.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Emet m'Tsiyon

Thursday, November 12, 2020

Is It Legitimate for Biden to Become President?

 

Before examining political, diplomatic and foreign affairs issues affecting Biden's legitimacy, let's deal first with the more personal and moral issues.

The man is now in 2020 a shell of a man, a manikin, an empty suit guided and manipulated by others. His gaffes are the stuff of legend, like: We choose truth over facts; You're a dogfaced pony soldier [said to a young woman who had asked a friendly question that, it seems, did not agree with Biden], etc. For those who thought he would get progressively worse, his stable if uninspiring performance in the first debate indicates that he may be heavily medicated to stop the advance of his dementia or alzheimer's. Earlier in 2020, the eminent, respected American journalist, Britt Hume, had described Biden as "evidently senile." However, in that first debate his acceptable if pedestrian performance was not without another gaffe, perhaps one not as blatant as earlier ones and thus not noticed. He said during that debate: The polls should stay open until all the votes are counted. Now it seems that this gaffe was overlooked. In any case, the votes are supposed to be counted after the polling places are closed. Further, Biden's physical appearance does not look healthy. Hence, on physical and mental grounds he is not fit to be president. 

Of course, the moral reasons why he is unfit to be president are equally compelling. As vice president under Barack Obama, he ran an influence-peddling racket, using principally his son Hunter Biden but in which other family members such as his brother James were involved. The influence-peddling took place in far flung parts of the world where his duties as vice president took him. Indeed, Obama made him his "point man" or liaison for relations with the Ukraine. This particular fact was fateful for Israel since Obama used Biden to "persuade" or "convince" Ukraine not to abstain from the Security Council vote on UN SC resolution 2334, a very hostile anti-Israel resolution which US diplomats were promoting behind the scenes but which the US [= Obama and his team] was itself planning to abstain on. Obama wanted a uniform anti-Israel vote in the Security Council,  with all countries but the USA voting in favor, in order to show Israel that it had no friends but for the USA and that even the USA wanted Israel to capitulate to PLO/PA demands for anti-Jewish apartheid in what diplomats and journalists customarily call The West Bank. Biden was used by Obama to bring the Ukrainians into line, because their original decision on the UN SC vote was to abstain. Obama wanted only the US to abstain.

Besides Ukraine, Biden ran his racket in China, Rumania, Russia, and other countries, customarily traveling on Air Force 2, the official plane designated for the vice president [Hunter Biden traveled to China with Dad on Air Force 2 at least once]. Now, the truth be told, many persons in lands outside the USA were eager to pay money into Biden's racket, thereby purchasing influence. This paid off for Burisma, a Ukrainian energy company, which offered Joe's son, Hunter, a seat on its board of directors, at a generous salary for someone who knew little about the energy industry and did not know the languages commonly spoken in the Ukraine, Ukrainian and Russian. When the Ukrainian state prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, was going to investigate Burisma, Joe arrived in Kiev [pronounced Keef], the Ukrainian capital, and threatened the top Ukrainian leaders, Poroshenko the president and Yatsenyuk the prime minister, that he would withhold one billion dollars in badly needed US loan guarantees if that prosecutor --a corrupt man according to Biden-- were not dismissed in six hours. Biden told the Ukrainians that Obama supported him in this matter, and  if they thought he was lying then they could call Obama. Biden boasted of this extortion in his talk before the Council on Foreign Relations in New York in January 2018. 

Biden's worldwide influence peddling, also involving his family, led  Rudy Giuliani, former US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, who had prosecuted Mafia gangs as a senior Federal prosecutor, to speak of "The Biden Crime Family" as one might speak of the Genovese Crime Family. 

At this point, some background about US-Ukraine relations in the Obama and Trump periods might be helpful. After the fall of Communism in 1989-1990, many of the states emerging from the long Soviet and Communist winter found themselves burdened with corrupt governments where the new leaders were out to enrich themselves, as just coincidentally, Joe was too. In 2013-14 US govt officials, such as Victoria Nuland of the State Depatment, encouraged and aided a sometimes violent protest movement led by two neo-fascist parties, Right Sektor and Svoboda. After Washington had secured the fall of pro-Russian president Viktor Yanukovich through these Ukrainian allies, the new government found itself at war with Russian proxy forces in the east of the country, partly due to their own nationalistic arrogance and political ineptitude. Nevertheless, despite these Ukrainian allies having helped the USA achieve the foreign policy goal of eliminating and/or reducing Russian influence in the Ukraine, Obama's administration --which had encouraged them against the pro-Russian Yanukovich-- refused to give them major or lethal weapons in the war which followed Yanukovich's fall. Instead, Obama and his administration were pleased to supply the Ukraine with blankets and such like minor help. It was the Trump administration which first supplied lethal, major weapons to the Ukraine. This meant in particular the Javelin anti-tank missile that the Ukraine had been asking for for several years [Le Monde, 23 December 2017, updated 12-26-2017online]. This fact among others indicates that the widespread claim  by leading Democrats and its media allies that Trump was a cats-paw for Russia, for Putin, was simply vile political slander, a hoax, since Trump was sending weapons to a country with which Russia was at war, the Ukraine. Biden was part of this slander since he took part in a White House strategy meeting in early January 2017 [before Trump's inauguration] at which Biden suggested charging Trump with violating the Logan Act, a law from the late 18th century forbidding private US citizens from negotiating with foreign powers. However, in the much more complicated international politico-military-diplomatic situation of the 20th century, it became customary for foreign policy officials of incoming administrations to meet foreign counterparts and representatives in order to find out what was important and less important to both sides, etc. Yet General Flynn, Trump's candidate for National Security Advisor, was persecuted by the FBI and Federal prosecutors for meeting the Russian ambassador to the US in the interim between the 2016 election and Trump's inauguration.

Another place where Trump acted counter to presumed Russian interests was in Syria where Trump gave orders to bomb Syrian military targets to deter future Syrian gas and chemical weapons attacks on Syrian civilians, as at Douma on 7 April 2018 [Le Monde, 14 April 2018]. Russia objected to this bombing of Syrian targets at the Security Council. Obama broke his own promise, his own "red line" when he decided not to attack Syria after all for a poison gas attack against civilians in Syria several years before. And Biden too promoted this Russia Collusion Hoax.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

QUESTION of the day: Does anybody remember Tara Reade? Is it true that she had a "relationship" with Senator Joseph Biden? And why has she been so soon forgotten?

Labels: , ,

Monday, November 09, 2020

Is Joe Biden a Legal or Legitimate President?

Is it legal for Biden to be president? First of all, his widely alleged majority of electoral votes is due to vote cheating by his supporters, that is, the Democratic Party machines of several big cities: Philadelphia, Detroit, Las Vegas (Clark County, Nevada), Atlanta, Milwaukee, etc. The vote counting in those places, particularly Philadelphia and Detroit, was not transparent and supervised by representatives of both parties. In Philadelphia, local Democratic election officials refused to obey a court order to allow Republican representatives   close enough access to observe the counting where and while  it was going on. They were kept far away. There are many instances of the lack of proper observation or inspection of vote counting by both parties. Rudy Giuliani led the legal fight of the pro-Trump forces, especially in Philadelphia. Giuliani is a former US Attorney for the Southern District of New York and later mayor of New York. He is not some irresponsible, uneducated demagogue. He discusses methods of cheating by Democrats, and not just in Philadelphia. Giuliani also pointed out that the cheating methods --including those meant to prevent Republican inspection of the counting process-- were remarkably similar in various parts of the USA, in several cities. The vote fraud to come must have been planned months in advance.

On another legal point, Biden is prima facie involved in crimes involving using his power, influence and authority as vice president for personal purposes, including personal gain, including in foreign affairs. He appears to have committed felony crimes. However, he has not been convicted, indicted or even officially investigated [although it seems that his son Hunter is under FBI investigation]. Biden openly boasted of his ability to extort a foreign government, that of the Ukraine, to dismiss a prosecutor preparing to investigate a Ukrainian company on the board of which his son Hunter was sitting for a generous monetary consideration. According to emails found on a laptop computer belonging to Hunter Biden which were seen by the New York Post, his father Joe got a large share of the younger Biden's takings from the Ukrainian company, Burisma, as well as from Chinese sources, etc. Now since no legal action has been taken in these several cases involving Biden influence peddling, it may be legal on those grounds that Biden become president. However, the large-scale and widespread vote fraud against Trump by Democratic party officials makes Biden's "votes" illegal.                                                                  

Of course, Biden supporters in the media make claims of "no evidence" of vote fraud or "unsubstantiated allegations." This reminds me of the repeated denials of the Armenian genocide by the Turkish government, including by the sinister tyrant, Erdogan. "No evidence" is claimed by the Turks too. Or the genocide was only the usual mass killings taking place during a war. And so on and so forth.                        

Further, the phenomenon of vote fraud has a long history in the United States. Chicago used to be notorious for "voting the cemeteries" and also for the slogan "vote early and often." In recent years Philadelphia has become notorious for the same thing. But it did not start there just in 2020.

So much for the legality of Biden becoming president of the USA. In the next blog post, we will take up the illegitimacy of the election of Biden. Illegitimate means something wrong, not right, or unjust that may not necessarily be illegal.

Labels: ,

Friday, October 30, 2020

Biden's Crookedness in the Ukraine Is Also Linked to His Anti-Israel Mission for Obama

 So much new info has lately come out about Joe Biden's corruption, which also involved his son, Hunter, and his brother James, that there is little left to prove directly. Of course the Democratic Party and its media allies claim that everything is Russian disinformation. The New York Times and other major media outlets have totally or almost totally ignored the new revelations about Joe's corrupt doings. Yet the NYT is an old recidivist perpetrator when it comes to overlooking or omitting facts that do not fit the narrative that the NYT wants to support. Hence, you cannot trust the NYT to bring you all of the important and significant news. It might not fit. 

It has been a rival New York newspaper, the New York Post [go into the Post web site for several articles], that has brought to light extensive new information about Biden's corruption, although some of what the NY Post has revealed could have been and should have been inferred years ago. After all, in his speech to the Council on Foreign Relations in New York in January 2018, he openly boasted about getting the top officials of the Ukrainian govt to fire a prosecutor. He told them, blackmailing them, that he was giving them six hours [at that point in the speech he pointed at his watch] to fire this prosecutor or he would withhold a billion dollars in American loan guarantees that the Ukraine desperately needed.  That sounds like extortion to me. And sounds like something that US judicial authorities ought to be investigating. It sounds like something improper. Why would a US vice president want a prosecutor dismissed in a foreign land? Was Biden using his power and influence as vice president for personal gain? Were Biden and his son Hunter doing influence peddling? The questions seem obvious but Biden's very open and overt and public speech did not lead to any investigation of him. And when President Trump asked President Zelensky of the Ukraine about this matter, Trump was accused of improper activity and eventually impeached whereas it was Biden who was in the wrong!!!

So here is what I wrote a year ago on Biden's pressuring the Ukrainian govt on the matter of the prosecutor --who stated that he was preparing to investigate a Ukrainian company, Burisma, which had invited Hunter Biden to sit on its board of directors for a generous monthly salary. Although Hunter knew little about the company's field of activity, energy and natural gas, and did not know the Russian or Ukrainian languages. See the video of his speech of boastful admission in the speech to the Council on Foreign Relations in January 2018.

So the question remains: Just why did Biden want that particular prosecutor removed? Of course, he is telling the CFR in his talk that the prosecutor [indeed, the prosecutor-general of Ukraine] was corrupt. But most Ukrainian voters apparently thought that Pres. Poroshenko and PM Yatseniuk were corrupt. That is why they elected in 2019 a non-politician, a Jewish actor who had played in a TV drama about corruption in Ukrainian politics to be their next president. So if Biden were truly concerned about corruption in that country, why did he not go after Poroshenko and Yatseniuk who were considered corrupt in their country, instead of the prosecutor-general? So was Joe Biden trying to protect the object of that prosecutor's planned investigation [his name was Viktor Shokin], Burisma, on the board of which sat his own son Hunter Biden? If so, was Biden then using the power and  influence of the USA to benefit his own son's company, Burisma? All in the name of anti-corruption? Biden's display of arrogance towards the officials of another country is shocking as is his boasting about his successful extortion in front of the CFR.

And here is what I wrote about Biden pressuring the Ukraine in December 2016 to vote in favor of the racist anti-Jewish Security Council resolution 2334. Also see this Elder of Ziyyon: here

Labels: , ,

Thursday, October 29, 2020

The Problem of Joe Biden & the Jews & Israel

  LINK ADDED 11-17-2020 

To give full disclosure, I have disliked Joe Biden since 1975. I heard him at a dinner in the city where I lived at that time speaking to a pro-Israel organization and --I assume-- he was getting a generous speaking fee. At first I was inclined to be sympathetic because everyone knew at the time that he had lost his wife and one of their children in a traffic accident. Yet his speech to the group broadcast a nasty anti-Israel undertone. He made several snide anti-Israel insinuations, nothing too overt or specific. At the end of course he urged the audience to offer monetary support to this organization. So I suppose he, as  a US senator, had earned his fee for this organization. And I like others contributed what I could afford, although his answer to my question was somewhat irritating. I disliked him afterwards although I thought that he was basically OK as long as he voted right on issues that mattered to Jews.

Years later, I came to dislike him even more. That was when he came to Jerusalem representing Obama. But first let's go forward seven years from 1975 to 1982. In that year, when Prime Minister Begin spoke before the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee:

Back [in] 1982, Senator Biden (D-Delaware) threatened to cut off aid to Israel. In subsequent years he hotly denied this but Prime Minister Menachem Begin’s late right-hand man Yechiel Kadisha’i unequivocally confirmed Biden’s bullying in many conversations we held [Sarah HonigJerusalem Post 30 April 2015]

 Begin responded to Biden's threat:

“Don’t threaten us with cutting off your aid. It will not work. I am not a Jew with trembling knees. I am a proud Jew with 3,700 years of civilized history. Nobody came to our aid when we were dying in the gas chambers and ovens. Nobody came to our aid when we were striving to create our country. We paid for it. We fought for it. We died for it. We will stand by our principles. We will defend them. And, when necessary, we will die for them again, with or without your aid.” [ibid. Jpost]

By the year 2010, Biden had risen to the level of his incompetence as Barack Hussein Obama's vice president. He came to Jerusalem on Obama's behalf  and promoted the Obama administration's policy of enforcing apartheid against Jews in Judea & Samaria, expressing support for Mahmoud Abbas' demand that Israel stop any activity enabling Jews to take up residence in the heart of the ancient Jewish homeland, called Judea [IVDAEA] by the Roman Empire. On the day that Biden arrived the Interior Ministry announced plans for 1600 new homes for Jews in an already existing Jewish neighborhood in Jerusalem that happened to be north of the 1949 armistice line [called "East Jerusalem" in the media, to be sure]. Both the palestinian Arab leader Abbas and the American VP Biden expressed hostility to homes being built for Jews who were often living in crowded conditions in older areas of the Holy City. And this was in a city that had had a Jewish majority since 1853, if not before. Biden stated:

“It is incumbent on both parties to build an atmosphere of support for negotiations and not to complicate them,” Biden said in a media statement alongside Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in the West Bank city of Ramallah. “Yesterday the decision by the Israeli government to advance planning for new housing units in East Jerusalem undermines that very trust, the trust that we need right now in order to begin ... profitable negotiations,” Biden said. [Reuters, 10 March 2010: "Biden Scolds Israel over Settlement Plan"]

 There is so much more to say against Biden and against his anti-Israel actions and positions over the years that I will stop here for now, only promising to continue tomorrow with his support for Obama's dangerous Iran nuke deal, that did not stop Iran's move towards a nuke bomb for even one day, endangering both Israel and most Sunni Arab states. I will also cover Biden's work for Obama to force the Ukraine to vote in favor of the anti-Israel UN Security Council resolution 2334 of December 2016 which exemplifies the pro-apartheid [against Jews] anti-Jewish, anti-Israel policy of Obama and much of the old US foreign policy elite. And other matters.

- - - - - - - - - -                                                                                                                                                  LINK ADDED 11-17-2020

Biden's Anti-Israel Escapade in Ukraine:  here  by Elder of Ziyyon

Labels: , ,

Sunday, October 18, 2020

Do Jews Owe Anything to the US Democratic Party? -- Part 2

We have shown that Roosevelt [Saint FDR, in the bon mot of Lawrence Lipton in the LA Free Press circa 1963] was a silent partner in the Shoah. Of course young people may think that that was a long time ago. But the Democrats still honor Roosevelt with yearly memorial dinners and such. 

Nevertheless,  do we have more recent evidence that the Democratic Party is hostile to Jews, maybe to the point of collaborating in  a future Holoaust? Just two years ago, the Party nominated Ilhan Omar and Rashida Tlaib to the House of Representatives. And these two Muslim women were both elected. Of the two, Omar, a Somali immigrant to the USA, was the more blatantly Judeophobic, although Tlaib was of palestinian Arab background. 

