RUTHFULLY YOURS

Earlier this month, the visitors’ log of the Jewish part of Hebron enjoyed a boost as activists, largely American Jews, ‎descended on the ancient Jewish city. Not as tourists to the Cave of the Patriarchs, or for contemplation ‎or prayer at the Avraham Avinu synagogue, but to organize a protest against “Israel’s crimes” and to support the Palestinian community.

There was no mention of the ‎fact that only 3% of Hebron is accessible to Jews and the remaining 97% is Palestinian, ‎with a small area functioning as a military buffer zone, or that Palestinian Hebron has ‎functioned as a terrorist hub for some time. The group’s main objective, ‎according to their spokesperson, was to take over an old Palestinian factory, now part of ‎the buffer zone, and turn it into a movie theater.

Some of the activists brought ‎popcorn labeled “Cinema Hebron” with them as a prop to drive the point home. ‎There were 45 American Jewish activists and a handful from various other countries. They did their best to provoke the authorities in the already volatile city, but while a ‎few activists with Israeli citizenship were detained and charged with presence in a ‎closed military zone and organizing an illegal protest, the others were merely banned from ‎entering Hebron for two weeks and then permitted to return to Tel Aviv. ‎No violence erupted, and despite a heavy media presence, the event could be ‎considered a calm affair. At around 2 p.m. the activists left Hebron to go have lunch, and, ‎according to their spokesperson, they have no plans to come back to complete the movie theater task.

The leaders of this pack were Peter Beinart, an American left-wing activist and self-‎proclaimed intellectual, and Amna Farooqi, the Muslim president of J Street U. The activists belonged to such well-known groups as J Street, the New Israel Fund and Jewish ‎Voice for Peace, an organization that supports the boycott, divestment and sanctions ‎movement against Israel. During the hours spent in Hebron, Beinart said he was very happy with what they had achieved that day and that he saw this as ‎proof of not only the success of their message, but also of a “new leadership” emerging ‎within the Jewish world. ‎

Beinart has every reason to be happy and content, because he is a major player in ‎one of the world’s most lucrative and trendy industries — conflict and activism. I have ‎personally seen an example of this industry much closer to home, as my home of Sweden is also the home of the infamous Gaza flotilla, known as “Ship to Gaza,” involving well-known intellectuals, ‎politicians and pundits far more concerned with an idea than with actual results. This is clearly demonstrated by their cargo manifest, which includes 10-year-old antibiotics, a few footballs, canned goods, a second-hand fridge and a ‎generator — a considerably more humble contribution than the 700 trucks entering Gaza ‎every day from Israel, carrying building material, food, medicine and clothes.

Both wings of the totalitarian Liberal/Left, The American and European ones, have proven themselves to be as dedicated to suppressing and censoring speech as have been the Muslims. Totalitarian activists like Angela Merkel and Mark Zuckerberg would punish anyone who on Facebook or Twitter says nasty or critical things about Muslims or Islam. As Daniel Greenfieldhas eloquently pointed out, Germans who speak out about the rapes of German women by “migrants” or about the other crimes committed by “migrants’ are likely to be handed penalties as severe if not more so than any migrant charged and sentenced.

It’s not that German authorities are incompetent. A January headline informs us, “Germany springs to action over hate speech against migrants”. Merkel forged a censorship deal with Facebook and Twitter. So that next time Muslims commit thousands of sexual assaults, it will be much harder for the populace to get the news out through the digital curtain of dot com censorship and propaganda.

With her Communist background, Merkel understands the mechanics of censorship. And that makes her an accessory to the war crimes that Muslim migrants have committed in their invasion of Europe both before and after the fact.

A 29-year-old German woman had received five months probation for her outrage over Muslim rapes of women. In today’s Germany, the sentences for Muslim sexual assaults and for denouncing them are eerily similar.

It is an issue of self-loathing, for the Muslims as well as for the likes of Angela Merkel and Mark Zuckerberg, the censor and her enabler. As Muslims hate existence as well as their own, alleged “Westerners” like Merkel and Zuckerberg also hate their own and the superiority of the West. The poppies must be leveled, and everyone reduced to the lowest common denominator and if that means reducing men of independent thought to non-thinking conformists, erasing beauty as Muslims tried to erase Lara Logan in Tahrir Square, as the killers of Bataclan in Paris tortured and mutilated Westerners. When attempting to understand why many Westerners would turn against the civilized milieu in which they were raised, one can’t help but venture into a bit of “psychologizing.” Muslims subscribe to the notion that they are not fit for living except to serve Allah; why not ascribe the same or similar motive to Merkel and Zuckerberg? Merkel hails from a failed Communist regime, and is apparently making up for that by turning Germany into a fascist dictatorship that eats the non-Muslim or non-“migrant” citizens.

Zuckerberg undoubtedly comes from a society that holds self-sacrifice as a paramount moral virtue, as did Bill Gates, who has made it a goal to liquidate his own fortune, “to give back” what he claims he took from society. Altruism can emasculate a person, and turn him not only into a self-sacrificing nonentity but move him to become a monster who wishes to sacrifice anyone else who does not apologize for his existence or for what he may say.

Adel Kermiche made his first attempt to join the caliphate in March 2015. Alerted by his family, authorities picked him up in Germany and sent him back to France where he was placed under surveillance. In May 2015, he left again, this time using his cousin’s ID. He was picked up in Turkey, sent back to France via Geneva , and placed in detention awaiting trial on terrorist charges. He reportedly shared a cell with a 32 year-old Salafist. In early March 2016 the investigating judge responded favorably to his request for parole. The higher judicial authority objected, a 3-magistrate appeals panel overruled the authorities and released him on parole with the array of restrictions and requirements detailed above. (correction: he only had to report to the police once a week, not every day.)

One could write in advance the first reports about this jihad attack or the next one. The perpetrator(s) is always a nice guy, maybe a bit rough around the edges but friendly, likes music and partying. Nothing but absolutely really I mean completely totally nothing would have even slightly hinted that he might commit such untold violence. He wasn’t even religious! N.B. Islam is a religion of peace, has nothing to do with jihad, sharia, throat-slitting and other mass murders. But the sign that the suspect wasn’t suspicious is…he wasn’t religious. And what happens, two days later, when reporters get to the ‘hood? A year ago or two years ago, x changed. Grew a beard. Talked about nothing but jihad, sharia, Daesh, the koran, hung around the mosque, acted scary.

The second church killer is almost identified. They say it took this long to verify his identity because his facial features were obliterated by commando gunfire, he has never been fingerprinted because he has no criminal record. Though he was flagged as a security risk. Described as “brilliant,” he just earned his baccalauréat degree in business. He was living with his family in Aix les Bains. His mother swears he is not a terrorist but for some reason the specialized terrorist unit had been frantically trying to locate him a few days before the church attack. The “wanted” bulletins described him as dangerous and likely to go into action. Imminently. He left home on Monday, telling his mother he was going to visit a cousin in Nancy. Called home on the eve of the church slaughter. Then nothing. Named by sources as Abdel Malik P. he is probably the accomplice seen in a video testament sent by the pair to the Daesh agency (AMAQ) and proudly displayed.

Debate, as I said yesterday, is raging, and everything that can be said within the limits of decency is being said. The government is on the defensive, inside information is spilling out on all sides, the president, the PM, and the Interior Minister go from TV studios to church services to stand-up declarations in front of their palatial ministries but nothing will stem the tide.

Muslims around the world—especially in Europe where their numbers have burgeoned in recent times—are wreaking havoc.

The newest atrocity—assuming another one hasn’t already occurred since this writing—is the barbaric slaughter of an 84-year-old Christian priest in France. Yesterday (7/26) morning, “Allahu Akbar” shouting Muslims stormed his church in Rouen during morning Mass, slit the throat of the octogenarian priest (named Jacques Hamel), and “critically injured” a nun, before being killed by police—the same police who knew that that church was being targeted and had been monitoring one of the murderers for at least one-and-a-half years.

Days earlier in France and Germany, Muslims, mostly migrants, committed terrorist acts in Nice (84 dead), Munich (9 dead), attacked people in train stations (one dead, several injured), killed a pregnant Polish woman, and attacked a mother and her three adolescent daughters (puncturing the lungs of an 8-year-old).

Those who seek to reverse this situation must begin by embracing one simple fact: Islam is not terrorizing the West because it can but because it is being allowed to.

To be sure, that was not always the case: for over a millennium, Muslims repeatedly invaded and conquered portions of Europe—terrorizing, massacring, raping and enslaving in the name of Allah—and were only repulsed by great force of arms.

Indeed, invading and destroying churches, slaughtering priests, even raping nuns is as old as Islam’s first entry into Christian territory in the seventh century, and has played out countless times since. (Watch this brief video for an idea of how many jihadi campaigns were undertaken against Europe.)

Today, Muslim terrorists, rapists, criminals are not entering the West against its will but because of it.

Western Europe is now being hit by a wave of terror. Israel has expressed sympathy to the governments and peoples, and is helping or has offered to help the hardest-hit countries—France, Germany, and Belgium—fight the terror.

It has been different when terror has pounded Israel. Even during the five-year onslaught known as the Second Intifada (2000-2005), Europe was sharply critical of Israel and denounced all its terror-fighting methods as immoral.

The contrast is particularly striking in light of some disparities. From the Charlie Hebdo attack on January 7, 2015 to Tuesday’s attack in a church, 239 have been killed in France (pop. 67 million). In the Brussels bombings on March 22 this year, 32 were killed in Belgium (pop. 11 million). Since September 15, 2015, terror attacks (counting the Munich shooting late last week) have killed 15 in Germany (pop. 82 million).

During the five years of the Second Intifada, however, 1000 were killed in Israel (current pop. 8.5 million; even smaller then)—a much higher rate even than France has endured since the start of 2015.

Yet, in the course of those intifada years—and since then as well, including, of course, the Gaza wars—Europe’s criticism of Israel’s fight against terror has been unremitting.

The irony is deepened by the fact that some of the Israeli measures that Europe has most fiercely condemned are now used routinely by European countries themselves—without, of course, having to put up with criticism from Israel or anyone else.

For instance, there was once a time when targeted killings—if practiced by Israel—stirred world outrage. On April 17, 2004, with the Second Intifada still seething, an Israeli airstrike killed Hamas terror master Abdel Aziz al-Rantisi in Gaza.

Condemnations followed like clockwork. From the European direction, they were voiced, among others, by then-EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana, then-Italian foreign minister Franco Frattini, and then-British foreign minister Jack Straw, who said: “The British government has made it repeatedly clear that so-called targeted assassinations of this kind are unlawful, unjustified and counterproductive.” Only a U.S. veto saved Israel from UN Security Council censure for the killing.

Today, of course, drone strikes on terrorists by the U.S. and European countries are so routine that they can hardly compete for attention with weather forecasts. On November 26, 2015, the Daily Mail reported that “British drone strikes have killed 305 ISIS targets in the last year….”

European Union High Representative/Vice-President Federica Mogherini has publicly rejected PLO Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’s call for Arab nations to lobby the UN Security Council to not endorse a Quartet Report that Abbas considers biased in favour of Israel.

Addressing the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on 22 July, Mogherini declared:

“John Kerry and I sit together in quite an impressive number of different formats. Together we decided to revitalize the Middle East Quartet. The report we have come up with just a few weeks ago cannot be underestimated. For the first time ever, the US, the EU, Russia and the United Nations have agreed on a clear analysis of the situation on the ground, and also more importantly on recommendations on the way forward to turn the two states solution into reality. Together we have also agreed to engage more regularly with the key Arab states such as Saudi Arabia – the initiator of the Arab Peace Initiative – Egypt – for obvious reasons – and Jordan – for its role in the Holy places.”

The Report certainly cannot be underestimated – condemning and identifying the PLO and Hamas as fostering and condoning terrorism, including:

* “recent acts of terrorism” against Israelis, and incitement to violence including over 250 attacks and attempted attacks by Palestinians against Israelis since October 2015 – resulting in at least 30 Israelis having been killed in stabbings, shootings, vehicular attacks, and a bombing.

* Palestinians committing “terrorist attacks” being often glorified publicly as “heroic martyrs”

* Some members of Fatah – which Abbas heads – publicly supporting attacks and their perpetrators, as well as encouraging violent confrontation – including a senior Fatah official referring to perpetrators as “heroes and a crown on the head of every Palestinian”.

* Palestinian leaders having not consistently and clearly condemned specific “terrorist attacks”. And streets, squares and schools having been named after Palestinians who have committed “acts of terrorism”.

I live in Ma’ale Adumim, Israel. Some call it a West Bank Settlement but actually it’s a beautiful municipality of about 40,000 Jews. It has a mall with typical women’s shoe stores, places to eat, jeans stores, ACE hardware and more. It’s about 30 minutes east of Jerusalem by bus.

Ma’ale Adumim was almost given away to the PA by either PM Barak or PM Ohlmert in one of the land-for-peace deals that were turned down by the Arabs because 95% of what they asked for wasn’t enough. They can get way more dollars and euros complaining about an imaginary plight than by having their own state.

Between us and Jerusalem are Palestinian villages. Actually they’re townships with 8 to 12 story residential apartment buildings. There are large signs at the entrances to these townships warning Jews not to make a wrong turn and accidentally enter them. The signs say it’s dangerous to your life.

Israel is different than most countries; its immigrants are Jewish. First they sell their houses in America, France, South Africa, the former Soviet Union and other countries. Then many arrive with good amounts of cash. Not all have money, but enough to drive up the prices of apartments. The prices are alright for some but difficult for many children of those who’ve immigrated in the past decades and marry in their 20s.

In the Jerusalem area land is expensive and rents are high. New construction advertises luxury apartments and old buildings are constantly being renovated. But there’s lots of land around Ma’ale Adumim. It’s desolate. It’s desert. It’s comprised of rolling hills barren of vegetation.

Our mayor has been asking for permission to build on outlying land for years but the Israeli government had not given permission because of international pressure.

It’s been called Palestinian land but a Palestinian people never existed. The land was Jordanian or it was part of the Ottoman Empire. The desolate land around us never had a recognizable population. Most of today’s so-called Palestinians originally came from Jordan and Egypt for jobs. Yasser Arafat was Egyptian.

Palestine never existed beyond a map at British headquarters.

If the Obama administration needs any more clarity on what radical Islamic terrorism is all about, it was provided by Islamic State butchers in a Catholic Church in Normandy, France when they beheaded 86-year-old French priest Jacques Hamel as they chanted – wait for it “Allahu Akbhar” (God is great) As the Daily Mail reports:

Two ISIS knifemen who stormed a church in Normandy forced an elderly priest to kneel before filming themselves butchering him and performing a ‘sermon in Arabic’ at the altar, a terrified witness has revealed.

The attackers, claimed as ‘soldiers’ by ISIS, were both known to French police before they cut the throat of 84-year-old priest Jacques Hamel at the church in Saint-Etienne-du-Rouvray near Rouen.

Both were shot dead by police marksmen as they emerged from the building shouting ‘Allahu Akbar’ following the attack that also left a nun critically injured.

French President Francois Hollande, who visited the scene today, said the country is now ‘at war’ with ISIS after the terror group claimed responsibility for the attack.

It is a war between civilizations and cultures. It is also a war between religions, although we like to tip-toe around the politically correct “religion of peace” argument. As Christians, even those President Obama called “less than loving”, are being slaughtered around the world, and a French priest is beheaded, it might be time to ponder that Christian tenet, by their fruits ye shall know them.

The war on Christians by Islamist fanatics worldwide by ISIS and its associated groups has been documented by Robert Spencer at Jihad Watch:

We have seen this before on several occasions in Kenya. In September 2013 at Nairobi’s Westgate Mall, Muslims murdered people who couldn’t answer questions about Islam. In June 2014, Muslims murdered people who could not pass an Islam quiz. In November 2014, Muslims murdered 28 non-Muslims who couldn’t recite Qur’an verses. In April 2015, Muslims screaming “Allahu akbar” stormed Garissa University College, and only shot those who couldn’t recite Qur’an.Now we see it in Mali.

And this is coming to the U.S.

What “provocation” had the murdered priest, Father Jacques Hamel, provided?

An enemy willing to slaughter the most rollicking secularists and the most devout priest, both in their places of work, is an enemy with the entirety of French civilisation and culture in its sights. It is an enemy — extremist Islam — clearly intent not on some kind of tributary offering or suit for peace, but rather an enemy which seeks its opponent’s total and utter destruction.

Should this not be the moment for the entirety of one of the greatest cultures on earth to unite as one, turn on this common enemy and destroy it first, in the name of civilisation?

It is now 18 months since two gunmen forced their way into the offices of Charlie Hebdo in Paris and set about murdering the staff of that magazine. The gunmen from al-Qaeda in Yemen called for the editor — “Charb” — by name before murdering him and most of his colleagues. In an interview shortly before his death, taking into account the threat to his life which entailed constant security protection, Stéphane Charbonnier had said, “I prefer to die standing than live on my knees.” Charb did die standing, in the office of the magazine he edited.

In the 18 months since the attack on Charlie Hebdo and the massive demonstrations in solidarity on the streets of Paris, France has suffered a terrible set of further terrorist assaults The ISIS attack (which killed 130 people) last November on the Bataclan Theatre and other sites around Paris and the attack (which killed 84 people) in Nice on July 14 are the deadliest and most prominent. But other acts of terror — including the murder last month in their home of two members of the police, carried out by a man pledging allegiance to ISIS –have gone on and almost become normal.

Yesterday’s murder of an 84-year old priest, Father Jacques Hamel, while he was saying mass is shocking even by the standards of France during this period. Two men claiming allegiance to the Islamic State (ISIS) entered the church and ritually murdered the priest by slitting his throat. A second victim is currently struggling to stay alive. It is hard to see any end in this sight of this horror, but these two atrocities across an 18-month gap are worth considering alongside each other — not least because the reaction to them in France and outside may contain the tiniest glimmer of hope in a very dark time.

One of the striking things about the outrage after the murders at Charlie Hebdo was that it very nearly united France. There were those, including people who had been the victims of Charlie Hebdo’s satire in the past, who were not able to lionise them. But across mainstream society in France, there was near unanimity around the idea that the magazine and its rude, irreverent and specifically anti-clerical style of satire was uniquely French. No one seemed surprised that so many people around the world had missed the point of the magazine — people across the Muslim world in particular. The publication was recognised as a particularly French publication which as such stood for more than itself. In the days and weeks after January 7, 2015. the sense of the Republic itself having been attacked was especially strong.