Posted tagged ‘Islamic State’

« WarSclerotic home page
« Older Entries
Newer Entries »

Changing only our rules of engagement won’t help much – Updated October 6th

October 6, 2014

Changing only our rules of engagement won’t help much – Updated October 6th, Dan Miller’s Blog, October 6, 2014

(The rather “defeatist” views expressed here are mine and do not necessarily reflect those of Warsclerotic. — DM)

I posted this article from Israel Hayom at Warsclerotic, of which I am an editor. The article argues that to fight the Islamic State we need to change our rules of engagement. The parenthetical comment at the top of the Warsclerotic post is mine and is reproduced below.

(Could the U.S. and her allies put effective boots on the ground, or have the boots and the nation become too multiculturally damaged to do what needs to be done? More than the rules of war needs to change.

When the U.S. responded to the Russian supplied, trained and initially led North Korean invasion on June 25, 1950, we had been at peace for only five years. We were tired and wanted peace to continue but war came to us unexpectedly; it should have been expected. Our peacetime boots were badly supplied, trained and, more often than not, led. Some but not enough officers and senior noncoms had experienced war and knew what to do. Very few in the lower enlisted ranks had or did and “bug out” became a much used phrase. The NK troops had been hardened in combat, were adequately supplied, well trained and well led. Those who did not fight were executed. They pushed us back nearly to Pusan. By mid-September, we had more better led and trained troops; they had also become very angry at the NK troops, and intense anger is a powerful force multiplier. The NK tide was reversed, for a couple of years.

Were we now to try to put green boots on the ground to do what is necessary against well trained, led and financed Islamic troops, a  majority  of the public would oppose it and it would be politically unpopular. Were we to put boots on the ground anyway, they would likely need to undergo lengthy and deadly immersion-style baptism by fire. There would be substantial casualties and the opposition would increase.

Should we do it anyway if only the rules of engagement change? Can we, or is that now a fantasy? — DM)

Can the Obama Nation field a well trained, led and supplied contingent, of adequate size, to defeat the “non-Islamic” Islamic State, its cohorts and friends? Or are we too multicultural and decadent? Is our multicultural focus more on such nonsense as, for only one example, “gender equality” in the military than on winning wars?

I have few if any concerns about real gender equality. Kurdish women fighting against the Islamic State have disabused me of most that I once had. Please watch the video embedded below. One of the commanders was asked why she joked and smiled when around her troops. She answered, “I have to in order to keep their morale high.” That is a statement one would expect from a seasoned and competent commander.

However, when politically correct gender “equality” means that military training and other standards are lowered so that young ladies can serve, it becomes gender inequality and diminishes the effectiveness of our military. It would be only slightly less absurd, and only slightly less dangerous — to them and to those around them — to send such green “boots” on the ground into combat wearing high heel shoes and carrying only their purses.

Compare the Kurdish women fighters to this specimen of our deranged, multicultural and politically correct society:

Back to the Korea “police action:” President Truman had served in World War I as an artillery battery commander and rose to colonel in the reserves. Although a far from perfect Commander in Chief, he knew more about war than Obama could ever learn. Obama has no desire to learn; the “smartest person” in any room, He commonly ignores advice from those who have learned. Truman knew about the need for good military discipline, Obama has very little discipline himself and does not.

We fared poorly during the June 25 through mid-September period in South Korea. Could we now expect green boots on the ground to do even as well if plucked from a peaceful, multicultural environment and sent to fight against the Islamic State, et al, no less brutal than were the North Korean and later Chinese forces? Is there sufficient reason to try, now, even though our “kinetic activity” can not be successful with air power alone?

Do we even know the enemy, when Obama and others continue to refer to Islam as the “Religion of Peace” and praise its contributions to American culture? From Obama’s 2014 Eid Greeting:

While Eid marks the completion of Ramadan, it also celebrates the common values that unite us in our humanity and reinforces the obligations that people of all faiths have to each other, especially those impacted by poverty, conflict, and disease.

In the United States, Eid also reminds us of the many achievements and contributions of Muslim Americans to building the very fabric of our nation and strengthening the core of our democracy. [Emphasis added.]

When the Islamic State is erroneously deemed non-Islamic? When we continue to label Islamic terrorism at home as “workplace violence?” When, shortly after the recent Oklahoma beheading by an Islamist, Obama sends a special messenger from the White House to deliver a belated note of thanks to the mosque he attended for “helping rebuild the Moore community after a destructive tornado tore through the city in 2013.” [Emphasis added.]

“Your service is a powerful example of the powerful roots of the Abrahamic faiths and how our communities can come together with shared peace with dignity and a sense of justice,” President Barack Obama said.

The Imam, the leader of the prayer service, stated during his sermon that the Muslim faith has been called a “cancer that needs to be cut off from the American society.

It seems unlikely, at best, that we — or at least too many of us — know the enemy that cannot be named.

According to the linked Israel Hayom article,

Islamic State is not an organization that can be defeated with slow, uncertain, limited action. It cannot be defeated without “boots on the ground.” It is imperative to hit them with force; with waves of growing intensity. They must be attacked continuously, without breaks, without cease-fires and with the utmost determination. [Emphasis added.]

I agree, and wish that we could field a fighting force of that caliber to move quickly and effectively, before too many get clobbered and before we have to bring them all home, many in body bags. We seem less able to do that now than we were during the opening months of the “police action” in Korea. Since we can’t defeat the Islamic State, et al, with “slow, uncertain, limited action,” can we dispatch boots in the tens of thousands to do the job effectively? For the reasons suggested above, that seems even less likely.

Unfortunately, fantasy now trumps reality; until that changes, we should not send green boots into combat; we have few others to send. We. Are. Screwed.

 

Categories: Female Kurdish fighters, Iraq, Islamic State, Multiculturalism, Obama, Rules of war, Syria, U.S. Military
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Netanyahu: ‘The Malignancy of Militant Islam Is Growing and Spreading’

October 5, 2014

Netanyahu: ‘The Malignancy of Militant Islam Is Growing and Spreading’ You Tube, October 5, 2014

(Disregarding the obligatory kind words for the Obama Administration and the multicultural nation it has spawned, PM Netanyahu’s words ring true. — DM)

Categories: Iranian nukes, Iraq, Islamic State, Islamism, Obama
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

IDF Ups Presence Near Sinai Border Amid Heightened Tensions

October 5, 2014

IDF Ups Presence Near Sinai Border Amid Heightened Tensions, Israel National News, Tova Dvorin, October 5, 2014

(Beheadings? They must not be Islamic. — DM)

Egyptian security personnelEgyptian security personnel Reuters

An additional reason behind the deployment is the number of ISIS ‘copycat’ attacks in the peninsula, he added – noting that beheaded bodies have been found ‘continually’ in the Al-Arish area over the past several weeks.

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

Southern Command deployed in response to heightened tensions between Egypt, Sinai terror groups. ‘We don’t take risks,’ officer explains.

The IDF’s Southern Command has reinforced its forces along Israel’s southern border, a senior IDF officer revealed Sunday, due to rising unrest in the Sinai Peninsula. 

On Thursday, the Egyptian Army eliminated a major terror leader in the peninsula, the head of the ISIS-linked Ansar Bayt Al-Maqdis group.

Mohamed Abu Shatiya, who took part in the kidnapping of seven Egyptian soldiers in Sinai last year, died during fighting with the army south of Rafah, on the border with Gaza.

Terror attacks in Egypt have eased over the past month as the military squeezes their hideouts in the sparsely inhabited peninsula, analysts have noted – and could ease even further with the elimination – but IDF officials told Walla! News Sunday that the extra deployment is a necessary precaution.

“The Egyptian Army has raised the volume on its terror crackdown, and they in turn have increased their efforts to harm Egypt,” the officer stated.

An additional reason behind the deployment is the number of ISIS ‘copycat’ attacks in the peninsula, he added – noting that beheaded bodies have been found ‘continually’ in the Al-Arish area over the past several weeks.

Thus, the IDF has “decided not to take unnecessary risks,” he said, for fear that members of Ansar Bayt Al-Maqdis will turn to attacking Israeli targets in an attempt to destabilize the region. The group has claimed responsibility in the past for several rocket attacks that targeted the Israeli resort city of Eilat.

The Southern Command has increased its posts along the Gaza-Egypt border near Rafah, commanders in the field said, adding that the Egyptian Army “faces significant challenges.”

But more than just the regional threat of Ansar Bayt al-Maqdis, the source added, the deployment is also to fend off an increase in infiltrations from Gaza.

Last week, two separate infiltration attempts were apprehended along the same border. One suspect was armed; the other was not.

“Palestinians who have despaired of the situation in Gaza are jumping across the border with a knife, hoping to be arrested by the IDF,” the source said. “We do not take a risks; in our view, such intrusion is taken as an attempted attack.”

Categories: IDF, Islamic State, Siani
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

The rules of war need to change

October 5, 2014

The rules of war need to change, Israel Hayom, Dan Margalit, October 5, 2014

(Could the U.S. and her allies put effective boots on the ground, or have the boots and the nation become too multiculturally damaged to do what needs to be done? More than the rules of war needs to change.

When the U.S. responded to the Russian supplied, trained and initially led North Korean invasion on June 25, 1950, we had been at peace for only five years. We were tired and wanted peace to continue but war came to us unexpectedly; it should have been expected. Our peacetime boots were badly supplied, trained and, more often than not, led. Some but not enough officers and senior noncoms had experienced war and knew what to do. Very few in the lower enlisted ranks had or did and “bug out” became a much used phrase. The NK troops had been hardened in combat, were adequately supplied, well trained and well led. Those who did not fight were executed. They pushed us back nearly to Pusan. By mid-September, we had more better led and trained troops; they had also become very angry at the NK troops, and intense anger is a powerful force multiplier. The NK tide was reversed, for a couple of years.

Were we now to try to put green boots on the ground to do what is necessary against well trained, led and financed Islamic troops, a  majority  of the public would oppose it and it would be politically unpopular. Were we to put boots on the ground anyway, they would likely need to undergo lengthy and deadly immersion-style baptism by fire. There would be substantial casualties and the opposition would increase.

Should we do it anyway if only the rules of engagement change? Can we, or is that now a fantasy? — DM)

The enlightened world must pummel Islamic State into a pulp. This cancer needs to be excised, leaving no metastases behind. If the world is soft, the way most greasy, petit-bourgeois masses tend to be, it will soon learn that these horrifying decapitations are in fact prompting thousands of new volunteers to join the ranks of Islamic State. A toothless war will come back to bite us like a boomerang. It will weaken the good guys.

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

It was clear from the very beginning that the cruelest most terrible terror organization since the Khmer Rouge would not fold in the face of a flimsy, ill-timed attack by a few American, British and French jets. The possible addition of Australia, Canada and some Arab states — it is not yet clear where Turkey stands — to the coalition will not scare them either. On the contrary — Islamic State group draws its power from its image of extremist outlaws who will never compromise. At this point, refusing to surrender, the Islamic State group had no choice but to decapitate another innocent British national — Alan Henning — who only wanted to do good in this world.

The same fate awaits the next Westerner in line — an American by the name of Peter Kassig, who even converted to Islam to try to save his own life. But the murderers will not let up. Jihadi John is already sharpening his knife.

All this is happening because Islamic State is not an organization that can be defeated with slow, uncertain, limited action. It cannot be defeated without “boots on the ground.” It is imperative to hit them with force; with waves of growing intensity. They must be attacked continuously, without breaks, without cease-fires and with the utmost determination.

The day of Yom Kippur, regardless of the Jewish holiday, was a turning point in the war against Islamic State. They were bombed, yet immediately resumed decapitating prisoners. The reality has become one of walking on the edge; of all or nothing-style fighting. There can be no compromise; there can be no cease-fire. You are either with us or against us.

The enlightened world must pummel Islamic State into a pulp. This cancer needs to be excised, leaving no metastases behind. If the world is soft, the way most greasy, petit-bourgeois masses tend to be, it will soon learn that these horrifying decapitations are in fact prompting thousands of new volunteers to join the ranks of Islamic State. A toothless war will come back to bite us like a boomerang. It will weaken the good guys.

It will not be an easy victory. In the West, there are those who are afraid and who prefer to shut their eyes tight as part of a head-in-the-sand policy. There are those who are truly indifferent. There are bleeding hearts who find partial justification for the Islamist decapitations. One of them wrote an article blaming the Western violence for the rise of Islamic State. Others, at the U.N. of course, wondered whether bombing Islamic State targets would be in line with international law, or whether it could be a violation of Syrian sovereignty.

The hypocrisy is still benefiting the terrorists’ side. In our regional conflict, Hamas fires rockets indiscriminately at Jewish populations without prior warning, and the IDF, before retaliating (with much more force, granted), warns every Gazan to leave their homes to avoid getting hurt. Who gets blamed by the U.N.? Of course it is Israel, which warns the enemy, and not Hamas which fires in every civilian direction.

If, however, the familiar indifference doesn’t trip up the West, Islamic State will be vanquished and forever disgraced. Furthermore, the rules of war and international law will be amended in order to allow democracies to effectively defend themselves. The existing rules are good for guiding conflicts between enlightened nations. But these days, with Islamic State and its ilk dominating the scene, the enlightened world will have to allow itself to fight in a more resolute, effective manner if it doesn’t want to be defeated by Islamic terror.

At the end of the tunnel, a significant overhaul of the rules of war awaits.

Categories: Iraq, Islamic State, Islamism, Rules of war, Syria, U.S. Military
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: 4 Comments

Army chiefs tell Government: stop Gulf states funding terrorism

October 5, 2014

Army chiefs tell Government: stop Gulf states funding terrorism

Government urged to put pressure on Gulf leaders into tackling extremism by strangling the funding of terrorist networks and the religious ideology that fuels them

via Army chiefs tell Government: stop Gulf states funding terrorism – Telegraph.

 

The Telegraph has highlighted the links between a network of Qatari moneymen and terrorist fighters on the ground in Syria and Iraq Photo: Reuters
 

By Robert Mendick, Tim Ross and Patrick Sawer

9:17PM BST 04 Oct 2014

Pressure is mounting on the Government to take action against wealthy Gulf states accused of funding Islamist terrorism after the beheading of Alan Henning, the British aid worker kidnapped in Syria.

Two retired generals and a former defence secretary claimed that nations such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia were helping the rise of violent extremism by channelling cash to terrorist groups such as Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant (Isil), which carried out Mr Henning’s murder.

The trio of senior military figures said air strikes against Isil were insufficient to defeat the terrorist threat. Instead, they called on the Government to pressure Gulf leaders into tackling extremism by strangling the funding of terrorist networks and the religious ideology that fuels them.

Investigations by The Telegraph suggest that tens of millions of pounds have been raised for Isil — and al-Qaeda — by wealthy individuals in the Gulf region while its leaders have “turned a blind eye” to the problem or been complicit in funding certain groups.

In a series of exposés, The Telegraph has highlighted the links between a network of Qatari moneymen and terrorist fighters on the ground in Syria and Iraq.

Lord Dannatt, a former Chief of the General Staff, said: “It is completely unacceptable that some individuals in Qatar, Saudi Arabia and elsewhere see advantage in channelling large sums of money to the so-called Islamic State.”

Lord Dannatt called on the Government to insist that Gulf regimes dismantle terror fundraising networks before being allowed to buy further stakes in major UK projects. Qatar, for example, already owns a number of landmarks such as Harrods and The Shard skyscraper, as well as having large shareholdings in major British companies.

“It is not just governments in Doha or Riyadh that need to take action, but those in London and elsewhere have a responsibility to act too,” said Lord Dannatt.

 

Lord Dannatt wants Gulf regimes to dismantle terror fundraising networks (Julian Simmonds/The Telegraph)
 

It is not acceptable, for example, to welcome large capital injections into prestige projects like The Shard in London while not exerting the strongest pressure on the Qatari Government to crack down on some of their own citizens. Such potential hypocrisy runs the risk of undermining many of the other political and military actions being taken to discredit and destroy the caliphate ambitions of the jihadists.”

General Jonathan Shaw, a former assistant chief of the Defence Staff who oversaw Britain’s withdrawal from Basra in southern Iraq, said the current military campaign was “futile” unless the underlying ideology was also tackled head on. “It [this ideology] is funded by Saudi and Qatari money and that must stop,” said Gen Shaw. “I would far rather see a much stronger handle on the ideological battle rather than the physical battle.”

 

Liam Fox says that Isil is well-funded (Geoff Pugh/The Telegraph)
 

Liam Fox, the former defence secretary, also writing for the Telegraph, accused the Gulf governments themselves of financing terrorists.

“Isil is well-funded,” said Dr Fox. “Money has been flowing from rich individuals in the Gulf states, if not their governments, to finance them and their Sunni allies in their battle against the Assad regime.” The calls by the trio of former defence chiefs echo growing consternation over the failure to act. Last week, Sir Malcolm Rifkind, the chairman of Parliament’s intelligence and security committee, singled out Qatar for tougher international action — including possible sanctions — if it continued to allow fundraising for terrorist groups.

In a recent speech, Sir Richard Dearlove, a former head of MI6, accused Qatar and Saudi Arabia of, at the very least, “turning a blind eye” to terror fundraising.

“For Isil to be able to surge into the Sunni areas of Iraq in the way that it has done recently has to be the consequence of substantial and sustained funding,” said Sir Richard. “Such things simply do not happen spontaneously.”

Last month, however, in the first interview he has given, Qatar’s emir flatly denied the connection to terrorism. “We don’t fund extremists,” said Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al-Thani. “If you talk about certain movements, especially in Syria and Iraq, we all consider them terrorist movements.”

The murder of Mr Henning, 47, a father of two who was on a voluntary aid convoy to Syria when he was taken hostage, has caused widespread revulsion and anger.

In a statement issued yesterday, his wife, Barbara, said: “As a family we are devastated by the news of his death. There are few words to describe how we feel at this moment. Myself, Lucy and Adam, (his teenage children) and all of Alan’s family and friends are numb with grief.

“On behalf of the entire family, I want to thank everyone who campaigned for Alan’s release, who held vigils to pray for his safe return, and who condemned those who took him. Your efforts were a great support to us, and we take comfort in knowing how many people stood beside us in hoping for the best.”

She added: “Alan was a decent, caring human being. His interest was in the welfare of others. He will be remembered for this and we as a family are extremely proud of him and what he achieved and the people he helped.”

Colin Livesey, Mr Henning’s brother-in-law, suggested more should have been done to secure his release. “They could have done more months and months ago,” he said.

Yesterday Britain’s Muslim community voiced its despair at Mr Henning’s murder.

Dr Shuja Shafi, the Secretary General of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: “Alan was a friend of Muslims, and he will be mourned by Muslims.” Dr Shameela Islam-Zulfiqar, who accompanied Henning on his final trip to Syria, spoke of her “disbelief, shock and horror”. On behalf of the Manchester Central Mosque, she said: “We cannot comprehend that something so terrible can happen to such a wonderful and compassionate human being. News of his murder has left us all enraged and distraught.” But her statement was heavily critical of the Government for failing to secure his release.

“By joining the US Air Strikes, we handed Alan and many other Western hostages a death sentence,” it added.

David Cameron yesterday met officials from the intelligence agencies, the Foreign Office, Home Office, police and the military at Chequers to discuss the Government’s response to Mr Henning’s murder. The Prime Minister said: “We will be doing everything we can do to defeat this organisation which is ruthless, senseless and barbaric in the way it treats people.”

Security services are studying the video of the murder, released on Friday night, for further clues to the identity of “Jihadi John”, the British terrorist responsible for Mr Henning’s death and those of three other Western hostages, including David Haines. A second video posted by another British jihadist — Omar Hussain, 27, a former supermarket worker from High Wycombe — is now subject to a police investigation. In it, he challenges Mr Cameron to send ground troops to Iraq.

This week, Theresa May, the Home Secretary, and European interior ministers will discuss plans to try to stop Islamist extremists who are EU citizens from returning.

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Islamic State reportedly on Baghdad’s outskirts after week of victories

October 4, 2014

Islamic State reportedly on Baghdad’s outskirts after week of victories, Sydney Morning Herald, Mitchell Prothero, October 14, 2014

A diplomat in Irbil, the capital of the autonomous Kurdistan region, said an IS  presence in Abu Ghraib would put Baghdad International Airport within artillery range of the militants.

The airport is a key lifeline for Western embassies and holds a joint operations centre staffed by US military advisers.

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

Irbil, Iraq: Islamic State militants have taken control of key cities in Iraq’s western province of Anbar and have begun to besiege one of the country’s largest military bases in a weeklong offensive that’s brought them within artillery range of Baghdad.

IS,  also known as ISIS, and its tribal allies have dominated Anbar since a surprise offensive last December, but this week’s push was particularly worrisome, because for the first time this year Islamist insurgents were reported to have become a major presence in Abu Ghraib, the last Anbar town on the outskirts of the capital.

“Daash is openly operating inside Abu Ghraib,” according to an Iraqi soldier, who used the common Arabic term for IS . “I was at the 10th Division base there two days ago, and the soldiers cannot leave or patrol,” he said, asking that he be identified only as Hossam “Daash controls the streets.”

Hundreds of kilometres to the west, IS  forces continued their push into the Syrian Kurdish city of Kobane, where it appeared unlikely that Turkey would intervene to stop the advance. Kurdish officials from the town said the Turkish government had yet to respond to their pleas for weapons, and reports from the Turkish-Syrian border said there was no evidence Turkey was preparing to take action.

A diplomat in Irbil, the capital of the autonomous Kurdistan region, said an IS  presence in Abu Ghraib would put Baghdad International Airport within artillery range of the militants.

“We know they have captured substantial numbers of 155mm howitzers,” said the diplomat, whose country is participating in the US-led anti-IS coalition.

“These have a range of about [30 kilometres] and if they are able to hold territory in Abu Ghraib then the concern they can shell and ultimately close [the airport] becomes a grave concern.”

The airport is a key lifeline for Western embassies and holds a joint operations centre staffed by US military advisers.

Anbar is a predominantly Sunni Muslim province that remains deeply suspicious of the Shiite-dominated government in Baghdad, and IS has pressed to expand its control there since last winter’s initial offensive. In the past week, the militants have scored a string of other victories in the province.

 

Categories: Baghdad, Iraq, Irbil, Islamic State
Tags: , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Why Obama Refuses to support anti-Islamist, Secular Moslems

October 4, 2014

Why Obama Refuses to support anti-Islamist, Secular Moslems, American Thinker, Manda Zand Ervin, October 4, 2014

(Please see also Muslim Leaders Sign Letter Against ISIS, But Endorse Sharia and “Goodbye, Dear Mum”: Iran Executes Rayhaneh Jabbari — UPDATED.– DM)

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.

This is how America loses 75,000,000 friends.

 

 

Categories: Iran, Iranian nukes, Islamic State, Islamism, Obama
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: Be the first to comment

Jen Psaki on withdrawal from Afghanistan

October 3, 2014

Jen Psaki on withdrawal from Afghanistan, You Tube, October 2, 2014

(Please see also Obama’s Ex-CIA Chief Slams White House for ‘Hesitation and Half Steps’ — DM)

Categories: Afghanistan, Iraq, Islamic State, Leon Panetta, Obama, Syria
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

Obama’s Peace Process for Iraq, Syria and the Islamic State begins [Caution: includes satire]

October 2, 2014

Obama’s Peace Process for Iraq, Syria and the Islamic State begins [Caution: includes satire], Dan Miller’s Blog, October 2, 2015

Obama was heard to remark during a recent presidential golf game,

“Israel is a terrorist war criminal. It won’t even yield to my reasonable demands for a two state solution with my beloved Palestinians, whose children and other innocent civilians it relishes murdering. However, Iraq, Syria, ISIL, etc. are humanitarians and will recognize that I am like them, as I lead them to peace through the Light of My true wisdom and greatness.”

FINALLY, He has a plan!

His best plan yet!

Obama functions at His very best with no intelligence. Intelligence would imperil His domestic and foreign priorities and perhaps even His brilliant world view.

I don’t think the problem is Obama’s inattentiveness. It’s not the demands of his golf game. It’s not his incessant fundraising. It’s his worldview. [Not satire.]

(The video is not satire)

The first Peace Process phase

In Iraq and now in Syria, Obama is trying to appear less humanitarian. It’s the initial focus of His Peace Process (PP), through which He plans to arrange a three state solution among the Non-Islamic Islamic State, its cohorts, friends and associates, Iraq and Syria. During His initial PP phase, He intends to gain credibility with and empathy from the Islamic State, et al. Accordingly, He has lifted His rules of engagement, previously intended to minimize civilian casualties, when striking forces of the Islamic State, et al.

The White House revealed on Tuesday that its usually strict rules of engagement, intended to prevent civilian casualties of US airstrikes, have been relaxed in the current offensive against the Islamic State and other radical Islamist groups. [Emphasis added.]

National Security Council spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden told Yahoo News in an email that a much-publicized statement last year by President Barack Obama that US drone strikes would only be carried out if there is a “near certainty” of no civilian injuries would not apply to the US campaign against jihadi forces in Syria and Iraq.

Hayden wrote that the “near certainty” rule was intended “only when we take direct action ‘outside areas of active hostilities,’ as we noted at the time.

“That description — outside areas of active hostilities — simply does not fit what we are seeing on the ground in Iraq and Syria right now,” she continued, but added that the strikes, “like all US military operations, are being conducted consistently with the laws of armed conflict, proportionality and distinction.”

The statement came after reports that a dozen civilians, including women and children, were killed on September 23 after an errant Tomahawk cruise missile hit a house in the village of Kafr Daryan, in Syria’s Idlib province, believed to be a stronghold of al-Qaeda-linked militants. [Emphasis added.]

In a briefing to the House Foreign Affairs Committee last week, Syrian rebel commanders described scenes of devastation as the bodies of women and children were pulled from the beneath the rubble of the destroyed building, which was apparently being used as a shelter for displaced civilians. [Emphasis added.] [Not satire.]

It’s His most clever strategy yet, and only Obama could devise it: by showing the Islamic State, et al, that He agrees with their strategy of maximizing casualties, both combatant and civilian, Obama will easily convince them of the benefits of the true peace and security His PP will provide.

When asked whether, during the next Gazan conflagration, Israel should adopt His modified rules of engagement, Obama was heard to mumble at the 15th hole, “That’s entirely different. Hamas does not threaten My popularity in My country.” State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki hinted at much the same in August:

US State Department Spokesperson Jen Psaki delivered an unusually strong condemnation of an Israeli strike near a Gaza school being used as a shelter in Rafah, saying that the US was “appalled” by the “disgraceful shelling outside an UNRWA school. [Emphasis added.]

The shelling, which left 10 people dead according to Palestinian reports, drew harsh condemnations worldwide, including from the United Nations, London and elsewhere, amid growing international criticism of the 27-day-long operation. [Emphasis added.]

The IDF issued a statement saying that forces had targeted three Palestinian Islamic Jihad terrorists on board a motorcycle in vicinity of an UNRWA school in Rafah, and added that “the IDF is reviewing the consequences of this strike.”

However, the US said that the presence of combatants did not justify targeting areas near the school. [Emphasis added.]

. . . .

Before the reports of the latest strike came in, senior White House adviser and Obama confidant Valerie Jarrett addressed the ongoing violence on CBS’s Face the Nation Sunday morning.

Describing the conflict as “a devastating situation,” Jarrett asserted that “Israel absolutely has the right to defend itself, and we are Israel’s staunchest ally.”

At the same time, she added that “you also can’t condone the killing of all of these innocent children,” referring to the hundreds of civilian casualties reported in Gaza over the course of the past three weeks. [Emphasis added.] [Not satire.]

Neither Psaki nor Jarrett mentioned Obama’s popularity at home expressly. However, increasing civilian (mainly Muslim) casualties in Iraq and Syria, and demanding that Israel do even more to engage in strictly proportionate kinetic actions against Hamas Islamists, are both calculated to increase Obama’s popularity at home. This twofer is consistent with an address prepared for Him by my confidential White House informant, The Really Honorable I.M. Totus:

Israel’s actions have been disgracefully disproportionate and must stop. If they do not cease before I leave for my much needed family vacation at Martha’s Vineyard on August 9th, my red line will have been crossed and upon my return I may issue an Angry Executive Decree chastising Israel. Here is what Israel has done and what it must stop doing:

Israel has used WMDs (Weapons Minimizing Death and Destruction) including “Iron Dome,” warning sirens and shelters to thwart missile attacks. The Palestinians in Gaza have no even remotely comparable WMDs: They have no Iron Domes, their tunnels — clearly dug as air-raid shelters — have been destroyed maliciously and their air-raid sirens often can not be used due to Israel’s inhumane refusal to furnish electricity. They are therefore forced to use civilians, including small children, to guard their missile sites. They do so in the forlorn hope that Israel will take pity on them and refrain from attacking. Merciless Israel continues to attack, wantonly and intentionally wasting the precious lives of many innocent Palestinians. [Emphasis added.] [Satire.]

Second PP phase

Unlike the Obama Nation and its splendid coalition of the unwilling, the Islamic State, et al, have no aircraft. Nor have they any WMDs comparable to the Iron Dome used by wickedly ferocious Israel. Despite that, airstrikes have done little to diminish their effectiveness.

As of Tuesday, the U.S. and its coalition partners had conducted nearly 310 air attacks on Islamic terrorist targets, more than 230 in Iraq and 76 in Syria, a Pentagon spokesman said.

And while the air campaign has forced the terrorists to change their tactics, “We still believe ISIL remains a very potent force,” Admiral John Kirby told reporters on Tuesday. [Emphasis added.]

“Yes, they’ve changed some of their tactics, there’s absolutely no question about that, in response to the pressure that we put them under, but that doesn’t make them less dangerous or less potent over time,” Kirby said. [Emphasis added.] [Not satire.]

Accordingly, during the second phase of His PP strategy, Obama will cease all air strikes. He will also require Iraqi, coalition and any U.S. boots on the ground to use only stolen or abandoned weapons, ammunition and vehicles. As the photo provided below clearly shows, Islamic State, et al, forces have little more than rocks for weapons and that is not fair. Neither is forcing them to steal the few they do have, vigorously punished under Sharia law.

islamic-state-stoning-from-dabiq-magazine-ip_0 (1)

Additionally, all lethal weapons heretofore provided to those fighting disproportionately will now be provided only to the Islamic State, et al. Obama will make it perfectly clear that, in return, non-Islamic freedom fighters must read their rights under Sharia law (to be drafted by Attorney General Holder) to all whom they intend to execute. If convenient, the notification must be read in languages they are believed able to understand.

These steps will level the playing field and help the non-Islamic Islamic State, et al, to understand that Obama is the Messiah of true Peace, Virtue and Understanding based on true Islamic values under Sharia law, as recently articulated in a letter signed by one hundred and twenty-six moderate Islamists (not satire). They may even accept Him as the Mahdi, an honor greater even than His highly regarded and equally well deserved Nobel Peace Prize.

Third PP phase

With the realistic understanding of His life, His universe and everything which Obama will thus give to them, they will follow Him anywhere He may lead, particularly from well behind. They will jump, shout with joy and fire our their rifles into the air when He receives His second Nobel PP prize.

Conclusions

According to Reuters, Obama met with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu at the White House on October 1st — the same day that His new rules of engagement increasing civilian casualties in Iraq and Syria were announced.

Even as Netanyahu pressed Obama over Iran in White House talks, the president urged the Israeli leader to help find ways to prevent Palestinian civilian casualties like those inflicted in the recent Gaza war between Israel and Hamas militants.

. . . .

While Netanyahu put the emphasis on Iran, Obama was quick to focus on the bloody 55-day Gaza conflict, which ended in August with no clear victor. This followed the collapse of U.S.-sponsored peace talks between Israel and Palestinians in April. [Not satire]

“Iran? Nukes? What’s wrong with that,” Obama didn’t ask. He probably knows that a nuke deal allowing the Islamic Republic of Iran to get (or to keep) nukes will enhance His popularity ratings if Iran doesn’t actually use them until He leaves office in January of 2017, in accordance with His informal understanding with the Islamic Republic. And to Him, that’s what matters. When He leaves office, anything bad that happens will be somebody else’s fault, as He will be quick to point out.

Anne in PT, my favorite Israeli blogger, wrote a serious article about Obama’s hypocrisy titled Hypocrisy as demonstrated by the White House. She began,

In this post I want to highlight the brazen double standards and utter screaming hypocrisy demonstrated by that ill-mannered hostile man who stands at the head of Israel’s ostensible best friend, America. [Not satire.]

She then does so, clearly and well. I had considered writing a similar article but didn’t have the stomach for it. Therefore, I tried to write this bit of satire instead.

Categories: Hamas, Iran, Iranian nukes, Iraq, Islam, Islamic State, Israel, Palestinians, Netanyahu, Obama, Syria
Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

Comments: 5 Comments

WATCH: Kurdish Women Fight against ISIS

October 2, 2014

WATCH: Kurdish Women Fight against ISISIn a special aired on 60 Minutes this week, an all-female unit of the PYG was featured. These Kurdish women are fighting with great determination against ISIS in Syria. They believe that ISIS fears being killed by a woman, because men killed by women don’t go to paradise to receive their 72 virgins. They beg the west to support them.

Oct 02, 2014, 05:26PM | Rachel Avraham

via Israel News – WATCH: Kurdish Women Fight against ISIS – JerusalemOnline.

 

In a special aired on 60 Minutes this week, a unique unit of the PYG, otherwise known as the Kurdish People’s Protection Unit, which consists of Kurdish women fighting against ISIS, was featured.   Their organization is described by the Carnegie Middle East Center as “one of the most important Kurdish opposition parties in Syria,” which is chaired by Salih Muslim.   It has been noted that the Kurdish forces, particularly the female fighters, are the west’s best hope for defeating ISIS, whether they be the Peshmerga or the PYG. “These mothers, wives and daughters are highly trained, committed and absolutely fearless,” 60 Minutes reported.

“ISIS is not a threat to a single nation,” one of the Kurdish female fighters told 60 Minutes. “It’s a threat to all humanity. It’s like a disease, like cancer spreading everywhere.” Another Kurdish female fighter reported, “They say if we are killed by the hand of a man, we will go to heaven but if we are killed by the hand of a woman, we will not go to heaven.” These facts prompt the Kurdish female fighters to be especially vigilant in their jobs.

One of the Kurdish women, Julie, dreamed of becoming an economist in Syrian Kurdistan, but because of the emergency situation in her country, she instead has joined the ranks of the Kurdish People’s Protection Unit: “We are not lovers of weapons. We are not lovers of fighting. We are not lovers of killing. All of us wanted to live a safe life, to complete our studies and to have a boyfriend. But now, as I said, we live in an emergency situation.”

“ISIS has come to our area and destroyed everything, damaged everything, killed the children, kidnapped the women, and made everything bad in the region,” she stressed on 60 Minutes. “We can say that we are fighting with our will, but ISIS is fighting with their weapons. I think that willpower is stronger than weapons. For us, when someone from ISIS is killed by the hand of a woman, for us, we are so proud because this woman killed an enemy of humanity. A woman has a right to save herself and protect herself.”

“My first responsibility as a female commander is to prove that women everywhere can have a will and a reason to exist,” Kurdish female commander Nasreen told 60 Minutes. “So many times our victories have been won by women. They even motivate the men to be stronger and better fighters. In every fight, the women prove their true strength and abilities. They proved that it is a lie that women cannot fight.”

She noted that she has a fear for the survival of her society and culture in the face of the ISIS threat: “We know their goal is not a humane goal. That’s why we fight hard.” ISIS is notorious for raping the women they capture, before either slaughtering them or selling them into slavery. But ISIS is not only a threat to Kurdish women. They also have beheaded westerners. Julie stressed, “What we hope from the world is that they will help us in fighting this terrorism movement because it is not only dangerous for us; it’s dangerous for the entire world.”

The 60 Minutes report noted that the US has armed Kurdish forces in Iraq, but these women who are fighting against ISIS on the front line in Syria have been given nothing. One of the Kurdish female fighters reported: “We need better weapons because bravery and determination are not always enough to win on the battlefield.” The west has been reluctant to support the PYG because it is affiliated with the PKK, which the United States and European Union considers to be a terrorist organization due to its armed struggle against the Turkish state. The PKK was responsible for a series of suicide bombings in Turkey in the past, but signed a ceasefire agreement in 2013. Turkey considers the PYG as nothing more than the Syrian branch of the PKK and has been opposed to countries offering the PYG help based on this belief. However, while the PYG considered jailed PKK head Abdullah Ocalan as its ideological leader, they insist that the PKK does not interfere with how the PYG conducts Syrian Kurdish affairs.

Commander Nasreen denies that the PYG is a terrorist organization and declares that her fighters are the best hope against ISIS: “No, I am not a terrorist. We only kill to defend human rights. We are fighting for justice. We are fighting for all humanity.” Julie stressed, “We are fighting here to save our nation; not only our nation, our society. For us, we want to save the humanity, civilization and culture of this region.” Whether or not the PKK has any say in how the PYG conducts Syrian Kurdish affairs, there is one thing that is certain. Unlike many elements of the Free Syrian Army that are backed by the Obama administration who are aligned with the Muslim Brotherhood and are now helping ISIS to defeat the Kurds, the PYG remains a secular organization that does not have an anti-western agenda.

 

Categories: Uncategorized
Tags: , , , , ,

Comments: 1 Comment

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »