What would building an ‘army of Palestine’ look like? By Moshe Phillips

https://www.jpost.com/opinion/article-790620

While some advocates of a Palestinian state have been claiming that the state would be demilitarized, others are already making the case for building up a Palestinian army.

A feature in the Washington Post this week warned that the Palestinian Authority’s security forces are not yet big enough or powerful enough for the Palestinian state that the Biden Administration is now advocating. The PA forces are “underfunded and widely unpopular [and] ill-equipped to take on the massive responsibilities that their Western backers are envisioning.”
 
So what will the Palestine statehood crowd prescribe as the solution? Give them more funds and more weapons, of course. Build them into a full-fledged army, disguised as a “security force.”

The excuse will be that the PA needs the money and guns to fight terrorism. Everybody seems to have forgotten that the PA was supposed to have been fighting terrorism since it was created back in the 1990s by the Oslo Accords—but it never has done the job.

The first Oslo Agreement, in 1993, stipulated that the Palestinian Arabs would have “a strong police force.” (Article VII) It didn’t say anything about the formation of an army. But the Palestinian Authority quickly exploited the opportunity. The original 12,000 man “security force” ballooned to 60,000—and the international community didn’t say a word. 

Then came Oslo II, in 1995, which spelled out more specifically that the PA security forces are obligated to “apprehend, investigate and prosecute perpetrators and all other persons directly or indirectly involved in acts of terrorism, violence and incitement.” (Annex I, Article II, 3-c). 

Lessons for the Future Republic By J.B. Shurk

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2024/03/lessons_for_the_future_republic.html

Victor Davis Hanson and Dennis Prager are keen observers of American society.  Like honored physicians who examine the body politic for disease, they expertly diagnose what ails our country.  What they say and write matters.  It is significant, then, when both reach the conclusion that the United States is disintegrating.  

In an essay entitled “American Paralysis and Decline,” Hanson begins by quoting Roman historian Livy: “We can bear neither our diseases nor their remedies.”  He then walks us through America’s open border crisis, unsustainable debt, epidemic of crime, and weaponization of the criminal justice system.  In every instance, he argues, Americans know that the disease is killing us, yet we lack the courage to choose the proper remedy.  Instead, our tormentors bully us into submission with meaningless taunts that we are politically incorrect, racist, nativist, uncaring, cruel, or bad Christians.  As the Roman Republic collapsed in Livy’s time, Hanson worries that the American Republic will fall during his.  When societies “are so paralyzed by their fear that the road to salvation becomes too painful to even contemplate,” he concludes, “they implode gradually, then suddenly.”

Within days of Hanson’s essay, Prager published an essay entitled “The Left-Right Divide Is Not Bridgeable.”  Whereas Hanson’s essay diagnoses America as suffering from a state of “paralysis” in which we are unable to confront what is destroying us, Prager recognizes that even if we were able to snap into action, we are entirely too divided to heal ourselves.  “Millions of Americans,” he begins, “harbor a wish that something or someone can bridge” our ideological divisions.  That wish is “understandable” but a total “fantasy.”  He then takes us through a compendium of symptoms that spell doom for the Union.  Americans sharply disagree about such fundamental issues as biological sex, colorblind meritocracy, Hamas terrorism, childhood sexualization, law enforcement, free speech, respect for opposing points of view, and the nature of democracy.  “Today’s left-right divide is at least as great as the North-South divide before and during the Civil War,” Prager laments.  “The only thing that remains the same is that it was the Democratic Party that opposed freedom then, and it is the Democratic Party that opposes freedom today.”  

Note the common warning from both Hanson’s and Prager’s respective diagnoses: American society is showing identical symptoms to societies that disintegrated into civil war.  Both are plainly saying that, although we have detected the cancer destroying us, we have failed to treat it in time.  The options still available to us are grotesque: amputation, debilitation, or even death.  It is no longer clear that the patient can be saved or, if it is saved, whether it will resemble anything like its former self.  Will the American Republic, like the Roman Republic, become a dictatorship and a slowly dying empire?  Many would say we are already far along that path.  Will Americans descend into such bloodshed as to destroy the Union for good?  Many might agree that the U.S. government’s aiding and abetting of the criminal invasion at our borders has already precipitated so many drug-related or violent deaths as to constitute civil war.

Joe Biden Says He’s ‘Ready to Fix’ the Border, Ignores His Role in Breaking It

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/joe-biden-says-hes-ready-to-fix-the-border-ignores-his-role-in-breaking-it/

President Joe Biden said during a feisty State of the Union address on Thursday that he was “ready to fix” the southern border, and he blamed Donald Trump for pressuring congressional Republicans to derail a bipartisan border-security bill that he said would have allowed him to do so.

Despite the border chaos on his watch, Biden touted his immigration efforts, declaring that “on my first day in office, I introduced a comprehensive plan to fix our immigration system, secure the border, and provide a pathway to citizenship for Dreamers and so much more.”

But while he tried to point the blame at Trump and Republicans, Biden failed to acknowledge that he and his administration bear most of the blame for the historic surge of illegal crossings that began shortly after his inauguration in 2021. And he didn’t acknowledge that he already largely has authority to take action on his own to improve security at the border.

Biden said the bipartisan border bill would have hired more border-security agents, immigration judges, and asylum officers, and it would have given him “new emergency authority to temporarily shut down the border when the number of migrants at the border is overwhelming.” Republicans jeered.

“What are you against?” Biden said. “Look at the facts. I know you know how to read.”

He blamed the bill’s failure on Trump, whom he did not name. “I’m told my predecessor called Republicans in Congress and demanded they block the bill. He feels it would be a political win for me and a political loser for him.” He flubbed a line about the bill, saying “I’d be a winner” instead of “It’d be a winner for America,” and he egged on Republicans, telling them that they “owe it to the American people to get this bill done.”

At one point he appeared to botch the name of Laken Riley, a young Georgia woman who was recently killed by an illegal immigrant while she was jogging — Biden called her “Lincoln.”

“We can fight about the border, or we can fix it,” Biden said. “I’m ready to fix it.”

Biden Delivers the Most Anti-Israel Presidential Speech in History By Philip Klein

https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/biden-delivers-the-most-anti-israel-presidential-speech-in-history/?utm_source=recirc-desktop&utm_

President Biden was late to deliver his State of the Union address because anti-Israel protesters blocked the traditional motorcade route from the White House to the U.S. Capitol. Rather than have the protesters dispersed for violating traffic laws, he took an alternate route. It was a sign of how intimidated Biden is by the pro-Hamas element within his party. It also turned out to be a fitting prelude to the most anti-Israel speech delivered by a U.S. president in American history.

It wasn’t until Biden nearly reached the end of the speech that he brought up the Israel–Hamas conflict — at which point he tried to turn it into a “both sides” issue describing events as “gut-wrenching for so many people, for the Israeli people, the Palestinian people, and so many here in America.”

After a perfunctory mention of October 7 and the hostages, Biden then launched an extended attack on Israel’s response to the war and the conditions in Gaza that accepted, whole cloth, Hamas casualty figures that his own administration had previously questioned as unreliable. For those keeping score, his description of the events on the day of October 7 lasted 42 words (or 77 if you count his shout-out to the hostage families present at the speech). The part of the speech describing the “heartbreaking” conditions in Gaza, demanding that Israel do more, and describing U.S. aid efforts in Gaza was 214 words. 

Speaking of aid. At the start of his speech, Biden spoke of the “unprecedented moment” we’re in — and in his survey of momentous world events, he made the case for the need for the U.S. to support Ukraine. And he pitched his harebrained scheme to have the U.S. military build a port in Gaza to facilitate more aid. At no point did he make the case for the component of the security bill that would provide aid to Israel.

It Is Time for Europe to Stop the Fearmongering About a Second Trump Presidency Europe was better off under Trump’s presidency than it is today, and a second Trump term likely will reverse the global instability caused by the weakness and incompetence of the Biden administration. By Fred Fleitz

https://amgreatness.com/2024/03/08/it-is-time-for-europe-to-stop-the-fearmongering-about-a-second-trump-presidency/

Griping by the European elite about a second Trump presidency has reached a fever pitch that is so bad that it borders on attempts to influence the 2024 presidential election.

The UK’s Economist magazine is in full panic mode about the prospect of Donald Trump returning to the White House, calling Trump “the biggest danger to the world in 2024” and lamenting that Democrats do not have a “plan B” to stop Trump.

London’s Guardian newspaper has called Trump “a clear and present danger to the UK’s vital interests in a way no previous US president has ever been.”

France’s LeMonde newspaper has called Trump’s comeback “as embarrassing as it is worrying for American democracy.”

Other Europeans have called for “Trump-proofing” European foreign policy before Mr. Trump possibly takes office next January.

European elitists despised Donald Trump as president because he was a populist who bucked conventional wisdom and challenged Europe. He pressured European states for fair trade with the U.S. and to meet their NATO treaty obligations on defense spending. He justifiably ridiculed European states—especially Germany—for becoming dependent on Russian energy and withdrew from the Nord Stream-2 gas pipeline. European states were irate with Trump for withdrawing from bad agreements and treaties, such as the deeply flawed 2015 nuclear deal with Iran (the JCPOA) and the Paris Climate Accord.

European leaders have always hated brash American presidents who act unilaterally without the consent of Europe and the United Nations. This was especially true concerning Donald Trump, whose strong leadership and America First foreign policies drove them crazy.

Europe was therefore greatly relieved when Joe Biden won the 2020 presidential election because he shared their liberal ideologies and establishment views on foreign policy. Biden would work through the UN and defer to Europe. There would be no foreign policy surprises. Europe knew it could control Biden.

The European elite was initially ecstatic with the Biden presidency. Biden immediately rejoined the Paris Climate Accord and designated climate change as the primary threat to U.S. national security. The Biden Administration aggressively promoted the far-left “diversity, equity, and inclusion” ideology and forced it on the U.S. military. Biden initiated talks to revive the JCPOA. European leaders were delighted by Biden’s sophomoric declarations in 2021 that “America is back” under his presidency. French President Macron happily welcomed Biden to the “European Club.”

‘Ramadan – Month of Jihad’ : Ramadan Will Not Stop Hamas From Killing Jews by Bassam Tawil *****

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20467/ramadan-jihad-killing

On March 5, Biden warned of potential problems without a ceasefire deal by Ramadan. “There’s got to be a ceasefire because Ramadan – if we get into circumstances where this continues to Ramadan, Israel and Jerusalem could be very, very dangerous,” he told reporters in Washington.

Such statements are undoubtedly based on the extremely false assumption that Muslims do not engage in wars and armed conflicts during the month of fasting. In fact, the opposite is true. As the New York Times reported “It is widely believed that the rewards earned for noble acts are greater during Ramadan….”

Hamas… even published an article entitled, “Ramadan – The Month of Jihad, Fighting, and Victory over the Enemies.”

Throughout history, Muslims have taken advantage of Ramadan to wage war against their enemies. Five historic Islamic battles were fought in the month of Ramadan: Battle of Badr, Conquest of Mecca, Battle of Tabuk, Battle of Amin Jalut, and Battle of Hattin.

Those who believe that Hamas seeks a ceasefire ahead of Ramadan are deluding themselves. Those who are concerned about the sanctity of the holy month ought to listen to what the terrorists themselves are saying: Ramadan actually increases their desire for Jewish blood.

International mediators and world leaders, including US President Joe Biden, are hoping to secure a ceasefire deal between Israel and the Iran-backed Hamas terror group before the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, which starts on March 10.

On March 5, Biden warned of potential problems without a ceasefire deal by Ramadan. “There’s got to be a ceasefire because Ramadan – if we get into circumstances where this continues to Ramadan, Israel and Jerusalem could be very, very dangerous,” he told reporters in Washington.

Such statements are undoubtedly based on the extremely false assumption that Muslims do not engage in wars and armed conflicts during the month of fasting. In fact, the opposite is true. As the New York Times reported “It is widely believed that the rewards earned for noble acts are greater during Ramadan….”

Blaming Israel For the Stampede Deaths in Gaza The uncritical acceptance of Hamas’ claims. by Hugh Fitzgerald

https://www.frontpagemag.com/blaming-israel-for-the-stampede-deaths-in-gaza/

Rushing to judgment, many political leaders, and much of the world’s media, have uncritically accepted Hamas’ claim that the IDF is responsible for the deaths of 104 Gazans on February 29 at a site where a convoy of more on 30 aid trucks was trying to make its way to a distribution point, when thousands of Gazans swarmed over the trucks, trying to loot them and carry off their cargo of food aid. What is not in dispute is that a great many Gazans died, though the Hamas figure of 104 may be an exaggeration. What is also not in dispute is that the IDF fired some shots and that thousands of Gazans swarmed over the aid trucks, trying to loot them. The Israelis say they did not fire into the crowd. First they fired warning shots into the air, and then, when a group of Gazans failed to be dissuaded by those warning shots and continued to move menacingly toward them, the IDF shot “fewer than ten” Gazans. The IDF maintains that the vast majority of those who died did so when they were either trampled upon in the stampede to loot the trucks, or actually fell under the wheels of the trucks that continued to move, albeit slowly, forward. More on this incident can be found here: “US blocks Security Council motion blaming Israel for deadly Gaza aid convoy incident,” Times of Israel, March 1, 2024:

Amid American opposition, Arab nations failed Thursday overnight to get immediate support for a UN Security Council statement that would have blamed Israeli forces for the more than 100 reported deaths as Palestinians in northern Gaza swarmed an aid convoy.

The Boys in the Boat, The Peasants, and The Zone of Interest Three great films best seen in a theater. by Danusha V. Goska

https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-boys-in-the-boat-the-peasants-and-the-zone-of-interest/

Friend, I beg of you. Go to a theater and see three great movies sometime soon: The Boys in the Boat, The Peasants, and The Zone of Interest.

Leopold Staff, a Polish poet who survived the Nazi occupation of Warsaw, said that “Even more than bread we now need poetry, in a time when it seems that it is not needed at all.” Movies are democratic. They are accessible and they are communal. It’s fashionable to declare one’s superiority by sneering at popular culture. It’s harder to sneer when you remember that Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a fearless counter-jihadi, was inspired by Nancy Drew novels, and that Top Gun and Saving Private Ryan drove military recruitment. Politics is downstream from culture. The culture we support with our ticket-buying dollars is as important as the candidates we support with our votes.

We get something from publicly watching a movie together with our fellow citizens. The Major and the Minor is a 1942 screwball comedy. I’d watched it a couple of times at home, alone, on a small TV screen before seeing it for the first time in a jam-packed, Greenwich Village art house theater. In that crowd of rollicking laughter, I suddenly realized what a very naughty movie The Major and the Minor is. Its double entendres had flown right over my head. While watching Gone with the Wind, a loud and spontaneous sigh erupted when the camera zoomed in on Rhett Butler’s handsome face (see here). Gathering in the ladies room after a movie like that is a genre of psychotherapy. While washing your hands you ask complete strangers, “Do you think Scarlett and Rhett ever got back together?” You comfort and enlighten each other and the world is warmer, more connected, less lonely and tense. Mel Gibson’s The Passion depicts Christ’s torture, crucifixion, and death in grisly detail. Three Muslim guys took seats directly behind me. They were joking sarcastically. Clearly, they were in the theater to mock. After the film ended, I turned around to check on them. One was doubled over, distraught. His companions were rubbing his back and speaking softly to him.

The loss of public movie-going erodes not just community, but also art. Ali’s well is a famous, eight-minute scene in Lawrence of Arabia. Most of what we see is a completely flat, lifeless, tan desert landscape against a blue sky unbroken by any cloud. Two men draw water from a desert well. A tiny dot appears on the horizon. Slowly we realize that that dot is a man approaching on a camel. He shoots one of the men to death. As we wait, and wait, and wait for the approaching man  to arrive, we experience a fraction of the desert: the emptiness, the boredom, the terror, the sudden and irrational violence, the value system so very different from our own. That scene could never move us in the same way on a small screen. And, when we are watching alone on a small screen, we can fast forward through the parts we don’t like, like, say, the grim depictions of the Holocaust in Schindler’s List.

My students, trained on media that rushes and delivers jolts of violence and sex aimed at the lizard brain’s reward-squirting mechanisms, lack the ability to sit through a scene like Ali’s well. They also have trouble sitting through a complex lecture on current events, or a long story of personal struggle told by a friend. Movies, like all art, have the potential to train us to be our best selves.

Critical Race Theory Is the New Segregation across Schools Nationwide By Wai Wah Chin

https://nypost.com/2024/03/06/opinion/critical-race-theory-is-the-new-segregation-across-schools-nationwide/

Since the public became aware of critical race theory a few years ago, it’s subverted almost every aspect of America’s fabric. 

In operative terms, CRT, a neo-Marxist dogma, reduces every interaction between individuals into a collectivist conflict, between the oppressor race (the guilty villain) and oppressed race (the righteous victim). 

And the kids are not well. 

CRT is not just a war on kids — it’s actually a war on the entire Western civilization as characterized by the Enlightenment values of individual agency and freedom. 

Even at the Department of Defense’s K-12 schools for the children of US service members, CRT indoctrination was found to be so divisive and toxic that the organization responsible for it, the Education Activity Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion, was shut down — though this indoctrination remains in use, and the DEI office was caught last month reincarnated as the DEI “Steering Committee.” 

The collectivist race reductionism of CRT indoctrinates kids — even young ones still “reading” picture books — to despise all whites as privileged oppressors and rally to all blacks as helpless victims.

Beginning in full force next year in California but already introduced in some locations, for example, the state’s recently mandated Ethnic Studies Model Curriculum instructs kids that they belong to either the oppressor group or the victim group, due only to their individual race. 

Howard Husock Jamaal Bowman’s Voting Rights Hypocrisy The vocal opponent of restrictive voting rules stands to benefit from New York’s onerous registration policies.

https://www.city-journal.org/article/jamaal-bowmans-voting-rights-hypocrisy

Rep. Jamaal Bowman of New York, best known for pulling a fire alarm in the Capitol, has made voting rights a signature issue. A member of the uber-progressive “Squad” led by Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, Bowman has even engaged in a hunger strike and been arrested while protesting the Senate’s failure to suspend the filibuster rule to pass the John R. Lewis Voting Rights Act, which effectively would have federalized state voter laws. Following his arrest, Bowman insisted that he would “do it again and again and again” and promised to do “everything in my power to bring attention to the crisis we are in and ensure our democracy functions in a manner that represents the people.” For all his preening, however, Bowman stands to benefit from New York State’s especially restrictive voter-registration laws in his own hotly contested primary this June.

Bowman’s polarizing politics have drawn a serious challenger into the Democratic primary field: moderate Westchester County executive George Latimer, whose entry into the race was prompted, in part, by Bowman’s anti-Zionism. The Squad member notably supported a House resolution calling for a Gaza ceasefire within days of Hamas’s attacks on Israel and conspicuously boycotted Israel president Isaac Hertzog’s address to Congress. In response, major Jewish groups, including the American Israel Political Action Committee and even the left-leaning group J Street, have supported Latimer’s campaign.

But Bowman’s opponents have had to race against time, and the constraints of New York’s voting laws, to improve Latimer’s chances by expanding the pool of primary voters, especially Jewish independents. While New York’s Democratic primary isn’t until June 25, the state set a February 14 deadline for voters to choose or change their political party—four months before the election. That’s the earliest deadline in the country, according to John Opdyke of the group Open Primaries, and it especially hurts Latimer, who had not announced his campaign until late December.