Posted originally on the conservative tree house April 25, 2021 | Sundance | 137 Comments
Senator Rand Paul appears on Maria Bartiromo to discuss the ongoing ramification from current leftist policy as being produced on Capitol Hill. The interview begins with Senator Paul discussing the leftist definitions of ‘infrastructure’ and how left-wing groups are beneficiaries of trillions of taxpayer funds.
On the economic ramifications Senator Paul notes the impact of massive capital gains increases and how increasing corporate income taxes only provides incentives for national companies to establish themselves overseas to avoid tax liability. The multinational corps, those already positioned overseas, do not have the same risk exposure to corporate tax increases, thus they do not oppose legislation that hurts national business and small U.S. corporations.
Overall the points made by Rand Paul are all valid; however, those in DC still hold back from pointing out the intent of the JoeBama group – that’s frustrating. This game where incompetence is claimed under the guise of ‘benefit of doubt’ is a severe weakness within the GOP. The refusal to aggressively confront Obama 3.0 is beyond frustrating.
Anyone who believes Democrats own exclusive opposition to the America First principles are completely ignoring the deliberate construct of the republican party. There are just as many -if not more- natural enemies within the Republican apparatus as there are within the Democrat group. “America-First” is antithetical to the UniParty.
The frustration amid the MAGA community is valid. Everything about it is righteous. The mechanisms that run the system in DC must be deconstructed if we are to win the battles and the war against this massive enemy. We have the largest coalition of American patriots on our side; however, there are only a handful of representatives willing to confront with the needed ferocity.
Multinationals want control; some call that corporatism…. but the names are moot. Multinationals want control, and capitalism does not allow them control; that is why multinationals do not want capitalism. Multinationals use lobbyists to generate regulations that stall competition.
Multinationals do not want competition; they are, by nature of their interest, anti-capitalists.
This misunderstanding is everywhere.
Most people think when they vote for a federal politician -a House or Senate representative- they are voting for a person who will go to Washington DC and write or enact legislation. This is the old-fashioned “schoolhouse rock” perspective based on decades past.
There is not a single person in congress writing legislation or laws. In modern politics not a single member of the House of Representatives or Senator writes a law, or puts pen to paper to write out a legislative construct. This simply doesn’t happen.
Over the past several decades a system of constructing legislation has taken over Washington DC that more resembles a business operation than a legislative body.
The for-profit groups (mostly multinational corporations) have a purpose in Washington DC to shape policy, legislation and laws favorable to their interests. They have fully staffed offices just like any business would – only their ‘business‘ is getting legislation for their unique interests.
These groups are filled with highly-paid lawyers who represent the interests of the entity and actually write laws and legislation briefs.
In the modern era this is actually the origination of the laws that we eventually see passed by congress. Within the walls of these buildings within Washington DC is where the ‘sausage’ is actually made. Again, no elected official is usually part of this law origination process.
Almost all legislation created is not ‘high profile’, they are obscure changes to current laws, regulations or policies that no-one pays attention to. The passage of the general bills within legislation is not covered in media. Ninety-nine percent of legislative activity happens without anyone outside the system even paying any attention to it.
Once the corporation (multinational) or representative organizational entity has written the law they want to see passed – they hand it off to the lobbyists.
The lobbyists are people who have deep contacts within the political bodies of the legislative branch, usually former House/Senate staff or former House/Senate politicians themselves.
The lobbyist takes the written brief, the legislative construct, and it’s their job to go to congress and sell it. “Selling it” means finding politicians who will accept the brief, sponsor their bill and eventually get it to a vote and passage.
Corporations (special interest group) write the legislation. Lobbyists take the law and go find politician(s) to support it. Politicians get support from their peers using tenure and status etc. Eventually, if things go according to norm, the legislation gets a vote.
Within every step of the process there are expense account lunches, dinners, trips, venue tickets and a host of other customary financial way-points to generate/leverage a successful outcome. The amount of money spent is proportional to the benefit derived from the outcome.
The important part to remember is that the origination of the entire process is EXTERNAL to congress.
Congress does not write laws or legislation, special interest groups do. Lobbyists are paid, some very well paid, to get politicians to go along with the need of the legislative group. When a House or Senate member becomes educated on the intent of the legislation, they have attended the sales pitch; and when they find out the likelihood of support for that legislation; they can then position their own (or their families) financial interests to benefit from the consequence of passage. It is a process similar to insider trading on Wall Street, except the trading is based on knowing who will benefit from a legislative passage.
When we understand the business of DC, we understand the difference between legislation with a traditional purpose and modern legislation with a financial and political agenda.
If you know a better solution to this mess than repeal of the 17th amendment, I am all ears.
If, as the constitution outlined, the Senate were still a place where all legislation required a 2/3 majority for passage; and if, as the constitution outlined, the Senate were a body filled with representatives selected by State Houses instead of popular election – then perhaps Senators could not be purchased by multinational interests. Alas it is not.
Passage of the 17th amendment took away the very intentional roadblock of the Republican framework that Jefferson spoke of when he called it a saucer to cool the hot emotional tea of short-sighted legislation. The constitution outlined consent as “two-thirds” (66), which was progressively watered down to become “three-fifths” (60) as the majority rule; and substantively, as it now stands according to democrats objectives, one-half plus one (51).
We are on the precipice and the GOP operate as if the constitution burning can be restored if they just reach across the aisle more.
Armstrong Economics Blog/China Re-Posted Feb 13, 2021 by Martin Armstrong
The Ox is the second of all zodiac animals. According to one myth, the Jade Emperor said the order would be decided by the order in which they arrived to his party. The Ox was about to be the first to arrive, but Rat tricked Ox into giving him a ride. Then, just as they arrived, Rat jumped down and landed ahead of Ox. Thus, Ox became the second animal.
From a cyclical perspective, these are years that do correspond to important shifts in trends. The year 1913 was the year of the Ox when both the income tax and the Federal Reserve were created. (125 was the year the bull market really began to take off and real estate was the first to peak 2 years later. Of court 1949 was the first currency devaluation under Bretton Woods. Even 1961 was Kennedy election, 1973 OPEC, 1985 peak in dollar birth of G5, 1997 Asia Currency Crisis, 2009 bottom in the 2007 Financial Crisis, and now 2021 looks to be shaping up as a disaster and Biden takes control. The next will be 2033 one year after our model peaks in 2032.
The PLO and Hamas should be spurned world-wide until they let their citizens emigrate
The PLO’s continuing refusal to negotiate with Israel on President Trump’s Peace Plan—whilst also denouncing the peace treaties signed by the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Bahrain with Israel—sees West Bank and Gazan Arabs remaining captive to accepting these disastrous PLO decisions without any rights to vote or emigrate.
These disenfranchised, beleaguered and long-suffering populations have seen the PLO reject proposals for peace flowing from:
- 1993 Oslo Accords,
- 2000 Camp David Summit,
- 2003 Bush Road Map,
- Israel’s unilateral disengagement from Gaza 2005
- 2007 Annapolis Conference,
- 2014 Kerry negotiations and
- Trump’s 2020 deal of the century—reportedly endorsed by Qatar.
Financial assistance to improve their miserable lives has been lost—including:
- $750 million annually from direct American aid
- $360 million per annum in American aid to UNRWA
- America terminating its payment of 22% of UNESCO’s annual budget following UNESCO’s admission of the “State of Palestine” as a member contrary to American domestic law and in contravention of UNESCO’s own constitution
- $28.5 billion that would have flown from international donors at the Manama Conference held on June 25/26, 2019 if the Trump Peace Plan was implemented.
The UAE voiced its support for the Manama Conference and what it hoped would be achieved:
“The UAE supports all international efforts aimed at supporting economic progress and increasing opportunities in the region, and alleviating the suffering of people in the region, particularly our brothers in Palestine… It (the Conference) aims to lift the Palestinian people out of misery and to enable them for a stable and prosperous future,”
Hamas and the PLO violently opposed and boycotted the Manama Conference.
Hamas—which turned Gaza into a hell hole following Israel’s unilateral disengagement in 2005—had the gall to warn the Manama Conference Arab attendees:
“We warn Arab states against the malicious activities aimed to pave the way for normalisation with the Israeli occupation and involvement in the deal of the century,”
The UAE and Bahrain wisely rejected this advice at the White House last week.
PLO spokesman Saeb Erekat—expressed his opposition to the Manama Conference claiming:
“there will be no economic prosperity in Palestine without the end of the occupation.”
Tens of millions of desperate people have fled their birthplaces for economic reasons in recent years seeking to enter other countries illegally.
Policies espoused by both Hamas and the PLO in relation to Israel have wrought disaster:
- Materially affecting West Bank and Gazan Arabs’ personal lives and
- Wrecking hopes for peace and a brighter future for themselves and their families.
Many West Bank and Gazan Arabs would want to emigrate after Erekat’s depressing prediction—especially to Arab countries prepared to accept them legally.
Employment, economic prosperity and better lives tantalisingly beckon West Bank and Gazan Arabs in:
- Saudi Arabia’s NEOM project—a planned US$500 billion mega city.
The project includes a bridge spanning the Red Sea, connecting the proposed city to Africa.
Some 25,900 square kilometres—the size of Israel—has been allocated for the project—which will be close to the borders of Jordan and Egypt.
- The planned relocation of the Egyptian Government offices from Cairo to a new $58 billion administrative capital city 45 km east of Cairo covering an area of 741 square km.
West Bank and Gazan Arabs—caught up in three decades of disastrous decisions and continuing internecine in-fighting between their corrupt governments—should be allowed to vote with their feet and move—with international financial assistance—to other countries willing to accept them.
The PLO and Hamas should be spurned world-wide until they let their citizens emigrate.
Author’s note: The cartoon — commissioned exclusively for this article — is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones”- one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators — whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades. His cartoons can be viewed at Drybonesblog
Sadly, the United Nations, under Mr. Guterres’ leadership, is legitimizing the Palestinian leaders’ deceptions and exploitation
Re-Posted from the Canada Free Press By Joseph A. Klein, CFP United Nations Columnist —— Bio and Archives—September 16, 2020
The member states of the United Nations plan to adopt a declaration next week marking the 75th anniversary of the United Nations and committing to a reinvigorated multilateralism, according to UN Secretary General Antonio Guterres. They will also invite the Secretary General “to report on our common agenda for the future,” Mr. Guterres told reporters at a press conference in which reporters participated both in person and virtually. “This will be an important process of reflection and I will report back with analysis and recommendations.”
Secretary General presented a false choice between “global solidarity” through globalist institutions like the United Nations versus “go-it-alone nationalist approaches”
One wonders why the Secretary General is not already prepared to offer his concrete analysis and specific recommendations for keeping the UN relevant in the years ahead. It’s not as if he is new to the job. Secretary General Guterres is in his fourth year of a five-year term and presumably has already been thinking ahead to a possible second term. However, the Secretary General was short on specifics in his opening remarks to reporters. He fell back instead on his usual platitudes, calling for global solidarity to deal with climate change, the coronavirus, a global ceasefire, eradicating poverty and the like. Secretary General Guterres said nothing about trying to fix the UN’s own problems of trust caused by its lack of accountability for misdeeds by UN personnel and its lack of transparency.
“People are thinking big – about transforming the global economy, accelerating the transition to zero carbon, ensuring universal health coverage, moving towards a universal basic income and making decision-making more open and inclusive,” Secretary General Guterres said. “They are also expressing an intense yearning for global solidarity – and rejecting go-it-alone nationalist approaches and divisive populist appeals. Now is the time to respond to these aspirations and realize these aims. In this 75th anniversary year, we face our own 1945 moment.”
The Secretary General presented a false choice between “global solidarity” through globalist institutions like the United Nations versus “go-it-alone nationalist approaches.” There is a responsible third choice that is most consistent with the UN Charter – smart, targeted multilateralism to address manageable transnational problems without giving up each nation’s sovereignty in the process.
United Nations does not have the authority “to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state”
The Charter of the United Nations, as designed by the victors of World War II who created the UN seventy-five years ago, does not compel the UN’s member states to forfeit their sovereignty to a global governance body. Quite the opposite. The United Nations was founded to bring sovereign nations together for the purpose of cooperating to solve common problems while taking collective action where warranted against threats to international peace and security. In fact, the United Nations Charter specifically recognizes the sovereign status of the member states. It stipulates that the United Nations does not have the authority “to intervene in matters which are essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of any state.”
Only the Security Council has enforcement powers under Chapter VII of the Charter to impose sanctions and authorize the use of collective military force to maintain or restore international peace and security, subject to the veto power of its five permanent members. Everything else about United Nations governance outside of paying assessed dues is voluntary.
As President Trump said in his remarks to the UN General Assembly last year, “The future does not belong to globalists. The future belongs to sovereign and independent nations who protect their citizens, respect their neighbors, and honor the differences that make each country special and unique.” At the same time, President Trump stressed that the United States “is ready to embrace friendship with all who genuinely seek peace and respect. America knows that while anyone can make war, only the most courageous can choose peace.”
While Secretary General Guterres speaks in abstract about a “collective push for peace,” President Trump has worked with other nations in a multilateral fashion to achieve real results in the pursuit of peace.
UN’s myopic obsession on the Palestinian cause
Most notably, on September 15th at the White House, peace agreements were signed between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and between Israel and Bahrain. Israel, the United Arab Emirates, and Bahrain will establish embassies, exchange ambassadors, and embark on a cooperative relationship involving such matters as trade, healthcare, and security.
Inexplicably, Secretary General Guterres neglected to mention these historic agreements in his opening remarks. In response to a question about the agreements, Secretary General Guterres claimed they “managed one very important result, and that was the suspension of the annexation of occupied territory.” Typical of the UN’s myopic obsession on the Palestinian cause, the Secretary General downplayed the importance of two Arab countries reaching peace accords with Israel for the first time since Israel and Jordan signed their Treaty of Peace 26 years ago. The only other peace agreement signed by Israel with an Arab country was the Camp David Accords with Egypt in 1979.
As commentators in the Arab world are increasingly recognizing, Middle East peace is not all about satisfying the Palestinian leadership’s maximalist demands. The commentators were disgusted with the Palestinian leaders’ reflexive denunciations of normalizing relations between Israel and the two Arab Gulf countries. They are beginning to see through the Palestinians’ lies and self-dealing at the expense of the Palestinian people and genuine peace.
A Saudi writer, for example, wrote the following, as transcribed by MEMRI:
The UN is continuing its decades-old role as the enabler of Palestinian rejectionists
“The situation of our Palestinian brothers is regrettable. For over 60 years, their politicians have cashed in on their cause, and persisted in not reaching an arrangement, in destroying the negotiations, and in opposing every peace initiative, whether proposed by the Israelis or by the other international elements. The Palestinian politician has inflicted this on his cause and his people in order to profit from leaving things as they are, since the way he has chosen for decades was the only way to guarantee that he would remain in the picture and [benefit from the] influx of funds, donations and aid flowing from all directions, particularly from the Arab and Islamic world, into his coffers and his European bank accounts. Today, the situation is different, because the peoples who once identified with the Palestinian cause are completely aware of this manipulation and the way it is done.”
A Saudi Member of Parliament wrote, as transcribed by MEMRI:
“The Palestinians must understand… that today’s Arabs and Muslims are different than the past [generations], for the young generation has gained awareness and can no longer be deceived or exploited. The Palestinians have kept their cause exclusively under their own control, traded in it, and missed opportunities one by one, until their rights evaporated.”
Sadly, the United Nations, under Mr. Guterres’ leadership, is legitimizing the Palestinian leaders’ deceptions and exploitation. The UN is continuing its decades-old role as the enabler of Palestinian rejectionists who still insist on a Palestinian state stretching from “the river to the sea.” This is not the way to move forward successfully with Mr. Guterres’ desired “collective push for peace.”
I found The Book of Trees, by Leanne Lieberman, to be an unusual reading experience. I was struck by its inauthenticity, as the author clearly had a list of grievances and concocted a story line to convey them. Her intent was to disparage and delegitimize Israel as a nation and the Jews as a people – indeed to challenge their very existence – revealing her opinion through Mia.
Mia is the 17-year-old daughter of unwed parents in Canada. Her mother is an irreligious, Jewish, Bohemian-type remnant of the 1960s; her father, an atheist, lapsed Catholic, and a travelling musician who was often absent. She is lonely, in need of spiritual grounding. Alluding to her Jewish grandmother, she responded to a Jewish outreach poster and accepted a scholarship to study in Israel with a friend, Aviva Blume, for the summer between high school and university.
From the first day that she can run off on her own, Mia finds beauty in the endless desert and in the mosque on the Temple Mount and the Armenian church within the Old City. She disparages all else – Mrs. Blume, who hosted Mia’s first Shabbat dinner in Canada, as “frumpy”; Mr. Blume, as “fat and middle-aged,” although Mia was touched by the evening and the traditional love song. In Israel, she finds the tourists “dorky,” the Kotel “just a stone wall,” and the wigs worn by orthodox women for modesty “weirded me out.” The young man in class is cute, but “geeky.” The teacher’s kerchief is “ugly” and classes about the laws of kashruth (Jewish religious laws of the suitability of food) are “ridiculous” and “disappointing.” She is often dizzy, her head aches from clenching her teeth, and she was “nauseated” during prayers. However, she finds the non-Jewish American guitarist, Andrew, attractive, and she makes a feeble attempt at limiting her association. The author’s opinions about Judaism and Jews have become obvious.
She takes her first bus trip with Aviva into the Judean Desert, its name derived from Judah, one of the sons of the Jewish Patriarch, Jacob, also known as Israel, but the author has obvious reasons for overlooking the connection. Also ignored are the 3,000 years of recorded Jewish history on this land, including verified accounts of kings, prophets, characters that define the people, their artifacts and values, preferring to imagine credibility for Arabs who have no historical ties whatsoever.
Mia criticizes a grove of neatly spaced trees that had been planted by the Jewish National Fund (JNF), saying they looked unnatural, lacking the undergrowth of a northern forest. “It felt dead, like a tree graveyard.” She belittles the monument that commemorates the soldiers who took the hill in the 1948 War of Independence, battling five Arab armies that attacked the new sovereign state. Aviva suggests that the trees were probably planted over what had been an Arab village, to which Mia responds, “I guess they were determined to keep their homeland,” again endorsing the Muslim story line.
Rather than fact-check prior to writing, Lieberman recently reviewed her own book for credibility; book sales are weak, perhaps due to her tenacious bias. Mia cries for trees she imagines have been planted over Arab villages, but not for the Israelis murdered by those Arab villagers, or for diners killed, crippled or blinded by a jihadi’s explosive belt; or for the homes and playgrounds and thousands of agricultural acreage and wildlife preserves burned to cinders by their youths’ incendiary balloons. She repeats the Palestinian lie of Israeli oppression, and accuses Israel of apartheid, the charges never substantiated. During the pandemic, the Palestinian Authority continues to prioritize payments to convicted terrorists and their families over their people’s well-being. Even though Israel’s economy has suffered and people have died, the Jewish state continues to send aid to the PA and Gaza.
Muslim citizens enjoy more rights in Israel than they do under Islamic rule. The 20th century is packed with Arab raids, terrorism, massacres, revolts, numerous wars, intifadas, and suicide bombings worldwide. Azzam Pasha, secretary-general of the Arab League, declared of Israel on May 15, 1948, “This will be a war of extermination and a momentous massacre which will be spoken of like the Mongolian massacres and the Crusades.” Islam has been the cause of mass slaughter, devastation and annihilation since its inception and responsible for the more than 37,483 deadly attacks, worldwide (to 8/18/20), since 9/11. They have never declared a desire for peace as Lieberman suggests. and have never enacted laws to abolish slavery or grant individual freedoms. The Book of Trees is a mission in deception for the Palestinian narrative, and it is time to drop the legend of indigenous Palestinians.
The 600,000 – 750,000 Arabs who left Israel according to their own armies’ commands were part of the displaced masses from the Arab-initiated war, and should have been welcomed back to Egypt, Iraq, Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. Egypt is 36:1 the size of Israel, Iraq 15.7:1, Syria 6.6:1, and Jordan 3.2:1, and the Naqba is the betrayal by their own. Lieberman’s hope that Israel will welcome their avowed enemy and descendants is a wish for Israel’s annihilation. She does not advocate that the 850,000 displaced Jews be permitted to return to the Islamic countries from which they fled at the same time. Yasser Arafat declared that a Palestinian state would be Jew-free, yet the author and others expect Israel to be overwhelmed by their enemy.
From her new lover, Andrew, Mia learns that the Palestinians are “a poor native people who have been uprooted,” and that they want clean water and good schools – basic human rights. She does not know that Israel supplies large amounts of water from its own provisions to Palestinians and Jordan because this desert country has become a world leader of water conservation and desalination, overcoming almost insurmountable obstacles, while Hamas-controlled Gazans refuse to cooperate to improve their lot, and use the water as a political issue. Similarly, Mia seems not to know that Palestinians refused every opportunity to create their own country on land offered by the UN and Israel, and unaware that their children are raised to be murderous jihadis. And how is “good schools” defined when they teach hate against Israel and all Jews, and how to behead their perceived enemy. After the Arabs lost their War of 1967, they still declared, NO peace with Israel, NO recognition of Israel, and NO negotiation with Israel.
Mia learns about the checkpoints, but not of their effectiveness at apprehending terrorists before they can gain entry into Israel and discharge their explosive devices among the citizens. Lieberman describes the West Bank as a third-world country, with no infrastructure, their economy in ruins, but appears to be unaware that their more-than-generous funding (among the world’s largest per-capita aid recipients) gets funneled to Palestinian officials, for armaments against Israel and for mothers of jihadi martyrs. Funds earmarked for cement for housing are instead used to construct miles of terror tunnels, and the elite reside in grandeur.
Andrew tells Mia that he volunteers to teach music and tutor English at a Palestinian school, and he rebuilds Arab homes razed by the Israeli military. Once again, Lieberman withholds why these homes have been destroyed. Some were built as illegal acts of defiance by the United Nations against Israeli law; others were erected by nomadic tribes on land that lacked infrastructure and deemed unsuitable for housing (Israel offers to move Bedouins!); and still others were intentionally demolished as reprisal for the families of murderous martyrs.
Upon seeing the Kotel, the remaining Western Wall of the ancient Jewish Temple and Jewry’s holiest shrine (built in 2nd century BCE, destroyed by the Romans in 70 CE), Mia criticizes their prayer customs of thousands of years. (Doubtful that she would be this respectful with other religions.) Lieberman uses Andrew to remind the reader once again, that the Palestinians were “violently” expelled in 1948, their trees and groves destroyed, the innocents killed or imprisoned by the Israeli army. (Read Arab accounts here) Lieberman’s choices of informational sources are no different than if she had contacted Josef Goebbels for data about the Holocaust.
Despite the attempts to discredit and delegitimize Israel, the truth is known. Auni Bey Abdul-Hadi, an Arab Muslim leader, told the Peel Commission in 1937: “There is no such country as Palestine! Palestine is a term the Zionists invented. (TK – The Romans invented the term as an affront to the Jews.) There is no Palestine in the Bible. Our country was for centuries part of Syria.” In 1946, Arab-American historian Philip Hitti testified before the 1946 Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry: “There is no such thing as Palestine in history, absolutely not,” – meaning that there had never been a nation bearing this name.
Syrian President Hafez Assad told Yasser Arafat, “Palestine is an integral part of Syria,” and Prince Hassan of the Jordanian National Assembly said, on February 2, 1970, “Palestine is Jordan and Jordan is Palestine.”
PLO executive committee member, Zahir Muhsein, said, “The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel.” in short, its only purpose is to oppose Zionism and this is one of many war tactics.
Of the numerous Muslim-majority states worldwide, they may all have begun as small parcels of land, no-go zones within cities that expand by force under Islamic rule, but an independent Arab Palestine has never existed – not under Ottoman rule or British rule, not under the United Nations Partition Plan, and not under Jordanian or Egyptian rule. For now, it remains a myth based on deception, and Lieberman’s book for vulnerable children and young adults a sad symptom of our times.
www.amazon.com/dp/B08CP9DMZH Please note new link, pls change accordingly; thanks)
by Tabitha Korol
This is my fifth review of a children’s propagandist library book. “Tasting the Sky” described Barakat’s childhood. “Balcony on the Moon” covers her high school years and her ongoing pursuit for Palestine.
Ramallah-born Ibtisam Barakat, a kind, intelligent child, has become a thoughtful, accomplished young woman. She excelled in her studies and defied Islamic custom by breaking free of an early arranged marriage to pursue her education.
In her book, Balcony on the Moon, she explains that she was born in “Palestine,” but questions why it appears nowhere on a map. Except for the nineteen years of Jordan’s rule over its “West Bank,” it was historically Judea (from which is derived “Jew”) and Samaria. The name Palestine was a Roman-contrived insult to the Jews, a taunt of their ancient Cretan enemies, the Philistines.
Ibtisam’s surname, Barakat, is Egyptian. Her mother is Bedouin, a nomadic people. There is no history, government, language, culture, literature, monetary system, or archaeological evidence of a Palestinian nation.
As further explanation, the following is my abridgement of Efraim Karsh’s The Privileged Palestinian“Refugee.”
After World War II and the displacement of millions, the UN General Assembly organized the International Refugee Organization (IRO) in December 1946. Only the Arab escapees of the 1948-49 war received their own relief agency with 110 times the money allocated to others worldwide, although they did not meet the conventional refugee concepts. They were not unprovoked victims, but the aggressors who should have compensated their Jewish and Israeli victims. They were not displaced victims because they remained in their country of nationality, and they had no fear of persecution because Israel did not persecute them. Israel’s future prime minister, Ben Gurion, promised them equality without exception, no harm, no expulsion, but peaceful coexistence with Israel’s Arab population. Nevertheless, the UN blindly registered the false claimants as refugees, a lie, even adding new non-Palestinian arrivals to the roster.
They could not return to their dwellings in Judea and Samaria, Jordan’s West Bank, because Egypt and Jordan prohibited them, and Israel was awaiting a workable peace plan. Those who fled to Jordan became Jordanian citizens. And had King Hussein not attacked, there would have been no war, no refugees, and the West Bank would have remained Jordan’s.
Within months of its creation, UNRWA should have yielded control to the host countries and ended UN support for the works program on June 30, 1951, but it didn’t. The Arabs refused to improve their condition and, instead, demanded increased and improved medical and education services. The works program became a relief operation for an exaggerated number of Arabs; the mission of reintegration was all but abandoned by 1956.
Seventeen thousand displaced Jews in Israel plus hundreds of thousands of Jewish refugees from Arab countries were absorbed into Israel’s citizenry, but the Arabs perpetuated their entitlement status of welfare recipients for generations, now in its 72nd year of eternal refugeedom. Each time the Arabs were offered a large expanse of land, they refused and went to war. They remain in the West Bank and in Gaza, hoping to someday conquer Israel and rename it Palestine for themselves.
Ibtisam Barakat’s Author’s Note begins: “When I mention that I am Palestinian, I am often asked: but where is Palestine on the map?” She defines it geographically as an area ruled by many nations, Ottoman governance until World War I and a British military mandate until 1948. (TK-This was followed by Jordanian control for 19 years following its attack on Israel, until Jordan lost another attack in 1967, when Israel, the victor, was forced into administering the territory. It is now called “disputed land,” not Palestine.)
Ibtisam continued that Israel became a state because of the Holocaust, an incorrect, perpetuated lie. Theodore Herzl, journalist, playwright, and visionary began bringing the centuries of love of Zion (Israel) to the world in the 1800s. Ibtisam said that Britain had suppressed Palestinian aspirations for freedom, not true, a lie, and that Israel had been established on three-quarters of the mandate, also untrue, a lie. The Jews were betrayed in several ways over 100 years, one being that 78% of the land originally promised to them became Jordan, and the Arabs west of the Jordan River declined statehood. They were Egyptians, Yemenites, Iraqis and sundry nomadic tribes, not Palestinians. They adopted the term in 1967 to support their victimhood narrative (a lie) with its lure of financial aid and the eventual goal of eradicating the Jews. They eschewed statehood and independence.
During and after the Holocaust, many Jews returned to their homeland (then a borderless swath of land known as Palestine) and embraced Zionism, the movement to re-create the Jewish state. After tirelessly petitioning for an independent state in their homeland, Israel became a UN-recognized, independent nation in 1948. Tension between Jews and Arabs a constant, now escalated, and the neighboring Arabs immediately waged war against the nascent state.
Lest Ibtisam or the reader continue the belief that the upheaval rests with Israel’s rebirth, we must return to the history of Islamic Jihad, beginning with Mohammed’s slaughter of Meccan Jews in 620 CE to the present. The Quran commands violence. Muslims must convert or eliminate all non-Muslims. Mohammed founded the deadly cult of Islam, his words encouraging Islam’s children to relinquish their lives so as to take the lives of others. Only Islam has this unique fanaticism of a self-sustaining religious component that feeds on the psychological weaknesses of humans who fear the unknown and need a secure hereafter. This is what drives them to accept suicide bombings, fight holy wars, force conversions, and slaughter humans – the comfort that their view is must be followed by the rest of the world.
Ibtisam continues her story of family and school, surrounded by war and war stories. She is never taught that their leadership refuses statehood and independence at every opportunity, and that her people’s political narrative of victimhood is a fallacy, another lie. Just as she seeks independence, so too could her people have done the same. The key was in their own hands.
In ninth grade, she learns about Dalal al-Mughrabi, the female terrorist responsible for the 1978 Coastal Road massacre in Israel, killing 39 Israeli civilians, including 13 children, and compares 30 hours of fierce offensive terrorism with Menachem Begin’s defensive actions. Attempting to equate an act of terror and slaughter with Israel’s self-protection is an invention, a lie. She learns to create her own newspaper by reversing roles, featuring the terrorist Dalal as the embodiment of heroism, courage and resistance.
With each bomb explosion, she believes that armed Israeli settlers are taking Palestinian property. She has bought the war of words, using settlers to mean colonizers, when these Jews are the progeny of the indigenous people of thousands of years before who hold the legal title deed to the land of Israel. Not only can the Jewish people claim an eternal covenant to the land of Canaan given them by God in Genesis 13-17, but upon their return from exile in the late 1890s, they bought the desolate land at exorbitant prices from the absentee Arab landlords who had laid claim to the land under the Ottoman Empire.
Our writer looks back, but not far enough. For her, the conflict began when Jews said they would rebuild Israel on Jewish land, and purchased or restored fallow or swamp land in the early 1900s. But it began long before. From the Prophet’s jihad against Arabs (622-634); to the Jewish tribes (624), to Zoroastrians (634-651), to Byzantine Christians (634-1453), Berbers (650-700), Hindus (638-1857), Christian Coptic Egyptians (640-655), Nubians (650), Turks (651-751), Spaniards (711-730), Franks (720-732), Chinese (751), Sicilians (812-940), Armenians and Georgians (1071-1920), Mongols (1260-1300), Albania (1332-1853), Serbs, Croats and Albanians (1334-1920), Romania (1350-1699), Bulgaria (1350-1853), Croatia (1389-1843), Poland (1444-1599), Indonesians and Malays (1450-1500), Assyrians, Armenians and Greeks (1450-1853), Russia (1500-1683), Hungarians (1500-1683), Germany (1529 – ongoing), Yazidis (1640), Austrians (1683), and into modernity – Israelis, Americans, British, Russians, Norwegians, Swedes, Thais, Nigerians, Australia –jihad is now global. The International Union of Muslim Scholars calls on all Muslims to spread incitement to terror and extremism, for Palestinians to “seek death so as to be given life.”
Certainly, Ibtisam has not studied true Islamic history and she would be shocked to learn of the centuries of bloodshed, and it is possible that she would deny that history. In Islam, lies are acceptable if the purpose is deemed worthy. Mohammed set the laws: it was right to take land from others, to steal women from conquered men, and to make and break treaties for conquest.
The concept was significant when Ibtisam was taking her final high school exam, and her proctor asked if she would help a girl who was crying because she had no student enough to complete the questions. Ibtisam reasoned that this would not qualify as cheating because Islam justifies lying if it is done to help a fellow Muslim. She did not reason that if this incompetent student is accepted into college and subsequently drops out, the space she appropriated from a capable student is now lost. The help for one came at the expense of another, and the lie has now become theft, perhaps even life-altering.
The Palestinians who once identified with other Arab countries came to Israel and now occupy land they lost in their war of aggression against Israel, previously Jordan’s, previously Ottoman, previously a host of other ruling entities. Wars change boundaries. Until Israel chooses to annex the area, the Palestinians will continue to have meager health services because their huge funds are funneled to the PA for weapons and awards for mothers of martyrs. Today’s Arabs are tired of Arab corruption and more freely express that they prefer life under Netanyahu. They want an Israeli ID to work freely in Israel, a parliamentary democracy.
Saudi writer Abdulhameed Al-Ghobain tells the Arabic media that he and others support Israel’s annexation of Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria. He states, “There was a call for establishing a Palestinian state. The Palestinians, the Arabs, and even the Arab league refused to recognize that there should be a Palestine state. Maybe if a Palestinian state had been established, the situation would be different. So for us to be waiting all these years, destroying our Arab nation, destroying our economies and not achieving anything . . . I arrived at the conclusion that this cause has not been a real and just cause at any point in history. The Palestinian cause is an illusion … nothing to do with reality.”
by Tabitha Korol
This is another in a series of children’s propagandist story books distributed to libraries nationwide and in other countries, another facet of the many war strategies used against the west, overtly about Israel, but covertly about changing opinions and accepting Islam. The facade of victimhood is usually at play; one need only be alert to recognize how it’s employed.
Tasting the Sky, by Ibtisam Barakat, is a story told through the memories of a three-and-a-half-year-old girl in Ramallah, West Bank, the heartland of Biblical Israel and known through the centuries as Samaria. it is categorized to be read by Middle Graders, ages 6 and up, who know nothing of the region’s history. Without guidance, analysis and clarification, they would conclude that Israel is the interloper and Palestinians the natives, and by extension, western civilization is evil. This is Islamic indoctrination, inappropriate for distribution.
It begins with a sketchy historical note that the conflict over the State of Israel, the background of the story, continues to this day, but the conflict’s origin is ignored. For over fourteen centuries, Arabs have been following Mohammed’s decrees by attacking and slaughtering the Jews within the land and brutalizing Christians, Romans, Persians, Ethiopians, Berbers, Turks, Visigoths, Franks, Egyptians, Indians, and more, elsewhere. Unable to deny 1400 years of Jewish presence in the land, the Arabs embellish the discord with lies of shared history, prophets, and archaeology. But the land has only ever been the ancestral homeland of the Jews, who reestablished their national independence in Israel after 2,000 years, its legality endorsed by the United Nations, in 1948. Israel also received the recognition of Yusaf Diya al-Khaldi Mayor of Jerusalem (1899), Lord Robert Cecil (1918), Emir Faisal, leader of the Arab World (1919); and Sir Winston Churchill (1920).
To devalue Israel’s legitimacy, the author alleges that the State of Israel was founded solely because of the Holocaust, but that is not the case. “Zion” is the age-old name for Jerusalem; “Zionism” is love of Zion, and the national liberation movement begun in the late 1800s with the creation of 20 new Jewish cities in what was then called Palestine (a Roman appellation). It is also the political movement of restoration and return founded by Theodor Herzl in 1897, decades before the Holocaust. After World War I, when Iraq, Lebanon and Syria were created from the defeated Ottoman Empire, so were Palestine’s boundaries created and recognized as the Jewish homeland. This is what Mohammed’s successors repudiate. Israel’s capital, Jerusalem, established 1000 BCE, has held a majority Jewish population since the late 1860s.
Barakat’s personal story begins at age 19, returning home from Birzeit, West Bank, where activist students ignore the barbaric crimes of Islamist groups – lynching, beheading, whipping, crucifixion, castration, rape-to-death, burning alive and other unspeakable tortures – but fight with Israeli soldiers, protesting the “occupation.” “Occupier” is legal terminology that does not apply to Israel, as Israel’s legal title and rights were established in the San Remo resolution, adopted by the Allied Powers after World War I, confirmed by the League of Nations, and incorporated into the UN charter. Calling Israel an occupier is equal to calling the Arabs occupiers of Arabia. This is “projection,” attributing one’s own qualities or ideas to another. After losing their aggressive war in 1967, they self-identified as Palestinians and occupy this land as their strategy.
In the book, Ibtisam is returning to Ramallah, once a Christian city, now renamed “Hill of Allah” by Arab forces that took the town in the first Arab-Israeli war, 1948-49. When her bus is stopped at an Israeli checkpoint, she expresses fear for passengers’ showing their ID and tickets, although identification is commonplace at border crossings between jurisdictions. Because Palestinians have proven an aggressive people, Israelis also check for weapons or passengers swathed in explosives, their parents’ sacrifices to Allah for monetary reward. The naïve readers are influenced to fear.
The Israel Defense Forces (IDF) operate on strict commands that, as representatives of Israel, they must behave with humanity. Passengers are not raped, tortured, or beheaded. Rather, once cleared, they are free to proceed. In fact, Palestinians have begun producing fictitious film enactments to blame Israelis for mistreatment because they cannot confirm their claims, Israelis being known for their morality. The author even writes that one soldier attempts to return her fare because they will be rerouted to the Military Rule Center, a detention center.
As her story unfolds, she is three years old when an Israeli soldier comes to their house and allegedly makes sexual gestures to her mother. Mother tells Father that she fears rape if he returns, but I question why he didn’t rape her right then. The accusation is possible but since Ibtisam’s story is fraught with fabrications, both the checkpoint accusation and this one might be projections. Muslim men have endangered the streets of Germany, France, and London, and made Sweden the Rape Capital of the West and India, the Rape Capital of the World. Mother could assume the same of Israeli soldiers.
Israelis are held accountable for their actions under Israeli law; rape is not sanctioned as in Islam. A noteworthy phenomenon: reports indicate the lack of Israel’s military rape, which “merely strengthens the ethnic boundaries and clarifies the inter-ethnic differences – just as organized military rape would have done.” A Seattle university professor declared at a BDS event, “You IDF soldiers don’t rape Palestinian women because Israelis are so racist and disgusted by them that you won’t touch them.” In any case, Father accepts Mother’s word and they leave.
As Ibtisam’s bus is en route to the detention center, she ponders her postal box, her foreign pen pals, and recalls her father’s nightmares as he relived his loss of freedom in 1967. He’d told his children that the war came to them, not that five Arab nations initiated an offensive against the new Israel in 1948. He excluded that the Arabs ignored the UN and Israel’s decision to designate Jerusalem an international city, home to Israelis and Arabs. Instead, they forced the Jews out, destroying graveyards and at least 50 percent of the city’s synagogues. Nineteen years later, 1967, following Israel’s warning that Nasser’s closure of the Straits of Tiran against Israeli shipping and his forces mobilized at the border would be casus belli, Israel preempted Egypt’s action by destroying its air force and initiating a ground offensive. The result was Israel’s acquisition of the West Bank/Judea-Samaria, the Golan Heights, Sinai Peninsula, and Gaza. Although Israel immediately offered to return land for peace, the Arab governments refused to talk or recognize Israel. Father’s story is misleading; the reader misled.
The author recalls June 5, 1967. She is three when Father returns from work without his usual treats, announcing that Israeli planes are targeting Palestinians, soldiers combing their homes and butchering everyone. Again, this is untrue, but projection. (Mohammed’s conquests included beheading the men and enslaving the women.) The Arab countries initiate, and Israeli forces repel, the onslaught, yet the Israeli government nevertheless invites the Arab residents to remain safely in their homes and become citizens. Some families stay, but many heed their own army’s orders to go to Jordan or the caves, expecting to return triumphant. Mother and children escape with the rest; father leaves to see if he can be of help.
Yes, Ibtisam remembers gun shots, air raids, but she cannot name the aggressor, and the reader assumes they run to escape the Israelis. The child knows they lost the war, her home, and her shoes. and they cannot return to Ramallah. Her mother is 24, with three children in tow, ages 8, 7, and 3, and she soon gives birth to her fourth child. Father is 44. At the time of their marriage, Mother was 15, Father 35. In a culture where there is no loving courtship, marriage is described as a series of rapes interrupted by childbirth.
When a little boy has drowned in the river, they say the water stole him. We often see signs of Islamic projection. The young reader cannot alone grasp that Muslims take no responsibility for their behaviors, attacks or plight, and lies are routine. With the announcement that they “lost Palestine” comes the stinging victimization, not the realization that their wounds were self-inflicted.
Radio announcements of refugees who may return to the new Israel include Ibtisam’s family, but many are refused entry to their countries of origin, the surrounding countries that pursued war.
And because so much of the humanitarian aid is redirected to the Palestinian Authority, for weapons and payments to families of “martyrs” who are killed while killing Israelis, the dispossessed are destined for neglect for generations to come, their victimhood worsened, their futures bleak. To this day, they blame Israel for “colonizing their land,” when there is no evidence that “Palestinians” were ever an identifiable people, with history, government, culture or language. They were Arabs from surrounding lands or nomadic Bedouins.
Facts are facts: Jews (Hebrews) are the indigenous people of what the Romans called Palaestina. Despite Israel’s overtures of peace, unilaterally returning land to Egypt and Lebanon, and signing a peace treaty with Jordan, Palestinians continue their attacks. Do the young readers see Israel’s offers of peace and opportunities to prosper? Do they know that the Palestinians refuse?
Back in Ramallah, the Israeli soldiers marching in formation down the streets, armed but carrying Israeli flags and “chanting” (singing), are a source of anxiety and entertainment. When Ibtisam hears “sounds of war,” she does not know that they are the Palestinians’ ongoing, daily attacks against Israelis – throwing rocks and missiles at Israeli vehicles, firing rockets and mortar into Israel, or youths hurling firebombs at troops who then return fire with their weapons. The Palestinians are consistent. They will continue to attack until one day, with Allah’s help, they expect success. Meanwhile, generations of people endure in stagnant misery and perceived victimhood.
When Jamel Abdel Nasser dies, Father exclaims, “Now we are all orphans.” It is likely that Father, if not mother also, has his roots in Egypt. “Barakat” is a Muslim name, and common to Egypt, Iran, Pakistan, India and Bangladesh; its definition is “blessings.” When the women of the family gather for the boys’ circumcision, dressed in “the styles of hundreds of years,” the embroidery may indicate their country’s design, or that of the nomadic Bedouin. It cannot represent a Palestinian country that never existed.
Ibtisam’s family has survived whole, parents and six children, but there are others who have endured much hardship. She does not speak of the many victims of the Palestinian leadership’s greed and complete disregard to the people’s suffering. During the same years since 1948, while Israelis create a prosperous nation, are happy, and live in comparative freedom and security, generations of Palestinians wallow in poverty, hardship, self-pity and resentment – squandered lives with the fear of another war looming over their heads. This book has hidden many truths, and a new generation of readers grows up to take on Mohammed’s legacy of war, to side with the tyranny of Islam and resent the freedoms of Israel and America. Rather than reading propaganda, American children should be learning more about the humble beginnings and magnificence of America’s ideals and, by extension, Israel’s.
by Tabitha Korol
Can two men who meet in the name of peace be truly capable of declaring what is right and just for the entire world?
Early February 2019 ushered in a momentous event, the joint signing of a covenant, “The Document on Human Fraternity for World Peace and Living Together,“ by the Grand Imam of Al-Azhar Ahmed el-Tayeb, the head of Sunni Islam, and the Roman Pope Francis for a One World Religion. The historic ceremony was held in front of religious leaders of other faiths as a call for peace between nations, religions and races, although historically, Islamic peace is never achieved and it is they who continue to wage war. The declaration of peace, freedom, and women’s rights is indeed a beautiful document as described by Vatican News. Yet the imam is one man and the Islamic blood lust has maintained its presence in our world for 1400 years as a tribute to its founder, affecting even its own with intimidation and rules of torture, murder and suicide. Islam is the one religion that has been incompatible with the others and the Pope would do well to question whether Catholicism and the others would be willing to relinquish their own laws to accommodate the one that demands their elimination, in the quest for peace and a one-world religion.
Indonesian Muslim scholars also agreed to boost harmony and spirituality over the violence of the past by encouraging a school curriculum for “teaching Islamic history that contains the compassionate character of the prophet.” The suggestion is hardly comforting if it is the same prophet who beheaded the 600 to 800 Jewish men of Medina and enslaved the women and children, and whose descendants continue to engage in the same art of decapitation by the sword and bondage into the perpetual future.
Islam is a complete 100% system of life with religion being the camouflage for the legal, political, economic, social and military components. The Koran is designed to emotionally and physically control every aspect of human life for the devotee and the kafir (non-Muslim) through mind control via five-times-daily prayers and speech control, as well as through threats and wanton violence. Worldwide, Muslims exercise a disproportionate influence on others and work to get the ruling government of the nation they invade to permit them self-rule, sharia, first within the confines of their limited living quarters but eventually with the immutable goal of establishing Islamic law throughout the land. They are commanded never to assimilate in their host culture, and to destroy crosses and overtake churches. Thus are the indigenous people victimized and engulfed. It is safe to say that Muslims, through hijrah, are making headway in virtually all the countries of the world, although recognizably not at the same pace or using the same technique. Muslims are a factor in 95% of the world’s wars and gaining ground, so that a totalitarian regime’s signature to such a virtually submissive pact is suspect.
Islam sees itself as superior to all other peoples and takes offense at signs of progress accomplished by cultures that preceded it. To that end, its goals are to destroy those cultures’ histories and replace them with their own – to present themselves as the original and best of humanity when all others are gone. Allah’s Messenger said: “By Him (Allah) in Whose Hand my soul is, surely the son of Mary [Isa (Jesus)] will shortly descend amongst you people (Muslims), and will judge mankind justly by the Law of the Quran (as a just ruler) and will break the Cross and kill pigs and abolish the Jizyah [a tax] ….” (Bukhari 3:2222)
Christians who do not accept Muhammad and the Qur’an are considered the most vile of created beings: “Nor did those who were given the Scripture become divided until after there had come to them clear evidence. And they were not commanded except to worship Allah, sincere to Him in religion, inclining to truth, and to establish prayer and to give zakah (alms). And that is the correct religion. Indeed, they who disbelieved among the People of the Book and the polytheists will be in the fire of Hell, abiding eternally therein. Those are the most vile of created beings.” — Qur’an 98:6 It is prudent to note that while most religions give alms (tzedakah, in Hebrew), and Israel is invariably the first responder to any nations in need of help during natural disasters, Islam specifies that alms and aid not be given to those who do not honor Islam.
Just as Mohammed captured and has since had full control over Mecca and Medina, Islam established a mythic link to overtake Jerusalem, and Rome is in its sights once again as its fourth holiest city. Vatican City is 100% surrounded by massive, 39-foot-high walls built in the 9th century for protection against the Saracen pirates who pillaged St. Peter’s in 846. From that first jihad attack into Rome in 846, Islam declared Rome would follow the fate of Constantinople 500 years before, and the Christian basilica would become a mosque. This, then, is tyrannical globalism and its underlying raison d’etre, with which the Pontiff has signed a peace pact. Although his is a noble mission, without written rules of agreement and, indeed, trustworthy mutual compromises, it may still be too soon to prepare for celebration.
There is no doubt that there were some globalist spectators to the historic event, who, if included in the event, would tirelessly campaign for eliminating nationalism and border sovereignty. To facilitate the control of the world population, they prefer overarching establishments, such as the EU (European Union) and WTO (World Trade Organization) to have control and make decisions for all others. Can we – and should we – trust someone at the top to decide our fuel needs? food and quantity requirements? How about medicines and treatment accessibility? our education, entertainment, and available technology? Can the administrator be capable of making impartial, unemotional judgments, and what if he/she allows personal biases to direct the making of decisions that affect the rest of us? We must be guided by our own local supply and demand issues, the obtainability of goods and services or be overtaken by a socialist economy that always results in scarcity, poverty, hunger, and death.
if one or some of the attendees hold communist leanings, with the belief that man is incapable of self-governing, the stronger master will be put in charge. Such an ideology controls the information circulated, the art produced, the leaders to follow and the thoughts to ponder, and leads to arrests without due cause, punishment without trial, forced labor by humans owned by the state. Contrary to the Commandment, Thou shalt not steal, private property will be eliminated, goods commonly owned, production controlled and distributed to others, and the freedom to earn and benefit in accordance with the individual’s productions seized.
Judaism has been a persistent annoyance to Islam for 1400 years. Would the Roman Catholic Church now consider joining Islamic forces or would Islam agree to lay down its billion swords? Is the Holy Father aware that Islam’s open warfare has already declared, “First comes Saturday, then comes Sunday,” meaning, once Judaism is obliterated, Christianity will follow. Yet, how can there be an agreement when even word definitions differ so drastically? To the Pontiff, peace is the absence of war and the hope of amity throughout the lands. To the imam, peace is Allah’s blessing to make war against the infidel and bring all to submission, and it is the submission of all that is seen as peace.
Although I have no personal investment in anyone’s belief choice, I am fully attentive regarding their future deeds. I favor the continuation of the Church’s position of “subsidiarity,” which is to support, but to not interfere with, a community’s internal life, whereas Islam has its finger firmly positioned on every aspect of human and communal life. Would Islam agree to altering the Koranic dictates and eliminate corporal punishment in its rule or would the pope acquiesce to meting out severe pain for select insubordination? How would their view change the people’s autonomy over their own culture, health and safety and over individual national sovereignty? Would any group that’s given complete dominion over how we live, how we conduct our personal lives or our business affairs, and how our wealth is spent, truly rule with our best interests in mind? Globalists seek a dictatorial society.
History has provided us with many leaders. Would the ruler of the new globalist world be a Pericles? a Moses? a Charlemagne? Or a Mugabe? a Pol Pot, or a Hitler?
Does the Pope understand that his new friend may represent his steadfast adversary? Putting our future in the hands of a few is a decided threat to the United States Constitution. We have had enough history to learn what should be obvious, that the more power is removed from the people, the more power would be consolidated to those in control. This is a menace not to be ignored, no matter who sits at the summit.
by Tabitha Korol
I discovered a paper by the accomplished social scientist, Dr. Evelin Lindner, regarding her theory that the humiliation of a people may cause them to react in anger. The summary by Brett Reeder, Conflict Research Consortium, of “Making Enemies: Humiliation and International Conflict,” confirmed that this was, indeed, her intent. However, a violent reaction is by no means inevitable, but a matter of choice, and by broadcasting her assumption, she has merely provided another excuse for claiming victimhood.
By the third paragraph, it had become apparent that there would be the accusations I’d come to expect. With a deft twist, the authoress had crafted two unproven theories as facts in order to support her beliefs. Her first statement, not in quotes by Reeder, was:
The Versailles Treaty’s treatment of Germany after World War I is widely believed to have been a major impetus for the rise of Hitler and World War II.
Widely believed may be credible, but not factual. Can anyone seriously posit that, had the Treaty been more reasonable, Hitler would not have risen to power? His belief in the innate superiority of the Aryan race and its destiny to rule the world would have supplied sufficient impetus for such an amoral megalomaniac. Guided by his personality, Hitler made a choice.
One error invariably unleashes another, and Lindner applies her humiliation-causes-anger theory to the Arab-Israeli situation:
The treatment of Jews in the Holocaust certainly contributed to Israelis’ feelings of victimhood, which is manifested, in part, by their humiliating treatment of Palestinians.
It is offensive to suggest that humiliated Holocaust survivors vented their anger on the Palestinians, but more notable is that she portrayed the first two groups, Nazis and Jews, as humiliated-turned-aggressor, but Palestinians as humiliated-remaining-passive. A theory cannot be credible if it lacks consistency. The good doctor displays her bias in favor of the Palestinians and against the Jews.
History has shown the Palestinians to be violent, not passive, and the question is whether their violence can be traced to alleged humiliation by the Israelis. To do so, she had to overlook Islam’s entire 1400-year history of expansionism, atrocities, enslavement, rape and bloodshed in every nation they invaded, killing more than 669 million people. The Palestinian heritage is Islam, and the writer ignored the innumerable pogroms against the Jews, the Armenians, and others before Israel’s sovereignty in 1948. The Muslim attackers were neither humiliated by Israel nor passive.
Oddly, Lindner said, “humiliation destroys everything in its path,” and it “brings about depression and victimhood.” However, despite the trials of centuries and the harsh rules under which Jews have been forced to live, they did not succumb to humiliation with anger and war, but spent their lives improving their lot. They held fast to their identity, faith, morality, and God’s promise of returning to Zion. They comforted each other through the Inquisition, ghetto confinement, pogroms and concentration camps; and once liberated, rebuilt their vibrant country out of desert and malarial swamp. The small country’s exceptional success reflects their confidence and innovation, energy and industry, not victimhood and humiliation. Life is a gift to be treasured, not squandered. Given the choices of sanity and madness, the Jews chose the former. Further, their countless offers of peace to the Palestinians indicate magnanimity, not the bitterness of past humiliation.
Victimhood is a choice that the Palestinians continue to make because it garners cash and sympathy from the world. Israel recently delivered hundreds of coronavirus-detection kits to Gaza, but Palestinian leaders chose to foster their victimhood by concealing that help from their own and the international community and to condemn Israel for their heightened death toll.
The Palestinians elected to not to build their own country concurrently when the Jews were rebuilding theirs, during the same time and climatic conditions – although the Arabs had the oil money and funds from Europe, America, Israel and UNWRA. They chose the victim personae.
To verify Lindner’s views that Palestinian violence is caused by the Jews’ mistreatment of them, we must examine the cherished, savored victimhood of the Palestinians and recognize that, as with a painting’s canvas, the personality must also be primed.
Islam is the basis of the blame/shame culture in which Muslims, and Palestinians specifically, are raised. The social and psychological phenomenon of humiliation is one in which the fault in a crime is attributed entirely to the victim. This is a coping mechanism of transference, of rationalization, characteristic of borderline personality disorder. It is found in cultures that produce jihadis, in the children’s early nonverbal communication, their psychotic attachment to their mother, play activities that reveal their traumatic early-life experiences, and their body language that communicates emotional instability, the sadism from their earliest terrors.
The jihadi (or female jihada) has often been described as having masochistic personality disorder, obtaining gratification from the persistent degradation by humiliation, self-sacrifice and indulgent misery, thus creating the victimization. Described as an unconscious self-punishment that results from the damaged bond with the devalued, hated mother, the jihadi is capable of committing crimes against humanity. In mass masochism, the jihadis fuse in a non-thinking, regressed group to commit crimes and sacrifice that the population celebrates, a form of mass hysteria. The Islamic antisemitism and terrorism are stabilized in the inherently fragile, violent jihadi personality.
These traits are clearly found among Gaza’s Palestinians. The boy’s experiences are harsh. In the family of as many as four wives and multiple children to one husband, the sons are ignored by the father and raised among the women for his first seven years, when he terror-bonds with his mother and accepts her worthlessness. It is an atmosphere of envy and rivalry among the wives as well as the children. When the father does take control of his education, his mother has already exposed him to a painful betrayal, where he is raped and humiliated into submission by other men. Despite the veneer of Islamic disgust about homosexuality, Arab poetry is replete with the joys of sodomy.
A boy’s friendships and education are strictly limited but they may come together as a group, faces covered, humiliation hidden, to take out their aggression on Mohammed’s sworn enemies, the Jews. They work in unison when throwing rocks or incendiary missiles across Israel’s border. Our social scientist, Lindner, appears oblivious of the ruinous upbringing experienced by the future jihadis, their eagerness for death and martyrdom, instead she attributes their violence to imagined humiliation by the Jews.
Neither is the daughter spared her own childhood nightmare. In such a family unit, she experiences her own terror and distrust of her family when she undergoes Female Genital Mutilation. The indignation of being restrained on a table while a stranger imposes on her privacy to inflict severe pain that negates her femaleness also brings her humiliation. Raised in this household, forced into a loveless marriage to an older man and raped at will, the daughter, still in need of motherly nurturing, must be the mother to the numerous children. Covered from head to toe, unseen by the world, restricted in her every move, can this be anything but humiliation? From one generation to the next, the child terror-bonds with her mother, has no outlet for calm and affection, no education save memorization of the Koran, no expressions of art and music, no friends or courtships – and no credibility in a court of law if she seeks a way out.
The daughter has a role to play in the Islamic war against humanity. She is responsible for creating more children for Allah’s army and martyrdom or to emulate the jihadi’s function. The jihada is exemplified by Linda Sarsour, Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, as well as by the exploits of female terrorists. Yet we are to believe the Palestinian violence is caused by an outside source of humiliation.
Ironically, Lindner inadvertently suggests that the Jews played no part in Palestinian humiliation, clarifying that humiliation is a hierarchal, ranking scale to maintaining social cohesion. Israelis lives are filled with study and time spent in service to the country, and Israeli Arabs have the same opportunities. They are encouraged to have a career, to marry and raise a family – the very activities not available to the Arab children of Gaza. A successful neighbor can either inspire emulation or humiliation, the choice is given.
The Palestinians have been primed – humiliated by their culture and dishonest circumstances. The invading Arab nations were bent on Israel’s destruction, and encouraged and caused the bulk of the Arabs to flee Israel, telling them they would return victorious. Now, after all they endured by their people, from their people, and for their people, the piece de resistance, the final slap-in-the-face, the grand humiliation occurred when their armies lost and these individuals were abandoned, discarded and forbidden from ever returning to their lands of origin – Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Jordan. While they saw that the Jews who fled mistreatment from Arab countries were welcomed by their Israeli brethren, how demeaning to be told that they were not wanted, must never more identify with their history, their heritage, and other family members. They were going to be used once again, as pawns. With no distinguishing language, religion, or culture, and no lineage to this land back more than four generations, they had to create an identity out of whole cloth. This was indeed the ultimate cause for humiliation, and it was their own kith and kin who did the humiliating.