue. Today, however, Ahmadis are hunted and murdered by neo-Islamist militants not only in Pakistan, but also in Britain. No one in Pakistan cared that the "Father of the Nation," Muhammad Ali Jinnah, was a secular politician. Today, the label secular could get you killed.

No one in Pakistan cared that the "Father of the Nation," Muhammad Ali Jinnah (d. 1948), was a secular politician. Today, the label secular could get you killed. (Image source: Wikimedia Commons)

In Iran under the Shahs, building a political career did not hit sectarian hurdles, and Sunni Muslims held high offices as ministers, governors, ambassadors and military commanders. (The Minister of Justice in the last cabinet formed under the Shah was a Sunni Muslim lawyer.)

Today, however, only one Iranian Sunni Muslim holds a high post, as Ambassador to Vietnam, a country with limited relations with Iran.

In Indonesia, which has the world's largest number of Muslims after India, such reformers as Abdul-Rahman Waheed and Nucholish Madjid enjoyed wide audiences and enough freedom, even under the military dictatorship, to promote their views in the marketplace of ideas. Today, many of their works are banned and seminars on them are attacked by neo-Islamist militants who claim they can decide who is a Muslim and who is not.

In Turkey, the neo-Ottoman elite won't even allow former Islamist allies, led by Fethullah Gulen, even a tiny space for dissent.

And what about the mass murder of over 400 Egyptian adepts of Sufism at a mosque in the Sinai last week? Yes, Egypt, which throughout Islamic history was a cradle of Sufism and the birthplace of "alternative" ways of understanding and living Islam? "Egypt, where the perfume of a hundred flowers refreshes the believer's soul" said the great Persian Sufi poet Sanai.

Almost 1,000 years later, there are people in Egypt who do not tolerate even a single flower, insisting that their violent thorn should conquer the earth. Had the Enlightenment theory of progress been right, today in Egypt we would have a thousand flowers instead of a single blood-stained thorn.

Today, we are wealthier, better educated and healthier than ever in Islamic history. And yet, we are faced with more ignorance, prejudice, fanaticism and violence than ever.

Others now remember us when they are asked to take off their shoes at airports and when they see our self-styled extremists cut people's throats on television.

So, maybe we are in a zigzag mode. If so, the question is how to zig our way out of the current deadly zag?

This article first appeared in Asharq Al Awsat

Amir Taheri, formerly editor of Iran's premier newspaper, Kayhan, before the Iranian revolution of 1979, is a prominent author based on Europe. He is the Chairman of Gatestone Europe.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/11476/progress-history

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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