Daily Archives: October 24, 2015

Ben Carson is Not Beating Donald Trump: Even In Iowa!

Ben Carson: Intensify the Drug War

Says police state necessary to combat “hedonistic activity”

by Kurt Nimmo | Infowars.com

http://www.infowars.com/ben-carson-intensify-the-drug-war/

Presidential candidate Ben Carson told Glenn Beck that if elected he will intensify the war on drugs. He also said he opposes the legalization of marijuana.

“Absolutely,” the retired neurosurgeon said when asked by Beck if he intends to continue the war on drugs. “I intend to fight.”

According to a Des Moines Register/Bloomberg Politics poll, Carson is now the Republican frontrunner. His favorability stands at 28%, 9 percentage points ahead of Donald Trump’s 19%.

In 2010 alone the federal government spent over $15 billion combatting the use and distribution of illegal drugs, while state and local governments spent $25 billion.

The same year police around the country made 1.5 million arrests for drug violations. Arrests for possession of marijuana accounted for 48.3 percent of these arrests, according to FBI statistics.

In 2012, FBI data shows, police made one marijuana arrest every 42 seconds.

Earlier this week a Gallup poll found 58% of American adults believe marijuana should be legalized. Last year the number was 51%.

Alaska, Colorado, Washington and Oregon and the District of Columbia have legalized marijuana for recreational use while twenty-three states have legalized the use of medical marijuana.

Despite public support for marijuana legalization, as president Carson would work to keep drugs illegal. He would spend more federal money and dedicate more law enforcement resources to enforcing drug laws and imprisoning offenders.

“I don’t think this is something we really want for our society,” Carson told Greta Van Susteren of Fox News in 2014 after Colorado legalized recreational marijuana.

“You know, we’re gradually just removing all the barriers to hedonistic activity. We’re changing so rapidly to a different type of society, and nobody is getting a chance to discuss it because it’s taboo.”

After Van Susteren pointed out that many Americans believe making marijuana illegal restricts freedom of choice, Carson compared its use to owning an automatic weapon.

“Well, do those same people argue for freedom of choice when someone says, ‘I want to buy a gun, I want to buy an Uzi?’” Carson said. “Let’s be consistent with this thing.”

Parent Rebellion Brewing in Tennessee Over Islam-Centric Educational Standards

My Comments:  Our governor in the state of Tennessee is the from the family who owns Pilot Oil/Flying J.  When he ran for governor in 2010, he spent 20 million to get elected.  He claimed he was a Christian Conservative, but he is anything but….he has totally been in bed with Education czar Arne Duncan and Obama on ruining education totally in TN.  He has an administration filled with Muslims, including one Samar Ali who was an intern for Obama and whose father is an Obama supporter.  She is the head of finances for TN and is a Shariah compliant financial specialist.There is so much on this phony republican that it would take pages to tell it all, but the reason we’ve got this educational mess is because of this filthy governor.

REPOSTED FROM BREITBART.COM

blackboards

A group of parents in White County, about 100 miles east of Nashville, are taking the fight to the seven publicly elected county school board members in that county who approved the purchase of the new Islam-centric textbook that elaborates on those standards, myWorld History and Geography: The Middle Ages to Exploration of the Americas, published by Pearson Education.

A similar grassroots rebellion between 1999 and 2002 prevented the state’s establishment Republican Governor, Don Sundquist, from imposing a state income tax on Tennesseans. In 2014, that prohibition was made permanent in an amendment to the state’s constitution approved overwhelmingly at the ballot box by voters.

The current uprising pits Tennessee parents against Republican Governor Bill Haslam, the Tennessee Department of Education, the large and powerful multinational textbook publisher Pearson Education, the state’s educational bureaucrats, unaccountable local county school directors, and their far too compliant local school boards.

The involvement of Pearson Education is particularly controversial since its parent corporation, London based Pearson PLC, is partially owned by the Libyan Investment Authority. With 3 percent of Pearson’s outstanding stock, the Libyan Investment Authority is one of its largest shareholders.

The Washington Times recently reported there is a financial connection between the Libyan Investment Authority and the Council on American-Islamic Relations:

According to the Financial Times, the Libyan Investment Authority was founded by Muammar Gaddafi’s son, Seif al-Islam; more than five Gaddafi family members own shares. The Council on Islamic Relations (CAIR, a recently designated terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates), Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the Muslim Brotherhood invested in Pearson Education through the Libyan Investment Authority.

CAIR has inserted itself into the Tennessee seventh grade Social Studies standards political battle, even though barely 1 percent of the state’s population self-identifies as Muslim. The group has publicly criticized the state legislator who has introduced legislation to prohibit the teaching of religious doctrine prior to the tenth grade in Tennessee.

A number of Tennessee parents also claim that CAIR has provided supplementary materials used by some Tennessee school districts to support the new seventh grade standards.

One reason for CAIR’s interest in Tennessee is that it has the highest percentage of Evangelical Christians of any state in its population, according to a recent Pew Research Poll on religion in America. As a result, Tennessee may be the “tip of the spear” in attempts to crush public opposition to Islamization.

CAIR co-founder and executive director Nihad Awad, “a known Hamas supporter,” has publicly “reject[ed] Israel’s right to exist.”

As Breitbart News reported previously:

Even in the face of the Islamic State’s rampaging terror and slaughter, Awad called the Jewish state the biggest threat to world peace and security. Breitbart News reported he once publicly declared his support of the “Hamas movement.” Hamas, the radical Islamic group, is a United States designated terrorist organization. CAIR was charged as an unindicted co-conspirator in the largest terrorism-financing case in U.S history, the Holy Land Foundation trial.

Before launching CAIR, Awad served as PR director for the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), an organization identified by the U.S. government as an arm of the Palestinian Committee, a Hamas support network created by the Muslim Brotherhood. A 2001 Immigration and Naturalization Service memo documented IAP’s support for Hamas and the “facts strongly suggest” that IAP was a part of Hamas’ propaganda machine, according to the Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT).

Parents from across the county and the state will be gathering at Tuesday night’s town hall in Sparta, Tennessee sponsored by the group, White County Citizens Against Islamic Indoctrination, “to continue efforts to inform and engage the community about the pro-Islamic textbooks and materials being forced upon teachers and students by the White County School Board.”

In a press release, the group said:

School board members, including Chairman Edd Cantrell and Vice Chairman Gary Sparkman, have ignored parents’ objections to the textbooks and materials and refused to remove them or restrict their use in classrooms. Seventh grade social studies textbooks in White County contain nearly 50 pages devoted to a sugar coated view of Islam and the “Islamic World” while barely mentioning Christianity. The School Board has also violated at least 14 of their own policies and procedures in connection with conducting school board business and may have violated state laws concerning public access tomaterials used in the classrooms in White County. . . .

“The School Board has adopted the textbooks and materials in a shroud of secrecy and misrepresentation and have attempted to hide what is happening in our classrooms concerning the promotion of Islam and limited mentions of Christianity,” [Chairman] Anthony Wright pointed out. “We plan to expose what is happening and call the community to action since the values promoted by the School Board members in our classrooms do NOT reflect the values of our community nor do they follow the laws of the land.”

Bryan Wright, who recently attended a School Board meeting to object to the materials, explained that “the schools should teach any aspect of religion with a focus on fairness, balance and TRUTH; that is not happening with respect to the Islamic Indoctrination being presented in White County thanks to our own elected officials.” “The fault is not the teachers who are being forced to use these materials; it is the fault of the school board that unanimously approved them and who should be held accountable for that terrible decision,” Bryan Wright noted.

Overton County, Tennessee has adopted a set of supplemental materials to provide a fair and balanced teaching of social studies and religion but the White County School Board has refused to accept any alternative to the textbooks and materials they adopted despite significant and growing parental objections.

The Tennessean reported the group “expects hundreds of people” at Tuesday night’s town hall:

The new group, White County Citizens Against Islamic Indoctrination, joins others in the state concerned about pro-Islamic bias in middle school social studies classes.

The group claims a seventh grade social studies textbook unfairly represents major world religions. They also claim the White County school board has been unresponsive to their concerns.

“We have no problem with teaching world history. We have no problem with world religion. We want it to be fair and balanced and accurate,” said Anthony Wright, chairman of White County Citizens Against Islamic Indoctrination.

Tennessee sixth and seventh grade students learn about the rise, spread and impact of major world religions on societies in social studies classes. Students learn about Islamic civilization in seventh grade.

White County Schools, a small district with one middle school, uses “My World History and Geography: The Middle Ages to the Exploration of the Americas” in seventh grade social studies classes.

“It doesn’t report 9/11, ISIS. It doesn’t talk about any Islamic group,” Wright said, referring to the textbook.

Middle school students learn about the Islamic civilization up to the 1500s, according to state standards.

Wright also claimed the book explained how to convert to Islam, but not to Christianity.

“All it takes is one seventh-grader to go home and recite the five pillars of Islam, then go to a school with a bomb in their backpack and blow up 10 kids,” Wright said.

Muslim converts technically recite the Shahada to profess their new faith. The Shahada is the first pillar of Islam.

“We don’t want that book taught. There’s other books available,” Wright said.

School districts select and approve textbooks from a state-approved list. Other school districts, for example, use “Discovering our Past, A History of the World.”

Superintendent Sandra Crouch said she was advised by legal counsel not to comment.

“Our teachers do not teach religious doctrine at all. We simply teach world history according to the state department of education standards,” said school board chairman Edd Cantrell.

In a letter to the school board sent on Monday by James R. Omer, the Nashville attorney who represents the White County parents group, also demanded that the board make the new textbook and all related materials available for public inspection. Incredibly, the White County School district has refused to make either the new textbook or supporting materials available for public review.

The letter, addressed to the seven school members by name—Chairman Edd Cantrell, Vice Chairman Gary Sparkman, Jayson McDonald, Richard McBride, Kenneth Robinson, Janet Webb, and Roy Whited—presented a compelling argument:

Our clients are, by this letter, documenting your numerous violations of White County School Board policies and, if the violations enumerated herein are not remedied promptly, they will seek any and all legal remedies, including writs of mandamus and ouster. They are considering other legal action as well, to include legal accountability for violation of state and federal law.

Our investigation reveals that you have consistently been notified of the above violation and this, when combined with violation of the following sections of pertinent statute, Tenn. Code. Ann. § 49-2-301(b)(1), establishes the intentional lack of transparency which is not only illegal, but ignores the essence of your legal obligations and discharge of your duties.

In the letter, the parents group charges that:

During your August Board Meeting, you and the White County Board established a textbook review committee consisting of various board members and administrators and appointed Mr. [Bryan] Wright as an adviser to that committee. Regrettably, the Board only involved Mr. Wright in one meeting and refused others entry to the committee meeting in violation of Board Policy B-7 and TCA §8-44-102(b). . . .

“White County citizens are extremely angered by the approval of the 7th Grade textbook, “My World History and Geography: The Middle Ages to the Exploration of the Americas”and your actions and inactions have violated not only legislated laws, but the very Constitution of the State of Tennessee. Compare your actions with White County Board Policy A-1, wherein you mention your humble deference to that great document … our Constitution.”

The parents group tells the White County School Board “you have not only violated state, federal and local law, but you have lost touch with the very source of your authority to whom you owe the highest level of service: the Electorate, which you so aptly refer in the attached exhibit. It is easy to become comfortable within the bureaucracy and in a hurry to reach ‘rational’ decision when a more complicated, democratic movement is afoot.”

In addition to “adding policies which address the lack of transparency and website deficiencies,” the group demands the White County School Board pass the following resolutions:

  • The White County School Board will select textbooks that promote the basic democratic values of our state and national heritage, our republican form of government, and the principles of federalism. We will oppose the selection of textbooks that contain historical inaccuracies or omissions of world religions which could lead to religious bias.

– White County Schools will not discipline or discourage Teachers, Principals and School Personnel “for reporting inaccuracies or errors or potentially inflammatory material in textbooks or other educational materials to supervisors, elected officials, or parents or guardians; prohibits requiring a teacher or other educator to agree not to report inaccuracies or errors or potentially inflammatory material in textbooks or other educational materials, as a condition of employment” as in accordance with Tennessee Law, Public Chapter 165 enacted on July 1, 2015.

– White County Schools will include on their website; a copy of social studies state standards, a summary of the basic content of the instruction, a statement of a parent’s right to review the materials, and information describing a parent’s opportunity to participate in the review of social studies textbooks and supplemental materials. Parents may also request to remove their child from the instruction without retribution or penalty and the process for doing so will also be found on the White County Schools website and/or made available upon parental request.

– Statewide Assessments, or end of course exams, often drive curriculum decisions. Therefore, Statewide Assessment and end of the course exams should be reviewed by teachers, parents and taxpayers, or school boards prior to administration of exam to confirm students are not being tested on their knowledge of any religion.

“The biggest concern is the textbook is telling things that are untrue and is providing a false example of Islam,” Ed Butler, a member of the White County parents group, told WWTN Radio’s Dan Mandis on Tuesday.

“Islam is presented as matter of fact,” in the Pearson textbook, Butler said. “For example, on page 79 of the textbook, it reads ‘Mohammad said he worships the same God as Christians and Jews. Mohammad respects those religions.’ But that’s not how we see it. Allah is not the same God worshipped by Christians and Jews,” Butler added.

“The White County School Board is restricting information flow to parents, and not allowing us to speak at public board meetings,” Butler added.

“Bryan Wright was going to be part of the textbook review process, but he was only allowed in one meeting. Other parents were not allowed in those textbook review meetings.”

“It dumfounds me why they – the White County School Board—would not listen to the citizens of White County and to the right thing,” Butler told WWTN’s Mandis.

Mandis asked Butler what the next step is if the White County School Board continues to ignore your group.

“The Citizens of White County would demand their resignations immediately,” Butler responded.

Butler noted that there is virtual unanimity from the White County parents of children in the seventh grade there who are being forced to use the Pearson textbook.

“There are about 300 seventh grade students in White County. We have about 300 concerned parents in our group. That’s about every parent of a White County seventh grader,” Butler told WWTN’s Mandis.

The Tennessee parent rebellion is not limited to White County. In addition to nearby Overton County, uprisings are developing in Rutherford , Maury, and Williamson Counties as well.

Last week in Williamson County, the affluent Nashville suburb, school board member Dr. Beth Burgos, one of several Common Core opponents swept into office in 2014, “proposed a resolution about the teaching of religion, particularly Islam, pertaining to sixth and seventh grade students.”

“Williamson County parents and taxpayers have expressed concerns that some social studies textbooks and supplemental materials in use in Tennessee classrooms contain a pro-Islamic/anti-Judeo Christian bias,” she wrote in the resolution. “Therefore, we the Williamson County School Board encourage the state to develop social studies standards that reflect Tennessee’s commitment to public education. We know that the standards serve as the basic for statewide assessments, curriculum frameworks and instructional materials, but methods of instructional delivery must remain the responsibility of local educators.”

She requested the following actions: that the state revise and clarify the social study standards; textbooks or supplemental instructional materials in Tennessee classrooms reflect a balanced and equitable perspective; supplemental instructional materials should be unbiased; the textbooks and material should be made available to parents and taxpayers.

She also requested that, “no students shall ever be required as a qualification for graduation or statewide assessment to be tested on their knowledge of any religion.”

But Tim Gaddis, Williamson County assistant superintendent “said the textbooks treat all religion fairly and no religion is pushed on any student.”

This claim, however, is belied by the Breitbart News report that 10 of 75 learning objectives in the 7th Grade Social Studies standards (13 percent) deal with the tenets and history of Islam, while only 1 of 72 learning objectives in the 6th Grade Social Studies (1 percent) address the history of Christianity. Not all Williamson County School Board members support Dr. Burgo’s resolution, and its outcome remains in doubt.

As the Williamson Herald reported:

“You can’t go by the number of pages that each religion gets [in the Pearson textbook]. We have problems with getting enough bus drivers or substitute teachers. It’s crazy to fool around with this,” [School Board member Bobby Hullett said.]

Anne McGraw, 4th District, also weighed in on the matter.

“I’ve talked to a lot of people, and it never came in any regard,” McGraw said. …. The resolution, if approved, will be forwarded to the state legislature. Dr. Mike Looney and Chairman Gary Anderson, 5th District, will review the resolution and decide whether it should go forward. It has also not been reviewed by legal counsel, Anderson said.

Other board members such as McGraw said they would not sign the resolution and cannot support it.

Tennessee has 95 counties and approximately 140 distinct school districts.

Not all 140 districts have adopted and purchased the Pearson textbook, but all are subject to the new Islamic-centric standards.

“The Pearson text was only adopted by 30 of the 140 districts [in Tennessee]. McGraw Hill grabbed the rest of the market share,” Pearson Education’s Southern Regional Director, Dominic Chavez, tells Breitbart News.

If Tennessee’s recent past is any indication of how this political controversy will unfold, this grassroots parent rebellion is likely to spread to all 95 of the state’s counties, and to do so very soon.

 

Will Politicians Kill or Assist Elephant in the Room?

by Rev. Austin Miles

rhinos

SAN FRANCISCO 10/22/15–Just last week, Zimbabwe, an African territory that earns millions of dollars selling permits to wealthy trophy hunters, was again in the news. This time the shocking reports show that forty elephants were deliberately and cruelly poisoned with cyanide so that the savages who carried out this deed could cut off their tusks and sell them for big bucks to dealers who will have them carved into status-building objects of ‘art.’

Death by cyanide results in horrible agony as it curses like a wild saber through the body of the victim, burning through the intestines. An elephant virtually screams as it is brought down to the satisfaction of the poachers who baited oranges with the poison, and gave them to the unsuspecting herd.  It is not a quick death but a slow agonizing one.

It is probable that some of them are not yet dead when the poachers begin sawing off their tusks. Think of a dentist drilling in your teeth, without novocain. These sub-humans also bring down rhinos, then, while they are still alive, cut off the horn. A video aired that showed this horror as the helpless rhino, gasping deeply, was making agonizing groaning sounds like….’uh…uh…uh…’ This video can never be forgotten.

The tusks from the elephants are then smuggled into Asia where there is a strong market, particularly in China, where they will be carved up into objects of status-building art, such as statuary.  The rhino horns are ground up and sold as very expensive aphrodisiacs. And a living, breathing creature suffers so greatly for man’s uncontrollable lust even though this potion is only imagined, not real. In other words, it is useless.

This writer has personally known both elephants and rhinos. The elephants are very social creatures with deep feelings for their families as well as humans they have bonded with. They will greet you with little ‘beeps’ of trumpeting when they see you as a friend. They have a distinct trumpet when they are grieving such as one, when a little dog, that was her friend, was killed by a coyote. They have a warning trumpet when danger is near. And they have a screaming trumpet when they are poisoned or shot. 

A legendary circus owner, Gil Gray, had four huge elephants that he had raised from babies. At night he would come into the elephant’s area backstage. They would do the little beeps in delight as he came to them. He would go to each one and hug their trunks, telling them how beautiful they were. They responded with such love that it was unmistakable.They looked forward to that nightly visit. An elephant is not “just an animal.” There is no such thing. They are creatures with feelings, both physical and emotional, exactly like us.

While rhinos are not as affectionate, they are very peaceful creatures who will not attack unless they are provoked. Yet they are cruelly killed for their horns which are ground up and sold for big money to those who falsely believe the powder will increase their sex lives.

So how will the politicians deal with the elephant in the room?  The Republicans will no doubt kill the pachyderm in the room rather than assist it.  Congressman Steve King, for example, has killed any attempt to protect animals from inhumane treatment such as farm animal abuses while striking down law proposals that would stop the cruelty.

Like most Republicans, he loves his guns and hunting. It is the republicans who enjoy most the killing for the sake of killing and trophy hunting, where they bring down great beasts in order to cut off their heads to display over their mantles which they exhibit with pride.

We can never forget the video that was aired, showing Sarah Palin in an airplane out away from civilization flying over some wolves, many that looked up at the plane with curiosity. Then with a smile on her face, aimed her rifle and shot dead several wolves that screamed in pain and fell over kicking their legs in the air as they slowly died. Why? They were causing no problem.  It was the lust for killing which also brings sexual arousal we are told.

Yet, Sarah Palin smiled at the intense suffering she directly caused. She was killing for the sake of killing.  Not for protection, not for food, but simply to cause pain and suffering. This writer would NEVER support her in any way. I would need a layman to properly describe what this woman is.Democrats, on the contrary, such as Senator Dianne Feinstein, are very protective of animals and can always be counted on to support any law to prevent animal cruelty. In this they are solid.

A committee is being formed to put a stop to elephant murders, which is described correctly. So far, Cathy Taibbi, a leading wildlife and environmental journalist has come aboard as has Chaplain Dennis Guinta, a long time animal activist.We are getting in touch with Animals Australia, absolutely the most effective animal rescue organization in the world. What they do should be an example and master plan for the entire world. We are hoping to partner with them since this is a world-wide concern. For example, over 100,000 elephants have been killed in Africa in 2011-2013 alone. This must and WILL stop.This writer plans to meet with Senator Dianne Feinstein for her assistance in crafting a law against poaching once and for all, with severe penalties for violators. It will be requested that she set up a meeting with the Ambassador of China, or to go to China to meet with leaders, since China is the biggest exporter of ivory.  We want to encourage them to put an end to this.

The sale and shipment of ivory must be declared illegal. This writer plans to go with committee to visit merchants in Chinatown in San Francisco to persuade them to cease from selling anything made of ivory.

If you remember, Chef Ramsey, the cranky chef on Hell’s Kitchen, was so appalled by seeing the harvesting of shark fins being cut off of live sharks (that exhibited agony in the process), that he personally visited restaurants in San Francisco’s Chinatown and was able to successfully convince restaurant owners to no longer sell Shark Fin Soup, which is considered am expensive delicacy.  We must do the same regarding ivory.

This writer also plans to contact leaders in the United Nations to join us in taking a stand against poachers.  And it will be done. We ask all readers to get this out on social media.

No matter what one thinks about Obama, he did something for which I personally applauded him: he confiscated all ivory in one area of the country and publicly smashed it up, to make a statement regarding this horrendous marketing.  Yes, a tip of the beret.

Again readers, begin talking this up and circulating it on social media. We WILL put a stop to this atrocity that reduces us from a civilized people to a bunch of savages.  We must be a positive force against this.


Photo Caption: A Much Younger Rev. Miles with Rhino Friends

Photo Credit: Private Photo

 

 

 

Next Wave of Muslim Invasion: It’s All Men

http://https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=ijxknaKOXVc

France’s War Against the Jews

The attack on Israel’s sovereignty over the Temple Mount is just the beginning.

Caroline Glick FOR FRONTPAGEMAG.COM

Originally published by the Jerusalem Post.

France’s plan to use its position at the UN Security Council to bring about the deployment of international monitors to the Temple Mount in Jerusalem has been condemned by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and his ministers as biased, unhelpful and detached from reality.

Certainly it is all those things. But France’s decision to use its diplomatic position to advance a plan which if implemented would end Israeli sovereignty over Judaism’s holiest site is first and foremost a French act of aggression against the Jewish state.

Contrary to what the French government would have us believe, France’s Temple Mount gambit is not an effort to quell the violence. French protestations of concern over the loss of life in the current tempest of Palestinian terrorism ring hollow.

France doesn’t really oppose Palestinian terrorism.

To the contrary, it facilitates it.

Every year, the French government pays millions of euros, dollars and shekels to Palestinian NGOs whose stated goal is to destroy Israel. Through its NGO agents, France finances the radicalization of Palestinian society. This French-financed radicalization makes Palestinian terrorism inevitable.

Much of the current rhetoric used by the Palestinians to reject Israel’s legitimacy and justify violence against Jews is found in strategic documents that France paid Palestinian NGOs to write.

According to NGO Monitor, between 2010 and 2013, France gave $6.5 million to a consortium of Palestinian NGOs called the NGO Development Center. It paid for the NDC to put together a strategic plan to advance its members’ goals. That French-initiated and financed document includes a list of activities not aimed at promoting peace, enhancing the daily lives of Palestinians, or expanding economic growth.

Rather, the French-financed strategic planning document provides a list of activities that the NGOs will undertake to delegitimize and criminalize Israel and ensure that Palestinians hate the Jewish state and view it as the cause of all their suffering.

The paper called for “Establish[ing] monitoring databases by relevant NGOs on sectoral issues and themes (expansion of colonies, [i.e. Israeli neighborhoods and towns beyond the 1949 armistice lines,] construction of Separation and Annexation Wall, Gaza siege, Jerusalem, house demolitions and evictions, water resources, environment, political prisoners, etc.)”; “Implement[ing] and disseminat[ing] in depth thematic studies about Israeli violations of human rights in the occupied territories”; “Development of a unified NGO strategy for international advocacy.”

A 2008 NDC document required all member groups to ban all “normalization activities with the occupier, [both] at the political-security [and] the cultural [and] developmental levels.”

The document went on to call for Israel to be destroyed. No action on the part of any Palestinian entity can be carried out it said, “if it undermines the inalienable Palestinian rights of establishing statehood and the return of refugees to their original homes,” that is, the immigration of millions of foreign-born Arabs to the ruins of Israel.

The “international advocacy” referred to in the document includes lobbying foreign governments and societies to wage economic war against Israel. To this end, for instance, the Palestinian Agricultural Relief Committee, which has received hundreds of thousands of dollars from the French government, uses racist language to demonize Jews and Israel by among other things assaulting the so-called “Judaization of Jerusalem” and attacking Palestinians who work with Israeli companies.

In 2011, PARC sabotaged a trade delegation in France comprised of Israeli and Gazan farmers organized by Agrexco, Israel’s main exporter of agricultural products. Rather than welcome Israel’s actions on behalf of Gaza farmers, PAR C organized a boycott of the delegation – causing direct harm to Gazan farmers.

In its press release following its action, the beneficiary of French government financing wrote, “PARC salutes all activists and international supporters for the BDS campaign and especially our French friends and partners who were able to frustrate the Agrexco attempt to conduct a joint press conference with a few exploited Palestinian producers.”

Not to put too fine a point on it, but these are not the actions that peaceful groups interested in a non-violent, peaceful resolution of the Palestinian conflict with Israel undertake. By paying these groups to carry out these sorts of activities, the French government has made clear that far from seeking to advance the cause of peace, its actual goal is to block all prospects of peace between Israel and the Palestinians.

These sorts of actions are the norm, rather than the exception in France’s treatment of Israel. And France makes no bones about its hostility toward the Jewish state.

On December 2, 2014, barely a week after two jihadists from Jerusalem butchered like sheep four rabbis in prayer at a synagogue in the city and murdered a policeman who tried to rescue them, the French parliament recognized the non-existent “State of Palestine.”

That Islamic State-styled massacre was part of a larger Islamic terrorism offensive against Jews in Jerusalem that was incited by the leaders of “Palestine.”

Just as it does today, last fall the Palestinian Authority, led by PA President Mahmoud Abbas, spread the lie that Israel was planning to destroy the mosques on the Temple Mount and called on the Palestinians to attack Jews.

The French government’s policies on the ground in Israel and the PA are a natural complement to its anti-Jewish policies at home.

Whereas France seek to reward Islamic terrorists on the international stage by helping them to weaken the Jewish state, back home the French government is willing to place its own Jewish community at risk in order to pretend that Islamic terrorism doesn’t exist.

Since Jews are among the top targets for French jihadists, the French government’s policy of refusing to acknowledge or combat Islamic extremism and violence in France is an anti-Jewish policy.

Last January, in the wake of the jihadist massacre at the Hyper Cacher kosher supermarket in Paris, which had followed the massacre at Charlie Hebdo magazine, French President Francois Hollande refused to acknowledge that the murderous violence was rooted in Islam. To the contrary, Hollande perversely insisted, “These terrorists and fanatics have nothing to do with the Islamic religion.”

In a further act of hostility toward the grieving Jewish community, two days after the massacres Hollande told Netanyahu to stay away from Paris and not participate in his solidarity march with the victims of the attacks.

When Netanyahu insisted on participating in the march anyway, Hollande invited Mahmoud Abbas to participate as well, despite his direct sponsorship of anti-Jewish terrorism.

French authorities tried to push Netanyahu to the second row of marchers to prevent anyone from seeing him. Ahead of the march, they left him exposed, in an unsafe area, where his life was in danger every second, as he waited for a bus to pick him up and take him to the event.

In the evening after the march, Hollande refused to appear with Netanyahu at the memorial ceremony for the victims of the Hyper Cacher massacre. In a tangible snub, Hollande left the synagogue where it was being held before Netanyahu arrived.

In the nine months since the attacks, rather than go after the Islamic communities of France that infect their members with Nazi-like Jew hatred marinated in Koranic dispensations for murder, French authorities have forced French Jewry to live under lock and key. Jewish communal institutions are required to shoulder astronomical security costs as their buildings have come to look more like military garrisons than elementary schools and synagogues.

As a French professor writing under the pen name Alain El-Mouchain explained this month in Mosaic Magazine, the French government’s “refusal to identify either the culprits [of anti-Semitic violence] or their [Jewish] victims by their proper names… has perversely combined with the swift posting of police and military guards at Jewish institutions to make Jews feel that at best they have become ‘protected citizens’ in their own country, reinforcing the idea that they are no longer at home in France but are rather a new kind of dhimmi [a minority group that lives at the pleasure of the ruling Muslims].”

In rejecting France’s bid to destroy Israel’s sovereignty over the Temple Mount, Netanyahu and his ministers have all noted that such a position will do nothing to protect the Temple Mount or guarantee freedom of religion. Only Israeli control of the holy site, Netanyahu explained, protects members of all faiths.

Again, while their statements are correct, they miss the point. It isn’t that France is doing nothing to ensure freedom of religion. Through its actions, France has shown that it isn’t even vaguely interested in promoting freedom and peace. The policy of the French government, revealed yet again by its bid to end Israeli control of the Temple Mount, is to delegitimize Israel and curry the favor of jihadists at the expense of the Jews of Israel and of France alike.

India Fears U.S.-Pakistan Nuclear Deal

By Janet Levy for AmericanThinker.com
 
The meeting today between Pakistan Prime Minister Sharif and President Obama at the White House is a continuation of a dangerous charade engaged in for decades by the United States. By perceiving Pakistan, a failed Islamic terrorist state, as a valuable strategic ally when it, in fact, has a blatant history of actions and circumstances to the contrary, the United States is pursuing a delusional foreign policy that further endangers American national security.

The meeting with Pakistan occurs at a time when the ink is barely dry on the dubious Iran bomb deal. Now, President Obama stands poised to sign a second nuclear agreement that will threaten U.S. ally, India, and likely destabilize the region. The first agreement, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), was led by the United States and finalized in July. Six world powers endorsed giving Iran a sure path to nuclear weapons, lifting international sanctions, providing a cash bonanza of hundreds of billions of dollars, putting neighboring Israel and Arab Gulf states at grave risk and proscribing timely, comprehensive inspections. Nearly 60% of Americans oppose the JCPOA and believe it will make the world less safe, according to a national poll in August by Quinnipiac University.

A possible second nuclear agreement, perceived by India and Hindu activist groups as inimical to that region’s security and to India’s interests, could be brokered during the meeting. A White House spokesman played down the prospect of an agreement, yet expressed confidence in Pakistan’s ability to “understand the importance and high priority that the world places on nuclear security.” This statement rings hollow in light of the recent signing of the much-maligned JCPOA.

In the wake of the widely opposed Iran deal, the White House could again be making unrealistic assumptions: this time about Pakistan’s cooperation and the likelihood of mutual agreements on inspections. India’s skepticism is heightened by the U.S. lack of timely intelligence about the activities of the A.Q. Khan network, named after Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, which has provided illicit nuclear information to Iran, North Korea and Libya over several decades. Of equal concern is U.S. unwillingness to take decisive action to curtail the activity after the fact. Also, little faith exists in the U.S. capacity for oversight concerning Pakistan’s nuclear ambitions.

Many fear that Obama will repeat his Iran debacle in yet another ill-conceived nuclear agreement. This despite Pakistan’s long record of supporting Islamic terrorism, including its role in the 9/11 attacks, its sheltering of Osama bin Laden, its past nuclear proliferation, its aggression toward U.S. ally India, and its interference in U.S. operations in Afghanistan.

Pakistan has long been a haven for Islamic terrorist groups which successive Pakistani governments have engaged and supported in insurgent activities in Afghanistan and India. The Pakistan Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) has been accused by the West of aiding Islamic terrorist groups, including Laskar e-Toiba, perpetrators of the 2008 Mumbai attacks, the 2006 Varanasi bombing and the 2001 shooting in the Indian Parliament. The ISI has also provided training and assistance for hundreds of mujahedeen attacks in Jammu and Kashmir that have left more than 47,000 people dead. Since 9/11, more than 2,300 Americans have been killed in Afghanistan by the Pakistani-trained and supported Taliban. After coalition forces overthrew the Taliban as part of Operation Enduring Freedom, then-President Musharraf authorized the release from jail of 2,500 suspected Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters caught in Afghanistan during the war.

In 2011, the revelation surfaced that, despite repeated denials, Pakistan had long been harboring Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden while at the same time Pakistan maintained its position as a “partner in the global war on terror’ (GWOT), conferred by the Bush administration, and received $31 billion in U.S. aid since 9/11.

In response, the United States threatened to withdraw military aid if Pakistan failed to crack down on regional Islamic terrorism. Successive American administrations conditioned aid based on Pakistan meeting vague goals that demonstrated a commitment to combatting terrorist groups in their midst. Yet, the State Department has consistently waived these conditions. Additionally, Pakistan has been the recipient of generous Coalition Support Funds (CSF) that reimburse its dubious counter-terrorism operations. This even though a 2008 Rand Corporation study disclosed that individuals within Pakistan’s government are providing assistance to the Taliban and other Islamic insurgents in Afghanistan, effectively crippling American attempts to stabilize the country. The study singled out Pakistan’s powerful military intelligence, the ISI, as the key culprit. Shortly after the 9/11 attacks, the FBI and Indian intelligence disclosed that former ISI head, General Mahmud Ahmed ordered that $100,000 be wired to Pakistani 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta.

In 2004 A. Q. Khan confessed to abetting nuclear proliferation. A letter from Khan to his wife, discovered in 2003, revealed that the Pakistani military had full knowledge of Khan’s nuclear deals. According to national security expert Bill Gertz, a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) report from 2001 disclosed that Iran was building enriched uranium-based nuclear arms with assistance from the Pakistan’s A.Q. Khan network.

Following U.S. exposure of the network in 2004, neither Khan nor his co-conspirators faced criminal charges in Pakistan. The Bush administration at the time sought then-Prime Minister Pervez Musharraf’s assistance in the war in Afghanistan to rout Al Qaeda and the Taliban and U.S. nuclear proliferation concerns took a back seat to the region’s geostrategic interests. In noteworthy contrast, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was banned from the U.S. for close to a decade based on false and eventually disproven charges that he failed to stop deadly riots between Muslims and Hindus in the state of Gujarat when he was a newly elected chief minister.

According to a story in the UK Telegraph, world intelligence agencies concur that the Saudis have paid for more than half of Pakistan’s nuclear program in return for the ability to purchase warheads. Concern has arisen that the recent nuclear deal with Iran will serve as a catalyst for more nuclear proliferation in the region as Saudi Arabia calls in its warhead chits.

Even during periods of economic distress, Pakistan managed to finance nuclear weapons production. In 1972, President Zulfikar Bhutto, the father of Pakistan’s nuclear program said if India built an atomic bomb, “we will eat grass, even go hungry, but we will get one of our own.” In 1974, when India did successfully test a nuclear device, Bhutto proclaimed that Pakistan must develop its own “Islamic bomb.”

In an effort to quell negative publicity and criticism about the upcoming meeting with the Pakistani Prime Minister, the White House has downplayed the likelihood of any upcoming nuclear deal with Pakistan and characterized Prime Minister Sharif’s visit to the White House as part of an ongoing dialogue on the importance of nuclear security.

Given Pakistan’s troubled history with Islamic terrorist groups, U.S. officials have been justifiably concerned about the security of its nuclear arsenal. Obama indicated that in this week’s meeting he would urge the Pakistani leader to end sanctuaries for the Taliban and press them to return to peace talks in order to bring a semblance of stability to Afghanistan.

Last week, the New York Times reported that Obama’s primary objectives for the meeting are preventing Pakistan’s nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of Islamic terrorist groups and exploring a deal to provide Pakistan greater access to nuclear technology in exchange for limits on Pakistan’s arsenal. This is reminiscent of Obama’s recent ill-advised offer of state-of-the-art nuclear equipment to Iran to downsize its nuclear program.

The Indian government is justifiably concerned that any U.S.-Pakistan nuclear agreement will result in Pakistan’s strategic parity with India. In 2005, India signed a civil nuclear deal, the 123 Agreement, with the U.S., lifting a three-decade moratorium on nuclear trade. The agreement provided assistance to India’s civilian energy program and established cooperation between the U.S. and India on related technology. The Indian government is justifiably concerned that Pakistan will be awarded a similar deal to ostensibly enhance a dubious strategic relationship. In contrast, India has been a trustworthy ally, not harbored, armed or trained Islamic terrorists, not provided nuclear materials to other countries nor been responsible for the death of Americans. What’s more is that India is a significant bilateral trading partner that is not dependent on U.S. military or economic aid.

India is also concerned that a U.S.-Pakistan agreement would exert greater pressure on India to make concessions in Kashmir, a region long disputed between India and Pakistan. In the past, Pakistan has attempted to engage the U.S. to further its interests in Kashmir and shift the balance of power in the region away from India.

Additionally, India fears that increased U.S. aid to Pakistan that will be used to foment terrorism in India and Afghanistan. Until 2010, India had been a “no first use” nuclear power, a policy never adopted by Pakistan. India’s policy changed when Pakistan increased its nuclear weapons production and stockpile of fissile material and joined the “nuclear 100 club,” doubling its nuclear arsenal from 2007.

India has valid concerns about Obama’s upcoming White House meeting as yet another nuclear deal could further inflame the already volatile region. Recently, Saudi Prince Mohammed al-Saud declared, “Iran’s nuclear program poses a direct threat to the entire region and constitutes a major source and incentive for nuclear proliferation across the Middle East.”

Whereas India has been a reliable ally and substantial trading partner, Pakistan has harbored, supported and trained Islamic terrorists, been responsible for the death of Americans, interfered with U.S. operations in Afghanistan causing military fatalities, fomented violent jihad in India, engaged in clandestine nuclear proliferation and soaked up billions in U.S. aid. A nuclear agreement with the Islamic state of Pakistan would further incite the situation in South Asia and beyond, lead to increased destabilization and foster a widespread nuclear arms race.


October 22, 2015
India Fears U.S.-Pakistan Nuclear Deal
By Janet Levy

The meeting today between Pakistan Prime Minister Sharif and President Obama at the White House is a continuation of a dangerous charade engaged in for decades by the United States. By perceiving Pakistan, a failed Islamic terrorist state, as a valuable strategic ally when it, in fact, has a blatant history of actions and circumstances to the contrary, the United States is pursuing a delusional foreign policy that further endangers American national security.
The meeting with Pakistan occurs at a time when the ink is barely dry on the dubious Iran bomb deal. Now, President Obama stands poised to sign a second nuclear agreement that will threaten U.S. ally, India, and likely destabilize the region. The first agreement, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), was led by the United States and finalized in July. Six world powers endorsed giving Iran a sure path to nuclear weapons, lifting international sanctions, providing a cash bonanza of hundreds of billions of dollars, putting neighboring Israel and Arab Gulf states at grave risk and proscribing timely, comprehensive inspections. Nearly 60% of Americans oppose the JCPOA and believe it will make the world less safe, according to a national poll in August by Quinnipiac University.

A possible second nuclear agreement, perceived by India and Hindu activist groups as inimical to that region’s security and to India’s interests, could be brokered during the meeting. A White House spokesman played down the prospect of an agreement, yet expressed confidence in Pakistan’s ability to “understand the importance and high priority that the world places on nuclear security.” This statement rings hollow in light of the recent signing of the much-maligned JCPOA.

In the wake of the widely opposed Iran deal, the White House could again be making unrealistic assumptions: this time about Pakistan’s cooperation and the likelihood of mutual agreements on inspections. India’s skepticism is heightened by the U.S. lack of timely intelligence about the activities of the A.Q. Khan network, named after Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan, which has provided illicit nuclear information to Iran, North Korea and Libya over several decades. Of equal concern is U.S. unwillingness to take decisive action to curtail the activity after the fact. Also, little faith exists in the U.S. capacity for oversight concerning Pakistan’s nuclear ambitions.

Many fear that Obama will repeat his Iran debacle in yet another ill-conceived nuclear agreement. This despite Pakistan’s long record of supporting Islamic terrorism, including its role in the 9/11 attacks, its sheltering of Osama bin Laden, its past nuclear proliferation, its aggression toward U.S. ally India, and its interference in U.S. operations in Afghanistan.

Pakistan has long been a haven for Islamic terrorist groups which successive Pakistani governments have engaged and supported in insurgent activities in Afghanistan and India. The Pakistan Inter-Service Intelligence (ISI) has been accused by the West of aiding Islamic terrorist groups, including Laskar e-Toiba, perpetrators of the 2008 Mumbai attacks, the 2006 Varanasi bombing and the 2001 shooting in the Indian Parliament. The ISI has also provided training and assistance for hundreds of mujahedeen attacks in Jammu and Kashmir that have left more than 47,000 people dead. Since 9/11, more than 2,300 Americans have been killed in Afghanistan by the Pakistani-trained and supported Taliban. After coalition forces overthrew the Taliban as part of Operation Enduring Freedom, then-President Musharraf authorized the release from jail of 2,500 suspected Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters caught in Afghanistan during the war.

In 2011, the revelation surfaced that, despite repeated denials, Pakistan had long been harboring Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden while at the same time Pakistan maintained its position as a “partner in the global war on terror’ (GWOT), conferred by the Bush administration, and received $31 billion in U.S. aid since 9/11.

In response, the United States threatened to withdraw military aid if Pakistan failed to crack down on regional Islamic terrorism. Successive American administrations conditioned aid based on Pakistan meeting vague goals that demonstrated a commitment to combatting terrorist groups in their midst. Yet, the State Department has consistently waived these conditions. Additionally, Pakistan has been the recipient of generous Coalition Support Funds (CSF) that reimburse its dubious counter-terrorism operations. This even though a 2008 Rand Corporation study <http://www.rand.org/news/press/2008/06/09.html> disclosed that individuals within Pakistan’s government are providing assistance to the Taliban and other Islamic insurgents in Afghanistan, effectively crippling American attempts to stabilize the country. The study singled out Pakistan’s powerful military intelligence, the ISI, as the key culprit. Shortly after the 9/11 attacks, the FBI and Indian intelligence disclosed that former ISI head, General Mahmud Ahmed ordered <http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/jul/22/usa.september11> that $100,000 be wired to Pakistani 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta.

In 2004 A. Q. Khan confessed to abetting nuclear proliferation. A letter from Khan to his wife, discovered in 2003, revealed that the Pakistani military had full knowledge of Khan’s nuclear deals. According to national security expert Bill Gertz <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jul/22/inside-the-ring-controversial-iran-intel-estimate-/?page=all>, a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) report from 2001 disclosed that Iran was building enriched uranium-based nuclear arms with assistance from the Pakistan’s A.Q. Khan network.

Following U.S. exposure of the network in 2004, neither Khan nor his co-conspirators faced criminal charges in Pakistan. The Bush administration at the time sought then-Prime Minister Pervez Musharraf’s assistance in the war in Afghanistan to rout Al Qaeda and the Taliban and U.S. nuclear proliferation concerns took a back seat to the region’s geostrategic interests. In noteworthy contrast, Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi was banned from the U.S. for close to a decade based on false and eventually disproven charges that he failed to stop deadly riots between Muslims and Hindus in the state of Gujarat when he was a newly elected chief minister.

According to a story <http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/saudiarabia/11658338/The-Saudis-are-ready-to-go-nuclear.html> in the UK Telegraph, world intelligence agencies concur that the Saudis have paid for more than half of Pakistan’s nuclear program in return for the ability to purchase warheads. Concern has arisen that the recent nuclear deal with Iran will serve as a catalyst for more nuclear proliferation in the region as Saudi Arabia calls in its warhead chits.

Even during periods of economic distress, Pakistan managed to finance nuclear weapons production. In 1972, President Zulfikar Bhutto, the father of Pakistan’s nuclear program said if India built an atomic bomb, “we will eat grass, even go hungry, but we will get one of our own.” In 1974, when India did successfully test a nuclear device, Bhutto proclaimed that Pakistan must develop its own “Islamic bomb.”

In an effort to quell negative publicity and criticism about the upcoming meeting with the Pakistani Prime Minister, the White House has downplayed the likelihood of any upcoming nuclear deal with Pakistan and characterized Prime Minister Sharif’s visit to the White House as part of an ongoing dialogue on the importance of nuclear security.

Given Pakistan’s troubled history with Islamic terrorist groups, U.S. officials have been justifiably concerned about the security of its nuclear arsenal. Obama indicated that in this week’s meeting he would urge the Pakistani leader to end sanctuaries for the Taliban and press them to return to peace talks in order to bring a semblance of stability to Afghanistan.

Last week, the New York Times reported <http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/10/15/us-nuclear-pakistan-usa-idUSKCN0S92WX20151015> that Obama’s primary objectives for the meeting are preventing Pakistan’s nuclear weapons from falling into the hands of Islamic terrorist groups and exploring a deal to provide Pakistan greater access to nuclear technology in exchange for limits on Pakistan’s arsenal. This is reminiscent of Obama’s recent ill-advised offer of state-of-the-art nuclear equipment to Iran to downsize its nuclear program.

The Indian government is justifiably concerned that any U.S.-Pakistan nuclear agreement will result in Pakistan’s strategic parity with India. In 2005, India signed a civil nuclear deal, the 123 Agreement, with the U.S., lifting a three-decade moratorium on nuclear trade. The agreement provided assistance to India’s civilian energy program and established cooperation between the U.S. and India on related technology. The Indian government is justifiably concerned that Pakistan will be awarded a similar deal to ostensibly enhance a dubious strategic relationship. In contrast, India has been a trustworthy ally, not harbored, armed or trained Islamic terrorists, not provided nuclear materials to other countries nor been responsible for the death of Americans. What’s more is that India is a significant bilateral trading partner that is not dependent on U.S. military or economic aid.

India is also concerned that a U.S.-Pakistan agreement would exert greater pressure on India to make concessions in Kashmir, a region long disputed between India and Pakistan. In the past, Pakistan has attempted to engage the U.S. to further its interests in Kashmir and shift the balance of power in the region away from India.

Additionally, India fears that increased U.S. aid to Pakistan that will be used to foment terrorism in India and Afghanistan. Until 2010, India had been a “no first use” nuclear power, a policy never adopted by Pakistan. India’s policy changed when Pakistan increased its nuclear weapons production and stockpile of fissile material and joined the “nuclear 100 club,” doubling its nuclear arsenal from 2007.

India has valid concerns about Obama’s upcoming White House meeting as yet another nuclear deal could further inflame the already volatile region. Recently, Saudi Prince Mohammed al-Saud declared, “Iran’s nuclear program poses a direct threat to the entire region and constitutes a major source and incentive for nuclear proliferation across the Middle East.”

Whereas India has been a reliable ally and substantial trading partner, Pakistan has harbored, supported and trained Islamic terrorists, been responsible for the death of Americans, interfered with U.S. operations in Afghanistan causing military fatalities, fomented violent jihad in India, engaged in clandestine nuclear proliferation and soaked up billions in U.S. aid. A nuclear agreement with the Islamic state of Pakistan would further incite the situation in South Asia and beyond, lead to increased destabilization and foster a widespread nuclear arms race.