Garry Kasparov writes about 'securite. (See 1a below.)
===
Abbas admits. (See 2 and 2a below.)
===
My wife finally got into the act. (See 3 below.)
===
Semper Fi! (See 4 below.)
===
Need for a strategy and a narrower one all the better. (See 5 and 5a below.)
Obama's dismissive attitude and reaction to a realistic and moderate challenge calling for postponing Syrian refugees, until the administration can certify it can adequately assure they are not ISIS surrogates, is typical of the kind of response we have come to expect from our narcissistic president. Why? Because, Obama sees everything as a political challenge regardless of what is involved.
It is always his way and so far he has proven a winner because Republicans have been poorly led and have not demonstrated they have the guts to buck him.
Obama ignored the Syrian tragedy which helped create the problem and now he blames Republicans for the disaster he created. Typical Obama.
Voters are fed us with politicians who have proven to be shrinking violets and this, in part, explains Trump's appeal. Whether he can deliver may trump his words but until there is evidence he cannot he will continue to ride the waves of popular sentiment.
Americans hunger for leadership. The problem is Trump may prove he is more bluster than has the ability to measure up to the demands of the job.
The attack on Paris could give a boost to Christie's campaign. Time will tell.
===
Dick
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1)
What France and Europe Might Learn
By Bassam Tawil
- By constantly endorsing pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli policies, France has obviously been seeking to appease Islamic countries. France seems convinced that such policies will keep Muslim terrorists from targeting French nationals and interests. The French are now in grave danger of mistakenly believing that the November 13 attacks occurred because France did not appease the Muslim terrorists enough.
- When the terrorists see that pressure works — increasing the pressure should work even more!
- The French and Europeans would do well to understand that there is no difference between a young Palestinian who takes a knife and sets out to murder Jews, and an Islamic State terrorist who murders dozens of innocent people in Paris.
- The reason Muslim extremists want to destroy Israel is not because of the settlements or checkpoints it is because they believe that Jews have no right to be in the Middle East whatsoever. And they want to destroy Europe because they believe that Christians — and everyone — have no right to be anything other than Muslim.
- The terrorists attacking Jews also seek to destroy France, Germany, Britain and, of course, the United States. These countries need to be reminded that the Islamist terrorists' ultimate goal is to force all non-Muslims to submit to Islam or face death.
Earlier this year, France was one of eight countries that supported a Palestinian resolution at the United Nations Security Council, calling for a full Israeli withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines by the end of 2017.
This vote means that France supports the establishment of an independent Palestinian state, likely to be ruled by the same type of people who on Friday carried out the most grisly terror attacks in France since World War II.
Scenes from Friday's grisly terror attacks in Paris.
Today, every Palestinian child knows that in the best case, a future Palestinian state will be run by Hamas or Islamic Jihad, and in the worst case by the Islamic State and its affiliates. Has it occurred to anyone in Europe that the Palestinian people might not want to live under the rule of any of the groups, any more than Europeans would?
France and the rest of the EU countries have long been working against their own interests in the Middle East. By constantly endorsing pro-Palestinian and anti-Israeli policies, France has obviously been seeking to appease the Arab and Islamic countries. France seems convinced that such policies will keep Muslim terrorists from targeting French nationals and interests. That is probably why the French have made the catastrophic mistake of believing that the policy of appeasement toward Arabs and Muslims would persuade the Islamist terrorists to stay away from France. The French are now in grave danger of mistakenly believing that the November 13 attacks occurred because France did not appease the Muslim terrorists enough.
Sadly, the two earlier terrorist attacks that took place in Paris this year — against the Charlie Hebdo satirical newspaper and the HyperCacher Jewish supermarket — failed to convince the French that the policy of appeasement towards Arabs and Muslims is not only worthless, but also dangerous.
Instead of learning from these previous mistakes and embarking on a new policy toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in general and extremist Islam in particular, the French continued with their strategy of appeasement even after the Charlie Hebdo and the HyperCacher supermarket attacks.
Most recently, France voiced its backing for EU plans to label products from Israeli settlements, doubtless thinking that such a move would make the Muslim terrorists happy with the French. But, as last Friday's terrorist attacks showed, the Islamic State and its supporters are not particularly impressed by anti-Israel moves.
Muslim terrorists do not care about the settlements. For them, that is a trivial issue compared to their chief goal and dream: truthfully, to kill all infidels and establish an Islamic empire. The Muslim terrorists who have been murdering Jews in Israel and other parts of the world also seek to kill anyone they perceive as being friends of Western values in general. These include, above all, Christians — either those unfortunate enough still to be living in the Middle East, but also those living in France and other Western countries.
The reason Muslim extremists want to destroy Israel is not because of the settlements or checkpoints. They want to destroy Israel because they believe that Jews have no right to be in the Middle East whatsoever. And they want to destroy Europe because they believe that Christians — and everyone — have no right to be anything other than Muslim. That is also why Muslims seem not particularly interested in the EU's decision to label products from Israeli settlements. It is worth noting that the decision to label Israeli goods was not even an Arab or Islamic initiative.
The EU's decision to boycott products from Israeli settlements has sent entirely the wrong message to the enemies of Israel and the enemies of Western values. These enemies of the West see the decision to label products as just the first step toward labeling all of Israel as an “illegal settlement.” It is no surprise that the first to celebrate the decision were Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
What France and other Western countries do not understand is that concessions and gestures are being misinterpreted by the terrorists as signs of weakness, which just invite more violence. When the terrorists see that pressure works, increasing the pressure should work even more!
The European boycotts are seen by the people here as nothing but cynical and heartless — attempts to court a thieving leadership at the expense of the people. The boycotts are seen here as nothing but keeping the Palestinian people in the grip of its corrupt leadership and prompting us to take another look at the extremists — the only choice offered up.
What the Europeans might have learned is that the assaults in Paris are what all of us here — Muslims, Christians and Jews — have been living with for decades.
During the past 22 years, all Israel's territorial concessions and goodwill gestures have resulted only in increased terrorism against Israel, including us Arabs. Many Palestinians incorrectly saw the Israeli withdrawal from the Gaza Strip in 2005 only as a retreat and a sign of weakness. If shooting at Jews made them leave Gaza — as it appeared — keep shooting at Jews. The result was that Hamas took credit for driving the Jews out of the Gaza Strip with rockets and suicide bombings, and quickly rose to power.
In the same manner, each time Israel has released Palestinian prisoners (including dozens with blood on their hands) as a gesture to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas or U.S Secretary of State John Kerry, the Palestinians regarded the gesture as having their demands met. So the next step is to increase the violence and demand more. The Palestinians saw Israel's withdrawal from southern Lebanon and Gaza, and the release of Palestinian prisoners, not as a sign that Israel was interested in peace and calm, but as a reward for terrorism.
Two months ago, France took another step in appeasing the Arabs and Muslims. This time, the French voted in favor of raising a Palestinian flag at the UN headquarters. “This flag is a powerful symbol, a glimmer of hope for the Palestinians,” UN French Ambassador Francois Delattre said. Again, the French apparently thought that the vote would satisfy the Arabs and Muslims and persuade the terrorists that France was on their side in the fight against Israel.
France's — and Europe's — flawed policy toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict did not start in the past year or two. Four years ago, France voted in favor of granting the Palestinians full membership of the UN's Educational Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO). Last month, the Palestinian Authority leadership unsuccessfully tried to use UNESCO to pass a resolution declaring the Western Wall a holy site for Muslims only. The resolution was changed at the last minute into one just condemning Israel, but instead of opposing the resolution, an embarrassed France chose to abstain. UNESCO, however, did vote that two ancient Jewish heritage sites symbolic of the Biblical era, Rachel's Tomb and the Cave of the Patriarchs, would henceforth be known as Muslim heritage sites. The same week, another Biblical site, Joseph's Tomb, was set on fire (for the second time; the first was in 2000) by people whose government, the Palestinian Authority, had agreed to protect it.
For the past few weeks, Palestinians have been waging a new wave of terrorism against Israelis. This time, the Palestinians are using rifles, knives, stones and cars to murder as many Jews as possible. But we still have not heard any real condemnation — from France, Europe or anyone — of the Palestinian terrorism.
We have also not heard France or other EU countries demand that President Mahmoud Abbas condemn the terrorist attacks against Israelis. Most French media outlets and journalists have even refused to refer to the Palestinian assailants as terrorists — despite many of the terrorists being affiliated two Palestinian groups that share the same ideology as Islamic State: Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
By failing to condemn the terrorist attacks against Israelis and name the perpetrators for what they are — ruthless murderers and terrorists — France and Western countries are once again sending the wrong message to the Islamists: that killing Jews is not an act of terrorism.
What these countries do not realize is that the terrorists who are attacking Jews also seek to destroy France, Germany, Britain and, of course, the “Big Satan” (the United States). These countries need to be reminded every day that the Islamist terrorists' ultimate goal is to force all non-Muslims to submit to Islam or face death. Sometimes, the terrorists do not even have the patience to offer this choice to the “infidels,” and just kill them while they are watching a concert or a soccer match.
It now remains to be seen whether the French will wake up and realize that radical Islam is at war with the “unbelievers” and all those who refuse to accept the dictates of Islamic State and other Muslim extremists. This is a war that Israel has been fighting now for more than two decades, but, sadly, with little support — and most often with venomous obstruction — from countries in Europe, including France.
The French and Europeans would do well to understand that there is no difference between a young Palestinian who takes a knife and sets out to murder Jews, and an Islamic State terrorist who murders dozens of innocent people in Paris. Once the French and other Europeans understand this reality, it will be far easier for them to engage in the battle against Islamic terrorism.
Bassam Tawil is a scholar based on the Middle East.
1a) Dancing With Dictators Against Islamic State
By Garry Kasparov
Three days after coordinated terror attacks in Paris killed at least 129 people and put the lie to President Obama’s recent claim that Islamic State was “contained,” Mr. Obama took to the podium on Monday. Speaking from Antalya, Turkey, where he was attending a G-20 meeting, he threw the full weight of his rhetoric behind solidarity with France and behind the French military response against Islamic State, or ISIS. But he offered no policy changes. In other words, once again America is leading from behind.
Mr. Obama’s remarks in Turkey came after he sat down for an impromptu discussion with Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, who has shipped troops and military hardware to Syria to prop up the Bashar Assad regime and to produce desperately needed new war propaganda back home. A suggestion gaining currency in recent days—encouraged by the Putin-Obama photo op—that the U.S. and NATO cooperate with Mr. Putin against ISIS is ludicrous on many levels. The most obvious one being that Russian forces aren’t in Syria to fight ISIS.
Even after the death of 224 people—most of them Russian tourists—in the Oct. 31 Metrojet crash in Egypt that was almost certainly an ISIS terror bombing, Mr. Putin remains focused on his goals. He is in Syria to help Iran and Mr. Assad destroy any legitimate alternatives to the status quo. What is that status quo? The Assad regime and its Iranian backers controlling the region by force.
The Kremlin also wants to maintain a stream of Syrian refugees pouring into Europe. The migrant crisis is useful to Mr. Putin in two ways. It distracts European attention from his continuing military campaign against Ukraine. And the flood of refugees will enhance the fortunes of far-right European parties that openly embrace Mr. Putin, increasing pressure on the European Union to lift sanctions against Russia. If one of the terrorists in the Paris attack slipped into Europe with Syrian refugees, so much the better.
President Obama and other Western leaders desperate to resolve the conflict in Syria should keep in mind that the enemy of your enemy can also be your enemy. For the U.S. and the West, allying with Iran, Mr. Putin’s Russia and the Assad regime would be morally repugnant, strategically disastrous and entirely unnecessary. The immorality of such an alliance is self-evident: The U.S. officially designates Iran and Syria as state sponsors of terror.
The argument in favor of such an alliance cites the World War II precedent that the Allies joined Stalin to defeat Hitler. The comparison is inapt. First, NATO doesn’t need the help of Mr. Putin or Iran to defeat ISIS; NATO simply needs the resolve to do it. Second, such an alliance would only undermine the effort. Seeing the U.S. working with Mr. Assad and the Shiites of Iran—who essentially control Baghdad, too—would further convince the region’s Sunnis that they have no choice but to turn to ISIS for protection.
Americans above all should realize the importance of the Sunnis. The 2007 U.S. military surge in Iraq was so successful because it included the protection and recruitment of Sunni tribes to fight Sunni extremists. The Obama administration’s hasty exit from Iraq left the Sunnis at the mercy of a hostile Shiite government in Baghdad. Conditions were made ripe for the rise of Islamic State.
Even with France’s stepped-up bombing campaign against ISIS in Syria, and U.S. vows to intensify its own bombing effort, the fact remains: You can’t win hearts and minds from 30,000 feet. The problem with an air-power-only offensive is not only that you don’t always kill the right people, but that you can’t protect anyone. The people of Syria and Iraq need the protection and stability that will starve ISIS of its main source of recruits. No bombs, whether American or French, can provide that. Airstrikes will inspire as many ISIS volunteers as they kill, while also creating countless new refugees. Destroying infrastructure makes the refugees’ eventual return less likely.
“Boots on the ground” is the phrase that must never be mentioned, but mention it we must. Anything less than a major U.S. and NATO-led ground offensive against ISIS will be a guarantee of continued failure and more terror attacks in the West. It is immoral to continue putting civilians—Syrian and Western alike—instead of soldiers on the front line against terrorists.
Pacifying the region and protecting its people from the predation of terrorists and brutal dictatorships is the only path left. It is also the only way to ever repatriate the millions of refugees the Syrian civil war has created. We must support these people now, not watch from afar as they are slaughtered and enslaved, paying attention only when the horror makes its way into our capitals. Our fate is tied to theirs.
Heartfelt expressions of solidarity and candlelight vigils for the victims won’t stop ISIS unless that goodwill is turned to action. Playing defense is hopeless. The world today is too small, the threats too big. The only solution is to fight the problem at its source. You cannot have liberté, égalité, fraternité without sécurité.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2)
Abbas Admits For the First Time That He Turned Down Peace Offer in 2008
Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has publicly confirmed for the first time that he turned down a peace offer in 2008 that would have provided for an independent Palestinian state containing all of the Gaza Strip, much of the West Bank (with land swaps), and a tunnel connecting the two areas.
Abbas made his comments in an interview on Israel’s Channel 10, which has been broadcasting a three-part series on the peace talks of 2000 and 2008. According to both Abbas and Ehud Olmert, Israel’s Prime Minister in 2008, Olmert presented Abbas in September of that year with a map that delineated the borders of the future State of Palestine. Abbas said that he “rejected it out of hand” because he claimed not to be an expert on maps, and because Olmert’s domestic scandals meant that he would shortly leave office (Olmert was later convicted of corruption). While both Olmert and other Palestinian leaders have previously said that Abbas turned down a peace proposal, this is the first time that the Palestinian Authority president has admitted as such.
At 24:05 of the video, Channel 10 reporter Raviv Drucker asked Abbas: “In the map that Olmert presented you, Israel would annex 6.3 percent [of the West Bank] and compensate the Palestinians with 5.8 percent [taken from pre-1967 Israel]. What did you propose in return?”
“I did not agree,” Abbas replied. “I rejected it out of hand.”
At 26:53 of the video, Drucker pressed again:
Drucker: Why, really, did you not accept Olmert’s offer?
Abbas: He [Olmert] said to me, “Here’s a map. See it? That’s all.” I respected his decision not to give me the map. But how can we sign something that hasn’t been given us, that hasn’t been discussed?
The existence of the peace offer was first reported by The Tower’s Avi Issacharoff in 2013, when Olmert told him that he presented Abbas with a map proposal during talks at the Prime Minister’s Residence. Shortly after Olmert’s presentation, Abbas redrew that version of the map from memory, in order to make sure that he and Olmert were on the same page. Issacharoff acquired a photograph of that map, seen below:
As Issacharoff wrote:
Abbas silenced those present so that he could concentrate. He wanted to sketch out Olmert’s map from memory. The Israeli Prime Minister had told him that as long as Abu Mazen did not sign his initials to the map and endorse it, Olmert would not hand over a copy. Abu Mazen took a piece of letterhead of the Presidential Office and drew on it the borders of the Palestinian state as he remembered them.
Abbas marked the settlement blocks that Israel would retain: The Ariel bloc, the Jerusalem-Maaleh Adumim bloc (including E1), and Gush Etzion. A total of 6.3% of the West Bank. Then Abbas also drew the territories that Israel proposed to offer in their place: In the area of Afula-Tirat Zvi, in the Lachish area, the area close to Har Adar, and in the Judean desert and the Gaza envelope. A total of 5.8% of the West Bank. Abu Mazen wrote on the left side of the letterhead the numbers as he incorrectly remembered them (6.8% and 5.5%), and on the back he wrote the rest of the details of the proposal: Safe passage between Gaza and the West Bank via a tunnel, the pentilateral committee to administer the Holy Basin, the removal of the Israeli presence in the Jordan Valley and the absorption of 5,000 Palestinian refugees, 1,000 each year over five years, inside the Green Line.
Abbas’ hand-drawn map, sketched on the stationery of the Palestinian Office of the President and obtained by TheTower.org in the course of this investigative report about the clandestine negotiation between Olmert and Abbas, was published here yesterday exclusively. The two men met 36 times, mostly in Jerusalem and once in Jericho, and arrived at a formula that was to be the basis for a lasting agreement between the two parties. But in the end, peace accords between Israel and the Palestinians were not signed, despite the far-reaching proposal made by Olmert. As an official matter, the Palestinian Authority has not responded.
The next day, Abbas called off talks, saying that he had to attend a meeting in Jordan.
Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat had a similar recollection when interviewed by Al Jazeera in 2009:
Olmert, who talked today about his proposal to Abu Mazen, offered the 1967 borders, but said: “We will take 6.5% of the West Bank, and give in return 5.8% from the 1948 lands, and the 0.7% will constitute the safe passage, and East Jerusalem will be the capital, but there is a problem with the Haram and with what they called the Holy Basin.” Abu Mazen too answered with defiance, saying: “I am not in a marketplace or a bazaar. I came to demarcate the borders of Palestine – the June 4, 1967 borders – without detracting a single inch, and without detracting a single stone from Jerusalem, or from the holy Christian and Muslim places. This is why the Palestinian negotiators did not sign.
Abbas’ comments on Channel 10 were first picked up in English by veteran reporter Mark Lavie.
Palestinian leader confirms he turned down Israeli peace offer
For the first time, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has confirmed on the record that Israel’s prime minster offered him a map of the borders of a Palestinian state in 2008, and he turned it down–and I’m still waiting for a word of this to appear on an international news agency or website.
It’s the 2008 peace proposal that I discovered in March 2009, but my employers, The Associated Press, banned me from writing about it. A version of the map is here.
Israeli TV’s Channel 10 just wrapped up a three-part series about the peace talks in 2000 and 2008. In an on-camera interview, Abbas confirmed, in Arabic, that he was offered a map with borders of a Palestinian the equivalent to all of the West Bank (with some exchanges of territory), all of Gaza and a land link between the two. He refused to initial it, he said, because he’s not an expert on maps (though the territorial demands were always the most prominent of Palestinian requirements) and anyway, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert was under investigation for corruption and would leave office five months later.
I submit that Olmert’s domestic problems were none of his business, and if I were the leader of a nation that wanted a state, and I were offered a map giving me everything I want–I’d sign it and say, “let’s work out the details.” In fact, that’s what Israel did in 1947, when the UN partitioned the British mandatory areas and gave some to Israel–without that “let’s work out the details” part–Israel didn’t even have that option. Its leaders simply accepted the partition as offered, and then fought off Arab armies trying to destroy the Jewish state before it could get started.
But what I think is less important than whether this important disclosure gets any publicity. It’s been several hours since the program aired. I would have expected a news alert and a bulletin as soon as these words escaped Abbas’s lips, and then a full story, and then an analysis. I’m still waiting for any of that, but I’m not holding my breath. If they wouldn’t let me write about it in real time, claiming Israel never made such an offer, why would they write about it now, six years later? It doesn’t fit the accepted pattern that Israel is the intransigent side and the Palestinians are always the helpless victims
2a)Fatah official: Murdering Israelis is Palestinian "right"
Jamal Muhaisen at memorial for killer of 2:
"It is the right of our young men
to cause Israeli women to cry," says Fatah official,
about terrorist who murdered two Israeli men
leaving two young widows
PLO official:
Terrorist murderer of 2, Muhannad Halabi,
is a "role model for generations of young"
PA municipality erects memorial
for terrorist Halabi on road already named after the terrorist
A rally in murderer's honor "turned into a national wedding"
a
Memorial for terrorist murderer Muhannad Halabi in
Abu Qash municipality [zamnpress.com. Nov. 12, 2015]
Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik
Fatah Central Committee member Jamal Muhaisen participated in a rally honoring Palestinian terrorist murderer Muhannad Halabi, and "saluted the soul of [the] Martyr, who detonated the Jerusalem intifada," Ma'an news agency reported. The Fatah official supported the murders committed by Halabi and the other recent shooting and stabbing murders, saying that Palestinian young men have the "right" to cause "Israeli women to cry":
"It is the right of our young men to cause Israeli women to cry like our women are crying, even though our women make sounds of joy after their sons' and husbands' deaths as Martyrs."
[Ma'an, independent Palestinian news agency, Nov. 14, 2015]
Palestinian society continues to give special honor to Halabi, more than the other murderers of the current terror campaign, because he carried out the first "successful" stabbing attack. He murdered two Israeli men who were walking with their wives in Jerusalem, and his attack was then copied by dozens of other terrorists. According to Muhaisen, who spoke at a rally in Halabi's honor, Halabi "detonated the Jerusalem intifada." The rally itself "turned into a national wedding," the news agency reported. This is a reference to the Islamic belief that "Martyrs" for Allah are wedded to 72 Virgins in Paradise.
At the rally, PLO Central Committee Member and Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) member Omar Shehadeh stated that Halabi "represents an example and role model for generations of young." [Ma'an, independent Palestinian news agency, Nov. 14, 2015]. PLO Executive Committee member and Deputy Secretary-General of the DFLP Qais Abd Al-Karim called terrorist Halabi a "hero," expressed "pride" in him and talked about Palestinian "loyalty to [his] blood."
In addition to the rally, the PA municipality where the killer lived erected a memorial to honor him(see picture above). This comes after the PA municipality named a road after the murderer, as documented by Palestinian Media Watch.
The memorial displays a picture of the murderer and carries his name. At the ceremony inaugurating the memorial, which was attended by municipal council members, the murderer's "virtues" were praised:
"A number of speeches were made praising the virtues of Martyr Halabi, who died while defending Jerusalem and its free women, surprised the occupiers, and lay the foundation to a new phase in the Palestinian struggle to defeat the occupation."
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Nov. 13, 2015]
The PA memorial for Halabi on the road named after him is shaped as a map of "Palestine," including both the PA areas and all of Israel, thus denying Israel's existence in any borders.
Terrorist Muhannad Halabi, 19, killed 2 Israelis, Rabbi Nehemiah Lavi and Aharon Bennett, and injured Bennett's wife, Adele, and their 2-year-old son in a stabbing attack in the Old City of Jerusalem on Oct. 3, 2015. Following the attack, he was shot and killed by Israeli police. Prior to his attack, in a post to his private Facebook page, the terrorist referred to recent terror attacks as part of a "third Intifada," and said that it was a response to Israel's actions at the Al-Aqsa Mosque and that the Palestinian people would not "succumb to humiliation." This is a reference to the PA libel that Israel is plotting to take over and destroy the Al-Aqsa Mosque and to the PA's portrayal of Jews praying on the Temple Mount as "an invasion of the Al-Aqsa Mosque."
Murderer Halabi has also been honored by Fatah when the movement brought holy soil from the Al-Aqsa Mosque to his grave and the PA Ministry of Education planted trees in honor of recent terrorists - "the "Martyrs" of "the ongoing popular uprising."
The following are longer excerpts of the reports on the monument and the rally in honor of murderer Halabi:
Headline: "Ramallah: Rally to eulogize Martyr Muhannad Halabi"
"The rally to eulogize Martyr (Shahid) Muhannad Halabi, which the Islamic Jihad movement organized in the Salim Afandi Hall in El-Bireh on Saturday afternoon [Nov. 14, 2015], turned into a national wedding, during which everyone agreed on the importance of the continuation of the Jerusalem Intifada, a natural response to the occupation's aggression, settlement and Judaization campaigns.
Likewise, the Martyrdom wedding participants unanimously agreed that the heroic operation of Martyr Muhannad Halabi was the detonator that made the intifada explode, and emphasized that the rift [between Fatah and Hamas] must be ended, and national unity strengthened against the occupation and the gangs of settlers...
PLO Executive Committee member and Deputy Secretary-General of the Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) Qais Abd Al-Karim 'Abu Laila' opened with the words Martyr Muhannad Halabi engraved on his Facebook page the day before his ascent [to Heaven], and with them announced the outbreak of the third Intifada.
Abd Al-Karim said: 'When the hero Muhannad let loose these words, the intifada had not yet broken out, but he felt its excitement.' In addition, Abd Al-Kraim expressed his pride in the cry [Halabi] uttered for the place from which Prophet Muhammad Ascended to Heaven [the Al-Aqsa Mosque] and as a sign of opposition to the humiliation of our mothers and sisters who are carrying out Ribat (i.e., religious conflict/war over land claimed to be Islamic) in the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque.
He said that this Intifada sent two clear messages, the first to the world, that the existing situation, in which the occupation continue to expand the settlement, to Judaize Jerusalem, and to desecrate the sites holy to Islam and Christianity, cannot continue, and that its continuation will lead to our resistance.
The second message is to all the [Palestinian] factions and leaders: Put aside all the bickering over leadership positions, the narrow accounting, and the meaningless things, and unite against the occupation. Likewise, Abd Al-Karim emphasized that our loyalty to Muhannad's blood is expressed in the declaration of accepting his call to end our arguments and rift.
Abd Al-Karim finished his words by saying: 'Muhannad announced the outbreak of the Intifada, and I add that it continues, and the day will come when we will announce that the Intifada has won.'
Fatah Central Committee member Jamal Muhaisen declared his pride while standing in the presence of the Martyrs who rebelled for Jerusalem and the blessed Al-Aqsa Mosque.
Muhaisen saluted the soul of Martyr Muhannad Halabi, who detonated the Jerusalem Intifada, and emphasized that it is a revolution against the criminal occupation, which is supported by the fascist American administration. He said: 'Maybe we do not have planes or tanks, but we have willpower that can defeat the occupation and achieve victory,' and added: 'It is the right of our young men to cause Israeli women to cry like our women are crying, even though our women make sounds of joy after their sons' and husbands' deaths as Martyrs.' [...]
PLO Central Committee Member and Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (DFLP) member Omar Shehadeh noted that Muhannad represents an example and role model for generations of young...
He said: 'Muhannad felt the danger of the Zionist movement more than 20 years after the fraud, lie and delusion of the peace of Oslo, and he is now a symbol of the popular liberation from the fraud and political deception.'
Shehadeh added: 'Muhannad Halabi waved the flag of challenge at the Zionist project, which wanted to take advantage of the conditions in the Arab world which have led to our [Palestinian] cause being pushed aside, and he wished to deal with it by issuing a greater challenge, in order to prove that Palestine and we ourselves are stronger than death.' He continued: 'The Intifada which Halabi detonated succeeded in preventing the division of the Al-Aqsa Mosque and spoke out against the ghost of Jerusalem's Judaization.' In addition, he emphasized in this context his belief that in the end our people will liberate its land, and the whole world, from the affliction of the Zionist project."
[Ma'an, independent Palestinian news agency, Nov. 14, 2015]
"Division according to areas and times" refers to a proposed law (May 2013) being reviewed in Israeli Parliament that would allow for both Jews and Muslims to pray on the Temple Mount. The law seeks to designate separate prayer times and areas of the site for Muslims and Jews.
Israeli PM Netanyahu has stated on many occasions that the Israeli government has no intention of changing the status quo on the Temple Mount.
Headline: "Ramallah: One of the Abu Qash roads has been named after Martyr Halabi"
"The Surda - Abu Qash municipality named a road after Martyr (Shahid) Muhannad Halabi, which leads to the Al-Basatin neighborhood where his family lives, in an official ceremony marking the passing of 40 days since his death as a Martyr.
Likewise, a memorial with his name was placed in memory of the Martyr at the beginning of the road connecting to the road of Ramallah and El-Bireh, and the town of Bir Zeit, at an event at which municipality council members, the Martyr's family, residents of the Al-Basatin, neighborhood, and many people from the district were present.
During the event a number of speeches were made praising the virtues of Martyr Halabi, who died while defending Jerusalem and its free women (the murderer wrote on Facebook he wanted to defend the women carrying out Ribat (religious conflict/war over land claimed to be Islamic) at the Al-Aqsa Mosque - Ed.), surprised the occupiers, and lay the foundation to a new phase in the Palestinian struggle to defeat the occupation."
[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Nov. 13, 2015]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
3)
Apolitical Aphorisms
If God wanted us to vote, he would have given us candidates. ~Jay Leno~
The problem with political jokes is they get elected. ~Henry Cate, VII~
We hang the petty thieves and appoint the great ones to public office. ~Aesop~
If we got one-tenth of what was promised to us in these Electionspeeches, there wouldn't be any inducement to go to heaven. ~Will Rogers~
Politicians are the same all over. They promise to build a bridge even where there is no river. ~Nikita Khrushchev~
When I was a boy I was told that anybody could become Prime Minister or Premier; I'm beginning to believe it. ~Clarence Darrow~
Why pay money to have your family tree traced; go into politics and your opponents will do it for you. ~Author unknown~
Politicians are people who, when they see light at the end of the tunnel, go out and buy some more tunnel. ~John Quinton~
Politics is the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich, by promising to protect each from the other. ~Oscar Ameringer~
I offer my opponents a bargain: if they will stop telling lies about us, I will stop telling the truth about them. ~Adlai Stevenson, campaign speech, 1952~
A politician is a fellow who will lay down your life for his country. ~ Tex Guinan~
I have come to the conclusion that politics is too serious a matter to be left to the politicians. ~Charles de Gaulle~
Instead! of giving a politician the keys to the city, it might be better to change the locks. ~Doug Larson~
There ought to be one day -- just one -- when there is open season on senators. ~Will Rogers~
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------4)Subject: Marines have a wonderful way with words-clear, concise and to the point
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------THIS NEEDS TO GO AROUND THE USA MANY TIMES SO KEEP IT GOING!
If you look closely at the picture above, you will note that all the Marines pictured are bowing their heads. That's because they're praying. This incident took place at a recent ceremony honoring the birthday of the corps, and it has the ACLU up in arms. "These are federal employees," says Lucius Traveler, a spokesman for the ACLU, "on federal property and on federal time... For them to pray is clearly an establishment of religion, and we must nip this in the bud immediately."
When asked about the ACLU's charges, Colonel Jack Fessender, speaking for the Commandant of the Corps said (, "F*** the ACLU." GOD Bless Our Warriors. Send the ACLU to Afghanistan ! Then watch those SONS OF BITCHES pray.
Please send this to people you know so everyone will know how stupid the ACLU is getting in trying to remove GOD from everything and every place in America .May God Bless America , One Nation Under GOD!
What's wrong with the picture?
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! GOD BLESS YOU FOR PASSING IT ON!
THIS NEEDS TO GO AROUND THE USA MANY TIMES… IN GOD WE TRUSTBrian AhearnSemper Fi
5)- Do the Democrats Have a Strategy Against ISIS?
Before Saturday night’s debate, the Democratic presidential candidates had only a day to prepare for terrorism’s new centrality to the 2016 campaign. And it showed. Bernie Sanders rightly noted that both the Iraq War and climate change had contributed to the political breakdown on which ISIS feeds. But when it came to outlining a vision for fighting the Islamic State going forward, none of the candidates ventured much beyond platitudes.
Hillary Clinton backhandedly admitted as much when she promised that, “I will be laying out in detail what I think we need to do with our friends and allies in Europe and elsewhere to do a better job of coordinating efforts against the scourge of terrorism.” Given that Clinton announced her presidential bid in April, and months ago delivered policy speeches on a variety of domestic subjects, the fact that she hasn’t provided that detail yet shows how absent terrorism has been from the Democratic campaign.
Both politically and morally, that’s dangerous. The Republican line on ISIS’s attacks in Paris is clear: The United States left Iraq, and the larger Middle East, because Barack Obama doesn’t believe in American power, and now “radical Islam” is taking over the region and coming after Americans. So the U.S. must “lead” again, which means more bombing, a no-fly zone in Syria, tearing up the Iran nuclear deal, a harder line against Russia, and no admission of Syrian Muslim refugees to the country. If the Democrats don’t offer an alternative vision, and instead stick to generalities while waiting for the conversation to turn back to domestic affairs, the trust gap separating the two parties on national security will grow.
A Democratic response to Paris should start by noting that while Americans today feel some of the same fear and rage they felt after the 9/11 attacks, they also know that President George W. Bush exploited that fear and rage to do disastrous things. In the ISIS era, America must not repeat those mistakes.
The first mistake was Bush’s decision to make the “war on terror” a war against virtually every movement and regime in the greater Middle East with whom the United States had a beef, whether they were connected to 9/11 or not. For Bush, who repeatedly compared the “war on terror” to World War II, responding to 9/11 by merely going after al-Qaeda was “small ball.” So the United States invaded and occupied Afghanistan and Iraq while simultaneously intensifying its cold war with Iran. This satisfied the public’s desire for a response equal to the magnitude of the crime. But it cost the United States trillions of dollars and thousands of lives, and left it in a far weaker position in the world than before 9/11.
Bush’s mentality still dominates the GOP. Most of the Republicans running for president want the United States to declare war on “radical Islam,” an amorphous term that blurs the distinction between ISIS and those Islamist governments, for instance in Iran and Turkey, with which ISIS is at war.
The Democrats should note that America’s wisest presidents have done the opposite. They’ve defined America’s enemies narrowly, even when that means cooperating with nasty regimes, so as to give the United States the best chance of success. Franklin Roosevelt didn’t fight a war against totalitarianism: He allied with Stalin’s Soviet Union against Nazi Germany. Despite his anti-communist rhetoric, Harry Truman aided Yugoslavia’s communist leader, Marshal Tito, because Tito was resisting Soviet domination of Eastern Europe. Richard Nixon cozied up to an even more powerful communist regime, China’s, to increase America’s leverage over the U.S.S.R. During the Gulf War, George H.W. Bush didn’t declare war on Baathism: He brought one Baathist dictator, Hafez al-Assad in Syria, into the coalition against another, Saddam Hussein in Iraq.
5a) The Real War
Newt
5a) The Real War
Friday night's attack in Paris was another reminder that we are in a real war.
It is vital that we understand what the real war is and who the real enemy is.
The real war is not geographic and it is not defined by ISIS.
The real war is worldwide and the real enemy is Islamic supremacy in all its forms. The center of gravity is not Syria. The center of gravity is the internet.
We are confronted by a virus that is closer to epidemiology than to traditional state-to-state warfare. We will have to eradicate this virulent religious intolerance and violence here at home and across the planet. This is an extraordinarily difficult challenge.
Our elites have been hiding from the real war and the real challenge because it frightens them. They keep trying to redefine the problem so it can be solved without rethinking what we are doing.
Month after month the problem grows harder, the danger grows bigger, and more radicals are recruited. The elites wring their hands and hide. Each major attack leads to anguish, statements of sympathy and expressions of condemnation, but prompts no change in strategy and no effective action. These elites could be called the ostrich generation. They bury their heads in the sand and hide from reality.
Now let's put last weekend's tragedy in the context of the real war. Paris was, of course, only a skirmish in the larger war.
In the last two weeks, a Russian airliner was bombed in Egypt a terrorist stabbed four people in California after planning to behead someone and praising Allah and carrying the ISIS flag, scores were killed by car bombs in Lebanon, people continued to be killed in Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan....and eight terrorists carried out very visible, ruthless attacks in Paris.
Paris was so vivid, so symbolic, and so well televised that it became the center of attention.
Suddenly French President Hollande announced that these coordinated attacks by eight terrorists were an “act of war.” He promised to fight with “all the necessary means, and all terrains, inside and outside, in coordination with our allies.” Hollande promised a “pitiless” effort.
There are three key questions about President Hollande's sudden militancy.
First, why wasn't the attack on the magazine Charlie Hebdo and the Jewish grocery store back in January an act of war?
Second, does this declaration of war by the French President mean that victory is their goal and they have thought about how painful and expensive the Russian experience in Chechnya, the Israeli experience in the Palestinian territories, the Pakistani experience in the northwest frontier and the Egyptian experience of trying to police the Sinai have been?
Third, are they as prepared to wage war at home against the internal enemy as they are to bomb Syria? This week's announcement by the Interior Minister that some mosques that teach sharia and jihadism would be closed was a good start. There are, however, an estimated 47 mosques dedicated to sharia and jihad in the Paris region alone. Closing all of them would be a historic struggle.
First we have to define the real war and the real enemy.
Then we have to define victory and establish a strategy to achieve victory.
Then we have to ensure we have the systems and structures to implement that strategy.
If we don’t do all three, we can’t expect to start winning the real war.
Newt
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment