Pro-Hamas protestors were at it again, this time setting fire to the Israeli embassy in Mexico City, with some reports of injuries, puzzling quite a few observers.
According to the Jewish Chronicle:
Rioters on Tuesday set fire to the Israeli Embassy in Mexico during a protest ostensibly against the Israeli military operation in the southern Gazan city of Rafah.
Masked protesters threw stones at security forces who had created a barricade preventing access to the diplomatic mission in the Mexico City’s Lomas de Chapultepec neighborhood.
Around 200 people participated in the “Urgent Action for Rafah” demonstration, dozens of whom attempted to break down the barriers, according to AFP.
It was an ugly picture:
After all, why did they pick Mexico City? We expect these kind of violent, barbaric acts in places like, say, like Turkey, or maybe Paris or London, where large groups of Islamist militants have a foothold. Mexico doesn't have much in the way of that, Chile certainly has more with its large Palestinian-Chilean community as does Argentina, and as the commentator noted, they probably have never so much as met a Palestinian.
But here we are, and Mexico now has a black eye on the diplomatic front, failing to protect a sovereign embassy, which will probably prompt stepped-up security measures from at least the American one, either through incompetence, or maybe just standing around and letting it happen.
Of course if that were the case, they'd have a very black eye indeed, given that they responded so badly to Ecuador sending the cops into their embassy in Quito to rake out a fugitive criminal who was taking asylum in their quarters.
They howled about the importance of respecting national sovereignties in embassies. What have they got to say for themselves now that Israel has a burning embassy on their own territory? Seems the hypocrisy factor is major, and we have yet to see a Mexican government statement about it, though there probably will eventually be one.
Like a lot of Latin American states, they have given shelter to Hezb'allah operatives, not loudly, but there was a Hezb'allah bombmaker caught at the U.S.-Texas border a couple months ago, and Hezb'allah has reportedly had "trade" relations for illegal drugs with Mexico's notorious cartels in the past. Hezb'allah specializes in embassy attacks in the Americas -- they conducted two major ones in Buenos Aries, Argentina, on the Israeli embassy in the 1990s in what have since been called "dress rehearsals" for 9/11.
Maybe it was them.
A second possibility is that it was Cuba behind this.
Cuban operatives and their Venezuelan catspaws have manipulated both the Black Lives Matter protest leaders, and the recent crop of pro-Hamas protestors, offering them "training" in "revolutionary resistance." They personally mentored at least one campus protest leader in New York, at Columbia University, I wrote about that here. Mexico, particularly under the administration of Andres Manuel Lopez Obrador, a leftist, has been pretty palsy around the Cubans, with AMLO himself telling the feckless Biden administration via 60 Minutes that either it lifts sanctions on its Venezuelan, Nicaraguan and Cuban pals, or he won't stop the border surge.
Why would Cuba do this to its longtime ally and enabler? Possibly because AMLO never delivered the goods on the dropping of sanctions -- so here comes the civil unrest. It would suggest a pretty vise-like grip on the relations front that we don't know much about. But Cuba does this sort of thing, so they aren't above suspicion.
The third possible nexus of motives is that Mexico is in the throes of its elections with Election Day there on June 2. In this case, the conclusion is a foregone one, Mexico is expected to elect Claudia Sheinbaum, a Mexican leftist and Jewish woman who grew up steeped in far-left protest culture based on her parents. According to this interesting profile of her in The Nation written in April, she's the candidate of "continuity" while the other parties have banded together to present a strange left-right-center mix candidate, who doesn't appear likely to win.
The political figure she reminded me of was Dilma Rousseff of Brazil, who was similarly leaden and uncharismatic compared to her precedessor of the same party, but came from a solidly hard-left protestor past. Dilma had been the bookkeeper to a far-left terrorist organization in the '60s and '70s in Brazil. The report notes the Dilma comparison at the end.
But unlike Dilma, Sheinbaum never engaged in terrorist activities, she was just big on far-left protests -- on American college campuses such as Stanford University in the 1990s, and plenty more before and after. In other words, she was steeped in incipient wokester culture of the U.S., which is reflected in her political agenda -- green energy and other bound-to-fail garbage that upper middle class white liberals favor. In essence, she's a weak liberal like the various university presidents who were run circles around this past spring by far-left protestors. Think of her as Minouche Shafar of Columbia -- easy to roll around by crazed Jew-hating maniacs. And unlike Minouche, who is probably a secular Muslim, she's a secular Jew, which makes her an even more attractive target to the pro-Hamas protestors, even if they aren't being directed by either the Cubans or Hezb'allah or Hamas itself. Did someone from the pro-Hamas protestors want to lay her low, to entice her into bowing even lower to their cause with threats of violence on the table. It's somewhat far-fetched since it would seem more logical that they would attack a Mexican government building rather than the Israeli embassy on that motive, but their attack on Israel's embassy may be a practice run for worse to come for the Mexicans, particularly if they expect Mexico to do nothing about it.
We'll know more in coming days, particularly as we see Mexico's reaction, but for now, the crazies are loose in Mexico City and we've got an open border.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.