Facebook Feed

2 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
Purim Guide for the Perplexed 2023: bit.ly/3ZdlxHY ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

2 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
אתגר מרכזי לביטחון לאומי: bit.ly/3xkSwh1 ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

2 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
US-sponsored anti-Israel UN Security Council statement - acumen: bit.ly/3lVqpCM ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

2 weeks ago

Yoram Ettinger
bit.ly/3xHPCDc הסכמי אברהם – אינטרס ערבי, אמריקאי וישראלי: ... See MoreSee Less
View on Facebook

Wake up America, Islamic terrorism targets you!

The claim that the perpetrator of the November 1, 2017 NYC bicycle-path-terror is a “lone wolf” ignores the wider context of Islamic terrorism, oversimplifies and underestimates the threat, alleviates the pressure off anti-US Islamic rogue regimes, and derails counter-terrorism.
The NYC bicycle-path-terror was carried out by a member of the Islamic “pack of wolves” – not by a “lone wolf” – which has been systematically brainwashed and molded by the most effective production-line of Muslim terrorists: hate-education and incitement conducted by Islamic leaders, educators, social media and imams in mosques (and in US prisons!) in Muslim countries as well as in the US.
According to FBI testimony at a Senate Homeland Security Hearing: “Prison radicalization primarily occurs through anti-US sermons provided by contract, volunteer, or staff imams, radicalizing inmates who gain religious influence and extremist media… similar to that of Iran and Hezbollah…. These radicalization efforts expand beyond prison walls, resulting in potential threats to society at-large….”
Furthermore, Senators Schumer (D-NY) and Feinstein (D-CA) are concerned that the vetting of prison imams relies heavily on the Islamic Society of North America and the Graduate School of Islamic and Social Sciences, which according to Schumer, “are connected to terrorism and promote Wahhabism, which some consider to be an exclusionary and extreme form of Islam…. Pat Dunleavy, a former Deputy Inspector General for the NY State Department of Corrections says… the organizations were also sending [to inmates] tapes and CDs of speeches by Osama bin Laden, Muslim Brotherhood leaders and Al Qaeda’s Anwar Awlaki….”
Anti-US Islamic terrorists, such as the bicycle-path-terrorist, have been adrenalized by three dramatic developments, which have been highlighted by rogue Islamic policy, educational and media organs, suggesting global Islamic domination in-progress: (1) the gradual Islamic penetration of Europe, which is losing its will to flex muscles; (2) the retreat-in-process of the US from Afghanistan and Iraq, and its recent accommodation of the Ayatollahs; (3) the Soviet retreat from Afghanistan, which was followed by the collapse of the Soviet Union.
The NYC bicycle-path-terror was consistent with the definition of terrorism – a systematic and deliberate targeting of civilians – aiming to erode the confidence of Americans in their country’s homeland security forces, while bolstering the Islamic offensive in the US’ own “end zone.”
In fact, Islamic terrorists have already broken through the gates of the US!
The NYC terror was carried out within the geo-strategic context of the historical offensive of Islam against Christendom, in order to achieve global domination.
The “packs of Sunni and Shia wolves” has been unleashed against the USA, which is rightly perceived by Islamic rogue regimes to be the most critical obstacle on their way to dominate the Persian Gulf, the Arabian Peninsula, the Middle East at-large, Africa, Europe, South America and the rest of the globe.
It was carried out in an attempt to emulate a litany of prior acts of Islamic terrorism against Western democracies, and especially the US, which is rightly regarded by Islam as the pillar of Western democracy, economy, science and military.
It was carried out in the footsteps of the September 11, 2001 Twin Towers, Pentagon and Pennsylvania massacre; the November 28, 2016 Ohio State University attack by a Somali student/refugee; the June 12, 2016 Orlando nightclub massacre of 49 people; the December 2, 2015 San Bernardino massacre of 14 people by a Muslim couple; the April 15, 2013 Boston Marathon bombing by two Muslim brothers; and many more acts of terror perpetrated by members of the Islamic “packs of wolves.”
The NYC bicycle-path-terrorism was not an aberration, but an integral episode of 1,400 years of the intra-Islamic tectonic reality (e.g., the raging Arab Tsunami since 2010); the systematic use of terrorism against fellow-Muslims (e.g., the Muslim Brotherhood terrorism in Egypt); the terror tactics employed by Muslim regimes against their own peoples (e.g., civil liberties have not landed yet in Arab lands); and the 14 centuries of Quran-sanctioned terrorism against the abode of the “infidel.”  In fact, terrorism has dominated Islam from the 7th century, when three of the first four Caliphs (Umar, Uthman and Ali), who succeeded Muhammad, were assassinated by fellow Muslims.
The NYC bicycle-path-terrorist – like most Muslims – reveres history as a relevant tool to face contemporary challenges. Hence, this act of terrorism was intensely integrated with – not isolated from – a fundamental pillar of Islam, the Jihad (the Strive, the Holy War), which commands Muslims to emulate previous struggles against the enemies of Islam, within the context of the eternal battle between the Abode of Islam and the Abode of the “infidel.” The latter is defined as “the Abode of the Sword,” faced with the choice of embracing – or submitting to – Islam, or be consumed by the sword.
In order to defeat Islamic terrorism, Western societies – led by the US – must rid counter-terrorism of the “lone wolf” mentality; acknowledge the inherently non-compromising nature of Islamic terrorism and confront Islamic rogue regimes (just like rogue gangs at home) militarily, not diplomatically; recognize the centrality – and dismantle the infrastructure – of hate-education and incitement in the US and other Western democracies, as well as in Muslim countries; preempt, rather than react.

The architects of counter-terrorism may want to consider the implementation of the American football (“Jim Schoff”) principle: The closer you get to the “end zone” of your opponent, the closer you are to score a touchdown; the closer you get to your own “end zone,” the closer your opponent is to score a touchdown.




Videos

The post-1967 turning point of US-Israel cooperation

Israeli benefits to the US taxpayer exceed US foreign aid to Israel

Iran - A Clear And Present Danger To The USA

Exposing the myth of the Arab demographic time bomb

The Abraham Accords – the US, Arab interests and Israel

Secretary of State Antony Blinken and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan believe that the expansion of the Abraham Accords, the enhancement of Israel-Saudi defense and commercial cooperation and the conclusion of an Israel-Saudi Arabia peace accord are preconditioned upon major Israeli concessions to the Palestinian Authority.

Is such a belief consistent with Middle East reality?

Arab interests

*The signing of the Abraham Accords, and the role played by Saudi Arabia as a critical engine of the accords, were driven by the national security, economic and diplomatic interests of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, Morocco and the Sudan.

*The Arab interest in peace accords with Israel was not triggered by the realization that the Jewish State was genuinely seeking peaceful-coexistence, nor by a departure from the fundamental tenets of Islam. It was motivated by the assessment that critical concerns of the respective Arab countries would be effectively-served by Israel’s advanced military (Qualitative Military Edge), technological and diplomatic capabilities in the face of mutual and lethal enemies, such as Iran’s Ayatollahs and Muslim Brotherhood terrorism.

*Saudi Arabia and the six Arab peace partners of Israel (including Egypt and Jordan) are aware that the Middle East resembles a volcano, which occasionally releases explosive lava – domestically and/or regionally – in an unpredictable manner, as evidenced by the 1,400-year-old stormy intra-Arab/Muslim relations, and recently demonstrated by the Arab Tsunami, which erupted in 2011 and still rages.

They wish to minimize the impact of rogue regimes, and therefore are apprehensive about the nature of the proposed Palestinian state, in view of the rogue Palestinian inter-Arab track record, which has transformed Palestinians into an intra-Arab role model of subversion, terrorism, treachery and ingratitude.

*They are anxious about the erosion of the US posture of deterrence, which is their most critical component of national security, and alarmed about the 43-year-old US diplomatic option toward Iran’s Ayatollahs, which has bolstered the Ayatollahs’ terroristic, drug trafficking and ballistic capabilities. They are also concerned about the US’ embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is the largest Sunni terrorist entity with religious, educational, welfare and political branches. And, they are aware of the ineffectiveness of NATO (No Action Talk Only?), the European vacillation, and the vulnerability of all other Arab countries.

Israel’s role

*Saudi Arabia and the Arab partners to peace accords with Israel feel the machetes of the Ayatollahs and the Moslem Brotherhood at their throats. They consider Israel as the most reliable “life insurance agent” in the region.  They view Israel as the most effective US force-multiplier in the Middle East, and appreciate Israel’s proven posture of deterrence; flexing its military muscles against Iran’s Ayatollahs in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Iran itself and against Palestinian and Hezbollah terrorism. They respect Israel’s unique counter-terrorism intelligence and training capabilities, and its game-changing military and counter-terrorism battle tactics and technologies.

*The Arab view of Israel as a reliable partner on “a rainy day” has been bolstered by Israel’s willingness to defy US pressure, when it comes to Israel’s most critical national security and historic credos (e.g., Iran, Jerusalem and Judea and Samaria).  In addition, Saudi Arabia and Israel’s peace-partners aim to leverage Israel’s good-standing among most Americans – and therefore among most Senators and House Representatives – as a venue to enhance their military, commercial and diplomatic ties with the US.

*Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain are preoccupied with the challenge of economic diversification, realizing that they are overly-reliant on oil and natural gas, which are exposed to price-volatility, depletion and could be replaced by emerging cleaner and more cost-effective energy.

Thus, they consider Israel’s ground-breaking technologies as a most effective vehicle to diversify their economy, create more jobs in non-energy sectors, and establish a base for alternative sources of national income, while bolstering homeland and national security.

*The Abraham Accords – as well as Israel’s peace accords with Egypt and Jordan – and the unprecedented expansion of defense and commercial cooperation between Saudi Arabia and Israel, demonstrate that critical Arab national security interests may supersede fundamental tenets of Islam, such as the 1,400-year-old rejection of any “infidel” sovereignty in “the abode of Islam.”  Moreover, critical national security interests may lead to a dramatic moderation of the (Arab) education system, which is the most authentic reflection of one’s vision and policies.

Thus, contrary to the Palestinian Authority, the United Arab Emirates has uprooted hate-education curriculum, replacing it with pro-Israel/Jewish curriculum.

Abraham Accords’ durability

*The success of the Abraham Accords was a result of avoiding the systematic mistakes committed by the US State Department. The latter has produced a litany of failed peace proposals, centered on the Palestinian issue, while the Abraham accords bypassed the Palestinian issue, avoiding a Palestinian veto, and focusing on Arab interests. Therefore, the durability of the Abraham Accords depends on the interests of the respective Arab countries, and not on the Palestinian issue, which is not a top priority for any Arab country.

*The durability of the Abraham Accords depends on the stability of the individual Arab countries and the Middle East at-large.

*The Abraham Accord have yielded initial and unprecedented signs of moderation, modernity and peaceful coexistence, which requires the US to support the respective pro-US Arab regimes, rather than pressuring them (e.g., Saudi Arabia and the UAE).

*However, one should not ignore the grave threats to the durability of the accords, posed by the volcanic nature of the unstable, highly-fragmented, unpredictable, violently intolerant, non-democratic and tenuous Middle East (as related to intra-Arab relations!).  These inherent threats would be dramatically alleviated by a resolute US support.

*A major threat to the Abraham Accord is the tenuous nature of most Arab regimes in the Middle East, which yields tenuous policies and tenuous accords. For example, in addition to the Arab Tsunami of 2010 (which is still raging on the Arab Street), non-ballot regime-change occurred (with a dramatic change of policy) in Egypt (2013, 2012, 1952), Iran (1979, 1953), Iraq (2003, 1968, 1963-twice, 1958), Libya (2011, 1969), Yemen (a civil war since the ’90s, 1990, 1962), etc.

*Regional stability, the Abraham Accords and US interests would be undermined by the proposed Palestinian state west of the Jordan River (bearing in mind the intra-Arab Palestinian track record). It would topple the pro-US Hashemite regime east of the River; transforming Jordan into another platform of regional and global Islamic terrorism, similar to Libya, Syria, Iraq and Yemen; triggering a domino scenario, which would threaten every pro-US Arab oil-producing country in the Arabian Peninsula; yielding a robust tailwind to Iran’s Ayatollahs, Russia and China and a major headwind to the US.

*While Middle East reality defines policies and accords as variable components of national security, the topography and geography of Judea and Samaria (the West Bank) and the Golan Heights are fixed components of Israel’s minimal security requirements in the reality of the non-Western Middle East. Israel’s fixed components of national security have secured its survival, and have dramatically enhanced its posture of deterrence. They transformed the Jewish State into a unique force and dollar multiplier for the US.

*The more durable the Abraham Accords and the more robust Israel’s posture of deterrence, the more stable the pro-US Arab regimes and the Middle East at-large; the more deterred are anti-US rogue regimes; the less potent are Middle Eastern epicenters of anti-US terrorism and drug trafficking; the more bolstered is the US global posture and the weaker is the posture of the US’ enemies and adversaries.

*Would the Arab regimes of the Abraham Accords precondition their critical ties with Israel upon Israeli concessions to the Palestinians, which they view as a rogue element? Would they sacrifice their national security and economic interests on the altar of the Palestinian issue? Would they cut off their nose to spite their face?

The fact that these Arab regimes concluded the Abraham Accords without preconditioning it upon Israeli concessions to the Palestinians, and that they limit their support of the Palestinians to talk, rather than walk, provides an answer to these three questions.

Support Appreciated

 

 

 

 




Videos

The post-1967 turning point of US-Israel cooperation

Israeli benefits to the US taxpayer exceed US foreign aid to Israel

Iran - A Clear And Present Danger To The USA

Exposing the myth of the Arab demographic time bomb