Monday, November 30, 2015

Arabs and Muslims and Their Response To The Syrian Refugee Plight - NADA! America Will Never Win Another War With Obama's Mind Set Running The Pentagon!

I cannot resists posting these disparate cartoons because they are right on the mark.
Sowell on Christmas Gifts! (See 1 below.)


Prager responds to Columbia's black students. (See 1a below.)
After 60 years of watching Palestinians act in an irrational and evil manner I can only conclude they are a sinister people and deserve whatever plight comes their way.  The sooner the better,

There comes a time when you run out of patience, hope and think evil thoughts yourself.  I am way past that period.(See 2, 2a and 2b below.)

While I am on the subject of Arabs and Muslims let's take a look at what they are doing for some of their own from Syria - NADA! Why?  Because they know if they do nothing guilt ridden Colonialists will take over.  After all,  how many times have Europeans come to their rescue and bailed them out with beau-coup EUROS and America with all kind of "compassionate" aid?

Furthermore, our friends, the Saudis, continue to keep the price of oil low in order to cripple America's energy production while at the same time, they continue to fund Wahhabism and Mosques, the world over, where radical clerics and Imams preach their hatred and spew forth their venom.. (See 3 below.)

The Saudis also fund Middle Eastern Study Departments on American college campuses . These departments distort truth under the guise of education and many of the students who are drawn to these studies engage in radical campus behaviour disrupting free speech thereby, preventing a useful exchange of differing viewpoints.

And finally, we have the radicals who have hijacked Islam and turned it into a religion for the purposes of condoning their barbaric and destructive acts of murder and terrorism.

By now, world leaders should have had enough of the barbarism of renegade Arabs and Muslims but they continue to cower behind the insanity of Climate Change and  resist forming a coalition to wipe this scourge from the earth.  In fact, they persist in funding these radicals believing their efforts will be appreciated and buy a modicum of peace. Our cool president is now in Paris leading the parade of these blind idiots.

When will these leaders catch up to their citizens whom they profess to lead? I would  not recommend holding your breath.  Though,their behaviour defies logic and sanity it appears they prefer being guided by PC'ism because it makes them feel good, moral and reinforces their self -righteous attitudes. Once again, our president has taken "the point" and relishes heading this class of morons.
Obama's Pentagon - An analysis that is somewhat cynical but seemingly accurate.

It all comes down to the current Chief of Staff - A Marine, who is the only human left between the total destruction of the sole government agency that has come through time and again in accomplishing its mission when politicians leave them alone which has now  become never!

America will never win another war with the current mindset Obama has iposed on this once proud organization. (See  4 below.)
Response from very long time friend, fellow memo reader and one of the best investors I had the pleasure of working with as an institutional salesman "God has blessed you with a fantastic family! 
Grandma and Grandpa don't look too bad either.

The piece you sent yesterday on Global Warming by Brett Hoffstadt was the best thing I've seen on the subject since Bjorn Lomborg's "Cool It". They get to the same result by different routes - that it simply isn't worth spending zillions for a final miniscule result when there are so many better things that can be accomplished with the money  - like eradicating malaria for instance. I am not familiar with Hoffstadt's CV. Could you help me place him?

Thanks and Happy holidays!
Yesterday a low turnout of responsible citizens made a significant decision.  They decided to turn out black office holders and replace them with white ones. Their hope  and intention was to substitute novices with executives possessing administrative skills who will act responsibly and ethically.

In doing so, perhaps this beautiful and historic city of ours will turn away from becoming the "per capita" murder Capitol of America and one of the most mismanaged small cities in our nation.  

From every indication, we now have a competent Chief of Police and the new incoming crowd should support him fully so he can go about doing what he was hired to do and , based on his performance in Athens, knows how to do.

The next order of business, since our city is basically run by a city manager, is to get a competent one with vision so Savannah can realize its potential to the fullest.

We have made great strides when you go back to the '70's but in the past several decades we have slid backwards.

Go Savannah!

Christmas Gifts

By Thomas Sowell

People who want to buy Christmas gifts, without having to confront the crowds at the local shopping mall (or shopping maul) can take a load off their feet by buying books or movies on the Internet, while sitting in the comfort of their own homes.
In addition to old standbys like gorgeous coffee table books of Ansel Adams' scenic photographs or the collected works of Shakespeare -- or of "Calvin and Hobbes" comics -- there are also many thought-provoking books on current events or on history.
People who already seem to have everything may not have DVDs of the latest movies or perhaps of some old movie classics like "Citizen Kane" or "The Hunt For Red October."
Among the rare movies that children and adults can watch and enjoy together is the perennial favorite, "The Wizard of Oz." Other good choices, however, would include "The Great Muppet Caper," which I have watched a number of times and enjoyed each time.
For Sherlock Holmes fans, there is not only a large book titled "The Complete Sherlock Holmes" but also a boxed set of DVDs of many of the best Sherlock Holmes stories, starring Jeremy Brett as the best of a number of actors who have played the Holmes role over the years.
Among books on serious issues, some are great for people who are interested in a particular subject but have never read a good introduction to the issues involved. For young people, they may need to read something to counter the politically correct nonsense they have heard in their schools and colleges.
The recently published book "American Contempt for Liberty" by Walter E. Williams is an especially wide-ranging examination of current issues. This 417-page compilation of Professor Williams' newspaper columns devastates innumerable politically correct beliefs, often providing not only new information but also some much-needed examples of rational thinking in general.
An older book that has been recommended here before, but will be recommended again because there is nothing else like it, is "Life at the Bottom," by Theodore Dalrymple.
This is an insightful account of the dire consequences that the welfare state has led to among low-income whites in England. Many will recognize striking similarities to problems among low-income blacks in America -- problems often blamed on "a legacy of slavery," but which have followed in the wake of the welfare state in England, among whites with no legacy of slavery.
For those who would like a serious but very readable introduction to current issues among black Americans, there is none better than "Please Stop Helping Us" by Jason Riley.
Among my own books, "Basic Economics" remains the one read by the most people and translated into the most foreign languages. It presents economics without the graphs and equations, or the jargon, that make economics seem needlessly difficult to many people. "Basic Economics" was written with the idea that economics can be both informative and enjoyable.
My most recent book, published this past September, is "Wealth, Poverty and Politics." It has received the kind of praise from reviewers that an author wants but seldom gets. Part of this may be due to the interest aroused by the subject matter itself and part to the book's clarification of things that are too often presented in confused and misleading terms.
Much media hype about "the top ten percent" or "top one percent" of income earners collapses like a house of cards when you scrutinize the numbers and the words used to describe those numbers.
Over the course of a lifetime, for example, more than 60 percent of Americans are in households within the top ten percent of household incomes at one point or other. Politicians who want us to resent "the top ten percent" are encouraging most of us to resent ourselves.
Although that would not make sense, politicians are far less interested in making sense than in getting votes. Talk about the top ten percent or top one percent gets votes. And that is the politician's bottom line.
For someone who likes to read about serious subjects but already has the kinds of books you might want to give as a gift, what no one has are future issues of outstanding publications on serious issues. A subscription to "City Journal" or "Hoover Digest" is a gift that would solve that problem.
Merry Christmas!


A Response to a Black Student at Columbia

Dennis Prager

By Dennis Prager

Two weeks ago, the Columbia University newspaper, the Spectator, published an article titled "Students, faculty address institutionalized racism at University Life event."

As described in the article, one example of the institutionalized racism that black Columbia students must endure is the university's Core Curriculum.

In the words of one of the panelists, fifth-year undergraduate student Nissy Aya, a young black woman, "It's traumatizing to sit in Core classes. We are looking at history through the lens of these powerful, white men. I have no power or agency as a black woman, so where do I fit in?"

Her words are worthy of analysis and response.

First, they provide a fine example of how successfully universities have indoctrinated students with leftist ideas and rhetoric. For example, who, outside of academia, ever uses the word "agency" as she did? Did you ever say to anyone that you have or don't have "agency?"

This is not trivial. When people use words or terms that are used in only one setting, it means that that setting has profoundly influenced them and that the setting is a closed intellectual universe.

Her use of the word "traumatizing" is also a product of indoctrination. Columbia taught this young woman to be traumatized by its own Core Curriculum. Some things — war, torture and the murder of a loved one, for example — are objectively traumatizing. No one is taught to be traumatized by such things. But a university curriculum that attempts to convey the finest ideas and art developed in Western culture, and often in the entire world, and which has been taught to tens of thousands of students of all backgrounds for nine decades — that should not constitute a trauma.

The notion that she is "looking at history through the lens of these powerful, white men" means that race trumps profundity, wisdom, beauty and excellence. Thus, Shakespeare is not the greatest playwright we know of, he is just a white European (and male, to boot). Likewise Beethoven, Bach and other Western composers did not compose what is arguably the greatest music ever composed; they, too, were first and foremost white.

Whereas the Columbia Core Curriculum originally set out to teach the history of the West and the best art and literature that has been produced, the left has succeeded in teaching that no art is better than any other. It has done so by substituting race, gender and class for wisdom, beauty and profundity, and through its doctrine of multiculturalism, which asserts that all cultures are equal.

And how did Columbia respond to Aya?

Director of the Center for the Core Curriculum Roosevelt Montas said: "You cannot grow up in a society without assimilating racist views. Part of what is exciting about this conversation is that it's issuing accountability for us to look within ourselves and try to understand the way that racism shapes how we see the world and our institutions."

And, according to the Spectator, Executive Vice President for University Life Suzanne Goldberg "added that in addition to meeting with students, the Office of University Life is convening a task force of students, administrators and faculty to further explore issues of diversity on campus."

In other words, instead of defending the pursuit of wisdom and human greatness, Columbia sided with Aya and all the other students lamenting the "institutionalized racism" and resultant traumas endured by non-white students at the university.
At an actual learning institution, rather than at the left-wing seminary Columbia and nearly all other American universities have become, administrators would have told Aya that if she has really been traumatized by the Columbia Core Curriculum, she stands little chance of navigating any of the inevitable vicissitudes of real life because she has opted to remain a child, and therefore woefully unprepared for adulthood.

At a real university, administrators would have also told her and all the other "traumatized" students of all colors and backgrounds, that by using the word "traumatized" they have trivialized the suffering of all those individuals the world over who really have been traumatized.

But of course any administrator who said something so honest would be labeled racist by faculty and students at that university, The New York Times, Hillary Clinton, MSNBC and the rest of the American left.

After all, in their view, if you think students should concentrate on studying Bach, Shakespeare and Leonardo da Vinci, you are depriving black students of their agency. Is that not clear?



Bizarro reality

For the past few months, almost every day, Arab terrorists have ‎committed attacks on Israelis -- mostly knife assaults, but also cars ‎plowing into Israeli soldiers or civilians, and some shootings. Two dozen ‎Israelis have been killed, and a far greater number have been wounded. 

The ‎attacks followed a vicious incitement campaign by the Palestinian Authority, Hamas, ‎and other radicalized groups among Israeli and West Bank Arabs blasting out ‎repeated warnings that Israel and the Jews were mounting an assault on the ‎Temple Mount and Al-Aqsa mosque, with a design to change the character of ‎the arrangement that has existed there for nearly 50 years.‎

The warnings are false, of course, but also malicious, since the PA and its allies in ‎the slander campaign fully understand the power of the warnings about the alleged ‎threats to Al-Aqsa and Jerusalem, given the history of the conflict. No propaganda ‎campaign is more likely to incite attacks on Israel and Jews in Israel or elsewhere ‎than one focused on protecting Jerusalem and Al-Aqsa from the infidels ‎threatening it. 

Israeli soldiers, police, and in some cases civilians have responded to the ‎attacks quickly and forcefully, ending the lives of some of the attackers, wounding ‎or capturing others. All of the attacks presented life-threatening risks for the ‎Israelis who were attacked, and if ever a forceful response was justified by ‎Israelis or the authorities, these were such cases.‎

So how has the Palestinian Authority reacted to the attacks, other than calling for ‎more of them? Naturally, the PA has blamed Israel for unprovoked attacks and ‎killings of "alleged" Arab attackers, who of course are in most cases described as mere innocents on the scene. The PA has even gone so far as to claim ‎that knives were planted on some of the Arabs to justify the Israeli "attacks" on Palestinians (almost all of the Arab attackers have ‎come from the West Bank or Jerusalem). The Israelis who were murdered or ‎wounded must have been careless -- walking into knives without looking, or better ‎yet, prone to some previously unheard of disease that causes spontaneous bleeding wounds to suddenly appear on different parts of the body. 

We are in a strange ‎environment when the Palestinian Authority, the erstwhile partner for peace with ‎Israel according to all the world's diplomats, applauds the murders of Jews, honors ‎the "martyrs" who carry out attacks while simultaneously denying in many cases that they even ‎occurred, and condemns the defilement of the Temple Mount with the "filthy feet" of ‎the Jews.‎

This last canard was the language adopted by PA President Mahmoud Abbas, often described as ‎the moderate Palestinian leader representing the best hope for achieving peace ‎with Israel. ‎
It did not take long for U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry to link the attacks on Israelis ‎as a natural response by Palestinians to the continued frustration with the stalled ‎peace process, and the stepped up pace of settlement activity.‎

Abbas used almost identical language when ‎forced to acknowledge that there actually had been some attacks on Israelis (Jews ‎in almost all cases, of course). Continuing a streak of seemingly blind ‎misstatements, Kerry was wrong both on the supposed increase in settlement activity and ‎on the causes of the present wave of murderous attacks. In every poll of ‎Palestinians, the attacks were justified because of the risk to Al-Aqsa. Around 72% support ‎the current intifada, terminology used more frequently now to describe the terror ‎campaign. Even more to the point, only a tiny minority of Palestinians (11%) has any ‎interest whatsoever in a two-state solution and an end to the conflict. Palestinians are ‎not shy about telling polling organizations that all of Israel is a settlement, and the ‎goal of this current string of violent attacks is no different than all those that ‎preceded it -- the desire to eliminate Israel and kill the Jews. 

According to scholar Bassem Tawil, ‎"A recent poll found that 48% of Palestinians interviewed ‎believe that the real goal of the 'intifada' is to 'liberate all of ‎Palestine.' In other words, approximately half of Palestinians ‎believe that the 'intifada' should lead to the destruction of ‎Israel, which would be replaced with a Palestinian state, one ‎that now would be ruled by Hamas and jihadi organizations ‎such as Islamic State and al-Qaida.‎ It is notable that only 11% of respondents said the goal of the ‎‎'intifada' should be to 'liberate' only those territories ‎captured by Israel in 1967."‎

U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, in his welcoming ‎remarks to the climate summit in Paris, chose a moment of ‎silence for recent victims of terror in Paris, Bamako, ‎Beirut and Tunis. Missing, naturally, was any mention of Tel Aviv ‎or Jerusalem. One might think the secretary-general believes ‎terror attacks on Jews or Israelis are something different than ‎attacks in the rest of the world.‎
The United Nations has much to answer for itself in terms of being an ‎active participant in the current incitement campaign to ‎murder Jews, with teachers in UNRWA schools making their ‎own appeals for more killing of the Jewish "apes and pigs."‎

Double standards come naturally to the Obama ‎administration as well, which waited a few days to ‎acknowledge the murder of a Jewish American, Ezra ‎Schwartz, in one attack in Israel, after immediately noting ‎attacks that killed Americans in Paris and other places. The ‎public acknowledgment of Schwartz's death on a Monday night ‎football broadcast probably forced the president's hand.
Two weeks ago, the European Union finally followed ‎through on its long-expected announcement that it would ‎begin requiring labeling of products from settlements, and ‎would not allow these items to be labeled "product of Israel." Professor Eugene Kontorovich pointed out that the policy ‎was inconsistent with how the EU treats products from the ‎roughly 200 other conflicts around the globe where one side ‎or another may be occupying territory, is inconsistent with its ‎own rules and policies, and is in violation of various ‎international agreements. It did not take long for the U.S. State ‎Department to effectively endorse the EU action, since it also ‎claimed not to recognize the legality of Israeli settlements.
When Barack Obama became president, clues to his conduct ‎of foreign and domestic policy could be found in one formula ‎that pretty much always worked: If George W. Bush did ‎something one way when he was president, then Obama would do the opposite. ‎Bush led the U.S. into Iraq and Afghanistan, Obama would ‎get us out. Bush took prisoners to Guantanamo, Obama ‎would release them and close the prison. Bush supported tax ‎cuts, Obama would raise rates even higher than they had been before Bush reduced them. If you were describing the ‎behavior of a 5-year-old, you would say, he is "doing the ‎opposite." ‎

Another way to describe the behavior is Bizarro-like. ‎Bizarro was a super-villain who originally appeared in the Superman ‎comic book series. Superman, the Man of ‎Steel, was a force for good. Bizarro was Superman's opposite, a very negative ‎force whose powers were often the exact reverse of Superman's. ‎

Bizarro World is the EU treating Israeli products differently than those from ‎everywhere else. It is Obama forgetting only the Jewish terror victim in ‎his public comments. Bizarro World is the secretary of state distinguishing the ‎latest terror attacks in Paris as having had less legitimacy and rationale than the ‎earlier ones in January (which included the deliberate murders of Jews and ‎cartoonists who drew pictures of the Prophet Muhammad). I guess we should understand and ‎accept that Arabs and Muslims want to kill Jews and those who think they have a ‎right to caricature Muhammad, but attacks on others are more problematic. ‎Bizarro World is the U.N. secretary-general not treating terror attacks on Jews as ‎equivalent to terror attacks on anyone else. Bizarro World is treating ‎Abbas as a potential peacemaker while he fans the flames of mass murders of Israeli ‎Jews.‎

Take your pick: opposites or Bizarro World. In either case, we are forced to ‎confront some basic "truths": Terror is wrong, unless its victims are Jews. Boycotts ‎are wrong, unless they are aimed at the one Jewish state. Terror victims should be ‎named and remembered, unless they are Jews. For years, the United Nations has ‎been exhibit No. 1 in the Bizarro World presentation, as the Human Rights ‎Council, filled with the world's most thuggish regimes, only condemns behavior ‎by Israel. Now we are seeing evidence of similar selective treatment of Israel ‎by the United States. When the Palestinians reject Israeli peace offers (as we now ‎know occurred in 2008), Israel is blamed for the failure to finalize a deal ‎because of its settlement activity. When Palestinians refuse even to meet with ‎Israelis without prior concessions, Israel is blamed for its lack of interest in peace. ‎In Bizarro World, Israel cannot win, for everyone else sees the opposite of reality.‎

2a) The UN Can't Support Israel's Fight on Terrorism Since it Considers Israel the Terrorists

On November 19, 2015, Palestinian Arab terrorists attacked Israelis which resulted in the death of five people. On the same day, terrorists in Mali attacked a hotel and killed 20.
November 30, 2015 UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon commented on both terrorist attacks. His approach to each incident was quite different. The UN placed significant weight on its comments towards the Government of Mali. It extended condolences and offered “full support” to fight terrorists and extremists.
However, all such language and sentiment was absent for Israel over its wave of terrorism. This has been true for every announcement made about deliberate murders committed by Palestinian Arabs against Israelis, whether the killing of the Henkins in front of their children (October 2015) or the slaughter of the Fogel family in their beds (March 2011).
The reason becomes clear when reviewing the various UN statements. The November 19 attack was the first time that Ban Ki-Moon actually used the word “terror” about Israel. The reason? Because a Palestinian was listed among those killed. The language of the press release could lead a reader to conclude that the terrorism was CAUSED by Israel, rather than Arab murderers.That was the reason that the UN did not extend condolences to, or express support for the Government of Israel. For the UN Secretary-General, it seems in his mind Israel is as much part of the terrorist infrastructure as the jihadists.


The Palestinians and Their Real Goal of the Intifada

By Bassam Tawil
As the current Palestinian campaign of terrorism against Israel is about to enter its third month, it is still not clear to many what the Palestinians are trying to achieve. The Palestinians cannot even agree on a name for their campaign. Some are referring to it as an “intifada,” while others are describing it as a “Habba Jamahiriya” [“popular puff,” or “flurry”].
The Palestinians also have not been able to agree on the motives behind the stabbing, shooting, firebombing and car-ramming attacks. Palestinian Authority (PA) leader Mahmoud Abbas has repeatedly claimed during the past few weeks that the terrorists are setting out to kill Jews out of “despair and frustration” and the lack of a “political horizon.” But Abbas seems intentionally to be ignoring that it is he and his Palestinian Authority who are responsible — together with Hamas, Islamic Jihad and other Palestinian factions — for the violence, as a result of their daily incitement against Israel.
This is yet another instance in which anyone could have predicted what was going to happen. Throughout the past year, Abbas has been telling his people that Israel was planning to destroy the Al-Aqsa Mosque and “change the Arab and Islamic character and identity” of Jerusalem. He condemned Jews for “defiling the Aqsa Mosque with their filthy feet.” Abbas, his spokesmen and PA-controlled media outlets also have also repeatedly been telling Palestinians that Israel is committing “war crimes” and “summary executions” of innocent Palestinians.
This is, as Abbas knows, exactly the type of incitement that prompts Palestinian teenagers to grab a knife, run out into the street and murder the first Jew they see. Those young Palestinians are also tragic victims of the poisonous campaign of the inflammatory anti-Israeli language emanating from Palestinian leaders such as Abbas, mosque preachers, news outlets and social media.
Contrary to Abbas’s outrage, no one has yet found even one terrorist who claimed to have attacked a Jew out of “despair and frustration” at the “lack of a political horizon.” If you look through the social media accounts of these young terrorists, many have said that they set out to kill Jews to “defend” Al-Aqsa Mosque. They seem to have been influenced by the romantic notion of Abbas’s repeated fictitious claims that Jews were plotting to destroy the mosque, followed by high-flown fantasies of themselves as heroes charging forth to rescue it.
A public opinion poll published last week refutes Abbas’s claim that Palestinians are committing terrorist attacks out of “despair and frustration.” The poll, conducted by the Watan Center for Studies and Research, found that 48% of the Palestinians interviewed believe that the real goal of the “intifada” is to “liberate all of Palestine.” In other words, approximately half of Palestinians believe that the goal of the “intifada” should lead to the destruction of Israel.
What is notable, is that only 11% of respondents said that the true goal of the “intifada” should be to “liberate” only those territories captured by Israel in 1967. Another 12% of Palestinians said they believe that the goal of the “intifada” was to release prisoners held by Israel.
The results of the poll, which covered 1,167 Palestinians above the age of 18, show that a majority of Palestinians continue to seek the destruction of Israel. The poll shows that only a few Palestinians see only the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem as the future Palestinian state. They want the “intifada” to replace Israel with a Palestinian state — preferably, one that now would be ruled by Hamas and jihadi organizations such as Islamic State and Al-Qaeda.
These Palestinians do not see a difference between, say, Ma’aleh Adumim, a “settlement” on the outskirts of Jerusalem, and any city inside Israel. One only needs to look at reports in the Palestinian media to see that Tel Aviv, Rishon Lezion, Kiryat Gat and Ra’anana are all considered “settlements.” These reports also show that Palestinians do not see a difference between a Jew living in the West Bank and Israel — instead, they are all depicted as “settlers” and “colonialists.”
None of the Palestinians interviewed for the poll complained about “despair and frustration,” or the lack of a “political horizon.” Obviously, they are driven by hatred for Jews and Israel. They do not, however, have a problem with “settlements” or “poor living conditions.” They have a problem with Israel’s existence. A majority believes that Israel can — and should — be destroyed. They are not, as Palestinian leaders claim, seeking a two-state solution.
According to the poll, more than 75% of Palestinians support the use of violence against Israel. More than 44% of respondents support the use of firearms against Israel; 18% are in favor of using knives to kill Jews, and another 14% would like to see Palestinians use stones. This contradicts Abbas’s claim that the Palestinians want a “peaceful and popular” uprising.
Another noteworthy finding of the poll is that 72% of Palestinians want the current “intifada” to continue. In other words, an overwhelming majority of Palestinians would like to see their youths carry out more terror attacks against Israeli civilians and soldiers. They want to see more terror attacks because their leaders and journalists are telling them that those who kill Jews are “heroes” and “martyrs” who will have streets, squares, schools and tournaments named after them.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, who visited Israel and Ramallah last week in a bid to end the Palestinian terror attacks, was unable to make any progress. Even before he arrived in Ramallah to meet with President Abbas, Kerry was strongly condemned for referring to the Palestinian violence as “terrorism.” Palestinians who demonstrated not far from Abbas’s office shouted slogans condemning the U.S. Administration for its attempt to stop the terror attacks against Israelis and called for boycotting Kerry. The protesters also declared Kerry persona non grata in Ramallah.
Kerry and the U.S. Administration should know by now that the Palestinians are waging war on Israel not because of “despair and frustration,” but because they aspire to destroy Israel, as the results of the recent poll show.
The goal of the Palestinians is the destruction of Israel. This fact is something that other Western parties need to understand — that the Palestinian “struggle” is mainly aimed at eliminating Israel, and not “the establishment of a Palestinian state that would live in peace and security alongside Israel.” The recent poll should be translated into English and distributed among all those “pro-Palestinian” groups that continue to shout about the conflict being the result of Israeli “occupation” of the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem.
Today, it is clear that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not really about the “occupation” that began with the creation of Israel in 1948. The last three Palestinian “intifadas” and previous Israeli-Arab wars had (and still have) one goal: to see Israel removed off the map.
About the Author: Bassam Tawil is a scholar based in the Middle East and regular contributor to the Gatestone Institute web journal