Displaying the most recent of 90908 posts written by

Ruth King

The Abraham Accords Transform the Middle East by Daryl McCann

https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2020/11/the-abraham-accords-transform-the-middle-east/

The Abraham Accords, officially ratified at the White House on September 15, have diminished the sway of the Palestinian political leadership in the wider Arab world. The concept of a future Palestinian state has not been abandoned, although the rejectionist policy of the Palestinian leadership has been emphatically discarded. The presence of the Jewish state in the region is now accepted by the vast majority of the twenty-two Arab states as an irrevocable reality—like it or not. In the case of the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain, at least, it is a case of accepted and liked. Already the attitude of the Emiratis and the Bahrainis towards Israel looks very different from the cold peace that has existed between the Egyptians and Israel since 1979 and between the Jordanians and Israel since 1994. The story of Zionism and the Arabs is taking an unexpected turn.

The anti-Israel brigade, from the BDS movement and the Palestinian Authority to the Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamic Republic of Iran, are right to be dismayed. Rapprochement between UAE/Bahrain and Israel constitutes a sevenfold triumph for the Zionist project.

In the first instance, it is a crushing blow to the rejectionist argument that the Jewish state, founded on March 15, 1948, is an alien entity imposed on the region. If the broader Arab Sunni world is happy to give its imprimatur to the existence of Israel, then who are we to disagree? The League of Nations formally accepted the right of a Jewish nation to exist in the “historical Land of Israel” in July 1922. No less significant was the decision of the United Nations, in November 1947, to recognise a Jewish state within the territory of Mandatory Palestine (Resolution 181). The Abraham Accords further affirm the legitimacy of Israel. Theodor Herzl, Zionist prophet and author of The Jewish State (1896), would be pleased.

There is a second reason why the Abraham Accords are a triumph for Zionism and a defeat for the political leadership of Palestinian Arabs. Normalisation suggests that Sunni nations are now less prone to being taken hostage by the most radical or maximalist wing of Palestinian nationalism, which either repudiates the lawfulness of Israel’s existence or professes acceptance of the Jewish state but thwarts every overture to establish a complementary Palestinian Arab state. For the Palestinian rejectionists, the practice of spurning UN Resolution 181 and the partitioning of British Palestine—starting with Haj Amin al-Husayni in 1947 and maintained by the likes of Yasser Arafat and Mahmoud Abbas—remains in force. The PLO/PA has rebuffed offers of statehood (based on clearly defined borders) in 2000, 2003-04 and 2013-14. To this day it does not endorse Resolution 181. The UAE and Bahrain know it suits the Palestinian Authority  (PA) leadership to (a) perpetuate the unresolved Israel-Palestinian Arab dispute and (b) exploit this unresolvedness to slander Israel as an “occupier’, an “ethno-coloniser” and an “apartheid state” and, by so doing, prevent formal links between Israel and the wider Arab world.

If Americans Can No Longer Trust Our Elections, We’re In Big Trouble This is an incredibly dangerous moment for the country and may be a pivotal point in the future of America’s democratic republic. Did we just cross the Rubicon?By Willis L. Krumholz

https://thefederalist.com/2020/11/17/if-americans-can-no-longer-trust-our-elections-were-in-big-trouble/

The polls from the major networks and universities promised a blue wave. President Trump was down by at least 10 points nationally, and by nearly that much or more in the major swing states. The few pollsters, including Trafalgar, who got 2016 and 2018 right and called 2020 a close race, were widely ridiculed.

Nate Silver, a leftwing poll analyst, was chief among the critics. Silver gave former Vice President Joe Biden a nearly 70 percent chance of winning Florida.

Immediately on Election Day, turnout looked good for the GOP. Trump won Florida decisively and by 8:30 p.m. Central Time, and made huge inroads in urban areas. While Hillary Clinton won Miami-Dade County by 30 points in 2016, the 2020 Trump ticket was down only single digits in the county.

That’s because Trump made significant gains among nonwhite Americans, and according to exit polls had the second-highest nonwhite share of the vote of any Republican since 1976. Cuban Americans are a big reason for Trump decisively winning Florida, but Trump’s gains with minority voters are a nationwide trend. The flipside was lower black and Hispanic turnout for Democrats—except for several major Democratic cities in contested swing states.

In other words, a significant margin of minority voters who didn’t defect to Trump decided not to vote. Indeed, a Bloomberg article days before the election cited anonymous Biden officials who said the campaign was worried about black and Hispanic turnout due to a lack of a ground game in these traditionally Democratic strongholds. But the warnings had gone unheeded.

Turley Warns: The Biden Transition Team Just Took an Ominous Turn Katie Pavlich

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2020/11/17/turley-warns-the-biden-transition-team-just-took-an-ominous-turn-n2580217

Democrat and George Washington University Law Professor Jonathan Turley is warning that the Biden transition team has taken an “ominous turn” after former Vice President Joe Biden hired a number of anti-free speech zealots. 

“For those of us who have been critical of the growing anti-free speech movement in the Democratic Party, the Biden transition team just took an ominous turn.  The New York Post reports that Biden tapped Richard Stengel to take the “team lead” position on the US Agency for Global Media, including Voice of America, the Middle East Broadcasting Networks and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty,” Turley writes on his website. “As I previously addressed in a column, Stengel has been one of the most controversial figures calling for censorship and speech controls. For a president-elect who just called for everyone to “hear each other,” he picked a top aide who wants to silence many.  Since it would be difficult to select a more anti-free speech figure to address government media policy, one has to assume that Biden will continue the onslaught against this core freedom as president.  This is not the first Biden aide to indicate a crackdown on free speech in the new Administration and Biden himself has called for greater censorship on the Internet.”

“Last year, Stengel wrote a chilling Washington Post op-ed that denounced free speech as a threat to social and political harmony.  Like a number of liberal and Democratic figures, Stengel struggled to convince readers that what they need is less freedom:  “All speech is not equal. And where truth cannot drive out lies, we must add new guardrails. I’m all for protecting ‘thought that we hate,’ but not speech that incites hate,” he continues. “In January, Biden called for greater speech controls on the Internet and denounced Twitter for allowing others to speak freely. In insisted that tolerating such views in the name of free speech is same as “propagating falsehoods they know to be false.” Biden called for companies to bar Trump views on such things as mail-in voting as an invitation for fraud.  He is not alone. Congressional leaders like House Intelligence Committee Chair Adam Schiff have called for labeling and removal of material with some members directly threatening a legislative crackdown.”

Students Call on Harvard to Ban Trump Officials from Speaking, Holding Positions on Campus By Brittany Bernstein

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/students-call-on-harvard-to-ban-trump-officials-from-speaking-holding-positions-on-campus/

Harvard University students are calling on the university to ban Trump officials from giving talks or holding positions on campus over concern “about the impact of the actions of this administration on fundamental democratic institutions.”

In an open letter circulating online for signatures, students write to President Lawrence Bacow and Harvard University deans and leadership that they are hoping to get ahead of the tradition of “Harvard [becoming] a temporary home for officials from the outgoing administration.”

“We write to you now, in advance of the conclusion of the Trump administration, extremely concerned about the impact of the actions of this administration on fundamental democratic institutions,” the letter reads. “Most notably, in actively undermining faith in the electoral process and in refusing to concede the 2020 election, the Trump administration has trampled norms of free and fair elections and peaceful transfer of power that have defined our republic for over two centuries. These norms are crucial to the global well-being of democratic institutions.”

It continues: “A complete disregard for the truth is a defining feature of many decisions made by this administration. That alone should be enough to draw a line.”

Obama’s Ridiculous Call for Speech Police By Kyle Smith

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/11/obamas-ridiculous-call-for-speech-police/

The ex-president shows again he’s a deeply unserious man with an outlandishly un-American proposal.

F un game: Imagine President Obama’s litany of bitter grievances expressed not in the imitation deepthink of middlebrow magazines and their compassion for good government, but in the somewhat earthier demotic of his successor. Take this example, from Obama’s recent BBC comments to promote his third book on his favorite subject:

There are millions of people who subscribed to the notion that Joe Biden is a socialist, who subscribed to the notion that Hillary Clinton was part of an evil cabal that was involved in pedophile rings. I think at some point it’s going to require a combination of regulation and standards within industries to get us back to the point where we at least recognize a common set of facts before we start arguing about what we should do about those facts.

Obama, apparently referring to Facebook posts and other non-mainstream sources of information, is saying the United States should have a regulatory body empowered to stop anyone from publicly stating opinions with which he disagrees (“Biden is a socialist”) or assertions for which there is no evidence (Hillary Clinton was involved in a pedophile ring). Let’s be honest here: What Obama is saying is crazy. It’s a triple-layer cake of crazy with whipped craziness on top. He might as well tweet out: “We would win every election if it weren’t for the FAKE NEWS who will be DEALT WITH!!! My new DEPARTMENT OF FAKE NEWS BLASTERS will shut them up FOREVER!!!”

It’s crazy that Obama thinks the existence of a free press is, on balance, worse for his party than for Republicans; it’s crazy that Obama, a former constitutional-law lecturer, thinks there is some previously unnoticed truth clause in the First Amendment; it’s crazy that he thinks his idea would pass muster with a judiciary that is at the moment more supportive of the free exchange of ideas than in any previous period in American history, especially given the current makeup of the Supreme Court; it’s crazy that Obama thinks that Clinton narrowly lost her bid for the presidency, and Biden narrowly won his, because swing voters decided either that Biden is a socialist or that she is in league with pedophiles. It’s also crazy that Obama hasn’t noticed there are already “standards within industries” to limit the spread of information uncongenial to Obama’s party, revealed in Twitter and Facebook’s publicly admitted efforts to stop the New York Post’s reports about the contents of Hunter Biden’s laptop from spreading, a determined effort by mainstream-media outlets to ignore or downplay the story, and the startling admission by the editor of the New York Times that he removed accurate information from an already-published story centering on a sexual-assault allegation against Joe Biden because Biden’s campaign complained.

The usual suspects against Jewish construction in Jerusalem Nothing points to the legitimacy of housing units in Givat Hamatos better than the diatribes of Peace Now, the Palestinian Authority, the European Union and the United Nations.

https://www.jns.org/opinion/the-usual-suspects-against-jewish-construction-in-jerusalem/

A good way to evaluate a policy is by examining the identity of its critics. The controversy surrounding the tenders issued on Sunday by the Israel Lands Authority for the construction of 1,257 new housing units in the southeastern Jerusalem neighborhood of Givat Hamatos is a perfect case in point.

Outrage at the building plan, which has been in the works for six years, was swift to emerge from the usual suspects: the Israeli NGO Peace Now, the Palestinian Authority, the European Union and the United Nations. It’s basically all one needs to know before forming an opinion about the move.

Let’s begin with Peace Now. In September 2014, the organization that serves as a kind of settlement watchdog—growling and barking about every balcony added to an apartment in an area of the Jewish state that they deem “illegally occupied”—alerted fellow Israel-bashers across the ocean to the fact that the Jerusalem District Planning and Building Committee had approved the construction of homes in Givat Hamatos.

Never mind that the neighborhood, originally filled with caravans for the housing of new immigrants from Ethiopia, is outside the so-called Green Line.

Make the Palestinian Issue Central Again? Ambassador (Ret.) Yoram Ettinger

According to a November 12, 2020 OpEd by Nabil Amr, a confidant of Mahmoud Abbas, published by the leading Saudi daily Asharq Al-Awsat : “Ballots with Biden’s name would have filled the boxes if placed in Ramallah…. [The Palestinian Authority] bets are that Biden’s victory [will] resume ties with the US Administration, pumping money into the Palestinian Authority’s virtually empty coffers, reopening the PLO’s Washington Office and the US Consulate in Jerusalem, tasked with dealing with Palestinian affairs…. The new Administration will also go back to talking about the two-state solution and repudiate unilateral actions like annexation…. Trump’s Administration took a totally different path….”

However, the “Palestine Firsters” among the future policy makers in Washington, DC, are infatuated with the Palestinian cause, assuming that the Palestinian issue is central to the Arab-Israeli conflict and the overall Arab agenda.  They have ignored the fact that Arabs viewed Palestinians as the role model for intra-Arab terrorism, subversion and ingratitude, a low level (and negative) priority on their agenda.

The “Palestine Firsters” should study the two hour October 5, 2020 TV interview by Prince Bandar bin Sultan, a senior member of the Saudi royal family and a former head of the Saudi intelligence services and national security council:

“It is not surprising to see how quick are Palestinian leaders [criticizing the Israel-UAE peace accord] to use terms like ‘treason,’ betrayal’ and ‘backstabbing.’  These are their ways in dealing with each other…. They always bet on the losing side.  In the 1930s, [the top Palestinian leader] Amin al-Husseini was betting on the Nazis in Germany…. [Following WW2, the Palestinians embraced the USSR]…. [In 1970], Arafat’s headquarters were in Jordan, and he decided that it was time to liberate not Palestine, but Jordan [through a bloody civil war]…. They had only been in Lebanon a few years when they began to behave as they did in Jordan, and Lebanon became the new target.  It led to a [1975-1982] civil war…. No one can forget the image of Arafat as he visited Saddam Hussein in 1990, after the occupation of Kuwait [which was the most generous Arab host of the Palestinians]…. We saw Arafat in Baghdad, embracing Saddam, and laughing and joking with him…. We saw [Palestinian] youth in Nablus dancing joyfully in celebration of [Saddam’s] missile attack on Riyadh, holding pictures of Saddam…. We are at a stage in which rather than…serve the Palestinian cause, we have to pay attention to our national security and interests…. We are surrounded by a stormy sea [Iran’s Ayatollahs, the Muslim Brotherhood, Al Qaeda and Turkey’s Erdogan]…. We do not allow [Palestinian] liars and those who are disloyal to impose their tradition on us…. The Palestinian leaders have come to regard Tehran and Ankara higher than they regard Riyadh, Kuwait, Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Bahrain, Oman and Egypt….”

REP. BURGESS OWENS (UTAH-DISTRICT 4)

In Utah’ s 4th Congressional District, Republican Burgess Owens unseated the Democrat incumbent Ben McAdams.

Owens is a former NFL player who spoke with passion about his deep love and appreciation of America. Owens who is black credited the Republican party for its diversity and success with minorities. His patriotism is palpable and inspiring. Go to Washington Mr. Adams and give the squad and Nancy Pelosi a run for their tenure.

Smartmatic Director Admitted in 2017 that Their System Was Able to Create “At Least One Million” Phantom Votes in that Year’s Venezuela Election by Jim Hoft

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2020/11/smartmatic-director-admitted-2017-system-able-create-least-one-million-phantom-votes-years-venezuela-election/

Smartmatic has been stealing elections in Venezuela since at least 2004.

In Ausust 2017 Smartmatic Director Antonio Mugica admitted that the Smartmatic machines and software created at least one million phantom votes in the national elections in Venezuela.

Mugica added that the fact election observers were not in the room helped Smartmatic machines steal the election.

This statement by Mugica was in August 2017.

The related Dominion equipment is used in North Carolina, Nevada, Georgia, Michigan, Arizona and Pennsylvania – key battleground states this year.

According to Townhall, the Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) issued a statement last week defending the integrity of the 2020 election. The problem, however, is two of the main election software companies that have been called into question – Dominion Voting Systems and Smartmatic – sit on CISA.

What We Must Believe to Believe Biden Won David Catron

https://spectator.org/what-we-must-believe-to-believe-biden-won/

The Democrats dismiss any mention of the innumerable irregularities that tainted the general election as little more than crackpot conspiracy theories. This is a convenient way to avoid addressing serious questions raised by serious observers, but it will further undermine confidence in key institutions that form the foundation upon which the republic stands. Public trust in government, media, and even science was already declining before Election Day. This trend will dramatically accelerate if Americans don’t get answers to questions such as the following: Why would the voters deliver the Democrats a comprehensive down-ballot drubbing yet hand the White House to the worst presidential candidate in living memory?

The only bellwether county out of the 19 that Biden won is located in Washington state, which long ago went to all mail-in ballots and one-party rule. We are expected to believe that this is a coincidence.

The last time a Democrat “won” the presidency while his party sustained a double-digit loss in the House was in 1960, during an election tainted by probable vote fraud in Illinois and Texas. Still, we’re expected to believe that Joe Biden achieved the same feat in 2020 with no skulduggery? Moreover, as Juan Williams admits in the Hill, “President Trump set a record last week by attracting the highest percentage of the non-white vote of any Republican presidential candidate in the last 60 years.” Yet we are expected to believe that, despite the worst showing among minorities of any Democratic nominee since JFK, Biden surpassed Barack Obama’s record-breaking turnout by 10 million votes?