Friday, September 10, 2021

Iran's Nuclear Weapons Weeks Away - Majid Rafizadeh


by Majid Rafizadeh

By now, Raisi has been president of Iran for more than a month but there has not been the slightest effort by the Islamic Republic to restart any talks; in fact, all the while, the regime appears to have accelerated its enrichment of uranium to weapons-grade.

  • Apparently desperate to revive the nuclear pact, the Biden administration at once began appeasing the ruling clerics of Iran.

  • From the perspective of Iran's mullahs, Biden's desperate efforts to resurrect the nuclear deal manifested his weak leadership and therefore a delectable opportunity for Tehran to buy time, get more concessions, advance its nuclear program and become a nuclear state.

  • Notwithstanding all these policies of incentives and appeasements, Iran's mullahs continued to make excuses seemingly to drag out the nuclear talks. One of the latest overtures was that the world powers ought to wait until Iran's newly elected president, Ebrahim Raisi, took office before resuming the nuclear talks.

  • By now, Raisi has been president of Iran for more than a month but there has not been the slightest effort by the Islamic Republic to restart any talks; in fact, all the while, the regime appears to have accelerated its enrichment of uranium to weapons-grade.

  • At the moment, the Iranian regime is reportedly 8-10 weeks away from obtaining the weapons-grade materials necessary for a nuclear weapon.

From the perspective of Iran's mullahs, US President Joe Biden's desperate efforts to resurrect the nuclear deal manifested his weak leadership and therefore a delectable opportunity for Tehran to buy time, get more concessions, advance its nuclear program and become a nuclear state. (Image source: iStock)

Since the Biden administration assumed office, the nuclear talks with Iran have gone nowhere. Six rounds of negotiations have been concluded with no results. In contrast, two other issues have gone too far: the Biden administration's appeasement policies towards the Iranian regime, and the advancement of the mullahs' nuclear program.

When the Biden administration took office, it announced that it would curb Iran's nuclear program by returning to the 2015 nuclear deal -- known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which by the way Iran never signed -- and by subsequently lifting sanctions against the Iranian government.

Apparently desperate to revive the nuclear pact, the Biden administration at once began appeasing the ruling clerics of Iran. The first concession was delivered when the administration changed the previous administration's policy of maximum pressure toward Iran's proxy militia group, the Houthis. Even as the evidence -- including a report by the United Nations -- showed that the Iranian regime was delivering sophisticated weapons to the Houthis in Yemen, the Biden administration suspended some of the sanctions against terrorism that the previous administration had imposed on the Houthis.

Soon after, the Biden administration revoked the designation of Yemen's Houthis as a terrorist group. In addition, in June 2021, the Biden administration lifted sanctions on three former Iranian officials and several energy companies. Then, in a blow to the Iranian people and advocates of democracy and human rights -- a few days after the Iranian regime handpicked a mass murderer to be its next president -- the Biden administration announced that it was also considering lifting sanctions against Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

From the perspective of Iran's mullahs, Biden's desperate efforts to resurrect the nuclear deal manifested his weak leadership and therefore a delectable opportunity for Tehran to buy time, get more concessions, advance its nuclear program and become a nuclear state.

Notwithstanding all these policies of incentives and appeasements, Iran's mullahs continued to make excuses seemingly to drag out the nuclear talks. One of the latest overtures was that the world powers ought to wait until Iran's newly elected president, Ebrahim Raisi, took office before resuming the nuclear talks.

By now, Raisi has been president of Iran for more than a month but there has not been the slightest effort by the Islamic Republic to restart any talks; in fact, all the while, the regime appears to have accelerated its enrichment of uranium to weapons-grade. This escalation has even caused concerns among some European leaders and has, surprisingly, led the EU to pressure Tehran immediately to return to the negotiating table. "We vehemently ask Iran to return to the negotiating table constructively and as soon as possible. We are ready to do so, but the time window won't be open indefinitely" a ministry spokesperson from Germany warned.

After stating that they would resume talks when Raisi assumed office, Iran's leaders are now saying that they are not likely to restart the nuclear negotiations for another 2-3 months. "the... government considers a real negotiation is a negotiation that produces palpable results allowing the rights of the Iranian nation to be guaranteed," Foreign Minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian said during an interview broadcast by Iran's state television. He added that the nuclear talks are "one of the questions on the foreign policy and government agenda... the other party knows full well that a process of two to three months is required for the new government to establish itself and to start taking decisions."

As Iran's nuclear policy, however, is not set by the president or its foreign minister, this declaration sounded like just another excuse by the regime to buy time and advance enrichment. It is, of course, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei who enjoys the final say in Iran's nuclear and foreign policy issues.

At the moment, the Iranian regime is reportedly 8-10 weeks away from obtaining the weapons-grade materials necessary for a nuclear weapon. "Iran has violated all of the guidelines set in the JCPOA and is only around 10 weeks away from acquiring weapons-grade materials necessary for a nuclear weapon," Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz told ambassadors from countries on the United Nations Security Council during a briefing at the Israeli Foreign Ministry in Jerusalem on August 4, 2021. "Now is the time for deeds – words are not enough. It is time for diplomatic, economic and even military deeds, otherwise the attacks will continue."

Once again it seems that the mullahs of Iran are masterfully playing the Biden administration and the EU by stalling the nuclear talks, buying time to get more concessions, and accelerating their enrichment of uranium and nuclear program to reach a weapons-grade nuclear breakout.


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


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Biden violating his campaign pledge, 'politicizing' DOJ to do his bidding, legal experts warn - Kelly Laco


by Kelly Laco 


Biden directed DOJ to file lawsuits against GOP-led Georgia and Texas over voting and anti-abortion laws


President Biden is facing harsh criticism from legal experts and elected officials for violating his campaign promise to keep the Department of Justice (DOJ) non-political, after he directed the department to pursue politically charged lawsuits against Republican-led states. 

In recent weeks, Biden – supported by other Democrats and liberal groups – has green-lighted DOJ to file lawsuits against Georgia, over its state election statute, and Texas, over its controversial anti-abortion law. These political directives by the president come after he promised on the campaign trail that he would keep politics out of the department and it would be "totally independent" of him.

Biden said multiple times in 2020 that he would "not direct [DOJ] who to prosecute, what to prosecute, how to prosecute." 


Now, legal experts are saying that although Biden campaigned as a moderate, his decision to direct Attorney General Merrick Garland to pursue multiple political lawsuits shows that he is weaponizing the department to pursue a left-wing agenda.

Judicial Crisis Network President Carrie Severino told Fox News, "President Biden campaigned as a moderate but since taking office he and his Department of Justice have just carried water for the left-wing dark money groups who elected him – at the expense of the rule of law."

Stephen Miller, founder of America First Legal and former senior adviser to President Trump, said Biden has "horrendously and hopelessly politicized" DOJ, which is a violation of legal ethics.

"Joe Biden has horrendously and hopelessly politicized the DOJ by using them as an arm of the Democratic Party, filing frivolous litigation solely for political – not legal – reasons. This is a clear violation of legal ethics and it warrants a full investigation into who directed these deeply offensive and utterly meritless lawsuits against the states which clearly have no legal basis whatsoever," said Miller in a statement to Fox News.


Jessica Anderson, executive director of Heritage Action for America, accused Biden of lying on the campaign trail and claimed that his DOJ is actually "the most political and weaponized DOJ," in a tweet.

Elected officials in GOP-led states are also weighing in, saying that Biden's political lawsuits, and other crises his administration is managing, are damaging to the country.

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton told Fox News that it is "shameful" that Biden broke his campaign promise to keep DOJ non-political.

"It is shameful that Biden has broken countless campaign promises, however I’m not surprised. He is a danger to our country and is responsible for crises after crises – the border, Afghanistan, the economy and more to come. This won’t deter me from fighting for our freedoms and the law," said Paxton.

The attorney general for Montana, Austin Knudsen, said Biden's "weaponization" of federal agencies is wrong and will make Americans more skeptical of government.

"President Biden’s weaponization of federal agencies against the interests of states is wrong and will only serve to sow more skepticism of the federal government. Whether it’s trying to force masks on kids in schools or trying to overturn state laws enacted by duly elected state legislatures, it’s wrong," said Knudsen in a statement to Fox News.

"As Montanans' attorney general, I will continue to fight alongside other attorneys general to fight the Biden administration’s meddling in our states’ affairs," said Knudsen, who is leading multiple lawsuits against the president ranging from energy to immigration.

In June, Garland directed DOJ to sue Georgia, alleging Republican state lawmakers rushed through a sweeping overhaul with an intent to deny Black voters equal access to the ballot. Georgia officials, including Gov. Brian Kemp and Attorney General Chris Carr, fired back, saying the lawsuit is "blatantly political" and that Georgia's law actually strengthens security, expands access and improves transparency in elections.

Biden slammed the Supreme Court's ruling last week that Texas' restrictive abortion law could remain in effect in a 5-4 decision, calling it an "unprecedented assault on a woman’s constitutional rights." He also vowed that the his administration would take action through a "whole-of-government effort," and it was confirmed by Fox News Thursday that DOJ is preparing to sue imminently.

Garland officially announced the lawsuit against Texas during a press conference at DOJ headquarters on Thursday afternoon.

The White House didn't immediately return a request for comment.


Kelly Laco  is a news and politics editor for Fox News.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

How Jihadists Interpret the Infidel's Withdrawal - Joseph Puder


by Joseph Puder

Did the U.S. study the lessons Israel learned from evacuating from Southern Lebanon and Gaza?


The hasty and disastrous U.S. exit from Afghanistan before the deadline of August 31, 2021, was in compliance with the Taliban’s demand. It did not spare America from a terrorist attack that killed 13 U.S. Marines, and hundreds of Afghan civilians. Moreover, it left hundreds of American citizens behind who now will be either killed or used as hostages. Beyond the human tragedy, there is the material waste of an estimated $90 billion in sophisticated U.S. equipment. It includes 73 aircraft, mostly helicopters, 70  MRAPs (Mine Resistant Protected Vehicles), built to withstand blasts from IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices), 27 Humvees, etc.

Some in the mainstream U.S. media have expressed hope that the current takeover of Afghanistan by the Taliban will be different this time around -- that, unlike the takeover of power in 1996, the Taliban will be wiser in 2021, and won’t resort to the same intolerant and destructive behavior it displayed in 2001. Just prior to the U.S. invasion, the Taliban destroyed the ancient statues of Buddhas in Bamiyan. They also oppressed women and forbade the schooling of girls.

There are clear similarities between the Sunni-Muslim radical Taliban movement and the Sunni-Muslim Palestinian terrorist group Hamas ruling over the Gaza Strip. Aside from their mutual intolerance toward non-Muslims, both Hamas and the Taliban view democracy, liberty, and women’s rights with disdain. Conversely, Israel and the U.S. share the same values, including democracy, liberty, the rule of law, and women’s rights. Now, as the U.S. has exited Afghanistan, ending a 20-year war against terror, it is sharing Israel’s experience in May, 2000, when it withdrew from southern Lebanon after 18 years of clashes with Hezbollah. In 2005, when Israel abandoned the Gaza Strip, Hamas terrorists continued to attack. Israel, however, didn’t leave behind $90 billion worth of military equipment.

The U.S. must now learn the lessons that Israel learned following its withdrawal of its forces from Southern Lebanon and Gaza. Israel recognized that Jihad does not end upon withdrawal. Unfortunately, for the U.S. and Israel, the jihadists consider American and Israeli withdrawals as admissions of defeat, and “Allah’s victory.” It only encourages the Islamist jihadists to pursue what are considered the “enemies of Allah,” and in the process, they will continue spreading death and destruction against non-Muslims in the West, targeting America, and Israel in particular. 

Sadly, for the U.S., the American forces' departure from Afghanistan witnessed the return of al-Qaeda and the Islamic State-K (K for Khorasan, denoting the Afghanistan and Pakistan branch of the Islamic State). The latter perpetrated the killing of the 13 U.S. Marines and hundreds of Afghan civilians. Hezbollah and Hamas’s terror pursued Israel as well, following its withdrawals. The U.S. administration failure is in entertaining the notion that complying with the wishes of the Jihadist groups, whether the Taliban or Hamas, will change their ways. The U.S. witnessed this fallacy earlier this week at the Kabul airport. The Taliban “promised” safe passage for U.S. personnel, and Afghan helpers, and were therefore responsible for the terror at the Kabul airport, though the actual killers were the Islamic State-K jihadists.

The U.S. administrations and the European Union (EU) offered Israel recurring, unsolicited advice to be generous toward Hamas by lifting the blockade, providing Hamas with more fuel, or allowing more bags full of Qatari dollars to enter Gaza so that Hamas might change its violent behavior. This proved to be bad advice, when in May, 2021, Hamas attacked Israeli cities with over 4,000 rockets. Israel realized that its good intentions, and generous gestures, didn’t ameliorate the jihadist terrorist behavior.

Violent jihadism is not only a problem for Israel, the U.S., and the West; it's first and foremost a problem for ordinary Muslims. These Muslims have been the primary victims of both Sunni, and Shiite radical Muslim jihadists. The jihadist groups -- al-Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, Islamic State (IS), Islamic State-K, and the Taliban -- are focused on ridding the world of a threat they perceive as being western culture. Muslims that adopt western mores and values are to be wiped out along with the western presence.

The Islamic State (IS) was created in 2014, following their capture of the Iraqi city of Mosul. Taliban commanders, unsatisfied with the leadership of Mullah Mohammad Omar, defected to the IS, and swore allegiance to the IS leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. The Islamic State is a practitioner of Salafism, a form of fundamental Islam as practiced by the early Caliphs who succeeded the Muslim prophet Mohammad. Its barbarism stems from a hybridization of doctrinaire Salafism and other Islamic radical currents.

Hamas, the Palestinian terrorist group occupying the Gaza Strip, was founded in 1987, as a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood. Rather than fight for national self-determination for Palestinians, this Sunni Islamist group sees Palestine as but one of many battle zones for a worldwide holy war to prevent the fall of any part of the House of Islam into the hands of infidels. The Palestinian Authority educational system, while not as radical as Hamas, still teaches the young to hate Jews, Israel, and other non-Muslims, and promotes Jihad in schools and the media.

Hezbollah, the Shiite Muslim Lebanese terrorist group, according to the Council on Foreign Relations  (CFR), “Opposes Israel, and western powers operating in the Middle East, and functions as a proxy of Iran.” Hezbollah uses religious mechanisms such as Takif Shari (religious assessment), ijtihad (interpretation) of jihad, and fatwa (Islamic religious verdict), as political tools to mobilize Shiites in Lebanon, and to build political support throughout the Middle East. Hezbollah has created terror cells worldwide, and is financing its operations through illicit drug trafficking.

The Taliban observes Deobandism, a conservative Islamic orthodoxy that follows the Salafist model, which seeks to emulate the life, and times of the prophet Mohammad. Deobandism originated in India. While less extreme than the Salafi tradition practiced by al-Qaeda, and IS, it nevertheless enforces strict laws that forbids modern clothing, music, (especially western music), and education for girls.

The Islamic State-K (IS-K) is as violent as the one operating in Iraq and Syria. In 2014, Hafiz Saeed Khan, a Pakistani national, and a commander in the Tehrik-e Taliban Pakistan (TTP), pledged allegiance to al-Baghdadi in Syria. With the demise of Baghdadi, and IS’s loss of territory in Iraq and Syria, it has increasingly turned to Afghanistan as a base for its global Caliphate. The IS-K expansion has, however, sparked violent conflict and rivalry between the IS-K and the Afghan Taliban, now apparently in control of Afghanistan.

Sam Harris, a neuroscientist, philosopher, New York Times best-selling author, and host of the Making Sense podcast, pointed out that, “what do groups like ISIS, al-Qaeda and Hamas want? They want to impose their religious views on the rest of humanity. They want to stifle every freedom that decent, educated, secular people care about. This is not a trivial difference. And yet, judging from the level of condemnation that Israel now receives, you would think the difference ran the other way.”

Harris continued:

This kind of confusion puts all of us in danger. This is the great story of our time. For the rest of our lives, and the lives of our children, we are going to be confronted by people who don’t want to live peacefully in a secure, pluralistic world, because they are desperate to get to paradise, and they are willing to destroy the very possibility of human happiness along the way. The truth is, we are all living in Israel. It’s just that some of us haven’t realized it yet.

The cynical western world should take note of that.


Joseph Puder


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Suicide by 'Replacement Migration' - Bruce Thornton


by Bruce Thornton

Can any nation survive when its character has been transformed?


The Biden administration’s disastrous withdrawal from Afghanistan is also worsening our already dangerous immigration crisis. Tens of thousands Afghans are being brought into the country, with little serious vetting to discriminate between those who served loyally with our troops and intelligence agencies; and those who just want a better life or have more sinister motives. This new influx comes on top of the one million migrants who have crossed our southern border just since Biden’s inauguration. All these new migrants are being dispersed throughout the country at taxpayer expense.

This process of transforming American identity and its defining political principles and virtues has been going on since the feckless 1965 immigration bill, which provided entrance to family members of immigrants, multiplying their numbers by as much as a factor of 8. The political and economic motives for this weakening of our border have likewise long been obvious––voters for progressives, cheap labor for free marketeers.

But another dubious idea has developed to justify our and Europe’s porous borders: Replacement Migrations. Pursuing this short-sighted idea will accelerate the dilution of national identity, an outcome progressives fervently desire as a mechanism for transforming our Constitutional order of divided government, federalism, and unalienable rights into technocratic rule by a “managerial elite.” Those technocrats’ utopian ideals like “equity” an “social justice” will further compromise the rights and freedoms of others.

The pretextual rationale for Replacement Migration is pragmatic: Europe and, in recent years, the U.S. are not reproducing at a rate sufficient to maintain populations through internal growth. The U.S. rate, for example, has declined to 1.64 child per woman from the 2.1 child needed to maintain the population. Combined with medical treatments that extend longevity, this decline in reproduction means fewer younger workers contributing payroll taxes to support greater numbers of those receiving public subsidies. These trends have put programs like Medicare and Social Security on track to run out of money. The UN’s solution is Replacement Migration––importing more-fecund young immigrants, legal or otherwise, to make up the worker deficit.

Hence the erosion of our immigration laws, despite the dangers of lax immigration policies that take in peoples from less advanced regions with cultural, social, and religious customs hostile to the host countries’. In Europe, for example, generous welfare subsidies to migrants combined with restrictions on employment have created a sullen generation of Muslim immigrants exploited by jihadist recruiters working out of some of the many mosques that have arisen across Europe. In addition to the terrorist attacks that follow, migrant participation in crime, especially rape, is much greater than their share of the total population.

Moreover, in many countries, significant numbers of Muslim immigrants are segregated into “no go” neighborhoods or towns where they indulge their cultural and religious practices, such as honor-killing and polygamy, inimical to the liberal democratic principles of their host governments. These developments are the wages of failing to demand assimilation to the host country and its social and political culture.

This tendency towards Balkanization by unfettered immigration was remarked on in 1968 by British PM Enoch Powell in his infamous “Rivers of Blood” speech decrying England’s feckless immigration policies and failure to require assimilation: “Now we are seeing the growth of positive forces acting against integration, of vested interests in the preservation and sharpening of racial and religious differences, with a view to the exercise of actual domination, first over fellow-immigrants and then over the rest of the population. . . Here is the means of showing that the immigrant communities can organize to consolidate their members, to agitate and campaign against their fellow citizens, and to overawe and dominate the rest.”

These dysfunctions, moreover, are abetted by progressive elites of the host countries, including the U.S., who have endorsed the illiberal assumptions of multiculturalism and grievance politics, particularly the right of non-Western peoples to some sort of reparations for the West’s alleged imperial and colonial sins. A fashionable guilt has developed among progressive cognitive elites that inhibits requiring immigrants, particularly “people of color,” to assimilate to the host country. Such a demand is deemed  “racist” and “xenophobic.”

This guilty deference communicates national weakness and a civilizational failure of nerve, a trend that also was noticed years ago in French travel-writer Jean Raspail’s 1973 novel The Camp of the Saints, which is featured in the Southern Poverty Law Center’s index librorum prohibitorum. The story follows a spontaneous mass migration of millions of Third World poor to the south of France, whence they spread across Europe and eventually occupy it. When the French consul in India hears a Catholic bishop say he approves of the migration and is proud to be “bearing witness” to it, the consul retorts, “Bearing witness to what? To your faith? Your religion? To your Christian civilization? Oh no, none of that! Bearing witness against yourselves, like the anti-Western cynics you’ve become. Do you think the poor devils that flock to your side aren’t any the wiser? Nonsense! They see right through you. For them, white skin means weak convictions. They know how weak yours are, they know you’ve given in.”

So too today, when the decades-long denigration of our national identity has over the last several years been intensified by specious ideas like “Critical Race Theory” and the “1619 Project.” Destroying our history is a means to discredit it and its political principles, clearing the space for their replacement by more collectivist and technocratic ones. Third World immigrants are weapons in this war against our heritage, and so progressives cities create suicidal policies like “sanctuary cities” where federal immigration law is nullified, and criminal illegal aliens prey on their fellow migrants and American citizens alike.

Whether by design or not, Replacement Migration is a way to transform the character of a nation. The globalist, supranational cognitive elite has for a century been denigrating national identity in favor of an imagined “global community” comprising “citizens of the world,” something that exists only for those same elites whose jobs regularly take them abroad where they socialize with other elites. For the rest of the world, identity is created by a distinct national identity comprising language, customs, mores, and traditions different from those of other nations.

But national identity based on a political system that guarantees citizen participation and unalienable individual rights for all is not the same thing as the “blood and soil” diseased nationalism of Nazi Germany. Without the affection of people for their country and their shared identity, a nation becomes defined by mere geographic proximity and shared consumption of products and popular culture. As historian Michael Burleigh rhetorically asks,

Can any nation survive without a consensus on values that transcend special interests, and which are non-negotiable in the sense of “Here we stand”? Can a nation state survive that is only a legal and political shell, or a “market state” for discrete ethnic or religious communities that share little by way of common values other than use of the same currency? Can a society survive that is not the object of commitments to its core values or a focus for the fundamental identity of all its members?

In a country like ours where multicultural identity politics divides citizens into victims and oppressors based on accidents of superficial appearance, the answer is no. “It is inhuman,” French philosopher Alain Finkielkraut writes, “to define man by blood and soil but no less inhuman to leave him stumbling through life with the terrestrial foundations of his existence taken out from under him.” And it is dangerous when the world is full of aggressors who have no doubt about the worth of their own national identities.

Apart from its doubtful efficacy, Replacement Migration without strict protocols for vetting immigrants and encouraging them to assimilate to our political principles further erodes the foundations of our political order in unalienable rights that transcend exclusive ethnic identities. And that ultimately leads to national suicide.


Bruce Thornton is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

It's the Story of the Century, and the Media Yawn - Fletch Daniels


by Fletch Daniels

We shouldn't let the mainstream media bury a story of this magnitude.

Never before in human history has a global pandemic resulted in the dismemberment of first-world economies, highly divisive universal vaccine and mask mandates, education-stunting school shutdowns, and the isolation of entire societies to the point of extreme mental health damage.

Throughout all this, the media have remained incurious as to how this historic misery happened.

Anyone with half a brain cell already knew that a new virus that started within a stone's throw of a biosafety level 4 laboratory in an authoritarian nation likely either leaked or was released from that laboratory.  But acknowledging this obvious fact immediately led to expulsion from "polite" society, or at least from social media.

But the fact that Saint Fauci is the director of an organization, the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, that provided U.S. funding on "gain of function" research to the tune of nearly $600,000 on several types of coronaviruses at the very lab where the leak happened may well be the biggest story of the last fifty years. 

Gain of function is shorthand for research that adds a new function to an existing virus, which in this case is the rather inconvenient function of infecting humans.  We were literally funding research by our biggest geopolitical rival on how to turn a harmless virus to humans into one that could wreak chaos in human populations.  Mission accomplished.

That's an earth-shattering story that fully vindicates Senator Rand Paul, who has been at the forefront of this, even as he was lyingly insulted by the guilty Fauci himself. 

If I submitted a novel manuscript with a supervillain who conspires with his nation's chief rival to do research that causes a global pandemic, and then is tasked with leading the response to this disaster, I would expect publishers to tell me the story is too far-fetched.  And yet that is exactly where this story leads.

In between yawns, the media's primary response to the story is to bury it and disparage anyone who notes it. 

The media continue to have a tremendous negative impact on America in their war on truth.  And one of the most pernicious influences is in the stories they choose to bury, which is a lot of them, while setting the daily news agenda.  They say it's time to move on, and America largely moves on.

I asked a few colleagues about this story, and not one of them had the foggiest idea what I was talking about thanks to a near-total media blackout.

After reading the story, one colleague asked, "Why on Earth would we want to take a natural virus and turn it into something far more deadly to humans?  Aren't viruses bad enough without us making them worse?"  Good question. 

Even if there is perhaps some benefit that could be found in such research, the risk seems ridiculously high (as is now rather apparent) — so high that it would far outweigh any potential benefit short of the wicked one of creating a biological weapon to paralyze a rival society.

These media blackouts occur almost daily.  For example, just using today as an example, how many people who don't read conservative outlets like this know that four out of the five Taliban members traded for an American traitor, the worst of Guantanamo's worst, are now leaders of Afghanistan?

Or how about the fact that history's newest Picasso, who sells paintings for more money than most Americans will ever see in a lifetime, is none other than Hunter Biden, who admitted that he and his father are likely compromised by a laptop stolen by Russians?

This selection of what to cover to drive the narrative is the greatest damage that the media do to America.  For all their protestations, I don't think "enemy of the people" is that inaccurate of a description for an institution that has declared war on the truth and done incalculable damage to American society. 

The media also do damage through repetition, another contrast currently on display.  The media absolutely destroyed President George W. Bush through nonstop and blatantly unfair attacks on him during Hurricane Katrina.  Yet when a mentally challenged Democrat goes on vacation following a similar hurricane, while much of the same state is still without power, the media marvel at his tremendous competence and compassion. 

For those who were lauding the media for negatively covering the administration's Afghanistan disaster, they really had no choice.  The historic incompetence was at such a level that they were forced to do what they hate the most, even if they did it in the kindest way possible.  But they raced to turn the page and start the rehabilitation effort vice driving him from office, as would have likely happened to a Republican president under the same horrific self-inflicted circumstances. 

Returning to the story of the century, do any of the "mainstream" media outlets not find it rather coincidental that we were conspiring with China to turn a harmless bat virus into one that is lethal to mankind?  Does it not seem a little odd that the very man the media have lionized, since he is part of their cultural tribe, as the leader of the U.S. response provided funding to this effort?  I'm not a big believer in coincidences, and if this was a coincidence, it is the biggest one of all time. 

For those who might question that this "nonpolitical" wunderkind is part of their tribe, anybody who says about Hillary Clinton that "we all love her and are very proud to know her" is a leftist to the core.

If Fauci was aligned with the right instead of the left, the biggest question we'd likely be contemplating is which prison he would be heading to. 

Frankly, I don't know if the COVID release was an experiment gone bad or something far more sinister and intentional.  But it is always worth considering cui bono, or who stands to benefit, when looking at an issue like this.  The greatest beneficiaries of the destruction wrought by COVID (and the overheated response to it that is still paralyzing Western democracies) were China and leftists and globalists worldwide.

The release of the virus accomplished a number of objectives.  It reversed the damage that the Trump administration was doing to China while resulting in a significant increase in China's comparative power.  It resulted in a strong move toward authoritarianism across the globe.  And it resulted in the weakest and most compromised American president of my lifetime.  Cui bono, indeed.

At worst, this is a global conspiracy that rivals any in history.  At best, this is the worst cover-up of recent history.  The story is the blockbuster of all blockbusters.  But Democracy dies in darkness, as the paper that marveled at President Biden's competence and compassion intones, and darkness is what we have at the moment. 

I've gained a lot of respect for Senator Rand Paul for his commitment to the truth.  Here's to hoping a few other politicians buck the cultural power of the left and demand accountability and answers to the biggest questions of recent history.  The leftstream media certainly aren't going to do it, but we shouldn't let them bury a story of this magnitude.

Image: Tyler Menezes via Flickr.

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.


Fletch Daniels


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Hamas' Cruelty to Palestinians - Hugh Fitzgerald


by Hugh Fitzgerald

And how western 'progressives' abet it.


The indifference of Hamas to the wellbeing of those it claims to represent and care about – the Palestinians – is well known. After all, the terror group’s modus operandi is designed to put the Palestinian civilians in maximum peril. In Gaza, Hamas hides its vast store of weapons inside homes, schools, hospitals; it places its command-and-control centers in apartment high-rises; it launches its rockets into Israel from in or near those same civilian buildings – homes, schools, hospitals. Then, when Israel responds to a barrage of Hamas rockets, it necessarily aims at those places from where the rockets are launched, where the weapons are stored, where the Hamas senior command hides and schemes. The IDF makes great efforts to warn civilians of impending attacks. It uses leafletting, telephone calls, emails, and its “knock-on-the-roof” technique, all to minimize civilian casualties. Hamas, of course, hopes for the opposite; it wants more Palestinian civilians to be killed; such deaths make the Jewish state look bad, and for Hamas that, and not the wellbeing of those civilians, is what counts.

A report on the latest evidence of Hamas’—and the PIJ’s — callousness toward the Palestinians is here: “Hamas and Islamic Jihad’s True Concern for Palestinians Exposed Following Gantz-Abbas Meeting,” by Rachel O’Donoghue, Algemeiner, September 2, 2021:

If any additional evidence was needed that Gaza’s Hamas rulers are committed to the destruction of Israel — and do not care about enhancing the living conditions of Palestinians (see, for example, here and here) — the latest proof came in a statement released following a meeting on August 29 between Israeli Defense Minister Benny Gantz and Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas. 

Gantz and Abbas’ tete-a-tete was widely reported on, and resulted in an apparent agreement on economic measures designed to help Palestinians in the West Bank, including a loan of 500 million shekels ($155 million) against taxes and tariffs that Jerusalem collects on behalf of and remits to the PA — but that are being withheld in accordance with an Israeli law that counters Ramallah’s “Pay-for-Slay” policy of providing monthly “salaries” to terrorists and their families. 

