Archive for the ‘Islamic State’ category

Humor | To Get Obama’s Attention, ISIS Renames Self, ‘Global Warming’

December 8, 2015

To Get Obama’s Attention, ISIS Renames Self, ‘Global Warming’ The Jewish Press, December 8, 2015

New ISIS flagThe proposed new ISIS flag (courtesy NASA).

{Originally posted to website PreOccupied Territory, the “Island of Irony” in the Middle East}

Raqqa, December 6 – After years of attempting to directly engage with what it calls the Great Satan in a fateful, apocalyptic showdown, the Islamic State intends to rectify its failure to date to provoke the US into all-out warfare by renaming itself Global Warming in order to convince US President Barack Obama that it must be confronted seriously.

Self-proclaimed Caliph of the Islamic State Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi announced today that the long-sought confrontation with the infidel West can only happen if the Western leadership – at its head the American president – joins the battle. A series of televised hostage executions accomplished little in that regard, and the organization began resorting to attacks on Western targets, either directly or by encouraging local terrorism initiatives. Following last week’s deadly attack in San Bernardino, California, and Obama’s failure to name Islamic terrorism specifically as the scourge to combat, al-Baghdadi said he and his henchmen realized a rebranding was in order, with the aim of casting ISIS in the role of what the Obama administration does see as an imminent threat worth fighting: climate change.

“It is not enough that we traffic in fossil fuels to power our operations,” explained the ISIS leader in a recorded video message. “It is not enough that our signature form of transportation is a fleet of gas-guzzling pickup trucks. We must do more to drive home the urgency with which this confrontation must take place if the End of Days is to come about in our lifetimes.”

“Therefore,” continued al-Baghdadi, “Western angst over whether to call us by our Arabic acronym, or by some bastardized translation, will soon be at an end, for we will take on the name of the force their leadership apparently fears most: global warming. They will have no choice but to fight, for this force represents everything they oppose.”

Baghdadi conceded that it was possible Obama himself would shrink from the confrontation, as he has so far failed to stand up to Putin, Khamenei, and Assad, but that the specter of global warming would terrify others into forcing the president’s hand. “It is their misplaced concern for humanity that will be their weakness,” predicted the leader.

Analysts praised the rhetorical move. “It’s nothing short of brilliant,” gushed New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman. “I have so many misapplied, overwrought metaphors I could apply here, but let’s just say this is Baghdadi taking the fight right to virtual Gettysburg with an exploding tuba. In one stroke, he’s forced the Democrats to choose between their ecological values and their reluctance to fight actual wars properly. On top of that, now that he’s renaming the group Global Warming, continued dithering by the administration will open it to charges of Global Warming denial, which is about as disgraceful an act a left-wing figure can admit, other than support for Israel.”

Humor | A date that will live forever in infamy

December 8, 2015

A date that will live forever in infamy, Sultan Knish Blog, Daniel Greenfield, December 7, 2015

Naval Base Bombed, Shinto Worshipers Fear Backlash – New York Times – December 8 1941 

Pearl Harbor 9

A day after planes passed over their peaceful village on the way to attack the Naval Station at Pearl Harbor, local fishermen are still picking up the pieces.

“I don’t know what any of this is about,” a man who would only give his name as Paji said, holding the remains of a net which he had used to earn a living. “All I know is that the killing has to stop.”

In Washington, government officials urged the public to stay calm and not to jump to any conclusions warning that such reactions might play into the hands of the militant extremists responsible for the attack.

Early copies of President Roosevelt’s upcoming speech to Congress likewise warn the American public of the dangers of overreaction.

“We are not at war with Japan,” it says. “We are at war with a tiny handful of extremists who are attempting to drag the Japanese people into a conflict. But we must keep a cool head and not allow them to win by provoking a war. We will defeat this enemy, but we will do it by not fighting them.”

A profile has emerged of at least one of these attackers. Hideki Nakamura, a graduate of Harvard and a talented oboe player, was shot down and captured. Nothing in his background, which included playing for the Harvard squash team, would have lead anyone to conclude that he was capable of such a thing.

KATANA, a local civil rights organization partly funded by Japan’s war propaganda office, has warned that American foreign policy is responsible for the radicalization of such young men like Nakamura.

“What made this man hate America so much that he wanted to bomb it?” a spokeswoman for KATANA asked. “How did America fail him? And how can we win him back?”

Nakamura’s guards have suggested that the pilot is soft-spoken and has pleasant manners, but that he becomes vocally exercised over the American embargo of Japan and the refusal of many universities to install rice paper doors in dormitories.

“Detaining Nakamura only inspires others to imitate him,” KATANA said, suggesting that he instead be released back to Japan where the government is running an anti-extremism program at the Strategic Institute of War that claims to be able to deprogram extremists with a 97% success rate.

Unfortunately the program, dubbed KAMIKAZE, is unable to accommodate all potential extremists without additional foreign aid funding from the United States government.

image014

“It’s cheap for us to spend 3 million dollars fighting Japanese extremism by funding Kamikaze instead of spending 30 million on national defense,” Senator Earl Hawkins said. “Studies show that one of the leading causes of anti-American sentiments is unemployment. KAMIKAZE is tackling that.”

Foreign policy experts at the Center for American Progress warned that the so-called Pearl Harbor event was the product of decades of American expansionism.

“It’s easy for the flag-waving jingoist in the stockyards to rave about the Japs, but this attack did not occur in a vacuum,” Lester Gore-Vinton said. “Look at Commodore Perry’s globalization venture and the Philippines War and our ill-advised intervention in the Russian Revolution. This is blowback.”

At impromptu peace rallies in New York City’s Union Square and San Francisco’s Union Square, speakers called for the government to explore all options for peace. Many pointed out that more Americans die every year of shingles than were killed at Pearl Harbor.

“The United States is allied with Great Britain. We have been aiding the Western occupation of Asia,” Earl Gorber of Working People Want Peace and a Living Wage Now said. “The only amazing thing is that it took this long to happen. As long as the United States continues propping up the reactionary imperialists of Great Britain against the progressive movements of the German and Japanese vanguard of the working class, attacks like these will come again and again.”

Some were skeptical that Japan had even been behind the attack.

“Anyone can paint insignia on a plane and drop some smoke bombs. That’s all we’ve seen on these photos,” Martha Gabbitz exclaimed. “There hasn’t even been a declaration of war.  We don’t have a single piece of undeniable proof that there was even an attack. All it takes is a week in a photo lab and the government can produce a picture of anything.”

Meanwhile at Shinto temples in Los Angeles, the mood was fearful and subdued. Worshipers refused to give their names worried about the consequences to their families.

“This is madness,” an older gentleman studying detailed charts of the California coastline said. “One day you’re an All-American entrepreneur studying submarine trade routes to America and the next day everyone is glaring at you no matter how many American flags you stick on your aerial poison gas balloon.”

In San Francisco, the 109-year-old Rev. Francis Wheatley-Simpson, famous for protesting every war, including the Civil War, had already declared a hunger strike, even though no American forces were engaged in fighting.

US_Navy_040120-N-0879R-009_Pearl_Harbor_survivor_Bill_Johnson_stares_at_the_list_of_names_inscribed_in_the_USS_Arizona_Memorial

“War is never the answer,” Wheatley-Simpson said, as he had said about WW1, the Spanish- American War, the Civil War and the French and Indian War. “Love is the answer. Violence never solves anything. America was not built on war. It will not survive through war.”

“It doesn’t matter what Japan did. There will be war,” predicted Mason Johnson, author of War is a Farce That Forces Us to Fear. “We love war. We are obsessed with war. That’s why we have a society with such rampant criminality. Our idea of masculinity is to use force on everything. Even our national symbols represent violation and patriarchy. If it isn’t Japan, it will be someone else.”

Meanwhile on a Topeka street, Barnard Stevenson, an 18-year-old lad blinked in confusion when asked about Pearl Harbor. He likewise could not name Hitler or Mussolini and had no idea where Europe was. He was however able to name the stars of Rocket Assault, the latest big film in which a dashing reporter must team up with the enemy to stop his own government from provoking a war with a false flag attack.

“Is this anything kind of like that?” he wondered when the Pearl Harbor attack was explained to him. –

Today Show Pans Obama’s Terrorism Address: ‘No Sense of Urgency’

December 7, 2015

Today Show Pans Obama’s Terrorism Address: ‘No Sense of Urgency’ Washington Free Beacon via You Tube, December 7, 2015

Op-Ed: Post San Bernardino — How stupid are we supposed to be?

December 7, 2015

Op-Ed: Post San Bernardino — How stupid are we supposed to be? Israel National News, Jack Engelhard, December 7, 2015

A house filled with some 2,000 rounds of ammunition and nobody saw nothin’. Zip.

The place was crawling with a massive arsenal of weapons that likely filled the garage to the kitchen sink — but who, me?

Nothing. Looked pretty normal, say relatives, friends, acquaintances and anybody who visited a house that was stockpiled for mass destruction.

Even people who lived in and around the house – WHAT? We saw nothing unusual.

They had to step over and around a mountain of Improvised Explosive Devices (IED) to get from the living room to the bathroom, but nobody winced?

Nobody asked – “Yo, Syed, what’s this?”

That’s what we are supposed to believe. Nobody else but those two had a hand in the murder of 14 innocents in San Bernardino.

Accomplices? Zero. So they say and so we are expected to believe.

Mr. Obama spoke to us a few moments ago. Finally called it terrorism, though not Islamic terrorism. For us to guess.

He announced that he is taking the fight to ISIS. We should feel safe. Except that ISIS, or ISIL, as he calls it, is one problem.

Worse is the local, the unaffiliated but radicalized freelancer who comes from within our own neighborhood.

We know where ISIS lives. But for the introvert, the retail operator we have no address until it’s too late. Case in point, San Bernardino.

We are not at war with Islam, said the president, so no wonder people who knew the Farooks were shocked…shocked!

Typical Americans, say people who knew them.

Quiet. Unassuming. Friendly. Hard-working, Doting father. Loving mother. Played Scrabble. How do you spell jihad? Capital J?

There were no clues. Nope. Nothing to suggest a husband and wife radicalized to the hilt and armed to the teeth.

“They lived the American dream,” said a neighbor, who likewise saw nothing, knew nothing, suspected nothing. Nothing at all.

Golly, he was born here, good old Syed. What more do you want? Wife came from Pakistan. Wonderful country, Pakistan.

So what if, as rumor has it, he hated Jews and maybe Christians. Doesn’t everybody? A regular Joe, Syed.

She kept to herself, did Tashfeen. All agree to this. Typical American wifey in a hijab. Most likely clipped coupons to save on milk and explosives.

“They were the perfect couple,” say people who knew them as the perfect couple.

Too bad it had to end like this. Obviously it was our fault. Global warming.

So the president assures us that he is keeping us safe.

Ban Radical Islamists and those Syrian migrants from entering the country and we’ll start believing.

Breaking down Obama’s gun control terror denial speech

December 7, 2015

Breaking down Obama’s gun control terror denial speech, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, December 6, 2015

(Please see also, Satire | Advance copy of Obama’s Sunday address on the San Bernardino killings. — DM)

obama-wears-tan-suit-149481242256_1

Barack Hussein Obama II will stop striding around golf courses, Disneyland, pricey restaurants and assorted other photo ops long enough to sit down in the Oval Office and deliver a speech denying responsibility for the latest act of Muslim terror, denying that Muslim terrorism exists and demanding the abolition of the Bill of Rights.

It will predictably break down as

1. Muslims are Awesome – The Muslim community is our greatest resource for fighting terrorism, we need more of them, including tens of thousands of Syrian “refugees” (13% of whom poll in support of ISIS), to make us that more able to fight the “Un-Islamic” terrorism of Muslims. Anyone who disagrees loves terrorists and probably Hitler and discount cheese sandwiches.

2. Fear – We need to stop being afraid of Muslim terrorists because Obama has everything under control. ISIS is contained, except when it’s murdering Americans and Europeans, and expanding around the world. Muslim terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. Our greatest enemy is fear of Muslim terrorism which we can only combat with hefty doses of denial.

3. Gun Control – We need to give up our civil liberties to fight these un-Islamic terrorists (who have hijacked a great religion and flown into two skyscrapers and the Pentagon). It’s time for “common sense reforms” to outlaw the Second Amendment. Also we should bring Muslim terrorists to America, but deny 2nd amendment rights to anyone on a no-fly list… without actually deporting them.

Did I mention that these are “common sense reforms” that most “ordinary folks” like Washington D.C. lobbyists and Michael Bloomberg support?

4. Not Who We Are – Fighting Muslim terrorism is not “who we are”. We are more like the Swedes. We fill our country with Muslims who want to kill us and then double down on it after the latest attacks. Because these are our new “values”. We aren’t “afraid” of Muslim terrorists. That’s why we just stick our heads in the sand and double down on the same terror policies. We could change them, but that would not be who, Obama claims, “we are”.

Who are we? We are people who commit mass suicide. Who invite our enemies to kill us and then blame ourselves for offending them. That is Obama’s version of who we are.

5. Personal Stories – Pete from Cleveland is standing outside a mosque with a Nerf gun to guard it against imaginary hate crimes. Ahmed is fighting extremism in his mosque while shouting Allahu Akbar at Hamas rallies. Mohammed is sitting in the White House tweeting against ISIS and in support of the Muslim Brotherhood. Together they’ll defeat ISIS or America. Or something.

6. Someday We’ll Beat ISIS – Okay probably not today or tomorrow. But we have some of our best minds on it. And we’re making gains. Our policy of not really fighting ISIS is supported by political appointees like random Pentagon general and local police chief who attends mosque dinners. Go back to shopping at Whole Foods without fear. Obama has this covered. Right before his next vacation.

Satire | Advance copy of Obama’s Sunday address on the San Bernardino killings

December 6, 2015

Advance copy of Obama’s Sunday address on the San Bernardino killings, Dan Miller’s Blog, December 6, 2015

(The views expressed in this post are those of a lunatic and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic or any of its editors. — DM)

This advance copy of President Obama’s Sunday evening address to the nation was provided by my confidential informant, the Very Honorable and Highly Reliable I.M. Totus, the Teleprompter of the United States.

totus-seal

obama-pickyournose

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

My Fellow Muslims Americans, we live in difficult times. We must wrestle constantly with blasphemous, and therefore false, Islamophobic assertions such as that devout Muslims slaughtered innocents in Paris and more recently in California. I shall continue to pursue with all possible vigor the perpetrators of such Islamophobic speech and thought, which I recently declared felony-grade hate crimes.

Sadly, many innocents who shouldn’t be dead now are. [Rub eyes with handkerchief to feign grief.] However, assertions that they were killed by devout Muslims have no basis in fact or logic. We need common sense gun control, not Muslim control, because those innocents were murdered by guns, not by Muslims.

Unlike Muslims, Guns have minds of their own and usually act without regard to what their owners want. I have had substantial personal experience with guns, having tried to fire one several times. They always refuse to send the bullets where I want them to go. Here’s a recent photo.

Back-Fire

If the gun I was holding had been as obedient as gun fanatics claim, it would have known that I wanted the bullet to go away from Me, not toward Me; it would not have pointed itself at Me. Only the hasty intervention of My Sober Sacred Service agents saved Me.

As some of you may have heard, the folks who held the wicked guns which killed innocent civilians in California have been linked to the so-called Islamic State, which is neither Islamic nor a state. As I have often told you, it has nothing whatever to do with Islam, the religion of peace, truth, human rights (particularly female rights) and tolerance. Indeed, the high regard of Islam for human rights was recently made perfectly clear by the selection of Saudi Arabia to lead the UN Human Rights Council. I can think of no greater, higher or better-deserved honor, with the sole exception of My own Nobel Peace Prize.

The link between ISIS and those who held the wicked guns in California proves My point: Unlike Saudi Arabia and the Islamic State Republic of Iran, ISIS has nothing whatever to do with Islam; therefore, neither did those deluded killers. It’s as simple as that!

Today we begin our Great Leap Forward, ever confident that we shall overcome Climate Change, the most effective enabler of the Non-Islamic Islamic State, and along with it such terrorist organizations as the National Murder Rifle Association and its vile Republican co-conspirators. I shall lead the way as always, with determination and confident in the knowledge that you, My Fellow Travelers Americans are, and will continue to be, with Me on this road all the way to the bitter end.

images

Thank you, good evening, and may Allah God bless us all, Insha’Allah!

The New French “Résistance”

December 2, 2015

The New French “Résistance,” Gatestone InstituteGuy Millière, December 2, 2015

  • Some spoke of “resistance,” but to them, resistance meant listening to music. A man on a talk show said he was offering “free hugs.”
  • A French judge, Marc Trevidic, in charge of all the major Islamic terrorism cases over the last ten years, said a few days before the November attacks in Paris that the situation was “getting worse” and that “radicalized groups” could “carry out attacks resulting in hundreds of deaths.” He was quickly transferred to a court in northern France, where he has been assigned to petty crimes and divorce cases.
  • All the French political leaders know that the situation is out of control, but not one will say so publicly. Not one has asked the government why it took almost three hours for the police to intervene during the attack at the Bataclan Theater, where 89 people were murdered and over 200 wounded.
  • France’s political leaders are apparently hoping that people will get used to being attacked and learn to live with terrorism. In the meantime, they are trying to divert the attention of the public with — “climate change!”

Several weeks have passed since Islamist attackers bloodied Paris. France’s President François Hollande is describing the killers as just “a horde of murderers” acting in the name of a “mad cause.” He adds that “France has no enemy.” He never uses the word “terrorism.” He no longer says the word “war.”

France never was, in fact, at war. Police were deployed on the streets. Special Forces had to “intervene” a few days later in the Paris suburb of Saint-Denis. That was it.

French forces did bomb positions of the Islamic State in Syria; and Hollande traveled the world to find coalition, but could not. Now he says he wants to turn a page. The French public seems to want to turn a page, too.

From the beginning, pacifism and appeasement filled the air. A German pianist came to playJohn Lennon’s Imagine in front of the Bataclan Theater; since then, other pianists have come. On the Place de la République, people assemble every evening to sing more songs by the Beatles: All You Need Is Love; Love Me Do. Candles are lit, and banners deployed, calling for “universal brotherhood.”

Those invited to speak on TV about what happened allude to “senseless acts.” They do not blame anyone.

Some spoke of “resistance,” but to them, resistance meant listening to music. To others, it meant having a drink with friends in a bar. In a widely circulated video, a man tries to reassure his child. “They have guns,” he mutters, “but we have flowers.”

Heart-shaped stickers are posted on mosques. Words such as “We love you” and “We share your pain” are written on the hearts.

1372

Just after the attacks, French philosopher Michel Onfray said that France for many years had led Islamophobic bombings against the Muslim world, so “it was logical if the Muslims now attacked France.”

When his words were used in an Islamic State propaganda video, and reporters asked him if he regretted what he said, he replied, “No.”

A man who lost his wife in the Bataclan massacre said on a talk show that he would live in the future as he did before; that he had no hatred at all against the murderers, just compassion. Another man on a different talk show said he was offering “free hugs.”

If some French think otherwise, they are silent.

All political leaders in France speak like Hollande. They say the country must show “unity” and “solidarity.” All of them know the mood of the vast majority; even those who might want to say more, stay silent.

Almost no one mentions radical Islam. Those who do, prefer the word “jihadism,” and rush to emphasize that “jihadism” is “not related to Islam.”

Hollande, when he still spoke of war, said that France had “an enemy.” He avoided the word “Islamic,” instead referring to the Islamic State by its Arabic acronym, “Daesh.”

He knew that “Daesh” could not be defeated without an American intervention that would not take place. With symbolic gestures, he did the best he could.

He also seems to know that the main enemy of France is not in Syria or Iraq, but inside the country: France already finds herself defeated.

More than half the Islamists who attacked Paris on November 13 were Muslims born and raised in France. Mohamed Merah, the murderer of Jewish children in Toulouse in 2012, and those who attacked the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo and the kosher supermarket in January all were Muslims born and raised in France.

Over 750 no-go zones — autonomous areas ruled by radical imams and Muslim gangs — exist in France.

Radical imams and Muslim gangs also control most of France’s prisons: 70% of prison inmates in France are apparently Muslim. Non-Muslim inmates are attacked and threatened; many are forced to convert to Islam.

A British survey published in 2014 showed that 16% of French approve of the Islamic State. Among people aged 18-25, the proportion rose to 27%. Within the French Muslim population, the numbers are undoubtedly higher.

More than 1000 French Muslims have left France to fight for the Islamic State. At least 400 havereturned without being stopped or vetted at a border. Thousands of radicalized French Muslims have never left. Many are good, loyal citizens; but many could have learned all they wanted to know on the internet and on Islamic satellite television stations. Still others — hundreds of thousands of French Muslims — are not radicalized but are ready to help the radicalized ones; ready to host them or offer them asylum.

More than 10,000 French Muslims are classified as extremely dangerous by the police and are linked to “jihadist activities”. They are registered in what the French government calls “S files,” but there is no way to monitor their whereabouts. Placing them all in detention centers would involve a complete break with what is left of the rule of law in France.

All of the French Muslims who participated in the November 13 attacks were registered in “S files,” but that did not change anything. They were free to act, and they did.

For the first time in Europe, suicide bomb attacks took place. The explosive used to make suicide belts, triacetone triperoxide (TATP), is powerful and extremely sensitive to friction, temperature change and impact. Making belts containing TATP requires a “professional.”

A French judge, Marc Trevidic, in charge of all the main Islamic terrorism cases over the last ten years, said a few days before the November attacks that the situation was “getting worse,” was now “out of control,” and that “radicalized groups” established in the country could “carry out attacks resulting in hundreds of deaths.” He was quickly transferred to a court in Lille, northern France, where he was assigned to petty crimes and divorce cases.

All the French political leaders know that Marc Trevidic is right — that the situation is out of control — but not one will say so publicly. Not one has asked the government why it took almost three hours for the police to intervene during the attack at the Bataclan Theater, where 89 people were murdered and over 200 wounded. There are simply not enough well-trained police, and not enough weapons in the hands of the police, and not enough bulletproof vests.

For the next few months, more soldiers and police officers will be placed in front of public buildings, synagogues, churches and mosques, but “soft” targets, such as theaters, cafés and restaurants, are not protected. It is as easy to enter a theater in Paris today as it was on November 13. French police do not have the right to carry a weapon when they are on duty.

In a few weeks, French military actions against the Islamic State will doubtless stop. President Hollande, the French government, and most French political leaders probably hope that the French will soon forget the attacks. They know that the problems are now too widespread to be solved without something resembling a civil war. When more attacks occur, they will talk of “war” again. They are supposedly hoping that people will get used to being attacked and learn to live with terrorism.

In the meantime, French politicians are trying to divert the attention of the public with — “climate change!” The conference in Paris will last a fortnight. President Hollande says he wants save the planet. He will be photographed next to America’s Barack Obama and China’s Jiang Zemin.

French journalists are no longer discussing jihad; they are discussing “climate change.”

Until December 11, at least, Paris will be the safest city.

In June 2015, five months after the January attacks, French Prime Minister Manuel Valls said that the French had to “adapt to Islam”. In November, he added that “Islam has to stand up to jihadism”. The French Council of the Muslim Faith, offering “condolences” to the families of the victims, specified that Muslims were “victims” too, and that they should not be “stigmatized.”

Regional elections will be held on December 6th and 13th, the same time as the conference on climate change.

Polls show that the rightist party, National Front, will almost certainly win in a landslide. Marine Le Pen, leader of the National Front, did not depart from the calls for “unity” and “solidarity.” She is, however, the only politician to say unambiguously that the main enemy is not outside the country, but within. She is also the only politician to say that a return to security implies a return to border controls. A National Front victory does not, however, mean that Marine Le Pen will win the 2017 presidential election: all the other parties and the media might band together against her.

France’s National Front is part of the increasingly popular rejection of the European Union. Thei nvasion of Europe by hundreds of thousands of mostly Muslim migrants has strengthened that stance. The Islamist attacks in Paris, combined with the state of emergency decreed in Belgium for several days after the attacks, have helped this rejection to gain more ground. In addition, the news that several of the Paris terrorists came to France among illegal migrants — and had successfully used false Syrian passports to enter Europe, where they could go from country to country unhindered — did not help.

The rise of populism is slowly destroying the unelected, unaccountable, and untransparent European Union. Many European mainstream journalists see this change as a “threat.”

The real threat to Europe might be elsewhere.

“The barbarians,” wrote the commentator Mark Steyn, “are inside, and there are no gates.”

After the attacks in Paris, Judge Marc Trevidic, again, raised the possibility of simultaneous attacks in several cities in France and in Europe. He said that if these attacks took place, the situation would become “really serious”. He said he had documents to show that Islamist groups were planning to organize such attacks. If the suicide bombers, he said, had been on time at the Stade de France, before the 79,000 spectators had entered, the death toll could have been worse. He concluded that too little had been done for too long, and that now it was probably too late.

During the November 27 official ceremony in Paris honoring the victims of the attacks, a song, If We Only Have Love, by Jacques Brel — selected by President Hollande – was sung: “If we only have love – We can melt all the guns – And then give the new world – To our daughters and sons.”

How could an Islamist not be moved by that?

Benghazi Commission: Obama Admin Gun-Running Scheme Armed Islamic State

December 1, 2015

Benghazi Commission: Obama Admin Gun-Running Scheme Armed Islamic State, BreitbartEdwin Mora, November 30, 2015

ISIS-fires-rockets-FlickrAmir-Farshad-Ebraham-640x480

To avoid having the funds tracked back to the Obama administration, the arms flow to Libya was financed thru the United Arab Emirates, while Qatar served as the logistical and shipping hub, she noted.

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

The Obama administration pursued a policy in Libya back in 2011 that ultimately allowed guns to walk into the hands of jihadists linked to the Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) and al-Qaeda (AQ) in Syria, according to a former CIA officer who co-authored a report on behalf of the Citizen’s Commission on Benghazi (CCB), detailing the gun running scheme.

In Congress, the then-bipartisan group known as the “Gang of Eight,” at a minimum, knew of the operation to aid and abet America’s jihadist enemies by providing them with material support. So says Clare Lopez, a former CIA officer and the primary author of CCB’s interim report, titled How America Switched Sides in the War on Terror, speaking with Breitbart News.

The ripple effects of the illegal policy to arm America’s enemies continue to be felt as the U.S. military is currently leading a war against ISIS and AQ terrorists in Iraq and Syria, according to Lopez.

In late October, Defense Secretary Ash Carter said that the U.S. would begin “direct action on the ground” against ISIS terrorists in Iraq and Syria who may have reaped the benefits from the gun-running scheme that started in Libya.

“The Obama administration effectively switched sides in what used to be called the Global War on Terror [GWOT] when it decided to overthrow the sovereign government of our Libyan ally, Muammar Qaddafi, who’d been helping in the fight against al-Qaeda, by actually teaming up with and facilitating gun-running to Libyan al-Qaeda and Muslim Brotherhood [MB] elements there in 2011,” explained Lopez. “This U.S. gun-running policy in 2011 during the Libyan revolution was directed by [then] Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and [the late Libya Ambassador] Christopher Stevens, who was her official envoy to the Libyan AQ rebels.”

To avoid having the funds tracked back to the Obama administration, the arms flow to Libya was financed thru the United Arab Emirates, while Qatar served as the logistical and shipping hub, she noted.

“In 2012, the gun-running into Libya turned around and began to flow outward, from Benghazi to the AQ-and-MB-dominated rebels in Syria,” Lopez added. “This time, it was the CIA Base of Operations that was in charge of collecting up and shipping out [surface-to-air missiles] SAMs from Libya on Libyan ships to Turkey for overland delivery to a variety of jihadist militias, some of whose members later coalesced into groups like Jabhat al-Nusra and ISIS [also known as IS].”

Jabhat al-Nusra is al-Qaeda’s Syrian affiliate.

“The downstream consequences of Obama White House decisions in the Syrian conflict are still playing out, but certainly the U.S. – and particularly CIA – support of identifiable jihadist groups associated with the Muslim Brotherhood, Jabhat al-Nusra, Ahrar al-Sham, the Islamic State and other [jihadists] has only exacerbated what was already a devastating situation,” declared Lopez.

Some of the other weapons that eventually ended up in Syria included thousands of MAN-Portable-Air-Defense-System (MANPADS) missile units, such as shoulder-launched SAMs, from late dictator Muammar Qaddafi’s extensive arms stockpiles that pose a threat to low-flying aircraft, especially helicopters.

“It’s been reported that President Obama signed an Executive Order on Syria in early 2012 [just as he had done for Libya in early 2011], that legally covered the CIA and other U.S. agencies that otherwise would have been in violation of aiding and abetting the enemy in time of war and providing material support to terrorism,” notes Lopez. “Still, such blatant disregard for U.S. national security can only be described as deeply corrosive of core American principles.”

Libya Amb. Stevens was killed by jihadists in Benghazi on September 11, 2012, along with three other Americans.

Echoing a Benghazi resident who provided a first-hand account of the incident, retired U.S. Air Force Lt. Col. Dennis Haney, a CCB member, suggested to Breitbart News that Hillary Clinton’s State Department armed some of the al-Qaeda linked jihadists who may have killed the four Americans in Benghazi.

“The reason the U.S. government was operating in Libya is absolutely critical to this debacle because it reflects where America went off the tracks and literally switched sides in the GWOT,” points out Lopez. “This is about who we are as a country, as a people — where we are going with this Republic of ours.”

“There can be no greater treason than aiding and abetting the jihadist enemy in time of war – or providing material – weapons, funding, intel, NATO bombing – support to terrorism,” she continued. “The reason Benghazi is not the burning issue it ought to be is because so many at top levels of U.S. government were implicated in wrong-doing: White House, Pentagon, Intel Community-CIA, Gang of Eight, at a minimum, in Congress, the Department of State, etc.”

The State Department and the CIA did not respond to Breitbart News’ requests for comment.

Clinton was asked about the gun running operation when testifying before the House Select Committee on Benghazi in October.

The Democratic presidential frontrunner claimed she was not aware of any U.S. government efforts to arm jihadists in Libya and Syria.

Clinton did admit to being open to the idea of using private security experts to arm the Qaddafi opposition, which included al-Qaeda elements, but added that it was “not considered seriously.”

Members of the 2011 “Gang of Eight” mentioned in this report included: then-House Speaker Rep. John Boehner (R-OH), House Minority Leader Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-CA), then-Rep. Mike Rogers (R-AL), (R-MI), Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-MD), then-Sen. Majority Leader Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), then-Sen. Minority Leader Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY), Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), and Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA).

Cartoon of the day

November 30, 2015

H/t Cry and Howl

 

gw-summit-600-li

The Ukraine-ISIS Alliance

November 30, 2015

The Ukraine-ISIS Alliance, American ThinkerSierra Rayne, November 30, 2015

In July, the New York Times was reporting that three full Islamic battalions were fighting in eastern Ukraine.

What a mess. The question for the West now is who they would rather having controlling Ukraine’s territory in the near future — ISIS or Russia — and the answer is clearly the latter. If the West wants to build a common coalition against the Islamic State, the best approach may be to remove the Islamic State of Turkey from NATO, allow Russia to take Ukraine, and then invite Russia into NATO (or whatever new alliance seems appropriate) in our common cause against the global jihad.

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

Back in February, The Intercept was the first media outlet to reveal clear linkages between ISIS and Ukraine. The article by Marcin Mamon begins by recounting how the leader of the Islamic State’s underground branch in Istanbul was headed to Ukraine to join other members of ISIS in fighting those from Eastern Ukraine that want further autonomy from Kiev and a likely political alliance with Moscow.

Immediately we have a problem. It is unlikely that many average citizens in the West are aware that ISIS is fighting on the side of the Ukraine nationalists. If they were, public opinion might drastically shift towards support for Russia — as it should. Better to have Ukraine be a proxy state of Russia than yet another budding member of the global Islamic Caliphate taking shape.

Any arguments that ISIS is helping Ukrainian nationalists fight the Russian backed separatists out of the goodness of its heart, and that ISIS will just pack up and leave Ukraine if a victory is won, strain all measures of credulity. If the Russian separatists lose in eastern Ukraine, Ukraine may very well be on the path to falling under control — at least partially — of ISIS, placing ISIS with a state under its control on the borders of several NATO members. Did the West possibly back the wrong horse in Ukraine? Should we instead have supported Russia?

Kiev has become an important access point for ISIS terrorists into Western Europe:

Ukraine is now becoming an important stop-off point for the brothers, like Ruslan. In Ukraine, you can buy a passport and a new identity. For $15,000, a fighter receives a new name and a legal document attesting to Ukrainian citizenship. Ukraine doesn’t belong to the European Union, but it’s an easy pathway for immigration to the West. Ukrainians have few difficulties obtaining visas to neighboring Poland, where they can work on construction sites and in restaurants, filling the gap left by the millions of Poles who have left in search of work in the United Kingdom and Germany.

Remarkably, Justin Raimondo at the website Antiwar.com predicted the problems this would cause back in early March of this year:

We are told that ISIS is planning terrorist attacks in Europe, and security forces are busy rounding up suspects all across the continent – and yet here is this gaping hole in the West’s defenses, where “the brothers” are quietly infiltrating without much notice in the Western media. In cooperation with ultra-nationalist groups like Right Sector, which have also formed their semiautonomous battalions, the Islamists of Ukraine, brandishing Ukrainian passports, have opened a gateway to the West …

As US aid flows into Ukraine, how much of it will trickle down to these allies of ISIS — and to what future use will it be put? If John McCain and Lindsey Graham have their way, US arms will soon find their way into the hands of these terrorists, whose jihad against the Russians is bound to turn westward and strike at the capitals of Europe.

This is blowback with a vengeance: we are creating our own enemies, and giving them the weapons to harm us, even as we claim the need for universal surveillance in order to fight them. The mad scientists formulating US foreign policy are raising an army of Frankenstein monsters — who are sure to come after their deluded creators.

Like clockwork, eight months later we have the Paris attacks.

In July, the New York Times was reporting that three full Islamic battalions were fighting in eastern Ukraine. At about the same time, Elliot Friedland in The Jewish Voice was warning against the problems arising from this Islamic incursion in Ukraine:

Yet there are Islamist paramilitary battalions fighting alongside Ukrainian forces, which are aligned with the Islamic State and Chechen Islamist factions. If the U.S. steps up military aid to Ukraine, whose army is notoriously corrupt it may fall into the hands of Islamist battalions currently funded by a mixture of Ukrainian oligarchs, Gulf patrons, violent crime and extortion. The Ruskayya Blatina website said that a few militias belonging to the terrorist group ISIS began to fight against the Russian soldiers in Ukraine with support from the American authorities who gave recommendations to the Ukrainian government regarding the Islamic State … Islamic State-aligned fighters also use Ukraine as a cheap and easy place to buy weapons, which can then be smuggled to Iraq and Syria and Chechenya.

During the past two months, connections between Ukraine and ISIS have moved up the chain of command, as evidenced by a top Ukrainian official giving his public support for ISIS. Just last week, weapons — including a FN-6 antiaircraft missile system — from the Ukrainian military “magically” ended up in the hands of ISIS which “were meant to be delivered to the militant group in Syria via smuggling routes in Turkey.”

Soon after, the Russian hacking group CyberBerkut claimed it is “in possession of documents indicating that employees of the Ukrainian state-owned defense conglomerate Ukroboronprom had discussions with Qatari government officials over the possible sale of surface-to-air missiles [the S-125-2D Pechora-2D (NATO reporting name SA-3 Goa)] in September,” weapons that were almost undoubtedly destined for ISIS. According to the leaked documents, the U.S. embassy in Doha also approved the deal.

What a mess. The question for the West now is who they would rather having controlling Ukraine’s territory in the near future — ISIS or Russia — and the answer is clearly the latter. If the West wants to build a common coalition against the Islamic State, the best approach may be to remove the Islamic State of Turkey from NATO, allow Russia to take Ukraine, and then invite Russia into NATO (or whatever new alliance seems appropriate) in our common cause against the global jihad.

“Oh what a tangled web we weave, When first we practise to deceive!” — Sir Walter Scott, Marmion, Canto vi. Stanza 17