Europe's Civilizational Exhaustion - Giulio Meotti

by Giulio Meotti

Muslim extremists understand this advantage: so long as they avoid another enormous massacre like 9/11, they will be able to continue taking away human lives and undermining the West without awakening it from its inertia.

• Islam is filling the cultural vacuum of a society with no children and which believes -- wrongly -- it has no enemies.
• In Sweden, by 2050, almost one in three people will be Muslim.
• The European mainstream mindset now seems to believe that "evil" comes only from our own sins: racism, sexism, elitism, xenophobia, homophobia, the guilt of the heterosexual white Western male -- and never from non-European cultures. Europe now postulates an infinite idealization of the "other", above all the migrant.
• A tiredness seems to be why these countries do not take meaningful measures to defeat jihadism, such as closing Salafist mosques or expelling radical imams.
• Muslim extremists understand this advantage: so long as they avoid another enormous massacre like 9/11, they will be able to continue taking away human lives and undermining the West without awakening it from its inertia.

In a prophetic conference held in Vienna on May 7, 1935, the philosopher Edmund Husserl said, "The greatest danger to Europe is tiredness". Eighty years later, the same fatigue and passivity still dominate Western European societies.

It is the sort of exhaustion that we see in Europeans' falling birth rates, the mushrooming public debt, chaos in the streets, and Europe's refusal to invest resources in its security and military might. Last month, in a Paris suburb, the Basilica of Saint Denis, where France's Christian kings are buried, was occupied by 80 migrants and pro-illegal-immigration activists. The police had to intervene to free the site.

Pictured: French police eject some of the 80 migrants and pro-illegal-immigration activists who occupied the Basilica of Saint Denis, on March 18, 2018. (Image source: Video screenshot, YouTube/Kenyan News & Politics)

Stephen Bullivant, a professor of theology and the sociology of religion at St Mary's University in London, recently published a report, "Europe's Young Adults and Religion":

"Christianity as a default, as a norm, is gone, and probably gone for good – or at least for the next 100 years," Bullivant said.
According to Bullivant, many young Europeans "will have been baptised and then never darken the door of a church again. Cultural religious identities just aren't being passed on from parents to children. It just washes straight off them... "And we know the Muslim birthrate is higher than the general population, and they have much higher [religious] retention rates."

Richard Dawkins, an atheist and the author of The God Delusion, responded to the study's release by tweeting to his millions of Twitter followers:

Before we rejoice at the death throes of the relatively benign Christian religion, let's not forget Hilaire Belloc's menacing rhyme:
"Always keep a-hold of nurse
For fear of finding something worse."

Dawkins is apparently concerned that that after the demise of Christianity in Europe, there will not be an atheistic utopia, but a rising Islam.

That is the major point of what Philippe Bénéton in his book The Moral Disorder of the West ("Le dérèglement moral de l'Occident"): Islam is filling the cultural vacuum of a society with no children and which believes -- wrongly -- it has no enemies.

According to Radio Sweden, fewer newborns in that country are being baptized due to the demographic shift. By 2050, almost one in three people in Sweden will be Muslim, according to a recent Pew report

The European mainstream mindset now seems to believe that "evil" comes only from our own sins: racism, sexism, elitism, xenophobia, homophobia, the guilt of the heterosexual white Western male --and never from non-European cultures. So Europe now postulates an infinite idealization of the "other", above all the migrant. The heritage and legacy of Western civilization gets sectioned off piece by piece so that nothing remains; our values are mocked and our survival instinct is inhibited. It is a process of decomposition that Europe's political authorities seem to have decided to mediate, as if it were inevitable. Now, the European Union waits to receive the next surge of migrants, from Africa.

In German Chancellor Angela Merkel's major speech in the Bundestag after the unprecedentedly long and difficult process of forming a new government, she struck a conciliatory tone on immigration while offering an inclusive message on Islam. "With 4.5 million Muslims living with us, their religion, Islam, has also become a part of Germany", she said.

The most powerful politician in Europe capitulated: she evidently forgot (again) the difference between the civil rights of individuals, which Muslim citizens enjoy in Germany, and the sources of a national identity, on which Europe is based: humanistic, Judeo-Christian values. This realization may why a week earlier the new German Interior minister, Horst Seehofer, said that "Germany has been shaped by Christianity" and not by Islam.

Europe's tiredness can also be seen in a generational conflict embodied in the alarming rise of public debt. In Italy, the political establishment was recently shaken up by the election of two major populist parties. It is a country with a public debt of 40,000 euros per capita, and a tax burden equal to 43.3% of GDP. The average age of the population is the third oldest in the world, together with one of the lowest birthrates on the planet, one of the lowest retirement ages in Europe and the highest social security spending-to-GDP ratio in the Western world. It is also a country where pensions account for one-third of all public spending and where the percentage of pensioners in proportion to workers will rise from 37% today to 65% in 2040 (from three workers who support one pensioner to three workers who support two pensioners).

An Islamist challenge to this tired and decaying society could be a decisive one. Only Europe's Christian population is barren and aging. The Muslim population is fertile and young. "In most European countries—including England, Germany, Italy and Russia, Christian deaths outnumbered Christian births from 2010 to 2015," writes the Wall Street Journal.

Terrorist attacks will continue in Europe. Recently, in Trèbes, southern France, a jihadist took hostages in a supermarket and claimed allegiance to ISIS. It seems that Europe's societies consider themselves so strong and their ability to absorb mass immigration so extensive, that nothing will prevent them from believing they can assimilate and manage terrorist acts as they have automobile fatalities or natural disasters. A tiredness also seems to be why these countries do not take meaningful measures to defeat jihadism, such as closing Salafist mosques or expelling radical imams.

Muslim extremists understand this advantage: so long as they avoid another enormous massacre like 9/11, they will be able to continue murdering people and undermining the West without awakening it from its inertia. The most likely scenario is that everything will continue: the internal fracture of Europe, two parallel societies and the debasement of Western culture. Piece by piece, European society seems to be coming irreparably apart.

Giulio Meotti, Cultural Editor for Il Foglio, is an Italian journalist and author.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/12093/europe-civilizational-exhaustion

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Islam and Secularism in France - Michael Curtis

by Michael Curtis

Are Muslims destroying the distinction between religion and state in France?

Throughout history the relationship between religion and politics has vacillated with ongoing disputes about the power and influence of religious institutions in secular, political, and social affairs, and with encroachment of religion in the everyday life of citizens. If religion has brought consolation, religious disputes have also been the cause of hostility and warfare that has decimated populations as in the destructive 30 Years War (1618-48) that killed a third of the German population.

Agreement was slow to come, but in contemporary democratic countries there is now a general consensus on the desirability of a distinction, a separation between the political and the religious realms. For the state and for individuals in those countries, religious belief is a private matter separate from their political opinions or public status as citizens. The problem, however is that dissociation between the two realms is never complete. It is still undeniable that religious beliefs often have played and still play a role in the formation of individual and social consciousness and in the creation of an ethical consensus that affects action. Alexis de Tocqueville remarked that there is hardly any human action which does not result from some very general conception people have of religious views.

In recent years, the relationship between the two realms is being discussed from different points of view. One is that of Pope Benedict XVI, who on September 12, 2008 said it was time to reopen the debate on the relationship of Church and State in France, in order to preserve the religious freedom of citizens, and the responsibility of the state towards them. The Pope was troubled by what he saw as the spread of secularism and increasing hostility to churches and religious believers.

Another point of view was expressed on June 4, 2017 by British prime minister Theresa May after the third terrorist attack in UK in as many months. She talked of the need for "embarrassing conversations" to root out extremism in the UK, though her actions have been less determined on the issue. The terrorist networks, she said, were bound together by the single evil ideology of Islamist extremism that preaches hatred, sows division, and promotes sectarianism. Similarly, former French Prime Minister Manuel Valls in January 2015 declared that France was at war against radical Islam, not against a religion or civilization, but against terrorism and radical Islam in order to defend "our values which are universal."

Now French president Emmanuel Macron has entered this challenging arena of French values in a discussion of the fundamental concept of French "laicite," translated as secularism, a concept that has never been fully defined in a legal or constitutional text. On February 11, 2018 Macron declared that his goal was to discover what lies at the heart of secularism, the possibility of being able to believe as well as not to believe. He is concerned with preserving national cohesion while at the same time having free religious consciousness.

Macron's predecessor, Nicolas Sarkozy, in a speech at the Vatican on December 20, 2007, struggled with the issue and meaning of "laicite." The concept, he held, does not mean negation of the past or the elimination from France of its Christian roots: France is the oldest daughter of the Church. That would weaken the cement of national identity. At the same time, while accepting its Christian roots, France values and continues to defend secularism. He called for a "positive laicite" that recognized the contribution of religion to French culture.

France has struggled with the issue of religious tolerance for centuries, almost since Charles Martel, the Frank Christian leader, won the Battle of Tours against Spanish Muslim Moors in October 732. The Edict of Nantes in 1598 allowed Huguenots -- Calvinist Protestants -- tolerance, and ended religious wars in France.

However, it is the law of December 9, 1905 that framed the principle of "laicite," the separation of church and state, the freedom of citizens and organizations from the influence of organized religion, essentially the Catholic Church at the time. The French state is neutral towards religious beliefs and there is no state religion, and freedom of conscience is allowed, while no religion can interfere in the functioning of government. The state simply recognizes the existence of religious organizations and religious beliefs. It does not pay or subsidize nor endorse any religious sect.

One consequence is that religious education is banned in public school. All religious buildings are the property of the state and city councils. Separation of state and church is essential for freedom of thought. Though it overlaps with and is related to anti-clericalism, opposition to religious authority in social and political affairs, the two are not synonymous.

President Macron must now focus, as have former leaders on difficult issues in the diverse and multicultural French society with its six million Muslims, nine percent of the population: wherefore is Islam different from all other religions in France? Christians and Jews accept the principle of laicite, and pose no threat to state authority, and the state makes no attempt to manage them. The issue is whether the principle of laicite is being challenged or opposed by Muslim activity.

French government actions to regulate Muslim activity have been controversial. Among them are the ban on wearing of Muslim veils by public-sector employees. In 2004 the ban on all conspicuous religious symbols in public schools. In 2010 the ban on wearing full face veil in public, and on the burqa, the full body covering if it covers the face. In January 2018 the ban on religious garb in the National Assembly.

In dealing with Muslims in France, President Macron faces two problems regarding whether their religion and activity is compatible with the values of the French Republic: what is the fundamental nature and basic objectives of Islam in France where since 2015 more than 230 citizens have been killed by Islamist terrorists; and what is the degree of funding by and influence on French Muslims by foreign countries.

On the first issue, the basic objectives of Islam, there are acute differences of French opinion: is fundamentalism, violence, extremism, and jihadism central to Islam or is the essential religion being derailed by radical Islamists who are not typical of the majority? The issue is specifically germane in France because of the constant violence in the banlieus, the suburbs of largely low-income housing projects with foreign Muslim residents where assimilation has been difficult. France has witnessed young Muslims, cogs in a system, turning to extremism, and the rise of Wahhabism and Salafism, extreme and austere movements, in France.

Or is jihadism marginal in French Islam, and can young Muslims more properly be seen as troubled individuals preoccupied with fantasies of cruelty and violence, while the majority are not radicalized? Do terrorists in France kill in the name of religion though they may not be pious, or are they petty criminals, many of whom have experienced a prison term? Will there be a move from Islam in France to Islam of France, a more moderate concept?

To help in this respect, Nicolas Sarkozy in May 2003 set up the French Council of the Muslim Faith (CFCM), as the official interlocutor with the state to observe and advise on religious activities. Though not a legal entity, it is in effect the representative of French Muslims. Former President Hollande in 2015 sent French imams to training institutes in Rabat, seemingly moderate places. Macron has suggested imams be given courses on civil liberties and theology, and appears to imply the appointment of a Grand Imam, on lines similar to the French Grand Rabbi.

The second problem, one not confined to France, is the funding by foreign countries and institutions of Islam in France, including hundreds of mosques, paying and training imams in France. The CFCM has been influenced by and several hundred imams are paid by foreign governments and organizations in Morocco, the Gulf states, and Turkey. The need is urgent, to reduce outside influences, and ensure that French law with laicite takes precedence over Islamic law.

By extraordinary coincidence the Islamic issue was encountered in France in a single day in both fictional and realistic fashion. On November 19, 2015 a novel Soubmission (Submission, the literal translation of the Arab word Islam) by the provocative writer Michel Houellbecq was published. It deals with a Muslim presidential victory in 2022, and the consequential introduction of Islamic law, polygamy, veiling of women and their removal from the marketplace. On the same day, two Islamist terrorists attacked the offices in Paris of the satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo, which published caricatures of the Prophet Mohammed, and killed 12 people. France faces the problem, can the fictional novel one day become reality? President Macron faces the problems, can Islam in France become the Islam of France, and can laicite survive?

Michael Curtis

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2018/04/islam_and_secularism_in_france.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

We're Not the Thought Police - Bruce Bawer

by Bruce Bawer

That being said, what are you thinking?

To read Robert Spencer's Jihad Watch website regularly is to get an unsettling daily dose of real-life Islam-related horrors. But on April 4, Robert posted a half-hour audio that was even more disturbing than the bulk of his usual offerings. The audio records the visit by a couple of British police officers to the home of a British subject who had apparently been reported to the authorities for posting anti-Islam comments on social media. The householder in question greeted the cops with surprising – perhaps nervous? – cheeriness, and for a half hour he earnestly, willingly, and good-humoredly answered their indefensibly intrusive and insulting questions about his opinions. Among them: What were his political beliefs? What did he think of Islam? Did he hate Muslims? Was he a racist? Was he a Nazi? 

It quickly became clear that this man – whose name we never learn, unless I missed something – is anything but a racist or Nazi or hater of any kind. On the contrary, he is a thoughtful citizen who, after considerable study, has come to some sensible conclusions about Islam. He made it clear that, unlike his visitors, he had read the Koran, had acquainted himself with the major specifics of the life of Muhammed, and knew the basics of Islamic theology. He was, it emerged, a strong opponent of Islam for precisely the right reasons, including (as he mentioned) the fact that it commands believers to do harm to infidels, Jews, and gays. 

Yet even as he spelled out these indisputable truths about Islam, the police officers responded as if he was imagining it all. They suggested that he might want to sit down for a conversation with an Islamic scholar, who could clear up what they seemed determined to view as his misunderstandings. They insisted, moreover, that they were not the Thought Police – even though there is no other word for police officers who show up at the home of an innocent citizen to interrogate him about his personal opinions. 

A couple of reader comments on the Jihad Watch audio suggested it was fake, on the grounds that police officers in a free country would surely never do such a thing. Wrong. For me, the audio brought back vivid memories – for I've had my own very similar encounter with European policemen. My experience was slightly different in that instead of being visited at home, I was summoned to a local police station in Norway, where I live. But the encounter itself, which took place in January 2014, was strikingly similar to the one recorded on the Jihad Watch audio. My interrogators even assured me, as their British colleagues assured the fellow in the audio, that they were not the Thought Police. When I heard that statement on the audio, I couldn't help wondering: are cops around Europe, even in different countries, working off of the same script? 

Immediately after returning home from my visit to the police station back in January 2014, I sat down and typed up everything I could remember about the exchange I'd had with my new uniformed friends. The conversation had been in Norwegian, and I wrote it out in Norwegian. I sent copies to a few friends of mine, including Hans Rustad, editor of the vitally important Norwegian website document.no, who, in response, told me that he had heard similar, and equally disturbing, accounts from other people living in Norway. He actually took a copy of my testimony with him to a meeting at the Norwegian Ministry of Justice, where he confronted officials with this example of thoroughly inappropriate police conduct. 

My Norwegian-language account of my exchange with the police officers later appeared in print (but not online) in a document.no publication, but has never appeared in English. After hearing the audio at Jihad Watch, however, I decided that it might be worthwhile to translate my account into English so that any doubters might understand that, yes indeed, this how at least some police officers in Europe conduct themselves in this era of Islamization. 

So here it is, without further ado, but with newly added comments and explanatory information in brackets: 

On January 9, I received a phone call from a policeman in Skien [the county seat of Telemark, where I live]. He said he wanted to meet me because he thought my knowledge of Islam could help the police in the fight against Islamic terrorism. He explained that someone at PST [the Norwegian Police Security Service, Norway's equivalent of the NSA or MI5] had recommended that he speak with me. I said I would be glad to be of help. We agreed to speak again a few days later to agree on a time and place.

During the days that followed I spent a good deal of time preparing for what I imagined would be a crash course in Islam. When we spoke by telephone for the second time, I thought I detected a subtle change in his tone and immediately suspected that his objective was, in fact, not to draw on my expertise but to interrogate me. This suspicion was reinforced when he said, at the end of the conversation, that he himself was a PST officer. 

This was precisely the same thing that had happened to me during the [mass murderer Anders Behring] Breivik trial [in 2012], when Geir Lippestad [Breivik's lawyer] summoned me as an "expert witness." His real intention at that time was not to make use of my "expertise" but rather to expose me to scorn and derision as one of several writers who had supposedly "influenced" the killer and who thus shared in the blame for his crimes. 

On January 15, I met the PST officer and a colleague of his, also from PST, at a police station near my home. Indeed, it turned out that they had no interest in learning anything about Islam from me. They wanted to know about other things. How, for example, had I come to be so critical of Islam? Which other members of the anti-Islam community was I acquainted with? Which far-right websites was I in the habit of reading? Had I experienced discomfort in encounters with Muslims? Did I know Hans Rustad, editor of document.no, which publishes critical aticles about Islam and European immigration policy? Had I ever posted comments on his website? 

At first I played along – too much. I told them about the time my partner had been assaulted by a Muslim with a knife at a bus stop at St. Hanshaugen in Oslo, and about the time a Muslim yelled "faggot" at him and kicked him on the tram. I mentioned the doctor I knew who had been killed at his office by a Muslim asylum seeker. As for Hans Rustad, I said, "Yes, I know him. He's a terrific guy and he has a terrific website. But no, I've never commented on articles there."

They asked about Fjordman [counterjihadist writer Peder Are Nøstvold Jensen]. Had I ever met him? Yes, we had gotten together for beers 3-4 times in Oslo several years ago. We had also both attended a conference in The Hague sometime around 2006. Oh yes? Which conference? The Pim Fortuyn Memorial Conference. Who arranged that? I don't know. Who else took part? Robert Spencer, Bat Ye'or, several others. They seemed to be interested in these details. They asked me what I thought about Fjordman. I answered the question rather exhaustively. 

Then they came to Breivik. How had I felt when I learned that Breivik had read some of my books and articles? They emphasized that they were fully aware of the dangers of Islamic terrorism, but they were also worried that a writer like me could help "create a new Breivik" or several of them. It was at about this point that I began to fire back a bit. I said that Breivik was a maniac, and that if he hadn't happened to get hooked on Islam as an object of hate, he would have gotten hooked on something else to hate. They didn't seem to be willing to accept the possibility that Breivik was just a crazy man, an isolated case. I got the impression that they were working from the premise that Breivik was a cold-blooded counterjihadist who had been created by other counterjihadists.  

In a slightly irritated tone, one of the two men reminded me that during the first hours after the government buildings in Oslo were bombed, that is before Breivik was identified and before his motives were known, many people in Oslo had assumed that the city was under attack by Muslim terrorists, and that this had resulted in people assaulting Muslims in the streets. [Note: I have never seen any documentation of this claim.] One of PST's concerns, he said, was that if a Norwegian Muslim committed a murder like the horrible killing of Lee Rigby in London, there would be a violent anti-Muslim reaction. [They always worry more about the anti-Muslim "backlash" that virtually never happens than about the actual Islam-motivated atrocity.]  

My interlocutors had read Breivik's "manifesto." They talked about his patchwork of plagiarized historical essays and information about weapons in a way that suggested that, in their eyes, it was a key document for the understanding of the counterjihad movement. 

"Have you read the Koran?" I asked.

"No," both of them said. They were not at all embarrassed about it. 

"Well, you should," I said. "If you want to understand the mentality that underlies Islamic terrorism, you'll find its origin there." 

One of them answered quickly. "We know that radical Muslims have misinterpreted the Koran." 

"It's not a question of interpretation," I replied. "The passages in question are very clear." I emphasized that while none of the writers they were trying to link to Breivik had called for killing, the Koran calls for killing infidels again and again. 

They paid no heed to this. In fact they seemed to find it distasteful to talk about the Koran in this way. 

They wanted to know what I thought about the "Eurabia conspiracy theory."

"What do you mean by that term?" I asked. 

"Haven't you heard it before?"

"Of course, but I hope you understand that this is an expression one almost never hears outside of Norway. It's a concept that has been invented by the Norwegian left. What does it mean to you?" 

"It's about Muslims wanting to take over Europe."

"That's not a conspiracy theory. Jihad is a reality, it's a core Islamic idea. Do you know how Islam divides the world?"

They shook their heads. 

"The world consists of the House of Islam, where Islamic law prevails, and the House of War, which is the part of the world where Islamic law does not yet prevail. According to the Koran, there will not be peace in the world until the House of War is totally conquered by Islam."

They weren't interested in hearing about this, either. One of them explained what they meant by the "Eurabia conspiracy theory": "What we're referring to is the idea that, for example, Stoltenberg [Jens Stoltenberg, Labor Party politician and Prime Minister from 2000-1 and 2005-13] is secretly conspiring with Muslims with the goal of transforming Norway into an Islamic state." 

What struck me about this was that they talked about Stoltenberg as if he were still Prime Minister. [Just as America's Deep State is Democratic, Norway's is Labor.]

At one point, they asked a question that led me to say something very critical about the attempt, after July 22 [the date, in 2011, of Breivik's atrocities], to limit freedom of expression in Norway. One of them asked me, do you think that there is greater freedom of expression in the U.S. than in Norway? I replied that there's much more freedom of expression in the U.S. than in all of Western Europe. I mentioned Lars Hedegaard, Geert Wilders, and others who had been put on trial in various Western European countries because of things they had said or written about Islam. 

"Where is the limit, then?" asked one of the PST guys, his tone rather sharp. 

"There shouldn't be any limit, unless you call for violence," I said. They seemed to react to this. I had the impression that they felt I had crossed a line. 

During the conversation they reassured me at least three times that this was not an interrogation – but that's exactly what it was. A couple of times they said that they had no plans to arrest me – which, of course, served as a reminder that they had the power to do so. They also insisted a couple of times that they were not "Thought Police" [tankepoliti]. At one point, one of them mentioned that they can't do everything the NSA can do, because the law doesn't allow it, but that they do absolutely everything they can within the framework of Norwegian law. 

The entire conversation lasted about an hour and a half. It was intense. They fired questions at me almost without a break. Several times they returned to questions I had already answered. When the whole thing was over, they informed me that they might be contacting me again. 

Afterwards, I regretted that I hadn't just stood up and walked out when I realized that I had been summoned there under false premises. In these times, when certain critical voices and opinions are considered illegal, I would never knowingly have put myself in such a situation with the police. But this was a trap, and they were clearly betting that I would stay there and answer their questions because it would have seemed both uncomfortable and rude to do anything else.

They were right: I stayed there because I didn't want to make a scene. But while I'm sorry I answered some of their questions so dutifully, I'm glad I took advantage of the opportunity to put up at least something of a challenge. In any event, what emerges from the audio at Jihad Watch is that those bobbies in Britain (apparently Lancashire), like my PST buddies in Norway, have been trained to view Islam as essentially benign and criticism of Islam as a danger. Both sets of cops manifestly consider it part of their job to hunt down critics of Islam and try to intimidate them into silence. And none of them have the slightest regard whatsoever for freedom of speech. They don't even seem to grasp the concept. 

They've also apparently been taught – and this is the creepiest part – to emphasize that they're not Thought Police. This is obviously a result of training, because it would never occur independently to such people – who have plainly never read a word of Orwell – to make such a declaration in the first place. This, then, is what we are up against in today's western Europe: police departments that are producing Thought Police – and, as part of that production process, are instructing them to reassure the proles that, no, of course they're not Thought Police. 

Sure. And war is peace, freedom is slavery, and ignorance is strength. 


Bruce Bawer is the author of “While Europe Slept,” “Surrender,” and "The Victims' Revolution." His novel "The Alhambra" has just been published.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/269819/were-not-thought-police-bruce-bawer

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Trump slams Obama over not crossing 'red line' in Syria with 'Animal Assad' - Travis Fedschun

by Travis Fedschun

Dozens killed in suspected chemical weapons attack in Syria

President Trump slammed former President Barack Obama on Sunday for not crossing his stated "red line" with Syria, amid reports of a suspected chemical attack that left at least 40 dead near the capital, while also warning Russia and Iran there will be a "big price to pay" for backing the Assad regime.

Trump made the comments on Twitter in the wake of the alleged attack in the town of Douma amid a resumed offensive by Syrian government forces.

"Many dead, including women and children, in mindless CHEMICAL attack in Syria. Area of atrocity is in lockdown and encircled by Syrian Army, making it completely inaccessible to outside world," Trump said. "President Putin, Russia and Iran are responsible for backing Animal Assad. Big price to pay. Open area immediately for medical help and verification. Another humanitarian disaster for no reason whatsoever. SICK!"

He also slammed Obama, who vowed in 2012 that such actions would cross a “red line," but later failed to enforce the promise a year later when hundreds of Syrians were killed by sarin gas. Instead, Obama brokered a multi-nation deal in which Syrian President Bashar Assad pledged to remove his chemical-weapons stockpile.

"If President Obama had crossed his stated Red Line In The Sand, the Syrian disaster would have ended long ago! Animal Assad would have been history!" the president said.

While reports of the chemical attack could not be verified by the Associated Press and Reuters, first responders said they found families suffocated in their homes and shelters, with foam on their mouths.

The opposition-linked Syrian Civil Defense were able to document 42 fatalities but were impeded from searching further by strong odors that gave their rescuers difficulties breathing, said Siraj Mahmoud, a spokesman for the group, which is known as the White Helmets.

This image released early Sunday, April 8, 2018 by the Syrian Civil Defense White Helmets, shows a child receiving oxygen through respirators following an alleged poison gas attack in the rebel-held town of Douma, near Damascus, Syria.  (Syrian Civil Defense White Helmets via AP)
 

The Syrian government, in a statement posted on the state-run news agency SANA, strongly denied the allegations. It said the claims were "fabrications" by the Army of Islam, calling it a "failed attempt" to impede government advances.

SYRIA POISON GAS ATTACK KILLS AT LEAST 40, ACTIVISTS AND MEDICS SAY

"The army, which is advancing rapidly and with determination, does not need to use any kind of chemical agents," the statement said.

This image made from video released by the Syrian Civil Defense White Helmets shows medical workers treating toddlers following an alleged poison gas attack.  (Syrian Civil Defense White Helmets via AP)
 

U.S. State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert said that Washington was closely following "disturbing reports" of the alleged chemical weapons attack in Douma.

"These reports, if confirmed, are horrifying and demand an immediate response by the international community," she said in a statement late Saturday.

The alleged gas attack in Douma comes almost exactly a year after a chemical attack in the northern Syrian town of Khan Sheikhoun killed dozens of people. That attack prompted the U.S. to launch several dozen Tomahawk cruise missiles at a Syrian air base. President Trump said the attack was meant to deter further Syrian use of illegal weapons.

Video

Dershowitz on Trump's response to Syria attack, Comey's book

Questions about the administration's possible response reverberated throughout Washington in the hours after the attack. Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina called the decision "a defining moment in his presidency."

"If he doesn't follow through and live up to that tweet, he's going to look weak in the eyes of Russia and Iran," Graham said Sunday on ABC's "This Week." ''You need to follow through with that tweet. Show a resolve that Obama never did to get this right."

White House  Homeland Security Advisor Tom Bossert told ABC's "This Week" that another possible strike on Syria is "not off the table" after the latest apparent chemical attack. 

Bossert said that Trump's national security team has been reviewing photos of the incident, and that it's a "serious problem."

Vice President Mike Pence said on Twitter he's "closely monitoring" the likely chemical attack. 

"We condemn in the strongest possible terms the assault on innocent lives, including children. The Assad regime & its backers MUST END their barbaric behavior," Pence said. "As POTUS said, big price to pay for those responsible!"

The Syrian government and its ally, Russia, denied any involvement in the alleged gas attack. Maj. Gen. Yuri Yevtushenko was quoted by Russian news agencies on Sunday as saying Russia was prepared to send specialists to Douma to "confirm the fabricated nature" of the reports.

Video

McCaul: Russia and Iran complicit with Syria chemical attack

A chemical attack in eastern Ghouta in 2013 that was widely blamed on government forces killed hundreds of people, prompting the U.S. to threaten military action before later backing down.

Syria denies ever using chemical weapons during the seven-year civil war, and says it eliminated its chemical arsenal under a 2013 agreement brokered by the U.S. and Russia after the attack in eastern Ghouta.

The Associated Press contributed to this report.


Travis Fedschun

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2018/04/08/trump-slams-obama-over-not-crossing-red-line-in-syria-with-animal-assad.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

Report: Egypt, Saudi Arabia urge Hamas to end 'Great March of Return' protests - Shoshana Kranish, YASSER OKBI/MAARIV

by Shoshana Kranish, YASSER OKBI/MAARIV

The source also added that Saudi and Egyptian officials had opened contacts with Hamas leaders to urge calm in Gaza.

Palestinian demonstrators during a protest on the Israel-Gaza border east of the Jabalia refugee camp in the northern Gaza Strip on April 6, 2018.. (photo credit: MOHAMMED ABED / AFP)

Both Saudi Arabia and Egypt have called on militant organization Hamas to end the annual weekly protests it is holding for the "Great March of Return," according to an Egyptian source.

An Egyptian Foreign Ministry official was anonymously quoted as saying that, in exchange for halting the protests, Egypt would ensure that the Rafah border crossing, which Egypt controls, would be regularly opened. The source said that the agreement had come under the direction of the Saudis.


"The situation in Gaza is nearing an explosion towards anyone blockading (the Strip)," the source said, "and therefore there is a fear that Palestinian anger will turn toward Egypt in the coming weeks."

Palestinians take part in protests for the "Great March of Return" in Gaza (credit: Reuters)

The source also added that Saudi and Egyptian officials had opened contacts with Hamas leaders to urge calm in Gaza.

The London-based Al Hayat newspaper reported that an Egyptian delegation was being sent to Gaza to meet with Hamas leadership, and one source told the paper that the head of Egypt's General Intelligence Service, General Abbas Kamel, had been tasked by Saudi Arabia to send a team to "neutralize the explosive situation."

Earlier in the week, Shin Bet chief Nadav Argaman asked Kamel to pass on a message to Hamas leaders concerning the protests, saying that Israel has "no tolerance" for the goings-on in Gaza.

Egypt and Saudi Arabia, in communicating with Hamas, are also reportedly aiming to prevent greater confrontations between the Palestinians and Israel.

While Israel and Egypt signed a peace treaty in 1979 and have retained a relatively stable relationship since then, no official contact exists between Israel and Saudi Arabia. However, Israeli officials said in the fall that covert contacts had been made between the two countries. Saudi Arabia's recent ruling to allow India Air flights between Tel Aviv and New Delhi to fly over its sovereign air space signals a general warming trend between Israel and the region's largest Sunni state.

Indian airliner makes history by flying to Israel via Saudi airspace, March 23, 2018 (Reuters).mp4

Friday's protests marked the second week of the "Great March of Return" in Gaza. Crowds of approximately 20,000 turned out to protest on the border between Gaza and Israel. Ten Gazans, including two minors and one journalist, were killed in the clashes. While estimates of the number of protestors injured vary, it is assumed that over 1,000 Palestinians were wounded.

The protests are expected to continue each Friday for the next several weeks. 


Shoshana Kranish, YASSER OKBI/MAARIV

Source: http://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Report-Egypt-Saudi-Arabia-urge-Hamas-to-end-Great-March-of-Return-protests-549077

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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

New Israel Fund grantees pressed Rwanda to nix deportation plan - Tal Polon

by Tal Polon

Despite NIF denial of pressuring Rwanda, letter to Rwandan president reveals NIF grantees urged country to scrap deal with Netanyahu.

NGOs backed by the New Israel Fund sent a letter to the government of Rwanda, asking it not to accept illegals who had infiltrated Israel.

The revelation came to light following the Prime Minister’s cancellation on Tuesday of a deal with the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees which would have “facilitated the departure” of 16,250 infiltrators to Western countries while granting legal status to another 16,250.

Following opposition to the plan from coalition partners and activists working on behalf of residents in southern Tel Aviv, where most of the infiltrators to Israel have been living, Netanyahu announced the plan’s suspension on Monday evening.

In explaining his decision, Netanyahu pointed a finger at US-based funding organization The New Israel Fund (NIF), asserting that the poorly-received deal with the UN had resulted from the failure of a prior infiltrator-deportation agreement with Rwanda, which the PM said had backed out due to NIF pressure.

"In recent weeks, as a result of the tremendous pressure placed on Rwanda by the New Israel Fund and elements in the European Union, Rwanda has withdrawn from the agreement and has refused to absorb infiltrators from Israel who were forcibly deported," he said.

Netanyahu ultimately cancelled the agreement with the UN the next day, subsequently announcing that he had established a parliamentary commission of inquiry against the NIF.

"The New Israel Fund is a foreign organization that receives funding from foreign governments and elements hostile to Israel, such as from the fund of George Soros. The ultimate objective of the fund is to erase Israel's Jewish character and turn it into a state of all its citizens, alongside a Palestinian nation-state that is free of Jews on the 1967 lines with Jerusalem as its capital," Netanyahu explained.

Despite Netanyahu’s accusations, the NIF denied having pressured Rwanda to back out of the deportation agreement.

“The New Israel Fund did not pressure the Rwandan government to refuse to participate in Netanyahu’s cruel mass deportation plan,” NIF CEO Daniel Sokatch said in a statement released on Tuesday. “We did support massive numbers of Israelis standing up for what is right and demanding action from their own government.”

“This isn’t about NIF. It’s about all of us - everyone who cares about democracy and equality in Israel. It’s time for everyone who cares about Israeli democracy to stand up and stand together against this blatant assault on Israeli civil society from an increasingly desperate and flailing PM.”

On Wednesday, Rwandan minister Olivier Nduhungirehe denied that the New Israel Fund had pressured Rwanda, asserting that Rwanda "didn't even know what this New Israel Fund is all about."

"I am extremely surprised by [Netanyahu's statements about the influence of the New Israel Fund]. My surprise comes less from the fact that Rwanda doesn’t even know what this New Israel Fund is all about, but more from the assumption that a foreign NGO can successfully impose any pressure on a sovereign government named [Rwanda]," he tweeted.

However, Arutz Sheva saw a letter addressed to Rwandan President Paul Kagame by seven Israeli NGOs - five of which have received funding from The New Israel Fund. In the letter, first printed in The Rwandan in November and also reported on by The Jewish Press, the NGOs call on the Rwandan leader not to accept infiltrators from Israel.

“His Excellency Paul Kagame, President of the Republic of Rwanda,
We are turning to you, and to the people of Rwanda, with an urgent request.

Rwanda and Israel have an ongoing special relationship. However, this relationship cannot include trading in African lives.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is telling the Israeli public that Rwanda has agreed to take on African refugees from Israel. Prime Minister Netanyahu says that the refugees will be forced to leave: if they do not agree to go to Rwanda, they will be put in prison forever.

We trust in you, and the people of Rwanda, that you will not agree to this denial of liberty. We hope and trust you will not agree that African refugees are caged and traded in this way.

We call on you to make it clear to Prime Minister Netanyahu – Rwanda will not take refugees who do not come of their own free will.

We urge you to use your friendship with Netanyahu to remind him – Israel is a country of refugees, it should open its heart to those who have fled Eritrea and Sudan and give them shelter."

[Signed] ASSAF-Aid Organization for Refugees and Asylum Seekers in Israel

The Association for Civil Rights in Israel

Physicians for Human Rights -Israel

Hotline for Refugees and Migrants

Amnesty International Israel

Kav La’Oved – Workers’ Hotline

HIAS Israel


Tal Polon

Source: https://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/244107

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

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