Sunday, September 22, 2013

New Iranian President boasts of deceiving the West regarding their nuclear program

The new finger of Iran

Uh oh, after all the talk about Rouhani being a "moderate" and wanting to engage the West in dialogue, we have this.

Remember, Muhammad said war is deceit.  Rouhani is just following orders.

From the Daily Caller September 20 by Reza Kahlili

VIDEO: Iranian president brags about deceiving the West

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has gone on a charm offensive lately with multiple interviews with American media promising collaboration, but a recent video shows he takes pride in deceiving the West.

“Gone is the age of blood feuds,” Rouhani stated in an op-ed in the Washington Post. “World leaders are expected to lead in turning threats into opportunities,” he wrote in the Post Friday.

In interviews with ABC and NBC, Rouhani said that Iran will never develop nuclear weapons and that he has the authority to make a deal with the West. “In its nuclear program, this government enters with full power and has complete authority,” Rouhani said. “Under no circumstances would we seek any weapons of mass destruction, including nuclear weapons, nor will we ever.”

Rouhani, who is one of the most trusted figures of the Islamic regime’s supreme leader, has served the Islamic Republic at the highest levels since the 1979 revolution. He has been the deputy speaker of Parliament, the head of the Executive Committee of the High Council for War Support during the Iran-Iraq War, the deputy to the second-in-command of Iran’s joint chiefs of staff, a member of the Expediency Council, a member of the Assembly of Experts (the body that chooses the supreme leader), a former nuclear negotiator, and, most importantly, the representative of the supreme leader to the Supreme National Security Council since 1989.

Despite the recent charm offensive in the American media, a recently revealed video of an interview prior to the June Iranian election shows him bragging how he, in his role as Iran’s top nuclear negotiator, deceived the West during negotiations on Iran’s illicit nuclear program even as Iran expanded its nuclear power. At the same time, Rouhani managed to relieve pressure by the West, especially in convincing the Europeans to avert possible military aggression by the Bush administration.“The day that we invited the three European ministers [to the talks], only 10 centrifuges were spinning at [the Iranian nuclear facility of] Natanz,” Rouhani boasted on the tape. “We could not produce one gram of U4 or U6 [uranium hexafluoride]. … We did not have the heavy-water production. We could not produce yellow cake. Our total production of centrifuges inside the country was 150.”
But then Rowhani admitted in the video the purpose of prolonging negotiations: “We wanted to complete all of these — we needed time.”

He said the three European ministers promised to block U.S. efforts to transfer the Iran nuclear dossier to the United Nations, using veto power if necessary. He called Iran’s claim that it stopped its nuclear program in 2003 a statement for the uneducated and admitted that the program not only continued, but was significantly expanded under his tenure.

While President George W. Bush was increasing pressure on Iran in 2007, a report by American intelligence agencies concluded that Iran halted its nuclear program in 2003 and that the program had remained frozen since.

In the interview, Rouhani said that after he took over the country’s nuclear project, the country’s 150 centrifuges grew to over 1,700 by the time he left the project.

Then Rouhani made his boldest statement: “We did not stop; we completed the program.”

He said that Iran’s nuclear activity was under the supervision of the supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, and that he, as Khamenei’s representative, was to ensure this deceit.

Keyhan newspaper, which the supreme leader directly supervises, published a column Wednesday that quoted an informed source: “Despite the noise by the Western media, Iran will not present any new proposal in New York [to the United Nations General Assembly] and only expects new proposals from its counterparts.”

Read it all

"...Alami is praised by a rebel leader for enduring ‘the prison of the Americans in Guantanamo... where he did not reform or change"

First admitting he was a member of Al-Qaeda, then saying that his confession was because he was tortured, Mohammed Al-Alami is one of the many who were detained at Gitmo, promising to behave, then being released only to end up right back in the fray, fighting for the jihadists in Syria.  Makes me proud to be an American with my tax dollars going for such good use.


From The Daily Mail September 21 by Sean Rayment

Terrorist released from Guantanamo Bay after convincing officials he was no longer a threat to the West is killed fighting for Al Qaeda in Syria

A former Guantanamo Bay prisoner who fought against British and US forces in Afghanistan has been killed while fighting for Al Qaeda in Syria.
Mohammed Al Alami was released from the top-security detention centre in 2006 after convincing officials that he was no longer a threat to the West.
The 37-year-old, who spent four years in custody, claimed he confessed to being a terrorist only after being beaten and threatened with death.
But it has now been revealed that he was killed last month while fighting for Al Nusra Front, one of the most violent and ruthless Islamic groups in Syria. 
A video posted on YouTube last week showed a funeral in which Alami is praised by a rebel leader for enduring ‘the prison of the Americans in Guantanamo... where he did not reform or change’.
The disclosure will further fuel concerns that Britain and the United States should not become embroiled in Syria’s civil war, in which Al Qaeda-affiliated groups are playing an increasingly prominent role, with hundreds of rebel fighters reportedly defecting to them.
Western intelligence agencies including MI6 and the CIA fear that any weapons sent to bring down the regime of Syrian dictator Bashar Al-Assad could used to attack the West in the future.
One official said last night that, in addition to the defections, Syria had experienced a ‘massive influx’ of Islamists seeking jihad in recent months.

