Monday, April 16, 2018

Israel fears that Trump may leave Israel alone to face Iran

From Times of Israel, 14 April 2018:

Though strongly backing US-led airstrikes, Jerusalem also reportedly worried Putin may now supply Assad with advanced air-defense systems, reducing Israel's air supremacy

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (left) and US President Donald Trump in the White House Oval Office, March 5, 2018 (Haim Tzach/GPO)
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (left) and US President Donald Trump in the White House Oval Office, March 5, 2018 (Haim Tzach/GPO)

While Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu firmly backed the US-led airstrikes on Syria in the wake of its use of chemical weapons, Israeli security chiefs made clear on Saturday night that Israel fears the Trump Administration will now consider that its work in Syria is done, and leave Israel alone to face the dangers posed by Iran’s growing military presence in Syria.

Israel’s defense chiefs are also reportedly worried that Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, seeing Syria under US-led attack, may provide President Bashar Assad with more advanced air defense systems — which could reduce Israel’s air supremacy in the skies of Syria and Lebanon. A Russian general indicated such an arms supply was possible in comments on Saturday.

Israel’s Channel 10 news reported on Saturday that Israel and the US held numerous discussions ahead of the US-led strike, that Netanyahu’s national security adviser spoke to British and French officials, and that these talks reflected Israel’s profound concern over the Iranian military’s growing involvement and presence in Syria.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, a senior Israeli security source told Israeli media on Saturday night:
“The attack will enable the Americans to say, we’ve done what was necessary, and withdraw from Syria...In such a scenario, “Israel remains alone, facing the threat of Iran establishing itself on the northern border,” the source said.

Syrian government supporters chant slogans against US President Trump during demonstrations following a wave of US, British, and French military strikes to punish President Bashar Assad for suspected chemical attack against civilians, in Damascus, Syria, Saturday, April 14, 2018. (AP Photo/Hassan Ammar)

US President Donald Trump has repeatedly made clear his aim of withdrawing US forces from Syria as soon as possible. In his speech announcing the air strikes on Friday, Trump stressed: “America does not seek an indefinite presence in Syria under no circumstances. As other nations step up their contributions, we look forward to the day when we can bring our warriors home.”

In further comments underlining Israel’s concerns about finding itself alone on the front line, Trump also said, “No amount of American blood or treasure can produce lasting peace and security in the Middle East. It’s a troubled place. We will try to make it better, but it is a troubled place. The United States will be a partner and a friend, but the fate of the region lies in the hands of its own people.”

Israel is also reportedly worried that Putin may utilize the US-led strike as a pretext to justify making some of its advanced air defense systems available to Assad, Israel’s Hadashot TV reported Saturday night.

The report cited fears in the Israeli security establishment that the airstrike “will give Russia the excuse to ignore Israel’s demands and accelerate the supply to Assad of advanced air defense systems which could impinge upon Israel’s air supremacy.”


This Dec. 11, 2017 photo shows Russian President Vladimir Putin, right, and Syrian President Bashar Assad watching troops march at the Hemeimeem air base in Syria. (Mikhail Klimentyev, Sputnik, Kremlin Pool Photo via AP, File)

Earlier Saturday, a Russian general said Moscow may indeed now consider supplying S-300 surface to-air missile systems to Syria and others.

Colonel-General Sergei Rudskoi said Russia had “refused” to supply these systems to Syria, “taking into account the pressing request of some of our Western partners.” But in the wake of the Allied airstrikes, he said, “we consider it possible to return to examination of this issue not only in regard to Syria but to other countries as well.”

Israel has repeatedly urged Putin not to bolster Assad’s air defenses.

The imperative for the Israeli air force to retain its freedom of operation against Syria and Lebanon was underlined last Monday, when Israel allegedly struck the T-4 air base in central Syria where Iran has reportedly been building a fully functional air base of its own and where it has centered its attack drone operations. The base was reportedly protected by surface-to-air missile defense systems among other defenses.

At least seven members of the Iranian military were killed in the strike, and Iran has vowed to hit back at Israel — prompting a heightened alert by the Israeli military in the north of the country.


Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu waves part of an Iranian drone downed in Israeli airspace on February 10, 2018, during a speech on the third day of the 54th Munich Security Conference (MSC) held at the Bayerischer Hof hotel, in Munich, southern Germany, on February 18, 2018. (Screen capture)

While refusing to comment on whether it carried out the strike, Israel on Friday revealed for the first time that an Iranian drone dispatched from T-4 in February was an attack drone that carried explosives and was headed to an unspecified location in Israel when it was shot down 30 seconds after entering Israeli airspace....


National Security Adviser Meir Ben-Shabbat. (Amos Ben Gerschom/GPO)

...Israel’s National Security Adviser Meir Ben-Shabbat spoke on Thursday to his British counterpart, and on Friday to a senior French presidential adviser. According to western diplomats quoted in the report, Israel was at pains to stress that “Iran is the problem” and that strikes on Assad’s chemical weapons facilities, while emphatically necessary, won’t solve it.

Punitive Airstrikes Don't Scratch the Surface

From The New Republic, April 15, 2018, by JONATHAN SPYER:

Don't congratulate the administration on avoiding Russian retaliation. The humanitarian crisis in Syria remains, and the real collision course here is between Israel and Iran.

Despite escalating worries about Russia in past weeks, the skies did not fall as a result of the American-led punitive raid on Syria’s chemical weapons storage and research facilities Saturday morning. Great care was taken to avoid hitting the many sites within “Assad-controlled” Syria which are in fact administered by powers other than the Syrian dictator—namely, Russia and Iran. “A perfectly executed strike,” the president declared on Twitter. “Mission accomplished.” U.S. ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley struck a similar tone of satisfaction. ‘“If the Syrian regime uses this poisonous gas again,” she told an emergency meeting of the UN Security Council, “the United States is locked and loaded.”

A great victory, then—depending on whom you ask. Damage was done to Assad, a tyrant responsible for the deaths of an increasingly uncountable number of his own civilians. The careful planning seems to have prevented anything but angry rhetoric from Russia. And the participation of France and the United Kingdom lent at least some air of multilateralism.

But while the tactical prowess of western armed forces over Syrian air defenses was confirmed, it is not quite clear what else has been achieved. Assad will remain in power. The humanitarian crisis persists. And arguably, the focus on checking off proportionate punishment for chemical substances represents a diversion from the issues really at stake in Syria.

U.S. and western officials were keen to note that the operation of recent days did not represent an intervention in the Syrian civil war. A “one-time shot,” Defense Secretary James Mattis called it. It may therefore be assumed that the western stance toward that war remains unchanged. Earlier this month, President Trump declared his intent to  withdraw U.S. troops from Syria, “ideally” within six months. These forces are currently guaranteeing a western-aligned, Kurdish-dominated entity that controls 28 percent of Syria, including the greater part of its gas and oil assets.

If the withdrawal of these forces means that U.S. air power will also no longer be employed to keep Assad, the Iranians and the Russians out of this area, then the region will certainly be reconquered by the regime and its allies. Support for the non-jihadi rebels in the provinces of Deraa and Quneitra, meanwhile, was ended in December, and renewed regime bombardment, despite last year’s “de-escalation zone” truce, began in March. The removal of chlorine from the equation is unlikely to change rebels’ fate.

If U.S. withdrawal proceeds as planned, the Syrian war seems likely to end in strategic triumph for Assad, Iran, and Russia. Western allies, including Israel, are deeply concerned at what is likely to follow from a geopolitical perspective. 

Iran is currently engaged in the construction of an extensive infrastructure in Syria. This includes the establishment of permanent military bases. In addition, the Revolutionary Guards are supporting proxy militia forces on Syrian soil in considerable numbers, and recruiting local “Syrian Hizballah” type forces such as Quwat al-Ridha from the Homs area, al-Ghalibun from the Sayida Zeinab area in Damascus Governorate, and the 313 Brigade from the Deraa area.

Tehran seems to intend to extend this structure to the area immediately east of Quneitra Crossing and the Golan Heights, in order that it may serve as a tool of pressure and potential aggression against Israel. Currently, the enclave controlled by the U.S. and its allies—including the non-Islamist rebel-controlled enclave in Deraa, which birthed the Syrian revolt—blocks Iran’s ability to develop the contiguous land corridor it seeks to extend all the way from the Iraq-Iran border.

U.S. withdrawal of support for these areas, and their subsequent collapse, would mean that Israel would be facing this advance alone—a scenario which has already sparked concern in Israeli media. 

Israeli officials have made clear that the entrenchment of this Iranian project and its extension to the border are utterly unacceptable to Jerusalem. The large-scale raid last week on the T4 base outside Palmyra, in which seven Iranian personnel including a colonel were killed, was an indication of the direction of Israeli policy. As Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman stated following this operation,
“Accepting Iranian entrenchment in Syria would be to accept Iranians putting a chokehold on us. We cannot allow that.”
In other words, although the U.S. and Russia appear to have avoided conflict over Syria, the current strategy seems almost guaranteed to leave Iran and Israel on a collision course. 

When the current western barriers to Iranian advancement are removed, Iran and its allies will finish off the rebel and Kurd forces that remain. Thus consolidated, Iran will then be the dominant actor in a giant land area stretching from the Iraq-Iran border to the Mediterranean Sea and the Syrian border with Israel. Israel will at this point seek Russian assurances to curb a further Iranian advance—which it is unlikely to get. What happens after that is the stuff of strategists’ nightmares.

When seen from this point of view, the destruction of a number of Assad’s chemical weapons research facilities might be seen as at best a diversion from the main point. Not only Syria’s humanitarian nightmare, but also the practical geopolitical problems, remain unchanged. 

Monday, April 09, 2018

Israel Defends Its Sovereignty

From Breitbart, 4 April, 2018, by Caroline Glick:

Monday may have been a turning point in the global battle between the forces of nationalism and national self-determination on the one hand, and the forces pushing for a post-nationalist world with open borders on the other.

While most eyes were on the U.S., where President Donald Trump used his Twitter feed to force the Mexican government to prevent a “caravan” of approximately 1,100 migrants from Central America from approaching the northern border, an even greater drama was unfolding in Israel.

Whereas Trump’s efforts are directed towards stopping the flow of illegal migrants across America’s porous southern border, in Israel the flow of illegal aliens into its territory from Africa has already been stopped.

In 2013, Israel completed construction of a barrier along its 150-mile land border with Egypt. In the years before the “wall” was constructed Israel, was flooded with thousands of illegal migrants from Eritrea, Sudan, and Somalia. On a per capita basis, Israel had accepted more illegal aliens than Spain. But by 2017, with the barrier in place, illegal migration ended completely.

After the flow of illegals ended, Israel was left with the issue of how to manage the 40,000 illegal immigrants from Africa who had entered the country before the “wall” was built. Those migrants, who live primarily in the poor neighborhoods of south Tel Aviv, have turned those neighborhoods into violent crime-plagued zones.

The Swiss Federal Administrative Court, and official delegations from Britain and Denmark, have all recently concluded that Eritreans, who comprise three-quarters of the migrants, can return home safely and without fear of punishment.

European courts and the UN’s High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) have both concluded they can return to their countries of origin without fear of punishment.

In light of these basic facts, the Knesset (the Israeli parliament) passed laws mandating the migrants’ removal from the country. Unfortunately, a consortium of Israeli and international forces have come together to prevent the government from enforcing those laws.

On Monday, their campaign accomplished its goal. Israel effectively agreed to give up its efforts to remove most of the African migrants.

On Monday afternoon, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Interior Minister Aryeh Deri held a joint press conference where they announced that they had ditched the government’s plan to deport illegal aliens from Eritrea, Sudan, and Somalia to other countries in Africa. In its place, they had concluded a deal with the UNHCR that would see 16,250 illegal migrants — or roughly 40 percent of the total — settled in Western countries. Netanyahu mentioned Canada, Germany, and Italy as destinations.

The rest, he said, would remain in Israel for a period of not less than five years.

Netanyahu said the government had no choice but to cut the deal because Rwanda, the country that had agreed to accept the migrants, reneged on the deal. At the same time, he noted, Israel’s Supreme Court had blocked every other option the government had developed for expelling them.

Israel’s political left, including most of its media organs, responded positively to the news. Like the media in the U.S., they equated citizens’ desire to preserve their nation’s identity with racism.

Netanyahu, they declared triumphantly, had finally accepted the responsibility of leadership and recognized that leadership means betraying racist voters.

Netanyahu’s voters and coalition members, including members of his governing Likud party, were appalled. They condemned the deal as a surrender of Israeli sovereignty. Education Minister Naftali Bennet, who heads the Jewish Home Party (which competes for the same voters as Likud), led the assault against the deal. Bennet charged that the deal “will turn Israel into a paradise for infiltrators.”

Gideon Sa’ar, Likud’s former interior minister — who many consider Netanyahu’s chief rival for his party’s leadership — also attacked the deal.

“The agreement to keep most infiltrators in Israel is a grave mistake. It shows weakness, renunciation of [Israeli] sovereignty, and encourages illegal immigration to Israel,” Sa’ar said.

In response to the outcry, on late Monday night Netanyahu announced that he was suspending the agreement pending discussions with south Tel Aviv residents the next morning. By Tuesday afternoon, Netanyahu announced that he was cancelling the deal.

Why did Netanyahu feel compelled to accept the UN agreement? Who were the forces that blocked the government from implementing the laws the Knesset had passed, which mandated deporting the migrants who had entered Israel illegally?

As political philosopher Yoram Hazony, author of the soon-to-be-released book The Virtue of Nationalism, explains:
“The international left has decided to wage war on the idea of borders and idea that states should be able to maintain and defend a unique national identity and heritage.
“The very idea that Israel should be different from other nations is itself seen as troubling, so naturally any policy aimed at protecting such difference is condemned as morally wrong. Liberal imperialists who want to see all countries adopt the same cookie-cutter set of liberal values can’t help finding fault with what Israel is.”
In Israel’s case, the anti-nationalist liberal imperialist coalition has four parts.

First, and most importantly, there is the Israeli judiciary. 
In the 1990s, Israel’s then-Supreme Court President Aharon Barak undertook what he referred to as a “judicial revolution.” By applying radical interpretations to a series of basic laws Israel’s Knesset had naively passed in the early 1990s, Barak arrogated to the Court the right to abrogate laws that had been duly passed. He also coined the term “Everything is Justicible,” and effectively gave the Court the right to rule on any issue it wished by giving legal standing to any party it wished to hear.

These two moves empowered a slew of radical leftist non-governmental organizations (NGOs), financed by foreign money, to petition the Court to overturn not only laws, but also government policies. Working hand-in-glove with these radical groups, over the past 25 years the Court has overruled government decisions and Knesset laws on everything from the Israeli military’s counterterrorism tactics; to the government’s right to conclude business deals with international corporations; to the government’s prerogative to select the military chief of general staff and the attorney general; to the government’s ability to enforce Israel’s immigration laws.

The cumulative impact of this judicial tyranny has been the gutting of the powers of the Knesset and the government to fulfill their duty to advance the will of the voters.

The second partner in this assault on Israel’s sovereignty is a consortium of radical, anti-Israel NGOs registered in Israel. 
Together and separately, they frequently petition the court against laws and government policies. Together and separately, they lobby foreign governments to oppose Israel, and run public campaigns in foreign countries to slander Israel and its right to self-determination.

The third partner in the coalition is a consortium of far-left American Jewish groups led by a radical multi-million dollar foundation called the New Israel Fund.
The New Israel Fund has been the subject of multiple investigative reports in Israel over the past 15 years. It has become shorthand for radical left political warfare against the state. The NIF supports the operations of Israeli NGOs that commit lawfare and political warfare against the state at home and abroad. According to Im Tirzu, Israel’s conservative student organization, NIF has donated $14.2 million to Israeli-registered NGOs that are campaigning against deporting the illegal migrants.

In his press conference Monday, and in his later statements this week, Netanyahu alleged that the NIF had lobbied European governments to pressure Rwanda to cancel its agreement with Israel to accept the deported migrants.

In other words, the NIF stands accused of deliberately undermining the foreign policy of the government of Israel.

When Netanyahu announced that he was abrogating his agreement with the UN, he called for the establishment of a parliamentary inquiry into the operations of the NIF.

This, then brings us to the fourth partner in the coalition against Israeli sovereignty: the EU.
According to Im Tirtzu, the governments of Europe and the EU have donated $16.2 million to the Israeli NGOs that ran the campaign against deporting the illegal aliens. And according to Netanyahu, the EU played a central role in forcing Rwanda to renege on its agreement to accept the deportees.

Working together, over the past three years, the four sides of the anti-Israeli sovereignty coalition overturned all three laws the Knesset had passed mandating the expulsion of the illegal migrants, and they ran a worldwide campaign to demonize Israel for its efforts to deport them.

But this week, the Rubicon was crossed. The public outcry against the deal was so immediate and so overwhelming that it forced two things to happen.


  • First, Netanyahu cancelled the deal with the UN. 
  • Second, and far more significantly, Finance Minister Moshe Kahlon announced he will support a new law that bars the Supreme Court from overturning Knesset legislation on illegal immigration.


Since Netanyahu formed his current government in 2015, Kahlon’s soft-right Kulanu party has blocked every effort to reform the judiciary. His announcement signals that the Court has lost its immunity from Knesset oversight for the first time.

Following Monday’s events, many Israeli commentators have noted that the day’s drama made clear what the critical issue will be in next year’s general elections. The vote will not be about the Palestinians or the economy. The power of the court will be the decisive issue.

And the party that convinces the public it will restore the balance of power between the three branches of government by checking the power of Israel’s Supreme Court will win.

"Terrorism" Turkish Style

From Gatestone Institute, 8 April 2018, by Uzay Bulut, a Turkish journalist born and raised in Turkey. She is presently based in Washington DC:

...Turkey, a NATO ally that considers itself a worthy candidate for EU membership, warmly welcomes and assists terrorists who commit genocidal crimes against humanity, yet persecutes non-violent academics and journalists whose opinions differ from those propagated by the regime.

On March 19, a group of students at Istanbul's Boğaziçi University, Turkey's leading institute of higher education, demonstrated against an event on campus. The event against which they were demonstrating, organized by the Society for Islamic Research, was to champion the Turkish soldiers who had participated in the Afrin invasion. While the pro-government students distributed Turkish delight sweets, the counter-demonstrators unfolded a banner reading: "Invasions and massacres are not [to be celebrated] with delights."

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan responded by having the anti-war students arrested for spreading "terrorist" propaganda. On April 3, a Turkish court jailed nine of them and freed the other six, pending their trial.

To protest what they called a "disturbing trend of criminalizing political speech and dissent in Turkey," over 1,800 renowned academics from around the world, among them Nobel and Pulitzer Prize laureates, signed an "Open Letter of Support for Students Arrested at Boğaziçi University". The letter reads, in part:
"The arrests on campus, as well as subsequent police raids of student homes and dormitories, continue a disturbing trend of criminalizing political speech and dissent in Turkey.
"Erdoğan has cynically referred to these students as 'terrorists,' vowed to expel them from Boğaziçi University, and to deny them the right to study at any other university. We have heard this kind of verbal attack from Erdoğan before and it was followed by the detention of thousands of academics, journalists, artists, and human rights advocates.
"We call upon the Turkish government to immediately cease all investigations and arrests of students exercising political speech."
The curtailing of free speech is nothing new in Erdogan's Turkey. Anyone who dares to challenge the government's accepted narrative runs the very real risk of being targeted and punished. Non-Turkish residents of the country are no exception.

Take the case of the American academic Norma Jeanne Cox, for example. After receiving a postgraduate degree from Boğaziçi University in 1983, Cox worked as a lecturer at Istanbul University, and subsequently at the Middle East Technical University in southern Turkey, where she engaged in discussions with her students and colleagues about the 1915 Armenian genocide, the forced assimilation of Kurds, and protested against the film The Last Temptation of Christ. For these "crimes," she was arrested, fired from her job and ultimately deported. The Ministry of the Interior claimed that Cox had been expelled and banned from re-entering Turkey due to "her separatist activities, which were incompatible with national security." In a suit she filed with the European Court of Human Rights -- which in 2010 convicted Turkey of violating her freedom of expression -- Cox argued that her rights had been violated by Turkey because of her Christian faith and dissenting opinions.

Since then, little has changed. On January 11, 2016, members of "Academics for Peace" -- who signed a declaration calling for non-violence between the Turkish government and the Kurds -- were detained by police, banned from going abroad, exposed to administrative investigations and dismissed from their jobs for "making propaganda for a terrorist organization," among other perceived offenses.

On January 13, 2017, an Armenian MP, Garo Paylan of the opposition party HDP, was suspended from three sessions of parliament for delivering a speech in which he warned against repeating the mistakes of the past. "Between 1913 and 1923, Armenians, Greeks, Syriacs, and Jews... were either exiled with genocides and major massacres or subjected to population exchanges," he said. All mentions he made of the Armenian genocide were removed from the parliamentary minutes.

On January 5, 2018, during a joint press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron at the Élysée Palace in Paris, Erdogan accused members of the media of nurturing terrorism, in response to Macron's concern over the Turkish government's crackdown on students, teachers and journalists:

"Terror doesn't form by itself. Terror and terrorists have gardeners. These gardeners are those people viewed as thinkers. They water ... from their columns on newspapers, and one day, you find, these people show up as a terrorist in front of you."


Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan recently accused members of the media of nurturing terrorism, and had anti-war students arrested for spreading "terrorist" propaganda. 
(Photo by Defne Karadeniz/Getty Images)

Erdogan's definition of terrorism is as skewed as Turkey's anti-terrorism laws, frequently used and abused by the government to arrest and imprison peaceful demonstrators -- a practice criticized in a 2010 Human Rights Watch (HRW) report entitled: "Protesting as a Terrorist Offense."

Meanwhile, Turkish authorities turn a blind eye to actual terrorist activities in, and on behalf of, the country. Ankara does nothing to prevent ISIS from selling Yazidi women and children in Turkey; allows unspecified numbers of people to use Turkish territory as a point of entrance into Syria and Iraq to join ISIS or other jihadist groups; hosts and aids Hamas, a terrorist organization that proudly targets civilians and vows to obliterate Israel; and enables jihadi terrorism through the oil trade.

Turkey, a NATO ally that considers itself a worthy candidate for EU membership, warmly welcomes and assists terrorists who commit genocidal crimes against humanity, yet persecutes non-violent academics and journalists whose opinions differ from those propagated by the regime. The inversion is not only surreal; it is deadly.


Wednesday, March 28, 2018

Fatah-style Gender Equality: grooming girls for murder

Dalal Mughrabi led the most lethal terror attack in Israel's history, known as the Coastal Road massacre, in 1978, when she and other Fatah terrorists hijacked a bus on Israel's Coastal Highway, murdering 37 civilians, 12 of them children, and wounding over 70.
Text on sign: "Martyr Dalal Mughrabi Center A cultural and social center and youth center" ...The center will focus especially on the history of the struggle of Martyr Dalal Mughrabi and on presenting it to the youth groups."  Logos of   The PA Ministry of Local Government (upper right), UN Women (lower right), and The Norwegian Representative Office to the PA (lower left)
Palestinian Media Watch reports that, at a ceremony celebrating International Women's Day, Secretary-General of the PA Chairman Abbas' office Tayeb Abd Al-Rahim cited female terrorist murderer Dalal Mughrabi as an example, pointing out that her role as leader of the attack is "testimony" of gender equality within Fatah:
"From the outbreak of our revolution in 1965, the outlook of the Palestinian National Liberation Movement - Fatah - has been clear in its social aspect; it saw no difference between women and men, and Dalal Mughrabi who led men is testimony to this."
[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 16, 2018]
Glorifying female terrorists was a repeating Palestinian theme for International Women's Day:
"District Governor of Qalqilya Rafe' Rawajbeh participated in the ceremony [for International Women's Day]... The district governor expressed his appreciation for the Palestinian women's giving, their sacrifice, and their participation in the national struggle in all of its stages. He mentioned hero Dalal Mughrabi- the anniversary of whose death as a Martyr (Shahida) is now - as a symbol of women rejecting the occupation."
[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 13, 2018]
At a recent ceremony at the El-Bireh High School for Girls, school principal Nida Abd Rabbo announced that promoting terrorist murderer Dalal Mughrabi as a role model to female students is an "educational responsibility":
"... [the Al-Yasser Cultural] forum's goal is ...to return the glory to the fighting Palestinian girls and women such as Dalal Mughrabi and others who sacrificed their lives for Palestine, and also to provide information and knowledge to these female students during recesses..."
[Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 19, 2018]
PA Minister of Education Sabri Saidam and Fatah Movement Central Committee member Jamal Muhaisen were also present at the ceremony. Palestinian Media Watch has documented that 5 PA schools are named after terrorist Dalal Mughrabi and dozens of other schools are named after other terrorist murderers. 

Marking the 40th anniversary of Mughrabi's attack, Fatah posted a video praising her, focusing on the fact that the leader of the attack was a woman.

The Fatah Movement also honored terrorist Mughrabi in Gaza by naming an organizational course after her. The official PA daily reported that "dozens of leaders of the western Gaza Fatah branches" participated in the Dalal Mughrabi course. [Official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, March 23, 2018]
Click to see more examples of PA and Fatah's glorification of murderer Mughrabi. 

Friday, March 23, 2018

The Richest Terror Organizations in the World

From Forbes International, 24 January 2018, by Itai Zehorai, business and economics journalist with Forbes Israel:


Children hold portraits of Hezbollah chief Hasan Nasrallah (C) and Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei in the southern Lebanese city of Nabatieh on October 4, 2017. / Mahmout Zayyat/AFP/Getty

2017 has turned out to be an especially bloody year. Over the course of the year, eight huge terror attacks were executed, each with more than a 100 fatalities. Six of the eight deadliest attacks claimed the lives of nearly 1,500 people this year in Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Egypt and Somalia – planned, financed and carried out by the Taliban, ISIS or Al-Qaeda. According to the Global Terrorism Database of the University of Maryland, in 2016, these organizations were responsible for approximately 70% of the world’s terror victims.

It is no coincidence that the deadliest terror organizations in the world are also the wealthiest. 

“There is a clear connection between the two factors,” agrees Maj.-Gen. (Res.) Amos Gilad, chairperson of the Institute for Policy and Strategy and former director of the Defense Ministry’s Political-Military Affairs Bureau, in an interview for Forbes Israel. “The financial component of terror organizations is critical, and its indispensability for terror attacks is like fuel for the car,” he adds.

As such, financial means are an essential necessity for terrorist organizations. But means of fundraising are inherently limited and are conducted primarily through underground channels, outside of and above the law in the global shadow economy. In many cases, the nature of fundraising activity is remarkably similar to that of criminal organizations – dealing in drugs, weapons, tobacco or humans, through bank robbery or collecting money in the name of “protection” and even kidnapping for ransom.

Alongside the clearly criminal activity, there is also open activity in which enormous sums of money change hands among funding bodies and terror organizations. This fundraising involves associations, charitable organizations, companies in business, finance bodies, wealthy businessmen – and as it would seem in recent years – governments and states of means.

“Behind every successful terrorist organization stands a financial system and in many cases, it's a country,” declared the head of IDF Intelligence, Major General Herzi Halevi. “In our region, Iran is the primary funder of terror organizations.” And, indeed, in a comparison of the estimated income of the richest terror groups that we conducted three years ago, one of the salient trends emerging from the findings is the significant strengthening of those terror organizations supported by assisting countries (Hizballah, Hamas, the Islamic Jihad) and the weakening of those that depend on independent sources (ISIS, Boko Haram).

Iran, one of the four countries defined by the US State Department as a terrorist country (along with Sudan, Syria and the newcomer North-Korea), is the main sponsor and force behind many terrorist organizations. Its centrality in the balancing of economic (and militant) forces of terror organizations in the Middle East has become critical as compared to previous years, and its importance in terror groups’ internal systems of considerations has become crucial.

All of this is possible on account of Iran’s being rescued from the financial quicksand in which it was sinking until not long ago. “The signing of the nuclear agreement and lifting of the sanctions was the removal of the rope around the Iranians’ neck,” asserted Major General (Res.) Amos Gilad. “It actually saved them from economic strangulation.”

Using Bitcoin to Avoid Risks

The involvement of other countries in the region, particularly those of the Persian Gulf, played a central role in the terror arena in recent years. Those countries constitute an important pillar in the financing of terror in the region, whether indirectly, by turning a blind eye to financial transgressions of private entities in the country, or by paying ransom for the release of abducted citizens.

Sometimes, as happened recently, the funding streams intersect – and the boundaries between aid money that flows to terror organizations from particular countries and ransom payments are blurred almost entirely. As part of the condition of the ransom transaction for the release of 26 members of the Qatari royal family who were abducted in Iraq by a local Shiite militia, supported by Iran, Qatar was “forced” to pay an imaginary ransom which, according to an exposé by the Financial Times was around a billion dollars. The unprecedented payment that financed some of the deadliest terror organizations in Syria and Iraq (and Iran itself), was seen by many as direct support of terror by the provocative princedom of oil and led to the famous boycott imposed by Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Bahrain.

And in addition to “traditional” means of funding, terrorist organizations are always perfecting their ways of raising and transferring capital from a variety of funding sources, through use of any technological means at their disposal. The Wall Street Journal recently reported that the FBI had exposed an international network run by ISIS that used fake eBay and PayPal accounts to transfer funds to operatives in the US. For some time now Google and Youtube have become the preferred platform of terror organizations for sharing propaganda videos which, thanks to their popularity, has granted them not just exposure and penetration into new audiences, but also generous royalties from advertisers. Sometimes the terrorist groups use the most advanced methods, such as the money transfer system built by IS that uses cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin in order to avoid traditional bank transfers and accompanying risk.

The rapid growth in recent years of trade in virtual currencies, which uses an alternative global financial system and is characterized by user anonymity, grants terror factions many new and secure possibilities for raising, laundering and transferring money – as proven by the arrest of the 27 year-old Long Island woman, who has been accused of stealing and laundering more than $85,000, using Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies, to support ISIS.

"Things have changed considerably in our century", argues Joseph Fitsanakis PhD., a global expert in intelligence and national security from Coastal Carolina University. "It can be argued that the rise in the value of many cryptocurrencies generates income for terrorist organizations— but more a method of circulating currency and providing services that generate funds. With the use of cryptocurrencies and the so-called Darknet, terrorist organizations are now able to engage in creative means of generating cash. They include the sale of pirated music, movies, and video-games, counterfeit products, including clothing, electronics, pharmaceutical products and even counterfeit tickets to high-profile sports events and music concerts. Those who buy those products often pay for them using cryptocurrencies, primarily through the Darknet".

The Top 10 List

Here is a list of some of the world’s wealthiest – and most dangerous – terrorist organizations and how they make their money. The list was created based on interviews with security experts and counter-terror specialists, as well as reports and analysis from international NGOs, academic and government organizations, and think-tanks. It brings to light estimated numbers behind the top ten wealthiest terrorist organizations from the State Department list of Designated Foreign Terrorist organizations.

We put together the first ranking three years ago., and the material accrued since then has enabled us to create a reliable and qualitative update of income estimates of terror organizations. But apart from examining the financial means at the disposal of today’s terror groups and the ways in which each organization finances its operations, the current research allows a behind-the-scenes glimpse into the way in which these organizations operate: what trends characterize the activities of terror groups, how the map of their interests has changed, who are the financiers behind them and how has the balance of power in the global terror arena changed in recent years.


#1 Hizballah

Total annual Income – $1.1 billion

Other than the Iranian Government, there is no doubt who is the primary beneficiary of the nuclear agreement. Within a few years, Hizballah’s budget jumped significantly with the government expenditure out of Tehran, and if in the past they received about $200 million per year, today the Iranian funding of the Lebanese terror group, according to estimates by the security establishment, is evaluated at more than $800 million dollars annually.

But despite the large sums of money flowing from Tehran, the extremist Shiite organization did not always enjoy such wide financial support and there were times in the not-too-distant past in which, as a result of urgent liquidity problems, they made do with just hundreds of millions. Because of this, Hizballah made sure to vary its sources of capital; from raising money and support collected by organizations camouflaged as charities and scattered all over the world, down to real estate dealings and “used car” dealerships run by private business people.

The crowning glory of Hizballah’s business portfolio is its hold on the global drug industry. The organization’s worldwide crime operation extends from South America, through Africa, Europe, the Far East, Australia and the Middle East. Among their various activities, there are active Hizballah cells engaged in constant money laundering, forgery, weapons trade, smuggling, and of course producing and trading drugs, primarily heroin and cocaine.

Despite sweeping denial by the leaders of the religious extremist organization, officials from the American Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) have in the past presented conclusive evidence linking the drug organizations active at the Triple Frontier (Argentina-Brazil-Paraguay) with extremist Muslim organizations and Hizballah in particular. Its involvement in the drug industry of South America began in the early 1980s and has gained significant momentum over the last decade; through use of the large Shiite-Lebanese diaspora and close collaboration with South American cartels and drug organizations as well as crime and terror organizations in North Africa, a global-narcotic network has been created, netting billions of dollars a year. Among those enjoying the spoils is Hizballah. Today the total income generated by the organization’s global-narcotic operations comes to hundreds of millions of dollars yearly.

#2 – The Taliban

Total annual income: $800 million

Unfortunately, the Taliban’s success in recent years can also be measured financially. The Taliban runs a financial mechanism similar to that of ISIS (until recently) – the broader the territory they seize and the greater the population under their control, the more resources and potential revenue streams they have to convert into huge sums of money. The Taliban’s primary source of income today, as much as hundreds of millions of dollars each year, comes from the production and trade of drugs (mainly growing opium and manufacturing heroin). After that (in order of decreasing importance) the organization makes hundreds of millions from the pirate mining of natural resources within the regions under its control, collecting ransom for hostages and, finally, from donations.

As mentioned, the foremost source of capital for the Jihadist organization relies on the extensive narcotic network built and refined over the years. This made Afghanistan into the biggest heroin production and growing operation in the world and the reason why more areas in Afghanistan are used for growing opium than there are areas in Latin America for growing coca. This network is responsible for one of the most essential arteries of the global drug industry, yielding hundreds of millions of dollars a year. According to the '2017 World Drug Report' of the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), Afghanistan is the largest producer and exporter of opium in the world and is responsible for the production of approximately 90% of the world’s heroin. In total, more than 400 tons of heroin are produced in Afghanistan each year and the net value of opium exports alone constitutes around 12% of the country’s GDP. A report presented to the UN’s Security Council states that roughly 3 million Afghani people today are directly or indirectly employed by the drug industry. This is mind-boggling, as the country’s entire workforce is approximately 8 million people, according to the CIA.

As much as this sounds like a huge sum, this is only half of the total income produced by the Taliban. An important additional piece in their rich and varied financial system is their pirate mining of minerals, namely copper and iron. A further significant source of income for the organization comes from donations, mostly from wealthy Saudi sheikhs and philanthropists. According to a study conducted by the New York Times, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia is among the group's heavy funders of the group. Although the government in Riyadh officially supports the Afghani government and the American task force in the country, Saudi authorities in practice turn a blind eye to the increasing sums of money flowing from the private accounts of the wealthy.

#3 – Hamas

Total annual income: $700 million

Last June marked tenth anniversary of the Hamas movement’s control over the people of Gaza. Looking back, it seems there is no cause to celebrate. A special report recently published by the UN allowed a glimpse into the intolerable life in Gaza under the mismanagement of Hamas and points to a dizzyingly escalating humanitarian crisis. According to a summary in the UN report, the Gaza Strip will be unlivable by 2020 if the current situation persists.

The security intensification that came with Hamas' seizure of rule over Gaza brought with it immediate economic mayhem. A stream of more than 100,000 workers that entered Israel daily, and provided livelihood for hundreds of thousands of people in the Gaza strip, has almost entirely stopped. According to the World Bank, the current rate of unemployment in Gaza is the highest in the world and stands at over 40%. Among youth, the rate rises above 60%. The average income in Gaza is $1,800 per capita, among the lowest in the world. Electrical infrastructure and the factories that were destroyed in fighting, as well as the gross lack of raw materials (those that are not redirected by the heads of the organization to rebuilding tunnels), has paralyzed industry, which currently amounts to furniture production, cultivation of tomatoes and fishing.

But despite the catastrophic situation of Gaza, Hamas is managing to generate numerous funding sources from the impoverished population there, bringing in tens of millions of dollars each month. The sophisticated and elaborate tax network redirects significant capital flowing into Gaza as aid. This, for instance, is how Hamas collects taxes on the money-changing companies that convert the foreign currency to shekels, pocketing tens of millions on the way. In addition, Hamas runs hundreds of businesses monopolizing a variety of fields from real estate to security, banking, and even hotels and tourism.

Along with taxes, hundreds of millions of dollars flow in to the organization’s account each year as private donations from business owners or various societies from all over the world. The biggest current funder of Hamas is, not surprisingly, Iran which, along with Qatar has committed to contributing large sums of money to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars a year. In order to ensure that not all the money goes to the rehabilitation of Gaza and improving its residents’ welfare, the regime in Tehran has specifically allocated a significant sum from its contribution to support Hamas and its military arm’s activities. According to security sources, this allowance is 70 million dollars a year, and is responsible for nearly half of the military wing’s estimated budget of 150 million dollars.

#4 – Al-Qaeda

Total annual income: $300 million


Under the organization’s fundamentalist umbrella are some of the deadliest organizations operating today. According to the US State Department Country Reports on Terrorism a number of the primary branches include: Al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (Libya, Algeria, Ivory Coast, Mali, Nigeria, Tunisia and Burkina Faso), Al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (Yemn and Saudi Arabia), Al-Qaeda in the Indian Peninsula (India, Pakistan and Bangladesh), al-Shabaab (Somaia) and Tahrir al-Sham (Syria).

Al-Qaeda of the Islamic Maghreb is mainly active in Central and Western Africa and exploits the region’s instability and the penetrable borders of the countries in which its operations are based. It currently deals in the illegal trade of drugs, weapons, automobiles and people – and recently in the increasingly profitable branch of illegal trade in cigarettes and tobacco. A special report by the KPMG firm estimated that the illegal cigarette market in the countries of the Maghreb in 2016 constituted tax losses of about 565 million dollars. The scope of the illegal tobacco trade in North Africa currently stands at more than a billion dollars annually, and according to the UN comes out to about 60 billion black market cigarettes annually, of which a significant portion flows directly to the criminal and terrorist organizations controlling the region. Kidnapping for ransom payments also constitute a large source of income for the group, bringing in additional millions of dollars annually.

Like its brother in the West, Al-Qaeda of the Arab Peninsula takes great advantage of the local instability and local support, particularly in Yemen, to occupy territories, consolidate its hold in the region and so produce sizable income streams. Two years ago, for instance, the organization succeeded in taking over Mukalla, an important central port city in Yemen. Their control of the city, held until April 2016, generated about 2 million dollars a day for the organization from collecting protection fees and taxes, as well as pocketing an additional 20 million dollars from plundering local banks – according to a special report of the UN Security Council. In addition, Al-Qaeda of the Arab Peninsula continues to create ongoing revenue streams from kidnapping and ransom payments, as well as donations from charities of wealthy notables, primarily from the Gulf States

Jabhat al-Nusra, Tahrir al-Sham in its current incarnation, is Al-Qaeda’s proxy in Syria. The extremist Sunni organization’s income comes primarily from ransom payments and generous donations from the wealthy Sunni Gulf states. This year the organization wrangled a hefty sum of money for the provocative transaction in which it released Qatari royalty in exchange for the unprecedented sum of an estimated $130 million, according to the Financial Times.

A relatively new organization in Al-Qaeda’s portfolio, but a veteran of Africa’s bloody terror arena, is al-Shabaab, the Somalian terror group.. Like the rest of Al-Qaeda’s destructive affiliates, al-Shabaab also obtains its own funding. According to a UN report, the organization raises funds mostly through taxing the inhabitants of the territories under its control. Additional funding comes from pirate mining and illegal coal trade as well as kidnapping and ransom payments – all of which make tens of millions of dollars per year for the terror organization.


#5 – ISIS

Total annual income: $200 million

As of now with the fall of the town Rawa, the organization has lost its last urban stronghold in Iraq and those who controlled a third of the country have been almost entirely eliminated. Getting rid of any remnants of their control is just a matter of time and considering the great power they held until not long ago, this is a remarkable collapse. At its peak towards the end of 2014, the Islamic State extended over 100,000 square kilometers – larger than South Korea – and subjected 10 million people to its oppressive rule at the height of its power.

The vast lands that the organization captured during its rapid conquests throughout 2014 and the millions of people subjugated to its cruel rule made up the source of its wealth in its heyday. ISIS controlled oil and gas fields, rich mineral deposits, fertile agricultural lands, factories, weapons and of course millions of people underpinning the organization’s finances, primarily through paying the organization taxes and ‘protection’ fees. Three years ago, precisely at the height of ISIS’ military and political power, its annual income stood at around 3 billion dollars. In an unprecedented, comprehensive study published by Forbes Israel, ranking the 10 richest terror organizations in the world, ISIS was rated as the richest terror organization in the world; indeed, the richest in the history of terror.

The basis for its speedy money-making (as with many similar examples in the Middle East) came, unsurprisingly, from one major factor – oil. But this source of quick income soon became ISIS point of weakness. The intensification of the fighting against them and the grueling daily battles on the ground eventually led to the loss of extensive territory, including loss of control over fields of oil, gas, and precious mineral deposits. The organization suffered massive air raids by the coalition forces (attacks deliberately focused on the oil reserves) which added further strain and ultimately brought about the dwindling of profits from the organization’s primary source of income. Soon afterwards, what's more, the price of oil collapsed, plunging from 110$ per barrel at the beginning of 2014, to less than 30$ per barrel in 2016, further slashing the organization’s profits.

Income from oil and gas, which constituted the main source of ISIS’ wealth, was not the sole source of capital in its financial system. Taxes, ransom, protection fees and robberies of banks and antiquities became important components of wealth accumulation. As the only governmental authority in villages and towns under its rule, ISIS collected taxes and protection fees from the occupied population. But loss of control of the population it controlled until recently naturally brought about a drop in this source of income.

Apart from the large energy reserves that they controlled and the coercive mechanism for collecting protection, ransom and taxes for their own profit – ISIS also conquered vast agricultural lands, factories, power stations, dams, and other strategic facilities – which added greatly to their power and economic strength. In addition, the organization held vast territory in the 5 most fertile agricultural districts in Iraq that control about 40% of the wheat crop and various types of grain grown in the country, which in total, according to estimates by agricultural experts, amounted to 30% of the local agricultural market under ISIS’ control. All of this was lost when the organization withdrew from the large areas that it held.

According to estimates, the deadly terror organization lost over 90% of its income in the last three years alone, from about 2-3 billion dollars in 2014 to only 200 million dollars in 2017. In the coming year, ISIS will return to its original financial standing, and will be supported again primarily by ransom payments, donations, and external aid to finance its guerrilla activities in Syria and Iraq.

#6 – PKK – Kurdistan Workers’ Party

Total annual income: $180 million

According to the US State Department’s annual terrorism report, the PKK has many and varied sources of capital and relies heavily on the widespread Kurdish diaspora across Europe for funding its operations. According to estimates, the money flowing into the organization ranges between $50 to $100 million annually.


The primary source of PKK’s income stems, unsurprisingly and similarly to other terror groups, from the drug trade – namely heroin and cannabis. The United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), has estimated that the organization makes about $75 million annually from heroin. In the past, British intelligence estimated that the PKK is responsible for 40% of the heroin smuggled into the European Union, with the US Treasury also noting its significance in the global drug industry.
Another important dimension of the PKK’s illegal business transactions is human trafficking, as well as pirating of tobacco and cigarettes, according to a special report by a NATO intelligence branch. From the illegal migration from Asian and African countries and smuggling people and illegal substances into European countries, the organization is making millions of dollars each year.

Apart from its criminal money-making activities, the PKK also runs a legitimate and legal network for raising funds and aid money from its many supporters. The PKK’s European arm runs hundreds of aid organizations for increasing propaganda and collecting donations and solidarity tax from among the Kurdish community, particularly in Germany. A special report published by Germany’s domestic intelligence service (the BfV), has estimated that funds flowing into the organization from donations come to about 30 million dollars annually, about half of which is collected from the Kurdish community in Germany.

#7 – Kata’ib Hizballah

Total annual income: $150 million

Practically since its inception, the organization has been heavily funded by its Iranian patron, which makes sure to devote money and resources for the organization’s activities. More can be learned from a lawsuit filed against European banks by American veterans and the families of soldiers killed in Iraq. According to the statement submitted against the banking powers, HSBC, Credit Suisse, Barclays, Standard Chartered and the Royal Bank of Scotland channeled money from Tehran to the terror organization in Iraq. These funds allegedly were transferred directly from Iran to Kata’ib Hizballah in order to finance shootings and roadside bombings in which dozens of American soldiers were killed or wounded. The claim explicitly implicates Kata’ib Hizballah as one of the main recipients of those funds which, according to the pleadings, came to over 100 million dollars.


An additional source of income comes from abductions and ransom payments, which in the last year brought huge sums into the Shiite terror organization’s account. Kata’ib Hizballah was the organization that headed the plan and execution of the abductions of 26 members of the Qatari royal family while they were on a falcon hunting expedition in December 2015. The dubious release transaction saw the royal family transfer the astronomical sum of a billion dollars to Iran and other terror organizations (which triggered the big boycott against Qatar by Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Egypt and Bahrain), and the Shiite organization is estimated to have received an especially hefty cut of the spoils. According to the Financial Times which exposed the details of the transaction, suitcases loaded with cash amounting to about 700 million dollars were transferred to Iran and its ‘partners’ in exchange for the hostages’ release.

#8 – Palestinian Islamic Jihad

Total annual income: $100 million

Up to 2 years ago, the Islamic Jihad was facing a severe economic crisis, as one of their senior officials expressed it “the most severe economic crisis in the history of the organization,” which was founded in 1979 as a branch of the Egyptian Islamic Brotherhood movement. The Jihadi organization’s sources of funding had dried up and its pockets emptied. In a political crisis with their Iranian patron, close ally and nearly exclusive sponsor, the latter threatened to cut the oxygen flow to the Jihadist organization - brought the Islamic Jihad to the brink of bankruptcy and to its lowest point in its many years of activity.

At that time the coalition forces of the region’s Sunni states (led by Saudi Arabia, Iran’s Sunni rival), began a large-scale military operation against the Houthis in Yemen. While the heads of the Islamic Jihad were determined to remain neutral, the Iranians demanded explicit support for the Shiite Houthis. When expression of support was not forthcoming, Tehran decided on a drastic cut in funding for the organization, which went into a violent tailspin.

Eventually, the Islamic Jihad leaders gave in and surrendered to the dictates of Tehran, including a public “declaration of loyalty”. A delegation of senior officials headed by Ramadan Shalah, secretary general of the organization, was dispatched to end the tensions and to consult the Revolutionary Guard. During the meeting, Shalah thanked Qasem Soleimani, commander of the Quds force (the elite unit of the Revolutionary Guard), for the ‘exclusive’ support of the Palestinian intifada. In what was described as a sweeping declaration of loyalty by the Islamic Jihad to Iran and unconditional acceptance of its demands, the organization’s secretary general criticized the ‘other Arab states’ that did not support the Palestinian uprising and declared that “Iran is the only country that supports the intifada and the families of the martyrs.”

Unsurprisingly, the reward soon followed. Soon after the meeting, the heads of the organization received an offer of reconciliation in the form of tens of millions of dollars. It is estimated that Islamic Jihad receives support from Iran of about $70 million a year and that Iran alone is responsible for supplying nearly 75% of the Palestinian terror organization’s entire budget.

#9 – Lashkar-e-Taiba

Total annual income: $75 million

According to the US State Department, the Lashkar-e-Taiba organization relies heavily on the Pakistani diaspora (with most capital flowing in from communities based in the Gulf States and Britain), and aid funding from business people, Kashmiri tycoons and Indian mafia. Additionally, many millions are funneled into funds and charities that operate under the organization’s aid arm, which they use to garner support and sympathy from among the local population.

Lashkar-e-Taiba maintains training camps for its fighters, along with schools, daycare centers, welfare institutions and clinics all over Pakistan and is active in Afghanistan as well. Most of the fundraising to the charity and welfare funds (in which, as usual, nobody knows where the line lies between funding charity and terror) is done publicly, through extensive publicity campaigns in the Pakistani media. In addition, according to some estimates, the Pakistani terror organization continues to receive generous financial support from Pakistani officials.

#10 – The Real IRA

Total annual income: $50 million

Despite the efforts of customs authorities and security forces, the organization’s leaders have refined their fundraising abilities and manage to pocket tens of millions of dollars per year, mostly through a sophisticated global network that smuggles and sells cigarettes and tobacco. The tobacco smuggling industry in Britain has been thriving in recent years, bringing in huge sums of money.

A special report produced by the international accounting firm KPMG suggests that the illegal cigarette trade on the black market in Britain is among the largest in Europe. In 2016, approximately 5.55 billion cigarettes were sold illegally – with a black-market value of around $1.1 billion annually. In a special investigation done by the Sun, senior government officials declared that IRA members (including the Provisional IRA) are responsible for about 40% of the illegal tobacco market in Britain, and with the profits generated by this industry annually, tens of millions of dollars in royalties go directly to the RIRA.

The crime and terror organization recently got an unexpected boost from parliament – thanks to the same law that forbids the branding of packets of cigarettes and rolling tobacco. According to experts, the passing of the law significantly simplified the forgery work required of those profiting from black market tobacco and is expected to channel tens of millions of dollars more their way with a hefty portion expected to go to the RIRA.

Apart from illegal trade in tobacco, the radical Irish organization also enjoys significant royalties from its pirate network of falsified alcohol and fuel products as well as protection fees that it collects – especially in those areas under its influence, in which police enforcement is low.


An additional source of capital for the Real IRA, according to the US State Department Report on Global Terror, comes from supporters in the large Irish community in the USA. The underground Irish organization knows well how to exploit this wealthy target audience, and raises funds based on the support of Irish-American activists who oppose the peace agreement.

Thursday, March 22, 2018

Pallywood exposed in the Australian Senate

From the Australian Senate Hansard, 19 March 2018:


Senator BUSHBY  (Tasmania—Chief Government Whip in the Senate) (21:50): 
Much has been made of the arrest of the Palestinian teenager Ahed Tamimi for slapping an Israeli soldier. Those promoting her cause would have us believe that Ms Tamimi is the poor victim of Israeli brutality, motivated by anger at the injuring of her cousin by Israeli troops into slapping a soldier trespassing on her land. 

The reality is very different. For the last five years Ahed Tamimi, and, to a lesser extent, her siblings, have become notorious for their constant efforts to provoke Israeli soldiers, to the extent that Ahed Tamimi, with her curly blonde hair, has become known as 'Shirley Temper'. The typical and often repeated modus operandi is for a Tamimi child to approach Israeli soldiers and slap, hit, kick, spit at and insult them, while the Tamimi family adults wait with camera in hand for the provoked soldiers to retaliate, so they can then show the world the so-called Israeli aggression against children. 

These exploits have earned Ahed and her family a significant social media following, especially among Palestinians. Ahed's mother, Nariman Tamimi, was filming the incident involving the soldiers and immediately following it asked Ahed what sort of message she wanted to convey to viewers. She was filmed saying:  
I hope that everyone will take part in the demonstrations as this is the only means to achieve the result. Our strength is in our stones, and I hope that the world will unite to liberate Palestine, because Trump made his declaration and—the Americans—need to take responsibility for any response that comes from us. Whether it is stabbings or suicide bombings or throwing stones, everyone must do his part and we must unite in order for our message to be heard that we want to liberate Palestine.

I repeat, this poster girl for Palestinian innocence called for stabbing attacks, suicide bombings and the throwing of rocks. 

Sadly, it would appear likely that Ahed has been raised to seek and glorify violence. In fact, her parents, Bassem and Nariman, are also well-known for their anti-Semitic social media posts glorifying terror attacks and calling for the end of Israel. Other members of the family are convicted terrorists, including the mastermind of the Sbarro pizzeria bombing in 2001, which killed 15 people including Malki Roth, who was then the same age as Ahed is now and whose parents were Australian. 

Those professing such concern for Ahed's welfare should perhaps question whether her upbringing is akin to child abuse or to the use of child soldiers. At the very least, she is being exploited. In other circumstances, they would, rightly, be quick to condemn this. Instead, they are more likely to condemn Israel for supposed transgressions of Palestine rights, such as its arrest and detention of children, its system of military law in the West Bank and its check points and security barriers. 

Let's look at what's behind those. Yes, Israel arrests and detains Palestinian children. Most of those arrested are in their mid to late teens and are arrested for acts such as throwing rocks at cars or security forces, which can be lethal, and even more serious attacks such as stabbings and bombings. If children in Australia were throwing rocks at passing cars or at police, we would want them arrested and detained, too. Ahed herself was arrested not just for slapping a soldier but also for throwing rocks and for the incitement mentioned earlier. 
Yes, Israel has a separate system of military law for the West Bank. This is not out of a desire to discriminate against Palestinians but out of legal necessity. If Israel were to apply its own civil legal system to the West Bank, that would amount to annexation and would no doubt be roundly condemned. 

Yes, Israel carries out arrests, including of minors, in night-time raids. It does so because experience has shown this is far safer for both the Israeli forces and the local Palestinians than going in during the day, when Palestinians riot and attack the Israelis, and the Israelis are forced to defend themselves, leading to casualties on both sides. 

Yes, Israel has a security barrier to separate Palestinians from Israelis and has checkpoints, but these were built out of necessity. In the intifada launched in 2000 in the wake of Yasser Arafat's refusal to accept the Camp David peace offer, more than 1,000 Israelis were killed, and thousands more were seriously injured by Palestinian terrorism, including many notorious suicide bombings. The intifada was finally defeated by those measures. The checkpoints, other than those at the security barrier, are often unguarded, depending on the security situation at the time, and the security barrier can ultimately be relocated or removed, depending on the nature of any peace settlement.

One aspect of Palestinian violence that is not widely understood is the role of Palestinian incitement. Palestinian children like Ahed Tamimi are subjected to nonstop incitement and glorification of terror from the Palestinian National Authority, Israel's supposed peace partner. They get it in their schools, on TV, on the radio and in the mosques—constant messages that Israel is illegitimate and that the Jews stole their land. Israelis do commit crimes against Palestinians, including occasional terror attacks. But, when this happens, the perpetrators are pursued and arrested, and the attacks are condemned from the Prime Minister down. By contrast, the Palestinian authority name streets, public squares, community facilities and even children's soccer tournaments after Palestinian terrorists who have killed Israelis. Perhaps even more invidiously, Palestinian terrorists who are captured by Israel are paid generous lifetime pensions, far higher than the average wage, by the Palestinian authority—and, if they are killed in the attack, the pension goes to their family. The more serious the attack is, the higher the pension. The Palestinians apparently need billions of dollars of international aid each year, yet the Palestinian authority made US$347 million worth of such payments for terror in 2017 and has budgeted US$403 million for 2018. 

There are those who would say that all of this results from Israel's occupation of the West Bank, so let's consider why Israel is there. Israel took control of the West Bank from Jordan in 1967 in the course of a defensive war, the Six-Day War. It took the West Bank and, also, East Jerusalem from Jordan, following Jordanian attacks on Israeli positions. When Jordan occupied East Jerusalem, Jews were expelled, were barred from visiting the holy sites, and all synagogues were destroyed. By contrast, Israel allows all faiths control of and access to their holy sites in Jerusalem.
Immediately after the war, Israel offered to return land captured, in exchange for peace, but the meeting of the Arab League in Khartoum in August and September 1967 responded with the infamous three noes: no negotiation, no recognition and no peace. Despite this, in 1979, Israel agreed to return Sinai—also captured in 1967, but from Egypt—to Egypt, uprooting all Israeli settlements there, and has had a peace, albeit often cool, with Egypt ever since. In 2000, at Camp David, under the auspices of the Oslo accords, Israel offered Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat a state consisting of all of Gaza, most of the West Bank, a shared capital in Jerusalem and a settlement package for the Palestinian refugees. Arafat refused—despite being urged by many, including Saudi Arabia, to take the deal—and instead launched the intifada. An improved offer in early 2001 at Taba met the same response.

In 2005, Israel's Sharon government, searching for another way to achieve peace, withdrew completely from Gaza, leaving behind greenhouses and other agricultural infrastructure. The hope was that the Palestinians there would establish a peaceful, prosperous society living in harmony with Israel, and this would provide the impetus for further peace moves. The reality was, sadly, very different. The greenhouses were immediately destroyed, and rockets soon began flying over the border, aimed at Israeli communities. In 2007, Hamas staged a coup and took over control of Gaza. Since then, there have been in excess of 10,000 rockets and mortars fired at Israel from Gaza; terror tunnels have been constructed under the Israeli border, using vast amounts of international aid intended for Gaza civilians; and the result has been three wars.

In 2008, then Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert made an even more generous offer than those previously tendered. Under that peace plan offer, the Palestinian state would have all of Gaza and almost all of the West Bank, with land from inside Israel in compensation for the rest. There was to be a land bridge between the West Bank and Gaza; a shared capital in Jerusalem, with Palestinian control over Muslim holy sites; a limited return of Palestinian refugees to Israel; and compensation for all other Palestinian refugees and their millions of descendants. As Palestinian authority president Mahmoud Abbas recently admitted, he rejected the offer out of hand—again, without so much as a counteroffer.

It appears that the sticking point is that any agreement would require the Palestinians to genuinely accept Israel's right to exist in peace and that there could be no further claims, including the so-called return of the refugees and their millions of descendants. This influx of in excess of five million Palestinians would mean the end of Israel as a Jewish state and is therefore completely incompatible with the two-state peace the Palestinians profess to be seeking.

It is also worth noting that this demand for the return of not only the original refugees but their descendants—treating the descendants as refugees too—is a demand made only for Palestinians and is not repeated for any of the world's many refugee populations. Since the election of the Netanyahu government in 2008, Israeli measures to encourage peace talks have included an unprecedented 10-month moratorium on building in settlements, and the release of Palestinian prisoners. As you can see, the matter is not as simple as it appears. 

Wednesday, March 21, 2018

Hail Haley

From The Australian, 21 March 2018, by Janet Albrechtsen:

...Nikki Haley, the first Republican in cabinet as US ambassador to the UN since the end of the Cold War...  has proven to be a formidable voice of reason on a body that is corrupted by its own membership — only 87 of its 193 members are full-fledged democracies or “fully free” according to Freedom House.
Last month Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat told Haley to “shut up” with her criticism of Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas. Haley declined the advice. “I will not shut up,” she said at the UN Security Council. “I will respectfully speak some hard truth.” And she’s doing that is spades.
...Haley nailed her credentials to the wall last December after Trump decided to relocate the US embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. In a withering speech, she relied on facts and logic, confronted the false piety of the UN and destroyed the hypocrisy of Palestinian leaders.
Haley said that Israel, like other nations, had the right to determine its capital city and Jerusalem had been its capital for thousands of years.
She pointed out that the decision gave effect to what had been US government policy since 1995, when the US congress recognised that Jerusalem was the capital of Israel and voted to move the US embassy there.
“This week, President Trump made the decision to no longer ignore the will of the American people,” Haley said.
In a speech that has been likened to Daniel Patrick Moynihan’s speech in 1975 when, as US ambassador to the UN, he condemned the “Zionism is racism” resolution passed by the UN, the straight-shooting Haley said that UN was “one of the world’s foremost centres of hostility towards Israel”.
“The UN has done much more to damage the prospects for Middle East peace than to advance them. We will not be a party to that. The US no longer stands by when Israel is unfairly attacked in the UN. And the US will not be lectured to by countries that lack any credibility when it comes to treating both Israelis and Palestinians fairly...”
A fortnight later Haley rebuked members of the Security Council who voted for a resolution that slammed the right of a sovereign nation to determine where to locate its embassy. Her blistering speech against the anti-Israel bias of the UN had facts on her side.
There have been more than 400 anti-Israel resolutions in the General Assembly since Israel’s establishment in 1948, more resolutions than against all other UN members combined.
Between 2012 and 2016, the General Assembly passed 123 resolutions criticising individual countries, 103 (84 per cent) were about Israel. The best year for Israel in that period was 2016, when only 20 of 26 condemnatory country-specific resolutions (or 77 per cent) by the General Assembly targeted Israel alone. Syria attracted three, with one each for Iran, North Korea and Crimea.
US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley with Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop. Picture: AP.
US Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley with Australian Foreign Minister Julie Bishop. Picture: AP.
In the 10 years since its creation, the UN Human Rights Council has condemned Israel in 68 resolutions — almost more than the rest of the world combined. The UN Human Rights Council was reformed because of the bias of its predecessor, the UN Human Rights Commission. Alas, the name change hasn’t altered its anti-Israel agenda. It has one permanent agenda item, No 4, dedicated to “human rights abuses by Israel”. And another permanent agenda item, No 7, devoted to the “human rights abuses by the other 192 UN member states”.
Not all criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic. But the UN’s criticism of Israel, compared with its light touch towards countries from Saudi Arabia, Syria and Iran to North Korea, has destroyed its moral credibility....

Sunday, March 04, 2018

Abbas successor will act the same towards Israel

From JNS, 28 Feb 2018, by HAROLD RHODE:

The Israelis and Americans should stop worrying about who will lead the Palestinians, and instead spend time thinking about how Israel and America can address the civilizational war engulfing the entire region.



The Israeli and American establishments spend a lot of time over who should replace Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas when he’s gone.

This establishment thinking was expressed in a recent article titled, “Jibril Rajoub vs. Muhammad Dahlan to replace Mahmoud Abbas” by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs and published on JNS.

Any Palestinian (Muslim) will end up acting the same towards Israel.

Why? Because the root problem is that no Muslim leader can sign a final peace agreement with the non-Muslim state of Israel and remain alive. He would be labeled a traitor because according to the Shari’a, once a land is conquered by Muslims, it must remain Muslim forever. Muslims conquered all of these lands in 637 CE.

All of pre-1967 Israel, the West Bank and Gaza must, therefore, remain under Islamic rule. The non-Muslim Jewish state of Israel, from their perspective, has no right to exist because it is not Muslim.

If a Palestinian leader would sign any such agreement, the people he supposedly would lead would destroy him.

That is why former Palestinian head Yasser Arafat rejected the generous peace offer made by former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak at Camp David in 2000 with U.S. President Bill Clinton, and was quoted as saying he did not want to end up drinking tea with assassinated Egyptian President Anwar Sadat. In other words, the Palestinians would kill him if he signed a peace deal to end the conflict.

The Americans and Israelis waste so much energy on who should rule after Abbas even though it is an irrelevant issue. Many policy-makers simply don’t understand—or choose ignore—that the underlying root of the problem is a religious, civilizational struggle that does not depend on one leader here or there. The Muslim struggle for the land will continue, no matter who is leading the Palestinian people. This is their cultural choice.

As the Israeli Arab journalist Khaled Abu Toameh pointed out:
“No Palestinian leader has a mandate to reach an everlasting peace agreement with Israel. No leader in Ramallah or the Gaza Strip is authorized to end the conflict with Israel. ...any Palestinian who dares to talk about concessions to Israel is quickly denounced as a traitor. Those who believe that whoever succeeds Abbas will be able to make real concessions to Israel are living in an illusion.”
Thus, the Israelis and Americans should stop worrying about who will lead the Palestinians, and instead spend time thinking about how Israel and America can address the civilizational war engulfing the entire region.