Archive for the ‘United States’ category

Condemnation will not stop Assad’s chemical war

April 5, 2017

Condemnation will not stop Assad’s chemical war, DEBKAfile, April 5, 2017

The task of locating destroying Assad’s stocks of pernicious weapon of war can only be performed by troops on the ground. And that is unlikely to happen.


Seven nations maintain elite military units in Syria – the US, Russia, Britain, Germany, France, Jordan and Israel. American, Russian and Turkish troops are backed by air support. Had those powers decided to destroy the Syrian dictator Bashar Assad’s poison chemical arsenal, they could have combined to do so and finished the job in a few days – and this week’s horrific tragedy possibly been averted.

The death toll from the Syrian chemical warfare bombardment of the rebel-held town of Kkhan Sheikhoun Monday, April 3, is now estimated at 150 with several hundred injured, cared for in totally inadequate medical facilities. The number of child victims has raised the pitch of world condemnation  The total figure fluctuates according to source.

But the most tragic truth of all is that no one in Moscow, Washington or Ankara is ready go ahead with this operation, any more than they are focused on ending the six-year old Syrian war, which has claimed a death toll of more than 600,000 – most civilians – and the displacement of 12 million refugees. Instead, they are calling the UN Security Council into another emergency (useless) session.

The most cynical aspect of this international wringing of hands is the sorry record of the way Assad’s toxic warfare record has been handled.

On May 3, 2014, the US military reported that efforts to bring about the dismantling of the Syrian army’s chemical weapons had come to naught after Bashar Assad refused to hand over the 27 tons of sarin precursor chemicals, so long as the UN disarmament agency (OPCW) insisted on his destroying their underground storage sites..

According to DEBKAfile’s sources, 12 of those bunker facilities are still operational and barred to access by UN inspectors.

Five months later, OPCW reported that Assad’s chemical weapons stocks had been liquidated. US Secretary of State John Kerry and Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov shook hands in Geneva to flashing cameras to celebrate the successful outcome of their negotiations on the subject.

This turned out to a charade, staged to cover up President Barack Obama’s decision to dodge his own red lines and abstain from action against the Assad regime if he resorted to chemical warfare.

Careful reading of the final OPCW report gives the game away: “To date, nearly 95 percent of all chemical weapon stockpiles declared by the possessor states have been destroyed under OPCW verification.” For its extensive efforts in eliminating chemical weapons, the OPCW received the 2013 Nobel Prize for Peace.

So 5 percent of the poisonous substances remained intact. In the interim four years, the Syrian ruler was able to substantially build up his depleted stocks of poison gas, the use of which also spread to the war in Iraq. The Syrian air force meanwhile began unbridled air strikes with chlorine bombs. They were replenished by Iranian freight planes landing at the Damascus military airfield and the T4 military air base near Palmyra with fresh consignments of chlorine bombs custom-made at Iran’s military industry factories.

Neither the Obama administration in Washington nor the Kremlin in Moscow lifted a finger to stop these deliveries. In the opposition camp, certain Syrian rebel groups, ISIS and Al Qaeda’s Nusra Front branch started tests on homemade chemical weapons, some of them successfully building up stocks of primitive poison weapons. Other rebel groups simply purchased Syrian chemical weapons from Syrian army officers.

Today, no international inquiry commissions would be able to establish beyond doubt the source of the chemical substances that poisoned hundreds of people in Idlib this week or determine who was ultimately responsible for this atrocity. It must be said that only the Syrian military had the ability to carry out an aerial attack like the one that struck the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun. The Russians will certainly try to use as a pretext for vetoing a condemnatory UN Security Council resolution the claim that Syrian warplanes had only struck an insurgent storehouse containing toxic substances.

The task of locating destroying Assad’s stocks of pernicious weapon of war can only be performed by troops on the ground. And that is unlikely to happen.

Has the Time Come for Amexit From the UN?

January 24, 2017

Has the Time Come for Amexit From the UN? AlgemeinerKenneth L Marcus, January 23, 2017

(The UN is rotten to the core. But what effect would a UN Security Council resolution have on America and her allies if America were no longer a member of the UN, hence of the Security Council and hence unable to veto the resolution? — DM)

unhrc1The United Nations Human Rights Council, in the Palace of Nations (Geneva). Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

Governor Nikki Haley, the US Ambassador-nominee, recently observed, “The United States is the indispensable voice of freedom. It is time that we once again find that voice.” When we do find that voice, we may need to find a better venue in which it should be heard.


As British Prime Minister Theresa May plans a Brexit from the EU, Americans may soon ask what kind of exit we want from another international institution.

In our case, the organization is not the European Union, but the United Nations. Earlier this month, Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) introduced a bill to block taxpayer dollars from going to the UN. These senators, like many Americans, are incensed by a recent anti-Israel resolution adopted by the world body. But the US’ problems with the UN run deeper than one bad resolution. They are endemic to the institution. At some point, our elected leaders will ask whether the time has come not just to defund, but also to depart — and then replace the UN with something better.

That point may come sooner rather than later.

Today — Monday, January 23 — journalist Edwin Black is launching a national conversation about United Nations reform. At a major noon-time event in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill, I will be pleased to join Black, US Representative Trent Franks and other concerned leaders in the launch of a new project called “The Covenant of Democratic Nations” (CDN). The event coincides with the first full workday of a new presidential administration. Additional events are planned for New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Berlin, London, Ottawa and many other cities.

More of a conversation than an institution or a treaty, the CDN asks us to consider whether the time has arrived to fundamentally rethink our involvement with international institutions.

The United Nations was established seven decades ago, in the aftermath of the Nazi horrors, to free the world from the scourge of war, to promote social progress, to encourage treaty compliance and, in the language of the United Nations Charter, “to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small.”

Yet, in the ensuing years, this corrupt, ineffective and biased body has failed at all of these goals  — but none more sadly than its pursuit of fundamental human rights.

In retrospect, the UN’s basic problems were probably unavoidable from the start, given that the institution is by design primarily a congress of undemocratic, corrupt and ineffective nations. Consider that the 2017 elected membership of the UN Human Rights Council includes Burundi, China, Cuba, Iraq, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and the United Arab Emirates.

In its one-sided obsession with Israel, the United Nations has largely disregarded serious human rights violations the world over. The UN, founded with such high hopes, has responded year after year with silence and indifference to persecution, torture and violence. It has done little to nothing to respond to global brutalities and genocides. From the Cambodian genocide to the bloodbath in Syria, the United Nations has proven peculiarly unfit to the task for which it was founded.

The problem with the United Nations is not just its abject failure to accomplish its mission, but also its affirmative wrongdoing. It has condemned one single state in resolution upon resolution. That state is democratic Israel. And through it all, tyrants throughout the rest of the world continue to go ignored.

To paraphrase Hillel Neuer, the UN has become the forum at which those who condone rape lament the rights of Palestinian women; the occupiers of Tibet bemoan the disputed territories West of the Jordan River; the bombers of Yemen castigate the treatment of Gaza; and the murderers of Muslims in Syria claim to care about Muslims in little Israel.

The UN’s failings were on display last month with passage of Security Council Resolution 2334, just as those failings were previously on display when the UN passed the infamous 1975 resolution equating Zionism with racism. As then-US Ambassador to the UN Daniel Patrick Moynihan said at the time, “If there were no General Assembly, this could never have happened.”

Even the UN’s boldest critics agree that the UN does some important work. The question is whether other institutions could do it better. In Black’s vision, the CDN will review all of the United Nations’ treaties and actions. Some could be repealed, others continued and still others strengthened. The result could be a long-overdue rethinking of international law.

This doesn’t need to happen all at once. In England, Prime Minister May has chosen a “hard Brexit.” When it comes to the UN, we may have other options, and we may be well-advised to put strong new institutions in place before we withdraw from the old ones. The key however is that we should permit ourselves to think boldly and not feel imprisoned by the international status quo.

Governor Nikki Haley, the US Ambassador-nominee, recently observed, “The United States is the indispensable voice of freedom. It is time that we once again find that voice.” When we do find that voice, we may need to find a better venue in which it should be heard.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Christmas Greeting – 2015

December 24, 2015

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Christmas Greeting – 2015IsraeliPM via You Tube, December 24, 2015


The Islamic State nuclear doomsday

December 22, 2015

The Islamic State nuclear doomsday, Jerusalem Post, Farhad Rezaei, December 21, 2015

ShowImage (19)ISIS sets sites on Washington in new video. (photo credit:ISLAMIC SOCIAL MEDIA)

Whatever strategy IS uses to obtain its doomsday weapon, “The Perfect Storm” article and other sources indicate that the organization has amassed a considerable fortune of approximately 2 billion dollars.

According to Cantlie, IS has more than enough resources to purchase NR materials from traffickers or corrupt officials in Pakistan or elsewhere.


The emergence of jihadists known to be searching for nuclear and radiological (NR) material has lent a tone of urgency to the debate about ways to prevent nuclear terrorism. At the same time, the supply side of the equation has grown from inchoate attempts at smuggling to a more organized market in NR material. This combination of factors has arguably increased the probability of spectacular attack in the not so distant future. The reason for this assessment is based on a straightforward calculation: a nuclear or radiological device is the ultimate force multiplier and a NR attack is considered “spectacular” enough for jihadists to fulfill their divine mission.

Though not publicized, anxiety about the threat of individuals acquiring sufficient materials to perpetuate such an attack intensified after September 11, 2001. When immediately after the attack, a source codenamed “Dragonfly” informed American intelligence that al-Qaida had smuggled a nuclear device into the United States, National Security adviser Condoleezza Rice described it as a “problem from hell,” evoking a previous comment referring to the “sum of all our fears.”

Producing nuclear weapons, including the required materials – plutonium and uranium – is beyond the skills of terrorist groups. The level of skills needed for the fabrication of a sophisticated weapon are judged to pose a barrier for terrorists. However, terrorists may seek to weaponize radiological materials in other ways.

Though there is a large selection of radioactive isotopes, only a few are good candidates for terrorism: cobalt-60, strontium-90, yttrium-90, cesium-137, iridium-192, radium-226 and plutonium-238.

Two types of radiological attack are possible. First, the Simple Radiological Device (SRD) involves placing a radioactive material in a public place to create an aerosol or burning it to trigger vaporization. Second, a “dirty bomb” uses conventional explosives to disperse radiological material.

While the problem has been well articulated, preventing terrorists from shopping for illicit material has been difficult. In spite of decades of US effort to institute safeguards, the supply side of the terrorism equation has actually expanded. Following the disintegration of the Soviet Union, a haphazard business in stolen nuclear materials emerged.

The IAEA data represents only about 20 percent of all probable illicit traffic; the true number is impossible to calculate.

More worrisome, the decline in the number of cases reported may merely indicate more sophisticated operations of a maturing market. In the past two decades, criminal gangs have incorporated terrorist supplies into their traditional business such as narcotics and human trafficking.

In the realm of NR smuggling, these global networks bring together “suppliers, intermediaries and end-users.”

While the terrorism-crime nexus is global in scope, certain regional hubs hold a particular attraction for the Islamists.

The Pakistani node plays an important role for terrorists. Pakistan boasts one of the world’s fastest-growing arsenals, with weapons stored at bases spread across the country. In addition, Pakistan had embarked on the production of Tactical Nuclear Weapons (TNW), highly prized by terrorists because of their compact size and sophisticated assembly. The prospect of an “inside job” within the nuclear establishment cannot be ruled out and is high on the list of dangers.

Next in line are the conflict zones of Chechnya, Abkhazia and North Ossetia where conditions for the terrorism- crime nexus are particularly fertile. Geographical proximity to the Russian Mafia turned the region into a high-profile route in NR trade.

Criminal organizations have established sophisticated mechanisms for smuggling narcotics that could be simply adapted to trafficking NR material. Experience in avoiding detection, knowledge of safe routes and protection by corrupt officials would all assist them in the smuggling of radiological material.

Finally, with its well-established drug smuggling networks, the Turkish node offers easy access to NR shoppers. In the years up to 2009, Turkish authorities recorded 75 seizures of radioactive materials, including weapon-grade uranium (HEU), cesium-137, americium, antinomy, bismuth and scandium.

Theft of radiological material provides another opportunity. According to the IAEA, as of 2013, 2,477 incidents were reported to the agency, of which 664 involved the theft of NR material. Although stockpiles of HEU are better guarded today, they are not beyond reach of terrorist organizations.

The record of the Islamist terrorist groups demonstrates their deep commitment to creating an doomsday- style event. In this sense, terrorist organizations can be conceptualized as rational players akin to state proliferators.

On the one hand, Islamists can carry out a NR attack to cause mass casualties, create widespread economic havoc and inflict profound psychological trauma on the target population. On the other hand, jihadists consider such an attack an ideal way to precipitate Armageddon.

Abu Musab al-Suri, strategist of the jihadist movement, offered a similar postulate to establish a caliphate.

Al-Suri wanted to bring about the largest number of human casualties possible for America and its allies, a plan that involved obtaining WMD.

Influenced by al-Suri, Abu al-Harith al-Sawahiri, a member of al-Qaida in Yemen, published step-by-step instructions on a do-it-yourself plan to make a dirty bomb on the group’s Internet site.

Under Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Islamic State moved closer to fulfilling its plan of a spectacular NR attack. At the theological level, through Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al-Baghdadi was in tune with the Islamist revivalists who sought to create a caliphate and who proclaimed the coming apocalypse.

Apocalypse aside, violence against the West is considered an essential part of IS strategic thinking, an idea first articulated by Abu Bakr Naji who provided a strategy that jihadists could follow to create a new Islamic caliphate. Naji also advised al-Baghdadi to attack the West to draw it into a counteroffensive in a wide swath of Muslim land, a conflagration expected to generate masses of jihadi volunteers.

But al-Baghdadi was under no illusion that small-scale terrorism would provoke the West, since even 9/11 was not big enough to trigger war between the civilizations. In any event, al-Baghdadi became convinced that nothing short of a NR attack would befit the caliphate.

Writings in the IS magazine Dabiq reflected this thinking. The article “The Perfect Storm,” apparently written by the captive journalist John Cantlie, declared that IS had every intention of striking the United States using a nuclear device, surpassing all past attacks. Indeed, Abdullah Ahmed al-Meshedani, a member of IS’s highly secretive six-man war cabinet, issued a manifesto proclaiming WMD to be a high priority for the group. The document, seized by an Iraqi special forces unit, was apparently distributed among top commanders to familiarize them with the IS’s NR doctrine.

Compared to its “sister” organizations, IS is well positioned to implement its apocalyptic plans. After occupying Mosul, IS confiscated 40 kg. of low-enriched uranium (LEU) from Mosul University. While LEU is not suitable for an SRD per se, IS claimed that the group had used it to construct a dirty bomb.

Whatever strategy IS uses to obtain its doomsday weapon, “The Perfect Storm” article and other sources indicate that the organization has amassed a considerable fortune of approximately 2 billion dollars.

According to Cantlie, IS has more than enough resources to purchase NR materials from traffickers or corrupt officials in Pakistan or elsewhere.

The United States and Islam: What Is Going On?

December 22, 2015

The United States and Islam: What Is Going On? Gatestone InstituteAmir Taheri, December 22, 2015

♦ The irony is that no major power in recent history has gone out of its way as has the United States to help, respect, please and, yes, appease Islam. And, yet, no other nation has been a victim of vilification, demonization, and violence on the part of the Islamists as has the U.S.

♦ The politically correct crowd has turned Islam into a new taboo. They brand any criticism of Islam as racist, ethnocentrist or simply vile, all crammed together in the new category of “Islamophobia.” Is it Islamophobia to question a religion whose Middle East leaders often preach “Death to America” and hatred for Western values?

♦ More prevalent than Islamophobia is Islamophilia, as leftists treat Muslims as children whose feathers should not be ruffled. The Islamophilia crowd invites Americans and Europeans to sacrifice part of their own freedom in atonement of largely imaginary sins against Muslims in the colonial and imperialist era.

♦ Many Muslims resent the kind of flattery that takes them for idiots at a time that Islam and Muslims badly need to be criticized. The world needs to wake up and ask: What is going on?

With Americans still trying to absorb the shock of San Bernardino massacre, the perennial debate about “why do they hate us” is on with more intensity than ever since 9/11. The irony is that no major power in recent history has gone out of its way as has the United States to help, respect, please and, yes, appease Islam. And, yet, no other nation has been a victim of vilification, demonization, and violence on the part of the Islamists as has the U.S.

Both Presidents John Adams and Thomas Jefferson tried to appease the Islamist pirates of North Africa in the hope of persuading them to cease their raids on U.S. commercial ships and stop capturing Americans and selling them as slaves in the Mediterranean. They sent peace missions laden with gifts and cash, and flattered the pirates, successors to Kheireddin, the Red Bearded One, in almost lyrical terms. In the end, however, they had to take military action to cut the head off the snake. However, the episode was soon forgotten, except in the U.S. Marine Corps, where it became part of its folklore, and the U.S., a nation built on the principle of religious freedom, resumed its benevolent attitude towards Islam.

I remember back in the 1980s, the diplomat then in charge of the United Sates counterterrorism program, Robert Oakley, insisted that the U.S. will never be targeted by homegrown Islamist terrorists because it was “their final destination, their last best hope.”

That was the time when groups controlled by Ayatollah Khomeini kidnapped or killed Americans in the Middle East.

So what happened to make that “final destination” a stopover to paradise for martyrs?

Why do so many Muslims hate Americans to the point of wanting to massacre them in their offices as in 9/11 or at a Christmas Party at San Bernardino — despite the fact that the United States is the only major power in modern times to offer Muslims a helping hand when they needed it?

Wasn’t it President Woodrow Wilson who insisted at the end of the First World War that the main European imperial powers of the day, Great Britain and France, publicly commit to respecting the right of self-determination for nations freed from the Ottoman yoke? The Americans invented the idea of “mandates” under the League of Nations to prevent the European imperialist world-grabbers from turning their Muslim conquests in the Middle East into a new colonial galaxy. Without that, there would probably have been no independent Arab states in the Levant, at least for decades.

And wasn’t it President Harry Truman who in 1946 used eyeball-to-eyeball diplomacy against Soviet despot Josef Stalin to force him to take Russian occupation troops out of Iran’s northwestern provinces and forget about his plan of creating a Soviet Iranistan? (At the time the Soviets hadn’t yet developed a nuclear arsenal and thought twice before provoking a clash with the U.S.)

It was President Truman again who prevented the British from sharing out mandatory Palestine among their Arab clients, having already taken a big chunk of it to create an emirate for their Hashemite protégés on the east bank of the Jordan.

And it was thanks to U.S. sending the Marines in the nick of time in 1958 that both Lebanon and Jordan managed to retain their independence and avoided becoming early versions of what is Syria today.

Then we had the 1956 crisis, when Britain and France invaded Egypt to prevent the nationalization of the Suez Canal. Wasn’t it President Dwight Eisenhower who went against American’s oldest allies to let the Egyptians assert their national sovereignty?

From 1961 onwards, President John F. Kennedy exerted immense pressure on France and used his charm on General De Gaulle to accelerate progress towards Algeria’s independence. In 1997 Redha Malik, a former Prime Minister of Algeria and key negotiator with France, told me that throughout the Evian peace talks, the Algerian team knew it had “a strong friend in Washington.”

In the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, triggered by Egyptian dictator Gamal Abdul-Nasser’s quixotic attempt at imposing a blockade in the Strait of Tiran, the U.S. used its clout to persuade the Israelis to stop the war after only six days. In his memoirs, the long-standing Soviet apparatchik and future Prime Minister, Yevgeni Primakov, claims that the Israelis wanted to complete their destruction of Arab air forces by wiping out Nasser’s heavy weapons on the ground as well. It was under American pressure that the Israelis agreed to temper their appetite for victory and accepted a ceasefire under the auspices of the United Nations.

The Nasserist regime could live to fight another day, which came in 1973. In the October 1973 war, too, U.S. intervention helped restrain the Israelis, who had built up an invasion force under General Ariel Sharon a stone’s-throw from Cairo.

In the Camp David talks that led to peace between Egypt and Israel, intense pressure by President Jimmy Carter forced the Israelis to abandon plans to maintain “security enclaves” inside the Sinai Peninsula, thereby helping President Anwar Sadat recover all of Egypt’s lost territory.

In 1982 a multinational force, led by the United States, intervened in Lebanon to stop the Israeli advance beyond the Litani River. That force also helped save the lives of Yasser Arafat and his close associates in the leadership of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) when, trapped in Beirut, they risked being captured or killed by the Israelis. President Ronald Reagan even arranged for Arafat and his entourage a safe passage to Tunisia, free of charge.

During the lengthy crisis that led to the disintegration of Yugoslavia, the U.S., having at first hesitated to intervene under President George H.W. Bush, assumed a leadership position under President Bill Clinton and helped save the lives of many Muslims in Bosnia-Herzegovina, where a Serbian ethnic cleansing master plan was in full application. Later, it was also U.S. military power that helped Kosovo’s Albanian majority, overwhelmingly Muslim, achieve independence. Ethnic Albanian leader Ibrahim Rugova told me in an interview that he had counted on “Europe’s conscience to wake up” only to see that it was “the American cavalry” that in the end came to the rescue, while the Europeans “danced around the dying man.”

The U.S. was the only major power to have no state-owned oil company and thus never used its military clout to obtain a share of the Middle East’s energy resources.

Should Muslims hate Americans because they refused to disband their military bases on Islamic lands? Again, history shows that the U.S. was the only major power prepared to pack up and leave as soon as its hosts showed it the door.

In 1969, an astonished Col. Moammar Khadafy watched as the Americans closed one of their most important military bases in the Mediterranean, Wheelus, located on Libyan territory, as soon as his newly installed military government asked Washington to leave. A couple of years earlier, it had taken months of bloody battles and tens of thousands of lives before South Yemen was able to force Britain to close its base in Aden.

In 1979, the U.S. had 27,000 military personnel in Iran, operating “listening posts” set up as part of the strategic arms limitation accords to monitor Soviet missile tests. But when the new Islamic regime led by Khomeini asked the U.S. to close the listening posts, which had been approved by the Soviets as well, the Americans did no foot-dragging. The only Americans left behind were diplomats, soon to be seized as hostages by Khomeinist militants.

We witnessed a repeat of that in the 1990s on a grander scale, when the Americans simply packed up and left when the Saudis asked them to close their bases after driving Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait, tangentially also saving Saudi Arabia from Iraqi occupation.

That the U.S. was a friend of Muslims and of Islam was again illustrated when American power helped drive the Soviets out of Afghanistan and, later, liberate Afghans and Iraqis, a total of 50 million Muslims, from the vicious domination of Taliban and the Ba’ath Party.

In 2005, Iraqi Oil Minister Hussein Sharestani was publicly wondering why the Americans were not coming to “steal our oil,” which anti-U.S. propaganda claimed had been Washington’s key objective in toppling Saddam Hussein. We left there, too.

During the past six decades, the U.S. has been by far the largest donor of aid to more than 40 of the 57 Muslim-majority nations. In the 1940s and ’50s, tens of millions of Muslims were saved from starvation and famine thanks to U.S. food aid. And the Point IV program, launched by President Truman, helped eradicate a number of endemic diseases, including smallpox and malaria, which killed large numbers of Muslims each year.

Many Muslims nations have been annually receiving large checks from the U.S. for decades, among them Egypt, which gets $2 billion, and Pakistan, the homeland of San Bernardino killer Syed Farook, which gets $1 billion.

1395After the San Bernardino massacre carried out by jihadists Syed Farook (right) and Tashfeen Malik (left), the perennial debate about “why do they hate us” is on with more intensity than ever since 9/11.

When the last Islamic Caliph was driven out of Turkey in 1924, he went into exile first to France and then to the United States, where his descendants lived in New York. In fact, the last pretender to the Islamic Caliphate, Ertugul Osman V, died in Manhattan in 2009.

An open society, the U.S. has always welcomed Islamic exiles of all kinds, including some of its own bitter enemies. The only time that the pan-Islamist Hezbollah movement, founded and led by Iran, has ever held an international conference outside Iran or Lebanon was in Austin Texas in 1986, when a number of Latin American branches of the movement were created. Hundreds of former high-ranking Khomeinist civilian and military officials and clerics have ended up in the U.S. as exiles, while many others have their children attending U.S. schools and universities.

Today, half of Islamic Republic President Hassan Rouhani’s closest aides are holders of PhDs from U.S. universities, among them his Chief of Staff, Muhammad Nahavandian, a Green Card holder, and his Foreign Minister Muhammad Javad Zarif. (The other half consists of former holders of U.S. hostages in Tehran, among them Defense Minister Hussein Dehqan and Environmental director Masoumeh Ebtekar.)

Quite a few of Osama bin Laden’s 50 or so siblings are either holders of U.S. passports or green cards, along with thousands of other Saudis.

Unlike Russia, which has a 200-year history of war against Muslims, having annexed Islamic land at the rate of one square kilometer a day during the 19th century, the U.S. never annexed any Muslim-majority nation. And unlike China, which is still holding its Muslim minority, the Uighurs, in East Turkestan (Xinjiang) surrounded by a ring of steel, the U.S. is not trying to stop a Muslim nation’s aspiration after self-determination.

In the 1990s, when Saudi Arabia normalized ties with the People’s Republic of China, it shut down the offices of the Uighur exiles in Jeddah. Where did the exiles transfer to? The answer is: Washington DC, since neither Muslim nations nor Europeans would agree to host them.

Since the 1970s, the U.S. has been host to more than five million Muslims from all over the world, many of them fleeing brutal Islamist regimes in their homelands. In a conversation in 2002, Princeton Professor Bernard Lewis expressed the hope that Muslims in the United States and other Western democracies could become “beacons of enlightenment” projecting light back to their old counties. Many of us shared that hope.

Now, however, we see that the opposite is happening. Instead of exporting “light” back to the Muslim world, a growing number of Muslims in Western democracies have become importers of darkness in their new abodes.

Worse still, the politically correct crowd has turned Islam into a new taboo. They brand any criticism of Islam as racist, ethnocentrist or simply vile, all crammed together in the new category of “Islamophobia.”

Is it Islamophobia to question a religion whose Middle East leaders often preach “Death to America” and hatred for Western values?

More prevalent than Islamophobia is Islamophilia, as leftists treat Muslims as children whose feathers should not be ruffled.

The Islamophilia crowd does great disservice to both Western democracies and to Islam itself.

They invite Americans and Europeans to sacrifice part of their own freedom in atonement of largely imaginary sins against Muslims in the colonial and imperialist era. They also invite Muslims in the West to learn how to pose as victims and demand the rewards of victimhood as is the fashion in Europe and America. To the Muslim world at large, the message of Islamophilia is that Muslims need no criticism, although their faith is being transformed into a number of conflicting ideologies dedicated to violence and terror.

Never mind if Islamic theology is all but dead. To say so would be a sign of Islamophobia.

Never mind that God makes only a cameo appearance in mosque sermons almost entirely obsessed with political issues.

All that Western intellectuals or leaders need to do is stop flattering Islam, as President Obama has been doing for the past seven years, claiming that virtually anything worthwhile under the sun has its origin in Islam.

Many Muslims resent that kind of flattery, which takes them for idiots at a time that Islam and Muslims badly need to be criticized. The world needs to wake from its slumber and ask: What is going on?

Building an Islamic State in America, one church at a time

August 27, 2015

Building an Islamic State in America, one church at a time, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, Augut 27, 2015


Civilizations don’t fall because there are barbarians at the gate. There are barbarians at the gate because a dying civilization has lost touch with the values that made it great. The barbarians didn’t bring down Byzantium. They aren’t bringing down America and Europe. The barbarians of the prophet just show up to profit from the fall and we are the ones who open the gates and hand over the keys to our killers.


Across Europe, thousands of churches have closed and many of them have become mosques. The St. Mark’s Cathedral in London survived Nazi bombers in WW2, but fell to a new invasion and became the New Peckham Mosque. In France, where there are now more Muslims than practicing Catholics, the Islamic colonists demanded that thousands of empty churches be turned into mosques. The Capernaum Church in Germany has become the Al-Nour Islamic Center. In Amsterdam, the St. Ignatius Church was transformed into the Fatih Camii Mosque. Its name means ‘The Conqueror’s Mosque’.

The original Fatih Camii Mosque had been built by the Turkish invaders in Constantinople on the site of the Church of the Holy Apostles. Like their ISIS descendants, the Turks drove out the Greek Christians, destroyed the church and replaced it with a mosque named after the monster Mehmed II, who inaugurated Islamic rule over the fallen city with slavery, rape and beheadings in the ISIS style.

Today ‘Conqueror’s Mosques’ have sprung up not only in Istanbul and Amsterdam, but in Paris, Toronto, Melbourne and Brooklyn, where within sight of the Statue of Liberty extending her torch of freedom to the oppressed of the world, stands the grim squalid outpost of the oppressor of the world.

Mehmed and the Statue of Liberty, the armies of Islam and our way of freedom cannot long coexist.

Islam is conquering Europe. It is also conquering America.

In Syracuse, New York, the Holy Trinity Catholic Church has become a mosque. Despite the church being protected by the Landmark Preservation Board, its crosses were cut down and painted over. After the Islamic terror attacks of September 11, no more planes flew into buildings. Instead they landed at airports disgorging a different sort of conquering army that came with visas instead of boxcutters.

In the decade after 9/11, the number of Muslims in Onondaga County more than doubled.  A key role was played by Catholic Charities of Onondaga County, which could not find the money and energy to maintain a church into which generations of immigrations had poured their hopes and dreams, but which served as one of the VOLAGs (voluntary agencies) filling the area with UNHCR approved refugees.

75% of the “refugees” colonizing Syracuse are Muslim. Almost a thousand refugees a year are inflicted on the people of Syracuse who already live in the 23rd poorest city out of the 575 biggest cities in the country. Half the children of Syracuse live in poverty. But each refugee means a $725 check for the VOLAG. Last year that meant a $3 million grant for Catholic Charities.

And while VOLAGs like Catholic Charities cater to migrants, churches are turned into mosques. The North Side, where Catholic Charities has been active in its “charity work” is now full of women in hijabs and the Holy Trinity Church is no more.

Yusuf Soule, who bought the church, explained why he chose it. “The North Side is the magnet for refugees.  The two agencies that work with refugees (InterFaith Works and Catholic Charities) are here.”

The more of these magnets we create, the fewer churches and synagogues there will be. Temple Beth El in Syracuse was hit by a Muslim terrorist who set fire to it while shouting, “I did this for you, Allah.”

No one had to set the Holy Trinity Church on fire. The Conference of Catholic Bishops took care of that.

Civilizations don’t fall because there are barbarians at the gate. There are barbarians at the gate because a dying civilization has lost touch with the values that made it great. The barbarians didn’t bring down Byzantium. They aren’t bringing down America and Europe. The barbarians of the prophet just show up to profit from the fall and we are the ones who open the gates and hand over the keys to our killers.

Islam is built on the bones of civilizations. Every Islamic mosque is a conqueror’s mosque.

The most thrilling experience for the new colonizers of the West is the taking of a church or a synagogue and transforming it into a mosque. While for the moment this has to be done legally, it is the closest thing to the ISIS experience that an Islamist can have in America or Europe without going to jail.

This tragedy isn’t only happening in Europe. As the events in Syracuse show, it is taking place right here.

And it isn’t only Catholic churches in New York that are falling victim to this new breed of immigrant Taliban demolishing the un-Islamic to make way for the Islamic.

Two Baptist churches in Louisville, Kentucky have been turned into mosques.

“On a trip to England a few years ago, I recall seeing dozens of churches that had become mosques and wondering how it could happen there; now it’s happening here,” Paul Chitwood, the executive director of the Kentucky Baptist Convention, said.

Louisville has the misfortune of being a “preferred resettlement site” which makes it a major dumping ground. The Syrians are on their way courtesy of Islamic Relief USA and it already has 1,605 Somalis and plenty of Iraqis too.

Churches are being turned into mosques all across America. The Abundant Life Family Church in Nebraska is now the Sabah Mosque. St. John’s Catholic Church in Minneapolis became the Darul-Uloom Islamic Center. In Detroit, Our Lady Help of Christians Church fell to the Islamic Center of North Detroit.

Slowly and quietly, this is happening all across America as the Immigration Jihad uses taxpayer money to accomplish what Mohammed, Al Qaeda and ISIS could not. Al Qaeda can destroy our buildings, but only our government can import Muslim colonists who will take over them as bases for their ideology.

Back in Istanbul, Erdogan’s Islamist regime continues pressing to convert churches into mosques, completing the original work of the Caliphate before it was aborted by secular reformers.

Erdogan had made his agenda clear when he recited the Islamist poem proclaiming, “The minarets are our bayonets, the mosques are our barracks, the believers are our soldiers”.  And so it has ever been.

The secular West is being swiftly Islamized. Vacant churches become mosques. The barracks of Islam fill with believers who batten on the hate and go out one day to behead a soldier or shoot up a recruiting office. Minarets hatefully thrust their bayonets at the sky warning of a larger war to come.

The Immigration Jihad is colonization plain and simple. It is a war of birth rates and beliefs. A West whose elites have lost their faith is unable to come to terms with the fact that the East has not. The mosques are not “additions to the community”, they are outposts of a hostile civilization whose faith is in the destruction of the West. ISIS or the Muslim torching a synagogue while crying, “I did this for you, Allah” are all part of one terrible arc of theological destruction.

In Mosul, the Syrian Orthodox Church of St Ephraim has been captured by ISIS and turned into a mosque. While we bemoan the barbarisms of ISIS, we are assembling its building blocks right here in our cities. Churches become mosques. Beheadings and horrible acts of terrorism take place monthly.

Our leaders refuse to put the pieces together. They refuse to understand what the flow of Muslim recruits from America to ISIS means and what the transformation of churches into barracks and bayonets means. They refuse to understand that they are helping to build an Islamic State in America.

Stop Blaming America for Every Damned Thing Wrong with this World.

July 7, 2015

Let’s stop blaming America

Dr. Khalid Alnowaiser (Yep, an Arab) Published — Saturday 28 May 2011 (Many years ago) Via Arab News

The easy way out. [Source: Unknown]

(Pardon me while I release a little steam. – LS)

We are still the prisoners of a culture of conspiracy and inferiority.

I AM a proud and loyal Saudi citizen, but I am tired of hearing constant criticism from most Arabs of everything the United States does in its relations with other countries and how it responds to global crises. No nation is perfect, and certainly America has made its share of mistakes such as Vietnam, Cuba and Iraq. I am fully aware of what happened when the atomic bombs were dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki and the unprecedented abuses at Guantanamo and Abu Ghraib. However, what would we do if America simply disappeared from the face of the earth such as what happened to the Soviet Union and ancient superpowers like the Roman and Greek empires? These concerns keep me up day and night. It’s frustrating to hear this constant drumbeat of blame directed toward the United States for everything that is going wrong in the world. Who else do we think of to blame for our problems and failures? Do we take personal responsibility for the great issues that affect the security and prosperity of Arab countries? No, we look to America for leadership and then sit back and blame it when we don’t approve of the actions and solutions it proposes or takes.

For instance, if a dictator seizes and holds power such as Egypt’s Mubarak and Libya’s Qaddafi, fingers are pointed only at America for supporting these repressive leaders. If the people overthrow a dictator, fingers are pointed at America for not having done enough to support the protestors. If a nation fails to provide its people with minimum living standards, fingers are pointed at America. If a child dies in an African jungle, America is criticized for not providing necessary aid. If someone somewhere sneezes, fingers are pointed at America. Many other examples exist, too numerous to mention.

I am not pro-American nor am I anti-Arab, but I am worried that unless we wake up, the Arab world will never break out of this vicious and unproductive cycle of blaming America. We must face the truth: Sadly, we are still the prisoners of a culture of conspiracy and cultural inferiority. We have laid the blame on America for all our mistakes, for every failure, for every harm or damage we cause to ourselves. The US has become our scapegoat upon whom our aggression and failures can be placed. We accuse America of interfering in all our affairs and deciding our fate, although we know very well that this is not the case as no superpower can impose its will upon us and control every aspect of our lives. We must acknowledge that every nation, no matter how powerful, has its limitations.

Moreover, we conveniently forget that America’s role is one of national self-interest, not to act as a Mother Teresa. Every great nation throughout history has used its power and gained ascendancy in order to serve its own strategic interests. America is not just its foreign policy. We must not forget who promoted education and respected learning, who took on research as a way to discovery, who made the airplane that carries us to our destination and the luxurious car we want to own, who created the Internet and developed social media that has transformed the way we do business and interact with one another, who conducted the scientific research that has saved lives and treated cancer, renal failure, AIDS, malaria, poliomyelitis, and who discovered genetic engineering. When man walked on the Moon, it was an American. Who did Japan turn to for help after the devastating earthquake and tsunami? America that led and organized the international relief effort of the Red Cross. Who do people turn to for support when their leaders seek to brutalize them? Who organized NATO air cover and saved the Libyan city of Benghazi from certain destruction by Qaddafi’s brutal armed forces?

Anyone who is a student of history knows that America is simply doing what all other civilizations before it have done for thousands of years, which is to protect and further its own self-interest. The Greek civilization could not have lasted had it not served its own interests, and the same applies to the Persian, Roman, and Chinese civilizations. All of these civilizations put their own welfare before all others, and by doing so, they strived to achieve great things. The truth is that no nation can ever become great without understanding this reality. Indeed, the Islamic civilization has been through horrible and cruel phases. Hideous events that send goose bumps up one’s spine can be extracted from Islamic history, such as that of As-Saffah (The Shedder of Blood), founder of the Abbasid Caliphate, who took out the remains of the caliphs of Bani Umayyah, one after the other, but found nothing but the tip of a nose from the remains of Hisham Bin Abdul Malak. He took him out and whipped him. He then crucified and burned him and sprinkled his ashes in the wind, without mercy, oblivious to any religious or moral restraints.

There are many other similar examples. But does this mean that Islam is unholy? Of course not. Does this imply that Islamic civilization only had Saffahs? Absolutely not. Islamic civilization has given the world brilliant examples in the areas of art and education and promoted a culture of forgiveness, peace and love. However, today, we as people, not Islam, are in desperate need of an intellectual earthquake, a cultural tsunami to get us back on track, to revive Islam’s cultural intellect and combat our undeniable inferiority complex.

The Holy Qur’an states Allah will not change the condition of a people until they change what is in themselves. He has the power to change them, but He prefers that they change with their own will power which He respects.

What we are seeing now in the Arab streets is a new hope and a step forward to change what is in ourselves. I remain very optimistic because we have now begun to realize that simply blaming the United States for our problems will not help us progress toward great personal freedoms. Our enemy is not America but an inferiority complex from which I am sure the Arab world with its rich culture and history will eventually recover.

— Dr. Khalid Alnowaiser is a columnist and a Saudi attorney with offices in Riyadh and Jeddah. He can be reached at: and/or Twitter (kalnowaiser).