The "Middle East and Terrorism" Blog was created in order to supply information about the implication of Arab countries and Iran in terrorism all over the world. Most of the articles in the blog are the result of objective scientific research or articles written by senior journalists.
From the Ethics of the Fathers: "He [Rabbi Tarfon] used to say, it is not incumbent upon you to complete the task, but you are not exempt from undertaking it."
This is a perfect storm for the press which has done everything it can for years to protect Hunter Biden
The story the legacy media
tried for years to suppress is back with a vengeance. Hunter Biden, the
president’s oft-troubled son, is once more in the news and not in a
good way. An IRS criminal supervisory agent requested whistleblower
protection, claiming the five-year Hunter Biden investigation is being
impacted by "preferential treatment and politics."
To
make things worse for the press, the White House responded to the
allegations just days before President Joe Biden is reportedly
announcing his re-election campaign. White House spokesman Ian Sams told
Fox News Digital that the president has stood by his commitment for
Justice Department "independence" and that the investigation is "free
from any political interference."
This is a perfect storm for the press which has done everything it can for years to protect Hunter Biden
from embarrassing coverage or news that might hurt his father. Now
journalists are stuck at least acknowledging the crisis. That doesn’t
mean they will cover it fairly.
Still, news eked out in the
coverage. Such as the fact that I.R.S. and F.B.I. agents reportedly want
to bring charges against Hunter Biden. Or that the whistleblower claims
to have information that would "contradict sworn testimony by a senior
political appointee." CBS said, "that was Attorney General Merrick
Garland."
Maybe that explains why the investigation has lasted
longer than a presidential term. News types might ask that question, but
only if Biden had an "R" after his name.
CBS
led the way for the broadcast networks with a story April 19, as the
news broke. Both ABC and NBC followed the next morning with their own
takes on the news.
Thursday morning, NBC spent only 36 seconds on
the story. That’s like covering a forest fire with a glass of water, but
they still did it.
ABC’s "Good Morning America" devoted more
than three times that with fill-in co-host Rebecca Jarvis declaring,
"ABC News learning the president’s son is allegedly getting preferential
treatment." That’s quite the step-up for a show ordinarily a Democrat
mouthpiece run by anchor and former official Democrat mouthpiece George
Stephanopoulos.
The Washington Post ran with a straight
investigation story on Wednesday under the headline, "Whistleblower
claims administration is mishandling probe of Biden’s son." Notably
absent from the headline was mention of Hunter Biden.
By
Thursday, the Post tried another tactic, mentioning Hunter in a PR piece
about him assuming a larger role in the president’s campaign. The
paper’s whole argument was that Hunter Biden aiding his father’s
campaign is a good thing – despite all of his scandals. As the Post put
it, Hunter, "after years of listening to his father’s advisers
counseling a low profile, is now willing to take a more public
posture."
"Hunter Biden takes on higher profile amid
investigations" waited 12 paragraphs to note the new allegations. The
article quoted the president and his son a combination of 15 times,
along with a couple Biden supporters. It cited the whistleblower’s
lawyer just once and Kentucky Republican Rep. James Comer twice.
This
was the paper glossing over a son who makes the stories about Jimmy
Carter’s brother Billy laughable by comparison. (At least, Billy Carter
preferred to drink his refreshments and brought us the classic "Billy
Beer.") Instead, Hunter is portrayed as the dutiful son keeping his
senile father in line, literally.
That results in this exchange:
"‘You’re supposed to do the rope line, Dad,’ the son said. ‘I’m
supposed to do the rope line?’ the father responded. ‘Just to say hi to
everybody,’ the son offered."
A more accurate portrayal of the
incident might note that the leader of the free world is being led
around by his unelected, formerly drug-addled son. Hardly comforting.
The
New York Times downplayed the news and ran with, "I.R.S. Official Is
Said to Assert Political Meddling in Hunter Biden Inquiry." Fifteen
paragraphs into the Times piece, the paper admitted, "I.R.S. and F.B.I.
agents have complained for months that they have enough evidence to
bring a case against Hunter Biden." The paper added the question is
"whether a less prominent person would be charged with a crime in the
same circumstances."
Both papers lacked the typical venom they use in stories attacking Republican politicians, but they still had to write them.
Shocker, I know.
Now,
the question is how the press will handle this embarrassing situation
going forward. Will they try to bury the story six-feet under like they
did with Hunter’s laptop prior to the election? Or will they allow more
coverage, reflecting Democrat Party sentiment that Biden needs to be pushed aside and Hunter Biden could be just the man to do it.
Either
way, you can bet most reporting won’t have anything to do with
journalism. Instead, it will be either a way to protect Biden’s
re-election or push him aside so another, more-electable Democrat can
take over.
Dan Gainor is a freelance opinion editor for Fox News Digital.
Extraordinary admission by career intelligence officer Michael J. Morell provides stunning evidence that the now-infamous letter from 51 security officials in October 2021 was not an organic intelligence community event but rather a political dirty trick.
A
former acting CIA director has admitted to Congress that he helped
organize the letter that falsely portrayed Hunter Biden's laptop as
Russian disinformation in an effort to influence the 2020 election in
favor of Joe Biden and that his role was “triggered” by a call from
current Secretary of State Antony Blinken, according to a letter
released Thursday by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan.
The extraordinary admission by career intelligence officer Michael J.
Morell provides stunning evidence that the now-infamous letter from 51
security officials in October 2020 was not an organic intelligence
community initiative but rather a political dirty trick originating with
Blinken and the Biden campaign.
Jordan sent a letter demanding Blinken answer a series of questions
about Morell's stunning testimony, as lawmakers weighed the enormity of
America's top diplomat being willing to accuse a nuclear-armed
superpower of interfering in the 2020 election without evidence. That
letter included major snippets of Morell's testimony.
Morell, who retired as deputy CIA director after a long and storied
career and served as its acting chief, was on the short list in fall
2020 to be Biden's CIA director when he became involved in the letter.
He ultimately did not receive the job.
In a transcribed interview with the House Judiciary government
weaponization subcommittee, Morell admitted he got involved with the
letter after a conversation with Blinken and later received a call from
the Biden campaign thanking him when Joe Biden used the letter and its
false implication to blunt criticism of Hunter Biden's foreign business
dealings
The transcript of Morell's interview showed he had no intent to write
the statement and that Blinken's "call triggered" his actions.
The same day Blinken reached out to Morell, an article was published
in USA Today alleging that the FBI was looking into the laptop as part
of a "disinformation campaign."
"Morell testified that his communication with you was one of a few
communications he had with the Biden campaign, explaining that he also
received a call from Steve Ricchetti, Chairman of the Biden campaign,
following the October 22 debate to thank him for writing the letter,"
Jordan wrote Blinken.
Included in Jordan's letter was Morell's recollection of the call.
"After the debate — I think it was after the debate — in fact, I'm
pretty sure it was after the debate — I got a phone call from Jeremy
Bash, who I work with at Beacon and who is active politically," Morell
told the Committee. "And Jeremy said: Do you have a minute to talk to
Steve Ricchetti? I said: Of course. He was the head of the Biden
campaign at the time. And Jeremy got him on the line, and Steve thanked
me for putting the statement out. And that was the extent of the
conversation."
He also testified that the Biden campaign team coordinated to release
the statement on the laptop to a specific reporter at the Washington
Post and admitted that he got involved to help give Biden a leg up on
Trump during the debates.
"There were two intents," he said. "One intent was to share our
concern with the American people that the Russians were playing on this
issue; and, two, it was [to] help Vice President." When asked why he
wanted to help Biden, he replied, "because I wanted him to win the
election."
Morell, who was working as a podcaster and contributor at CBS News,was
said to have been on the short list for CIA director and had his desire
for a promotion leveraged against him in return for his cooperation.
A spokesman for CBS News did not immediately return an email from
Just The News earlier this week, seeking comment from Morell or the
network.
Jordan wrote that based on this testimony, "it is apparent that the
Biden campaign played an active role in the origins of the public
statement, which had the effect of helping to suppress the Hunter Biden
story and preventing American citizens from making a fully informed
decision during the 2020 presidential election.
"We believe that you possess material that would advance our
oversight and inform potential legislative reforms. Accordingly, we ask
that you please provide the following information and records in your
personal possession:
Identify all people with whom you communicated about the
inception, drafting, editing, signing, publishing, or promotion of the
'Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails' dated October 19, 2020,
during the period October 14, 2020, to November 24, 2020; and
Produce all documents and communications referring or relating to
the 'Public Statement on the Hunter Biden Emails' dated October 19,
2020, sent or received between October 14, 2020, and November 24,
2020."
The Committee asked Blinken to produce these items "no later"
than May 4, 2023 and also requested they be from his "personal"
materials, as he was not yet serving as Secretary of State when these
events were unfolding.
"Because these events occurred prior to your nomination and
confirmation as Secretary of State, we seek your cooperation with our
requests in your personal, and not your official capacity," the letter
concluded.
This revelation comes just four days after Jordan told Just the News
he expects to release a report from the House panel on weaponization of
government later this month, laying out detailed evidence and the key
players behind the letter.
"It was all done with politics, and it looks like there was some some
real connections with the Biden campaign," Jordan said during an
interview on the John Solomon Reports podcast, declining to be more
specific because there are more witness interviews being conducted.
It also comes just three days after House Intelligence Committee member Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.) told the "Just the News, No Noise" TV show that the laptop coverup was what won Joe Biden the presidency.
"Would Joe Biden be the president United States if there hadn't been
the laptop cover-up?" he asked. "I doubt it. Would inflation be where it
is if there hadn't been laptop cover-up? I doubt it. You know, we're
paying a price right now for the double standard in journalism."
Just The News reached out to CBS and Morell again, to inquire if he still works at the network, but got no response.
Democrats on Friday, however, rejected the Republican portrayal of Morell’s interview.
“Jim Jordan has released cherry-picked excerpts of a transcribed
interview,” a Democratic House Judiciary committee spokesman said in a
statement. “To be clear, no part of that interview demonstrates that
Tony Blinken or any other Biden campaign official asked Mike Morell to
write a letter about Hunter Biden’s laptop.”
The Democrats released a different part of the transcript in which
Morell said he did not recall Blinken specifically asking him to write
the letter. “My memory is that he did not, right. My memory is that he
asked what I thought.”
The last posting of his weekly podcast appears to have been dated March 29th, and there has not been a new episode since.
The State Department issued a brief response when asked about the letter, attributed to an agency spokesperson.
"As a general matter, we do not comment on Congressional correspondence or ongoing investigations," the reply read.
President Joe Biden is now 80 years old. He will be 82 when he
campaigns for the 2024 presidency – and a clearly debilitated 86 should
he be elected and fill out his second term. He has been in government
for over a half-century.
Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and current representative from California is 83.
Rep. Steny Hoyer, D-Md., the second-ranking Democratic House member
behind Pelosi, was House majority leader until early this year. He is
83, and has been an elected official for nearly 60 years.
Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., is 72, with 48 years in elected government.
Democratic luminary and former chairman of the Senate Judiciary and
Intelligence Committees, Senator Diane Feinstein, D-Calif., is 89, and
ailing – after 53 years as an elected official.
James Clyburn, D-S.C., is House minority whip and 82. These are the official faces of the Democratic Party.
They came into power and maturity three decades ago during the Clinton years of 1993-1999.
Decades ago, they sometimes supported strong national defense, secure
borders, gas and oil development, fully funding the police, and a few
restrictions on partial-birth abortions.
Not now.
Their role has changed from that of liberals of the Clinton era to
serving as the thin power-holding veneer that masks the new real
Democratic Party.
The party has been changed beyond recognition by Senators Bernie
Sanders, I-Vt., Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., the so-called Squad, the
Congressional Black Caucus, newly elected senators like the Georgia duo
of Jon Ossoff and Raphael Warnock – and Antifa and Black Lives Matter.
Yet Biden and company are still familiar American faces. Their final role is to acculturate the electorate to the new Democratic Party.
Its radicals are breathing down their necks to get out of the way.
Yet for a while longer they still need such an ossified veneer of
respectability to ease the transition to what is now essentially a
socialist-European green party.
This new Democratic Party believes in defunding the police.
It supports the George-Soros-funded state and city district attorneys.
These prosecutors seek either to release violent criminals without bail or reduce their felonies to misdemeanors.
Critical legal and race theories are their creeds. So they argue that crimes have little to do with individual free will.
Criminals are not deterred by tough enforcement of the laws. Instead,
“crime” reflects arbitrary constructs of a racially oppressive
hierarchy. They believe the “woke” revolution of using race and
gender in lieu of a meritocracy should dominate government and corporate
boardrooms.
Racial separation in graduations, dorms, and university programs are needed reparations.
Big Tech is their ally. All the better when it partners with
government, especially the FBI and CIA, to suppress “misinformation” and
“disinformation.”
They believe gender is socially constructed. Thus transitioning biological males can and should compete in women’s sports.
They want a Green New Deal right now, one that calls for the
abolition of natural gas and oil for electricity generation and
transportation.
Abortion is seen as a God-given right – even as a baby passes through the birth canal. Climate
change is their religion, trumping any concern for the viability of the
middle-class suffering from inflation, high interest rates, and
recession.
They want semiautomatic rifles to be banned. Concealed handgun permits should be almost impossible to obtain.
The more voters skip Election Day through mail-in balloting and early voting, the better.
There is no longer “dark money,” only useful “correct” money.
The more that Silicon Valley and Wall Street grandees quietly reroute
hundreds of millions of dollars into hard-Left PACs and “nonpartisan”
causes, the more the donors should expect lucrative crony-capitalist
green deals and government concessions.
Much of the ideology of the new Democratic Party arose in academia,
like critical race theory and modern monetary theory. The giveaway word
is “theory” – a mask for any absurd doctrine that can be dressed up as a
sophisticated new idea.
When Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., the new Democratic minority leader
in the House or Elizabeth Warren in the Senate advocate these
positions, the voters recoil. That pushback is understandable, since
almost none of these notions poll above 50 percent. The role of a calcified Biden, Pelosi, Feinstein,
Hoyer, or Clyburn is to reassure voters through their notoriety and
apparently staid exteriors that they are hardly the sort to embrace
revolution, although that is exactly what they do.
“Ol’ Joe” Biden’s old guard and the new hard Left play a game of mutual advantage.
The new majority of radical Democrats allows the old fogies to bask
in the limelight until they drop – exempt from counter-revolutionary
criticism or inter-party primary challenges or demands to retire.
In return, the codgers reassure the nation that old faces like theirs
cannot possibly be polyester revolutionary socialists – despite their
role in airbrushing and photoshopping the radical catastrophe unfolding
before our eyes.
Setting: Loudoun County, Virginia, 2021. A girl is sexually assaulted
in a school bathroom by a self-styled “trans girl” – i.e., a boy. But
school administrators are so fiercely devoted to transgender ideology
that they cover up the assault – and when the victim’s father, Scott
Smith, speaks up at a school-board meeting, he gets tackled by
cops. In the wake of this and similar incidents around the country, the
National School Boards Association (NSBA) collaborates with Biden White
House staffers on a letter to the Justice Department falsely claiming
that parents like Smith have been guilty of “malice, violence, and
threats against public school officials” and asking the DOJ to deal
appropriately with these “domestic terrorists.”
Cruz, who begins his splendid third book, Justice Corrupted: How the Left Weaponized Our Legal System,
with this story, points out that it’s taken months for the DOJ to
answer letters from him – a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
But it took only six days for the NSBA letter to result in a memo by
Attorney General Merrick Garland promising to act against recalcitrant
parents and ordering the FBI and DOJ to investigate them. Thanks to
widespread publicity, massive displays of parental outrage, a definitive
investigation by the Daily Wire, and a firm grilling of Garland by Cruz
himself at a Senate committee hearing, the DOJ backed off. For the
moment, anyway.
Such weaponization of executive agencies isn’t new. Cruz tells the
story. The DOJ, founded in 1870 by President Grant to address the rise
of the Ku Klux Klan, succeeded eventually in bringing it down. Grant was
a Republican and the Klan was overwhelmingly Democratic, but the DOJ’s
mission wasn’t political; it operated independently from the White
House, and continued to do so under successive administrations. That
changed under FDR. Both the DOJ and Edgar Hoover’s FBI (founded in 1908)
engaged in extralegal shenanigans on FDR’s orders; FDR also seems to
have been the first president to weaponize the IRS (founded in 1913),
which he used to target personal enemies as well as New Deal critics
such as Huey Long and William Randolph Hearst. Later, JFK not only
sicced the DOJ (conveniently led by his brother) on his enemies, but
also told the IRS to deny nonprofit status to conservative groups.
Then came Nixon, at whose behest the FBI harassed the likes of John
Lennon and Muhammed Ali; in 1975, a committee led by Senator Frank
Church uncovered sundry abuses not just by the FBI but also by the CIA
and NSA. But during the Nixon years there were also cases of impressive
integrity. The IRS, while willing enough to look into Nixon’s enemies,
balked at acting against them; indeed, IRS commissioner Donald Alexander
eventually halted such investigations altogether, and when Nixon tried
to fire Alexander, Treasury Secretary George Schulz threatened to quit.
Similarly, when a low-level Nixon aide, with the president’s approval,
proposed a joint DOJ, FBI, and CIA operation against presidential
enemies, both Hoover and Attorney General John Mitchell said no; later,
both Attorney General Elliot Richardson and Assistant Attorney General
William Ruckelshaus famously quit rather than obey Nixon’s order to
dismiss Watergate prosecutor Archibald Cox. In short, as Cruz puts it,
to a remarkable extent “the system worked during the Nixon
administration.”
And so it remained, more or less, until the advent of Barack Obama –
who, when it came to making political use of executive agencies, made
his predecessors look like amateurs. Under Obama, IRS agents were
ordered to target the Tea Party movement and other conservative groups.
After a Treasury Department report uncovered these abuses, IRS director
Lois Lerner took the Fifth at two House committee hearings. She should
have been prosecuted – Cruz himself led an effort to see her brought to
justice – but the DOJ did nothing. “Not only had [Obama] fulfilled the
Nixonian dream of turning the IRS on his political opponents,” observes
Cruz wryly, “he had also pulled off the cover-up that Nixon could never
get right.” Cruz introduced two amendments to address IRS abuses, but
Senate Democrats voted them down. (For what it’s worth, Cruz makes a
trivial mistake here, writing that the current IRS tax code, at 2.4
million words, is four times as long as War and Peace; in fact, it’s closer to fifty times as long.)
Obama’s weaponization of the IRS having ended in a debacle, he
apparently decided that it was better instead to use the FBI, CIA, and
DOJ. So in the last days of his presidency, after Donald Trump had been
elected to succeed him, Obama met with Attorney General Sally Yates, FBI
director James Comey, and Vice President Biden to concoct the the
Trump-Russia hoax. Their ensuing attempt – in collusion with Hillary
Clinton and the Democratic National Committee, and with the assistance
of most of the corporate media, as well as assorted anti-Trump judges
and juries – to bring down Trump by means of false corruption charges
was itself, of course, a colossal (indeed, unprecedented) act of
presidential corruption. In summarizing Obama’s plot against Trump, Cruz
provides just enough detail to make us angry all over again.
Not all of the abuse of government power occurs on presidential
orders. In American courts, the ideal of blind justice has been widely
replaced by Critical Race Theory, which teaches its adherents to view
black felons as wronged innocents and their white victims as guilty
heirs to a legacy of oppression. One of the many terrible consequences
of this twisted mentality was that a thug named Darrell Brooks was
repeatedly freed after committing a series of violent crimes, enabling
him to plow his car into the 2022 Christmas parade in Waukesha,
Wisconsin, killing five and injuring sixty-two (a crime that many media
tried to pass off as an accident and that, in any event, was soon
dropped down the memory hole). Another consequence of the ascent of CRT
was the demonization of the heroic teenager Kyle Rittenhouse, who in
Kenosha (not far from Waukesha) protected private property from BLM
protesters only to be widely depicted as a racist and put on trial by
zealous – but, fortunately, incompetent – prosecutors.
CRT has manifested itself in numerous ways, all horrible. Seattle
mayor Jenny Durkan hailed the 2020 anarchist takeover of a chunk of her
city as evidence that it was experiencing a “summer of love.” Chicago
district attorney Kim Foxx announced that she wouldn’t prosecute theft
cases involving less than $1000; Rachael Rollins, a Boston DA, similarly
promised not to try a long list of offenses. Kamala Harris promoted a
fund to bail out rioters. Across the country, the movement to “defund
the police” was celebrated. When Cruz tried to have Antifa designated as
a terrorist organization, Democrats killed the bill in committee. (In
his account of all this woke nonsense, by the way, Cruz makes another
minor mistake, writing that postmodernist Judith Butler won a
worst-writing prize from the Guardian; in fact, that distinction was awarded by the journal Philosophy and Literature.)
Then came the outraged left-wing response to legitimate concerns
about the fairness of the 2020 election. When White House officials
quite reasonably challenged the results, Cruz urged them to hire better
lawyers, but the ones Cruz approached refused to sign on: that’s how
good a job the left had done of making it toxic simply to provide the
likes of Trump with legal representation. Cruz himself was willing to
argue a couple of cases before the Supreme Court, but the Court declined
to hear them. Meanwhile, cases in lower courts kept being dismissed on
procedural grounds – fueling ignorant media assertions that there was
nothing in Trump’s claims of election fraud. Convinced that the claims
merited serious attention, Cruz put together a group of Senators who
promised that on January 6 they’d reject electors from disputed states
and vote to form an Election Commission to perform an audit; but after
the “insurrectionists” entered the Capitol the plan evaporated – and
Biden’s win was certified. This account intensifies one’s suspicions
that the “insurrection” was orchestrated by the Democrats precisely in
order to achieve that result.
And then came the deluge. Far exceeding traditional bounds of
partisan discourse, Democrats accused virtually half the country of
“treason” and “sedition.” Having smiled on the summer 2020 riots, they
now equated January 6 with 9/11; whereas hundreds of Antifa and BLM
hoodlums who’d set fires, destroyed property, and pummeled innocents
hadn’t been arrested at all, 775 citizens who’d been in or near the
Capitol that day, exercising their constitutional rights, were taken
into custody, with hundreds of them being imprisoned for months. When
Cruz and other members of Congress inquired about these arrestees, the
DOJ ignored them. As if all that weren’t enough, it soon started to look
as if FBI agents – among them a shadowy figure named Ray Epps – had
been among the January 6 “insurrectionists” and had encouraged them to
enter the Capitol.
What to say at the end of such a book? There’s no proper way to conclude it. Justice Corrupted isn’t
a report on a problem that’s been resolved – it’s a snapshot of
conditions that we’re living with right now. If there was, indeed, mass
election fraud in 2020, who’s to say that it won’t be repeated in 2024?
We already know that Obama, Biden, and Hillary Clinton were involved in
the plot to depict Trump as a Russia tool – yet today he’s the
one who’s been subpoenaed (on trumped-up charges) while they remain at
large. We also know that Biden, his name long a synonym for mediocrity,
laziness, and sleaze, has profited from an international
influence-peddling operation whose level of ambition would have stunned
any previous president – at least, any president before Obama. The whole
disgraceful mess is unworthy of America. And there’s no chance of any
improvement unless Trump regains the White House, the GOP retakes the
Senate, and gutsy members of Congress like Ted Cruz help him, at long
last, to drain the swamp.
Bruce Bawer is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.
Are Chinese Communist front groups controlling Democrat officials?
There was a ramen restaurant offering spicy beef tendons on the
ground floor and a spy base upstairs on a busy street in Manhattan’s
Chinatown. When the FBI raided it last year, agents in dark blue
shouldered their way past hole-in-the-wall produce stands selling cheap
strawberries, ads for overseas mobile phone plans, and illicit gambling
dens to search a secret police station.
Indictments charge that this police station did not belong to the
NYPD, but China’s feared Ministry of Public Security. The men working
there in the shadow of the rusted blue steel of the Manhattan Bridge
were allegedly harassing and threatening Chinese Americans, organizing
political events and donating to and meeting with local and national
Democrat officials.
A handful of blocks away from police headquarters, federal court
buildings, and the financial district where Wall Street’s brokers play
with billions a day, sits a slice of Chinatown where elderly men still
ride shaky bicycles and tiny elderly women carrying giant sacks of
recycled cans on their backs pass by. An artist offers cartoonish
sketches of Mao alongside Madonna and musicians squat on sidewalks
playing haunting airs on stringed lutes.
While most New Yorkers think of Chinatown as being all one place,
there are actually strict divisions between the generations of
immigrants, mainlanders who predate the Communist takeover and later
arrivals who are divided by language and politics. The feuds between
these two groups across tenement property lines and community groups
have been as furious as they have been invisible to the rest of the
city. And it’s a struggle in which the new Communist arrivals with their
superior numbers and political connections have won not only in
Manhattan, but in San Francisco, Los Angeles and in other parts of the
country served by the covert buses ferrying illegal migrants from city
to city from depots near the illegal secret police station.
Where Cuban exiles mobilized and made Cuban Americans a bastion of
anti-Communism despite aggressive and energetic efforts by Cuban
intelligence operatives, traditional immigrant ‘Chinatowns’ (which
represent a minority a the Chinese-American population in America) are
dominated by Communist front groups to whom Democrat elected officials
owe their allegiance.
Such was allegedly the case with 107 E. Broadway where the America
Changle Association shared space with an acupuncturist, a restaurant and
a handful of other typical neighborhood businesses. Prosecutors allege
that the America Changle Association housed the secret Chinese police
station which used its premises to coordinate with China’s Ministry of
Public Security and to threaten opponents and fugitives from the brutal
Communist regime.
The Changle district of the Chinese city of Fuzhou provides most of
the cheap migrant labor for the sweatshops and restaurants in Chinatown.
The Fuzhounese come in, sometimes legally and sometimes illegally, and
then are bused to work in Chinese restaurants across America. If you’ve
seen Chinese dishwashers who don’t speak English furiously scrubbing in
the back of some red-and-gold painted eatery with Fu Dog statues out
front, the odds are that they’re from Changle. And that they barely know
that they’re in the United States of America.
The Chinese city of Fuzhou had allegedly set up the spy operation in
Little Fuzhou. To most New Yorkers, the street it was on looks like just
another packed Chinatown thoroughfare, but within Chinatown, East
Broadway is the ‘broadway’ of Little Fuzhou. At the borders, the
Cantonese of the older Chinese-Americans confronts the Fujianese of the
new arrivals. And the Cantonese speakers have been delighted to see the
FBI raid on one of the epicenters of Fujianese power in Chinatown. Local
papers and TV stations have talked of little else.
They hope that the FBI raid on Little Fuzhou last year and the recent indictment of two men,
Chen Jinping (no known relation to President Xi “Pooh” Jinping) and
“Harry” Lu Jianwang, will be the beginning of a larger reckoning. But
that may be excessively optimistic. Secret police stations are one thing
but the America Changle Association has political connections to Mayor
Eric Adams and most Democrat politicians, local or national, who
represent the area.
At one America Changle Association event, Democrat politicians and representatives for Rep. Grace Meng were in attendance.
Figures associated with the Fuzhou group were shown to have donated to
Adams, Meng, as well as her father, Jimmy Meng, a Democrat state
assemblyman who was sent to prison after soliciting an $80,000 bribe
inside a fruit basket. Other recipients included Rep. Judy Chu, on whose
behalf Chinese spy Fang Fang helped organize a town hall.
If all of these stories seem small, it’s because law enforcement is
barely touching the tip of a political iceberg that could shred the
country. Earlier this year, Canadian Security Intelligence Service
documents leaked revealing that similar
setups of immigrant association groups had been used to work to elect
Trudeau and his Liberal Party. The secret papers exposed “undeclared
cash donations” and “having business owners hire international Chinese
students and ‘assign them to volunteer in electoral campaigns on a
full-time basis.’”
Chinese diplomatic institutions were helping set up community associations and then mobilizing them to help the political candidates favored by Beijing, Trudeau and his Liberals, win.
It would be foolish to pretend that this is not happening in America.
Had the CSIS materials not leaked, no one would know how Trudeau and
his leftists were really elected. And, barring an FBI leak, we likely
won’t learn what the Bureau really knows about China’s interference in
our elections. And even if we do, China’s political puppets have learned
to shout “racism” over any measure from expelling ChiCom spies to
investigating research theft to banning TikTok.
The alleged secret police station in Little Fuzhou is one piece in a
much larger political operation. And while the DOJ and the FBI have
stepped in to resist China’s long standing practice of conducting police
state operations on American soil, they aren’t about to blow up the
secret relationship between Democrat elected officials and Communist
front community groups.
The secret base above a ramen place was typical of Beijing’s
operationalizing of its mass migration to western nations. Consulates
coordinate community groups which become elected local and then national
officials. Businessmen funded by the Chinese government and its
oligarchs become community leaders, donate to politicians and set the
agenda for Chinatown.
And that agenda becomes the Democrat agenda.
Harassing political dissidents, threatening violence against them and
their families, organizing pro-China rallies, all things that “Harry”
Lu Jianwang was accused of doing, are small stuff in the bigger picture.
Last year, David Wenwei Chou opened fire in a
Taiwanese church in Laguna Woods, California. Chou had been a director
of Las Vegas Chinese for Peaceful Unification: allegedly a chapter of
the China Council for the Promotion of Peaceful National Reunification.
How many other Chinese Communist operatives would be willing to carry
out terrorist attacks in this country in the event of hostilities? And
what are Beijing’s plans for operationalizing them?
Such questions may not be asked even though plenty of patriotic
Chinese-Americans have put them forward and warned that Communist
infiltration presents a grave threat to their country.
Meanwhile, the secret police station near the Manhattan Bridge where
the subway passes in a rattling show of sparks overhead has closed.
Another one will open in its place. Little Fuzhou continues to grow and
there will be no shortage of waiters with nothing to eat and struggling
businessmen watching their loans balloon with the interest rates who
will happily sign up as “volunteers” to serve the Ministry of Public
Security. There will be knocks on tenement doors in the dead of night,
red flyers, threats outside restaurants where roasted pigs and chickens
hang spread out in the windows, and perhaps even a disappearance or two
that will go unresolved.
And some of the same operatives will lend a hand and some cash for the Democrats.
Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center, is
an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and
Islamic terrorism.
Officials said they were 'very concerned about the cumulative impacts of multiple wind energy projects'
The executive directors of three federally
established fishery councils along the East Coast expressed concern last
year about the threats posed by offshore wind energy projects.
In an Aug. 22 letter to former Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM)
Director Amanda Lefton, the three officials — who respectively lead the
New England, Mid-Atlantic and South Atlantic Fishery Management
Councils — expressed concern about current processes for approving
offshore wind development. They also made a series of recommendations to
help the federal government mitigate impacts on fisheries.
"As we
have stated in several past comment letters to BOEM, we are very
concerned about the cumulative impacts of multiple wind energy projects
on the fisheries we manage," they stated in the letter. "The multiple
wind energy projects planned along the east coast will have cumulative
and compounding effects on our fisheries."
"The synergistic
effects of multiple projects may be more than additive and this may not
be sufficiently identified in project-specific documents; therefore,
losses may be undercompensated by taking a project-by-project approach,"
they continued.
A
lift boat is pictured off the beach near Wainscott, New York, on Dec.
1. The vessel's drill will be used in the construction of the South Fork
Wind farm that is expected to start generating power in late 2023.(Johnny Milano/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
In
addition, the Pacific Fishery Management Council, which represents the
region encompassing the entire West Coast, penned its own letter to
Lefton, similarly warning about the impacts of offshore wind development
on fisheries.
The council said every proposed offshore wind lease area with multiple projects could negatively impact the ecology of the marine ecosystem, the fisheries the council manages and local fishing-dependent communities.
The
letters from the regional councils — which Congress established in 1976
to manage the nation’s marine fishery resources — came after BOEM
proposed guidance in June to ensure offshore renewable energy
development "occurs in a thoughtful manner" and that its conflicts with
fisheries are minimized. Lefton said at the time the agency was seeking
"open and honest conversations focused on finding solutions."
BOEM is expected to finalize the guidance in the coming weeks.
The
draft guidance, though, was criticized by the regional fishery
management councils and a series of fishing industry groups that said it
fell short.
Interior
Secretary Deb Haaland participates in a groundbreaking ceremony for an
offshore wind project in 2022. The Department of Interior has expanded
plans for offshore lease sales for wind development along the nation's
eastern and western coastlines and in the Gulf of Mexico.(Steve Pfost/Newsday RM via Getty Images)
"We
recognize the need for renewable energy and the role these energy
sources will play as we work to reduce our reliance on fossil fuels.
However, addressing climate change should not require significant
negative impacts to food producers or to our ocean environment," Seafood
Harvesters of America, a national organization representing thousands
of fishermen nationwide, wrote in a letter to Lefton.
"We remain
deeply concerned that these guidelines are simply recommendations and
hold no promise of any actual mitigation or compensation for the fishing
industry," they continued. "Any potential effectiveness of these
guidelines is negated by the fact that they are only suggestions for
offshore wind energy developers, rather than binding requirements."
In a separate letter, U.S. Small Business Administration
Office of Advocacy Chief Counsel Major Clark said his department had
heard concerns from heard from "small commercial fishermen, port
operators, marine equipment retailers, onshore processors, fish markets,
and other fishing industry representatives."
"Small businesses
renewed their concerns regarding their inability to adequately comment
on mitigation measures without knowing the impacts that offshore wind
development activities will have," Clark wrote. "There are simply too
many unknowns for the current guidance to be effective."
Hundreds
rallied earlier this year in Point Pleasant Beach, New Jersey, against
offshore wind projects over concerns they are harming whales.(Ali Reid/Twitter/Video Screenshot)
Meanwhile,
offshore wind projects have also faced increasing scrutiny in light of a
recent spate of whales beaching along the East Coast.
Since the
beginning of the year, more than 20 humpback whales and endangered North
Atlantic right whales have been discovered dead along the East Coast
with most beaching in New Jersey, New York and Virginia, according to
federal data. The uptick in deaths has led to calls
from lawmakers, local officials and conservation organizations for a
federal moratorium on wind development in the Atlantic Ocean.
While administration officials and some environmental groups
have said there is no evidence suggesting wind turbine construction is
killing whales and that the deaths are part of an "unusual mortality
event" for both whale species dating back years, the region is on pace
to far surpass death figures set since the mortality events were
declared.
BOEM didn't respond to a request for comment.
Thomas Catenacci is a politics writer for Fox News Digital.
"The Americans are keeping their desire to negotiate with the Islamic Republic [to revive the nuclear deal] in secret in the midst of denial and silence". — Independent Persian, February 23, 2023.
Nothing seems to stop the
Biden administration from wanting to reward the ruling mullahs of Iran
with a nuclear deal that will pave the way for the Islamist regime of
Iran legally to obtain as many nuclear weapons as it likes, empower the
ruling mullahs with billions of dollars, lift sanctions against their
theocratic regime, allow them to rejoin the global financial system and
enhance their legitimacy on the global stage.
These benefits presumably include further enabling the regime's
ruthless expansion throughout the Middle East -- Iraq, Syria, Yemen,
Lebanon and the terrorist groups in the Gaza Strip -- and into Latin
America.
"The Americans are keeping their desire to negotiate with the
Islamic Republic [to revive the nuclear deal] in secret in the midst of
denial and silence". — Independent Persian, February 23, 2023.
In addition, Iran, called by the US Department of State a "top
sponsor of state terrorism," has been ratcheting up its presence and
terror cells in Latin America while using the continent as a sanctuary.
During the Biden administration, the Iranian regime has also attempted to assassinate US officials on American soil.
Even The Washington Post pointed out that the attempted
kidnappings should be a serious warning to the Biden administration:
"The message for the Biden administration, which has frequently
proclaimed its intention to defend pro-democracy dissidents, is that
Iran and other foreign dictatorships won't shrink from launching attacks
inside the United States unless deterred..."
Instead, the Biden administration remains silent and evidently
still wants to reward the mullahs with the nuclear deal and it continues
to see "diplomacy" -- read: appeasement -- as the only path to deal
with the Iranian regime.
Nothing.... seems to be deterring the Biden administration from
trying to give the Islamist regime of Iran the ultimate gift: unlimited
nuclear weapons.
(Image source: iStock)
Nothing seems to stop the Biden administration from wanting to reward the ruling mullahs of Iran with a nuclear deal that will pave
the way for the Islamist regime of Iran legally to obtain as many
nuclear weapons as it likes, empower the ruling mullahs with billions of
dollars, lift sanctions against their theocratic regime, allow them to
rejoin the global financial system and enhance their legitimacy on the
global stage.
These benefits presumably include further enabling the regime's
ruthless expansion throughout the Middle East -- Iraq, Syria, Yemen,
Lebanon and the terrorist groups in the Gaza Strip -- and into Latin
America.
According to the Independent Persian on February 23:
"Ali Bagheri Keni, the chief nuclear negotiator of the
Islamic Republic, emphasized the continuation of negotiations to revive
the JCPOA and announced that negotiations are still ongoing [between
Iran, the Europeans and the Biden administration] within the framework
of the exchange of messages between the two sides, and the parties are
exchanging their views... The Americans are keeping their desire to
negotiate with the Islamic Republic [to revive the nuclear deal] in
secret in the midst of denial and silence".
Here are some the Iranian regime's terrorist actions since the Biden Administration assumed office:
Most recently, the Iranian regime, with a drone strike, killed an American contractor and injured six other US personnel deployed in Syria. On the same day, Iranian-backed groups also launched 10 rockets that targeted coalition forces at the Green Village in northeast Syria.
The Iranian regime, by providing weapons and troops to Russia, is also entrenched in the war on Ukraine. Even the European Union ultimately acknowledged
that the Iranian regime was "provid[ing] military support for Russia's
unprovoked and unjustified war of aggression against Ukraine," via
"development and delivery of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles to Russia."
British Foreign Secretary James Cleverly noted in a statement:
"These cowardly drone strikes are an act of desperation.
By enabling these strikes, these individuals and a manufacturer have
caused the people of Ukraine untold suffering."
In addition, Iran, called by the US Department of State a "top sponsor of state terrorism," has been ratcheting up its presence and terror cells in Latin America while using that continent as a sanctuary.
During the Biden administration, the Iranian regime has also
attempted to assassinate US officials on American soil. A member of the
Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Shahram Poursafi, aka Mehdi
Rezayi, 45, of Tehran, was charged
on August 11, 2022 with a terrorist plot to pay an individual in the
United States $300,000 to murder former US National Security Advisor
John Bolton. According to the US Department of Justice:
"An Iranian national and member of Iran's Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) was charged by complaint, unsealed
today in the District of Columbia, with use of interstate commerce
facilities in the commission of murder-for-hire and with providing and
attempting to provide material support to a transnational murder plot."
The regime also attempted to assassinate former US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who was reportedly the second target of the Iranian regime. The IRGC member allegedly offered $1 million for Pompeo's murder. In addition, a man armed with an assault rifle showed up
at the Brooklyn, NY home of Iranian-American author and human rights
activist Masih Alinejad. Last year, she was the target of a kidnapping plot in which she says she would have been killed. There are likely other US citizens on the regime's murder list as well.
"An attempted assassination of a former U.S. Government official on
U.S. soil is completely unacceptable and will not be tolerated," said Steven M. D'Antuono, Assistant Director in Charge of the FBI Washington Field Office.
These attempts to murder US citizens on American soil by the Iranian
regime are unprecedented and deliberate violations of US sovereignty.
The Biden Administration, however, as can be seen from the chaos on the
US southern border, is not taking the security of the American people
seriously. So far, at just that border, the US has seen the entry of 5.5
million illegal migrants; 1.4 million "gotaways," about whom the government knows nothing; 853 people who died
trying to enter in just 12 months; fentanyl, originating in China, that
has been killing tens of thousands of Americans each year and is now, according
to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, "the top cause
of death among U.S. adults (ages 18-45)," and continuing to kill
Americans "in record numbers." Also seen across America's southern border, are 87,000 children who are unaccounted for and may well have been abducted into child slavery or sex-trafficking.
Even the Washington Postpointed out that Iran's attempted kidnappings on American soil should be a serious warning to the Biden administration:
"The message for the Biden administration, which has
frequently proclaimed its intention to defend pro-democracy dissidents,
is that Iran and other foreign dictatorships won't shrink from launching
attacks inside the United States unless deterred..."
Instead, the Biden administration remains
silent and evidently still wants to reward the mullahs with the nuclear
deal and it continues to see "diplomacy" -- read: appeasement -- as the
only path to deal with the Iranian regime. "I continue to believe,
Biden said on July 14, "that diplomacy is the best way to achieve this outcome."
Secretary of State Antony Blinken said,
"We continue to believe that ultimately diplomacy is the most effective
way to deal with this, but that's not where the focus is."
Nothing, not even the killing and wounding of American citizens,
seems to be deterring the Biden administration from trying to give the
Islamist regime of Iran the ultimate gift: unlimited nuclear weapons.
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a business strategist and
advisor, Harvard-educated scholar, political scientist, board member of
Harvard International Review, and president of the International
American Council on the Middle East. He has authored several books on Islam and US Foreign Policy. He can be reached at Dr.Rafizadeh@Post.Harvard.Edu
Sen. Ron Johnson and Rep. Andy Biggs say Blinken should face impeachment if he doesn't step down.
Two
high-profile Republicans who have probed the Biden family scandal are
calling on Secretary of State Antony Blinken to resign or face
impeachment over allegations he helped trigger an intelligence community
letter during the 2020 election that falsely portrayed Hunter Biden's
laptop contents as Russian disinformation.
The rebukes of Blinken by Rep. Andy Biggs (R-Ariz.) and Sen. Ron
Johnson (R-Wisc.) came after the release Thursday night of testimony
from former CIA chief Michael Morell that Blinken had spurred him to
organize the now-infamous October 2020 letter to benefit the Biden
campaign. Morell testified he agreed to do so because Blinken reached
out to him and he wanted to influence the election in Joe Biden's favor.
"This, in my opinion, probably disqualifies him to serve as the
Secretary of State," Biggs told Just the News in a wide-ranging
interview Friday on the John Solomon Reports podcast. "And I know people
keep saying, 'Andy, you want to impeach everybody?' Well, you know,
Tony Blinken probably should be impeached, just like [Homeland Secretary
Alejandro] Mayorkas should be impeached.
Biggs, a member of the House Judiciary and Oversight Committees that
are currently probing the Biden family influence peddling allegations,
said the revelation that Blinken allegedly was willing to accuse a
nuclear superpower, Russia, of interfering in the U.S. election without
evidence just to create a presidential debate talking point for Joe
Biden made it impossible for him to deal credibly with foreign countries
as America's chief diplomat.
"Let's talk about our allies who now don't trust us at all," he said.
"And why would they? They think we're weak, untrustworthy. How in the
world can he remain our spokesperson to the world? ... I just don't see
how he can, and he should go. I think he's irreparably harmed the United
States."
Asked whether he was formally asking Blinken to resign, Biggs
answered: "Yeah, in fact, I'll break it on your show. Tony Blinken, you
should resign."
Johnson, who led a 2020 Senate probe that concluded Hunter Biden's
foreign business dealings while his father was vice president harmed
U.S. national security, also called for Blinken to resign if Morell's
allegations prove true.
"And if he doesn't resign, he should be impeached," he said during an
interview Friday with the Star News Network. "Again, so many members of
the Biden administration have this level of deceit, dishonesty and
corruption. This is a lawless administration."
The State Department declined to address Morell's allegations about
Blinken, saying it would not comment on matters currently under
investigation.
House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, who conducted the
bombshell interview with Morell that uncovered Blinken's role, has
demanded the secretary of state answer questions about his role in the
letter and whether others, including the president, were involved.
"Based on Morell's testimony, it is apparent that the Biden campaign
played an active role in the origins of the public statement, which had
the effect of helping to suppress the Hunter Biden story and preventing
American citizens from making a fully informed decision during the 2020
presidential election," Jordan wrote Blinken in demanding he turn over
evidence about the letter.
"This concerted effort to minimize and suppress public dissemination
of the serious allegations about the Biden family was a grave disservice
to all American citizens' informed participation in our democracy," he
added.
Jordan released an excerpt of Morell’s interview in which the former
CIA officer said that a call with Blinken, then an adviser to the Biden
campaign, “triggered” his effort to get intelligence experts to sign the
letter.
Democrats rejected the Republican portrayal of Morell’s interview.
“Jim Jordan has released cherry-picked excerpts of a transcribed
interview,” a Democratic House Judiciary committee spokesman said in a
statement. “To be clear, no part of that interview demonstrates that
Tony Blinken or any other Biden campaign official asked Mike Morell to
write a letter about Hunter Biden’s laptop.”
The Democrats released a different part of the transcript in which
Morell said he did not recall Blinken specifically asking him to write
the letter. “My memory is that he did not, right. My memory is that he
asked what I thought.
In this new video, Paul Watson discusses the creation of
black victimhood by the Woke media as crime stats soar in Chicago (now
known as “Chiraq”). A weekend of absolute chaos, riots and crime by
young black youth in the Democrat-run city continues to rage on with no
results, except to blame police and white people.
Even though Syrian and Iraqi Christian asylum seekers in Turkey face harassment, poverty and discrimination, the asylum applications of many Iraqi and Syrian Christians are rejected by Australia, Canada, the US and other Western countries. Why?
Iraqi and Syrian Christian
asylum seekers, stuck in Turkey for years, suffer from countless
problems such as their children's lack of education, severe poverty,
lack of religious liberty, lack of work permits, restricted freedom of
movement, the hostility of some Muslims against their faith, and
rejections of their asylum applications by Western governments.
"Although the European Union says the full amount has been
allocated and more than 4 billion euros have been disbursed, the Turkish
government has taken issue with the pace and manner of the payments,
which have gone to refugee-serving organizations rather than government
accounts." — Migration Policy Institute, April 8, 2021.
Even though Syrian and Iraqi Christian asylum seekers in Turkey
face harassment, poverty and discrimination, the asylum applications of
many Iraqi and Syrian Christians are rejected by Australia, Canada, the
US and other Western countries. Why?
Around 22,000 Iraqi and Syrian Christian asylum seekers currently
live in Lebanon, Jordan and Turkey. They have been exposed to genocide,
terrorism, war crimes and crimes against humanity in their home
countries. Where are the Western governments?
So, what has happened to the 6 billion euros given by the EU to
Turkey so that Turkey would help refugees more? If such a huge amount of
money has been granted to Turkey to provide more for refugees, why are
so many refugees and asylum seekers still suffering under horrible
conditions in the country? And who are these organizations referred to
as "refugee-serving"? Have they taken the money, embezzled it, spent it,
and it wasn't enough? The international community, including the EU,
urgently needs more transparency regarding how the money has been spent
and how many refugees and asylum seekers have benefited from it.
Why not issue non-refugee visas? Especially as, according to
figures reportedly released by the Biden Administration, 5.5 million
illegal migrants have crossed the Mexican border into the US as well as
"more than 414 million lethal doses" of fentanyl just in 2022.
Currently, asylum seekers need humanitarian visas to be resettled
in the West. But many Christian asylum seekers are educated or have
skills, so they would be qualified to receive work permits to reside in
Western countries. They hope to safely migrate for work, using their
skills to provide for their families and live dignified lives.
Where are the UN, international women's organizations, the
International Rescue Committee and children's rights organizations?
These asylum seekers are facing extinction in their homelands, suffering
in places such as Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan, and hoping someday to
find safety in the West.
Iraqi and Syrian Christian asylum seekers, stuck in Turkey
for years, suffer from countless problems such as their children's lack
of education, severe poverty, lack of religious liberty, lack of work
permits, restricted freedom of movement, the hostility of some Muslims
against their faith, and rejections of their asylum applications by
Western governments. Pictured: Kahramanmaras refugee camp, built to
house 11,500 people from Syria, photographed on September 19, 2019 in
Kahramanmaras, Turkey. (Photo by Burak Kara/Getty Images)
The Christians of Iraq and Syria have for decades suffered from persecution and instability caused by oppression by the Ba'ath regimes, the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq, the outbreak of Sunni-Shiite fighting in 2006, al-Qaeda terrorism, the 2014 genocide by ISIS, ongoing Turkish airstrikes on Iraq and Syria,
and in many cases, pressures and harassment at the hands of their
Muslim neighbors. All this persecution has forced many of them to leave
their home countries and seek asylum elsewhere.
"Iraq is home to a number of traditional Orthodox and
Catholic churches, but all are seriously affected by intolerance,
discrimination and persecution from local leaders, government
authorities and Islamic extremist groups....In the Nineveh Plains
region, church leaders have been kidnapped in the past; those speaking
out against local militias or political leaders are particularly at
risk."
Since the 2003 US-led invasion of Iraq, the country's Christian
community has dwindled from around 1.5 million to fewer than 200,000.
The persecution of Christians peaked with the takeover of large areas of
Iraq by ISIS in 2014.
After ISIS captured the Iraqi city of Mosul in June of 2014,
Christians were given the option to either convert to Islam, pay taxes (jizya), leave, or be killed. ISIS marked Christian homes with the Arabic letter "N," for Nasrani,
or Christian. Two months later, in August 2014, ISIS took control of
Christian towns in the Nineveh Plains, resulting in a second wave of
mass displacement, according to a report by the University of Minnesota.
In Syria, Christians also continue to face severe persecution. Open Doors reports:
"Christians in Syria still grapple with daily persecution
that may become violent, despite the public threat from so-called
Islamic State having largely subsided.... Sharing the gospel is very
risky, and church buildings have often been completely destroyed. The
abduction of church leaders continues to have a considerably negative
impact on Christian communities.
"The number of Christians in the country continues to decrease, as many have fled conflict and persecution.
"All Syrians and Iraqis have experienced hardship in the past decade,
but Christians have faced more than most. In many regions, they were
targeted by Islamic militants – losing their jobs, their homes and even
their lives. Many had to flee, displaced either within Syria or abroad."
Many persecuted Christians from Iraq and Syria, since they were
forced to leave their home countries, are still looking for a new
homeland.
At present, approximately 5,000-6,000 Iraqi and Syrian Christian
asylum seekers live in Turkey, waiting to be resettled in the West. Many
arrived in Turkey during the 2014 genocide by ISIS. They are currently
living in 35 cities in Turkey, as the government has spread them across
the country.
The Iraqi Christian Relief Council
(ICRC) went to Turkey in late February to interview Christian families
from Iraq and Syria on camera for an upcoming documentary on the refugee
crisis. The author spoke with ICRC and its founding president, Juliana
Taimoorazy.
Forgotten, abandoned people
Iraqi and Syrian Christian asylum seekers, stuck in Turkey for years,
suffer from countless problems such as their children's lack of
education, severe poverty, lack of religious liberty, lack of work
permits, restricted freedom of movement, hostility of some Muslims
against their faith and rejections of their asylum applications by
Western governments.
A major problem they face is their children's inability to receive an
education in Turkey. Middle East Christians deeply value education, but
when their children try to go to school in some of the smaller Turkish
towns, many are bullied for being Christian and for not speaking
Turkish. Some of them go to makeshift schools that are not accredited in
Turkey. Most, therefore, do not go to school at all.
In Iraq and Syria, the Christians who fled were mainly professionals,
such as teachers, doctors, engineers, lawyers and business owners. In
Turkey, however, they are just asylum seekers with minimal rights and –
important in the Middle East – they feel it is "a loss of dignity".
Although many are educated and capable, they cannot get work permits, so
they cannot legally work. They, therefore, cannot provide for their
families and struggle from extreme poverty.
Some resort to begging in the streets or borrowing money from
families or neighbors – then end up in debt. In some instances, their
relatives try to help, but most, even in the West, are refugees
themselves and can only offer minimal help, if that.
The neighborhoods are bad, the homes are damp and infested with
cockroaches. They cannot afford heat. Sometimes two families live
together in one apartment with no privacy.
Many are ill, but many do not have access to healthcare.
They cannot travel freely: even to go from one town to another, they
must first get permission (an official document) from state authorities.
Single mothers
Single mothers try to be both the mother and the father. Their
husbands have either died or left their families because they were
unable to handle the terrible situations that their families were going
through. Unfortunately, there have been some cases reported of women not
having a choice but to sell their bodies to provide for their families –
but they say that goes against their faith, their morals, and
everything they were raised to defend.
Hostility to Christians
In some towns, the asylum seekers are not able to socialize with
locals: they are discriminated against for being Iraqi or Syrian and
Christian. In smaller towns, because of the hostile environment against
Christians, parents fear sending their daughters alone outside even to
go shopping.
As most live in small towns, they are afraid of saying they are
Christian. They hide their faith for fear of persecution and avoid open
worship.
When asylum seekers live in the same neighborhood with Muslim
refugees or migrants from Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria, they fear them as
well. In bigger cities, their lives are a bit better: people are
somewhat kinder and friendlier towards Christians and foreigners.
Turkey's responsibility towards Christian asylum seekers and refugees
The "EU-Turkey deal,"
signed in March 2016, refers to the "statement of cooperation" between
EU states and the Turkish government. According to it, Turkey would
receive €6 billion to improve the humanitarian situation faced by
refugees there. In December of 2020, the European Union paid the final installment of a €6 billion fund to Turkey to host refugees.
According to a 2021 report by the Migration Policy Institute, however:
"The European Union agreed to provide 6 billion euros in
humanitarian assistance, education, health care, municipal
infrastructure, and socioeconomic support for Syrian refugees in Turkey
between 2016 and 2019. Although the European Union says the full amount
has been allocated and more than 4 billion euros have been disbursed,
the Turkish government has taken issue with the pace and manner of the
payments, which have gone to refugee-serving organizations rather than
government accounts. In 2020, the European Union committed to providing
an additional 485 million euros to see some programs continue through
2021."
So, what has happened to the 6 billion euros given by the EU to
Turkey so that Turkey would help refugees more? If such a huge amount of
money has been granted to Turkey to provide more for refugees, why are
so many refugees and asylum seekers still suffering under horrible
conditions in the country? And who are these organizations referred to
as "refugee-serving"? Have they taken the money, embezzled it, spent it,
and it wasn't enough? The international community, including the EU,
urgently needs more transparency regarding how the money has been spent
and how many refugees and asylum seekers have benefited from it.
Since 2018, the government of Turkey has been in charge of refugee
work. The Turkish government authorities are thus responsible for the
wellbeing of those asylum seekers.
In 2018, the U.N. refugee agency handed over the management of registration procedures for refugees in Turkey to the country's migration authority.
Turkey's Directorate General of Migration Management itself now
oversees the registration of refugees and determines their status. Any
foreigner seeking international protection in Turkey first has to apply
to the local offices of the Turkish migration authority.
Hence, the government officials of Turkey could help asylum seekers
and refugees more. They could provide them with healthcare including
medicines and mental health therapy. And they could lodge Christian
asylum seekers in cities and towns that are more tolerant towards
Christians and other non-Muslims.
Asylum applications rejected by the West
Even though Syrian and Iraqi Christian asylum seekers in Turkey face
harassment, poverty and discrimination, the asylum applications of many
Iraqi and Syrian Christians are rejected by Australia, Canada, the US
and other Western countries. Why? The Iraqi Christian Relief Council is
launching an effort to discover the reason.
Around 22,000 Iraqi and Syrian Christian asylum seekers currently
live in Lebanon Jordan, and Turkey. They have been exposed to genocide,
terrorism, war crimes and crimes against humanity in their home
countries. Where are the Western governments?
Why not issue non-refugee visas? Especially as, according to figures reportedly
released by the Biden Administration, 5.5 million illegal migrants have
crossed the Mexican border into the US as well as "more than 414
million lethal doses" of fentanyl just in 2022.
Currently, asylum seekers need humanitarian visas to be resettled in
the West. But many Christian asylum seekers are educated or have skills,
so they would be qualified to receive work permits to reside in Western
countries. They hope to safely migrate for work, using their skills to
provide for their families and live dignified lives.
Western governments and international human rights organizations
could cooperate with and form partnerships with other organizations such
as the Iraqi Christian Relief Council to help asylum seekers and
refugees urgently and effectively.
Rt. Rev. Bashar Warda, the Archbishop of Irbil, the capital of Kurdistan Regional Government of Iraq, said in London in 2019:
"Christianity in Iraq, one of the oldest Churches, if not
the oldest Church in the world, is perilously close to extinction.
Those of us who remain must be ready to face martyrdom."
Referring to ISIS jihadists that displaced Christians from their historic homelands in Iraq, the archbishop said:
"Our tormentors confiscated our present while seeking to
wipe out our history and destroy our future. In Iraq there is no redress
for those who have lost properties, homes and businesses. Tens of
thousands of Christians have nothing to show for their life's work, for
generations of work, in places where their families have lived, maybe,
for thousands of years."
The archbishop criticized Britain's Christian leaders of failing to do enough in defense of the vanishing Christian community in Iraq.
Nearly four years after the archbishop's plea, nothing has changed.
Where are the UN, international women's organizations, the International
Rescue Committee and children's rights organizations? These asylum
seekers are facing extinction in their homelands, suffering in places
such as Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan, and hoping someday to find safety in
the West.
Uzay Bulut, a Turkish journalist, is a Distinguished
Senior Fellow at the Gatestone Institute. She is also a research fellow
for the Philos Project.