There was also an agreement on an initiative that gives an additional 16,000 Palestinians the right to work in Israel, as well as the approval of Palestinian construction projects in Area C of the West Bank….

 Both the $155 million loan that Israel has agreed to lend the PA and the Jewish state’s offer of allowing another 16,000 Palestinians — both from the West Bank and Gaza — and to work in Israel, will ameliorate conditions for the desperate Palestinians in Gaza.

Hamas spokesman Abd al-Latif al-Qanou described the Gantz-Abbas meeting as a “stab in the back of the Palestinian people and what they have sacrificed,” adding it was a “betrayal of the blood of martyrs.” 

Apparently it is a “stab in the back of the Palestinian people” to be able to provide work in Israel for 16,000 more Palestinians.. It is a “stab in the back” for Mahmoud Abbas to have accepted a much-needed loan of $155 million from Israel. No doubt it is also a “stab in the back” by the PA for helping persuade Israel to enlarge the fishing zone accessible to Palestinian fishermen to 15 miles, and to permit more goods to be allowed into Gaza, including some dual-use products such as cement. Most Palestinians would welcome more such “stabs in the back.”

Another spokesman for the US-designated terrorist group accused Abbas of “encouraging Arab countries to normalize [relations] with Israel.” This condemnation is rich, given that PA officials slammed several Arab nations when they recently established diplomatic ties with the Jewish state under the auspices of the Abraham Accords. 

Abbas and his cronies in the PA have never encouraged the Abraham Accords, according to which four Arab states have chosen, in pursuit of their national interest, to normalize relations with Israel. The PA has consistently attacked them, as Hamas knows perfectly well. The terror group is hoping its audience will have forgotten what the PA has been saying all along about the Accords. In any case, Hamas knows there is no harm in misrepresenting the truth — that is to say, in lying. It’s been doing so, with great success, ever since it was founded in 1987.

Echoing Hamas’ sentiments, a representative of Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Tariq Silmi, crowed: “The blood of children killed by the army on Gantz’s orders has not yet dried, even as President Abbas meets him in Ramallah.”…

The Gantz-Abbas meeting in Ramallah was clearly a net gain for the PA. Abbas came away with a large loan of $155 million for the P.A., along with permits for 16,000 additional Palestinians to work in Israel. And soon after that meeting, and in its spirit, Israel announced there would be an enlarged fishing zone — to 15 miles — for Gazan fishermen, and more goods would be allowed into Gaza, including some “dual-use” cement, through the Ein Kerem crossing controlled by Israel.

Following all three of the previous Hamas-Israel conflicts, aid money to repair damage in Gaza was sent to Hamas. Some of that aid money was pocketed by Hamas leaders for themselves (just two of them, Khaled Meshaal and Mousa Abu Marzouk, have each managed to amass fortunes of at least $2.5 billion); some of the aid money went to replenish Hamas’ supply of weapons, and to help build its network of terror tunnels. What was left over then went to “reconstruction.” Israel was determined that this time the aid money offered by Qatar — $10 million every month — would not go to Hamas, but instead would be made accessible directly to the 100,000 poorest families in Gaza, bypassing the terror group. Israel cares about the wellbeing of Palestinians in Gaza; Hamas, itching to get its hands on all that Qatari aid money — money which Israel helped to raise — does not.

For Hamas, it’s any port in a storm. The 52nd anniversary of the attack on Al-Aqsa by a lunatic Australian will serve as well as anything else as an excuse to foment riots by Palestinians at Israel’s security fence. And once the riots started in August, they have been continued every night by Hamas, and as of this writing, show no signs of stopping.

Hamas in mid-August recommenced its earlier (2018-2019) Great March of Return, in which thousands of Palestinians marched every Friday as close as they could to Israel’s security fence, and tried to breach it. Hamas has now been sending the Palestinians not weekly, but every night, to march up close to the fence and once there, to throw rocks and Molotov cocktails at the Israeli soldiers on the other side; in one case, a Palestinian with a gun shot point-blank at a Border Policeman, who has since died. Israel uses tear gas, rubber bullets, and stun guns to keep the rioters from breaching the fence; it uses live fire only in the most dangerous situations, and tries then to aim at the legs of those whom it wishes to stop. Israel wishes to minimize serious injuries and deaths among Palestinian civilians.

Hamas, on the other hand, wants more of those marchers to be wounded or killed. It makes sure, too, that children are pressed into service, placed at or near the head of the marchers, so that they have a better chance of being hurt. Who in Hamas cares if some of those marchers are wounded or worse? Hamas is well-pleased when marchers are seriously wounded or killed; this provides more grist for the terror group’s propaganda mill.

If Hamas had a real interest in the welfare of the Palestinians in Gaza, it would stop hiding its weaponry inside, or under, or next fo, homes, schools, hospitals, and high-rises in the Strip.. It would not be launching rockets at Israel from inside, or under, or beside, those same homes, schools, hospitals, and high-rises. It would not be exposing Palestinian civilians to the dangers of Israeli reprisals. It would not be using Palestinian civilians as its sacrificial Great-March-of-Return marchers, deliberately placing them in harm’s way, and encouraging them to try to breach the fence. Since 2018 36,000 Palestinian marchers have been wounded — most very lightly — at or near the security fence because, despite Israel’s best efforts to use less harmful means (tear gas, rubber bullets, stun guns) to stop the marchers, such woundings have been unavoidable. Tear gas, and the canisters that contain it, can cause injuries, so can rubber bullets — though rarely are the wounds that result serious.

Israel has been doing its best, despite every conceivable provocation by Hamas, to make the lives of Palestinians in both the West Bank and Gaza less burdensome. That is why Defense Minister Benny Gantz promised Mahmoud Abbas the loan of $155 million, and to provide permits for an additional 16,000 Palestinians to work in Israel. It’s why Israel has extended the zone made accessible to Palestinian fisherman in Gaza, and decided to allow into Gaza more goods, including even some that have “dual-use.” Hamas, on the other hand, started a war with Israel, the fourth in a series, only in order to show that it, and not the P.A., was the true “resistance” to the Jewish state. Like the previous three wars, this one, too, ended in much of Gaza’s infrastructure being left in ruins. Why should Hamas care? It declared it had won, and waited for the money to come flowing in. Only this time, the aid — from Qatar, the only Arab state still willing to fund the Palestinians — will bypass Hamas and go directly to its intended recipients, the most impoverished people in Gaza. This was done at the insistence of Israel which, unlike Hamas, does indeed care about the wellbeing of the Palestinians.


Hugh Fitzgerald


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

White racist leftist in ape mask assaults Larry Elder and just look at how the LA Times covered it - Monica Showalter


by Monica Showalter

Norman Rockwell's 'The problem we all live with' is back this time in Los Angeles, and the paper that called Larry Elder 'the black face of white supremacy' puts out an idiot headline.

So is butt-naked racism against the man who may become California's first black governor O.K. so long as a Democrat is doing it?

Apparently so, based on how the Los Angeles Times is covering yesterday's egg-hurling incident.

A leftist white woman in a gorilla mask, unsubtle as she could get, hurled an egg at the head of gubernatorial candidate Larry Elder in Venice, California, nearly hitting him, as did another leftist later as Elder was hustled off by his aides into an SUV.

The Los Angeles Times headline, noted by reporter Ryan Saavedra, was incredible:

Would they write the same kind of blase headline were say, Stacey Abrams, attacked by a white wearing a gorilla mask? The question answers itself.

As Saavedra notes, this would be the same Los Angeles Times that ran a headline a couple of weeks ago calling Larry Elder "the black face of white supremacy," in some amazingly pretzeled Orwellian newspeak.

That didn't work, of course, so now, they claim that Elder was leaving based on the "hostile reception" he drew as if were the bad guy here who somehow brought on a bad reaction from some displeased voters because he somehow brought it on himself by his unpopular ideas. The racist nature of the attack and the disgustingness of the human being who launched the projectile attack, which could have caused injury, were never focused on. Who was she, and why wasn't she arrested for assault intended to interfere with the democratic process, that same democratic process Democrats are still howling about in the Jan. 6 incident? Nope, this was just a "hostile reception," something supposedly to be expected, instead of a racist organized attack. Nothing to see here...

Was Bull Connor resisting racial desegregation orders in the Jim Crow South just a 'hostile reception? Were the lumpy characters blocking the schoolhouse door and spraying foul graffiti complete with hurled tomatos to a little black girl in New Orleans in 1964 just a "hostile reception"? 

Or was the actual story as it had to be covered at the time all about racists who saw their power structure crumbling with their response to that was to use violence and force?

Take a look at how eerily similar the attack on Elder photo looks, when cast in black in white, to the photos from the Civil Rights era.

Take a look at Norman Rockwell's iconic 1964 "The Problem We All Live With" painting of the Civil Rights era, which is brimming with evidence of violence in the filthy graffiti from some "activist" splattered right in the middle of the painting, and of course, the smashed hurled objects similar to eggs, in this case, tomatoes.

Was that a "hostile reception" or was it about something much more? Hint: You can find it in the title of the painting.

But to the Los Angeles Times, this attack was somehow a routine little thing, rather than bare-naked racism, as it is now practiced by the left which views itself as bulletproof to 'racism' charges no matter how many racist acts it does.

It's obvious as heck that hurling eggs at California's first black Republican gubernatorial candidate while wearing a gorilla mask is about racist as it gets. After all, there are all kinds of masks out there and this white woman selected the black gorilla mask as her "statement" about Elder, knowing that she'd get her picture with herself in it in the news from this attack. We need her name -- and to see her charged with assault and hate crimes.

You'd think that Elder's opponent, Gov. Gavin Newsom, would have said something just to distance himself from the racist attack. After all, he's still trying to get the black and Latino vote over to his side. But actually. he's said nothing.

Where is Black Lives Matter? The organization was founded in Los Angeles by UCLA leftists, and its founder still has her spreads in Malibu and South Central. They too have said nothing.

But Los Angeles Times is particularly disgusting in its coverage, completely casting a false light on what went down and trying to make it look like a routine case of Elder bringing these naked racist attacks onto himself, if not cast racism versus a black guy threatening the power structure as just a trifle of political disagreement amounting to a hostile reception. In fact it was a couple of racist disruptors trying to shut down free speech, free political activity and silence a black candidate's right to reach out to the voters.

It's appalling. This racism has to be held up to public shame because it certainly is the problem we all live with today. 

Correction: An earlier version of this post referred to Elder as the first Black gubernatorial candidate in California. Elder is actually the first Black Republican to run for governor in California. Tom Bradley, a former Los Angeles mayor, ran twice, in 1982 and 1986, heading the Democrat party ticket.

Image: Twitter screen shot

To comment, you can find the MeWe post for this article here.


Monica Showalter


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Putin’s Anti-Navalny Law - Dr. Jiri and Leni Valenta


by Dr. Jiri and Leni Valenta

Anyone who opposes Putin is an "extremist" or a "terrorist" and is barred from running for office. So simple.


Vladimir Putin and Alexei Navalny, image via Wikimedia Commons

BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 2,148, September 8, 2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: On June 4, Russian president Vladimir Putin signed a law banning “individuals designated as ‘extremists’ from running for public office.” There is little doubt that the legislation is aimed primarily at opposition leader Alexei Navalny, now in prison, and whoever supports him. 

According to CNN, a law recently signed by President Vladimir Putin

prevents members of “extremist” or “terrorist” organizations from standing in elections for a period of three to five years… Founders and leaders of designated groups will not be able to run for elected office for five years… Employees or financial supporters of court-ruled extremist and terrorist organizations will be banned from running for office for three years.

Five days after Putin signed the law, dissident Alexei Navalny’s Anti-Corruption Foundation (FBK) and the Citizens’ Rights Protection Foundation were declared by the Moscow City Court to be extremist organizations. CNN added,

The court ordered that the FBK be liquidated and its property transferred into the ownership of the Russian Federation, according to a statement from the Moscow City Court’s press service.

The court’s decision, subject to immediate execution, “also banned the activities of Navalny’s regional political offices around Russia,” which have upheld Navalny’s “smart voting strategy” of supporting candidates not from Putin’s party and which have organized protests in the past.

The ruling has been described by Navalny’s lawyers as part of an “unprecedented crackdown” on his activities. It not only bans his allies from running in elections at every level but also “grants [the] authorities the power to jail activists and freeze their bank accounts,” according to US News & World Report.

All this took place a week before the Putin-Biden summit.

Tatiana Stanovaya, a political analyst at Carnegie Moscow, told CNN that “the law threatens not only opposition politicians but ordinary Russian citizens.” She said,

The law is part of a larger campaign against anti-regime behavior in Russia… The battlefield has become much larger. Now even a Russian citizen who participates in protests, retweets an opposition post or donates to opposition groups faces the risk of prosecution.

Navalny was imprisoned in January upon his return to Russia from Germany, where he had been recovering from poisoning with the nerve agent novichok, with which his underwear had been tainted at a hotel in Tomsk. Navalny asserts and has sought to prove that his poisoning was ordered by agents of Putin.

Immediately upon his return to Russia, he was imprisoned for having failed to attend parole hearings while convalescing from the poisoning in a German hospital. He spent part of his convalescence in a coma.

The main reason for keeping Navalny incarcerated may well be to make sure the popular leader remains isolated and unable to get involved in organizing opposition to Putin’s United Russia party ahead of the elections. Russia’s decision to crush all political opposition seems a clear indicator of the degree to which Putin fears Navalny and his influence over the Russian electorate—despite the facts that United Russia is the country’s ruling political party and has constituted the majority in the chamber since 2007, and that Navalny is in prison and in ill health.

At Putin’s June 16 summit with President Biden in Geneva, he either ignored questions from the American press about Navalny’s condition or discussed the situation without mentioning him by name.

Putin deflected criticism of his crackdown on dissent by wrapping a justification for his own brutal repression inside criticism of the US. He cited the actions in the US by the Black Lives Matter movement and the disarray at the Capitol on January 6: “We saw disorder, destruction, violations of law. We feel sympathy with the USA, but we don’t want that to happen on our territory.”

In an interview with NBC before the summit, Putin said he could not guarantee that Navalny would be released from prison alive:

Look, such decisions in this country are not made by the president. They’re made by the court whether or not to set somebody free.

As far as health, all individuals who are in prison, that is something that the administration of the specific prison or penitentiary establishment is responsible for. And there are medical facilities in penitentiaries that are perhaps not in the best condition.

According to the Guardian, “Putin maintained his longstanding avoidance of saying Navalny’s name, referring to him as ‘that person’. He said he hoped the jail medical service would do its job ‘properly’ but added: ‘To be honest I have not visited such places for a long time.’”

Biden responded to Putin’s comments by saying, “Navalny’s death would be another indication that Russia has little or no intention of abiding by basic fundamental human rights… I made it clear to him that I believe the consequences of that would be devastating for Russia.” He added, “What do you think happens when he’s saying it’s not about hurting Navalny, all the stuff he says to rationalize the treatment of Navalny, and then he dies in prison?… It’s about trust. It’s about their ability to influence other nations in a positive way.”

Navalny’s death might be a setback for US-Russian relations, whether Putin believes it or not. The US is preparing new sanctions against Russia for Navalny’s poisoning. According to US National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, “We are preparing another package of sanctions to apply in this case… It will come as soon as we have developed the packages to ensure that we are getting the right targets.”

No matter what Putin says, he seems—at least for now—to have instructed his underlings to keep Navalny alive in prison. If Navalny is lucky, he might even be released in September—after the Russian election, which Putin’s United Russia party is expected to win easily.

After the summit with President Biden, Putin defended the court ruling against Navalny “extremists” by claiming that Navalny’s group had shared instructions on how to make firebombs. This allegation was denied by Navalny’s legal team, who announced that in the ruling, there was no mention of firebombs.

Another seemingly false accusation came from the judge who presided over the “extremists” ruling. Reuters wrote:

According to the judge, individuals associated with the Anti-Corruption Foundation and Navalny’s headquarters used Nazi paraphernalia and symbols in their activities… But no actual link between the individuals and Navalny’s organizations was established by the Prosecutor’s Office, the lawyers said.

These manufactured accusations are apparently being used to support Putin’s claim that supporters of Navalny’s organizations are dangerous people who must be barred from ever running for office, as should anyone who helps or contributes to their organizations.

A number of Russian opposition politicians have already been barred from taking part in elections or been persecuted for their support for Navalny or other pro-democracy groups.

In mid-June, Navalny wrote on Instagram: “The process was held behind closed doors, and I myself did not participate in it. Even though we demanded it, I was not even invited.” The Russian courts, Navalny wrote, are a “laughingstock.”

View PDF

This is an edited version of an article published by the Gatestone Institute on July 16, 2021.


Jiri Valenta is a non-resident senior research associate with the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies and a member of the US Council on Foreign Relations. He previously taught Soviet and East European Studies at the US Naval Postgraduate School and is the author and editor of several books.

Leni Friedman Valenta has written articles for the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies, the Gatestone Institute, Circanada, The National Interest, Aspen Review, and other publications.


Dr. Jiri and Leni Valenta


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

French teachers hail Taliban and Jihad - Giulio Meotti


by Giulio Meotti

Islamists have infiltrated French public apparatus, from police to schools. recruiting dozens of ex-military who converted to Islam.

Almost a year after the beheading of Professor Samuel Paty in a middle school in Conflans-Sainte-Honorine, after which the Minister of Education Jean Michel Blanquer revealed that 800 Islamist "episodes" have occurred in French schools, a French professor was suspended for praising the Taliban.

On August 16, the day after the capture of Kabul, Khalid B. wrote on his Facebook account: "The Taliban have will and courage ...". Khalid B. does not teach in a "difficult suburb", but in Peltre. A village of 1,900 inhabitants, Peltre, near Nancy, tops the 2020 list of “villages and towns where life is good”. Le Figaro tells that it is not the first time that the teacher has praised the Islamists.

And he is certainly not the first French teacher to praise Jihad.

L’Express reveals that a math teacher, who was also an imam, Abdelali Bouhnik, was suspended from the Académie of Créteil for having invited "the faithful to pray for jihadists around the world". Member of National Education for more than 25 years, the man taught mathematics at the Jean Moulin high school in Torcy.

In Lyon, says Le Parisien, an aspiring professor was arrested for "condoning terrorism and threats to Catholic staff and students".

More than 1,000 jihadist propaganda photos and videos were stored on another professor's computer, Le Parisien reveals. The Grenoble-born mathematics teacher, born in Morocco, was sentenced to two years in prison after teaching for a long time in public and high schools. Khalid Z., a member of a Salafist movement and translator of Al Qaeda, taught in a public high school in Rennes.

What do all these cases tell us? That French disintegration is at a very advanced stage and that Islamists have infiltrated all ganglia of the public apparatus, from the police to the schools. Islamists have already recruited dozens of French and ex-military soldiers who converted to Islam. Many come from specialized units, with experience in handling weapons and explosives.

Two years ago, an Islamist hit one of the safest buildings in France from the inside: the monumental Paris police headquarters, near Notre-Dame Cathedral, where he killed four colleagues. The Islamist, in fact, worked in the anti-terrorism unit. "I have the impression that our immune defenses have collapsed and that Islam is winning," says French essayist Pascal Bruckner.

“Comment on a laissé islamisme pénétrer l'école” is the title of the book by Jean-Pierre Obin, former inspector general of education, on the Islamist conquest in French schools. We have reached the point that 40 per cent of teachers in France censor themselves on "sensitive" subjects.

A country where a student, Mila, had to drop out of two schools this year and now lives "like the staff of Charlie Hebdo, bunkerized", as Mila's lawyer Richard Malka said (there are 85 policemen to protect journalists).

A country where "Caroline L.", a lecturer at the University of Aix-Marseille, has received countless death threats, accused of "Islamophobia", for having explained to her students that "there is no freedom of conscience in Islam".

A country where a university teacher was placed under police protection and another had to leave school and ask for a transfer due to Islamist threats.

A country where in a high school in Caluire-et-Cuire, in Lyon, a student threatened a teacher to "cut off his head".

A country where a high school in Riom was even closed due to "death threats" against teachers.

In 1989, when the campaign to Islamize public schools began, the slogan was "Teachers do not capitulate!". Since then, it is France that seems to have capitulated. And it is on the way, as the Algerian writer Boualem Sansal observed, to become "an aspiring Islamic republic".


Giulio Meotti is an Italian journalist with Il Foglio and writes a twice-weekly column for Arutz Sheva. He is the author, in English, of the book "A New Shoah", that researched the personal stories of Israel's terror victims, published by Encounter and of "J'Accuse: the Vatican Against Israel" published by Mantua Books, in addition to books in Italian. His writing has appeared in publications, such as the Wall Street Journal, Gatestone, Frontpage and Commentary.


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Thursday, September 9, 2021

Protesters In Kabul Chant 'Pakistan, Pakistan, Leave Afghanistan' - Tufail Ahmad


by Tufail Ahmad/MEMRI

Pakistan is the new invader of Afghanistan through its proxy: the Islamic Emirate

On September 7, 2021, hundreds of Afghans – most of whom were women defying the Taliban jihadis patrolling public life in Afghanistan – turned out in the streets of Kabul chanting anti-Pakistan, anti-Taliban slogans. Some of the slogans raised by the protesters included: "Pakistan, Pakistan, Leave Afghanistan" and "Freedom, Freedom."[1] The women protesters – chanting "Death to Pakistan," "Allah-o-Akbar," "Freedom," and "We do not want captivity" – demanded the closure of the Pakistan Embassy in Kabul.[2] The first of these protests was led by a group of Afghan women who demonstrated in front of the Pakistan Embassy in Kabul and were joined by men, according to an Afghan media report.[3]

Afghan women protest Pakistan (Photo:

The anti-Pakistan protests, which were held in Herat and other cities, reflect a deeply buried understanding among Afghans that it was the Pakistani military's Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) that planned and engineered a long-running bloodshed in Afghanistan that has gone on for the past four decades by aiding and nurturing the current Afghan Taliban leaders after 9/11 and their predecessors, with American and Saudi aid, during the 1980s.

In this context, the visit of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) chief Lt.-Gen. Faiz Hameed to Kabul on September 4 seems to have come as a reminder to Afghans that Pakistan is the new invader of Afghanistan through its proxy: the Islamic Emirate, the Afghan Taliban organization that America courted over the past few years, ultimately helping the jihadist organization to recapture power on August 15, 2021.[4] Lt.-Gen. Faiz Hameed visited Kabul to mentor the Afghan Taliban leaders on forming a government that is to Pakistan's liking. Pakistani ISI is known as the creator and nurturer of jihadi terror organizations in Pakistan and its surrounding region: Afghanistan and Kashmir.  

The ISI played "a direct role" in a major terror attack on the U.S. Embassy in Kabul.[5] Testifying before the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee in 2011, Adm. Mike Mullen, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, noted that the ISI used the Haqqani Network of the Afghan Taliban to attack the U.S. Embassy, saying: "The Haqqani network acts as a veritable arm of Pakistan's Inter-Services Intelligence agency."[6] Adm. Mullen added: "We also have credible evidence that they were behind the June 28th attack against the Intercontinental Hotel in Kabul and a host of other smaller but effective operations."[7]

As expected, Sirajuddin Haqqani, the chief of the Haqqani Network of the Islamic Emirate, was appointed acting interior minister of Afghanistan on September 7, the day anti-Pakistan protests erupted in Kabul.[8] ISI has always protected Sirajuddin Haqqani, whose father Jalaluddin Haqqani founded the Haqqani Network.

As of September 8, the FBI website lists Sirajuddin Haqqani, the new interior minister of the Taliban government in Afghanistan, among its Most Wanted Terrorists.[9] The FBI notes: "Sirajuddin Haqqani is wanted for questioning in connection with the January 2008 attack on a hotel in Kabul, Afghanistan, that killed six people, including an American citizen. He is believed to have coordinated and participated in cross-border attacks against United States and coalition forces in Afghanistan. Haqqani also allegedly was involved in the planning of the assassination attempt on Afghan President Hamid Karzai in 2008."[10]

As of September 8, 2021, the FBI lists Sirajuddin Haqqani among its Most Wanted Terrorists

Sometime in February 2021, Sirajuddin Haqqani, the Afghan Taliban's operational chief and major terror mastermind, delivered a major speech to a gathering of jihadi terror commanders where he, fearing that the U.S. could rescind the Doha agreement, issued a sharp warning to America:[11] "[After 9/11] we fought them with faith and with weaker military strength. Today we have both. We have the technology to use drones, we have our own missiles. This time if the mujahideen resume fighting, it would be something they have never seen before. They will wish the battlefield was like in the past," Sirajuddin Haqqani said.[12]

Afghans are now realizing that the Haqqani Network, which is the most influential jihadi unit of the Islamic Emirate, is a proxy through which Pakistan will once again rule over Afghanistan. This realization is behind the eruption of anti-Pakistan protests that the Afghan Taliban, whom former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto once described as "our children," are trying to curb in Afghanistan. Also, on September 7, the Afghan Taliban, befitting their jihadi mindset and ideology, abolished the Ministry of Women's Affairs as they announced the formation of a new government. After seizing power in Kabul, the Afghan Taliban promised to give rights to women, minorities, and the media. But when the protests began on September 7, the Taliban's armed jihadi fighters stopped journalists from filming.

According to a report, ToloNews cameraperson Wahid Ahmadi was detained and his camera was confiscated.[13] The Taliban's jihadi forces beat up four Afghan journalists and cameramen, according to another report.[14] Sami Jayesh, a reporter for Ariana News, was detained and taken to an unknown place by the Taliban while he was reporting the protests in Kabul, journalist Shafi Karimi tweeted.[15] A media report also noted that despite the Taliban jihadis' restrictions, women still protested and chanted slogans against Pakistan while many protestors were detained by the Taliban.[16]

1972: Afghan women in the streets of Kabul city (picture: Laurence Brun/Rapho).

Speaking of the Taliban's crackdown on anti-Pakistan protesters, journalist Bilal Sarwary tweeted: "Taliban do face a socially transformed, rather connected and highly aware Afghanistan. Demonstrations in Kabul under Taliban Afghanistan becoming widespread by the day. The demonstrators are upset by the recent visit [of the ISI chief to Kabul] and Pakistan's interference in Afghanistan."[17] Journalist Nadia Momand, demanding that the international community impose global sanctions on Pakistan, tweeted: "Pakistan seeks to impose a government made of a bunch of Mullahs [radical Islamic clerics] from the Pakistani madrassas. Afghans will never accept that. Taliban is a terrorist group and not capable of running modern Afghanistan. #FreeAfghanistan #SanctionPakistan."[18]

Not many people know that the women of Afghanistan were first granted the right to vote not by America, but by the Afghan government in 1964. It is apt that many women, nurtured in the culture of democratic values that has been reinforced especially during the past two decades of American occupation, were among the protesters who turned out in the streets of Kabul on September 7.[19]

Ever since the Islamic Emirate seized power in Kabul on August 15, Afghans have protested the Taliban, especially fearing that women's rights could be curbed at any time. The anti-Pakistan protests on September 7 erupted around the time Ahmad Massoud, the leader of the National Resistance Front (NRF) of Afghanistan in Panjshir Valley, released an audio recording calling on the people of Afghanistan to revolt against the Taliban.[20]

Images from social media of the September 7 protests are given below:

"Pakistan! Get out of Afghanistan" reads a banner in the anti-Pakistan protest in Kabul; photo tweeted by journalist Habib Khan.[21]

"Freedom, Freedom" shout protesters (image:

Anti-Pakistan, anti-Taliban protests in Herat where two people died and many were wounded (image tweeted by journalist Zaki Daryabi).[22]

"ISI stay away" from Afghanistan, demands a protester in Kabul; photo tweeted by journalist Nadia Momand.[23]

Women protesters in Kabul confront Taliban forces (image:

Afghan Taliban forces firing gunshots at women protesters in Kabul.[24]

Women protesters in Kabul; photo tweeted by journalist Jamaluddin Mousavi[25]

"Long live resistance" – anti-Pakistan protesters; video tweeted by journalist Zahra Rahimi.[26]

Women protesters in Kabul raise the slogan of "Death to Pakistan" (image:

Anti-Pakistan protesters in Kabul, photo tweeted by journalist Nadia Momand.[27]

Muzhgan Farooqi, an Afghan woman, tweeted this clip along with the text: "Incredible participation of #women in protest against Pakistan. This time women are changing the history of Afghanistan. These women are not from the 1990s. Listen Pakistan! We will resist your invasion and we will prevail."[28]

"Azadi" – freedom, i.e., from the Taliban imposed by Pakistan, reads the placard; photo tweeted by journalist Tajuden Soroush.[29]

* Tufail Ahmad is Senior Fellow for the MEMRI Islamism and Counter-Radicalization Initiative. His writings can be read here


[1] (Afghanistan), September 7, 2021.

[2] (Afghanistan), September 7, 2021.

[3] (Afghanistan), September 7, 2021.

[5] (U.S.), September 22, 2021.

[6] (U.S.), September 22, 2021.

[7] (U.S.), September 22, 2021.

[8] (Afghanistan), September 7, 2021.

[9] FBI.Gov (U.S.), accessed September 7, 2021.

[10] FBI.Gov (U.S.), accessed September 7, 2021

[13] (Afghanistan), September 7, 2021.

[14] (Afghanistan), September 7, 2021.

[15], September 7, 2021.

[16] (Afghanistan), September 7, 2021.

[17], September 7, 2021.

[18], September 7, 2021.

[19] MEMRI Daily Brief No. 204, The Doha Plot To Give Afghanistan To The Taliban, January 8, 2020.

[20] (Afghanistan), September 7, 2021.

[21], September 7, 2021.

[22], September 7, 2021.

[23], September 7, 2021.

[24], September 7, 2021.

[25], September 7, 2021.

[26], September 7, 2021.

[27], September 7, 2021.

[28], September 7, 2021.

[29], September 7, 2021.


Tufail Ahmad is Senior Fellow for the MEMRI Islamism and Counter-Radicalization Initiative. His writings can be read here


Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter