Month: April 2022

As with many other cases involving a migrant who reportedly killed his victims due to jihadist motives, a Somali man who killed three women in Würzburg in a stabbing spree last year while screaming “Allahu Akbar” will end up receiving institutional mental health treatment rather than head to prison.

The trial against the Somali began in Bavaria on Friday, with the court hearing how Abdirahman J., who came to Germany in 2015, stabbed and killed three women aged 24, 49, and 82 years within just five minutes in the early evening of June 25, 2021. Equipped with a 30-centimeter-long blade, the Somali migrant severely injured four other women, including two girls between the ages of 11 and 16, and slightly injured three others.

One of the murdered victims was a mother and school teacher defending her daughter from the Somali man. Covered in both her own blood and her mother’s, the 11-year-old girl was reported as screaming, “I don’t want to die,” as she ran through the Woolworth department store in the quiet German city.

The German prosecutor’s office is demanding institutional psychiatric treatment instead of prison for the 32-year-old Somali migrant, saying he is schizophrenic. The prosecution is seeking to send him to a “closed psychiatric ward” which would feature a higher level of security.

The man has a checkered past. Upon enter Germany, the man reportedly lied about his age, reducing it by eight years. Although his asylum claim was rejected, he was never deported. At the time of the stabbing, he lived in a homeless shelter and had resided in Würzburg since 2015. Just before the attack, he had been hospitalized in a mental institution.

“His mental state has been observed in recent months, including violent tendencies. A few days ago he was ordered to receive psychiatric treatment,” said Bavaria’s Interior Minister Joachim Hermann at the time.

Herrmann originally said following the attack that there was “blatant suspicion” of an Islamist motive, however, the Abdirahman J.’s defense has been successful in arguing he was simply mentally ill.

The perpetrator shouted “Allahu Akbar” at least twice during the attack and, according to investigators, acted out of hatred for Germany. However, his lawyer claimed there was no terrorist motive behind the attack, and investigators have been unable to find that the Somali man belong to any sort of radical Islamic organization such as ISIS.

Abdirahman J. did not comment on his action in court on Friday. However, his lawyer stressed that he regretted the suffering he had caused to the victims and survivors. According to his attorney, the “voices in his head” led him to attack.

That is why the prosecution wants the court to send the Somali migrant to a closed psychiatric ward for a long time. According to a pair of psychiatric reports, he was insane in the act and could therefore pose a long-term danger to the public.

More than 50 knife attacks occur everyday in multicultural Germany, and the Somali migrant is not the only one currently on trial for a brutal stabbing. Another Somali man is currently on trial for stabbing a man 111 times and slicing off his head. As Remix News previously reported, the German media routinely obscures the disproportionate role of migrants in such attacks.

The stabbing murder of three women in Würzburg also has much in common with a previous case in Germany from 2020, which was briefly reported on at the time it occurred. In that case, a Somali man randomly targeted an elderly pensioner, beating him into a coma while screaming “Allahu Akbar.” After 11 months in a coma, the man passed away. After nearly a year in hospital, the elderly man was forced to die alone after coronavirus restrictions kept his son from being able to visit him. Just as in Würzburg, the Somali migrant never had to face prison, but was the instead ruled to be mentally incompetent.

https://rmx.news/article/somali-man-who-screamed-allahu-akbar-while-stabbing-3-german-women-to-death-will-avoid-prison/

More and more food processing plants are going up in flames in the US. Sixteen such incidents have been recorded so far. The background is unclear, but terrorism is being ruled out.

The fact is, however, that the basic needs of the population are massively threatened in some places by these attacks on infrastructure while authorities downplay the incidents.

Throughout the past year, but especially since February 2022, a series of devastating fires in the United States and Canada have destroyed or severely damaged food processing plants – mostly meat plants (slaughterhouses, hog and poultry farms), but also silage and large-scale grain production plants. As a result, there could be food shortages and price increases in many areas.

Devastating damage

The damage is catastrophic: an employee of an affected factory in Texas estimates that 50 to 100 truckloads of onions were destroyed there alone. A factory in Oregon was completely destroyed by a boiler explosion and all 244 employees had to be laid off. A fire in California had to evacuate 2 700 people around the affected factory.

Food prices are already at record highs in the US. The Rockefeller Foundation released an analysis of when a “massive, immediate food crisis” could start, and added that it would probably be “in the next six months”. The foundation shares the outlook of the World Economic Forum (WEF), advocating for the “Great Reset”.

Fires and explosions: possible connections
Officially, there are various reasons for the fires: the authorities downplay the possibility of any connections, and the Homeland Security Department does not assume terrorist attacks. At least one fire in Georgia last week was caused by a plane crashing onto a factory site. Since fires and explosions on factory premises and similar events repeatedly broke out for unknown reasons, some experts also suspect the likelihood of serial perpetrators and targeted attacks.

Conceivable would be militant animal or nature conservationists, climate activists or enemies of industrial food production, who are resorting to increasingly uncompromising means in the US just as they are in Europe.

Food crisis is getting worse
It is undisputed that the never-ending series of incidents will further exacerbate the food crisis, which is also noticeable in the US, as a result of supply chains that are already strained. In any case, the extent of the damage caused by the destruction in this sensitive key sector cannot yet be quantified; it also depends on how quickly the damaged or completely destroyed facilities can be repaired.

The FBI’s Cyber Division meanwhile published a warning about increased “cyber-attack threats” on agricultural cooperatives.

native advertising
“Ransomware actors may be more likely to attack agricultural cooperatives during critical planting and harvest seasons, disrupting operations, causing financial loss, and negatively impacting the food supply chain,” the notice read, adding 2021 and early 2022 ransomware attacks on farming co-ops could affect the current planting season “by disrupting the supply of seeds and fertilizer”.

The agency warned, “A significant disruption of grain production could impact the entire food chain, since grain is not only consumed by humans but also used for animal feed … In addition, a significant disruption of grain and corn production could impact commodities trading and stocks. ”

FBI Warns of Targeted Cyber Attacks On Food Plants After Mysterious Rash Of Fires | ZeroHedge https://t.co/QQLuRiHJvR

— Dr. Benjamin Braddock (@GraduatedBen) April 24, 2022

https://freewestmedia.com/2022/04/25/us-food-production-threatened-by-mysterious-fires-in-meat-plants/

By Alex Maistrovoy

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine was largely predictable but it also brought some surprises. It was quite expected that the current U.S. administration would try to draw Russia into the “Ukrainian swamp” in order to weaken and isolate it as much as possible. It was expected that the inexperienced and naive Ukrainian leader would trust the promises of the Biden team and let them to drag his country into a devastating gamble.

It was expected that Russia, seeking to restore its former empire, would use Western provocations to establish its presence in a weak and corrupt Ukraine. It was completely unexpected that instead of a modern, maneuverable, and highly organized Russian army, we saw poorly trained troops erasing entire cities from the face of the earth like nomadic hordes. A terrifying surprise has been the use by the Kremlin against its brothers in blood and faith of the Chechen and Syrian militants of the Wagner group. Finally, the biggest surprise was the desperate courage of the Ukrainians themselves and the high combat readiness of their armed forces.

This war will not end in the foreseeable future. Most likely, it will lead to the destruction of Ukraine and the extreme weakening of Russia, exhausted by excessive exertion of forces and sanctions.

The question is what goals should the West set for itself in this situation and should it strive for the complete destruction of Russia? Or, on the contrary, does it need a comparatively strong Russia?

Relations between the West and Russia are determined by three factors: geopolitical, economic, and cultural.

In geopolitical terms, Russia was natural buffer between the West and Asia, which includes the Muslim East and China. The weakening of Russia will mean a simultaneous sharp rise of Islam and China.

Let’s start with China. Russia is already turning into a raw materials appendage of a high-tech and powerful Chinese empire. If Russia is cut off from the West, it will inevitably become completely dependent on China with its unlimited human and technological resources. This means that China, through its satellites in the Kremlin, will directly reach European borders. The old Soviet joke about the “Chinese-Finnish border” will become an ominous reality. The huge military resources of Russia will become a de facto part of the Chinese military machine, which can simultaneously threaten both the U.S. and Europe. It is the worst possible scenario for the West.

There are large Muslim enclaves in Russia itself, including Chechnya, other Caucasian republics and the Volga republics: Tatarstan, Bashkortostan and others. Islamic radical groups, branches of the Muslim Brotherhood and Salafis operate everywhere here. In the event of a losing or weakening of control from the Kremlin, they inevitably (as in other failed states) try to create a series of “caliphates,” like the Islamic State. With the support of the gigantic Muslim communities in Russia’s major cities, they will get a base for further advances to the West. In such case they will get assistance from Turkey, which regards significant parts of Ukraine and Russia as a natural part of the new Ottoman Caliphate. Crimea, the historical vassal of Turkey, will be drawn into the orbit of the new “High Porte” too.

The regimes of Central Asia are to a large extent supported by Russian bayonets. If Moscow withdraws from the region, the Afghan Taliban, successfully brought back to power by President Biden and his team, will immediately fill the resulting vacuum. The huge territories of largely artificial states, like Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Kyrgyzstan and others, will turn into a single “caliphate” and a natural reserve for terrorist groups. At the same time, masses of refugees from these countries will rush to the West in search of salvation. Compared to these unrestrained flows, the migration of 2015 will be child’s play.

Only the wishful thinking of the ignorant and arrogant elites of the West can deny the reality of such a scenario. None of them imagined that the defeat of the USSR in Afghanistan would become a prelude to 9/11 and world Islamic terror, and the romance of the “Arab spring” would give this terror a new impetus.

In the economic aspect, the West is in dire need of Russian raw materials, not only energy resources, but valuable minerals. Russia is the world’s largest diamond miner, a leading exporter of cobalt, vanadium, and platinum, gold, nickel and sulfur, silver and phosphates, and iron ore. The West cannot count on other sources of energy resources — from the Persian Gulf, Iraq, Libya, and Iran. First, such resources are not enough, and secondly, they are located in an extremely unstable and unpredictable region. Attempts to replace traditional energy sources with alternative “green energy” are doomed to failure as well.

In the cultural aspect, both Europe and America are already forced to desperately fight for their national identities, undermined by such neo-Marxist ideologies as identity politics, Critical Race Theory, intersectionality, cancel culture and others.  So far, the national movements of North America and Europe are losing this game. Eastern Europe remains the main so far the only stronghold of European cultural identity, however, in the event of the collapse of Russia, the countries of Eastern Europe and the Balkans will find themselves between a rock and a hard place: the globalist West, on the one hand, and China and Muslims, on the other. Their future, like the future of Israel, will be in doubt. The fall of Russia as a strong country with stable Christian national traditions will leave America, already extremely weakened by globalists and progressives, alone in the fight against external threats. The consequences of this will be very sad for the U.S. as a state, and for Western civilization as a whole.

Thus, having lost Russia, the West will lose the powerful natural barrier that separates it from the hostile East, and will significantly strengthen both the Chinese empire and world Islam. The way to the West will be open.

This has happened three times in the past. The first time it occurred in the first millennium, when the hordes of the Huns broke through the defenses of the Byzantine Empire, invading Europe.

The second time was in the 13th century, when the Mongol hordes crushed Kievan Rus, destroyed Hungary and Poland and almost reached Prague, Austria, and German lands.

The third time the Christian West allowed Byzantium to die under the blows of the Turks in the 15th century and actually opened the way to Vienna for Ottomans.

In all three cases the West was saved by divine guidance. Will it save the West for the fourth time?

https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2022/04/will_the_collapse_of_russia_mean_the_end_of_the_west.html

Healthcare costs associated with Germany’s rapidly growing immigrant population are soaring, and the port city of Hamburg helps exemplify just how much the country is spending.

Authorities in Hamburg have paid out almost half a billion euros on medical care for migrants since 2015, according to a parliamentary query by the Alternative for Germany (AfD) parliamentary group in the city’s local parliament.

Asylum seekers in Hamburg have generated significant costs in recent years, with Alexander Wolf, the AfD parliamentary group spokesman, calling the figure a “huge sum which puts our community of solidarity at risk.”

“Migrants obliged to leave the country must be brought home immediately,” Wolf demanded, insisting such a move was necessary to “relieve our social security funds.”

“If the parent state pays for medical expenses in abundance for all migrants, then it will soon be sick itself,” he added.

Germany’s substantial intake of migrants over the last decades, and especially in the last six years, has placed enormous strains on the country’s budget. In order to deal with poorly integrated, and mostly unemployed migrants, many of them from the Middle East and Africa, more taxpayer money is being funneled into caring for them than ever before. In 2020, the German government indicated it planned to spend €64 billion to migrants for housing, integration, education, and health care over the course of four years. That sum came on top of the already tens of billions the government had spent up until that point.

With a large influx of Ukrainian refugees, those costs can be expected to be pushed much higher, all at a time when inflation and rising healthcare costs associated with Germany’s aging population are expected to increase.

Hamburg, along with Berlin and other major German cities, remain top destinations for migrants across the world. Approximately 60,000 people registered as refugees are currently living in Hamburg. Of these, 2,800 do not have permission to remain and are required to leave the country. Recently, 15,000 more refugees from Ukraine have arrived.

https://rmx.news/article/germanys-migrant-population-places-major-burden-on-healthcare-system-and-state-budgets/

German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock (Greens) is in self-destruction mode. “Germany is getting out of Russian energy imports completely,” she declared.

Germany as well as the EU will completely stop its oil imports from Russia by the end of this year, according to the Green politician. “That’s why I’m saying here clearly and unequivocally: yes, Germany is also getting out of Russian energy imports completely.”

She continued: “We will halve oil by the summer and be at zero by the end of the year, and then gas will follow, in a joint European roadmap, because our joint exit, the complete exit with the European Union, is our joint strength.”

But Germany in particular has considerable problems implementing the boycott announcements because the German economy is even more dependent on Russian energy supplies than other economies. The EU is thus hardly united on the issue. In the first quarter of 2020, Russian supplies accounted for 40 percent of German gas imports. The economy in particular is warning of the massive consequences of a hasty turn away from Russian deliveries.

Baerbock certainly shocked industrialists by saying that a rapid total phase-out of Russian energy was planned.

A letter from the radical climate group “Last Generation” has also surfaced, which was launched just a day before the Baerbock statement.

Planned sabotage of the economy

In its open letter, “Last Generation”, which recently generated negative headlines with road blockades, hunger strikes and protests in front of the Ministry of Economic Affairs, announced more acts of sabotage. In the letter, dated Tuesday, April 19, the group said: “Starting next week we will peacefully shut down the pipelines of oil and gas that flow through our country.” Fossil fuels would allegedly lead to “famine, war and destruction”.

Therefore, this protest will be extended to the “fossil infrastructure”. They maintain that their acts will remain “absolutely non-violent and peaceful” and they supposedly “do not want to endanger or injure people”. The fact is that sabotaging the German economy and energy supply would no doubt mean great suffering and the loss of jobs for millions of people, but this does not seem to concern them in the least.

They have given the the “Great Reset” disciple from the WEF squad an ultimatum: They demand that the government “give an assurance that it will stop all expansion and financing of future fossil fuel infrastructure”. Otherwise energy supply will be cut off.

https://freewestmedia.com/2022/04/25/german-fm-in-self-destruction-mode/

The globalists have won. Emmanuel Macron was re-elected President of the French Republic on April 24, 2022 with an estimated 58% of the votes. Marine Le Pen, his challenger, got only 42% of the votes.

This French presidential election is a good illustration of the conflict that runs through all Western societies, namely the fight between the mobile and the rooted, between globalists and nationalists, between progressive elites and common citizens, between those who feel good everywhere and those who feel good where they were born.

But in France, this classic conflict between the top and the bottom of society is not perceived as such. Since the late 1980s, all French political life has been built on a fiction. In France, anyone who opposes the progressive establishment, anyone who opposes immigration policy, anyone who criticizes, say, the violence — or the suppression of women and free speech — in Islam, is considered the equivalent of Adolf Hitler’s nephew.

This strange situation was created in the late 1980s by France’s socialist president, François Mitterrand. To divide the right and prevent them from returning to power. Mitterrand promoted, through the state-owned radio and television corporations, a microscopic far-right party, the National Front, the first that actually dared to speak out against immigration.

From the middle of the 1980s until now, the media and the “left” together manufactured an industrial-strength shame machine to stigmatize as “racist” and “Nazi” anyone who dared to raise his voice on issues of immigration or the arguably less-sympathetic aspects of Islam.

During the two weeks preceding the second round of the just-concluded presidential election, all observers had the feeling that in France, a titanic metaphysical battle was taking place between Good and Evil.

The daily Le Monde sought out veteran sociologists such as Edgar Morin to assert that France was facing a “historic risk” if its citizens were losing their minds and voted for Marine Le Pen. In another article, Le Monde quoted Prefects (representatives of the state in all regions of France) who “themselves draw parallels” between a possible election of Marine Le Pen and the invasion of France by the Nazis in 1940.

Minister of the Interior Gérald Darmanin explained that with Marine Le Pen, “the rich may lose weight, but the poor may die”.

Some left-wing media outlets, such as L’Obs, raised the spectre of nuclear war. “If Marine Le Pen were elected, “48,000 Hiroshimas” would become possible.

The public service radio certified every five minutes that Marine Le Pen was “extreme right” (meaning “racist” and “Nazi”).

And the leftists of the Canard Enchainé headlined, “neither Marine, nor Le Pen”. Even Charlie Hebdo featured on its cover, “Sunday, let’s get rid of that” (meaning Le Pen)

NGOs of course were on deck. The Licra, an anti-racist NGO, declared that the victory of Le Pen would mean “the liberation of xenophobia and racism”. The League of Human Rights called for “demonstrations against the extreme right”. And the NGO SOS Racism added that Le Pen’s victory would mean “the establishment of a French-style apartheid”.

The Archbishop of Strasbourg called for a vote for Macron, although the French Bishops’ Conference magnanimously left Christians free to “vote according to their conscience”. The Protestant Federation of France warned against the Le Pen’s National Rally Party, while Jewish organizations (Representative Council of Jewish Institutions of France and the rabbis of the Consistory) called to “put up a barrier” against Le Pen.

The Rector of the Grand Mosque of Paris, of course, called for voting in favor of Macron in the name of the fight against “malicious forces that call for the banishment of Muslims” and the Rassemblement des Musulmans de France (close to Morocco) explained that “only a vote for Emmanuel Macron allows our country to preserve the principles of the republic”.

About 50 sports stars — all those athletes who see no problem in going to the Winter Olympics in Beijing or kicking a ball in Qatar ,where thousands of workers died while building of air-conditioned stadiums — signed a vibrant call to block the National Rally Party and to defend “Republican values”.

After the athletes, came the artists. Nearly 500 actors, singers, directors, producers and dancers called to “block Marine Le Pen… whose program remains that of xenophobia and inward-looking attitude.

The unions followed. While Le Pen came out on top in the first round of the presidential election in all blue-collar area, while she was the candidate of the Yellow Vests and the French working classes, the two largest trade union organizations, CFDT and CGT, called to “make a barrage” against Le Pen. The leaders of these two unions even signed an op-ed together, explaining that “Marine Le Pen is a danger for all workers.”

The environmentalist and feminist Alice Coffin tweeted that Le Pen was preparing to “assassinate” all feminists.

The author Julia de Funes was astonished in Le Figaro by this outpouring of opinions, and remarked that the exhibition of voting intentions in favor of Macron “was kind of a farce”. All these personalities who express themselves on the vote, do not seek to “share an opinion… but to exhibit their perfect morality”. For these people, “to think right is to think well. And to think well means to think like them”.

Another author, Michel Onfray, noted on Twitter that in France there is “a single party and if you are not part of it, you are a fascist, a racist, a xenophobe!”

These debates prevented — but perhaps it was their function — the real problems from being covered by the media and politicians – such as Muslim mass-immigration (2 million more Muslim immigrants under the Macron presidency); the creeping Islamization of the suburbs ; the rampant lawlessness and lack of security (an assault occurs every 44 seconds and the police are confronted with refusals to comply every 30 minutes); the abuse of power by the European Union’s courts of justice; the authoritarian drift of the European Commission; Macron’s authoritarian and terrorizing management of the Covid-19 pandemic, and the violence he wielded against the Yellow Vests –none of these subjects was ever addressed during the presidential campaign.

Now that the results of the presidential election are known, the media bubble may revert to how it was before the titanic metaphysical battle. The first observation that can be made is that the French political landscape is now entirely upended. The classic parties were swept away. The Socialist Party, which dominated the political scene since the 1980s, got only 1.75% of the votes at the first round of the presidential election and Les Républicains, on the right, won only 4.78% of the votes.

From now on, three new political formations share the electoral terrain, all three around a central figure: the La République en Marche is Macron’s party (the largest number of voters: 9.8 million voters, 27.8% of the votes in the first round). It was created in 2016 and its electorate is composed of the beneficiaries of globalization, some of the French Muslims and retirees who usually vote for the party in power.

The second largest party in France is the National Rally, centered around Le Pen (8.1 million votes, 23.15% of the vote in the first round of the presidential election). The RN is the party of the non-Muslim working class, the party of the poor people and the middle classes who are attached to the croissant-baguettes “French way of life”. The RN represents the “somewheres” fighting against the “anywheres”. If we add to the RN, the votes collected by Éric Zemmour (2.4 million votes, 7%), the RN equals the party of Macron.

The third party in France is La France Insoumise, built around the thundering personality of Jean-Luc Mélenchon (7.7 million votes; 21.95% of the vote on the first round). Mélenchon is a former socialist who wanted to ban the Islamic veiland who, in 2015, in the aftermath of the deadly terrorist attack that year on the offices of the French satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, denounced Islamic fanaticism as his main enemy. Less than five years later, however, in 2019, Mélenchon made an about-face and demonstrated on the side of Islamic organizations. Since then, he has multiplied his attacks against police officers accused of “racist behavior”, against secularism which “must not be a state atheism” — ether against the “persecution of Muslims” or for “the freedom to wear the veil“. Today, the main collaborators of Mélenchon are Islamists, leftists and Woke personalities. A recent IFOP poll confirmed that 70% of French Muslims voted for Mélenchon.

On the evening of his elimination from the first round of the presidential election, Mélenchon called several times not to vote for Le Pen. Perhaps he was heard. The Islamists who carried Mélenchon might have joined forces with the globalists who carried Macron. Both defeated the nationalists who supported Le Pen.

The nationalists, the French “somewheres”, have become a minority in their own country.

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/18470/france-macron-reelected

Watching France’s election, albeit from behind geographic and linguistic barriers, I have to wonder what the outcome would have been if the Ukraine war had never happened. It’s absurd to think that this would even be a major election issue in France, which isn’t exactly sharing a border with Russia, yet Macron had few arguments to make against Le Pen except for, “Russia, Russia, Russia”.

What would his core argument have been if Putin hadn’t invaded Ukraine? If anyone gets the credit for saving Macron, it would have to be Putin.

For Americans, the question is to what extent does this offer a preview of coming attractions?

While it’s probably unlikely that there will be an intense conflict in the region for years, Russian nationalists keep talking about where they would like to go after Ukraine. (Considering their failure to digest Ukraine, that doesn’t seem like a great plan, but I wouldn’t rule it out either.)

While the war has inflicted plenty of economic pain on Europe, Macron’s victory shows that it also confers economic benefits. Likewise, Biden has been able to spin his economic disaster, at least to some, as Putin’s. 

Neither Putin, who has seen Russia take too much of a military beating to leave with anything short of some sort of substantial gains, nor Biden or the Euros have much of an incentive to end the conflict. As long as the war continues, the various leaders can keep their countries in crisis mode.

That’s another reason why this war needs to end, preferably sooner rather than later.

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2022/04/did-putin-save-macron-daniel-greenfield/

Eldad Beck, Israel Hayom correspondent to Europe, explains the implications of the recent elections in France, where polls show incumbent Emmanuel Macron enjoying a wide lead over his nearest challenger, Marine Le Pen.

“Macron smashed the left wing parties years ago, and now is breaking up the right wing parties as well. He leads a political block that combines left and right,” Beck says.

Marine Le Pen, he adds, has her own appeal to the public: “There are a lot of people who are feeling anti-Macron right now. They might not vote for Le Pen, but at least they won’t back Macron.”

Beck shows that Jewish communities, and Israel as a whole, have what to gain from the shift in France’s political playing field: “There is a huge gap between the official position of the French Jewish community and what the simple members of the community believe. While the official position still speaks to older values that see the extreme right as an enemy, more and more people are starting to believe that the extreme right could be a partner to the Jewish community.”

Despite some gaps in ideologies, Beck believes that he has the answer for the Jewish community: “of course, there are some problems, such as the issue of Kashrut, I believe that if there could be a dialogue with those parties, a solution could very quickly be found.”

Regarding Israel’s stance, Beck advises caution. “Being Jewish means there’s always something to be worried about, but we must stop behaving like Jews in the ghetto and start being far more sovereign about foreign policy, particularly what serves Israel’s interests.”

https://www.israelnationalnews.com/news/326312