03/10/17

Inside the CIA: Leaks, Moles and “Diversity”

By: Cliff Kincaid | America’s Survival

Former senior CIA Officer Michael Scheuer spent over 20 years with the CIA and talks in this interview about leaks, moles and “diversity” at the agency. The controversial and outspoken former chief of the Osama bin Laden unit in the CIA, he says the U.S. is losing the war on Islamic terrorism.

02/14/17

Cruz Nails It… Revoke Citizenship of Americans Who Join ISIS

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton | Right Wing News

I simply adore Ted Cruz. He’s absolutely right here. If an American citizen tries to join ISIS or any other terrorist group, they should have their citizenship stripped. That means for those who go overseas to wage Jihad, the door will no longer be open to them to return here. And before the left starts screeching over this, Hillary Clinton supported very similar legislation. Cruz supports President Trump’s embattled plan to temporarily ban refugees from seven Middle Eastern countries. So do I. He just thinks it only addresses half the problem and he has a point. We don’t want trained, battle hardened Jihadists returning to the US after going on a killing spree.

When previous versions of this bill were submitted, some civil libertarians threw a fit. They claim it would give the federal government expanded powers to revoke citizenship without due process. That’s rich considering they never decried Obama’s extension of federal powers. Under Cruz’s bill, anyone who lost their citizenship over alleged terrorist ties would have 60 days to request a due process hearing to challenge the decision. “The awesome and horrible power of being able to take away the citizenship of an American citizen would be turned over to an unnamed bureaucrat,” claimed Christopher Anders, senior legislative counsel for the American Civil Liberties Union’s Washington legislative office. It is not unconstitutional and I contend it would indeed stand if it went to the Supreme Court.

From the Washington Examiner:

Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, is renewing a push for Congress to pass legislation that would revoke the citizenship of any American who tries to join the Islamic State or other terrorist groups.

Cruz thinks that banning people from terrorist-stricken countries from entering the U.S. only deals with half of the problem, and that the federal government also needs to worry about U.S. citizens who may try the same thing.

“If an American citizen travels abroad and joins a terrorist group waging jihad on America, attempting to murder innocent Americans, this legislation would strip that individual of their U.S. citizenship, so that we would not have terrorists returning to America using U.S. passports,” Cruz told the Washington Examiner.

Hundreds of Americans have tried to join the Islamic State in recent years, according to Cruz. He said another 124 U.S. citizens or green card holders have traveled overseas to join other jihadist groups in the years since the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. “This should be an idea that even Senate Democrats can support given that Hillary Clinton, when she was in the Senate, supported very similar legislation,” he said.

Ted Cruz steadfastly stands by his bill. Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa has introduced it for consideration. Cruz says it uses the same process to revoke citizenship from terrorists that the government has used since 1926 to revoke citizenship from Americans who join foreign armies at war with the United States. That’s exactly right. “This legislation is a common sense step to recognize that people can [wage] war against America in more ways than one,” he said. “You don’t need to be a member of a nation-state military to be a terrorist at war with America.”

There is a good chance that the bill will pass in Congress considering the Trump administration’s agreement with its pretext. Additionally, a former Cruz staffer, Victoria Coates, now works for the White House National Security Council. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota in the House joins Senator Cruz in support for the bill. It is entitled the Expatriate Terrorists Act. Meanwhile, in the House of Representatives, Republicans Bachmann and Ted Poe of Texas also introduced bills that call for the United States to revoke the passports of Americans involved with groups like ISIS.

Bachmann puts it perfectly: “Those who have joined a foreign terrorist organization have taken up arms against the United States and our very way of life. By turning against their country, their passports should be revoked and if they’re naturalized citizens, they should lose their citizenship.”

01/28/17

President Trump Keeps His Word… Halts Refugee Program and Commences Extreme Vetting [VIDEO]

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton | Right Wing News

Finally! President Trump did it… he froze refugees from coming into the US for four months. I would have preferred two years for all immigrants, but I’ll take it. He also permanently banned all Syrian refugees until further notice. Extreme vetting will now begin to be implemented through the Department of Homeland Security and the Secretaries of State. Trump also lowered the number of refugees that can come into the US in a given year to 50,000. Obama has already had 32,125 come in, so there will be very few coming in the rest of the year.

Now… if we can now emulate Switzerland on reviewing refugees as well, that will be a good start. They require that immigrants and refugees assimilate into their culture or they are deported. They are watched for years and their neighbors are interviewed. For instance, school girls who refuse to swim in a pool with boys violate their rules and their whole family is deported over it. We need similar reviews of those already here.

From Breitbart:

President Trump signed an executive order late Friday which temporarily bars refugees from entering the United States.

Trump signed the order on refugees while at the Pentagon, minutes after General James Mattis was sworn in as Secretary of Defense by Vice President Mike Pence at a brief ceremony which the president attended.

The executive order, “Protecting the Nation from Terrorist Attacks by Foreign Nationals,” contained these key elements:

  • Suspended the U.S. Refugee Admissions Program for 120 days, prohibiting the arrival of refugees into the United States from any country during that period
  • Ordered the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security to undertake a complete review of the refugee vetting process
  • Permanently banned Syrian refugees until President Trump determined otherwise, and
  • Lowered the ceiling of refugees allowed to enter the United States during FY 2017 to 50,000.

Opponents of the federal refugee resettlement program praised Trump’s actions. “This is a great beginning, and much needed,” Ann Corcoran of Refugee Resettlement Watch told Breitbart News.

During the 12 months up to September 30, 2016, the federal government accepted 84,995 refugees in the United States.

In the three months and twenty-seven days since Fiscal Year 2017 began on October 1, 2016, 32,125 refugees have entered the United States.

In an exclusive one-on-one interview with the Christian Broadcasting Network (CBN), President Trump told CBN’s David Brody of The Brody File that he will be reversing the Obama regime’s preference of Muslims over Christians when it comes to allowing refugees to enter the United States from foreign countries. Glory freaking hallelujah! That’s simply awesomesauce.

DAVID BRODY: “When it comes to persecuted Christians — we’ve talked about this. Overseas, the refugee program that — or the changes you’re looking to make — as it related to persecuted Christians, do you see them as kind of a priority here?”

PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: “Yes. They’ve been horribly treated. You know, if you were a Christian in Syria, it was impossible, at least very, very tough to get into the United States.

If you were a Muslim, you could come in. But if you were a Christian, it was almost impossible. And the reason that was so unfair is that — everybody was persecuted in all fairness; they were chopping off the heads of everybody — but more so the Christians.

And I thought it was very very unfair, so we are going to help them.”

I assume this means there will be exceptions made for Christians fleeing Syria. I’m ecstatic over that. The executive order does allow the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security the discretion, on a case by case basis, “to process… those refugee claims made by individuals on the basis of religious-based persecution, provided that the religion of the individual is a minority religion in the individual’s country of nationality.” I could kiss the lawyer that wrote that… that refers directly to Christians.

The Department of Homeland Security on Wednesday announced the suspension of the processing of any refugees overseas currently under consideration for acceptance to the program. The executive order also included a temporary block on visas for 90 days for “immigrants and non-immigrants” from Syria, Somalia, Sudan, Libya, Yemen, Iran and Iraq, and specifically directed the Secretary of State to “request all foreign governments that do not supply such information [regarding refugee vetting] to start providing such information regarding their nationals within 60 days of notification.”

Signing the “Protecting the Nation from Terrorist Attacks by Foreign Nationals” executive order was one of two executive actions taken by President Trump immediately after he congratulated General Mattis. The other action was the signing of a presidential memorandum, whose purpose, the president said, is “to begin a great rebuilding of the armed services of the United States, developing a plan for new planes, new ships, new resources and new tools for our men and women in uniform.” All of this makes me warm and fuzzy inside. What a great first week.

01/28/17

Trump Mocks ISIS As ‘Sneaky, Dirty Rats’ – Mattis Focuses on Wiping Them Out

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton | Right Wing News

President Trump referred to ISIS as ‘sneaky, dirty rats’ in his interview with Sean Hannity this week. I have much more descriptive terms for them, but I understand the use of sanitized descriptors for these monsters. Trump is correct that when we fought Germany and Japan, they wore uniforms and were easy to identify. With ISIS, you can only go by their religious beliefs and their military moves. This is where extreme vetting comes into play. And perhaps the cunning use of flags (see Eddie Izzard):

In all seriousness, President Trump is right… these are evil bastards. And evil always loses in the end… see General ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis. Trump also discussed enhanced interrogation techniques and torture. Personally, I’m all for them. I truly believe that there are times when it is the only thing that produces results, if you are going to get anything at all out of the enemy. The enemy has no moral dilemma about torturing us. War is hell and sometimes violence is required. I know that is shocking… the left can just deal with it.

From Breitbart:

Appearing on Sean Hannity’s Fox News program Thursday evening, President Donald Trump had some choice words for the Islamic State.

We have evil that lurks around the corner without the uniforms. Ours is harder because the people that we’re going against, they don’t wear uniforms. They’re sneaky, dirty rats. And they blow people up in a shopping center. And they blow people up in a church. These are bad people.

When you’re fighting Germany, they had their uniforms, and Japan, and they had their uniforms and they had their flags on the plane and the whole thing. We are fighting sneaky rats right now that are sick and demented. And we’re going to win.

Trump also discussed the use of enhanced interrogation techniques, after Hannity argued opponents of waterboarding would endorse the technique if their own loved ones had been kidnapped by terrorists.

Trump said yesterday that despite his feeling that torture works, he’s going to defer judgement on that to his Secretary of Defense, General Mattis, who openly disagrees with him. I find that surprising from Mattis, but we will see. I think Mattis is more of a ‘shoot first and screw the intel’ kind of guy. Trump is deferring to Mattis as he should here. He said Defense Secretary James Mattis “doesn’t intend to use it” and “I’m with him all the way.”

President Trump is also cultivating a close relationship with Egypt’s President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, who has been extremely critical of radical Islam. “He went into a tough situation, and all I can say is, I like him,” Trump declared. As for Saudi Arabia, Trump suggested he was biting his tongue in the interests of maintaining a good relationship with the Kingdom, but he is not pleased with their past activities: “A lot of money is being spent from certain countries on radicalizing people. I don’t like that. I don’t like that.” Saudi Arabia is not our friend and they should be treated as an enemy as far as I’m concerned. Along with Iran, I blame them for 9/11. Trump will have to tread lightly there, but in the end he may find that you can’t really befriend Islamists. It always ends badly.

01/24/17

Cruz and Poe Introduce Legislation for States to Reject Refugees

By: Denise Simon | FoundersCode.com

There is some additional help coming from the Trump administration as President Trump is likely to issue and sign executive order on immigration that will impact visa holders from Iraq, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. These are worn torn countries where hostilities continue with terror organizations. An issue that still remains however that Trump has not addressed is the asylum seekers.

S. 2363 (114th): State Refugee Security Act of 2015

A bill to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to permit the Governor of a State to reject the resettlement of a refugee in that State unless there is adequate assurance that the alien does not present a security risk and for other purposes. The 2 page text is here.

New bill from Cruz, Poe would let states reject refugees

WT: Republicans in the House and Senate have introduced legislation that would give governors the power to reject federal efforts to resettle refugees in their states.

The bill from Sen. Ted Cruz and Rep. Ted Poe, both of Texas, is a reaction to years of growing GOP frustration with the Obama administration’s aggressive effort to take in refugees and resettle them across the country. Republicans continue to have doubts that refugees can be vetted to ensure they aren’t Islamic State terrorists.

The State Refugee Security Act would require the federal government to notify states at least 21 days before they seek to settle a refugee. Under the bill, if a state governor certifies that the federal government hasn’t offered enough assurances that the refugee does not pose a security risk, the state can block the resettlement effort.

Poe said the Obama administration’s “open door policy” has forced states to take on refugees without these guarantees, and said states need a way to opt out.

“Until the federal government can conduct thorough security screenings and confirm that there are no security risks, Congress should empower states to be able to protect their citizens by refusing to participate in this program,” he said.

Cruz said the first obligation of the president is to keep Americans safe, and said the bill would be a step in that direction.

“I am encouraged that, unlike the previous administration, one of President Trump‘s top priorities is to defeat radical Islamic terrorism,” he said. “To augment the efforts of the new administration, this legislation I have introduced will reinforce the authority of the states and governors to keep their citizens safe.”

****

The Trump White House also has not addressed the issue of criminal deportation of foreign nationals. Each foreign inmate is known to cost the taxpayer an estimated $21,000 per year. Enforcement and removal operations of those illegal foreign nationals now falls to the newly confirmed DHS Secretary Kelly.

FY 2015 ICE Immigration Removals

In addition to its criminal investigative responsibilities, ICE shares responsibility for enforcing the nation’s civil immigration laws with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS). ICE’s role in the immigration enforcement system is focused on two primary missions: (1) the identification and apprehension of criminal aliens and other removable individuals located in the United States; and (2) the detention and removal of those individuals apprehended in the interior of the U.S., as well as those apprehended by CBP officers and agents patrolling our nation’s borders.

In executing these responsibilities, ICE has prioritized its limited resources on the identification and removal of criminal aliens and those apprehended at the border while attempting to unlawfully enter the United States. This report provides an overview of ICE Fiscal Year (FY) 2015 civil immigration enforcement and removal operations. See FY 2015 ICE Immigration Removals Statistics

Expectations of a quick solution and immediate movement to address the immigration matter are misplaced as this will be a long slog of an operation and will take the coordination of several agencies including the U.S. State Department which is presently operating without a Secretary until Rex Tillerson is confirmed and sworn in. The fallout will include a diplomatic challenge which is many cases does need to occur, however other nations such as China and Russia will step in to intrude on the process including those at the United Nations level, falling into the lap of the newly confirmed U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, Nikki Haley.

01/19/17

Obama’s Iranian Nuke Deal is a Major Challenge for Trump

By: Roger Aronoff | Accuracy in Media

No matter how false and misleading it is to cite the Iran deal as “signed,” when it is little more than a set of unenforceable political commitments, the news media continue to publish fake news arguing that somehow Iran and the P5+1 have agreed on a single text of the deal. In reality, the Iranian parliament endorsed a different version of the deal than was supposedly accepted by the P5+1, and the JCPOA was agreed upon without signatures or signatories.

Now President Obama is using a news organ of the U.S. government, RadioFreeEurope/RadioLiberty, to sell the narrative that this is a signed deal. “Rohani has been accused of overhyping the agreement and being duped by Washington and five other world powers at the negotiating table,” reports Frud Bezhan for RadioLiberty. “In many ways, it mirrors the situation in the United States, where supporters have fended off consistent opposition to the Joint Comprehensive Plan Of Action (JCPOA), in which Tehran agreed to curtail its nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief, since it was signed in July 2015” (emphasis added). In other words, American critics should stop complaining because the Iranians don’t believe the deal benefited them either.

How can the author of that article not know that the Iran deal was not actually signed? It was the State Department’s Julia Frifield who sent a letter to Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-KS) saying that the Iran deal is “not a treaty or an executive agreement, and is not a signed document.” Rather, she wrote, this deal represents “political commitments” between Iran and other nations. How, exactly, can policymakers politically commit to something that the parties have not agreed on in writing, validated by signatures? There is no such document, and this news article is little more than government-funded propaganda.

Even The New York Times admits that the parties had to parse out different interpretations when it reported in January of last year that Iran and the United States had not yet agreed on “details of what kind of ‘advanced centrifuges’ Iran will be able to develop nearly a decade from now.” This, the Times stated, was “the kind of definitional difference that can undermine an accord”—yet these details were being worked out months later than when the agreement was supposedly signed.

“But as the first anniversary of implementation day approaches on January 16, Rohani has been saddled by the high expectations he set, as Iran’s economy continues to struggle and the great boost in foreign investment and other benefits he envisioned has so far failed to materialize,” reports RadioLiberty. There are a number of different landmarks in how the Iran Deal is supposed to be implemented, which allows the Obama administration to acknowledge multiple anniversaries of the deal.

For example, the White House celebrated July 14, 2016 as the first year anniversary of this unsigned deal. “Today marks one year since the conclusion of the Iran nuclear deal…by representatives of the United States, Iran, France, the United Kingdom, Germany, China, Russia, and the European Union,” read President Obama’s statement. “Over the last year, the Iran Deal has succeeded in rolling back Iran’s nuclear program, avoiding further conflict and making us safer.”

But there are multiple anniversaries that the administration, as well as the compliant press, can use to their political advantage, highlighting Obama’s signature foreign policy achievement. After all, there is the day of the agreement (July 14, 2015), Adoption Day (October 18, 2015), and Implementation Day (January 16, 2016). The Hill, in particular, published a news story on the anniversary this week which exclusively cites President Obama, and no other sources. In other words, this January anniversary is yet another chance for the mainstream media to produce more propaganda in favor of the unsigned and unenforceable deal.

“Today marks the one-year anniversary of the implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)—a deal that has achieved significant, concrete results in making the United States and the world a safer place,” reads President Obama’s statement this week. The Washington Times reports that Obama used the one-year anniversary to warn “Americans—chief among them President-elect Donald Trump—that unraveling the agreement would bring ‘much worse’ consequences.” In other words, Obama is willing to lie to the public about the contents of the deal in order to salvage his foreign policy legacy from Trump’s future actions.

Obama is on the same page with Iranian President Hassan Rohani, who had harsh words for President-elect Trump. On Tuesday, Rohani said that talk of renegotiating the deal was “meaningless,” and that he “doesn’t think [Trump] can do much when he gets to the White House.”

Trump has nominated Rep. Pompeo to head the Central Intelligence Agency. Pompeo, in response to the letter he received from the State Department, said that the deal was “nothing more than a press release and just about as enforceable.” Yet Obama continues to claim, again and again, that the Iran Deal will make the world safer. The opposite is true: Iran, under this deal, has been given a pathway to develop nuclear weapons.

I recently asked Rep. Eliot Engel (D-NY), the ranking member of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs and a great friend of Israel, how this is a deal if it’s not signed. He said that “theoretically it wasn’t signed, but it was agreed to.” Theoretically? He said that it was a matter of semantics. “It was a bad deal,” he told me. “It doesn’t matter whether it was signed or not, it was a bad deal.”

Perhaps there is another anniversary that Obama should be celebrating—coordinating ransom money to the Iranians. According to The Wall Street Journal, “The U.S. Treasury Department wired the money [$1.7 billion] to Iran around the same time its theocratic government allowed three American prisoners to fly out of Tehran….The announcements coincided with the implementation of the nuclear agreement with Iran, lifting international economic sanctions in exchange for Iran curtailing its nuclear program.” President Obama claimed that this wasn’t a ransom payment—but the proximity to the release of U.S. prisoners demonstrates that this was, in fact, nothing short of buying off the Iranians.

If Obama wishes to celebrate, and the media continue to applaud, the anniversary of this terrible, unsigned agreement, then both parties must take ownership of how the ransom money sent to Iran—and sanctions relief—emboldens this totalitarian, theocratic regime.

Obama continues to appease the Iranians, opposing Congress’ recently renewed Iran Sanctions Act. The Wall Street Journal reported that Obama “decided to let the legislation imposing U.S. restrictions on Iran’s missile program become law without his signature” and that the law had overwhelming bipartisan support from Congress. In fact, the vote in the Senate was 99-0. In response, Rohani “ordered the development of a nuclear-powered system for ships, a move described as retaliation for the sanctions extension,” yet Obama’s press secretary, Josh Earnest, claimed that “Iran’s decision does not violate the nuclear deal.”

What, exactly, would violate this unsigned, unenforceable agreement? The fact that the parties have not signed this agreement, and that Iran has a different conception of the deal, means that Iran’s belligerence, and the deceit from both Iran and the Obama administration, amounts to a very challenging mess for the incoming Trump administration. Will the “art of the deal” prevail, or is a military confrontation inevitable?


Roger Aronoff is the Editor of Accuracy in Media, and a member of the Citizens’ Commission on Benghazi. He can be contacted at [email protected]. View the complete archives from Roger Aronoff.

12/29/16

GW Bush Doing the Work Kerry Should on N. Korea

By: Denise Simon | FoundersCode.com

Sometimes when a panel is mobilized that includes media, negotiators, diplomats and legislators, interesting facts emerge. Such is the case where President George W. Bush convened a panel at the George W. Bush Institute on the matter of North Korea. Going beyond the proven human rights violations by the Kims, there is more to understand when it comes to relationships including the DPRK, China, Japan, S. Korea, Taiwan, Iran, Syria and more.

There is a U.S. citizen currently in prison doing slave labor in N. Korea but John Kerry voids his failure to get Otto Warmbier released. Kerry deferred the process to former governor Bill Richardson and there has been no progress.

The DPRK is in fact developing technology and weapons systems that are not only being tested but being sold to rogue nations for revenue purposes.

GW Bush has reached out to North Koreans that have escaped and made their way to the United States in a manner where they provide information and continued work for the benefit of Congress, the State Department, diplomatic objectives and policy to address the Kim regime going forward.

This is a fascinating discussion where real truths are revealed pointing to labor, human rights violations, military and nuclear operations, trade and more. North Korea is stacking missiles on launch pads and working on miniaturized nuclear weapons. The objective is to reach the United States. What has John Kerry done for deterrents? Nothing….

****

North Korea’s Rockets and Missiles

Space/2013: North Korea’s missile program is shrouded in secrecy, which helps the outlaw nation keep the rest of the world guessing.Still, Western experts have learned a fair bit about Pyongyang’s stable of rockets and missiles over the years by analyzing test flights, satellite photos and other data. Here are five of the most interesting things they’ve figured out.

FIRST STOP: Soviet Origins of Missiles

Soviet Origins

The Hermit Kingdom’s missile program is based primarily on Soviet Scuds, which apparently entered the country via Egypt in the 1970s. North Korea was building its own Scud version, called the Hwasong-5, by the mid-1980s, and moved onto bigger and more powerful missiles after that. [North Korea’s Missile Capabilities Explained]NEXT: Poor Accuracy

Poor Accuracy

North Korea’s missiles have lousy accuracy compared to those developed by the United States, experts say. Pyongyang’s Hwasong line, for example, can reach targets a few hundred miles away, but with an accuracy of just 0.3 miles to 0.6 miles (0.5 to 1 kilometer).A missile called the Nodong can fly 620 miles to 800 miles (1,000 to 1,300 km), but its estimated accuracy is even worse — 1.8 to 2.5 miles (3 to 4 km). Such missiles can’t reliably hit military targets, but they can certainly strike larger targets such as cities.

NEXT: Iran’s Help

Cooperation with Iran

North Korea has apparently cooperated extensively with fellow pariah nation Iran on rocket and missile technology. For example, the third stage of Pyongyang’s Unha-2 rocket is very similar to the upper stage of Iran’s Safir-2 launcher, physicists David Wright and Theodore Postol noted in a 2009 report.NEXT: Satellite Success

Satellite Launch Success

North Korea joined the ranks of satellite-launching nations last December, when its Unha-3 rocket launched a small satellite to Earth orbit.This breakthrough came after three consecutive failures — one in 1998, one in 2009 and another in April 2012. North Korean officials didn’t always admit to these mishaps, however. For example, they claimed that the Kwangmyongsong-1 (“Bright Star 1”) satellite reached orbit in 1998 and broadcast patriotic songs into space. [Unha-3 Rocket Explained (Infographic)]

NEXT: Nuclear Warheads Possible

Nuclear Warheads Possible

North Korea has been ratcheting up its bellicose rhetoric lately, threatening to launch nuclear strikes against Washington, D.C. and other American cities.While the rogue nation’s nuclear-weapons program is thought to be at a relatively primitive stage, Pyongyang may indeed already possess warheads small enough to be carried large distances by a ballistic missile, experts say. “Having something that’s around 1,000 kilograms, or maybe somewhat smaller than that, unfortunately does not seem impossible,” Wright told SPACE.com. “We don’t really know, but I think you have to take seriously that they could well be there.”

Most analysts doubt, however, that North Korean missiles are powerful enough to deliver a nuclear weapon to the American mainland. The tough talk from Pyongyang is primarily bluster aimed at wringing concessions out of the international community and building support for young leader Kim Jong-Un at home, they say.

12/29/16

Obama’s Treachery Exposed

By: Joan Swirsky | Canada Free Press

After watching all the pomp and circumstance of the presidential inauguration of January 20, 2009, I remember turning to my husband Steve and saying: “The sole mission of Barack Obama and his henchmen is to destroy Israel.”

Steve reminded me that there was a mountain of domestic issues awaiting the new, far-left regime, and I agreed. And sure enough, Mr. Obama and his minions proceeded to wreak havoc on job creation and on the American military, inflict strangulating regulations, amass crushing national debt, foist horrific healthcare and education systems on our citizens, and seed every government department with operatives from the Nazi-inspired terrorist organization Muslim Brotherhood, and then hand over control of the Internet to the United Nations—the most corrupt, tin-pot-dictator-driven, anti-American, anti-Semitic, American-resource-draining cesspool in our country.

But all that still left them plenty of time to enact a foreign policy that genuflected to our enemies and spit in the face of our most faithful allies, most particularly Israel.

Writer Mona Charen has said that Mr. Obama has a “genocidal hostility toward Israel.” As if to reinforce that opinion, he just engaged in his longtime habit of spitting on Jews—and also Christians—by launching his poison dart on December 23rd, right in time for Chanukah and Christmas.

After the first vote proposed by Egypt to condemn Israeli “settlements”—meaning housing on Israeli land—was canceled after President-elect Trump intervened, the vote was rescheduled in the United Nation’s Security Council when New Zealand (10,000 miles from Israel), Malaysia (where the official religion is Islam), Senegal (which is 90-percent Muslim), and Venezuela (so impoverished that people are now scrounging for toilet paper) reinstituted the anti-Israel measure, and the United States, reversing decades of U.S. policy, refused to veto it.

Resolution 2334 demands that Israel “immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the [so-called] occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem.” It also advised all states “to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967”—what former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon called “Auschwitz borders.”

Despite White House denials that it had anything to do with creating the Resolution, there is no doubt that this sneak attack was hatched and orchestrated directly from the Oval Office and involved Mr. Obama himself, Secretary of State John Kerry, Susan Rice, and other of his Jew-hating acolytes. Israel says it has “iron-clad evidence” of direct involvement, and leaked documents already confirm that claim.

TEAM OF JEW HATERS

Samantha Power is Obama’s Ambassador to the U.N. and it was she who delivered the curare-tipped pronouncement to not veto the vote. Her involvement is rich with irony, wrote Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, author of The Israel Warrior: Standing Up for the Jewish State from Campus to Street Corner (2016), For the duration of the seemingly endless Syrian civil war [Power] has figuratively fiddled while that country burns. Now, with one foot out the door from a tenure that has all but obliterated her once formidable reputation as an anti-genocide activist, she’s decided to kick Israel in the teeth. Earth to Samantha: 500,000 Arabs died in Syria. Do you really think the problem in the Middle East is Jews building extra bedrooms in communities in Beit-El? You couldn’t pass even one United Nations Security Council Resolution condemning Russia, Syria, and Iran for the slaughter in Syria. But you passed this motion condemning peace-loving Jews who live in the ancient Biblical lands of Judea and Samaria?”

Power, as far back as 2002, advocated an end all U.S. military aid to Israel and wrote of her willingness to “alienate a domestic constituency of tremendous political and financial import [American Jews]…” She also advocated, Ed Lasky writes, “that America send armed military forces,” “a mammoth protection force” and an “external intervention” to” impose a settlement between Israel and the Palestinians.” Nice.

Power joins a long list of Jew haters that Mr. Obama has surrounded himself with. This is the short list and does not count the teeming swamp of anti-Semites like Israel-loathing Islamist professors Rashid Khalidi and Edward Said and others going back to his childhood:

  • The “court Jews” who sold their souls to the devil in exchange for the seductive allure of access to power. One of many examples is Rahm Emanuel, who curried favor as White House Chief of Staff for his figurative 10-minutes of fame and effectively sold out his Israeli-born father and the land his father heroically fought for in the early years of Israel’s existence.
  • Robert Malley, longtime security adviser to Mr. Obama and now his new ISIS czar, is a fan of Hamas and Hezbollah, and has often called for an end to all aid to Israel. Wikipedia says he’s the son of Simon Malley, an Egyptian-born Jewish journalist, and Barbara Silverstein, a New Yorker who worked for the U.N. delegation of the Algerian National Liberation Front. Both loathed Israel and apparently passed their toxic DNA onto their son.
  • Dennis Ross, Mr. Obama’s former special adviser for the Persian Gulf and Southwest Asia, which included Iran, participated in 12 years of failed Israeli-Palestinian “peace” efforts. He once suggested a plan that translated today would mean listening to the 22 hostile states that surround Israel and saying “majority rules!”
  • George Soros, the Hungarian-born Jewish multibillionaire, has devoted his entire life to far-left causes. Perhaps as a dress rehearsal for bringing down big bad America, he was responsible for breaking the bank of England and also implicated in the Asian financial crisis that broke the bank of Thailand et al. He has also founded and funded numerous groups that work unstintingly to bring about Israel’s destruction. He is known as Obama’s “puppet master,” meaning that his money essentially calls the shots on both America’s domestic and foreign policies. According to Richard Poe’s book, The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Sixties Radicals Seized Control of the Democratic Party, the Soros cabal is really “a network of radicals dedicated to transforming our constitutional republic into a socialist hive.” Read about the vast scope of the radical organizations Soros funds here, and why he is considered the “godfather of the left” here.
  • Hillary Clinton, says Dick Morris, has had “relationships with terrorists [that] began in the mid-1980s when she served on the Board of the New World Foundation—which gave funds to the Palestine Liberation Organization [when] the PLO was officially recognized by the U.S. government as a terrorist organization.” As a lackey of and putative heir to Obama’s, ahem, legacy, Hillary’s rancid relationship with Israel is well known.
  • Susan Rice, former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. and current National Security Advisor, advocated ending all U.S. military aid to Israel and has inspired dozens of articles with titles like these in CommentaryMagazine.com: “Susan Rice Is Doing Something at the UN: Targeting Israel” and “What Was Susan Rice’s Embarrassing Anti-Israel Tirade Supposed to Accomplish?
  • Lee Hamilton, former Indiana congressman, whom Ed Lasky calls the eminence grise of Obama’s Mideast policy and who has suggested that the U.S. should pressure Israel to surrender the Golan Heights and leave the West Bank, said not a word about dismantling Hamas or Hezbollah!
  • Zbigniew Brzezinski, an Obama advisor and longtime Israel loather, suggested that the Obama administration should tell Israel that the U.S. will attack Israeli jets if they try to attack Iran.
  • John Brennan, former Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and current head of the CIA, suggested that Mr. Obama & Co. “reach out” to Hezbollah. He has also said that jihadists and Islamists are not enemies of America because jihad is a holy struggle…”
  • Valerie Jarrett, Iranian-born Muslim and Senior Advisor to Obama, is described in a riveting article by Karin McQuillan in American Thinker as the power behind both Obamas. McQuillan also elaborates on Barack Obama’s envy problem, which is central, I believe, to his Jewish problem. More on this below.
  • And of course John Kerry, who on Wednesday, speaking directly for his boss, spent over an hour on TV engaging in egregious historical revisionism and fairytale bromides to essentially inflict a two-state solution on Israel, with partners who to this day do not—and have sworn they never will—accept a Jewish state in their midst. My favorite line was Mr. Kerry saying that Israel could be Jewish or democratic, but not both. Duh.

EYES AND EARS…THE OLD RELIABLE STANDBYS

Why was I was confident that Obama’s burning mission—his obsession—was to destroy Israel?

The first reason is that I trust what I see and hear.

Who can forget Mr. Obama’s claim that in the 20 years he sat in the pews of “Reverend” Jeremiah Wright’s “church,” he heard not one of the uncountable instances of virulent anti-American and anti-Semitic rants. But unless he was clinically deaf, of course he both heard and tacitly agreed with Wright—especially when it came to the Jews.

Impossible to forget the interview with George Stephanopoulos when Mr. Obama referred to “my Muslim faith”—which he did not correct but his host rushed to correct. I’m Jewish and I can promise you of the 14 million Jews in the world, not one would ever refer to “my Buddhist faith,” just as not one of the 1.3-billion Christians in the world would ever refer to “my Zoroastrian faith.” Plain and simple, it appeared that Mr. Obama experienced what old Sigmund would call a Freudian slip, i.e., when you accidently blurt out the truth.

In addition to his psychological inability to utter the words “Islamic terrorism,” Mr. Obama has consistently lectured us about Islam’s immense contribution to America (my history teachers strangely omitted this revelation). We know he was raised in his formative years in Indonesia, attended a Muslim madrassa, and even recalled as an adult that “the sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer.” Of course, he also said that, “Whatever we once were, we are no longer a Christian nation” and, speaking at the U.N., “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.” That may play well in Indonesia, but it’s completely alien to those of us who believe in free speech.

Two other indelible events were when the Prime Minister of Israel came to the White House in 2010 and was left waiting for over an hour when Mr. Obama abruptly ended their meeting to eat dinner, sending the PM out the side door, and when he intrusively meddled in an Israeli election (while pontificating that there should be no meddling in the election that just repudiated his entire tenure in office). Just as indelible was the sight of Mr. Obama literally bowing deeply at the waist to the theocratic leader of Saudi Arabia and despots just like him.

We have good evidence that the Saudis paid for Mr. Obama’s education at Harvard Law School. And that the Saudis, until the Iran deal went through, were sworn enemies of Israel. Could Mr. Obama have orchestrated U.N. Resolution 2334 to please his moneybags benefactors?

But most compelling is what the book Mr. Obama studied, the Koran, says about Jews, none of it good. For instance: “Oh Muslim…there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him.”

This is a man who may call himself a Christian—in spite of the fact that when he spoke at Georgetown University, the nation’s oldest Catholic and Jesuit school—he had the school cover up the name of Jesus Christ with black cloths—but it is clear that his heart and soul and politics lie squarely in the Muslim world—the world that loathes both Jews and Israel.

As I said, eyes and ears.

BEHAVIOR

The second reason for my conviction that Mr. Obama’s mission was to destroy Israel derived from two powerful lessons I learned from being a psychotherapist for over two decades. The first, simply stated, is that you are what you do. Not how you describe yourself or your lofty plans, but what you actually do in this life. Your behavior.

Everything I’ve observed about Mr. Obama’s behavior—what he does—from the anti-Israel, Jew-hating people he associated with in his past, to the anti-Israel, Jew-hating people he’s chosen for high positions in his administration, to the pastor whose pews he sat in for 20 years (with ears wide opened), to his indefensibly rude and contemptuous behavior toward the Prime Minister of Israel, to his anti-Israel benefactors—not only the Saudis but George Soros—to his latest treachery at the U.N., strengthens my conviction.

Finally, what I learned is that the strongest human emotion is not hatred, not anger, and not vengeance, but jealousy! When you peel back the layers of emotion—whether it’s in the commission of a crime like theft or even murder or hatred of Jews and Israel—jealousy is almost always the animating force.

Mr. Obama and his minions see the pathetic lack of creativity, of innovation, of an elevated standard-of-living, and of progress in the community of Arabs as maddening.

First, they were humiliated when at the founding of Israel in 1948 , powerful Arab armies attacked the fledgling state and were annihilated by the bedraggled survivors of the Holocaust,

Second, the arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat decided in the late 1960s to name the disgruntled Arabs “Palestinians,” effectively relegating them to perpetual victim status and allowing the world to watch them accomplish little more than sending their children on suicide-bombing missions and then naming a street after them and collecting a stipend for their “sacrifice.”

Third, to this day they remain pathetically dependent on another ineffectual U.N. agency—the United Nations Relief and Works Agency [UNRWA], which has exploited them in the same way that Democrat politics have kept African-Americans in abject poverty for over 60 years, with high crime rates and inferior education, while promising them the moon.

When Mr. Obama & Co. contrast this embarrassing history with the jaw-dropping evolution of the Jewish state—its trailblazing technology and medical innovations, its symphonies, sports teams, booming economy and military might—it’s infuriating to them. They get angry, crazed with anger, murderous with anger.

But under the fury is jealousy. They can’t help it. What you see is the anger because anger feels good and jealousy feels bad. It’s that simple.

MR. OBAMA’S IMPOTENCE

In the case of the latest punishing U.N. resolution, however, it is pure conceit on the part of Mr. Obama & Co. to imagine that it will make any difference at all.

First and foremost, the powerful State of Israel does not take its marching orders from anyone except its democratically-elected officials, certainly not from a body like the U.N. that has seen fit to condemn Israel dozens of times while true monster states only once or not at all. In less than a month, Israel will have a true friend in the White House with President-elect Trump, Vice President-elect Pence, and virtually all of Mr. Trump’s cabinet and staff choices.

Personally, if I could offer Mr. Trump one suggestion, it would be to throw the entire, utterly useless, money-wasting United Nations out of the United States! This is exactly what Fox News commentator Charles Krauthammer suggested the other night, to send this feckless excuse for an organization to Zimbabwe, and as for the “good real estate in downtown New York City…Trump ought to find a way to put his name on it and turn it into condos.”

Vic Rosenthal, aka Abu Yehuda, describes yet more impotence. Is the resolution binding? No. Does it make settlements illegal? No. It is a Chapter VI resolution, defined as a “recommendation.” Does it make settlements illegal? No. It just asserts that they are, but the legal case is weak. Does it mean that Israel is “occupying Palestinian territory? No…that is just the U.N.‘s opinion. In fact, there is no such state or territory or entity called “Palestine” and declarations by the U.N. can’t make it so.

How bad is this for Israel? It has no significance in international law, it will not cause Israel to withdraw from the territories, and it might even spur Israel to build more in the territories and Jerusalem or even extend Israeli law to parts of Judea and Samaria. [Read the entire riveting article to see that every attempt by Mr. Obama to “put it” to Israel is the very definition of impotence].

WHAT NOW?

Writer and editor Ruth S. King says that her “proposal for a daring act by Israel [is to] leave the United Nations. Pack up, close the Permanent Mission to the United Nations and find real jobs for all the bureaucrats, pseudo diplomats and ancillary staff.”

Writer Victor Sharpe asks: Is there any light in this bleak picture? He cites Professor Barry Rubin, director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center: “Israel is not going to allow a president with no credibility, who clearly doesn’t understand what’s at stake, fails to support his Arab allies, is soft on his Iranian and Syrian enemies, doesn’t learn from his past errors, is sacrificing U.S. interests in the region, and pays no attention to what’s happening in Egypt, to determine its future.”

Lt. Col. Ralph Peters sums up Mr. Obama’s Middle East policy quite nicely: “Praise Islam, ignore Christians, blame Jews.”

It is fitting to end with the prescient words of Mark Twain (aka Samuel Clemens), the great American writer who penned the following words in 1899 in Harper’s Magazine:

“The Egyptian, the Babylonian, and the Persian rose, filled the planet with sound and splendor, then faded to dream-stuff and passed away. The Greek and Roman followed, made a vast noise and they are gone. Other peoples have sprung up, and held their torch high for a time, but it burned out and they sit in twilight now or have vanished. The Jew saw them all, beat them all, and is now what he always was, exhibiting no decadence, no infirmities of age, no weakening of his parts, no slowing of his energies, no dulling of his alert and aggressive mind. All things are mortal, but the Jew. All other forces pass, but he remains. What is the secret of his immortality?”

12/29/16

A Saga of Bitterness and Hope

Arlene from Israel

Regrettably, I encountered a transmission problem of significant proportions when I sent out my last email posting, “Anger, and Not Panic,” written in response to the Security Council Resolution 2334 which passed because of Obama’s decision to abstain.  It was a brief piece, providing reassurance as to the limits of the damage from this perfidy.  But somewhere between one-third and one-half of my readers never received it.

The problem is not solved, although I hope it will be by some time next week.  Know that I am doing my best and mighty frustrated.

~~~~~~~~~~

I will not resend that email because I want to move on. It can be found on this site.

But I do highly recommend an analysis that has just come out from Alan Baker, Director of the Institute for Contemporary Affairs at the Jerusalem Center and the head of the Global Law Forum.  I think you will find this article highly informative and considerably reassuring.

http://jcpa.org/dangers-un-security-council-resolution-2334-2016/

Credit: JCPA

~~~~~~~~~~

The bitterness?  It’s palpable. There’s a sense of betrayal, of being knifed from multiple directions.

That is because of Obama’s stance, which is a reversal of US policy and former commitments. In his 2011 address to the UN he said repeatedly that a genuine peace can be achieved only via direct negotiations between Israel and the PA. “Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the United Nations,” he declared.  This rather confirms that his motivation for his current stance is not “peace” at all, but sticking it to Israel.  Not that this comes as a surprise.

And because no other nation on the Council stood with Israel (I’ll come back to this).

And because the resolution itself is so shockingly one-sided – lacking perspective and anything resembling justice, relying instead on a gross distortion of historical reality:

[] It refers to all Israeli presence beyond the Green Line as “a flagrant violation of international law.”  This means the Kotel and Har HaBayit and much, much more, including the Mount of Olives, where Jews have been buried for 3,000 years.

[] It refers to all territory beyond the Green Line as “occupied Palestinian territory” and demands that Israel cease “all settlement activity” – which is Israel’s “legal obligation.”

~~~~~~~~~~

These are facts that refute the position of this resolution:

[] The British Mandate for Palestine of 1922, passed unanimously by the League of Nations, was an article of international law.  It recognized the Jewish historical connection to the land, and conferred upon Britain responsibility for establishing a Jewish homeland in Palestine.  Britain was to “encourage…close settlement by Jews on the land.”  (This was in ALL of Palestine.)

[] The partition plan of 1947, which proposed dividing Palestine into two states carried no weight legally because it was merely a recommendation by the UN General Assembly.  In any event, the Arabs rejected it.  The Mandate stood.

[] Israel declared independence on a portion of Palestine in 1948. The remainder remained unclaimed Mandate land.  There is a principle in customary international law that when a new state is founded, its borders follow the borders of the administrative entity that existed prior.

[] As soon as (actually, even before) independence was declared, the Arab states declared war.

When the War of Independence was over in 1949, armistice lines were drawn.  THIS was the Green Line. To Israel’s east, the armistice line was between Israel and Jordan.   There was no mention of “Palestinians.”  The armistice agreement signed between Israel and Jordan stated specifically that the armistice line (i.e. the Green Line) was only a temporary line that would not prejudice a permanent border, to be determined via negotiations.  At that point, Jordan occupied Judea and Samaria and eastern Jerusalem illegally – it acquired the area in an offensive war and its occupation of the area was recognized by only two states in the world.

[] During the Six Day War of 1967, Jordan broke its armistice with Israel by joining in attack.  By the end of the war, Israel had liberated Judea and Samaria, and east Jerusalem.  This was Mandate land.  What is more, Israel’s right to it was strengthened by the fact that it was secured in an defensive war.

[] Within months, the Security Council had passed Resolution 242. It did NOT call for Israel to return to the Green Line.  It recognized that this line did not constitute a secure border for Israel, something to which all nations are entitled.  It said that the final border would be determined via negotiations.  Again: the negotiations were to be with Jordan; there was no mention of “Palestinians.”

[] In 1994, Jordan and Israel signed a peace treaty. The border determined by this treaty followed the border of the Mandate. In the area of Judea and Samaria, this is the Jordan River.

[] In 1995, the Interim Accord of Oslo was signed (and was witnessed by US President Bill Clinton). It divided Judea and Samaria into three administrative areas.  Area C is under full Israeli civil and military control.  There is NOTHING in Oslo that prohibits Israel from building in C.

Under Oslo – which actually does not speak specifically of a Palestinian “state” – a final status resolution was to be determined by negotiations between Israel and the PA.

As Dore Gold, President of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs notes, The Palestinians themselves agreed in the 1995 Interim Agreement that the issue of Israeli settlements in the West Bank should be addressed as an item for negotiation between the parties.

http://jcpa.org/israeli-settlements-become-legally-contentious-issue-un/

~~~~~~~~~~

Please note that in none of the above is there a legal prohibition on Israeli building in Judea and Samaria, or now, at a minimum, in Area C.

There is absolutely no indication in “international law” that Israel belongs only behind the 1947 armistice line.  Be aware that the Palestinian Arabs and their supporters invoke “international law” as it suits them.

There is no international law that prohibits an Israeli presence in any part of Judea and Samaria, that is, that determines that it is all “occupied Palestinian land.”

The Palestinian Arabs have done a superb job of promoting falsehoods that are now adopted by a bulk of the world’s nations, without regard for justice or historical reality.

~~~~~~~~~~

A quick word about Israel’s alleged “occupation” of Judea and Samaria.  First, a nation cannot “occupy” its own land, and this is Israeli land according to the international law of the Mandate.

Occupation occurs only when the army of one sovereign state moves into the territory of another sovereign state.  But Judea and Samaria was not the territory of any other sovereign state: Jordan was there illegally.

The Geneva Convention does not apply to this situation, although is sometimes claimed.

~~~~~~~~~~

I spoke above about Obama’s reversal of US policy, and his decision to abstain.  But, as has now been revealed, he actually helped to craft the resolution and pushed it vigorously behind the scenes.

Israeli Ambassador to the US Ron Dermer has told CNN that there is solid evidence of Obama’s orchestration of the resolution.

“We will present this evidence to the new administration through the appropriate channels. If they want to share it with the American people they are welcome to do it.”  As Dermer put it, Obama was behind the “ganging up” on Israel at the Security Council.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/222310

According to Netanyahu spokesman David Keyes, the solid information comes from Arab countries and others in the international community.

~~~~~~~~~~

On Sunday night, Netanyahu went to the Kotel to light the second Chanukah candle. Standing there, he declared:

I ask those same countries that wish us a Happy Chanukah how they could vote for a U.N. resolution which says that this place, in which we are now celebrating Chanukah, is occupied territory.

The Western Wall is not occupied.  The Jewish Quarter is not occupied.” (Emphasis added)

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/patrick-goodenough/western-wall-not-occupied-netanyahu-says-un-resolution-we-were-here

Credit: prime minister’s office

Our prime minister is very very angry, and with excellent reason.  Yesterday, he declared that Israel will not “turn the other cheek.”

~~~~~~~~~~

US Ambassador to Israel Dan Shapiro was called in for a 45 minute dressing down by Prime Minister Netanyahu.  I wish I could have been a fly on the wall for that meeting.  Other ambassadors were also called in, but Netanyahu met only with Shapiro, because of the expectations of US friendship that had been so severely dashed.

Credit: matzav

~~~~~~~~~~

As to the other nations on the Security Council: five permanent members, China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom, and the United States, and ten non-permanent members elected for two-year terms by the General Assembly: Angola, Egypt, Japan, Malaysia, New Zealand, Senegal, Spain, Ukraine, Uruguay, and Venezuela…

The four that sponsored the resolution after Egypt withdrew were Malaysia, New Zealand, Senegal and Venezuela. Israel does not have diplomatic ties with Venezuela or Malaysia. The ambassadors to New Zealand and Senegal were recalled for consultations.

The situation with Senegal was particularly disappointing.   Israel has been providing agricultural technology to small farmers, and through Israel’s Agency for International Development Cooperation 4,000 farms were being supported.

Netanyahu has now ordered a cut-off of all assistance to Senegal, as well as the cancellation of the upcoming visit of the Senegalese foreign minister.  The message: you cannot accept Israel’s outstretched hand, gladly taking the assistance offered, and then actively promote a resolution that is destructive to Israel.

Similarly, has assistance to Angola been terminated.

~~~~~~~~~~

As to the other nations, some were a lost cause, of course.  But in other instances, a different response might have been expected.

Theresa May, new prime minister of the UK, speaks in very pro-Israel terms, at least part of the time.  The UK, as a permanent member of the Council, could have cast the necessary veto, but voted for the resolution. Netanyahu has now cancelled a planned meeting with May at the sidelines of the Davos World Economic Forum. May declares herself “disappointed.”

And the Ukraine, which is traditionally considered a friend of Israel, voted for the resolution anyway.  Netanyahu has now cancelled the visit of Ukrainian Prime Minister Volodymyr Groysman, who was due here next week. Ukrainians at first were miffed about this cancellation, and expressed surprise at Netanyahu’s anger. “The text of the resolution is balanced,” said the Ukrainian foreign ministry, which subsequently spoke about expectation that warm ties would endure.

(It is being charged, by the way, that V.P. Biden placed a call to the Ukraine that “encouraged” support on the resolution.)

~~~~~~~~~~

Netanyahu has been criticized in some quarters for what is seen as an over-reaction.  I see it otherwise.  Time to hold our heads up in an attitude of self-respect: Don’t claim friendship with us and knife us in the back when it suits.  Some of Netanyahu’s positions will undoubtedly mellow over time, but it’s not bad to deliver a new message now.

Look at this: Ukrainian MP Alexander Feldman, who is Jewish, has announced on his Facebook page that he intends to submit a bill for moving the Ukrainian embassy to Jerusalem.  He hopes this will bring the Ukrainian-Israeli relationship to a whole new level.

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/222380

Doesn’t mean this proposal will succeed – it flies directly in the face of the resolution. But would Feldman even have suggested this if not for Netanyahu’s anger?

~~~~~~~~~~

Netanyahu is also evaluating Israel’s relationship with the UN.

~~~~~~~~~~

Defense Minister Lieberman has instructed COGAT [Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories] to have no interaction with the PA except on security matters.  See more on what this entails here:

http://www.jewishpress.com/news/breaking-news/defense-minister-liberman-orders-cogat-to-cut-non-security-ties-with-pa/2016/12/25/

The simple fact of the matter is that the PA is behind this resolution. Their current gloating is obscene.  This has been their intention all along: to achieve ends without negotiations and without compromise.

This is a cartoon that Fatah put on its Facebook page after the resolution passed.  The Arabic is the list of nations that supported the vote.  It suggests an international endorsement of terrorism.

https://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=19588

~~~~~~~~~~

Lieberman also had something to say about France: The French, ludicrously, are planning a “peace conference” on January 15, five days before Obama leaves office. He has called it a “modern day Dreyfus trial. There’s only one difference, this time, instead of the defendant being one Jew, it will be the entire nation of Israel and the State of Israel.

This summit’s entire purpose is to undermine the State of Israel’s security and tarnish its good name.” (Emphasis added)

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4898780,00.html

(The Dreyfus affair, at the end of the 19th century, was a French scandal during which an innocent Captain Alfred Dreyfus, a Jew, was convicted of treason. Anti-Semitism was at work in France then, and now.)

~~~~~~~~~~

My readers can rest assured that Israel has no intention whatsoever of halting building in Judea and Samaria, and eastern Jerusalem.  Quite the contrary.

~~~~~~~~~~

As I complete this and prepare for transmission, I am aware that Secretary of State Kerry is scheduled to give a speech outlining his vision of a “comprehensive peace” between Israel and the PA.  I’m sure it will be chock full of untenable ideas and outright lies that seek to further the damage to Israel.  There is nothing but nothing he could say that would be constructive or original.  How much damage this will do remains to be seen.  I must deal with this in my next posting.

Recently, Kerry sent out a “Happy Chanukah” message.

One blogger replied, “Go choke on a latke.” On that note, I close.

12/28/16

Red Russia, the Red Jihad and Israel Under Siege

By: Cliff Kincaid | Accuracy in Media

Patrick Buchanan’s provocative column, “Is Europe’s future Merkel or Le Pen?” reflects a limited and bad choice for America and Europe. Both of these leaders serve Russian interests. German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s pro-immigration policies have destabilized Europe, leading to the rise of pro-Putin right-wing political parties. Marine Le Pen of France’s National Front party, one of those pro-Putin political parties, wants to destroy NATO, a long-time Russian goal.

The terrible choices facing the United States mean that we are in the biggest crisis the West has faced since World War II. The dilemma outlined by Patrick Buchanan means that the incoming Trump administration has to recognize that Germany, the most important country in Europe, is in the hands of a Russian agent of influence. Despite running as the candidate of the conservative-leaning Christian Democratic Union, Merkel has destabilized her country and much of Europe by facilitating a Muslim invasion. Her involvement in the Communist Party of East Germany, when it was a major base of Soviet espionage operations, goes a long way toward explaining her curious behavior.

In a column titled, “The Suicide of Germany,” Guy Millière writes, “The attack in Berlin on December 19, 2016 was predictable. German Chancellor Angela Merkel created the conditions that made it possible. She bears an overwhelming responsibility.” He notes, “When she decided to open the doors of Germany to hundreds of thousands of Muslims from the Middle East and more distant countries, she must have known that jihadists were hidden among the people flooding in. She also must have known that the German police had no way of controlling the mass that entered and would be quickly overwhelmed by the number of people it would have to control. She did it anyway.” (emphasis added)

The “she must have known” formulation is more evidence of a deliberate policy to destabilize Europe. She intends to run for re-election in 2017.

Labeled a “populist” by Buchanan, Marine Le Pen, the leading candidate for the presidency of France in 2017, talks a lot about French sovereignty but acts like a tool of Moscow. The Russia Today (RT) propaganda channel highlights her call for “closer ties with Russia” and opposition to U.S.-led NATO.

In events that have shocked the liberal media, Trump and/or his advisers have been reported to be meeting with representatives of European right-wing political parties, some of them pro-Putin. However, Trump’s national security adviser, Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, has written in his own book that there is a “Russia connection” to Islamic terror networks and “many of the KGB’s safe houses, station headquarters, and secure communications networks were put at the disposal of terror groups.” This implicates Vladimir Putin, former officer and head of the KGB, in the conflicts that have spilled over into Europe and Israel.

Meanwhile, as commentators in the U.S. criticize the Obama administration for abstaining on the anti-Israel United Nations resolution, it is no surprise that Russia and China both voted for it. Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich did not miss the significance of this anti-Israel vote, commenting, “So Russia having illegally occupied Crimea and eastern Ukraine votes to condemn Israel for ‘occupied lands.’ We are supposed to be impressed.” He might have mentioned China’s own illegal seizures of territory.

“Russia has never ruled Israel,” notes one Israeli commentator, Adam Eliyahu Berkowitz, “but the Russian Army has never stood as close to Jerusalem as it does today.” Professor Efraim Inbar of the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies tells the publication, “It should be remembered that Russia sides with Iran, supports Hezbollah, and even has relations with Hamas.”

Turkey, a member of NATO, has since joined with Russia and Iran, the new powers in the region, for talks. It has been forced into the arms of Russia because of the Obama administration’s failure to save Syria from Russian aggression that propped up an unpopular and repressive dictatorship. In truth, Obama help accelerate the conflict when he ordered his CIA to support “rebels” against the Syrian regime that were linked to jihadist groups. They were no match for the superior Russian and Iranian forces which intervened on the side of the Syrian regime. Up to 500,000 were killed.

Trump’s decision to move the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem will have symbolic value. But it does nothing to protect Israel from an attack by its regional enemies bearing Russian arms.

One way to turn the tide is to order the CIA out of the terror-supporting business and start shining the light on Russia’s historical links to Islamic terrorism, known as the Red Jihad. These connections, which still exist, are not only a threat to Israel but demonstrate that “Red Russia” is behind the immigration crisis and the Muslim invasion of Europe.

Obama is leaving the White House. His ability to damage Israel and other U.S. allies will soon end. But Putin has only just begun to fight. What’s at stake is the control of Europe and the entire Middle East.

If President Trump falls for Putin’s offers of a truce, he will demonstrate to his political enemies and even his supporters that he was in fact a dupe of the Russians.


Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at [email protected] View the complete archives from Cliff Kincaid.