HAMAS IS CLASSIC FASCIST AND IN ELECTION PALESTINIAN ARABS SWUNG BEHIND…WHY DEFENCE OF NETANYAHU IS CENTRAL

According to Hamas’ official television station, “Christians, Communists and Jews must be eliminated down to the very last man.” Hamas has the support of 61 percent of the Palestinians. Even if we assume that support for Hamas will fall, Hamas will take a violent stand against its opponents. Some of the Hamas leaders are talking about “the conquest of Rome and Andalusia.”

The above is on Israpundit and comes from an article on the Jewish website YNET NEWS

QUOTE…Ben-Dror Yemini, writing in YNET, which is left of center and Netanyahu’s arch enemy, makes the case, “Given the upheaval in the Arab world, Obama needs to ask himself why he thinks a Palestinian state is viable right now; meanwhile, Israel’s right needs to understand that its actions are leading to a bi-national state.”

http://www.israpundit.org/archives/63605679

CAN I ANALYSE THE ABOVE…The position of YNET is contradictory. Like all Jews it is loyal in the final analysis to Israel but let me examine the contradiction.

YNet analyses correctly that Hamas is basically Fascist (Note the reference to the killing of Communists in the above – classic Fascist position meaning not just Jew Hatred is involved here)

YNet also verifies for us that the Arabs in Palestine are swinging behind Hamas, that is behind that genocide.

Yet YNET feels it has to criticise the single Jewish State idea. I call the Likud wing Jewish Patriot and definitely not Right or Left etc.

How can that make any sense except to in essence blame the Jews for the Antisemitism of Islam (the Jihad) (The fact that in the election Arabs swung behind the above Antisemitism which I actually am characterising as Fascism)

Ynet which also represents Herzog and Livni thus live out a contradiction. That was what led to the attacks on Netanyahu in the elction.

Netanyahu actually saved Israel from the Fascism of the Arabs and he did this by confronting Obama and really challenging the whole basis that Obama operates his Jihadist Muslim political positions upon.

It was the March 8 action in the American Congress that saved Israel. To take this action Netanyahu had to fight these (is it safe to say traitors) at home.

Why do I use the Word “action”? I do so because it was more than a speech it was a “political action”.

The drive to Fascism led by Obama was stopped by that action. I have explained elsewhere how that political action made the necessary change from “houses” to the EXISTENTIAL IRAN ISSUE.

To move forward Netanyahu still has to be defended. Without that defence you cannot move forward.

Why precisely is this? Because life is causal.

I SAY…You cannot leapfrog. If you do not defend Netanyahu then you are saying nothing happened on March 8 in that fateful Congress in historical America.

WE TROTSKYISTS OF 4INTERNATIONAL JOYOUSLY SUPPORT THE VICTORY OF NETANYAHU AND ALL JEWISH PATRIOTS

 

This is what has been avoided by the joyous victory in Israel  and on St Patricks day too. If the Left Fascists of Livni and Labour had won then in combination with the evil of Jihad Arab Muslims IN Israel – Fascist dictatorship would have followed and all discussion closed down

vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvictory

The Israeli election and victory for Netanyahu is a major positive. There is no doubt that if the Left Fascists Herrzog and Livni had won and then teamed up with the United Arab faction which is now the third largest in a Jewish Israeli Parliament (while Jews are killed in every Arab country and repressed terribly in Iran – what is left of them that is)

 

It is this alliance of Left Fascists inside of Israel and of Jihadist Israel Hating Arabs who have been given a vote and base also inside of Israel that was so dangerous. These moves were being orchestrated against Bibi by Obama who does not really hate so much Bibi as hates Bibi as a representative of Jews and Jewish culture in our world. In other words Obama is an Antisemite. That is what the election defeated.

I referred in a recent article to the reality of world Antisemitism and how the tiny Israeli state was being buffeted by this world Antisemitism. It comes onto the tiny state from the surrounding very wide circle of Muslim Jihad and Jew Hatred, and then in a wider still circle, a world circle, from Christian and Capitalist rooted Antisemitism, with Stalinism and Anarchism thrown into that latter mix as well.

The election over I see the possibilities but these possibilities are also tied up with immediate great dangers. But these dangers are understandable as in the explanation, a Trotskyist and materialist explanation, I gave above. There is no respite from this any more than there was a respite from the Nazis in 1933 to 1945.

Today I do pay tribute to Netanyahu especially to his great spech to Congress on March 8 which focused the minds of many poor people in Israel who realised because of that speech that the poverty and housing problems (undoubted) had to be seen in the context of danger of Nuclear wipeout from Islamic Fascist Iran. It was this that the Left Fascists (note terminology “Left” is not accurate) now well established in Israel behind Labour and Israeli Stalinist type politics of “Peace Now” etc were thus attacking Jews once more in a most dangerous context.

There was also an act of self-sacrifice in that many voters for Bennett switched to Likud and Netanyahu in an action of great intelligence and political sophistication especially by the Jewish homes, families and villages of Judea and Samaria (note 4international never uses the term “settler” and just never ever the term “West Bank”)

We enter a most critical period everywhere in the world and not just in Israel but yes! in Israel. The first thing is discussion and the right to discuss. Just yesterday 8 young protesters were given 3 year jail sentences in the new “democratic” Spain for doing so (just youthful protest) outside of the Catalonian Parliament. There are other great attacks on freedom to discuss in every country. This is above all what has to be defended and this applies very much to Israel also. But if Herzog had won all discussion would have been closed down along the lines and using the stratagems of especially Obama as well as using the brute force of the state as in Spain and the murder of Jews by the Jihadist Muslims.

This is why I appeal to all Jews, to all Israelis, to all Spanish, Irish and all others – it is a time to discuss issues and for the opening of the mind to new possibilities. This is not going to be easy but because we are all being forced by a peculiar crisis to each country and in each country – it does become doable

quote from that article I mentioned above follows:

whatever happens the fire of Jewish national liberation is well and truly alight as secular people and Young, especially young women, flock to Rabin Square last night…israellycool photo

Secular Jews are flocking to support Netanyahu, Bennett and the patriotic side in the election against the traitors Livni and Herzog.

The mass rally last night in Rabin Square was covered by Channel 20 and reported on by the editor of Israpundit Ted Belman in person

But both Ted Belman and Channel 20 both reported amazing facts about the rally. Huge number of secular Jews coming out, travelling long distances from all parts of the Jewish State, to make sure the traitors to the Jewsish cause are defeated and as we said in our last article that they are kept away from state power. In this respect Ted Belman backs up what we said there in that very article. State power is a very serious proposition and issue. Belman noted that the notorious OSLO vote was carried by only ONE vote in the Knesset. But look how many Jewish and indeed Arab lives were lost because of that one vote. It is the combination of Parliament and State Power (latter is a Leninist phrase) that is so telling.

Along with that issue of secular Jews supporting goes a huge number of Young people and especially Young women turning out to support the Jewish and Patriotic side.

Ted Belman reporting on the spot notes on this:

It’s not even 7:30 PM and Channel 20 estimates that tens of thousands of people have already arrived for the rally that only begins at 8PM this evening.

Channel 20 also reports that the rally is filled with secular Jews, and not just religious ones.

Perhaps the issue of secular Jews is the most important fact that has come out of this amazingly important election.”

FIRE OF JEWISH NATIONAL LIBERATION WELL AND TRULY ALIGHT AS ISRAELIS HEAD TO ELECTION

whatever happens the fire of Jewish national liberation is well and truly alight as secular people and Young, especially young women, flock to Rabin Square last night…israelycool photo

Secular Jews are flocking to support Netanyahu, Bennett and the patriotic side in the election against the traitors Livni and Herzog.

The mass rally last night in Rabin Square was covered by Channel 20 and reported on by the editor of Israpundit Ted Belman in person

But both Ted Belman and Channel 20 both reported amazing facts about the rally. Huge number of secular Jews coming out, travelling long distances from all parts of the Jewish State, to make sure the traitors to the Jewsish cause are defeated and as we said in our last article that they are kept away from state power. In this respect Ted Belman backs up what we said there in that very article. State power is a very serious proposition and issue. Belman noted that the notorious OSLO vote was carried by only ONE vote in the Knesset. But look how many Jewish and indeed Arab lives were lost because of that one vote. It is the combination of Parliament and State Power (latter is a Leninist phrase) that is so telling.

Along with that issue of secular Jews supporting goes a huge number of Young people and especially Young women turning out to support the Jewish and Patriotic side.

Ted Belman reporting on the spot notes on this:

It’s not even 7:30 PM and Channel 20 estimates that tens of thousands of people have already arrived for the rally that only begins at 8PM this evening.

Channel 20 also reports that the rally is filled with secular Jews, and not just religious ones.

Perhaps the issue of secular Jews is the most important fact that has come out of this amazingly important election.

The speech of Netanyahu to Congress Mar8 2015 is still central and will remain central no matter what way the election goes. It was about the danger to Israel and the world from the Iranian Nuclear Bomb. The so called experts of Herzog and Livni are dunces.

FELIX QUIGLEY SAYS:

The statement from Channel 20 is pointing towards the future regardless of the votes cast here.

It means that the old terms of right and left have now become lethal for the future of the Jewish people.

New terms have to be found and accepted by the main people in all áreas of the struggle. For example a much better name for “left” will encompass the idea that these people are lacking in belief in the Zionist cause and have swallowed more or less the Palestinian Narrative.

Think of the political line of myself who is both atheist, communist and secular. My last 2 articles are (but you can go right back many years and you will find a most consistent line):

http://4international.me/2015/03/16/a-photo-produced-by-fake-palestinians-that-is-100-fake-richard-silverstein-published-it/

http://4international.me/2015/03/14/vote-for-the-netanyahu-likud-bennett-side-in-the-election-to-keep-traitors-away-from-state-power/

More reports on this stupendously important rally last night on:

http://www.israpundit.org/archives/63605376/comment-page-1#comment-63356000153615

AM I THE ONLY PERSON CRYING OUT IN ANGUISH AGAINST THIS HATRED BY DAVID ICKE

Felix Quigley answers this evil hatred of a people by David Icke. The following appears on the David Icke website. Icke has taken this from “MiddleEastMonitor” and this scurrilous charácter Icke is saying this Jewish soldier gives water to a Palestinian Arab woman, has a photo taken for propaganda purposes and then shoots her in the head. Meanwhile this horror calumny against the Jewish people is carried onto the airways thanks to British Jew Martin Nathan and his radio station Talk Radio Europe … on which station many Jewish people are working and are associated with. The spawn of Icke a person called “Richie Allen” is offered 2 hours nightly for publication of this kind of stuff. Am I the only person fighting against this I cry out in anguish?

‘During the Israeli bombardment and shelling of the Gaza Strip last summer, an Israeli soldier approached a 74-year-old Palestinian woman Ghalya Abu-Rida to give her a sip of water. He gave her the water, took a photo with her and then he shot her in the head from a distance of one metre. He then watched as she bled to death, the Palestine Information Centre reported.

This is how Ahmad Qdeh, a journalist in Al-Aqsa TV, described the scene that he witnessed during the latest Israeli aggression. The spokesman of the Israeli army, Avichay Adraee, shared the photo of an Israeli soldier holding the water bottle and helping the old woman drink as an example of the “humanity” of the Israeli army towards the civilians in the Gaza Strip.’

EL SISI IS A VALIANT LEADER AND MUST BE SUPPORTED BUT HIS TASK IS HUGE INDEED

Obama brought the full weight of the west to overthrow the secular leaders like Ben Ali, Gaghbo, and here Mubarak and Gadhafi in favor of the Jihadists their mortal enemies. It will not be easy for el Sisi

FELIX QUIGLEY SAYS…At the end Martin Sherman writes

“So while Sisi’s endeavor should be warmly applauded – and supported – its chances of success are sufficiently uncertain – indeed, remote – that it would be more than imprudent of the West and for Israel to make any assumption of such success a basis for future policy.”

That is a wise warning.

Ben Shapiro took on Ben Affleck and the myth that only a tiny minority of Muslims worldwide are radical. Shapiro based his thoughts on this so vital matter on the Pew Poll Research. There are huge numbers in ALL of these countries like Egypt who are in favor of Sharia Law, or aspects of Sharia Law, such as hand cutting for theft. This is the culture of 1500 years of indoctrination by Islam.

It therefore cannot be easy and it is well to know this. But there is one other factor which is absolutely central. There is the role of the world capitalist governments of all types, especially the US Governments and the European states. Their role is to defend and prop up, even promote, Islam.

And note it well there is only ONE Islam. It is based on the Koran. Note the extreme confusión that even the valiant el Sisi throws up on thiis very score.

But back to those governments. The Arab secular governments have met not just the wrath of the Islam but also the wrath of those very governments. Obama insisted on overthrowing Mubarak and he invited the Muslim Brothers in Egypt to attend his first public occasion in Cairo. Remember that. Then on to Ivory Coast, Tunisia, above all to the war on Gadhafi. Britain and France were to the very fore in this.

So that is the enemy. It is a huge enemy indeed. The Fascist left like the David Icke spawn are playing perhaps a key roll where even the murder of cartoonists in Paris and Jews in a Kosher establishment are being changed, morphing into sheer Antisemitism – the Palestinian Arab ANTISEMITIC narrative enters everything.

Martin is right. This is a huge task. Please let us discuss the implications with an open mind.

Into the Fray: Sisi or ISIS?

Abdul Fattah al-Sisi
It is possible that $1.6 Billion people [Muslims] should want to kill the rest of the world’s inhabitants – that is 7 billion – so that they themselves may live? Impossible!” – Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, Al-Azhar, January 1

“O ye who believe! Fight those of the disbelievers who are near to you, and let them find harshness in you, and know that Allah is with those who keep their duty.” – Koran, Sura 9:123

“Violence… occurs between Muslims, on the one hand, and Orthodox Serbs in the Balkans, Jews in Israel, Hindus in India, Buddhists in Burma and Catholics in the Philippines. Islam has bloody borders.” – Samuel Huntington, “The Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign Affairs, 1993

<a href=”http://www.bidvertiser.com/bdv/BidVertiser/bdv_publisher_toolbar_creator.dbm”>toolbar</a>
On New Year’s Day, Egyptian president Abdel Fattah al-Sisi delivered a remarkable address at Cairo’s Al-Azhar University.

The Obama-Sisi contrast

He directed measured, but nonetheless severe, censure at much of the Islamic clergy, their interpretation of religious texts and their prescription for how Muslims should practice their faith in the modern day: “I am referring here to the religious clerics. We have to think hard about what we are facing – and I have, in fact, addressed this topic a couple of times before. It’s inconceivable that the thinking that we hold most sacred should cause the entire umma [Islamic world] to be a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world. Impossible!”

Ironically, Sisi spoke at the same venue that Barack Obama chose to deliver his 2009 “Outreach Speech” to the Muslim world. But the contrast between the two could hardly be more striking. As one US analyst deftly noted: “Obama began the 2009 speech by praising the same seminary that Sisi reprimanded,” emphasizing “That [Obama’s approach] is different from Sisi, who is trying to suppress the Brotherhood movement and push Al-Azhar’s Islamic leaders toward modernity.”

Sisi used the occasion to condemn the ongoing practices in the Islamic world, after having coercively removed the regressive and ruinous regime of the Muslim Brotherhood from power. By contrast, Obama heaped effusive praise on Islam, and insisted on places of honor for senior Brotherhood representatives – to the chagrin of his host, president Hosni Mubarak. Indeed, many consider Obama’s words and gestures in Cairo as providing a considerable – arguably, crucial – fillip in the process that swept the Brotherhood to power barely two years later.

Revolution not reform

Although Sisi was at pains to appear respectful to Islam as a religion per se, there was little doubt as to the grim view he took of the consequences of the manner in which Muslims were being instructed to observe their faith.

“That thinking – I am not saying ‘religion’ but ‘thinking’ – that corpus of texts and ideas that we have sacralized over the years, to the point that departing from them has become almost impossible, is antagonizing the entire world!” he said.

Sisi appealed to the religious establishment for a “more enlightened perspective”: “I am saying these words here at Al-Azhar, before this assembly of scholars and ulema [top Islamic scholars] – Allah Almighty be witness to your truth on Judgment Day concerning that which I’m talking about now…you cannot feel it if you remain trapped within this mindset. You need to step outside of yourselves to be able to… reflect on it from a more enlightened perspective.”

But despite his ostensible deference, Sisi made no bones about what was called for. Not gradual reform but swift revolution. “I say and repeat again that we are in need of a religious revolution. You, imams, are responsible before Allah. The entire world, I say it again, the entire world is waiting for your next move,” he urged.

Tendency to appease

Sisi is undoubtedly correct in his diagnosis of Islam as comprising “a source of anxiety, danger, killing and destruction for the rest of the world.” However, until recently the tendency of the “rest of the world” has been to appease rather than oppose, to understand rather than withstand, to excuse rather than expunge.

Nonetheless, lately there does appear to be the beginning of rumbling discontent in the West, and indications that resistance to Islamic-inspired outrages is beginning to emerge – albeit far too timidly and far too slowly.

It is still too early to assess whether the savage slaughter in Paris last week will prove a tipping-point in the mood toward Islam and shift it from angst to anger. There is, however, considerable room for skepticism.

For despite the short-term uproar the killings at Charlie Hebdo and Hyper Cacher has generated, the death toll pales when compared to far-greater Muslim-motivated atrocities perpetrated in the West without producing a sustained, resolute response to deal adequately with the manifest menace.

With 17 dead, last week in Paris seems unlikely to become a watershed event. After all, the Madrid train bombings left 191 dead and 1,800 wounded in 2004; the London subway bombing 52 dead and 700 wounded in 2005; the Mumbai attacks almost 170 killed and over 600 injured in 2008, and the Moscow metro bombing 40 dead and over 100 injured in 2010. This of course is but a minute sample of a long, gory list of post 9/11 Muslim massacres, carried out in the name of their religious belief.

Islam’s bloody borders

It is difficult to see why the ordeal in Paris, gruesome as it was, will produce the required stiffening of resolve.

After all, the incipient clash between the Islamic and non-Islamic worlds has been part of the public discourse for over two decades. In his controversial – some might say, prescient – article “The Clash of Civilizations?” in Foreign Affairs (1993), the late Harvard political scientist Samuel Huntington predicted: “The fault lines between civilizations will be the battle lines of the future.” He warned: “… the great historic fault lines between civilizations are once more aflame. This is particularly true along the… boundaries of the… Islamic bloc of nations, from the bulge of Africa to central Asia…. Islam has bloody borders.”

In a subsequent book, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order (1998), Huntington wrote: “No single statement in my Foreign Affairs article attracted more critical comment than: ‘Islam has bloody borders.’… Quantitative evidence from every disinterested source conclusively demonstrates its validity.”

Subsequent events and statistics strongly corroborate Huntington’s contentions.

Bloody borders (cont.)

It is possible to fill tomes with examples of obdurate Islamic enmity to Judaism and Christianity. But Islamic intolerance is not confined to the monotheistic People of the Book.

One of the most graphic illustrations of Islam’s abiding rejection of all that is not Islamic is provided by the 2001 destruction of the giant Buddha statues in Afghanistan.

The statues, which stood for 15 centuries (!) were designated by UNESCO as a World Heritage Site, and were perhaps the best-known cultural landmark of the region. Despite all this, and ignoring international appeals, the Taliban government reduced the statues to rubble, in a determined, prolonged and complex effort.

According to the then-Afghan culture minister, 400 religious clerics from across the country decided the “statues were un-Islamic.”

The Taliban’s spiritual leader and supreme commander Mullah Muhammad Omar, proclaimed: “Muslims should be proud of smashing idols. It has given praise to God that we have destroyed them.” The then-foreign minister told a Japanese daily: “We are destroying the Buddha statues in accordance with Islamic law… it is purely a religious issue.”

This implacable enmity toward the un-Islamic is reflected in the appalling statistics regarding Islamic violence.

Some estimates indicate that since 9/11, there have been a staggering 25,000 lethal acts of Islamic terrorism.

Islam’s bloody innards

In his Al-Azhar address, Sisi issued a stern warning: “… this umma [Islamic world] is being torn, it is being destroyed, it is being lost – and it is being lost by our own hands.” The warning is timely and accurate.

For, as I pointed out in last week’s column, as appalling as Muslim violence against non-Muslims might be, it pales into insignificance when compared to violence among Muslims themselves.

In a sense, Sisi was echoing views Huntington articulated in his book: “Islam’s borders are bloody and so are its innards. The fundamental problem for the West is not Islamic fundamentalism. It is Islam, a different civilization whose people are convinced of the superiority of their culture and… obsessed with the inferiority of their power.”

Judging from the scope of the carnage, Islam’s innards are if anything bloodier than its borders, and the enmity for fellow Muslims far outstrips that for the infidel.

Quite apart from the well-known Sunni- Shia rift that has resulted in untold deaths, the myriad massacres in mosques, marketplaces and madrassas across Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and elsewhere in the Muslim-dominated Dar a-Salaam (Zone of Peace) make it impossible for anyone other than a learned expert to decipher the patterns of intra-Islamic rivalries and the reasons for their lethal consequences.

Sisi’s passionate cry that the Muslim world is being torn apart at its own hands is corroborated everyday by a never-ending stream of blood-soaked facts.

‘No stronger retrograde force exists…’

Well over 100 years ago, in his book The River War (1899), Winston Churchill predicted with stunning prescience much of the realities which Sisi laments in his New Year address: “How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful, fatalistic apathy.”

Churchill warned of adverse effects on Muslim economies and societies: “The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live… the influence of the religion paralyzes the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world.”

On Islam’s attitude to women, he wrote: “The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child, a wife or a concubine – must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.”

Regarding conflict with the West, he provided an ominous caveat: “Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science… the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome… ”

Given the situation in Europe today, this is a prognosis that should not be lightly dismissed.

Ataturk or Anwar Sadat?

It’s difficult to overstate the importance that Sisi’s speech could have – and equally important to exercise sober caution in developing excessively optimistic expectations as to the practical impact it may have.

Earlier this week, the influential US columnist George Will raised both the prospects and the perils: “…as head of the Egyptian state, Al Sisi occupies an office once occupied by Anwar Sadat who was murdered by Islamic extremists for his opening to Israel. This was an act of tremendous bravery by Sisi, and if the Nobel Peace Prize committee is looking for someone who plausibly deserves it, they could start there.”

Will Sisi be able to initiate a Kemalist-like transformation of Egypt as Kemal Ataturk did in Turkey just under a hundred years ago (and now disintegrating rapidly under the Islamist Erdogan regime)? The answer is far from certain. The times and circumstances in today’s Egypt are vastly different – and arguably more daunting – than those in post-WWI Turkey.

Egypt faces almost insurmountable socioeconomic challenges, and failure by Sisi to address them adequately will provide his numerous radical opponents much grist for their extremist mills to grind.

Recent reports (The Jerusalem Post, January 12) that a newly exposed Islamic State-affiliated cell that “planned to assassinate government ministers, media personalities and businessmen in the coming days” dramatically underscore how a tragic rerun of political assassination in Egypt cannot be discounted.

So while Sisi’s endeavor should be warmly applauded – and supported – its chances of success are sufficiently uncertain – indeed, remote – that it would be more than imprudent of the West and for Israel to make any assumption of such success a basis for future policy.

Sisi, ISIS & Israel

The outcome of the titan battle between Sisi and Islamic State will, of course, have dramatic impact on Israel, particularly with regard to the fate of Sinai, and the ramifications this will have on our long southern border and the city of Eilat.

But that is a topic for another – and somewhat depressing – article in the future.

Martin Sherman (www.martinsherman.org) is the founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies http://www.strategicisrael.org.

Nitsana Darshan-Leitner AND HER ACTION IN THE HAGUE IS TOTAL BETRAYAL OF JEWS AND SERBS

The Israeli Law centre is wrong and is a danger to Israel. Taking any case to the Nazi Hague Court (ICC) is a betrayal of Serbs and Jews. Fatah and Hamas are Nazi organizations founded by this Nazi (above) Hajj Amin el Husseini from whom Arafat and Abbas descended

I am totally opposed to this business of Israel taking Palestinian Arabs to the International Criminal Court. I have a far better strategy which is for Israel to arrest the leadership of Fatah and Hamas and to uproot their organizations.

 

I am opposed to the concept of “International Law” full stop. There is no difference between this concept and the Samantha Power very great danger to Israel and to the independence of ALL national states of “Responsibility to Protect”

 

This Israeli legal group Shurat HaDin, the Israel Law Center, is walking right into this trap. It is seeking to disarm Jews of Israel and their supporters internationally in the face of Samantha Power and Obama’s lethal “Responsibility to Protect”.

 

This means that I am also totally in opposition to the concepts in the brain of this lady called Nitsana Darshan-Leitner who is the Chairwoman.

 

As an aside I would wish to know where she was and what she was saying when the Serbs such as Slobadan Milosevic were being hauled in front of this same Court (set up specially for Yugoslavia)???

 

I suspect that this lady was in favour of the hounding of the Serbs. I say I “suspect” and when I find different I will publish.

 

I very much have the feeling that this lady was FOR the hounding of the Serbs. Let us see!

 

In any case her taking of any case to this Court in The Hague has to be opposed by every Jew and every Israeli.

 

That is precisely playing the game of Abbas.

 

There is indeed an alternative. That is for Israel, the state of the Jews, to immediately arrest the leaders of Fatah and Hamas and to uproot totally their whole organizations. Destroy these organizations which are rooted in the Nazi Holocaust. These organizations are in fact Nazi organizations. You do not take a law case against Nazi organizations or individuals in or to another Nazi centre which is what the Hague Court really REALLY is.

 

Israeli legal group Shurat HaDin, the Israel Law Center, filed lawsuits on Monday at the International Criminal Court (ICC) against three Palestinian Authority leaders for alleged war crimes, terrorism and human rights offenses, following PA President Mahmoud Abbas’s move last week to join the court and seek to prosecute Israel.

 

 

Indictments were brought against PA Prime Minister Rami Hamdallah, Abbas’s deputy; minister Jibril Rajoub; and PA intelligence chief Majed Faraj, all of whom belong to Abbas’s Fatah party.

 

 

The NGO is also pursuing existing litigation filed against Abbas last November, as well as a case against Gaza-based terror group Hamas and its leader Khaled Mashaal, filed at the ICC on September 2014.

 

According to Shurat HaDin, during the 2014 Israel-Gaza conflict “Fatah openly boasted in Facebook pages and other media channels that it launched projectiles that caused the injury and death of Israeli civilians — a war crime under international law.”

 

The NGO pressed The Hague to issue international arrest warrants for the three pending litigation.

 

Shurat HaDin’s chairwoman and founder, attorney Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, said that the organization will make it as difficult as possible for Palestinian leaders at the ICC, and that they must be held accountable for crimes committed under their supervision.

 

“Abbas and his friends in terror organizations believe that the courts can be used as a weapon against Israel, while at the same time, the Palestinian leadership carries out crimes with utter impunity against their own people and against Israeli civilians,” Darshan-Leitner said.

 

The case brought against Faraj and Hamdallah details widespread torture and killings of Palestinian residents who reside in areas under PA control, according to a statement released by the group.

 

“Faraj and Hamdallah, as commanders in the Palestinian security services, are directly responsible for widespread human rights violations committed [in the West Bank] against regular Palestinians by units under their authority,” the statement read.

 

 

According to the indictment, Rajoub, too, was fully aware of the violations it listed and should be held “accountable for the actions committed under his auspices by his subordinates in the organization,” the statement read.

 

The ICC can prosecute individuals accused of genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes committed since July 1, 2002, when the court’s founding treaty, the Rome Statute, came into force.

 

“The PA and Hamas have to understand that the International Criminal Court is a double-edged sword,” Darshan-Leitner said. “Years of murder, acts of terrorism and incitement will now be brought before prosecutors for investigation.”

http://www.timesofisrael.com/group-files-war-crimes-lawsuits-against-palestinian-leaders/

 

 

TROTSKYISM ALONE IS THE VOICE WHICH WILL FIGHT IN OUR ERA FOR JEWISH FREEDOM…HOW TO FIGHT THE UN SECURITY COUNCIL PLOTS

Abbas is a Nazi and the whole business of recognising a Palestine State in the UN is Nazi business. There is only one antidote to this poison which is that Israel arrests Abbas and breaks up forever both the Fatah and the Hamas organizations…I mean totally

This is a most interesting and useful analysis of the position Israel finds itself at the hands of Abbas in the United Security Council. It says the following:

 

The U.N. Vote on Palestine Was a Rehearsal

 

And so it was, of course!

 

I saw this on the Israpundit website. Let me quote first of all the editor Ted Belman introduction to this John Bolton analysis:

 Belman… Bolton rightfully argues that the US should reject out of hand any resolution that circumvents its policy of requiring direct negotiations to achieve an agreement. Although the Obama Administration keeps repeating the mantra of direct negotiations, it still violated the principle of a negotiated solutions by embracing in advance of such negotiations, borders which are based on ’67 lines plus swaps. To do so limits the scope of negotiations.

 

Here is where I start to disagree (as a Trotskyist) with Belman and Bolton. Stay with me on this because I think it is important.

 

Trotskyism is a very bad name for all Jews that I know of. They listen to me quietly and sullenly. If I am right they say nothing at all. Just get ready to stick the knife in later when they can. Ah well!

 

This is my take on what Belman says above:

 

I do not think that “Bolton rightfully argues” at all at all in this analysis for very fundamental reasons. Why should Israel be dependent on anything at all that the US does? Note I did not say what Obama does. I mean the US. Israel is an independent country and it must not allow itself to be placed in this situation for a single moment.

 

But it is and that is the crucial thing now in every day in the lives of every Israeli.

 

Belman follows this American ruling classes creep Bolton. He was the guy all over the place calling for the invasion of Iraq and the destruction of Saddam in 2003. Bolton has never for a second changed his position on this game changer.

 

That remains the key issue for Jews. That issue which is hardly ever discussed is the key issue to discuss.

 

It was the overthrow of Saddam by Bush and Blair, supported totally by so many Jews like Belman, that is the defining issue.

 

It was the toppling off Saddam and the destruction of the Baathists (no matter how Antisemitic they were and all Arabs are Antisemitic) that opened the door to the Jihad in all its forms.

 

That action that Bolton was behind was followed by the Arab Spring which is actually a “Nightmare” for Jews.

 

To be kind to him Belman cannot see past his nose. Belman hates Trotskyism. So let us debate, really debate and I am ready against all comers on these issues.

 

So what then as an alternative to that do I propose? I am a Trotskyist and a socialist revolutionary.

 

I propose that there is only one answer. That is for the Israeli Government to arrest and break up all of the Fatah leadership/movement and of course to do the same with the Hamas movement.

 

That is the answer. That is the only answer.

 

In order for that to happen there must be a Government in Israel that is elected to do just that.

 

A Government which is headed by either Netanyahu or Bennett, or by Netanyahu in coalition with Bennett, or in coalition with Labour, or in coalition with Labour and Livni, or any one of a hundred concoctions, will never do that.

 

Do you see my point?

 

This Trotskyist based on the tradition of Trotskyism which Robert Wistrich is so hateful in his writings towards is coming up with this policy, and as far as I can see I am quite alone in putting this forward although I intend in future articles to go into some of the articles of both Sherman and Gil White to prove my point.

 

Belman is saying as is Bolton that the future of Israel is tied to the US Government. If so then Israelis finished. Israel must not for a second depend on the US Governemnt for anything.

 

 

 

An influx of new Security Council members means a likely ‘yes’ vote—and a veto dilemma for Obama.

 

 

By JOHN BOLTON, Wall Street Journal

 Jan. 2, 2015

http://www.israpundit.org/archives/63603723

 

Long-standing Palestinian efforts to use the United Nations to achieve internationally recognized statehood status nearly succeeded early Wednesday. Just after midnight, the Security Council narrowly rejected a Jordanian draft resolution fixing a one-year deadline for Israeli-Palestinian negotiations, requiring Israeli withdrawal to pre-1967 lines, and declaring Jerusalem the capital of “Palestine.”

 

Because the U.N. Charter requires nine affirmative votes from among the Security Council’s 15 members (assuming no vetoes) to pass a resolution, Jordan’s proposal failed—by one vote. There were eight in favor, two against, and five abstentions. Nonetheless, a pro-Palestinian, U.N. Charter-compliant majority may soon exist.

 

And absent more-effective U.S. diplomacy, the Obama administration could soon face making a choice that it would dearly like to avoid: whether to veto a biased, anti-Israel resolution. The Palestinian Authority has already significantly upped the ante by moving, later on Wednesday, to join the treaty creating the International Criminal Court.

 

 

 

A firmer U.S. strategy might have prevented the dilemma from arising. The White House’s opening diplomatic error was in sending strong signals to the media and U.S. allies that Mr. Obama, wary of offending Arab countries, was reluctant to veto any resolution favoring a Palestinian State. Secretary of State John Kerry took pains not to offer a view of the resolution before it was taken up. Such equivocation was a mistake because even this administration asserts that a permanent resolution of the Israeli-Arab conflict requires direct negotiations and agreements among the parties themselves.

 

No draft resolution contrary to these precepts should be acceptable to the U.S or worth wasting time on in the diplomatic pursuit of a more moderate version. This American view, advocated for years and backed by resolute threats to veto anything that contradicted it, has previously dissuaded the Palestinians from blue-smoke-and-mirror projects in the Security Council.

 

It is precisely the Obama administration’s audible heart palpitations about negative Arab reactions to a possible U.S. veto that encouraged the Palestinian Authority and its supporters to plunge ahead. Mr. Obama neither prevented the resolution from going forward nor prevailed decisively enough to discourage the Palestinians from trying again within months or even weeks.

 

 Several factors support a swift Palestinian reprise. First, they obtained a majority of the Security Council’s votes, even if not the required supermajority of nine. In today’s U.N., the eight affirmative votes constitute a moral victory that virtually demand vindication, and sooner rather than later.

 

Second, the text of Jordan’s resolution was wildly unbalanced even by U.N. standards—for example, it demands a solution that, “brings an end to the Israeli occupation since 1967,” and calls for “security arrangements, including through a third-party presence, that guarantee and respect the sovereignty of a State of Palestine.” A few meaningless tweaks here and there, and several countries that abstained could switch to “yes.” Third, on Jan. 1 five of the Security Council’s 10 nonpermanent members stepped down (their two-year terms ended), replaced by five new members more likely to support the Palestinian effort.

 

Consider how Wednesday’s vote broke down, and what the future may hold. Three of the Security Council’s five permanent members (France, China and Russia) supported Jordan’s draft. France’s stance is particularly irksome, since it provides cover for other Europeans to vote “yes.” The U.K. timidly abstained, proving that David Cameron is no Margaret Thatcher ; the abstention signals that a more “moderately” worded resolution might be enough to flip London to a “yes.”

 

Washington cast the only permanent member’s “no” vote, which is characterized as a veto only when nine or more Security Council members vote in a draft resolution’s favor. Will President Obama now have the stomach to cast a real veto against a U.N. Charter majority backing the Palestinians? Is this the point where the “liberated” Mr. Obama allows a harsh anti-Israel resolution to pass? Happy New Year, Jerusalem.

 

Among the nonpermanent members, the prospects are grim. Three “yes” votes came from Jordan, Chad and Chile, which all remain Security Council members in 2015. Two additional supporters, Argentina and Luxembourg, have been replaced, respectively, by Venezuela (no suspense there) and Spain. Spain narrowly won election in October, defeating Turkey after three ballots. Madrid might be expected to support Washington, but not necessarily, given recent EU hostility to Israel and the appeasers’ argument to soothe wounded Muslim feelings about Turkey’s loss by backing the Palestinians.

 

Only Australia joined the U.S. in voting “no.” Its successor, New Zealand, would either have abstained or voted affirmatively, according to Foreign Minister Murray McCully.

 

South Korea abstained, but its replacement, Malaysia, is a certain affirmative vote. Angola, taking Rwanda’s seat, is an abstention at best. While abstainers Lithuania and Nigeria remain, Nigeria’s Boko Haram problem could easily move it to “yes” as an olive branch to the Muslim world. And Lithuania, as a new member of the euro currency union, could well succumb to arguments for EU solidarity, especially if Britain also surrenders.

 

Finding nine affirmative votes, and likely even more, looks decidedly easy. The Obama administration can only prevent what it dreads by openly embracing a veto strategy, hoping thereby to dissuade pro-Palestinian states from directly confronting the U.S.

 

And if that fails, the veto should be cast firmly and resolutely, as we normally advocate our principles, not apologetically. As so often before on Middle Eastern issues, a veto would neither surprise nor offend most Arab governments. If the administration had courage enough to make clear that a veto was inevitable, it would minimize whatever collateral damage might ensue in Arab lands. But don’t hold your breath.

 

Mr. Bolton is a senior fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and the author of “Surrender Is Not an Option: Defending America at the United Nations and Abroad” (Simon & Schuster, 2007).

 

– See more at: http://israel-commentary.org/?p=10498#sthash.1a1zwwZ6.dpuf