Posted tagged ‘Israeli elections’

How Israel Would Become Palestine

February 20, 2017

How Israel Would Become Palestine, The Jewish PressFred Maroun, February 19, 2017

israel-palestine-flag

If Israel annexes the West Bank, the Jewish majority in Israel would be reduced immediately from 75% to between 56% and 57%, and the Arab minority in Israel would double from 21% to between 40% and 41%.

While Jews would retain a clear majority immediately after annexation, the Arabs’ influence on government would increase dramatically. Arab parties have been kept out of every governing coalition in Israel’s history, but the continuation of that practice would be almost impossible when Arabs represent 40% to 41% of the population. It would require that all Jewish parties, from left to right, always agree to work together after every election; sooner or later, that Jewish-only coalition would break up.

There is not much that is uncertain in this common-sense scenario resulting from annexation of the West bank, other than how long it would take to unravel. The end result is that Israel, which would likely be renamed Palestine, would no longer be a Jewish state by any definition of the term.

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

The idea of Israel annexing the West Bank was tentatively endorsed by Israeli President Reuven Rivlin who insisted that if this occurred, Palestinians living in the West Bank must be given Israeli citizenship. US President Donald Trump signaled that he is willing to accept a one-state solution, and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s lack of response to Trump indicates that he is not opposed to it either.

Based on the Jewish Virtual Library, in Israel, as of January 2017, “The Jewish population makes up 6,450,000 (74.8%); 1,796,000 (20.8%) are Arabs; and, those identified as ‘others’ (non-Arab Christians, Baha’i, etc) make up 4.4% of the population (384,000 people)”. Based on the Jerusalem Post, “Current estimates of the West Bank population, according to Israeli, Palestinian and US numbers, put the number of Palestinians at anywhere between 2.7 and 2.9 million.”

If Israel annexes the West Bank, the Jewish majority in Israel would be reduced immediately from 75% to between 56% and 57%, and the Arab minority in Israel would double from 21% to between 40% and 41%.

While Jews would retain a clear majority immediately after annexation, the Arabs’ influence on government would increase dramatically. Arab parties have been kept out of every governing coalition in Israel’s history, but the continuation of that practice would be almost impossible when Arabs represent 40% to 41% of the population. It would require that all Jewish parties, from left to right, always agree to work together after every election; sooner or later, that Jewish-only coalition would break up.

As Arab parties negotiate to be included in governing coalitions, some of their priorities would become government policy. Arab policies that are outright anti-Zionist would be rejected at first, but other priorities would have to be accepted.

One of the first priorities to be demanded by Arab parties is likely to be the immigration into Israel of relatives of Israeli Arab citizens, including some Palestinian refugees residing in Arab countries and some Palestinians residing in Gaza. This would have the effect of further increasing the size of the Arab minority, which would lead to even more Arab clout in the government.

Other Arab demands would have to be met, including immigration of more Palestinian refugees into Israel and the annexation of Gaza. Eventually, Arab parties would be able to govern with little or no Jewish representation. As Arabs control the Israeli government, they would eliminate laws that discriminate against them, including the unlimited Jewish right of return, perhaps even replacing it with an unlimited Palestinian “right of return”.

There is not much that is uncertain in this common-sense scenario resulting from annexation of the West bank, other than how long it would take to unravel. The end result is that Israel, which would likely be renamed Palestine, would no longer be a Jewish state by any definition of the term.

Why the Anti-Israeli Sentiment?

January 5, 2017

Why the Anti-Israeli Sentiment? Town HallVictor Davis Hanson, January  5, 2017

israelflag

Secretary of State John Kerry, echoing other policymakers in the Obama administration, blasted Israel last week in a 70-minute rant about its supposedly self-destructive policies.

Why does the world — including now the U.S. — single out liberal and lawful Israel but refrain from chastising truly illiberal countries?

Kerry has never sermonized for so long about his plan to solve the Syrian crisis that has led to some 500,000 deaths or the vast migrant crisis that has nearly wrecked the European Union.

No one in this administration has shown as much anger about the many thousands who have been killed and jailed in the Castro brothers’ Cuba, much less about the current Stone Age conditions in Venezuela or the nightmarish government of President Rodrigo Duterte in the Philippines, an ally nation.

President Obama did not champion the cause of the oppressed during the Green Revolution of 2009 in Iran. Did Kerry and Obama become so outraged after Russia occupied South Ossetia, Crimea and eastern Ukraine?

Ambassador to the United Nations Samantha Power was never so impassioned over the borders of Chinese-occupied Tibet, or over Turkish-occupied Northern Cyprus.

In terms of harkening back to the Palestinian “refugee” crisis that started in the late 1940s, no one talks today in similar fashion about the Jews who survived the Holocaust and walked home, only to find that their houses in Eastern Europe were gone or occupied by others. Much less do we recall the 11 million German civilians who were ethnically cleansed from Eastern Europe in 1945 by the Soviets and their imposed Communist governments. Certainly, there are not still “refugee” camps outside Dresden for those persons displaced from East Prussia 70 years ago.

More recently, few nations at the U.N. faulted the Kuwaiti government for the expulsion of 200,000 Palestinians after the liberation of Kuwait by coalition forces in 1991.

Yet on nearly every issue — from “settlements” to human rights to the status of women — U.N. members that routinely violate human rights target a liberal Israel.

When President Obama entered office, among his first acts were to give an interview with the Saudi-owned news outlet Al Arabiya championing his outreach to the mostly non-democratic Islamic world and to blast democratic Israel on “settlements.”

Partly, the reason for such inordinate criticism of Israel is sheer cowardice. If Israel had 100 million people and was geographically large, the world would not so readily play the bully.

Instead, the United Nations and Europe would likely leave it alone — just as they give a pass to human rights offenders such as Pakistan and Indonesia. If Israel were as big as Iran, and Iran as small as Israel, then the Obama administration would have not reached out to Iran, and would have left Israel alone.

Israel’s supposed Western friends sort out Israel’s enemies by their relative natural resources, geography and population — and conclude that supporting Israel is a bad deal in cost/benefit terms.

Partly, the criticism of Israel is explained by oil — an issue that is changing daily as both the U.S. and Israel cease to be oil importers.

Still, about 40 percent of the world’s oil is sold by Persian Gulf nations. Influential nations in Europe and China continue to count on oil imports from the Middle East — and make political adjustments accordingly.

Partly, anti-Israel rhetoric is due to herd politics.

The Palestinians — illiberal and reactionary on cherished Western issues like gender equality, homosexuality, religious tolerance and diversity — have grafted their cause to the popular campus agendas of race/class/gender victimization.

Western nations in general do not worry much about assorted non-Western crimes such as genocides, mass cleansings or politically induced famines. Instead, they prefer sermons to other Westerners as a sort of virtue-signaling, without any worries over offending politically correct groups.

Partly, the piling on Israel is due to American leverage over Israel as a recipient of U.S. aid. As a benefactor, the Obama administration expects that Israel must match U.S. generosity with obeisance. Yet the U.S. rarely gives similar “how dare you” lectures to less liberal recipients of American aid, such as the Palestinians for their lack of free elections.

Partly, the cause of global hostility toward Israel is jealousy. If Israel were mired in Venezuela-like chaos, few nations would care. Instead, the image of a proud, successful, Westernized nation as an atoll in a sea of self-inflicted misery is grating to many. And the astounding success of Israel bothers so many failed states that the entire world takes notice.

But partly, the source of anti-Israelism is ancient anti-Semitism.

If Israelis were Egyptians administering Gaza or Jordanians running the West Bank (as during the 1960s), no one would care. The world’s problem is that Israelis are Jews. Thus, Israel earns negative scrutiny that is never extended commensurately to others.

Obama and his diplomatic team should have known all this. Perhaps they do, but they simply do not care.

Clinton’s ‘foreign intervention’ hypocrisy

October 11, 2016

Clinton’s ‘foreign intervention’ hypocrisy, Israel Hayom, Ruthie Blum, October 11, 2016

During the second U.S. presidential debate on Sunday night at Washington University in St. Louis, Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton did her best to sidestep the issue of the tens of thousands of emails she deleted from her private server.

This she tried to accomplish by urging listeners to”fact-check” on her web site.

But then, co-moderator Martha Raddatz asked a question — posed by a social media user — surrounding alleged excerpts, released by WikiLeaks, from her exorbitantly paid speeches. In one such address to Wall Street bigwigs, Clinton purportedly said to the hosts she pretends in public to revile, “You need both a public and private position on certain issues.”

Is it okay, Raddatz asked on behalf of the person who had submitted the question, “for politicians to be two-faced?”

Clinton’s response was to compare her double-dealings with America’s 16th president — or at least to Steven Spielberg’s rendition of Abraham Lincoln in the Oscar-winning film.

“I was making the point that it is hard, sometimes, to get the Congress to do what you want to do,” she said. “And you have to keep working at it. And, yes, President Lincoln, [in] trying to convince some people … used some arguments; convincing other people, he used other arguments. That was a great … display of presidential leadership.”

This analogy was so ridiculous that even Hillary knew she had better squirm her way out of it. “But, you know, let’s talk about what’s really going on here, Martha,” she said, self-correcting and diverting attention to her Republican rival. “Because our intelligence community just came out and said in the last few days that the Kremlin, meaning Putin and the Russian government, are directing the attacks — the hacking of American accounts — to influence our election.”

Indeed, she declared, “We have never in the history of our country been in a situation where an adversary, a foreign power, is working so hard to influence the outcome of the election, and … they’re not doing it to get me elected. They are doing it to try to influence the election for Donald Trump.”

One could almost hear Russian President Vladimir Putin and Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei laughing out loud at this assertion. Why in the world would they want to throw a wrench into the good thing they have going with America in a state of weakness? What could possibly possess them to wish to rock the boat? Iran is getting billions of dollars in cash and renewed business deals; Russia is starting to realize its dream of becoming a superpower again. Furthermore, with a Clinton White House, radical Islamists would have an easy time entering the U.S. — as “refugees” — to wreak havoc on the “Great Satan.”

Now, Hillary may be no dummy, but she is a great hypocrite. This was evident during the debate not only in her assault on Trump’s escapades with women and wealth. Even more striking was her shock and awe about foreign powers attempting to influence the upcoming U.S. election.

As a former member of the Obama administration, she ought to know a thing or two about such a practice. Yes, her pals in the White House and State Department invested hundreds of thousands of dollars in a concerted campaign to prevent the re-election last year of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. They did this by funneling “grant” money to a far-Left, pro-Palestinian nongovernmental organization called OneVoice.

A Senate investigation revealed that the activities and political leanings of OneVoice were well known. In addition, as the Washington Free Beacon reported in July, a senior State Department official admitted that he had deleted several email exchanges pertaining to the administration’s coordination with OneVoice, whose grants and oversight were done by then-U.S. Consul General in Jerusalem Michael Ratney.

“It is completely unacceptable that U.S. taxpayer dollars were used to build a political campaign infrastructure that was deployed … against the leader of our closest ally in the Middle East,” said Sen. Rob Portman (R-Ohio), who chaired the subcommittee that investigated the fiasco.

Not to worry, though. Private money from Hillary’s billionaire friends, such as the virulently anti-Israel George Soros, was also spent on the effort to keep Netanyahu from winning the election. Another organization, established specifically for this purpose, was V15 (victory 2015).

Founded by an Israeli named Nimrod Dweck, V15 hired U.S. consulting firm “270 Strategies” — comprised, as the website World Net Daily reported — mostly of former top staffers for Obama’s 2012 re-election campaign. Dweck told World Net Daily that it was OneVoice that persuaded him to hire the firm.

The attempt to topple Netanyahu by bolstering the Israeli Left failed abysmally, much to the dismay of Obama and cohort Democrats. But theirs was a blatant example of foreign intervention in the election process of another country.

I guess Hillary thinks that’s okay, as long as it’s her team running the interference.

US Declassifies Document Revealing Israel’s Nuclear Program

March 25, 2015

US Declassifies Document Revealing Israel’s Nuclear Program, Israel National News, Ari Yashar, Matt Wanderman, March 25, 2015

DimonaDimona nuclear reactor circa 1960sNational Security Archive/Flash 90

In a development that has largely been missed by mainstream media, the Pentagon early last month quietly declassified a Department of Defense top-secret document detailing Israel’s nuclear program, a highly covert topic that Israel has never formally announced to avoid a regional nuclear arms race, and which the US until now has respected by remaining silent.

But by publishing the declassified document from 1987, the US reportedly breached the silent agreement to keep quiet on Israel’s nuclear powers for the first time ever, detailing the nuclear program in great depth.

The timing of the revelation is highly suspect, given that it came as tensions spiraled out of control between Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama ahead of Netanyahu’s March 3 address in Congress, in which he warned against the dangers of Iran’s nuclear program and how the deal being formed on that program leaves the Islamic regime with nuclear breakout capabilities.

Another highly suspicious aspect of the document is that while the Pentagon saw fit to declassify sections on Israel’s sensitive nuclear program, it kept sections on Italy, France, West Germany and other NATOcountries classified, with those sections blocked out in the document.

The 386-page report entitled “Critical Technological Assessment in Israel and NATO Nations” gives a detailed description of how Israel advanced its military technology and developed its nuclear infrastructure and research in the 1970s and 1980s.

Israel is “developing the kind of codes which will enable them to make hydrogen bombs. That is, codes which detail fission and fusion processes on a microscopic and macroscopic level,” reveals the report, stating that in the 1980s Israelis were reaching the ability to create bombs considered a thousand times more powerful than atom bombs.

The revelation marks a first in which the US published in a document a description of how Israel attained hydrogen bombs.

The report also notes research laboratories in Israel “are equivalent to our Los Alamos, Lawrence Livermore and Oak Ridge National Laboratories,” the key labs in developing America’s nuclear arsenal.

Israel’s nuclear infrastructure is “an almost exact parallel of the capability currently existing at our National Laboratories,” it adds.

“As far as nuclear technology is concerned the Israelis are roughly where the U.S. was in the fission weapon field in about 1955 to 1960,” the report reveals, noting a time frame just after America tested its first hydrogen bomb.

Institute for Defense Analysis, a federally funded agency operating under the Pentagon, penned the report back in 1987.

Aside from nuclear capabilities, the report revealed Israel at the time had “a totally integrated effort in systems development throughout the nation,” with electronic combat all in one “integrated system, not separated systems for the Army, Navy and Air Force.” It even acknowledged that in some cases, Israeli military technology “is more advanced than in the U.S.”

Declassifying the report comes at a sensitive timing as noted above, and given that the process to have it published was started three years ago, that timing is seen as having been the choice of the American government.

US journalist Grant Smith petitioned to have the report published based on the Freedom of Information Act. Initially the Pentagon took its time answering, leading Smith to sue, and a District Court judge to order the Pentagon to respond to the request.

Smith, who heads the Institute for Research: Middle East Policy, reportedly said he thinks this is the first time the US government has officially confirmed that Israel is a nuclear power, a status that Israel has long been widely known to have despite being undeclared.

Hero of the Middle East: The Israeli Messenger

March 18, 2015

Hero of the Middle East: The Israeli Messenger, The Gatestone InstituteBassam Tawil, March 18, 2015

In its evident, inexplicable eagerness to sign just about any deal with Iran to allow it nuclear weapons capability, the U.S. State Department has removed Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah — two of the world most undisguised promoters of terror — from its Foreign Terrorist Organizations List.

Iran’s President, Hassan Rouhani, has even openly admitted that Iran’s diplomacy with the U.S. is an active “jihad.” How much plainer does a message have to get?

The Islamists have nothing but contempt for Europe’s weakness.

The West needs to paralyze Iran, rather than appease it.

A series of significant defeats to Islamist organizations will counter the effects of their efforts to entice young people to join them, especially ISIS.

In these terrible times, critical for the future of our region, Netanyahu spoke to the representatives of the American people, despite the objections of many Israelis and Americans. He was willing to accept personal, political and diplomatic setbacks in order to look after his people’s security.

We are all also hoping that that the government of Israel will focus even more on bringing the Arabs of Israel into the Israeli fold. Otherwise a “fifth column” could form and harden that will drive them into the open and waiting arms of Hamas and other terrorist groups.

Arab-Israeli politicians might also focus more on helping such an effort, rather than, as many Arab politicians do, lash out and blame others for what is wrong — a lazy, destructive substitute for actually helping improve the lives of their people.

Ever since Israel’s Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, came back from his recent visit to the United States, it has repeatedly been shown that he was right to stand before Congress and issue his warnings. Tehran’s Ayatollahs have not only held a naval exercise in the Strait of Hormuz, where they targeted a simulated a U.S. Navy aircraft carrier, they also displayed new missiles that could paralyze all the shipping in the Gulf.

Iran has already surrounded the oilfields of the Middle East, and is openly increasing its efforts to bring down the “Big Satan,” the United States. Iran’s President, Hassan Rouhani, has even openly admitted that Iran’s diplomacy with the U.S. is an active “jihad.” How much plainer does a message have to get?

Iran has not only taken over Yemen, Lebanon and Syria It is also in the process of taking over — presumably with the help of its negotiations with the U.S. — Bahrain, Iraq, Libya and parts of South America, especially Venezuela, with its vast reserves of uranium, and Bolivia, now with a suspected nuclear installation.

In its evident, inexplicable eagerness to sign just about any deal with Iran to allow it to achieve nuclear capability, the U.S. State Department has removed Iran and its proxy, Hezbollah — two of the world’s most undisguised promoters of terror — from its Foreign Terrorist Organizations List, presumably at Iran’s request.

After Republican Senators sent a letter to Iran warning that any agreement with the U.S. would have to be endorsed by Congress, the Iranians used it to claim that the United States is so weak it is about to fall apart. The king of Saudi Arabia said that if the U.S. did not halt Iran’s nuclear program, Saudi Arabia would begin enriching its own uranium, to acquire a nuclear potential equal to that of Iran.

Ashraf Ramelah, president of the Christian human rights organization Voice of the Copts, asked House Speaker John Boehner to invite Egyptian President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi to address Congress, to warn America of the mistake it clearly intends to make. The members of the Arab League met in Riyadh to warn America of the approaching disaster.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry recently hinted that the agreement with Iran was not particularly urgent, and claimed that should the talks fail, the United States had alternatives.

Apparently with the sole objective of embarrassing Netanyahu, no one in the U.S. administration was willing to admit that he was right, or that unfortunately there were many American individuals and organizations actively intervening in the Israeli elections, with the goal of toppling Netanyahu. The U.S. Administration clearly wanted to replace him with Yitzhak Herzog, who is weak — another link in the chain of American foreign policy failures, from Allende and the Shah of Iran to Mubarak, all victims of the political and diplomatic elite’s ignorance and lack of political common sense.

The lesson President Obama has not yet learned from his experience with Arabs is that anyone who deliberately ignores or applauds when his own fanatic Muslim nationals (or guests) kill “infidels” will eventually be repaid with the killing of his own non-extremist Muslims. That is exactly what is going to happen in Iran, Turkey, Qatar, Lebanon and other countries that support terrorism.

The Western world should be wary, and not be tempted into breathing a sigh of relief because the Muslim Brotherhood condemned the burning of the Jordanian pilot. The Muslim Brotherhood, which consistently preaches the murder of innocents of every stripe, is currently trying to cover its tracks regarding murder carried out in the name of Islam through the taqiyya, which permits Muslims to lie to “protect” Islam — in this case against the global wave of outrage against Islamist terrorism. Perhaps they condemn the burning alive of the pilot because, according to Islam, only Allah can burn someone to death. But behind their pious declarations they are overjoyed by his death, and continue inciting their followers to murder more of those they have designated as “infidels,” while every day designating still more.

That Hamas and ISIS identify with one another, collaborate and have almost identical goals was made clear recently by the arrests Hamas operatives in the Palestinian Authority on the grounds that they vandalized the memorial set up in Ramallah for the murdered Jordanian pilot.

In their misguided, fumbling experiments, EU officials, along with the Arab League foreign ministers, are forming a united front to fight Islamist terrorism, while including the very countries known consistently to support it. These include Turkey, which mainly supports ISIS, and Qatar, which supports the Islamist terrorist organizations in the Sinai Peninsula and the Gaza Strip.

Despite the fact that the Muslim Brotherhood and the other Islamist terrorist organizations thrive in Arab states — although in some they have been outlawed — the West, especially the Obama Administration, doggedly refuses to outlaw them and insists they are peace-loving religious organizations. For some intriguing reason, the leaders of the Western world find it impossible to see the relationship between the Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamist terrorist organizations it fosters.

Obama’s behavior underlies the conspiracy theory, common in the Middle East, that he is a Muslim Brotherhood mole.

The U.S. Administration refuses to recognize the dangerous game Turkey is playing by ignoring the West’s sanctions on Iran. Despite the fact that Turkey is a member of NATO, it has, in fact, upgraded and improved its trade agreements with Iran.

The European Union, in its cowardice and folly, has removed Hamas, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Palestinian branch, from its list of designated terrorist organizations. Europe refuses to change its stance, even though barely a week ago, Egypt designated the entire Hamas movement a terrorist organization. Hamas supports ISIS in the Sinai Peninsula and within Egypt itself, as they attack government, security and civilian targets.

The Islamists have nothing but contempt for Europe’s weakness, and in the meantime, ISIS’s wave of success in Iraq and Syria, and its brand as “powerful,” encourage young, impressionable Muslims to join its ranks.

In the meantime, in the wake of rising Islamist sentiment in the Muslim communities of Europe and the U.S., imams and Islamist activists have been falling over themselves to reassure the public. They have opened mosques to casual visitors, in an effort to allay their fears and downplay the threat, as if a Westerner on a guided tour could possibly understand the degree of propaganda and incitement churned out behind closed doors, in classrooms and libraries.

* * *

The wages America pays Iran, in return for questionable aid it may or may not receive in the fight against ISIS, only serve to strengthen the Ayatollahs and their collaborators — Russia, Syria and Hezbollah — and ease the sanctions against Iran to make it stronger, enabling further expansion. And that is before Iran achieves nuclear weapons capability. What about after?

The saga will likely end with an agreement ending the sanctions on Iran, permitting it to build its nuclear bomb “for peaceful purposes,” while in the meantime Iran will have taken over Yemen, completed its new line of “defensive” missiles, of the sort that will be able to reach Europe and be loaded onto submarines.

The soon-to-be-signed agreement between Iran and the United States not only abandons the Sunni Arab states and Israel to their fates; it also paves the way for an inevitable nuclear arms race involving Sunni states, carried out in the vain hope that they will be able to contain the Shi’ites before they launch a nuclear Armageddon on the Middle East.

There is also the rumored approaching death of Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Thus, any agreement signed with the Iranians won’t be worth the paper it is printed on, because no one knows who will replace him and if his replacement will agree to honor any commitments signed by the previous regime.

Instead of strengthening moderate Sunni states such as Egypt and the Gulf States, both of which are exploring an innovative, moderate, contemporary Islam, America has chosen to support the Muslim Brotherhood, which has fooled it into thinking it is not doing its utmost to weaken those moderate states.

The U.S. is driving a wedge into the unity of the Sunni Arab world and weakening its efforts to counter Iran.

To misrepresent the agreement with Iran, the Obama Administration enlisted European countries to create a smokescreen and media white noise, labeling Israel’s failure to reach a peace agreement with the Palestinians as the only important issue problem the Middle East.

They are using Europe to turn Israel into a leper, as if it is Israel’s bound duty to accept American dictates because of its dependence on the American veto in the UN. Obama’s National Security Advisor, Susan Rice, instead of focusing on the catastrophically serious Iranian threat, recently made the hostile statement that Israel must now resolve the Palestinian issue.

The efforts Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu has made to convince Congress not to support the agreement with Iran were brutally attacked by the White House, which is apparently only open to hearing opinions that agree with it.

968Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu speaks before the U.S. Congress, March 4, 2015. (Image source: C-SPAN video screenshot)

Despite reservations regarding Netanyahu’s hard line in Israel’s negotiations with Palestinians, many of us in the Middle East are of the opinion that he is another real hero of the Middle East.

Many people here are also hoping that as the Arab Israeli vote was the third largest bloc in the yesterday’s election, perhaps now the government of Israel will focus more on bringing the Arabs of Israel even closer and more comfortably into the Israeli fold. Otherwise, there is the serious possibility that a “fifth column” could form and harden, one that will drive the Arab Israelis into the open and waiting arms of Hamas and other terrorist groups.

We also hope that the Arab Israeli politicians will focus more on such an effort, rather than, as many Arab politicians do, lashing out and blaming others for what is wrong — a lazy, destructive substitute for actually helping improve the lives of their people.

In these terrible times, critical for the future of our region, Netanyahu spoke to the representatives of the American people, despite the objections of many Israelis and Americans. He was willing to accept personal, political and diplomatic setbacks in order look after his people’s security.

Throughout history, prophets have often been without honor in their own countries, and have been rejected by the very people who should pay attention to them. There is, it seems, in every culture, a deep and real wish to kill the messenger.

The West would do well to understand that anyone really interested in fighting terrorism needs to outlaw the Muslim Brotherhood movement — all its branches, wherever they are. Even more, it needs to paralyze Iran, rather than appease it.

The West’s dark, contradictory dealings with Turkey, Qatar, Iran and other shadowy regimes serve the growth of Islamist terrorist organizations. They destroy the chance for any success against radical Islam.

The fight against Islamist organizations needs to be creative, deliberate and continuous, to keep them from gaining even one victory either on the ground or in their propaganda campaigns. The Muslim public must not view them as attractive, or see joining them a sign of success. A series of significant defeats to Islamist organizations will counter the effects of their efforts to entice young people to join them, especially ISIS.

It is sad that in the face of the coming catastrophe, Western leaders — either blind, naïve or malevolent — are going to make a deal and appease Iran, just as a deal was made to appease Hitler in 1938.

Cartoon of the day

March 18, 2015

Obama comments on Netanyahu victory

1291664255_obama-kiks-door-open

Israelis prepare to vote; Palestinians prepare to fight

March 17, 2015

Israelis prepare to vote; Palestinians prepare to fight, The Gatestone InstituteKhaled Abu Toameh, March 16, 2015

For some Palestinians, the election is not about removing Netanyahu from power. Rather, it is about removing Israel from the face of the earth and replacing it with an Islamist empire.

Kerry’s statement about the revival of the peace process shows that he remains oblivious to the reality in the Middle East, particularly with regards to the Palestinians.

Kerry is ignoring the fact that the Palestinians are today divided into two camps; one that wants to destroy Israel through terrorism and jihad and another that is working hard to delegitimize and isolate Israel with the hope of forcing it to its knees.

As Kerry was talking about the revival of the peace process, Hamas announced that it has completed preparations for the next confrontation with Israel.

Abbas will come to the talks with the same demands he and his predecessor have made over the past two decades, namely a full Israeli withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines. And when Israel does not accept all his demands, he will again walk out and demand international intervention to impose a solution on Israel.

Talk about the resumption of the peace process is nothing but a silly joke.

As Israeli voters head to the ballot boxes to elect their new representatives, Palestinians say they are preparing for another war with Israel.

The preparations came even as US Secretary of State John Kerry and some Israeli candidates, especially Zionist Camp leaders Isaac Herzog and Tzipi Livni, continue to talk about the need to revive the Israeli-Palestinian peace process after the election.

For some Palestinians, the election is not about removing Likud leader Binyamin Netanyahu from power. Rather, it is about removing Israel from the face of the earth and replacing it with an Islamist empire.

The next Israeli government will face a two-pronged attack on the Palestinian front — one from the Gaza Strip, where Hamas and Islamic Jihad say they have just completed preparations for the next conflict with Israel, and another from the West Bank, where the Palestinian Authority (PA) says it is determined to pursue its “diplomatic war” against Israel in the international arena.

On the eve of the election, Kerry expressed hope that Israelis will elect a government that “meets the hope for peace.”

Kerry’s statement about the revival of the peace process shows that he remains oblivious to the reality in the Middle East, particularly with regards to the Palestinians.

Kerry is ignoring the fact that the Palestinians are today divided into two camps; one that wants to destroy Israel through terrorism and jihad, and another that is working hard to delegitimize and isolate Israel in the international community with the hope of forcing it to its knees.

Hamas and Islamic Jihad continue to scoff at Kerry’s talk about the resumption of the peace process. The two groups, which control the 1.7 million Palestinians of the Gaza Strip, actually have other plans for the post-election era. Their main plans center around preparing for the next war with Israel.

983Israel’s Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu (left) and Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh (right, in blue shirt).

As Kerry was talking about the revival of the peace process, Hamas’ armed wing, Izaddin al-Qassam, announced that it has completed preparations for the next confrontation with Israel.

These preparations, according to the group, include the reconstruction of Hamas military bases and training centers that were destroyed during the last war, known as Operation Protective Edge. The group says that it has not only rebuilt the destroyed sites, but has also set up new military posts, especially along the border with Israel.

Of course, when Hamas talks about “military bases,” it is also referring to the underground tunnels that it is hoping to use in the next conflict to infiltrate Israel.

Some of the bases are located only a few hundred meters away from the border with Israel, such as the Yarmouk and Palestine posts. Hamas says that the decision to build the military bases so close to the Israeli border is aimed at sending a message of defiance to Israel.

Islamic Jihad also does not seem to be impressed with the recent talk about the resumption of the peace process between Palestinians and Israelis.

Earlier this month, Islamic Jihad too unveiled its preparations for war, by inviting journalists on a tour of its tunnels inside the Gaza Strip.

“We’re on our highest level of alert to counter any attack. We’re used to the occupation breaking its ceasefires,” senior Islamic Jihad commander Abu al-Bara told Agence France Press. “It’s a war that never ends. We’re ready to go to another level against the Zionist occupation and carry out actions we’ve never done before.”

Meanwhile, the Palestinian Authority is also preparing for a confrontation with Israel, albeit one of a different nature.

The PA says it is determined to pursue its effort to seek worldwide support for imposing a solution on Israel. It is hoping to do so with the help of the United Nations, the European Union, the Obama Administration and some Arab countries.

In order to achieve its goal, the Palestinian Authority is currently waging a massive campaign in the international arena whose goal is to delegitimize, isolate and weaken Israel to a point where it would be forced to succumb and make far-reaching concessions, such as a full withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines.

PA President Mahmoud Abbas will find it almost impossible to return to the negotiating table with Israel now that he has told his people that the Palestinians’ next step is to file “war crime” charges against Israel with the International Criminal Court (ICC). Abbas’s aides have even set a date for the filing of the first anti-Israel case with the ICC: April 1.

Even if Abbas does return to the negotiating table — under heavy pressure from the Americans and Europeans — he would be doing so not in order to achieve an agreement with Israel, but to try to show the world that Israel does not want peace.

Abbas will come to the talks with the same demands he and his predecessor have made over the past two decades, namely a full Israeli withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines. When Israel does not accept all his demands, he will again walk out and demand international intervention to impose a solution on Israel. And while he would be waging his diplomatic campaign, Hamas and Islamic Jihad would resume their terror attacks against Israel from the Gaza Strip.

Under the current circumstances, where some Palestinians continue to seek the destruction of Israel and others are unable to make any concessions for peace, any talk about the resumption of the peace process is nothing but a silly joke.