Gaza War Diary 1 Sun. Dec. 18, 2016 Day 1200 1 1am | Emanuel Winston Archives

December 18th, 2016 by Gail Winston | Archived in: Gaza War 2014


Gaza War Diary 1 Sun. Dec. 18, 2016 Day 1200 1 1am

Dear Family & Friends,

So the miracle I asked for last night may have shined down upon us from Shamayim (the Heavens of G-d). Let’s pray it’s real & enduring Forever. As our heroine: Daniella Weiss proclaimed at last Tuesday’s Rally for Amona in front of the Prime Minister’s home: “Amona Forever!!”

Let’s also pray that the Government & the Supreme Court finally do a forensic investigation of the claims that the Lands on the rocky, barren hill which stands Amona is “private” “Palestinian” land. Those 2 words in quotes I would claim are fraudulent. Where are the papers to prove it? How did Yesh Din manipulate the Israeli Nationalistic government into folding to such lies? We still have a lot to dig into & prove. Take a short rest; dance with the irrepressible youth defending Amona (not from our army but from the false claims of the outside world) – & then go back to work to undo the extreme damage that the alt-Left has created.

Meantime, prepare for Chanukah with joy not trepidation for another coming cruel eviction. This Chanukah those youth were our Maccabees! Celebrate with them & the Government who came through. I’d love to have been a ‘fly on the wall’ to see how it was done.

All our very best especially to all our “Heroes On The Hill” & those who supported them.

Gail/Geula/Savta/Savta Raba x 2/Mom

Our Website is still open for you:

1. Amona residents accept compromise agreement

2. New Amona plan thwarted?

3. Government approves Amona deal

4. Amona protesters confront construction minister

5. Impotent Rage about Trump Directed at Steve Bannon

6. Relocating the US Embassy to Jerusalem – a litmus test
7.Islamism in Europe by Khadija Khan, GATESTONE INSTITUTE 12/17/16

8. Dry Bones by Ya’acov Kirschen “Legacies . . .His and Ours.”

1. Amona residents accept compromise agreement

Contested eviction averted as residents approve new deal, which would allow over half the town to be relocated to nearby plots on same hill.

Arutz Sheva Staff, 18/12/16 15:35 | updated: 16:06


Demonstrators gather in Amona – Eliran Aharon

Amona residents voted Sunday afternoon to approve a new offer presented by the government Saturday night which would allow over half the town’s families to remain on the hill where it is presently located.

The agreement, reached by Education Minister Naftali Bennett (Jewish Home) and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu (Likud) after a previous offer was rejected by residents, would allow 24 of Amona’s 42 families to be relocated to nearby plots on the same hill on which Amona currently stands. Those plots, currently unclaimed land, would be incorporated as state land using the Absentee Property Law.

The previous agreement would have allowed only 12 of the families to be relocated to the nearby plots and the residents rejected it as untenable.

Clearly defined timetables for the relocation were also added to the new compromise agreement worked out between the Jewish Home leader and the Prime Minister.

Amona representative Ofer Inbar clarified on Sunday that the town’s acceptance of the deal did not signal an end to the struggle on behalf of the embattled Samarian town if the government does keep its side of the agreement..

“We’ve decided to temporarily suspend the resistance [against the planned eviction], and to accept the government’s offer to build 52 new homes and public buildings in Amona,” said Inbar. “We decided to give the offer a chance and to [re]build our homes and lives here in Amona.”

“We’ll keep a close watch and see if the state lives up to its promises to build homes and new public buildings in Amona,” added Inbar.

“If the state doesn’t stand by its promises, we won’t hesitate to renew our efforts on behalf of our town and all of the Land of Israel – Amona will not fall again.”

Related Stories

· PM: Government did the ‘maximum’ for Amona

· Minister Galant: Amona received me very well

· Agriculture Minister: Amona deal is the best we can offer

· New Amona plan thwarted?

· Amona protesters confront construction minister

· Amona residents offered new proposal

· IDF soldiers leave post in protest of Amona eviction

· Preparations underway for Amona eviction

· Netanyahu to Erdan: Destroy illegal Arab buildings

· Amona rabbi: No violence during expulsion

Amona residents accept compromise agreement

2.New Amona plan thwarted?Shlomo Piotrokovsky, 18/12/16 12:15

The Left organization “Yesh Din” claims they’ve identified a Palestinian Arab owner of “lot 38,” the basis for new Amona plan.

Morning in Amona – צילום: Miriam Alster/Flash90

On Sunday morning, the extreme left-wing organization “Yesh Din,” claimed that they have succeeded in thwarting the most recent plan for saving Amona proposed by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Education Minister Naftali Bennett.

The organization claims that a Palestinian Arab owns “parcel 38,” which is where 24 of the 42 families currently living in Amona are supposed to settle, according to the latest plan.

The organization plans to file an appeal against building on the parcel and thereby thwart the latest proposed solution for Amona, which was based on applying the absentee property arrangement to this parcel.

Amona residents meanwhile gathered Sunday morning to discuss the plan presented to them Saturday night by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Education Minister Naftali Bennett. One of the Amona representatives to whom the plan was presented said “We understand that this is the best we could get but it will be a hard sell to the residents.” The residents were given a 12:00 noon deadline to come to a decision.

Meanwhile, security forces are preparing for a forced evacuation.

Ten Givati Brigade soldiers who were sent to the area to help secure the approaches to the community left their base in protest, but reportedly returned to their posts after receiving assurances from their commanders that they would not take place in the actual evacuation – which will be done by police and border police.

New Amona plan thwarted?

3.Government approves Amona deal

Coalition to request month’s delay in Supreme Court date for eviction of Amona residents so that new homes can be built on nearby plots. By Hezki Baruch, 18/12/16 19:07

Amona – Flash90

The government unanimously approved on Sunday a compromise deal hammered out between Jewish Home leader and Education Minister Naftali Bennett and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu that would relocate more than half of the Samarian town of Amona to nearby plots.

The Supreme Court ruled that Amona was built on private land after a suit to that effect was filed by a left wing organization, although none of the Arab “owners” stepped forward to claim the land and the homes were built in good faith with government aid. The court refused to allow compensation to the absentee owners.

According to the outline of the deal, 24 of the town’s 42 families will be relocated to undeveloped plots on the same hill where Amona is currently located. The government will take control of the unclaimed land under the Absentee Property Law, making the plots state land.

As part of the agreement, the state will request a one-month extension from the Supreme Court for the eviction orders, currently slated for December 25th.

Earlier on Sunday, residents of Amona voted to accept the modified compromise agreement by a margin of 45 to 25, with 2 abstentions.

The new deal expands the number of families allowed to remain on the hill from 12 to 24, and provides explicit timetables for the building of new structures for the relocated town. In total, the new location of Amona will include 56 private homes and public buildings.

Government approves Amona deal

4.Amona protesters confront construction minister

Construction Minister promises to make Amona even bigger, Amona residents meet to discuss new solution. By Eliran Aharon, Amona, 18/12/16 10:41

Construction Minister Yoav Galant (Kulanu) arrived at Amona on Sunday morning and met with the town’s secretariat, as well as residents’ representatives and Yesha Council heads.

“We’ll find a way to build Amona even bigger,” Galant said during his visit.

After leaving the secretariat, Galant was met by protesters yelling, “You should be ashamed! You’ve sold Amona, you’ve sold the mountain. Israel is not for sale!” as well as chants of, “We don’t give away Israel’s land.”

Galant’s secrity detail successfully dealt with the protesters, among them right-wing attorney and activist Itamar Ben-Gvir.

After spotting Ben-Gvir, Galant told him to “educate these youth.”

On Sunday morning, Amona residents gathered in Ofra to discuss a new solution suggested to them by Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Education Minister Naftali Bennett on Saturday night.

In order to allow the government time to request the Israeli Supreme Court to delay the demolition, Amona residents been told to announce their decision by 12pm on Sunday.

The new solution would allow 24 families to stay on the mountain in adjacent Lot 38, while previous versions allowed for only 12 families to stay. The new version also includes a clear timetable stating when the government intends to fulfill each of its promises to Amona’s residents, and details who would be directly in charge of completing the project.


Construction Minister promises to make Amona even bigger

5.Impotent Rage About Trump Directed at Steve Bannon

The witch hunt against Bannon is animated by the impotent rage of the “anyone but Trumpers.”

By: Lori Lowenthal Marcus Published: Nov. 15, 2016 Latest: Nov. 17, 2016

Stephen K. Bannon, president-elect Trump’s Chief Strategist
Photo Credit:

It didn’t take haters of president-elect Trump long to shift their negative energy away from Trump and instead focus it towards an easier target: former Breitbart editor-in-chief and newly named Trump’s chief strategist Stephen Bannon.

Trump won the election, he isn’t going anywhere and people, especially liberal Democrats who have been lulled by eight years of validation, are angry. Also greatly peeved are the traditional establishment conservatives who refused to back the aggressively non-intellectual Donald Trump. It was not only shocking but personally insulting to many of the elites that the “loser” actually won. Much better to throw word-bombs at a liberal for four years than to have to eat crow – picking feathers out of one’s teeth is never fun.

So when the president-elect filled his first two positions and one of the two was an establishment stalwart, Republican National Committee chair Reince Priebus as chief of staff, heads swiveled and the keyboards pointed towards the second, the easier target, Bannon.

Bannon has been decisively labeled “an anti-Semite,” and “alt-right,” and therefore “racist.” The anti-Semite charge has been traced back to claims made by an ex-wife during divorce proceedings. The most inflammatory thing she claimed he said is he didn’t want to send their girls to a school with “too many Jews.” But they did send their girls there. Bannon denies the charge. That’s it for evidence of anti-Semitism. Really? Words uttered in a custody battle?

Anyone remember the claim that Hillary Clinton referred to one of her husband’s Jewish staffers as a “[expletive verb deleted] Jew [expletive noun deleted]”? Of course it was never proven that she said that – same with Bannon’s alleged anti-Semitic remarks – but it was repeated & rumors about it persisted, yet none ever rose to the level of a disqualifier for public office, let alone an advisory role.

Since we can’t know the truth about whether Bannon uttered what was attributed to him by his ex-wife in a custody battle, what do people who know or worked with Bannon have to say about whether the man is an anti-Semite?

David Goldman, the economist and author who used to write under the pen name Spengler, wrote from personal experience that he was confident Bannon is not anti-Semitic. Writing on his Facebook wall, Goldman responded to a post on a conservative news site which blasted Bannon for promoting “anti-Semitism,” “racism” & “white nationalism.”

Goldman did a Google search of the site.

I looked through roughly a thousand articles & found nothing but pro-Israel, pro-Jewish articles that might well have appeared in Israel Hayom. There is not a shred of evidence–not a single article–that supports [John] Podhoretz’ allegation that Bannon & Breitbart aid & abet anti-Semitic views.

Earlier in the day Goldman took the Financial Times to task for the same kind of evidence-free accusation.

“I know Steve Bannon, and have had several long discussions with him about politics. I first met him when he approached me at a conference to tell me that he liked my writing, which is unabashedly Zionist,” Goldman posted.

Goldman responded to an email query with: “I discussed Israel with him on a couple of occasions and he is a gung-ho pro-Zionist conservative.”

Joel B. Pollak is senior editor-at-large at Breitbart News and an Orthodox Jew. He has worked with Bannon for years and in response to the brouhaha wrote a column on Monday, Stephen K, Bannon, Friend of the Jewish People, Defender of Israel.”

Pollak elaborated on his full-throated defense of Bannon in a telephone call late Monday evening. “Steve Bannon is the best friend Israel has ever had in the White House,” Pollak said. “Under Bannon, Breitbart has expanded to open a Jerusalem bureau, and it consistently posts positive stories about Israel.”

So what about the charges of anti-Semitism? Pollak laughed. “I won’t tell you which ones, but during the [Republican] primary I had to repeatedly talk Steve off a ledge when he became irate that one or more of the contenders made comments Steve interpreted as anti-Semitic.” If anything, Pollak explained, “Steve is overly-sensitive to statements by others he thinks are anti-Semitic.”

No one claims Bannon is a pussycat. Several people who spoke out against the anti-Semitism claim willingly described Bannon as “tough” or “difficult” or “as hard-[expletive deleted] as they come,” but no one has come forward with any basis for calling Bannon anti-Semitic.

What about the claims of Bannon promoting Breitbart as a refuge for alt-right views?

Pollak explained that saying Breitbart promotes “alt-right” because Breitbart contains reporting on the alt-right is “like saying CNN promotes Black Lives Matter because CNN reports on the BLM movement.”

Indeed, there are articles about the alt-right on Breitbart. The most expansive one is co-written by the alleged icon of the alt-right, Milo Yiannopoulis, An Establishment Conservative’s Guide to the Alt-Right.”

In a 5200-plus word article Yiannopoulis and his co-author Allum Bokhari debunk myths while creating a taxonomy of the alt-right movement.

Much of the alt-right, the two explain, focuses on community-building and values lifestyles. The “prankstering” or outrageous “memes” appear to be the source of much misunderstanding about the movement, which the two explain is even more hilarious to the alt-righters who practically choke on how those they aggravate “get played.”

But then there are the “1488ers,” who are just a small segment of the movement. Yiannopoulis and Bokhari explain:

1488ers are the equivalent of the Black Lives Matter supporters who call for the deaths of policemen, or feminists who unironically want to #KillAllMen. Of course, the difference is that while the media pretend the latter are either non-existent, or a tiny extremist minority, they consider 1488ers to constitute the whole of the alt-right.

Those looking for Nazis under the bed can rest assured that they do exist. On the other hand, there’s just not very many of them, no-one really likes them, and they’re unlikely to achieve anything significant in the alt-right.

Yiannopoulis also said that “he is too pro-Israel” even for non-1488er alt-rightists to include him in their movement. The same is surely true for Breitbart itself, and for Bannon.

So the scary bogey-men of the alt-right is a fringe element of a fringe element, about which Breitbart runs articles, just – to quote Pollak – as CNN runs articles about the recent attention-grabbing movement on the left, Black Lives Matter.

Similarly, of the recent anti-Trump protests many involved were just dispirited Hillary fans, while a few called for violent revolution and there was even a sign held by one protester advocating “rape Melania.” Should all Clinton-voters be condemned? Should Hillary Clinton?

The blogger Jeff Dunetz wrote for Breitbart for several years. Although he never met Bannon, Dunetz wrote a column on his own blog on Monday, with a commonsense title: If Steve Bannon is an anti-Semite, Why Can’t I Find Any Anti-Semitism? Dunetz remarked on a column written by David Horowitz which ran at Breitbart. In that column Horowitz referred to longtime neo-con leader Bill Kristol as a “renegade Jew” for refusing to support the Republican Party nominee, Donald Trump. But Horowitz – a Jew – wrote the column, not Bannon.

It is true that the Horowitz column ran at Breitbart, but that does not make Breitbart or Steve Bannon any more anti-Semitic than the New York Times running a column written by Mahmoud Abbas makes that paper a Holocaust-denier. And just because the Democratic Party endorsed the Black Lives Matter platform does not necessarily make it or its standard bearers anti-Israel or anti-police, although the BLM certainly is the latter and has officially charged Israel with being an Apartheid State and committing genocide.

Yet another point has to be made: when critics claim Breitbart News, and then by extension Bannon, is either anti-Semitic, racist or vile because some of Breitbart’s readers are, one must admit that reading the talkbacks of any major – and some quite minor – media outlets would render those outlets anti-Semitic or racists, using the same standard.

From the available evidence it does not appear that Steve Bannon is either an anti-Semite or a proponent of white nationalism or racism. As Joel Pollak said on CNN Monday evening, “the worst thing Steve Bannon has done is win the White House.” And that really seems to be what is animating the witch hunt against Steve Bannon; the impotent rage of those who wanted “anyone but Trump.”

Lori Lowenthal Marcus is a contributor to the A graduate of Harvard Law School, she previously practiced First Amendment law and taught in Philadelphia-area graduate and law schools. You can reach her by email:

Impotent Rage About Trump Directed at Steve Bannon

Yoram will be in the US in 2017, available for speaking engagements.

6. Relocating the US Embassy to Jerusalem – a litmus test
by Ambassador (ret.) Yoram Ettinger, “Second Thought: a US-Israel Initiative”
“Israel Hayom”, December 18, 2016,

Terminating the Department of State policy which refers to the whole of Jerusalem as an international (not Israeli) city, recognizing unified Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, and relocating the US Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, represent a litmus test of President-elect Donald Trump’s resolve to Make America Great Again, by defying Arab/Muslim pressure and threats, as well as overruling the politically-correct establishment of the Department of State.
Moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem is, also, a litmus test of Prime Minister Netanyahu’s intent to leverage the non-conventional Trump/Pence worldview, which abhors domestic and international political-correctness, respects firmness and the defiance of odds, recognizes Israel as a unique ally in the battle against the Ayatollahs and Islamic terrorism, and is aware that US national security interests transcend the Palestinian issue.
The decision to relocate the US Embassy to Jerusalem will usher in the Trump era, setting President Trump apart from his predecessors, underscoring the independence of US unilateral – rather than multinational – action, distinguishing him from the US and international foreign policy establishment and setting him apart from the UN worldview, while reflecting the state-of-mind of most Americans.
Establishing the US Embassy in Israel’s capital will signal Trump’s determination to resurrect the US posture of deterrence, which has been eroded in recent years, underlying a realization that succumbing to pressure & threats fuels violence, while defying them deters rogue elements & advances security & the prospects of peace. For example, in 2011, the Department of State warned the White House against vetoing a UN Security Council condemnation of Israel’s settlements policy, lest it fuel terrorism. Contrary to the December 1988 US recognition of the PLO & the 1993 Israel-PLO Oslo Accord – which intensified Palestinian terrorism & hate education – vetoing the UN Security Council resolution was not followed by bloodshed.
While moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem would not undermine or prejudge the peace process – since the location of the Embassy is in pre-1967 Israeli Western Jerusalem – a failure to implement the law will further radicalize the Arabs, who cannot afford to be less demanding that the US, thus presenting more obstacles to the pursuit of peace.
The relocation of the US Embassy to Israel’s eternal capital, Jerusalem, will implement US law, the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, which enjoys massive support on Capitol Hill and beyond, but was not implemented by presidents who abused national security as an excuse for non-compliance.
Relocating the US Embassy to Jerusalem will, also, be consistent with the worldview of the early Pilgrims and the US Founding Fathers, as reflected by the existence of 18 Jerusalems and 32 Salems (Shalem was the original name of Jerusalem) in the US, and by the spelling of JerUSAlem.
Jerusalem was central to the agenda of Israel’s Founding Father and first Prime Minister, David Ben Gurion. In December 1949 – at the end of Israel’s War of Independence – he declared Western Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, in defiance of brutal pressure from the US, and notwithstanding harsh opposition by Israeli President Chaim Weizmann and Foreign Minister Moshe Sharett, who predicted costly consequences, diplomatically, economically and militarily. Resisting the US call to refrain from annexing – and constructing in – Western Jerusalem, Ben Gurion relocated government offices and the Knesset from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, and built new neighborhoods all the way to the ceasefire lines in Jerusalem, thus enhancing the stature of Jerusalem and Israel.
However, in 1995, I heard from a frustrated Senator Daniel Inouye – who was Israel’s leading supporter on Capitol Hill – that Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin collaborated with President Bill Clinton in pressuring US Senators to insert a waiver provision into the Jerusalem Embassy Act, which enjoyed a veto proof majority. That waiver enabled US presidents to suspend implementation of the Act, supposedly, due to national security considerations.
Similarly, in July 1999, Prime Minister Ehud Barak asked Senators Lieberman and Kyl to heed President Clinton’s request to shelve an updated edition of the Jerusalem Embassy Act – supported by 84 Senators – which would revoke the waiver provision, prescribing a $100MN deduction from the Department of State budget upon non-implementation. Barak contended that the initiative was “ill timed,” and would amount to sacrificing the peace process on the altar of Jerusalem. However, Barak’s slapping the face of Israel’s friends on Capitol Hill – and his proposed unprecedented, reckless concessions to Arafat – sacrificed Jerusalem on the altar of a failed peace process, further radicalizing Palestinian expectations, and therefore dooming the peace process.
Recent months suggest that President-elect Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu realize that the relocation of the US Embassy to Jerusalem is their litmus test.
President-elect Trump has demonstrated his politically-incorrect vigor to learn from the past by avoiding presidential errors, to relocate the US Embassy to Jerusalem and to bolster the US posture of deterrence, while projecting his own compliance with the US law of the land.
Prime Minister Netanyahu will not sacrifice the unique potential of the Trump/Pence team on the altar of political correctness, and therefore will follow in the footsteps of Ben Gurion, who would not sacrifice Jerusalem on the altar of “doomsday assessments,” realizing the critical geo-strategic impact of his attitude toward Jerusalem on Israel’s power projection, deterrence of Israel’s enemies and cooperation with the politically-incorrect, newly-elected President Trump.

Yoram Ettinger, Jerusalem, Israel, “Second Thought: US-Israel Initiative,”

“Relocating the US Embassy to Jerusalem – a litmus test” by Amb. (ret.) Yoram Ettinger

7.Islamism in Europe by Khadija Khan, GATESTONE INSTITUTE 12/17/16


Since the unprecedented terror attacks in France, Belgium and Germany, citizens have been living in constant fear. In France,

soldiers are deployed in the streets. Pictured: A soldier on guard at the Eiffel Tower in Paris. (Image source: Kirsteen/Flickr)

  • Ironically, those who dare to speak out against extremists either face severe consequences, such as death threats, or are called anti-Muslim bigots. This kind of response often discourages progressive voices from speaking out, and understates the progress of counter-extremism even within the Muslim community. Opposition voices still might be there — more than ever. They just go underground.
  • Since the unprecedented terror attacks in France, Belgium and Germany, citizens across the Europe have been living in constant fear. They seem to be sick and tired of the Muslim extremists; children might be in danger on their way to school, and shopping takes place under the protection of soldiers.
  • With Brexit, the election of Donald Trump, and Italy’s
  • referendum, there seems to be a snowball effect. The growing influence of Alternative for Germany (AfD), the National Front in France, the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands, the Freedom Party Austria and the Five Star Movement in Italy all appear to be byproducts of the same rhetoric.
  • The dull reaction of a vast number of European Muslims to the rising wave of terror and violence has also contributed to this shift. Increasing numbers of native-born Europeans seem angry and distrustful of their fellow Muslim citizens, especially when everyone else has come out loud and clear in denouncing terrorist crimes.

German authorities and those across Europe seem finally to be strengthening their campaign against the militant far-right, including Muslim extremists, during the past few weeks.

This awakening, however, seems to be coming after a major price that Europe had to pay in terms of death and chaos unleashed by terrorists in Germany, Belgium, France, Denmark, and so on.

Governments across the Europe seem to be switching into panic mode to prevent the rise of European radicalism through the rise of the far-right, racism and nationalism throughout the entire continent.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel sounds as if she is backing down a bit from championing the influx of migrants and her slogan of “We can do it!” in developing a multicultural society. She not only vowed to Germans in an address last week that the migrant crisis must never be repeated; she also called for an all-out ban on the full-face veil covering in Germany.

Following Merkel’s lead, Interior Minister Thomas de Maizière also proposed a partial ban on veils, and pronounced them contrary to assimilation.

The dramatic shift in policy might be a consequence of the planned and perpetrated acts of terrorism by extremist Muslims, many of whom are the migrants on whom Merkel placed her hopes. It might also be the result of the resultant rise of European neo-Nazis. More likely, it would appear to come from an eye to re-election.

Merkel was declared by many the only defender of the free world after the election of Donald Trump as U.S. president. Perhaps, after the surprising victory of Donald Trump, she realized that it might be a good idea finally to address the grievances of her fellow countrymen.

The brutal rape and murder of a 19-year-old German woman, Maria Ladenburger, apparently by Afghan migrant who claims to be 17 years old, seems to have been the last nail in the coffin of Merkel’s open-door migrant policy, which she had promised to not to let go even after extreme opposition from within her own party’s leadership.

Ladenburger had been a medical student volunteering at a migrant housing facility. Her murderer had reportedly seen her in the shelter. The incident set off shockwaves not only in the Germany but also across Europe, especially after promises by Germany’s interior ministry to deport as many Afghan citizens as possible after failing to confirm any credible claims for asylum.

In the meanwhile, authorities in Berlin last weekend announced the arrest of an Afghan citizen who was actively involved in terrorist attacks in Afghanistan, while living part-time in Germany.

German police a few weeks back also launched an operation against a Salafist group in the country, whose members were brainwashing Muslim youths, mostly in Germany, to get jihadist training and join the Islamic State’s battle against the world in Syria and Iraq.

The Salafist organization had registered itself as a social work entity under the cover of distributing the Quran in markets and public places, and claiming to be bridging the gap between the West and Islam.

ne suspect was arrested in Aschaffenburg and another was detained in Mannheim, on the allegation of plotting an Islamically motivated attack on a public place.

This recent shift in strategy is also a lesson that the West has learnt a bit too late, despite having experienced similar assaults not that long ago by the Nazis, Mussolini, Lenin, Stalin as well as terror organizations such as Baader Meinhof, al-Shebaab, ETA, the Red Brigades, Hamas, Al Qaeda, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah, to name just a few.

Since the unprecedented terror attacks in France, Belgium and Germany, citizens across the Europe have been living in constant fear. They seem to be sick and tired of the Muslim extremists; children might be in danger on their way to school, and shopping takes place under the protection of soldiers.

With Brexit, the election of Donald Trump & Italy’s referendum, there seems to be a snowball effect. The growing influence of Alternative for Germany (AfD), the National Front in France, the Party for Freedom in the Netherlands, the Freedom Party Austria and the Five Star Movement in Italy all appear to be byproducts of the same rhetoric.

The dull reaction of a vast number of European Muslims to the rising wave of terror and violence has also contributed to this shift. Increasing numbers of native-born Europeans seem angry and distrustful of their fellow Muslim citizens, especially when everyone else has come out loud and clear in denouncing terrorist crimes.

Ironically, those who dare to speak out against extremists either face severe consequences, such as death threats, or are called anti-Muslim bigots. This kind of response often discourages progressive voices from speaking out, and understates the progress of counter-extremism even within the Muslim community. Opposition voices still might be there — more than ever. They just go underground.

The majority of Muslims in the West seem oblivious to the fact that they would be the greatest victims of empowered lunatic extremists such as ISIS or neo-Nazis, because both would try to punish progressive Muslims either for remaining silent about terrorist attacks or for not joining the bandwagon for ISIS.

Progressive Muslims should realize that their voices matter at this sensitive time if they do not want to end up being losers between those two extremes.

The failed political policies of the global powers have started to translate into a dreadful future for humanity where a clone of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Anders Breivik or a Neville Chamberlain clone might be calling the shots, and the civilized world would become a hell for those caught in the middle, the rest of us.

Khadija Khan is a Pakistan-based journalist and commentator.

Islamism in Europe by Khadija Khan, GATESTONE INSTITUTE 12/17/16

8.Dry Bones by Ya’acov Kirschen “Legacies . . .His and Ours.”


Yes, Aleppo is Part of Obama’s Legacy

9.Israel (Finally) Takes Possession of F-35s

Tuesday, December 13, 2016 | Israel Today Staff


Israel on Monday became the first nation after the US to take possession of F–35 Joint Strike Fighter jets.

Two of the planes landed at Nevatim Air Force Base in southern Israel.

Already adorned with the Star of David, the planes are now officially part of the Israel Air Force.

The welcome ceremony was attended and addressed by Israel’s top political and military leadership, as well as by US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter.

Israel Air Force engineers will now pore over the planes, and Israeli-developed systems will be added. Then Israeli pilots will take the F–35s to the skies and the Jewish state’s qualitative edge over its enemies will increase. Want more news from Israel?

Israel (Finally) Takes Possession of F-35s


Avast logo

About the Author

Gail Winston is co-founder of the Winston International Institute for the Study of Prejudice.

Leave a Reply