Posted tagged ‘Terrorism’

Cutback of Israeli troops on West Bank led to upsurge of Palestinian terror. Four Israelis dead

October 4, 2015

Cutback of Israeli troops on West Bank led to upsurge of Palestinian terror. Four Israelis dead, DEBKAfile, 11:55 PM IDT, October 3, 2015

Old_city_stabbing_D_3.10.15Child saved in Jerusalem stabbing attack

Amid a wave of terror that has hit Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria during the holiday of Sukkot, and which has already resulted in the murder of four Israelis, it is necessary to point a finger at  some senior IDF officers and members of the Israeli security establishment as partially responsible.

Putting all political issues aside, we point to a decision by IDF Chief of Staff Gady Eisenkot to reduce the number of IDF forces in Judea and Samaria so as to detach them for other missions, that we are unable to reveal here. It was a serious error for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon to approve the troop reduction in the face of warnings regarding a surge in terror attacks, especially in Jerusalem.

Yaalon and Eisenkot corrected this error on Thursday, October 1, immediately after the murder of Eitam and Na’ama Henkin by killers who appeared to function like professionals. They ordered the immediate redeployment of four battalions to flashpoint areas in Judea and Samaria.

There is no way to immediately turn the clock back and restore security to these areas overnight. It will take time and, meanwhile, there more terror attacks are foreseen in the near future.

The general feeling in some military quarters is that the commanders responsible for security in Judea and Samaria and Jerusalem, down to the heads of regional brigades were not the right choices for dealing with complex and sensitive security situations.  The officials who made those appointments must be held responsible for incorrectly presuming that the situation in those areas would stay calm in the long term and therefore failing to instal officers best able to handle the current threats.

In the space of 48 hours, during the Jewish festival season, two pairs of Israel parents were attacked by Palestinian terrorists. After gunmen killed the first couple Eitam and Na’ama Henkin in a drive-by ambush near Alon More Thursday night, a second couple and their two-year old child were knifed in the Old City of Jerusalem Saturday night, Oct. 3 by a another Palestinian terrorist on their way to the Western Wall. They were among a large crowd thronging through the main street to the Kotel.

The father and a second man died of their injuries before reaching hospital, the mother is in grave condition.. The child was struck in the foot. A fourth victim is in very serious condition. After his stabbing attack, the terrorist snatched the sidearm of one of his victims and began shooting at passing tourists before Border Guards police cut him down. The dead terrorist has meanwhile been identified as Muhand Halabi, 19, from El Bireh near Ramallah.

Jerusalem is beset for some weeks now by fast escalating aggressive Palestinian terror.The heavily beefed up forces of Border Guards and IDF troops are clearly failing to staunch or avert the rising violence.

The fatal stabbing attack in Jerusalem Saturday followed two overnight attacks elsewhere in the city: gunfire on an Israeli vehicle near Maale Adummim. In the southern district, gunshots from Jebel Mukabar reached the neighboring Jewish neighborhood of Nof Zion. No one was hurt in both these incidents. Saturday night, there was more shooting from Jebel Mukabar.

Police have imposed a curfew on the Old City of Jerusalem and shut all the gates to Temple Mount.

The large-scale army raid of Nablus in pursuit of the murderers of Eitam and Na’ama Henkin has rounded up a number of suspects.

Obama’s U.N. message — kick me, I won’t feel a thing

September 30, 2015

Obama’s U.N. message — kick me, I won’t feel a thing, Power LinePaul Mirengoff, September 30, 2015

Obama’s options are to counteract the expansion or offer lectures while Russia gives him a “back kick.” Like so much of his conduct, Obama’s U.N. speech amounts to pasting a “kick me” sign on his backside.

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

“History, Stephen said, is a nightmare from which I am trying to awake. . .What if that nightmare gave you a back kick?”

This passage from Ulysses captures the Obama presidency in the realm of foreign policy. History, the nightmare from which the president is trying to escape, has given him a “back kick” — in Iraq, Syria, Libya, Ukraine, and Yemen for example — and he risks becoming a laughingstock as a result.

But there’s a twist. President Obama denies he has been kicked. His nightmare thus becomes ours.

Obama’s speech to the United Nations illustrates the problem. Elliott Abrams, describing the speech as “surreal,” writes that it “is filled with nice lines that unfortunately bear no relationship to his seven years of foreign policy — and in some cases, no relationship to reality.”

Abrams supports this claim by analyzing what Obama had to say about Syria, Libya, Ukraine, and Cuba. The analysis is well worth reading.

I want to focus, though, on a portion of just one passage. Obama stated:

I stand before you today believing in my core that we, the nations of the world, cannot return to the old ways of conflict and coercion. We cannot look backwards. We live in an integrated world — one in which we all have a stake in each other’s success. . . .And if we cannot work together more effectively, we will all suffer the consequences. That is true for the United States, as well.

The disdain for history is evident and, in a sense, warranted. But it doesn’t follow from the fact that history has been unpleasant that we cannot (or should not) look back at it. History has much to teach us.

One lesson is that Obama’s claim that “we cannot return to the old ways of conflict and coercion” is rubbish. The world not only can “return” to them, it has (and never stopped).

Another lesson is that conflict and coercion don’t necessarily cause “all” to “suffer” bad “consequences.” Often conflict and coercion produce winners and losers. The losers suffer, but the winners, though often paying some price, thrive for decades and sometimes centuries.

The fact that we “live in an integrated world” doesn’t alter this reality. If Obama knew anything about history, he would understand that integration isn’t new. Europe and large portions of Asia were integrated by trade and migration more than two thousand years ago. In important ways, today’s world, with its religious wars and mass movement of peoples, bears more resemblance to the ancient one than to yesterday’s world of seemingly solid nation states (which was also integrated).

Obama wasn’t offering a history lesson, though. The speech was an exercise in self-justification — an attempt to demonstrate that although he looks like a loser, he isn’t really one because the old world of losers and winners has been extinguished. This farcical claim will only enhance Obama’s status as a laughingstock.

But the speech had a serious side, I think. It seems to me that Obama was sending this message to Putin: Russia will suffer if you don’t cooperate with the U.S. In fact, Obama mentioned the sanctions against Russia and their consequences (“capital flight, a contracting economy, a fallen ruble, and the emigration of more educated Russians”) in his speech.

The message isn’t implausible. Russia reportedly is starting to run short on foreign currency reserves, thanks in part to sanctions. Russia also runs the risk of military overreach if it continues to become more involved in Syria. Its dirty little war in Ukraine enjoys only mixed support at home and polls show little appetite by Russians for large scale military involvement in Syria. (Just as we had Vietnam, Russia had Afghanistan).

But Putin is a skillful operator. He doesn’t need lessons from Obama.

Taking on ISIS to a serious degree would require a level of military engagement that might erode Putin’s domestic support. But it’s unlikely that Putin is serious about doing ISIS in (though I’m pretty sure he would like to). He just dangles this prospect, as Iran does, to tantalize Obama.

Putin’s goals, it seems to me, are (1) to work with Iran to help Assad maintain control over a portion of Syria, (2) cement relations with Iran, and (3) diminish U.S. influence in the region. He may well be able to accomplish these objectives without a level of military involvement that might hurt him at home.

As for Russia’s finances, they appear to be a looming problem. Ironically, however, Obama has undercut the Russia sanctions by lifting those on Iran. The Iran deal will boost the Russian economy by enabling Russians to sell all manner of weapons to the mullahs.

These sales alone won’t solve Russia’s economic problems. It needs a strong rebound of oil prices, which may or may not be in the cards.

But history suggests that “capital flight, a contracting economy, a fallen ruble, and the emigration of more educated Russians” won’t be sufficient to dissuade an autocrat like Putin from expanding Russia’s influence in Eastern Europe and the Middle East.

Obama’s options are to counteract the expansion or offer lectures while Russia gives him a “back kick.” Like so much of his conduct, Obama’s U.N. speech amounts to pasting a “kick me” sign on his backside.

Petraeus: Fight Against Islamic State ‘Inadequate’

September 22, 2015

Petraeus: Fight Against Islamic State ‘Inadequate’

BY:
September 22, 2015 2:37 pm

Source: Petraeus: Fight Against Islamic State ‘Inadequate’

Retired Gen. and ex-CIA Director David Petraeus testified Tuesday that U.S. progress against the Islamic State (IS, also known as ISIS) terrorist group has been “inadequate.”

“It has been more than a year since the U.S. commenced military action against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria,” Petraeus said to the Senate Armed Services Committee. “While there have been significant accomplishments, the progress achieved thus far has been inadequate.

The U.S. has carried out thousands of air strikes against IS as part of Operation Inherent Resolve, but the terrorist group shows no signs of retreating.

“In Iraq we have halted and reversed ISIS’s momentum in some areas, but we have seen gains by ISIS in others such as Ramadi,” Petraeus said.

Petraeus said that “some elements of the right strategy” to defeat IS are being utilized by the U.S., but that “several are under-resourced while others are missing.”

Petraeus recommended ramping up U.S. military support for its allies in the area, notably the Iraqi Security Forces and Kurdish Peshmerga. He also recommended embedding U.S. advisors behind the front lines in Iraqi brigades, coordinating airstrikes more closely with Iraqi coalition partners, and broadening the rules of engagement to carry out airstrikes against IS targets.

Petraeus stopped short of recommending the deployment of U.S. troops for combat roles before a “viable” force of Iraqi partners was available to hold onto the areas taken back from IS.

Petraeus’s testimony can be added to a litany of bad news about U.S. progress against IS, although the White House had until recently characterized the fight as successful.

Retired Marine Gen. John Allen, who created the anti-IS coalition, will step down in November after struggling with the White House for control of the war, Bloomberg reported Tuesday.

Last week, Gen. Lloyd Austin, the U.S.’s top commander of Middle East operations, admitted the failure of a program to train and equip moderate rebels to fight IS in Syria.

Hanging over these revelations are serious allegations that senior U.S. officials manipulated intelligence on IS to hide its strength, lending credence to the White House’s narrative that Inherent Resolve was working.

2,000 Russian Troops Head To Syria For “First Phase” Of Mission To Support Assad

September 22, 2015

2,000 Russian Troops Head To Syria For “First Phase” Of Mission To Support Assad Tyler Durden’s picture

Submitted by Tyler Durden on 09/22/2015 09:32 -0400

Source: 2,000 Russian Troops Head To Syria For “First Phase” Of Mission To Support Assad | Zero Hedge

With each passing day, The Kremlin seems less and less interested in observing any niceties with regard to how it describes Russia’s military involvement in Syria.

Initially, it seemed likely that Moscow would go the Ukraine route by providing logistical support and lurking behind the scenes while officially denying – or at least downplaying – its role in the conflict. Over the course of the last two weeks, it’s become increasingly clear that Russia now intends to make no secret of its intention not only to stabilize the Assad regime but in fact to turn the tide completely with the provision of advanced weapons and equipment including combat aircraft, tanks, and drones.

The only remaining question was how long it would be before Syrian Foreign Minister Walid al-Moualem made an official request for ground troops, allowing Moscow to abandon all pretense that Russia isn’t officially at war and while we may not have reached that point yet, you can’t very well build a forward operating base and not staff it which is why now, according to FT, Moscow is set to send 2,000 troops to Latakia as part of the mission’s “first phase”. Here’s more:

Russia is to deploy 2,000 military personnel to its new air base near the Syrian port city of Latakia, signalling the scale of Moscow’s involvement in the war-torn country.

 

The deployment “forms the first phase of the mission there”, according to an adviser on Syria policy in Moscow.

 

The force will include fighter aircraft crews, engineers and troops to secure the facility, said another person briefed on the matter.

 

Three western defence officials agreed that the Russian deployment tallied with the numbers needed to establish a forward air base similar to those built by western militaries in Afghanistan.

Here’s more, from The New York Times, on the buildup at Latakia:

The deployment of some of Russia’s most advanced ground attack planes and fighter jets as well as multiple air defense systems at the base near the ancestral home of President Bashar al-Assad appears to leave little doubt about Moscow’s goal to establish a military outpost in the Middle East. The planes are protected by at least two or possibly three SA-22 surface-to-air, antiaircraft systems, and unarmed Predator-like surveillance drones are being used to fly reconnaissance missions.

 

Russia has military presences near Latakia and in Tartus.Russian Moves in Syria Widen Role in MideastSEPT. 14, 2015

 

“With competent pilots and with an effective command and control process, the addition of these aircraft could prove very effective depending on the desired objectives for their use,” said David A. Deptula, a retired three-star Air Force general who planned the American air campaigns in 2001 in Afghanistan and in the 1991 Persian Gulf war.

 

In addition, a total of 15 Russian Hip transport and Hind attack helicopters are also now stationed at the base, doubling the number of those aircraft from last week, the American official said. For use in possible ground attacks, the Russians now also have nine T-90 tanks and more than 500 marines, up from more than 200 last week.

 

“The equipment and personnel just keep flowing in,” said the American official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss confidential intelligence reports. “They were very busy over the weekend.”

On Monday, the Russian embassy in Damascus came under mortar fire. That attack, Moscow says, did not emanate from ISIS but rather from other anti-Assad forces backed by “external sponsors”:

The Russian foreign ministry said a shell, which landed near its embassy on Sunday but caused no casualties, came from Jobar, which is held by anti-Assad fighters who were not allied with Isis and had “external sponsors”.

 

“We expect a clear position with regard to this terrorist act from all members of the international community, including regional players,” the ministry said. “This requires not just words but concrete action.”

 

It added that the fighters’ “foreign sponsors” were responsible for using their influence on “illegal armed formations”.

Clearly, “foreign sponsors” is a reference to Assad’s US-backed regional enemies including the Saudis, Qatar, and Turkey among others and this certainly seems to indicate that the Russians will not be prepared to tolerate attacks on their assets by groups who enjoy the support of the US-backed coalition. Of course quite a few of the groups battling for control of Syria are supported either directly or indirectly by the US and its regional allies which means that even if Russia manages to avoid direct confrontation with the handful of troops the US overtly backs, avoiding confrontations with the troops covertly supported by the US and other state actors will be impossible by definition, as they, just as much as ISIS, are angling for the ouster of Assad.

Meanwhile, the French took the absurdity to a whole new level on Monday when Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius claimed that the country’s plans to begin bombing Syria were born out of concerns for “self defense”. Here’s the quote:

“We received specific intelligence indicating that the resent terrorist attacks against France and other European nations were organized by Daesh [Arabic derogatory term for IS] in Syria. Due to this threat we decided to start reconnaissance flights to have the option for airstrikes, if that would be necessary. This is self-defense.

And so, as the violence escalates and Syria looks set to become the stage for a not-so-cold war pitting Russia and its regional proxies against the US and its regional proxies, we close with the following graphic which (partially) quantifies the human cost of geopolitical wrangling gone horribly awry:

U.S. Military Trained Top ISIS Commander

September 22, 2015

U.S. Military Trained Top ISIS Commander Written

by Alex Newman

Thursday, 17 September 2015

Source: U.S. Military Trained Top ISIS Commander

U.S. Military Trained Top ISIS Commander

 

One of the Islamic State’s top military commanders was actually trained by U.S. Special Forces in the nation of Georgia before taking up arms for ISIS in Syria, according to a variety of sources quoted in an explosive new report by the McClatchy news agency. Another member of the Obama administration’s supposed “anti-ISIS” coalition, the Wahhabi-Islamic dictatorship in Saudi Arabia, played a key role radicalizing the jihadist leader through a hard-core Islamist mosque it funded near his village. In other words, without the direct assistance of key “anti-ISIS” governments — including Washington, D.C. — the man said to be ISIS’ most fearsome and skilled military leader would almost certainly never have arrived in Syria to wage ruthless war on infidels in the first place. But ISIS commander Tarkhan Batirashvili (shown), who now calls himself Abu Omar al Shishani, is hardly the only one.

As explosive evidence and news reports continue to emerge highlighting the trend, it is becoming increasingly difficult to tell where ISIS begins and the globalist establishment ends. Among other revelations, Vice President Joe Biden, speaking at Harvard, admitted that Obama’s “anti-ISIS” coalition had funded and armed various terrorist groups in Syria that went on to become ISIS. Later, U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Martin Dempsey revealed in Senate testimony that Sunni Arab dictators in Obama’s “anti-ISIS” coalition were not just supporting ISIS — they were funding it. Next, a 2012 U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency report released under the Freedom of Information Act exposed the fact that Western powers and their Islamic dictator allies were supporting Islamic terrorists and wanted to see a fundamentalist Islamic State created in Eastern Syria. And finally, the former chief of DIA went on TV and spilled the beans on Obama’s “willful” support to Islamic terrorists while distancing himself from the deadly policies.

The McClatchy report, then, is only the latest shoe to drop in a long train of revelations directly linking the U.S. government and its allies to ISIS and jihad more broadly. Headlined “U.S. training helped mold top Islamic State military commander,” the September 15 article by special correspondent Mitchell Prothero contains a treasure trove of information about the U.S.-trained terrorist gathered from interviews with a wide range of sources, including many close to the ongoing Syrian war. In essence, the report paints a troubling picture of Batirashvili’s background, and offers much insight into how he became a leading ISIS commander responsible for a number of critical victories secured by the terrorist group. From his U.S. military training in Georgia to his radicalization in a Saudi-funded mosque, the piece provides still more evidence about the utter failure — or outright insanity, perhaps even criminality — surrounding what Washington, D.C., likes to characterize as “foreign policy.”

According to the McClatchy report, the 30-year-old Batirashvili (a.k.a. Abu Omar) is a “key figure” in ISIS, reportedly serving on the ISIS “governing council” in addition to being the terror group’s “supreme military leader in northern Syria and Aleppo.” The report, citing his military prowess obtained from U.S. training and a number of critical military victories he led over Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad’s forces, also refers to him as “perhaps the group’s most fearsome ground commander.” And there is a good reason for that: your tax dollars. “We trained him well, and we had lots of help from America,” an unidentified former Georgian defense official told the news agency, asking not to be named because of the sensitivity of the terrorist’s role in ISIS. “In fact, the only reason he didn’t go to Iraq to fight alongside America was that we needed his skills here in Georgia.”

Batirashvili’s former comrades in the Georgian military echoed the praise for the terrorist’s military abilities and told McClatchy that he was “immediately” recruited into Georgia’s U.S.-trained special forces upon enlistment. Again, your tax dollars — and your sons serving in the U.S. military — played a crucial role in transforming Batirashvili from an impoverished Muslim Chechen villager into a brutal and well-trained commander whose forces are now busily decapitating Christians and selling children into sex slavery to fund jihad. “He was a perfect soldier from his first days, and everyone knew he was a star,” explained a former military comrade of Batirashvili, who also requested anonymity because he was violating orders by speaking to the press about the issue. “We were well trained by American special forces units, and he was the star pupil.”

Of course, the U.S. government training for Batirashvili and other soldiers in Georgia did not take place with the explicit goal of producing future military leaders for a group of savages styling themselves the Islamic State. Instead, similar in many ways to what happened with Osama bin Laden and al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, the U.S. government plan, supposedly at least, was to help the government of Georgia defend itself against potential aggression from the Kremlin. And indeed, according to sources interviewed for the McClatchy report, Batirashvili fought well against Russian strongman Vladimir Putin’s forces, first as a Chechen rebel, and later as a U.S.-trained Georgian Special Forces officer.

While Batirashvili came from an isolated Islamic enclave in the largely Christian nation, Batirashvili and others from his region had traditionally followed a moderate strain of Islam, so-called Sufi Islam. But Sufi Muslims are often considered heretics by their more radical coreligionists in places such as Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan. Eventually, thanks to generous funding from the U.S.-allied Saudi dictatorship, hardcore Wahhabi Islam would soon make its mark on the Chechen enclave in Georgia — and on Batirashvili in particular. The same phenomenon has happened around the world.

According to McClatchy, the moderate version of Islam followed by locals from Batirashvili’s region came under pressure in the year 2000, when the Saudi regime financed the construction of a new mosque for the handful of ethnic Chechen villages in the Georgian valley. A local community leader quoted in the article explained that this new mosque “preached a kind of alien Wahhabi-style Islam” — the same radical Islam that the Saudi monarchy, a key member of Obama’s “anti-ISIS” coalition, has for generations been trying to propagate around the world with lavish funding from its oil revenues. “It told our people that it was wrong to pray at graves of saints and ancestors, as our people have done for hundreds of years, and even to share our religious rites with our Christian brothers,” the community leader said. Other residents told the news agency that by the mid-2000s, the new Saudi-backed mosque had split the local Muslim community in two, with older Muslims sticking to their traditional faith while younger villagers became radicalized in the new mosque.

Then, the globalist-engineered civil war broke out in Syria after years of U.S. taxpayer funding for Syrian opposition groups exposed in official U.S. diplomatic cables. At that point, the radicalized young Muslim villagers in Georgia affiliated with the Saudi mosque — prepared for violent jihad through years of Saudi-funded radical teachings — began an exodus to go wage holy war in Syria. “They all started leaving for Syria,” the community elder told McClatchy. “Things are safer here now because all the radicals — our children — have gone to Syria.” The report also notes that the radicalized Batirashvili served as an excellent recruiting tool for ISIS, attracting jihadists from across central Asia to join the jihad on the “apostate” dictator of Syria.

It is impossible to know how many other ISIS fighters from around the world were also radicalized in mosques funded by members of the “anti-ISIS” coalition, or how many of those fighters received training from the U.S. military under various guises. But without a doubt, there are many. In fact, Obama’s alleged plan to fight ISIS — training and equipping so-called moderate jihadists to fight more radical jihadists — was exposed as a monumental failure this week. Testifying before the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee on September 16, General Lloyd Austin, the top U.S. military commander for the Middle East, admitted that just “four or five” of Obama’s U.S.-trained jihadists were actually fighting against ISIS in Syria. On the other hand, as The New American and others have documented extensively, far more than that are currently fighting with ISIS, al-Qaeda, and other terrorist groups across Syria — often with heavy U.S. weapons. Indeed, entire brigades of U.S.-trained rebels have joined terror groups or signed agreements with them to fight Assad.

As a direct consequence of the Obama administration’s lawless so-called “foreign policy” machinations, hundreds of thousands are dying, millions are fleeing their homes, refugees are swamping Europe, Middle Eastern Christians are facing genocide, and the national security threat to the United States is growing stronger by the day. Now, all those crises are being exploited by the same globalists who created them to push more of the same insanity.

It is time for Congress to shut down this farce and hold everyone responsible for it accountable.

Photo of  Abu Omar al Shishani, taken from a video: AP Images

Alex Newman, a foreign correspondent for The New American, is normally based in Europe. Follow him on Twitter @ALEXNEWMAN_JOU. He can be reached at anewman@thenewamerican.com.

Related articles:

U.S. Intel: Obama Coalition Supported Islamic State in Syria

ISIS: The Best Terror Threat U.S. Tax Money Can Buy

U.S. Defense Intel Chief: Obama Gave “Willful” Aid to Al-Qaeda

Globalists Who Created Refugee Crisis Now Exploiting It

Globalists Using Muslim Terrorists as Pawns  

Globalists Exploit ISIS Threat to Empower UN

Obama and Co. Middle East Policies Aiding Genocide of Christians

Anti-ISIS Coalition Built ISIS (Video) 

Christian Massacres: A Result of U.S. Foreign Policy

ISIS Origins Traced to U.S. Prison in Iraq

U.S.-backed Syrian Opposition Linked to Bilderberg, CFR, Goldman Sachs & George Soros

Bin Laden & Al-Qaeda: U.S. Govt. Creations

Two-State Solutions and Double Standards

September 22, 2015

Two-State Solutions and Double Standards Why is it only the Jewish state, and not Iraq or Syria, that is pressured to split into parts?

September 22, 2015

Joseph Puder

Source: Two-State Solutions and Double Standards | Frontpage Mag

The Assads in Syria and the Sunni-Muslim Saddam Hussein (now deceased) are examples of minorities ruling over majority populations not of their own ethnic or religious branch. The fall of Saddam’s Iraq was like Humpty Dumpty: once broken, it cannot be put together again.  In the Syrian civil-war, the Sunni-Muslim majority is determined to end the Assad dictatorial rule through unprecedented violence and mayhem. Atrocities are perpetrated by both the Assad regime and the Islamic State. It has resulted in fracturing Syria. Millions of Iraqis and Syrians are now displaced, streaming toward European shores. It is fair to ask why the U.S. and the West in general are not openly supporting the new realities in the Levant.

The George W. Bush and Barack H. Obama administrations have displayed double standards toward Israel with respect to the “two-state solution.” One can legitimately ask why not apply the three-state solution to Iraq and the five-state solution to Syria? Why is it that, according to Obama, the Jewish state can be split into parts (two states), while the artificial colonial creations of Iraq and Syria must remain unitary states? In the case of Israel, the territory it occupies from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean was recognized by the League of Nations as the historical homeland of the Jews.

British Colonial Secretary Winston Churchill wrote in June, 1922 that the Jews are “in Palestine as of Right and not on Sufferance.” The text of the League of Nations mandate (July 24, 1922) entrusting the Mandate to Britain reads: “Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their national home in that country; and whereas the Principal Allied Powers have selected His Britannic Majesty as the Mandatory for Palestine…”

Charles Krauthammer summarized in the National Post (March 20, 2015) the reasons why a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is impossible at this time. “The fundamental reality remains: This generation of Palestinian leadership – from Yasser Arafat to Mahmoud Abbas – has never and will never sign its name to a final peace settlement dividing the land with a Jewish State. And without that, no [Israeli] government of any kind will agree to a Palestinian state.”

Israel is being surrounded by jihadist forces in Gaza (Hamas) and in Lebanon (Hezbollah). In the Sinai Islamic state affiliates are attempting to destabilize the government of President al-Sisi of Egypt, and King Abdullah’s Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan. In Syria, both the Islamic State and the Assad regime with its Iranian allies threaten Israel. Should Israel vacate the West Bank (Judea and Samaria) to satisfy the Two-State solution, it will likely fall into Hamas’ hands. Israel’s population centers and industrial infrastructure will then be within range of Hamas’ rockets. Moreover, the Palestinian Authority ruled by Mahmoud Abbas is tottering and with little legitimacy. The two-state solution can only work if the Palestinians accept Israel as a Jewish state, take off the table Palestinian “right of return,” and only when the Middle East finds a modicum of regional stability that might allow Israel to take risks.

It is a different story in Iraq and Syria. Following the bloodbath in Syria that killed 250,000, few, if any, would want to live under the Assad dictatorial regime or the murderous and intolerant Caliphate of the Islamic State. The Kurds, after Kobane, want independence and perhaps a merger with the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in Erbil (Northern Iraq). The Alawis (10-15% of the population of Syria) whose base is in northwestern Syria, expect the Sunni majority to exact revenge for the deadly attacks the Bashar Assad’s regime perpetrated against them. They too, would like an independent state or some form of loose federalism. The Sunni-Arab majority wants to rule Syria again, but that Syria would have to be without approximately 1.8 million Christians, or 10% of the population who would rather join their co-religionists in an expanded Christian Lebanon. The Kurds, Alawis, and Druze (the smallest group) would likewise not want to live in a fundamentalist Sunni-Arab dominated state.

One can easily envision five states (or statelets) in Syria: a large Sunni-Arab state in central-eastern Syria, bordering Iraq’s Anbar province (which contains some of the same tribes); a Kurdish state in the Northeastern corner of Syria bordering the KRG in northeastern Iraq; an Alawi state in northwestern Syria along the Mediterranean Sea; a new Christian state that would bring together the diminished Christians of Lebanon (who at one time led Lebanon and for whom the state was created in 1943 by the French) and the suffering Syrian Christians, in a territorially expanded region that would stretch from Beirut northeastward, including the Mount Lebanon area. Also, the Druze would prefer a small independent state around Jabal Druze in southwestern Syria.

Salman Shaikh, Director of the Brookings Doha Center, had this to say about Syria (January 6, 2015): “We have to recognize that Syria is now a broken, fragmented, divided state.” A regime change in Damascus and the demise of the Assad regime will inevitably bring an end to a unitary Syria.

Jeffrey Goldberg (January/February 2008) writing in The Atlantic pointed out that

[i]t was Winston Churchill who, in the aftermath of World War I, roped together three provinces of the defeated and dissolved Ottoman Empire, adopted the name Iraq, and bequeathed it to the luckless branch of the Hashemite tribe of West Arabia. Churchill would eventually call the forced inclusion of the Kurds in Iraq one of his worst mistakes ­­- but by then, there was nothing he could do about it. The British, together with the French, gave the world the modern Middle East. In addition to manufacturing the country now called Iraq, the grand Middle East settlement shrank Turkey by the middle of the 1920’s to the size of the Anatolian peninsula; granted what are now Syria and Lebanon to the French; and kept Egypt under British control.

The situation in Iraq has been clear since the fall of Saddam Hussein. Only a brutal dictator could keep Iraq together. Appearing on PBS News Hour, David Brooks of the New York Times (May 30, 2015) opined, “I give Joe Biden credit. He’ll renounce it, but years and years ago, probably 2006, 2007, he had an idea for a loose federal Iraq. And that, in retrospect – that looks to me like a smarter and smarter idea. We have tried to keep this country together, but the Shias are not really sharing power with the Sunnis. They’re not willing to give the Sunni forces the weapons and other things they need to defeat ISIS. The political system is still fractured. The soldiers clearly do not believe in that country[.]”

Recent U.S. administrations have pressured Israel to negotiate for an impractical two-state solution. They have, at the same time, insisted on maintaining Iraq and Syria as unitary states when it is clear that these artificial states created by the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement are collapsing and are ungovernable. The time has come for the U.S. to support the hopes of the Kurds and others for independence, while supporting Israel’s historical rights to Judea and Samaria and its genuine security needs.

Syrian army bolstering Iranian terrorism, Netanyahu tells Putin

September 21, 2015

Syrian army bolstering Iranian terrorism, Netanyahu tells Putin PM in Moscow to ‘clarify’ Israeli policy amid Russian buildup; Kremlin leader says Damascus too busy to bother with fighting Israel as both By Times of Israel staff September 21, 2015, 4:39 pm

Source: Syrian army bolstering Iranian terrorism, Netanyahu tells Putin | The Times of Israel

Russian President Vladimir Putin shakes hands with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, right, during their meeting in the Novo-Ogaryovo residence, outside Moscow, Russia, Monday, Sept. 21, 2015. (AP Photo/Ivan Sekretarev, Pool)

Russian President Vladimir Putin shakes hands with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, right, during their meeting in the Novo-Ogaryovo residence, outside Moscow, Russia, Monday, Sept. 21, 2015. (AP Photo/Ivan Sekretarev, Pool)

The Syrian army is aiding Iran and Hezbollah in building an anti-Israel terror network on the Golan Heights, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told Russian President Vladimir Putin Monday, with the Kremlin strongman responding that Damascus has no time to worry about fighting Israel.

Netanyahu’s three-hour meeting with Putin during a lightning trip to the Kremlin Monday came amid reports that Moscow is building up militarily in Syria, and Israeli concerns of a possible clash with Russian forces, which are bolstering embattled Syrian President Bashar Assad.

“Israel and Russia have a shared interest to ensure stability in the Middle East,” Netanyahu told Putin at the start of the meeting, according to an account from the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office. “And I am here because of the security situation, which is becoming more complex on our northern border. As you know, in recent years, and increasingly in recent months, Iran and Syria are arming the extremist Muslim terror group Hezbollah with advanced weaponry, which is pointed at us and has already been fired at us over the years — thousands of missiles and rockets on our cities.”

Syria’s military, Netanyahu added, was giving cover to Iranian efforts to open a new front against Israel.

The West has been concerned over Russia’s military buildup in Syria, which Moscow has said is aimed to help the Syrian government fight the Islamic State group. Russia, Syria’s long-standing ally, has denied that it helps Syria militarily to support the Assad regime.

Earlier this week, new satellite imagery showed the recent arrival of Russian tanks, armored personnel carriers and other military equipment at an air base in Syria’s coastal Latakia province, confirming reports by US, Israeli and other officials of a Russian military buildup.

Israel has long expressed concerns that Iranian and Hezbollah agents have used the fighting in Syria as cover to build up forces along the Golan heights to carry out attacks against Israel. A number of airstrikes over the last several years, reportedly targeting Iranian backed cells and weapons shipments, have been assigned to Israel.

“Iran, under the auspices of the Syrian army, is trying to build a second terror front against us from the Golan. Our policy is to prevent these weapons transfers, and to prevent the formation of a terror front and attacks against us from the territory of the Golan. In these circumstances, I thought it was very important that I come here, both to clarify our policy and to make sure there are no misunderstandings between our forces,” Netanyahu told Putin.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is welcomed by representatives of the Israeli Embassy in Russia, as well as Russian delegates, as he arrives on an official visit to Moscow, Russia, September 21, 2015. (Israeli Embassy in Russia/Flash90)

Putin welcomed Netanyahu’s visit, but expressed skepticism over the latter’s Syria warnings.

“All Russia’s actions in the region were always very responsible. We are aware of the issue of bombardments of Israel [with rockets] and reject all such bombardments. To my knowledge, these bombardments are carried out by homemade systems,” he said.

“As for Syria, We know that the Syrian army and Syria as a whole are in such a state that they have no time for a second front. They need to save their own state. Our main goal is to defend the Syrian state. With that, I understand your concern, and I’m very happy you came here so we could discuss all these issues in detail.”

The visit to Moscow comes a week before Netanyahu is scheduled to fly to the US to speak at the United Nations and meet with American officials, ahead of a White House visit in November.

Jerusalem has tried to maintain friendly ties with Russia, shying away from taking a position on fighting in Ukraine or other issues that the Kremlin and Washington have clashed over recently.

Putin also praised Israel, which is home to some million Russian-speakers.

“We never forget that a great many expats from the former Soviet Union live in the State of Israel, and that has a special impact on relations between the countries.”

In Moscow, presence of IDF generals sends a message of military urgency

September 21, 2015

In Moscow, presence of IDF generals sends a message of military urgency In rare move, Netanyahu brings both IDF chief and intelligence head to Russia to drive home concerns on Hezbollah, Syria By Judah Ari Gross September 21, 2015, 11:54 am

Source: In Moscow, presence of IDF generals sends a message of military urgency | The Times of Israel

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sits with IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot during a visit to the northern border of Israel on August 18, 2015. (Amos Ben Gershom/GPO)

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu sits with IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eisenkot during a visit to the northern border of Israel on August 18, 2015. (Amos Ben Gershom/GPO)

n a sign that it has not taken last week’s movement of the Russian military into Syria lightly, Israel sent not one but two members of the IDF General Staff with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Moscow Monday, in an effort to hash out the precarious relationships between Israel, Russia, Syria and Hezbollah.

Both IDF Chief of Staff Lt. Gen. Gadi Eisenkot and Military Intelligence Head Maj. Gen. Herzl “Hertzi” Halevi are accompanying Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to discuss the movement of Russian troops into Syria with Russian President Vladimir Putin and his advisers.

The presence of either one of these generals on this trip would be notable in itself. That both are traveling with Netanyahu is meant to demonstrate to both the people of Israel and the government of Russia the gravity of the situation on Israel’s northern border and the IDF’s intention to keep up airstrikes on high-priority Hezbollah targets in Syria.

Israel has admitted to targeting several Hezbollah and Syrian weapons facilities and convoys in the past several years, and it has been assumed that the Israel Air Force has carried out many more, despite officials’ refusal to claim responsibility.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Russian President Vladimir Putin at Netanyahu's residence in Jerusalem on June 25, 2012 (Marc Israel Sellem/POOL/Flash90)

Most such attacks have been against so-called advanced weapons systems — missiles and artillery guns, rather than rifles and grenades.

Putin, however, complicated Israel’s strategies vis-a-vis Hezbollah and Syria when he announced that the Russian military would be moving into the war-torn country, setting up in the port city of Latakia.

Satellite images already show Russian-made artillery guns and SU-30 combat planes in the northwestern Syrian city.

The presence of Russian soldiers in the country is an added obstacle for the IDF, which must now continue to prevent Israel’s enemies from obtaining dangerous weapons, without causing an international incident by killing an ally’s soldiers.

In 2013 and 2014, Israel was suspected of having carried out airstrikes on weapons sites in Latakia. With Russian military now present in the city, similar attacks may be more difficult to carry out.

An armored personnel carrier, likely a Russian made BTR-82A, firing large-caliber bullets during a battle in Latakia, Syria, is seen in a video posted online on August 23, 2015. (Screen capture YouTube)

Though the Israeli government has not released an itinerary for Monday’s trip, Eisenkot and Halevi will likely meet with their Russian army counterparts to address two related issues: preventing Hezbollah from obtaining Russian-made weaponry and Israel Air Force strikes against the advanced weapons systems already in the possession of the Iran-aligned militia.

Though some of Hezbollah’s arsenal comes from Iran, several of its deadliest weapons — the Kornet anti-tank missile, which has been deadly in combat against Israeli Merkava tanks, and the Katyusha rocket, which rained down on Israel’s northern cities during the Second Lebanon War in 2006 — come from Russia.

Though many of these weapons systems were intended for Syria, some have nevertheless ended up in the hands of Hezbollah, according to Nadav Pollak, a senior fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.

Some of the systems sold by Russia include anti-aircraft guns and surface-to-air missiles, which could be devastating to Israel’s air superiority in a future conflict with Hezbollah, Pollak said.

As head of intelligence, Halevi will likely present information to the Russian military, showing how these Russian-made weapons end up in the hands of Hezbollah, Pollak explained.

Brig. Gen. Herzi Halevi speaking Thursday. (photo credit: Mitch Ginsburg/Times of Israel)

In addition to attempting to prevent further such transfers, Netanyahu, Eisenkot and Halevi will also discuss Israel’s plans to destroy those advanced systems the terrorist organization has already acquired.

As Hezbollah has been closely aligned with Russia’s ally Assad, this may be a sticking point with Putin, though it is not one Israel is prepared to give up on, Yossi Cohen, national security adviser to the prime minister, told the Israel Hayom newspaper Monday.

Netanyahu will tell Putin that Israel won’t accept restrictions on its response capabilities in Syria, Cohen said.

As Israel’s strikes against Hezbollah have taken place on Syrian territory, which violates its sovereignty, Pollak explained, “there is a chance that Russia will express its objection to this policy.”

The United States has also voiced concerns over Putin’s role in the Syrian civil war.

“Continued military support for the regime by Russia or any other country risks the possibility of attracting more extremists and entrenching Assad, and hinders the way for resolution,” US Secretary of State John Kerry told reporters in Germany on Sunday.

Kerry has proposed military-to military talks with Russia to prevent any clashes between US and Russian forces in the region, to ensure that “there’s no potential of a mistake or of an accident of some kind that produces a greater potential of conflict.”

Muslims of America terrorist training compounds

September 20, 2015

Muslims of America terrorist training compounds

By Carol Brown

September 20, 2015

Source: Articles: Muslims of America terrorist training compounds

While the Middle East remains a hotbed for terrorists, we’ve got our own jihad training compounds set up in rural areas across the United States. They are run by an organization called Muslims of America (MOA). Law enforcement describes these compounds as “classically structured terrorist cells.”

If you visit the MOA website, you’ll get a hefty dose of taqiyya. The home page has an image of a large American flag along with a banner advertising one of their offshoot organizations called the United Muslim Christian Forum. The goal of this bogus group is to find common ground between Muslims and Christians, including mutual hatred of Jews. The web site also features a slick 16-minute propaganda video.

On the opposite end of the spectrum from what the MOA is publically peddling is the non-taqiyya version of who they are. Otherwise known as the truth.

Let’s start with the founder: El Sheikh Gilani. Prior to MOA, he founded Jamaat ul-Fuqra, a Pakistani terror organization. MOA is the American version of ul-Fuqra.

Gilani is also the man Daniel Pearl had set out to interview on that fateful day when Pearl was kidnapped. (May Daniel’s soul rest in peace.)

Per the Northeast Intelligence Network, Gilani emigrated from Pakistan around 1980. He settled in Brooklyn, NY, where he began preaching at a mosque frequented by African-American Muslims. This is where he started to recruit for jihad in Afghanistan, often targeting black criminals who converted to Islam in prison — a source of recruits for jihad that continues to this day.

Then Gilani took things a step further and set up a terror-training compound in a rural area of upstate New York. There are now numerous MOA compounds across the United States. Estimates vary regarding how many there are, ranging from 22 to 35. As of this writing, states where MOA has set up shop are: Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, Kansas, Massachusetts, Michigan, New York, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania, South Carolina, Texas, Tennessee, Virginia, Washington, and West Virginia.

In other words, they’re just about everywhere.

In some states there is more than one location. New York’s “Islamburg” (located in the town of Hancock) is the largest operation and serves as the headquarters. The MOA compound in Colorado was the site of a 1989 seizure by federal authorities of firearms, explosive devices, forged documents, military manuals, and data on potential targets. (See here, here, here, here, here, here, and here for more information on MOA locations, including maps.)

There is no doubt that MOA is a terror organization operating on American soil. It is well documented by the FBI whose records state that MOA has the infrastructure to plan and carry out terror attacks (here, and overseas) and that MOA leaders urge their members to commit jihad against enemies of Islam.

In addition to the FBI, there are courageous individuals and private organizations on the bleeding edge of investigating and exposing this deadly organization, including the Christian Action Network (CAN), with founder and author of Twilight in America, Martin Mawyer, leading the way. (Interview with Mawyer, here.)

Two reports by CAN reveal MOA’s insular communities that thrive on brainwashing, deception, hate, and violence. These reports are summarized below.

  • MOA trains men, and women, to become jihadists poised to attack Americans when Gilani gives the order. Toward this end, MOA maintains a stockpile of illegal weapons. Residents are taught that jihad is their life’s purpose and have been indoctrinated to believe Gilani can travel through space and time to spy on them. After recruits are trained here, many are then sent to Pakistan for more paramilitary training.
  • Compounds are completely insular, with their own stores, mosques, and graveyards, as well as guard posts to intercept visitors. Living conditions are typically poor. Many locations are near lakes where jihadists-in-training shoot weapons across the lake (standing behind the 2nd amendment when confronted about it) in addition to learning other means of attack such as slitting throats and strangulation. All members follow Sharia law and consider themselves to be above local, state and federal authority.
  • Large families and government dependence are encouraged with much of the money sent to Gilani, who is now back in Pakistan. Welfare fraud is rampant as children are urged to commit crimes against non-Muslims and to engage in scams, including welfare fraud and drug-related crimes (with drug money sent to Gilani). Members often use aliases and spelling variations of their names.
  • There are as many as four generations of people living in these camps, all of whom have been taught from the outset to distrust Americans and to prepare for jihad. For some members, life in the camp is all they’ve ever known. In addition to those who were born at the compound, MOA openly recruits through social service organizations, with many new members coming from the prison system.
  • Discipline in the camps is ruthless and is used to exact punishment and intimidate members from leaving. If members break a rule, they may be tied to a tree and beaten. In addition, women are routinely raped and children are physically abused. Girls are denied an education, such as it is.

Per the Northeast Intelligence Network, MOA members have been suspected and/or convicted of a variety or crimes, including assassinations, fire bombings, and fraud. Money has been laundered through Muslim front organizations established by Gilani, including an Islamic university and private elementary schools.

So how does MOA get away this?

Two former FBI agents (Tim Clemente and John Guandolo) reported on factors that reflect a combination of deception, political correctness, and public policy that inhibits the FBI’s ability to do their job. First, the FBI wants to avoid the appearance that it is scrutinizing Muslim organizations and/or is infringing on religious freedom. Second, MOA sets up religious/charitable causes to mask their illicit activities, intertwining good with bad. This enables them to play the victim card during investigation attempts.

In other words, suicidal political correctness overrides our safety as United States law enforcement allows itself to be intimidated by faux charities that provide cover for terrorists.

But perhaps the most significant barrier to our ability to take action is the fact that our State Department refuses to designate ul-Fuqra a terrorist organization despite unequivocal evidence that they are. In addition, as Ryan Mauro, national security researcher for CAN stated back in 2009: “law enforcement authorities do not have the tools they need to search these compounds…members involved in terrorist and criminal activity are being treated as if they are isolated incidents; rogue followers of an otherwise innocent cult. Legislation on the state level also needs to be passed to permit the authorities to search these compounds.”

So we’ve got jihad training camps and sleeper cells scattered all across the United States ready to attack. And what are we doing about it? Precious little.

Who among us will be the next to fall victim to Gilani’s directive?

“Act like you are his friend. Then kill him.”

(To learn more about MOA, see here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

Videos here, here, and here.)

 

Hat tips: Bare Naked Islam, The Clarion Project, Counterjihad Report, Facing Islam, Law Enforcement Today, The Conservative Papers, Sharia Unveiled, Jihad Watch, The Blaze, Front Page Magazine
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/09/muslims_of_america_terrorist_training_compounds.html#ixzz3mHOzxcyf
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook

Cooked Intel on IS Could Be Biggest Scandal for Obama

September 19, 2015

Steve Hayes: Cooked Intel on Islamic State Could Be Biggest Scandal of Obama’s Presidency

BY:
September 18, 2015 10:35 pm

Source: Fox: Cooked Intel on IS Could Be Biggest Scandal for Obama

Weekly Standard senior writer Steve Hayes said Friday that the alleged manipulation of intelligence about the Islamic State (IS, also ISIS) by senior officials could be the biggest scandal of President Obama’s presidency.

“You had analysts who provided information, provided assessments that said that ISIS was actually a growing threat and a real danger, and those threats were systematically rewritten to downplay the threat from ISIS,” Hayes said on Fox’s Special Report with Bret Baier.

“I think this is potentially the biggest scandal of the Obama administration,” Hayes said later.

The scandal in question has simmered under the surface for some time before an article in The Daily Beast brought matters to a boil. The article revealed that 50 intelligence analysts had formally complained that their reports about IS and al Nusra, an al Qaeda-affiliated terrorist group, were being altered by senior officials to downplay the groups’ strength.

Hayes said that intelligence has been hidden and massaged by the Obama administration to downplay the strength of al Qaeda for years.

“My argument is that this isn’t a new scandal at all,” Hayes said. “There were games played with [the Osama bin Laden documents]. The administration was arguing at the time that al Qaeda was no longer a threat—that it was, in fact, retreating—when you had somebody like Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn, the former chairman of the [DIA] saying at the time that al Qaeda had doubled in strength

 

Transcript below:

BRET BAIER: Cooking the books on intel about ISIS. The chairman of the House Intelligence committee says knows it’s been going on since 2012, because he was told by an informant that it was going on back then. What about all of this? We start the Friday lightning round. We’re back with the panel. Steve.

STEVE HAYES: Well, I think this is a big deal. There has been a lot of media focus over the past couple weeks, past couple months about intelligence manipulation as it relates to ISIS, where you had analysts who provided information, provided assessments that said that ISIS was actually a growing threat and a real danger, and those threats were systematically rewritten to downplay the threat from ISIS. But most of the media is treating this as a new scandal. My argument is that this isn’t a new scandal at all. In fact, it has happened before both with respect to the War on Terror but also involving [the Defense Intelligence Agency] and CENTCOM. That goes back to the translation, the exploitation of the documents that were captured in Osama bin Laden’s compound. The same thing happened. Those documents, there were games played with them. The administration was arguing at the time that al Qaeda was no longer a threat—that it was, in fact, retreating—when you had somebody like Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn, the former chairman of the [DIA] saying at the time that al Qaeda had doubled in strength. I think this is potentially the biggest scandal of the Obama administration.

BAIER: Okay. Mark it down.