Could it be "Open Season" on the Jewish People?

The treatment of Jewish people around the world is now making the news almost daily. It is obvious that antisemitism is running rampant. The question has changed over the last two decades. First, it was, "What will we do IF it happens again?", then it became, "What will we do WHEN it happens again?" Now we have to ask the question "What are we doing NOW that it is here?" Yet, the majority of the world is still in denial or willful ignorance about the crisis of antisemitism that is plaguing us all.

We can have a propensity to measure the danger of a conflict taking place in the world by its proximity to where we live. If a war raging across the planet is far enough, then we don't have to worry about it and chances are, it won't disturb our lives too much. This sounds very selfish, but deep down, most people don't really feel affected. To some degree, antisemitism can be viewed through a similar set of filters. People who live in areas where there a very few Jewish people or in some cases none, do not feel that concerned. "Sure, it looks bad in Brooklyn, Paris or Israel...But that's not my problem, I don't live there..." some will think.

Antisemitism IS a war, but a non-conventional one. If it was somewhat geographically contained during the Second World War, it no longer is today. In December 2019, a series of attacks against orthodox Jews took place in Brooklyn. We still remember the terrorist attacks at the synagogues in San Diego and Pittsburgh. This is real, this is global and this happening almost on a daily basis. But the recent tragedy that we should pay attention to took place in Paris, and it could create a terrifying precedent.

On April 4, 2017, in Paris, Sarah Halimi, a 66-year-old Jewish woman, was thrown from her third-floor window. Her body landed on the pavement. It remains uncertain if she was thrown alive or already dead from being tortured. What the police found out was that the perpetrator was Kobili Traoré, her Muslim neighbor, who screamed "Allahu Akbar" and "I have killed Satan" as he recited verses from the Qur'an that according to him ordered him to kill Jews. That is such a tragedy, and yet it is only part of the story. How can it possibly get worse?

Kobili Traoré was found under the influence of marijuana and was placed in a mental institution. The whole incident took place during a presidential election year in France–not a good time to make public the murder of a Jew by a Muslim. It took months for the family of Mrs. Halimi to get the French authorities to admit that it was indeed a murder AND that it was an antisemitic hate crime. That is another tragedy because if it had been a person from any other ethnic group thrown out of a window after being tortured, nobody would have questioned the nature of the crime.

The court eventually declared that Traoré had indeed murdered Sarah Halimi willingly, but because he was under the influence of marijuana, he was irresponsible and couldn't be prosecuted. The whole thing was thrown out of court and Mr. Traoré was ordered to go into rehab.

One of the lawyers for the Halimi family, Francis Szpiner, declared: "Sarah Halimi jurisprudence" has been created: "anyone who suffers from a delusional puff because of the use of illicit and dangerous substances will be exempt from criminal responsibility", and that is the real danger. I am terrified at the idea that someone can smoke a joint or get drunk, go on a killing rampage to get a few Jews, and then plead intoxication, walk free, go to rehab for 30 days, and plan their next murder. In essence, this is exactly what precedent this case is making.

No punishment for killing Jews is truly making it open season on the Jewish people wherever they are not wanted–which is just about anywhere but Israel. Journalist Céline Pina of French paper Le Figaro wrote: "When one kills in the name of Allah, the excuse of mental imbalance does not hold. If there is one thing in common in all of this blood that keeps flowing, it is the implantation of Islamists on our soil, their network of mosques, their propaganda through books, satellite dishes, their speeches which permeate many districts and territories, their shows of strength.... the situation is not under control."

She is right, and I believe that the situation is spinning further out of control. We are approaching–if we are not already there–the time when "Righteous Gentiles" will have to step up to the plate and help their Jewish friends. It is very serious. Christians are coming to an important crossroads. This is eerily reminiscent of what Yeshua said in Matthew 25:40: "The King will answer and say to them, 'Truly I say to you, to the extent that you did it to one of these brothers of Mine, even the least of them, you did it to Me.’" While this is an event that is contextually taking place during the Great Tribulation and after the Rapture, the principle remains. The world is desperately in need of a new generation of "Righteous Among the Nations."

Sir Winston Churchill would say: "I told you so!"

When you fail to be proactive you are left with two choices. You can completely ignore the crisis at hand and quickly become overtaken by it, or you can do your best to handle it as you become reactive. Today, the European Union finds itself somewhere in the middle of denial and reaction.

There is not one country in Europe that can ignore the reality of the current wave of emigration out of Syria, Afghanistan, Iran, Iraq and other countries. Some news outlets are even starting to describe it as an exodus, as we are seeing very large numbers of people fleeing various countries. Europe was touched by the photo of a Syrian baby's body dead on the beach. The whole world reacted in horror and sadness. I join them in mourning the loss of that innocent little boy and the many others who tried to escape their respective countries. Germany reacted the strongest and took the lead in welcoming migrants. They might receive as many as 1.5 million people by year’s end.

German chancellor Angela Merkel continues to open Germany's borders to tens of thousands of migrants. The Economist sees her as the catalyst of the migrants movement "the political courage of Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, who told her people to set aside their fear of immigrants and show compassion to the needy".

I am not ready to call Merkel's move "political courage."I don't doubt that she wants to help desperate people seeking asylum but I cannot ignore the fact that she is hoping to boost Germany's economy by allowing migrants to be added to its workforce.  I would prefer to call it political courage mixed with economic greed. Yet, the professional skills and talent brought by the migrants remain to be determined. If they turn out to be unskilled laborers, Germany could find itself at the head of a bigger problem.

Sweden isn't far behind and neither is France along with other countries like Serbia, Austria, the Netherlands and Hungary. Let's face it, ethnic migrations are not a bad thing. America's fabric is mostly the result of massive migrations over the years, and there is nothing wrong with that as long as there is a certain amount of control in the process of integrating migrants.

Control is exactly what Germany and most of the EU are lacking. Germany is seeing an increase of rape and forced prostitution between asylum seekers forced to temporarily live in tight co-ed quarters. But there are also many reports of rape of German women by migrants, as there are apparently more males than females migrating to Europe and the demand for female sex partners is high. Even if many of the new immigrants are not rapists or thugs, reports abound of Muslims refusing treatment by women in hospitals and relief centers.

Another ignored danger coming to Europe is anti-Semitism. Almost all the asylum seekers, being war refugees or economic migrants come from Muslim countries. They were raised where anti-Semitism is a congenital indoctrination. Hating Jews and desiring the destruction of Israel is in their cultural DNA. No, this doesn't make every single Muslim an anti-Semite, but it still increases the danger of Jew hatred on a continent that certainly could use a break in that area. With about a million refugees coming to Germany by the end of 2015, the scale is quickly being tipped. Apparently, some Palestinians and some members of ISIS are mixed in the current flux of migrants. They didn’t flee Islam, they fled a geographical area to bring Islam to another, and that is a critical difference that we shouldn’t ignore. The jewish communities of Germany, France and the Netherlands to name just a few, are worried about surges of radical Islamic anti-Semitism.

Some will be quick to react and claim that this is Islam's ultimate goal of a global Caliphate as they attempt to retake areas that were previously under the Muslim banner. It is possible, but even if the current "exodus" is not a direct invasion–and it probably isn't–it creates a lot of tension as Islam still continues to grow in Europe.

When I was conducting my research for my first book "They Have Conspired", I came to the conclusion that at the current rate (2000-2005) of Muslim immigration and birthrate, Europe would probably become a continent with a majority of Muslims by 2050. I was not counting on the current mass exodus that has been taking place for the last few months. I do not think that it will take another 35 years for the scale to be tipped. Of course, we have to also take in consideration that many European countries are seeing their natives immigrate to other countries. What I am saying here is no different that what I said 10 years ago except for the fact that things are speeding up in front of our eyes.

Several European countries are on the verge of economic collapse. Greece is already there. The migrant crisis is not just a humanitarian crisis. It is also a cultural crisis, a financial crisis and a political crisis. It looks like Europe is letting the fox inside the chicken coop. In the meantime, there are plenty of countries that could welcome some of the refugees but won't. Many of them in the Middle East and the Gulf States, a place where culture, ideology, language and religion are already familiar to many of the refugees.

The very fabric of Europe and even of Western Civilization is about to change forever very quickly, and I am not sure that it is for the better! It might surprise you but look at what Sir Winston Churchill said it in 1899:"Individual Muslims may show splendid qualities, but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilization of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilization of ancient Rome."

If he was around today, he would look at the European leaders take a puff off his cigar and say: “I told you so!”

Refugees, Migrants and Terrorists: Europe is out of Control!

At the very time when global borders should be tightly monitored because of the ISIS invasion, Europe is faced with a tsunami of migrants. I choose to call them migrants because they are far from all being "refugees." The guidelines of acceptance vary from one European country to the next. It goes from Germany having pledged to receive in excess of 800,000 refugees to Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria, Macedonia, and Hungary building fences and walls to prevent anyone from entering illegally. The one thing that all these European countries have in common is a lack of preparedness for such a tidal wave of people.
To be sure, there has always been a somewhat steady flow of immigrants to Europe. They have always been attracted by better lives and safer environments and even in some cases, financial independence.
France opened its doors to Algerian, Moroccan and Tunisian migrants in the 1950s. They came as guest workers and received the jobs that native Frenchmen wouldn't dare touch such as garbage collectors, street sweepers and construction workers. Today, their kids and grandkids are French citizens constituting a hard to ignore voting power as seen during the last French presidential elections.

Too many, too fast:
It would almost appear that the refugee crisis happened overnight. It seems like the on-going Syrian civil war is forcing people out. Nobody can argue with one's decision to leave their native land to escape persecution, oppression and even death. So the question isn't about the validity of the Syrian refugee flight. One of the concerns is the sheer number of migrants. For 20 years now, the "New Europe" has allowed people to move freely between its borders, acting as if it had virtually erased them all. But the recent flow of migrants has many European countries reconsider and re-close their borders. Germany still believes that they can welcome at least another 800,000 migrants. Chancellor Merkel is under the assumption that her refugee intake will help balance out the dangerously low native birthrate. I am not convinced that we are comparing apples to apple here! There isn't one country in Europe that has the infrastructure to assimilate such a flow of people properly. We have already seen issues in the area of space needed, health and safety. Curiously enough, most Gulf States like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, the UAE, Bahrain and Kuwait that speak a similar language, have similarity in culture and religion have taken none. NONE! They do have the space and are some of the richest countries in the world and they have taken none, WHY?

Not all Syrians are Syrians:
And that is all before we even entertain the concept of some of the migrants being impostors. When I speak of impostors, I actually mean two different kinds. First we have those who claim to be Syrians but are not. We could call them the "desperate impostors". Technically, only legal immigrants can remain in a host country. Others, without the proper application of identification papers will be sent back. Of course, this doesn't apply to war or political refugees. Syrians qualify as refugees of war and as such have a much greater rate of acceptance (98%). Since the publication of the 1951 Refugee Convention by the UNHCR, a refugee is a person who from "fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his nationality and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself of the protection of that country; or who, not having a nationality and being outside the country of his former habitual residence as a result of such events, is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to return to it." Going by that definition, Syrians qualify as refugees, along with other countries being plagued by civil unrest. In reality, many people are flooding the European borders with little or no proof of Syrian citizenship.

A Potentially Dangerous mix:
Then we have those who choose to pose as Syrians to be granted asylum and benefits but know all along that they enter a country with a different agenda. These are dangerous individuals that we could call the "radical impostors." They belong to Al-Qaeda, ISIS and other terrorist organizations. Their immigration isn't a result from persecution and/or oppression but rather based on their desire to infiltrate, recruit, train and deploy more terrorists. The last 18 months have shown us the damage inflicted by ISIS infiltration and recruitment. The current wave of migration will only exacerbate the whole problem. It is virtually impossible to detect a Syrian from a non-Syrian refugee, so how do various European governments expect to detect ISIS impostors? Good luck with that!

An Unlikely Assimilation:
Being migrants in search of a better life or refugees seeking asylum, the vast majority of these people have Islam in common. In and of itself, this shouldn't be a concern since the very definition of who qualifies as a refugee includes freedom of religion. Yet it should now be very obvious to the West that Muslims do not integrate and assimilate very well if at all. This isn't to say that all the incoming Muslims are a menace to Europe, but there is a danger to the cultural and religious divide that is being created by their insertion into the respective countries. And frankly, ISIS' recruits have almost exclusively been from Islam sympathizers of all sorts. Yet there is also another possibility that most westerners are unaware of and that is part of Islam's ideology. It is some sort of "stealth jihad" akin to the changing demographics due to European Muslim high birthrates of the last 50 years. It is known as the Islamic doctrine of migration or hijrah.

The Muslim Migration Known as Hijrah :
Islam's expert Robert Spencer writes: "To emigrate in the cause of Allah – that is, to move to a new land in order to bring Islam there, is considered in Islam to be a highly meritorious act,” . He then quotes Islam's holy book: “And whoever emigrates for the cause of Allah will find on the earth many locations and abundance, And whoever leaves his home as an emigrant to Allah and His Messenger and then death overtakes him, his reward has already become incumbent upon Allah. And Allah is ever Forgiving and Merciful” (Quran 4:100).
While the original concept of hijrah is based on Mohammed's flight from Mecca to Medina, it can also be applied to modern Muslim migrations. It is usually referring to leaving a country were Muslim are persecuted for one where they are welcome and can join other Muslims. But it can also refer to their moving to a non-Muslim country considered to be a "lesser evil." This goes against every fiber of postmodernism, multiculturalism and tolerance, yet it is happening in front of our very eyes. Again, this doesn't mean that every Muslim is to be treated as a potential terrorist, although I have no doubt that many will end up being manipulated into the radical Islamist agenda, either against their will or even unbeknownst to them.

Europe might not yet be on the edge of extinction but in light of the current refugee crisis, it is running the risk of reaching that point of no return sooner than expected. Many European countries already have a severe "native birthrate drought" and are seeing a demographic Muslim takeover. I am all in favor of helping refugees, but now is not the time to uncontrollably open borders to unknown Muslim migrants.  This blurred combination of stealth jihad, demographic jihad and radical apocalyptic jihad is a lethal cocktail that Europe doesn't seem to be able to control!

Western Civilization's Assisted Suicide!

I have never been a supporter of assisted suicide. Many people consider it to be a murderous act, and I tend to agree; yet there is a moral chasm between murder and assisted suicide. The first is a premeditated act by the perpetrator(s), while the second is a premeditated act by the victim(s). They both lead to annihilation and sadly remind me of what is taking place in our contemporary society.

I have watched the erosion of Judeo/Christian values over the last two decades with much sadness at first. Today, I have great concern and even fear for the increasingly decaying state of the West. There is no doubt in my mind that western civilization is slowly committing assisted suicide. End-Times anti-Semitism is in full force across the globe, swinging it's lethal pendulum from liberal Left to neo-Nazi extreme right. Somewhere on the edges we can spot the agnostics, secularists, atheists and universalists, along with radical Islam smack in the middle. While the pendulum swings destructively and endlessly from one extreme to the next, I believe that the bulk of the damage is performed by the center part.

There are several reasons why radical Islam has been so successful over the last few decades (I offer no apologies if you feel a "they against us" attitude since I have no doubt that it is exactly what’s happening):

It is on this last point of "dhimmitude" that I wish to elaborate further because it exactly where I think the West is participating in assisted suicide.
The word "dhimmitude" was coined by scholar/activist Bat Y'eor in 1983 as she explained: Dhimmitude: the Islamic system of governing populations conquered by jihad wars, encompassing all of the demographic, ethnic, and religious aspects of the political system. The word "dhimmitude" comes from dhimmi, an Arabic word meaning "protected". Dhimmi was the name applied by the Arab-Muslim conquerors to indigenous non-Muslim populations who surrendered by a treaty (dhimma) to Muslim domination.... ruled by the same type of laws, based on the shari'a.

"Dhimmitude" used to be inflicted on various ethnic subjects under Islamic control, and it continues to be forced upon people by those within Islam who believe that shar'ia is the only valid law of the land. Of course, what they mean by land is more on a global than local scale. Islamic rigidity and even violence is too often whitewashed by political correctness, tolerance and multiculturalism. This process has helped "dhimmitude" become the default reaction of the West in almost every case. While I certainly do not believe that every single Muslim falls into the shar'ia "trap", the trojan horse of Islam has been advancing slowly but steadily, leading Americans to believe that an all-encompassing ideology is just another religion to be tolerated. Consider the following non-exhaustive list of unchallenged submissions to Islamist rigid ideology. While these examples are all from the United States, it is safe to say that they are a very accurate representation of Western civilization:

Government (Federal and local)
• US Congressman Keith Ellison was sworn into office in 2007 using the Qur'an.
• CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) which is affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood has had many welcomed visits to the White House.
• DHS (Department of Homeland Security) advises against training their people "against" the Muslim Brotherhood.
The FBI no longer includes Islamic Terrorism in its list of threat assessment.

• Shar'ia Law is adopted by the city of Dearborn, Michigan (30% Muslim)

Educational Institutions
• Public Schools are being pressured to serve halal food (prepared according to islamic dietary law) to their students and have it financed by tax-payer dollars.
• Muslim curriculum has been forced in some California school districts.

Financial Institutions
• Many US banks are now "shar'ia" compliant, meaning that they do not charge interest to Muslims and they must invest 2% of their profits into Muslim charities; with quite a few of these charities linked to terrorist organizations.

Media
• Liberal Media censors cartoons about Islam but has no problem humiliating Christians and Jews.

The Military
Jihad is justified as "communal military defense" for Muslim in the military and head scarves are becoming a common part of the military uniform.
• Muslims in the military don't seem to be held to the same standard as other US personnel.

Judicial System
• US Attorney Eric Holder refuses to talk about radical Islam in a testimony before the House Judiciary Committee on 5/13/2010

 The Police
• Police forces in Dearborn ignore a Muslim mob descending on a Christian group and sting them.

The Church
• After recently having officially recognized the State of Palestine, Pope Francis no equates the Bible and the Qur'an.
• Evangelical Christians are increasingly buying into the lies of BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) against Israel and also changing from Christian Zionism to Christian Palestinianism.

The point is that the United States have been shamefully and cowardly flexing under the pressure of Islamic influence for quite a while now, as many apparently innocent and harmless Muslims continue to infiltrate all levels of society. Many nominal Muslims want absolutely nothing to do with the rigidity of shar'ia law but at the end of the day they will have to choose which side of the fence they will stand on. I am not convinced that their desire for tolerance and multiculturalism will win the other side over. By other side I mean the radicals of course!

There is a tolerance that is worth investigating; that is biblical tolerance of course. Those who have a relationship with God understand His love and can easily be more tolerant toward others. Tolerance doesn't have to mean compromise or standing for nothing. Biblically speaking, we must defend our beliefs as we are committed to be on God's side, but at the same time we are to extend God's love onto others. This is available to all (Muslims, Jews and Christians) through the work of Yeshua the Messiah.

Proverbs 16:24 tells us that  "Gracious words are like a honeycomb, sweetness to the soul and health to the body".

Additionally, in Romans 12:14-19, we learn much about love and tolerance: " Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse. Rejoice with those who rejoice, and weep with those who weep. Be of the same mind toward one another; do not be haughty in mind, but associate with the lowly. Do not be wise in your own estimation. Never pay back evil for evil to anyone. Respect what is right in the sight of all men. If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men. Never take your own revenge, beloved, but leave room for the wrath of God, for it is written, “ Vengeance is Mine, I will repay,” says the Lord.

Political correctness is one of the most viral enemies of America. It blinds people into one-sided tolerance. I really don't care what you choose to call it because at the end of the day it yields the same result–the death of modernity, the death of freedom, and the death of freedom of religion. In other words, the death of Western civilization by assisted suicide!

Is this an Aliyah or an Exodus for French Jews?

It has only been two months since the terrorist attacks in France led to the death of 17 people including four Jews in a kosher supermarket on the east side of Paris. Prime minister Manuel Valls delivered an emotional speech punctuated with rightful indignation in front of the French Assemblée Nationale, calling anti-Semitism "The symptom of a democracy in crisis". French President François Hollande vowed to defend France's Jews when he was recently quoted saying: "Jews are at home in France, it's the anti-Semites who have no place in the republic, in protecting its Jews, the republic is protecting itself."
 In reality, French Jews continue to feel very uneasy in France. The assurance of safety seems to only be a façade. Even with 10,000 troops and police officers deployed all over France in front of key Jewish locations like schools and synagogues, French Jews do not feel properly protected. After all, it wasn't long after the January attacks that some French soldiers were attacked by a man as they were guarding a Jewish site. Additionally, a Jewish cemetery was vandalized in northern Alsace and over 200 tombstones were destroyed. French Jews are scared and they are not alone. Other European Jewish communities have joined the French in their feeling of uncertainty. But there is no doubt that France leads the pack when it comes to immigration to Israel.

This unprecedented increase in immigration didn't just happen because of the Paris attacks of January 2015. To be sure, the rise of anti-Semitism in Europe in general and France in particular has led to an exponential increase in the number of European Jews making Aliyah. But again, France is way ahead of all the other European countries. In 2012, about 2,000 Jewish people left France for Israel followed by 3,120 in 2013 (a 60% increase over 2012). Then in 2014, over 7,000 French Jews made Aliyah to Eretz Yisrael, making it the largest Aliyah out of France since the 1970s and the top country for Jewish emigration in 2014( the highest global number in 12 years). We must keep in perspective that this number of over 12,000 Jews out of France over the last three years all happened even before the events of January 2015.

Over 1,000 Jews have already left France for Israel in the first two months of 2015. Numbers could exceed 10,000 by the end of the year. This is of course if no other tragic act of anti-Semitism takes place in France, something I am unfortunately not willing to bet on. Here are some other frightening statistics from the Jewish People Policy Institute:

Jewish Agency Chairman Natan Sharansky expressed his fears in the summer of 2014 in Paris while the Gaza War was taking place in the Middle East, and French Jews were already leaving in droves. He was quoted saying: “Something historic is happening, it may be the beginning of the end of European Jewry. I think it’s a tragedy for Europe, what is happening in France, the strongest of Europe’s Jewish communities, reflects processes taking place elsewhere in Europe. I keep asking people if Jews have a future in Europe.”


I am afraid that Mr. Sharansky might have been right. We could be witnessing the start of the decline of European Jewry with the departure of the French Jews as some sort of "handwriting on the wall" of western European civilization. The question that I ask myself has to do with the numbers of Jews leaving or planning to leave in the next few years. While a few thousands already create a noticeable demographic shift, if we indeed see up to 100,000 Jews leave France in the next five years or so, we are not talking Aliyah anymore, we are talking exodus.

Not all French Jews will immigrate to Israel. Some will move to America, Canada and even the U.K, but those who choose to make Israel their new home will constitute a formidable demographic and economic challenge to region. Set aside the challenge, Israel will gain a pool of people that will undoubtedly contribute to its further developing. It will be a win/win situation for the French Jews and Israel.

The loser in all this will be Europe. Already demographically circling the drain, Europe cannot afford to lose its Jews. With the Jews still in Europe, we are already seeing the emergence of Eurabia as a result of the Muslim "demographic Jihad" of the last 50 years. Even though French government officials expressed their desire to see French Jews remaining in the country, If France cannot protect its Jews, it is only a matter of time before other people groups or minorities become a target.

If indeed we are in the infancy stage of a mass European Jewish exodus, there is much more at stake than the loss of a once thriving community. God was not speaking figuratively when He promised Abraham to bless those who bless him and the Jewish people and curse him who curses them (Genesis 12:1-3). God meant every word of it then and He means every word of it today. With its Jews leaving, France becomes even more vulnerable to her enemies. Isn't it ironic that the very people that many have described as a curse actually are a blessing from God?

Help us protect ourselves from the people who want to kill you!

Recently, the Saudis have made two very peculiar moves to protect their country from an ISIS invasion and/or Iran. It is interesting to note that we now have an apparently sharia compliant country trying to defend itself from a sharia enforcing state. Is there more than one way to abide by sharia law?

It is also worth noting that the brand of Islam known as Wahhabism or Salafism, that is the driving force behind the Islamic State was born within the borders of Saudi Arabia. Even though it is clear that Saudi Arabia has progressively distanced itself from the extremist brand of Wahhabism adopted by ISIS, the connection cannot be ignored. It would appear as if the pupil has surpassed the master.

First, it was recently officially announced by the Saudis that they had decided to build a 600 mile wall/fence on their northern border with Iraq to protect themselves from a possible ISIS invasion. Seeing how Iraqi forces have poorly responded to ISIS, the Saudis are getting concerned. But this isn't a reaction based on the growing threat from the Islamic State since apparently the idea first came up almost a decade ago.

Then there is the most recent offer they made to Israel in regards to opening their air space for the IDF to use if they choose to strike Iran. Of course it wasn't announced in those words and was only discussed behind closed doors with some European leaders. According to The Wall Street Journal : US and Arab diplomats say that, although Arab nations have avoided matching statements made by Israel, they share many of the same fears regarding a nuclear deal with Iran. While I can appreciate Saudi Arabia's desire to protect their borders, I find both those moves to be quite hypocritical.

The 600 miles wall/fence isn't necessarily a bad idea. I believe that any sovereign state is absolutely entitled to its own safety. This is a sad reflection on the times we live in, when countries have to isolate themselves for their own safety, but like someone once said: "It is what it is!" As Saudi Arabia is building their fence, why isn't there any outrage about their isolationist attitude? Should we accuse them of Islamophobia, or better yet "ISISophobia"? Are they becoming an apartheid state? Of course, you see where I am going with this as nobody is finding the Saudi fence to be out of line, yet the Israeli fence is Islamophobic and driven by colonialism and an apartheid mentality. Give me a break, the Saudi fence AND the Israeli fence have the exact same purpose and that is sovereign protection of their citizens. Why the double standard?

Now let us consider the opening of the airspace over Saudi Arabia for the IDF to fly over he they decide to strike Iran. As the United States continue to flex under the Iranian arrogance, the whole world is wondering how soon Iran will be ready to go nuclear. It certainly appears to be a matter of when and not if. Iran just performed a military exercise days ago and destroyed a life-size replica of a US ship to show the world how capable and certainly willing they are to destroy the West. They now have missiles capable of reaching Europe and the United States. What are we waiting for?

Saudi Arabia doesn't share a border with Iran but finds itself on the other side of the Persian Gulf and definitely vulnerable. They understand that the one country that can and might do something is Israel, so they are willing to open up their air space in case of a strike. They obviously have much to gain with that move. But wait, there is a catch! The Saudis expect Israel to promise progress in the Israeli/Palestinian "Peace talks" if they want air space access. Nothing has been specified regarding what kind of progress, but good will towards reconciliation must be shown.

Excuse me! Saudi Arabia wants Israel to get along with Hamas who pretty much lines up with much of ISIS' ideology and wants nothing but the death of all Jews (first) and the West (next). Last September, at the United Nations, Netanyahu rightfully said: "ISIS and Hamas are branches from the same poisonous tree." Reconciliation requires both sides to be willing to reconcile. One-sided reconciliation is abdication, and in Israel's case, abdication to Hamas would mean instant suicide.

How hypocritical is it from the Saudis to ask Israel to negotiate with some of the same bloody murderers that they [the Saudis] are trying to protect themselves from? How can they keep a straight face and ask Israel to "Help us protect ourselves from the people who want to kill you!"

It might still come to the time when Israel flies over Saudi skies to strike Iran, and it could be a positive move for the whole region. This being said, it is time for the world to recognize that Israel isn't the enemy but the only hope in the Middle East. Deep down, Saudi Arabia probably knows it, otherwise they wouldn't open their air space to them, but they are not willing to make such a statement in the open.

I look at the Saudis and It reminds me of Doc Holliday in the movie Tombstone, when he said:"My hypocrisy only goes so far!"

Equal Opportunity Vagueness Is a Real Danger!

France is still trying to recover from the terrorist attacks of early January 2015. But it wasn't just France that was affected, as many around the world are starting to realize that the danger of radical Islam isn't specific to the Middle East and/or exclusive to the Islamic State. Our global community was hit. There is still a very long road ahead of us if we really care to defeat people with an ideology in line with that of ISIS. But at the very least, it is now impossible to ignore the danger.

Yet it is one thing to acknowledge a real danger and it is another to strategize and move forward to fight it. For the most part, the world is being forced to recognize the brutality and barbarism of the Islamic State, but few if any have made any progress in the war against that enemy. Its is quite mind boggling that some governments have yet to clearly label the Islamic State as a radical Islamic group. Leading the pack is the Obama administration whose vagueness regarding the Islamic State is a real danger.

We can all agree that the beheadings, crucifixions and burnings have placed the Islamic State to the forefront of our contemporary enemies, yet for any government to even hesitate in calling the group a radical Islamic terrorist group, is a grave mistake. Last September, in one of his addresses, President Obama declared that the Islamic State was neither Islamic nor a State. In regards to being a state, I would agree with Mr. Obama; the Islamic State might have declared a caliphate a few months back, but it doesn't qualify them as being a bona fide state. They are more of an illicit economy as the Wall Street Journal labeled them.

On the other hand, they are every bit "Islamic" if we understand the meaning of the word Islamic. It is a misconception to believe that Islam is simply a religion of peace, because it is much more complex than that. Yes it is true and extremely important to understand that many Muslims want nothing to do with the Islamic State barbaric methods, yet any serious student of the Qur'an cannot ignore that it contains plenty of verses about violence, deception and killings of the infidels.

What we could call "orthodox Islam" is a lot closer to radical Islam that one might think. There simply are many Muslims who do not adhere to that kind of literal approach to the Qur'an. They have distanced themselves from the extremism taught in those verses. These people are what we call "moderate Muslims", yet they are not even recognized by radical Muslims as true Muslims. I think that a better description would be to call them "cultural Muslims."

To avoid calling the Islamic State "Islamic" is a vagueness that is far from accidental. It is deliberate! It remains uncertain if the choice is made out of fear of reprisals or simply because of political and/or ideological alignment. Nevertheless, the Islamic State IS Islamic from a Qur'anic standpoint.

Continuing with the vagueness that has stricken our President in the past few months, we also need to question his motives when he claims that the Paris Kosher Market attacks were random attacks. In an interview with VOX in the last few days, Mr. Obama didn't identify the victims as Jews but simply as"a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris." Of course, the fact that Amédy Coulibaly (the killer) entered a "kosher" store, said that he was linked to Islamic State and killed the people inside because they were Jewish was purely anecdotal and I guess irrelevant! What an insult to the Jewish community!

Mr. Obama was further defended by the White House press secretary Josh Earnest who very awkwardly backed him up. This didn't satisfy the press and drew the ire of the social networks. Then, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki added a couple of days later that we should let the French government decide if the events were of an antisemitic nature. Give me a break; if a radical Muslims barges into a kosher store and kills Jewish people, there is NOTHING RANDOM there. The French government has authority since this took place on French soil, but that doesn’t invalidate the original intent of the act itself.

Finally, the White House decided to back pedal and do damage control on Thursday when they made a statement declaring the events of the Paris kosher store as anti-Semitic. Again, the vagueness applied to the description of the terror attack at the supermarket is very dangerous because it reduces the tragedy to a random act of violence, removing it from the hate crime that it was.

Is this part of the conditioning of the masses to lead them to ignore both a real danger and a real victim? This vagueness is terrifying to me because it was only 70 years ago that some of my family members went from being human beings to being prisoners to just being a simple number. Eventually, the whole process led to a need to exterminate my people who had been reduced to the status of animal.

Calling the Paris terrorist attack "random" is in and of itself "targeted" because often we say a lot more by saying less, and once again Mr. President your vagueness doesn't appear to be accidental!