Iran's Missile Violations: Where is the International Community? - Majid Rafizadeh

​
by Majid Rafizadeh

Instead of appeasing the ruling mullahs of Iran, it is incumbent on the international community to act to stop this predatory regime -- now.

• "The important point about these missiles is that they are fully equipped with homing. It means they are of the fire-and-forget type. We fire the missile and the data is on the missile itself, it has various navigation systems built in." — Iran's Navy chief, Adm. Hossein Khanzadi, Associated Press, June 8, 2020.
• "We are open about the fact that Hezbollah's budget, its income, its expenses, everything it eats and drinks, its weapons and rockets, come from the Islamic Republic of Iran." — Hassan Nasrallah, leader of Hezbollah, The New Yorker, December 13, 2016.
• "Today, more than ever, there is fertile ground - with the grace of God - for the annihilation, the wiping out, and the collapse of the Zionist regime. In Lebanon alone, over 100,000 missiles are ready to be launched...." — Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps Brigadier General Hossein Salami, to Iran's state-run IRIB TV, July 1, 2016.
• Iran's foreign-based weapons factories give it an advantageous military capability for waging wars or striking other nations through third countries such as Syria, Lebanon, Yemen or Iraq.
• Instead of appeasing the ruling mullahs of Iran, it is incumbent on the international community to act to stop this predatory regime -- now.

Not a word of condemnation has been issued by either the UN or the EU on the Iranian regime's acceleration of its threatening ballistic missile program. Pictured: Iranian soldiers launch a Ghader missile on September 11, 2020, during a military exercise near the Strait of Hormuz in southern Iran. (Photo by Iranian Army Office/AFP via Getty Images)

Not even a word of condemnation has been issued by either the United Nations or the European Union on the Iranian regime's latest violations and acceleration of its threatening ballistic missile program. Instead, the UN and the EU are still committed to lifting the arms embargo on Tehran and keeping global sanctions removed from the ruling mullahs.

The regime, meanwhile has been focusing on the proliferation of long-range precision-guided ballistic missiles. It recently unveiled several new missiles -- the Haj Qasem surface-to-surface ballistic missile and the Abu Mahdi long-range naval cruise missile -- as well as several reportedly high-quality jet engines.

Iran's theocratic regime currently possesses the largest and most diverse ballistic missile program in the Middle East. It is worth noting that no country other than Iran has acquired long-range ballistic missiles before obtaining nuclear weapons. While ballistic missiles can be used for either offensive or defensive purposes, the sophisticated missiles are mainly developed as delivery vehicles for nuclear weapons.

The regime has fired several ballistic missiles in the past few months and Iran's Navy chief, Adm. Hossein Khanzadi, bragged on Iran's state television:

"The important point about these missiles is that they are fully equipped with homing. It means they are of the fire-and-forget type. We fire the missile and the data is on the missile itself, it has various navigation systems built in."

The Iranian regime is in clear violation of the UN Security Council Resolution 2231. The resolution calls on the Islamic Republic of Iran "not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology."

In addition, as Iran and the P4+1 (Germany, the UK, Russia, China and France) still contend that the nuclear deal (which Iran never signed) remains effective, Tehran is even violating the nuclear deal due to the fact that it indicates that Iran should not undertake any ballistic missile activity "until the date eight years after the JCPOA Adoption Day (Oct. 18, 2015) or until the date on which the IAEA submits a report confirming the broader conclusion, whichever is earlier."

The regime's expansion of its ballistic missile program poses a threat to the stability of the region and the national interests of other countries. For one thing,, the beneficiaries of Iran's expanding ballistic missile arsenal are basically terror and militia groups. Hassan Nasrallah, the leader of Hezbollah, previously admitted:

"We are open about the fact that Hezbollah's budget, its income, its expenses, everything it eats and drinks, its weapons and rockets, come from the Islamic Republic of Iran."

Iran has also ratcheted up its efforts to advance the missile technology of Yemen's Houthis. As a UN panel of experts previously acknowledged when the Houthis fired missiles into Saudi Arabia, it is extremely unlikely that the Houthis could manufacture such missiles on their own:

"The design, characteristics and dimensions of the components inspected by the panel are consistent with those reported for the Iranian-manufactured Qiam-1 missile."

The regime has also been clear about its intentions when it comes to annihilating Israel with ballistic missiles. Iran's Supreme Guide Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who enjoys the final say in all of Iran's domestic and foreign policies, proclaimed last year to the youth of Iran that they will soon witness the demise of Israel and all of American civilization. Khamenei made Iran's intentions clear while meeting with students, declaring:

"You young people should be assured that you will witness the demise of the enemies of humanity, meaning the degenerate American civilization, and the demise of Israel".

The Commander-in-Chief of Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Hossein Salami, also made the strategy of his regime vehemently clear by stating on Iran State TV Channel 2, "Our strategy is to erase Israel from the global political map. And, it seems that, considering the evil that Israel is doing, it is bringing itself closer to that."
Salami also famously told the state-run IRIB TV:

"Today, more than ever, there is fertile ground - with the grace of God - for the annihilation, the wiping out, and the collapse of the Zionist regime. In Lebanon alone, over 100,000 missiles are ready to be launched. If there is a will, if it serves [our] interests, and if the Zionist regime repeats its past mistakes due to its miscalculations, these missiles will pierce through space, and will strike at the heart of the Zionist regime. They will prepare the ground for its great collapse in the new era"

The Iranian regime is also reportedly setting up weapons factories abroad and manufacturing advanced ballistic missiles and weapons in foreign nations, including Syria. Some of the arms that Tehran is producing there include precision-guided missiles, using advanced technology to strike specific targets. Iran's foreign-based weapons factories give it an advantageous military capability for waging wars or striking other nations through third countries such as Syria, Lebanon, Yemen or Iraq.

Instead of appeasing the ruling mullahs of Iran, it is incumbent on the international community to act to stop this predatory regime -- now.

• Follow Majid Rafizadeh on Twitter

Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a business strategist and advisor, Harvard-educated scholar, political scientist, board member of Harvard International Review, and president of the International American Council on the Middle East. He has authored several books on Islam and US foreign policy. He can be reached at Dr.Rafizadeh@Post.Harvard.Edu

Source: https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16505/iran-missile-violations

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Group led by Black Lives Matter founder is 'fiscally sponsored project' of pro-China org: report - Adam Shaw

​
by Adam Shaw

Black Futures Lab is a 'fiscally sponsored project' of the Chinese Progressive Association.

A group led by one of the founders of Black Lives Matter has ties to a progressive pro-China organization that acts as a fiscal sponsor to the group, according to a new report by a conservative think tank.

Black Futures Lab, which says it “works with Black people to transform our communities, building Black political power and changing the way that power operates – locally, statewide and nationally,” is headed by Alicia Garza – one of the co-founders of Black Lives Matter.

BARR CRITICIZES BLACK LIVES MATTER MOVEMENT: 'NOT INTERESTED IN BLACK LIVES, THEY'RE INTERESTED IN PROPS 

But a new Heritage Foundation investigation has found that the Black Futures Lab's website says the group is a project of a pro-China group called the Chinese Progressive Association.

*Black Futures Lab is a fiscally sponsored project of the Chinese Progressive Association,” the “Donate” section of the website says. Clicking on the banner on the page takes the user to the CPA website.

The CPA was founded in 1972 and says it “educates, organizes and empowers the low-income and working-class immigrant Chinese community in San Francisco to build collective power with other oppressed communities to demand better living and working conditions and justice for all people.”

But the Heritage Foundation describes it as an organization that has long supported the communist government in Beijing.

“From its start, it has been a promoter of the People’s Republic of China,” the report says.
Neither Black Futures Lab nor the Chinese Progressive Association responded to requests for comment from Fox News.

Video

The Heritage investigation found that the Boston chapter teamed up with the Chinese consulate general in New York to offer Chinese nationals to renew passports  – picking up praise from Chinese state media – and has sponsored the Chinese flag flying over Boston’s City Hall to honor the Chinese Revolution.

FLORIDA SCHOOL DISTRICT'S PRO-BLM CARTOON DRAWS THE IRE OF SOME PARENTS

It also cites an essay by one of the CPA’s co-founders, in which they called for a “revolutionary strategy” to achieve a “fundamentally different society." The report also found that the CPA picked up praise recently again from Chinese state media for taking part in Black Lives Matter protests in San Francisco.

“Communist China has put its vast propaganda apparatus to work in support of the mayhem that has wreaked havoc in American cities this year,” Heritage Foundation’s Mike Gonzalez writes in the report. “China is, after all, a rival of the United States, and would see weakening of U.S. society and the country in general as advantageous.”

“The involvement of an outfit as closely associated with the Chinese government in the funding of one of Garza’s ventures is something else entirely, however,” he says.


Adam Shaw is a reporter covering U.S. and European politics for Fox News.. He can be reached here.

Source: https://www.foxnews.com/politics/group-black-lives-matter-founder-is-fiscally-sponsored-project-china-report

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Fitzgerald Video: BLM Takes Over California Schools - Sean Fitzgerald

​
by Sean Fitzgerald

Pledge to BLM or fail!

Frontpagemag Editor's note: Below is Sean Fitzgerald's new video, BLM Takes Over California Schools, which reveals the Gestapo atmosphere our children now face: Pledge to BLM or fail! 

The video was created in conjunction with the Freedom Center's Stop K-12 Indoctrination campaign. To read our pamphlet on this issue, "Leftist Indoctrination in Our K-12 Public Schools," click here or order your own copy here.

Don't miss it!




Sean Fitzgerald

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/09/fitzgderald-video-blm-takes-over-california-sean-fitzgerald/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

State Department official reveals extent of Hezbollah terrorism in Europe - Elad Benari

​
by Elad Benari

At AJC program, State Department Coordinator for Counterterrorism says Hezbollah weapons caches have been discovered across Europe.

Ambassador Nathan Sales, the US State Department’s Coordinator for Counterterrorism, announced during an American Jewish Committee (AJC) Advocacy Anywhere program on Thursday that Hezbollah weapons caches, including significant stores of ammonium nitrate, have been discovered and destroyed across Europe.

“Hezbollah is active in Europe right now” and it is important for European governments and citizens to know the extent of Hezbollah’s reach on European soil, said Sales.

“Since 2012, Hezbollah has established caches of ammonium nitrate throughout Europe by transporting first aid kits whose cold packs contain the substance,” he added. “I can reveal that such caches have been moved through Belgium, to France, Greece, Italy, Spain, and Switzerland. I can also reveal that significant ammonium nitrate caches have been discovered or destroyed in France, Greece, and Italy. We have reason to believe that this activity is still underway. As of 2018, ammonium nitrate caches were still suspected throughout Europe, possibly in Greece, Italy, and Spain.”

Sales said the only reason Hezbollah has been stockpiling ammonium nitrate on European soil “is to conduct major terrorist attacks whenever it, or its masters in Tehran, decide.”

European designation of Hezbollah as a terrorist organization is imperative for regional security and for Lebanon’s future, said Sales.

“The European approach to Hezbollah since 2013 has not worked,” said Sales. The EU in 2013 adopted a measure that bifurcated Hezbollah into “political” and “military” wings, designating only the so-called “military” component but not the “political” wing.

“There is a growing international momentum to designate or ban Hezbollah as a terrorist organization,” he added. “It is fiction that terrorist activities can be cordoned off from the other activities of Hezbollah.”

Sales noted that an increasing number of individual European states, led by Germany and the United Kingdom, are taking decisive action against Hezbollah.

In May, he German Interior Ministry issued a federal order outlawing Hezbollah in Germany, and also took enforcement measures under the provisions of the order.

In March of 2019, the British government designated Hezbollah as a terrorist organization. Earlier this year, Britain's finance ministry added the entire Hezbollah organization to its list of terrorist groups subject to asset freezing.

The US, which designated Hezbollah in 1997, has maintained an approach that both combats the terrorist organization and helps Lebanon. The US has invested $2 billion in Lebanon security services since 2006, and $1 billion in economic aid, Sales said.

“We do not believe it’s helpful to engage Hezbollah as if it is a legitimate political actor. It’s a terrorist organization that exploits the Lebanese people,” said Sales.

Also appearing on the AJC Advocacy Anywhere program, “The Case for Banning Hezbollah,” were Sajid Javid MP, Britain’s Chancellor of the Exchequer between 2019 and 2020 and Home Secretary from 2018 to 2019; and Hans-Georg Engelke, German State Secretary at the Federal Ministry of the Interior. Simone Rodan-Benzaquen, Director of AJC Europe, moderated the hour-long conversation.

Engelke was emphatic that any funds Hezbollah raises in Germany are banned because they inevitably support the group’s terrorist activities. 

Javid noted that there has been no problem for the United Kingdom in dealing with the Lebanese government since the Hezbollah ban was put in place in 2019. Contrary to what some European diplomats asserted, “the aftermath of our decision to designate Hezbollah was nothing like what all the doomsayers had said before. Our relationship with Lebanon didn't suffer.” 


Elad Benari

Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/287519

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Who Killed George Floyd? - Don Brown

​
by Don Brown

What role did fentanyl play in George Floyd's death?

If they get a fair trial, a questionable proposition at best, Minneapolis police officers charged with murdering George Floyd should be acquitted.

Let's consider new, undisputed evidence, beyond the initial bystander’s video that we’ve all seen, to understand why.

On Memorial Day, around 8 PM, Minneapolis Police are called to a local convenience store. Two suspects passed a fake $20 bill to buy cigarettes. When police arrived, the shop manager pointed across the street, where three suspects sat in a parked vehicle. George Floyd sat behind the wheel.

When the officers crossed the street to investigate, two other suspects, another man, and a woman, both black, stepped from the car and politely cooperated.

But George argued and disobeyed ten separate commands from officers to keep his hands up. After the tenth order, he finally put his hands on the steering wheel as instructed.

As George protested, police walked him across the street to the police cruiser, the vehicle shown in the bystander’s video.

That bystander’s video, isolated alone, implies that the officer cruelly forced George onto the ground, then callously put his knee on George's neck, causing George to cry out, pitifully, “I can't breathe.”

But when a Minnesota judge authorized the release of police body cam footage, a completer and more different story emerged. First, the police never wanted George on the ground at all, and frantically tried getting him into the back of their squad car.

But Floyd, a strong six-feet-eight-inches tall, fought police every second, and tried pushing his way out. Police video shows George repeatedly saying, “I can't breathe” long before he was on the ground, and before Officer Chauvin employed the infamous knee-restraint tactic.

This is crucial.

Claiming to be “claustrophobic” as they ordered him into the back seat, George Floyd demanded to be placed on the ground. So, the officers did not thrust him down to the ground and then put their knee on George’s neck, as the bystander’s video suggests.

Let's delve into the evidence.

From Officer Thomas Lane's body camera, at 8:09 PM, officers approached George's vehicle, tapped on the window, instructing him to either put his hands up or put his hands on the steering wheel. But George refuses.

Ten separate times, police either instructed George to let them see his hands, or to put his hands on the wheel. Finally, George puts his hands on the wheel, protesting he had “not done anything.”

At 8:17 PM, officers walk George across the street. He keeps arguing, as they order him into the back of the squad car.

“I'm claustrophobic,” he claims, twice, resisting as they again order him to sit in the back seat. He screams, fights and resists getting in the squad car.

At 8:18:08, still standing beside the car and fighting the officers, he says, for the first time, with no knee on his neck, “I can't breathe, officer!” At this point, police are still ordering him into the back seat.

A bystander urges George to stop fighting. “You can’t win,” the bystander says.

George fights anyway.

Police push him in the back seat. He keeps resisting.

Nine seconds later, fighting from the backseat of the police car, George says three times, in rapid succession, beginning at 8:18:19, “I want to lay on the ground! I want to lay on the ground! I want to lay on the ground!” He repeats it a fourth time, five seconds later, ““I want to lay on the ground!”

Then, as if he knows he is dying, says, “I’m going down.” 

At 8:18:39, fighting in the backseat, he again says, three times in rapid succession, “I can’t breathe!” Then again,” I can’t breathe.” And then, again, at 8:18:50 repeats, “I can’t breathe!”

At this point, George had demanded to be laid on the ground four times and said “I can't breathe” at least six times, while in the back seat of the squad car, with no knee on his neck.

At 8:19:06, he again says, “I can't breathe,” for the seventh time. 

Of course he can’t breathe. A fentanyl overdose stops a man from breathing.

George fought the officers non-stop for over ten minutes before officers finally removed him from the car and put him down on the ground, beside the squad car, as George himself demanded.

Bystanders then film George on the ground, declaring, “I can’t breathe,” as if this was the first time George said, “I can’t breathe,” and as if Officer Chauvin’s knee (not the fentanyl) caused George’s breathing problems.

Fox 9 in Minneapolis reported that Chief Hennepin County Medical Examiner Dr. Andrew Baker, in a memorandum filed May 26 concluded, “The autopsy revealed no physical evidence suggesting that Mr. Floyd died of asphyxiation.”

In other words, Dr. Baker initially ruled out Chauvin’s knee as causing George’s death.
In a second memorandum filed June 1, Baker described Floyd’s fentanyl level as “pretty high,” and a potentially “fatal level.”

Dr. Baker reported Floyd had 11 ng/mL of fentanyl in his blood, adding, “If he were found dead at home alone and no other apparent causes, this could be acceptable to call an OD. Deaths have been certified with levels of 3."

In other words, while levels of 3 ng/mL have caused fatal fentanyl overdoses. George ingested nearly four times that amount, or 11 ng/mL of fentanyl, in his bloodstream. In another document, Dr. Baker said, "That is a fatal level of fentanyl under normal circumstances."

Granted, mounting political pressure led to subsequent private autopsy reports, paid for by the family, showing the cause of death as a combination of both fentanyl and asphyxiation from the officer’s knee.

Of course they do.

But the prosecution, to obtain a conviction, must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. They must prove that the officer’s knee, and not the massive fentanyl dosage, killed George Floyd.

That’s a tall order.

Not only that, but the infamous, “knee-technique,” which should be banned, was authorized by the Minneapolis PD. Officer Chauvin followed authorized procedure, a technique for keeping a suspect on the ground, after George Floyd had fought officers for over ten minutes, and after, only -- and this is the kicker -- George requested, repeatedly, to lay on the ground.

But Chauvin’s knee is a red herring. The issue here is fentanyl.

Here's how the respected website, WebMD, describes the effects of fentanyl:

“[F]entanyl has rapid and potent effects on the brain and body, and even very small amounts can be extremely dangerous.

“It only takes a tiny amount of the drug to cause a deadly reaction,” ... “Fentanyl can depress breathing and lead to death. The risk of overdose is high with fentanyl.”

Here’s what the CDC says about fentanyl. “It is 50 to 100 times more potent than morphine.” https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/opioids/fentanyl.html

Of course George couldn’t breathe -- because fentanyl, mixed with methamphetamines, kills breathing. Despite the bad optics, “I can’t breathe” was not because of the officer’s knee.

The medical examiner’s statement on lethal fentanyl, and the previous protestations of “I can’t breathe,” even before he got into the back seat of the squad car, and long before Chauvin applied the notorious “knee” technique, shows that George was already dying from the lethal fentanyl overdose before officers put him in the back seat of the car. That fentanyl, with methamphetamine ingestion, and cannabinoids -- that’s right, George popped some meth alongside the fentanyl, plus a little reefer too -- raises more than a reasonable doubt in favor of these policemen.

Here’s the prosecution’s problem - proving beyond a reasonable doubt that it was the officer’s knee, and not the massive fentanyl overdose, that killed George.

No one can prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, not in this case, that Chauvin killed Floyd, not with any intellectual honesty. George overdosed on fentanyl, and mixed it with meth, and reefer. That’s why he’s dead. Without the overdose, George Floyd would still be alive. The officers should be acquitted.

Which begs the question, who killed George Floyd?

Sadly, George Floyd killed himself.


Don Brown, a former U.S. Navy JAG officer, is the author of the book “Travesty of Justice: The Shocking Prosecution of Lieutenant Clint Lorance.” He is one of four former JAG officers serving on the Lorance legal team. Lorance was pardoned by President Trump in November of 2019. Brown is also a former military prosecutor, and a former Special Assistant United States Attorney.

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2020/09/who_killed_george_floyd.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

The Scary Answer to Trump’s Question About Ilhan Omar - Raymond Ibrahim

​
by Raymond Ibrahim

“Where are the people that vote for such a horrible woman who hates our country?”

Yesterday, while speaking at a Minnesota rally, President Donald Trump inquired as to how Congresswoman Ilhan Omar—“a horrible woman who hates our country” and who “called the Minneapolis police a cancer and said they were rotten to the root”—won in that state’s Democratic primaries last week.  Asked an exasperated Trump:

How the hell did she win?  This woman is crazy. She’s a horrible woman who hates our country….  Seriously, how does a woman who hates our country, who says nothing but bad things about our country and Israel and other allies, how does this woman win? Where are the people that would vote for her?

The answer to these critically important questions—especially that last one—has two parts.
First, someone like Omar won because virtually every Somali and every Muslim in Minnesota voted for her.  This isn’t just because Somalis are immensely tribalistic in nature, but because Islam itself is immensely tribalistic and reinforces tribalism in the Muslim mind via the highly divisive doctrine of al-wala’ wa’l bara’.

Commonly translated as “loyalty and enmity,” or “love and hate,” it requires Muslims always to side with and support fellow Muslims, while disavowing and having enmity for non-Muslims—even if the Muslim in question is not good for you and the “infidel” is.    To quote the scholar Ibn al-Taymiyya, reverentially known as the “Sheikh of Islam,” a Muslim believer “is obligated to befriend a believer—even if he is oppressive and violent toward you—while he must be hostile to the infidel—even if he is liberal and kind to you” (The Al Qaeda Reader, p. 64; see also Koran 48:29, 58:22, 60:4 ).

As Muslim numbers continue to grow in the U.S., the impact of this divisive doctrine is naturally expected to grow with them.  (Incidentally, while this doctrine may compel Muslims in general to vote for an Omar, it is a moot point for Somalis, whose own sense of ethnic tribalism compels them to vote for a fellow Somali.)

The second reason Omar won should be much more disconcerting and bodes ill for this nation’s future: She won because the overwhelming majority of Minnesotan citizens who voted for her—who are white and not Muslim—have been everywhere and at all times indoctrinated in insanity (AKA “Leftist” views).  These should be familiar by now and include fear and hate of their own kind, the dreaded WASPs (white, Anglo-Saxon Protestants); a belief that the antithesis of themselves, namely, “minorities”—in Omar’s case, in gender, race, and religion—are somehow intrinsically good and noble, and therefore ideal political leaders; and of course a belief in one of 2020’s most fashionable lies, that police—because they are predominantly white males—are, as Omar said, all “rotten to the root,” a “cancer” that needs to be purged.

Why this second and much larger group of Minnesotan citizens voted for and enabled the victory of someone who, as Trump correctly asserted, “hates our country,” is much more problematic than why Somalis and other Muslims voted for her.

For starters, tribalism at least makes some sense, on a primitive level; untamed instincts will always side with those who look like and behave like one, and profess the same values/religion, as opposed to those who are different in all ways.   At this point in time in U.S. history, however, such tribalism is hardly enough to impact politics and get someone like Omar into office: Somalis/Muslims are currently a tiny percentage of Minnesota, maybe one percent. 

Hence why the second and main reason she got elected—indoctrination in Leftist views, that is to say, indoctrination in sheer madness—is much more troubling, including for the long term.  For, even if Trump wins the upcoming presidential election, what is or will be done to ameliorate the ongoing and unbridled Leftist indoctrination that emanates from every corner of American society—an indoctrination that has today gotten Americans to vote for “a horrible woman who hates our country,” and tomorrow will lead to worse?


Raymond Ibrahim is a Shillman Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/09/scary-answer-trumps-question-ilhan-omar-raymond-ibrahim/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Black Mayors and Police Chiefs are Being Accused of White Supremacy - Daniel Greenfield

​
by Daniel Greenfield

No black official is radical enough for Black Lives Matter.

“I would have so much more respect for the Bail Fund if they had bailed him out and then let him stay in one of their homes,” Suffolk County District Attorney Rachael Rollins blasted the Massachusetts Bail Fund (MBF).

A statement from a DA blasting the MBF for freeing a rapist wouldn't usually be extraordinary, except that Rollins, whose campaign was backed by George Soros, was supposed to be different. Not only had Rollins run on a pro-crime platform promising not to prosecute shoplifting, breaking and entering, and resisting arrest, but she had reacted to the Black Lives Matter riots with a hysterical rant about her rage and the white community.

Rollins had dismissed the damage from Black Lives Matter riots because it "could be fixed".

And then the Massachusetts Bail Fund freed Shawn McClinton, a convicted sex offender, who had been accused of raping a woman a few weeks after he was let go, leading Rollins to snap.

The Massachusetts Bail Fund, whose motto is “Free them all”, really meant it.

The problem that Rachael Rollins, the first black DA of Suffolk County, a pro-crime black nationalist activist, ran into is a familiar one for a new generation of leftist politicians, many from an identity politics slate, who learned the hard way that they will always be out-radicaled.

It’s no longer enough to just support riots and property crimes, you have to support rapists too.

The Black Lives Matter wave destroyed the credibility and leadership of a new wave of identity politics Democrats who had seemed exciting until they were actually tested and failed miserably.

A few years ago, Jenny Durkan was being hailed as the first lesbian mayor of Seattle. Then she was besieged by a Black Lives Matter mob, and, after hailing CHOP as a new Summer of Love, had no choice but to shut it down. Carmen Best, Seattle’s first black police chief, was forced to resign after facing police defunding budget cuts that decimated her department.

Chief Danielle Outlaw, formerly Portland's first black police commissioner, who got away from the city's perpetual riots to become Philadelphia's first black female commissioner, discovered that there's no escaping the violence. Many of the cities at the center of the violence have tried appointing black police leaders and electing black DAs only to realize that doesn’t appease.

“The fact that I, as a very obvious African American female police chief, have been accused by those within that group or those who support that group, as being a supporter and protector of those who are believed to be white supremacists—if that's even the case—is ridiculous. Right?” Chief Outlaw had wondered back in Portland.

Chief Outlaw may have thought that she would leave that kind of craziness behind when she left Portland, but she was soon being accused of white supremacy in Philly when the police didn’t crack down on white business owners protecting their businesses from BLM rioters.

"We do not condone any acts of violence, and as an agency we don't take sides," she argued.

Lori Lightfoot’s victory was supposed to calm the radicals in Chicago who had bedeviled Rahm Emanual. The city, for the first time in its history, had a number of firsts, a black female lesbian leader, who represented everything that the identity politics slate wanted or could possibly want.

But the pandemic and the riots left her hopefully outmatched and outclassed. Like many other leftist city leaders, Mayor Lightfoot was forced to ban BLM rioters from rallying on her block.

Black Lives Matter activists were soon accusing Lightfoot of "creating problems in black and brown communities to protect white people" and having "bloodied people for their disobedience to white supremacy", by which they meant taking the minimum possible steps to stop the riots.

And so the black lesbian mayor of Chicago had officially become a white supremacist.

The speed with which the ‘firsts’ who break glass ceilings become the enemy is breathtaking.

Los Angeles DA Jackey Lacey went from being hailed as "the first woman and first African-American to serve as Los Angeles County District Attorney" to having her house besieged by Black Lives Matter racists and when her husband waved a gun to get them to leave, he, like the McCloskeys, was charged by the connivance of the Democrat machine.

Rep. Schiff, Mayor Eric Garcetti, and other Democrats quickly pulled their endorsements from Lacey. The first black female DA was now officially a racist oppressor of black people.

“A lot of the cases that people shout the loudest at me about are those cases where the man who was killed had a gun or was shooting someone or harming someone,” Lacey pointed out.

But, like the right to rape in Suffolk County, harming and shooting someone is a right in LA.

You can be the first black DA of Los Angeles, the first gay mayor of South Bend, the first lesbian mayor of Seattle, the first black female police chief of Portland, Philadelphia, or Seattle, you can even be the first black lesbian mayor of Chicago, and you still won’t be radical enough.

You can even run on a pro-crime platform backed by George Soros and it’s still not enough.
That’s because the problem isn’t racism: it’s radicalism.

If the problem really were racism, it would be solvable. But radicalism has no stopping point. As soon as a mayor, a DA, or police chief seems to fit the bill, they’re not radical enough.

Mayors, DAs, and police chiefs who try to actually do their jobs are the first to fall.

Just ask Danielle Outlaw, who was hounded out of Portland, or Carmen Best, who was forced to resign in Seattle. Checking the right identity politics boxes doesn’t matter if you’re not a radical.

But no amount of radicalism is ever enough. Just ask Rachael Rollins.

History is full of examples of revolutions where the radicals ate each other. The story of CHOP and of Portland’s over 100 days of rioting, the guillotines and people’s committees, is the familiar one of the French and Russian revolutions, of the radicals killing anyone less radical until there’s no one left except either a tyrant or a populace who is tired of the endless violence.

What the revolutionaries want is a society so unlivable that it even horrified a Soros DA.

When they say that they want to free all the criminals, they really mean it. And when they say that they want to defund the police, they mean that too. These aren’t bold slogans for anything more moderate as their defenders among the Democrats and the media have falsely insisted.

The most obvious symptom of a political movement’s descent into extremism is its inability to describe the problem. Extremism has no language for criticising its own extremism except by warning that it’s undermining the larger cause. And that’s been the Democrat response. The riots and the crime, they keep warning, are eating into Biden’s lead in some swing states.

That’s a compelling argument for those making it and a contemptible one to those it’s made to.

Not only the Democrats, but even the Left, and even the radicals are losing control of a movement that is turning on them for not being radical enough. And no amount of identity politics can stop the crackup of a movement that has lost its mind and its brakes.


Daniel Greenfield, a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the Freedom Center, is an investigative journalist and writer focusing on the radical Left and Islamic terrorism.

Source: https://www.frontpagemag.com/fpm/2020/09/black-mayors-and-police-chiefs-are-being-accused-daniel-greenfield/

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Oslo as political Kryptonite - Dr. Martin Sherman

​
by Dr. Martin Sherman

Labor's fall from the heights of political hegemony to the depth of political oblivion is a fitting fate for pushing the Oslo Accords.

Areas A,B,C after Oslo Accords                          OneStateIsrael

Kryptonite: Something that can seriously weaken or harm a particular person or thing – Oxford Dictionary.

Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad. An ancient proverb, mis-attributed to Euripides.

More Israelis have been killed by Palestinian terrorists in the 5 years since the first Oslo agreement was signed in September 1993 than in the 15 preceding years...- Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs, January 10, 1998.

Today there is no Palestinian state, no peace — and no sign there ever will be either. Since Oslo, about 10,000 Palestinians have been killed by Israel…, and more than 1,500 Israelis have been killed by Palestinians. - Jon Schwarz & Alice Speri, No One Will Be Celebrating the 25th Anniversary of the Oslo Accords, The Intercept, Sept 13, 2018.

Last Sunday was the 27th anniversary of the signature of the Oslo Agreements.

In the global media, there was precious little to mark the event that had once fired the imagination of millions across the globe. Moreover, almost all the scanty coverage accorded the occasion was caustically critical of it—in stark contrast to the rosy reports, approving assessments and skewed analyses that accompanied the unfounded hopes and ill-founded expectations that it generated in the past.

Of course, I realize that the past week provided an abundance of more topical issues to write on than a failed and fatally flawed agreement signed well over a quarter century- ago. For example, there was the signing of the peace/normalization pacts between Israel and the UAE/Bahrain; the soaring COVID-19 infection rate; the tightening polls for the November presidential elections; the renewed rocket fire from Gaza; or the natural and man-made disasters that are ravaging the US from coast to coast…

When virtue became vice—and vice, virtue

Yet despite the temptation to dive into each and every one of these worthy topics, I have nevertheless decided to focus (or refocus) on what I have referred to in the past —see here (2018); here (2019) and here (2020)—as a traumatic point of inflexion in the annals of the Zionist enterprise and a point of singularity, after which all that followed it was radically different to that which preceded it.

After all, it is difficult to overstate the pernicious and perilous effect that the Oslo Accords have had on the evolution of Zionist endeavor. Indeed, as I noted in a recent article, they constituted a major metamorphosis that transformed what were hallowed virtues into heinous vices. Thus, steadfast devotion to the land and to its settlement by Jews, once considered the defining essence of Zionism, were now branded odious symptoms of territorial avarice. Similarly, military prowess, once a source of pride and an instrument for the preservation of liberty, mutated not only into a means of malevolent oppression, but also into an ominous precursor of imminent fascism.

The reverse was also true. What once was a nefarious vice became a noble virtue. Thus, pursuit of Palestinian statehood transitioned from being borderline sedition to being an essential requirement for enlightenment and the sine qua non for access and acceptance into “polite circles”. Likewise, an abhorrent arch-terrorist miraculously morphed from a brutal, blood-soaked butcher into a sought-after statesman and an internationally lauded peace laureate. No less grotesque was the astounding transformation of his murderous organization from a thuggish terrorist gang, with which contacts were prohibited—and punishable—by Israeli law, into a prospective peace partner, indispensable for the preservation of Zionism.

Blatant bad faith

Many still recall how the ill-conceived Oslo Accords were concluded with great pomp, ceremony and fanfare on the White House lawn in mid-September, 1993. The event was accompanied by giddy optimism and grand promise of the emergence of a “New Middle East”, similar to the EU, stretching from Casablanca to Kuwait, with open borders and linked by a network of modern communications, heralding a new era of peace and prosperity for all the peoples of the region.

Of course, none of these pie-in-the-sky promises were ever fulfilled. Indeed, things began to go awry almost from the get-go. Thus, in 1994, almost immediately after the Palestinian Authority was established, Arafat attempted to smuggle, in his own motorcade, several terrorists into Gaza, who were prohibited from entering the territory by the terms of the Oslo Accords—including by sitting himself on one of them, lying on the back seat of his car!

This gross violation of trust was to typify the bad faith shown to Israel throughout the post-Oslowian years—which have compelled it to undertake four major military operations since the heady days on the White House lawns, to contain Palestinian terror launched from territory handed over by Israel to Palestinian-Arab control.

Yet despite being subjected to heavy losses, Palestinian-Arabs have continued their efforts to harm Israel and Israelis unabated—particularly from Gaza. Indeed, only a combination of Israeli forbearance, together with excellent civil defense and good fortune (which have largely rendered ineffective the myriad of Judeocidal efforts by Palestinian-Arabs) have prevented—or at least postponed—harsher responses than those hitherto undertaken.

A swathe of devastation—political and physical

The Oslo Accords—and the attempts to implement them—cut a swathe of devastation—both physical and political—through the lives of any and everyone who was impacted by them.

For the average Israeli, they heralded trauma and tragedy on an almost daily basis. Every mundane outing was a harrowing and hazardous ordeal. Every trip to a neighborhood café, every visit to a shopping mall, every meal in a restaurant, every ride on a city bus could--and not infrequently, did—culminate in grisly death or grievous injury.

Indeed, rather than fulfill its promise to reduce terror attacks against Israel and Israelis, Oslo in fact heralded an unprecedented increase in them. Thus, in the five years after the Oslo Accords, more Israelis were killed by Palestinian-Arab terrorists than in the fifteen years that preceded them.

But if average Israelis paid dearly for the ideological caprices of their Oslo-era leadership, the cost imposed on the general Palestinian-Arab population has been decidedly greater.

The enhanced access that the Oslo Accords provided the Judeocidal terror groups to an abundance of firearms and military grade explosives encouraged them to launch a wave of gory attacks on Jewish civilians, which in turn compelled Israel to launch several large punitive counter-attacks, which inevitably and unavoidably inflicted grim collateral damage on Palestinian-Arab civilians.

The initiative, spawned by the Oslo Accords, to foist self-governance on the Palestinian-Arabs produced dismal results.

Despite almost universal international endorsement and huge financial aid, all the Palestinian-Arabs have managed to establish after almost three post-Oslo decades, is a corrupt kleptocracy in Judea -Samaria and a tyrannical theocracy in Gaza, with a minuscule private sector and a bloated public one, and dysfunctional governance in both.

Not only Right-wing recriminations

In Gaza, the situation is particularly dismal, where much of the dwindling natural water supply is undrinkable; streets are awash with untreated sewage that pollutes the beaches and flows directly into the sea, and incessant power outages reduce supply to a few hours a day.

Condemnation of the dire consequences that the Oslo Accords precipitated, has not been confined to detractors on the Right-wing side of the political spectrum.

For example, radical left-wing political scientist, Neve Gordon, in an article in Aljazeera, entitled The Oslo Accords' calamities ,writes: “On the eve of the September 1993 Oslo agreements, just before responsibilities were transferred from Israeli hands to the Palestinian Authority, five percent of Gaza's residents did not have access to running water…Twenty years later… more than 80 percent of Gazans buy bottled drinking water either because they are not connected to water supply or because the water they receive is undrinkable.”

Gloomily, he remarks: “The water crisis in the Gaza Strip is just one concrete manifestation of Oslo's legacy.”

Looking beyond Gaza and the water crisis, Gordon sums up the grim statistics of the post-Oslo casualties on the Palestinian side: “Surveying the contemporary Palestinian landscape, everywhere one looks calamities meet the eye. During the first 27 years of occupation (1967-1993), Israel killed an estimated 1,850 Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza. By contrast, during the 20 years since Oslo it has killed more than 7,100."

He thus concludes dourly: “Following the implementation of Oslo's so-called separation principle…the average number of annual Palestinian deaths actually increased fivefold.”

Recriminations (cont.) 

For the Palestinian-Arabs, Oslo’s failure on the economic front has been no less resounding. Glumly, Gordon writes: “Along similar lines, the peace accords have increased the economic fragility of the Palestinians. GDP per capita in the 'West Bank' and Gaza has risen from $1,320 in 1994 to $2,489 in 2011, not much more than a $1,000 increase in 18 years. In Gaza…the per capita GDP has risen by less than $300 in two decades, amounting to $1,534 in 2011.”

Accordingly, he underscores the impotence of the Palestinian economy: “…this minute increase is an outcome of foreign aid and has nothing to do with an improvement of the productive capacity of these two regions. Twenty years after Oslo, Palestinian society is completely dependent on humanitarian assistance.”

Thus, despite the fact that its resounding failure is conceded even by the majority of its erstwhile proponents, they still cling doggedly to the elements that underlaid it—such as Palestinian statehood, territorial concessions and political appeasement. Indeed, these pernicious perspectives still permeate much of, indeed, virtually all the aspects of, the current political discourse on the Palestinian issue.

A lingering malignancy in Israel’s body politic

Indeed, the Oslo Accords, or enduring allegiance to the remnants thereof, continue to exert a lingering malignant influence, which overshadows nearly all discussion on policy options—and the lack thereof—on how Israel is to deal with the Palestinian-Arab population west of the Jordan River .

Accordingly, it is of crucial importance to maintain a sustained discussion on the Accords so as to generate the widest possible public awareness of their deadly detriments—for both Jew and Arab alike—and to ensure that nothing even remotely similar to them is ever undertaken again.

The Oslo Accords were the result of one of two elements—or perhaps, a hapless hybrid of both:

(a) The triumph of naïve optimism and fanciful hope, with caution cast to wind with reckless abandon, over somber circumspection and responsible restraint, born of long and bitter experience; and/or

(b) An unscrupulous—and desperate—ploy in domestic politics to marginalize political opponents, with scant regard for the security of the nation and the safety of its citizens.

But whatever the motivation—naïve or nefarious—they clearly backfired on the instigators—consigning them to political oblivion.

Oslo as political Kryptonite

Over the past weeks, several opinion polls emerged, presenting their findings as to the electoral prospects of the various political parties – see for example here; here ; here ; here and here.

Significantly, the parties which opposed the Oslo Accords show growing strength and, according to the findings, are consistently able to establish a majority coalition in the Knesset—without the inclusion of Avigdor Liberman’s recalcitrant Yisrael Beiteinu, which also opposed them.

But perhaps not less interesting is the fate of the party which initiated and implemented the Oslo process: The once hegemonic Labor Party—the party, which was once, for many, almost synonymous with the State itself; the party, which in many respects was responsible for initiating and establishing a good number of the nation’s primary institutions—from the IDF to the defense industries, from the agricultural enterprises to numerous national infrastructures, from much of the country’s financial institutions to some of its major medical facilities; the party that once boasted a cavalcade of iconic leaders from David Ben Gurion and Haim Weizmann, Israel first Prime Minister and President; to Golda Meir, Moshe Dayan, Defense Minister during the Six Day War, Pinchas Sapir, the omnipotent Finance Minister, who laid the foundation for much of Israel’s early industry and commerce…to name but a few.

In every one of the recent surveys, the Labor Party failed to pass the minimum threshold for representation in the Knesset.

The fall from the heights of political hegemony to the depth of political oblivion is perhaps the most fitting fate for the perpetration of the Oslo Accords, that ran counter to every Zionist norm that prevailed at the time.

Thus indeed, Oslo has proven to be political Kryptonite—at least for its perpetrators.


Martin Sherman is the founder and executive director of the Israel Institute for Strategic Studies.

Source: http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/287517

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter

Why Kamala Harris will lose in November - Arnold Cusmariu

​
by Arnold Cusmariu

Let me count the ways...

In a bit of chutzpah worthy of Hillary Clinton, Kamala Harris told Americans during a roundtable to be ready for "a Harris administration, together with Joe Biden as the president of the United States." She quickly corrected herself, but by then, Humpty-Dumpty had crashed to the ground.

A day later, talking about jobs and educational programs for military members and their families, Biden said this:

For example, making it easy to carry your professional credentials with you from one state to another when your spouse moves. Harris-Biden administration is going to relaunch that effort and keep pushing further to make it easier for military spouses and veterans to find meaningful careers[.]

What's going on here? Here are some scenarios. Take your pick.

• Biden and Harris are both addle-brained; it's just a matter of degree.
• Joe is scared of Harris and the left generally and didn't dare correct her.
• Joe's wife wears the pants in the family, so he's used to being second.
• Joe was just reading from a script as usual, doing as he's told.
• Joe was afraid of being accused of sexism and/or racism if he corrected Harris.
• Harris thinks she's already in charge and doesn't need to clear anything with the Biden people.
• Harris was admitting what everyone knows: Biden is senile and won't be making decisions in their administration.
• Joe is often confused. He doesn't know where he is, which day it is, whether it's about Iraq or Iran, and so on.
• Joe was predicting who'll be running the show.
• Biden sees Harris as a female Obama and obediently put himself second, which is where he was for eight years. Old habits die hard.

Though you didn't see this admitted on CNN or the rest of them, one key reason Hillary Clinton lost the election is that millions of Americans perceived Clinton, correctly, as an ambitious, heartless, corrupt, arrogant harpy. These attributes are also present in Harris, who is an AA/EOE "twofer" to boot: female and "person of color." The latter is why she got the V.P. spot, despite dropping out after a disastrous campaign for the top position.

Americans absolutely detest arrogant politicians. A "Harris-Biden" or "Biden-Harris" administration is delusional. Forget about polls and other propaganda nonsense on the news, including Fox, claiming that the election will be close. It will be a blowout, because it's about sheer survival. The choice is simple: the rule of law or anarchy. Without blue lives, whom Republicans love and Democrats hate, we are at the mercy of the "mostly peaceful protesters" coddled by the Democrat press. We can't afford the security details Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer have, paid for by taxpayers.

Democrats have done absolutely nothing to disavow the rioting and the looting. On the contrary, there is a widespread and correct perception that they encouraged the mayhem, calculating that it would help elect them. This should boomerang and result in the removal of Nancy Pelosi as House speaker. President Trump will be able to work even more miracles with full congressional support during his second term.

Arnold Cusmariu

Source: https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2020/09/why_kamala_harris_will_lose_in_november.html

Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter