The Secret Revolution

By David Kupelian

Whistleblower Magazine – September 2017

Why Marxism in America, though ubiquitous and destructive, goes largely unrecognized

While President Trump was being demonized for acknowledging the obvious – that in Charlottesville there were two evil sides, the violent neo-Nazis and the violent communists – most journalists and politicians, including prominent Republicans, tried to outdo each other in condemning the violent neo-Nazis while excusing or actually praising the violent communists.

It wasn’t until two weeks later, when the same communist “antifa” group viciously attacked peaceful protesters at a “No to Marxism in America” rally in Berkeley – beating those they deemed “white supremacists” and “Nazis” with sticks and shields ironically emblazoned with the phrase “No Hate” – that a few politicians finally dared to condemn the wildly violent masked group.

Why the glaring double standard? Why does it come so easy to most Americans to condemn hateful and violent neo-Nazis, but not equally hateful and violent communists, whose malevolent ideology is responsible for far more deaths? In fact, why is it that, with a virulent and totalitarian form of Marxism spreading not just in America’s universities, but throughout the country as a whole – scarcely a word is breathed about it by the media?

The answers to these and many other critical questions are found in the electrifying September issue of Whistleblower magazine, titled “THE REVOLUTION: Why Marxism in America, though ubiquitous and destructive, goes largely unrecognized.”
While Whistleblower chronicles the new and exotic forms of Marxism in America and shows their rotten communist roots, some glaring examples from America’s recent history demonstrate that the elite establishment couldn’t care less about communism.

For instance: Even though Chinese communist leader Mao Zedong killed a staggering 45 million peasants during his famed “Great Leap Forward,” making him hands-down the biggest mass murderer in world history, President Barack Obama’s White House communications director, Anita Dunn, publicly bragged that Mao was one of her “favorite political philosophers.” How could that be?

Likewise, Obama’s friend and colleague, William Ayers, who helped Obama launch his political career and guided him in writing his famed autobiography “Dreams From My Father,” is a self-described “small-c communist” who founded the Weather Underground communist domestic terror group.

During the ’60s and ’70s, Ayers’ organization declared war on the U.S. government, caused wanton death and destruction, and bombed banks and U.S. government buildings, including the U.S. Capitol, State Department and Pentagon. Notorious for saying “Kill all the rich people. … Bring the revolution home. Kill your parents,” Ayers reaffirmed his enduring hatred for America as recently as 2001, when he said: “What a country. It makes me want to puke.”

Yet today, Ayers exerts a huge influence on America’s education system, having trained hundreds of teachers. In March 2008, he was elected vice president for curriculum studies at the American Educational Research Association, giving him tremendous clout over what is taught in America’s teacher-training colleges as well as to Americans’ children in public schools.

Ayers is not alone. Legions of self-proclaimed communist radicals who once labored to subvert America’s Constitution, overturn her government and establish a totalitarian system – including Ayers’ wife, Weather Underground co-founder Bernardine Dohrn, who once graced the FBI’s 10 Most Wanted List – are now glorified as tenured professors and thus exert enormous influence on the minds and souls of America’s next generation.

How is this possible?
The website of the Communist Party USA,, which came into existence as a Moscow-directed-and-funded U.S.-based Communist Party, is today almost indistinguishable from the Democratic Party in its concerns, sensibilities and solutions to America’s societal and economic problems.

But nobody seems to notice or care. Why?

“THE REVOLUTION” goes to the beating heart of the problem. It reveals what has really been happening to America, and where the solution lies.
As a very special feature, the article by Dr. Paul Kengor, titled “The Marxist roots of the ‘safe spaces’ movement,” documents journalistically for the very first time the overwhelming communist/Marxist origins of the “safe spaces” movement now sweeping America’s college campuses.

And it provides a fascinating guided tour of the shockingly perverse thinkers, authors, teachers and “experts” who birthed what can fairly be called the madness that dominates American higher education – and increasingly, our entire society.
To subscribe to Israel Commentary:
Send your email address to
Facebook: Jerome S. Kaufman
Twitter: @israelcomment
Fan Club:

Trump Returns U.S. to Realpolitik in World Affairs (ala Kissinger)

By Gerald F. Seib

The Wall Street Journal
Sept. 20, 2017

President’s United Nations address marks return of U.S. foreign policy to practical considerations rather than moral calculations

President Donald Trump told the United Nations General Assembly that Iran has become an “economically depleted rogue state” whose chief export is violence and chaos in the Middle East. He also called the Iran nuclear deal an “embarrassment.”

Early in his maiden speech to the United Nations General Assembly on Tuesday, President Donald Trump offered fellow world leaders the best, most concise summary he’s ever provided of his approach to world affairs: “We are guided by outcomes, not ideology,” he declared.

Having signaled that his listeners should be prepared for some blunt, hard-nosed pragmatism, Mr. Trump proceeded to deliver just that. In many ways, in fact, Mr. Trump’s address marked the return of American foreign policy to realpolitik: a set of principles and precepts based on practical considerations rather than philosophical or moral calculations.

And while his predecessors might have cloaked their threats and grievances in a rhetorical velvet glove while at the U.N., Mr. Trump took off that glove while delivering the most important and most revealing speech of his young presidency.

He declared that if the U.S. is forced to defend against North Korea’s nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles, “we will have no choice but to totally destroy North Korea.” In the president’s terminology, Kim Jong Un wasn’t the leader of North Korea, but rather the “Rocket Man…on a suicide mission.”

Iran, a country his predecessor spent years seeking to engage, was in Mr. Trump’s description a nation engaged in the “pursuit of death and destruction.” As for the nuclear deal with Iran that President Barack Obama’s team labored for years to negotiate, Mr. Trump branded it “one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into” and “an embarrassment.”

President Donald Trump threatened to “totally destroy North Korea” if the U.S. is forced to defend itself or its allies against Pyongyang’s aggression, Mr. Trump also warned that the U.S. is prepared to take further, undefined steps to change the course of Venezuela’s socialist regime. And, while he offered words of thanks to China and Russia for help on other matters, he indirectly called them out for their aggressive behavior in their neighborhoods:

“We must reject threats to sovereignty, from the Ukraine to the South China Sea. We must uphold respect for law, respect for borders and respect for culture, and the peaceful engagement these allow.”

Both the stark nature of Mr. Trump’s messages and his willingness to deliver them from the U.N. podium were unprecedented for an American president. The U.N. audience got Trumpism in its pure, unvarnished form.

In one of the most intriguing sections of the speech, Mr. Trump attempted to define what his “America First” approach to the presidency really means, in terms specifically designed to appeal to fellow world leaders nervous about the concept:

“As president of the United States, I will always put America first, just like you, as the leaders of your countries, will always and should always put your countries first. All responsible leaders have an obligation to serve their own citizens, and the nation-state remains the best vehicle for elevating the human condition.”

That final line represented a dig at the notion that a global economy, instantaneous world-wide communications and the free flow of goods and people are making traditional national identities obsolete. The Trump message is the opposite: Nations and borders matter no less in the era of globalization.

Afterward, some said they found the president’s bluntness refreshing, others alarming. But all who listened came away understanding that the Trump Doctrine is the doctrine of transactions: I am not disengaging from the world, he seemed to be saying, but rather engaging with it on my terms, and purely in pursuit of American interests.
The address had some broader strokes as well. In fact, it was almost two speeches back-to-back.

The first segment offered some of the more traditional odes to American ideals and leadership: “In America, we do not seek to impose our way of life on anyone, but rather to let it shine as an example for everyone to watch,” Mr. Trump declared. “In America the people govern, the people rule and the people are sovereign.”

From there, he moved into the second section, marked by direct messages to American foes. His barbed warnings to North Korea will get the most attention, and raise the question of whether such threats are more likely to scare North Korea away from nuclear weapons or deepen its belief they are needed for protection.

Yet the most dramatic departure from the approach of the Obama administration actually came elsewhere, in his discussion of Iran. Mr. Obama saw Iran as a country to be engaged and slowly pulled away from its revolutionary moorings and into the international mainstream.

Mr. Trump suggested no patience for such a course. Instead, he virtually called for Iranians to effect a regime change:
“Oppressive regimes cannot endure forever, and the day will come when the people will face a choice: Will they continue down the path of poverty, bloodshed and terror, or will the Iranian people return to the nation’s proud roots as a center of civilization, culture and wealth, where their people can be happy and prosperous once again?”


Subscribe to Israel Commentary:

Send your email address to
Facebook: Jerome S. Kaufman
Twitter: @israelcomment

President Trump et al, under H.R. McMaster tutelage, whitewash Islamic Terrorism responsibility for 9/11/2001 World Trade Center Twin Tower destruction murdering 2996 innocent American citizens.

(Evidently it was not 15 Muslim fanatics. of whom 11 were Saudi Arabs but perhaps “Norwegians?” As Trump and his advisors woefully retreat from identifying our mortal enemy – a huge mistake. Is the fate of the European Union and Sharia law next for this once great country?) jsk

Phantom Enemy: Islamic Terrorists Missing From 9/11 Speeches

By Aaron Klein

The Jewish Press, Sept. 15, 2017

(The September 11 attacks (also referred to as 9/11)[a] were a series of four coordinated terrorist attacks by the Islamic terrorist group al-Qaeda on the United States on the morning of Tuesday, September 11, 2001. The attacks killed 2,996 people, injured over 6,000 others, and caused at least $10 billion in infrastructure and property damage.)

On the sixteenth anniversary of the September 11, 2001, Islamic terrorist attacks, President Donald Trump did not once mention the terms “radical Islam” or “Islamic terrorism” during a commemoration ceremony at the Pentagon. (Why?)

Instead of naming the enemy, Trump seemingly went out of his way to use other descriptors in his speech, including “terrorists who attacked us,” “barbaric forces of evil and destruction,” “horrible, horrible enemies,” “enemies of all civilized people,” and “enemies like we’ve never seen before.”

Similarly, Pence, speaking at the Flight 93 National Memorial in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, referred to the scourge as “evil terrorists” and “global terrorism.”

Mattis, addressing the same Pentagon memorial as Trump, outwardly minimized the Islamic motivations of the terrorists by calling them “maniacs disguised in false religious garb.” He referred to “attackers perpetrating murder” on that fateful day, not even using the words “terrorist” or “terrorism.”

Sessions perhaps came closest to prescribing a religious ideology, calling out “extremists” who “seek to impose their speech codes, their religion, their theocracy.”
“For these extremists, it’s more than religion; it’s ideology,” he stated. “We have no choice but to defend against it.”

But Sessions did not mention a specific religion and did not expound upon which ideology the terrorists maintain.

When speaking of common threads among terrorists, Sessions also failed to mention the one major thread of Islam when he stated: “While the threats we face are diverse and evolving, terrorist ideologies have one thing in common: their disregard for the dignity of human life and they share an obsession with forcing everyone into their twisted ideology. And the terrorists know they can’t persuade people using reason, so they use coercion and intimidation. They seek acquiescence and inaction.”

Acting Department of Homeland Security Secretary Elaine Duke released a brief statement that referred to the 9/11 radical Islamic jihadist perpetrators as “terrorists.”

Trump’s reluctance to name the actual enemy contrasts with speeches he gave in the past, including during the 2016 presidential campaign, when he repeatedly utilized the phrase “radical Islamic terrorism.”

The uniform lack of mention of radical Islamic terrorism from the administration Monday comes after previous reports that H.R. McMaster, Trump’s embattled national security adviser, has petitioned against using the phrase. This reporter previously exposed numerous instances of McMaster’s minimizing the Islamic motivations of radical Muslim terrorists.

Subscribe to Israel Commentary:
Twitter: @israelcomment


Hitler had no problem killing 6 Million Jews. The Church had done all the spade work the previous 700 years and longer.

From: A Feud For The Ages: A History Of The Jews And The Church

(Part IV: Inquisition And Insurgency)

By Libi Astaire – 7 Elul 5777
The Jewish Press, Olami Section, August 25, 2017

Life was always precarious for Europe’s Jews during the Middle Ages. But the thirteenth century saw the rise of an exceedingly dangerous foe – mendicant orders such as the Dominicans and Franciscans, whose zeal for hunting down heresy led to the establishment of the Inquisition, as well as the death and destruction of many Jewish communities.

When Pope Gregory IX approved the creation of the Dominican and Franciscan Orders in the 1230s to combat heresy within the Catholic Church, few could foresee the havoc they would wreak on Europe’s Jews.

The friars were supposed to take care of their own. Western Europe was becoming increasingly urban, with more people leaving the countryside for the city. As often happens, instead of finding riches, many found only poverty and sickness. The job of the friars, who had been granted papal permission to travel wherever they were needed without having to report to the local bishop, was to minister to the poor masses, reinforce their faith, and correct doctrinal errors.
The friars themselves were something of an anomaly. On the one hand, they were highly educated. Not only did they study at universities, members of their orders held the theological chairs. But many of the friars were the sons of craftsmen or peasants. Therefore, thanks to their humble beginnings, they were able to cloak their theological arguments in language the common people could relate to and understand.

Preaching in open-air markets and similar places, a good orator could attract thousands of a city’s residents. Indeed, it’s said that tens of thousands of people came to hear Dominican Girolamo Savonarola preach in Florence.

Very soon the friars set their sights on a different audience – the Jews, whom they hoped to convert. The friars began to learn Hebrew and study Jewish texts, looking for ammunition they could use to refute Judaism and prove the correctness of their own religion.

Their attack plan included disputations, such as the one that took place between Ramban and the Dominican Pablo Christiani in Barcelona, and forcing Jews to gather in churches and listen to their sermons. The friars, having found the Talmud and other seforim to be filled with “heresy,” also advocated for the burning of the troublesome books or, at the very least, their censorship.

When the Jews proved resistant to their eloquence, the friars took their anger and frustration to the marketplace, where they found an audience ready to listen – and act. While the start of the horrific massacres of 1391 which destroyed most of Spain’s kehillos (Jewish communities) can be attributed to the rabble-rousing sermons of Ferrand Martinez, who was an archdeacon and not a member of a mendicant order, the mob violence between 1411 and 1413 resulted from the virulent rhetoric of Dominican Vincent Ferrer, who had influence over Castile’s king and threatened Castile’s Jews with expulsion if they didn’t convert. It’s estimated that Ferrer oversaw the forced baptism of 20,000 of Castilian Jews by using these strong-arm tactics.

Ferrer was also the instigator behind the Laws of Valladolid, which severely curtailed the rights of the Jews. After the laws were enacted in 1412, all Jews were forced to live within the gates of an enclosed Jewish quarter, were prohibited from working in most professions, including medicine or handicrafts of any kind, and were forbidden to leave the country. The purpose of the laws was to humiliate and impoverish the Jews, again with the goal of convincing them to convert.

It’s estimated that the total number of Spain’s Jews who succumbed to the pressure to convert was between 200,000 and 250,000 souls. Those who remained true to the Torah were expelled in 1492. But those who had converted learned that not even conversion could save them from the friars’ fiery wrath.

The Rise of the Inquisition

Before there was a Spanish Inquisition, there was a Medieval Inquisition, which was established in 1184 by Pope Lucius III to determine if certain Christian sects were, indeed, guilty of heresy. In theory, the Inquisition was a non-violent way for those who had strayed to repent, do penance, and be restored to the Church. But because torture was used to extract confessions and unrepentant heretics were turned over to the secular authorities, who administered the death penalty, the Inquisition quickly became associated with violence and death.

The Dominicans, in particular, were given the mission of rooting out heresy. Thus, it was Dominican friar Alonso de Ojeda who first alerted Queen Isabella that some conversos were secretly practicing Judaism. Another Dominican, Thomas de Torquemada, was placed at the head of the Spanish Inquisition when it was established in 1478.

In the early years of the Inquisition, Old Christians, who were jealous of the success and wealth of the conversos, used the Inquisition to settle scores. By 1482, the accusations and arrests had become so numerous that Pope Sixtus IV tried to intervene, commenting that the Inquisition was “causing disgust to many.”

But when Sixtus ordered the local bishops to take a role in the proceedings, King Ferdinand accused the pope of taking bribes from the conversos. The king also warned the pope not to try to interfere again or he would withdraw military support, and Sixtus, who was worried about a Turkish assault on Rome, heeded the warning.

It’s hard to estimate how many people were arrested or burned at the stake during the nearly 350 years that the Spanish Inquisition was in existence because much of the post-1560 documentary evidence has been destroyed or lost. The historical record has also been muddied by the “Black Legend of the Spanish Inquisition.”

While today we know that the vast majority of those hunted down and sentenced to death were the formerly Jewish conversos, during the mid-1500s the Church found yet another target to investigate – Protestants.

Only a few hundred Protestants were arrested – there weren’t that many living in Spain – but because of political tensions between Catholic Spain and Protestant England and other Protestant lands, the Protestants used the excesses of the Inquisition to paint an even blacker picture of what went on in Inquisition prisons and courtrooms than actually occurred.

Therefore “Black Legend” estimates that perhaps hundreds of thousands, or even millions of people, were arrested and killed are today considered much too high. On the other hand, the Catholic Church’s recent estimate of only about 1,250 people being sentenced to death is almost certainly too low.

The British historian Cecil Roth, citing research done by Jose Amador de los Rios about the first 50 years of the Spanish Inquisition, put the number at 28,540 souls burned alive and another 16,520 burned in effigy, with more than 300,000 people punished in other ways.

But even if the number of people killed is “just” in the thousands or tens of thousands, the total number of people effected – the number of people arrested, the number of people tortured, the number who had their property confiscated by the state, as well as all those who lived in terror of being arrested – is certainly much, much higher.

The Inquisition wasn’t limited to Spain. It was set up in many Catholic-ruled countries, including Portugal, Mexico and other parts of South America, and Goa in Portuguese controlled-India. Although some popes protested the excesses of the Spanish Inquisition, in the mid-1500s they established an Inquisition of their own, which was called the Roman Inquisition.

The Roman Inquisition was established in response to changes in the Western world that were threatening the Church’s dominance over Europe. The Church had always had critics within its ranks, those who claimed that the Church’s vast power and wealth had made it corrupt. The early mendicant orders, which required a vow of poverty to join, were formed partly in response to this complaint. But by the 1400s even the friars were selling indulgences – the Church’s remedy for reducing punishment for sins.

One friar disgusted by the Church’s corruption was Martin Luther, who was a member of the Augustine Order. In 1517 he nailed to the door of Wittenberg’s All Saints Church his now-famous Ninety-five Theses, in which he accused the Church of corrupting the people’s faith through the cynical sale of indulgences. Aided by a new invention – the printing press – copies of the Ninety-five Theses swept through Germany in two weeks and reached the rest of Europe within two months.

Luther had started a revolution, which is today called the Protestant Reformation. With much of Northern Europe turning Protestant while Southern Europe remained Catholic, the whole of Europe would become a battleground between Catholicism and Protestantism for the next two centuries.

In the beginning, Luther spoke favorably about the Jews, portraying them as models of common sense. “If I had been a Jew and seen such oafs and numbskulls governing and teaching the Christian faith,” he wrote in 1523, “I would have rather become a sow than a Christian.” But like other Christians before him, his goal was to persuade the Jews to convert, which he thought he could do by gentle persuasion. Surely, he reasoned, it was only the corruption the Jews had objected to; now that Christianity had been purified, the obstacles had been removed.

When the Jews continued to remain true to the Torah, Luther turned against them. Indeed, by the end of his career his hostility exceeded that of the Church. He advocated destroying synagogues and Jewish homes, confiscating Jewish writings, prohibiting the rabbis from teaching, prohibiting Jews from making loans and charging interest, banning Jews from the roads and marketplaces, forcing Jews to do hard labor and, when all else failed, expelling them.

The short-term effects of the Reformation were an increase in Jewish persecution in German lands. Conditions also worsened for the Jews living in the Papal States and northern Italy, who were forced to live in ghettos for the first time. But the Reformation also brought with it some positive changes. The split of Christianity into Catholic and Protestant sects ended the Church’s dream of creating and controlling a homogeneous society. New ideas about how religious authority should – and should not – be exercised would eventually lead to the development of the principle of separation between church and state.

Another change was the role of the Bible in Christian life. Until the Reformation, study of the Bible was reserved for clergymen, who mainly used the Latin Vulgate translation. Luther insisted that the Torah be translated into the language that people spoke so that anyone could read it.

Once the translations were made, people did read it, avidly. In many places, groups were formed to study the laws and values of ancient Jewish society, seeking a model for their own. While admiration for the Torah didn’t usually result in love for individual Jews, there was at least a grudging respect for the people who had wisely clung to the Torah, despite so many centuries of persecution.

But all that lay in the future. In Part V of this series we will take a look behind the Ghetto’s doors to see how a new century of Church decrees affected Jewish life and culture.

Subscribe to Israel Commentary:
Twitter: @israelcomment

Israel Rescue Team responds immediately to Houston Texas Mayor Request for Help

Israeli Volunteers Help Evacuees In Texas

By Jewish Press Staff – 16 Elul 5777 – September 6, 2017 0

On Friday, Sept. 1, United Hatzalah and Israel Rescue Coalition’s (IRC) Houston relief team headed to Beaumont at the request of Houston Mayor Sylvester Turner. After distributing aid to evacuated residents of the area, the team set up a booth at Jack Brooks Regional Airport, located between Beaumont and Port Arthur, two of the hardest hit areas by Hurricane Harvey.

IRC and United Hatzalah team member Dr. Sharon Slater with a young evacuee.

Evacuees were brought on buses to the airport for care and to receive supplies before being sent by plane to a long-term evacuation center.

Relief team member Avi Tennenbaum, a psychotherapist and addictions expert, spoke about the team’s experience. “We treated many people who had just been evacuated and were en route to their next long term location as well as many first responders, members of the National Guard, and EMS crews.”

Tennenbaum is a registered EMT with United Hatzalah and one of the more senior volunteers with the organization’s Psychotrauma and Crisis Response Unit. He is a also a board-certified addiction professional and directs JNARS, a nonprofit organization for advancing the professional treatment of addiction disorders.

“We arrived in Port Arthur and met dozens of brokenhearted people who were evacuated with nothing but the shirts on their backs,” Tennenbaum said.

“We were able to bring some light into their dark experience and help them move forward to the next leg of their journey. We also offered critical emotional support to exhausted EMS personnel who were working around the clock to rescue those surrounded by floodwaters.

“The military, National Guard, EMS crews, and good Samaritans who were volunteering to help their fellow Texans were extremely grateful for our presence. We kept receiving hugs, blessings, and photo requests. But most incredible were the stories people shared with us.

“Part of the job here is to listen. We heard some unbelievable stories from people and we allowed them to cry and share their stories of how they evacuated babies on floating air mattresses and saw human organs floating in the floodwaters. Other stories included people going for three days with no water or food, or facing dangerous snakes that entered homes via the floodwaters. People kept telling us how they simply woke up to water surrounding their bed in the morning.

“The stories were simply endless and our job is to listen and provide psychological and emotional support and that is what we did.”

Among the volunteers assisting in the evacuations were pilots and EMS teams, many of whom had been working non-stop.

“We need to listen to their stories and the stories of other volunteers and first response personnel just as much as we need to listen to the experiences of the civilians,” said Tennenbaum.

“And the first responders need to talk and offload the stress of their experiences. Over the course of the weekend we were able to treat several pilots and EMS crews, all of whom couldn’t stop thanking us.”

“Shabbat was a bit of challenge for us,” said team leader Miriam Ballin, “as we were not able to leave the area to get back to Houston due to the high waters on the roads. So we stayed in the airport and continued helping people. One flight paramedic eagerly invited herself to our Shabbat meal and shared with us some incredible stories.”

“It’s been a memorable few days and we merited doing great things here. We hope to continue our efforts,” said Tennenbaum.

By Sunday afternoon, some 2,500 evacuees had made their way to the mega-shelter set up for them at the Dallas Convention Center. At the center, all the services evacuees would need for their long-term stay until they return home were being provided. Police, fire and rescue services, social services, EMS, hospital teams, and even day care services were on hand, as were three volunteers from the Israel Rescue Coalition and United Hatzalah’s Psychotrauma and Crisis Response Unit.

“Our team is working together with the Red Cross, the psychological department of the hospital team that is here, and with the children’s department,” explained Einat Kauffman, a psychotherapist and Ph.D. candidate who specializes in treating grief and loss.

“Today we focused primarily on working with the children,” said Kauffman. “What really moved me was to see how fast the children understood what was happening around them. Whenever we asked them where they lived, they responded by pointing at a bed nearby and saying ‘This is my bed, and over there is my parents’ bed.’ It was quite sad on the one hand, but also simply remarkable to see how quickly they adjusted.”

Team members attempted to get the children to release some of their frustration and anxiety via play aimed at helping them internalize their new situation. “We worked with children from ages two to eleven and had them recreate for us how their homes looked by using Play-Doh and by drawing on the floor with chalk,” said Kauffman.

“This helped them express their feelings of loss and we were able to work from there. Some children spoke about their pets that were lost, others talked about being separated from other family members. Our goal was to get them to open up about what they were feeling in a non-threatening and positive manner in order to be able to begin processing their feelings.”

Team leader Ballin noted the team was instrumental on both ends of the trip.

“We had people at Jack Brooks assisting with the process of preparing evacuees for departure to Dallas. Then our team in Dallas had people ready to welcome and help the evacuees at the other side. It was a highly effective process and we were able to help many people.”

Kauffman said the teams were notified that thousands of additional evacuees were expected at the mega-shelter over the next few days – many of whom will be suffering the same shock and disillusionment those already present at the shelter were experiencing – and that IRC and United Hatzalah’s Psychotrauma and Crisis Response Unit will be on hand, working with them one person at a time and in small groups.

Subscribe to Israel Commentary:


Twitter: @israelcomment

Past time Pres. Trump replaced Obama’s man, Nat’l Security Chief Gen’l H.R. McMaster — dedicated to Obama anti-US policies

(McMaster’s long list of people wrongly fired and wrongly appointed who are  detrimental to the best interests of the United States.)

By Morton A. Klein, Elizabeth Berney and Daniel Mandel

Jewish & Israel News,

August 27, 2017

The Zionist Organization of America’s August 2017 report detailed US National Security Chief General H.R. McMaster’s troubling record regarding Iran, Israel and radical Islamist terrorism. McMaster’s statements and actions appear to be diametrically opposed to President Donald Trump’s support for Israel, opposition to the Iran nuclear deal and determination to name and combat radical Islamist terrorism.

Critics of ZOA’s report have failed to show that ZOA’s report was wrong in any substantive respect. The criticisms have amounted to name-calling against ZOA, and McMaster’s friends vouching for his character — which is irrelevant to the vital policy issues addressed in ZOA’s report.

McMaster reportedly wrongly refers to the existence of a Palestinian state before 1947 — when no Palestinian state ever existed, and maligns Israel as an “illegitimate,” “occupying power.” In fact, Israel’s re-establishment in 1948 and her self-defensive capture of Judea/Samaria (West Bank) in 1967 were both legal under binding international law, and deprived no country of its sovereign territory.

McMaster wrongly claimed that President Trump would recognize “Palestinian self determination” during his visit to Israel; reportedly opposed President Trump’s visit to Jerusalem’s Western Wall, refused to state that the Western Wall is in Israel, and insisted that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could not accompany President Trump to the Western Wall.

And alarmingly, when Israel installed metal detectors at Jerusalem’s Temple Mount after Palestinian terrorists smuggled in firearms and murdered two Israeli policemen, McMaster, according to a senior defense official, described this as “just another excuse by the Israelis to repress the Arabs.”

In his short tenure at the National Security Council (NSC), General McMaster has fired or removed from the NSC six staunchly pro-Israel/anti-Iran officials: Steve Bannon; K.T. McFarland; Adam Lovinger; Rich Higgins, Derek Harvey and Ezra Cohen-Watnick.

McMaster quickly removed Bannon, architect of much of President Trump’s pro-Israel, anti-Islamist terrorism agenda, from the Principals Committee of the NSC. McMaster also promptly removed K.T. McFarland, a key member of the team of Iran deal opponents originally assembled by President Trump, and a veteran pro-Israel national security professional in the Nixon, Ford and Reagan administrations.  She was shunted off to be ambassador to Singapore. Lovinger, a pro-Israel national security strategist from the Pentagon, was returned to the Pentagon with his security clearance revoked.

McMaster also sacked Iran “hawk” Rich Higgins, the NSC’s director of strategic planning, after Higgins wrote a memo about personnel opposed to President Trump’s foreign policy agenda.

McMaster removed Derek Harvey, senior director for the Middle East, who has been described by former Army Vice Chief of Staff General Jack Keane as “hands down the very best intelligence analyst that the United States government has on Iraq,” after Harvey prepared a list of NSC Obama-era holdovers.

McMaster should have removed the personnel on Harvey’s list — but instead fired Harvey. And McMaster also fired Cohen-Watnick, a staunch opponent of the Iran deal, who sought to intensify efforts to counter Iran in in the Middle East and rein in officials opposed to the president’s policies.

McMaster’s replacements and appointees are on the wrong side of the issues of concern. McMaster appointed Colonel Kris Bauman, who has blamed Israel for Palestinian terror and urged Israel to negotiate with Hamas, to work on the Israel-Palestinian desk. Bauman is working to revive General Jim Allen’s defective and dangerous Obama-era plan for Palestinian statehood.

McMaster also replaced K.T. McFarland with Dina Habib-Powell — a defender of Huma Abedin and friend of pro-Iran-deal Obama era figures such as Valerie Jarett.

As PJ Media New York editor David Steinberg wrote: “One is hard-pressed to identify a member of the NSC brought in by McMaster with a history of aligning with President Trump on Iran or with his Mideast policy in general.”

A White House official estimated that well over fifty percent of the NSC staff are Obama holdovers.

McMaster has also promoted certifying that Iran is in compliance with the Iran deal — even though Iran: banned International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors from its Parchin nuclear facility; refused to allow IAEA investigators to interview Iran’s nuclear scientists; and has repeatedly tested intercontinental ballistic missiles in violation of UN Security Council resolutions; and despite German intelligence reports that Iran is cheating on the deal.

And when pressed about Iran’s violations, McMaster inaccurately and misleadingly stated that Iran is merely violating the Iran deal’s “spirit.” This flies the face of President Trump’s promise to tear up or rigorously enforce the Iran deal and punish violations.

Mirroring the Obama administration’s practices, McMaster opposes using the term “radical Islamic terrorism” or other indicia of terrorists’ jihadist ideology.

It’s notable that those who have castigated ZOA’s detailed critique of McMaster have failed to refute a single ZOA concern. They merely condemned ZOA as wrong and scurrilous. The most that any of ZOA’s critics could offer was the “opinion” of anonymous Israeli officials that McMaster is a “friend” and that there is “no need to agree with every position McMaster has taken.”
Another issue that’s been ignored is why has a bevy of anti-Trump, anti-Israel activists and groups — including CNN’s Van Jones, Media Matters, and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) — leapt to Trump appointee McMaster’s defense.

Yet they never leapt to defend the pro-Israel David Friedman’s appointment as ambassador to Israel when he was criticized. Meanwhile, many strong supporters of Israel have supported ZOA’s critique of McMaster’s actions.

All of ZOA’s critics have two things in common. They use ugly, nonsensical, vacuous name-calling to defend McMaster and they fail to refute a single issue of concern ZOA raised. The critics’ inability to address ZOA’s numerous concerns only strengthens ZOA’s case about McMaster’s hostility to Israel and failure to take strong action against Iran and radical Islami st terrorism.

Subscribe to Israel Commentary:
Twitter: @israelcomment