Obama will bypass Senate, ratify Paris climate accord himself during trip to China: report

Posted August 29, 2016 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: China, Climate change, Obama and Constitution, U.S. Constitution, U.S. Senate
Tags: , , , ,

Obama will bypass Senate, ratify Paris climate accord himself during trip to China: report, Washington Times,  Valerie Richardson, August 29, 2016

(Another Obama Iran scam of the U.S. Constitution. — DM)

Asia_Obama_Trade.JPEG-a71e9_c0-0-4826-2813_s885x516In this file photo taken Nov. 30, 2015, President Barack Obama meets with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Le Bourget, France. A trade deal that is a centerpiece of Obama’s efforts to counter Chinese influence in Asia . . . .

President Obama is prepared to enter into the Paris climate accord as early as this week even though Republicans have insisted that the pact must be ratified by the Senate, according to a report out of China.

The South China Morning Post reported that Mr. Obama and Chinese President Xi Jinping are “set to jointly announce their ratification” of the ambitious international climate-change pact on Friday, two days before the start of the 11th G-20 Summit in Hangzhou, Zhejiang.

“There are still some uncertainties from the U.S. side due to the complicated U.S. system in ratifying such a treaty, but the announcement is still quite likely to be ready by Sept. 2,” an unnamed source told the English-language newspaper.

In addition, “[s]enior climate officials from both countries worked late into the night in Beijing on Tuesday to finalise [sic] details,” said the article, citing “sources familiar with the issue.”

The Thursday report touched off alarm among foes of the Paris Agreement, which calls for nations to reduce their greenhouse-gas emissions with the aim of holding global temperatures to an increase of “well below” 2 degrees Celsius from pre-industrial levels.

Myron Ebell, director of the free-market Competitive Enterprise Institute’s Center for Energy and Environment, described the report as “curious because ratifying treaties in the United States requires a two-thirds vote of the Senate.”

“In China’s Communist Party dictatorship, ratification merely requires their Maximum Leader to say, ‘So be it,’ ” said Mr. Ebell, who flagged the article, adding, “Lo and behold, the president of the United States can ratify a treaty in the same way as China’s Maximum Leader. He merely has to say the magic words, ‘So be it.’ “

Sen. James Inhofe, chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, has warned other nations that without Senate approval, the agreement will “soon become another stack of empty promises on global warming.”

“I want to make sure international participants are warned now that the president’s commitment lacks the support of his own government and will fail,” Mr. Inhofe said in an April 12 statement.

He delivered his broadside shortly before Secretary of State John Kerry participated in a United Nations ceremony on Earth Day to sign what he described as the “historic” Paris agreement. Participating nations are required to sign and ratify the agreement.

U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-moon called last month on international leaders to “accelerate” the ratification process after countries were slow to jump aboard.

The accord takes effect after ratification by 55 nations responsible for at least 55 percent of global emissions, but so far only 23 nations covering 1.1 percent of emissions have signed and ratified the pact, according to the “ratification tracker” maintained by Climate Analytics.

The group’s analysts expressed concern last month that the “window of opportunity” for ratification is “closing fast,” but that there have recently been “positive developments.”

“Many countries, led by the two biggest emitters, China and the United States, have signaled their intent to ratify by the end of 2016, leaving just four countries and 1.72% of global emissions needed for it to become official,” the Climate Analytics analysis said.

The Obama administration has maintained that the Paris Agreement is not a legally binding treaty and therefore does not require Senate ratification, while Republicans have insisted that it does.

“One can only speculate how the administration plans to ratify the agreement without approval of the Senate,” the Science and Environmental Policy Project said in a Sunday statement. “But given the disregard the administration has demonstrated toward Congress and the Constitution, such speculation is fitting.”

Comments: 1 Comment

Will the Clinton Foundation Mark the Fall of Our Republic?

Posted August 29, 2016 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: 2016 elections, Clinton character, Clinton cover ups, Clinton e-mails, Clinton Foundation, Corruption, Democrats, Department of Justice, Department of State, Donald Trump, Never Trumpers, Republicans, Unsecured server
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Will the Clinton Foundation Mark the Fall of Our Republic?, PJ Media, Roger L Simon, August 28, 2016

bill_hillary_clinton_roman_empire_banner_8-28-16-1.sized-770x415xc

No matter how extreme the future revelations of Julian Assange and others turn out to be, the truth about the Clinton Foundation is already clear. Whatever its original intentions, this supposed charity became a medium to leverage Hillary Clinton’s position as secretary of State for personal enrichment and global control by the Clintons and their allies.  We also now know—as the Wall Street Journal’s Kimberley Strassel made clear in her recent oped—why Hillary decided to hide all her emails on her “infamous server.”

To my knowledge, nothing like this has ever been done in the history of the United States government. It calls to mind, if anything, the United Nations’ scandalous Oil-for-Food program in which millions were siphoned off from a plan to feed Iraq’s children during the war.

It could even be worse, because of the national security implications. The Clinton Foundation and the State Department were commingled to such an extent we may never know the truth, certainly not before the election since that same State Department has refused to release Hillary’s official schedule before then.

This means, quite simply, that the United States of America has abandoned the rule of law. Maybe we did a while ago. In any case, we are now a banana republic—a rich and powerful one, at least temporarily, but still a banana republic.

The election of Hillary Clinton—our own Evita—will make the situation yet more grave. Consider something so basic as how you raise your children in a country where the president is most probably an indictable criminal and most certainly a serial liar of almost inexhaustible proportions. What do you tell them? What do their teachers tell them? A far cry from George Washington, isn’t it? What does this say about our basic morality and how does that affect all aspects of our culture? The fish, as they say, rots from the top.

Equally importantly, what does our government do as further actionable information emerges as it inevitably will? The Department of Justice, as we have seen, is already corrupt, unable to indict those in power, indeed colluding with them aboard airplanes. The same personnel will undoubtedly be in place. Can we rely on congressional oversight for justice and/or a potential impeachment? What if the Democrats control the Senate?

In the far less serious Watergate era, Republicans like Howard Baker stood up against Nixon. Democrats, however, cling to power the way they accuse Republicans of clinging to their guns and religion and will no doubt avert their eyes, pretending, with their friends in the media, that nothing out of the norm is happening. But plenty is and will. Look to Sweden for the future of America.   And with expanded entitlements and immigration, Syrian and otherwise, don’t look for a Republican revival in 2020. Those days will be long over.

“A republic, if you can keep it,” Benjamin Franklin reportedly said when emerging from the Constitutional Convention of 1787.  Yes, it may be apocryphal, but so are many important statements that are true in concept.

2016 is about to mark the year we lost that republic. It could well be an historical date like 1066, 1215 and 1776. Think about that one.

Which leads us to Donald Trump (as usual).

He is, like it or not, the last man standing to prevent this. He and all of us. And that includes you, NeverTrumpers. There is nothing, repeat NOTHING, that Trump has ever done that comes remotely within the proverbial spitting distance (even from a dragon) of the malfeasances of the Clinton Foundation. The big difference between Trump and Clinton is this: What distresses us about Donald is what he says. What distresses us about Hillary is what she does. Anyone with an IQ in the also proverbial triple digits knows which is worse.

It’s time for the NeverTrumpers to abandon what’s left of their crusade for the sake of the country.

Comments: 2 Comments

Obama Solves America’s Terrorist Shortage

Posted August 29, 2016 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: Islamic refugees, Islamic terrorism, Obama and Islamic refugees
Tags: , ,

Obama Solves America’s Terrorist Shortage, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, August 29, 2016

at

America’s terrorist shortage may be reaching an end. If Orlando didn’t satisfy you and San Bernardino left you wanting more. If you thought, why can’t we have more Boston Marathon bombings, Obama has your back, and your front and any other directions that a pressure cooker full of nails can hit you from.

This week the land of Washington, Jefferson and Mohammed Atta will reach a new milestone by taking in Syrian refugee number 10,000. It’s unknown if the TSA will shower him with balloons and confetti once he passes the gate while clutching a Koran and a copy of the Caliphate Cookbook.

Either way we hit the big explosive ten thousand. And the clock is ticking.

Media outlets are puffing out sympathetic portrayals of the oppressed Syrians moving into some neighborhood near you, and far from the bosses behind the major media outlets. All these folks fleeing the violence of their own religion want is a safe place to live. And safe inevitably means non-Islamic.

There’s an obvious lesson here that neither they nor our expertly chattering classes seem able to grasp.

But a few years from now there will be bodies and the killer will have the same last name as one of those oppressed refugees who weren’t looking to be safe, but to make us unsafe.

Indistinguishable from press releases, the stories tell us that the refugees have been thoroughly screened. Or as thoroughly as you can screen people coming from a country that we have no diplomatic relations with and major portions of which are on fire so that even if its government, which also used to sponsor global and regional terrorism as a hobby to pass the time on long summer days, was willing to cooperate with our immigration authorities, the information would be mostly useless.

How are we going to screen a Syrian or Iraqi man who claims to be from a city held by ISIS?

Are we going to phone the local ISIS office and ask the head headchopper to confirm that the fellow smiling for the camera isn’t affiliated with ISIS? Perhaps the local Jihadi Jack or Allah Akbar Abdul will regretfully inform us that they would be happy to help, but the local government office was burned down during a massacre of Christians, Yazidis and American hostages.

But there is really no doubting the fact that Obama has subjected Syrian refugees to the most thorough screening imaginable.

The most persecuted peoples in Syria are Christians and Yazidis. Obama has officially resettled 9,144 Syrians. 9,077 of them are Muslims. A mere 47 Christians and 14 Yazidis managed to slip through the nets of his careful screening process.

Remember those people on television pleading to be saved from genocide and mass rape? Obama took in barely a dozen of them.

8,984 of the poor oppressed refugees are members of the genocidal Sunni Islamic majority in Syria. That’s 98 percent.

That’s not a statistic. It’s a war crime.

A dozen from the victimized minority… and nine thousand from the genocidal majority.

When Obama talks about how thoroughly the refugees were “screened”, this is what he means. He and his people thoroughly screened out the Christians and the Yazidis. They kept out anyone who isn’t a Muslim. Christians make up 10 percent of Syria and 0.5 percent of Obama’s resettled refugees.

How is it possible that the most persecuted group in Syria is also this disadvantaged in resettlement?

Imagine a government welfare program located in a major city with a ten percent minority population whose recipients were 98.2% rich white men? Obama, the DOJ, the EOC, the FBI, the EPA and OPIARE would be burying it in lawsuits, investigations and media lynch mobs before you could whistle.

And yet the champions of disparate impact investigations who treat simple numerical discrepancies as proof of discrimination want us to believe that the 98.2% and the 0.5% are an accident of fate.

Obama, Hillary and a million media voices squawk that a “religious test” for immigration would be Un-American. But there already is a religious test. It prioritizes Muslims and excludes everyone else.

And so here we are near that big ten thousand mark.

It’s not the only milestone.

America now admits more Muslim refugees than Christian refugees worldwide. Give us your tired, poor huddled masses yearning to behead. Send us your wretched, teeming refuse eager to get on welfare and then shoot up a Florida gay nightclub or a Texas army base to maximize the diversity of their victims.

13% of Syrian refugees, supposedly fleeing ISIS, stated in a poll that they support ISIS. That’s 1,300 ISIS supporters in that big ten thousand. Along with 47 Christians and 14 Yazidis.

This is what Obama’s right side of history looks like. His moral arc of the universe is a Jihadi sword on a Christian neck.

Support among Syrians for Al Qaeda runs as high as a third. Three-quarters of Syrians, a decade ago, backed Hamas.

The Temple you blow up with a HIAS donation may be your own.

So there will be more bombings, shootings and arsons. There will be more rapes and grooming gangs. There will be more bearded men scowling at you on street corners while waving the black flag of the Jihad. And there will be more “American” youths being droned in terrorist training camps.

And, to distract from all of this, there will be more hysterical media stories trumpeting the latest petty Muslim grievance. Sorry murdered Christians and Yazidi sex slaves, you just don’t matter as much as a supposed dirty look that some Muslim somewhere received and then wrote a Facebook post about that went viral when the media reported on it. Was your wife just murdered in a Muslim terrorist attack? Here, enjoy this latest piece on how Muslims at the site of the latest terror attack fear a backlash.

Our Muslim terrorism shortage has finally been solved. The media will never have to worry that it will be deprived of being able to cover the latest act of “Nothing to do with Islam” terrorism while advocating for gun control. The Koran’s call for killing non-Muslims doesn’t kill people. Sam Colt does.

As Allah is our witness, we’ll never go a weekend without a suicide bombing again.

10,000 is just a drop in the bucket. Our entire immigration system, from top to bottom, favors Islam. That horrifying 98.2% and 0.5% contrast is only a microcosm of the way that the game is rigged.

If you are a member of ISIS, you have a better chance of reaching America than your Yazidi sex slave.

That is the simple indictment of the monstrous crime committed by the left. It is not only Obama alone who perpetrated this evil. It is every member of the left, every willing liberal who cheered the refugees who aren’t and refused to hear about the refugees who are. In the last century, they allied with Stalin. In this century, they allied with Mohammed.

The empty hearts of the bleeding hearts did not bleed for the political prisoners in gulags or the starving peasant, the Rabbi shot in the snow or the dissident tortured in a psychiatric hospital. They bled red only for their Communist killers. Today the great empathizers care nothing for the victims of Islamic terror. Their every effort is directed at bringing as much of the Sunni Muslim population responsible for ISIS, Al Qaeda and Hamas to the United States at the expense of their Christian and Yazidi victims.

The Syrian ten thousand are a crime against America and they are a crime against humanity.

Obama has left the victims of Islamic terror to rot while filling our towns and cities with its perpetrators.

Comments: Be the first to comment

CRISIS: Internet to Have Global Governance October 1.

Posted August 29, 2016 by Peter Hofman
Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: ,

CRISIS: Internet to Have Global Governance October 1. Call Congress! Better Censorship for Tyrants by

Judith Bergman •

August 29, 2016 at 6:00 am

Source: Gatestone Institute

  • The U.S. announced its plan to pass the oversight of the agency to a global governance model on October 1, 2016. The Obama Administration says that the transition will have no practical effects on the internet’s functioning or its users, and even considers the move necessary in order to maintain international support for the internet and to prevent a fracturing of its governance. Oh really?
  • The absence of the U.S. in overseeing the governance of the internet could spell the end of the current era of free speech on the internet, as well as free enterprise.
  • What guarantees are there that internet governance will not eventually end up in the hands of those very governments, seeing as they are all very eager to gain control of it? None. The Geneva Declaration of Principles makes clear that the UN, run by a majority of authoritarian governments, wants a decisive role for governments in internet governance.
  • Civil society groups and activists are calling on Congress to sue the Obama Administration — perhaps at least to postpone the date until more Americans are aware of the plan. It is not too late.

Very soon, on October 1, 2016, much of the internet’s governance will shift from the US National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA) authority to a nonprofit multi-stakeholder entity, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers, also known by its acronym ICANN.

Until now, NTIA has been responsible for key internet domain name functions, such as the coordination of the DNS (Domain Name System) root, IP addresses, and other internet protocol resources. But in March 2014, the U.S. announced its plan to let its contract with ICANN to operate key domain name functions expire in September 2015, passing the oversight of the agency to a global governance model. The expiration was subsequently delayed until October 1, 2016.

According to the NTIA’s press release at the time,

“NTIA’s responsibility includes the procedural role of administering changes to the authoritative root zone file – the database containing the lists of names and addresses of all top-level domains – as well as serving as the historic steward of the DNS. NTIA currently contracts with ICANN to carry out the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority (IANA) functions and has a Cooperative Agreement with Verisign under which it performs related root zone management functions. Transitioning NTIA out of its role marks the final phase of the privatization of the DNS as outlined by the U.S. Government in 1997”.

According to the NTIA, from the inception of ICANN, the U.S. government and internet stakeholders envisioned that the U.S. role in the IANA functions would be temporary. The Commerce Department’s June 10, 1998 Statement of Policy stated that the U.S. government “is committed to a transition that will allow the private sector to take leadership for DNS management.” The official reason, therefore, is that

“ICANN as an organization has matured and taken steps in recent years to improve its accountability and transparency and its technical competence. At the same time, international support continues to grow for the multi-stakeholder model of Internet governance as evidenced by the continued success of the Internet Governance Forum and the resilient stewardship of the various Internet institutions”.

The Obama Administration says that the transition will have no practical effects on the internet’s functioning or its users, and even considers the move necessary in order to maintain international support for the internet and to prevent a fracturing of its governance.

Oh really?

While the transition may appear ostensibly “technical”, the absence of the United States in overseeing the governance of the internet could spell the end of the current era of free speech on the internet, as well as free enterprise.

This is not merely wild speculation; it is evident in the statements that several governments, who are less than enchanted with the concept of freedom of speech, have made in recent years regarding the governance of the internet.

Some of these statements have come to light in the preparatory work of the United Nations World Summit on Information Society, known today as WSIS+10 — a process that began in 2003 with the Geneva Declaration of Principles and that continues to this day. Purportedly, the purpose of the process is a “commitment to build a people-centred, inclusive and development-oriented Information Society, where everyone can create, access, utilize and share information and knowledge” (section A.1), but already in section B.1 it becomes clear that the UN, run by a majority of authoritarian governments, wants a decisive role for governments in internet governance:

“Governments, as well as private sector, civil society and the United Nations and other international organizations have an important role and responsibility in the development of the Information Society and, as appropriate, in decision-making processes. Building a people-centred Information Society is a joint effort which requires cooperation and partnership among all stakeholders”.

The UN, in the form of International Telecommunication Union (ITU), has already tried in vain to wrestle control of the internet from ICANN, but where the ITU failed, WSIS+10 may succeed with the new “global governance” ICANN, unshielded from the protection of the US.

The urge of various governments to control the internet is evidently there. If anything, this was clear from the submissions for the December 2015 WSIS+10 UN General Assembly High Level Meeting.

The written submission of the Group of 77 plus China — a coalition, dating from 1964, of developing countries that now includes 134 nations — stated that, “The management of the Internet involves both technical and public-policy issues and … the overall authority for Internet related public policy issues is the sovereign right of States.”

China’s individual submission was even more interesting. It stated that,

“The multi-stakeholder governance model that brings together governments, the private sector and non-governmental organizations would be respected… This model should not be lopsided, and any tendency to place sole emphasis on the role of businesses and non-governmental organizations while marginalizing governments should be avoided. The roles and responsibilities of national governments in regard to regulation and security of the network should be upheld. It is necessary to ensure that United Nations plays a facilitating role in setting up international public policies pertaining to the Internet. We should work on the internationalization of Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers”.

When China says that ICANN should be internationalized, it hardly has in mind an increased role for non-governmental organizations.

Russia did not even pay lip service to the multi-stakeholder governance model but cut straight to the point:

“We consider it necessary to consecutively increase the role of governments in the Internet governance, with strengthening the activity of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in this field, as well as with support of the UNESCO activity in the development of ethical aspects of Internet use…”

“Ethical aspects of Internet use”?

Saudi Arabia, in its submission, also emphasized, that a priority for the WSIS+10 should be, “actualization of enhanced cooperation to enable governments… to carry out their roles and responsibilities in international public policy issues pertaining to the internet”.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the Obama Administration — as well as many in the high-tech community — regards the long-planned move as necessary to maintain international support for the internet and prevent a fracturing of its governance — a claim critics may find dubious. The U.S. government’s role “has long been a source of irritation to foreign governments,” according to the NTIA. One look at many foreign governments and it is easy to see why. The NTIA claims that, “These calls for replacing the multi-stakeholder model with a multilateral, government-run approach will only grow louder if the U.S. government fails to complete the transition”. Is that a threat?

But what guarantees are there that internet governance will not eventually end up in the hands of those very governments, seeing as they are all very eager to gain control of it? None.

In fact, those who claim to care about a free and uncensored internet, unbridled by government and international state organizations, should take a close look at the proposals for the plan for ICANN that the different stakeholders, including governments, came to agree on in March 2016 in Marrakech. According to this plan, the Governmental Advisory Committee (GAC), a decisional participant in ICANN, will — subject to certain limitations — be able to participate in decision-making on budgets, board member removals, and other matters of ICANN corporate governance. This is new and represents a major shift, which should concern those who care about internet freedom. Even if this plan is discarded for some reason, it shows how eagerly governments are pushing for control in internet matters. That observation alone should serve as a warning to those who take at face value the U.S. administration’s declarations that nothing will change.

The decision to transfer authority to ICANN has met with resistance in the U.S. Congress, and a coalition of more than two dozen civil society groups and activists are even calling on Congress to sue the Obama Administration — perhaps at least to postpone the date until more Americans are aware of the plan. It is not too late.

Judith Bergman is a writer, columnist, lawyer and political analyst.

 

Comments: 3 Comments

Lieberman: “A fighter does not need to the battlefield with a lawyer”

Posted August 29, 2016 by Peter Hofman
Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: ,

Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman: “A fighter does not need to go to the battlefield with a lawyer”

Aug 29, 2016, 3:46PM
Rachel Avraham

Source: Lieberman: “A fighter does not need to the battlefield with a lawyer” – Israel Politics News | JerusalemOnline

photo Credit: Reuters/Channel 2 News

Lieberman strongly criticized how the media has responded to the trial of Elor Azaria, the Hebron soldier who shot the terrorist, and the Israeli fighter who shot a Palestinian earlier today.

A fighter does not need to go to the battlefield with a lawyer,” Israel’s Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman stated this morning in reference to the trial of Elor Azaria, who is being investigated for shooting a terrorist, and the Israeli fighter who shot a Palestinian in Ofra earlier today, which was reported on JerusalemOnline.

“I would like to take this opportunity and to appeal to the Israeli media in three parts,” he stated. “First of all, the Israeli media needs to remember that Israel is a democratic country who only convicts people in court. It isn’t the media but the courts that decide. This includes Azaria and the other soldier.”

“The second thing that people need to remember is that we are fighting against terrorists every day,” Lieberman added. “They cannot go out on a mission with a lawyer glued to them. To reach a situation where every soldier asks for a lawyer before going out on a mission is impossible. I expect for the Israeli media to strengthen Israel’s deterrence and not to deter the soldiers in their struggle against the terrorists.”

Earlier today, one of Azaria’s commanders concurred with Lieberman regarding Azaria: “All of the time we updated that a knife is only the beginning and the day will come when there will be something greater, such a shooting incident or an explosive device. When the commanders came to the scene of the incident, it is the first thing that they think about. When I saw this big body and heard a citizen shout ‘fear of explosive device,’ this creates a frightening picture. I think that it is impossible to state at the scene that there is no fear and that there is a chance that something else is there.”

“As long as the incident is not finished, it is impossible to state that there was no danger to human life,” he added. “When terrorists are alive in the area, the danger exists. The terrorist was shot and moved a little. He was still a danger and I didn’t for nothing position a soldier beside him to differentiate him from the first terrorist that was shot in the head. I instructed soldiers to make sure that the terrorist doesn’t move and that they need to follow the rules of engagement. I positioned him further away for I feared an explosive device. The soldier was instructed to shoot if the terrorist implemented sudden movements or moved his hands towards his body. This shifting of responsibility is not responsible.”

Comments: 1 Comment

Sinai attacks decline as Egypt’s fight against IS yields results

Posted August 29, 2016 by Peter Hofman
Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Sinai attacks decline as Egypt’s fight against IS yields results Through targeted bombings on Islamic State’s Jabal Hilal stronghold, Egyptian military deals strong blow to terror group’s capabilities

By Avi Issacharoff

August 29, 2016, 2:51 pm

Source: Sinai attacks decline as Egypt’s fight against IS yields results | The Times of Israel

Smoke rises after a house was blown up in a military operation in Egypt’s Sinai peninsula on November 20, 2014. (Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90)

There has been a steady and significant decline in terror attacks carried out by the Islamic State in the Sinai Peninsula in recent months, according to both Egyptian and Israeli sources.

Get The Times of Israel’s Daily Edition by email
and never miss our top stories   Free Sign up!

Though the Islamic State’s armed activities continue apace in the northeast triangle framed by the Israel, Gaza and Egypt borders, there have been fewer terror attacks on the Egyptian army, with a smaller number of casualties than last year, and the attacks have been less ambitious than those IS carried out in 2014 and 2015, as a result of the group’s weakened force and diminished weapons supply.

The Egyptian military’s operations in the central Sinai Peninsula and a series of airstrikes in the Jabal Hilal region — a terrorist-controlled area — have dealt a powerful blow to IS’s military capabilities, the sources said.

For the past few years, Jabal Hilal has been the stronghold of the extremist group in the peninsula, mostly due to its topography.

The region’s extensive cave system — it is considered the “Tora Bora of the Sinai,” an allusion to the rugged region of Afghanistan that Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters made into a bastion against the United States — has made it the preferred destination for IS, the current iteration of the Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis group.

Three months ago, toward the end of May, the Egyptian military spokesperson, Col. Muhammad Samir announced the killings of “88 armed members of the jihadist group in central and northern Sinai.”

May’s large-scale aerial campaign not only took out nearly 100 IS operatives, it also injured hundreds more, dozens of them seriously. In addition to the human casualties, the bombings destroyed the group’s weapons storage facilities and ammunition caches, which had been kept hidden for years.

Essentially, the “logistic front” of the Islamic State in Sinai was destroyed, the sources said.

Around the same time, Egyptian President Abdel-Fattah el-Sissi also discussed the actions against IS, which focused on Jabal Hilal, an area that is seen as particularly problematic. According to Sissi, there had been a significant victory in the fight against terror. However, he clarified, the state of emergency for Egypt would continue.

An image taken from a video clip released by the Sinai affiliate of the Islamic State group on August 1, 2016. (MEMRI)

An image taken from a video clip released by the Sinai affiliate of the Islamic State group on August 1, 2016. (MEMRI)

Earlier this month, the Egyptian military announced another achievement, the execution of Abu Duaa al-Ansari, the presumed commander of the Islamic State in Sinai, formerly known as Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis.

According to the military’s statement, the series of bombings south of el-Arish — the provincial capital of the Sinai — in which al-Ansari was killed came as the result of precise intelligence. During the bombings, a number of weapons storehouses were destroyed and some 45 operatives were killed.

Illustrative: Egyptian security forces in the Sinai, in July 2013. (Mohamed El-Sherbeny/AFP)

Illustrative: Egyptian security forces in the Sinai, in July 2013. (Mohamed El-Sherbeny/AFP)

Throughout 2015, dozens of Egyptian soldiers were killed by IS, with the worst attack taking place during the month of Ramadan in simultaneous assaults on a number of Egyptian military outposts near the town of Sheikh Zuweid that left over 50 dead.

Since the July 1, 2015 attack, however, the Egyptian military’s intelligence has improved. In addition, security collaboration and cooperation with Israel has continued.

Recently, Egypt has made a number of significant gestures in the diplomatic realm, including a rare meet-up between its foreign minister and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, that testify to the closeness of the two sides.

Comments: Be the first to comment

Iran deploys S-300 missiles around major nuclear site

Posted August 29, 2016 by Joseph Wouk
Categories: Uncategorized

Source: Israel Hayom | Iran deploys S-300 missiles around major nuclear site

Iranian state media shows footage of long-range defense system deploying near the Fordo underground uranium enrichment facility • Protecting nuclear facilities “is paramount under all circumstances,” Iranian Air Defenses commander tells local TV channel.

News Agencies and Israel Hayom Staff

Russia’s S-300 aerial defense missile system [Archives]

 Photo credit: AFP

Iran has recently deployed advanced S-300 missiles around one of its key nuclear sites, Israel’s Army Radio reported Monday.

According to Iranian state media, the Russian-made long-range defense system was deployed near the Fordo underground uranium enrichment facility.

Protecting nuclear facilities “is paramount under all circumstances. Today, Iran’s sky is one of the most secure in the region,” Agence France-Presse quoted Iranian Air Defenses Commander Gen. Farzad Esmaili as telling the country’s IRIB TV channel on Monday.

The channel aired a video showing S-300 missile batteries being trucked into Fordo. One battery was shown being placed into position, raising its missile launchers toward the sky next to other counter-strike weaponry.

Iranian media aired the footage following a speech by Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei to air force commanders, including Esmaili. In his speech, Khamenei stressed that Iran’s military power “was for defensive purposes only.”

“Continued opposition and hype on the S-300 or the Fordo site are examples of the viciousness of the enemy,” Khamenei said. “The S-300 system is a defense system, not an assault one, but the Americans did their best for Iran not to get hold of it.”

Under the 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and the West, uranium enriching operations in Fordo, built into a mountain near the city of Qom, southwest of Tehran, stopped in January 2016. The deal required Iran to dismantle most of the estimated 19,000 centrifuges installed in the facility, keeping only 5,000 active for research purposes.

Comments: 2 Comments

Iran: No Range Limit for Our New Ballistic Missiles

Posted August 29, 2016 by danmillerinpanama
Categories: Iran scam, Iranian missiles, Obama and Iran, Obama's foreign failures, Russian missiles
Tags: , , , ,

Iran: No Range Limit for Our New Ballistic Missiles, Clarion Project, Meira Svirski, August 29, 2016

Iran-Missile-HP_9An Iranian missile test (Photo: © Reuters)

Iran has successfully played America as the fool, challenging the U.S. to stand up to its belligerence. Every time America backs down, by either making excuses for the Islamic Republic (i.e., by redefining the deal) or ignoring their latest outrage, Iran becomes more empowered.

Sanctions relief let the Iranian genie out of the bottle. Now, the terror-supporting and oppressive regime is taking its place on the world stage unrestrained and unopposed.

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

The Iranian defense minister recently pronounced that the Islamic Republic has “no limit for the range” of the ballistic missiles it is developing.

In making the pronouncement, General Hossein Dehqan also said that Iran is now on par with world standards for most of its weapons and military equipment, specifically, that “production of the national individual weapons and efforts to improve the quality and precision-striking power of ballistic missiles are among the defense ministry’s achievements…”

One of the advanced weapons Iran has developed is a ballistic missile that deploys multiple warheads against a single target. As the government-aligned Fars News Agency reported, “This makes for an efficient area attack weapon.”

(Never mind that just three months ago, that the state-owned IranianPress TV announced that “all these advancements on the military level are only for defensive reasons.”)

In addition, Iran has now deployed the long-awaited Russian-made, long-range S-300 missile system. The system was deployed to protect the country’s Fordo nuclear facility, which the commander of Iran’s air force calls paramount “in all circumstances.”

Western officials, who tried to block the delivery of the missile system, said that once in place, the S-300 would essentially eliminate the military option to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons.

The nuclear deal made with Iran and the world powers was sold to the public as a way to contain not just Iran’s nuclear weapons program, but its ballistic missile program as well.

Ballistic missiles are mainly used to deliver nuclear warheads. Under the terms of the agreement we were told that the current UN restrictions on Iran’s ballistic missile program would remain in effect for eight years, including forbidding Iran from testing of ballistic missiles.

Less than two months after the deal was formalized, a senior figure in the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC), Brigadier General Amirali Hajizadeh, announced, “Some wrongly think Iran has suspended its ballistic missile programs in the last two years and has made a deal on its missile program … We will have a new ballistic missile test in the near future that will be a thorn in the eyes of our enemies.”

As far as the defense minister Dehqan, commenting about the restrictions, he said, “To follow our defense programs, we don’t ask permission from anyone.”

After the first ballistic missile test conducted by Iran after the agreement was made, the U.S. administration backtracked, saying that the test was really not a violation of the nuclear agreement but there were “strong indications” that the test violated UN restrictions.

The second ballistic missile test came as U.S. Vice President Joe Biden was visiting Israel. Painted on the two missiles (which had the capability of reaching the Jewish state) were written the word in Hebrew, “Israel should be wiped out.”

Hajizadeh said at the time, “The 1,240-mile range of our missiles is to confront the Zionist regime. IRNA, Iran’s state news agency, reported the head of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps as saying the test had Iran’s enemies “shivering from the roar” of the missiles.

For his part, Biden said at the time, the U.S. would “act” if Iran broke the nuclear agreements.

Judging from its lack of action, the U.S. ostensibly does not count this as a violation of the agreement, despite clear evidence to the contrary.

Since the signing of the nuclear agreement Iran has engaged in aprovocative “cat and mouse” game with the U.S.

In addition, to the ballistic missile tests, since signing the agreement:

●      In September, Iran simulated a missile attack on a US aircraft carrier in an agitprop video titled “If Any War happens.”

●      In October, just three days after one of the ballistic tests, Iranian state TV aired unprecedented footage of an underground missile base.

●      In December, Iran tested rockets with live fire within 1,500 yards of American warships in the Strait of Hormuz

●      In January, Iran test-fired an upgraded surface-to surface cruise missile in a new set of wargames code-named Velayat-94

●      In January, an unarmed Iranian surveillance drone flew near U.S. and French aircraft carriers in the Gulf, managing to take “precise” photos while the ship was involved in an ongoing naval drill. An Iranian submarine was also detected in close proximity to the aircraft carriers.

●      In January, Iran captured 10 U.S. sailors whose boat had strayed into Iranian territorial waters. The soldiers were humiliated and held for 15 hours. Iran has since used the incident to mocked America in videos and plays.

“Without understanding Iranian culture, it is impossible to understand what is going on,” said Harold Rhode, an expert on Islamic culture who worked for the Pentagon for 28 years, in an interview with The Algemeiner. “Nothing is in and of itself. The way negotiations work among Iranians is that an agreement as we understand it means nothing. It is nothing more than a step along the way to getting what they want.”

“From an Iranian cultural point of view, at all times there is a balance — ‘Are you giving it or are you getting it?’ … It’s simply domination; it’s simply power.”

Iran has successfully played America as the fool, challenging the U.S. to stand up to its belligerence. Every time America backs down, by either making excuses for the Islamic Republic (i.e., by redefining the deal) or ignoring their latest outrage, Iran becomes more empowered.

Sanctions relief let the Iranian genie out of the bottle. Now, the terror-supporting and oppressive regime is taking its place on the world stage unrestrained and unopposed.

Comments: Be the first to comment

All-out Turkish-Kurd war. Barazani goes to Tehran

Posted August 29, 2016 by Joseph Wouk
Categories: Uncategorized

An all-out Turkish-Kurdish war has boiled over in northern Syria since the Turkish army crossed the border last Wednesday, Aug. 24. A Turkish Engineering Corps combat unit is equipped for crossing the Euphrates River and heading east to push the Kurds further back, but the main Kurdish force is deployed to the south not the east.   

DEBKA: All-out Turkish-Kurd war. Barazani goes to Tehran


An all-out Turkish-Kurdish war has boiled over in northern Syria since the Turkish army crossed the border last Wednesday, Aug. 24 for the avowed aim of fighting the Islamic State and pushing the Syrian Kurdish YPG militia back. Instead of falling back, the Kurds went on the offensive and are taking a hammering. This raging confrontation has stalled the US-led coalition offensive against ISIS and put on indefinite hold any US plans for campaigns to drive the jihadists out of their Syrian and Iraqi capitals of Raqqa and Mosul.
The Kurdish militia ground troops, who were backed by the US and assigned the star role in these campaigns, are now fully engaged in fighting Turkey. And, in another radical turnaround, Iraqi Kurdish leaders (of the Kurdish Regional Republic) have responded by welcoming Iran to their capital, in retaliation for the US decision to join forces with Turkey at the expense of Kurdish aspirations.
The KRG’s Peshmerga are moreover pitching in to fight with their Syrian brothers. Together, they plan to expel American presence and influence from both northern Syria and northern Iraq in response to what they perceive as a US sellout of the Kurds.

debkafile’s military analysts trace the evolving steps of this escalating complication of the Syrian war and its wider impact:

  • Since cleansing Jarablus of ISIS, Turkey has thrown large, additional armored and air force into the battle against the 35.000-strong YPG Kurdish fighters. This is no longer just a sizeable military raid, as Ankara has claimed, but a full-fledged war operation. Turkish forces are continuing to advancing in three directions and by Sunday, Aug. 28 had struck 15-17km deep inside northern Syria across a 100km wide strip.
    Their targets are clearly defined: the Kurdish enclave of Afrin in northwest Syria and the Kurdish enclave of Qamishli and Hassaka in the east, in order to block the merger of Kurdish enclaves into a contiguous Syrian Kurdish state.
    Another goal was Al-Bab north of and within range of Aleppo for a role in a major theater of the Syrian conflict. To reach Al-Bab, the Turkish force would have to fight its way through Kurdish-controlled territory.
  • The Turks are also using a proxy to fight the Syrian Kurds. Thousands of Syrian Democratic Army (SDF) rebels, whom they trained and supplied to fight Syria’s Bashar Assad army and the Islamic State, have been diverted to targeting the Kurds under the command of Turkish officers, to which Turkish elite forces are attached.
  • A Turkish Engineering Corps combat unit is equipped for crossing the Euphrates River and heading east to push the Kurds further back. Contrary to reports, the Turkish have not yet crossed the river itself or pushed the Kurds back – only forded a small stream just east of Jarablus. The main Kurdish force is deployed to the south not the east of the former ISIS stronghold.
  • Neither have Turkish-backed Syrian forces captured Manbij, the town 35km south of Jarablus which the Kurds with US support captured from ISIS earlier this month. Contrary to claims by Ankara’s spokesmen, those forces are still only 10-15km on the road to Mabij.
  • Sunday, heavy fighting raged around a cluster of Kurdish villages, Beir Khoussa and Amarneh, where the Turks were forced repeatedly to retreat under Kurdish counter attacks. Some of the villages were razed to the ground by the Turkish air force and tanks. At least 35 villagers were reported killed.
  • In four days of fierce battles, the Kurds suffered 150 dead and the Turkish side, 60.
  • debkafile military sources also report preparations Sunday to evacuate US Special Operations Forces and helicopter units from the Rmeilan air base near the Syrian-Kurdish town of Hassaka. If the fighting around the base intensifies, they will be relocated in northern Iraq.
  • Fighters of the Iraqi-Kurdish Peshmerga were seen removing their uniforms and donning Syrian YPG gear before crossing the border Sunday and heading west to join their Syrian brothers in the battle against Turkey.
  • The KRG President Masoud Barazani expects to travel to Tehran in the next few days with an SOS for Iranian help against the US and the Turks. On the table for a deal is permission from Irbil for the Iranian Revolutionary Guards to win their first military bases in the Iraqi Kurdish republic, as well as transit for Iranian military forces to reach Syria through Kurdish territory..

Comments: Be the first to comment

Report: Putin to Host Netanyahu Abbas Summit in Moscow

Posted August 29, 2016 by Peter Hofman
Categories: Uncategorized

By: JNi.Media Published: August 29th, 2016

Source: The Jewish Press » » Report: Putin to Host Netanyahu Abbas Summit in Moscow

Moscow’s Red Square / Photo credit: Vicente Villamón

Advanced talks have been conducted recently in preparation for a summit conference with Prime Minister Netanyahu and Chairman Abbas in Moscow this fall, according to the daily Yediot Aharonot. The paper reported on Monday that both PA and Israeli officials have confirmed that the summit is scheduled to take place in October or shortly thereafter, under the auspices of Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Abbas has personally expressed his willingness, in principle, to partake in a Moscow summit. However, according to Yediot, the PA Chairman still insists that Israel first commit to freezing settlement construction and carry out the fourth phase of terrorist prisoners release which was halted when Secretary of State Kerry’s peace initiative collapsed in 2015. Abbas also insists on setting a specific date for the end of negotiations and for reaching a final agreement.

Political sources in Jerusalem have told Yediot that when Netanyahu and Putin spoke on the phone last week, the summit plan was part of their discussion. But they stress that the summit idea at this point is “mere speculation, it’s too soon.” Still, the same sources say Netanyahu is willing to meet with Abbas directly any time.

On Wednesday, August 17, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Bogdanov, Putin’s Special Representative for the Middle East and Africa, discussed prospects for advancing PA-Israel peace talks with Abbas in Amman, and delivered a personal message from Putin to Abbas. Since then, Bogdanov has met twice with the head of the PA mission in Moscow Faed Mustafa and with Israeli ambassador Zvi Hefetz. One of Bogdanov’s meetings with Hefetz was on August 24, the day of the Putin-Netanyahu phone conversation.

Comments: Be the first to comment

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »