Thursday, February 27, 2014

Erdogan Caught on Tape Discussing Hiding Stolen Millions

Jew-hating, Islamic-supremacist skunk erdogan is finally getting his just desserts.

Jew-haters like erdogan always project their own wickedness and evil onto the Jews.

How long before he claims the tape was faked by the Mossad?

Thousands across Turkey call for Erdogan’s ouster: Audio Recording surfaces discussing hiding stolen millions - See more at:

Lee Rigby Murderers Scream “Allahu Akbar” “You (Britain) and America will never be safe”

How many thousands or millions more have to be butchered before clueless, pathetic western politicians stop proclaiming islam to be a religion of peace?

Muslim Killers Who Beheaded Lee Rigby on London Street Scream “Allahu Akbar” “You (Britain) and America will never be safe” at sentencing...

Jews Denied Rights on Judaism's Holiest Site

The fact that Jordan is lording it over Israel regarding the holiest site in Judaism in the supposedly sovereign Jewish state is a total disgrace. Shame on the cowardly, feeble Jewish leadership for surrendering to the muslims what belongs to the Jewish people.

The Temple Mount is in play

[Hotovely: What the Left Really Fears on Temple Mount]
Nadav Shragai.., Israel Hayom..
    ..It has been 47 years since Moshe Dayan handed over the keys to the Temple Mount to the Jerusalem waqf (Islamic trust) and ever since then we have been forced to stomach straw and gravel, incitement and violence, exclusion and damage to antiquities.
mountFor years now, the Temple Mount has not been in our hands and Israeli sovereignty in the area has been de facto conditional. The past three generations have seen Jews allowed to visit the compound, but only as long as they do not look like Jews, pray like Jews and, at times, as long as they do not mention to anyone that they had been there.

It has been 47 years since Moshe Dayan handed over the keys to the Temple Mount to the Jerusalem waqf (Islamic trust) and ever since then we have been forced to stomach straw and gravel, incitement and violence, exclusion and damage to antiquities. Hamas and Palestinian Authority flags are flown over the area more often than not and it seems that the only flag the police make sure is never seen there as is Israel’s flag, and most recently — Jewish worshipers.
On Tuesday, just like two weeks ago, and two months ago, and a year ago, the compound was closed to Jewish visitors over the Muslim worshipers’ riots and threats of violence. The meager allowances made to the Jewish worshipers to visit the holy site in set hours and in very small groups, are being eroded.
The status quo on the Temple Mount, which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu seeks to maintain, is fluid and the current allowances are constantly gnawed at to the detriment of the Jewish side. It is one thing if we were to stick to and uphold the official status quo, but as things stand, the Muslims are gaining increased control over the Temple Mount. When it comes to the Muslim worshipers the status quo is as pliable as play dough, but when it comes to the Jews it is as hard as a rock.
Jordan’s position on the Temple Mount is becoming stronger. Israel believed that to keep radical elements, such as Islamic Movement head Sheikh Raed Salah, at bay, Jordan’s status there should be bolstered, but while the original intent was well meant, the reality has seen it taken too far. Far enough, in fact, that last week, Jordan was able to pressure Israel into postponing a Knesset session on Israeli sovereignty over the Temple Mount. Far enough, it seems, that Jordan’s influence has exceeded the Temple Mount and now stretches beyond it.
In the early 2000s, Jordan was entrusted with the restoration of the southern and eastern walls, whose foundations have destabilized. It then vetoed the Israeli plan to replace the temporary, rickety wooden bridge leading to the Mughrabi Gate at the Western Wall with a permanent one. They fail to see — and justly so, as far as they are concerned — the difference between the walls. The result is an eyesore leading up to Judaism’s holiest site.
A similar Jordanian veto is currently preventing adequate restoration work at the Little Western Wall, some 180 meters (590 feet) north of the Western Wall plaza. Was that really what we meant when we sought cooperation with Jordan?
As part of the 1994 peace treaty with Jordan, Israel pledged to “afford high priority to Jordan’s historic role” on the Temple Mount, should the peace process mature to the point where its permanent status in negotiated. In reality, this priority is already in effect.
In 2012, Jordan and the Palestinian Authority signed a mysterious treaty regulating the two’s respective status on the Temple Mount. Israel’s fingerprints are evident there as well, as it sought to ensure Jordan’s role as the leading Arab entity on the Temple Mount ahead of time, but things have gone too far yet again.
It is inconceivable that Jordan’s influence on the Temple Mount would cripple Israel, even given the special — and less known — ties between the two countries. The Muslims’ violence in the compound is a red line and unless it ceases they should be temporarily barred from the Temple Mount. It has been done before and the sky did not fall down around us. The Muslims must be made to understand that when it comes to the Temple Mount, they also have something to lose.

Lessons from the floating coffin

A stark reminder of why Jews should never be made powerless again. Israel should not relinquish one inch of its homeland to its genocidal enemies. This would be suicidal.

Another Tack: Lessons from the floating coffin

02/23/2012 21:24

The world’s apathy-cum-enmity toward Jews hasn’t disappeared, it has simply mutated.

The only extant photo of the Struma
The only extant photo of the Struma Photo: Courtesy
Exactly 70 years ago – on February 24, 1942 – 19-year-oldDavid Stoliar terrifyingly clung to bobbing debris in the Black Sea. At first he heard screams in the frigid waters but the voices died down. It eventually emerged that Stoliar was the sole survivor of the Struma, an un-seaworthy vessel chuck-full of frantic Jewish refugees.

World War II was already in fever pitch. Against the enormity of the then-unfolding Holocaust, the loss at sea of 768 Jewish lives (103 of them babies and children) was at most blithely overlooked as a marginal annotation.
Moreover, although these Jews fled the Nazis, in the pedantic literal sense they weren’t executed by Third Reich henchmen.
This atrocity was the coldblooded handiwork of Great Britain(committed while it combated the Germans but remarkably without compassion for their Jewish victims), supposedly neutral Turkey (whose so-called nonalignment didn’t extend to outcast Jewish refugees), by the Arabs (who were openly and unreservedly Nazism’s avid collaborators and who pressured London into denying endangered Jews asylum in the Jewish homeland) and, finally, by the Russians (who targeted the immobilized sardine can that carried Jews to whom nobody would allow a toehold on terra firma).
The entire world seemed united in signaling Jews how utterly unwanted they were anywhere.
Such apathy-cum-enmity hasn’t disappeared.
Only its form and context had mutated but the essence is still ultra-relevant to the Jewish state.
We’re still threatened with annihilation. Nonetheless, unmistakable harangues from Tehran notwithstanding, the international community worries about an Israeli preemptive strike – not a genocidal strike against Israel.
To put it plainly, our fate today interests other nations just about as much as the fate of the Struma’s Jews did back then, which (to resort to understatement) was hardly much.
Today’s disingenuous post-Holocaust lip-service is invariably accompanied by hand-wringing about lack of foreknowledge of Germany’s fiendish plot to systematically exterminate the defenseless Jewish people (unmistakable harangues from Berlin notwithstanding).
What sets the Struma apart and imbues it with extraordinary significance is that from December 16, 1941, until the afternoon of February 23, 1942, its ordeal was played out before the entire watching but unfeeling world. No country could deny awareness of the impending calamity and yet all countries let it happen in full view.
The Struma, then a 115-year-old Danube cattle barge, was a pitiful peanut-shell of a boat packed with nearly 800 refugees from Romania. Bound for the Land of Israel, they desperately fled Hitler’s hell and the horrors of Bucharest’s fascist regime.
Pogroms and ghastly atrocities had already sullied cities likeIasi, where thousands of Jews were assembled in the market square and mowed down with machine guns. Venerable old rabbis and Jewish community leaders were impaled on meat hooks in town centers.
THE STRUMA wasn’t struck suddenly. It was slowly tortured, accentuating with demonic deliberation how disposable Jews were, just when genocide’s monstrous machinery was switched into high gear. This 75-day shipboard melodrama underscored the total helplessness and humiliation of Jews without power.
Struma passengers gathered in the Romanian port of Constanza on December 8, 1941. For four days, Romanian customs officials “examined” their belongings. In fact, they pilfered all they saw – clothing, underwear, jewelry and most important, food. The immigrants left on the perilous journey bereft of provisions and medications. But the Struma did carry 30 doctors, 10 engineers and 15 lawyers.
On December 12, the rickety vessel chugged out to sea. After four hair-raising days (instead of the routine 14 hours) the Struma unsteadily dragged itself into Istanbul Harbor. It couldn’t continue. Its makeshift motor had sputtered its last. There was no fuel, food or water.
Several passengers held valid entry visas into pre-independent Israel. All others were “illegals.”
The hope, though, was that once in Turkey, they’d all be allowed to proceed to their destination.
After all, with Europe in the throes of war, thousands of Jewish immigration certificates (British Mandate permits) remained unutilized.
But the British authorities refused unequivocally.
The Arabs raged and rallied against giving haven to Jewish refugees. Eager to appease pro- Nazi Arab opinion, Britain chillingly declared that under no circumstance could the Struma’s human cargo set foot in Eretz Yisrael.
Furthermore, Britain pressured Turkey not to let anyone off the crippled boat at its end either.
Obligingly, the Turkish premier argued that “Turkey cannot be expected to serve as a refuge or surrogate homeland for people unwanted anywhere else.”
Thus hundreds were imprisoned in narrow, unventilated confines. A sign saying “Help!” was suspended over the Struma’s side. One of the visa-holders, who after weeks was allowed ashore, described the boat as a “floating coffin.”
The freezing hull below reeked, but there wasn’t sufficient room on deck. Refugees took turns to climb up for a breath of air. There was no sleeping space for all, no infirmary, no galley, no bathing or sanitary facilities. Minimal food rations, provided by local Jews, were smuggled aboard after enough Turkish palms were greased.
An official Jewish Agency appeal, forwarded to the British on January 19, 1942, stressed that the Struma transported refugees escaping the most tangible threat of massacre. The Mandatory authorities didn’t even dignify the Jewish Agency with a reply.
On the next day, the Struma’s 35th in Istanbul, the Wannsee Conference opened in suburban Berlin to formally decide on “the final solution for the Jewish problem.” Hitler surely hadn’t overlooked this latest demonstration of utter callousness toward hapless Jews.
The British didn’t bother to answer ensuing emotional Jewish Agency entreaties on January 30 and February 10. Then they acquiesced to the entry of four visa-holders, who only at this point were permitted to disembark. More news of the dreadful conditions on the Struma now came out.
The new British line was that the Struma’s refugees were suspect Nazi agents because they came from enemy territory. The assertion that the Germans’ most hideously persecuted victims were their tormenters’ spies was labeled “Satanic” in embryonic Israel.
In a very long February 13 communication to the Mandatory government, the Agency noted that Britain was helping with much fanfare to resettle in the Mideast thousands of non-Jews – Greeks, Yugoslavs, Poles and Czechs – all of whom came from German-controlled areas.
More than any of them, Jews had reason to be loyal to theAllies.
On February 15, the British announced they’d make an exception in the case of Struma children aged 11 to 16. Wartime rationing was cited as the pretext for barring younger or older kids.
The Jewish Agency guaranteed maintenance for all 103 underage Struma captives. In the end no child was freed.
Meanwhile, Turkey, egged on and emboldened by Britain, threatened to tow the floundering deathtrap beyond its territorial waters.
The Jewish Agency warned that “the boat is in total state of disrepair and without life-saving equipment. Any sea-journey for this vessel cannot but end in disaster.”
The Turkish government, however, pitilessly ordered the condemned Struma tugged out to the Black Sea. Hundreds of truncheon-wielding Turkish policemen were dispatched to the Struma on February 23. They viciously clubbed passengers below deck. Despite resistance from the refugees, the anchor was cut, the Struma was towed out and was left paralyzed, to drift precariously without supplies or a drop of fuel.
On February 24, an explosion ripped it apart.
A Soviet submarine, Shchuka-213, patrolled northeast of the Bosporus. Stalking Axis craft, it torpedoed the wobbly barge, which sank in minutes. It’s estimated that as many as 500 were killed outright by the blast. The rest flapped feebly in the waves, till they expired of wounds, fatigue and hypothermia. Stoliar alone hung on, semi-conscious.
In pre-state Israel there was shock and grief.
Demonstrations were mounted. For one day all work and commerce were halted and the population imposed a voluntary protest curfew on itself. Posters appeared on exterior walls everywhere bearing British High Commissioner Harold MacMichael’s photo and announcing that he was “Wanted for Murder.”
The Struma’s heartrending end marked the effective end to most attempts to break Britain’s anti-Jewish blockade until the conclusion of WWII. A few fishing and sporting sailboats briefly tried to ferry handfuls of refugees. Some of them were sunk. Europe’s Jews had no escape left. Embattled Britain took time out from the war to make sure of it.
Stoliar was imprisoned by the Turks for six weeks for the crime of not drowning. He was finally allowed into Mandated Palestine despite MacMichael’s warnings that “this would open the floodgates” and “completely undermine our whole policy regarding illegal immigrants.”
Today, to most Israelis, Struma is a curious street name in a few towns. Israeli school children barely encounter its esoteric story. Politically correct authors and trendy leftwing filmmakers shun the subject, preferring postmodern portrayals of Arab terrorists as Zionism’s prey.
Oblivion is perhaps the greatest sin against the Struma but also against ourselves. If we forget the Struma, we forget why this country exists, why we struggle for its survival. We forget the justice of our cause.
Dimmed memory and self-destructive perverse morality hinder our ability to protect ourselves from the offspring and torchbearers of the very Arabs who doomed the Struma. They haven’t amended their hostile agenda. We just don’t care to be reminded.
The state the Jews created is threatened with destruction and its population with obliteration.
Yet there’s negligible sympathy for Israel and even less practical support to avert tragedy. The Struma’s story is seminal in understanding why the Holocaust was possible and why a second Holocaust cannot be ruled out. More than anything, the Struma powerfully illustrates what happens when Jews rely on others’ goodwill.

Tuesday, February 25, 2014

British Soldiers Warned not to Wear Uniforms in Public Over Fears of Lee Rigby Inspired Jihad Attacks

How far Britain has deteriorated when its own soldiers are being warned by their government not to wear their uniforms in THEIR OWN COUNTRY! One has to wonder what exactly they are fighting for since apparently its not their country anymore. 

British soldiers warned not to wear uniforms in public: alert over copycat Lee Rigby-style jihad murders

Saudi Arabia: The Middle East's Real Apartheid State

We hear endlessly about the history of white American and western slavery. But we never hear about arab-muslim slavery and anti-black racism. It's ironic that some blacks convert to islam and change their names to Arabic out of a sense of alienation from white American society and solidarity with muslims. Yet while blacks have made so many advances in America, they are still treated like slaves and worse in Arab-muslim countries. Far from being an oppressed people for whom black Americans should identify with, the Arab/muslims are the ones who are the brutal oppressors of blacks and other peoples. Also these countries are never the target of left wing boycotts even as they actually inflict the kinds of atrocities these malcontents falsely accuse Israel of doing.

Saudi Arabia: The Middle East's Real Apartheid State

There is a country in the Middle East where 10 percent of the population is denied equal rights because of their race, where black men are not allowed to hold many government positions, where black women are put on trial for witchcraft and where the custody of children is granted to the parent with the most “racially superior” bloodline.
This Apartheid State is so enormously powerful that it controls American foreign policy in the Middle East even as its princes and princesses bring their slaves to the United Kingdom and the United States.
That country is Saudi Arabia.
Saudi Arabia abolished slavery in 1962 under pressure from President Kennedy, who accomplished what the Ottoman Empire and the League of Nations had not been able to, but that hasn’t stopped its citizens from selling castrated slaves on Facebook or its princes from beating their black slaves to death in posh London hotels.
The Saudis had clung to their racist privileges longer than anyone else. When rumors reached Mecca that the Ottoman Empire might be considering the abolition of African slavery and equal rights for all, the chief of the Ulema of Mecca issued a fatwa declaring “the ban on slaves is contrary to Sharia (Islamic Law)… with such proposals the Turks have become infidels and it is lawful to make their children slaves.”
But Saudi Arabia’s oil wealth eventually made slavery economically unnecessary. Early on, African slaves worked for foreign oil companies which paid their masters, but they were a poor fit for the oil economy. The Kingdom no longer needed agricultural slaves and pearl drivers; it needed trained technicians from the West and international travel made it cheaper to import Asian workers for household labor and construction than to maintain its old trade in slaves.
The Saudis replaced the 450,000 slaves of the 1950s with 8.4 million guest workers. These workers are often treated like slaves, but they are not property and are therefore even more disposable than the slaves were. Exact numbers are hard to come by, but Nepal alone reported 265 worker deaths in Saudi Arabia in a single year.
Human Rights Watch has described conditions for foreign workers in Saudi Arabia as resembling slavery.
Meanwhile the three million Afro-Saudis are denied equal rights, prevented from serving as judges, security officials, diplomats, mayors and many other official positions. Afro-Saudi women are not allowed to appear on camera.
“There is not one single black school principal in Saudi Arabia,” the Institute for Gulf Affairs, a Saudi human rights group, reported.
Kafa’ah, equality in marriage, is used to establish that both sides are free from the “taint” of slave blood. The blood of Takruni, West African slaves, or Mawalid, slaves who gained their freedom by converting to Islam, is kept out of the Saudi master race through genealogical records that can be presented at need.
Challenges to the Kafa’ah of a marriage occur when tribal members uncover African descent in the husband or the wife after the marriage has already occurred. The racially inferior party is ordered to present “proof of equality” in the form of family trees and witnesses. If the couple is judged unequal, the Saudi Gazette reported, “Children’s custody is usually given to the ‘racially superior’ parent.”
These Saudi efforts at preventing their former slaves from intermarrying with them have only accelerated their incestuous inbreeding. In parts of Saudi Arabia, the percentage of marriages among blood relatives can go as high as 70%.
Saudi Arabia has the second highest rate of birth defects in the world, but a Saudi Sheikh blamed this phenomenon on female drivers, even though women are not allowed to drive in Saudi Arabia.
Equality has always been a foreign concept to the Saudis whose tribal castes determine the right to rule. In Saudi Arabia everyone has their place, from the Afro-Saudi, to the non-Muslim guest worker to the Saudi woman.
On the road to Mecca, a sign points one way for “Muslims” and another for “Non-Muslims.” Only Muslims are allowed into the holy cities of Islam. A Christian truck driver from Sri Lanka who wandered into Mecca was arrested and dispatched for trial to a Sharia court of Islamic law.
Likewise, women are barred from many jobs, kept from driving and even electronically tracked to prevent them from leaving the country. Guest workers in Saudi Arabia are treated as slaves, their identity papers held by their employers, preventing them from leaving without permission.
The guest workers however, if they survive the witchcraft accusations and sexual assaults, will escape back to Ethiopia, Sri Lanka or the Philippines with a fraction of the money that they were supposed to earn. The Afro-Saudis however have nowhere to return to. Saudi Arabia is the only home they know.
The Arab slave trade was longer, crueler and far more enduring than anything Europeans and Americans are familiar with and left behind large numbers of Afro-Arabs across the Middle East and Afro-Turks in Turkey. While African-Americans are prominently represented in American life, Afro-Arabs and Afro-Turks suffer from an inferior status which keeps them away from political power and out of public view.
American soldiers in Basra were surprised to discover large numbers of Afro-Iraqis. The hundreds of thousands of Afro-Iraqis are a legacy of the Zanj slave rebellion when 500,000 African slaves rose against their Arab masters. The Afro-Iraqis are free, but relentlessly discriminated against. In Gaza, 10,000 Afro-Arabs face daily discrimination. But it is the Afro-Saudis who are the Middle East’s best kept secret.
Nawal Al-Hawsawi was dubbed the Rosa Parks of Saudi Arabia when she took three women to court who insultingly called her “Abd” or slave. Nawal dropped the court case after she received an apology, but the taunt of “slave” is one that Afro-Saudis have to live with daily in Saudi Arabia.
“The monarchy’s religious tradition still views blacks as slaves,” Ali Al-Ahmed, the Director of the Institute for Gulf Affairs, wrote in Foreign Policy Magazine.
The Institute blames Deputy Saudi Foreign Minister Abdul Aziz Bin Abdullah, the son of the Saudi king, for being the architect of the Saudi apartheid state, but Saudi apartheid predates any one man.
Saudi slavery was intertwined with Islam, receiving sanction from the Koran and the Hadiths while relying on the Saudi role as the guardians of Mecca and Medina to lure African Muslims into slavery. African Muslims who made the pilgrimage to Mecca were defrauded and forced to sell their children into slavery to afford the return trip home. Slave traders lured African Muslims from Sudan, Mali and Burkina Faso by promising to take them to the holy places of Islam and teach them to read the Koran in Arabic.
Sheikh Saleh Al-Fawzan, a leading authority on Islam in Saudi Arabia, bluntly stated, “Slavery is a part of Islam. Slavery is part of jihad, and jihad will remain as long there is Islam.” The linkage between slavery, Jihad and Islam dates back to Mohammed whose followers were compensated with human property.
In The Legacy of Arab-Islam in Africa, John Alembillah Azumah writes that, “In pre-Islamic Arabia blacks were held in high esteem and did marry Arab women … the discrimination on account of the colour of their skin is a development within the Islamic period.”
Racism was a necessary prerequisite to the expansion of Islam through Jihad. The land that is today known as Saudi Arabia was at the center of those conquests, growing rich in slaves and loot. Today it is once again at the center of the new Jihad, its every atrocity justified by its role in the holy wars of Islam.

Sunday, February 23, 2014

Muslims Demand 'Right of Return' to Spain

This needs to be seen by Europeans who harangue Israel to surrender "occupied" territory to the fakestinians. As far as muslims are concerned, Spain is also occupied territory belonging to muslims.  Of course the difference between Spain granting diaspora Sephardic Jews citizenship as opposed to muslims, is that the muslim presence in Spain was the result of violent conquest by the Moors.

Muslims Demand ‘Right of Return’ to Spain




Monday, February 3, 2014

Waters' Continues to Call for nazi Boycott of Jewish State

As morally reprehensible as John Kerry and Obama is for easing sanctions on Iran while threatening sanctions against Israel, the vile nazi roger waters is far worse. And no I am not using hyperbole in describing waters, who's relentless jihad against the Jewish state cannot be described as anything but nazism. Iran continues working on a nuclear bomb, hanging homosexuals and generally repressing its own citizens, there's a civil war in Syria which sees both sides engaging in wholesale massacre, al qaeda is taking over whole nations, muslims are waging global jihad, threatening to terrorize the Olympic games, terrorizing the entire world, Christians are being persecuted and slaughtered in muslim countries, China represses its own citizens and occupies Tibet. I could go on and on discussing the turmoil, wars and horrific human rights atrocities around the world. Yet the monstrous waters chooses as his cause, to organize boycotts against Israel. The only country in the Mideast where these horrors are NOT taking place, where Arabs have more freedom than in Arab countries. Where is the logic? Where is the decency and humanity in ignoring millions of suffering people and instead wage a campaign against Israel? There is only one conclusion which can be drawn and we all know what that is. I'm sure Scarlett Johansson does indeed care about human rights, Roger, which is exactly why she refuses to participate in your hateful boycott campaign against Israel, which is the ONLY Mideast country NOT engaging in human rights violations. And if you actually cared about human rights, Waters, Israel is the last country you would be focused on, you fraud. If you actually cared about human rights, you would be speaking out against Iran, Syria, Egypt, Libya etc. If you actually cared about human rights you would be speaking out about the plight of Christians under islamic rule.  So with all the horrors taking place around the world which I mentioned above, the Obama administration,  the EU, academia, human rights NGO's and celebrities set their sites on attacking Israel, making Israel a pariah, singling out Israel with calls for boycotts and sanctions. What is wrong with this picture? Can there be any logical explanation but antisemitism? If the west thinks it will buy its safety and security by throwing Israel under the bus, they will face a great reckoning. It didn't work when they sold out Czechoslovakia and rounded up their Jewish citizens and handed them over to the nazis, and it won't work now.

Roger Waters calls on fellow artists to join Israel boycott

In public Facebook post, former Pink Floyd lead singer Roger Waters calls on singer Neil Young and actress Scarlet Johansson to support a cultural boycott of Israel • Waters, who performed in Israel in 2006, has become an ardent BDS backer.
Saar Gamzo
Former Pink Floyd lead singer Roger Waters 
 Photo credit: AP

Sunday, February 2, 2014

Kerry Threatens Israel, Again

Why not threaten the "palestinians" with boycotts if they don't stop terrorism and incitement? John Kerry is reprehensible. But then again, is this a surprise coming from a man who betrayed his own country and fellow soldiers during Vietnam?

Kerry warns of boycott against Israel if peace deal not reached
US secretary of state makes remarks at Munich Security Conference; Deputy defense minister Danon slams Kerry's remarks saying that Israel will "not negotiate with gun to its head."
US Secretary of State John Kerry believes Israel could face an economic boycott if the current round of peace negotiations with the Palestinians does not lead to a final deal. Kerry made the remarks on Saturday at the Munich Security Conference.

"There's an increasing de-legitimization campaign that has been building up. People are very sensitive to it. There are talk of boycotts and other kinds of things, Kerry said, referring to the possible failure of the talks.

Economy Minister Naftali Bennett (Bayit Yehudi) reacted strongly to Kerry's remarks.

"No nation has ever given up its land because of economic threats and we won't either," Bennett said.

"Only security will bring economic stability, not a terror state near Ben Gurion Airport," he added. "We expect our friends in the world to stand by us during attempts at an anti-Semitic boycott of Israel, instead of being their megaphone."

"Either way, we knew in the past and know today how to stand strong," Bennett warned.

Deputy Defense Minister, Danny Danon (Likud-Beytenu), also criticized Kerry's boycott related remarks on Saturday.

"We respect the [US] secretary of state but we will not negotiate with a gun put to our head," Danon said.

Danon called Kerry's words an "ultimatum", and said that true friends do not set ultimatums.

"We will make decisions that protect Israel's interests," Danon added, "If we had made decisions according to every boycott threat, we would not be here today."

Deputy Minister in the Prime Minister's Office Ofir Akunis (Likud Beytenu) echoed Bennett and Danon's criticism. "We were here before him [Kerry] and we'll be here after him."

"Kerry is using an aggressive policy against Israel, which is not bringing peace any closer," Akunis added.

On the other side of the political spectrum, MK Nachman Shai (Labor) agreed with Kerry's boycott fears and said Israel is facing an "economic tsunami" and that boycotts have "passed the point of no return."

"Together with other sanctions, the international community is starting a joint battle to pressure Israel," Shai stated. "Our nightmare is coming true and the government refuses to understand that things will never be the same."

Meretz leader Zehava Gal-On also in line with Kerry's boycott fear called on Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu to stop settlement construction in the West Bank.

"Continuing the occupation and settlements are not acceptable anymore not just to European countries but to banks and private companies," Gal-On stated. "Their decisions can turn Israel into an outcast country, isolated like Cuba and South Africa."

"The prime minister needs to wake up, because the world is losing patience and the threat of boycotts on Israel grows from day to day," Gal-On added.

Along with his boycott warning Kerry remained hopeful that the Obama administration's effort to broker a peace deal between could succeed.

"I'm not going to sit here and give you a measure of optimism, but I will give you a full measure of commitment," Kerry said.

The United States hopes to complete a "framework" accord in coming weeks and will then try to negotiate a final peace deal by the end of 2014, a US official said this week, according to a participant in a briefing with American Jewish leaders.

"I am hopeful and we will keep working on it," Kerry, who despite widespread skepticism is leading the US effort to push the two sides toward a deal, said during remarks at the Munich security conference.

"I believe in the possibility or I wouldn't pursue this," he said. "I don't think we're being quixotic ... We're working hard because the consequences of failure are unacceptable."

US envoy Martin Indyk said the framework would address core issues in the conflict, including borders, security, refugees and Jewish settlements, a participant in the briefing said.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's coalition, which includes pro-settler parties, has already shown signs of strain over talks on Palestinian statehood.

Rewarding Iran, Punishing Israel

Such is the low moral state of the free world that countries are lining up to do business with Iran while threatening sanctions and boycotts against Israel. Israel has a gun to its head to surrender territory to terrorists and throw Jews out of their homes, while Iran is being rewarded for continuing to develop nuclear weapons and threatening genocide.

Obama and Iran in business
By JPost Editorial01/02/2014
The early bird really does catch the worm and, mindful of that, European firms are rushing with headlong alacrity to do deals with Iran.
The early bird really does catch the worm and, mindful of that, European firms are rushing with headlong alacrity to do deals with Iran – even though pro forma only some sanctions on the ayatollah regime have been lifted.

Europe’s eagerness might well give the impression to the uninitiated that all sanctions were dropped.

It seems reentering the Iranian market is a chance not to be missed for a gamut of concerns – from banks and financial conglomerates to the oil and gas sector and even car makers and assorted other manufacturers.

The French, for example, are flying planeloads of executives from no fewer than 100 firms for “exploratory talks” hot on the heels of the partial sanctions suspension.

Their German, Dutch and Swiss counterparts are not far behind. Simultaneously, from Asia come equally keen Chinese and Indian overtures toward Tehran.

While Europeans and Asians fall over themselves to restore chumminess with Iran – its terror-mongering and nuclear machinations notwithstanding – the international community is awash with amplified boycott threats against democratic Israel.

Washington, which once spearheaded sanctions but has now eased them, is setting the tone for the surge of interest in the Iranian economy.

The Islamic Republic’s business boosters could only take heart from US President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address on Tuesday. His principal foray into the mine field of foreign relations was to declare his intention to veto the conditional sanctions bill sponsored by a bipartisan group of senators – 13 Democrats and 13 Republicans. This bill would exacerbate sanctions only in the event that negotiations with Iran on a final agreement fail.

Ostensibly, this should not rile Obama, as it reinforces his bargaining position.

But instead, the US leader exploited his most important annual address to put his political weight behind the Iranians against a bipartisan coalition representing the majority of American congressmen. This is nothing if not extraordinary.

Obama appears to side with his Iranian interlocutors, who had already lashed out against the legislation, warning that its passage would scuttle the interim agreement reached in Geneva in November. But that is patently specious. The bill’s very rationale is that sanctions would be intensified only if talks fail.

Obama acknowledges that Tehran was compelled to accept the interim agreement because the sanctions inflicted substantial pain on its economy. The natural assumption then should be that Iran would be motivated to be more accommodating by the prospect of tougher constraints on its oil exports, access to bank holdings abroad and funding for assorted construction and other projects in the country.

The inescapable conclusion is that Obama – in the name of diplomatic prudence – has come out forcefully in defense of the Iranian position while Iran and the US in continue to be at loggerheads, including on how to interpret the interim deal.

Tehran, in other words, can literally stick to its guns and evince an extreme hardnosed approach, while Washington’s response is implausible indulgence that triggers an unnerving competition in Europe and Asia for Iranian business.

If anything, the Senate bill, authored by Democrat Robert Menendez and Republican Mark Kirk, might cool the ardor to curry favor with the Islamic Republic. Its unmistakable bottom line is that any investment in Iran before a final nuclear deal is struck is unsafe.

It is obvious why Iran should bristle against this measure.

The bet in Tehran is that the limited sanctions reprieve will generate an across-the-board collapse of the entire sanctions structure. This could spawn a fait accompli even if the talks are irredeemably deadlocked.

But while Iran’s self-serving logic is transparent, it is exceedingly difficult to fathom the White House’s reasoning.

The bill would not curtail Obama’s freedom to negotiate, as long as he focuses on his much-touted goal of actually dismantling Iran’s rogue nuclear project rather than settling for its sham pledges to do so.

If Obama were truly sincere in wishing to ensure Israel is safe from the menace of Iranian nukes, he surely would not oppose even such minimal pressure on the mullahs.