Archive for June 2, 2016

« WarSclerotic home page

Europe Braces for More Jihadist Attacks

June 2, 2016

Europe Braces for More Jihadist Attacks, Gatestone Institute, Soeren Kern, June 2, 2016

♦ Sports stadiums and big music events are especially vulnerable: “This is where you put a small town into a small area for a couple of hours.” — Neil Basu, deputy assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, London.

♦  “We know that the Islamic State has the European Championship in its sights.” — Hans-Georg Maaßen, head of Germany’s domestic intelligence agency.

♦  According to Patrick Calvar, head of the France’s domestic intelligence agency, at least 645 French nationals or residents, including 245 women, are currently with the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. Another 200 individuals are “in transit,” either on their way to Syria or returning to France. Around 244 jihadists have already returned to France.

♦British police chiefs are struggling to recruit enough officers who are willing to carry a firearm, because many fear they will be treated as criminal suspects if they use their weapon in the line of duty.

European security officials are bracing for potential jihadist attacks at public venues across Europe this summer.

In France, officials are preparing for possible attacks against the European Football Championships. The games, which start on June 10, comprise 51 matches involving 24 teams playing in 10 host cities across the country.

Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve said that more than 90,000 security personnel will be on hand to protect the 2.5 million spectators expected to attend the games, as well as the hundreds of thousands more who will watch the matches on big screens in so-called “fan zones” in major cities.

Patrick Calvar, the head of the France’s domestic intelligence agency (Direction générale de la sécurité intérieure, DGSI), warned: “We know that the Islamic State is planning new attacks in France.” He added:

“We risk being confronted with a new form of attack: a terrorist campaign characterized by placing explosive devices in places where large crowds are gathered, and repeating this type of action to create a climate of panic.”

According to Calvar, at least 645 French nationals or residents, including 245 women, are currently with the Islamic State (ISIS) in Syria and Iraq. Another 200 individuals are “in transit,” either on their way to the Middle East or returning to France. Around 244 jihadists have already returned to France, and another 818 people have “demonstrated their intention to go to Syria.”

1636The Stade de France, located in a Paris suburb, was attacked by three Islamic State suicide bombers in November 2015. The stadium will be hosting games during the UEFA Euro 2016 football championships (June 10 – July 10, 2016), and French officials are preparing for possible jihadist attacks. (Image source: Wikimedia Commons/Liondartois)

Calvar’s concerns have been echoed by Hans-Georg Maaßen, the head of Germany’s domestic intelligence agency (Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz, BfV). In an interview with Rheinische Post, Maaßen said: “We know that the Islamic State has the European Championship in its sights.”

On May 29, British media quoted Belgian security sources as saying they had discovered an Islamic State plot to attack British football fans in the southern French city of Marseille when England plays Russia on June 11. The plans were reportedly discovered on a laptop used by Salah Abdeslam, a Belgian-born French national of Moroccan descent who is thought to be the mastermind of the November 2015 terrorist attacks on Paris which left 130 dead.

The laptop is said to have contained information about a plot to kill large numbers of British fans using assault rifles, suicide bombers and possibly even drones armed with chemical weapons. The laptop contained photos and references to Marseille’s historic Old Port, where tens of thousands of football fans are expected to gather at the many bars and restaurants in the area.

Meanwhile, French Interior Minister Bernard Cazeneuve also announced that more than 23,000 police will be deployed to protect the Tour de France, the world’s premier bicycle race, which takes place from July 2 to 24.

Teams of special operations forces (Groupe d’intervention de la Gendarmerie Nationale, GIGN) will guard riders and an estimated 12 million spectators along a route that covers 3,500 kilometers (2,180 miles). “Everyone understands that this year the Tour de France is taking place in a particular context,” Cazeneuve said. He added: “The terrorist threat remains very high.”

In Poland, officials are preparing for possible jihadist attacks against the Catholic Church’s World Youth Day, which is expected to draw 2.5 million to Krakow from July 26 to 31. Poland will impose border controls at all of its national borders from July 4 to August 2.

In Britain, music festivals, big sports venues and nightclubs have been placed on “high alert” for potential jihadist attacks, according to a senior anti-terrorism officer interviewed by the Sunday Times.

Neil Basu, the deputy assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, said that crowded places — including Glastonbury, billed as the world’s largest music festival, which will draw 135,000 people to Somerset from June 22 to 26 — are a major concern for police this summer. Basu warned:

“These people are perfectly happy to target civilians with the maximum terror impact. Crowded places were always a concern for us, but now they are right at the top of the agenda.”

Basu said that sports stadiums and big music events are especially vulnerable: “This is where you put a small town into a small area for a couple of hours.”

Police in rural communities in Britain that host large summer festivals are warning that they could be “sitting ducks” in the face of a jihadist attack as they wait for armed backup to arrive from many miles away.

In an interview with the BBC, John Apter, the head of the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Police Federation, said:

“Being realistic, if a firearms unit was coming from the middle of the county you are still talking about 30 miles away — you are not talking about a few minutes. There would be an understandable delay. If a firearms unit is the other side of the county they could be 70 miles away so you are talking a significant distance. So the only officers that you have available are unarmed and vulnerable officers and they are the officers that are saying to me that in a terrorist situation they would be sitting ducks.”

Most police in Britain are unarmed. According to Deputy Chief Constable Simon Chesterman, the UK’s top firearms officer, British police chiefs are struggling to recruit enough officers who are willing to carry a firearm, because many fear they will be treated as criminal suspects if they use their weapon in the line of duty.

Senior British security officials estimate that the UK needs an extra 1,500 armed officers to tackle jihadist attacks such as those carried out in Paris. Because half of the recruits will not make it through the rigorous training, however, 3,000 volunteers are needed to come forward.

Che Donald of the Police Federation — which represents the 5,647 officers throughout Britain who currently carry firearms — told the Guardian that while major cities such as London are sufficiently protected, other large towns and cities are not: “Currently there are not enough firearms officers who could deal with an incident in quite a lot of areas of Britain.”

In Brussels, Manuel Navarrete Paniagua, the head of the European Counter Terrorism Centre at the European police agency Europol, warned Members of the European Parliament that terrorist cells in Europe are stockpiling weapons and explosives for future attacks:

“We have some information reported by the member states that terrorists groups are trying to establish large clandestine stockpiles of explosives in the European Union to be used eventually in large scale home attacks.”

Paniagua added that police had foiled more than 200 terrorist attacks in the EU in 2015. A total of 151 people were killed and more than 360 injured during terrorist attacks in the EU in 2015. More than 1,000 people were arrested for terrorist-related crimes.

In an interview with Time magazine, Europol director Rob Wainwright revealed that “several hundred” battle-trained European jihadists are probably plotting new attacks. He said that his agency is working on 50 ongoing terrorist investigations:

“This is the highest terrorist threat we have faced in Europe since the days of 9/11. We have 5,000 Europeans who have been radicalized by the Islamic State and have traveled to Syria and Iraq and engaged in conflict experience. We suspect that about one-third of them have come back: That is our best guess. We don’t know for sure…

“Our real concern is that there are other networks, either in Europe already, or who are being trained in Syria for further action. We know that the Islamic State last year took a strategic decision to establish an external operations command, a division to plan exactly the kind of attacks we have now seen. We think that they are still active and planning to do that. The threat is alive and current. Another attempted attack is almost certain. Whether it gets through depends of course. I am concerned about the Islamic State’s clearly expressed desire for the spectacular.”

On May 31, the U.S. State Department issued a travel alert for Europe this summer:

“We are alerting U.S. citizens to the risk of potential terrorist attacks throughout Europe, targeting major events, tourist sites, restaurants, commercial centers and transportation. The large number of tourists visiting Europe in the summer months will present greater targets for terrorists planning attacks in public locations, especially at large events.”

The travel alert urges vigilance when in public places or using mass transportation, and avoiding crowded places.

Categories: Europe, Guns, Islamic integration, Islamic invasion, Islamic State, Islamic terrorism, Islamisation
Tags: , , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

John Kerry, The Islamic Republic’s New Lobbyist

June 2, 2016

John Kerry, The Islamic Republic’s New Lobbyist, Front Page Magazine, Ari Lieberman, June 2, 2016

(Please see also, Is Obama’s Iran Deal a ‘Dhimmi’ Contract? — DM)

john_kerry_senator_from_ma-2 (2)

Iran, the nation that has built a well-deserved reputation as the world’s premier state-sponsor of terrorism has a new lobbyist and he is none other than U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry. Since the Obama administration inked the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action in January, Kerry has been busying himself with ensuring that European banks start doing business with the Iranians. Yes, you read that correctly. Not only has the United States and its European allies agreed to lift sanctions against the Islamic Republic, the administration is now encouraging the private banking sector to do the same. It appears however, that their intense lobbying efforts are being received with a healthy dose of skepticism.

HSBC’s chief legal officer, Stuart Levey confirmed that Kerry had requested that HSBC start opening its banking doors to the Iranians and transact business with them. Levey criticized Kerry’s misguided initiative noting that the U.S. still maintains other non-nuclear related sanctions against the Islamic Republic and that doing business with Iran runs the risk of running afoul of those sanctions. HSBC has had prior negative experience with the U.S. Treasury and Justice departments. In 2012, the bank was forced to fork over $1.9 billion to U.S. authorities to settle allegations involving money laundering for Mexican drug barons.

Levey also noted that the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, which controls large swaths of the Iranian economy, has been slapped with sanctions by both the U.S. and Europe because of the central role it plays in illicit regional and international activities. Doing business with Iran will almost certainly result in facilitating IRGC operations. Adding to the uncertainty, Iran has over the years developed a penchant for hiding money, engaging in shady deals and money laundering thus making it difficult, if not impossible for banking institutions to engage the Iranians in legitimate business transactions without being complicit in their illegal dealings.

Kerry has assured the banks that they have nothing to fear if they perform their due diligence but banking representatives have expressed other legitimate concerns. Iran is one of the most corrupt nations on the planet and ranks poorly in the categories of transparency and ease of doing business. Banking institutions and large businesses are naturally reluctant to deal with such an opaque entity.

Practical matters and banking concerns aside, it is disturbing to witness the zeal in which Kerry is conducting his lobbying campaign on behalf of an enemy country whose national pastime involves chants of “Death to America” and “Down, Down U.S.A.” Even more disturbing is the fact that despite signing the JCPOA, Iran continues to act in defiance of United Nations Security Council resolution 2231 which calls on Iran to cease all research and testing activities relating to its ballistic missile program.

Since the conclusion of the Iran deal, the Islamic Republic has test-fired eight ballistic missiles. The Iranians boasted that some of their missiles were capable of reaching targets 1,200 miles away. Israel is only 1,000 miles away from Iran placing it well within the target radius. Emblazoned on the side of at least one test-fired missile was an ominous threat; “Israel must be wiped out from the face of the earth.”

The Iranians are continuously attempting to increase the range and accuracy of their ballistic missiles. Iran’s illicit ballistic missile program has only one aim, to deliver weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). That apocalyptic prospect does not seem to worry Kerry who seems more interested in propping up the Islamic Republic rather than ensuring that it lives up to its international obligations and stops behaving like a pariah state. Indeed, in an effort to prevent derailment of the JCPOA, the administration asked the Iranians not to publicize their launches. Iran’s illicit ballistic missile program doesn’t seem to bother the Obama administration so long as the Iranians keep their activities below the radar.

Iran’s nefarious undertakings extend far beyond its illicit ballistic missile program. The IRGC, the group that runs Iran in partnership with the ayatollahs, represents the life-blood of Hezbollah. Both Hezbollah and the IRGC are engaged in a full-fledged operation to destabilize the region. From Syria to Yemen, Iranian and Hezbollah operatives are fomenting chaos and bloodshed with the aim of establishing a Shiite arc extending from Iran through Syria and Lebanon as well as securing control of two of the region’s most important chokepoints, the Strait of Hormuz and the Bab-el-Mandeb Strait.

Hezbollah’s main source of funding comes from Iran, which trains, arms and pays the salaries of its operatives. Its other sources, though minor in comparison to Iranian assistance, include drug trafficking and extortion. Last week, Adam Szubin, the acting Treasury undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence, noted that Hezbollah was “in its worst financial shape in decades.” It’s hard to take that near-comical boast seriously in light of the $150 billion cash infusion the Obama administration injected into the anemic Iranian economy. It’s hard to imagine that Iran will spend any of that money on improving the quality of life of its citizens and promoting human rights. Iran will almost certainly channel a large portion of those funds to its proxy stooges in Syria, Lebanon, Iraq, Yemen and elsewhere.

Kerry’s lobbying efforts on behalf of Iran in connection with the banking industry will make Iran’s ability to transfer funds to these terrorist groups less difficult. The lengths to which the Obama administration will go to indulge the Iranians is beyond shocking, it’s frightening. But we should expect no more from an administration that expressed gratitude to the Islamic Republic after its naval pirates kidnapped and humiliated 10 American sailors when their craft encountered mechanical difficulties in the Arabian Gulf. Sadly, the Obama administration continues to lose the trust of its allies, while emboldening its enemies and has given new meaning to the term appeasement.

Categories: Foreign policy, Iran - human rights, Iran - sanctions relief, Iran scam, Iranian missiles, Iranian proxies, IRGC, Kerry, Middle East, Obama and Iran
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 3 Comments

“Build the wall” Trump plans July trip to Israel

June 2, 2016

“Build the wall” Trump plans July trip to Israel, DEBKAfile, June 1, 2016

TrumpInIsrael480

Donald Trump, presumptive US president nominee, plans to visit Israel a few days before his Republican party convention opens in Cleveland July 18,  DEBKAfiles sources in Washington and Jerusalem report. But still under discussion are the exact dates of the visit, the Israeli public figures he will meet and the sites he will visit.

The timing of the trip is planned for Trump to reach the convention hall in Cleveland directly from Israel, while issuing statements of support for the Jewish state along the way. Just as importantly he will guarantee to terminate the secret military cooperation deal between the US and Iran if he is elected President, while warning Iran against going forward with the development of its nuclear and ballistic missile programs.

The visit and its schedule are being worked out by the candidate’s legal officer for his business and his advisor on Israeli affairs, Jason Dov Greenblatt, who is an Orthodox Jew from New Jersey, and Ron Dermer, Israel’s ambassador in Washington.

Trump has evidently changed his mind since December 2015, when he announced: “I have decided to postpone my trip to Israel and to schedule my meeting with Netanyahu at a later date after I become President of the US.”
At the time, there were 16 Republicans running for president and very few Israeli intelligence experts imagined the candidate would last long enough to challenge Hillary Clinton.

Had the Trump visit taken place seven months ago, it would have consisted of not much more than a photo-op of shaking hands with Netanyahu. The visit at this stage will have a more practical import.

One of Trump’s important objectives would be to demonstrate the feasibility of the wall he is hard-selling between the US and Mexico, to curb the flow of illegal migrants to the US. He hopes to point to the 240km fence Israel erected along its border with Egypt as a good example for one of his key campaign slogans to build the wall. It is a fact that the Sinai barrier staunched the flow of  potentially millions of migrants into Egypt and through there to Israel. The wall built in the year 2015, has proved massive enough to act as a barrier against ISIS intrusions from Egyptian Sinai.

A visit to the southern fence will be essential to Trump’s visit, along with explanations from IDF high ranking officers and a photo shoot with soldiers from the Karakal battalion who are defending the fence. There will also be a visit to the northern security fence along the border with Syria and Lebanon.

These tours will give Trump an opportunity to speak about his support to Israel, and will also allow him to criticize President’s Obama’s policy and that of Hillary Clinton regarding what goes on beyond that fence, in the wars in Syria and in Iraq against ISIS.

Trump will also be able to speak against Washington’s support for the Iranian forces taking part in these wars  and denigrate the covert US and Iranian military cooperation. He is aware that one of Obama’s last goals before leaving office  is to push the US-Iranian detente as one of his main achievements.

Indeed, after his visits to Kobe and Hiroshima in Japan, Obama is preparing to travel to Tehran or any other venue, to stage a meeting with Iran’s president Hassan Rouhani. DEBKAfile‘s Iranian sources report that the White House has already sent feelers to this end. During Trump’s upcoming visit to the fence along Israel’s northern border, he will declare his intentions to block such moves when he enters the White House.

Categories: 2016 elections, Donald Trump and Israel, Israel borders, Israel's southern border wall, Trump and Iran
Tags: , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

On the Iran Deal, Lies Upon Lies

June 2, 2016

On the Iran Deal, Lies Upon Lies, Power Line, Paul Mirengoff, June 2, 2016

(Here’s a video of a portion of a State Department press conference during which the Department spokesperson tries to wiggle out of explaining what happened, why, how, by whom it was ordered and how often that sort of deception occurs.

— DM)

The State Department acknowledged today that an archived video of a December 2, 2013 press briefing was intentionally edited to remove a portion of a conversation about the Iran nuclear talks. Previously, the Department had tried to blame the removal on a “glitch.”

The deleted segment of the briefing featured Fox News reporter James Rosen asking then-State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki whether the Obama administration had lied about having secret talks with Iran in 2011. Psaki essentially admitted that it had.

Rosen inquired, “Is it the policy of the State Department, where the preservation or the secrecy of secret negotiations is concerned, to lie in order to achieve that goal?” Psaki responded, “James, I think there are times where diplomacy needs privacy in order to progress. This is a good example of that.”

The start date of the Iran nuclear negotiations is back in the spotlight because of a New York Times Magazine piece in which Ben Rhodes admitted that the Obama administration “largely manufactured” a narrative for the Iran deal in order to garner support for it. A key element of the manufactured narrative was that negotiations began in 2013 with the election of a “moderate” Iranian president.

It looks like the State Department tried, by editing the video, to cover up the administration’s lie about when Iran negotiations commenced (together with the admission that it is willing to lie), and then lied again by claiming that the cover up was the product of a glitch.

The State Department now says the edit was the result of a request made three years ago. It was just under three years ago that the “moderate” was elected, thus laying the basis for Obama’s claim that negotiations with Iran should proceed. At that point, or a bit earlier when it looked like a “moderate” might win, it would be important for Team Obama to scrub what in effect was an admission that negotiations were already under way long before election.

Who requested the scrubbing? The State Department claims not to know. It says that officials “tried” to determine who ordered the edit, “but it was three years ago and the individual who took the call [to edit the tape] just simply doesn’t have a better memory of it.”

Jen Psaki, who made the admission that needed to be deleted, is an obvious suspect. She denies responsibility.

Will the State Department launch an investigation? No, it will not. Current spokesperson John Kirby says:

There were no rules governing this sort of action in the past, so I find no reason to press forward with a more formal or deeper investigation. What matters to me — and I take it seriously — is our commitment to transparency and disclosure.

The Obama State Department just can’t stop lying.

Categories: Department of State, Iran scam, Lies
Tags: , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

What is happening in Jordan?

June 2, 2016

What is happening in Jordan? Israel Hayom, Mudar Zahran, June 2, 2016

Days ago, King Abdullah II‎ of Jordan dissolved the parliament and appointed a new prime minister.

This came ‎weeks after the king amended the constitution to expand his already swollen authority as the sole ‎ruler, and has launched a wave of speculation in the Western and Israeli media. The media are puzzled and rather clueless about what exactly is happening in my country, Jordan. Some, including respected publications, jumped to the convenient conclusion ‎that the king has “appointed a pro-Israel prime minister” and even that “Israel has a new friend ‎in the Middle East, Jordan’s prime minister.” These statements by ‎themselves are irrelevant to the status quo and the situation in Jordan is much more critical and ‎dire than anyone in the Israeli media realizes.‎

In November 2015, U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said ‎Jordan’s future was “not clear” and that Palestinians and Israelis needed to know what will ‎happen in Jordan and “whether Jordan will remain stable” before they resume the peace process. Clinton’s tenure as U.S. secretary of state saw anti-regime protests in Jordan, particularly the November 2012 revolution, ‎when a million Jordanians took to the streets demanding that the Hashemite royals leave the ‎country. She knows more about the reality in Jordan from firsthand experience than any other U.S. presidential candidate.

While Clinton’s statements cannot be taken as prophecies from the Torah or the Quran, the facts on the ‎ground do support her concerns for Jordan. As these lines are being written, unrest continues in the ‎Wadi Mousa-Petra area, including gun battles between the king’s police and the locals, arrests, the ‎destruction of vehicles and other property, stone throwing, and rumors of casualties on both sides. In ‎short, there is an intifada at one of Jordan’s most significant tourist sites.

Days ago, King Abdullah II‎ of Jordan dissolved the parliament and appointed a new prime minister.

This came ‎weeks after the king amended the constitution to expand his already swollen authority as the sole ‎ruler, and has launched a wave of speculation in the Western and Israeli media. The media are puzzled and rather clueless about what exactly is happening in my country, Jordan. Some, including respected publications, jumped to the convenient conclusion ‎that the king has “appointed a pro-Israel prime minister” and even that “Israel has a new friend ‎in the Middle East, Jordan’s prime minister.” These statements by ‎themselves are irrelevant to the status quo and the situation in Jordan is much more critical and ‎dire than anyone in the Israeli media realizes.‎

In November 2015, U.S. presidential candidate Hillary Clinton said ‎Jordan’s future was “not clear” and that Palestinians and Israelis needed to know what will ‎happen in Jordan and “whether Jordan will remain stable” before they resume the peace process. Clinton’s tenure as U.S. secretary of state saw anti-regime protests in Jordan, particularly the November 2012 revolution, ‎when a million Jordanians took to the streets demanding that the Hashemite royals leave the ‎country. She knows more about the reality in Jordan from firsthand experience than any other U.S. presidential candidate.

While Clinton’s statements cannot be taken as prophecies from the Torah or the Quran, the facts on the ‎ground do support her concerns for Jordan. As these lines are being written, unrest continues in the ‎Wadi Mousa-Petra area, including gun battles between the king’s police and the locals, arrests, the ‎destruction of vehicles and other property, stone throwing, and rumors of casualties on both sides. In ‎short, there is an intifada at one of Jordan’s most significant tourist sites.

In addition, anti-regime ‎protests take place every Friday, yards away from the king’s palace. Those protests are not ‎continuous, but they are a regular occurrence and likely to grow. Protests against Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak began in the same ‎way in 2004, and 10,000 protests later, a one-strike revolution toppled him in ‎‎2011, the same year that the current protests in Jordan began.‎

Jordan’s debt-to-GDP ratio is above 90%. Greece’s economy collapsed when it hit ‎the same rate, and the Jordanian regime is not getting the help from Arab states that Greece got from the European Union. Nevertheless, the Jordanian royal family spends beyond belief and is not shy about showing off its opulent lifestyle to its starving subjects.‎

Less than a month ago, Jordan’s king visited our Saudi brothers and came back speaking ‎about billions of Saudi riyals “on the way.” None of this has yet materialized. While these ‎things do take time, Saudi King Salman‎ announced a $25 billion aid package to the el-Sissi regime half an hour ‎after the king’s arrival in Egypt in April. ‎

There are also no signs or news of aid money coming from the ‎Gulf states. Our Arab brothers are wise; they won’t give their money to an ailing regime.‎

On the other hand, the king has been fragile for years now, and many — myself included — have ‎predicted his fall, yet he remains on the throne in Amman. So why should anyone worry that ‎the king might fall now?

In fact, the situation has completely changed.‎

Today, Jordan’s army is independent of the king, and so is Jordan’s intelligence service. Both are tightly coordinated with the U.S. Central Command. When the Islamic State group became a real threat to Jordan, ‎the U.S. must have realized it could no longer tolerate the king’s recklessness, inexperienced ‎handling of security, and mismanagement of Jordan’s military operations and funds. Thus, the ‎U.S. supported separating the army and intelligence apparatus from the king’s influence. This happened trough tight and direct cooperation between the Jordanian and U.S. militaries, and between Jordanian and U.S. intelligence agencies, particularly the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency.‎

This new arrangement might explain the record-smooth cooperation between Jordan and Israel on ‎security, which is described in the Israeli media as “unprecedented.” Yes, it is unprecedented, ‎because the king no longer has any influence over the army or intelligence service.‎

Further, the U.S. has announced it is about to finish building a massive security wall separating ‎Jordan from Syria and extending along the Iraqi borders. This little-publicized wall will be fully ‎operational in August, according to its contractor, Raytheon, at a cost of over $500 million. At the same time, Israel is quickly and publicly building a $1 billion wall ‎along its border with Jordan.‎

These measures, taken by the U.S. and Jordanian armies, suggest that both are expecting major change in ‎Jordan. The outcome should be safe; Islamic State cannot take over Jordan with thousands of American soldiers stationed ‎in several major U.S. bases across Jordan. ‎

Meanwhile, Jordan’s king sees firsthand signs that his angry, hungry, and hopeless ‎people could actually topple him, and with him having no control over the army now, the king ‎could face a situation like that of Egypt’s 2011 revolution, which was supported by the ‎Egyptian army.‎

Afraid and helpless, Jordan’s regime has turned to the oldest trick in the book: beating the Israeli ‎drum. The regime knows that if a new intifada breaks out in Israel, this ‎could buy it more time in power; the world would be too busy to let it go and Jordan’s ‎public would be distracted by anti-Israel hatred once again. This might explain why an official Israeli ‎statement on Sept. 21, 2015, confirmed that “Jordan was a major contributor to Temple ‎Mount tension” and accused Jordan’s government of exacerbating tensions in Jerusalem with ‎inciting statements and actions.‎

In November 2014, I published an article in which I warned that Jordan’s regime was ‎planning to set the West Bank and Jerusalem on fire in order to stay in power. Also, a month ‎before the “knife intifada” broke ut, I noted several times on social media that Jordan’s ‎regime was going to launch unrest in Jerusalem itself.‎

Change is coming to Jordan. It could be tomorrow morning or in five years, but the ‎Hashemites already have a one-way ticket out, and it seems they are now purposely ‎causing damage to Jordanian, alestinian, American and Israeli interests. ‎

It is about time the few pro-Hashemite hopeless romantics wake up and smell the strong ‎Jordanian coffee already brewing in Amman.‎

As far as the Israeli government is concerned, it has been clear from the beginning: The Israelis ‎will not be involved in the Arab Spring or its aftermath, and will keep good ties with Jordan’s ‎regime, military and intelligence agencies, without any involvement in Jordan’s internal politics. As ‎Jordan’s opposition, we highly appreciate Israel’s stance and fully understand it.‎

As we expect change in Jordan, we must work hard to make sure Jordan remains committed ‎to peace while it becomes economically prosperous and gives hope to all its citizens.‎

Mudar Zahran is secretary-general of the Jordanian Opposition Coalition. Twitter ‎@mudar_zahran.

Categories: Islamic State, Israel, Israel and Jordan, Israel borders, Jordan, U.S. Military
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Cartoon of the Day

June 2, 2016

H/t Joopklepzeiker

Sweedish

Categories: Humor, Immigration
Tags: ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

An Immigration Reality Check for Former Telemundo Chief Nely Galan

June 2, 2016

An Immigration Reality Check for Former Telemundo Chief Nely Galan, Front Page Magazine, Michael Cutler, June 2, 2016

Galan

On Tuesday, May 31, 2016 Fox & Friends conducted an interview with the former president of Telemundo, Nely Galan, and posted a video of that segment with the title, “What can Donald Trump do to win back Hispanic voters? Former president of Telemundo Nely Galan weighs in on the race for the White House, talks new book ‘Self Made’.”

I have decided to address Nely Galan’s five-minute segment on Fox & Friends and the statements she made because, although she is not a particularly significant person, the themes of the claims she made have also been made by far too many other people and have been broadcast frequently on news programs for years without being properly challenged.

Furthermore, while it took Donald Trump to move immigration to center stage for this presidential election, immigration has been the most significant issue confronting our nation and our citizens for decades because of how it impacts virtually every challenge and threat we face, from national security, public safety and public health to the economy, unemployment, healthcare, education and the environment.

Today we will examine the position that Ms. Galan took on the issue of immigration and how this issue, she claims, adversely impacts the candidacy of Donald Trump.

To begin with, let’s consider what transpired during the segment.

Galan said that immigrants make up half of all entrepreneurs in the United States and dismissed the statement by Brian Kilmeade that Donald Trump’s problem is illegal immigrants not legal immigrants.  She responded by saying that this is like saying, “I like this minority but not that minority.”

Pete Hegseth, one of the co-hosts of the program, then asked if it was not a fair and important distinction to differentiate between legal immigrants and illegal immigrants.  Galan said it was not fair and adamantly rejected the use of the term “illegal immigrant,” saying, “We don’t like that word, ‘illegal immigrant.’” She never defined who “we” referred to and insisted that aliens who enter the United States without being lawfully admitted are simply “undocumented.”

To Ms. Galan, illegal immigration is obviously an insignificant issue and anyone who makes such a distinction between aliens who are legally present from those who are illegally present are apparently bigots.

If she truly believes that there should be no distinction between aliens who enter the United States legally with those who enter illegally, then why should our country spend nearly 14 billion dollars annually on Customs and Border Protection?  I addressed this question in my recent article,  “Immigration Law Enforcement: Why Bother?”

When she was pressed to articulate how she came to her conclusions, Galan dismissed any questions by saying that she is not a political pundit.  This raises what should be an obvious question: having conceded that she lacks the knowledge to discuss this issue, why did she take a strong position on immigration, an issue that has a profound impact on America, Americans and the political campaigns of the candidates for the presidency of the United States?

While on the topic of contradictory statements made by Nely Galan, let’s also remember that she also said it was not right to talk about people “en mass” ignoring her own all-encompassing statements.

At the beginning of her segment, she made the wacky assertion that “immigrants are more American than anybody.”  How in the world can an illegal alien be “American” let alone “more American” than anybody?

Galan also made additional unsupported claims about people (en mass) claiming that immigrants comprise half of all entrepreneurs in America, that Latinos are very conservative people and that Latina Women “are the number one emerging market in the world – in the U.S.”

No one on the set at Fox & Friends called her out for her absurd, hypocritical assertions.

Let’s begin by considering the term “alien.”  It is not a pejorative and certainly not the equivalent of the “N word.”  The term alien is defined in the Immigration and Nationality Act as simply being “[a]ny person, not a citizen or national of the United States.”  There is absolutely no insult in that definition, only clarity.

The Immigration and Nationality Act (INA) is the all-encompassing body of laws that governs the entry of aliens into the United States and states the conditions under which they may remain in the United States, the activities that they may or may not engage in and under what circumstances they may be granted immigrant status or even United States citizenship.  The laws also prescribe under what circumstances aliens may be ordered to be removed (deported) from the United States.

It is an absurdity to claim that an alien who enters the United States by evading the inspections process at one of America’s 328 ports of entry is “undocumented.”   Such an alien is, at the very least, a trespasser and under the jargon of immigration enforcement personnel, has entered the United States without inspection.  In fact, when I was an INS agent, we described such individuals as EWI (Entrants Without Inspection).

The inspections process conducted at ports of entry are mandated by law and are conducted to attempt to prevent the entry of aliens whose presence in the United States would be problematic.  When aliens evade the inspections process and then remain in the United States, they pose a threat to national security and public safety.  At a minimum, they also pose a problem for tens of millions of unemployed and underemployed Americans and lawful immigrants who are displaced by these illegal workers or face wage suppression as a consequence of the flood of foreign workers, as a function of the fundamental principle of “supply and demand.”

This impact is most profoundly felt in America’s minority and ethnic immigrant communities.

From a criminal standpoint, aliens who evade the inspections process at ports of entry know that they belong to one or more categories of excludible aliens. These grounds for exclusion can be found in Title 8 U.S. Code § 1182 – Inadmissible aliens, and includes aliens with dangerous communicable diseases, who suffer extreme mental illness and are prone to violence or are sex offenders, criminals, fugitives from justice, are gang members, spies, or terrorists.  Additionally, aliens who would likely become a public charge or are likely to seek unlawful employment are also excludible.

Consider this excerpt from Chapter 12 of the 9/11 Commission Report:

Before 9/11, no agency of the U.S. government systematically analyzed terrorists’ travel strategies. Had they done so, they could have discovered the ways in which the terrorist predecessors to al Qaeda had been systematically but detectably exploiting weaknesses in our border security since the early 1990s.

…We also found that had the immigration system set a higher bar for determining whether individuals are who or what they claim to be-and ensuring routine consequences for violations-it could potentially have excluded, removed, or come into further contact with several hijackers who did not appear to meet the terms for admitting short-term visitors.33

Our investigation showed that two systemic weaknesses came together in our border system’s inability to contribute to an effective defense against the 9/11 attacks: a lack of well-developed counterterrorism measures as a part of border security and an immigration system not able to deliver on its basic commitments, much less support counterterrorism. 

Aliens are illegally present if they enter without inspection or conceal a material ground for exclusion when they enter the United States through the inspections process.  As is noted in the laws, an alien who would be excludible at entry is deportable (subject to removal) any time thereafter.  An alien commits fraud by using a false name at entry or lies about his/her criminal history or connection to criminal or terrorist organizations.  Think about the Nazi war criminals who managed to hide in the United States for decades until they were finally discovered.

Aliens may also become subject to removal (deportation) if they violate the terms of their temporary (nonimmigrant) admissions into the United States, for example, by remaining in the United States beyond their authorized period of admission, failing to attend a school for which they were admitted to attend, accepting illegal employment or failing to work on the job for which they were granted a specific work visa.

Lawful immigrants may be subject to removal (deportation) when they commit certain serious crimes.  (This issue of committing serious crimes also applies to the removal of nonimmigrant aliens as well.)

While on the topic of aliens who commit crimes, my recent article, “President Obama: Accessory to the Crimes Committed By Illegal Aliens?” was predicated on the April 19, 2016 hearing conducted by the House Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security on the topic, “The Real Victims of a Reckless and Lawless Immigration Policy: Families and Survivors Speak Out on the Real Cost of This Administration’s Policies.”

Our immigration laws and our borders constitute our first and last line of defense against those who would enter our country to commit crimes and/or carry out terror attacks.

Here is the question I would love to ask Nely Galan and those who share her views: “How ‘American’ is anyone who would strip away our defenses in this particularly perilous era?”

Categories: Donald Trump, Illegal immigration, Immigration
Tags: , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Turkey recalls Ambassador from Germany after Armenian genocide recognition

June 2, 2016

Turkey recalls Ambassador from Germany after Armenian genocide recognition The German Parliament recognized officially the Armenian massacres as genocide and this created a political tsunami. Turkey has now announced that they are recalling their ambassador from Berlin for consultations.

Jun 2, 2016, 4:09PM

Rachel Avraham

Source: Turkey recalls Ambassador from Germany after Armenian genocide recognition | JerusalemOnline

Archives Photo Credit: Reuters/Channel 2 News

Shortly after Germany decided to recognize the Armenian massacres as genocide and caused much anger in Turkey, the Turkish government instructed to recall their ambassador from Berlin in order to hold consultations.

“The one who is responsible for the decision is the racist Armenian lobby in Germany,” Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim stated. The Turkish Foreign Minister also stated that the German decision is “irresponsible and baseless.”

On the other hand, German Chancellor Angela Merkel stated that relations between Germany and Turkey are strong and good, stressing that there has been no change regarding German policy towards Turkey.

Earlier today, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan warned German Chancellor Angela Merkel that the decision will have consequences, even if it is a symbolic decision. Ankara is opposed to various governments around the world classifying the Armenian massacres during World War II as genocide. A Turkish government spokesman stated that the German decision was a “historic mistake.”

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Dave Horowitz talks about #NeverTrump

June 2, 2016

Dave Horowitz talks about #NeverTrump via YouTube, May 30, 2016

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D3xNl8kWbhQ

Categories: Conservative intellectuals, Democrats, Donald Trump, Never Trumpers
Tags: , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Quietly, Liberal Muslims Are Defining Islam for Themselves

June 2, 2016

Quietly, Liberal Muslims Are Defining Islam for Themselves, Clarion Project, Elliot Friedland, June 2, 2016

Inclusive-Mosque-Prayer-640 Mosque Initiative service. (Photo: Supplied)

Women leading the service? Musical interludes? Not quite what you would expect from a traditional mosque service.

But the Inclusive Mosque Initiative (IMI) is not your typical mosque. All of this and more was found in the IMI service in Bern, Switzerland last week, the first such service in Switzerland.

The Inclusive Mosque Initiative Project  started in the UK and is an umbrella organization with chapters around the world, including Switzerland and Kashmir.

Dr. Elham Manea got to know them when she was in the UK to give a lecture and lead a prayer. Non-denominational, egalitarian, welcoming to the LGBT+ community, the Inclusive Mosque Initiative is trying to build an environment of inclusive Islam

The vision of the IMI is to establish a place of worship where everyone is welcome.

Jasmina Elsonbati and Elham Manea are co-chairs of the IMI in Switzerland and organized the service.

It was held on Friday, May 27, in the Dialogue Section of the House of Religions in Bern, which has religious establishments belonging to different faith communities housed together under one roof. Manea first spoke with the imam of the mosque to make sure he realized the initiative was not trying to cause him any disrespect, and that it was separate private event.

It was conducted by a team and followed the traditional order of a service.

Jasmina Elsonbati introduced the whole concept in opening remarks.

Elham Manea gave the khutbah (sermon, full text here). The sermon spoke about women’s rights and having women as imams.

Halima Gosai Hussain (IMI UK Chair) led the Friday Prayer.

Tamisla Tauqir held the iqamah, aadhan and dua (different parts of the prayer service).

All of these roles are normally done by men.

Nehad El Sayed joined with his Aud and music.

Music can be a potent spiritual tool, and what Manea calls the “Arabization of Islam” has pushed it out of many mosques and other religious environments. She also noted that men and women used to pray together in mosques in the 1970s in Bern (although in separate areas), but that this Arabization process has increased gender segregation. The music was performed during the traditional break in the sermon.

Helene Aecherli took the pictures.

The Inclusive Mosque Initiative is one among a few similar organizations. There is one in South Africa, run by an openly gay imam. In North America, Universalist Muslims in Canada and Muslims for Progressive Values cater to the needs of Muslims who don’t feel represented or welcomed in traditional Islamic spaces.

Manea was keen to point out that the IMI was not opposed to Muslims who want to worship in a more traditional setting. The project is fundamentally about choice. Those who wish to worship in a gender-segregated setting should be free to do so, just as the IMI provides a space for those who wish to worship in a mixed-gender environment.

Since the pictures and the Khutbah were posted to Facebook, Manea said she has received a lot of hate mail. Most of it was because a woman was leading the prayers and some of the women were not wearing a hijab. Others objected to the music.

But there were also a lot of messages of support. The pictures were shared over 300 times, and Manea received messages including, “I would love to pray in such a mosque.”

Organizations like this one show that liberal Muslims are not going to wait for a fatwa from Al-Azhar to legitimize their faith. They are going out there and defining their religion for themselves, in defiance of extremists who want to control them.

Categories: Islamic reformation
Tags:

Comments: 2 Comments