Archive for February 7, 2017

The Trump-Trudeau Tryst

February 7, 2017

The Trump-Trudeau Tryst, Gatestone InstituteThomas Quiggin, February 7, 2017

It had been reported prior to 2015 that the Muslim Brotherhood and Jamaat-e-Islami front groups would use the Liberal Party of Canada as a vehicle for political entryism.

The article also noted the roles of ISNA Canada and ICNA Canada in these efforts. A number of Canadian Members of Parliament have Islamist connections, advocate for sharia law or, in the case of Cabinet Minister Maryam Monsef, states that “Sharia fascinates me :)”

President Trump may be meeting with Prime Minister Trudeau of Canada shortly. The two leaders worked across from each other on the world’s longest undefended border.

The January 29, 2017 shooting at a Quebec City mosque in which six people were killed may prove to be “interesting” as it plays on USA/Canada relations. There is emerging information to show that the mosque may have been targeted as a “Muslim Brotherhood mosque.” This includes a July 2016 article (i.e. seven months before the attack) by the Journal de Quebec which stated that a pamphlet had been circulated in the neighbourhood claiming it was a Muslim Brotherhood mosque. Three weeks prior to the pamphlet being distributed, a pig’s head had been left at the doorway of the mosque. Three incidents around one mosque suggests a pattern of activity and escalation by an individual or group that has grievances with the Muslim Brotherhood. It is not yet clear if terrorism charges will be laid in addition to charges of first degree murder.

South of here, a series of reports suggest that President Trump may use executive authority to list the Muslim Brotherhood and some of its front groups in the USA as terrorist entities. Senator Cruz (R-TX) has a bill in the US Congress that would have the effect of listing the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist entity along its front groups CAIR USA, ISNA and the North American Islamic Trust.

Trudeau and the Islamist Front Groups

Prior to the Canadian election of November 2015, it had been reported that the Muslim Brotherhood and Jamaat-e-Islami front groups would use the Liberal Party of Canada as a vehicle for political Entryism. The article also noted the roles of ISNA Canada and ICNA Canada in these efforts. A number of Canadian Members of Parliament have Islamist connections, advocate for sharia law or, in the case of Cabinet Minister Maryam Monsef states that “Sharia fascinates me 🙂

In December of 2015, Prime Minister Trudeau sent a video message to the “Reviving the Islamic Spirit” conference in which he stressed “our shared beliefs.” This, despite the fact the conference is sponsored by and has been attended by a virtual who-is-who list of Muslim Brotherhood front group members over several years. The same conference also featured Linda Sarsour who is currently leading a number of US demonstrations against President Trump and has ties to a variety of Islamist groups. Many members of her family have a long history with HAMAS – another Muslim Brotherhood spin-off organization. Prime Minister Trudeau had also appeared as a member of Parliament at the Reviving the Islamic Spirit Conference in 2012.

Member of Parliament Justin Trudeau also gave a speech at the ISNA mosque in Mississauga, albeit in 2013 before the ISNA had the charity status for its “Development Fund” revoked for funding terrorism. The ultimate destination of the funding was the south Asian based Jamaat-e-Islami , the same group noted above as being involved in the Liberal Party. The ISNA in turn has welcomed the election of Prime Minister Trudeau.

1998-1In 2016 Prime Minister Trudeau chose not to observe any official 9/11 memorial ceremony to honour the Canadians who died that day. However, the very next day, he attended the Ottawa Main Mosque which has multiple links to extremism. (Image source: Rebel.media screenshot)

Prime Minister Trudeau and his Public Safety minister also appeared to have stumbled into making claims about “hate crimes against mosques” when there is no evidence to suggest a hate crime actually occurred.

Canada and the USA – Terrorism and the Border

Cross border terrorism has a long and complex history between Canada and the USA. Terrorists from the USA (Jamaat al Fuqra) entered Canada in 1991 with the intent of killing some 5,000 people in an attack on a Hindu Temple and a theatre. Hezbollah has used Canada as a base of operations, including shipping dual-use technologies from Canada into the USA for transhipment to Lebanon, as well as smuggling, fund raising and immigration fraud. Then there was Ahmed Ressam in 1999. His intent was to depart Canada, enter the USA through Washington State and set off his car-bomb at LAX. Senators Senator Clinton and Senator McCain have made repeated statements that some of the 911 terrorists entered he USA though Canada, even after this story had been debunked numerous times.

Canada and the Cycle of Violence

The shooting at the Quebec mosque was the final one of three incidents which appears to show a pattern of escalation and a clear grievance against the Muslim Brotherhood. If this is the case, and the shooter did target the mosque for its Muslim Brotherhood connections, then this signals that a “cycle of violence” (attacks, revenge attacks, claims of victimization followed by more attacks) around Islamist extremism is indeed in Canada. This attack, of course, follows four previous Islamist violent incidents in Canada:

  • The terrorist murder of Warrant Office Vincent in 2014.
  • The attack on the National War Memorial and the Parliament with the killing of Corporal Cirillo, also in 2014.
  • The attack on the Canadian Forces Recruiting Centre in Toronto in 2016 and the attempted suicide bombing by Arron Driver, in which the bomb’s detonator and the RCMP killed him in a taxi near London Ontario in 2016.

Additionally, many Canadians, including a number of Muslim Student Association alumni have died overseas as suicide bombers, ISIS fighters or propagandists.

US Canada Relations

US/Canada relations may hit a bumpy patch, especially given that Canada continues to act as host for a variety of Muslim Brotherhood front groups while taking no visible political action against them.

Canada may hit a bumpy patch too.

Robert Spencer: Democrat Leaders Protest Trump’s Determination to Fight Jihad

February 7, 2017

Robert Spencer: Democrat Leaders Protest Trump’s Determination to Fight Jihad, Jihad Watch

Spurious moral equivalence employed in order to divert attention from the real threat. My latest at The Geller Report:

trump6

It was reported Friday that “a trio of House Democrats say President Trump is making a mistake pushing for counter-extremism efforts to focus only on radical Islam….Friday’s letter was signed Democratic Reps. Bennie Thompson (Md.), Eliot Engel (N.Y.) and John Conyers (Mich.).”

Thompson, Engel and Conyers wrote: “Such a move is wrongheaded insofar as persons who commit acts of violent extremism are inspired by diverse political, religious and philosophical beliefs, and are not limited to any single population or region.”

In reality, there have been over 30,000 murderous jihad terror attacks worldwide since 9/11. What other political, religious and philosophical beliefs have been responsible for any comparable number? A widely publicized study purporting to show that “right-wing extremists” have killed more people in the U.S. than Islamic jihadis, and thus pose a greater threat, has been debunked on many grounds.

These representatives also wrote: “Changing the name to ‘Countering Islamic Extremism’ or ‘Countering Radical Islamic Extremism’ would have damaging effects to our national security by feeding into the propaganda created by terrorist groups and child domestic and international diplomatic relations. Additionally, it could further alienate and create distrust with the Muslim-American communities when the program depends on close cooperation with law enforcement.”

Islamic jihadis routinely cite the texts and teachings of Islam to justify their actions and make recruits among peaceful Muslims. The idea that Muslims who reject jihad terror will be enraged if the U.S. government takes note of this is absurd. If they reject jihad terror, they won’t embrace it because officials are saying things they don’t like; in fact, if they really reject it, they should welcome and cooperate with efforts to identify its causes and eradicate them. These Congressmen are recommending that we curtail our speech to avoid criticizing Islam, which is a Sharia blasphemy provision that the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) has been trying to foist upon the U.S. by means of “hate speech” laws for years. That the statements of Thompson, Engel and Conyers are simply today’s conventional wisdom is one indication of how successful these efforts have been.

Critics of President Trump’s plan have complained: “The program, ‘Countering Violent Extremism,’ or CVE, would be changed to ‘Countering Islamic Extremism’ or ‘Countering Radical Islamic Extremism,’ the sources said, and would no longer target groups such as white supremacists who have also carried out bombings and shootings in the United States.”

Indeed, but the white supremacist threat has been wildly exaggerated by Soros-funded groups (which exaggerations have been pushed by Soros-funded media) that downplay and deny the jihad threat. Reuters’ equivalence here also ignores the fact that the jihad is an international movement set on destroying the U.S. and found on every continent; white supremacism is not.

What Trump is really doing here is reversing Obama’s bow to Muslim Brotherhood-linked groups in scrubbing counter-terror training materials of all mention of Islam and jihad. On October 19, 2011, Farhana Khera of Muslim Advocates delivered a letter to John Brennan, who was then the assistant to the president on National Security for Homeland Security and Counter Terrorism. The letter was signed by the leaders of virtually all significant Islamic groups in the United States: 57 Muslim, Arab, and South Asian organizations, many with ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, including the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA), the Muslim American Society (MAS), the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), Islamic Relief USA, and the Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC).

The letter denounced what it characterized as U.S. government agencies’ “use of biased, false and highly offensive training materials about Muslims and Islam.” Khera complained specifically about me, noting that my books could be found in “the FBI’s library at the FBI training academy in Quantico, Virginia”; that a reading list accompanying a slide presentation by the FBI’s Law Enforcement Communications Unit recommended my book The Truth About Muhammad; that in July 2010 I “presented a two-hour seminar on ‘the belief system of Islamic jihadists’ to the Joint Terrorism Task Force (JTTF) in Tidewater, Virginia”; and that I also “presented a similar lecture to the U.S. Attorney’s Anti-Terrorism Advisory Council, which is co-hosted by the FBI’s Norfolk Field Office.”

These were supposed to be terrible materials because I was supposedly bigoted and hateful. However, many of the examples Khera adduced of “bigoted and distorted materials” involved statements that were simply accurate. The only distortion was Khera’s representation of them.

For instance, Khera stated:

A 2006 FBI intelligence report stating that individuals who convert to Islam are on the path to becoming “Homegrown Islamic Extremists,” if they exhibit any of the following behavior:

“Wearing traditional Muslim attire”

“Growing facial hair”

“Frequent attendance at a mosque or a prayer group”

“Travel to a Muslim country”

“Increased activity in a pro-Muslim social group or political cause”

The FBI intelligence report Khera purported to be describing didn’t actually say that. Rather, it included these behaviors among a list of fourteen indicators that could “identify an individual going through the radicalization process.” Other indicators included:

“Travel without obvious source of funds”

“Suspicious purchases of bomb making paraphernalia or weapons”

“Large transfer of funds, from or to overseas”

“Formation of operational cells”

Khera had selectively quoted the list to give the impression that the FBI was teaching that devout observance of Islam led inevitably and in every case to “extremism.”

Despite the factual accuracy of the material about which they were complaining, the Muslim groups signing the letter demanded that the task force, among other actions:

“Purge all federal government training materials of biased materials.”

“Implement a mandatory re-training program for FBI agents, U.S. Army officers, and all federal, state and local law enforcement who have been subjected to biased training.”

They wished to ensure that all law enforcement officials ever learn about Islam and jihad would be what the signatories wanted them to learn — and Brennan was amenable to that. He took Khera’s complaints as his marching orders.

In a November 3, 2011, letter to Khera that — significantly — was written on White House stationery, Brennan accepted Khera’s criticisms without a murmur of protest and assured her of his readiness to comply. He detailed specific actions being undertaken, including “collecting all training materials that contain cultural or religious content, including information related to Islam or Muslims.” In reality, this material wouldn’t just be “collected”; it would be purged of anything that Farhana Khera and others like her found offensive. Honest, accurate discussion of how Islamic jihadists use Islamic teachings to justify violence would no longer be allowed.

The alacrity with which Brennan complied was unfortunate on many levels. Numerous books and presentations that gave a perfectly accurate view of Islam and jihad were purged. Brennan was complying with demands from quarters that could hardly be considered authentically moderate.

This Obama policy of the U.S. government ensured that numerous jihadists simply could not be identified as risks. The Obama administration was bound, as a matter of policy, to ignore what in saner times would be taken as warning signs. Now we can hope that Trump will reverse all that. Indeed, it is our only hope of defeating this scourge.

The Left and Islam: Brothers from Another Mother

February 7, 2017

The Left and Islam: Brothers from Another Mother, PJ MediaMichael Walsh, February 6, 2017

(Please see also, Toronto Muslim speaker: “We must celebrate our way of life…until their way of life dissipates under our feet”. — DM)

amishterror

“Bleak” and “dark” — according to the New York Times in an extraordinary piece of pro-Muslim agitprop the other day, this is the view of Islam held by President Trump and his top aides. And this, needless to say, is a very bad thing:

It was at a campaign rally in August that President Trump most fully unveiled the dark vision of an America under siege by “radical Islam” that is now radically reshaping the policies of the United States.

On a stage lined with American flags in Youngstown, Ohio, Mr. Trump, who months before had called for a “total and complete shutdown” of Muslim immigration, argued that the United States faced a threat on par with the greatest evils of the 20th century. The Islamic State was brutalizing the Middle East, and Muslim immigrants in the West were killing innocents at nightclubs, offices and churches, he said. Extreme measures were needed.

“The hateful ideology of radical Islam,” he told supporters, must not be “allowed to reside or spread within our own communities.”

Mr. Trump was echoing a strain of anti-Islamic theorizing familiar to anyone who has been immersed in security and counterterrorism debates over the last 20 years. He has embraced a deeply suspicious view of Islam that several of his aides have promoted, notably retired Lt. Gen. Michael T. Flynn, now his national security adviser, and Stephen K. Bannon, the president’s top strategist.

Please read the story at the link and parse it carefully, for this is how the mouthpieces of the Left masquerading as news organizations will henceforth attempt to take down the Trump administration, strangling the baby in its cradle if it can, but promising four years of biased, negative coverage. It’s all part of the “Resistance,” the movement to delegitimize the new president even before he has fully taken the reins of office.

This worldview borrows from the “clash of civilizations” thesis of the political scientist Samuel P. Huntington, and combines straightforward warnings about extremist violence with broad-brush critiques of Islam. It sometimes conflates terrorist groups like Al Qaeda and the Islamic State with largely nonviolent groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoots and, at times, with the 1.7 billion Muslims around the world. In its more extreme forms, this view promotes conspiracies about government infiltration and the danger that Shariah, the legal code of Islam, may take over in the United States.

Those espousing such views present Islam as an inherently hostile ideology whose adherents are enemies of Christianity and Judaism and seek to conquer nonbelievers either by violence or through a sort of stealthy brainwashing.

Islam’s inherent hostility toward the West seems to me utterly inarguable. From the time the Arab armies swept out of the desert, the adherents of the Religion of Peace have waged continual war upon Christendom, the formerly Christian middle east, Hindu India, Zoroastrian Persia, and Indonesia. To deny that is simply irresponsible.

Of course, Not All Muslims, etc. But that doesn’t matter. A good Muslim, as many good Muslims have pointed out, including Erdogan of Turkey, must believe in the triumph of Islam, forcible or otherwise; a good Christian must perforce resist. Hence the Left’s partially successful attempt to de-Christianize the West, and why a latter-day Restoration or Reconquista is so important. The West has done it before — with punishing victories over Islam Tours, Lepanto, Vienna, Omdurman — and it can do it again. All that’s needed is the will.

But the cultural sappers at the Times and elsewhere cannot have that, of course. And so they persist in framing the issue of Muslim “immigration” to America as some kind of civil-rights issue; they cannot be bothered in defending the very culture that gives them the liberty to do so. Since the attacks of 9/11, Muslim bylines have flourished in the America media, Muslim “charities” have been left largely alone, and creeping shariah has begun to spread from colonized England to the States.

And is where George W. Bush so signally failed his country, by going into the kind of defensive crouch that has given us vastly increased immigration from the ummah and the TSA here at home. Barack Obama, of course, only pushed the pedal to the metal even harder. That the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan continue to this day is to America’s everlasting shame.

Beyond the restrictions the order imposed on refugees and visitors from seven predominantly Muslim countries, it declared that the United States should keep out those with “hostile attitudes toward it and its founding principles” and “those who would place violent ideologies over American law,” clearly a reference to Shariah.

Rejected by most serious scholars of religion and shunned by Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama, this dark view of Islam has nonetheless flourished on the fringes of the American right since before the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. With Mr. Trump’s election, it has now moved to the center of American decision-making on security and law, alarming many Muslims.

Who cares what “most serious scholars of religion” think? The question of what to do about Islam is not primarily “religious” — in which case the liberals will use the Constitution as a sword, citing the text but not the meaning or the context of its proscription of religious tests for public office and pretending that applies to immigration — but historical and cultural. Islam, unchecked, destroys everything it touches — representational art, painting, music, libraries (“Boko Haram” translates as “Western education is forbidden”). Churches are demolished or, with the great cathedral of Sancta Sophia in Constantinople, turned into mosques. And all Western notions of secularism are eliminated in favor of an established “faith.”

This is what the new administration is fighting. That the Left now openly sides with our religious, political and cultural enemies is something with which every American must reckon.

“They’re tapping into the climate of fear and suspicion since 9/11,” said Asma Afsaruddin, a professor of Islamic studies at Indiana University and chairwoman of the Center for the Study of Islam and Democracy. “It’s a master narrative that pits the Muslim world against the West,” appealing to Trump supporters who know nothing of Muslims or Islam beyond news reports of terrorist attacks, she said.

Since 9/11, Americans have seen all they need to know of Islam. The great question of our time is what to do about it.

Trump vs. Globalists

February 7, 2017

Trump vs. Globalists, Front Page MagazineMichael Cutler, February 7, 2017

bjn

President Donald Trump has been confronted by unprecedented demonstrations not only in the United States but even in foreign countries.

President Trump’s support of Brexit and his promises to secure our border with Mexico and subject aliens seeking entry into the United States to “extreme vetting” runs contrary to the Globalists goals. Consequently they fired up the mobs even before Trump’s inauguration.

Globalists are behind the vilification of President Trump and anyone who supports effective immigration law enforcement. 

Globalists abhor the notion of national sovereignty and see secure borders as impediments to their wealth and consequently are doing everything possible to create Immigration Failure — By Design.

Globalists have support “Sanctuary Cities” ignoring the nexus between terrorism, enclaves and sanctuary cities.

For decades globalists and their “front groups” such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce have foisted their lies on Americans, through what I have come to refer to as the immigration con game.

News organizations have, all too often, become venues for the disbursement of propaganda.

Consider how the seven countries whose citizens are being temporary barred from entering the United States have been described in the media as “Muslim majority countries.”  Yet there is nothing in Trump’s executive orders that mention Islam but rather focus on how the list of  countries was compiled by the Obama administration because of their links to terrorism and the inability to vet citizens of those countries.

Obviously the Democrats have been publicly leading the charge to vilify President Trump.  Trump upset their plans to coronate Hillary and were stunned by her defeat.  In response Democrats tried every possible strategy to delegitimize the outcome of the election and, by extension, the Trump presidency.

However, it is impossible to ignore that many journalists and politicians have, marching lockstep with the globalists, accused Trump of not really being a Republican but of being a “Populist”

Populism has been defined as:

 support for the concerns of ordinary people: it is clear that your populism identifies with the folks on the bottom of the ladder | the Finance Minister performed a commendable balancing act, combining populism with prudence.

the quality of appealing to or being aimed at ordinary people: art museums did not gain bigger audiences through a new populism.

Those journalists and politicians, upset over the notion of a President of the United States being a “Populist,” must not have read the Declaration of Independence that begins with the phrase, “We the people…”

You have to wonder what the Founding Fathers and especially what Thomas Jefferson would say about all of this.

In order to block the implementation of Trump’s immigration policies crafted to protect national security and the lives of Americans, the Democratic Party went “Judge shopping” and came up with James Robart, a jurist who, the media has been quick to report, had been, in fact, appointed by President George W. Bush.

CNN provided a thumbnail sketch about James Robart: 5 things to know about judge who blocked travel ban that noted that Judge Robart sided with “Black Lives Matter” over the police in Seattle, Washington in a case last year, involving an allegation of excessive force by police.

The CNN report also noted that Judge Robert had also provided pro bono assistance to refugees.

My recent article on President Trump’s Immigration Challenge  noted that the President not only has to undo the catastrophic damage done to immigration law enforcement by the Obama administration but also deal with the very structure of the Department of Homeland Security, the agency created by the Bush administration in the wake of the terror attacks of September 11, 2001 to address vulnerabilities in the immigration system identified by the 9/11 Commission.

My article noted that I testified at a hearing on May 5, 2005 conducted by the House Subcommittee on Immigration, Border Security and Claims conducted a hearing on the topic, “New ‘Dual Mission’ Of The Immigration Enforcement Agencies.”

Of particular interest is the statement made by the then-chairman of that subcommittee, Rep. John Hostettler who, in part said in his prepared statement:

The Homeland Security Act, enacted in November 2002, split the former Immigration and Naturalization Service, or INS, into separate immigration service and enforcement agencies, both within the Department of Homeland Security. This split had been pursued by Chairman Sensenbrenner based on testimony and evidence that the dual missions of INS had resulted in poor performance.

Separating the former INS into two separate agencies to separate the immigration benefits program from the law enforcement elements of the former INS was a strategy I had strongly advocated in my testimony for the 9/11 Commission and during my discussions with members of the Congress as well as in my testimony at several hearings.  However, when the DHS was created, the immigration enforcement components of the DHS were split up and combined with other, non-immigration law enforcement agencies, thereby severely hobbling efforts at immigration law enforcement.

Consider this additional excerpt from Chairman Hostettler’s testimony:

At no time during the reorganization planning was it anticipated by the Committee that an immigration enforcement agency would share its role with other enforcement functions, such as enforcement of our customs laws. This simply results in the creation of dual or multiple missions that the act sought to avoid in the first place.

Failure to adhere to the statutory framework established by HSA has produced immigration enforcement incoherence that undermines the immigration enforcement mission central to DHS, and undermines the security of our Nation’s borders and citizens.

It is impossible to believe that this was done by accident.  Clearly the Bush administration opposed securing our borders and effectively enforcing our immigration laws.

Today Democrats such as Chuck Schumer have seized every opportunity to bash Donald Trump over his immigration policies.  Of course, during the Obama administration it was Schumer who called for a suspension of the admission of Syrian refugees because of concerns that it was impossible to vet these aliens, a concern raised by no less an authority than John Brennan, the Director of the CIA who had been appointed by Obama.

As the Washington website, The Hill, reported on November 17, 2015, Schumer: Refugee pause may be necessary.

What a difference a year (and and administration) can make!  You have to wonder if Schumer’s own words back then, bring tears to his eyes today.

However, now that President Trump is giving Schumer what he asked for in 2015, pausing the admission of refugees who cannot be vetted, to protect Americans lives and national security, Schumer has taken to shamelessly bashing the President.

On January 27, 2017 CBS reported, Sen. Menendez Slams Border Wall, Trump’s Other Immigration Plans that included this excerpt:

Menendez called the Mexican border wall a “wall of hate.” He said further that Trump’s plan to fund it violates national agreements, and will ultimately cost American jobs.

“So this is one of the worst ideas I’ve heard in the incipiency of a new administration that only creates a major diplomatic and trade challenge with one of the most significant front door neighbors that we have in the western hemisphere,” Menendez said.

Menendez’s statements are nonsensical.  The purpose of the wall is to prevent the entry of criminals, terrorists and illegal aliens who displace American and lawful immigrant workers by evading the inspections process at ports of entry.

The purpose of the wall is to prevent the flood of narcotics into the United States.  Indeed, as Menendez made that statement, El Chapo” was being held in a jail in lower Manhattan.  Perhaps Menendez should read the January 20, 2017 press release“Joaquin “El Chapo” Guzman Loera Faces Charges in New York for Leading a Continuing Criminal Enterprise and other Drug-Related Charges” and check out the links it contains to the Detention Memo and the Indictment

Furthermore, the wall that President Trump is determined to build would not block access to our ports of entry along the U.S./Mexican border, just make certain that all movements across that violent border take place at those ports of entry and not between those ports of entry.

The only commerce that would be blocked by that wall would involve the influx of massive quantities of drugs and illegal aliens including criminals and terrorists.

However, Menendez is a Democrat.  It is clear where the Democrats stand on all of these issues.

The question that has to be raised, however, is why Republicans such as Lindsay Graham and John McCain would stand should to shoulder with Menendez and Schumer on virtually every single issue where immigration and border security are concerned.

The answer is not difficult to find- they were all members of the “Gang of Eight” or, as I prefer to refer to them, “The Eight Gangsters.”

If the Republican Party is to continue to meet the rational and reasonable demands of the citizens of the United States and maintain its majority in both the Senate and House of Representatives, it will need to purge the globalists from their ranks, who have far more in common with today’s Democrats than with the goals of the Trump administration and “We the people.”

The Globalists are betraying America and Americans.

This is not about “Left” or “Right” but about right or wrong.

Israel’s inaction in Syria may open Golan to Iran

February 7, 2017

Israel’s inaction in Syria may open Golan to Iran, DEBKAfile, February 6, 2017

jordanisraelsyria480en

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has given “diplomatic priority” to stressing the perils posed by Iranian-sponsored terrorism and its nuclear-capable ballistic weapons, and placed them at the top of his talks with British premier Theresa May in London Monday, Feb. 6, and with President Donald Trump in Washington on Feb. 15.

But it stands to reason that their national security and intelligence experts have advised the US president and the British premier that Netanyahu has been firmly advised up to the present day to stay clear of military involvement in the Syrian conflict by the IDF high command and his past and present defense ministers, Avigdor Lieberman and Moshe Ya’alon.

Israel therefore stands to be excluded from the practical deliberations ongoing for Syria’s future. Jordan in contrast has stepped forward as the key Middle East player in the pacts and military understandings shaping up between the US, Russia and Turkey for throwing Iran out of Syria.

Jordan’s King Abdullah swallowed his pride and took the initiative of flying to Washington last Thursday, Feb. 2, to buttonhole President Trump. From their brief conversation, he became the first Middle East ruler to win a green light from the US for an air strike against the ISIS ally, the Khalid Ibn al-Walid Army, which occupies the triangle formed by the Syrian, Jordanian and Israeli borders. Israel has never attacked this force in the five years since it moved into that part of southern Syria.

DEBKAfile”s military and intelligence sources disclose that Abdullah informed Trump that the air strike would take place under the supervision of the US, Russian and Syrian commands, making it the first instance of US-Russian support for a Middle East army’s action against ISIS in Syria.

And so, on Saturday, Feb. 4, six Royal Jordanian Air Force F-15 fighters and five drones bombed seven Khalid Ibn al-Walid positions. This air strike most probably heralded more bombardments to come. Jordanian commando units are also likely to mount raids, in concert with the Syrian rebel militias they have trained, to seize the ground occupied by ISIS’ offshoot.

And on the diplomatic front, the US President authorized Jordan’s attendance at the Syrian peace talks that are ongoing under Russian sponsorship at the Kazakh capital of Astana. The Jordanian delegation was deputized to act on America’s behalf to monitor the process for determining the future of Syria.

This move came a week after the British prime minister was urged by Trump to fly straight to Ankara after their talks in Washington in search of a military collaboration deal for Syria between the UK and Turkey.

The onset of Jordan’s military action in Syria has pumped up to seven the number of foreign armies involved in that country’s conflict: Russia, Iranian Revolutionary Guards, pro-Iranian Shiite militias from Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan, the Lebanese Hizballah, US forces, the Turkish Army and now Jordan.

Synchronously with the Jordanian air strike in southern Syria, President Bashar Assad announced that its launch makes it possible for Syrian civilians who fled from the Islamists to start returning to their homes, starting with the Quneitra region of the Syrian Golan. He was talking about 30,000 refugees.

It is obvious to anyone familiar with the Syrian scene that this population shift is an open invitation for thousands of Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps members and Hizballah terrorists to take the opportunity of stealing into the Golan, in the guise of returning refugees.

Israel, aside from providing an intelligence service on Syria to coalition forces, finds itself left out of any say in the currently evolving peace process. While ISIS may be rooted out of this border area at some point, the Netanyahu government’s military inaction risks exposing the Golan to another attempted incursion by Iranian and Hizballah forces by covert means.

The diplomatic prioritization of the Iranian threat, coupled with talks with US president Trump and deals with Russian President Putin, amount to a policy that has gone bankrupt for Netanyahu and his security chiefs. The powers who will determine what happens next in Syria are bound by military cooperation and action. Because Netanyahu’s rhetoric about the perils posed by Iran is not backed by military action, Israel has no influence on coming events, and faces the very real risk of being faced with an Iranian presence on its northern doorstep.

Sunni States’ Military Spending Sprees Could Fall to Radical Islamists

February 7, 2017

Sunni States’ Military Spending Sprees Could Fall to Radical Islamists, Investigative Project on Terrorism, Yaakov Lappin, February 7, 2017

1965

Faced with an array of developing threats to their stability and survival, Sunni Arab states have gone on an unprecedented military spending spree, buying up some of the very best capabilities the West has to offer. This development holds the potential for danger should these states be overrun by radical Islamists.

As long as the Sunni governments, guided by concerns over Iran, ISIS and other extremist actors, remain firmly in power, possessing high quality Western weapons in such large quantities will serve their goals of defending themselves.

But should the Sunni countries disintegrate into failed states, or undergo an Islamist revolution – an unfortunate yet distinct possibility in the 21st century, chaotic Middle East – Israel and the West could face an explosively dangerous development.

An organized Islamist rise to power would see the military forces of such states come under the command of belligerent decision makers. Alternatively, a failed state scenario would mean that military bases in these countries could be looted, and deadly platforms taken over.

Either way, the scenario of jihadists seizing game-changing military capabilities is real enough for Israel to acknowledge that it is planning ahead for it as a necessary precaution.

Outgoing Israel Air Force Commander Maj.-Gen. Amir Eshel spoke explicitly of this danger on Jan. 24 at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv.

His air force must know how to act as a precise surgeon, Eshel said, able to conduct pinpoint strikes based on fine intelligence. But it also must be able to operate like a “big hammer” able to deal with large-scale threats. In the tumultuous Middle East, he said, it seems unreasonable to believe that the current situation will remain as it is. “In five, 10, or 15 years, states can fall,” he warned.

Eshel was referring to pragmatic Sunni states that, like Israel, are deeply threatened by Iran’s expanding radical Shi’ite axis, and by Salafi jihadist Sunni groups that are bent on destroying all countries that do not fit their vision of an extremist caliphate.

“Even if we have shared regional interests [with these Sunni countries now], we do not know what will happen in the future. Western military sales to these countries have reached $200 billion. This is state of the art weaponry. It is not just about the quantity,” Eshel said. It is the Air Force’s responsibility to assume that “something will collapse.”

Most of the Arab countries’ spending spree has gone into their air forces and surface-to-air missiles. The Israel Air Force must ensure it can deal with these capabilities, he added, in the event of future jihadist revolutions.

In the same week that Eshel spoke, the U.S. State Department announced the first weapons sales to Gulf states under the Trump administration, pending approval by Congress.

The sales reportedly include $400 million worth of helicopter gunship parts and air-to-air missiles to Kuwait, and $525 million for intelligence balloons to Saudi Arabia. ISIS has already built and deployed its own armed drones, according to reports, and if its goal of seizing control of state assets were realized, it could try to use some of the means on the battlefield.

Gulf Arab countries continue to break records in their rush to purchase military hardware. As part of its bid to deter Iran and boost its ability to hit the Islamic Republic’s capital, Tehran, Saudi Arabia modernized its missile arsenal in recent years, purchasing Chinese medium-range surface-to-surface missiles from China, in a deal reportedly facilitated by the CIA.

More recently, the Saudis, who are leading a coalition against Iran-backed Houthi Shi’ite rebels in Yemen, spent $179.1 billion on weapons in 2016, and intend to spend $190 billion in 2017.

Saudi Arabia in recent years has replaced Russia as the third largest defense spender in the world. Salafi jihadists would like nothing more than to topple the Saudi royal court, which they see as a Western puppet, and take control of Islam’s holiest sites, Mecca and Medina.

Last September, the U.S. approved $7 billion worth of fighter jets (F-15s and F-18s) to Kuwait and Qatar, and more than $1 billion in F-16 sales to Bahrain.

Egypt, too, has joined the shopping rush, becoming the world’s fourth largest defense importer in 2016, buying up arms from the U.S. and France, as well as submarines from Germany.

Egypt, which is in a state of deep civil conflict with the Muslim Brotherhood, is also fighting a stubborn ISIS jihadist insurgency in its Sinai province. ISIS’ terror campaign has claimed many lives among Egyptian security forces, and threatens to spread to other areas of the country.

After the fall and disintegration of Syria, Iraq, Libya, Yemen, the idea that the Middle Eastern map will remain unaltered in the coming years is far from certain.

Had Israel, according to international media reports, not bombed Syria’s nuclear weapons production facility in Deir Al-Zor in 2007, the area, now filled with ISIS, could have seen nuclear weapons fall into the hands of genocidal jihadists.

Should Sunni states begin their own nuclear programs in response to Iran’s own future nuclear efforts, the danger of atomic bombs falling into Islamist hands would increase.

There is no alternative but to plan for such contingencies in the current unpredictable regional environment, where today’s rational states could be replaced by sinister forces tomorrow.

Toronto Muslim speaker: “We must celebrate our way of life…until their way of life dissipates under our feet”

February 7, 2017

Toronto Muslim speaker: “We must celebrate our way of life…until their way of life dissipates under our feet”, Jihad Watch

Canada’s Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act forbids child marriage, polygamy, and forced marriage. It is being widely derided now as “anti-Muslim,” probably by the same people who last week were telling us that such practices had nothing whatsoever to do with Islam. It has even been blamed for the Harper government’s defeat. It will probably soon be a relic of history, and immigrants can stream into Canada and practice child marriage, forced marriage, and polygamy to their heart’s content. Here again we see that to the Left, all cultures must be defended and preserved except Western Judeo-Christian ones.

Meanwhile, this Syed Hussan is openly preaching sedition. But that is apparently just fine these days as long as you’re on the Left.

Note his open Sharia supremacism and call for the conquest of Canada: “We must celebrate our way of life, what they called barbaric cultural practices on our streets and in our homes until their way of life dissipates under our feet.”

“Toronto Protest: ‘Celebrate our barbaric cultural practices’, become ‘enemies’ of liberalism,” by Jonathan D. Halevi, CIJ News, February 6, 2017:

Thousands gathered on Saturday, February 4, 2017 in front of the American Consulate in Toronto to protest the policy of US President Donald Trump. The demonstration was organized by Black Lives Matter – Toronto (BLM TO) – the self proclaimed “coalition of Black Torontonians resisting anti-Black racism, state-sponsored violence and police brutality” – that has launched a nation-wide campaign entitled “National Days of Action Against Islamophobia & Deportations.”

One of the speakers at the rally was Syed Hussan, who represented the organization No One Is Illegal-Toronto and is affiliated with Toronto Community Mobilization Network and Migrant Workers Alliance for Change.

In his speech, Syed Hussan portrayed white supremacy, capitalism and liberalism as the enemy describing Donald Trump and Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as the two sides of the same coin….

The following is the transcript of Syed Hussan’s speech:

I want you to repeat these names with me Mamadou [Tanou Barry], Abdelkrim [Hassane], Khaled [Belkacemi], Aboubaker [Thabti], Azzeddine [Soufiane], Ibrahima [Barry] shot, killed, murdered, executed, massacred while praying, for praying, never forget. Lives extinguished, families torn apart, children made fatherless, a river of tears.

A river of tears by the gun shots of a single man [Alexandre Bissonnette] or so we are told. An act of hate someone has to believe.

But this act, this attack, this shooting was no act of hate. It is a strategic act, and intentional act, a thoughtful act.

Mamadou [Tanou Barry], Abdelkrim Hassane] and Khaled [Belkacemi] were killed because they were seen as enemies. Aboubaker [Thabti], Azzeddine [Soufiane], Ibrahima [Barry] were killed not by a lone wolf, but because they were threats.

You see, we, you and I, pushed out by borders, beaten down by police and impoverished in our communities. We are threats. We are fundamental challenge to our system of oppressiveness, this destructive way of life that cherishes the few over the many.

This way for life is what killed them. It gauges on oil to spread its evil wings. And to steal this oil it must declare us, it must declare the places we come from with oil, anti of humanity. It must turn us into enemies.

This way of life is Islamophobia. It’s Capitalism. This way of life brings perpetual war, enraging war from Mosul (Iraq) to Mogadishu (Somalia), from the Chiapas (Mexico) to Chernobyl (Ukraine), from Aleppo (Syria) to Algeria.

For as long as there has been history, black, brown, we’re the others. It is on our deaths that this system, this way of life, dances. And this way of life is what killed those six men.

This way of life needs borders. It needs to divide some of us into citizens and the rest of us into undocumented, migraines, others.

It needs to steal Indigenous children, destroy language, disappear women. We are made into enemies, disposable, locked up in prisons, forced to do endangered labour, in forms of factories. Pushed of our lands, recorded, weighed and measured for our skin.

This murderous way of life is white supremacy. This way pf life needs to be taken care off, its children fed, its food cooked, its homes kept warm and for that it must have gender, women. Women that are made to serve but watch closely. This way life is patriarchy.

And this way of life, the one that killed our six loved ones, needs armed forces whose work is death. And it needs bureaucrats, it needs administrators to sustain it. It needs courthouses like this one [The Toronto Courthouse]. And it needs a public, a public that is you and I to uphold these laws, enforcing them in the smallest of ways as teachers that check ID cards, as nurses that check health cards.

This kind way of life is liberalism. And this way of life comes in all colours. It comes in the red, the blue and the orange of your political parties. It comes in many flavors. It comes in a caustic bile of [US President Donald] Trump and it comes in the saturated sweetness of [Justin] Trudeau, who defends Muslims, but will arm the [Saudi] bombing of Yemen, who defends Muslims, but will scrap to the likes of Barrick Gold [mining company] and will not clean the five decade long of mercury poisoning in Grassy [Narrows Reserve in Ontario]….

We must break down the borders that keep out migrants and refugees. We must tear down the prisons and the detention centers.

We will seize the farms and the factories. We must become the enemies, so that in this city everyone can live with food, shelter, dignity.

We must become the enemies that sow terror in their hearts so that laws like C-51 shredded away.

We must celebrate our way of life, what they called barbaric cultural practices on our streets and in our homes until their way of life dissipates under our feet.

Let us become enemies. Let us organize. Let us win. We cannot wait. Freedom is calling. This is what these demands, that demand of us, let us be enemies.