Palestinians are Islamic and Islam is the religion of peace. Don’t forget it, unless you are a hateful Islamophobe and look forward to being murdered.
A You Tube copy of a heart-warming Palestinian instructional video on how to achieve blessed Islamic peace with Jewish oppressors is embedded a few paragraphs below. The video has “gone viral” in the Palestinian social media.
The 1 minute and 13 second-video, as seen below, shows the “teacher” calmly walking up to a “victim,” stabbing him, and walking away.
One of the tactics appears to imitate the Islamic State method of beheading.
The guide to killing Jews teaches that after stabbing the victim, the knife should be twisted to maximize wounds and cause death.
To put the video in proper perspective, here’s an excerpt from Imam Obama’s October 3, 2014 Eid al-Adha greeting to Muslims around the world:
As our Muslim neighbors and friends gather for Eid celebrations, Muslim Americans are among the millions of pilgrims joining one of the world’s largest and most diverse gatherings. Hajj brings together Muslims from around the world – Sunni and Shiite – to share in reverent prayer, side by side. It serves as a reminder that no matter one’s tribe or sect, race or religion, gender or age, we are equals in humanity. [Emphasis added.]
On Eid, Muslims continue the tradition of donating to the poor and joining efforts with other faith communities in providing assistance to those suffering from hunger, sickness, oppression, and conflict. Their service is a powerful example of the shared roots of the world’s Abrahamic faiths and how our communities can come together in shared peace, with dignity and a sense of justice. [Emphasis added.]
And now, the beautiful video showing Palestinian pathways to a shared humanitarian peace between Muslims and Jews with dignity and (social) justice for all:
In similar vein, a Palestinian envoy to Iran recently “said that ‘Israel is a cancer’ that ‘will be destroyed’ . . . ”
He is the envoy from the Palestinian Authority, Israel’s peace partner in discussions which Secretary Kerry has pushed ever since he first honored and delighted Israel by becoming the U.S. Secretary of State.
Here’s an Andrew Klavan video condemning Israel’s own brutal war on innocent cancer cells. They are probably not the types of cancer cells to which the esteemed Palestinian Authority envoy referred.
Finally, here’s an uplifting video from November of 2011 about the glories of the Arab Islamic Spring and the peace, enlightenment and happiness it is bringing to all whom it touches.
Qassem Suleimani and Hadi al-Ameri head of Badr Organization
The objective of mullahs in dispatching revolutionary guards and strengthening militias is not to fight ISIS but to compensate for the decisive blow of Nouri al-Maliki’s ouster and to consolidate dominion of velayat-e faqih caliphate over Iraq
NCRI – The Iranian Resistance warns of the escalating presence of the criminal revolutionary guards of the terrorist Qods Force (QF) in Iraq that is a blatant breach of UN Security Council resolutions and underscores that their objective is not to fight ISIS, but to compensate for the heavy blow caused by Maliki’s ouster and to consolidate the velayat-e faqih caliphate in Iraq.
The slaughter and forced migration, along with aggression against the Iraqi people, in particular the Sunnis, and ridding them of their property by the revolutionary guards and their affiliated militias under the pretext of fighting ISIS has endangered peace and security throughout the region and fuels the machine of extremism and terrorism in the whole region.
1. According to Resistance’s information from inside the regime, the number of revolutionary guards of the QF now reaches 7000 in Iraq. A large number of them have been stationed in Baghdad, Diyala and Salah ad-Din provinces and the cities of Samarra, Karbala, Najaf, Khaneqain, Sa’adiyah and Jaloula. A great number of commanders and experts from the revolutionary guards accompany the terrorist militias in various areas of Iraq. Regime’ fighter jets have been flying in Iraq since early November and are currently carrying out military missions in Diyala and Salah ad-Din provinces.
2. The extent of this meddling is such that mullahs’ Defense Minister Dehqan stated on December 20: “In the realm of weapons and equipment, usually their governments (Iraq and Syria) purchase from us and in the realms of training and advising we are serving the armies and resistance forces of Syria, Lebanon and Iraq.” He added: The presence of Qasem Soleimani in Iraq “is to offer advice, guidance and training… the people who have gone there are to advise and offer training to help out with organizing and training and to offer advice on operational plans”.
3. The clerical regime and the QF that had brought Iraq under their hidden occupation in a step by step manner since 12 years ago, had taken over all aspects of that country through their proxy prime minister. Subsequent to the initiation of the popular uprising against Maliki in January 2013, they broadened their interference to suppress the uprising and to strengthen their hand in Iraq.
4. Since January 2014 that Maliki initiated the Anbar conflict and suffered a severe defeat in the hands of the people and tribes of that region, the Iranian regime felt imperiled and thus the presence of the QF in Iraq took on new dimensions. Mohammad Hejazi, Deputy for Logistics in regime’s General Command Headquarters of the Armed Forces, announced that the clerical regime is prepared to offer Iraq equipment and consultation (IRNA News Agency – January 5, 2014).
5. In February 2014, a number of QF commanders who had participated in the slaughter of the Syrian people went to Iraq to pass on their experiences in trainings to the Iraqi forces. Intimately and directly they transferred their experience in Iran and Syria to Ali Qaidan, the at the time Commander of the Army, and Fadhil Barwari, the Commander of the Golden (Dirty) Division. They primarily order to Maliki to establish a Basij-like force. They noted that they had initiated the civil defense in Syria which is capable of saving Assad’s regime; the classical army is designed to fight an external war and is useless in guerrilla warfare.
6. During this period, the QF beefed up the terrorist militia groups under its command such as Asa’ib Ahl al-Haq, Kata’ib Hezbollah and Badr Corps and dispatched them to Anbar Province, especially to Ramadi and Garmeh regions. Their first task was to pump morale into Maliki’s military. Since March 2014, 15-day training courses were arranged for these militias in Iran; the same thing that the regime had initiated two years ago for the mercenaries who were dispatched to Syria.
7. In March 2014, the QF sent some trainers from the Lebanese Hezbollah to Iraq to organize and train the militias and concurrently sent all types of weapons and equipment in an attempt to organize a powerful force capable of preserving the power in the hands of Maliki and Iranian regime’s elements.
8. Since late March 2014, the militias who had been equipped and organized in orderly units and were accompanied by QF commanders were deployed in battlefields and specific defensive lines were trusted to them. The Garmeh region until Zaidan and Baghdad Beltway from Taramiyah to Abu Ghoraib was given to Asa’ib militias; Fallujah and Baghdad Beltway from south of the airport to Yousefiyah was given to the Kata’ib terrorist group; and the Badr forces were deployed to the west of Fallujah and Ramadi. A division composed of the militias was organized to be deployed in Baghdad’s Beltway from Taramiyah to Madaen, west of Baghdad. Maliki and the QF jointly provided their equipment. Special equipment, bombs and missiles were transferred to Najaf and Baghdad through air transport with coordination by Hadi Ameri, Iraq’s at the time Minister of Transportation, to be transferred subsequently to these forces.
9. During this period, the commanders of the QF were placed in active liaison and direct coordination with Maliki’s army and police commanders and a joint Tactical Operating Center (TOC) was set up in Anbar. IRGC Brigadier General Iraj Masjedi, Qasem Soleimani’s “supreme advisor”, and a number of other commanders of the QF were deployed in Iraq. In addition, “Esmail Qa’ani Akbarnejad”, Deputy to Qasem Soleimani, regularly travelled to Iraq to supervise the situation.
10. Following the disintegration of Maliki’s army on June 10 and as Ninawa and Salah ad-Din slipped from his hands, the QF dispatched its command system to Iraq in a matter of hours. In the early days of this development, over 2000 seasoned revolutionary guards entered Iraq who were primarily tasked to Baghdad’s Beltway. Others were deployed in Diyala. Concurrently, people from IRGC Air Force were deployed in Diyala, Salah ad-Din and Kurdistan to collect information and direct drones. The number of revolutionary guards continues to rise and has now reached 7000.
11. At this stage, Soleimani used Abu Mehdi Mohandess, the known terrorist, as his Deputy of Operations in Iraq and commander of the militias and formed a special TOC for coordinating the militias in Baghdad. The military and security responsibility for Diyala was given to Hadi Ameri, Maliki’s Minister of Transportation. These two are both in the list of 32000 employees of IRGC in Iraq. This is the list that the Iranian Resistance exposed back in 2006.
12. To compensate for the sidelining of Maliki and regain former status, the clerical regime ramped up the presence of the QF in August and the presence of Qasem Soleimani increased, especially in battlefields such as Amerli, Jarf al-Sakhar, Sa’adiyah and Jaloula. In order to build up the morale of its defeated mercenaries, regime’s Farsi and Arabic speaking media staged a noisy propaganda campaign about the presence of Soleimani and the IRGC in Iraq.
13. During this period, organizing the “popular Basij” forces was left to the militias and the QF. In an interview with al-Iraqiya state TV on December 22, Maliki’s National Security Advisor Faleh Fayad stipulated that there are a number of “Iranian advisors” within the “popular Basij” forces.
14. The objective of IRGC and the militias is not to fight ISIS, but to exploit on the present situation and consolidate their grip on Iraq. That is why the massacres, aggressions, forced migration of populations, and ridding the Sunnis of their property that have been ongoing by these forces since 2003 took on unprecedented dimensions in the recent months. In an interview on December 1st with the official website of Kurdish Democratic Party (KDP), Sheik Jafar, KDP’s official in Khaneqain, said: “The actions of Shia militias is like ISIS or even worse. They are experts in killing, burning and looting. They have disrupted 90% of Sa’adiyah and looted and burned all its places… Their objective is to expand their rule and influence… They rarely use the Iraqi flag and mostly hoist a flag that carries the emblem of the Islamic Republic of Iran… They have initiated purging of all Sunnis and kill people anywhere they can… These forces blew up people’s homes under the pretext of neutralizing mines and explosives.”
15. In a shocking report on December 15, the Al-Jazeera TV unveiled the bombing of Sunni areas and forcible displacement of the Sunnis in Iraq including in Diyala and Salah ad-Din and especially in Samarra, various districts of Baghdad and its suburbs such as Mahmoudiyah, Arab Jabour, Jarf-al-Sakhar, Yousefiyah, Latifiyah, Abu Ghraib, Taji and Moshahedeh by the militias affiliated with the QF. The number of forcibly displaced people in Baghdad reaches one million. A resident of Jarf-al-Sakhar testified, “Militias burn homes, arrest the youth, and kill them in undisclosed locations… No Sunni family is left in Jarf-al-Sakhar. They arrest young and old men, forcibly displace the families, and kill them… We are witnessing the beginning of an Iranian caliphate just as ISIS has announced its caliphate.”
16. On 14 October 2014, in a detailed report titled “Absolute impunity, Militia rule in Iraq”, Amnesty International underscored the affiliation of the militias to the Iranian regime and wrote:
• The growing power of Shi’a militias has contributed to an overall deterioration in security and an atmosphere of lawlessness.
• Shi’a militias are ruthlessly targeting Sunni civilians on a sectarian basis under the guise of fighting terrorism, in an apparent bid to punish Sunnis for the rise of the IS and for its heinous crimes.
• Scores of unidentified bodies have been discovered across the country handcuffed and with gunshot wounds to the head, indicating a pattern of deliberate execution-style killings.
• Militia members, numbering tens of thousands, wear military uniforms, but they operate outside any legal framework and without any official oversight.
• By granting its blessing to militias who routinely commit such abhorrent abuses, the Iraqi government is sanctioning war crimes and fuelling a dangerous cycle of sectarian violence that is tearing the country apart.
• Successive Iraqi governments have displayed a callous disregard for fundamental human rights principles. The new government must now change course and put in place effective mechanisms to investigate abuses by Shi’a militias and Iraqi forces and hold accountable those responsible.
17. On 18 September 2014, the Foreign Policy website in an article titled “Iraq’s Shiite militias are becoming as great a danger as the Islamic State” wrote: “These groups, many of which have deep ideological and organizational links to Iran… are actively recruiting — drawing potential soldiers away from the Iraqi army and police and bringing fighters into highly ideological, anti-American, and rabidly sectarian organizations. Many of these trainees are not simply being used to push back Sunni jihadists, but in many cases form a rear guard used to control districts that are supposedly under Baghdad’s control…In early June, Shiite militias, along with Iraqi security forces, reportedly executed around 255 prisoners, including children…The growth of these pro-Iranian Shiite militias, and many more like them, helps demonstrate Iran’s goals for the domination of Shiite Iraq. These groups not only benefit from Iran’s patronage and organizational capabilities — they also all march to Tehran’s ideological tune. They are loyal to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei and Iran’s ideology of absolute wilayat-e faqih.”
18. On September 16, New York Times wrote: “‘We break into an area and kill the ones who are threatening people,’ said one 18-year-old fighter with Asaib Ahl al-Haq… insisting that their militia commanders had been given authority by Iraqi security officials… This militia was once a leading killer of American troops … Alla Maki, a Sunni lawmaker said that under former Prime Minister Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, Asaib Ahl al-Haq was ‘encouraged to do dirty jobs like killing Sunnis, and they were allowed to operate freely. Now the international community are all being inspired by the removal of Maliki personally, but the policy is still going on’… So far, though, there is no sign of any official attempts to investigate even the most publicized allegations of extrajudicial killings of Sunnis by Asaib Ahl al-Haq.”
Also, Obama’s need for a legacy consistent with his ideology trumps all else, including Iran’s abysmal human rights record, its theocratic government, its support for terrorism, its hatred for Israel and desire to eliminate her, its duplicity in its P5+1 negotiations and its insistence on getting (or keeping) nukes. True, removal of statutorily based sanctions would require congressional action. However, Obama has little interest in avoiding constitutional irregularities. No congressional approval was granted for the “temporary suspension” of sanctions and laws inconsistent with Obama’s desires can be and are waived. Litigation over the de facto removal of sanctions by executive order would take many years.– DM)
After almost 53 years of Cold War between the U.S. and Cuba, the transformation of ties between these two adversaries has sparked a considerable amount of debate with respect to the normalization of ties with other longstanding rivals. The possibility of resolving other diplomatic imbroglios, specifically the revival of diplomatic ties between the U.S. and Iran is a case that comes to mind.
Some Iranians showed their excitement on Twitter with regards to the Cuban deal. Some showed hope that their government will be next and they could soon see an American embassy in Tehran. However, others thought that an Iran-U.S. deal is an idealistic and unreachable dream.
Indeed, any normalization of diplomatic relationships between the Islamic Republic and the U.S. will likely have significant positive impacts on both nations, leading to a critical strategic and geopolitical shift in the Middle Eastern political chessboard. Currently, both countries have some shared strategic and geopolitical objectives in Iraq and Syria particularly when it comes to fighting ISIS.
A possible Iranian deal will remove the economic sanctions on the Islamic Republic, assisting Tehran to achieve its highest economic potential in exports, imports and wealth. The tourist industry would be revived in Iran, with many European and Americans fond of visiting thousands of years old historical sites in Esfahan Shiraz, Hamadan, and other provinces. Normalization of diplomatic ties will lead to the flow of (primarily) European companies to do business with the Islamic Republic. In addition, as Iranian youth have shown to be in favor of American brands and products, American manufactures will find a share in Iran’s market as well. Further, U.S. airplane companies will begin cooperation with Iranian airlines.
As many people are pondering on the likelihood of a deal similar to the recent Cuba agreement with Iran, the question is whether the executive order to lift the embargo on the Islamic Republic and conducting back channel diplomacy to fully open ties with Tehran is possible?
Iran’s file is more complicated and multilayered
There are some partial similarities between the Obama administration’s method to initiate a deal with Raul Castro’s government and the way it has recently approached the Islamic Republic. The major commonalities are the back channel diplomacy and talks.
Similar to the Cuban deal, the Obama administration has conducted back channel talks with Iranian politicians with respect to Iran’s nuclear program. In addition, President Obama sent a clandestine letter to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei highlighting some of the shared strategic, national and geopolitical interests that both nations have in the Middle East.
Nevertheless, these commonalities in diplomatic approaches have led some scholars, politicians, and policy analysts to jump to the conclusion that the same deal should be applicable to the case of Iran because such an approach was possible with Cuba and the embargo on Cuba was lifted.
But, not too fast.
Iran’s file is much more complicated, multifaceted and multilayered than the Cuban case. While Cuba is a small island close to the state of Florida with a population of approximately 11 million, Iran, with a population of over 80 million, is located in the complex geopolitical chessboard of the Middle East, and entangled among mixture of alliances and enmities in the oil rich region.
Second of all, from Washington’s perspective, Cuba has hardly been a serious threat to American strategic, geopolitical, or economic interests. On the other hand, the Islamic Republic has been a major player in scuttling U.S. foreign policy objectives and opposing its allies (including Israel) in the Middle East.
Third, several crucial regional developments are viewed from the prism of a zero-sum game for both Iranian and American officials. Iranian leaders are less likely to accept any compromises on their top foreign policy priorities, such as: keeping President Bashar al-Assad in power, withdrawing its financial, advisory, intelligence, and military support to the Iraqi and Syrian government, and assisting formidable proxies such as Hezbollah.
Fourth, there was no international consensus on the U.S. embargo and economic sanctions against the Cuban government. As a result, President Obama can issue an executive order to lift the embargo. Many European countries were doing business with the Cuban government and the United Nations repeatedly condemned U.S. sanctions. On the other hand, the four rounds of economic sanctions on Tehran came with the approval of the U.N. Security Council. Unlike Cuba, many regional and global powers are dubious about Iran’s nuclear and regional hegemonic ambitions.
Fifth, several developments in Iran, such as revelations of clandestine nuclear sites, the possibility of testing exploding detonators for nuclear weapons in Parchin military site, and the military dimension of Tehran’s nuclear program, have led to regional and international strain.
Finally, and more fundamentally, unlike Castro, Khamenei has shown no interest in fully normalizing diplomatic ties with the United States. For example, the Obama administration received no positive response from Khamenei through its diplomacy. In addition, there is no official public debate among Iranian politicians, across various spectrums of Iran’s political system, of even allowing the opening of an American embassy in Tehran. The U.S. domestic opposition to normalize ties with Iran, particularly from the Republicans, is much higher in comparison to the Cuban case. Although the Obama administration has taken some back channel steps to negotiate with the Islamic Republic, Iran’s supreme leader has not responded with signs of willingness to normalize relationships and he has been clear in not trusting the “Great Satan. “
The signal that Iranian leaders received from the Cuban deal is not what the Western media depicts- that Iran is optimistic about normalizing ties with the U.S.. The message that Tehran received was that the Islamic Republic has to persist in its policies and that economic sanctions will ultimately fail. As foreign ministry spokeswoman Marzieh Akfham articulated: “The defense by the Cuban government and people of their revolutionary ideals over the past 50 years shows that policies of isolation and sanctions imposed by the major powers against the wishes of independent nations are ineffective.”
(For European nations, America and others, abortive efforts to bring “peace” among Israel and warring Islamic factions provide welcome distractions from difficulties elsewhere which are even less tractable and more damaging to them. — DM)
[N]ot even a utopian-style peace treaty will end the fight against Israel that is being waged by Europe and the global left wing (and here as well, to some degree). The dozens of organizations that have been established to take away the Jews’ right to their own land (for some reason, these groups are known as “human-rights organizations”; after all, you know, we Jews have no human rights) will no longer show any interest in the cruel dictatorship that they helped set up next door. Instead, they will aim their heavy artillery against Israeli society, which they will accuse of racism for being an exclusive state for the Jewish ethnic group instead of a “state of all its citizens,” which is actually code for “a state of all its nationalities.”
*****************
1. The upcoming elections have plunged Israel into a wartime atmosphere, and a good deal of blame is being thrown about. Each side, instead of looking to its own misdeeds, is making accusations against the other. They are not saying, “We have sinned,” but rather, “You have sinned.”
Here, too, the accusations are meant to generate shallow headlines rather than addressing deep issues. This is a big mistake. Despite the piles of mud and refuse that are customarily dumped onto the average Israeli, the average Israeli is generally well aware of what is going on. They understand ideology and vision.
On the political plane, one gets the impression that the discourse, at least on the Left, is still stuck in the 1980s, before the great experiments that the Oslo Accords brought upon us — before Hamas, before Islamic State, before the Middle East fell to pieces. What can Tzipi Livni accomplish with the Palestinians that she hasn’t done over the past two years, when she was in charge of the talks with them? Did she bring any sort of agreement to the government that it turned down? If so, let her tell us.
But she knows that there is nobody to talk to on the other side. They never had the slightest desire to end the conflict with the Jews. I would be glad to hear any Arab leader name his final demands — the ones for which, if they were fulfilled, he would sign on the dotted line that the conflict was over and state that he had no further claims. Are there any volunteers?
We have not even mentioned Jerusalem or the refugees or recognition of Israel as a Jewish state. The demand that our neighbors recognize Israel as the national home of the Jewish people was not for us, but for them. That is the litmus test of the integrity of their intentions. Do they recognize the right of Jews to any part of the historical Land of Israel? We know that any Arab leader who grants such recognition can expect an uncomfortable death.
That is the reason for the effort to anchor the Jewish nature of the State of Israel in a Basic Law. It is because not even a utopian-style peace treaty will end the fight against Israel that is being waged by Europe and the global left wing (and here as well, to some degree). The dozens of organizations that have been established to take away the Jews’ right to their own land (for some reason, these groups are known as “human-rights organizations”; after all, you know, we Jews have no human rights) will no longer show any interest in the cruel dictatorship that they helped set up next door. Instead, they will aim their heavy artillery against Israeli society, which they will accuse of racism for being an exclusive state for the Jewish ethnic group instead of a “state of all its citizens,” which is actually code for “a state of all its nationalities.”
2. As we look on, Europe is falling like a ripe fruit at the feet of the radical Islam sweeping over it. The more terrorism conquers the streets of Europe, the greater the Europeans’ desire will be to pay the terrorists a ransom in exchange for being left in peace, unmolested. As history has taught us, the ransom will be the Jews. The ludicrous statements by the European parliaments about recognizing the Palestinian state show the blindness of a society in decline that lost its basic instincts long ago. The Europeans care nothing about the Palestinians, whom they have doomed to a life of misery and suffering under oppressive regimes that are among the worst in the world, where there is no such thing as basic human rights.
The Palestinians are the last thing that the Europeans care about, just as they care nothing about the atrocities being perpetrated in Syria, Iraq or Africa. The Europeans are recognizing the Palestinian state not because they have any desire to improve our neighbors’ situation, but because they have a problem with the Jews. They always did.
Ironically, the return to Zion made the Jewish problem worse because it gave the Jews an independent political living space — which the Europeans find completely unacceptable. That is also the reason why there are dozens of European organizations in this region, and why they funnel hundreds of millions of euros supposedly to help the Palestinians, but actually in efforts to undermine the legitimacy of the Jewish state. The “peace process” is just one more tool in that mechanism.
3. The talk of a “diplomatic agreement” is also a media ransom, lip-service paid by politicians who seek the sponsorship of the media party. Avigdor Lieberman is quite familiar with this work.
“We must reach a diplomatic agreement,” he said in a “closed-door conference,” and received flattering headlines right away. “What is going on today is that they are doing nothing; there is a status quo. The initiative must be a comprehensive regional agreement.”
Have we not heard those empty phrases a thousand times already? Have we not tried to reach a political agreement in all kinds of ways? Has Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu not gotten into trouble with his own camp over it? Did he not freeze construction in Judea and Samaria for ten months? And, before him, did Ehud Olmert not offer our neighbors what even Lieberman (I hope) would never dare offer?
And what about the two Yisrael Beytenu princes, Uzi Landau and Yair Shamir? Where are they? Why are they not responding to their party chairman’s heretical statements? After all, were they not the ones who gave Lieberman the stamp of approval to be a right-wing party? More evidence of Lieberman’s desertion to the Left is his use of the well-known leftist scare tactic terminology: “a political tsunami.” But what burst out this week was more of a police tsunami against the members of Yisrael Beytenu. Now that the leader has adopted the Orwellian language of peace and speaks the language of the media party, maybe they will cut him some slack.
4. In the end, the dispute between most of the Right and most of the Left boils down to one question: Do we believe the Palestinians or not? Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has declared many times that he will never recognize Israel as a Jewish state, and he specifically named 6 million, with all its symbolism, as the number of Palestinians who expect their demand for the right of return to be fulfilled. Abbas is currently being kept alive by the Israeli army, which is protecting him as they would a delicate flower from attacks by the street, which supports Hamas. This does not stop the Palestinians from going all over the world, accusing us of every possible atrocity.
The purpose of their action is to gain the maximum amount of territory at the minimum price — actually, for no price at all — but not to establish a tiny statelet. The past hundred years have taught us that what unites Arab-Palestinians is not the desire to improve their own living conditions, but to destroy the Jews’ lives. What more has to happen for us to believe what they say? In the meantime, they are sticking close to us so that we will protect them against Islamic State.
5. So what is the solution? First, whoever said that there was a solution? Second, if we tried and did not succeed, maybe we ought to leave something for future generations to accomplish. You do not really believe the well-known chorus of lamentation that things are bad here and that the country is “stuck.”
We have succeeded quite well, thank God, considering the fact that only one of our hands is engaged in construction, development and cultural work, since the other is busy with self-defense. Where were we just 70 years ago, in 1944 — and where are we now? Let us put things in perspective.
(Surely Imam Obama will soon issue a fatwa proclaiming that the Islamic Republic of Iran is not Islamic. Right? Meanwhile the P5+1 Iran Scam continues unabated. — DM)
Hassan Rouhani / AP
Iran executed a record-shattering 411 citizens in the first half of 2014 and a total of 852 people in the last 15 months, including at least eight juveniles, according to a new United Nations report that will be introduced to the organization’s General Assembly Tuesday.
In addition to a surge in state-sanctioned killings that a U.N. official referred to as “shocking,” Iran continues to torture imprisoned individuals using techniques such as amputation, electroshock, flogging, and burnings, according to the report, which details human rights in the Islamic Republic.
Ahmed Shaheed, the U.N.’s special rapporteur for human rights in Iran, described the situation in the country as “shocking” and pushed countries such as the United States to finally speak up about it.
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, who was hailed by the Western media as a “moderate,” has not lived up to promises to reform the judicial system, Shaheed told reporters on Monday.
Rouhani “is unable to address the issues, unable to arrest this trend, to convert his promises which spoke to arresting this trend into action,” Shaheed, who is barred from entering Iran, was quoted as telling reporters on Monday.
Executions in particular have hit record levels in Iran, according to the report.
“Between July 2013 and June 2014, at least 852 individuals were reportedly executed, representing an alarming increase in the number of executions in relation to the already-high rates of previous years,” the report states. “The government also continues to execute juvenile offenders.”
Human rights organizations have put the number of those executed during Rouhani’s term at 967, while Iranian opposition groups have claimed it surpasses 1,000.
Iranian authorities over the weekend carried out the execution of a 26-year-old female rape victim who had killed her attacker in a violent struggle.
Multiple Iranian refugees who have fled the country reported being tortured during stints in Iranian prisons, according to the report.
Many were subjected to “psychological and physical torture” meant to elicit false confessions of crimes, according to the report.
Others who spoke to the U.N. “reported torture and ill-treatment and psychological abuse, such as prolonged solitary confinement, mock executions, and the threat of rape, along with physical abuse, including severe beatings, use of suspension and pressure positions, electroshock, and burnings,” according to the report.
Prisoners also faced “amputation and corporal punishment,” such as flogging, according to the report.
Democratic rights such as freedom of expression also were reported to have led to executions in Iran, a development the report dubs “deeply troubling.”
“Members of ethnic minority groups, in particular those espousing ethnocultural, linguistic or minority religious rights, appear to be disproportionately charged with moharebeh [‘enmity against God’] and mofsed fel-arz [‘corruption on Earth’], sometimes seemingly for exercising their rights to peaceful expression and association,” the report states.
Iran is gearing up to further crack down on democratic displays.
Draft laws in existence “appear to further undermine the rights to freedom of expression” and will facilitate “discrimination against women” by rolling back protection against forced marriage and education rights, according to the report.
Women in Iran continue to face great oppression and state-sanctioned violence.
At least 66 percent of Iranian women reported being a victim of domestic violence, with the current legislative framework in the country being “insufficient to combat such violence,” according to the report.
“Laws continue to explicitly allow for non-consensual sexual relations in marriage,” the report found. “There are insufficient safe houses for women in need of refuge.”
Any Iranian women seeking to leave an abusive relationship, for instance, must “first prove that there is a significant risk of bodily harm or a threat to her life,” the report explains.
Moreover, under Iranian civil code, women seeking to obtain a divorce as a result of domestic violence must first prove that the abuse was intolerable,” the report says.
Restrictions on the Internet in Iran also continue to grow.
“Severe content restrictions” continue to be imposed and many who skirt the laws can face harsh prosecution, according the report, which put the number of blocked websites at 5 million.
When confronted by the U.N. about this, Iran maintained that it, “(like many countries) blocks all immoral websites in the arts or social groups,” according to the report.
The head of Iran’s human rights council over the weekend dismissed the U.N. report.
“Our first problem is that they should explain why [the U.N. wants to send] a special rapporteur, what has happened in Iran that they have appointed a special rapporteur and why this rapporteur is needed for Iran and not for other countries,” Javad Larijani was quoted as saying on Sunday by Iran’s semi-official Fars News Agency.
Larijani accused the United Nations of fabricating information about the country’s human rights record.
Insanity, craziness or madness is a spectrum of behaviors characterized by certain abnormal mental or behavioral patterns.
Although the definition references “abnormal mental or behavioral patterns” [emphasis added], the behaviors here involved have become increasingly “normal.” Multicultural linguistics are part, but only part, of the problem.
Insane responses to Iran nukes, terrorism support and human rights
As the P5+1 negotiations continue under Obama’s guidance, Iran appears increasingly likely to get or keep nukes. Iran knows Obama.
The Iranian president’s senior advisor has called President Barack Obama “the weakest of U.S. presidents” and described the U.S. leader’s tenure in office as “humiliating,” according to a translation of the highly candid comments provided to the Free Beacon. [Emphasis added.]
. . . .
And with the deadline quickly approaching on talks between the U.S. and Iran over its contested nuclear program, Younesi’s denigrating views of Obama could be a sign that the regime in Tehran has no intent of conceding to America’s demands.
. . . .
“Americans witnessed their greatest defeats in Obama’s era: Terrorism expanded, [the] U.S. had huge defeats under Obama [and] that is why they want to compromise with Iran,” Younesi said.
. . . .
“We [the Islamic Republic] have to use this opportunity [of Democrats being in power in the U.S.], because if this opportunity is lost, in future we may not have such an opportunity again,” Younesi said. [Emphasis added.]
. . . .
The criticism of Obama echoes comments made recently by other world leaders and even former members of the president’s own staff, such as Former Defense Secretary Robert Gates.
Do enough of us, and of perhaps greater importance enough of our “leaders,” know Him as well as Iran does?
The P5+1 negotiations were a scam from the beginning and the scam continues, enhanced by perceived needs to work with the (Shiite) Islamic Republic of Iran to degrade the Sunni (but “non-Islamic”) Islamic State and otherwise to “degrade” terrorism.
The Iranian government is well known for its funding of terrorism. The U. S. Government has long been well aware of it.
The United States State Department describes Iran as an “active state sponsor of terrorism.”[2]US Secretary of StateCondoleezza Rice elaborated stating, “Iran has been the country that has been in many ways a kind of central banker for terrorism in important regions like Lebanon through Hezbollah in the Middle East, in the Palestinian Territories, and we have deep concerns about what Iran is doing in the south of Iraq.”[1]
So is the Obama Administration.
In July 2012, the United States State Department released a report on terrorism around the world in 2011. The report states that “Iran remained an active state sponsor of terrorism in 2011 and increased its terrorist-related activity” and that “Iran also continued to provide financial, material, and logistical support for terrorist and militant groups throughout the Middle East and Central Asia.” The report states that Iran has continued to provide “lethal support, including weapons, training, funding, and guidance, to Iraqi Shia militant groups targeting U.S. and Iraqi forces, as well as civilians,” despite pledging to support the stabilization of Iraq, and that the Qods Force provided training to the Taliban in Afghanistan on “small unit tactics, small arms, explosives, and indirect fire weapons, such as mortars, artillery, and rockets.” The report further states that Iran has provided weapons and training to the Assad regime in Syria which has launched a brutal crackdown on Syrian rebels, as well as providing weapons, training, and funding to Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine-General Command, among others, and has assisted in rearming Hizballah. [Emphasis added.]
Iran is also remarkable for its failure to provide even minimal human rights. For example, it has been reported that Iran executed more than four hundred people during the first half of 2014. That’s more than two per day.
Despite Iran’s state anti-Semitism, the recent arrest of U.S. journalists, and the continued oppression of women, the Obama administration has been attempting a rapprochement with the Iranian regime. Fending off Iran hawks in Congress and the D.C. punditocracy, the administration has argued for a policy of constructive engagement, pursuing diplomacy over military action to halt Iran’s nuclear program. The execution of two gay men, while it may not be surprising, certainly doesn’t make that “engagement” any easier.
Iran’s cooperation also is seen as essential to managing the chaos in Iraq and the Islamic State. With U.S. airstrikes against the Sunni militants, on-off (now definitely off) support of Iraq’s Shiite (ex-) Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, and the possible disintegration of Iraq, this cooperation—or at least not overt opposition—is surely of more strategic importance than the latest human rights abuse. [Emphasis added.]
Iran’s support for terrorism, abysmal violation of even the most basic human rights — and what these Iranian characteristics suggest that Iran is likely to do with its nukes — appear to be deemed of no importance by the P5+1 negotiators.
Domestic terrorism
Terrorism is often labeled “workplace violence,” a “traffic accident“ or just about anything but Islamic. This is from Jihad Watch:
A traffic incident in Jerusalem. Another traffic incident in Canada just a few days ago. Odd coincidence: both drivers were devout Muslims who killed Infidels “in the name of Allah” (as the Canadian bad driver put it). Meanwhile, also in Canada, a mentally ill man shoots up the Parliament building and murders a soldier. And in New York City, a man wielding a hatchet injures several police officers. Another odd coincidence: both the Canadian mentally ill man and the New York hatchet-wielder were also devout Muslims. The father of the former waged jihad in Libya, and the latter called for armed revolt in the U.S. But you must put all of these odd coincidences out of your mind right now. We know that none of this can have anything to do with Islam, and that greasy Islamophobes are the only ones who think otherwise.
“Memo from US Consulate refers to Jerusalem terror attack as ‘traffic incident,’” by Itamar Eichner, Ynet News, October 24, 2014 (thanks to Hamish):
Hours after a Palestinian terrorist drove his car into a crowd waiting at a light rail station in Jerusalem, the US consulate in the city issued a memo referring to the attack as a “traffic incident”.
A three-month-old baby was killed and seven other people were wounded when Abdel Rahman a-Shaludi drove his car across incoming traffic to strike the people waiting at the station. The baby girl, Chaya Zissel Braun, had American citizenship.
The memo was sent to employees of the American consulate, which is based in East Jerusalem. It asks staff to report “any emergency.”
AnneinPT (Israel) provides an actual Associated Press news headline about the “traffic accident.” “Israeli police shoot man in east Jerusalem.”
Here’s how the AP, consistently with its customary reporting on things Israeli, might treat Palestinian rockets thwarted by Israel’s Iron Dome defense system: “Palestinian rockets damaged beyond repair by Israeli counter-measures.”
“Lone wolf” Islamic terrorists are exceedingly rare.
[N]umerous examples show that terrorist actors are almost always part of a network who were involved in recruiting and tasking terrorist activity. As Max Abrahms at Northeastern University has observed:
Since the advent of international terrorism in 1970, none of the 40 most lethal terrorist attacks has been committed by a person unaffiliated with some terrorist group, according to publicly available data from the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism, which is funded by the Department of Homeland Security and stored at the University of Maryland. In fact, lone wolves have carried out just two of the 1,900 most deadly terrorist incidents over the last four decades.
So why “lone wolf”? Simply, it was a mechanism promulgated by the CVE [countering violent extremism] industry, with willing cooperation from law enforcement and intelligence officials, to exonerate themselves when a terrorist attack happened. At its core is terror agnosticism: “There is possibly no way to predict who will turn to terrorism, so therefore we can’t be held responsible when it happens. Oh, and give us more money so we can better improve how we won’t be able to predict terror attacks.” [Insert added.]
It’s Islamic terrorism all the way down:
Yet there has been great reluctance to associate terrorist attacks with the “religion of peace.” Here are examples of media and official reactions to the recent terrorist attacks in Canada: “CBC’s Derek Stoffel tweeted: ‘Amid the speculation in the #OttawaShooting in #Canada, it’s important to remember #ISIS hasn’t shown interest in attacks abroad.’” However,
Stoffel should have known that in late September, the Islamic State’s spokesman, Abu Muhammad Al-Adnani, urged Muslims to murder non-Muslims in the West. “Rely upon Allah,” he thundered, “and kill him in any manner or way however it may be. Do not ask for anyone’s advice and do not seek anyone’s verdict.
“The hard-Left Vox reacted to the revelation that Zehaf-Bibeau was a Muslim by dismissing the fact as irrelevant.”
Not to be outdone in multicultural empathy,
In the wake of the shootings in Ottawa, the police chiefs of Toronto and Ottawa wrote to local Muslim leaders, assuring them of their good will and urging Muslims to contact them in case of a “backlash.” These politically correct cops appear to have learned their lesson well: after every jihad attack, Muslims are the victims, and need special reassurances.
Eventually, the Canadian terrorist attacks were labeled “terrorism.” Even the White House called them “despicable terrorist attacks,” without mentioning the words “Islam” or “Islamist.”
In 2008 we the people elected Obama as “our” President. We did it again in 2012. He was viewed by many as the one for whom they had been waiting.
He was seen as the “God of all things.”
Fortunately, some seem to be recovering from their dementia.
However, all too many are still infected with insanity and continue to be contagious. Here’s a video of James O’Keefe talking with college students about vote fraud:
Vote fraud is apparently good when done for a “good” purpose.
When Obama spoke about Democrats running for reelection appearing to desert but really supporting him, he said
“So this isn’t about my feelings being hurt. These are folks who are strong allies and supporters of me. And I tell them, I said, ‘You know what, you do what you need to win. I will be responsible for making sure that our voters turn out.'” [Emphasis added.]
He may not have intended to encourage voter fraud, but “you do what you need to win” may well have been taken seriously by Obamabots. It has, as a minimum, an unpleasant odor.
How many non-citizens participate in U.S. elections? More than 14 percent of non-citizens in both the 2008 and 2010 samples indicated that they were registered to vote. Furthermore, some of these non-citizens voted. Our best guess, based upon extrapolations from the portion of the sample with a verified vote, is that 6.4 percent of non-citizens voted in 2008 and 2.2 percent of non-citizens voted in 2010. [Emphasis added.]
. . . .
Because non-citizens tended to favor Democrats (Obama won more than 80 percent of the votes of non-citizens in the 2008 CCES sample), we find that this participation was large enough to plausibly account for Democratic victories in a few close elections. Non-citizen votes could have given Senate Democrats the pivotal 60th vote needed to overcome filibusters in order to pass health-care reform and other Obama administration priorities in the 111th Congress. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) won election in 2008 with a victory margin of 312 votes. Votes cast by just 0.65 percent of Minnesota non-citizens could account for this margin. It is also possible that non-citizen votes were responsible for Obama’s 2008 victory in North Carolina. Obama won the state by 14,177 votes, so a turnout by 5.1 percent of North Carolina’s adult non-citizens would have provided this victory margin.
. . . .
We also find that one of the favorite policies advocated by conservatives to prevent voter fraud appears strikingly ineffective. Nearly three quarters of the non-citizens who indicated they were asked to provide photo identification at the polls claimed to have subsequently voted. [Emphasis added.]
With early voting starting Thursday, North Carolina’s election board found 154 ineligible voters on its poll lists — and officials are examining thousands more questionable registrations.
The State Board of Elections said late Tuesday that more than 9,000 additional voters’ names are being checked for legal status. They do not expect to finish checking before early voting starts Thursday.
It’s necessary for Republicans to win outside the “margin of fraud,” and there have already been signs of voter fraud. In Arizona,
A Republican party official in the largest county in Arizona says surveillance tape shows a progressive Hispanic activist blatantly and openly engaging in vote fraud.
. . . .
Between 12:54 and 1:04, LaFaro said, he observed a man wearing a “Citizens for a Better Arizona” T-shirt loudly drop a box containing hundreds of early-voting ballots on a table.
Citizens for a Better Arizona is a progressive group.
The man then began “stuffing the ballot box,” LaFaro said. “I watched in amazement.”
In Chicago, Republican state representative candidate Jim Moynihan’s votes for Republican candidates, including for himself, were registered as having been cast for Democrats. He noticed the problem before pulling the ultimate lever and it was determined that the machine had been “improperly calibrated.” There is no indication in the linked article whether other machines were also “improperly calibrated” or whether any of them were examined to find out. Obviously, voters need to check for whom the machines say they have voted before pulling the lever. How many will bother to do so?
Since voter fraud may be insufficient, President Obama has diligently prevented voters from understanding what He intends to do about immigration soon after the election. Jonathan Turley, Esq., a “liberal” in the old fashioned sense rather than a leftist, wrote this about Obama’s refusal to disclose or even discuss His post-election plans for immigration “reform.”
[Y]esterday [October 23d] White House CBS reporter Major Garrett broke from the mainstream pack and pressed White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest on a report that the Administration has order material for a “surge” of immigration IDs of up to 9 million in one year. Ernest called the questions “crazy” and encouraged everyone not to speculate . . . before the election obviously. [Emphasis added.]
[T]his Administration is openly withholding any information in its plans for unilateral presidential action despite the President’s pledge to take action after the election and before the New Year — only a matter of weeks. It is a cynical decision to prevent voters from being fully informed of the plans in a major policy area. Regardless of how one feels about immigration policies, it should be condemned by people across the political spectrum. [Emphasis added.]
More importantly, the media has to show some independence from the White House in this and other stories. Garrett is one of the few such reporters to press the point. His extraordinary exchange however was not covered by the mainstream press and, once again, the stonewalling on the issue was again dropped. I expect given the record of the White House corp, such questioning from Garrett does seem “crazy.” After all, disclosure of such plans might harm the White House in the upcoming election and only a “crazy” reporter would pursue such a story. [Emphasis added.]
Get your excuses for not voting prepared if you like the status quo:
If you don’t like the status quo, vote and remind your friends to do so as well.
Conclusions
From the P5+1 negotiations with Iran and the failure of our “leaders” even to pause on their path to Iranian nukes due to Iran’s abysmal human rights record, its support for terrorism and the dangers Iran already poses for what’s left of the free and democratic world — and will pose in even greater measure with nukes — to rampant antisemitism to Islamic attacks on and persecution of Christians qua Christians, to domestic Islamic terrorism to voting fraud, far too many are either insane or extraordinarily devious. Those who appear to be insane either do not recognize the nature of our enemies or do not care. Some are perhaps complicit.
As this insidious form of insanity spreads we seem to have no antidote more powerful than reason and common sense, both increasingly rare. Will our enemies have to provide a more effective antidote in the form of an attack on the United States so severe, clear and obvious that insanity can no longer be ignored even by our lunatics?
If we are really determined to eradicate Islamism, we should stop making deals with them and start supporting the people against the Islamist regimes.
It is believed that the reason for President Obama’s silence is the fear that it may cause the supreme leader Khamenei unhappy. He needs the top Islamist’s consent to give him a deal on their nuclear bomb no matter what the cost.
*******************
The war against Islamist terrorism has been going in the wrong direction, and the cancer has metastasized under the present administration. As we get rid of one Islamist tumor, more pop up.
But the most dangerous of all Islamists are ruling Iran and are determined to make themselves untouchable by possessing their own nuclear bomb.
We have wrongly chosen to ignore the majority moderate and secular Moslems in the Middle East and here at home. Those advising the White House and the State Department are lobbyists for the Islamist dictators, not secular Moderate Moslem Americans.
For reasons unknown, the Obama Administration had no qualms in removing and even bombing the secular Arab dictators, citing the human rights of their citizens, but when it comes to the human rights of the citizens living under the bloodiest Islamist dictators in Iran, this administration has gone out of its way to ignore the victims and empower the aggressors.
President Obama did not support the secular uprising in Iran but chose to stand by the Islamist clerics and their international terrorist Revolutionary Guards who are creating havoc across the Middle East, Africa, South America, and even here in the United States. Hizb’allah is the brainchild of Khomeini. Hamas is another gang of Islamists that Khamenei supports, leaving the people of Iran hungry. The Revolutionary Guards are operating in Africa, in every city in Europe, and in South America making deals with the drug cartels.
If we are really determined to eradicate Islamism, we should stop making deals with them and start supporting the people against the Islamist regimes.
America was the savior of the colonial world after the WWII. American foreign policy was based on human rights, but it is now based on policies that the old imperialists might well approve of.
94% of Iranian people are against the ruling Islamist regime that is anti-Iranian, anti-American, anti-civilization, and rules under barbaric Sharia laws.
Many Iranian clerics are against the rule of religion in government. The majority of the clerics do not dare to speak up — the ones who have spoken up have either disappeared or been arrested, imprisoned, tortured, and executed by the clerics in charge of Iran’s so- called Justice system, called Revolutionary Court.
The numbers of opposing clerics are high enough for the regime to create Cleric’s Wards in the prisons of Iran.
The most prominent cleric prisoner is Ayatollah Seyyed Hossein Kazemeini Boroujerdi, who has been held in the dreaded Evin prison since the supreme leader Khamenei ordered his arrest in 2006.
Not only he was arrested, his wife and children were harassed and their home and belongings were confiscated. By order of the supreme leader Khamenei, he was then defrocked and imprisoned. Since being in prison he has suffered two heart attacks as the result of mistreatment and torture.
Mr. Broudjerdy’s crimes have included urging the separation of the government of Iran from Islamic rule. He first went public with his support of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and protestations against the abuses of theocratic rule. He condemned Islamic fundamentalism, radicalism, and terror. He rejected anti-Semitism and advocating religious freedom. He has spoken for the equal rights of women and has called for abolishment of capital punishment, and cruel, inhuman, degrading treatment or punishments such as torture, stoning and flogging.
On the day President Rohani was speaking in the United Nations, clergyman Mohammad Movahedi, was in the clerical ward of the Evin prison Threatening Mr. Boroujerdi, and all those who had proceeded to publish and disseminate his books will be sentenced for apostasy and executed.
Although there has been calls from the human rights organizations and Iranians in and outside Iran who have provided a Petition with more than 600,000 signatures asking the president of the United States to help his release, there has been no response from the most powerful man on earth.
It is believed that the reason for President Obama’s silence is the fear that it may cause the supreme leader Khamenei unhappy. He needs the top Islamist’s consent to give him a deal on their nuclear bomb no matter what the cost.
Instead of supporting the secular Moslems to rid the world of a gang of Islamist clerics and their revolutionary guards, United States is ignoring the security of Israel, the world at large, and the human rights issue and instead supports the Islamists.
Syrian civil war death toll rises to more than 191,300, according to UN Human rights office says figure includes additional killings from earlier periods as well as deaths since last report in July 2013
Associated Press in Geneva theguardian.com, Friday 22 August 2014 11.22 BST
A Syrian man cries as he sits oamong the rubble of a building
following a reported barrel-bomb attack by Assad forces in Aleppo
earlier this month Photograph: Baraa Al-Halabi/AFP/Getty Images
The death toll from Syria‘s civil war has risen to more than 191,300 people, the United Nations has said.
The figures for March 2011 to April 2014 are the first to issued by the UN’s human rights office since July 2013, when it documented more than 100,000 killed.
The UN’s top human rights official, Navi Pillay, who oversees the Geneva-based office, said the figures are so much higher because they include additional killings from earlier periods, as well as deaths since the last report. The exact figure of confirmed deaths is 191,369, Pillay said.
“As the report explains, tragically it is probably an underestimate of the real total number of people killed during the first three years of this murderous conflict,” she said.
Pillay, the UN high commissioner for human rights, criticised what she described as the world’s “paralysis” over the fighting in Syria, which “has dropped off the international radar” in the face of so many other armed conflicts.
In January, her office said it had stopped updating the death toll, blaming a lack of access in Syria and its inability to verify source material. It was unclear why it has released new figures now.
The UN also would not endorse anyone else’s count, including the widely quoted figures from the Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, which has closely counted the deaths since Syria’s crisis began in March 2011. On Thursday, the observatory said the number of deaths has reached 180,000.
Qassem Suleimani and Hadi al-Ameri head of Badr Organization
anneinpt
artaxes
danmillerinpanama
davidking1530
Peter Hofman
Joseph Wouk
Peter
Louisiana Steve
WarSclerotic 
Recent Comments