Category: Ron Jager

The Sunni Nations and the 'Jordanian Option'


On September 1, 1967, the Arab League summit delivered the “Three No’s” – no to peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel. This declaration was passed as part of the Khartoum Resolution at a summit attended by eight Arab heads of state in the shadow of the Six-Day War, which saw Israel’s unprecedented defeat of Egypt, Jordan and Syria. For the past 70 years, this has been the official policy of all Sunni nations in the Middle East: no to Israel and yes to the Palestinians demand for an independent state, until now. All of this has now come to an end.

The split in the Islamist nations between the Sunni majority led by Saudi Arabia and the Shia minority led by Iran has turned the tables on many strategic givens.  The continuing obsolete thinking in the United States and Western European capitals must change.  What was, will no longer be. Sunni nations that were in the past at the forefront of the “Three No’s” strategy are today major allies of the State of Israel, and are coordinating  their military and strategic postures with Israel to defend themselves against the aggressive Shia threat emanating from Iran and her allies.

The Palestinians are a major ally of Iran alongside the terror movement Hezb’allah and are totally subservient to the Shia regime of Ayatollahs in Iran. With the Palestinians leaving the fold of the Sunni world, they have not only lost the support of all major Sunni nations, but have also sabotaged by their own hand the feasibility of a two-state solution. For this reason, the two state solution for the Palestinians is out, and the “Jordanian Option” is back on the table as a viable and sustainable option.

Now is time for the international community to go back to basics and seek a remedy elsewhere, after nearly forty years of advocating the two-state solution and after thousands of Israelis have been killed by Palestinian terrorists.  Palestinian autonomy based on a federation within the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan offers the only viable and sustainable hope for the Palestinian Arabs residing in the West Bank — also known in Israel as Judea and Samaria. This “Jordanian Option” of enabling the Palestinian Arabs to be incorporated within the sovereign borders of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan can offer a realistic approach in meeting the legitimate historical claims of Israel as the state of the Jewish people, and at the same time satisfy those Palestinian Arabs with the political aspiration of controlling their own destiny. After nearly 100 years of a failed Palestinian Arab national movement and given the bleak scenarios that lie ahead for the Palestinians, now is the time to go back to the establishment of a Jordanian-Palestinian federation.

With the Palestinians losing the financial and political support of the Sunni nations of the Middle East, how can this new reality be used to engage strategic actors to play a critical role in making the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan re-engage the Palestinian leadership into some kind of federation within the Kingdom? The Gulf States, especially Saudi Arabia, can provide the finance for the newly formed Palestinian-Jordanian Sunni ally. The United States, under President Donald Trump, has recommitted to maintaining the U.S. security umbrella with the Gulf states. With the establishment of the Palestinian-Jordanian federation, the United States will have a strategic belt of nations spanning from Saudi Arabia – Palestinian-Jordanian federation – Israel – Egypt making a united and powerful front to the larger threat posed by Iran to American interests. The formidable military power of this strategic belt will provide the United States with the needed deterrence against Iran without having to commit American forces.

Jordan can also become a major recipient of international aid that has been earmarked for the Palestinian Authority. Jordanian control of these funds would significantly improve due diligence and transparency, ensuring that the funding is not funneled to incitement and terror but to provide for the basic needs of the Palestinian Arabs. Much of the Palestinian frustration is in response to the corruption and outright stealing of international aid by Palestinian leaders over the years. Jordanian control of international aid at the expense of the Palestinian Authority, would allow Jordan to deepen her political influence among the Palestinian local leadership, and build a constituency that will gain strength among the general Palestinian public.

As for peace prospects, a Palestinian-Jordanian federation could negotiate with Israel a peace agreement in accord with principles agreed upon over two decades when Israel and Jordan signed an official peace agreement that has been in force and largely successful in creating peace between the two nations. The road map to such a peace agreement won’t be easy but the potential benefits in renewing the “Jordanian Option” outweigh the suffering and the immense cost of the conflict associated with a two state solution that is no longer viable.

The writer, a 25-year veteran of the I.D.F., served as a field mental health officer and Commander of the Central Psychiatric Military Clinic for Reserve Soldiers at Tel-Hashomer. Since retiring from active duty, he provides consultancy services to NGO’s implementing Psycho trauma and Psychoeducation programs to communities in the North and South of Israel and is a former strategic advisor to the Chief Foreign Envoy of Judea and Samaria.   To contact: medconf@gmail.com

On September 1, 1967, the Arab League summit delivered the “Three No’s” – no to peace with Israel, no recognition of Israel, and no negotiations with Israel. This declaration was passed as part of the Khartoum Resolution at a summit attended by eight Arab heads of state in the shadow of the Six-Day War, which saw Israel’s unprecedented defeat of Egypt, Jordan and Syria. For the past 70 years, this has been the official policy of all Sunni nations in the Middle East: no to Israel and yes to the Palestinians demand for an independent state, until now. All of this has now come to an end.

The split in the Islamist nations between the Sunni majority led by Saudi Arabia and the Shia minority led by Iran has turned the tables on many strategic givens.  The continuing obsolete thinking in the United States and Western European capitals must change.  What was, will no longer be. Sunni nations that were in the past at the forefront of the “Three No’s” strategy are today major allies of the State of Israel, and are coordinating  their military and strategic postures with Israel to defend themselves against the aggressive Shia threat emanating from Iran and her allies.

The Palestinians are a major ally of Iran alongside the terror movement Hezb’allah and are totally subservient to the Shia regime of Ayatollahs in Iran. With the Palestinians leaving the fold of the Sunni world, they have not only lost the support of all major Sunni nations, but have also sabotaged by their own hand the feasibility of a two-state solution. For this reason, the two state solution for the Palestinians is out, and the “Jordanian Option” is back on the table as a viable and sustainable option.

Now is time for the international community to go back to basics and seek a remedy elsewhere, after nearly forty years of advocating the two-state solution and after thousands of Israelis have been killed by Palestinian terrorists.  Palestinian autonomy based on a federation within the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan offers the only viable and sustainable hope for the Palestinian Arabs residing in the West Bank — also known in Israel as Judea and Samaria. This “Jordanian Option” of enabling the Palestinian Arabs to be incorporated within the sovereign borders of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan can offer a realistic approach in meeting the legitimate historical claims of Israel as the state of the Jewish people, and at the same time satisfy those Palestinian Arabs with the political aspiration of controlling their own destiny. After nearly 100 years of a failed Palestinian Arab national movement and given the bleak scenarios that lie ahead for the Palestinians, now is the time to go back to the establishment of a Jordanian-Palestinian federation.

With the Palestinians losing the financial and political support of the Sunni nations of the Middle East, how can this new reality be used to engage strategic actors to play a critical role in making the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan re-engage the Palestinian leadership into some kind of federation within the Kingdom? The Gulf States, especially Saudi Arabia, can provide the finance for the newly formed Palestinian-Jordanian Sunni ally. The United States, under President Donald Trump, has recommitted to maintaining the U.S. security umbrella with the Gulf states. With the establishment of the Palestinian-Jordanian federation, the United States will have a strategic belt of nations spanning from Saudi Arabia – Palestinian-Jordanian federation – Israel – Egypt making a united and powerful front to the larger threat posed by Iran to American interests. The formidable military power of this strategic belt will provide the United States with the needed deterrence against Iran without having to commit American forces.

Jordan can also become a major recipient of international aid that has been earmarked for the Palestinian Authority. Jordanian control of these funds would significantly improve due diligence and transparency, ensuring that the funding is not funneled to incitement and terror but to provide for the basic needs of the Palestinian Arabs. Much of the Palestinian frustration is in response to the corruption and outright stealing of international aid by Palestinian leaders over the years. Jordanian control of international aid at the expense of the Palestinian Authority, would allow Jordan to deepen her political influence among the Palestinian local leadership, and build a constituency that will gain strength among the general Palestinian public.

As for peace prospects, a Palestinian-Jordanian federation could negotiate with Israel a peace agreement in accord with principles agreed upon over two decades when Israel and Jordan signed an official peace agreement that has been in force and largely successful in creating peace between the two nations. The road map to such a peace agreement won’t be easy but the potential benefits in renewing the “Jordanian Option” outweigh the suffering and the immense cost of the conflict associated with a two state solution that is no longer viable.

The writer, a 25-year veteran of the I.D.F., served as a field mental health officer and Commander of the Central Psychiatric Military Clinic for Reserve Soldiers at Tel-Hashomer. Since retiring from active duty, he provides consultancy services to NGO’s implementing Psycho trauma and Psychoeducation programs to communities in the North and South of Israel and is a former strategic advisor to the Chief Foreign Envoy of Judea and Samaria.   To contact: medconf@gmail.com



Source link

Liberal Jews to Israel: Do It Our Way or Else



Israel is a Jewish nation agreeable to a palate of liberal American Jews, provided they can remain Jewish from afar.



Source link

Britain’s Islamic Domino


The current wave of Islamic terror seen in Manchester and London, only reinforces the general feeling that the excessive  political correctness of recent years by the Obama Presidency, by the British Labor party, and the European media has fostered and festered productive breeding grounds for Islamic terrorists in the heart of England. London’s current Mayor Sadiq Khan, a practicing Muslim, could have a significant impact on the minds and hearts of many of England’s young Muslims should he decide to express what should have been said years ago to Muslims living in England and throughout the Western World.

Khan could have reinforced the idea that practicing Muslims such as himself are modern citizens who happen to worship Allah, yet do not bring any kind of belief in the preeminence of Sharia Law. Islamic terror is the logical extension of the belief that Sharia must be imposed.  Mayor Khan could state that the former would not pose a threat to England or the Western lifestyle while the latter belief would be a “mortal threat.”  The danger facing Britain and other Western nations from the Islamic wave sweeping the Middle East and beyond arises not from the fact that people practicing the Islamic religion are Muslim, but rather from the degree to which they adhere to the totalitarian, supremacist Islamic doctrine of Sharia.

However, you don’t have to go back very far in Mayor Sadiq Khan’s past to find links with some pretty questionable characters. Some of these associations date back to his time as a human rights lawyer trying to get England to lift its ban on the American Nation of Islam leader, Louis Farrakhan, who has described Jews as ‘blood-suckers’ and called Hitler ‘a very great man.’ Khan didn’t mind speaking at the same conference as Sajeel Abu Ibrahim, a member of the now proscribed Islamist organization that trained the 7/7 bomber Mohammad Sidique Khan.  In 2004, Sadiq Khan appeared on a platform with five Islamic extremists at a conference in London organized by Al-Aqsa, a group that has published works by the notorious Holocaust denier Paul Eisen.

In the same year, Khan was the chair of the Muslim Council of Britain’s legal affairs committee, and was involved in defending the Muslim scholar Dr Yusuf Al-Qaradawi. Among other things, he’s the author of a book called The Lawful and Prohibited in Islam, in which he justifies wife beating and discusses whether homosexuals should be killed. Most notoriously, he condones ‘martyrdom operations’, i.e. suicide bombings, against Israeli civilians, which he describes as ‘God’s justice’: ‘Allah Almighty is just; through his infinite wisdom he has given the weak a weapon the strong do not have and that is their ability to turn their bodies into bombs as Palestinians do.’

In spite of holding these views, Qaradawi was not an ‘extremist’ in Sadiq Khan’s eyes.  In 2006, by which time Khan had been elected to Parliament, Khan was one of the signatories of a letter to the Guardian that blamed terrorist incidents, such as 7/7, on British foreign policy, particularly Britain’s support for Israel. ‘It is our view that current British government policy risks putting civilians at increased risk both in the UK and abroad,’

Should Mayor Khan decide to, he can render a real public service by not shying away from the issue of what it means to be a practicing Muslim in a Western nation.  He can align himself with the call for tougher counterterrorism measures suggested by the British PM and be the first to demand that the UK must not pretend that things can remain the same. Khan can abandon the politically correct rhetoric about Islam and the legitimacy of terror to advance political goals, whether it be ISIS or the Palestinians who have been using terror for the latter part of the past 100 years, at first against Jews and later against the State of Israel. Khan could share his new understanding that what was perceived in the past as threat on Israel is now beginning to be understood as a problem for Britain and the Western world as a whole. This is the meaning of the Islamic Domino Effect.

During the latter part of the previous century, a powerful and belligerent conglomeration of state and non-state Islamic forces adopted the use of terror to create a strategic threat on the continuing survival of the State of Israel. During those years the use of Islamic terror was considered a local threat to Israel and a consequence of the ongoing conflict between Israel and her Arab neighbors. Islamic terror was perceived in the West as a complementary Islamic tactic to weaken Israel between periods of intermittent full-blown military warfare, always resulting in Israel’s defeat of combined Arab military forces. Islamic terror was not understood or interpreted as a strategic threat for Western nations. This acceptance of Islamic terror as a genuine and justifiable expression of nationalistic aspirations provided for the leaders of Radical Islam the belief that the Western world must accept Islam, by force if necessary, and that they have a divine right to impose Islam on the Western world.

Until recently, Israel stood alone in the Middle East in the midst of a sea of Islamic forces. Israel, a bastion of democratic stability, a regional military superpower, and a frontline defense for Britain and the Western World against the belligerency and imperialistic inspirations of Islamic forces who wish to conquer the West. No longer should politically correct rhetoric be articulated unchallenged, presenting the conflict between the Palestinians and Israel as a localized conflict rather than  as the preliminary stage for the Islamic threat to pose a direct territorial threat on France, on England, and on the rest of the Western World. The seeds of this Islamic threat on the integrity of the Western World are already planted to grow and attack from within and from without, creating a domino effect that will disrupt Western societies as we know them. This week’s terror in the streets of London is only a preview of what to expect in the future. The Mayor of London,  Sadiq Khan, can be an agent of change that modern Islam so clearly needs.

