For Israel, Biden Will Prove Worse than Bernie - Matthew Mainen

​
by Matthew Mainen

Biden routinely attacked the underpinnings of Jewish self-determination and pushed for failed policies that have proven to exacerbate the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Though less vocally anti-Israel than Sen. Bernie Sanders (left), presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden will likely prove more damaging to Israel should he win the presidency.

Pro-Israel Democrats breathed a sigh of relief when it became clear Joe Biden would win the nomination. After all, conventional wisdom held that Bernie Sanders posed a unique threat to the Jewish State.

Not so fast. Rather than dodging a bullet with Biden as the presumptive nominee, Democrats may have opened the gates of Troy to someone even more damaging to Israel than Bernie could ever have been.

Whereas Bernie was substantially more antagonistic than Biden toward Israel, foreign policy was a distant priority to his domestic agenda of transforming the United States into a socialist utopia. Every radical alteration Bernie desired for this country would have required compromising on other issues.

Foreign policy was a distant priority behind Bernie's domestic socialist agenda.

For example, in the event that Bernie attempted to institute unprecedented taxes on Wall Street while canceling student debt, legislators lukewarm to that idea, but reasonably pro-Israel, could have conditioned their support on continued U.S. aid to the Jewish State.

Biden, on the other hand, will not be in a position where such compromises are required. Most Democrats will support his domestic agenda, such that his insidious policies toward Israel will receive little internal pushback. While not as radical as Bernie's positions, Biden's flawed approach to Israel will have a much greater likelihood of being implemented.

During his eight years as second-in-command in the Obama administration, deemed by Israelis to be the most hostile to their interests in recent history, Biden routinely attacked the underpinnings of Jewish self-determination and pushed for failed policies that have proven to exacerbate the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.

Biden is convinced that the Jewish people must be guided by enlightened Westerners.

While Zionism was founded on the idea that the Jewish people should collectively determine their fate as they saw fit, Biden is convinced that enlightened Westerners lacking their lived experiences must guide their hand.

His marked paternalism towards the Jewish state was crystallized in his 2010 speech at Tel Aviv University, in which he said, "Sometimes only a friend can deliver the hardest truth" in lecturing Israelis about the settlements. A year prior, Israeli voters had brought to power a pro-settlement government. Wise Uncle Joe could see what common Israelis couldn't, and if he had to arm-twist their democratically elected leadership to see the light and break their campaign promises, so be it.

When it ultimately appeared that Israelis wanted to decide for themselves how to deal with the Palestinians, the Obama-Biden administration attempted to tip the scales by funding political opposition, which used U.S. tax dollars and derivative work-product in attempting to unseat Prime Minister Netanyahu.

The Obama-Biden administration attempted a soft coup against Prime Minister Netanyahu.

Even if friends sometimes need to deliver the hardest truth, they don't attempt soft coups against one another.

Aside from undermining Jewish self-determination, which should be seen as disqualifying to anyone who considers themselves pro-Israel, Biden remains a fervent adherent to the failed, groupthink-driven international consensus on resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which erroneously places the burden on Israel to make concessions.

In the mid-'90s, Biden saw firsthand what happened when Israel agreed to allow Yasser Arafat and his Palestinian Liberation Organization to relocate from Tunisia to the disputed territories. Israel gave the Palestinians self-government, and they, in turn, gave Israel suicide bombings and overall carnage.

Despite this, and with heavy encouragement from the U.S., Israel then unilaterally withdrew from the entire Gaza Strip in 2005, uprooting thousands of Jewish settlers in the process. The Palestinian response? Hamas, an organization even worse than the PLO, took over the territory and proceeded to launch thousands of rockets at Israel.

Biden victim-blamed Israel until his last days in office.

Rather than learning from the repeated mistakes of the past, in which each Israeli concession only served to embolden Palestinian militancy in its quest to erase the Jewish State, Biden doubled down on this formula as vice president and victim-blamed Israel until his last days in office.

Biden recently embraced an endorsement from J-Street, a far-left organization that seeks to impose upon Israel policies thoroughly rejected by the Israeli electorate. This, combined with his increasingly hostile rhetoric against Israel's democratically elected government, we can expect him to embrace and even amplify the Obama administration's posture toward the Jewish state if he becomes president.

American supporters of Israel should think carefully about whether that's a risk worth taking.

Matthew Mainen is a Washington-resident fellow at the Middle East Forum and graduate of Stanford Law School. Follow him on Twitter.

Source: https://www.meforum.org/60810/for-israel-biden-will-prove-worse-than-bernie

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Mullahs Threaten Trump with October Surprise - Amir Taheri

​
by Amir Taheri

The reward they want, and people like Senator Feinstein seem ready to provide, is to get a free hand in building an ideological empire as a springboard for "exporting" revolution.

• "No War on Iran" placards are appearing where "No wars by Iran" would make more sense.
• In other words, the Islamic Republic doesn't need medical and technical help; it needs crisp greenbacks that could be spent on Hezbollah, Bashar al-Assad, the Popular Mobilization Forces, the Houthis, Hamas and other members of the "Resistance Front". And, then, not to forget the $100 million Tehran has allocated for lobbyists in the US.
• The reward they want, and people like Senator Feinstein seem ready to provide, is to get a free hand in building an ideological empire as a springboard for "exporting" revolution. In the end, either Iran must become like the rest of the Middle East or the rest of the Middle East must become like the Islamic Republic.

Some politicians in the West insist that Iran deserves a $5 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund because of the coronavirus crisis. However, Iran's Health Minister Sa'id Namaki says Tehran was never short of "whatever needed" to cope with the coronavirus pandemic or cover other medical needs. (Photo by Atta Kenare/AFP via Getty Images)

With the Khomeinist regime once again in deep trouble, the usual suspects launch a campaign to portray the Islamic Republic as victim and US President Donald Trump as oppressor.

Slowly the blame is shifting from the mullahs to the Trump administration as the debate is redirected to tackle the hypothetical question of US military action rather than the Islamic Republic's real misdeeds.

"No War on Iran" placards are appearing where "No wars by Iran" would make more sense.
The attempt at fabricating another "cause" with which to bash America is backed by the claim that the mullahs are behaving badly because Trump refuses to talk to them, although he has repeatedly said he is prepared to talk anywhere, anytime.

Eleven Democratic senators have written to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo calling for an end to "maximum pressure" which, with no evidence, they claim is the chief, if not the only, source of Islamic Republic's sorry state today.

For his part, the Democratic Party's presumptive presidential nominee Joe Biden has called for the US to return to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the witches' brew that President Barack Obama dished out to bypass international law and the US Congress.

Those calling for the lifting of sanctions offer four arguments.

Some insist that Tehran deserves help because of the coronavirus crisis.

Senator Diane Feinstein (D-California) says we cannot let people die by preventing Tehran from securing a $5 billion loan from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) because of a US veto.

The fact that Tehran's application is still under study by the IMF and that no US veto has been cast is ignored. The lobby supporting Tehran wants the mullahs to be exempt from even routine banking rules. Their message is: Give the mullahs cash and ask no questions!

However, Khomeinist leaders say loud and clear that they don't need any outside help to deal with the coronavirus and that, on the contrary, they are giving aid to anyone who asks for it. President Hassan Rouhani says that the Islamic Republic has already helped a dozen countries, among them the People's Republic of China. Tehran has also given assistance to the Mayor of London Saddiq Khan, a Muslim, to cope with the coronavirus in a city where Muslims form a substantial portion of the population.

Islamic Health Minister Sa'id Namaki says Tehran was never short of "whatever needed" to cope with the virus or cover other medical needs.

Surena Sattari, Rouhani's aide for technology, says the Islamic Republic is producing "all equipment needed at a fraction of the cost in Western countries".

Fars News Agency, run by the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), reports that Iran is exporting coronavirus testing kits, masks and other equipment to a dozen countries. Rouhani throws in the tantalizing tale that Iran may be the first to develop a vaccine against Covid-19, ahead of the American "Great Stan" and the Israeli "Little Satan."

Last March, Tehran arrested and expelled a team of Doctors Without Borders, who came from France to fight the coronavirus.

In other words, the Islamic Republic doesn't need medical and technical help; it needs crisp greenbacks that could be spent on Hezbollah, Bashar al-Assad, the Popular Mobilization Forces, the Houthis, Hamas and other members of the "Resistance Front". And, then, not to forget the $100 million Tehran has allocated for lobbyists in the US.

The second argument is that if Tehran is pressed too hard, it may renounce the JCPOA and even exit from the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT).

The answer to that is: So what?

The JCPOA has already been violated by all participants. Tehran has officially suspended complying with some key parts. The US, under Obama, was committed to buy Iran's stock of plutonium through Westinghouse, a company that went bust; but never did. Russia was committed to buying Iran's stock of uranium enriched up to 20% but stopped doing so after only half was shipped out. China was committed to re-design and recommission the nuclear plant in Arak. But five years later it hasn't, clinging to flimsy excuses. Britain, France and Germany, were committed to help Iran revive its foreign trade and gain access to capital markets. So far, however, they have only arranged a $7 million package for Iran to buy medical supplies it claims it doesn't need.

A "deal" that none of its participants respects seems to be more of a confidence-trick than genuine diplomacy.

As for the Islamic Republic leaving, or with some shenanigans, half-leaving, the NPT, the "so what" mentioned above could be repeated more loudly.

If the mullahs wish to develop a nuclear arsenal they would not be stopped by JCPOA and/or NPT. Nor would possession of a nuclear arsenal ultimately save their weird system.

The old Soviet Union had enough nuclear weapons to destroy planet earth 22 times over, and, yet, it collapsed under the weight of its contradictions without opponents firing a shot.

The mullahs have used the nuclear blackmail to confuse adversaries.

On the one hand they say they will never make a bomb because it is "haram" (forbidden). On the other they imply unless they are helped to pursue their misdeeds they would do just that.

In other words, they say: Reward me for not doing what I never wanted to do anyway!

The reward they want, and people like Senator Feinstein seem ready to provide, is to get a free hand in building an ideological empire as a springboard for "exporting" revolution. In the end, either Iran must become like the rest of the Middle East or the rest of the Middle East must become like the Islamic Republic.

The third argument is that the embargo imposed by the United Nations on sales of arms to Iran will end in October and, unless "maximum pressure" is eased; the mullahs may rush to buy weapons.

That argument, too, is hollow. Who is going to sell them arms?

Hopefully, not the US, or France and Britain. Russia may. But even then, Russia has always looked for a weak Iran on its doorstep. President Vladimir Putin sold Tehran an air defense system for $800 million but delivered the obsolete version of S-300, keeping the upgraded version for India and Turkey, among others.

Even then, where would Tehran find the money?

Unable to sell oil even at current low prices, the mullahs won't have much to spend on arms. China, of course, could, and because it sits on $22 billion of Iran's frozen assets, it might not face payment problems. But switching to Chinese arms might require years of redesigning Iran's defense doctrine when the current regime's survival policy is internally challenged on a day to day basis.

The fourth argument is that unless Trump yields, the mullahs might produce an "October Surprise", just days before voting, to derail his re-election, by testing a nuclear device or capturing some American hostages or even seizing a US Navy vessel in the Strait of Hormuz.

Well, that is what a "think tank" in Brussels is peddling, with a nod and a wink from "The New York Boys" in Tehran.

This article was originally published by Asharq al-Awsat

Amir Taheri was the executive editor-in-chief of the daily Kayhan in Iran from 1972 to 1979. He has worked at or written for innumerable publications, published eleven books, and has been a columnist for Asharq Al-Awsat since 1987. He is the Chairman of Gatestone Europe.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/15968/iran-trump-october-surprise

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Why Bill de Blasio is unafraid of New York’s Jews - Jack Engelhard

​
by Jack Engelhard

He will say to Jews what he will never say to Muslims. Opinion.

Bill de Blasio                                                                                                                     Reuters

Well of course Mayor Bill de Blasio felt safe blaspheming the entire Jewish population of New York City for a lockdown breach committed by a few.

These were Williamsburg faithful who crowded around a cemetery for their rabbi’s funeral – and to do so was a mistake.

But it could have been corrected by a whisper. Instead, read this, the Mayor went to twitter to vent his anger at the mourners, to the point of threatening their arrest, and by extension roping together all Jews as pandemic scofflaws. As you’d expect, of the 1.1 million Jewish New Yorkers, this outraged the 99 percent who abide the rules.

What did they do? 

Says here, they expressed their “anger and disappointment” against the Mayor by – sending him a letter. 

Yes, yes, more than 100 Jewish leaders sent him a letter to “discuss constructive approaches to the pandemic.” Etc. Then they DEMANDED a meeting,

That will surely be followed by calls, by them, for an interfaith meeting between Muslims and Jews.

Will the Mayor accede to their demands? Why should he?

New Yorkers will vote for him anyway…de Blasio or any other Democrat. Jews in NYC and elsewhere do not care how often they, and Israel, are betrayed by the Party.

They vote Democrat. Period.

So there is no reason for de Blasio to appease the hurt, because Jews are unlike some others. These do not send letters when they are offended.

The world knows how they retaliate, and the world is afraid. De Blasio is afraid. He will say to Jews what he will never say to Muslims…never so frankly.

The world knows, and de Blasio knows that Jews, when offended, will never slash tires, break windows, overturn automobiles, stab pedestrians, nor riot in any other way.

Jews don’t riot.

Jews send letters.

Jews DEMAND a meeting.

Jews want to DISCUSS.

Jews want more interfaith DIALOGUE.

Yes, that is sure to make a difference.

Of the faithful in Williamsburg, who were so harshly singled out…how did they respond?

They prayed. 

Nothing for de Blasio to worry about. What – that gangs of Yeshiva kids are going to terrorize the subways? Never on the Sabbath or any other day of the week.

Jews don’t terrorize.

Of what is there to be afraid?

This isn’t Israel, where Jews know how to fight.

This is America, where Jews have been utterly tamed.

No insult will dissuade my brothers and sisters from their loyalty to the Party. Will they keep on voting like this…at a clip of 85 percent Democrat?

Such a question. Of course they will. De Blasio knows his people; the people who never learn.
 

Jack Engelhard writes regularly for Arutz Sheva.
He wrote the worldwide book-to-movie bestseller “Indecent Proposal,” and the authoritative newsroom epic, “The Bathsheba Deadline,” followed by his coming-of-age classics, “The Girls of Cincinnati,” and, the Holocaust-to-Montreal memoir, “Escape from Mount Moriah,” for which contemporaries have hailed him “The last Hemingway, a writer without peer, and the conscience of us all.” Website: www.jackengelhard.com

Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/279588

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

How to Rescue Ukraine from Herself - Alexander G. Markovsky

​
by Alexander G. Markovsky

Corruption is the blood of the Ukrainian economy -- the stimulus for government officials and employees to perform their duties.

Ukraine has been a tragic setback for American’s democratic aspirations for the region. Over the course of six presidents, with two notable exceptions of the first President Leonid Kravchuk and the current President Volodymyr Zelensky, who was elected just a year ago, those commitments to democracy have not been shared by the Ukrainian people, who found it difficult to elect leaders who recognize the importance of democracy other than as a means to achieve their personal enrichment.

Mr. Zelensky was elected on the platform of combatting government corruption and achieving prosperity. In his inauguration speech, he quoted former U.S. President Ronald Reagan: “Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.” Ironically, his administration has been using “the problem” to solve two critical interwoven issues -- the economy and corruption. Political frivolity rarely goes unpunished. The economy is in the toilet and corruption remains unaddressed.

The existing pseudo-capitalist economy -- a mixture of government-owned and privately owned enterprises -- incorporates two overlapping and contradictory economic organizations that cannot coexist efficiently. The fundamental flaw of the system is that the government as a law enforcer and protector of consumers from the inherent warts and blemishes of capitalism should not be allowed to be part of the same system -- to own and operate for-profit enterprises. In those mutually exclusive capacities, the government is positioned to abuse its power with impunity. Not bound by the concepts of restraints, the government bureaucrats choose winners and losers, engage in embezzlement, solicit bribes, and drive private competitors out of business at will.

In this environment, corruption is an elemental necessity, a precondition for functioning governance. It is the blood of the Ukrainian economy -- the stimulus for government officials and employees to perform their duties.

