Help Pseudo-Palestinians Emigrate


John R. Houk

© June 13, 2017

 

It has always been my opinion that a Two-State Solution would NEVER be a harbinger for peace between Israel and the Arabs that call themselves Palestinians. A Palestinian State would merely be a launching ground for Islamic terrorist attacks against Israel. The result would be Israeli military incursions to punish an independent Palestine for allowing the terrorist launching pads. Or an independent Palestine might have the hutzpah claim the terrorism is military incursions for whatever fake/false reason given.

 

The only raison d’être for a Palestinian State existence would be to end Israel’s existence and to kill Jews. Because of Muslim animus against Israel, a One-State Solution is the best solution.

 

The best One-State Solution is to find a way to move Jew-hating Muslims out of any area that is a part of ancient Jewish heritage.

 

Dr. Martin Sherman has written a two-part essay touching on the logistics and feasibility of an ethical fashion to aid Jew-hating Muslims to emigrate to another Arab-Muslim nation. I found out about Dr. Sherman’s from the Facebook Group “No Palestinian State!” (If you are a Pro-Israel kind of person you should go there and request to be a member and add to the discussion.)

 

The title is “INTO THE FRAY: The Humanitarian Paradigm – Answering FAQs”. You can read the 6/2/17 Part One HERE. Part Two is cross posted below.

 

JRH 6/13/17

Please Support NCCR

*****************

INTO THE FRAY: The Humanitarian Paradigm – Answering FAQs (Part 2)

 

Sequel to the dispelling of doubts regarding the feasibility – and morality – of largescale, financially incentivized emigration as the only non-kinetic approach for resolution of the Israel-Palestinian impasse.

 

By Dr. Martin Sherman

June 9, 2017 06:48

Israel National News – Arutz Sheva 7

 

The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty. -attributed to Winston Churchill

 

Readers will recall that last week I began a two part response to FAQs (Frequently Asked Questions) relating to the practical feasibility/moral acceptability of my proposed Humanitarian Paradigm (HP), which prescribes, among other measures, large-scale financially incentivized emigration of the Palestinian-Arabs, living across the pre-1967 lines as the only route to attain long-term survivability for Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.

 

To recap briefly

 

In last week’s column, I addressed the question of the overall cost of the funded emigration project, and showed that, given the political will to implement it, it would be eminently affordable – even if Israel had to shoulder the burden alone. If other industrial nations could be induced to participate, the total cost would be an imperceptible percentage of their GDP.

 

I then went on to demonstrate that there is ample evidence indicating a wide-spread desire in large sections of the Palestinian-Arab population to emigrate permanently in search of more secure and prosperous live elsewhere. This point was underscored by a recent Haaretz article, describing how thousands of Gazans had fled their home to Greece, undertaking perilous risk to extricate themselves from the harrowing hardships imposed on them by the ill-conceived endeavor to foist statehood on the Palestinian-Arabs.  Significantly, according to the Haaretz report, none of them blamed Israel for their plight—but rather the ruling Hamas-regime, which, it will be recalled, was elected by popular vote to replace the rival Fatah faction, ousted because of its corruption and poor governance.

 

Finally, I dealt with the question of the prospective host nations, pointing out that the funded Palestinian-Arab émigrés would not arrive as an uncontrolled deluge of destitute humanity, but as an orderly regulated stream of relatively affluent immigrants spread over about a decade-and-a-half, whose absorption would entail significant capital inflows for the host nation’s economy.  Moreover, given the fact that, globally, migrants total almost a quarter billion, Palestinian-Arab migration of several hundred thousand a year would comprise a small fraction of one percent of the overall number—hardly an inconceivable prospect.

 

Following this short summary of previously addressed FAQs, we can now move on to tackle several additional ones.

FAQ 4: Won’t fear of fratricide deter recipients?

 

One of the most commonly raised reservations as to the practical applicability of the HP is that potential recipients of the relocation/rehabilitation grants would be deterred from accepting them because of threats of retribution from their kin-folk who allegedly would view such action as perfidious betrayal of the Palestinian-Arabs’ national aspirations.

 

In contending with this question, it is necessary to distinguish between two possible scenarios, in which such internecine intimidation will be either a phenomenon whose scope is (a) limited; or (b) wide-spread and pervasive.

 

Clearly, if the former is true, it is unlikely to have any significant inhibiting impact on the conduct of prospective recipients of the relocation/rehabilitation grants.

 

If, however, the assumption is that the latter is the case, several points need to be made:

– If this objection to the HP is to have any credence, its proponents must present evidence (as opposed to unproven supposition) that potential violent opponents of the HP program have the ability not only to inflict harm on prospective recipients (as opposed to issuing empty threats), but that they can sustain such ability over time.

– In this regard, it should be kept in mind that implementation of the HP entails the disarming, dismantling and disbanding —if need be, coercively—of the ruling Palestinian regime, and reinstating Israeli governance over all territory under Palestinian-Arab control.

Inhibiting internecine intimidation

 

The HP is hardly unique with regard to this latter point. All other proffered policy alternatives for the failed, foolhardy two-state formula entail such measures—either by explicit stipulation, or implicit inference—since preserving the current Palestinian regime intact would clearly preclude their implementation.  Indeed, they are even endorsed by some pundits who do not discount the eventual emergence of a Palestinian state, such as Middle East Forum president, Daniel Pipes.

 

Clearly, the dispersal of the central Palestinian governing body, together with the defanging of its armed organs and the deployment of Israeli forces in their stead, will greatly curtail (although not entirely eliminate) the scope for internecine intimidation and the capacity to dissuade potential recipients of the relocation/rehabilitation grants from availing themselves of the funds.

 

In addition, Israel should task its own formidable military and intelligence services to protect prospective recipients of these grants by identifying, intervening and thwarting attempts to intimidate those seeking to enhance their lives by extricating themselves from the control of the disastrously dysfunctional regime under which they live.

 

Moreover, the international community should be called upon to cooperate with and participate in this principled endeavor to prevent fratricidal elements within Palestinian society from depriving their brethren of the opportunity of better, safer lives. After all, violence against Palestinian-Arabs, who choose to reside within any given host nation, would comprise an intolerable violation of that country’s national sovereignty.

 

Appalling indictment of “Palestinian” society?

  

Of course invoking the specter of large-scale fratricide as an impediment to the acceptance of the HP is an appalling indictment of Palestinian-Arab society.

 

After all, the inescapable implication of such an objection to the HP’s practical applicability is that its acceptance by otherwise willing recipients, wishing to avail themselves of opportunity to seek security and prosperity elsewhere, can only be impeded by violent extortion of their kin-folk.

 

Accordingly, if the concern over large-scale fratricide is serious, it is in fact, at once, both the strongest argument in favor of the HP and against the establishment of a Palestinian state.  After all, two unavoidable conclusions necessarily flow from it: (a) any predicted reluctance to accept the relocation/rehabilitating grants would not be a reflection of the free will of Palestinian-Arabs, but rather a coerced outcome that came about despite the fact that it is not; (b) Similarly, the endeavor for a Palestinian state is not one that manifests any authentic desire of the “Palestinian people” but rather one imposed on them, despite the fact that it does not.

 

As a result, any Palestinian-Arab state established under the pervasive threat of lethal retribution against any dissenter will not be an expression of genuine national aspirations but of extortion and coercion of large segments of Palestinian-Arab society, who would otherwise opt for an alternative outcome.

 

In summation then, if the fear of fratricide can be shown to be a tangible threat, it should not be considered a reason to abandon the HP formula. Quite the opposite! It should be considered an unacceptable phenomenon to be resolutely suppressed –by both Israel and the international community—in order to permit the Palestinian-Arab public the freedom of choice to determine their future.

 

FAQ 5: Would funded emigration not be considered unethical “ethnic cleansing”?

I have addressed the question of the moral merits of the HP extensively elsewhere (see “Palestine”: Who Has Moral High Ground?), where I demonstrate that the HP blueprint will be the most humane of all options if it succeeds, and the least inhumane if it does not.

 

I shall therefore refrain from repeating much of the arguments presented previously and focus on one crucial issue: The comparative moral merits of the widely endorsed two-state paradigm (TSS) and those of my proposed Humanitarian Paradigm (HP).

 

Since there is very little doubt (or dispute) as to the domestic nature of any prospective Palestinian state, anyone seeking to disqualify the HP because of its alleged moral shortcomings must be forced to contend with the following question: Who has the moral high-ground?

 

(a) The TSS-proponents, who advocate establishing (yet another) homophobic, misogynistic Muslim-majority tyranny, whose hallmarks would be: gender discrimination, gay persecution, religious intolerance, and political oppression of dissidents? ; or

 

(b) The HP-proponents who advocate providing non-belligerent Palestinian individuals with the opportunity of building a better life for themselves elsewhere, out of harm’s way, free from the recurring cycles of death, destruction and destitution, brought down on them by the cruel, corrupt cliques that have led them astray for decades.

 

Furthermore, TSS advocates should be compelled to clarify why they consider it morally acceptable to offer financial inducements to Jews in Judea-Samaria to evacuate their homes to facilitate the establishment of said homophobic, misogynistic tyranny, which, almost certainly, will become a bastion for Islamist terror; yet they consider it morally reprehensible to offer financial inducements to Arabs in Judea-Samaria to evacuate their homes to prevent the establishment of such an entity?

 

FAQ 6: What about those who remain?

 

This is, of course, a serious question and a detailed response would depend on, among other things, the size of the residual Palestinian-Arab population who refuse any material compensation as an inducement to emigrate.

 

The acuteness of the problem would undoubtedly be a function of its scale. Clearly, the smaller this residual population, the less pressing the need will be to deal with it. For example it seems plausible that if, say, only a hundred thousand Palestinians remain, consideration may well be given to the possibility of offering them Israeli citizenship – subject to stringent security vetting and sworn acceptance of Jewish sovereignty as the sole legitimate source of authority in the land – without endangering the Jewish character of the country.

 

However, it should be remembered that, unlike the two-state approach which advocates perilous concessions, and the one-state prescription which calls for incorporating the Palestinian-Arabs resident across the pre-1967 lines into Israel’s permanent population, the HP does not involve any cataclysmic irreversible measures.

 

At the heart of the HP program is a comprehensive system of material inducements to foster Palestinian emigration, which includes generous incentives for leaving and harsh disincentives for staying. As detailed elsewhere, such incentives would entail substantial monetary grants, up to 100 years GDP per capita per family in Palestinian terms; while the latter entail phased withdrawal of services (including provision of water, electricity, fuel, port facilities and so on) that Israel currently provides to the Palestinian-Arabs across the pre-1967 lines.

 

Accordingly, should it be found that the initial proposed inducements are ineffective, the former can be made more enticing, and/or the latter more daunting, until the proffered package is acceptable.

 

Seen in this context, it is difficult to envisage that many non-belligerent Palestinian-Arabs would prefer to endure the rigors of discontinued provision of services rather than avail themselves of the generous relocation/rehabilitation funds—especially given the dispersal of the Palestinian regime as an alternative source of such services.

 

 FAQ 7 What if the same kind of offer were made to induce Jewish emigration?

 

In addressing this question several points should be borne in mind:

 

The offer would clearly not be made by an Israeli government. After all, the HP is intended as a measure to: (a) Ensure – not undermine – the survival of Israel as the nation-state of the Jews, and (b) Relieve the genuine humanitarian predicament of the Palestinian-Arabs—precipitated by the dysfunctional administration they have been subjected to since the 1993 Oslo process—not Jewish disgruntlement with the imperfect functioning of the Israeli government.

 

Of course, it would be impossible to prevent Arab elements from offering Jews financial inducement to emigrate from Israel, but in this regard it should be recalled that: (a) As a sovereign nation Israel can control the financial flows into the country and impede money from hostile sources reaching Israeli citizens, considerably complicating the transfer and receipt of funds. (b) Arab governments have been singularly reticent in providing large sums  to advance the “Palestinian cause” and there is little chance (or evidence) that they would advance the hundreds of billions required to finance large scale Jewish emigration;  (c) The overwhelming majority of Israelis enjoy living standards of an advanced post-industrial nation with a GDP per capita around 20 times higher than that in the Palestinian-administered territories; (d) Accordingly, it would be commensurately more difficult to tempt them to leave. Indeed, sums offered would have to be considerably higher to create a comparable incentive, running into millions rather than hundreds of thousands per family. (e) Moreover, a slew of recent polls show the large majority of Israelis are satisfied with their lives – thus the prospect of material incentives to induce large-scale emigration seems remote.

Urgent Zionist imperative.

 

The HP is the only Zionist-compliant policy prescription that can save Israel from the perilous dangers of the two-state formula and the specter of Lebanonization/Balkanization inherent in other proffered alternatives. Embarking on its implementation is a Zionist imperative that is both urgent and feasible.

_________________

Martin Sherman is the founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies.

Dr. Martin Sherman

The writer served for seven years in operational capacities in the Israeli Defense establishment, was ministerial adviser to Yitzhak Shamir’s government and lectured for 20 years at Tel Aviv University in Political Science, International Relations and Strategic Studies. He has a B.Sc. (Physics and Geology), MBA (Finance), and PhD in political science and international relations, was the first academic director of the Herzliya Conference and is the author of two books and numerous articles and policy papers on a wide range of political, diplomatic and security issues. He is founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies (www.strategicisrael.org).

 

 Born in South Africa, he has lived in Israel since 1971. More from the author

 

© Arutz Sheva, All Rights Reserved

 

Palestinian State Means Israel’s Destruction


John R. Houk

© May 23, 2017

 

About a month ago I found an interesting PragerU video at the G+ Community Islam contribution to America about Israel’s constant offers to give up land for an Arab state to be called Palestine and the Palestinian terrorists constant rejection of the Israeli offers. The owner of the community Roland Oliva posted the video on 4/27/17.

 

The enumeration of the Arabs that call themselves Palestinians constant rejection is well presented on the video. David Brog is the video speaker. His conclusion for Israeli/Arab peace is to accept the existence of the Jewish State of Israel in a Two-State Solution format.

I know it is a bit extreme and politically incorrect, but I have no doubt that a Two-State Solution is workable path. Why? The Multiculturalist believing world will continue to expect Israel to supply the infrastructure operations (electricity, water, etc.) while the fake Palestinian people will continue to find ways to destroy Israel. Hamas controlled Gaza (aka Hamastan) is enough evidence of the parameters of a Two-State Solution.

Rather the defensible survival of the Jewish nation is a One-State Solution with Israel annexing most of Judea and Samaria (known as the West Bank to Multiculturalists and Jew-hating Arabs) and Gaza. Push the Jew-hating Arabs out of the annexed areas. Offer Jordan a small portion of Judea and Samaria next to the Jordanian border. Let Jordan deal with the volatile Arabs that call themselves Palestinians in any way the best suits the maintenance of their government. Then let the chips fall where they may.

 

As a side note, the Hashemite Monarchy of Jordan had to expel Arabs that call themselves Palestinians because old Yasser Arafat tried to dethrone the Monarchy and claim Jordan for himself to launch future attacks against Israel. The Jordanians won that civil war and expelled Arafat and his military cadres. Arabs that consider themselves Palestinians still make up a large chunk of the Jordanian population. These pseudo-Palestinians do not have full citizenship benefits in Jordan undoubtedly due to Arafat’s attempt to root out the Hashemite Monarchy.

 

Here’s the PragerU video but there is more to peace than for Arabs to recognize the existence of a Jewish State.

 

VIDEO: Why Isn’t There a Palestinian State?

 

Posted by  PragerU

Published on Mar 27, 2017

 

Why don’t the Palestinians have their own country? Is it the fault of Israel? Of the Palestinians? Of both parties? David Brog, Executive Director of the Maccabee Task Force, shares the surprising answers.
Donate today to PragerU: http://l.prageru.com/2eB2p0h

Read David Brog’s book, “Reclaiming Israel’s History”. http://l.prageru.com/2nmj8ez

Get PragerU bonus content for free! https://www.prageru.com/bonus-content

Have you taken the pledge for school choice? Click here! http://www.schoolchoicenow.com

Download Pragerpedia on your iPhone or Android! Thousands of sources and facts at your fingertips.

iPhone: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsnbG

Android: http://l.prageru.com/2dlsS5e

Join Prager United to get new swag every quarter, exclusive early access to our videos, and an annual TownHall phone call with Dennis Prager! http://l.prageru.com/2c9n6ys

Join PragerU’s text list to have these videos, free merchandise giveaways and breaking announcements sent directly to your phone! https://optin.mobiniti.com/prageru

Do you shop on Amazon? Click https://smile.amazon.com and a percentage of every Amazon purchase will be donated to PragerU. Same great products. Same low price. Shopping made meaningful.

VISIT PragerU! https://www.prageru.com

FOLLOW us!
PragerU is on Snapchat!
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/prageru
Twitter: https://twitter.com/prageru
Instagram: https://instagram.com/prageru/

JOIN PragerFORCE!
For Students: http://l.prageru.com/2aozfkP
Sponsor a Student: http://l.prageru.com/2aoz2ht

JOIN our Educators Network! http://l.prageru.com/2aoz2y9

Script:

If Israel just allowed the Palestinians to have a state of their own, there would be peace in the Middle East, right? That’s what you hear from UN ambassadors, European diplomats and most college professors.

But what if I told you that Israel has already offered the Palestinians a state of their own – and not just once, but on five separate occasions?

Don’t believe me?

Let’s review the record.

After the breakup of the Ottoman Empire following World War I, Britain took control of most of the Middle East, including the area that constitutes modern Israel.

Seventeen years later, in 1936, the Arabs rebelled against the British, and against their Jewish neighbors.

The British formed a task force – the Peel Commission – to study the cause of the rebellion. The commission concluded that the reason for the violence was that two peoples – Jews and Arabs – wanted to govern the same land.

The answer, the Peel Commission concluded, would be to create two independent states – one for the Jews, and one for the Arabs. A two-state solution. The suggested split was heavily in favor of the Arabs. The British offered them 80 percent of the disputed territory; the Jews, the remaining 20 percent. Yet, despite the tiny size of their proposed state, the Jews voted to accept this offer. But the Arabs rejected it and resumed their violent rebellion. Rejection number one.

Ten years later, in 1947, the British asked the United Nations to find a new solution to the continuing tensions. Like the Peel Commission, the UN decided that the best way to resolve the conflict was to divide the land.

On November 7, 1947, the UN voted to create two states. Again, the Jews accepted the offer. And again, the Arabs rejected it, only this time, they did so by launching an all-out war. Rejection number two.

Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Lebanon and Syria joined the conflict. But they failed. Israel won the war, and got on with the business of building a new nation. Most of the land set aside by the UN for an Arab state – the West Bank and east Jerusalem – became occupied territory; occupied not by Israel, but by Jordan.

Twenty years later, in 1967, the Arabs, led this time by Egypt and joined by Syria and Jordan, once again sought to destroy the Jewish State.

The 1967 conflict, known as the Six Day War, ended in a stunning victory for Israel. Jerusalem and the West Bank, as well as the area known as the Gaza Strip, fell into Israel’s hands. The government split over what to do with this new territory. Half wanted to return the West Bank to Jordan and Gaza to Egypt in exchange for peace. The other half wanted to give it to the region’s Arabs, who had begun referring to themselves as the Palestinians, in the hope that they would ultimately build their own state there.

Neither initiative got very far. A few months later, the Arab League met in Sudan and issued its infamous “Three No’s:” No peace with Israel. No recognition of Israel. No negotiations with Israel. Again, a two-state solution was dismissed by the Arabs, making this rejection number three.

 

For the complete script, visit https://www.prageru.com/courses/foreign-affairs/why-isnt-there-palestinian-state

 

JRH 5/23/17

Please Support NCCR

Funding Hamastan


Bloody Hamas Handout Demand toon

It is horrendously amazing how many Western NGOs, Western governments (via official government agencies) and the international bureaucratic apparatuses of the United Nations support the Islamic terrorist organizations of Hamas and the Palestine Authority (really controlled by the PLO [HERE, HERE and HERE). Hamas and the PA are nothing more Jew-Hatred organizations committed to the destruction of the Jewish Homeland and Jews in general. They are murderous cowards hoodwinking Multiculturalist power-brokers to unwittingly (or maybe even wittingly) to support the evil of murderous Jihad.

 

Rachel Ehrenfeld exposes this money trail of Western Jihad supporters which sadly includes American taxpayers due to the sympathies of Obama’s Left Wing Administration.

 

JRH 5/19/16

Please Support NCCR

********************

Funding Hamastan

 

By Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld

May 16th, 2016 9:18PM

American Center for Democracy

 

Since 1987, the Gaza-based terror group has kept itself in the international spotlight through acts of violence against the Jewish State of Israel. It was designated as terrorist by the Unites States in 1997. In 2006, under the guise of the “Change and Reform” party, it won the elections for the Palestinian Authority and in 2007, after violent confrontations with Fatah, took over the Gaza Strip. Since then, it has escalated its attacks against Israel.

 

Who helps finance Hamas ongoing terrorism against the ‘Zionist entity?’

 

Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood branch in Gaza, was established in December 1987, days into the Palestinian Liberation Organization’s (PLO) first Intifada against Israel. This Sunni terrorist organization controls the Gaza Strip and imposes sharia on its constituents. Unlike the Islamic State (ISIS), which flaunts its radicalism – through their brutal abuse of women and children and indiscriminate slaughter of civilians, mostly other Muslims in Iraq and Syria, mega-attacks in Europe, and a sophisticated social media apparatus, – Hamas manages to portray itself as a victim.

 

Why? Because unlike impatient ISIS, whose agenda is to eliminate all infidels to create now the global Islamic Caliphate, Hamas, which prioritizes the destruction of the Jewish State of Israel, has been the recipient of direct and indirect support of some Muslims states, as well as supposedly Western-oriented organizations such as the European Union the United Nations, and even the United States. These are joined by international Muslim Brotherhood-affiliated and anti-Israeli groups and the international media. They use the guise of humanitarian aid, to assist the Hamas terrorist regime in Gaza politically and financially.

 

The arrival of the Internet in the late 1990s introduced a new, easily-accessible vehicle for Hamas to portray the people it exploits in Gaza as victims of Israeli retaliations rather than its own twisted ideology. The terrorist organization learned that posting photos of wounded children and crying mothers has a considerable effect in the ‘hearts’ and minds’ battle in gaining the support of the international community. Thus, far from safeguarding its own citizen’s rights Hamas’ strategy has become the maximum extraction of civilian casualties from among its constituents.

 

Hamas Islamist indoctrination campaigns are so successful that not only the suppressed Muslims in Gaza are ready to carry out attacks against Israel, but even the brutalized Christians that remain in the Gaza Strip, are complaining not against Hamas for banning Christmas and forcing submission to sharia, but against “Israeli occupation.”

 

Last month marked the celebration of the Annual Palestine Festival for Childhood and Education in Gaza throughout the Hamas-run territory’s school system, most of which is operated and funded by the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA).  The events included young veiled girls and boys in military uniforms, simulating stabbing attacks on Israelis, killing IDF soldiers and ‘heroically’ releasing Palestinian terrorists from Israeli jails.

 

These events were sponsored by the Ramallah-based Bank of Palestine, UK-based Interpal Fund, and the Hamas-controlled University College of Applied Sciences in Gaza, whose funders include the World Bank and European Commission.  While many in the free world would find this link between international aid and a celebration of hatred alarming, it is the norm rather than the exception in the Hamas-ruled coastal enclave, where democratic principals [sic] are quashed and wanton hatred of Israel propagated.

 

The Hamas government receives funding from an array of sources, though lately fewer are doing so publically. Directly, it receives contributions from the international Muslim community, international NGOs, such as the BDS groups, and online. A good example of indirect funding is the $50 million announced by the U.S. “to provide basic humanitarian assistance and create jobs. The money will be distributed by the U.S Agency for International Development in partnership with Catholic Relief Services.” At the same time, Sweden also announced additional $8 million to UNRWA “for all Palestinian refugees.”

 

Hamas also receives aid through its own political adversary, the Palestinian Authority (PA), itself the recipient of international aid second only to Syria. (Palestinians are the recipients of highest per capita assistance in the world”). Funding comes from numerous international bodies, including The European Commission (EC)UNRWA; the United Nations Children’s Emergency Fund UNICEF; the United States Aid Agency (USAID), and the World Bank. These and others fund the PA to re-allocate funds to Hamas-ruled Gaza, as humanitarian aid, to create jobs, housing projects, and also in support of “good governance,” programs that failed under the PA, and funded Hamas since it took over in 2007. While there are efforts to stop aid from reaching Hamas, according to last month’s Congressional Research Service (CRS) report: “Since 2007, USAID could not “reasonably ensure” that its money would not wind up in terrorist hands.” Moreover, “UNRWA makes publicly available the names of all recipients of UNRWA contracts of annual aggregate value of $100,000 or more.” There is little doubt that Hamas is exploiting this big financial loophole to support the construction of its expanding tunnel-infrastructure under the border with Israel, for training and buying weapons, and to increase the hate-propaganda it designed to guarantee the supply of cannon-fodders for war against Israel. [***As blog editor I adjusted an editing glitch on the part of ACDemocracy for better continuity. Unless ACDemocracy fixes that glitch their webpage will appear to have an unfinished sentence circa this paragraph.]

 

Estimates of how much money flows into Hamastan are varied. However, as events such as the Annual Palestine Festival for Childhood and Education, and the continuing tunnel- construction rather than rebuilding Gaza’s shattered infrastructure shows, much of the funding that goes to Gaza directly and through the PA, aid Hamas’s terrorist agenda against Israel, rather than improving the lives of Gazans.

____________________

* Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld is Director of New York-based American Center for Democracy, and author of “Funding Evil: How Terrorism is Financed and How to Stop It”, 2011

 

* A different, unedited version of this article was published by Israel Public Diplomacy Forum

 

Copyright © 2013 | The American Center for Democracy is a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization. Your contribution is tax-deductible to the fullest extent of the law.

 

About ACD

 

OUR MISSION

 

The ACD is dedicated to exposing threats to our free speech rights, political and economic freedoms and national security.

 

ACD is a 501(c)(3) not-for-profit organization. All contributions are tax-deductible to the fullest extent of the law.

 

OUR DISTINCTION

 

ACD fills an important gap created by inadequate risk assessments of our cyberspace, GPS & UTC. We use our Threatcon programs, our multidimensional Terrorist Finance Network Tracker (TFNT), and our experts to better inform government, public and private sectors’ policy makers.

 

CONNECTING THE DOTS

 

  • ACD’s synergistic approach to connect the dots on emerging threats is facilitated by extensive multidisciplinary global research in various languages. We publish our knowledge-based analysis and use the information to offer special tools to help prevent and mitigate such threats.

 

  • ACD’s Threatcon, offers individually tailored programs of briefing and scenario gaming to encourage government, public and private sectors to cooperate in preventing and mitigating the risks to our political and economic freedoms and to our national security.

 

  • ACD’s Terrorist Finance Network Tracker (TFNT), a unique anti money laundering (AML) system, is using a multidimensional approach to build and regularly update a comprehensive database identifying operational and financial networks of transnational radical Islamic groups.

 

“Lean and agile, ACD/EWI is always ahead of the next threat: cyber attacks, market manipulation, the use of legal structures to inhibit free speech and stifle debate”- Richard Perle, former Assistant Secretary of Defense

 

OUR IMPACT

 

ACD Initiatives: READ THE REST

 

Too Evil to Fail?


Just below is a quote from the Ari Bussel article sent about what the real detractors of ISIS call “Daesh”:

The Palestinian Authority is spouting venom in all directions, firing without notice. It blames the USA for ISIS.

Fear has not frozen the PA. Instead, it has sprung to action in the only manner it knows: it attacks, pleads, lies and cheats. It deceives. It creates a false reality in which it is at the center – the light and the embodiment of innocence – and everyone around is trying to harm it.

It asserts the world must spring into action to protect it. Even Israel, its sworn enemy, must do all it can for the PA, “for Israel’s own sake.”

Let us look at the PA’s twisted logic: Save us, or else Daesh will take over, we will be gone and you will face a fiercer enemy on your borders.

You will shortly comprehend from Ari’s article that even the Muslim terrorists that surround Israel are becoming afraid of Daesh. Those same Muslim terrorists are crying for Israel to protect them from Daesh so that the Muslim terrorists kill all the Jews of Israel and renamed the Land of the Jews as Palestine.

JRH 1/20/16

Please Support NCCR

**********************

Too Evil to Fail?

The Black Plague

By Ari Bussel

Sent: January 20, 2016 12:19 AM

“Daesh is on our border; they are here with their ideology; and they are looking to find a suitable platform to establish their base. Therefore, we must prevent a collapse here, because the alternative is anarchy, violence and terrorism.” Major General Majid Faraj, head of the Palestinian General Intelligence Service, in an interview with Defense News.

Those who remember the self-made financial crisis of 2008-2009, would also remember that the top banks – Bank of America, Citibank, Chase, Wells Fargo – were to be safeguarded as “too big to fail.”

If these business entities were allowed to topple, we were warned, the world would collapse and systems fail and an end of apocalyptic proportions would descend upon us.

Not really. Quite the contrary—it is healthy in a free marketplace for systems to fail from time to time, and they should not receive immunity just because of their size or market domination.

A few years later, a new crisis has erupted and the world is awash in fear. It is known as the Islamic State, ISIL, ISIS or by its abbreviation in Arabic, Daesh.

The Palestinian Authority and Hamas alike are afraid of Daesh, “dead afraid,” and there is no pun intended. The moderate Jordanian regime likewise feels threatened. Its strong neighbor to the north is fighting for its survival against the forces of Daesh. Even the American President is afraid for some reason of the word “Daesh” and is enraged by it.

Daesh is good, though, for Muslims in the USA. They have found a new bull’s eye to which to direct any criticism. Overnight they became “moderate” and the Islamists who want to establish an Islamic Caliphate and have expanded throughout the Arabian Peninsula and Middle East are just a “perversion” of their “peaceful religion.”

Except, there is not much difference between the ideology of Daesh and that of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, Iran and Hezbollah or Saudi Wahhabism so prevalent in the USA. They all strive to establish a global Islamic Caliphate, and their varying degrees of fanaticism only differ in the extent to which atrocities are carried out.

Wahhabism has seemingly adapted to Western living, whereas Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran have mastered duplicity, talking to Western ears in one manner and still behaving as they wish. Whereas Daesh behaves as they believe, in the same manner accepted by all previous cancerous organisms: They behead, burn live people, shoot hundreds at point blank just to make a point, rape and mutilate women and children and sell them for slavery, all done for the world to see and fear.

All these forms of Islam are not perversion, but modern day manifestations and feelings of strength and power. Current-day Islamists grow, multiply, conquer and spread, and the world seems unable to stop them. In a way, they are like a biological system, where Daesh is similar to an Ebola-type disease, Iran a cancer with long latency period, Hamas and Hezbollah more aggressive types of cancer and Wahhabism is similar to AIDS (we have grown accustomed to living with it).

The day has now come when evil is worried about the spread of something even more evil. Even in nature, one knows its exact place in the food chain, and predators are prey to even larger, more vicious predators they cannot ignore if they wish to remain alive.

Not knowing what to do and how to protect itself, each behaves differently. Hamas suddenly becomes a bit more compromising, realizing that Israel is much more bearable than Daesh.

The Palestinian Authority is spouting venom in all directions, firing without notice. It blames the USA for ISIS.

Fear has not frozen the PA. Instead, it has sprung to action in the only manner it knows: it attacks, pleads, lies and cheats. It deceives. It creates a false reality in which it is at the center – the light and the embodiment of innocence – and everyone around is trying to harm it.

It asserts the world must spring into action to protect it. Even Israel, its sworn enemy, must do all it can for the PA, “for Israel’s own sake.”

Let us look at the PA’s twisted logic: Save us, or else Daesh will take over, we will be gone and you will face a fiercer enemy on your borders.

Do all you can for our sake, for then you will be helping yourselves.

We are your peace partners who for the past four months, had to kill 29 of you and wound some 300, only because you left us no choice. The land was thirsty for your blood, because we say you were defiling the Temple Mount and threatening the Al Aqsa Mosque.

You stole our capital and our cities, from Acre to Haifa to Jaffe. Yes, you do not appear on our maps, but you do not really expect to remain here, do you? Go back to Europe, from where you came. You have no claim or connection to this land.

Millions of us are waiting in refugee camps, in Jordan, in Europe and in the USA, to return to their homes. We kept the keys. We are the true owners of the land. It will be ours once again one day very soon.

We see Palestine with no Jews. Oh, any loyal Arab who dares to sell his land to the Jews is a traitor. He must pay the price and be made an example for all to see and fear. The Jews have already stolen all that was ours, and they still want more!

Boycott Israel! Divest from Israel! Sanction Israel! The Zionist dream is nothing short of Colonialism, Imperialism and Apartheid all combined. It is the most evil and dangerous experiment the world has ever seen.


Why are you silent? Why do you not help us? You must maintain the flow of money. You must pressure Israel even more.

Those Settlements must be dismantled and removed. They are the true obstacles to peace. The Settlers are the worst embodiment of evil on earth. Even the Israelis who live in Tel Aviv admit this is the case and would not go beyond the Green Line, buy wines from Occupied West Bank or extend services to the wild west there in Satan’s land.

The world must come to our rescue! You must protect us, for Daesh is at our borders and our power is limited by those Israelis.

We must receive more weapons, ammunition and money. We must be strengthened, or else Daesh is here and might topple us down!

The PA seems to think it is too important to fail, and I humbly submit it is too evil and must fail. [Blog Editor: Bold Print Mine] Only then the world might wake up to the realization it has wasted the past few decades fighting the body Israel instead of strengthening it, for if Israel dies, the world will die next without a vaccine.

You see, in the laboratory of the Middle East, Israel is the guinea pig. If no inoculation becomes available against the fanatical Islamists (PA, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran), Israel will die and the world will be next. It has already been infected and is has weakened tremendously.

Thus, the fate of humanity as we know it and of the free world rests in this laboratory. Is Israel the canary in the Middle-Eastern coalmine, or will she manufacture the necessary antidotes?

History has taught us that for millennia the Jewish people managed to survive. The Black Plague is once again threatening the world, and those in the Middle East have felt the threat and are shaking with fear. Without Israel, the world is doomed. Without the PA, Israel may still survive to save the world.

_________________

This is the latest in the series “Postcards from America – Postcards from Israel,” a collaboration between Zager and Bussel, a foreign correspondent reporting from Israel.

Ari Bussel and Norma Zager collaborate both in writing and on the air in a point-counter-point discussion of all things Israel-related. Together, they have dedicated the past decade to promoting Israel.

© Israel Monitor, January, 2016

First Published January 18, 2016

Contact: bussel@me.com

Answering John Kerry


Intro to Glick’s ‘Answering John Kerry’

Edited by John R. Houk

12/13/15

Caroline Glick posted an essay about John Kerry’s speech at the Brooking Institute’s Saban Forum. This is the same forum that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu video streamed a speech to the Saban Forum from Jerusalem. To comprehend just how idiotic Secretary of State John Kerry is (and by extension President Barack Hussein Obama), let me share some excerpts from Netanyahu’s speech that addresses Islamic terrorism internationally and the terrorism of Arabs calling themselves Palestinians who refuse to accept the existence of the Jewish State of Israel:

I want to thank my friend Haim for giving me the opportunity to address you. This comes at a time when the United States has experienced a terrible and savage attack in San Bernardino, and I wish to offer the condolences of the people of Israel to the families, the aggrieved families, and of course send our wishes for a speedy recovery to the wounded. [Blog Editor: a sentiment rarely shared from Obama and Kerry to Israeli-Jewish victims of Palestinian Islamic terrorism.]

And these values are what makes the bond between Israel and the United States, the American people and the people of Israel, so strong. It’s that identity of values, those very values that are under such fierce attack today. …

Insofar as the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is concerned, I think there is another misunderstanding. People have long said that the core of this conflict is the acquisition of territories by Israel in the 1967 War. That’s an issue that needs to be addressed in any peace process, as is the question of settlements, but it’s not the core of the conflict. In Gaza, nothing changed. In fact, instead of getting peace, we gave territory and got 15,000 rockets on our heads. We took out all the settlements; we disinterred people from their graves; and did we get peace? No. We got the worst terror possible.

… Why has this conflict not been resolved for a hundred years? Why has it not been resolved after successive Israeli prime ministers, six in fact after the Oslo Agreement, have offered to make peace, have offered the Palestinians the possibility of building a state next to Israel – it’s because the Palestinians have not yet been willing to cross that conceptual bridge, that emotional bridge, of giving up the dream not of a state next to Israel, but a state instead of Israel.

And that’s why they persistently refuse – not only Hamas in Gaza, but the PA – they consistently refuse to accept that in a final peace settlement, they will recognize the Jewish state, they will recognize a nation-state for the Jewish people. They ask that we recognize a nation-state for the Palestinian people, but refuse to accord that same right to us. I have said and I continue to say it, that ultimately the only workable solution is not a unitary state, but a demilitarized Palestinian state that recognizes the Jewish state. That’s the solution. But the Palestinians have to recognize the Jewish state and they persistently refuse to do so. They refuse to recognize a nation-state for the Jewish people in any boundary. That was and remains the core of the conflict. Not this or that gesture or the absence of this or that gesture, but the inability or unwillingness of the Palestinian leadership to make the leap.

You got a hint of that the other day when Abu Mazen spoke about the “occupation of Palestinian lands for the last 67 years”. Did you hear that? Occupation of Palestinian lands? For the last 67 years? Sixty-seven years ago was 1948. That’s when the State of Israel was established. Does Abu Mazen mean that Tel Aviv is occupied Palestinian territory? Of Haifa? Or Beer Sheba? He refuses to fess up to his people and say it’s over, from their point of view what they say are the borders they wish, the final borders they wish. They refuse to recognize that they will have no more claim on the territory of the Jewish state, that they will not try in any way to flood it with the descendants of refugees. After all, we in Israel took in an equal and even larger number of Jewish refugees from Arab lands. You should READ the ENTIRE Speech (Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Remarks to the Saban Forum; By PM Benjamin Netanyahu; Release by Israel GPO posted at SlantRight 2.0; posted 12/7/15)

Now as you read Glick’s essay you will notice that Secretary Kerry acts like he is completely deaf and blind about the intentions of the Arabs that call themselves Palestinians to not only establish a state out of some territory of Jewish heritage but also the complete destruction of Israel to be replaced by an Arab State. In case you haven’t been paying attention to what ISIS is doing to the Christians that have lived in Syria and Iraq that means a brutal genocide against the Jews of Israel.

JRH 12/13/15

Please Support NCCR

********************

Answering John Kerry

By Caroline Glick

December 11th, 2015

CarolineGlick.com

On Saturday, US Secretary of State John Kerry gave a speech before the Brookings Institute’s Saban Forum. Kerry focused on the Palestinian conflict with Israel and sought to draw a distinction between the two-state policy model, which he supports, and the one-state policy model, which he rejects.

To justify his rejection of a policy based on Israeli sovereignty over areas beyond the 1949 armistice lines, Kerry raised a series of questions about what a one-state policy would look like.

I answered all of his questions, as well as many others, in great detail in my book The Israeli Solution: A One- State Plan for Peace in the Middle East. I will do so again here, albeit with the requisite brevity.

But before discussing the specific questions Kerry raised with regard to the one-state model, it is important to discuss the nature of the policies Kerry described in his speech.

Kerry argued Israel should deny civil and property rights to Jews beyond the 1949 armistice lines, and ignore the building and planning laws of both Israel and the military government in Judea and Samaria in order to allow unrestricted Arab construction in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem.

Such steps, he argued, will advance the cause of peace because they will pave the way for an Israeli withdrawal from the vast majority of these areas. Such a withdrawal in turn will bring about the desired two-state solution.

Since the two-state solution is supported by the whole world, Kerry argued that once Israel withdraws from the areas, it will gain the support of the world, peace with its Arab neighbors as well as the Palestinians, and become more prosperous and happy than it is today. It will also secure its democracy.

On the other hand, Kerry argued, if Israel respects the civil and property rights of Jews and continues to enforce the law toward Arabs as well as Jews, and if it eventually applies its laws to any or all of Judea and Samaria, Israel will enter a state of perpetual war with the Palestinians and the wider Arab world. Israel will cease to be a democracy. Israel will be impoverished.

Israel will be isolated internationally even more than it is today.

If Kerry’s options were real options, then Israel would have a clear and easy choice, just as he argues it has.

But unfortunately, they aren’t real options. They are fantasies.

Today Israel has three options. As Kerry advocates, it can withdraw from Judea and Samaria and partition Jerusalem. But if it does so, there is no reason to believe that the outcome will be a Palestinian state, let alone peace.

Rather, it is far more likely that an Israeli withdrawal will lead to the establishment of a second independent Palestinian enclave that the Palestinians and the international community will insist is still under occupation, just as the Palestinians and the international community insist that Gaza remains under Israeli occupation 10 years after Israel vacated the Gaza Strip entirely.

Without Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, Israel will become a strategic basket case in an increasingly chaotic region. It will invite aggression from the Palestinians and from the east that it will be hard pressed to defend against.

Just as Israel is condemned for every action it has taken to defend against Palestinian aggression from Gaza, so it will be condemned for the actions it will be forced to take to defend itself from Palestinian aggression in Judea, Samaria, Jerusalem and beyond.

In other words, the so-called “two-state solution” is a recipe for war and expanded international isolation for the Jewish state.

The second option for Israel is to maintain the status quo. Today, Israel shares governing power in Judea and Samaria with the PLO. Sometimes the PLO cooperates with Israeli security forces, and sometimes it cooperates with terrorist groups.

The PLO rejects Israel’s right to exist. It uses every available platform to undermine Israel’s legitimacy and wage economic and political war against the Jewish state.

The advantage of the status quo is that under it, Israel has security control over Judea and Samaria. Consequently, it is able to prevent Judea and Samaria and Jerusalem from becoming strategically indistinguishable from Gaza, where Hamas is now openly collaborating with Islamic State forces in Sinai.

Israel’s third option is to apply its laws over all or parts of Judea and Samaria. The first benefit of this option is that it maintains Israel’s ability to defend itself against security threats emanating from the Palestinians and from the east.

Beyond that, under Israeli law, the civil rights of Palestinians and Jews in Judea and Samaria will be vastly improved. Israel’s liberal legal code is superior to both the military code governing the Jews and the Palestinian Authority’s law of the jackboot which governs the Palestinians.

Whereas the status quo invites and engenders politicization of Israel’s military commanders who serve as the governing authorities of the areas, the third option would end the politicization of the IDF. Generals would take a backseat to elected leaders and government ministries. Police would be responsible for law enforcement. Rather than deploy regular and reserve units to dispel rioters, police, who are better trained for such events, would be judiciously deployed in areas where they are most needed. The IDF’s operations would be limited to counterterrorism.

None of Israel’s actual three options will necessarily enhance its international standing. This is the case because, as we have seen, Israel’s international standing has little to do with anything Israel does.

But then again, by exhibiting strength, and forcefully asserting its rights, Israel may find itself winning the respect of some foreign governments that currently view it is weak and open to blackmail.

This brings us to Kerry’s questions about a one-state model.

Kerry asked, “How does Israel possibly maintain its character as a Jewish and democratic state when from the river to the sea there would not even be a Jewish majority?” The answer is easily. Israel will retain its strong Jewish majority, and its commitment to democracy, after it applies its laws to Judea and Samaria.

Kerry asked, “Would millions of Palestinians be given the basic rights of Israeli citizens including the right to vote, or would they be relegated to a permanent underclass?” The answer is yes, they would be given the basic rights of Israeli citizens, including the right to vote, and no, they would not be relegated to a permanent underclass.

Kerry asked, “Would the Israelis and Palestinians living in such close quarters have segregated roads and transportation systems with different laws applying in the Palestinian enclaves?” The answer is, no.

Kerry asked, “Would anyone really believe they were being treated equally?” The answer is that, as we have seen repeatedly, no matter what Israel does, and no matter what the Palestinians do, people like Kerry will always claim that Israel is mistreating the Palestinians.

Kerry asked, “What would the international response be to that, my friends, or to a decision by Israel to unilaterally annex large portions of the West Bank?” The answer, again, is that the international response to such a move would be about the same as the international response to the continuation of the status quo or to an Israel withdrawal. To wit, the response will be hostile to Israel.

Kerry asked, “How could Israel ever have true peace with its neighbors, as the Arab Peace Initiative promises and as every Arab leader I have met with in the last year reinforces to me as recently as in the last month that they are prepared to do?” The answer is that Israel can have true peace with the Arab world when the Arab world accepts the legitimacy and permanence of the Jewish state.

Kerry asked, “How will [Arab states make peace]… if there is no chance for a two-state solution?” The answer is that they will make peace when they decide they want peace and they rid their societies of Jew hatred.

Kerry asked, “How will the Arab street in today’s world let… [the two-state solution] go by?” The answer is that the Arab street doesn’t believe in the “two-state solution.” The Arab street wants the dissolution of Israel.

Finally, Kerry asked, “And wouldn’t Israel risk being in perpetual conflict with millions of Palestinian living in the middle of a state?” The answer is that Israel is at risk of perpetual conflict with the Palestinians and the Arab world as a whole for as long as the Arabs hate Jews. The millions of Palestinians living within Israel’s borders constitute a far smaller strategic danger to Israel than the millions of Jew-hating Arabs, who have terrorist armies, perched on its international borders.

At the outset of his remarks, Kerry explained that as far as US Middle East policy is concerned, “Our goal, our strategy is to help ensure that the builders and the healers throughout the region have the chance that they need to accomplish their tasks.”

Sadly, this is neither a goal nor a strategy. It is the sort of platitude you’re likely to find inside a Chinese fortune cookie.

If Kerry is interested in an actual strategy, he can fork out 20 bucks and buy my book.

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.

____________________

All right reserved, Caroline Glick. 2015

About Caroline B. Glick

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Remarks to the Saban Forum


Ari Bussel sent the transcript of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address about Islamic terrorism using the San Bernardino Massacre as a starting point then proceeding to the growth of Islamic terrorism that has plagued Israel from its modern inception in 1948 to the present. PM Netanyahu takes note that the Arabs that call themselves Palestinians have had plenty opportunities to (steal) appropriate Jewish land to create an independent Arab state but have failed to accept the existence of a Jewish State on their ancestral homeland.

The Bussel email included a link to the 14 minute Youtube version of the Prime Minister’s address to the Saban Forum.

VIDEO: PM Netanyahu’s Address to the Saban Forum 2015

 

Posted by IsraeliPM

Published on Dec 6, 2015

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s address to the Saban Forum 2015
דברי ראש הממשלה בנימין נתניהו בפני פורום סבן 2015

JRH 12/7/15

Please Support NCCR

***************************

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Remarks to the Saban Forum

By Benjamin Netanyahu

December 6, 2015

Israel Government Press Office

The Prime Minister’s Office

Greetings from Jerusalem.

I want to thank my friend Haim for giving me the opportunity to address you. This comes at a time when the United States has experienced a terrible and savage attack in San Bernardino, and I wish to offer the condolences of the people of Israel to the families, the aggrieved families, and of course send our wishes for a speedy recovery to the wounded.

The terrorists are attacking in California or in Israel, or for that matter in Paris. They are attacking the very values that we hold dear – freedom, tolerance, diversity. All the things that define the value of life and society in our eyes, they find anathema and that’s why they attack us. I think too that this is what makes us strong. They think that we are hedonistic and weak; we’re actually very strong societies, very resilient, because of the very values that they despise so much.

And these values are what makes the bond between Israel and the United States, the American people and the people of Israel, so strong. It’s that identity of values, those very values that are under such fierce attack today. I think nobody should underestimate the resilience and power of our societies. Nobody should underestimate the United States. It was, it remains and will be the leader of the world precisely because it is so rooted in the values that make societies great.

And these are the same values by which we live, and that’s why nobody should underestimate Israel, and nobody should underestimate the strength of our alliance. It’s strong and it will be even stronger in years to come. And I appreciate the President’s willingness to forge a new agreement between Israel and the United States, a ten-year MoU to strengthen Israeli-American cooperation and strengthen Israel’s security with American support. I think everybody in Israel appreciates that, beginning with me.

We face today two challenges that I’d like to briefly discuss with you. One is a global challenge of the battle of militant Islamic terrorism that plagues not only the Middle East, but increasingly Europe and the United States and Asia, everywhere – Africa. And the second is the specific problem of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, which I’d like to address.

On the global front, I have to say that many used to say that the core of the conflicts in the Middle East, and from there the rest of the world, were rooted in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. That was never true, but it’s now demonstrably false. And what we see is the old order established after the Ottoman Empire collapsing and militant Islam, either of the Shiites, Shiite hue led by Iran, or the Sunni hue, led by ISIS, rushing in to fill the void. Now those two forces are clashing with each other because each wants to be the king of the Islamist hill. They hope to first establish in the Middle East and after that in their mad designs throughout the rest of the world, but it nonetheless is a battle of militant Islam against other Muslims and against everyone else.

That is clearly demonstrated in the case of ISIS, that doesn’t mince its words, and is disguised by Iran, that has equal ambitions. The danger that we face is augmented when militant Islam gets a sovereign state, because a state gives them money, in oil revenues in particular for either one, and it gives them the power to develop weapons or acquire weapons – chemical weapons in the case of ISIS and other sophisticated weapons – and of course the quest for nuclear weapons or submarines or satellites and sundry other rockets and precision-guided missiles in the case of Iran.

These battles, these forces are battling each other now over the soil of Syria, and our position has been – my position has been not to intervene because an ISIS-dominated Syria is bad and a Iran-dominated Syria is bad. I think that our policy has been therefore not to try to strengthen one at the expense of the other, but weaken both. But in any case, my policy has been non-intervention with two exceptions. The first is humanitarian. We were among the first countries to offer humanitarian aid to Syria. We established a field hospital right next to the border of, our border in the Golan and have taken in thousands of Syrians who’ve come in, astounded. They were always taught that Israel and Israelis were devils and now they were healing angels. And the second thing that I’ve decided to do is to make it clear that Israel will not tolerate the use of Syrian territory for passing lethal weapons to Hezbollah, to open up a warfront against us in Lebanon, or to use Syrian territory for attacks against us or to enable Iran to build a second terror or military front against us from the Golan or anywhere else in Syria.

These are clear principles which we uphold. I’ve expressed also to President Putin of Russia that these are principles that we’ll continue to uphold and that it makes sense that Russia and Israel have deconfliction. We’ve done that, just as the United States has done that, but it’s very important for me to stress that Israeli policy will continue along the lines that I’ve just outlined.

If I look at the world overall, the core of the conflicts in the Middle East, that is the battle between early medievalism and modernity, is the battle that is being waged now around the world. And the advanced countries in the world, the civilized countries of the world, have to make common cause to contain and ultimately defeat militant Islam. Deep down, human beings want to have freedom and I think that desire and the technology of freedom, the spread of information, will ultimately defeat militant Islam, just as it defeated another murderous ideology bent on world domination: Nazism.

In the case of Nazism, it took down about 60 million people and a third of our own people before it went down, and this cannot allow to happen again. I think it won’t happen again: one, because we have the historical antecedents; and two, because we have the State of Israel, as far as the Jewish people are concerned. We will not allow any one of these violent medievalist forces to threaten our country and threaten our people.

Insofar as the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is concerned, I think there is another misunderstanding. People have long said that the core of this conflict is the acquisition of territories by Israel in the 1967 War. That’s an issue that needs to be addressed in any peace process, as is the question of settlements, but it’s not the core of the conflict. In Gaza, nothing changed. In fact, instead of getting peace, we gave territory and got 15,000 rockets on our heads. We took out all the settlements; we disinterred people from their graves; and did we get peace? No. We got the worst terror possible.

I think that happened earlier too, when we left Lebanon and people said, “Well, if you leave Lebanon, then Hezbollah will make peace with you.” And in fact, we got 15,000 rockets from there too. And so people are naturally saying, look, if we want a solution vis-à-vis the Palestinians in Judea and Samaria, in the West Bank, how can we ensure that this doesn’t happen again? Well, in order for us to ensure that it doesn’t happen again, we have to address the root cause of the problem. Why has this conflict not been resolved for a hundred years? Why has it not been resolved after successive Israeli prime ministers, six in fact after the Oslo Agreement, have offered to make peace, have offered the Palestinians the possibility of building a state next to Israel – it’s because the Palestinians have not yet been willing to cross that conceptual bridge, that emotional bridge, of giving up the dream not of a state next to Israel, but a state instead of Israel.

And that’s why they persistently refuse – not only Hamas in Gaza, but the PA – they consistently refuse to accept that in a final peace settlement, they will recognize the Jewish state, they will recognize a nation-state for the Jewish people. They ask that we recognize a nation-state for the Palestinian people, but refuse to accord that same right to us. I have said and I continue to say it, that ultimately the only workable solution is not a unitary state, but a demilitarized Palestinian state that recognizes the Jewish state. That’s the solution. But the Palestinians have to recognize the Jewish state and they persistently refuse to do so. They refuse to recognize a nation-state for the Jewish people in any boundary. That was and remains the core of the conflict. Not this or that gesture or the absence of this or that gesture, but the inability or unwillingness of the Palestinian leadership to make the leap.

You got a hint of that the other day when Abu Mazen spoke about the “occupation of Palestinian lands for the last 67 years”. Did you hear that? Occupation of Palestinian lands? For the last 67 years? Sixty-seven years ago was 1948. That’s when the State of Israel was established. Does Abu Mazen mean that Tel Aviv is occupied Palestinian territory? Of Haifa? Or Beer Sheba? He refuses to fess up to his people and say it’s over, from their point of view what they say are the borders they wish, the final borders they wish. They refuse to recognize that they will have no more claim on the territory of the Jewish state, that they will not try in any way to flood it with the descendants of refugees. After all, we in Israel took in an equal and even larger number of Jewish refugees from Arab lands.

I mention this point about mutual national recognition because it is so fundamental, and like the mantra that was raised time and time and time again, that the core of the conflict, always in the singular, the conflict in the Middle East was the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, that has turned out to be even childish and irrelevant. The same thing I am saying will happen with the argument about the core of the conflict being the settlements or the territories. They’re an issue to be resolved, but they are not the core of the conflict.

And I think it’s important if we’re ever going to resolve this issue is to demand from the Palestinian leadership to recognize the Jewish state. We’ll still have many, many issues to resolve, but it begins with the recognition of the right of the Jewish people to have a state of their own. This is the fundament of peace and the absence of this recognition is the real obstacle.

I don’t lose hope. You can’t be a leader of the Jewish people and not have hope because we’ve overcome so many travails in the last thousands of years and in the last hundred years. We have clawed our way back to a sovereign existence. We built a remarkable state. It’s a world leader in technology, in agriculture, in irrigation, in cyber, in medicine – in so many areas. And we’ve made peace with two countries: Jordan and Egypt. And as the picture that I described about the threat of militant Islam to Arab and Muslim society emerges, we are making inroads and a lot of contacts with Arab countries – a lot of contacts that are not Arab countries as well: the leading countries of Asia, China, India, Japan; dozens of African countries; countries in Latin America. And it’s heartening. It’s heartening to see how Israel is being received and how people are changing their view of Israel as they change their view of the essential conflict between medievalism and modernity that is now spreading throughout the entire world.

But I know, with all the openness that we have with dozens and dozens of countries, including in our own region, I still know that we have no better friend than the United States. This is a partnership of solid values. It’s the deepest partnership there is. I value it across the partisan divide – Democrats, Republicans, Independents – we cherish your support. We value it and we believe that this partnership between Israel and the United States of America is the axis around which many other partnerships can be built in our region and beyond for the betterment of all humanity.

Thank you.

__________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

 

Sent by Ari Bussel

 

Israel Government Press Office

The Knockout


In America Conservatives warn how the Left Wing Obama transformation is turning the USA into a pariah among allies and destroying America’s culture with unconstitutional executive actions plugging a Leftist utopianism. Counterjihad writers warn of how Islam is NOT conducive to the development of Western culture, indeed Islam’s very nature is antithetical to Western Heritage and to the U.S. Constitution.

Stabbing Jews is “a symphony of love for Jerusalem:”

Ari Bussel writes about how Israel’s complacency to Islamic terrorism and Arab lies from those calling themselves Palestinians is slowly destroying the Jewish State from within. The Left/Right similarities between the two allies – USA and Israel – is quite stunning. The only real difference between the USA’s and Israel’s political situations is that Israel’s situation is existential. If America’s Left maintains its transformation agenda I have no doubt the Home of the Free and the Land of the Brave will face an existential threat.

JRH 10/19/15

*************************

The Knockout

Israel, Yes, You Can

By Ari Bussel

Sent: 10/18/2015 3:02 PM

For the past two weeks, I stood witness to what was taking place in Israel. It started outside the walls of Jerusalem, and very quickly crept right inside. From there, it spread throughout the country.

Young men and women, some in their teens, answered the call of their president who falsely claimed that the Jews were defiling the Al Aqsa mosque with their filthy feet.

“We will not allow them to enter, and we will do everything in our power to protect our Jerusalem.” [Mahmoud Abbas]

Thus started the concert of bloodshed. A righteous and courageous one indeed against the Jews’ “delusional myths,” one in which stabbing Jews is “a symphony of love for our Jerusalem.”

All that one needs to do is read the Palestinian Media Watch [http://www.palwatch.org/] daily bulletin, bringing the clips and excerpts of the words of hatred in origin.

Abbas thus unleashed wave after wave of terrorists, and against them stood at ready a most sophisticated propaganda machine. One terrorist blows herself up in a car filled with tanks of gas, clearly – lied the Israel haters – she was horrified due to an electric failure that she immediately turned and shouted “Allah U Akbar.”

A boy of 13 using a knife to try and murder another boy [See HERE] his age not only did nothing wrong, according to the propagandists, but was then executed by the Israelis. The fact the boy was receiving treatment in a private room at Hadassah Hospital in Jerusalem mattered not to these deceivers.

13 year old Islamic Terrorist Ahmad Manasra

The terrorists are all “innocent,” the Israelis are all “executioners.”

Israel had to defend herself on two fronts, happening simultaneously: terrorists attacking civilians in the streets and a most oiled propaganda machine spewing lies.

Security Cabinet member Dr. Yuval Steinitz along with the Director General of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs invited the foreign press to a special media briefing and two days later Prime Minister Netanyahu briefed the press corps as well. In these briefings, we were introduced to the hatred and incitement by the PA and its president, which made little impression other than the obligatory “oh, how dreadful.” The questions by the foreign press left no doubt where the wind was blowing among the members of the international press.

Some in the Israeli media were quick to criticize Netanyahu for waiting two weeks to convene such a press briefing, and others wonder to this day why Israel’s public diplomacy machine is not fighting back against the torrent of lies.

While I do not buy the attacks against Netanyahu (a favorite pastime here in Israel, thus obligatory outside of Israel), the question of why Israel is not fighting the way only she knows how to fight – i.e. to win – remains relevant. At present, she is not doing anything other than trying to restore calm to the streets, peace to her citizens.

Thus, while Netanyahu and his government were trying to wade off the onslaught of terrorists locally and attacks internationally (the Los Angeles Times along with Israel’s usual detractors were busy at work doing what they do best – selling papers blaming Israel and the Jews for the ills of the world, twisting reality so that Israel a priori is found guilty in the court of public opinion), Abbas was planning the next round.

Hamas, usually a foe of Abbas, already made promises: Anyone caught while trying to free Jerusalem of the Occupier-Jews will be released at the earliest opportunity of prisoners exchange (they are already working on kidnapping a soldier or civilians to force such an exchange). They called for armed resistance inside the Green Line and throughout Occupied Palestine and went as far as easing restrictions on Fatah militia inside Gaza, all for the common goal of attacking and defeating the Zionist enemy.

While these fronts will eventually be manageable, and in the foreseeable future other parts of the world – from Jordan to Paris and London and even Washington, D.C., New York and San Francisco – will have to turn to Israel to copy from her the lessons learned at subduing and conquering such terrorism, Abbas, the master-chess-player, is already several steps ahead.

He has prepared the ground of lies for all too long. Israel, we have been told for eight long years, is planning to topple the third holiest place for Muslims. Israel is defiling the holy mountain. Israel is fabricating a claim to the place, where in reality she has no connection whatsoever. Israel is changing the status quo and executing innocent Arabs right and left, without stop.

How can the world stand silent in view of such an egregious behavior? How can any honorable human being with even a tiny bit of compassion allow such atrocities to continue? Abbas knows how easily the world is fooled and all too anxious to turn against Israel.

The concert continues: blood spilled all over. Not the blood of the Jewish victims by Arab terrorists, but the blood of “innocent” Arabs (i.e. perpetrators of these attacks). Even the spokesperson of the U.S. Department of State joined, admonishing Israel for using “excessive force.”

The screen is so full of the flowing rivers of blood that one cannot see anything else, one cannot think of anything but Israel’s newly found pastime: Genocide!

Thus, stood the French with the utmost bravery, and declared: International Observers to Jerusalem!

Abbas, busy at work at the moment to change the Western Wall to an international heritage site of the “Palestinians,” raised his hands, the hands of a victor, and proclaimed: “Knockout!”

He is so close to declaring “Checkmate,” that one is holding one’s breath with anticipation. Just let the Israelis and the Jews remain busy at the immediate. While they are focused on putting out fires, he is ready to have the world crown Al Quds (previously known, for a shameful period of time, as Jerusalem) as the eternal capital of “Palestine.”

Long live the King. The world is crazed with hatred for the Jews, and thus will follow whatever lies it is told. No one checks the facts, uses common sense or bothers with a reality-check. It is easier to beat the Jews, for secretly, we all wish for them to be gone.

It is time for Netanyahu to convene a Kitchen Cabinet of people he can trust, those who think outside the box. People who will not follow the status quo and what Israel has been engaged in doing, but will focus instead on fighting in the one arena that is completely desolate of any Jewish or Israeli fighters: the international public diplomacy front, in the court of public opinion.

For even if Israel manages to get up from one knockout after the next, the boos and rotten tomatoes thrown at her will eventually hit. The tomatoes have already been replaced with stones, and these with knives. Eventually, Israel might be left body parts strewn everywhere, as the crowd is overjoyed beyond its wildest dreams.

In a war one must fight. And Abbas is a very sleek and sophisticated enemy. He is playing the long game, while the world simply reacts to the effects of his lies. Time to fight Abbas, and Israel—yes, you can!