Israelis Forced to Bail Out Biden’s Failed Gaza Aid Pier 3 US Soldiers injured. 1 seriously. by Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/israelis-forced-to-bail-out-bidens-failed-gaza-aid-pier/

Biden wasted over $300 million and two months, put the lives of American soldiers to set up a pier that was supposed to provide a permanent port to move materials in and out of Gaza. I argued at the time that it was meant to be a ‘Trojan Pier” that would lock Israel out of the process.

While administration officials describe the pier as “temporary”, a senior official also admitted that “we look forward to the port transitioning to a commercially operated facility over time.”

That means it’s not actually meant to be temporary, but a permanent port for the terrorists.

That looks like it won’t be happening because the whole JLOTS setup didn’t account for the weather.

Portions of the floating pier already had to be brought to the Israeli port of Ashdod after stormy weather. And now portions of the pier have broken off and need to be taken in for repairs. Some US Navy vessels were also apparently beached. 3 soldiers were reportedly injured while one remains in critical condition. And the only end result of the pier was a lot of damage and some limited supplies delivered to Hamas.

The damage, first reported by NBC News, occurred three days after heavy seas forced two small US Army vessels to beach in Israel, according to US Central Command, while another two vessels broke free of their moorings and were anchored near the pier.

The Globalist Perversion of Justice Agendas over principles. Bruce Thornton

https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-globalist-perversion-of-justice/

The International Criminal Court is seeking warrants to arrest Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and Defense Minister Yoav Gallant, along with three Hamas chiefs, one of whom was the mastermind of the October 7 massacre. A German government official has pledged to execute the warrant should Israel’s Prime Minister set foot on German soil.

This shameful stunt––like South Africa’s earlier charges of genocide against Israel via the International Court of Justice ––reminds us of the moral idiocy and political corruption of what British historian Corelli Barnett called “moralizing internationalism.” That century-long attempt to set aside human nature as it actually is, and replace violent conflicts with “diplomatic engagement,” international law, and transnational institutions like the ICC, has now reached its reductio ad absurdum with its disgraceful and hypocritical bout of moral preening.

The ICC was created in 1998, and like most of the “rules based international order” since the League of Nations, it came into being at a time of feckless optimism––the West’s arrogant pretensions that the tragic nature of interstate relations had ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Liberal democracy and free-market capitalism, human rights and justice under law, were now poised to expand freedom and prosperity to the whole world. With peace and trade, nationalist and ideological passions along with autocratic gangster regimes would wither away, and with them armed conflict.

Typical of this wishful thinking were the sentiments George H.W. Bush proclaimed in 1991, when he announced a “new world order . . . where diverse nations are drawn together in common cause to achieve the universal aspirations of mankind––peace and security, freedom, and the rule of law.”

Yet despite the repudiation of this idealism on 9/11 by the horrific display of diverse creeds and beliefs about justice and violence, George W. Bush doubled-down with dubious begged questions. In the 2002 National Security Strategy, Bush defined U.S. foreign policy as a focus on the promotion of a “single sustainable model for national success: freedom, democracy, and free enterprise,” for “these values of freedom are right and true for every person across the globe. We will actively work to bring the hope of democracy, development, free markets, and free trade to every corner of the world.”

However, subsequent history has exposed the arrogance and naïveté of this radical simplification of global diversity, which comprises an irreducible complexity of ethnicities, histories, cultures, religions, ambitions, traditions, and notions of honor and vengeance. As such, many of these global folkways necessarily conflict with our own, and those diverse markers of identity make many peoples resent the power and influence the West possesses.

Guess Which ‘Moderate’ Palestinian Terrorist Group Participated In the October 7 Massacre by Bassam Tawil

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20668/fatah-october-7-atrocities

[Other groups that] participated in the October 7 massacre…. include Palestinian Islamic Jihad — and Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, the armed wing of the Fatah faction headed by none other than the president of the Palestinian Authority (PA), Mahmoud Abbas.

The involvement of terrorists from Abbas’s Fatah faction in the October 7 slaughter and terrorist attacks against Israeli soldiers and civilians, however, may surprise some people. Many in the West consider Fatah, which dominates the PA, to be a “moderate” party that wants to live in peace and harmony with Israel. This rumor may have come about because we have been told many times by Palestinian officials that Fatah’s armed wing, Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, was dismantled (at least in the West Bank).

Earlier this month, Abu Mohammed, the official spokesman for Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, revealed that the group’s fighters participated in the Hamas-led October 7 attack on Israeli communities near the border with the Gaza Strip.

In another recent video, Fatah claimed responsibility for a “sniper operation” against Israeli soldiers in Jabalya refugee camp, a stronghold of Hamas and PIJ in the Gaza Strip. The Fatah terrorists said that they used a Hamas-manufactured rifle called Al-Ghoul to target the Israeli soldiers. The video is clear evidence that Abbas’s Fatah loyalists have been working in coordination with Hamas.

That Fatah participated in the October 7 massacre and other terrorist attacks shows that there is really little if no distinction between Mahmoud Abbas’s Fatah, and Hamas. It also demonstrates why, after Hamas is removed from power, the Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority absolutely cannot be trusted to rule the Gaza Strip. Both Fatah and Hamas continue to engage in terrorism and are outspokenly proud of their attacks on Jews. Fatah and Hamas seem, in fact, to be competing to prove to the Palestinians who is carrying out more terrorist attacks against Israel.

So long as Abbas and Fatah are producing and arming terrorists, all plans by the Biden administration to “revitalize” the Palestinian Authority are worthless. If the Biden administration is sincere about reforming the PA, it ought to begin by insisting that Abbas disband his own terrorist organization and stop endorsing terrorists and compensating them with monthly payments. Until then, handing over the Gaza Strip to Abbas and his Fatah terrorists would be a monstrous mistake.

A Chill Has Fallen Over Jews in Publishing By James Kirchick

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/27/opinion/publishing-literary-antisemitism.html

This month, an account on X with the handle @moyurireads and 360 followers published a link to a color-coded spreadsheet classifying nearly 200 writers according to their views on the “genocide” in Gaza. Titled “Is Your Fav Author a Zionist?,” it reads like a cross between Tiger Beat and “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion.”

The novelist Emily St. John Mandel, the author of “Station Eleven” and “Sea of Tranquility,” earned a red “pro-Israel/Zionist” classification because, according to the list’s creator, she “travels to Israel frequently talks favorably about it.” Simply for posting a link to the Israeli chapter of the Red Cross, the novelist Kristin Hannah was deemed a “Zionist,” as was the author Gabrielle Zevin for delivering a book talk to Hadassah, a Jewish women’s organization. Needless to say, the creator of the list — whose post on X announcing it garnered over a million views within a few days — encourages readers to boycott any works produced by “Zionists.”

The spreadsheet is but the crudest example of the virulently anti-Israel — and increasingly antisemitic — sentiment that has been coursing through the literary world since the Hamas massacre of Oct. 7. Much of it revolves around the charge of genocide and seeks to punish Zionists and anyone else who refuses to explicitly denounce the Jewish state for allegedly committing said crime. Since a large majority of American Jews (80 percent of whom, according to a 2020 poll, said that caring about Israel is an important or essential part of their Judaism) are Zionists, to accuse all Zionists of complicity in genocide is to anathematize a core component of Jewish identity.

Over the past several months, a litmus test has emerged across wide swaths of the literary world effectively excluding Jews from full participation unless they denounce Israel. This phenomenon has been unfolding in progressive spaces (academia, politics, cultural organizations) for quite some time. That it has now hit the rarefied, highbrow realm of publishing — where Jewish Americans have made enormous contributions and the vitality of which depends on intellectual pluralism and free expression — is particularly alarming.

As is always and everywhere the case, this growing antisemitism is concomitant with a rising illiberalism. Rarely, if ever, do writers express unanimity on a contentious political issue. We’re a naturally argumentative bunch who — at least in theory — answer only to our own consciences.

To compel them to express support or disapproval for a cause is one of the cruelest things a society can do to writers, whose role is to tell society what they believe, regardless of how popular the message may be. The drawing up of lists, in particular, is a tactic with a long and ignominious history, employed by the enemies of literature — and liberty — on both the left and the right. But the problem goes much deeper than a tyro blacklist targeting “Zionists.”

The ICC’s War Crimes by Caroline Glick

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/20665/icc-war-crimes

Far from starving or deliberately killing civilians, Israel is doing more to protect the lives of the Palestinian population in the Gaza Strip than any military has done to protect the lives of civilians in war zones in human history.

The ICC’s goal in propagating this slander against the Jewish state is to criminalize the State of Israel and pave the way for its annihilation by denying it the right to self-defense.

[I]t is also illegal. The ICC has no jurisdiction over Israel. Israel is not a signatory of the Rome Treaty, which founded the ICC, and set out its powers and jurisdiction. To get around that fact, the ICC illegally accepted “Palestine” as a signatory to the treaty.

The PA was established in 1994 by force of the bilateral agreements the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) signed with Israel during the 1990s. Those agreements —popularly known as the “Oslo Accords”— bar the PA from seeking membership as a sovereign state in international bodies, including the ICC.

Unlike the libelous accusations Khan raised against Israel’s elected leaders, Khan’s provision of material support for Hamas’s war of genocide is an actual war crime.

First, the United States should indict Hamas’s terror masters, including senior leaders Yahya Sinwar, Mohamed Deif, Ismail Haniyeh, and other top Hamas terrorists for the murder, rape, kidnapping and torture of U.S. citizens on and since Oct. 7. Not only should these war criminals not get a free pass for their actions, they should be held criminally liable by real courts, as opposed to the ICC’s kangaroo court….

Second, Khan and his associates should be charged with extortion of U.S. elected officials…. [O]n May 3, the ICC issued a statement that Khan posted on his X account, threatening action against anyone acting against them.

As Netanyahu explained, the ICC’s move against Israel won’t daunt him as he leads the country in this difficult war for national survival. But actions taken against Israel by the ICC and similarly corrupt international bodies form noxious precedents that can be used in the future against free nations fighting genocidal terror armies and regimes. If permitted to proceed unpunished for its crimes, the ICC will gain in power and stature. And just as it is using its power against the lone Jewish state today, so it will use it against the United States tomorrow.

Signs of America’s Declining Power and the Emerging Multipolar World If we want our country to be safe and powerful, we should start on the firm foundations of respect for peace, human life, and other nations’ sovereignty. By Christopher Roach

https://amgreatness.com/2024/05/28/signs-of-americas-declining-power-and-the-emerging-multipolar-world/

During Bush’s years as president, Democrats frequently criticized his foreign policy, complaining that he acted like a cowboy, pursuing wars unilaterally without the imprimatur of the “international community.” Internationalism was a particular obsession of 2004 Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry, who lambasted the Bush administration for snubbing the United Nations and upsetting France with its Iraq policy.

Obama was mostly a darling of foreign leaders, as he ceded American power and prestige in a bid to right what he considered the historic wrongs of colonialism and western chauvinism. This was evident in his obsession with completing the Iran deal, participating in the Kyoto accords, assisting NATO attacks on Libya and Syria, and in the general tone of public diplomacy during the Arab Spring.

That said, America made quite a few interventions in the Obama years, especially in the second term, and we largely called the shots.

A Fake “International Community”

For all the talk of the international community, it was mostly a fig leaf for American unilateralism no matter which party was in charge. This practice extended from the Clinton presidency through Obama’s. When the United Nations would not approve something, we went to NATO. And when NATO wouldn’t get involved, we acted unilaterally, as in the early attacks on Syria or the targeted killing policy employed against al Qaeda

This is another way of saying that the United States acted as the sole superpower since the end of the Cold War, and this prevailed regardless of the party in power. There were some arguments on the margins, but every administration embraced this prerogative to impose the American vision of a “rules-based international order.” Even Trump, who ran on an America First platform, supported American unilateralism in Syria and expanded the provision of lethal aid to Ukraine.

In practice, the UN, NATO, and other institutions were there either to supply resources and allow the appearance of multilateralism or they were safely ignored. The United States had little fear of the International Criminal Court or the myriad other international institutions because it funded most of them, and they were effectively powerless in the face of American opposition.

The International Court of Justice: Can Israel Expect To Be Treated Fairly? A careful look at the current 15 justices. Hugh Fitzgerald

https://www.frontpagemag.com/the-international-court-of-justice-can-israel-expect-to-be-treated-fairly/

The list of the current 15 justices on the International Court of Justice bodes ill for Israel.

Here is that list:

The President of the Court is Nawaf Salam, a Muslim from Lebanon.

The Vice-President is Julia Sebitunde of Uganda. Religion unknown.

Judge Peter Tomka of Slovakia.

Judge Ronny Abraham of France.

Abraham is a native of Egypt, possibly a Copt. He is the author of, inter alia, Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. That title includes the phrase “Occupied Palestinian Territory,” which makes clear where his sympathies lie.

Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf of Somalia. A Muslim.

Judge Xue Hanqin, China.

China is now being swept by an anti-Israel and antisemitic campaign in the media, promoted by the government. Judge Hanqin would not dare to defy the policies of the Chinese government.

The EU’s empire of censorship Brussels’ war on ‘hate speech’ and ‘disinformation’ is a brazen attack on democracy. Norman Lewis

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/05/27/the-eus-empire-of-censorship/

There is another war going on in Europe outside of Ukraine. It is one being waged by the EU elites, over what can be said, heard and thought. This is a war against ‘hate speech’ and ‘disinformation’, which the EU claims pose an existential threat to democracy. In truth, it is the Eurocrats’ censorious designs that are the real danger to Europeans’ liberties.

With the European Parliament elections fast approaching in June, the EU has ramped up its censorship campaign. Last month, several mayors of Brussels attempted to forcibly shut down the NatCon Brussels event. And last week, European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen pledged to create a ‘European Democracy Shield’ if she were re-elected for a second term. She says this would combat ‘foreign interference and manipulation’ by establishing a new unit dedicated to detecting and removing online disinformation.

Von der Leyen’s speech follows a similar one made in January by EU foreign-policy chief Josep Borrell. He warned that disinformation is ‘not about a bomb that can kill you, it is about a poison that can colonise your minds… [that] spreads like a cancer and puts the health of our democracies at risk’.

Not to be outdone, Věra Jourová, European Commission vice-president for values and transparency, spoke dramatically of ‘rivers of dirt and hatred and lies’ at a conference organised by the European Digital Media Observatory last week. She also suggested that the EU must increasingly deploy AI to ‘detect manipulation’ and ‘better enforce what is qualified as crime’.

Brussels’ warnings about hate speech and disinformation have become almost apocalyptic.

The smearing of JK Rowling How the lies of trans activists turned a beloved children’s author into an international hate-figure. Lauren Smith

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/05/28/the-smearing-of-jk-rowling/

If you’d have said 10 years ago that JK Rowling would become the No1 hate figure of the cultural elites, people would have thought you were mad.

Until quite recently, she was a beloved children’s author, whose Harry Potter series is credited with turning a generation of young people on to literature. The only people who raged against her were ultra-religious Christians in the US, terrified that her ‘Satanic’ novels would teach their children the ways of witchcraft.

For most of her career, Rowling was embraced by the great and the good. After all, she was immaculately liberal-left. She voted Labour. She loved Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton. She voted Remain in the EU referendum. She was outspoken about feminism and women’s rights. What could she possibly be demonised for?

The answer? She believes in a thing called biological sex. She doesn’t believe that men can become women – views that are held by the vast majority of the population.

In 2018, her dark secret began to surface. Rowling had long been an active user of X, or Twitter as it was known back then. And it came to light that she had ‘liked’ a tweet describing transwomen as ‘men in dresses’. This was back when the trans issue had barely entered mainstream consciousness. So, when Rowling’s spokesperson claimed she had liked the tweet by accident, there was an element of plausible deniability.

Then, in 2019, Rowling made her views plain. This was the year that researcher Maya Forstater was forced out of her job at a think-tank due to her trans-sceptical opinions. Forstater took her case to court and eventually established that gender-critical beliefs must be protected from discrimination under the UK Equality Act. Rowling tweeted her support.

‘Dress however you please’, she said, ‘call yourself whatever you like. Sleep with any consenting adult who’ll have you. Live your best life in peace and security. But force women out of their jobs for stating that sex is real? #IStandWithMaya.’

This raised the hackles of some among Rowling’s audience. But it wasn’t until the next year that the campaign against her really took off.

In June 2020, Rowling took to Twitter again to mock the use of awkward and nonsensical ‘trans-inclusive’ phrases to describe women. Responding to a headline which used the phrase ‘people who menstruate’, Rowling quipped: ‘I’m sure there used to be a word for those people. Someone help me out. Wumben? Wimpund? Woomud?’

Later that month, she responded to this Twitter controversy with a lengthy essay on her blog. Here, she clearly – and compassionately – articulated her position on the gender issue. In it, she made clear that she has no problem with transgender people. But she is concerned that the attempt to erase biological sex threatens hard-won rights. She is worried about the effects trans ideology might have on female healthcare, education, child safeguarding, freedom of speech – all completely valid concerns, you might think.

CHAPTER 20: In Their Own Words: The Sexual Revolution Begins in Kindergarten Space Is No Longer the Final Frontier—Reality Is (forthcoming release July 2024)

https://goudsmit.pundicity.com/27806/chapter-20-in-their-own-words-the-sexual

Pundicity page: goudsmit.pundicity.com  and website: lindagoudsmit.com 

Planned Parenthood[i] is the instrument of “transformative sexual change” in the United States. Marketed as scientificand evidence-based, transformative sexual change advocates changing restrictive laws that hinder the exercise of reproductive rights, and transforming social norms that perpetuate prejudices on reproductive rights. Over 40 percent of the organization’s revenue comes from your tax dollars in the form of government reimbursements and grants. Planned Parenthood (PP) is a political organization that disguises its political agenda as health education. My last book, The Collapsing American Family: From Bonding to Bondage (Chapter 10, “The Scheme and the Schemers Determined to Reeducate America”), exposes Planned Parenthood’s infiltration of the classroom, and its catastrophic Marxist agenda.

In an August 20, 2020, Daily Signal article, “Problematic Women: Planned Parenthood Ideology ‘Killing the Family,’ Ex-Volunteer Says,”[ii] Monica Cline, former volunteer and “comprehensive sex educator” at Planned Parenthood, is quoted. She explains how children were being pressured and deliberately sexualized in school because no adult was offering them the alternative of abstinence.

At one point she asks a group of thirteen- and fourteen-year-olds, “Guys, do you realize you don’t have to have sex? You don’t have to have oral sex, vaginal sex, or anal sex. And if you don’t, you never have to come in contact with someone else’s body fluids.” A little girl raised her hand and said, “Ma’am, no one has ever told us that.” That was the turning point for Monica Cline. She finally and fully understood:

There is a “huge movement to normalize childhood sex.” The sex education program of Planned Parenthood is “encouraging children to dehumanize themselves and each other, making them sexually active at a young age, normalizing every sexual behavior…. By doing that those children become dependent on getting condoms and contraceptives and getting treated, and yes, even getting abortions. And so, once that dependency occurs, and the parent who is purposely left out of the picture, there’s no one else who’s really guiding those children…. They empathize with them and say, “Oh, yeah. Your mom and dad would probably be really mad to know you are sexually active. But we know it is perfectly normal, and we’re here to help you.” … It sounds so positive. But what they are really doing is creating a barrier between a family and their child, the guidance of a parent.