Montana is an example of anti-refugee sentiment spilling forth in wake of Trump victory

This is an Associated Press story that ran on Christmas day so not sure how many of you saw it.

sk_rossi

S.K. Rossi

For background, Montana had a small refugee program many years ago, but up until this year it was alone with Wyoming in not having one at all.  That changed in 2016 as Missoula ‘welcomed’ its first African and Middle Eastern refugees. I traveled to the state this summer and can attest to the sentiment outlined in this story.

For new readers you might like to see our Montana archive, here.

S.K. Rossi, advocacy and policy director for the ACLU of Montana: “It’s pretty widely known that this is going to be a hard year…”

From AP at The Seattle Times:

HELENA, Mont. (AP) — The push to restrict refugee resettlements and immigration in the U.S. that figured so prominently in Donald Trump’s election is now headed to states that are preparing to convene their legislative sessions early next year, immigration advocates said.

In Montana, which took in just nine refugee families from January to early December, about a dozen bill requests related to refugees, immigration and terrorism have been filed ahead of next month’s session. The measures include requiring resettlement agencies to carry insurance that would defray the cost of prosecuting refugees who commit violent crimes and allowing towns and cities to request a moratorium on resettlements in their communities.

Refugee rights advocates say those measures are a sign of what is to come as the anti-refugee rhetoric that featured prominently in the presidential election spills over to statehouses and local governments.

“It’s pretty widely known that this is going to be a hard year for those of us who are seeking to protect the rights of refugees and immigrants,” said S.K. Rossi, advocacy and policy director for the ACLU of Montana.

The president-elect campaigned on building a border wall with Mexico to stop illegal immigration, deporting immigrants who are in the nation illegally and halting the resettlement of refugees to strengthen the federal program that vets them.

[….]

“It absolutely does not end with the presidential election,” McKenzie [Michele McKenzie, deputy director of the Minneapolis organization The Advocates for Human Rights] said. “It’s a national strategy by a small but organized group of anti-immigration advocates and anti-refugee advocates.”

[….]

“We need to get serious,” said Nancy Ballance, a Republican state representative from Ravalli County.

Ballance said refugees are a “gigantic issue” in her southwestern Montana county, just south of the liberal college city of Missoula. “People expect to see some legislation brought,” she said.

It is pretty clear that legally state legislators can’t do much to change the US Refugee Admissions Program (USRAP), but here we have the ACLU lobbyist making the crucial point about efforts in the Montana (yours too!) legislature.

“Filing this and making it a public conversation automatically undermines the refugee process,” Rossi said.

“They can’t legally undermine the process, but they can socially undermine the process.”

Continue reading here.

Trickle up!

You have a right to ask questions and demand that your elected officials at all levels of government be transparent, and consider your economic worries and your safety concerns when the federal government targets your communities.

Efforts like these in the Montana legislature are important to help create controversy because the ultimate goal is for the controversy to ‘trickle up’ to Congress and to the new Trump Administration. There is no doubt that the USRAP must be trashed or reformed, but that pressure must come from the states (and local governments) to Washington.  Politicians hate noise and so it is your job as grassroots activists to make political noise!

To that end, since Montana’s lone House member is likely going to the Trump Interior Department, it is critical that you, in Montana, make the selection of his replacement a referendum on the refugee program. See The Hill (scroll down to Rep. Zinke).

Endnote: I am off to jury duty, be back later!

Muslim Brotherhood and Jamaat-e-Islami: Terrorist Ideological Brothers

BRUSSELS, Belgium /PRNewswire/ — The South Asia Democratic Forum (SADF), an organisation working to promote freedom, democracy and peace in South Asia and Europe, will be releasing a new report comparing the ‘Muslim Brotherhood’ (MB) and the ‘Jamaat-e-Islami’ (JeI) titled “Muslim Brotherhood and Jamaat-e-Islami: Ideological Brothers”, on December 23, 2016. This report carries out an in-depth study of the origin, ideology and evolution of the MB and JeI, and draws parallels between the two Islamist organisations.

Tracing the origin of the JeI in 1941 by Maulana Sayyid Abu‘l-A’la Mawdudi, the report shows how he was deeply influenced by the Brotherhood, and subsequently how the MB borrowed heavily from the writings of Mawdudi. Both groups have a similar ideology that permits use of extreme violence for promoting Islam in society, and during the periods that they have been in the government, namely the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt from June 2012 to July 2013 and JeI-BD in Bangladesh in 2001, have been marked by incidents of increasing violence against women, minority Muslim communities and political institutions. Moreover, both groups have also been known to give birth to extremely radical offshoots, the Al-Qaeda and Hamas in case of the MB, and the Islamic Chhatra Shibir in the case of JeI-BD.

The study clearly brings out the deep ideological similarities between Islamist movements like the MB and JeI-BD, which despite their democratic rhetoric and resort to democratic practices like elections to come to power, believe in a Millennial Islamic Movement to establish their ‘cherished goal’ of global caliphate, or ‘God’s Kingdom’, in which women and minorities would not enjoy equal opportunities and rights.  Their lip service to democracy and apparent acquiescence to secular law reflects their pragmatism, not their transformation into liberal democratic organisations. The study further highlights that the founders of both the MB and JeI, and the leadership that followed, continue to strive for ‘God’s Sovereignty’.

The study cautions that the world needs to take note of the deep ideological similarities between the two Islamist fundamentalist organisations, which have been the ideological inspiration for a multitude of terrorist groups in various parts of the world. Adding that the followers of these ideologies have adopted multi-pronged strategies, namely the spread of the ‘madrassa’ system of education to mold the thinking of Muslim youth, adherence to a uniform dress code, mass conversions, negation of national boundaries on grounds of religion and intolerance towards other sects and religious beliefs, the study cautions that the spread of such violent Islamic thought has the potential of pushing the world into a violent confrontation between Islam and other religions.

ABOUT THE SOUTH ASIA DEMOCRATIC FORUM (SADF)

SADF is a non-profit organisation registered in Brussels. It intends to encourage the application of the United Nations general principles and resolutions regarding human rights. It stands against all kinds of discrimination based on colour, race, language, gender, political orientation, religion, nationality, tradition, ethnic origin or social background, social or legal status, age or birth. The organisation aims to promote labour rights, sustainable development, freedom, open governance, peace and democratic laws. Learn more about SADF here: http://sadf.eu/new/.

Donald J. Trump and the Death of the Two-State Solution

President Obama has set the stage for President-elect Donald J. Trump to pivot away from a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians to a one-state solution policy.

How is this possible?

Sandy Tolan, in her article The Death of the Two-State Solution, writes:

Washington has finally thrown in the towel on its long, tortured efforts to establish peace between Israel and the Palestinians. You won’t find any acknowledgement of this in the official record. Formally, the U.S. still supports a two-state solution to the conflict. But the Obama administration’s recent 10-year, $38-billion pledge to renew Israel’s arsenal of weaponry, while still ostensibly pursuing “peace,” makes clear just how bankrupt that policy is.

For two decades, Israeli leaders and their neoconservative backers in this country, hell-bent on building and expanding settlements on Palestinian land, have worked to undermine America’s stated efforts — and paid no price. Now, with that record weapons package, the U.S. has made it all too clear that they won’t have to. Ever.

Read more…

Given the reality on the ground and the failure since 1967 to negotiate a two-state solution President-elect Trump has a historic opportunity to reverse U.S. policy in the Middle East, starting with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

The Began-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies in a white paper UNSCR 2334: A Sad Disservice to the Cause of Peace by Col. (res.) Dr. Eran Lerman concludes:

In four respects, UNSCR 2334 undermines the prospects of Israeli-Palestinian peace and threatens what little regional stability is left. First, it could force Israel to fall back on its powerful legal position as the only existing legal inheritor of the British Mandate. Second, it compounds the error made by Obama’s transition team even before he came to power of ignoring a written commitment of a US president. Third, it has placed Sisi’s government in Egypt – a keystone of regional stability – in an untenable position. Fourth and most painfully, it will make it far more complicated – if not impossible – for the Palestinian leadership, enticed by the prospect of international coercion, to accept a reasonable compromise. The New Zealanders, do-gooders with a very dim understanding of what they have wrought, can be forgiven such folly. The Obama administration has no such excuses.

Read more…

Jews have lived in Judea and Samaria—the West Bank—since ancient times. The only time Jews have been prohibited from living in the territories in recent decades was during Jordan’s rule from 1948 to 1967.

Numerous legal authorities dispute the charge that settlements are “illegal.” Stephen Schwebel, formerly President of the International Court of Justice, notes that a country acting in self-defense may seize and occupy territory when necessary to protect itself. Schwebel also observes that a state may require, as a condition for its withdrawal, security measures designed to ensure its citizens are not menaced again from that territory.

According to Eugene Rostow, a former Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs in the Johnson Administration, Resolution 242 gives Israel a legal right to be in the West Bank. The resolution, Rostow noted, “Israel is entitled to administer the territories” it won in 1967 until ‘‘a just and lasting peace in the Middle East’’ is achieved.

Though critical of Israeli policy, the United States does not consider settlements illegal.

End the two-state solution and it will have a ripple effect across the Middle East.

In an The Algemeiner column titled “Trump Announces Next US Envoy to Jewish State Will Be Attorney David Friedman, Who Says He Looks Forward to Working From ‘Israel’s Eternal Capital, Jerusalem’” Barney Breen-Portnoy writes:

In a pre-election interview with The Algemeiner in early November, Friedman said that a Trump administration would not expect Israel to uproot its citizens who now live in the West Bank and east Jerusalem as part of any future peace deal with the Palestinians.

“It is inconceivable there could be a mass evacuation on that magnitude, in the unlikely event that there was an otherwise comprehensive peace agreement,” Friedman said. “It makes no sense for Judea and Samaria to be ‘Judenrein [void of Jews],’ any more than it makes sense for Israel to be ‘Arabrein [void of Arabs].’ It’s not fair.”

[ … ]

Friedman went on: “The critical thing is to recognize that there is not going to be any progress on a Palestinian state until the Palestinians renounce violence and accept Israel as a Jewish state. Until that happens, there is really nothing to talk about in terms of a political process.”

What a Trump administration would not do, Friedman said, “is put its finger on the scale and try to force Israel into a particular outcome, but rather will support Israel in reaching its own conclusion about how to best achieve peace with its neighbors.”

Read more…

Some, like Amos Yadlin from the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) , still cling to the idea of a two-state solution. Yadlin in his INSS article Security Council Resolution 2334 and a Strategy for Israel writes:

In the final days of 2016, it is more important to look ahead than to engage in a retrospective analysis of the events that led to Resolution 2334. Preparations must be made with the aims of minimizing the negative impact of this resolution and formulating a more suitable policy for Israel, considering the difficult political situation that the resolution has created.

What will minimize the “negative impact of this [UN] resolution”? Donald J. Trump. Yadlin suggests, “[I]t would be advisable for Israel to adopt a proactive strategy that is based on understandings with the United States. Israel could present a proposal to the Trump administration for a proactive Israeli initiative that involves practical actions to shape an improved reality. Israel must successfully resist the contentions that the settlements are the obstacle to peace…”

The two-state solution is dead. Long live the one-state solution.

Geert Wilders’ message to Israel — ‘Ignore UN, continue building’

Leave it to good friend of Israel, Geert Wilders, leader of the Dutch Freedom Party to send an important message to embattled Israel following the betrayal by President Obama and the UN Security adverse vote approving resolution 2334.  Israel National News republished  this statement on his Facebook page today offering an important advice:

“Ignore the UN and continue building”

Leading Dutch politician Geert Wilders has criticized US president Barack Obama for not vetoing the Security Council resolution against Israel on Friday and advised Israel to ignore the UN resolution.

Wilders, the founder and leader of the Dutch Freedom Party, who has dominated Dutch polls during the year of 2016, wrote on his Facebook page:”Obama betrayed Israel. Thank God for Trump. My advice to my Israeli friends: ignore the UN and keep building more and more settlements.”

Wilders was voted politician of the year 2016 when 40,000 people participated in the annual public election held by Dutch TV-show ‘EenVandaag’. He is known for his sharp criticism of Islam and his outspoken support for Israel.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Netanyahu: Israel Doesn’t Accept U.N. Resolution

December 23, 2016: Another date that will live in infamy

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

Fake news: Mary, Joseph and Jesus were not refugees!

Have you seen the meme—the one that the refugee industry has been blasting all over social media—to guilt-trip good-hearted people into welcoming Syrian Muslims*** to America?  It is maddening!

Here is what I said on Twitter when Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Service, which is being paid (by the head) by the U.S. taxpayer to resettle Syrians to your towns, spread fake news (on Twitter) about Jesus!

screenshot-102

Here is a good article at the Daily Wire debunking the purposeful misreading of the New Testament:

Every December, as millions celebrate the birth of Christ, a bevy of people who know absolutely nothing about the New Testament try their dead-level best to trap Christians in a hypocrisy trap. Memes and quotes spread across social media like a virus, claiming the story of Mary, Joseph, and Jesus is analogous to the Syrian refugee crisis…

[….]

A healthy debate about the Syrian refugee crisis is perfectly acceptable and necessary, however, it is in no way analogous to the story of the birth of Christ. Let us count the ways.

[….]

Mary and Joseph were returning home for a government-mandated census.

Continue reading here.

***98% of all Syrians being admitted to the US are not the persecuted Christians, but are mostly Sunni Muslims.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Senator Lindsey Graham: Cut off UN funding!

Iranian wants refugee status in Australia because he is an alcoholic

The Malice of the Leader of the Democratic Party

President Barack Obama is the leader of the Democratic Party. It is expected that after he leaves office on January 20th, 2017 he will continue to be the de-facto leader of the Democratic Party.

His legacy is the legacy of the Democratic Party.

In my column “How Democrats Fundamentally Changed from the Party of JFK to the Party of BHO” I asked, “Where are the Blue Dog Democrats? Purged from the BHO Party? As Ronald Reagan once said he did not leave the Democratic Party, rather the Democratic Party left him. So it is with many Democrats. The BHO Party has left them in the lurch.”

The Democratic Party has become the party of protests, anarchists and tribalism. They cling to illusions of racism, bigotry and embrace an anti-American world view. 

We have been writing about how President Obama has warmly embraced Islam as a person, as President and as the leader of the Democratic Party. Since his election in 2008 there has been malice, with forethought, against America in general and Israel in particular.

In a May 2015 column Dissected: President Obama’s Anti-Israelism Jerry Gordon wrote:

Both Vic Rosenthal’s Abu Yehuda  blog post, “For Obama it’s a Moral Crusade” and Brett Stephens’ Tuesday Wall Street Journal column,“The Rational Ayatollah Hypothesis” suggest that the President’s comments sinuously convey anti-Israelism.

Rosenthal gives the following evidence:

Some of the reasons I and others find Obama anti-Israel are these:

  1. His stubborn attempts to force Israel into a suicidal agreement with the Palestinians.
  2. His acceptance (regardless of his words) of a nuclear-armed Iran, and his efforts to stop Israel from acting against it.
  3. His open contempt for our Prime Minister.
  4. His taking the Turkish president’s side in the Mavi Marmara affair, and forcing PM Netanyahu to apologize to the Turks.
  5. His acceptance of Hamas claims that the IDF acted ‘disproportionally’ in Gaza (as shown by his demand for an immediate cease-fire and imposition of an arms embargo during the recent war).
  6. The aforementioned leaks about Israeli actions in Syria and elsewhere.
  7. His acceptance of the anti-Israel narrative that Israel’s right to exist rests on the Holocaust and that it must be balanced against the rights of the ‘deserving’ Palestinians (as expressed in his 2009 Cairo speech).
  8. His attempts to interfere in Israeli politics, including trying to defeat Netanyahu at the polls. It’s ironic that American money was used to help get out the presumably anti-Netanyahu Arab vote — and then Obama bitterly criticized Netanyahu for telling his supporters that they should get out and vote because the Arabs were!
  9. The double standard he displays: compare his condemnation of the PM for his election-day remark with his lack of response to the daily barrage of Israel-hatred and veneration of terrorists coming from the official Palestinian media. Or look at his expressed concern for Palestinians suffering the indignities of checkpoints against his failure to mention the almost daily Jewish victims of Palestinian terrorism.

I could go on, but this should be enough to show that the belief that Obama is anti-Israel is substantive, not simply a political reflex as he suggests.

Obama and Democratic Party have now shown malice toward Israel.

This malice began when Obama was first elected to the Presidency. His remarks about embracing Israel, and its people, and having their backs was a fabrication, a political calculation to lure them into a spiraling chamber of death.

The Nazis tried to exterminate the Jews under Adolf Hitler. President Obama has given the followers of Mohammed another signal that its alright to exterminate the state of Israel – the definition of malice. Obama with one abstention has made possible the unthinkable.

Lutheran Pastor Dietrich Bonhoeffer, an opponent of Adolf Hitler, wrote, “Not to act is to act, not to speak is to speak.” Obama chose not to act, not to speak, at the United Nations on December 23rd, 2016.

That is his and the Democratic Party’s legacy.

RELATED ARTICLES:

John Bolton: ‘The Two-State Solution Is Dead’

With New Resolution, the UN Drives Stake into Israeli-Palestinian Peace Hopes

Our World: Obama’s war against America

Israel will share ‘evidence’ of Obama-UN collusion with Trump, ambassador says

Netanyahu rips U.S.: ‘Friends don’t take friends to the Security Council’

Israel summons US ambassador over UN vote

Obama’s War on Israel: Netanyahu’s Remarks on UN Resolution at Lighting of the First Chanukah Candle

Security Council Resolution 2334 and a Strategy for Israel

Obama’s malice, May’s shame. Drain the UN swamp by Melanie Phillips

Obama’s self-defeating settlements policy

U.S. May Back Additional UN Security Council Moves Tied to Paris Peace Conference

Lessons learned from the Berlin Terror Attack and Immigration Law Violations

On Monday, December 19th Berlin was rocked by a deadly terror attack that killed 12 innocent victims and injured 48.  A December 21, 2016 CNN report, “Berlin attack: Police hunt Tunisian suspect after finding ID papers” named 24 year-old Tunisian, Anis Amri as the prime suspect who drove a stolen truck into pedestrians visiting a Berlin Christmas market.

The body of the truck’s driver was found in the truck.  He was shot and stabbed, likely by Amri.

This attack is reminiscent of the terror attack carried out in Nice, France on July 14, 2016 by a 31 year-old Tunisian, Mohamed Lahouaiej-Bouhlel.

According to the CNN report, Amri had entered Italy without documentation and was subsequently convicted of committing violent crimes in Italy and spent four years on prison.

Italian authorities attempted to deport him back to Tunisia but Tunisia refused to accept him because he had multiple identity documents in false at least six false names and Tunisian authorities claimed to not have any reliable records to identify him.

He is then believed to have entered Germany illegally.  He unsuccessfully applied for political asylum in Germany, his application was reportedly denied, at least in part, because of his ongoing relationship with radical Islamic organizations.

Here is an excerpt from the CNN news report:

Before Amri was publicly named, Ralf Jaeger, interior minister of North Rhine-Westphalia, told reporters the suspect was known to German security services as someone in contact with radical Islamist groups, and had been assessed as posing a risk.

One German security official told CNN the suspect had been arrested in August with forged documents in the southern German town of Friedrichshafen, on his way to Italy, but a judge released him. The suspect also came onto the radar of German police because he was looking for a gun, the official said.

However, while Germany refused Amri’s asylum application because of known terror ties, they permitted him to remain at large where he continued to pose a threat, a threat that became all too clear when he mowed down his victims.

Given the string of successive deadly terror attacks across Europe, the United States and other regions of the world, you would have thought that German officials, including the judge who released Amri, would err on the side of caution to protect German citizens.

To everyone’s relief, Amri was killed in a shootout with police as reported on December 24th by the New York Times, “Berlin Attack Suspect Is Killed by Police Near Milan.”

Amri fled to Italy in an attempt to evade law enforcement by disappearing through the “trapdoor” frequently used by international terrorists and transnational criminals.  That “trapdoor” involves crossing international borders.  Unsecured borders facilitates this movement of criminals and terrorists so that they can carry out attacks and/or crimes or flee from such actions after the fact.

That shootout occurred during a “routine” police ID check as described in this excerpt from the beginning of the N.Y. Times article:

SESTO SAN GIOVANNI, Italy — It was a routine identity check, the kind Italy has relied more on to stem the flow of illegal migration deeper into Europe. But the man stopped by two police officers around 3 a.m. Friday outside the northern city of Milan was anything but an ordinary drifter.

He turned out to be perhaps Europe’s most wanted man, Anis Amri, the chief suspect in the deadly terrorist attack on a Christmas market in Berlin that killed 12 people. Asked to show his papers and empty his backpack, he pulled a gun, shot one officer, and in turn was shot and killed by another.

“Police bastards,” Mr. Amri, who turned 24 this week, shouted in Italian before dying, according to the account given by Antonio De Iesu, director of the Milan police, at a news conference.

One of my earliest and most important lessons as a federal agent is that there is no such thing as a “routine” stop in law enforcement.  When a law enforcement officer encounters an individual there may be no immediately apparent way of knowing who that individual is or the threat he/she may pose.

We don’t know what we don’t know.

The notion of only deporting aliens who have serious criminal histories is a dangerous strategy.  While criminals should certainly garner the greatest attention by law enforcement, arresting immigration law violators who have not immediately discernible criminal histories is important to maintain the integrity of the immigration system and to also potentially interrupt criminal and terrorist operations.

Criminal and terror watch lists are important but are of limited value.  Successful terrorists attempt to keep low profiles and often have no criminal histories.

The day before an attack a terrorist may go to his mundane, nondescript job or attend classes.

Therefore all violations of borders and immigration laws must be taken seriously.

Time and again countries around the world, including the United States, have been attacked by radical Islamist terrorists who managed, in one way or another, the find vulnerabilities in border security and the immigration systems of those countries, to carry out deadly attacks.

Globalist national leaders refuse to see in those attacks lessons from which to learn how to prevent future horrific terror attacks.

Obama’s refusal to accept the nexus between border security / immigration law enforcement and national security, is paralleled by Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel who has admitted hundreds of thousands of refugees who cannot be vetted.

Obama has ignored clear warnings voiced by members of his own administration and national security experts.  On February 12, 2015 ABC News reported, “U.S. Officials Admit Concern Over Syrian Refugee Effort.”

Merkel has similarly ignored indisputable facts.  For example, the Taiba mosque in Hamburg, Germany, believed to have been the meeting place for some of the 9/11 hijacker/terrorists, was according to a report published by the BBC, shuttered in 2010 because it was continuing to be used by radical Islamic jihadists.

Consider this excerpt from the BBC report:

“We have closed the mosque because it was a recruiting and meeting point for Islamic radicals who wanted to participate in so-called jihad or holy war,” said Frank Reschreiter, a spokesman for Hamburg’s state interior ministry.”

About a year ago I wrote an extensive analysis comparing the findings and recommendations and findings of the 9/11 Commission with the policies of the Obama administration, citing in my analysis numerous examples of the nexus between immigration and national security including the November 20, 2013 ABC News report, “Exclusive: US May Have Let ‘Dozens’ of Terrorists Into Country As Refugees” and the July 13, 2011 Washington Times article, “Visas reviewed to find those who overstayed / Aim is to find any would-be terrorists.”

I began my paper with a quote from Sir Winston Churchill contained in his eloquent speech he delivered before the House of Commons on May 2, 1935, in which he voiced his frustrations and consternation about missed opportunities and failures to learn from history, as the storm clouds of war were gathering on the horizon:

“When the situation was manageable it was neglected, and now that it is thoroughly out of hand we apply too late the remedies which then might have effected a cure. There is nothing new in the story. It is as old as the sibylline books. It falls into that long, dismal catalogue of the fruitlessness of experience and the confirmed unteachability of mankind. Want of foresight, unwillingness to act when action would be simple and effective, lack of clear thinking, confusion of counsel until the emergency comes, until self-preservation strikes its jarring gong–these are the features which constitute the endless repetition of history.”

The famed playwright, George Bernard Shaw’s lament more succinctly parallels Churchill’s perspectives:

“We learn from history that we learn nothing from history.”

My dad used to tell me that in life there are no mistakes, only lessons, provided that we learn from our errors.

Clearly Obama is not alone in his willful blindness to the lessons that history should have taught him about how essential secure borders and effective immigration law enforcement is to national security in spite of a long list of terror attacks carried out throughout Europe and, indeed, the world, by terrorists who entered the countries that they attacked by exploiting failures of border security.

Germany’s chancellor Angela Merkel has also pushed for the admission of huge numbers of refugees from Syria and other Middle Eastern countries who cannot be vetted that parallel the admission of tens of thousands of Syrian refugees and refugees from other parts of the world who cannot be vetted or even reliably identified.

Obama’s refusal to secure our borders also provides criminals and terrorists with a means of entering the United States not only without vetting, but without detection. Indeed, Entry Without Inspection = Entry Without Vetting.

While President-Elect Trump certainly understands this issue, incredibly, mayors of “Sanctuary Cities” ignore this very obvious nexus between Terrorism, Enclaves And Sanctuary Cities and how sanctuary cities facilitate the growth of terror enclaves in America.

Memo to mayors of Sanctuary Cities: insanity has been defined as doing the same things the same way and expecting a different outcome.

Jews and Christians: Your Holly Sites are now Muslim territory and the death of a Two State Solution

Why did Obama stab Israel in the back and end the prospect of a two state solution as he was leaving office?

The recent Resolution against Israel awards East Jerusalem an Israeli suburb where 600,000 Jews have lived over the years and the Western Wall the most holly place for Jews and the Christian Holly Sites to the Muslims. The Resolution is so broad that it didn’t even exclude these sites from the definition of illegal Settlements.

Before the six day war neither Jews or Christians were allowed to visit their holly places, which were being desecrated by the Muslims. Jews have lived in East Jerusalem for a thousand years and the area was called the Jewish Quarter. In one fell swoop Obama and the gang of 14 made these sites and the Jewish homes illegal. Obama’s move as he is about to leave office is tantamount to the ‘mid night massacre’ of an ally.

Neither Israel or the Jewish people will accept this abomination. However in the future the anti Semites will try to use the Resolution to damage Israel politically and financially.

It gives me no pleasure to say to my Democrat friends who put their faith in Obama and the Democrat Party unfortunately you have received your comeuppance.

Some pundits say Obama’s action was driven by his anger with Netanyahu and Trump. However I think the reason lies within Obama’s personality. Before he became President Obama looked upon Reverend Write as a father figure. He had a close association with Farrakhan a Black Muslim. Both of these men were confirmed anti-Semites and anti American. Obama’s father was a Muslim which under Islamic law made him a Muslim. His paternal grandparents with whom he is close and his family are Muslim. During his Egyptian speech he lashed out at America and lauded the Muslims including the Muslim Brotherhood who were given honored seats. He welcomed the Muslim Brotherhood who took over Egypt and criticized their successor. He promised to prevent Iran from having nuclear weapons while he was secretly negotiating a deal with them to allow it.Then he entered into a disastrous Nuclear agreement with the support of several Democrat Senators. Before Obama there was no daylight between Democrats and Israel. Polls show this is no longer the case. Obama refused to allow Israel to take military action against Iran and threatened Israel if they did so.

Obama’s Legacy: The end of the two state solution. Will American Jews understand what was done to them?

Obama’s roots are clearly Muslim and as a parting shot against Israel and Jews he conspired with enemies of Israel to pass a UN Resolution damaging Israel the Jewish people and the reputation of America. It is also the death of a two state solution. Obama’s behavior defines who Obama is.

The open question–will American Jews understand what was done to them?

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Islamists Attack Christmas, but Europeans Abolish It

Obama’s malice, May’s shame. Drain the UN swamp by Melanie Phillips

CHRISTIAN WORSHIP IS ‘WORSE THAN MURDER AND BLOODSHED’: Another Islamic teaching behind the slaughter of Christians

Democrats Abandoned Isreal on December 23, 2016: A date that will live in Infamy

The leader of the Democratic Party has decided to abandon Israel on December 23rd, 2016 and Democrats knew full well that he would. To understand why this happened one must read President Obama’s 2012 speech to the United Nations.

Barack Obama said in a speech before the United Nations on September 25th, 2012 that, “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam.”

Democrats stood by the President, knowing that he was speaking directly to the Arab world, Israel, and those in the United States and beyond, who did not fully embrace the “religion of peace.”

Democrats knew their President stood squarely on the side of Islam and Islamists and they did nothing.

President Obama commented on Benghazi stating:

That is what we saw play out in the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.  Now, I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity.

It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well — for as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and every faith.  We are home to Muslims who worship across our country.  We not only respect the freedom of religion, we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe.  We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them.

I know there are some who ask why we don’t just ban such a video.  And the answer is enshrined in our laws:  Our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech.

This about Tunisia, now a hot bed of terrorism and the home of the Berlin Christmas market slaughter:

It has been less than two years since a vendor in Tunisia set himself on fire to protest the oppressive corruption in his country, and sparked what became known as the Arab Spring.  And since then, the world has been captivated by the transformation that’s taken place, and the United States has supported the forces of change.

We were inspired by the Tunisian protests that toppled a dictator, because we recognized our own beliefs in the aspiration of men and women who took to the streets.

This about the Muslim Brotherhood takeover of Egypt:

We insisted on change in Egypt, because our support for democracy ultimately put us on the side of the people.

This about Yemen:

We supported a transition of leadership in Yemen, because the interests of the people were no longer being served by a corrupt status quo.

This about Libya:

We intervened in Libya alongside a broad coalition, and with the mandate of the United Nations Security Council, because we had the ability to stop the slaughter of innocents, and because we believed that the aspirations of the people were more powerful than a tyrant.

And this about Syria:

And as we meet here, we again declare that the regime of Bashar al-Assad must come to an end so that the suffering of the Syrian people can stop and a new dawn can begin.

Each of these statements were honey to the ears of Democrats and the Arab world and the Muslim community.  But for those who understood his real message, knew it was a death knell for the Israelis, Syrians, Libyans, Egyptians, Yemenis, Europeans and Americans.

Obama was saying that the future belongs to Islam. History will call December 23rd, 2016 a date that will live in infamy but the foundation of the betrayal of the Christian world was laid on September 25th, 2012.

And Democrats were silent.

RELATED ARTICLE: Obama’s malice, May’s shame. Drain the UN swamp by Melanie Phillips

President Obama’s act of folly and betrayal of Israel

President Obama yours was the unkindest abstention in the history of the U.S. actions as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council. Yesterday, in a deliberate act of retribution and in consort with four council members, two imperialist Islamic member states of the Organization of Islamic States, Malaysia and Senegal, New Zealand  and Venezuela, an ally of Iran, you abandoned the Jewish nation of Israel; this country’s only democratic ally in the Middle East, Israel.

This act of infamy was given a standing ovation by all 14 members of the Security Council. The Palestinian representative declared it a “day of victory.”

Israeli UN Ambassador Danny Danon demurred, calling it a “victory for terrorism.”

History will mark your action as an ignominious faithless act of betrayal of your oath of office and long-standing friendship of America towards the Jewish nation of Israel. A nation that shares the foundational values of our country.

Your abstention and the vote of UN Security Council approving Resolution 2334 dismembers Israel’s eternal capital of Jerusalem violating its existing right to negotiate just and secure borders.

Your act and that of the Security Council will not bring peace. Instead it will inflame Islamic terrorism against our ally Israel.

You have brought shame and dishonor on your office and reputation of this country and its people you were elected to faithfully serve.Your legacy following the end of your final term in office is forever tarnished by this act of folly.

The irony of your misguided conduct comes on the eve of the Jewish Festival of Hanukkah, meaning ‘consecration’, celebrating the victory two millenia ago by the Maccabees, the few against the many, blessed by Ha Shem. These warrior priests rose up with the cry of the High Priest Mattisyahu, “whoever is for for God, follow me.” Their mortal combat achieved a victory over the foreign tyrannyof Syrian-Greek despot, Antiochus, occupying ancient Judea. It was a victory in furtherance of the inalienable right of freedom to worship emblazoned in the First Amendment of our Constitution. An ancient victory that also affirmed the State of Israel’s right to the land of its Jewish fore-bearers and descendants.

Your action Friday , December 23, 2016 suborned that ancient legacy that this country was founded on to uphold 234 years ago with fight for Independence from another occupying tyranny.

It will now be left to a new Congress and your successor as President to redress your betrayal of our country and ally Israel.

Full text of UNSC resolution, approved Dec. 23, demanding Israel stop all settlement activity

The Times of Israel

Approved by 14-0, with US abstaining, text seeks action ‘to reverse the negative trends on the ground that are imperiling the two-state solution’

Text of Egyptian-drafted resolution 2334 on settlements, approved by the UN Security Council, on December 23, 2016.

The Security Council,

Reaffirming its relevant resolutions, including resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 446 (1979), 452 (1979), 465 (1980), 476 (1980), 478 (1980), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003), and 1850 (2008),

Guided by the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations, and reaffirming, inter alia, the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by force,

Reaffirming the obligation of Israel, the occupying Power, to abide scrupulously by its legal obligations and responsibilities under the Fourth Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949, and recalling the advisory opinion rendered on 9 July 2004 by the International Court of Justice,

Condemning all measures aimed at altering the demographic composition, character and status of the Palestinian Territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, including, inter alia, the construction and expansion of settlements, transfer of Israeli settlers, confiscation of land, demolition of homes and displacement of Palestinian civilians, in violation of international humanitarian law and relevant resolutions,

Expressing grave concern that continuing Israeli settlement activities are dangerously imperilling the viability of the two-State solution based on the 1967 lines,

Recalling the obligation under the Quartet Roadmap, endorsed by its resolution 1515 (2003), for a freeze by Israel of all settlement activity, including “natural growth”, and the dismantlement of all settlement outposts erected since March 2001,

Recalling also the obligation under the Quartet roadmap for the Palestinian Authority Security Forces to maintain effective operations aimed at confronting all those engaged in terror and dismantling terrorist capabilities, including the confiscation of illegal weapons,

Condemning all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation, incitement and destruction,

Reiterating its vision of a region where two democratic States, Israel and Palestine, live side by side in peace within secure and recognized borders,

Israel's UN ambassador Danny Danon addresses the Security Council on October 19, 2016. (UN Photo)

Israel’s UN ambassador Danny Danon addresses the Security Council on October 19, 2016. (UN Photo)

Stressing that the status quo is not sustainable and that significant steps, consistent with the transition contemplated by prior agreements, are urgently needed in order to (i) stabilize the situation and to reverse negative trends on the ground, which are steadily eroding the two-State solution and entrenching a one-State reality, and (ii) to create the conditions for successful final status negotiations and for advancing the two-State solution through those negotiations and on the ground,

1. Reaffirms that the establishment by Israel of settlements in the Palestinian territory occupied since 1967, including East Jerusalem, has no legal validity and constitutes a flagrant violation under international law and a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace;

2. Reiterates its demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem, and that it fully respect all of its legal obligations in this regard;

3. Underlines that it will not recognize any changes to the 4 June 1967 lines, including with regard to Jerusalem, other than those agreed by the parties through negotiations;

4. Stresses that the cessation of all Israeli settlement activities is essential for salvaging the two-State solution, and calls for affirmative steps to be taken immediately to reverse the negative trends on the ground that are imperilling the two-State solution;

5. Calls upon all States, bearing in mind paragraph 1 of this resolution, to distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967;

6. Calls for immediate steps to prevent all acts of violence against civilians, including acts of terror, as well as all acts of provocation and destruction, calls for accountability in this regard, and calls for compliance with obligations under international law for the strengthening of ongoing efforts to combat terrorism, including through existing security coordination, and to clearly condemn all acts of terrorism;

7. Calls upon both parties to act on the basis of international law, including international humanitarian law, and their previous agreements and obligations, to observe calm and restraint, and to refrain from provocative actions, incitement and inflammatory rhetoric, with the aim, inter alia, of de-escalating the situation on the ground, rebuilding trust and confidence, demonstrating through policies and actions a genuine commitment to the two-State solution, and creating the conditions necessary for promoting peace;

8. Calls upon all parties to continue, in the interest of the promotion of peace and security, to exert collective efforts to launch credible negotiations on all final status issues in the Middle East peace process and within the time frame specified by the Quartet in its statement of 21 September 2010;

9. Urges in this regard the intensification and acceleration of international and regional diplomatic efforts and support aimed at achieving, without delay a comprehensive, just and lasting peace in the Middle East on the basis of the relevant United Nations resolutions, the Madrid terms of reference, including the principle of land for peace, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Quartet Roadmap and an end to the Israeli occupation that began in 1967; and underscores in this regard the importance of the ongoing efforts to advance the Arab Peace Initiative, the initiative of France for the convening of an international peace conference, the recent efforts of the Quartet, as well as the efforts of Egypt and the Russian Federation;

10. Confirms its determination to support the parties throughout the negotiations and in the implementation of an agreement;

11. Reaffirms its determination to examine practical ways and means to secure the full implementation of its relevant resolutions;

12. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Council every three months on the implementation of the provisions of the present resolution;

13. Decides to remain seized of the matter.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Obama’s malice, May’s shame. Drain the UN swamp by Melanie Phillips

‘The Crescent Must be Above the Cross’: Muslim Persecution of Christians 2016

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

23 years after Black Hawk Down U.S. admitting Somali ‘refugees’ at highest rates ever

Two decades have passed since the deadly Black Hawk Down incident at the end of the G.H.W Bush Administration and what do we get, over 100,000 Somalis seeded throughout America (with no end in sight!) because they are incapable of governing their own country! At what point does our responsibility end? In fact, when did it start?

“Somali refugees are probably an even bigger risk than Syrians, as Somalis have committed several terrorist attacks on U.S. soil recently.”  states Leo Hohmann.

We gave you some numbers yesterday for Somali resettlement in the waning weeks of the Obama Administration and the numbers are astronomical.

Why is Somalia our problem more than 25 years since the civil war there and 23 years since, as part of a United Nations mission, we lost 18 of our finest men in the infamous Battle of Mogadishu ‘Black Hawk Down’ attack.

Why must American cities and towns be roiled decades later because the Somali people can’t govern their own country?

And, once the Syrian flow has begun in earnest, what makes you think it will ever stop?

Yesterday, World Net Daily reporter Paul Bremmer asks the same question.  And, frankly, as we ramp up the Syrian resettlement, if Donald Trump doesn’t come through for those millions of voters who want to see the program curtailed especially from terror producing regions of the world, then we are in for another quarter of a century admitting Syrians along with the Somalis!

Here is WND:

While many Americans worry about the influx of Syrians, the U.S. has taken in even more refugees from Somalia this year. Through the first 11 weeks of FY 2017, the U.S. resettled 3,269 Somali refugees. At this rate, the country would absorb more than 15,550 by fiscal year’s end. At this point in FY 2016, the U.S. had only admitted 1,721 Somali refugees on its way to taking in 9,020 for the year.

More than 99.9 percent of the Somalis admitted this fiscal year are Muslims, as was the case in FY 2016 as well.

Hohmann noted Somali refugees are probably an even bigger risk than Syrians, as Somalis have committed several terrorist attacks on U.S. soil recently.

“There’s been no debate in Congress or the media asking the obvious questions: Why is America still taking thousands of refugees every year from Somalia more than 25 years after that country’s civil war broke out?” Hohmann asked. “How many is too many, and why aren’t the Somalis doing a better job of assimilating? Dozens have gone off to fight for overseas terror organizations while even more have been charged, tried and convicted here at home of providing material support to overseas terrorists.”

At the end of this informative article is a slight change of subject worth highlighting. New low income housing in your town you will get refugees!

Hohmann said while he can’t prove the State Department and the federal contractors have targeted red states over blue ones, it wouldn’t surprise him. But he warned that the availability of housing is the biggest factor in determining the placement of refugees.

“They are bringing the refugees in so fast right now that it’s difficult to find places to house them,” he revealed. “I’ve been hearing stories from my sources that some are being secretly housed in Muslim-owned hotels and being held there until openings can be found in local apartment complexes. Housing is always the key for this program. That’s why I often tell people to be wary of government-subsidized housing projects being built in your city because this is often a precursor to refugee resettlement, especially if you have a liberal mayor at the helm of your city.”

If you have been a loyal follower of Ben Carson and want to help fight this fight, you should try to reach him and tell him to scrap Obama’s ‘Affirmatively furthering fair housing’ initiative which funds housing projects in largely white communities where politicians promise diversity will be injected into the community.

Be sure to get Leo Hohmann’s new book: Stealth Invasion.  It is the first full-length book on the US Refugee Admissions Program and where it has gone wrong.

See my accounting that began in 2008 of the Somali resettlement each year and note two things: The big influx began with Bill Clinton’s first year in office (1994), but up until this year (FY17), the greatest rates of admission of Somalis came in the George W. Bush Administration.

Berlin Islamic killer came through Italian island of Lampedusa in 2011

Two years later, in 2013, the Pope went to Lampedusa to welcome the African migrants to Italy!

pope-on-lampedusa

Pope Francis welcoming Muslim migrants to Lampedusa.

The Pope welcomes the African migrants to Lampedusa, Italy in 2013. See our post where he lectured Italians to be more welcoming, and to “cry” for the migrants. 

From The UK Sun (see the pictures):

The ISIS extremist ploughed a lorry into festive shoppers at a Berlin Christmas market on Monday night.

[….]

Rewind five years, and just days after arriving on Lampedusa trouble-maker Amri was involved in the burning down of a migrant shelter.

We have the Pope and Mama Merkel to blame for the invasion of Europe.

See all of our ‘Invasion of Europe’ news by clicking here.

RELATED ARTICLES: 

Obama State Department approves 100 Syrian Muslims for West Virginia state capitol

New Mexico: Lutheran resettlement contractor puts brakes on new Sante Fe refugee program

Texas AG makes stupid, uninformed comments about refugee program!

Asheville, NC still under consideration for new refugee site

Refugee controversy hot in Hudson, Wisconsin; Congressman wants answers

What the hell! Somali American goes HOME for visit to Somalia!

The ruling elites happy face on Islamic terror

By the time you read this article, there may well have been yet more Islamic vehicular terror attacks throughout the world similar to the carnage wrought in Nice, France and Berlin, Germany.

This will be even as Germany’s Chancellor Merkel, President Obama and the ruling elites in too many western nations – along with their morally compromised media – continue putting a happy face on uncontrolled mass-migration from Arab and Muslim lands.

berlin-truck-attack

The hi-jacked removal truck used to kill and maim innocent Christians.

According to German police, the atrocity in Berlin was committed by a Muslim suspect from Tunisia who took control of a Polish moving company’s truck after murdering the driver and then deliberately plowing it into civilians, killing twelve people and maiming scores more; mere days before both the Christian Christmas and Jewish Hanukkah festivals are celebrated.

This is now a weapon of choice by the legions of Muslim terrorists who hate Judeo-Christian civilization and are urged on to commit their grisly deeds by the unholy trinity of al-Qaeda, ISIS and the Muslim Brotherhood, along with its demons, the Palestinian Authority, Islamic Jihad, Hamas, Fatah, PLO, Al Shabab, Boko Haram, ad nauseam.

The writer, Bat Ye’or, penned these words many years ago when she was an almost lone voice warning of what was to come from resurgent and totalitarian Islam – long before ISIS and the destruction of Christianity in the Middle East:

  • Where are the great Catholic or Protestant voices protesting against this Islamization of Christianity? This passivity, this indifference makes you think that Europe will soon look more like Lebanon.
  • This has ruined Europe – because the enemies of Israel are also enemies of Christianity and of Europe. How can you ally yourself with those who want to destroy you, without in fact dying yourself?
  • The same obsessive hatred Hitler had for the Jewish people, which led to the ruin of Europe, has persisted today in the European Union’s animus against the Jewish State. The great irony is that in trying to destroy Israel, Europe is destroying itself.

Most people in the West now have seen on their TV screens the horrific vehicular terrorism in Nice, France which killed 84 people and left 300 more horribly maimed and scarred for life. More and more places around the world have already become victim to this barbarism or are likely to endure it in the coming year.

Remember, too, the recent vehicular attack on Ohio students who were mown down by a Somali refugee and student who then jumped out of his car and began stabbing fellow students?

But one embattled nation, Israel, has been mourning hundreds of such victims of Muslim Arab knife, gun and bomb horror, as well as car and truck terror for years – although the benighted mainstream media (MSM) has mostly ignored what Israelis have been enduring.

Since September 2015 there have been some 50 vehicular terror attacks by Muslims upon Israeli civilians with trucks and cars plowing into people standing at bus stops or out shopping in busy streets. But the ever biased MSM has rarely reported these cruel barbarities perpetrated by those Arabs who call themselves Palestinians because the victims were Israelis.

The liberal, progressive and left leaning media folks nearly always refrain from condemning the Palestinian miscreants or, if they do, they usually make an equally deplorable moral equivalence between the Arab victimizers and the Israeli victims.

Instead of condemning and highlighting the 50 or more vehicular terror attacks against Israeli civilians spawned by the Palestinian junior partners of ISIS, al Qaida and the Muslim Brotherhood, namely the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, Fatah or the PLO, the MSM’s cynical silence has allowed this Muslim pestilence to spread to all corners of the world and especially to Europe, which opened its arms to well over a million and a quarter Muslim “refugees.”

It is instructive to report that the police union in the German state of Thuringia was forced to issue an open letter to the state’s Interior Minister describing the crumbling law and order situation amid rising immigrant crime and terror. The letter reads:

“You are abandoning us completely to a superior force … but what changes? Nothing. One instead gets a sense of deep apathy and disinterest.”

That superior force is the tip of the Islamic spear.

Meanwhile, representatives of the Arab and Muslim community were telling the police in the Ruhr: “Your police will not win a war with us because we are too many.”

According to Giulio Meotti who writes for the Italian newspaper, Il Foglio:

“It is no secret that Islamic fundamentalists consider the Germans and so many in the West as a bunch of cowards and wherever they look they see people and governments only too ready to capitulate.

We could have hailed a meaningful change in the German policy toward Islamic terrorism if the day after the carnage at the Christmas market in Berlin, a couple of German war planes had bombed the Islamists’ bases in the Middle East and pulverized a few dozen of them. Nothing happened. Nothing will happen.”

Each time the mainstream media (the deplorable MSM) insists in knee jerk fashion that the atrocities have nothing to do with Islam, they then proceed to enter yet further into the realms of fantasy by showering Europe’s growing Muslim population with inane, unmerited praise.

Too few in the world understand the terrifying fact that Islam cannot tolerate a world that does not share its beliefs or that Islam has chosen to impose its “ideology wrapped in a religion” (as Winston Churchill himself once described it) by force and has done so since the 7th century. The MSM and elitist politicians have deliberately turned a blind eye to Islam.

As the great Dutch politician, Geert Wilders, has recently written: “They refuse to acknowledge what is written in the Koran, namely permission by Muslims to kill Jews and Christians (Surah 9:29), to terrorize non-Muslims (8:12), to rape young girls (65:4), to enslave people for sex (4:3), to lie about true goals (3:54), to make war on ‘infidels’ (9:123), and to subjugate the entire world to Allah (9:33).

President Barack Hussein Obama has himself brought untold thousands of Muslims into the United States, very often in great secrecy. The result has been a grim succession of Islamic terror atrocities and a commensurate curb on our cherished American freedoms.

In Germany, various intelligence agencies have warned that Muslim terrorists would attempt to carry out attacks during the holiday season. The British Foreign Office warned its citizens traveling to Germany to “remain vigilant.”

But how people are expected to do so is not explained when, at any minute, a fanatical terrorist screaming in Arabic the Islamic supremacist war cry, Allahu Akbar (meaning Allah is Greater – not God is Great) will plow a huge truck or even a smaller automobile into innocent shoppers.

Now Europeans, and our fellow Americans, are beginning to feel what embattled Israeli civilians have been forced to live with day in and day out.

RELATED ARTICLES:

CHRISTIAN WORSHIP IS ‘WORSE THAN MURDER AND BLOODSHED’: Another Islamic teaching behind the slaughter of Christians

Obama’s malice, May’s shame. Drain the UN swamp by Melanie Phillips

Italian girl converts to Islam, joins the Islamic State: “I can’t wait to die as a martyr”

Germany: Police chiefs warn of “further significant attacks”

Trump Influenced Egypt to Delay a U.N. Resolution that would have irreparably harmed Israel

A vote was scheduled by the U.N.for this past Thursday concerning Israeli settlements which would have irreparably harmed Israel. In the past the U.S. would have vetoed such a resolution. However it is now reported Obama wasn’t going to veto it.

Fortunately for Israel Donald Trump in an unusual move for a President Elect publicly called for Obama to veto the resolution sending Egypt a clear message of Trump’s position. As a result Egypt has postponed a vote on the resolution. This will give President Trump the opportunity to veto it when it is rescheduled.

From all of us who support Israel, thank-you President Elect Trump.


Trump influenced Egypt’s decision to postpone anti-Israel UN vote, diplomats say

Egypt postponed a vote on an anti-Israel UN resolution it had sponsored shortly after US President-elect Donald Trump called for a veto of the measure, which would have condemned Israeli building in Judea and Samaria.

US President-elect Donald J. Trump has implicitly called for outgoing US President Barack Obama to veto a UN Security Council resolution scheduled for Thursday afternoon, which would have condemned Israeli construction in all areas gained by the Jewish state during the Six-Day War in 1967, when it was threatened with extinction by the surrounding Arab countries.

“The resolution being considered at the United Nations Security Council regarding Israel should be vetoed,” Trump wrote on his Facebook page. “This puts Israel in a very poor negotiating position and is extremely unfair to all Israelis.”

“As the United States has long maintained, peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians will only come through direct negotiations between the parties, and not through the imposition of terms by the United Nations,” Trump added.

Read more…

RELATED ARTICLES:

Israel and the rising new West by Caroline B. Glick

Security Council likely to vote on settlements Friday despite Egyptian reversal

Even if the Russians Did Hack the Emails, So What?

“The Russians hacked the election!” say Democrats trying to discredit Donald Trump’s presidency. Of course, their statement is deceptive, referring only to the theory that the Russians provided WikiLeaks with the campaign season’s revelatory Democrat emails.

Not surprisingly, the Fake (establishment) Media has embraced the theory, which is probably the best argument for its falsity. In addition, Wikileaks founder Julian Assange denies Russian involvement. So does Britain’s former ambassador to Uzbekistan, Craig Murray, who said “I’ve met the person who leaked them [the emails]” and that the individual is an “insider” representing Democrats angry over “the corruption of the Clinton Foundation and the tilting of the primary election playing field against Senator Bernie Sanders.” Moreover, both FBI director James Comey and James Clapper, director of National Intelligence, said there’s “no credible evidence” Russia influenced Nov. 8’s outcome, according to reporter Ed Klein. Yet whatever the truth, the more important matter is that the issue is being used as a distraction and a tool for disruption.

What was actually revealed by WikiLeaks and what effect it had are being conflated with the matter of who revealed it, as if the messenger somehow changes the message. Consider an analogy: Imagine it came to light that a Capitol Hill restaurant’s kitchen was filthy and vermin-infested. Would the health department’s course of action be dictated by whether the information came from a disgruntled employee or an investigative reporter who illegally gained access to the kitchen? If the latter, would Washington Democrats still eat there?

As a reminder, the WikiLeaks emails contained damning information showing direct collusion between the mainstream media and the Hillary Clinton campaign, including evidence that a CNN figure gave Clinton debate questions ahead of time, thus disadvantaging primary-season opponent Sanders. They contained other dirt on the Democrats as well. Is anyone but Clinton and her apologists upset these truths came to light?

Of course, our systems must be made safe from intrusion by foreign actors, but this gets at an important point: It will reflect better on the Democrats if the WikiLeaks source is a leaker. After all, whose systems were supposedly hacked and under whose watch would it have occurred?

Answers: the Democrats’ systems and the Obama administration.

The New York Times recently ran a painfully long article about how “how Russian cyberpower invaded the U.S.,” calling it “The Perfect weapon.” But the piece mainly illustrates how Democrat and administration entities exhibited the perfect storm of incompetence. The Times writes of how its examination “based on interviews with dozens of players targeted in the attack, intelligence officials who investigated it and Obama administration officials who deliberated over the best response — reveals a series of missed signals, slow responses and a continuing underestimation of the seriousness of the cyberattack.”

In contrast, there reportedly was also a hacking attempt by Russia on the Republicans. It apparently didn’t work, however, because they actually secured their systems.

So here’s the Democrat complaint, translated: “We were too incompetent to secure our systems — or react promptly to a perceived threat by a hostile foreign actor — and as a result damning truths about us were revealed. We’re such victims!”

Taking the above together with Hillary Clinton’s use of a “home brew” server to send classified emails, and that the FBI stated there appeared to be hacking attempts on it, a question is raised:

Were these people ever qualified to be at the nation’s helm, in charge of national security?

In the 1997 film Liar Liar, Jim Carrey plays a shyster lawyer who, after a birthday wish made by his son comes true, is suddenly incapable of telling a lie. Objecting to the opposing counsel’s argument in court but robbed of his verbal legerdemain, he responds to the judge’s question as to why he objected by saying, with the only argument he could honestly muster, “Because it’s devastating to my case!”

That is essentially the democrats’ gripe regarding the quite true WikiLeaks revelations. Objection overruled.

Contact Selwyn Duke, follow him on Twitter or log on to SelwynDuke.com.