Saturday, October 3, 2020

Pew Survey Shows Media Bias Destroyed Trust in the Media - Daniel Greenfield


by Daniel Greenfield

As an institution, the media has succeeded in fantastically building its brand among its own political faction while losing the rest of the country.




Behind the latest Pew survey documenting historically low levels of trust in the media are three simple sets of numbers.

Only 10% of Republicans, 36% of independents, but 73% of Democrats trust the media. 

Republican trust in the media was in the 40s from the 90s to the oughts before hitting a major cliff in 2004 and falling into the 30s. By 2012, it dropped even more catastrophically, plummeting into the 20s, after a brief recovery toward the end of Obama's term in office, it dropped into the teens in 2016.

I don't think anyone needs a map for these dates.

The Iraq War, the 2012 election, and the 2016 election. Curiously, Republican trust in the media didn't take that much of a beating in 2008. It was the Iraq War, Obama's reelection, and Trump vs. Hillary that did it. The media can try to blame President Trump's Fake News line, but it was beating a dead horse. And it's pretty obvious that the media's blatant bias at crucial periods resulted in an almost total Republican jettisoning of the media.

Among independents, the Iraq War proved to be a crucial cliff, followed by a steady decline, with fewer cliffs.

Meanwhile, among Democrats, the opposite reaction took place.

The Iraq War was also a cliff, but Democrat trust then quickly rose, and shot up dramatically in the Trump era, going from the 50s to the 70s. 

As an institution, the media has succeeded in fantastically building its brand among its own political faction while losing the rest of the country.

Plenty of conservatives have observed that the media is a Democrat messaging machine. But it's also good to remember that it structurally functions that way because it's made for Democrats by Democrats, and for lefties by lefties.

When you listen to the media, it's like you're vacationing in France and watching the local news. The media's content isn't meant for you.


Daniel Greenfield

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2020/10/pew-survey-shows-media-bias-destroyed-trust-media-daniel-greenfield/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



Levin hammers Biden over ‘bigoted, racist’ past, asks ex-VP: 'Are you still a White supremacist?' - Angelica Stabile


by Angelica Stabile


'Life, Liberty & Levin' host details inflammatory comments by the Democratic presidential nominee dating back 35 years

 VIDEO: Mark Levin asks if Joe Biden is 'still a white supremacist?'


Joe Biden has come out with several "bigoted, racist" remarks over his nearly five decades in public office that should dog his presidential campaign at every step, Fox News host Mark Levin said on “Hannity” on Thursday night.

The "Life, Liberty & Levin" host began by stating that the mainstream media repeatedly presses President Trump over whether he supports White supremacist groups. However, Levin said, the more important question is whether Biden is "still a White supremacist?”

In 1975, according to Levin, then-Sen. Biden told The Philadelphia Inquirer that the Democratic Party could “stand a liberal George Wallace. Someone who’s not afraid to stand up and offend people.” That same year, Biden called the concept of desegregation busing a “rejection of the whole movement of Black pride.”

“If that doesn’t come close to promoting segregation, or opposing integration, I don’t know what does,” Levin stated.

CANDACE OWENS RIPS BIDEN FOR SUGGESTING TRUMP'S 'SUBURBS' RHETORIC IS A 'RACIST DOG WHISTLE'

Two years later, in 1977, Biden said that “non-orderly” racial integration would cause his kids to grow up in a “racial jungle.”

Levin also discussed relationships Biden had fostered with “racist” politicians such as Sens. James Eastland, D-Miss., and John Stennis, D-Miss. According to the syndicated radio host, Biden went so far as to praise Stennis -- who signed the Southern Manifesto of 1956 opposing racial integration of public spaces --  on the Senate floor in 1988.

BIDEN CAMPAIGNING ON 'RETURN TO NORMALCY' BUT SOME DEMS EYEING RADICAL CHANGES TO POLITICAL CHANGES TO POLITICAL SYSTEM IF THEY WIN

Levin went on to say that Biden had even “bragged” about Stennis gifting him the table the manifesto was signed on.

“How is it he escapes scrutiny for his bigoted, racist past?” Levin asked of Biden. “Comments coming out of his big mouth.”

Levin concluded the segment with a series of questions: "Joe Biden, are you still a White supremacist? Are you still a bigot? Are you exactly what [running mate] Kamala Harris called you?

"I think in many ways you still are. In many ways you still are, because all you do is, you yell at the president, you call him a liar and you dare to call him a racist? You are a disaster. That's why they hide you in the basement."


Angelica Stabile

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/media/mark-levin-biden-bigoted-racist

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



New York Times caught naked in bed with Trump's tax strategy, and the New York Sun exposes them - Monica Showalter


by Monica Showalter

The New York Times' Hypocrisy is Exposed


Now, here's some old-school shoe-leather investigative reporting the New York Times probably didn't anticipate after it published its stolen-documents exposé about President Trump's bad, bad tax returns, coming from the green-eyeshade mavens at its tiny rival, the New York Sun.

In Ira Stoll's report, headlined "Guess How the Times Knows So Much About Tax Losses Trump Uses," the Times is exposed for doing the exact same things that President Trump did on his taxes, in a report that leaves its piety in smoking ruins. Hypocrite much? 

The brilliant piece begins with this:
The New York Times' investigation of President Trump says the president used big tax losses in some years to avoid paying taxes in others, that he invested some of his profits into money-losing businesses, and that Mr. Trump paid his daughter as "a way to transfer assets to his children."
In addition, it says that Mr. Trump's businesses are propped up by foreign revenue and that Mr. Trump "has written off as business expenses costs — including fuel and meals — associated with his aircraft, used to shuttle him among his various homes and properties."
The Times ought to know — because the New York Times Company and the Ochs-Sulzberger family that control it have done the same things.
What follows is a brutal takedown of classic Grade-A media hypocrisy, in what was obviously some research done for years, a careful reading of the tiny line items of the Times' tax returns showing that they were doing the exact same things Trump does. It's a heck of a damning report.

It was done by someone who knows hell-all about tax returns and writes so crisply and clearly that even a layman can understand it. Stoll is a brilliant writer and extremely well versed in economics, but if we had to guess, the Sun's founder and editor-in-chief, Seth Lipsky, probably had a research hand in it, too. Lipsky is an ex–Wall Street Journal ace who knows how to ask questions and has been doing that for decades. Here's just the front of it:
The New York Times Company had a loss of about $58 million in 2008, and its 2009 annual report disclosed a net income tax "benefit" of nearly $6 million that year. The annual report says, "State tax operating loss carryforwards ('loss carryforwards') totaled $13.5 million as of December 27, 2009 and $9.5 million as of December 28, 2008. Such loss carryforwards expire in accordance with provisions of applicable tax laws and have remaining lives generally ranging from 4 to 20 years."
Similarly, in 2006, the New York Times Company was in trouble. Its stock price had tumbled to a low of $21.58 in that year from a high of $40.80 in 2005. The company reported an annual loss for 2006 of $543 million. The Times 2006 annual report says the company's "effective income tax rate was 3.0% because the majority of the non-cash impairment charge of $814.4 million at the New England Media Group is non-deductible for tax purposes."
Speaking of the New England Media Group, it is to the Ochs-Sulzberger family what loss-producing golf courses are to the Trump family. The Times Company bought the Boston Globe for $1.1 billion in 1993, added the Worcester Telegram & Gazette for $295 million in 1999, and sold them both to Boston Red Sox owner John Henry for $70 million in 2013.
Like Mr. Trump, the Times Company has even dabbled in the golf sector: The Times Company bought Golf Digest magazine in 1969 for between $3 and $4 million, then sold it in 2001.
The Times makes a big investigative scandal about President Trump's businesses paying his sons and his daughter Ivanka, describing it as a way around the gift tax. Less than a week before the Times published its investigative report, it issued a press release: "the New York Times Company today announced that Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr., 69, will retire as chairman and a member of its Board of Directors on Dec. 31, 2020 and will be succeeded as chairman by A.G. Sulzberger, 40, Times publisher since 2018. Mr. Sulzberger Jr. will assume the title chairman emeritus."
Then it gets into even more minute and venal details, with example after example around the world, all mirroring the actions they piously charge President Trump with questionably doing. There's all kinds of wild stuff about Singapore subsidiaries, and China partners, and "forgotten" to mention stock transfers that the Times would have raked Trump over the coals for had he somehow forgotten instead. The report makes the Times look downright shady in its tax dealings even as the Times points the finger at Trump, who, like the paper, had done only what the law allowed — and whose returns were illegally leaked. 

Tax dodges OK for me, but not for thee, see.

Monica Showalter

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/10/new_york_times_caught_naked_in_bed_with_trumps_tax_strategy_nysun.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



Why Is President Trump in the Hospital? - Brian C. Joondeph, M.D.


by Brian C. Joondeph, M.D.

Don't despair. There are good reasons for this...and Trump is probably going to be fine.


Election season is in full swing, with October surprises popping up like a jack-in-the-box at any moment. Within just over a week, we had the passing of Supreme Court justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg followed promptly by Judge Amy Coney Barrett nominated to take her place. Then there was the debate between President Trump and both Joe Biden and Chris Wallace.

An even bigger surprise started brewing Thursday when it was announced that presidential adviser Hope Hicks tested positive for COVID and that the president and first lady were being tested. Friday morning, America awoke to news of Mr. and Mrs. Trump both testing positive for the China virus.

Most serious human beings expressed well wishes and prayers, but a number of the "tolerant and compassionate" leftist politicians, entertainers, and media were gloating and wishing a painful death for the president. Vice President Pence tested negative.

As the day wore on, so did the surprises. President Trump was flown to Walter Reed Medical Center for "the next few days," not because he was sick, but as a "precautionary" measure. According to CNN, "[h]e walked on his own, without assistance, displayed no outward signs of illness."


YouTube screen grab.

Trump's medical team, earlier in the day, began treatment — specifically, "an experimental monoclonal antibody cocktail" produced by pharmaceutical company Regeneron. He is also taking zinc, vitamin D, famotidine, melatonin, and aspirin. The latter medications are thought to mitigate the effects of the virus but are hardly considered cures. Famotidine is a fancy name for Pepcid, an over-the-counter medication for gastric reflux and heartburn.

Of greater interest is Regeneron's antibody cocktail, considered experimental and still under investigation but allowed for the president based on compassionate use. Trump's actual symptoms are unknown but obviously not severe if he could walk unassisted from the White House to Marine One. There was no mention of hydroxychloroquine, a drug Trump had taken previously but that potentially would not mix well with the antibody cocktail.

The Regeneron cocktail, rumored to be called the Covfefe Double Shot, is a "novel two-antibody cocktail, REGN-COV2, with potential to diminish risk of viral escape by effectively binding to the virus's critical spike protein in two separate, non-overlapping locations."

Per Regeneron:
For infectious diseases, Regeneron typically pursues a "cocktail" approach of two or more antibodies against a pathogen combined in a single medicine. The different antibodies working in slightly different ways have a higher chance of effectively blunting the virus should it mutate (change in form or nature) over time.
Both antibodies bind to the spike protein of the Wuhan virus, rendering it inactive, much like two police officers working in tandem to apprehend a violent offender. Fortunately, "Virus Lives Matter" hasn't begun protesting the heavy-handed medical enforcement techniques of antibodies.

So why is President Trump in the hospital? Several reasons. He is infected and potentially contagious. He is not living in a small house with just his wife, but instead is in the command center of the U.S. government, the White House, with hundreds of employees potentially exposed to the president and first lady.

What better place to quarantine for a few days than in a hospital, already prepared for caring for a potentially infectious patient?

The China virus is funny in that it can cause those infected to crash quickly, meaning going from breathing well and talking to gasping for breath and needing respiratory assistance in a matter of hours. Why leave Trump at the White House, risking him deteriorating rapidly, then having to move him to the hospital? Continuity of government is paramount regardless of who the president is, what party he belongs to, and whether he tweets too much.

Last is the treatment itself. Monoclonal antibodies have potential side-effects including fever, chills, weakness, nausea, vomiting, and low or high blood pressure. While the White House has emergency medical capability, why take the chance of an adverse reaction in the White House rather than a hospital?

How common is hospitalization for someone Trump's age with the Wuhan flu? Trump's age group has a rate of hospitalization of 12 per 100,000, compared to 16 per 100,000 for someone Joe Biden's age. For both, the odds are relatively low.

Looking at it another way, compared to a college-aged kid, Trump has a fivefold higher rate of hospitalization and a 90-fold higher risk of death. For his campaign opponent, those rates are eight times and 220 times, respectively. Both presidential candidates are in the later years of their lives, and both are more susceptible to disease and death. Hopefully, that's not a rationale for AOC running for president in 2024. Neither Trump nor Biden is invincible and should take advantage of appropriate medical safeguards.

Applying the same distinction between those dying from or with COVID, one could similarly argue that Trump is being hospitalized with, rather than due to, COVID. So the above numbers are not directly applicable to Trump since, as far as we know, he is being hospitalized out of precaution, not because he is sufficiently sick.

Hopefully this antibody cocktail works as it has in the studies, where "those who got Regeneron's experimental therapy had lower virus levels in the bloodstream seven days later compared with patients who received a placebo." While there are no guarantees, the odds favor a full recovery for the president.

Send thoughts and prayers to the president and don't listen to the hair-on-fire media hardly able to contain themselves with ideas of Trump dropping out of the race. Be discerning when listening to "breaking news," as it may be blown out of proportion, as is most news these days. President Trump has good reasons to spend the next few days in a hospital, getting top-notch medical care in his temporary but secure castle.

Image: ABC News via YouTube.


Brian C Joondeph, M.D. is a Denver-based physician and freelance writer whose pieces have appeared in American Thinker, Daily Caller, Rasmussen Reports, and other publications. Follow him on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, Parler, and QuodVerum.

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/10/why_is_president_trump_in_the_hospital.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



On Dinesh D'Souza's important Film "Trump Card" - Sally Zahav


by Sally Zahav

Probably D'Souza's most important film, and just in time for the Nov. 2020 election




Dinesh D'Souza produces videos with political content. His material is potent enough for him to have earned the ire of top Democrat operatives. This is the trailer from his most recent film, Trump Card".


Sally Zahav

Source:Middle East and Terrorism

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



EU Still Siding with the "World's Worst Human Rights Abuser" - Majid Rafizadeh


by Majid Rafizadeh

The European Union, in empowering a regime that is torturing and executing protesters and political prisoners, is making itself complicit in these crimes against humanity.

  • "One day, I heard screams, shouting, and pleas for help in the police department.... I witnessed two officers who were dressed in unofficial uniform cursing and hitting Navid with batons and metal pipes with no mercy. They would tell him: 'the truth is whatever we say, will you write what we are saying or not?' Navid was... begging: 'please, stop, please don't hit me, I didn't do anything.' He covered his head with his arms. And one of the officers, whose name I later learned was Abbasi, hit Navid with such strength that Navid let out a gut-wrenching scream and fell unconscious". — Witness to the torture of Iran's wrestling champion, Navid Afkari, who was reportedly tortured into a false confession, then hanged.
  • Iran's leaders most likely wanted to make an example of the highly respected wrestler, to impose fear in society, and send a strong message to the people that anyone who dares to protest can face severe consequences.
  • Did they hear about the four teenagers who will have their fingers amputated as a punishment for stealing, also, according to them, after being tortured until they "confessed"?
  • The European Union, in empowering a regime that is torturing and executing protesters and political prisoners, is making itself complicit in these crimes against humanity. Instead, the EU needs immediately to join the US in putting pressure on the mullahs and holding them accountable.

Despite an international outcry, Iran's theocratic establishment on September 12 defiantly executed wrestling champion Navid Afkari, an innocent protester who was apparently tortured into a false confession. His execution was clearly carried out in a hurried manner and he was even denied a last visit from his family. Pictured: Protesters in London, England denounce Afkari's execution, on September 12, 2020. (Photo by Justin Tallis/AFP via Getty Images)

The European Union is openly siding with the ruling mullahs of Iran and attempting to scuttle US efforts to pressure the rogue regime to stop. Britain, France and Germany, on September 18, told the UN Security Council that the EU is strongly committed to ensuring the continued lifting of sanctions against the Iranian government. The three European powers added that, as far as they were concerned, even if the United States reimposes all sanctions, their UN sanctions relief for Iran would continue beyond September 20.

The EU has also been helping Iranian leaders to evade US sanctions through a payment mechanism labeled as INSTEX (Instrument in Support of Trade Exchanges), which is designed to permit European firms and corporations to continue doing business with the Iranian government in spite of US economic sanctions against Tehran.

The EU is, despite all its sanctimonious lecturing about human rights, unapologetically assisting a regime that is publicly committing some of the worst human rights abuses ever. Did the European leaders hear about the latest executions of innocent protesters such as Navid Afkari, who was apparently tortured into a false confession? Did they hear about the four teenagers who will have their fingers amputated as a punishment for stealing, also, according to them, after being tortured until they "confessed"?

