Obama: Le national-socialisme n’a rien à voir avec l’Allemagne ou le peuple allemand (President Franklin Delano Obama: Imagine Obama as an American president in 1939)

Photo via PJMedia

Sack cartoon: Obama's Islamic State strategy
 Mes bons amis, voici la seconde fois que nous rentrons d’Allemagne à Downing Street avec une paix honorable. Je crois qu’il s’agit de la paix pour notre temps. Nous vous remercions du fond du cœur. À présent, je vous conseille de rentrer chez vous, et dormez en paix. Neville Chamberlain
I do not believe we should be in the business of telling Muslims what their religion is or isn’t. So I kind of recoil from anyone who says it’s all this, or anyone who says it’s not any of that. I think we should be in the business of asking them, “Why is this happening?” We don’t know. We have an overwhelming number of Muslims who are American citizens living in this country and who are wonderful citizens. So we don’t have this problem. So maybe you could explain it to me, but I sort of recoil at anyone sitting back who’s not a Muslim, saying, “That is not Islam.” What the hell do you know what Islam is? “Oh, I read the Quran in college” … you don’t know anything, OK? And that’s not our job, it seems to me.So, the way I’ve written about it is that obviously this is emerging from their faith community. First of all, it’s not emerging from across their faith community. It’s not a problem in Indonesia, the world’s biggest Muslim country. It’s not a problem in India, the world’s second-biggest Muslim country. We’re talking about a problem that has clearly been emerging from the Arab world and Pakistan, primarily. Now what is that about? » I think it’s a really complicated mix of a product of years of authoritarian government, mixing with the export of Wahhabi puritanical Islam from Saudi Arabia, all over that world, that has really leached out the more open, joyous, synchronistic Islam that you had in Egypt. You look at pictures of graduates from Cairo University in 1950, you’ll see none of the women were wearing veils. Today you look at the picture and probably most of the women will be wearing veils. Thank you, Saudi Arabia. That is the product of the export of a particular brand of Islam from Saudi Arabia with the wealth of that country. And that’s mixed in also with the youth bulge and unemployment. And so where Islam starts in that story and where authoritarian begins, how much people hate their own government, bleeding into Wahhabism, bleeding into massive amounts of young men who have never held power because they’re not allowed to in their country, never held a job, never held a girl’s hand. And when you have lots of young males who have never held power, a job, or a girl’s hand, that is real dynamite. Tom Friedman
Je sais que c’est horrible à dire, mais je ne pense pas que le président aime l’Amérique. Il ne vous aime pas, il ne m’aime pas. Il n’a pas été élevé comme vous et moi dans l’amour de ce pays. Il critique l’Amérique. Il parle des croisades en disant que les chrétiens étaient des barbares, oubliant de finir sa phrase en disant que les musulmans étaient aussi des barbares. Rudolph Giuliani
Je ne remets pas en cause son patriotisme, je suis sûr qu’il est patriote. Mais dans sa rhétorique, je l’entends très rarement dire les choses que j’avais l’habitude d’entendre chez Ronald Reagan ou Bill Clinton concernant leur amour pour l’Amérique. Je l’entends critiquer l’Amérique beaucoup plus que d’autres présidents américains. Rudolph Giuliani
L’agenda de ces négociations a été fixé en novembre 2013. Les deux précédentes dates butoirs, de juin 2014 et novembre 2014, n’ont pas permis d’arriver à un compromis. La nouvelle échéance est celle de juin 2015. Je ne suis pas optimiste car le dossier capotera toujours sur un détail ou sur un autre. Le programme nucléaire iranien répond au besoin hégémonique régional des mollahs. Il faut empêcher à tout prix ce régime d’arriver au seuil du nucléaire militaire. (…) La France est plus intransigeante que les États-Unis. Heureusement! Il y a chez les Américains une certaine forme de naïveté. Ils cherchent, en quelque sorte, à faire un nouveau Camp David, du nom des accords qu’ils ont obtenus en 1978 entre Israéliens et Égyptiens. Ils oublient que le nouveau président iranien, Hassan Rohani, présenté comme plus conciliant, n’a pas la main. C’est le guide Khamenei qui est important, et je ne pense pas que celui-ci acceptera que son programme nucléaire soit placé sous contrôle international. (…) Il est illusoire de penser que, face à la menace du radicalisme sunnite, la théocratie chiite iranienne peut être un allié. N’oublions pas que ces deux radicalismes ont un ennemi commun: la liberté, la démocratie, les droits de l’homme… Toutes les valeurs portées par l’Occident sont, pour eux, des poisons. N’oublions pas non plus que, bien avant al-Qaida et l’État islamique, Khomeyni a été le premier à lancer une fatwa contre l’écrivain Salman Rushdie. (…) Encore une fois, le régime n’y a aucun intérêt parce que sa survie en dépendrait à long terme, à quatre ou cinq ans. À court terme, les relations ne se réchaufferaient pas pour autant. Tout le monde marcherait sur des œufs et seuls les affairistes profiteraient de la situation. (…) Il n’y a qu’une seule bonne solution pour libérer mon pays: un mouvement populaire. Toute intervention militaire ne peut mener qu’à une situation encore plus catastrophique. Mais un soulèvement n’est possible que si la population se sent soutenue. Ce qui manque aujourd’hui, c’est une volonté politique des grandes démocraties pour soutenir les Iraniens dans leurs aspirations démocratiques. Les Iraniens ont en tête l’exemple de la révolution syrienne qui a débouché sur le chaos car les Occidentaux n’ont pas répondu présent. Que reste-t-il d’ailleurs de l’espoir placé dans les printemps arabes? Pas grand-chose malheureusement. (…) Je souhaite que la France et la communauté internationale mettent davantage la pression sur le régime à propos des droits de l’homme. Depuis l’arrivée d’Hassan Rohani, la situation s’est nettement détériorée. Beaucoup de prisonniers politiques me contactent et demandent que le monde libre fasse davantage. Je veux évoquer le cas de l’ayatollah Boroujerdi, torturé régulièrement en prison depuis sept ans car il défend la laïcité. Il faut se mobiliser pour sa libération, et aussi pour l’ensemble des prisonniers politiques. (…) Seuls des changements significatifs dans cette région permettront l’élimination à la source des réseaux djihadistes et contribueront à assurer la sécurité de tous partout dans le monde. Ces attentats montrent une fois encore à quel point nos destins sont liés. Reza Pahlavi
The real sticking point isn’t the speech; the sticking point is the deal.(…) Republican House Speaker John Boehner went around the Democratic White House to invite Mr. Netanyahu to speak to a joint session of Congress about the threat from Iran. The speech will come two weeks before Mr. Netanyahu is running for a new term at home, and three weeks before the deadline for the talks the U.S. and five other world powers are holding with Iran over a possible deal to curb its nuclear program.(…) The administration believes the deal it’s negotiating will reduce Iran’s capacity to enrich uranium so much that Tehran’s leaders would need a year to break out of the agreement and produce enough fissile material to build a bomb—sufficient time to allow the U.S. and its allies to stop any such breakout. Mr. Netanyahu thinks that the residual enrichment capability granted Iran would still leave it as a threshold nuclear state, and would in any case be too large to adequately monitor and inspect with any certainty. Gerald F. Seib
As the six-week trial revealed, the Palestinian Authority provided backing for terrorists—and continues to do so today. Palestinian military and intelligence officials, Mr. Yalowitz calculated, spend $50 million a year to keep terrorists on the payroll while they are held in Israeli jails. The Palestinian government also awards “martyr payments” to the families of suicide bombers. Monday’s verdict comes as something of a vindication for the family of Leon Klinghoffer, the wheelchair-bound American who in 1985 was murdered by Palestine Liberation Organization terrorists aboard the hijacked Italian cruise liner Achille Lauro. The Klinghoffer family filed a lawsuit, but U.S. federal courts had no jurisdiction over acts of terrorism outside the country. The case was dropped, and the PLO settled with the Klinghoffers out of court for an undisclosed sum in 1997. The 1992 Anti-Terrorism Act provides federal courts “with an explicit grant of jurisdiction over international terrorism” and a private right of action for “any national of the United States injured in his or her person, property, or business by reason of an act of international terrorism.” The act also has the virtue of allowing American citizens to assign blame for supporting terrorism, even if politicians are reluctant to do so. Jessica Kasmer-Jacob
Let me be perfectly clear: Mr. Hitler is playing to a domestic audience. He adopts a sort of macho shtick, as a cut-up in the back of the class who appeals to disaffected countrymen. Our task is to demonstrate to Mr. Hitler that his current behavior is not really in his own interest, and brings neither security nor profit to Germany. As for acts of violence in Germany itself, we must express our worry to the German government over apparent extremism, but at the same time we must not overreact. As far as these sporadic attacks on random civilians, as, for example, during the recent Kristallnacht violence, we must keep things in perspective, when, for example, some terrorists randomly targeted some folks in a store. (…) We must not overestimate the SS, a sort of jayvee organization that remains a manageable problem. (…) These terrorists are desperate for legitimacy, and all of us have a responsibility to refute the notion that groups like the SS somehow represent socialism because that is a falsehood that embraces the terrorist narrative. So make no mistake about it: National Socialism has nothing to do with Germany or the German people but is rather a violent extremist organization that has perverted the culture of Germany. It is an extremist ideology that thrives on the joblessness of Germany and can be best opposed by the international community going to the root of German unemployment and economic hard times. Let us not confuse Nazism with legitimate expressions of German nationalism. Stiff-arm saluting and jack boots are legitimate tenets of Germanism, and the German Brotherhood, for example, is a largely peaceful organization. So we Americans must not get on our own high horse. We, too, have bullied our neighbors and invaded them. We, too, have struggled with racism and anti-Semitism, slavery and Jim Crow. And our own culture has at times treated American citizens in the same callous way as the National Socialist do Germans. Before we castigate the Nazis, let us remember the Inquisition and the Crusades. (…) Germany has always been a part of America, always a part of the American story. The future will not belong to those who slander German culture. I made clear that America is not — and never will be — at war with Germany. President Franklin Delano Obama
No radical ideology, religious or otherwise, starts out coherently, much less representing the majority; but it eventually can if appeased and left unchallenged. Does Obama think that National Socialism could never have represented the Germany of Goethe and Schiller just because it only appealed to a minority of Germans in the 1932 election or was clearly a perversion of traditional German values? All that was true, but irrelevant two years later when Germans who once laughed at the barbarity of National Socialism suddenly were willing to look the other way at its thuggery, killings, and ethnic cleansing in exchange for the sense of pride it lent a public that felt itself victimized. (…) Hitler rose to power not because most Germans favored euthanasia and rounding up Jews, but because they were willing to overlook that and a lot more if Hitler were able to win back respect for traditional German influence and status. It matters little right now that most Muslims in theory reject ISIS and find its barbarity a perversion of what they see as traditional Islam, in the way National Socialism distorted classical socialism and German values and history. The key instead is to what degree by its success in gaining territory and numbers, and in humiliating the West, will ISIS gain adherents among Muslims? ISIS assumes that most Muslims, despite their present reservations over its methodology and religious contortions, harbor some quiet admiration that at least radical Islam strikes back at Muslims’ supposed oppressors. ISIS like Hitler expects that in time it will win psychological resonance for a large minority of Muslims — at least in sufficient numbers to ensure its existence and growth. The abyss from Bismarck and Hegel to Auschwitz was not inherently greater than from the Koran to ISIS, given the unchanging nature of humankind. Psychoanalyzing Hitler or declaring that National Socialism was a betrayal of classical Germany or fearing conflating Nazism with Germany itself was a useless parlor game in the 1930s. All that mattered was whether Hitler’s thuggery could be humiliated — its bluff called in the Rhineland or at Munich — and shown to be weak and a prescription for disaster before it became too strong. Victor Davis Hanson

Vous avez dit « paix pour notre temps » ?

A l’heure où le prétendu Monde libre pourrait s’acheminer vers un accord nucléaire que tout le monde sait incontrolable fin mars …

Avec un pays qui, du Liban à l’Irak et au Yemen, étend chaque jour un peu plus son influence mortifère …

Et qu’un leader dudit  prétendu Monde libre se refusant, lui et sa claque médiatique politiquement correcte y compris dans sa version light à la Tom Friedman, à prononcer même le nom de son ennemi …

N’a pas de mots assez durs pour le dirigeant d’un Etat qui refuse de faire les frais d’un accord qui pourrait signifier pour son pays rien de moins que son rayage, depuis longtemps claironné, de la carte du monde …

Pendant que face au secret de polichinelle de l’organisation et du financement du terrorisme par l’Autorité palestinienne depuis des décennies, une cour de justice américaine est contrainte de se substituer à la pusillanimité de ses dirigeants politiques qui financent ladite Autorité …

Comment ne pas voir avec l’historien militaire américain Victor Davis Hanson …

Via l’exemple, hypothétique mais ô combien parlant, d’un President Franklin Delano Obama …

La véritable catastrophe que nous prépare une telle approche ?

President Franklin Delano Obama Addresses the Threat of 1930s Violent Extremism
Imagine Obama as an American president in 1939

Victor Davis Hanson

PJMedia

February 23, 2015

“The United States has made significant gains [2] in our struggle against violent extremism in Europe. We are watching carefully aggressions in Czechoslovakia, Austria, and in Eastern Europe. My diplomatic team has made it very clear that aggression against neighbors is inappropriate and unacceptable. We live in the 20th century, where the 19th century practice [3] of changing borders by the use of force has no place in the present era.

“Let me be perfectly clear: Mr. Hitler is playing to a domestic audience. He adopts a sort of macho shtick, as a cut-up in the back of the class who appeals to disaffected countrymen. Our task is to demonstrate to Mr. Hitler that his current behavior is not really in his own interest, and brings neither security nor profit to Germany.

“As for acts of violence in Germany itself, we must express our worry to the German government over apparent extremism, but at the same time we must not overreact. As far as these sporadic attacks on random civilians, as, for example, during the recent Kristallnacht violence, we must keep things in perspective, when, for example, some terrorists randomly targeted [4] some folks in a store. My job is sort of like a big-city mayor, to monitor these terrorist acts that are said to be done in the name of the German people. Let us not overreact and begin to listen to radio commentators who whip us up into a frenzy as if we were on the verge of war. We must not overestimate the SS, a sort of jayvee organization [5] that remains a manageable problem.

“Here let me just say that we must never fall into the trap of blaming the German people abroad, but especially our German community here at home. National Socialism by no means has anything to do with socialism [6]. These terrorists are desperate for legitimacy, and all of us have a responsibility to refute the notion that groups like the SS somehow represent socialism because that is a falsehood that embraces the terrorist narrative. It is true that America and Germany have a complicated history, but there is no clash of civilizations. The notion that America would be at war with Germany is an ugly lie.

“So make no mistake about it: National Socialism has nothing to do with Germany or the German people [7] but is rather a violent extremist organization that has perverted the culture of Germany. It is an extremist ideology that thrives on the joblessness of Germany [8] and can be best opposed by the international community going to the root of German unemployment and economic hard times. Let us not confuse Nazism with legitimate expressions of German nationalism. Stiff-arm saluting and jack boots are legitimate tenets of Germanism, and the German Brotherhood, for example, is a largely peaceful organization [9].

“So we Americans must not get on our own high horse [10]. We, too, have bullied our neighbors and invaded them. We, too, have struggled with racism and anti-Semitism, slavery and Jim Crow. And our own culture has at times treated American citizens in the same callous way as the National Socialist do Germans. Before we castigate the Nazis, let us remember the Inquisition and the Crusades [11].

“In the face of Nazi challenge, we must stand united internationally and here at home — opposing workplace violence and man-caused disasters. We know that overseas contingency operations [12] alone cannot solve the problem of Nazi aggression. Nor can we simply take out [13] SS troopers who kill innocent civilians. We also have to confront the violent extremists — the propagandists working for Dr. Goebbels and Herr Himmler, recruiters and enablers — who may not directly engage in man-caused disasters themselves, but who radicalize, recruit and incite others to do so. One of the chief missions of our new aeronautics board will be to reach out to Germans to make them feel proud [14] of German achievement. I want to remind Americans that Germans fostered the Renaissance, and helped create sophisticated navigation, mathematics, and medicine. This week, we will take an important step forward, as governments, civil society groups and community leaders from more than 60 nations will gather in Washington for a global summit on countering violent extremism. We hope that the efforts of those like Mr. Chamberlain, Mr. Daladier and others will focus on empowering local communities, especially in Britain and France.

“Groups like the SS offer a twisted interpretation of German culture that is rejected by the overwhelming majority of the world’s German-speaking communities. The world must continue to lift up the voices of moderate German pastors and scholars who teach the true peaceful nature of German culture. We can echo the testimonies of former SS operatives and storm troopers who know how these terrorists betray Germany. We can help German entrepreneurs and youths work with the private sector to develop media tools to counter extremist Nazi narratives on radio and in newspapers.

“We know from experience that the best way to protect all people, especially young people, from falling into the grip of violent extremists like the SS and the National Socialists is the support of their family, friends, teachers and faith leaders throughout Germany and Western Europe in general.

“More broadly, groups like those headed by Herr Hitler and the National Socialists exploit the anger that festers when people in Germany feel that injustice and corruption leave them with no chance of improving their lives. The world has to offer today’s youth something better. Here I would remind ourselves of our past behavior in waging wars near the homeland of Germany. I opposed the Great War, and further opposed the Versailles Treaty that disturbed the region and stirred up violent passions and extremism.

“Governments like those in Europe that deny human rights play into the hands of extremists who claim that violence is the only way to achieve change. Efforts to counter such violent extremism will only succeed if citizens can address legitimate grievances [15] through the democratic process and express themselves through strong civil societies. Those efforts must be matched by economic, educational and entrepreneurial development so people have hope for a life of dignity. It does no good to talk of wars against Germany or Italy, or to demonize particular political movements as if they are monolithic or in any way represent the feeling of the majority of Germans and Italians.

“Finally — with Nazism and fascism peddling the lie that the United States is at war with Germany and Italy — all of us have a role to play by upholding the pluralistic values that define us as Americans. This week we’ll be joined by people of many faiths, including German and Italian Americans who make extraordinary contributions to our country every day. It’s a reminder that America is successful because we welcome people of all faiths and backgrounds. Germany has always been a part of America [16], always a part of the American story. The future will not belong to those who slander German culture. I made clear that America is not — and never will be — at war with Germany.

“That pluralism has at times been threatened by hateful ideologies and individuals from various nations. We’ve seen tragic killings directed at particular groups in our country, among them German Americans.

“We do not yet know why at times Germans have been attacked here in the United States.  But we know that many German Americans across our country are worried and afraid. Americans of all faiths and backgrounds must continue to stand united with the German community in mourning and insist that no one should ever be targeted because of who they are, what they look like, or how they worship.

“Our campaign to prevent people around the world from being radicalized to violence is ultimately a battle for hearts and minds. With this week’s summit here at Washington, we’ll show once more that — unlike terrorists who only offer misery and death — it is our free societies and diverse communities that offer the true path to opportunity, justice and dignity.”

URLs in this post:

[1] Image: http://pjmedia-new.pjmedia.netdna-cdn.com/victordavishanson/user-content/2/files/2015/02/obama_fdr_fireside_chat_2-22-15-1.jpg

[2] has made significant gains: http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-obama-terrorism-conference-20150218-story.html

[3] the 19th century practice: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=8&ved=0CEMQFjAH&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.wsj.com%2Farticles%2FSB10001424052702304914904579441752139339602&ei=QD3qVP-rBYHEggTJxIHYBg&usg=AFQjCNHwHv2jKDxUqKjGWG_KMLNjUrI7BQ&sig2=dblN6k69fR9hAM6wwfbscQ&

[4] randomly targeted: http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2015/02/11/jewishlivesmatter/

[5] jayvee organization: http://www.nationalreview.com/campaign-spot/384723/remember-when-obama-called-isis-jayvee-jim-geraghty

[6] with socialism: http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2008/01/11/long-live-mussolini-long-live-socialism/

[7] or the German people: http://blogs.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/timblair/index.php/dailytelegraph/peaceful_majority_irrelevant/

[8] the joblessness of Germany: http://pjmedia.com/eddriscoll/2014/11/01/ezra-klein-gleichschaltung/

[9] is a largely peaceful organization: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2011/02/10/dni_james_clapper_muslim_brotherhood_a_largely_secular_group.html

[10] on our own high horse: https://www.commentarymagazine.com/2015/02/09/get-off-high-horse-mr-obama/

[11] the Crusades: http://tinyurl.com/kftmprc

[12] overseas contingency operations: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/24/AR2009032402818.html

[13] simply take out: http://www.breitbart.com/video/2015/02/16/harf-we-cant-kill-our-way-out-of-war-against-isis/

[14] to make them feel proud: http://michellemalkin.com/2010/07/06/the-left-stuff-nasas-muslim-outreach/

[15] legitimate grievances: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2015/02/18/obama-extremists-have-legitimate-grievances-you-know-n1958902

[16] has always been a part of America: http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/02/20/obama-islam-woven-into-the-fabric-of-our-country-since-founding/

Voir aussi:

The Administration’s Adolescent Rants about ISIS
Victor Davis Hanson

NRO- The Corner

February 23, 2015

It is disheartening to listen to Obama and his administration voices childishly reiterating that ISIS has nothing to do with Islam because it does not represent the majority of Muslims or what Westerners perceive as normative values distilled from the Koran.

No radical ideology, religious or otherwise, starts out coherently, much less representing the majority; but it eventually can if appeased and left unchallenged.

Does Obama think that National Socialism could never have represented the Germany of Goethe and Schiller just because it only appealed to a minority of Germans in the 1932 election or was clearly a perversion of traditional German values?

All that was true, but irrelevant two years later when Germans who once laughed at the barbarity of National Socialism suddenly were willing to look the other way at its thuggery, killings, and ethnic cleansing in exchange for the sense of pride it lent a public that felt itself victimized.

Western European observers of the 1930s who were worried at what was going on in Germany did not, like our president, insist that National Socialism had nothing to with socialism or Germany, but rather feared that it might exploit both and end up not just representing Germany, but enthusiastically embraced by a majority of Germans. They were right. Hitler rose to power not because most Germans favored euthanasia and rounding up Jews, but because they were willing to overlook that and a lot more if Hitler were able to win back respect for traditional German influence and status.

It matters little right now that most Muslims in theory reject ISIS and find its barbarity a perversion of what they see as traditional Islam, in the way National Socialism distorted classical socialism and German values and history. The key instead is to what degree by its success in gaining territory and numbers, and in humiliating the West, will ISIS gain adherents among Muslims?

ISIS assumes that most Muslims, despite their present reservations over its methodology and religious contortions, harbor some quiet admiration that at least radical Islam strikes back at Muslims’ supposed oppressors. ISIS like Hitler expects that in time it will win psychological resonance for a large minority of Muslims — at least in sufficient numbers to ensure its existence and growth. The abyss from Bismarck and Hegel to Auschwitz was not inherently greater than from the Koran to ISIS, given the unchanging nature of humankind.

Psychoanalyzing Hitler or declaring that National Socialism was a betrayal of classical Germany or fearing conflating Nazism with Germany itself was a useless parlor game in the 1930s. All that mattered was whether Hitler’s thuggery could be humiliated — its bluff called in the Rhineland or at Munich — and shown to be weak and a prescription for disaster before it became too strong.

Voir également:

The Palestinian Authority’s Bad Day in Court
The government of the West Bank, which receives hundreds of millions in U.S. foreign aid, is found liable for financing terrorism in Israel.
Jessica Kasmer-Jacobs
WSJ
Feb. 26, 2015

For the better part of a decade, Congress has annually allocated $400 million to the Palestinian Authority in foreign aid, ostensibly to build schools, renovate hospitals and repair roads. On Monday in a U.S. federal court, a Manhattan jury found that this same Palestinian government financed and supported six terrorist acts that killed dozens of people in 2002-04 during the Second Intifada against Israel.

The verdict held the Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization liable for $218.5 million in damages. Under the 1992 Anti-Terrorism Act, the sum automatically triples to $655.5 million, roughly 15% of the Palestinian Authority’s annual budget. The Palestinian groups said they will appeal.

For the 10 American families who were injured or lost relatives more than a decade ago in the terrorist attacks, the ruling is overdue justice. Mark Sokolow, the lead plaintiff, had narrowly escaped the south tower of the World Trade Center on 9/11 and was in Jerusalem four months later. He and his family were outside a shoe store when a suicide bomb detonated. Mr. Sokolow’s wife, Rena, recalled in testimony hearing “a whoosh, and I started spinning around like I was in a washing machine.” She looked at her leg and saw “the bone sticking out.” Nearby, Ms. Sokolow said, “I saw a severed head of a woman.”

The families in the lawsuit were represented by Kent Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter, and Nitsana Darshan-Leitner of Shurat Ha’Din, an Israeli law firm. Representing the Palestinians was Mark Rochon of Miller & Chevalier, who told the jury that the attacks were carried out by agents “acting on their own for their own reasons” and not by the government he was defending. Those agents were “crazy, wrong, contemptible,” said Mr. Rochon, “but not my clients.”

Yet as the six-week trial revealed, the Palestinian Authority provided backing for terrorists—and continues to do so today. Palestinian military and intelligence officials, Mr. Yalowitz calculated, spend $50 million a year to keep terrorists on the payroll while they are held in Israeli jails. The Palestinian government also awards “martyr payments” to the families of suicide bombers.

Monday’s verdict comes as something of a vindication for the family of Leon Klinghoffer, the wheelchair-bound American who in 1985 was murdered by Palestine Liberation Organization terrorists aboard the hijacked Italian cruise liner Achille Lauro. The Klinghoffer family filed a lawsuit, but U.S. federal courts had no jurisdiction over acts of terrorism outside the country. The case was dropped, and the PLO settled with the Klinghoffers out of court for an undisclosed sum in 1997.

The 1992 Anti-Terrorism Act provides federal courts “with an explicit grant of jurisdiction over international terrorism” and a private right of action for “any national of the United States injured in his or her person, property, or business by reason of an act of international terrorism.” The act also has the virtue of allowing American citizens to assign blame for supporting terrorism, even if politicians are reluctant to do so. A jury in New York has spoken about the Palestinian Authority and the Palestine Liberation Organization. Congress might want to consider that fact as it prepares next year’s foreign-aid budget.

Ms. Kasmer-Jacobs is an assistant books editor at the Journal.

Voir encore:

Capital Journal
White House-Netanyahu Rift Isn’t Over the Speech, but the Deal
Israeli leader seems almost certain to oppose deal the U.S. is negotiating with Iran on nuclear program
Gerald F. Seib
WSJ
Feb. 27, 2015

As Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu heads to Washington for a controversial speech to Congress next week, the immediate problem isn’t that he and the Obama administration disagree. At the moment, the problem actually is that they seem to agree on this: As things stand now, the Israeli leader seems almost certain to oppose and try to block the deal the U.S. is negotiating with Iran over its nuclear program.

That is a change, and a significant one, from just a few months ago, when it seemed possible there could be a negotiated deal that both Mr. Netanyahu and President Barack Obama could embrace, if not exactly love. This change is why Mr. Netanyahu thinks it’s worth undermining his entire relationship with an American president by making a speech the White House didn’t know about and fumed about once it became known. And it’s why the White House has taken on Mr. Netanyahu so directly.

In short, the real sticking point isn’t the speech; the sticking point is the deal.

All of which raises a broader question: Does it have to be this way, or is there still hope of closing the rift? Despite all the tension, the possibility of common ground may not have disappeared entirely.

But first consider the immediate situation in Washington, where the controversy in coming days will be more about a speech rather than the substance of the Iran question. By now, the saga is well known. Republican House Speaker John Boehner went around the Democratic White House to invite Mr. Netanyahu to speak to a joint session of Congress about the threat from Iran. The speech will come two weeks before Mr. Netanyahu is running for a new term at home, and three weeks before the deadline for the talks the U.S. and five other world powers are holding with Iran over a possible deal to curb its nuclear program.

The White House was miffed. Very. But not, as is commonly assumed, simply because the speech represented a breach of diplomatic protocol, in which world leaders deal with each other rather than through their countries’ respective opposition parties.

The deeper cause for concern within the administration was a feeling that the speech means Mr. Netanyahu has concluded that there is no version of the deal currently being negotiated with Iran that he can endorse—and that he is embarked on a strategy of using his strong connections with Republicans in Congress to find a way to use the legislative branch to block an agreement negotiated by the executive branch.

“He’s advocating against any deal. That’s just not diplomacy,” a senior administration official said. “And he’s not putting forward an alternative deal.”

Little that Mr. Netanyahu has done in recent weeks suggests otherwise. He said this week that it appears the “world powers” negotiating with Iran “have given up” on their commitment to stop Iran from getting a nuclear weapon.

In a nutshell, here’s the substantive disagreement. The administration believes the deal it’s negotiating will reduce Iran’s capacity to enrich uranium so much that Tehran’s leaders would need a year to break out of the agreement and produce enough fissile material to build a bomb—sufficient time to allow the U.S. and its allies to stop any such breakout. Mr. Netanyahu thinks that the residual enrichment capability granted Iran would still leave it as a threshold nuclear state, and would in any case be too large to adequately monitor and inspect with any certainty.

There was a time, not long ago, when Mr. Netanyahu appeared to be pleased enough with the economic pressure the U.S. and the West were putting on Iran that he thought it might produce a deal he considered good enough. By all appearances, that’s what has changed.

Is there any alternative to this impasse? Dennis Ross, a Middle East diplomat under several American presidents, including Mr. Obama, thinks there might be. He suggests a new kind of anywhere, any-time inspections regime, enshrined in both a deal and legislation passed by Congress. If that legislation also mandated explicit consequences for Iranian violations, including use of military force, it might create the kind of American assurance Mr. Netanyahu could accept.

“There is a way to bridge the difference,” Mr. Ross says. Next week, though, that may be hard to see.

Voir encore:

Thomas L. Friedman on what’s wrong with Islam
Thomas Friedman

February 8, 2015

The following is excerpted from remarks New York Times columnist Tom Friedman gave Feb. 8 at Stanford University at the annual Daniel Pearl Memorial Lecture. We’re reprinting here because it is one of the most succinct and cogent approaches to the heated debate over whether Islam is inherently violent. A student journalist asked Friedman to address the Muslim nature of the Muslim extremist problem. This was Friedman’s response. Below is video of the full presentation:

I do not believe we should be in the business of telling Muslims what their religion is or isn’t. So I kind of recoil from anyone who says it’s all this, or anyone who says it’s not any of that.

I think we should be in the business of asking them, “Why is this happening?” We don’t know. We have an overwhelming number of Muslims who are American citizens living in this country and who are wonderful citizens. So we don’t have this problem. So maybe you could explain it to me, but I sort of recoil at anyone sitting back who’s not a Muslim, saying, “That is not Islam.” What the hell do you know what Islam is? “Oh, I read the Quran in college” … you don’t know anything, OK? And that’s not our job, it seems to me.

So, the way I’ve written about it is that obviously this is emerging from their faith community. First of all, it’s not emerging from across their faith community. It’s not a problem in Indonesia, the world’s biggest Muslim country. It’s not a problem in India, the world’s second-biggest Muslim country. We’re talking about a problem that has clearly been emerging from the Arab world and Pakistan, primarily. Now what is that about?

I think it’s a really complicated mix of a product of years of authoritarian government, mixing with the export of Wahhabi puritanical Islam from Saudi Arabia, all over that world, that has really leached out the more open, joyous, synchronistic Islam that you had in Egypt. You look at pictures of graduates from Cairo University in 1950, you’ll see none of the women were wearing veils. Today you look at the picture and probably most of the women will be wearing veils. Thank you, Saudi Arabia. That is the product of the export of a particular brand of Islam from Saudi Arabia with the wealth of that country. And that’s mixed in also with the youth bulge and unemployment.

And so where Islam starts in that story and where authoritarian begins, how much people hate their own government, bleeding into Wahhabism, bleeding into massive amounts of young men who have never held power because they’re not allowed to in their country, never held a job, never held a girl’s hand. And when you have lots of young males who have never held power, a job, or a girl’s hand, that is real dynamite.

And so I like to talk about it in its full complexity. But I also don’t want to excuse it. We need to have a serious conversation. But we should be in the business of asking them, not excusing them, not accusing everyone.

We need to understand there is a pattern here. You can talk about the Crusades in the 13th century — we’re not living in the 13th century anymore, OK? It’s very hard, I think, for us to get into someone else’s narrative. Only they can get into that narrative. And we need to leave it to them. But I think it is important to ask, to probe, and to challenge in a serious way and stop telling them who they are.

Voir enfin:

Reza Pahlavi: «Face au terrorisme, nos destins sont liés»
Le Figaro
06/02/2015
Reza Pahlavi, fils aîné du dernier chah d’Iran, mercredi à Paris. Crédits photo : FRANCOIS BOUCHON
INTERVIEW – Le fils aîné du dernier chah d’Iran a été reçu cette semaine par des députés français, à Paris. Selon lui, «il est illusoire de penser que, face à la menace du radicalisme sunnite, la théocratie chiite iranienne peut être un allié».

Le dernier chah d’Iran a été chassé de Téhéran en février 1979, sans avoir abdiqué officiellement. Il est mort en 1980. Son fils aîné a été reçu mercredi par la commission des affaires étrangères de l’Assemblée nationale, présidée par Élisabeth Guigou. Il a exposé, à cette occasion, son analyse des négociations sur le programme nucléaire iranien et son point de vue sur la situation dans son pays. Âgé de 54 ans, Reza Pahlavi, qui vit aux États-Unis, prône la désobéissance civile pour venir à bout du régime des mollahs.

LE FIGARO – Les négociations engagées par le groupe 5+1 (Chine, États-Unis, France, Royaume-Uni, Russie et Allemagne) avec Téhéran sur le programme nucléaire iranien ont-elles une chance d’aboutir?

Reza PAHLAVI – L’agenda de ces négociations a été fixé en novembre 2013. Les deux précédentes dates butoirs, de juin 2014 et novembre 2014, n’ont pas permis d’arriver à un compromis. La nouvelle échéance est celle de juin 2015. Je ne suis pas optimiste car le dossier capotera toujours sur un détail ou sur un autre. Le programme nucléaire iranien répond au besoin hégémonique régional des mollahs. Il faut empêcher à tout prix ce régime d’arriver au seuil du nucléaire militaire.

Quel rôle joue la France dans ces négociations?

La France est plus intransigeante que les États-Unis. Heureusement! Il y a chez les Américains une certaine forme de naïveté. Ils cherchent, en quelque sorte, à faire un nouveau Camp David, du nom des accords qu’ils ont obtenus en 1978 entre Israéliens et Égyptiens. Ils oublient que le nouveau président iranien, Hassan Rohani, présenté comme plus conciliant, n’a pas la main. C’est le guide Khamenei qui est important, et je ne pense pas que celui-ci acceptera que son programme nucléaire soit placé sous contrôle international.

Certains Occidentaux pensent qu’il faut se rapprocher de l’Iran pour contrer l’État islamique en Irak et en Syrie. Qu’en pensez-vous?

Il est illusoire de penser que, face à la menace du radicalisme sunnite, la théocratie chiite iranienne peut être un allié. N’oublions pas que ces deux radicalismes ont un ennemi commun: la liberté, la démocratie, les droits de l’homme… Toutes les valeurs portées par l’Occident sont, pour eux, des poisons. N’oublions pas non plus que, bien avant al-Qaida et l’État islamique, Khomeyni a été le premier à lancer une fatwa contre l’écrivain Salman Rushdie.

«Il n’y a qu’une seule bonne solution pour libérer l’Iran : un mouvement populaire. Toute intervention militaire ne peut mener qu’à une situation encore plus catastrophique»
Si accord il y a, que se passera-t-il?

Encore une fois, le régime n’y a aucun intérêt parce que sa survie en dépendrait à long terme, à quatre ou cinq ans. À court terme, les relations ne se réchaufferaient pas pour autant. Tout le monde marcherait sur des œufs et seuls les affairistes profiteraient de la situation.

La population iranienne souffre des sanctions économiques infligées à son pays, peut-elle encore tenir longtemps ainsi?

Il n’y a qu’une seule bonne solution pour libérer mon pays: un mouvement populaire. Toute intervention militaire ne peut mener qu’à une situation encore plus catastrophique. Mais un soulèvement n’est possible que si la population se sent soutenue. Ce qui manque aujourd’hui, c’est une volonté politique des grandes démocraties pour soutenir les Iraniens dans leurs aspirations démocratiques. Les Iraniens ont en tête l’exemple de la révolution syrienne qui a débouché sur le chaos car les Occidentaux n’ont pas répondu présent. Que reste-t-il d’ailleurs de l’espoir placé dans les printemps arabes? Pas grand-chose malheureusement.

Quel rôle jouez-vous personnellement?

J’essaye précisément de créer les conditions de ce soulèvement intérieur. Je milite pour la désobéissance civile dans la non-violence. Cela pourrait commencer par une grève générale qui mettrait à mal le régime. Pour cela, il faut des moyens, réunir des fonds, obtenir des soutiens. En avril 2013, j’ai créé le Conseil national iranien pour des élections libres que je préside.

Que demandez-vous à la France?

Je souhaite que la France et la communauté internationale mettent davantage la pression sur le régime à propos des droits de l’homme. Depuis l’arrivée d’Hassan Rohani, la situation s’est nettement détériorée. Beaucoup de prisonniers politiques me contactent et demandent que le monde libre fasse davantage. Je veux évoquer le cas de l’ayatollah Boroujerdi, torturé régulièrement en prison depuis sept ans car il défend la laïcité. Il faut se mobiliser pour sa libération, et aussi pour l’ensemble des prisonniers politiques.

«Seuls des changements significatifs dans cette région permettront l’élimination à la source des réseaux djihadistes»
Êtes-vous encore entendu dans votre pays?

Je bénéficie d’un capital politique auprès de la génération des nostalgiques de mon père. Dans la nouvelle génération, beaucoup me voient comme un recours pour une transition vers un avenir meilleur.

Après les mollahs, à quoi voudriez-vous que ressemble l’Iran?

Je milite pour une démocratie laïque. Mais, avant des élections libres, nous devrons passer par une phase de réconciliation nationale. J’ai rédigé une charte en dix-sept points avec des activistes politiques menant la résistance à l’intérieur de l’Iran. Ce texte prévoit notamment la séparation de la religion et de l’État, l’égalité des droits entre les hommes et les femmes, le respect du traité de non-prolifération des armes nucléaires, l’abolition de la peine de mort…

Comment avez-vous réagi aux attaques islamistes de ce début d’année à Paris?

Dès le 7 janvier, jour de l’attaque contre Charlie Hebdo, j’ai écrit à François Hollande. Je lui disais que ce drame devait nous engager dans une politique volontariste de soutien aux démocrates des pays du Moyen-Orient, premières victimes du radicalisme religieux. Seuls des changements significatifs dans cette région permettront l’élimination à la source des réseaux djihadistes et contribueront à assurer la sécurité de tous partout dans le monde. Ces attentats montrent une fois encore à quel point nos destins sont liés.

Laisser un commentaire

Entrez vos coordonnées ci-dessous ou cliquez sur une icône pour vous connecter:

Logo WordPress.com

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte WordPress.com. Déconnexion / Changer )

Image Twitter

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Twitter. Déconnexion / Changer )

Photo Facebook

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Facebook. Déconnexion / Changer )

Photo Google+

Vous commentez à l'aide de votre compte Google+. Déconnexion / Changer )

Connexion à %s

%d blogueurs aiment cette page :