Archive for November 30, 2016

David Horowitz Takes on Administrators Bullying Students at Tufts

November 30, 2016

David Horowitz Takes on Administrators Bullying Students at Tufts, Front Page Magazine (The Point), Daniel Greenfield, November 30, 2016

hamas_finger_poster_2016_cropped_0

The free speech movement has become the anti-free speech movement. And as the Freedom Center fights the anti-Semitic SJP hate group, its poster campaigns are touching nerves from GMU, where Oleg Atbashian was arrested and spent 14 hours in jail and has been threatened with years of prison time, to Tufts, where the administrators are bullying students.

Now David Horowitz is fighting mad and fighting back.

November 29, 2016

James M. Glaser, Dean of the School of Arts & Sciences, Tufts University

Jianmin Qu, Dean of the School of Engineering, Tufts University

Gentlemen,

I have just received your letter of November 14, conveying your “serious concerns regarding the posters placed on the Tufts University campus on October 19, 2016,” for which we took responsibility. The posters in question identify a hate group – Students for Justice in Palestine, which is sponsored by your institution. SJP calls for the destruction of the Jewish state, receives funding from the terrorist organization Hamas, and sponsors campus resolutions to boycott Israel, which liberals ranging from Larry Summers and Alan Dershowitz to Hillary Clinton have condemned as anti-Semitic. The statements in our posters are factual, or are reasonable opinions based on the facts.

Your “serious concerns” are summed up in two claims. First that “the posters in question violate our community standards” and, second, that they “violate our poster policy which requires notification and authorization by a university office or recognized student group prior to placing posters on campus.” You ask us in future to seek such permission.

Really. The two of you have already sent a letter to every member of the Tufts student body warning them that the university condemns our posters and that, “The university will be sending a statement to the posters’ sponsors in order to make clear that such materials are not welcome on our campus.” Now what student or student group, knowing that the university condemns these ideas, and has taken the extraordinary step of warning the entire student body that our ideas are unwelcome, would be willing to risk authorizing our posters? Which is why we took the step of putting up our posters without asking permission, since we are well aware that institutions like Tufts seek to be “safe places” for a politically correct orthodoxy and can be ruthless in acting to hermetically seal off dissenting ideas like ours.

I have read your terse email many times without being able to find a single reference to anything we actually said in our posters that might violate your community standards. Nor do you mention a single community standard that we might have violated. This is just another way in which you choose to show your contempt for individuals who express ideas that make you uncomfortable. And who wouldn’t be uncomfortable in your position when someone comes along to point out that you sponsor and support organizations that accuse Jews – falsely – of stealing Arab land, maintaining an “apartheid state,” and murdering innocent women and children, while giving full-throated support to the terrorists of Hamas?

Just to be duly diligent, I went up to the Tufts’ official website and found your community principles, prominent among which is the following statement: “Freedom of expression and inquiry are fundamental to the academic enterprise.” Too bad you and the Tufts administration have abandoned this principle, and too bad you lack the candor to admit it

If you had a shred of integrity you would invite me to your campus to debate this issue. Instead you will no doubt go on suppressing our efforts, all the while pretending to support the free exchange of ideas.

Sincerely,

David Horowitz

Freedom of expression these days means leftist harassment of opposing viewpoints with the aim of suppressing them.

Curse Trump or Denounce Political Islam: Which Will It Be?

November 30, 2016

Curse Trump or Denounce Political Islam: Which Will It Be?, Clarion Project, Tahir Gora, November 28, 2016

american-muslims-640_0American Muslims (Illustrative photo: © Reuters)

Sadly, Political Islamists in our major mosques and other Islamic establishments are maneuvering ordinary Muslims’ sentiments against Western societies. 

Until these mosques and organizations in the USA, Canada and elsewhere denounce violent jihad, sharia law, gender inequality, intolerance, the mixing of religion in politics and Political Islam itself, Muslims won’t be able to integrate in modern societies.

*********************************

Donald Trump’s victory in the U.S. elections represents a hope for many progressive Muslims around the globe that adherents to Islamic extremist groups from Islamic State to the Muslim Brotherhood and Jamaat-e-Islami will get some resistance both to their abhorrent activities and their mindset.

The Muslim Brotherhood and Western liberal parties’ alliances have left Islamists forces unleashed on liberal and progressive Muslims.

We are unfortunately experiencing this kind of alliance in Canada, too, where some members of parliament, who are silent supporters of the Brotherhood and Jamaat-e-Islami, are threatening and harassing journalists who oppose their Brotherhood ideologies. Sadly, our Liberal government doesn’t seem to consider these threats to our own core values.

Given this such situation, liberal and progressive Muslims have no choice but to align themselves with the conservative parties that at least denounce honor killings, sharia law, gender inequality and concealing one’s identity through the wearing of a niqab.

President-elect Trump used rough and tough language regarding Muslims during his election campaign. Many in the liberal media and Muslim organizations tried their best to create a backlash, but he survived and won the election in a landslide victory in the Electoral College.

Let’s examine what he actually said in his most infamous election campaign speech regarding banning Muslims. From a press release issued by Trump:

Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on.

According to Pew Research, among others, there is great hatred towards Americans by large segments of the Muslim population. Most recently, a poll from the Center for Security Policy released data showing “25% of those polled agreed that violence against Americans here in the United States is justified as a part of the global jihad” and 51% of those polled, “agreed that Muslims in America should have the choice of being governed according to Shariah.”

Shariah authorizes such atrocities as murder against non-believers who won’t convert, beheadings and more unthinkable acts that pose great harm to Americans, especially women.

Mr. Trump stated, “Without looking at the various polling data, it is obvious to anybody the hatred is beyond comprehension.” 

Trump was simply presenting research findings by Pew Research and The Center for Security Policy.

As a Muslim-born person and a practicing journalist for over 30 years within a number of Muslim communities, I see more underlying hatred within the Muslim diaspora against each other’s sects as well as towards non-Muslims than described by Pew Research and The Center for Security Policy.

Liberals and my fellow Muslims! Let’s understand and accept the facts.

Being beneficiary to each other in terms of Muslim vote banks for liberals and “Muslims’ privileges” from liberals is not the deal at all.

Together, we are ruining the liberal pillars of democracy.

President-elect Trump raised a vital question during his election campaign: Where does this hatred comes from?

In my humble opinion, this hatred comes from the mindset of Political Islam as espoused by the teachings of the Muslim Brotherhood, Jamaat-e-Islami and Hizb-ut-Tahrir and the like.

These groups are the ideological forefathers of Islamic State, the Taliban, Al-Qaeda, Boko Haram, Al-Shabaab, etc.

The sooner we acknowledge this fact, the sooner we will be able to recognize the clandestine players of Political Islam active within our own political system and its policies.

Sadly, Political Islamists in our major mosques and other Islamic establishments are maneuvering ordinary Muslims’ sentiments against Western societies.

Until these mosques and organizations in the USA, Canada and elsewhere denounce violent jihad, sharia law, gender inequality, intolerance, the mixing of religion in politics and Political Islam itself, Muslims won’t be able to integrate in modern societies.

Rather than cursing President-elect Trump, the mosque establishment in the U.S. needs to sit with the new government and provide assurances about modernizing their institutions and communities.

Obama Steals from Medicare, Curing Cancer for Illegal Aliens

November 30, 2016

Obama Steals from Medicare, Curing Cancer for Illegal Aliens, Front Page Magazine (The Point), Daniel Greenfield, November 30, 2016

(Please see also, Overwhelmed Border Patrol Agents Stuck Serving Burritos to Illegal Immigrants. — DM)

mission-accomplished_3

Every politician rewards his voters. Obama’s just happen to be illegal aliens. It’s why his DOJ spent more time fighting efforts to fight voter fraud… than fighting voter fraud. So Obama is stealing from seniors, from AIDS patients and everyone else… to fund his illegal alien base.

The Department of Health and Human Services is raiding several of its accounts, including money for Medicare, the Ryan White AIDS/HIV program and those for cancer and flu research to cover a shortfall in housing illegal youths pouring over the border at a rate of 255 a day.

Her sources said the following programs are being hit to pay for the illegals, about half of which the government will lose contact with.

— $14 million from the Health Resources and Services Administration, including $4.5 million from the Ryan White HIV/AIDS Program and $2 million from the Maternal and Child Health program.

Well who needs to help AIDS patients or babies… when we can help illegal aliens invade the country.

$14 million from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for contagious disease prevention and treatment and other critical public health programs.

Not only do the migrant hordes spread disease, but funding to fight the diseases they cause is being cut.

$72 million from the National Institutes of Health, for research on cancer, diabetes, drug abuse, mental health, infectious diseases and much more.

— $8 million from the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, for treatment and prevention programs.

— $8 million from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

— $39 million from the Children and Families Services Program.

Sorry cancer patients and Medicare patients and children… illegal aliens matter more than you do. To the left.

Forget Obama’s cancer “moonshot”. His real moonshot is the illegal alien invasion of America.

Jewish #NeverTrump Site Defends Bannon; Slams Ellison, Schumer

November 30, 2016

Jewish #NeverTrump Site Defends Bannon; Slams Ellison, Schumer, BreitbartJoel B. Pollak, November 30, 2016

charles-schumer-chip-somodevilla-getty-640x480Chip Somodevilla / Getty

Tablet magazine, an online magazine on Jewish affairs, was one of the leading “NeverTrump” websites — but has published an op-ed defending Donald Trump and denouncing Democrats for supporting Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) to lead the party.

The article, by Jeff Ballabon, documents Ellison’s history of supporting and defending rabid antisemites. It also defends the President-elect, as well as adviser Stephen K. Bannon and Breitbart News, from false charges of antisemitism. Ballabon also notes that some of the same Jewish politicians that led the attack on Bannon, such as incoming Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY), are also leading the effort to elect Ellison as the next chair of the Democratic National Committee. He also notes that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL), which led the attack on Bannon, has had to “withdraw their accusations.”

Ballabon writes:

It is clear that Ellison trafficked with incredibly virulent, open anti-Semites and supported and defended them until it became politically inconvenient. Then he lied about it—and once in office, he decided to target the Jewish state.

Personally, I don’t care if Ellison ever did or still does hate Jews. He’s entitled to love and hate whomever he wants. What worries me is that a leading member of the extreme anti-Israel wing of the Democratic Party is poised to become the party’s chairman. What disturbs me is that the mainstreaming and elevating of this man—who, at the very least, is clearly more enthusiastic about Louis Farrakhan than he is about the State of Israel—is being done with the support of Sen. Chuck Schumer, and of organizations that claim to represent the interests of American Jewry.

It is also hard to miss the fact that these same politicians and groups are now diverting attention away from actual threats to a campaign of politically-motivated fictions and calumnies directed against Donald Trump, a man who has spent decades supporting an impressive array of Jewish causes and of the State of Israel—and whose daughter, son-in-law and grandchildren are Orthodox Jews. Trump’s daughter Ivanka chose to join the Jewish people, and she did so by all accounts with the approval and full support of her father. Perhaps Keith Ellison, despite his associations and activities, is secretly a great friend of the Jewish people and the State of Israel, and Donald Trump, despite his friends and family, is secretly the raving anti-Semite his detractors allege. But even the most extreme partisan would have to admit that the evidence for either proposition is quite thin. In fact, the ADL and friends have also had to withdraw their accusations of anti-Semitism against Trump’s adviser Steve Bannon and Breitbart news, which briefly flourished after Trump’s win, since they could not point to any actual evidence that either charge was true: In fact, Bannon and Breitbart have demonstrably been among the most dedicated supporters of the State of Israel and most vociferous opponents of BDS and campus hate in the America media.

Read the whole article here.

Overwhelmed Border Patrol Agents Stuck Serving Burritos to Illegal Immigrants

November 30, 2016

Overwhelmed Border Patrol Agents Stuck Serving Burritos to Illegal Immigrants, Washington Free Beacon, November 30, 2016

FILE - In this Wednesday, June 22, 2016, file photo, Border Patrol agents look over the primary fence separating Tijuana, Mexico, right, and San Diego in San Diego. An estimated 40 percent of the 11.4 million people in the U.S. illegally overstayed visas, a crucial but often overlooked fact in the immigration debate. More people overstayed visas than were caught crossing the border illegally. (AP Photo/Gregory Bull, File)

FILE – In this Wednesday, June 22, 2016, file photo, Border Patrol agents look over the primary fence separating Tijuana, Mexico, right, and San Diego in San Diego. (AP Photo/Gregory Bull, File)

“We’re returning less than four percent,” Johnson said. “So isn’t the reality that if you come as an unaccompanied child from Central America and you get into this country—and by the way it’s easy to get here—you just walk across the bridge, turn yourself in, you’re apprehended and processed, and disbursed.”

**********************************

Border Patrol agents are reporting that they are overwhelmed by a massive uptick in illegal immigration of unaccompanied foreign children, leaving some members of the force stuck serving food to kids and ordering various supplies such as baby wipes, according to Mark Morgan, chief of the Border Patrol, which operates within the Department of Homeland Security.

Border agents have expressed shock at the menial tasks they’ve been required to perform following a massive flow of illegal immigrant children across the U.S. southern border, according to Morgan, who warned that the force is being strained as a result of this influx.

During one recent trip to a border patrol outpost, “the supervisor in charge said, ‘Chief, we’re going to do whatever this country asks us to do, but I never thought in my 20 years that I would be, as part of procurement, ordering baby powder and baby wipes,’” Morgan recalled during Wednesday testimony before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee.

“I just got from one sector,” Morgan continued, “where agents, one of their jobs during the day, is to actually make sure the food, the burritos we’re providing are being warmed properly. It takes a tremendous amount of resources to do this.”

The number of unaccompanied children and families traveling from Central America to the United States has increased significantly during the past few years.

The number crossing the U.S. border from Honduras, Guatemala, and El Salvador has jumped to 46,893 in fiscal 2016, up from 28,387 in 2015, according to statistics provided by Sen. Ron Johnson (R., Wis.), the committee’s chair.

Johnson said these numbers are not being publicized enough in the media.

“My concern is we’re not publicizing it because the border patrol has” quietly been handling the situation on its own, he said.

Morgan warned the committee that nearly all of the children and families apprehended on the border are released into the United States.

“Basically 100 percent of those family units and [unaccompanied children] are released into the U.S.” Morgan said, expressing distress at the amount of border patrol resources now being “dedicated to being professional child care providers at this point.”

Johnson offered statistics showing that just under 4 percent of illegal immigrants apprehended are sent back to their country of origin.

“We’re returning less than four percent,” Johnson said. “So isn’t the reality that if you come as an unaccompanied child from Central America and you get into this country—and by the way it’s easy to get here—you just walk across the bridge, turn yourself in, you’re apprehended and processed, and disbursed.”

“They have access to social media, so more children, more families from Central America realize, it creates an incentive,” Johnson said. “Pay the fee, make the journey because if you get to America, you can stay.”

Morgan agreed with this assessment, stating, “right now, they know that if they make it to the border they will be released into the interior of the United States.”

“That sends a strong message to those folks in those countries, that if you get to the United States border, we’ll let you in,” Morgan said.

Peters: Obama Can ‘Never Admit He’s Wrong About Anything’

November 30, 2016

Peters: Obama Can ‘Never Admit He’s Wrong About Anything’, Washington Free Beacon, Charlie Hoffmann, November 30, 2016

(Please see also, Dr. Jasser joins Your World discussing ideological vetting that must occur in wake of OSU attacks. — DM)

Retired Lt. Col. Ralph Peters chastised President Obama on Wednesday for his handling of Islamic terrorism while discussing the recent terrorist attack at Ohio State University during a Fox News appearance.

Host Martha MacCallum referenced President-elect Donald Trump’s tweet in response to the attack and compared it to the responses President Obama has given to past terrorist acts.

 

ISIS is taking credit for the terrible stabbing attack at Ohio State University by a Somali refugee who should not have been in our country.

 “President Obama can never admit he’s wrong about anything ever, and he’s obviously wrong about ISIS and Islamist terrorism in general,” Peters said. “One thing I have high hopes for with the incoming administration is we will put a lot of this political correctness behind us.”

Peters then said certain communities of immigrants should have more surveillance because of their inability and unwillingness to integrate into American society.

“They concentrate, they refuse to integrate, and this political correctness has resulted in of all states, Minnesota becoming the per capita greatest exporter of recruits for ISIS in the United States,” Peters said in reference to the large Somali immigrant population in Minnesota.

Citing the practice of some Somalis practicing female genital mutilation, Peters told MacCallum that he does not view this as a religious or racial issue but instead as a cultural one.

“One point I want to stress, because I don’t want it to get lost in all this” Not all Muslims are terrorists,” Peters said. “So we have to focus on the troublesome groups. We don’t want to pay the same amount of attention to Iranian Americans who serve in our military.”

Peters then expressed hope that the new Trump administration would get America’s immigration system in order to prevent further lone wolf terrorists attacks from occurring.

Dr. Jasser joins Your World discussing ideological vetting that must occur in wake of OSU attacks

November 30, 2016

Dr. Jasser joins Your World discussing ideological vetting that must occur in wake of OSU attacks, American Islamic Forum for Democracy via YouTube, November 29, 2016

(Please see also, How James Mattis As Defense Secretary Could Bust Our Deathly Political Correctness About Islam. — DM)

How James Mattis As Defense Secretary Could Bust Our Deathly Political Correctness About Islam

November 30, 2016

How James Mattis As Defense Secretary Could Bust Our Deathly Political Correctness About Islam, The Federalist, November 31, 2016

usmc-08001-998x666

Is political Islam in America’s best interests? This question should be central to our strategy of fighting ISIS and Islamist terrorism in general. Yet it’s one that many political leaders would rather not answer, because of our politically correct climate. But since Trump’s transition team announced last week that it’s considering retired Gen. James Mattis for secretary of defense, this reluctance might fade.

In a speech given at the Heritage Foundation last year, Mattis spoke about America’s position vis à vis political Islam. Rather than equivocating on the matter in order to avoid saying something uncomfortable or politically incorrect, Mattis simply pointed out that America needs to make a decision about its stance toward this ideology.

Recall that political Islam, or Islamism, is a movement within Islam: it works toward the increasing implementation of Islamic law and values in all areas of life—usually via state control—in order to make Islam a dominant force in the world.

Why We Don’t Talk About Islamism

Mattis’ suggestion—which sounds like a basic element of defense strategy—has been surprisingly neglected in the years since 9/11. The U.S. tends to deal with Islamism on a case-by-case basis. And so long as any particular group or political entity doesn’t have a direct and obvious link to terrorism, we tend to give them a pass. Even then, this is sometimes too high of a bar, as is the case with the Muslim Brotherhood and associated groups.

No one wants to delve into the question of Islamism because it has become a politically charged issue, one that often leads to accusations of bigotry and Islamaphobia. As Islam is increasingly treated as a protected class by America’s progressive Left, any scrutiny of any faction within Islam is considered off limits. This is done in the name of tolerance, but is in fact a highly intolerant position. But it’s successfully scared off politicians and military personnel, who tend to make vague and noncommittal statements on the topic.

This makes Mattis’ statements all the more notable. He’s simply urging the U.S. to make a decision. And what’s more, he’s arguing that this decision ought to be based on what we believe is in our best interest:

“Is political Islam in the best interest of the United States?…If we won’t even ask the question then how do we even get to the point of recognizing which is our side in the fight? And if we don’t take our own side in this fight we’re leaving others adrift.”

What Is In The Country’s Best Interests?

This is a surprisingly unpopular question to ask in general, and specifically when it comes to Islam. The concept itself—asking what is in America’s best interest—has largely been ignored as of late. Under Obama, America has pursued a policy of “leading from behind,” and more or less disregarding America’s interests abroad. The Obama administration has done this based on the notion, central to the progressive narrative of history, that America is a de facto colonialist power, whose influence in the world is malign and ought to recede of our own volition.

But if the U.S. can’t identify what is in its best interests, or refuses to pursue those interests out of an oversized sense of political correctness, there’s no way to forge a comprehensive global defense strategy. As Mattis points out, if we won’t even talk about political Islam with a critical eye, how can we figure out which side we’re on, and make decisions from that point? Neglecting the question not only hurts our interests—it leaves our allies unsure of where we stand and how we will proceed when Islamist movements gain traction in their countries.

Mattis also points out that ISIS is counting on Americans not having a debate on whether political Islam is good for America. If we don’t examine this question, we can’t create a cohesive strategy, and our fight against ISIS’s self-proclaimed Caliphate (or other groups like them) will ultimately fail.

This is the opposite of what some Islamist apologists and those on the left insist, which is that ISIS wants us to talk about the connections between Islam and violence, in order to make Muslims feel like the West is at war with their entire religion. Then, so the thinking goes, Muslims will turn on the West.

Mattis Would Change Our Reputation

As it is, ISIS has largely won this battle. Any serious strategic discussion about the relationship between political Islam and American national interests has been deemed illegitimate and offensive by the political Left. See, for example, the scrubbing of terms related to Islam from Department of Homeland Security training materials.

Mattis’ appointment as Defense Secretary would be a marked change not only from the Obama administration, but also from the Bush years. Both administrations were reluctant to substantively engage in a debate on the merits or threats of political Islam.

Since giving this speech at Heritage, ISIS has experienced significant territorial losses. But the question Mattis raises has not lost its relevance. It will be central to many of the Trump administration’s foreign policy challenges. Political Islam remains, and will remain, a problem for the West both in terms of domestic security and global strategy. Whether it’s the Muslim Brotherhood’s activities in the U.S., or political Islam in a post-Arab Spring Middle East, the U.S. needs to know where it stands on this issue.

Mattis concludes that political Islam is not, in the end, good for America. But he acknowledges that what’s most important is that we have a discussion about it—so that we can develop a broader strategy for how to deal with Islamism in the world. Without a cohesive strategy, there is little hope of checking the destructive influences of political Islam both at home and abroad.

Stop the Presses: Abbas Reelected Fatah Chief

November 30, 2016

Stop the Presses: Abbas Reelected Fatah Chief, The Jewish PressDavid Israel, November 30, 2016

Palestinian Authority President Mahmud Abbas (C) chairs a meeting with the Revolutionary Council of his ruling Fatah party on June 16, 2015 in the West Bank city of Ramallah. Photo by STR/Flash90 *** Local Caption *** ??? ???? ????? ???? ?????? ????? ????????? ????

Palestinian Authority President Mahmud Abbas (C) chairs a meeting with the Revolutionary Council of his ruling Fatah party on June 16, 2015 in the West Bank city of Ramallah. Photo by STR/Flash90

In an astonishing move that caught the world by surprise, about 1,250 Fatah party politicians opened their seventh conference in Ramallah on Tuesday by reappointing Mahmoud Abbas chairman. At 81, an invigorated Abbas, a.k.a. Abu Mazen, was voted in unanimously, despite speculations that this time the ruling party of the PA would entertain serious discussions of a post-Abbas future.

Fataḥ, formerly the Palestinian National Liberation Movement, is the largest faction of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). Abbas was elected in January 2005 as President of the Palestinian National Authority until January 2009, but in December 2009 was voted into office indefinitely by the PLO Central Council.

An estimated 75 Fatah representatives from Gaza were not granted permits by Israel to leave the Strip to attend the conference. But its doubtful the vote in Ramallah would have been any different had they been allowed to go through.

The date picked for the conference, as it is done every conference, was November 29, the anniversary of the last time the Arabs in the Land of Israel had a real chance for statehood, which they blew, in the spirit of the late Abba Eban, who said, The Arabs never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. For the record, Eban did not focus solely on the Arabs who call themselves Palestinians, since he made his immortal observation after the 1973 Geneva Peace Conference with Arab countries (which Syria refused to attend).

November 29 was commemorated by the UN on Tuesday, as the International Day of Solidarity with the Palestinian People. UN General Assembly president Peter Thomson honored the occasion by wearing a Palestinian flag scarf, just like the one Yasser Arafat wore when he first appeared at the General Assembly back in 1974 as the chief of Fatah – which was established back in 1959 to “organize the armed resistance against Israel,” almost a decade before the 1967 war.

Which brings to mind another Abba Eban immortal observation, from 2004: If Algeria introduced a resolution declaring that the earth was flat and that Israel had flattened it, it would pass by a vote of 164 to 13 with 26 abstentions.

The UN’s Palestine Language

November 30, 2016

The UN’s Palestine Language, Gatestone InstituteA.J. Caschetta, November 30, 2016

For decades, UN agencies have slandered the Jewish state, most recently with the April 2016 accusation that it has been “planting Jewish fake graves” in Palestinian territory, and with UNESCO declaring last year that the ancient Jewish Biblical sites Rachel’s Tomb and the Cave of the Patriarchs are actually Muslim holy sites, and last month that the Temple Mount, where the Jewish Temples were destroyed in 587 BCE and 70 CE, is an Islamic site with no connection to Judaism.

West Bank: This territory was for millennia called Judea and Samaria. After the 1948 War of Independence, Transjordan annexed it, renamed it the “West Bank,” and occupied it for nearly two decades. In the Six Day War, after Jordan attacked Israel, Israel entered the territory and administered it until the Oslo Accords era, when Israel turned over much of the area to the Palestinian Authority.

Occupation: When it comes to Israel, the UN is obsessed with the word “occupation.” A recent Wall Street Journal article documents 530 General Assembly references to Israel as an “occupying power” versus zero for Indonesia (East Timor), Turkey (Cyprus), Russia (Georgia, Crimea), Morocco (Western Sahara), Vietnam (Cambodia), Armenia (Azerbaijan), Pakistan (Kashmir), or China (Tibet). Saying that Jews are “occupying” Judea is as nonsensical as saying Arabs are “occupying” Arabia or Gauls are “occupying” France.

Settlement: The UN uses the term to insinuate Israeli theft of “Palestine.” The Obama administration eagerly embraced this terminology. If there is an occupying force in Gaza, it is Hamas. The West Bank is “disputed territories” to anyone claiming a modicum of neutrality. As Elliot Abrams put it, “the term ‘settlement’ loses meaning when applied to Jews building homes in their nation’s capital city.”

US President-elect Donald Trump won the White House promising to reform our dysfunctional government. But will he also stand up to the even more dysfunctional United Nations?

As the Trump campaign emphasized in a position paper released November 2, the UN has long displayed “enormous anti-Israel bias.” For decades, UN agencies have slandered the Jewish state, most recently with the April 2016 accusation that it has been “planting Jewish fake graves” in Palestinian territory, and with UNESCO declaring last year that the ancient Jewish Biblical sites Rachel’s Tomb and the Cave of the Patriarchs are actually Muslim holy sites, and last month that the Temple Mount, where the First and Second Jewish Temples were destroyed in 587 BCE and 70 CE, is an Islamic site with no connection to Judaism. On the day America elected a new president, the UN adopted ten new resolutions against Israel.

2003UNESCO last year declared ancient Jewish Biblical sites to actually be Muslim holy sites: the Tomb of the Patriarchs in Hebron (left) as the “Ibrahimi Mosque,” and Rachel’s Tomb in Bethlehem (right) as the “Bilal ibn Rabah Mosque.” (Images source: Wikimedia Commons)

The UN’s greatest achievements against the Jewish state have been rhetorical. By controlling the language of the Palestinian-Israel conflict, the UN has skewed the narrative falsely against Israel. This fabricated language is, in turn, absorbed and perpetuated by the media (both old and new), academics, politicians, and pop culture figures such as Roger Waters, further tainting the world’s perception of the conflict.

UN documents regularly use the term “occupied Palestine” and refer to “occupied Palestinian territory” (especially the “West Bank”) being stolen by Jewish “settlement activity.” All four UN terms — “Palestine,” “occupation,” “West Bank,” and “settlement” — are misleading.

Palestine: While UN documents regularly refer to “Palestine” and “the State of Palestine,” there is, in fact, no state of Palestine. As David Bukay shows “there has never been a land known as Palestine governed by Palestinians at any time in history.” Until recently there have never been a people nor a culture known as “Palestinian” distinct from “Arab.” The Arabs who lived in UN Mandated Palestine turned down statehood in 1947 by rejecting UN Resolution 181. In 1974 the UN recognized the PLO, a terrorist organization, as the official representative of the Palestinian people, paving the way for its emergence from the Oslo peace process under the guise of the Palestinian Authority (PA). In 2000, the PA turned down yet another offer of statehood because the offer did not recognize the “right of return” for millions of descendants of those displaced in 1948 to relocate to within Israel — a population transfer that would eliminate the existence of a Jewish state by demographic means. In 2012, the UN General Assembly upgraded the PA/PLO government to “Non-member Observer State”; UN rules dictate that new member states can only be created by the Security Council.

West Bank: The term “West Bank” is also a misnomer. In fact, this territory was for millennia called Judea and Samaria. After the 1948 War of Independence, Transjordan (now known as the Kingdom of Jordan) annexed it, renamed it the “West Bank,” and occupied it for nearly two decades. In the Six Day War, after Jordan attacked Israel, Israel entered the territory and administered it until the Oslo Accords era; then it turned over much of the area to the Palestinian Authority. The final borders of a Palestinian state were left contingent upon Palestinian progress in ending terrorism and bilateral negotiations over presumed land swaps.

Occupation: When it comes to Israel, the UN is obsessed with the word “occupation.” A recent Wall Street Journal article documents 530 General Assembly references to Israel as an “occupying power” versus zero for Indonesia (East Timor), Turkey (Cyprus), Russia (Georgia, Crimea), Morocco (Western Sahara), Vietnam (Cambodia), Armenia (Azerbaijan), Pakistan (Kashmir), or China (Tibet). UNESCO’s “Occupied Palestine” document uses the phrase “Israel, the occupying Power” thirteen times.

Most Palestinians in Judea and Samaria live under the governance of the Palestinian Authority. Referring to this territory as the “occupied West Bank,” is an unnecessary concession to the UN narrative. Saying that Jews are “occupying” Judea is as nonsensical as saying Arabs are “occupying” Arabia or Gauls are “occupying” France. Nevertheless many media sources (Washington Post, New York Times) use this term reflexively. New-media sources often take it a step farther. Any Google search combining the words “occupation” and “Israel” leads to a “People Also Ask” drop-down offering the following: “At the heart of the Israel/Palestine conflict today lies the question of the Palestinian territories occupied by Israel since the war of 1967, which include the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem.” Somehow Google missed the fact there have not been Israelis in Gaza since 2005.

Settlement: The term “settlement” evokes imagery of white European settlers encroaching on the ancestral territories of red, brown and black peoples, connoting the moral baggage of colonialism. The UN uses the term to insinuate Israeli theft of “Palestine.” In truth, many of the “West Bank settlers” bemoaned by the UN are not pioneers from other lands but infants, new members of growing families in long-established Jewish neighborhoods.

The Obama administration eagerly embraced this terminology. On July 27, Obama State Department spokesman John Kirby issued a statement that reads as though it were written at the UN. The document, entitled “Recent Israeli Settlement Announcements,” suggests that Obama’s State Department has come around to the UN’s way of thinking, especially in “strongly condemning” Israel for its “settlement activity” which it pronounces “corrosive to the cause of peace.”

Now that South Carolina governor Nikki Haley has been chosen as the Trump administration’s Ambassador to the UN, it will be up to her to challenge the UN’s ahistorical, slanted Palestine thinking. If there is an occupying force in Gaza, it is Hamas. What Israelis call Judea and Samaria, and Palestinians call the West Bank, are “disputed territories” to anyone claiming a modicum of neutrality. As Elliot Abrams put it, “the term ‘settlement’ loses meaning when applied to Jews building homes in their nation’s capital city.”