Archive for December 29, 2016

DHS, FBI release joint report on Russian cyber activity

December 29, 2016

,DHS, FBI release joint report on Russian cyber activity, Washington ExaminerGabby Morrongiello, December 29, 2016

(A thirteen page PDF “Joint Analysis” is available at the link. — DM)

A joint report released Thursday by the Department of Homeland Security and FBI has shed light on how federal investigators concluded that Russia was behind the hacking of Democratic political institutions in the presidential election.

Without mentioning either by name, the 13-page document illustrates how Russian civilian and military actors compromised the Democratic National Committee’s internal communications network and hacked thousands of emails sent and received by Hillary Clinton‘s campaign chairman, John Podesta, as well as other “U.S. government, political and private sector entitites.”

“These cyber operations have included spearphishing campaigns, targeting government organizations, critical infrastructure entities, think tanks, universities, political organizations, and corporations leading to the theft of information,” states the report.

The report was released just hours before the White House imposed a series of new sanctions on Russian officials and institutions as part of its pledge to retaliate against Moscow for interfering in the 2016 election. It is separate from the “full review” of Russia’s hack-and-release operations President Obama requested earlier this month.

According to the report, the Democratic party appears to have been the victim of a spearphishing campaign in which hundreds of employees were tricked “into changing their passwords through a fake webmail domain” hosted by Russian hackers.

Though U.S. intelligence officials insists the hacks were perpetrated by the Russian government, President-elect Trump has refused to accept such findings as fact.

“I think we ought to get on with our lives,” Trump told reporters late Wednesday when asked about the Obama administration’s plan to level sanctions against Russia for the election-year hacks.

 

The New Axis of Evil (or Comedy): CAIR, JVP and the Huffington Post

December 29, 2016

The New Axis of Evil (or Comedy): CAIR, JVP and the Huffington Post, Investigative Project on Terrorism, Steven Emerson, December 29, 2016

1930

Jewish Voice for Peace . . . [is] a Jewish group that is adamantly opposed to Israel and eager to retail Palestinian revisionist history and grievance propaganda against Israel. JVP supports Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) actions against Israel, targeting numerous companies for boycotts because they do business with Israel. It also has supported divestment campaigns on college campuses, succeeding in getting divestment resolutions passed at Hampshire College and Evergreen State College, and engaging in failed divestment campaigns at the University of California Berkeley and the University of California San Diego.

JVP’s mission statement calls for “an end to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem.” Echoing CAIR’s criticism of the U.S. alliance with Israel, JVP calls on the U.S. government to “stop supporting repressive policies in Israel and elsewhere.” It even applauded former U.S. President Jimmy Carter for meeting with Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal, and called on Israeli officials to meet with Meshaal as well.

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

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has finally found a Jewish group it likes.

At its annual banquet on Dec. 17, CAIR gave its new “Defender of Liberty” award to Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP).

The Huffington Post ran the original story about this award, continuing its long tradition of running apologias for radical Islamist and Muslim Brotherhood front groups all over the United States as well as promoting virulent anti-Semitic conspiracy theories.

In 2012, the Huffington Post UK even hired Mehdi Hasan, a radical Islamist who has also proposed a one-state solution to the Israeli/Palestinian conflict – one which would lead to the slaughter of the new Jewish minority. He also was once caught on video calling non-Muslims “animals:” Hasan called on Muslims to keep “the moral high ground,” adding: “Once we lose the moral high ground we are no different from the rest, of the non-Muslims, from the rest of those human beings who live their lives as animals, bending any rule to fulfill any desire.”  And he nefariously blamed Israeli influence for the war in Iraq. David Duke would be proud of the Huffington Post.

CAIR’s decision to honor a Jewish group may seem odd to those familiar with its anti-Semitism. Hussam Ayloush, the director of CAIR’s Southern California chapter, has used the term “zionazi” to describe Israeli Jews. CAIR officials have repeatedly claimed that Jews control U.S. policy. CAIR has even invited a neo-Nazi, William Baker, to speak at several conferences, and attacked those who pointed out Baker’s history. CAIR has repeatedly defended the virulently anti-Semitic Muslim Brotherhood cleric Yusuf al-Qaradawi, who has said: “On the hour of judgment, Muslims will fight the Jews and kill them.”

Qaradawi has defended suicide bombings and is hostile to Jews, saying: “There should be no dialogue with these people [Israelis] except with swords.”

CAIR is vehemently opposed to both the Israeli-Palestinian peace process and to the normalization of relations between Israel and the Palestinians. Despite claims to the contrary, CAIR officials have rejected a two-state solution and justified violence as a means to a legitimate end. “Our preference is peaceful negotiation…but if the peace process is flawed, then resistance is necessary,” CAIR co-founder and executive director Nihad Awad said in 2001.  Awad addressed a rally outside the Israeli embassy in Washington, D.C. in October 2000, at which rallygoers chanted, “Khaibar, Khaibar, Ya Yahud, Jaysh Muhammed Safayood” (“Khaibar, Khaibar, O Jews, the Army of Mohammed is coming for you”), as well as the Hamas slogans, “With our blood and soul we will liberate Palestine,” and “with our blood and soul we will sacrifice our life on your behalf, martyr.”

Given CAIR’s vehemently anti-Semitic background, it is hard to imagine any Jewish group that would be palatable to this “civil rights” organization, but in Jewish Voice for Peace, it found its perfect match: a Jewish group that is adamantly opposed to Israel and eager to retail Palestinian revisionist history and grievance propaganda against Israel. JVP supports Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) actions against Israel, targeting numerous companies for boycotts because they do business with Israel. It also has supported divestment campaigns on college campuses, succeeding in getting divestment resolutions passed at Hampshire College and Evergreen State College, and engaging in failed divestment campaigns at the University of California Berkeley and the University of California San Diego.

JVP’s mission statement calls for “an end to the Israeli occupation of the West Bank, Gaza Strip, and East Jerusalem.” Echoing CAIR’s criticism of the U.S. alliance with Israel, JVP calls on the U.S. government to “stop supporting repressive policies in Israel and elsewhere.” It even applauded former U.S. President Jimmy Carter for meeting with Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal, and called on Israeli officials to meet with Meshaal as well.

Marking its 28th anniversary, Meshaal’s organization vowed “to remain faithful to the liberation of Palestine and to keep its weapon directed at the Israeli occupation only.”

Meshaal also rejected peace efforts and wondered how “can anyone possibly have an excuse to abandon the path of jihad?”

“The Palestinians have reached the realization that negotiations with the (Israelis) are useless…the so-called peace process is futile. There is no peace. Only the path of Jihad, sacrifice, and blood (will bear fruit),”

So the first Jewish group that CAIR honors is a venomously anti-Israel one that retails propaganda against the Jewish state and ignores the genocidal anti-Semitism of its foes.

The name of the award that CAIR gave to JVP is noteworthy. Neither JVP nor CAIR are interested in defending the liberty of Israelis who build homes on land deemed to be “illegal settlements,” or the liberty of Israelis to live in and govern a Jewish state at all. So in what way does CAIR think of JVP as a “Defender of Liberty?” Did it honor JVP for defending the liberty of suicide bombers to murder Israeli civilians? Did it hail JVP for defending the liberty of Palestinians who have passed out candy to celebrate the murders of those civilians? Did it give its new award to JVP for defending the liberty of superannuated and anti-Semitic former Presidents to meet with terror masterminds?

The “Defender of Liberty” award that CAIR gave to Jewish Voice for Peace ought to be regarded as a mark of shame for an organization which claims to represent Jews and work within the Jewish tradition while advocating for policies that would expose the Jews of Israel to greater danger, greater poverty, and greater international opprobrium.

CAIR, JVP, and the Huffington Post, all such staunch promoters of Islamist terrorist front groups, deserve one other.

For Obama Administration, Time to Put Up or Shut Up on ‘Russian Hacking’

December 29, 2016

For Obama Administration, Time to Put Up or Shut Up on ‘Russian Hacking’, PJ Media, Michael Walsh, December 29, 2016

(Please see also, Obama administration announces measures to punish Russia for 2016 election interference. Obama just did it, with no recitation of evidence, credible or otherwise. — DM)

trump-truman-sized-770x415xt

Barack Hussein Obama, in the waning days of his administration, is clearly preparing to do maximum damage to his country and its allies on his way out the door to a very comfy — and no doubt ungratefully activist — retirement. First, there was the stab in the back to Israel at the UN the other day; now, he’s threatening to “retaliate” against the Russians for “hacking” the American election:

The Obama administration is under intense pressure to release evidence confirming Russian interference in the presidential election before leaving office. The administration up until now has provided little documentation to back up its official October assessment that the Russian government was attempting to interfere in the U.S. election.

Nor has it corroborated subsequent leaks from anonymous officials contending that the CIA believes the campaign was an attempt by Russian President Vladimir Putin to ensure Donald Trump’s victory.

President Obama has ordered the intelligence community to produce a complete review of its findings before Trump takes office on Jan. 20. The White House has said it will make as much of the report public as it can. But officials have warned that the document will contain “highly sensitive and classified information” and it is unclear how much concrete evidence it will be able to release.

Yeah, right. This is simply another shot across the incoming president’s bow — part of the “resistance” deracinated Democrats have promised in the wake of Hillary Clinton’s surprising (to them) — but thoroughly satisfying defeat in November.

Releasing any documentation of Russian interference would be a slap in the face to Trump, who has rejected assertions that the Kremlin was involved in the hacks on the Democratic National Committee (DNC) andHillary Clinton campaign chairman John Podesta.

The president-elect and his team have treated any suggestion of Russian involvement as an attack on the legitimacy of his election, and Republican leaders in Congress have treaded carefully on the issue.

The firestorm ignited by the CIA’s assessment has spurred calls from both parties for the administration to provide proof of Russian meddling. In late November, seven Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee urged the White House to declassify “additional information concerning the Russian Government and the U.S. election.”

As of last week, they had not yet received a response.

“If the CIA Director [John] Brennan and others at the top are serious about turning over evidence … they should do that,” Trump aide Kellyanne Conway said earlier this month. “They should not be leaking to the media. If there’s evidence, let’s see it.”

How about that? What this episode shows is the near-complete untrustworthiness of the CIA under career hack John Brennan, and its politicization by Obama. It also reveals the extent to which mainstream newspapers — the Washington Post and the New York Times — are so addled by partisanship that they have willingly abrogated their ethics in order to smear the new administration. As I wrote in the New York Post on Dec. 13:

In the wake of their shocking loss, Democrats and their fellow travelers in the media have mounted a frantic, and increasingly deracinated, campaign to deny Trump the fruits of his victory in the Electoral College and thus overturn the election by any means necessary, fair or foul.

The recounts failed, so now it’s on to the Russians. Unsourced speculation from “sources” inside the CIA says Russian agents hacked John Podesta’s emails from the Democratic National Committee, according to “bombshell” reports in the Washington Post and New York Times.

Except that was the same “bombshell” that Jeh Johnson, the secretary of homeland security, and James Clapper, the director of national intelligence, said on the record in October. The same “bombshell” that had Joe Biden acting like John Wayne, saying the US was going to retaliate. “We’re sending a message. We have the capacity to do it. And the message — he’ll know it,” Biden said about Vladimir Putin on “Meet the Press.”

No proof was offered then, or now, that Russia was involved. But it’s not as though voters weren’t aware of the speculation before the election, as some Democrats and columnists claim.

So what’s changed? Now Democrats and their media allies are in panic mode, looking for something, anything, to try to change the results.

As I’ve been saying on Twitter since the election: don’t believe a word you read in the MSM until Jan. 20, because every single “news” story will be a naked attempt at propaganda. After the inauguration, of course, the same warning will apply; it’s just that, having failed to stop Trump from taking office, the media will be on to something else in order to sabotage him and his voters.

ICC Begins to Pale

December 29, 2016

ICC Begins to Pale, Daily Bell, December 29, 2016

(The ICC is the International Criminal Court, funded in part by George Soros and other gl0balists. — DM)

Justice of this sort is best delivered by those involved. The idea that some supranational body can swoop in and adequately administer a curative is simply untrue. What’s involved could eventually have more if an impact on the west than the east, and not a good one.

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

Rising nationalism leaves international criminal court at risk Top lawyer warns withdrawal of countries and limiting of funding threaten future of tribunal … Six months after the international criminal court’s new Dutch palace of justice was formally opened on windswept sand dunes beside the North Sea, a tide of nationalist sentiment is threatening to undermine the project. Three African states have begun withdrawing from its jurisdiction, raising fears that a succession of others will follow suit. Russia has removed its signature from the founding statute, the Philippines and Kenya are openly contemplating departure and key member nations – including the UK – have limited its funding.

So the ICC Criminal  Court may be on the way out and that surely a positive development. Here at The Daily Bell, we are not fans of growing worldwide justice. We would rather see justice move in the other direction and become more privatexed again.

The ICC is funded in part by George Soros, and there is a reason for that. Soros gets involved when events are headed in an international direction. The creation and elaboration of global law is near and dear to the hearts of globalists everywhere.

The tribunal embodies international efforts to prosecute those responsible for genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity, but in 2017 it will face serious challenges to its credibility, insiders say.

Brexit, the election of Donald Trump and derogations from the European convention on human rights all represent a common theme of emphasizing national interests over international – usually stigmatised as “foreign” – laws.

The most immediate threat is the move by Burundi, South Africa and the Gambia, which in the last quarter of 2016 have all served notice of intention to withdraw, citing complaints that ICC prosecutions focus excessively on the African continent.

The ITC has 10 ongoing investigations since 2004 and these are almost all in Africa. This has led quite rightly to the idea that the ITC is mostly a way of focusing on Africa by Western white countries. A spokesman denied that the ICC was overly focused on Africa.

“Geographic considerations as such have no part in the exercise of this legal mandate. Most of the ICC‎ investigations in Africa were opened at the request of the African governments themselves. Two more were opened following referrals to the ICC prosecutor by the United Nations security council.”

But all in all, the ITC is pursuing fewer cases rather than more and offering less “justice” as well. Again from our point of view this is a good thing. What starts out aimed at bad guys almost invariable ends up afflicting the West instead of its stated targets whatever they are.

Additionally, while this sort of justice is supposedly supposed to be on bleeding edge of fairness, it is often far less equitable than it seems. The targets are preemptory, and often the remedies are delayed or denied. It doesn’t help that Soros is involved.

Conclusion: Justice of this sort is best delivered by those involved. The idea that some supranational body can swoop in and adequately administer a curative is simply untrue. What’s involved could eventually have more if an impact on the west than the east, and not a good one.

Obama administration announces measures to punish Russia for 2016 election interference

December 29, 2016

Obama administration announces measures to punish Russia for 2016 election interference, Washinton PostMissy Ryan and Ellen Nakashima, December 29, 2016

(Please see also, Obama sanctions Russia to retaliate against cyberattacks for a link to the executive order. –DM)

U.S. officials believe that a military spy agency in Russia hacked into the Democratic National Committee and stole emails later released by WikiLeaks. Emails hacked from the account of John Podesta, who chaired Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, were also made public, and state electoral systems were also targeted. The cyber-intervention was aimed primarily at Democrats.

U.S. officials have also considered criminal indictments of Russian officials, but the FBI appears to have been unable so far to compile sufficient evidence to take that step.

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

The Obama administration announced new measures on Thursday in retaliation for what U.S. officials have characterized as Russian interference in American elections, ordering the removal of 35 Russian government officials from the United States and sanctioning agencies and individuals tied to the hacks.

The announcement comes several weeks after President Obama promised to respond to Russian hacking in both public and covert actions, “at a time and place of our own choosing.”

U.S. officials believe that a military spy agency in Russia hacked into the Democratic National Committee and stole emails later released by WikiLeaks. Emails hacked from the account of John Podesta, who chaired Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign, were also made public, and state electoral systems were also targeted. The cyber-intervention was aimed primarily at Democrats.

Prior to the announcement, administration officials had been discussing how to adapt a 2015 executive order allowing the president to respond to foreign cyberattacks. Because the order was intended primarily for attacks against infrastructure or commercial targets, officials have been scrambling to ensure the order can be used to punish Russia for the election hacks.

Russia has denied involvement in attacks related to the election and promised to retaliate against any new sanctions.

President-elect Donald J. Trump has already suggested that the United States should drop its effort to retaliate against Russia, telling reporters this week that “we ought to get on with our lives.” Trump has also cast doubt on U.S. intelligence agencies’ conclusion that Russia was behind the hacks.

U.S. officials have also considered criminal indictments of Russian officials, but the FBI appears to have been unable so far to compile sufficient evidence to take that step.

Obama sanctions Russia to retaliate against cyberattacks

December 29, 2016

Obama sanctions Russia to retaliate against cyberattacks, Washington ExaminerJoel Gehrke, December 29, 2016

(Credible evidence of hacking and harm done? — DM)

President Obama issued a new round of sanctions targeting Russia in retaliation for the cyberattacks against the Democratic National Committee and Democratic campaigns, despite Russian warnings not to do so.

The sanctions target nine Russian intelligence officials and tech companies “determined to be responsible for or complicit in malicious cyber-enabled activities that result in enumerated harms that are reasonably likely to result in, or have materially contributed to, a significant threat to the national security, foreign policy, or economic health or financial stability of the United States,” according tot he Treasury Department.

2016cyberamend.eo.Rel by Daniel on Scribd (Full text in PDF format at the link. — DM)

Germany: Muslim migrants kick baby on bus, attack paramedics trying to treat child

December 29, 2016

Germany: Muslim migrants kick baby on bus, attack paramedics trying to treat child, Jihad Watch

The new masters of Germany are impatient with those who do not recognize their preeminence. But a few more lessons about how it’s “racist” to resist, and all will no doubt be well.

augsburg-bus

“Rampaging Syrian migrants KICK BABY on bus, then attack paramedics trying to treat child,” by Rehema Figueiredo, Express, December 28, 2016 (thanks to Blazing Cat Fur):

MIGRANTS kicked a one-year-old baby on a bus then attacked paramedics with BELTS as they tried to treat the infant.

The shocking attack happened at approximately 9pm on Sunday night in Augsburg, one of Germany’s oldest cities.

Residents were being evacuated following the discovery of a bomb from the Second World War and some had boarded a replacement night bus when a fight broke out.

Several Syrian migrants erupted with anger because of a pram taking up space on the bus.

Migrants hurled abuse at other passengers before a fight broke out, with four of the Syrian men using the handles on the bus to hoist themselves up and attack women and old people to try and drag them into the fighting, according to an eyewitness.

The migrants paid no attention to anyone in their way, at one point kicking a one-year-old in the face.

Paramedics were called and arrived on the scene to help the injured but the men began attacking them with belts – not letting up until the police were called….

Cartoons and Video of the Day

December 29, 2016

Via LATMA TV

 

Via Hope n’ Change

crystal-clear-sm

 

H/tPower Line

johnkerry

H/t Vermont Loon Watch

bozo

 

UK: 12 million more migrants will arrive in 25 years without hard Brexit

December 29, 2016

UK: 12 million more migrants will arrive in 25 years without hard Brexit, Jihad Watch

MASS immigration will continue at “unacceptable” levels for at least the next two decades unless Britain makes a full break with Brussels, a report predicted last night.

The case for a hard Brexit is compelling, given the self-induced disintegration of Europe due to its reckless immigration policy.

“An increase of anything like 12 million in just 25 years is, quite simply, unacceptable to the British public and certainly not what they voted for in the referendum.”

A hard Brexit will likely be well received by the Queen, given her views about Muslim migration. A BBC political editor reported this week that the Queen stated: “I don’t see why we can’t just get out. What’s the problem?” Back in June, the Queen accused EU Courts of denigrating Britain by “protecting terrorists,” and asked dinner guests: “‘Give me THREE good reasons’ to remain inside the European Union.”

uk-migrants

“BREXIT WARNING: 12 MILLION more migrants to arrive in UK in 25 years without hard Brexit”, by Macer Hall, Express, December 29, 2016:

Figures showed that annual net migration to the UK from EU countries would be unlikely to fall below 155,000 in the “medium term” if the country stays in the EU’s Single Market.

And the Government’s ability to reduce the influx will be “extremely limited” as long as the EU’s free movement rules remain in force.

The disturbing forecast of near-record levels of migration for years ahead was set out in a report from the population think tank Migration Watch. It was being seen last night as a devastating blow to campaigners for a so-called “soft Brexit” that retain the UK’s full Single Market membership.

Supporters of a full break with Brussels insisted that snatching back control over immigration was at the heart of the vote to leave the EU in last summer’s referendum on the UK’s membership of the bloc.

Alp Mehmet, vice-chairman of Migration Watch UK, said: “This research spells out the very serious consequences for our society of net migration continuing at its present scale with membership of the single market resulting in a relentless increase in our population.

“An increase of anything like 12 million in just 25 years is, quite simply, unacceptable to the British public and certainly not what they voted for in the referendum.”

Tory MP Philip Hollobone said: “Migration Watch’s forecasts have always been thoroughly reliable and are the best we are going to get from anyone.

“The picture they paint is completely unacceptable.

“We simply can’t stay in the Single Market if it means we are going to get that sort of level of immigration.

“Above all, people voted in the referendum for a change in our approach to immigration.”

And John Bickley, Ukip’s immigration spokesman, said: “Migration Watch have confirmed Ukip’s worst fears, that remaining in the Single Market will not result in the UK ‘leaving the EU’ as we will have to continue to accept uncontrolled immigration from the EU.

“Total net immigration will add 12 million people to the population in just 25 years, more than the equivalent of the entire current populations of Bulgaria and New Zealand.”

He added: “Theresa May needs to set out in no uncertain terms that when the UK leaves the EU it will also cease to be a member of the Single Market.

“The UK will then, like the rest of the world, have access to the Single Market, and tariff free access will be hugely beneficial to the EU, which runs a massive trade surplus with the UK.”

The Migration Watch report cited official figures showing that annual net migration from other EU nations to the UK reached 189,000 in the 12 months to the end of last June….

The Resilience of Israel

December 29, 2016

The Resilience of Israel, Town HallVictor Davis Hanson, December 29, 2016

bibi1

The Obama administration’s estrangement from Israel has had the odd effect of empowering Israel.

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

Israel would seem to be in a disastrous position, given the inevitable nuclear capabilities of Iran and the recent deterioration of its relationship with the United States, its former patron and continued financial benefactor.

Immediately upon entering office, President Obama hectored Israel on so-called settlements. Obama promised to put “daylight” between the U.S. and Israel — and delivered on that promise.

Last week, the U.S. declined to veto, and therefore allowed to pass, a United Nations resolution that, among other things, isolates Israel internationally and condemns the construction of housing in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

Obama has long been at odds with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Over objections from the Obama administration, Netanyahu addressed a joint session of Congress last year about the existential dangers of the Obama-brokered Iran deal and the likelihood of a new Middle East nuclear proliferation race.

Obama then doubled down on his irritation with Netanyahu through petty slights, such as making him wait during White House visits. In 2014, an official in the Obama administration anonymously said Netanyahu, a combat veteran, was a “coward” on Iran.

At a G-20 summit in Cannes, France, in 2011, Obama, in a hot-mic slip, trashed Netanyahu. He whined to French President Nicolas Sarkozy: “You’re tired of him? What about me? I have to deal with him every day.”

In contrast, Obama bragged about his “special” relationship with autocratic Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan. Never mind that Erdogan seems to want to reconstruct Turkey as a modern Islamist version of the Ottoman Empire, or that he is anti-democratic while Israel is a consensual society of laws.

The Middle East surrounding democratic Israel is a nightmare. Half a million have died amid the moonscape ruins of Syria. A once-stable Iraq was overrun by the Islamic State.

The Arab Spring, U.S. support for the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, the coup of General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi to regain control of Egypt, and the bombing of Libya all have left North Africa in turmoil.

Iran has been empowered by the U.S.-brokered deal and will still become nuclear.

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s bombers blast civilians not far from Israel’s borders.

Democrats are considering Rep. Keith Ellison as the next chairman of the Democratic National Committee despite his past ties to the Nation of Islam and his history of anti-Israel remarks.

Yet in all this mess, somehow Israel is in its best geostrategic position in decades. How?

The answer is a combination of unintended consequences, deft diplomacy, political upheavals in Europe and the United States, and Israel’s own democratic traditions.

Huge natural gas and oil finds off Israel’s Mediterranean coast and in the Golan Heights have radically changed Israel’s energy and financial positions. Israel no longer needs to import costly fossil fuels and may soon be an exporter of gas and oil to needy customers in Europe and the Middle East. (America recently became the world’s greatest producer of carbon energy and also no longer is dependent on Middle Eastern oil imports, resulting in less political influence by Arab nations.) Israel is creating its own version of Silicon Valley at Beersheba, which is now a global hub of cybersecurity research.

The Obama administration’s estrangement from Israel has had the odd effect of empowering Israel.

Rich Persian Gulf states see Obama as hostile both to Israel and to themselves, while he appeases the common enemy of majority-Shiite Iran.

After a “leading from behind” U.S withdrawal from the Middle East, many Arab nations now see Israel more as a powerful ally against Iran than as an old existential enemy. They also see Israel as a country that has likewise been snubbed by America.

The idea of an Arab-Israeli understanding is surreal, but it is developing from shared fears of being targets of Iranian bombing and American indifference.

Many of Israel’s neighbors are threatened by either ISIS or al-Qaida nihilists. Those deadly dangers remind the world that democratic, free-market Israel is the sole safe port amid a rising Middle East tsunami.

Changing Western politics are empowering Israel as well.

More than 2 million migrants — for the most part, young males from the war-torn Middle East — have terrified Europe, especially after a series of radical Islamic terrorist killings. Suddenly, Europe is far more worried about Israel’s neighbors than about lecturing Israel itself.

Pushback against the Obama administration extends to its foreign policy. President-elect Donald Trump may be more pro-Israel than any recent U.S. president. And he may be the first U.S. leader to move the American embassy to Israel’s capital in West Jerusalem.For all the chaos and dangers abroad, the map of global energy, Western politics and Middle Eastern alliances has been radically redrawn.At the center is a far stronger Israel that has more opportunities than at any other time in its history. It will have an even brighter future after Obama has left office.