Garland, Texas: Islamic State Jihadi Illegally Purchased Weapon from Fast and Furious Operation

/in , , , /by

The Los Angeles Times reported, Nadiv Soofi one of two Garland, Texas jihadis, the other was roommate Elton Simpson, killed in the May 2015 attack illegally purchased a weapon  in 2010 from a Fast and Furious front in Phoenix, “Assailant in Garland, Texas, attack bought gun in 2010 under Fast and Furious operation”. Sen. Ron Johnson (R-WI) picked up on this and senate investigators are looking into how a terrorist killed in the Texas purchased a weapon illegally from the much maligned Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (BATF) “gun walking” program. Fast and Furious first came to light in 2010 with the tragic killing of US Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry by one of the ” gun walking” weapons used by a drug cartel member.

You may recall that former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder criticized Republicans in 2011 for “politicizing” the furor over the revelations.  In testimony before Congress Holder eschewed knowledge and responsibilities simply saying  it was “flawed in its concept, and flawed in its execution”. He was charged with contempt of Congress for his testimony.

The Times investigative report by Richard Serrano noted:

Five years before he was shot to death in the failed terrorist attack in Garland, Texas, Nadir Soofi walked into a suburban Phoenix gun shop to buy a 9-millimeter pistol.

At the time, Lone Wolf Trading Co. was known among gun smugglers for selling illegal firearms. And with Soofi’s history of misdemeanor drug and assault charges, there was a chance his purchase might raise red flags in the federal screening process.

Inside the store, he fudged some facts on the form required of would-be gun buyers.

Late Nadir Soofi Garland Texas Mohammed Cartoon contest assailant

Late Nadir Soofi, Garland, Texas Mohammed Cartoon contest assailant.

What Soofi could not have known was that Lone Wolf was at the center of a federal sting operation known as Fast and Furious, targeting Mexican drug lords and traffickers. The idea of the secret program was to allow Lone Wolf to sell illegal weapons to criminals and straw purchasers, and track the guns back to large smuggling networks and drug cartels.

Texas gunman’s mother: ‘He just had a normal American upbringing’

Instead, federal agents lost track of the weapons and the operation became a fiasco, particularly after several of the missing guns were linked to shootings in Mexico and the 2010 killing of U.S. Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry in Arizona.

Soofi’s attempt to buy a gun caught the attention of authorities, who slapped a seven-day hold on the transaction, according to his Feb. 24, 2010, firearms transaction record, which was reviewed by the Los Angeles Times. Then, for reasons that remain unclear, the hold was lifted after 24 hours, and Soofi got the 9-millimeter.

As the owner of a small pizzeria, the Dallas-born Soofi, son of a Pakistani American engineer and American nurse, would not have been the primary focus of federal authorities, who back then were looking for smugglers and drug lords.

He is now.

In May, Soofi and his roommate, Elton Simpson, burst upon the site of a Garland cartoon convention that was offering a prize for the best depiction of the prophet Muhammad, something offensive to many Muslims. Dressed in body armor and armed with three pistols, three rifles and 1,500 rounds of ammunition, the pair wounded a security officer before they were killed by local police.

A day after the attack, the Department of Justice sent an “urgent firearms disposition request” to Lone Wolf, seeking more information about Soofi and the pistol he bought in 2010, according to a June 1 letter from Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.), chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, to U.S. Atty. Gen. Loretta Lynch.

Though the request did not specify whether the gun was used in the Garland attack, Justice Department officials said the information was needed “to assist in a criminal investigation,” according to Johnson’s letter, also reviewed by The Times.

The FBI so far has refused to release any details, including serial numbers, about the weapons used in Garland by Soofi and Simpson. Senate investigators are now pressing law enforcement agencies for answers, raising the chilling possibility that a gun sold during the botched Fast and Furious operation ended up being used in a terrorist attack against Americans.

Among other things, Johnson is demanding to know whether federal authorities have recovered the gun Soofi bought in 2010, where it was recovered and whether it had been discharged, according to the letter. He also demanded an explanation about why the initial seven-day hold was placed on the 2010 pistol purchase and why it was lifted after 24 hours.

Asked recently for an update on the Garland shooting, FBI Director James B. Comey earlier this month declined to comment. “We’re still sorting that out,” he said.

This is mind numbing. Nadir Soofi, one of the two jihadis killed in the May 2015 Garland, Texas AFDI Mohammed cartoon contest attack purchased a weapon illegally from the Fast and Furious sting front in Phoenix, with the ironic name of Lone Wolf Trading. Ask yourself why this illegal transaction occurred despite Soofi’s drug and assault charges record. This latest revelation demonstrates that the BATF sting operation was totally misguided and worked against apprehension of suspects giving material aid to Islamic terrorism. Notice this info occurred after record checks were run on weapons seized by local Garland police and run through the federal gun clearance data base.

Too bad that former attorney general Eric Holder, now at premier D.C. law firm Covington and Burling, and the former BATF program officials were never investigated or referred for possible prosecution for this lame brained scheme.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review. The featured image is from Twitter.

U.S. Spends Billions on Bombing Campaign, but the Islamic State Still Stands Strong!

/in , , /by

“The assessments by the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency and others appear to contradict the optimistic line taken by the Obama administration’s special envoy, retired Gen. John Allen, who told a forum in Aspen, Colorado, last week that “ISIS is losing” in Iraq and Syria.” As long as the denial and willful ignorance about the reason for the Islamic State’s appeal continue, and no one is willing to commit ground troops to destroying the Islamic State, the U.S. and its allies will not make significant headway against the Islamic State. After the last Iraq misadventure, no one is going to commit ground troops, and even if anyone did, they would no doubt be hamstrung by impossible Rules of Engagement and politically correct nation-building efforts that would only strengthen Sharia forces — just like last time.

“Despite Bombing, Islamic State Is No Weaker Than a Year Ago,” by Ken Dilanian, Zeina Karam, and Bassem Mroue, Associated Press, July 31, 2015:

After billions of dollars spent and more than 10,000 extremist fighters killed, the Islamic State group is fundamentally no weaker than it was when the U.S.-led bombing campaign began a year ago, American intelligence agencies have concluded.

U.S. military commanders on the ground aren’t disputing the assessment, but they point to an upcoming effort to clear the important Sunni city of Ramadi, which fell to the militants in May, as a crucial milestone.

The battle for Ramadi, expected over the next few months, “promises to test the mettle” of Iraq’s security forces, Marine Corps Brig. Gen. Kevin J. Killea, who is helping run the U.S.-led coalition effort in Iraq, told reporters at the Pentagon in a video briefing from the region.

The U.S.-led military campaign has put the Islamic State group on defense, Killea said, adding, “There is progress.” Witnesses on the ground say the airstrikes and Kurdish ground actions are squeezing the militants in northern Syria, particularly in their self-proclaimed capital in Raqqa.

But U.S. intelligence agencies see the overall situation as a strategic stalemate: The Islamic State remains a well-funded extremist army able to replenish its ranks with foreign jihadis as quickly as the U.S. can eliminate them. Meanwhile, the group has expanded to other countries, including Libya, Egypt’s Sinai Peninsula and Afghanistan.

The assessments by the CIA, the Defense Intelligence Agency and others appear to contradict the optimistic line taken by the Obama administration’s special envoy, retired Gen. John Allen, who told a forum in Aspen, Colorado, last week that “ISIS is losing” in Iraq and Syria. The intelligence was described by officials who would not be named because they were not authorized to discuss it publicly.

“We’ve seen no meaningful degradation in their numbers,” a defense official said, citing intelligence estimates that put the group’s total strength at between 20,000 and 30,000, the same estimate as last August, when the airstrikes began.

The Islamic State’s staying power raises questions about the administration’s approach to the threat that the group poses to the U.S. and its allies. Although officials do not believe it is planning complex attacks on the West from its territory, the group’s call to Western Muslims to kill at home has become a serious problem, FBI Director James Comey and other officials say.

Yet under the Obama administration’s campaign of bombing and training, which prohibits American troops from accompanying fighters into combat or directing airstrikes from the ground, it could take a decade or more to drive the Islamic State from its safe havens, analysts say. The administration is adamant that it will commit no U.S. ground troops to the fight despite calls from some in Congress to do so.

The U.S.-led coalition and its Syrian and Kurdish allies have made some inroads. The Islamic State has lost 9.4 percent of its territory in the first six months of 2015, according to an analysis by the conflict monitoring group IHS….

Was that anything like this map, that conveniently left out the territory it had gained?

RELATED ARTICLES:

Muslim cleric: Caliphate will bring down the U.S., eliminate West entirely

Islamic supremacist academic Omid Safi recommends that the U.S. disarm in the face of the advancing jihad

30 Second Video: Kerry – Iran ‘Atomic Bromance’ Explained

/in , , , /by

Is John Kerry ‘related’ to Mohammed Zrif?

HAVE YOU HAD ENOUGH OF THIS IRAN-KERRY INSANITY YET?

Either Kerry is the biggest buffoon who just had an Iranian “information operation” spun on his head or he is so partial to Iran that he wants them to exert regional dominance in the Middle East, thus clearly threatening Israel.

What will it take for Americans to realize that we MUST dump this Iran nuke deal, get the Iranians back to the negotiating table and require complete dismantling of their key nuke facilities.

Washington, D.C. – At today’s Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing regarding the Obama Administration’s nuclear deal with Iran, U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) highlighted the importance of U.S. sanctions as a viable alternative to President Obama’s deal and outlined how, if the deal is implemented, Iran will be in a much stronger position when the deal expires.

“When people vote on this deal in a few weeks, you’re going to live with this for the rest of your life,” Rubio said during the hearing. “In 10 years, in 12 years, when Iran has a nuclear weapon and we can’t target them, people are going to remember this vote that’s coming up and this deal as what laid the groundwork for it, and I keep hearing this notion that there is no other alternative and no other way forward, but I disagree.

“I believe U.S. sanctions are the most important part of all the sanctions,” Rubio continued. “I believe that these banks in Europe, German banks, whatever banks may be, if they were forced to choose between having access to the American economy and access to the Iranian economy, that’s not going to be a hard choice for them.”

A video of Rubio’s remarks and the full exchanges is available here.

Transcript of Senator Rubio’s.

Senator Marco Rubio: “The choice right before us was two things.

“On the one hand was to continue with what we thought was the strategy which is international sanctions that had an impact on Iran’s economy. They continued to make progress in their enrichment capabilities and so forth, but it was a combination of international sanctions and the threat of credible military force, which no one wants to talk about, but that was on the table, and the President has said that, in fact, if it came down to it, the U.S. would do that, if it were necessary.

“Versus what we have now, which is a deal that basically argues, well what this will do is that if they comply with it, it will slow them down, and in 10 years if they want to break out, it buys us 10 years of time, and it avoids, assuming everybody complies with everything.

“Here’s my problem with that analysis. My problem with it is that in 8 to 10 years, which sounds like a long time to all of us here, it’s nothing. Ten years goes very quickly, and that’s if we’re optimistic. In 10 years, Iran will be in a much stronger position. In fact, I think in 10 years they’ll be immune from international pressure compared to where they are today, and here’s why.

“First of all, they are going to use this sanctions relief and the billions of dollars that it frees up, and I know everyone wants to believe they’re going to invest it in hospitals and roads and social services in order to win their next election. I promise you, they’re going to win they’re next election. I don’t think they’re worried about that as much as they are about their need for example, to get to modernize their enrichment capability into a 21st century industrial system.

“It actually falls right in line with the mandate that the Supreme Leader, I believe, gave to the negotiators, which is, ‘Don’t agree to anything that’s irreversible. Go as far as you need to go to get the sanctions removed, but don’t agree to anything that’s irreversible.’

“So they’ll have less centrifuges, but they’ll be better ones and they’ll be modernized, and they’ll retain that infrastructure, which is the hardest part of any nuclear program, is the infrastructure, the hardware that it takes to do this.

“But here’s what else they’re going to do, they’re going to continue to build their conventional capabilities. We don’t think about that enough, but Iran in 10 years will have conventional capabilities, maybe less, that could potentially drive us out of the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz because the price of being there will be too high, I mean they can buy Chinese asymmetrical capabilities that allow them to kill ships, add to these fast swift boats things that they’ve been able to come up with that can threaten an aircraft carrier. They’re going to continue to build long range rockets. Why are you building a long range rocket, an ICBM? Are you going to put a man on the moon? No. They’re building it for purposes of targeting the continental United States. And they look at North Korea and say, ‘Yeah the North Koreans have a long range rocket.’ We don’t know where it is going to hit yet because they aren’t very good yet at guidance, but it will hit somewhere, like the West Coast of the United States. That alone has made North Korea immune.

“And they’re going to continue to build up their surrogates in the region, which I would argue already, even now before the sanctions relief has given Iran tremendous leverage over U.S. policy. As an example: Iran has laid out some pretty clear red lines. They are going to hold back Shi’ite militias in Iraq from attacking American troops or going after Americans. They’ll agree to hold them back if, we don’t cross certain red lines they have made very clear.

“What are their red lines? For starters they don’t want to see any U.S. combat troops in Iraq, and if we make any move toward any sort of permanent presence in Iraq in the future, we are going to get attacked by Shi’ite militias at their orders. They don’t want to see us take any concrete steps to remove Assad from power. If they see us moving toward getting Assad out of power, we’re going to get hit by surrogate groups in the region, including Hezbollah and their Shi’ite militia. If we take steps to help put in place an Iraqi government that actually unifies that country and isn’t a puppet of Iran, not to mention one that might actually be hostile toward Iran’s ambitions in the region, they’re going to attack us.

“So they already have leverage over our policy. Now extrapolate that 8 to 10 years from now, when their conventional forces are higher, when these groups are better armed, when Hizballah in a couple of years doesn’t just have rockets, they have guided rockets, guided missiles that don’t just hit somewhere in Israel, they hit exactly what they want to hit.

“So imagine a world in 10 years, where Iran decides, or 8 years, or 12 years, where they just decide, ‘You know what, we’re building a nuclear weapon because we believe Israel has one or because we think someone else is going to threaten us.’

“What can the world do then? Well then reimposing sanctions really won’t be an option at that point because all these companies that are deeply invested in that economy just won’t let their nations or their governments do anything about it. We’ve already seen that in the case of the Europeans.

“But what will the price be of actually going after their systems? It’ll be worse than the price of going after North Korea now. Do we have a credible military option today to target the North Koreans’ program? We do not. We do not because we know that the price of going after the North Korean program through a credible military option, the price of that is Tokyo, the price of that is Seoul, the price of that is Hawaii, they’ll hit us back.

“Well imagine Iran where the price of going after the Iranian program in 10 years if they decide to break out will be Washington, D.C. or New York City, not to mention Tel Aviv and Jerusalem and any number of places in the region that are our allies.

“So my argument is that, in fact, what I think we’ve done here is walk right into the situation they wanted to lay out, they didn’t want a nuclear weapon next week anyway. But we have created a system where in 8 to 10 years they will be, they will have the capability to quickly become, walk into the nuclear weapons club, not sneak in, walk in to the nuclear weapons club with a world class industrial enrichment capability, a much more powerful conventional weapons force capable of actually asymmetrically driving our navy from the region or further out and quite frankly immune from any sort of credible military action because if we attack them the price is going to be a nuclear devastating strike, potentially even on the continental United States.

“So my point is that when people vote on this deal in a few weeks, you’re going to live with this for the rest of your life. In 10 years, in 12 years, when Iran has a nuclear weapon and we can’t target them, people are going to remember this vote that’s coming up and this deal as what laid the groundwork for it, and I keep hearing this notion that there is no other alternative and no other way forward, but I disagree.

“I believe U.S. sanctions are the most important part of all the sanctions. I believe that these banks in Europe, German banks, whatever banks may be, if they were forced to choose between having access to the American economy and access to the Iranian economy, that’s not going to be a hard choice for them.”

Texas Congressman Introduces Bill to Suspend Refugee Resettlement Program

/in , , , , , /by

Rep. Brian Babin is a first term Congressman from East Texas.

Rep. Brian Babin (R-TX) has introduced the Resettlement Accountability National Security Act (H.R. 3314) which seeks to suspend refugee resettlement to America until economic costs are analyzed and national security concerns are put to rest.

I’ve been following this issue for eight years and this is the first time I have seen anyone in Congress (other than recent concerns about Syrian refugees) take a single step to begin to scrutinize the entire program.

Now, let’s see if Rep. Trey Gowdy will give the bill a hearing in his all-important Subcommittee on Immigration and Border Security!

Just a reminder, Babin’s home state of Texas is presently the number one state targeted by the UN/US State Department for refugee distribution.

Here is Babin’s press release late today (hat tip: Rosemary):

Washington, DC – U.S. Rep. Brian Babin (TX-36) yesterday introduced the Resettlement Accountability National Security Act (H.R. 3314), which places an immediate suspension on allowing immigrants into the United States under the refugee resettlement program, until the Government Accountability Office (GAO) completes a thorough examination of its costs on federal, state and local governments. According to the U.S. refugee admissions database, nearly 500,000 new immigrants have come to the U.S. under the resettlement program since President Obama first took office – with the state of Texas and its taxpayers being asked to take in more than any other state.

“It is extremely unsettling that the Obama Administration would continue to expand the U.S. resettlement program at such an irresponsible pace in light of our economic and national security challenges,” said Rep. Babin. “While this program may be warranted in certain situations, it is continuing at an unchecked pace. For the past decade the U.S. has been admitting roughly 70,000 new refugees a year, with little understanding of the economic and social costs on our communities.

“Our legislation institutes a common sense pause in the program so that we can better understand the long-term and short-term costs that this program has on local governments, states and U.S. taxpayers. It also gives us an opportunity to examine potential national security issues related to entry and resettlement, particularly as federal law enforcement officials are increasingly concerned about home-grown terrorists.”

This is a very big deal!  Please! Thank Rep. Babin (202-225-1555) and put pressure on Gowdy’s subcommittee to give the bill a hearing!  It is shameful that the program has not in all of its 35-year history been subject to a thorough review.  Call Gowdy at 202-225-6030 even if you have done it before!

Consider sending your horror stories to Rep. Babin!

An afterthought:  Babin is going to get pounded by the supposedly religious resettlement contractors especially ones with tentacles in his district.  If you live in his district and are supportive of his efforts, please let him know.  Those ‘Christian’ contractors can be pretty mean!

Stormy U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee Hearing on Iran Nuke Deal

/in , , /by

The Administration rolled out its “A Team” of witnesses at the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee hearings on July 29th, chaired by Chairman Arizona Republican Senator John McCain. The Hearing addressed national security issues arising from the Iran nuclear pact scheduled by a Congressional vote on or before September 17th under the term of the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act. Yesterday’s hearing was the last in a series of House and Senate sessions prior to the summer recess  adjournment starting Thursday, July 31st. Congress reconvenes following the Labor Day holiday giving less than 10 days for additional hearings before the vote to either accept or reject the Iran nuclear pact. Public opinion poll taken during the current series of Congressional shows a majority of Americans tilting towards asking Congress to reject the pact. The issue is how many of the undecided 13 Democratic Senators and over 30 Democratic Representatives will decide if a negative vote will be veto proof, given a threat by President Obama.

The panel of witnesses included, Secretary of State John Kerry, Energy Secretary Earnest Moniz, Treasury Secretary Jack Lew, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter and outgoing Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Gen. Martin Dempsey. While questions naturally arose about the credibility of maintaining a military option, there was a tough grilling of Secretary Kerry and Secretary Moniz by Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton on the secret side deals between the UN nuclear watchdog agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and the Islamic Republic of Iran over prior military developments.

DefenseNews reported  the comments of Secretary Carter and Gen. Dempsey on military capabilities:

“It’s important that we have an agreement and it be verifiable, and that we keep doing what we need to do: Defend our friends and allies, remain strong in the Gulf — frequent navigation, ballistic missile defense, all the things that we’re doing, and the agreement doesn’t limit us in any way,” Carter said.

Indeed, “military options remain,” Dempsey said, though a negotiated settlement provides a more “durable” solution, as well as time to work with local partner nations to address Iran’s activities. Dempsey said there are a series of initiatives with Israel and the Gulf Cooperation Council to that effect.

Exercising airstrikes to take out Iran’s nuclear capability would disrupt its program by several years, Dempsey said. However analysis suggests it would also provoke Iran to “counter our presence in the region at every opportunity and use these other malign activities they have.”

That led to exchanges with Senators Roger Wicker (R-MS) and Joni Ernst (R-NE). Ernst like Senate panel colleague Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AK) is a former combat veteran who served in Iraq:

Sen. Roger Wicker, R-Miss., characterized Dempsey’s brief opening statement, as a “tepid endorsement” of the accord and “damning disagreement with faint praise,” which Dempsey disputed, saying he agreed with the deal.

His statement was neither “tepid nor enthusiastic, but pragmatic,” Dempsey said. His input in the deal was sought “episodically,” his final recommendation given weeks before negotiations concluded. At least in part, his recommendation was to keep pressure on Iran relative to ballistic missiles and arms trafficking for as long as possible.

Challenged by Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, over the president’s assertion that the US faces a choice between an Iran deal or a resolution by force — which Ernst characterized as “war” — Dempsey said he had not said anything to that effect to the president.

“We have a range of options, and I hope to present them,” Dempsey said. “As long as we agree, military strikes on a sovereign nation are an act of war, but there are things between here and there.”

Sen. Cotton was on top of his game engaging in the most withering  Q&A  with  Secretary Kerry and  Energy Secretary Moniz  about their knowledge or the lack thereof  concerning the so-called secret IAEA side deals on prior  military nuclear developments (PMD).  Late he engaged Gen. Dempsey during a discussion of exhibits to corroborate the lethality of Iranian IEDS used to kill American service personnel in Iraq. Dempsey lent the impression he was less inclined to be a booster of the Iran nuke deal. Cotton is both a veteran of combat in Iraq as a former U.S. Army officer and a Harvard Law School graduate and admitted lawyer

Cotton, like any good prosecutor, secured the facts that bolstered his line of questioning to elicit a response he was seeking for the Committee record. Prior to this Armed Services Hearing, Cotton and Kansas Republican Congressman Mike Pompeo had flown to Vienna to confer with IAEA officials uncovering the alleged secret side deals on investigation of Iranian compliance with prior military developments in their nuclear program (PMD).

schultz i know nothingKerry and Moniz, when queried about whether they had either knowledge of or read the IAEA secret side deals on PMD, adopted what in TV land is the fabled Sergeant Schultz defense from the 1960’s TV WWII Nazi prison camp comedy series, “Hogan’s Heroes” – “I know nothing” They simply fobbed it off saying that someone like Undersecretary of State Wendy Sherman may have glanced through these documents. Just indicates that the Administration either elected not to conduct due diligence or used the ploy that those agreements were confidential between the IAEA and Iran, that as Cotton pointed out “the Ayatollah read”.

Former IAEA deputy director Olli Heinonen, who is now a Senior Fellow at the Harvard Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, provided the answers in a report by Armin Rosen of Business Insider.  Heinonen in an email said:

“According to the IAEA rules and practices such documents could be made available to the members of the IAEA Board”. Heinonen said the IAEA secretariat could not divulge these side agreements to other member states on its own initiative. But there are two ways US diplomats could access them. In one scenario, Iran would agree to divulge the documents: “Iran can make it available by asking to distribute it as an [Information Circular] document to all IAEA member states as they did with the 2007 Work Plan,” Heinonen said, referring to a publicly available agreement between the IAEA and Iran on nuclear safeguards.

US diplomats could also view these side agreements if a member state of the IAEA’s 35-member Board of Governors requests their distribution.

Such a move would stand a decent chance of success: “If a board member asks it and others resist the distribution … this can be overcome by a vote,” Heinonen said. “Simple majority is enough, and no vetoes exist in the IAEA system. The board can also request the whole document to be made public. Such a request could be best done by a country which is not part of the JCPOA process; my favorite is Canada.”

Cotton showed   the witness panel two exhibits graphically portraying the effects of an Iranian developed shaped charge IED that were used to kill 500 American service personnel in Iraq. Gen. Dempsey acknowledged what they were and the devastating effects on Humvees, their occupants and other vehicles. Cotton then asks Kerry for his reaction. While, expressing appropriate sorrow for the loss of American lives, Kerry   told the Senate panel that Quds force commander Qasem Soleimani who developed the shaped charge IEDs would not have sanctions removed.  Reports by both ABC news and the Iranian FARS news agency  have confirmed  that Gen.Soleimani has been confirmed among a list   of Iranian persons and institutions included in an annex to the JCPOA who will have both travel bans and asset restrictions lifted.

Watch this YouTube video of Senator Cotton’s Q&A at the Senate Armed Services Committee:

Senator Tom Cotton’s grilling of Kerry and Moniz revealed their lax conduct of due diligence on the IAEA side deals. They spent too much time being hounded with repeated demands for concessions by Javad Zarif in negotiations in Vienna. Instead, they should have sent aides over to the IAEA headquarters to ask about the side deals to provide a road map on prior military developments of Iran nuclear program. Senator Cotton and Rep. Pompeo did just that. Instead Kerry and the negotiating tea m basically said in so many words, we already know what Iran did, let’s move on and get with the program by approving the Iran nuclear pact. The video of Senator Cotton  Senate  Armed Services Committee Q&A should be widely shared  on social media  to inform  undecided  Congressional Democrats about why the Iran nuclear pact  should be rejected.

Hearing by hearing testimony by the Administration “A Team” on the Iranian nuclear pact demonstrates how bad a deal Kerry and the Obama negotiating team crafted with the experts in playing multi-dimensional chess, the Islamic Regime in Tehran.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review.

What Israeli Intelligence Knew About Iran Nuclear Negotiations

/in , , /by

Dr. Ronen Bergman is the Intelligence affairs columnist for Israeli daily Yediot Ahronoth. He’s the author of The Secret War with Iran: The 30-Year Clandestine Struggle Against the World’s Most Dangerous Terrorist Power, 2007. In February 2012, we published an interview with him on a possible Israel attack on Iran’s nuclear infrastructure, “Is the Clock Ticking on a Nuclear Iran?” At the time, some Israeli action appeared imminent, which did not materialize that year, perhaps because of the intervening U.S. secret discussions with Iran.

Bergman, published a dossier in The Tablet, July 29th, obtained from Israeli intelligence on Iran and from Western intelligence sources on U.S. capitulation on concessions repeatedly over the past several years, “What Information Collected by Israeli Intelligence Reveals About the Iran Talks.”

There was also evidence that the U.S. was not immediately forthcoming with ally Israel as to the timing, scope and content of these secret discussions with Iran.  This is reflected in the run up to the climactic JCPOA announced on July 14th and endorsed by the UN Security Council on July 22nd. The JCPOA is presently undergoing review by  both U.S. Senate and House Committees under The Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act of 2015 (INARA) with a votes by both the Senate and House targeted by mid-September.  Recent Congressional revelations about secret side deals between the UN nuclear watchdog, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), and last minute lifting of conventional arms and ballistic missile technology have raised questions about the circumstances behind U.S. and world powers capitulations to demands of Iranian negotiators. This has given rise to both Congressional and public skepticism. Public  opinion polls suggest that a majority of Americans want  Congress to reject the Iran nuclear pact.

The following are excerpts from Dr. Bergman’s Tablet article:

bergman

Dr. Ronen Bergman. Source Dror Malka.

What Information Collected by Israeli Intelligence Reveals About the Iran Talks

By Ronen Bergman

The West’s recognition of Iran’s right to perform the full nuclear fuel cycle—or enrichment of uranium—was a complete about-face from America’s declared position prior to and during the talks. Senior U.S. and European officials who visited Israel immediately after the negotiations with Iran began in mid 2013 declared, according to the protocols of these meetings, that because of Iran’s repeated violations of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, “Our aim is that in the final agreement [with Iran] there will be no enrichment at all” on Iranian territory. Later on, in a speech at the Saban Forum in December 2013, President Barack Obama reiterated that in view of Iran’s behavior, the United States did not acknowledge that Iran had any right to enrich fissile material on its soil.

In February 2014, the first crumbling of this commitment was evident, when the head of the U.S. delegation to the talks with Iran, Wendy Sherman, told Israeli officials that while the United States would like Iran to stop enriching uranium altogether, this was “not a realistic” expectation. Iranian foreign ministry officials, during meetings the Tehran following the JPOA, reckoned that from the moment the principle of an Iranian right to enrich uranium was established, it would serve as the basis for the final agreement. And indeed, the final agreement, signed earlier this month, confirmed that assessment.

The sources who granted me access to the information collected by Israel about the Iran talks stressed that it was not obtained through espionage against the United States. It comes, they said, through Israeli spying on Iran, or routine contacts between Israeli officials and representatives of the P5+1 in the talks. The sources showed me only what they wanted me to see, and in these cases there’s always a danger of fraud and fabrication. This said, these sources have proved reliable in the past, and based on my experience with this type of material it appears to be quite credible. No less important, what emerges from the classified material obtained by Israel in the course of the negotiations is largely corroborated by details that have become public since.

In early 2013, the material indicates, Israel learned from its intelligence sources in Iran that the United States held a secret dialogue with senior Iranian representatives in Muscat, Oman. Only toward the end of these talks, in which the Americans persuaded Iran to enter into diplomatic negotiations regarding its nuclear program, did Israel receive an official report about them from the U.S. government. Shortly afterward, the CIA and NSA drastically curtailed its cooperation with Israel on operations aimed at disrupting the Iranian nuclear project, operations that had racked up significant successes over the past decade.

On Nov. 8, 2013, Secretary of State John Kerry visited Israel. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu saw him off at Ben Gurion Airport and told him that Israel had received intelligence that indicated the United States was ready to sign “a very bad deal” and that the West’s representatives were gradually retreating from the same lines in the sand that they had drawn themselves.

The West’s recognition of Iran’s right to perform the full nuclear fuel cycle—or enrichment of uranium—was a complete about-face from America’s declared position prior to and during the talks. Senior U.S. and European officials who visited Israel immediately after the negotiations with Iran began in mid 2013 declared, according to the protocols of these meetings, that because of Iran’s repeated violations of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, “Our aim is that in the final agreement [with Iran] there will be no enrichment at all” on Iranian territory. Later on, in a speech at the Saban Forum in December 2013, President Barack Obama reiterated that in view of Iran’s behavior, the United States did not acknowledge that Iran had any right to enrich fissile material on its soil.

In February 2014, the first crumbling of this commitment was evident, when the head of the U.S. delegation to the talks with Iran, Wendy Sherman, told Israeli officials that while the United States would like Iran to stop enriching uranium altogether, this was “not a realistic” expectation. Iranian foreign ministry officials, during meetings the Tehran following the JPOA, reckoned that from the moment the principle of an Iranian right to enrich uranium was established, it would serve as the basis for the final agreement. And indeed, the final agreement, signed earlier this month, confirmed that assessment.

One of the promises made to Israel was that Iran would not be permitted to stockpile uranium. Later it was said that only a small amount would be left in Iran and that anything in excess of that amount would be transferred to Russia for processing that would render it unusable for military purposes. In the final agreement, Iran was permitted to keep 300kgs of enriched uranium; the conversion process would take place in an Iranian plant (nicknamed “The Junk Factory” by Israel intelligence). Iran would also be responsible for processing or selling the huge amount of enriched uranium that is has stockpiled up until today, some 8 tons.

The case of the secret enrichment facility at Qom (known in Israel as the Fordo Facility) is another example of concessions to Iran. The facility was erected in blatant violation of the Non Proliferation Treaty, and P5+1 delegates solemnly promised Israel at a series of meetings in late 2013 that it was to be dismantled and its contents destroyed. In the final agreement, the Iranians were allowed to leave 1,044 centrifuges in place (there are 3,000 now) and to engage in research and in enrichment of radioisotopes.

At the main enrichment facility at Natanz (or Kashan, the name used by the Mossad in its reports) the Iranians are to continue operating 5,060 centrifuges of the 19,000 there at present. Early in the negotiations, the Western representatives demanded that the remaining centrifuges be destroyed. Later on they retreated from this demand, and now the Iranians have had to commit only to mothball them. This way, they will be able to reinstall them at very short notice.

Israeli intelligence points to two plants in Iran’s military industry that are currently engaged in the development of two new types of centrifuge: the Teba and Tesa plants, which are working on the IR6 and the IR8 respectively. The new centrifuges will allow the Iranians to set up smaller enrichment facilities that are much more difficult to detect and that shorten the break-out time to a bomb if and when they decide to dump the agreement.

The Iranians see continued work on advanced centrifuges as very important. On the other hand they doubt their ability to do so covertly, without risking exposure and being accused of breaching the agreement. Thus, Iran’s delegates were instructed to insist on this point. President Obama said at the Saban Forum that Iran has no need for advanced centrifuges and his representatives promised Israel several times that further R&D on them would not be permitted. In the final agreement Iran is permitted to continue developing the advanced centrifuges, albeit with certain restrictions which experts of the Israeli Atomic Energy Committee believe to have only marginal efficacy.

As for the break-out time for the bomb, at the outset of the negotiations, the Western delegates decided that it would be “at least a number of years.” Under the final agreement this has been cut down to one year according to the Americans, and even less than that according to Israeli nuclear experts.

Over the past 15 years, a great deal of material has been amassed by the International Atomic Energy Agency—some filed by its own inspectors and some submitted by intelligence agencies—about Iran’s secret effort to develop the military aspects of its nuclear program (which the Iranians call by the codenames PHRC, AMAD, and SPND). The IAEA divides this activity into 12 different areas (metallurgy, timers, fuses, neutron source, hydrodynamic testing, and warhead adaptation for the Shihab 3 missile, high explosives, and others) all of which deal with the R&D work that must be done in order to be able to convert enriched material into an actual atom bomb.

The IAEA demanded concrete answers to a number of questions regarding Iran’s activities in these spheres. The agency also asked Iran to allow it to interview 15 Iranian scientists, a list headed by Prof. Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, whom Mossad nicknamed “The Brain” behind the military nuclear program. This list has become shorter because six of the 15 have died as a result of assassinations that the Iranians attribute to Israel, but access to the other nine has not been given. Neither have the IAEA’s inspectors been allowed to visit the facilities where the suspected activities take place. The West originally insisted on these points, only to retreat and leave them unsolved in the agreement.

In mid-2015 a new idea was brought up in one of the discussions in Tehran: Iran would agree not to import missiles as long as its own development and production is not limited. This idea is reflected in the final agreement as well, in which Iran is allowed to develop and produce missiles, the means of delivery for nuclear weapons. The longer the negotiations went on, the longer the list of concession made by the United States to Iran kept growing, including the right to leave the heavy water reactor and the heavy water plant at Arak in place and accepting Iran’s refusal of access to the suspect site.

The intelligence material that ‘[Prime Minister Netanyahu] was relying on gives rise to fairly unambiguous conclusions: that the Western delegates crossed all of the red lines that they drew themselves and conceded most of what was termed critical at the outset; and that the Iranians have achieved almost all of their goals.

EDITORS NOTE: This column originally appeared in the New English Review. The featured image is of U.S. and Iranian Negotiators, Vienna, June 2015. Source: Reuters.

Obama Takes the Presidency to a New Low

/in , , , /by

Recently, President Obama approved what is possibly the worst international deal in United States history.  That agreement gives Iran an unchallenged pathway to produce nuclear weapons.  For years, the islamic regime has blocked United Nations inspectors from conducting impromptu inspections.  Of course, the whole planet is well aware of the tremendous level of state sponsored terrorism the Iranian nation has thrown it’s financial muscle behind.

Yet the president, who was elected to govern on behalf of “We the People” has in fact, bumbled on behalf of every enemy this nation has in the world.   For example, while both China and Russia are embarking enormous military buildups, the Obama administration is overseeing the largest military build-down in U.S. history.  Considering the political conditions around the world at the moment, these are not the times for the faint of heart or a weak military.  In fact, our national security and sovereignty are both at stake.

Whether it is the porous borders, where illegal immigrants are strolling in like they own the place or are committing legions of crimes against Americans and their property, it is occurring with the approval of President Obama, his fellow democrats and rino republicans.  President Obama is also bringing in over sixty thousand American, Christian, Black people and Jewish hating muslims, while refusing to allow Christian refugees from the middle east entry into the United States.  To add insult to injury, the rogue federal is not even allowing local officials, or the sovereign citizens of any town they move the islamic refugees to where they are being housed.

With all of the major problems facing our nation and other countries around the world, it is mind boggling how president Obama is so fixated on forcing African nations to adopt and legalize unnatural sexual practices.

It was refreshing to read in CNS NEWS about how Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta told U.S. President Obama to back off of his mission to promote homosexuality and lesbianism in his country.  He plainly stated that “Kenyans had more pressing concerns to deal with including health, education, and insuring inclusivity of women,” He added “maybe once, like you have overcome some of these challenges, we can begin to look at new ones.”  “But as for now, the fact remains that this [homosexuality] issue is not really an issue that is on the foremost mind of Kenyans, and that is the fact.”

I find it rather insane and pathetic, that Obama is more fixated on forcing African nations into spreading a lifestyle that according to the Centers for Disease Control is more dangerous than cigarette smoking.  He prefers promoting unnatural lifestyles than help them to adopt free market principles, improved farming techniques, and a closer walk with the one who blessed America.

What the White House Occupier does not seem to recognize, (or most likely ignores) is that promoting unnatural lifestyles does not lead to the path of personal improvement, national economic growth, better medical care, victory over the threatening islamic nations, tribes and groups who have vowed to destroy all who won’t bow to allah, etc.

Speaking of equality Obama style.  He has without fail, sought to destroy America through his putrid philosophy of unnatural lifestyles, big government healthcare, and redistribution of wealth from the productive to the idle, muslim resettlements in America and much more.  Oh and I cannot forget his mentally destructive droning on about he and all blacks in America are victims of racism.

I marvel at how with a straight face, Obama cab travel to (some believe his native homeland) and as president of what was the greatest nation in the history of humankind complain of being treated differently because of his race.  I have to ask, to which race is he referring,? Because he is both, black and white, and president for goodness sakes.

President Obama has been a textbook case on how not to govern, parent, or lead in any capacity.  Obama has consistently governed from behind or in other ways to negatively impact our republic, such as only forcing polices upon society that result in negative outcomes.  Thus our republic turned mob-ruled democracy is more vulnerable economically, morally, ethically, spiritually, militarily, educationally, etc. than at any time throughout our nation’s history.

I find it ironic how Mr. Obama and the first lady like to describe /America as a racist nation, but yet they and many like them are openly bigoted and discriminatory against everything that is good about the United States and even God who shed his grace upon her.

For you who are so inclined, it is 2 Chronicles 7:14 time.

Why Muslim Rapists Prefer Blondes: A History by Raymond Ibrahim

/in , , , /by

The Muslim penchant to target “white” women for sexual exploitation—an epidemic currently plaguing Europe, especially Britain and Scandinavia—is as old as Islam itself, and even traces back to Muhammad.

Much literary evidence attests to this in the context of Islam’s early predations on Byzantium (for centuries, Christendom’s easternmost bulwark against the jihad).  According to Ahmad M. H. Shboul (author of “Byzantium and the Arabs: The Image of the Byzantines as Mirrored in Arabic Literature”) Christian Byzantium was the “classic example of the house of war,” or Dar al-Harb—that is, the quintessential realm that needs to be conquered by jihad.  Moreover, Byzantium was seen “as a symbol of military and political power and as a society of great abundance.”

The similarities between pre-modern Islamic views of Byzantium and modern Islamic views of the West—powerful, affluent, desirable, and the greatest of all infidels—should be evident.  But they do not end here.  To the medieval Muslim mind, Byzantium was further representative of “white people”—fair haired/eyed Christians, or, as they were known in Arabic, Banu al-Asfar, “children of yellow” (reference to blonde hair).

Continues Shboul:

The Byzantines as a people were considered as fine examples of physical beauty, and youthful slaves and slave-girls of Byzantine origin were highly valued….  The Arab’s appreciation of the Byzantine female has a long history indeed.  For the Islamic period, the earliest literary evidence we have is a hadith (saying of the Prophet).  Muhammad is said to have addressed a newly converted [to Islam] Arab: “Would you like the girls of Banu al-Asfar?”  Not only were Byzantine slave girls sought after for caliphal and other palaces (where some became mothers of future caliphs), but they also became the epitome of physical beauty, home economy, and refined accomplishments.   The typical Byzantine maiden who captures the imagination of litterateurs and poets, had blond hair, blue or green eyes, a pure and healthy visage, lovely breasts, a delicate waist, and a body that is like camphor or a flood of dazzling light.[1]

While the essence of the above excerpt is true, the reader should not be duped by its overly “romantic” tone. Written for a Western academic publication by an academic of Muslim background, the essay is naturally euphemistic to the point of implying that being a sex slave was desirable—as if her Arab owners were enamored devotees who merely doted over and admired her beauty from afar.[2]

Indeed, Muhammad asked a new convert “Would you like the girls of Banu al-Asfar?” as a way to entice him to join the jihad and reap its rewards—which, in this case, included the possibility of enslaving and raping blonde Byzantine women—not as some idealistic discussion on beauty.

This enticement seems to have backfired with another Muslim who refused Muhammad’s call to invade Byzantine territory (the Tabuk campaign).  “O Abu Wahb,” cajoled Muhammad, “would you not like to have scores of Byzantine women and men as concubines and servants?” Wahb responded: “O Messenger of Allah, my people know that I am very fond of women and, if I see the women of the Byzantines, I fear I will not be able to hold back. So do not tempt me by them, and allow me not to join and, instead, I will assist you with my wealth.”[3]  The prophet agreed but was apparently unimpressed—after all, Wahb could have all the Byzantine women he desired if the jihad succeeded—and a new Sura for the Koran (9:49) was promptly delivered condemning the man to hell for his reported hypocrisy and failure to join the jihad.

Thus a more critical reading of Shboul’s aforementioned excerpt finds that European slave girls were not “highly valued” or “appreciated” as if they were precious statues—they were held out as sexual trophies to entice Muslims to the jihad.

Moreover, the idea that some sex slaves became mothers to future caliphs is meaningless since in Islam’s patriarchal culture, mothers—Muslim or non-Muslim—were irrelevant in lineage and had no political status.   And talk of “litterateurs and poets” and “a body that is like camphor or a flood of dazzling light” is further anachronistic and does a great disservice to reality:  These women were—as they still are—sex slaves, treated no differently than the many slaves of the Islamic State today.

For example, during a recent sex slave auction held by the Islamic State, blue and green eyed Yazidi girls were much coveted and fetched the highest price.  Even so, these concubines are being cruelly tortured.  In one instance, a Muslim savagely beat his Yazidi slave’s one year old child until she agreed to meet all his sexual demands.

[ … ]

Another relevant parallel between medieval and modern Islamic views exists: white women were and continue to be seen as sexually promiscuous by nature—essentially “provoking” Muslim men into lusting after them.

Much of this is discussed in Byzantium Viewed by the Arabs by Nadia Maria El Cheikh.  She writes:

Fitna, [an Islamic term] meaning disorder and chaos, refers also to the beautiful femme fatale who makes men lose their self-control.  Fitna is a key concept in defining the dangers that women, more particularly their bodies, were capable of provoking in the mental universe of the Arab Muslims.

After explaining how the fair haired/eyed Byzantine woman exemplified Islam’s femme fatale of fitna, Cheikh writes:

In our [Muslim] texts, Byzantine women are strongly associated with sexual immorality…

Our sources show not Byzantine women but [Muslim] writers’ images of these women, who served as symbols of the eternal female—constantly a potential threat, particularly due to blatant exaggerations of their sexual promiscuity….

Cheikh documents how Muslims claimed that Byzantine (or “white Christian”) females were the “most shameless women in the whole world”; that, “because they find sex more enjoyable, they are prone to adultery”; that “adultery is commonplace in the cities and markets of Byzantium”—so much so that “the nuns from the convents went out to the fortresses to offer themselves to monks.”… Keep reading

EDITORS NOTE: Nadia Maria El Cheikh makes a key observation when she states, “Fitna, [an Islamic term] meaning disorder and chaos, refers also to the beautiful femme fatale who makes men lose their self-control.  Fitna is a key concept in defining the dangers that women, more particularly their bodies, were capable of provoking in the mental universe of the Arab Muslims.”

In this case Fitna is caused by blonde women and therefore Muslim men have a duty to slaughter (rape) them to stop the Fitna. Stopping the Fitna, resistance to Islam, is the strategy of the Global Islamic Movement (GMI). To learn more visit Fitnaphobia.com.

RELATED ARTICLES:

UK Muslim bought ricin to kill 1,400 people, faces light sentence: “no evidence that he was planning any sort of terrorist attack”

“All countries in the region can only conclude that America is indeed weak. America has capitulated to Iran.”

Children at Increasing Risk of Islamist Radicalization in UK

/in , , , /by

Children are increasingly at risk of radicalization in the UK, according to an investigation by The Telegraph.

The Channel Project, which acts to prevent vulnerable people being radicalized, had some 758 under 16s reported last year for worrying behavior. Of those, 113 were under 12.

Those reported included a three-year old, whose entire family was reported for worrying behavior.

The Channel Project does not arrest those reported to it, but implements its de-radicalization strategies.

Deputy Chief Constable Craig Denholm, one of the police officers in charge of the Channel Project., told The Telegraph:

“Channel supports people who are vulnerable to being radicalised and drawn into terrorism. It works in a similar way to other safeguarding, partnership activity where agencies come together to support vulnerable individuals; for example work to address drugs, guns and gangs issues through early intervention.

“Types of support can include life-skills, mentoring, and access to education, careers advice, and consideration of housing need amongst others. It has increasingly become recognised by partner agencies as having an important role to play in safeguarding communities from harm. Both vulnerable adults and young people are safeguarded through Channel.

“In exceptional circumstances some younger children are provided support as part of a wider, whole family approach.

“This does not mean that a young child is expressing radical views. However, this enables a family to benefit from the expertise and wrap around support that Channel provides.”

There remain doubts about the efficacy of the counter-extremism program, particularly since it was revealed that one of the boys placed on the program when a 13-year old later went on at 15 to attempt to mastermind an Islamic State bomb plot in Australia to attack the ANZAC Day commemoration ceremony.

The number of teenagers and children referred to the Channel Project will double in the next two years, if current trends continue, due to the rise of the Islamic State.

David Cameron launched his new approach to tackling Islamist extremism this month, with the government’s new strategy on countering violent extremism to be rolled out in September.

His new strategy may prove a turning point in the struggle against Islamism in the UK.

RELATED ARTICLES

How to Scam ISIS

Three ISIS Terror Trials This Week in America

ISIS: The Next Generation

Islamic State Receives $6.9 Billion in Money Transfers

EDITORS NOTE: The featured image is of an Islamist protest in the UK. (Photo: © Reuters)

How to Scam the Islamic State

/in , , /by

Three Chechen women pretended to be jihadi brides through fake social media accounts, but kept the travel money ISIS sent them instead.

Three young Muslim women have scammed the Islamic State out of over $2,500. The Chechen women set up fake social media accounts and contacted the Islamic State, claiming to be aspirational jihadi brides, titillated by the prospect of moving to Syria.

They only required the funds for travel.

Once ISIS militants had wired them the money, the girls promptly deleted their accounts and pocketed the money.

Chechen police have now arrested them for the scam. Officer Valery Zolotaryov told Moskovsky Komsomolets “I don’t recall any precedent like this one in Chechnya, probably because nobody digs deep enough in that direction.”

He added “Anyhow, I don’t advise anyone to communicate with dangerous criminals, especially for grabbing quick money.”

For women who travel to Syria to become jihadi brides, their husbands hold complete power over them and they face the possibility of a life of sexual abuse.

For more information about the Islamic State, see Clarion Project’s Special Report: The Islamic State (ISIS: ISIL)

RELATED ARTICLES

Children at Increasing Risk of Islamist Radicalization in UK

Three ISIS Terror Trials This Week in America

ISIS: The Next Generation

Islamic State Receives $6.9 Billion in Money Transfers

Has Ohio become a Sanctuary State under Governor Kasich?

/in , , , , /by

Did you see the tragic news from Lake County Ohio yesterday?   Another illegal alien (known to law enforcement) has been arrested in what appears to be a random shooting of a 60-year old woman, the wounding of another woman and the attempted rape of a 14-year old.

Ohio illegal

Another alleged illegal alien killer: Juan Emmanuel Razo

Here is the story at Cleveland.com (hat tip: Cathy):

PAINESVILLE, Ohio — Lake County sheriff’s deputies learned that Juan Emmanuel Razo was in the U.S. illegally from Mexico more than two weeks before his arrest in the death of a 60-year-old Concord Township woman.

Razo made his first court appearance Tuesday in the death of Margaret Kostelnik where a judge set a $10 million bond. He’s also accused in the attempted rape of a 14-year-old girl and the shooting of another woman who survived.

Razo pleaded not guilty to a charge of attempted murder, but still faces possible murder and other charges in connection to the other incidents.

Lake County Sheriff’s Det. Brian Butler said during the court hearing that during a July 7 traffic stop, deputies contacted border patrol agents who advised the sheriff’s office not to detain Razo despite his status as an undocumented immigrant.

Continue reading here.

Unaccompanied alien children trafficked in Ohio

Then two weeks ago we learned that Ohio Senator Rob Portman had asked for an investigation into the alleged trafficking of Central American children in a slave labor case involving a large egg processing facility there.  Did the traffickers feel safe to do their dirty work in Ohio?  Some of those arrested in the case were here illegally.

Ohio targeted to receive large numbers of refugees!

Two years ago we told readers that Cleveland (site of the August 6th Fox News Presidential debate and the location for the 2016 Republican Party convention) was becoming a community destined to be diversified with the resettlement of a large number of refugees by the likes of Welcoming America. Are we to believe that the Governor knew nothing about the arrival of Welcoming America to Cleveland?

I’m starting to wonder if the big push is on to diversify Cleveland by Obama-friendly community organizers at Welcoming America to somehow stick it to Republicans in the  lead-up to the November 2016 election.

By the way, Welcoming America played a key role in crafting the Obama New Americans strategy to seed American towns and cities with diversity.

Just ten days ago we told you how Ohio is now number 7 in the nation for refugee resettlement.

There is no doubt in my mind that the No Borders movement agitators (aka Democrats) are stacking the decks in all-important states like Ohio by pushing more immigrants (legal and illegal) into the state.  And, for all of you who are saying, they can’t vote if they aren’t citizens, you are in la-la land.  They are voting illegally, they have been voting illegally and no one is stopping them!

So why did Governor John Kasich (with a D on NumbersUSA scorecard) let the state become a sanctuary state?  Was it willful blindness?

Note to concerned citizens and wannabe bloggers, someone should write an entire blog just on Immigrants voting in the lead-up to the 2016 Presidential election, and beyond!  Previously we told you that the resettlement contractors and other non-profit groups are receiving tons of federal cash to get immigrants ready to vote!  I bet an analysis of where that Obama cash is going would reveal that the bulk of it is in 2016 swing states.

The Left can’t win with ideas so they are simply changing the electorate, and the big question is:  why are Republicans letting them get away with it?

Senator Marco Rubio: Joint Chiefs Chairman Undercuts Obama’s Main Argument for Iran Nuke Deal

/in , , , /by

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) issued the following statement regarding Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey’s comments today before the Senate Armed Services Committee that the American people do not face a choice between a flawed Iran deal and war with Iran, as President Obama and his administration have insisted:

“President Obama’s entire premise for his deeply flawed deal with Iran was destroyed today by a simple question and an honest response.

“President Obama has been trying to scare the American people into believing that we must accept his terribly negotiated deal with Iran, or resign ourselves to war with Iran. Under questioning by Senator Joni Ernst today, General Martin Dempsey unequivocally dismissed that argument, and with it President Obama’s entire justification for this terrible compromise of America’s national security.

“With each passing day, President Obama’s case for this agreement with Iran crumbles bit by bit. In just the past week alone, Secretary John Kerry has failed miserably in trying to defend this deal before members of Congress and the American people as each day brings new disturbing details about the scope and breadth of this administration’s concessions to the mullahs in Iran. We’ve learned about secret side deals the Iranians entered into with International Atomic Energy Agency. We’ve learned that Iran will be allowed to submit its own samples to prove it’s not cheating, which defies all common sense. We’ve learned that the president allowed Iran to continue developing ballistic missiles capable of reaching our shores, and administration officials have even indicated that they are not certain whether President Obama would abide by the Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act and maintain sanctions on Iran if Congress rejects this deal.”

Earlier today, Rubio participated in a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing regarding the nuclear deal with Iran where he challenged the president’s proposition that the United States would be isolated if Congress rejects this flawed deal.

“Why I find this all absurd is this idea that somehow the U.S. must now do this, because the world would be really upset at us,” Rubio said during the hearing. “The last time I checked this country saved the rest of the world on at least two occasions in the last century. I don’t remember the last time the world saved America.”

A video of Rubio’s remarks and his exchanges with witnesses is available here:

Idaho: Iranian-American Pastor says stop Muslim immigration to America

/in , , , , /by

Shahram Hadian, a former Muslim, told an audience in Twin Falls, Idaho on Monday night that more Muslim immigration to America is a threat to our national security.

From MagicValley.com:

FILER • A pastor from Washington state who is best known for preaching against Islam, said Monday night that immigration from Muslim countries should “immediately be limited and heavily scrutinized,” and that refugee resettlement should be ended.

“This is a direct national-security threat,” Shahram Hadian told the crowd at the Canyon View Baptist Church. “You don’t think that ISIS is going to embed? It’s already happened with the Somalis.”

The refugee program that the College of Southern Idaho has run since 1984 became a lightning rod of controversy in the area in April, after news broke that Syrians*** would be among the 300 refugees expected to be resettled in Twin Falls this October.

Please go read the remainder of the article.  We can’t show more or this paper will send me another threatening letter and editorialize that I am a thief!

***The UN, 14 US Senators and the federal resettlement contractors want 65,000 Syrians resettled in the US by the time Obama leaves office!

For all of our coverage of the Twin Falls, Idaho ‘pocket of resistance,’ go here.  And, see our new category for information on the growing number of ‘Pockets of Resistance’ here.

See Pastor Shahram Hadian on Blaze TV below in May (hat tip: Diane):

30 Second Video: HAMAS Loves Iran Nuke Deal — Thanks Obama!

/in , , , /by

In this 30 Second video we explain the upside-down foreign policy world of President Obama, and how he is now creating friends between those who have been vicious enemies.

Who could have imagined that one of the leaders of the Sunni HAMAS would ever say anything positive about Shi’a Iran?

Well, all you (Obama) have to do is give your enemy (Iran) nuclear weapons to kill their greatest enemy (Israel) and WA’LA, the “Hatfields & McCoys” now spend Thanksgiving together.

Sanctuary Criminals and a Feckless Congress

/in , , , , , /by

Sanctuary cities that protect illegals who are felons are criminal enterprises and should be treated as such.