Hillary Clinton Deserves to Lose Tonight’s Debate for this Reason…

There are so many reasons that Hillary deserves to lose tonight’s debate and therefore the election.  She is part of the neoconservative globalist elite whose goal is to destroy nationhood, individualism, and free thought.  Their main aim in doing so is to uproot the people of Israel from their Land, thus rendering the people of G-d non-chosen.  This is their mission.  If they succeed, the tremendous light that was brought into the world upon the Jewish people’s return to their homeland, would be extinguished.

All of these reasons are enough not to support Hillary. Yet, the above video is perhaps the greatest reason of all. In November 1999, Hillary Cinton found herself in Ramallah with the wife of arch-terrorist suddenly transformed into a statesman Yasser Arafat.  After Suha gave a scathing address against Israel, Hillary embraced her.  This singular event should remind everyone who she is.  Arafat was responsible for killing more Jews post Holocaust than anyone else.  He was the architect of the imaginary Palestinians and a KGB agent.

Hillary and her husband Bill knew who these people were and still saw fit to threaten and conjole Israel into an agreement with the leader of a group of heinous individuals languishing in terrorist exile in Tunisia.  Arafat and his number two the current “President” of the Palestinian Authority Abbas came to Ramallah under the Oslo accords and wasted no time wiping out their moderate opposition. After they accomplished this they began a campaign of brainwashing the “Palestinian” Arab youth that still continues today.

The above image should remind voters who they should vote for, because if she can kiss the wife of the father of modern global terrorism, what makes them believe she has a desire to keep America, Israel, and the world safe.

[huge_it_share]

Break the BDS

ON THE FRONTLINES: Free Free Palestine

Free Palestine

In the 21st Century world of political and social justice tweeting, the slogan Free Free Palestine has been used by Israeli BDS movements around the world.  Like anything else in the struggle over the Land of Israel, names are important as is the history behind them.

In 1964, Yasser Arafat built the Palestine Liberation Organization around the idea of recapturing or conquering the Jewish state of Israel.  Either by a stroke of genius or luck, his choice of the name Palestine has been the single biggest weapon the Arabs of the Land of Israel have used against Israel.  If after all Israel is the rightful heir to the Land what was the need to change the name.  Palestine it always was, wasn’t it?

Of course, we all know that the name Palestine was not used as a legal definition to the land in question until the British created the Mandate of Palestine.  In fact, the Arabs at the time demanded the name the Turks used for the area remain, otherwise known as the area of Southern Syria, which included Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Israel. It was the Jews who adopted the word Palestinian for themselves. Up until 1948, that was the name that was most synonymous with the cause of returning and creating a Jewish Homeland.

The name Palestine and Jewish Homeland was so intensely intertwined that the major organization that successfully lobbied the Congress for a sovereign Jewish State in the Palestinian Mandate was known as the American Palestine Committee. Two thirds of congress belonged to the committee whose singular aim was to establish an independent Jewish Commonwealth in the Land of Israel.

Free Palestine

So who are the Palestinians today? The question is one of semantics. If history is our guide, the Palestinians are today’s Israelis and the Palestinian flag is essentially the Israeli flag.  Those Arabs purporting to be Palestinian were residents of Southern Syria pushed to migrate to the southern Levant in hopes of blocking the Jewish resettlement of “Palestine.”

The key to peace in the region is removing the appropriation of one’s culture by another.  The Arabs of Southern Syria are nothing more than a vast collection of unconnected clans now conditioned to believe they were once a glorious nation.  These clans have almost nothing in common other than the religious, political, and cultural goal of serving as the spearhead of the neo-colonialist goal of delegitimizing the Jewish connection to te Land of Israel.

In order to destroy the plans of the Western dominated globalist security state is to free Palestine from its false association and rightfully placing it within its proper historical context.

 

Opting Out of Freedom

During the occupation of Poland by Nazi Germany, a young woman found herself traveling on a packed tram. She was Jewish but living in hiding and pretending to be a non-Jew so as to save herself and the few people in her family who were still alive. The tram was not only packed to the brim, but also filled with German officers, raising the risk of her being caught.

The woman was sitting next to a Polish peasant woman who was in town to sell produce. At one point during the ride, an insane impulse grabbed hold of the woman, and she suddenly reached out and pinched the peasant’s leg, right there, in the middle of the packed tram, crawling with Germans.

This could have been the end of her. The Nazis could have grabbed her and snuffed out her life, as they did with millions of others. The reason I know she did not meet her end is that I would not be here to tell the story if she had: The young woman was my grandmother.

What happened? The peasant woman did not scream out in pain or curse my grandmother. She kept still, quiet and unresponsive to my grandmother’s unprovoked violence. The tram continued on its bumbling way, and my grandmother, perhaps drawing a long breath, was saved by the peasant woman’s grace.

I have thought about this story countless times over the years. My grandmother never gave a straight answer to why she acted in this manner, putting her life at risk on a whim. The more I thought about it, however, the more I came to realize that my grandmother’s act was not necessarily meaningless, even if it was extremely reckless.

I have come to believe that her act — a rather reprehensible act of violence — was an impulsive act of defiance. It was a way of punching fate in the face, as it were, and challenging it to a fight at a time of extreme oppression and total absence of freedom. Showing her hostile and ruthless surroundings that she was there, too, not just a shadow hiding from extinction, but a living being forced to spend her every breathing moment guarding her life from extinction.

But why did the peasant woman keep quiet? She did not know my grandmother and she could have screamed and cursed her, drawing the attention of the German officers. My guess is that this rare woman, stoic as she was, instinctively realized that any pinch from my grandmother was a caress compared to the pain that the Germans would have unleashed and she would have no part of it. She saved herself, most likely, along with my grandmother.

After the war, the occupier’s flag changed and instead of the swastika came the hammer and sickle as the Soviets mercilessly snuffed out any brief euphoria. Eastern Europe was a place bereft of freedom, where the thought police controlled all avenues of communication and the only accepted speech was that parroting the communist slogans of the Soviet politburo.

My grandmother continued her life in this “communist paradise,” where there was no freedom from communist orthodoxy — although conditions in Poland were far from being the worst among the countries behind the Iron Curtain — and where, in the words of George Orwell, if you wanted to keep a secret, it was best to keep it hidden even from yourself.

Having been inoculated against any and all versions of communism and socialism from a very early age — a natural consequence of having felt the effects of those ideologies in real life and not just as “beautiful” theories — I often marvel at the speed with which history is forgotten.

It has only been a quarter of a century since the United States conclusively won the Cold War against the Soviets, yet I often ask myself whether the Soviets aren’t metaphorically jumping for joy from their place in hell, considering how political correctness has permeated public discourse in the United States and Western Europe.

After all — and tragically very few people know this — the standard tropes of political correctness, especially in Israel-related discourse, were conceived by the Soviets. When young people think they are fighting for social justice and freedom, they are often repeating Soviet tropes that would have made Communist Party leader Leonid Brezhnev proud. It was he who, after the Israeli invasion of Lebanon in 1982, told Yasser Arafat that the invasion amounted to “the same genocide against Palestinians that the Nazis committed against other people during World War II.”

The terrible accusation that Israel is an apartheid state is also a Soviet invention, which has refused to die even after the demise of its inventors. There is a certain irony in the fact that young college-age Americans, who in the old days would have been fighting the Soviets, are now reciting Soviet slogans.

I wonder at the ease with which perfectly free people throw away their freedom of speech in favor of living up to the expectations of political correctness, rigid as they are in all their reductionist groupthink. Living in free societies, they are seemingly incapable of appreciating how precious that freedom is, and how easily it can be snuffed out. Not by invading armies of the totalitarian kind, but by the equally totalitarian impulse to adhere to a particular rendition of reality.

Current generations living in the West have never gone through the experience of being reduced to complete silence, desperately communicating their anger by pinching total strangers on trams. They have the entire world at their feet and still they choose to narrow it to its smallest components, censoring themselves and others who disagree with them, until all that is left is the embarrassing sight of shrunken, small minds, fearful of sticking out in the crowd.

“The choice for mankind lies between freedom and happiness, and for the great bulk of mankind, happiness is better,” George Orwell wrote in his satirical book “1984.” Political correctness, and all the ills of intellectual dishonesty and moral cowardice that flow from it, can only become as pervasive as it is when the majority prefers happiness over freedom.

This article was originally published by Israel Hayom.