Friday, October 4, 2019

Schiff’s Deep State Collusion - Matthew Vadum

by Matthew Vadum

NY Times accidentally suggests the intelligence committee chairman’s fingerprints are all over the so-called whistleblower’s report.

Leftist conspiracy-monger Adam Schiff was aware of select details of the Ukraine-Biden allegations against President Donald Trump before a lying CIA snitch reportedly involved in the case filed a complaint under a whistleblower law, according to the intermittently reliable New York Times.

It has been widely reported that the CIA official’s complaint was based on a July 25 telephone conversation between Trump and Ukrainian President Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that the said stoolie somehow learned about.

Rep. Schiff is the California Democrat, now the laughably unqualified chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, a Trump-hater who spent the last three years smearing anyone who doubts the existence of his Trump-Russia electoral collusion conspiracy theory as traitors and agents of the Russian government while apparently leaking secret details of congressional investigations to his friends at CNN and elsewhere in the media at every opportunity.

Trump stands accused by Democrats without any credible evidence whatsoever of trying to muscle the government of Ukraine into investigating a potential 2020 opponent, Joe Biden, in order to discredit his campaign.

This, of course, is the exact opposite of what actually happened. Three Democrat senators urged Ukraine to investigate Trump and a Democratic National Committee operative named Alexandra Chalupa went on a dirt-digging expedition hoping to get usable opposition research on Trump from Ukrainian officials.

The New York Times makes the claim about Schiff’s foreknowledge of the whistleblower report citing “a spokesman and current and former American officials,” so take the report with a grain of salt. The Old Gray Lady lies habitually nowadays so trusting the once-respected media outlet is a risky enterprise.

But assuming the news report is accurate, it points to yet another a real-life conspiracy by the nation’s intelligence community to drive Trump from office, this time after it became clear that the Russian “pissgate” dossier paid for by Hillary Clinton and semi-senile former Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s useless report on Russian meddling in U.S. elections wouldn’t get the job done.

And Schiff, whose party still cannot accept that Hillary Clinton was defeated fair and square, is a vital player in the ongoing plot to nullify the results of the 2016 election that brought us President Trump.

The news report states that the mysterious CIA officer in question approached Schiff’s committee “with his concerns about Mr. Trump only after he had had a colleague first convey them to the C.I.A.’s top lawyer.”

“Concerned about how that initial avenue for airing his allegations through the C.I.A. was unfolding, the officer then approached the House aide. In both cases, the original accusation was vague.

“The House staff member, following the committee’s procedures, suggested the officer find a lawyer to advise him and file a whistle-blower complaint. The aide shared some of what the officer conveyed to Mr. Schiff. The aide did not share the whistle-blower’s identity with Mr. Schiff, an official said.”

“Like other whistle-blowers have done before and since under Republican and Democratic-controlled committees, the whistle-blower contacted the committee for guidance on how to report possible wrongdoing within the jurisdiction of the intelligence community,” said Schiff mouthpiece Patrick Boland.

In the hearsay-driven whistleblower complaint, which some have said reads like it was written by committee, the CIA stool pigeon claimed Trump pressured the Ukrainian government to investigate various issues that could help him politically.

Curiously, the demonstrably true claim that former Vice President Joe Biden threatened to cut off U.S. aid promised to Ukraine if it didn’t fire a top prosecutor who was investigating a Ukrainian company Biden’s son, Hunter, worked at did not appear in the New York Times account. Hunter Biden, reportedly a substance-abusing philanderer with no obvious background in natural gas or Ukrainian affairs, earned up to $50,000 a month in his five years with the energy company, Burisma Holdings, becoming a member of its board.

As everyone now knows, Joe Biden was captured on video in early 2018 bragging about how as vice president in 2016 he strong-armed the Ukrainians into firing a prosecutor who had been looking into Burisma.

“I said, I’m telling you, you’re not getting the billion dollars. … I looked at them and said: I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money. Well, son of a bitch. He got fired.”

It just so happens that Fox News reported Oct. 2 that the fired prosecutor, Viktor Shokin, was asked to drop his investigation into Burisma and that the pressure to do that came from the Obama administration.

Fox obtained notes from a January 2019 interview Trump attorney and former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani conducted with Shokin.

“Mr. Shokin attempted to continue the investigations but on or around June or July of 2015, the U.S. Ambassador Geoffrey R. Pyatt told him that the investigation has to be handled with white gloves, which according to Mr. Shokin, that implied do nothing,” the notes from the interview stated. The notes, which the Department of State’s inspector general sent to Congress Oct. 2, also made the assertion that Shokin was told Biden had put U.S. aid to Ukraine on hold over the Burisma investigation.

The notes indicated Shokin, who admittedly, like virtually all public figures in Ukraine stands accused of corruption, said his “investigations stopped out of fear of the United States.”

No wonder Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential campaign put the heat on big media outlets to stop giving Giuliani air time. The campaign recently sent letters to NBC News, CBS News, Fox News, and CNN to articulate its “grave concern that you continue to book Rudy Giuliani on your air to spread false, debunked conspiracy theories on behalf of Donald Trump.”

Returning to the Old Gray Lady, the Times reporters, Julian E. Barnes, Michael S. Schmidt and Matthew Rosenberg, also brazenly lied about the transcript of a July 25 telephone conversation between Trump and Zelensky that the CIA stoolie somehow learned about. This is the conversation that Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi relied on Sept. 24 when she pulled the trigger to begin the process of impeaching President Trump, falsely claiming Trump “asked a foreign government to help him in his political campaign at the expense of our national security.”

“A reconstituted transcript released by the White House of a call between Mr. Trump and President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine backed up the whistle-blower’s account, which was itself based on information from a half dozen American officials and deemed credible by the inspector general for the intelligence community,” the Times report states.

But we know the transcript backs up no such thing. In fact, it contradicts the CIA rat’s account.

Trump never threatened Zelensky, a fact the Ukrainian president himself confirmed Sept. 25 to reporters.

Trump asked for help from Ukraine, something the United States is entitled to do pursuant to a circa 2000 mutual legal assistance treaty between the countries.

The telephone call transcript shows that Trump told Zelensky that he “heard you had a prosecutor who was very good and he was shut down and that’s really unfair.” He said Giuliani and U.S. Attorney General Bill Barr would call him. Barr, it so happens, is conducting an investigation that deals with the 2016 U.S. election, the Democrat-Deep State plot to overturn said election, and Ukraine’s connection to it.

Trump also mentioned CrowdStrike, the California-based cybersecurity firm that the Democratic National Committee keeps assuring us determined that DNC computer systems were hacked by the Russians.

Yes, that is the same allegedly hacked computer platform that the DNC strangely refused to allow the FBI to examine. The DNC has also never provided proof that the Russian cyberattack actually took place.

“I would like you to do us a favor though, because our country has been through a lot and Ukraine knows a lot about it,” the transcript indicates Trump saying, as he alluded to Barr’s fact-finding mission.

“I would like you to find out what happened with this whole situation with Ukraine, they say CrowdStrike … I guess you have one of your wealthy people … The server, they say Ukraine has it. There are a lot of things that went on, the whole situation.”

Trump said, “The other thing, there’s a lot of talk about Biden’s son, that Biden stopped the prosecution and a lot of people want to find out about that so whatever you can do with the Attorney General would be great. Biden went around bragging that he stopped the prosecution so if you can look into it -- it sounds horrible to me.”

Trump is America’s chief law enforcement officer. He is entitled to get to the bottom of the long-running cabal to invalidate the votes of the 63 million Americans who voted for him. If that means investigating Joe Biden, so be it. Biden doesn’t special immunity just because he’s running for office. As we now know, Trump didn’t get any kind of immunity from investigation just because he was seeking the presidency – to the contrary, the fact of his candidacy brought meddling government officials from inside and outside the United States down on him precisely because he was running.

On Oct. 2, Trump said Schiff should be forced to resign for reading a fictional account of the transcript at a recent congressional hearing. Schiff likened Trump to a mafia don.

“We don’t call him shifty Schiff for nothing,” said Trump. “He’s a shifty dishonest guy.”
It is hard to argue with that.

Matthew Vadum


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

"Anti-Normalization" With Israel: The True Goal - Bassam Tawil

by Bassam Tawil

They are worried that Arabs who go to work in Israel may fall in love with Israelis and stop thinking of ways to kill them or destroy Israel.

  • If greeting a Jew on his or her holiday, cleaning the beach with an Israeli, or working in Israel are considered by many Arabs a "crime," what will be the fate of any Arab who makes peace with Israel?
  • Those who are calling for boycotts of Israel -- and are threatening and inciting their people against any Arab who dares to host a Jew or send him or her greetings -- are also emphatically opposed to peace with Israel. For them, making peace with the "Zionist entity" is considered an act of treason.
  • They are worried that an Arab who greets a Jew may one day make peace with Israel. They are worried that an Arab state that hosts Israeli athletes may one day make peace with Israel. They are worried that Arabs who go to work in Israel may fall in love with Israelis and stop thinking of ways to kill them or destroy Israel.

The presence of Israeli athletes at the World Athletics Championships in Qatar (Sept. 27 - Oct. 6) drew sharp criticism from many Arabs, who expressed outrage on social media through a hashtag titled, "Normalization is Treason." Pictured: Lonah Chemtai Salpeter of Israel (left) and Desi Jisa Mokonin of Bahrain during the Women's Marathon at the World Athletics Championships in Doha, Qatar on September 27, 2019. (Photo by Matthias Hangst/Getty Images)

Arabs who dare to greet Jews in public on the Jewish New Year are being denounced by their fellow Arabs as traitors. Arabs who dare to engage in sports activities with Jews are also being condemned by their fellow Arabs as traitors.

In the past week, many Arabs have taken to social media to express outrage over a Jewish New Year greeting by Sheikh Abdullah bin Zayed Al Nahyan, the Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation of the United Arab Emirates (UAE).

On September 29, the minister posted on his Twitter account "Shana Tova" ("Good Year" in Hebrew). His greeting to Jews celebrating the Jewish New Year has triggered a wave of condemnations from many Arabs, including Palestinians, who accused the minister of promoting normalization with Israel.

The vicious ad hominem attacks on the UAE foreign minister included prayers that God allow him to burn in hell and several posters comparing him to a monkey. Because of the greeting, the minister is also being denounced as a "Zionist," "war criminal," "dog," "traitor" and "pig."

Some Arabs expressed hope that the UAE will vanish "just like Israel will cease to exist."

Others seized the opportunity to remind the "shameless" minister of the Qur'an verse (Al-Ma'idah, 51) that says:
"O you who believe, do not take the Jews and the Christians as allies. They are allies of one to another (when against you), and whoso from amongst you takes them for allies, is indeed one of them."
The attacks on the UAE foreign minister came as many Arab social media users strongly condemned Qatar for allowing Israeli athletes to participate in the 2019 World Athletics Championship, held at the Khalifa International Stadium in Doha from September 27- October 6.

The presence of the Israeli athletes in Qatar drew sharp criticism from many Arabs, who expressed outrage on social media through a hashtag titled, "Normalization is Treason."

Qatar has been accused by its Arab neighbors, including Saudi Arabia and its Gulf allies, of sponsoring and funding the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood and extremist groups such as Hamas, the Palestinian terror group ruling the Gaza Strip.

Qatar's alleged support and financing of extremist groups, however, has not spared it criticism from Hamas and Islamic Jihad, the second-largest terror group in the Gaza Strip. In recent months, Qatar has been playing a role in preventing all-out war in the Gaza Strip between Israel and Hamas. The Qataris have also been delivering millions of dollars in cash to Palestinians in the Gaza Strip as part of an effort to boost the Palestinian economy there and help poor and unemployed Palestinians.

Hamas and Islamic Jihad now seem to be spearheading the campaign of incitement against Qatar for its decision to allow Israeli athletes to participate in the World Championships in Doha.

Hamas expressed "regret" over Qatar's decision and said it considers the hosting of the Israeli athletes as "a form of normalization that will be used [by Israel] to whitewash its image in front of the world." This is the same Hamas that has been begging Qatar for cash in the past few months.

Similarly, Islamic Jihad issued a statement strongly condemning Qatar and repeating its call for Arabs and Muslims to boycott Israel. The terror group also took Qatar to task for allowing the athletes to raise the Israeli flag in Doha.

Many Arab social media users claimed that the Israeli athletes were "soldiers" serving in the Israel Defense Forces.

Mohammed al-Madhoun, a Palestinian media personality and political activist from the Gaza Strip, commented:
"The presence of an Israeli athletic team in Qatar is a stain of disgrace on the forehead of those who hosted them and allowed to participate. Does the host [Qatar] know that the members of the team are soldiers in the occupation army? I wish you would ask them: Did they participate in the Gaza massacres? How many Palestinians did they kill during their military service? How many times did they storm the Al-Aqsa Mosque [in Jerusalem]?"
Some Arabs posted photos of Israeli runner Adva Cohen, who participated in the World Championships in Qatar, and falsely accused her of "slaughtering" Palestinians. The incitement is directed not only against Qatar, but also against the Israeli athletes who are now being forced to see their photos taken from their own social media accounts in the context of the "Normalization is Treason" online campaign.

Some Palestinians went as far as inciting Arabs to revolt against their leaders for reportedly engaging in normalization with Israel.

The "anti-normalization" campaign is even targeting Jordanian divers who teamed up with Israeli colleagues to clean the beach in the Jordanian Gulf of Aqaba and the Israeli city of Eilat. The divers were participating in the first-ever ecological festival during International Beach Clean-Up Day and the United Nations International Day of Peace.

An anti-Israel group called the Association for Supporting Resistance and Confronting Normalization claimed that Jordanians who work in Eilat and other Israeli cities are often recruited as informants by the Israeli security services. The group accused the Jordanian government of "complying with all the demands of the Zionists on the pretext of cooperation for the sake of peace." The claim that Jordanians who go to work in Israel or help clean the beach are recruited as spies is aimed at painting them as traitors, a charge that is likely to put their lives at risk.

Instead of thanking Israel for allowing Jordanians to come and work in Eilat, the "anti-normalization" activists are inciting the workers to boycott Israel. These activists, of course, are not offering the Jordanian workers jobs and salaries.

In March 2019, Israel agreed to increase by 33% the number of Jordanian day laborers employed at hotels in Eilat from 1,500 to 2,000. The permits for the Jordanians are designed to allow them to work in the hotel industry of Eilat, close to the border with Jordan. The move is part of an agreement signed between Israel and Jordan to advance ties between the two countries through economic and social cooperation initiatives.

As far as the "anti-normalization" activists are concerned, inciting their people against Israel and the Jordanian workers is more important than any economic and social initiatives. These activists hate Israel to a point where they prefer to see 2,000 workers lose their jobs than continue working and earning good salaries in Eilat.

If greeting a Jew on his or her holiday, cleaning the beach with an Israeli, or working in Israel are considered by many Arabs a "crime," what will be the fate of any Arab who makes peace with Israel?

Those who are calling for boycotts of Israel -- and are threatening and inciting their people against any Arab who dares to host a Jew or send him or her greetings -- are also emphatically opposed to peace with Israel. For them, making peace with the "Zionist entity" is considered an act of treason. They are worried that an Arab who greets a Jew may one day make peace with Israel. They are worried that an Arab state that hosts Israeli athletes may one day make peace with Israel. They are worried that Arabs who go to work in Israel may fall in love with Israelis and stop thinking of ways to kill them or destroy Israel.

Bassam Tawil is based in the Middle East.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Are Air Defense Systems Ready to Confront Drone Swarms? - Seth Frantzman

by Seth Frantzman

The key -- is to close the gap that potentially exists near the ground.

Iran's September 14 attack on Saudi oil facilities highlights the threat posed by swarms of drones and low-altitude cruise missiles.
JERUSALEM — The attack on Saudi Arabia's Abqaiq and Khurais oil facilities on Sept. 14 served as a reality check for countries struggling to define the level of the threat posed by drone swarms and low-altitude cruise missiles.

Now, in a region where that threat is particularly acute, countries are left to reexamine existing air defense technology.

According to the Saudi Defense Ministry, 18 drones and seven cruise missiles were fired at the kingdom in the early hours the day in mid-September.

The drones struck Abqaiq, a facility that the Center for Strategic and International Studies think tank had warned the month before was a potential critical infrastructure target. Several cruise missiles fell short and did not hit the facility. Four cruise missiles struck Khurais. Saudi and U.S. officials put blame on Iran, but the government there denies involvement.

Smoke billows from an oil-processing facility in Abqaiq, Saudi Arabia, following the September 14 attack.
What is clear is the failure of existing air defense systems to stop the attack.

The Abqaiq facility's air defenses reportedly included the American-made Patriot system, Oerlikon GDF 35mm cannons equipped with the Skyguard radar and a version of France's Crotale called Shahine. Satellite images posted by Michael Duitsman, a research associate at the James Martin Center for Nonproliferation Studies, shows the setup: Impeded by radar ranges and the facility itself, as well as the speed and angle of the drones and missiles, Saudi air defense apparently did not engage the drones.

"If U.S.-supplied air defenses were not oriented to defend against an attack from Iran, that's incomprehensible. If they were, but they were not engaged, that's incompetent. If they simply weren't up to the task of preventing such precision attacks, that's concerning," said Daniel Shapiro, a former U.S. ambassador to Israel and a visiting fellow at the Institute for National Security Studies. "And it would seem to validate Israeli concerns that even effective air and missile defense systems, as Israel has, could be overwhelmed by a sufficient quantity of precision-guidance missiles."

Daniel Shapiro: The September 14 attack "would seem to validate Israeli concerns that even effective air and missile defense systems ... could be overwhelmed by a sufficient quantity of precision-guidance missiles."
There is a debate about the level of this threat. Brig. Gen. Pini Yungman, a former air defense commander with the Israeli Air Force and current head of Rafael's air defense systems division, contrasts the drone swarm with a cruise missile with a range of 1,000 kilometers and equipped with a large warhead. "Drones, even drone swarms, are not a strategic threat, even if you take dozens to attack. They carry a very low weight of bomb or ammunition," Yungman said.

Uzi Rubin, former director of the state-run Israel Missile Defense Organization, doesn't think what happened in Saudi Arabia could happen in Israel. "We have a smaller area, and that has an advantage in many respects because it is an advantage in controlling our airspace."
The challenge in stopping an attack like September 14 is detecting low-flying threats, not shooting them down.
He said the primary challenge in stopping an attack like that in Saudi Arabia is not the ability to shoot down the threats, but rather to detect the low-flying threats. "When it comes to missiles, missile defense sensors will aim above the horizon because the missile is above it and you don't want clutter. So when it comes to guarding, the issue is things that can sneak in near the ground," he explained.

The key, then, is to close the gap that potentially exists near the ground.

"It's not too difficult to close the gap; the Saudis can do it with local defenses," he asserted. But he acknowledged that the larger the land area, the more difficult it can be to maintain control.

Rubin said shooting down drone swarms can be accomplished with anti-aircraft guns, noting that Iraq downed several Tomahawk cruise missiles in 1991 after discovering their flight path.

"You don't need anything fancy," he said — the Russian SA-22 or Pantsir system, with 30mm cannons, missiles and infrared direction finders would do.

"I think once the surprise of the [Sept. 14] attack wears off, then one should sit back and see it is not a very devastating attack." Like Yungman, he said a long-range precision missile aimed at a strategic facility like a nuclear reactor in a European country would be a more serious threat.

Thomas Karako: "The specter of complex, integrated air and missile attack ... [is] not a technological problem, it's an engineering problem."
However, Thomas Karako, a senior fellow at the CSIS think tank, told Defense News that the attack suggests a dramatic escalation. "More broadly speaking, it is what I've been talking about: The specter of complex, integrated air and missile attack is not theoretical — it has arrived."

He argues that the Abqaiq attack draws a "bright red line under the problem set" and that "we need a mix of active and passive measures, kinetic and non-kinetic to counter."

"It's not a technological problem, it's an engineering problem," he said. "You need to look beyond the horizon and look in every direction." That would include 360 coverage by radar and elevated sensors.

Israel, the Test Bed

Yungman considers the Middle East, particularly Israel, to be a proving ground. Since the 1940s, a number of different weapons systems, many made in Western countries or the Soviet Union, were used in regional combat.

"In this region, the asymmetric threat became bigger. So in the north there are almost 200,000 short-range rockets and missiles and accurate missiles as a threat" from Hezbollah, he said. "And in Syria we can see accurate, maneuvering ballistic missiles and cruise missiles. So air defense and air missile defense became, from the asymmetric aspect, bigger and bigger, and the air defense system became an issue we need to invest in and develop as fast as we can."

With the support of the United States, Israel built and tested the Arrow system in the 1990s, becoming one layer of the country's multilayered system that eventually included Arrow-2, Iron Dome and David's Sling.

Short of using preemptive airstrikes against drone manufacturers and launch teams, Israel is upgrading its air defense on a "daily basis," Yungman noted.

"The main threat is not face-to-face [combat] threats — it is rockets, drones, cruise missiles, maneuvering [theater ballistic missiles] and [short-range ballistic missiles] with big and small warheads. When we are talking about thousands or tens of thousands or more, it is very complicated, but it can be defeated," he said.

Soft-kill measures involve jamming a drone's GPS or radio controls.
One way to confront drone swarms involves soft-kill measures. Because drones are operated by GPS and radio control, jamming or taking control of the drone is one route.

But Rubin said what stands out about the Abqaiq incident is that the homing by the drones appeared to be optical, not GPS-guided.

Also noteworthy, evidence indicates that some of the UAVs weren't carrying warheads, as they didn't all explode.

Alternatively, a hard-kill approach might involve using a 5- to 10-kilowatt laser. Lasers can destroy drones up to 2.5 kilometers away, according to Yungman.

Hard-kill measures involve physically destroying or disabling an incoming drone.
The U.S. has looked at lasers for its Stryker armored vehicles, and Germany, Russia and Turkey are among the nation-states developing the technology. Israel's Rafael has been working on laser interceptors for years, including the Drone Dome laser-based intercept system.

"I can say that from 2 kilometers I could hit a drone the size of a penny," Yungman claimed.
Another option could be drone-on-drone combat, though that capability is still under development.

While systems like the Iron Dome are combat-proven, questions remain about their ability to confront a drone swarm.

Remains of Iranian cruise missiles and drones used in the September 14 attack
In theory, when using radar and electro-optics, an air defense system should be able to cover the bands necessary to track the drones using several systems and 360-degree phased-array coverage.

"In our research and technology we have the radar and electro-optical and jamming, GPS-denying [capabilities]," Yungman said. "And we have the ability to kill it."

Rubin described the attack on Saudi Arabia as a kind of "Pearl Harbor," and it reminded him to an Aug. 17 attack on the Shaybah oil field in Saudi Arabia by Houthi rebels involving 10 drones.

"The surprise was not in the attack, but the audacity," Rubin recalled, adding that a precision attack by drones doesn't make the aircraft less vulnerable to air defense systems.

The Stunner interceptor missile of David's Sling, for instance, has the capability to intercept drones, missiles and other ordnance, including low-flying cruise missiles. But for that to work, there can't be a gap in the radar coverage, Rubin noted.

Certainly, the recent attack in Saudi Arabia will impact industry and spur development from the key players in this area of defense, according to Karako of CSIS.

"I think you'll see global demand signal for a variety of means to counter these threats," he said. "It will spark a lot of solutions."

Seth Frantzman, a writing fellow at the Middle East Forum, is the author of After ISIS: America, Iran and the Struggle for the Middle East (2019), op-ed editor of The Jerusalem Post, and founder of the Middle East Center for Reporting and Analysis.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

In Whitewashing Islamism, K-12 Programs Advance Jihad - Mitchell Bard

by Mitchell Bard

These propagandists seek to silence their critics and smear anyone who exposes the truth as "Islamophobic."

You may have read about the proposed ethnic studies curriculum developed for California public high schools, which caused an uproar because of its biased treatment of Jews and Israel, support for the BDS movement, and fear that it fomented anti-Semitism. That is one of many battles over curricula as Islamists attempt to rewrite history and erase any mention of Islamic extremism.
The "Islamophobia" industry is engaged in a nationwide effort to whitewash the history and practice of Islam and perpetuate the myth that Islam has always been a religion of peace. These propagandists seek to silence their critics and smear anyone who exposes the truth as "Islamophobic."
We have seen this effort on college campuses, which have received nearly $3 billion since 2012 from Arab/Muslim states and individuals who hope to influence the next generation of Americans to adopt their view of the Middle East. These investments have paid off in the hiring of apologists for Islamist terror who teach, write textbooks, and serve as sources for the media.
Historian Martin Kramer noted how American scholars have made "a deliberate effort to . . . turn Islam into a pacifist faith — a kind of oriental Quakerism."
Equally disturbing, as I wrote in The Arab Lobby, is an increasing effort to shape the views of children in K-12. The terror attacks on 9/11 provoked fear and misunderstanding about Muslims and Islam while political correctness allowed the lobby to present its sanitized version of events aimed at downplaying Arab/Muslim distinctions, ignoring differences in values and interests, and dismissing links between Islam and terror.
U.S. taxpayers underwrite some of these efforts through government-funded Title VI Middle East Studies centers at major universities. Today's "Islamophobia" lobby can have an exponential impact through these centers, whose mandate is to educate teachers about the region. As I've documented, as part of their obligation to engage in outreach, Title VI centers often produce materials reflecting the lobby's views that teachers pass on to students.
Advancing the same politicized agenda that rules academe, Islamist organizations have allied with leftwing interest groups and pressured publishers to revise textbooks to better reflect multicultural ideologies. The result is a reluctance to discuss negative aspects of Islam such as the discriminatory treatment of non-believers, women, and gays, the role of radical Muslims in terrorism, and the Islamist animus toward the United States, Israel, and the West. A 2008 study by Gary Tobin and Dennis Ybarra concluded:
Discovering in our schools a pervasive set of erroneous beliefs about such a vital topic should alarm every taxpayer, every parent, and every school official. To allow biased textbooks and outright propaganda in supplemental materials into the schools is to pervert the very purpose of public education and a misuse of our democratic system.
One such battle occurring in Virginia's Loudoun County centers around the misrepresentation of the meaning of jihad. Loudoun's presentation of jihad and Islamic terrorism were criticized for bias. While it is understandable that American Muslims would not want their religion associated with radicalism, teaching that jihad is a wholly benign concept related to a believer's internal struggle distorts the term's meaning by ignoring its relationship to extremism even as terrorists – such as Palestine Islamic Jihad – use the word to convey their malignant mission
Bernard Lewis
Middle East scholar Bernard Lewis explained that "Conventionally translated 'holy war,' [jihad] has the literal meaning of ... 'striving in the path of God' (fi sabil Allah). Some Muslim theologians ... have interpreted the duty of 'striving in the path of God' in a spiritual and moral sense. The overwhelming majority of early authorities ... discuss jihad in military terms."
The "Islamophobia" lobby might veto citing Lewis, a Jew smeared by critics as a Western-oriented propagandist, but textbook authors can also cite the medieval Muslim historian Ibn Khaldun, who wrote "In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the (Muslim) mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force."
Students can find a more contemporary definition in the Encyclopaedia of Islam, where Emile Tyan wrote "Jihad consists of military action with the object of the expansion of Islam."
Learning the meaning of jihad is also key for students to understand the Middle East today, where the commitment to jihad by terrorist organizations such as Palestine Islamic Jihad and Hamas perpetuates the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Students should learn, for example, that Palestine Islamic Jihad considers jihad the only way to liberate Palestine. A Tel Aviv University analysis explains the group believes a "Muslim victory and the elimination of Israel are foreordained by God's words in the Quran."

Hamas Emblem

By reading primary documents, students can see for themselves the true meaning of jihad. To understand the ideology of Hamas, teachers can direct them to the group's charter, which states "There is no solution for the Palestine question except through jihad" and calls on Muslims to "raise the banner of jihad" to "rid the land and the people of their uncleanliness, vileness and evils."
American public schools could also use material taught about Islam in Muslim schools. A study of Saudi textbooks, for example, found they "encourage both violent and non-violent jihad against non-believers."
A Palestinian textbook for eleventh graders offered a definition of jihad very different from the one proposed for Loudoun school children: "Jihad is an Islamic term that equates to the term war in other nations. The difference is that jihad has noble goals and lofty aims and is carried out only for the sake of Allah and for His glory . . . ."
Unquestionably, students should learn more about Islam. But they should learn it from unbiased sources, not from apologists for Islamism. It is a disservice, and intellectually dishonest, to teach them a sanitized version of history that whitewashes the extremist elements of the religion. If the "Islamophobia" lobby has its way, the next generation will grow up unaware and unprepared to face the danger from Islamists who threaten American lives, values, and interests.

Mitchell Bard, a Campus Watch Fellow, is the author/editor of 22 books, including the 2017 edition of Myths and Facts: A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict, The Arab Lobby, and the novel After Anatevka: Tevye in Palestine.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Violence Erupts in Hong Kong on China’s 70th Anniversary National Day - Joseph Klein

by Joseph Klein

Student shot by police in first use of live fire against protesters.

Large anti-government protests took place again in Hong Kong on October 1, China’s 70th anniversary National Day. Tens of thousands of protesters gathered in the streets in defiance of a police ban. Some of the protesters marched peacefully. Others, however, resorted to violence, including the use of bricks, petrol bombs, acid bombs and sticks against police officers, which prompted harsh police responses across the city. The police fired six live rounds of ammunition, some of which were aimed at the protesters. The most serious incident occurred when one policeman, who was allegedly hit with a rod as he tried to help a fallen officer, shot an 18-year-old student protester in the chest at close range after reportedly issuing a verbal warning to the student and another rod-wielding protester. The critically injured student protester was taken to the hospital where he underwent life-saving surgery. He is reportedly in stable condition. In addition, as reported by South China Morning Post, “police revealed that they had fired about 1,400 rounds of tear gas, 900 rubber bullets, 190 beanbag rounds and 230 sponge-tipped rounds” at the protesters. Scores of people on both sides were injured. South China Morning Post also reported that the police “arrested 269 people, aged 12 to 71, for various offences, including rioting. Among them were 93 students.” Other charges included attacking police officers and possessing offensive weapons.

The police defended their actions. “The police force really did not want to see anyone being injured, so we feel very sad about this. We warn rioters to stop breaking the law immediately, as we will strictly enforce the law,” said a police spokeswoman. Opposition lawmakers condemned the police in a joint statement. “The policeman’s close-range shooting seems to be an attack rather than self-defence ... Many police officers have gone out of control and rudely treated demonstrators, the public, medical staff, journalists, social workers and lawmakers,” they said in their statement.

As Hong Kong endured a virtual lockdown during the turbulent day of protests, with retail activity and Mass Transit Railway service seriously curtailed, Hong Kong’s Chief Executive Carrie Lam was out of town. She had decided to join her comrades in Beijing for the official National Day celebrations. Indeed, she joined President Xi Jinping on the rostrum of the Gate of Heavenly Peace. President Xi delivered a televised speech for the occasion, during which he referred to Hong Kong but not explicitly to the protests. “We need to maintain the long-term stability and prosperity of Hong Kong and Macau,” he said. He also declared the intention to uphold the principle of “one country, two systems” that was supposed to guide China’s policy towards the semi-autonomous enclave since the British turned over sovereignty of Hong Kong to China. The Hong Kong protesters, however, claim they are trying to defend their freedoms from increasing encroachment by China’s central government that is undermining the original intent of the "one country, two systems" policy.

The New York Times described what it called the “split-screen contrast of tightly choreographed goose-stepping military formations in Beijing to celebrate the National Day versus the chaos of firebombs and rubber bullets in Hong Kong” as “jarring, and almost certainly infuriating to President Xi Jinping.” Fending off foreign criticisms of the Hong Kong police’s handling of the protests, Chinese authorities condemned the protesters not worthy of support, calling them “black mobs.” China’s Office of the Commissioner of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in Hong Kong said of the “mobs” that “there is no evil they will not commit.” The office defended the police shooting, declaring that “Hong Kong police were forced to fire at the attackers to save themselves and their colleagues, after being attacked, encircled and having their lives threatened by mobs.”

So far, President Xi has not ordered direct action by Chinese military or security forces already inside Hong Kong, or stationed nearby, to quell the protests by whatever means necessary. But any patience he has tried to display to date may wear thin as protesters’ challenges to order and stability in Hong Kong continue. Although much smaller in scale than the Tuesday protests, disruptive protests broke out on Wednesday in reaction to the shooting of the student protester the day before. A crowd chanted “Hong Kong police, manslaughterer,” and “stand with Hong Kong.” Later in the day, angry protesters “dug up bricks, blocked roads, started fires, vandalised train stations and targeted mainland Chinese-linked businesses,” according to a South China Morning Post report of the latest developments in which it too used the term “mobs” to describe some protesters. It should be noted that, while South China Morning Post describes itself as Hong Kong’s “newspaper of record” and has correspondents on the ground to report first hand on unfolding developments, the newspaper has received some criticism for becoming more pro-China since its acquisition by Alibaba Group. Nevertheless, according to the Media Bias Fact Check website, it found evidence that South China Morning Post covers “both sides by being critical of China as well as praising them.”

In light of the police’s expanded use of force, including the shooting of the student protester with live ammunition, as well as more arrests, the protests are likely to intensify. Protesters continue to demand greater police accountability for alleged brutality, amnesty for arrested protesters, and greater freedoms including direct elections. Beijing and its apparent puppet Chief Executive Carrie Lam have dug in their heels against these demands. They have the tools at hand to up the ante against the protesters if they so choose.

China's garrison stationed in Hong Kong is reported to have doubled in size (to a level estimated to be between 10,000 and 12,000) since the protests began, according to Reuters. It reportedly includes members of a paramilitary force specially trained in riot suppression under President Xi Jinping’s personal control, as well as People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops. The garrison could legally assist in “the maintenance of public order” if the Hong Kong government asked the central government for help, according to Article 14 of the Garrison Law of The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of The People's Republic of China. Moreover, Article 6 of the Garrison Law provides that “the Hong Kong Garrison shall perform its duties in accordance with the provisions of national laws decided to be applied in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region by the Central People's Government” if there is “turmoil within the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region which endangers national unity or security and is beyond the control of the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.” The same would be true if the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress “decides that the Region is in a state of emergency.”

While President Trump did not mention the Hong Kong protests in his tweet congratulating President Xi and the Chinese people on the 70th Anniversary of the People’s Republic of China, he said during his address to the United Nations General Assembly last week that the U.S. would be “carefully monitoring the situation” in Hong Kong. He added, “The world fully expects that the Chinese government will honor its binding treaty made with the British and registered with the United Nations in which China commits to protect Hong Kong's freedom, legal system and democratic ways of life.”

High-level trade talks between China and the United States are expected to resume next week in Washington. Discussing the potential impact of the most recent Hong Kong protests on the trade talks during Fox Business News’ "Varney & Co.," Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross said, “It probably will have some impact on the Chinese side, even despite whatever it has on ours, because this is a sign of domestic dissent within their community and Hong Kong is quite important for the international trading activities of China.” How much of an impact the current turbulence in Hong Kong will have on the trade talks remains to be seen.

Joseph Klein


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Fight for Fair Elections Takes a Step Forward - Lloyd Billingsley

by Lloyd Billingsley

California sued for violations of National Voter Registration Act.

Attorneys Harmeet Dhillon and Mark Meuser, the California Globe reports, have filed a federal lawsuit against Alex Padilla, California Secretary of State, and Steve Gordon, director of the California Department of Motor Vehicles, for violations of the National Voter Registration Act of 1993. The state violates the Act, Meuser said in an October 1 post, “by failing to ensure that only citizens are placed on the voter rolls.”

Under the National Voter Registration, the state determines eligibility to vote but the right to vote is still based on U.S. citizenship. Two of the plaintiffs in the suit, Roxanne Hoge and Ali Mazarei, are legal immigrants and concerned that only citizens get registered to vote. That has not been happening in California.

All the state is doing Meuser explains, is looking at “state records for felons or duplicate registrations.” Secretary of State Padilla “has established a pattern and practice of doing nothing to verify that a potential voter is a United States citizen, thus causing non-citizens to be placed on the voter rolls.” Padilla thus acts as a “glorified clerk simply transmitting the data from the voter registration application to the counties for data entry purposes.” For this duty, state Democrats have deployed the DMV.

The DMV “motor voter” program automatically registers to vote anybody who receives a driver’s license, which California allows for those illegally present in the United States. Back in 2015, Padilla told the Los Angeles Times, “At the latest, for the 2018 election cycle, I expect millions of new voters on the rolls in the state of California,” with “new voters” code for ineligible voters.

Padilla said the DMV kept “firewalls” in place but didn’t explain how they worked, or how many ineligible voters the firewalls had blocked. Padilla had to know how many ineligible non-citizens voted in November 2016, but he wasn’t talking and refused to release any voter information to a federal voter-fraud probe.

True to form, by March, 2018, more than one million “undocumented” immigrants received driver’s licenses from the state Department of Motor Vehicles, which automatically registered them to vote under the “motor voter” program. So the millions of new voters Padilla expected in 2018 are indeed on the rolls, and the Meuser-Dhillon lawsuit aims to find out how many were non-citizens and therefore ineligible to vote. The state is claiming zero.

While registering illegals to vote, the DMV was failing miserably at its duly appointed tasks, leaving Californians standing in line for hours. That prompted calls for an audit by State Auditor Elaine Howle, who uncovered University of California president Janet Napolitano’s secret $175 million slush fund. Democrats would not let the intrepid Howle anywhere near the DMV and left the audit to the Department of Finance, under the control of the governor’s office. The results were not surprising.

Only “six California residents,” were “erroneously” added onto voter rolls in the 2018 midterms, Padilla claimed in August. This was due to “DMV errors” and none was undocumented and none guilty of “fraudulently voting or attempting to vote.” DMV Communications Deputy Director Anita Gore is on record that “conditions that led to the problems have been addressed,” so nothing to see here folks. Legal immigrants and legitimate citizens might recall the back story 

Californians have voted to limit property-tax increases (Proposition 13, 1978), bar illegals from receiving taxpayer-supported services (Proposition 187, 1994), and banned race and ethnic preferences in state education, employment and contracting through the California Civil Rights Initiative (Proposition 209, 1996). California voters also banned bilingual education, which was really Spanish language education, through Proposition 227 in 1998.

These victories alarmed Democrats, who sought to cancel the voice of the people by importing an electorate from Mexico and Central America. The illegals vote Democrat and in return get protection from deportation through sanctuary laws, which protect from deportation even the worst violent criminals including cop-killers and MS-13 murderers.

In return for protection, the illegals get driver’s licenses, in-state tuition and now government paid health care. This is bound to attract more illegals and Californians recently got some enlightenment on the total number illegally present in the state.

Attorney General Xavier Becerra, once on Hillary Clinton’s short list as a running mate, has filed some 60 lawsuits against the Trump administration, including a challenge to the public-charge rule for illegals, blocking green cards for those who accept government assistance. When they announced the suit, Becerra and Gov. Gavin Newsom displayed a chart claiming 10 million “immigrants” in California.

“Immigrants” and “residents,” are also Democrat code for illegals. For years the default figure for the number in the entire country was 11 million, and with 10 million in California alone the Democrats probably have their imported electoral college. So it’s long past time for legal action.

“The fight for fair elections just took a huge step forward,” says Mark Meuser. Meanwhile, he and Harmeet Dhillon are not alone in the fight.

Judicial Watch has filed a federal lawsuit against Los Angeles County, charging failure to clean up voter rolls and deliver records related to elections. Judicial Watch charges that eleven California counties have registration rates exceeding 100 percent of eligible voters and California has the highest number of inactive registrations of any state.

With 2020 just around the corner, legal immigrants and legitimate citizens will be watching.

Lloyd Billingsley


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter