President Obama Throws Israel Under the Bus the Day Before Hanukkah and Christmas Eve

/1 Comment/in , /by

It is a decision that will live on in reproach and infamy, bringing further shame to the legacy of President Barack Obama: Just one day before the beginning of Hanukkah and Christmas, our departing president threw Israel under the bus.

Shame on you, Mr. President. Your betrayal will not be forgotten.

For weeks now there has been talk that Obama would take one last shot at Prime Minister Netanyahu, with whom he has had an icy, often tense, relationship. There were even accusations that he actively worked against Netanyahu’s 2015 reelection, accusations that make Obama’s indignation over Russia’s alleged involvement in our 2016 elections all the more ironic.

Would he try to push again for a two-state solution, even arguing for 1967 borders, as he once did?

It turns out there was another plan, one that would use the UN Security Council to condemn Israeli settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem — the so-called disputed, Palestinian territories — with one Israeli official claiming that the Obama administration helped the Palestinian leadership craft the resolution.

This much we know for sure. On Thursday, when the vote was to go before the security council, President-elect Trump reached out to Egyptian President el-Sisi, asking him to withdraw sponsorship of the bill, and remarkably, el-Sisi complied.

It appears that Egypt wants to have Israel as an ally in its war against Isis and the Muslim Brotherhood, not to mention Egypt’s desire to be on good footing with our new president, and so, the resolution was tabled for the day.

On Friday, however, New Zealand, Malaysia, Senegal, and Venezuela reintroduced the bill for a vote, and for the first time, rather than using our veto power as a permanent member of the security council to stop this biased attack on Israel, President Obama instructed Samantha Power, our Ambassador to the UN, to abstain from voting. And so, with the direct help of the President of the United States, the UN Security Council condemned the nation of Israel for building settlements in the “occupied territories.”

I’m aware, of course, that there are legal and moral disputes over the settlements, with Israel constantly reaffirming its legal and moral right to continue to build. A spokesman for the president gave this simple justification for our actions on Friday: We stand with Israel — after all, we “just concluded a $38 billion tenure (memorandum of understanding) for security assistance to Israel” — and we join the international community in opposing the settlements, which are an obstacle to peace.

But there is no coincidence that, with just days left in his administration, and with the reality that much of his legacy will quickly be undone by incoming President Trump, outgoing President Obama committed this act of betrayal against our one true ally in the Middle East, America’s historic close friend, Israel.

The fact is, there are more than 1.5 million Palestinian Arabs living as full-citizens in Israel, serving on the Supreme Court, holding seats in the Knesset, enjoying the unique benefits and freedoms that Israel offers to its people. (For the record, when polled, they have no desire to be under Palestinian leadership.) In contrast, the Palestinians do not want any Jews living in their disputed territories, all the more so if there is a two-state solution.

In other words, the Palestinian Arabs will continue to live in Israel, but a Palestinian State must be Judenrein — entirely free of Jews. Where is the world outcry over this?

The bottom line, though, is this.

The UN has been infamously anti-Semitic through its history – that is to say, it has been so unjustly and blatantly anti-Israel that it has demonstrated actual anti-Semitism – and this latest UN resolution was just another manifestation of that ugly pattern.

At times like this, regardless of whether America was supportive of Israel’s settlement policy, there was only right thing for us to do, namely, veto the resolution and stand with Israel. Instead, President Obama was complicit in condemning Israel on the world stage shortly before leaving office, thereby confirming the criticisms of the many who always questioned the depth of his solidarity with the Jewish state.

Ironically, this has paved the way for President-elect Trump to make his solidarity with Israel (and his antipathy to the UN) all the more clear, as he tweeted out yesterday: “As to the U.N., things will be different after Jan. 20th.”

And on the allegedly anti-Semitic Breitbart.com, Orthodox Jewish columnist Joel B. Pollack has already written about, “Five Ways Trump Could Avenge the Anti-Israel UN Vote,” all of which are very feasible.

President Obama, then, has shown his true colors in the closing days of his presidency and immediately before the beginning of Christmas Eve and the first day of Hanukkah.

