The Palestinian Authority on Sunday called for “resistance” and boycott of all Israeli goods, capping off a campaign of promoting the blood libel that Israel planned the recent radical Islamic terror attacks in France.

Why would Israel do such a horrid thing? Why would Israel draft the Mossad to pay off Muslims to kill Jews and Christians in France?

Abbas and his Fatah movement have the answers: Aliyah of Jews from France and “revenge on European government…because of their positions on the Palestinian cause.”

Now that we know why 17 people were killed in three straight days of barbaric murder, we must remember that Secretary of State John Kerry has said over and over again the past several years that Abbas is against violence and does not incite his lone wolves to murder the sheep.

So how can it be that a recent poll of Arabs in Judea, Gaza and Samaria found that 84.4 percent of the respondents support the claim that “the operation (i.e., terror attack) was suspicious, and that Israel may be behind it,” while “only 8.7% believed that the murder of the French [citizens] in Paris was a natural result of the spread of Islamic extremism in Europe.”

The answer is that they read official Palestinian Authority media.

The official PA daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida reported last week, as translated and published by the Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) today:

The Mossad, the Israeli Secret Intelligence Service, planned the attacks because Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu and other Israeli leaders want to encourage Jewish immigration and take “revenge on European governments… because of their… support for… an independent Palestinian state.”

One regular columnist, Muwaffaq Matar, argued that because Netanyahu “wishes to realize the myth of the ‘Jewishness of Israel’” and encourage immigration, the attacks against Jews in France and elsewhere in Europe were “no coincidence, but a carefully executed and fully controlled plan.” He further argued that these claims were true because “‘Netanyahu’s Jewish State’ was the only one to benefit” from these attacks….”

Another regular columnist, Omar Hilmi Al-Ghoul, claimed that “Turkish sources, including intelligence and the mayor of Ankara,” determined that the attacks were “planned by the Israeli Mossad.”

The Palestinian Authority also used its official television network to tell viewers on January 12, in an interview with a journalist, that “in the past, the Israeli Mossad carried out operations (i.e., terror attacks): It bombed synagogues in order to force the Jews to emigrate.”

It gets even worse. Israel even trained the terrorists and gave them weapons, according to another writer for the daily.

Yahya Rabah wrote:

We have seen how Israeli terrorism in all its forms… is what grants patronage to all the terrorist groups in the region. Eventually, we have seen that terror[ists] have begun to receive training, weapons and perhaps [even] intelligence from Israel. Therefore, many believe that there was more to the last wave of terrorism in France than [just] two young Muslims. This was an [attempt to] target the role of France… [which voted] in favor of the Palestinian-Arab proposal at the [UN] Security Council last month!

Kerry can take pleasure in the fact that the Palestinian Authority officially condemned the attack on the Charles Hebdo magazine offices while letting a writer for its official daily write that the “unknown Charlie Hebdo magazine” had published “offensive cartoons” of the Prophet Mohamed “to get publicity and “extract itself from financial crises.”

None of this is a surprise to our readers.

But it is a surprise that the Obama administration still cannot come to terms with reality because doing so would be an admission that it has been hoodwinked for 20 years by a two-faced monster that has conned successive American governments and the State Dept., which still insists that none of this would have happened if Israel simply would follow the Arab world’s orders and stop insisting on Zionist demands, such as remaining a Jewish state and protecting its citizens from terror.

The U.S. State Dept. has strongly attacked the International Criminal Court (ICC) for opening a probe of alleged Israeli war comes and left open the question whether the ICC even has the a right to conduct a probe of last year’s war with Hamas.

The State Dept. called the ICC announcement a “tragic irony,” a statement that was further bolstered by praise for the ICC decision by Hamas, which may find itself under the ICC microscope.

Jeff Rathke, director of the State Dept. press office, stated:

We strongly disagree with the ICC Prosecutor’s action today. As we have said repeatedly, we do not believe that Palestine is a state and therefore we do not believe that it is eligible to join the ICC. It is a tragic irony that Israel, which has withstood thousands of terrorist rockets fired at its civilians and its neighborhoods, is now being scrutinized by the ICC.

He told reporters at Friday’s daily press briefing:

We don’t think that the Palestinians have established a state, and we don’t think they’re eligible to join the International Criminal Court. I would highlight that many other countries share this view.

In answer to a question whether the ICC is conducting “an illegitimate preliminary examination,” Rathke responded, ” I’m not going to characterize it.,” and he declined to say one way or the other if the United States will appeal to the ICC to drop the preliminary examination.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu spoke with Sec. of State John Kerry Friday and asked him to intervene against the ICC on behalf of Israel

Hamas was thrilled by the ICC decision and declared on Saturday, “We are ready to provide (the court) with thousands of reports and documents that confirm the Zionist enemy has committed horrible crimes against Gaza and against our people.”

“Tragic irony” is an excellent definition of the ICC decision, which is even more astonishing since it apparently follows a complaint by the Palestinian Authority, which will not be a member of the ICC until April 1.

Technically, the ICC is off the hook of overreaching its authority.

The “Rome Statute” concerning war crimes states that non-members cannot ask for an investigation of war crimes.

The ICC got around this restriction by stating it is “examining” whether an investigation should be conducted, and it obviously cannot make a decision until April 1.

But how can the ICC examine alleged war crimes dating back to last year, when the Palestinian Authority did not even apply for ICC membership.

PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas presented documents to the ICC giving it authority to act retroactively.

The ICC stated it will open its examination on alleged Israeli war crimes in last summers’ war with “full independence and impartiality.”

If so, it will have a hard time ignoring Hamas war crimes, which Israel documented day by day in the war, having learned to do so after the United Nations’ scathing Goldstone Report that barely mentioned Hamas’ war crimes in the three-week Operation Cast Lead counter-terrorist campaign in late December 2008 and early January 2009.

Prime Minister Netanyahu said that the ICC announcement of a preliminary examination as based on an “outrageous request” by the Palestinian Authority.

Israeli soldiers arrested two terrorists in Jenin overnight and confiscated a cache of weapons, including, two rifles, a revolver, grenades, bullets and bullet cartridges.

Elsewhere, the IDF arrested eight other suspected terrorists.

Jenin, like other cities, is under control by the Palestinian Authority, which is committed by the Oslo Accords, to weed out terrorists.

The problem is that the Oslo Accords exists on paper buried in the overflowing trash pile of the U.S. State Dept. which still talks about the “peace process” that PA chairman Mahmoud Abbas decimated this week by asking the U.N. Security Council to scrap the last remnants of the Oslo Accords and removing all possibility of negotiations with Israel by voting on a resolution to unilaterally define the borders of Israel.

The resolution failed, the terrorists run free in Judea and Samaria and the IDF keeps Israel – and Abbas – safe from terrorists.

The United States stated on Wednesday that not every resolution the Palestinian Authority presents to the United Nations Security Council is necessarily a ”unilateral” step, a term used in the Oslo Accords that prohibits Israel and the Palestinian Authority from taking steps that would preclude negotiations.

Article XXXI of the Oslo 2 Accords, signed by the Palestinian Authority and Israel, states:

Neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the West Bank and the Gaza Strip pending the outcome of the permanent status negotiations.

This article prohibits unilateral measures which would alter the legal status of the areas, such as annexation or declaration of statehood.

Every time the Palestinian Authority turns to the United Nations, it is a unilateral action that violates the Oslo Accords. In truth, it doesn’t matter because there have been enough other gross violations that render it null and void.

Examples are, unilaterally halting security cooperation with Israel, exceeding the overall limit on the number of Palestinian “police,” failure to coordinate movement of Palestinian police, detention of Israeli citizens without notifying Israel, and failure to enforce restrictions on visitors’ permits

The United States has consistently winked its eye at the violations, but U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s spokeswoman Jen Psaki revealed that the Obama administration has turned around former policy by specifically putting a stamp of approval on the Palestinian Authority’s proposing a resolution to the U.N. Security Council on its future status if it “does not prejudge the outcome of the negotiations.”

How can she do such a thing? It’s simple. You just re-define the word “unilateral.”

Here is what deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf had to say last May, referring to Palestinian Authority threats to approach to the United Nations when her boss’s Peace Talks Follies fell apart:

We don’t think either side should do anything to complicate efforts right now to build the trust necessary to resume negotiations. No one should take any steps that undermine trust, including unilateral.

That was six months ago.

Psaki told reporters Tuesday, “UN Security Council resolution is not, in our view, a unilateral measure by either one of the parties. There are the – obviously, the details are what matter. And so our objection here, and our objection historically has been to measures that would prejudge the outcome of the negotiations. If you had a Security Council resolution from the Palestinians, which we’ve had in the past, that sought to have them recognized as a member of the – of – as a member state, that’s a unilateral action, as you all know. But if you were to do some kind of terms of reference in the Security Council resolution, that would not be what we would consider to be a unilateral step….

“We have supported a range of actions in the past. What we haven’t supported is steps that are unilateral actions that predetermine the outcome of negotiations.”

Kerry, speaking from London, said, “This isn’t the time to detail private conversations or speculate on a U.N. Security Council resolution that hasn’t even been tabled, no matter what pronouncements are made publicly about it.”

In plain talk, the U.S. State Dept. has given the green light for a resolution that does not specifically recognize the Palestinian Authority as a country  but leaves the door open for a resolution that calls on Israel to commit itself to “negotiations” based on Israel “withdrawing” from all land that is to be part of a new Arab country.

The fancy semantic footwork is the expertise of western diplomats trying to prejudge an outcome of negotiations by leaving open no other possibility.

U.S. State Dept. Spokeswoman Jen Psaki showed exhaustion from having to parrot absurd American policy and was caught on a “hot mike” last week saying that her department’s lack of reaction to an Egyptian court acquittal of former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak on murder charges was “ridiculous.”

Psaki and her sidekick Marie Harf entertain reporters every weekday with non-answers to questions, which is the job of spokesmen. Their function is to defend their bosses, no matter how stupid they sound.

That is why Psaki constantly ignores incitement by the Palestinian Authority and constantly calls on Israel not to take any action that would “inflame tensions” after terrorist attacks.

That also is why she kept a straight face when questioned by reporters about the Egyptian decision. She set a near record for then number of times saying “no comment” in several different ways.

One reporter opened the issue by asking, “Do you have any reaction to the court’s decision dropping the charges against former President Mubarak?”

Psaki answered, “Generally, we continue to believe that upholding impartial standards of accountability will advance the political consensus on which Egypt’s long-term stability and economic growth depends,” she said. “But beyond that, I would refer you to the Egyptian government.”

Associated Press reporter Matt Lee, one of the few daily briefing reports who asks Psaki and hardball questions, couldn’t restrain himself.

 But I – wow. I don’t understand that at all. What does that mean? You believe that – of course you do. But was that – were those standards upheld in this case?

MS. PSAKI: I don’t have anything – any specific comment on the case. I’d point you to the Egyptian Government.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) justice was served? Do you think justice was served in this case?

MS. PSAKI: I don’t have anything specific on the case…..

QUESTION: — to argue with you or ask about the comment. Are you trying to understand what is – does – this decision means?

MS. PSAKI: I don’t have anything more for you.

Do we have anything more on Egypt?

QUESTION: Do Egyptians explain to you what’s going on?

MS. PSAKI: We obviously remain in close touch with the Egyptians, but I don’t have anything more to peel back for you….

QUESTION: Yeah, but I mean, Transparency International is basically disappointed with that. And some international organizations have also expressed concern over, like, dropping all the charges against Mubarak, who’s accused of having murdered – having ordered the murder of protestors…and also corruption, other things. And so you’re not willing to show your concern over that?

MS. PSAKI: Well, we speak frequently, including in annual reports, about any concerns we have about – whether its rule of law or freedom of speech, freedom of media, and we do that on a regular basis. I just don’t have anything more specifically for you on this case.”

Lee persisted and said, “You call for accountability and transparency all the time from any number of governments. And so if no one is held to account, if no one is being held accountable for what happened, it would seem to me that you would have a problem with that and “

Psaki assured him, “If there’s more we have to say, Matt, we will make sure you all know.

Lee tried again:

But I mean, what you have said, that the – what you said says nothing. I mean, it just – it’s like saying, “Well, we support the right of people to breathe.” Well, that’s great, but if they can’t breathe –

MS. PSAKI: If we have a further comment on the case, I will make sure all of you have it. ”Al Quds correspondent Said Arikat persisted, “I mean, aren’t you a little bit annoyed that the person who was elected by the Egyptian people, Morsi, is languishing in prison while the person who is accused of murdering hundreds of people is actually out on –

Psaki, obviously a bit fed up with having to parrot the insane American policy, tried to smile while saying, “I appreciate your effort, Said. I don’t have anything further on this case.”

The United States stated that Tuesday’s barbaric murders of four Jews praying in a Jerusalem synagogue “differs from recent attacks, potentially demonstrating low-level coordination to attack a pre-identified soft target as opposed to an opportunistic random act of violence.”

A Druze policeman who helped kill the Arab murderers and prevent a worse tragedy also was killed.

A statement from the U.S. Consulate in Jerusalem added that it cannot confirm the claim of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP) that it organized and carried out the brutal killings.

It also said there has been no information indicating that the Arab murderers intentionally targeted Americans. Three of the worshippers who were killed were native Americans, and the fourth man was originally from Britain.

The U.S, statement contradicted a claim Tuesday by Israel Police Commissioner Yochanan Danino said the attack appeared to be carried out “lone terrorists,” but he added the police have not completed their investigation.

“Lone wolves” have carried out several murderous attacks on Israelis the past two or three years, leaving Israelis in increasing panic that anyone can wake up one day and decide the time has come for him to kill Jews while shouting “Allahu Akba” on his way to the Land of 72 Virgins.

Israel’s establishment media, which for years has campaigned for the “Two-State” illusion and for releasing thousands of Palestinian Authority terrorists, now are scaring the wits out of everyone by screaming that the Netanyahu government is not providing citizens with security.

Israelis must not let the medias establishment, which partially caused the breakdown of Israeli security and now is pointing fingers elsewhere, get away with it.

For once, the United States has it right. The primitive murders in the Har Nof synagogue were not a spontaneous attack. The timing may have had something to do with the blood libel that Israeli “settlers” supposedly “executed” an eastern Jerusalem Arab bus driver who, according to pathology reports prepared by an Arab as well as by Jews, committed suicide.

Whether or not the attack itself was well-planned, as the Consulate said it was, the killers escaped Israel intelligence. The Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet) may have goofed by not following the cousins who carried out the attack and whose families have a record of involvement in terror, but count on officials to widen a dragnet over potential murderers.

The government is not going to abandon Jerusalem.

During the Oslo War days of suicide bombings, before the security fence reduced them to almost zero, Israelis bounced back immediately to populate the same areas where the murderers struck. Likewise, Jewish Home chairman Naftali Bennett and Yesh Atid Knesset Member Dov Lipman were among dozens of Jews who rushed on Wednesday to pray at the Kehillat Bnei Torah synagogue where the killers struck during prayer service yesterday.

“The terrorists accomplished nothing by their horrific murders” because although four Jews were murdered, the Jewish People live, said Lipman. “I was inspired by the intensity of this morning’s prayers and was touched deeply by the cries and tears of those who publicly gave thanks to God for surviving yesterday’s attack,” he said.

Israel obviously cannot defend citizens against every “lone terrorist,” but the death that Tuesday’s killers met and the government decision to deport to Judea and Samaria the wife of one of the terrorists are the first steps to strike fear back into the hearts of would-be murderers.

Israel must not show fear. It must make the enemy afraid.

The same U.S. State Dept. that is condemning Israel’s policy of demolishing Palestinian Authority terrorists’ homes sanctions the same destruction by Egypt of hundreds of civilians’ homes in the Sinai.

State Dept. spokeswoman Jen Psaki on Thursday said it was “counterproductive” for Israel to demolish the homes of terrorists.

When asked Friday about Egypt’s al-Sisi regime’s demolitions of Sinai homes, whose owners’ only crime was living in an area that Egypt wants as a buffer zone with Gaza, she condoned Egypt’s action.

“There have been some serious security challenges in the Sinai,” Psaki said. “We respect Egypt’s concern about their security in the area and support its right to self-defense. We also expect that they will ensure the rights of those being displaced are respected and that they are adequately compensated. That continues to be what we have conveyed to the Egyptians.”

And how about Israel’s right to self-defense?

“So you don’t regard that as being counterproductive to the cause of peace or fighting extremism, these home demolitions?” in the Sinai, asked Associated Press reporter Matt Lee. “You would not argue that – I mean, you say that there are serious security problems in the Sinai for the Egyptians. Are there not also serious security concerns and security problems for the Israelis?…

”It’s not okay for the Israelis to demolish homes, but it’s okay for the Egyptians to demolish homes?”

Psaki dug up the expired “borders’ argument, to wit:

“Well, it’s an entirely different scenario, Matt. Egypt is not predetermining what borders would be by taking these steps. It’s a different scenario….

We believe it’s counterproductive to their stated goals. In Egypt, we understand their concerns about their security. We’ve seen recent threats to that in the Sinai, as you all have reported on. I think I’m going to leave it at that. They’re different scenarios.”

No, no, Madame Psaki, you may not leave it at that.

She is explicitly saying that since the Obama administration backs the Palestinian Authority claim that half of Jerusalem belongs to a country that does not exist, Israel does not have the right to try to deter terror by tearing down the homes of a terrorist who killed an American-Israeli baby in a vehicle terror attack at a Jerusalem light rail station last month.

She is saying Israel may not send a warning to future terrorists by destroying the home of the attempted murderer who last month shot at point-blank range Rabbi Yehuda Glick for wanting the right for Jews to pray on the Temple Mount.

Psaki is explicitly saying that Egypt has the right to tear down not one home, and not dozens of homes but hundreds of homes of civilians – not terrorists – in Sinai because it is an act of self-defense. In Israel it is “counterproductive.”

Thousands of people on the Egyptian side of Rafah were displaced three weeks ago when the Egyptian army dynamited their homes to create the buffer zone that Egypt hopes will help put a stop to the surge of weapons and terrorists into the Sinai from Hamas-controlled Gaza.

The difference between Israel and Egypt, according to the Obama administration, is that Israel has no right to deter terror if terrorists are killing Jews because of the assumed motive of securing borders for the Palestinian Authority and which Washington has pre-determined and which preclude negotiations that the same Obama administration tries to make believe exist.