Archive for November 13, 2015

« WarSclerotic home page

Martin Indyk’s latest low

November 13, 2015

Martin Indyk’s latest low, Israel Hayom, Ruthie Blum, November 13, 2015

(The absurd Israeli objection to being murdered by peace-loving Palestinian heroes is the obstacle to peace. Why can’t they just trust them? The Fogel Family of Itmar could not be reached for comment. — DM)

Just when you thought you’d heard it all from professional peace promoter Martin Indyk, he goes and one-ups himself. The ability to do so when the policies he has espoused over the decades have consistently backfired is an accomplishment in and of itself. And it explains why he was appointed twice to serve as U.S. ambassador to Israel and also filled the role of assistant secretary of state for Near East affairs.

Indyk, author of “Innocent Abroad: An Intimate Account of American Peace Diplomacy in the Middle East,” has always held the position that an accord is possible between Israel and the Palestinians — if the “two sides” would only trust one another. This, of course, is why he was a perfect fit for Secretary of State John Kerry, under whom he was dispatched to Israel as an envoy to broker a deal.

Well, that didn’t work out so well, and he quit after nine months to return to his full-time job as director of foreign policy at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. He, like many peace processers, feels more at home presenting global strategies in a think tank than confronting the need for actual tanks in the real Middle East the rest of us occupy.

This is not to say that Indyk is uncomfortable in Israel. On the contrary, he loves visiting the country where he is treated like a king by the chattering classes, while enjoying a cappuccino or two from balconies overlooking the Mediterranean.

So it was no surprise that he attended the Israel Conference on Peace, hosted by the left-wing daily Haaretz at Tel Aviv’s David Intercontinental Hotel this week, to wow the crowd with regurgitated slogans about why war keeps getting in the way of their aspirations for — you know — peace.

That he attributed this to Israeli intransigence was to be expected. His call on the public to grasp that a two-state solution is the only viable path — and that the Palestinians would be true “partners” if only Israel would withdraw from more territory — was also cause for a yawn, as was his dig at the Netanyahu government.

“To allow your leaders to convince you that you are victims and have to live by the sword is to give way to hopeless future for your people,” he said, repeating a line he has been spouting for years, and adding a lie for good measure: “The creeping annexation of land which is continuing apace will make it impossible” to come to an agreement with the PA.

His failure to remember that Israel relinquished most of the land in question to the Palestinians, whose response was and continues to be to slaughter Jews, was par for the course. Indeed, nobody mentioned the irony of the fact that last year’s Haaretz peace conference was interrupted by air raid sirens as Hamas fired rockets into Tel Aviv from Gaza, territory from which Israel had forcibly yanked out all Jews in 2005; and this year’s gathering was taking place amid Palestinian stabbing, shooting, fire-bombing and car-ramming attacks.

Nor was Indyk’s reference to late Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin cause for pause. There is nothing as tried and true as resurrecting the dead to claim that if he had lived, things would have been different. You know, because, according to Indyk, Rabin “had the trust of the Israeli people, and the trust of Yasser Arafat.”

All one can do when faced with such a preposterous assertion is guffaw.

On the issue of Syria, Indyk engaged in similar sophistry, resting on questionable logic. “For the historical record,” he said, “five Israeli prime ministers, including Netanyahu, offered a full withdrawal from the Golan. … If you want to ask, ‘Where would you have been if’ — you would have been where you are with Egypt today: A revolution and a counterrevolution later, you still have a peace treaty with them. Guess what? ISIS [Islamic State] is in the Sinai, but you have an arrangement with Egypt under which you can help fight ISIS.”

Huh?

Israel tried to make peace with Syria by giving up the Golan Heights and was rejected. And this, like the bloody civil war in which pro-Assad regime forces and rebels are massacring each other, is Israel’s fault?

Yes, Indyk bemoaned, had Israel reached a deal with Syria in the past, “It would have transformed the Israeli-Arab conflict in a dramatic way. We missed the opportunity for a comprehensive peace between Israel and its neighbors — Lebanon would have followed as well. Problems with Hezbollah would have been in an entirely different context. And the U.S. would have remained the dominant power in the region. You can trace the arc of the decline of American influence in the region to that moment, when we failed to get the Syrian deal.”

Mr. Indyk, with all undue respect, the “decline of American influence” can be traced to the election of President Barack Obama. To blame Israel for that travesty goes beyond your usual chutzpah. Kudos for letting your immoral compass guide you to new low levels of discourse that, fortunately, most Israelis are no longer listening to.

Categories: Israel, Kerry, Martin Indyk, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian heroes, Palestinians and Jews

Comments: Be the first to comment

Terrorist Kills Two Israelis as Palestinian Incitement Continues to Spread

November 13, 2015

Terrorist Kills Two Israelis as Palestinian Incitement Continues to Spread, Investigative Project on Terrorism, November 13, 2015

A Palestinian terrorist shot and killed a father and son, wounding another youth in the south Mount Hebron region on Friday after firing at their vehicle, the Jerusalem Post reports.

The Israeli military is searching for the gunmen.

Hamas glorified the “heroic” murders without claiming responsibility. Moreover, Palestinian sources told the Jerusalem Post that people are handing out candy in the streets in Gaza to celebrate the terrorist attack.

In the past few months, Fatah-run TV has regularly broadcast a famous Palestinian song that encourages violence against Jews, reports Palestinian Media Watch (PMW). Other popular incitement songs are being played in Ramallah’s streets, specifically calling for Palestinians to riot, throw rocks, and attack innocent Israelis with “cleavers and knives.”

“The owner of the stall selling discs on Al-Irsal Street [in Ramallah] said that the discs of national songs make up 90% of his sales at the moment because the prevailing national sentiment causes people to buy them… From another stall near the El-Bireh cultural center the song ‘I come out to you, my enemy, from every home, neighborhood and street’ is heard,” according to a Nov. 2 article in the Palestine National Authority daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida and translated by PMW.

That song was posted on Fatah’s official Facebook page last November, shortly after terrorists killed five Israelis in a Jerusalem synagogue, using butchers’ knives and firearms. Last month, Rabbi Yehiel Rothman succumbed to wounds inflicted almost a year after the attack.

These latest examples demonstrate that Mahmoud Abbas’ Fatah party and official Palestinian Authority institutions continue to fuel violent incitement against Jews and Israelis, which in turn is promoted broadly by Palestinian society.

Since the beginning of October, Palestinians have waged a violent uprising targeting innocent Israelis and security personnel in a wave of stabbing, vehicular, rock throwing, and Molotov cocktail attacks. The violence has killed 11 Israelis and injured numerous others. Nearly 80 Palestinians also have been killed as a result – many of whom were alleged attackers killed at the scene, while others died during confrontations with Israeli soldiers.

Categories: Abbas, Fatah, Hamas, Israel, Palestinian Authority, Palestinian heroes, Palestinians and Jews, Peace process
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

An American Fascism

November 13, 2015

An American Fascism, Front Page Magazine, David Horowitz, November 12, 2015

(Many of those who oppose freedom of speech also oppose Israel and maintain that “Palestinians” must be helped to eliminate her. Please see also, Selective Outrage on Campus. Their momentum appears to be increasing and the ability of those who oppose them appears to be diminishing. When will it be too late to oppose them effectively?– DM)

click

The racist, McCarthyite, totalitarian movement rearing its ugly head on college campuses as diverse as Missouri, Yale and Vanderbilt is being treated by conservatives as a case of kids too fragile to handle views with which they disagree. This may work as a debating tactic but it misunderstands both the malignancy of the politics behind the campaign and the ferocity of its radical leaders. Now they are calling for the heads of liberals (and getting them). But quaint American prejudices like the First Amendment still stand in their way. But for how long? If this movement, which includes large contingents of the Democratic Party – including the president, achieves critical mass and succeeds in its agendas and acquires the necessary power, who can doubt that they will be putting dissenters in prison and worse? These are people intoxicated with their own virtue, and determined to purge non-believers in their path. They are a perfect analogue to the Islamic fanatics who want to purify the planet. While the Islamic fanatics behead, the American fanatics suppress and burn. At bottom, they see the world in parallel terms: Slay the infidels wherever you find them.

The current eruptions on college campuses, which will be escalating through this year, are the product of four decades of capitulations to leftwing racism and political correctness, which is a totalitarian party line whose inventor Mao Zedong murdered 70 million Chinese in its name. America still has strong traditions of intellectual pluralism and individual rights, which are obstacles in the way of the progressive storm troopers, but for how long? How many capitulations by so-called liberals, how many unconstitutional executive orders, how many coercions by Democrat-controlled government agencies before there are no obstacles left?

We saw these lynch mobs first hand in Ferguson, but only an inaudible few were willing to name them for what they were. In Ferguson, the president of the United States supported the lynchers, along with the Democratic Party and the leftwing chorus. And so it spread to New York and Baltimore and now Missouri and Yale. The time has come to call this for what it is, an American fascism.  But the time is also getting late to reverse the tide.

Categories: Academia, Antisemitism, Freedom of speech, Israel, Jewish occupation of Israel, Jewish state, Palestinian heroes, Palestinians and Jews
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Sweden Descends into Anarchy

November 13, 2015

Sweden Descends into Anarchy, The Gatestone Institute, Ingrid Carlqvist, November 13, 2015

(Might a bit of “anarchy” be better than a gross excess of multiculturalism? — DM)

  • “You have to understand that Swedes are really scared when an asylum house opens in their village. They can see what has happened in other places.” — Salesman for alarm systems.
  • Since Parliament decided in 1975 that Sweden should be multicultural and not Swedish, crime has exploded. Violent crime has increased by over 300% and rapes have increased by an unbelievable 1,472%.
  • Many Swedes see the mass immigration as a forced marriage: Sweden is forced to marry a man she did not choose, yet she is expected to love and honor him, even though he beats her and treats her badly. Her parents (the government) tell her to be warm and show solidarity with him.
  • “Are the State and I now in agreement that our mutual contract is being renegotiated?” — Alexandra von Schwerin, whose farm who was robbed three times. Police refused to help.

Once upon a time, there was a safe welfare state called Sweden, where people rarely locked their doors.

Now, this country is a night-watchman state — each man is on his own. When the Minister of Justice, Morgan Johansson, encourages breaking the law, it means opening the gates to anarchy. Mr. and Mrs. Swede have every reason to be worried, with the influx of 190,000 unskilled and unemployed migrants expected this year — equivalent to 2% of Sweden’s current population. The number is as if 6.4 million penniless migrants who did not speak English arrived in U.S. in one year, or 1.3 million in Britain.

And the Swedes are preparing: demand for firearms licenses is increasing; more and more Swedes are joining shooting clubs and starting vigilante groups. After a slight dip in 2014, the number of new gun permits has gone up significantly again this year. According to police statistics, there are 1,901,325 licensed guns, owned by 567,733 people, in Sweden. Add to this an unknown number of illegal weapons. To get a gun permit in Sweden, you need to be at least 18 years old; law-abiding; well-behaved, and have a hunting license or be a member of an approved shooting club. In 2014, 11,000 people got a hunting license: 10% more than the year before. One out of five was a woman.

“There is also a high demand for alarm systems right now,” says a salesman at one of the security companies in an interview with Gatestone.

“It is largely due to the turbulence we are seeing around the country at the moment.” People have lost confidence in the State, he added. “The police will not come anymore. Truck drivers say that when they see a thief emptying the fuel tank of their trucks, they run out with a baseball bat. It is no use calling the police, but if you hit the thief, you can at least prevent him from stealing more diesel. Many homeowners say the same thing: they sleep with a baseball bat under the bed. But this is risky: the police can then say you have been prepared to use force, and that might backfire on you.”

The salesman, who asked to remain anonymous, also spoke of Sweden’s many Facebook groups, in which people in different villages openly discuss how they intend to protect themselves: “Sometimes you get totally freaked out when you see what they are writing. But you have to understand that Swedes are really scared when an asylum house opens in their village. They can see what has happened in other places.”

One blog, detailing the consequences for the local population when an asylum facility opens, is aptly named Asylkaos (“Asylum Chaos”). There is a list of companies the reader is prompted to boycott; the blog claims these businesses encourage the transformation of Sweden to a multicultural society, and are therefore considered “hostile to Swedes.”

At another security company, a salesman said that every time the Immigration Service buys or rents a new housing facility, his firm is swamped with calls. “The next day,” he said, “half the village calls and wants to buy alarm systems.”

Ronny Fredriksson, spokesman of the security company Securitas, said that the demand for home alarm systems first exploded about six years ago, when many local police stations were shut down and police moved to the main towns. This, he said, could result in response times of several hours. “More and more people now employ the services of our security guards. Shopping malls and stores in the city come together and hire guards. We are kind of like the ‘local beat’ cops of old.”

Even though Securitas makes big money from the increased need for home security alarms and security guards, Fredriksson says they also are worried about the effect on society:

“The problem is that we too need the police. When our guards catch a burglar or a violent person, we call the police but the response times are often very long. Sometimes, the detainees get violent and quite rowdy. On occasion, the police have told us to release the person we have apprehended, if we have his identity, because they do not have a patrol nearby.”

Even before the massive influx of migrants in the fall of 2015, Swedes felt a need to protect themselves — and with good reason. Since the Parliament decided in 1975 that Sweden should be multicultural and not Swedish, crime has exploded. Violent crime has increased by more than 300%, and rapes have increased by an unbelievable 1,472%.

The politicians, however, ignore the people’s fear completely. It is never discussed. Instead, the people who express concern about what kind of country Sweden has become are accused of xenophobia and racism. Most likely, that is the reason more and more people are taking matters into their own hands, and protecting themselves and their families to the best of their ability.

All the same, some people do not settle for that. It seems some people are trying to stop mass immigration to Sweden. Almost every day there are reports of fires being set at asylum houses. So far, miraculously, no one has been hurt.

These fires are set not only by Swedes. On October 13, a 36-year-old woman living in Skellefteå was convicted of setting fire to the asylum facility in which she herself resided. The woman claimed she lit a candle and then fell asleep. Yet forensic evidence showed that a combustible fluid had been doused throughout the room, and the court found beyond a reasonable doubt that she herself had ignited the fire.

1341Left: The burned remains of a home for asylum seekers in Munkedal, Sweden, after it was torched last month. Right: There are nearly 2 million licensed guns, owned by 567,733 people, in Sweden.

The number of violent incidents at Sweden’s Immigration Service facilities is now sky-high. In 2013, according to Dispatch International, at least one incident happened every day. When Gatestone Institute recently acquired the incident list for January 1, 2014 through October 29, 2015, that number had risen to 2,177 incidents of threats, violence and brawls — on average, three per day.

The Swedish government, however, would apparently rather not talk about that. Foreign Minister Margot Wallström conceded, in an interview with the daily Dagens Nyheter that garnered international attention, that Sweden is, in fact, heading for a systemic breakdown:

“Most people seem to think we cannot maintain a system where perhaps 190,000 people will arrive every year. In the long run, our system will collapse. This welcome is not going to receive popular support. We want to give people who come here a worthy reception.”

Symptomatic of Swedish journalists, this statement was tucked away at the end of the article. The headline was about how the political party that is critical of immigration, the Sweden Democrats Party (Sverigedemokraterna), is responsible for the asylum-housing fires. But foreign media, such as The Daily Mail and Russia Today, picked up Wallström’s warning about a systemic collapse and ran it as the urgent news it actually is.

Nevertheless, in official Sweden, the imminent collapse is ignored. Instead, journalists exclusively focus on attacks by supposedly “racist” Swedes on refugee centers. To prevent new fires, the Immigration Service decided on October 28 that from now on, all asylum facilities would have secret addresses. And meager police resources will now be stretched even further — to protect asylum seekers. Police helicopters will even patrol refugee centers. But considering there are only five helicopters available, and that Sweden’s landmass is 407,340 square km (157,274 square miles), this gesture is effectively empty.

At a meeting with the Nordic Council in Reykjavik, Iceland, on October 27, Sweden’s Prime Minister, Stefan Löfven, was questioned by his Nordic colleagues about the situation in Sweden. Löfven had recently said that, “We should have the option of relocating people applying for asylum in Sweden to other EU-countries. Our ability, too, has a limit. We are facing a paradigm shift.” That comment led a representative of Finland’s Finns Party (Sannfinländarna) to wonder, with a hint of irony, how mass immigration to Sweden, which for years Swedish politicians have touted as being so profitable, has now suddenly become a burden.

Another Finns Party representative, Simon Elo, pointed out that the situation in Sweden is out of control. “Sweden has great abilities, but not even the Swedes have abilities that great,” Elo said.

When Löfven was asked how he is dealing with the real concerns and demands of the citizenry, his answer was laconic: “Of course I understand there is concern,” Löfven said. “It is not easy. But at the same time — there are 60 million people on the run. This is also about them being our fellow men, and I hope that viewpoint will prevail.”

The daily tabloid Expressen asked Löfven about the attacks on asylum facilities. He replied, “Our communities should not be characterized by threats and violence, they should be warm and show solidarity.”

As if such behavior can be forced.

Many Swedes see mass immigration as a forced marriage: Sweden is forced to marry a man she did not choose, yet she is expected to love and honor him even though he beats her and treats her badly. And on top of that, her parents (the government) tell her to be warm and show solidarity with him.

More and more Swedish commentators are now drawing the same conclusion: that Sweden is teetering on the brink of collapse. Editorial columnist Ivar Arpi of the daily Svenska Dagbladet, wrote an astonishing article on October 26, about a woman named Alexandra von Schwerin and her husband. The couple lives on the Skarhults Estate farm in Skåne in southern Sweden; they have been robbed three times. Most recently, they were robbed of a quad bike, a van and a car. When the police arrived, von Schwerin asked them what she should do. The police told her that they could not help her. “All our resources are on loan to the asylum reception center in Trelleborg and Malmö,” they said. “We are overloaded right now. So I suggest you get in touch with the vigilante group in Eslöv.”

What the police had called a “vigilante group” turned out to be a group of private business owners. In 2013, after being robbed more or less every night, they had decided to come together and start patrolling the area themselves. Currently, they pay a security firm to watch their facilities.

“On principal, I am totally against it,” von Schwerin said. “What are the people who cannot afford private security to do? They will be unprotected. I’m sure I will join, but very, very reluctantly. For the first time, I feel scared to live here now. Are the State and I now in agreement that our mutual contract is being renegotiated?”

Commenting on the police’s encouraging people to join vigilante groups, social commentator and former Refugee Ombudsman Merit Wager wrote:

“So, the Swedes are supposed to arrange and pay for their own and their families’ security and keep their farms from being subjected to theft, even though that has up to now been included in the social contract — for which we pay high taxes, to have police we can count on to protect us and apprehend criminals?! When did the social contract expire? October 2015? Without any notice of termination, since the tax-consuming party is not fulfilling its part of the deal? This should mean that our part of the deal – to pay taxes for public, joint services — has also become invalid? If the social contract is broken, it is broken. Then it is musical chairs (lawlessness, defenselessness, without protection), and that means that each and every one of us should pay less taxes.”

Ilan Sadé, lawyer and social commentator, wrote about the refugee chaos at Malmö Central Train Station on the blog Det Goda Samhället on October 27: “The authorities no longer honor the social contract.” He described four large signs on display around the station that read “Refugee? Welcome to Malmö!” in four different languages.

“It is unclear who the sender of the message is, or, for that matter, who is in charge of the reception facility — a number of barracks by the old post office in the inner harbor. Everything is utterly confusing. It could be Malmö City or the Immigration Service, but it might as well be ‘Refugees Welcome,’ or possibly a religious community. I think to myself that a government agency could not reasonably write like this, a correct and pertinent sign would say something like: ‘Asylum seekers are referred to the barracks for information and further transport.’ But I am probably wrong; Malmö City is the chief suspect communicant. … The signs in and around the Central Station are symptoms of something incredibly serious: Role confusion and the decay of the constitutional state. And thus, that our authorities no longer honor the social contract.”

In a post called Anarchy, blogger Johan Westerholm, who is a Social Democratic Party member and a critic of the government, wrote that the Minister for Justice and Migration, Morgan Johansson, is now urging authorities to “be pragmatic” about laws and regulations (concerning asylum housing for so-called unaccompanied refugee children). Westerholm stated that this is tantamount to the government “opening the gates to anarchy”:

“Our country is founded on law; Parliament legislates and the courts apply these. Morgan Johansson’s statement and his otherwise passive approach are testimony to how this, our kind of democracy, may fade into a memory very shortly. He now laid the first brick in the building of a state that rests on other principles. The principles of anarchy.”

If anarchy really does break out, it would be good to remember that there are nearly two million licensed firearms in Sweden. Sweden’s shooting clubs have seen a surge in interest; many are welcoming a lot of new members lately.

Categories: Anarchy, Asylum seekers, Crime, Hijrah, Islamic culture, Islamic immigration, Islamic invasion, Islamic supremacy, Multiculturalism, Sweden
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

ISIS launches its winter terror offensive with first 274 deaths

November 13, 2015

ISIS launches its winter terror offensive with first 274 deaths, DEBKAfile, November 13, 2015

Borj_al-Barajneh12.11.15Suicide bombers strike Hizballah in Beirut
Execution of Steven Sotloff (1983 – 2014) by Jihadi John of ISIS. In August 2013, Sotloff was kidnapped in Aleppo, Syria, and held captive by militants from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Jihadi John (Mohammed Emwazi, born August 1988) a British man who is thought to be the person seen in several videos produced by the Islamic extremist group ISIL showing the beheadings of a number of captives in 2014 and 2015. (Photo by Universal History Archive/UIG via Getty Images)

Execution of Steven Sotloff (1983 – 2014) by Jihadi John of ISIS. In August 2013, Sotloff was kidnapped in Aleppo, Syria, and held captive by militants from the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant. Jihadi John (Mohammed Emwazi, born August 1988) a British man who is thought to be the person seen in several videos produced by the Islamic extremist group ISIL showing the beheadings of a number of captives in 2014 and 2015. (Photo by Universal History Archive/UIG via Getty Images)

The US drone strike Thursday night, Nov. 11, targeting the Islamic State’s infamous executioner known as “Jihad John” in the northern Syrian town of Raqqa may or may not have hit the mark – the Pentagon says it is too soon to say. The hooded, masked terrorist with the British accent has been identified as a British Muslim born in Kuwait called Mohamed Emwazi. He appeared on videos worldwide showing the cold-blooded murders of US, British, Japanese and other hostages.

The drone attack occurred shortly after the latest ISIS atrocity: Thursday night, two or three suicide bombers blew themselves up, killing 43 people and injuring at least 240 in the Hizballah stronghold of southern Beirut opposite Burj Barajneh.

Ten days earlier, the Islamic State brought down the Russian Metrojet airliner over Sinai killing all 224 people aboard. This spectacular act of terror was apparently the first strike of the jihadist group’s winter offensive. It achieved its objectives of multiple murder; mortal damage to Egypt’s tourism industry and a blow to the prestige of its president Abdel-Fatteh El-Sisi.

The attack also punished President Vladimir Putin for bringing the Russian military into the center of the Syrian conflict.

The next Islamic State assault was aimed to undermine the credibility of Jordan’s King Abdullah and his security services: On Nov. 8,  a Jordanian police captain opened fire at a high-security US training facility outside Amman, killing two American trainers, a South African and two Jordanians. The number of US personnel injured in the attack was not released. This attack was timed to coincide with the 10thanniversary of the massive al Qaeda assault on Amman’s leading hotels, all American owned, which left 61 dead.

In northern Sinai, the murder of a family of 9 Egyptians at El Arish Thursday morning raised the total of ISIS murders in less than a month to 274.

DEBKAfile’s counterterrorism sources discern three objectives in the attack Thursday night in Beirut

1. A lesson for Tehran and Hizballah’s leader Hassan Nasrallah to show them that the Islamic State is able to reach them on their home ground, no matter how many troops they deploy to fight the jihadis in Syria (Iran and Hizballah together field an estimated 13,000 soldiers in Syria). ISIS was capable of inflicting terrible casualties both on the battlefield and in their homeland, first in Beirut and eventually in Tehran.

2.  The day before, Wednesday, Nov. 11, in a speech marking the “Day of the Shahid,” Nasrallah gloated over Hizballah’s triumph in a battle outside Aleppo. He also boasted that his domestic security shield in Lebanon presented an impenetrable barrier against ISIS or Nusra Front terrorist intrusions.

The Islamic State’s tacticians determined to blow up both claims in Nasrallah’s face. He and Iran were to be shown that they could not stop ISIS or prevent the Syrian war’s spillover into Lebanon.

3.  By blowing up the Russian airliner over Sinai, the Islamists sought to underscore this point for Moscow too. Russia might send a powerful military force to Syria, but the Islamists would hit Putin from the rear at a location of its choosing anywhere in the Middle East. Moscow may have opted to defend Bashar Assad, but what can it do to protect Hizballah and its other allies?.

DEBKAfile’s counterterrorism sources note that US and Russia have taken lead roles in the broad military effort to defeat ISIS – often by means of pinpointed operations. At the same time, under their noses, the Islamist terrorists have launched their winter campaign, striking with extreme ferocity and agility in unexpected places that are outside the regular battle fronts in which the big powers are engaged.

Categories: Egypt, Foreign policy, Hezbollah, Iranian proxies, Islamic State, Israel, Jordan, Middle East, Nasrallah, Russia - Middle East, Russia - Syrian war, Russian aircraft down, Syria war
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Selective Outrage on Campus

November 13, 2015

Selective Outrage on Campus, The Gatestone Institute, Alan M. Dershowitz, November 12, 2015

(“Safe spaces,” in which infantile narcissists are shielded from ideas inconsistent with their own perceptions and which they therefore deem offensive are becoming an unfortunate part of the college experience. Freedom from ideas they find offensive trumps freedom of speech. Here’s a link to an article I posted at my blog yesterday titled Infants in University Land. It deals with the recent mess at my alma mater, Yale College. — DM)

Following the forced resignations of the President and Provost of the University of Missouri, demonstrations against campus administrators has spread across the country. Students — many of whom are Black, gay, transgender and Muslim — claim that they feel “unsafe” as the result of what they call “white privilege” or sometimes simply privilege. “Check your privilege” has become the put-down du jour. Students insist on being protected by campus administrators from “micro-aggressions,” meaning unintended statements inside and outside the classroom that demonstrate subtle insensitivities towards minority students. They insist on being safe from hostile or politically incorrect ideas. They demand “trigger warnings” before sensitive issues are discussed or assigned. They want to own the narrative and keep other points of view from upsetting them or making them feel unsafe.

These current manifestations of a widespread culture of victimization and grievance are only the most recent iterations of a dangerous long-term trend on campuses both in the United States and in Europe. The ultimate victims are freedom of expression, academic freedom and the free exchange of ideas. Many faculty members, administrators and students are fearful of the consequences if they express politically incorrect or dissident views that may upset some students. So they engage in self-censorship. They have seen what had happened to those who have expressed unpopular views, and it is not a pretty picture.

I know, because I repeatedly experienced this backlash when I speak on campuses. Most recently, I was invited to deliver the Milton Eisenhower lecture at Johns Hopkins University. As soon as the lecture was announced, several student groups demanded that the invitation must be rescinded. The petition objected to my mere “presence” on campus, stating that my views on certain issues “are not matters of opinion, and cannot be debated” and that they are “not issues that are open to debate of any kind.” These non-debatable issues include some of the most controversial concerns that are roiling campus today: sexual assault, academic integrity and the Israel-Palestine conflict. The protesting students simply didn’t want my view on these and other issues expressed on their campus, because my lecture would make them feel unsafe or uncomfortable.

The groups demanding censorship of my lecture included Hopkins Feminists, Black Student Union, Diverse Sexuality and General Alliance, Sexual Assault Resource Unit and Voice for Choice. I have been told that two faculty members urged these students, who had never heard of me, to organize the protests, but the cowardly faculty members would not themselves sign the petition. The petition contained blatant lies about me and my views, but that is beside the point. I responded to the lies in my lecture and invited the protesting students to engage me during the Q and A. But instead, they walked out in the middle of my presentation, while I was discussing the prospects for peace in the Middle East.

According to the Johns Hopkins News-Letter, another petition claimed that “by denying Israel’s alleged war crimes against Palestinians,” I violated the university’s “anti-harassment policy” and its “statement of ethical standards.” In other words, by expressing my reasonable views on a controversial subject, I harassed students.

Some of the posters advertising my lecture were defaced with Hitler mustaches drawn on my face. Imagine the outcry if comparably insensitive images had been drawn on the faces of invited minority lecturers.

I must add that the Johns Hopkins administration and the student group that invited me responded admirably to the protests, fully defending my right to express my views and the right of the student group to invite me. The lecture went off without any hitches and I answered all the questions — some quite critical, but all polite — for the large audience that came to hear the presentation.

The same cannot be said of several other lectures I have given on other campuses, which were disrupted by efforts to shout me down, especially by anti-Israel groups that are committed to preventing pro-Israel speakers from expressing their views.

The point is not only that some students care less about freedom of expression in general than about protecting all students from “micro-aggressions.” It is that many of these same students are perfectly willing to make other students with whom they disagree with feel unsafe and offended by their own micro- and macro-aggressions. Consider, for example, a recent protest at the City University of New York by Students for Justice in Palestine that blamed high tuition on “the Zionist Administration [of the University that] invests in Israeli companies, companies that support the Israeli occupation, hosts birthright programs and study abroad programs in occupied Palestine [meaning Israel proper] and reproduces settler-colonial ideology throughout CUNY though Zionist content of education.”

Let’s be clear what they mean by “Zionist”: they mean “Jew”. There are many Jewish administrators at City University. Some are probably Zionists. Others are probably not. Blaming Zionists for high tuition is out and out anti-Semitism. It is not micro-aggression. It is in-your-face macro-aggression against City University Jews.

Yet those who protest micro-aggressions against other minorities are silent when it comes to Jews. This is not to engage in comparative victimization, but rather to expose the double standard, the selective outrage and the overt hypocrisy of many of those who would sacrifice free speech on the altar of political correctness, whose content they seek to dictate.

Categories: Academia, Antisemitism, Diversity, Israel, Jews, Palestinian heroes, Palestinians, Palestinians and Jews
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Comments: 2 Comments

BREAKING: Dead and Wounded in Shooting Attack Near Otniel

November 13, 2015

BREAKING: Dead and Wounded in Shooting Attack Near Otniel

By: Jewish Press News Briefs Published: November 13th, 2015

Source: The Jewish Press » » BREAKING: Dead and Wounded in Shooting Attack Near Otniel

Otniel

Otniel
Photo Credit: Google Maps

Two parents in their 50’s were killed, and a 16-year-old was moderately wounded, in a shooting attack outside of Otniel, at the family’s car.

The attack happened just north of the Samua junction in the Har Hebron region.

The attack happened Friday afternoon, around 3PM.

IDF forces are chasing after the terrorists.

 

Update 1:

Update: Dead and Wounded in Shooting Attack Near Otniel

 

Update 2 :

http://www.timesofisrael.com/

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: Be the first to comment

Report: Israel’s New F-35s Designed to Let US Disable them over Internet Link

November 13, 2015

No Internet, no F-35? Oy!

By: JNi.Media

Published: November 13th, 2015

Source: The Jewish Press » » Report: Israel’s New F-35s Designed to Let US Disable them over Internet Link

Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon examines F-35 fighter jet at Lockheed Martin production facility in Texas. (Archive: Oct 2013)

Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon examines F-35 fighter jet at Lockheed Martin production facility in Texas. (Archive: Oct 2013)
Photo Credit: IMOD/Ministry of Defense/Flash90

(JNi.media) A revelation made by Defense Aerospace last week exposes what could emerge as a sinister plot on the part of the US and F-35 maker Lockheed Martin to disable at will the new aircraft while it is in use by a client state.

Back in September, JNi.media quoted Steve Over, Lockheed Martin director for F-35 International Business Development, who said that even though Israel will have “plenty of capability to do light maintenance in-country” for the aircraft, all the heavy maintenance of the airframes and engines will be done at Joint Program Office-managed, company-established facilities “just like we do with all our other partners.”

At the time, we attributed the Americans’ anxiety to the fact that Israeli technicians love messing around with their American machines until their makers can barely recognize them. We wrote: Perhaps betraying their reservations about what usually happens to the American weapons after the Israelis lay their hands on them, Lockheed executives said Israel would be able to add specific capabilities or upgraded functions—which the Israelis love doing—as long as it did not affect the overall design or the aircraft software. As Over put it: “The Israelis have an ability to do some unique things. But anything wholesale that would impact the design or capabilities driving all the airplanes for all the countries would have to be done by consensual agreement.”

According to Defense Aerospace, the US has made a unilateral decision to locate all F-35 software laboratories on US shores, where US personnel will manage the operation and support of all the F-35 fleets, foreign and domestic. This unprecedented move introduces a huge risk that the F-35—which must maintain permanent data exchanges with the software labs and logistic support computers to operate effectively—may be disabled or even downed in extreme cases, any time the two-way flow of information is disrupted.

Mind you, this vulnerability does not refer to a malicious interruption on the part of the US operators, only the loss of Internet service for any reason, such as accidentally corrupted router tables to a malicious Russian submarine cutting the undersea Internet cables which they have been aggressively operating near as of late. But, this same “problem” could become an enormous leverage for the US, should it decide to severely hamper the operation of entire foreign F-35 fleets.

For an aircraft that costs around $100 million per unit, this is some design glitch.

It will mean that all the F-35s in the world will have to update their mission data files and their Autonomic Logistic Information System (ALIS) profiles before and after every sortie—and not while in the air—to guarantee that the systems on-board are programmed with the latest available operational data and that ALIS is kept permanently informed of each aircraft’s technical status and maintenance requirements. At the moment, that process is also excruciatingly slow.

Here’s a fun fact: according to Defense Aerospace, the ALIS has been known to prevent aircraft from taking off because of an incomplete data file.

The F35’s shortcomings are well known, involving hardware malfunctions and software glitches cost its development program three years and $200 billion over budget, according to CNN. Then, while the world was watching, there was that bedeviled mock dog-fight last January, when the spiffy, new F-35 kept losing to the plane it is supposed to replace, the good old F-16, because the F-35 just couldn’t turn quickly enough to engage the F-16.

US Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said back then that the dogfight provided “valuable data,” which could mean a lot of scary things. Then she promised the new F-35 will be a completely different plane when it’s fully operational and will guarantee the US’ continued air supremacy over its rivals.

But when she said that no one would have guessed she was talking about booby trapping the F-35 sold to US allies.

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: Be the first to comment

Russia said to deploy advanced missile system in Syria

November 13, 2015

Russia said to deploy advanced missile system in Syria Report claims Moscow put S-400 missile battery in Latakia, with range capable of hitting targets 400 kilometers away

By Times of Israel staff

November 13, 2015, 9:53 am

Source: Russia said to deploy advanced missile system in Syria | The Times of Israel

A Russian Su-24 fighter jet taxis at an air base near Latakia, Syria, with an alleged S-400 air defense battery in the background. (Russian Defense Ministry Facebook)

A Russian Su-24 fighter jet taxis at an air base near Latakia, Syria, with an alleged S-400 air defense battery in the background. (Russian Defense Ministry Facebook)

Moscow has reportedly deployed a sophisticated anti-aircraft system near the Syrian port city of Latakia capable of striking aircraft as far distant as Tel Aviv, the Daily Mail reported Friday.

The paper said that photos released by the Russian Defense Ministry appear to show installations at the Russian air base near Latakia belonging to the S-400 Air Defense System, known to NATO as SA-21 “Growler.”

The photo of the radar installation in question, posted on the Defense Ministry Facebook page, is blurred by the exhaust of a Russian military aircraft. It is part of a series of photographs posted from a recent media visit to the Latakia air base.

The report could not be independently confirmed.

Certain versions of the missiles used in the S-400 Air Defense System have a maximum range of 400 kilometers (250 miles), placing much of northern and central Israel, as well as Cyprus, Lebanon and southern Turkey, in their range. The missile system is considered among the most advanced in the world, capable of targeting F-15, F-16 and potentially the sophisticated F-22 Raptor fighter jets.

It wasn’t immediately clear what kinds of surface-to-air missiles Russia has deployed to Latakia.

The report came out as Russia increased its military presence in Syria as part of its air war to help bolster its ally, Syrian President Bashar Assad, and carry out strikes against Syrian rebel groups, including the Islamic State.

Last month, Israel and Russia arranged to coordinate their respective activities in Syrian airspace to prevent unwanted conflict and miscommunication. Since then, Israel has reportedly carried out two airstrikes on targets in Syria, the most recent one an alleged arms shipment earlier this week.

Earlier this week, Iran said it would receive most of the previous generation S-300 air defense missile systems it ordered from Russia by the end of the year, despite vocal opposition to the move by Israel.

“We signed a contract with Russia. It is being done. We will acquire a large portion of the systems by the end of this year,” Defense Minister Hossein Dehghan told state television late Tuesday.

He said Iranian troops were being trained in Russia to operate the surface-to-air missile systems.

This week, the state-run Russian Technologies corporation Rostec announced the signing of a delivery contract in Tehran for S-300 missiles.

Russia will provide Iran with a “modernized and updated” version of the missile systems, following up on an initial contract signed in 2007, Rostec Director General Sergey Chemezov said in a statement.

One of the most sophisticated anti-aircraft weapons in the world, the S-300 is capable of tracking multiple planes at once, and some versions have an interception range of up to 200 kilometers.

A Russian S-300 anti-aircraft missile system on display at an undisclosed location in Russia (photo credit: AP)

A Russian S-300 anti-aircraft missile system on display at an undisclosed location in Russia (AP)

Israel has long sought to block the sale to Iran of the S-300 system, which analysts say could impede a potential Israeli strike on Tehran’s nuclear facilities. Other officials have expressed concern that the systems could reach Syria and Hezbollah, diluting Israel’s regional air supremacy.

Russia initially agreed to sell the system to Iran in 2007 but then balked, saying at the time it was complying with a United Nations arms embargo on the Islamic Republic.

In April, shortly after the announcement of the Lausanne outline for the nuclear deal between world powers and Iran, Russia announced it was lifting the ban on selling the advanced missile defense system to Iran, over American and Israeli objections.

In August, Iran and Russia announced that the system would be delivered by the end of the year, with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov saying at the time that “just technical details” remained to be agreed upon.

AFP contributed to this report.

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: 1 Comment

Iran Threatens to Walk Away from Nuke Deal

November 13, 2015

Iran Threatens to Walk Away from Nuke Deal Rouhani: Any new sanctions are a deal breaker

BY:
November 12, 2015 3:05 pm

Source: Iran Threatens to Walk Away from Nuke Deal – Washington Free Beacon

Iran has threatened to walk away from the recently inked nuclear deal and stop rolling back its nuclear enrichment program, according to recent comments by Hassan Rouhani, the Islamic Republic’s president.

Rouhani, in comments on Thursday, threatened to break the deal if the United States imposes any new sanctions on Iran, even ones concerning the country’s human rights abuses and its ballistic missile program.

The comments are a direct response to promises by the Obama administration to continue pursuing economic sanctions targeted at Iran’s terrorist proxies and efforts to foment unrest across the globe.

The warning from the Iranian president was delivered amid bipartisan calls in Congress to increase pressure on Iran in response to its recent arrest of two Americans, one a dual citizen and one a D.C.-based permanent resident.

Iran “will not fulfill agreements” aimed at curbing its nuclear program if any new sanctions are considered, Rouhani said, according to reports carried by the country’s state-controlled media.

“The obligations are the following: the group of six [global powers] will not impose new sanctions, and we should fulfill the agreements,” Rouhani said. “In case the Unites States or other countries fail to comply with their obligations, we will be forced to do the same.”

Rouhani’s made these comments just days after reports emerged indicating that Iran has stopped dismantling its nuclear centrifuges, a key requirement of the agreement.

Major differences between the United States and Iran have arisen on the issue of sanctions. While Iran maintains that all U.S. sanctions must be terminated, the Obama administration says it is only required to suspend nuclear-related sanctions.

This leaves open the possibility that the United States could reintroduce sanctions if Iran violates the deal and could level new sanctions unrelated to the country’s nuclear program.

Rouhani acknowledged that this has caused tension between the two nations, stating in his remarks, “a U.S. decision to withdraw only nuclear-related sanctions on Tehran but keeping other restrictions in place has led to continuous disagreement between Iran and the United States.”

The Iranian president also demanded in his remarks that the United States “apologize” for its past actions against Iran.

“If they [the U.S.] modify their policies, correct errors committed in these 37 years and apologize to the Iranian people, the situation will change and good things can happen,” Rouhani said.

Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas), a vocal opponent of the nuclear deal, told the Washington Free Beacon that the administration is intentionally ignoring Iran’s bad behavior in order to preserve the accord.

“The Obama administration may insist that the nuclear deal is somehow isolated from other bad behavior on the part of the Islamic Republic, but the fact is that this is all part of the same ugly pattern,” Cruz said. “Tehran understands perfectly well that the terrorist activities of the Revolutionary Guard, including the detention last month of American citizen Siamek Namazi and American resident Nizar Zakka, are part of the same anti-American hostility that also fuels their nuclear program.”

“Trying to separate out their activities is a fool’s errand,” Cruz said. “There can be no good-faith deal with a regime that is the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism and that has been targeting America and our allies for 36 years.”

The Obama administration has reserved the right to pursue new sanctions.

The State Department explained to the Free Beacon earlier this week that it will not remove sanctions relating to certain elements of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, an organization responsible for waging terror attacks. Other sanctions aimed at curbing Iranian human rights abuses also remain in place.

However, the State Department has declined to go further with its sanctions against the corps, telling the Free Beacon that it is not considering designating the military group as a foreign terrorist organization, which could severely restrict its activities.

“We believe the sanctions we have in place remain the most appropriate and effective tools for targeting the IRGC, and we are making full use of such authorities with respect to the IRGC,” a State Department official told the Free Beacon this week. “In addition to Iran’s designation as a State Sponsor of Terrorism, we have a substantial set of sanctions already in place against the IRGC.”

Questions still remain about whether the United States will respond to the recent arrests of two American citizens in Iran. While members of Congress have called for sanctions as a result of the arrests, the administration has balked.

Sen. Mark Kirk (R., Ill.), among other lawmakers, has demanded that the Obama administration work with lawmakers to strengthen sanctions.

“Iran’s threatening behavior will worsen if the administration does not work with Congress to enact stronger measures to push back, including renewal of the expiring Iran Sanctions Act of 1996 and targeted sanctions against Iran’s Revolutionary Guard and against any Iranian official found to have participated in the unjust detainment of American citizens,” Kirk said in a statement.

“It should come as no surprise that Iranian leaders are trying to blackmail the administration into ignoring Iran’s terrorism, human rights abuses, tests of missiles that can strike Israel, and detention of American citizens,” Kirk told the Free Beacon. While Congress has red lines that Iran passed long ago, the question is whether the administration has any red lines.”

Iran is pursuing a policy aimed a tying the White House’s hands, analysts said.

“Under the deal Iran always has a gun to America’s head,” said Omri Ceren, managing director for press at The Israel Project, a D.C.-based organization that has been critical of the final terms of the deal. “Any time the Iranians don’t like anything the U.S. is doing, they can blackmail Washington by threatening to walk away from the deal. “

“This time they’re telling Congress that lawmakers are prohibited from responding to the arrest of American citizens,” Ceren said. “Who knows what they’ll ban the U.S. from doing next time?”

Other analysts agreed.

Michael Rubin, a former Pentagon adviser and expert on rogue regimes, said that these types of threats by Iran are a hallmark of the hardline administration.

“It’s the traditional Tehran two-step: One step forward and two back,” Rubin said.

Iran is comfortable issuing threats because it has already begun to receive sanctions relief granted under the nuclear accord. Tehran also has leverage over the Obama administration because of the way the deal is structured, according to Rubin.

“Kerry’s team played into Iran’s hands by front-loading Iran’s rewards and removing any incentive for Tehran to adhere to commitments,” Rubin said. “Who besides Obama and Kerry would give a rogue regime and the world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism a free pass against consequence for any of their actions?”

“Kerry essentially handed Iran a get out of jail free card, and the Iranian leadership will respond by seeing how far they can push,” Rubin explained. “Obama stays quiet on the arrest of reporters or businessman? Well, why not execute one or two and see what happens then? Obama ignores Iranian shipment of missiles to Hezbollah? Why not launch a few?”

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment