Archive for January 2016

A Strategy to Defeat Islamic Theo-fascism

January 7, 2016

A Strategy to Defeat Islamic Theo-fascism, American ThinkerG. Murphy Donovan, January 7, 2016

Surely, whatever passed for American foreign or military policy in the past three decades is not working. Just as clearly, in case anyone keeps score these days, the dark side of Islam is ascendant at home and abroad. What follows here is a catalogue of policy initiatives that might halt the spread of Islamic fascism and encourage religious reform in the Ummah.

Some observers believe that the Muslim problem is a matter of life and death. Be assured that the need for Islamic reform is much more important than either. The choices for Islam are the same as they are for Palestine Arabs; behave or be humbled. Europe may still have a Quisling North and a Vichy South; but Russia, China, and even America, at heart, are still grounded by national survival instincts – and Samuel Colt.

Call a spade a spade

The threat is Islam, both kinetic and passive aggressive factions. If “moderate” Islam is real, then that community needs to step up and assume responsibility for barbaric terror lunatics and immigrants/refugees alike. Neither America nor Europe has solutions to the Islamic dystopia; civic incompetence, strategic illiteracy, migrants, poverty, religious schisms, or galloping irredentism. The UN and NATO have no remedies either. Islamism is an Ummah, Arab League, OIC problem to solve. Absent moral or civic conscience, unreformed Islam deserves no better consideration than any other criminal cult.

Western Intelligence agencies must stop cooking the books too. The West is at war and the enemy is clearly the adherents of a pernicious ideology. A global war against imperial Islam might be declared, just as angry Islam has declared war on civilization.  A modus vivendi might be negotiated only after the Ummah erects a universal barrier between church and state globally. Islam, as we know it, is incompatible with democracy, civility, peace, stability, and adult beverages.

Oxymoronic “Islamic” states need to be relegated to the dustbin of history. If the Muslim world cannot or will not mend itself, Islamism, like the secular fascism of the 20th Century, must be defeated, humbled in detail. Sooner is better.

Answer the Ayatollahs

Recent allied concessions to Tehran may prove to be a bridge too far. If the Persian priests do not abide by their nuclear commitments, two red lines might be drawn around Israel. Firstly, the ayatollahs should be put on notice, publicly, that any attack against Israel would be considered an attack against America — and met with massive Yankee retaliation. Secondly, any future cooperation with NATO or America should be predicated on an immediate cessation of clerical hate speech and so-called fatwas, those arbitrary death sentences.

Clerical threats to “wipe Israel off the face of the earth” and “death to America” injunctions are designed to stimulate jihad and terror globally. The only difference between a Shia ayatollah and a Sunni imam in this regard these days seems to be the torque in their head threads.

Ostracize the Puppeteers

Strategic peril does not emanate from Sunni tacticians like Osama bin Laden, Mullah Omar, or Abu Bakr al-Baghadadi. Nor does the real threat begin with or end with al Qaeda, the Taliban, Hezb’allah, Hamas, or the Islamic State. Lethal threat comes, instead, on four winds: toxic culture, religious politics, fanatic fighters, and furtive finance, all of which originate with Muslim state sponsors. The most prominent of these are Saudi Arabia, the Emirates, Turkey, Iran, and Pakistan.

Put aside for a moment the Saudi team that brought down the Twin Towers in New York. Consider instead, the House of Saud as the most egregious exporter of Salifism (aka Wahabbism) doctrine, clerics, imams, and mosques from which ultra-irredentist ideologies are spread. The Saudis are at once the custodians of Islam’s sacredshrines and at the same time the world’s most decadent, corrupt, and duplicitous hypocrites. Imam Baghdadi is correct about two things: the venality of elites in Washington and Riyadh. The House of Saud, an absolutist tribal monarchy, does not have the moral standing to administer “holy” sites of any description — Mecca, Medina, or Disneyland.

The cozy relationship between Europe, the European Union, and Arabia can be summarized with a few words; oil, money, arms sales, and base rights. This near-sighted blend of Mideast obscenities has reached its sell-by date. The “white man’s burden” should have expired when Edward Said vacated New York for paradise.

Jettison Turkey and Pakistan

What Saudi Arabia is to toxic ideology in North Africa, Turkey and Pakistan are to perfidy in the Levant and South Asia. Turkey and Pakistan are Islam’s most obvious and persistent grifters. Turkey supports the Islamic State and other Sunni terror groups with a black market oil racket. Pakistan supports the Taliban, al Qaeda, and ISIS with sanctuary and tolerance of the world’s largest opium garden. Oil and drug monies from Arabia, Turkey, and South Asia are financing the global jihad. Turkey also facilitates the migration of Muslims west to Europe while sending Islamist fighters and weapons south to Syria and Iraq.

With the advent of Erdogan and his Islamist AKP, Turkey has morphed into NATO’s Achilles Heel, potentially a fatal flaw.  Turkey needs to be drummed out of NATO until secular comity returns to Ankara. Pakistan needs to be restrained, too, with sanctions until it ceases to provide refuge for terrorists. Pakistani troops harassing India could be more prudently redeployed to exterminate jihadists.

Sanctions against Russia and Israel are a study in moral and political fatuity whilst Arabs and Muslims are appeased midst a cultural sewer of geo-political crime and human rights abuses. If NATO’s eastern flank needs to be anchored in trust and dependability, Russia, Kurdistan, or both, would make better allies than Turkey. Ignoring Turkish perfidy to protect ephemeral base rights confuses tactical necessity with strategic sufficiency.

Recognize Kurdistan

Aside from Israel, Kurdistan might be the most enlightened culture in the Mideast. The Kurds are also the largest ethnic group in the world not recognized as a state. While largely Muslim, the Kurds, unlike most of the Ummah, appreciate the virtues of religious diversity and women’s rights. Indeed, Kurdish women fight alongside their men against Turkish chauvinism and Sunni misogyny with equal aplomb. For too long, the Kurds have been patronized by Brussels and Washington.

While Kurdish fighters engage ISIS and attempt to control the Turkish oil black market, Ankara uses American manufactured NATO F-16s to bomb Kurds in Turkey and Syria. Turkish ground forces now occupy parts of Iraq too. In eastern Turkey, Ergdogan’s NATO legions use ISIS as an excuse for bookend genocide, a cleansing of Kurds that might rival the Armenian Christian genocide (1915-1917).

195876_5_Kurdish angel of death

All the while, American strategic amateurs argue for a “no-fly” zone in contested areas south of Turkey. Creating a no-fly zone is the kind of operational vacuity we have come to expect from American politicians and generals. Such a stratagem would foil Kurdish efforts to flank ISIS and allow the Erdogan jihad, arms, and oil rackets to flourish. A no-fly zone is a dangerous ploy designed to provoke Russia, not protect Muslim “moderates.”

Putin, Lavrov, and the Russians have it right this time; Turkish and Erdogan family subterfuges are lethal liabilities, not assets.

Washington and European allies have been redrawing the map in Eastern Europe, North Africa, South Asia, and the Mideast since the end of WWII. The time has come to put Kurdistan on the map too. Kurdistan is a unique and exemplary case of reformed or enlightened Islam; indeed, a nation that could serve as a model for the Muslim world.  If base rights are a consideration, Kurdistan would be an infinitely more dependable ally than Turkey or any corrupt tribal autocracy in Arabia. America has a little in common with desert dictators — and fewer genuine friends there either. Indeed, at the moment America is allied with the worst of Islam.

Create New Alliances

NATO, like the European Union, has become a parody of itself. Absent a threat like the Soviet Union or the Warsaw Pact, Brussels has taken to justifying itself by meddling in East Europe and resuscitating a Cold War with the Kremlin. Indeed, having divided Yugoslavia, NATO now expands to the new Russian border with reckless abandon; in fact, fanning anti-Russian flames now with neo-Nazi cohorts in former Yugoslavia, Georgia, and Ukraine.

NATO support for the Muslims of one-time Yugoslavia is of a piece with support for Islamic troublemakers in Chechnya and China too. Throughout, we are led to believe that jihad Uighurs and caliphate Chechens are freedom fighters. Beslan, Boston, Paris, and now San Bernardino put the lie to any notion that Islamists are “victims” (or heroes). Indeed, the Boston Marathon bombing might have been prevented had Washington a better relationship with Moscow.

Truth is, America has more in common with Russia and China these days than we do with any number of traditional European Quislings. Indeed, it seems that Europe and America can’t take yes for an answer.

The Cold War ideological or philosophical argument has been won. Moscow and Beijing have succumbed to market capitalism. Islamism, in stark contrast, is now a menace to Russian, Chinese, and American secular polities alike. The logic of a cooperative or unified approach to a common enemy seems self-evident. America, China, and Russia, at least on issues like toxic Islam, is a match made in Mecca.

The late great contest with Marxist Russia and China was indeed a revolution without guns. Now the parties to that epic Cold War struggle may have to join forces to suppress a theo-fascist movement that, like its Nazi predecessor, will not be defeated without guns. The West is at war again, albeit in slow motion. Withal, questions of war are not rhetorical. Saying that you are not at war does not make it so. Once declared, by one party or the other, the only relevant question about war is who wins and who loses. Losers do not make the future.

If America and Europe were as committed to Judeo/Christian secular values as Islamists are committed to a sick religious culture, then the war against pernicious Islam would have been won decades ago. Or as Jack Kennedy once put it: “Domestic policy can only defeat us; foreign policy can kill us.

Trump Footnote

Donald Trump made several policy suggestions on the Islamism issue, one on immigration, the other on Mideast oil. On the former, he suggests a hiatus on Muslim immigration until America develops a plan or reliable programs to vet migrants. On Arab oil, he suggests, given the lives and treasure spent liberating Kuwait and Iraqi oil fields, America should have held those resources in trust and use oil revenues to finance the war against jihad, however long that takes. The problem with both Trump ideas is that they come perilously close to common sense, an American instinct in short supply these days.

 

UK Review of Muslim Brotherhood: Top 13 Quotes

January 7, 2016

UK Review of Muslim Brotherhood: Top 13 Quotes, Clarion ProjectRyan Mauro, January 7, 2015

(All bold face print is from the original article. — DM)

Egypt-Muslim-Brotherhood-Supporters-Flags-IPMuslim Brotherhood supporters (© Reuters)

The U.S. government rejected the conclusions of the British government’s 18-month review of its intelligence and policy towards the Muslim Brotherhood, concluding that the Islamist group is linked to terrorism and extremism. The comprehensive study welcomed outside contributors, of which the Clarion Project was one.

The British government rejected the myth that the Brotherhood is “moderate” and the patently false notion that it is “non-violent.” The Brotherhood and its ideology are now rightly seen as adversarial and measures will be taken to counter its threat. While the UK stopped just shy of banning it as a terrorist group, Prime Minister David Cameron said it will “keep under review whether the views and activities of the Muslim Brotherhood meet the legal test for proscription.”

Here are the top 13 quotes from the British government review andPrime Minister Cameron’s official statement in no particular order:

1. “The Muslim Brotherhood’s foundational texts call for the progressive moral purification of individuals and Muslim societies and their eventual political unification in a Caliphate under Sharia law. To this day the Muslim Brotherhood characterizes Western societies and liberal Muslims as decadent and immoral. It can be seen primarily as a political project.”

2.  “Aspects of Muslim Brotherhood ideology and tactics, in this country and overseas, are contrary to our values and have been contrary to our national interests and our national security.”

3.  “From its foundation the Muslim Brotherhood organized itself into a secretive ‘cell’ structure, with an elaborate induction and education program for new members…This clandestine, centralized and hierarchical structure persists to this day.”

4.  “The Hamas founding charter claims that they are the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Muslim Brotherhood treat them as such. In the past ten years support for Hamas (including in particular funding) has been an important priority for the MB in Egypt and the MB international network.”

5.  “From at least the 1950s the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood also developed an international network, within and beyond the Islamic world. Europe became an important base for the growing Muslim Brotherhood global network.”

6.  “The wider international network of the Muslim Brotherhood now performs a range of functions. It promotes Muslim Brotherhood ideology (including through communications platforms), raises and invests funds, and provides a haven for members of the Brotherhood who have left their country of origin to continue promoting Brotherhood activity.”

7.  “[F]or the most part, the Muslim Brotherhood have preferred non violent incremental change on the grounds of expediency, often on the basis that political opposition will disappear when the process of Islamization is complete. But they are prepared to countenance violence—including, from time to time, terrorism—where gradualism is ineffective.”

8.  “Muslim Brotherhood organizations and associated in the UK have neither openly nor consistently refuted the literature of Brotherhood member Sayyid Qutb which is known to have inspired people (including in this country) to engage in terrorism.”

9.  “[The review] concluded that it was not possible to reconcile these [MB] views with the claim made by the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood in their evidence to the review that ‘the Muslim Brotherhood has consistently adhered to peaceful means of opposition, renouncing all forms of violence throughout its existence.'”

10.  “In the 1990s the Muslim Brotherhood and their associates established public facing and apparently national organizations in the UK to promote their views. None were openly identified with the Muslim Brotherhood and membership of the Muslim Brotherhood remained (and still remains) a secret.”

11.  “[MB fronts] became politically active, notably in connection with Palestine and Iraq, and promoted candidates in national and local elections…sought and obtained a dialogue with Government….were active members in a security dialogue with the police.”

12.  “The Muslim Brotherhood have been publicly committed to political engagement in this country. Engagement with Government has at times been facilitated by what appeared to be a common agenda against al Qaida and (at least in the UK) militant Salafism. But this engagement did not take into account of Muslim Brotherhood support for a proscribed terrorist group and its views about terrorism which, in reality, are quite different from our own.”

13. “Senior Muslim Brotherhood figures and associated have justified attacks against coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

The U.S. government, without even conducting any kind of review of its own, issued a statement to the Investigative Project on Terrorism rejecting any ban or even any “de-legitimizing” of the Brotherhood at all.

“Political repression of non-violent Islamist groups has historically contributed to the radicalization of the minority of their members who would consider violence…The de-legitimization of non-violent political groups does not promote stability and instead advances the very outcomes that such measures are intended to prevent,” the U.S. government statement claims.

In other words, the U.S. position is this: Be held hostage by the so-called “non-violent Islamist groups.” Sure, the Muslim Brotherhood has a wing named Hamas that the U.S. officially designated as a Foreign Terrorist Organization but it could be worse—at least not allo f the group’s members are engaging in violence.

Accept them as “moderates” as they wish, even at the cost of better Muslim alternatives. Don’t confront them. Don’t even “delegitimize” them for their radicalism and ideology because that might push them over the edge.

That’s not a mindset that understands what the threat is and certainly is not one that can defeat it.

The mountainous Arab Israeli gun problem has spiralled beyond control

January 7, 2016

The mountainous Arab Israeli gun problem has spiralled beyond control, DEBKAfile, January 7, 2016

Neshek_ArabsCENTER480

The mountainous quantities of illegal weapons, run-of-the-mill and exotic, in the hands of Israeli Arabs have grown to unmanageable proportions. No Israeli civilian police, or even military force, has the scale of manpower required to mount raids in Israeli Arab population centers – ranging from Galilee in the North, the Triangle and Jaffa in the Center and the Bedouin of the Negev – for a comprehensive campaign to impound them – not even if backed by tanks and commando units.It is pointless to call on all 1.5 million Arab, Bedouin, Druze and Circassian minority citizens to voluntarily surrender their guns. Almost every individual has at least one shooter. The accumulation would not shame any Middle East militia.

The authorities’ inability to deal effectively with this arsenal is not only shocking but has also made the Israeli underworld rich. And even more alarming, it provides a profitable link between terrorist organizations and both Israeli and Palestinian crime mobs and drug dealers. The failure to enforce order in some parts of the population, while other communities abide by the law, has created two parallel societies living by different rules.

The official data on the quantity of guns loose and unaccounted for are sketchy, bu the variety is hair-raising: grenade launchers; AT-3 Sagger and BGM-71 TOW antitank missiles; M-16 and Kalashnikov automatic rifles, submarine guns – mostly Uzis; heavy and light machine guns and mortars; explosive devices for remote detonation;  concussion, gas and stun grenades; diverse ammunition; magazines; IDF uniforms; protective and bulletproof vests; night vision equipment; and much more.

The approximate black market price list we have obtained includes handguns – 15,000 shekels; grenades – 2,500 shekels; M-16 automatic rifles – 50,000 shekels; explosive devices (depending on size and power) 15,000-25,000 shekels; hand grenade – 500 shekels.

Arab Israeli leaders, especially their representatives in the Knesset, have vocally and repeatedly appealed to the police to collect the weapons loose in Arab villages and cities. They see their prevalence as a major cause of the violence and disorder rampant inside those communities. This is no doubt true, but there is also an element of hypocrisy in their demand, in view of their own failure to address – and even exploit – the underlying causes of the epidemic

1. Israeli Arabs customarily resort to the use of guns rather than the law to resolve their disputes and conflicts of interest.

2. It has finally been admitted that 90% of the weapons in illegal hands today were stolen from Israeli army depots, some by traffickers in uniform. Those soldiers were not averse to flogging arms to gangs capable of turning against their own units.

According to DEBKAfile’s defense and counterterrorism sources, the remaining 10 percent, mostly handguns and submachine guns, are manufactured on underground production lines in the West Bank, Gaza or even within the Green Line in Israel. A small amount of the weapons is smuggled by land from the Sinai, Jordan and Lebanon.

Neshek_ArabsNORTH480

3. The IDF’s failure to properly guard its weapons and ammunition depots is stunning, scarcely illuminated by the figures the IDF has presented to various parliamentary committees:  From 2010 to 2015, an average of only 100 weapons per year were officially stolen from army bases, military vehicles and the homes of soldiers.

However, army and police officers familiar with the figures say the number is tenfold, more like 1,000 pieces of weaponry stolen year by year.

Officers and enlisted men whose weapons were stolen receive only light penalties. However, robbing arms depots has become endemic, with Bedouin in the south making the Negev training bases their “home ground.”
They follow IDF units on exercises and steal anything lying about, even cooking utensils and sleeping bags.

There is a sour joke in IDF tank and artillery battalions, that every maneuver has its “camp followers” of Bedouin gun and ammunition thieves.

4.  Internal Security Minister Gilad Erdan, addressing the problem in a Knesset debate on Jan. 6, said that a comprehensive police roundup of illegal guns in Arab communities would immediately raise the charge that Israel was persecuting the Arab minority. He was answering charges of negligence hurled by Arab Knesset Member Ahmad Tibi.

5. The symbiosis that has developed between regular crime mobs and terrorists further boosts the illicit gun traffic. The availability of weapons encourages serious crimes. The “crime families” most notorious for their uncontrolled use of gunfire are to be found embedded in the Arab community, including the mixed towns of Lod, Jaffa and the Arab Triangle towns. Some of these mob chiefs may also contribute their violent services to Palestinian terrorist organizations.

Their activities certainly have a detrimental effect on the majority of their societies who are law abiding and uninvolved in criminal pursuits.

The problem could become more dangerous if the Bedouin, Druze or Circassian communities decided to rise up against Israeli majority rule, because their sons enlist for service in the IDF, the police and the prisons service. They are armed from head to toe, highly trained as soldiers and may be infected with the religious or national fanaticism sweeping the region.

In any case, there is no chance of the illegal guns and arms in every Arab home and gang arsenal being relinquished voluntarily. It is no good looking to national Arab leaders to lead any effort to collect them, because its much more convenient and politically profitable to blame Israel’s national authorities for the violence fostered by a culture that has made gun possession rife and a status symbol.

Saudi warplanes attack Iranian embassy in Yemen

January 7, 2016

Saudi warplanes attack Iranian embassy in Yemen

Iran Published time: 7 Jan, 2016 11:00 Edited time: 7 Jan, 2016 11:27

Source: Saudi warplanes attack Iranian embassy in Yemen – Iran — RT News

Iran has accused Saudi warplanes of attacking the Iranian embassy in the Yemeni capital Sana’a. Some guards were reportedly wounded in the attack, according to state news channel IRIB.
Iranian embassy in Sanaa. © Mohammed Huwais

The Saudi-led coalition fighting in Yemen says it will investigate the accusation, according to coalition spokesman Brigadier General Ahmed Asseri, as cited by Reuters.

Asseri acknowledged that coalition jets carried out heavy airstrikes in Sana’a on Wednesday night, targeting missile launchers used by the Houthi militia. He added that the group has used civilian facilities, including abandoned embassies.

He said the coalition had requested that all countries supply the coordinates of their diplomatic missions, adding that accusations made on the basis of information provided by the Houthis “have no credibility.” 

It comes as Iran bans the import of all products made in Saudi Arabia. The Thursday decision was made in a cabinet meeting chaired by President Hassan Rouhani, according to Iranian student news agency ISNA.

The Saudi-led coalition, which is supported by the US, is targeting Houthi rebels aligned with former President Ali Abdullah Saleh, who resigned in 2012 following a popular uprising against his rule.

The coalition has been heavily criticized for the way it conducts its airstrikes, and was accused of attacking a center for the blind in Yemen on Tuesday. It was also blamed for hitting a Doctors Without Borders hospital in Sanaa in December.

The instability in Yemen began during the Arab Spring protests in 2011. In 2014, Houthi Shiite rebels supported by pro-Saleh forces rose up and seized large territories in Yemen, including Sanaa.

The death toll from fighting in Yemen had reached 2,795 as of Tuesday, according to the UN. At least 81 people were killed in December alone.

 

Who Actually Represents American Muslims?

January 7, 2016

Who Actually Represents American Muslims?

by Samuel Westrop

January 7, 2016 at 5:00 am

Source: Who Actually Represents American Muslims?

  • Activists participating in CAIR’s lobby day included Abdullah Faaruuq, a Muslim cleric, who, in response to the arrest of Al Qaeda operative Aafia Siddiqui, told Muslims to “grab onto the gun and the sword and go out and do your job.”
  • “[CAIR] is a Muslim Brotherhood front organization. It works in the United States as a lobby against radio, television and print media journalists who dare to produce anything about Islam that is at variance with their fundamental agenda. CAIR opposes diversity in Islam.” — Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi, Muslim cleric and secretary general of the Italian Muslim Assembly.
  • Very few American Muslims seem to feel that CAIR is a legitimate voice for American Islam. According to a 2011 Gallup poll, about 88% of American Muslims said that CAIR does not represent them.
  • CAIR has been denounced by anti-racism groups, the federal government and by other Muslims. When legislators meet with CAIR, they help CAIR impose itself upon Muslim communities as a self-declared representative.

On November 12, 2015, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), with the support of a number of local Islamic groups in Boston, organized a lobbying day at the Massachusetts State House, ostensibly to advocate on behalf of local Muslims.

Nadeem Mazen, a director of CAIR’s Massachusetts branch (CAIR-MA) and an elected councillor for the city of Cambridge, explained: “We must be thought leaders and exemplars in our communities for basic social justice. And we’re meeting with our legislators to remind them that we are hundreds, thousands, and in many cases tens of thousands strong in their communities.”

Certainly, the discussions that took place fit the “social justice” narrative – the Boston Globe reports that participants argued for “increasing affordable housing, reforming school discipline, and reducing mass incarceration for non-violent offenders.”

But who exactly was behind this lobbying day? And what does it mean for American Muslims that such groups claim to represent their interests in state legislatures?

The chief organizing body, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, is a prominent Islamic group, but which has a long history of involvement with extremist and terrorist causes. In 2009, during the Holy Land Foundation terror financing trial, U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Solis concluded that, “The government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR… with the Islamic Association for Palestine, and with Hamas.”

During the trial, CAIR was designated an “unindicted co-conspirator.” As a result of CAIR’s apparent links to a terrorist movement, the Justice Department in 2009 announced a ban on working with CAIR. The FBI also severed relations.

CAIR was founded in 1994 by three officials of the Islamic Association of Palestine, which, the Holy Land Foundation trial would later determine, was a prominent Hamas front group. One of CAIR’s Islamic Association of Palestine founders, Nihad Awad, is today CAIR’s Executive Director.

The Anti-Defamation League notes that CAIR has long expressed anti-Semitic and pro-terror rhetoric, adding that, “[CAIR’s] public statements cast Jews and Israelis as corrupt agents who control both foreign and domestic U.S. policy and are responsible for the persecution of Muslims in the U.S.”

The other groups involved in the lobbying day included the Muslim Justice League, which campaigns against counter-terrorism initiatives; and MassMuslims, a Boston-based organization that claimed to promote civic engagement for the region’s Muslims. Nadeem Mazen — a councilor in Cambridge, a director of CAIR-MA and the chief architect of the lobby day — founded MassMuslims in 2014. His group has promoted events with Omar Suleiman, a extremist preacher who describes homosexuality as a “disease” and a “repugnant shameless sin.”

In May, another MassMuslims official, Omar Khoshafa, invited the extremist preacher Yasir Qadhi to address students at Harvard. Qadhi has claimed that “Hitler never intended to mass-destroy the Jews,” and that the Holocaust is “false propaganda.” Khoshafa, who was quoted as a participant at the lobby day, describes Yasir Qadhi as “one of the foremost Muslim-American scholars and an amazing lecturer.”

Other activists involved with CAIR’s lobby day included Abdullah Faaruuq, a Muslim cleric, who, in response to the arrest of the Al Qaeda operative, Aafia Siddiqui, told Muslims to “grab onto the gun and the sword and go out and do your job.”

Abdullah Faaruuq, wearing a white skullcap, with CAIR at the Massachusetts State House.

But do any of these extremist connections matter if the purpose is simply to involve Massachusetts Muslims in the democratic process? The lobbying topics may seem relatively benign — affordable housing, school reform and prison incarceration rates. But a letter sent by the Boston-based Americans for Peace and Tolerance to all State Legislators, and signed by a number of prominent Muslims explained that, “CAIR’s initial strategy is to assert itself as the political voice of Massachusetts Muslims by addressing some of the legitimate needs of the American Muslim community, but it will eventually be lobbying for the acceptance of a radical and hateful ideology, to the detriment of Massachusetts’s historically moderate, integrated Muslim population and the greater Boston community.”

By purporting to advocate on behalf of Massachusetts Muslims, CAIR appears to be seeking credibility as a voice of American Islam. When legislators meet with CAIR, they help CAIR impose itself upon Muslim communities as their self-declared representatives.

Very few American Muslims, however, seem to feel that CAIR is a legitimate ambassador for American Islam. According to a 2011 Gallup poll, about 88% of American Muslims said that CAIR does not represent them. Muslims all over the world, in fact, apparently do not think CAIR is a moderate or legitimate Muslim group: in 2014, the United Arab Emirates, a pious Muslim state, designated CAIR a terrorist organization, along with dozens of other Muslim Brotherhood organizations.

In reality, American Muslims are extremely diverse, and no single group can claim to speak on their collective behalf. American Islam comprises dozens of different religious sects and political movements, many of which advocate distinctly different ideas. But for Islamist bodies such as CAIR, it suits their agenda if American Muslims are portrayed as a monolithic community. If American Muslims can be seen as homogenous, then a group such as CAIR has a better claim to represent their interests.

Even CAIR’s own research, however, undermines their claim to speak on behalf of American Muslims. A 2011 report reveals that a majority of American mosques are not affiliated with any American Islamic body.

Addressing a conference in 2000, Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi, a Muslim cleric and secretary general of the Italian Muslim Assembly, explained that, “[CAIR] is a Muslim Brotherhood front organization. It works in the United States as a lobby against radio, television and print media journalists who dare to produce anything about Islam that is at variance with their fundamental agenda. CAIR opposes diversity in Islam.”

In truth, CAIR only speaks on behalf of a small extremist ideology that, as discovered by federal prosecutors, emerged across the United States during the 1990s out of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Although CAIR does not represent American Muslims, it managed, before the Holy Land Foundation terror trial in 2008, to persuade a great many people that it did. Enough time has passed that CAIR seems to believe it can try this move once again.

CAIR has been denounced by anti-racism groups, the federal government and by other Muslims. Its activities in the Massachusetts State House appear to be part of a larger effort to rehabilitate its image in the eyes of politicians and journalists.

While CAIR’s preferred topics of discussion may seem benign is irrelevant, the real threat is one of legitimacy. If State Legislators continue to meet with CAIR and journalists continue to write puff pieces about CAIR’s work, then we betray a worthy non-extremist Muslim majority while rewarding an extremist minority.

Who represents America’s Muslims? In truth, no one. And certainly not CAIR.

Richardson: North Korea May Have Launched Nuclear Test to Get Nuclear Deal Like Iran’s

January 7, 2016

Richardson: North Korea May Have Launched Nuclear Test to Get Nuclear Deal Like Iran’s, Washington Free Beacon, January 6, 2016

(Why not? Their human rights records are comparable. — DM)

Richardson, who ran for president in 2008, endorsed Clinton for the 2016 election. Clinton, Obama’s former secretary of state, has been a vocal supporter of the Iran nuclear agreement.

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

Hillary Clinton supporter and former New Mexico governor Tom Richardson said North Korea’s nuclear test may have been an attempt to gain leverage for a nuclear deal similar to the one Iran struck with the Obama administration and other world powers.

North Korea claimed it successfully tested a hydrogen bomb on Tuesday, although nuclear experts doubt that was the actual device tested. CNN reported the test corresponded with a 5.1 seismic event.

CNN host Wolf Blitzer asked Richardson whether North Korean dictator Kim Jong-un was crying out for attention with this latest act of aggression.

“I think he’s trying to get attention, number one, but I think he’s also sending a message that if you want to deal with me, if you want me to curb our nuclear weapons, it’s going to be a very high price,” Richardson said. “It’s a very poor country. They need humanitarian assistance. They need energy assistance. They need all kinds of sanctions lifted. It could be that he’s preparing for a negotiation. I think he’s looking at what happened with Iran, and he says, ‘You know, maybe there’s a deal that can be struck for me,’ although we don’t know this man thinks. He’s very unpredictable.”

Richardson, who ran for president in 2008, endorsed Clinton for the 2016 election. Clinton, Obama’s former secretary of state, has been a vocal supporter of the Iran nuclear agreement.

The Iran nuclear deal made in July and championed by the Obama White House, despite numerous concessions, was met with celebration in Tehran. The world’s largest state sponsor of terrorism received billions of dollars in sanctions relief, among other sweeteners, as part of the agreement.

Home-drone terrorism

January 7, 2016

Home-drone terrorism, The Hill, Ben Lerner, January 6, 2016

Non-state actors are already either deploying drones in the field or are drawing concern from security experts about their potential to do so.  Both Hezbollah and Hamas have sent (for now) non-weaponized, rudimentary drones of limited capability into Middle Eastern skies, including one Hezbollah drone that made it 140 miles into Israel. 

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

In the aftermath of the horrific terrorist attack that took the lives of fourteen victims in San Bernardino, California last month, a raft of information has been coming out regarding the identities and histories of the perpetrators, and also the arsenal they had amassed to carry out their plans.

Amidst all the reporting, it would be easy to miss a significant item that authorities found among the weaponry, as reported by Fox News:

“…Another source said investigators discovered a dozen pipe bombs in the house, as well as small explosives strapped to remote-controlled cars – a signature of terrorist groups including Al Qaeda, according to counter-terrorism experts.” [Emphasis added — DM]

Why remote-controlled cars?  Well, it turns out that as much as jihadist terrorists may value their own deaths in the course of their attacks, they also favor using any weapon that maximizes the number of casualties, and the fear that entails, whether they themselves are killed in the process or not.  Hence the high utility of and interest in improvised explosive devices (IEDs), which can be built cheaply and detonated from afar, allowing operators to evade detection and therefore minimize interdiction.  Add an ability to move the explosive to a specific location by remote, and you have a low-tech but lethal precision-guided weapon.

Those advantages of the remote IED – precision, evasion, cost-effectiveness – have prompted authorities increasingly to worry that terrorists will turn next to another device to help them carry out attacks: drones.

Drones have the potential to function essentially as the aerial version of the remote-controlled car bombs found in that San Bernardino apartment.  They could be rigged to carry small explosives and sent to a target as a precision-guided weapon, or could be deployed without an explosive and just flown, deliberately, into a jet engine.   And even if the user in question opts not to use the drone itself as a weapon, it can still operate overhead with a camera and provide what the military calls intelligence-surveillance-reconnaissance (ISR) to support an attack on the ground, for example by providing intelligence on additional targets or possible escape routes for the attackers.

Non-state actors are already either deploying drones in the field or are drawing concern from security experts about their potential to do so.  Both Hezbollah and Hamas have sent (for now) non-weaponized, rudimentary drones of limited capability into Middle Eastern skies, including one Hezbollah drone that made it 140 miles into Israel.  Drug cartels are already attempting to use drones for smuggling narcotics, and some in law enforcement have speculated that cartels will find value in drones for surveillance purposes.  The New York Police Department has been worried for some time about the potential for terrorist attacks on New York City using drones.

Given the threat posed by drones in the hands of terrorists or criminals, there is an urgent need to grapple with how to secure American skies in effective, sensible ways.  Broadly speaking, policymakers should proceed on this front bearing two things in mind:

Deploy counter-drone technologies to protect U.S. airspace.  Addressing the terrorist/criminal drone threat will require the deployment of counter-drone technology, sooner rather than later, that can be used to safely disable and bring down drones in non-military environments.  The military has been working on fielding counter-drone technologies for some time – the Navy has already made significant advances with deployment of directed energy technology to counter threats from Iranian drones and other weapons in the Persian Gulf, and recent reporting indicates that the Army’s Rapid Equipping Force (REF) and Asymmetric Warfare Group (AWG) have been collaborating extensively to identify workable counter-drone options as well.  While the homeland security side of the federal government appears to be catching upon this front, the question remains as to whether effective technology will be ready in time for use against this kind of bad-actor drone in the skies over American cities and infrastructure – particularly when, unlike their military counterparts, those responsible for homeland security are more constrained to avoid counter-drone measures that involve blowing one up in mid-air over lower Manhattan or knocking out electronic communications in downtown Washington, D.C.

Recognize the limitations of traceability and “geo-fencing.”  In recent months, there have been numerous unauthorized drone flights in U.S. airspace – near airports, near commercial aircraft, over sporting events, and in some cases, in the path of wildfire relief efforts – the preponderance of which appear to have been the result of reckless or careless drone use, rather than a malicious intent to cause harm.  These kinds of incursions have prompted the Department of Transportation to announce that it will require those who use drones to register them with the department by February of 2016.  It is thought that having operators register their drones will give law enforcement an opportunity to trace drones back to their operators in certain circumstances for deterrence and accountability purposes, though there is room to debate whether this is unnecessarily burdensome for your average law-abiding user, and whether a more effective way to create deterrence and accountability would be through tracing manufacturer serial numbers, via the retailer, back to the point of sale.

Of course, having the ability to trace a drone back to its owner only matters after a drone has already flown into restricted airspace – it won’t prevent incursions from taking place.  That reality has prompted drone companies to explore the option of manufacturer-installed “geo-fencing” technology that pre-programs a drone to render it incapable of flying into restricted airspace.

Policymakers should recognize that while traceability mechanisms and geo-fencing could be important public safety tools to better manage increasingly crowded airspace and mitigate irresponsible or reckless drone use, they will not solve the problem of malevolent drone use.  Terrorists and criminals won’t register themselves under any system, or make themselves otherwise vulnerable to having ownership traced back to them, and a determined terrorist or criminal will be all the more inclined to disable geo-fencing features, and perhaps all the more capable of doing so.

The best drones are already doing much good in American skies for law enforcement, homeland security, and a variety of industries putting them to innovative use.  As is the case with all beneficial technologies, however, bad actors will find ways to use a drone’s otherwise positive qualities to cause harm.  Dealing with that threat will entail understanding which counter-drone technologies can be usefully applied to preventing terrorist/criminal acts, and which ones are less likely to get that particular job done, other potential benefits notwithstanding.

167 Women Attacked in Germany by Muslim New Year’s Mobs… and Number Keeps Rising

January 6, 2016

167 Women Attacked in Germany by Muslim New Year’s Mobs… and Number Keeps Rising, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, January 6, 2016

2.bild_

The story of the Muslim New Year’s Eve sex attacks keeps getting worse. Similar incidents took place in a number of German cities with large Muslim populations. Many of them had hosted large numbers of “refugees”.

According to the Bild, 167 women have come forward.

In Cologne, more than 100 complaints were filed, 53 in Hamburg, also from Berlin, near the Brandenburg gate, Frankfurt and Dusseldorf there are new reports – in the meantime there are already more than 167.

And that’s not the final total. And it’s only during one period. Merkel’s flood of Muslim migrants has turned Germany into a no-go zone for women.

The incidents follow a similar pattern across different cities. With the same brand of perps.

Local police spokesman Holger Vehren said: ‘The information we have so far is that the victims were targeted at the same time by more than one man with a southern or Arabic-looking appearance.’

So it’s more of the same. So far only four are in custody. Out of hundreds of attackers in multiple cities. But they did get the guy who wanted to take a meat cleaver to them. Anyone doubt he’ll be spending more time in jail than any of the Muslim rapists will?

Police said he told officers he was shocked by the sex attacks at the station last week, and had decided to travel there to make sure it did not happen again.

Volker Stall, a police spokesman, said the man wanted to ‘bring things in order’.

‘When he was asked what he was planning, he said he was travelling to Cologne in order to get a picture about what exactly happened there for himself.

‘Asked what he planned to do with the weapon, he said that the meat cleaver was a part of that process.’

So expect more such attacks. But don’t expect any common sense from European politicians.

Horst Seehofer, the Bavarian leader of the Christian Social Union, said that the country should make sure that from now on there was an absolute limit of no more than 200,000 refugees per year into Germany.

He said: ‘Speaking from experience of the past, I believe that Germany can probably accommodate between 100,000 and 200,000 asylum seekers from warzones per year.

You can’t accommodate any. Plenty of the attackers had come before this latest wave, but no doubt recruited the new arrivals into their networks. 1,000,000 is worse than 200,000, but 200,000 is still far more than you can integrate when your average population age is far older than those of the newcomers.

Geert Wilders on New Year’s Eve Sexual Assaults in Cologne Germany by Arab and North African men

January 6, 2016

Geert Wilders on New Year’s Eve Sexual Assaults in Cologne Germany by Arab and North African men, New English Review, January 6, 2016

Protest Sign in Cologne Germany APProtest Signs in Cologne Germany on New Year’s Eve Sexual Assaults Source: AP

Reports of sexual assaults and robberies of women gathered for celebrations in Cologne, Germany on New Year’s Eve have created a firestorm of concern in Germany, but also in neighboring Holland.  Geert Wilders, leader of the Freedom Party (PVV) raised questions in the Hague Parliament of the ruling coalition cabinet members on January 5th.  Today, Wilders sent a letter to Prime Minister Rutte leader of the VVD party ruling coalition requesting preventive actions to foil such possible attacks by migrants and refugees in Dutch reception centers and communities.

Reports of 90 incidents by women victims in Cologne of such sexual attacks and robberies indicated that the perpetrators were “Arabic or North Africa looking” males.  It heightened concerns in this most culturally and ethnically diverse German city and among opposition political leaders who have questioned the wisdom of allowing in more than 1 million predominately Muslim  migrants and refugees from  the Middle East, North Africa and South Asia. That prompted  Chancellor Merkel ,who has welcomed the mass immigration wave of Muslims, as a means of dealing with Germany’s acute labor shortage to have the ruling CD government Justice Minister  investigate these  charges and determine if any arrests can be made by local law enforcement. However, reports of riots at reception centers by migrants and refugees have aroused protests in a number of German communities.

CNN updated these developments  arising from the Cologne New Year’s  Eve sexual attacks , “Reports of New Year’s Eve sex assaults in Cologne fuel German migrant debate:”

A spate of alleged sexual assaults and robberies at New Year’s Eve festivities in the German city of Cologne has fueled a political firestorm over immigration in Germany.

Ninety criminal incidents, a quarter of which were sexual assaults, were reported following New Year’s Eve celebrations in the city, Cologne police told CNN.

Police said victims described the perpetrators as gangs of Arab or North African men. Many of the assaults were likely intended to distract, allowing attackers to steal mobile phones and other devices, police said.

Authorities said the crimes, including a rape, occurred around the train station, next to the western German city’s landmark cathedral.

Video footage of the celebrations in the area show riotous scenes, with revelers shooting fireworks into crowds.

In a phone call with Cologne Mayor Henriette Reker Tuesday, German Chancellor Angela Merkel expressed outrage over the attacks, labeling them “disgusting” and calling for the culprits to be identified and punished as soon as possible, CNN affiliate ARD reported.

Cologne police Chief Wolfgang Albers said at a press conference Monday that the incidents were “intolerable,” describing them as “crimes of a totally new dimension.”

The episode raised questions about the viability of Cologne’s famous Carnival next month when hundreds of thousands are expected to join celebrations on city streets, he said.

A smaller number of similar assaults also were reported in the German city of Hamburg on New Year’s Eve, Hamburg police told CNN.

The women involved in the Cologne sexual attacks gave evidence of what occurred:

One of the Cologne victims said she was too scared to go out alone following the ordeal.

“The men surrounded us and started to grab our behinds and touch our crotches,” she said.

“They touched us everywhere. I wanted to take my friend and leave. I turned around and in that moment someone grabbed my bag.”

She said she feared she could be killed or raped by the attackers.

“Nobody noticed and nobody helped us. I just wanted to get out.”

Another victim said she had unsuccessfully tried to fight off her assailant.

“But there were so many people around me that there was no control. There was no way out. There was no way to protect yourself,” she said.

“We ran to the police. But we saw the police were so understaffed. They couldn’t take care of us and we as women suffered the price.”

Watch this UK Telegraph video of protests in Cologne against these sexual attacks and robberies of young women allegedly by Arab/North African young men:

(Video at the link — DM)

download (1)

 

Geert Wilders in Hague Parliament

In view of these attacks by  Arab attackers in several German cities lead by Cologne,  Geert Wilders and fellow PVV MP Sietse Fritsma,  presented the  Dutch Prime Minister and the Secretary of State for Security and Justice in the Hague parliament on January 5, 2016 the following questions:

1.) Are you aware of reports that on New Year’s Eve groups of mostly Arab men assaulted, robbed and raped dozens of young women in several German cities?

2.) Are you also aware also of the statements by female victims who said “They surrounded us and began to grope us? Their hands were everywhere. I had fingers in every bodily orifice”?

3.) Do you agree with Wolfgang Albers, the Cologne Police Chief that we are dealing here with “a whole new dimension of violence”? If not, why not?

4.)Do you agree with us that this new dimension of violence is the result of the import of migrants with a violent, Islamic culture that often regards women and young girls as inferior? If not, why not?

5.)Are you still of the opinion that the word testosterone bomb is a terrible word, as you told the first signatory of these questions during the parliamentary debate on September 17th last year, or do you now finally realize that allowing tens of thousands of Arab men in Netherlands jeopardizes the safety of our citizens?

6.)Do you remember the parliamentary debate on asylum seekers of October 14th, 2015, during which the first signatory of these questions read several reports of women who had been harassed by asylum seekers in the Netherlands? If so, why do you continue to endanger Dutch women by allowing the massive admission of asylum seekers?

7.) Do you realize that, if you continue to leave our borders wide open, it is only a matter of time before mass robberies and assaults such as those in Germany, will also happen on the same large scale in the Netherlands? Do you want to have this on your conscience or are you finally ready to close the Dutch borders to Islamic testosterone bombs?

In a Dutch newspaper, The Post, on-line article by Wilders, “Cologne Assaults May Soon Happen on Large Scale in Netherlands Too,” he wrote:

If we continue to allow asylum-seekers and immigrants from Islamic countries to settle in our country en masse, then what has happened on New Year’s Eve in Germany will soon happen on the same large scale in the Netherlands, too. The first signs are already there.

During the parliamentary debate on October 14, 2015, I quoted from emails of ordinary Dutch citizens suffering from the behavior of asylum seekers and immigrants. These mails referred to young girls being “immorally touched”, daughters being “harassed,” women who are told “I want to f___k you.”

The events in Cologne are the signs of a future which lies before us if the government and the majority of the parliamentarians refuse to face the truth.

Cologne is nearby. Our wives and daughters must be protected. The government needs to wake up. Mark Rutte must do his duty. Our borders must be closed. We must de-Islamize the Netherlands.

Today, Wilders issued a follow up letter to Dutch PM Rutte saying:

Dear Mr. Prime Minister,

Yesterday and today, I received hundreds of emails. Hundreds of emails full of fear and indignation. About the horrific events on New Year’s Eve in Cologne.

I have not heard you about those events. I find that very strange. After Paris last November, we now have Cologne. After the Islamic terror, the sexual jihad. But we do not hear you. Hello, Mr. Prime Minister? Are you still there?

What happened in Cologne is repulsive. Fear reigns in Germany, but also in the Netherlands. Don’t you notice it? Thousands of Dutch women worry about their safety. Thousands of Dutch men fear for the safety of their wives. And thousands of Dutch parents are afraid of what might happen to their daughters.

All these people realize that it will not be long before large group attacks on women will also take place in the Netherlands. Testosterone bombs I have called them, but it is far worse. This is sexual terrorism, this is sexual jihad.

On a smaller scale, it is already happening in the Netherlands today. Ever more women are being harassed. Yesterday, the media reported about a girl in the province of Zeeland which had been assaulted by an Arab man. For years already, there is a plague of assault rapes by non-Western men in Sweden and Norway. It is coming our way.

You do not like to hear this, Mr. Rutte. And that is undoubtedly the reason why you are so quiet now. But you are responsible for this situation. Because, despite all the warnings, you have opened our country’s borders to tens of thousands of people – mostly young men – from an Islamic culture.

I hope that your eyes will finally open and that you will close our borders at once and start to de-Islamize the Netherlands. So that our country may once again be the safe country the Dutch people are entitled to.

Geert Wilders

Geert Wilders MP is leader of the Party for Freedom (PVV) in the Netherlands

The plague of sexual assaults, robberies  and rapes  of young women by  Muslim migrant young men in Sweden has made it what some allege has become  the rape capital of Europe. Then we have the sexual grooming practices of young British girls by South Asia Muslim émigrés in the UK. With a million Muslim refugees and migrants who broke the borderless Schengen system, they are seeking more than sanctuary and possible economic employment, opportunities.  Rather it may result in establishing virtual no go areas emboldened by sexual terrorism ruled under Sharia Islamic law condoned by EU countries under the guise of myopic politically correct multi-culturalism policies. What they do not comprehend to their undoing is that the great wave of Muslim immigration is a furtherance of the Dar al Hijrah immigration strategy to spread Islamization to Europe and the West.  That is what concerns Wilders and others in the broken borders of the EU with thousands of refugees arriving daily from conflicts in the Muslim Ummah exemplified by the Jihad of the self-declared Caliphate, the Islamic State.

 

Examining Allegations Of Nuclear Ties Between North Korea & Iran

January 6, 2016

Examining Allegations Of Nuclear Ties Between North Korea & Iran, Fox News, January 6, 2016

(This video relates the claimed North Korean test of a miniaturised H-Bomb to previous joint Iran – North Korea nuke efforts. — DM)