02/26/15
Michael McCaul

Posing for the Cameras While the Islamic Threat Grows

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

Rep. Michael McCaul  (R-TX), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, says the danger is great that the thousands of Syrian refugees coming into the United States will include terrorists who want to kill Americans. So what is he doing about it? He told Sean Hannity of Fox News the other night that he has sent a letter!

He said, “I sent a letter to National Security Advisor Susan Rice asking her to explain why she’s doing this, and to try to stop this from happening. My job as chairman of Homeland Security is to protect the American people. I believe this will put Americans at risk.”

“Keep up the good work,” said Hannity.

It’s true. McCaul sent a letter to Obama National Security Advisor Susan Rice. But what is she going to do about it? Rice was part of the Benghazi cover-up.

This is the same Congressman McCaul who didn’t even respond to our letter two years ago asking for an investigation of Al Jazeera’s expansion into the United States.

A letter is not a substitute for a bill to stop this dangerous wave of immigration into the United States. But this is what passes for “action” from the Republican running the House Committee on Homeland Security.

McCaul is very good at posing for the cameras and going on Fox News to talk about his hearings. But his record of doing anything to actually stop the Islamic threat is weak.

McCaul did introduce a bill, the “Secure Our Border First Act of 2015,” supposedly designed to curb illegal immigration. But Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL), perhaps the top opponent of amnesty for illegal aliens in the U.S. Congress, said that McCaul’s border bill does not include the following reforms needed to achieve a sound immigration system:

  • It does not end catch-and-release.
  • It does not require mandatory detention and return.
  • It does not include worksite enforcement.
  • It does not close dangerous asylum and national security loopholes.
  • It does not cut off access to federal welfare.
  • It does not require completion of the border fence.
  • It delays and weakens the longstanding, unfulfilled statutory requirement for a biometric entry-exit visa tracking system.

We are now learning why McCaul is so reticent about doing anything of substance against the Islamic threat.

McCaul was recently exposed by Matthew Boyle of Breitbart News for having held a friendly meeting with an Islamic leader from the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in Texas. McCaul and CAIR Houston branch executive director Mustafa Carroll were photographed together. A photograph of the meeting includes a note written in silver sharpie from McCaul to Carroll: “To Mustafa and the Council on American Islamic Relations, the moderate Muslim is our most effective weapon.”

The February 11 hearing held by McCaul, “Countering Violent Islamist Extremism: The Urgent Threat of Foreign Fighters and Homegrown Terror,” was certainly worthwhile.

But the idea that a letter to Rice is somehow sufficient to deal with the threat is laughable.

Rice is one of the top Obama officials implicated in the Benghazi terror attack cover-up. And she is now supposed to do something to stop terrorists from coming into the U.S. disguised as refugees because McCaul has sent her a letter?

McCaul himself signed a letter to Obama, noting that Rice “propagated a falsehood that the [Benghazi] attacks were ‘spontaneous,’ the outcome of a protest ‘spun out of control,’ and the result of a YouTube video.”

The letter, signed by McCaul and others, said Rice “is widely viewed as having either willfully or incompetently misled the American public in the Benghazi matter. Her actions plausibly give U.S. allies (and rivals) abroad reason to question U.S. commitment and credibility when needed.”

The letter was designed to warn Obama against making Rice Secretary of State. Instead, he made her National Security Advisor.

The letter that was sent to McCaul two years ago, warning of Al Jazeera’s expansion into the U.S., cited Dr. Judea Pearl’s criticism of Al Jazeera as “the main propaganda machine” of the pro-terrorist Muslim Brotherhood. Equally significant, Dr. Pearl, the father of slain journalist Daniel Pearl, said that “Al Jazeera weaves the ideological structure and combustible angers from which Jihadi recruits eventually emerge.”

McCaul now claims to be concerned about the emergence of Islamic terrorists on American soil. Yet he refused to even respond to the letter about Al Jazeera.

Accuracy in Media learned and reported that Al Jazeera and its financial sponsor, the government of Qatar, had hired various K Street lobbyists to put pressure on McCaul and other Republicans to stop a probe into Al Jazeera’s operations on American soil.

Yet, former Attorney General Michael Mukasey has said, in regard to Al Jazeera, “I think if an American medium is controlled by a political force from abroad, that’s a proper subject for inquiry.”

McCaul is emerging as very good at getting “face time” on the news to sound tough about the Islamic threat. But when the threat is mounting, sending letters just doesn’t seem to cut it.

A tougher border bill that would help keep radical Islamic terrorists out of the United States seems like an absolute necessity. But McCaul and the Republican-controlled Congress aren’t even pushing for that.

“My job as chairman of Homeland Security is to protect the American people,” he says. So why won’t he do his job?

A letter to Susan Rice won’t protect us. A tougher border bill would help. And so would hearings into Al Jazeera leading to the eviction of this Muslim Brotherhood channel from the United States.

02/26/15
Honor Killing

Interview of Interest With a Top Sharia Lawyer from Iran

By: Benjamin Weingarten
TheBlaze


Purchase at Amazon.com

This afternoon I had the chance to interview a top Sharia lawyer from Iran — Daniel Akbari, author of the recent book Honor Killing — on all things Islam.

I found the conversation to be eye-opening and insightful, and think you might too.

Should you be interested, below are the links to the full interview and some pertinent short clips.

And if this kind of thing interests you, please subscribe to my books/ideas podcast: [iTunes, Soundcloud].

Full Interview

“‘Moderate’ Muslims Are the Backbone of Jihad”: An Interview With a Top Sharia Lawyer from Iran [iTunes, Soundcloud

Clips

02/25/15
Israel

Threats, Lies and Politics

Arlene from Israel

The situation surrounding the negotiations with Iran and Prime Minister Netanyahu’s speech to Congress daily grows more ominous, more convoluted, and more contentious.

I would like to begin with the latest “scoop” – which is supposed to put the lie to Bibi’s charge in 2012 in the UN (complete with that famous chart) that Iran was on the cusp of becoming a nuclear power.

As Arutz Sheva described the situation yesterday:

“Al Jazeera began publishing Monday night several documents allegedly leaked from the Israeli Mossad – via the Spy Cables database shared with the British Guardian.

One of the documents alleged that, just a few weeks after the famous speech Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu gave in 2012 assessing Iran as being about one year away from building a nuclear weapon, the Mossad sent a confidential report to South Africa’s State Security Agency (SSA) stating that, in their estimation, ‘Iran does not engage in the necessary activities required for the production of weapons of mass destruction.’  (Emphasis added)

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/191748#.VOyL4pv9nIV

~~~~~~~~~~

Ah ha! went the cries of those opposed to Bibi’s speech – See, he exaggerated, he misrepresented, he’s not to be trusted.

No so, my friends.  And please do not take my word for this.

Today I contacted Brig. Gen. (ret.) Yossi Kuperwasser, until recently the director-general of the Ministry of Security Affairs.  There is no contradiction between the alleged Mossad report and what Bibi said, Kuperwasser explained:

The Mossad was talking about weaponization. And it’s true that in 2012 Iran was not involved in the weaponization process – they had already done this before 2003.  (I note that by 1998 Iran was domestically producing the Shahab-1 and Shahab-2, and by 2003 the Shahab-3 – ballistic missiles being one part of the weaponization.)

What the prime minister was talking about, said Kuperwasser, was the enrichment process: Iran had stocks of uranium enriched to 20%, and were in the position of being able to follow through to do enrichment to 90+%, which is what is needed for weapons purposes.

What must be made clear, however, is that in bringing the uranium to 20%, 90% of the enrichment effort has already been expended. That is, the hard part is getting it to 20%.  To move it from 20% to 90+% – which is weapons grade uranium – is a relatively quick and simple process. This is the danger Netanyahu was warning the world about in 2012.

~~~~~~~~~~

But there is even more, which I ask you to note as well, from Yossi Melman, intelligence correspondent, writing in the JPost (emphasis added):

“After promising to release a bombshell of leaked secret Mossad cables, Al Jazeera’s publication of documents later Monday fell short of that mark…Al Jazeera did not obtain an original and authenticated document from the Mossad…

“What they published was a South Africa Sate Security Agency (SSA document that is based on a briefing given to them by the Mossad.  The document from 2013 contains no secrets and any reader, or follower of public reports on Iran’s nuclear program, especially the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is familiar with the facts written in that document.

“The Mossad provided details in its briefing, such as the quantities of Iran’s enriched uranium at its two levels – 3.5% and 20% – about the development of Iran’s nuclear reactor at Arak, and its statement that Iran is ‘not performing the activity necessary to produce weapons.’

“That assessment was correct – it isn’t possible to utilize fissile material for a bomb only with 20% enriched uranium – an enrichment of 93% is required – and Iran did not have it at the time of the document’s writing, and doesn’t have it now.  Certainly it doesn’t present any evidence of a wedge between the Mossad and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu with regard to Iran’s nuclear program

Israeli intelligence estimates are that Iran is working to be a nuclear power – a few months way from the ability to assemble the bomb – but not capable of building it now.

More than anything, Iran wants the international community to lift the economic sanctions.

Israeli intelligence researchers know that Iran is already on the verge of becoming a nuclear threshold state.  It has the know-how, technology and materials to construct the bomb in a matter of a few months or perhaps a year, if and when the Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei gives the order.”

http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/Al-Jazeeras-release-of-Mossad-cables-falls-short-391976

And so please, my friends, do not believe everything you read and hear in the current effort to discredit Netanyahu.

~~~~~~~~~~

Please see, as well, yet another piece – “Now we know who to believe on Iran,” by David Horovitz, editor of Time of Israel (emphasis added):

“The Obama administration claimed Israel was misrepresenting its deal with the ayatollahs.  Reports from Geneva indicate Israel’s concerns were all too accurate…

“After anonymous sources in Jerusalem leaked to Israeli reporters in recent weeks the ostensible terms of the deal being hammered out, various spokespeople for the Obama administration contended that the Netanyahu government was misrepresenting the specifics for narrow political ends. They sneered that Israel didn’t actually know what the terms were. And they made the acknowledgement — the astounding acknowledgement for a United States whose key regional ally is directly and relentlessly threatened with destruction by Iran — that the Obama administration is consequently no longer sharing with Jerusalem all sensitive details of the Iran talks.

And yet among the terms of the deal being reported by the Associated Press from Geneva on Monday are precisely those that were asserted in recent weeks by the Israeli sources, precisely those that were scoffed at by the Administration. Centrally, Iran is to be allowed to keep 6,500 centrifuges spinning, and there will be a sunset clause providing for an end to intrusive inspections in some 10-15 years. If anything, indeed, some of the terms reported by the AP are even more worrying than those that were leaked in Jerusalem: ‘The idea would be to reward Iran for good behavior over the last years of any agreement,’ the AP said, ‘gradually lifting constraints on its uranium enrichment program and slowly easing economic sanctions.’ There is also no indication of restrictions on Iran’s missile development — its potential delivery systems

It goes without saying that this weekend’s developments in Geneva have only bolstered Netanyahu’s determination to sound the alarm before Congress next Tuesday. It’s also still clearer today why the Obama administration has been so anxious to query his motives and seek to discredit his concerns.”

http://www.timesofisrael.com/now-we-know-who-to-believe-on-iran/

~~~~~~~~~~

“It is also still clearer today why the Obama administration has been so anxious to query [Netanyahu’s] motives and seek to discredit his concerns.”

Keep this in mind, please, as you read the hysterical accusations against Bibi. And I ask that you do something else.  Speak out with the facts.  You know the routine: do talkbacks on the Internet, letters to the editor, call-ins on talk-shows, put this information on your FB pages and websites, put it up on group discussion lists, etc. etc. Here is an opportunity to help Israel.

~~~~~~~~~~

Yet another charge that is being leveled at Netanyahu is that the unrest he is “causing,” the tension he is generating politically in the US, will result in a reduction of American support for Israel.

The only problem with this charge is that it’s not true. A Gallup poll conducted between February 8 and February 11 indicates that seven in 10 Americans continue to view Israel favorably, and there has been no significant change in that number from a year ago.

“According to Gallup’s explanation of the results, these numbers suggest that neither the friction between Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama nor last summer’s conflict in Gaza significantly impacted on the US public’s perceptions toward Israel or the Palestinians.”

http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/Gallup-poll-US-public-support-for-Israel-not-hurt-by-Iran-flap-391934

~~~~~~~~~~~

And then this piece of news:

Two Democratic Senators, Richard Durbin (D-Illinois) and Dianne Feinstein (D-California), have written a letter to PM Netanyahu, inviting him to meet with Democratic lawmakers while he is in Washington next week. Their intention is to “maintain Israel’s dialogue with both political parties in Congress.”

http://www.timesofisrael.com/democratic-senators-invite-netanyahu-to-meet-in-washington/