Omar had written a few years years before that, in 2012: "Israel hypnotized the world. May Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel.

This is not only a specimen of traditional anti-Jewish bigotry but an expression of magical thinking. Omar showed that she had a loose grip on reality. She also expressed Muslim loyalty and Muslim beliefs including the several and sundry prejudices against other religions and  nations that abound in the Quran and the Hadiths and so on. Hence, one would  think that when committee assignments were given out by the Democratic Party leadership in the House of Representatives, care would be taken to place Omar on a committee where she could do little harm. Yet instead, Omar was assigned to the highly prestigious House Foreign Affairs Committee which actually does influence the foreign relations of the United States, a committee to which first-term congressmen are not ordinarily assigned. Maybe she could have been assigned instead to the committee in charge of national parks and/or fisheries or education. Or perhaps the committee in charge of  Housing and Urban Development where maybe --not necessarily-- she might have been able to make a contribution. Instead she is dealing with issues of war and peace, or which foreign countries to befriend and which to harm or be indifferent to.

While a member of the House, Rashida Tlaib put forth a more hypocritical, subtler expression of Judeophobia. She expressed sorrow over the Shoah while claiming that the Palestinian Arabs were victims of the Shoah, whereas their leaders were among the perpetrators of the crime of genocide against the Jews.

In early 2019 when Omar and Tlaib took their seats in Congress, their views gained attention and angry criticism. After she was already a member of the House, this Islamic supremacist [she voted merely "present" on a resolution recognizing the Armenian genocide, perhaps fulfilling a commitment she had made when she met with Turkish tyrant Erdogan before entering Congress] came out with another hypocritical assault on Jews:

Ms. Omar said that pro-Israel activists were pushing “for allegiance to a foreign country” — a remark that critics in both parties said played into the anti-Semitic trope of “dual loyalty.” [NY Times 7 March 2019]

These Judeophobic remarks did elicit public unease and criticism. The Democrats running the House did prepare a resolution condemning antisemitism.  But then . . .

It started as a resolution condemning anti-Semitism. Then, anti-Muslim bias was added in. After that came white supremacy. And by the end, it cited “African-Americans, Native Americans, and other people of color, Jews, Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs, immigrants and others” victimized by bigotry.  [NY Times, 7 March 2019]
So a resolution originally meant to condemn Judeophobia was watered down to become a general statement against bigotry of all sorts. The message against antisemitism was lost and no acknowledgement was made that at least one of the groups that the resolution spread its protective wings over was a group, Muslims, that has been long imbued with Judeophobia, going back to the Quran, the hadiths and other medieval Islamic writings. Nor was either Rep. Omar or Rep. Tlaib mentioned by name. Thus the resolution defeated its ostensible original purpose. 

The refusal of the Democratic Party to clearly and unequivocally condemn Judeophobia/antisemitism, instead substituting a much watered down, nearly meaningless resolution, without naming its own who were complicit in promoting Judeophobia, shows that the US Democratic Party is now home to antisemites and is complicit in their doings. American Jews should not trust this morally corrupt and hypocritical party.

References

https://nypost.com/2019/03/07/house-overwhelmingly-approves-resolution-condemning-hate/

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/06/us/politics/anti-semitism-resolution.html?action=click&module=RelatedCoverage&pgtype=Article&region=Footer

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/07/us/politics/ilhan-omar-anti-semitism-vote.html


Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, October 04, 2020

Do Jews Owe Anything to the Democratic Party? Any thanks or gratitude?

expanded on 27 October 2020

Of course, we owe the Democratic Party nothing. We can look at Roosevel's shameful treatment of Jews persecuted in Europe and North Africa before and during the Shoah. Then there was Jimmy Carter's hostility for Israel in the 1970s. And another low point was reached in the presidency of Barak Hussein Obama which saw support for Israel's Islamist enemies and saw the     US undermining Israel at the UN Security Council  [for example, SC Res 2334 of December 2016], in which the Obama gang worked, as it did in various venues for eight years, in favor of apartheid against Jews in the Land of Israel.

Perhaps most damning is the complicity of the revered Democratic president, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in the Shoah. Despite the liberal and humanitarian rhetoric that poured out of FDR, his administration did not work to stop the German nazi mass murder machine nor did they do more than token acts to help Jews escape from the Nazi-fascist domain in Europe. This was true in the 1930s before the Shoah actually got started but Hitler and his gang were already persecuting Jews. It was also true during the years when the Shoah was working at high speed. 

Rabbi Eliezer Berkovits concluded in his book, Faith After the Holocaust, that Roosevelt and his government wanted the Jews to die. It certainly seems that way. 

Even in the 1930s, when German Jews wanted to leave Germany because of the persecutions, FDR's officials imposed obstacles in their way to coming to the United States. It is important to know that at that time immigration to the United States was governed by quotas for different countries. Germany had one of the biggest quotas. Yet this large quota was not filled in the years after Hitler took power [30 January 1933]. Officials of FDR's State Department put up obstacles [on this episode see books and articles by David Wyman, a non-Jew, by the way]. 

During the war, American warplanes could and did reach the area of Poland where the Auschwitz camp was located starting in August 1943 when Sicily was liberated. US  bombers then bombed industrial plants in the area of Auschwitz but not the death camps. When in 1944 Jewish leaders implored the Allies to bomb the railroad tracks that led to Auschwitz and other camps, Roosevelt and Churchill refused, makiing the usual excuses. Jewish-American Democratic politicians were of little help in pushing FDR to help save Jews.

And Roosevelt, sometimes called Saint FDR by detractors, was a Democrat, a hero to the party, and most damning about the Democratic Party is that it still holds annual celebrations to honor and commemorate Roosevelt and his ill legacy.

In subsequent posts, we will look at anti-Israel policies by Democratic presidents Carter and Obama. Recall that both were mentored by the sinister Zbigniew Brzezinski. 

Democratic Party candidate for president, Joe Biden, was a willing partner in Obama administration schemes to harass and discriminate against Jews. I had a personal encounter with Biden in 1975 and I have disliked him ever since. God willing, he will not become the president of the USA.

- - - - - - - - - - - - 

References among others:

Josiah E Dubois, Jr, The Devil's Chemists (Boston: Beacon Press 1952). Dubois was a US Treasury official who studied what the US Govt was doing to help Jews under German-Nazi control during the war, Jews who slated for mass murder by the German Nazis. Dubois issued a report under the broad sponsorship of Treasury Secretary Morgenthau entitled: "The Acquiescence of this Government in the Murder of the Jews." After the war, Dubois served as a prosecutor at the Nuremberg Trials foccusing on the case of the German chemical giant, I G Farben.

- - - - - - -about Dubois, see Rafael Medoff, Blowing the Whistle on Genocide - Josiah E. DuBois, Jr. and the Struggle for a U.S. Response to the Holocaust (Purdue U Press 2009). 

Jan Karski, The Story of a Secret State (1944). Karski was the messenger sent by the Polish national underground to the West to tell about events in German-occupied Poland, including the mass murder of Jews that he witnessed first hand. After meeting with Anthony Eden and other British leaders he went to Washington and met with President Roosevelt, among others. He spoke to FDR about various matters, the events in Poland, the starving people, the oppression, etc, he came to the situation of the Jews. He tried to tell FDR about the horrible conditions that the Jews were living under in the Warsaw Ghetto and the Belzec concentration camp [where he had visited]. But Roosevelt did not want to hear about the Jews' suffering and changed the subject.

Arthur D Morse, While Six Million Died (1968)

David Wyman, The Abandonment of the Jews (1984)

Rafael Medoff, The Jews Should Keep Quiet: Franklin D. Roosevelt, Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, and the Holocaust (2020)  here

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, July 22, 2020

British Fake Experts Falsify Jewish Population in Israel before the State in 1948

Everyone should know by now that we cannot always trust experts or authorities. That includes respected "newspapers of record" like the NY Times, and all sorts of "newsweeklies" and commentators on TV and supposedly scientific public opinion polls, not to mention professors of the Humanities and Social Sciences. As to the news media, they can lie or falsify in several ways. One is an outright, direct lie, an explicit lie. Another way is by omission. The NY Times has used this technique, sometimes hinting at a truth but minimizing its importance or pretending that it is just a rumor whispered in the corridors whereas the fact had been openly proclaimed, even boasted of by an official of a government guilty of a contemptible atrocity. Another way to falsify is to use insinuations through the skillful use of adjectives, adverbs, verbs and nouns, etc.

In English speaking lands, especially the United States. media cover ups and falsifications both subtle and blatant  are aided by the general ignorance of languages other than English. I have often found a totally different picture of an event or phenomenon which took place outside the United States when reading the newspapers in French or Hebrew or Italian, etc, than I got from American English- language media. Such as the NYT. This ignorance induced the Times to think it could get away with falsifying a statement by no less a personage than the Pope. The Times reported falsely that the pope had called Abu Mazen [Mahmoud Abbas] an "angel of peace" on his visit to the Vatican. When I checked how the Italian press had reported the Pope's statement, I found that he had told Abbas that he "could be an angel of peace [= Lei possa essere un angelo della pace]," if only he made peace with Israel. Not quite the same.

Of course, reference books and dictionaries, encyclopedias and lexicons. can also falsify. This brings me to A Dictionary of Politics published by the respected British  Penguin Books (F Elliott & M Summerskill, eds, 1961), as an aid to understanding current international affairs. It should come as no surprise that a blatant lie in the book concerns Israel, Jews and Zionism.
On  page 267 under the rubric "Palestine" we find this:
. . . . the population of which [of "Palestine"] had in 1919 been almost entirely Arab.

This is a gross lie. The Jewish population before WW One has been variously estimated at between 12% and 14% of the total population. The absolute number of Jews in the Land of Israel [not a distinct political/administrative entity under the Ottoman Empire] was estimated between 75,000 and 90,000. Since the whole country had a total estimated population of 650,000 to 750,000, then even the low estimate of 75,000 Jews in the Land was no small, insignificant number. Unfortunately many Jews fled the country during the war or were expelled on account of being citizens or subjects of enemy countries to the Ottoman Empire in WW One. These enemy states included Russia, France and Britain. The French Jewish citizens likely included Jews from Algeria and Tunisia. 
Hence, the Jewish population of the country was less in 1918 than in 1914, going down from 85,000 to 56,000,  according to Michael J Cohen. The causes were expulsion, flight, starvation and disease. The expelled Jews included not only enemy aliens but Jews expelled from the new city of Tel Aviv in 1917 and forced to wander the roads of the country. To be sure, the starvation also affected the Arab population due to Ottoman confiscations of food for the army from the civilian population. This significantly lowered the numbers of the population generally.

The historian Yehoshua Kaniel cites the overall population figures of 300,000 for the beginning of the 19th century, 400,000 for the 1870s and 700,000 for the eve of WW One. These numbers refer to the territory west of the Jordan River. The number of Jews in that same period, according to Kaniel, was about 5,000 at the start of the century, about 10,000 around 1850 and 85,000 on the eve of WW One. There are other estimates but they are not especially dissimilar. See below for other authorities and for bibiographic data. Now if Jews were 85,000 on the eve of WW I, making up about 12% of the total population, then at that time, the Land west or the Jordan was hardly "almost entirely Arab," not to mention other nationalities living there, such as Bosnian and Circassian Muslims, Greeks, Armenians, and Europeans and Americans belonging to various religious communities, some of them churchmen, some diplomats, some civilian residents like the German Templars who later mostly became pro-Nazi and therefore aided the Arab Revolt of the mid-1930s, politically led by Haj Amin el-Husseini and supported materially by Nazi Germany. Much of the  money and weapons supplied by Germany went through the Templars to the Arab forces led by Husseini. [To be sure, the Revolt was called a "revolt by leave," an uprising by permission of the British ruling authorities, according to some Jewish observers].

Long before 1914, Jews were already a majority in Jerusalem. This majority status goes back to the year 1853 in the middle of the 19th century, if not earlier. The numbers were cited  by none other than Karl Marx in an article for the New York Tribune on 15 April 1854. Marx took the numbers from a book by the French diplomat and historian Cesar Famin  published in 1853. In that year, Jews also lived elsewhere in the country, in Hebron, Safed, Tiberias, Gaza and in several villages and towns. 

- - - - - - - - - -
SOURCES
Michael J Cohen, "The Mandatory Period", in Israel: People, Land, State (edited by Avigdor Shinan; Jerusalem: Yad Izhak Ben Zvi 2005),  p 275.
Yehoshua Kaniel, "The Late Ottoman Period (1775-1917," in Shinan, ed., Israel: People, Land, State; pp 257-258.
Yehuda Slutsky, "Ottoman Period," in History from 1880 (Israel Pocket Library; Jerusalem: Keter 1973), p 24.  The Israel Pocket Library collection is taken from the Encyclopedia Judaica.

        Slutsky's figures are approx. 90,000 for 1914. He writes that 11,300 Jews left the country during the war and this number represented "over an eighth" of the pre-war Jewish population. I have simply multiplied 11,300 by eight. Slutsky does not give numbers of Jews dying of starvation or disease during the war.


Sunday, June 28, 2020

Applying Israeli Sovereignty to Judea-Samaria Will Help the Cause of Justice & Peace

People the world over are looking at Israel, at Jerusalem, to see if and how Israel will apply its sovereignty to parts of Judea & Samaria. These areas are part of the Jewish National Home juridically erected by the international community at San Remo in 1920 & at the League of Nations in 1922. No subsequent piece of legislation in any international forum did or could have vitiated that part of international law.

Yet it is precisely on these grounds, the grounds of international law, that much of the criticism and/or hostile opposition to Israel's expected move is focussed. The expected hypocritical criticism has come from the European Union and the Arab states, with some voices in Europe, both governmental and among the public, being even more vituperative, if possible, than most Arab states. As to hypocrisy, neither the EU nor the Arabs have much to say about Turkey's occupation of northern Cyprus, going on since 1974, although Cyprus is itself a member of the EU!!!
Another source of hypocritical and/or historically ignorant criticism or vituperation comes from the so-called "Liberals" or "progressives" in the United States who mostly revolve politically around the Democratic Party. The Dem critics usually go off about Israel violating international law or Israel preventing peace by making a "two-state solution" more difficult or impossible to achieve, so forth and so on. Some Dems are worse.

Leading Democratic politicians, including the Dems' presumed presidential candidate, Joe Biden, have publicly opposed what they call Israel's "annexation" of territory assigned to the Jews on the grounds of historical right as part of the aforementioned Jewish National Home. Moreover, the Dems shamelessly or ignorantly overlook their own party's role in furthering the Nazi Holocaust, the Shoah. Indeed, every year they honor President Franklin Delano Roosevelt --a Democrat-- with a dinner and former president, Barak Hussein Obama, once said that FDR was his "role model". Yet FDR was a silent partner in the Shoah. The Dems have not yet agreed to acknowledge that. Let those who disagree with me about FDR and the Shoah produce some historical evidence that he tried to rescue or even allowed the rescue of more than a token number of Jews threatened by the German Nazis. How about evidence that FDR used his air power to destroy the gas chambers and the railroad tracks that led up to the death camps?

Now in view of the fact that much of the criticism of Israel's application of sovereignty claims to rest on international law, one of the major tasks of the Israeli government in moving toward the application of sovereignty and Israeli law to land that belongs to Israel lawfully is to explain and elaborate why the move is in consonance with international law and that it is just on historical and political grounds. Indeed the League of Nations mandate for Palestine writes in its Preamble:
Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connexion of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country . . .

But  this and previous governments of Israel have been remiss in not emphasizing to the world our rights to the Land under international law. The web site The Israeli Settlement Blog is a good source of information not only on settlements but on the legal issues involved. Its section on the legality of settlements is especially helpful as it contains a large groups of informed articles on the legality of the settlements as well as of Israel ownership of the Judea-Samaria territory. See at link below:
http://theisraelisettlements.blogspot.com/p/settlements-legal-issues.html

Wednesday, March 11, 2020

Benito Gantz Talks & Acts like a Dictator -- Israel's Democracy in Danger

Fraud is a common feature of politics, Who would deny it? A blatant contemporary example is the so-called Blue-White Party in Israel. Blue and white are the national colors of Israel, appearing on the flag. Hence, the Blue-White Party wants to be seen as patriotic. It pretends to be nationalist, often called "right-wing" in Israel although that term is often misleading. To further the ambition of Benny Gantz to dominate Israel's government, it was necessary for his party to pretend to be national or "right-wing." This is because  the "left-wing" Labor Party had led Israel into the disastrous Oslo Accords, which multiplied the number of Israelis being murdered in terrorist attacks. And was thus discredited. So "left-wing" became an ugly, threatening term to most Israelis. Therefore, a party had to seem non-"left" or "right-wing" or national in order to win enough votes to form a govt with other  parties in a coalition.

Staying with the Israel Labor Party, although one would think that a labor party would automatically be considered "leftist," the Israel Labor Party pretended to be "rightist" or national in the 1992 elections. In fact, some journalists complained in 1992 that the party was "Likud B." In other words, the party was too close to the Likud in its election rhetoric. It was imitating Likud. Yits'haq Rabin who was at the top of the party's list, and therefore would become prime minister if the party succeeded in forming a government, promised repeatedly that he and his party would not negotiate with the  PLO. We now know that the party, perhaps through Shimon Peres, was negotiating before the 1992 elections with Arab parties, such as Hadash, which was the Israel Communist party but with a chiefly Arab voting base and with Arab nationalist policies and rhetoric. After the election, Yossi Beilin was sent by foreign minister Peres to negotiate with the PLO and these ill-starred negotiations took place in Oslo, Norway, as part of the Norwegian contribution to world terrorism, which the Norwegian govt of the time would have called helping  the "peace process." Perhaps Rabin was sincere in his promise not to negotiate with the PLO. But Peres was able to work around him. It seems that Rabin did not not know about the secret Peres-Beilin-PLO talks in Oslo and was then presented with a fait accompli by Peres. Rabin had previously called Peres "a tireless subverter" [חתרן בלתי נלאה] and he had called Beilin "Peres' poodle." As prime minister, Rabin should have known better than to trust Peres.

This history of the Oslo Accords is very relevant for what is now going on in Israeli politics. Gantz and other party members of Blue-White claimed over and over that they would not try to form a minority govt supported from outside the government by the frankly anti-Israel group of parties in the Joint Arab List.
Just before last week’s election, Yair Lapid, the No. 2 in Benny Gantz’s Kahol Lavan, wrote on Facebook that his party could have formed a government after the previous election in September with the support of the Joint List of Arab parties. But it decided not to. “We won’t form a government with the Joint List. Period, exclamation mark. Whatever you choose.” [Anshel Pfeffer, Haaretz, 10 March 2020]
Gantz even went so far as to call prime minister Netanyahu a "liar" for forecasting that that is what he would do after the election. Now, after the election on 2 March, last week, it turns out that Netanyahu was right and that Gantz was unjustly calling him a "liar" for his accurate forecasting. Gantz is hardly one to heed the will of the people if just one week after the election he is already breaking an important promise to his voters. Gantz is not democratic and is a habitual liar himself. We will get to that later.

First, the Israeli system needs explanation. There are 120 members of the parliament, the Knesset. They are elected by proportional representation. That is, the total vote is counted and parties that get more than the necessary threshold of vote percentage [3.25%] will get seats divided up by the percentage of votes for each qualifying party or party list. If a party list gets approximately 10% of the votes, it will get10% of the seats, that is, 12 out of 120. Since a party never gets half or more of the seats [61], it has to form a coalition. In the last three elections, neither major party [neither Likud nor Blue-White] has gotten enough seats among the Jewish parties [most of which have some Arab or Druze voters] to form a govt even in coalition. The Arab parties (including the Communist Hadash), being anti-Israel and Arab nationalist in rhetoric and policies, have never been part of a coalition [alhough the Communist Party in 1948 signed the Israeli Declaration of Independence]. So there is good reason not to include them in a coalition --as opposed to individual Arab politicians considered loyal to the state who have been in the government.

As Benito Gantz has been speaking in favor of forming a minority government supported from outside the govt by the Joint Arab List to provide a 62 seat majority, two members of Blue-White, considered "right-wing," have spoken out publicly against the very idea. Gantz naturally became angry with them, although they were only insisting that the party hold to Gantz' own promises to the voters rejecting the very notion of a govt based on the Joint List [including Communists and Islamists]. What Gantz said to these two members of his own party elected on the Blue-White list to the Knesset is very interesting and instructive. He did not merely tell them why he thought they were wrong and he was right, he put it this way:
Gantz however issued a statement saying “In Blue and White there can be a variety of opinions, but there is only one position and one decision - that of the chairman of the party. Not that of senior officials or associates.” [Jerusalem Post, 10 March 2020]
Benny Gantz issued this statement. But it could just as well have been issued by another Ben, Benito Mussolini. Or Stalin, for that matter. The party leader is called by Gantz the "chairman" as in Communist countries where the top dictator was the chairman of the Communist Party. Is there any doubt that this Benito is a danger to Israel's democracy and a danger to the Jews?

Just to add a little extra sweetness to our portrait of Benito, let's look at what he said last Saturday night. Netanyahu gave a speech to members of Likud in which he severely criticized Gantz. Gantz responded with a speech of his own in which he threatened civil war. Of course, he charged Netanyahu with threatening or working towards a civil war due to Netanyahu's alleged "incitement." But the charge of incitement has been used all too often here in Israel in order to silence political opponents. In fact, Gantz and some of his Blue White comrades have been inciting against Netanyahu by gross lies [here]. Here are beauties from Gantz' speech on Saturday night:
"The Right in recent in weeks are [sic! should be "have"] left no room for no [sic!! This second no does not belong here] doubt, Netanyahu is threatening a civil war with his call of incitement. I stand here in front of you in the name of many people on the Right and Left and say: it's time to heal Israeli society from the plague of hatred," [i24news]
In fact, Gantz has been smearing Netanyahu since his first major political speech in February 2019 [here].
Gantz is far from being a true military hero. He was a mediocre general at best. In Yiddish we can call him Ah gantser gornisht [ א גאנצער גארנישט], a total nothing!! On the other hand, Netanyahu served in the elite Sayeret Matkal commando unit. He took part in various missions, such as rescuing the passengers on a Sabena [Belgian] airline who were hijacked to the Lod airport here in Israel by terrorists.
Now for the good news. It seems that Orly Levy Abecassis has served as the Queen Esther of our times --on Purim appropriately-- and rescued us from the nightmare of a minority government dependent on the hostile Arab parties who had already warned that they demand a high price be paid for supporting Gantz' would-be govt from outside. For instance, they ruled out any future major military action against the Hamas jihadi terrorists in the Gaza Strip.
Orly Levy, daughter of a Likud foreign minister, joined with Zvi Hauser and Yoaz Hendel in refusing to back Gantz in his endeavor to form a minority govt supported from outside by hostile Arab parties.
Whereas Hauser and Hendel belong to Blue-White and were elected on its list, Levy Abecassis was elected on a joint list of her party, Gesher, along with Labor and Meretz.


Labels: , , ,

Friday, January 17, 2020

Turkey Still Getting away with Murder -- The Next Iran?

Turkey in World War I carried out mass murder of Armenians who were numerous, even in the majority, in several areas of what is now the Turkish Republic. What is less known is that hundreds of thousands of ethnic Greeks and Assyrians --both Christian peoples-- were also slaughtered and driven from their homes during that war. After the war, when the new regime of Kemal Ataturk had taken over from the Ottoman Empire which --under the leadership of the so-called Young Turks, the Committtee for Unity and Progress -- had carried out genocide during the war, the new regime too carried out genocide and ethnic cleansing. For this service to Islam, so it was seen in Turkey at the time, Ataturk was given the title of Ghazi, glorious victor in jihad, in a holy war.* These post-war massacres and expulsions took place mainly in 1922, as from Smyrna. Before WW I, millions of non-Muslims who were not Turks lived in what was then called Asia Minor, or Anatolia or Turkey in Asia. By 1923, this large population was almost all gone. The Armenians were almost totally gone while some tens of thousands of ethnic Greeks still lived in Constantinople, known today under its Turkish name, Istanbul, and thousands of Assyrians kept on living in the southeast.

Turkey never had to pay for its crimes during WW I and the 1920s. It was believed to contain oil, petroleum, and for that reason or others, it was thought best not to bother or harass the Turks with accusations or punishments for their crimes. And when Ataturk imposed or tried to impose some secularizing reforms later in the 1920s, his position became firm in most Western public opinion. He was an admired figure in the West, including the USA. Turkey as such was admired too [a popular American song around 1950 featured the line: It's nobody's business but the Turks']. His successors in the late 1930s and in the 1940s were wise enough to keep out of WW II, although pro-German sentiment was strong. Hence, the new, supposedly secular Turkey was accepted into NATO in 1952 at the same time as Greece. Yet old habits die hard. In 1955, while both Turkey and Greece belonged to NATO, tens of thousands of ethnic Greeks were driven out of Istanbul and taken in by Greece.** Here we had a NATO member state performing ethnic cleansing on people who shared ethnicidentity with the people of another NATO member state. And NATO did nothing about it. Indeed, the Turks got away with murder both figuratively and literally.

With the rise to power of Rejep Tayyip Erdogan in late 2002, Islamist, jihadist inclinations were once again overt in the Turkish Republic. Ambitions of Ottoman imperial revival, called neo-Ottomanism, were revived and Erdogan's Turkey took a special interest in the Islamist, jihadist Hamas movement that took over the Gaza Strip in 2007. In 2010 he joined forces with Western partisans of Hamas and the Arab anti-Israel cause, including the American feminine outfit called Code Pink. They organized a so-called "Free Gaza" convoy of seven boats to supposedly bring needed goods to Gaza kept out by Israel's partial blockade of Hamas-ruled Gaza. This was a pretense for a  pro-Hamas undertaking. The supposedly needed goods in Gaza carried by the convoy included medications near to or past their expiration dates and assorted equipment, much of it what some Turkish businesses were willing to get rid of. The largest of the seven boats was a Turkish ferry that customarily crossed the Turkish straits.

As the convoy approached the coast of Gaza, Israel's navy warned it not to go further. Since the warning was not heeded, Israeli commandos landed from a helicopter on the ferry boat, the Mavi Marmara. But they were not prepared for the reception they got from the scores of jihadis on the craft, Turks and others. They were attacked with knives and clubs and a few guns. When more commandos got involved, the jihadis were overcome and ten Turkish jihadis were dead, one of them a dual Turkish-US citizen, Although the jihadis were violating a legitimate blockade, President Obama acted and spoke as it were Israel doing wrong. The story of the convoy and Obama's interference is a long, detailed one that will be skipped for now.

In following years, Turkey has claimed ownership of Greek territorial waters and successfully interfered in oil and gas exploration in those waters by Italian companies working with the Greeks. Likewise, Turkey has interfered in oil and gas exploration in Cypriot territorial waters, whereas it had already occupied northern Cyprus in 1974. About a month or so ago, Turkish warships chased away from Cypriot waters an Israeli scientific research ship working in cooperation with the Greek Cypriot Republic of Cyprus authorities.

Again, Turkey, falsely seen as a democratic Western country, has been getting away with murder. But  its offenses have gotten much less attention in the American press than they deserved. The commentator Yohanan Visser argues that Turkey is the next Iran. Here is part of his article bringing the story up to date:
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF), for the first time ever, added Turkey to the list of security threats in the annual national security assessment.
At the same time the IDF doesn’t see a confrontation with the Turkish army in 2020.
The addition of Turkey - a country that maintains diplomatic relations with Israel and once was an ally of the Jewish state - to the list of security threats is related to the bellicose actions by Turkish dictator Recep Tayyip Erdogan in the Middle East the IDF said in the assessment.
Erdogan routinely denounces Israel for its policies toward the Palestinian Arabs and uses to compare [
= often compares] the country to Nazi-Germany while also threatening Israel over a plan to build a pipeline in the Mediterranean Sea that would bring Israeli gas from the Leviathan gas field to Europe.
The Turkish leader last month signed a memorandum with Libya about the linking of their so-called economic zones in the Mediterranean Sea.
The deal that was clearly meant to prevent Israel, Greece and Cyprus from realizing their plan for the construction of the pipeline and to claim the expected gas reserves in these zones.
"Other international actors cannot conduct exploration activities in the areas marked in the Turkish-Libyan memorandum. Greek Cypriots, Egypt, Greece and Israel cannot establish a natural gas transmission line without Turkey's consent," Erdogan said after Israel signed the gas pipe deal with Greece and Cyprus.
The Turkish Foreign Ministry later summoned the Israeli ambassador in Ankara to tell him that the construction of the gas pipeline required Turkey’s approval and that there was no need for the pipe since there is already a similar pipe line from Azerbaijan to Turkey and from there to Europe. [Israel National News, 15 January 2020]
It may be needless to say, but if anyone is not aware, there is no legal substance to Turkey's claim to ownership of the maritime territory of the eastern Mediterranean or to hegemony over it. But apparently NATO is still letting Turkey, now under the Islamist tyrant Erdogan, get away with murder.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
References
For more info on the expulsions of 1922-23, see:
Ernest Hemingway, "On the Quai at Smyrna" and the epigraph to Chapter II, both in the collection In Our Time
George Horton, The Blight of Asia
Marjorie Housepian, The Smyrna Affair


** For info on the pogroms and expulsion of the ethnic Greeks from Istanbul [Constantinople] in 1955:
Called Eylul Olaylari in Turkish, these pogroms took place on 6-7 September 1955, and were staged by the government of Adnan Menderes.
Pappas Post [here]
wikipedia in English [here]
wikipedia in Hebrew [here]
Alfred de Zayas, the events according to international law [here]
Kathimerini [newspaper] [here]
youtube, still photos from the events [here]
Aykan Erdemir in Politico.eu [here]
Greek Reporter [here]
European Journal of Turkish Studies [here]
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
* On Ataturk's victories as Islamic victories & on the title of Ghazi, see:
Albert Avakian, "Pouvoir et Islam en Turquie  de 1919 a` 1960," Revue d'Histoire de la deuxie`me Guerre Mondiale et des Conflits Contemporains (vol 35, no. 137; 1985), pp90-91
- - - - - - - - - - - - -
Previous posts on Emet m'Tsiyon on modern Greek-Turkish events & the indulgent Western policy towards Turkey
http://ziontruth.blogspot.com/2011/02/more-on-us-pro-islam-pro-arab-policy.html

http://ziontruth.blogspot.com/2007/10/gem-of-absurdity-from-walt-mearsheimer.html
http://ziontruth.blogspot.com/2010/06/euro-hypocrites-forget-turkish-mass.html

http://ziontruth.blogspot.com/2018/01/mahmoud-abbas-tells-european-union-that.html
http://ziontruth.blogspot.com/2005/10/bolsheviks-for-jihad-genocide-stalins.html

Labels: , , , ,

Friday, November 29, 2019

The BBC Favors Islam & Muslims, according to Sikh Leader

BBC favoritism for Arabs and Muslims goes far back, maybe as far back as its founding in 1927. Likewise, the BBC. either openly or by omission, has long been hostile to Jews. After all, if the BBC omits from its broadcasts during the Shoah the news that organized, systematic mass murder of Jews is going on in Nazi-occupied territory, then that is obvious Judeophobia. For several reasons, but let us consider just two: If people in the BBC's home country, that is the United Kingdom, do not know about the Shoah, then they will not demand that their government do anything about it. The British Jews too may remain in the dark. Of course, it is and was the duty of the BBC to inform British people about what is going on in the world, and during WW2 in particular, to inform them of what is happening in the Nazi-ruled countries. One would think that news about the Shoah would have increased the disgust of British people for the Nazi Germans. But this cannot happen if people do not know about the ongoing Shoah.

On the other hand, during WW2 people in occupied countries often depended on BBC radio broadcasts to inform them. That included many Jews. If the Jews do not know about the ongoing Shoah, then they are not likely to take steps to save themselves or to fight the Wehrmacht and SS or the local armed forces that collaborated with the Germans, such as the SS Handschar Division which was made up of Bosnian Muslims and had been recruited  for the Germans by Haj Amin el-Husseini, the top leader of the Palestinian Arabs at the time. This SS division plus the Skanderbeg SS division, recruited among ethnic Albanian Muslims in Kossovo, were guilty for mass slaughter of Serbs, Jews and Gypsies in that order [this applies more to the Handschar, as far as I know].

At the same time, it has been BBC policy to whitewash wrongs done by Muslims, whether Arabs or Pakistanis, etc. This policy caused a minor storm lately when a leader of the Sikh religion in the UK, Lord Indarjit Singh [he is a British peer] quit his long time  participation on a  radio show focused on religion, called Thought for a Day on BBC Radio Four. Here is a summary of highlights of Lord Singh's complaints:
Celebrated interfaith activist Lord Indarjit Singh has sensationally quit BBC Radio 4 after accusing it of behaving like the "thought police". He alleges that the corporation tried to prevent him discussing a historical Sikh religious figure who stood up to Muslim oppression -- in case it caused offence to Muslims, despite a lack of complaints.
The Sikh peer, who has been a contributor on Radio Four's Thought For The Day programme for more than three decades, is also accusing Radio Four bosses of "prejudice and intolerance" and over-sensitivity in relation to its coverage of Islam, after he says he was "blocked" from discussing the forced conversion of Hindus to Islam, under the Mughal emperors in 17th century India.
 - - - - - - - - - - - -
The segment, originally aired on November 28, 2018 -- and in spite of Singh's script containing no criticism of Islam -- is the latest in a long line of suspect BBC decisions enforced by seemingly over-zealous producers. [Gatestone Institute]
- - - - - - - - - - - - -ss
Subsequently, Lord Singh told the London Times:
 Another time "when I wanted to include the words 'the one God of us all' [central to Sikh teachings], I was told I could not mention this 'because it might offend Muslims.'" . . . . 
Of course, overlapping with the BBC's pro-Muslim favoritism is its anti-Israel hostility. See at link:
here.

Labels: , , ,

Wednesday, October 30, 2019

The Rights of the President: Joe Biden, Trump and the Ukraine

The Rights of the President by Leon Kozak

Mr Trump, as President, has the Constitutional duty to enforce the laws of the land and to lead the way in the conduct of US foreign affairs. Thus, he is entitled to investigate acts that could be illegal under US law including the Foreign  Corrupt Practices Act which addresses certain acts of US persons taking place in foreign countries. Moreover,  a treaty with the Ukraine specifies that the US may ask the Ukraine to assist the US in investigating  potential criminal behavior of US persons under US law and the Ukraine is required to comply.

The President has significant discretion under the Constitution  in his use of foreign aid as a means of conducting foreign affairs and may withhold, delay or make it s release conditional in many circumstances.

In my view, the above Presidential powers are applicable even  if the target of the investigation is a potential political opponent of the President as long as there is at least some colorable claim that illegal activity under US law involving a foreign country or foreign officials  may have taken place. The threat to withhold US aid is a perfectly legitimate means of using these Presidential powers in the international context. Although  President Trump  is adamant that there was in fact no”quid pro quo” (ie, “quid”-investigate Biden in order to “quo”- get military aid from the US), it would not matter if there were  in fact a quid pro quo.


Was there at least a colorable claim that some illegal activity took place involving VP Biden? Here are some facts which make it clear that the colorable claim test has easily been met.

—Mr Shokin was the chief prosecutor in the Ukraine during some of the years of the Obama administration. His office had commenced an investigation of Burisma Holdings a Ukraine-based energy group. The investigation raised questions as to whether Burisma had violated the criminal corruption laws of the Ukraine and other countries. Officials of Burisma were reported to be concerned about the investigation.


—Mr Shokin has indicated in a signed affidavit  and in other documents that he was told to exercise caution in  proceeding with this investigation because of the connection of Burisma to powerful interests in the US government. Mr Shokin has also stated that he believes he was dismissed as prosecutor at the insistence of US government officials because of his office's investigation into Burisma. 

—Hunter Biden (son  of former VP Joe Biden) was given a Board position by Burisma during the years of the Obama administration. He was paid at least $50,000.00 per month as compensation for  serving in this position and much more for undisclosed activities. Prior to taking on this position, Hunter Biden had no experience in the energy sector, in corporate governance or in Eastern Europe. Hunter Biden admitted in a television interview that he likely would not have obtained the position but for his family connection to VP Joe Biden.

—-VP Joe Biden was given primary responsibility for dealing with Ukraine matters by Pres Obama.

—-VP Joe  Biden knew about Hunter s involvement with some company in Ukraine and told him to make sure he knew what he was doing. 

—-The staff of VP Joe Biden was informed by the staff of Pres Obama and by certain State Department officials that Hunter Biden's Ukraine activities represented at least a perception of a conflict of interest (and could be an actual conflict of interest) when considering VP Joe Biden's responsibilities with respect to the Ukraine.

—-At some point, VP Joe Biden flew to the Ukraine on official business. (The VP flew on Air Force #2. Hunter Biden joined him on the flight.) VP Joe Biden informed the government  of the Ukraine that the government needed to dismiss Mr  Shokin immediately. VP Joe Biden later admitted in a public conference (shown on television numerous times) that in the course of that visit to the Ukraine he informed the Ukrainian government officials that if Mr Shokin were not dismissed before VP Biden headed back home (six hours hence), the US would withhold $1 billion in foreign aid intended for the Ukraine.

—-Mr Shokin was dismissed on that day before VP Joe Biden left the country

[Thanks to Leon Kozak, Esq, for allowing circulation of this well-reasoned essay]
[Mr Kozak is an attorney living in northern New Jersey]
See two previous posts on Emet m'Tsiyon [here] and [here] and [here]

Labels: , ,

Sunday, October 20, 2019

The Real Joe Biden; two videos to show his reality

Here are two prize videos showing the real Joe Biden:

1) Biden boasts before an audience at the prestigious Council on Foreign Relations that he had made the two top Ukrainian officials, of several years ago, Pres. Poroshenko and Prime Minister Yatseniuk, bend to his demand to fire an investigating prosecutor. The prosecutor was investigating corruption at the Burisma energy company, on the board of directors of which his son Hunter sat. To be sure, Biden claims that he himself was fighting corruption in Ukraine and that the dismissed prosecutor had not been "solid." Steve Hilton of Foxnews reported that Biden did various favors for Burisma, such as getting a law passed with some of his Democratic friends in the Senate that facilitated the import into the USA of natural gas from Burisma.
The part of the discussion on the Ukraine comes at about 50:30 on the video, if the video does not open up at the desired point. See video here.

2) Joe Biden's hoof in mouth video. It is very short but telling [here]

Also see our two previous posts on Biden exerting improper pressure on Ukraine
1--  Biden pressured Ukraine to vote against Israel. See post here.

2-- This post shows how Biden was used by Obama to force Ukraine to change its vote on UN SC res 2334 in December 2016, after the last presidential election. The resoluton in question was very anti-Israel. Ukraine wanted to abstain but Obama wanted it to vote in favor eventhough the USA was going to abstain itself. I explain why: Obama wanted to protect the sacred anti-Israel narrative [here]

Labels: , ,

Sunday, September 29, 2019

Biden Pressured the Ukraine on Another Matter -- to Vote against Israel

New Material added 10-12-2019
When Biden pressured Ukraine 
to vote against Israel after the 
2016 presidential election [here]

Senator Joe Biden --a Democrat-- is at the center of an energetic effort by his party's members of the House of Representatives to impeach President Trump. The impeachment effort focuses on a phone call between Trump and Volodymyr Zelensky, the new president of the Ukraine. Without reviewing the Democrats' charges against Trump, we point out that President Trump and his supporters such as Rudy Giuliani, former US Attorney in New York City and former mayor of New York, have accused Biden of pressuring the previous Ukrainian leadership --before Zelensky's election-- to dismiss a prosecutor who was investigating a Ukrainian company, Burisma, an energy company, in which Biden's son, Hunter Biden, sat on the board of directors. Now just how and why it came to be that Biden Junior was appointed to the Board of a Ukrainian energy concern when he had little or no expertise in the energy field [oil and gas, etc] nor did he know the Ukrainian or Russian languages, is a matter of great and relevant curiosity. Maybe somebody at the company, Burisma, thought that having the younger Biden on the Board would give the company or maybe the government of Ukraine, a certain influence in Washington on policy making in the energy field or in regard to Burisma in particular or in favor of the Ukrainian government of that time, approximately 2014-2016. Young Biden was supposed to be paid $50,000 per month by Burisma for his services on the Board.

An interesting question. And did Joe Biden pressure the Ukrainian govt to dismiss a prosecutor investigating Burisma? Biden did boast about successfully pressuring or intimidating or blackmailing the Ukrainian leadership of the time in a public speech which was delivered, as far as I know, before the Council on Foreign Relations, an influential and prestigious US organization. A video on the internet shows Biden boasting of his successful extortion of the Ukrainian govt: I gave them six hours [to dismiss the offending prosecutor or US loan guarantees in the amount of $1.5 billion would be withheld].

Interesting questions but be they as they may, I intend now to show that Biden applying pressure on the Ukraine was his practice in his capacity as President Obama's designated liaison between his administration and the Ukrainian govt. Hence Biden was in a good position to apply pressure on the Ukraine and indeed he was responsible for dealing with the Ukraine under Obama and thus his relations with the country had a certain official status.

In fact, in the last month of Obama's presidency in 2016 late in December, Biden served his boss, Obama, in threatening the Ukraine on another matter, the UN Security Council res. 2334, which was a very anti-Israel resolution, essentially saying that Jews/Israelis had no right to live across the 1949 Green Line, even in Jerusalem in places, neighborhoods, where Jews had lived before 1947. This episode seems to support the Trump-Giuliani version of events.

My post on Biden and Obama's role in pressuring the Ukraine on UN SC res. 2334 is here.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -REMARKS BELOW ADDED 10-12-2019 - - - - - - - - -
What a Ukrainian member of parliament & former Ukrainian security chief, Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, said in the WSJ about the Biden-Trump Affair
Serious allegations have been made in the U.S. and Ukraine, including that Ukrainian government officials and organizations assisted Hillary Clinton’s campaign in 2016 and that Burisma, a major Ukrainian gas company, hired Hunter Biden, Joe Biden’s son, for cynical purposes. Regardless of the implications of these charges within American politics, Ukraine has a responsibility to investigate them completely and transparently.
First, as I have insisted for more than two years, we must resolve the allegation that Ukrainian officials interfered in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. If we find that Ukrainian laws were broken, the perpetrators here must be prosecuted swiftly, to the fullest extent of the law.
Second, Ukraine must resolve the allegations regarding Burisma. As the former head of the Security Service of Ukraine, our version of the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation, I know there are many accusations of corruption against this company.
It isn’t clear whether Ukrainian officials meddled in the American election, but Parliament must find out. We also do not know if Hunter Biden was complicit in Burisma’s alleged corruption, or why he was appointed to the board of a Ukrainian company. The allegation that Burisma arranged its relationship to the younger Mr. Biden by donating to a U.S. think tank is merely a small part of the larger question about its activities.
[Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, Wall Street JournalOct. 10, 2019]

Labels: , , , ,

Monday, May 20, 2019

The Truth against Rashida Tlaib's Lies

New congresswoman Rashida Tlaib is very devoted to her Arab heritage and to Arab historical grievances, which are sometimes true or partly true or often false and often totally hyperbolic. It is curious that both Tlaib and her comrade, Ilhan Omar, have made strange accusations against Jews. Omar is notorious for claiming --albeit in 2012-- that "Israel hypnotized the world. May Allah awaken the people and help them see the evil doings of Israel."  And she more recently accused American Jews of being more loyal to Israel than the USA, also  accusing American Jews of forcing congressmen and senators of the USA to declare allegiance to a foreign power, meaning Israel, whereas both Tlaib and Omar champion Muslim interests abroad. Of course they both seem to say provocative things once a week or once every other week. So it's hard to keep up and get it all straight in one's mind.

Now, Tlaib's latest provocation was a rant, a rather short one, in which she turned modern Middle Eastern history upside down. She claimed that the Palestinian Arabs had helped Jews obtain a safe haven:
“ … when I think of the Holocaust, and the tragedy of the Holocaust, and the fact that it was my ancestors—Palestinians—who lost their land and some lost their lives, their livelihood, their human dignity, their existence in many ways, have been wiped out, and some people’s passports … just all of it was in the name of trying to create a safe haven for Jews, post-the Holocaust, post-the tragedy and the horrific persecution of Jews across the world at that time. And I love the fact that it was my ancestors that provided that, right, in many ways, but they did it in a way that took their human dignity away and it was forced on them.” [here]

One of the things that we can derive from Tlaib's remarks is that the Palestinian Arabs were victims of the Holocaust or Shoah as we call it in Hebrew. Rather than being victims of it, however, Palestinian Arabs were perpetrators. The top leadership of the Palestinian Arabs, Haj Amin al-Husayni [el-Husseini] were pro-Nazi and in fact Husayni spent most of the war years in the Nazi-fascist domain in Europe. Husayni regularly broadcast pro-Nazi genocidal propaganda towards Jews in Arabic over Radio Berlin in Arabic. In one of his broadcasts he called on the Arabs to: Kill Jews wherever you find them. . . . He and his entourage operated out of a headquarters in Berlin that the Germans put at his disposal and worked from there to persuade Muslims in Europe, especially Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union, to collaborate with the Nazis. He was successful in helping the Germans recruit an SS division [the Handschar] among the Bosnian Muslims, which is one of the reasons for the bitterness of the Bosnian Serbs against the Bosnian Muslims in the Yugoslav civil war of the 1990s. This SS division helped the Nazis slaughter Serbs, Jews and Gypsies. For that reason, the post-war Yugoslav government put Husayni's name on a UN list of war criminals that they wanted tried by the UN or the Allies. Husayni also worked his influence on the Germans to get them to prevent Jews --including Jewish children-- from leaving the Nazi-fascist domain. Among other things, he and other Arab leaders urged the Germans to extend their persecution of Jews to Jews living in Arab-ruled countries. And so on.

So the Palestinian Arabs were hardly opposed, as a group, to the German Nazi extermination project against the Jews. The problem was not only Husayni. His entourage in Germany was made up of scions of leading Palestinian Arab families. Now before we get into more tedious detail, which you can find at the linked articles and blog posts, we may ask did they feel regret after the war. Tlaib asserts "it was my ancestors—Palestinians—who lost their land and some lost their lives, their livelihood, their human dignity, their existence in many ways, have been wiped out . . . . all of it was in the name of trying to create a safe haven for Jews, post-the Holocaust, post-the tragedy . . . . I love the fact that it was my ancestors that provided that . . . . in many ways"

The truth be told, after the war the Palestinian Arabs as a group did not feel regret or remorse for the mass murder of the Jews. After all, their top leader Husayni had been applauding it and urging Arabs to murder Jews "wherever you find them." So the Arabs did not provide a safe haven for Jews or work to that end. They tried to prevent the establishment of a Jewish state in the ancient Jewish homeland. With the encouragement of the British government, under the Labour Party at that time, and the encouragement of most of the US State Department and CIA, and parts of the French government of the time. And most notably for the issue of Tlaib's claims, they applauded perpetrators of the mass murder of Jews.
Take the case of one Tscherim Soobzokov, a Circassian Muslim and Soviet citizen before WW2. When the Germans came to the northern Caucasus, Soobzokov joined the Einsatzgruppen, mobile mass murder squads that slaughtered Jews in towns and cities of the occupied USSR, mainly in Belarus and Ukraine of today. He had been recruited into the SS under the rule of Heinrich Himmler. It is curious that during WW One and the Armenian genocide, Circassian mass murder units had worked under the Ottoman Empire to slaughter Armenians
After WW2 Soobzokov desperately wanted to escape Soviet punishment for treason/Nazi collaboration/. He made his way to Egypt with Egyptian government aid and was sent by the Egyptians to Jordan, then Transjordan. 
Now, how was this mass murderer received by Palestinian Arabs in Jordan? 

"Soobzokov's arrival in Jordan coincided with the first Arab-Israeli war and . . . . Soobzokov made another practical alliance; the  Palestine refugee organizations could be a promising connection for an ingenious man.  Mahamet Perchich in his statement . . . wrote: 'During my stay in Jordan, it was 1949, I was witness of a conversation between Tscherim Soobzokov and the head of the Palestinian Arabs refugee camp, when Mr Soobzokov told the Arabs about his activities during World War II. As part of his story Mr Tscherim Soobzokov told the Arabs that if all those Jews he liquidated during World War II were now in Palestine, all the Arabs in the camp would not be enough to drink the blood of all those Jews. The same day the head of the camp gave an evening of festivities in honor of Mr Tscherim Soobzokov.' 
"And Danil Gussov . . . . wrote: 'While in Jordan Mr Soobzokov used to show Palestine refugee Arab leaders [sic] his documents with photos certifying his membership in Nazi execution commandos and that he was a killer of Jews in World War II, for which Mr Soobzokov received material help from Arab leaders . . .'" [These testimonies come from the book by Howard Blum, Wanted: The Search for Nazis in America (New York: Quadrangle 1977), see pp 60-61, 67. Quadrangle publishers was owned at the time by the New York Times].
It is clear that Palestinian Arabs knew at the time about the Shoah massacres which were reported  in the European press at the time. Or, in the unlikely possbility that they did not know about the Shoah, when they were informed about it, as Soobzokov recounted his role in it, they did learn about it. And in this case they approved of it and even celebrated it. The story of Soobzokov in Howard Blum's book  makes this clear. So Tlaib is either grossly ignorant of how Palestinian Arabs felt at the time --just a few years after the ovens of Treblinka were shut down-- or she is a gross liar. She may be both. One does not rule out the other.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
For additional info on Haj Amin al-Husayni [usually spelled el-Husseini], see posts on the Emet m'Tsiyon blog for lists of other books and articles.

Rashida Tlaib is trying to rob Jews of their history [here] - Yisrael Medad

Fake History: Rashida Tlaib's Grotesque Distortion. . . [here] - Lahav Harkov

The Myth that Palestinian Arabs Helped Jews in WW2 [here]

CNN Anchor Corrects Tlaib: Palestinian Arab Leaders of the WW2 Period Sided with Hitler [here]

Labels: , ,