The memory of a fierce regent of old can inspire Ukrainians today in the face of war.
The past few days have seen a spate of videos showing Ukrainians and their president defying an onslaught of Russian aggression. Who could fail to be moved by the video of a Ukrainian woman confronting an armed and jackbooted soldier, telling him to put sunflower seeds in his pockets so at least sunflowers will grow where he dies.
Or President Zelensky’s heroic selfies from Kyiv’s front line, which inspire far more widely than just among his countrymen?
Ukrainians are used to adversity, and they have a special medieval role model who personifies their bravery in the face of hardship. The Mongol horde destroyed her tomb in Kyiv in 1240, but a Ukrainian Orthodox cathedral dedicated to her was consecrated there as recently as 2010.
Olga of Kyiv, consort of Igor, second ruler of the Rurikid dynasty, is today recognised as one of Eastern Orthodoxy’s greatest saints. A fierce and proud woman who protected her young son and avenged her husband’s death, she was a crucial figure in the consolidation of the medieval kingdom of Kyivan Rus’ as a political entity and in its peoples’ conversion to Christianity.
Olga was born to Viking parents in Pskov, northern Russia, around the turn of the 10th century. She married Prince Igor young and may have been only 20 when the Drevlians, a neighbouring tribe, rose up against his rule and murdered him.
The Byzantine chronicler Leo the Deacon gives gruesome details of Igor’s killing: he was tied to two tree trunks which were then released so his body was split in two. Leo’s account may have been embellished (the ancient historian Diodorus of Sicily in fact tells a similar tale), but Igor’s death still left his wife and three-year-old son alone and potentially helpless in a particularly dangerous and brutal corner of the medieval world.
Burying her enemies
Olga’s legend was born of her actions in the weeks and months that followed. The Drevlians sent her emissaries to suggest she marry their leader Prince Mal. The Primary Chronicle, an 11th-century manuscript which is our main source for what follows, records Olga as greeting them deceptively, apparently to bide for time.
The account may be part-fictitious or at least exaggerated. Yet that is not the point: in medieval hagiography, it is the morality of the tale that matters most.
“Your proposal is pleasing to me”, Olga told her interlocutors. “Indeed, my husband cannot rise again from the dead. But I desire to honour you tomorrow in the presence of my people. Return now to your boat, and remain there… I shall send for you on the morrow.”
The hubristic Drevlian delegation took her at her word gleefully. But what they did not know was that she had arranged for a trench to be dug, into which they and their boat were flung.
They were buried alive.
Olga summoned a second Drevlian embassy before the rest of the tribe had had time to learn of the first one’s fate. When they arrived, she commanded her people to draw a bath for them.
The Drevlians then entered the bathhouse, but Olga ordered the doors to be bolted and the building set ablaze.
For a third reprisal, Olga went to the place where the Drevlians had killed her husband, telling those present she wished to hold a funeral feast to commemorate him. Once the Drevlians were drunk and incapacitated, she had her men massacre them.
Finally, she laid siege to the Drevlians’ base at Iskorosten (the modern-day Ukraine city of Korosten). She tricked those inside the city with an offer of peace: all they had to give up were three pigeons and three sparrows from each house.
But when Olga had the birds in her possession, she had her men tie a sulphurous cloth to one of each one’s legs. The birds flew back to their nests for the night and the sulphur set every building on fire simultaneously.
Olga ordered her soldiers to catch everyone who fled the burning city so they could be extirpated or taken into slavery.
Her revenge for her husband’s death was at last complete.
Channelling Saint Olga’s spirit
Olga lived a further 25 years, residing in her son’s capital of Kyiv. She was instrumental in persuading him not to abandon the Ukrainian lands for “better prospects” further south on the Danube’s bank. Her grandson, Volodymyr the Great (c. 958-1015), then expanded the kingdom into what is now seen as the first Russian principality (which Vladimir Putin now views as the forerunner of the imperial Russian state).
Volodymyr too is acknowledged as a saint for his role in completing the Christianisation which Olga had started.
Olga’s Mad Max-style ventures ought to grate with us a bit today: the modern world really shouldn’t be a site of such bloodshed. That is why Russia’s sudden large-scale invasion into a peaceful country strike us as so shocking.
Yet Olga’s memory can clearly still provide an important focal point for Ukrainian resolve.
The Eastern Orthodox and Greek Catholic Churches recognise her with the venerable and extraordinary title “Isapóstolos”: Equal to the Apostles. She and Kyiv’s patron saint, St Michael the Archangel, remain key figures of intercession among those who need comfort in an hour of greatest need.
And Olga’s Christian faith, acquired during a visit to Byzantium late in life, can sustain others now just as it sustained her after her own tribulations.This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Miles Pattenden is Senior Research Fellow in Medieval and Early Modern Studies at the Australian Catholic University, and the Co-Editor of The Journal of Religious History. He specialises in the history… More by Miles Pattenden
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00MercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexitieshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexities2022-03-07 08:21:112022-03-07 08:32:40Saint Olga of Kyiv: Defiance and Vengeance
Russia has been laying the ground for military action against Ukraine since 2014.
Despite suggestions to the contrary from the Kremlin, Ukraine remains surrounded by Russian troops, both along its long border with Russia and from within occupied Crimea. The Russian Federation has deployed land, air and naval forces that give the Kremlin a range of possibilities should it seek to initiate military action.
Russia has been laying the ground for military action against Ukraine since 2014, when it seized Crimea and thereby gained a more substantial military foothold to the south. Meanwhile, the ongoing war in Ukraine’s Donbas region allowed Russian security and intelligence units to continue to gauge Ukrainian military and paramilitary operations.
In spring 2021, the Russian Federation ramped up actions against Ukraine, stopping short of actual war. It launched cyber attacks and misinformation campaigns as well as disrupting the energy supply. The Ukrainian Security Service has identified operational and sleeper units from Russia’s Federal Security Service, Foreign Intelligence Service, Military Intelligence and Special Forces operating within its borders.
If military action does occur, there are three likely scenarios for how it would play out.
Scenario 1: decapitation
The first is the decapitation approach. Russian military and security forces would seek to remove the current government and state powers in order to insert replace them with people more favourable to (and owned by) Moscow. Perhaps surprisingly, this would entail keeping on some people who are already working in the Ukrainian state. There are figures who have shown sympathies for and have worked with the Russian Federation.
This scenario would probably entail security and intelligence units on the ground in Ukraine as well as units from the military exercise currently being conducted in Belarus. The greatest concern for Russia in this scenario would be how the Ukrainian military and police would respond. There may also be a significant public backlash against a change of government led from Moscow.
Scenario 2: war in the east
The second possibility is the eastern war approach. Here, Russian forces would seek to reinforce the breakaway regions in the Donbas with arms, supplies and intelligence. These areas would then be used as a springboard to take more Ukrainian territory to more fully cover those areas where ethnic Russians and Russian speaking Ukrainians are located.
Such a manoeuvre could take Russian troops as far as the Dnieper river, which splits the country into east and west. It could also stretch across the coast of the Black Sea all the way to the Moldova border (where another Russian reinforced breakaway region is located).
Such an operation would be supported by military forces stationed in and around the Russian region of Rostov-on-Don, to the east of Ukraine, forces to the south stationed in Crimea and also probably Russian army motor and rifle battalions stationed in the breakaway Transnistria in Moldova.
Scenario 3: full invasion
The final possibility is the full invasion approach. All of those forces mentioned thus far as well as air units located further north would seek to defeat Ukraine militarily. They would use recent experience in combat operations in Syria to defeat any popular insurgency against Russian forces.
This approach would be devastating for the people of Ukraine. Large-scale death tolls would be expected across the Ukrainian military and police forces as well as among local populations adjacent to battles. There would be major flows of refugees to the west of Ukraine and into the bordering states of Poland, Hungary, Romania and Moldova. Such a refugee crisis could be the largest in Europe since the second world war.
It’s important to note that these approaches are not mutually exclusive. They could even occur sequentially should the Kremlin be unsatisfied with the changes it finds in Ukraine or the west.
Regardless of what Russia does, other countries with unsettled disputes over breakaway territories, such as Moldova with Transnistria and Georgia with South Ossetia and Abkhazia, will be watching events nervously. A victory in Ukraine for Russia might well fuel actions against these countries in the future. And if the west fails to respond robustly, even countries like Estonia and Latvia could face threats in the future.
Russia’s military threat against Ukraine has put the west in a difficult position. It has to decide how to deal with a belligerent Russia and how far it should expand its membership to, say, Ukraine or Georgia and beyond. Nor are these predicaments helped by the fact that the United States is more concerned with China, the South China Sea and the status of Taiwan these days than the fate of eastern Europe.
What’s more, the very future of NATO may be on the line if it cannot have a credible response to Ukraine through diplomacy, military assistance and maybe even military response. Such a loss of credibility would be a major win for Russia, which sees NATO as a threat to its own national security and global strategy to regain power. In other words, the significance of the situation in Ukraine cannot be underestimated.
David Galbreath is Professor of International Security at the University of Bath, in the UK. His current research is on military transformation, the role of science and technology in defence and security,… More by David J. Galbreath
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00MercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexitieshttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngMercatorNet - Navigating Modern Complexities2022-02-21 06:26:142022-02-21 06:28:53Ukraine: what would a Russian invasion actually look like? These are the three most likely scenarios
The State Department has ordered family members of U.S. embassy personnel and nonessential staff to evacuate Ukraine as soon as Monday due to escalating tensions with Russia.
The evacuation announcement comes on the heels of Ukraine’s acceptance of the first installment of up to $75 million in lethal aid pledged by the U.S. to help counter Russia’s military build up along the Ukrainian border, according to the New York Post.
The aid, which is part of a $768 billion defense bill signed in December, provided $300 million to the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative to assist Kiev in acquiring the resources needed to counter Russia’s troop buildup on its eastern border, according to the New York Post.
The announcement also follows President Joe Biden’s comments in a press conference Wednesday that suggested America and NATO’s response to Putin’s actions would “depend on what [Russia] does.”
“It’s one thing if it’s a minor incursion, and then we end up having a fight about what to do and what not do, etc.,” Biden stated. “But if they actually do what they’re capable of doing with the force they’ve massed on the border, it is going to be a disaster for Russia,” he concluded.
Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov Friday in an attempt to deescalate the situation along Ukraine’s border. “We didn’t expect any major breakthroughs to happen today,” Blinken stated, according to CNN. “I believe we are on a clearer path in terms of understanding each other’s concerns, each other’s positions. Let’s see what the next days bring,” he concluded.
Hours later, Blinken expressed his support for Ukraine in a series of tweets, some of which thanked NATO nations for sending defensive support to the beleaguered nation.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the shipment of lethal aid does “nothing to reduce tensions,” according to the AP.
Next week, the State Department is expected to encourage other Americans living in Ukraine to begin leaving the country via commercial flights “while [they] are still available,” reported Fox News.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00The Daily Callerhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngThe Daily Caller2022-01-23 07:21:342022-01-27 05:59:52State Dept. Orders U.S. Embassy Families To Evacuate Ukraine Amid Rising Tensions With Russia
Once again, the Dems embolden – and enable – evil. My latest in FrontPage:
On his new Save America website, former President Trump stated the obvious that the elites wish us to overlook: “When I was in office we were known as the Peace Presidency, because Israel’s adversaries knew that the United States stood strongly with Israel and there would be swift retribution if Israel was attacked. Under Biden, the world is getting more violent and more unstable because Biden’s weakness and lack of support for Israel is leading to new attacks on our allies.”
Weakness and lack of support for Israel, and open support for the Palestinian jihad. The Washington Free Beacon reported last March that “the Biden administration privately confirmed to Congress last week that the Palestinian Authority has continued to use international aid money to reward terrorists but said the finding won’t impact its plans to restart funding.”
And it didn’t. Biden’s handlers gave $235 million to the Palestinians in April. So now you can see your taxpayer dollars at work, funding the bloody Palestinian jihad against Israel, thanks to Biden’s handlers. Meanwhile, in an example of a frequent leftist tactic, the complete inversion of reality, Rep. Rashida Tlaib (D-Ramallah) tweeted: “American taxpayer money is being used to commit human rights violations. Congress must condition the aid we send to Israel, and end it altogether if those conditions are not followed. Statements aren’t working @SecBlinken. Enough is enough.” American taxpayer money is indeed being used to commit human rights violations, but not in the way Tlaib has in mind.
The kind of people that Tlaib and her colleagues in the American left are fronting for are epitomized by Hamas Political Bureau Member and former Minister of the Interior Fathi Hammad. According to the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI), Hammad said on Hamas’ Al-Aqsa TV Friday: “People of Jerusalem, we want you to cut off the heads of the Jews with knives. With your hand, cut their artery from here. A knife costs five shekels. Buy a knife, sharpen it, put it there, and just cut off [their heads]. It costs just five shekels. With those five shekels, you will humiliate the Jewish state.”
Hammad continued with a quotation from the Qur’an: “‘You shall find the strongest in enmity towards the believers to be the Jews and the polytheists.’” That’s Qur’an 5:82. Hammad added: “The Jews have spread corruption and acted with arrogance, and their moment of reckoning has come. The moment of destruction at your hands has arrived.” Palestinian Arab leaders and their allies around the Islamic world routinely frame the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in Islamic terms. Western Middle East “experts” just as routinely ignore or downplay the role of Islam in the conflict. This foredooms all their peace-processing to failure. The Palestinian Delusion explains why in detail.
But Biden’s handlers are not interested in learning the lessons of history or the clear evidence regarding the motivating ideology underlying the conflict that can be found in the texts and teachings of Islam. They are committed instead to adhering to the left’s claims to stand for the oppressed and downtrodden, no matter how much Palestinian jihad propaganda they have to swallow in order to enable themselves to see the Palestinian jihadis as innocent victims of the rapacious Israeli war machine. And ultimately, they’ve gotten Israel and the world into this mess by the overarching determination to undo everything Donald Trump did as president. John Kerry had said with the confidence of someone who is ignorant, arrogant and half-educated that no peace was possible between Israel and the Muslim countries of the region without first making peace between Israel and the Palestinians. Trump proved Kerry wrong, so now Kerry and the rest of the foreign policy establishment have to wipe the egg off their face by undoing Trump’s achievements and reasserting the status quo they created.
Now they have done so, and the Middle East is on the brink of all-out war.
In his message about this imbroglio, Trump enunciated more unwelcome truths as well: “America must always stand with Israel and make clear that the Palestinians must end the violence, terror, and rocket attacks, and make clear that the U.S. will always strongly support Israel’s right to defend itself. Unbelievably, Democrats also continue to stand by crazed anti-American Rep. Ilhan Omar, and others, who savagely attack Israel while they are under terrorist assault.”
Needless to say, if he were still president, none of this would be happening. Strength engenders respect.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2021-05-15 05:36:122021-10-07 20:28:00Biden’s Handlers Get the Israeli/Palestinian Conflict They Wanted
“A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within…” – Cicero
The BBC radio news informed us that a recently released report states that successive governments failed to deal with Russia’s long term infiltration of all areas of Britain’s’ society. Object? To destroy democracy. Sound familiar? I’ve warned you about that for the last thirty-five years. Yes, this chaos we witness in all corners of our society has been primarily caused by the failure of our FBI and Intel. Though Communist China is our immediate military foe in the 21st century, the Marxist, Socialist/Communist ideology spread by Russia in the 20th century laid the blueprint for the chaos, killing, and cultural changes. The infiltration and indoctrination was ignored by the FBI. Both agencies also did nothing to stop the Dems Party’s ideological transformation to Socialist Party and its long-term collaboration with Russia…
Infiltration: The Features of Socialism on American Soil
History is the Mother of all Sciences and Knowledge of the past will open your eyes to the future. I’ve been writing and warning you about Soviet Socialism, describing the Concentration camps and the menace of the Gulag in Russia. China has established a system quadruple the size of the Gulag and those Concentration camps—an unavoidable indication of China’s Socialist/Communist regime in 2020. The spying and theft of secrets and intellectual property is the lifeblood of the criminal regime. You can see another feature of the ideology: the spread of violence on our streets in New York, California, Oregon, Minnesota, Washington D.C. and others. “We are at war, an ongoing asymmetrical war with many different fronts, using a variety of tools, devices, methods, and tricks unknown before. Seemingly unrelated events, in fact, are inextricably connected—all geopolitical events coordinated and directed from the Kremlin.” Read here my column Revelation, April 26, 2018.
It is not a spontaneous movement: the crusade was designed and calculated by Marxist, Socialist/Communist Charlatans in 20th century Russia, where Soviet Socialism was born, practiced, and spread throughout the globe including China. Though the USSR’s Socialist economy is dead, it collapsed in 1991, nothing substantially has changed in Russia and instead of failed Socialism it is now Crony capitalism. Yet, Russia still is being run by Putin’s KGB using the old and fraudulent terminology of Socialism. If you do not know Soviet Socialism, you can’t see its infection around you. I have lived through such a regime a half of my life. I see all the familiar features of the Socialist regime in America today. Judge for yourself…
For the most visual example of the Socialist/Communist infiltration and violence I present – the clans of Antifa, BLM, and the Squad—a militant face of the protest, promoted by the Dems. They are openly calling for the destruction of our political and economic systems—their goal is changing America, they want Communism. They are the armed forces of a so-called Democrat Party and America’s Socialist mafia, creating the chaos, killings, and vandalizing our history: the Squad in the Congress is agitating for the same destruction of the political system, designed and left to us by our Founding Fathers. Please, read Black Lives Matter” and the Camouflage for American Marxism, by Gary Gindler, the FrontPage Magazine, 7, 22, 2020.
At every level of government in the Dems’ states, they are stripping away freedoms and rights from the people. COVID-19 was not a surprise for them, it had brought what the Democrats needed—OPPORTUNITY – power to cement their control over the people as they forced them into a lockdown that has now been months long. It wasn’t an instantaneous transformation of the Dems Party to a Socialist Party, it took decades of Socialist infiltration and spying. A major role in that was played by Bill Clinton and his mafia. When I saw the name Strobe Talbot President of Brooking Institution, my antenna went up I knew that the Russian connection is there, and the famous Trump/Dossier could’ve been concocted under prestigious name of the Institution.
Subversion – Socialist Media-Mob
Commenting on the highly publicized resignation of New York Times editor Bari Weiss, evangelist Franklin Graham is warning Americans not to let the far left sway this year’s election. Her resignation letter, Graham wrote Thursday on Facebook, “confirms what many people already have known – the New York Times is biased to the left, socialist, radical agenda of the Democratic Party.” Franklin Graham warns Americans not to let socialists sway election, By WND Staff Published July 16, 2020. ‘Media powers are putting forth every effort to spin the story.’
I agree with every word written above, and in my writings I was warning you to learn the enemy, because Socialism/Communism is our mortal enemy with one agenda—destruction of American capitalism and implementation of Socialism. I was stunned reading Weiss’ description about publishing in the New York Times, it was a carbon copy of the Soviet newspapers business’ in Pravda. The only difference was the name of the beneficiary party. I lived under one-party system of Communist Party in Russia, writing today in America Weiss was mentioning ‘progressive causes’ of the Democrat Party. She wrote:
“It was very difficult to get anything published that did not ‘explicitly promote progressive causes’ and if something was published, it could happen only ‘after every line is carefully massaged, negotiated and caveated.” She just described the operation within the media in the government of the one-party system, like it was in Soviet Russia.
Conservative writer Andrew Sullivan announces resignation from New York magazine July 15, 2020. Sullivan subsequently expressed support for Weiss on Twitter. “The mob bullied and harassed a young woman for thoughtcrimes,” he wrote. “And her editors stood by and watched. I’d say Bari’s future is a lot more promising than the NYT’s.” He is absolutely right, considering NYT’s systemic anti-Trump publications confirm the ideological Marxist, Socialist/Communist brainwashing of America’s media …
Guard your Freedom: The Enemies Within
At the same time Queen-of-Lies Nancy Pelosi called our law enforcement agents—“Nazis.” What a shameful statement! Her words forces me to remind you the main Stalin’s postulate of the 20th century: “Never admit crime committed, instead accuse the opposition in that exact crime.” As a matter of fact, the ideology of Socialism/Communism is based on lies and deceit, treachery and fraud, intimidation and disinformation. Knowing the Russian methods, agenda, and a proclivity to mold Socialist style charlatan-leaders around the world to engineer the cadres of a fifth column, I was stunned when seeing them on America’s soil. Pelosi’s behavior calling China-Covid-19, the “Trump-virus” has stunned me again, driving my memory to the past. It was a Red Flag.
Do you remember the Christmas Season on 2019? The Christmas Season is a wonderful time in America—with charming music, people are happily busy with preparations for Christmas. I have always enjoyed those several weeks in America: they were time of celebration, delight, pleasure, and happiness. The Christmas Season in 2019 was the opposite of that—Nancy Pelosi brought Impeachment against President Trump to Christmas 2019. It was an awkward and very unusual Christmas time in America. Moreover, she was in a hurry doing that, in real hurry as if she was afraid to be late to something extremely important. The inquiry was so flimsy that even Stenny Hoyer, the Democrat House Majority Leader, cautioned against the impeachment. In December 2019 nobody knew what was coming and why Pelosi was in such urgency. Do you have an idea why Pelosi was in such a hurry?
I believe that the puzzle can be solved if you are familiar with the global network of Socialism, its methods, and general agenda, which is the destruction of capitalism. The Dems’ anti-Trump war had several phases and steps. It started with Obama’s weaponized Intel and FBI to go after the president. Both had known that there was no Trump/Russia collusion, so they invented it, to cover-up the real Dems’ collusion with Russia—a treasonous one. Then the farce of Mueller Investigation, the Christmas Season Impeachment, and so on. Though all that ended in fiasco, the subsequent coronavirus changed the predicament by freezing and crippling people’s lives in our country.
I presented at the beginning of this column the Global Network of Socialism for a reason, its methods, and dirty tricks so you could grasp the monumental implication and significance of the events going on before your eyes. In my opinion Nancy Pelosi was in a hurry to Impeach Trump because she knew that Covid-19 way on its way to America from its home in China. She and America’s Socialist mafia were ready to use it as the next step of the anti-Trump war. Look at Dems officials – they are intentionally caving to the mob. Marxist, Socialist, Charlatans are devouring Democrat-led cities. The events in the Blue states indicate a long-term preparation with the calculation of unified actions against Trump and America’s interests. In fact, the Democrats are engaged in a counter-revolutionary putsch against the American Constitutional Republic and against you!
My fellow Americans!
Before your eyes, it is an ideological confrontation waged by global Socialist forces against American Capitalism, Western civilization, and your way of life. That Socialist-aggressive force will fight until a total destruction of our country. The Republican Party is the only political force pursuing American interests and defending a political system designed by our Founding Fathers. In this warfare, there is no choice for us-“we the people” and Republican Party, but to win this war…
It really is time to get ready. If you are like me, you might be thinking that you don’t want to imagine the worst, that things are tough enough between the Chinese Virus ‘crisis,’ the election, the riots, and the economy, but it could be worse and here Leo Hohmann tells us how bad it could get.
Conclusion: Best to swallow the red pill and be prepared.
The Bolshevik army shows its face in Atlanta suburb of Stone Mountain
We’re witnessing the convulsions of a nation breaking apart at the seams.
Each new convulsion will be deeper, more traumatic and more violent than the previous.
The latest escalation occurred Saturday, July 4th, in Stone Mountain, Georgia.
According to the nonprofit group Georgia Law Enforcement, which posted a description of the event on Facebook, an armed group of “protesters” carrying AR-15 semi-automatic rifles, marched through the streets of Stone Mountain yelling threats at white people.
Let’s cut to the chase. This is the Bolshevik Army showing its face in America. They are signaling that they are for real and they are ready for action. The time for talking is over.
Black Lives Matter is just a smokescreen meant to lure in the do-gooders. You know the type, those who feel all warm and fuzzy when they virtue signal about their lily white hearts, which bleed for the oppressed while accusing America of “systemic racism.” These social-justice warriors are hopelessly lost and lacking in discernment as to where things are heading, and it may be too late to save them from what’s coming.
Short of some miracle that unites the country, neither side is going to accept the outcome of that election. Certainly not the left-leaning side.
That means more violence in November, and it will be worse than what we saw in June, far worse.
Most conservatives make the fatal mistake of underestimating their enemy. We tend to look at the mostly white rich kids knocking over statues and think this is the face of our adversaries. Weak. Pathetic.
But behind this façade is a well-trained coalition of highly trained white and black militants associated with groups like the Weather Underground and the Muslim Brotherhood. Underestimate them at your own risk.
I advise every American who is concerned about these leftwing militias to contact their local sheriff and ask him or her where they stand with regard to mobs of people tearing down monuments, shouting violent or threatening slogans, and now, increasingly, starting to arm themselves.
I’ve only snipped a very tiny bit of the post, you must read it all.
Addendum: To add to your discomfort this morning, see Ann Coulter, here.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Ann Corcoranhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAnn Corcoran2020-07-06 07:57:282020-07-06 07:59:10Black Bolshevik Army shows its Face in Atlanta Suburb of Stone Mountain
The US/Taliban peace talks have been a grim charade. No one in the foreign policy establishment will acknowledge the fact, but the Taliban are strict, Sharia-observant Muslims, and the Sharia guidelines for treaty-making with Infidels are based on Muhammad’s Treaty of Hudaybiyya. Muslims can only enter into such a treaty when they are weak and need time to gather their strength (or, more remotely, if they think the enemy is about to convert to Islam). Then they can break it when it is no longer needed. The Taliban will not honor whatever treaty is made.
However, if it enables Trump to get US troops out of Afghanistan, then it will have at least one good result. Yes, the Taliban will gain when the troops are gone. That would be true no matter when we left. What we need is a better strategy, one that contains jihad activity within Afghanistan and doesn’t allow them to target Americans again. We don’t need American troops there until the end of time.
“U.S., Taliban to Sign Landmark Peace Deal to End War in Afghanistan,” by Adam Kredo, Washington Free Beacon, February 29, 2020:
The Trump administration is poised to sign a landmark peace accord Saturday morning with the Taliban terrorist organization more than 18 years after the United States first entered Afghanistan following the 9/11 terrorist attacks in New York City.
In a move that U.S. officials say could end the nation’s longest war in history, the Trump administration announced it has reached a truce that will massively scale down the American military presence with the expectation of an eventual full withdrawal….
Rumors of the long-percolating deal have been circulating in Washington, D.C., for weeks, prompting a group of Republican members of Congress to petition the Trump administration against going through with the agreement. They and other critics say the Taliban cannot be trusted to implement peace and that the moment U.S. forces vacate the country, terror forces will again rise to power.
The Trump administration had declared peace talks with the Taliban dead in September after abruptly canceling a meeting at Camp David between the United States and the Taliban. However, channels between the two sides remained open, leading to Saturday’s announcement.
The Trump administration is now committed to giving the deal a shot. The United States intends to scale down its troop presence from some 14,000 troops to around 8,600 by the end of the year—a number administration officials insist is enough to do the job of keeping the fragile peace deal alive….
“There’s been broad support for what we’re trying to do,” according to the senior administration official, who briefed reporters on background. “Everybody has the same goals. No one wants to see the return of the Islamic Emirate.”
Officials further acknowledged that there is no military path to victory in Afghanistan.
“The 30,000-foot conclusion by all parties is that a military solution is not possible without endless amounts of resources,” the official said. “Everybody decided the best way forward was a political settlement, rather than a military solution. The Taliban has not been defeated. They represent a portion of Afghan society” that must be included in discussions.
U.S. officials also pushed back against criticism that the signing ceremonies represent a photo opportunity and little more.
“This is not just optics in any way,” the official said. “This is historic. We have worked out a deal with them where they make commitments to us on counterterror that matter to us.”
This includes cracking down on the remnants of al Qaeda in Afghanistan and giving up the near-constant barrage of terror attacks.
“We made commitments to them. If they fulfill their commitments, we’re prepared to proceed with pulling out our troops. We never wanted a permanent” presence in Afghanistan, the official said. “It’s just the beginning. It’s a whole new stage of challenges we’re launching here.”
However, Afghanistan “is not going to become Switzerland overnight,” the official conceded.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2020-03-01 07:09:102020-03-01 07:09:55U.S. to Sign Peace Deal with Taliban and Move Toward Full Withdrawal of American Troops
At the Freedom Center’s Restoration Weekend in Palm Beach, Florida on November 17, 2019, I unveiled the duplicity and deception at the heart of the Israeli-Palestinian “peace process” and explained, among other things, why Anwar Sadat should not be revered as a man of peace.
Thank you very much. I thought by way of transition I would tell all of you that I wouldn’t be here tonight, today, if it were not for Peter Collier. In the ‘90s, well actually going back further, in the early ‘80s, I worked at Revolution Books, which was the bookstore of the Revolutionary Communist party, and I was very hardcore leftist. And along the course of things, I read Destructive Generation, which had an explosive effect on me, as it had on so many people. Then some years later, I was working as an ad writer, a copywriter and ghostwriter, who read the Qur’an for fun, and after 9/11, was asked to write a book by somebody who knew me and I worked with — to write a book explaining what had happened and why. And I said, “Well, I’m nobody. Why would anybody pay attention to what I think about any of this?,” and the guy said, “Just write it, and if it’s quality work and if it explains the material, then I will get somebody to publish it,” and, of course, the person he got to publish it was Peter Collier.
My first book, Islam Unveiled, came out in 2002 from Encounter Books, and I remember talking to him on the phone after he read the manuscripts and being sort of staggered and amazed when he said that he liked it. And you can hear all these people saying that he completely rewrote — he did rewrite about half of it, but still he liked it. I’m still thrilled. In any case, the other part of that story is that the gentleman who asked me to write the book and encouraged me to do so worked for a different publishing house, a rival publishing house to Encounter, and they were going to publish the book, but then the head of the publishing house, who was a leading conservative publisher, he said in a meeting while I was there that he had visited Gaza and the Palestinians were wonderful people, and he didn’t want to offend them by publishing this book — and that’s a lot of the fix that we’re in, and what I address in this new book, The Palestinian Delusion, which you all got in the bags when you registered.
You may remember Jimmy Carter standing there beaming happily with Anwar Sadat of Egypt and Menachem Begin, the Prime Minister of Israel, at Camp David in the late ‘70s, and there was going to be peace. And you may remember Bill Clinton standing there with Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat, and they’re shaking hands and Clinton is beaming, and there’s going to be peace. And you may remember George W. Bush standing there with Mahmoud Abbas and Ariel Sharon and beaming as they shake hands, and there’s going to be peace. And you may remember Obama standing there with Abbas again and Benjamin Netanyahu, same thing. And the one thing we’ve never had is peace. We’ve had 40 years of peace process and no peace. The reason why is revealed in many of the things that took place in the first and most celebrated aspect of that peace process and that, of course, is the Camp David summit and Anwar Sadat’s overtures to Israel after the 1973 war. This is, of course, very important in world history. If you go to Jerusalem, you can go to the Begin Sadat Center that studies ways to bring about peace and so on, and Sadat is a revered figure around the world, but I would expect that many of you will be surprised to know why exactly it was that he reached out to the Israelis and began the peace process. He is a great saint now. He’s a Gandhi figure and so on, but the real story is a little bit different, as is always the case.
Anwar Sadat, of course, was President of Egypt, and in the Yom Kippur war he was one of the Muslim Arab countries that attacked Israel gratuitously and without cause, and they were, of course, making great inroads, because it was Yom Kippur. They were making great inroads at the beginning, and then the Israelis began to regroup and to beat them back, and then the ceasefire was concluded, and so on. And shortly after this, there was a Politburo meeting, a meeting of the high command of the Soviet Union. Now of course at this time, the Israeli/Palestinian conflict was part of the Cold War, with the Israelis on the American side and the Palestinians on the Soviet side, and everything was binary, not like it is now, and you had Gromyko, the foreign minister of the Soviet Union, speaking with Leonid Brezhnev, the Premier of the Soviet Union, about what to do about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, and he actually asked them at this Politburo meeting. I’ve got the minutes in the book. “Leonid, what are going to do about the Israelis and the Palestinians?” And Brezhnev says, “We’re going to participate in negotiations. At the appropriate time, we will restore diplomatic relations with Israel.”
And everybody, the whole Politburo was shocked, and Gromyko says, “But the Arabs will get angry.” Well, the sun will come up, but anyway, the Arabs will get angry, and this is what Brezhnev responded, and this is very important. Brezhnev says, “They can go to hell. We have offered them a sensible way for so many years, but no, they wanted to fight. Fine. We gave them technology, the latest, the kind even Vietnam didn’t have. They had double superiority in tanks and aircraft, triple in artillery and in air defense and anti-tank weapons, they had absolute supremacy. And what? Once again they were beaten. Once again they scrammed. Once again they screamed for us to come and save them. Sadat woke me up in the middle of the night twice over the phone, Save me. He demanded we send Soviet troops immediately. No, we’re not going to fight for them. The people would not understand that and especially we will not start a world war over them. So, that’s that. We will do what I said.”
You notice that he said Sadat pleaded for help after he had given them all the best weaponry, and they still lost. And so what did Sadat do? He was very astute. He realized okay, the Soviets want me to make peace with Israel, but who really has the leverage over Israel to get them to make concessions? Not the Soviets, but the Unite States. So Sadat took Brezhnev’s advice, but he switched sides, and that was when Sadat, you may recall those of you who are as old as I am, you may recall that in the early ‘70s Sadat broke with the Soviets and approached the United States and made an accord with the United States, and it was considered to be a great Cold War breakthrough. But Sadat himself explained, when he was asked why he was doing this, he said, “What other country can force Israel to withdraw?” That’s what it was all about, and that’s what the peace process was all about.
Sadat, very famously, offered to go to Israel, and of course Israel, being besieged and battered and excoriated in world opinion and everything else for so many decades, they were thrilled, and the Israelis greeted Sadat rapturously when he went to Jerusalem, and he addressed the Knesset and was received as a tremendous hero. But if you actually look at what he said, it’s astonishing. What he was saying essentially in his speech in the Knesset was “Let’s negotiate. You give me everything I want, and our negotiations will be concluded.” Because what he said was, “Let me tell you without the slightest hesitation,” this is Sadat in the Knesset, “that I did not come to you under this dome to make a request that your troops evacuate the occupied territories. Complete withdrawal from the Arab territories occupied in 1967 is a logical and undisputed fact. Nobody should plead for that.” And he talked about permanent peace based on justice, and then he said that moves to ensure our coexistence and peace and security in this part of the world would become meaningless “while you occupy Arab territories by force of arms.”
Now, he’s talking about the 1967 borders, which of course is still a very hot issue, and was demanding that Israel withdraw completely from the so-called occupied territories, but the fact is that, of course, it is a staple of the Muslim Arab rhetoric about Israel that Israel actually is entirely occupying land that belongs rightly to the Muslim Arabs, and thus, none of it has any legitimacy. So, when he’s saying that there can be no peace until all the Arab territories that you occupy by force of arms are cleared out, he’s saying Israel has to stop existing, and then we’ll be friends. And yet nobody really paid attention to this. Nobody pondered the implications at the time, and of course, most famously, Jimmy Carter invited Sadat and Begin to Camp David a few years after that, about a year after this, rather, and there was going to be peace. It was going to be great. But the thing was, Carter was entranced by Sadat. Carter did think that Sadat was some extraordinary, magnanimous Gandhi-like world figure for peace, and so he told him essentially that he would give him anything he wanted. He called him a great and good man, and Carter said to Sadat, “I will represent your interests as if they were my own. You are my brother.”
Now, contrast that to Carter’s national security advisor, you remember Zbigniew Brzezinski. Yeah, you remember him. And he said in his memoirs that Carter’s relationship with Begin was “icy” and even mutual praise was formalistic and devoid of any personal feeling. But meanwhile Carter’s telling Sadat, “I hope I’ll never let you down.” And what’s really ironic about his is that Sadat went back to Mohamed Kamel, his foreign minister, and the rest of his entourage, and he’s telling them all this with great hilarity and talking to them about the person he called “poor naïve Carter.” And it was really sort of ludicrous how he took advantage of Carter at Camp David, and what happened essentially is Begin caught on very quickly. He went back to his own group, and he said the Americans have adopted the Egyptian program. That’s that, and that’s essentially what was forced upon the Israelis at the time. I mean it was really an unfair conflict. It was two against one, and so there wasn’t really any chance.
Begin actually brought along Samuel Katz, who’s the author of a great book called Battleground about the case, essentially the case for Israel, and he had Katz talking to Carter to try to explain to him why Israel had a just case that ought to be respected. And Carter just got more and more impatient until he cut him off entirely. He had no interest in listening to this at all. In any case, what happened was that Sadat is walking, and this is an indication of what his true mindset was, Sadat is walking in the woods in Camp David with Kamel, his foreign minister, and some others, and he’s saying this: “We are dealing with the lowest and meanest of enemies, the Jews. The Jews even tormented their prophet Moses and exasperated their God. I pity poor Carter and his dealings with Begin with his stilted mentality.” And so, then Kamel asks him, “Well, do you think that Carter is going to pressure Begin to give us what we want?,” and Sadat says, “Oh yeah, of course he will.” It was in the bag.
Now, what’s really interesting about this story is that moments after this, or as they’re having this conversation, who walks up to them but Ezer Weizman, the Israeli foreign minister who is also walking in the woods, and he says to Sadat, “Can we talk face to face later on today?,” and Sadat suddenly changes. Seconds ago, he’s talking about “the lowest and meanest of enemies, the Jews,” and now he says, “Oh, of course. It’s always a pleasure to talk to you.” He was completely duplicitous. And really, actually it’s been extraordinarily effective. His historical memory is a monument of duplicity. Now, in any case, you know what happened, that the Israelis were made to give up the Sinai, which they had occupied, and make other concessions.
Now, remember that we’re talking about what happened after a defensive war. Why did Israel take the Sinai? Did it have imperialistic design on Egypt? Did it want to colonize the entire Middle East, as a lot of the paranoid Palestinian propaganda says? Obviously not. What you have is the same thing that happened if you look at a map of Germany before World War II and a map of Germany after World War II, and one thing that you’ll notice is that Germany is smaller after World War II. Why is that? Did Poland and the Soviet Union and the rest of them, well, the Soviet Union may have, but Poland was not working from some imperialist project. The entire continent of Europe had been victimized by the Germans, and it was considered to be entirely just that they lose some territory, and that the surrounding nations gain some territory as a matter of protecting their own security. And this is a law of human history, really, that you find multiple examples of throughout history that the victorious nation can expand its territory at the expense of the defeated nation so as to protect itself more effectively from future attacks of the same kind. Only when it comes to Israel was this not allowed.
But Sadat and Carter compelled Begin to give up the Sinai, which had been taken for security purposes, and to make various concessions. One of the extraordinary concessions that Begin made or was forced to make was the recognition of an entity called the Palestinian people. And I’m sure that you all know that there is no such thing as the Palestinian people. The Arabs of the region — in the first place the name. “Palestine” was a name given by the Romans to the land of Judea after the Bar Kokhba revolt in 134 of the Common Era. In the year 134, there was a Jewish leader, Bar Kokhba, who led a revolt against the Romans, and they lost. And so the Romans had had enough. This was not the first revolt, and they expelled the Jews from the area, and they renamed Jerusalem “Aelia Capitolina,” and they renamed Judea “Palestine.” Where did they get the name Palestine? They went into the Bible, and they saw that the Jews’ enemies were the Philistines, and they named the region accordingly. But at that point, it was just a region’s name. It was like Brooklyn. To say that there’s a Palestinian people that is distinct from the other Arabs of the region is as silly as saying that Brooklynites are ethnically or culturally different and are a separate nation unto themselves. Well, maybe they are.
And when it comes to Palestine, there were always Jews living there, because the Romans had expelled the Jews from the area, but the expulsion decree was not universally enforced, and there was a Jewish presence in Palestine from that moment, 134, up to the present day, uninterrupted. Meanwhile, after the seventh century conquest of the area by the Muslim Arabs, then Arabs moved into the area, and were there intermittently. They were conquered by the Turks, and so on. The people who lived there were Arabs. The Arabs were not differently linguistically, culturally or religiously from Arabs anywhere else in that area. There was no distinct Palestinian people. There never was. And as far as the legal right to the land was concerned, you have various conquests, and the right of conquest is something else that’s always been recognized in human history. So, we can say the land belonged to the Arab Muslim caliphates and that it belonged to the Turkish caliphate, the Ottoman Empire, and then what happened? The Ottoman Empire fell at the end of World War I, and the Turks ceded their right to that area to the League of Nations, the precursor to the United Nations. And the League of Nations gave Brittan what is known as the Mandate for Palestine, which was intended to allow for the creation of a Jewish homeland in Palestine. That was what it was explicitly for.
So there is nobody else who has any legal claim to that land other than the Jews, other than the State of Israel. And even more than this, you have an unbroken historical record of Jewish presence there. You have the fact that nobody else has any claim to that territory. I’m speaking about the fact that people say nowadays that Israel exists on stolen land. Who was it stolen from? If I pick up a wallet on the street, it belongs to somebody, but nobody owns this wallet. It’s the land that was set aside for the Jewish Mandate for Palestine, and remember, that includes what is known as the West Bank for Judea and Samaria and Gaza, and as a matter of fact it includes Jordan as well, although Jordan was detached from the land dedicated to the Mandate for Palestine by the British early on.
You know the phrase “Perfidious Albion? “Perfidious Albion” is a phrase used for Britain, and I’m sorry if Katie’s here, sorry. But anyway, but there’s no doubt that Albion was perfidious in this case, because, of course, you have the Zionist project beginning in the nineteenth century. In the background of everything that I’m saying, you have the Zionists beginning to say, “This is our land, this is our historic homeland, we need to return to this place so that we have our own nation and are not subject to persecution by everybody else.” And so, Jews from Europe, Jews from all over begin to move into the land of Palestine, and the British are supposed to be behind this. The British are supposed to be saying, “This is what is supposed to happen,” but after it started to happen, the Arabs started to complain, and the Arabs started to complain very simply because of a Qur’an verse. If you open your Qur’an to chapter 2, verse 191, you’ll see it. “Drive them out from where they drove you out.” Now, it is a historical myth in several stages that the Israelis drove anybody out. There was nobody driven out. It was the Jews who were driven out by the Romans in the first place, most of them, although many stayed, as I said.
But anyway, once the Arabs started complaining on this very basic principle, you see, “Drive them out from where they drove you out,” if you think about that for a minute, it means no Jews should be here. This is land that belongs to Muslims because Muslims once ruled it, and if Muslims once ruled it, they have the responsibility before Allah to drive out those who rule it now. So they had to drive out the Jews from the area, and the British, there was a British colonel, Colonel Bertie Harry Waters-Taylor, and he spoke to them. He went to the Mufti of Jerusalem, Haj Amin al-Husseini, some of you may have heard of him — and I’m sorry, Douglas Murray couldn’t make it, so I had to do it. Colonel Bertie Harry Waters-Taylor went to Haj Amin al-Husseini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, and the Mufti of Jerusalem is somebody you may be familiar with because he lived in Berlin during World War II, was friends with Himmler and Eichmann and encouraged the final solution, the genocide of the Jews. But this is in 1920. This is before all that, and Colonel Bertie Harry Waters-Taylor told him we’ve got a bit of a sticky wicket here because we encouraged the settlement, but now you are complaining, and we want to make you happy. So, what we need to do is if you commit a few terror attacks, then the British government will see that the Zionist project is not viable and will withdraw.
Yes, the British government encouraged the Arab Muslims of Palestine to commit terror attacks against the Jews, and told them they would be rewarded for doing so. Now, you see, if you think about that, if that is the beginning of all this, then you see why in a microcosm, world opinion is so crazy nowadays, because this is something that the seeds of were planted years ago, that intimidation will work. They were told that if they were bullying and if they were violent, then they would be rewarded, and they have been. Sadat’s overture for peace was just another way to go about the principle, attaining the principle to “drive them out from where they drove you out.” And they have worked on the basis of intimidation ever since. Ever since until one thing happened: Donald Trump was elected president.
Now, you’ll notice intimidation has been the basis of American foreign policy regarding Israel and the Palestinians really ever since the State of Israel was founded. After the State of Israel was founded, with very few exceptions, we have bowed to Arab Muslim intimidation and allowed them to dictate exactly what we would do regarding Israel. Sadat and Carter is one example of that, and pretty much every other peace process initiative, as you’ll see in the book, are more examples of it. And one of the most egregious examples of it came when the U.S. Congress in the ‘90s recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, but added a caveat that Jerusalem would not be recognized as Israel’s capital if the president thought it an expedient, for whatever reason, to postpone that recognition. And Bill Clinton postponed it. George W. Bush postponed it. Obama postponed it. On what grounds? Because the Palestinians would riot, because of intimidation. They had been taught from the beginning, they had been told by the British, if you’re violent, if you commit acts of terror, you’ll be rewarded. Trump changed all that. Trump said, “I’m moving the capital. I’m not going to bow to your bullying and intimidation.”
And so finally we have a chance to achieve some sanity in this conflict, but for the rest of the story, for a record of insanity, you have the book all in your bags, and thank you very much for being here this morning.
EDITORS NOTE: This Jihad Watch video is republished with permission. All rights reserved.
http://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.png00Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2019-12-31 06:03:402019-12-31 06:04:43VIDEO: Clearing Away the Delusions about the Israeli/Palestinian Conflict
Just before Christmas, it appeared the United States was on the verge of quickly withdrawing remaining U.S. troops from Syria, a move which would have thrown the safety, security, and religious freedom of the area into doubt. Now, thankfully, the quick withdrawal isn’t so sure.
When President Trump announced this decision, FRC expressed concern — as did a number of the president’s supporters — about the religious freedom implications of this move. If the United States moves out, ISIS, Turkey, Iran, and other Islamist groups move in. As our own General Jerry Boykin pointed out to CBN News, among the vulnerable are Christian communities, including those made up of former Muslims, who would undoubtedly receive the brunt of ISIS’s rage if the group is allowed to fester and again conquer freed areas of Syria. Syrian Christians also appealed directly to fellow believers in the United States, asking not to be abandoned now, after our support enabled them to fight for some semblance of freedom.
As General Boykin told Fox News over the Christmas break, while he “wants the president to succeed,” he believes it would be a mistake to pull U.S. troops out of Syria this quickly. Aside from the shame of again abandoning our allies the Kurds, any genocide that occurs due to our withdrawal would destroy President Trump’s legacy on ISIS and the Middle East. It makes sense that the president would want to fulfill this campaign promise, but the United States needs to make sure ISIS is fully defeated.
It appears the president is listening. Following his initial statement about a “quick” withdrawal, Trump more recently announced that the withdrawal would take four months. After a recent lunch with the president, Senator Lindsey Graham (who shares our concerns about the move), said Trump “told me some things I didn’t know that make me feel a lot better about where we’re headed in Syria.” President Trump “promised to destroy ISIS. He’s going to keep that promise,” Graham said. “We’re not there yet. But as I said today, we’re inside the 10-yard line and the president understands the need to finish the job.”
One of the vulnerable areas is known as the Federation of Northern Syria, which is a modern religious freedom miracle — permitting those of all religions (including former Muslims) to live out their faith (something quite rare in the Middle East). Those cultivating this miracle want to build religious freedom for everyone over the long-term — the type of allies the United States needs as we seek to promote religious freedom around the world. Failure to support the work of such allies will inevitably result in destabilization, only causing more people to flee and seek refuge elsewhere.
Aside from the actual problems associated with a quick pull-out, the optics of this potential move are very bad. It appears President Trump spoke with Turkey’s President Recep Erdogan who had threatened to invade Northeastern Syria, and now the United States is planning to pull out. Even if the two leaders have some kind of agreement to protect the Kurds, this looks bad, because Erdogan cannot be trusted. Compounding all this is the fact that our withdrawal could lead to Iran’s increased presence, which will further threaten Israel. Yet now, with the Saudis ready to spend big money to re-build some of Syria, President Trump has a perfect opportunity.
It remains to be seen how this will all play out. With his announcement that our troops will now be withdrawn more slowly, it appears the president recognizes some of the concerns we and others have pointed out, and we are optimistic he will continue to take them into account. In supporting religious freedom models like the Federation of Northern Syria, and helping build them elsewhere in the region, President Trump has an opportunity for a truly historic legacy in the Middle East.
Tony Perkins’ Washington Update is written with the aid of FRC senior writers.
EDITORS NOTE: This column with images by FRC is republished with permission.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/010219_syria_770x400-e1546594322786.jpg366640Family Research Councilhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngFamily Research Council2019-01-04 04:33:242019-01-06 07:51:30VIDEO: Hope Restored for Syria’s Christians?
University of California’s Hatem Bazian, co-founder of the anti-Israel Students for Justice in Palestine, has been calling for intifada in the United States.
It was a matter of time before jihad-minded Muslim leaders in the U.S. started calling for “intifada” (violent uprising) on American soil. It is the result of too much kowtowing by non-Muslim authorities to Islamic supremacists. This brazenness is bound to get much worse, given that there is far too much acceptance today of Palestinian propaganda against Israel, and Palestinian victimology narratives. Even at violence-inciting al-Quds Day rallies, chants of “Death to Israel” and “Death to America” ring out, with no fear of legal consequences.
More on this story. “US Professor: ‘How come we don’t have intifada in this country?’”, by Mordechai Sones, Arutz Sheva, July 27, 2017:
University of California’s Hatem Bazian, co-founder of the anti-Israel Students for Justice in Palestine, has been calling for intifada in the United States, as documented in a video by Canary Mission.
In it, Prof. Bazian is seen in various venues calling for intifada in the United States.
Bazian is not the only US Muslim in a leadership position who has been calling for violent uprising. Last week, Arutz Sheva reported on MEMRI’s video of Egyptian-born American Imam Ammar Shahin delivering a Friday sermon at the Islamic Center of Davis, northern California, where he called for the slaughter of all Jews…..
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Hatem-Bazian.png370640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2017-07-31 11:15:202017-08-03 08:26:53Muslim professor at University of California calls for ‘intifada’ in America
Islamic State (ISIS/ISIL) is using attack drones to drop grenades while fighting to keep hold of the Iraqi city of Mosul. Captured by ISIS in 2014, Iraq’s second largest city is in the process of being recaptured from the terrorist group by the Iraqi army.
One strike in eastern Mosul, which has been liberated by Iraqi national forces, wounded eight people.
Previously, ISIS was known to use drones for surveillance purposes. Now the drones have been upgraded to be used as attack weapons. “This is the first time I’ve heard of ISIL dropping weapons from a drone,” Iraqi special forces medic Colonel Khalil Jawad told The Telegraph.
ISIS is thought to be using easily-purchasable hobbyist drones such as quadracoptors along with slightly larger fixed-wing aircraft.
As this technology advances, ISIS and other terrorist groups will come up with new ways to apply the technology to terrorism.
Until the underlying ideology fuelling jihadist terrorism is addressed, coping with each developing security threat as new technologies and methods of slaughter emerge will simply be a game of wack-a-mole.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Quadracopter-creative-commons-simon-jardine-640-320.gif320640Clarion Projecthttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngClarion Project2017-01-29 06:21:372017-01-29 06:21:37ISIS Using Drones To Kill Civilians and Soldiers in Mosul
Listen to this compelling, yet disturbing Lisa Benson Show with guests Shoshana Bryen of The Jewish Policy Center and best selling author and investigative journalist Ken Timmerman.
The round table discussion reveals the duplicity of Turkey, with Russia and U.S. complicity in Syria throwing the Kurds under the bus gutting the war against the Islamic State (ISIS).
The discussion revealed how the Obama Administration is:
abandoning the Persian Gulf to Iran,
destabilizing the world’s energy supply,
getting ready to withdraw U.S. Naval assets from the region
and avoiding Congressional appropriation authorities by paying Tehran with $1.3 billion from a State Department “slush fund” possibly via the Swiss Central Bank.
Listen to the broadcast and share it widely as this is not being covered by mainstream media in the run up to the Presidential campaign foreign policy debate.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/putin-obama-world.jpg360634Jerry Gordonhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJerry Gordon2016-08-29 06:21:532016-08-29 06:38:04PODCAST: U.S. – Russia – Syria – Iran – Turkey – Israel a ‘Tectonic Policy Shift’
A country whose leaders constantly make its citizens scream “Death to America” and “Death to Israel.” What could possibly go wrong? Nothing, of course: Barack Obama and John Kerry promised us that their nuke deal would secure peace in our time.
Iran is offering to help the global community construct nuclear power plants, according to a top official, who said that Iran would be home to seven new nuclear plants by 2020, according to recent remarks.
Behrouz Kamalvandi, the spokesman for Iran’s Atomic Energy Organization, announced on Friday that Iran has the technology and know-how to help the world’s advanced nations construct nuclear power plants.
Iran is currently holding talks with a variety of nations aimed at cementing new deals to construct new nuclear plants, Kamalvandi was quoted as saying in the country’s state-controlled press.
“Besides Bushehr nuclear power plant and two other plants being constructed in Iran, four others will be built by 2020,” Kamalvandi announced.
Iran has been working with Russia to construct several new nuclear plants in the country.
“The Islamic Republic is pursuing a plan “to build at least one nuclear power plant every 15 years,” Kamalvandi said in separate remarks this month.
“After this stage, we will have a better opportunity in different fields, including increasing the number of power plants, and we are in talks with different countries to attain this goal,” he was quoted as saying….
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/epalive369615-e1430739274134.jpg372640Jihad Watchhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJihad Watch2016-04-30 13:05:532016-04-30 13:05:53Iran to build seven new nuclear plants by 2020
George Santayana’s careworn expression may be invoked yet again over the meme adopted in Trump’s first Foreign Policy speech delivered at the Center for National Interest (CNI) in Washington, DC on Wednesday April 27, 2016. America First. Santayana said: “Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
Trump in his CNI speech issued his emphatic clarion call to the remaining primary voters across America:
It’s time to shake the rust off America’s foreign policy. It’s time to invite new voices and new visions into the fold, something we have to do. The direction I will outline today will also return us to a timeless principle. My foreign policy will always put the interests of the American people and American security above all else. It has to be first. Has to be.That will be the foundation of every single decision that I will make. America First will be the major and overriding theme of my administration.
He did have this welcomed comment on Israel:
Israel, our great friend and the one true democracy in the Middle East has been snubbed and criticized by an administration that lacks moral clarity. Just a few days ago, Vice President Biden again criticized Israel, a force for justice and peace, for acting as an impatient peace area in the region.
That gave rise to criticism by the ADL’s Greenblatt cited in a Ha’aretz article:
The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) urged Trump to reconsider the phrase Thursday citing its “anti-Semitic use in the months before Pearl Harbor by a group of prominent Americans seeking to keep the nation out of World War II.”
According to a statement released by the Jewish watchdog, the most prominent leader of the “America First Committee” was Charles Lindbergh, who “sympathized with the Nazis and whose rhetoric was characterized by anti-Semitism and offensive stereotypes, including assertions that Jews posed a threat to the U.S. because of their influence in motion pictures, radio, the press, and the government.”
Nonetheless, ADL chief Jonathan A. Greenblatt said “the undercurrents of anti-Semitism and bigotry that characterized the America First movement … are fortunately not a major concern today.”
“However, for many Americans, the term ‘America First’ will always be associated with and tainted by this history,” he said, adding that “in a political season that already has prompted a national conversation about civility and tolerance, choosing a call to action historically associated with incivility and intolerance seems ill-advised.”
For those of us old enough to have some knowledge of the isolationist anti-Semitic American First movement championed by Hitler admirer, Charles Lindbergh, who was given a personal award by Der Fuhrer for his aviation exploits, Trump’s use of it was jarring.
When I read the transcript of his speech, I asked a source in the Trump campaign about Dr. Walid Phares, one of Trump’s foreign policy advisers, who I knew personally from a decade of interaction including co-hosting radio shows on common subjects dealing with the Middle East, Israel and Jihad. I asked whether he had written Trump’s America First speech. The answer was,” no.” instead I was directed to Phares’ Fox News opinion article that purports to lay out Trump’s foreign policy vision. There was no America First meme presented in his discussion. Lots of suggestions on changes in the traditional Americans alliances, prevention of Iran getting the nuclear weapon, that it may already possess, getting our allies in the NATO alliance to ante up the required annual defense budget allotments, dealing with ISIS and its global affiliates and the Muslim Brotherhood both here and abroad. Phares’ ringing conclusion:
A new popular majority is sweeping the country during these primary elections and another greater national current will legitimize these new principles with the election of Donald Trump as president in November. These new foreign policy directions will have a deeply informed public backing them, so that President Trump can muster the energies of the American people to create a sustainable defense, encompassing clear objectives coupled with a strong international presence.
Now more than ever, confident American leadership is vital for a world in disarray.
The meme of new policy directions figured prominently in a PBS News Hour discussion on the merits of Trump’s Foreign Policy speech with Phares and former State Department official, now Hoover Institute scholar, Nicholas Burns. Burns found what he deemed lots of contradictions in Trump’s CNI speech. Phares demurred saying it was really about replacing old worn out failed policies with new ones.
Watch the PBS News Hour interview with Phares and Burns.
Phares was interviewed by Steve Inskeep of NPR’s Morning Edition. I have to issue a disclaimer on my part. I had found NPR’s news biased against Israel back in 2003. I participated in coordinating a national one day protest against NPR local affiliates in more than 40 locations, including the one I led in Connecticut. That led to a series of abrupt exchanges with the VP for News at the DC headquarters for several weeks following that protest. Notwithstanding, my attention was drawn to the transcript of NPR interview with Phares. Inskeep of NPR pressed Phares on what Trump’s speech was all about with alleged contradictions upending the old policies in favor of new directions. Phares pushed back on that until the inevitable occurred. Inskeep asked him about the American First meme as it brought memories of the pre-WWII American Firster isolationists led by Lindbergh. Here is the transcript exchange:
INSKEEP: Dr. Phares, one other thing. And we’ve just got about 30 seconds here. He uses this phrase, America First. It’s got a particular historical resonance. He’s borrowing a phrase that was used by people who opposed U.S. Involvement against Germany in World War II – 1939, 1940, 1941. Very, very briefly, is there a message here?
PHARES: If you are criticizing Mr. Trump, you will find all the bad connections. He is very optimistic, and he is very positive none of these sentences that he pronounces go back to dark ages or go back to negative aspects at all.
I returned to the Campaign source and asked about that history. The response:
“America First” is a simple phrase that Mr. Trump uses to describe his approach to all aspects of American relations with the world, including trade, immigration and national defense. Under President Trump, the interests of the American people will be paramount. Putting it in the old category of the isolationists of the past who fought against American involvement in WWII is a mistake.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/Trump_10-e1461955312938.jpg428640Jerry Gordonhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngJerry Gordon2016-04-29 14:42:062016-04-29 14:44:54Trump Campaign Dismisses America First Controversy
We live in incredible times! The invasion of Europe is happening before our eyes and the invaders are being welcomed!
In the wake of the latest Islamic terrorist attack, this time in Belgium, a writer who says he is weary (he should be he has been writing and warning about the escalating Islamic violence in Europe for at least ten years, maybe longer, but that’s when I began reading Fjordman’s work) penned an essay posted at Gates of Vienna last week.
This is the section that jumped out at me:
After the many Islamic terror attacks in Europe in 2015 and 2016, several Western political leaders have stated that we are at “war.” Yes, we are. But at war with whom? Are we supposed to wage war against an enemy we don’t even dare to name?
The cause of this situation is very simple: Mass immigration in general and Muslim immigration in particular. Western Europe did not have these problems 50 years ago. The eastern half of Europe that has not been widely subjected to Muslim immigration does not face the same problems today. All those who have promoted or accepted Muslim immigration are responsible for creating entire urban districts full of people who are plotting to murder us. And yet, they still continue.
What is that? The lie that America’s Muslims are better assimilated and we won’t have these problems.
Maybe we don’t have it as bad as Europe yet, but we will when American cities have the large Muslim populations cities like Brussels have. It is only a matter of numbers!
I’m too lazy to do all the searching around for those population percentage numbers, but here is a 2014 article at Gatestonereporting on the high Muslim populations of cities in Belgium and The Netherlands (Fjordman thinks Holland is next).
The number of Muslims in Brussels—where roughly half of the number of Muslims in Belgium currently live—has reached 300,000, which means that the self-styled “Capital of Europe” is now one of the most Islamic cities in Europe.
In 2013, Muslims made up approximately 26% of the population of metropolitan Brussels, followed by Rotterdam (25%), Amsterdam (24%), Antwerp (17%), The Hague (14%) and Utrecht (13%), according to a panoply of research.
We hear the refrain constantly—the U.S. is bad because we support Israel, we kill women and children in the Middle East and so many of us are ‘Islamophobic’ (LOL! Some of us like Donald Trump), but what did the people of Belgium do to justify being brutally murdered in the name of Islam? Nothing as far as I can tell. They have “welcomed” the Muslim migration with open arms, accommodated them, and still get kicked in the teeth!
The comforting lie….
Have you noticed this? A whole host of talking heads, elected officials, ‘humanitarians’ and so forth are running around saying that in America it’s different, our Muslims don’t live in impoverished situations and they have upward mobility, yada yada yada. First of all, that theory assumes that there is no Islamic component to their lives, but it isn’t true and it won’t be true if we continue to import over 100,000 (more?) a year to America.
We already see the beginning of the ‘disenfranchised’ Muslims in Minneapolis where there exists a large Somali Muslim population where 63% of Minnesota’s Somalislive below the poverty level. So, if you want to blame violent Islamic terrorism on poverty, we have that too!
It is very simple, once the Muslim population reaches a certain level (exactly what that point is will vary), the Islamists among them become emboldened and ‘moderates’ fear them and protect them because they all know that this is about theHijra, the migration, the creation of Islamic caliphates around the world.
The smart ones are being patient, working their way in our political system, while it’s the young hot heads, the ones who can’t wait for the generations-long change the migration take-over requires who jump the gun and want to kill us (and do kill some of us!).
Maybe in some strange way, we should welcome some Islamic terror attacks which help to alert us, wake us up! so hopefully we can stop the great demographic takeover before it is too late.
The only way to save America from the same fate as Europe, is to enact a moratorium on Muslim immigration—NOW!
For our complete archive on the ‘invasion of Europe’ going back years, click here.
https://drrichswier.com/wp-content/uploads/World-War-3-feature.jpg368640Ann Corcoranhttp://drrich.wpengine.com/wp-content/uploads/logo_264x69.pngAnn Corcoran2016-04-04 12:45:472016-04-05 05:56:17Europe: ‘We are at war’ — Mass Muslim migration is the cause