French Free Speech Victory - Andrew Harrod

by Andrew Harrod

While the world mourns the Charlie Hebdo victims, at least French law for now remains on the side of the right to openly discuss and debate Islam, thanks to the legal efforts of individuals like Scipilliti.

A French appeals court on December 18, 2014, overturned a hate speech conviction involving Christine Tasin's condemnation of Islam. Tasin's encouraging victory, won with Legal Project aid, demonstrates that not all threats to free discussion of Islam are violent like the subsequent Paris jihadist Charlie Hebdomassacre.

The retired classics teacher Tasin had appeared on October 15, 2013, in a parking lot before a temporary tent abattoir in use by local Muslims in the French city of Belfort near the Swiss border. During the ritual animal slaughter for the Eid al Adha ("Festival of Sacrifice") Muslim festival, Tasin before Muslim bystanders had criticized Islam's halal slaughter as unsanitary and cruel to animals. In an ensuing argument filmed and uploaded to the internet, she received "Islamophobe" accusations.

"Yes I am an Islamophobe, so what? It's normal!" answered Tasin. "I'm against Islam that causes problems. I don't find it normal to torture animals" or "to veil women. I'm talking about a serious problem." Tasin considered "outrageous that everyone has to eat Halal without knowing it . . . sixty percent of animals killed in France are killed ritually in line with Islam." "I am proud of hatred of Islam," Tasin concluded. "Islam is piece of sh*t . . . a danger for France."

Tasin's words brought her prosecution under an 1881 law prohibiting in its Article 24 speech provoking "discrimination, hatred, or violence . . . on the basis of . . . a specific ethnicity, nation, race, or religion." At Tasin's July 2, 2014, trial opening, prosecutor Alexandre Chevrier said she had violated French law with her "extremely strong" words of a "nature to incite the rejection of Muslims." Nordine Gherbi, a lawyer for two Muslim civil complainants against Tasin, emphasized that her "hateful discourse" occurred during "one of the most important festivals for the Muslim community."

Dressed in the French national colors of red, white, and blue, Tasin at trial expressed her "fear of Islam." Yet she distinguished her "battles against the Islamization of France" and "Islam and not against Muslims." Her defense attorney, Joseph Scipilliti, also noted that "Islam is not Muslims," a "specific group," thus ruling out any conviction of Tasin for her "liberty of expression."

Nonetheless, Tasin's August 8, 2014 conviction imposed a suspended three-month prison sentence and a 3000 Euro fine, half of which was also suspended. Scipilliti found the "judgment incomprehensible." He recalled a 2009 case in which the appeals court overturned the conviction of the black French rapper Richard Makela ("Monsieur R") for "words of the same order as those of my client concerning France."

The incriminated lyrics of Monsieur R's FranSSe, among other things, stated that "France is a bitch, do not forget to screw her until exhaustion." Makela's litany of social ills included the complaint that "my Muslim brothers are hated like my Jewish brothers during the epoch of the Reich at the hands of the Nazis." The appeals court, however, determined that Makela merely made a "committed, enraged criticism of the state" of France and "not an insult or an appeal for hate against the French in their entirety." Indeed, the court noted Makela's lyrics that "when I speak of France, I do not speak of the French people, but of the leaders of the French state."

Hate speech charges also failed against French writer Michel Houellebecq in a 2002 case similar to Tasin's. In a 2001 interview, Houellebecq had called Islam the "stupidest religion" and "dangerous . . . right from the start." "When you read the Koran," he added, "you're shattered," in contrast to the "beautifully written" Bible. Yet Houellebecq distinguished at trial between having "as much contempt as ever for Islam" but not the "least contempt for Muslims." The court agreed that his comments "did not contain any intent to verbally abuse, show contempt for or insult the followers of the religion."

While the world mourns the Charlie Hebdo victims, at least French law for now remains on the side of the right to openly discuss and debate Islam, thanks to the legal efforts of individuals like Scipilliti. Tasin after her appellate win rejoiced in her vindicated right to "think and say that Islam is a threat to France." "The Resistance to Islam and all those who, in France, fear that freedom of expression is disappearing, and that blasphemy has become a crime again are relieved," she explained.

Tasin's case shows that both lethal and legal threats to freedom exist, as some Muslims deceptively claim that attacking the idea of Islam is equivalent to attacking the individuals who identify with it. Yet all phenomena, however venerated, should be equally open to critique by various opposing forces, whether the French state or Islam. The world's free citizens must prepare for more such battles against backdoor imposition of Islamic blasphemy laws to come.

 This article was commissioned by The Legal Project, an activity of the Middle East Forum. 

Andrew Harrod, JD, PhD, is an independent researcher and a fellow at The Lawfare Project .

Source: http://www.legal-project.org/4341/french-free-speech-victory

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

The Islamic State, Then and Now - Lloyd Billingsley

by Lloyd Billingsley

The rise of ISIS has been rapid, but it should come as no surprise to Western leaders familiar with history. Barely 100 years ago, in early 1915, another Islamic state was mounting a similar campaign.

In early 2015, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria, or simply “the Islamic State,” as news organizations now have it, has escalated its murders, massacres, persecutions and push for territory. The rise of ISIS has been rapid, but it should come as no surprise to Western leaders familiar with history. Barely 100 years ago, in early 1915, another Islamic state was mounting a similar campaign.

That would be the Ottoman empire, specifically Turkey, where Armenians had long been marginalized and ostracized. As Christians the Armenians had virtually no legal rights and no recourse in Islamic courts. As Peter Balakian showed in The Burning Tigris (2003) this grew worse under Turkey’s Committee for Union and Progress (CUP) which perceived Armenians as a kind of infection. CUP leaders Behaeddin Shakir and Mehmed Nazim, both medical doctors, called Armenians “tubercular microbes” infecting the state, and physician Mehmed Reshid likened them to “dangerous microbes.”

CUP propagandist Ziya Gokalp believed the Turks could only revitalize by getting rid of non-Muslim elements. On November, 14, 1914, sheikh-ul-islam, chief Sunni religious authority in Ottoman world, formally declared jihad, and the Ottoman empire boasted an extensive bureaucratic infrastructure easily deployed in the cause. The clandestine Special Organization (SO), Balakian noted, was “the first state bureaucracy to implement mass killing for the purpose of race extermination.” The SO recruited tens of thousands of criminals to massacre the Armenian population.

The SO used trains, cramming 90 people in a car that normally carried 36 people or six horses. The 32,000 Armenians deported by rail included more than 9,000 children. The trains took them to camps where the men were killed, the women abducted and raped, and children sold into slavery. If any Muslim tried to protect a Christian, according to one instruction, “first his house shall be burned, then the Christian killed before his eyes and then his family and himself.”

The genocidal campaign against the Armenians did not lack high-profile, witnesses, including U.S. ambassador Henry Morgenthau, on record that “I do not believe the darkest ages ever presented scenes more horrible than those which now took place all over Turkey.” Torture squads would apply red-hot irons, tear off flesh with hot pincers, then pour boiled butter into the wounds. The soles of the feet would be beaten, slashed, and laced with salt. Dr. Mehmed Reshid tortured Armenians by nailing horseshoes to their feet and marching them through the streets. He also crucified them on makeshift crosses.

The Muslims hacked Armenians to pieces and dashed infants on the rocks before their mothers. They burned bodies not for sanitary reasons but in search of gold coins they believed the Armenians had swallowed. The Muslims also tore apart the victims’ feces in the search for gold. U.S. consul Leslie Davis, a former attorney and journalist, documented the Islamic zeal.

“We could all hear them piously calling upon Allah to bless them in their efforts to kill the hated Christians,” Davis wrote. “Night after night this same chant went up to heaven and day after day these Turks carried on their bloody work.” Around Lake Goeljik, Davis wrote, “thousands and thousands of Armenians, mostly innocent and helpless women and children, were butchered on its shores and barbarously mutilated.”

Leslie Davis and British historian Arnold Toynbee both called the Turkish campaign a “reign of terror,” and it drew a strong response in the United States. Now, 100 years later, Egyptian president Abdel Fatah al-Sissi feels compelled to speak out on current Islamic terror. He recently told Muslim clerics in Egypt that departing from the corpus of texts and ideas Muslims have sacralized “has become almost impossible” and “is antagonizing the entire world.” Therefore, “I say and repeat again that we are in need of a religious revolution.” But events of 100 years ago suggest that may not be possible in Islam.

An Islamic state mounted a reign of terror against an unarmed civilian population, under siege, and pillaged of its material goods. This reign of terror indulged mass murder, torture and cruelty on a massive scale. It produced unfathomable suffering and claimed more than one million victims. But no statements of regret emerged from the Islamic regime, only denial. As far as can be discerned, no Muslim cleric issued any call for a “religious revolution” in Islam. And the events of 1915 did nothing to forestall the current Islamic state and its reign of terror in 2015.

Peter Balakian believes the terror of 1915 happened because, based on their attacks of the 1890s, the Turks found they could act with impunity. Western leaders should make a change in that dynamic. Otherwise the world will see more of what is already happening in 2015.


Lloyd Billingsley

Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/lloyd-billingsley/the-islamic-state-then-and-now/

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

James Burnham on Militant Islam and the Clash of Civilizations - Francis P. Sempa

by Francis P. Sempa

Since Burnham wrote that prescient column more than forty years ago, militant Islam has grown, strengthened, expanded its geographical reach, and acquired modern weapons, perhaps even weapons of mass destruction. Burnham realized that if the West failed to understand or acknowledge the spiritual inspiration of its enemies, it was doomed to defeat.

More than forty years ago, in a little-remembered column in National Review, James Burnham, the former Trotskyist turned Cold War analyst, focused his insightful gaze upon the rise of radical Islam and the threat it posed to the world. The genesis of the column, which appeared in the November 8, 1974 issue of the magazine, was Arab use of the oil weapon, but Burnham sensed larger forces—religious, ideological, demographic, and geopolitical—at work.

“Islam,” he wrote in words that today might result in death threats or worse, “is a militant religion in the earthly as well as the spiritual sense.” According to the Koran, Burnham noted, “[i]t is the will of Allah that all men should acknowledge Him, should be under the temporary sway of the descendants of Mohammed, and made subject to the laws of the Koran.” He continued:

In its union of a universal earthly goal (global Islam),
totalist system of belief, and correlated army of believers,
Islam is analogous to modern Communism. In the jihad,
the holy war to fulfill Allah’s will that is suspended from
time to time but never ended until completed, these true
believers who die are translated at once to Paradise.

Burnham then briefly traced the beginnings of Islam in the Arabian peninsula in the 7^th century; its expansion to Indonesia, North Africa, across the straits of Gibraltar, to Portugal, Spain and southwestern France; its recession after the Crusades during the Dark Ages; and its reinvigoration by Turkish tribes from central Asia, only to be halted at the gates of Vienna. Then, wrote Burnham, “in the slow pace of the centuries, the wave receded from the shores of Europe, and in this cycle Islam seemed to sink into the will-less lethargy that ends in the historical death of a civilization.”

Nasser’s rise to power in the most populous Arab state, Egypt, in the 1950s, revived Islam, which despite secular impulses in the Arab world “does not and cannot cut wholly loose from Allah and his Messenger and Book . . .,” Burnham explained. Geopolitically, with its dynamic base on the land-bridge between Europe, Asia, and Africa, “and controlling the passage between the Indian Ocean and the Mediterranean,” the Islamic revolution “appears spatially as a series of concentric circles encompassing ever wider regions of Africa, Asia, and, as the diameters lengthen, Europe.”