But the timing of his infamous act reminds me of this: God’s purposes for the world through Jesus will continue unabated, and in the Hebrew words commemorated by the Hanukkah miracle, Am Yisrael Chai, The People of Israel Live. (For more from the author of “President Obama Throws Israel Under the Bus the Day Before Hanukkah and Christmas Eve” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Thank You, Bibi Netanyahu! This Is How You Deliver a Christmas Message

/0 Comments/in , /by

The Prime Minister of Israel Bibi Netanyahu posted a special message for Christians around the world today, wishing them a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year.

Israel remains a bright spot for religious liberty in the war-torn Middle East, where Christians, Muslims, and other religions are free to worship and proselytize according to their consciences. Christians there will be able to celebrate Christmas openly, without the fear of persecution felt by so many in the Middle East.

Meanwhile, the American president has thus far only sent a “Happy Holidays” card. Will we see a Merry Christmas message from President Obama? (For more from the author of “Thank You, Bibi Netanyahu! This Is How You Deliver a Christmas Message” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Germany to Commit More Troops to NATO in Lithuania

/0 Comments/in , /by

Germany is upping its contribution to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization in the Baltic state of Lithuania. This is a welcome development.

The initial news came in October when Germany announced its commitment of Bundeswehr forces to Lithuania in 2017 as part of a NATO deterrence mission.

Materially, the German deployment will be substantial. Of the 1,000 NATO soldiers that are to be posted in Lithuania, almost 700 will be provided by Germany. Heavy weapons such as the Leopard 2 main battle tank are also to be a part of the contingent.

Germany’s contribution is particularly welcome since it tends to get lumped into a group of NATO countries that could probably contribute more, but often fail to do so. The timing is also opportune, considering President-elect Donald Trump has stressed that NATO’s European members need to do more.

Furthermore, Germany is often criticized as sympathizing with Russia in order to safeguard deep economic interests with Moscow. The Bundeswehr deployment signals that Germany prioritizes European security and its relationship with the U.S.

There is a positive history of recent U.S.-German military cooperation that should be acknowledged but not overstated. Germany is also home to numerous U.S. military installations.

Through NATO, Germany has stepped up to the plate in Afghanistan. At one time, Germany was the third-largest troop contributing nation to the NATO-led mission in Afghanistan. However, German soldiers were largely confined to the peaceful northern part of the country and were heavily restricted by operational caveats.

Yet one should not conclude from this deployment that Germany will always follow the U.S. policy line. Disagreement abounds between the U.S. and Germany on issues ranging from Ukraine, the eurozone debt crisis, the desirability of a European Union army, and the details of a potential transatlantic trade agreement.

Nor can Berlin guarantee acquiescence to U.S. policy. For example, Italy’s new prime minister, Paolo Gentiloni, recently resisted attempts to extend European Union sanctions on Russia by a year in addition to broadening the sanctions to cover Russia’s actions in Syria.

The Trump administration needs to appreciate Germany’s delicate relationship with the rest of Europe. During the periodic episodes of the eurozone debt crisis, depictions of Angela Merkel as a Nazi or of panzers rolling through southern European countries were commonplace.

Caricatures like these, while ridiculous, unfair, and unworthy of serious consideration, reflect lingering European suspicions that Germany harbors ambitions of geopolitical hegemony.

Acting through multilateral organizations like NATO allows Germany to positively contribute to European security and governance without engendering fear from its neighbors.

Ultimately, the Trump administration will have to deal with the Germany it has, not the one it wants. Berlin will probably never be willing to partake in every military operation that the U.S. undertakes. Berlin will probably insist that any NATO operation abide by the dictates and fine minutiae of international law. Berlin will probably place as much emphasis on dialogue with unsavory regimes as it ever will on military strength.

But when push comes to shove, Berlin will hopefully be there for Washington when it needs a partner that will do what it can to safeguard a peaceful and prosperous Europe, just as it is doing now in Lithuania. (For more from the author of “Germany to Commit More Troops to NATO in Lithuania” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Terror Attack in Germany Puts Spotlight on Refugee Policy

/0 Comments/in , /by

Before this year, Germany was not used to Islamist terrorists striking on its home soil. A lot has changed since.

The terror threat that haunts Germany seemingly culminated—at least for 2016—in the outrage that occurred in Berlin this week. At present, 12 are dead and dozens more were injured in a truck attack that mirrored the one that took place in Nice, France, this past summer.

It comes as no surprise that the Islamic State, also known as ISIS, has claimed credit for the attack in Berlin, although the actual perpetrator is yet to be arrested.

Intelligence services clearly had an idea that something like this was possibly coming. A State Department travel alert from November warned of a “heightened risk of terrorist attacks throughout Europe, particularly during the holiday season.”

The travel alert went on to say, “U.S. citizens should exercise caution at holiday festivals, events, and outdoor markets.” It stated that “credible information” indicated that ISIS or al-Qaeda could be likely perpetrators of an attack.

Such target-rich environments appeal to terrorist groups aiming to cause death and carnage during the holiday season. Even before the plot targeting Berlin, a 12-year-old boy radicalized by an ISIS operative tried to blow up a Christmas market in Ludwigshafen on Nov. 26. Fortunately, his bomb failed to detonate.

On the same day, arrests were made in Strasbourg and Marseille, which disrupted an ISIS plot targeting a Christmas market in Champs-Elysees, Paris.

Yet the threat does not begin and end with ISIS. Those trained by al-Qaeda have also planned to attack a Christmas market in Strasbourg. That plot was disrupted in December 2000 and four Algerians were subsequently jailed for between 10 and 12 years.

Al-Qaeda has also launched terrorist attacks on aviation during the holiday season—in 2001, via shoe bomber Richard Reid, and in 2009, via underwear bomber Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab.

With the Berlin assailant still on the loose (at the time of this writing), German authorities will be working with counterterrorism partners domestically and internationally to try and stop another attack from taking place. In the short-term, this involves finding whoever was responsible, what networks they were connected to, and any ties to foreign terrorist groups.

It may be that there were ties to terrorists based in Germany. For example, it is worth remembering that “Charfeddine T”—a 24-year-old Tunisian—was arrested just days ago on the suspicion that an attack was being planned in Berlin. Whether there are any ties is unknown, although the timing is worth noting.

Presumably, whoever carried out the attack will be caught relatively quickly. Even so, there is much to reflect on for Chancellor Angela Merkel and for German society generally.

This is the fourth terrorist attack that has taken place there this year, and there have been a host of other attempted attacks thwarted. Several of these plots have been planned by refugees recently settled into the country.

Clearly the vast majority of the 1 million-plus refugees to have entered Germany are not terrorists. Yet the numbers that Germany took in were so large that even a small minority has led to a very big issue.

So, the problem is clear. Whether the German political class has adequate solutions, much less so. (For more from the author of “Terror Attack in Germany Puts Spotlight on Refugee Policy” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Could Murder of Russian Ambassador Lead to a Reassessment of Turkey’s Role in NATO?

/0 Comments/in , /by

Imagine if the U.S. Ambassador to Mexico were publicly executed in Mexico City by a Mexican government security guard who shouted slogans about “justice” for illegal immigrants. And if then we found out that the guard had a track record of involvement in radical nationalism. How would the U.S. government respond to that? What would ordinary Americans demand that we do?

Expect the Russian government to be similarly aggressive in responding to the blatant, vicious murder of Andrei Karlov, its Ambassador to Turkey — who was gunned down on camera while visiting an art gallery by Turkish riot policeman Mevlut Mert Altintas. Russian president Vladimir Putin has called for Russian security services to be involved in Turkey’s investigation of the murder, which was caught on camera (WARNING: graphic footage):

Revenge for Those “Moderate Rebels” in Syria

The murderer claimed that his attack was revenge against Russia, which has helped Syria’s dictatorial government defeat al Qaeda-allied Islamist rebels in Aleppo, preserving that country’s secular regime and the safety of religious minorities in Syria, including a million Christians. Turkey has been one of the prime sponsors of the Islamist militias in Syria, which have executed Christians, ISIS-style, in regions which they seized. Those jihadists also benefited from U.S. aid, advocated by the likes of John McCain and Lindsey Graham for “moderate rebels” who turned out not quite to exist.

If a confrontation were to develop between the governments, whose side will America take? The media-vilified Russian government or the Islamist regime in Turkey? By treaty, we are actually committed to defend Turkey, because it is still a member of NATO. No doubt Erdogan’s rogue regime feels empowered by that legacy of the Cold War. It will also count on the reflexive hostility to Russia by those who see that country as our inveterate enemy, whatever its regime. But it’s time to reconsider those impulses, and a Trump administration seems likely to ponder long and hard whether Russia is our enemy or Turkey our friend.

Who is Invading Europe: Russia or Turkey?

Before Russia shook off its Communist regime, Turkey was a solid U.S. ally, with a secular government that did a reasonable job of protecting the rights of Christian and other minorities — the tragic remnants of Byzantine Christianity after centuries of ethnic cleansing and grinding Islamic rule under the Ottomans. That Muslim empire lorded it over the citizens of Hungary, Romania, Greece, Bulgaria and Serbia for centuries. Features of Ottoman rule included the regular kidnapping of thousands of Christian infants, to be raised as Muslim soldiers.

Secular Turkey could protect its minorities, serve as a U.S. ally, and advance toward modernization as long as it was a military regime, which enforced its non-Islamic constitution by refusing to hold elections. Once Turkey, under misguided American pressure to democratize, began its transition to mass elections during the late 1990s, the voice of Islamist radicals began to drown out all the others.

Springtime for Islamists

Now the country is ruled by the increasingly autocratic Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who has jailed hundreds of journalists in the wake of a dubious coup attempt in July. Erdogan has made it clear that he is nostalgic for Turkey’s old imperial, Islamist past: He is dressing his palace guards in old Ottoman uniforms, revising history books to glorify the country’s Islamist past, and cracking down on the religious rights of Christians.

Turkey aided and abetted the mass colonization of Europe by Syrian “refugees,” who under international law should have remained there, as the “first safe country” they could reach. Instead, Turkey helped them to enter Greece and other countries, from which they could travel to Germany, Sweden, and other lands with generous welfare systems. The resulting wave of immigrant crimes and terrorist attacks is disrupting politics all across the European Union.

Instead of mitigating the flow, Turkish president Erdogan is using the fear of more refugees as a stick in negotiations with the EU, demanding that it continue moves to admit Turkey to the EU, and grant visa-free travel for the whole population of Turkey throughout the whole European Union — or else face a new influx of 1-2 million more colonists, who he threatens to ship into a supine Europe unwilling to defend its southern borders.

NATO was created to deter a Russian invasion. It succeeded. What a hideous irony it would be if NATO were used to protect a regime that is invading Europe with a far more intractable enemy: Muslims who oppressed and terrorized large parts of Europe for 400 years. (For more from the author of “Could Murder of Russian Ambassador Lead to a Reassessment of Turkey’s Role in NATO?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

What a Special Committee Investigating Russia’s Cyberattacks Could Do

/0 Comments/in , /by

A bipartisan group of senators is pressing for the creation of a special panel—known as a select committee—to investigate and provide the definitive account of Russian cyberattacks on the U.S. political system.

Sens. John McCain. R-Ariz., and Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., along with incoming Democratic leader Chuck Schumer of New York and Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I., called for a select committee on cybersecurity in a bipartisan letter to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.

McConnell, so far, has resisted the idea of appointing a unique investigative body, preferring to go through the normal process where already existing committees with jurisdiction over cybersecurity issues, like the Intelligence Committee and Armed Services Committee, conduct their own probes.

“We don’t need to set up a special committee to do what we [can do] through regular order,” McConnell said Monday night on Kentucky Educational Television.

Supporters of the select committee say Russia’s actions are extraordinary enough to warrant an all-encompassing investigation.

“Recent reports of Russian interference in our election should alarm every American,” the bipartisan group of senators wrote on Sunday to McConnell. “Cybersecurity is the ultimate cross-jurisdictional challenge, and we must take a comprehensive approach to meet this challenge effectively.”

McConnell would need to allow the vote on a select committee to go forward, although senators could force a vote on the floor.

According to media reports, the intelligence community, including the CIA and FBI, have concluded that hackers associated with Russia broke into the computer systems of the Democratic National Committee and other political organizations, and leaked emails during the presidential campaign.

The CIA recently told Congress that Russia tried to help President-elect Donald Trump win. A new leaked memo shows the FBI director backs that assessment. Russia hackers also tried to hack the Republican National Committee, The Wall Street Journal reports.

The procedural debate is important because forming a select committee would raise the public profile of Russia’s actions at a time when Trump continues to reject the conclusions of intelligence reports.

The Daily Signal below explains the many questions surrounding a potential select committee.

What Is a Select Committee and How Is One Formed?

Congress usually forms a select committee to examine a specific issue for a limited time, but they are rarely created. When they are, these special panels tackle issues that span the different coverage areas of the normal committee structure.

“You can imagine if lots of committees looked into this, you would get different answers and interpretations of evidence, so there is a lot of value in having a select committee that produces the definitive account,” Susan Hennessey, a fellow in national security in governance studies at the Brookings Institution, said in an interview with The Daily Signal.

Members and senators in either chamber of Congress could introduce a resolution creating a select committee. The House and Senate could also authorize a select committee together, but it’s more likely to be handled by one chamber individually.

On Monday, Politico reported that Sen. Cory Gardner, R-Colo., plans to introduce a bill that, if passed, would mandate a new select Senate committee on cybersecurity.

A stand-alone proposal in the Senate creating a select committee would require 60 votes to overcome a filibuster attempt. The president cannot veto the imposition of a select committee.

Select committees are made up of lawmakers from both parties chosen by leadership.

What Would a Select Committee on Cybersecurity Do?

Lawmakers spell out the specific duties of a select committee in the resolution mandating its creation.

“The role could be framed as a committee just investigating Russian cyberattacks or it could be framed more broadly and be about foreign cyberattacks conducted on the U.S. since a specified date,” said Jordan Tama of American University, who specializes in foreign and national security policymaking.

Schumer, McCain, Graham, and Reed, indicated to McConnell that the panel they propose would focus not only on Russian cyber behavior but also potential threats from other countries, including China and Iran.

The senators recommended that such a committee also develop “comprehensive recommendations and, as necessary, new legislation to modernize our nation’s laws, governmental organization, and related practices to meet this challenge.”

Typically, however, select committees do not have direct legislative authority, meaning they cannot issue legislation. They usually devise a report with recommendations for action, and lawmakers could use the findings to separately introduce legislation outside the committee structure.

A select committee does have the power to issue subpoenas, and they would likely hold high-profile news conferences and hearings, bringing more attention to the Russian hacking issue.

Supporters of a major investigation say that would be the biggest role of a select committee—credibly telling the story of what happened to a still skeptical public.

A new Politico/Morning Consult poll revealed that just one-third of Americans say they believe Russia influenced the 2016 presidential election.

“Many Americans still don’t believe that the Russians influenced our elections, and vast majorities for Russians don’t believe it,” Michael McFaul, a former U.S. ambassador to Russia in the Obama administration, wrote in an email to The Daily Signal. “You need firm attribution before taking steps against Russian individuals or agencies.”

What Other Select Committees Has Congress Authorized?

The most prominent recent example is the House select committee investigating the 2012 attacks on the American diplomatic compound in Benghazi, Libya. Democrats have dismissed that committee as partisan.

Select committees have a longer history in the Senate where dozens have been formed, according to CNN, including ones probing the Iran-Contra scandal, Watergate, and the Ku Klux Klan.

The 9/11 Commission, set up to provide the “complete account” of the Sept. 11 attacks, is perhaps the most recognized congressionally-authorized investigation. However, an independent commission is different than a select committee in significant ways.

The 9/11 Commission included bipartisan members who were not in elected office at the time, but they had previous legislative and executive experience.

House Democratic leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has led a chorus in her caucus calling for an independent commission into Russia’s actions this election. Republicans so far are not supporting that effort.

Does the Trump Administration Have to Follow the Committee’s Findings?

Trump has downplayed the Russian hacks so far, and if he maintains that stance, he could clash with Republicans in Congress if they participate in a select committee that proposes actions against the Kremlin.

“The president is not bound by the findings, nor does he have to agree with it,” Hennessey said. “To the extent the committee’s report includes classified information, he does have some control over what can be made public.”

Tama said Trump could also limit the degree to which the executive branch cooperates with a select committee investigation.

“With an investigation, the bigger, more direct conflict is whether Trump will allow or encourage executive branch officials to cooperate with the investigation,” Tama said. “Any congressional investigation can be made more complicated if the president is not cooperating either directly or implicitly by saying he doesn’t want the executive branch to cooperate.”

Reince Priebus, White House chief of staff, suggested Sunday that Trump will accept Russia’s role in the hacking if the intelligence agencies draft a report with consensus agreement.

“I think he would accept the conclusion if they would get together, put out a report, and show the American people they are on the same page,” Priebus said on “Fox News Sunday.” (For more from the author of “What a Special Committee Investigating Russia’s Cyberattacks Could Do” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Russian Ambassador to Turkey Gunned down ‘for Aleppo.’ What’s next for Turkish-Russian Relations?

/0 Comments/in , /by

Russia and Turkey have come a long way over the past year.

In November 2015, the Turkish Air Force blew a Russian fighter jet out of the sky. And the countries were (and continue to be) at great odds over the civil war in Syria. Over the past year, however, relations between the two countries have rapidly improved. Their successful detente was illustrated by the Russian ambassador’s speaking engagement at a photo exhibit’s opening ceremony in the Turkish capital of Ankara.

Today, however, Russian Ambassador to Turkey, Andrey Karlov, was delivering remarks, when he was assassinated by a lone assailant who has since been identified as 22-year-old Turkish police officer Mevlut Mert Altintas. The off-duty officer reportedly shouted, “Allahu akbar! Do not forget Aleppo! Do not forget Syria! Do not forget Aleppo! Do not forget Syria!”

“After shooting the ambassador, the gunman climbed to the second floor of the same building and a 15-minute shootout with police ensued before he was killed, Turkey’s Anadolu news agency reported,” the AP reports.

Now, where do we go from here?

Take him at his word?

The gunman’s actions and rhetoric suggest he was motivated by the Russian government’s role and action in Syria’s civil war. It should be noted that he did not attack the stunned innocent bystanders at the exhibit after striking down the Russian ambassador.

Was this a mere act of revenge, or something much more?

Was the shooter a jihadist?

Pro-government sources in Turkey are alleging that shooter could have been tied to Al Nusra, an ally of al-Qaeda that is operating in Syria. But there appears to be no proof of any substantial ties thus far.

What is the state media saying?

Observers may want to check in with the state-run media outlets in both Moscow and Ankara, as the media censors often reflect the official government stance on important issues.

Blame Gulen?

The Turkish government, often without proof, frequently takes to blaming Gulenists — followers of Fethullah Gulen, a popular cleric who now lives in exile in America — for terrorist attacks or any other negative event that happens inside the country.

Most notably, after a failed July coup attempt, Turkish President Tayyip Erdogan blamed Gulen for inciting the attempted overthrow. Yet, he never provided any evidence that Gulen was involved.

And right on cue, the mayor of Ankara has alleged Gulen is to blame for Andrey Karlov’s assassination.

Blame America/the West?

Nothing unites two adversaries like some good old-fashioned anti-American conspiracies, which are known to be rife in both Turkey and Russia.

Katehon, a Russian think tank that promotes extreme anti-American views, has called the assassination a “typical CIA operation” meant to sow discord between Russia and Turkey.

Additionally, a Kremlin representative has blamed the attack on the “secret services” of a “NATO country.”

Syria

Will this incident worsen the ever-increasing sectarian chaos in Syria? Just before the assassination, Russia had finally agreed to pause its military campaigns in Aleppo and let select civilians evacuate from the area. Does this latest incident mean the deal is off? (For more from the author of “Russian Ambassador to Turkey Gunned down ‘for Aleppo.’ What’s next for Turkish-Russian Relations?” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Truck Plows into Christmas Market in Berlin, Killing at Least 9 and Injuring Dozens More

/0 Comments/in , /by

At least nine people are dead and dozens more injured after a large truck drove into a crowd at a Christmas Market in Berlin Monday night.

Berlin Police arrested someone they believe may be the attacker at the scene.

U.S. officials are saying the incident is reminiscent of the Nice, France, terrorist attack in July.

That attack, which left 86 people dead, was perpetrated by an Islamic terrorist.

“Every year, the city of Berlin hosts a Christmas market there near the fashionable Kurfuerstendamm avenue. The attack happened at the foot of the landmark Kaiser Wilhelm memorial church, which was kept as a ruin after World War II,” CBS News reported.

“The truck careered into the Berlin market at what would have been one of the most crowded times for the Christmas market, when adults and children would be gathering in the traditional cluster of wooden huts that sell food and Christmas goods,” The Daily Telegraph reported.

“I heard a big noise and then I moved on the Christmas market and saw much chaos … many injured people,” Jan Hollitzer, deputy editor in chief of Berliner Morgenpost, told CNN. “It was really traumatic.”

The Berlin police believe the danger has passed, tweeting late Monday, “Currently, there are no indications of further dangerous situations in the city near #Breitscheidplatz.” (For more from the author of “Truck Plows into Christmas Market in Berlin, Killing at Least 9 and Injuring Dozens More” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Trump Condemns ‘Radical Islamic Terrorist’ Who Assassinated Russian Ambassador

/0 Comments/in , /by

President-elect Donald Trump called for the “universal condemnation” of the “radical Islamic terrorist” who assassinated Russia’s ambassador to Turkey on Monday.

“Today we offer our condolences to the family and loved ones of Russian Ambassador to Turkey Andrei Karlov, who was assassinated by a radical Islamic terrorist,” Trump said in a short statement.

“The murder of an ambassador is a violation of all rules of civilized order and must be universally condemned,” the president-elect added.

The White House also issued a statement condemning the violence, but it refrained from connecting the shooting to radical Islam.

“This heinous attack on a member of the diplomatic corps is unacceptable, and we stand united with Russia and Turkey in our determination to confront terrorism in all of its forms,” the White House said.

Trump has long criticized President Obama for refraining from using the term “radical Islamic terrorism.”

A Turkish police officer fatally shot Karlov in front of an audience at a photo exhibit in Ankara. The assailant, identified as Mevlut Mert Altintas, was later killed in a shootout with police.

Altintas, a member of Ankara’s riot police squad, walked into the room during the middle of Karlov’s speech shouting “Allahu akbar,” according to an Associated Press photographer who witnessed the incident.

The terrorist then shot the diplomat dead in front of a room of frightened spectators, angrily denounced the bloodshed in Syria and reportedly shouted, “We are the descendants of those who supported the Prophet Muhammad, for jihad.”

He also shouted, “Don’t forget about Syria, don’t forget about Aleppo,” according to Reuters.

Footage of the assassination was captured and immediately shared around the world. Russia’s Foreign Ministry said it considered the shooting to be a terrorist attack.

Three other people were wounded in the shooting, authorities said. (For more from the author of “Trump Condemns ‘Radical Islamic Terrorist’ Who Assassinated Russian Ambassador” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.

Why Donald Trump Is Catching Heat for Planning on Moving the Embassy to Jerusalem

/0 Comments/in , /by

There is no controversy like the controversy that surrounds the city of Jerusalem, the most divided city on the earth and the most coveted city on the earth. The Bible predicted this more than 2,500 years ago, describing the day when Jerusalem would be a “a cup that brings dizziness to all the surrounding nations” (Zech. 12:2, NET), even declaring that one day, the whole world would be in uproar over Jerusalem.

Stop and think about it for a moment.

Why does the whole world get so exercised over Jerusalem? Is there any other city on the planet that evokes such intense emotions and polar views?

And why does every nation put its embassies in the city that the host country identifies as its capital, except for the city of Jerusalem, identified as Israel’s capital in 1950? Why do virtually all embassies remain in Tel Aviv?

There is something of spiritual significance to this ancient city that simply cannot be denied.

The Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995, “passed by overwhelming bipartisan majority in both the House and Senate,” states that “Jerusalem should be recognized as the capital of the State of Israel and the United States Embassy in Israel should be established in Jerusalem no later than May 31, 1999.”

Then why didn’t presidents Bush or Obama move the embassy? As explained by Rabbi Shraga Simmons, “since the congressional act allows the President to implement a waiver at six-month intervals, that’s exactly what has happened every six months since 1995.”

Now that Donald Trump has insisted that he will, in fact, relocate our embassy — in accordance with the 1995 act — the controversy is hitting the fan. In the words of Sheikh Ekrema Sabri, imam of the al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem, moving the embassy would be as good as a “declaration of war.”

Trump’s Pick for Ambassador to Israel

Consider the opposition to Trump’s appointee for Ambassador to Israel, David Friedman, a strong supporter of Israel who speaks of our embassy’s imminent relocation. As he said openly and proudly after his nomination, “I intend to work tirelessly to strengthen the unbreakable bond between our two countries and advance the cause of peace within the region, and look forward to doing this from the US embassy in Israel’s eternal capital, Jerusalem.”

According to a December 16 email from Rabbi Shmuley Boteach, known as “America’s rabbi,” Friedman is a “brilliant choice for Ambassador to Israel. One of America’s most respected and accomplished attorneys, David is regarded in the highest esteem by the New York Jewish community as an exemplar of the American and Jewish virtues of education, erudition, philanthropy, and communal commitment.”

He continued, “David has vast exposure to, and knowledge of, the Jewish State and its history and enjoys the confidence and respect of Israel’s leaders. A man of humility and openness, he has a gift for listening, showing respect and deference to all whom he meets.”

In sharp contrast, as noted on the Elder of Ziyon website, last Friday’s New York Times “had four articles against Donald Trump’s choice to be the US ambassador to Israel.

“Yes — four articles in one day. Two ‘news’ articles, one editorial, and one op-ed.”

As Noah Pollack reported on The Washington Free Beacon, “The NYT Is Having a Meltdown Over Trump’s Israel Nominee.”

Pollack writes, “David Friedman is a prominent and successful attorney in New York who has spent 20 years representing Donald Trump, among other clients. He is also a proud Jew who holds unapologetic pro-Israel views that are heretical in Times-world, and he has also expressed acid disdain for the kind of Jewish anti-Israel activism regularly glorified in the pages of the Times.

“So he must be destroyed — and to destroy him he must be lied about. Which is what the Times did.”

Pollack does not specifically mention Friedman’s strong support for relocating our embassy, since there are other, controversial pro-Israel positions that Friedman supports, including the building of settlements in territories under Palestinian control and skepticism about a two-state solution. But you can be assured that a big part of the ruckus over Friedman’s appointment is his affirmation that the American embassy will be moved.

The Ruckus Over Moving the Embassy

That’s why a headline on the Independent discussing Friedman’s nomination focused on this issue alone, noting that, “Moving US embassy to Jerusalem would be ‘declaration of war’.”

And that’s why New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman stated to Chris Cuomo on CNN that “moving the American embassy — and this is an evergreen, everyone running for President tosses this out, no one actually does it — moving the embassy to Jerusalem from Tel Aviv, in the absence of an agreed upon solution between Israelis and Palestinians, I would call that the ‘Full Employment for Iran Act.’”

Yes, according to Friedman, it would also alienate the Sunni Arab regimes, meaning that this move would provoke the Shiite Muslims in Iran and the Sunni Muslims in countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Jerusalem, the city of controversy indeed!

Thomas Friedman then reiterated to Cuomo and co-host Alisyn Camerota: “This is such madness that it’s — it’s just — I can’t believe we’re talking about it.”

Yet Kellyanne Conway, Trump’s senior adviser, has reiterated that the incoming president really does plan to make this move, calling it a “big priority” for him. And how revealing that Thomas Friedman noted that “everyone running for President tosses this out” but “no one actually does it,” whereas Trump is threatening actually to do it. This is the very reason many people voted for him: They expect him to be a doer, not just a talker.

Should President Trump succeed in relocating our embassy to Jerusalem, I predict three things: 1) all hell will break loose against him (expect it in the most shrill tones), with constant, worldwide controversy over the move); 2) God will bless our president for doing it; and 3) God will bless America for doing it.

There’s just something about Jerusalem. Watch and see. (And to think that as recently as last month, an article in the Washington Post claimed that, “Anti-Semitism is no longer an undertone of Trump’s campaign. It’s the melody.” The irony is exquisite.) (For more from the author of “Why Donald Trump Is Catching Heat for Planning on Moving the Embassy to Jerusalem” please click HERE)

Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE.