So it is nothing less than a slap in the face of Americans that a sculpture bearing the emerald Saudi flag with a sword and the Arabic inscription, “There is no god but Allah, and Mohammed is the prophet,” was recently erected on the World Trade Center grounds, a stone’s throw away from the 9/11 memorial.
Davis Richardson reports for Observer, January 9, 2019, that the 9-foot-tall sculpture, shaped to resemble a piece of candy, celebrates Saudi Arabia’s place in the G20 Summit. It was created by French sculptor Laurence Jenkell in 2011 as part of the larger “Candy Nations” installation depicting G20 countries as sugary delights, and has since been featured in over 25 countries. All 20 sculptures are currently on display outside the Oculus shopping center.
The installation was curated and installed by the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey. In a December press release announcing the exhibit, the Port Authority said:
In its continuing efforts to transform the World Trade Center site into a dynamic space in Lower Manhattan, the Port Authority announced that beginning today it will showcase famous candy sculptures around the World Trade Center campus crafted by renowned French artist Laurence Jenkell. Each of the sculptures features flags from countries in the G20 summit, and the art work was commissioned by companies and organizations including the Chanel Foundation, the International Olympic Committee and Coca-Cola.
Sculptor Jenkell told Observer:
“I first created flag candy sculptures to celebrate mankind on an international level and pay tribute to People of the entire world. Given the unique and justified sensitivities surrounding the World Trade Center, it came to my mind to propose to remove the sculpture showcasing the flag of Saudi Arabia, or relocate it to a less sensitive location. But there is no way I can do such a thing as the flag of Saudi Arabia is entirely part of the G20 just like any other candy flag of this Candy Nations show.”
Observer points out:
Although the installation was originally created in 2011 to convey “an optimistic message of unity beneath external differences,” its placement at the World Trade Center raises questions given longstanding accusations directed toward Saudi Arabia in the aftermath of the September 11 attacks. In 2003, hundreds of families affected by the 9/11 terror attacks sued the Kingdom over its alleged involvement in harboring terrorism—given that 15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi. Last March, a U.S. federal judge rejected Saudi Arabia’s motion to drop the charges.
So it should come as no surprise than German Chancellor Angela Merkel is now outright telling European states — and all the countries in the world — that they “must today be ready to give up [their] sovereignty” as independent nation-states.
Tom Nellist reports for the UK Express that on November 23, 2018 in a speech at an event organized by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation in Berlin, titled “Parliamentarianism Between Globalisation and National Sovereignty,” German Chancellor Angela Merkel defended the United Nations migration pact signed in July by all UN member countries except the United States. Merkel said, “In this day nation states must today – should today, I say – be ready to give up sovereignty. But of course in an orderly procedure.”
In a thinly veiled attack on President Trump and populist parties in Europe, .Merkel trashed nationalism and countries that are nationalist as selfish. Instead, nation-states should cede their power to a superstate, which is a better form of nationalism. She said: “Either you are one of those who believe they can solve everything on their own and only have to think about themselves. That is nationalism in its purest form. This is not patriotism. Because patriotism is if you include others in the German interest and accept win-win situations.”
Last month, Merkel announced she was stepping down as leader of her party but not as Chancellor of Germany.
Retribution? Bloomberg Quint reports that “Hackers have released private data linked to Chancellor Angela Merkel and hundreds of other German politicians in the biggest data dump of its kind in the country. The information includes email addresses, mobile phone numbers and personal chat transcripts…. The data were leaked over the past weeks via a Twitter account called ‘G0d’ that identifies itself as based in Hamburg….”
Founded in 1888, Financial Times (FT) is an international daily newspaper, headquartered in London, with a special emphasis on business and economic news. In 2015, Acquired in 2015 by Nikkei Inc. for £844m ($1.32 billion), FT is considered the most important business read, reaching 36% of the business-financial population, 11% more than its main rival, The Wall Street Journal (WSJ).
Financial Times has just named George Soros “Person of the Year” — the ever-scheming financier who made his billionaire fortune in the wholly unproductive currency-speculation and hedge funds, and who, through his foundations, foments and funds every Leftist, western civilization-destroying machination and movement, from racial protests and the “migrant caravan” invasion of America, to Europe’s open-border policy for Muslim “migrants” and “refugees”. See:
In the words of the Financial Times, Soros is Person of the Year because he fights the “extreme right” “forces of nationalism and populism,” which is FT‘s way of commending him for championing the left, globalism and elitism.
FT also stoops low by flinging the all-purpose “anti-Semitic” label at critics of Soros, which effectively shields him from every and all criticism.
For a man facing daily attacks for his activism and liberal vision of the world, George Soros was in a curiously buoyant mood on a sunswept afternoon in Marrakesh. He had just visited South Africa, home to his first philanthropic foray in the late 1970s, when he funded black students under apartheid. This time he learnt that Soros-backed investigative media and civil society groups had helped thwart an allegedly corrupt nuclear power plant contract with Russia.
“It was a tremendous boost to reinforce my belief that we are doing something right,” says Mr Soros. “We haven’t stopped having a beneficial influence.”
Influence has come at a painfully high cost for the 88-year-old father of the hedge fund industry and one of the world’s most prominent philanthropists. From his native Hungary to his adopted America, the forces of nationalism and populism are battering the liberal democratic order he has tirelessly supported. The man once described as the only individual with a foreign policy must contend with the rise of strongmen across the globe — and a vicious backlash designed to delegitimise him.
The Financial Times’s choice of Person of the Year is usually a reflection of their achievements. In the case of Mr Soros this year, his selection is also about the values he represents.
He is the standard bearer of liberal democracy and open society. These are the ideas which triumphed in the cold war. Today, they are under siege from all sides, from Vladimir Putin’s Russia to Donald Trump’s America.
For more than three decades, Mr Soros has used philanthropy to battle against authoritarianism, racism and intolerance. Through his long commitment to openness, media freedom and human rights, he has attracted the wrath of authoritarian regimes and, increasingly, the national populists who continue to gain ground, particularly in Europe….
There are so many anti-Semitic conspiracy theories targeting Mr Soros that it is difficult to keep count. Hardly a day goes by without a statement, a tweet or an image depicting him as a master manipulator of global politics.
Earlier that month, Mr Soros was the first in a series of Trump critics targeted with an explosive device sent to his suburban New York home. “I have been painted as the devil. The fact that extremists are motivated by false conspiracy theories about me to kill hurts me tremendously,” says Mr Soros. […]
In his twilight years, Mr Soros is looking beyond his formidable legacy. Having originally planned that his foundation would last his lifetime, he completed the transfer last year of $18bn from his family office to the Open Society Foundations. That reduced his fortune to $8bn, according to Forbes magazine, but ensured that his activism would take on a life of its own. And he has found a successor in philanthropy: his son, Alexander. “We fight for principles, we fight irrespective of the results, win or lose,” he says. And, almost as an afterthought, he says: “I don’t like to lose so much.”
The Danish government will not admit it, but by its decision to send (an initial) 100 “unwanted” migrants to a small island, Copenhagen effectively admits that its open door policy to mainly Muslim “migrants” and “refugees” is a failure.
According to a Danish-language report (Google Translate here) on the Danish government’s Immigration and Integration Ministry website uim.dk, which was last updated on December 4, 2018, the Danish government and the Danish People’s Party have signed an agreement on the Finance Act for 2019 with “a number of initiatives” concerning refugees and migrants.
While Denmark “helps and protects persons fleeing from war and unrest,” too many refugees who have come to Denmark in the last 20 years are “still in Denmark”. A “new approach” is needed, which “sends a clear signal that the refugee stay in Denmark is temporary and that Denmark has both the will and the ability to act quickly and efficiently when the basis for the individual’s residence permit is no longer present.”
The new agreement signed by the government is aimed at sending refugees “home as soon as possible” and to”better control who is in Denmark,” especially “foreigners who are unwanted in Denmark,” who will be “accomodated” on Lindholm, a small island southwest of the capital Copenhagen.
“A new exit center” will be established on the island to accomodate “unwanted foreigners,” including criminals and rejected political-asylum seekers “who are convicted of violation of the Penal Code, the Arms Act, the Knivloven Act or the Act on Euphoric Drugs”.
Immigration and Integration Minister Inger Støjberg says:
“We have concluded an agreement that clearly indicates that refugees’ stay in Denmark is temporary. Refugees must meet from day one the expectation that they will return home as soon as they can to help build their country. It makes sense for both them and us…. With the agreement we also introduce a family reunification ceiling. It is crucial that Denmark does not return to a situation like in Autumn 2015, and a family reunification ceiling is a clear signal that there is a limit to how many refugee family reunions Denmark can handle. I am pleased that we have also agreed to establish an exit center on the island of Lindholm for the criminals who currently live at the Outreach Center Kærshovedgård. They are unwanted here in this country, and the new exit center on Lindholm is a signal that they have no future in Denmark. ”
The agreement also specifies the following:
The Immigration Act must be amended so that residence permits issued to refugees and refugee family reunification are withdrawn when the basis for the residence permit is no longer present and as soon as Denmark’s international obligations allow it. Residence permits for refugees will not be issued with the possibility of permanent residence.
Foreigners are to be self-sufficient as soon as possible; refugees’ residence in Denmark is strictly temporary.
New refugees must work as quickly as possible, sustaining themselves until they can be repatriated to their native countries.
The “transitional” allowance for single parents is reduced by DKK 2,000 per person per month, for cohabiting and married parents by DKK 1,000 per person per month — equivalent to DKK 2,000 per household. The state refund of 50% of municipal expenses for supplementary and individual benefits under the Integration Act will be abolished.
The repatriation scheme is strengthened, among other things by extending the target group for repatriation to refugees from areas where temporary protection status is granted and to refugees who have dual citizenship, including Danish, if they opt out of Danish citizenship.
To enforce the new rules on refugees’ temporary residence in Denmark, fingerprints and face recognition experts will be trained.
A family reunification ceiling will be introduced where the number of asylum seekers increases sharply.
Convicted aliens will be sentenced and imprisoned for longer terms.
Sharper penalties for foreigners who violate their residence, notification and reporting.
As soon as possible and by the end of 2019, an agreement must be reached with a partner country to establish Danish prisons abroad, so that criminals sentenced to expulsion will serve their sentences abroad rather than be a cost for Danish prisons and Danish society.
An amendment to the Danish Constitution and Denmark’s international obligations will seek to prevent foreign monetary donations to communities, associations and organizations whose purpose is to counteract and undermine Denmark’s democracy and fundamental freedoms.
Founded in 1986, the European Jewish Congress (EJC) is an umbrella organization of 42 national Jewish communities in Europe, representing more than 2.5 million European Jews. Affiliated to the World Jewish Congress, the EJC is one of the most influential international public associations. It works with national governments, European Union institutions and the Council of Europe. Based in Paris, the EJC has offices in Brussels, Strasbourg, Berlin and Budapest.
The Jerusalem Post reports that on November 21, 2018, the EJC convened a high level conference in Vienna, Austria, on “Europe beyond antisemitism and anti-Zionism – securing Jewish life in Europe”.
The conference was arranged by the Federal Chancellery of Austria led by Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz who, in his opening address, said “Antisemitism and anti-Zionism are getting blurred, but they are two sides of the same coin.”
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave a recorded video speech at the conference, in which he said that antisemitism was resurgent again “throughout the world,” and that a new antisemitism has arisen which attempts “to demonize the Jewish state and prevent the Jewish people the right to self-determination in the homeland of our forefathers, the Land of Israel. Netanyahu said that “The Holocaust did not begin in the gas chambers of Auschwitz. The Holocaust began with the spread of hate speech, the burning of books and the smashing of shop windows.”
EJC president Dr. Moshe Kantor said at the conference:
“Today, on European streets, people are being killed again simply for being Jewish. Jewish communities in Europe are increasingly concerned about their security and pessimistic about their future. Europe doesn’t have a monopoly on antisemitism anymore. No Jewish community anywhere in the world, however strong and well organized, is now immune from Jew hatred. Fighting antisemitism deserves much more than simple statements of good will – we need concrete policies and reinforced legislation.”
To that end, the conference produced a Catalogue of Policies to Combat Antisemitism — detailed proposals and recommendations for combating antisemitism in Europe, drawn up by the EJC with the assistance of academics from universities in Vienna, Tel Aviv and New York. (Daily Mail names Israeli historian Dina Porat and New York University professor Lawrence H. Schiffman as among the academics.)
Chancellor Kurz said he intends to bring the document before the European Council, the body comprising the 28 EU member heads of state that determines policy direction, at its next summit in December. Raising the issue at the European Council would be prelude to the adoption of the recommendations by the EU and Europe’s national governments.
On its website, the European Jewish Congress identifiesthe following recommendations of the Catalogue of Policies to Combat Antisemitism:
Adoption and implementation of the IHRA Working Definition of Antisemitism by all countries, institutions and businesses;
Governments and intergovernmental organizations should condemn the blatant state-sanctioned antisemitism that exist in a number of countries, such as Iran;
All countries should appoint an envoy for combatting antisemitism;
Every country should commit to a percentage of its GDP, annually, to fund the fight against antisemitism;
Creating new legal frameworks to combat antisemitism effectively and strengthening existing ones;
People who express or hold antisemitic views should not be allowed to be members of political parties or occupy a position of power;
Companies should be advised not to do business with countries or organizations that support antisemitism in any way;
Governments should commit financial and operational resources to ensure the security of Jewish communities;
Internet companies should be liable for antisemitic content on their platforms.
Curiously, left out of the above recommendations is the call for new editions of the Bible and Koran to carry warning messages about anti-Semitic passages.
James Wood reports for Daily Mail, Nov. 23, 2018, that the recommendation is in the EJC’s conference document, An End to Antisemitism! A Catalogue of Policies to Combat Antisemitism, in a chapter entitled “Recommendations regarding Religious Groups and Institutions”. The document reads:
Translations of the New Testament, the Qur’an and other Christian or Muslim literatures need marginal glosses, and introductions that emphasize continuity with Jewish heritage of both Christianity and Islam and warn readers about antisemitic passages in them. While some efforts have been made in this direction in the case of Christianity, these efforts need to be extended and made consistent in both religions.
The Catalogue of Policies to Combat Antisemitism also calls for:
The identification and rejection of all antisemitic texts and passages in the heritage of Christianity and Islam.
Religious leaders and thinkers to public denounce as “unholy writ” all canonical or quasi-canonical writings of religious anti-Semites.
The Catalogue‘s justification for these changes is because divine messages are always communicated through human beings and therefore subject to error. It reads:
God’s revelation is thus marred by human fallibility. Beginning with the New Testament, divine revelation expresses itself in Christian holy texts that also express a form of hatred. The manifestations of this hatred resulted in a tradition of antisemitism that gave moral legitimacy to crimes against the Jewish people, the epitome of which is the Shoah.
Several themes in the New Testament have come under fire for being anti-Semitic. These include blaming Jews for the death of Jesus, and negative remarks about the stubborn nature of the Jewish people and their disloyalty to God.
So what is the IHRA working definition of antisemitism?
Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.
Alas, the working definition does not define what “hatred toward Jews” means, but that meaning can be gleaned from what the IHRA considers to be contemporary examples of antisemitism, including:
Making mendacious, dehumanizing, demonizing, or stereotypical allegations aboutJews as such or the power of Jews as collective—such as, especially but not exclusively, the myth about a world Jewish conspiracy or of Jews controlling the media, economy, government or other societal institutions.
Denying thefact, scope, mechanisms (e.g. gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during World War II (the Holocaust).
Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust.
Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations.
Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis.
What the IHRA, European Jewish Congress and its Catalogue of Policies to Combat Antisemitism conveniently omit is that the Talmud, which supercedes the Torah (Old Testament) in religious authority for Jews, is rabidly anti-Christian.
Written in Hebrew between the third and sixth centuries, the Talmud is a collection of 63 books that together codify the oral law that Jewish rabbis claim was handed down from Moses. Jesus, in Matthew 15, however condemns that oral law when he said: “By the traditions of your elders you make void the Word of God.”
English translations of the Talmud have been watered down so as to conceal from the Gentiles the “satanic verses” contained in the original Hebrew. Those “satanic verses” can be classified into three categories:
Hatred for “goys” or Gentiles
Hatred for Jesus Christ, the Virgin Mary, and all Christians. Some examples:
Jesus (“Yashu”) is in Hell being “boiled in hot excrement” (Gittin 57a); Jesus was sexually immoral and “worshipped a brick” (Sanhedrin 107b); Jesus was cut off from the Jewish people for his wickedness and refusal to repent (Sotah 47a).
Mary (“Miriam the hairdresser”) was a prostitute who “had sex with many men” (Shabbath 104b, Hebrew Edition only); “She who was the descendant of princes and governors played the harlot with carpenters” (Sanhedrin 106a).
“Christians who reject the Talmud will go to hell and be punished there for all generations” (Rosh Hashanah 17a); “All things pertaining to the Goim are like a desert; the first person to come along and take them can claim them for his own” (Babha Bathra 54b).
Now, two of the biggest promoters of mass immigration are making tsk-tsk noises about Europe being “crushed” and “roiling” from “migration”.
In an interview with The Guardian, Hillary lectured to European leaders that they must “get a handle on migration” that is “roiling the body politics” because migration “is what lit the flame” of “the bread and circuses” of rightwing populism that poses “a serious threat to our freedom and our democratic institutions.”
She said back-handedly that although “I admire the very generous and compassionate approaches that were taken particularly by leaders like Angela Merkel, but I think it is fair to say Europe has done its part, and must send a very clear message – ‘we are not going to be able to continue provide refuge and support’ – because if we don’t deal with the migration issue it will continue to roil the body politic.”
John Kerry, who took over from Hillary as Obama’s secretary of state, also lamented to The Guardian: “Look at Europe! Europe’s already crushed under this transformation that’s taken place because of immigration.”
Kerry also wrung his hands about Donald Trump dismantling the Paris climate agreement and about the gross inequality in America where “Fifty-one per cent of the income of America going to 1% of Americans.”
But, as The Guardian points out, Kerry and his second wife, Teresa Heinz, themselves are exalted members of the top 1%:
According to a 2015 New Yorker profile, between them they own at least six properties, including a 23-room mansion in Georgetown, Washington DC, and a 90-acre farm outside Pittburgh in Pennsylvania, as well as a 23-metre (76ft), $7m (£5.4m) sailboat called Isabel. “We’ve got to make America fair again. You gotta make things work for working folks so they can pay their bills and send their kids to school, reach the brass ring, retire in dignity, have healthcare – the priorities are pretty clear, in my judgment. We need infrastructure. Desperately. We need to start rebuilding America,” he says.
Israel is the largest cumulative recipient of U.S. foreign assistance since World War II.
To date, the United States has provided Israel $134.7 billion (current, or non-inflation-adjusted, dollars) in bilateral assistance and missile defense funding. Almost all U.S. bilateral aid to Israel is in the form of military assistance, although in the past Israel also received significant economic assistance. (Source: Congressional Research Service Report to Congress, February 26, 2018)
Callum Paton reports for Newsweek that on August 9, 2017, the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) revealed construction details of a new $800 million underground wall to run along Israel’s 40-mile border with Gaza and extending into the Mediterranean.
Israel already is protected by a 143-mile border fence, touted by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) for drastically reducing illegal immigration along its southern border:
“Israel … had a real problem with illegal immigrants coming in from the southern border, about 16,000 in one year. In two years, they constructed 143-mile fence, about $2.9 million per mile, and it cut that illegal immigration rate from about 16,000 to I think 18. Cut it by 99 percent.”
The new $800 million wall is to protect Israel from the threat of attack tunnels dug by Hamas, the Islamist militant group that has controlled Gaza since 2007, and to stop Hamas fighters from swimming ashore.
The wall, 19-ft. high and 131 feet underground, will be constructed mainly from concrete, reinforced with iron bars and pipes and covered in sensors. Work on the wall began in October 2017 and is expected to take two years to complete.
Meanwhile, Paul Dijks reports for Voice of Europe that on Nov. 20, 2018, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu cited Israel’s need to protect its borders as the reason why Israel will not be signing the United Nations’ global migration pact set to be formally approved on December 12 in Marrakech, Morocco.
Netanyahu said in a statement:
I instructed the Foreign Ministry to announce that Israel won’t participate [in the Marrakech gathering]and won’t sign the migration pact. We have a duty to guard against illegal infiltrators. [Jewish Nation-State Law requires the government] to stand up for a clear migration policy that protects our borders from illegal infiltrators.
Seven countries have withdrawn from the UN global migration pact over concerns about national sovereignty: Australia, Austria, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and the United States.
On December 2, 2017, the Trump administration announced that the U.S. Mission to the United Nations had informed the UN Secretary-General that the United States is ending its participation in the Global Compact on Migration because the compact is “inconsistent” with U.S. policies:
The New York Declaration contains numerous provisions that are inconsistent with US immigration and refugee policies and the Trump Administration’s immigration principles. As a result, President (Donald) Trump determined that the United States would end its participation in the Compact process that aims to reach international consensus at the UN in 2018.
Curiously, Jews outside of Israel are rabidly pro-migration and anti-border wall. See: