USA and EU embroiled in Hamas and PFLP plans to destroy Israel

[Published 6 February 2019]

Israel’s Ministry of Strategic Affairs has issued a 79 page report exposing a network of members of Hamas and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) embedded in Pro-Palestinian non-Government organisations (NGOs) based outside Israel that openly operate in the USA and European Union (EU).

The Report — “Terrorists in suits” — is a must-read - detailing:

“How terrorists came to hold key positions in NGOs promoting the Boycott Divestment and Sanction (BDS) campaign against the State of Israel; and how, through these NGOs, they exploit Western governmental funding, philanthropic foundations, financial platforms and civil society to advance their goal of dismantling the State of Israel.”

The PFLP was designated a terrorist organization by Israel in 1986, the USA (1997) and the European Union (2002) — as was Hamas by Israel (1989), the USA (1997) and the European Union (2014).

Both Hamas and PFLP Charters openly seek the elimination of the State of Israel and use NGOs to influence public opinion against Israel in furtherance of this heinous objective.

The Report names and shames the following NGO’s, identifies their areas of operation, their ties to Hamas and the PFLP and outs Hamas and PFLP members — many of them convicted terrorists — who are or have been actively involved in these organisations’ campaigns aimed at denigrating and delegitimising Israel:

1. The Palestinian BDS National Committee
2. Samidoun
3. Addameer
4. Al-Haq
5. Defense For Children International — Palestine
6. The European Coordination of Committees and Associations for Palestine
7. Palestinian Center For Human Rights
8. The Palestinian Return Centre
9. The Palestine Solidarity Campaign
10.Friends of Al-Aqsa
11.American Muslims For Palestine
12.Hamas Operatives active in NGOs in the UK: Muhammad Sawalha and Zaher Birawi

A look at just one organisation — Al-Haq —headquartered in Ramallah and operating in Judea and Samaria (West Bank), the Netherlands, France, and Northern Europe - indicates the modus operandi that similarly exist in the others.

Al-Haq (established in 1979):

1. Has Governmental Sponsors: European Union, Norway, Switzerland, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands and Ireland

2. Received Grants from Governmental Sources, 2014-2018: Over $3 million

3. Published with a group of French NGOs a report in March 2017 entitled “The Dangerous Liaisons of French Banks with the Israeli Colonization”.

4. Leads the legal effort to delegitimize Israel at the International Criminal Court in The Hague

5. Shawan Jabarin, General Director of Al-Haq since 2006, served as a senior PFLP official in the past and at least until recently maintained close ties with PFLP operatives in Judea and Samaria. Jabarin was tried and convicted for his military activity in the PFLP and has served multiple prison sentences.

Jabarin was described in a 2007 Israeli Supreme Court case by the presiding judge as:

“Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. Some of his time is spent in conducting a human rights organization, and some as an operative in an organization which has no qualms regarding murder and attempted murder, which have no relation whatsoever to rights. Quite the opposite, they reject the most basic right of all, without which there are no other rights, that is, the right to life.”

6. Three other PFLP members arrested by Israel are also identified as working or having worked for Al-Haq: Ziyad Hmeidan, Zahi Jaradat and Majed Abbadi.

European and American funding of these organisations should be banned, their offices in the USA and EU closed - and those identified as Hamas and PFLP members deported.

Terrorists in suits denigrating and delegitimising Israel in slick racist and ongoing deceptive public relations campaigns of lies and half-truths - can be just as dangerous as terrorists armed to the teeth.

The EU and America must stop being played for suckers by these Jew-hating organisations.

Author’s note: The cartoon — commissioned exclusively for this article — is by Yaakov Kirschen aka “Dry Bones” - one of Israel’s foremost political and social commentators — whose cartoons have graced the columns of Israeli and international media publications for decades. His cartoons can be viewed at Drybonesblog

Trump Or Clinton Victory Could Depend On Non-Voters

[This article was submitted for publication to Canada Free Press on 4 November 2016 but was never published.

When I enquired as to reason why - I received the following response:

CFP-Copy
09/11/2016

Dear David,

Apologies.

I just site searched the article and found it in our spam folder. For some reason unknown to us, a few of our writers — in the last week— had their submissions arrive in spam.

Not sure why this happened, but sorry it did

Brian and Judi

Russian conspiracy theorists - here is something for you to go ballistic about.]



It would indeed be ironic if the next President of the United States was determined by the number of previous voters who this time did not exercise the most fundamental right bequeathed to them by their forefathers - the inalienable right to vote.

An increase in this class of non-voters has become more likely with the release of a Washington Post-ABC News poll - which found 46% of likely voters saying Trump is more honest and deserving of trust as against 38% for Clinton. That is seen as a wide lead for Trump since both he and Clinton were tied when the same question was asked by the Washington Post-ABC poll in September.

Clinton's decline comes amidst some extraordinary events:

1. the FBI reopening an investigation into Clinton’s private email server, having found more emails on the private computer of her senior aide Huma Abedin.

2.Interim Democratic National Committee Chairperson Donna Brazile being caught out - whilst a contributor at CNN - feeding two questions to the Clinton camp likely to be asked in a Democrat debate without the knowledge of her Presidential opponent Bernie Sanders.

3. An undercover video surfacing that tied Robert Creamer - a White House visitor on 340 occasions meeting with President Obama 45 times - to plans to incite brawls at Trump rallies and illegally bus voters to polling stations.

These latest developments could influence many previous voters - both democrats and disenchanted republicans intending to vote for Clinton - into not voting.

Bernie Sanders supporters are no doubt outraged by the treatment accorded to him by two Democratic National Committee Chairpersons.

Brazile's predecessor Senator Debbie Wasserman Schultz had been forced to resign that position after hacked emails revealed a plot to embarrass and undermine Sanders in the Democratic primaries as the Democratic Party nominee.

Brazile survives - defiant, unrepentant and unscathed.

Many other Democrats might not be prepared to vote for a candidate who could be embroiled in a lengthy FBI investigation extending well into her Presidency - that could both hamstring her administration and impact on her decision making capacity.

Republican voters - such as the Bush family - affronted and publicly distancing themselves from Trump's policies and his sometimes irrational and explosive behaviour not to mention his alleged sexual indiscretions - will now reflect on voting for Clinton in the face of these latest developments but decide they still cannot vote for Trump. They could opt to vote for neither.

The crowds flocking to Trump's rallies are far larger than Clinton's. One can reasonably conclude that the enthusiasm of Trumps's supporters far outweighs that of Clinton's - and that the likelihood of Trump voters turning out to vote will probably not diminish no matter what happens in the next few days.

Voter turnout dipped from 62.3% of eligible citizens voting in 2008 to an estimated 57.5% in 2012.

The low 2012 turnout could be explained by the fact that President Barack Obama was running for his second term whilst enjoying a high popularity rating.

It would therefore be more circumspect to accept the figure of 62.3% as setting the bar that both Trump and Clinton should be watching closely as the votes are being counted.

If the voter turnout is less than 62.3% - then Trump is more likely to win. If higher than 62.3% - then Clinton is more likely to win.

There is no doubt that this has been the most volatile Presidential election campaign ever and that the popularity of both Trump and Clinton is very low.

Hopefully dedicated past voters choosing to not vote in 2016 will never again be faced with this difficult choice of rejecting both the Republican and Democratic parties nominees.


[PS:I received the following reply from Fox News pollster Larry Sabato on 10 November 2016 after I sent him this article:

David,

It’s an excellent piece. I am going to share it with my entire team; I want every one of them to read it.

I appreciate your kind words. Most people wrote to suggest an early retirement — or a firing squad! So I salute your humanity.

Best wishes,

Larry

Dr. Larry J. Sabato
Director, Center for Politics
University Professor of Politics
University of Virginia
sabato@virginia.edu]