SOCIAL MEDIA GIANTS INCITE TO JIHAD: Christians, Jews & Others – Raise Your Voices! “First They Came For The Jews” Is More Than A Saying. Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

(“We salute the Facebook Jihad, Twitter Jihad and Whatsapp Jihad.”)

BEFORE we proceed, let’s set some basic parameters and clear boundaries: This site will not tolerate any conflation between the all important underpinning of civilized nations, freedom of speech/expression, with the ‘right’ of others to incite to genocide via this same freedom. Dangerous, dangerous immoral inversion.

INDEED, as most rational folks internalize, civilized societies adhere to limits. In fact, NO ethical, moral or legal bases exist which underlie ‘equal’ rights and protections for those who incite to genocide, in juxtaposition to those who rightfully speak out against said inciters to genocidal jihad! Yes, to accede as much is to agree to live in a topsy turvy universe.

NOT only that, a concomitant rallying cry to destroy another nation should be an ethical, moral and legal boundary, one which should never to be crossed by civilized individuals. A slippery slope. More pointedly, what about political leaders and the so-called  ‘fourth estate’ – including social media giants – who hide under the umbrella of freedom of speech/expression and act in the service of radical revolutionary political agendas and ideological sympathies?

EFFECTIVELY, unless one is living in Orwell’s universe, whereby there is no diff between good and evil; whereby killers and victims are ‘equals’; whereby the ‘norm’ is an immoral equivalence across the board, then, and only then, the same freedom of speech/expression should be granted to inciters of genocide and those who are its victims.

ALAS, this site has made itself abundantly clear vis-a-vis the above. Still yet, before we segue to the crimes – yes, they are crimes – relative to social media giants, it is imperative to hear from one who is deemed an expert among experts by many esteemed professionals; international law Professor Louis Rene Beres. Mind you, he is this investigative journalist’s mentor in the legal arena, as documented here.

SO among a HUGE compendium of professional work,  the following is gleaned via his documented footnotes, specifically, # 2: ‘Genocide, Death and Anxiety: A Jurisprudential/Psychiatric Analysis‘ –   

Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, opened for signature, December 9, 1948, entered into force, January 12, 1951, 78 U.N.T.S. 277. Although the criminalizing aspect of inter­national law that proscribes genocide‑like conduct may derive from a source other than the Gen­ocide Convention (i.e. it may emerge from customary international law and be included in different international conventions), such conduct is dearly a crime under international law. Even where the conduct in question does not affect the interests of more than one state, it becomes an inter­national crime whenever it constitutes an offense against the world community delicto ius gentium. See M.C. Bassiouni, International Criminal Law: A Draft International Criminal Code 30‑44 (1980). See also Bassiouni, “The Penal Characteristics of Conventional International Criminal Law,” 15 Case W. Res. J. Int’l 27‑37 (1983).

IN this regard, social media giants – with the leader of the pack being Facebook, followed by Twitter, Whatsapp and Youtube – are ‘guilty as charged’, even though appearing to be untouchable.

FrenchJews

Still more victimization of Jews in France. Will French authorities act? Or will they continue to cower in fear before predatory Leftists and Islamic supremacists?

“Facebook Page Publishing Identities of French Jews to Encourage Attackers; 15 Men Assault a Jew in Paris Suburb After Confirming Photo,” by by Joshua Levitt, Algemeiner, July 25, 2014:

A violent mob of  more than a dozen men in France assaulted a Jew at his home in a Paris suburb after confirming that his photograph had been published by a French Facebook page identifying Jews to be targeted for physical intimidation, The Union of Jewish Students of France, the UEJF, said in a statement on Friday.

The Facebook page, ‘Jeunes Révolutionnaires Français’, JRF, or ‘Young French Revolutionaries’,posted the names and photos of 32 Jews. The assault on one of those listed took place on Thursday night in Bobigny, Seine-Saint-Denis, a Paris suburb. The assailants were armed with iron bars.

On the ‘Secret Tel Aviv’ Facebook page, Daniel Cohen called the group anti-Semitic, and exhorted Facebook users to report the JRF page to site administrators for removal.

On Facebook, Cohen wrote, “An anti-Semitic page is publishing names and pictures of French Jews in order to target them physically! A few have already been attacked at their homes, one last night by 15 people on one Jewish guy. We need to remove this page!”

The JRF captioned its page with the photos of the Jews to be targeted, “Smile, you’re caught! JRF watches! # AntiLDJ,” referring to the LDJ, the French initials of the Jewish Defense League, an organization created to teach Jews how to defend themselves from anti-Semitic attacks.

The title page of the group’s Facebook presence features a large Palestinian flag and calls for members to attend a rally on Saturday in connection with the international Al Quds Day protests around the world where police are preparing for violence against Jews.

The UEJF condemned the page and provided testimony from the assaulted Jew in Bobigny, according to France’s Le Monde Juif, or The Jewish World on Friday.

The UEJF said three men went to the victim’s house and asked him, “Are you the guy in the photo on Facebook?”

They then said they were there to “break the Jew” and do to him “the same as Ilan Halimi,” a 23-year-old who was kidnapped and tortured for 24 days by a gang led by Youssouf Fofana,described by The Jewish Chronicle as, “the extraordinarily cruel, Paris-born fifth of seven children of immigrants from the Ivory Coast.”

Halimi was found naked, handcuffed and bound to a tree near a railway station in February, 2006, and his body had been mutilated. Still alive, he died on the way to hospital. Halimi’s murder was made into a movie by French Jewish film director Alexandre Arcady entitled, 24 jours: la vérité sur l’affaire Ilan Halimi, or “24 Days: The Truth About the Ilan Hamili Affair,” inspired by a book with a similar title written by the victim’s mother, Ruth.

In Bobigny, after they confirmed him to be the Jew in the photo, the three men werejoined by 15 more, armed with iron bars, who assaulted the victim, the UEJF said. When another resident in the building appeared, the men fled the scene.

The UEJF said: “For several days, many Facebook pages have been created to encourage physical violence against young Jews. Photos were published, with the identities, phone numbers, and contact information. This young man was directly affected by such a Facebook page. It is unacceptable that the Jews are the target of Facebook calls to murder.”

The UEJF said it will file a complaint against the administrators of the Facebook page for incitement to racial hatred and incitement to violence.

In the French media, the LDJ has been blamed for calling for a strong reaction by Jews threatened with violence over the past two weeks since Israel began its Operation Protective Edge to stop Hamas’s rocket fire from Gaza.

But Roger Cukierman, president of the CRIF, the umbrella organization representing the Jewish community in France, told The Daily Beast on Friday that was not instigating further violence, and those accusations were beside the point.

“I am shocked when I hear journalists saying if the De La Roquette synagogue was attacked, it is because of the Jews,” Cukierman told The Daily Beast. “This is propaganda.”

“We had eight synagogues being attacked,” he said. “I am worried about the fact that synagogues are being attacked and not worried about these self-defense groups.”

AND as added back-up to the bloody effects of Arab/Muslim militant jihad, its blow back, look no further: ‘Israel On Fire: Arab Israelis (‘Palestinians’) Wage Militant Jihad Against Jews. What’s To Be Done?’

PARADOXICALLY, it is due to their gargantuan sizes that they have a concomitant responsibility to rein in jiihadi incitement at their platforms. On the other hand, it is this same bigness which renders them seemingly immune to accountability. Not so fast.

AS many have already become aware, an Israeli ‘legal eagle’, Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, a ‘rock star’ in Zionist circles – as well as respected by her peers for her ability to hold countless feet to the fire in a worldwide arena – has filed a class action lawsuit against Facebook, and 20,000 Israelis have signed on as plaintiffs. You go girl!!

Twenty thousand Israelis have brought a class-action lawsuit against Facebook in New York requiring the social media giant to immediately remove all Palestinian Facebook posts inciting attacks against Jews.

The plaintiffs allege that Facebook has failed in its “legal and moral” obligation to monitor and remove Facebooks posts — including videos and cartoons — inciting hatred towards Jews and calling for deadly attacks against Israelis.

Haaretz reports that the suit, filed late on Sunday in New York State Supreme Court in Brooklyn by 20,000 Israelis, with the Israeli-American Richard Lankin as lead plaintif, argues that Facebook’s refusal to stop the flood of incitement to violence and murder on its online platform is endangering the lives of Israelis.

According to the Shurat HaDin-Israel Law Center in a news release issued on Monday, Facebook posts calling for Palestinians to attack Jews are inspiring deadly attacks against innocent Israeli civilians. Social media posts calling on Palestinians to stage attacks against Israelis are “spurring on the terrorist attacks against Israelis in the past month,” the suit claims.

While acknowledging the “need to keep the web free,” the suit argues that being a publicly traded company that “wields tremendous power,” Facebook has the responsibility to act to stop extremists using its online platform to incite others criminal acts. 

According to the complaint, despite the fact that Facebook employs sophisticated algorithm that is able to “monitor and block postings by extremists and terrorists urging violence,” Facebook has allowed its platform to be used to “connect inciters to terrorists… to perpetrate stabbings and other… attacks against Israelis.”

“Facebook’s algorithms and platform connects inciters to terrorists who are further encouraged to perpetrate stabbings and other violence attacks against Israelis.”

The suit alleges that many Palestinian attackers “were motivated to commit their heinous crimes by incitement to murder they read on Facebook — demagogues and leaders exhorting their followers to ‘slaughter the Jews,’ and offering instruction as to the best manner to do so, including even anatomical charts showing the best places to stab a human being.”

Challenging past precedent that protects Internet services from liability for third party posts, the complaint argues that Facebook has a “legal and moral obligation” to monitor and delete content that contains incitement to murder because its social media platform is “far from a neutral or passive social media platform and cannot claim it is a mere bulletin board for other parties’ postings.”

Masked Palestinian Youths
Masked Palestinian Youths Armed With Slingshots (Photo By Pacific Press/Getty Images)

The 20,000 Israeli plaintiffs are seeking an injunction requiring Facebook to “immediately remove all pages, groups and posts containing incitement to murder Jews; to actively monitor its website for such incitement that all incitement is immediately removed prior to being disseminated to masses of terrorists and would-be terrorists; and to cease serving as matchmaker between terrorists, terrorist organizations, and those who incite others to commit terrorism.”

The suit is not seeking monetary compensation for damages, although the lead plaintiff, 76-year-old Richard Lankin, remains in a critical condition in a Jerusalem hospital following an attack in which he suffered multiple knife wounds and a gunshot wound to the head.

The attack against commuters in a Jerusalem bus on October 13 was staged by Palestinians armed with knives and guns. Two people were killed and more than 20 wounded in the attack.

Although most of the other plaintiffs have not suffered an attack, they claim in the suit that the incitement on Facebook is endangering their lives and that because of it they are living “in the crosshairs of a murderous terrorist rampage carried out by killers who attack people with knives, axes, screwdrivers, cars and Molotov cocktails for no reason other than that the attacker perceives the victims to be Jewish.”

According to Hareetz, the 76-page complaint was prepared by “attorney Robert Tolchin (New York), Asher Perlin (Fort Lauderdale, Florida) and Nitsana Darshan-Leitner, with the Shurat HaDin-Israel Law Center.”

Haaretz notes that Palestinian youths and militant organizations have a strong presence on social media, such as Facebook and Twitter. The Israeli news site quotes an Associated Press report which says that millions of Palestinians follow the social media accounts of the Hamas-affiliated Shehab News Network and Islamic Jihad-affiliated Quds News Network.

The class-action lawsuit follows eruption of violence in Israel involving attacks by Palestinians armed mostly with knives and handguns. About 10 Israelis have been killed in the attacks while 50 Palestinians have died.

Many of the 50 Palestinians were assailants killed during or after attacks.

AS always, there is no time, nor inclination, to rework the wheel, so to speak. Thus, let us take a page out of history’s most prescient quotes, in so far as its implications couldn’t be more applicable. 

REMEMBER?

“First They Came for the Jews”
By Pastor Niemoller

 "The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities." - Ayn Rand
First they came for the Jews and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.

Then they came for the Communists and I did not speak out because I was not a Communist.

Then they came for the trade unionists and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist.

Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me.

INTRINSICALLY, whether or not one is Jewish is beside the point, when it comes to Islamic incitement to genocide. Basically, whereas countless will shrug their shoulders re the exhortations found at social media (giants ) to “kill the Jews”, said incitement is played out – again and again – against the Christian community on a multiplicity of levels. 

EXHIBIT A:

HOW to stab a Jew – video

EXHIBIT B:

FACEBOOK’s STAB Israelis Community pages

facebookstab1.jpg

 ( )
TO wit, how is Facebook (other sites alike) NOT responsible??
{re-blogged at Joe For America}
{re-blogged at Islam Exposed}
{re-blogged at The Homeland Security Network}

HUSSEIN Obama’s Deal With Genocidal Iran: Hitler Redux. How Did This Happen? Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

AS the Islamist-in-Chief awaits with bated breath to sign off on “peace in our time” – duly backed up by a recent Iranian defector, a top aide to Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani – it must be understood, in relation to Obama Inc. and Iran, the “negotiations” have been little more than theatrical spectacles. Window dressing. Don’t ever forget this.

NOT only that, but guess who is one of his chief adviser’s via said “negotiations”? A highly connected mouthpiece for the Iranian regime! Say what? As is said, the fix is in!

BY the way, Sec Kerry has gone native, and not least of which because his son-in-law is Iranian.

Secretary of State John Kerry exposed a secret that journalists and academics have been agonizing over for the past six weeks: the fact that his daughter has married an Iranian-American who has extensive family ties to Iran.

“I am proud of the Iranian-Americans in my own family, and grateful for how they have enriched my life,” Kerry said in the official statement.

Interesting. Nothing to see there…

Friend of colleague ran into at chocolate shop tdy. She said friends in are looking forward to deal. He said ‘inshallah’

Inshallah means – If Allah wills it.

BUT if anything lends itself to said dire outcome, well, this site’s (Nov. 2013) commentary should be considered a centerpiece: “Valerie Jarrett, Iran’s Deal Maker: Her Main Mission As Obama’s Consigliere.”

NOT only that, since this site’s inception, mega alarm bells (seek, and you shall find) rang, and all indicators pointed towards this moment in time. But let’s use the following one (Dec. 2013) as an exemplar, in so far as one of the world’s most authoritative experts on nuclear doctrine, Professor Louis Rene Beres, gave this investigative journalist a special shout out (among many) to said effect, and this one was especially high on his register: “Iran, A (De Facto) Nuclear State: Israel’s Former AMAN Chief Concurs With Former CIA Head.” Them’s fighting words. 

FAST forward 15 months to the here and now, and DEBKAfile Intelligence sets the record straight: “U. S. Surrender On Break Out Time To A Bomb Leads To Breakthrough On Nuclear Deal.”

FOLKS, who’s still shocked…shocked. After all, how many alarms bells had to be rung here and there?

STILL, let’s dare not overlook the historical parallels to the run up to Hitler’s genocidal swathe, if any sense of history still counts among non-blinded and rational thinkers. 

PAY (historical) heed to the (un)learned lessons:

‘Subhumans’ rhymes with ‘Infidels’

Netanyahu, Obama, Iran, nuclear bombs, and a new Munich

Francisco Gil-White – March 26, 2015 – http://www.hirhome.com/iraniraq/obama-iran-eng.htm
( Times of Israel )

“Israel must vanish from the page of time!”

–Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, founder of the Iranian Islamist State (1979)

 “Israel must be wiped off the map!”

–Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, former president of Iran (2005)

 “Israel… has no cure but to be annihilated.”

–Ali Khamenei, Supreme Leader of Iran (2014)

“Peace for Our Time,” announced a proud Neville Chamberlain after placing the Czechoslovaks in Hitler’s foaming bite, one he relaxed only to spit threats of European war and anti-Jewish genocide. “Peace in our time” promised Barack Obama in his inaugural speech of 2013. History may not repeat itself, but it does rhyme. Obama prepares already the signature that will normalize the nuclear program of terrorist Ali Khamenei, ‘Supreme Leader’ (official title) of Iran, and would-be emulator of Hitler’s crime against the Jews.

Santayana was right: lest we understand history we are doomed to repeat it. So let us interrogate this history and find the rhymes to grasp our moment: How could Chamberlain vault over public opinion to commit his diplomatic barbarities? Historians have answered this already.

In The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich (1960) William Shirer remarked that the Times of London, “This great journal, one of the chief glories of English journalism, …play[ed]… a dubious role in the disastrous British appeasement of Hitler.” How so? By raising the Führer’s prestige every time he interrupted his violent tantrums to communicate his commitment to ‘peace,’ promised always in return for some license (to reoccupy the Rhineland, rearm Germany, absorb Austria, consume Czechoslovakia…).[1] This media barrage gave Chamberlain cover when he repeated each time—another time—that Hitler could be ‘appeased.’

It wasn’t just the Times.

Neville Chamberlain’s Conservative Party created, in the late 1920s, “ ‘a little intelligence service of our own’ ” that jerked the conservative press around with a clandestine bridle every bit as short as that employed in the totalitarian states. It was led by Sir Joseph Ball, Chamberlain’s most intimate friend, as documented in research published by R.B. Cockett in The Historical Journal. Ball began extending his control over the rest of the British press when the Great Depression called forth the so-called ‘national’ government, in truth conservative to the hilt.[2].

According to Anthony Adamthwaite’s investigations, published in the Journal of Contemporary History, by 1936 this conservative government had “the BBC… firmly on the leash.” That was not enough. In 1937, with Chamberlain installed as Prime Minister, Goebbels complained about remaining criticisms of Hitler still daring to rear their heads in the dailies. Lord Halifax, foreign minister, “promised to do all he could to secure ‘the cooperation of the British Press’ ” and rushed to solve the problem with the owners of the Daily Herald, the News Chronicle, the Daily Mail, and the Evening Standard. There were “awkward questions” about all this in the House of Commons “[that] were met with denials, evasion and ambiguity.”[3]

One newspaper went to extremes: Truth. Chamberlain confessed in a letter to his sisters that “the paper was ‘secretly controlled by Sir Joseph Ball’ ” (he had purchased it clandestinely). And “Truth,” explains Cockett, “as an expression of the views of Ball and Chamberlain, seems to have differed little in its ideological content from the professed prejudices and beliefs of the Nazi leaders.” In fact, “Truth adopted an overtly antisemitic and racialist tone…, [and] any opponent of appeasement came to be branded as a Jewish/Communist traitor to the true English cause.” Naturally, “Truth also became overtly pro-German and pro-Italian as Chamberlain proceeded in his search for a diplomatic settlement with Hitler and Mussolini.”[4]

And in the United States?

Historian Frederick Marks points out in The Historical Journal that Franklin Delano Roosevelt projected in public positions quite at variance with his backstage dealings, producing a “gap between appearance and reality” that was “very wide indeed.” To British ambassador Ronald Lindsay, Roosevelt confessed that he would be the first to celebrate the success of British and French pressure on Czechoslovakia, but that he would be impeached if the US public came to know his opinion.[5]

What about the press? Hearst all by himself owned half of the US press, and it was by “making overtures to William Randolph Hearst and other like-minded businessmen” that Roosevelt had managed to get the White House.[6] What did Hearst want? This was well known, because “Hearst’s editorials were usually printed in all of his 26 newspapers.”[7]

Consider a few of Hearst’s opinions, compiled by historian Rodney Carlisle in the Journal of Contemporary History: 1) Nazism was a welcome barrier against communism; 2) the United States should not threaten Germany or support the League of Nations; 3) Nazi demands about redrawing Germany’s borders were reasonable and the desire to unify German lands quite just; 4) the reoccupation of the Rhineland was justified; 5) if the Nazis attacked US navy ships, this should be tolerated if they issued a sincere apology (!?); and 6) Chamberlain did well in giving Czechoslovakia over to the Nazis.[8]  It was not by accident that Hearst was called “the keystone of American fascism.”[9]

Support for the ‘appeasement’ (is that what it was?) of Hitler was an Anglo-American, and not merely a British phenomenon.

In our time US and British leaders invade Afghanistan and Iraq creating voids that Iran is quick to fill. Now they rush to negotiate with Iran that country’s development of nuclear weapons. In charge is Wendy Sherman, undersecretary of state, author of the deal that allowed North Korea her nuclear bombs and possessor of quite some gall for scolding the South Koreans who insist those bombs are unacceptable.[10]

And to all this, the respected press of our day, what does it say?

On November 2014 the Economist confessed that “Iran is hard to fathom,” and that “journalists who have been able to obtain a precious visa still leave with a sense of uncertainty as few Iranians feel free to speak their mind.” Despite these limitations the British magazine, the most prestigious in the world, the most influential with ‘intelligent’ and ‘educated’ people, stated confidently that “The [Iranian] Revolution is over” and that “the country has unmistakably changed,” flooding its readers with statistics and anecdotes that speak to the supposed liberalism, modernity, and education of the Iranian population.[11]

However, the nuclear agreement will not be signed with the Iranian population but with the tyrants who rule it. In November 2014, when the Economist published said piece, those rulers were energetically financing, as they still do, terrorist groups with a genocidal and antisemitic ideology; prosecutor Alberto Nissman was still around to denounce with his own voice the Argentinian government’s cover up of the Iranian officials responsible for the terrorist attack against the Jewish community of Buenos Aires (85 dead and 300 wounded); and one could still hear echoes of Iranian ‘Supreme Leader’ Ali Khamenei’s July threat of “annihilation” against the Jewish State.[12]

One has got to take this seriously. Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani—former president of Iran and father of Iran’s nuclear program—has already made plenty clear what that program is for: “the application of an atomic bomb would not leave any thing in Israel but the same thing would just produce damages in the Muslim world.”

Benjamin Netanyahu, prime minister of Israel, orated eloquently some days ago before the US Congress on the intentions of the ayatollahs and the dangers of signing with them. The Economist replied with firm support for Obama.[14] As did the New York Times.[15]

Thus were we spoken to right before Czechoslovakia was thrown to Hitler. But that wasn’t (not exactly…) a free press. Have things changed? What does recent historical research reveal on the influence of the Western power elite over the media?

Research by Christopher Simpson, professor of communication at American University, documents that US intelligence agencies spent rivers of money to create in the postwar—in a snap—schools and academic departments of ‘communication’ (and related institutes) and staffed them with the researchers who had created the WWII ‘psychological warfare’ programs for the US government. (McCarthyism took care of any dissenters.) This infrastructure “underlies most college- and graduate-level training for print and broadcast journalists, public relations and advertising personnel, and the related craftspeople who might be called the ‘ideological workers’ of contemporary U.S. society.”

        (Watch some related videos here.)

These same intelligence agencies were granted explicit permission, in the National Security Act of 1947, to use ‘covert actions’ to corrupt foreign media.[17]

There is more than enough here for whoever sees in the press nothing less than Power’s megaphone. It was Chamberlain who celebrated Chamberlain’s policies; now Obama sells Obama.

History does not repeat itself, but it does rhyme. We should take heed, because antisemites are dangerous to us all. In World War II more than 54 million non-Jews lost their lives. For Hitler we were ‘subhumans’; for Khamenei, ‘infidels.’ Will the outcome be very different?

 

(An Islamist wind is blowing through the White House…the People’s House…threatening to destroy the west, if left unchecked!)

IN the same manner in which the geo-political stage was pre-set for World War 2, make no mistake, so too this go around is heading towards World War 3. In fact, whatever doubts one had re his intentions – as to what HUSSEIN Obama has been up to – there should no longer even be a scintilla. For when one factors in the requirements – the geo-political fault lines – for Iranian hegemony (and this is the mullahs and HUSSEIN Obama’s end goal, aside from everything else), it became necessary to alight the entire Mid East (and parts of Africa) to effectuate their plans. None of the fires were happenstance.

BASICALLY, a Sunni-Shia showdown had to take place, and the hyper-muscle of the Islamist-in-Chief was pressed into action to stir the ever-brewing cauldron of inter-Islamic/Arab struggle for regional (then global) hegemony. This was precisely what the so-called “Arab Spring” was about, followed up by the illegal thrust into Libya, Benghazigate. Precursors. 

NOW, for the newly initiated it becomes confusing because HUSSEIN Obama is Sunni and in deep sympathy with the Sunni Muslim Brotherhood. However, overriding factors are in play, and allowing Iran’s regime to gain nuclear weapons surpasses certain inherent fealty.

REGARDLESS, Valerie Jarrett’s Iranian roots pave his way forward, and she is his absolute right hand…left too. Therefore, rest assured, the west will soon be living under the shadowy threat of a nuclear-armed Iran.

MIND you, PM Netanyahu bears partial responsibility for this nightmare, as repeatedly stated at several forums. Most recently, his onus can be found here. Indeed, he has been in power for years, and did little more than order certain counter measures to push back against Iran’s genocidal march, many of which will never (rightfully so) be known.

NEVERTHELESS, when re-elected in 2009, had he brought to bear (knowing full well that HUSSEIN Obama would never stop Iran’s mullahs) Israel’s FORMIDABLE and multi-layered strike forces, that would have been 6 years less time for Iran’s centrifuges to spin, and said determinate action would have cut the wind out of both their sails, Iran’s and the Islamist-in-Chief’s.

INEXORABLY, as a result of all of the above, back in Dec. 2012, the following was written and this investigative journalist had the foresight to query: Where Have PM Netanyahu’s “Red Lines” Gone…HUSSEIN Obama’s (Ostensibly) Too?”

INDEED!!

{re-blogged at Islam Exposed}

{re-blogged at Joe For America}

Israel Smacks Down Syria & Russia;ADVANCED Russian Hardware Destroyed.Assists America Too.What’s The Calculus?Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

{re-blogged at Islam Exposed}

{re-blogged at Jews Down Under}

MANY have heard about the IAF’s lighting strikes into Syria, especially over the last few years. As always, they are not for nothing, irrespective of the whining from assorted (near and far) foes. Guaranteed, they are not training exercises to prove their mettle. That ship has sailed. In fact, the only air force that can compete with the IAF (at times, beat) is the USAF. {blogger’s note: this site is pro-American and pro-Israeli, make no mistake…but, bear in mind, there are various “sore loser” explanations in the link below}

“How badly did the United States Air Force Get Beaten By The Israeli Air Force During Red-Flag Exercises Or War-Games Exercises (that were not classified)?”

SO with the above understanding in mind, readers must recognize that nations are operating, as they should, in their own national interests. But it is equally intrinsic to realize when it is prudent to work together and when to go it alone, even parting company with an ally. This is a lesson PM Netanyahu too often shuns. In fact, the 2014 summer-long fiery war with Hamas should become EXHIBIT NUMBER ONE; it demonstrated that tying Israel’s strings to Obama Inc. evinced incalculable knock-on effects. The full blown evaluation can be found within the following interview. A relevant excerpt sets the tone:

Adina Kutnicki: Wolff, before we review the dangers associated with the newly-formed Muslim-American party, it must be reiterated: traditional American allies are caught up in a horrifying spider’s web through their association with the Obama administration. Poisonous.

Illustrative of said entangling, one has to internalize when it is in a nation’s best interests to align with a “best friend” and when prudence demands a “trial” separation, at least for the time being.

Basically, PM Netanyahu, MIT smartie that he is, hasn’t figured out this seemingly simple calculus. Along this trajectory, through his joined-at-the-hip actions with Barack HUSSEIN Obama (don’t be distracted by their public tussles – as media grabbing as they are – that’s not where the action/collusion is) Israel now finds herself “involved” with Sunni jihadists, the likes of which include Al Qaeda, Al Nusra and ISIS! Yup.

Trenchantly, there is a “quiet” war being fought on the Syrian side of Israel’s northern Golan border to capture key sites. It may very well blow up Israel’s Golan front. Currently, the struggle is between Assad’s henchmen and the aforementioned Sunni jihadists. These are the same “rebels” whom Obama Inc. has “surreptitiously” armed, ever since the administration entered into an absolutely illegal war in Libya. Its (hidden) basis was to arm Sunni terrorists to take over the region for the Muslim Brotherhood! Full circle.

Resultant, instead of PM Netanyahu opting out of choosing between one Islamic devil over another (Assad’s forces are inseparable from Iran’s proxy pawns), thereby, reacting to whichever side illegally fires from Syria into Israel with resolute IDF firepower, Israel is now – like it or not – aiding those who abet Hamas. Ditto, Assad/Iran have been doing likewise.

Assuredly, there are times when NOT choosing sides makes the most strategic sense. However, this is definitely not the case with the Kurdish issue. Alas, it was a relief that PM Netanyahu publicly stated his support for Kurdish independence from Iraq. As is said, even a broken clock can be right once in a while.

Stipulated, sans a scintilla of a doubt, under PM Netanyahu’s missteps, the dangers to Israel have never been greater….

IN this regard, this week’s Israeli airstrike into Syria wielded a two-edge sword; a dual track. Yes, as critical as this investigative journalist is of PM Netanyahu’s penchant for spinelessness, this go around he exerted proper hyper-muscle and secured Israel’s national interests – finally.

High-ranking American military sources revealed Monday, Dec. 8, that Israel’s air strikes near Damascus the day before wiped out newly-arrived Russian hardware including missiles that were dispatched post haste to help Syria and Hizballah frustrate a US plan for a no-fly zone over northern Syria.

The advanced weapons were sent over, as DEBKAfile reported exclusively Sunday, after Russian President Vladimir Putin learned that the Obama administration and the Erdogan government were close to a final draft on a joint effort to activate a no-fly zone that would bar Syrian air force traffic over northern Syria.

The Kremlin has repeatedly warned – of late in strong messages through back channels – that the establishment of a no-fly or buffer zone in any part of Syria would be treated as direct American intervention in the Syria war and result in Russian military intervention for defending the Assad regime.
According to the US-Turkish draft, American warplanes would be allowed to take off from the Turkish airbase of Incirlik in the south for operations against Syrian warplanes, assault helicopters or drones entering the no-go zone. Thus far, Ankara has only permitted US surveillance aircraft and drones the use of Incirlik for tracking the movements of Islamic State fighters in northern Syria.
The Obama administration was long deterred from implementing a no-fly zone plan by the wish to avoid riling Moscow or facing the hazards of Syria’s world-class air defense system.

But Washington was recently won over to the plan by a tacit deal with Damascus for American jets to be allowed entry to help Kurdish fighters defend their northern Syrian enclave of Kobani against capture by al Qaeda’s IS invaders.

However, the US administration turned down a Turkish demand to extend the no-fly zone from their border as far as Aleppo, Syria’s largest city, over which Syrian army forces are battling rebels and advancing slowly into the town.
The no-fly zone planned by US strategists would be narrow – between a kilometer and half a kilometer deep inside Syria. However Moscow is standing fast against any such plan and objects to US planes making free of Syrian airspace, a freedom they are now afforded over Kobani.
To drive this point home, the Russians delivered a supply of advanced anti-air missiles and radar, whose use by the Syrian army and transfer to Hizballah in Lebanon were thwarted by the Israeli air strikes Sunday.

Moscow reacted swiftly and angrily with a Note to the United Nations Monday accusing Israel of “aggressive action” and demanding “that such attacks should not happen again… Moscow is deeply worried by this dangerous development, the circumstances of which demand an explanation.”

The Assad regime has held back from reacting to past Israeli air raids for preventing advanced weaponry from reaching Hizballah. This time, spokesmen in Damascus warned that their government’s response would be clandestine and cause Israel “unimaginable harm.”

EXTRAPOLATING further – and despite the warning that Syria’s response would be clandestine and cause Israel “unimaginable harm” – the fact of the matter is that they never cease plotting to exert “unimaginable harm”. Israel is, as is said, damned if it does and damned if it doesn’t. But never mind. Its PRIMARY vested interest (by striking Syria, the transit route to Lebanon’s Hezbollah) is to ALWAYS keep advanced anti-missile hardware out of Hezbollah’s hands. In essence, these air strikes (and other clandestine operations) frustrate Iran’s proxy arm from causing grave damage to Israel. Significantly, said pre-emptive actions should be a no-brainer, even for Israel’s appeasement-oriented political leaders. Not only that, they are manifestly legal under international law, despite Russia’s (and Syria’s) shrill pronouncements before the U.N.’s anti-Israel gaggle of kleptocrats.

AS detailed by this site‘s close and valued contact, Professor Louis Rene Beres, in his joint analysis with U.S. Admiral Leon “Bud” Edney & General Thomas G. McInerney at Oxford’s University Press, anticipatory self-defense is codified:

Enter international law. Designed, inter alia, to ensure the survival of states in a persistently anarchic world – a world originally fashioned after the Thirty Years War and the Peace of Westphalia in 1648 – this law includes the “inherent” right of national self-defense. Such right may be exercised not only after an attack has already been suffered, but, sometimes, also, in advance of an expected attack.

What can now be done, lawfully, about relentless Iranian nuclear weapons development?  Do individual states, especially those in greatest prospective danger from any expressions of Iranian nuclear aggression, have a legal right to strike first defensively? In short, could such a preemption ever be permissible under international law?

For the United States, preemption remains a part of codified American military doctrine. But is this national doctrine necessarily consistent with the legal and complex international expectations of anticipatory self-defense?

To begin, international law derives from multiple authoritative sources, including international custom. Although written law of the UN Charter (treaty law) reserves the right of self-defense only to those states that have already suffered an attack (Article 51), equally valid customary law still permits a first use of force if the particular danger posed is “instant, overwhelming, leaving no choice of means and no moment for deliberation.” Stemming from an 1837 event in jurisprudential history known as the Caroline, which concerned the unsuccessful rebellion in Upper Canada against British rule, this doctrine builds purposefully upon a seventeenth-century formulation of Hugo Grotius.

Self-defense, says the classical Dutch scholar in, The Law of War and Peace (1625), may be permitted “not only after an attack has already been suffered, but also in advance, where the deed may be anticipated.”  In his later text of 1758, The Right of Self-Protection and the Effects of Sovereignty and Independence of Nations, Swiss jurist Emmerich de Vattel affirmed: “A nation has the right to resist the injury another seeks to inflict upon it, and to use force and every other just means of resistance against the aggressor.”

Article 51 of the UN Charter, limiting self-defense to circumstances following an attack, does not override the customary right of anticipatory self-defense.  Interestingly, especially for Americans, the works of Grotius and Vattel were favorite readings of Thomas Jefferson, who relied  heavily upon them for crafting the Declaration of Independence of the United States of America.

We should also recall Article VI of the US Constitution, and assorted US Supreme Court decisions. These proclaim, straightforwardly, that international law is necessarily part of the law of the United States.

The Caroline notes an implicit distinction between preventive war (which is never legal), and preemptive war. The latter is not permitted merely to protect oneself against an emerging threat, but only when the danger posed is “instant” and “overwhelming.” Using such a literal framework, it could first appear doubtful that the United States may now construct a persuasive legal argument for preemption against Iran. This would be the case even if the planned American defense operation were carefully limited to exclusively nuclear military targets.

Nonetheless, we live in very different times. Grotius, Vattel and those later jurists who were focused on the Caroline could never have anticipated the genuinely existential risks soon to be posed by a nuclear Iran.  Understandably, the permissibility of anticipatory self-defense is far greater in the nuclear age than in prior centuries. Today, after all, it is easy to imagine, simply waiting impotently to suffer an enemy nuclear attack could be entirely irrational. Even suicidal.

A  special danger is posed by terrorist group surrogates. If not prevented from receiving nuclear weapons or fissile materials from patron states, such proxies (e.g., Hezbollah, Hamas, al-Qaeda) could inflict enormous harms upon targets that would be out of range of nuclear-tipped missiles.

The United States is not the only country at risk from Iranian nuclear weapons. Israel is at greater risk. There is, however, a long and respected international legal tradition that Great Powers have proportionately great responsibilities. This would suggest, from a management of world power standpoint, that America must remain ever-mindful of a potential nuclear threat to other, far smaller states.

MOREOVER, the international precepts outlined above are doubly applicable for distinct genocidal foes. Thus, how many times, how many ways, do Israel’s foes have to declare: it is their intent to destroy her, before pre-emption (against Iran, its proxy arms or others) becomes the only nation-saving option? Ten….50….100…

NOT to be lost in the discussion, this week’s  strike assisted the U.S. military in its quest to block Russia from imposing a “no-fly” zone over Syrian airspace, and all that it entails. Resultant, it became a win-win to strike.

CONCOMITANTLY, Israel’s leaders must steer clear of Obama Inc.’s “relationship” with ISIS and its attendant terror arms, thus, knowing when to “part company”!

 

 

Iranian Nukes & ‘Palestinian’ Statehood:Synergistic (Awaiting) Catastrophes For Israel & America/West …Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

{re-blogged at Islam Exposed}

{re-blogged at Jews Down Under}

Sentient and rational folks can no longer deny the obvious: the Iranian regime, when they exhort Death to Israel and Death to America, is indeed gunning for both nations. Their genocidal war inexorably twins the “Big Satan” and the “Little Satan”. Factual. Indisputable. Take them at their exact words. 

This past Monday marked the 34th anniversary of the takeover of the U.S. embassy in Iran, leading to 52 Americans being held hostage for several months. Contrary to what many analysts thought, and despite the recent “thaw” and optimism considering rapprochement between Iranian authorities and American leaders, tens of thousands of Iranian demonstrators packed the streets outside of the former U.S. embassy in Tehran this year. Hundreds of thousands also demonstrated against Israel and the U.S. in other cities across the country.

The protests were unprecedented in their scale and scope, reported as the biggest anti-U.S. and anti-Israel rally in years. According to Iran’s official media, millions of people participated in these protests and demonstrations around the country, the largest turnout in years.

Additionally, the leaders of the Islamic Republic of Iran have designated Nov. 4 as a “National Day against Global Arrogance.” While this week, tens of thousands of Iranians shouted “death to America” and “death to Israel.” The burning of American and Israeli flags permeated throughout the cities. Furthermore, effigies of American President Barack Obama, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry were held up high by protesters….

SIMILARLY, when self-coined PA Arabs (in tandem with Hamas, their “bad cop” partners, and officially part of their terror entity) slaughter Jews, an imperative to destroy Israel, know that their hatred towards America is equally annihilatory. In fact, who recalls PA Arabs dancing and handing out sweets after 9/11/01 jihadists incinerated over 3,000 Americans under the banner of Islam? Their jihad has only gotten worse after years of perfecting their “art”. Think about it.

SO the urgent questions before Israelis and Americans – and the west at large – are: what exactly does Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s backroom deal with Iran’s mullahs portend? and, at the same time, how is PA (jihadi) “statehood” fitting into this same impending prism, both jointly and separately?

IN this regard, aside from Professor Louis Rene Beres, no one is more qualified to address these two synergistic global menaces. This too is a fact. And said qualifier is irrespective of his cornerstone at this site.

Ominously, especially for Israel, Iranian nuclearization and Palestinian statehood are progressing at roughly the same pace. Although this simultaneous emergence is proceeding without any conscious intent or coordinated design, the cumulative security impact upon Israel will still be substantial. Plausibly, and in contrast to more usual geometric orthodoxy, the “whole” of this impact will be considerably greater than the sum of its “parts.” Expressed more precisely, the appearance of Iranian nuclear weapons and “Palestine” will be synergistic.

For Israeli planners, of course, this unique and unprecedented threat should be treated with appropriate intellectual respect. In essence, and contrary to a long-prevailing conventional wisdom, Iran and Palestine do not represent separate or unrelated hazards to Israel. Rather, they delineate intersecting, mutually reinforcing, and potentially existential perils. It follows, unambiguously, that Jerusalem must do whatever possible to remove or diminish expected dangers on both fronts, and also at the same time.

Among other things, Israel will need to further enhance its multi-layered active defenses. As long as incoming rocket aggressions from Gaza, West Bank, and/or Lebanon (Hezbollah) were to remain conventional, the inevitable “leakage” could still be considered tolerable. But once these rockets are fitted with chemical and/or biological materials, any such porosity would quickly prove  “unacceptable.”

Facing Iranian nuclear missiles, Israel’s “Arrow” ballistic missile defense system would reasonably require a fully 100% reliability of interception. To achieve any such level of reliability, of course, would simply not be possible. Now, assuming that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has already abandoned any residual hopes for a cost-effective eleventh-hour preemption against pertinent Iranian nuclear assets – an altogether credible assumption, at this late time – this means that Israeli defense planners must look instead to deterrence.

Because of the expectedly corrosive interactive effects involving Iranian nuclear weapons and Palestinian statehood, Israel will soon need to update and further refine its existing strategies of deterrence. In this connection, Israel’s leaders will have to accept that certain more-or-less identifiable leaders of these prospectively overlapping enemies might not always satisfy the complex criteria of rational behavior in world politics. In such improbable but still conceivable circumstances, assorted Jihadist adversaries in Palestine, Iran, Lebanon or elsewhere might sometime refuse to back away from contemplated aggressions against Israel.

By definition, moreover, these irrational enemies could exhibit such refusals in thoroughly considered anticipations of a fully devastating Israeli reprisal.

Sooner rather than later, and facing a new and incalculable synergy from Iranian and Palestinian aggressions, Israel will need to take appropriate steps to assure that: (1) it does not become the object of any non-conventional attacks from these enemies; and (2) it can successfully deter all possible forms of non-conventional conflict. To meet this ambitious goal, Jerusalem, inter alia, must retain its recognizably far-reaching conventional superiority in pertinent weapons and capable manpower, including effective tactical control over the Jordan Valley.

In principle, such retentions could reduce the overall likelihood of ever actually having to enter into any chemical, biological, or nuclear exchange with regional adversaries. Correspondingly, Israel should plan to begin to move incrementally beyond its increasingly perilous posture of “deliberate nuclear ambiguity.” By preparing to shift toward prudently selective and partial kinds of “nuclear disclosure” – in other words, by getting ready to take its “bomb” out of the “basement,” and in carefully controlled phases – Israel could better ensure that its  relevant enemies will remain sufficiently subject to Israeli nuclear deterrence.

In matters of strategy, operational truth may sometimes emerge through apparent paradox. Israeli planners may soon have to understand that the efficacy or credibility of their country’s nuclear deterrence posture could sometime vary inversely with enemy views of Israeli nuclear destructiveness. However ironic or counter-intuitive, therefore, enemy perceptions of a too-large or too-destructive Israeli nuclear deterrent force, or of an Israeli force that is not sufficiently invulnerable to first-strike attacks, could sometime undermine this deterrence posture.

Also critical, of course, is that Israel’s current and prospective adversaries will see the Jewish State’s nuclear retaliatory forces as “penetration capable.” This means forces that seem assuredly capable of penetrating any Arab or Iranian aggressor’s active defenses. Naturally, a new state of Palestine would be non-nuclear itself, but it could still present a new “nuclear danger” to Israel by its impact upon the more generally regional “correlation of forces.” Thereby, Palestine could represent an indirect but nonetheless markedly serious nuclear threat to Israel.

There is more to be done. Israel should continue to strengthen its active defenses, but Jerusalem must also do everything possible to improve each critical and interpenetrating component of its nuanced deterrence posture. In this bewilderingly complex process of strategic dissuasion, the Israeli task may also require more incrementally explicit disclosures of nuclear targeting doctrine, and, accordingly, a steadily expanding role for cyber-defense and cyber-war. And even before undertaking such delicately important refinements, Israel will need to more systematically differentiate between adversaries that are presumably rational, irrational, or “mad.”

Overall, the success of Israel’s national deterrence strategies will be contingent upon an informed prior awareness of enemy preferences, and of specific enemy hierarchies of preferences. In this connection, altogether new and open-minded attention will need to be focused on the seeming emergence of “Cold War II” between Russia and the United States. This time around, for example, the relationship between Jerusalem and Moscow could prove helpful rather than adversarial.

For Jerusalem, it may even be reasonable to explore whether this once hostile relationship could turn out to be more strategically gainful for Israel, than its traditionally historic ties to the United States. Credo quia absurdum. At this transitional moment in geostrategic time, when Washington may need to align itself with Tehran and Damascus against Islamic State, virtually anything is possible.

It is essential that Israeli planners approach absolutely all prospective enemy threats as potentially interactive or synergistic. Even more specifically, if a soon-to-be-formalized state of Palestine does not readily find itself in the same ideological orbit as Iran – now a distinctly plausible conclusion, especially in view of steadily accelerating Shiite-Sunni fissions in the Middle East – the net threat to Israel could still become more perilous than the merely additive result of its area enemies. In approaching the near simultaneity of Iranian nuclear weapons and Palestinian statehood, Jerusalem must consciously bear in mind that the adversarial “whole” would be greater than the simple sum of its belligerent “parts.”
————–

Louis René Beres (Ph.D., Princeton, 1971) is Professor of Political Science and International Law at Purdue. He is the author of ten major books, and several hundred journal articles, in the field. Professor Beres’ shorter opinion articles appear in many leading US and Israeli newspapers and magazines, including The Atlantic, US News & World Report, The Jerusalem Post, The Washington Times, and Oxford University Press. In Israel, where his current writings are published by the BESA Center for Strategic Studies, the Institute for Policy and Strategy, and the Institute for National Security Studies, he was Chair of Project Daniel (2003). Dr. Beres’ most recent strategy-centered publications were published in The Harvard National Security Journal (Harvard Law School), The International Journal of Intelligence and Counterintelligence, Parameters: Journal of the US Army War College, The Brown Journal of World Affairs, and the Israel Journal of Foreign Affairs.

CLEAR as a bell!

Iranian WMD Program Intersects With ISIS.Booms at Parchin Military Base & More…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

iran, nuclear

{re-blogged at Islam Exposed.org}

{re-blogged at Jews Down Under}

FROM the onset, let’s be very clear: no stone was left unturned at this site to highlight the genocidal goals of Iran’s mullahs, to the point of collaborating with a world-class resource to said effect. 

IN this regard, this investigative journalist has kept in close contact, for more than a decade, with Professor Louis Rene Beres. His contributions to all aspects of this global threat are duly noted – and gratefully appreciated – at this site’s “About” tab.

My “go to” expert on all matters pertaining to international law, and a country’s right to anticipatory self defense – via preemptive strikes – is none other than Professor Louis Rene Beres of ‘Project Daniel.’ The working group’s original policy paper is found herein. He was Chair of the above strategic nuclear policy paper given to PM Ariel Sharon in 2003 – and subsequently briefed the report to President George W. Bush and to current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – in relation to Israel’s nuclear strategy in the face of Iran’s pursuit of WMD’s. He is a man of great integrity and humility. Lou, a heartfelt thank you for being my mentor.

SO when this issue crops up at these pages, rest assured, it is with a deep understanding of the subject matter. But before we get to the latest “booms”, as well as the (inevitable/eventual détente) relationship between ISIS and Iran, let’s perform a recap.

Recap One:

COME what may, the Jihadi-in-Chief is leading Iran to the WMD finish line. Yes, he is. The reasons are manifest and may appear convoluted, but they are no less true.

WITHIN this quest belies his Iranian point woman, communist aligned Valerie Jarrett. One can be an Islamist AND a communist. 

Recap Two:

Back in 2003, the most comprehensive report/analysis – in relation to the corresponding global menace – surrounding Iran’s race to nuclear arms status was hand delivered to both President Bush and PM Ariel Sharon. Six years later, with the genocidal program still in place, the report’s essence was requisite updated. These are facts. It was a commissioned report by the most acknowledged apolitical nuclear expert team, bar none. Therein lies its inherent value.

Recap Three:

That being said, fast forward to April 2013 and the following was regretfully reported, but do read between the lines:

In the often-unpredictable theater of modern world politics, a drama that so often bristles with apparent meaninglessness, decisions that rest upon ordinary logic may quickly crumble before madness. Here, dangers can reach even the most utterly portentous level. This is the aptly-dreaded point of convergence, when madness and nuclear weapons capability would coincide, fuse, or otherwise come together.

Enter Israel and Iran. Soon, because not a single responsible member of the “international community” has ever demonstrated a determinable willingness to undertake appropriately preemptive action (“anticipatory self-defense,” in the formal language of law), the Jewish State may have to face an expressly genocidal Iranian nuclear adversary. Although improbable, a potentially “suicidal” enemy state in Iran, one animated by graphically precise visions of a Shiite apocalypse, cannot be wished away, or, capriciously, dismissed out of hand.

Iran’s current leadership, and possibly even a successor “reformist” government in Tehran, could, at some point, choose to value Israel’s physical destruction more highly than even its own physical survival. Should this happen, the “play” would almost certainly end badly for all “actors.” In recognizably theatrical terms, the “director’s” command would be both unambiguous and immobilizing.

Exeunt omnes!

Nonetheless, despite U.S. President Barack Obama’s disingenuous hope for “a world free of nuclear weapons,” Israel’s ultimate source of national security must inevitably lie in sustained nuclear deterrence. Although still implicit or ambiguous, and not yet open, or disclosed, this Israeli “bomb in the basement” could readily “crumble before madness.” In certain easily-imaginable instances, circumstances involving enemy “madness,” the results of failed Israeli retaliatory threats could ultimately be existential…..

IN tandem, do take the time to read Prof Beres’s special Iran report featured at the U.S. Army’s Strategic Institute Publication, Parameters.

BUT let us now turn our attention to Israel’s PM Netanyahu.

FOR over five and a half years, since March 31, 2009, “Bibi” has been in charge of Israel’s ship of state. Within any rational discourse this is a monumental burden, unlike none other. He is, at this critical juncture in history, the guardian of the Jewish people’s thousands yr old – one and only – homeland. Patrimony. And as an American-Israeli (a nationalist Zionist, now living in Israel) there is little more important on this end.

THAT being said, to remonstrate Israel’s PM before a world audience has always been a personal burden. An absolute shame and stain. Nevertheless, it is what it is. As such, let’s first recount his latest operational failure, and it will reveal why he has been incapable of ordering the complete pre-emption of Iran’s explicitly genocidal program, instead of piecemeal (delaying) actions here and there. 

Interview With Adina Kutnicki: (at Inquisitr)

Burying another brave son of Israel who died to protect his people and his homeland.

Burying another brave son of Israel who died to protect his people and his homeland.

Wolff Bachner: Much to our sorrow, the world is in even worse shape than the last time we spoke. Since your previous visit, Hamas managed to provoke another war with Israel, which gave all the Israel bashing bigots of the European Union the excuse they needed to rampage and riot with a truly disgusting display of virulent Jew hate. Adding to the misery, ISIS commenced their campaign of butchering and bloodshed, beheading thousands of helpless human beings as they tore through the Levant in the name of the new Caliphate. Certainly, we are witnessing what may be the beginning of the next clash of civilizations, but let’s narrow our focus just a bit and start our discussion with Israel, Hamas, and much maligned Operation Protective Edge.

Once again, we see Israel’s so-called leaders caving in to pressure from foreign governments and ending the campaign to demilitarize Gaza and disarm Hamas before the job is done.

What effect will this have on the people of Israel, and what will this ill-advised strategy allow Hamas to do to Israel in the future?

Why would Netanyahu call off Operation Protective Edge while rockets are still raining down on Israel. Is this a sane military strategy?

More importantly, is this fair to the many thousands of Israelis who spend part of every day in bomb shelters?……{read the whole thing…..}

MOREOVER, how many toothless (and cartoonish) “red lines” can a leader use as credible threats, after which they mean less than the paper they are drawn on? Exactly.

ON the other hand, what appears to be the case –  as demonstrated with Stuxnet – he is signing off on temporary “setbacks”, in the vain hope Iran won’t go nuclear under his watch and regroup after the latest rubble is cleared. In a nutshell, he will pass the buck. 

 Iran

TRUE, none but a VERY few can say with exactitude who triggered the latest boom-like setbacks, but one would be wise not to discount Israel’s long arm(s). The odds are on Israel and here is why:

The explosion that destroyed the Parchin site was massive. Various reports reveal that windows shattered up to 15 kilometers away. Satellite photographs backed up claims that the explosion was the result of an attack, and showed almost total devastation to the facility.

Israel’s government declined to issue an official statement on the incident, but Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in recent weeks had renewed his firm warnings that Israel would not accept a nuclear-armed Iran.

HERE too: 

A spectacular explosion on Sunday night outside Tehran took place deep inside the Parchin military base, where Iran produces crucial elements of its missiles and other munitions, raising new questions about whether the blast was an accident or sabotage.

The explosion and resulting fire, which Iranian news organizations have described in only the most general terms, could be seen from apartments in Tehran and appeared to have destroyed several buildings. But it was distant from a part of the base to which the International Atomic Energy Agency has been seeking access for years, to investigate reports of experiments on high explosives that could have been used in nuclear weapons.

The agency’s evidence about that activity dates back more than a decade, and that part of the base has been so bulldozed and reconfigured in recent years that inspectors concede it is doubtful there is much left to see or test if they ever get access.

The explosion, according to satellite photographs from Airbus that were analyzed by the Institute for Science and International Security, took place in a densely built region toward the southern end of the base, in an area that appeared from past photographs to be littered with bunkers. The damage was reminiscent of pictures of a missile-development site 30 miles west of Tehran that was virtually destroyed during a test in November 2011 that killed 17 people, including Gen. Hassan Tehrani Moghaddam, the leading force behind Iran’s advanced missile efforts.

Parchin military base

 

 

At that time, Israel was widely suspected of sabotaging the base. Yet there was never definitive evidence, and no group has ever taken responsibility. (A senior Israeli officer noted several weeks later that the timing of the explosion was remarkable because General Moghaddam, who traveled often, “just happened to be sitting in his office” at the time.)

REGARDLESS, those of sound mind don’t really believe that Israel’s current crop of leaders have the balls to FULLY thwart the Islamist-in-Chief’s push for a “deal” with Iran’s mullahs, whatever the costs to Israel and the west. Resultant, an all out strike on an admitted existential threat would entail going up against Washington’s dictates. And if past is prologue, as detailed within the above linked interview, a PM who couldn’t stand up to Barack HUSSEIN Obama’s demands to leave Hamas’s leaders alive (and their underground command and control structures intact), is certainly not likely to lay to waste, once and for all, Iran’s death program, even though we all know Israel has a multiplicity of strike forces to perform the hits in rapid sequence.

ASK yourselves: does anyone believe that whatever blows up in one part of Iran doesn’t have a mirror site, a redundancy, somewhere else in that vast country? On the other hand, if SEVERAL key sites are laid to waste then it will be (perhaps) decades before Iran’s mullahs catch up to speed. In effect, the open question is: will all the KEY facilities meet similar fates?

MOST significantly, even though Iran’s Shia mullahs are battling ISIS (Sunni) jihadists for Islamic hegemony, the fact of the matter is that either will aid the other when it comes to wiping out Israel. So if ISIS gets its hands on dirty bombs, well, they will unleash them without hesitation. But if Iran requires assistance from ISIS to smuggle in a nuclear bomb into Israel, rest assured, they will more than eagerly cooperate in concert with one another.

AND with the CIA backed operational/intelligence expertise of Clare Lopez, now an integral part of Washington’s Center For Security Policy – a top tier intelligence shop – connecting the regional and global dots, The Islamic State/ISIS/ISIL takes on a crystal clear focus, as does the apocalyptic visions of Iran’s mullahs. Hence, “A Lesson On The Islamic State” is a MUST view!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aX9ENISNsJA&list=PLSeyVmBCs1s_kehDdV-We6jb_0117MhpO

WITHIN this scope of looming dangers and tribal grudge matches going on between the Shia mullahs and the Sunni ISIS, the reality is that Iran – as it stands -comes out the winner, even though there are booms going off here and there.

CONCLUSIVELY, celebrating Parchin’s dust up for long-term effects is premature, but still very welcome news!

Israeli Leadership LEGITIMIZES & NEGOTIATES With Hamas Terrorists.”Cease-Fires” & Fleeing Jews;The Nexus…Commentary By Adina Kutnicki

An Israeli commando from the engineering corps Yahalom (“Diamond”) unit takes part in a tunnel-hunting drill in Sirkin special forces base, near Tel Aviv …

An Israeli army officer on Friday shows journalists a Palestinian tunnel that runs from the Gaza.

AS a native New Yorker – now living in Israel – the following thought experiment is highly germane. Apropo.

IMAGINE, if you will, living nearby the border between the east and west sides of NYC, somewhere in mid-Manhattan’s Fifth Avenue range, but your actual address is west of Fifth. Then, picture heavy-duty missiles flying out of the eastern demarcation into your western sphere, and for well over a decade. Hmm. Yet, in your mind’s eye, go a step further. Situate yourselves in another scenario: “wild west” east siders have upped the ante; digging tunnels into west side buildings, ever ready to cause more explosive terror! Which leader(s) in their rational mind would allow their citizens to “live” under such terrorizing conditions, ever fearful of becoming cannon fodder? Rhetorical.

Hamas’s Missiles.

NOW, as previously demonstrated, Israel’s top leadership – the buck stops with “Bibi” – commit double crimes. The first tier deals with an absolute ILLEGALITY;  negotiating – thus legitimizing – with Hamas, a designated terror group, even within Washington’s listing of terror groups! This is beyond dispute. Beyond the pale, even if masking such negotiations under political/diplo cover. Whom are they fooling? NOT the majority Zionist public, that’s for sure.

A demonstration in support of the war in Gaza in Tel Aviv.

SIGNIFICANTLY, time and again, Israel’s leaders negotiate “ceasefires/deathfires” with terror groups, be they Hamas, Fatah or Hezbollah. It makes no diff. And while said “ceasefires” aren’t worth the price of bupkes, the fact of the matter is not only are they worthless and exponentially dangerous – whetting their appetites for more of the same – they are ILLEGAL. Plain and simple….

International Law Precludes Ceasefires With Terror Groups

Professor Louis Rene Beres – {blogger’s mentor}

Any time there is an announced “cease fire” between Israel and Hamas, it wrongly and foolishly bestows upon that terror organization

(1) an expressly legitimate status under international law; and

(2) a clear and newly incontestable condition of legal symmetry between the parties.

This is never a tolerable jurisprudential arrangement for Israel.

Moreover, no proper system of law can ever permit any sort of compromise or accommodation by a government with criminal organizations, even, in the case of Israel and Hamas, one that might involve a somewhat less formal arrangement than the currently proposed cease-fire.

It follows that Israel ought never to unwittingly prop up its criminal adversary in Gaza by agreeing to a cease-fire or similar “armistice”; instead, it should proceed immediately to do whatever is needed operationally, while simultaneously reminding the world that the pertinent conflict is between a fully legitimate sovereign state (one that meets all criteria of the Convention  on the Rights and Duties of States, 1934) and an inherently illegal insurgent organization that meets none of these criteria, and that routinely violates all vital precepts of the law of armed conflict….

IN contravention of said illegality, Israel’s mentally besieged leadership charges forward; one “cease-fire” after another, in fact, feeding, fueling and supplying the enemy!

NEVER ENDING, like drunken sailors on a sinking ship they lumber hither and on, attempting to find a life raft to latch themselves onto, instead of executing what must be done – SMASHING Hamas’s top leadership and command centers!! Alas, here they go again, even as Netanyahu yanks Jerusalem’s negotiating team – like yo-yos – back and forth from Cairo.

BUT never mind…Hamasnicks have measured the mettle (tragically, quite correctly) of Israel’s leaders, as they barrage Israel with more missiles, even before the last “cease-fire” is due to expire at midnight on 8/19…and the next “cease-fire” is surely not far behind.

G-d have mercy…save us from our derelict leaders! You may rightfully inquire: are Israel’s leaders irrational? have they truly lost their minds?

DEBKAfile’s sources report an attempt by some Israeli officials to present the draft as incorporating a process which separates the humanitarian and security issues.
However, it may be that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ya’alon are looking for a pretext to explain the concessions that were made for the sake of a ceasefire for an indefinite period – or else they are trying to ward off Egyptian-Palestinian browbeating for a deal.

According to the disclosures so far, the draft agreement – if it is approved by the cabinet – will embody four major Israeli concessions:
—  Waiving demilitarization of the Gaza Strip and disarmament of Hamas’s rockets and terror tunnels at this point.
—  Lifting the  blockade of the Gaza Strip – economically and by the establishment of ports.
—  Reversal of a government decision to abstain from negotiating the release of convicted Palestinian terrorists from jail, which the Israeli public will never accept.
—  Rehabilitation of the Gaza Strip before any steps are taken towards disarming Hamas.

The danger of this waiver is already apparent in the announcement by the radical Popular Committees faction that it is not bound by any Hamas commitment to suspend rocket attacks. In any case, according to a Egyptian foreign ministry statement late Monday: Israel and the Palestinians have only agreed to a 24-hour ceasefire extension – i.e., until Tuesday midnight, for further negotiations.

SO, now that the legalities are squared away, as well as their Pavlovian responses to “cease-fires”, Israelis (this blogger included) and onlookers are left in a dizzying state of suspension, incessantly wondering: when will their madness end?and where are they leading the nation of Israel? To PROLONGED war, that’s where!

Most Israelis were stunned Tuesday afternoon, Aug. 19, when rocket fire suddenly erupted from the Gaza Strip against Beersheba and Netivot, after they had been lulled into a sense of false security by the suspension of Hamas attacks for 135 hours. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon sent the air force straight back into action to bomb “terror targets’ across the Gaza Strip, and recalled Israel’s negotiators from the indirect talks taking place with Hamas in Cairo through Egyptian intermediaries.

After a month of tough fighting and painful losses, Israelis were aghast to find themselves dumped back in the same old routine, which their leaders had vowed Operation Defensive Edge would end once and for all.

By midnight Hamas had fired around 50 rockets in a steady stream across most of Israel, including Greater Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

So what went wrong?
DEBKAfile reports that, as recently as Monday, Aug. 18, a senior intelligence source asserted that Netanyahu and Ya’alon were satisfied with the Cairo talks, because their outcome would refute their critics, ministers and security chiefs alike, by bringing Hamas to its knees.
Asked how this would come about, the source repeated the mantra heard day after day during the fighting: Hamas is looking for a way out of the conflict and wants to end hostilities, he explained. That is what we are banking on.

AMAN chief Maj.Gen. Aviv Kochavi is believed by some cabinet sources to be the author of this prescription, to which the prime minister and defense minister have stubbornly adhered, against all the evidence to the contrary. They therefore held back from inflicting a final defeat on the Palestinian fundamentalists.

ON this investigative journalist’s worst day, the above outcome could have been predicted. Clear as a bell.

STILL yet, it is not as if a certain segment of Israelis residing on the southern border – particularly within the “Gazan belt” – don’t possess special standing in this life and death struggle to “cease”, or not, Israel’s “firepower”. Why? Well, having been terrorized with missiles for over a decade, for the most part, they relied upon the political leadership to do the right thing, whatever that meant. How did THAT work out? Truth be told, an unfathomable patient response.

BE that as it may, that was then and this is now. Now that tunnels are under some of their bedrooms, kindergartens and what not…hmm…their patience has worn thin, to say the least. In this regard, over 60% of said residents FLED the area, declaring that they won’t return, unless the leaders SMASH Hamas’s terror apparatus for good!   

DEAR readers, juxtapose the spectacle of many thousands of Jewish residents of Israel’s southern belt fleeing for their lives – within the Jewish homeland, no less! – to the return of the scourge of anti-semitism throughout Europe (Islamic-Nazis gaining the aid of radical leftists and far-right fascists…video linked), as Europe’s Jews flee for their lives! Is this American-Israeli the only one who sees the craziness, the irony, of said dual flights?

 

Video screenshot

IN other words, while France’s Jews (and others) are running for their lives into the arms of the Jewish homeland – a land this blogger would give her life for – Israel’s leaders not only fail to protect Jews already living here, but, by dint of odds, will fail those who are fleeing into her arms! Orwellian. For the record, some of these French Jews (and other new immigrants) are encouraged by Israel’s Absorption Ministry to move to areas not far from Gaza!  

France’s politicians and community leaders have criticised the “intolerable” violence against Paris’ Jewish community, after a pro-Palestinian rally led to the vandalizing and looting of Jewish businesses and the burning of cars.

It is the third time in a week where pro-Palestinian activists have clashed with the city’s Jewish residents. On Sunday, locals reported chats of “Gas the Jews” and “Kill the Jews”, as rioters attacked businesses in the Sarcelles district, known as “little Jerusalem”.

Manuel Valls, France’s prime minister said: “What happened in Sarcelles is intolerable. An attack on a synagogue and on a kosher shop is simply anti-Semitism. Nothing in France can justify this violence.”…….

More than a thousand Jews have made aliyah (the term used when Jews immigrate to Israel) in the past 10 days, according to the Israeli government.

“I came because of anti-Semitism,” said teary-eyed Veronique Rivka Buzaglo, one of 430 immigrants who arrived from France the day before. “You see it in the eyes of people. I see it in everything,” she told HuffPost.

Buzaglo says nothing would have stopped her from becoming an Israeli citizen this week – not even the rocket sirens frequently blaring in the south of the country, where she plans to live.

BASICALLY, one has to peer into ones heart of hearts and decide: are the words of Israel’s leaders meaningful, or just over-bloated hot air? Moreover, it must be recognized that not all bullsh-t is equal. Life and death.

IN this regard, listen carefully to their words and see if they match their actions! Then, decide for yourself: what order of manure are they shoveling?

MEN without chests…feet of clay…

UPDATE: Let’s just assert that public pressure helps…Zionists, the majority public, are getting restless…and this is one such indicator…may their heads roll…faster…faster…but it won’t happen without blowing up SHIFA…and Deif is just one of MANY top level targets still to blow up!!  Hammering Hamas Chiefs With Pinpointed Intelligence New War Effort.

ISRAEL’S CEASEFIRES WITH TERROR ORGS VIOLATE INT’L LAW.INTERNAL LAWS TOO!Commentary By Adina Kutnicki


Palestinians throw stones during clashes with Israeli security forces in Jerusalem, Thursday, July 3, 2014. The violence erupted Wednesday after a 16-year-old Palestinian Mohammed Abu Khdeir was abducted and a charred body, believed to be the boy, was found in a Jerusalem forest. The family has blamed extremist Jews for killing him in revenge for the deaths of the three Israeli teens, whose bodies were found in a field in the West Bank on Monday after a more than two-week search. (AP Photo/Mahmoud Illean) Palestinian official: Murdered youth 'burned alive'

{reblogged here – http://jewsdownunder.com/2014/07/09/israels-ceasefires-terror-orgs-violate-intl-law-internal-law/}

{reblogged here – http://joeforamerica.com/2014/07/israels-ceasefires-terror-orgs-violate-intl-law-internal-laws/}

AS always, pretending what is isn’t becomes the proverbial elephant in the room…the 600 lb gorilla…monkey on the back too. And as onerous as it can be within family confines – yes, “it be” – imagine how much more so it is when embedded within a nation’s belly, especially one as endangered as Israel.

IN light of this week’s BELATED operation to deal with Hamas – strangely coined “Operation Protective Edge”…this American-Israeli prefers “Operation Pulverizer…Smackdown”…no matter…after hundreds of rockets/missiles have rained down in recent weeks, let alone over many years – little is more pressing than the oft misunderstood subject of “ceasefires”. They are the death of us.

SIGNIFICANTLY, time and again, Israel’s leaders negotiate “ceasefires/deathfires” with terror groups, be they Hamas, Fatah or Hezbollah. It makes no diff. And while said “ceasefires” aren’t worth the price of bupkes, the fact of the matter is not only are they worthless and exponentially dangerous – whetting their appetites for more of the same – they are ILLEGAL. Plain and simple.

The relentless war waged against Israel has absolutely nothing to do with land per se, and this is precisely why every insane concession, gesture and withdrawal offered by Israel’s (peace-obsessed) leaders has not elicited an expected reciprocal peace gesture, but paradoxically incites to additional jihadist behavior. And in a tangible realm it makes sense for Arabs/Muslims to become hyper-aggressive, particularly after each Israeli capitulation counter intuitively whets their insatiable appetites for more of the same. So as a result of the leadership’s desperate attempt to allay international pressure, thus abating another dangling sword, they have become wedded to peace delusions. A double whammy. Never mind the fact that murderous jihad hasn’t ceased within Israel from time immemorial. But logic escapes many of Israel’s “leading lights”, except for a handful. At the top of the list heralding Israel’s “intellectual warriors” stand Dr. Martin Sherman and Professor Paul Eidelberg.

IN certain high level legal/political circles, primarily in America and Israel, Professor Louis Rene Beres requires little introduction. But for the newly on board, introducing…

My “go to” expert on all matters pertaining to international law, and a country’s right to anticipatory self defense – via preemptive strikes – is none other than Professor Louis Rene Beres of ‘Project Daniel.’ The working group’s original policy paper is found herein. He was Chair of the above strategic nuclear policy paper given to PM Ariel Sharon in 2003 – and subsequently briefed the report to President George W. Bush and to current Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu – in relation to Israel’s nuclear strategy in the face of Iran’s pursuit of WMD’s. He is a man of great integrity and humility. 

Lou, a heartfelt thank you for being my mentor.

International Law Precludes Ceasefires With Terror Groups

Professor Louis Rene Beres

Any time there is an announced “cease fire” between Israel and Hamas, it wrongly and foolishly bestows upon that terror organization

(1) an expressly legitimate status under international law; and

(2) a clear and newly incontestable condition of legal symmetry between the parties.

This is never a tolerable jurisprudential arrangement for Israel.

Moreover, no proper system of law can ever permit any sort of compromise or accommodation by a government with criminal organizations, even, in the case of Israel and Hamas, one that might involve a somewhat less formal arrangement than the currently proposed cease fire.

It follows that Israel ought never to unwittingly prop up its criminal adversary in Gaza by agreeing to a cease fire or similar “armistice”; instead, it should proceed immediately to do whatever is needed operationally, while simultaneously reminding the world that the pertinent conflict is between a fully legitimate sovereign state (one that meets all criteria of the Convention  on the Rights and Duties of States, 1934) and an inherently illegal insurgent organization that meets none of these criteria, and that routinely violates all vital precepts of the law of armed conflict.

Hamas’ inherent illegality is readily deducible from the far-reaching codified and customary criminalization of terrorism under authoritative international law, and can never be challenged by even well-intentioned third parties (e.g., the United States) in the presumably overriding interests of “peace.” This is true even if Hamas were somehow mistakenly acknowledged to have “just cause” for its insurgency

Since the Hebrew Bible, there have always been clear and determinable rules of warfare. Now, moreover, especially since prominent codified changes enacted in 1949 and 1977, these rules bind all insurgent forces, not only uniformed national armies. In modern usage, they derive most plainly from the St. Petersburg Declaration (1868), which, in turn, followed upon earlier limitations expressed at the First Geneva Convention of 1864.

In any conflict, the means that can be used to injure an enemy are not unlimited. It follows that no matter how hard they may try to institute certain self-serving manipulations of language,  those who would identify the willful maiming and execution of noncombatants in the name of some abstract ideal – any ideal – are always misrepresenting international law.

Whenever Palestinian insurgents (Hamas; Fatah; Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine; Islamic Jihad, it makes no difference) claim a legal right to use “any means necessary,” they are attempting to deceive. Even if their corollary claims for “national self-determination” were in some fashion legally supportable, there would remain fully authoritative limits on permissible targets and weapons.

Under binding humanitarian international law, the ends can never justify the means.

Intentional forms of violence directed against the innocent are always repugnant, and always prohibited.

While it is true that certain insurgencies can be judged lawful, any such permissible resorts to force must nonetheless conform to the laws of war. Even if incessant Palestinian cries of “occupation” were reasonable rather than contrived, any corresponding claims of entitlement to oppose Israel “by any means necessary” would remain unsupportable.

International law has precise form and content. It cannot be invented and reinvented by terror groups or aspiring states, merely to accommodate their own presumed interests.

Earlier, on November 29, 2012, the Palestinian Authority (PA) had been upgraded by the U.N. General Assembly to the status of a “nonmember observer state,” but significantly, the PA has since declared itself nonexistent.

On January 3, 2013, Mahmoud Abbas formally “decreed” the absorption of the “former “PA into the “State of  Palestine.” While this administrative action did effectively and jurisprudentially eliminate the PA, it assuredly did not succeed in creating a new state by simple fiat. Leaving aside Abbas’ illegal refusal to follow the Palestinian Arabs’ binding obligation to negotiate full sovereignty directly with Israel, the evident criteria of “nonmember observer state” also fell far short of expectations of the only authoritative international treaty on statehood. This governing document is the Convention on the Rights and Duties of States (the “Montevideo Convention”) of 1934.

National liberation movements that fail to meet the test of just means are never protected as legitimate. Even if we were to accept the argument that Palestinian insurgent groups somehow met the criteria of “just cause,” they would not meet the additionally limiting standards of discrimination, proportionality, and military necessity. These compulsory standards have been applied to insurgent organizations by the common Article 3 of the four Geneva Conventions of 1949, and also by the two authoritative protocols to these Conventions of 1977.

They are also binding upon all combatants by virtue of broader customary and conventional international law, including Article 1 of the Preamble to the Fourth Hague Convention of 1907. This rule, called the “Martens Clause,” makes all persons responsible for upholding the “laws of humanity,” and for the “dictates of public conscience.”

Every use of insurgent force by Palestinian insurgents must be judged twice, once with regard to the justness of the objective (in this case, a Palestinian state to be built upon the charred ruins of Israel), and once with regard to the justness of the violence employed.

American and European supporters of a Palestinian State continue to believe that this 23rd Arab country will somehow be part of a “two-state solution.”  Oddly, this wishful presumption is contradicted almost everywhere in the Arab/Islamic world. Cartographically, in this world, Israel has already been eliminated. On these maps, unambiguously, Israel exists only as “Occupied Palestine.”

Always, terrorist crimes mandate universal cooperation, in both apprehension and punishment. As punishers of “grave breaches” under international law, all states are expected to search out and prosecute, or extradite, individual terrorist perpetrators. In no circumstances are any states permitted to characterize terrorists as “freedom fighters.”

This expectation is explicitly and emphatically true for the United States, which already  incorporates all international law as the “supreme law of the land” at Article 6 of the U.S. Constitution (the “Supremacy Clause”), and which was intentionally formed according to the principles of Natural Law. For the Founding Fathers of the United States, of course, these principles had already been “born” at Sinai.

IN furtherance of the above legal application, Israel’s leaders, by negotiating with terrorists (and releasing them from jail!), commit treason, as evinced within Israel’s internal laws! Yes, they do.
Article Two: Treason.
Impairment of sovereignty or integrity of the State.
97. (a) If a person commits an act liable to impair the sovereignty of the state with the intention to impair that sovereignty, then he is liable to the death penalty or to life imprisonment.
(b) if a person commits an act liable to remove any area from the sovereignty of the state or place it under the sovereignty of a foreign state with the intention to bring that about, then he is liable to the death penalty or to life imprisonment.

 

IT is duly instructive that another of this site’s trusted contacts, the above named Professor Paul Eidelberg, joins the fray…

A Question of Treason Leading to Anarchy

Prof. Paul Eidelberg

In my June 2, 2008 report on Israel National Radio, I said, inter alia: “Knesset Member Arieh Eldad is to be congratulated for saying Prime Minister [Ehud] Olmert’s offer to yield the Golan Heights to Syria is nothing less than treason.  But the same crime may be attributed to Prime Ministers Ehud Barak and Ariel Sharon – to say nothing of many other politicians who have been complicit in yielding Jewish land to Israel’s enemies.”

A year after my report of June 2, 2008 – on June 14, 2009 to be exact – PM Benjamin Netanyahu, in a speech at Bar-Ilan University, endorsed the creation of a Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria, and did so without Knesset or public debate.

If (former) MK Arieh Eldad could say “[PM Ehud] Olmert’s offer to yield the Golan Heights to Syria is nothing less than treason,” what shall we say of PM Netanyahu’s offer to yield Judea and Samaria to the Palestinian Authority?

Is it any wonder that Israel today is verging on a state of anarchy?

CONSEQUENTIALLY, in light of continuous rocket/missile barrages – more accurately, blitzkriegs – on southern Israel, one has to stand up and shout unequivocally: today’s incessant barrages – responsible for over a million of Israel’s citizens running into bomb shelters – are the poisonous fruits of the absolutely illegal “ceasefire” from 2012!

Then, as always, PM Netanyahu “ceased” Israel’s firepower during “Operation Cast Lead” in 2008 (and in 2012 during operation עַמּוּד עָנָן, ʿAmúd ʿAnán, literally: “Pillar of Cloud”…as derived from the Bible…aka Operation Pillar of Defense…this is NOT for nothing…know your Bible well…), pulling the troops back both times, as they closed in on victory!

PERVERSELY, what kind of delusional and derelict leadership behaves as such? Will this go around be any different? Time will tell…

Smoke rises from Gaza airport