Category: Politics

Posted on

THE TWO-STATE SOLUTION IS A ZOMBIE

It can’t be dead because it never lived.

“Is the two-state solution dead?”

The two-state solution, a perverse euphemism for carving an Islamic terror state out of the land of Israel and the living flesh of her people, is in trouble. The solution, which has solved nothing except the shortage of graves in Israel and Muslim terrorists in the Middle East, is the object of grave concern by the professionally concerned from Foggy Bottom to Fifth Avenue.

Obama set up his betrayal of Israel at the UN to “save” the two-state solution from Trump. The media warns that David Friedman, Trump’s pick for ambassador, is so pro-Israel that he’ll kill the “solution.”

But you can’t kill something that was never alive.

The two-state solution is a zombie. It can’t be dead because it never lived. It was a rotting shambling corpse of a diplomatic process. If you stood downwind of the proceedings, it looked alive.

Up close there was only blood and death.

Like the Holy Roman Empire, the two-state solution didn’t solve anything and it wasn’t in the business of creating two states. Not unless you count a Hamas state in Gaza and a Fatah state in the West Bank.

What problem was the two-state solution solving?

It wasn’t the problem of terrorism. Turning over land, weapons and power to a bunch of terrorists made for more terrorism. It’s no coincidence that Islamic terrorism worldwide shot up around the same time.

The consequences of giving terrorists their own country to play with were as predictable as taking a power drill to the bottom of a boat or running a toaster in a bubble bath. The least likely outcome of handing guns to homicidal sociopaths was peace. The most likely was murder. And that was as intended.

The problem that the two-state solution was solving was the existence of Israel; the Jewish Problem.

Spray the two-state solution over an irritating country full of Jews who managed to survive multiple Muslim genocides. Apply and wait for as long as it takes until the Jewish Problem is solved again.

The two-state solution didn’t end the violence. It turned it up to eleven. It didn’t even create a Palestinian state. But it did a moderately decent job of solving the Jewish Problem by killing Jews.

It killed thousands of them. It filled cemeteries, ethnically cleansed towns and villages, and brought war to Jerusalem and Tel Aviv for the first time in a generation. It turned terror from an aberration into a routine. It made death into a way of life for the Muslim population controlled by the terrorists and the Jewish population targeted by them. It endangered the existence of Israel for the first time since 1973.

The two-state solution isn’t dead. It is death.

The “solution” has turned children into orphans and left parents weeping at the graves of their daughters. It has sown hilltops with dragon’s teeth of rockets and sent cities fleeing to bomb shelters. It has ushered in an endless age of wars against terrorists who can’t be utterly defeated because that would destroy the two-state solution.

And it can’t get any better. Only worse.

Death is the only thing that the two-state solution has ever accomplished. That’s the only thing that it was meant to accomplish. It’s all that it will ever accomplish.

The two-state solution is a zombie. Its existence has no purpose except death. As long as it goes on moving, it will go on destroying. But, like a zombie, the two-state solution is weak. It’s a slow and shambling thing. It’s absurdly easy to escape it. The only way it can catch you is if you let it.

In the nineties, the two-state solution looked like a living thing. There were negotiations and big plans. There were ceremonies and Nobel prizes being handed out like party favors. There were equally big bombings and mangled body parts smeared along sidewalks and storefronts. But it was easier to listen to another round of peace songs and pay no attention to the ghastly carnage.

But by the oughts, the Muslim settler population in ’67 Israel, for whose benefit the two-state solution had been crafted, made the same “democratic” decision that the Egyptians and other Arab Spring countries would later make. They chose the Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamic law that demands that non-Muslims must surrender and be ruled by Muslims as before. Or be massacred and subjugated.

And then the zombie solution began to rot from the head.

The two-state solution was kept alive by pretending that Hamas had never won. An illegal takeover by Fatah, the “good” Islamic terrorists who were willing to pretend to negotiate in exchange for enough foreign aid from the United States, led to two Islamic terror states, one in Gaza and one in the West Bank. These states occasionally tried to form a united government, but couldn’t even get along with each other. Never mind getting along with Israel.

The two-state solution had become a ghoulish joke.

Some two-state solutionists urged embracing Hamas. A crazed collection of leftist activist “Rabbis” even signed a petition calling for outreach to the Muslim Brotherhood terror state despite a charter which called for exterminating all the Jews. Kerry aided a Code Pink mission to Hamas.

Most two-state solutionists decided to pretend that nothing had gone wrong. The zombie solution was in the best of health. Pay no attention to the stench of decay and the way it keeps trying to eat you.

They wanted to strengthen the “good” Islamic terror state in the West Bank to discredit the “bad” Islamic terror state in Gaza. Anyone who opposed the “good” terror state was accused of trying to kill the “two-state solution” which had already killed more people than the average natural disaster.

But then the “good” terror state stopped even pretending to negotiate.

Since the terrorists wouldn’t negotiate, Obama and Kerry just propped up the corpse of the two-state solution on their shoulders, Weekend at Bernie’s style, and tried to pretend it was still alive by negotiating with Israel on behalf of the terrorists without telling either Israel or the terrorists.

But the “good” terrorists rejected the unsolicited deal that Obama and Kerry got for them.

Obama and Kerry solved that problem the way that the solutionists had been solving it for decades. They blamed Israel. The insane logic of the two-state solution demanded it.

An Islamic terror state is the “solution” offered by the two-state solution. If you blame the terrorists, you undermine the credibility of the solution. If you admit the terrorists don’t even want to negotiate, you kill the two-state solution. And then how will you justify destroying Israel?

The great two-state solution began incrementally with an autonomous territory of disarmed terrorists. This fantasy led to a two-state solution of heavily armed terrorists inside Israel. The next stage is a one-state solution in which Israel will be forced to take in every single Muslim claiming to be a refugee.

And you can’t get from one stage to the next without blaming Israel when the previous stage fails. As it was always intended to. Each planned failure advances a more extreme incarnation of the “solution”.

All the way up to the final solution.

Each failure has to be blamed on Israel to justify an even more extreme solution. Each attack on Israel, like Obama’s UN treachery, is justified as a defense of the two-state solution. As long as the lie that the two-state solution is a pro-Israel policy lives, it can be weaponized as a pro-Israel attack on Israel.

In its terminal stage, the solution zombie will kill Israel and then die. Unless we kill it first.

The two-state solution hasn’t solved anything. It is the problem. And now it’s time to solve the problem of the two-state solution. Like the rest of the Jihad, the two-state solution is not a potent threat. It is a lie that we have become too weak to resist.

Lies die when we see them for what they are.

Like the old Monty Python bit, the two-state solution is a dead parrot. The shopkeepers of the press who keep trying to sell us its stiff unmoving body insist that the peace process is just pining for the Norwegian fjords of the Oslo peace accords. Feed it some more of Israel and it’ll fly back to life.

It’s never worked before, but there’s always an Nth time.

Lies are zombies. They are mimicries of the truth that feed off what we wish to be true.

The two-state solution is a parasite that thrives by feeding off our hopes and fears, our optimism on the one hand and our inability to imagine an alternative on the other. When we see the lie for what it is, when we turn our hopes and fears to sustaining what we truly care about, then it will fall.

Real solutions, such as Caroline Glick’s Israeli Solution, already exist.

The two-state solution however never existed. There will only be one state in Israel. The question is whether it will be a Jewish State or an Islamic terror state.

Originally published in FrontPageMag.

Posted on

Israel’s Deputy Defense Minister: “We have an obligation to protect our soldiers”

With the country still seething over the Military Tribunal’s conviction of Sgt. Elor Azaria for shooting a terrorist who was perceived to be subdued, Deputy Defense Minister Eli Ben-Dahan has proposed a new bill protecting soldiers from criminal convictions is found in similar situations.

According to the bill, security forces shall not “bear criminal responsibility, nor be interrogated with a warning and will be immune from any legal proceedings due to actions they carried out or refrained from carrying out, and all before, after, and during an operational activity or terrorist attack that was not part of the day-to-day operational activities of the unit in which he/she works or serves.”

The soldier can still lose his or her immunity under the bill by abusing the bill’s mandate. “Any soldier accused of looting, destruction of property, accepting bribes, bullying or sexual offenses would not be immune to criminal prosecution.”

In a statement given to The Jerusalem Post, Ben-Dahan said that “the law sends a clear message to IDF soldiers that just as they protect us, we are protecting them.”

“The law allows IDF soldiers [to] perform their duties in defending the State of Israel fearlessly and with no concern of potential criminal prosecution while providing a stipulation which allows for the removal of the immunity if violations of the rules occur,” Ben-Dahan added. “In recent years we have seen too many soldiers and commanders suffer from a delay of justice, with long trials, and then finally be acquitted just because there are no clear legal or ethical statements that we are protecting them while they carry out their duties. As someone who served as a major in the army I’m sure it will help our soldiers. I have no doubt that MKs will support the law. “

The importance of Ben-Dahan’s proposed bill cannot be understated.  With Azaria being thrown in jail for an action that could easily happen to any combat soldier, the government needs to find a way that young combat soldiers do not lose morale and the ability to defend themselves in dangerous situations out of fear of being prosecuted.

Posted on

[watch] Huckabee: Absurd to Say Putin Impacted the Election

Featured Image Source: Gage Skidmore

With the latest intelligence report indicating the Russians were behind the DNC hack, Democrats have tried to use the findings to delegitimize Donald Trump’s presidency.  Governor Mike Huckabee points out that the problem with this is that, the hacking took place before anyone new who the Republican nominee was and that the report clearly states, that no actual voting machines were hacked.

President-Elect Trump also reacted to the report.

Ultimately what we see is that instead of losing graciously it is the Democrats who are not giving into the election results. Isn’t that what they said Trump would do?
[huge_it_share]

Posted on

The IDF’s new social contract

Sgt. Elor Azaria, who was convicted of manslaughter Wednesday for shooting a terrorist in Hebron last March, is a symptom of what may be the most dangerous threat to Israeli society today.

Azaria, a combat medic from the Kfir Brigade, arrived at the scene of an attack where two terrorists had just stabbed his comrades. One of the terrorists was killed, the other was wounded and lying on the ground, his knife less than a meter away from him.

A cameraman from the foreign-funded, Israeli- registered anti-Israel pressure group B’Tselem filmed Azaria removing his helmet and shooting the wounded terrorist. According to the military judges, the film was the centerpiece of the case against him.

The day of the incident, the General Staff reacted to the B’Tselem film with utter hysteria. Led by Chief of General Staff Lt.-Gen. Gadi Eisenkot and then-defense minister Moshe Ya’alon, Israel’s generals competed to see who could condemn Azaria most harshly.

For the public, though, the issue wasn’t so cut and dry. Certainly Azaria didn’t act like a model soldier. It was clear, for instance, that he acted without proper authority and that his action was not permitted under the rules of engagement then in effect in Hebron.

But unlike the IDF’s senior leadership, the public believed that the fact that it was B’Tselem that produced the film meant that it had to be viewed with a grain of salt.

The name “B’Tselem” was seared into the public’s consciousness as an organization hostile to Israel and dedicated to causing it harm with the publication of the UN’s Goldstone Commission Report in 2009. Among the Israeli-registered groups that provided materials to the biased UN commission charged with finding Israel guilty of war crimes during the course of Operation Cast Lead against Hamas in late 2008 and early 2009, B’Tselem made the greatest contribution.

The Goldstone Report cited B’Tselem as the source for its slanderous “findings” 56 times.

After the UN published the Goldstone Report, Michael Posner, the US assistant secretary of state for human rights, visited Israel and met with Jessica Montell, B’Tselem’s executive director at the time.

The US Embassy’s official report of their meeting was published by WikiLeaks.

During their meeting, Montell told Posner that her group’s goal in providing the Goldstone Commission with materials was to force the government to pay a heavy price for its decision to fight Hamas, by criminalizing Israel in the court of world opinion.

As B’Tselem saw it, Israel needed to come to the point where it would consider whether it could “afford another operation like this.”

Montell explained that from B’Tselem’s perspective the root of the problem with Israel is the Israeli public. The public is the source of Israel’s bad behavior, according to B’Tselem, because it “had zero tolerance for IDF killed.” As far as the public is concerned, she said, harm to Palestinian civilians is preferable to harm to IDF soldiers.

Since, in B’Tselem’s view, the public’s commitment to the lives of its soldiers meant that it would not constitute a “moral check on war,” and check the bellicosity of IDF commanders, it fell to B’Tselem to make the IDF brass and the government care more about world opinion than they care about what the public thinks.

The public’s condemnation of B’Tselem after its role in compiling the Goldstone Commission’s libelous accusations against the IDF was made public made no impression whatsoever on the group.

Following Operation Protective Edge in 2014, B’Tselem’s materials were cited 67 times by the report of the biased UN commission put together to slander Israel.

In 2007, B’Tselem launched its “Camera Program.”

The camera initiative involved providing video cameras to B’Tselem employees and volunteers in Judea and Samaria in order to document the actions of Israeli security forces and civilians in the areas.

In many cases, the videos B’Tselem produced distorted reality for the purpose of criminalizing both groups.

For instance, in 2011, B’Tselem gave a film to Ynet’s Elior Cohen that purported to show Israeli police brutally arresting a young Palestinian boy and preventing his mother from coming to the police station with him.

But as CAMERA showed at the time, B’Tselem’s portrayal of events was fanciful at best. In all likelihood, the event was staged by the B’Tselem photographer.

At the outset of the film the boy is unseen as he throws rocks at a police van. The boy is first seen as he runs toward the B’Tselem camerawoman. For her part, the camerawoman screams at the police and identifies herself as from B’Tselem.

The police are shown asking the boy’s mother repeatedly to join them in the car. As she stands poised to enter the vehicle, a Palestinian man is shown telling her in Arabic not to go.

In July 2016, B’Tselem released a film taken in Hebron during an attempted stabbing attack by a female Palestinian terrorist against Israel police at a security checkpoint outside the Cave of the Patriarchs.

The police reported that the terrorist tried to stab a policewoman who was checking her in an inspection room. Another policewoman shot and killed her.

B’Tselem claimed that its film proved that the female terrorist was shot for no reason. But the fact is that it does no such thing. As NGO Monitor noted, the B’Tselem film neither contradicts nor proves the police’s version of events.

Over the years, the public’s growing awareness of B’Tselem’s unwavering hostility went hand in hand with its growing distress over what was perceived as the IDF’s willingness to sacrifice the safety of troops to prevent it from receiving bad press.

For instance, in 2012, a film went viral on social media that showed a platoon of combat engineers fleeing from a mob of Palestinians attacking with rocks, Molotov cocktails and slingshots.

When questioned by reporters, the soldiers said that they had repeatedly asked their battalion commander for permission to use force to disperse the crowd and they were repeatedly denied permission.

Retreat was their only option.

In 2015, another film went viral showing a group of Palestinian women hitting and screaming at a soldier trying to arrest one of them for throwing rocks at his platoon. He did nothing as he absorbed the blows. And no harm came to the women who assaulted him.

Along with the films, came stories that soldiers on leave told their friends and family about the IDF’s rules of engagement. The tales were always the same. The rules of engagement are so restrictive that all initiative is placed in the hands of the enemy. Not only can terrorists attack at will. They can flee afterward and expect that no harm will come to them, because what is most important, the soldiers explain, is to ensure that IDF maintains its reputation as the most moral army in the world.

This was the context in which Azaria killed the wounded terrorist.

Although the headlines relate to Azaria, and his family members have become familiar faces on the news, the fact is the reason the Azaria affair was the biggest story of the year is that it really has very little to do with him.

There are three forces driving the story.

First of course, there is B’Tselem.

B’Tselem’s produced the film to advance its goal of obliging Israel’s national leadership, including the IDF brass, to care more about “world opinion” than about the opinion of Israeli citizens.

Second then, is the pubic that cares more about the lives of IDF soldiers than about what the world thinks of it.

Finally, there is the IDF General Staff that is being forced to pick which side it stands with.

Since Israel was established nearly 70 years ago, the relationship between the IDF and the public has been based on an often unstated social contract.

From the public’s side, Israel’s citizens agree to serve in the IDF and risk their lives in its service.

Moreover, they agree to allow their children to serve in the military and to be placed in harm’s way.

From the IDF’s side, the commanders agree to view the lives of their soldiers as sacrosanct, and certainly as more precious than the lives of the enemy and the enemies’ society.

The third side is the General Staff. In the years leading up to the Azaria affair the generals were already showing disturbing signs of forgetting their contract with the public.

The films of fleeing soldiers and the rules of engagement weren’t the only signs of our military leadership’s estrangement.

There were also the promotions given to radical lawyers to serve in key positions in the Military Advocate-General’s unit, and the red carpet treatment given to radical leftist groups like B’Tselem that were dedicated to criminalizing soldiers and commanders.

Since the shooting in Hebron, the General Staff’s treatment of the public has become even more disdainful.

Ya’alon and Eisenkot and his generals have repeatedly offended the public with comparisons of “IDF values” with alleged processes of barbarization, Nazification and ISIS-ization of the public by the likes of Azaria and his supporters.

If there was a specific moment where the military brass abandoned its compact with society once and for all, it came on Tuesday, the day before the military court convicted Azaria of manslaughter. In a speech that day, Eisenkot insisted that IDF soldiers are not “our children.” They are grownups and they are required to obey the orders they receive.

By making this statement the day before the verdict in a case that pitted society against the General Staff, which sided with B’Tselem, Eisenkot told us that the General Staff no longer feels itself obligated by a sacred compact with the people of Israel.

Azaria is the first victim of a General Staff that has decided to cease serving as the people’s army and serve instead as B’Tselem’s army. The call now spreading through the Knesset for Azaria to receive a presidential pardon, while certainly reasonable and desirable, will likely fail to bring about his freedom. For a pardon request to reach President Reuven Rivlin’s desk, it first needs to be stamped by Eisenkot.

A pardon for Azaria would go some way toward repairing the damage the General Staff has done to its relationship with the public. But from Eisenkot’s behavior this week, it is apparent that he feels no need and has no interest in repairing that damage.

As a result, it is likely that Azaria will spend years behind bars for killing the enemy.

Moreover, if nothing forces Eisenkot and his generals to their senses, Azaria will neither be the last nor the greatest victim of their betrayal of the public’s trust.

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post. 

[huge_it_share]

Posted on

JERUSALEM FIGHTS BACK: John Kerry Keeps Attacking Israel While It Freezes $6M To The UN

Israel has decided to retaliate against the UN over UNSC 2334 by freezing $6 million of its annual $40 million dues.

“It is unreasonable for Israel to fund bodies that operate against us at the UN. The UN must end the absurd reality in which it supports bodies whose sole intent is to spread incitement and anti-Israel propaganda,”  Danny Danon, Israel’s ambassador to the UN said.

Given that the UN is gearing up for more anti-Israel resolutions, Israel’s move to cut money is just the first of many measures prepared in the coming weeks to fight back against the international community’s assault on the Jewish state.

Kerry: Moving US Embassy could cause ‘explosion’ in Middle East

Along with the the UN, the outgoing US secretary of state John Kerry has attacked Donald Trump’s planned move of the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.

“If all of a sudden, Jerusalem is declared to be the location of our embassy, that has issues of sovereignty, issues of law that would deem to be affected by that move and by the United States acquiescing in that move and that would have profound impact on the readiness of Jordan and Egypt to be able to be supportive and engaged with Israel as they are today,” Kerry said.

With January 20th just around the corner, both the US administration and the UN are working together to prepare the groundwork for one last diplomatic push that could permantently harm Israel.  This political pressure is exactly what the Republicans in the congress rebuked and censured in their Thursday vote against the UNSC.

Posted on

JORDAN THREATENS DONALD TRUMP: Moving US Embassy to Jerusalem is Crossing a Redline

A Jordanian govenment spokesman, speaking to the Associated Press warned President-Elect Donald Trump that his planned move of the US Embassy to Jerusalem is “crossing a redline” and will be “catostrophic.”

Momani, the Jordanian minister, said that moving the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem “will have catastrophic implications on several levels, including the regional situation.” He said countries in the region would likely “think about different things and steps they should take in order to stop this from happening.”

“It will definitely affect the bilateral relationship between countries in the region, including Jordan, and the parties that will be related to such a decision,” he said.

As January 20th draws closer, the Middle East awaits hisDonald Trump’s policy, which by all indications will be decidely pro-Israel. In fact Last month, Trump adviser Kellyanne Conway was quoted as saying that moving the embassy to Jerusalem is a “very big priority” for the president-elect.

Jordan is a Make Believe Country

One of the reasons why Jordan is afraid of Trump’s move is that the Kingdom is actually carved out of the original Palestinian Mandate as a gift to the Hussein family for their support of the British in World War One.  The King and his family are originally from what is today the Arabian penninsula.  His control over Islamic holy sites in Jerusalem is the only thing that gives him gravitas in the Muslim world.

Any solidification of Israel’s control over the Jewish capital of Jerusalem would reveal that the King of Jordan is a paper tiger with no real power.  He is propped up by American tax payer dollars and Israeli security forces.  Without them, he would have fallen to the majority Palestinian populace he brutally controls a long time ago.

 

Posted on

Why is the DNC Hosting a Candidate Forum at an Anti-Israel Restaurant?

The Democratic National Committee decided to host its candidate forum at a restaurant known for its anti-Israel views. Candidates for the top DNC post will participate in a candidate forum later this month at Busboys and Poets in Washington, D.C., according to a Politico report.

The restaurant is owned by Andy Shallal, an Iraqi-born political activist who uses his venue to advance a far-left political agenda. More specifically Shallal is anti-Israel activist.

“Israel continues to violate international law … while the U.S. and its allies sit on the side, getting its marching orders from Tel Aviv,” Shallal said during the World Says No to the Israel Occupation rally in 2007. “Folks, this is not an accident—this is a plan to create a new American-Israeli century, and those who dare to speak out will be squashed.”

With the Democrats under fire for their increasing shift to an openly anti-Israel agenda, one wonders why they chose to allow the forum to take place at Shallal’s restaurant. The answer is, they just don’t care.

According to the Washington Free Beacon, the restaurant has hosted numerous 9/11 truther events, fundraisers for the Gaza Flotilla, and even a speech by Bill Ayers.

Posted on

World leaders speak out on biased UNSC resolution; New Zealand waits

While the passing of the controversial UNSC Resolution 2334 on the eve of Christmas and Hanukkah went under the radar of many, a number of world leaders have spoken out. Even members of Obama’s own party are appalled at the stance taken by the United States; UK Prime Minister Theresa May has rebuked John Kerry for focussing on Israeli settlements; and Australia, a country without a seat at the Security Council, has called the resolution “one-sided” and “deeply unsettling”. However, New Zealand Prime Minister Bill English is yet to comment, despite repeated calls for him to do so.

Fifteen countries sit on the United Nations Security Council. On 24 December 2016 (NZT), when resolution 2334 was adopted, half of the ten non-permanent members were considered “Free” democracies by the UK based Economist Intelligence Unit.

New Zealand had the highest Democracy Index of all fifteen nations, yet joined Venezuela (a “Hybrid regime”), Senegal, and Malaysia (both “Flawed democracies”) to co-sponsor the text prepared by Egypt (“Authoritarian”).

Regardless of how democratic a country is, the votes at the UNSC are cast by individual representatives who may not be fully supported by the citizens they represent. There are suggestions that New Zealand Foreign Minister, Murray McCully, did not seek cabinet approval before sponsoring or voting for the text. There is also evidence to suggest the United States colluded with the Palestinians and Egypt to formulate the text of the resolution, despite US denial.

United States President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry abandoned a longstanding practice of using the US veto power against biased resolutions when they abstained from the vote, prompting bipartisan outrage from congress. The US also allegedly helped develop the text, which would include abandonment of longstanding US policies, including land-for-peace, opposing the discriminatory BDS movement, and insisting that the parties to the conflict must resolve their differences.

Despite UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson casting the UK vote for the resolution, Prime Minister Theresa May has spoken out against the aggressive and biased rhetoric of Obama and John Kerry in their “lame duck” period. She said:

We do not believe that the way to negotiate peace is by focusing on only one issue, in this case the construction of settlements, when clearly the conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians is so deeply complex… The [UK] Government believes that negotiations will only succeed when they are conducted between the two parties, supported by the international community”Theresa May

Russia was another country that voted for the resolution but, after the vote, issued a statement criticizing the way it was brought to the Security Council, in a surprise move just a day after Egypt pulled its own proposal on the matter. The Russian statement said

Our experience shows convincingly that a two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict is only possible through direct talks between Palestinians and Israelis without any preconditions.”Russian government

Not all nations have waded into commentary on the anti-Israel resolution. However, Australia – a country that does not have a seat at the Security Council – has condemned the resolution. Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull affirmed his country’s support for a peace deal between Israelis and Palestinians, which he said could only come about through direct negotiations between the parties, a stance Israel has repeatedly put forward. This follows Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop saying Canberra “has consistently not supported one-sided resolutions targeting Israel” and would have voted against resolution 2234. This is consistent with an interview Bishop gave in 2014, in which she said West Bank settlements should not be referred to as “illegal” and

I don’t think it’s helpful to prejudge the settlement issue if you’re trying to get a negotiated solution. And by deeming the activity as a war crime, it’s unlikely to engender a negotiated solution.”Julie Bishop

The only democratic country to be more fiercely opposed to the resolution is Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected the resolution in the symbolic act of lighting Hannukah candles at the Western Wall (which the resolution considers part of “occupied Palestinian territories”). He reportedly said “Israel is strong, and I won’t let us be spit on. We will respond forcefully.” Israel has also recalled ambassadors to Senegal and New Zealand.

The less-than-democratic world leaders have praised the resolution. Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar not only welcomed the resolution but also praised John Kerry for the proposal that Theresa May rebuked. Fatah has publicly thanked the Security Council for the resolution, using a cartoon of Israel being used as a knife and Hamas also praised the resolution, with a spokesperson saying

We expect further support for the Palestinians’ righteous cause of ending the occupation.”Fawzi Barhoum

While all these leaders have spoken out, Kiwis wait. Even though New Zealand co-sponsored the text and voted for the resolution, Kiwis wait for comment from their leaders. Despite protests, a letter to the Prime Minister and petitions, concerned New Zealanders wait for a response from their Prime Minister.

Originally published on Shalom Kiwi

Posted on

Bibi Netanyahu: Pardon Elor Azaria

The Prime Minister used Facebook to make the following comment concerning the guilty verdict in the Elor Azaria case:

This is a difficult and painful day for all of us – first and foremost for Elor Azaria and his family, IDF soldiers, many citizens and parents of soldiers, myself included.

I call on all Israeli citizens to act responsibly toward the IDF, its commanders and staff. We have one army which is based our existence. IDF soldidealers are our sons and daughters, and they must remain beyond any dispute.

I support giving amnesty Elor Azeria.

Whether out of sincere conviction that a great injustice was done or a shrewd populist move, the Prime Minister has with one statement dismantled the leftwing of the country. The entire media except for rightwing sites, attacked Azaria from the start.  The incessant interest to smear an innocent soldier was part of the left’s game plan to hold the IDF hostage. The problem is that most of the country has sons and daughters in the IDF and this could have happened to them.  By Bibi being able identify with them, he has given energy to what will be seen in years to come as a movement to take back Israel from the judicial tryaranny it now finds itself in.

Posted on

IDF CHAOS: What Does the Guilty Verdict in the Elor Azaria Trial Mean for the IDF and Israel?

After nine long months of indescribable torture towards Sgt. Elor Azariya and his family, the army court has handed down a verdict of guilty of manslaughter.  What a black day in the history of the State of Israel.

The left has been licking their chops since March when they discovered that they could take a soldier who is defending his/our country and turn him into a scapegoat.  What a treasure Elor became for them.  The left took it to the max and to the media and started a nonstop attack of character assassination towards Elor.  Through one method or another, they have managed to control the trial.  It appeared as if the trial was already signed, sealed, and delivered as time went on.

The attack continued on Elor by bringing in top officers from the IDF to testify that Elor allegedly shot an arab while not being in a situation of self defense and that he do not operate according to the rules opening of fire of the IDF.  What does that mean that Elor went against firing orders?  Who can know what went through Elor’s mind at the time of the alleged incident?  Elor probably can’t even know.  In the heat of battle you do what you have to do.  Its kill or be killed.  The arab came into the area in Hebron with the intention of killing Jews.  No less and no more.  Any soldier or for that matter any civilian who is in that situation, it is clear as day what must be done.  Yes the arab was on the ground however he was not subdued, he was not handcuffed and the danger still existed that the arab could get up, and continue to kill Jews.  It would not have been the first time that an arab on the ground got up and continued trying to kill Jews.  The orders for opening fire are very clear in that if the soldier is in fear for his life or others around him, he can open fire on the enemy.  Doesn’t IDF stand for Israel Defense Forces?  Elor was just trying to defend himself and all others around him.

The judge during the handing down of the verdict, said that Elor killed a man as opposed to saying that Elor killed a terrorist.  This shows how the judges themselves are corrupt and have for a long time already decided what the verdict will be.  This goes hand in hand that the arab who was allegedly shot by Elor was suddenly turned into a martyr.

Elor testified that the arab in question was wearing clothes that were not appropriate for that time of year and that he was moving around the area in a very suspicious way.

At the base of this whole trial is the constant attempt by the left to regain control of the government.  They have done everything in their power to make this the case of the year if not decade so that the right will fall.

Even more is what happens now?  In the future we could have an eighteen year old who is getting ready to go into the army.  He has to think twice now (no matter what the verdict is today), does he really want to enlist in a combat unit?  What if he gets into the same situation as Elor was and thinks twice about shooting the arab and the arab gets up and Heaven forbid kills him and or other Jews and Jewish soldiers.  Or what if there is a soldier who is already in a combat unit.  In a normal situation he can come into contact with arab attackers on a daily basis and then what does he do?  Freeze up because he doesn’t want to be arrested and therefore by doing that he can endanger his life and others.  Here is where the left wants to take the People Of Israel.

This is a sad  day for Israel.  The People Of Israel have been taken down to a new low by the left.  The country now is really torn in two.  The fifth column has managed to destroy us once again from within.

The judge spoke for almost THREE hours before giving the verdict.  The judge went over section by section of the charges against Elor.  What an embarrassment.  If Elor is innocent, then pronounce that Elor is innocent.  If Elor is guilty, Heaven forbid, then pronounce that he is guilty.  What an embarrassment  to all of Am Yisrael.  The arabs and the fifth column inside Israel will have a field day now.

The chief of staff just yesterday said that an eighteen year old is not everyone’s soldier but the army’s soldier.  What happened to the ethic that all of Israel is responsible for one another?  What happened to the ideal that our children who are in the army are everyone’s child?  The defense minister must come out right now and censure the chief of staff for this outrageous remark.  The People Of Israel do not want and do not deserve such a person to be the chief of staff.  It will only lead to military disasters.

Minister of Education Naftali Bennett said this week that if Elor is found guilty he must be pardoned immediately.  Prime Minster Netanyahu also spoke in favor of Elor during the trial.  Similar quotes have been made by various Knesset members, from all sides of the political spectrum.  With the help of God, this will happen very quickly and the fifth column here in Israel will once and for all be silenced and destroyed.