The Khanning of America - Dr. Mark Christian

by Dr. Mark Christian

Have you read your Qur'an, Mr. Khan? I am an ex-Imam. Allow me to give you a copy.

Once again, the American public is being duped. This time it's by Hillary Clinton, the Democratic National Party, and Pakistani-American immigration lawyer Khizr Khan. They say that birds of a feather flock together. It couldn’t be more true than when we are speaking about this group of pathological liars.

Khan, as we all know, because of the “heart-wrenching” tales spun by the liberal media following his DNC appearance, is the Gold Star parent of a hero, his deceased son, Captain Humayun Khan, who was killed by a suicide bomber in Iraq in 2004 while serving in the U.S. Army. As a speaker at the Democratic National Convention, Khan was presented to the public as a grieving parent who loves America, the Constitution, and the American way. He even went so far as to wave around his pocket version of the Constitution and challenge Donald Trump: “Have you read the Constitution? I will lend you my copy.”

America – you’ve been conned once again.

Khan wasn’t at the DNC with the purpose of honoring his fallen son. His appearance was political theater intended to lure Donald Trump into a scheme, baiting him with the Muslim immigration theme. He asked if Trump had read the Constitution, questioning the constitutionality of a temporary ban on Muslim immigration as Trump has proposed in the past.

When Trump hit back, asking why Khan’s wife, Ghazala, did not speak at the DNC and suggesting that it could have to do with Sharia, Khan denied that Sharia was a part of Islam (now, please understand, "sharia" simply means “law” in Arabic).  It’s interesting then that Khan has authored paper after paper related to Islamic law. Who does he think he’s kidding? I would like to ask him, have you read your Qur'an, Mr. Khan? I have. I am an ex-Imam. Allow me to give you a copy!

The very reason Khan’s son was killed is because of the Qur'an itself and the Sharia law contained within. The Iraqi who drove the vehicle with the suicide bomb that took his son’s life did so for one reason – he was hoping to claim martyrdom by waging jihad. How do I know? Because I know what the Qur'an says. But Khan is getting lots of airtime for spreading his lies and misinformation, while Patricia Smith, the mother of one of the Americans massacred in Benghazi, has been virtually ignored since her Republican National Convention appearance. Ms. Smith was actually standing up for the honor of her son by calling out Hillary Clinton for failing to protect and save the men who were abandoned by her State Department. Khan’s appearance, on the other hand, was nothing more than the ever-present political grandstanding typical of Hillary Clinton and her ilk.

Are we supposed to take these theatrics seriously? Khan is a Sharia-observant Muslim who worked for a law firm, Hogan and Hartson, now Hogan and Lovells LLP, and operates a website specializing in Muslim immigration, which has been taken down since questions have arisen about Khan’s background. The fact is that Khan has deep ties to an immigration program, EB5, which essentially allows wealthy foreigners to buy their way into America. The EB5 immigration program according to Sen. Chuck Grassley, chairman of the U.S. Senate’s Judiciary Committee, is “riddled with flaws and corruption.”

Let’s explore a few more facts:

Khizr Khan, during his time in Saudi Arabia, advocated personally for Sharia. The law firm for which Khan worked for more than a decade has deep legal and political connections to the Clintons and Saudi Arabia. The Saudis have retained that same law firm for years and donated between $10 and $25 million to the Clinton Foundation. Trump has repeatedly called for Hillary to return that Saudi cash but her response has always been “no can do.” The law firm also does Clinton’s taxes. Sounds like this group is very cozy indeed.

As for Khan’s assertion that Trump’s plan is unlawful, he got that wrong too. The Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 grants the president the authority to bar any class of aliens deemed a threat to the national security. Unfortunately, that doesn’t square with Khan’s efforts as a Muslim immigration advocate. If he wants to lend a copy of the Constitution to anyone, it should be Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, who want nothing more than to gut the document.

So let’s dispense with this ridiculous idea that Khan is a Gold Star dad standing up for the U.S. military and the American way of life. It is nothing short of tyranny that Hillary Clinton and the Left are using the sacrifices of our military to lie and scheme and dupe the American public. Their tactics are reprehensible, exploiting those men and women who served honorably and using their stories for political gain. They apparently have learned propaganda tactics from the masters – the former Soviet Union, North Korea and China.

A total of 4,491 U.S. service members were killed in Iraq between 2003 and 2014, 14 of those being Muslim, meaning that Muslims comprise only about 3/10^th of 1% of all Iraq War KIA. Humayun Khan was the one that was most politically useful to Hillary Clinton, out of 4,491 dead. The evening news continues to lambaste Trump for his statements about the Khans, though his charges were true. Meanwhile, Khan and CAIR and other Muslim Brotherhood front groups continue their unfettered false dialogue about the nature of Islam and its Muslim adherents.

CAIR and American Muslim activists, like Khizr Khan, can wave the U.S. Constitution in the air all they want. The fact remains, however, that that document is the very one they seek to dismantle, one principle at a time. The times we live in are unprecedented. President Obama and his gang of Democrats have spent eight long years walking all over the Judeo-Christian guidelines for governance outlined in our Constitution.

Hillary Clinton, in bed with the Saudis, the Muslim Brotherhood, and other dangerous Islamic organizations, will continue that legacy of destruction by using any “gold star” lie she can construct.

We’ve once again been conned by the Clinton machine, or in this case, it would seem that we’ve been Khanned.

Dr. Mark Christian is the President and Executive Director of the Global Faith Institute. A former Islamic Imam who converted from Islam to Christianity, he has dedicated his life and work to the proposition that “the first victims of Islam are the Muslim themselves.”

Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/263742/khanning-america-dr-mark-christian

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the aut

Dems Want To Investigate Trump, But Clinton Has the Real Unseemly Russia Connections - Ari Lieberman

by Ari Lieberman

New report highlights Clinton’s “pay for play” role in the transfer of sensitive American technology to the Russian military.

“Russia, if you're listening I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing.” That comment, made in jest last week by GOP candidate Donald Trump has raised the ire of some congressional Democrats who are seeking to have Trump investigated for possible violations of federal cyber and espionage laws.

Sens. Chris Coons of Delaware (D-DE) and Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI) have asked former Trump rival Ted Cruz (R-TX), to investigate Trump's comment to determine if laws were broken. Cruz chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee oversight subpanel, the body tasked with investigating such claims.

Trump’s comment came against the backdrop of Hillary Clinton’s gross mishandling of classified data while secretary of state through the use of an unsecured, home-brewed bathroom server. Despite her efforts to delete the emails, some of which constituted government property, the FBI was able to retrieve all but 30,000 of them. 

Given the reckless manner in which she mishandled classified data, it is very possible, indeed probable, that the irretrievable emails are currently in possession of an unknown third party. If, as Clinton alleges, the emails were all of a personal nature, the United States should not be overly concerned.  However, thanks to the investigative efforts of the FBI, we are now cognizant of the fact that many of the emails sent and received were of a classified nature and some were so top secret, FBI agents needed special clearance to view them.

Neither Coons nor Whitehouse seem bothered by Clinton’s careless disregard for government property and gross mishandling of classified information – information that placed lives at risk. But an off-the-cuff humorous comment, clearly made in jest, has them convulsing.

The Coons/Whitehouse spectacle demonstrates with utmost clarity the extreme partisanship of some congressional Democrats and assorted Clinton lackeys. It also demonstrates that among this sad group, hypocrisy knows no bounds.

During her tenure as secretary of state, Clinton approved a deal that placed 20 percent of America’s uranium production capacity in the hands of Russia. Clinton’s approval was necessary given the strategic nature of the acquisition. It was later revealed that entities with vested interests in seeing the deal go through donated $2.35 million to the Clinton Foundation. Moreover, before the deal was finalized, Bill Clinton was invited to come to Moscow to give an address for which he was handsomely remunerated with a cool $500,000. 

The stealth contributions made by these Russia-connected entities to the Clinton Foundation were never publicly disclosed despite an agreement that Clinton struck with Obama to publicly identify all donors. The foul deal, involving transference of strategic assets to a hostile entity and stealth donations from entities tied to Russian interests bear all the hallmarks of “pay for play.” In fact, they reek from it.

But it gets worse, much worse. Not only did Clinton hand over America’s strategic assets to Russia, she significantly enhanced Russia’s cyber and military capabilities as well and did so in what appears to be another convoluted “pay for play” scheme involving monies flowing from Russia to the Clinton Foundation. This according to a new report by investigative journalist Peter Schweizer and the Government Accountability Institute he heads.

While serving as secretary of state, Clinton oversaw a program meant to “reset” relations with Moscow and improve ties. The program centered around the Russian city of Skolkovo near Moscow with the stated aim of “identifying areas of cooperation and pursuing joint projects and actions that strengthen strategic stability, international security, economic well-being, and the development of ties between the American and Russian people.”

The program transformed Skolkovo into a technology hub, a Silicon Valley of sorts. Sensitive American technology was transferred to the Russians, substantially enhancing their military and cyber capabilities. The US Army and the FBI concluded that Russia had exploited the program for military applications.

Of course, anyone with a scintilla of foresight could have anticipated such an unfortunate and dangerous outcome. In Putin’s Russia, everything has military or security dimensions. Indeed, in 2014, the FBI warned American technology companies doing business in Skolkovo that the Skolkovo project “may be a means for the Russian government to access our nation's sensitive or classified research development facilities and dual-use technologies with military and commercial application.”

Russia’s access to sensitive American technologies represents but half the problem. There is a far more sinister side to this story.  Schweizer notes that Russian and American companies and individuals involved in the Skolkovo fiasco “had major financial ties to the Clintons.” He further notes that during the Russian reset period, those entities provided the Clintons with “tens of millions of dollars” in the form of “contributions to the Clinton Foundation, paid for speeches by Bill Clinton, or investments in small start-up companies with deep Clinton ties.”

While partisan Democrats like Coons, Whitehouse and their allies in the mainstream media focus on Trump’s minor gaffes, Clinton continues to emerge relatively unscathed by scandal after scandal involving egregious national security breaches and corruption. Ignominy of this magnitude would have derailed any other candidacy but Clinton chugs happily along, safe in the knowledge that the dishonest media will do everything to bury this story, just like they did with the Benghazi debacle.

Ari Lieberman is an attorney and former prosecutor who has authored numerous articles and publications on matters concerning the Middle East and is considered an authority on geo-political and military developments affecting the region.

Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/263749/dems-want-investigate-trump-clinton-has-real-ari-lieberman

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the aut

Israel responds to Obama: Munich Agreement didn't prevent WWII - Elad Benari

by Elad Benari

Defense Ministry responds to claims by Obama that Israel believes the Iran nuclear deal was successful.

Israel's Defense Ministry on Friday responded to U.S. President Barack Obama's claims from a day earlier that the nuclear deal signed between Iran and the West had been successful in improving the security situation in the Middle East, and that even Israel acknowledges this fact.

"The Israeli defense establishment believes that agreements have value only if they are based on the existing realities, and have no value if the facts on the ground are completely opposite of those upon which the agreement rests," the statement read.

"The Munich Agreement did not prevent the Second World War and the Holocaust, precisely because their basic premise, that Nazi Germany could be a partner to some agreement, was incorrect and because the world's leaders at the time ignored the blunt remarks of Hitler and other Nazi leaders."

The Defense Ministry noted that Iran "announces clearly and openly that its goal is the destruction of Israel, and the report of the U.S. State Department published this year determined that it is in first place as a sponsor of global terrorism." The statement further added that therefore "the defense establishment, like the people of Israel and much of the world, understands that agreements such as the one signed between world powers and Iran not only are not useful, but also harm the uncompromising struggle which must be taken against a terrorist state like Iran.”

Obama, speaking at the Pentagon on Thursday, said the agreement “has worked exactly the way we said it was going to work.”

“And it's not just the assessment of our intelligence community. It's the assessment of the Israeli military and intelligence community,” he stressed. “The country that was most opposed to this deal acknowledges this has been a game-changer that Iran has abided by the deal that they no longer have the sort of short term breakout capacity that would allow them to develop nuclear weapons,” he claimed.

Obama's comments are not the first time that an American official has quoted Israeli security officials in justifying the nuclear deal.

Secretary of State John Kerry in February cited comments by IDF Chief of Staff Gadi Eizenkot as proof that the nuclear deal with Iran has improved Israel's security.

He was apparently referring to comments by the IDF Chief of Staff at the Institute for National Security Studies’ annual conference in Tel Aviv, where he said that although the nuclear agreement between Iran and the six world powers contained “many risks,” it also featured "opportunities" for Israel.


Elad Benari

Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/216040

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the aut

Connecting the Nuclear Dots - Peter Huessy

by Peter Huessy

Instead of heeding the nuclear missile "dots" that are emerging all around us, we are busy promoting trade with Iran, downplaying its violations of the nuclear deal, simply ignoring its ballistic missile developments and dismissing the growing evidence of its terrorist past.

After the attacks on September 11, 2001, Congress, the Bush administration, and terrorist experts complained that the country had simply not "connected the dots" provided by prior terrorist threats.

The 9/11 Commission also concluded that the attacks "should not have come as a surprise," as "Islamist extremists had given plenty of warning that they meant to kill Americans indiscriminately and in large numbers."

The Commission then listed 10 Islamic terror plots against the US prior to 9/11:

"In February 1993, a group led by Ramzi Yousef tried to bring down the World Trade Center with a truck bomb.
"Plans by Omar Abdel Rahman and others to blow up the Holland and Lincoln tunnels and other New York City landmarks ...
"In October 1993, Somali tribesmen shot down US helicopters, killing 18 and wounding 73...
"In early 1995, police in Manila uncovered a plot by Ramzi Yousef to blow up a dozen U.S. airliners while they were flying over the Pacific.
"In November 1995, a car bomb exploded outside the office of the US program manager for the Saudi National Guard in Riyadh, killing five Americans and two others.
"In June 1996, a truck bomb demolished the Khobar Towers apartment complex in Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, killing 19 US servicemen and wounding hundreds.
"In August 1998, al Qaeda, carried out near-simultaneous truck bomb attacks on the US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. The attacks killed 224 people, including 12 Americans, and wounded thousands more.
"In December 1999, Jordanian police foiled a plot to bomb hotels and other sites frequented by American tourists...
"...US Customs agent arrested Ahmed Ressam at the US-Canadian border as he was smuggling in explosives intended for an attack on Los Angeles International Airport.
"In October 2000, an al Qaeda team in Aden, Yemen, used a motorboat filled with explosives to blow a hole in the side of a destroyer, the USS Cole, almost sinking the vessel and killing 17 American sailors."

Despite the overwhelming indications that an attack like 9/11 was around the corner, as former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told the country in her April 2004 testimony to the 9/11 Commission, "The terrorists were at war with us, but we were not yet at war with them. For more than 20 years, the terrorist threat gathered, and America's response across several administrations of both parties was insufficient."

Are we now better equipped to "connect the terrorist-threats by dots" than we were prior to 9/11? Certainly we are not still echoing the testimony of Richard Clarke when he told the Emerging Threats Subcommittee in the summer of 2000 that the administration "had not yet" determined how to spend homeland security funds even some eight years after the first World Trade Center bombing of February 1993.

Unfortunately, not only are we not connecting the terrorist dots, we are actively downplaying their significance. Nowhere else is this more apparent than in the virtually complete failure, on the part of the US, to hold Iran responsible for the terror attacks that have killed and maimed thousands of Americans since 1979. This failure is all the more disturbing after the numerous court decisions that have found Iran accountable for nearly $60 billion in damages owed to the victims and survivors of these attacks, including the 9/11 attacks.

The outstanding news analyst and author Melanie Phillips wrote nearly a year ago that Iran had been "...perpetrating acts of war against Western interests for more than three decades -- including playing a key role in the 9/11 attacks on America." Phillips noted that a Revolutionary Guard-Iranian Intelligence (MOIS) task force

"designed contingency plans for unconventional warfare against the US... aimed at breaking the American economy, crippling or disheartening the US, and disrupting the American social, military and political order -- all without the risk of a head-to-head confrontation which Iran knew it would lose."

She explained that the court testimony from former Iranian agents illustrates that Iran "...devised a scheme to crash hijacked Boeing 747s into the World Trade Center, the White House and the Pentagon. ... The plan's code name was 'Shaitan dar Atash' ('Satan in flames')." Further, the court evidence revealed that Iran obtained "a Boeing 757-767-777 flight simulator which it hid at a secret site where the 9/11 terrorists were trained."

In December 2011, Judge George B. Daniels found that Iran, with the participation of its Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was directly and heavily involved in the 9/11 atrocities. Khamenei instructed intelligence operatives that while expanding collaboration between Hezbollah and al-Qaeda, they must restrict communications to existing contacts with al-Qaeda's second-in-command Ayman al Zawahiri and Imad Mughniyeh -- Hezbollah's then terrorism chief and agent of Iran.

Iran's Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei (center), is shown meeting in May 2014 with Iran's military chief of staff and the commanders of the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps. (Image source: IRNA)

While the 9/11 Commission found solid evidence Iran aided the 9/11 hijackers in their travels from Iran, the "Extensive cooperation in major global terrorist activities," between Iran, Hezbollah and Al Qaeda, including the 1996 bombing of the Khobar Towers housing complex in Saudi Arabia and the 1998 East Africa US embassy bombings, escaped the 9/11 Commission's detailed attention. Notably, as long ago as in 2000, a US Defense Intelligence Agency analyst was alerting the government to a web of connections between al-Qaeda, the Iranian intelligence agencies controlled by Khamenei, and other terrorist groups.

Many press reports and analysts, cognizant of Iran's terrorist history and aware that Iran has been designated by the US Department of State as the world's premier state sponsor of terror, choose to believe the 2015 Iranian nuclear deal should not be derailed over concern of Iran's possible future terrorist plans. Especially when it is often assumed these plans are aimed primarily at Israel and groups in Syria, Iraq and Lebanon, and thus not of real concern to the United States.

Is the nuclear deal with Iran thus a good trade? We get to slow Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons, but any serious sanctions or military effort to stop Iran's terror agenda are off the table. Let's connect the new nuclear-related Iran dots.

First, the world's expert on Iran ballistic missiles, Uzi Rubin, revealed on July 15 that Iran has five new missile capabilities: they can strike the middle of Europe, including Berlin; they can target with GPS accuracy military facilities in Saudi Arabia; they can launch missiles from underground secret tunnels and caves without warning; they have missiles that are ready to fire 24/7; and they have developed other accurate missiles whose mission is to strike targets throughout Gulf region.

Second, the Associated Press revealed that a side agreement under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) nuclear "deal" actually allows Iran to break out of the agreement in year 11, not 15, at which point Iran will not even be six months away from having sufficient nuclear fuel to arm a nuclear warhead, and Iran will be able to install nuclear centrifuges five times more efficient than the ones they have today.

Third, according to German intelligence reports, Iran has, a few dozen times since the July 2015 nuclear agreement, sought to purchase nuclear ballistic missile technology, a violation of previous UN resolutions.

As Americans wonder who will be behind the next terrorist attacks on our country -- "lone wolf" terrorists inspired by social media from Islamist groups; organized cells of ISIS, Al Qaeda, Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah; states such as Iran and Syria; or a combination of all three -- we would do well to be reminded of the long-term use of terrorism by the former Soviet Union as one of their trademark elements of "statecraft."

Iran's pursuit of nuclear weapons has not been stopped and at best has been delayed. Add to that Iran's enhanced ballistic missile capability, its growing partnership with North Korea and its history of terrorist attacks on the United States, and connecting the dots reveals a stark reality -- nuclear terrorism by missile may be on its way.

During the spring and summer of 2001, US intelligence agencies received a stream of warnings that Al Qaeda was determined to strike. The specific information pointed to threats from overseas. The Bush administration began developing a strategy in early 2001 to eliminate Al Qaeda in three years. The 9/11 attacks happened "too soon."

Iran seeks to do us grave harm, potentially with ballistic missiles and nuclear weapons. The threat warnings are clear and we have strong evidence -- Iran has attacked us repeatedly over the past 30 years

But instead of heeding the nuclear missile "dots" that are emerging all around us, we are busy promoting trade with Iran, downplaying its violations of the nuclear deal, simply ignoring its ballistic missile developments and dismissing the growing evidence of its terrorist past.

In short, we are not connecting these dots; we are erasing them.
 

 

Dr. Peter Huessy is President of GeoStrategic Analysis, a defense consulting firm he founded in 1981, and was the senior defense consultant at the National Defense University Foundation for more than 20 years. He is now the National Security Fellow at the AFPC, and Senior Defense Consultant at the Air Force Association.

Peter Huessy

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8632/connecting-nuclear-dots

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the aut

A covenant of shadows - Yaakov Amidror

by Yaakov Amidror

The growing ties between Israel and the region's Sunni Arab states are a result of a divided Middle East where Islamic State poses the greatest threat • But a peace deal with the Palestinians is a prerequisite to forge formal diplomatic ties.

Many of the world's nations are looking on in surprise and admiration at the ever-strengthening ties between Israel and the more important Sunni Arab countries in the region -- the open relationship with Egypt and Jordan, with which Israel maintains official diplomatic relations, but also the informal relationships with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf emirates. 

This shift appears to be fueled by three main factors: First, these Sunni countries fear Iran's growing power over a Shiite bloc, which threatens the security as well as the unity of the Sunni states. There is an ancient religious conflict between the Sunni majority and the Shiite minority, but the minority enjoys the advantage of a singular leadership that is willing to do anything to change the status of the Shiites in the Middle East. This leadership, which sits in Tehran, is spearheading orchestrated and focused efforts to liberate the Shiites in Yemen, Bahrain and Saudi Arabia, and defend the Shiites in Iraq, Syria and Lebanon. The objective is to create an uninterrupted distribution of Shiites from Tehran through Baghdad to Beirut. 

Meanwhile, Iran is trying to undermine the Sunni dominance on the Arab side of the Gulf between the Saudi Peninsula and Iran: Saudi Arabia, with its Shiite minority, in the oil-rich region; Bahrain, which underwent a Shiite coup attempt; and Yemen, where Saudi Arabia is fighting with the Sunni majority against the Iranian-backed Houthi minority.

The Sunni-Shiite conflict also has a nationalist aspect. It is impossible to ignore the fact that Iran is focusing its efforts exclusively on Arab countries. This nationalist struggle also manifests itself in inter-Shiite disputes, especially in Iraq, where the city of Najaf was once considered the most important Shiite city, but has since been replaced by the Iranian city of Qom. 

Keeping the momentum

The second factor fueling the Sunni countries' concerns is the threat of extreme Salafism led by the Islamic State group. The group's Arabic acronym, Daesh, stands for "the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria," but today, the organization is active in Sinai and in Libya as well, and it has active chapters in Africa and in Europe, as the recent wave of terrorist attacks may indicate. Therefore, the simple name "Islamic State" may be more apt. 

The expansion of the group's activities poses a threat to the Sunni states, because they represent an enemy of the highest order. In Egypt, the threat is even more pronounced thanks to IS deployment in parts of Sinai and its collaboration with Hamas, the Palestinian chapter of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood -- the mortal enemies of the current Egyptian leadership. In Jordan and in Saudi Arabia, Islamic State threatens the regime from within, because in both countries there is extensive sympathy for the group among various sectors in the population. Even if the coalition of nations currently working to combat IS manages to dramatically diminish the areas under its control in Iraq and Syria, the ideology propagated by the group will still pose a very palpable threat to the Sunni states. Moreover, the coalition is currently having trouble maintaining its momentum against IS, following a string of important victories. 

The third factor stems from the general sense that the U.S. has abandoned its allies in their time of need, intending to scale back its involvement in the region. In Egypt, this feeling is founded on America's having abandoned deposed President Hosni Mubarak and having appeared to support the Muslim Brotherhood. In Saudi Arabia and in the Persian Gulf, the frustration stems from the fact that they view the landmark agreement between the West and Iran, spearheaded by the U.S., as an American capitulation. The countries in the region have been very disappointed with the U.S.'s conduct toward Mubarak on the one hand, and toward Syrian President Bashar Assad, who continues to massacre Sunnis uninhibited, on the other. They realize that not only is the U.S. no longer on their side in the fight against Iran, the U.S. expects them to make concessions to Iran. It is clear to the Sunni states, which once viewed the U.S. as a superpower whose mere existence was enough to stop any threat they faced, that things have profoundly changed. Even if the U.S. is still a superpower, it has lost the will to use its power in the Middle East. Furthermore, when it does exercise its power, like in leading the anti-IS coalition, action is taken sparingly and extremely cautiously. And now, the U.S. is compromising with its adversaries, as indicated by the weak American response to Russia's increasing involvement in Syria. 

The key to enhanced relations

These countries are looking for someone to help them at this time of need. Israel is the only country in the area whose stability is not in question. It is a strong country, both economically and militarily, and it has the ability and willingness to defend its essential interests. This is the foundation for the blossoming relationships between Israel and these Sunni countries -- classic status-quo countries in an ever-shifting region looking for an anchor to stabilize themselves. Israel can serve as this anchor. It is a marriage of convenience, not of love, but it is one of increasing importance. 

Cooperation is key to truly enhancing these relationships, as I was told by a Saudi prince who shared a stage with me at a conference in Washington recently.

"The combination of Israeli money and Arab talent can have a positive impact on any region," he said jokingly. But behind this line there was a great truth. Israel can provide these countries with precisely what they lack: security, technology and enormous improvements in the areas of water, agriculture and health. 

However, a serious collaboration -- a public, unhindered cooperation -- between Israel and these Arab states requires a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. Not because this issue is dear to the hearts of the Sunni leaders, but because without it, these leaders would lose the support of the street, which is imperative if the relationship is to go public. But, sadly, the Palestinians are in no rush to advance a peace agreement and their relations with Israel; on the contrary, realizing that they are the key to enhancing Israel's ties with the nations of the region only makes them think more highly of themselves and prompts them to ratchet up their demands. 

The only way to overcome this hurdle is to change the order of the steps: First build a relationship that will serve as an inclusive umbrella for Israelis and Sunni Arabs, and then lead the Palestinians into it to engage in peace negotiations.

Unlike in the past, at present the enhancement of relations is no less important to the Sunnis than it is to the Israelis. But the Palestinian obstacle is in the way. It is not clear whether the Arab nations will be able to overcome this obstacle, despite their clear interest. Israel needs to think about ways it can help them overcome it, seeing that this could be a historical opportunity and it would be a shame to squander it.

Yaakov Amidror

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=35499

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the aut

The First Weapon Against Lone Terrorists: Big Data Analytics - Yaakov Lappin

by Yaakov Lappin

The old thinking, that lone attackers do not communicate with others, may have been wrong

European security and intelligence agencies are scrambling to regroup and reorganize following a steady, growing flow of jihadist atrocities. They have a steep learning curve ahead of them when it comes to thwarting terrorism. 

To do so, European governments will need to greatly expand budgets for domestic and overseas intelligence operations, create international security cooperation, and enable real-time intelligence sharing, on a scale not seen before. They will also need to deploy wide-reaching signals intelligence capabilities that will build up a database of leads, for monitoring and arresting suspects. Such tactics work very well against transnational terror networks which involve ISIS command centers in Syria and Iraq dispatching cells to the West, or with localized cells in Western cities acting under the influence of ISIS ideology.

Yet even a country like Israel, which arguably has the biggest scope of counter-terrorism experience on Earth, has not been able to prevent a different type of terrorism, which led to a succession of Palestinian attacks that began last year. In most cases, alert security forces and members of the public responded quickly to neutralize the attackers, but the fact remains that Israel's vaunted intelligence services had not been able to thwart these attacks, and for good reason.

The vast majority of "successful" terrorism that got through Israel's security net is of the "lone-wolf" kind. These are Palestinian attackers who woke up one morning, and, influenced by a potent concoction of jihadist incitement to violence and personal triggers, decided that would be the day that they open fire, run over, or stab their victims and die in the process.

The organized kind of terrorism has reared its head rarely in Israel in recent months and years, due to the nightly arrests and 24-7 intelligence-gathering work that thwarts these threats, and prevents Israeli cities from turning into perpetual war zones.

Organized terrorist cells leave behind tracks, such as instructions via phone calls or internet communications, the transfer of money, suspicious purchases of chemicals and weapons, and other warnings signals that can be picked up by a well-funded, hi-tech national intelligence agency with good human intelligence coverage on the ground too.

The lone attacker, on the other hand, does not usually communicate with others and can easily move under the radar of national security forces, at least until now.

Israeli security officials have begun employing a new weapon in the war against lone attackers: Big data analytics. This new counter-terrorism measure could prove to be equally useful and life saving in the West, where cities are increasingly being attacked by lone terrorists inspired by ISIS's murderous ideology.

Although it is still under development, Israel's Shin Bet domestic intelligence agency and other security groups have begun using advanced algorithms to sift through a vast volume of social media activity. Their goal is to search for the small – yet deadly – needles in a haystack of online information, and find warning signs pointing to an individual who is primed to strike.

The old thinking, that lone attackers do not communicate with others, may have been wrong, it turns out. They may, in fact, be communicating with the entire world through social media, and if anyone cares to listen to them attentively enough, their murderous intentions might be foiled. The precise details of this technique remain classified, but it is being used on an increasing basis by Israeli security agencies monitoring Palestinian threats.

The internet remains the prime recruitment tool used by ISIS to convert Muslims in Europe into terrorists, and ISIS has expressed a preference for those keen on carrying out acts of jihad to do so on their Western home turf, rather than travel to the caliphate.

Within Israel's battle against Palestinian terrorism, big data analytics have begun to work, and for the first time, a number of lone attackers were arrested before they could pounce, according to security sources.

Security forces have recently issued warnings to individuals marked as potential future lone attackers, making clear the repercussions of such acts on their families. After terror attacks, the government of Israel often orders the army to demolish the home of the perpetrators.

The number of lone attackers has decreased in recent months for a variety of reasons, and big data countermeasures appear to be among them.

Security forces have begun monitoring Facebook pages of young people who have praised past acts of murder and express desire to become martyrs. Most of those who express jihadist sentiments do not go on to the action stage, but a minority of suspects do, and the correct algorithms can help identify them.

The system remains far from perfect, and security sources say much more work is needed to improve results. It is, however, the first time that technology is being used not only to break up budding, organized terrorism cells, but also to track down and arrest the lone wolves before they pounce.


Yaakov Lappin is the Jerusalem Post's military and national security affairs correspondent, and author of The Virtual Caliphate (Potomac Books, 2011), which proposes that jihadis on the internet established a virtual Islamist state and sought to upload it in failed states. The book was published four years before ISIS declared a caliphate.

Source: http://www.investigativeproject.org/5555/the-first-weapon-against-lone-terrorists-big-data

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the aut

The 11th Encyclopædia Britannica on Who Is a Palestinian - Daniel Pipes

by Daniel Pipes

The Arab Palestinian identify dates to after this encyclopedia entry was written, to the year 1920.

Robert Alexander Stewart Macalister (1870-1950)

As several authors (Aryeh L. Avneri, Joan Peters, Fred M. Gottheil) have shown, the non-Jewish population of Palestine grew because of the many in-migrants who came to work at Zionist economic enterprises. But it's also worth noting that, even before that immigration began, this small territory was already filled with a wide range of peoples.

  The famed Encyclopædia Britannica, 11^th edition, dating from 1910-11, or antedating the British conquest of the area, provides colorful information on these peoples. The entry Palestine in vol. 20, by the Irish archeologist Robert Alexander Stewart Macalister, delineates Palestine

as the strip of land extending along the eastern shore of the Mediterranean Sea from the mouth of the Litany ... southward to ... a short distance south of Gaza. ... Eastward ... the line of the pilgrim road from Damascus to Mecca is the most convenient possible boundary. (p. 601)

This map shows what's meant (in modern terms, more or less northern Israel and northeastern Jordan) by Palestine.

Map of Palestine, Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th ed. vol 20, p. 602.

Macalister's section on the population of Palestine stresses its diversity.

The inhabitants of Palestine are composed of a large number of elements, differing widely in ethnological affinities, language and religion. It may be interesting to mention, as an illustration of their hetereogeneousness, that early in the 20^th century a list of no less than 50 languages, spoken in Jerusalem as vernaculars, was there drawn up by a party of men whose various official positions enabled them to possess accurate information on the subject.

A footnote adds that only 30 languages are regularly used but that too is "a sufficient number ... to indicate the cosmopolitan nature of the city." This complexity makes it "no easy task to write concisely and at the same time with sufficient fullness on the ethnology of Palestine," whose population Macalister roughly estimates to be 650,000. Nevertheless, he plunges ahead in an 850-word summary, provided here in its entirety, with additional paragraphing inserted for easier reading:

There are two classes into which the population of Palestine can be divided - the nomadic and the sedentary. The former is especially characteristic of Eastern Palestine, though Western Palestine also contains its full share. The pure Arab origin of the Bedouins is recognized in common conversation in the country, the word "Arab" being almost restricted to denote these wanders and seldom applied to the dwellers in towns and villages.
It should be mentioned that there is a third, entirely independent, nomad race, the despised Nowar [Nawar], who correspond to the gipsies or tinkers of European countries. These people live under the poorest conditions, by doing smith's work; they speak among themselves a Romani dialect, much contaminated with Arabic in its vocabulary.

The EB deals quickly with the sedentaries:

The sedentary population of the country villages - the fellahin, or agriculturists - is, on the whole, comparatively unmixed; but traces of various intrusive strains assert themselves. It is by no means unreasonable to suppose that there is a fundamental Canaanite element in this population: the "hewers of wood and drawers of water" often remain undisturbed through successive occupations of a land; and there is a remarkable correspondence of type between many of the modern fellahin and skeletons of ancient inhabitants which have been recovered in the course of excavation.

The focus is on the waves of foreign colonization:

New elements no doubt came in under the Assyrian, Persian and Roman dominations, and in more recent times there has been much contamination.
The spread of Islam introduced a very considerable Neo-Arabian infusion. Those from southern Arabia were known as the Yaman tribe, those from northern Arabia the Kais (Qais). These two divisions absorbed the previous peasant population, and still nominally exist; down to the middle of the 19^th century they were a fruitful source of quarrels and of bloodshed. The two great clans were further subdivided into families, but these minor divisions are also being gradually broken down. In the 19^th century the short-lived Egyptian government introduced into the population an element from that country which still persists in the villages. These newcomers have not been completely assimilated with the villagers among whom they have found a home; the latter despise them, and discourage intermarriage.

Villages contain some Christians:

Some of the larger villages - notably Bethlehem - which have always been leavened by Christianity, and with the development of industry have become comparatively prosperous, show tangible results of these happier circumstances in a higher standard of physique among the men and of personal appearance among the women. It is not uncommon in popular writings to attribute this superiority to a crusader strain - a theory which no one can possibly countenance who knows what miserable degenerates the half-breed descendants of the crusaders rapidly became, as a result of their immoral life and their ignorance of the sanitary precautions necessary in a trying climate.

The towns are more diverse:

The population of the larger towns is of a much more complex nature. In each there is primarily a large Arab element, consisting for the greater part of members of important and wealthy families. Thus, in Jerusalem, much of the local influence is in the hands of the families of El-Khalidi, El-Husseini and one or two others, who derive their descent from the heroes of the early days of Islam. The Turkish element is small, consisting exclusively of officials sent individually from Constantinople. There are very large contingents from the Mediterranean countries, especially Armenia, Greece and Italy, principally engaged in trade. The extraordinary development of Jewish colonization has since 1870 effected a revolution in the balance of population in some parts of the country, notably in Jerusalem.

Dispensing with Zionism in that one sentence, the Encyclopædia Britannica goes on to the many other peoples of the region:

There are few residents in the country from the more eastern parts of Asia - if we except the Turkoman settlements in the Jaulan, a number of Persians, and a fairly large Afghan colony that since 1905 has established itself in Jaffa. The Mutāwileh (Motawila), who form the majority of the inhabitants of the villages north-west of Galilee, are probably long-settled immigrants from Persia. Some tribes of Kurds live in tents and huts near Lake Huleh.
If the inmates of the countless monastic establishments be excluded, comparatively few from northern or western Europe will remain: the German "Templar" colonies being perhaps the most important. There must also be mentioned a Bosnian colony established at Caesarea Palestina, and the Circassian settlements placed in certain centres of Eastern Palestine by the Turkish government in order to keep a restraint on the Bedouin: the latter are also found in Galilee. There was formerly a large Sudanese and Algerian element in the population of some of the large towns, but these have been much reduced in numbers since the beginning of the 20^th century: the Algerians however still maintain themselves in parts of Galilee.

The most interesting of all the non-Arab communities in the country, however, is without doubt the Samaritan sect in Nablus (Shechem); a gradually disappearing body, which has maintained an independent existence from the time when they were first settled by the Assyrians to occupy the land left waste by the captivity of the kingdom of Israel. (p. 604)

Samaritans of Nablus.

This overview of Palestine mentions in no less than 20 foreign ethnicities other than the native fellahin (farmers) and the Jews: Assyrian, Persian, Roman, Arabian, Crusader, Nawar, Arabian, Turkic, Armenian, Greek, Italian, Turkoman, Motawila, Kurd, German, Bosnian, Circassian, Sudanese, Algerian, and Samaritan.

So, enough of this nonsense about the Palestinians all being an ancient people going back to the Jebusites. The Arab Palestinian identify dates to after this encyclopedia entry was written, to the year 1920. (July 31, 2016)

Daniel Pipes

Source:

http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2016/07/11th-encyclopaedia-britannica-who-is-palestinian

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the aut

VIDEO: Iran Targets Its Largest Minority - Denis MacEoin

by Denis MacEoin

A video about the Bahais in Iran

The Iranian regime that hangs and imprisons peace-loving people for their beliefs is today a major threat to the free world. Iran is building a massive arsenal of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. Denis MacEoin, in our latest video, asks: Does it not seem perverse that the UN, the EU and the US administration smile fondly on the persecutors and defame the protectors?



Don't miss our next video -- subscribe free to the Gatestone Institute YouTube channel!
Recent Articles by Denis MacEoin

• Western Universities: The Best Indoctrination Money Can Buy
• The Impact of Islamic Fundamentalism on Free Speech
• Anti-Semitism in the UK Labour Party
• The Self-Contradictory Liberals

Denis MacEoin

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/8636/video-iran-bahai

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the aut

"Divorces of convenience" can clear the way to the main target - Dr. Mordechai Kedar

by Dr. Mordechai Kedar

Sometimes it is best to separate temporarily so as to be able to join forces with others. It doesn't matter, just so long as each party keeps their eyes on the prize - in this case, Islam's global domination.

Everyone is familiar with the ex‎pression a "marriage of convenience." This refers to the type of marriage that is not based love and affection but is undertaken in order to advance the financial, social or other interests of the couple.  Divorce, in contrast, is always a result of conflict and generally results in harm to both sides. A "marriage of convenience" can be used to describe organizational, political or other unions between two bodies who have little love for one another but wish to promote their own interests.

 

Sometimes divorces lead to an improvement in the status of one or both of the sides involved, and then one can talk of a "divorce of convenience" – whether the two sides are a couple or consist of organizations, political parties and states.

This week an incident of that ilk occurred between two Jihad organizations, al Qaeda and Jabhat al Nusra, the first a global Jihad organization and the second operating only in Syria. Up to now, Jabhat al Nusra operations were directed by Ayman al-Zawahiri, head of al Qaeda, and the group was considered the Syrian arm of al Qaeda. This connection gave Jabhat al Nusra recognition as an organization with capabilities and the means to act on them, but the group paid a high price for being identified more as a global organization than as a Syrian liberation organization.

 

This week, Abu Mohammed al-Jolani,, the leader of al Nusra, appeared in a video clip broadcast in real time, his face revealed for the first time, and read the following proclamation (my additions are in parentheses, M.K.):

After the usual greetings, al-Jolani said; "My Muslim brothers wherever you may be, Salaam Aleikhim, the mercy of Allah and his blessings upon you. We give thanks to  all the Sheikhs of al Qaeda al Jihad (al Qaeda's full name) and especially Sheikh Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, may Allah protect him, and his second in command, Sheikh Ahmad Hassan Abu al-Khayr, may Allah guard him."

 

"We thank you for coming to the aid of the sons of al Sham (the classic name for Syria), for the help proffered both to  their Jihad and blessed revolution and to Jihad in general (worldwide). History will tell of al Qaeda's steadfastness with veneration and in letters made of light, because this blessed leadership (of al Qaeda) has granted and still provides the most magnificent model of how the interests of Muslims as a whole supersede limited organizational interests. They have carried out the words of Sheikh Osama (bin Laden), may Allah's mercy be upon him, who said that the interests of the Umma (Islamic nation) take precedence over the interests of every private organization, the interests of the Umma take precedence over the interests of any one Islamic nation, the interests of the nation take precedence over those of a group, and the group is of more importance than an individual.

"We, the leaders of Jabhat al Nusra, in conjunction with the directives and general trends of the blessed  leadership (of al Qaeda) act from a feeling of responsibility for the good of the sons of al Sham and their Jihad, trying to ease their burdens without lessening the immutable demands of our religion, to guard the Jihad in the land of al Sham,, protect it and use all legitimate means to achieve the goals we have set, bridge the gaps between ourselves and other Jihad organizations, in the hope that a unified group will arise, as a result of our consultations and discussions to that end, and will unite the sons of al Sham, liberate their land, protect their religion and grant power to the word of the one God in their midst.

 

"In accordance with the will of the sons of al Sham to put an end to the excuses of the international community headed by Russia and the USA who use our connection with al Qaeda as the excuse to bomb and disperse the sons of al Sham while claiming that they are aiming at al Qaeda and Jabhat al Nusra – we have decided to cease operating under the name Jabhat al Nusra and establish a new unified front called Jabhat Fatah el [sic]  al Sham (The al Sham Conquering Front) and keep this group from forging any connections with outside bodies.

"The new group will work towards achieving the following goals:

 

1. Actions for the religion of Allah, may he be exalted, strengthening Sharia law and the rule of justice between people, all people.

2.Actions aimed at unity with the other groups in Syria,  in order to have all the Jihad fighters under one roof, thereby able to succeed in freeing the land of al Sham from the rule of despots (the Alawites) and destroy the regime and its cohorts. Allah said: "Keep hold, all of you, to the religion of Allah and be not afraid" (Koran, Sura 3, verse 103).

 

3. Protecting Jihad in the land of al Sham, perseverance in that mission and using any and all legal means that can be of help.

4. Expending efforts to serve the Muslim populace, improve their ability to resist  and the conditions they live under and ease their suffering in every possible way.

 

5. Seeing to it that there is security, stability and a decent life for everyone.

Praise be to Allah, Lord of the Universe

Your brother, Abu Mohammed al-Jolani"

So ends al-Jolani's speech, now the leader of the newly-named "Al Sham Conquering Front." Most striking is the lack of any anger aimed at al Qaeda, and in fact there is much respect and admiration – perhaps in order to leave the path to future reunification intact, if circumstances allow that to be considered or force it upon the organization. It is clear that al-Jolani wants to create a wide coalition of Syrian organizations, especially those who do not want to be affiliated with al Qaeda.

Ayman al-Zawahiri, the leader of al Qaeda, responded in a video in which he said "The affection of Islam that exists between us is stronger than all the temporary and changeable organizational ties, while your unity, coming together and joining one another are important and more dear to us than any organizational ties (with us). Your uniting and enhancing the unity within the ranks are above any party loyalty and organizational attachment. Unhesitatingly, we must sacrifice the political and organizational ties that are antithetical to the closing of the ranks between you, to your becoming one solid edifice that allows you to stand in the face of your secular ethnic (Alawite) enemies supported by Iran (here he used a derogatory term for the country), Russia and China, and the modern Crusade (meaning the West) to which they lend their support."

 

The leader of al Qaeda says these words as a father, leader, teacher and counselor, who derives pleasure from his student-sons who evince independence, wish to separate from him in order to unite for a goal in which he believes and which he inculcated in them so that they would succeed in achieving it. There is not an iota of anger in his words about al Jolani's leavetaking. On the contrary, he sees great importance in al Jolani's attempt to establish a joint front of local Syrian organizations, even if that means not being identified with al Qaeda, so long as this unity leads to achieving the supreme goal, ending the Assad Alawite regime. 

Al-Zawahiri is well aware of the intense suffering borne by the Syrians and the difficulties facing the rebels due to the intensive, merciless intervention of Russia, Iran and Hezbollah in the Syrian maelstrom. The situation on the ground forces the rebels to unite, and al-Zawahiri understands the challenge and identifies with the rebel needs. He is willing to step aside and grant them his best wishes for a safe trip.

 

It is more important to him to be rid of Assad, defeat the Iranians, destroy Hezbollah and sweep out the Russians than to be organizationally connected to the Syrian rebels.

Jabhat al Nusra's separation from al Qaeda is another step in the process of the privatization of Jihad and its becoming a local phenomenon instead of a global one. Al Jolani's success in uniting the rebels in Syria will allow him to resist Islamic State more effectively – and that is the biggest challenge facing al Qaeda, despite the fact that both organizations are alumna of Osama bin Laden and Ayman al Zawahiri.

 

The big question is deciding what is preferable: local Jihad that is joined by non-Jihad groups, or global Jihad limited to Jihadists. That is the crucial question at the root of the debates about the character and scope of Jihad organizations. The goal – Islamic rule the world over – is the same for both, with the argument only over the question of how best to achieve that goal. Is it better to work locally or internationally? This question will continue to be raised in various Jihad organizations for the forseable future. The answer depends on continuously changing variables in each place and at each moment in time. That is why these organizations change their organizational strategy each time the situations warrants it.

Written for Arutz Sheva, translated from Hebrew by Rochel Sylvetsky, Arutz Sheva Op-ed and Judaism editor.

Dr. Mordechai Kedar is a senior lecturer in the Department of Arabic at Bar-Ilan University. He served in IDF Military Intelligence for 25 years, specializing in Arab political discourse, Arab mass media, Islamic groups and the Syrian domestic arena. Thoroughly familiar with Arab media in real time, he is frequently interviewed on the various news programs in Israel.

Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Articles/Article.aspx/19292

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the aut