The Case Against Legalizing Unknown Millions of Illegal Aliens

At least as far back as the administration of Jimmy Carter, the immigration debate has been waged by globalists who have, over time, succeeded in hijacking the language and terminology applied to immigration.

Consider that Jimmy Carter: Orignator of the Orwellian Term “Undocumented Immigrant,” understood that by removing the term “alien” from discussions about immigration he could, over time, subvert the debate by confounding the public’s understanding about the entire immigration issue.

Carter insisted that INS employees immediately stop using the term “Illegal Alien” to describe aliens who were illegally present in the United States but refer to them as being “undocumented aliens.”

Today many politicians and journalists claim that illegal aliens who run America’s borders, thereby evading the inspections process conducted at ports of entry, have entered the United States “undocumented.”

In actuality, aliens who evade the inspections process enter the United States without inspection.  This creates a huge threat to national security and public safety, after all, Entry Without Inspection = Entry Without Vetting.

Additionally, aliens who enter the United States through ports of entry but then go on to violate the terms of their admission, depending on the category of visa they used to enter the United States, certainly are not making “undocumented” entries.

However, to the globalists and immigration anarchists, these facts are merely speed bumps that need to be overcome so that they can craft their false narrative.

One of America’s most cherished symbols is the Statue of Liberty that is equated with America’s rich and diverse immigrant heritage.  Over time his strategy of altering the terminology succeeded in convincing huge numbers of Americans that anyone who would interfere with the flow of “immigrants” into the United States was acting against America’s culture and traditions.

The media was quick to jump on the bandwagon and identified to immigration anarchists who oppose secure borders and effective immigration law enforcement as being “Pro-Immigrant” while branding advocates for effective immigration law enforcement as “Anti-Immigrant.”

Of course if honest and accurate nomenclature was used the two sides should be referred as as “Immigration Anarchists” vs “Pro “Immigration Law Enforcement.”

However the agenda is to eradicate America’s borders which, to the globalists, are impediment to their wealth and political power.

Not being content to alter the language of the debate, the immigration anarchists have concocted a false narrative about the nature of illegal aliens and the way that the immigration crisis can be fixed since, they claim, “The immigration system is broken.”

We can find adherents to this madness in both political parties, however, the Democrats are clearly leading the charge.

Of course, in reality, what has traditionally been “broken” is the lack of resources and political will to enforce our immigration laws from within the interior of the United States.  President Trump is certainly sending a clear message that this situation will be finally remedied by hiring many more ICE agents and Immigration Judges and taking the gloves off the agents by stating that there will no longer be any category of illegal aliens who may not be arrested, as was the Obama administration’s policies.

But I am compelled to address an issue that is of great concern.

While many journalists and politicians have agreed that aliens who have serious criminal convictions should be deported, but insist that since the millions of illegal aliens who are present in the United States cannot all be arrested, it is reasonable to provide them with lawful status, especially if they are working and paying taxes.

Of course our immigration laws are not about aliens paying taxes and not only are illegal aliens prohibited from working but aliens admitted under certain categories of visas are also prohibited from working.  This is about protecting the jobs and wages of American workers.

This sort of “reasoning” is never applied to any other area of law enforcement whether we consider the law enforcement response to drunk driving, texting while driving, tax fraud or other crimes.  Yet this supposed solution, is no solution at all, just a thinly veiled effort to meet the demands of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the American Immigration Lawyers’ Association and a laundry list of industries and special interest groups who make monumental campaign contributions seeking to get “the best government money can buy.”

Additionally, the true number of illegal aliens is unknown and unknowable but the media and many “think tanks” claim that there are between 11 million and 12 million such illegal aliens present in the United States.

During the Reagan administration it was estimated that the Amnesty of 1986 would get roughly one million such aliens “out of the shadows.”  That amnesty eventually enabled more than 3.5 million aliens to acquire lawful status.

immigration-chaos-millions-of-visa-overstays-add-to-illegal-alien-problemIn 2007 the CBO estimated that there were 12 million illegal aliens present in the United States.

Given those factors and others, it is likely that any massive amnesty program would likely provide tens of millions of illegal aliens with lawful status.

The numbers would be so huge that there would be no way to interview these aliens and no way to conduct any field investigations of these millions of aliens who evaded the United States surreptitiously without inspection.

What is not understood by most folks is that an adjudications officer can approve and application in mere minutes but would require days or weeks to deny an applications since it must be expected that when an application is denied the alien will, through his/her attorney, file an appeal of that denial.  Therefore before and application for legalization is denied the adjudicator would likely require an investigator conduct a field investigation and the subsequent denial would have to be reviewed by a government attorney to make certain it meets minimal standards to withstand any legal challenges.

Consequently, it is likely that well over 90% of these applications will be approved.

Since no field investigations could be conducted, there would be no way to determine who many of these aliens actually are.  There would be no way to ascertain when these aliens actually entered the United States.

It would be simple matter for aliens to claim to have entered the United States prior to whatever cutoff date would be established to meet the statutory requirement.  As more and more aliens succeed in gaming the system more and more aliens will be encouraged to enter the United States and make similar false claims about entry data and other pertinent facts, thereby creating a vicious cycle of fraud.

The 9/11 Commission found that immigration fraud played a major role in the ability of terrorists to enter the United States and embed themselves.

twin towersThis was my focus in my article, Reflections on 9/11’s Vulnerabilities.

Most terrorists have not had criminal histories.

Terrorists, not unlike spies and other “Sleeper” agents seek to maintain a low profile.

Indeed, it is believed that at least four of the 9/11 hijackers had been encountered by police officers for motor vehicle violations.  The police officers simply treated their motor vehicle violations as routine matters and permitted them to go on their way.

On January 9, 2002 BBC reported, Hijacker ‘pulled over by police’ as did CNN, Another hijacker was stopped for traffic violation.

Clearly aliens who have serious criminals histories or established involvement in gang or other criminal activities should be deported.

I would also strongly recommend that illegal aliens who frequent places of criminality such as brothels or locations associated with the drug trade should be arrested and deported (removed) in an effort to combat these criminal enterprises.

So-called “collateral” arrests are essential to imbue the immigration law enforcement program with integrity so that aliens understand that we are serious about our immigration laws.

This helps to deter aliens from entering the United States illegally.

Additionally, under the law enforcement principle known as “randomness” by arresting illegal aliens during the course of routine field work, it is to be expected that ICE agents will stumble across serious crimes and intelligence concerning major criminal organizations and even potentially uncover terrorists and aliens who support terrorism.

My very first assigned fraud investigation, as a brand new agent in 1976, led me to uncover a terror plot in Israel that was, thankfully averted.  The investigation began with a young man from Israel who attempted entry in the United States with and altered visa.

No one expected this mundane and routine assignment to trigger a major international investigation.

Finally, aliens who are provided with lawful status are entitled, under our immigration laws, to immediately petition to have their spouses and all of their minor children to be admitted into the United States.

Families in Third World Countries tend to have many children.  It is entirely possible that a massive amnesty program would enable more minor aliens to be granted visas than the number of illegal aliens who would be granted lawful status.

The impact of admitting tens of millions of children who would immediately be enrolled in school systems across the United States would be devastating to already beleaguered school districts across the United States.

President Trump’s immigration policies are already having the desired impact of deterring illegal immigration as reported by the Border Patrol.  It is important that he stay the course he has wisely plotted, America and Americans will benefit from his courageous leadership.

The cost of lifting U.S. Sanctions on Sudan: GENOCIDE by Lt. Gen. Abakar M. Abdallah

Sudan’s volatile security situation and human right abuses have worsened despite the partial lifting of sanctions by former President Obama, just days before the onset of the Trump Administration in January 2017. Under the terms of that partial sanctions lifting, there is a six months ‘look back’ period which could be reversed if evidence of ethnic cleansing, genocide or support for Jihad terrorism persisted. This report graphically presents evidence that genocide, war crimes and human right abuses have not ended in Darfur, Kordofan, and Blue Nile regions of the Sudan. Random killings, torturing, rape and extra-judicial executions continue unabated in all parts of these regions. There is evidence of aerial bombing attacks and the alleged use of banned chemical weapons.  Syria is not the only Muslim country in the Middle East and Africa where indiscriminate use of weapons of mass destruction have been used against civilian populations. This has been delivered through by bombing attacks of the Sudan Air force.  Both China and Russia are supplying weapons and equipment in support of Sudan’s genocidal Jihad funded by Gulf Emirates and Saudi Arabia.  Time for the Trump Administration to re-impose Sudan sanctions and to consider establishing no-fly safe zones in Sudan conflict areas.

Sudan peace force Massacres of Kababiish and Hamar Tribes in South Kordofan

Over 119 people were killed in South Kordofan in early April 2017 and the fighting continues. This is another tragedy wrought by President Bashir with funding support from the Arab cabal of Qatar and Saudi Arabia. The massacre of 119 Harmar and Kababiish tribal people comes in the wake of a $200,000,000 gift from Her Royal Highness Sheikha Mozah Bint Naser of Qatar donated while on a recent trip to Sudan for the purpose of helping children in the Kordofan region. As we have written previously, the actual use of those funds was to support recruitment and arm more Janjaweed Arab “peace force” militias.

The Sudan Tribune reported Kababiish tribesmen shot and killed 36 people of the Hamar tribe. These people had their hands tied, were shot, slaughtered and their bodies burned and buried.  According to Ambassador Hassan Ibrahim Jadkerim those involved in the massacre were wearing Sudan regime’s military uniforms and were armed with heavy weapons provided by the government.

According to the eye witness report the fighting erupted between the two tribes of Hamar and Kababiish because of alleged stolen camels, despite both tribes using government supplied weapons and trucks killing each other. Both tribes are trained and armed by the government and they are part of the Janjaweed peace forces militias. The current governor of South Kordofan, Ahmed Harun, an indicted war criminal wanted for arrest by the International Criminal Court ICC), has been organizing, training and arming these militias to attack the people of Darfur, Blue Nile and South Kordofan. He is directly responsible for these government trained militias, financially sponsored by the State of Qatar. Fighting has been going on between these two tribes since the beginning of April, 2017. Instead of providing security protection, the Sudan regime National Intelligence and Security Service (NISS) is supporting both conflicting groups with both weapons and logistic supplies.

Mass killing of Hamar-Kababiish by Sudan regime’s tribal militias clashes April 6, 2017 Sodori, North Kordofan, Sudan

The Sudan regime NISS security apparatus recruits, organizes, trains and arms these tribes with heavy weapons. The regime also provides them with trucks and logistic supplies. Moreover, the Bashir regime has granted them with full authority to kill anyone who opposes the implementation of the Arab Coalition plan directed at establishing a virtual Caliphate making demographic changes in Darfur and in the entire African Sahel region.

The Janjaweed peace forces Arab militias were established to enable the survival of the Bashir regime, fomenting international Jihad terrorism; the end state of the Muslim Brotherhood organization of the Islamic movement. The Bashir regime duplicitously arms these Arab militias.  However, when they committed heinous crimes, such as the massacring innocent civilians, the regime will deny that it had connections with them calling them outlawed groups. It is the regime’s strategy arming such groups and denying them when they committed crimes, so that they did not have to reveal that to the public and the international community. Effectively, the regime would eliminate any Arab militia group that refused to recruit its militants to fight for the regime. The fighting between Kababiish and Hamar is not the first instance of Arab militias fighting among themselves. It is an example of the internecine war to eliminate those opposing the Bashir regime to implement the strategy of the Arab Coalition.

Arab tribal militias armed by Sudan regime Sodori, North Kordofan, Sudan March 6, 2017

Arson and Killing in Darfur

The Sudan NISS and its armed Janjaweed peace force militias continue executing innocent civilians. They are massacring people, robbing, seizing of properties, committing arson and raping women. This is in furtherance of its strategy to dismantle Internally Displaced Persons (IDP) camps.  The regime intelligence apparatus recruited and trained individuals unleashing them to conduct arson of homes in IDP camps and markets.  Since late March 2017 several IDP camp homes and shops were burned in Nertiti, Zalengi, Central Darfur and Greida in South Darfur, and Garsila, in the Western Darfur region. These fires destroyed homes, food supplies, clothes and belongings of the IDP residents.   Losses from this arson in Greida alone were estimated at approximately $3 million US dollars. The government’s intention is to force the IDP camp residents into cities or move elsewhere so their land and wells are left to Arab Janjaweed peace force new settlers.

Sudan’s Rapid Support Forces (reorganized Janjaweed militias. Formerly riding horses and camels but currently equipped with Toyota Pickup trucks and heavy weapons). Sodori, North Kordofan, March 6, 2017

The National Congress Party Sudan regime is surviving only through crisis. The regime’s security apparatus instigate such crises just to create confusion among Arab Janjaweed peace force militia and Darfur people alike and keep them busy fighting among themselves. The tribal clashes in Darfur and Kordofan regions are using government provided arms killing hundreds of people. These clashes are fomented, logistically supported and controlled by the NISS.

On March 31, 2017 nine Janjaweed militia fighters riding camels attacked a group of villagers driving their livestock to Tawal Shala water wells in eastern Jebel Marra. The militias opened fire and killed 3 people on the spot while others being pursued escaped for their lives. They seized all the possessions of those people killed including cows, donkeys and goats.

On April 3, 2017 Janjaweed militias shut and killed two brothers, Ali Ismael and Hamad Ismael. They were caught with their motor-cycle in the Kasab IDP camp, Kutum, North Darfur.

On April 6, 2017 another group of Janjaweed militias riding camels intercepted a vehicle between Buram and Greida killed one man and wounded two others then robbed the passengers.

Human violations in Darfur have continued for more than fifteen years. In addition to Janjaweed militias’ attacks, the Sudan government planes continue air bombardment on Jebel Marra and elsewhere. On April 6, 2017 Sudanese war planes dropped bombs in the area west of Dereibat.

These attacks demonstrate that the Sudan regime and its militias target innocent civilians and their property.

Muslim prayers for two Brothers: Ali Ismael and Hamadi Ismael Janjaweed Militias shut and Killed and taken their motor cycle in Kasab IDP camp, Kutum North Darfur April, 3, 2017

Why Obama Lifted Sanctions on Sudan

Why did the former Obama Administration lift sanctions on Sudan if its militias continued to kill innocent people? Over 3 million people of Darfur are now living in IDP and refugee camps and their land is occupied by Janjaweed militias.

By lifting partial economic sanctions President Obama ignored long-standing US commitments to put an end to Sudan’s years of internal conflicts and security instability caused by the National Islamic Front/Muslim Brotherhood regime. Former US President Obama’s  cooperation with the Islamic regime in Khartoum undermined United States engagement that might have  prevented  human right violations and protected  indigenous populations targeted  for ethnic cleansing by the Sudan regime. Instead the Obama Administration’s inaction in the face of these humanitarian violations by President Bashir was pursued in the vain hope of obtaining of counterterrorism intelligence information. Effectively the Bashir regime provided little useful information and cooperation with US in the global war on terrorism.  The National Islamic/Muslim Brotherhood regime continued to recruit, harbor and support terrorist organizations including fighters from the Islamic State.  Obama’s cooperation with the Sudan’s indicted President Bashir compounded the problem by opening a door for other Western governments, such as Great Britain, Italy and Germany, to establish various types of bilateral and multilateral economic and security cooperation agreements despite the Bashir regime’s worsening human rights record.

Sudan’s NISS burning of IDP camps and markets, March 2017 in Greida, South Darfur, Sudan

Failure of African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur

The African Union-United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID) deployed in Darfur since 2007 with the mandate to protect civilians has unfortunately has become a puppet of the National Congress Party regime of President Bashir. Since its inception in Darfur none of the UNAMID Secretaries have reported human right violations in Darfur. None of the UNAMID forces have protected any civilian that has his or her life threatened by the Janjaweed militias. Most of the killing, rape, torture, and other human right abuses committed by the Janjaweed occur close to or in the vicinity of UNAMID camps. The Janjaweed militias commit these crimes because they know UNAMID’s movement is strictly controlled by the regime’s security forces who are mainly Janjaweed militias themselves. That is the reason UNAMID forces could not investigate incidents or protect innocent civilians even one kilometer outside their camp. The UNAMID forces cannot move without obtaining permission from the Sudan regime. Effectively they cannot file a report or conduct an independent investigation without consulting the Sudan regime’s officials and its security forces.

Sudan NISS burning of IDP camps to dismantle Otach IDP camp, Nyala South Darfur, Sudan March 7, 2017

 Failure of UNAMID to investigate incidents and write independent reports is probably the main reason that the international community distanced itself from Darfur. Darfurian people were internationally neglected and abandoned because UNAMID forces deployed to protect them had no capability to freely conduct operations.

The organization abandoned its primary role of protecting the innocent civilians and monitoring of human right violations instead policing the behavior of the Sudan government.  Witness the newly appointed Secretary of UNAMID openly demanding UN pressure Darfur resistance movements to cease armed struggle and sign false peace deals with the Bashir regime. Peace deals that bring no benefit to our people but instead more suffering.

How could the international community appoint a South African as head of the UNAMID mission in Darfur since South African President Jacob Zuma refused to arrest President Bashir in his country even announcing they were resigning membership in the International Criminal Court? The Darfur people have not healed from the wounds of Thabon Mbeki who became the right hand man of Bashir establishing false roadmaps and calling upon the international community to rally behind the genocidal regime.

The former South African President Thabon Mbeki who worked in the Darfur crisis for over 9 years said he brought peace in Darfur because he had been working closely with the African Union to help maintain Bashir in power and undermine the ICC.

The newly appointed Chief of UNAMID is another South African who has already begun ignoring human right violations that the regime is continually committing against the people of Darfur. Addressing the UNSC on April 4, 2017, the South African diplomat failed to mention Janjaweed militias committing daily atrocities on innocent civilians on Darfur. He also failed to mention the mission’s inability to provide security to the very people that they were mandated to protect. He called the Janjaweed, a well known government militia, just bandits.

The United Nations Security Council must appoint qualified officials who are impartial and empowered with the capacity to speak truthfully and act against the menace of genocide.  Peace and justice for the Darfurian people must prevail.

The UNSC has no capability to force Sudan’s regime to stop human right violations. Moreover, the Bashir regime has the power to dismiss any UN employee working in Sudan. The UNSC cannot protect them. Ivo Freijsen the Coordinator of Humanitarian Affairs in Sudan was expelled. Over the last two years the Bashir regime expelled four UN officials from Sudan while the UNSC did nothing. Sudan simply did not recognize any of the UNSC resolutions. The UNSC issued over 18 resolutions on Darfur but none of these resolutions were implemented.

Indicted President Bashir has not been committing genocide alone without aid from Arab countries.  China and Russia supply arms.  Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, European Union and some European states provide financial assistances that ends up recruiting and training Janjaweed Militias, Rapid Support Forces or what President Bashir calls ‘peace forces.’ African Union and many Arab League member states collectively provide protection for Bashir to avoid arrest and prosecution by the ICC.

Conclusion

The Chinese and Russians are providing weapons that Sudan President Bashir uses to kill our people.  Arab countries and the European Union provide funds that are funneled to finance the recruitment of Janjaweed peace force militias that commit genocide against indigenous people of Sudan. We seek US and international assistance to stop the genocidal Jihad regime of President Bashir by seeking his arrest and establishing no-fly zones in Darfur, Kordofan and the Blue Nile region to save the lives of the country’s indigenous people.

ABOUT LIEUTENANT GENERAL ABAKAR M. ABDALLAH

Lt. Gen. Abakar M. Abdallah is Chairman of the Sudan United Movement (SUM). He is a native of North Darfur who joined the Sudan Liberation People’s Army (SPLA) in 1984 and became active in the Nuba Hills and Darfurian resistance. In 1989 he joined the Patriotic Salvation Movement in neighboring Chad based in Darfur. He served as an officer in the Chadian army for 23 years. He held senior intelligence and counterterrorism posts including as Coordinator of the Multi-National Joint Task Force of Nigeria, Chad and Niger. He is a December 2002 graduate of the Intelligence Officers’ Advanced and Combating Terrorism Courses, US Army Intelligence Center and Schools, Fort Huachuca, Arizona. He was a Graduate Terrorism Fellow and is a Graduate of the College of International Security Affairs, National Defense University, Washington, DC, 2005. He was an International Fellow and Graduate of the US Army War College, Class of 2008.

EDITORS NOTE: Jerry Gordon, Senior Editor of the New English Review assisted in the preparation of this article. This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

Muslim artist hides anti-Jewish and anti-Christian messages in X-Men comics

QS 5:51, that is, chapter 5 verse 51 of the Qur’an, says: “O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you – then indeed, he is of them. Indeed, Allah guides not the wrongdoing people.”

Ibn Kathir explains: “Allah forbids His believing servants from having Jews and Christians as friends, because they are the enemies of Islam and its people, may Allah curse them.”

The word translated above as “allies” and frequently as “friends” is awliya, which means friend and protector, i.e., someone entrusted with another’s safety — hence the extrapolation that this verse means that “Muslims should not appoint the Jews and Christians as their leader” is not unreasonable.

In any case, why is Marvel allowing Ardian Syaf to do this? Would they allow a Jewish or Christian cartoonist to draw subtle messages criticizing Islam? To ask the question is to answer it.

“Marvel Artist Ardian Syaf Hid Anti-Christian And Jewish Messages In This Week’s X-Men Comic,” by Rich Johnston, Bleeding Cool, April 8, 2017:

In Indonesia, 212 is the number used to denote a specific mass protest from 2nd December last year. Hundreds of thousands of Muslims marched against the Christian governor of Jakarta, Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, known as Ahok,, [sic] over allegations of blasphemy regarding his use of the Qu’ran [sic] in campaigning against opponents. The march was organised, in part, with the National Movement to Safeguard the Indonesian Ulema Council’s Fatwa. It was pretty hardline conservative and the protest demanded the government prosecute and jail Ahok based on the council’s fatwa, declaring him to be a blasphemer. This year, a 212 2.0 march with similar aims was held on the 21st of February.

Ahok caused a great deal of controversy in Indonesia after he referred to a verse in the Qur’an while campaigning, specifically the verse Al Maidah 5: 51 and said that people should not believe Islamic leaders who claim it forbids Muslims from being led by non-Muslims. He has since repeatedly apologised for his statements, but it hasn’t stemmed the protest.

The verse translates into English as “O you who have believed, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are, in fact, allies of one another. And whoever is an ally to them among you – then indeed, he is one of them. Indeed, Allah guides not the wrongdoing people.”

A more common Indonesian translation of the verse, however, states that “Muslims should not appoint the Jews and Christians as their leader”. So. What has this to do with comic books?

212

The number 212 and 51 appears in a scene of X-Men Gold #1 by Indonesian artist Ardian Syaf, published last Wednesday, with comic book character Kitty Pryde addressing the crowd. Let’s zoom in.

That would be the Jewish character Kitty Pryde, in a scene talking about being the new leader of the X-Men….

Later in the comic, on Colossus’ shirt, we see the letters and numbers QS 5:51 referring to that verse. QS stands for Qur’an Surah, with Surah meaning chapter.

5-51

RELATED ARTICLE: New Jersey: Muslim group harassing and intimidating private citizens for opposing mosque

Westminster slaughterer linked to radical Islamic mosque

Why is this mosque still open? Because that great warrior against “extremism,” Theresa May, wouldn’t dare offend Muslims by taking action against a source of incitement in the ongoing jihad against her country.

“Westminster killer’s link to Luton mosque,” by Andrew Gilligan and Robin Henry, The Sunday Times, April 9 2017:

The Westminster terrorist had a key role at a mosque that urges Muslims to take up weapons to gain “victory over the Jews and the rest of the enemies of Islam”.

Khalid Masood was a public contact person for calltoislam.com, the main website of the hardline Luton Islamic Centre mosque.

Masood’s name, a phone number that The Sunday Times has confirmed as his, and the calltoislam.com web address appear on stickers attached to leaflets on display at the mosque….

RELATED ARTICLE: UK’s Theresa May offers to work together with Swedish PM against “extremist attacks”

Another Known Wolf: Truck jihadi had been in Swedish Security Service files

“Anders Thornberg, head of the Swedish Security Service, said ‘the suspect didn’t appear in our recent files but he earlier has been in our files.’”

One long-term strategy of the Islamic State is to overwhelm the security services of the West with so many jihadis and would-be jihadis that they collapse. And they’re well on their way.

Anders Thornberg

“The Latest: King: Sweden is still be [sic] safe, peaceful country,” Associated Press, April 8, 2017 (thanks to Darcy):

…Swedish prosecutors Hans Ihrman confirms that the suspect detained over Friday’s deadly truck attack is a 39-year-old Uzbekistan-born man.

The head of Sweden’s domestic intelligence agency says the man had been on authorities’ radar some time ago.

Anders Thornberg, head of the Swedish Security Service, said “the suspect didn’t appear in our recent files but he earlier has been in our files.”

He said the security services are working with other nations’ security agencies on the matter, but declined to elaborate….

RELATED ARICLE:

King: “Sweden is…and will continue to be a safe and peaceful country”

Detroit: Muslim who spoke of attacking church and hospital wanted to skin victims “like sheep”

RELATED VIDEO:

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy on One News.

Heathens Take Note

trump constitutionSome conservatives, isolationists and “Peaceniks” miss the point. Putin and Assad were testing U.S. tolerance …  how far would President Trump let them go to establish control in the Syrian civil war? The U.S. President gave a clear, decisive, immediate answer … not that far. This was very refreshing, and needed after 8 years of weakness in the face of similar tests.

The President had to take a specific, limited, targeted, and immediate response or allow mayhem in Syria, and the world, to spread.

Chemical weapons open the Pandora’s Box of military and terror nightmares. They are indiscriminate, and unacceptable.  Their use must be stopped before they are accepted as viable weapons, and they spread.  As we know from the 1995 Aum Shinrikyo Tokyo subway attack, sarin is easy to make, but only truly devastating when properly weaponized. The attack on Khan Sheikhoun was effective, and devastating.  If the preliminary assessments are true, the sarin gas was weaponized.

Military grade chemical weapons preparation, weapons loading, flight tracking, and confirmation procedures for release are very specific events…and very traceable. The argument it was a terrorist attack and conspiracy to blame Assad as justification for a Trump war is nonsense – the logic won’t hold. There is no reason to attack a Syrian base with Russian troops on it without very specific validation.

Where is the evidence of a conspiracy to contrive a reason to start a war? If this chemical attack was ISIS or other terrorist, wouldn’t that help justify more action against the terrorist groups?  And for the conspiracy theorists who question President Trump’s motives, the U.S. already has hundreds of troops operating in Syria to destroy ISIS and to stop the madness – a stated Trump top campaign priority.  The U.S. conducts airstrikes routinely, and will be there for a long time.  The war is already raging, in case you missed it, Senator Paul and Michael Savage.

The U.S. red-line on chemical weapons was drawn long ago – as the global leader the U.S. failed to act when it was crossed.  Our Nation, and our past President, lost the credibility to lead the civilized world.  Debate is great, but a timely, proportionate response was far more important than telegraphing US intentions, as has happened over and over again in the previous 8 years.

Allowing anyone to use chemical weapons with impunity sends the wrong message.  The next use might be in a crowded sports stadium in Europe or the US, with much greater effect. Action had to be taken.  Passive tolerance of unacceptable terror invites mayhem, as the world witnesses almost daily now.

President Trump made a statement – The U.S. will act decisively in its interests, not just talk about them.  A bold, gutsy, immediate response sent a message to Russia, Syria, North Korea, China and terror networks everywhere. Americans don’t want war, but cross a line that threatens our interests, beware. That statement is essential to US security and global stability.

Thank God the U.S. now has leadership willing to take a stand.  President Trump, thank you for defending America, and humanity, with guts.  Heathens take note; the US will no longer passively watch the world disintegrate into chaos.

RELATED ARTICLE: Get Ready for the Trump Doctrine – Middle East Forum

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is courtesy of RangerUp.com.

VIDEO: Harvard students say Trump is more dangerous than ISIS

This is the result of the relentless and ubiquitous hard-Left indoctrination that passes for education at Harvard and on virtually all university and college campuses today. If these students get the chance to see the Islamic State in action up close, which they very well might courtesy of the policies they themselves support, they will change their tune, but by then it will be far too late.

“VIDEO: Harvard students say Trump is more dangerous than ISIS,” by Cabot Phillips, Campus Reform, April 5, 2017:

Over the past year and a half, college administrators and students have boldly spoken out against the election, and now the presidency, of Donald Trump.

Perhaps nowhere was this more noticeable than on the left-leaning campus of Harvard University.

“I think he’s an asshole in chief. I don’t think he really cares that much about the American people.”

Campus Reform has reported numerous times on the overwhelming liberal bias at the Ivy League university, and just this week, students there started an anti-Trump “resistance school” with the goal of learning how to fight back against the president’s agenda.

Students consistently cite the “danger” posed by President Trump, and claim to feel “threatened” by his policies.

Wanting to know just how dangerous these students think Donald Trump is, Campus Reform went to Harvard to ask a simple question, “Who is more dangerous to Americans, Donald Trump or ISIS?”…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Violence erupts at pro-Trump rally in Berkeley – SFGate

Rappers, actors, leftist activists call for Trump’s ASSASSINATION

Fifty Shades of Green

“Palestinian” rams car into Israeli soldiers, killing one and injuring another

Fifty Shades of Green By Alexander Maistrovoy

“Being unable to cause might to obey justice, men have made it just to obey might.” — Blaise Pascal

“Progressive man” refuses to recognize the crimes of Islam, not because he is naïve, fine-tempered or tolerant. He does it because, unconsciously or subconsciously, he has already accepted Islam as a religion of salvation. As he accepted Stalinism, Hitlerism, Maoism and the “Khmer Rouge” before it…

Joseph de Maistre, a French aristocrat of the early 19th century, argued that man cannot live without religion, and not religion as such, but the tyrannical and merciless one. He was damned and hated, they called him an antipode of progress and freedom, even a forerunner of fascism; however, progressives proved him right again and again.

In their nihilistic ecstasy, Homo progressicus threw God off the pedestal, trampled upon the humanistic ideal of Petrarch, Alberti and Leonardo Bruni, who relied on Reason and strove for virtue, and … found themselves in complete and gaping emptiness. They realized that they could not live without the God-man — the idol, the leader, the ruler, who would rely on the unshakable, ruthless idea of salvation — not in the other world, but in this real world here and now. And with all the passion so inherent to their shallow, unstable, infantile nature, they rushed out in search of their “prince on a white horse.”

The idols of the progressives were tyrants armed with the most progressive ideology: Robespierre, and after him Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez, and finally — Islam.

In the 20th century, the Western intelligentsia was infected with red and brown bacilli.

Walter Duranty ardently denied the Holodomor. Bernard Shaw and Romain Rolland justified OGPU terror and the kangaroo court in Moscow; Aragon, Barbusse (the author of the apologetic biography of Stalin: Stalin. A New World Seen Through the Man) and Jean-Richard Bloch glorified “the Father of nations.”
“I would do nothing against Stalin at the moment; I accepted the Moscow trials and I am prepared to accept those in Barcelona,” said Andre Malraux during the massacre of anarchists from POUM by Communists in Barcelona in 1937.

Let’s guess: who is writing about whom? “Lonely overbearing man… damned disagreeable,” “friendly and commonplace,” possessing “an intelligence far beyond dogmatism”… “sucked thoughtfully at the pipe he had most politely asked my permission to smoke… I have never met a man more fair, candid, and honest.” Got it? It was Stalin, as portrayed by H. G. Wells.

How many sufferings – Solzhenitsyn recalled — were caused by progressive Western journalists, who after having visited the GULAG, praised Potemkin villages with allegedly heated barracks where political prisoners used to read Soviet newspapers sitting at clean neat tables? Indeed, Arthur Ransome (The Guardian), an American journalist and a fan of Mao, Agnes Smedley, New York reporter Lincoln Steffens (after the meeting with Lenin he wrote,“I have seen the future and it works”), Australian-British journalist Leonore Winter (the author of the book  called Red Virtue: Human Relations in the New Russia) and many others sympathized with the Bolsheviks and the Soviet Union. Juan Benet, a famous Spanish writer, suggested “strengthening the guards (in GULAG), so that people like Solzhenitsyn would not escape.” The Los Angeles Times published Alexander and Andrew Cockburn, who were Stalin’s admirers.

Hitler? Knut Hamsun, Norwegian novelist who won the Nobel Prize, described Hitler in an obituary as a “fighter for humanity and for the rights of all nations.” The “amorousness” of Martin Heidegger for the “leader of the Third Reich” is well known. In the 1930s, the Führer was quite a respectable person in the eyes of the mass media. Anne O’Hare McCormick – a foreign news correspondent for the New York Times (she got Pulitzer Prize) — described Hitler after the interview with him: he is “a rather shy and simple man, younger than one expects, more robust, taller… His eyes are almost the color of the blue larkspur in a vase behind him, curiously childlike and candid… His voice is as quiet as his black tie and his double-breasted black suit… Herr Hitler has the sensitive hand of the artist.”

The French elites were fascinated by Hitler. Ferdinand Celine said that France would not go to “Jewish war,” and claimed that there was an international Jewish conspiracy to start the world war. French Foreign Minister Georges Bonnet rendered honors to Ribbentrop, and novelist, essayist and playwright Jean Giraudoux said that he was “fully in agreement with Hitler when he states that a policy only reaches its highest form when it is racial.”

The Red Guards of Chairman Mao caused deadly convulsions in China and ecstatic rage in Jean-Paul Sartre and Simone de Beauvoir, Jan Myrdal, Charles Bettelheim, Alain Badiou and Louis Pierre Althusser. In Paris, Barbusse and Aragon created “the pocket monster” — Enver Hoxha; at Sorbonne University, Sartre worked out “the Khmer Rouge Revolution” of Pol Pot, Hu Nima, and Ieng Sary. Noam Chomsky characterized the proofs of Pol Pot’s genocide as “third rate” and complained of a “vast and unprecedented propaganda campaign against the Khmer Rouge.” Gareth Porter, winner of the Martha Gellhorn Prize for Journalism, said in May 1977: “The notion that the leadership of Democratic Kampuchea adopted a policy of physically eliminating whole classes of people was …a myth.”

In the 70’s, the whole world already knew the truth about the Red Guards. However, German youth from the Socialist Union of German Students went out  on demonstrations with portraits of the “Great Helmsman” and the song “The East is Red.” In the USA, they went into the streets holding red flags and portraits of Trotsky and Che Guevara, and dream of “Fucking the System” like their idol Abbie Hoffman. The hatred of “petty bourgeois philistines,” as Trotsky named ordinary people, together with the dream of guillotines, bayonets, and “red terror,” keep inspiring Western intellectuals like Tariq Ali, the author of the revolutionary manual Trotsky for Beginners.

“The middle class turned out to be captured by ‘bourgeois-bohemian Bolshevism,’” Pascal Bruckner wrote.

Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot passed away, but new heroes appeared in their places. Leading employees of CNN – reporter Peter Arnett, producer Robert Wiener and director of news department Eason T. Jordan – had excellent relations with close associates of Saddam Hussein, pretending they didn’t know anything about his atrocities. Hollywood stars set up a race of making pilgrimages to Castro and Chavez. Neo-Marxist professors and progressive intellectuals, such as Dario Fo, Jean Baudrillard and Martin Amis, welcomed the triumph of al-Qaeda on September 11.

The romanticization of  the “forged boot” and “iron hand,” the worship of “lonely overbearing” men with “the sensitive hand of the artist” — this explains the amazing easiness with which recent anarchists, pacifists, Marxists, atheists, after having changed a couple  of ideologies, burden themselves with the most primitive, barbaric and despotic religion of our time: Islam.

What they crave for is not religion as such. They don’t want Buddhism, Bahaism, Zoroastrianism, or even the mild Islam of the Sufi or Ahmadiyya version. They want a religion that would crush them, rape their bodies and souls, and destroy their ego — one that would terrify them and make them tremble with fear, infirmity and impotence.

Only bloodthirsty medieval Islam is able to do this today. It alone possesses unlimited cruelty and willingness to burn everything on its way. And they  gather like moths flying to the flame: communists Roger Garaudy, “Carlos the Jackal,” Trond Ali Linstad, Malcolm X, Alys Faiz; human rights defenders Jemima Goldsmith, Keith Ellison, and Uri Davis, the fighter against Zionism for the rights of the Palestinians. Fathers favor Castro, such as Oliver Stone; their sons accept Islam, such as Sean Stone. According to a public opinion poll conducted in August 2014 (Madeline Grant, Newsweek), “16% of French citizens support ISIS.” There are 7% to 8% of Muslims living in France. Who makes up the rest 8% to 9%?

Ken Livingstone, Jeremy Corbyn, John Brennan, Hollywood stars, Ylva Johansson, Sweden’s Integration Minister, who like  her boss Stefan Löfven claimed that “there was no connection between crime and immigration”; Michael Fabricant, a former vice-chair of the Tory party, who said that “some conservative Anglicans are the same as ISIS”; German politicians that established a media watchdog to “instruct the press to censor ethnicity and religion in crime reports” (a modification of Soviet censure); the Chief Justice of England and Wales, Lord Phillips, who believes that it is inevitable to recognize Sharia courts in Great Britain; atheist-apologist for Islam (O my God!) CJ Werleman; Canadian Liberals, who support  the anti-Islamophobia motion; Georgetown professor Jonathan Brown, who justifies slavery and raping of female slaves; Wendy Ayres-Bennett, a UK professor who is urging Brits to learn Urdu and Punjabi to make Muslim migrants feel welcome; Ohio State University, that offered a course on “how Muslims helped build America”; the Swedish state-owned company Lernia encouraging the replacement of standard Swedish with the “migrant-inclusive accent”; American feminists with the slogans “Allahu akbar” and “I love Islam,” who endorse the BDS movement; Swedish feminists wearing burkas in Iran; “proud  feminists” such as Elina Gustafsson and Gudrun Schyman defending Muslim criminals who raped Swedish girls – all of them and thousands of others have already converted to Islam, if not de jure, then de facto.

They appeal to Islam to escape from their fears, complexes, helplessness, and uselessness. They choose the despotism of body and spirit to deprive themselves of their freedom – the freedom that has always been an unbearable burden for their weak souls full of chimeras. They crave slavery.

They are attracted by Islam today, but it’s not about Islam. It’s about them. If Islam is defeated tomorrow and a new Genghis Khan appears with the “religion of the steppe,” or the kingdom of the Aztecs rises with priests tearing hearts from the chest of living people, they will passionately rush into their embrace. They are yearning for tyranny, and will destroy everything on their way for the sake of it. Because of them, “we shall leave this world here just as stupid and evil as we found it upon arrival.” (Voltaire)

Alexander Maistrovoy is the author of Agony of Hercules, or a Farewell to Democracy (Notes of a Stranger).

RELATED ARTICLES:

Islamic State hackers release ‘kill list’ with 8,786 targets in U.S., UK

Video: Harvard students say Trump is more dangerous than the Islamic State

The French Presidential Campaign — Deuxième Partie

Part 1 [partie un] may be found here – click.

The Interior Minister sniffles, Valls gives Macron a peck on the cheek, France 2 throws Fillon into the lion’s den, a book spills the beans on Hollande… And: whither the Jewish vote

Sniffles

The last time we saw acting Interior Minister Bruno Le Roux he was at Orly airport, solemnly declaring the “suspect had tried but failed” to get the soldier’s gun. This was followed shortly by a photo in the Figaro of the dead suspect lying on the floor with the Famas assault rifle still slung across his chest. Deliberately misleading? Honestly misinformed? No one seemed to care publicly. But LeRoux was forced to resign last week…for a different reason.

How, in the absence of any discernible competence, did the deputy get to be Interior Minister? Musical chairs. François Hollande waited to the last minute to announce he would not be running for re-election, Prime Minister Manuel Valls could finally resign and throw his hat into the Primary ring, Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve was bumped up to the PM slot, and Le Roux became a low-key Interior Minister in the twilight Hollande government.

Last week Le Roux went out in a sniffle. Looking like the fall guy meant to knock over François Fillon. Deputy Le Roux hired his teenage daughters as parliamentary assistants over a 7-year period with 24 different temporary contracts for a total salary of €55,000. Cross-checkers produced damning evidence. Not only were the teenies overpaid, they were apparently moonlighting for their father while simultaneously holding other jobs, studying, traveling, etc. Of course le Roux was allowed to deny any wrongdoing before resigning. The Greek chorus media chanted “Le Roux resigned why not Fillon?”

Candidates for President of France.

Valls pecks Macron on the cheek.

Defeated in the primaries, the former PM, who has shown integrity and valor in some of the worst moments of jihad violence, had nowhere to go. He could not decently respect the good sport promise to defend the victor, Benoît Hamon, one of the “frondeurs,” an informal caucus of far Left deputies that persistently hounded the Hollande-Valls government. Hamon’s last ditch socialism is outplayed by Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s eloquent extravagance.  The centerpiece of Hamon’s primary campaign was a shiny universal salary promise, based on a post-employment theory: in our modern economy, jobs don’t need people, people don’t need jobs, so the government will give them salaries and their purchasing power will boost the economy. No one ever asked him why a small businessman or a CEO would work days, nights and weekends to produce the wealth that would be distributed like Care packages.

Hamon had gadflied the socialist party; Mélenchon opted out years ago and created a far Left conglomerate that repeatedly splinters and regroups. Today he runs on his personal ticket –La France Insoumise. The “insoumise [= that does not submit] has nothing to do with the Islamic concept of submission; it’s about the 99% not submitting to the 1%.  Reeking of authenticity, dressed in corduroy casual, the earthy showman makes outworn class struggle rhetoric seem new. But pollsters say he gets only 13% of the working class vote, with 51% going to Marine Le Pen. Mélenchon delights in punishing the privileged classes. Under his regime, doctors won’t be allowed to apply surcharges (paid, it should be noted, by the patient). The GP that takes €50 for a consultation today would have to be satisfied with the health system rate of €25.

Mélenchon’s solution for world peace is to exit NATO and the “logic of war.” The people’s army he intends to create by reestablishing the draft is more a public works project than a defense measure. Awkward attempts by Hamon to create a united Left by swallowing up Mélenchon’s candidacy have failed miserably, as Mélenchon’s fortunes rise and Hamon’s sink

[Go to familysecuritymatters.org to see photos by Jiro Mochizuki]

Valls pecks Macron on the cheek

Manuel Valls, the unashamed Social Democrat announced he will vote for Emmanuel Macron on the 1st round. Yes but Emmanuel Macron, who served as Minister of the Economy in the Valls government, wants to be the new face, the new way, the new name, the very image of the never-before- better -than- ever. Not old Socialist Party wine in trendy new bottles! In a press conference hastily organized on the eve of Valls’s announcement, Macron gave En Marche a St. Paul touch: Neither Jew nor Greek, neither Socialist nor Républicain and not even Modem; the multitudes that came to him must drop their former affiliations and become En Marcheurs. No matter how many ministers, deputies, advisors and supporters of the outgoing team join En Marche, including Hollande waiting in the wings, they’ll give up their labels and abandon hopes of cushy jobs in Macron’s Brand New World.

Emmanuel Macron’s post-politics is enticing. Brimming over with boisterous benevolence for modern multicolor France, he promises success for one and all, with balanced doses of IT, startups, and social engineering. Problems aren’t addressed-that creates anxiety-they’re swooped into Bright New World projects that leap from the banlieue to the depressed hinterland and across the Mediterranean all the way to the Cape of Good Hope. His government will invest in ecology and all that’s renewable, offer culture to the rich & poor, recycle the jobless with modern skills, solve conflict with love not hate, welcome immigration with hospitality not rejection of the Other. Cut & paste plagiarizer, Macron takes bits & pieces of Fillon’s security measures…and then claims his rival doesn’t have a program.

Fillon in the lion’s den

The French must have a passion for politics because the media are serving it in an unending flow, to the exclusion of everything else happening in the outside world. The level of discourse varies but it is sometimes meaty and quite fascinating. Last week’s Emission Politique (Political Broadcast) on the France 2 channel of al Dura blood libel fame was vicious. François Fillon was pummeled, speared, mocked, scorned, berated, wracked and cracked…no holds barred.

Journalists, specialists and invited guests did not act as individuals challenging a candidate; they were a mob unleashed on a caricature of guilt. Not a living breathing human being, not even a punching bag, François Fillon was a sheet of newspaper blackened with accusations, he was the front page of Le Canard Enchaîné. And they felt free to grind him into the muddy gutter.

Is he too corrupt to be president? No matter his program, his lucidity, his mastery of details and context, his experience and skills and, now, his exceptional resistance to low blows, no matter the expectations of the majority of voters that correspond to Fillon’s offer, no matter the perception that the welfare and security of the nation depend on getting government out of the hands of François Hollande and his suite, is François Fillon so corrupt that he should have been dumped?

Deputies are allotted a budget to pay their assistants. There is no job description for parliamentary assistants. Unless I’m mistaken, this hasn’t been an issue of public concern. Deputies also dispose of a “discretionary” fund that they use in their circumscriptions. Questions have been raised about petty favoritism and donations to shady associations linked to the underground economy and/or Islamic subversion. Hush money, so to speak, doled out in the interests of keeping the ‘hood quiet.

Le Canard Enchaîné managed in the space of a few hours to brand François Fillon with the scarlet letter of Corruption. Subsequent revelations piled on. Fillon, who cuts an elegant figure, had accepted the gift of two or more expensive tailor-made suits from a friend. Aha! Other devoted friends have given him expensive watches. But it was the initial thunderbolt that blasted his campaign. With rare exceptions, the media and pollsters relay the accusations, reinforce the guilty verdict without trial, and assume that Fillon will be eliminated on April 23rd.

François Fillon had the same budget as any other deputy. Along with more than a hundred of his fellow deputies, he chose to employ family members, his wife (1996-2013) and, briefly, his adult children. Whether they worked a little, very much, or not at all, the allotment didn’t vary. If he had hired a stranger who did or didn’t work, the budget wouldn’t vary. Did Penelope Fillon deserve her €3,600 (net) monthly salary more or less than President Hollande’s coiffeur who is paid €10,000 (gross) a month?

David Pujadas, host of Emission Politique, had no qualms about hitting François Fillon right between the eyes: “Do you like money?” he asked, maliciously. Does David Pujadas like money? Some sources say he earns €18,000 a month, others a more modest €12,000. A large percentage of French employees earn the minimum monthly wage of €1,143 net.

Economist François Lenglet came into the ring challenging Fillon on his economic program that “favors the wealthy.” Graphic simulations of the candidate’s tax cut showed benefits in the hundreds for low earners, in the thousands for high earners. “Are you a Marxist?” asked Fillon, and then went on to explain that heavy taxes account for the dearth of French investment capital, leaving companies in the hands of foreign pension funds and Qatari sovereign funds. (N.B. the same Lenglet is denounced by a Mélenchon supporter as a darling of the money grubbers!)

The lowest point of the low class broadcast was an obscene diatribe vomited onto Fillon by a mediocre writer whose name doesn’t need to be mentioned.

Though it might matter, in the absolute, to know if François Fillon is more or less gluttonous for power, money, luxury goods and privileges than any or all of his fellow politicians, the real question is how did so much private information get into the public sphere at this crucial moment in the presidential campaign? The moralizing purificators that have been hammering away at the unspeakable scandal of a few bespoke suits are curiously indifferent to the perversion of the police, the judiciary and the media to destroy political rivals that imperils our democracy.

A book spills the beans on Hollande

Emission Politique coincided with the release of Bienvenu Place Beauvau, an exposé by one former and two current Canard Enchaîné journalists. Cutting through the tangled underbrush of nicknames, acronyms, anecdotes, rumors, bile, and citations from anonymous sources, I dimly perceive the intent to show that François Hollande was unfortunately unable to moralize the security and intelligence apparatus left by his predecessors. Incidentally, by amateurism rather than malice, President Hollande ended up using the police, the courts, and the media to hack away at his rivals.

This inside info confirms what we had deduced from the outside. Shortly after losing the 2012 race, Nicolas Sarkozy was hit with damning revelations and a series of thirteen or more lawsuits.  Guilty, too, of liking money, Sarkozy was accused of squeezing millions from the trembling hand of heiress Liliane Bettencourt , engaging in shameful intercourse with Qatari think tanks, falsifying the accounts of his 2012 presidential campaign, peddling influence, and a variety of other crimes and misdemeanors. His phones were tapped, his confidential communications with his lawyer were tapped, he and his lawyer were pursued, investigated, searched & seized and, on one occasion, the ex-president was convoked by a judge in the middle of the night. So far every case has ended in acquittal.

I think it would be fair to say that Nicolas Sarkozy’s chances of running for president in 2017 were destroyed. Manuel Valls, Hollande’s PM and expected rival for the socialist nomination, was poked and pinched, bonked with nasty rumors, and thrown a variety of banana peels. And so on and so forth.

Paralyzing the lions with his steady gaze on that fateful Emission Politique evening, François Fillon accused President Hollande of orchestrating the campaign of delegitimization aimed at him since January. Shocking! The authors of the exposé don’t know where to put themselves. Having convincingly described Hollande’s machinations, they explicitly deny that Fillon is a victim of same. But a document I received last month describes in detail how the LR [Les Républicains] candidate was tracked, exposed, bagged and dragged through the media streets, victim of the exact procedures described in the book: secret information is sucked out of Tracfin, police searches & interrogations, wiretaps, etc. and  funneled up to President Hollande; the police are used as henchmen, specific media chosen to disclose biased information and inquisitional secrets, handpicked judges are named to prosecute & persecute.

Top LR brass has combed through the exposé and reportedly found at least 40 infractions that they duly reported to the same authorities that launched the Fillon investigation. If these courts are truly the expression of a public demand for ethics in politics and not, as some might think, President Hollande’s hatchet men, they will soon be announcing a slew of investigations.

Obviously relieved, Fillon vigorously pursues his campaign, buoyantly self-confident, focused on the issues. Traditional pollsters keep him at an anemic 19% 3rd place, in danger of being overtaken by Jean-Luc Mélenchon who’s roaring down the fast track.  And if it should turn out to be true, as the Right insists, that Macron is a Hollande remake, why not go for broke with a Mélenchon-Le Pen final round? Lawd have mercy! That feisty showman promised, in the 2012 legislative election, to drive the wicked witch into the ditch at Hénin-Beaumont. He lost. Marine Le Pen won.

Left-leaning Libération (owned by Macron backer, the French-Israeli cable & media mogul Patrick Drahi) snickers at the Filteris big data analysis results published by Right-oriented Valeurs Actuelles, consistently showing Fillon at the top of the heap. Proper pollsters, invited like yeast to raise the dough of big-audience political broadcasts, unanimously deny the possibility of a hidden Fillon vote. We do our polls via the Net, they say. No shaming face-to-face confrontation.

The shame, my friends, lies not in your pollsters…. Fillon voters chased away by the shock & awe campaign face their own conscience. Can they tell themselves “He cheated and now he’s lying, he’s guilty and claims to be innocent, I’m scrupulously honest and he accepts lavish presents, but I’m going to vote for him because he has the best program?” Yes, when push comes to shove, they will vote Fillon. Because they have nowhere else to go. Marine Le Pen? Why trust her to clean up the Islamization mess when Fillon has gone further than any candidate in diagnosis and treatment? He outlined his approach in Vaincre le totalitarisme islamique [Defeat totalitarian Islam]. He is competent, serious, level-headed, determined, and capable of governing. Marine-for-president straddles an antiquated isolationist welfare state economic program and an Islamo-neo Nazi back office. She is a decoy, a magnet for frustrations that would worsen if her program were ever applied. A Macron-Fillon runoff would be a logical confrontation of two distinctly different approaches to the life and death challenges of the 21st century.

The Jewish vote

It shouldn’t count for anything. But it does. Numerically insignificant, the Jewish vote weighs significantly in a democracy.

Jean-Luc Mélenchon, according to a March 25, 2017 post on the Parole 2 Paix Ismael site, promises to recognize the Palestinian state, impose sanctions on Israel, and abrogate the Alliot-Marie decree recommending legal action against supporters of BDS.

The “Israel” wing of the socialist party has pulled out of Benoît Hamon’s campaign because of his pro-BDS positions and advisors, including BDS activist Salah Amokrane and close associate Alexis Bachelay who declared that Israeli persecution of Palestinians is far worse than what the South African apartheid government did to Blacks.

Emmanuel Macron’s right hand man, Richard Ferrand, denies accusations (by a site reportedly aligned with the “Identitaire” movement) of supporting BDS. In fact, he gave a financial contribution to a regional branch of France Palestine Solidarité, an association that enthusiastically supports BDS.

François Fillon has ruffled feathers with his longstanding opposition to BDS. The BDS-allied BNC objects to his disapproval, claiming that BDS promotes “justice and universal rights.” Hugh Fitzgerald expands on Fillon’s forceful opposition to BDS and denunciation of the French votes in support of the UNESCO resolutions that deny the eternal bond between Judaism and Jerusalem. Contrary to the official French position, Fillon is opposed to international pressure for a solution to the conflict between “Israel and the ‘Palestinians’.”

According to the Animal politique collective, cited in Libération, Marine Le Pen, Nicolas Dupont-Aignan, Jacques Chemiade, and Jean-Luc Mélenchon are unambiguously opposed to halal and kosher slaughter. Benoît Hamon hedges. Though Libération claims François Fillon, too, insists that the laws of the nation supersede religious laws [his position in 2012] he now favors derogation for halal and kosher slaughter.

Who are the CRIF’s best friends?

I attended talks by two presidential candidates under the auspices of Les Amis du Crif, the event-organizing branch of the Jewish community umbrella organization. François Fillon received a standing ovation from a packed audience of 700, chanting in unison “Fillon president, Fillon president.” Ten days later, Emmanuel Macron arrived a half hour late, the audience was restless, lukewarm, sometimes audibly in disagreement. Quite a few people left before the end. Fillon was relaxed, warm, and personable. Macron had none of the charisma he exhibits at rallies. Fillon was at home with this particular audience. Macron is more excited by the other diversity, the kind he celebrated from the top of his lungs at a recent rally in Marseille, shouting “This is France, these are the French,” and then naming more than a dozen countries of origin, Algerians, Armenians, Comorians…through to Senegalese, Tunisians…

Much more could be said about their respective programs but I must conclude now, 3 hours before the chockfull debate on BFM TV featuring all 11 candidates. Yes, there are 11 candidates, most of them to the Left of Mélenchon. Readers will thank me for not reviewing the full spectrum!

NEWS OF THE DAY

Sunday April 1st: despite protests from a variety of individuals and organizations, and concerns expressed by Paris mayor Anne Hidalgo, a “pro-Palestinian” demonstration was authorized at Place du Châtelet. The original BDS and anti-Semitic slogans-demanding separation of “CRIF and State”-were toned down but the message was clear. Approximately 200 people showed up. A counter-demonstration of some 100 Zionists was kept at a distance.  No clashes were reported.

Photos at http://www.europalestine.com/spip.php?article12839

French Presidential Campaign Part 2 UPDATE

5 April 2017

I drop in to the Shir Hadash Bookstore on rue des Rosiers at the end of the day. Madame Magnichever comes in, pale and troubled, and whispers to me: “A dear friend… we’ve known her for 40 years…she was assassinated… an Islamist pushed her out the window.”

Reports of the incident came out first in Jewish media, then it was picked up by a few two generalist sites: A Jewish woman in her mid-sixties was pushed out of a third (in U.S. 4th)-floor window by a 27 year-old Muslim neighbor who, according to some accounts, had recently become radicalized. He had frequent run-ins with the police for violence and “petty” crime. According to testimony of a  neighbor who witnessed the crime, the assailant who shouted allahu akhbar as he pushed the victim out the window. He is in police custody, undergoing psychiatric examination. Police sources say he made “incoherent statements” (we’ve heard that before).

Detail will follow in Part 3 of the ongoing series.

RELATED ARTICLES:

A Kosher Stamp for Marine Le Pen?

‘Pinkwashing’ populism: Gay voters embrace French far-right

Jew Haters in Ohio: Nurses, Cooks, a Real Estate Agent and 18 others

“F**kin jew get your ass out of here,” says Adam Salti from Cleveland, Ohio. Salti works in a hospital.

This is one of scores of anti-Semitic comments uncovered by our latest report.

The Greater Cleveland Report focuses on 21 students and professionals, who made dozens of viciously anti-Semitic remarks as well as anti-Black and anti-LGBT comments on social media.

The report covers students from 6 Cleveland universities and includes members of Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP), the Muslim Students Association (MSA) and Arab Student Union (ASU).

Professionals represented:

Would you eat food cooked by Ayman Ramahi who works in the restaurant at the Sunoco North Olmsted gas station? He said “YEA AND WELL KILL THE YAHOOD! [Jews]” and “U fuxin faggot kys [Kill Yourself]” and “Abeed [black people] are disgusting.”

Would you buy a house from Mohamed Wahdan, the realtor and gun enthusiast who delights in anti-Semitic and homophobic comments and bizarrely takes nude photos of men in public?

Would you buy a phone from Allen Allan, a telephone company employee who is a Holocaust denier, conspiracy theorist and racist?

For more information on these 21 unsavory characters please see below.

The Canary Mission team are in an on-going effort to expose individuals and organizations that engage in hate-speech and anti-Semitism. But we need your assistance. You can help by donating and encouraging others to subscribe.

View Complete Report

21 Cleveland Anti-Semites

Mohamed Wahdan is a student at Cleveland State University, majoring in Business. In June 2016, Wahdan was fired from Holton Wise —  a Cleveland, OH real estate company — after Wahdan tweeted derogatory remarks to professional basketball player, Stephen Curry, about Curry’s sister, Sydel. Wahdan’s offending tweet contained a reference to Riley Curry — Stephen Curry’s 3-year-old daughter — demanding: “You and your whole family get the f**k out of Cleveland and take Riley’s faggot a** with you.” As of March, 2017, Wahdan worked as a Realtor at Howard Hanna’s Westlake, Ohio office.

Moe Clammy Hamdan attended Cuyahoga Community College and says he is a branch manager at Enterprise Rent-A-Car. Hamdan has tweeted violent hatred of Jews, such as: “Why don’t one of your little Jew a** bitchs come over to Palestine so we can smack the f**k outta ur ugly A**.”

Deanna Silmi was a student activist with SJP at Cleveland State University from 2015 – 2016. Silmi has demanded the boycott of Jews, tweeting: “If you buy anything supporting the Jewish during this month especially and your Muslim I’m judging you.” Silmi applied to the Cleveland Heights Police Academy, and was looking for a job in a Police Department as of January 20, 2017. On February 24, 2017, Silmi posted on Facebook from Sandusky, OH that she is employed at Planet Fitness.”

Bahaa Falweh was the president of the Arab Student Union at Cleveland State University (CSU) from 2015 to 2016. Falweh is also affiliated with SJP at CSU. He is now pursuing an MBA in Health Administration at CSU. He has tweeted anti-Semitic attacks such as: “Jew bitch,” “F**k you Jews” and “Jews die.”spacing=”0″ cellpadding=”0″>

Raed Naserallah attended nursing school and has worked in Intensive Care units in the Cleveland Clinic. He has tweeted a plethora of anti-Semitism, anti-Black racism and hate for LGBT. Is Naserallah safe to attend to patients at their bedsides?

Kasem Abed is an electrical engineering major at Cleveland State University. Abed has tweeted: “I’m bringing rocks to school on Monday, bout to turn s**t up in the library. That Jew better run” and “F**k the Jews.” Abed also tweeted many anti-Black remarks, including a wish that Black people should be murdered indiscriminately.

Wala’a Mohammad is the treasurer and budget officer for SJP and a member of MSA at CSU. Mohammad expressed hatred of Israel supporters and made homophobic comments on Twitter. She also tweeted: “allah yin3an al yahood [May Allah curse the Jews].”

View Complete Report

Ayman Ramahi is an employee of Sunoco in North Olmstead, Ohio. Ramahi has tweeted “@zainabmustafaa YEA AND WELL KILL THE YAHOOD! [Jews]” and “If I had the chance to go NOW to #Palestine and throw ONE rock at a Zionists face AND get killed I would do it.”

Cleveland State University student Rahma Bakhshi tweeted violent hatred of Jews and Black people, such as: “‘@moeab75: I finally figured out what I want to do in my life. I’m gonna finish what hitler started! And add blacks to the list too.’”

Cleveland State University Civil Engineering Major Mashhour Shehadeh tweeted “When life hands you rocks, throw them at yahood [jews].”

Moe Jaber spread violent hatred of Jews and Israel on Twitter. Jaber subsequently deleted his Twitter account, in February 2017.

Nawal Sharab of Englewood, Ohio implied that her expressions of Jew-hatred are directed only toward “Zionist Jews.” Yet she tweeted “If I’m following any Jews or if any are following me please let me kno and unfollow me.” She also expressed her desire to slit the throat of an Israeli.

Mohammed Abuaun has spread hatred of Jews, hatred of Israel, mocked the Holocaust  and spread homophobic insults on social media. Abuaun claimed on Facebook to have been a student at Cleveland State University until 2017, studying Business Information Systems. Abuaun tweeted: “I haven’t had a day off since hitler was offing Jews and my country was free.”

Ali Allan was a student at Cuyahoga Community College, in 2015. Allan tweeted “‘@RashadAhmad95: Jews are up the street’ kill em all.” Allan also tweeted a vine clip of himself sitting on a hospital bed pretending to shoot a male nurse, then giggling. The tweet read: “Its a Jew.”

Ahmad Saleh tweeted: “Where tf is Iran with there nuclear weapons so they can f**k up these damn Jews.” On July 23 2015, Saleh tweeted that he was “having good luck” at Wright State University. And on January 5, 2017 he tweeted that he hoped nursing school would “be a breeze.” Would you want a guy like that at your bedside?

Moe Hamdan is affiliated with the Muslim Students Association at Cuyahoga Community College and claims to work as a manager at Marathon Petroleum Corporation. He tweeted many anti-Semitic remarks, such as “‘Ew, that ugly Jewish monkey” and used the Arabic word “abeed” — a racist slur, meaning “slav.”

Pipeline Opponents Push Do-It-Yourself Ecoterrorism Manual

Don’t expect the Pipeline Wars to simmer down, because some radical opponents will go to any lengths to stop them.

Cover-for-Direct-Action-Manual-655x1024Inside Sources reports one group of pipeline protesters is selling an ecoterrorism manual to instruct others on how to fight energy infrastructure projects:

They call it DAM. That’s short for Direct Action Manual. Groups connected to the protest camp for the Mariner East 2 pipeline in Pennsylvania are selling copies for $25. Published by Earth First! — an openly radical environmentalist (sic) group and journal — the manual lays out protest techniques for use by environmentalists. Some of these approaches were even used at the pipeline protests in North Dakota last year. Earth First! supports violent actions against energy infrastructure development and the manual itself is essentially an ecoterrorist’s handbook, laying out techniques and approaches to stop various forms of energy infrastructure development. Now on its third edition, its publishers are supporters of the protest against the Mariner 2 pipeline in Pennsylvania and worked to stop the Keystone XL pipeline in the past.

The report goes into some of the tactics mentioned in the book:

“The possibilities are really endless, and you should let your imagination run wild,” the Direct Action Manual advises. “Do they only value money and property? Some slashed tires, paint stripper, and sand in the gas tank can certainly make them think twice about if their choices are worth it…Channel your inner younger sibling energy and you’ll be sure to make someone’s life hell.”

This is followed by a section detailing how to turn off lights and water at someone’s home or business and recipes for DIY stink bombs and “critter bombs,” involving a dead animal.

Many of those violent tactics were used in the protests surrounding the recently-completed Dakota Access Pipeline: Arson;  rioting; vandalism; tires slashed and hoses cut on heavy machinery; construction and security workers attacked; Molotov cocktails launched at police.

What’s more, during the protests, pipeline opponents calling themselves, “Climate Direct Action,” attacked four other pipelines. One expert warned their actions could’ve created a “catastrophic” pipeline disaster.

Now with an energy-friendly president in the White House, it should be easier to get oil and natural gas pipeline projects through the federal permitting process. In response, “Keep it in the ground” folks may resort to more violence to stop them.

Energy infrastructure developers and law enforcement must be vigilant. Also, anyone (or groups) tempted to join these pipeline protests—like celebrities—should think twice about the types of people they may be associating with.

Spirited debate is an American tradition, but it crosses the line when it becomes violent.

MORE ARTICLES ON: ENERGY

RELATED ARTICLES:

Here’s Why We Need to Build More Pipelines

A Historic Moment for U.S. Energy

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of Dakota Access Pipeline protesters pinning a security guard against a truck. Photo source: Morton County (N.D.) Sheriff’s Department.

America as the Last Man Standing

Let us not forget those who warned us of the threat to our Constitutional Republic, our culture and Western Civilization. The greatest threat to the free world – the massive global Muslim migration.

The below speech by Geert Wilders, given in New York City in 2008, is prophetic.

Democrats and their allies in the courts are fighting to keep the Muslim migration flowing in the name of social justice, while those with vision see what is happening in Europe with growing alarm. There are two elections to watch in the coming months. The first in France and then in Germany. If the populists win in these two countries, then the free world wins. If not, Europe is doomed.

As Dr. Andrew Bostom wrote:

… liberty is the most precious of gifts. My generation never had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by people who fought for it with their lives.

All throughout Europe American cemeteries remind us of the young boys who never made it home, and whose memory we cherish. My generation does not own this freedom; we are merely its custodians. We can only hand over this hard won liberty to Europe’s children in the same state in which it was offered to us. We cannot strike a deal with mullahs and imams. Future generations would never forgive us. We cannot squander our liberties. We simply do not have the right to do so.


wilders i fight for freedomGeert Wilders, chairman Party for Freedom, the Netherlands

Speech at the Four Seasons, New York

September 25, 2008

Dear friends,

Thank you very much for inviting me. Great to be at the Four Seasons. I come from a country that has one season only: a rainy season that starts January 1st and ends December 31st. When we have three sunny days in a row, the government declares a national emergency. So Four Seasons, that’s new to me.

It’s great to be in New York. When I see the skyscrapers and office buildings, I think of what Ayn Rand said: “The sky over New York and the will of man made visible.” Of course. Without the Dutch you would have been nowhere, still figuring out how to buy this island from the Indians. But we are glad we did it for you. And, frankly, you did a far better job than we possibly could have done.

I come to America with a mission. All is not well in the old world. There is a tremendous danger looming, and it is very difficult to be optimistic. We might be in the final stages of the Islamization of Europe. This not only is a clear and present danger to the future of Europe itself, it is a threat to America and the sheer survival of the West. The danger I see looming is the scenario of America as the last man standing. The United States as the last bastion of Western civilization, facing an Islamic Europe. In a generation or two, the US will ask itself: who lost Europe? Patriots from around Europe risk their lives every day to prevent precisely this scenario form becoming a reality.

My short lecture consists of 4 parts.

First I will describe the situation on the ground in Europe. Then, I will say a few things about Islam. Thirdly, if you are still here, I will talk a little bit about the movie you just saw. To close I will tell you about a meeting in Jerusalem.

The Europe you know is changing. You have probably seen the landmarks. The Eiffel Tower and Trafalgar Square and Rome’s ancient buildings and maybe the canals of Amsterdam. They are still there. And they still look very much the same as they did a hundred years ago.

But in all of these cities, sometimes a few blocks away from your tourist destination, there is another world, a world very few visitors see – and one that does not appear in your tourist guidebook. It is the world of the parallel society created by Muslim mass-migration. All throughout Europe a new reality is rising: entire Muslim neighbourhoods where very few indigenous people reside or are even seen. And if they are, they might regret it. This goes for the police as well. It’s the world of head scarves, where women walk around in figureless tents, with baby strollers and a group of children. Their husbands, or slaveholders if you prefer, walk three steps ahead. With mosques on many street corner. The shops have signs you and I cannot read. You will be hard-pressed to find any economic activity. These are Muslim ghettos controlled by religious fanatics. These are Muslim neighbourhoods, and they are mushrooming in every city across Europe. These are the building-blocks for territorial control of increasingly larger portions of Europe, street by street, neighbourhood by neighbourhood, city by city.

There are now thousands of mosques throughout Europe. With larger congregations than there are in churches. And in every European city there are plans to build super-mosques that will dwarf every church in the region. Clearly, the signal is: we rule.

Many European cities are already one-quarter Muslim: just take Amsterdam, Marseille and Malmo in Sweden. In many cities the majority of the under-18 population is Muslim. Paris is now surrounded by a ring of Muslim neighbourhoods. Mohammed is the most popular name among boys in many cities. In some elementary schools in Amsterdam the farm can no longer be mentioned, because that would also mean mentioning the pig, and that would be an insult to Muslims. Many state schools in Belgium and Denmark only serve halal food to all pupils. In once-tolerant Amsterdam gays are beaten up almost exclusively by Muslims. Non-Muslim women routinely hear “whore, whore”. Satellite dishes are not pointed to local TV stations, but to stations in the country of origin. In France school teachers are advised to avoid authors deemed offensive to Muslims, including Voltaire and Diderot; the same is increasingly true of Darwin. The history of the Holocaust can in many cases no longer be taught because of Muslim sensitivity. In England sharia courts are now officially part of the British legal system. Many neighbourhoods in France are no-go areas for women without head scarves. Last week a man almost died after being beaten up by Muslims in Brussels, because he was drinking during the Ramadan. Jews are fleeing France in record numbers, on the run for the worst wave of anti-Semitism since World War II. French is now commonly spoken on the streets of Tel Aviv and Netanya, Israel. I could go on forever with stories like this. Stories about Islamization.

A total of fifty-four million Muslims now live in Europe. San Diego University recently calculated that a staggering 25 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim just 12 years from now. Bernhard Lewis has predicted a Muslim majority by the end of this century.

Now these are just numbers. And the numbers would not be threatening if the Muslim-immigrants had a strong desire to assimilate. But there are few signs of that. The Pew Research Center reported that half of French Muslims see their loyalty to Islam as greater than their loyalty to France. One-third of French Muslims do not object to suicide attacks. The British Centre for Social Cohesion reported that one-third of British Muslim students are in favour of a worldwide caliphate. A Dutch study reported that half of Dutch Muslims admit they “understand” the 9/11 attacks.

Muslims demand what they call ‘respect’. And this is how we give them respect. Our elites are willing to give in. To give up. In my own country we have gone from calls by one cabinet member to turn Muslim holidays into official state holidays, to statements by another cabinet member, that Islam is part of Dutch culture, to an affirmation by the Christian-Democratic attorney general that he is willing to accept sharia in the Netherlands if there is a Muslim majority. We have cabinet members with passports from Morocco and Turkey.

Muslim demands are supported by unlawful behaviour, ranging from petty crimes and random violence, for example against ambulance workers and bus drivers, to small-scale riots. Paris has seen its uprising in the low-income suburbs, the banlieus. Some prefer to see these as isolated incidents, but I call it a Muslim intifada. I call the perpetrators “settlers”. Because that is what they are. They do not come to integrate into our societies, they come to integrate our society into their Dar-al-Islam. Therefore, they are settlers.

Much of this street violence I mentioned is directed exclusively against non-Muslims, forcing many native people to leave their neighbourhoods, their cities, their countries.

Politicians shy away from taking a stand against this creeping sharia. They believe in the equality of all cultures. Moreover, on a mundane level, Muslims are now a swing vote not to be ignored.

Our many problems with Islam cannot be explained by poverty, repression or the European colonial past, as the Left claims. Nor does it have anything to do with Palestinians or American troops in Iraq. The problem is Islam itself.

Allow me to give you a brief Islam 101. The first thing you need to know about Islam is the importance of the book of the Quran. The Quran is Allah’s personal word, revealed by an angel to Mohammed, the prophet. This is where the trouble starts. Every word in the Quran is Allah’s word and therefore not open to discussion or interpretation. It is valid for every Muslim and for all times. Therefore, there is no such a thing as moderate Islam. Sure, there are a lot of moderate Muslims. But a moderate Islam is non-existent.

The Quran calls for hatred, violence, submission, murder, and terrorism. The Quran calls for Muslims to kill non-Muslims, to terrorize non-Muslims and to fulfil their duty to wage war: violent jihad. Jihad is a duty for every Muslim, Islam is to rule the world – by the sword. The Quran is clearly anti-Semitic, describing Jews as monkeys and pigs.

The second thing you need to know is the importance of Mohammed the prophet. His behaviour is an example to all Muslims and cannot be criticized. Now, if Mohammed had been a man of peace, let us say like Ghandi and Mother Theresa wrapped in one, there would be no problem. But Mohammed was a warlord, a mass murderer, a pedophile, and had several marriages – at the same time. Islamic tradition tells us how he fought in battles, how he had his enemies murdered and even had prisoners of war executed. Mohammed himself slaughtered the Jewish tribe of Banu Qurayza. He advised on matters of slavery, but never advised to liberate slaves. Islam has no other morality than the advancement of Islam. If it is good for Islam, it is good. If it is bad for Islam, it is bad. There is no gray area or other side.

Quran as Allah’s own word and Mohammed as the perfect man are the two most important facets of Islam. Let no one fool you about Islam being a religion. Sure, it has a god, and a here-after, and 72 virgins. But in its essence Islam is a political ideology. It is a system that lays down detailed rules for society and the life of every person. Islam wants to dictate every aspect of life. Islam means ‘submission’. Islam is not compatible with freedom and democracy, because what it strives for is sharia. If you want to compare Islam to anything, compare it to communism or national-socialism, these are all totalitarian ideologies.

This is what you need to know about Islam, in order to understand what is going on in Europe. For millions of Muslims the Quran and the live of Mohammed are not 14 centuries old, but are an everyday reality, an ideal, that guide every aspect of their lives. Now you know why Winston Churchill called Islam “the most retrograde force in the world”, and why he compared Mein Kampf to the Quran.

Which brings me to my movie, Fitna.

I am a lawmaker, and not a movie maker. But I felt I had the moral duty to educate about Islam. The duty to make clear that the Quran stands at the heart of what some people call terrorism but is in reality jihad. I wanted to show that the problems of Islam are at the core of Islam, and do not belong to its fringes.

Now, from the day the plan for my movie was made public, it caused quite a stir, in the Netherlands and throughout Europe. First, there was a political storm, with government leaders, across the continent in sheer panic. The Netherlands was put under a heightened terror alert, because of possible attacks or a revolt by our Muslim population. The Dutch branch of the Islamic organisation Hizb ut-Tahrir declared that the Netherlands was due for an attack. Internationally, there was a series of incidents. The Taliban threatened to organize additional attacks against Dutch troops in Afghanistan, and a website linked to Al Qaeda published the message that I ought to be killed, while various muftis in the Middle East stated that I would be responsible for all the bloodshed after the screening of the movie. In Afghanistan and Pakistan the Dutch flag was burned on several occasions. Dolls representing me were also burned. The Indonesian President announced that I will never be admitted into Indonesia again, while the UN Secretary General and the European Union issued cowardly statements in the same vein as those made by the Dutch Government. I could go on and on. It was an absolute disgrace, a sell-out.

A plethora of legal troubles also followed, and have not ended yet. Currently the state of Jordan is litigating against me. Only last week there were renewed security agency reports about a heightened terror alert for the Netherlands because of Fitna.

Now, I would like to say a few things about Israel. Because, very soon, we will get together in its capitol. The best way for a politician in Europe to loose votes is to say something positive about Israel. The public has wholeheartedly accepted the Palestinian narrative, and sees Israel as the aggressor. I, however, will continue to speak up for Israel. I see defending Israel as a matter of principle. I have lived in this country and visited it dozens of times. I support Israel. First, because it is the Jewish homeland after two thousand years of exile up to and including Auschwitz, second because it is a democracy, and third because Israel is our first line of defense.

Samuel Huntington writes it so aptly: “Islam has bloody borders”. Israel is located precisely on that border. This tiny country is situated on the fault line of jihad, frustrating Islam’s territorial advance. Israel is facing the front lines of jihad, like Kashmir, Kosovo, the Philippines, Southern Thailand, Darfur in Sudan, Lebanon, and Aceh in Indonesia. Israel is simply in the way. The same way West-Berlin was during the Cold War.

The war against Israel is not a war against Israel. It is a war against the West. It is jihad. Israel is simply receiving the blows that are meant for all of us. If there would have been no Israel, Islamic imperialism would have found other venues to release its energy and its desire for conquest. Thanks to Israeli parents who send their children to the army and lay awake at night, parents in Europe and America can sleep well and dream, unaware of the dangers looming.

Many in Europe argue in favor of abandoning Israel in order to address the grievances of our Muslim minorities. But if Israel were, God forbid, to go down, it would not bring any solace to the West. It would not mean our Muslim minorities would all of a sudden change their behavior, and accept our values. On the contrary, the end of Israel would give enormous encouragement to the forces of Islam. They would, and rightly so, see the demise of Israel as proof that the West is weak, and doomed. The end of Israel would not mean the end of our problems with Islam, but only the beginning. It would mean the start of the final battle for world domination. If they can get Israel, they can get everything. Therefore, it is not that the West has a stake in Israel. It is Israel.

It is very difficult to be an optimist in the face of the growing Islamization of Europe. All the tides are against us. On all fronts we are losing. Demographically the momentum is with Islam. Muslim immigration is even a source of pride within ruling liberal parties. Academia, the arts, the media, trade unions, the churches, the business world, the entire political establishment have all converted to the suicidal theory of multiculturalism. So-called journalists volunteer to label any and all critics of Islamization as a ‘right-wing extremists’ or ‘racists’. The entire establishment has sided with our enemy. Leftists, liberals and Christian-Democrats are now all in bed with Islam.

This is the most painful thing to see: the betrayal by our elites. At this moment in Europe’s history, our elites are supposed to lead us. To stand up for centuries of civilization. To defend our heritage. To honour our eternal Judeo-Christian values that made Europe what it is today. But there are very few signs of hope to be seen at the governmental level. Sarkozy, Merkel, Brown, Berlusconi; in private, they probably know how grave the situation is. But when the little red light goes on, they stare into the camera and tell us that Islam is a religion of peace, and we should all try to get along nicely and sing Kumbaya. They willingly participate in, what President Reagan so aptly called: “the betrayal of our past, the squandering of our freedom.”

If there is hope in Europe, it comes from the people, not from the elites. Change can only come from a grass-roots level. It has to come from the citizens themselves. Yet these patriots will have to take on the entire political, legal and media establishment.

Over the past years there have been some small, but encouraging, signs of a rebirth of the original European spirit. Maybe the elites turn their backs on freedom, the public does not. In my country, the Netherlands, 60 percent of the population now sees the mass immigration of Muslims as the number one policy mistake since World War II. And another 60 percent sees Islam as the biggest threat to our national identity. I don’t think the public opinion in Holland is very different from other European countries.

Patriotic parties that oppose jihad are growing, against all odds. My own party debuted two years ago, with five percent of the vote. Now it stands at ten percent in the polls. The same is true of all smililary-minded parties in Europe. They are fighting the liberal establishment, and are gaining footholds on the political arena, one voter at the time.

Now, for the first time, these patriotic parties will come together and exchange experiences. It may be the start of something big. Something that might change the map of Europe for decades to come. It might also be Europe’s last chance.

This December a conference will take place in Jerusalem. Thanks to Professor Aryeh Eldad, a member of Knesset, we will be able to watch Fitna in the Knesset building and discuss the jihad. We are organizing this event in Israel to emphasize the fact that we are all in the same boat together, and that Israel is part of our common heritage. Those attending will be a select audience. No racist organizations will be allowed. And we will only admit parties that are solidly democratic.

This conference will be the start of an Alliance of European patriots. This Alliance will serve as the backbone for all organizations and political parties that oppose jihad and Islamization. For this Alliance I seek your support.

This endeavor may be crucial to America and to the West. America may hold fast to the dream that, thanks tot its location, it is safe from jihad and shaira. But seven years ago to the day, there was still smoke rising from ground zero, following the attacks that forever shattered that dream. Yet there is a danger even greater danger than terrorist attacks, the scenario of America as the last man standing. The lights may go out in Europe faster than you can imagine. An Islamic Europe means a Europe without freedom and democracy, an economic wasteland, an intellectual nightmare, and a loss of military might for America – as its allies will turn into enemies, enemies with atomic bombs. With an Islamic Europe, it would be up to America alone to preserve the heritage of Rome, Athens and Jerusalem.

Dear friends, liberty is the most precious of gifts. My generation never had to fight for this freedom, it was offered to us on a silver platter, by people who fought for it with their lives. All throughout Europe American cemeteries remind us of the young boys who never made it home, and whose memory we cherish. My generation does not own this freedom; we are merely its custodians. We can only hand over this hard won liberty to Europe’s children in the same state in which it was offered to us. We cannot strike a deal with mullahs and imams. Future generations would never forgive us. We cannot squander our liberties. We simply do not have the right to do so.

This is not the first time our civilization is under threat. We have seen dangers before. We have been betrayed by our elites before. They have sided with our enemies before. And yet, then, freedom prevailed.

These are not times in which to take lessons from appeasement, capitulation, giving away, giving up or giving in. These are not times in which to draw lessons from Mr. Chamberlain. These are times calling us to draw lessons from Mr. Churchill and the words he spoke in 1942:

“Never give in, never, never, never, never, in nothing great or small, large or petty, never give in except to convictions of honour and good sense. Never yield to force; never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy”.

RELATED ARTICLE: Another French Jew murdered in Paris by Muslim neighbor “screaming “Allahu Akbar.”

RELATED VIDEO: Fitna.

EDITORS NOTE:  To learn more about Islam please visit: www.Fitnaphobia.com.

Muslim women accuse Ayaan Hirsi Ali of ‘white supremacism’

Islam critic Ayaan Hirsi Ali has hit back at Australian Muslim women for accusing her of being a white supremacist and a misogynist, describing them as apologists for terrorist groups.

Anyone who criticizes Islam legitimately for its Sharia-sanctioned abuse of women, apostates and infidels is deemed “a white supremacist” and an “Islamophobe.” The absurdity of referencing Ayaan Hirsi Ali (who has herself been victimized in the name of Islam) as a “white supremacist” exposes the stealth agenda of Islamic supremacists, along with the useful idiots who assist them in advancing their Sharia objectives.

ayaanhirsiali“‘Shutting people up raising awareness about Sharia law’: Islam critic Ayaan Hirsi Ali hits back at Muslim women accusing her of being a ‘white supremacist’ – after she was forced to cancel Australian tour over security”, by Stephen Johnson, UK Daily Mail, April 5, 2017:

Islam critic Ayaan Hirsi Ali has hit back at Australian Muslim women for accusing her of being a white supremacist and a misogynist, describing them as apologists for terrorist groups.

Six Muslim women, including four wearing hijabs, feature in a video describing the Somali-born writer and former refugee as someone who marginalises followers of Islam.

The three-minute clip, posted on Facebook by a group called Persons of Interest, describes Ms Ali as a racist and sexist person.

They overlook how she is a black woman who campaigns against female genital mutilation.

‘This is the language of patriarchy and misogyny. This is the language of white supremacy. This is the language used to justify war and genocide,’ the women say.

They posted the video on Monday, after Ms Ali’s AHA Foundation and event organisers Think Inc announced she had abruptly cancelled her Australian tour for security reasons.

Speaking from the United States, Ms Ali accused the woman of ‘carrying water’ for Islamist extremist groups campaigning for a global caliphate based on sharia law.

The 47-year-old former Dutch politician linked them to the Egyptian-based Muslim Brotherhood, which is outlawed in its home nation, Islamic State and Boko Haram, which captured 276 schoolgirls in 2014.

Moroccan Soup Bar owner Hana Assafiri, who featured in the video, is the same person who was a spokeswoman for a change.org petition calling for Ms Ali’s Australian tour to be cancelled.

That petition was authored by Islamic Museum of Australia board director Sherene Hassan.

Daily Mail Australia contacted Ms Assafiri for comment on Tuesday.

However, on Monday she declined to criticise sharia law, which secular Muslims reject.

‘Sharia law is a whole massive conversation we need time to discuss and debate with,’ she said.

‘It’s not something I can give you a quick sound bite.’

Zerin Firoze, a former Muslim turned atheist who lives in New York, denounced the video.

‘This is the dumbest video I have seen recently,’ she said on Facebook.

‘Ex-Muslims like Ayaan Hirsi Ali are not demonising Muslim women or Islam.

‘Islam itself demonises Muslims, especially Muslim women.’

Ms Ali, a former Muslim turned atheist who spent part of her childhood in Saudi Arabia, has called for a reformation of Islam so the Koran isn’t taken literally and individual rights are respected…..

RELATED ARTICLES:

Canada: Imam claims that “Islam is the most feminist religion”

Trump administration undertaking “critical review” of American airplane sales to Iran

White House Aide Dr. Sebastian Gorka smeared with fake news report

The Forward has stooped to a new low smearing the good name of Dr. Sebastian Gorka and his late father Paul who was both an anti-Fascist and anti-Communist courageous member of resistance who was imprisoned, tortured and released from prison during the 1956 Hungarian Revolt.

We wrote about his family background following the publication of his best selling book, “Defeating Jhad: the winnable war” in April 2026. We were fortunate to have been among the first to interview Dr. Gorka on the former Lisa Benson Show.

You read our interview with Dr. Sebastian Gorka that Mike Bates and this writer did on 1330 AM WEBY published on March 1, 2017. You may have seen the picture of my colleague Mike Bates with Dr. Gorka during a visit to the White House Press Room.

Our interview with Gorka revealed his support for Israel, America’s trusted ally in the Middle East. That was corroborated by similar reports from David P. Goldman, Michael Rubin, David Reaboi.

Mort Klein of the Zionist of America has been a relentless fighter for Emet – the truth in this savage piece of real “fake news” perpetrated by the hate driven editors and writers at the “progressive” national Jewish weeky, The Forward.

Read this ZoA dossier on what can only be considered as an artless act of character defamation using selective editing of videos in a patent act of character assasination.

Kol hakavod for Mort Klein of the Zionists of America for standing by and through investigation defending Dr. Sebastian Gorka, a great friend of Israel and the Jewish people, as well as a proud American immigrant.

ZOA: The Forward Smears WH Aide Gorka with Spliced…

The Forward newspaper has again wrongly smeared counter terrorism and radical terrorism expert, Deputy Assistant to President Trump, and Strategic Initiatives…

MILITARY-TECHNOLOGIES.NET

RELATED ARTICLE: 

‘Explanatory Memorandum’ Detractors Ignore Evidence about Muslim Brotherhood in America

A Muslim Woman’s Fight Against Radical Islam

Why did the Foreign Policy Research Institute invite the PLO ‘ambassador’ to present his opinions?

The Philadelphia-based Foreign Policy Research Institute (FPRI) reached out to Maen Rashid Areikat PLO ““ambassador”” and head of the Washington, DC based delegation to present his views at an event on March 28, 2017 at the National Liberty Museum. FPRI was founded in 1955 by the legendary Robert Strausz-Hupé , a noted Cold War era U.S. diplomat and foreign policy scholar. It has more than 100 affiliated scholars and experts in national and international security, foreign policy regional studies, including the Middle East, and counterterrorism. Heretofore, the FPRI has been a stalwart supporter of the Jewish nation of Israel and numbered among its board members and donors, a number of prominent Jews. The late Irwin Borowsky, self made media entrepreneur and founder of the National Liberty Museum in Philadelphia was a proud American Zionist. Yet, here was the Museum’s CEO, Gwen Borowsky, a trustee of FPRI, providing the venue for “ambassador” Areikat and FPRI president, Alan Luxenberg to engage in a dialogue about the future for Israel and the Palestinians.

Background on “ambassador” Areikat

“ambassador” Areikat, a native of Jericho, Jordan is U.S. educated, a graduate of Arizona State University and Western International University. He has also received training at a diplomatic institute in Canada and at similar programs at Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government. He became head of the PLO Delegation in Washington in 2009, following episodes as part of the PLO negotiating team with several Israeli governments over the past 20 years.

However, “ambassador” Areikat has had his moments of negative publicity in the US. In 2011, cited in a USA Today article, he was asked whether Jewish settlers would be permitted to remain in a future Palestinian state. He replied:

“After the experience of the last 44 years of military occupation and all the conflict and friction, I think it would be in the best interest of the two people to be separated,” Maen Areikat, the PLO “ambassador”, said during a meeting with reporters sponsored by The Christian Science Monitor. He was responding to a question about the rights of minorities in a Palestine of the future.

To which former Bush National Security Council senior official Elliott Abrams replied:

Such a state would be the first to officially prohibit Jews or any other faith since Nazi Germany, which sought a country that was judenrein, or cleansed of Jews, said Elliott Abrams, a former U.S. National Security Council official.

The Palestinian demand is unacceptable and “a despicable form of anti-Semitism,” Abrams said. A small Jewish presence in a future Palestine, up to 1% of the population, would not hurt the Palestinian identity, he said.

“No civilized country would act this way,” Abrams said

How the PLO established a Washington, D.C. Delegation

The Washington, DC PLO delegation was enabled, despite its 1987 US terrorist designation, in 1994 by an executive waiver signed by President Clinton nullifying provisions against terrorist organizations operating in this country with the proviso that it was intended to facilitate negotiations towards a final status agreement based on the 1993 Oslo Peace Accords interim agreement. Legislation was introduced in 2016 during the 114th Congress, the PLO Accountability Act that sought to shut down the PLO delegation for alleged breach of agreements, sponsoring terrorism and incitement of violence against the State of Israel.  The possibility of re-introducing such legislation may be prompted by the recent designation by Israeli Minister of Defense Avigdor Liberman of the Palestinian National Fund as a terrorist organization operated by the PLO. The PNF provided salaries to jailed terrorists in Israel and monthly stipends to their families with amounts tied to the length of their sentences.  BBC Watch provided details as to how the PA-PLO terrorist financial payments scheme worked:

The role of the newly blacklisted Palestinian National Fund is explained as follows by PMW:

“…PMW has uncovered PA Ministry of Finance documents that indicate a money trail, showing the transfer of money from the PA to the Palestinian National Fund (PNF), the body that funds the PLO, in the amount needed to pay the salaries to terrorist prisoners […]

In 2015, after the Ministry of Prisoners’ Affairs was closed, the PA raised its annual transfer to the PLO via the Palestinian National Fund by 481 million shekels ($128 million):

2014 transfer – 294 million shekels

2015 transfer – 775 million shekels

The additional 481 million shekels the PLO received from the PA in 2015 was the amount it needed to fund the PLO Commission of Prisoners’ Affairs, undertaking the responsibilities of the Ministry of Prisoners’ Affairs. The transfer of 481 million is virtually identical to the budget of the Ministry of Prisoners’ Affairs in 2014 (442 million), plus 10% yearly growth due to rising prisoners salaries. According to PA law, the salaries of terrorist prisoners rise the longer they are in prison.

The Washington PLO delegation has a new man who is joining the 12 on staff, 43-year old Husam Zumlot. He appears to have a new strategy to implement in the political circus in DC that may be appealing to millennials and progressive Jewish youth in J Street university chapters. Especially those who sported tee shirts at the AIPAC Washington Policy Conference saying, “Anti- BDS, Anti-Occupation.” Husam Zomlot, a product of a Gaza so-called refugee camp, earned a Master’s from the London School of Economics and Doctorate from the School of Oriental and African Studies of the University of London. He was featured in a March 31, 2017 Politico Magazine article, “Palestine’s Man in Washington.” He was cited in this Politico interview saying:

“U.S. public opinion is still tilted heavily against the Palestinians, but Zomlot claims, with some reason, that the youth of America aren’t as reflexively pro-Israel as previous generations, an opening he will seek to exploit through his own powers of persuasion. “How this conflict has been depicted and portrayed in America is wrong, inaccurate, and misinformed. One of my main missions is to make it accurate,” he said. “We will have to redefine the discourse on this whole thing.”Congress perhaps aside, there are other more fertile areas of opportunity available to Zomlot. He is already a well-known presence in the Washington policy community, traveling to the U.S. several times a year for meetings at think tanks (“name them, I’ve been there,” he says) and to give speeches at universities and conferences—including left-leaning Jewish ones like J Street and Haaretz. From his perch in Ramallah, he is already a darling of the international press corps. Strictly in terms of visibility, Zomlot’s presence in Washington will likely be an upgrade for the Palestinians over the existing situation, wherein their official standing verges on nonexistent. As one Washington policy insider with long experience on Capitol Hill told me, “I couldn’t even say who the [current] Palestinian ambassador is. I’ve never heard of him and never met him, if that tells you anything about his profile around town.”

Putting the PLO Presentation in Context

The rationale for this FPRI event should be seen in the context of several recent events in Washington, Amman, Ramallah and Gaza.

The February 15, 2017 meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump reflected a warming of relations between the two allies.  Nevertheless, on the matter of settlement building in the disputed territories of Judea and Samaria, what the Arabs refer to as the “West Bank,”  the cautionary message from the new President was about holding back on new construction, while holding out the range of possible peace prospects to include the frayed two-states for two people meme, one state or an alternative. Netanyahu commented that he did not consider settlement building “as a barrier to peace.”

Prior to “ambassador” to Israel David Friedman’s Senate confirmation vote on March 23, 2017, Trump dispatched aide, lawyer Jason Greenblatt, to hold a week of discussions evaluating prospects for rekindling peace discussions,  dormant since 2014 when Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas broke off discussions with Israeli PM Netanyahu over the issue of recognition of Israel as a Jewish nation. He met in Amman, Jordan with King Hussein; in Ramallah with Mahmoud Abbas, PA President; and in Jerusalem with Israeli PM Netanyahu. Greenblatt concluded talks with Netanyahu  suggesting that any settlement freeze on construction in the major blocs in the disputed territories was not likely to be forthcoming.  President Trump had previously announced that his son-in-law Jared Kushner would be responsible for handling US involvement in a renewed peace process.

An Arab League Summit was attended by 21 member monarchies, emirates, and republics on Wednesday March 29th held at a Jordanian Dead Sea resort hosted by King Abdullah II of Jordan. The summit Declaration announced its support of the 2002 Peace Plan proposed by the late Saudi King Abdullah essentially backing the PLO position of fixing the pre-1967/ 1949 Armistice line as the border between a future State of Palestine and Israel with “East” Jerusalem as its capital. All in exchange for recognition of Israel  as a Jewish  state.

There was the parallel development of a new charter for the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, mitigating many of the 1988 document’s worst articles with its Qur’anic doctrine anti-Semitic hatred and violence aimed at ridding the space between the river and the sea of the Jewish nation. Moreover there were broad hints of fairer treatment of non-Muslims and the prospect of distancing itself from its Muslim Brotherhood affiliation. How that is received by the Islamic State Province in the Sinai where a number of Hamas military wing leaders have left to join is another matter. All while Hamas retains the very means of terrorism committed in three rocket and tunnel wars against Israel in 2008, 2012 and 2014. The revised Hamas charter played a part in the FPRI presentation of PLO “ambassador” Areikat, as offering parallel political positions in any renewed negotiations with Israel. The revised Hamas Charter is to be unveiled shortly in Doha, Qatar by Hamas “Political Wing” leader Khalid Meshaal.

The Dialogue between Luxembourg and “ambassador” Areikat

At one point in the dialogue with “ambassador” Areikat, Luxenberg asked whether “this is the best of times or the worst of times to hold such a discussion?” To which Areikat ironically inveighed the moral imperative of Rabbi Hillel, “if not now when.” A  theme picked by the self named progressive Jewish  protesters accusing Israel of  “illegal  occupation” of Palestinian lands  who  disrupted  US Senate Foreign Relations Committee confirmation hearings of Trump’s Israel “ambassador” nominee, since cleared by the US Senate, the Hon. David Friedman

Areikat noted the problems of the Palestinian’s two governments, one in the disputed territories or West Bank, the other in Gaza, each with their own military wings.  He also referred to the possible tacit alliance between Arab monarchies, emirates and republics in the Middle East on the one hand and Israel on the other that required in his view resolution of the Palestine-Israel conflict.

When asked by Luxenberg about his vision for the future of the Palestinian-Israel conundrum he pointed to the history and issue of “trust and competing historical narratives.”  The high in these past negotiations he suggested was the Rabin – Arafat Oslo accords and subsequent arrangements in the 1990’s that “broke the barrier” focusing  on achieving a “win-win” solution. But that cratered in his mind with the election of the Netanyahu government and the onset of the Second Intifada in September 2000, fomented by Arafat using the late PM Sharon’s visit to the Temple Mount as a false pretext. That period which ended with Arafat’s death in 2004 and election of Mahmoud Abbas as succeeding PA President was marked by Israel building the security barrier and what he claimed was “excessive use of force by the IDF against Palestinian violence.” Both Israel and the Palestinians failed to reach an “acceptable agreement” on key issues; “Jerusalem, Rights of Return of Refugees, borders and water rights.”  What he suggested was an end to “historical claims”, meaning Israel’s biblical and legal rights to the land and “acceptance of the two states solution.”

Luxenberg then asked Areikat about several things that might build trust and acceptance of each other as equals.  Areikat launched into a tirade about Israeli occupation of Palestinian lands which meant that there were no negotiations between equals. He argued it would amount to the “occupied people guaranteeing the security concerns of the occupier.” That translates that the PLO doesn’t accept UN Security Resolutions 242 and 338 that established Israel’s rights to a just and secure border.  He evaded the evidence of historical Jewish presence and the well documented legal claims to the land emanating from the League of Nations mandates granted at the San Remo Conference of 1920 establishing the Jewish Homeland.  He illustrated the “imbalance” by saying the current policy amounted to providing “1,000 square kilometers to project a 2 kilometer settlement.”  He said what the PLO wants is a “win/win solution for both sides providing a future independent Palestinian state living in freedom that would provide a bridge to peace with the larger Arab world.”

Luxenberg posed the question of what kind of confidence building measures would it take to achieve a peace that Areikat proposes. He cited several caveats by long term US negotiator Dennis Ross, notably, “forswearing annexation of the West Bank and Gaza” by Israel.  Areikat suggested that the crux of the conundrum was a “political conflict” not a “religious conflict” that provokes the “rise of religious extremists to further their objectives,” an obvious reference to so-called religious right of the Israeli settler movement. Areikat illustrated the “imbalance” given the 1996 Agreements establishing “Area C, comprising 60% of the West Bank, Judea and Samaria under Israeli Control,” containing most of the major blocs including Jewish communities established during the pre-State Yishuv period. He contended that Area A that constituted 18% of the disputed territories designated for Palestinian Authority control was “continually violated by the IDF.”

That left Area B, representing “22% under joint control.”  What the PLO wants is greater control over Area C that if implemented would generate jobs and upwards of an estimated $3 to $4 billion in revenues for the Palestinian economy requiring less reliance on foreign donations.” Clearly that is in conflict under the terms of the amendments to the Oslo Accords. Areikat said that “the parties lost confidence in trying to achieve a final agreement.” He returned to the core argument of reaching agreement on all the issues and tradeoffs by both parties, Israel and the Palestinians. As we will see shortly, this amounts to a multilateral deal involving regional Arab countries, major powers like Russia and the US akin to the Quartet under UN auspices. He then recited the history of negotiations from the 1988 Palestine National Council recognition of UNSC Resolutions 242 and 338 to Oslo in 1993, the 1996 Amendments and the Wye River negotiations in 1998.

Areikat suggested that the 2006 negotiations came close to achievement, except for the internal problems with the Olmert government. While avoiding the matter of recognition of Israel as a Jewish nation, “we don’t shy away from the 2 states solution and accepting Israel.”

Luxenberg then brought up the ‘elephant in the room,” meaning the launch of a revised Hamas charter, that we have noted earlier. Luxenberg referenced the election of  Yahya Sinwar, the extremist head of the Hamas military wing, to which Areikat suggested that the revised Hamas charter was the product of Ismail Haniyeh and Khalid Meshaal of the  political wing and the Hamas Shura.  Before addressing that development, Areikat discussed the 2011 USA Today contretemps over his statement rejecting Jewish presence in an independent Palestinian state that brought criticism from former Bush National Security adviser, Elliot Abrams, as tantamount to making a future Palestinian state, “judenrein.” Areikat claimed that the PLO was not ‘anti-Semitic”, as they were “semites” and had no official policy of being anti-Jewish. He conveyed the fiction that throughout Islamic history that Muslims had treated Jews kindly, referencing the Kurdish leader, Saladin who allowed Jews to worship after the reconquest of Jerusalem that terminated the second Crusade.  Further, he said that Hamas was “not anti-Semitic”, which on its face was preposterous given the genocidal doctrine towards ethnic cleansing of Jews prominent in the articles of the 1988 charter. He suggested that the revised Hamas charter would transform the terrorist group into a politically pragmatic institution akin to the PLO.

On the matter of the role of youth, the next generation of Palestinian leaders, raised by Luxenberg Areikat was not optimistic.  Despite the people to people exchanges, Palestinian youth, he contended, have no faith in its leaders to deliver a solution given the settlement growth with 600,000 Jews in the disputed territories/West Bank, the security walls and “the lack of progress.” Israel by contrast is “prosperous, yet their youth is drifting away from supporting possible peace.” He accused the Netanyahu government of “creating an atmosphere of paranoia and fear.”  Thus, Areikat suggested that [peace] is not happening anytime soon.” That seems to be reflected in overwhelming responses to recent Israeli polls taken on the issue of peace based on the two state solution.

The Q & A that followed the Discussion

Luxenberg opened the forum inviting questions from the audience.

On the matter raised about challenges facing UN support for the two state solution, Areikat suggested that the UN was handicapped by US opposition to implementation of several anti-Israel UNSC resolutions, the latest being UNSC 2334 in December 2016. The U.S. did not oppose this, it abstained Further he suggested that the US leadership over 23 years since Oslo has failed to achieve a final agreement. He suggested instead a “multilateral platform” that included regional Arab countries and other world powers. Even with that he suggested the Arab street would not recognize Israel.

When asked about Hamas being anti-Jewish, the questioner suggested that if the IDF was not in the disputed territories/West Bank that Hamas would take over in less than 3 to 5 days.  Areikat launched into the recent archeological discoveries of 5,000 year old “giants” in Israel that he suggested demonstrated that they were “Palestinian ancestors.” He then segued to note what his new colleague at the PLO delegation in Washington, Zumlot, argued that American Jews evince growing concerns over Israel and the settlements, returning to the growth over 23 years of 600,000 Jewish settlers in the disputed territories as the primary obstacle to peace.

When asked about Palestinian Media Watch evidence of Jews being called by Palestinian Imams as “sons of Pigs and Monkeys”, he referred back to the 2011 contretemps with Elliott Abrams over the Palestinian arguments for separation as the equivalency of making the future state “judenrein”.  He argued that Israel wanted a 99 year commitment to security control over any future Palestinian state to protect settlers that rejected its sovereignty and independence. That, he contended is an insult to the Palestinians and evidence of occupation a cause for incitement to violence. He suggested that a Trilateral Anti-Incitement commission involving Israel, the Palestinians and the US failed to be activated.

When asked why a final agreement wasn’t signed at Camp David in 2000, Areikat responded that ‘both sides were not ready’.  Further he accused then Secretary of State Madeleine Albright of reneging about an alleged agreement “that if things don’t happen, don’t accuse us.”

The reality as we now know, Arafat had already made up his mind following Barak’s pell mell withdrawal from the southern Lebanon security zone in May 2000 that Israel was weakened by Hezbollah jihad. That suggested to Arafat that the Palestinians could foment a new and more violent Jihad Intifada on September 28, 2000 when PM Sharon visited the Temple Mount.

Conclusion

The FPRI invitation to PLO “ambassador” Maen Rashid Areikat gratuitously gave him a platform to present the usual Palestinian accusations against Israel as the intransigent party without any rebuttal by an Israeli. It also revealed a new agenda, forming an alliance with Hamas, following the latter’s unveiling of a revised charter virtually akin to that of the PLO. The strategy rejects US involvement under the guise of a regional and major power multilateral negotiations “peace” process that if followed would result in the ultimate division of Jerusalem and destruction of the Jewish nation of Israel.

Watch the FPRI dialogue with PLO “ambassador” Maen Rashid Areikat on the Future for Israel and Palestine.