Netanyahu Slams EU Following 'Earthquake' Directive:(video)

Netanyahu Slams EU Following 'Earthquake' Directive: 'We Will Not Accept Any Outside Diktat About Our Borders'

Unknown - the algemeiner,  July 16th, 2013
UCI DAILY NEWS

Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu slammed the European Union in an emergency cabinet meeting Tuesday, called after news broke that the EU initiated a directive requiring member states to boycott Israelis living in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

The directive included conditions for future contacts between the EU and the State of Israel.

“We will not accept any outside diktat about our borders,” pledged the Prime Minister, adding, “This issue will be decided only in direct negotiations between the sides.”

The Prime Minister criticized the EU for taking the steps unilaterally while paying lesser attention to urgent regional matters such as Syria’s civil war and Iran’s race towards nuclear armament.

“I would expect those who truly want peace and stability in the region would discuss this issue after solving more urgent regional problems such as the civil war in Syria or Iran’s race to achieve nuclear weapons,” he said.

Expressing solidarity with all  Israeli citizens Netanyahu promised that “As the Prime Minister of Israel, I will not allow the hundreds of thousands of Israelis who live in Judea and Samaria, on the Golan Heights and in Jerusalem, our united capital, to be harmed.”

The meeting was held at the Prime Minister’s Jerusalem office. Those in attendance included Justice Minister Tzipi Livni, Economy Minister Naftali Bennett and Deputy Foreign Minister Zeev Elkin.

Earlier today Israeli daily Haaretz first reported that the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, two weeks ago issued the directive requiring all 28 member states to ban all funding, collaboration, scholarships, research grants and awards to Israeli entities in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, while requiring that any future agreements signed with Israel must include a clause stating that the settlements are not part of the sovereign State of Israel and therefore are not part of said agreement. The directive goes into effect this Friday.

Israeli officials sharply criticized the move, and members of the Israeli cabinet also expressed disappointment in the timing of the decision, claiming it undermines U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s recent push to resume negotiations.

A senior Israeli official told Haaretz that the ruling was an “earthquake” which unprecedentedly turns “understandings and quiet agreements that the Union does not work beyond the Green Line” into “formal, binding policy.”

and, 

For the first time, the EU formally forbids trade with bodies located beyond 1949 Armistice lines, including Golan.

By Gil Ronen

JEWSNEWS

The European Union has issued orders forbidding its member states from cooperating, transferring funds, giving scholarships or research grants to bodies in Judea and Samaria, eastern Jerusalem , and even the Golan Heights, Haaretz wrote Tuesday.

The new instruction, promulgated bt the European Commission, which is the operative arm of the EU, sets parameters for cooperation between the EU and its members states, on the one hand, and Israeli governmental and private elements on the other. The instructions are for the years 2014 – 2020 and will go into force on Friday, July 18.

The decision also states that any future agreement signed with Israel must include a section that says the “settlements” are not part of sovereign Israel and therefore not included in the agreement.

A senior source in the Foreign Ministry said Tuesday that the new EU decision is dramatic, and can be called “a true earthquake.”

“This is the first time in which a explicit and formal instruction like this is issued. Until now, there were silent understandings and agreements that the EU does not work beyond the Green Line” – as the 1949 Armistice Line is known – “but this is an official and binding prohibition.”

Deputy Foreign Minister Ze’ev Elkin said that the EU decision is “very worrisome” and will make it difficult for the state of Israel to conduct contacts with the EU regarding cooperation agreements.

ARUTZ SHEVA

A Year after Burgas Tragedy, IDF Officer Remembers

A Year after Burgas Tragedy, IDF Officer Remembers Helping Israeli Victims of Terror

By IDF Blog on July 18, 2013

TLVFACES

The IDF’s International Squadron flies missions overseas to provide humanitarian aid to countries requiring medical assistance. After last year’s Burgas terror attack, an IDF officer recalls how members of the squadron arrived in a foreign country to care for their own

One year ago today, a Hezbollah terrorist killed five Israelis and injured 32 others vacationing in the Bulgarian city of Burgas. As the tourists prepared to depart the airport for their hotel, a suicide bomber boarded their tour bus and detonated an explosive. Moments after learning of the attack, the Israel Air Force’s International Squadron deployed to Bulgaria to provide medical care to injured survivors.

The International Squadron, one of the IAF’s most distinguished units, flies missions overseas to provide humanitarian aid to countries requiring medical assistance. Special missions have taken the squadron across the globe – everywhere from Japan and Haiti to Ghana and Mexico. During last year’s rare emergency, the crew flew to a foreign country to care for their own.

In an interview with the IDF Blog, Maj. Itai described a difficult and emotional experience on the ground, recalling his interactions with victims of the terror attack.

“They were very quiet, and they were very much in shock,” Maj. Itai said of the Israeli survivors. “They wanted as much as possible to go home, but they were very relaxed because they saw that many people had arrived to help and care for them.”

Maj. Itai’s crew had an especially trying task: to bring the coffins of the five Israeli casualties back to Ben Gurion Airport in Israel.

As ordered by the Chief of the General Staff, Lt. Gen. Benny Gantz, the International Squadron arrived as part of an IDF medical team to assist victims suffering from a range of injuries. While the squadron mostly dealt with lightly injured victims, other teams transferred severely wounded victims back to Israel.

The advanced IDF medical team included doctors specializing in a variety of fields, including trauma, orthopedics, intensive care, surgery, burns and pediatrics.

In an exclusive IDF video, which was filmed one year ago in Burgas, Medical Operations Officer Maj. Assi Halper gave a live account of the operation. Working as part of the Homefront Command – a division of the military that specializes in aiding victims of terror attacks in Israel – Maj. Halper directed efforts to assist and evacuate Israeli survivors in Burgas.

The IDF’s elite Airborne Rescue and Evacuation Unit, 669, also took part in the mission, working with a range of professionals to make assessments about the situation on the ground.

Maj. Itai recalled the strong feelings of cooperation among the IDF personnel who were in Burgas, saying they felt united by a common purpose to help the Israeli victims.

“There were a lot of IDF forces,” Maj. Itai explained. “It gives you a good feeling to know that they were coming from all over the world to help one another.”

—

http://www.tlvfaces.com/a-year-after-burgas-tragedy-idf-officer-remembers-helping-israeli-victims-of-terror/

Via The idfblog.com

Terror On Video: The Truth About Hezbollah and IDF Report

Bee's Note: This report is for all the "world" leaders that are debating whether or not Hezbollah is a terrorist organization.

IDF Says Hezbollah Weapons Cache Exceeds 60,000 Rockets, All Israel in Range

By TLVFaces Staff on July 12, 2013

On the seventh anniversary of the start of the month-long Second Lebanon War, marked Friday, the Israel Defense Forces said in a statement that Lebanese terror group Hezbollah has dramatically expanded its arsenal of weapons, exceeding 60,000 rockets and missiles in 1,000 military facilities, making the terrorist group capable of striking any part of Israel with continuous, precise attacks.

The organization’s missiles endanger Israel’s entire population, the IDF said. Hezbollah’s upgraded stockpile can strike at any of Israel’s civilian centers, including its southernmost city of Eilat. Thousands of missiles can strike targets within 40 kilometers, placing Israel’s northern region at risk of a devastating attack.

Seven years ago today, Hezbollah terrorists abducted two IDF soldiers in an unprovoked assault on Israel’s northern border. The attack sparked the Second Lebanon War, a month-long conflict in which Hezbollah fired over 4,000 rockets at Israeli civilians.

The war ended with UN Security Council Resolution 1701. The international measure sought to limit Hezbollah’s activities, demanding its departure from Southern Lebanon. In violation of the resolution, Hezbollah has dramatically expanded its weapons stockpile, building the arsenal of over 60,000 rockets and missiles near Israel’s border.

Since the war, Hezbollah has tripled the size of its missile arsenal. In 2010, Former US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates commented that Hezbollah “has more missiles than most governments in the world.” IDF officials have expressed similar concerns, citing intelligence analysis that points to the rapid growth of Hezbollah’s stockpile.

Hezbollah-Warriors | IDF

In 2009, an IDF intelligence report revealed that Hezbollah had built close to 1,000 military facilities throughout Southern Lebanon. The installations included more than 550 weapons bunkers and 300 underground facilities. Since the report’s release, Hezbollah has continued to build facilities in the region, enhancing its ability to strike at nearby Israeli towns and cities.

Hezbollah’s weapons are capable of causing far more substantial damage than its 2006 arsenal. With its current abilities, Hezbollah is capable of bombarding Israel with continuous, precise attacks over an extended period of time.

Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah has boasted about the broad reach of Hezbollah’s missiles. In a 2007 news interview, he asserted that the group’s missiles “could absolutely reach any corner and any point” in Israel’s territory. In a speech in August 2012, he proclaimed that a future Hezbollah assault would “turn the lives of thousands of Zionists into a living hell.”

The terrorist organization receives most of its missiles from Iran and Syria, its key supporters in the region. With help from both countries, the organization regularly smuggles weapons into Lebanon. In 2009, Israel’s Navy intercepted a ship carrying 500 tons of weapons intended for Hezbollah operatives.

Hezbollah intentionally places many of its weapons in populated areas – using Lebanon’s people as human shields, the IDF said. This strategy ensures that counter attacks targeting terrorists will instead strike civilian communities. There are 160 villages in Southern Lebanon alone where Hezbollah is hiding weapons.

The organization’s method is evident in the Lebanese village of al-Khiam. Approximately 90 terrorists operate in the village, where Hezbollah uses homes, schools and hospitals to store thousands of tons of bombs and explosives.

The IDF keeps a close eye on Hezbollah’s military advancement. With 60,000 missiles and 1,000 military facilities, the organization presents a major threat to Israel’s security. Seven years after its war with Hezbollah, the IDF says it remains determined to protect Israeli civilians and to stop terror.

 Read more.

___________________________

Bee's Note:

Bulgaria, Israel mark Burgas terror attack anniversary

http://www.jpost.com/International/Bulgaria-Israel-mark-Burgas-terror-attack-anniversary-320356

Bulgaria confirms new evidence pointing to Hezbollah in Burgas attack

July 17, 2013 3:58pm

Read more: http://www.jta.org/2013/07/17/news-opinion/israel-middle-east/bulgaria-confirms-new-evidence-pointing-to-hezbollah-in-burgas-attack#ixzz2ZVfnbCBh

Europe's hypocrisy by Dr. Haim Shine

Secretary of State John Kerry with EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton in Washington, DC, in February 2013. (photo credit: Youtube screenshot)

http://www.timesofisrael.com/the-first-casualty-of-the-eu-settlement-directive-john-kerry/

UCI Daily News

Israel Hayom - Dr. Haim Shine,  July 17th, 2013

How fitting that the EU's decision regarding settlements was reported on the day of the Tisha B'av fast, when Jews all over the world mourn the destruction of Jerusalem, the loss of our national sovereignty and our 2,000-year exile from the land. The EU's directive instructs member states not to have contact with Israeli individuals or institutions in parts of Jerusalem that are beyond the Green Line, as well as in Judea, Samaria and the Golan Heights.

In addition, the directive says that every future agreement signed with Israel must indicate that the settlements are not part of the state. The EU neglected to mention that for Arab countries, at whose service Europe is acting, Tel Aviv is the biggest settlement of all.

Anyone with eyes in their head realizes that this is a European ploy to return Israel to its 1967 borders and to curry favor with the clusters of Islamic power that are taking over Europe. The only consensus issue for European countries is the desire to place Israel in existential danger. The Middle East is burning, Egypt and Syria are at or near civil war, Iran is loading missiles with nuclear warheads and the EU places Jerusalem above everything else.

It is important for Israeli citizens to realize that the real battle is over Jerusalem, the Jewish people's eternal capital. Settlements like Kedumim, Beit El and Ariel are just pretexts for Europe's unwillingness to see a strong, thriving, enlightened Jewish state moving forward with a united and whole Jerusalem as its capital. Jewish sovereignty flies in the face of Christian theology, on the altar of which all of Europe was soaked in Jewish blood.

Beyond theology, European leaders believe that solving the Jewish-Arab conflict will lead to world peace. This is an illusory fantasy that the State of Israel has been made to pay for time after time. It is a pity that Europe has become so captivated by a desert mirage.

Anyone who wishes to return the State of Israel to its 1967 borders in fact has a single goal, to help Arab countries to lead the Jewish state to the blue line, the last line in their phased plan. This is the evil plan that has guided Arab countries since the outset of Zionism.

It is incumbent on all Israeli citizens to show grit in the face of this ploy. There is no difference between a family that lives in Tel Aviv and Shilo. If Europe's ploy is successful, it will hurt all Israeli citizens wherever they live. All Israeli political parties, Left, Right and Center, must stand shoulder to shoulder and inform the world that the nation of Israel has returned to the land of Israel, not to be at other's mercy but to be an “iron wall” that insists on our right to the land of Israel and our right to defend ourselves. All the nations will understand that after 2,000 years, Jews are no longer willing to be the punching bag of cynical, hypocritical and dangerous political manipulators.

Israel must show determination and leaderly courage. The government must conduct a global front against the European decision with the knowledge that the entire nation is behind it and understands the real meaning of returning to the 1967 borders.

____________________

Bee's Note:

The following links may help anyone who wishes to understand more about Israel's sovereignty, and the EU's present day agenda.  Unfortunately, for Israel, the EU's agenda of supporting Morsi/Muslim Brotherhood, along with USA's president Obama, Israel has a tough road ahead in defending itself from world "opinion".  Opinions, when not based on FACTS, have no business (or authority) in determining Israel's borders.  That should also be Israel's response to the so-called "peace talks", headed up by John Kerry.

From "Think-Israel":

The Legal Foundation of Jewish Sovereignty of the Land of Israel

Howard Grief's book, "Legal Foundations and Boundaries of Israel under International Law" was one of the first and one of the most complete explanations of Israel's indisputable sovereign rights under international law to Israel, Samaria, Judea, Golan and Gaza. In his memory, we present two of Howard Grief's papers that appeared in Think-Israel. The first is entitled "Legal Rights And Title Of Sovereignty Of The Jewish People To The Land Of Israel And Palestine Under International Law" from the July-August 2005 issue. The original introduction read:

In this essay, Howard Grief brilliantly fulfills his objective "to set down in a brief, yet clear and precise manner the legal rights and title of sovereignty of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and Palestine under international law." This paper should be part of your armamentarium for the next time you are told that Resolution XXX of the U.N. guarantees the rights of the Palestinian Arabs to YYY.

READ MORE 

The second article is entitled "The Rights Of The Jewish People Over The Land Of Israel Under International Law" from the January-February 2012 issue. The introduction to the article read:

Howard Grief sets forth the firm legal foundation of Israel being the exclusive owner of the land designated as Jewish by the League of Nations. The Land of Israel — current Israel, Samaria and Judea (aka West Bank), the Golan and Gaza — was given to the Jewish people as a perpetual trust and handed in that condition to the successor to the League of the Nations, the United Nations. This is a clear presentation of the documents that preceded the document of ownership and some of the history of the time. Any whittling away of this trust is illegal, whether it is attempted by a foreign country, the Israeli government or the U.N. itself. The question that remains is why have successive Israeli governments not asserted their claim. For that matter, why would a Jewish government allow control of the Temple Mount, its most holy site, by the Arabs?

READ MORE

and

Europe’s ruling elites hate Jews. For a while they covered this up well. But it never went away. Today they disguise their hatred as a love for the invented Palestinian cause, but it’s a very thin disguise we should all see through.

Read more here: http://blogs.timesofisrael.com/eu-funding-laws-are-nuremberg-2-0/

and

EU sources: Settlement directive will be published as planned

http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/EU-sources-Settlement-guidelines-will-be-published-as-planned-320255

and

EU's Ashton urges Morsy release as loyalists rally http://www.egyptindependent.com/news/eu-s-ashton-urges-morsy-release-loyalists-rally

and
The first casualty of the EU settlement directive: John Kerry

Israel's "Red lines" - Summer has arrived

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel shows an illustration as he describes his concerns over Iran's nuclear ambitions during his address to the 67th session of the United Nations General Assembly at U.N. headquarters Thursday, Sept. 27, 2012.

Bee's note: 

Few will forget PM Netanyahu's speech at the UN last September - the "red line" was visually drawn, as he stated "the world had until next summer" to stop Iran. He stated that Iran was already 70% on their way to obtaining the bomb.  Here is a quote from NBC news:

 "In his most detailed plea to date for global action against Iran's nuclear program, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Thursday the world has until next summer at the latest to stop Iran before it can build a nuclear bomb.  Netanyahu flashed a diagram of a cartoon-like bomb before the U.N. General Assembly showing the progress Iran has made, saying it has already completed the first stage of uranium enrichment."

The world yawned, a year has passed and summer has arrived.

According to an Opinion piece in YNet News, by Yoaz Hendel, Netanyahu has missed a "golden" opportunity to strike; however, "threats were not enough" to get the job done and I am sure Iran is much closer today in reaching its intended goal. Sadly, from offensive, Israel has turned to defensive within a year's time.  

Like many who listened to Netanyahu's speech, I had actually expected Israel to strike shortly after the "red line" had been drawn and while understanding our president dragged his feet, Obama has clearly demonstrated these past five plus years that he speaks "smooth" words, but his actions and support of the Muslim Brotherhood and Islam were the warning signs that he did not support Israel's same concerns about Iran, nor did the international community.

Meanwhile, the clock is ticking and the midnight hour is about to strike!

Miss on the way to a bomb

Op-ed: Netanyahu must find new ways to curb Iran's nuclear ambitions; threats aren't enough

Yoaz Hendel

Published: 07.18.13, 10:26 / Israel Opinion

The issue of a military strike in Iran is no longer on the table. Reality determined this. The State of Israel had countless opportunities to attack the nuclear installations, but it chose to postpone the decision. The options decreased as time passed. The point of no return was crossed each year, and Iran continues its race toward a nuclear bomb.

A military attack is based on three elements: Operational capability, international support and political decision-making. The first element still exists, although the indecisiveness did exact a certain price. The time that has passed decreased the efficiency of the military strike and increased the risks involved. On the other hand, Israel is still in the game. The means for an effective strike exist. We can still damage the nuclear project.

With regards to the second element – international support – Israel finds itself in a problematic position. The recent elections in Iran dealt a devastating blow to the effort to create broad international agreement. As president, Ahmadinejad was an asset to Israel's public diplomacy. Whenever he opened his mouth he shot himself in the foot. The combination of nuclear weapons, Holocaust denial and calls to annihilate Israel made it rather easy for Israel to promote its position.

The world was opposed to an Israeli military operation, but only because it feared the results of the escalation: Local interests that mixed gas prices with the negative influences of the Muslim world. During his first term, President Obama searched for every possible way to avoid a confrontation, but he failed. Ahmadinejad's conduct was illogical. His statements damaged Iran's ability to pursue its nuclear program under the radar. The diplomatic disputes he created brought the West closer to Israel and distanced him from the East.

Despite Washington's statements, the recent elections in Iran gave the West a comfortable ladder with which it can climb down from the tree. President-Elect Rohani's moderate statements are like music to the ears of those who object to a strike on Iran. Wishes overcome doubts and facts. Iran can buy valuable time under the cover of moderateness. Israel, for its part, will lose its legitimacy to act.

And if all this was not enough, the third element – the political decision – has become more complicated. For four years Netanyahu headed a government that would have made it easy to reach a decision to attack. Then-Defense Minister Ehud Barak supported a strike, as did other ministers. Netanyahu dealt with critics from within the security establishment and with outside criticism. He was close, but then he stopped. Now he is alone. The current government is comprised of new ministers with a lot of political power and of decision-makers who will have a hard time withstanding public pressure. The price of the mistake of a military operation has increased. What was is not what will be. New politicians don't necessarily like new risks.

Netanyahu is left with the results of his previous term – for good and bad. To the PM's credit, the international pressure he created led to a global awakening. Harsh sanctions were imposed on Iran largely due to Netanyahu's threats. The West was afraid of Israel's intention to attack more than it feared Iran's intention to produce nuclear weapons. The problem is that deterrence relies on action and past experience.

Israel has an interest in bringing Iran back to the international discourse in order to make it clear that everything is on the table. In the past Netanyahu accomplished this with words, and for a long period of time it was enough. Now he'll have to find new ways. There's not enough room on the table. There are too many statements on it.

• Follow Ynetnews on Facebook and Twitter  

Bee's note:

Here is a scenario of "The Last Day" ... if Iran reaches its goal, published by an Israeli:

Obama unabashed in his support of the MB in Egypt

Protesters in Cairo 

UCI Daily News

Melanie Phillips - Israpundit,  July 15th, 2013

In all the welter of words about the ousting of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, very little has been written in the mainstream media about the extraordinary contortions of the Obama administration, which did so much to put the Brothers into power there in the first place.The administration’s first reaction was to threaten to cut off US aid to Egypt in order to punish the military for unseating the Muslim Brother President, Mohamed Morsi.  Then a State Department official vouchsafed that Morsi had been ‘undemocratic’, and the administration backed away from outright confrontation.  Nevertheless, reports persist that the US continues to support the Brothers against the Egyptian military.  As Raymond Ibrahim reports, the US ambassador to Egypt, Anne Patterson, has come to be seen as a Brotherhood stooge:

‘… soon after the overthrow of Morsi, U.S. ambassador Anne Patterson assured Hisham Qandil, who hours ago was Egypt’s Prime Minister, that “there are many forms of pressure, and America holds the keys to the Gulf.”

‘Among other things, in the days leading to June 30, she called on Egyptians not to protest — including by meeting with the Coptic Pope and asking him to urge the nation’s Christian minority not to oppose the Brotherhood, even though Christians have naturally been the most to suffer under Morsi, especially in the context of “blasphemy” accusations.

‘Thus, and once again, the Obama administration makes indubitably clear that its primary interest in Egypt is to see the Muslim Brotherhood stay in power, the Egyptian people’s will — the will of tens of millions of secularists, liberals, moderates, and Christians — be damned.’

Then there was this:

‘Yesterday El Fagr reported that, during their most recent phone conversation, U.S. ambassador Anne Patterson demanded that Egyptian General Sisi release all Muslim Brotherhood members currently being held for questioning: “And when Sisi rejected this order, the American ambassador began threatening him that Egypt will turn into another Syria and live through a civil war, to which Sisi responded violently: ‘Neither you nor your country can overcome Egypt and its people.’”

‘Moreover, the day before the Salafi party withdrew from negotiations with the new Egyptian government, Al Nahar reported that Patterson had “incited them [the Nour Party, the Salafi party] to tamper with the political scene and the road map and to threaten to withdraw from political participation if Dr. Muhammad Baradei becomes elected as Prime Minister…”Apparently, these are the “many forms of pressure” that Patterson earlier assured Hishan Qandil the U.S. would use to reinstate the Brotherhood.’

Things have come to such a pass that Patterson has even been called a member of a MB sleeper cell.  So what does that make Obama  — whose bidding, after all, his Ambassador to Egypt is merely doing?

The astonishing thing is that, given Obama’s backing for the Brothers, the US currently might be said to be more Islamist than Saudi Arabia.

And all this, moreover, when the Arab world is convulsed in unprecedented ferment, offering the best chance of stopping the advanced of the Brotherhood – mortal enemies of the west  —  that has occurred for a very long time.  As the authoritative Israeli commentator Ehud Ya’ari has observed, the ousting of Morsi has delivered a stunning reverse to the Brothers’ hitherto steady progress towards regional power.

And as Khaled abu Toameh writes, Egypt is now punishing the Palestinians on account of Hamas’s support of the Egyptian Brotherhood by sealing its frontier with Gaza and denying access of food, fuel and other supplies to the Palestinians (with not a peep, of course, from the anti-Israel BDS crowd against this ‘collective punishment’).

So now a new and powerful alliance against Iran, the deadly Shia Islamic foe of the west, is on the cards between Egypt, Saudi and the Gulf states. There is a chance to put the Muslim Brotherhood, the deadly Sunni Islamic foe of the west, back in its box. Even Qatar, backer of Hamas and the Brotherhood, is now under pressure to reposition itself. And Egypt is getting down to stamping out al Qaeda in the Sinai.  For the first time in living memory, a popular uprising has ousted Islamists from power  — and suddenly the prospects for dealing the forces of darkness a severe blow look brighter than anyone can remember.

Yet at this critical juncture, when western leadership to take advantage of this situation is essential, the US is on the wrong side. Despite posing as the champion of the Egyptian masses who craved freedom, Obama has aligned the US with those seeking to extinguish freedom.

The ironies abound. Having declared he would reposition the US as the friend of the Arab and Muslim world, by extending to it the hand of friendship and promoting the Muslim Brotherhood for all he was worth, Obama now finds that hand is being furiously bitten off.

The millions who took to the Egyptian streets were demonstrating not just against Morsi — the man who was leading the country into both economic ruin and religious tyranny and was tacitly supporting those who were killing Egyptian soldiers — but also against the man they blamed for putting him there, Barack Obama.

As the Egyptian film director Mazen Said has said in this passionate video: Mr Obama, stop supporting terrorists and leave Egypt alone.

The instinct of the shallow, ignorant, culturally narcissistic west, which cannot conceive of anyone not behaving or reacting like itself, is to say that anyone who opposes tyranny must be a good guy. But at present in the Arab and Muslim world only bad guys, alas, are likely to gain power.  The reason is that freedom and democracy do not automatically follow from elections. They depend instead on the prior establishment of free institutions. In the absence of such institutions, elections merely empower more tyrannical regimes. And such institutions largely do not yet exist in the Arab and Muslim world.

Those young Arabs and Muslims who really do crave western freedoms will unfortunately have a long time to wait. For the foreseeable future, therefore, it’s a war to the finish between barbarism and civilisation.

Maybe one day the US and UK and the rest will finally work out which is which. But not until Obama himself has passed into history – where it goes without saying, he will be fixed for all eternity on the wrong side.

________________________

Bee's Note: 

Extremist Agenda Muslim Brotherhood Expanding In United States

America Joins the Jihad

WEDNESDAY, JULY 17, 2013

Hamas/Gaza - Demonstration

MIDDLE EAST AND TERRORISM
by Clare M. Lopez 

Instead of presenting a firm defense of American principles based on the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, the entire U.S. national security leadership simply caved in to this attempt to suborn the government. The FBI submissively complied with these jihadist demands, purging its anti-terrorist curriculum of hundreds of pages that an undisclosed group deemed "offensive to Muslims." Next demand? The removal of HAMAS from the U.S. Foreign Terrorist Organizations list.

It is not just that the United States government has aligned itself with the avowed vanguard of Islamic jihad -- the Muslim Brotherhood [MB] -- or committed American troops to battle (in Libya, and maybe soon in Syria) to ensure the victory of al-Qa'eda-linked militias. It is not just that whenever an opportunity has arisen, as in Iran in 2009, or pre-and-post revolutionary Egypt, or the Syrian civil war, the U.S. deliberately has chosen to side with the forces of jihad and shariah law and against the voices of civil society and genuine democracy.

The current U.S. administration has actually managed to flip from one side to the other, from "for the people in the streets" to "against the people in the streets," as recently became evident in late June 2013, when protests mounted against the incompetent, oppressive regime of Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi and the Muslim Brotherhood. The U.S. Ambassador to Egypt, Anne Patterson, reportedly asked Coptic Pope Tawadros II, "to urge the Copts not to participate" -- as well as other groups, apparently -- in the demonstrations planned for June 30. There had been no such request reported two years earlier when Muslim Brotherhood supporters thronged Tahrir Square to demand that long-time U.S. ally President Hosni Mubarak step down. Nor did Ambassador Patterson pressure Morsi's Muslim Brotherhood government to return power to Hosni Mubarak, an American ally for three decades, after those street demonstrations prompted the Egyptian military to remove him from power in February 2011. She also did not protest even after Morsi seized power outright from that military command in August 2012. Patterson has, however, reportedly been pressuring the Egyptian military command to reinstate Morsi after it stepped in once again on July 3, 2013 to remove chaos from the streets by removing Morsi from office.

What these policies make painfully obvious that the United States of America has apparently abandoned the core principles of its Founding Fathers and capitulated to the forces of jihad and shariah.The vision of America as "Shining City on a Hill," an exceptional nation whose leaders champion the natural rights of the individual against the liberty crushing oppression of totalitarian theocracy, for the moment at least, has been suborned to a different vision: the vision of an America as a force for harm in the world, that apologizes for its exceptionalism, abandons its friends and allies, emboldens its enemies, and seeks unilateral disarmament so as to better meet its president's desire to be just another "citizen of the world."

"Behead all those who insult the Prophet." The 'Istanbul Process', in which the State Dept. is taking a leading role, aims to achieve international-level legislation that would curtail free speech about Islam. (Source: WikiMedia Commons)

The years from 2009-2013 have witnessed the remaking of the map of the Middle East and North Africa [MENA] region. The driving forces behind the Islamic uprisings were powerful indeed: beginning no later than the summer of 2010, al-Qa'eda and the Muslim Brotherhood meshed their tactics and timing in a synchrony that previously had only characterized their identical Islamic ideology. Absent any serious groundwork over the preceding years by the U.S., whether official or by NGOs, to nourish genuine pro-democracy voices, once al-Qa'eda's July 2010 Inspire magazine call for jihad had been met with MB Supreme Guide Muhammad Badi's answering declaration of war in the cause of Islam [jihad] in late September 2010, and al-Azhar had provided the fatwa[Islamic religious edict] of approval for offensive jihad in January 2011, there was no one capable of standing effectively against the tidal wave of popular pro-shariah sentiment. Perhaps no one could have held back that long suppressed desire for Islamic Law.

But the U.S. did not even try. To the contrary, the current administration consistently and repeatedly appeared to respond eagerly to the calls for revolution from the Muslim Brotherhood's senior Islamic scholar, Yousef al-Qaradawi. When al-Qaradawi said thatMubarak had to go, the U.S. waited a whole three days before throwing America's key ally in the Middle East for over three decades under the bus. When al-Qaradawi called for Libyan rebels to kill Muammar Qaddafi (so the al-Qa'eda jihadis in his jails could get out and join the revolution), the U.S. led the Western military campaign that brought al-Qa'eda, the MB, and chaos to Libya. And when al-Qaradawi issued a call for jihad in Syria, in early June 2013, the U.S. quickly issued an invitation to Abdullah bin Bayyah (al-Qaradawi's vice president at the International Union of Muslim Scholars), who told an Al-Jazeera reporter that, "We demand Washington take a greater role in [Syria]." It took the U.S. less than one week after al-Qaradawi's fatwa to announce authorization of stepped-up military aid to the al-Qa'eda-and-Brotherhood-dominated Syrian rebels. The White House announcement came just a single day after bin Bayyah met with National Security and other senior administration officials.

When looking for some explanation, some reason for such astonishing behavior from the erstwhile leaders of the free world, the U.S. government's "disastrous Muslim outreach efforts," as described by Patrick Poole, must top the list. Unfortunately for us, what may have been rationalized as choosing the lesser of two evils -- picking the "good jihadis" (Muslim Brotherhood) over the "bad jihadis" (al-Qa'eda) -- instead has turned out exactly as dangerously detrimental to U.S. national security as the Islamic enemy planned.

Driven by fear of more violent terror into foolish relationships with the Armani-suited, soft-spoken purveyors of the "civilization jihad" who demand neutralization of our national defenses, we have officially purged our counterterrorism lexicon and training curriculum, and blacklisted and professionally marginalized our most capable instructors of Islamic doctrine, and thereby destroyed all ability to pre-empt Islamic terror in the ideological, pre-attack phase. The carnage at the April 15, 2013 Boston Marathon is Exhibit A for the catastrophic and inevitable domestic consequences of this misguided policy. Abroad, the current administration's unabashed embrace of jihadist forces, while abandoning courageous moderates to their fate, is contributing in a significant way to the march of Islamic law across the MENA region.

None of these cataclysmic changes benefits U.S. national security or that of our friends and allies. Far from inoculating the homeland against more Islamic terror, the current administration's limp response to direct enemy threats, such as its institutionalization of the U.S. government's increasingly cozy relationship with the Muslim Brotherhood, has only earned it the contempt of our adversaries, both Muslim and non-Muslim, and laid the country wide open to more terrorism. Russian strongman Vladimir Putin's body language at his June 2013 G-8 Summit meeting with Obama should have been enough to anticipate the predictable 'Nyet' from Moscow when it was suggested that renegade National Security Agency (NSA) leaker, Edward Snowden, might be put on a plane home from Sheremetyevo airport. Worse yet, as it is now increasingly difficult to recognize -- and even forbidden by official stated policy within the U.S. military and security agencies -- to act upon evidence of deepening jihadist commitment before an attack occurs, there will be more acts of fard 'ayn [individual jihad], just as al-Qa'eda has encouraged.

The growing list of demands being placed before U.S. leadership by its "partners" in Muslim outreach leads in one direction only: acquiescence to Islamic conquest and expansion in the MENA region accompanied by full withdrawal of all U.S. forces, both civilian and military, from allegedly "Muslim lands." Failure to comply in an expedient manner with Muslim demands will result in the repeated application of terror measures, until that state of submission is achieved which Brigadier-General S.K. Malik wrote about in his 1979 manual, "The Quranic Concept of War":

Terror struck into the hearts of the enemies is not only a means, it is the end in itself. Once a condition of terror into the opponent's heart is obtained, hardly anything is left to be achieved.

A number of demands, some even delivered in person and (incredibly) by invitation, have already been presented. Omar Abdel Rahman, known as the Blind Sheikh, a renowned juridical scholar of Islam and the emir (leader) of the Egyptian Gama'at al-Islamia terror group, is serving a life sentence in the U.S. after being convicted on terrorism charges. Those charges were based on his leadership of a jihadist cell responsible for bombing the World Trade Center in 1993, and other simultaneous plots to conduct bombings of New York City landmarks, including the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels, the United Nations complex, the George Washington Bridge, and more. After his successful prosecution by a Department of Justice legal team led by Andrew McCarthy, Abdel Rahman issued thefatwa that Usama bin Laden cited publicly as the shariah justification for the 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center. Demands by Gama'at al-Islamia (the Islamic Group) for Abdel Rahman's release were punctuated by the brutal 1997 massacre of tourists in the Egyptian city of Luxor. The following year, in 1998, the Islamic Group joined bin Laden's and al-Qa'eda's formal declaration of war [jihad] against the U.S. As might be expected,Gama'at al-Islamia is on the U.S. Foreign Terrorist Organizations list.

But being both an al-Qae'da affiliate and on the Foreign Terrorist Organizations List did not stop the issuance of a U.S. visa to Gama'at al-Islamia member Hani Nour Eldin in late June 2012 so that he could come to Washington, D.C. to accept an invitation to meet with officials from the National Security Council [NSC] to present in person a formal "request" for the release of the Blind Sheikh. Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood's then-president-elect Mohamed Morsi followed up about a week later with his own pledge to seek the release of the Blind Sheikh. As September 11 of that year drew near, the Blind Sheikh was still no closer to release. So, on Aug 30, 2012, Gama'at al-Islamia announced plans for a massive 9/11 protest outside the U.S. Embassy in Cairo; although subsequent publicity for a low-budget YouTube video about the life of Muhammad roused furious demonstrators to storm the Embassy, breach its walls, and tear down the American flag, the demand for the release of the Blind Sheikh remains.

This same YouTube video, "Innocence of Muslims", would eventually play its own role in this litany of Muslim demands. After al-Qa'eda jihadis attacked the U.S. mission in Benghazi, Libya, the night of September 11, 2012, killing Ambassador Christopher Stevens, diplomat Sean Smith, and former Navy SEALs Glenn Doherty and Tyrone Woods, the current U.S. administration hastily concocted a bogus narrative for public consumption, falsely claiming for weeks that it was this YouTube video that had incited the assault. (In these murders, incidentally, the only person who has so far been jailed is the filmmaker.) In addition to diverting attention away from the Department of State's prior close working relationship with the Ansar al-Shariah and other jihadis -- who were actually responsible for the murder of four Americans and the destruction of an official U.S. diplomatic post that night -- placing blame on the film also served to help meet Islamic demands that the U.S. should criminalize all criticism of Islam.

Since 2011, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had been working closely with the Organization of Islamic Cooperation [OIC] through the "Istanbul Process" to implement UN Human Rights Council Resolution 16/18, one of the key vehicles aimed at legislating restrictions on Americans'-- and everyone's, worldwide -- right to free speech. TheIstanbul Process is the name given to the OIC's high level implementation effort to achieve international-level legislation that would curtail free speech about Islam. Key to the Istanbul Process is the U.S. Department of State commitment to take a leading role in a series of OIC meetings at the Foreign Minister level, the first of which was held in Istanbul in December 2011, hosted by the U.S. State Department. The reported focus of that 3-day working session, held behind closed doors, was "Islamophobia," and how to implement tactics that would ensure Islam not be defamed. One way to do this is by claiming that any expression that may cause offense to Muslims -- the legal shariah definition of slander, 'Umdat al-Salik, r2.2 -- may constitute incitement to violence, as measured by a "test of consequences" -- a chilling prospect:

if the criterion for determining "incitement to imminent violence" is a new "test of consequences," then this is nothing but an invitation to stage Muslim "Days of Rage" following the slightest perceived offense by a Western blogger, instructor, or radio show guest, all of whom will be held legally liable for "causing" the destruction, possibly even if what they've said is merely a statement of fact. The implications of such prior restraint on free speech would be chilling (which is precisely the point).

As we saw in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, this is exactly what the Obama administration dutifully asserted, echoed within days by an international network comprised of U.S.-based Muslim Brotherhood affiliates, OIC Secretary General Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, and a procession of OIC member state leaders -- plus the President of the United States himself -- who made their respective ways to the microphones of the UN General Assembly a couple of weeks later to demand strict limits on free speech and expression. In a jaw-dropping obeisance to the Islamic Law on slander, Obama declared in his UN speech that "The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam."

Free speech has not been legislated away in the U.S. just yet, but it is headed in that direction. 2011 was a pivotal year for the First Amendment. As momentum built for an overhaul of U.S. government training curriculum on the topic of Islamic terrorism, driven by pressure from Muslim Brotherhood front-groups and affiliates, such as the Islamic Society of North America [ISNA] and the Muslim Public Affairs Council [MPAC], enablers of Sharia in the left-wing media, such as Wired magazine's Spencer Ackerman, clamored for changes in FBI training about Islam. No doubt buoyed by that clamor, on October 19, 2011, a collection of 57 signatories, representing the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood and other Islamic groups, sent a letter to John Brennan, then the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and Deputy National Security Advisor, listing their supposed "grievances," mostly relating to feelings of "offense," along with a list of demands. Among these demands were:

1. Review all trainers and training materials at government agencies, including all FBI intelligence products used such as the FBI intranet, FBI library and JTTF training programs; US Attorney training programs; U.S. Department of Homeland Security, U.S. Department of Defense, and US military intranet, libraries and training materials, resources and experts;

2. Purge all federal government training materials of biased materials;

3. Implement a mandatory re-training program for FBI agents, U.S. Army officers, and all federal, state and local law enforcement who have been subjected to biased training;

4. Ensure that personnel reviews are conducted and all trainers and other government employees who promoted biased trainers and training materials are effectively disciplined;

Instead of presenting a firm defense of American principles based on the Constitution and Bill of Rights, the entire U.S. national security leadership simply caved in, en masse, to this unreservedly offensive attempt to suborn the government. During the months that followed, the FBI submissively complied with these jihadist demands, purging its anti-terrorism curriculum of hundreds of pages and presentations that an undisclosed group of (Muslim Brotherhood?) Subject Matter Experts deemed "offensive to Muslims." Other agencies and departments followed suit. In April 2012, apparently oblivious to the implications of government controls on free speech, Wired magazine's clueless young scribbler, Spencer Ackerman, crowed that Gen. Martin E. Dempsey, the Chief of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, had ordered the entire U.S. military to scrub its training materials of content Muslims might find offensive.

Lest any think that the Great Purge of 2012 completes the U.S. government compliance requirements in response to the demands of the Muslim world, think again. The Blind Sheikh remains in the U.S. Medical Center for Prisons in Springfield, Missouri; the Guantanamo Bay detention facility remains open; Bashar al-Assad still rules Damascus; and free speech in America is still protected by the First Amendment. The next demand, however, is just edging into sight: according to a June 25, 2013 report from The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT), HAMAS leader Ghazi Hamad told a Palestinian news outlet (Sky News Arabia) that he met directly with U.S. government officials "close to the White House" who were present at early June 2013 HAMAS meetings with European officials.

Topic of discussion?

Removal of HAMAS from the U.S. Foreign Terrorist Organizations list.


Clare M. Lopez 

Source: http://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/3850/america-joins-jihad

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.