Read it all

France: Mother jailed for having her baby wear a "I am a Bomb" shirt

Forget for a moment that the child's name is Jihad and he was born on Sept 11, having a shirt on a little child with the words "I am a Bomb" emblazoned on it.  That alone will draw the ire of the public and law enforcement, but the bigger question for me is; where is free speech protection in this instance?

In France, free speech rights are different than here in the US, no allowance is made for speech seen as insulting, demeaning or hurtful and this action by the mother falls into that category.  I have a problem with persecuting anyone for their exercise of the right to speak, yet at the same time I question quashing that right in the name of social peace.

I don't think the mother should have done what she did but I am torn as to whether she should have been prosecuted and convicted of the charge of "glorifying a crime".

France does not have on their books jihad as a crime, so why would they convict her of glorifying jihad?

From International Business Times September 20 by Conner Adams Sheets

French Mother Gets Jail Sentence For 3-Year-Old Son Named Jihad’s ‘I Am A Bomb’ Shirt
A French mother who named her son Jihad has reportedly been convicted by an appeals court in the city of Nimes, France, of “glorifying a crime” for sending the 3-year-old to school wearing a shirt emblazoned with the French words for “I am a bomb” and “Jihad born on September 11th.”
The woman, Bouchra Bagour, was given on Friday a one-month suspended prison sentence and ordered to pay a €2,000 ($2,705) fine for having the boy, -- who was named Jihad when he was born on Sept. 11, 2009 -- wear the shirt, according to the Local, an English-language French news outlet. The boy’s uncle, Zeyad Bagour, who bought the shirt for Jihad, was convicted of the same crime: He was given a two-month suspended prison sentence and ordered to pay a fine of €4,000 ($5,409.)

Bouchra Bagour put the shirt on her toddler on Sept. 25 of last year, then took him to school wearing it, but when Jihad’s teacher saw it, she went to the authorities prompting prosecutors to launch an investigation several days later.

The duo -- who the prosecutors described as not being known Islamists -- argued their innocence in court, saying they had the boy wear the shirt as a “joke,” but the claim didn’t get them off the hook.

“At some point, there must be limits. They are not stupid. They understand the significance of what they are doing,” the Local previously quoted a prosecutor as having told the court in French, referring to Jihad’s mother and uncle.

The mother claimed in court that she hadn’t expected there to be an outcry over her choice of clothing for Jihad. “For me, the text is simply my son’s name and his date of birth,” she said in French. “It’s a bit different, but I thought it would make people laugh. ... My brother gave my son the sweatshirt, I put it on him, and I never thought anything of it.”

Zeyad Bagour also claimed he was innocent in remarks before the court, but was unable to avoid conviction. “I had no intention of being provocative or shocking people,” he said. “For me, the words ‘I am a bomb’ mean ‘I am beautiful.’”

The pair’s attorney, GaĆ«le Guenoum, called the court’s decision to overrule a lower court’s not-guilty ruling “severe, surprising and amazing.” The siblings could have been sentenced to as long as a year in prison and a €45,000 ($60,845) fine for the crime.

The case started a controversy in France as a select group of citizens and politicians including Josette Pessemesse of the Front de Gauche party called for the court to protect the “right to humor.”

Sunni-Shia violence continues in Iraq: 92 murdered at funeral

It is axiomatic that the best place to kill many is where they gather, thus the funeral attack in Baghdad. Continuing Shia-Sunni violence where each is seen by the other as "not Muslim enough" and that is justification enough for death and destruction.  Ironic that funerals are the favorite target; one doesn't have to go far to make burial arrangements for the recently murdered.

From OregonLive September 21

Suicide bombers kill at least 92 at Shiite funerals in Baghdad, around Iraq
BAGHDAD — Two suicide bombers, one in an explosives-laden car and the other on foot, hit a cluster of funeral tents packed with mourning families in a Shiite neighborhood in Baghdad, the deadliest in a string of attacks around Iraq that killed at least 92 people on Saturday.
The assaults, the latest in a months-long surge of violence, are a chilling reminder of insurgents' determination to re-ignite sectarian conflict more than a decade after the U.S.-led invasion.
Thousands of Iraqis have been killed in violent attacks in recent months — a level of bloodshed not seen since Iraq pulled back from the brink of civil war in 2008 — despite appeals for restraint from Shiite and Sunni political leaders.
The attack on the funeral was one of the largest single terrorist assaults on civilians in Iraq in recent years. It happened shortly before sunset in the densely populated Shiite neighborhood of Sadr City in northeastern Baghdad.
Police said at least 72 people were killed and more than 120 were wounded in that attack. One bomber was able to drive up near the tent before detonating his deadly payload, and another on foot blew himself up nearby, police said.
The explosions set the tents and several nearby cars on fire, sending a towering plume of thick black smoke over the city.
"I saw several charred bodies on the ground and tents on fire and also burning cars. Wounded people were screaming in pain," said Sheik Sattar al-Fartousi, one of the mourners. "The scene was horrible. The funeral turned into an inferno."
He said the first blast went off as dinner was being served in one of several tents set up for the funeral of a member of the al-Fartousi tribe. He estimated that more than 500 people were attending the event.

Read it all

Twin jihad bombings murder at least 75 Christians outside church in Pakistan

Pakistani Christians mourn beside the coffins of relatives killed in two suicide bomb attacks in Peshawar, 22 September 2013

Feel the tolerance.

From the BBC September 22

Pakistan church blast kills dozens

A twin-suicide bombing outside a church in Peshawar in Pakistan has killed at least 75 people, in one of the worst attacks on Christians in the country.

Two bombers blew themselves up as worshippers were coming out of the city's historic All Saints church after attending Sunday Mass, police say.

Relatives of the victims gathered at the scene to protest against the government's failure to protect them.

Militants linked to Pakistani Taliban have said they carried out the bombing.

The group, Jandullah, said it was in retaliation US drone strikes in Pakistan's tribal northwest.

Sunday's twin attacks targeted Peshawar's historic All Saints Church as hundreds of worshippers were attending Mass.

Witnesses said they heard two blasts, the second more powerful than the first.

Suicide vests were later found outside the church, officials say. More than 120 people were wounded in the bombings.

Read it all

NPR Interview on Coptic Christian persecution by Islam

No, you won't find much truth here, just the usual deflections and confusion on the part of NPR when it comes to identifying the real source of the violence against Copts in Egypt.  Oh, they appear to try, but it for naught.

From PBS September 20

In Egypt, Coptic Christians Become Target for Attack in Times of National Stress
(...)MARGARET WARNER: Human rights investigators say, though some Muslim Brotherhood members were involved in last month's rampage against Christian churches, it wasn't a campaign that appeared to have been directed by the leadership. But that's not the view of much of the public, as we found in the Shubra district of Cairo, with a big Coptic population.

A local Muslim landlord, Mona Gharib, had no question who was behind it.

Do you really think it's the Brotherhood themselves or do you think it's the extreme Islamists?

MONA GHARIB, landlord (through interpreter): It was the Brotherhood, because they wanted to bring back Morsi, but he's never coming back.

MARGARET WARNER: She introduced us to a Coptic shopkeeper, who insisted there's no ill feeling between ordinary Christians and Muslims here.

MAN (through interpreter): Muslims and Christians, we are one hand. And any external attempt to divide us will never happen.

MARGARET WARNER: Who do you think is trying to divide you?

MAN (through interpreter): The Muslim Brotherhood, they are not Muslims. They are terrorists and their actions are not Islamic. Even if all the churches are burned, we will pray in the mosques. We all worship the same God.

MARGARET WARNER: And when she took us to the Church of the Virgin Mary and Archangel Michael, the pastor, Father Raphael Ramzy, struck the same theme.

Have there been any threats against this church?

FATHER RAPHAEL RAMZY, Church of the Virgin Mary and Archangel Michael (through interpreter): No, because our Muslim brethren protect us here; we are like a big family. Far away from the Muslim Brotherhood, we are a family.

MARGARET WARNER: The accusation that the Brotherhood was behind the church attacks is an insidious lie, insists Amr Darrag, a former minister in Morsi's government and a top official in the Brotherhood's political wing, the Freedom and Justice Party.

AMR DARRAG, Freedom and Justice Party: The attacks on the churches in Minya (INAUDIBLE) were done by thugs who are historically related to the security forces. And he actually called -- many times, he called the security forces to come and help in protecting the churches, but they declined.

MARGARET WARNER: So the Brotherhood was completely uninvolved in these attacks on churches?

AMR DARRAG: One hundred percent, definitely. This is an old technique that has always been used, unfortunately, by the -- some parts of the security forces to put a wedge between Muslims and Christians in the country and show the world that there is a problem.

MARGARET WARNER: So that leaves the question why? Why do Coptic Christians become targets in times of national stress? Some see political motives behind the latest attacks. Morsi had accused Christians of being among his chief opponents. And when General Abdel Fattah al-Sisi announced he'd deposed Morsi, he was flanked by civil and religious figures, including the Coptic pope.

But Mona Zulficar, a prominent corporate lawyer, a Muslim who also fights for women's and minority rights, thinks the animosity goes deeper than that, among the ranks of Islamic fundamentalists.

MONA ZULFICAR, Egyptian Constitutional Committee: There is a part of the extremist view looks at the non-Muslims as infidels, and this is not true Islam. I mean, I must underline this. This is a malicious, abusive interpretation that has no foundation in the holy Koran.

Uh, Mona, what say you about these two Qur'anic passages?
(5-17) "They have certainly disbelieved who say that Allah is Christ, the son of Mary. Say, "Then who could prevent Allah at all if He had intended to destroy Christ, the son of Mary, or his mother or everyone on the earth?" And to Allah belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth and whatever is between them. He creates what He wills, and Allah is over all things competent." 
(5-72) " They have certainly disbelieved who say, " Allah is the Messiah, the son of Mary" while the Messiah has said, "O Children of Israel, worship Allah , my Lord and your Lord." Indeed, he who associates others with Allah - Allah has forbidden him Paradise, and his refuge is the Fire. And there are not for the wrongdoers any helpers."

There is more, read it all

Friday, September 13, 2013

CIA weapons delivered to Syrian jihadists

Here we go.  The escalation begins.

From The Washington Post September 11 by Ernesto Londono and Greg Miller

U.S. weapons reaching Syrian rebels

The CIA has begun delivering weapons to rebels in Syria, ending months of delay in lethal aid that had been promised by the Obama administration, according to U.S. officials and Syrian figures. The shipments began streaming into the country over the past two weeks, along with separate deliveries by the State Department of vehicles and other gear — a flow of material that marks a major escalation of the U.S. role in Syria’s civil war.

The arms shipments, which are limited to light weapons and other munitions that can be tracked, began arriving in Syria at a moment of heightened tensions over threats by President Obama to order missile strikes to punish the regime of Bashar al-Assad for his alleged use of chemical weapons in a deadly attack near Damascus last month.

The arms are being delivered as the United States is also shipping new types of nonlethal gear to rebels. That aid includes vehicles, sophisticated communications equipment and advanced combat medical kits.

U.S. officials hope that, taken together, the weapons and gear will boost the profile and prowess of rebel fighters in a conflict that started about 21 / 2 years ago.

Although the Obama administration signaled months ago that it would increase aid to Syrian rebels, the efforts have lagged because of the logistical challenges involved in delivering equipment in a war zone and officials’ fears that any assistance could wind up in the hands of jihadists. Secretary of State John F. Kerry had promised in April that the nonlethal aid would start flowing “in a matter of weeks.”

The delays prompted several senior U.S. lawmakers to chide the Obama administration for not moving more quickly to aid the Syrian opposition after promising lethal assistance in June. The criticism has grown louder amid the debate over whether Washington should use military force against the Syrian regime, with some lawmakers withholding support until the administration committed to providing the rebels with more assistance.

Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), who has pressed the Obama administration to do more to help the rebels, said he felt embarrassed when he met with Syrians along the Turkish border three weeks ago.

“It was humiliating,” he said in an interview Wednesday night. “The president had announced that we would be providing lethal aid, and not a drop of it had begun. They were very short on ammunition, and the weapons had not begun to flow.”

The latest effort to provide aid is aimed at supporting rebel fighters who are under the command of Gen. Salim Idriss, according to officials, some of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity because part of the initiative is covert. Idriss is the commander of the Supreme Military Council, a faction of the disjointed armed opposition.

U.S. officials, speaking about the provision of nonlethal aid, said they are determined to increase the cohesion and structure of the rebel fighting units.

“This doesn’t only lead to a more effective force, but it increases its ability to hold coalition groups together,” said Mark S. Ward, the State Department’s senior adviser on assistance to Syria, who coordinates nonlethal aid to rebels from southern Turkey. “They see their leadership is having some impact.”

A message to the American people from Vladimir Putin

At the moment, I would prefer Putin to Obama as my president.

From The New York Times September 11

A Plea for Caution From Russia
What Putin Has to Say to Americans About Syria
MOSCOW — RECENT events surrounding Syria have prompted me to speak directly to the American people and their political leaders. It is important to do so at a time of insufficient communication between our societies.
Relations between us have passed through different stages. We stood against each other during the cold war. But we were also allies once, and defeated the Nazis together. The universal international organization — the United Nations — was then established to prevent such devastation from ever happening again.

The United Nations’ founders understood that decisions affecting war and peace should happen only by consensus, and with America’s consent the veto by Security Council permanent members was enshrined in the United Nations Charter. The profound wisdom of this has underpinned the stability of international relations for decades.

No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military action without Security Council authorization.

The potential strike by the United States against Syria, despite strong opposition from many countries and major political and religious leaders, including the pope, will result in more innocent victims and escalation, potentially spreading the conflict far beyond Syria’s borders. A strike would increase violence and unleash a new wave of terrorism. It could undermine multilateral efforts to resolve the Iranian nuclear problem and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and further destabilize the Middle East and North Africa. It could throw the entire system of international law and order out of balance.

Syria is not witnessing a battle for democracy, but an armed conflict between government and opposition in a multireligious country. There are few champions of democracy in Syria. But there are more than enough Qaeda fighters and extremists of all stripes battling the government. The United States State Department has designated Al Nusra Front and the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, fighting with the opposition, as terrorist organizations. This internal conflict, fueled by foreign weapons supplied to the opposition, is one of the bloodiest in the world.

Mercenaries from Arab countries fighting there, and hundreds of militants from Western countries and even Russia, are an issue of our deep concern. Might they not return to our countries with experience acquired in Syria? After all, after fighting in Libya, extremists moved on to Mali. This threatens us all.

From the outset, Russia has advocated peaceful dialogue enabling Syrians to develop a compromise plan for their own future. We are not protecting the Syrian government, but international law. We need to use the United Nations Security Council and believe that preserving law and order in today’s complex and turbulent world is one of the few ways to keep international relations from sliding into chaos. The law is still the law, and we must follow it whether we like it or not. Under current international law, force is permitted only in self-defense or by the decision of the Security Council. Anything else is unacceptable under the United Nations Charter and would constitute an act of aggression.

No one doubts that poison gas was used in Syria. But there is every reason to believe it was used not by the Syrian Army, but by opposition forces, to provoke intervention by their powerful foreign patrons, who would be siding with the fundamentalists. Reports that militants are preparing another attack — this time against Israel — cannot be ignored.

Read it all.

Million Muslim March in DC on 9-11 really wasn't

25 showed up, and 20 anti-jihad protesters showed as well.  I would say it was a draw.

From NBCWashington September 11

"Million Muslim March" Attendees Confronted by Christian Protesters on National Mall

Attendees at a sparsely attended Million American March Against Fear were met with protests by a small group of Christians on the National Mall Wednesday.

U.S. Park Police were keeping the group of protesters back. Several displayed signs with messages such as "Muhammad is a liar" and were yelling to the Muslim attendees, reported News4's Mark Segraves.

About 25 people -- including activist Cornel West -- were at the march as of 12:30 p.m., Segraves reported.

The event was known as the Million Muslim March during planning stages, but 
organizers said they thought the earlier name was "scary."

Organizers from the American Muslim Political Action Committee (AMPAC) say they are "patriotic Muslims" who are demanding new laws to protect their First Amendment rights.

Approximately 20 protesters were also at the scene, Segraves said. It was not clear whether they were from a specific church or organization.

The rally included prayers, speeches and a moment of silence to remember the victims of the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks.

"In the past 12 years since 9/11 the United States government as failed to protect and promote Constitutional liberties and human life, here and abroad," read part of a statement on AMPAC's website. "We feel that accountability in government has been ignored and the time has arrived to collectively speak truth to power."

Syrian child chained to fence and forced to watch execution of parents by US-backed jihadists

Normally this kind of hysterical coverage would be taken by yours truly with a large grain of salt.  As it has been reported by Raymond Ibrahim, one of the worlds leading experts on Christians and Islam I take this article as true.  It happened back in June but the time lag in no way diminishes the barbarity of Islam.

Be warned, the photo is disturbing.

From June 13

Syria: Child Tied by U.S.-Supported Jihadis and Forced to Watch Killing of Parents

According to Syrian Truth’s Facebook page, the above photo is of a toddler living in the Deir ez-Zor Governate in eastern Syria, bordering Iraq. She was tied up by members of the U.S.-supported “Free Syrian Army” — which is dominated by foreign, Sunni jihadis — and made to watch as her mother and father were killed for being Shia. Here is how the Obama administration is using your tax dollars — mockingly in the name of “freedom.”

No other words are required, the photo is at the link above.

May God accept the parents into Heaven.

"...Iran has dedicated a large number of resources to recruiting and converting people in Mexico, who have easier access to the U.S. border and can easily blend in with other migrants crossing the border"

Amidst the Syrian crisis, the global jihad continues.

From The Blaze September 3 by Sara Carter

Iran is recruiting an “invisible army” of revolutionary sympathizers in Latin America to infiltrate the U.S. through the “soft belly” of the southern border, U.S. officials and national security experts told TheBlaze. And they’re using one website in particular to do it.
The Iranian regime’s conversion efforts are becoming increasingly aggressive, especially over the Internet, with the goal of conducting operations against United States interests in the Western Hemisphere, according to U.S. government officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity due to the nature of their work in the region., which focuses on religion and politics, is one of Iran’s main recruitment and conversion websites for Latin America on the Internet, TheBlaze has learned. The site, which launched in 2008, includes links to Iranian television for Spanish speakers, anti-American news stories, essays on reasons to convert to Islam, chat rooms and a personal message from the Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei, the supreme leader of Iran.

Even as President Barack Obama waits for Congress to make a decision on Syria, the Iranian website wastes no time and has no shortage of stories ridiculing the U.S. administration for threatening to strike President Bashar Assad’s regime, a staunch ally of Iran.

Jim Phillips, a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation and expert in Iranian affairs, said Iran’s focus on Hispanic converts is a new evolution in Iranian operations in Latin America. Phillips said Khamanei’s message titled “The Importance of Work and the Nobility of the Worker” in Islam, is significant because the Ayatollah is “normally a background player in these sorts of efforts and doesn’t usually play such a public role.”

“Historically, Iran has tried to recruit agents from the Lebanese Shi’ite diaspora in South America and West Africa,” Phillips said. ”This emphasis on Hispanic converts is something new.”

In the past, “U.S. intelligence focused on Iran’s relationship with Hezbollah but now with the people they are recruiting it could be much more difficult to gauge who is infiltrating the U.S.,” Phillips added.

In August, the U.S. State Department decided to order a new review of Iranian terror activity in Latin America, based on a 500-page report issued by Argentinian prosecutor Alberto Nisman on Iran’s terrorist strategy in the region. Nisman was the original prosecutor in the 1994 bombing of the Argentine Israelite Mutual Association that killed 85 people and wounded hundreds more. Nisman believes Hezbollah, on orders from Iran, was responsible for the bombing.

The report states that Iran has attempted to infiltrate “for decades, large regions of Latin America, through the establishment of clandestine intelligence stations and operative agents which are used to execute terrorist attacks when the Iranian regime decides so, both directly or through its proxy, the terrorist organization Hezbollah. These actions have been taking place within the so-called ‘export of the revolution,’ which was never masked by Tehran and is, in fact, written in their own constitution.”

Nisman’s report supports the evidence U.S. officials say they’ve found in the region. Iran’s revolutionary guard is focused on Latin America and has ramped up its efforts over the past decade, utilizing the same Internet tools they censor and ban from their own citizens. It is ”part of their effort to build an invisible army to penetrate the U.S. and our interests without suspicion, and it’s something we should be extremely mindful of,” said a U.S. official familiar with Iranian operations in Latin America.

The official said recent Iranian activity in Latin America shows the importance of the region in Iran’s political and ideological goals...

Read it all

Wednesday, September 4, 2013

If we invade, they will pay says Kerry

How about this.  Unnamed Arab countries have offering to foot the entire bill for our usurpation of Assad and Kerry appears to say the administration is thinking about it.

Are you f#*king kidding me?  Sorry for the profanity kids but is this real?  Would it be even legal?  The implications of this are staggering; if we agreed to take their money we would be nothing less that Al-Qaeda's hired guns.

If we did what they are asking, what would the new regime in Syria look like?  Think Afghanistan 2.0 and you would have some idea of the trouble we would have created.

This is insane, I would hope there is no serious consideration of accepting.  Then again, Obama has done some weird stuff as President so as impossible as it sounds, there is an air of plausibility.

From The Washington Post August 4

Kerry: Arab countries offered to pay for invasion

Secretary of State John Kerry said at Wednesday’s hearing that Arab counties have offered to pay for the entirety of unseating President Bashar al-Assad if the United States took the lead militarily.

“With respect to Arab countries offering to bear costs and to assess, the answer is profoundly yes,” Kerry said. “They have. That offer is on the table.”

Asked by Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) about how much those countries would contribute, Kerry said they have offered to pay for all of a full invasion.

“In fact, some of them have said that if the United States is prepared to go do the whole thing the way we’ve done it previously in other places, they’ll carry that cost,” Kerry said. “That’s how dedicated they are at this. That’s not in the cards, and nobody’s talking about it, but they’re talking in serious ways about getting this done.

So that statement implies that with us or without us, the removal of Assad will happen.  I wonder what our price would be, I mean over and above the actual cost of the attack.  Would we do it for 100B?  200B?  Everyone has their price, if that price was met by the Arab countries, would we really say no?

“I didn’t set a red line. The world set a red line"

Did Obama really just say that?  Yes he did, completely disavowing his statement from June on how if Syria crossed the red line there would be repercussions.  I don't remember any statement from Obamsa which included the international community, do you?

More than 50% of Americans do not want an attack on Syria, but as Obama has shown a great propensity to disregard the will of the people our voice will not matter.

Is there an exit on this bus?  I want off.

From Politico August 9 by Jennifer Epstein

President Obama: America’s credibility on the line in Syria

President Barack Obama warned Wednesday that the international community’s credibility — though not his — is at risk if there’s no response to the use of chemical weapons in Syria, though he expects Congress to agree to take military action against Bashar Assad’s regime.

“My credibility is not on the line. The international community’s credibility is on the line,” Obama said at a press conference in Stockholm, Sweden. “And America and Congress’s credibility is on the line.”Obama’s comments came during a joint appearance with Swedish Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt, ahead of his brief trip to the G20 summit in Russia, where he’s expected to continue pushing for international support for intervention in Syria, even with Russian President Vladimir Putin, who remains allied with Assad.

(.)Though the “red line” Obama first spoke of more than a year ago has been cast as a standard that he set — and that is forcing him to act — the president insisted it wasn’t his own construct but a clear international standard. “That’s not something I just made up. I didn’t pluck it out of thin air,” he said. “I didn’t set a red line. The world set a red line.”

But you articulated it, didn't you Obama?

Read it all

Putin demands proof of chemical weapons use by Assad

Never a big fan of Russia, in this Syrian debaucle I have supported Russia's stance and their call for absolute proof that Assad authorized chemical weapons use.  We keep hearing that there is proof, but it is never presented for our approval.  Remember Iraq and the preponderance of evidence presented?  Turns out it was almost all made-up, but at lease they decided to put on the dog and pony show.  This time we are supposed to believe what Kerry and Obama say with no offer of evidence to back their claim.

From the Egypt Independent August 4

Putin demands evidence of chemical weapons used in Syria
Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday that his country may support a Security Council resolution for a strike against Syria, but only if it can be proven that President Bashar al-Assad's army used chemical weapons in Syria.
Russia has demanded convincing evidence that the Syrian regime used chemical weapons, Putin said. The country would not take decisive action unless evidence was presented to it.
The Russian president explained that his country has provided Damascus with some parts for a missile defense system, but it has frozen the rest of the shipments.
Russia is Syria's largest military backer. It  has a military base in the coastal city of Tartous in north-west Syria.
In addition to military support, Moscow used its veto to disrupt three resolutions condemning the Syrian regime at the UN Security Council .
This comes just days after U.S. President Barack Obama said he had decided to launch a military strike against Syria, requesting a mandate from Congress.

SCOTUS Kerry: "The rebels “have changed significantly — they have improved, and as I said earlier, the fundamentals of Syria are secular, and I believe, will stay that way"

Another trip down the rabbit hole.

"Nowhere in rebel-controlled Syria is there a secular fighting force to speak of" -- New York Times, April 28, 2013

Syrian rebels pledge loyalty to al-Qaeda -- USA Today, April 11, 2013

From The Daily Caller August 4 by Neil Munro

Kerry insists Syrian rebels are secular

Despite evidence to the contrary, Secretary of State John Kerry told a Senate hearing Tuesday that Syria’s rebel forces are increasingly dominated by secular groups.

“It’s our judgment that — and the judgment of our good friends who actually know a lot of this in many ways better than we do because it’s their region, their neighborhood — … [that] the secular component of Syria will re-emerge” once the Syrian government is deposed, Kerry claimed in the hearing.

It's called taqiyya, Kerry and a working knowledge of this important doctrine would help to dispel the fog of lies you are laboring under.

Those “good friends” are officials from Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Turkey, Jordan and the United Arab Emirates, which are all religious and political enemies of Syria’s embattled dictatorship.

Frenemies, actually.
“I’m talking about the Saudis, the Emirates, the Qataris, the Turks, the Jordanians,” he said.

The democratic bonafides of Syria’s rebels are important. That’s because President Barack Obama’s planned intervention in Syria — following the Aug. 21 nerve gas attack on Syrians by the government — may weaken the dictatorship enough to help the rebels possibly impose an Islamic dictatorship.


Kerry dismissed numerous media reports from inside Syria that say the rebels are dominated by groups that are fundamentalist, fanatical, well-funded and increasingly entwined with al-Qaeda-style jihadi veterans.

The rebels “have changed significantly — they have improved, and as I said earlier, the fundamentals of Syria are secular, and I believe, will stay that way,” insisted Kerry, who served as a Massachusetts Senator for 28 years until he became Secretary of State.

Kerry’s claim echoes the much-ridiculed Feb. 2010 claim by then-Director of National Intelligence James Clapper that the multinational Muslim brotherhood is “largely secular.”

And I am largely a woman.

Read it all

War with Syria courtesy Dear Leader Obama

I am still gobsmacked at the decision of the Senate Committee to give the green light to attack Syria.
There are so many distinct variables, most of which come from the inability to separate jihadists from the less dangerous "moderate" Muslims that to do anything but sit on our hands is folly of Biblical proportions.

Our politicians, especially Republicans have rushed to Obama's side, fawning sycophants who cannot wait to say we agree with you, oh great one.

It makes no sense to arm and equip those who are not just our potential enemies but have stated they want to kill us.  With Al-Qaeda as one of the primary movers in Syria it behooves us to tread lightly and not do anything that would have the potential to come back and chew our asses off, yet the administration insists, and which John McCain has strongly advocated that the rebels are secular and moderate, guaranteed.

Supporting the rebels is going to be the biggest mistake we have made in the Middle East in decades.  Our belief that we can send in a few cruise missiles and then wave goodbye smacks of Clintonian foreign policy; think Kosovo and the ensuing genocide in Serbia.  Not to mention the wayward rocket that slammed into the Chinese Embassy, killing innocents.  Do we really need to circle the wagons again when the option would save us from embarrassment and shame?

Pray for a peaceful or diplomatic out from this misadventure, we cannot afford, both financially and morally to do what is wrong while ignoring what is right.

From Atlas Shrugs August 4 by Pamela Geller


Now we are fighting al qaeda's war. Unbelievable.
BREAKING: Senate panel approves resolution giving Obama authority to use military force against Syria

This could not have happened without RINO support:
On Tuesday, some Republicans, including House Speaker John Boehner of Ohio, lent their support to a limited attack on the Syrian government for using poison gas against rebels outside the Syrian capital Aug. 21.

The resolution would limit American involvement to two months, with a possible one-month extension, and would bar the use of ground forces. The administration has said punishing Syria would not mean putting “boots on the ground.”

“The president is not asking you to go to war,” Kerry told Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky. and a skeptic of a Syria strike, during a hearing of the Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday.
U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Rep. Jeff Duncan, R-S.C., debate whether America should launch military strikes against Syria.

At Wednesday’s House hearing, Rep. Steve Chabot, R-Ohio, expressed deep reservations and asked whether Obama would have “bothered to come to Congress” if the British Parliament had passed its own resolution supporting military force. Parliament rejected it instead.

Monday, September 2, 2013

Million Muslim March on Sept 11 clashes with 2 million Bikers to DC rally


This is a kettle of fish nobody wanted, yet the clash between the two groups is a natural offshoot of the cultural differences between veterans and Muslims.  Strange how, after questions were raised the name was changed and the Muslim was eliminated from the gathering.  Now called "Million American March against Fear" this new name begs the question; is there a concern some may see the word Muslim in the wrong light?  Are we not supposed to conflate Muslim with peaceful protest?

From the Examiner August 25 by Barry Secrest

'Million Muslim March' tries Hijack of '2 Million Bikers to DC' Rally

While the "Million Muslim March on DC" has fueled a wide range of US reactions, major event organizers for a rival US protest group were treated to a rather remarkable episode of infiltrative subterfuge from both the Million Muslim March group and its stealthy media disciples behind the scenes.

It was the much earlier idea of a Ground Zero mosque from the US Islamic movement which sparked a firestorm of US controversy when announced in May of 2010. Now, the controversy surrounds an already infamous "Million Muslim March on DC," slated for 9/11/13, and coming exactly one year after the 2012 deaths of Ambassador Stevens and three others at the hands of Islamic terrorists in Benghazi.

But, there is one particularly patriotic group of Americans who have a serious problem with the Million Muslim March idea, and it's not exactly your ordinary political action group. In an outraged response to what many consider to be an ongoing insult to the memory of 9/11 by Islamists, America's prolific and often rough-riding Bikers have taken issue with the radical Muslim group and are planning a counter-rally ride in DC to voice their opposition titled, the "2 Million Bikers to DC" rally, also to be held on 9/11.

The Biker Group organizers state that what many may not initially understand is the fact that the Million Muslim March group is not exactly your typical religious protest group, either. Below is the Muslim group's direct initial statement on the planned protest march from a January press conference held in New York:

"One million Muslims will march to Washington D.C. and demand that our civil rights be protected by our government. We are demanding that laws be enacted protecting our First Amendment rights. We are asking President Obama to fulfill his promise from his first campaign for the Presidency of a transparent government. Lastly we are asking for the establishment of a real 9/11 Commission to reveal the truth to the American people.”

While the events surrounding the Benghazi debacle continue to outrage both politicians and Americans alike, at the same time bedeviling the ongoing pro-Islamic efforts of the White House, the initially stated goals by the Islamist group seem to diverge from the radically moderated MMM message heard more recently (7/31)

"We American Muslims reject violence and terrorism, and defend the Constitutional rights of all Americans," says MD Alam, founder of AMPAC. "Every year on September 11th, beginning in 2013, we will be marching in Washington DC as we build toward our goal of bringing one million American Muslims to march in our nation's capital."

The question that is increasingly being asked is which version of the Million Muslim March should Americans believe? Perhaps one particularly important clue might be the more recent change in name of the Islamic protest event. After the initial public outcry aimed against the event's radicalized title, the Muslim march was renamed "Million American March Against Fear," which completely altered the group's initially publicized reason for marching in the first place.

But was the group's inital goal replaced?

"Not so," says Charlotte Grass-Roots Activist, Belinda Bee, of the Opposition Biker Rally group. Bee believes that the name was changed only to co-opt innocent, peace-loving, Americans into taking part in the Muslim march event. Bee may be right, in fact, as she points to the Muslim practice of "Taqiyya," which in shi'ia Islam means to subvert or hide the truth in order to further the aims of Islam.

According to event spokeswoman and co-founder Bee, the number of possible Riders participating in the event is growing by leaps and bounds daily. The "2 Million Bikers to DC" group has already netted an astounding amount of attention on Facebook and throughout social media sites. Just in one day alone, the group's Facebook page grew by over 8,000 "Likes" to a total of over 32,000 "Likes" at this writing, and in only matter of several days.

A Bit of Islamist Subterfuge

The "2 Million Bikers to DC" rally, which is the brainchild of Biker Billy Williamson of Virginia, appears to be no less popular than the Overpasses for the Impeachment of Obama groups which have spread like wildfire throughout the US. But the confusion surrounding the Islamic event's true aims, along with an unsettling bout of subterfuge parlayed against the Biker to DC group by the Muslim March leaders, has left many participants and even event organizers scratching their heads in confusion.

According to event organizer Bee, many Biker members were stunned to learn that their organization had supposedly accepted an invitation from the Million Muslim March to join with their group, thereby stealthily co-opting the original intent of the Biker's rally as being in opposition to the Islamist event in the first place. Bee states, in effect, that the original title of the rally was "2 Million Bikers to DC Against Million Muslim March," but thought better of it when considering the overall negative implications of the two groups possibly clashing in DC. Rumor has it that the Bikers riding "guard" or "shotgun" for the event aren't exactly the "lightweights" of America, either.

On the website Veterans Today, an ideologically Left-leaning site, which often shares writers with other pro-Islamic, anti-semitic sites, Islamist ideologue writer Kevin Barrett, who is also a spokesperson for the sponsoring American-Muslim Political Action Committee, confirms the Biker event organizers' claims that Million Muslim March leaders were playing fast and loose with the truth regarding the 2 Million Bikers' having joined in the Million Muslim March.

Read it all