Despite an international outcry, the theocratic establishment defiantly went ahead and executed wrestling champion Navid Afkari by hanging him in the southern city of Shiraz, according to Iranian state media. His execution was clearly carried out in a hurried manner and he was even denied a last visit from his family.

After he was given two death sentences by the Sharia court, Afkari declared:
"People! I will fight for my life because it is the logical and right thing to do. There are plenty of documents and evidence that prove my innocence. All the evidence and documents that we have collected and all the things that I am telling you right now, is to let you know that if I get executed, you should know that, in the 21st century, with all these human right organizations and expenses, with the United Nations, with the UN Security Council etc., an innocent human being, who tried his best and fought will all the power he had for his voice to be heard, was hanged."
The EU must know that Afkari, like many other political prisoners and those who participated in previous peaceful protests, was brutally tortured. The Iranian regime denies that it tortures prisoners, but an eyewitness, Shaahin Naaseri, recounted some of the torture that the wrestler endured while in detention:
"One day, I heard screams, shouting, and pleas for help in the police department. The sergeant accompanying me asked me to wait in the corridor. He went and opened up a door. I followed him to see what was happening out of curiosity. I witnessed two officers who were dressed in unofficial uniforms cursing and hitting Navid with batons and metal pipes without mercy. They would tell him: 'the truth is whatever we say, will you write what we are saying or not?' Navid was also begging: 'please, stop, please don't hit me, I didn't do anything.' He was covering his head with his arms. And one of the officers, whose name I later learned was Abbasi, hit Navid with such strength that Navid let out a gut-wrenching scream and fell unconscious."
Iran's leaders most likely wanted to make an example of the highly respected wrestler, to impose fear in society, and send a strong message to the people that anyone who dares to protest can face severe consequences.

Amnesty International has documented some of the torture techniques that the Iranian regime is employing:
"The organization's research found that victims were frequently hooded or blindfolded; punched, kicked and flogged; beaten with sticks, rubber hosepipes, knives, batons and cables; suspended or forced into holding painful stress positions for prolonged periods; deprived of sufficient food and potable water; placed in prolonged solitary confinement, sometimes for weeks or even months; and denied medical care for injuries sustained during the protests or as a result of torture."
Navid Afkari's case is not an isolated one. Last month, the Iranian regime also secretly hanged another protester, Mostafa Salhi. Amnesty International condemned his execution, stating that it "was carried out... despite serious unfair trial concerns incl torture & other ill-treatment & the denial of access to a lawyer during the investigation phase of his case."

Another high-profile figure that the regime arrested and tortured is 20-year-old Ali Younesi, a student who in 2018 won a gold medal as a member of Iran's national team during the 12th International Olympiad on Astronomy and Astrophysics. He and his friend Amirhossein Moradi have been held without charge since April, accused by the authorities of having connections to the opposition.

The European Union, in empowering a regime that is torturing and executing protesters and political prisoners, is making itself complicit in these crimes against humanity. Instead, the EU needs immediately to join the US in putting pressure on the mullahs and holding them accountable.

  • Follow Majid Rafizadeh on Twitter

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

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16539/eu-iran-human-rights-abuse

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



Erdogan's Plan to Take Over the Palestinian Authority - Khaled Abu Toameh


by Khaled Abu Toameh

Now he [Erdogan] has a chance to use the Palestinian elections to try to bring his Hamas friends to power after getting rid of Abbas.

  • What we are witnessing is an Arab autocrat (Abbas) seeking the help of a Muslim autocrat (Erdogan) in holding "free and fair" elections. Abbas, it seems, is confident that Erdogan's observers would rubber-stamp the results of any Palestinian election to ensure that the PA president emerges victorious
  • Now he [Erdogan] has a chance to use the Palestinian elections to try to bring his Hamas friends to power after getting rid of Abbas.
  • "It is terrifying that Abbas speaks as if he lives in another world. Is there a Palestinian interest in attacking the US administration, even if this administration takes unfair positions against the Palestinians? Is there a Palestinian interest in referring negatively to the peace accords between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain? There is a Palestinian need to return to reality. There is a Palestinian need to come to terms with the truth." — Khairallah Khairallah, Lebanese journalist and political commentator, al-Arabiya, September 29, 2020.


What we are witnessing is an Arab autocrat (Mahmoud Abbas) seeking the help of a Muslim autocrat (Recep Tayyip Erdogan) in holding "free and fair" elections. Abbas, it seems, is confident that Erdogan's observers would rubber-stamp the results of any Palestinian election to ensure that the Palestinian Authority president emerges victorious. Pictured: Abbas (left) and Erdogan in 2015. (Photo by Thaer Ghanaim/PPO via Getty Images)

On September 21, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas phoned Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and requested that Turkey send Turkish observers to monitor Palestinian elections, if and when they are held.

The phone call came as Turkey hosted a meeting between Abbas's ruling Fatah faction and the Iran-backed Hamas movement. At the meeting, the Fatah and Hamas reportedly agreed to hold long overdue elections for the PA presidency and parliament, the Palestine Legislative Council (PLC).

Abbas's request surprised many Palestinians and Arabs, especially in the wake of charges that Erdogan had forged the 2018 presidential and parliamentary elections in Turkey. Shortly after the voting ended, thousands of Twitter users launched a hashtag called #Erdogan_forged_election, accusing him of rigging the elections.

This was not the first time that Erdogan has been accused of election fraud. In 2014, Turkey's opposition accused Erdogan's party of rigging the country's local elections.

What we are witnessing is an Arab autocrat (Abbas) seeking the help of a Muslim autocrat (Erdogan) in holding "free and fair" elections. Abbas, it seems, is confident that Erdogan's observers would rubber-stamp the results of any Palestinian election to ensure that the PA president emerges victorious.

The 85-year-old Abbas, currently in the 15th year of his four-year-term in office, appears to be an admirer of Erdogan's authoritarian rule. While Erdogan is seeking to resurrect the Ottoman Empire and assume the role of Sultan (ruler of a Muslim realm), Abbas is searching for ways to hold onto power until his last day.

Erdogan apparently wants to expand his influence in the Middle East by meddling in the affairs of the Palestinians after already involving himself in conflicts in Libya and Syria. Now he has a chance to use the Palestinian elections to try to bring his Hamas friends to power after getting rid of Abbas.

Abbas, who has no intention of competing with Erdogan for the title of Sultan, wants to maintain his status as president-for-life of the Palestinians. Abbas is hoping that Erdogan will assist him in achieving his goal.

In January 2005, Abbas was elected president of the Palestinian Authority. The next presidential election was supposed to take place in January 2009, but a dispute that erupted between Fatah and Hamas has so far prevented the Palestinians from holding presidential and parliamentary elections. The last Palestinian parliamentary election was held in January 2006, when Hamas won most of the Palestine Legislative Council seats.

A year later, Hamas staged a violent coup in the Gaza Strip, overthrowing Abbas's PA and seizing full control of the coastal enclave, home to nearly two million Palestinians. Since then, the Palestinians have been left without a parliament due to the split between the PA-controlled West Bank and the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip.

Several attempts by Egypt and other Arab countries to resolve the Fatah-Hamas rift over the past 12 years have failed, leaving the Palestinians with two separate mini-states: one in the West Bank, the other in the Gaza Strip.

Abbas, in the past 11 years, has more than once expressed his desire to end the conflict with Hamas and pave the way for holding the long overdue elections. Such statements have often been ridiculed by his critics.

"Palestinian elections are merely a lie we've been hearing for years and never see happening on the ground," noted several social media users on Twitter. One posted a video that included various statements by Abbas in which he talks about holding new elections.

In 2009, Abbas announced: "I have issued a decree for holding presidential and parliamentary elections on January 24, 2010."

In 2016, Abbas stated:
"We are continuing our sincere efforts to achieve Palestinian reconciliation [with Hamas] by forming a national unity government on the basis of the PLO program and holding presidential and parliamentary elections."
In 2017, Abbas, in a speech at the United Nations General Assembly, called on Hamas to allow the Palestinian Authority to assume its responsibilities in the Gaza Strip and hold general elections.

Last year, in another speech at the UN General Assembly, Abbas again announced his intention to hold presidential and parliamentary elections. "Upon my return to the homeland," he said, "I will call general elections in the West Bank, Gaza Strip and Jerusalem."

In September 2020, during a videoconference meeting of leaders of Palestinian factions, Abbas said:
"Despite all the obstacles you are aware of, we are preparing to hold the parliamentary election, and then the presidential election, with the participation of all the Palestinian factions."
Abbas has long managed to avoid fulfilling his election promise, once by blaming Hamas and another time by blaming Israel. As far as Abbas is concerned, everyone is to blame for the absence of free and fair elections except himself.

Now Palestinians and some Arabs are saying that they no longer believe Abbas. A hashtag trending on Twitter under the name "The Election Play" shows that many Palestinians and Arabs are skeptical of Abbas's real intentions.

"We have become used to the talk about elections," remarked Hesham Abo Al-Hosom, a Palestinian political activist from the Gaza Strip. "The elections Abbas is talking about are a play steeped in lies and delusions."

Palestinian social media user Rawan Armana commented: "We are fed up with speeches, lies and deceit. We have lost confidence [in our leaders]."

Tareq Al-Farra, a member of Fatah, derided Abbas's repeated promise to hold elections: "When will this play end? We are tired of statements about holding general elections and achieving national unity. Stop your lies."

Yara Lolo, who describes herself as a supporter of Abbas's arch-rival, Mohammed Dahlan, wrote: "The people who elect corrupt opportunists and swindlers are not considered victims, but rather partners in crime."

Commenting on Abbas's request that Turkey monitor the Palestinian elections, Egyptian social media user Ahmed Maka wrote:
"Did you know that the Palestinian Authority president called on Turkey to monitor the Palestinian elections, despite the fact that Turkey itself rigged the local elections [in Turkey], according to the testimony of international observers?"
Lebanese political analyst Nidal Al-Sabeh also expressed concern over Abbas's demand that Turkey monitor the Palestinian elections. The PA president's request to Erdogan, Al-Sabeh said, "exposes to Abbas's stance against Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Syria, and his involvement with the Qatari-Turkish project."

Khairallah Khairallah, a Lebanese journalist and political commentator, wondered whether the proposed elections would lead to real change on the ground and put an end to Hamas's "Taliban-style Islamic emirate" in the Gaza Strip:
"With the exception of Turkey, which hosted the Fatah-Hamas meeting to assert its regional role, it is not known how the elections will lead to a profound change that the Palestinians need more than ever... The elections can be the gateway to a major change. Most of all, the elections can be a bridge to a transformation that leads to the birth of a different Palestinian leadership. It is terrifying that Abbas speaks as if he lives in another world. Is there a Palestinian interest in attacking the US administration, even if this administration takes unfair positions against the Palestinians? Is there a Palestinian interest in referring negatively to the peace accords between Israel and the United Arab Emirates and Bahrain? There is a Palestinian need to return to reality. There is a Palestinian need to come to terms with the truth."
Khairallah called on the Palestinian factions to explain what they mean when they talk about achieving national unity and holding new elections. "There is a need to stop selling illusions," he added.
"There is a need to adapt to international and regional developments. There is a need to acknowledge that national unity cannot be restored by appeasing Turkey or Iran, or by acknowledging the legitimacy of what Hamas is doing in Gaza. Palestinian elections cannot be held without a clear vision that is based above all on preserving an independent Palestinian decision, away from the interference of Turkey and Iran."
Palestinian political analyst Hani al-Masri said it was "useless" to talk about holding elections while the Palestinians are divided.
"Without a unity government that provides an atmosphere of confidence and respect for human rights and freedoms, combats corruption, and unifies institutions, especially the judiciary, there can be no elections... What is required is a new and strategic vision, a single leadership, and a true partnership."
Erdogan's renewed interest in the Palestinian issue might be seen in the context of his embrace of the Muslim Brotherhood and its affiliates, including Hamas. If Erdogan is going to send Turkish observers to monitor the Palestinian elections, it is because he would like to help his friends in Hamas win the vote.

A report by the Century Foundation on the Turkish government's ties to the Muslim Brotherhood estimated that 20,000 Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood members live on Turkish soil. Recently, another report revealed that Turkey has given passports to a dozen members of Hamas in Istanbul.

Erdogan evidently cares about Hamas more than Abbas does. The Turkish leader would certainly like to see Palestinians hold new elections -- and he is prepared to provide all the help needed. By inviting Turkey to monitor the elections, Abbas is playing into the hands of Erdogan and Hamas. Abbas is advancing Turkey's mission of replacing his regime with a Muslim Brotherhood-led government.

  • Follow Khaled Abu Toameh on Twitter

Khaled Abu Toameh, an award-winning journalist based in Jerusalem, is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at Gatestone Institute.

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16576/erdogan-abbas-palestinian-authority

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



Iran: Can the U.S. Make Peace with the Mullahs? - Peter Huessy


by Peter Huessy

If anyone thinks that diplomacy can resolve such threats, one need not do any more than remember the diplomatic success Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain had in preventing Nazi Germany from attacking Poland.

  • With regard to the JCPOA itself, Iran's serious and continuing violations of the nuclear enrichment terms of the existing agreement reflect the true intentions of the mullahs, and clearly indicate that a new nuclear deal could not be implemented with any confidence: it would also be violated by Iran. Secretary Pompeo, in a statement posted on the Department of State's website, noted that Iran has shown no willingness to live in peace.
  • Like other criminal cartels, Iran has operational arms, including the IRGC, Hezbollah and Hamas, to do its dirty work. In 2014-15, Iran's terror proxy, Hezbollah, financed its terrorism through smuggling contraband cigarettes in the United States, and working with Venezuelan drug cartels to smuggle drugs and traffic in women and children. Revealingly, a nearly-completed law enforcement effort to take down Hezbollah's cigarette smuggling ring was shut down by the Obama administration just before the 2015 JCPOA was concluded.
  • If anyone thinks that diplomacy can resolve such threats, one need not do any more than remember the diplomatic success Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain had in preventing Nazi Germany from attacking Poland.


U.S. Secretary Mike Pompeo, in a statement posted on the Department of State's website, noted that Iran has shown no willingness to live in peace. (Photo by Atta Kenare/AFP Getty Images)

On Saturday, September 19, after months of futile diplomatic efforts to extend the UN ban on Iran's purchase of advanced weapons, the Trump administration implemented "snap back" sanctions as set forth in the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). That action was taken, said U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, because "The Iranians are largely ignoring the most important components of the [nuclear deal] with respect to nuclear enrichment."

The sanctions were imposed despite the objections of China, Russia and members of the European Union who stated that the U.S. could not do so because U.S. President Donald J. Trump had withdrawn from the JCPOA. To complicate the issue further, U.S. presidential candidate Joe Biden has promised that, if he wins the presidency, he would rejoin the nuclear deal and lift sanctions, diplomatic actions that he apparently but incorrectly believes will entice the mullahs to make peace and dissuade them from building nuclear weapons and ICBMs.

Questions now arise. What will Russia, China and the EU do about the new sanctions? Will Iran honor what is left of the JCPOA? After all, it never honored the JCPOA agreement -- which it had never signed-- in the first place. Is it even possible to make peace with Iran's anti-Western theocracyin the hope that it will moderate its disruptive actions in the Middle East, at homeand elsewhere?

Russia, China and the EU, for their part, now that the UN arms embargo is ending, will be tempted to sell Iran advanced weapons – including missile and nuclear technology. Should they do so, the U.S.,according to the U.S. Department of State, will harshly sanction all companies that conduct such trade. Actions to deter trade with Iran will likely also propel Washington to blacklist moreIranian banks.

As current events analysts Mark Dubowitz and Richard Goldberg explain, "at least 14 Iranian banks remain open for business with foreign customers. These banks are Tehran's financial lifeline." They continue: "...the American Financial Crimes Enforcement Network declared Iran's entire financial industry a primary jurisdiction for money laundering... If these determinations have any meaning, all Iranian banks need to be banned from global finance;" however, allowing Covid-19 related humanitarian assistance through a Swiss financial channel utilizing one bank, could be permitted.

Some in Congress would evidently like to do just that. A letter sent to President Trump by Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) as well as other senators urges the administration to "impose sanctions on the entirety of Iran's financial sector" that may still be connected to the global banking system known as the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunications (SWIFT). "Iran's desperate economic circumstances provide a critical opportunity for the United States to force the regime to abandon its malign activities and return to the negotiating table on your terms," the senators wrote.

With regard to the JCPOA itself, Iran's serious and continuing violations of the nuclear enrichment terms of the existing agreement reflect the true intentions of the mullahs and clearly indicate that a new nuclear deal could not be implemented with any confidence: it would also be violated by Iran. Secretary Pompeo, in a statement posted on the Department of State's website, noted that Iran has shown no willingness to live in peace.

Iran's belligerency is further exemplified by the threat made by General Hossein Salami, head of the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) to "hit" all Americans connected to the killing of his predecessor, General Qasem Soleimani. His threat was underscored by intelligence reports of Iran's intention to assassinate the US ambassador to South Africa.

Like other criminal cartels, Iran has operational arms, including the IRGC, Hezbollah and Hamas, to do itsdirty work. In 2014-15, Iran's terror proxy, Hezbollah, financed its terrorism through smuggling contraband cigarettes in the United States, and working with Venezuelan drug cartels to smuggle drugs and traffic in women and children. Revealingly, an early-completed law enforcement effort to take down Hezbollah's cigarette smuggling ring was shut down by the Obama administration just before the 2015 JCPOA was concluded.

Hezbollah's partnership with Latin American cartels appears to be further evidence that Iran has transformed itself into a criminal enterprise with tentacles in the Western hemisphere and that cross U.S. borders. There is also the possibility that Iranian-sponsored terrorism will appear on U.S. soil.

When Al Qaeda decided to strike directly at America in the decade after the end of the Cold War, the U.S. suffered the horror of 9-11. Like Al Qaeda, Iran may now be planning not only to attack America and its allies in the Middle East but also to strike the American homeland. The FBI, after 9-11, already detailed in the United States the widespread presence of terror cells, particularly those of Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hezbollah, all Iranian terrorist proxies.

Iran terror proxies could release a biological weapon like Covid-19, or destroy several of the 31 critical US infrastructure nodes, as shown in the 1999-2004 Gilmore homeland security commission findings. Even if Americans are tempted to think that they are safe from "loose" nuclear weapons smuggled across U.S. borders, or that missile defenses could intercept missiles fired from a ship close to the shore, it would be foolish to sleep easy knowing of the potential threats threat posed by Iranian terrorists.

If anyone thinks that diplomacy can resolve such threats, one need not do any more than remember the diplomatic success Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain had in preventing Nazi Germany from attacking Poland.


Peter Huessy, Senior Consulting Analyst at Ravenna Associates, is President of GeoStrategic Analysis

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16582/iran-can-the-us-make-peace-with-the-mullahs

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter



From 9/11 to Khashoggi: The Saudi Islamist State Within a State (Part II of III) - Irina Tsukerman


by Irina Tsukerman

The role of Islamists in hijacking Saudi governance and major regional Arab and Muslim institutions has long been overlooked.





BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 1,767, October 2, 2020


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The role of Islamists in hijacking Saudi governance and major regional Arab and Muslim institutions has long been overlooked. A recent interview with a former Saudi intelligence official who was witness to key events highlights some of the actors who financed extremism and whose role in the planning of 9/11 and other terrorist activity has been ignored for nearly two decades.


The second development that reveals the true picture of the influence of Islamists on Saudi governance and Muslim institutions is the testimony of Adnan Rahmatallah, a former Saudi intelligence officer and later an employee of the Islamic Development Bank (IDB). In an exclusive interview with this author, Rahmatallah for the first time publicly discusses his observations of the Islamist “state-within-a-state” formerly inside Saudi Arabia.


This concept goes beyond the idea of a “deep state” of government officials driven by ulterior motives who push a shadow agenda behind the scenes that clashes with the official position of the legitimate government and/or head of state. Rather, it speaks of an entire population beholden to particular views that are at odds with the official positions.


Islamist views were the vertebrae of this hidden state. The ideology of Islamism is contrary to the very idea of the nation state; therefore, its proponents did not contain themselves to a specific geographic location. They coordinated their activities with their counterparts abroad and across international organizations, such as financial institutions and NGOs.


During the interview, Rahmatallah refers to Islamists who closely followed the agenda subsequently revealed by Qatar’s former Emir Hamad in secret tapes of his conversations with Libyan dictator Muammar Qaddafi. In other words, these plans were in the works years before the attempted assassination of Crown Prince Abdullah and other operations acknowledged to be part of a transnational agenda aimed at dividing Saudi Arabia and diminishing its role in the region.


As part of his early work for IDB, Rahmatallah says he was tasked with projects related to Pakistan. While there, he came across a secretive and suspect project affiliated with an individual Rahmatallah later recognized from a photo to be Khaled Sheikh Muhammad, following the release of that information in connection with the 9/11 attacks. He also observed none other than Osama bin Laden himself interacting with colleagues and overheard discussions concerning the Twin Towers attacks.


Another individual affiliated with this network was Yassin Qadi, an al-Qaeda affiliate who started out as an Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood member and who found asylum, along with many Brothers fleeing Nasser’s crackdown, in Saudi Arabia under King Fahad. Qadi was deeply involved in the Pakistani al-Qaeda program. In Saudi Arabia, he succeeded in founding a business that worked with the Saudi government. In a striking turn of events, just as Saudi Arabia finally designated the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization in 2014, Qadi was delisted from OFAC counterterrorism sanctions. He had been listed by US authorities for his alleged involvement in financing the 9/11 terrorist attacks and was first removed from the sanctions list by the UN in 2012. The OFAC statement only said the circumstances that had led to his designation “no longer apply.”


Who gave Qadi cover for decades? And who was able to intervene on his behalf in 2014, when King Abdullah, nearly assassinated years earlier, was interested in aggressively pursuing Islamists? Who was the right hand responsible for counterterrorism action? By 2014, it was none other than Muhammad bin Naif—the same Crown Prince lauded by all the usual Western suspects for his alleged cooperation against al-Qaeda. And who was his intelligence chief? Saad Jabri, who is now wanted by the Saudi authorities for embezzlement and who recently filed a lawsuit accusing Muhammad bin Salman of trying to assassinate him. This is the same accusation levied with no evidence by Ali Soufan, who magically makes all terrorist connections leading to Qatar mysteriously disappear.


Adnan Rahmatallah explains how every major IDB operation stood in contrast to the institution’s own bylaws, the stated goals of the supposed project, and the interests of many of the 54 countries comprising the institution. The true beneficiary was always the Islamist network, which ran deep and spread wide.


For instance, where Saudi Arabia pushed for the establishment of an IDB branch in Azerbaijan, known for its cooperation with the West and tough stand on terrorism, Bader Ayban, a businessman in the oil sector who was seeking to strengthen Saudi business with Baku, was thwarted by the president of the IDB. A new IDB branch was then opened in Astana, the capital of Khazakhstan, where, much to Rahmatallah’s surprise, the operation appeared to be filled with Hamas officials and Palestinian activists who were receiving loans and other types of funding in clear violation of the bank’s security obligations, and likely involving various types of fraud and money laundering.


These strange occurrences fell under the mandate of Suleiman Shamsuddin, who was the bank’s Director of the Special Assistant Office. The president of IDB, and those below him, relied on loyalists of assorted backgrounds to cover up obvious financial inconsistencies and improprieties. Abdul Ryazak Lababdy, a Syrian Muslim Brotherhood member who worked in the finance department, was consistently employed by the president to audit the department and cover up any wrongdoing, especially those at the Kazakh branch. An official who worked closely with Lababdy was Ahmed Nujaimi, who was involved on the administrative side.


Further irregularities indicated that Lababdy and other officials of the IDB essentially hijacked the institution with the object of promoting the Islamist/Muslim Brotherhood agenda—right under the noses of the governments they were supposed to represent.


One of the more shocking illegal operations Rahmatallah discovered was funding allocated to the Iranian nuclear program. In the early 2000s, the common intellectual talking points among the foreign policy and security elites were that Sunnis and Shiites were implacable enemies and that Iran and Arab Gulf States had nothing in common. The key official in charge of this program, which was in direct violation of IDB’s policies, was Tareq Ridi, director of a department called Operations and Projects. Ridi proposed allocating the funding directly to Iran’s Central Bank. None of this was mentioned at the time or at any time afterward, noted Rahmatallah, who believes these issues should be scrutinized and investigated.


When Rahmatallah started asking questions, the senior members of the bank were not pleased. Several plotted against him to prevent further inquiry and also to use him as a scapegoat and a distraction from the illicit operations. A corrupt lawyer by the name of Adel Jamjoom, who had been assigned to cover up mistakes made by the Al Inted company in yet another suspicious operation in Albania, as well as Lababdy and Nujaimi, were involved in the cover-up. They eventually succeeded in drawing unwanted attention to Rahmatallah’s investigation. Rahmatallah was accused of financial improprieties and was essentially fired.


Rahmatallah’s natural recourse would have been to relay this information to Saad  Jabri, but he was concerned that Jabri might be involved. Instead, he conveyed his concerns to Turki Faisal through his special assistant, Jamal Khashoggi. He never heard back, for reasons he could not understand at the time.


Rahmatallah eventually learned that the Muslim Brotherhood was onto him and considered him a threat serious enough to warrant detention or worse. He decided not to stick around to find out what would happen, packed up his family, and left the country. He would later play a role in preventing an Islamist-backed attempted assassination of then-President of Pakistan Musharraf on US soil.


While testifying about that matter to FBI agents and assorted intelligence officers, he tried to convey the hijacking of IDB by the Islamists and their clandestine role in backing al-Qaeda’s attacks on the US. He discovered that there was more interest in covering up the fact that these elements were subverting the will of the monarchs than in disclosing the full facts.


Rahmatallah’s experience was not an isolated event. The FBI agents he learned about who had been pursuing the Qadi angle at the time and for years to come were taken off the case. Rahmatallah came away with an impression that some degree of political corruption or infiltration had taken place within Western intelligence agencies, and that there was either a pattern of willful blindness toward the role of Islamists in this matter or a concerted effort to frame Riyadh for the sins of the Islamist network that had taken hold of institutions both internally and externally.


In retrospect, the congruence of factors that came together at the time could not have been a coincidence. The al-Qaeda attacks on US soil, the progress of the Iranian nuclear program, the various Islamist plots and operations, and the series of attempted assassinations of high-profile heads of state known to have pro-Western inclinations, such as Musharraf and later Crown Prince Abdullah, all took place while the aforementioned IDB officials were playing an active and senior role, when Jabri was a little-known but greatly trusted intelligence operative for Muhammad bin Naif (who was already active in security matters long before his promotion), and when Jamal Khashoggi was likewise a trusted intelligence operative for Turki Faisal. All these people were legendary figures in Saudi security and diplomacy, and all during a period where Saudi Arabia itself was facing a plague of terrorist attacks but simultaneously gaining a reputation for exporting extremist Islamist ideology all over the world. Can it possibly be a coincidence that all these figures were in position when these occurrences took place, and when Ali Soufan, who was increasingly connected to Qatar even in his FBI days, was assigned to handle many related terrorist cases?


Whatever the case may be, the IDB officials responsible for contributing to the false narrative about 9/11 and Saudi Arabia were from 54 different countries—and those who are still alive remain well known in their capacities. Some are now in senior positions in the IDB. Many people linked to Rahmatallah’s story were never investigated for their wrongdoing—indeed, this is the first time their role in those events is being aired in public.


Much more remains to be uncovered. Adnan Rahmatallah’s testimony is key to understanding how millions of people were hoodwinked by Qatar’s well-known narrative, which was playing out decades before the current discussions, about its alleged role in funding Hezbollah, Hamas, and other terrorist organizations. Moreover, it can safely be said that the roots of the Islamist Quartet vastly predate the most recent operations. The calamity that befell Crown Prince Muhammad bin Salman with Khashoggi’s death at the Saudi consulate in Istanbul likely has its roots in events that predate the Crown Prince’s birth, much less his own confrontation with the corrupt Islamists haunting the Saudi scene.





Irina Tsukerman is a human rights and national security attorney based in New York. She has written extensively on geopolitics and US foreign policy for a variety of American, Israeli, and other international publications.

Source: https://besacenter.org/perspectives-papers/saudi-governance-islamists/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter