Why the So-Called ‘Palestinians’ Don’t Deserve a State

For decades the two-state solution has been repeatedly floated as the preferred goal of peace between Israel and the Arabs (‘Palestinians’). Yet it has never been realized. Accusations have been tossed around by various voices laying blame on both sides for the failure of the two-state solution to be implemented.

In light of the recent summit between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Trump, it would appear the long standing position of the US promoting the two-state solution is fizzling out. In my opinion this is long overdue.

Simply put the so-called ‘Palestinians’ don’t deserve a state.

Allow me to make the case.


In order to have an appreciation for today’s stalemate, it’s important to understand how it came about.

The concept of a two-state solution has already been attempted with the 1947 UN partition of two states, one Arab, one Jewish. (the original two-state solution) It failed. Why? The Arab nations rejected and ignored the resolution, attacking the fledgling Jewish state one day after it declared independence in 1948. Six decades and seven wars later (three with Hamas) what has changed?

A dramatic shift took place in 1967 when Yasser Arafat decided the Arabs who were displaced from the 1948 and 1967 wars deserved to have their own unique identity. He renamed them “Palestinians.” For the record before 1967 the term “Palestinians” referred to Jews. Walid Shoebat, an Arab who was living in Jericho during the ’67 war said “On June 4 I went to sleep as an Arab. The next day, without moving anywhere I am suddenly a “Palestinian.”

Arafat’s campaign included more than just an identity change for these newly renamed ‘Palestinians.’ He demanded an independent state, and laid claim to the entire area west of the Jordan River which Israel captured during the war. This is biblical Judea/Samaria, commonly referred to as the West Bank. As far as Arafat was concerned all this land was ‘Palestinian’ land, in spite of the fact International law affirms any land captured during a defensive war belongs to the victor, which was Israel.

His original goal when he founded the PLO in 1964 was to ‘liberate’ (destroy) all of Israel and replace it with a single ‘Palestinian’ state. Since Israel captured Judea/Samaria during the Six Day War he now added this to his goal.

The Age of Terror

After the 1967 war other terror groups sprung up including, Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (1967), Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine (1969), Islamic Jihad (1979), Hezbollah (1985) Hamas (1987), and several others. For the past 15 years the Fatah Party has been the dominant party in Judea/Samaria. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is the party Chairman.

Each of these groups is dedicated to ‘liberating’ (destroying) the state of Israel.

So why don’t the ‘Palestinians’ deserve a state? First off their claim to the land has no basis in reality. It’s not as though Arabs have no history in the land. They do. However the greater and more historical association belongs to the Jews. The Bible tells us it is this very land which was given to the Jews as “an everlasting inheritance.”  This land, including Jerusalem is the ancestral home of the Jewish people, superseding ‘Palestinian’ claims by thousands of years. This is a simple indisputable fact.

Present Day

However, let’s transition from the legitimate historical connection the Jews have to this land to present day.

Let’s examine today’s Israeli/Palestinian relations a little closer.

Israel has made several attempts to appease the ‘Palestinians,’ through agreements and offers. In 2000 for example, Prime Minister Ehud Barak made an unprecedented offer to Yasser Arafat. It included turning over roughly 99% of Judea/Samaria (aka: West Bank), dividing Jerusalem, and compensation for so-called “refugees.” Additionally, the Gaza Strip would be contiguously linked, effectively splitting Israel in two. By any definition this was a huge sacrifice on the part of Israel. President Clinton who was brokering the negotiations later said he “couldn’t believe how good the offer was.” Yet Arafat rejected it and the talks collapsed.  Clinton laid blame squarely where it belonged, on Arafat.

Why was such an incredibly generous offer rejected? Simple, the Muslims refuse to accept the existence of a Jewish state under any circumstances, no matter what the borders are. They are firmly convinced every square inch of the state of Israel is Muslim land. Thus, to accept the existence of a sovereign Jewish state on land which they consider theirs is viewed as blasphemy, which is punishable by death. Never mind that they have no legitimate claim to the land.

Not only do they refuse to accept the existence of Israel, or peacefully co-exist, they have mounted a decade’s long campaign to destroy the Jewish state.

Doctrines of Destruction

For example, look at some points in their founding charters:

Fatah Charter (party of Mahmoud Abbas)

Article 12- “complete liberation of Palestine, and eradication of Zionist economic, political, military and cultural existence”

Article 13- “Establishing an independent democratic state with complete sovereignty on all Palestinian lands, and Jerusalem is its capital city”- Armed struggle is a strategy and not a tactic, and the Palestinian Arab People’s armed revolution is a decisive factor in the liberation fight and in uprooting the Zionist existence, and this struggle will not cease unless the Zionist state is demolished and Palestine is completely liberated.”  


PLO Charter

Article 9- “armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine”

Article 19- “The partition of Palestine in 1947 and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal”

Hamas Charter

Preamble: “Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it, just as it obliterated others before it.”

Article 6-  “The Islamic  Resistance  Movement  is  a  distinguished  Palestinian movement, who’s allegiance is to Allah, and  whose  way  of  life  is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine.”

Article 13- “…There is no solution for the Palestinian problem except by Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are but a waste of time, an exercise in futility.”

With the exception of Hezbollah in Lebanon, these three organizations are today’s main players in the conflict. Their charters represent the principles upon which each organization was founded. Based on the quotes from each of their charters it is unquestionable none of them seek a two state solution, or peaceful co-existence with a Jewish state of Israel. They all seek its destruction.

Ignoring the Truth

Yet, instead of calling out these organizations world leaders and the UN continue to blame Israel’s construction of homes as the main obstacle to a peace agreement. Recently the UN made this their official position with the passage of resolution 2334. Their action ignores the Palestinian’s indisputable requirement of the annihilation of Israel. Keep in mind-

  • Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has repeatedly said he will never accept Israel as a Jewish state.
  • He glorifies those who murder innocent Israeli civilians by naming parks and schools after them.  
  • The PA pays large salaries to jailed murderers of Israelis.
  • When young Arabs stab Israeli’s or run them over with vehicles, Abbas refuses to condemn such terror.
  • He considers every drop of Muslim blood holy in its pursuit of Palestine’s liberation. In other words he is blessing murder in cold blood, while world leaders consider him a ‘moderate.’ Calling him a ‘moderate’ is redefining the very meaning of the word.
  • Curriculum in Palestinian schools teaches students the Jews stole their land, and they should strive to retake every inch of ‘Palestine,’ by jihad. Moreover, they are taught it is holy to murder Jews and be a martyr for Allah.


Some might suggest the terrorists don’t represent the Arab Palestinian population as a whole. If this is true why has there not been any outcry from the general Palestinian population against the terror? Why has there not been a single demonstration for peace with Israel on the Palestinian street? Where are the editorials condemning the terrorist in the Arab Palestinian press?

If the Palestinians are committed to peacefully co-exist with a Jewish state of Israel shouldn’t we see visible evidence of this? Instead, we see continued terror amid calls for Israel to cease construction. World leaders and the UN are ignoring the Palestinians true agenda. They need to realize the true obstacle to peace is not Israel’s construction. In 1948 or 1967 there were no “settlements,” nor were there any settlements in 1964 when the PLO was founded. Yet even though the land areas have changed, the goal was the same then as today- rejection of Israel’s right to exist.  The ‘Palestinians’ must be held accountable for this. Saying construction is the obstacle to peace makes as much sense as blaming the Jews for the Holocaust.   

The reality is the Arab Palestinians need a civilized gut check. Until such time as they renounce all terror, recognize Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state with Jerusalem as its capital, drop all future land claims and amend their charters, they are undeserving of a state.

A civilized world should not reward murderers committed to destroy their presumed peace partner with nationhood. Moreover, Israel has every right to oppose sacrificing precious land to unreformed terrorists. Such action would be tantamount to handing bullets to your assassin.

In the Middle East “News” Has Become “Opinion”

When we watch, listen or read news are we entitled to get objective reporting? To such a question most might say yes news should be objective. In other words it should be unbiased, neutral, non-partisan. Yet is that what we are getting?

In far too many situations we are not.

A glaring example of lack of objectivity is coverage of the conflict between Israel and those identified as “Palestinians.”

Let’s take a closer look at this situation and drill down a bit on some popular terms used by media.


It may surprise some to know that prior to 1967 the term “Palestinians” referred to Jews who lived in their ancient biblical homeland, which the Roman Emperor Hadrian renamed “Philistia.”  This term is Latin for “Philistine,” which became transformed to Palestinian. Contrary to rumor there is no connection between the ancient Philistines and today’s so-called “Palestinians.”

So who are todays “Palestinians?”

After Israel’s rebirth in 1948 many Arabs became displaced due to a variety of circumstances, not the least of which was their desire to destroy the fledgling Jewish state. After Israel defeated the surrounding Arab nations who conveniently ignored UN resolution 181 calling for one Arab and one Jewish, many Arabs ended up nationless in no-man’s land.

Subsequently, Israel successfully staved off another attempt to annihilate it in the Six Day War of 1967. As a result victorious Israel took control of additional land, and the plight of these Arabs became more visible, thanks in part to widespread media coverage and a campaign waged by the leader of the recently  formed PLO- Yasser Arafat.

After the Six Day War the defeated Arab nations refused to repatriate their Arab brethren. In his effort to gain exposure and empathy Arafat renamed these displaced Arabs “Palestinians.” A revisionist cottage industry was born and took root, without regard to its accuracy.

In point of fact there has never been an indigenous people known as “Palestinians.” It’s “fake news.”

Occupation or Occupied Palestinian Territories

This typically refers to the land west of the Jordan River, up to the so-called “green line,” which includes the eastern portion of Jerusalem.  

For anyone familiar with the Bible this land is known as Judea & Samaria. It is part of the ancient homeland of the Jewish people. The Bible also makes clear in several places the land was given to Abraham and his descendants- the Jews. In an attempt to delegitimize the Jews, some say both Arabs and Jews are children of Abraham. However, twice in the Bible (Genesis 17:20/21 and Romans 9:7) the promises of God are specifically confirmed through Isaac.

Yet, in spite of Scripture’s historical account, the so-called “Palestinians,” claim Israel is illegally occupying their land. In point of fact, Israel fought defensive wars in 1948 and 1967. During the 1967 war Israel captured the land west of the Jordan River, which had been illegally occupied by Jordan since 1948. Yet where were the cries of “occupation” during this 19 year period? International law states that any territory captured in a defensive war belongs to the victor. In this case that means Israel.

Thus it is factually incorrect (“fake news”) to define this land as “occupied Palestinian territories.”  Using such terminology is not news, its opinion. Many refer to this same area as the West Bank. This also delegitimizes Israel’s’ right to the land. I understand why some may refer to it as such, however using terms such as “Occupied Palestinian territory,” can be seen as offensive to many, and renders any media outlet referring to it as such from being seen as objective.

East Jerusalem

First off, there is no such city as “East Jerusalem.” Jerusalem has a 4,000 year history. During this time it has always been known as Jerusalem. “East” Jerusalem is yet another example of a term used to delegitimize the rightful claim the Jewish people have to their ancient and eternal capital city. The Old City is located in the eastern part of Jerusalem, which the Arabs wish to steal from the Jews as capital of their presumed Palestinian state.  In their revisionist narrative the Arabs (so-called Palestinians) have gone so far as to suggest there has never been any proof of a Jewish connection to Jerusalem. (again- “fake news”)

The UN has even gotten into revising history by passing resolutions stating Temple Mount and the Western Wall are Muslim holy sites, rather than Jewish.  Shame on them.

It has been said “….a lie told often enough becomes truth.”

As an institution media has an obligation to distinguish between news and opinion. There is no question opinion pieces have a legitimate role to play within media. However, when media outlets report news by using terminology reflecting personal bias, (or opinion) they cease being a credible news source.

Terms such as “Palestinians,” “Occupied Palestinian Territories,” and “East Jerusalem,” belong in opinion pieces, not objective news.

Mr. Obama, your legacy is secure

The recent reluctance of the US to veto UN resolution 2234, which essentially singles out Israeli construction as the main obstacle to a two state solution has been seen by some as the final nail in the coffin in a combative relationship between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu that has endured throughout both terms of the Obama presidency.

While this may be obvious, I doubt it will silence those who are still convinced Obama is a strong, reliable friend to Israel. Indeed, in his post UN resolution justification speech at the State Department, Secretary of State John Kerry said “no American administration has done more for the security of Israel than Barack Obama.”

Such self-promoting observations make convincing sound bites, regardless of their accuracy. However, since the door is about to close permanently on the Obama administration, it might be worthwhile to check Kerry’s comment against the facts.

A stroll down memory lane of the Obama tenure recalls the following:

Right out the starting gate his first phone call to a foreign leader in January, 2009 was to Mahmould Abbas, letting him know he was the first foreign leader he called as President of the United States.

In June 2009 his first foreign speech was delivered in Cairo where he signaled a new era in US-Muslim relations. He made the following comments during the speech:

“the United States does not accept the continued legitimacy of Israeli settlements.”

“they (Palestinians) endure daily humiliation, large and small, that come with occupation.”

He signaled a new approach toward Iran (the world’s biggest sponsor of terrorism) by letting Israel know their flexibility toward the Palestinians would influence Obama’s approach to Iran. In effect he was invoking diplomatic blackmail against Israel.

He demanded Israel sign the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, and threatened to expose a 40 year old confidential understanding between Israel and the US about its Dimona nuclear facility if Israel didn’t sign the NNPT. Israel did not. Obama retaliated by interrupting routine travel of Israeli nuclear scientists between the two countries.

In 2010 after seeing a clear pattern of hostility toward Israel, over 50 retired US Generals signed a letter to Obama demanding he stop treating Israel so poorly and treat them like ally they are.

Also in 2010, in an unprecedented move, both houses of Congress having seen the same hostile pattern,  signed letters telling Obama to stop treating Israel so poorly.

Apparently Obama didn’t get the message. The same year he walked out on a White House meeting with Netanyahu, leaving him sitting alone. While Obama had dinner with his wife Michelle Netanyahu was let in and out of a side door to the White House with no diplomatic fanfare.

Subsequent to this Mahmoud Abbas was welcomed with full diplomatic protocol and fanfare.

In 2011 Egypt ousted Hosni Mubarak, a 30 year US ally, replacing him with Mohammed Morsi, a Muslim fundamentalist and member of the Muslim Brotherhood. Obama openly supported Morsi. This brought a further chill in US-Israel relations.  A little over a year later the Egyptians voted Morsi out. Obama voiced his opposition to Morsi’s purging. Today, Morsi remains in prison.

In May 2011 while Netanyahu was airborne in route to Washington, to address a joint session of Congress Obama spoke to Congress urging any two state solution should be based on ’67 lines, with mutual land swaps. The timing of Obama’s speech was seen as an effort to sabotage Netanyahu. Following Obama’s speech, in an unprecedented bi-partisan move, Republican and Democratic leaders condemned Obama’s speech and publically distanced themselves from the President.  When Netanyahu delivered his speech to the joint session of Congress he received 30 standing ovations, which was largely seen as a rebuke of President Obama, who along with Vice President Biden and John Kerry, were noticeably absent during Netanyahu’s speech.

In March 2013 in Ramallah Mahmoud Abbas referred to Israel’s 1948 rebirth as “the Nakba,” (the catastrophe), while Obama stood next to him in silence.

During Operation Protective Edge, the 2014 war with Hamas (who has fired over 15,000 rockets into Israel against innocent civilians) Obama threatened to stop US arms supply to Israel.

In 2015 Israel was gearing up for new elections. Jeremy Bird, a democratic strategist who helped the 2012 Obama campaign, was dispatched to Israel in an effort to help defeat Netanyahu. This brought harsh criticism of Obama for what was seen as a direct effort to influence Israeli elections. In the end the effort failed as Netanyahu was re-elected. Today he has become the longest serving Prime Minister in Israel’s history.

Finally, in what was called by many as the single most damaging decision Obama made is the 2015 Iran nuclear deal. No other move has caused greater concern for Israel’s security than this agreement. While there remains robust disagreement on the deal’s justification, there is little doubt Israel has the most to lose.

To be fair to Obama, there has been an occasional bright spot. For example the US did award Israel a $38 billion 10 year defense package, which is the largest ever. Yet,  it does part from previous such packages in that by year three 100% of the funds must be spent in the US. Prior agreements allowed Israel to award up to 24% of the funds to their own defense contractors.  The absence of this option will have a severe impact on small – medium companies and put thousands of Israeli’s out of work.

There are numerous other examples of how the Obama administration has been a blight on relations with the strongest ally the US has in the Middle East, however I believe the short list contained herein constitutes more than enough facts to render Kerry’s words about the Obama Administration commitment to Israel’s security little more than what they are- mere words, with little or no facts to corroborate them. The reality shows the Obama administration has been one of, if not the most hostile ever toward Israel.

Meanwhile 4 more Israeli’s were just murdered in the ongoing wave of Palestinian terrorism which began in October, 2015. To date President Obama has not held Palestinian leadership accountable for a single Israeli death.

As the old saying goes, with “friends” like this…..

President Obama, your legacy has been secured. Time for an actual friend of Israel to take over…..

What Kerry Should Have Said

When Sec. of State John Kerry delivered his comprehensive statement on the Arab-Israel conflict in front of a safe audience at the State Department, he took over an hour to defend the decision of the United States to in essence allow passage of the recent UN anti-Israel resolution by abstaining from it, rather than adhering to the long standing policy of the US to veto such resolutions.

The general thrust of his message was to chastise Israel for building “settlements” on land defined as “occupied Palestinian territory,” as the main obstacle preventing a two-state solution.

In addition to focusing attention on criticizing Israel Kerry failed to mention some critically important points which are clearly more central to why a two state solution has failed to materialize.

For example, the most obvious is the fact that Mahmoud Abbas, President of the Palestinian Authority, who is also seen by most of the world as a moderate, has steadfastly said he will never recognize Israel as a Jewish state. As I see it, this alone is the single biggest non-starter for a two state solution. While Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s  consistent commitment to accepting a Palestinian state, demonstrates his desire for mutual recognition, Mr. Kerry conveniently omitted Abbas’s destructive statements on refusing to accept Israel’s right to exist.

How realistic is a two state solution when one side won’t even recognize the other’s right to exist?

Mr. Kerry emphatically stated the US opposition to terror and incitement. However, empty statements like this have been made on numerous occasions by the American administration. What good are such statements if they are not backed up by tangible action?

The PA receives hundreds of millions of dollars in financial aid from many countries, most of it from the US. The PA in turn uses a portion of international aid to line the pockets of terrorists who have murdered Israeli’s with huge salaries. This financial windfall allows their families a living standard which is 5 times greater than the average Palestinian. Did Mr. Kerry say or even hint that the US would suspend all financial aid to the PA to demonstrate how strongly they feel about the need to stop terrorism? He did not. Actions speak louder than words Mr. Kerry.

The constitution of Abbas’s Fatah party explicitly calls for the destruction of the “Zionist entity,” which in plain words means Israel. Did Mr. Kerry make any mention of this? Moreover, one can only imagine what he might say if Israel’s constitution called for the destruction of a Palestinian state. Heaven forbid!

The official emblem of the Fatah party shows one state, not two. The one state covers the entire area of Israel, and shows every square inch of land as one state of “Palestine.” Their emblem also includes weapons of war, suggesting their goal is to destroy Israel through violence. Again Kerry is silent.

If Mahmoud Abbas wants to be seen as a serious peace partner, would it be too much to suggest that he publically condemn the plethora of terror attacks the Palestinians have perpetrated against innocent Israeli civilians? Not only has Abbas failed to condemn such attacks, he and his party have continuously glorified these murderers.

Kerry also downplayed the US role in the anti-Israel UN resolution, suggesting the US was not involved in composing, or sponsoring it. Yet, by abstaining the Obama administration knows full well, it was as if they voted for it, because they chose not to use their veto power, which allowed it to pass.

With its passing the Obama administration has intentionally left the door wide open for the UN to take further action against Israel.  

With only days remaining in the current administration, the timing of Kerry’s speech was more about punctuating the anti-Israel tenor of the Obama administration with one last trumpet blast about land for peace. However, all one needs to do is look at what happened when Israel evacuated the Gaza Strip after 38 years. They were rewarded with 3 wars and 20,000 rockets.

If the Obama administration is truly as concerned about Israel’s security as Kerry states, their failure to hold the Palestinians accountable for their wanton terror renders any statements about understanding Israel’s need for security meaningless.

Since the UN resolution cannot be reversed, the Obama administration has knowingly done two things-
1. They have put the incoming Trump administration in a difficult position.
2. Obama has placed a nail in the coffin of his relationship with Israel. With the door now open for further punitive UN action against Israel, his administration will go down in history has the most anti-Israel administrations ever.

One doesn’t need to be a rocket scientist to recognize the two sides of the conflict have entirely different agendas. Israel desires to have peace, while the Arab Palestinians goal remains p-i-e-c-e, every piece of the land of Israel to be theirs. For not recognizing this and blaming Israel for being the obstacle to peace, the Obama administration has reduced itself to being hypocrites by ignoring their own oft stated commitment to Israel’s security.


Why Hillary’s “Experience” Presents a Problem

hillary clinton terrorism

Many people are understandably concerned about this year’s presidential election. Some are saying the two chief candidates are the worst choices in decades. I’ve often heard it said that elections are not so much about voting for who you favor, but more about voting against who you disfavor. In other words, voting for the lessor of two evils.  In 2016 this represents my personal position as well.

Some have decided to boycott the election altogether. In my opinion this is a copout and negates said individual from participating in discussions, as they have opted out of the process. Not making a decision, is making a decision.

One of the justifications people have used to support Hillary Clinton, vs Donald Trump, is she has experience.  I understand that, however just because someone has “experience,” does that mean they deserve to be the most powerful person in the world? Also, one has to evaluate their “experience,” to determine if what they have previously done merits greater responsibility, and reward.

One of the flashpoint issues of the day is terrorism. It is here where I would like to dig a little deeper. Since Trump has not served in public office, his “experience” cannot be evaluated. Yet, he has made his views  regarding terror quite clear.

Hillary on the other hand has significant experience, which includes serving as Secretary of State from 2009 – 2013. Let’s take a closer look, specifically with respect to terrorism.

One of the official duties in the job description of Secretary of State is “ensures the protection of the US Government to American citizens, property and interests in foreign countries.”


In March 2016 an American- Taylor Force was murdered by a terrorist while he was visiting Israel. His killer, Basar Masalha who was killed during the attack, was a member of Hamas. Masalha was praised as a “martyr” by the official PA newspaper Al-Hayat Al Jidada. PA President Mahmoud Abbas was asked to publically condemn the murder. He refused, which is tantamount to implicit support.

What’s the connection between Force’s murder and Hillary Clinton? Allow me to connect the dots.

It’s been documented, but worth repeating the Arab Palestinians reward terror.  Starting in 2003, when a “soldier of Allah” commits murder, or another act of terror his crime provides him with a place of honor. It also entitles him to be paid a salary. The more heinous the crime, the greater the salary. If the murderer dies, or is killed while committing his crime, he becomes known as a “shahid,” or martyr. In this case his family is awarded the financial compensation. Palestinian murderers and/or their families in some cases collect as much as $3,500 (US) per month, which is 5 times greater than the average Palestinian family income.

Aside from Hamas, the terrorist can be from numerous groups, including Fatah, the political party of PA President Mahmoud Abbas.

The Palestinian Authority allocates roughly 6% of their budget to reward murderers. Since the government of the Palestinians is providing said compensation, it can easily be defined as state sponsored terrorism. Yet where are the demands to halt this despicable policy? Certainly none have come from Hillary.

While world leaders turn a blind eye to this ‘official’ sanctioning of murder, the same world leaders are often heard roundly criticizing Israel for construction in areas that have long been understood as being part of the Jewish State. Such criticizing voices have included Hillary Clinton. While there may be disagreement that said construction is in an acceptable area, how can any leader deserving of respect focus on construction, while ignoring outright murder?

Yet, there is more to this story. The Palestinian Authority receives over $1.3 billion aid money from around the world. (2014 figures) The single largest source is the United States which provides $400 million annually. The EU, Saudi Arabia and UK are 2nd, 3rd and 4th respectively in annual support.

While Clinton was not Secretary of State when Taylor Force was murdered, she was from 2009 – 2013. As such she was part of an ongoing US policy of being the majority financial supporter for a government which promotes and rewards murderers of Israeli civilians, which subsequently included Americans. In addition to Taylor Force, one of the three teens murdered by Hamas in June 2014-Naftali Frenkel, was American. During Clinton’s tenure she did nothing to criticize, impede or prevent the PA policy of rewarding murder, which was in place while she served as Secretary of State, and remains in effect today.

What’s the take away from this?

Indeed it is true that Hillary Clinton has “experience.” The question begs is the knowledge of and financial support for ongoing murder of innocent lives (which includes Americans) the type of “experience” that justifies electing her President?

I think Donald Trump would say “no.”

The real question is what will Americans say?

For more of Dan Calic’s articles see his Facebook Page.

Definition of Insanity: Slaughtering Jews Invokes Criticism of Israel

Last Wednesday a murderous terror attack took place in Tel Aviv, ripping four innocent lives away from their loved ones forever. One moment they were sitting in a café enjoying themselves, and a split second later they were gone, lifeless, leaving only precious memories behind.

When did Tel Aviv become “disputed territory?”

In the wake of this latest in a lengthy wave of despicable attacks we are left once again to wonder when will it end? When will those who support and perpetrate such acts realize there exists no moral equivalence between murder and justice? Do these murderers actually think the Jews are going to be intimidated into giving up their rightful homeland? It’s high time they accept this and find another cause to vent their hatred toward. Their goal will not be realized.

Israel is the one single nation whose people were dispersed throughout the world for two millennia, only to be reborn in its original location. That cannot be coincidence.

After the attack we’re witness to the typical reaction coming in from around the world voicing outrage and condemnation, while expressing solidarity with Israel and its need for security. Having been the victim of more terror attacks than they wish to admit, Israel is quite used to seeing such empathetic statements.

Frankly, while not attempting to speak on behalf of Israeli leadership, I’d be willing to bet they are sick and tired of hearing and reading such reactions. Why? Not because they aren’t appreciated. I’m sure they are. However, they’re sick and tired of having to endure such horrific tragedy which engenders said reactions. Frankly, I wouldn’t blame Israel one bit.

However, while sympathetic statements poured in condemning the terrorism, there exists another chorus of voices. These voices minimize the murderous attack on innocent civilians and use the tragedy as a platform for their own agenda. At a moment when grief and shock resounds throughout the country, especially with the bereaved families, they take the opportunity to launch criticism of Israel.

For example, French Foreign Ministry Jean-Marc Ayrault said this in reaction to Israel’s decision to revoke permits for thousands of Muslims planning to enter Israel during Ramadan- “the decision by the Israeli authorities today to revoke tens of thousands of entry permits could stoke tensions which could lead to a risk of escalation….we must be careful about anything that could stoke tensions.”

Moreover, while Palestinian Arabs danced in the streets celebrating the brutal murders MSNBC ran a report on the attack, which included the following comments- “the siege that continues in Gaza….there’s a tremendous amount of frustration on the part of the Palestinians living in the occupied West Bank…..further oppression in the occupied West Bank.” New Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman was referred to as an “extreme right winger…he’s a settler himself.”

Adding insult to injury is the ever friendly United Nations. During their 2015 session for example it passed 20 resolutions singling out Israel for criticism. The number of resolutions passed against the rest of the world- 3.

Plus, the office of the UNHRC High Commissioner (United Nations Human Rights Council) Zeed Ra’ad Al Hussein released this statement- “We are deeply concerned about the response from the Israeli authorities, which includes measures that may amount to prohibitive collective punishment and will only increase the sense of injustice felt by the Palestinians at the very tense time.”

If the issuers of these statements will permit me, I would like to offer what some might consider to be a much needed pragmatic reaction to their comments- Are these people living on planet earth? Ok, so this isn’t very pragmatic.

In all seriousness where is their collective conscience? They have the audacity to sit in judgement of the Israeli government’s policies and while simultaneously minimizing the murder of innocent civilians.

In the totality of their collective untimely salvos at Israel where were any comments regarding the responsibility of the Palestinian Arab leadership? For example, Hamas was eager to take responsibility for the attack, offering praise to the murderers.  Mahmoud Abbas provided a general statement which criticized violence, yet offered no specific condemnation of the attack.

Am I the only one who thinks that after such an event, it might be an appropriate time to suggest Mahmoud Abbas publically condemn the murderers and announce strict measures to prevent such attacks, since the terrorists came from territory he is responsible for? Is it unreasonable to expect that mainstream media such as MSNBC include comments about how little is done by the Palestinian leadership  to prevent ongoing terror? Moreover, would be reasonable to expect that MSNBC state that murdering innocent civilians is unacceptable, period, even if their network disagrees with Israeli policies.

Might one expect that the UNCHR urge the Palestinian leadership to act more like a genuine peace partner by cracking down on the extended intifada which has pushed the prospects for peace further away than ever.  Where are such voices?

Statements from the EU, Britain and even the US did not mention a word about the need for the Palestinian Arabs and their leadership to do a better job of policing their own.  General statements condemning the violence do nothing to prevent similar murders from reoccurring. This is inexcusable.

When the response to terrorism is viewed as less acceptable than terrorism itself, it’s a welcome mat for more.

Sometimes I wonder if two Israelis were sitting in a café in Ramallah or Gaza City and suddenly without warning started shooting indiscriminately at Palestinian Arabs, murdering them in cold blood, what might world reaction be to such horror?

On second thought maybe it’s not such a good idea to wonder such things.

Do We Spray the Ants or Eradicate the Nest?

(The views in this article are those of the author)

In light of the horrific attack in Tel Aviv where 4 Israeli civilians were murdered by Arab terrorists dressed in suits, we find ourselves in yet another quagmire. The issue is how to respond.

Prime Minister Netanyahu says “we will attack those who attacked us.” Exactly what does that mean Mr. Prime Minister? Is Israel going to launch a targeted strike on Hamas operatives in Gaza or Judea/Samaria?

What will that accomplish? Indeed, it may take out some Arab terrorists, but what will it accomplish in the end? Will it prevent future attacks from taking place? Will it deter leadership from promoting jihad against Israeli Jews? Will it foster a better environment for peace?

Killing Arab terrorists is the equivalent of spraying a trail of ants with pesticide. It only eliminates the ones you see. In order to stop more of them from coming, one must go all the way to the nest and root it out completely.

Other suggestions include halting the influx of Arabs for Ramadan. I find no problem with refusing to allow thousands more Muslims into Israel, which can only increase the chances of more violence.

Still others are suggesting clamping down on goods being shipped into Gaza. This has been an ongoing seesaw issue for years. Every time Israel relents and expands the array of allowable goods, Hamas ends up stealing much of it and using it to manufacture weapons, terror tunnels, or underground bunkers so their leadership remains protected during outbreaks of war with Israel.

What sense does it make to allow shipments of materials that everyone knows will be used for military purposes? Yet world pressure continuously and relentlessly mounts on Israel to “lift the siege of Gaza.”

Pressure also continues against Israel to end the “occupation,” and relax the checkpoints coming in from Judea/Samaria.

Do those who promote said suggestions actually believe such acquiescence would result in peaceful coexistence between Israel and the Palestinian Arabs? If they do, they are either more naïve then Neville Chamberlain, or they have little or no concern for the safety of Jewish lives. The other possibility is they are just plain anti-Semitic.

In actuality, counter attacks by Israel will not address the problem. Clamping down on Gaza will not address the problem. Even if nothing other than basic items, such as food, water and medicine is allowed in. Tightening checkpoints, temporarily revoking permits or razing homes of terrorists in Judea/Samaria won’t remedy the situation. These are all symptomatic remedies, which do nothing to address the core issues.

Turning the tide should be seen as a comprehensive plan that involves a combined effort across many fronts.

One place to start is the classroom. Arab Palestinian children do not receive an “education,” as normal school children do in most countries. They are taught to hate Jews, and to die as martyrs. Take a look at this recent clip below. This is a typical example of how children are “educated” in UNRWA run schools in Judea/Samaria and Gaza.

What kind of adults do you think these children become having been “educated” like this? UNRWA receives over $1 billion annually. The largest donors are the US – $400 million, followed by the EU, Saudi Arabia and the UK. Together they provide over 50% of UNRWA’s funding.

This is where a change must take place. The donor countries should demand their funds be used for proper education, rather than allowing these ‘schools’ to be nothing more than terror training facilities. Further, independent monitoring should take place on an ongoing basis to ensure appropriate education is being administered.  If the schools refuse to provide normal education and continue their terror training, the funding for them should be cut off, period.

Another systemic issue is religious ‘education.’ Religion plays a huge role in the upbringing and character building of people from all cultures and countries. When it comes to the Arab-Israeli conflict Arabs again are being ‘educated’ to hate and kill, rather than coexist with Israel. Take a look at this clip.

The imam is supposed to be a man of God. He is supposed to provide teachings which reflect how we are to treat our fellow man in a way which God honors. What kind of god would bless the words that come out of that imam’s mouth? Yet this another huge component in weaving together the fabric of Arab Palestinian society.

Once again, I believe independent monitors should be at every mosque, and when such messages are delivered said leader should be warned that this type of hate mongering will not be tolerated. If he refuses to comply he should face criminal charges.

Will these suggestions be easy? No. Will they immediately change the atmosphere in the Arab-Israeli conflict. Unlikely. However, something must be done, because we know what has been done until now has not produced fruit. What have we to lose?

I have only addressed two particular segments of society with this essay. There are more that need addressing to be sure. However, these two are of huge significance and influence.  If the fundamental institutions of their society are ignored and allowed to maintain the status quo, this is tantamount to declaring the future will continue to be one of symptomatic  remedies.

We can either keep spraying the ant trail and allow it to keep coming back, or we can pursue it to the nest and eradicate it. We have a choice.


UNRWA Honors Jerusalem Bus Bomber; US & EU Pay the Bill

On April 18 Abd al-Hamid Abu Spour, a 19 year old Palestinian Arab destroyed two public transportation buses in Jerusalem. There were numerous injuries, two of which remain hospitalized, one with severe burns.  This was the first bus attack during the 7+ month long intifada being waged against Israeli’s, which has resulted in at least 34 deaths to date.

The one person killed in the attack was the perpetrator himself. All Palestinian factions welcomed the attack. In the eyes of many Muslims, dying while committing a terror attack means Abu Spour is a “shahid,” or martyr for Allah.

His family has lashed out saying he acted in “self-defense,” and “only you Israelis are guilty.” Such inflammatory rhetoric while disturbing, is not unusual from many Arab Muslims.

However, in this case reaction to the attack has gone beyond the family. It has taken on an ‘official’ flavor.

On Monday, a week after the attack, a gathering took place at the UNRWA refugee camp in Aida, near Bethlehem. The location has a huge monument of a lock and key, symbolizing the defiant goal that the Palestinian Arabs will one day root out the Jews and take over the land they believe belongs to them.

The “festivities of the martyrs” event took place under the aegis of UNRWA (United Nations Relief Works Agency).  To think the official body representing the world’s community of nations is celebrating terrorism is bad enough. However, that is not the worst of it. The number 1 financial donor to UNRWA is the US, by far. The EU and UK are #2 and #3 in financial support. Their combined total represents over 50% of UNRWA’s donor support.

Virtually no media coverage

US & UK citizens should ask themselves how they feel about having their hard-earned taxes paying for events that honor terrorists.

Aside from this there is another troubling element to the UNRWA sponsored event.

One might think a public event honoring terrorism sponsored by a branch of the United Nations would be widely covered by the media. Yet, when it comes to the Arab-Israeli conflict most of the world’s media seems to come under a spell of double-standard. The abnormal becomes normal, the unacceptable turns into acceptable, and the victim is often seen as the bully.

There was virtually no media coverage of this publicly supported terrorist honoring event. One journalist- David Bedein who runs the Jerusalem based Israel Resource News Agency did send a crew to cover it. According to Bedein, the crew didn’t just cover the event; they are interviewing the family of the terrorist. Soon they plan to release a film that will be screened at a forthcoming session of the Middle East Subcommittee of the US House Foreign Affairs Committee, when the debate on further US funds for UNRWA will be discussed.

On March 22, Bedein appeared in a closed session of that Middle East Subcommittee and suggested an UNRWA REFORM POLICY INITIATIVE formula as a new funding framework. This would make US financing for UNRWA contingent upon them taking concrete measures to assure transparency. It would also require a crackdown on UNRWA hosting terror entities in its midst, and the re-education UNRWA residents. Currently they are promised the “right of return” to villages that existed before 1948. The committee is chaired by Rep. Ilena Ros-Lehtinen (R) FL.

Senator Jim Risch (R- Idaho) chairman of the US Senate Subcommittee for the Near East, also met with Bedein in Washington. This week Senator Risch issued a statement that “we are looking to write a letter to the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to get them to update the audit of US monies that go both to UNRWA as well as funding for education related issues that the GAO had performed several years ago”.


Regarding media coverage, Bedein sent out a press release to over 600 journalists throughout Israel, informing them of the UNRWA event honoring the terrorist. Incredibly he received a reply from only one. This ‘yawn’ by the media is yet another disturbing reminder of the double-standard Israel receives from most of the world.

Picture this- Suppose there was an event held in the US at a public school, sponsored by the Dept. of Education (using taxpayer money) honoring the Muslim couple who murdered 14 people in San Bernardino last year? How much media coverage do you think there might be? Not only that, but those who were responsible for holding the event might be have some serious explaining to do, even in this era of political correctness.

Not so in the Arab-Israeli conflict where it appears the media seems to have largely taken up the narrative of the perpetrators of terrorism.

The US provides the Palestinian Authority over $400 million annually. Concern about the Palestinian educational system is growing in Congress.

US taxpayers have an opportunity to send a strong message opposing their tax money being used to honor terrorists who target innocent citizens of America’s strongest ally in the Middle East. They can contact the members of the Middle East Subcommittee in the House of Representatives, as well as the Near East Subcommittee in the Senate.

There is no moral equivalence between terror and justice. It’s high time the UN stop making an exception when it comes to Israel.

Bi-polar Islam: At War With the World…and Itself

The most significant undeclared contemporary war of our time is with Islam. The first salvo took place November 4, 1979, the day Iran took US citizens hostage in Tehran and held 52 of them against their will for 444 days.  While 9/11 was the worst single tragedy by far, it wasn’t the beginning. That was a wake-up call, which which has largely been ignored, especially by President Obama.

Some may suggest there is no such war. Others claim it is the West that has declared war on Islam. Neither statement is correct. The fact is Islam has declared war. War on democracy, the West, the US, Israel, Jews, Christians and all “infidels,” which includes other Muslims. We are in perilous times. The very fabric of the free world is under attack. Unless democratic nations, especially the US, acknowledge this and take steps to combat the threat, Islam may eventually engulf everyone and everything.

The most important and powerful leader in the free world is the President of the United States. He should be at the forefront of this battle. Yet President Obama has steadfastly refused to correctly identify what everyone else knows — the United States (and the free world) is in the crosshairs of Islam. Their goal is to see the Islamic flag over the White House.

New normal

If you are one of those who doesn’t think we are in a crisis, consider this- Prior to the ’79 takeover of the US embassy in Iran, how often did you hear these terms: “jihad,” “Islamic fundamentalist,” “martyr,” “Allah,” “alluah Akbar,” or “Sharia law?”

Today they are commonplace and exemplify the new normal the US and the world lives with. In fact it would be an unusual day if we didn’t hear any of these terms.

I recall when it was possible to walk out to the gate at the airport to meet an incoming passenger. How about when there was no such thing as an airport security check? I guess I’m only showing my age….

Not all Muslims

Before going further, an important distinction should be made. Am I suggesting this war is with all Muslims? No. Not all Muslims are fundamentalists. In fact the majority are not. Yet the terror from the minority is affecting almost everyone, whether Muslim or not in one way or another.

Thus an obvious question becomes how many fundamentalists are there?

Estimates vary widely. Some say it’s as low as 3%, others up to as much as 50% or more, depending on your source. Statistics on this are rare and generally without credible references. This is where some simple math is quite telling. Current population statistics indicate there are 1.65 billion Muslims worldwide. (This is not in dispute) For the sake of this article I’ll use a conservative estimate of 10% being fundamentalists. That means 90% are peaceful.

If 10% are fundamentalists, that translates to 165 million. If all of them lived in one country it would rank #8 in the world. These are numbers no one should dismiss or take lightly.

True Muslims

The next question is who are the “true” Muslims, the 90% or the 10%? Sheer numbers tend to suggest the 90%. Yet is this really the case? Let’s drill down a bit deeper.

The non-violent Muslims will tell you Islam is a religion of peace and the fundamentalists have hijacked it. While peaceful Muslims may indeed be sincere in their commitment to non-violence, are they correct by accusing fundamentalists of hijacking Islam? This needs to be addressed soberly.

The fundamentalists who commit violence in Allah’s name consider themselves to be the true Muslims. In fact they will tell you the ones who accuse them of hijacking Islam are not true Muslims.

Yet both peaceful and fundamentalist Muslims look to the Quran as their holy book.

How can two different groups both claiming to be Muslim read the same holy book and see things so differently? Is one group making claims about the Quran that are false?

Before examining this closer keep one thing in mind. There are approximately 40,000 Christian denominations. Wide differences exist among them on numerous topics. Yet would it be fair for a Pentecostal to accuse a Presbyterian of not being a Christian?

There is one holy book for those who believe in the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob: the Bible, albeit different books are used by Christians (New Testament) and Jews (Torah/Prophets/Writings), and some differences exist between Catholic and Protestant versions.  While there is a wide range of interpretations of scripture, a Presbyterian considers himself just as much a Christian as a Pentecostal.

This same principle applies to Muslims.

Due diligence requires examination of the Quran to see if there are verses which substantiate the fundamentalist view of condoning violence.

Violence condoned

There are numerous verses in the Quran which make it clear that violence is not only condoned, it is required against disbelievers. This includes against peaceful Muslims who do not engage in violence as instructed in the Quran. Altogether there are over 160 verses in the Quran which support violence or jihad.

Plus, there is clear disdain for Jews and Christians.

What’s also noteworthy is Mohammed himself supported violence. He was responsible for numerous killings, which included massacring several hundred Jews of the Qurayza tribe in Medina in 627.

Today Muslim religious leaders continue their calls for Jewish blood.

Based on the aforementioned information, the following conclusions can be drawn-

  • There is a wide range of Muslims
  • The Quran sanctions violence
  • Mohammed himself condoned and engaged in violence
  • The Quran indicates disdain for non-Muslims
  • Muslims are both peaceful and violent
  • Fundamentalists are Muslims
  • They have not hijacked Islam

With respect to whether Islam is a peaceful religion, after confirming what the Quran says, it would seem such a characterization is not only naïve, it’s incorrect, possibly dangerous. Further, if a Presbyterian doesn’t have the right to say a Pentecostal is not a Christian, it follows that a peaceful Muslim doesn’t have the right to say a fundamentalist is not a Muslim.

If a “true believer” is one who follows everything in their holy book, and the fundamentalists are adhering to this, how should we view peaceful Muslims? While I believe they are indeed Muslims, can it be the fundamentalists are actually the true Muslims?

What’s the takeaway?

The free world should open its eyes, understand there is a war going on. Ignoring it won’t eliminate it. In fact doing so will allow it to continue unabated. We should stop letting naïveté and political correctness govern our views or our laws. Difficult decisions will need to be made, and soon.  If the status quo continues, the lifestyle free people are accustomed to will soon become a thing of the past.

Years ago there was a commercial by a manufacturer of engine oil filters that suggested not to ignore the importance of changing filters when necessary. The closing words of the commercial were “pay me now… or pay me later.”

US Funds PA Terrorists, Winks at Abbas Corruption, While Chiding Israel

The US and others, while suggesting they are strong supporters of Israel and its need for security, in reality are not promoting peace. Their policies are actually sustaining and rewarding terror.

Let me explain…

President Obama, for example, has repeatedly stated throughout his administration that America’s commitment to Israel’s security is “unshakable.” No doubt these are reassuring words to Israel and its friends around the world. However,  his actions contradict his words.

How so? It has been the policy of the US and others to condemn the ‘settlements’ and the ‘occupation’ as the main obstacles to achieving peace with the Arabs. For those who subscribe to said view, where were the ‘settlements’ or ‘occupation’ in 1948 or 1967? They did not exist.

However, in order to see the folly of blaming the lack of peace on these issues, we should look at what the statements imply:

  1. They suggest the US is attempting to be balanced. This is meant to appeal to the Arab world which thinks the US has been too supportive of Israel for many years.
  2. They allow the US to avoid tackling the real issues which are preventing peace.

Placing accurate blame

The Arabs flatly refuse to accept the right of Israel to exist. The charters of the PLO, Hamas and Mahmoud Abbas’s own party Fatah, all require its destruction. Is the US devoting anywhere near as much attention to combating this as they are about condemning ‘settlements?’ Absolutely not.  Abbas has repeatedly stated he will never recognize Israel as a Jewish state.  Israeli leadership has consistently committed to recognizing a state for the so-called ‘Palestinians,’ yet is the US applying equal pressure on him to recognize Israel? Again, no.

Another issue is money.

The US and others believe if there is measurable improvement in the overall economic environment of the Arabs it would reduce their “frustration,” which many believe motivates their terror attacks against Israelis. For the uninformed Arab, terror against Jews has been ongoing since the rebirth of Israel in 1948. Moreover, such statements carry with them an implied justification for the terror and provide additional incentive for more of them. In my view, there exists no moral equivalence between justice and terror.

Moreover, after Israel is forced for the umpteenth time to neutralize murderers of innocent civilians, we hear the ever-present catcalls that they are using disproportionate force. My response to this is something I heard years ago- “if the response to terrorism is seen as less acceptable than terrorism itself, we invite more of it.”

If the Arabs wish to express frustration regarding their poor economic condition, I say they have that right. However, they should be expressing it at the appropriate party, and that is not Israel.

The responsibility of the economic plight of the Arabs belongs to their own leadership.

When Yasser Arafat formed the Palestinian Authority in 1994, he promised new hospitals, clinics, educational institutions and improvements to the general infrastructure. He also promised greater employment opportunities. However, instead of delivering on his promises, he took complete control of all media, as well as the flow of money. None of the promised improvements took place. With virtually no independent oversight this became a recipe for corruption.

He and his cronies systematically stole huge sums of money, while the average Arab remained in abject poverty, which is the case today.

Such information rarely gets much attention, and certainly not in Arab media, heaven forbid!

Tracking the money

Here are some rather incredible facts:

Since its formation, the Palestinian Authority has received over $31 billion in foreign aid. In 2014 alone they received well over $2 billion. Of that amount the US provides the most by far- roughly $400 million, followed by the European Commission ($140 million), Saudi Arabia ($103 million), the UK ($95 million), etc. [see chart]  In fact the Arabs have received more money than any other group of people in human history. If you take into account historic inflation, the PA has received more money than the US gave to rebuild all of Europe under the Marshall Plan after WW ll,” according to Calev Myers of the Jerusalem Institute of Justice who has studied this extensively. The funds were given to 17 countries with a combined population of 300,000,000. By comparison the number of Arabs living in Judea/Samaria, commonly referred to as the West Bank, is just under 3 million, or equal to 1% of post WWll European population. Yet they have been given more money than all of Europe!

With respect to Arafat, while the average Arab suffered, his wife Suha who lived in Paris received $200,000 per month from him. She also is alleged to have received numerous bulk payments, one of which was $11 million according to reports.  Where did this money come from? More important, what happened with the vast amount of international aid given to the PA?

When Arafat died in 2004 an investigation showed he had $1 billion stashed away in Swiss bank accounts. Plus, he supposedly was in control of up to $6 billion in assets.  His widow refused to reveal the location of the stolen money unless she was awarded a ‘finder’s fee.’ Rumor is the investigative team paid her as much as $40 million. The team was led by Mahmoud Abbas.

Abbas Palace in Ramallah
The Presidential Guest Palace in Surda, Ramallah being built by Mahmoud Abbas at a cost of $13 Million

Since then, Abbas has traveled down the same road of corruption of his predecessor. His personal wealth is said to be as much as $1 billion. However, since he is not subject to financial accountability, who really knows? He is currently constructing a $13 million mansion for himself.

Another area of fiscal irresponsibility is the PA owes roughly $300 – 400 million to Israel in unpaid electricity bills. Given Mr. Abbas’s accumulated stolen wealth, no doubt he could write a personal check for the entire amount.

In reality the economic well-being of the Arabs has long been in their own hands. However, they have never been able to realize it because their leadership has literally stolen it. Meanwhile, western leaders bemoan the presumed poverty driven frustration as the reason for terror, while international money keeps lining the pockets of corrupt leadership, and the average Arab continues to live in poverty.

Someone needs to have a blunt conversation with Mahmoud Abbas.

As for the Arab health care system, it remains so under developed many of them in desperation come to Israel for needed care. Indeed, in 2014 when tensions were extremely high due to the disappearance of three Jewish teens, who were later found murdered, Abbas’s wife was having surgery in an Israeli hospital. Plus, in the midst of the current spate of terror, which Abbas has fueled with hateful rhetoric, his brother-in-law had life-saving surgery in Israel. Israel even treated the granddaughter of Ismael Haniyeh, Hamas’s leader in the Gaza Strip.

International aid funding murderers

Aside from pilfering money meant to improve the lot of the average Arab, there is another disturbing aspect of how international aid is being used by the PA.

Approximately 16% of their total budget is designated to reward terrorists and their families. This is done under what is called The Law of the Prisoner.

Here’s how it works:

If an Arab commits a crime against an Israeli and is imprisoned he becomes eligible to earn a large monthly income. It can be as much as $3,500, ($42,000 annually) which is five times greater than the average Arab earns. The monthly income is on a sliding scale. The most heinous crimes get the highest monthly stipend.

You’ve heard the old saying “crime doesn’t pay?” These terrorists are proof it does pay. US and European taxpayers are the ones who are providing the “pay.”

Abbas’s actions are nothing short of criminal, plus he is guilty of using international humanitarian aid to reward murderers.

While the likelihood of him being imprisoned is remote, here are few suggestions for the US and others:

  1. Stop blaming Israeli ‘settlements’ and ‘occupation’ for the lack of progress toward peace.
  2. Demand Abbas condemn terror against Israelis and take steps to eliminate it.
  3. Require mutual national recognition and hold him accountable if he refuses.
  4. Demand the PLO, Fatah and Hamas amend their charters which call for Israel’s destruction. (no legitimate peace partner is party to a charter calling for the others destruction)
  5. Insist the PA set up independent oversight and engage in complete financial transparency and accountability.
  6. Demand the Law of the Prisoner be scrapped. Inform the PA financial aid will be terminated if murderers continue to be financially rewarded.

At the end of the day the effort of the US to appear balanced by maintaining the status quo is not only failing to move the peace process forward, it is actually perpetuating an environment which will never produce peace.

What is needed is for world leaders, especially the US, is to get blunt with Abbas as well as the Arabs, and stop trying to persuade Israel to further compromise its security by rewarding those who uncompromisingly seek its destruction with land and money.