President Barack Obama resolved earlier this month, much to the surprise of Washington insiders, to open a third anti-terror front in Libya to eradicate the Islamic Front’s tightening grip on the country.
This top-secret decision was first revealed by DEBKA Weekly 692 on Jan. 1.
While collaborating with Russia in the Syrian arena, and with the Iranians and the Iraqi army and Sunnis in Iraq, Obama took his close aides by surprise by another decision – to lead the Libya campaign again in conjunction with Russia, as well as with concerned Western Europe allies.
The first step in this campaign took place this weekend: A group of US, Russian, French and Italian Special Forces quietly landed at a point south of Tobruk near the Libyan-Egyptian frontier. Standing by after preparing the ground were some 1,000 British SAS troops.
The landing area is located some 144 kilometers from Darnah, the main bastion of extremist Libyan Islamic groups linked to Al Qaeda or ISIS, of which the ultra-violent Ansar al Sharia is the most powerful.
The joint US-Russian war offensive building up in Libya, the first such collaboration in many decades, may be seen as an extension of their expanding military partnership in Syria, DEBKAfile’s military sources report.
Preparations for the campaign were assigned to two special operational commands set up at the Pentagon and at the US Central Command, CENTCOM, in Tampa, Florida.
According to the scenario sketched in advance by DEBKA Weekly, large-scale US air, naval and ground units are to spearhead the new coalition’s combined assault on the main Libyan redoubts of ISIS, Al Qaeda, Ansar al-Sharia and other radical Islamist organizations. Cruise missiles strikes will blast them from US, British, French and Italian warships on the Mediterranean.
At the peak of the assault, large-scale US, British and French marines will land on shore for an operation first billed as the largest allied war landing since the 1952 Korean War. The attachment of Russian forces was negotiated later.
According to this scenario, one group will be dropped ashore from the Gulf of Sidra (see attached map) to seize the town of Sirte, a city of 50,000, where ISIS has located its central military command center in Libya.
This group will then split up into two task forces.
One will head south to take over Tripoli and its oil fields 370 kilometers away and reinstate Libya’s central government, which had been exiled to Tobruk, at its seat in the capital.
On its way to Tripoli, the force will take control of three renegade towns: Misrata, Zliten and Khoms.
The second task force will head north to capture the eastern Libyan capital of Benghazi, seizing Ras Lanuf, 200 kilometers east of Sirte, en route. A second marine force will meanwhile land in eastern Libya to capture the radical Islamist stronghold of Darnah, a port city with 150,000 inhabitants.
The Obama administration will therefore be going into Libya for the second time in four years – only this time up front and on the ground – for three objectives:
1. Control of Libya’s oil and gas fields.
2. Stripping ISIS of its jumping-off base for terrorizing Europe, especially Italy, from across the Mediterranean.
3. Saving Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco from the noose ISIS and Al Qaeda are pulling around them from their back yard.
The scenario was first published in DEBKA Weekly 692 (for subscribers) on Jan. 1, 2016
Israeli and Palestinian security officers are exploring the possible formation of a new Palestinian militia to take charge of enforcing law and order in the Arab districts of Jerusalem and halting the anti-Israel terrorist attacks emanating from those districts.
DEBKAfile’s intelligence sources disclose that the dialogue is led by senior Israeli Shin Bet and police officials and the Palestinian General Intelligence (Mukhabarat) chief Maj. Gen. Majid Faraj.
Our sources cannot confirm that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu or other top officials, such as Public Security Minister Gilead Erdan, are fully in the picture, but it will certainly have been brought to their notice.
Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas is kept up to date.
Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas is kept up to date.
The plan was first broached in top Israeli police circles, who first asked the Shin Bet and IDF if they had any objections to the creation of a special local Palestinian force or militia, whose members would serve under the orders of the Israeli Police, with a status similar to that of Jerusalem Arab permanent residents, who serve in the local police force.
The new militia would undertake responsibility for maintaining order and security in the Palestinian districts of East Jerusalem, and a commitment to prevent the continuation of terror attacks from the districts under their authority.
This plan gained rapid momentum in recent days over concerns on both sides over the rapidity with which the Islamic Sate was gaining adherents in Palestinian communities.
IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gady Eisenkott disclosed this week that an estimated 14-16 percent of Palestinians support ISIS – the highest proportion in the Arab world, where the average is no more than 5-6 percent.
In a little-noticed incident on Dec. 3, 2015, a Palestinian General Intelligence officer called Mazen Aribe, 37, suddenly turned his official rifle on Israeli soldiers. After he injured two, their comrades shot him dead.
Investigators of the incident later confirmed that it bore the hallmarks of an ISIS attack.
Aribe, who happened to be the nephew of the senior Palestinian peace negotiator Saeb Erekat, was a highly respected intelligence officer and a loyal supporter of his boss, the a/m Maj. Gen. Faraj. His sudden turn to violence against Israeli troops set off alarm bells in the Palestinian intelligence services as well as the Shin Bet and Israeli police.
The progress of the talks for establishing the new force, since named the “Palestinian Popular Police for East Jerusalem,” can be measured by Israel’s consent to extend “a measure of autonomy” for certain administrative municipal appointments for its areas of control, provided their work is fully coordinated with Israeli government and municipal authorities.
The discussions cover the Palestinian-populated districts of North Jerusalem – Shoafat, Hizme and Beit Hanina – and the two big refugee camps at Shoafat and Anata. Many of the recent terrorist attacks against Israelis were perpetrated in the last four months by dwellers of these sections of Jerusalem.
The Old City and the Palestinian villages of Issawiya, A-Tur and Jabal Mukabar have not been covered in the bilateral security discussions.
Gen. Faraj is the live wire promoting the initiative. He is motivated most of all by the opportunity for his agency to gain a foothold in East Jerusalem. For decades, Israel has consistently blocked Palestinian attempts to establish their ruling bodies in its capital.
While the two negotiating parties formally agree to the new militia coming under Israel’s security services, its da-to-day operations will effectively be subject to Faraj’s intelligence agency.
In recent interviews, Faraj has made a point of stressing that cooperation between Israel’s army and Shin Bet and Palestinian security forces remains solid and must continue, notwithstanding the current wave of Palestinian terror.
He also claims that his officers have thwarted 200 terrorist attacks and their detention of 100 would-be terrorists with large arms caches, had foiled several more.
Faraj is clearly doing his utmost to bring to Israel’s attention the efficacy of the forces under his command and, by the same token, how valuable the new militia would be as a security, anti-terror asset for the city.
DEBKAfile’s counterterrorism sources note that the realization of the new Palestinian Police Force project – if it does get the green light in Jerusalem – would crown the four-month Palestinian knife intifada with a huge achievement, which has long proved elusive – the Palestinians would plant their first security footholds in the Arab neighborhoods of Israel’s capital. This would no doubt also provoke a flaming controversy on Israel’s political scene.
Jihadi hate for non-Muslims is not limited to the Islamic State, which U.S. leadership dismisses as neither a real state nor representative of Islam. Rather, it’s the official position of, among others, Saudi Arabia — a very real state, birthplace of Islam, and, of course, “friend and ally” of America.
Saudi Arabia’s Permanent Committee for Islamic Research and Issuing Fatwas — which issues religious decrees that become law — issued a fatwa, or decree, titled, “Duty to Hate Jews, Polytheists, and Other Infidels.” Written by Sheikh Abd al-Aziz ibn Baz (d. 1999), former grand mufti and highest religious authority in the government, it still appears on the website.
According to this governmentally-supported fatwa, Muslims — that is, the entire Saudi citizenry — must “oppose and hate whomever Allah commands us to oppose and hate, including the Jews, the Christians, and other mushrikin [non-Muslims], until they believe in Allah alone and abide by his laws, which he sent down to his Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings upon him.”
To prove this, Baz quotes a number of Koran verses that form the doctrine of Loyalty and Enmity — the same doctrine every Sunni jihadi organization evokes to the point of concluding that Muslim men must hate their Christian or Jewish wives(though they may enjoy them sexually).
These Koran verses include: “Do not take the Jews and the Christians for your friends and allies” (5:51) and “You shall find none who believe in Allah and the Last Day on friendly terms with those who oppose Allah and His Messenger [i.e., non-Muslims] — even if they be their fathers, their sons, their brothers, or their nearest kindred” (58:22; see also 3:28, 60:4, 2:120).
After quoting the verses, Baz reiterates:
Such verses are many and offer clear proofs concerning the obligation to despise infidels from the Jews, Christians, and all other non-Muslims, as well as the obligation to oppose them until they believe in Allah alone.
Despite documenting its official hatred for all non-Muslims (albeit on a website virtually unknown in the West), in the international arena, Saudi Arabia claims “to support the principles of justice, humanity, promotion of values and the principles of tolerance in the world,” and sometimes accuses the West for its supposed “discrimination based on religion.”
Such hypocrisy is manifest everywhere and explains how the Saudi government’s official policy can be to hate Christians and Jews — children are taught to ritually curse them in grade school — while its leading men fund things like Georgetown University’s Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding (the real purpose of which appears to be to fund influential “Christian” academics to whitewash Islam before the public).
Our other “good friend and ally,” Qatar, also officially documents its hate for every non-Muslim — or practically 100 percent of America’s population. A website owned by the Qatari Ministry of Awqaf and Islamic Affairs published a fatwa titled “The Obligation of Hating Infidels, Being Clean of Them, and Not Befriending Them.”
Along with citing the usual Loyalty and Enmity verses, the fatwa adds that Christians should be especially hated because they believe that God is one of three (Trinity), that Christ is the Son of God, and that he was crucified and resurrected for the sins of mankind — all cardinal doctrines of Christianity that are vehemently lambasted in the Koran (see 5:72-81).
Incidentally, this same Qatari government-owned website once published a fatwa legitimizing the burning of “infidels” — only to remove it soon after the Islamic State justified its burning of a Jordanian pilot by citing several arguments from the fatwa.
In short, it’s not this or that “radical,” who “doesn’t represent Islam,” or isn’t a “real state,” that hates non-Muslim “infidels.” Rather, it’s the official position of the governments of Saudi Arabia and Qatar, which are presented to the American public as “friends and allies.”
Thus, as American talking heads express their “moral outrage” at Donald Trump’s call “for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country’s representatives can figure out what is going on,” perhaps they should first consider the official position of foreign Muslim governments — beginning with U.S. “friends and allies” — concerning Americans: unmitigated hate and opposition “until they believe in Allah alone and abide by his laws.”
That might explain why the majority of terrorism is committed by Muslims and why the majority of Americans support Trump’s measures.
The Russian-Turkish conflict is reflected not only in the military, political and economic tension between the two countries but also in the Russian media, which expresses extreme hostility towards Turkey and its president.
This is evident, for example, in articles in English published recently on the Russian websites NEO[1]and Pravda.[2]One of these articles cites “a leading military expert” as saying that, in the event of a war between the two countries, “Russia will have to use nuclear weapons immediately, because the existence of the nation will be at stake.” The others focus on Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan, presenting him as an enabler and supporter of the Islamic State (ISIS) and calling him a “madman” and a “murderer.” One even suggests that Turkey was “a prime mover in the [November 13] Paris attack.”
The following are excerpts from the articles.
The Russian bear stamps out terror, but Erdogan prepares to stab it in the back (Sputniknews.com, November 24, 2015)
‘It Would Be A Mistake For Russia Not To Use Nuclear Weapons’ In A War With Turkey
A Pravda.ru article titled “‘Scenarios For Real War Between Russia And Turkey” states:
“The possibility of a full-fledged war between Russia and Turkey has been a talk of the day for conspiracy theorists, analysts, couch warriors and experts on international politics for several weeks already… Let’s assume that a real war sparks between Russia and Turkey (NATO) – what kind of war would it be? What results would it bring?
“Politonline.ru[3]discussed the topic with leading military experts that follow various approaches to international armed conflicts.
“A leading expert of the Center for Military and Political Studies,[4]Mikhail Alexandrov, is convinced that in case of a real war, Russia will have to use nuclear weapons immediately, because the existence of the nation will be at stake.
“‘It would be a mistake for Russia not to use nuclear weapons in this case,’ [he said]. ‘The West and Turkey will try to drag us into a war such as the Crimean war, where escalation will be slow, combat actions in the Caucasus will erupt, and the Russian group in Syria will be destroyed. The West will be helping Turkey – there will be military units and state-of-the-art aviation deployed there. It will be a war of the wearing-out strategy’, he said.
“‘From my point of view, should the war with Turkey start, it must be a determined, ambitious and quick war. Russia will have to strike a nuclear blow on main infrastructure and military targets in Turkey immediately’…
“‘During the first few hours of this war, Russia must destroy the entire military infrastructure of Turkey’, Mikhail Alexandrov said. ‘One does not even have to use ballistic missiles in this strike – Iskander-M with nuclear warheads would be enough. As soon as the military infrastructure is destroyed, the Russian troops will go and take the area of the straits’, he added.
“‘The West will not even have time to do anything. European countries will be so horrified that they will not even dare to intervene. The Americans will face a choice – either they begin a strategic nuclear war against Russia or not. As a result, Russia will take the area of the straits, and the rest will be left to Turkey’, said the expert.
“In turn, non-nuclear scenario of a hypothetical possibility, but deputy head of the Tauric information-analytical center at Russian Institute for Strategic Studies,[5]Sergey Ermakov, suggested a non-nuclear scenario.
“‘Hopefully, the real conflict will not happen. Using nuclear weapons is an extreme option. As for a regional war, there are non-military tools in the region. There are many anti-Turkish players in the region. In the case of a military conflict, the Kurds will rip the region to pieces, so for Turkey, a war is a game not even with the zero, but with a negative sum’, he said.
“‘If Turkey provokes the conflict, NATO may not resort to the fifth article. Aggression is one thing, but a country asking for a conflict and pulling NATO into it is another thing. In such cases, NATO tries not to get involved’, Sergei Ermakov said.
“‘No one wants to get involved in a direct military conflict with Russia. This conflict is fraught with a nuclear war and a global tragedy’, he added.”[6]
‘The Leader Of The Turkish Nation Is Not Just An Islamist, He’s A Supporter Of International Terrorism”
An article on NEO titled “What Fate Awaits Turkey?” states:
“It is now clear that Tayyip Erdogan’s political career is heading to a closure, slowly but surely. He had a chance of saving it if he had the courage to immediately offer his apologies to Moscow after the downing of the Russian Su-24 bomber over Syria, that was in fact heading away from Turkey, not toward it.
“Instead, he got tangled in a web of ridiculous lies and explanations, all while being rude to Russia. On top of it all, he framed Washington, by trying to excuse the actions of the Turkish Air Force with alleged orders he personally received from Barack Obama at the G20 summit held in Antalya.
“But even with his back against the wall, Turkey’s President proved to be stubbornly shortsighted, which forced Russia to go even further by uncovering the role Turkey and Erdogan’s family played in the smuggling of stolen Syrian oil, which is a direct violation of the UN Security Council Resolution that was adopted on February 12, 2015. This means that the Turkish state is directly responsible for the sponsorship of international terrorism, which, according to the UN, should be punished in a particularly harsh manner.
“But what’s even more grave – the president has publicly disgraced himself before the country. His had already been steadily losing his position, but once he dropped his mask, his ratings started falling abruptly. It turns out that the leader of the Turkish nation is not just an Islamist, he’s a supporter of international terrorism.
“Now we are presented with a situation in which the AKP leader and the sitting Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu who are largely secured by the victory for the ruling party, has obtained as much influence as the president. And after the downing of Russia’s bomber he strengthened his positions even more, even though he decided not to distance himself publicly from the president. It’s safe to assume that he’s just quietly waiting for a perfect opportunity to strike a mortal blow. He’s nothing short of a dangerous contender that is prepared to replace Erdogan at any given moment.
“But the deposing of Erdogan is a relatively positive scenario. Those who remember Turkish history should know that Erdogan is hated by the military command of the Turkish Armed Forces, which has traditionally played a crucial role in the maintaining of country’s stability… The army is not getting any revenues from the illegal oil smuggling, so, should the ties between ISIL and Ankara be maintained, the military command, while enjoying the support of NATO allies, can launch a coup d’etat and return to the power they had three decades ago. But this scenario won’t satisfy local Kurds and other ethnic and religious minorities, who have experienced the cruelty of the army in the suppression of their rights first hand.
“Turkey is going to be plunged into political chaos, when the ruling AKP will find itself opposed by both the army and the legal opposition, along with 22 million Kurds led by the banned Kurdistan Workers Party (PKK). In this case, the civil conflict could result in the collapse of the Turkish state with the Kurdish areas (the entire South-East Anatolia) breaking away, seeking ways to create an independent Kurdistan that will absorb certain areas in Syria in Iraq, changing the whole balance of power in the Middle East.
“Whatever happens, one thing is clear: Tayyip Erdogan will be forced to answer for his stubbornness, inability to respect others, dictatorship, corruption, and connections with ISIL. And above all, he must answer to the people of Turkey. And also to Russia for the cowardly attacks that claimed the lives of two Russian soldiers who fought valiantly against terrorism.”[7]
‘Turkey May Well Have Been A ‘Prime Actor’ In The Paris Attack’
Another NOE article, titled “Mad King Erdogan’s Oil Lies,” stated: “Erdogan is claiming he stole no oil. He has threatened to resign if he receives proof. There is little doubt that Erdogan is insane, those who have been watching his dance of death with ISIS have known this all along.
“However, while Erdogan talks only of oil, there are other issues to note as well. First of all, let’s talk about arms shipments that cross Turkey and move into Syria and Iraq. By Erdogan’s claim of total innocence, we must assume that ISIS, al Qaeda and the other openly terrorist groups that make up 95% of those fighting against Iraq and Syria are operating without any outside supplies.
“Where Erdogan’s wild claims fail is simple as looking at a map. When Russia publishes surveillance photos of not just hundreds but thousands of oil trucks, how can there be denial? The roads that these trucks use only go to Turkey.
“They don’t go anyplace else, there is no place else. There is absolutely no vehicle traffic between the Turkish occupied areas of Iraq and Syria, and we might as well call them that, and the areas under control of the legitimate governments in Baghdad and Damascus.
“What is support of terrorism if it isn’t trading oil for arms or, moreover, trading oil and the other loot of Iraq and Syria, for the cooperation of Turkish politicians and, just perhaps, their European and American friends as well.
“Yet no one considers that Turkey may well have been a ‘prime actor’ in the Paris attack. Would Erdogan have downed a Russian plane if it weren’t for the Paris attack? What about the Russian airliner downed over Syria? When you add MH17 and examine what is now known, that Ukraine and Turkey have been working closely together all along, with ISIS troops joining Kiev forces against NovoRussians, do we see a pattern?”[8]
‘Turkey’s “Leader” Should Be Charged With Murder’
A Pravda.ru article titled “Turkey: Treacherous Turncoat,” stated:
“Turkey’s ‘leader’ should be charged with murder. The sanctimonious West is in denial. NATO, partly complicit if not the instigator, vows to defend the murderer. Washington, which knows every detail, feigns ignorance. Why is there no Western condemnation in absence of Turkey’s compunction?
“Turkey, though paying lip service to Obama’s ‘coalition of the coerced’ to at long last fight ISIS in Syria with military force, is loath to do so. More important Turkey has its political/economic motives to do just the opposite: not lift a finger (against ISIS). That is because, as President Putin already disclosed to Russia’s Western ‘partners’ at the G20 Summit, Turkey is in reality a turncoat. Russian military intelligence provided the evidence: Turkey, including its President, are really aiding and abetting the ISIS terrorists. Detailed satellite images show that Turkey provided the egress for the stolen oil that ISIS has been trucking in and through Turkey.
“From there the contraband, once brokered by the Turks, is sold elsewhere. The ‘buyers’ list includes Israel, the European Union and as some have suggested, even America. The scale and the scope of the covert theft equates to over 50 million barrels. Moreover, Turkey has profited from this nefarious heist for almost four years. Russia has more proof. The laundered money trail flows straight to the Turkish President’s palace. Using a labyrinth of the Erdogan’s financial network including his own son, the ill-gotten gains are then spirited outside the country.
“While the Kurds fight ISIS, Erdogan courts the terrorists by providing them military cover. Russia, now wiser as to Erdogan’s true colors, should endeavor to be ever more vigilant in its Syria campaign as to joining the West’s coalition of ‘partners’.
“That same portent applies to the newest ‘partners’: Hollande and Cameron. The two turkeys are even bigger U.S. vassals. Neither one is trustworthy. Syria’s war is about oil; both Putin and Assad know that well.”[9]
Endnotes:
[1] NEO (New Eastern Outlook) is the journal of the Russian Academy of Science’s Institute of Oriental Studies, a leading research institution dealing with Asian and African countries and cultures. NEO presents itself as follows: “We cover political and religious issues, economic and ideological trends, regional security topics and social problems. We are committed to develop NEO into a notable international networking platform offering unbiased expert opinions and open dialogue among all thinking people worldwide regardless of their nationality, race or religion… We are focused on creating a new culture of partnership where opinions influence decisions.” (Journal-neo.org, “About” section, accessed January 12, 2016).
[2] Pravda.ru is a pro-government news and opinion website. According to its former Director General, Vadim Gorshenin, it is the successor of Pravda, the official mouthpiece of the Soviet Union’s Communist Party. It was founded by prominent members of Pravda’s editorial staff who left it in 1999, and today it is privately owned by Pravda.ru Holding, of which Gorshenin is the head. Its current Director General, Inna Novikova, is Gorshenin’s wife.
The Pravda website publishes in four languages: Russian, English, Italian, Portuguese, and has more than 200,000 visitors daily. According Gorshenin, the English version is the second most popular English-language Russian website, after Russia Today (Pravda.ru, September 16, 2013).
[3] Politonline.ru is a political website, part of the Pravda media network.
[4] The Center for Military-Political Studies is a division of the Russian foreign ministry’s Moscow State Institute of International Relations. The center studies trends and affairs in the domains of defense policy, weaponry, military industry, military cooperation and state security (Eurasian-defence.ru).
[5] The Russian Institute for Strategic Studies (RISS) is a research center established by the President of the Russian Federation. Its main task is to inform various Russian state institutions on the political, economic and socio-political situation in the Black Sea countries and Mediterranean region (En.riss.ru).
[6] Pravdareport.com, December 8, 2015. The Russian version of the article was published on Politonline.ru on November 27, 2015.
[7] Journal-neo.org, December 7, 2015. The author, Peter Lvov, is described by NEO as a Ph.D in political science.
[8] Journal-neo.org, December 7, 2015. The author, Gordon Duff, is described by NEO as a U.S. Marine combat veteran of the Vietnam War and a senior editor and board chairman of the Veterans Today website.
[9] Pravdareport.com, December 16, 2016. The author’s name is given as “Montresor.”
(The views expressed in this article are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or its other editors. — DM)
Obama keeps telling us what America isnot. What does He think she is? Does He think that Obama’s America is America, or that His supporters are what America is? Does He think they make America great? Will America become acceptable to Obama, and hence “who we are,” only after He or His successor finishes her fundamental transformation?
By virtue of the now-implemented Iran nuke “deal,” Iran’s possession of an atomic and/or hydrogen bomb will be delayed for a few years unless she cheats (as in the past), reneges on the “deal” or out-sources nuke development to her long term partner, North Korea.
The Islamic Republic of Iran is now reaping the benefits of more than $100 billion in immediate sanctions relief plus a settlement of Iranian claims amounting to $1.7 billion.
Secretary of State John Kerry said today that the settlement is $400 million debt and $1.3 billion in interest dating back to the Islamic revolution. That’s separate from the sanctions windfall Iran will receive.
Iran will also benefit on a long-term basis from trade with countries formerly prohibited by sanctions.
Back in June 2015, Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei had outlined the general policies of the country’s 6th quinquennial development plan.
On defense and security, the proclamation necessitated an increase in Iran’s defense capabilities at the level of a regional power in order to fulfill the national interests by allocating at least 5 percent of the national budget to boosting the defense power. [Emphasis added.]
With increased funding, Iran will be able to increase its already substantial support for Shiite terrorism throughout the Middle East; it will likely do so.
Iranians continue to experience Islamic human rights. Here’s a link to an article titled The Real War on Women in a Nightmarish Islamic Stateby Dr. Majid Rafizadeh. An Iranian-American political scientist and scholar, he is the president of the International American Council and serves on the board of the Harvard International Review at Harvard University.
When it comes to executions, girls are systematically more vulnerable due to the Islamist penal code of Sharia law.
Let’s take a look at the Islamist state of Iran, which creates its laws from the legal codes of Sharia and Quran. The first type of discrimination is related to age: girls are held criminally accountable at the maturity age of 9 Lunar years. (This will automatically put girls at a higher risk of execution by the court.)
Iranian ruling politicians hold the highest record when it comes to the most executions per capita in the world. Intriguingly, in the last two years that the so-called moderate, Hassan Rouhani, has been in office, there have been more than 2000 executions conducted in Iran. That is nearly 3-4 executions a day.
More importantly, Iranian leaders are also the largest executioner of women and female juveniles. Some of these executions were carried out on the mullahs’ charge of ‘Moharebeh’ (enmity with Allah), or waging war against Allah, ifsad-i Fil Arz (Sowing Corruption on Earth), or Sab-i Nabi (Insulting the Prophet). [Emphasis added.]
There are three methods of execution for women and female juveniles: 1. Stoning 2. Public hanging 3. Shooting. Some women are also beaten so severely in the prison that they die before reaching the execution. Shooting, which is the fastest method of the three for execution, has not been used since 2008. Instead, the most common method to execute women is public hanging or stoning. Some of these women are flogged right before they are hanged. Public hanging not only imposes fears in the society but also aims at dehumanizing and controlling women as second-class citizens. According to the Islamist penal code of Iran, women offenses are classified as: Hadd, Diyyih, Ta`zir, and Qisas. [Emphasis added.]
Please read the entire article. Isn’t it heartwarming that “we” are giving even more than a mere $100 billion to Iran? Perhaps some of the new money can be used to buy sharper stones and new devices for hangings. How about some new torture devices?
Islam, The Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates
The Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas-affiliated Council of American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) claims to represent Muslims in America. They do represent those who favor terrorism and despise human rights (in the name of which they ironically claim to act).
[T]he Council on American-Islamic Relations, is a prominent Islamic group, but which has a long history of involvement with extremist and terrorist causes. In 2009, during the Holy Land Foundation terror financing trial, U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Solis concluded that, “The government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR… with the Islamic Association for Palestine, and with Hamas.” [Emphasis added.]
During the trial, CAIR was designated an “unindicted co-conspirator.” As a result of CAIR’s apparent links to a terrorist movement, the Justice Department in 2009 announced a ban on working with CAIR. The FBI also severed relations.
[F]or the past seven years, the Obama White House has opened its doors to the entire spectrum of radical Islamist groups, just like CAIR. These groups have rationalized the actions of Islamic terrorist groups that have killed Americans, warned American Muslims against cooperating with law enforcement, smeared genuine Muslim moderates like Zuhdi Jasser and Asra Nomani as traitors and accused anyone who dared to utter the term “radical Islam” as “Islamophobic.” These are the groups that the White House should have marginalized. The fact that Obama legitimized radical Islamist groups will be his real legacy. [Emphasis added.]
Very few American Muslims, however, seem to feel that CAIR is a legitimate ambassador for American Islam. According to a 2011 Gallup poll, about 88% of American Muslims said that CAIR does not represent them. Muslims all over the world, in fact, apparently do not think CAIR is a moderate or legitimate Muslim group: in 2014, the United Arab Emirates, a pious Muslim state, designated CAIR a terrorist organization, along with dozens of other Muslim Brotherhood organizations.
In reality, American Muslims are extremely diverse, and no single group can claim to speak on their collective behalf. American Islam comprises dozens of different religious sects and political movements, many of which advocate distinctly different ideas. But for Islamist bodies such as CAIR, it suits their agenda if American Muslims are portrayed as a monolithic community. If American Muslims can be seen as homogenous, then a group such as CAIR has a better claim to represent their interests.
Even CAIR’s own research, however, undermines their claim to speak on behalf of American Muslims. A 2011 report reveals that a majority of American mosques are not affiliated with any American Islamic body.
Addressing a conference in 2000, Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi, a Muslim cleric and secretary general of the Italian Muslim Assembly, explained that, “[CAIR] is a Muslim Brotherhood front organization. It works in the United States as a lobby against radio, television and print media journalists who dare to produce anything about Islam that is at variance with their fundamental agenda. CAIR opposes diversity in Islam.”
In truth, CAIR only speaks on behalf of a small extremist ideology that, as discovered by federal prosecutors, emerged across the United States during the 1990s out of the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas. Although CAIR does not represent American Muslims, it managed, before the Holy Land Foundation terror trial in 2008, to persuade a great many people that it did. Enough time has passed that CAIR seems to believe it can try this move once again.
state that Congress believes the Muslim Brotherhood fits the State Department’s criteria of a Foreign Terrorist Organization. The Secretary of State would be required to designate the Brotherhood within 60 days or to provide a detailed report explaining why it does not. Three U.S.-based Brotherhood entities named in the bill are CAIR, the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT). [Emphasis added.]
The House version of the bill (HR3892) was introduced by Rep. Mario Diaz-Balart (R-FL) with Reps. Louie Gohmert (R-TX), Randy K. Weber (R-TX), Diane Black (R-TN) and Mike Pompeo (R-KS) as original cosponsors. They are now joined by Reps. Steve King (R-IA); Steven Palazzo (R-MS); Kay Granger (R-TX); Jim Jordan (R-OH); Steve Stivers (R-OH); Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA); Ilena Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL); Charles W. Dent (R-PA); Bill Johnson (R-OH) and David A. Trott (R-MI).
HR3892 was referred to the Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security on December 4, 2015. Two cosponsors, Rep. Gohmert and Rep. Trott, sit on that subcommittee.
The Senate version of the bill (S2230) was introduced by presidential candidate Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) and later cosponsored by Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT). It was referred to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on November 3. Two of Senator Cruz’s presidential rivals, Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) and Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) sit on that committee and have not taken a position on the bill.
Although the bill has yet to earn bi-partisan support at this early stage, it is supported by members of Congress from different spectrums of the Republican Party. It includes endorsers of the presidential campaigns of Marco Rubio, Jeb Bush and John Kasich and not only supporters of Ted Cruz.
If enacted by the Congress, Obama will almost certainly veto it. If He signs it, He will ignore or bypass it as He often does.
Britain recently declared the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization. Here are thirteen quotes from the British Government’s review and Prime Minister Cameron’s official statement:
1. “The Muslim Brotherhood’s foundational texts call for the progressive moral purification of individuals and Muslim societies and their eventual political unification in a Caliphate under Sharia law. To this day the Muslim Brotherhood characterizes Western societies and liberal Muslims as decadent and immoral. It can be seen primarily as a political project.”
2. “Aspects of Muslim Brotherhood ideology and tactics, in this country and overseas, are contrary to our values and have been contrary to our national interests and our national security.”
3. “From its foundation the Muslim Brotherhood organized itself into a secretive ‘cell’ structure, with an elaborate induction and education program for new members…This clandestine, centralized and hierarchical structure persists to this day.”
4. “The Hamas founding charter claims that they are the Palestinian branch of the Muslim Brotherhood and the Muslim Brotherhood treat them as such. In the past ten years support for Hamas (including in particular funding) has been an important priority for the MB in Egypt and the MB international network.”
5. “From at least the 1950s the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood also developed an international network, within and beyond the Islamic world. Europe became an important base for the growing Muslim Brotherhood global network.”
6. “The wider international network of the Muslim Brotherhood now performs a range of functions. It promotes Muslim Brotherhood ideology (including through communications platforms), raises and invests funds, and provides a haven for members of the Brotherhood who have left their country of origin to continue promoting Brotherhood activity.”
7. “[F]or the most part, the Muslim Brotherhood have preferred non violent incremental change on the grounds of expediency, often on the basis that political opposition will disappear when the process of Islamization is complete. But they are prepared to countenance violence—including, from time to time, terrorism—where gradualism is ineffective.”
8. “Muslim Brotherhood organizations and associated in the UK have neither openly nor consistently refuted the literature of Brotherhood member Sayyid Qutb which is known to have inspired people (including in this country) to engage in terrorism.”
9. “[The review] concluded that it was not possible to reconcile these [MB] views with the claim made by the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood in their evidence to the review that ‘the Muslim Brotherhood has consistently adhered to peaceful means of opposition, renouncing all forms of violence throughout its existence.’”
10. “In the 1990s the Muslim Brotherhood and their associates established public facing and apparently national organizations in the UK to promote their views. None were openly identified with the Muslim Brotherhood and membership of the Muslim Brotherhood remained (and still remains) a secret.”
11. “[MB fronts] became politically active, notably in connection with Palestine and Iraq, and promoted candidates in national and local elections…sought and obtained a dialogue with Government….were active members in a security dialogue with the police.”
12. “The Muslim Brotherhood have been publicly committed to political engagement in this country. Engagement with Government has at times been facilitated by what appeared to be a common agenda against al Qaida and (at least in the UK) militant Salafism. But this engagement did not take into account of Muslim Brotherhood support for a proscribed terrorist group and its views about terrorism which, in reality, are quite different from our own.”
13. “Senior Muslim Brotherhood figures and associated have justified attacks against coalition forces in Iraq and Afghanistan.”
The linked article goes on to note that
The U.S. government, without even conducting any kind of review of its own, issued a statement to the Investigative Project on Terrorism rejecting any ban or even any “de-legitimizing” of the Brotherhood at all. [Emphasis added.]
Do the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates represent Obama? Are they or Obama “what we are?” I don’t think so and hope not.
Ayaan Hirsi Ali and reformation of Islam
In Heretic (which I reviewed here), Ayaan Hirsi Ali wrote,
For years, we have spent trillions on waging wars against “terror” and “extremism” that would have been much better spent protecting Muslim dissidents and giving them the necessary platforms and resources to counter that vast network of Islamic centers, madrassas, and mosques which has been largely responsible for spreading the most noxious forms of Islamic fundamentalism. For years, we have treated the people financing that vast network — the Saudis, the Qataris, and the now repentant Emiratis — as our allies. In the midst of all our efforts at policing, surveillance, and even military action, we in the West have not bothered to develop an effective counternarrative because from the outset we have denied that Islamic extremism is in any way related to Islam. We persist in focusing on the violence and not on the ideas that give rise to it. [Emphasis added.]
Here is a video of which Hirsi Ali was the executive producer. It features Muslim and former-Muslim women discussing Islam and the Islam-mandated male domination of women.
Here’s Part II of Honor Diaries:
Here’s a video characterizing Hirsi Ali as an “Islamophobe.”
Along with the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), Azeezah Kanji — the featured speaker in the above video — has been very active in disparaging Hirsi Ali and Honor Diaries. Like CAIR, she has ties to the Obama White House and was named a “Champion of Change” by the White House in 2011. What changes in Islam does Ms. Kanji champion? None, apparently, of those intrinsic to it.
Ibrahim Hooper, a spokesman for the CAIR, condemned Hirsi Ali as “one of the worst of the worst of the Islam haters in America, not only in America but worldwide.”
On becoming a U.S. Citizen
Who better represents American values? Hirsi Ali, once a refugee from Somalia and a proud citizen of the United States since April 25, 2013, or President Obama? In the immediately linked Wall Street Journal article, she offers suggestions on American immigration with which I plan to deal in a subsequent post. In the meantime, here is her 2014 address at the William F. Buckley Program at Yale University on the clash of civilizations. If you have not yet watched it, please do so. If you have watched it, please do so again. I just did. Every time I watch it, there is something I had not previously considered.
Conclusions
To Obama and His acolytes, Islam is the religion of peace and tolerance; the Islamic State, its equally non-peaceful and intolerant franchisees and other comparable terrorist organizations are “not Islamic.” If “not Islamic,” what are they?
Despite Obama’s many statements and gestures, He has yet to convince any Islamic terrorist group that it is not Islamic. He has convinced them only that He is ignorant of Islam, a liar or both. Perhaps He needs a better joke writer.
was very striking for the one-sidedness and disproportion of the president’s concern for religious suffering.
President Obama worried that “politicians insult Muslims, whether abroad or fellow citizens.”
But he couldn’t bring himself to worry aloud about the Christians being driven from Middle Eastern countries, the churches being burned from Nigeria to Malaysia, or the 22 Coptic Christians who were beheaded on video on a beach in Libya by Islamic supremacists.
Will our next president at least make a concerted effort to un-transform Obama’s America? Will he name and fight our enemies, foreign and domestic? Or will he simply “go with the flow” and do none of the above. Much depends on who it is and on the composition of the Congress.
During the Democrat Party debate on January 17th, Hillary Clinton “linked herself to the president again and again. And again.” An Obama clone to continue Obama’s fundamental transformation of America is the opposite of what we need. Nor will merely “fixing” broken parts of the governmental apparatus with duct tape and bailing wire be satisfactory. As I wrote last September, To bring America back we need to break some stuff.
In later posts in this series, I hope to deal with immigration, race relations, the ways in which Obama is distorting the Constitution, the decline of education and Obama’s very foreign foreign policy.
In recent months, further information about the AKP government’s support for ISIS and other jihadis in Syria has come to light. Turkish journalists who have documented their government’s support for terrorists and who have published evidence of truckloads of arms and ammunition, as well as fighters, being sent into Syria have been threatened, arrested, and imprisoned by Turkish authorities.[1] Foreign media have also extensively covered Turkey’s sponsorship of ISIS and other terrorist organizations, and documented the ease with which thousands of foreign and Turkish jihadis enter and exit Syria under the eyes of Turkish officials.
However, Western governments have refrained from criticizing Turkey’s conduct in this matter, and continue to call Turkey “a partner in the fight against terrorism.” Many in Turkey, including Mehves Evin, columnist for Turkish opposition daily Diken, have asked, in light of this heavy media coverage of Turkey’s sponsorship of jihadi terrorists, “Why isn’t there a peep from the West?”[2]
The following report presents further evidence of the Turkish government’s support and sponsorship of ISIS and other jihadi terrorist organizations:
After Turkish Daily Cumhuriyet Released Video Footage Of Weapons-Filled Syria-Bound Turkish Trucks, Paper’s Editor-In-Chief, Ankara Bureau Chief Are Imprisoned, Charged With Treason, Espionage, And Terrorism
On November 26, 2015, Can Dundar, prominent journalist and editor-in-chief of Turkey’s oldest dailyCumhuriyet, and Erdem Gul, its Ankara bureau chief, were arrested; they are now being held in isolation pending a trial initiated by Erdogan himself, on charges of espionage, treason, and providing support for terrorism. The charges are in connection with the newspaper’s May 29, 2015 publication of video footage of a January 19, 2014 search conducted by Turkish judicial, security, and military officials of three large Syria-bound trucks in the Turkish border province of Adana; the search turned up heavy weaponry concealed under boxes of medicines. The weaponry, including missiles, mortars, anti-aircraft ammunition artillery, and grenades, was being transported by Turkey’s National Intelligence Organization (MIT) to jihadi organizations in Syria. Erdogan, at that time prime minister, immediately intervened to stop the search, and to secure the release of the MIT personnel carrying the arms into Syria.
Earlier, on January 1, 2014, a similar truck was stopped in the border province of Hatay, but no search could be conducted due to intervention by the local governor on behalf of the government.
The Adana and Hatay prosecutors’ investigations into both of the incidents, which came to be known as the “MIT trucks affair,” and all related legal files, were closed; gag orders were issued, and all security personnel, high-ranking military officers, and prosecutors involved in the searches were arrested. Erdogan, the AKP government, and its partisan media claimed that the trucks had only been carrying humanitarian aid to Turkmens in Syria.
Along with the video footage, published 17 months after the incident, Cumhuriyet also published other court documents, under the headline “The Weapons That Erdogan Said Did Not Exist”[3]
The following is the video footage published by Cumhuriyet:
Following Dundar’s imprisonment, an outcry arose in Turkey and in press organizations in Turkey and internationally; he has since received multiple press awards. Additionally, teams of journalists from the anti-AKP media, along with MPs from the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), and artists and intellectuals, have been sitting in shifts outside the gates of the Silivri prison compound in Istanbul, where the detainees are being held, in solidarity.[4]
MIT Transports Jihadis, Weapons From One Syrian Battlefront To Another – Via Turkey
On June 11, 2015, Cumhuriyet also published a video of statements by two bus drivers telling authorities how they had been commissioned by the MIT to transport, on the night of January 9, 2014, over 70 Jabhat Al-Nusra (JN) jihadi fighters, along with a large load of arms and ammunition, from Atme Camp in Syria near the Reyhanli border crossing in the Turkish province of Hatay, to Tel Abyad in Syria, near the Akcakale border crossing in the southeastern Turkish province of Urfa. They showed where they had entered Syria from Turkey, without headlights, stopping near a building in Atme Camp where the JN flag was flying and “La-i-lahe-il-Allah” (“There is no God but Allah”) was painted on the wall. At Atme, they said, they had not been allowed off their buses, and the buses had been boarded there by bearded, Arabic-speaking militants who also loaded large boxes of weapons onto them. The drivers said that they then drove back into Turkey and proceeded without stopping to re-cross into Syria at Akcakale. At around 5:30 AM, near Tel Abyad, the militants disembarked with their weaponry.
It will be remembered that at that time ISIS was fighting to take control of Tel Abyad, and several days later, on January 13, it succeeded in doing so.
According to Cumhuriyet, the jihadis were transported from one point to another in Syria via Turkey because it was unsafe for Islamist fighters to travel through Syrian territory that was under Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) control, such as Kobane.
The drivers also stressed that they had committed no crime, as they had been hired by the MIT to work for the government and had been escorted throughout by MIT operatives in two black vehicles.
The AKP government called the Cumhuriyet report a lie and libel, and, on February 14, 2014, ordered the investigation into the matter and the related files closed, removed the prosecutor from his position, and sealed and covered up the incident.[5]
Left: The Cumhuriyet video showing the building in Atme Camp where the drivers picked up the jihadis. Right: The route taken by the buses carrying jihadis from Atme Camp in Syria to Tel Abyad in Syria, via Turkey.
CHP MP Says Sarin Gas Components Were Transferred To ISIS Via Turkey; Erdogan Accuses Him Of Treason; Criminal Investigation Against Him Is Launched
On several occasions – at an October 21, 2015 press conference, in an early December 2015 interview with the Russian news agency RT, and in a December 10, 2105 speech in the Turkish parliament, CHP MP Eren Erdem said that components for sarin gas had been imported from foreign countries, some of them European, by Turkish businessmen on behalf of an ISIS operative, and delivered to a terrorist organization in Syria, for the production of chemical weapons that were later used in Syria.[6]
Erdem said that his claims were based on a 2013 investigation, case file number 2013/139, by the Chief Prosecutor’s Office in the southern province of Adana. According to this investigation, five Turkish citizens the wanted Al-Qaeda/ISIS militant and Syrian citizen Hayyam Qassap were arrested and prosecuted for procuring the toxic components to be transferred to ISIS in Syria.
Erdem stressed that the statements he was making were not his own, but that he had been quoting a Republic’s Chief Prosecutor. He added that in late June 2013 this case had been closed and a news blackout imposed on it, and that on July 1, 2013 the six accused had been released from prison and allowed to cross into Syria.
Erdem launched a parliamentary inquiry in October 2015 demanding government explanations in this matter, but to date Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu has not responded.
On December 18, 2015, Erdogan publicly accused Erdem of treason. The same day, the Ankara Chief Prosecutor’s Office sent a summary of proceedings to the Ministry of Justice for permission to begin legal action against Erdem; if it is sent on to the parliament, the process to strip him of his parliamentary immunity so that he can be tried for treason will begin.[7] Since then, he has been threatened by the pro-AKP media and subjected to a lynching campaign on social media; in addition, he and his family have received death threats.
On December 23, 2015, Erdogan blasted Erdem again, calling him a “traitor,” and also slammed CHP leader Kemal Kilicdaroglu for his defense and protection of Erdem. The previous evening, in a televised interview,[8]Erdem had reiterated that he had accused neither Turkey nor the government, but had only objected to the release of the suspected businessmen and of a Syrian militant who had attempted to procure illegal chemical components to transfer to Syria via Turkey.[9]
“Jihad Hospital” In Turkey For Islamist Terrorists
In September 2015, the Turkish opposition daily Birgun visited a 75-bed “jihad hospital” in the border province of Gaziantep that treats the mujahedeen fighting in Syria, and on September 22 reported:[10] “Turkey… is turning a blind eye to a medical support network serving the Islamic Front militants. The administrators of the six-floor, 75-bed hospital in Gaziantep told Birgun that during the first eight months of 2014 they had treated well over 700 militants; they administrators also expressed their gratitude to the local security officials and the AKP municipality for their assistance, and for the AKP government’s support.”
The Birgun report continued: “The AKP government… continues to assist the jihadi organizations, and by permitting the operations of a medical network that extends from Aleppo to Ankara and Istanbul, is trying to strengthen the hand of the Islamic Front, an umbrella organization for many jihadi groups fighting in Syria, which is structured like ISIS and has at least 45,000 active fighters, especially in the Idlib and Aleppo areas. Their wounded are treated in Gaziantep.
“The treatment of the wounded fighters is made possible by ImkanDer, an Islamist association, whose regional representative is Sait Gokdere. He is the former executive of the Humanitarian Relief Foundation (IHH), that became known in connection with from the 2010 sailing of the Mavi Marmara to break Israel’s blockade on Gaza. Gokdere told us that the IHH focused their activities on Syria when the civil war broke out, and that thanks to the AKP government’s permission and support, ‘may Allah bless them,’ they were able to provide health services to the mujahideen at this rehabilitation facility and in the many houses in the area that have been turned into clinics, reaching a capacity of 150 beds. He said that the hospital personnel were conducting their activities, and exiting and entering Syria officially, with the permission of the authorities.
“Doctors with whom we [Birgun] spoke explained that the treatment of wounded fighters begins with receiving news [of them] from Aleppo, through their local sources there. They then dispatch vehicles into Syria to bring them over. The seriously wounded are taken to state hospitals in Kilis or Gaziantep, and in the rare cases when they are not able to treat their injuries, they are sent to hospitals in Ankara or Istanbul. Once these wounded mujahedeen are out of intensive care, they are taken to the home clinics or to this hospital. Upon their recovery, they return to Syria to resume fighting.”
A recovering jihadi in the “jihadi hospital” in Gaziantep. Birgun, September 22, 2015
ISIS In Turkey
Since 2013, the opposition media in Turkey have been reporting on the spread of Salafi ideology within the country, and on the steady stream of thousands of Turkish jihadis who join ISIS, Jabhat Al-Nusra, Ahrar Al-Sham, and other terrorist organizations in Syria. An estimated 10,000 Turkish jihadis have gone to Syria to join the fight, as the AKP government has turned a blind eye.
Turkish ISIS Militant In Ankara: ISIS “Loves Turkey, Because Of The Ease At The Borders And For Its Allowing Safe Passage To Fighters Of Many Nationalities”
Birgun interviewed multiple ISIS militants in the Hacibayram district, in Ankara, which has become an ISIS center. While its report, published July 8, 2015, included names of recruiters and recruits, the Turkish government has done nothing to stem the flow of recruits into Syria.
C.A., 29, told Birgun that initially there had been many Al-Qaeda operatives in the area, but that they had declared their allegiance to ISIS. He recounted how, after he decided to go to the Islamic State in February 2014, he had established contact with some well-known people in order to cross the border. He told how upon arrival he had received education in Koranic verses, Hadith, shari’a law, and the high purpose of ISIS’s fight, and then had received military training. He said he fought there for nine months and could not remember how many people he had killed.
Asked whether he had seen any Turkish police or soldiers during his border crossings, C.A. said: “Turkey permits the crossings to Dawla [the Islamic State]. My first time, I came face to face with a military police officer. They see you, but pretend they don’t,” Only once, he said, the last time he returned to Turkey was he caught – and that time he was taken before a judge, who released him. Asked about how ISIS views Turkey, and whether “talk that ISIS militants may [be planning to or intending to] conduct operations inside Turkey” was true, C.A. answered: “Dawla loves Turkey, because of the ease it provides at the borders and for its allowing safe passage to fighters of many nationalities. The mujahideen there [in the Islamic State] criticize Turkey because it is not ruled by Allah’s rule, but there is no thought or intention to fight Turkey. Turkey, on the other hand, helps us because we fight particularly against the Kurdish PKK. Allah knows, if ISIS is given one month without the [coalition and Russian] air raids, we will eliminate the PKK.”[11]
Turkish Jihadi: “Jihad Is A Religious Obligation, Like Daily Prayers; If A Muslim Is Hurt In The Arctic, We Would Go There Too”
The major mainstream Turkish daily Hurriyet tracked ISIS in five Turkish cities, interviewing the families of many who had joined ISIS, and some jihadis. The report, published September 22, 2014, showed how easy it was for thousands of Turkish and foreign fighters to cross the southeastern border of Turkey into Syria, and how a new breed of Islamist associations, Islamist lodges, Islamist chat rooms, and Islamist bookstores and cafes were popping up around the country encouraging young Turks to join the jihad and to receive Islamic education and preliminary training. The report also mentioned young jihadis who had fought alongside ISIS or the Al-Qaeda affiliate Jabhat Al-Nusra and who had returned to Turkey to receive medical treatment after being wounded.
An ISIS recruit, interviewed in Istanbul, told the reporters that he had entered Syria five times. Like the other recruits, he said, he had been escorted by militants to the border, jumped the fence, and ran into one of the houses on the Syrian side. First, he had joined Jabhat Al-Nusra, but then switched to ISIS. Asked whether he would also go to fight in other Muslim countries, he answered: “It is a religious obligation. Jihad [is] like daily prayers. If a Muslim is hurt in the Arctic, we would go there too.”
Worried families told Hurriyet that that their sons had gone “to die for the Muslims.” A father in Gaziantep said that his son, 22, and nephew, 34, had both left to join ISIS, and that when he reported this to police, he was told: “Everybody goes there [to ISIS]. Don’t mess with this issue, so as not to get yourself into trouble.”[12]
In a July 2015 column titled “ISIS Among Us,” Aydin Engin wrote in Cumhuriyet that not only were the suicide bomber who carried out the July 20, 2015 attack in Suruc, that killed 33, and the bombers who killed over 100 in Ankara on October 10, 2015 Turkish citizens who had joined ISIS, but that there were thousands more like them across Turkey. He wrote that ordinary citizens in all the cities and towns of the southern border provinces of Turkey can easily point out ISIS houses, ISIS cells, the wounded ISIS militants brought in daily from Syria to their hospitals, and groups of ISIS members sitting at tables in restaurants. Engin asked how it would be possible for the AKP government and the MIT not to be aware of what every citizen knows so well – i.e. that ISIS is everywhere in Turkey.[13]
ISIS Affiliates In Istanbul Hold Events, Call For Jihad – Without Interference By Turkish Security
While Turkish police are always present at protests, and frequently disperse crowds with water cannon, pepper gas, and, sometimes, bullets, Islamist organizations are allowed to openly demonstrate and call for shari’a law and jihad, in major cities. Similarly, the AKP government closes down media outlets and websites of dissenters and Kurds, while Islamist websites disseminating ISIS propaganda are left to operate freely.
ISIS-affiliated group at an encampment in an Istanbul park allocated to them by the AKP celebrates Ramadan, praises ISIS, and calls to jihad. Photos: Rotahaber and Twitter, July 29, 2014.
When it comes to the connection between Islam and “anti-infidel” violence, one fact must be embraced: the majority of those in positions of leadership and authority in America are either liars or fools, or both. No other alternative exist.
The reason for this uncharitable assertion is simple: If Islam was once a faraway, exotic religion, now hardly a day goes by without Americans hearing calls for, and seeing acts of, violence committed in the name of Islam. If our leaders don’t, many of us still have “ears that hear and eyes that see” (Proverbs 20:12).
Today, Muslims from all around the world and from all walks of life unequivocally and unapologetically proclaim that Islam commands them to kill or subjugate all who resist it—including all non-Muslims.
This message is hardly limited to jihadi groups like the Islamic State. It’s the official position of several Muslim governments (including America’s closest “friends and allies,” like Saudi Arabia and Qatar, as demonstrated in a forthcoming article); it’s the official position of Islamic institutions of lower and higher learning, including Al Azhar, the world’s most prestigious Islamic university; and it’s the official position broadcast in numerous languages on Islamic satellite stations.
In short, there’s no excuse for ignorance about Islam in America—especially if you hold a position of leadership or authority. Yet it is precisely those in such positions who vehemently deny any connection between Islam and violence. Why?
The most recent example took place on January 7. Edward Archer, a convert to Islam, shot and wounded Philadelphia police officer Jesse Hartnett. He later explained his motivation: “I follow Allah. I pledge my allegiance to the Islamic state. That is why I did what I did.”
Yet after showing a surveillance video of Archer in Islamic dress shooting at Hartnett, Philadelphia mayor Jim Kenney emphatically declared:
In no way shape or form does anyone in this room believe that Islam or the teaching of Islam has anything to do with what you’ve seen on the screen….It is abhorrent. It is terrible and it does not represent the religion or any of its teachings. This is a criminal with a stolen gun who tried to kill one of our officers. It has nothing to do with being a Muslim or following the Islamic faith.
Kenney’s assertions are either the product of an addled brain or calculated lies. Take your pick, but there are no other alternatives.
If those running the show still don’t “get it,” the overwhelming majority of Americans have by now learned, in Donald Trump’s words, that “there’s something going on” with Islam, “You see the hatred. I mean, we see it every day.”
“We see it every day” is absolutely correct—hence why those who deny it must either be liars or fools. (See “Muslim Persecution of Christians,” reports which I’ve been compiling every month since July 2011, and witness the nonstop violence and carnage committed against non-Muslim minorities living under Islam.)
Still, Kenney’s falsehoods and/or foolishness are mainstream. Most politicians—practically every democrat but also a majority of republicans—makes the same claims, beginning with U.S. President Obama who insists that the Islamic State “is not Islamic,” calls for the “rejection by non-Muslims of the ignorance that equates Islam with terror,” and classified the Fort Hood massacre as “workplace violence,” despite the overwhelming evidence that it was jihad.
More recently, democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton admonished us to get aboard the wishful thinking bandwagon: “Muslims are peaceful and tolerant people and have nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.” Republican leaders like John McCain say that “unequivocally, without a doubt, the religion of Islam is an honorable and reasonable religion. ISIS has nothing to do with the reality of Islam.” “Conservative” talking heads like Bill O’Reilley flippantly dismiss jihad as “a perversion of Islam, we all know that.”
And so it goes. In the context of the most recent slaughter of Americans at the hands of Muslims—one last December and one last November, both in California—the usual chorus of politicians, media, and others made the same tired claims.
Despite the evidence that the Muslim couple that massacred 14 people in San Bernardino was motivated by Islamic teachings of jihad against the hated “infidel,” Obama claimed “We do not know their motivations.” Chris Hayes and MSNBC were also “baffled” in their search for a motive.
Despite the many indicators that the Muslim student who went on a stabbing spree in UC Merced was motivated by Islam—he was described as a “devout Muslim,” had an ISIS flag, and praised Allah in his manifesto—“local and federal authorities continue to insist that Faisal Mohammad, 18, carried out the vicious attack because he’d been banished from a study group.”
In response, the father of Byron Price, who was stabbed while defending some Merced victims, observed that, “Everyone is afraid to be politically incorrect… [I]t seems like to me we aren’t getting the whole story. I just wonder how much of this is driven from way higher up and is politically driven — I just don’t know.”
Unfortunately, it was one thing to be politically correct when America existed in a utopian bubble away from all the nastiness “over there,” but to be politically correct at this late hour when the tentacles of the global jihad are well entrenched in America is suicidal, literally.
Either way, political correctness is a fancy way of saying “lying”— bringing us right back to our question and a final observation: It doesn’t matter if those running the show are liars or fools, for at day’s end, the result is the same: the world’s strongest nation lays paralyzed before a vicious threat that grows more emboldened by the day.
As many as 25 House Democrats are expected to have Muslim guests during Tuesday night’s State of the Union speech. It’s in response to a call from Democratic National Committee chair Debbie Wasserman Schultz and Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison, the first Muslim voted into Congress, to counter an “alarming rise in hateful rhetoric against Muslim Americans and people of the Islamic faith worldwide.”
The gesture might not generate much more than a shrug, except that in at least two cases, Democrats invited officials from a group the FBI formally avoids due to historic ties to a Hamas support network. Delray Beach Rep. Alcee Hastings invited Nezar Hamze, regional operations director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in Florida. And San Jose, Cal. Rep. Zoe Lofgren invited Sameena Usman, a 10-year veteran government relations official with CAIR’s San Francisco chapter, the Investigative Project on Terrorism has learned.
CAIR officials routinely accuse federal law enforcement of entrapping otherwise innocent and peaceful Muslims in order to gin up terrorism prosecutions. Hamze’s colleagues in CAIR-Florida are helping a family sue the FBI over the 2013 fatal shooting of a terror suspect who attacked agents after extensive questioning.
Usman’s office published a notorious poster urging Muslims to “Build a Wall of Resistance [and] Don’t Talk to the FBI.” For its part, the FBI cut off contact with CAIR, except in investigations, in 2008 based on evidence its agents uncovered which placed CAIR in a Hamas-support network in the United States. Until it can be shown that those connections no longer exist, an FBI official explained in 2009, CAIR is not “an appropriate liaison partner.”
Calls to press contacts in Lofgren and Hastings’ offices were not returned Monday.
Last month, the IPT provided exclusive details from eyewitness accounts about CAIR’s creation, including an account of how a co-founder sought approval from the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood for CAIR’s bylaws, and how Executive Director Nihad Awad’s move to Washington was “in order to represent Hamas.”
Hastings and Lofgren either failed to check out their guests’ employer or they don’t care. These connections have nothing to do with the faith of CAIR officials. But the organization has a record that elected officials stubbornly insist should be ignored.
Unfortunately, this is part of a pattern of outreach House Democrats seek out with the wrong people. Last month, CAIR-Florida’s Hassan Shibly was invited to the White House for a discussion about religious discrimination. Then, as with the State of the Union speech, no one from the new Muslim Reform Movement – which issued a declaration clearly rejecting “interpretations of Islam that call for any violence, social injustice and politicized Islam” and standing for “peace, human rights and secular governance.”
In 2012, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi sat with Awad, the only executive director in the organization’s history, at a fundraiser for the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.
A seat in the House chamber for the State of the Union bestows undeserved clout to the CAIR officials. And, in trying to show the public that American Muslims are not a monolithic group of radicalized Islamists, Hastings and Lofgren are doing their cause more harm than good.
Is someone holding a gun to the heads of Western politicians, forcing them to state immediately after every Muslim terror attack that “Islam has nothing whatsoever to do with terror”? Who cares about whether Islam has or has not something to do with terror? The only people who care about Islam’s reputation are the so-called “moderate” Muslims who have been making excuses for jihad terror, and covering up for Islamic atrocities for centuries, while blaming Western foreign policy for their jihad.
As for all the jihadist groups themselves, they couldn’t care less about associating terrorism with Islam. In fact, jihadists have no problem with expressing pride in their terrorism, and love to see us disappointed and confused in our Western dilemma over what is or what is not Islam.
But now Western leaders are joining the ranks of “moderate” Muslims to cover up the real agenda of Islam. While their statements defending Islam are getting more and more outrageous and even sickening in the eyes of the informed Western citizen, they continue to mislead people as they blame Western thinking for not being tolerant enough.
It is not the job of Western leaders to defend Islam’s reputation from being connected with terror, especially if major Muslim institutions have consistently refused any condemnation of ISIS as un-Islamic. In fact, not one major Islamic university or leader in the Muslim world has condemned ISIS as un-Islamic. Usama bin Laden continues to be called Sheikh and held in high regard by many Muslims, even by the Arab media itself. The leaders of Al-Azhar University in Cairo keep telling the world over and over again that if Al-Azhar condemned ISIS, it would mean they are condemning themselves and their own teaching as un-Islamic.
So why do President Obama and the embarrassed moderate Muslims keep hammering us with defending Islam? The only explanation for this defense of Islam as having nothing to do with terror is that it is really not intended to please Muslims, as many might think. But in fact, it is intended to shame the uninformed American citizen into respecting Islam and capitulating to its agenda.
The head of the cheerleading team for Islam, President Obama, has inspired many other American politicians and world leaders to do the same thing, disciplining their own citizens to put up with Islamic tyranny to the point of insanity. In that process, Western leaders have no problem with using twisted logic, such as the idea that whatever negativity is done in the name of Allah must be tolerated because it has nothing to do with Islam.
The virus of this defective logic has penetrated the minds of almost all Western political leaders and the media, including the very people who are supposed to inform and protect us, such as the mayor of Philadelphia, Hillary Clinton, the German Chancellor Angela Merkel, and the Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau. They are all echoing the same thing in order to silence their citizens into accepting the dawn of a new multicultural era in which lawlessness, rape, and terror are to be tolerated and excused, lest we speak ill of Islam.
Western leaders are acting like hostages of the Islamic State, and are seriously expecting the obedient Western citizens to believe them. Nothing seems to work to remind those leaders as to who they are actually working for. They are not only defending Islam, but are also covering up for it and minimizing its danger to Western freedom, stability and law and order.
Even the mainstream media seems unshaken by all that is going on, and is cooperating with the political leaders into the shaming the side that supports freedom and the truth.
Discontent and fear are now brewing among the average Western citizen, who feels defenseless and scared to death of the Islamic agenda, and of loosing life in an orderly society. But instead of getting the message, Western leaders are doubling down on their assault on their own citizens, in order to force them into respecting anything and everything Islamic and never ever criticizing it.
It is now obvious that the 9/11 terror attack has achieved its Islamic goal, and has worked wonders on the psyche of the West. Terrorism is an old Arabian trick and tool for submission, and has always achieved wonders for Muslims. Even Mohammed was quoted saying, “I have been made victorious through terror.” Now that most Western leaders have capitulated, and instead of fighting back against Islam’s declaration of war, they have chosen to fight their own citizens.
Who could have ever imagined that this would have happened a little over a decade after 9/11? That Islamic rape, terror and violence would be running wild daily all over Europe and America, and Sharia blasphemy laws which go against all Western constitutions are being illegally enforced on Western citizens.
The defense of Islam by Western leaders has become pathological and extremely offensive to the majority of Americans, especially families and friends of victims of terrorism. And thus the only logical explanation for it is that Western leaders are selling out to Islam.
The abuse of the Western citizen, not only by Islam, but also by Western political leaders and its mainstream media, must end, because this is a recipe for disaster and a guarantee of future violent confrontations between the forces of freedom and forces of dhimmitude to Islam.
AFDI Geller Fellow Nonie Darwish is the author “The Devil We Don’t Know” and president of “Former Muslims United,” a program of the American Freedom Defense Initiative.
WarSclerotic 
Recent Comments