Displaying posts categorized under

WORLD NEWS

UNESCO: Why the United States Needs to Watch Out by Shoshana Bryen

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13123/unesco-israel-united-states

The Old Testament is read by Christians with the same reverence as the New Testament. Jesus did NOT send the money changers out of the Al Aqsa Mosque.

UNESCO votes inform the way people think about history. One can disagree with Israeli policies and practices while agreeing that the Land of Israel is the historic space of the Jewish people. But when UNESCO erases that connection, there remains no reason to posit that there should be a State of Israel at all. Which leaves the Hamas and Fatah position that “Palestine from the River to the Sea” as the natural arrangement of things.

To the extent that Europeans (and some Americans) dismiss their traditional, biblically grounded understanding of the Middle East, Israel and the free world are less secure. UNESCO’s members understand that such dismissal by the West advances their goal toward the elimination of Israel. The United States should, too.

The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), regarding international interest in preserving historic sites in Israel, is a sham. Its work consists mainly of denying a Jewish connection to the land and its history. In a 2016 vote, UNESCO denied any connection between Israel and its historic Temple Mount and the Western Wall — a retaining wall which is all that is left of the ancient Jewish Temples (Solomon’s Temple, destroyed by the Babylonians in 586 BCE and the Second Temple, destroyed by the Romans in 70 CE).

In 2017, UNESCO’s resolution on “Occupied Palestine” announced that:

“…all legislative and administrative measures and actions taken by Israel, the occupying Power, which have altered or purport to alter the character and status of the Holy City of Jerusalem, and in particular the ‘basic law’ on Jerusalem, are null and void and must be rescinded forthwith…”

Two draft resolutions approved by UNESCO’s 59-member Executive Committee last week were merely “follow-ons.” First, that Hebron’s Old City and the Tomb of the Patriarchs (Cave of Machpela) are Palestinian heritage sites, and second that they are “in danger.” From Israel.

The votes were entirely consistent with previous UNESCO pronouncements and the list of “for”, “against”, and “abstain” was to be expected.

Why Palestinians Do Not Have a Parliament by Khaled Abu Toameh

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13136/palestinian-parliament

In the absence of a parliament, the Palestinians have no address to express their grievances. They cannot write to or phone their elected legislators to complain about anything. All they can do is resort to social media, especially Facebook, to air their views.

As Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas does not tolerate criticism particularly well, he doubtless feels more comfortable delivering speeches at international forums such as the United Nations, the European Parliament and his own Fatah and PLO institutions than at the Palestinian parliament. The others are places where no one takes him to task for his tyranny.

In the past few years, scores of Palestinians have been harassed, arrested and interrogated by Abbas’s security forces for posting critical comments on Facebook.

Parliaments, among the strongest manifestations of a democracy, represent the electorate, enact laws and oversee the government through hearings and inquiries.

Apparently, this does not apply to the Palestinians, who, as a result of the power struggle between Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas’s ruling Fatah faction in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, have, for the past 11 years, been without a functioning parliament.

The Palestinian Authority’s unicameral legislature is the 132-member Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC). Both the PA and PLC were established after the signing of the Oslo Accord in 1993. The first Palestinian legislative election took place in January 1996. The second, and last, election took place in January 2006; it resulted in a victory for Hamas.

In 2007, Hamas violently seized control of the Gaza Strip and toppled the Palestinian Authority regime that was there. Since then, the Palestinian parliament has not been functioning properly, although Hamas legislators sometimes meet separately in the Gaza Strip. In the absence of a functioning parliament, Abbas has been passing laws by “presidential decree.” Several Palestinians have questioned their legality and accused the Palestinian leader of violating Palestinian Basic Law.

A martial nation needs Churchill to inspire us Daniel Johnson

From Boadicea’s chariot to Britannia’s trident, the British have always been fond of martial metaphors. That is not the same as a “national obsession” with “war-worship”, which David Cameron’s former speechwriter Clare Foges, writing recently in The Times, blamed for “leading us to Brexit and the mess we are in”. She claims that our constant references to the Second World War and “the casual elision of evil bastards back then with earnest bureaucrats today” have “been poisonous to relations with Europe”. As evidence for this, Ms Foges cites the former German ambassador, Peter Ammon, who said that back in Berlin they could not believe that the British saw Germany as dominant in the EU, adding that “if you focus only on how Britain stood alone in the war, how it stood against dominating Germany, well, it is a nice story, but it does not solve any problem of today”.

For my own part, I find it revealing that someone so close to the prime minister who accidentally precipitated Brexit is still so naive about Germany’s role in the EU that she accepts such an artful gambit at face value. Mr Ammon knows perfectly well that his country’s political and economic (but not military) dominance in Europe is taken for granted by the elites of every one of the EU’s 28 member states, including his own. To admit as much in public would be a faux pas for a postwar German diplomat, but not for a British one: Sir Paul Lever, ambassador to Germany from 1997 to 2003, has written an entire book on the subject with the self-explanatory title Berlin Rules: Europe and the German Way. Sir Paul isn’t anti-German; he merely seeks to explain how the EU works. Only last month it emerged that Brussels broke its own rules by installing Martin Selmayr as Secretary-General of the European Commission. Will he now be removed from office? Of course not: Dr Selmayr is perhaps the most ardent living exponent of the ideology of European federalism, which has been an article of faith for every German chancellor since Adenauer and is now largely enshrined in EU law. Many Continental Europeans accept this fait accompli as the natural order of things. As far as they are concerned, Berlin rules OK.

What, though, about the war, and the part played in it by Britain — what Ambassador Ammon called “a nice story”? Is it really no more than that? Are we deluding ourselves with our habit of “war-wallowing”, to which Ms Foges cheerfully pleads guilty? Have we, in fact, constructed our entire national identity on the basis of a convenient untruth, a necessary fiction — or even a deliberate lie?

That, in a nutshell, is the argument of a new book by Peter Hitchens: The Phoney Victory: The World War II Delusion (IB Tauris, £17.99). Dedicated to his father, a Royal Navy commander, this white-hot polemic is intended to expose those who unnecessarily plunged the British people into a catastrophic war for which they were unprepared and for which they paid the price: a pyrrhic victory that bankrupted the economy, reduced a global empire to an American satellite and sacrificed much that had made Britain great.

A Swift Iran Decision Iranian banks have to be expelled from the global financing network.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/europes-not-so-swift-diplomacy-1539730896

Another trans-Atlantic showdown is looming as the Trump Administration prepares its next tranche of financial sanctions on Iran, and the puzzle is why Europe keeps backing itself into a corner. Brussels and European Union states seem ready to stage a battle with Washington over an obscure but important financial-service network—against Europe’s own interests.

The looming brouhaha concerns Swift, the Belgium-based cooperative that manages the global system that banks use to communicate with each other for cross-border transactions. The Trump Administration will soon lay out its plans for financial sanctions on Tehran to take effect in November, as Washington reintroduces sanctions lifted under the Obama Administration’s 2015 nuclear deal. One question is whether the new sanctions include Swift.

They will have to in order to be effective, because cutting Iran off from Swift’s services is one of the best ways to ensure that financial sanctions bite. Were Swift to sever ties with Iranian banks, Iranian companies and financial institutions would struggle to transfer money to and from the rest of the world.

Alternatives exist, but none offer Swift’s global reach or security. Europe’s much-vaunted “special-purpose vehicle” for trading around U.S. financial sanctions, announced last month, is expected to be little more than a glorified barter arrangement with limited scope.

Swift is particularly prone to U.S. pressure because the American financial system looms so large in the world. Swift’s board includes representatives of European and American banks, and many messages across its network travel to or from the U.S. Some Europeans believe Washington wields too much influence over a network they think should operate on a multilateral consensus like a financial EU.

Lee Smith:Ten Key Questions About the Khashoggi Affar

http://thefederalist.com/2018/10/15/10-key-questions-khashoggi-affair-answer-buying-press-narrative/
The discipline shown in the messaging campaign against Saudia Arabia suggests Turkish President Recep Erdogan is managing the Khashoggi file directly.

On October 2, Saudi national and U.S. green-card holder Jamal Khashoggi reportedly walked into the Saudi consulate to resolve issues related to his marital status. Through anonymous leaks to the press, Turkish sources claim he did not leave the diplomatic facility alive. More anonymous sources claim he was tortured and murdered, allegations repeated in the U.S. press without evidence.

It is possible that the circumstances around Khashoggi’s disappearance will soon come to light. However, it’s equally likely that the passage of time will only further obscure events. To cast some light on the issue, I thought it was worthwhile asking what seem to me the central questions.
1. Is There Evidence Khashoggi Was Murdered?

Turkish sources say there is. The U.S. press has reported that unnamed Turkish officials have told them—or unnamed second-hand Turkish sources had told them—they have evidence, audio and video, that a team of Saudi officials detained, tortured, and killed Khashoggi.

However, no reporters, neither Western nor Turkish, have seen that evidence. If it exists, the Turks have not made it public. In one of the few leaks from the U.S. government, an intelligence official told CNN there is no hard evidence as to whether Khashoggi is dead or alive.
2. Why Has Turkey Asked Saudi Arabia to Join Its Khashoggi Investigative Team?

According to press reports, the government in Ankara has asked Riyadh to help investigate what happened to Khashoggi. The Turkish foreign minister recently complained that the “[Saudis] aren’t cooperating in full extent to uncover the circumstances of Khashoggi’s disappearance. We would like to see a genuine cooperation from them.”

This makes no sense. If Saudi Arabia is suspected of abducting or killing Khashoggi, its involvement in the investigation would compromise the probe, even giving a potential suspect opportunity to tamper with evidence. Further, if there is audio and video evidence that a Saudi team killed Khashoggi, as Turkish and U.S. media report, there is no need for an investigation—the case has already been solved.

Turkey: Enabling Mass Illegal Migration into Greece by Uzay Bulut

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/13127/turkey-greece-migration

Turkish authorities repeatedly have threatened Europe with an influx of migrants. President Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s threats should not be ignored.

Ever since the migrant crisis started to escalate in 2011 — with the onset of civil war in Syria — those who were critical of mass, unchecked immigration have been called “racists,” “bigots” or “Islamophobes.”

Today, however, the continued chaos in many European countries caused by immigration, and accompanying increase in crime — including murder and rape committed by Islamist extremists — appear to have proven the critics right.

Greece is currently facing a serious surge in undocumented migrant arrivals in the Evros region, an entry point for migrants illegally trying to enter the country from Turkey. Arrivals have roughly doubled since 2017, and Athens is holding Ankara responsible.

The influx from places such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria, Iraq, Bangladesh and African countries into Turkey reportedly has been on the rise in recent months, with 1.5 million people from Muslim countries waiting on the Iranian border to enter Turkey. This has sparked fears in Athens that they could be heading for Greece.

According to a fact sheet released last month by the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR), “Sea arrivals [in Greece] peaked this month with 4,000 people. Land arrivals through Evros also increased to 1,400.”

As a result, the Greek city of Thessaloniki is in crisis. According to a recent article in The Greek Reporter, “Dozens of migrants have turned Aristotelous square in the center of Thessaloniki to a makeshift camp,” with many “sleeping in the open.”

Russian Pensions and the Risk of War Putin raises the retirement age, inflaming the street. Will he find an external enemy to shore up support? By Leon Aron

https://www.wsj.com/articles/russian-pensions-and-the-risk-of-war-1539730575

In the streets of more than 80 Russian cities, thousands of men and women have turned out for antigovernment rallies in the past few months. They aren’t the usual malcontents—the middle class, intelligentsia or students—but rabotyagi, blue-collar working stiffs. Both the cause of the rallies and their political context reveal the impoverishment of Russia and the fragility of Vladimir Putin’s regime, despite its outward appearance of toughness. The West, however, shouldn’t gloat; facing problems at home, Mr. Putin could try to create new problems abroad.

The demonstrators are protesting Mr. Putin’s pension law, introduced in June. The law is meant to save the Russian treasury $15 billion a year by 2024 by gradually increasing the retirement age to 65 from 60 for men, and to 60 from 55 for women. At first glance, the reform doesn’t seem dramatic enough to stir such passions. Russian pensions are skimpy anyway, averaging around $220 a month. That’s barely above the Russian poverty line of $171 and among the lowest rates in Europe.

Yet for millions of Russians, an extra five years of work is a hard blow. At $592 a month, the average Russian salary is puny. That’s why Russia today can have near-full employment, while 14% of the population, or 20 million Russians, are in poverty, as per official statistics. Independent experts from the Higher School of Economics in Moscow estimated last year that 41% of Russians have trouble paying for clothing and food. For many, the choice is between near-poverty while working or near-poverty while staying home.

Life expectancy for Russian men is under 67, not even two full years past the new, higher-than-ever retirement age. Many men fear they’ll literally be worked to death. “With this pension reform, with everything pushed back, I feel like I’ll never get out,” a railway worker said last month.

The protests exposed a fissure in what might be called Mr. Putin’s contract with the Russian people: You stay out of politics and I’ll give you stability. The contract held up in past tough times, most notably in 2008-09, when the Russian economy contracted almost 8% after oil prices fell. Then, difficulties could be blamed on external factors. No such excuses exist today. Incomes have declined for four consecutive years, and the pain is self-inflicted—Russians feel that Mr. Putin’s regime has stabbed them in the back. CONTINUE AT SITE

New British TV Show about a ‘Trans Child’ Is Deeply Irresponsible By Madeleine Kearns

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/transgender-focused-british-television-show-deeply-irresponsible/

When dealing with subjects of life-altering (even life-ending) gravity such as sex-changes and suicide, and especially when exploring how they affect children, what might an appropriate narrative be? Surely a cautious, evidence-based one?

But that’s not the narrative by the creators of Butterfly, a new TV drama in the U.K., which tells the story of an eleven-year-old boy who wants to become a girl. In the TV show, Max who believes himself to be Maxine slits his wrists and declares that a transgender identity the only solution to his misery. His family supports his decision to transition.

There is compelling evidence to suggest that the uptick in gender dysphoria in youth may be partly due to social contagion. Similarly, “suicide clusters” are also well recognized as having a social-psychological component. Two very good reasons to be cautious when broaching such subjects in mainstream media, then.

Understandably, therefore, Butterfly has sparked considerable protest from many parents and specialists who consider such a storyline to be deeply irresponsible. Indeed, the National Health Service’s only gender specialist clinic has expressed concern, calling the story “not helpful” and pointing out that it “would be very unusual for a child of that age to attempt suicide.”

Nevertheless, certain transgender campaign groups, such as Mermaids U.K., who were heavily consulted during the making of the series, prefer to throw caution to the wind. Mermaids, incidentally, receive considerable public funding: £35,000 from the Department for Education and £128,000 from Children in Need. They also provide mandatory training for teachers on how to help “transgender youth.”

Meanwhile, many parents are now asking themselves how it is that such a radical propaganda is cropping up on their TVs and in their schools.

French city won’t honor hero police officer slain by ISIS over concerns of offending Muslims

https://americanmilitarynews.com/2018/10/french-city-wont-honor-hero-police-officer-slain-by-isis-over-concerns-of-offending-muslims/

A French police officer who heroically saved a hostage from an ISIS terrorist will not be honored in public over fears of offending Muslims.

Arnaud Beltrame, a police officer from Marseille, France, negotiated with an ISIS terrorist during a Mar. 2018 hostage situation in which he traded himself for a female hostage and was later stabbed to death. Attempts to name the city’s 15th district after Beltrame were recently rejected over concerns of offending the Muslim community, Voice of Europe reported Saturday.

Stephane Ravier, Marseille’s 7th district National Rally mayor, said that the proposal was refused during a Marseille town council meeting.

“Leftist elected officials, socialist and communist, refused that a place in the 15th district be named after Arnaud Beltrame, in the first time, they’ve said, under fallacious pretext, that this place wasn’t prestigious enough, before telling the truth in these terms: we are on the field, we witnessed that the population has changed and if we give the name of Arnaud Beltrame in this district, the population will take that as a provocation,” Ravier said.

The 15th district in Marseille, much like the overall city, has a wide population of immigrants, many of whom are practicing Muslims. The area is also said to contain a large population of jihadists. The attack that ended Beltrame’s life took place just five months after an ISIS terrorist killed two women in the same area.

Radouane Lakdim, 25, stole a car and opened fire on police before entering a supermarket on Mar. 24, 2018. There, he fatally shot two patrons and took hostages, CNN reported at the time. He was armed with a handgun, a knife, and three bombs, and shouted “Allah Akbar” while committing the murders.

Beltrame, a lieutenant colonel with the National Police, successfully negotiated a trade of himself for a female hostage. He entered the supermarket with his phone on so authorities could overhear the terrorist’s communication and activities.
When gunfire was heard inside the supermarket after a three-hour standoff, police stormed in. The gunman was killed and Beltrame was fatally stabbed.

Hal G.P. Colebatch Trump Derangement Syndrome (Part II)

https://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2018/10/trump-derangement-syndrome-spreads-part-ii/

A Florida woman took a huge loss rather than sell her home to a Trump supporter, yet one more indication how deep the lunacy has spread. After Obama, when the Left thought it had won once and for all, bitter disappointment has spawned a sweeping, often violent and ominous hysteria.

Before my first collection of instances of Trump Derangement Syndrome had been published (Quadrant, September 2018) it had already been overtaken by a mass of new material, so virulent and widespread as to give the impression that the US and the Western world are in a kind of low-grade civil war.

The Trump Presidency has exposed deep and hitherto unsuspected levels of corruption, perhaps mere self-seeking, perhaps part of a larger, more treasonous agenda, in the “higher” Washington political class, including much of the media and parts of the Department of Justice and the FBI. Watching the current US political news brings to mind a passage in C.S. Lewis’s 1945 novel That Hideous Strength: “Here was a world of plot within plot, crossing and double-crossing, of lies and graft and stabbing in the back … and a contemptuous guffaw for the fool who lost the game.”

Trump, for all his faults, appears to be standing against this, ripping up the established rules, speaking plain and simple truths—as he promised, draining the swamp—which accounts for some of the frenzied attacks on him. But there is more to it. Trump Derangement Syndrome appears in people who have no stake in the power game and when it is even contrary to their own interests.

It is easy to believe that a large number of Trump’s enemies, Republicans as well as Democrats, for all the loud professions of patriotism, are really opposed to him because they want his anti-Left program to fail. Their greatest and most permanent and decisive victory would be to have Trump impeached, notwithstanding the fact that more than two years of frantic searching has failed to discover any grounds for impeachment.

The activities of Left-fascist thugs, attempting to physically attack and silence Trump supporters and conservatives in general, are coming to bear a chilling resemblance to the political climate in the latter days of the Weimar Republic. This is emphatically not because the Sydney Morning Herald in October 2016 claimed that “Donald Trump and Adolf Hitler Have More in Common than Slogans”; rather, it is the institutionalisation and acceptance of violence and lies on the Left as an acceptable method of ideology making.

As Daryl McCann has pointed out (Quadrant, September 2018), Madeline Albright has called Trump, on no evidence whatsoever, “the first anti-democratic president in modern history”. This is not only false, but something like the reverse of truth. However, when it comes to the establishment attacking Trump, reason, logic and obvious facts cut no ice. A case could be made that he is hated, feared and despised by the media and other privileged denizens of academia, the “arts” and the political class, simply because he is democratic. He has better democratic credentials than all but a handful of presidents, and has ushered in an economic boom which has been of the greatest benefit to low-income-earners. This ignoring of fact and evidence for the sake of ideologically-based abuse seems to me to be itself a great threat to democracy and, in the long run, perhaps even to civilisation.

It appears to grow from overwhelming rage and fear on the part of the Left at seeing its overarching project for the socialist/communist transformation—or, for some, the destruction—of America and the West radically and effectively opposed for the first time since the Reagan Presidency. The fact that with the Obama Presidency it had looked as if the Left’s project was receiving a mighty boost towards total victory must have made Trump’s victory even more unbearable.

Writing in the Washington Post, the late Charles Krauthammer, a psychiatrist by training, originally named the condition of Bush Derangement Syndrome—“the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency—nay—the very existence of George W. Bush”. It has morphed into the more virulent and even more irrational Trump Derangement Syndrome.