This immoral economy does not generate enough wealth to cover the expenditures.

To keep the wheels moving, the administration, driven by a quasi-socialist mentality, chooses to create wealth “an old-fashioned way” -- keeping on borrowing with total disregard to the implications of the growing indebtedness. The search for loans and economic aid put forward as the key to salvation is elevated to a national purpose. In the process, an enormous effort and political capital are spent on what may prove to be an exercise in futility.

The United States plays a major role in the IMF, the World Bank, and influences the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development (EBRD). President Trump made his position abundantly clear – no money to a corrupt country. It is not just a matter of decorum; it reflected Trump’s moral convictions that a conventional approach providing foreign aid and project financing directly to the governments that are in many instances unstable and corrupt doesn’t just fail to produce expected results but actually exports corruption. Ukraine is a case in point.

Since 2014, Ukraine has received from various sources more than $22.4 billion in loans, economic, and military aid. Most, if not all, of this enormous financial assistance was simply stolen by the commercial, military, and political elites. Ukraine must stop stepping on the same rake. It needs a fundamental revision of concepts of economy and corruption.

The economic solution lies with the greatest wealth generation machine ever invented -- free-market capitalism. The caveat is that Ukraine is a hybrid of contending aspirations and a multiplicity of conflicting interests. Any significant change requires a thoughtful approach and time to develop the environment for political consensus and peaceful compromise. It should not be rushed by IMF and EBRD bureaucrats, who see the world through the prism of western society, to rendezvous with turmoil. 

Government corruption, on the other hand, can be easily contained per the anti-corruption strategy outlined in “Ukraine: Curbing Corruption.” That is where the immediate emphases should be made. The proposed arrangements have earned high marks from the business community, the media, and were endorsed by Leonid Kravchuk the first President of Ukraine. One of the leading Ukrainian publications characterized it as follow:

“The author offers an ingenious in its simplicity plan to curb corruption, which is suitable, in fact, in any country in the world.”

The implementation of the proposed anti-corruption strategy would satisfy Trump’s immediate demands and open a door to the negotiation of terms of economic assistance. Economic assistance should serve as the scaffolding for the transition to sustained economic growth. Curbing corruption and unleashing the power of private enterprise will turn the economy of mass corruption into the economy of mass prosperity.

In short, “Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem.”

Alexander G. Markovsky is a senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research, a conservative think tank that examines national security, energy, risk-analysis and other public policy issues. He is the author of Anatomy of a Bolshevik and Liberal Bolshevism: America Did Not Defeat Communism, She Adopted It. Mr. Markovsky is the owner and CEO of Litwin Management Services, LLC. He can be reached at info@litwinms.com

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/05/how_to_rescue_ukraine_from_herself_.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Bill Gates's treasonous defense of China - why? - Mario Alexis Portella

​
by Mario Alexis Portella

Have Bill Gates's financial interests in China driven him to say ridiculously kind things about the Chinese government?

Microsoft founder Bill Gates recently called the United States government’s coronavirus testing data “bogus” because of testing inequality and slow turnaround, with three to four days to get results.

Earlier in the week, President Trump, during a news conference, came under fire from a reporter who claimed that South Korea had tested more people per capita than the U.S. The Coronavirus Response Coordinator Dr. Deborah Birx, who was present, defended the president, saying: “I just want to make it clear that South Korea’s testing was 11 per hundred thousand [residents], and we’re at 17 per hundred thousand.” This matches the latest statistics at Worldometers, which maintains a constantly-updated database of coronavirus statistics globally, by country, down to the state level.

Seems there's not enough bad to say about testing, and Gates was out front in that effort.
The tech tycoon had previously taken a swipe at the president for publicly castigating China for its cover-up of the coronavirus. During a Sunday interview on CNN, Gates not only argued that it is not time to be questioning the Chinese Communist Party’s (CPC) efforts in handling the COVID-19 outbreak, but went so far as to dispel any wrongdoing by the communist regime:

“China did a lot of things right at the beginning, like any country where a virus first shows up. They can look back and say where they missed some things. You know, some countries did respond very quickly and get their testing in place, and they avoided the incredible economic pain. It’s sad that even the U.S. that you would have expected to do this well, did it particularly poorly. But it’s not time to talk about that.”

President Donald Trump has repeatedly blamed the CCP for its mishandling of the outbreak, criticizing the country for restricting domestic travel to slow the virus but not international travel to keep it from spreading abroad. On Thursday, Trump went so far as to indicate that China may have intentionally released the coronavirus. Based on evidence he claims to have seen, the president is now speculating that the origin of the infectious disease came from a lab in Wuhan, the epicenter of the Chinese outbreak.

He said the U.S. now “is finding how it came out…. It’s a terrible thing that happened. Whether they made a mistake or whether it started off as a mistake and then they made another one, or did somebody do something on purpose.”

Besides hanging the testing deficit around Trump, Gates had also found Trump’s move to slash funding for the World Health Organization (WHO) a biased mistake:

“In the retrospective, we’ll see things that WHO could have done better, just like every actor in this whole picture. But the WHO has a strong connection with one country. That country is the United States. The number of CDC people who are there, people who used to work for the CDC, there’s no U.N. agency more connected to a country than WHO is to CDC.”

WHO, an agency of the United Nations, has been criticized for its chummy relationship with the CCP, including its role in manipulating a Chinese study that claimed the coronavirus could not spread between humans.

One may ask, why would Bill Gates defend China? The answer is apparently quite clear. Gates is one of many executives whose businesses have been ensnared by the Trump administration’s battle with China over technology and trade. In his case, it may specifically be his TerraPower LLC, a nuclear-energy project in China that Gates co-founded.

As reported last year by The Wall Street Journal, TerraPower signed a deal in 2015 with state-owned China National Nuclear Corp. to develop the technology, and, in 2017, agreed to build a demonstration reactor to test the technology in Cangzhou, about 130 miles south of Beijing. The project was to be the first demonstration of TerraPower’s technology.

Gates’s plan was thwarted last November by U.S. foreign investment restrictions after Trump began taking direct aim at China.

In 2019, under a long-term deal sealed by the Obama administration, a Chinese communist company was set to control America’s second-largest container port behind the nearby Port of Los Angeles. In an unreported Trump administration victory, the Chinese had to withdraw after a drawn-out national security review forced a unit of China-based COSCO Shipping Holdings Co. (Orient Overseas Container Line — OOCL) to sell the container terminal business, which handles among the largest freight of imports into the U.S. 

Incidentally, Trump was the first U.S. president to place economic sanctions on Chinese companies for their human rights violations — a fact completely ignored by the mainstream media, to say nothing of Bill Gates. This would give credence to Trump’s belief that that Beijing “will do anything they can” to have him lose his re-election bid in November.

In 2017 Gates was elected as a foreign member of the Chinese Academy of Engineering (CAE), one of the country's top academic institutions.” The CAE is China’s elite society of technology professionals who have proven their service to the CCP. But like many other super-wealthy westerners, such as George Soros and Ted Turner, Gates has shown nothing but sympathy to authoritarian and totalitarian regimes.

When White House trade adviser Peter Navarro was asked about Gates’ stunning praise of China, he did not mince any words: “Bill Gates, I’m all for innovation, but we have to hold China accountable and now China is even flooding us with these bad tests. So, Mr. Gates and I will differ on the need to hold China accountable. That’s certainly the case. Because the Chinese communist party basically inflicted this virus on the world. And we should never forget that here in America.”

But Gates saw things differently. In early April, Bill Gates had complimented the Chinese for their “extreme intervention in terms of reducing [the coronavirus] movement — they were able to crush that epidemic. Those hospitals are gone. Look at the commerce. Stores are open now in China and nowhere else, whereas before, it was the opposite.” This could not be any further from the truth.

Yes, the stores have reopened but only under coercion. Despite the CCP’s determination to recast the country as a global leader that has conquered the COVD-19 pandemic, such a claim is fictitious or manipulated at best. General Secretary Xi Jinping, in fact, forged a new mythology of the coronavirus in which he claims that he was secretly managing the response behind the scenes the whole time and was let down by local officials who did not follow his perfect plans to the letter. China’s Central Propaganda Department actually put this story of how “the centralized and unified leadership of the Communist Party Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at the core” defeated the coronavirus into book form and published the book in six different languages.

According to Radio Free Asia (RFA), Xi and his legion of censors are working hard to stamp out anything that contradicts his revised political mythology of the epidemic. RFA pointed out that a major article about an early coronavirus whistleblower named Dr. Ai Fen has been erased. His account is very similar to that of the late Dr. Li Wenliang, who was one of the colleagues she shared her suspicions about a burgeoning epidemic with.

Unless Bill Gates is extremely naive—he is just the opposite — to believe that communist China should be complimented for its so-called good handling of the coronavirus outbreak and that it is a model to emulate is as pretentious as believing in the tooth fairy. One thing is to gripe about Trump’s policy towards China — Gates’ apparent reason is his own financial interests — yet another thing is to absolve the Chinese government officials’ coronavirus cover-up by praising them, which is borderline treason.


Mario Alexis Portella

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/05/bill_gatess_treasonous_defense_of_china__why.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Is Trump a racist? - John Eidson

​
by John Eidson

See for yourself.

It's next to impossible to turn on the TV and not see another story declaring with utmost certitude that President Trump is a racist. 

Is he? You decide:

• For 14 years, NBC made Trump the host of its prime-time television series, The Apprentice, something the network would never have done had there been even a hint of racism in his past.
• Trump was a high-profile real estate developer in New York City, one of the most liberal jurisdictions in America. Had he been infected with racism, he would have faced insurmountable hurdles getting his projects approved.
• Before running for president, Trump donated $1.5 million to high-profile Democrat candidates, including Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, and Andrew Cuomo, none of whom would have accepted a dime from him if there was a shred of doubt about his racial bona fides.

Only when Trump became the GOP presidential nominee did Democrats hurl racial hand grenades his way at every turn. Maybe they didn't know about the time he drove a stake in the heart of institutional racism in South Florida...

When Trump fought the racists

In 1985, 31 years before being elected president, Trump bought the 126-room, 62,500-sq-ft Mar-a-Lago estate, the magnificent Palm Beach, Florida seaside resort built by Post Cereals heiress Margaret Merriwether Post. The brash New York real estate developer was intent on turning his newly acquired property into a private club that would compete with other high-society clubs in the area, which barred blacks and Jews from membership.

When Trump, then 39, revealed that memberships at his proposed club would be offered without regard to race or religion, the Palm Beach town council imposed zoning restrictions to prevent him from turning Mar-a-Lago into a club. Sensing that the restrictions were intended to perpetuate the discriminatory practices of the Old South social order in Palm Beach, Trump went head-to-head with the town council.

As part of his strategy to bring long overdue social change to the upper echelon of Palm Beach society, he sent the city commissioners a copy of the Sidney Poitier movie Guess Who's Coming to Dinner, a film about upper-class racism. When the commissioners still wouldn't budge, Trump filed a $100-million lawsuit, and the rest is history.

Under Trump's ownership, Mar-a-Lago has been open from the beginning to anyone who could qualify, regardless of race or religion. Influenced in part by Trump's ground-breaking example, other clubs in the area slowly began doing away with discriminatory policies. Today, all high-society clubs in Palm Beach are open to blacks and Jews. Long before he ran for president, Donald Trump was dismantling racial barriers in South Florida, not something a racist would do.

Note: The narration above was condensed from this American Spectator article titled "When Trump Fought the Racists."

President Trump is fulfilling his promise to reach out to the black community 

In 2018, President Trump signed a clemency plea for a black American grandmother who had served 20 years of a life sentence for a nonviolent drug offense. Hollywood celebrity Kim Kardashian brought Alice Marie Johnson's plight to the attention of President Trump, who ordered her set free. "I felt like I was losing hope. Thank you, President Trump. I love you and I am going to make you proud that you gave me this second chance in life." See story and photo here. Not everyone was thrilled that Trump had set Johnson free. Democrat HBO host Bill Maher said he fears that "grateful black folks" like Alice Johnson will cause Trump to rise in the polls.

Citing racial injustice, President Trump posthumously pardoned black boxing legend Jack Johnson. In 1913, the first black heavyweight champion was convicted by an all-white jury for taking his white girlfriend across state lines for "immoral purposes." The conviction and imprisonment destroyed Johnson's boxing career. With Sylvester Stallone and former heavyweight champion Lenox Lewis at his side, President Trump signed the pardon in an Oval Office ceremony. Previous presidents, including George W. Bush and Barack Obama, rejected bipartisan requests to grant clemency to Johnson. See 47-sec. video here.

In 2018, President Trump signed a bill elevating the birthplace of Martin Luther King, Jr. to full national park status. With the slain civil rights leader's niece, Alveda King, looking on, Trump signed the bill aboard Air Force One. The legislation gives the landmark attraction additional resources, including park rangers and funding for community improvements. Previously turned down by presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, the long championed bill was sponsored by civil rights icon Rep. John Lewis (D-Ga.). 

President Trump is considering pardoning Muhammad Ali. The former heavyweight boxing sensation was sentenced in 1970 to five years in prison after he was convicted of draft evasion. As a conscientious objector to the Vietnam War, Ali refused to serve in the military. The prison sentence was overturned in 1971 in a unanimous Supreme Court decision that found that the Department of Justice had improperly told the draft board that Ali's stance wasn't motivated by his religious beliefs.

A month after taking office, President Trump signed an executive order that historically black colleges and universities will be a priority in his administration. As one of more than 100 black educators in attendance, Leonard Haynes, former executive director of the 40-year-old White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, said, "Oh man. I've been around for a long time and I've never seen as many black folks in the Oval Office." See photo here.

In January 2018, President Trump extended an olive branch to the NFL kneelers by asking them to send him the names of black Americans they feel were unfairly treated by the criminal justice system, promising to have his administration review such cases and take remedial action if warranted.

In May 2018, black NYPD detective Miosotis Familia, mother of two, was gunned down by a cop-hater. At a memorial service in the nation's capital, President Trump hugged, kissed, and held hands with Familia's 90-year-old mother. Would a racist ever do such a thing? Click here to see heartbreaking pictures of Familia's grieving mother embracing President Trump. 

Democrats know that President Trump is not a racist. But because the "race card" has long been an effective way to incite racial hatred against Republican presidents, they continue to target him with racial invective. Unfortunately for them, the black electorate is awakening to the fact that they've been lied to about America's current president. Last December, Newsday reported an electrifying surge in black support for Trump, with three national polls showing his approval among black voters at 33, 34, and 35 percent, respectively. With Democrats having taken the black vote for granted since the 1960s, survey results like those could torpedo their chances on November 3. 

With a Republican president extending a hand of genuine friendship to the black community, the race card is losing its clout, but that won't stop more fabricated charges of racism against President Trump. In attempting to drive down his record approval among black voters, Democrats will continue using one of the Third Reich's most effective propaganda techniques: if you're going to lie, make it a Big Lie, keep repeating it, and people will believe it.

See how a half-century of Democrat rule has devastated urban America by watching this heart-tugging 2014 video.


John Eidson

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/05/is_trump_a_racist.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

High Court hears petitions against Netanyahu's rule, unity government - News Agencies , Israel Hayom Staff

​
by News Agencies , Israel Hayom Staff

The proceedings, held by an exceptionally large panel of 11 justices, focus on seven petitions challenging the Likud-Blue and White deal, as well Netanyahu's ability to form a government while facing criminal indictments.

The High Court of Justice in session, Sunday

The High Court of Justice began hearing petitions on Sunday against Benjamin Netanyahu forming a government while facing criminal indictments – something the Israeli legal code does not explicitly prohibit.

The proceedings, held by an exceptionally large panel of 11 justices and in a rare instance also broadcast live, will also address other controversial aspects of the Blue and White-Likud coalition deal. Seven petitions seek to challenge the deal, claiming it is unconstitutional.

If the court voids Netanyahu's ability to serve as prime minister, Israel could be plunged into political chaos, and it would likely trigger the country's fourth consecutive election in just over 12 months.

The high court has become a lightning rod for criticism by Netanyahu and his political allies, who accuse it of overreach and political interference, while the long-time leader's opponents consider it a bastion of democracy under dangerous assault.

Pro-democracy demonstrators have been taking to the streets weekly to protest Netanyahu's continued rule. Last week, counter-protesters against the court demonstrated against its hearing the petitions against Netanyahu's rule.

In an exceptional move, Sunday's hearing was broadcast live on the High Court's website while most of the country remains under coronavirus movement restrictions. The judges, attorneys and clerks wore face masks, and plastic barriers separated each of the 11 justices on the bench.

Netanyahu was indicted earlier this year on charges of accepting bribes, fraud and breach of trust. He has denied any wrongdoing. His trial was postponed due to restrictions his hand-picked interim justice minister placed on the courts after the coronavirus crisis erupted and is scheduled to commence later this month.

Last week, Israel's attorney general, Avichai Mandelblit, said in an opinion to the court that while Netanyahu's indictments "raise significant problems," there was no legal basis for barring him from serving while facing criminal charges.

Israeli law mandates that cabinet ministers and mayors resign if indicted, but prime ministers are not specifically required to step down. In January, the High Court declined to rule on whether Netanyahu could form a government under indictment, saying the matter remained "theoretical" ahead of March's elections.

On Monday, the court will address petitions concerning Netanyahu's power-sharing coalition deal with his main rival, former military chief Benny Gantz.

Netanyahu and Gantz signed the agreement to form a national government last month after Israel's third consecutive, deadlocked election in just over a year. The deal would have Netanyahu serve the first 18 months as prime minister, after which Gantz would assume power for the next 18 months.

The coalition deal and Netanyahu's upcoming corruption trials have triggered large protests in Tel Aviv's main square. Participants in the demonstrations observed social distance in accordance with public health regulations.

The petitions against Netanyahu were filed by advocacy groups that have asked the court to ban any indicted politician, including Netanyahu, from being allowed to form a new government. They also say that parts of the coalition deal are illegal.

Eliad Shraga, head of the Movement for Quality Government in Israel, one of the groups petitioning the court, said in a statement ahead of Sunday's proceedings that it was "unconscionable that a man like this will go in the morning to court to sit in the dock and in the evening will manage the security cabinet and send us and our children to battle."

Netanyahu, Israel's longest-serving prime minister, has held onto power as a caretaker leader for more than a year as political stalemate prevented the creation of a government and triggered successive elections.

Officials in Likud and Blue and White both have urged the court against interfering in the unity deal.

Blue and White said that such interference exceeded the court's purview and risks sending Israeli to a fourth vote, an expensive process a country facing economic repercussions of the coronavirus crisis should avoid.

Likud warned that if the High Court of Justice insists on disregarding the voters' wishes, "We [the Knesset] will pass a law circumventing the court on this issue."

News Agencies , Israel Hayom Staff

Source: https://www.israelhayom.com/2020/05/03/high-court-hears-petitions-against-netanyahus-rule-unity-government/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Large convoy protests High Court's 'judicial dictatorship' - Arutz Sheva Staff

​
by Arutz Sheva Staff

Convoy sets out to protest Supreme Court's decision to hear petitions against the Likud-Blue and White unity government deal.

A large convoy set out Sunday morning in protest over the High Court of Justice's decision to hear petitions against the Likud-Blue and White unity government deal.

The convoy, comprised of more than 100 Israeli flag-carrying cars led by the Zionist watchdog Im Tirtzu, accused the High Court of abusing its power by unlawfully interfering in the Knesset's agenda.

The demonstrators insisted that this was merely the latest action in a long history of undemocratic and biased political activism by the court.

Due to the current health crises, the organizers stated that the protest was coordinated with the police and adhered to the Health Ministry regulations.

The demonstrators chanted slogans including "stop stealing our democracy" and "this isn't Iran," and called on the courts to stop their "judicial piracy."

Acclaimed legal scholar and former United States federal judge, Richard Posner, was the first to coin the term "judicial pirate," which he labelled former Israeli Supreme Court president Aharon Barak who was responsible for Israel's "constitutional revolution" that gave more power to the courts.

Batel Trappler from Ra'anana, who participated in the convoy, stated: "The judges are in total control and are robbing our democracy – and us ordinary citizens are powerless against them."

Michael Lobobikov from Tel-Aviv, who also participated in the convoy, noted: "The High Court is a radical political actor that is trying to impose its anti-Zionist will on the people."

Im Tirtzu CEO Matan Peleg stated: "The High Court justices are twisting the law and using it as a tool to advance their political goals."

"This blatant violation of the basic principles of democracy endangers the future of the State of Israel, and the time has come for the judges to end their judicial dictatorship and realize that this is a democracy, not Iran."


Arutz Sheva Staff

Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/279572

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Shoah Did Not End Anti-Semitism - Joseph Puder

​
by Joseph Puder

My parents experienced it, and it’s still rising.

Tuesday, April 21, 2020, the Jewish world observed the Holocaust Remembrance Day.  Many of us, who are children of survivors, will pause to evaluate the losses we suffered collectively as a people, and individually. We will remember our relatives who perished in the tidal wave of hatred unleashed by the German Nazis. The “enlightened” Christian Europe incited 2000 years of Jew hatred in Europe that consumed the lives of 6 million innocent Jews, and millions of others died in crusades, pogroms, and blood libels. They were murdered because of the singular “sin” of being born as Jews. 

Church-inspired hatred of Jews receded after the Second Vatican Council. The Catholic Church must be given credit for changing the liturgy and teachings as it relates to Jews. Elements of the liberal Protestant denominations however, such as the Evangelical Lutheran Church, United Methodist Church, and the Presbyterian Church USA, to name the most visible, have substituted their anti-Jewish bias with a new form of anti-Semitism called anti-Israelism, attacking the collective Jew, which is the Jewish state of Israel instead of the individual Jew. Nathan Sharansky, a dissident in the former Soviet Union, and later, chairman of the Jewish Agency, coined the “triple D” to define antisemitism. Delegitimization of Israel, Demonization of Israel, and subjecting Israel to a Double Standard… 

Antisemitism has never been eradicated, just as scapegoating continues to exist as a part of human nature, where the strong majority blames the ills of society on the weaker minority. That has been the European case vis-à-vis the Jews of Europe. Church inspired religious antisemitism gave way to racial antisemitism since the late eighteenth century. Germany and France were the sources of this new phase of hatred. In the early modern Europe, post Napoleon, with Jews finally receiving civil rights, at least in western Europe, envy of Jewish successes in all spheres of intellectual and scientific endeavors opened to them, along with the baptismal font … The latter was the only way Jews were able to gain positions of importance in West European societies – by conversion to Christianity.
In the more traditional and orthodox Jewish societies of Poland, Russia, and Eastern Europe in general, where larger number of Jews lived, violence and blood libels against Jews were commonplace. There, the church and government tended to initiated pogroms, and were the main oppressors of Jews. Antisemitism came from above and seeped down to the largely ignorant masses. My family in Poland experienced the more vulgar prejudice, albeit, there were also Philo-Semitic Poles, and Russians.

I grew up with only one set of grandparents. On my father’s side, my grandfather, a famous and beloved teacher who taught Philosophy, languages (he spoke 9 languages), as well as music and Bible studies, found shelter at a home of a Polish-Catholic fellow professor. However, not wanting to endanger his friend’s family, he left, only to be swept up in a Nazi hunting operation (Aktion) sometime in 1942. He was murdered in his town of Ulanow, along with 1,500 other Jews, and buried in a common grave.

As with my grandfather, I never knew my aunts, uncles, or cousins who perished in October, 1942, at the Belzec Death Camp in southeastern Poland. As Poland was divided in 1939 by the Ribbentrop-Molotov (Soviet Union -Nazi Germany) agreement, my parents ended up on the German side of the border. The Russians arrived before the Germans to their town of Ulanow, and it was a Jewish officer in the Red Army who warned my mother to move east. He told her simply, “the Nazis will kill you.” My dad’s brothers and sisters refused to leave, fearing the Russians more than the Germans, and my dad, being the youngest of the children, didn’t want to leave his father. My mom prevailed, and with my brother (then a baby), they moved east. My dad risked his life by returning to fetch his father, but a German soldier at the border hit him hard and pushed him back. In retrospect, it saved his life. 

Stalin, the Soviet dictator, ordered his troops to ship the Jews who crossed to the Russian side, into a labor camps in Siberia. Prior to that, while at a Ukrainian inn, the innkeeper and his mates were preparing to murder my family and take their possessions. My mom, a poor sleeper, saw them sharpening their long knives. She snuck out and ran amok toward a Russian (Soviet) military post and begged them to come and help. The Russians caught the Ukrainians red-handed, just before they could butcher the entire family, and shot them on the spot. 

The Soviet policy was to deport the Polish Jews to labor camps in Siberia. There, in sub-zero temperatures, enduring constant hunger, and under the strict control by NKVD (predecessor of the KGB), my family barely survived. Nevertheless, against all odds, and hoping to be witnesses to the tragedy that befell the family, and the Jewish people, my parents, and two brothers survived. Just before the end of WWII, my family received permission to travel from Siberia to Uzbekistan, and from there, several more weeks and thousands of miles of train travel to the DP camps in Germany. Ultimately, the family ended up in the new State of Israel. 

My parents personally experienced antisemitism in Europe, and even though they and so many others are gone, European antisemitism is as vicious as ever. A study by the Kantor Center for the Study of Contemporary European Jewry at Tel Aviv University noted that coronavirus-inspired expressions “constitute forms of traditional Jew-hatred and of conspiracy theories. So far, these accusations appear to be promoted mainly by extreme rightists, the far left, and Islamists, each group according to its narrative and beliefs such as different conspiracy theories as well as the image of the Jew as a producer of diseases.”  

The study suggested that “2019 witnessed a rise of 18% in major violent cases compared to 2018 – 456 cases in 2019 compared to 387 in 2018. Seven Jews and non-Jews were killed during anti-Semitic attacks, and a rise in most other manifestations, in most countries. At least 53 synagogues (12%) and 28 community centers and schools (6 percent) were attacked. An increase in life-endangering threats (47%) and in attacks on private properties (24%).” The study also noted that in the US, a new phenomenon is emerging, one with increased violent anti-Semitic manifestations, with shooting sprees and numerous casualties, inspired mainly by right-wing ideologies as well as by certain groups within the Black community, and the Nation of Islam in particular.

Tad Stahnke, director of the William and Sheila Konar International Educational Outreach, part of the William Levine Family Institute for Holocaust Education at the US Holocaust Memorial Museum, summarized it well when he said: “Some were workers, some teachers, some neighbors. Many ordinary people enabled the Holocaust simply by doing their jobs. Some made the choice to help, while others decided to join in with the persecution, betraying Jewish friends and classmates. But what ‘fueled the Holocaust was antisemitism’ which didn’t end with the defeat of the Nazis, and ‘continues today’, affecting all of society.”

* * *

Photo by slgckgc

Joseph Puder

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/05/shoah-did-not-end-antisemitism-joseph-puder/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter