VIDEO: The Vortex — Bishops’ Billions. Turn off the spigot, now.

/in , , , , /by

TRANSCRIPT

$1 billion — that’s the estimate of how much money is stolen or misappropriated each year in the Catholic Church by crooked prelates or thieving clergy.

According to the trade industry publication The Review of Faith & International Affairs, in an article titled “Embezzlement in the Global Christian Community,” the amount of money stolen each year from parishioners’ donations is reaching windfall amounts.

The model for calculating the degree of theft was used in a recent documentary titled Thievery: Catholic Church Exposed. According to producers, thievery in the United States has reached epidemic proportions, as illustrated by the 97 non-sex abuse cases of $100,000 or more uncovered in the recent documentary — and that’s only the tip of the iceberg, for researchers project over 90% of the thievery cases go unreported.

Further, based upon validated research models and confirming data from the Association of Certified Fraud Examiners, it’s estimated that more than $1 billion is stolen annually from the U.S. Catholic Church.

Theft of enormous sums of money has gotten little attention in the Church, but that is changing, as new reports begin to surface. Hundreds of millions stolen from the Vatican’s Peter’s Pence annual collection, $25 million ripped last year from the American-based Papal Foundation, hundreds of thousands paid out in cash by the perverted Theodore McCarrick, West Virginia Bp. Michael Bransfield’s regular stealing of huge amounts and so forth.

There have of course been whiffs here and there of various financial improprieties, such as the case covered up by New York Cdl. Timothy Dolan of the notorious Fr. Peter Miqueli, who stole vast sums from parishes to fund a lifestyle that included drugs and gay-for-pay prostitute Keith Crist. That story — the sex and the money — eventually exploded onto the front pages of New York City papers, finally forcing Dolan’s hand.

But financial experts and auditors Church Militant has spoken to say the problem is much worse than the occasional headline or story that comes to the surface. Bishops keep their finances clothed in secrecy, eschewing even any appearance of transparency, and experts say that’s because there is no real accountability. Bishops don’t really answer to anybody, not in this life anyway.

Then there is what’s called “soft theft.” That’s when money that’s taken is allocated “legally” but oftentimes is immoral or unethical, like when a bishop approves a vast sum to spend on a house for himself.

Wilton Gregory, the new archbishop of Washington, D.C., could be described as a “soft thief,” allocating millions for a new house for himself — until news of his actions broke into the secular media and he backpedaled and canceled the plans, saying he wasn’t aware of how his actions looked. They looked bad because they were, in fact, bad.

Bishops all over the country routinely do this.

The retired bishop of San Jose, California plonked down a couple million for a “retirement pad” for himself in a swanky neighborhood until he, too, got busted in the secular press and withdrew the purchase.

Retired Newark Abp. John Myers wasn’t halted, however, in his bid as Theodore McCarrick’s successor to spend money like a drunken sailor on his retirement digs. His retirement house was originally purchased with parishioners’ money in 2002 for $700,000 and is set in eight acres of one of New Jersey’s more expensive and peaceful corners. It has five bedrooms, three bathrooms, a three-car garage, an elevator and a swimming pool. And of course, what retirement home for successors of the Apostles would be complete without a hot tub — what the archdiocese calls a “therapeutic whirlpool.”

And while New York’s Timothy Dolan didn’t actually spend money to purchase his weekend getaway pad in upstate New York because it was donated, you’ve got to imagine the upkeep and maintenance bill is pretty hefty — especially the 75-foot Venetian swimming pool, which, of course, doesn’t clean itself.

We could go on and on, like CNN did a few years back in a piece they called The Lavish Homes of American Archbishops.

But the party may soon be over for this thieving crowd, as Catholics everywhere are waking up to the moral and financial corruption of the mitered class.

According to one well-informed source, the Vatican — which lost millions each of the last few years — has seen a dramatic decrease in donations under the reign of Pope Francis, and the USCCB has folks close to the books who say donations across the United States are beginning to dry up.

If that continues in 2020, it could be a good year squeezing the crooks dry.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Vatican Enables Illegal Gay Rave on New Year’s Eve

German Bishop Backs Proposal for ‘Ecumenical Congregations’

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Texas: Somali Cleric Arrested on Charges of Sexually Assaulting Children

/in , , , , , , , /by

The first question I have is:  Is he a refugee since the vast majority of Somalis in the US are refugees, but I am seeing no definitive answer on that, so I figured this news would be best reported at ‘Frauds and Crooks’ rather than at my other blog, ‘Refugee Resettlement Watch.’ 

Although let me say that there are many of my RRW stories that could just as easily be reported here especially those stories involving the nine anti-Trump federal refugee contractors masquerading as ‘religious’ non-profits! See today’s post at RRW!

From the Houston Chronicle:

Islamic religious teacher arrested for alleged sex crimes against children

The Fort Bend County Sheriff’s Office has arrested an Islamic religious teacher for alleged sex crimes against children. Mohamed Omar Ali, 59, was charged with one count of sexual assault of a child and three counts of sexual indecency of a child following his Jan. 3 arrest.

At a press conference Monday morning, Fort Bend County Sheriff Troy Nehls said that all four victims were children under the age of 14. Ali is a Somalian national who was living in the U.S. illegally, according to Nehls. The bail for Ali was set at $125,000, but due to his illegal status, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement put a detainer on Ali, and he is being held at the Fort Bend County jail, Nehls said.

According to Detective Michael Alexander of the Fort Bend County Sheriff’s Office, Ali gained access to his alleged victims by gaining the trust of the victim’s families, who invited him into their homes to teach the Quran to their children.

Other Members of the Islamic community are distancing themselves from Ali:

Shariq Abdul Ghani, Director of the Minaret Foundation and representative of the Muslim community, added that Ali was not an employee or official volunteer of any particular mosque, but he traveled to different mosques and schools in the area, establishing himself as a defacto religious leader.

In a phone interview on Monday afternoon, Ghani also said that leaders within the Houston Muslim community were unfamiliar with Ghani. Ali lives in the Houston area of Fort Bend County, according to a news release from the sheriff’s office.

[….]

Surveillance of Ali began in September of 2019, after victims reported the abuse to the FBI, but investigators believe the alleged crimes date back to 2013. Investigators said they believe there are many more victims who have not spoken up, and the sheriff’s office urges those victims to come forward.

More here.

I’ve been joking here at ‘Frauds and Crooks’ that Michigan and Florida seem to have the most ‘new American’ crooks and criminals, but Texas might be giving them a run for the money.

See yesterday at RRW about the Iraqi refugee arrested in Texas suspected of murdering a mother of three in Colorado.

As you can see, there is a lot of crossover between my blogs!

EDITORS NOTE: This is Frauds, Crooks and Criminals republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Bernie Sanders: Killing a Terrorist Is Like Putting Muslims in Concentration Camps

/in , , , , , , , /by

With Beto O’Rourke out of the race, it’s up to Bernie Sanders to come up with the best hot take on the killing of Soleimani. And he delivers exactly the sort of rambling senile socialist rant you would expect from Jeremy Corbyn. All he leaves out is throwing around “empire”, “endless war”, and “neo-liberalism”. And then blaming the whole thing on corporations. But at least he manages to compare Trump to Putin and Xi.

SANDERS: No, I think it was an assassination. I think it was in violation of international law. This guy was (INAUDIBLE) — was a bad news guy, but he was a ranking official of the Iranian government.

And Baghdadi was the ranking head of the Islamic State.

So what?

If a foreign government official decides to engage in terrorist operations, he’s a terrorist. The silly argument that Soleimani can’t be killed because he has an official title is nonsense. Terrorists don’t stop being terrorists because they have titles.

And you know what? Once you get into violating international law in that sense, you can say there are a lot of bad people all over the world running governments. Kim Jong-un in North Korea, not exactly a nice guy, responsible for the death, perhaps, of hundreds of thousands of people in his own country, to name one of many, you know?

Killing terrorists isn’t a violation of international law, but if it were, are all violations equivalent? Bernie’s argument is that if you shoplift, you might as well be a serial killer. It’s the sort of purity that lefties would vehemently reject when it comes to criminal justice, but not international law.

Funny.

The president of China now has put a million people in — Muslims, into educational camps. Some would call them concentration camps. But once you start this business of a major country saying, hey, we have the right to assassinate, then you’re unleashing international anarchy.

Some being Bernie. Anyway I thought he was a supporter of anarchists. And assassinations. The KGB did quite a bit of it.

I’m not a lawyer on these things, it might be. But this guy is, you know, was, as bad as he was, an official of the Iranian government.

And you unleash — then if China does that, you know, if Russia does that, you know, Russia has been implicated under Putin with assassinating dissidents.

I’m not a lawyer, I’m just a senator running for president and speaking on CNN.

Doesn’t Bernie have any lawyers working for his campaign? Or proxies? Or is it all Islamists who support Louie Farrakhan and killing Jews?

Anyway, according to a supporter of every Marxist terror group on the planet, killing an Islamist  terrorist is just like Putin killing dissidents. So Soleimani must be a dissident? Attacking a US embassy would be his form of dissent.

What would President Sanders do if a US embassy were attacked by Iran? Apologize. And blame some guy on YouTube for making a video.

COLUMN BY

DANIEL GREENFIELD

RELATED ARTICLES:

Leftists Are Wrong: US Killing of Iran’s Suleimani a Legal Action

Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren hosting call with pro-Tehran lobby group NIAC

Ilhan Omar On the Warmongering Trump and the Killing Of Qassem Soleimani

Rep. Ilhan Omar Casts Iranians, Iraqis as Victims of Trump

RELATED VIDEOS:

Iran’s Islamic Republic – 40 Years of Terror and Crime

Afghans rape 3 American sisters in Spain Posted by Eeyore

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

VIDEO: The Vortex — McCarrick Mystery

/in , , , , /by

TRANSCRIPT

We have been telling you for years, even as recently as earlier this week, that the Catholic establishment media cannot be trusted because all they do is republish press releases and lies from various bishops’ offices.

And wouldn’t you know, practically no sooner had those words come out of our mouths a couple of days ago, but all the proof you need just plopped into our laps.

Late Tuesday, news broke that the monstrous serial molester former Cdl. Theodore McCarrick was being transferred from his former residence in St. Fidelis Priory in Victoria, Kansas. His new whereabouts — where he was being transferred to — however, was still a mystery.

Church Militant had received information shortly afterward from a very reliable source that his destination was some facility in the diocese of St. Augustine, Florida, near Jacksonville.

After confirming what we could, we published what we knew after performing our due diligence and calling various places in the diocese where he might be being housed and — this is important — calling the diocese itself, which we did.

Our article set off a series of denials and accusations and charges that Church Militant was producing fake news.

Now, so we have the record straight, we did call the diocese of St. Augustine in Jacksonville and asked about our information. They called us back and said no one there had heard anything about it. But that’s not the story we’re talking about today, the McCarrick-specific story.

What we are talking about is how that same diocese of Jacksonville yesterday issued a formal statement denying McCarrick’s presence in the diocese and that Church Militant had called them and asked questions about the information we were chasing down.

Here is the relevant part of their official statement: “It is unfortunate that Church Militant didn’t contact the diocese for the truth before posting their inaccurate story.”

Oops. That’s unfortunate for them they would lie in an official statement. Remember: They denied we ever contacted them and asked, implying of course that we don’t know how to do our jobs and are fake news.

Please listen to this recording between Church Militant and Jerome Wilamowski, who calls himself Jerry. He was returning our call.

Jerome Wilamowski: This is Jerry Wilamowski, Bishop Felipe Estevez’s assistant. Just got back to my desk, got your message.

CM: Calling from Church Militant, we received a rumor today on our tip line that they’re moving the former archbishop McCarrick to a facility there in St. Augustine diocese. 

JW: I got your message. Bishop Estevez is actually on a retreat this week with, like, 30 other bishops in South Florida, so I did, I sent him a note with your information and your contact information to have him give you a call back when he gets a chance.

CM: Ok. 

JW: I chatted with our chancellor here in our communication area, and they have not heard anything, they have not heard anything, nor have I. That doesn’t mean the bishop doesn’t know. I did send him a note that you called, and I’ll have him reach out to you.

So not only did we speak with Jerry, the executive assistant to Bp. Felipe Estévez, but he himself tells us, as you heard yourself, that he had discussed it with the chancellor in the communications area.

So they did get a call from us and they admitted it. That press release is, in short, a straight-up lie.

Now part two to the story: The Catholic establishment media couldn’t resist licking their chops and coming after Church Militant, trying to prove we are fake and sensational news.

Catholic News Agency editor-in-chief J.D. Flynn pounced on the diocesan statement, gleefully tweeting out that we never called the diocese: “That was a rumor circulated by Church Militant, who never contacted the diocese for information,” a spokeswoman said.

Now, Catholic News Agency’s (CNA) repeating of the diocese’s charge is rich because they released a social media hit on us for not contacting the diocese, when CNA had never contacted us asking if what the diocese claimed was true.

So we get lied about by a diocese — formally, publicly, officially (which we have the proof of is a lie) — and then the Catholic establishment media, unquestioning, just repeats the lie.

This is exactly what Church Militant has been reporting for years, and now thanks to the phone recording, we have the proof.

And thanks to CNA’s horrible reporting skills and lack of professional due diligence, we have the goods on them as well.

In journalism, we have a term for this: gotcha!

A lying diocese and sycophant media outlet.

Gotcha, guys. Gotcha.

RELATED ARTICLE: Ex-pope Benedict rejects opening up priesthood to married men

EDITORS NOTE: This Church Militant video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

No, Jesus Wasn’t a Socialist

/in , , , /by

Christian charity, being voluntary and heartfelt, is utterly distinct from the compulsory, impersonal mandates of the state.

The claim that Jesus Christ was a socialist has become a popular refrain among liberals, even from some whose Christianity is lukewarm at best. But is there any truth in it?

That question cannot be answered without a reliable definition of socialism. A century ago, it was widely regarded as government ownership of the means of production. Jesus never once even hinted at that concept, let alone endorsed it. Yet the definition has changed over time. When the critiques of economists such as Ludwig von Mises, F. A. Hayek, and Milton Friedman demolished any intellectual case for the original form of socialism, and reality proved them to be devastatingly right, socialists shifted to another version: central planning of the economy.

One can scour the New Testament and find nary a word from Jesus that calls for empowering politicians or bureaucrats to allocate resources, pick winners and losers, tell entrepreneurs how to run their businesses, impose minimum wages or maximum prices, compel workers to join unions, or even to raise taxes. When the Pharisees attempted to trick Jesus of Nazareth into endorsing tax evasion, he cleverly allowed others to decide what properly belongs to the State by responding, “Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and to God that which is God’s.”

Nonetheless, one of the charges that led to Jesus’s crucifixion was indeed tax evasion.

With the reputation of central planners in the dumpster worldwide, socialists have largely moved on to a different emphasis: the welfare state. The socialism of Bernie Sanders and his young ally Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is that of the benevolent, egalitarian nanny state where rich Peter is robbed to pay poor Paul. It’s characterized by lots of “free stuff” from the government—which of course isn’t free at all. It’s quite expensive both in terms of the bureaucratic brokerage fees and the demoralizing dependency it produces among its beneficiaries. Is this what Jesus had in mind?

Hardly. Yes, amid the holidays, it’s especially timely to think about helping the poor. It was, after all, a very important part of Jesus’s message. How helping the poor is to be done, however, is mighty important.

Christians are commanded in Scripture to love, to pray, to be kind, to serve, to forgive, to be truthful, to worship the one God, to learn and grow in both spirit and character. All of those things are very personal. They require no politicians, police, bureaucrats, political parties, or programs.

“The poor you will always have with you, and you can help them any time you want,” says Jesus in Matthew 26:11 and Mark 14:7. The key words there are you can help and want to help. He didn’t say, “We’re going to make you help whether you like it or not.”

In Luke 12:13-15, Jesus is approached with a redistribution request. “Master, speak to my brother that he divideth the inheritance with me,” a man asks. Jesus replied, “Man, who made me a judge or divider over you?” Then he rebuked the petitioner for his envy.

Christianity is not about passing the buck to the government when it comes to relieving the plight of the poor. Caring for them, which means helping them overcome it, not paying them to stay poor or making them dependent upon the state, has been an essential fact in the life of a true Christian for 2,000 years. Christian charity, being voluntary and heartfelt, is utterly distinct from the compulsory, impersonal mandates of the state.

But don’t take my word for it. Consider what the apostle Paul says in 2 Corinthians 9:7: “Each of you should give what you have decided in your heart to give, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver.”

And in Jesus’s Parable of the Good Samaritan, the traveler is regarded as “good” because he personally helped the stricken man at the roadside with his own time and resources. If, instead, he had urged the helpless chap to wait for a government check to arrive, we would likely know him today as the Good-for-Nothing Samaritan.

Jesus clearly held that compassion is a wholesome value to possess, but I know of no passage in the New Testament that suggests it’s a value he’d impose by force or gunpoint—in other words, by socialist politics.

Socialists are fond of suggesting that Jesus disdained the rich, citing two particular moments: his driving of the money-changers from the Temple and his remark that it’s easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter heaven. In the first instance, Jesus was angry that God’s house was being misused. Indeed, he never drove a money-changer from a bank or a marketplace. In the second, he was warning that with great wealth, great temptations come, too.

These were admonitions against misplaced priorities, not class warfare messages.

In his Parable of the Talents, Jesus talks about a man who entrusts his wealth to three servants for a time. When the man returns, he learns that one of the servants safeguarded his share by burying it, the second put his share to work and multiplied it, and the third invested his and generated the greatest return of all. Who’s the hero in the parable? The wealth-creating third man. The first one is admonished, and his share is taken and given to the third.

That doesn’t sound very socialist, does it?

Likewise, in Jesus’s Parable of the Workers in the Vineyard, the story upholds capitalist virtues, not socialist ones. When some workers complain that others were paid more, the employer rightfully defends the right of voluntary contract, private property, and, in effect, the law of supply and demand.

At Christmas time and throughout the year, Jesus would want each of us to be generous in helping the needy. But if you think he meant for politicians to do it with police power at twice the cost and half the effectiveness of private charity, you’re not reading the same New Testament I am.

This article was reprinted with permission from the Washington Examiner.

COLUMN BY

Lawrence W. Reed

Lawrence W. Reed is President Emeritus, Humphreys Family Senior Fellow, and Ron Manners Ambassador for Global Liberty at the Foundation for Economic Education. He is also author of Real Heroes: Incredible True Stories of Courage, Character, and Conviction and Excuse Me, Professor: Challenging the Myths of Progressivism. Follow on Twitter and Like on Facebook.

EDITORS NOTE: This FEE column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Iran Shot Down The Jet

/in , , , , /by

UPDATE: Iran Finally Admits to ‘Unintentionally’ Shooting Down Airplane

Iranian expat offers a few words about the legacy media and people who comment on Iran.

CBC framed the question to force people to think it was the US’s fault that Iran shot down a passenger jet after the US responded to yet ANOTHER Iranian attack on a US embassy.

New York Times says it has verified the video of a missile hitting the passenger jet shortly after take off from Iran

Video verified by The New York Times appears to show an Iranian missile hitting a plane above Parand, near Tehran’s airport, the area where a Ukrainian airliner stopped transmitting its signal before it crashed on Wednesday.

A small explosion occurred when a missile hit the plane, but the plane did not explode, the video showed. The jet continued flying for several minutes and turned back toward the airport, The Times has determined. The plane flew toward the airport ablaze before it exploded and crashed quickly, other videos verified by The Times showed.

Trudeau lets Iran off the hook for shooting down the jet within 90 seconds of his beginning this press conference. Again, if Israel or the US had shot down this jet even because of a systems error, which would likely be the nature off the accident, more specifically, a badly designed air defence system misidentifying the jet, his language would be stronger and less forgiving it is fair to assume.

To be fair to a singularity unfair man, He does say our FM condemns Iran’s strikes against military bases and other targets. That was our FM though, not Trudeau.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Why It Looks Like Iran Shot Down Ukrainian Airliner

Iran Sentenced Us to Death. Here’s How Iranians Really View the Regime.

EDITORS NOTE: This Vlad Tepes Blog column with video posted by Eeyore is republished with permission. All rights reserved.

House Democrats Pass War Powers Resolution Criticizing Trump’s Killing of Suleimani

/in , , , , , , /by

The Democrat-controlled House approved a resolution late Thursday aimed at reining in President Donald Trump’s future actions on Iran and condemning him for not notifying Congress before last week’s drone strike that killed an Iranian terrorist leader, who was one of the country’s most senior officials.

The resolution passed 224 to 194, with three Republicans joining the Democratic majority in supporting it and eight Democrats opposed. Rep. Justin Amash of Michigan, a Republican-turned-independent, voted for the symbolic resolution.

“Last week, the Trump administration conducted a provocative and disproportionate military airstrike targeting high-level Iranian military officials, and he did so without consulting Congress,” House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said on the House floor.

Trump ordered a drone strike that killed Gen. Qassim Suleimani, head of the Quds Force, the terrorist arm of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, on Jan. 3. Suleimani commanded numerous terrorist attacks, which killed about 600 Americans, according to the State Department.

The demand for socialism is on the rise from young Americans today. But is socialism even morally sound? Find out more now >>

“When I first heard from the administration, the secretary of defense and chairman of the Joint Chiefs, I said, ‘Why did you not consult Congress?’” Pelosi said. “They said, ‘Because we had to keep this close.’ You had to keep it close from the ‘Gang of Eight,’ the leadership of Congress?”

The “Gang of Eight” comprises the House speaker and House minority leader, Senate majority and minority leaders, and the chairmen and ranking members of the House and Senate Intelligence committees.

The House on Thursday passed the measure as a concurrent resolution, which means it’s nonbinding and would not be forwarded to the Senate or president—who would be unlikely to sign it anyway—and would not carry the force of law. Rather, it’s a statement by the House against the administration’s action.

“We know full well, better than many in the administration, the importance of classified information,” Pelosi said. “So, who were they keeping it close from? They admitted they were keeping it close from the Congress of the United States.”

The nonbinding resolution was sponsored by freshman Rep. Elissa Slotkin, D-Mich., who has a background with the CIA and the Defense Department.

Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., has introduced companion legislation in the Senate. The Senate is controlled by Republicans, where it is unlikely to get a vote.

The War Powers Act is a 1973 law that obligates the president to provide notification to Congress about a military action within 48 hours and gives Congress limited ability to prohibit further action.

During the House floor debate, Trump retweeted former national security adviser John Bolton’s criticism of the War Powers Act, saying he agreed that the law was unconstitutional and should be repealed.

Earlier Thursday, in remarks at the White House, Trump defended the decision to kill Suleimani.

Rep. Mark Meadows, R-N.C., noted that the administration took action to kill a dangerous terrorist and criticized the Democrats who are attacking him for it.

“I never thought that I would hear, on this House floor, an apology to the Iranian people for an action that we took that was justified, taking out a terrorist,” he said.

The North Carolina lawmaker noted the carnage caused by the Iranian general killed in the strike.

We have a gentleman who gave his legs in service to this country, and yet we are apologizing to the Iranians with a nonbinding resolution that is nothing more than a press release.

It has no effect. It doesn’t do anything. … All they are doing is trying to get a press release to keep them from having a primary opponent.

This is a sad, sad day. Yet here we are, having another speech to try to take on the president of the United States for actually taking out a terrorist.

I would ask my colleagues the opposite. How many Americans does a terrorist have to kill before they join with us? Is 600 not enough? Does it have to be 1,000, or 10,000? A million?

At some point, we have to stand up and let the long arm of justice go in and take out these terrorists.

In retaliation for the strike that killed Suleimani, Iran launched missiles at two U.S. military bases in Iraq on Tuesday, but there were no casualties. Trump announced on Wednesday he would be pushing more sanctions on Iran in response to the attack.

COLUMN BY

Fred Lucas

Fred Lucas is the White House correspondent for The Daily Signal and co-host of “The Right Side of History” podcast. Lucas is also the author of “Tainted by Suspicion: The Secret Deals and Electoral Chaos of Disputed Presidential Elections.” Send an email to Fred. Twitter: @FredLucasWH.

RELATED ARTICLE: No, Sen. Mike Lee Isn’t Breaking With the President on Iran. But He Has a Point.

A Note for our Readers:

With the demand for socialism at an all-time high among our young people—our future leaders and decisionmakers—the experts at Heritage stopped and asked a question that not many have asked:

Is socialism really morally sound?

The researchers at The Heritage Foundation have put together a guide to help you and our fellow Americans better understand the 9 Ways That Socialism Will Morally Bankrupt America.

They’re making this guide available to all readers of The Daily Signal for free today!

GET YOUR FREE COPY NOW! >>

EDITORS NOTE: This Daily Signal column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Iran told you all this was coming

/in , , , , /by

I wrote it in 2016, but I could have written it yesterday. The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Iran details the Islamic Republic’s militaristic aims, its support for global terrorism, its oppression of its own people, and much, much more, including exactly why Barack Obama’s late and much-lamented nuclear deal was so disastrous.

Here is the publisher’s statement about the book from 2016. This sentence jumped out at me: “The Islamic Republic is already at war with America. If we refuse to recognize that fact, we are only falling prey to the mullahs’ campaign of duplicity.”

Our Most Dangerous Enemy

Think it’s ISIS? Think again.

Iran is the terrorist powerhouse of the world—made all the more dangerous by the disastrous “nuclear deal” that restricts Iran’s nuclear ambitions hardly at all.

The Iranian government is an open enemy of the United States—and of anyone who dissents from Shia Islam.

Iran confronts U.S. Navy ships in the Persian Gulf “on a near daily basis.”

It executes more of its citizens than any other nation.

It is a country torn by hypocrisy—lectured by mullahs, and with brutally enforced Islamic religious laws, but rife with alcoholism.

Once America’s ally, Iran now claims leadership of the global jihad, and the ayatollahs’ aim is nothing less than world conquest for Islam.

In his extraordinary new book, The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Iran, New York Times bestselling author Robert Spencer reveals:

How the Iranian “nuclear deal” is sheer capitulation to the mullahs, allowing Iran to inspect its own facilities and pursue nuclear weapons

Iran’s long-standing support for terrorists—including shocking evidence that Iran helped plan the 9/11 attacks

Why Iran wants nuclear weapons—clue: it’s not about deterrence

American diplomatic folly—why the Obama administration has grossly underestimated the Iranian threat

A new grand strategy: how Iran’s Shi’ite terrorism might be contained and its threat to the United States reduced

The Islamic Republic is already at war with America. If we refuse to recognize that fact, we are only falling prey to the mullahs’ campaign of duplicity.

The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Iran exposes the true nature of the threat, lays out what America must do to defeat it, and gives you all the information you need about America’s least understood yet potentially most lethal foe.

“The brilliant and courageous Robert Spencer rips to shreds the claim that the Iran nuclear deal will bring peace to the world, and shows the truly shocking extent to which Iran is a threat to the stability not just of the Middle East, but of the entire world — and has been for decades while all too many American leaders have dithered, temporized and appeased it. The Islamic Revolution (enabled by Jimmy Carter), the hostage crisis, the Green Movement — it’s all here, including little-known facts about Iran’s role in 9/11 and its sponsorship of terror around the globe. Here is the one book that will put to rest forever the idea that the Islamic Republic will ever be a peaceful member of the family of nations, and shows what’s at stake if our leaders continue to pretend otherwise.” (Lt. Gen. William G. “Jerry” Boykin, Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence (2002-2007))

“Robert Spencer has succeeded where many fail, sweeping through Iran’s history with a sure touch and an eye for the essential. He has also understood the monumental significance of Iran’s material contribution to the September 11, 2001 plot. Despite sectarian enmity, Sunnis and Shia can get along just fine when it comes to killing Jews and Americans.”  (Kenneth R. Timmerman, President, Foundation for Democracy in Iran)

“Robert Spencer is arguably the most knowledgeable, authoritative and prolific of American infidels with respect to sharia, jihad and their most dangerous state sponsor: the Islamic Republic of Iran. Naturally, his is the complete guide for what all of us — Muslim and non-Muslim alike — need to know about Iran.” (Frank Gaffney, Center for Security Policy)

“Simultaneously, Iran is the modern iteration of one of human history’s richest civilizations and a paranoid jihadist state bent on global conquest, the destruction of Israel, and ‘Death to America.’ It is our most immediate threat, yet one strangely remote from our understanding. In The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Iran, Robert Spencer punctures our common misconceptions and Washington’s dangerous delusions about Iran, bringing to bear his unique blend of fearlessness, erudition, and clear-eyed analysis. All Americans, and most especially the political class, would do well to read this highly accessible book and grasp the challenge that confronts us.” (Andrew C. McCarthy, bestselling author, National Review contributing editor, and former federal prosecutor)

“Iran is the gravest threat to world peace today, and in this essential new book, Robert Spencer explains why. From all the astonishing details of just how disastrous Obama’s nuke deal is to Iran’s continuing war footing toward the U.S. and Israel and the shocking beliefs that may lead the Iranians to decide to nuke Israel, it’s all here. The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Iran should be placed on the desk of every official in Washington — especially in the Oval Office.” (Steve Emerson, Investigative Project)

“This masterpiece illuminates the most lethal threats against America and civilization today. Iran aims at global and hegemonic control through its terror networks, which are widely dispersed over the planet. Robert Spencer’s vivid, lucid and comprehensive record of Iran’s genocidal apocalyptic nuclear program gives us an invaluable and perspicuous tool for understanding current crucial topics. Essential reading to prevent mass extermination.” (Bat Ye’or, author of Eurabia : the Euro-Arab Axis)

“Eye-opening. Sobering. Informative. Gripping. The Complete Infidel’s Guide to Iran is a comprehensive and unique look at the world’s foremost and most dangerous rogue state. It’s what every American needs to know about the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism. Robert Spencer makes it all clear: Iran’s magnificent history and terrible present, the full horror of the Obama/Kerry nuclear deal, Iran’s global anti-U.S. and anti-Israel adventurism, its role in 9/11, and the warped theology that makes it so eager to destroy Israel. No one who cares about America’s future and the survival of the free world should miss this book.” (Pamela Geller, President, American Freedom Defense Initiative)

RELATED ARTICLES:

Trump: Since 1979, world has tolerated Iran’s terrorist adventurism, “Those days are over”

U.S. Out of Iraq? By All Means

CNN claims Trump’s threat to attack Iranian cultural sites could be a “war crime”

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Islam, Realism, and the Church

/in , , /by

William Kilpatrick: Church leaders continue to insist that Islam is not a threat, despite the fact that an abundance of facts shows Muslim hostility to Catholicism.

In comments last year, Marcello Pera, a prominent Italian intellectual and non-believer, criticized Pope Francis for “openly going against tradition, doctrine, and introducing inexplicable innovations, behaviors and gestures.”

A philosopher of science, former president of the Italian Senate, and close friend of Pope Benedict XVI, Pera asserted that Francis had turned Catholicism into “a Church so outgoing that it can no longer be found anywhere.”

In an earlier 2017 interview with Il Mattino, Pera was even more outspoken.  In answer to a question about “indiscriminate” welcoming of migrants to Europe, he replied: “Frankly, I do not get this pope, whatever he says is beyond any rational understanding.  It’s evident to all that an indiscriminate welcoming is not possible:  there is a critical point that can’t be reached.”

He continued: “If the pope. . . insists in a massive and total welcoming, I ask myself:  why does he say it?. . .Why does he lack a minimum of realism, that very little that is requested of anyone?  The answer I can give myself is only one:  The Pope does it because he hates the West, he aspires to destroy it. . . .As he aspires to destroy the Christian tradition.”

Two years ago, most Catholics would have found that hard to swallow.  But now, the idea that Pope Francis hates the West is beginning to seem plausible.  It would explain much of what he says and does – his criticism of capitalism and colonialism, Amazonian initiative and, above all, encouragement of mass Muslim migration into Europe.

Does he also aspire to destroy the Christian tradition?  Well, he rarely misses an opportunity to criticize traditional Catholics.  At the same time, he seems intent on introducing exotic and decidedly non-traditional practices into the life of the Church.

The key word, of course, is “aspires.”  Does Francis consciously desire to “destroy” the West and traditional Christianity (aka Christianity).  Or is he simply a well-intentioned do-gooder who doesn’t understand the consequences of his experiments?

That’s a serious question, but it’s unnecessary to know the answer in order to raise a related question:  Whatever the intention, do his policies and programs actually tend toward the destruction of the West and of Christianity?

I would say, “Yes, they do.” And I would argue, as Professor Pera does, that they “lack a minimum of realism.”  Future historians may well look back upon our era as the Age of Unreality.  And many in the Church have embraced this unreality as though it were a newly revealed Gospel.

Some Church leaders have been flirting with the idea of same-sex marriage, and some seem willing to believe that females can transition to males and males to females.  Others, including the pope himself, seem to believe in the fantasy idea that the lot of the poor can be improved by getting rid of fossil-fuels – which may be the reason that they have also revived the fantasy of the Noble Savage.  Because, minus the benefits of electric power, much of the world will be quickly reduced to a primitive level.  In which case, we may all find ourselves praying to Pachamama and the rain gods for a good harvest.

The most dangerous fantasy, however, is the one that Church leaders have created about Islam.  We are told that it’s a religion of peace, that it shares much common ground with Christianity, that Muslims venerate Jesus just as Catholics do, that terrorism has nothing to do with Islam, and that the slaughter of Christians by Muslims can be attributed to a tiny minority who “misunderstand” their religion.

At the same time, we are taught that “Islamophobia” – an irrational fear of Islam – is a far greater danger than Islamic aggression.

Pera’s point is that these supposedly “irrational” fears are actually quite reasonable.  He is mainly concerned with the fantasy that Europe can successfully absorb millions of Muslim migrants who don’t want to assimilate.  But as one can see, there is a whole basketful of other fantasies that Catholic leaders believe about Islam.

Where does the fantasy come from?  Some attribute it to the influence of Louis Massignon (1883-19620, a French Catholic scholar of Islam whose work had a profound effect on Catholic thinking.  Yet Massignon’s main interest was in the Sufi mystical tradition within Islam, which is only a sliver of the whole.  In short, Massignon and his followers seem to have confused Islam with a relatively small sect of Islam – one that is unrepresentative of mainstream beliefs and practices.  Indeed, many Muslims look upon the Sufis as heretics.

Massignon’s magnum opus was published almost 100 years ago, yet many Catholics still take his idiosyncratic view of Islam to be the “true” and “authentic” Islam.  Ever since the publication of Nostra Aetate in 1965, this woefully inadequate view of Islam has been handed down to successive generations of Catholics, and it’s well past time to challenge it.

Over against the fantasies, there stands an abundance of facts about Islam that are not friendly to the current Catholic narrative.  Catholics need to acquaint themselves with these facts lest they be lured into a deadly complacency.

Let’s start with one rather large and longstanding fact:  All of North Africa, Turkey, and the Middle East were once Catholic.  In fact, for many centuries they were the great centers of Catholic culture.  Now, however, these regions are over 90 percent Muslim.

Fast forward a millennium and it looks like the same thing is happening again.  Lebanon was 62 percent Christian in 1970, but by 2010 the Christian population was only 36 percent.  In Iraq, the Christian population has declined by more than 90 percent just since 2003.  Meanwhile, Christians are being slaughtered in the name of Islam all over the world – in Nigeria, Syria, Kenya, Burkina Faso, the Philippines, Sri Lanka, and elsewhere.

It’s not a pretty picture, but it’s a much more accurate one than that painted by the Church’s current cadre of whitewashers, and one that those of us possessing even “a minimum of realism” need to take very seriously.

COLUMN BY

William Kilpatrick

William Kilpatrick is the author of Christianity, Islam and Atheism: The Struggle for the Soul of the West, and a new book, The Politically Incorrect Guide to Jihad. His work is supported in part by the Shillman Foundation. For more on his work and writings, visit his website, The Turning Point Project.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Here’s Why Authors, Theologians Think Pope Francis Cooperates With The Chinese Government Despite Persecution Of Religious Groups

Add Iran’s Leadership to the Ash Heap of History

EDITORS NOTE: This Catholic Thing column is republished with permission. Copyright 2020 The Catholic Thing. All Rights Reserved. For reprint rights, write to: info@frinstitute.org. The Catholic Thing is a forum for intelligent Catholic commentary. Opinions expressed by writers are solely their own.

Islam’s Contributions to Iran

/in , , , , /by

Islam, “the religion of peace,” has contributed to Iran Absolutely nothing, except misery, servitude, hatred, backwardness, hypocrisy, ignorance, superstition and more. From the moment, the Arab barbarians stamped into Iran with the sword of Allah, imposing their desert ideology onto the sophisticated Persian culture, Iranian people haven’t been able to find peace.

Throughout the years, this barbaric ideology brought intolerance, fatalism, institutionalized slavery, injustice, jihadism, oppression of women and non-Muslims, celebration of death, lack of respect for individualism, rejection of freedom and democracy, belief in the theocracy of Allah as ministered by the self-serving clergy who are not accountable to the people, stifling of questioning and inquiry, disallowing all legitimate forms of freedom, hatred of others, blind servitude, and superstitious.

They say history repeats itself. What the hordes of Arabs, did to Iran 1400 years ago, today, the children of these savages, the Islamic Republic and their proxies are doing the exact same thing to the people of Iran. Just take a quick look at Islam’s history as well as what is happening today in the Islamic lands. Islam is not a religion of peace and it has never been. Islam is violent, oppressive, racist, and irrational at its very core. It is treachery for people to present it as otherwise, either out of ignorance or because of their own personal reasons.

In most other lands conquered by Islam, the conquered peoples have lost their own identity and heritage and embraced the ways of their new rulers, under an “Arab” identity. Conversely, in Iran a band of indigenous victims, “infected” by Islam, have mindlessly turned on their Iranian compatriots and tried to rob them of their remaining ancient heritage.

It is exactly this savage minority that has established an oppressive tyrannical rule and wields power against the Iranian people. Yet, even under the rule of the Mullahs, the overwhelming majority of Iranians of various ethnicities and religions remain faithful to their ancient creed – Zoroastrianism.

Today, Iran is under the occupation of the most savage form of the Islamic butchers. These are the descendants of the same Islamic butchers who conquered Persia 1400 years ago with the sword of Islam. These are the same creatures that plundered and burned Iran and took Iranian women as slaves to the desert of Arabia. Even now the Islamic Republic is selling the Iranian women in Dubai and other Persian Gulf kingdoms

In its savage crusade against others, Islam sanctioned slavery, condemned women to a cast of inferior, and summarily sentenced to death any and all people who rejected its yoke of bigotry.

Crimes committed by this cult of savagery are too many to fully enumerate here. Sallying out of the Arabian dessert with the sword of avarice, Muslims attacked civilized people in search of booty. Their early success enflamed their lust and propelled them in their march of death and destruction.

Islamic clergy, the parasitic prime beneficiaries of Islam, are master practitioners of the carrot-and stick-strategy. By drawing heavily from the Quran and the Hadith, the conniving mullahs and imams have assembled a potent arsenal of threats and promises to keep the faithful in line.

They had little trouble in so doing, since Islamic scripture is replete with graphic horrific punishment awaiting the wayward and the unbelievers, while the rewards for the obedient docile, if he is male, are described as endless variety of sensual pleasures.

Anyone daring to leave the corral of Islam is apostate and automatically condemned to death. And that’s just for starters. The punishment awaiting the ungrateful deserter of the one and only true path, Islam threatens, is a raft of horrific eternal torment in Allah’s hell.

The Islamdom is at a crossroads. Millions in Iran, a hugely important force of sustaining and fanning the Islamic fire, have already turned and are turning against Islam. They and the rest of the world need to hear the voices of secular decent people who are in league with them. I am sure you want to play your part in this honorable endeavor and lend your help to put Islam, the very spawning swamp of the deadly virus that makes for jihadists, out of business.

© All rights reserved.

INTEL REPORT: More Sulaimani Reactions and Key Developments in Libya

/in , , , , /by

IRAQ

The Saudi owned site alarabiya.net is reporting that in the southern (Shi’a) city of al-Basra, members of the Iraqi Hizbollah, which is one of the heshd sha’bi (popular mobilization) units directed by the late Qaseem Sulaimani and his Iraqi deputy al-Muhandess, drove pick-ups into a crowed of anti-Iranian protestors, in an attempt to break up the protests.  Later the protestors burned one of the trucks belonging to the Hizbollah group.

In Nasriyyah, another southern Iraqi Shi’a city, Iraqi Hizbollah units fired live rounds against anti-Iranian protestors when the protestors refused to engage in even “symbolic” mourning for al-Muhandess.  The protestors then burned the local Hizbollah HQ.

Alarabiya is also reporting that an IRGC asset, who had worked directly under Solaimani in the failiq al-quds brigade, was killed in Yemen.  The report, which came originally from Iranian sources, did not mention where he was killed, or how.

Alarabiya.net is also reporting this morning that the leaders of the Iraqi popular mobilization units have told their people to avoid public appearances and to change their phone numbers, in the wake of the Solaimani killing.

U.S. news sources are reporting that the Somali al-Qaeda franchise, al-shabaab attacked an airfield in Kenya where U.S. troops were training Kenyan troops.  One U.S. serviceman and two U.S. contractors were killed, before Kenyan security forces could react and kill five of the attackers while driving the rest of them off.

COMMENT:  Since al-Qaeda is closely allied to Iran (as well as Qatar and Turkey), it is tempting to see this attack as Iran’s first counter-punch for the Solaimani killing.

IRAQ/LEBANON

On a lighter note, Sarah Dhamdhawi, who hosts a show on al-arabiyya TV called tafaalkom and in which she talks about what is currently lighting up the Arabic social media accounts, commented on the after affects of the Solaimani killing saying that the vehicle bearing the bodies of Solaimani and al-Muhandess through the streets of Bagdad, after the killing, was the subject of lots of sarcasm on twitter.  This is because the vehicle  bearing their bodies was a Chevy, an American-made vehicle.

She also reported on the photos of Solaimani that the Lebanese Hizbollah distributed around Beirut in hopes of eliciting sympathy, instead it became also the subjects of sarcasm, though she didn’t say why.

LIBYA

Both al-arabiyya TV and alarabiya.net are reporting this morning Erdogan’s stooge, Fayez Sirraaj (head of the “government” in Tripoli), along with the Turkish Foreign Minister, visited Algiers in hopes of inducing Algeria to also intervene on behalf of the Sirraaj Government.  So far, no go on that account.

Also this morning alarabiya.net is reporting that General Haftar’s Libyan National Army now has complete control of the city of Sirte, which was one of the only two major cities still allied to the Tripoli faction.  The LNA then announced that they will move on Misratta next (which is the other city allied to Tripoli).

The capture of Sirte was later confirmed by al-arabiyya TV.  The Libyan source interviewed by the TV news anchor said that the LNA entered the city from five different directions and it took them only four hours to put down all opposition and establish complete control of the city.

COMMENT:

Sirte and Misratta are both located on Libya’s Mediterranean coast on the far west side of the country, near Tripoli.  When the LNA’s battle for Tripoli began last Spring, I thought that they had made a huge strategic mistake by trying to go after Tripoli first before taking out Tripoli’s smaller allies first.

My fears proved well founded as during the summer and fall, whenever the LNA began to make progress in Tripoli, fighters from Misratta would come out and hit them in the flanks forcing a retreat.  Also, Turkey alternately used the ports of Sirte and Misratta for landing supplies and terrorists from other countries which would then be slipped into Tripoli to aid the Sirraaj government.

This shift in strategy by the LNA to do what they should have done in the first place, might be traced to the influence of their Russian “advisors” from the Wagner company.

Erdogan’s plans to step-up Turkey’s involvement with regular Turkish troops may have also convinced the LNA of the need to take out Sirte and Misratta.

© All rights reserved.

MIDDLE EAST INTEL REPORT: Getting Wild

/in , , , , , /by

Recent evens in Iraq and Libya have dominated virtually all Arabic TV news programs and internet sites this weekend, as events and reactions continue to unfold.

EGYPTIAN REACTION

Popular Egyptian talk show host ‘Amru Adeeb, on his show al-hakaya (the story) which airs every weekend on MBS-Egypt, opened his coverage of America’s killing of Qaseem Solaimani with the words:  “Trump just won re-election!”  He repeated the phrase several times, with pauses in between for dramatic effect.

“Nobody’s talking about impeachment now,” he said.  “Trump’s got four more years.”

He went on to say that Trump is “strange.  Perhaps the strangest president America’s ever had, but he made the strong decision.  And the whole world is astonished!”

He added that Qaseem Solaimani has left a “river of blood” all across the Middle East.  The protestors in Iraq, the hundreds that have been killed . . . “that’s on Qaseem Solaimani.”

He noted how Iran had attacked oil tankers, and America did nothing.  Iran had hit Aramco, and America did nothing.  And, the Iranians thought that Trump was a weak president, that he couldn’t do anything until after the elections.  But, then, Iran kills one American . . . “just one!  and Trump takes out Solaimani and al-Muhandess.”

Regarding America’s follow-up attack on installations of the Iraqi Hizbollah (one of the heshd sha’abi (Iranian operated Iraqi Shi’a militias), ‘Amru Adeeb said that it was because Trump wanted to take out those who had attacked the American embassy.

He added that “America is no longer reacting.  America is acting!”

COMMENT:

‘Amru Adeeb is close to the as-Sisi regime, and has connections with the upper echelons of Egyptian General Intelligence (EGI), so his views generally reflect those of the current Egyptian government.

U.S. intelligence is saying that Iran had been planning to stage a coup in Iraq.  Why they would want to do that might be a mystery to some, given that the current Iraqi government is virtually subservient to Iran as it is.  But, perhaps submission is not enough, what the Iranians would want is a clone of themselves in Iraq, so the coup would be to replace the current submissive government with a full Shi’a Islamic Republic.

This coup, had it occurred, would have been spearheaded by the all of the heshd sha’abi (popular militias) and directed by Solaimani.  Therefore,  just taking out Solaimani was not enough.  The Americans had to also take out elements that were to play a key role in the proposed coup.

OTHER REACTIONS

In Iran’s capital city of Tehran, the regime called out tens of thousands of their supporters to protest the killing of Solaimani, whom many thought was a future president of Iran.  However, elsewhere in Iran, there were equally large outpourings of demonstrators expressing their joy over Solaimani’s death.

In Iraq, a similar situation.  In the capital, Baghdad, there were demonstrations by the pro-Iranian crowd against the killing of Solaimani, and chants of “America is the great Satan.”  But elsewhere there were even larger outpourings of people (including shi’a) dancing in the streets, and celebrating Solaimani’s death.  “No more Solaimani” they chanted.

The Saudi-owned www.alarabiya.net is reporting that the Iraqi government has placed additional “restrictions” on the American forces in Iraq after the killing of Solaimani.  Many Iraqis have expressed their fear that their country will become the battle ground for a war between Iran and America.

Most of the guests interviewed by the anchors on the sister Saudi-owned TV channel of al-arabiyya TV were pleased with the take down of Solaimani.  The regular news casts on al-arabiyya TV have reported that Iranian newspapers are reporting that Iran’s revenge will come via their militias, meaning that militias in countries other than Iran will do the dirty work leaving Iran’s hands theoretically clean.

In Lebanon, folks also feared that their country would suffer from Iran’s anger.  In Lebanon, the largest and most powerful “political party” is Iran’s puppet terrorist militia, the heavily armed Hizbollah.  So, the fear is that they might trigger a war with Israel, which would hurt all of Lebanon, and/or attack western embassies and other western interests in Lebanon.

Meanwhile, our great, loyal NATO ally, Erdogan, is crying tears over Solaimani’s death, calling him a great martyr.

LIBYA

The UN SEC GEN Gutierez warned Turkey against intervening in Libya.  This is noteworthy because it is the UN that made the mistake of granting international recognition to the Turkey-supported Sirraaj government in the first place.

U.S. President Trump has also advised Turkey to not intervene in Libya.  Yet, the U.S., like most other countries, still maintains an Embassy in militia-controlled Tripoli.

Libyan General Hafter said they will teach Turkey a severe, and historical lesson if they try to intervene in Libya.

Nonetheless, Erdogan seems poised at this point to follow through with his plan to send Turkish troops to Libya.  He is talking about only 250-300 at this point.  However, French intelligence has reported that four civilian airliners carrying fighters from Syria has landed near Tripoli, courtesy of Erdogan.  An article in today’s www.alarabiya.net talks about 1,000 Syrian “mercenaries” that Turkey has trained and shipped to Libya.

These Syrian “mercenaries” are the al-Qaeda, ISIS, and Muslim Brotherhood types whose goals match that of the Turkish regime.

COMMENTS: 

During the above-mentioned al-hakaya program by popular Egyptian talk show host ‘Amru Adeeb, he touched on the Libya situation as well as Iraq.  While condemning Erdogan’s moves, he commented that in his view the Trump administration was okay with Turkey moving into Libya because the Russians were supporting the other side.  At the time, I tended to agree with that comment based on previous statements by the administration.  However, Trump’s more recent comment advising against Turkish intervention has to be seen as a positive development.  It is far better that the U.S. remain neutral on the Libya situation than to offer moral, diplomatic, or any other sort of support to the wrong side (which happens to be the side that Turkey supports).

While ‘Amru Adeeb was ranting about Erdogan’s Libya moves, a split screen was showing scenes from the below-mentioned Egyptian military exercises.  The Saudi-owned al-arabiya TV did the same thing during their coverage of the Libya situation.

I believe that these military exercises by Egypt were not just to make sure the troops were ready in the event they should be needed, but it was also a message sent to Turkey.  Likewise, the TV coverage of these exercises in conjunction with the news coverage on the Libyan situation made it clear that this is a specific warning to Turkey

I doubt that the Libyan National Army by itself could do much against a full scale Turkish invasion.  Their air force consists of about two or three ancient MIGS left over from the Soviet era, and a handful of helicopters.  The mechanized portion of their army appears to be primarily Japanese pick-up trucks with machine guns, artillery, and anti-aircraft guns converted to artillery mounted in the back.  Maybe two or three ancient Soviet tanks.  However, were Egypt to enter the Libyan war in earnest, they would hand the Turks their rear-ends and send them packing.  Some comments coming out of Egypt now indicate that they just might do that.

While previous comments coming out of the Egyptian regime have stressed that Egypt’s army is just for defending Egypt’s soil, and Egypt’s borders.  Period.  Comments coming out this weekend include the importance of defending Egypt’s national security, and a stable Libya (i.e. free of terrorists and Turks) as being in the interest of Egypt’s national security.  There have also been comments to the effect that Egypt is prepared “to defend its coastlines and the coastlines of its neighbors” (i.e. Libya).

Coincidentally, or not, the Egyptian military on Saturday morning 04 January 2020 staged a huge naval exercise and practice marine landing on one of its Mediterranean beaches west of Alexandria.  Participating in this exercise were landing craft for unloading Humvees, tanks, and other heavy equipment, a helicopter “aircraft carrier” and the ‘copters it bore, Apaches and Shinooks, submarines, and anti-submarine aircraft and naval craft, F-16s, and special forces.

In comparing the militaries of Turkey and Egypt, Turkey has the larger and more powerful navy, as Erdogan has been spending billions on his navy in preparation for ruling the entire Mediterranean as in the Ottoman days of old.  But Egypt likely has adequate submarine forces (including the latest German models), and anti-submarine air craft to take out any Turkish ships approaching Libya that it wants to.

In terms of air power, Egypt wins hands down.  Both countries are equipped with substantial numbers of F-15s and F-16s, and NATO helicopters, but Erdogan purged most of his pilots in the wake of the failed coup attempt of 2016, and they as yet do not have adequate replacements.

While the Turkish army could probably muster close to the same amount of manpower, given the respective populations of the two countries (80 million for Turkey, 100 million for Egypt) as Egypt, they would have the logistical problem of transporting them across the sea, and then problems of supply.  Whereas Egypt would have the advantage fighting close to their home soil.  The Turkish army also has command and control, and chain of command problems thanks to Erdogan’s numerous purges of the army beginning in 2009, and continuing through 2016.

Then there is the matter of Egypt’s huge, modern tank force, and the flat, easily traversed terrain between Cairo and Tripoli.

Stay tuned.  Things just might get exciting.

SUNDAY 05 MAY

The Iraqi parliament met to vote on expelling U.S. forces from Iraq in the wake of the killing of Solaimani and a number of his stooges.  Significantly, the Sunni Arabs and the Kurds boycotted the meeting, leaving the Iranian stooges, including the Prime Minister, totally in charge.

After the vote by the Iran-subservient Iraqi parliament, protests broke out in Baghdad against the decision according www.alarabiya.net.  Other protesters in the Shi’a holy city of Karbala protested the parliament’s decision by blocking the road to Karbala, and burning tires.

Iraqi Shi’a leader Muqtada Sadr has recommended that Iraq close down the U.S. embassy in Baghdad, and pass a law criminalizing any contacts of any sort with any and all Americans.  An article in www.alarabiya.net says that Muqtadi Sadr, whom they call a “proxy” of Iran, has also called for the formation of an “international militia.”

Another alarabiya.net article hints that Iran and its proxies may go after European targets.

The Leader of Iran’s puppet Lebanese Shi’a Hizbollah, Nasrallah, has stated that the killing of Solaimani launched a “brand new era in the Middle East.”  The implication of his words were rather ominous.

ANALYSIS:

Judging from the reactions and comments coming out of the Iranian leadership, and from their client terrorist entities around the Middle East, such as Hizbollah and Hamas, Iran will try to unleash a broader reign of terror throughout all of the Arab countries using its proxies to do the dirty work.

Iran’s analysis being that by using their proxies to do their dirty work (including killing American citizens, attacking embassies, consulates, and private businesses) in other countries, that any response by the U.S. will take place in the countries where the attacks take place, causing those countries also to want to sever ties with the U.S. as Iraq is doing.

Meanwhile, the Iranian regime is under increasing pressure, not only economically from Trump’s embargoes, but internally from their own population’s disgust with the regime’s behavior and domestic policies.

BOTTOM LINE:  As things escalate throughout the Middle East, and assuming that the U.S. responses will increase in severity as well, the Iranian Mullah’s may well reach the conclusion that “if we’re going down anyway, we’re going to set the entire Middle East on fire and let Allah sort it out later.”

VIDEO: 2019 Focus on White Supremacist Violence Doesn’t Explain NYC Attacks

/in , , , , , , , /by

In 2019, both authorities and a rising number of organizations shifted focus to the threat of white supremacist violence. The shift was necessary, considering both the El Paso attack at a Walmart that killed 22 and Poway synagogue shooting (which followed the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting in 2018).

As reported by NPR, here are some steps being taken:

  • Congressional committees held at least four hearings on hate crimes and white nationalism, calling on counterterrorism officials to treat Far-Right militants as seriously as they do jihadists
  • Two U.S. senators, one Republican and one Democratic, introduced bills that would give federal authorities tools similar to those used to combat Islamist extremists to combat white supremacist violence. The issue remains controversial because of questions of free speech and other concerns.
  • The Department of Homeland Security unveiled a strategic plan that pledged more resources for fighting Far-Right extremism – a surprise from an agency that previously focused almost exclusively on Islamist militancy. The introduction to the document stated, “As the threats evolve, we must do so as well”
  • Academics across the United States who study the Far Right formed the Consortium on Hate and Political Extremism, saying they felt compelled to help teach the public about the evolving threat. It’s modeled after Europe’s Center for Research on Extremism, known as C-REX

Yet the recent string of attacks against New York City’s Jewish population isn’t from white supremacists; it’s from members of the city’s Black-American population.

Since attacks surged, the New York City Police Department (NYPD) announced the launch of a unit focused on racially and ethnically motivated extremism, called by the same name (acronym REME) to understand and counter this phenomenon.

What Did We Miss?

I think the problem lies in the fact that we’ve been so focused on white supremacy, that we’ve ignored the larger monster in the room. The larger monster is the thing that is allowing the pattern of racial/ethnic violence to duplicate.

Anti-Semitism is the oldest hate in history. Fortunately, this scourge has been relatively dormant since the establishment of our nation, which was founded to a large degree on the idea of rights for all individuals and faiths.

Now we must ask: What is it about this hate that it is suddenly re-emerging? For better insight into the problem, I talked with former extremists who, at one point in their lives, embraced hate before they decided to walk away from it.

A common theme is the increasing polarization of our society leading to an emergence of extremism on both sides of the political spectrum, creating an environment which makes Jews vulnerable from all angles.

Former Extremists Weigh In

Jeff Schoep, former leader of the National Socialist Movement, speaks about America’s increasingly polarized landscape:

Extremism and radicalization can come from many different sources, the Far Right, Far Left, white nationalists, Black nationalists, religious extremists, the list goes on. In 2019, polarization between Americans of all various political and societal differences has risen to such extremes that people who were once considered moderate are lumped into one extreme or another.

For example, Trump supporters increasingly were being called racists and Nazis, while Democrats were being called communists. Both sides are increasingly intolerant of each other which, in some cases, is leading to violence.

As Americans we need to unite and come together and not divide ourselves over petty differences. We need to learn to love each other and accept that just because someone has a different opinion than someone else, it does not give anyone the right to act upon or against those opinions with violence and hate.

Jesse Morton, a former recruiter for Al-Qaeda, calls on us to see the relationship between different forms of extremism that we see emerging on the U.S. scene:

What Can Change . . . Today?

I personally feel the problem is significantly rooted in language. We’re using the proverbial “master’s tools” to dismantle the master’s house — meaning, we’re using language based on the mistaken idea that human beings can be reduced to generic color blocks to talk about the problem.

By using labels that speak to color, we’re reaffirming the myth of difference and invoking the language on which that myth is dependent.

Saying a white supremacist did this, or a Black person did that, we’re seeing the behavior through myth of the group. We’re not seeing the individual, which is necessary if we’re going to understand the behavior that drives these individuals.

It’s also necessary if we hope to take power away from the offending “group.” In order for white supremacists, for example, to exist, we need to see and reaffirm them as a group: white. Take away the coded language, and you’ve dismantled, in part, a significant factor that group needs to exist.

These and other ideas need to be explored if this problem is going to be tackled in the upcoming year.

Meanwhile, one group is taking to the streets and tackling the problem. Watch the following video about New York’s Guardian Angels patrolling the Crown Heights neighborhood of Brooklyn, New York, where anti-Semitic crimes have been rampant in the last weeks. The citizen’s patrol group was started in 1979 by Curtis Sliwa (featured in the video) as a response to the out-of-control crime in the New York City subway. The group now has branches in over 130 cities and 13 countries worldwide. Older Jewish residents of Crown Heights remembered the Guardian Angels’ presence during the 1991 Crown Heights riots, when the police largely let widespread violence against Jews go unanswered:

RELATED STORIES:

Muslim Response to Anti-Semitism Not Good Enough, Says Reformer

Pipe Bombs, Synagogue Murders; How We Move Forward

Have Ilhan Omar and CAIR Bred Acceptance of Today’s Rampant Anti-Semitism?

EDITORS NOTE: This Clarion Project column with video is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

VIDEO: Qassem Soleimani — Inside the twisted, terrible reign of Iran’s top general

/in , , , , /by

The killing of Iranian terror-meister Qassem Soleimani in a targeted US air strike in Baghdad on Thursday will have a dramatic impact on the stability of the Iranian regime and its ability to conduct oversea terrorist operations.

Soleimani was, in many ways, the irreplaceable man. Known as a charismatic leader — indeed, the only charismatic leader in Iran’s military today — he has no parallel among contemporary Iranian commanders.

Wherever Iran has sent its expeditionary Quds Force to war — in Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Yemen — there you would find Soleimani.

During the early years of the US occupation of Iraq, he became the puppet master of successive Iraqi governments. Not only did he select presidents and prime ministers, but over the years he placed his minions in key positions in every Iraqi government ministry where they controlled personnel and finance decisions.

He also set up a far-flung financial empire, reportedly taking a percentage of the float on all foreign currency exchange from Iraqi banks, netting close to $1 billion per month in black money to finance his terror empire.

While he was serving as Barack Obama’s CIA director, Gen. David Petraeus liked to tell a story about a text message he received from Soleimani at the peak of the surge in 2008.

After the death of General Qassim Soleimani, people throughout Iran and the city of Rasht mourned him on the streets.

“Dear General Petraeus, you should know that I, Qassim Soleimani, control the policy for Iran with respect to Iraq, Lebanon, Gaza and Afghanistan. And indeed, the ambassador in Baghdad is a Quds Force member. The individual who’s going to replace him is a Quds Force member.”

Staff Sergeant Robert Bartlett was one of several thousand US soldiers wounded by “explosively made penetrators,” a particularly deadly form of IED, in Iraq. They were designed to kill American troops, and were built and shipped to Iraqi terror groups by Soleimani. In just a two-year period, from 2005-2007, they claimed the lives of an estimated 600 US servicemen in Iraq, according to the Department of Defense.

The force of the projectile “cut me in half from the left corner of my temple down to my jaw, and took my gunner’s legs off. Because of this Iranian bomb, I died three times in five days. Only my faith kept me alive,” Sgt. Bartlett told me in a videotaped interview. The US never retaliated for these attacks.

In 2011, Soleimani and his men recruited a down-and-out drug dealer named Manssor Arbabsiar, to try to assassinate then-Saudi ambassador to Washington, DC, Adel al-Jubeir, who had angered the Iranian regime by publicly calling out their terror ties.

Video shows moment Iran’s top general Qassem Soleimani is blown away.

According to federal court documents, Arbabsiar traveled repeatedly to Tehran to meet with an associate of Soleimani’s to receive orders and money and ultimately recruited a Mexican drug dealer to carry out the barbarous plot the Iranians proposed: to kill al-Jubeir while he was lunching at the upscale restaurant at the Watergate Hotel.

If successful, the bombing could have killed more than a hundred people in the heart of the US capitol, but Soleimani reportedly wasn’t worried about the collateral damage. As I wrote at the time, the only reason the plot failed was very good luck (as far as the FBI was concerned). Arbabsiar chose the wrong Mexican to carry out the hit, one who happened to be an informant for the Drug Enforcement Administration.

In recent years, Soleimani has traveled repeatedly to Syria to supervise the construction of a network of military and intelligence bases Iran planned to use to expand its presence on Israel’s borders. Israeli fighter jets reportedly narrowly missed him during a 2015 strike on an Iranian base in Aleppo province. Shortly after that attack, he told an Iranian Internet news service, “Martyrdom is what I seek in mountains and valleys but isn’t granted yet.”

Former Iranian intelligence officers told me about Soleimani’s direct involvement in planning, financing and directing the Sept. 11, 2012, attacks on US diplomatic and intelligence facilities in Benghazi, Libya, where four Americans were killed.

At the time, writing in these pages, I called him the “Wizard of Oz of Iranian terror.”

His goals in attacking us in Benghazi were to shut down the US arms pipeline from that city to the anti-regime jihadi groups in Syria and ultimately to drive the United States out of Libya entirely, both of which he accomplished.

His many brushes with death and his outrageous terror rap sheet, which is longer than bin Laden’s, led Soleimani and his supporters to consider him invincible. His demise at the hands of US forces on Thursday not only shows that is not the case but that the aura of invincibility of the regime itself is over.

I believe the Iranian people will draw the obvious conclusion that this once powerful regime has feet of clay. Expect bigger anti-regime protests inside Iran in the coming weeks and popular revolts against Iranian interference in Lebanon and Iraq as well.

To me, the biggest question remains: Is President Trump ready for the revolution he has unleashed? With this single act, the United States has set in motion big historical forces for positive change. We must be prepared to help the forces of freedom against tyranny and oppression.

RELATED ARTICLE: 5 Things to Know About Top Iranian General Killed by US Airstrike

EDITORS NOTE: This New York Post column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.

Iraq: MPs scream “Allahu akbar” after voting to expel US forces from the country

/in , , , , /by

This vote was a foregone conclusion, since Iraq has had a weak Shi’ite government dominated by the Islamic Republic of Iran ever since the toppling of Saddam Hussein. And the MPs are right: we should leave Iraq and everywhere our troops are without any defined mission or goal.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Iranian official offers $80,000,000 for the head of “yellow haired lunatic” Trump, crowd screams “Allahu akbar”

UK: Muslims attend community memorial at Islamic Centre in London for “honorable Islamic commander” Soleimani

Canada: Demonstrators screaming “Down with USA and Israel” build shrine to “heroes of Islam” Soleimani and al-Muhandis

“An Entire World Will Avenge You”: Pro-Soleimani rally in Molenbeek, Muslim area of Brussels

EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch column is republished with permission. © All rights reserved.