[IsraelHayom] Americans felt the vibe — that American wokeness and moral self-doubt were insidious weaknesses. And therefore, they ruled that the Obama era finally must end.
More than last week's US presidential vote being a victory for Donald Trump, it was a searing defeat, a supreme rebuke, for Barack Obama.
In a torrent of impassioned campaign stops over the past two months, former President Obama made it clear that this election was a referendum on his policies. He explicitly warned that unless Kamala Harris was elected president, everything that he stood for and worked for would be washed down the drain. He literally said that the "fate of the nation" hung in the balance. He said the same thing in 2016 when he strenuously campaigned for Hillary Clinton.
Back then, Obama told voters "If you supported me in '08, if you supported me in '12, if you think that I've done a good job, if you believe that Michelle has done a good job — everything that we've done over the last eight years will be reversed with a Trump presidency. And everything will be sustained and built on with a Hillary Clinton presidency."
Well, there never was a Hillary Clinton presidency, and there will not be a Kamala Harris presidency either. And it is not just because both were flawed candidates. (In Harris' case, this is the understatement of the century.)
It is because more than half of Americans rejected the notion that Obama had "done a good job," and they were not interested in "sustaining" his policies. They didn't want another four or eight years of stand-ins for Obama, on top of his own eight years in the White House and his four surrogate years via President Biden.
They did not buy the Democratic message that everything was swell in America and that all that was needed was a competent Democrat to advance Obama's superior approach. They didn't buy the assertion that Obama was America's leading tutelary figure.
#1
Obama really hated flyover country (most Americans). Turns out that he was a pampered elitist. We still don't know much about him. Open the files on him and see what he's about.
#3
I had lunch this afternoon with one of my clients. He went to Brockton (MA) High, lived in Dorchester the rest of his life, lifelong Democrat who worked on the political campaigns for various Boston Dem. city councilors like Charles Yancey and Bruce Bolling, old-time Democrats. We've made it a point not to talk about politics but that ended this afternoon. He spent the ride to the restaurant and back bitching about the Dem party becoming 'the party of trannies, illegals, and this minority group, and that bunch of mental cases.' I didn't say a damn thing; I'm just glad to see him get redpilled.
[IsraelTimes] Reinvigorated Dutch court case demanding end of weapons sales to Israel demonstrates possible fallout from The Hague’s ruling against Netanyahu and Gallant over war against Hamas
Pro-Paleostinian, anti-Israel activists told a Dutch court on Friday that the Netherlands is violating international law by selling weapons to Israel, demonstrating the potential for arms embargoes against Israel due to the International Criminal Court’s decision to issue arrest warrants against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Gallant.
If The Hague District Court supports the activists’ complaint, the Netherlands will be banned from sending arms or weapons parts to Israel. The court will rule on December 13. The Netherlands has already halted the export of F-35 fighter jet parts to Israel following a similar case earlier this year.
The complaint illustrates analysts’ warnings that Israel could face arms embargos as a result of Thursday’s ICC decision, which said there were grounds to believe Israel had targeted civilians and used starvation as a weapon of war.
Citing legal scholar Eran Shamir-Borer — formerly a member of the IDF’s international legal team — Haaretz military analyst Amos Harel said the ICC decision could lead to arms embargoes by "Western countries that have hitherto satisfied themselves with more lenient steps against Israel."
Though the decision relates to Netanyahu and Gallant as individuals rather than Israel as a state, it could still bolster challenges demanding an arms embargo against Israel, as numerous states have provisions against selling arms to nations that might use them in ways that violate international humanitarian law.
The Netherlands, which hosts the ICC and is a signatory of its founding charter, the Rome Statute, was one of the European countries to say it would be obligated to arrest Netanyahu and Gallant should they set foot there.
The United States — the source of just under 70% of Israel’s arms imports — "fundamentally" rejected the court’s decision. Like Israel, the US is not a member of the ICC; a day before the court’s ruling, the US Senate voted decisively against a bill calling for an end to the sale of offensive weapons to Israel, though a third of Democratic senators supported the motion.
Germany, which is a member of the ICC, has indicated it would respect the court’s rulings, but did not commit to ending its robust arms trade with Israel. Germany is the source of some 30% of Israel’s arms imports, making it Israel’s second-biggest arms supplier after the US.
Assaf Uni, a Berlin-based correspondent for Israeli market daily Globes, cited German media as saying Jerusalem had committed to Berlin in writing that German arms would not be used in a way that violates international law — presumably giving the German government legal cover in case of challenges to its arms trade with Israel.
"The ICC will weaken the German government’s case, if pro-Paleostinian organizations petition the court on this matter, as they have in the past," wrote Uni, noting that concerns German arms would be used illegally have "now received high-level legal validation."
Neve Gordon, a professor of international law at Queen Mary University of London, was cited by Al Jazeera as saying the ICC’s decision had "made a certain demand on Western countries" regarding "the kind of trade agreements that they have with Israel — first and foremost with the trade relating to arms."
"If leaders of Israel are charged with crimes against humanity, then this means that the weapons provided by Western nations are being used to commit crimes against humanity," said Gordon.
He told Al Jazeera that most countries’ arms contracts include a memorandum that lays out the conditions for the deal, specifically that they "cannot send weapons to an entity that uses the weapons to carry out serious violations of international humanitarian law."
"I assume NGOs within the countries will file petitions in the domestic courts to question the legality of continuing to send arms to Israel," said Gordon.
Even before the ICC decision, the specter of an arms embargo has hung over Israel, with more than 50 countries — including Russia and China — joining Ottoman Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan’s letter to the United Nations ...an organization conceived in the belief that we're just one big happy world, with the sort of results you'd expect from such nonsense... earlier this month demanding Israel be embargoed.
Nor has the sentiment been exclusive to Israel’s adversaries. French President Emmanuel Macron claimed last month that an arms embargo is the only way to end the war in Gazoo
...Hellhole adjunct to Israel and Egypt's Sinai Peninsula, inhabited by Gazooks. The place was acquired in the wake of the 1967 War and then presented to Paleostinian control in 2006 by Ariel Sharon, who had entered his dotage. It is currently ruled with a rusty iron fist by Hamas with about the living conditions you'd expect. It periodically attacks the Hated Zionist Entity whenever Iran needs a ruckus created or the hard boyz get bored, getting thumped by the IDF in return. The ruling turbans then wave the bloody shirt and holler loudly about oppression and disproportionate response... . In September, British Prime Minister Keir Starmer halted the delivery of some weapons over stated concerns they could be used to commit war crimes, but stopped short of calling for a full embargo. Canada’s Foreign Minister Melanie Joly also announced in September that she was suspending some 30 permits for arms shipments to Israel, saying Ottawa would not have "arms or parts of arms be sent to Gaza."
After the ICC’s decision Thursday, La Belle France and Britannia indicated they would respect the court’s rulings, while Canada said explicitly it would comply with the arrest warrants. All three are signatories of the Rome Statute.
Meanwhile,
...back at the shootout, bullets whapped! around Butch as he tried to tie his scarf around his shoulder as a tourniquet...... in the Netherlands, the ten activist groups demanding an end to arms sales to Israel pointed to the separate legal proceeding against Jerusalem at the UN’s highest court, the International Court of Justice.
The ICJ case, brought by South Africa, accuses Israel of genocide, and the court found in January that Paleostinians had plausible grounds to request protection from the crime. Because the ICJ looks at other court rulings, the ICC decision could further sway it against Israel.
The activist groups claimed the ICJ’s opinion confirmed the Netherlands was obliged to stop selling arms to Israel.
"The government uses my own tax money, that I pay, to kill my own family. I’ve lost 18 members of my own family," Ahmed Abofoul, legal adviser for the pro-Paleostinian organization al-Haq, told a full courtroom.
"This is the result of the complicity of governments for decades," he told news hounds after the hearing.
The Dutch state denied it was violating the 1948 Genocide Convention, which requires signatories to do everything they can to prevent and punish genocide, and argued that the court should not take the role of the state in setting foreign policy.
Jerusalem has strongly rejected the accusation of genocide, claiming it is engaging in legitimate self-defense after thousands of Hamas ..a contraction of the Arabic words for "frothing at the mouth",... -led holy warriors stormed southern Israel on October 7, 2023, to kill some 1,200 people and take 251 hostages.
Direct Translation via Google Translate. Edited. by Dmitry Polyakov
[REGNUM] On November 21, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Yoav Galant. They are accused of committing “war crimes and crimes against humanity” in the Gaza Strip. However, the ICC did not stop there.
At the same time, an arrest warrant was issued for Muhammad Deif, the leader of Hamas' military wing. He is considered one of the main organizers of the October 7, 2023 terrorist attack. It is noteworthy that, according to the Israel Defense Forces (IDF), Deif was liquidated this summer.
All three warrants were issued by the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Karim Ahmad Khan.
THE ESSENCE OF THE ACCUSATIONS
The arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Galant are for crimes committed between October 8, 2023 and at least May 20, 2024. The ICC says it has reason to believe that the Israeli prime minister and former defense minister deprived civilians in the Gaza Strip of vital resources.
"Both individuals intentionally and knowingly deprived the civilian population of Gaza of items essential to their survival, including food, water, medicine and medical supplies, as well as fuel and electricity," the court said in a statement.
Despite warnings and appeals from international organizations and leaders of other countries, Israel has provided only “minimal humanitarian assistance.” For this reason, the ICC has raised suspicions that Netanyahu and Galant may be guilty of using starvation as a weapon of war.
The statement also claimed that "the alleged crimes against humanity were part of a widespread and systematic attack against the civilian population of Gaza."
As for Mohammed Deif, the ICC said he is suspected of having committed “crimes against humanity and war crimes committed in the territory of the State of Israel and the State of Palestine since at least 7 October 2023.” These crimes include murder, extermination, torture, hostage-taking, rape and other violence.
"ANTI-SEMITIC DECISION"
It is important to note that the execution of the ICC order is mandatory for countries that have ratified the Rome Statute. There are 124 such countries. However, there are also those that have signed but not ratified the statute – 29 states in total. Among them are Israel, its main ally – the United States, as well as Russia, Iran and some Arab countries.
It is noteworthy that the members of the European Union, friendly to Israel, have ratified the Rome Statute and are ready to implement the court's decision. Thus, the head of European diplomacy Josep Borrell stated that "the ICC decision is binding on all member states."
The French Foreign Ministry also expressed its willingness to follow the court's principles and announced that "Paris's response to the ICC's arrest order against Netanyahu will be in line with these principles." The foreign ministries of Belgium and the Netherlands responded in a similar manner.
The only EU country that does not agree with the court's decision is Hungary. Budapest said it was ready to accept the Israeli prime minister, guaranteeing his safety. The decision is explained by the fact that Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban has long established friendly relations with Benjamin Netanyahu and supports Israel on many issues.
The Jewish state, for its part, categorically disagrees with the arrest warrant issued by the ICC. A statement released by the Israeli Prime Minister's Office said the accusations against the country were false and anti-Semitic. "The anti-Semitic decision of the International Criminal Court is a modern-day Dreyfus trial, and it will end the same way," the statement said.
Israel considers the ICC a biased and discriminatory political body that makes false and absurd accusations. The statement also said the decision to issue the warrants was made by a “corrupt attorney general who is trying to protect himself from sexual harassment charges and biased judges driven by anti-Semitic hatred of Israel.”
The case concerns the ICC's November 11 decision to open an external investigation into allegations of sexual assault against Khan, who denies any wrongdoing.
THE WEST IS DISAPPOINTED
Karim Ahmad Kan requested an arrest warrant for Netanyahu and Galant back in May. However, the process was delayed due to concerns that its implementation could hinder negotiations on a ceasefire and the release of hostages. The negotiations have not yielded results in the past six months. On the contrary, the situation has become even more tense after the assassinations of Hamas political bureau chief Ismail Haniyeh and the movement's leader in Gaza, Yahya Sinwar.
The Israeli military cabinet does not seem to be stopping. Netanyahu visited Gaza this week and declared that Hamas would not be in the Strip. Moreover, the Jewish state has been conducting a destructive ground operation in Lebanon for the second month. It is probably Israel’s intransigence that has convinced the ICC that there is no point in delaying the warrant any longer.
The timing was not accidental. The ICC ruling came during ceasefire talks between Israel and Hezbollah this week led by US special envoy Amos Hochstein.
On Tuesday and Wednesday, he visited Beirut, where he held a series of meetings with acting Lebanese Prime Minister Najib Mikati and the secretary general of the Shiite Amal Party, Nabih Berri, who is acting as a mediator between Hezbollah and Western countries. At the final press conference, Hochstein said that he had managed to achieve progress in the dialogue with the Lebanese side.
Immediately after, Hezbollah Secretary General Naim Qassem appeared on television. He noted that the success of the current negotiations depended on Israel's reaction and the "seriousness" of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. However, Qassem emphasized that the Jewish state was putting forward too serious conditions: "Israel wants to achieve through an agreement what it could not achieve on the battlefield. This is impossible."
After the Beirut talks, Amos Hochstein traveled to Tel Aviv, where he held several meetings with Israeli officials, including Netanyahu. According to Arab media reports, Israel is reluctant to make concessions on fundamental issues, so the American envoy is pushing for more rounds of talks.
It is significant that the International Criminal Court issued an arrest warrant for Israeli citizens precisely at the time of Netanyahu's negotiations with Hochstein. This decision shows that Western countries are extremely disappointed with Israel's intransigence and are perhaps trying to put pressure on the country's leadership.
In this situation, the reaction of the French Foreign Ministry is quite understandable. Paris is trying to actively participate in the resolution of the conflict, but its attempts to penetrate deeply into Lebanon through mediation efforts are each time met with the unwillingness of the Israeli side to compromise.
Certainly, the arrest warrant signals a higher stakes in the negotiations. However, the decision could only make matters worse. With Netanyahu in a difficult position, he may refuse to compromise and take steps that will escalate the conflict, including continuing military operations in Gaza and Lebanon.
#2
"The arrest warrants for Netanyahu and Galant are for crimes committed between October 8 ..."
I.E. any military reaction to 10/7 is being criminalized, while the state actors behind the aggression of 10/7 (Iran, Qatar, Russia) aren't even mentioned, let alone held responsible.
The ICC is a disgusting and reprehensible travesty that isn't even trying to mask its nature.
#3
Israel should announce terrorist death warrants for the ICC, since they are aiding and abetting terrorists, they will die like them. Then pick 5-6 of them and take them out in interesting ways, toilet bombs, etc.
[FE] Christian Craighead interviewed by Lucas Bernard
LB: Alright Christian, the Browning Hi-Power/SA-35. Why does it hold a special place in your heart?
CC: It’s the first handgun I ever got my hands on at the age of 17. I used it in 1993 straight out of training. Deploying to Northern Ireland, learning to shoot it was part of the induction course into the Parachute Battalion. You had to use the Hi-Power because as part of our role in Northern Ireland we’d sometimes wear plain clothes. Not in specialist covert activities, just more like escort duties. That was my first exposure to the pistol.
LB: The last article was drawn from your experiences as a boy fantasizing about all these wonderful movie guns. Do you remember when you were waiting in line to get issued your pistol and being like: "Oh my god, I finally get to have one!"?
CC: It did feel really cool to get my hands on one and have the lessons. We were professional about it. To me it was just another tool, but it did feel good to have the gun, and if necessary, to be able to use it. That said, it felt quite strange carrying it concealed for the first time. Remember it’s the UK—we’re not really exposed to guns very much.
LB: After you left the Parachute Battalion, that wasn’t the end of your relationship with the Hi-Power was it?
CC: No, around 1999, when I was serving in the Pathfinders, we started getting issued the Hi-Power as a secondary weapon. These pistols were very old and way past their "use by date" in my opinion. So, the frustration was that they were not that accurate—or not as accurate as they should be.
LB: So now that you have a SA-35 and are impressed with it, is it now your “go-to” pistol?
CC: Not really. The best analogy would be this: Imagine the Hi-Power as a first girlfriend you had at the age of 17. Admittedly, when you first got your hands on her, you didn’t really know what you were doing, and it definitely wasn’t a great experience. Now, 31 years later, she’s the SA-35 and you’ve reconnected with her. You know she’s been around a bit, but she’s had a makeover, she’s looking good and doing well for herself; and you’re pleased. When you got your hands on her again, it’s certainly a lot better than you remember and a somewhat pleasurable experience. Will you carry on with her though? Probably not. Life moves on, as do your standards.
#3
I fell for a hi-power in '85.
Over the years the finish needed cosmetic touchups and finally a full frame gloss blueing.
I replaced the barrel after the bore wore out with a shiny new chrome treatment that eventually needed attention due to throat erosion from hot loads.
I would occasionally replace high tension springs with tough new stainless and once or twice let a friend shoot her.
I carried her for years but finally gave her up for a price that was more than what she was worth.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
..a contraction of the Arabic words for "frothing at the mouth",...