The writer, a 25-year veteran of the I.D.F., served as a field mental health officer and Commander of the Central Psychiatric Military Clinic for Reserve Soldiers at Tel-Hashomer. Since retiring from active duty, he provides consultancy services to NGO’s implementing Psycho trauma and Psychoeducation programs to communities in the North and South of Israel and is a strategic advisor to the Chief Foreign Envoy of Judea and Samaria Contact: medconf@netvision.net.il

The current wave of Islamic terror seen in Manchester and London, only reinforces the general feeling that the excessive  political correctness of recent years by the Obama Presidency, by the British Labor party, and the European media has fostered and festered productive breeding grounds for Islamic terrorists in the heart of England. London’s current Mayor Sadiq Khan, a practicing Muslim, could have a significant impact on the minds and hearts of many of England’s young Muslims should he decide to express what should have been said years ago to Muslims living in England and throughout the Western World.

Khan could have reinforced the idea that practicing Muslims such as himself are modern citizens who happen to worship Allah, yet do not bring any kind of belief in the preeminence of Sharia Law. Islamic terror is the logical extension of the belief that Sharia must be imposed.  Mayor Khan could state that the former would not pose a threat to England or the Western lifestyle while the latter belief would be a “mortal threat.”  The danger facing Britain and other Western nations from the Islamic wave sweeping the Middle East and beyond arises not from the fact that people practicing the Islamic religion are Muslim, but rather from the degree to which they adhere to the totalitarian, supremacist Islamic doctrine of Sharia.

However, you don’t have to go back very far in Mayor Sadiq Khan’s past to find links with some pretty questionable characters. Some of these associations date back to his time as a human rights lawyer trying to get England to lift its ban on the American Nation of Islam leader, Louis Farrakhan, who has described Jews as ‘blood-suckers’ and called Hitler ‘a very great man.’ Khan didn’t mind speaking at the same conference as Sajeel Abu Ibrahim, a member of the now proscribed Islamist organization that trained the 7/7 bomber Mohammad Sidique Khan.  In 2004, Sadiq Khan appeared on a platform with five Islamic extremists at a conference in London organized by Al-Aqsa, a group that has published works by the notorious Holocaust denier Paul Eisen.

In the same year, Khan was the chair of the Muslim Council of Britain’s legal affairs committee, and was involved in defending the Muslim scholar Dr Yusuf Al-Qaradawi. Among other things, he’s the author of a book called The Lawful and Prohibited in Islam, in which he justifies wife beating and discusses whether homosexuals should be killed. Most notoriously, he condones ‘martyrdom operations’, i.e. suicide bombings, against Israeli civilians, which he describes as ‘God’s justice’: ‘Allah Almighty is just; through his infinite wisdom he has given the weak a weapon the strong do not have and that is their ability to turn their bodies into bombs as Palestinians do.’

In spite of holding these views, Qaradawi was not an ‘extremist’ in Sadiq Khan’s eyes.  In 2006, by which time Khan had been elected to Parliament, Khan was one of the signatories of a letter to the Guardian that blamed terrorist incidents, such as 7/7, on British foreign policy, particularly Britain’s support for Israel. ‘It is our view that current British government policy risks putting civilians at increased risk both in the UK and abroad,’

Should Mayor Khan decide to, he can render a real public service by not shying away from the issue of what it means to be a practicing Muslim in a Western nation.  He can align himself with the call for tougher counterterrorism measures suggested by the British PM and be the first to demand that the UK must not pretend that things can remain the same. Khan can abandon the politically correct rhetoric about Islam and the legitimacy of terror to advance political goals, whether it be ISIS or the Palestinians who have been using terror for the latter part of the past 100 years, at first against Jews and later against the State of Israel. Khan could share his new understanding that what was perceived in the past as threat on Israel is now beginning to be understood as a problem for Britain and the Western world as a whole. This is the meaning of the Islamic Domino Effect.

During the latter part of the previous century, a powerful and belligerent conglomeration of state and non-state Islamic forces adopted the use of terror to create a strategic threat on the continuing survival of the State of Israel. During those years the use of Islamic terror was considered a local threat to Israel and a consequence of the ongoing conflict between Israel and her Arab neighbors. Islamic terror was perceived in the West as a complementary Islamic tactic to weaken Israel between periods of intermittent full-blown military warfare, always resulting in Israel’s defeat of combined Arab military forces. Islamic terror was not understood or interpreted as a strategic threat for Western nations. This acceptance of Islamic terror as a genuine and justifiable expression of nationalistic aspirations provided for the leaders of Radical Islam the belief that the Western world must accept Islam, by force if necessary, and that they have a divine right to impose Islam on the Western world.

Until recently, Israel stood alone in the Middle East in the midst of a sea of Islamic forces. Israel, a bastion of democratic stability, a regional military superpower, and a frontline defense for Britain and the Western World against the belligerency and imperialistic inspirations of Islamic forces who wish to conquer the West. No longer should politically correct rhetoric be articulated unchallenged, presenting the conflict between the Palestinians and Israel as a localized conflict rather than  as the preliminary stage for the Islamic threat to pose a direct territorial threat on France, on England, and on the rest of the Western World. The seeds of this Islamic threat on the integrity of the Western World are already planted to grow and attack from within and from without, creating a domino effect that will disrupt Western societies as we know them. This week’s terror in the streets of London is only a preview of what to expect in the future. The Mayor of London,  Sadiq Khan, can be an agent of change that modern Islam so clearly needs.

The writer, a 25-year veteran of the I.D.F., served as a field mental health officer and Commander of the Central Psychiatric Military Clinic for Reserve Soldiers at Tel-Hashomer. Since retiring from active duty, he provides consultancy services to NGO’s implementing Psycho trauma and Psychoeducation programs to communities in the North and South of Israel and is a strategic advisor to the Chief Foreign Envoy of Judea and Samaria Contact: medconf@netvision.net.il



Source link

at-painter-og-image.png

England’s Islamic Domino Effect


The current wave of Islamic terror in Manchester and in London only reinforces the general feeling that the excessive political correctness of recent years by the Obama presidency, by the British Labor party, and the European media has fostered and festered breeding grounds for Islamic terrorists in the heart of England. London’s current Mayor Sadiq Khan, a practicing Muslim, could have a significant impact on the minds and hearts of many of England’s young Muslims, if he decides to express what should have been said years ago to Muslims living in England and throughout the Western world by the very Muslims that have enjoyed the privileges and benefits of living and prospering in a Western nation.

In response to this week’s Islamic terror attack in the heart of London, Mayor Khan should have taken the initiative, using himself as a role model of what it means to be a Muslim in a Western nation. Mayor Sadiq Kahn is a practicing Muslim and regularly attends the Al-Muzzammil mosque in Tooting. He has two daughters, both raised in the Islamic faith. Khan could have forcibly reinforced the idea that practicing Muslims such as himself are modern citizens who happen to worship Allah, yet do not belong to any kind of belief in the preeminence of Sharia Law which clearly is based on the belief that Sharia Law must be imposed on others, Islamic terror being the logical extension of this imposition. Mayor Kahn could state that the former would not pose a threat to England or the Western lifestyle while the latter would be a “mortal threat.” The danger facing England and other Western nations from the Islamic wave sweeping the Middle East and beyond arises not from the fact that people practicing the Islamic religion are Muslim, but rather from the degree to which they adhere to the totalitarian, supremacist Islamic doctrine of Sharia.

However, you don’t have to go back very far in Mayor Sadiq Khan’s past to find links with some pretty questionable characters. Some of these associations date back to his time as a human rights lawyer trying to get England to lift its ban on the American Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who has described Jews as ‘blood-suckers’ and called Hitler ‘a very great man’, and speaking at the same conference as Sajeel Abu Ibrahim, a member of the now proscribed Islamist organization that trained the 7/7 bomber Mohammad Sidique Khan. In 2004, Sadiq Khan appeared on a platform with five Islamic extremists at a conference in London organized by Al-Aqsa, a group that has published works by the notorious Holocaust denier Paul Eisen. In, the same year, Khan was the chair of the Muslim Council of Britain’s legal affairs committee and was involved in defending the Muslim scholar Dr. Yusuf Al-Qaradawi. So, who is this Muslim scholar so vigorously defended by Sadiq Khan? Among other things, he’s the author of a book called The Lawful and Prohibited in Islam in which he justifies wife beating and discusses whether homosexuals should be killed. Most notoriously, he condones ‘martyrdom operations’, i.e. suicide bombings, against Israeli civilians, which he describes as ‘God’s justice’: ‘Allah Almighty is just; through his infinite wisdom he has given the weak a weapon the strong do not have and that is their ability to turn their bodies into bombs as Palestinians do.’ Despite holding these views, Qaradawi was not an ‘extremist’ in Sadiq Khan’s eyes. In 2006, by which time Sadiq Kahn had been elected to Parliament, Khan was one of the signatories of a letter to the Guardian that blamed terrorist incidents, such as 7/7, on British foreign policy, particularly Britain’s support for Israel. ‘It is our view that current British government policy risks putting civilians at increased risk both in the UK and abroad,’

Khan can align himself with the call for tougher counterterrorism measures suggested by the British PM and be the first to demand that England must not pretend that things can remain the same. Khan can abandon the politically correct rhetoric about Islam and the legitimacy of terror to advance political goals. The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, can be that agent of change that modern Islam so clearly needs.

The writer, a 25-year veteran of the I.D.F., served as a field mental health officer and Commander of the Central Psychiatric Military Clinic for Reserve Soldiers at Tel-Hashomer. Since retiring from active duty, he provides consultancy services to NGO’s implementing Psycho trauma and Psychoeducation programs to communities in the North and South of Israel and is a strategic advisor to the Chief Foreign Envoy of Judea and Samaria.

Contact: medconf@netvision.net.il

The current wave of Islamic terror in Manchester and in London only reinforces the general feeling that the excessive political correctness of recent years by the Obama presidency, by the British Labor party, and the European media has fostered and festered breeding grounds for Islamic terrorists in the heart of England. London’s current Mayor Sadiq Khan, a practicing Muslim, could have a significant impact on the minds and hearts of many of England’s young Muslims, if he decides to express what should have been said years ago to Muslims living in England and throughout the Western world by the very Muslims that have enjoyed the privileges and benefits of living and prospering in a Western nation.

In response to this week’s Islamic terror attack in the heart of London, Mayor Khan should have taken the initiative, using himself as a role model of what it means to be a Muslim in a Western nation. Mayor Sadiq Kahn is a practicing Muslim and regularly attends the Al-Muzzammil mosque in Tooting. He has two daughters, both raised in the Islamic faith. Khan could have forcibly reinforced the idea that practicing Muslims such as himself are modern citizens who happen to worship Allah, yet do not belong to any kind of belief in the preeminence of Sharia Law which clearly is based on the belief that Sharia Law must be imposed on others, Islamic terror being the logical extension of this imposition. Mayor Kahn could state that the former would not pose a threat to England or the Western lifestyle while the latter would be a “mortal threat.” The danger facing England and other Western nations from the Islamic wave sweeping the Middle East and beyond arises not from the fact that people practicing the Islamic religion are Muslim, but rather from the degree to which they adhere to the totalitarian, supremacist Islamic doctrine of Sharia.

However, you don’t have to go back very far in Mayor Sadiq Khan’s past to find links with some pretty questionable characters. Some of these associations date back to his time as a human rights lawyer trying to get England to lift its ban on the American Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, who has described Jews as ‘blood-suckers’ and called Hitler ‘a very great man’, and speaking at the same conference as Sajeel Abu Ibrahim, a member of the now proscribed Islamist organization that trained the 7/7 bomber Mohammad Sidique Khan. In 2004, Sadiq Khan appeared on a platform with five Islamic extremists at a conference in London organized by Al-Aqsa, a group that has published works by the notorious Holocaust denier Paul Eisen. In, the same year, Khan was the chair of the Muslim Council of Britain’s legal affairs committee and was involved in defending the Muslim scholar Dr. Yusuf Al-Qaradawi. So, who is this Muslim scholar so vigorously defended by Sadiq Khan? Among other things, he’s the author of a book called The Lawful and Prohibited in Islam in which he justifies wife beating and discusses whether homosexuals should be killed. Most notoriously, he condones ‘martyrdom operations’, i.e. suicide bombings, against Israeli civilians, which he describes as ‘God’s justice’: ‘Allah Almighty is just; through his infinite wisdom he has given the weak a weapon the strong do not have and that is their ability to turn their bodies into bombs as Palestinians do.’ Despite holding these views, Qaradawi was not an ‘extremist’ in Sadiq Khan’s eyes. In 2006, by which time Sadiq Kahn had been elected to Parliament, Khan was one of the signatories of a letter to the Guardian that blamed terrorist incidents, such as 7/7, on British foreign policy, particularly Britain’s support for Israel. ‘It is our view that current British government policy risks putting civilians at increased risk both in the UK and abroad,’

Khan can align himself with the call for tougher counterterrorism measures suggested by the British PM and be the first to demand that England must not pretend that things can remain the same. Khan can abandon the politically correct rhetoric about Islam and the legitimacy of terror to advance political goals. The Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, can be that agent of change that modern Islam so clearly needs.

The writer, a 25-year veteran of the I.D.F., served as a field mental health officer and Commander of the Central Psychiatric Military Clinic for Reserve Soldiers at Tel-Hashomer. Since retiring from active duty, he provides consultancy services to NGO’s implementing Psycho trauma and Psychoeducation programs to communities in the North and South of Israel and is a strategic advisor to the Chief Foreign Envoy of Judea and Samaria.

Contact: medconf@netvision.net.il



Source link

Living with Anti-Semitism in America


American Jews and the Jewish organizations that represent them have demanded, in thundeing pleas, that President Trump take action and end the current tsunami of anti-Semitic attacks on the American Jewish community.  This is just and reasonable.  Expecting political leadership not to abdicate their responsibility and at best act as conflict managers only allows a problem to fester and proliferate.  Political leaders act to change a situation, leading a nation to a better place, allowing the people to feel secure and not under threat.  This is a natural expectation that any normal public can expect of their national leadership.

Despite anti-Semitic acts being a relatively common occurrence way before the presidential campaign, since President Trump’s election, these ripples of anti-Semitic hatred have blossomed into a giant wave.  American Jews have become consumed with trepidation and are beginning to realize that they have every right to stand up and demand that the president take action and end this vile anti-Semitism. Local television channels in the United States are flooded with footage of small children holding the hands of adults walking next to them and trying to catch up with them.  The adults, meanwhile, are seen trying to get the little ones to walk a bit faster without making them panic.  From North Carolina to Maryland, from Alabama to Rhode Island, thousands of children have been evacuated from Jewish community centers and schools, as if it is happening everywhere.

Yet this very same American Jewish leadership, who in recent weeks have been banging on the walls of the White House demanding that the current wave of anti-Semitism be stopped immediately, have for the latter part of the past quarter of a century demanded that the Israeli public, and the Israeli political leadership, continue with business as usual, despite the incessant Palestinian Arab incitement and blatant anti-Semitism in Israel.

Palestinian Arab anti-Semitism has long been recognized as the Arab world’s prominent vehicle for the hatred of the Jews.  From academics teaching that Judaism permits murder and rape of non-Jews to religious leaders teaching that Islam demands the extermination of Jews, Palestinian anti-Semitism is a compelling force driving hatred and terror.  The Palestinian Authority depicts Jews as the archetypal force of evil throughout history.  Jews are said to be responsible for all the world’s problems: wars, financial crises, even the spreading of AIDS.  Palestinians have long claimed to receptive ears that Jews are a danger to humanity.

Palestinian incitement to murder Jews has always been a natural outgrowth of anti-Semitic incitement rampant in Palestinian society, expressed at all levels without hesitation and without sanction.  In Palestinian society, no one is ever held accountable for anti-Semitic incitement.  This has never prevented American Jewish leaders from meeting with and supporting the Palestinian people and their leaders.

When Jews attack Jews, and when Jews deny the State of Israel the basic right of self-defense afforded to all nations of the world, thereby making it OK to express hatred of Israel, then they are invoking hatred toward themselves and hatred towards the Jews of America.  Over the years, since the heyday of the Oslo agreement, American Jews, liberal Jews, have bent over backward supporting the case of the Palestinian Arabs, while here in Israel, the Palestinians have made anti-Semitism and incitement the backbone of the Palestinian education syllabus from kindergarten and up.  Is it any wonder that the world has gotten used to the hatred of Jews and a culture of unabated anti-Semitism?

In America, the irony of all this is that over the past eight years of the Obama presidency, the administration opened the gates and encouraged millions of Muslims to flood into America.  As with the Palestinians, anti-Semitism is rife in the Arab world, with over 80 percent of the Muslim public holding strongly anti-Semitic views.  Yet this anti-Semitism, harbored by a large portion of Muslims, has never stopped these same Jewish organizations, these liberal Jews, from being at the front lines of demonstrations or political action when President Trump attempted to stop this unrestricted refuge admission into America.  These Jews never ever expressed any concern that supporting this continuing addition of anti-Semitic Muslims to American society would create a breeding ground for the kind of anti-Semitism that the American Jewish community is experiencing today.  American liberal Jews have become infatuated with doing “Tikkun Olam” and paving the way for flooding America with Muslim anti-Semites while ignoring the potential problems of admitting an untold number of immigrants from Muslim countries where extreme anti-Semitic sentiments are mundane and unrestricted.

All this will not end well.  With no tradition of assimilation or integration into Western societies, Europe being the best example of this, the restive Muslim minorities that have entered America by the millions over the past eight years will only grow louder, and the level of anti-Semitism will get much worse before it gets better.  The myth of multiculturalism, propagated wholeheartedly by the American Jewish liberal community, will implode as the volume of anti-Semitism becomes louder and more brazen.  The American melting pot, a symbol of America for the millions and millions of immigrants over the past century, will cease to exist, leaving these anti-Semitic and anti-American Muslim minorities to reproduce, in America, the anti-Semitic and cultural squalor they claim to have wanted to flee.

The writer, a 25-year veteran of the IDF, served as a field mental health officer and commander of the Central Psychiatric Military Clinic for Reserve Soldiers at Tel-Hashomer.  Since retiring from active duty, he provides consultancy services to NGOs implementing psycho-trauma and psycho-education programs to communities in the North and South of Israel and is a strategic adviser to the chief foreign envoy of Judea and Samaria.  Contact: medconf@netvision.net.il.

American Jews and the Jewish organizations that represent them have demanded, in thundeing pleas, that President Trump take action and end the current tsunami of anti-Semitic attacks on the American Jewish community.  This is just and reasonable.  Expecting political leadership not to abdicate their responsibility and at best act as conflict managers only allows a problem to fester and proliferate.  Political leaders act to change a situation, leading a nation to a better place, allowing the people to feel secure and not under threat.  This is a natural expectation that any normal public can expect of their national leadership.

Despite anti-Semitic acts being a relatively common occurrence way before the presidential campaign, since President Trump’s election, these ripples of anti-Semitic hatred have blossomed into a giant wave.  American Jews have become consumed with trepidation and are beginning to realize that they have every right to stand up and demand that the president take action and end this vile anti-Semitism. Local television channels in the United States are flooded with footage of small children holding the hands of adults walking next to them and trying to catch up with them.  The adults, meanwhile, are seen trying to get the little ones to walk a bit faster without making them panic.  From North Carolina to Maryland, from Alabama to Rhode Island, thousands of children have been evacuated from Jewish community centers and schools, as if it is happening everywhere.

Yet this very same American Jewish leadership, who in recent weeks have been banging on the walls of the White House demanding that the current wave of anti-Semitism be stopped immediately, have for the latter part of the past quarter of a century demanded that the Israeli public, and the Israeli political leadership, continue with business as usual, despite the incessant Palestinian Arab incitement and blatant anti-Semitism in Israel.

Palestinian Arab anti-Semitism has long been recognized as the Arab world’s prominent vehicle for the hatred of the Jews.  From academics teaching that Judaism permits murder and rape of non-Jews to religious leaders teaching that Islam demands the extermination of Jews, Palestinian anti-Semitism is a compelling force driving hatred and terror.  The Palestinian Authority depicts Jews as the archetypal force of evil throughout history.  Jews are said to be responsible for all the world’s problems: wars, financial crises, even the spreading of AIDS.  Palestinians have long claimed to receptive ears that Jews are a danger to humanity.

Palestinian incitement to murder Jews has always been a natural outgrowth of anti-Semitic incitement rampant in Palestinian society, expressed at all levels without hesitation and without sanction.  In Palestinian society, no one is ever held accountable for anti-Semitic incitement.  This has never prevented American Jewish leaders from meeting with and supporting the Palestinian people and their leaders.

When Jews attack Jews, and when Jews deny the State of Israel the basic right of self-defense afforded to all nations of the world, thereby making it OK to express hatred of Israel, then they are invoking hatred toward themselves and hatred towards the Jews of America.  Over the years, since the heyday of the Oslo agreement, American Jews, liberal Jews, have bent over backward supporting the case of the Palestinian Arabs, while here in Israel, the Palestinians have made anti-Semitism and incitement the backbone of the Palestinian education syllabus from kindergarten and up.  Is it any wonder that the world has gotten used to the hatred of Jews and a culture of unabated anti-Semitism?

In America, the irony of all this is that over the past eight years of the Obama presidency, the administration opened the gates and encouraged millions of Muslims to flood into America.  As with the Palestinians, anti-Semitism is rife in the Arab world, with over 80 percent of the Muslim public holding strongly anti-Semitic views.  Yet this anti-Semitism, harbored by a large portion of Muslims, has never stopped these same Jewish organizations, these liberal Jews, from being at the front lines of demonstrations or political action when President Trump attempted to stop this unrestricted refuge admission into America.  These Jews never ever expressed any concern that supporting this continuing addition of anti-Semitic Muslims to American society would create a breeding ground for the kind of anti-Semitism that the American Jewish community is experiencing today.  American liberal Jews have become infatuated with doing “Tikkun Olam” and paving the way for flooding America with Muslim anti-Semites while ignoring the potential problems of admitting an untold number of immigrants from Muslim countries where extreme anti-Semitic sentiments are mundane and unrestricted.

All this will not end well.  With no tradition of assimilation or integration into Western societies, Europe being the best example of this, the restive Muslim minorities that have entered America by the millions over the past eight years will only grow louder, and the level of anti-Semitism will get much worse before it gets better.  The myth of multiculturalism, propagated wholeheartedly by the American Jewish liberal community, will implode as the volume of anti-Semitism becomes louder and more brazen.  The American melting pot, a symbol of America for the millions and millions of immigrants over the past century, will cease to exist, leaving these anti-Semitic and anti-American Muslim minorities to reproduce, in America, the anti-Semitic and cultural squalor they claim to have wanted to flee.

The writer, a 25-year veteran of the IDF, served as a field mental health officer and commander of the Central Psychiatric Military Clinic for Reserve Soldiers at Tel-Hashomer.  Since retiring from active duty, he provides consultancy services to NGOs implementing psycho-trauma and psycho-education programs to communities in the North and South of Israel and is a strategic adviser to the chief foreign envoy of Judea and Samaria.  Contact: medconf@netvision.net.il.



Source link