The Human Cost of Jihad Denial

By Robert Spencer / Front Page Magazine

Wednesday brought new confirmation of the increasingly obvious fact that the U.S. intelligence apparatus in the age of Barack Obama is woefully unprepared to deal with the foremost threat to the safety of Americans today: Islamic jihad terrorism.

Nor is this lack of preparedness due to a lack of funding (Lord knows there is plenty of that for anything Obama wants to do) or other resources. There are many people who are deeply knowledgeable in the ideology and belief system that inspires Islamic jihad terror, and they are ready and willing to share their knowledge with intelligence officials – indeed, many of them did so during the Bush Administration and the early years of the Obama Administration, before his 2011 purge the of counter-terror training materials of the truth about Islam and jihad.

That purge came after hard-Left journalistic propagandist Spencer Ackerman wrote a series of “exposes” that supposedly exposed “Islamophobia” in government counterterror training — that is, truthful information about Islam and jihad. See here and here for details. Then Farhana Khera, Executive Director of an Islamic organization called Muslim Advocates, wrote a letter on October 19, 2011 to Barack Obama’s then-Deputy National Security Advisor for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism and current CIA director John Brennan. The letter was signed by 57 organizations, including many with ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, including the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR); the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA); Islamic Relief USA; the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA); the Muslim American Society (MAS); and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC).

The letter demanded that Obama officials “purge all federal government training materials of biased materials” – that is, materials that they claimed were biased against Islam – and “implement a mandatory re-training program for FBI agents, U.S. Army officers, and all federal, state and local law enforcement who have been subjected to biased training.”

The Obama Administration immediately complied. Dwight C. Holton, former U.S. Attorney for the District of Oregon, emphasized that same day that training materials for the FBI would be purged of everything that Islamic supremacists deemed offensive: “I want to be perfectly clear about this: training materials that portray Islam as a religion of violence or with a tendency towards violence are wrong, they are offensive, and they are contrary to everything that this president, this attorney general and Department of Justice stands for. They will not be tolerated.”

And so a year and a half after this purge, on Tuesday night we learned that not only the Russians, but also the Saudis warned U.S. officials about Tamerlan Tsarnaev’s jihadist leanings. The UK’s Daily Mail reported that “the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia sent a written warning about accused Boston Marathon bomber Tamerlan Tsarnaev to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in 2012, long before pressure-cooker blasts killed three and injured hundreds, according to a senior Saudi government official with direct knowledge of the document. The Saudi warning, the official told MailOnline, was separate from the multiple red flags raised by Russian intelligence in 2011, and was based on human intelligence developed independently in Yemen.” Moreover, “a Homeland Security official confirmed Tuesday evening on the condition of anonymity that the 2012 letter exists, saying he had heard of the Saudi communication before MailOnline inquired about it.”

However, on Wednesday the Saudi Embassy in Washington denied all this. Embassy officials did not explain, however, how the DHS official who had confirmed the story the previous day got this false information. And so the question of whether or not the Saudis warned the FBI about Tamerlan Tsarnaev joins the strange story of the Saudi national who was questioned shortly after the Boston bombing – both remain full of unexplained anomalies. And Obama officials don’t appear to be in any hurry to clear up those anomalies, because it is likely that the Saudis are backtracking so as to cover up yet more evidence that the see-no-jihad, hear-no-jihad FBI ignored warnings that their politically correct training did not equip them to understand.

Also on Wednesday, three friends of jihad bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev were arrested for helping him dispose of material connected to the jihad bombings. These arrests followed assurances from numerous officials that the Tsarnaev brothers acted alone.

That made two intelligence failures in one day: the thorough discrediting of the widely circulated claim that the bombers acted alone, and news of a second country warning the U.S. about a jihadist at a time when U.S. officials are not allowed to know what a jihadist is.

On Tuesday, Spencer Ackerman complained that the examination of counterterror procedures that Obama promised during his press conference that day was unlikely to bear fruit. He noted that James “Clueless” Clapper, the director of national intelligence, was overseeing that review, and “yet before the inquiry has concluded, Clapper is satisfied — as he first said last week, before any review even got started — that the intelligence agencies didn’t drop the ball on Boston.”

He should be grateful for that. If the Obama Administration’s review of the massive intelligence failures related to the Boston jihad bombing were thorough, it would lead directly to him.

In any case, Wednesday’s revelations show the human cost of the denial of the reality and magnitude of the jihad threat. Three people are dead and well over 200 wounded because bumbling, ill-instructed (and in many cases reeducated) FBI agents didn’t know how to understand or act upon intelligence they received from Russia and (probably) Saudi Arabia. How many more have to die before the bloody legacy of Farhana Khera, John Brennan, Spencer Ackerman and Barack Obama is decisively rejected?

Can Republicans Win the Senate in 2014?

Donald Lambro / Townhall Columnist

 

The 2014 election battle for control of the Senate will affect just about everything it does this year and next, because it could take just a handful of upsets to put the Republicans back in charge.
The two-year, midterm election cycle, which is off to a faster pace than usual in the Senate, certainly affected the gun control vote when five Democrats from conservative-leaning states voted against it.

Two of the Democrats' no votes were Sens. Mark Pryor of Arkansas and Mark Begich of Alaska who will face the voters next year in states where gun control isn't popular. The upcoming votes on immigration reform will also pose a tough test for Democrats in states where the issue is just as unpopular.

Democrats control 55 seats in the Senate, including two Independents who usually vote with them. But once again, the Republicans have a stronger numerical advantage in next year's Senate races, because 21 Democratic seats are at stake compared to just 14 for the Republicans.

Making matters even tougher for Democrats, six of their seats will be open races due to retirements.

The GOP has a better than even chance of picking up four of them: Iowa (Tom Harkin), Montana (Max Baucus), South Dakota (Tim Johnson) and West Virginia (John D. Rockefeller).

The Cook Political Report, which closely tracks House and Senate races, calls all four contests pure "toss ups."

The widely-followed Rothenberg Political Report rates the West Virginia race somewhere between a toss-up to "Tilt Republican."

At this writing, only two Senate Republicans are retiring: Sen. Saxby Chambliss of Georgia and Mike Johanns of Nebraska. Both seats are considered safe for the GOP.

In fact, Cook says all 14 Republican seats up next year are either "likely" to remain in GOP hands or "solid" slam dunks for the party.

If the GOP were to win all the toss-up races, they would need just two more seats to control the Senate, which may not be likely at this point but it's not impossible, according to election handicappers.

Notably, Cook puts these six Democratic seats in the shakier "lean Democratic" column: Sens. Mark Begich, Alaska; Mark Pryor, Arkansas; Mary Landrieu, Louisiana; Al Franken, Minnesota; Kay Hagan, North Carolina; and retiring Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan.

Depending upon their Republican opponents -- and it's too early to assess that lineup -- the GOP has a chance to take over the Senate with the right candidates.

And with the right issues -- which, as of now, appear to be rapidly trending against the Democrats on a number of fronts.

Certainly, the battered economy will be front and center in the months to come and the Democrat's base may be growing tired of waiting for a dramatic turnaround that isn't visible on the economic horizon.

Right now, it's painfully clear that the Obama economy is slowing down and the national news media seems to be stepping up its criticism of a weak job market, and the Democrats' failure to do anything about it.

In the run up to this week's Fed meeting, "economic data took a turn for the worse. Hiring slowed dramatically in March to just 88,000 jobs -- well below the 200,000 a month needed to significantly lower the unemployment rate," the Washington Post said Thursday.

An ADP Employment Report forecasts only 119,000 new jobs were created in April. That led Mark Zandi, chief economist at Moody's Analytics, which compiles the job figures, to say the economy appears to be "throttling back" on the jobs front.

"It probably forestalls any increase in unemployment, but it's certainly not enough to generate any declines in unemployment," Zandi said.

The Fed said Wednesday that it will keep its benchmark interest rate near zero until the unemployment rate drops below 6.5 percent. But both the Fed and Congressional Budget Office forecasts do not see the jobless rate falling below that level this year or next.

In his widely read Washington Post blog titled, "The Incredible Stagnant U.S. Economy," economic analyst Neil Irwin said the first quarter's 2.5 percent economic growth rate -- almost one point below expectations, showed that "We're still stuck in the muck."

GDP growth is not expanding "fast enough to spur the robust recovery that the country needs," he writes.

If this situation persists or worsens this year and next, the midterm races could turn out to be a more compelling referendum on President Obama's economic policies. In fact, GOP officials are already talking about making the weak economy the centerpiece of their midterm election strategy, urging GOP candidates to pound the Democratic-controlled Senate and the administration for their failure to come to grips with this issue.

Moreover, the grassroots political dynamics are going to be very different for the Democrats in 2014 than they were in 2012.

Voter turnout will be significantly lower, as it usually is in midterm elections. Obama's base will not be streaming to the polls in the same record numbers for congressional races. It will be an election driven on the margins by voters who are angry over the economy, fewer jobs, flat incomes, sharply rising health care costs and insurance premiums, gas prices, gun control, and maybe the outcome of the immigration debate.

Obama's mediocre job approval score is polling around 50 percent, with 44 percent of Americans disapproving, an embarrassing grade at the start of a second term. It's not very hard to see his numbers falling below that, especially if things aren't seen to be improving in the sixth year of his presidency.

Americans are, by nature, impatient. All they ask of their leaders is to find the problem and fix it, and they've given Obama and the Democrats plenty of time do that, without any significant results.

The midterm elections will be their next chance to send the president and Congress a message that their patience has come to an end.

The Left's Sick Fetish for Cop-Killing Radicals

Michelle Malkin / Townhall Columnist

There's a stomach-turning segment of the American population that sees surviving Boston bomber suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev as a romantic maverick. The New York Times mused about the accused jihadist's "Holden Caulfield-like adolescent alienation." Pop singer Amanda Palmer wrote a fan girl "Poem for Dzhokhar." An adoring "Free Jahar" movement thrives on social media.

 

Fringe, you say? Think again. The fetish for cop-killing fugitives and cop-hating radicals is a mainstay of Hollywood, academia, the liberal media and Democratic Party circles. It has persisted for decades. It reared its head on May Day with rock-hurling anarchists in Seattle and D.C. shouting "F**k the pigs" and kicking cops. And consider the exaltation of the woman just named to the FBI's Most Wanted Terrorist list, Joanne Chesimard.

On Thursday, the feds announced that they are doubling their reward for the capture of Chesimard (a.k.a. "Assata Shakur"). The former Black Panther and Black Liberation Army agitator has been a fugitive from justice for nearly 40 years and openly thumbs her nose at her victim's family while living in Cuba as a political asylee. Congressional Black Caucus members have stubbornly protested extradition efforts, invoking the poisonous race card and deifying Chesimard as a "political prisoner." Columbia University professor Marc Lamont Hill glorifies her as a "freedom fighter."

Just last week, rapper Common added an Assata Shakur tribute verse to Jay Z's recent "Open Letter" rap defending his wedding anniversary trip to Chesimard's sanctuary of Cuba. "The same way they say she was a shooter, Assata Shakur, they tried to execute her. We should free her like we should (convicted cop-killer) Mumia (Abu Jamal)," Common proclaims.

Chesimard/Shakur is the godmother of the late Tupac Shakur, a gangsta rapper whose genre spawned NWA's "F**k tha Police," Ice-T's "Cop Killer" and The Game's "911 is a Joke" ("I ought to shoot 51 officers for the 51 times that boy was shot in New York").

Mic check this: In 1973, Chesimard shot and killed New Jersey state trooper Werner Foerster execution-style during a traffic stop. The gunfight also left her brother-in-law, Black Liberation Army leader Zayd Malik Shakur, dead. At the time, the BLA had been tied to the murders of more than 10 police officers across the country. Chesimard, Zayd Shakur and another member were wanted for questioning in the murder of two of those cops when they were stopped.

Chesimard was convicted and sentenced to life in 1977, but escaped from prison two years later with help from violent left-wing accomplices. One of those thugs, Black Liberation Army killer Tyrone Rison, admitted to participating in a series of armored-car robberies, including a $250,000 heist in the Bronx on June 2, 1981, that left a Brink's guard dead. Rison also confessed to taking part in the planning of the Rockland County, N.Y., $1.6 million Brink's robbery by left-wing domestic terrorists on October 20, 1981. Police officers Waverly Brown and Edward O'Grady and Brink's guard Peter Paige were murdered during the siege.

Chesimard's brother, Jeral Wayne Williams (a.k.a. Mutulu Shakur), was the convicted ringleader of the group responsible for murdering those law enforcement officers; he also masterminded Chesimard's escape. His release is set for February 2016.

Celebrated left-wing heroine Kathy Boudin and her then-husband David Gilbert were convicted for their role in the bloody Rockland County robbery. Boudin and Company, as I reported in March, are the inspirations for Robert Redford's new movie love letter to the Weather Underground. Boudin now holds an adjunct professorship at Columbia University's School of Social Work, along with a scholar-in-residence post at New York University, as the New York Post reported in April. The adoptive parents of her son, Rhodes scholar and Yale legal fellow Chesa Boudin, are Weather Underground militants-turned-academics Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

Susan Rosenberg, a violent "progressive" domestic terrorist who participated in bombings of the United States Capitol Building, three military installations and other sites during the 1980s, was a principal getaway coordinator for Chesimard, Shakur, Boudin, et al. After receiving a pardon from Bill Clinton, Rosenberg taught literature at John Jay College of Criminal Justice and was offered a teaching position at Hamilton College.

Blogger Bill Ardolino, whose father was a N.J. state trooper and classmate of murdered N.J. trooper Werner Foerster, recounted Chesimard's chilling lack of remorse: "After their capture, my father was part of the team assigned to guard the severely wounded Chesimard in the hospital. As the troopers stood outside of her room, she incessantly chanted, 'If I had some poison gas, I'd throw it on your white ass.' ... Today she walks free as a professor, counter-cultural heroine and published author reviewed by The New York Times: "A deftly written book ... a spellbinding tale."

From Free Assata to Free Mumia to Free Jahar, the left's police-bashing bloodlust is not just a sick joke. Their romanticizing of cold-blooded terrorism is a pathology. Twisted Dzhokhar Tsarnaev summed it up in three letters for his friends while still on the lam for committing a deadly terrorist attack, murdering a police officer and wounding another:

"LOL."

Newsmax Exclusive: US Hired al-Qaida-Linked Group to Defend Benghazi Mission

By John Rosenthal

  / Newsmax

• 5
  inShare

The Libyan militia group that the State Department hired to defend its embattled diplomatic mission in Benghazi had clear al-Qaida sympathies, and had prominently displayed the al-Qaida flag on a Facebook page for months before the deadly attack.

That organization, the February 17th Martyrs Brigade, was paid by the U.S. government to provide security at the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya. But there is no indication the Martyrs Brigade fulfilled its commitment to defend the mission on Sept. 11, when it came under attack.

The assault claimed the lives of four Americans: Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, information officer Sean Smith, and former Navy Seals Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty. Stevens was the first U.S. ambassador to be killed in the line of duty since 1979.

Several entries on the militia’s Facebook page openly profess sympathy for Ansar al-Sharia, the hardline Islamist extremist group widely blamed  for the deadly attack on the mission. The U.S. State Department did not respond to a Newsmax request for an explanation as to why the February 17th Martyrs Brigade was hired to protect the mission.

On April 23, House Republicans released an interim progress report on its investigation into the Benghazi killings. It cited “numerous reports” that “the Brigade had extremist connections, and it had been implicated in the kidnapping of American citizens as well as in the threats against U.S. military assets.”

The report also stated that just a few days before Ambassador Stevens arrived in Benghazi, the Martyrs Brigade informed State Department officials they would no longer provide security as members of the mission, including Stevens, traveled through the city.

From June 2011 to July 2012, Eric Nordstrom, the Regional Security Officer for Libya at the time, documented over 200 security threats and violent incidents threatening to U.S. personnel in Libya. Some 50 of those incidents occurred in Benghazi.

Yet despite those threats, repeated requests for additional security from the mission went unheeded by the State Department, for reasons that remain unclear.

But perhaps the biggest question is why the State Department would hire a group that openly displayed its admiration for al-Qaida, and ask it to participate in the defense of its diplomatic mission.

The banner, or “cover photo” of one of the group’s Facebook pages, shows an Islamic fighter or mujahid with a portable rocket launcher resting on his shoulder.

The distinctive black flag of al-Qaida can be seen fluttering to the man’s left, attached to the vehicle in which he is riding. The mujahid also wears a headband based on the design of the al-Qaida flag. The flag in question features the shahada or Islamic declaration of faith, and a white circle that is sometimes described as the “seal of Mohammed.”

The flag was made famous by the late Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s Iraqi al-Qaida affiliate, commonly known as “al-Qaida in Iraq.” The flag originally used by al-Qaida was a plain black flag with the shahada written on it in white. Both flags are widely used by contemporary jihadist groups.

The original cover photo on Facebook page of the February 17th Martyrs Brigade, displaying the al-Qaida banner.

An Arabic inscription written over the photo reads: “Allah, his prophet and Libya and that’s it.” The cover photo was posted by the site administrator on June 10, 2012. It represents the first activity on the Facebook page.

The photo was presumably taken at a massive rally in support of the sharia, or Islamic law, that was held in Benghazi three days earlier, on June 7. The rally included a military parade featuring units from a large cross-section of the Eastern Libyan militias that spearheaded the 2011 rebellion against Moammar Gadhafi.

Video of the event posted by local sources shows several al-Qaida flags being flown at the event. Al-Qaida-inspired accessories, such as headbands and decals, were widely displayed as well. One of the sponsoring organizations of the rally was none other than Ansar al-Sharia. The term Ansar al-Sharia means “supporters of the sharia.” Sharia is Islamic law and regulations.

On June 15, five days after the photo was posted, the February 17th Martyrs Brigade updated the cover photo on the Facebook page, replacing the image by a photo montage featuring its own logo and a masked commando sporting the colors of the new Libyan national flag on a shoulder patch.

The cover photo has been further updated several times since then. It is clear, however, that the group has repudiated neither al-Qaida nor its violent ideology.

On June 28, for example, the brigade posted a second graphic bearing a headline title that translates to: “The bearded [man] is suspect until he proves he is not a Muslim!!!”

The graphic features two rows of pictures. The top row consists of bearded Muslim men. The images include some of the leading figures of modern-day jihadism, including al-Qaida founder Osama bin Laden, and the founder of al-Qaida in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. The Arabic text on the graphic states the Muslims are accused of various faults, including “terrorism” and “extremism.”

The second row shows bearded non-Muslims (including the likes of Tolstoy, Che Guevara and George Bernard Shaw). The caption suggests the Western world sees the bearded non-Muslims as intelligent, and holds them in high esteem.

To drive home the point,  the graphic includes a quotation from the Quran: “Then will we treat Muslims like criminals? What is the matter with you? How do you judge?”

The implication is that the Muslims in the top row, including Osama bin Laden, have been unfairly labeled.

Graphic from Facebook page of the February 17th Martyrs Brigade

Several entries on the Facebook page make clear the brigade’s sympathies for the Ansar al-Sharia militia, which allegedly has al-Qaida ties. In the Western media, Ansar al-Sharia has been widely accused of having perpetrated the September 11 Benghazi attacks.

An entry posted a few days after the deadly Benghazi attacks, on Sept. 19, laments the death of an Ansar al-Sharia member. It asks God to “receive him amongst the martyrs” and to receive him “into his wide paradise.” The entry points out that the deceased, one Adham al-Falastini, was previously a member of the February 17th Martyrs Brigade.

Another revealing entry, posted on June 25, 2012, shows a graphic from a now defunct Ansar al-Sharia Facebook page. It carries a warning from Ansar al-Sharia about the distribution of pens bearing an image of the Virgin Mary.  The graphic cautions against propagating beliefs that Muslims should scorn.

A warning from Ansar al-Sharia about “Virgin Mary pens.” Graphic reproduced on a Facebook page of the February 17th Martyrs Brigade.

At least two recent entries on the February 17th Martyrs Brigade site feature the Ansar al-Sharia logo. One of these, dated Jan. 29, suggests that Ansar al-Sharia is the target of a “treacherous” plot to get the brigade blamed for various attacks and assassination attempts.
The other, dated Jan. 20, announces that Ansar al-Sharia has begun guarding the western gate of Benghazi “in the service of our religion and…of the Libyan people.”

This news, which is corroborated by other sources, is highly notable in light of Western news reports claiming Ansar al-Sharia was driven out of the city following the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. mission.

Ansar al-Sharia logo on Facebook page of February 17th Martyrs Brigade

A more recent entry, dated March 2, features a graphic celebrating Jabhat al-Nusra, the offshoot of Al-Qaida in Iraq that has played a leading role in the Syrian insurrection against the rule of Bashar al-Assad.

Late last year, Jabhat al-Nusra was designated as a terrorist organization by the U.S. government.

In defiance of the U.S. designation, the Arabic on the graphic declares, “We are all Jabhat al-Nusra.”

The accompanying Facebook entry repeats this sentiment, and recites the exploits of the al-Qaida linked brigade in the Syrian war, including “more than 40 martyrdom operations.” The phrase “martyrdom operations” is used by jihadist groups to refer to suicide bombings.

“We are all Jabhat al-Nusra.” Graphic from a Facebook page of the February 17th Martyrs Brigade

The U.S. State Department had hired the February 17th Martyrs Brigade to provide security at the U.S. mission in Benghazi. A document recovered from the mission two days after the attack indicated the State Department had arranged for the Martyrs Brigade to act as a “Quick Reaction Force” to protect the mission. The Memorandum of Agreement states that “in the event of an attack on the U.S. mission, QRF will request additional support from the 17th February Martyrs Brigade.”

Throughout the summer leading up to the attack, embassy officials repeatedly asked the State Department for additional security. But the State Department actually reduced security, pulling out a military detachment that had been tasked with defending diplomats in Libya.

One reason the requests for additional security may have been denied: They did not fit into the administration narrative that al-Qaida elements no longer posed a threat to U.S. interests.

One diplomatic cable to the mission indicated that the U.S.-based deputy assistant secretary for diplomatic security was “reluctant to ask for [additional security] apparently out of concern that it would be embarrassing to the [State Department] to continue to have to rely on [Defense Department] assets to protect our mission.”

When the mission’s regional safety officer expressed an interest in July 2012 asking State Department official to permit the military security team to continue to protect the mission, Charlene Lamb, the deputy assistant secretary in charge of diplomatic security, sent an e-mail that responded: “NO, I do not [I repeat] not want them to ask for the [military security] team to stay!”

Republicans have complained in recent weeks that the Obama administration has been stonewalling their investigation. According to Fox News, four career officials at the State Department and the CIA have retained counsel, as they prepare to provide Congress with inside information on the attacks.

Victoria Toensing, an attorney representing one of the whistleblowers, said they have been threatened by CIA and State Department officials with repercussions if they talk to Congress about what happened in Benghazi. But President Obama said earlier this week he was “unaware” of anyone being discouraged from coming forward to tell Congress their side of the story.

House Republican Darrell Issa, chairman of the House Oversight Committee, issued a statement on Tuesday that: “Over the past two weeks, I have sent four letters requesting that this administration make information available about how lawyers -- who already have security clearances and are representing Benghazi whistleblowers -- can be cleared to fully hear their clients’ stories. I have yet to receive any responses from the Obama administration.”

The House Republicans’ Interim Progress Report concludes with an ominous warning that states: “This singular event will be repeated unless the United States recognizes and responds to the threats we face around the world, and properly postures resources and security assets to counter and respond to those threats.

“Until that time, the United States will remain in a reactionary mode and should expect more catastrophes like Benghazi, in which U.S. personnel on the ground perform bravely, but are not provided with the resources for an effective response,” the report stated.

 

Op-ed:
Obama pushes for statehood for a non-existent people 
By: Diane Sori

We all know Barack HUSSEIN Obama sides with his muslim brethren in regards to all things Israel, and he can't fool 'We the People' with his photo-op rhetoric and lies, for his actions, like SELLING Israel arms to defend themselves while freely GIVING arms to Israel's enemies, speak louder than any of his words ever can. And while he continues to try and get Arab nations (who are Israel's enemies) to support his administration's push for a Palestinian state in 2014 he, his brethren, and all the anti-Semite Jew-haters that he surrounds himself with forget one major thing...there is NO such thing as a 'Palestinian people'.

NO people means NO state...got that Barack HUSSEIN Obama...NO 'Palestinian people' means NO Palestinian state.

And while Obama believes that with Arab support a peace deal could be brokered between Israel and the so-called 'Palestinians', which most likely would NEVER happen because the so-called 'Palestinians' don't really want peace, what Obama really needs is a history lesson, a secular history lesson (we all know that the Holy Bible says Israel belongs to the Jews), and needs one fast...NOT that the facts will mean anything to him...but I'll give them to him anyway.

Fact one: The word 'Palestine' is NOT even Arabic.

The name Palestine itself is just the Romanized version of the word ‘Philistia,’ the name given to the region by Rome in the first century, naming it after the Philistines, who were enemies of the Jews. This name stayed until the end of the British Mandate period in 1947 when the modern state of Israel was born. However, Jews have always claimed this land as their homeland, with Jerusalem its capital, and with Israel its name. And the land has never been without as many Jews as the governing powers would allow. In fact, for 3,700 years Jews NOT Arabs have lived continuously in the ancient Biblical 'Promised Land of Israel', especially in Judea and Samaria.

Fact two: a stateless Palestinian people is a fabrication as Palestine is a geographical area, NOT a nationality.

Palestine has never existed as an autonomous entity nor has there ever been a Palestine governed by Palestinians, because a ‘Palestinian people’ with a Palestinian language, distinct Palestinian culture, and Palestinian nationality all their own simply does NOT exist and NEVER has existed. The so-called 'Palestinian people' were solely the creation of former PLO head Yasser Arafat, and was embellished upon by the surrounding Arab nations and the media after the humiliating Arab defeat to Israel in the '67 war. Today’s so-called ‘Palestinian people’ are just regular run of the mill Arabs indistinguishable from Jordanians, Syrians, Lebanese, Iraqis, etc...just regular Arabs who speak Arabic, whose religion is islam, and whose culture is shared by the surrounding Arab countries.

In fact, the current rhetoric by Arabs on behalf of the so-called 'Palestinian people' is just empty bloviations, because Arab leaders have never officially recognized a Palestinian entity. And remember, in 1947 the UN gave the Arabs a chance to establish an Arab and a Jewish state, when the they recommended partitioning Palestine, but the Arabs said no. Nor did the Arabs recognize or establish a Palestinian state during the two decades before the Six-Day War when the West Bank was still under Jordanian control and the Gaza Strip was under Egyptian control. And the so-called Palestinian Arabs never demanded autonomy or independence during those years under Jordanian and Egyptian rule.

So, there you go Obama...there is NO such thing as a 'Palestinian people'...period.

Therefore, a non-existent people are NOT entitled to a homeland, especially a homeland at the expense of our ally and friend Israel. Let the so-called 'Palestinian peoples' own Arab brethren and nations absorb them into the 99.9% of the land making up the rest of the Middle East, and leave the tiny sliver of land known as Israel alone.

Got that Obama, leave Israel alone, because if you and your brethren don't you will NOT like the final outcome of trying to stab Israel in the back.