NJN-29.
New Jerusalem News.
28 July, 2011, 26 Tammuz 5771
Contents:
1. HOW SUPPORTERS OF PALESTINIAN TERRORISM ARE MURDERED AND RAPED BY THEIR PALESTINIAN SPONSORS
by Steven Plaut
2. Palestinians Receive More Per Capita SupportD than all Other Unfortunates!
3. Is Germany Taking Charge of Europe??
Germany's Choice: Part 2 by Peter Zeihan and Marko Papic
 |
Members of the Fogel Family from Itamar Murdered by Arab Terrorists. |
|
Brit-Am Discussion Group 
|
Contents by Subject |
Research Recognition Reconciliation Contribute |
|
Site Map Contents in Alphabetical Order |
 This Site |
1. HOW SUPPORTERS OF PALESTINIAN TERRORISM ARE MURDERED AND RAPED BY THEIR PALESTINIAN SPONSORS
by Steven Plaut
http://www.think-israel.org/plaut.pahelpersmurdered.html
Extracts:
The media and the cyber-world are all abuzz this week over the Palestinian-perpetrated murder of an Italian communist and cheerleader for terrorism. An accomplice to Islamist terrorism, the "victim" was one Vittorio Arrigoni. He evidently found himself[1] in the middle of a turf war between Hamas and another genocidal Islamist organization. The rival terrorist group is being described by the media alternatively as an al-Qaeda branch or as "Salafists," meaning Islamist fundamentalists led by Saudi Arabian Wahhabis. But I think it is more likely they are simply a front for the "Islamist Jihad" Palestinian terror group.
Arrigoni was sent to Gaza[2] to assist the Islamist terrorists by the pro-terror International Solidarity Movement or ISM, the same group that once sent Rachel Corrie into Gaza to collaborate with terrorists and obstruct Israeli anti-terror operations. One of the more amusing pastimes this week has been watching radical leftist groups try to "make sense" of the "senseless" murder of Arrigoni. Many of these folks simply blame Israel and Jews, reverting to their knee-jerk anti-Semitic instincts. Others just whine and wring their hands over the "tragedy."
So just why did the Islamists murder Arrigoni? The answer is simple: These fanatics believe that everyone who is not a Muslim, and especially not a Muslim of their own particular fundamentalist genre, is an infidel, an enemy, someone deserving death. It does not matter in the least that the infidel in question has come to Gaza to assist the terrorists. In the case of Arrigoni, it did not even matter that he had tattoos on his body endorsing their terrorism. The "bewilderment" being expressed by the ISM and its amen chorus, along with Arrigoni's Stalinist Italian groupies, is simply further indicative of how little these people know about the Middle East.
For Arrigoni is just one among many Western fellow-travelers who have suffered brutal fates at the hands of the Palestinians. The verbal and physical abuse of Western women at the hands of the Palestinian "freedom fighters" they came to support have been reported before....
Numerous other leftist Western women[7] who have come to the West Bank to protest Israel's security fence and to confront Israeli soldiers and police have also been sexually abused and molested by the very Palestinians they came to support. A leftist local blogger reports[8] that these Western women are raped by the Palestinians "day after day, night after night."
The embarrassing secrets of Palestinian molestations of their Western solidarity supporters are coming out of the closet. The radical Left has been hiding the reports of sexual abuse, lest they blemish the terrorist cause. In a report published[9] by one radical activist: "Roni Aloni Sedovnik, a feminist activist, penned an article in News1 ? an independent website run by respected investigative reporter Yoav Yitzchak ? under the heading "The Left's Betrayal of Female Peace Activists Who were Sexually Assaulted." She goes on to describe the molestation as: "A dark secret that threatens to smash the basic ideological values upon which the demand to end the occupation of the Territories rests."
Aloni Sedovnik stressed that these are not isolated incidents, but an ongoing general pattern of abusive behavior by Palestinians against the very Western women who have come to support them. Sedovnik also accused radical Israeli feminists of sweeping the information about the abuses under the rug, lest it diminish world support for the Palestinian cause beloved by those feminists.
According to the local leftist blogger[10] cited above:
It is not a matter of rape to satisfy lust. They are done systematically in order to impregnate the girl, and then to marry her, after she converts to Islam. Of course, we know about this method from girls who underwent a similar process inside Israel and escaped to Europe, but it is hard to escape from the [Palestinian] territories. Sometimes these women, some of whom are already older women, are not allowed to leave their homes unaccompanied, in order to prevent their escape. If someone doubts my words…please, check the statistics for entries and departures, and you will discover that a large portion of female leftist activists did not leave the country. Everyone knows about it, but nobody dares to talk about it. I ran into a few Norwegian girls married to Palestinians. They are not happy. Their lives were destroyed. Their families have broken off contact with them. They have no place to return to. They are deep in the raising of children and wish to die.
Arrigoni had entered Gaza illegally in a so-called "peace flotilla" that attempt to break the Israeli blockade of Gaza, a blockade that is designed to prevent explosives, rockets and other weapons from reaching the terrorists ? weapons used by the Palestinians to murder Israeli civilians. Arrigoni's own mother has[31] announced she will be joining the next boat to attempt to challenge the Israeli siege. We know some Gazan Salafis who might like to host her.
2. Palestinians Receive More Per Capita Support than all Other Unfortunates!
From: Steven Shamrak <stevenshamrak.e@gmail.com>
Endless anti-Israel Support
So-called Palestinians are better off than some of the people who are footing most of the PA bills. Percentage of the population who live below the poverty line:
West Bank (under PA control) 16%
Washington, D.C. 18.9%.
Greece 20%.
Israel 24%.
Palestinians are already receiving more money in international financial assistance than other groups who are struggling in far more dire circumstance. Per capita Foreign Assistance 2009:
Palestinian Authority $725.00
Afghanistan $219.00
Sudan $56.00
Central African Republic $53.00
Ethiopia $48.00
Democratic Republic Congo $34.60
Niger $31.20
Bangladesh $8.00
In fact, the Palestinians are the top per-capita aid recipients in the history of the planet. Its not just how much, but how long Palestinians have received international welfare that breaks all records. For 63 years, the US, European nations and the UN have been nonstop donors. While all refugees in the world receive assistance for a few years from the United Nations Refugee Agency, UNHCR, Palestinians have their own, seemingly eternal source of UN welfare under the auspices of the United Nations Relief United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).
Set up in 1949 with a temporary, three-year mandate (UNGA Resolution 302IV) to provide aid and jobs for 700,000 Palestinian refugees, UNRWA has grown into a permanent institution for the only people allowed to hold refugee status for over sixty years. The number of 'refugees' has inflated to 4,618,141 since refugee status is an inheritance which is passed on to all descendants and their descendants no matter where they live. (International anti-Semitic idiots claim that it is all done in the name of peace and humanitarian aid. In fact, they have been assisting Arabs to destroy Israel , the only Jewish state.)
3.Is Germany Taking Charge of Europe??
http://www.stratfor.com/weekly/20110725
-germanys-choice-part-2?utm_source=freelist-
f&utm_medium=email&utm_
campaign=20110726&utm_term=
gweekly&utm_content=readmore&
elq=bdbfcbc869be4dd8beacbdf7ca54078b
Germany's Choice: Part 2
July 26, 2011 | 0849 GMT
By Peter Zeihan and Marko Papic
Extracts:
Seventeen months ago, STRATFOR described how the future of Europe was bound to the decision-making processes in Germany. Throughout the post-World War II era, other European countries treated Germany as a feeding trough, bleeding the country for resources (primarily financial) in order to smooth over the rougher portions of their systems. Considering the carnage wrought in World War II, most Europeans, and even many Germans, considered this perfectly reasonable right up to the current decade. Germany dutifully followed the orders of the others, most notably the French, and wrote check after check to underwrite European solidarity.
However, with the end of the Cold War and German reunification, the Germans began to stand up for themselves once again. Europe's contemporary financial crisis can be as complicated as one wants to make it, but strip away all the talk of bonds, defaults and credit-default swaps and the core of the matter consists of these three points:
Europe cannot function as a unified entity unless someone is in control.
At present, Germany is the only country with a large enough economy and population to achieve that control.
Being in control comes with a cost: It requires deep and ongoing financial support for the European Union's weaker members.
What happened since STRATFOR published Germany's Choice was a debate within Germany about how central the European Union was to German interests and how much the Germans were willing to pay to keep it intact. With their July 22 approval of a new bailout mechanism, from which the Greeks immediately received another 109 billion euros, the Germans made clear their answers to those questions, and with that decision, Europe enters a new era.
The Origins of the Eurozone
The foundations of the European Union were laid in the early post-World War II years, but the critical event happened in 1992 with the signing of the Maastricht Treaty on Monetary Union. In that treaty, the Europeans committed themselves to a common currency and monetary system while scrupulously maintaining national control of fiscal policy, finance and banking. They would share capital but not banks, interest rates but not tax policy. They would also share a currency but none of the political mechanisms required to manage an economy. One of the many inevitable consequences of this was that governments and investors alike assumed that Germany's support for the new common currency was total, that the Germans would back any government that participated fully in Maastricht. As a result, the ability of weaker eurozone members to borrow was drastically improved. In Greece in particular, the rate on government bonds dropped from an 18 percentage-point premium over German bonds to less than 1 percentage point in less than a decade. To put that into context, borrowers of $200,000 mortgages would see their monthly payments drop by $2,500.
Faced with unprecedentedly low capital costs, parts of Europe that had not been economically dynamic in centuries, in some cases, millennia, sprang to life. Ireland, Greece, Iberia and southern Italy all experienced the strongest growth they had known in generations. But they were not borrowing money generated locally, they were not even borrowing against their own income potential. Such borrowing was not simply a government affair. Local banks that normally faced steep financing costs could now access capital as if they were headquartered in Frankfurt and servicing Germans. The cheap credit flooded every corner of the eurozone. It was a subprime mortgage frenzy on a multinational scale, and the party couldn't last forever. The 2008 global financial crisis forced a reckoning all over the world, and in the traditionally poorer parts of Europe the process unearthed the political-financial disconnects of Maastricht.
The investment community has been driving the issue ever since. Once investors perceived that there was no direct link between the German government and Greek debt, they started to again think of Greece on its own merits. The rate charged for Greece to borrow started creeping up again, breaking 16 percent at its height. To extend the mortgage comparison, the Greek 'house' now cost an extra $2,000 a month to maintain compared to the mid-2000s. A default was not just inevitable but imminent, and all eyes turned to the Germans.
A Temporary Solution
It is easy to see why the Germans did not simply immediately write a check. Doing that for the Greeks (and others) would have merely sent more money into the same system that generated the crisis in the first place. That said, the Germans couldn?t simply let the Greeks sink. Despite its flaws, the system that currently manages Europe has granted Germany economic wealth of global reach without costing a single German life. Given the horrors of World War II, this was not something to be breezily discarded. No country in Europe has benefited more from the eurozone than Germany. For the German elite, the eurozone was an easy means of making Germany matter on a global stage without the sort of military revitalization that would have spawned panic across Europe and the former Soviet Union. And it also made the Germans rich.
But this was not obvious to the average German voter. From this voter?s point of view, Germany had already picked up the tab for Europe three times: first in paying for European institutions throughout the history of the union, second in paying for all of the costs of German reunification and third in accepting a mismatched deutschemark-euro conversion rate when the euro was launched while most other EU states hardwired in a currency advantage. To compensate for those sacrifices, the Germans have been forced to partially dismantle their much-loved welfare state while the Greeks (and others) have taken advantage of German credit to expand theirs.
Germany's choice was not a pleasant one: Either let the structures of the past two generations fall apart and write off the possibility of Europe becoming a great power or salvage the eurozone by underwriting two trillion euros of debt issued by eurozone governments every year....
The New EFSF [European Financial Stability Facility i.e. EU Bank]
The result was an EFSF redesign. Under the new system the distressed states can now access, with German permission, all the capital they need from the fund without having to go back repeatedly to the EU Council of Ministers. .. It is a massive debt consolidation program for both private and public sectors. In order to get the money, distressed states merely have to do whatever Germany, the manager of the fund, wants. The decision-making occurs within the fund, not at the EU institutional level.
...For states that experience problems, almost all of their financial existence will now be wrapped up in the EFSF structure. Accepting EFSF assistance means accepting a surrender of financial autonomy to the German commanders of the EFSF. For now, that means accepting German-designed austerity programs, but there is nothing that forces the Germans to limit their conditions to the purely financial/fiscal.
For all practical purposes, the next chapter of history has now opened in Europe. Regardless of intentions, Germany has just experienced an important development in its ability to influence fellow EU member states, particularly those experiencing financial troubles. It can now easily usurp huge amounts of national sovereignty. Rather than constraining Germany's geopolitical potential, the European Union now enhances it; Germany is on the verge of once again becoming a great power. This hardly means that a regeneration of the Wehrmacht is imminent, but Germany's re-emergence does force a radical rethinking of the European and Eurasian architectures.
Reactions to the New Europe
Every state will react to this new world differently. The French are both thrilled and terrified, thrilled that the Germans have finally agreed to commit the resources required to make the European Union work and terrified that Berlin has found a way to do it that preserves German control of those resources. The French realize that they are losing control of Europe, and fast. France designed the European Union to explicitly contain German power so it could never be harmed again while harnessing that power to fuel a French rise to greatness. The French nightmare scenario of an unrestrained Germany is now possible.
The British are feeling extremely thoughtful. They have always been the outsiders in the European Union, joining primarily so that they can put up obstacles from time to time. With the Germans now asserting financial control outside of EU structures, the all-important U.K. veto is now largely useless. Just as the Germans are in need of a national debate about their role in the world, the British are in need of a national debate about their role in Europe. The Europe that was a cage for Germany is no more, which means that the United Kingdom is now a member of different sort of organization that may or may not serve its purposes.
The Russians are feeling opportunistic. They have always been distrustful of the European Union, since it, like NATO, is an organization formed in part to keep them out. In recent years the union has farmed out its foreign policy to whatever state was most impacted by the issue in question, and in many cases these states has been former Soviet satellites in Central Europe, all of which have an axe to grind. With Germany rising to leadership, the Russians have just one decision-maker to deal with. Between Germany?s need for natural gas and Russia?s ample export capacity, a German-Russian partnership is blooming. It is not that the Russians are unconcerned about the possibilities of strong German power, the memories of the Great Patriotic War burn far too hot and bright for that, but now there is a belt of 12 countries between the two powers. The Russian-German bilateral relationship will not be perfect, but there is another chapter of history to be written before the Germans and Russians need to worry seriously about each other.
Those 12 countries are trapped between rising German and consolidating Russian power. For all practical purposes, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova have already been reintegrated into the Russian sphere. Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary, Romania and Bulgaria are finding themselves under ever-stronger German influence but are fighting to retain their independence. As much as the nine distrust the Russians and Germans, however, they have no alternative at present.
The obvious solution for these Intermarium states as well as for the French is sponsorship by the United States. But the Americans are distracted and contemplating a new period of isolationism, forcing the nine to consider other, less palatable, options. These include everything from a local Intermarium alliance that would be questionable at best to picking either the Russians or Germans and suing for terms. France's nightmare scenario is on the horizon, but for these nine states which labored under the Soviet lash only 22 years ago - it is front and center.
Pleased with what you read'
Click Here to make an offering. |
Jerusalem News and New Jerusalem News.