Displaying posts published in

December 2016

Obama set to back a boycott of Israel: A Wake-up Call to American Businesses and Taxpayers: Anne Bayefsky

This article by Anne Bayefsky originally appeared on Washington Examiner.

U.S. companies are in for a shock as President Obama takes aim once again at Israel in the final month of his presidency. In the coming days, he is expected to direct his team at the United Nations to vote for U.S. funding of “BDS,” the boycott, divestment and sanctions campaign aimed at financially ruining Israel and smearing the companies with which it does business.

The vote concerns the U.N. budget that is currently being negotiated and scheduled to be finalized this week. One of the line items provides funding for the implementation of a Human Rights Council resolution adopted in March. The resolution calls for the creation of a blacklist of companies around the world doing any business, directly or indirectly, connected to Israeli settlements. In effect, it launches a U.N.-sponsored BDS movement. Since the General Assembly holds the purse strings for the Human Rights Council’s operations, the time has come to allocate the money to pay for it.

With Obama’s U.N. diplomats sitting on their hands while the funding scheme is being hotly debated, American taxpayers can expect to find themselves funding BDS in the very near future, with American businesses caught in the crosshairs.

Israeli settlements consist of Jews living peaceful, productive lives on disputed territory whose ownership, by existing agreement, is to be determined through negotiations. This Jewish presence on Arab-claimed territory is offensive to a deeply anti-Semitic enemy that seeks to guarantee that land swapped in an eventual deal to create a Palestinian state will be Jew-free.

In the context of a Palestinian policy of ethnic cleansing, these Jewish farms, enterprises and schools are an “obstacle to peace,” to use the preferred verbiage of the United Nations and the Obama administration. The fact that Jews have repeatedly been moved in advance of a negotiated end to hostilities by their own government for the sake of peace, only to have those hopes dashed time and again, is simply dismissed.

Tunisian Migrant Investigated for Suspected Terror Ties Is Sought in Berlin Truck Attack Revelation that authorities sought and failed to deport asylum seeker stokes criticism of Angela Merkel’s refugee policy By Anton Troianovski and Ruth Bender see note pleaser

OH PULEEZ! ASYLUM SEEKER??? JIHAD SEEKER IS MORE LIKE IT…..RSK

BERLIN—Anis Amri, a Tunisian migrant whom authorities previously investigated for suspected terror ties and tried to deport, became Germany’s most wanted man as the new prime suspect in the capital’s deadly truck attack.

The revelation that the asylum seeker had been able to remain in Germany despite efforts to expel him stoked a furor over what many politicians called dangerous gaps in the country’s immigration policy and escalated the political crisis facing Chancellor Angela Merkel’s government.

The federal police issued a rare international wanted notice for Mr. Amri—who arrived in Germany last year after time in an Italian prison—and offered a €100,000 ($104,000) reward, warning that he could be armed and dangerous.

Officials cautioned that they weren’t certain that Mr. Amri had, in fact, committed the crime and that it was possible someone else had planted the man’s residency permit in the truck. It was discovered in the cab of the semitrailer Tuesday, the day after it rammed into a Berlin Christmas market, leaving 12 dead and dozens injured. But, they said, the man was currently their No. 1 suspect.

Details emerging about Mr. Amri’s biography showed the case’s potential to boost critics who have argued that Ms. Merkel wasn’t taking Germans’ safety seriously enough in her open-door refugee policy. It also raised questions about the effectiveness of Germany’s security apparatus and, more broadly, Europe’s, particularly since the onset of the continent’s migration crisis.

On Wednesday, it appeared that critics’ predictions had come true: Despite German authorities’ earlier suspicions that the suspect had links to Islamist extremism, they said they had been unable to deport him because he lacked documentation proving he was from Tunisia. Officials said Germany finally received the new papers from Tunisian authorities on Wednesday—two days after the Christmas market attack.

“There is clearly a connection between the refugee crisis and the elevated terror danger in Germany,” conservative lawmaker Stephan Mayer said after a closed-door briefing in parliament on the investigation.

Trump’s Opportunity: Saving Coptic Christians Egypt’s minorities, long persecuted, are counting on the U.S. president to defend religious freedom. By Samuel Tadros

Islamic State’s local affiliate in Sinai claimed credit for the bombing of St. Peter and St. Paul’s Church in Cairo earlier this month. The group could not have chosen a more symbolic target. Erected in 1911, St. Peter’s was an architectural marvel built and decorated by Italian architects and mosaic artists.

It stood for a cosmopolitan Egypt that welcomed thousands of foreigners as its rulers sought to make it the Paris of the East. It captured the dreams and pains of the Boutros-Ghali family, which rose to power and financed the church’s construction after being emancipated from the shackles of dhimmitude. It represents what is now a bygone era.

Twenty-five worshipers, mostly women, died in the St. Peter’s blast. It is part of an ominous trend. Twenty Copts were killed by their neighbors during the 2000 New Year massacre in El Kosheh village. The Dec. 31, 2010, bombing of a church in Alexandria left 23 dead. The 2013 burning of more than 50 churches by Muslim Brotherhood demonstrators was the worst violence on Coptic churches since the 14th century. And the February 2015 beheading of 20 Coptic workers by Islamic State on the shores of Libya was the most horrifying incident for Copts in memory.

Persecution has never been alien to the Copts. Roman and Byzantine emperors, along with Arab and Turkish caliphs and rulers, have each claimed their share of Coptic blood. A church that stood as one of the pillars of Christianity in late antiquity was reduced to a small minority struggling for survival. Even during Egypt’s proto-liberal age (1923-1952), the Copts weren’t spared incitement and attacks.

Egypt’s generals were no better, but one thing had changed—the possibility of emigration. The slow flow of Coptic emigrants from Egypt in the 1950s has turned into a tsunami. Based on my research, I estimate that more than a million Copts have found new permanent homes in the West, where their more than 500 churches now flourish.

The Egyptian revolution of 2011 accelerated the process. The security vacuum, the empowering of Islamists in villages, and the Muslim Brotherhood’s rise to the presidency pointed to the coming doom. At their moment of desperation, many Copts placed their hopes, like those of other non-Islamist Egyptians, in army general Abdel Fattah Al Sisi. Those hopes were misplaced.

President Sisi may be personally sympathetic to the Copts, but his government has done little to protect them. Deadly bombings capture the world’s attention for a moment, but daily life for Copts in Egypt is a struggle. Discrimination is rampant—from government appointments to soccer teams.

Mob attacks on churches and homes occur frequently and are increasing, and security forces fail to prevent them. Anti-Copt attackers escape punishment as the government forces Copts into reconciliation sessions that sidestep the legal process and often reward the mob by acquiescence to their demands. A new law for building churches that every Egyptian ruler since Hosni Mubarak has promised was passed by parliament this year, but the law retains the role of state security in the approval process and ties approval of churches to the size of the community in the area. CONTINUE AT SITE

Obama’s ‘Permanent’ Drilling Freeze He claims his latest executive order can’t be repealed—ever.

The White House is attempting to overload the bandwidth of its successor with a surge of new regulation, and the latest is a ban on oil drilling in much of the Arctic and Atlantic. This rule even purports to be “permanent,” unchangeable by any future President for all time. We’ll see about that, but in the meantime spare us the liberal panic about Donald Trump’s supposed authoritarianism.

The last-gasp executive action prohibits federal offshore drilling and mineral leases on some 3.8 million acres from Virginia to Maine and 115 million acres off the coast of Alaska, including some of the world’s great untapped repositories of hydrocarbons. President Obama rolled out the rule in concert with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, and the greens are cheering that still more fossil-fuel regions will be walled off from exploration.

For years federal regulators have obstructed oil production on already leased lands. Royal Dutch Shell holds the sole drilling permit in Alaska and in 2015 suspended operations in the Chukchi and Beaufort seas despite $7 billion of sunk investment. So in a sense the new rule is merely truth in advertising.

But the press corps is rushing to euphemize Mr. Obama’s “creative” interpretation of a “rarely used” provision of the 1953 Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act. Ocsla allows that the President “may, from time to time, withdraw from disposition any of the unleased lands of the Outer Continental Shelf.” Because the law does not explicitly give the President the power to un-withdraw lands, the White House touts the rule as a forever condition. In other words, this is Mr. Obama’s typically illegal M.O.

Congress passed Ocsla, as the law’s preamble states, in order to make the “vital national resource reserve” that is the continental shelf “available for expeditious and orderly development.” The power to lock is also the power to unlock. Bill Clinton used Ocsla to withdraw 300 million offshore acres from an area that was already a designated marine sanctuary, but George W. Bush reinstated about 50 million.

Political Revolution Is Brewing in Europe by Geert Wilders

The German authorities are dangerously underestimating the threat of Islam… They have betrayed their own citizens.

Let no-one tell you that only the perpetrators of these crimes are to blame. The politicians, who welcomed Islam into their country, are guilty as well. And it is not just Frau Merkel in Germany, it is the entire political elite in Western Europe.

Out of political-correctness, they have deliberately turned a blind eye to Islam. They have refused to inform themselves about its true nature. They refuse to acknowledge that is all in the Koran: the permission 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 one’s true goals (3:54), and the command to make war on the infidels (9:123) and subjugate the entire world to Allah (9:33).

We will have to de-islamize our societies…. But it all begins with politicians with the courage to face and speak the truth.

More and more citizens are aware of that. This is why a political revolution is brewing in Europe. Patriotic parties are rapidly growing everywhere. They are Europe’s only hope for a better future.

Yesterday, the Islamic State claimed the Berlin terror attack of Monday evening, in which twelve people were killed with a truck at a Christmas market.

The killer managed to escape. However, in the truck the police found identity papers belonging to Anis A., a Tunisian who came to Germany as an asylum seeker in 2015.

(Image source: RTL Nieuws video screenshot)

When last year German Chancellor Angela Merkel opened Germany’s borders to almost one million refugees and asylum seekers, she invited the Trojan horse of Islam into her country. Among the so-called refugees were many young men of Islamic background, filled with hatred for the West and its civilization. One of them was Anis A.

It took almost a year for the German authorities to reject his asylum request, but meanwhile the man had disappeared. The police are now looking for him as a prime suspect of Monday’s attack in Berlin.

The German authorities are dangerously underestimating the threat of Islam. They signs are there for all to see. In October, an Afghan asylum seeker raped and murdered a 19-year old German girl in Freiburg. And a 12-year old Iraqi boy was caught before he could explode a nail bomb at a Christmas market in Ludwigshafen.

Change Is Coming and Change Can Be Good by Shoshana Bryen

Palestinian statehood demands should be taken seriously only within the context of bilateral negotiations with the Government of Israel. American attention should be paid to the non-democratic excesses of Palestinian leadership – and U.S. economic support and general support for the PA should be attached to improvements in press freedom, human rights and economic opportunity supported by the PA government.

President-elect Trump’s choice of David Friedman as Ambassador to Israel appears to be an excellent decision. It has already brought howls of protest from people invested heavily in the Oslo and subsequent accords, the “peace process” and the concept of the United States as an “evenhanded” broker between Israelis and Palestinians. Friedman, an Oslo-skeptic, has said he believes that, “Notwithstanding ‘agreements’ reached at Camp David, Oslo, Wye Plantation and elsewhere, neither Yasser Arafat nor Mahmoud Abbas ever had any intentions to observe the minimal conditions required of a two-state solution.”

On the other hand, he said of Israel that he would work “tirelessly to strengthen the unbreakable bond between our two countries,” correcting the relationship between two democratic, transparent, multi-cultural, multi-ethnic, free market, countries — one large and one small. Israel goes from an impediment to American interests in the Middle East to a partner in a vital region — innovative, experienced, and successful.

It is worthwhile to review the parameters of the Oslo Process, negotiated in 1993 without the participation of the U.S., but adopted formally by President Clinton, because its underlying assumptions are about to be challenged.

Are Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait Funding German Salafism? by George Igler

The Sheikh Eid Bin Mohammad al-Thani Charitable Association and the Saudi Muslim World League are coordinating a “long-running strategy to exert influence” by Gulf States in Germany, according to a report authored by Germany’s security agencies.

“This is about war, about children being indoctrinated, they are only in primary school and already fantasize about how when they grow up, they want to join the jihad, kill infidels.” — Wolfgang Trusheim, Frankfurt State Security office.

“For quite some time we’ve had indications and evidence that German Salafists are getting assistance, which is approved by the governments of Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Kuwait, in the form of money, the sending of imams and the building of Koran schools and mosques.” — Rolf Mützenich, German MP and Middle East expert.

Declining to assimilate in the West continues with the apparent, religiously mandated, preference to have the host countries become Islamic.

Salafism — from salaf, “ancestors” or “predecessors” in Arabic — urges the emulation of the first three generations of the Islamic prophet Mohammad’s companions, and Mohammad himself. It is often deemed the most fundamentalist interpretation of Islam.

Security agencies in Germany claim that 9,200 such Islamic extremists currently call the country home. Another intelligence briefing cited by Süddeutsche Zeitung, warns that “the ideology already has 10,000 followers” and growing, in the country.

“Almost all of the German nationals who have travelled to Syria to fight for Islamic State became radicalized by Salafis, who target low-income Muslim youths in German cities,” wrote the Los Angeles Times, adding that it is proving increasingly challenging for German intelligence officials, “to differentiate between those who identify intellectually with Salafism and those who espouse using violence to realize a radical version of Islam.”

Ban Ki-moon’s last hypocritical hurrah: Ruthie Blum

The outgoing secretary-general of the United Nations outdid himself this week. In his final briefing ‎to the U.N. Security Council on Friday, Ban Ki-moon said, “Over the last decade, I have argued that ‎we cannot have a bias against Israel at the U.N. Decades of political maneuvering have created a ‎disproportionate number of resolutions, reports and committees against Israel. In many cases, ‎instead of helping the Palestinian issue, this reality has foiled the ability of the U.N. to fulfill its role ‎effectively.”‎

Listening to the head of the international body that long ago ceased to fulfill any role other than that ‎of providing a platform for despots, one might have mistaken him for an innocent bystander whose ‎voice has been drowned out by the cacophony against the Jewish state.

In fact, Ban is a prominent ‎member of the Israel-bashing choir he has been conducting for the past 10 years, taking every ‎opportunity to equate the only democracy in the Middle East with the forces bent on its destruction ‎and on the subjugation of the West. ‎

Indeed, he even performed this feat in his farewell address, admonishing both Israel and the ‎terrorist organization that rules the Gaza Strip in the same breath. Israel, he warned, “needs to ‎understand the reality that a democratic state, which is run by the rule of the law, which continues to ‎militarily occupy the Palestinian people, will still generate criticism and calls to hold her accountable.” ‎Hamas, with its “anti-Semitic charter, which seeks to destroy Israel,” he said, should “condemn ‎violence once and for all and recognize Israel’s right to exist.”‎

He conveniently forgot to mention that Israel withdrew completely from Gaza in 2005, and that ‎Hamas — which took control over the enclave two years later — has no reason to “condemn” the ‎violence against Jews that it perpetrates and promotes.‎

But no matter. Ban, like the rest of his cohorts at the U.N., never lets facts get in the way of ‎ideology. Nor do his own contradictions in terms cause him to pause, which is why he had no ‎problem saying that though the Palestinian conflict is not at the root of the other wars in the Middle ‎East, “its resolution can create momentum in the region.” If he has some notion of how, exactly, the ‎mass murder of Syrians at the hands of the Russian- and Iranian-backed regime of President ‎Bashar Assad and rebel forces would be affected by some deal between Jerusalem and Ramallah, ‎he is keeping it under wraps.‎

Heroic Female IDF Fighter Fights Off 23 Terrorists After Being Wounded in Ambush by Mark Tapson

Take that, Beyonce. Here’s a real feminist.

Captain Or Ben-Yehuda of the Israeli Defense Forces just put Generation Snowflake to shame.

While many American youth — male as well as female — cower in college safe spaces to protect themselves from microaggressions, this young female IDF Captain has just been decorated with the country’s highest honor, the Medal of Valor, for her leadership and bravery in the face of an ambush by nearly two dozen terrorists near the Egyptian border.

According to The Tribunist, Captain Ben-Yehuda was in charge of the Caracal Battalion which was stationed near the Israeli / Egyptian border. When three suspicious vehicles approached the battalion’s position, Captain Ben-Yehuda went with a driver to check them out.

As they approached the first vehicle, nearly two dozen armed men opened fire on their position in an ambush attack. Both Captain Ben-Yehuda and her driver were immediately shot in the volley of gunfire.

Despite suffering from a gunshot wound, Captain Ben-Yehuda managed to get on the radio and call for backup, administer first aid to her driver and return several magazines worth of gunfire back at her attackers.

Backup, in the form of several vehicles full of IDF soldiers, arrived on scene, the wounded Captain commanded the responding soldiers and positioned her men to effectively fight back the terrorists.

At this point it was obvious the IDF was going to be able to push back the armed group, and medical personnel wanted to evacuate Captain Ben-Yehuda to treat her gunshot wounds. However, she was unwilling to leave the battlefield until all of the fighting was done.

After she recovered from her injuries, Captain Ben-Yehuda’s own mother showed up to present the award to her daughter in a special awards ceremony.

Her mother, Emma Dina Ben-Yehuda, is no slouch either. A decorated IDF officer herself, she served in the Yom Kippur War and was also honored later for her work with grieving families of IDF soldiers killed in the line of duty.

Take that, Beyonce and Amy Schumer. This is what a feminist looks like:

The Intersectional Power of Zionism by Einat Wilf

Zionism has a story to tell that is not only about Jews or for Jews.
Zionism has a story to tell that, when properly understood, has the
power to inspire people and peoples to great acts of daring and
sacrifice. Zionism tells a simple story: Victimhood is not destiny. A
history of marginalization, humiliation, discrimination, persecution,
massacres, and even genocide can be transcended. A people, no matter
how downtrodden, can find within themselves the power to change their
future.

When the story of Zionism is told, continuity is often highlighted:
the continuous presence of Jews in the Land of Israel, the ongoing
yearning of a people in exile to return to their homeland, the
unrelenting hope for the ingathering of a people from all corners of
the earth to find redemption in an ancient land.

But Zionism is as much a revolution in Jewish life as a continuation
of it. In the immediate aftermath of the Roman exile, the Judeans
might have conceived of their return to Judea as a forthcoming
possibility. But by the 19th century, the idea of return was
sublimated into a Messianic wish, expressed in ritual and prayer. One
day, a descendant of King David would arise and lead the Jewish people
out of a fragile existence into a life of dignified sovereignty in a
land of their own. It was a passive hope that mandated no action.

Zionism was a rebellion against this Jewish passivity. To the Jewish
people, Zionism carried the message that they need not wait for the
Messiah. Rather, they should be their own Messiahs. Zionism, born of
the enlightenment, embodied the idea of human agency. Rather than wait
for God or Messiah to bring about their salvation, Zionism called upon
the Jewish people to be the vehicles of their own redemption. Zionism
demonstrated that, even when dealt some of the worst cards in history,
humans were active agents, capable of changing the course of their
private and collective futures.