I have no more information at this point, but this seems a positive turn of events.

~~~~~~~~~~

The negotiations in Geneva?  Terrifying. Rushing at break-neck speed to something disastrous.  News about how the deal is shaping up, and other indications that it might not come together.

I will be writing about this in up-coming posts, needless to say, but hope also to touch some other bases.

02/25/15
Obama and the Islamic State

William Palumbo On The Air Tonight With John McCulloch – The Betrayal Papers

Hat Tip: Dick Manasseri

William Palumbo will be interviewed by John McCulloch
Wednesday 2/25 at 6 PM EASTERN
WDTK 1400 AM 92.7 FM The Patriot
http://www.newstalk1400.us/pages/wide/JM_Show
Listen Live oline – http://saleminteractivemedia.com/ListenLive/player/WDTKAM
Call-in to talk with William and John – 800-923-9385

02/25/15
Muslim Brotherhood Control of US Govt

Betrayal Papers Part 2: In Plain Sight: A National Security “Smoking Gun”

The first article of the Betrayal Papers asserted that the Muslim Brotherhood was not only influential in the United States government, but in fact dominated the administration of President Barack Hussein Obama. This article will name several key people who were or are in the Obama administration and who have various, documented associations with organizations which are directly tied to and/or funded by the Muslim Brotherhood and the State of Qatar (home to Brotherhood’s Spiritual Leader, Yusuf al-Qaradawi). These individuals have helped dictate national security policies that have crippled counterterrorism efforts at home and abroad.

The Muslim Brotherhood’s Network of Civic Organizations: Apologists for Terror

Muslim Brotherhood Control of US GovtIn 1963, the first Muslim Brotherhood front group established itself in the United States and Canada: the Muslim Students Association of the U.S. and Canada (MSA), a group based on college campuses in North America. Through this organizational foothold, the Brotherhood has recruited and indoctrinated generations of American and Canadian Muslims into an Islamic belief system that pits Islam against the world. In more than a few cases, Muslims who join MSA chapters at their colleges have taken this ideology to its logical extreme: terrorism.

For example, it was recently reported by the Canadian Military Association that eleven (11) of Canada’s highest profile terrorists were tied to the MSA.

The Muslim Students Association (MSA): The MSA, the first Muslim Brotherhood organization to gain a foothold in the United States, was founded in 1963. Many founding members were Muslim Brothers or had connections to the Muslim Brotherhood. The three most significant founders of MSA were Hisham al Talib, Jamal Barzinji, and Ahmed Totanji, and all of whom were MB leaders of Iraqi descent. While a student at George Washington University, Hillary Clinton’s personal aide Huma Abedin was on the Executive Board of her MSA.

Since the early 1960s, the Muslim Brotherhood’s MSA has birthed a large number of purported “civic organizations,” which are anything but civil. We shall now name some of the groups, and establish the facts that link them to their parent organization, the Muslim Brotherhood.

Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR): CAIR was founded by two individuals with close ties to a Hamas operative. Hamas, according to its own charter, is the branch of the Muslim Brotherhood in Palestine. In 2007, founder Omar Ahwad was named as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terrorist financing trial. In November 2014, CAIR was designated a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates.

Muslim American Society (MAS): MAS was founded in 1992 by members of the Muslim Brotherhood, according to MAS secretary-general Shaker Elsayed. MAS, and the Muslim Brotherhood, advocate for Sharia law in the United States. MAS identifies the Islamic Society of North American (ISNA) and Muslim Students Association (MSA) as organizations with the same goal: the “Islamic revival movement.” In November 2014, MAS was designated a terrorist organization by the United Arab Emirates.

Islamic Society of North America (ISNA): ISNA was created out of four Islamic organizations, including the Muslim Students Association. Its former president Mohamed Magid was appointed an advisor to DHS and the National Security Council by Barack Obama in 2011, and was a recent guest at the White House.

Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC): MPAC was founded by members of the Muslim Brotherhood, specifically Hassan and Maher Hathout, both whom were acolytes of Muslim Brotherhood founder, Hassan al-Banna. MPAC supports the Tunisian Ennahda (Muslim Brotherhood) Party leader, Rachid Ghannouchi, whom they termed “one of the most important figures in modern Islamic political thought and theory.” Its current President is Salam Al-Marayati, who represented the US to the United Nations and UNESCO in 2010.

Additionally, a 1991 internal memorandum of the Muslim Brotherhood specifically identifies CAIR, ISNA, and the MSA in “A list of our organizations and organizations of our friends.” (Note: CAIR’s organizational predecessor, the Islamic Association of Palestine, is named.)

Finally, CAIR and ISNA were named un-indicted co-conspirators which materially supported terrorism by a federal court, in connection with the infamous Holy Land Foundation trial, an alleged humanitarian charity for Palestine. An incorporating member of MAS, Dr. Jamal Badawi, was named an unindicted co-conspirator. MPAC and MSA members are on the record supporting the Holy Land Foundation against government terrorism charges.

This evidence begs some questions from the honest reader:

  • If these are all independent organizations, why is it that each of them is so neatly tied to the same parent organization, the Muslim Brotherhood?
  • Why are most of them named by the Muslim Brotherhood in their own memorandum?
  • Why were all involved, directly as unindicted co-conspirators or indirectly as ardent supporters of the accused, with the Holy Land Foundation trial?

It doesn’t take a super sleuth to realize that these organizations are in fact fronts and subsidiaries of one organization, the Muslim Brotherhood. All one has to do is glance at the published information on their backgrounds, and the fact reveals itself.

The Anschluss (“Annexation”) of Georgetown and the Brookings Institution

You know the sayings. Money makes the world go ’round, and Follow the money, and Money is the root of all evil. These are important to keep in mind when considering the influence that Qatari money has had on two institutions as American as apple pie: Georgetown University and the Brookings Institution.

In 2005, Georgetown University established a new campus for their prestigious School of Foreign Service in Doha, Qatar (SFS-Q). (It bears stating here that the State of Qatar was the driving Arab force behind the Arab Spring, which resulted in the Muslim Brotherhood coming to power in Tunisia, Libya, and Egypt.) Today they have a faculty of more than 35 academics.

As part of Qatar’s Education City, Georgetown has had all SFS-Q campus development costs covered by the Qatar Foundation, a charity with noted links to terrorism. May this, perchance, have some influence over the education that Georgetown is giving to future American diplomats in Qatar? At the very least, it may explain some of the blatant anti-Semitic comments in Georgetown’s student newspaper.

The Brookings Institution is also heavily funded by Qatar. In 2013, they received $14.8 million; in 2012, $100,000; and in 2011, $2.9 million. This explains why Obama had Brookings Vice President (and purported diplomat) Martin Indyk, negotiating the ‘peace terms’ between Israel and Hamas. Today, Indyk is busy negotiating with an aggressive and nuclear-aspiring Iran.

Is it any wonder why Israel doesn’t trust this administration? By all reasonable logic, they are on the side of Qatar and Hamas, which is officially the Palestinian franchise of the Muslim Brotherhood.

The Obama Administration’s Agents

Given that these organizations function in a coordinated ideological manner, indeed they derive from the same root, it follows naturally that an individual associated with one organization would likely be associated with many, if not most of the others – not to mention the proxies of Georgetown and Brookings.

An experiment: Let’s choose seven Obama administration appointees with suspected ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Where to pluck these seven from? In December 2013, the Egyptian political magazine Rose El-Youssef, in an article titled Not Huma Abedin Alone, named six additional Obama appointees it claimed were operatives of the Muslim Brotherhood. You can read an English translation of the article here. Let’s see if their claims stack up, based on the information above.

Here are the six named operatives (plus Human Abedin) and their titles in the Obama administration:

Arif Alikhan – Assistant Secretary for Homeland Security for Policy Development. 2009-2010.

Eboo Patel – Member of the President’s Advisory Council to the Office of Faith Based and Neighborhood Partnerships. 2009-Present.

Huma Abedin – Personal Aide/Chief of Staff to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. 2009-2013.

Mohamed Magid – DHS Countering Violence and Extremism Working Group. 2011-Present.

Mohammed Elibiary – Senior Member of DHS’s Homeland Security Advisory Council. 2010-2014.

Rashad Hussain – U.S. Special Envoy to the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC). 2010-Present. Deputy Associate Counsel to Barack Obama. 2009-2010.

Salam Al-Marayati - Administration representative to UNESCO and United Nations. 2010.

(Dates in administration are best efforts based on publicly available information.)

Now let’s compare their affiliations and associations, officially and less formally, across the above named organizations. We’ll also include the Department of Homeland Security, which earlier this week was praised by CAIR for identifying “right-wing sovereign citizen extremist groups,” not Islamic terrorism, as the prime terrorist threat facing the United States.

Color Chart Muslim Brotherhood Influence on US Govt

Color Key

Green: Has worked or works in an official capacity for organization; is a named member of the organization.

Yellow: Has been associated with org., e.g., authored paper on their behalf; spoke on their behalf and/or at their events; proven personal relationship between the individual and organization’s leadership, etc.

Gray: No known or documented association.

No Coincidences

Notice the heavy concentration of green and yellow boxes, including for Georgetown and Brookings, in the table above. Notice the relatively few gray boxes. Individually these associations mean little; likewise, had this been just one random appointee in the entire administration, this story wouldn’t warrant the attention of the American public.

The intersection of individuals, organizations, Muslim Brotherhood money, and policy recommendations paint a picture of a carefully constructed conspiracy operating in plain sight.   The Muslim Brotherhood has hijacked the American government and military and is using them as a tool to build a global Islamic Caliphate. The conspirators are changing the culture at home to accommodate sharia law and using law enforcement to demonize ordinary American citizens as national security threats.

These are Barack Hussein Obama’s appointees. This is Barack Hussein Obama’s administration and these are people chosen to advise him on national security and Islam.

From expunging DHS training materials of the threat posed by Islamic doctrine, to corrupting American foreign policy – the policy ramifications of these and similar appointments will be explored in the next articles.

* This analysis was completed after a careful survey of available press releases, news reports, and credible published information. They will be published in an upcoming report. Source is material available upon request.

The Betrayal Papers is a collaborative effort by the Coalition of Concerned Citizens, which includes: Andrea Shea King, Dr. Ashraf Ramelah, Benjamin Smith, Bethany Blankley, Brent Parrish, Charles Ortel, Chris Nethery, Denise Simon, Dick Manasseri, Gary Kubiak, Gates of Vienna, Hannah Szenes, IQ al Rassooli, Jeff Bayard, Leslie Burt, Marcus Kohan, Mary Fanning, General Paul E. Vallely, Regina Thomson, Scott Smith, Terresa Monroe-Hamilton, Colonel Thomas Snodgrass, Trever Loudon, Wallace Bruschweiler, and William Palumbo.

02/25/15
ISIS Job Fair

Watcher’s Council Nominations – Getting Ahead Edition

The Watcher’s Council

160283_600

Welcome to the Watcher’s Council, a blogging group consisting of some of the most incisive blogs in the ‘sphere and the longest running group of its kind in existence. Every week, the members nominate two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. Then we vote on the best two posts, with the results appearing on Friday morning.

Council News:

This week, The MidKnight Review, Anne’s Opinions and The Pirate’s Cove earned honorable mention status with some great articles.

You can, too! Want to see your work appear on the Watcher’s Council homepage in our weekly contest listing? Didn’t get nominated by a Council member? No worries.

To bring something to my attention, simply head over to Joshuapundit and post the title and a link to the piece you want considered along with an e-mail address (mandatory, but of course it won’t be published) in the comments section no later than Monday 6 PM PST in order to be considered for our honorable mention category. Then return the favor by creating a post on your site linking to the Watcher’s Council contest for the week when it comes out on Wednesday morning.

Simple, no?

It’s a great way of exposing your best work to Watcher’s Council readers and Council members while grabbing the increased traffic and notoriety. And how good is that, eh?

So, let’s see what we have for you this week…

Council Submissions

Honorable Mentions

Non-Council Submissions

Enjoy! And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that! And don’t forget to tune in Friday for the results!

02/24/15
Revolution Day Iran

15 Photos From Iran’s Revolution Day 2015 Demonstrations You’ll Never See In Legacy Media #Obama #Nukes

Doug Ross @ Journal

Curiously, a massive wave of vicious anti-American sentiment in Iran has been utterly ignored by vintage media, even as the Obama administration does its level best to position the regime as a nuclear power.

Revolution Day 2015 In Iran: A Regime-Organized Display Of Hatred For U.S., Obama

On February 11, 2015, the Iranian regime marked the Islamic Revolution’s 36th anniversary. Regime spokesmen, and first and foremost Iran’s Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, emphasized in processions and speeches the anti-American character of Revolution Day, the Iranian regime’s hatred for the United States and its yearning for America’s downfall. Regime spokesmen motivated the public to participate in processions in which the regime’s top leaders, including the heads of the pragmatic camp took part.

With nuclear negotiations between the U.S. and Iran in an attempt to reach an agreement soon in the background, the displays of hatred towards President Obama, depicted as hanging from a gallows, and towards Secretary of State Kerry, who was shown as a devious fox were prominent…

 

“Khamenei Facebook’s Page Calls On Public To Participate In Rally As A “Decisive Answer” To U.S.”

“Basij Commander: “The Iranian People Calls In Unison… ‘Death To America’ And ‘Death To Israel'””

“Defense Minister Deghan: We Expect America To Die Of Fury”

“Ahmad Khatami: The Iranian People’s Hatred For America Grows From Year To Year”

“Ahmad Khatami: The Iranian People’s Hatred For America Grows From Year To Year”

Experts indicate that the deal being worked out by the Obama administration fails to address Iran’s nuclear weaponization program whatsoever.

Which should work out well in the future, what with its development of ballistic missiles, its support of terror groups worldwide, and its virulent hatred of America.

Hat tip: BadBlue News

02/22/15
Israel

How Ugly Can It Get?

Arlene from Israel

Before I get to the ugly stuff, let me begin with a lovely scene: Jerusalem in the snow.

The snow fell this past Thursday night, accumulating to the better part of a foot and enfolding our beautiful city in a mantle of white.   It is gone now because of heavy rains over Shabbat.

Credit: thejc.com

The windmill you see in this picture is a Jerusalem landmark.  Built in the Mishkenot Sha’ananim neighborhood – the first Jewish neighborhood outside the walls of the Old City – in 1857, it was restored to working order a couple of years ago.

~~~~~~~~~~

From the sublime – the beauty of Jerusalem in the snow – to the ridiculous.  Because ridiculous is how I see the current political hoopla, which, yes, is also very, very ugly.

The issue is the scheduled talk by Prime Minister Netanyahu on March 3 in the Congress, on the subject of the negotiations with Iran. Should he go?  Is he damaging Israel’s relationship with the US by doing this?  Has the focus on Iran been lost because of the politics?  Is this a partisan issue in the US, pitting Democrats against Republicans? And on and on and on…

Now it has been announced that Obama and Biden and Kerry may boycott the AIPAC conference, which is being held at the time Netanyahu will be in Washington.

And I doubt we’ve seen the end of this yet.

~~~~~~~~~~

I am not going to belabor every step of this on-going maneuvering.  It would be a waste of my time and yours.

For all who have eyes to see, the situation that underlies this is quite clear: Obama is seeking to throw up a political smokescreen.  He wants to make things difficult for Netanyahu – to make him look small and less competent, to seem to be a trouble maker – because he desperately does not want the Congress or the American people to give credence to what our prime minister is going to say.  For what Bibi intends to say stands a reasonable chance of undercutting the negotiations.

This is not about personal animosity between Obama and Netanyahu, it is about an existential issue.

~~~~~~~~~~

It is not really a partisan issue, dividing Democrats and Republicans, either.  A piece written in Algemeiner last week estimated that 98% of the Senate and 95% of the House of Representatives will attend.  “Despite two weeks of intense anti-Netanyahu leaks, insults, and pressure, the White House has so far succeeded in persuading only a handful of Democratic members of Congress to stay away from the speech.”

http://www.algemeiner.com/2015/02/18/obamas-boycott-of-netanyahu-is-collapsing/

I would say it is more an issue that divides the Congress from the White House.  Which is why Congress should be given the courtesy of having Netanyahu share directly the information he has.

~~~~~~~~~~

As to damaging our relationship with the US…  In the end, what is being damaged is our relationship with one particular president, not our relationship with the US. Both Congress and the American people are with us.  Note that just today Israel announced the purchase of 14 additional next-generation US-made F-35 fighter jets, to be delivered in 2016.

Were Israel to adhere to whatever Obama wanted of us now, it would be suicidal.  In Hebrew we say, ein breira – no choice.  Obama has to be challenged. Netanyahu has made the point repeatedly now that we have displeased American presidents several times over the years, and yet have sustained a solid relationship with the US.  It started, our prime minister reminds us, with Ben Gurion, who flouted President Truman’s wish that he not announce Israeli independence when he did.

I am one of those who believes Netanyahu absolutely must not back down now – rescheduling his talk or changing the venue. There can be no backing down at this point.  There has been so much talk about how politicized this issue has become. But for Bibi to decline to speak to Congress as scheduled would also be a political act, because of how the situation has been framed.  He would be seen as weak, and Obama as the winner. And he would be letting down those who have spoken out for him to come.

~~~~~~~~~~

Senator Marc Rubio (R-FL) makes yet another point: it is exceedingly important for Israel’s enemies to see that the Congress stands with Israel, for if they believe Congress is not with Israel as strongly as was once the case, they will be emboldened.  He implores all members of Congress to be present, to provide the support that Israel deserves.  They must not be distracted, he says, by the minor issues such as the way Boehner extended the invitation. Israel has been the most loyal of allies, and is in trouble now – and the members of Congress must provide public backing with their presence.

Please, see and then widely share Senator Rubio’s extraordinary speech:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ODjcm7U4lo0#t=148

It has been a tough year for Florida Senator Marco Rubio. 2014 will be a big key how bright his future really is.

Credit: Newstalkflorida

~~~~~~~~~~

The public figure who most recently voiced support for what Netanyahu is doing is former NY City mayor, Rudy Guiliani.  In an interview with Israel Hayom, he said (emphasis added):

“Netanyahu’s speech is absolutely essential. If I had been in his position, and the third most important person in the U.S. [the speaker of the House of Representatives] invited me to speak before Congress to explain the danger of a nuclear Iran — of course I’d accept the invitation and come. You have to understand that I, as an American, fear a nuclear Iran no less than the prime minister of Israel and no less than the people of Israel. Think for a moment — a bad agreement with Iran would give a group of irrational and insane people nuclear capability. If I were Netanyahu, I would go to the ends of the earth to discuss Iran’s nuclear program — on any stage I was given and in every situation. In our case, it’s the Congress….

“I met with Bibi privately on two occasions two weeks ago. I told him I would be doing the exact same thing if I were him. I told him that the American people respect him and agree with him, even if Obama and his administration are trying to paint a different picture. Netanyahu is doing exactly what he needs to do: to come and speak out against a bad agreement, even if the government doesn’t like it. Most Americans agree with Netanyahu on the Iranian issue.”

http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=23673

Credit: AP

~~~~~~~~~~

In the course of this on-going political melodrama, we have just learned that Netanyahu has been accused of “leaking” information about the negotiations.  In fact, Obama has now admitted that he has been withholding information about the negotiations from Israel.

http://www.frontpagemag.com/2015/ari-lieberman/obama-withholds-iran-negotiation-info-from-israel-1/

Obama’s claim is that Netanyahu would “cherry pick” the information he wished to leak without placing it “in context.”  He claims that Israel does not know the full context of negotiations, and thus is in no position to critique what’s going on.  But truth lies elsewhere: Obama does not want anyone to know how bad the deal is.

As to not having full context, there are certain elements of what is going on that have been made public and are clear: that the infrastructure for enriching uranium would be left in place, that there are no restrictions on building of the missiles that would deliver a nuclear warhead, etc.

~~~~~~~~~~

Key here is the matter of a confidential report from the IAEA, which has been obtained by AP and Reuters.  Any deal with Iran that lifted all sanctions is supposed to be predicated on the ability of the IAEA to monitor its program. But, says, the IAEA, Iran is being “evasive and ambiguous” as it tries to do a full assessment of the Iranian nuclear program.

In the face of this evidence of the unreliability of Iran, world powers should not be wooing Iran for a deal, declared Netanyahu.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/pm-stop-courting-an-iran-thats-refusing-to-come-clean-on-its-nuke-program/

Not exactly “cherry picking,” is it?

~~~~~~~~~~

I note with more than passing interest that Sunni Arab states have been voicing concern to the US about the impending deal with Iran.

http://www.timesofisrael.com/arab-nations-said-deeply-concerned-over-nuclear-agreement/

What I wonder is whether these states would be speaking out if Netanyahu had not done so first.

Of course, they are not saying explicitly that they agree with the Israeli prime minister.  Perish the thought.  But this is implicit in what’s happening.  And as I see it, it shifts the dynamic.  While Obama is prepared to come out swinging when the critic is Netanyahu, his tone is more deferential with the Arabs.

In fact, we’re hearing something now that we haven’t heard in a while.  For some time Obama has been saying that a deal is close, is possible.  But yesterday, Kerry declared that there were “significant gaps” and that the US was prepared to walk away if terms were not satisfactory.  Doesn’t mean they don’t still intend to push ahead (they do), but this is a different tone.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4629230,00.html

That the US is pushing ahead was made evident as Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and Secretary of State John Kerry were meeting today for “intensive talks.”

~~~~~~~~~~

I end with this piece, “Divided over that speech, not over a lousy deal with Iran,” by David Horovitz, editor of The Times of Israel (emphasis added):

“It is time to reframe the dispute. We are not witnessing what is being widely depicted as a battle between the Obama administration and the Netanyahu government over the timing, content and ostensible partisan implications of the prime minister’s scheduled March 3 address to Congress over Iran. We are, rather, watching the collapse of trust between the two leaderships over the critical issue of thwarting Iran’s nuclear weapons ambitions.

“The looming deal is similarly inexplicable to the political rivals of Netanyahu who are campaigning to oust him in general elections on March 17…

”Where [Zionist camp head Bujie] Herzog and other Israeli party leaders differ with Netanyahu is over his handling of the crisis. Like Herzog, centrist Yesh Atid leader Yair Lapid does not underestimate the Iranian threat. They just both think that Netanyahu is acting counterproductively and for domestic political reasons by preparing to lobby publicly against Obama in Congress, when they say he ought to be working to shift the administration more discreetly, behind the scenes.

“Of course, party leaders like Herzog and Lapid have to publicly criticize and castigate the prime minister; we’re less than a month from elections, and their entire domestic political goal is to undermine Israeli public confidence in his leadership so as to unseat him…”

No, no.  There is no “of course” here!  Horovitz elaborates on this point:

”In truth, it can hardly be doubted that Netanyahu has tried to impact the president’s stance in years of one-on-one conversations and in the endless top-level contacts between his officials and the Obama administration. The nature of the imminent deal — whose terms cannot be independently verified, but are profoundly troubling to such diplomatic veterans as Henry Kissinger and George Shultz — would indicate that private argument and entreaty have failed…

In these final weeks of the election campaign, the face-off with Obama has become one more issue for the challengers to use against Netanyahu

”Three years ago at a graveside in Jerusalem, the prime minister eulogized his father, historian Benzion Netanyahu, for having ‘taught me, Father, to look at reality head-on, to understand what it holds and to come to the necessary conclusions.’

The prime minister says it would have been unthinkable to turn down the invitation to set out his concerns in the world’s most resonant parliamentary forum.

Israel and those who care for Israel should not be blindsided by the battling between Netanyahu and Obama, or between Netanyahu and his domestic rivals, over the Congressional speech.

They should be sounding the alarm to prevent a deal that would allow Iran to maintain an enrichment capability and other core aspects of its nuclear program.

Those who care for Israel, in short, should look at reality head-on, understand what it holds, and come to the necessary conclusions…”

http://www.timesofisrael.com/divided-over-that-speech-not-over-a-lousy-deal-with-iran/

02/22/15
Islamic War

There Will Always Be War

By: Alan Caruba
Warning Signs

alwayswar1

We begin with the reality that the United States and many other nations are at war with militant Islamists. They are a growing army of religious zealots murdering Christians, Jews, others who are not Muslim, and even other Muslims.

In my youth America knew how to win wars. In Europe it bombed Germany into submission, leading its allies in an invasion that left Germany divided for decades until the Soviet Union collapsed. In Asia Truman dropped two atomic bombs on Japan because they didn’t get the message when Hiroshima was destroyed on August 6, 1945. It took a second bomb on Nagasaki on August 9 to bring about Japan’s surrender.

Millions died in World War II but the alternative would have been the loss of freedom for millions worldwide.

If one spends any time learning history, the primary lesson is that war has been a constant factor from the beginning of what we call civilization about five thousand years ago.

The Bronze Age introduced new weapons that gave the residents of the Fertile Crescent in the Middle East a distinct advantage over invading nomadic people, but the invaders introduced chariots and it took the Egyptians and Babylonians a while to catch up. War has always been about new, more lethal weaponry.

Why would we be surprised to learn that the Assyrians who originated in what is now northern Iraq or the Islamic State (ISIS) were the most violent and bloodthirsty of the ancient world’s peoples? Known to all their neighbors by 1300 B.C.E., their army become a source of terror for the Middle East during the ninth century. They destroyed the Kingdom of Israel around 732 B.C.E., but the southern part of the Kingdom of Judah survived. In time the Babylonians would defeat the Assyrians.

Not all wars involved religion. The Greeks fought each other and then fought the Persians. Alexander the Great, a Macedonian, loved waging war and was very successful. The constant factor, however, was war and, of course, Rome would become the greatest empire of its time, beginning around 509 B.C.E., fighting three Punic wars with Carthage, but losing an estimated 400,000 in the first war and 150,000 in the second.

Eventually, Rome was so powerful it imposed a “Pax Romana” on the entire Mediterranean area it controlled. In time, Rome would be destroyed by the “barbarians”, Visigoths, Vandals, Ostrogoth’s, and Burgundians. By 476 C.E., the Roman Empire was history.

After establishing a group of followers in the Arabian Peninsula as the “last prophet”, proclaiming Islam as the one, true faith, Muhammad died in 632 C.E. Within ten years, the Arabs had conquered Jerusalem and were taking aim at Damascus and Cairo. Baghdad and the Libyan Desert were the next to be conquered. They moved on to Spain and Central Asia.

Military HistoryDuring his lifetime, Ali, Mohammad’s son-in-law, was the leader of the Arab forces. As noted in Samuel Willard Crompton’s ‘The Handy Military History Answer Book’, by the time the Arabs fought the Byzantines and the Persians they had also initiated the great split that remains today between the Sunnis and the Shiites.” Shiite means “follower of Ali.” The Sunnis wanted to elect their own caliph.

After taking the southern half of Spain, the Muslim army was poised to take all of Europe, but their 732 C.E. defeat in the Battle of Tours put an end to further expansion. Their momentum in Asia was stopped in 751 C.E. with a defeat in the Battle of Talas. As Crompton notes, “in the century that followed the Prophet’s death, the Arabs took over ninety percent of all the urban centers in the Western world, and their conquests equaled those of ancient Rome.”

The Crusades

Which brings us to the first Crusade; it began when Pope Urban II in 1095 told a gathering of 10,000, mostly French and German knights, that a “new accursed group”, the Muslims, had taken control of the holy land were preventing pilgrims from visiting holy sites. The knights responded to his call to liberate Jerusalem by chanting “Deus Volt! Deus Volt!”—God wills it.

They were joined by a “Peasants Crusade” between 1095 and 1096. By June 1099 the knights arrived outside Jerusalem and what followed was a wholesale murder of everyone there. In 1185, Saladin, the emir of Cairo and Lord of Damascus, proclaimed a jihad—a holy war—against the Christians in the Kingdom of Jerusalem. The knights defending it were defeated.

A Second Crusade followed in 1147 C.E. but accomplished little and the Third Crusade had the same result. A Fourth Crusade resulted in the Europeans taking control of Constantinople in August 1204 C.E. They would rule it for the next fifty years. Years later, in 1489, a war drove the Muslims from Spain.

Ralph PetersThe spokeswoman from our Department of State who said that the present generation of Muslim holy warriors can’t all be killed doesn’t know that this is the way wars are won. You kill the enemy until the enemy decides that dying for their cause is not worth it.

If ISIS is insane enough to bring the war to our homeland (and even if it doesn’t), a war of total destruction will be the only way to end the present conflict. Currently, the Jordanians and the Egyptians are doing what they can to resist ISIS, but recent polls confirm that Americans are beginning to conclude that our active boots-on-the-ground participation is the only way this will end.

Obama is merely going through the motions of conducting a war against ISIS, but retired generals and diplomats have told Congress that only full-scale war will end the threat they represent.

Meanwhile, ISIS is committing genocide against the Christians of the Middle East while Boko Haram is doing the same in Africa. Hezbollah would do the same against Israel if it could. Given nuclear arms, Iran will assert control over all of the Muslim warriors, threatening both Israel and the U.S.

Our next President will have to commit to destroying ISIS. There is no alternative. That is history’s primary lesson.

Editor’s Note: The Handy Military History Answer Book is published by Visible Ink, $21.95, softcover.

© Alan Caruba, 2015