Nazi Underground is Seeing Daylight

Posted on December 30, 2014December 30, 2014 by Denise Simon

The Nazi’s had a well defined underground system in several countries for a complete infrastructure including foreign workers.

In 1944 the SS picked 300 workers from other camps, including Buchenwald 75 miles away, to hack out vast underground chambers. Out of reach of allied bombers, production equipment was lowered into the mine. Deep underground, the Polish, French and Russian workers – some Jewish – assembled parts for Germany’s war industry.

“We worked in three shifts, 6am-2pm, 2-10pm and 10pm-6am,” Geoffroy de Clercq, a French resistance fighter who arrived in Wansleben in March 1944, and survived the war, told the Guardian. “We slept above ground in bunks. Underground we didn’t suffer from the cold. The temperature was constant – about 24C (75F). Read more here.

But just a few weeks ago, yet another underground location was found and quite by accident in Austria.

Filmmaker says he uncovered Nazis’ ‘biggest secret weapons facility’ underground near concentration camp

An Austrian filmmaker believes he has discovered a huge Nazi “secret weapons facility” in an underground complex near the remains of the Mathausen-Gusen concentration camp in Austria, where thousands of Jews were killed.

“This was a giant industrial complex and most likely the biggest secret weapons production facility of the Third Reich,” documentary filmmaker Andreas Sulzer told the Sunday Times. The underground complex is connected to the B8 Bergkristall underground factory, where Germans produced the first jet fighters, the Messerschmitt Me 262.

Though the full scope of what occurred inside those reported chambers in the Austrian town of St. Georgen remains unclear and Sulzer’s conclusions are speculative, some analysts are already trumpeting the findings. The “filmmaker opened an important door that one has to go through,” Samuel Laster, editor of a Vienna newspaper, told the Jeursalem Post.

It was that facility where Nazi leadership possibly “aspired to create a combination of missiles and weapons of mass destruction,” historian Rainer Karlsch, who has long researched Hitler’s pursuit of an atomic bomb and worked with Sulzer on the project, told the Sunday Times. “They wanted to equip [a V-2] missile, or more advanced rockets, with poison gas, radioactive material or nuclear warheads.”

The reported findings, if corroborated by further inquiry, could add fresh fodder to an ongoing debate over the Third Reich’s ultimately failed attempt to secure an atomic weapon. The project, begun in the late 1930s, was called the “Uranium Society” or the “Uranium Club” by German scientists. It was inspired by a report by a pair of German chemists named Fritz Strassmann and Otto Hahn who detailed the mechanisms of nuclear fission.

Sulzer’s quest to discover what he called the Third Reich’s “biggest secret weapons facility” began years ago with the discovery of an off-hand remark buried in a letter written by a German scientist named Viktor Schauberger. Schauberger, Sulzer told the Sunday Times, “was involved, under the strictest secrecy, in research projects for the SS in St. Georgen. … In his letters he talks about splitting the atom,” Sulzer said. He added in an interview with the Sunday Times: “He warned colleagues in letters that he was involved in ‘atom-smashing.”

Sulzer then uncovered additional evidence suggesting the Nazis had perhaps conducted highly secretive weapon experiments in the same location, maybe even atomic experiments. In February of this year, after tests revealed unusually high radiation levels, drilling started near a vast network of tunnels constructed by concentration camp prisoners. The search for secret laboratories sought to answer a question that consumed the community: Did Hitler try to build an atomic bomb there?

“We just want to know whether a potential hazard exists,” the mayor of Perg in northern Austria told the Sunday Times. “We want hard facts.”

Then last week, the news broke in the German press. After heavy equipment cut through large granite plates Nazi troops used to seal an entrance shaft at the site, the team, using radar, found catacombs that coursed through an underground facility of roughly 75 acres.

It was already known that, as World War II raged, thousands of prisoners in the camp were used to construct massive underground facilities in St. Georgen that would be safe from the Allied bombing campaigns. In those facilities, workers produced rockets and fighter jets.

But perhaps other production was also quietly occurring. The head of the SS, Heinrich Himmler, who had lots of biological weapon schemes, was a regular visitor to the St. Georgen. It was also frequented, according to the filmmaker, by the man who directed Hitler’s missile programs, Hans Kammler. What’s more, Sulzerunearthed blueprints that he said showed additional, undiscovered chambers underground.

Then the biggest clue emerged. He found testimony by a top American operative who kept tabs on Nazi scientists who said there was a major complex hidden underground near St. Georgen. “We found these very, very interesting documents that point out that there was a very secret project going on in St. Georgen,” Sulzer told Russia Today earlier this year. “It could also be associated with atomic research.”

But there was a problem: Austrian authorities had pumped the tunnels full of concrete at a cost of millions of euros. And now, just as Sulzer’s team, which is funded by German state television network ZDF, may be close to discovering what happened there, local Austrian authorities stopped further excavation, requesting additional permits. Sulzer, however, told the Sunday Times he thinks they’ll start up work again in the coming weeks.

“Prisoners from concentration camps across Europe were handpicked for their special skills — physicists, chemists or other experts — to work on this monstrous project,” the filmmaker said. “And we owe it to the victims to finally open the site and reveal the truth.”

The State of Palestine, Yes, No Maybe

Posted on December 30, 2014December 30, 2014 by Denise Simon

Update: As of 5:00 PM, EST

UN REJECTS PALESTINIAN RESOLUTION TO DEMAND ISRAEL WITHDRAW FROM WEST BANK, EAST JERUSALEM

A revised text in the resolution for Palestinian statehood has been presented to the United Nations. There are some interesting demands such that some global leaders are not in support including the United States and Britain. Sadly through all the years of debate over statehood, very few look at history and borders. The debate is a false one when it is understood where “Palestine” was/is.

The draft resolution by the Palestinians calling for an Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and East Jerusalem within three years and revised to include language declaring East Jerusalem as the future capital of a Palestinian state was presented to the UN Security Council late Monday.
The draft resolution affirms the urgent need to achieve “a just, lasting and comprehensive peaceful solution” to the decades-old Palestinian-Israeli conflict within 12 months and sets a December 31, 2017 deadline for Israel’s occupation to end.

State Department Spokeswoman Jen Psaki, when asked today if the United States would support a proposed United Nations resolution that would set terms of a peace deal between Israel and the Palestinians, said that “it is not something that we would support.”

The Times of Israel reports:

Washington has seen the text of a draft resolution circulating in the UN Security Council and “it is not something that we would support,” State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki told reporters.

“We wouldn’t support any action that would prejudge the outcome of the negotiations and that would set a specific deadline for the withdrawal of forces,” Psaki said.

Psaki’s answer indicates that the United States would veto the resolution if it came before the Security Council.

Psaki’s comments came shortly after Senators Chuck Schumer (D – N.Y.) and Lindsey Graham (R – S.C.) called on the administration “to make clear that the United States will veto any United Nations resolution … to bypass direct negotiations and impose peace terms on Israel through the United Nations Security Council and other international bodies,” earlier today.

(Reuters) – Britain joined the United States on Tuesday, declaring that it cannot support a new Palestinian draft proposal calling for peace with Israel within a year and an end of the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories by late 2017.

Jordan on Tuesday circulated to the U.N. Security Council a draft resolution prepared by the Palestinians, who said they want it put to a vote before Thursday. Washington said it could not support the draft because it was not constructive and failed to address Israel’s security needs.

British U.N. Ambassador Mark Lyall Grant was asked by reporters whether his delegation could support the Palestinian draft.

“Well no,” he said. “There’s some difficulties with the text, particularly language on time scales, new language on refugees. So I think we would have some difficulties.”

Global Financial Outlook 2015~Grim

Posted on December 30, 2014December 30, 2014 by Denise Simon

What is the financial outlook for 2015? Not good as the monetary experts have created a study group in the United States to examine conditions, causes and solutions.

The Federal Reserve deliberately keeps quiet about how it measures lenders’ performance during downturns, to prevent banks from finding loopholes in the process that would allow them to take more risk, senior regulators have said publicly. It has given banks a little more information recently, but many executives still gripe about the tests.

“You put something in and one year it’s okay and the next year they say ‘no,’ and you’re scratching your head,” said one bank executive. The executive, like others that spoke to Reuters, spoke about the stress tests on the condition of anonymity.

A few years ago, banks might have hesitated to share information with rivals about how they measure risk and how they communicate with the Federal Reserve. Their willingness to talk to competitors about these issues underscores just how exasperated they are with the process. Meanwhile, banks in Europe are failing stress tests as Italy suffered the worst count: nine of the country’s 21 banks examined failed the test. Italy is Europe’s fourth-largest economy.

Greece and Cyprus, southern European countries that required international bailouts, were next. In each country, three of four banks examined did not pass muster.

Five of the Italian banks and one Greek bank have since covered their shortfalls.

Only one of the 25 major banks in Germany, Europe’s strongest economy, failed the test, but it has since raised sufficient capital.

Greece is the indicator for Europe as Greece has undergone the most strenuous financial retooling program in the last few years and yet it is not enough. Banks are all interconnected given the quiet bailouts globally through the International Monetary Fund and associated global banks. So what about Greece?

Greece’s threat to the European economic recovery

It is difficult to exaggerate the importance of the Greek government’s failure today to secure sufficient votes in parliament to choose a new president for the country. Since such a failure not only forces Greece to hold snap elections by the end of January, which could see the coming to power of a radical left-wing government. It also raises the real possibility that Greece will be forced to exit the Euro in 2015 that would be a major blow to the prospects of a meaningful European economic recovery.

On the basis of current electoral polls, the Syriza Party, headed by Alexis Tsipras, should win the parliamentary elections now scheduled for January 25. Judging by Syriza’s consistent electoral promises, if elected one must expect that Syriza will roll back the austerity policies imposed on Greece by the IMF, the ECB, and the European Union (the so-called “troika”). Syriza must also be expected to reverse many of Greece’s recent structural reforms in the labor market and in the area of privatization policy. In addition, it will more than likely insist on substantial official debt relief from the ECB, the IMF, and its European partners.

The prospect of a Syriza government taking office is already sending shudders through the Greek financial markets and is undermining confidence in the still very depressed Greek economy. One must expect that the election of Syriza will put Greece on a collision course with both the troika and the German government. Since it is difficult to see how the troika and the German government can accede to Greece’s request for either debt relief or for additional budgetary financing at a time that Greece’s economic policy would be going in a direction clearly unacceptable to its European partners. For its part, it is difficult to see how Syriza can quickly make a policy U-turn from a position that it has been consistently espousing these past few years.

To be sure, a month in Greek politics is a long time and Syriza is by no means assured of electoral victory. However, it would seem that even in the best case scenario of a New Democracy win, it would fall well short of the votes needed for forming a majority government. With a deeply divided PASOK Party highly likely to be decimated in the elections, New Democracy will have difficulty in forming a stable coalition government. It is also likely that in the election campaign, New Democracy will emphasize that if re-elected it too will take a tough line with the troika, from which line it will be difficult to withdraw after the elections.

Greece’s already battered economy can ill-afford a prolonged period of political uncertainty, and much less a radical government, especially without the backstop of a troika financial support program. For not only does Greece have substantial official debt amortization payments to make in 2015 — it is also vulnerable to a run on its bank deposits. This would especially appear to be the case in light of the recent Cypriot experience, where Cyprus’s official international lenders insisted on a large write-down of bank deposits in return for their financial support to the country. Without a troika program in place, Greek banks would not be in the position to access the European Central Bank’s rediscount window in the event of a bank run that would almost certainly lead to the further collapse of the Greek economy.

European optimists argue that, unlike in 2010, any spillovers now from a Greek crisis to the rest of the Eurozone would be limited. However, in so doing they overlook Europe’s very poor economic and political fundamentals, which make the Eurozone all too susceptible to renewed contagion from the Greek crisis intensifying. After all, Europe is on the cusp of yet another economic recession and of a prolonged period of Japanese-style price deflation. Meanwhile, its economic periphery remains highly indebted and throughout Europe support for its political elite is crumbling at a time that parties on the extreme-left and the extreme-right of the political spectrum appear to be on the march.

Investigating U.S. Based Islamic Charities

Posted on December 29, 2014December 29, 2014 by Denise Simon

The most famous case was the Holyland Foundation Trial where millions of dollars from the United States found the pockets of global terrorists. Not much came of this in total due in part to Eric Holder. It is imperative that readers trace money and people domestically as it still goes on. Here is a link to use as a launch pad for continues whistleblowing.

Meanwhile, it appears that the UK is beginning to do some good work in investigating charities and it is likely the same thing occurs in America. These people and charities in America have tax exempt status from the IRS.

Charity Commission: British charities investigated for terror risks

William Shawcross, the chair of the Charity Commission, warns that money donated by the British public may already have been sent to Islamic State fighters, as the watchdog opens cases on 86 aid groups at risk from extremists

By Tim Ross, Robert Mendick, and Andrew Gilligan

The government’s charity watchdog has launched a series of formal investigations into British aid organisations, amid concerns that they are at risk of being hijacked by terrorists in Syria and Iraq.

The head of the Charity Commission told The Telegraph he fears that groups distributing money and supplies donated by the public in Britain could be exploited by Islamists to smuggle cash, equipment and fighters to terrorists on the front line.

The regulator has begun scrutinising 86 British charities which it believes could be at risk from extremism, including 37 working to help victims of the Syria crisis, according to new figures released today.

It has launched full-scale investigations into four charities operating in the region, including the group that employed the murdered hostage Alan Henning when he was kidnapped, and another organisation allegedly infiltrated by a suicide bomber.

The number of terrorism-related cases that the regulator is examining has almost doubled since February, amid growing concerns that charities working in the region are potential targets for the so-called Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isil, also known as Islamic State, and Isis).

William Shawcross, the chair of the Commission, said there was “a risk” that money donated by the British public had already been sent to Isil fighters, who have beheaded two British hostages, among many other victims, and are holding a third.

“It is absolutely terrifying to see these young British men going out to be trained in Syria and coming back here,” Mr Shawcross said.

“Most of them are not going out under the auspices of charities but, when that happens, it is absolutely our duty to come down on it.

“Even if extremist and terrorist abuse is rare, which it is, when it happens it does huge damage to public trust in charities. That’s why I take it very seriously.”

The warning comes at a critical time for global efforts to stem the flow of money to terrorists in Iraq and Syria.

The Telegraph’s Stop the Funding of Terror campaign, which has won wide support in Parliament, the military and overseas, is calling for action to cut off terrorist finance.

The Commission, which regulates charities in England and Wales, has worked with the government of Qatar as well as Kuwait and Saudi Arabia, among others, to strengthen their systems for regulating charitable groups.

However, despite these efforts, funded by British taxpayers, America warned earlier this month that Qatar and Kuwait remain “permissive” regimes in which terrorist financiers are able to operate.

Analysts fear that millions of dollars in so-called charitable donations raised inside Qatar and Kuwait have been used to buy weapons and supplies for jihadists in Iraq and Syria. In other developments this weekend:

:: The brother of David Haines, the British hostage executed by his captors, has made an impassioned plea to Gulf States to strangle the funding to terror groups operating in Syria and Iraq. Michael Haines told The Telegraph: “We have to attack their finances. We need to fight them on every front that we can find. We have to destroy them.”

:: It has emerged that the cousin of Qatar’s foreign minister has been convicted of funding international terrorism. Abdulaziz bin Khalifa al-Attiyah was found guilty in absentia by a Lebanese court for channelling financial support to al-Qaeda.

:: Lord Lamont, the former chancellor, praised the Telegraph in Parliament for “highlighting the movement of funds to terrorist groups in the Middle East” as he pressed ministers to raise the issue with Gulf rulers.

:: Foreign Office Minister Baroness Anelay promised that Britain was having “robust” talks with Qatar and other Gulf states as she called for “much greater progress” to stop terror financing. The minister revealed that Isil gets most of its money from selling oil, extortion, and hostage ransoms, as well as from foreign donations.

:: The government is facing new questions over the “extraordinary” inconsistencies in British action against terrorist financiers, after it emerged that terrorists whose assets have been frozen under Treasury sanctions may not be banned from travelling to the UK. Stephen Barclay, a Conservative MP, called on his own party leadership to “spell out” why Britain has a different sanctions regime against Qatari terror financiers from America, the UK’s closest intelligence ally.

Last Wednesday, David Cameron raised concerns that the wealthy Gulf state of Qatar had failed to act against rich Qatar-based fundraisers and “charities” that have sent millions of dollars to jihadists fighting in Iraq and Syria.

During a private, one-to-one discussion with Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, the Emir of Qatar, the Prime Minister urged the Gulf ruler to accelerate efforts to tackle terrorist financiers operating within the country.

Sources said the issue was also raised during a formal lunch in Number 10, which was also attended by Mr Cameron’s chief of staff, Ed Llewellyn, his national security adviser Sir Kim Darroch, and the Foreign Secretary, Philip Hammond.

In Britain, the Charity Commission had already taken action against charities linked to extremists, with the most serious cases going to court as part of terrorism prosecutions.

Speaking to The Telegraph, Mr Shawcross said the regulator was stepping up its assault on the abuse of charitable funds by terrorists, as well as other kinds of malpractice including fraud, mismanagement, and mistreatment of vulnerable adults and children.

An extra £8 million has been given to the watchdog, along with planned new powers, to enhance its ability to tackle abuse of charities by Islamists and others, he said.

However, he warned that it was “often very difficult” to ensure that aid and money sent to war zones to help the victims of violence does not end up in the wrong hands.

“Of course there is a risk [that funds raised here in Britain have been transported to Isil jihadists in Iraq and Syria].

“If we find any evidence of it happening through charities we will pursue it robustly in conjunction with the police and other law enforcement agencies.”

He said he was particularly concerned about the large number of small, new charities that have been set up to raise money to help victims of the Syrian crisis, while “aid convoys” delivering supplies to the region were especially vulnerable.

“I think there are 500 British charities that say they operate in Syria in one form or another and 200 of them have been registered since the conflict there began. Some of them are inexperienced and obviously more vulnerable to exploitation than bigger more established charities, the household names.”

Mr Shawcross said the regulator was concerned that “there may not be adequate controls as to where the goods and supplies were being delivered” from the aid convoys. He insisted that “most Muslim charities are run by good people”, many of whom are “more horrified than anybody else by abuse of charities by Islamists”.

Mr Shawcross insisted that “most Muslim charities are run by good people”, many of whom are “more horrified than anybody else by abuse of charities by Islamists”.

“Charities can be abused, people working along the Syrian border can be abused, for Islamist or extremist purposes, there is no question about that – sometimes knowingly, sometimes unknowingly,” he said.

New figures from the Commission show there are 86 case files currently open in which officials are reviewing the operations of charities, at least in part because there are fears that they operate in countries – or for particular causes – which could be targeted by extremists or terrorists.

The regulator’s figures showed that 37 of these 86 charities under scrutiny were working in Syria, by raising money in Britain, sending humanitarian supplies, or participating directly in aid convoys to the worst hit areas.

This workload has increased significantly since February, when the Commission was working on 48 extremism-related cases, about 10 of which involved charities that focused on Syria.

Full “statutory inquiries“ – the Commission’s most serious kind of formal investigation – have begun into four British charities operating in Syria, including the Al-Fatiha Global organisation, which the beheaded hostage Alan Henning was working with when he was kidnapped.

The others are Children in Deen, Aid Convoy and Syria Aid. All four investigations are still “live”, while dozens of other charities are being monitored or scrutinised by the Commission because they are operating in Syria or raising funds for the region in Britain.

Mr Henning was driving an ambulance on behalf of Rochdale Aid 4 Syria, which raised money on behalf of Al-Fatiha Global. He was part of a convoy of 20 vehicles making the 4,000-mile journey to Idlib in north-west Syria when he was kidnapped on Boxing Day last year.

The Charity Commission launched its investigation after one of Al-Fatiha’s leaders was photographed with his arms around two hooded fighters carrying machine guns. A trustee of the charity has challenged the commission’s decision to launch the inquiry.

The investigation into Children in Deen began in April after it emerged that a participant in the Birmingham charity’s aid convoy last year, Abdul Waheed Majeed, had allegedly become Britain’s first suicide bomber in Syria.

Majeed, 41, killed dozens of civilians when he drove a truck full of explosives into the wall of Aleppo prison, enabling hundreds of prisoners to escape.

Last year, the Commission began formal inquiries into Aid Convoy, and Syria Aid, over concerns about the way their funds were being used once inside Syria.

The watchdog issued a formal warning against aid convoys to Syria and urged members of the public to donate to the larger aid agencies and major international charities to minimise the risk that their money will be stolen by extremists.

Masood Ajaib, a trustee of Children in Deen, condemned the actions of Majeed and completely dissociated himself and the charity from any links to violence. He said the commission’s investigation had already hit fundraising and made its operations more difficult.

“We had nothing to do with this and do not support violence,” he said. “All we want to do is help the women and children affected by the biggest humanitarian disaster we have seen for generations.”

UN Considering a Rewrite of Israel’s History

Posted on December 29, 2014December 29, 2014 by Denise Simon

UNITED NATIONS (AP) — Arab ambassadors met Monday to discuss Palestinian amendments to a U.N. resolution that would call for an end to Israel’s occupation within three years, a move vehemently opposed by Israel.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said the revised resolution would be submitted Monday and voted on Tuesday.

Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday that if the Security Council doesn’t reject the resolution “we will.”

The Palestinian Authority is “seeking to impose on us a diktat that would undermine Israel’s security, put its future in peril,” Netanyahu said in a statement. “Israel will oppose conditions that endanger our future.”

Jordan’s U.N. Ambassador Dina Kawar, the Arab representative on the Security Council, told reporters as she headed into Monday’s closed-door meeting that Jordan would have liked more consultations among the 15 council members but respects “very much” that the Palestinian situation is difficult.

“We will be doing what the Palestinians want and in conformity with the Arab League,” she said.

The Security Council is almost certain to reject a resolution with a timetable to end Israel’s occupation. Even if the resolution musters the minimum nine required “yes” votes, the United States, Israel’s closest ally, will likely veto it. The U.S. insists there must be a negotiated solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Netanyahu said Israel expects “the international community — at least the responsible members of that community — to oppose vigorously this U.N. diktat, this U.N. Security Council resolution because what we need always is direct negotiations and not imposed conditions.”

Palestinian U.N. Ambassador Riyad Mansour has said the Palestinians can’t return “to the same cycle of failed negotiations,” which he says Israel uses to entrench its occupation. He has urged international support for the resolution setting a deadline for a complete Israeli withdrawal.

The Palestinians circulated a draft on Oct. 1 asking the council to set a deadline of November 2016 for an Israeli withdrawal from all Palestinian territory occupied since 1967. France had been working for a U.N. resolution aimed at restarting Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations, setting a two-year deadline for success.

Palestinian official Saeb Erakat said Sunday that the amended resolution calls for ending the Israeli occupation within three years and establishing a Palestinian independent state within the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital. He said it also calls for solving the problem of Palestinian refugees in accordance with U.N. resolutions and the release of Palestinian prisoners in Israeli jails.

In December 2011, former House Speaker and presidential candidate, Newt Gingrich made the following observation regarding the Palestinians;

Remember there was no Palestine as a state. It was part of the Ottoman Empire. And I think that we’ve had an invented Palestinian people, who are in fact Arabs, and were historically part of the Arab community…

That comment set off a firestorm of debate and criticism but is in actuality, grounded in historical fact. As noted historian Benny Morris pointed out in his acclaimed book, 1948: The First Arab-Israeli War, at the turn of the 20^th century, most Arabs residing in the Land of Israel or “Palestine” considered themselves to be subjects of the Ottoman Empire. There were some Palestinian Arabs with vague nationalistic tendencies but even this minority considered itself to be part of Greater Syria. There simply was no reference to an independent Palestine for a distinct group of people calling themselves “Palestinians.”

Morris also perceptively notes that the residents of Palestinian villages routinely failed to come to the assistance of nearby villages that were under attack by Jewish forces thus reinforcing the view that Arab villagers felt little loyalty to all but clan and village. The notion of a “Palestinian people” was an alien concept to the common Palestinian villager who was not bound by any sense of duty to assist a neighboring village.

Occasionally, Palestinians themselves will acknowledge this fact. In a revealing 1977 interview with the Dutch newspaper Trouw, PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein stated,

The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct ‘Palestinian people’ to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa. While as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan.

It was a rare but astonishing moment of candor. A senior PLO member was openly acknowledging what few would readily admit. But his was not an isolated admission. In a March 2012 televised address, Hamas Minister of the Interior and of National Security Fathi Hammad essentially validated Gingrich’s assessment of the Palestinians. While pleading for Egyptian fuel, Hammad let loose with a series of embarrassing admissions that were certainly not intended for Western audiences.

“Every Palestinian…throughout Palestine can prove his Arab roots, whether from Saudi Arabia or Yemen or anywhere.” He went on to say that “personally, half my family is Egyptian, we are all like that.” And further buries himself deeper by stating, “Brothers, half the Palestinians are Egyptian and the other half are Saudis…Who are the Palestinians?” he asks rhetorically. “We have families called al-Masri whose roots are Egyptian, Egyptian! We are Egyptian! We are Arab! We are Muslim!” He concludes his rant with the obligatory Muslim battle cry, “Allahuakbar!” Curiously absent from his long diatribe is any recognition of an independent Palestinian identity and that’s precisely because there simply isn’t any.

Lacking their own independent history, culture and identity, Palestinians have adopted a strategy of denying Jewish history. Arafat, for example, flat out denied the fact that great Jewish Temples, built first by king Solomon and then by Herod, once stood where the Al-Aqsa Mosque currently stands. So ridiculous were his comments that they earned a swift rebuke from President Clinton. Arafat’s successor, Mahmoud Abbas taking cue from his boss also adopted this odious position. It should therefore come as no surprise that Abbas is also a confirmed Holocaust denier, despite his transparent efforts to rehabilitate his image for his gullible Western audience.

Palestinian Arabs have also attempted to recruit Western “experts” and academics to their cause. In his insightful book The Fight for Jerusalem: Radical Islam, the West, and the Future of the Holy City, veteran Israeli diplomat Dore Gold chronicles the length to which Arab-Muslims and their Western lackeys will go to deny the Jewish nexus to the Land of Israel. They argued that much of ancient Jewish history was nothing but mythology including the Kingdoms of David and Solomon.

From the Arab perspective, the tactic was a sound one. Sever the ancient historical Jewish nexus with Israel and you severely undermine claims of indigenousness. But archeology does not lie and those very Western academics (at least the intellectually honest ones) were forced to retract their findings and conclusions after the dramatic 1993 discovery of a 9^th century stele at Tel Dan in northern Israel that clearly referenced the “House of David.” Additional discoveries since then, including finds in Jerusalem, Tel Zayit and at the Fortress of Elah have further eroded claims by skeptics and naysayers.

Not content with denying Jewish history, Palestinian Arabs have actually attempted to co-opt it by absurdly claiming that Moses as well as King Saul were Palestinian Muslims who conquered and claimed “Palestine” for the benefit of Palestinians. These risible comments were spewed forth by “Dr.” Omar Ja’ara, a lecturer at Al-Najah University in Nablus and broadcast on Palestinian Authority TV. He notes further that the actions of Moses and Saul represented “the first Palestinian liberation through armed struggle to liberate Palestine… this is our logic and this is our culture.”

Incidentally, Al-Najah University boasts on its website that it is “the first Palestinian University to obtain the EFQM European Certificate of Excellence.” Something to bear in mind next time any parent contemplates sending their child off to Europe for higher education.

Of course it doesn’t matter that Saul lived approximately 1,700 years before Muhammad was zygote. Facts play absolutely no role in Palestinian academia. Empirical data and evidence is ignored. Precedence is given to upholding a false, pernicious and viscerally anti-Semitic narrative that either denies historical fact or co-opts it.

As PLO bigwig Zahir Muhsein candidly noted, the claim of a Palestinian identity is a myth whose aim is not designed to achieve liberation or advancement for any particular people but rather to subjugate and destroy another people. For those of you, who still remain unconvinced; consider the recent comments made by a prominent sheikh during a religious sermon at the Al-Aqsa Mosque. During his tirade, which included the usual dose of anti-Semitic vitriol, the sheikh never once uttered a desire or longing for Palestinian statehood. Instead he expresses the desire to join with ISIS in its quest for an Islamic caliphate and asks the large crowd of acolytes surrounding him to, “pledge allegiance to the Muslim Caliph,” and they in turn respond with chants of “amen!”

Few in the West have faced up to this malevolent reality. They continue to adhere to the harmful, dogmatic formula of a two-state solution. What they willfully fail to realize is that such a solution poses an existential threat to the Mideast’s only democracy and will most certainly have grave negative consequences for the region at large.

Ari Lieberman is an attorney and former prosecutor who has authored numerous articles and publications on matters concerning the Middle East and is considered an authority on geo-political and military developments affecting the region.