Archive for December 17, 2015

« WarSclerotic home page

US continues to push for negotiations with Taliban despite direct ties to al Qaeda

December 17, 2015

US continues to push for negotiations with Taliban despite direct ties to al Qaeda, Long War Journal, , December 17, 2015

siraj-haqqani-wanted-poster1-e1438370266398-1024x432Images of Siraj Haqqani, one of the Taliban’s two deputy emirs, from a US government wanted poster.

The US government and military continue to seek a negotiated settlement with the Afghan Taliban despite the group’s continuing support for al Qaeda and the increased leadership role the Haqqani Network plays in the Afghan insurgency.

The Department of Defense asserts in its biannual Enhancing Security and Stability in Afghanistan report, released earlier this week, that “reconciliation and a political settlement with the Taliban” is a key part of its strategy to end the conflict in Afghanistan.

“The U.S. and Afghan governments agree that the best way to ensure lasting peace and security in Afghanistan is reconciliation and a political settlement with the Taliban,” the report says in its very first section, titled US Strategy in Afghanistan.

The report then states that to achieve a political settlement, the Taliban must take the very steps the group has refused for 15 years: denounce al Qaeda and submit to Afghanistan’s constitution.

“Success of an Afghan-led peace process will require the Taliban and other armed opposition groups to end violence, break ties with international terrorist groups, and accept Afghanistan’s constitution, including its protections for the rights of women and under-represented groups.”

The Pentagon report continues to advocate for reconciliation with the Taliban despite the fact that al Qaeda’s emir, Ayman al Zawahiri, swore and oath of allegiance to the new leader of the Taliban, Mullah Akhtar Mohammad Mansour, after he was publicly named successor to Mullah Omar over the summer. Mansour accepted Zawahiri’s oath just days after it was given.

Shockingly, the Pentagon report made no mention of Zawahiri’s oath and Mansour’s acceptance in its 90-page report. The report did note that the emir of the Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan swore allegiance to the Islamic State’s leader, Abu Bakr al Baghdadi.

The Pentagon also continues to press for negotiations despite the fact that Sirajuddin Haqqani, the operational commander of the Haqqani Network – a powerful Taliban subgroup that is closely tied to al Qaeda and backed by Pakistan’s military and intelligence establishment – was appointed as one of Mansour’s two deputies. Siraj is effectively the Taliban’s military commander. The US military does recognize that Siraj’s “elevation” in the Taliban leadership is problematic.

“The elevation of Haqqani Network leader Siraj Haqqani as Taliban leader Mullah Mansour’s deputy signals that the Haqqani Network will remain a critical and lethal component of the overall Taliban-led insurgency,” the report states.

“Of the groups involved in the Taliban-led insurgency, the Haqqani Network remains the greatest threat to U.S., coalition, and Afghan forces and continues to be the most critical enabler of al Qaeda,” the report continues. “Haqqani Network leader Siraj Haqqani’s elevation as Taliban leader Mullah Mansour’s deputy has further strengthened the Haqqani Network’s role in the Taliban-led insurgency. The Haqqani Network and affiliated groups share the goals of expelling U.S. and coalition forces, overthrowing the Afghan government, and re-establishing an Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan.”

Siraj’s tight working relationship with al Qaeda has been confirmed by multiple sources. Files recovered in Osama bin Laden’s Abbottabad compound revealed the depth of the collusion. [See LWJ report, The Taliban’s new leadership is allied with al Qaeda.]

Since accepting Zawahiri’s oath of loyalty and appointing Siraj as a top deputy, the Taliban have not backed off from either party. In early September the Taliban released a video that highlighted Siraj’s importance to the group as well as Mansour’s accepting Zawahiri’s pledge. In early September, the Taliban also devoted significant space to al Qaeda leaders and pro-al Qaeda clerics eulogizing its former emir in that month’s edition of Al Sumud, the group’s official magazine.

Categories: Afghanistan, Al Qaeda, Department of Defense, Obama and terrorism, Taliban
Tags: , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Carson demands CAIR probe

December 17, 2015

Carson demands CAIR probe, Front Page Magazine, Matthew Vadum, December 16, 2015

bc_0

GOP presidential candidate Ben Carson is demanding the federal government investigate the links that the notorious Council on American-Islamic Relations has to Islamic terrorism.

“The Department of State should designate the Muslim Brotherhood and other organizations that propagate or support Islamic terrorism as terrorist organizations, and fully investigate the Council on American-Islamic Relations as an offshoot of the Muslim Brotherhood and a supporter of terrorism,” Carson wrote in a policy paper in which he also called for a formal declaration of war against Islamic State (a.k.a. ISIS, ISIL, and Daesh).

Although political correctness prevents Democrats and many Republicans from admitting it, it is already well established that CAIR has ties to terrorism.

CAIR, which masquerades as America’s largest Muslim civil rights group, is an outpost of international jihadism. It is an enemy propaganda organization whose longstanding ties to the terrorist underworld have been exhaustively documented at DiscoverTheNetworks and elsewhere. CAIR aims to influence America’s domestic and foreign policies. CAIR wants to make America safe for Sharia law by bullying Americans into not questioning Islam, a religion-centered ideology that has been generating a body count for 1,400 years.

Accusing critics of so-called Islamophobia, a term invented by Islamists, is CAIR’s favorite method of silencing critics and opponents. It is part of a dangerous effort to discourage Americans from thinking freely and arriving at their own conclusions about Islam and mainstream the tenets of Islam in our society. The idea is to eventually make it as difficult and uncomfortable as possible to criticize the faith founded by Muhammad in the seventh century after the birth of Christ.

In the words of one critic, CAIR exists to undermine law enforcement and U.S. national security. The group’s goal “is to create as much self-doubt, hesitation, fear of name-calling, and litigation within police departments and intelligence agencies as possible so as to render such authorities ineffective in pursuing international and domestic terrorist entities.”

CAIR was founded in 1994 by Nihad Awad, Omar Ahmad, and Rafeeq Jaber. The three men, reports DiscoverTheNetworks, “had close ties to the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), which was established by senior Hamas operative Mousa Abu Marzook and founded as Hamas’ public relations and recruitment arm in the United States.”  CAIR opened an office in the nation’s capital with a $5,000 grant from the Marzook-founded Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development (HLF), a charity that the Bush administration shuttered in 2001 for collecting money “to support the Hamas terror organization.” CAIR called the action “unjust” and “disturbing.” In 2004 Marzook was indicted on racketeering charges related to his pro-Hamas activities. Ahmad was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation trial.

Ghassan Elashi, a co-founder of the Texas branch of CAIR, was convicted in 2005 of terrorism-related offenses and sentenced to 80 months in prison. CAIR civil rights director Randall Todd Royer was sentenced to 20 years imprisonment on federal weapons and explosives charges in 2004. Bassem Khafagi, a community affairs director at CAIR, was convicted in 2003 on bank and visa fraud charges and agreed to be deported to Egypt. Rabih Haddad, a fundraiser for CAIR’s chapter in Ann Arbor, Mich., was detained in 2001 after overstaying his tourist visa. Authorities found a firearm and boxes of ammunition in his home. He served 19 months in prison and was deported to Lebanon in 2003. CAIR board member Abdurahman Alamoudi was sentenced to 23 years imprisonment for funneling at least $1 million to al-Qaeda. CAIR was founded in 1994 by Nihad Awad, Omar Ahmad, and Rafeeq Jaber. The three men, reports DiscoverTheNetworks, “had close ties to the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), which was established by senior Hamas operative Mousa Abu Marzook and founded as Hamas’ public relations and recruitment arm in the United States.”

This is just the latest in a series of run-ins that Carson has had with CAIR.

In October, Carson called for the IRS to revoke the tax-exempt status of CAIR after it demanded he withdraw as a candidate. “CAIR is a tax-exempt nonprofit, and the IRS rules explicitly prohibit such groups from intervening in political campaigns on behalf of – or in opposition to – a candidate,” Carson said in an email to supporters.

CAIR, which labeled Carson a bigot and an Islamophobe, was upset because Carson said a Muslim should not be elected president.

“We find it interesting that Dr. Carson seeks to use a federal government agency to silence his critics and wonder if that tactic would be used to suppress First Amendment freedoms should he become president,” CAIR said at the time.

“CAIR is not in violation of any IRS regulation in that we did not ‘participate in’ or ‘intervene in’ any political campaign. We, as mandated by our mission as a civil rights organization, merely expressed the opinion of our community” that Carson’s views made him “unfit for public office.”

Obama White House press secretary Josh Earnest attacked Carson at the time saying his statement was “entirely inconsistent with the Constitution.”

“Ultimately, there will be consequences and those views will be taken into account by voters, not only in the primary, but also the general election,” Earnest said.

Anti-Islamism activist Pamela Geller defended Carson. “Electing a Muslim president would be dangerous. We have seen the Islamic pattern of previously moderate Muslims becoming devout and then aiding and abetting jihad. How could we be sure a Muslim president would not do the same?”

But at least three Republican presidential contenders took shots at Carson back then.

“You know, the Constitution specifies there shall be no religious test for public office, and I am constitutionalist,” Cruz said, citing Article VI of the Constitution, which forbids the use of a “religious test” for a candidate who sees public office.

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.), echoed Cruz, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) said Carson’s comments were evidence he is “not ready to be commander in chief.”

On Dec. 2 CAIR hastily arranged a press conference while the bodies of 14 American victims of jihadism in San Bernardino, Calif. were still warm in order to push a media narrative that exonerated Islam in the attack.

CAIR, which the United Arab Emirates designated a year ago as a terrorist group, got to work crafting a storyline about the mass-murdering Muslim married couple, Syed Rizwan Farook and Tashfeen Malik. As they fashioned a template for lazy, gullible, or sympathetic reporters to embrace, CAIR officials behaved as if Farook and Malik were strange outliers and bad Muslims.

CAIR-LA Executive Director Hussam Ayloush pretended Islam didn’t inspire the attack.

“We don’t know the motive. Is it work, rage-related? Is it mental illness? Is it extreme ideology? At this point it’s really unknown to us and it is too soon for us to speculate.”

Two days later, Ayloush changed his tune, blaming America for the shootings. “Let’s not forget that some of our own foreign policy, as Americans, as the West, have fueled that extremism,” he told CNN’s Chris Cuomo. “We are partly responsible. Terrorism is a global problem, not a Muslim problem. And the solution has to be global. Everyone has a role in it.”

CAIR definitely has a role in it.

Categories: CAIR, Doctor Ben Carson, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic invasion, Islamic jihad, Islamic myths, Islamic supremacy, Islamic terrorism, Islamism, Islamophobia, Muslim Brotherhood
Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

The Salafis’ Daddy Warbucks: Saudi Arabia

December 17, 2015

The Salafis’ Daddy Warbucks: Saudi Arabia, Front Page Magazine, Rachel Ehrenfeld, December 17, 2015

(Please see also, Germany: Salafist “Aid Workers” Recruiting Refugees. — DM)

ks

[T]he most important obstacle is the West’s decades-long willful blindness to name and shame Saudi Arabia as the biggest terror financier, as well as the Saudis’ role in the development and spread of opaque Sharia finance institutions and Islamic charities.

The spread of Salafist radical groups, such as the global Hizb ut–Tahrir,Tablighi Jamaat, and ISIS proves the effectiveness of the decades-long, $2 trillion’s worth of Saudi funding to indoctrinate Muslims everywhere, creating a large base of followers ready for further radicalization of what the West has erroneously labeled “self-radicalization.”

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

The first-ever global meeting of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) network of some 200 jurisdictions over the weekend in Paris “to discuss actions…to combat the financing of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) …and to combat the financing of terrorism ” will probably make the participants feel good, but will do little to cut-off state sponsorship of the fast growing radical Islamist movement.

The development of new technologies and encryption of online communications, financial transactions and other non-traditional methods to transfer money present serious obstacles to monitoring funding of large number of terrorists and their supporters.  But the most important obstacle is the West’s decades-long willful blindness to name and shame Saudi Arabia as the biggest terror financier, as well as the Saudis’ role in the development and spread of opaque Sharia finance institutions and Islamic charities.

Thus, Germany’s Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel‘s recent condemnation of Saudi Arabia’s ongoing funding of the spread of radical Islam in the West was surprising. “Wahhabi mosques all over the world are financed by Saudi Arabia. Many Islamists who are a threat to public safety come from these communities,” he told Bild am Sonntag, the largest-selling German Sunday paper. Even more unexpected was his statement: “We have to make clear to the Saudis that the time of looking away is over.”

The Saudi role in fostering Islamic terrorism is no secret. Before it came under some criticism after the al Qaeda’s 9/11 attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the Saudi Kingdom used to openly brag about its large donations to build, maintain and supply mosques, Islamic centers and madrassas, stocking them with Wahhabi Imams and ulemas (religious teachers) and covering expenses such as salaries, pensions, and “terrorcare” that included hospitals and other public services.

Directed by Muslim Brotherhood advisors who championed the oxymoron ‘Political Islam’ to deceive the infidels, the Kingdom funded Western tax exempt Islamic organizations engaged in dawah (proselytization for Islam). Among them were networks of charitable organizations that provide financial aid to prisoners (including non-Muslims to lure them to Islam) in Western jails, lavishly funded academic chairs in Middle East Studies in universities around the world, student-exchange programs and spending many millions of dollars to increase Saudi political influence in the West — even contributing $100 million to coordinate and assist the United Nations international counterterrorism efforts.

Saudi efforts to bring Wahhabi Islam to global dominance began in earnest in 1962, with the establishment of the first international Saudi charity, the Muslim World League (MWL). Influenced by exiled Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood members, then-Crown Prince Faisal bin Abdul Aziz used growing oil revenues to fund MWL, which in turn established many other Islamic charities and nonprofits that helped directly and indirectly create the global jihadist movement. Successive Saudi kings have created additional “charitable” organizations to fund the worldwide spread of Wahhabism and have on occasion organized several national campaigns encouraging their subjects to support Sunni terror organizations outside the country, including the PLO, Hamas and al Qaeda. Thus it would be wrong to distinguish between contributions to radical Sunni organizations by the Saudi theocratic monarchy, its government and its wealthy subjects.

But Saudi support for terrorism extends much beyond direct deposits to openly radical elements. Direct financing of terrorist activities is but one of several means to further their agenda.

Indeed, little has changed since then-Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Stuart Levey’s testimony before the Senate Finance Committee in 2008 that Saudi Arabia is “serious about fighting Al Qaeda in the kingdom…[but] the seriousness of purpose with respect to the money going out of the kingdom is not as high” (emphasis added).

The spread of Salafist radical groups, such as the global Hizb ut–Tahrir, Tablighi Jamaat, and ISIS proves the effectiveness of the decades-long, $2 trillion’s worth of Saudi funding to indoctrinate Muslims everywhere, creating a large base of followers ready for further radicalization of what the West has erroneously labeled “self-radicalization.”

Saudi Arabia’s role in initiating and fomenting worldwide Muslim riots to curtail Western free speech has been mostly ignored. However, Muslims riots following the October 2005 publication of the Muhammad cartoons in Denmark’s largest daily, Jyllands-Posten, began only after Saudi Arabia recalled its ambassador to Denmark; after Sheikh Osama Khayyat, imam of the Grand Mosque in Mecca, praised on national Saudi television the Saudi government for its action; and after Sheikh Ali Al-Hudaify, imam of the Prophet’s Mosque in Medina, called “upon governments, organizations and scholars in the Islamic world to extend support for campaigns protesting the sacrilegious attacks on the Prophet.” The Saudi-controlled Organization of Islamic Conference (OIC) initiated and coordinated Muslim rioting worldwide after the Danish Muhammad cartoon publications.

Moreover, to wield more control over Muslim communities worldwide, better orchestrate “spontaneous demonstrations,” and better allocate funds for them, the Saudi-backed OIC established the clerical International Commission for Zakat (ICZ) on 30 April 2007. Previously, there were more than 20,000 organizations that collected zakat. Now, however, the Islamic clerics’ centralized “expert committee” based in Malaysia also supervises and distributes zakat funds globally. Yet, President Obama and his former Secretary of State and current Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, describe Malaysia as a “moderate Muslim country” and Saudi Arabia as an ally.

The public outrage and rejection of Saudi King Salman’s offer to fund 200 new mosques for more than 800,000 new Muslim refugees in Germany, and the Vice Chancellor’s statement: “We have to make clear to the Saudis that the time of looking away is over” point in the right direction. But don’t hold your breath. Germany, the United States and the rest of the West have been turning a blind eye to Saudi funding of thousands of mosques, madrassas and Islamic centers that have propagated radical Islamic ideology for decades and are unlikely to face reality anytime soon.

Categories: Education, Islam, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic State, Islamism, Muslim Brotherhood, Salafists, Saudi Arabia, Wahhabi
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Tehran biennial to grant $50,000 cash prize to best cartoon on Holocaust

December 17, 2015

Tehran biennial to grant $50,000 cash prize to best cartoon on Holocaust, Tehran Times, December 17, 2015

[A] contest focusing on the portrait of Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has been arranged on the sidelines of the competition.

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

TEHRAN – Organizers of the 11th Tehran International Cartoon Biennial has allocated a cash prize of $50,000 for the best cartoon on the Holocaust, the organizers announced on Wednesday.

Three other cartoonists will also receive cash prizes of 12,000, 8,000 and 5,000 dollars respectively, the secretary of the biennial, Masud Shojai-Tabatabai, told the Persian service of MNA.

He added that the competition will be held in June 2016 in Mashhad with cartoonists participating from 50 countries.

“We do not mean to approve or deny the Holocaust, however, the main question is that why is there no permission to talk about the Holocaust despite their (the West) belief in freedom of speech.

“Moreover, why should the oppressed people of Palestine pay the price for the Holocaust? We are also worried about the contemporary holocausts in which a great number of women and children are being killed in Iraq, Yemen and Syria,” he added.

Shojai-Tabatabai also said that a contest focusing on the portrait of Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, has been arranged on the sidelines of the competition.

The Palestine Museum of Contemporary Art will be hosting an exhibition of the works at the time of the competition.

Categories: Holocaust, Iran, Iran and Israel, Iranian anti-semitism, Netanyahu
Tags: , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

 Paris Jews Intentionally Poisoned

December 17, 2015

The lock to a shul in southeastern Paris was coated with poison, sickening more than a dozen congregants.

By: Lori Lowenthal Marcus

Published: December 17th, 2015

Source: The Jewish Press » » Paris Jews Intentionally Poisoned

Vandalized synagogue in Bonneuil-sur-Marne, southeastern Paris.

Vandalized synagogue in Bonneuil-sur-Marne, southeastern Paris.
Photo Credit: Google map

The electronic lock to a synagogue in southeastern Paris was coated with poison which led to 14 Jews being sickened.

The incident took place on Monday evening, Dec.14, in the community of Bonneuil-sur-Marne.

Women arrived at the closed shul at around 9:00 p.m. to participate in a meeting. Ralph Botbol, president of the synagogue, said that just after arrival, two women began experiencing itchy hands, and one woman’s face “swelled significantly.”

Several more congregants began experiencing intense burning sensations in their eyes and itchy rashes on their skin, at which time emergency services were called.

More than a dozen fire fighters responded to the call and treated those affected. It was then that the problem was traced to the poison discovered on the lock.

They learned that the digital lock had been sprayed with the poison, and every woman who had come in contact with the lock experienced the burning sensations.

Although the shul is typically under police and military protection when open, the violent act of vandalism is believed to have taken place when the building was closed and no guards present. The vandals presumably knew when they could strike.

Initial analyses conducted on Tuesday disclosed that the poison used was “tear gas, very diluted with water.”

The president of the synagogue filed a complaint for this “anti-Semitic act.” He said: “We will not close our eyes, we checked, it is the only street to have been sprayed.”

The Creteil prosecutor on Tuesday opened an investigation for “aggravated violence,” which was handed over to the local police station.

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Virginia HS Students Pen Allegiance to Allah – Through Calligraphy

December 17, 2015

Virginia HS Students Pen Allegiance to Allah – Through Calligraphy, The Clarion Project, December 17, 2015

(Please see also, Islamist Terror vs. the More Deadly Cancer of Islamisation. Please watch the video at the end of the article.– DM)

Shahadah-HPThe shahada, Islamic creed of faith

Outraged parents from Virginia met with school district officials to discuss their children’s assignments that included writing out the Muslim creed of faith and inviting girls to don a hijab, or Islamic headscarf.

As part of a world geography class in Riverheads High School in Augusta County, Virginia, students were asked to copy the Arabic “calligraphy” that stated that “There is no god but Allah. Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.”

The phase is known as the shahada, the Islamic profession of faith. Conversion to Islam is accomplished by saying this statement three times in front of witnesses. At the time, the children were unaware of what they were writing, according to district officials.

One of the parents also asked why the students were given copies of the Quran, but not the Bible, to which the teacher explained that all of the students had already seen or read the Bible.

As for the hijab, district officials said, “Modest dress adopted by many in the Islamic faith and were invited to try on a scarf as a part of an interactive lesson about the Islamic concept of modest dress.”

Officials said the school’s curriculum also covers others other world religions.

Controversy over the way public schools are presenting Islam has been making headlines in many school districts around the U.S. and worldwide:

  • In Tennessee, a bill was introduced to prevent schools from teaching classes on “religious doctrine” before the 10th grade. The bill is in reaction to objections by parents to a three-week curriculum under the topic of world religion for middle-school students that covers the “Five Pillars of Islam” that obligated children to write assignments about Islamic principles of faith, such as “Allah is the only God.” Parents particularly objected because no other religion was taught at the same time and the amount of time spent on Islam was considerably more than that spent on any other religion.
  • In Maryland, parents objected to the way Islam was taught in the school’s “World History” class, presenting Islam in an historically untrue way and listing all the “benefits” of Islam.
  • After being threatened with a lawsuit, an Ohio school district agreed to remove a video about Islam from a seventh grade world-history curriculum that was challenged as falling under the category of proselytizing and favoring one religion over another (a violation of the Constitution’s Establishment Clause). The video, titled 30 Days: Muslim and America, features a young Christian man who agrees to totally immerse himself in Islam for a month by living with a Muslim family in Dearborn, Michigan.  It was shown to students as part of a course that requires students to “describe achievements by the Islamic civilization and how these achievements were introduced into Western Europe in the time period between 750 BC – 1600AD.”
  • In Massachusetts, the Wellesley Middle School, another public school was caught in a controversy when a video (see below) of a student trip to the Roxbury megamosque was released. On the trip, students were taught propaganda – among other things, that Muslim women got the vote before women in the West – by the mosque staff. The boys can be seen prostrating themselves to Allah alongside Muslim men. The video was covered extensively on Boston TV and radio.
  • In Massachusetts, the Newton public school system became enmeshed in a similar controversy about deceptive and anti-Semitic lessons concerning Muslim women being taught to their students. Even though the curriculum was removed, school administrators refused to tell the children the information was inaccurate (as was the case above with the Wellesley Middle School).
  • In the UK, regulators placed five Muslim-dominated public schools in the city of Birmingham under “special measures” after inspectors found pupils were systematically exposed to radical Islamic propaganda. The move followed emergency inspections of 21 primary and secondary public schools after a document surfaced that outlined a plot—dubbed Operation Trojan Horse—by Muslim fundamentalists to Islamize public schools in England and Wales.
  • In Germany, at least 25 primary and secondary schools across Hamburg are believed to have been infiltrated by Salafists and other fundamentalist who engaged in an organized strategy of intimidation and influence.

 

Categories: Education, Islam, Islamic culture, Islamic indoctrination, Islamic supremacy, Islamisation, Islamism
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Israel slams IAEA move to end Iran nuclear investigation

December 17, 2015

Source: Israel Hayom | Israel slams IAEA move to end Iran nuclear investigation

Energy Minister Yuval Steinitz says international community “turning a blind eye” to Iranian misconduct • Meanwhile, new report says Iran violated a Security Council resolution in October by test-firing a missile capable of delivering a nuclear warhead.

Eli Leon, Shlomo Cesana, News Agencies and Israel Hayom Staff
An Iranian Emad rocket is launched as it is tested at an undisclosed location October 11, 2015|
Photo credit: Reuters

Israel on Wednesday responded with consternation over the International Atomic Energy Agency’s decision to close its 12-year investigation into whether Iran had a secret nuclear weapons program. The decision seemingly runs counter to a report produced by the IAEA earlier this month, which strongly suggested Iran engaged in coordinated activities aimed at developing a nuclear bomb up until 2003, though it found no credible sign of weapons-related work beyond 2009.

“Once again, the report clearly indicates that Iran made a coordinated effort to develop a nuclear weapon, including efforts beyond 2003” the Foreign Ministry said.

National Infrastructure, Energy and Water Minister Yuval Steinitz remarked Tuesday that “the IAEA’s decision runs contrary to IAEA Director Yukiya Amano’s report that concluded that not only was Iran involved in researching and developing nuclear weapons until 2003, it continued some of its activity to develop a bomb until 2009.”

According to Steinitz: “The IAEA director made another claim, no less disconcerting, that Iran has been working up until recently to conceal its illegal nuclear activity in order to disrupt the IAEA’s investigation. It appears, therefore, that the decision made [on Tuesday] is politically motivated and off point, and it sends a bad message to the Iranians that the international community is willing to turn a blind eye to their conduct in order to speedily advance the agreement and the removal of sanctions.”

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry welcomed the decision to close the investigation. In a written statement released in Moscow, where he is holding talks with top Russian officials on the Syrian civil war, Kerry said: “Closing the [Possible Military Dimensions] agenda item will in no way preclude the IAEA from investigating if there is reason to believe Iran is pursuing any covert nuclear activities in the future, as it had in the past.”

He added that the July 14 nuclear deal between Iran and Western powers, called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, improved the IAEA’s ability to monitor Iran.

The IAEA’s decision, meanwhile, appeared doubly outrageous after a team of sanctions monitors on Tuesday said Iran violated a U.N. Security Council resolution in October by test-firing a missile capable of delivering a nuclear warhead.

According to a confidential report by the Security Council’s Panel of Experts on Iran, first reported by Reuters, the launch showed the rocket met its requirements for considering that a missile could deliver a nuclear weapon.

“On the basis of its analysis and findings, the panel concludes that the Emad launch is a violation by Iran of paragraph 9 of Security Council resolution 1929,” the panel said.

Diplomats have said the rocket test on Oct. 10 was not technically a violation of the July nuclear deal between Iran and six world powers, but the U.N. report could put U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration in an awkward position.

Iran has said any new sanctions would jeopardize the nuclear deal but if Washington fails to call for sanctions over the Emad launch, it would likely be perceived as weakness.

Diplomats said it was possible for the U.N. sanctions committee to blacklist additional Iranian individuals or entities, something Washington and European countries are likely to ask for. But they said Russia and China, which dislike the sanctions on Iran’s missile program, might block any such moves.

The panel’s report was dated last Friday and went to members of the Security Council’s Iran sanctions committee in recent days. The report came up on Tuesday when the 15-nation council discussed the Iran sanctions regime.

It said the panel considered ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons to be those that can deliver at least a 500-kilogram (1,100-pound) payload within a range of at least 300 kilometers (190 miles).

“The panel assesses that the launch of the Emad has a range of not less than 1,000 km with a payload of at least 1,000 kg and that Emad was also a launch ‘using ballistic missile technology,'” the report said.

Iran’s U.N. mission did not respond to a request for comment. In October, Tehran disputed the Western assessment that the missile was capable of delivering a nuclear warhead.

The panel noted that Iranian rocket launches from 2012 and 2013 also violated the U.N. ban on ballistic missile tests.

The chair of the Iran sanctions committee, Spanish Ambassador Roman Oyarzun, told the council the Panel of Experts had concluded the attempt by Iran to procure titanium alloy bars earlier this year also violated U.N. nuclear sanctions.

Republicans in Congress who disapprove of the Iran nuclear deal were seizing on the U.N. panel’s findings as grounds for additional congressional sanctions. Even some Democrats supported unilateral U.S. action on the missile violations.

Democratic U.S. Senator Chris Coons, a member of the foreign relations panel who backed the Iran nuclear deal, said it was up to the Security Council to act, but if it did not, the United States should, including by imposing direct sanctions on Iranians responsible for the missile tests.

While ballistic missile tests may violate U.N. Security Council sanctions, council diplomats note that such launches are not a violation of the nuclear deal, which is focused on specific nuclear activities by Iran.

Iran, which has always rejected sanctions against it as illegal and unjustified, has repeatedly made clear it has no intention of complying with the restrictions on its missile program.

Categories: Uncategorized

Comments: Be the first to comment

To Strike or Not to Strike, That is the Question

December 17, 2015

To Strike or Not to Strike, That is the Question, The Investigative Project on Terrorism, Paul Alster, December 16, 2015

1310 (1)

[C]ould there still be a window of opportunity, unpalatable as much of the international community might find it, of Israel launching a pre-emptive strike against what is widely perceived as a massive and increasing threat to its security?

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

Israeli estimates of the number of missiles terrorist powerhouse Hizballah has in Lebanon increased last summer from 100,000 to 150,000. The Shi’ite army continues to gain strength, unhindered by the token presence of United Nations troops in what was supposed to be a de-militarized zone following the 2006 Second Lebanon War.

Hizballah’s promises of capturing the Galilee – that have inspired a feature-length Lebanese movie on the subject – are oft-repeated. The imminent release (as a result of the P5+1 nuclear deal) of billions of dollars to its guardian angel and guiding hand, the Islamic Republic of Iran, promise more money and materiel will be placed at the disposal of an organization that has already fought two vicious wars against the Jewish state, a state whose existence it refuses to recognize.

Hizballah’s growing strength, and its acquisition of advanced weapons, (undoubtedly aided of late by Russian air strikes in support of the Syrian army), has Israeli leaders thinking hard about how long they can allow such a build-up to go unchecked, and whether there is a growing case for something more than sporadic cross-border interventions to temporarily stem Hizballah’s growing firepower.

“We operate in Syria from time to time to prevent it turning into another front against us,” Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu acknowledged Dec. 1 at the Galilee Conference in Acre. “We act, of course, to prevent the transfer of deadly weaponry from Syria to Lebanon.”

His surprise comments came on the back of two reported airstrikes on Syrian weapons convoys – attributed to the IAF – apparently destined for Hizballah.

Two days later, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon again highlighted the increasing danger posed by Iran’s overt support of the Hizballah, telling members of the U.S. Congress, “We are very worried about Iran’s presence in Syria… This regime generates terrorism and undermines many of the regimes in the Middle East, and this is not good news for the region, not only Israel.”

Reports last week of Iran completing a second medium-range ballistic missile test in contravention of U.N. Security Council resolutions did little to ease Israeli fears. On Dec. 10, in another indication of the urgency with which it views the Iran-Hizballah threat, Israel successfully tested its Arrow 3 missile defense system, an extra layer of defense on top of the Iron Dome, David’s Sling, and the Arrow 2 system that may well prove critical in defending against the Iranian-made Shihab 3 longer ranger missiles.

In an exclusive interview with the Investigative Project on Terrorism, a senior IDF official – who for security reason must remain anonymous – spelled out the likely scenario should Hizballah live up to its promises and attack Israel from the north. He did not discuss the likelihood of an Israeli pre-emptive strike against Hizballah, but painted a sometimes grim assessment of what the Israeli public can expect.

“The next war will be different. As an Israeli citizen, father to two boys in the army, I really hope we will find a solution to peace in the area… but we have to deal with this,” the IDF official explained. “I believe that in the next war we will see that Hizballah and Hamas will both launch missiles. They have the same interest here.”

Earlier this month, subsequent to this interview taking place, Israel’s Channel 2 news reported that Shadi el-Meni, the Islamic State leader in the Sinai Peninsula, met with Hamas leaders to discuss increased weapons supplies to the Gaza-based terrorists. The ideological differences between the two sides seemingly set aside in the pursuit of preparing an enhanced assault on Israel.

The IDF officer suggested that during the 2014 Gaza War more than 70 percent of the Israeli population was covered by the Iron Dome as it intercepted missiles coming from the Hamas-controlled enclave. But with rockets raining down from Israel’s north and south, Iron Dome’s use would be limited. There will be occasions when civilians will not be protected when defending strategic installations take priority.

“We understand that Iron Dome next time will not do the same work,” he said, “because you will not always put it on populations; you will put it in strategic locations that we need to defend like chemical factories, and gas [installations], of course.”

Israel’s third largest metropolitan area, Haifa, is home to a huge Mediterranean port and a major Israeli naval base. Defending such a massive target will be “very hard” he said. “We have Iron Dome, the Arrow and the Patriot as well, but when you have 150,000 missiles from Lebanon, you cannot assume that every missile they will launch will [be intercepted]. This is what we need to explain to the Israeli population. A lot of [apartment blocks], a lot of industrial zones, a lot of factories will be targeted, and at the same time Hamas will launch from Gaza. This is our understanding.”

He suggested there will be sustained bouts of simultaneous rocket attacks in the north, although there is no doubt that Hizballah’s arsenal offers the capability to reach as far as Tel Aviv and Jerusalem.

“I think the enemy has [learned] very well. Today we see Hizballah fighting in Syria. Hizballah a few years ago said they are just defensive, now we see they are an offensive force. After the [2014] operations near Israel’s Gaza border, we understand that kibbutzim near the [Lebanese] border may be ‘evacuated and moved back.’ We think it is possible [Haifa] will be without electricity for 72 hours,” he continued. “No phones. No talking to your family. We have practiced evacuations to shelters and built civilians rescue teams in the towns and villages.”

Civilian teams have trained to help get people into shelters and in emergency response in Jewish towns and Arab villages alike. Haifa, for example, is home to a wide variety of communities, including around 30,000 Israeli Arabs, (both Muslim and Christian), Druze, and followers of the Baha’i faith.

“We assume everything Hizballah sees in Syria they can try to bring into Lebanon, so I assume that they will try to bring missiles such as Scuds and try and launch them all over Israel. In [the Haifa] district what we will see is the 122mm – they have thousands of these Katyushas that have a range of up to 45 kms – and that would take them from the [Lebanese] border to Tirat HaCarmel [on the south side of Haifa]. This is the main problem for the first days of the war.”

“Hizballah has advanced weapons. You don’t need to be in uniform to know that if they take the C-802 that they launched at Eilat in 2006 they will try launching it [again]. They have very good, advanced weapons, anti-tank missiles – a huge stockpile.”

And, under the cover of missile fire, the senior IDF officer said he has little doubt Hizballah will attempt some degree of land invasion.

“I think that there are maps of this,” he said. “We understand this when [Hizballah leader Hassan] Nasrallah says he will be in the Galilee and will take it from Israel. I don’t think that he will [achieve] it. So, they will take Metula, or Shlomi, or Hanita for a few hours and they’ll raise a flag. Okay, so they will launch thousands of rockets. It will be hard, but Israel will continue to exist. With Hizballah fighting in Syria in offensive attacks with tanks, infantry, UAV’s, you understand they are building a very powerful military with much practical experience.”

During the long and bloody fight against ISIS, Al Nusra and others in Syria, Hizballah has picked up large amounts of weaponry from the battlefield, weapons manufactured around the globe, some likely from the U.S. who have armed the Free Syrian Army. Whatever they captured could be fired on Israel when the war everyone expects finally breaks out.

With the exception of its border with Jordan, Israel faces non-state actors at all points of the compass. Hizballah in south Lebanon, Hizballah, ISIS and the Al Nusra Front in Syria, Hamas and Islamic Jihad in Gaza, and ISIS and al-Qaida in Sinai. There are also signs that the Fatah-run Palestinian Authority is increasingly vulnerable to radical Islamists from Hamas or ISIS as the stabbing terror spree against Israelis continues into a third month.

Could the awful Paris attacks in November have finally brought Europeans around to understanding the Israeli predicament in facing terror organizations on virtually all sides?

“I think that all over the world we have problems with radical Muslims. What we see… is a common enemy. These radical terror organizations have similar tactics and I hope the world will understand what Israel has [faced] in the last decades. I think maybe we don’t know how to explain our story [very well]. I hope that maybe now they will understand what a threat the world has, facing non-state actors and terrorist organizations – and we know it is Iran that gives money to Hizballah and tries to give them missiles to hit every place in Israel.”

The best opportunity for Israel to intervene might have presented itself last summer, when Hizballah appeared to be on the ropes.

“One can conclude that Israel may see an auspicious opportunity to make a preemptive attack to destroy Hezbollah’s massive ordnance in southern Lebanon, stockpiled since the 33-day Israel-Hezbollah war in 2006,” Iranian-Canadian political analyst Shair Shahidsaless wrote at the Huffington Post in June.

That was before the game-changing Russian entry into the conflict that has seen the balance of power sway back towards Assad and Hizballah. But could there still be a window of opportunity, unpalatable as much of the international community might find it, of Israel launching a pre-emptive strike against what is widely perceived as a massive and increasing threat to its security?

Categories: Galilee, Golan, Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran - Middle East, Iran - sanctions relief, Iranian proxies, Israel, Palestinians, Russia - Middle East
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment