Archive for November 2014

[Satire] Iran’s Letter to Obama: Thanks for the Nukes!

November 15, 2014

Iran’s Letter to Obama: Thanks for the Nukes! Israel Today, Noah Beck, November 14, 2014

131015_iran

Dear President Obama,

You’ve been a great friend for the last six years and, to express our appreciation, we’d like to acknowledge some of your many helpful actions:

1) In 2009, our presidential election results were so dubious that millions of brave, pro-democracy protesters risked their lives to demonstrate throughout our country. When our Basij paramilitary force brutalized them, you kept your response irrelevantly mild for the sake of “engaging” us. That surely helped Iranians understand the risks of protesting our “free” election of 2012 (involving our eight handpicked candidates). It was indeed a very orderly rubberstamp.

2) After eight years of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, we KNEW you’d fall for the smiles of his successor, President Hassan Rouhani! Human rights abuses have actually worsened under his rule and his polished charm only makes him better at duping the world into acquiescing to our nukes, so we LOVE how you’ve overlooked these facts.

3) You’ve been unilaterally weakening the sanctions against us by simply not enforcing them (which reassures us that you’re desperate to avoid any real confrontation).

4) You’ve threatened to thwart any Congressional attempt to limit your nuclear generosity by simply lifting sanctions without Congressional approval. Good stuff!

5) You isolated Israel on the issue of how close we are to a nuclear capability – we love how your estimates are so much laxer than theirs are!

6) The diplomatic snubs and betrayals of Israel by your administration have been EPIC. We couldn’t have asked for more – from your humiliation of Prime Minister Netanyahu in 2010, to Secretary of State John Kerry’s betrayal of Israel during Operation Protective Edge, to calling Netanyahu a “chickenshit” a few weeks ago, without even apologizing later. We found it hilariously ironic that your administration’s accusation of Israeli cowardice was made anonymously! And, FYI, Netanyahu is actually the only leader in the world with the guts to defy us, respond to Syrian border violations, enforce his own declared lines, etc., so we thought that this was particularly priceless.

7) Speaking of enforcing red lines, we LOVE how you backed off yours, after our Syrian buddy, Basher Assad, used chemical weapons on his own people. That was a very helpful signal to everyone that we need not take your threats too seriously (contrary to those scary words you issued in 2012 about how stopping our nukes militarily was still an option, unlike containment, and how you don’t bluff). But we understood back then that you were trying to get re-elected, so we didn’t take it personally.

8) It was adorably naive of you (in 2011) to request so politely that we give back your drone that went down on Iranian soil. In fact, your request was so quaint that we couldn’t resist recently showcasing our knock-off based on that drone.

9) Fortunately, you don’t take our Supreme Leader Khamenei seriously when he tweets out his plan for destroying Israel (why let our true motives get in the way of a fantastic nuclear deal, right)?

10) We LOVE how you obsess over Israel building apartments in Jerusalem because it’s the perfect distraction from our deal.

11) You’ve been pressuring Israel to retreat from more disputed territory, effectively rewarding Palestinians for launching the third missile war against Israel from Gaza in five years last summer and, more recently, the third Intifidah inside Israel in 17 years. You’re almost as awesome as the European appeasers who think Palestinian bellicosity merits statehood!

12) It’s so cute of you to write us these letters asking for help against ISIS and showing us how desperately you want a nuclear deal. All we had to do was hint at an ISIS-for-nukes exchange and you got so excited!

13) You’re smart to go behind everyone’s backs when dealing with us. That’s a bummer that your top aide, Ben Rhodes, was caught saying how a nuclear accord with us is as important to you as “healthcare.” But we’ve got the perfect slogan to sell our deal to Americans: “If you like your nukes, you can keep them.”

14) What’s really awesome about the deal that we’re “negotiating” is that it allows us to continue nuclear enrichment but makes it even harder for Israel to take any military action against our nuclear program. And our agreement will give the press even more ammunition against such an attack. We already know about the world media’s anti-Israel bias – they can’t even get a simple story about vehicular terrorism against Israelis correct. Even we were surprised at how The Guardian writes accurate headlines when Canada suffers an Islamist car attack but not when Israel does). So if you accept our nukes and Israel then attacks them, the media will be even harsher on Israel (even though the world will be silently relieved, if Israeli courage succeeds at neutralizing what scared everyone else).

But we kind of feel sorry for you, because nobody takes you seriously and you’re a lame duck now. Putin is unabashedly conquering neighboring countries while going all Cold War on you with 40 provocative security incidents involving Western nations and Russian flights into the Gulf of Mexico (despite your promise of greater flexibility after your 2012 reelection). The North Koreans are closer than ever to building nuclear missiles. China is dangerously testing disputed borders with India, growing increasingly assertive in the contested Spratly archipelago, and stealing your sensitive defense and corporate data. Oh, and ISIS has grown into a veritable jihadi lovefest thanks to your excellent strategy against them.

Indeed, your foreign policy seems like a massive FAIL, but we’re super ready to help! Your trusted Russian friends have suggested continuing our nuclear talks past the November 24th deadline, and we’re totally down with more enrichment time (that’s another reason we’ve stonewalled the IAEA’s investigations into our nukes), so count us in on this extension like the one from last July (and any future ones). Hey, it’s good for you too: an extension (or agreement) looks so much better than calling out our manipulations and issuing more empty threats to stop us, right?

And after everyone sees the killer deal that you’re giving us, the world’s bad actors will line up to talk to you, with demands of their own that you can try to satisfy in the hope that they’ll stop opposing your national interests so much.

Overall, we appreciate you even more than we did President Carter, because getting nukes is WAY COOLER than holding 52 American diplomats and citizens hostage for 444 days.

With our deepest gratitude,

Your Friends in the Iranian Regime

p.s. We’re glad you didn’t take any personal offense when one of our officials used the N-word to describe you back in 2010. He actually has nothing but respect for you, as do we.

Noah Beck is the author of The Last Israelis, an apocalyptic novel about Iranian nukes and other geopolitical issues in the Middle East.

A deadly deadline?

November 14, 2014

A deadly deadline? Israel Hayom, Ruthie Blum, November 14, 2014

For one thing, the drawn-out process has provided Iran with the opportunity to spread out and better fortify its nuclear plants. For another, U.S. President Barack Obama has exhibited a negative attitude toward the endangered Jewish state, a declared ally which he treats like an enemy. There is no doubt in anyone’s mind that he has told Israel, in no uncertain terms, not to launch a strike.

***************

Following a second day of talks between top American, European and Iranian diplomats in Oman on Monday, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry admitted that “real gaps” remain between the sides, but stressed that the negotiation partners were “working hard” toward an agreement by the end of the month.

He was referring to the self-imposed Nov. 24 deadline for signing a deal that would curb Iran’s nuclear program to a mutually satisfactory extent.

Statements emerging on the sidelines of the talks, which continued beyond Tuesday among lower-tier negotiators, indicated a degree of optimism on the possibility of progress in time to make the deadline. But the real test will take place next week in Vienna, when a final round of meetings is held to iron out differences that have prevented reaching an accord until now — unless another extension is decided upon, in the event of a stalemate.

Whatever happens, however, the outcome cannot be good.

The signing of a deal would mean that the P5+1 (the U.S., Russia, China, the U.K., France and Germany) will have succumbed to Iran’s demand that it be able to complete its “peaceful” nuclear program, unencumbered by restrictive international sanctions.

The absence of a deal would basically amount to the same thing, since Russia and the Obama administration will not cease pushing for an easing of sanctions, no matter what Iran does.

This no-win situation for the West is precisely what has been buying Iran time to build nuclear bombs.

It is also what enabled Iranian President Hassan Rouhani to receive Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s tacit consent to engage in negotiations with the world’s “infidels” whom Iran intends to subjugate.

Khamenei has had good reason to trust Rouhani’s methods. Diplomacy has not kept centrifuges from spinning or uranium from being enriched. And all the stalling has helped reduce the odds of an Israeli military strike.

For one thing, the drawn-out process has provided Iran with the opportunity to spread out and better fortify its nuclear plants. For another, U.S. President Barack Obama has exhibited a negative attitude toward the endangered Jewish state, a declared ally which he treats like an enemy. There is no doubt in anyone’s mind that he has told Israel, in no uncertain terms, not to launch a strike.

If this, by itself, were not enough to embolden the Islamic republic, Obama’s latest act of groveling at the feet of the chief mullah did the trick. As was revealed last week in the Wall Street Journal, Obama sent a letter to Khamenei, in which he urged the Supreme Leader to agree to a deal by the Nov. 24 deadline, and offered to cooperate with him to defeat Islamic State.

Now, Iran has no interest in joining forces with the “Great Satan” to secure a victory over the Islamic State terrorists who are competing with it for control of a global caliphate. But it certainly enjoys bringing Obama to his knees, which is just how such an appeal on his part is interpreted.

Obama’s supplication, coupled with his repeated censure of Israel, is music to Khamenei’s ears and fodder for his sermons, speeches and social media posts.

On Sunday, he tweeted a link to a chart detailing nine ways to ensure Israel’s elimination. Among these was the urgency of arming the West Bank — “like Gaza” — to confront Israel militarily.

With weakness oozing from the White House and strong support being issued from Iran, the Palestinian Authority is feeling especially empowered, as is indicated by the intifada it is currently waging against innocent Israelis.

The one aspect of the bigger picture that threatens to alter the status quo is the Republican sweep of the Senate on Nov. 4. It will now be almost impossible for Obama, already a lame duck, to get on with his job of wreaking havoc on America.

But, stripped of his domestic abilities, Obama is certain to shift his focus to foreign affairs. Desperate to go down in history as a leader with a legacy, he wants to sign a deal with Iran (and force Israel to establish a Palestinian state) before the end of his term in 2016.

With the changing of the guard at the Senate taking place in January, he is in an even bigger hurry to do so. Unfortunately — and for the first time since entering into phony negotiations with the West — Iran, too, may be anxious to reach a deal.

Fearing a tougher stance from a Republican-dominated Congress, the regime in Tehran is now calculating the wisdom of continuing to postpone an agreement. Since it has no intention of honoring any commitment involving a reduction of its nuclear capabilities, or of having its facilities monitored, it just might decide that it is preferable to sign a worthless piece of paper than risk the wrath of the Republicans.

With all this in mind, the events of the coming week in Vienna should be observed with great trepidation.

Obama desperate for a deal with Iran

November 14, 2014

Obama desperate for a deal with Iran, Israel Hayom, Isi Leibler, November 14, 2014

(Is Obama getting advice from Mr. Gruber on how to lie effectively to the “stupid” American public? Please see also To get a nuke deal with Iran Obama and the Islamist world demonize Israel.– DM)

[T]he administration continues to grovel in an effort to appease the Iranians. It is widely believed that the unprecedented hostility recently directed against Israel, especially the statement that Israel had lost the opportunity of exploiting the military option to prevent Iran becoming a nuclear power, was primarily for the benefit of Khamenei.

Under pressure, following the public release of his letter to Khamenei, Obama has stepped back, stating that there is still a big gap and that “we may not be able to get there.” He added, “Our number one priority with respect to Iran is making sure they don’t get a nuclear weapon.” Even Obama’s closest associates would question their president’s credibility when he voices such statements.

********************

Despite statements to the contrary, the Obama administration appears determined to achieve an “agreement” with Iran and seems willing to breach its repeated undertakings that it would never countenance Iran becoming a nuclear power. With the mullahs’ increased intransigence as they sense the desperation of the Americans to avoid a confrontation, the Nov. 24 deadline will probably be extended, enabling the centrifuges to continue spinning while the P5+1 countries engage in fruitless negotiations with the duplicitous Iranians.

The Iranians have mocked Secretary of State John Kerry’s overtures, including his secret appeals to them to coordinate with the U.S. in opposing the Islamic State group. Speaking from a podium bedecked with banners blazing “America cannot do a damn thing,” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei boasted that the “Great Satan’s” efforts to bring Iran to its knees had failed, and that U.S. President Barack Obama lacked the courage for a military confrontation. Ali Younesi, senior adviser to “moderate” President Hassan Rouhani, referred to Obama as “the weakest of U.S. presidents,” whose six years in office were “humiliating.”

Nevertheless, the administration continues to grovel in an effort to appease the Iranians. It is widely believed that the unprecedented hostility recently directed against Israel, especially the statement that Israel had lost the opportunity of exploiting the military option to prevent Iran becoming a nuclear power, was primarily for the benefit of Khamenei.

The London Times claimed that American and Iranian officials have even been discussing the opening of a U.S. trade office in Tehran.

The frenzied, initially covert, efforts to engage the support of Iran in the struggle against Islamic State — despite Iran being designated by the U.S. as a terrorist state — has further undermined the little credibility the U.S. retains with the moderate Sunni states, considered until recently as staunch allies.

Obama’s deception of his allies was further exemplified when it was disclosed that he had written a secret letter to Khamenei pleading with him to reach an accommodation. This, the fourth letter he had written to the ayatollah — all of which were ignored — was an explicit breach of undertaking to his allies that any independent initiatives would be preceded by consultations.

Even one of Obama’s favorite in-house journalists, Jeffrey Goldberg, felt impelled to remark that the “most recent letter was delivered at an unfortunate moment in the run-up to the putatively climactic negotiations between Iran and the world powers” when the Obama administration had already conceded many of Iran’s demands. Goldberg concluded his column by stating: “The Iranians originally came to the negotiating table because U.S.-led sanctions were hurting them badly. I understand the need for give and take negotiations, but I’m getting worried that the U.S. is focused too much on the first half of that equation.”

The U.S. administration has already given approval to Iran to enrich uranium, effectively making it a nuclear threshold state. While the global powers agreed to enable the Iranians to have 1,000 centrifuges to process material required to create nuclear fuel, the Iranians have outrightly refused to dismantle any of the 19,000 centrifuges they have already accumulated. It is understood that Iran is already in the position to accrue sufficient enriched fissile material to become a nuclear power within a few months, if it so desires. The U.S. has indicated that it would be willing to sign off on a deal that would extend this breakout phase to one year, hardly reassuring to the region.

The Iranians also displayed utter contempt toward the U.S. by violating the interim accord and failing to disclose an enrichment facility in Qom and even denying access to inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency to military sites and nuclear scientists engaged in research. Clearly, the duplicitous Islamist regime would continue to circumvent any agreement that is not rigorously monitored and enforced — a procedure that the Iranians have already made clear they will never accept.

While the outcome of this issue will have immense global implications, especially in the Middle East, Israel is the country most affected. The Iranian regime’s hatred of Israel is messianic. It openly proclaims its commitment to destroy the Jewish state. Coinciding with Obama’s groveling letter to him, Khamenei tweeted a message stating that the only way to stop the “Israeli crimes” was to “annihilate” the “barbaric, wolflike & infanticidal regime of #Israel.”

Israel cannot accept the prospect of such a fanatical terrorist regime becoming a nuclear threshold state.

Under pressure, following the public release of his letter to Khamenei, Obama has stepped back, stating that there is still a big gap and that “we may not be able to get there.” He added, “Our number one priority with respect to Iran is making sure they don’t get a nuclear weapon.” Even Obama’s closest associates would question their president’s credibility when he voices such statements.

The question is whether at this advanced stage, the P5+1 nations, desperate to appease and reach an accord with the terrorist state at any price, can still be deterred from capitulating.

The key rests with the United States. The extraordinary landslide victory by the Republicans at the midterm elections — clearly a vote of no confidence in Obama — provides some hope.

Yet it should be noted that within the American political system, the president has primary control of foreign relations.

The Republican-controlled Congress and Senate can certainly pass resolutions, but that will not necessarily limit the White House in this arena of foreign policy. In addition, realizing that on the domestic scene his hands will be restricted by Congress, Obama might even decide to intensify his foreign policy activities. The principal areas are likely to include the embrace of the Iranians and possibly trying to impose a settlement on the Israelis with the Palestinians.

However, in relation to Iran, the president must persuade Congress to rescind the sanctions it originally legislated. Obama may constitutionally override the congressional sanctions and unilaterally suspend enforcement, but that could lead to a major confrontation with Congress.

Needless to say, if a reasonable agreement is achieved, it will be endorsed by Congress. But all indications suggest that Obama is promoting an Alice-in-Wonderland deal with the Iranians, which Congress should reject.

The incoming Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) has already stated unequivocally that the Senate will review any deal with Iran and ensure that “any comprehensive agreement concerning the Iranian nuclear program, both protects the national security of the United States and recognizes Israel’s own defense as a security partner of our country.”

At this critical time, American Jews and friends of Israel should exert all their influence to convince the administration and a bipartisan Congress that appeasing the Iranian mullahs will have horrific long-term consequences and must be avoided. They should mount a powerful public campaign to demonstrate the extent of the catastrophe the government would cause should it appease this evil terrorist regime, which in the absence of becoming a nuclear state, is likely in time to implode because of the growing opposition from its own young people and the middle class.

If the current U.S. desperation to avoid a confrontation enables the Iranian terrorist state to achieve a nuclear threshold level, it is likely to have far worse long-term global repercussions than Chamberlain’s appeasement of the Nazis at Munich which led to World War ll.

Mahmoud Abbas’s ‘Run Them Over’ Intifada

November 14, 2014

Mahmoud Abbas’s ‘Run Them Over’ Intifada

Only Israel is demanded to “make peace” with the barbarity.

by P. David Hornik

November 12, 2014 – 11:28 pm

via PJ Media » Mahmoud Abbas’s ‘Run Them Over’ Intifada.

 

“Run [them] over, destroy,
annihilate, blow them up;‎

Don’t let the Zionist live long

O Al-Aqsa, we’re your defenders
O son of Jerusalem, cry ‘Allah is great!’”

‎“Wait for them at the intersection
Let the settler drown in red blood
Terrorize them”‎

Those quotes are from Palestinian Media Watch’s translation of a song that is now a big hit among Palestinians. PMW notes that:

One video version of the song “Run over [the settler]!” ‎by singers Muhammad Abu Al-Kayed and Anas Jaradat has more than ‎‎385,000 viewings on the “Quds News Network” Facebook page. On one of the singers’ ‎YouTube channel the song has more than 71,000 viewings.‎

What has evoked this enthusiasm is a spate of murderous Palestinian attacks on Israelis over the past few weeks. The fatalities have been a three-month-old Israeli girl and a 22-year-old Ecuadorian woman, both killed in a car-ramming attack in Jerusalem; a 38-year-old Israeli Druze border patrol captain killed in another car-ramming attack in Jerusalem; a 20-year-old off-duty Israeli soldier stabbed to death in Tel Aviv on Monday; and a 26-year-old Israeli woman stabbed to death beside a Judea community that same day.

Clearly, the Palestinians celebrating these attacks are not concerned about age or gender, security-force vs. civilian status, location (“East Jerusalem,” the “West Bank,” and Tel Aviv are all fine), or even whether the victims are Jewish or Israeli. They also are not devotees of a “two-state solution” with “two states living side by side in peace and security.”

Palestinian-affairs analyst Khaled Abu Toameh notes that:

The most popular [current Palestinian social-media] campaign is entitled Daes, which translates into “run over” in Arabic. Daes is also a reference to Daesh, the Arabic acronym for ISIS. The online campaigns feature cartoons that encourage Palestinians to use their vehicles to kill Israelis.

All sources agree that this wave of violence, which also includes rioting in Jerusalem, the West Bank, and in Israeli Arab towns within Israel proper, is being incited by the Palestinian terrorist organizations Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Some sources also say external terrorist organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood—and ISIS—have had a hand in organizing or inciting the violence.

A major role is also being played, however, by Mahmoud Abbas, chairman of the Palestinian Authority and Israel’s alleged peace partner, and his Fatah movement.

With Jerusalem’s Al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem serving as a flashpoint of the incitement, as Palestinians are whipped up by the entirely libelous claim that Israel is planning to destroy it, on October 18 Abbas declared that Israelis “must be barred from entering the [mosque] compound by any means. This is our Aqsa…and they have no right to enter it and desecrate it.”

 

On October 29 in Jerusalem a Palestinian named Mutaz Hijazi, who may well have internalized the message of “by any means,” attempted to assassinate Yehuda Glick, an advocate of Jewish prayer on the Temple Mount—where Al-Aqsa is located, and which is also the site of the ancient Jewish First Temple and Second Temple. The Mount is the most sacred place on earth for Jews, and has a lower degree of sacrality for Muslims.

Hijazi was quickly found and killed by Israeli security forces. Abbas responded by promptly writing to his widow:

With anger, we have received the news of the vicious assassination crime committed by the terrorists of the Israeli occupation army against [your] son Mu’taz Ibrahim Khalil Hijazi, who will go to heaven as a martyr defending the rights of our people and its holy places.

Hijazi, it should be stressed, shot Glick, a civilian, at pointblank range. Fortunately Glick now appears to be recovering in hospital.

The assassin’s admirer, Mahmoud Abbas, is the same Mahmoud Abbas about whom President Barack Obama said last March:

I think nobody would dispute that whatever disagreements you may have with him, he has proven himself to be somebody who has been committed to nonviolence and diplomatic efforts to resolve this issue.

That was in an interview where Obama, of course, portrayed Israeli prime minister Binyamin Netanyahu as the recalcitrant party who needs to “seize the moment” and make peace.

Palestinian anti-Jewish terror has been rising and falling in waves over the course of a century. After years of relative quiet, this latest wave is clearly propelled by the current regional atmosphere of extreme Islamist brutality.

With Muslim Arabs of different sects committing atrocities against each other, and savagely attacking non-Muslim or non-Arab Kurds, Yazidis, Christians, and others, it should come as no surprise that the Jews of Israel are also under attack.

Israel will deal with the problem and eventually quell the violence as it has before. Israel, though, is the only target of the Middle Eastern aggression that is dogmatically demanded to “make peace” with a community that views it as having no right to live.

A more rational approach would acknowledge Israel’s identity as an island of light in the region and stop equating it with the side that goes on producing car-rammers, shooters, and stabbers despite all efforts.

Islamic State leader claims ‘caliphate’ has expanded in new audio message

November 13, 2014

Islamic State leader claims ‘caliphate’ has expanded in new audio message, Long War Journal, Thomas Jjoscelyn, November 13, 2014

The Islamic State, an al Qaeda offshoot that currently controls large portions of Iraq and Syria, has released a new audio message from its leader, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi. The Islamic State’s emir is defiant in the recording, saying his group will continue its fight against all of its enemies.

Baghdadi was rumored to have been killed in airstrikes that took place sometime on Nov. 7 and Nov. 8. Some Iraqi officials claimed Baghdadi had been mortally wounded. But no firm evidence emerged to back up those claims. And Baghdadi references events that took place since those airstrikes, thereby demonstrating that he is alive.

On Nov. 10, jihadists in Algeria, Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen swore allegiance to Baghdadi and the Islamic State’s caliphate. In the newly-released audio recording, Baghdadi accepts their oaths of allegiance and praises the jihadists who made them.

Baghdadi gives glad tidings and announces “the expansion of the Islamic State to new lands, to the lands of al Haramain [meaning Saudi Arabia] and [to] Yemen, and to Egypt, Libya and Algeria.”

Baghdadi accepts “the bayat (oath of allegiance) from those who gave us bayat in those lands,” pronounces “the nullification of the groups therein,” and announces the creation of “new wilayah [provinces] for the Islamic State, and the appointment of wali [provincial leaders] for them.”

The Islamic State’s emir calls on “every” Muslim to “join the closest wilayah to him, and to hear and obey the wali appointed by us for it.”

Baghdadi’s statement is deliberately provocative as he is saying that all other jihadist groups, especially those that have not pledged allegiance to the Islamic State, are nullified. The Islamic State’s ideologues have argued that, with the reestablishment of an Islamic caliphate, all other jihadist groups owe their allegiance to Baghdadi as the caliphate expands into their lands.

The Islamic State made this argument in late June, when its leaders announced that the group was now a caliphate. “The legality of all emirates, groups, states, and organizations, becomes null by the expansion of the [caliphate’s] authority and arrival of its troops to their areas,” the Islamic State’s founding statement reads.

The swearing of bayat from jihadists in several countries on Nov. 10 was, therefore, intended to legitimize the Islamic State’s right to rule over the jihadists’ affairs within those nations. Long established jihadist groups operating in those countries, including al Qaeda’s official branches, obviously do not agree, as they have not sworn allegiance to Baghdadi.

Indeed, in three of the five cases (Libya, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen), the announcements of allegiance to Baghdadi came from unidentified jihadists who do not represent any well-known jihadist groups. In Algeria, the announcement came from a group of al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) veterans who have broken away from their parent organization and are now known as Jund al Khilafa. The Algerian-based jihadists had already sworn allegiance to Baghdadi earlier this year.

The announcement from Egypt was made by an anonymous jihadist representing a faction of Ansar Bayt al Maqdis (ABM), or Ansar Jerusalem, in the Sinai.

Baghdadi praises the jihadists in the Sinai specifically, offering them his congratulations because they “have carried out the obligation of jihad” and “terrified the Jews.”

It appears that ABM is already marketing itself as the Islamic State’s “wilayah,” or province, in the Sinai, as that is how the group refers to itself on its official Twitter feed. ABM’s Twitter page has been taken down repeatedly over the past several months. The latest iteration was posted online in the past few days.

The Islamic State leader rails against the “Crusaders” and the “Jews,” whom he blames for conspiring to launch the airstrikes against the jihadists.

Baghdadi also references President Obama’s decision to send 1,500 additional military advisors to Iraq, claiming that this demonstrates the coalition has been unable to stall the Islamic State’s advances with airstrikes alone. The Obama administration announced the president’s decision to deploy additional forces on Nov. 7, shortly before Baghdadi was supposedly hit in an airstrike.

Baghdadi concludes by calling on the soldiers of the Islamic State to cause “volcanoes” of jihad to “erupt” everywhere.

 

Netanyahu captains Israel into the doldrums

November 13, 2014

Netanyahu captains Israel into the doldrums, Al-MonitorAkiva Eldar, November 12, 2014

(Perceptions of a “senior columnist” for Harretz, perhaps the most left-wing newspaper published in Israel. Please see also To get a nuke deal with Iran Obama and the Islamist world demonize Israel. — DM)

 

European Union foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini attends a media conference  with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in JerusalemEuropean Union foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini (L) attends a media conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem, Nov. 7, 2014. (photo by REUTERS/Jim Hollander)

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has devoted special efforts in recent weeks to stop the diplomatic erosion of Israel’s stand in Europe’s capitals. As noted by Uri Savir in his latest Al-Monitor article on Nov. 9, there are growing indications that if the leading European states decide to take off their gloves in the fight against Israel’s right-wing government policies, the Barack Obama administration will not rush to use its long-standing veto weapon. Netanyahu’s weapon in the defensive battle he is waging for Europe’s soul is epitomized in the crushing question that he fires at guests from the neighboring continent: “Tell me, please, on which state in this region can you truly rely? On Syria? Iraq? Jordan? Egypt?”

The answer is obvious and also fairly correct: Israel is the most stable country in the Middle East and the only one that espouses Western democratic values. In the speech Netanyahu delivered at the annual memorial ceremony for former Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin on Nov. 5, he portrayed Israel as a bubble of Judeo-Christian well-meaning normalcy, which finds itself in a hostile Middle Eastern Muslim environment. “We were always proud of our democracy, which is unusual in the landscape that surrounds us,” waxed poetic the man who took part in the incitement against Rabin that preceded his murder.

He added, “Indeed, the State of Israel is not a violent country. We see this clearly in light of what is occurring around us — beheadings, throats being cut, firing squads, executions and so on. Israel’s exceptional nature in this landscape is remarkable.”

Indeed, if one measures it on a Middle Eastern scale, next to the Islamic State, the regime of Bashar al-Assad in Syria and even the Egyptian administration of Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, Israel’s democracy is a dazzling beacon. But, when Israel demands that Europeans judge it by Western standards, it must take into account that their values do not include prolonged occupation, the end of which is nowhere in sight. Europe never accepted the claim that Netanyahu made on Nov. 7 to European Union High Commissioner for Foreign Affairs and Security Federica Mogherini that settlements are not an obstacle to peace.

The correct question is not which country is the most wonderful in the Middle East, as Netanyahu asked, but which country that presumes to be a standard bearer of democracy and human rights would take the liberty, in 2014, of confiscating lands from foreigners to settle its citizens on them. What Western state withholds basic rights from millions of people living under its rule? What would the European Union do with a member state that conducts itself toward its Jewish minority the way Israel does toward its Arab minority?

In Netanyahu’s defense, it must be said that he does not have a copyright on the condescending and righteous attitude toward Israel’s surroundings. In an interview with The New York Times at the First Zionist Congress in Basel in 1897, Theodor Herzl promised that establishing a Jewish state in the Land of Israel would provide Europe with a “new frontline bastion against Asian barbarism.” Max Nordau, Herzl’s close aid, claimed in his speech at the same congress that the peoples of Asia are “degenerates.” More than 20 years ago, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak described Israel as “a villa in the jungle,” and subsequently upgraded the analogy to “an oasis in the middle of the desert” surrounded by a “turbulent world.”

Nonetheless, Barak stressed that while one hand must always have a finger on the trigger, the other must always be feeling its way toward the possibility of an arrangement with the neighbors.

In his book “Political Rhetoric: Israeli Leaders in Stressful Situations,” Nadir Tsur of the political science department at Hebrew University describes Prime Ministers David Ben-Gurion, Menachem Begin and Yitzhak Rabin, in his second term, as “formative leaders.” In addition to providing for the basic needs of the general public, Tsur explains, these men left their mark by adopting change and improving Israel’s lot. At the memorial ceremony for Rabin, Netanyahu said that “we all share” the slain prime minister’s hope that the political moves he made would create “an island of peace inside this violent ocean.” Nonetheless, he immediately added, “We all share this hope, but we are not averting our gaze and ignoring what is happening around us.” What diplomatic move of Netanyahu’s created “an island of peace”? Indeed, he does not ignore events around us; there is nothing he does better than warn against “the heaving ocean” around us.

On the day Netanyahu delivered this speech, former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger was laying out his credo to members of the Council on Foreign Relations in New York.

“[A]ny decision in foreign policy must begin with an analysis of the situation. And it must answer the question, where are we?” the noted statesman suggested. “The next question is, where are we going? Where we are going no matter what we do? And where should we be going?” After you answer these two questions, you have to define the limitations of what is possible, Kissinger explained, and warned that setting targets that the system cannot handle will cause it to explode.

“A great statesman operates at the outer limit of what is possible on the basis of a correct analysis and the difference between greatness and mediocrity,” Kissinger said.

Netanyahu’s rhetoric, deeds and misdeeds prove that based on his analysis of Israel’s situation, he has come to conclude that the best move is stepping in place and scaring people away from any change. But Netanyahu’s ultimate goal — perpetuating the occupation and bringing the Palestinians to heel — deviates from a long list of external limitations: starting with the demographic problem, through the state of Israeli democracy and up to the danger of losing the peace agreements with Egypt and Jordan, withdrawal of the Arab Peace Initiative and a weakening of US and European support.

According to Kissinger’s diagnosis, Netanyahu is, at best, a mediocre statesman. Or, as was well put by Amir Peretz, who resigned on Nov. 9 from his job as minister of environmental protection, ”Netanyahu is not the solution — he is the problem.”

 

To get a nuke deal with Iran Obama and the Islamist world demonize Israel

November 13, 2014

To get a nuke deal with Iran Obama and the Islamist world demonize Israel, Dan Miller’s Blog, Dan Miller, November 13, 2014

This is a guest post by Imam Mohamed allah-Dork, chairman of the Washington Islamist Coalition for Peace and Prosperity (WICPAP). Although it might appear to be satire it is not, because he articulates, far more candidly than most, the objectives of the “progressive” Obama Administration. I found him with the assistance of (another) imaginary “friend,” the Highly Honorable Ima Librul, Senator from the Great State of Confusion Utopia, where happy unicorns frolic endlessly in the service of Obama.

obama1_unicorn_fantasy

********************

Hatred of Israel is among our Dear Leader Obama’s most effective weapons against those who oppose Iran’s nuclear ambitions. He has made heroic efforts to encourage and use it, with help from the progressive media and His other friends.

Because of the wise efforts of Our Dear Leader and His brilliant Secretary of State, hatred of Israel has increased in recent years. This has been due, in large part, to Israel’s continuing and patently unreasonable refusals to commit national suicide by agreeing to all of the righteous demands of Palestinian Authority President Abbas, as Obama and Kerry  have also demanded. Peaceful Palestinians have responded to Israel’s malicious refusals through non-violent protests resulting in the death or injury of Jewish terrorists, accidentally run over, stabbed or shot.

Israeli Terrorists

Jewish Terrorists

The beautiful song embedded above was recently augmented by a new Palestinian musical offering including wholesome family-oriented lyrics.

I am so proud of the composers, singers and musicians that I cry whenever I watch the video!

According to a specious article at a right-wing propaganda site called PJ Media,

What has evoked this enthusiasm is a spate of murderous Palestinian attacks on Israelis over the past few weeks. The fatalities have been a three-month-old Israeli girl and a 22-year-old Ecuadorian woman, both killed in a car-ramming attack in Jerusalem; a 38-year-old Israeli Druze border patrol captain killed in another car-ramming attack in Jerusalem; a 20-year-old off-duty Israeli soldier stabbed to death in Tel Aviv on Monday; and a 26-year-old Israeli woman stabbed to death beside a Judea community that same day.

That is absurd. They were no more “murdered,” than are filthy dogs which are righteously slaughtered because they are dangers to society at large.

Unless Israel’s refusal to commit national suicide is condemned world-wide, undue attention will focus on the peace loving Islamic Republic of Iran and its legitimate goal of having nuclear weapons to bring Islamic peace to all who desire it. Israel opposes Iran’s quest for Islamic peace through nukes and therefore selfishly rejects it.

Hatred is irrational and bad, except that directed at genocidal, apartheid Israel and others who fail to embrace Islam. Hatred of them is rational and good. Just as hatred of Israel must be encouraged to the extent possible, so must the stupidity great credulity of the American people be fed and used for Progressive purposes, as it was fed and used to give them the blessings of superior health care.

Lies, obfuscation and secrecy for good purposes as praised by our Dear Leader’s consultant Jonathan Gruber, such as the passage of ObamaCare, are good because they are necessary. Leading the way, our Dear Leader promised to have the most transparent administration in history.

It was all diversionary symbolism, of course, because truth, clarity, transparency and accountability in pursuit of bad objectives — such as defeat of our Dear Leader’s policies — are intolerable because it is racist to oppose Him. Also, they might succeed.

That brings us to our Dear Leader’s dominant role in the P5+1 negotiations with The Islamic Republic of Peace Everlasting, Iran.

Some warmongering, racist Neanderthals blither that On Iran, No One Can Afford to Be Wilfully Blind.

It is more than simply unfortunate that Western policymakers look at Iran and appear to see only what they want to see. They heap praise on progress in the nuclear negotiations without looking at the actual content. They tune into televised smiles and reasonable-sounding public statements from the Rouhani administration and tune out the bombastic threats, insults and anti-Western rhetoric that invariably accompanies them. They push for large-scale rapprochement with Iran on the apparent assumption that its crimes will disappear if we somehow pretend they don’t exist. [Emphasis added.]

But these wishful thinkers are in the corridors of power in Washington and Westminster. Although ISIS has grown stronger thanks to the sectarian conflict that Iran has helped create, these unrealistic optimists would imply that somehow Iran is our best hope for defeating this menace. So they give in to Iranian intransigence in the nuclear talks by senselessly giving away more and more leverage. [Emphasis added.]

Make no mistake, Tehran’s theocratic rulers are very well aware of this “pie-in-the-sky” illogicality. Indeed, they are counting on it. The regime’s officials are so confident in our diplomatic vulnerability that they have been trying to use the crisis in Iraq not only to obtain unearned concessions in the nuclear domain, but also to pressure the U.S., the U.K. and their allies to modify their stance against the dictatorship of Bashar Assad in Syria. [Emphasis added.]

Nonsense! Iran needs nuclear weapons to pursue its peaceful, humanitarian goals and, with our Dear Leader’s help, will get (or keep) them! Life will then be better for everyone who matters.

No deal with Iran will be finalized unless all of Iran’s righteous demands are met. Unless ample lies and obfuscations are spoon-fed to the American public to minimize the consequences of Iran’s victory, the deal may well be opposed. Lies and obfuscation were needed to pass ObamaCare, even with solid Democrat majorities in both houses of Congress. A deal with Iran is even more important. Our Dear Leader’s wise consultant, Jonathan Gruber, knows this very well and so does our Dear Leader.

Fortunately, a Washington think tank is taking the lead to counter the silly stuff spouted by racists.

A leading liberal think tank in Washington, D.C., has begun enlisting its associates in an “all-hands-on-deck effort to support” the Obama administration as it seeks to ink a nuclear deal with Iran by the end of the month, according to emails obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

The Truman National Security Project, a nonprofit think tank with ties to the administration, is assembling a “crack team of writers” to flood national and local media outlets with articles supporting the White House’s efforts before the details of a final nuclear deal have even emerged, according to internal emails sent by the organization to its listserv. [Emphasis added.]

“Our community absolutely must step up and not cede the public narrative to neocon hawks that would send our country to war just to screw the president,” Graham F. West, Truman’s writing and communications associate, wrote in a recent email to the organization’s listserv. [Emphasis added.]

Pay no attention to insane mumblings by the editor of this subversive blog. He has long opposed what he refers to as the Iran Scam and recently wrote this racist diatribe against our own Dear Leader and His quest for peace everlasting. If this sick cartoon isn’t racist, then I don’t know what is.

legacy

Our Dear Leader has already accomplished countless wonderful things to establish His magnificent legacy. Here are just a few:

He is the first African American President of the United States.

The award of His Nobel Peace Prize on October 9, 2009, a mere nine months after He became the President of the United States. No other President has accomplished that.

He compelled passage of the Affordable Care Act during His first term in office.

He has already issued more crucial executive decrees than any former President.

He has consistently condemned the apartheid, illegitimate state known as Israel.

Miller even contends, speciously, that Iran’s alleged human rights abuses and alleged support for world-wide terrorism should be considered by the esteemed P5+1 negotiators under our Dear Leader’s helpful guidance. That, like all of his other suggestions, would elevate facts, transparency and accountability for a bad purpose over lies, obfuscation and non-accountability for a good purpose. What great sage once wrote “the truth shall make you flee?” He was right. Truth would make many Americans flee from a deal with Iran, and we need their unthinking support to show that, despite recent election results, they reject racism and therefore still love, respect and have unbounded confidence in our Dear Leader.

********************

Editor’s comments

In an effort to help Imam Mohamed allah-Dork present his ideas most candidly and therefore effectively, I was pleased to provide the You Tube videos.

I agree with allah-Dork’s thesis that lies and obfuscation are as necessary to secure public approval of a nuke deal with Iran as they were to secure passage of ObamaCare. A nuke deal with Iran would be even worse than ObamaCare.

It will be very difficult, if not impossible, for Congress to repeal ObamaCare outright if for no reason other than that Obama would veto any bill repealing it. However, it is possible that the Supreme Court may deal ObamaCare a fatal blow if it finds that subsidies for customers of ObamaCare exchanges were clearly intended, and stated by the Congress, to be available only for customers of State, not Federal, exchanges.

Once Iran gets (or keeps) nukes, there will be no way for Congress to repeal the agreement, no way for the Supreme Court to overrule it and no way to force Iran to get rid of its nukes. That Iran may get rid of some of them voluntarily — by using them — offers no comfort at all.

Israel, the only free and democratic nation in the Middle East, has served as a useful distraction from the violation of even the most basic of human rights throughout the rest of the region. She continues to respect and implement those rights despite the Obama Administration’s increasing rejection of them and its refusal to take them into account when dealing with other nations. Iran is perhaps the worst human rights violator in the region as well as the most prolific sponsor of Islamic terrorism. As the Obama Administration ignores blatant human rights violations by other nations, it fantasizes that Israel is a gross violator and amplifies its fantasies at every opportunity.

Obama and His cohorts have learned the lessons taught by Mr. Gruber very well and have used them with success. Here is an excerpt from an article by Jonathan Turley, a liberal in the old fashioned sense of the word. He has often supported the ends which Obama has sought to achieve while opposing the methods He has used and continues to use.

In fairness to Gruber, he is again being honest about what happened in the passage of ACA and speaking as an academic. However, such machinations are rarely confirmed by high-level consultants or officials. The ACA was pushed through by a muscle vote on a handful of votes while the Administration made claims that he later had to admit were misleading at best, such as the President’s repeated assurance that citizens could keep your current insurance policy if you liked it. There was a great deal of cynicism and misleading representations made during the ACA debates — reflecting a deep-seated contempt for the intelligence of the American voter. Gruber however seems to celebrate the success in using what he viewed as the stupidity of citizens, to quote his earlier comments, to secure passage of the ACA. It is the triumph of the ends over the means — the mantra of Beltway denizens who view more principled actors as naive chumps. What is shocking for many outside of the Beltway is of course the moral relativism and cynicism reflected in such comments, but Gruber is the norm in Washington. He is the face of the consequentiality morality that has long governed this city. [Emphasis added.]

What is different is that he admits it.

Obama, et al, have consistently applied Gruber principles to the Iran Scam and will continue to do so in seeking public support for any nuke deal with Iran. They will also continue to obfuscate and lie about the Israeli situation to distract attention from what they are doing, relying on their perceptions of the “stupidity” of the American public.

A Turkish Quest to “Liberate” Jerusalem

November 13, 2014

A Turkish Quest to “Liberate” Jerusalem, Gatestone InstituteBurak Bekdil, November 13, 2014

Both Turkey’s President Erdogan and its Prime Minister Davutoglu have declared countess times that Gaza and Jerusalem (in addition to Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Somalia, and the Maghreb) are Turkey’s “domestic affairs.”

In truth, there is no mention of any city’s name in the Qur’an.

Turks have a different understanding of what constitutes an occupation and a conquest of a city. The Turkish rule is very simple: The capture of a foreign city by force is an occupation if that city is Turkish (or Muslim) and the capture of a city by force is conquest if the city belongs to a foreign nation (or non-Muslims).

For instance, Turks still think the capture of Istanbul in 1453 was not occupation; it was conquest.

In a 2012 speech, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan (then Prime Minister) said: “Just like Mecca, Cairo and Istanbul are cities of the Qur’an.” In truth, there is no mention of any city’s name in the Qur’an. Never mind.

“Conquest,” Turkey’s top Muslim cleric, Professor Mehmet Gormez, declared in 2012, “is not to occupy lands or destroy cities and castles. Conquest is the conquest of hearts!” That is why, the top Turkish cleric said, “In our history there has never been occupation.” Instead, Professor Gormez said, “in our history, there has always been conquest.” He further explained that one pillar of conquest is to “open up minds to Islam, and hearts to the Qur’an.”

It is in this religious justification that most Turkish Islamists think they have an Allah-given right to take infidel lands by the force of sword — ironically, not much different from what the tougher Islamists have been doing in large parts of Syria and Iraq. Ask any commander in the Islamic State and he would tell you what the jihadists are doing there is “opening up minds to Islam, and hearts to the Qur’an.”

Both President Erdogan and Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu have declared countless times that Gaza and Jerusalem (in addition to Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Somalia and the Maghreb) are Turkey’s “domestic affairs.”

This author wrote in this journal on Oct. 30:

In reality, with or without the normalization of diplomatic relations between Ankara and Jerusalem, the Turks have never hidden their broader goals in the Arab-Israeli dispute: that Jerusalem should be the capital of a Palestinian state; and that Israel should be pushed back to its pre-1967 borders. Until then, it will be ‘halal’ [permitted in Islam] for Erdogan to blame Israel for global warming, the Ebola virus, starvation in Africa and every other misfortune the world faces.

As if to confirm this whimsical view, Deputy Prime Minister Yalcin Akdogan has blamed Israel for democratic failings in the Arab world. “Israel works with [undemocratic] regimes and keeps its ship afloat.” So, it is because of Israel that Arab nations have never established democratic culture — before or after 1948; or before or after the Arab Spring revolts. But fortunately, Palestinians have a new “protector.”

From Prime Minister Davutoglu’s public speech on November 7:

Al-Aqsa [mosque in Jerusalem] will one day be liberated. The Israelis should know that the oppressed Syrians have a protector. The oppressed Palestinians too have a protector. That protector is Turkey. Just as Bursa [the Turkish city where he spoke] ended its occupation, the honorable Palestinians, honorable Muslims will end the [Israeli] occupation. Just as Osman Gazi [a sepulchre in Bursa] was liberated, al-Aqsa too will be liberated. Al-Quds [Jerusalem] is both our first prayer direction and has been entrusted with us by history. It has been entrusted with us by Hazrat Omar. The last freedom seen in Jerusalem was under our [Ottoman] rule. Al-Quds is our cause. It is the occupying, oppressive Israeli government that has turned the Middle East into a quagmire.

Echoing that view, President Erdogan said that protecting Islamic sites in the Holy Land is a sacred mission (for his government), and bluntly warned that any attack against the al-Aqsa mosque is no different than an attack on the Kaaba in the holy city of Mecca.

792Spot the difference: In the eyes of Turkey’s political and religious leadership, Istanbul and its Hagia Sophia (once a Greek Orthodox Basilica) were legitimately “conquered” by the Muslim Ottomans, while Jerusalem and its al-Aqsa mosque (built atop the ruins of the Jewish Temples) are illegally “occupied” by Israel. (Images source: Wikimedia Commons)

No doubt, after Gaza, al-Aqsa (and Jerusalem) has become a powerful Turkish obsession, and a treasure-trove of votes, especially in view of Turkey’s parliamentary elections next June. And do not expect the Turkish leadership only to corrupt facts. Plain fabrication is a more favored method. All the same, someone, sometimes, would unwillingly reveal the truth often when trying to corrupt other facts.

Since Davutoglu claimed that “Jerusalem has been entrusted with the Turks by Hazrat Omar,” it may be useful to refresh memories. Hazrat Omar is Omar bin Al-Khattab (579-644), one of the most powerful and influential Muslim caliphs in history. Within the context of “conquest vs. occupation,” he was referenced by the top cleric, Professor Gormez in a 2012 speech:

After Hazrat Omar conquered al-Quds [Jerusalem], he was invited to pray at a church [as there were no mosques yet in Jerusalem]. But he politely refused because he was worried that the [conquering] Muslims could turn the church into a mosque after he prayed there.

Since medieval historical facts cannot have changed over the past two years, the top Turkish ulama [religious scholar], referencing a most powerful Muslim caliph, is best witness that when the Muslims had first arrived in Jerusalem there was not a single mosque in the city. Why? Because Jerusalem was not a Muslim city. Why, then, do Turkish Islamists claim that it is Muslim? Because it once had been “conquered.” Would the same Turks surrender Istanbul to the occupying forces that took the city after World War I because its capture in 1920 made it a non-Turkish city? No, that was not conquest, that was occupation!

Had Messrs Erdogan and Davutoglu been schoolchildren, such reasoning might have been called bullying and cheating.

Turkish PM: Nothing will prevent us from protecting Jerusalem

November 12, 2014

Turkish PM: Nothing will prevent us from protecting Jerusalem
By JPOST.COM STAFF 11/12/2014 05:41


(And now, a word from our moderate muslim friends in Turkey.-LS)

Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu slammed Israel for its recent “attacks” on Jerusalem, vowing to defend the city and its holy sites, even if doing so alone.

“Nothing will prevent Turkey from protecting Jerusalem and the al-Aksa mosque,” Davutoglu addressed his party at a weekly faction meeting in Ankara, according to Turkish media.

Israel’s “brutal” leaders should not “dare consider” continuing their attacks on the city, Hurriyet quoted him as saying.

He promised his country would not be silent, even as the rest of the world turns a blind eye to the recent sequence of events in the capital. Turkey, Davutoglu said, will be the most vocal opponent against Israel’s actions, which have tainted the al-Aqsa mosque.

(Don’t you just hate it when Jews taint a mosque? Oh, the inhumanity of it all.-LS)

The Fighters of Iraq Who Answer to Iran

November 12, 2014

The Fighters of Iraq Who Answer to Iran

BY:
November 12, 2014 9:13 am

By Babak Dehghanpisheh

via The Fighters of Iraq Who Answer to Iran | Washington Free Beacon.

 


A fighter from the Shi’ite Badr Brigade militia wears a religious flag as he guards a checkpoint recently taken from militants of the Islamic State outside the town of Amerli / Reuters

 

BAGHDAD (Reuters) – Among the thousands of militia fighters who flocked to northern Iraq to battle militant group Islamic State over the summer was Qais al-Khazali.

Like the fighters, Khazali wore green camouflage. But he also sported a shoulder-strapped pistol and sunglasses and was flanked by armed bodyguards. When he was not on the battlefield, the 40-year-old Iraqi donned the robes and white turban of a cleric.

Khazali is the head of a militia called Asaib Ahl al-Haq that is backed by Iran. Thanks to his position he is one of the most feared and respected militia leaders in Iraq, and one of Iran’s most important representatives in the country.

His militia is one of three small Iraqi Shi’ite armies, all backed by Iran, which together have become the most powerful military force in Iraq since the collapse of the national army in June.

Alongside Asaib Ahl al-Haq, there are the Badr Brigades, formed in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq War, and the younger and more secretive Kataib Hezbollah. The three militias have been instrumental in battling Islamic State (IS), the extremist movement from Islam’s rival Sunni sect.

The militias, and the men who run them, are key to Iran’s power and influence inside neighboring Iraq.

That influence is rooted in the two countries’ shared religious beliefs. Iran’s population is overwhelmingly Shi’ite, as are the majority of Iraqis. Tehran has built up its influence in the past decade by giving political backing to the Iraqi government, and weapons and advisers to the militias and the remnants of the Iraqi military, say current and former Iraqi officials.

That was clear this summer, when fighters from all three militias took on IS. During IS’s siege of one town, Amerli, Kataib Hezbollah helicoptered in 50 of its best fighters, according to Abu Abdullah, a local Kataib Hezbollah commander. The fighters set up an operations room to coordinate with the Iraqi army, the other militia groups, and advisers from the Quds Force, the branch of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps that handles operations outside Iran and oversees Tehran’s Iraqi militias. Over days of fierce fighting in August, and with the help of U.S. bombing raids – a rare example of Iran and the United States fighting a common enemy – those forces successfully expelled IS.

Tehran’s high profile contrasts sharply with Washington’s. Both Iran and the United States are preparing for a long battle against IS. But Iraqi officials say the two take very different views of Iraq.

“The American approach is to leave Iraq to the Iraqis,” said Sami al-Askari, a former member of Iraq’s parliament and one-time senior adviser to former prime minister Nuri al-Maliki. “The Iranians don’t say leave Iraq to the Iraqis. They say leave Iraq to us.”

The danger, Iraqi officials say, is that Iran’s deep influence will perpetuate sectarian conflict in Iraq. Many Iraqi Sunnis complain that Maliki, who was Iraq’s leader until he was forced out in August, was beholden to Tehran and prevented Sunnis from getting greater political power. Maliki has denied sidelining Sunnis.

Former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi, a secular Shi’ite who left office in 2005, told Reuters that “Iran is interfering in Iraq. Foreign forces are not welcome here. And militias controlled by foreign powers are not welcome also.”

Iraq’s Shi’ite militias have certainly fueled sectarian violence. In the past few months they have taken revenge on Sunnis thought to be sympathetic to IS, burned homes and threatened to stop Sunnis returning to their towns. Shi’ite fighters have kidnapped or killed civilians, say Sunni family members.

“The militias are a problem,” said Askari, the former Maliki adviser. “What do you say after Islamic State ends? Thank you very much and go home?”

ECHOES OF LEBANON

The main body funding, arming, and training the Shi’ite militias is Iran’s Quds Force. The model it uses is Hezbollah in Lebanon. Created by Tehran in the early 1980s, and operating as both a military outfit and political party, Hezbollah has grown to become the most powerful force in Lebanon.

Like Hezbollah, Iran’s three big Iraqi militias have political wings and charismatic leaders.

Coordinating the three is Quds Force commander Qassem Soleimani, who, at least until the IS victories in Iraq this summer, had gained a reputation as one of the region’s most effective military leaders.

After the collapse of the Iraqi military in June, Soleimani visited Iraq several times to help organize a counter-offensive. He brought weapons, electronic interception devices and drones, according to a senior Iraqi politician.

“Soleimani is an operational leader. He’s not a man working in an office. He goes to the front to inspect the troops and see the fighting,” said one current senior Iraqi official. “His chain of command is only the Supreme Leader. He needs money, gets money. Needs munitions, gets munitions. Needs materiel, gets materiel.”

The Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, is the most senior religious authority in Iran and wields huge constitutional power.

Soleimani, who Reuters was unable to reach, knows the heads of the three big Iraqi militias personally, Iraqi officials say. A picture posted on a Facebook page in August shows him in an olive shirt and khaki pants next to Khazali, who is in clerical robes. A picture on Facebook and Twitter late last month showed Soleimani and the leader of the Badr Brigades grinning and wrapped in a tight hug after what was reportedly a victory against IS.

In an interview with Iranian state television in September, a senior Revolutionary Guard commander, General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, said that Soleimani, with a force of only 70 men, had prevented IS from overrunning Arbil. “If Iran hadn’t helped, Daesh would have taken over Kurdistan,” he said, using a common Arabic name for IS.

The way Iran and Soleimani work is “completely the opposite of Saudi intelligence that just gives money but are not on the ground,” said the current senior Iraqi official. “Soleimani sees a target and he has the powers to go after it.”

THE BADR BRIGADES

Iran’s oldest proxy in Iraq is the Badr Brigades, which is headed by Hadi al-Amri, a veteran of both combat and politics. The group renamed itself the Badr Organisation once it entered politics.

Amri fought alongside Iran’s Revolutionary Guard against Saddam’s army during the Iran-Iraq war in the 1980s. After the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, he won a seat in parliament and served as Minister of Transportation during Maliki’s second term.

Amri, who could not be reached for comment, is feared and loathed by many Sunnis for his alleged role in running death squads in recent years. In July, Human Rights Watch accused Badr forces of killing Sunni prisoners.

In recent battles with IS, Amri replaced his suit with a military uniform and transformed into a battlefield commander overnight, giving television interviews from the frontlines.

“Look at Amri’s uniform and then compare it to any Iraqi uniform … It’s completely different,” said a senior former security official. “Look for the uniform of the IRGC” – Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps – “it’s exactly one of them.”

KATAIB HEZBOLLAH

The head of Iran’s second proxy, Kataib Hezbollah, goes by the nom de guerre Abu Mahdi al-Mohandes. Many Iraqi officials simply call him al-Mohandes, or “the Engineer.”

Mohandes, who could not be reached for comment for this story, is Iran’s most powerful military representative in Iraq, according to senior Iraqi officials. At 60, he has distinctive white hair and a white beard. He studied engineering in Basra and joined Dawa, a political party banned by Saddam, according to a Facebook page set up in his name.

He began working with Iran’s Revolutionary Guard in Kuwait in 1983, organizing attacks against embassies of countries that supported Saddam in the war against Iran. He has repeatedly denied involvement in such attacks.

Following the first Gulf War, Mohandes lived in exile in Iran. After the United States invaded Iraq, he returned home and was elected to parliament. Even then, it was clear where his allegiances lay. On a 2006 trip to Tehran, when protocol dictated that the Iranian and Iraqi delegations sit apart, “he sat with the Iranians,” said Askari, the former Maliki adviser. “This was not normal.”

Kataib Hezbollah is the most secretive of Iraq’s militias, and the only one the U.S. Treasury labels a terrorist organization. In 2009 the Treasury sanctioned Mohandes for his alleged role in committing and facilitating attacks against U.S. and Iraqi forces. Mohandes has denied those charges, though his group’s website features several video clips showing improvised explosive devices blowing up American Humvees.

He has a house in Baghdad’s Green Zone close to Maliki, Iraqi officials say. In recent years, he occasionally delivered messages between Maliki and Iranian officials. He frequently visits Iran, where his family lives, according to a former senior Iraqi official.

When Ayatollah Ali Sistani, Iraq’s most powerful cleric, called on Shi’ites to rise up and fight IS earlier this year, Mohandes took charge of the tens of thousands of new volunteers. “He’s involved in everything: administration, funding, logistics and planning,” said a senior Iraqi security official.

ASAIB AHL AL-HAQ

The third big Iraqi militia, Asaib Ahl al-Haq, started as a splinter group of the Mahdi Army, a paramilitary force formed by anti-American Shi’ite leader Moqtada al-Sadr during the U.S. occupation.

Under leader Khazali, Asaib gained notoriety for kidnapping and killing Sunni civilians and carrying out attacks against U.S. forces.

In 2007 he was arrested by U.S. military forces for his alleged role in an attack on an Iraqi government compound in Karbala, which left five American soldiers dead. Khazali managed to use a kidnapped British consultant as a bargaining chip to win his own release. (British and U.S. military denied striking such a deal.)

Askari, the former Maliki adviser, played a key role in negotiations. When a senior British commander was skeptical that Khazali could wield power from Camp Cropper, the high security facility where he was imprisoned, Khazali asked for a phone. “They brought him a phone and he made a call,” said Askari. “Within two weeks the attacks stopped.”

Asaib has grown stronger in recent years. Sunnis say Maliki allowed Shi’ite militias, particularly Asaib, to kidnap and kill ordinary Sunnis to solidify his grip on power. Some Sunnis began to see Asaib as Maliki’s personal militia.

Khazali was not available to be interviewed. At Asaib’s offices in an upscale Baghdad neighborhood, the group’s spokesman, Naim al Aboudi, denied that Asaib is closely linked with Maliki or that the group targeted Sunni civilians. “We are … working toward building a more stable country,” he said.

THE SYRIA CONNECTION

Fighters from all three militias have sharpened their combat skills in Syria in recent years. In late 2011, as the Syrian conflict grew, Iran stepped in to defend Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. Assad is a follower of the Alawite faith, an offshoot of Shi’ism.

Iraqi Shi’ite fighters also flocked to Syria. Billboards and posters in Baghdad praise Iraqi “martyrs” in the conflict.

Syria has also helped militia fighters hone their media skills. Internet videos set to a booming soundtrack of Shi’ite militant religious songs show fighters shooting rocket-propelled grenades, sniping from rooftops and firing heavy machine guns from pickup trucks.

Some Iraqi Shi’ite militia commanders concede that defending Assad has been unsavory. But they argue that fighting in Syria was necessary for broader regional reasons, namely the struggle that Iran and its allies are waging against Israel.

“Bashar is a dictator,” said Abu Hamza, a burly commander from Kataib Hezbollah who has fought in Syria. “But his presence there preserves the line of resistance.”

BREAKING THE SIEGE

One of the biggest rallying points in recent months was Amerli, an Iraqi town of some 15,000 Shi’ites, which was besieged by IS for two months. Most residents there are Turkmen, not Arabs, but that did not change the symbolism of the conflict for Shi’ites. Graffiti sprayed outside the town in August read “Amerli is the Karbala of the age” – a reference to a seventh century battle that is a defining moment for Shi’ites.

Iran helped train Kataib fighters in the use of AK-47 assault rifles, heavy machine guns, mortars, rockets and IEDs, according to Abu Abdullah, the Kataib commander. Kataib fighters also used a camera-equipped drone to gather information on IS positions. A Reuters reporter met two men who spoke Farsi, the language of Iran, accompanying Asaib fighters during the battle. A third man said he had come from Iran to train police.

When the battle began in late August, Shi’ite militias teamed up with Kurdish fighters to attack IS positions, as American aircraft bombed around the town.

The importance of the battle for Iran was underscored when photographs and videos surfaced on the Internet that allegedly showed Revolutionary Guard commander Soleimani in the town.

In early September, a group of Shi’ite fighters and Kurdish peshmerga fought to protect a small village near Amerli called Yangije. Some 50 IS fighters had attacked the village in the early morning. After nearly eight hours of fighting, the Shi’ites and Kurds pushed the fighters out.

The next morning, Shi’ite and peshmerga fighters went house-to-house to check IS had cleared out. They came across an IS fighter hiding beneath a blanket. The man shot and killed one peshmerga and detonated a suicide belt, injuring several others.

Around midday, the burned and mangled body of the IS fighter was lying in the sun when a group of Shi’ite fighters approached. A Reuters team saw one Shi’ite fighter behead the corpse with a large knife while a handful of fighters filmed with their phones. The dead fighter’s head was mounted on a knife, and one Shi’ite fighter shouted, “This is revenge for our martyrs!”

The Shi’ite fighters put the head in a sack and took it away with them.