Φίλοι μου / μας!
Biden Frees Al Qaeda Ally Who Plotted to Smuggle Nukes Into US
Why settle for helping Iran nuke America, when you can also help Al Qaeda nuke America?
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
With inflation rising almost as fast as gas prices and the cost of a home, Joe Biden ain’t doing much for most Americans. But if you’re an Al Qaeda terrorist, he’s got your back.
Just ask three of Gitmo’s finest who are benefiting from Biden’s generosity.
Saifullah Paracha (pictured above) was a Pakistani businessman and New York travel agent with some big plans. The Gitmo inmate now being set loose by Biden wanted to “do something big against the US.”
9/11 was in Al Qaeda’s rearview mirror and its mastermind, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, was plotting a sequel. The Gitmo dossier for Paracha first details a plan to use his “textile business to smuggle explosives into the US” and these “ready-made explosives, specifically C4” would go into shipping containers full of “women and children’s clothing”.
Shipping Al Qaeda’s C4 to America would be more lucrative than dumping sweatshop labor sweatpants because “if al-Qaida used detainee’s textile company for shipping explosives to the US, he would likely be paid additional money beyond the standard shipping fees”. No word on whether there would have been a bonus for every American blown up.
And then things escalated from there with testimony that Paracha allegedly claimed that he, “believed he could obtain unspecified chemicals from Chinese sources”. The fellow he was talking to about the unspecified chemicals, Ammar al-Baluchi, one of the few Gitmo Jihadis whom neither Obama nor Biden had managed to release yet, had helped out the 9/11 hijackers with flight simulators, and manuals, and allegedly chatted with Mohammed Atta.
After 9/11, Al-Baluchi was looking at all sorts of plans for crashing planes into things, like the American consulate in Karachi or London’s Heathrow airport, but there were other options on the table. The nature of the chemicals out of China was never specified, but the KSM lieutenant believed they were” chemical or biological agents” that could be used “as a weapon”.
Paracha reportedly advised Al Qaeda that “one should look for a similar looking chemical and put it in between the good chemicals and it would be very easy to get [through] customs.” With his business experience, he could offer Al Qaeda tips on smuggling such as warning them about the “radiological sensors at ports or places of entry into the US” that would make it difficult to smuggle radioactive materials into the country”.
But Biden’s newest charity case wanted something bigger. The dossier describes the 9/11 mastermind’s associate and Paracha chatting about Al Qaeda getting some “radiological or nuclear items several times” because Paracha wanted “to help al-Qaida ‘do something big against the US.’”
Paracha “also discussed nuclear attacks and attacks against nuclear power plants” and had an idea for “al-Qaida to attack a nuclear power plant”.
So you can see why Joe Biden is letting him go.
Why settle for helping Iran nuke America, when you can also help Al Qaeda nuke America?
The Pakistani graduate of the New York Institute of Technology “expressed strong anti-US sentiment” and allegedly “stated that nuclear weapons should be used against US troops, as thousands of the troops would be killed at once”.
The pro-terror lobby has spent all these years claiming that Paracha was an innocent victim of American imperialism who was never charged with anything and was smeared with confessions obtained by acts of horrifying torture like Barney songs played on a non-stop loop.
Curiously the dossier mentions that Paracha’s diary had “references to military chemical warfare agents, and their effects on humans” including Sarin nerve gas.
But what New York travel agent hasn’t filled his diary with entries about the effects of nerve gas on humans along with the contact information for an alleged Al Qaeda anthrax operative?
You’d have to be an Islamophobe to find anything suspicious about that.
Sadly, none of these plans worked out. Instead the agents of the Great Satan told Palacha that they wanted him to come to Thailand to discuss a deal with Kmart. When Palacha showed up to pitch Kmart reps on a blue light special that might or might not glow in the dark, they weren’t there to get a deal on some Pakistani underwear, but offering a place off Cuba with a view.
Even Obama didn’t set Paracha loose, but Biden is determined to out-Obama him.
The media understandably doesn’t want to trouble Americans with any uncomfortable mentions of nuclear weapons and Chinese chemicals when explaining Biden’s latest gift to Al Qaeda.
The New York Times only mentions that Paracha is “a former businessman and longtime legal resident of New York” and that he has “heart disease, diabetes and high blood pressure”.
Also some years ago a spiritual leader with a Buddhist symbol made famous by an Austrian house painter carved into his forehead died of colon cancer while one of California’s oldest inmates. It’s almost as awful as when that elderly former house painter commited suicide after a long struggle with syphillis along with his new bride in a bunker that Biden would have envied.
The Hill plaintively whines that, “Paracha was the oldest and reportedly among the sickest detainees held at Guantánamo Bay. He suffered from heart disease, diabetes and high blood pressure.” Since Paracha is still alive and the description is in the past tense, we can only assume that being freed by Biden is a cure for heart disease, diabetes, and blood pressure.
If Biden really wants to cure cancer, he can drop all of that moonshot nonsense, all he needs to do is give all of Al Qaeda cancer, and then release them. If it doesn’t cure them, it’ll kill them.
Releasing Paracha might also be a concern for the Brits as the dossier also states that he had discussed with Al-Baluchi “how to smuggle explosives and chemicals into England”.
When Paracha wasn’t exploring the exciting possibilities of nuclear weapons, he met Osama bin Laden on a trip to Afghanistan and “offered to let UBL and al-Qaida use his media broadcasting business to film and distribute propaganda and training films” that would include “depicting UBL quoting Koranic verses”. While a lot of Paracha’s other plots were theoretical, the dossier indicates that Al Qaeda used Paracha’s “video broadcasting facility” to make a movie featuring “a senior Saudi al-Qaida facilitator associated with a cell targeting Americans in Saudi Arabia.”
But no doubt after all that time having to listen to Barney sing, “I Love You, You Love Me” on repeat at Gitmo, with nothing to read except the Koran and Harry Potter novels, Paracha has come around and now loves America. And from now on will commit to only shipping women’s and children’s clothing to Kmart without C4, Chinese chemicals, or nukes.
The other beneficiaries of Biden’s generosity are Uthman Abdul Rahim Mohammed Uthman, an alleged bodyguard for Osama bin Laden, and Abdul Rabbani, allegedly a member of an Al Qaeda cell plotting car bomb attacks against Americans.
Biden intends to continue Obama’s work of freeing all the Islamic terrorists of Gitmo.
Paracha had apparently told American investigators that “he did not think meeting with al-Qaida was a crime, just business”.
Biden clearly doesn’t think aiding Islamic terrorists is a crime either. That’s why he’s doing it.
Fake News Shills for Palestinians, Ignores Genocide of Christians
Ideologically driven hypocrisy.
Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
If all human lives are equally valuable, as the so-called “mainstream media” pretend, why do they highlight some while completely ignoring others?
Take the recent Israeli/Palestinian conflict. For two weeks, day after day, hour after hour, the media showed emotionally-charged videos, pictures, and provided regular updates of Palestinian lives lost, with 248 being the most recent figure.
If the average American was asked why the media so dwelled on this conflict, including by providing regular and updated statistics, their response would likely be that any human death is a terrible and therefore newsworthy matter—hence the media are only doing their job, objectively and fairly.
But if that was really the case, why do the media completely ignore so much other suffering and death—often exponentially worse than what the Palestinians experienced in both quality and quantity—around the world?
Consider the ongoing genocide of Christians in Nigeria, for example. In that west African nation, 248 is about the amount of Christians killed by Muslims every few weeks, going back for some two decades now. According to the most recent report, between January and April of this year alone, 1,470 Christians were hacked to death. On average this comes out to about 368 Christians killed every month for four months straight.
According to a more general report, “Not less than 32,000 Christians have been butchered to death by the country’s main Jihadists” between just 2009 and the first quarter of 2020; 13,000 churches were additionally destroyed by “Allahu Akbar” screaming Muslims since just 2016.
It is only slightly better for Christians in other sub-Saharan nations: in Mozambique, the Central African Republic, Mali, the Democratic Republic of Congo, and Burkina Faso, Muslims are terrorizing and slaughtering Christians, and have been for many years now.
Yet one expects that only a tiny, miniscule percentage of those Americans who heard about killed Palestinians ever heard about the slaughter of tens of thousands of Christians all throughout Africa, since the media seldom report on and certainly never dwell on the latter.
This is all the more irresponsible considering that the reason Christians are being brutally slaughtered—because they are Christians, because Muslims are taught to hate and subjugate the “other”—is certainly more newsworthy, than, say, why Palestinians get killed (terrorism crackdowns and other mundane factors).
Is the media racist, then? Do black lives not matter?
In fact, no lives intrinsically matter for the media; only those that can help push a certain narrative have any value for and are therefore worth reporting by the media. And, increasingly, wherever one looks, that narrative is about demonizing the innocent and/or law-abiding and exonerating the guilty and/or law-breaking.
Thus, every year in America, several thousand blacks, including children, are tragically killed by other blacks (324,000 between just 1979 and 2014). The media could care less. Yet, when one black man, George Floyd, was inadvertently killed during an arrest, the media went ballistic in an effort to further the narrative that all police are “racist.”
Of course, the media never cared about George Floyd; they only cared about using him to demonize the police, whose job it is to maintain law and order.
Similarly, the media does not care about the Palestinians; they only care about using them to demonize Israel, which is also trying to maintain law and order, including by defending itself against nonstop terrorist attacks from its Muslim neighbors.
From here, one also understands why it is that when the shoe is on the other foot—when the guilty butcher the innocent, as Muslims are doing to Christians, not because they are trying to maintain law and order, but because they hate “infidels”—the media is silent: that status quo is fine as is and requires no attention, certainly no amelioration.
John Oliver and Israel’s ‘War Crimes’
Late-night’s useful idiot.
John Oliver is the host of the late-night talk-show “Last Week Tonight.” On May 12, after two days of fighting between Hamas and Israel — the war started with a volley of 140 rockets that Hamas, in Gaza, launched against Israel — Oliver delivered his thoughts on the conflict. He came down hard on Israel. Yuval Yoaz reports on Oliver’s palpable want of sympathy for the Jewish State here: “What John Oliver doesn’t get about the war in Gaza,” Times of Israel, May 21, 2021:
“There is a lot to unpack there,” John Oliver began his opening monologue of “Last Week Tonight” last Sunday, where he sharply criticized Israel for its crushing airstrikes on Gaza strip. “From the use of the phrase ‘tit for tat’ war in a conflict in which one side has suffered over 10 times the casualties, something that speaks to the severe power imbalance that played here.” Oliver’s conclusion: this”severe power imbalance“ often “gets obscured by how we choose to talk about it.”
Oliver is, of course, free to criticize Israel, and, although he himself attests to the great difficulty in judging “the latest chapter in a long story you haven’t read” regarding the conflict in the Middle East, he is also free to draw conclusions and formulate a moral position. But Oliver should do this with the same standard he sets for others. Specifically, he’d better avoid obscuring essential facts in the way he chooses to talk about them.
The prism through which Oliver observes the latest flare-up between Israel and Hamas is that of power disparity. Israel has a strong and sophisticated army, fighter jets, and missile defense systems; Hamas does not. This much is true — there are huge, undeniable gaps in military power between Israel and Hamas.
In fact, the common notion is that these gaps are the exact reason the State of Israel exists: had it not built from the ground up a stronger army force than those of its enemies in the region, it is likely that it would have been erased from the map long ago.
Is Israel to be vilified because it has built up a strong army, allowing it to win every war that has been forced upon it, including three wars – in 1948, 1967, and 1973 – fought for the state’s very survival? Had Israel not had a stronger army, it would not merely have lost bits of territory, but as the Palestinian (and other Arabs) made clear, would have ceased to exist altogether. Does Israel have some kind of obligation to make sure that its military does not become unacceptably stronger than the terror group Hamas? Who decides that Israel must not be so much stronger than Hamas because that would be….”unfair”? On what theory? Were the Americans wrong – was it “unfair” of them — to keep fighting Nazi Germany, destroying its cities, long after the German army had been left in tatters and the Hitler Youth had in desperation been pressed into service, in order to help defend the Fatherland? When the Japanese were clearly beaten, was it wrong for the Americans to drop two atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, killing 140,000 in the first attack and 74,000 in the second? Was that “severe power imbalance” impermissible? Who decides? Is the side that is vastly stronger than its enemy therefore in the wrong for using that power? Should Israel have conducted half as many airstrikes on Hamas in order to correct that “severe imbalance” in power? John Oliver sounds as if that is what he believes.
But that’s not his main issue. Oliver’s primary failure stems from his complete disregard of three basic facts, without which it is impossible to even begin to understand the moral and legal significance of this round of fighting between Israel and Hamas.
- Oliver maintains the erroneous assumption that if there are civilian casualties in a combat situation, it necessarily means that a war crime has been committed;
- Oliver makes no distinction at all between the legitimacy of Hamas’ actions and those of Israel;
- And he makes no attempt to distinguish between what is happening in the Hamas-controlled Gaza strip, in territories controlled by the Palestinian Authority, and in East Jerusalem, which is under Israeli governance.
Going by Oliver’s logic, since innocent women and children were killed in the Israeli bombings, it is clear that Israel is committing war crimes. He therefore expresses anger at the forgiving attitude of the United States towards its “unwavering friend” Israel, instead of doing what Oliver expects a good friend to do — tell him that he is committing war crimes.
The assumptions embedded in Oliver’s argument can be seen, for example, in his critique of the demolition of high-rise buildings in Gaza: “For the record, destroying a civilian residence sure seems like a war crime, regardless of whether you sent a courtesy heads-up text.”
Well… that’s actually not true. It is unpleasant to say this, and it always sounds heartless, but in terms of international law, harming innocent people does not necessarily mean that war crimes were committed. Combat operations can be conducted while adhering to international law, even if the result is that, during the operations, innocent people are harmed.
Israel does not target purely “civilian residences.” It targets places where weapons are hid, where rocket launchers are placed, where senior commanders – fighters not civilians – may live, where intelligence offices and research-and-development offices are located. The much-discussed attack on the Jala tower took place not because Israel wanted to destroy the AP and Al Jazeera offices in that building, but because it was where Hamas weapons development and intelligence offices were located; the Israelis presented their proof of this to the Biden administration, that found their evidence convincing. And as is its consistent practice, the Israelis warned the residents of the Jala tower well in advance of the attack – in this case, an hour before — so as to prevent any civilian casualties.
The laws of war require that the purpose of military action be to strike a combat force. If Israel were to deliberately strike women and children (and all civilian populations not involved in hostilities in general), its actions would have been deemed a serious war crime.
But that is not what Israel is doing. The international law department in the IDF’s prosecution accompanies all combat operations in the Gaza Strip, in order to ensure not only that the targets of the operation are military hostiles, but that all necessary actions are taken to minimize the accompanying harm to civilians.
Israel never deliberately attacks civilians. It recognizes that there will unavoidably be civilian casualties in wartime, and especially when fighting Hamas, given that the terror group deliberately hides its weapons and rocket launchers among civilians, next to or inside private dwellings, office buildings, schools, hospitals, and mosques. Hamas, on the other hand, not only deliberately attacks Israeli civilians, but puts its own civilians in harm’s way, hoping to increase the number killed and wounded, in order to provide Hamas with a propaganda victory against those “war criminal” Israelis.
Israel’s modus operandi is to warn the inhabitants of the buildings it has targeted, giving them anywhere from 15 minutes to two hours of warning. The IAF calls residents or, when they can be located, the owners, of the buildings that are targeted, instructing them to warn others about the need to leave within the time limit given. The IAF also employs the “knock-on-the-roof” technique, its practice of dropping non-explosive or low-yield devices on the roofs of targeted buildings to warn inhabitants to leave.
Here, too — as in other cases — the rules of proportionality apply. The concomitant harm (it is hard to use such clinical words when talking about human life) should be proportionate to the primary military benefit of the concrete action.
One can argue about how Israel applies the rules of proportionality in this context. Is the IDF really making every possible effort to gather intelligence on the presence of “uninvolved” people in the houses and buildings where Hamas is located in the heart of Gaza? Are the guidelines to evacuate a building a few minutes before it is bombed really 100% effective? But it is not legitimate to argue that Israel commits war crimes simply by virtue of civilian casualties in the operations.
The IAF makes endless efforts to warn civilians to leave buildings about to be hit.. It is seldom a warning given just “a few minutes before [a building] is bombed”; for the largest structures, one or two hours warning may be given; in the case of the Jala building (which housed both Hamas intelligence offices and offices of the AP and Al Jazeera), an hour was given. The IAF realizes, of course, that these warnings will allow the Hamas fighters and other operatives to escape as well, but it’s a price Israel is willing to pay to minimize civilian casualties.
Given this extraordinary attention by the IAF to minimizing civilian casualties, is there evidence that Israeli has committed “war crimes”? War crimes were indeed committed in this 11-day war, but not by Israel. The “war crimes” of Hamas were committed against both Israelis and the civilian population in Gaza. For it was Hamas, violating the rules of war, that deliberately fired 4,350 rockets at civilian targets in Israel. That 90% of those rockets were intercepted by Israel, and abut 650 fell short and landed in Gaza, does not mitigate the charge against Hamas of “war crimes.” Hamas behaved in this Gaza war just as it had in its three previous wars with Israel, targeting Israeli civilians, and deliberately endangering its own population by placing weapons, and rocket launchers, in the midst of civilian areas and in civilian buildings. Both are war crimes.
Beyond the general, seemingly self-evident accusation that Israel commits war crimes, Oliver seems completely indifferent to the basic legal difference between Israel’s actions and those of Hamas. In Oliver’s words: “Both sides are firing rockets. But one side has one of the most advanced militaries in the world.”
Well, Israel is a sovereign state and — like any other sovereign state — is allowed to protect its civilian population. Israel is part of the “family of nations” and operates, at least [sic] explicitly, in accordance with the norms of international law.
Hamas, on the other hand, is a terrorist organization that has controlled the Gaza strip for 14 years.
In fact, each of the rockets launched by Hamas at Israel — every single one of them — is a war crime, whether they hit Israelis or land in open areas or are intercepted in the air by the “Iron Dome” system.
Hamas has no intention of harming military targets; it deliberately fires at the civilian population, with the aim of harming them. That is the very definition of a war crime.
Hamas fired 4,350 rockets toward Israeli cities during this latest Gaza war. And while some of those rockets hit civilian targets – leaving gaping holes in houses and apartment buildings — not a single military target, save for one soldier, was hit during the 11 days of fighting. Hamas was more interested in “striking terror” in the hearts of Israel’s civilian population with volleys of rockets fired into cities than in trying to hit the hardened targets of Israel’s military.
Israel is doing everything in its power to minimize the harm not just to its own people, but to civilians in Gaza, as part of its war against a terrorist organization that has placed its weapons and fighters within civilian areas. Meanwhile, Hamas is doing everything in its power to increase the number of casualties among Israeli civilians and its own people.
True, looking at the region from across the Atlantic sometimes makes it difficult to discern nuances. The distance between East Jerusalem and Ramallah and between Ramallah and Gaza is really small, even when you don’t look from afar.
But in terms of international law, there is a complicated system of agreements backed by international norms between Israel and the Palestinian Authority, which controls the West Bank, and it bears no resemblance to the constant state of combat between Israel and Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip. And that is even before we discuss the immeasurably complex legal regime in East Jerusalem.
Mixing all of these may give the impression that Israel controls all Palestinians in all territories that were part of historic Palestine — Gaza, Ramallah, Sheikh Jarrah, they are all the same for the popular HBO host. But they are not the same.
Since 2005, not a single Israeli has been left in Gaza, and following the 2006 elections, the Strip has been ruled despotically by the terror group Hamas. It is absurd to talk about Gaza as “occupied territory” or to claim that Israel “controls Gaza,” as John Oliver seems to think. If the IDF truly “controlled Gaza” there wouldn’t have been 14,000 Hamas rockets stockpiled and ready to rain down death on Israel (4,350 of then have now been used), nor would Hamas have been able to build that vast underground network of tunnels, 250 miles long, used to move weapons and fighters throughout the Strip.
Ramallah is the capital of the PA, headed by the colossally corrupt Mahmoud Abbas, an archenemy of Hamas who is now in the sixteenth-year of his four-year term. The PA is not controlled by Israel; rather, the PA controls the lives of the Palestinians who live in Areas A and B of the West Bank; only Area C remains fully under Israeli control. The PA differs from the terror group Hamas in matters of timing and tactics, but shares the same goal of the ultimate elimination of the Jewish state. While Hamas wishes to expel or kill every Jewish Israeli, the PA is prudently silent on what it would do to the Jews in case of a (highly unlikely) defeat of Israel by Palestinians and its allies such as Iran; it is possible it would allow Israeli Jews to remain as part of a “one-state solution”; those Jews could continue to live in “Palestine” so long as they benefited the Palestinians through their greater industry, inventiveness, and technological prowess. What those Jews living in a future state of “Palestine” — the “one-state solution” that a growing number of Palestinians now favor — could offer the Arabs would no doubt be understood as well-deserved Jizyah.
The conflict over some properties in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah, John Oliver fails to realize, is not part of some Israeli government scheme to “Judaize” East Jerusalem. 209,000 Palestinians live in East Jerusalem; since 1967, they have lived there, without any Israeli attempt to “displace” them. The Sheikh Jarrah dispute has nothing to do with the Israeli government; it is a private property dispute. Jews claiming to be the owners of properties in which four Arab families now live, have presented their evidence of ownership, which has been recognized as valid, not just by Israeli courts, but also by the very Arabs living in those properties. In 1982, and in 2020, Arabs living in the properties admitted that they were owned by the Jewish claimants. But for decades, they have continued to refuse to pay any rent, and they will not move. They no doubt are hoping that a large outcry – including violent riots by Palestinians in East Jerusalem, and howls of protest from the many Israel-haters abroad – everyone from Jeremy Corbyn and Roger Waters to Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib – will prevent the Israeli government from enforcing the law by expelling the Palestinian squatters and putting the true owners back into possession of their properties. John Oliver apparently knows nothing about this property dispute; for him it is just one more example of Israeli aggression and determination to push Arabs out of Jerusalem.
John Oliver is an extremely talented and funny comedian and TV personality. Quite often, he also holds commendable moral grounds. And he’s right: a friend should be told when he’s being an idiot.
Neither you nor I is a friend of John Oliver. But we’d nonetheless like to join in, and add our voices to the chorus of those who want to tell him that when it comes to Israel and Hamas, John Oliver, “you are certainly being an idiot.”
The Middle East Dispute Is About Religion, Not Land
Why the Muslims really seek Israel’s destruction.
If you’ve seen videos of recent attacks on Jews in New York City, Los Angeles, London and elsewhere, you may have missed a very revealing aspect of those attacks. They were almost always — as they have been for decades — accompanied by curses such as, “F—- the Jews.”
Now, given that the perpetrators are almost always Muslims — whether immigrants or children of immigrants from an Arab or other Muslim country — two questions present themselves:
Why attack American or French or British Jews? And why curse “the Jews”? In other words, given that the recent wars have been between Hamas and Israel, why aren’t these attacks outside of Israel on Israelis and Israeli institutions? And why level curses at “the Jews”?
The answer is this: The Muslims who seek Israel’s destruction do so because Israel is Jewish, not because Israel occupies the West Bank or Gaza.
First, the Muslim world sought Israel’s destruction from the day Israel was established in May 1948, before it occupied a centimeter of the West Bank or Gaza.
Second, Israel does not occupy Gaza. Israel withdrew completely from Gaza 16 years ago.
Third, the Palestinians rejected a state of their own five times:
Rejection No. 1: In 1937, the British Peel Commission offered the Arabs 80% of the geographical area known as Palestine. The Jews were offered 20%. The Arabs rejected it.
Rejection No. 2: In 1947, the Arabs rejected the United Nations partition plan.
Rejection No. 3: In 1967, in the course of defeating the attempt by Egypt, Syria and Jordan to destroy Israel, Israel conquered the West Bank from Jordan, Gaza from Egypt and the Golan Heights from Syria. Most Israelis had no interest in retaining Gaza or almost any part of the West Bank except for East Jerusalem, the Jewish city in which Jews have lived for 3,000 years, from 1,400 years before Muhammad was born. The Palestinians, as the Arabs of Palestine came to be known, and all the Arab states rejected partition and peace.
Rejection No. 4: In 2000, at Camp David, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat a Palestinian state in all of Gaza and 94% of the West Bank (Set ITAL)with East Jerusalem as its capital. But Arafat rejected the offer. In the words of U.S. President Bill Clinton, Arafat was “here 14 days and said no to everything.”
Rejection No. 5: In 2008, Israel tried again. Prime Minister Ehud Olmert went even further than Ehud Barak had, expanding the peace offer to include additional land to sweeten the deal. The Palestinians said no, again.
The reason for all these Palestinian/Arab rejections of a state of their own was that it meant a Jewish state in the Middle East still existed.
The Middle East dispute has never been about land. Israel is the size of New Jersey. It is slightly larger than El Salvador. If it were the size of Manhattan, the Palestinians and many Muslim states would still seek its destruction. There are 22 Arab states in the Middle East, but there is no room for one Jewish state. There is even a state with a Palestinian majority: Jordan. The issue is not land. The issue is religion.
Why is Iran wholly preoccupied with destroying Israel? It has nothing to do with Muslim solidarity; the Iranians don’t give a damn about Palestinians. It is entirely about hatred of Jews and the Jewish state. If the Iranians cared about fellow Muslims, they would be targeting China, which is accused by the United States and other Western countries of committing genocide against the Uyghurs — a predominately Muslim ethnic group that lives in China — a charge that includes forced sterilization of Uyghur women.
Westerners want to believe it is about land — in part because they are secular and think in secular terms. And in part because they need to believe that the dispute is about land. Only then can they blame Israel. If it were about a Muslim desire to destroy the Jewish state, they could no longer blame Israel. Even worse: They would have to blame Islamist fanaticism.
Stop Jew-Hate: End Islamist Immigration
Filling American cities with anti-Semitic Muslim mobs.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.
In 2015, The Atlantic ran a cover story titled, “Is It Time for the Jews to Leave Europe?”
In 2021, the question is whether it’s time for the Jews to leave New York and Los Angeles.
The magazine cover story mentioned Malmo. Most stories about antisemitism in Europe reference the Swedish city whose Jewish population dropped from 3,000 to barely 800. Current estimates are that Malmo will have no Jews left by the end of the decade as its population flees Muslim mob violence, firebombings, and random assaults: including 100 aimed at its sole rabbi.
“I hear students shouting in the hallway about killing Jews,” a public school teacher described. Firebombs are routinely thrown at Jewish institutions. Mobs have torn down gates to try to smash their way inside. A Swedish journalist who conducted a hidden camera investigation of what happens to anyone visibly Jewish was harassed within moments of sitting down to eat.
Americans who wondered how this could happen in Europe are now seeing it at home.
There’s nothing confusing about ‘how’ or ‘why’. Or as a CBC article about Malmo gingerly put it, “Anti-Semitism in Malmö reveals flaws in Swedish immigration system”. There are equally big flaws in our immigration system and too many Jewish groups have wasted time on outreach instead of working toward immigration reform to stop the ‘Malmoization’ of New York and LA.
Estimates of the size of the Muslim population in the United States doubled since 9/11.
Islamists claim that there are over 750,000 Muslim settlers in New York City, making up around 9% of the population, and operating hundreds of mosques across the five boroughs. Those numbers may be overstated, but there’s no denying that there are far more Muslims now. And much of the growth has happened at the lower end leading to a large young male population.
The viral videos of antisemitic attacks by mobs of young Muslim men are the outcome.
Like many European cities, New York City now has a large, angry population of young Muslim men who are looking to lash out. And Jews are an easy target. When Waseem Awawdeh was arrested over a vicious assault on a Jewish accountant, he declared, “If I could do it again, I would do it again,” and then received a hero’s welcome on his release.
New York City now hosts the largest Muslim population in the country. Los Angeles, the scene of more antisemitic mob attacks, hosts another of the country’s largest Muslim populations. Before 9/11, there were less than 100,000 Muslims in Los Angeles County. Even accounting for Islamist overestimates, the number has grown significantly.
Like NYC, LA is becoming ‘Malmoized’.
There are still enough Jews in both cities that the Democrat politicians offer token condemnations and ask the local police to make a few arrests. As the demographics continue to shift away from Jews and toward Muslims, they’ll react the way that Ilmar Reepalu, Malmo’s former mayor did, when he blamed Israel for the antisemitic attacks on Jews by Muslims.
The AOC crowd already echoes this type of rhetoric on social media. And George Soros, who funds much of the American Left, had made this exact argument two decades ago. “Attitudes toward the Jewish community are influenced by the pro-Israel lobby’s success in suppressing divergent views,” the former Nazi collaborator had argued.
But that’s only to be expected of an antisemitic movement. American Jews however spent a generation watching European Jews being driven out and did little with that time. After all these years of consuming articles about the fate of the Jews of Paris, Berlin, and Malmo, they went on supporting mass Muslim migration because they were told it was the right thing to do.
When President Trump tried to implement a ban on travel from Muslim terror states, the ZOA became the only Jewish organization to file a Supreme Court brief in defense of the move.
The ADL signed on to every HIAS push against the move to protect Americans from Islamic terror, alongside anti-Israel groups like J Street, Soros’ Bend the Arc, and T’ruah. HIAS, T’ruah, and Avodah, a feeder group for the anti-Israel movement funded by Steven Spielberg, showed up to a Linda Sarsour protest. Rallying for Muslim migration mattered more than antisemitism.
While Orthodox Jews stayed out of the protests, not counting Uri L’Tzedek, a component of the heretical leftist Yeshivat Chovevei Torah crowd, the Orthodox Union’s Nathan Diament put out a shameful statement comparing Syrian migrants to Jews fleeing the Nazi Holocaust.
Fortunately, the National Council of Young Israel took a stand, calling the obscene analogy “highly offensive to those Jews who survived Nazi persecution.”
As I wrote at the time, “when one of Diament’s migrants attacks Jews, they will not be able to say, ‘Our hands did not shed this blood and our eyes did not see it.’” Now the blood is being shed and the OU is co-signing letters calling for an antisemitism monitor as if the problem lies in a lack of monitoring rather than the inevitable crisis of Islamist immigration and demographics.
American Jews have followed the same failed strategy as European Jews.
“After two Muslim teenagers attempted to set fire to Malmo’s synagogue last March, HaCohen and Barakat telephoned their school principal, then visited the class the next day to discuss the incident. ‘We did not point out the kids,’ Barakat says, explaining they used the time to give a lesson about anti-Semitism, rather than punish them,” a Time Magazine article cheerfully notes.
The suicidal hobby of handing out lessons about antisemitism to synagogue burners continues.
Integrating the fight against antisemitism into broader leftist movements against bigotry has failed miserably because the central premise of intersectionality and anti-racism is that some people, privileged white people in general and Jews in particular, deserve to be hated.
The collapse of a liberal middle class into dueling Marxist and Fascist youth mobs is mainstreaming antisemitism in America the way that it already has in Europe. But the heavy lifting will still be done by young men whose parents came here from Iraq, Pakistan, or Gaza that we’ve seen assaulting random Jewish people in New York and Los Angeles.
The cries of “Kill Jews, Free Palestine” are not a horrid aberration: they’re the new normal.
The one thing that could have stopped this and perhaps still might would be for American Jews to be willing to say the unspeakable: that some people belong in this country and others don’t.
The idea that immigration should be a mutual social contract instead of a suicide pact is profoundly alien to everything that millions of Americans, Jews and Christians, have absorbed over the years. Beyond the Christian churches and HIAS which lobby to resettle more Islamists in America, much of the country is wedded to the idea that we must take anyone who comes.
But when we take anyone who comes, then we’re the ones who get taken for a ride.
While our streets are filled with the homeless and unemployed Americans are dying of drug overdoses at record rates, churches and temples lecture their parishioners on their moral duty to bring more Iraqis, Syrians, and Pakistanis to America. But 9/11 and the occasional terror attack in a major city are just the appetizers of Islamist demographic colonization.
The next stage, mob violence by what the European press carefully calls “angry youths”, is now underway in New York and Los Angeles. It won’t stop there. The era of the “lone wolf” Jihadi hasn’t ended yet, but the future of Islamic terror in America will be group attacks, like those in Bataclan in Paris, and more routine riots and mass assaults abetted by their leftist allies.
Jews in New York City are the easiest targets, but as the Swedes or the French could tell you, or the Poles and the Czechs, it rarely ends there.
Muslim violence isn’t a response to oppression or persecution. It’s a supremacist theological mission to colonize and subjugate non-Muslims as numerous Jihadis have told us at their trials.
We chose not to take them at their word.
Israel is not the issue. Just as Mohammed cartoons, a teddy bear with the wrong name, or false reports of a desecrated Koran were not the real issues at the heart of other Muslim rampages.
When thugs and terrorists want to beat and kill people, they can always find an excuse.
Listening to their excuses and taking them seriously is almost as dumb as visiting their countries or letting them inside your country long enough for them to kill you. If we want to survive, we’re going to have to stop being dumb. Otherwise we’ll learn to live and die like they do in Malmo.
It happened in Europe. Now it’s happening here.
If American Jews want to stop antisemitism, they need to stop importing it from the antisemitic capitals of the world. Really fighting antisemitism means fighting antisemitic immigration.
Or investing in bulletproof windows while educating synagogue burners about antisemitism.
Inside Hamas’ Hate
A journey into the Heart of Darkness.
There is ongoing incitement by the radical Muslims and their supporters against Israel using lies and deception. These actions are preparing their supporters to use and implement the concept of Jihad, to act against the Infidel in general, and against the Jews in particular.
Recently, there has been a confluence of several factors which gave the terror-supporting Iran and their proxy Hamas the miscalculated incentive to rally their oblivious supporters, and try to liquidate the state of Israel and gain power.
The initial excuse for the Arab confrontation in Jerusalem, was associated with two big lies:
1. “The Jews decides to evict innocent Palestinians from their homes in Jerusalem” – This is a lie. The fact is that this dispute is related to a long-standing refusal of four Arab squatter Families to pay rent to their Jewish landlords. This case was deliberated in the Israeli courts for many years and now it seems that the courts, that have already ruled to recognize the ownership of the Jews of these houses in the past, clarified that the Arab tenants refusal to pay rent is against the law. There is a pending Supreme Court decision which may decide that the squatters should be removed form these houses, which do not belong to them.
2. “The Israeli police decided to attack peaceful Muslim worshipers on Temple Mount” – This too is a lie. The fact is that following violence by some Radical Muslims and by few Radical Jews, Arab Palestinian agitators and Hamas supporters piled up fire bombs, firecrackers and rocks on the Temple Mount and in the Al Aqsa Mosque, and used them to attack the Jewish worshipers at the Western Wall Plaza, about 70 feet below them. The police had to go into the involved areas on Temple Mount, in order to stop these terror attacks and riots which spilled over also into other locations in Jerusalem and into other cities in Israel.
Hamas gave an ultimatum to Israel on May the 10th to leave the Temple Mount and the Sheikh Jarrah areas, and release by 6:00 pm all the Arab rioters that were caught and arrested by the Israeli police. Israel ignored this insane ultimatum, and Hamas started a massive assault on Jerusalem and other Israeli locations, launching multiple rockets from within their own civilian population, into the Israeli civilian population, in order to initiate and support a wider Jihad against Israel. They were hoping that it would involve even more of the brainwashed Israeli Arab Citizens and many of their international supporters around the world. Unfortunately, even many Media outlets fell prey for these maliciously calculated terror waves. Seeing civilian casualties is horrible, but when the casualties are caused by malicious calculation of a terror organization which planned to create this human disaster, it makes it even worse. Some of these casualties came despite the careful defensive Israeli efforts to stop the Hamas rocket launchers and the attempt to destroy the Hamas infrastructure which supported this terror effort. In addition, many Palestinian casualties were caused by the misfired rockets which were launched by Hamas, which were aimed at Israeli civilians, but hit their own population.
Encouraged, incited and financed by Iran, Qatar, Turkey and others, the Hamas Terror organization was emboldened also by the following additional contributing factors:
1. It seemed that the formation of the Israeli Government is complicated due to a variety of personal agendas of some of the people within the recently elected members to the Knesset. The assumption was that the Israeli Government is weak and that it can be exploited.
2. The Right and the Left leaning Israeli parties tried to negotiate a joint political venture with one of the anti Israeli Arab parties, a possibility of their participation in the creation the new Israeli Government coalition. This empowered some in the Arab rioters who were hoping to be able to eventually control the Israeli Government the way that the Hezbollah is controlling the Government of Lebanon. Others wanted to prevent any collaboration between Jews and Arabs, as they were hoping to continue to exploit the hostility between the Jews and the Arabs to their nefarious agendas.
3. The new American administration, which unfortunately includes some vicious anti-Israeli and anti- Jewish politicians, appeared to be very weak, as it gave in to the Arab Palestinians demands and allowed them to open their offices in Washington and sent them hundreds of millions of dollars, without conditioning this move on stopping incitement in their schools and all other communication outlets, stopping payments to terrorists and to their families, and dismantling their terror infrastructure.
In addition, the Americans have allowed transfer of billions of dollars to the Iranians, as they are trying to return to the irrational Iran Nuclear Deal. This move is despite the fact that Iran did not live up to any previous agreements, continued their effort to build nuclear weapons and continues to support terrorism all over the world and in particular in the Middle East.
The combination of these political moves gave the impression to Hamas and the Palestinian Authority, that the new American administration is less willing to support their long standing loyal ally, the state of Israel.
4. Hamas was very upset with the Palestinian Authority due to the fact that under the presidency of Abbas, they have canceled the recent elections. The self-serving corrupt Abbas and his cronies, who were elected to serve for four years, are still in office after more than 15 years. They were afraid that if they go for elections, Hamas would take over the leadership of the Palestinians and destroy the current Palestinian leadership, the way that they did in 2008 after the past elections in Gaza.
This opportunity is allowing the terror organization Hamas and its allies to try and show to their people that they are the real leaders of the Palestinians, and therefore, they should be the group in charge.
As of today, even after launching about 3500 rockets at Israeli civilians, Hamas and the Arab Israeli Rioters are miscalculating the resolve of the state of Israel to defend its citizens, to stop this wave of terrorism and to restore law and order, in the ancestral homeland of the Jewish people, to the benefit of all its citizens.
Hopefully, Hamas, the rioters and their supporters, will realize that their futile round of violence will not allow them to destroy Israel. Once they will realize that, hopefully, peaceful coexistence can be implemented, after stopping incitement and dismantling terror infrastructure, to the benefit of Jews, Arabs and all other peace-loving individuals.