The stage was set, wrote Burnham long before the more celebrated analysis of Samuel Huntington, for a general clash of civilizations between militant Islam and the largely secularized, but historically Christian, West.

So it has come to pass, even as the Western powers refuse to acknowledge the essence of the struggle. No Western leader today would dare call Islam a “militant religion.” Instead, after each attack by Islamic radicals, most Western leaders and many opinion-makers point to all possible motivations other than religion.

Since Burnham wrote that prescient column more than forty years ago, militant Islam has grown, strengthened, expanded its geographical reach, and acquired modern weapons, perhaps even weapons of mass destruction. Burnham realized that if the West failed to understand or acknowledge the spiritual inspiration of its enemies, it was doomed to defeat. As he concluded in his column, jets, missiles, tanks, trade balances and oil wells are important, but “perhaps King Faisal’s wish that he may pray before his death in an Arab Jerusalem is also of some importance in history’s scale.” “Quite possibly,” he wrote, “there are more things on heaven and earth than are dreamed of in either Marx’s or Adam Smith’s philosophy.”


Francis P. Sempa is the author of Geopolitics: From the Cold War to the 21^st Century (Transaction Books) and America’s Global Role: Essays and Reviews on National Security, Geopolitics and War (University Press of America). He has written on historical and foreign policy topics for The Diplomat, The University Bookman, Joint Force Quarterly, The National Interest, and The Claremont Review of Books. He is an Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Middle District of Pennsylvania and an adjunct professor of political science at Wilkes University.

Source: http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/francis-p-sempa/james-burnham-on-militant-islam-and-the-clash-of-civilizations/

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Iran’s influence grows after Yemen’s political collapse - Fred Fleitz

by Fred Fleitz

The political deterioration in Yemen might have been prevented if the United States had fully backed Hadi and not gone along with a transition plan that removed Saleh from power in 2012 but did not force him from Yemen’s political scene.

The international community is starting to realize the seriousness of the political chaos in Yemen, which has expanded Iranian influence in the region, bolstered Al Qaeda and could lead to the secession of the southern part of the country. This situation may also result in a political realignment that puts the family of the former autocratic president, Ali Abdullah Saleh, back in power in an alliance with the Iranian-backed Houthis, a Shiite insurgent group in northern Yemen that forced President Abed Rabbo Mansour Hadi and his cabinet to resign last week.

The political deterioration in Yemen might have been prevented if the United States had fully backed Hadi and not gone along with a transition plan that removed Saleh from power in 2012 but did not force him from Yemen’s political scene.

Saleh used his influence to undermine the Hadi government through army units and tribes loyal to him. While Hadi closely cooperated with U.S. counterterror operations against Al Qaeda, the Obama administration did nothing to prop him up. Unaware of the how fragile the Hadi government was, the Obama administration as recently as last September claimed Yemen was a success story for U.S. Middle East policy.

On Sept. 10, President Obama said in a speech, “This strategy of taking out terrorists who threaten us, while supporting partners on the front lines, is one that we have successfully pursued in Yemen and Somalia for years.” Two weeks later, the United States recommended U.S. citizens leave Yemen after Houthi rebels occupied Sanaa, the capital, and Al Qaeda fired a rocket at the U.S. embassy.

Massive Arab Spring protests in 2011 led to Saleh’s resignation in February 2012 after more than 33 years in power. Having been granted immunity from prosecution in a deal that handed power to Hadi, Saleh’s main objective since he left office reportedly has been to propel his son, Ahmed Ali Saleh, to the Yemeni presidency.

Even though his government persecuted the Houthis and they were part of the Arab Spring demonstrations that drove him from office, Saleh struck an alliance with Houthi leaders that allowed them to occupy Sanaa last September. Because of recent demonstrations in Sanaa by its Sunni majority against the resignation of the Hadi government and the occupation of the city by the Shiite Houthis, Houthi leaders may be considering restoring the corrupt Saleh family to power or installing a Saleh family ally. According to Yemeni law, Parliament Speaker Yahia al-Rai, a close ally of Saleh, is next in line to assume the presidency.

The return of the Saleh family to power would be a step backward for Yemen and could pose significant security implications for the region and the United States. If the Saleh family or a Saleh ally assumes the presidency, the new government probably would abandon Hadi’s power-sharing and political reform efforts, most of which were opposed by the Houthis. Such a transition would bring back the corruption and probably the oppression of the Saleh regime.

A new Yemeni government, whether it is headed by the Saleh family or not, will be controlled by the Iran-backed Houthis. This deeply worries the Saudis, who regard the Houthis as an Iranian proxy and last year declared them a terrorist organization. Although the U.S. might be able to buy off a new Yemeni government to get it to continue to participate in counterterrorism efforts, the Iran angle, the Houthis’ hatred of the United States and Saleh’s possible anger over being removed from power could make this difficult to achieve.

Meanwhile, Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula (AQAP), the world’s most dangerous Al Qaeda franchise, and the separatist Southern Movement, which wants southern Yemen to secede, are poised to exploit Yemen’s political chaos and may be collaborating. AQAP has tried to take advantage of the chaos of the last few months by staging suicide attacks in Sanaa.

Further complicating this situation, ISIS reportedly has entered the scene in Yemen and is competing with AQAP for recruits. Saudi leaders also are worried about Islah, a growing Muslim Brotherhood party in Yemen.

Although the Houthis are enemies of the Southern Movement and AQAP, they are looking for autonomy for their area in the north and probably have no plans to invade the south to battle these groups. This could lead to the secession of parts of southern Yemen (which had been a separate state until 1990) and a stronger, more consolidated AQAP.

The Obama administration needs to work with regional states, Europe and the United Nations to come up with a comprehensive strategy to promote stability, power sharing among regional groups and a new constitution in Yemen. Though there are currently many unknowns as to how the political crisis there will play out, given the country’s reliance on Saudi financial aid to run the government — aid that Riyadh cut off in December — and the Houthis’ hostility toward AQAP, an agreement between the international community and the Houthis to implement such a strategy may eventually be possible.

But even if such an agreement is reached, Iran’s increased influence in Yemen through the Houthis is unlikely to be reversed and will pose new security concerns for Saudi Arabia, the United States and the region.


Fred Fleitz

Source: http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/2015/01/30/middle-east-terror-irans-influence-grows-after-yemens-political-collapse/

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

German judge convicts man for shouting ‘Death to Zionists’ at march - Benjamin Weinthal

by Benjamin Weinthal

Landmark case equates lethal anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism.

Women and children attend a demonstration supporting the Palestinians, in Berlin July 22, 2014.. 

 (photo credit:REUTERS) 

BERLIN – A judge in Essen ruled on Friday that an anti-Israel activist incited hatred against Jews because of his calls to kill Zionists.

“‘Zionist’ in the language of anti-Semites is a code for Jew,” Judge Gauri Sastry said in a groundbreaking legal decision.

German Turk Taylan Can, 24, yelled “death and hate to Zionists” at an anti-Israel rally in Essen in July.

The daily Die Welt first reported on the decision. According to the paper, a video showed Can screaming for Zionists to be killed and stoked the crowd to follow his outbursts. Germany has strict anti-hate incitement laws.

The Left Party organized a rally against Israel in July and an “anti-Semitic mob” marched through the downtown area of Essen, the newspaper wrote. After the protest, anti-Israel demonstrators attacked pro-Israel supporters in the main train station. Salutes to Hitler and cries of “shitty Jews” were seen and heard. The explosion of hate resulted in 49 criminal complaints, 45 of which the Essen authorities dismissed in December.

The authorities pursued criminal action against Can. According to German media reports, he played a key role in many anti-Israel demonstrations over the summer.

The Jerusalem Post was not able to reach a court spokesman on Saturday familiar with the decision.

Nathan Gelbart, a managing partner at the international law firm FPS, told the Post on Saturday that the Essen court “has delivered a very brave judgment, though legally contestable. The judge has applied sociological and political arguments which are evident: those who say Zionists mean Jews as an ethnic entity.”

Gelbart added, “Due to German criminal procedure law the court must acquit the defendant in a case even where the slightest doubt of his guilt exists. We will have to see whether the defendant will appeal the verdict and how the magistrate’s court will confirm that there is only one interpretation of the wording ‘Zionist’ in connection with hate speech against Israel.”

In a police decision that prompted controversy at an anti-Israel rally in Hagen, located in the federal state of North Rhine-Westphalia, Can was allowed to use a police megaphone to chant, “Child killer Israel.” The police defended lending the megaphone to Can as a means to de-escalate the crowd. According to media reports, the crowd yelled “Hamas, Hamas – Jews to the gas!”

Die Welt reported that Can said at the Friday legal proceeding “I don’t have anything against Jews, I only have something against Zionists.” He told Sastry that because there is no group in Germany called Zionists, he had done nothing wrong. He argued that he certainly hates Zionists and wished their death but that is only a punishment of God.

“We can agree that is a punishment of God, right?” asked Can. Sastry replied, “No.”

Sastry said “When in the past year you called for the death of, and hate to Zionists, you mean the State of Israel and Jews. It was the State of Israel that found itself at war.”

The judge accepted the prosecutor’s recommendation and fined Can €200 and sentenced him to three months’ probation. Can has been convicted of previous crimes.

Sastry’s legal understanding of contemporary anti-Semitism appears to conform to German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s and French Prime Minister Manuel Valls’s recent statements.

Merkel said at a September rally against anti-Semitism that “pretend criticism of Israel,” is an “expression of Jew-hatred at pro-Palestinian demonstrations.”

Benjamin Weinthal

Source: http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/German-judge-convicts-man-for-shouting-Death-to-Zionists-at-march-389568

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Death of Saudi King & Coup in Yemen: Signs in Iranian Prophecy - Ryan Mauro

by Ryan Mauro

Iranian regime elements focused on the "end-of-times" prophecies see the coup in Yemen and the death of the Saudi King as the fulfillment of prophecy.

Foreground: Iranian Revolutionary Guards, banner in background: the late Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini

The coup in Yemen by Iranian proxies and the death of Saudi King Abdullah must be seen through the eyes of Iranian regime elements focused on the "end-of-times" prophecies. These huge developments are seen not only as strategic opportunities by the Iranian regime; they are seen as fulfillments of prophecy signaling the imminent appearance of the Mahdi to bring final victory over the enemies of Islam.

THE END-OF-TIMES WORLDVIEW

The Iranian regime’s view of the world is centered around the appearance of the Mahdi, also known as the Hidden 12th Imam in Shia Islam. It also explains its strategy in the context of prophecies surrounding the Mahdi’s arrival on the scene, including issues related to Yemen, Saudi Arabia and other countries.

Former President Ahmadinejad famously displayed his belief that the Mahdi’s return is very near to the point that other regime elements derided him and his clique as “deviant” for believing that the Mahdi is directly guiding them.

Ahmadinejad was not doing this for domestic political reasons. If anything, it hurt him politically. He’s continued the rhetoric even after leaving the office. In April, he said the Iranian regime will “provide the setting for the Hidden Imam’s world revolution” and it’s the “prime goal” to facilitate the “beginnings of the emergence of the Hidden Imam.”

Supreme Leader Khamenei’s beliefs are not different. He likewise preaches that the 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran is the fulfillment of prophecy to set the stage for the Mahdi to defeat Iran’s enemies.

Like Ahamdinejad, Khamenei believes Iran has a responsibility to consciously fulfill prophecy in order to trigger this event. His representative in the Revolutionary Guards said in June that Iran needs to shape the necessary “regional preparedness” for it to happen.

In July 2010, a senior Iranian cleric said that Khamenei told his inner circle that he had met with the Mahdi, who promised to “reappear” during his lifetime. A sermon by a top cleric in Qom and shown on state television claimed that Khamenei said “May Ali protect you” the second he was born.

The most vivid explanation of the end-of-times prophecy in the Iranian regime’s calculations came in 2011 when a terrifying video was leaked titled, “The Coming is Upon Us.” It was obtained by Reza Kahlili, a former CIA spy within the Iranian Revolutionary Guards. The Iranian regime did not contest its authenticity.

The basis of the video was that the Iranian regime is fulfilling specific prophecies to trigger the appearance of the Hidden 12th Imam. Supreme Leader Khamenei, President Ahmadinejad and Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah are depicted as the incarnations of figures foretold in prophecy.

Kahlili said the production of the film was overseen by President Ahmadinejad’s chief of staff and it ends with a list of endorsements from clerics. A portion was shown on the regime-controlled media.

The blowback was fierce even from within the regime. A major seminary in Qom even condemned the comparison of Ahmadinejad to the military commander who will lead the final war. Significantly, it did not condemn the comparison of Khamenei to the political leader who will ally with the Mahdi known as “Seyed Khorasani.”

The regime tried to distance itself from the video, but the filmmakers said it was shown to Khamenei and Ahmadinejad for approval. They also pointed out that prominent clerics and Revolutionary Guards commanders call him “Seyed Khorasani” to his face. Khamenei’s representative in the Guards told a state newspaper on April 12, 2011 that ayatollahs agreed that Khamenei is Khorasani.

The Iranian regime’s foreign policy is based on a fusion of these strategic and ideological goals. It rationally pursues these extremist objectives. The mistake that many Western analysts make is conflating the two. The regime appears Soviet-like in its strategic calculations, but they are made for a highly ideological end.

DEATH OF SAUDI KING & COUP IN YEMEN

The full significance of the death of Saudi King Abdullah can only be understood through the Iranian prophetic framework.

The aforementioned video produced by former President Ahmadinejad’s office is very clear that King Abdullah’s death is considered the clearest sign of the Mahdi’s imminent reappearance, so much so that it called for his assassination.

“Whoever guarantees the death of King Abdullah in Saudi Arabia, I will guarantee the imminent reappearance of the Mahdi,” it forcefully declares.

The film predicts that the death of King Abdullah will be followed by immense internal strife in Saudi Arabia. This leads us to what just happened in Yemen.

Iranian writer Rohollah Fahihi authored an article earlier this month about how the expected death of King Abdullah is being linked to a prophecy about the appearance of the Mahdi coming shortly after the death of a king named Abdullah in the Hejaz region of today’s Saudi Arabia.

The film cites the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen as leading a prophetic revolution. Their capturing of Yemen’s capital and achieving what is essentially a coup against the U.S.-allied government will be seen one of the strongest signals that the Mahdi is about to appear.

The film also mentions a prophecy about a Yemeni figure named Yamani who will lead a march to Mecca in Saudi Arabia. It suggested that Hezbollah chief Hassan Nasrallah is destined to play this role by pointing to his Yemeni heritage.

The rise of the Houthis will likely revise this interpretation. A leader directly from Yemen is more likely to be seen as the Yamani figure that will launch an offensive into Saudi Arabia.

OTHER FULFILLED PROPHECIES

War in Iraq

The end-of-times video states that the U.S. fulfilled a prophecy about an enemy invasion of Iraq from the south that kills its leader. The regime sees the current conflict in Iraq as part of the environment for the Mahdi’s appearance.

Last year, a new Shiite militia with strong Iranian backing formed in Iraq to fight the Islamic State terrorist group and it also operates in Syria. It is tellingly named Saraya al-Khorasani or the “Khorasani Brigades.” As discussed, Seyyed Khorasani is the prophesied political ally of the Mahdi.

The choice of name may be inspired by a legendary Shiite military leader who defeated the Umayyad Caliphate. However, the Khorasani Brigades’ emblem is identical to Khamenei’s Revolutionary Guards, strongly suggesting that Khamenei is seen to be Seyyed Khorasani.

Fahihi's aforementioned article quotes a Shiite cleric in Qom, Iran as explaining that the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda in Iraq and Syria are seen as fulfilling a prophecy by Imam Ali about a deceitful Muslim group raising black flags. These enemies will be named after cities, making a further correlation to the Islamic State through its self-declared caliph, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

Civil war in Syria

A reporter for Al-Monitor wrote in September 2013 that Hezbollah is treating the rebellion against the Syrian regime as part of prophecy based on a Shiite holy book titled Al-Jafr. The Washington Institute for Near East Policy confirmed this report in August.

Hezbollah believes that it foretells the killing of Syria’s leader (presumably Bashar Assad) and that a Sunni leader will come to power that oppresses the Shiites until Iranian forces arrive to liberate them. Hezbollah likely views the Islamic State and Jabhat al-Nusra (Al-Qaeda) as these enemies.

Perceived U.S. weakness towards Iran

The end-of-times video shows clips of U.S. officials talking about Iranian military might. Intimidation of America is offered as evidence that the Mahdi is about to come.

In May 2012, an Iranian newspaper controlled by Khamenei featured an article that seeped with enthusiasm for U.S. policy. It had prophetic overtones by mentioning the fall of the Saudi royal family as if its demise is a foregone conclusion.

“With diminishing support for Israel and with the (upcoming) collapse of the monarchy in Saudi Arabia, there won’t be any obstacles left facing Iran with its policy of annihilation of Israel,” the author writes.

The writer was particularly enthused with U.S.-Israeli tensions over the interim nuclear agreement and negotiations with Iran. He also pointed to the Muslim Brotherhood’s takeover of Egypt.

“It can be said that within the last 60 years, this is the first time that the Zionist regime [Israel], since its illegal inception, has had to endure rejection by the West over its vision and interest in the region,” he said.

IRAN'S NEXT MOVES: PROPHECIES TO BE FULFILLED

Destabilization of Saudi Arabia.

The prophecy states that there will be internal strife in Saudi Arabia so that is what must happen according to the Iranian regime. Some of this may be due to in-fighting within the royal family or a clash between reformers and the Wahhabist clerics, but there are also options for Iran to help trigger it.

First, the Houthi rebels of Yemen can move north into southern Saudi Arabia. Secondly, Iran can try to stir up the alienated Shiite-majority population in Saudi Arabia’s Eastern Province. This is a tempting target because of the favorable demographics and the fact that the area is home to 90% of the country’s oil.

Destabilization of Bahrain

The pro-U.S. Sunni government of Bahrain oversees a population that is 70% Shiite. A popular revolution nearly toppled the monarchy in 2011 until the Saudis and the United Arab Emirates sent troops to assist the government's violent crackdown.

“[Bahrain is] the best opportunity to begin setting the stage for the emergence of the 12th imam, our Mahdi,” said a representative of Khamenei to the universities at the time.

Iran nearly instigated a military clash with Bahrain and Saudi Arabia before backing down. The government stabilized but Iran continued to sponsor terrorist plots.

In February 2013, Bahrain foiled a plot by the Iranian Revolutionary Guards and Iraqi Hezbollah to attack the Interior Ministry and international airport. There was also a bomb plot, perhaps likewise hatched by Iran, to destroy the King Fahd Causeway that links Bahrain to Saudi Arabia.

The U.S. State Department confirms that an Iranian shipment of arms to Shiite opposition personnel in Bahrain was foiled in December 2013, specifically the February 14 Youth Coalition. The situation has since quieted down, but the Iranian regime will ramp up its activity in Bahrain if Saudi Arabia becomes distracted in handling its own destabilization.

Strengthening ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood and operations to destabilize Egypt, Libya and Tunisia.

The Iranian end-of-times video states that a prophetic figure named Shoeib-Ibn Saleh will spearhead an Iranian-Arab bloc against Israel, the U.S. and their Arab allies under the political leadership of Seyed Khorasani (Khamenei).

Ahmadinejad’s office predictably said he is the incarnation of this character. He is now out of office but the prophecy still stands.

The film cites the Arab Spring as an ongoing fulfillment of prophecy and identifies the Muslim Brotherhood (and therefore Hamas) as the Sunnis destined to ally with Iran.  The issue standing in the way is the Syrian civil war.

The Syrian Muslim Brotherhood is refusing to even negotiate with Iran, but that may change due to international pressure and dependency upon Turkey and Qatar. Iran has restored ties to Hamas and Hamas is offering Hezbollah a joint jihad against Israel. Khamenei is emphasizing his belief in a Shiite-Sunni alliance.

The Sunni Islamists’ massive setbacks in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya will have to be reversed for this prophecy to be fulfilled. Egypt says Hamas is involved in terrorist activity against its government. Sudan, an ally of Iran and Hamas, is accused of supporting Islamist forces in Libya and may do the same in Egypt.

Victory in Syria

Hezbollah and Iran believe the prophecy requires them to save the Shiites in Syria from radical Sunni oppressors. This may not necessarily mean re-capturing all of Syria.

It is possible that they will settle for a scenario where the Islamic State and Al-Qaeda are defeated, the Allawites (a Shiite offshoot) are protected and a ceasefire is reached with the rebel-held areas, especially if those rebels are willing to go along with a Shiite-Sunni jihad against Israel.

The bottom line is that Iran and Hezbollah believe that the Mahdi will only re-appear after Syria is brought to some kind of resolution that leaves the Allawites in power.

CONCLUSION

According to this end-of-days belief, all of these events lead up to the Iranian-led capturing of Jerusalem, after which the Mahdi will appear and bring about the final victory.
These violent beliefs and goals cannot be ignored.

The Iranian regime will feel a sense of immense empowerment by the coup in Yemen and the death of King Abdullah, especially if the prophesied instability happens in Saudi Arabia. Khamenei and those in the regime who think like him will see this as Allah’s green light for a dramatic escalation.


Ryan Mauro

Source: http://www.clarionproject.org/analysis/death-saudi-king-coup-yemen-signs-iranian-prophecy

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.

Obama Squirms to Dodge the Truth - James Lewis

by James Lewis

Iran’s theologian rulers are aiming for Mecca and Medina, the holy cities of Islam, which will give them control over the entire Muslim world. But they will have to fight the 80% majority Sunnis to get the holy cities.

Iran is on the verge of nuclear weapons and Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs). Obama is pretending it ain't, so he can sign his totally phony “peace agreement” with the mullahs. But Israel’s Netanyahu won’t sign on to a treaty that will give the genocidal cult of Iran all the power in the world.

We don’t want war; but war has been declared on us.

That is the dilemma of the political elites, and their string of puppets in the media.

Obama is the dance-away politician. He has always danced away from the consequences of his actions. But this time he can’t. The French, by facing the truth of the Charlie Hebdo massacre, are actually more honest and courageous in facing reality. America is lagging.

The reality that everybody secretly knows is that the Iranians have been chanting “Death to Israel! Death to America!” every single day since 1979, when Jimmy Carter allowed Ayatollah Khomeini to take over Iran, to throw out our ally the Shah, and to grow into a warmaking aggressor against all its theological enemies, including the Saudis. Now Obama has allowed Iran to take over the Iraqi regime in Baghdad along with Yemen, and Syria, creating a strategic pincer that points to Israel, Egypt, and Saudi Arabia. Iran’s theologian rulers are aiming for Mecca and Medina, the holy cities of Islam, which will give them control over the entire Muslim world. But they will have to fight the 80% majority Sunnis to get the holy cities.

This is what the Saudis are facing, and this is why the succession struggle for the head of state in Saudi Arabia has implications for the entire Arab and Muslim world, and therefore the rest of the world also. Iran is on the verge of nuclear weapons and Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs). Obama is pretending it ain't, so he can sign his totally phony “peace agreement” with the mullahs. But Israel’s Netanyahu won’t sign on to a treaty that will give the genocidal cult of Iran all the power in the world. That is why Obama hates Netanyahu, and wants to destroy him. Obama is therefore making exactly the same move made by the appeasers of Hitler and Stalin in Europe. He is gambling on a losing game of appeasement, but nobody, certainly not the Arabs, believes a word. They know who the totalitarian aggressor is, and they know he has to be defeated decisively. Meanwhile Obama, who is the most mentally rigid politician outside of Moscow, is publicly raging and ranting -- not at the mullahs, who are the plain and obvious aggressor, but at the scapegoat.

Jesus was a scapegoat for the fearful collaborators with the Romans in Israel at the beginning of the Common Era. The Jews were scapegoats for every tyrant since that time, except where Christians were the scapegoats for Romans, Vikings, Muslim invaders, and all the aggressive forces from that time to the Nazis and Communists. Scapegoats are needed when a politician needs to deny responsibility and blame the nearest victim who cannot escape. Scapegoating is the mark of mob politics.

In 1200 CE the first wave of Muslim invaders conquered India, and immediately started to wipe out all the Buddhist monasteries, which were vulnerable because the monks were pacifists who often did not defend themselves. Buddhism, a pacifist creed, was soon destroyed in its land of origin, and it has never come back in full flower. It is now practiced in China, Japan, and South East India. But not in most of India, where Vedanta philosophy flowered instead. Multiple Muslim invasions killed off Buddhism, because Vedanta, as a family and community creed, was able to withstand the multiple massacres imposed by wave after wave of Muslim jihadists. The last Indian-Muslim war was the Partition of India in 1948, which killed three million people, and led to the split between Muslim Pakistan and majority-Hindu India. Since then Pakistan keeps up a terrorist war against India, but it has not been able to mount a full-scale Muslim invasion of India. India has a thousand years of resistance against wave after wave of jihad invasion, and every citizen of India knows in his or her bones that peace is good, but survival is better, if you must choose. Hinduism is not as aggressive as jihadist Islam. Neither is Buddhism. But over the centuries they have learned to defend themselves.

But not the West. Our superficial and self-deluded political elites pretend that jihadi Islam is peaceful, just like early Buddhists did before all the monasteries were destroyed. Muslim forces have bought up our political and media class, which is why they keep lying to us about a clear and present danger.

So Obama is blaming the victim, along with his Eurosocialist buddies in Europe. If only Israel would surrender to the phony “Palestinians” everything will be okay. For Hitler it was Czechoslovakia that had to be his to prevent war, and once he swallowed the Sudetenland he would never, ever, be nasty again. Then it was Poland. Then it was all of Europe, and ultimately it would have been America, because the Nazis had a world-conquering ideology. So did Stalin.

At some point the lies became clear to every sentient person in the West, and reluctantly, very slowly and reluctantly, Western politicians and media types began to see how trapped they were. It was surrender or fight. No other choice.

Today, after the Charlie Hebdo massacre showed the French and other Europeans that this was a stand-or-die moment, the French people poured into the streets to show how well they got it. Forty political leaders jumped on the bandwagon, because their jobs were on the line. But Obama remained aloof, thinking that he could still dance away from the choice. Obama has long proclaimed delusional lies as the truth, and maybe he really believes he can still get away with it. But Canada, Australia, and Britain don’t think so. The French don’t think so. Most normal Europeans don’t think so. And Obama will be out of power soon.

This is the Phony War, the time of indecision and of desperate efforts to fake a solution to a dwindling chance of true peace. The only people who are bound and determined to have their way are the Jihadists, the Iranian mullahs on the Shi’ite side, and the ISIS fanatics on the Sunni side. Everybody else is trying to dodge the problem, hoping against hope. Obama may not believe he can walk on the water and create a peace agreement between all the players: Not just Israel and the Pals (a totally phony scapegoating conflict), but between Iran and Sunni tribes in Iraq and Syria, who support ISIS, between the Saudis who are caught between the devil and the deep blue sea, backed by Egypt and Pakistan. The jihadist aggressors are gambling that audacity and mass murder will win. Overall, Obama has been backing them whenever possible, including Al Qaeda in Libya, the Taliban in Afghanistan, and (through Turkey) even ISIS. Obama keeps thinking he can clever his way out of this trap, but he’s dealing with Persian and Arab rug sellers who have seen this game for a thousand years. They can tell a coward when they see him.

In the upshot, Obama does not want the china shop to fall apart before he leaves office. Like Bill Clinton, he cares less about the fate of the country and the world than he does about himself. Clinton dodged four chances to get Bin Laden, and when he left office the Twin Towers were bombed, right at the start of the Bush Administration. So George W. was stuck with the problem, and Clinton danced away from of blame (at least as far as his own media buds were concerned). That is Obama’s goal, too. He wants to be able to blame the next president for the messes he made, and which he allowed to go out of control, during his eight years. Obama is therefore trying to pin the blame on Netanyahu, who wants to save his country from nuclear genocide. This is a disgusting, cynical, mean-spirited game.

In the last few days Obama left his own trip to India, skipping the Taj Mahal, to fly to Riyadh and lobby the new leadership -- the new king is believed to suffer from dementia, and he had to talk to younger politicians, including probably Bandar El Sultan, who is jockeying for power along with the rest. The Saudis’ top pols were complicit in the Al Qaeda attack on this country in 9/11/01, and excused themselves to the Americans by saying their shaky failed state would not survive if the real fanatics, the Wahhabi theocrats, took over. We had a choice between supporting the Saudi villains to keep even worse characters from taking over. Both Bush and Obama went along, because OPEC controlled the international price of oil and could destroy our economy. It was a bargain with the devil.

When 90-year-old King Abdullah died Obama went on an emergency trip to Saudi, to figure out how he could keep Saudi Arabia’s Rube Goldberg contraption going long enough to finish his term in office. More than anything else Obama wants that Jimmy Carter photo op with the Israelis on one side, the Pals on the other, and the New York Times piously proclaiming Peace in our Time. The Obama goes home and allows the whole fake tower of cards to crumble, no matter who gets hurt. He has saved his reputation, at least among his True Believers (who will believe anything he says). Now he can blame whoever comes next. The Democrats and their fake media will scream and yell long enough until everybody believes the next president is a warmongering Republican. That’s how Clinton got away with it, and that’s how Obama wants to do it.

I don’t think the Saudis believed a word of it. Nobody in the know believes Obama any more. The Saudis are furious at him for allowing their worst enemies, the infidel Shi’ites of Iran, to build nukes and missiles. They live right in Iran’s bull’s eye. They are getting ready for the worst by bringing in Egyptian and Pakistani troops to man their borders (they don’t have a big enough population or military themselves), and to keep the option of buying off-the-shelf nukes from Pakistan. They just built a 600-mile military barrier to keep ISIS out. They are outraged at Obama for empowering their most deadly enemies, and some, like Prince Bandar, have already built mansions in the West. (Bandar’s exile mansion overlooks Aspen, CO).

Obama wanted America to withdraw from the world, and our political elites went along. Conservatives have understood very well that China, Russia, Iran, and other aggressors would instantly fill the vacuums created by American retreat. That is exactly what happened. Everywhere in the world, our closest allies are in big, big trouble, and they are rearming as quickly as they can.

In the Muslim world the thousand-year-old split between Sunnis and Shi’ites is devolving into war. In Iraq, the Baghdad regime is controlled by Iran, the new Persian caliphate. In Turkey, Sunni radicals led by Recip Erdogan are trying to re-create the Ottoman Empire -- including the old uniforms with the pointy helmets. In Lebanon Iran’s proxy terror group Hizb’allah is in control, and sending troops to support Syria’s Assad, who is a sort of Shi’ite. Egypt has managed to throw out Obama’s favorite Muslim Brotherhood puppet, and El Sisi sounds like the sanest voice in the Muslim Middle East. But he, too, is fighting a revolt by radical Islamofascists.

What a mess. Six years ago there was still a precarious balance in the Middle East, based in good part on Egypt, the “pillar of peace.” Today, Egypt’s Mubarak has been purged, but another military man, El Sisi has taken over. So the pillar survives, so far.

As for the rest, almost every single Muslim regime in the ME is gone or in trouble. Iran’s proxy just overthrew our guy in Yemen. Libya is at war, entirely due to Obama’s brainstorm of overthrowing Gadaffi and using his armaments to support the rebels in Syria.

This is how community agitators work. They don’t “organize” communities. They agitate to disorganize them, so they can pick up the pieces when things fall apart. Most of the world understands Obama by now, and they are afraid. But Americans can’t believe that our own president would be so utterly destructive. Ordinary Democrats think the chaos in the Middle East is just bad luck. But it’s not. It’s all part of Obama’s Grand Design, a narcissistic overreach so bizarre and improbable that it was bound to fail.

This is how Marxists always end up: grand ambitions ending in an enormous mess.

(Venezuela today is finally understanding that, and even the Washington Post has belatedly told them to give up on a centralized command economy).

The next president will have a lot of apologizing to do -- for Obama, not for the United States. But more important, the next administration will try to save what can be saved from the six decades of Pax Americana, when our allies could trust our word. Obama has killed off the most important single ingredient in any defensive alliance, real trust that the alliance would hold under pressure.

Nobody trusts us anymore, and there is no reason they should. We were the lynchpin of world security for six decades, but once trust it lost, it may never be restored.

Isn’t it great to have our first black president? Now the Democrats will try to repeat that trick, and foist on us a president merely because she is female. Or merely because s/he is LGBT. Or merely because… et. bs cetera.

With Obama our voters got suckered but good. The same thing happened with Bill Clinton and the Arkansas twins. Jimmy Carter, in retrospect, sold out to Muslim influence peddlers way back in 1979, when the Ayatollah took over our U.S. embassy and all its diplomats, and Jimmy did next to nothing. That was the first proof to the Muslim world that the United States was the weak horse, and they have been trading on that ever since. Even today, Carter and his foreign policy gurus still claim they were right to let the radical Islamists take over in Iran. That is why the mullahs show such utter contempt for this administration. Obama is a round-heeled pushover, like Jimmy Carter, and they are beating us hollow.

Today immense amounts of money from Muslim sources are going to Democrats, and probably some Republicans as well. On the R side, we have to demand a clear accounting of who is paying for what. The Democrats are a lost cause.

James Lewis

Source: www.americanthinker.com/articles/2015/01/obama_squirms_to_dodge_the_truth.html

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.