Posted tagged ‘Obama’

Russia Demands American Capitulation To Help Eradicate Islamic State

June 4, 2015

Russia Demands American Capitulation To Help Eradicate Islamic State

Author

By David Singer — Bio and Archives June 4, 2015

via Russia Demands American Capitulation To Help Eradicate Islamic State.

 

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has called on America to end its attempt to remove Syria’s President Assad from power in return for Russia’s co-operation to militarily confront Islamic State.

Lavrov reportedly told Bloomberg on 2 June 2015 :

“The U.S.’s “obsession” with [Syria’s President] Assad isn’t helping in the common fight against the threat from Islamic State…

“People put the fate of one person whom they hate above the fight against terrorism. Islamic State can go “very far” unless stopped, and air strikes alone “are not going to do the trick”

“If people continue to acquiesce with what is going on and continue to acquiesce with those who categorically refuse to start the political process until Bashar Assad disappears, then I’m not very optimistic for the future of this region…”

America is part of the Friends of Syria core group known as the London Eleven that has been assisting rebel forces in Syria attempting to overthrow Assad.

Assad – backed by Russia, Iran and Hezbollah – has rebuffed such attempts during four years of horrendous conflict that has so far seen over 220000 Syrians die, four million citizens made refugees and another 7.6 million internally displaced.

A report published by the UN in March 2015 estimated the total economic loss since the start of the conflict was $202bn and that four in every five Syrians were now living in poverty – 30% of them in abject poverty. Syria’s education, health and social welfare systems are also in a state of collapse.

America apparently intends to ignore Lavrov’s sage advice and continue to pursue its Syrian policy to oust Assad.

Marie Harf – a U.S. State Department spokeswoman told reporters in Washington that:

“we’re certainly not going to coordinate with a brutal dictator who’s massacred so many of his own citizens.”

“That’s just an absurd proposition. That’s certainly not going to happen.”

Lavrov’s comments come at a time when Islamic State – already controlling a large part of Syria and Iraq covering an area greater than the United Kingdom – continues to make further advances – recently seizing the city of Ramadi 110 kilometers west of the Iraqi capital –Baghdad – and capturing the strategic northern Syrian city of Palmyra – a World Heritage listed site containing the monumental ruins of one of the most important cultural centres of the ancient world.

Islamic State reportedly controls up to 80 per cent of oil fields in Syria and has destroyed and also sold looted antiquities in Hatra, Nimrod and Mosul to acquire a major source of its funding – sometimes for seven figure sums.

The American led coalition of some 62 States – meeting in Paris this week – has proved totally unable to stem the advance of Islamic State in its stated objective of restoring the Islamic Caliphate and Sharia law wherever it seizes territory.

Graeme Wood – a contributing editor at The Atlantic – sums up Islamic State’s vulnerability:

If it loses its grip on its territory in Syria and Iraq, it will cease to be a caliphate. Caliphates cannot exist as underground movements, because territorial authority is a requirement: take away its command of territory, and all those oaths of allegiance are no longer binding.”

Only a UN sanctioned military force can hope to achieve this objective.

Obama and Putin need to urgently do a deal that sees:

  1. A UN led process on the political future of Syria being undertaken without first removing Assad
  2. A UN Security Council Chapter VII Resolution passed under Article 42 of the UN Charter authorising military action against Islamic State.

Senseless head-butting needs to give way to sensible brain-storming.

Turkey, Our Ally

June 4, 2015

Turkey, Our Ally

June 4, 2015 by Robert Ellis

via Turkey, Our Ally.


On his visit to Turkey in 2009, U.S. President Barack Obama proclaimed that Turkey and the U.S. can build “a model partnership” and in an interview with Time in January 2012, he spoke of “the bonds of trust” he had forged with certain leaders, including Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Traditional Turkish foreign policy, based on Atatürk’s dictum “peace at home and peace abroad,” has been replaced by a delusion, created by former foreign and now prime minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, that Turkey can restore its former Ottoman magnificence. As Davutoglu proclaimed in Sarajevo in 2009, “Like in the 16th century, when the Ottoman Balkans were rising, we will once again make the Balkans, the Caucasus and the Middle East, together with Turkey, the center of world politics.”

The main thrust of this new policy has been to create a Muslim Brotherhood crescent running from Egypt through Turkey to Syria to rival Iran’s Shia crescent, but this policy has been a dismal failure. Turkish ambassadors have been withdrawn from Syria, Egypt, Israel, Libya and Yemen, and recently from Austria and the Vatican, after their acknowledgement of the Armenian genocide, resulting in what Ibrahim Kalin, Erdogan’s chief adviser, in a tweet two years ago, called “precious loneliness.”

It was the same Kalin who, in a keynote speech at the Istanbul Forum in 2012, rejected the European model of secular politics, democracy and pluralism in favor of what he termed a “value-based” (read: Islamist) foreign policy. However, the AKP government’s attempt to overthrow Syria’s Bashar al-Assad has seriously backfired, but they have still not given up trying to drag the U.S. into the quagmire. Turkey’s proposal for the creation of a safe zone and no-fly zone in Syria has been met with no response, and in return Turkey has denied its NATO ally the use of Incirlik airbase for sorties against Islamic State (ISIL).

Consequently, the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC) in Washington has in its April report concluded that Turkey is an increasingly undependable ally, and that because of the fundamental strategic disparities between Ankara and Washington, the U.S. should look to other regional players, for example, the KRG (Kurdistan Regional Government), for support.

An overriding factor in the BPC’s conclusions has been the Turkish government’s ideologically driven backing for extremist Sunni groups in Syria, where it has acted as a highway for would-be jihadists, who have been given free rein to travel through, recruit from, equip, operate and recuperate in Turkey.

Furthermore, a report from the U.N.’s Analytical Support and Sanctions Monitoring Team concludes that Turkey has also provided the primary routes for arms smuggled to ISIL and the Al-Nusrah Front, an Al-Qaida affiliate.

In the run-up to the Turkish elections on Sunday, there is a furor about video footage published last Friday by secular daily Cumhuriyet, which shows a shipment of weapons and ammunition disguised as humanitarian aid for Syria on trucks belonging to MIT (Turkey’s National Intelligence Organization), Erdogan’s Praetorian Guard. Reuters has also confirmed how MIT helped deliver arms to parts of Syria under Islamist rebel control during late 2013 and early 2014.

Characteristically, the public prosecutors and gendarmerie officers involved in intercepting the arms shipment have been arrested and charged with attempting to overthrow the Turkish government. A gag order has been imposed on coverage of the scandal and President Erdogan has personally threatened Cumhuriyet’s editor-in-chief with retribution. He has now filed a criminal complaint against the newspaper and its editor, demanding a life sentence.

The Turkish military is also uneasy about the charges brought against the gendarmerie officers involved, as their actions fall under military jurisdiction.

However, there is no reason to believe President Erdogan will give way without a struggle. As the Bipartisan Policy Center notes, losing power would be tantamount to a prison sentence, at best, and is simply not an option.

Pentagon: Iran Continuing Work on Nuclear Systems

June 4, 2015

Pentagon: Iran Continuing Work on Nuclear Systems

Covert support for terrorism ‘unabated’

BY:
June 3, 2015 5:46 pm

via Pentagon: Iran Continuing Work on Nuclear Systems | Washington Free Beacon.

Iran is continuing to develop missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons despite an interim agreement on its nuclear programs, according to a Pentagon report.

“Although Iran has paused progress in some areas of its nuclear program and fulfilled its obligations under the Joint Plan of Action (JPOA), it continues to develop technological capabilities that also could be applicable to nuclear weapons, including ballistic missile development,” a one-page unclassified summary of the report says.

A copy of the report was obtained by the Washington Free Beacon.

The report was due to Congress in January but was not sent to the Armed Services Committee as required by law until this month. Analysts said the delay appeared designed to avoid upsetting Tehran and the nuclear talks.

Disclosure of the continuing development of nuclear delivery capabilities comes amid reports that Iran increased the amount of nuclear material that could potentially be used to build nuclear weapons despite the JPOA.

The State Department sought to challenge International Atomic Energy Agency reports on the increase in Iranian nuclear material, despite President Obama’s claim that the nuclear agreement had halted Iran’s nuclear program.

State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said this week that the increase in nuclear production was expected and that the amount has increased and decreased.

Iran’s military also continues to threaten the strategic Strait of Hormuz, the Pentagon report said.

“Iran continues to develop its capabilities to control the Strait of Hormuz and avenues of approach in the event of a military conflict,” the report said, adding that Tehran is “quietly fielding increasingly lethal weapon systems, including more advanced naval mines, small but capable submarines, armed unmanned aerial vehicles, coastal defense cruise missile batteries, attack craft, and ant ship-capable missiles.”

U.S. officials said Iranian backing for Houthi rebels in Yemen is also aimed at gaining access to the strategic Red Sea strait called the Bab-el-Mandeb, which, like the Strait of Hormuz, could be used by Iran to disrupt oil and other shipping.

Tehran’s support for terrorism also has not stopped, according to the Pentagon.

“Iran’s covert activities appear to be continuing unabated,” the report says. “The Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps-Qods Force (IRGC-QF) remains a key tool of lran’s foreign policy and power projection, particularly in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Bahrain, and Yemen.”

The IRGC Quds Force also is continuing to improve its access within foreign countries and its ability to carry terrorist attacks “to safeguard or advance Iran’s interests,” the report said.

U.S. officials disclosed to the Free Beacon last week that Iran is increasing the number of Quds Force fighters and Lebanese Hezbollah militants it is sending to Yemen, to support pro-Iran Houthi rebels there.

The report asserts that Iran’s military doctrine is “primarily defensive” and seeks to insulate Iran from more aggressive Iranian policies involving covert action and terrorism.

Iranian military forces seek to deter attacks, survive initial strikes, and retaliate against aggressors.

“The ongoing civil war in Syria and the instability in Iraq have tested, but not fundamentally altered, this posture,” the report said. “Meanwhile, over the past year, the tone of publicity surrounding major military exercises has remained tempered, a trend that began in 2013, probably in support of negotiations over Iran’s nuclear activities.”

Iranian forces have been working with Iraq’s government to battle Islamic State forces that have taken over large portions of that Middle East state. They have included IRGC fighters.

The report, dated January 2015, concludes that Iran has not substantively altered its military and security strategies in the past year.

“However, Tehran has adjusted its approach to achieve its enduring objectives, by increasing its diplomatic outreach and decreasing its bellicose rhetoric,” the report said.

President Hassan Ruohani has sought to project a global message of “moderation and pragmatism” in support of those objectives.

Also, Iran is seeking to become the dominant regional power and in pursuit of that aim has “unwaveringly sought to improve its deterrent capabilities and increase its regional influence.”

Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, who is thought to be ill, “remains atop Iran’s power structure as both the political-spiritual guide and the commander in chief of the armed forces.”

The Senate Armed Services Committee, in its report on the fiscal 2016 defense authorization bill passed May 19, expressed concerns about the annual report on Iran’s military.

The report was due to Congress on Jan. 30 but said as of May it had not been provided.

“The committee remains concerned about the threat posed by Iran’s nuclear and ballistic missile development programs,” the report said.

Last year Director of National Intelligence James Clapper testified that Iran “would choose a ballistic missile as its preferred method of delivering nuclear weapons.” And in February, Iran launched a Safir long-range missile system.

“In 2013, the National Air and Space Intelligence Center (NASIC) made the following statement about this system: Iran could develop and test an ICBM capable of reaching the United States by 2015,” the report said.

“Since 2008, Iran has conducted multiple successful launches of the two-stage Safir space launch vehicle (SLV) and has also revealed the larger two stage Simorgh SLV, which could serve as a test bed for developing ICBM technologies.”

The committee asked the secretary of defense to provide an update on Iran’s ballistic missile programs.

As a result of the delay in the annual Iran military power report, the committee directed the Pentagon to provide a briefing on the Iranian missile threat, and to update the January report.

Ilan Berman, an Iran specialist with the American Foreign Policy Council, said the release of the report is good news but “has long been conspicuous by its absence.”

“The study is long overdue, and its delay suggests that the administration has been leery of injecting inconvenient facts into the Iran debate as it closes in on a nuclear deal with the regime in Tehran,” Berman said.

“The findings of the report confirm that Iran’s destructive regional activities have not abated over the past year,” he added.

“If anything, they have increased despite Iran’s dialogue with the West,” Berman said. “The product can be seen in the battlefield victories of Yemen’s Iran-supported Houthi rebels, of the persistence of the Assad regime in Syria, and of the growing profile and capabilities of Iraq’s Shi’a militias.”

“Iran’s activities represent a significant challenge to peace and security in the Middle East,” he said.

“The real question is what, if anything, the White House is prepared to do about it?” he said.

Mark Dubowitz, another Iran expert, said Tehran is continuing to develop long-range ballistic missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads, in violation of U.N. Security Council limits.

“The Obama administration ceded to Iranian demands that their missile program was non-negotiable and, instead, has tried to reassure Congress that this missile threat can be mitigated by constraining Iran’s ability to develop a nuclear warhead,” said Dubowitz, executive director of the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.

“This major administration concession to Iran will greatly complicate the U.S. intelligence community’s ability to detect whether Iran has develop a nuclear warhead-carrying ICBM capable of reaching the continental United States,” he added. “By its very nature, it is much more difficult to detect and prevent warhead development, which can take place in small, covert facilities, than it is to determine the nature and extent of a hostile missile program. In yet another example of how deeply flawed the emerging Iran deal will be, Tehran will have a much easier pathway to develop systems.”

 

 

Iran’s cooperation with North Korea includes nuclear warhead technology

June 3, 2015

Iran’s cooperation with North Korea includes nuclear warhead technology, The Hill, Alireza Jafarzadeh, June 5, 2015

(The author of the article,

Jafarzadeh, the deputy director of the Washington office of the National Council of Resistance of Iran, is credited with exposing Iranian nuclear sites in Natanz and Arak in 2002, triggering International Atomic Energy Agency inspections. He is the author of “The Iran Threat” (Palgrave MacMillan: 2008).

— DM)

For years, the conventional wisdom has been that Iran and North Korea have long cooperated in missile technology, giving the perception of not so dangerous of an alliance. That was until last week. In yet another groundbreaking revelation, Iran’s main opposition movement, the Mujahedin-e Khalq (MEK) provided information that Iran and North Korea have been engaged in extensive exchange of information and visits by experts on nuclear weapons and nuclear warhead design, as recently as April 2015.

The MEK, based on information obtained by its network inside Iran, provided a detailed account of a visit to North Korea in 2013 by Tehran’s top nuclear weapons experts headed by elusive Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, who was present during the last nuclear test conducted by North Korea.

A seven-member North Korean delegation, comprised of experts in nuclear warhead design and various parts of ballistic missiles including guidance systems, spent the last week of April in Iran. This was the third such nuclear and missile team to visit Iran in 2015. The next delegation is scheduled to secretly arrive in Iran in June and will be comprised of nine experts, according to the same MEK sources.

That Tehran continues to closely engage with North Korea, a country that cheated its way into making a nuclear weapon, all the while pledging that it would not do so, should be an additional cause for alarm. It should be a red flag for the P5+1 countries as they continue their negotiations with Iran in Vienna and Geneva with only days left before the June 30 deadline to sign an agreement.

The Iran-North Korea nuclear cooperation is in sharp contrast to what the Iranian regime leaders are telling the world. It also explains why the Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei rejects IAEA inspections of military sites, snap inspection of all sites, and interviews with nuclear scientists.

Tehran has so far managed to largely push its missile program out of the nuclear agreement requirements, and with it its extensive nuclear cooperation with North Korea—something that was kept under the radar for years.

The North Korean nuclear experts who traveled to Iran in April stayed in a secret guesthouse, a cordoned-off eight-story building, near a Hemmat Industrial Group site in the Khojir area, northeast of Tehran. Named “Imam Khomeini Complex,” and also known as 2000 units, the site is controlled by the Ministry of Defense (MoD).

The Korean delegation’s needs were met by Center for Research and Design of New Aerospace Technology, one of seven sections of the Organization of Defensive Innovation and Research (SPND). Dr. Aref Bali Lashak, who personally dealt with the Korean delegation, heads this section.

The North Korean delegation dealt with this section of SPND whose responsibility is electronics area of research and manufacturing interior parts of nuclear warhead. The visit’s arrangements were made by the Directorate of Coordination of the Iranian Ministry of Defense (MoD), headed by Brigadier General Nassorllah Ezati and the Directorate of Inspections of the MoD headed by IRGC Brigadier General Alireza Tamizi.

While there were earlier reports about Fakhrizadeh’s presence during the North Korean’s 2013 nuclear test, a two-year investigation by the Iranian opposition shows that Fakhrizadeh had gone to North Korea for the nuclear test through China under the alias  “Dr. Hassan Mohseni.”

Fakhrizadeh, the head of SPND and the key figure in activities concerning the military dimensions of the regime’s nuclear program, is a Brigadier General of the IRGC, with whom the IAEA has repeatedly requested interviews, but to no avail.

The MEK first exposed the formation of SPND in July 2011 and the State Department placed it on its sanctions list in August 2014.

According to the Iranian opposition reports, during the North Korean visit, Fakhrizadeh, accompanied by two other SPND nuclear experts, stayed in Hotel Koryo in Pyongyang and spent only two hours at the Iranian regime’s embassy. To keep his visit a secret, Mansour Chavoshi, Tehran’s Ambassador to Pyongyang, personally welcomed Fakhrizadeh and facilitated his communications and exchanges with North Korean officials.

The stunning detailed information provided by the MEK is further indication that the drive to acquire nuclear weapons remains at the core of the Iranian regime’s program as nuclear negotiations continue.

North Korea’s nefarious connection once again proves that after three decades of concealment and deception, adding six or nine months to the nuclear breakout time as a result of the P5+1 negotiations will not lead to a lasting solution. Washington needs to rethink its strategy in dealing with the Iranian regime; a strategy that would eliminate, not delay, the regime’s ability to build the bomb, because Tehran consistently shows that it must not be trusted. Any nuclear agreement with Tehran, which would leave open a pathway to the nuclear bomb, must be rejected. To that end, Congress might have its biggest role to play.

Obama Is Losing Iraq Just as LBJ Lost Vietnam

June 3, 2015

Obama Is Losing Iraq Just as LBJ Lost Vietnam, Commentary Magazine, June 3, 2015

Which way will Obama go now? Will he be another Johnson or a Bush? All signs, alas, point to the former. Thus it is particularly appropriate that to show progress (what used to be known as “light at the end of the tunnel”) the administration is now resorting to the discredited body counts of Vietnam days.

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

The Obama White House’s mental synapses must be short-circuiting right now. If the president were a robot (rather than just being a bit robotic), he would by now be repeating over and over: “Does not compute! Does not compute!” Neither of his basic operating assumptions about the anti-ISIS campaign are coming true; in fact, both are being refuted by reality in ways that suggest a fundamental flaw in the underlying mental software.

Assumption No. 1 was that a US air campaign could degrade ISIS and allow its defeat by US allies on the ground. There is no question that the US air campaign has taken a toll. Deputy Secretary of State Tony Blinken just bragged that 10,000 ISIS fighters have been killed since the start of bombing in August. Yet this is hard to square, as Bill Roggio notes at Long War Journal, with previous CIA estimates that ISIS only had 20,000 to 30,000 fighters. If Blinken’s number is right, ISIS should have lost one-half to one-third of its fighters, yet somehow during that time it has actually gained ground in both Iraq and Syria — oh, and estimates of its overall strength have not varied.

This means that either previous CIA estimates were gross underestimates (Roggio believes ISIS had at least 50,000 fighters to begin with) or that it has managed to replenish its losses—or both. Either way, what we are seeing now is what President Lyndon Johnson and Gen. William Westmoreland discovered for themselves in Vietnam: namely that it’s impossible to win a war of attrition against a foe that has a lot more will to fight and suffer losses than you do.

Assumption No. 2 can be summed up as “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” In both Syria and Iraq, the Obama administration calculated that Iran was the enemy of ISIS — after all, the Iranian regime is Shiite and ISIS is a Sunni organization. Thus the administration has tacitly embraced Iran’s allies — Iraqi Shiite militias and the Syrian regime of Bashar Assad — as the lesser evil in the expectation that they would do for us the dirty work of stopping ISIS. It’s a little hard to square this naïve assumption with the latest news, aptly summed up in a New York Times headline: “Assad’s Forces May Be Aiding ISIS Surge.” There are credible reports that Assad’s air force is making bombing runs in support of an ISIS offensive to capture Aleppo, a major city, from other rebel groups.

Why would Assad do this? Because he wants to reduce the battle in Syria to himself vs. ISIS on the assumption that with such an extremist foe, the rest of the world will be compelled to back him. By contrast, the more moderate rebel forces are viewed as a greater threat to his regime because they are capable of winning greater external backing. Iran is also relatively satisfied to have ISIS in control of Sunni areas in both Syria and Iraq because this gives Tehran the excuse it needs to consolidate its control over Alawite and Shiite areas — and Iran knows that it can’t rule over Sunni areas anyway.

There is nothing particularly novel about this development. There is a long history of reports suggesting deals between Assad and ISIS which range from a non-aggression pact to an agreement to cooperate in selling oil which has been captured by ISIS, while in Iraq it has long been obvious that Iranian militias are more interested in protecting Baghdad and the Shiite south than they are in pushing ISIS out of Mosul or Ramadi. The administration has just chosen to look the other way both in Syria and in Iraq rather than take on board facts that are at odds with its fundamental assumptions.

The Obama administration is now at a turning point in Iraq. It is roughly at the same place where the US was in Vietnam in 1967 and Iraq in 2006. In all those cases, the falsity of the assumptions under which we had been fighting had been revealed. The question was whether the president would execute a change of strategy. LBJ did not really do that, beyond his ineffectual bombing pauses and refusal to provide 200,000 more reinforcements to Gen. Westmoreland. It was left to Nixon and Gen. Creighton Abrams to transform the US war effort. By contrast, in Iraq in 2007 George W. Bush did execute a transformation of his strategy that rescued a floundering war effort.

Which way will Obama go now? Will he be another Johnson or a Bush? All signs, alas, point to the former. Thus it is particularly appropriate that to show progress (what used to be known as “light at the end of the tunnel”) the administration is now resorting to the discredited body counts of Vietnam days.

How Islam in America Became a Privileged Religion

June 3, 2015

How Islam in America Became a Privileged Religion, Front Page Magazine, Daniel Greenfield, June 3, 2015

(Much the same nonsense infects foreign policy and propels the notion that the Islamic State is not Islamic. — DM)

islam

What is Islam? The obvious dictionary definition answer is that it’s a religion, but legally speaking it actually enjoys all of the advantages of race, religion and culture with none of the disadvantages.

Islam is a religion when mandating that employers accommodate the hijab, but when it comes time to bring it into the schools, places that are legally hostile to religion, American students are taught about Islam, visit mosques and even wear burkas and recite Islamic prayers to learn about another culture. Criticism of Islam is denounced as racist even though the one thing that Islam clearly isn’t is a race.

Islamist organizations have figured out how lock in every advantage of race, religion and culture, while expeditiously shifting from one to the other to avoid any of the disadvantages.

The biggest form of Muslim privilege has been to racialize Islam. The racialization of Islam has locked in all the advantages of racial status for a group that has no common race, only a common ideology.

Islam is the only religion that cannot be criticized. No other religion has a term in wide use that treats criticism of it as bigotry. Islamophobia is a unique term because it equates dislike of a religion with racism. Its usage makes it impossible to criticize that religion without being accused of bigotry.

By equating religion with race, Islam is treated not as a particular set of beliefs expressed in behaviors both good and bad, but as an innate trait that like race cannot be criticized without attacking the existence of an entire people. The idea that Islamic violence stems from its beliefs is denounced as racist.

Muslims are treated as a racial collective rather than a group that shares a set of views about the world.

That has made it impossible for the left to deal with ex-Muslims like Ayaan Hirsi Ali or non-Muslims from Muslim families like Salman Rushdie. If Islam is more like skin color than an ideology, then ex-Muslims, like ex-Blacks, cannot and should not exist. Under such conditions, atheism is not a debate, but a hate crime. Challenging Islam does not question a creed; it attacks the existence of an entire people.

Muslim atheists, unlike all other atheists, are treated as race traitors both by Muslims and leftists. The left has accepted the Brotherhood’s premise that the only authentic Middle Easterner is a Muslim (not a Christian or a Jew) and that the only authentic Muslim is a Salafist (even if they don’t know the word).

The racialization of Islam has turned blasphemy prosecutions into an act of tolerance while making a cartoon of a religious figure racist even when it is drawn by ex-Muslims like Bosch Fawstin. The New York Times will run photos of Chris Ofili’s “The Holy Virgin Mary” covered in dung and pornography, but refuses to run Mohammed cartoons because it deems one anti-religious and the other racist.

The equating of Islam with Arabs and Pakistanis has made it nearly impossible for the media to discuss violence against Christians in those parts of the world. The racialization of Islam has made Arab Christians, like Bangladeshi atheists, a contradiction in terms. The ethnic cleansing of the Yazidi could only be covered by giving them a clearly defined separate identity. Middle Eastern Christians are increasingly moving to avoid being categorized as Arabs because it is the only way to break through this wall of ignorance.

While racialization is the biggest Muslim privilege, race provides no protection for many Islamic religious practices. Muslims then seek religious discrimination laws to protect these practices even if it’s often a matter of debate whether their lawsuits protect their religious practices or impose them on others.

Islam is a theocracy. When it leaves the territories conquered by Islam, it seeks to replicate that theocracy through violence and by adapting the legal codes of the host society to suit its purposes.

Islamic blasphemy laws are duplicated using hate crime laws. Employers are obligated to make religious concessions to Muslim employees because of laws protecting religious practices, but many of these practices, such as refusing to carry out jobs involving pork, liquor or Seeing Eye dogs, are really ways of theocratically forcing behaviors that Islam forbids out of public life much as Saudi Arabia or Iran do.

Accusations of bigotry are used to outlaw ideas that Islam finds blasphemous and religious protection laws are used to banish behaviors that it disapproves of. By switching from race to religion and back again, Islamists construct a virtual theocracy by exploiting laws designed to protect different types of groups.

Religions in America traded theocracy for religious freedom. They gave up being able to impose their practices on others in exchange for being able to freely practice their own religions. Islam rejects religious freedom. It exploits it to remove the freedom of belief and practice of others. When it cannot do so through religious protection laws, it does so through claims of bigotry.

Religions were not meant to be immunized from blasphemy because that is theocracy. Instead religions are protected from restrictions, rather than from criticism. Islam insists on being protected from both. It makes no concessions to the freedom of others while demanding maximum religious accommodation.

While race and religion are used to create negative spaces in which Islam cannot be challenged, the creed is promoted positively as a culture. Presenting Islam as a culture allows it easier entry into schools and cultural institutions. Islamic missionary activity uses the Western longing for oriental exotica that its political activists loudly decry to inject it into secular spaces that would ordinarily be hostile to organized religion.

Leftists prefer to see Islam as a culture rather than a religion. Their worldview is not open to Islam’s clumsy photocopy of the deity that they have already rejected in their own watered down versions of Christianity and Judaism. But they are constantly seeking an aimless and undefined spirituality in non-Western cultures that they imagine are free of the materialism and hypocrisy of Western culture.

Viewing Islam as a culture allows the left to project its own ideology on a blank slate. That is why liberals remain passionately convinced that Islam is a religion of social justice. Their Islam is a mirror that reflects back their own views and ideas at them. They pretend to respect Islam as a culture without bothering to do any more than learn a few words and names so that they can seem like world travelers.

By morphing into a culture, Islam sheds its content and becomes a style, a form of dress, a drape of cloth, a style of beard, a curvature of script and a whiff of spices. It avoids uncomfortable questions about what the Koran actually says and instead sells the religion as a meaningful lifestyle. This approach has always had a great deal of appeal for African-Americans who were cut off from their own heritage through Islamic slavery, but it also enjoys success with white upper class college students.

The parents of those students often learn too late that Islam is not just another interchangeable monotheistic religion, that its mosques are not places where earnest grad students lecture elderly congregants about social justice and that its laws are not reducible to the importance of being nice to others.

Like a magician using misdirection, these transformations from religion to race, from race to culture and from culture to religion, distract Americans from asking what Islam really believes. By combining race, religion and culture, it replicates the building blocks of its theocracy within our legal and social spaces.

Separately each of these has its advantages and disadvantages. By combining them, Islam gains the advantages of all three, and by moving from one to the other, it escapes all of the disadvantages. The task of its critics is to deracialize Islam, to reduce it to an ideology and to ask what it really believes.

Islam is a privileged religion. And there’s a word for that. Theocracy.

European Leaders Demand Regime Change in Iran

June 3, 2015

European Leaders Demand Regime Change in Iran

Call on Iran to allow international inspectors to take inventory of Iranian military sites

BY:
June 3, 2015 5:00 am

via European Leaders Demand Regime Change in Iran | Washington Free Beacon.

Some 200 European officials are calling for Iran’s hardline Islamic government to be dissolved and for the country to allow international inspectors to take inventory of all Iranian sites suspected of housing an illicit nuclear weapons program, according to a letter sent to European Union (EU) Foreign Policy Chief Federica Mogherini on Tuesday.

The delegation, comprised of 221 members of the European Parliament from 28 EU member states, slams Iran’s “destructive meddling” throughout the region and criticizes its human rights record, which is ranked among the worst in the world.

The delegation also backs regime change aimed to bring down Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei and his hardline inner circle of allies, according to the letter, which was spearheaded by Friends of a Free Iran (FoFI), a European Parliament group formed in 2003.

This regime change would include Iran becoming “a democratic pluralistic republic based on universal suffrage, freedom of expression, abolition of torture and death penalty, separation of church and state, a non-nuclear Iran, an independent judicial system, rights for minorities, peaceful coexistence in the region, gender equality and commitment to Universal Declaration of Human Rights,” the letter reads.

While the leaders did not take an explicit stance on the ongoing negotiations with Iran over its nuclear program, they demanded the country immediately allow inspectors to take inventory of its military sites.

Iranian leaders have rejected this demand multiple times in recent months.

“Iran needs to adhere to all UN Security Council resolutions with regard to its nuclear program and it should respond to all outstanding [International Atomic Energy Agency] questions while allowing intrusive inspections of all its military and non-military sites, whether declared or undeclared,” the letter states.

The European leaders also condemn Iran’s support for terrorism in the region, including in Iran, Yemen, Syria, and elsewhere.

“The destructive meddling of Iran in the region is of growing concern,” they write. “Amnesty International has disclosed many details on the war atrocities in Iraq of the Shia militias affiliated to Iran. Iran is at the heart of the crisis in this region and not part of the solution. If fundamentalism and extremism is to be uprooted in this region, Iran’s destructive influence and interference should end.”

The leaders also single out Iran Quds Force for contributing to atrocities in Syria.

“The active participation of the [Quds] Force, Hezbollah and other Iranian backed militias in the defense of [Bashar al-]Assad dictatorship has so far led to the death of 300,000,” the letter states. “Concurrently, Iran has expanded its dominion over Yemen.”

In addition to Iran’s expansion outward, it stepped up efforts within the country to silence democratic activists.

An Iranian artist, for instance, was sentenced to 12 years in prison this week for drawing cartoons lampooning members of the Iranian parliament.

It also sentenced to death a blogger accused of insulting the prophet in his writings.

Executions in Iran also have hit record levels under President Hassan Rouhani.

“The situation of human rights in Iran needs to be heeded in all relations with this country,” the European officials write. “Iran should end the executions, free political prisoners, stop the repression of women and respect the rights and freedoms of the Iranian people.”

Obama Officials Claim Iran’s Nuclear Program Frozen or Rolled Back During Negotiations

June 3, 2015

Obama Officials Claim Iran’s Nuclear Program Frozen or Rolled Back During Negotiations

BY:
June 3, 2015 5:00 am

via Obama Officials Claim Iran’s Nuclear Program Frozen or Rolled Back During Negotiations | Washington Free Beacon.

New York Times report Tuesday shows increases in Iran’s stockpile of nuclear fuel are “undercutting” the Obama administration’s claims to have “frozen” or rolled back its nuclear program during a period of negotiations.

The New York Times reported:

With only one month left before a deadline to complete a nuclear deal with Iran, international inspectors have reported that Tehran’s stockpile of nuclear fuel increased about 20 percent over the last 18 months of negotiations, partially undercutting the Obama administration’s contention that the Iranian program had been “frozen” during that period.

But Western officials and experts cannot quite figure out why. One possibility is that Iran has run into technical problems that have kept it from converting some of its enriched uranium into fuel rods for reactors, which would make the material essentially unusable for weapons. Another is that it is increasing its stockpile to give it an edge if the negotiations fail.

President Obama told CNN’s Candy Crowley Dec. 21 that “you look at an example like Iran, over the last year and a half, since we began negotiations with them, that’s probably the first year and a half in which Iran has not advanced its nuclear program in the last decade.”

“Our diplomacy is at work with respect to Iran, where, for the first time in a decade, we’ve halted the progress of its nuclear program and reduced its stockpile of nuclear material,” Obama said during his State of the Union Jan. 20.

In an interview with Vox posted in February, Obama said, “We have been able to freeze the program for the first time and, in fact, roll back some elements of its program, like its stockpiles of ultra highly enriched uranium.” During his weekly online address April 4, Obama claimed Iran “had agreed that it will not stockpile the materials it needs to build a weapon.”

Secretary of State John Kerry told This Week March 1, “The fact is, the interim agreement has been adhered to. It has been inspected. We have proven that we have slowed Iran’s–even set back–its nuclear program.”

In various press briefings, spokeswomen Marie Harf and Jen Psaki made similar assertions about the impact of the Joint Plan of Action, as has White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest.

Harf called the New York Times story “bizarre” and inaccurate Tuesday. However, analysis from the Institute for Science and International Security agreed with the article’s contention that Iran effectively had stockpiled enough low-enriched uranium that it would be nearly “impossible for them to meet those obligations in practice,” as blogger Omri Ceren put it.

Islamic State conquests in Syria nearing Israeli border

June 3, 2015

Islamic State conquests in Syria nearing Israeli border

Islamic State fighters managed to conquer two villages in southern Syria, only 60 kilometers from the border with Israel. With Assad’s forces weakening, the only force that can stop their advancement towards the Golan Heights is the Syrian Rebels.

Jun 03, 2015, 11:57AM | Tom Dolev

via Israel News – Islamic State conquests in Syria nearing Israeli border – JerusalemOnline.

 


Islamic State terrorists in Syria Photo Credit: Reuters / Channel 2 News

According to an announcement published by the Islamic State today (Wednesday), the terror organization’s fighters were able to conquer two villages north of the city of Daraa – meaning that the organization is nearing the border with Israel. The villages are located at the entrance to Hauran, the region closest to the Israel-Syria border.

Images from the area of the fighting show Syrian Rebels trying to fend off Islamic State fighters, who were able to reach as near as 60 kilometers from Quneitra. The Rebels on the other hand claim that they succeeded in thwarting the terror organization’s advancement.

According to reports, the Islamic State is getting closer to the border with Israel and the only force that can stop its advancement towards the Golan Heights is the Syrian Rebels, with Assad’s forces weakening. The As-Suwayda Governorate, in which a Syrian Druze population resides, is also under threat of an Islamic State takeover.
IS continues to advance in Syria

Islamic State continues to advance in Syria Photo Credit: Channel 2 News

Battles on the way to Damascus also continue, as Syrian Rebel and Islamic State forces are getting closer to defeating the Assad regime. According to reports from Syria, there is a real concern that the country could once and for all fall into the hands of the rebels, after decades under the rule of the Assad regime.

Meanwhile, US Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken reported a series of achievements reached by the coalition forces operating against the Islamic State. According to Blinken, the coalition forces were able to kill more than 10,000 Islamic State fighters thus far in nine months of fighting, a fact he claimed could have serious implications for the terror organization.

Harf ”perplexed” by NYT story on Iran’s increased nuclear stockpile

June 2, 2015

Harf ”perplexed” by NYT story on Iran’s increased nuclear stockpile, Washington Free Beacon via You Tube, June 2, 2015

(Please see also, Contrary to Obama’s claims, Iran increased its nuclear fuel stockpiles — DM)