Tag Archives: Jordan

Stealth Jihad vs. Kinetic Jihad

Posted on by

There are two basic types of jihad–stealth (can also be called cultural) and kinetic. Kinetic is the one that involves acts of terrorism. Stealth jihad is done through lawfare, propaganda, and cultural changes. Generally stealth jihad continues until the jihadists have enough of a majority to overthrow a society or government; at that point, you generally see kinetic jihad–acts of terrorism.

On September 12th, The Times of Israel posted an article about the recent elections in Jordan.

The article reports:

Jordan’s leading Islamist opposition party has won 31 out of 138 seats in the kingdom’s parliament, tripling its representation in legislative elections dominated by frustration over Israel’s war against the Hamas terror group in Gaza.

The Islamic Action Front (IAF), a political offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan, came ahead of other parties and factions in the legislature after Tuesday’s vote, but was far from clinching a majority, according to official election results released on Wednesday.

The result is a historic win for the Islamists and their largest representation since the Muslim Brotherhood in 1989 gained 22 out of the 80 seats that existed then.

The article concludes:

Jordan in 1994 signed a peace treaty with Israel, becoming only the second Arab state to do so after Egypt, but regular protests have called for the treaty’s dissolution since the war erupted on October 7 when Palestinian terror group Hamas led a devastating attack on southern Israel that killed 1,200 people, mostly civilians.

Israel responded with a military offensive to destroy Hamas in Gaza and free 251 hostages who were abducted by terrorists in the Hamas attack.

Oraib Rantawi, head of the Amman-based Al Quds Center for Political Studies, described the Islamists’ gains in the election as “astonishing in their magnitude.”

The Islamists won “nearly half a million votes,” a figure he said was unprecedented in their history in Jordan.

“Gaza played a major role in this,” he added, as well as a feeling among voters that other competing parties “were created in haste… to reduce the chances of success of the Islamic Action Front.”

The people of Jordan are not part of the terrorist movement. In the 1970’s the Palestinian Liberation Organization was kicked out of Jordan after they tried to overthrow the government. In recent years Jordan has supported Israel. Unfortunately, if the Islamist presence in Jordan’s parliament increases, it will pose a threat to possible peace in the Middle East.

The Value Of The Abraham Accords

Posted on by

On Monday, Robert Zimmerman posted an article at Behind the Black about the attack on Israel this past weekend. The article notes how the Abraham Accords, initiated during the Trump administration, helped protect the nation of Israel.

The article reports:

Over the weekend the Iranian attempt to bomb Israel drove home starkly the effectiveness of the Abraham Accords that Donald Trump pushed through during his term between Israel and a number of its Arab neighbors.

The effectiveness of the accords was not only illustrated by the moral and technical support given to Israel by the UAE and Bahrain (two accord signatories), the good will these agreements produced between Israel and the Arab world caused other Arab nations to add their own support as well.

First, when Iran tipped off several Arab countries of its intentions — which likely included both Jordan and Saudi Arabia (neither of which has signed the accords) — those countries then immediately passed that information to the United States, knowning full well it would then be passed to Israel. Iran had thought the Arab world was united with it, when in truth at least half the Arab world is now allied with Israel (either overtly or covertly).

Then Jordan denied Iran permission to use its airspace, and then followed this up by first opening its airspace to Israel and American fighter jets. All three then proceeded to shoot down Irans missiles and drones, preventing almost all from even reaching Israel.

The article concludes:

The situation of course remains very complex, but it will simplify enormously after Israel finishes Hamas off and then demonstrates its determination to rebuild Gaza as a sane place for both the Gazans and its neighbors. Despite the absurd screams of “genocide” by stupid Hama supporters, Israel’s neighbors very much want to get Hamas destroyed. They might mouth some complaints about the lose of civilian lifes in Gaza, but those protests are not to be taken very seriously. Hamas has done nothing for them except instill disorder and violence in the region. Remove it, and they know everyone will benefit.

The Trump administration was working toward peace in the Middle East. I am not sure what the Biden administration is working toward.

 

Action Is Good, But When Do We See Results?

Posted on by

On Friday, Townhall reported that Congressman Jim Jordan is seeking a specific document from FBI Director Christopher Wray regarding payments to the Biden family from overseas entities.

The article reports:

As House Republicans continue to explore impeaching President Joe Biden, House Judiciary Chairman Jim Jordan (R-OH) has a request for FBI Director Christopher Wray. On Thursday night, Jordan sent Wray a letter informing him that the Committee is seeking an FBI FD-1023 form from March 1, 2017 to do with “a confidential human source (CHS) report about payments made to the Biden family from foreign entities.” As the letter explained, the FD-1023 in question “is referenced in a second FD-1023 from June 2020 detailing bribery allegations that involve President Biden and his son, Hunter,” and is needed to “evaluate whether sufficient grounds exist to consider drafting articles of impeachment.” 

The Committee knows about the FD-1023 thanks to testimony  that former U.S. Attorney for the Western District of Pennsylvania Scott Brady provided, who had asked the FBI to find information on files to do with Burisma–where Hunter Biden served on the board of directors–after he had been tasked by then Attorney Bill Barr to sort through FBI files. 

As Jordan explained during his Thursday night appearance on Fox News’ “Hannity,” the 2017 FD-1023 “became the basis for…Brady… asking to talk to the [CHS] that produced the 1023 form we have.” They’re now asking for this form. 

Brady testified it was “correct” that the FD-1023 in question “was not information provided from the public.” The FBI also waited until being contacted by Brady to reach out to the CHS for more information. Brady categorized the FD-1023 as having “not been developed,” making clear “it’s fair to say that it had not been looked into or developed any further.” It was because of Brady’s directive that the FBI took action to develop the information in the FD-1023. 

Frankly, it is my opinion that all that will become of this is that Christopher Wray will stall until the end of the year, hoping that a few more Democrats will be elected to the House of Representatives and the issue will go away. We have seen so much obvious evidence of wrongdoing for years, and nothing has been done. I am not optimistic about that changing.

The History Explains A Lot

Posted on by

Obviously there will be a lot of refugees from the war in the Gaza Strip. The infrastructure has been destroyed and peoples’ homes have been destroyed. So why are the other Arab nations in the area unwilling to take in the Palestinian refugees?  The history of the refugees explains a lot. Understand that the refugee problem began in 1948 when Arabs who were living peacefully in Israel were told that if they left their homes to fight Israel they would get their land back plus land owned by the Jews who would be ‘driven into the sea.’ Well, it didn’t work out that way. The refugee problem was further exacerbated in 1967 when Israel reclaimed more of the land it had been promised in agreements with the League of Nations.

On Sunday, Townhall posted an article that explains some of the reasons the neighboring Arab countries are unwilling to take in the refugees from the Gaza Strip.

The article notes:

As the Left rages against Israel, hurling antisemitic slurs and chanting for more Jews to die, some might want to consider why the civilians have nowhere to go. Okay, maybe these folks do know but don’t care, but liberals are historically illiterate, so who knows? It goes beyond geography. The Palestinians bring trouble and have a long, sordid history of fomenting mayhem and terrorism in other Arab nations. 

…Egypt is the logical destination for these Palestinians, but Cairo doesn’t want them, and for good reason: terrorism. The border crossing at Rafah remains closed, with tanks now deployed to ensure their border is secure. Egypt’s prime minister even said his country is willing to sacrifice millions to ensure no Palestinians ever enter Egypt en masse (via WSJ):

The article concludes:

If Hamas and the Palestinians aren’t freely moving into Egypt, they’ll be okay with it. Also, Israel has resisted ceasefires and has continued to chip away at the terror group’s infrastructure in Gaza, but a humanitarian crisis could still emerge. 

As the tweet above mentioned, the Palestinians tried to take over Jordan in the 1970s, leading to the late King Hussein declaring war on them and driving them out. They were booted from Kuwait after collaborating with Saddam Hussein’s forces before the Gulf War. They set off a powder keg in Lebanon, a nation that has yet to recover from its brutal civil war that lasted 15 years. No Arab country wants these people because they bring instability and trouble. They’re not importing terrorism; that’s what we’re doing wholesale.

What country wants to import a bunch of dedicated terrorists?

The People Who Know

Posted on by

On Tuesday, Ed Morrissey at Hot Air reported that Jordan and Egypt have refused to take Palestinian refugees. They are not being heartless–they are protecting their regimes. There is a lot of history behind this decision.

The article reports:

How could Germany, of all countries, ask Jordan to accept a mass of Palestinian refugees? The PLO under Yasser Arafat tried to seize power in Jordan after King Hussein offered them sanctuary following the 1967 war with Israel. After two assassination attempts, Hussein finally used armed force to push Arafat and his collection of ingrates into Lebanon through Syria, another Arafat disaster that the Palestinians called Black September.

They gave that name to its terror wing, which is why Germany in particular should recall that history. After its ejection from Jordan, the PLO and its Black September wing went on an international terror spree, attempting to force the West to stop supporting Israel. One of its most well-known operations was the attempted abduction and murder of Israeli athletes in the 1972 Munich Olympics. As in Munich, Germany (West Germany at the time, of course).

How clueless does a German chancellor have to be to ask Jordan to recreate the conditions for another Black September — especially when the Gazans are so closely aligned with Iran? Clueless enough to attempt to ask Egypt next, apparently…

The article also notes:

Egypt’s Abdel Fattah al-Sisi has already rejected this idea, and with even more reason. As I wrote last week, Hamas sprang out of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, and the Muslim Brotherhood wants al-Sisi dead. Why in the world would anyone think that al-Sisi would allow tens of thousands of potential Muslim Brotherhood foot soldiers into his country now? If Germany or any of the other leaders in the West took even a moment to consider the precarious nature of both regimes, they’d be embarrassed to even have floated this idea.

The only country that should give refuge to the Gazans at the moment is Iran. They authored the present misery of the Gazans through their proxy Hamas. Iran won’t take them in either, though, even apart from the logistics of that kind of relocation. For one thing, the Persian Shi’ite mullahs couldn’t care less about the mainly Sunni Arabs of Gaza and the West Bank, but also they can’t afford their destabilizing presence either. They already have a restive population that the IRGC can barely contain, and that population hates the Palestinians and the way that the mullahs exploit their cause to justify their oppression.

Looking for a home for Palestinian refugees is like asking people to provide a home for a teenage murderer who has somehow escaped jail. Sometimes kindness involves great risk that can only end badly.

 

The Kabuki Theater Of The Middle East

Posted on by

President Biden is meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu during his trip to the Middle East. He was originally scheduled to meet with Jordan’s King Abdullah and Egyptian President al-Sisi. Jordan and Egypt cancelled those meetings. So why is President Biden going to Israel? Don’t assume that it is because America is supporting Israel.

The following video is posted on YouTube: I know it’s a long video, but it is worth listening to.

Caroline Glick explains the pressure America is putting on Israel to supply humanitarian aid to Gaza. Understand that any humanitarian aid to Gaza will be given to soldiers. Ordinary citizens will receive nothing. How many weapons can be smuggled in as ‘humanitarian aid,’ particularly when the inspectors belong to Hamas? Please see my previous article explaining HUDNA. 

The Conservative Treehouse reported on Tuesday:

Yesterday I provided some of my own thoughts on the motives.  “The people behind Joe Biden are sending him to Israel for (1) part of a rebranding effort; and (2) to impede Netanyahu and buy time for Hamas.”

Today, Caroline Glick affirms my perspective and also gives some troubling information about: (a) the White House demanding an invitation; and (b) Anthony Blinken threatening Israeli President Benjamin Netanyahu to hold back the ground invasion or the U.S. will not allow munitions and bombs Israel needs for resupply.

This is where we are. America is not acting like an ally of Israel regardless of what he has said.

Should American Politicians Support Terrorism?

Posted on by

The political left has long supported Palestine at the expense of Israel. We would do well to remember that there never actually was a Palestine–it was the name given to Israel by the Romans to insult the Jews.

Consider the following quote:

“We considered ourselves Jordanian until the Jews returned to Jerusalem. Then all of the sudden we were Palestinians – they removed the star from the Jordanian flag and all at once we had a Palestinian flag.” ~ Walid Shoebat

Walid Shoebat is also credited with saying:

One day during the 1960’s I went to bed a Jordanian Muslim, and when I woke up the next morning, I was informed that I was a Palestinian.

Keep that in mind as you read today’s news.

Just the News recently posted an article about the American political left’s embrace of Iran and Palestine. After what happened this past weekend, they might want to reconsider that embrace.

The article notes:

As evidence of civilian atrocities mounted, President Joe Biden emerged in public to unequivocally denounce the Hamas terror attacks as “pure unadulterated evil” but his repudiation cannot hide the long embrace by his party’s liberals of the two main actors behind the staggering violence that rocked the Middle East: the political and military leadership in Palestine and their backers in Iran.

Even as American hostages remained in peril, the beheaded torsos of innocent civilians were collected from Israeli streets and Hamas and Tehran celebrated the bloodletting, many liberals in America were still trying to express empathy for the attackers.

Rep. Rashida Tlaib flew a Palestinian flag outside her official congressional office, while Rep. Ilhan Omar suggested Israel’s counteroffensive might be a “war crime.” Biden’s secretary of state tweeted, then deleted a call for a “ceasefire” just as Israel ramped up its rescue missions. The U.S. Department of State’s Palestinian Affairs Office literally implored Israel to “refrain” from “retaliatory attacks” before reversing course. On the streets of liberal cities and the campuses of left-leaning universities like Harvard, many even suggested Israel deserved blame for Hamas’ attacks.

People who want to commit violence will always find an excuse.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. It is extremely insightful.

Questionable At Best

Posted on by

Yesterday Front Page Magazine posted a rather disturbing article about some of the Biden administration’s policies in the Middle East.

The article reports:

Iran and its proxies have targeted the US with missile strikes in Iraq. Its Houthi proxies have struck at Saudi Arabia from Yemen. So even as Biden is helping lubricate the flow of money to Iran’s terror machine, is pulling anti-missile batteries out of Iran’s way.

You’ll have to navigate some media spin for the story.

The Pentagon is pulling approximately eight Patriot antimissile batteries from countries including Iraq, Kuwait, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, according to officials. Another antimissile system known as a Terminal High Altitude Area Defense, or Thaad system, is being withdrawn from Saudi Arabia, and jet fighter squadrons assigned to the region are being reduced, those officials said.

…US forces in Iraq have come under fire from Iranian and proxy missiles. Either pull all the troops out of harm’s way or keep protecting them. Removing missile defenses while keeping thousands of American forces there just invites Iran to attack our troops.

…Iran is escalating. Biden is appeasing. As usual.

A senior defense official said the equipment withdrawals amount to a return to a more traditional level of defense for the region. Under former President Donald Trump, the U.S. actively deployed defensive systems as well as troops, jet fighter squadrons and naval warships to support its maximum pressure campaign against Iran.

By traditional, the echo chamber spinners mean Obama’s old appeasement policies.

Sometimes I wonder if the Biden administration isn’t simply trying to see how much damage they can do to America in a short time.

This Is A Form Of Antisemitism

Posted on by

The Federalist posted an article today about a recent decision by the EU’s Court of Justice (ECJ), the highest court in the EU. The court ruled that Jewish products made in contested areas of Israel must bear consumer warning labels.

The article notes:

Prior to the ruling, U.S. lawmakers in Congress fired warning shots, cautioning the EU that such a move would prompt the enforcement of American anti-boycott laws, thus endangering the EU’s trade with the United States.

Now, according to reporting by Adam Kredo of the Washington Free Beacon, the Trump administration is ready to go to battle over the ruling. Currently, the United States is the EU’s largest trading partner.

The origins of the legal dispute stretch back several years to when the EU issued a mandate in 2015 declaring that products produced in the West Bank and Golan Heights be labeled as coming from an Israeli settlement, facially for the purpose of promoting “consumer protection,” although it’s unclear if that is actually achieved here. In late 2016, France became the first EU member state to attempt to enforce the mandate, resulting in the Israeli winery Psagot filing a lawsuit claiming that such a mandate violated the EU’s anti-discrimination laws.

Under the new rule, goods produced by Jews will be labeled as having been produced in an Israeli settlement, while goods produced by Muslims may be labeled as made in “Palestine,” indicating blatant discriminatory treatment. Unsurprisingly, Israel’s presence in the West Bank and the Golan Heights are the only contested areas in the world to be the focus of the labeling ire of the EU.

The article notes that Israel is the only country singled out for this treatment:

“No other territory, occupied, disputed, or otherwise is subject to such requirements,” noted Eugene Kontorovich, director of the Center for International Law in the Middle East at George Mason University. Kontorovich emphasized the peculiarity of the ruling. “In no other case does any ‘origin labeling’ require any kind of statement about the political circumstances in the area. This is a special Yellow Star for Jewish products only.”

Indeed, there are a multitude of contested areas throughout the world that produce goods for which the EU has deemed politicized labeling requirements unnecessary. Despite Russia’s occupation of parts of Georgia or Morocco’s occupation of Western Sahara, nothing in EU law or greater international law requires labeling goods produced by Russia in occupied parts of Georgia as “Made in Georgia” or goods produced by Morocco in Western Sahara as “Made in Western Sahara.”

Just a side note about the concept of contested territories. If you look at a map of the land originally given to form a Jewish state, it not only includes the ‘contested territories,’ it includes Jordan. The country of Jordan was originally intended to be the Palestinian state (as there had never been a Palestinian state), but was turned over to the Hashemites. For pictures illustrating the history of Israeli territory, go here.

Sometimes It’s Hard To Figure Out Who Your Friends Actually Are

Posted on by

There has been a civil war going on in Libya since 2014. When Muammar Gaddafi was killed in 2011, there was a revolution for less than a year, and a government was established. A new government was elected in 2014, but there were controversies surrounding that election. There has been a civil war in Libya ever since.

On June 28th, The New York Times reported the following:

Libyan government fighters discovered a cache of powerful American missiles, usually sold only to close American allies, at a captured rebel base in the mountains south of Tripoli this week.

The article notes that America supports the current government of Libya. Gen. Khalifa Hifter and his forces are waging a military campaign to overthrow the current government and take over Libya. So where did the American weapons, to be used against a government America supports, come from?

The article notes:

Markings on the missiles’ shipping containers indicate that they were originally sold to the United Arab Emirates, an important American partner, in 2008.

If the Emirates transferred the weapons to General Hifter, it would likely violate the sales agreement with the United States as well as a United Nations arms embargo.

Both the State Department and Defense Department are investigating how the weapons wound up in Libya.

The article continues:

“We take all allegations of misuse of U.S. origin defense articles very seriously,” a State Department official said in a statement. “We are aware of these reports and are seeking additional information. We expect all recipients of U.S. origin defense equipment to abide by their end-use obligations.”

The United States supports United Nations-led efforts to broker a peaceful solution to the Libyan crisis, the official added.

A spokeswoman for the Department of Defense declined to comment further on the matter.

The United Arab Emirates ambassador to Washington, Yousef al-Otaiba, declined to answer questions about the provenance of the missiles.

Finally, the article notes some interesting contradictions in those who support of the current regime and the rebels:

When General Hifter started his assault on Tripoli on April 4, in the face of much international opposition, the Emiratis continued to support him. They supplied a Russian-made surface-to-air missile system, Chinese-made Wing Loong combat drones and Emirati drones, said a senior Western official with knowledge of the arms trade.

Jordan, another American ally to side with General Hifter, sent a Jordanian-made anti-tank system known as Nashshab, the official said.

Turkey, a regional rival of the United Arab Emirates, intervened on the other side of the fight, sending combat drones and armored vehicles to help the United Nations-backed government in Tripoli.

The United States supports the Tripoli government, which it helped install. However, President Trump appeared to endorse General Hifter and his military drive after the two men spoke by telephone in April, hailing his “significant role in fighting terrorism.”

Other American officials later rowed back that position by stressing American support for the United Nations-led political process.

The foreign interventions, which flout a United Nations embargo on all arms sales to Libya, highlight how the conflict set off by the ouster of Libya’s longtime dictator, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, in 2011 has partly devolved into a proxy conflict between rival regional powers.

I would just like to note that civil wars are nasty, and it is foolish for outsiders to get involved in them. It really doesn’t sound as if the current government in Libya is the one we should be supporting.

The Sorry State Of Freedom On Our College Campuses

Posted on by

A friend sent me a link to a Washington Post article posted on October 9. The headline in the article is, “A second Michigan instructor withheld a recommendation letter from student headed to Israel.”

The disturbing part is the reason given:

The article continues:

Her email echoed the one that arrived last month in the inbox of Abigail Ingber, another junior at the University of Michigan. 

“I am very sorry, but I only scanned your first email a couple weeks ago and missed out on a key detail,” John Cheney-Lippold, a cultural studies professor, wrote to Ingber in early September, upon realizing that the reference was for a program at Tel Aviv University. “As you may know, many university departments have pledged an academic boycott against Israel in support of Palestinians living in Palestine. This boycott includes writing letters of recommendation for students planning to study there.”

The concept that Israel includes Palestinian land is simply not true. As Walid Shoebat has stated, “One day during the 1960s I went to bed a Jordanian Muslim, and when I woke up the next morning, I was informed that I was now a Palestinian Muslim, and that I was no longer a Jordanian Muslim.” Jordan was established to be the Palestinian state. The Palestinians were kicked out of Jordan after they attempted to overthrow its government. The Arab countries have kept them as refugees for generations in order to gin up anger against Israel with the hopes of driving the Jews into the sea. It is unbelievable that our college professors are encouraging this sort of behavior. It’s a shame our college teachers don’t know history. In actuality, the land occupied by Jordan was initially given to Israel.

The article concludes:

Michael Zakim, a cultural historian at Tel Aviv University, argued that the boycott would end up undermining “the Palestinian struggle” by unwittingly supporting forces “determined to delegitimize the humanism and internationalism that predominates on Israeli university campuses.” He labeled as “inanity” some of the means taken to “discredit Israeli academic culture,” such as the refusal to serve as an external reader on a dissertation.

Feisal G. Mohamed, then of the University of Illinois and now at the Graduate Center of the City University of New York, responded, saying the boycott didn’t compel each of the actions decried by Zakim. Still, he reasoned, “any and all available means must be used to end an occupation.”

At Michigan, the board of regents declined last year to form a committee to investigate divesting the university’s endowment from companies doing business with Israel, after the student government passed a resolution supporting such a move.

But refusing to throw its weight behind BDS isn’t enough, Secker (Jake Secker) warned. If the university doesn’t take further action to insulate its students from the political actions of their professors, he said, it could have a crisis on its hands.

“This is an epidemic that’s starting to begin,” he said. “Especially being someone who has an Israeli background, I took it personally. It really disturbed me.”

Any university discriminating against students who want to study in Israel should lose all federal and state funding. BDS is not an acceptable policy, and the government should not be funding it.

Why Border Security Matters

Posted on by

The Daily Caller reported yesterday that a Jordanian national who allegedly smuggled six Yemeni citizens into the U.S. from Mexico was arrested Saturday. Yemen is know to be a hotbed of terrorism.

The article reports:

Moayad Heider Mohammad Aldairi, 31, was given an arrest warrant followed by a criminal complaint on May 29 for the supposed smuggling trips through the Texas border between July 1, 2017 and December 12, 2017, the DOJ reported Monday.

Aldairi was also a Mexican citizen and conspired with others who wanted to smuggle “Special Interest Aliens” across the border, according to the complaint.

…“The HSI (Homeland Security Investigations) interviews with the six (6) detained Yemenis revealed that each of them paid ALDAIRI varying amounts to be smuggled into the United States from Mexico,” the complaint said.

“Alien smuggling puts our national security at risk, and the Criminal Division is dedicated to enforcing our immigration laws and disrupting the flow of illegal aliens into the United States,” Assistant Attorney General Benczkowski said, according to the DOJ press release.

Does any thinking person believe that potential terrorists are not taking advantage of our porous borders–both north and south?

 

A Short History Lesson

Posted on by

The idea that Israel belongs to anyone except the Jews does not hold water historically. The British named the area of Israel Palestine as an insult to the Jewish people who lived there–it had nothing to do with there being a state of Palestine. Such a state never existed.

This is the picture of the land given to Israel in 1920:

The majority of that land that was originally given to Israel was given to Jordan. After the war in 1948, the Armistice Agreements left Jordan in control of the West Bank. In 1950, Jordan annexed the West Bank and gave all residents Jordanian citizenship. Until the 1967 War, the people living in the West Bank were considered Jordanian citizens. As I have noted in previous posts, Walid Shoebat stated, “One day during the 1960s I went to bed a Jordanian Muslim, and when I woke up the next morning, I was informed that I was now a Palestinian Muslim, and that I was no longer a Jordanian Muslim.”

So where am I going with this? Pamela Geller posted an article on her website on January 12 about a court case in the Court of Appeal of Versailles France.

The article reports:

…the Court of Appeal of Versailles ruled that West bank settlements and occupation of Judea Samaria by Israel is unequivocally legal under international law, in a suit brought by the Palestinian Authority against Jerusalem’s light rail built by French companies Alstom and Veolia…

Somehow the major media did not report this ruling.

The article includes a detailed analysis of the case and the reasons for the decision. I will try to summarize the highlights here:

In order to rule whether the light rail construction was legal or not, the court had to to seek the texts of international law, to examine international treaties, in order to establish the respective rights of the Palestinians and the Israelis.

And to my knowledge, this is the first time that a non-Israeli court has been led to rule on the status of the West Bank.

…Keep in mind though, that the Court’s findings have no effect in international law. What they do, and it’s of the utmost importance, they are clarify the legal reality.

The Versailles Court of Appeal conclusions are as resounding as the silence in which they were received in the media: Israel has real rights in the territories, its decision to build a light rail in the West Bank or anything else in the area is legal, and the judges have rejected all the arguments presented by the Palestinians.

The article lists the Palestinian arguments:

  • The PLO denounces the deportation of the Palestinian population, and the destruction of properties in violation of international regulations. Relying on the Geneva and Hague Conventions and the UN resolutions, it considers that the State of Israel is illegally occupying Palestinian territory and is pursuing illegal Jewish colonization. Thus, construction of the light rail is itself illegal (1).
  • The PLO adds that the light rail construction has resulted in the destruction of Palestinian buildings and houses, the almost total destruction of Highway 60, which is vital for Palestinians and their goods, and has conducted many illegal dispossessions. Therefore, several clauses from the annexed Regulations to the October 18, 1907 Fourth Hague Convention were violated (2).
  • Finally, the PLO alleges that Israel violates the provisions relating to the « protection of cultural property » provided for in Article 4 of the Hague Convention of 14 May 1954, Article 27 of the Hague Regulations of 1907, Article 5 of the Hague Convention IX of 1907, and Article 53 of Additional Protocol No. 1 to the Geneva Conventions.

The article explains why these are not valid arguments:

The Court explains that the Palestinian Authority misinterprets the texts and they do not apply to the occupation:

  • First of all, all the international instruments put forward by the PLO are acts signed between States, and the obligations or prohibitions contained therein are relevant to States. Neither the Palestinian Authority nor the PLO are States, therefore, none of these legal documents apply.
  • Secondly, said the Court, these texts are binding only on those who signed them, namely the « contracting parties ». But neither the PLO nor the Palestinian Authority have ever signed these texts.

Please follow the link to read the entire article. The 1967 lines were not borders–they were lines drawn in an armistice. Remember also what has happened in the Gaza Strip since Israel gave it up–it has become a launching pad for sending rockets into civilian areas, and all of the income-producing greenhouses were destroyed because they had been owned by Jews. That kind of hatred is not anything the world needs to encourage.

It will be interesting to see what the implications of this court case will be. First of all, will any of the major media report it? Second of all, will this impact any decisions made at the United Nations regarding a ‘two-state solution.’ Again, I would like to note that until the people involved in the ‘two-state solution’ are willing to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist, the ‘two-state solution’ is not a recipe for peace, but only an excuse for more war.

A Solution?

Posted on by

The New York Post posted an article today about the planned prisoner swap between Jordan and ISIS of Muath al-Kaseasbeh, a Jordanian pilot, and Kenji Goto of Japan.

The article reports:

Jordanian officials said would-be bomber Sajida al-Rishawi and other Islamic State fighters would be “quickly judged and sentenced” if Muath al-Kaseasbeh is killed, the Daily Mail reported.

The deadline for a possible prisoner swap passed Thursday with no word from the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, about the fates of al-Kaseasbeh or fellow hostage Kenji Goto of Japan.

“I have reliable contact in the Jordanian government who says a message has been passed to ISIS,” said Elijah Magnier, chief international correspondent for Kuwait’s Al Rai newspaper. “It warns that if they kill the pilot, they will implement the death sentences for Sajida and other ISIS prisoners as soon as possible. There are other prisoners in Jordan that ISIS would like to free.”

I have very mixed emotions about this. If Sajida is released, she will probably attempt another suicide bombing (and this time the bomb may go off). She will kill herself and also kill innocent people. You may save the lives of the two prisoners by turning her over to ISIS, but in the process you endangered other lives–probably more than two. Another part of this dilemma is the fact that the only thing ISIS seems to understand or respect is force. If taking hostages turns out to be a losing game for them, rather than something that gets their soldiers back or raises money for their organization, they might turn to something else. Depending on exactly what that something else is, it could be either a good or a bad thing.

Making Anti-Semitism Official

Posted on by

Last week the Daily Caller reported that the European Union has forbidden its member states from funding Israeli individuals or organizations based in the contested territories of the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

The article states:

In new guidelines that were originally published on June 30 and are scheduled to go into effect on Friday, the 28 nations that make up the E.U. are no longer allowed to contribute financially to or cooperate in any way with organizations that are headquartered beyond the historic “Green Line” that divides the West Bank from the rest of Israel.

Significantly, the guidelines also define East Jerusalem as one of the illegal Israeli settlements that cannot receive future funding. East Jerusalem includes Old City landmarks like the Temple Mount and the Western Wall that are central to thousands of years of Jewish faith and history, making Israeli agreement with the ruling very unlikely.

It’s amazing sometimes how some organizations rewrite history. In April 2011, the American Thinker posted an article stating:

…Except that there was no “border” on Israel’s eastern flank from 1948 until 1967 — only a 1949 armistice line that marked the farthest westward military penetration by Jordan during Israel’s War of Independence when half a dozen Arab armies unsuccessfully tried to exterminate the nascent Jewish state.

The 1949 armistice line was never recognized internationally as a “border.”  Neither of course were Jordan’s aggression and illegal occupation of the West Bank and East Jerusalem since  they occurred in flagrant violation of the 1947 UN partition plan to divide British Mandate Palestine between a Jewish state and an Arab state.

Israel needs defensible borders. Israel lives in a tough neighborhood where its neighbors won’t even admit that it has a right to exist there. The European Union is definitely coming down on the wrong side of history.

Enhanced by Zemanta

Now For Something Completely Different

Posted on by

The civil war in Syria continues despite the fact that the news doesn’t seem to be paying a lot of attention to it. I have no suggestions for a course of action–I am not convinced anyone involved is the ‘good guys.’ My only concern is for the civilians caught in the middle. We need to find a way to get the civilians out of the way and let the people who are determined to fight with each other slug it out. However, the human cost of this civil war is a major concern.

Gary Lane at CBN News posted a story today about the refugees that are fleeing the Syrian civil war.

Please follow the link above to CBN News to see the video showing what is going on in Syria.

The article reports:

The United Nations estimates the number of registered Syrian refugees at more than 170,000. They have scattered across the region, ending up in Turkey, Lebanon, Iraq, and Jordan.

These refugees are being met by Christian relief groups who are helping move from border camps to apartments. I was touched by a quote from a woman who was helped by the Christian groups:

The article reports:

Doyle (Tom Doyle, with the Dallas-based ministry E3 Partners) witnessed how the effort affected the life of one refugee.

“Some of the people were pushing them around and it was mass chaos and this woman looked at me and she said, ‘but it was the Bible people that came to us and gave us food and clothes and loved us and played with our children. It was the Bible people who were there for us,'” Doyle recalled.

“When she got done sharing her story she looked at me and said, ‘And I want you to know, I love Jesus now!'” he said.

Out of wartime tragedy, “The Bible People” are having an impact on the lives of the refugees by sharing the love of Christ, meeting material needs and shining light into the lives of Syrians fleeing chronic darkness.

Obviously, this is an awful situation, but it is encouraging to know that Tom Doyle and others like him are helping the refugees find a new life after fleeing such horrendous violence.

Enhanced by Zemanta

I Realize That This Is A Politically Incorrect Idea–But It Is True

Posted on by

Yesterday the Jerusalem Post posted an article with the headline, “There is no such thing as a two-state solution.” Unfortunately, based on the history of the past 60+ years, that is true. The article was written by Congressman Joe Walsh of Illinois.

The article states:

It is time to let go of the two-state solution insanity and adopt the only solution that will bring true peace to the Middle East – a single Israeli state from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. Israel is the only country in the region dedicated to peace and the only power capable of stable, just and democratic government in the region.

This solution is the best one for everyone, especially the Palestinians. They will trade their two corrupt and inept governments and societies for a stable, free and prosperous one. Those Palestinians that wish to may leave their Fatah and Hamas-created slums and move to the original Palestinian state – Jordan. The British Mandate for Palestine created Jordan as the country for the Palestinians. It was the only justification for its creation. Even now, 75 percent of its population is of Palestinian descent. Those Palestinians that remain behind in Israel will maintain limited voting power, but will be awarded all the economic and civil rights of Israeli citizens. They will be free to raise a family, start a business and live in peace, all of which are impossible under Arab rule.

It is telling that Israel, despite being a ‘Jewish state,’ is the only country in the Middle East that allows Christians, Jews, and Muslims to live together without being discriminated against by the government.

If the goal is peace, Israel has to have the right to exist. The countries whose sole purpose is to destroy Israel need to be denied access to American foreign aid money and allowed to go bankrupt. The people in those countries need to have the opportunity to prosper–either in Israel or Jordan–not in a terrorist state with no purpose other than terrorism.

 

 

Enhanced by Zemanta