Facing Down Tough Times

Arlene from Israel

Before I discuss those tough times, I want to recommend that you read my Front Page Magazine article critiquing Abbas’s speech at the UN. Just about everything he says is a distortion or outright misrepresentation; calling him on his positions is important. So, after you’ve read it, please share the URL widely. This is no time for reticence; people must be provided with facts:



And then, please, prayers for little Zakkai, the almost three year old who has had multiple surgeries on his spine because of a recurring (benign but very aggressive) tumor.

Very recently he had a less invasive technique applied for freezing a tumor nodule that had been discovered. It is not yet known if this technique was fully successful — more will be known when a scan is done. But what is known is that three other small nodules were discovered — that have not been treated yet. (It never seems done, which is the horror of this situation!). What is more, his spine is so damaged by all of the efforts to eradicate the tumors that he’s probably facing spine surgery in a matter of months.

Rephael Zakkai Avraham ben Yakira Avigael


Now, as to those tough times…

Toughest of all the problems we face is the very real threat presented by Iran, which is a huge promoter of terrorism, and on the verge of going nuclear.

Iranian president Hasan Rouhani is currently engaged in a new technique – popularly known as the “charm offensive” – for forestalling interference with his nation’s goals.

That offensive rose to a new level on Friday, when, for the first time since 1979, the leaders of the US and Iran spoke with each other by phone (via interpreters). As I am reading it, some feelers were put out by Iran, but the phone call was actually placed by the US. The Iranians are saying the call was strictly the initiative of the US.

Whatever the case, the call is being hailed at the White House as an historic diplomatic breakthrough, with Obama enthusing, after the call, that “I believe we can reach a comprehensive agreement.”

Credit: scmp

But the president is best advised to hold his horses and not yet speak about the “deeper relations” with Iran if a nuclear breakthrough can be achieved. For the cold, hard reality is that while Rouhani is behaving ever so graciously — and ever so differently from his predecessor — there is absolutely no indication of a change in Iranian policy with regard to nuclear development.


Enter Prime Minister Netanyahu, who left for the US last night.

Credit: Irishexaminer

Convinced that the Iranian outreach is a “fraud,” he’s coming with a message that Obama is not going to want to hear; he will be delivering it to the president tomorrow, and then to the UN General Assembly on Tuesday.

On his departure he said:

“I will represent the citizens of Israel, our national interests, our rights as a people, our determination to defend ourselves and our hope for peace.

“I will tell the truth in the face of sweet-talk and the onslaught of smiles.

“One must talk facts and one must tell the truth. Telling the truth is vital for the security and peace of the world and of course for the security of Israel.”


To put it simply, my friends, what he is doing takes integrity and guts. He is not going to be well received in New York or Washington, and he knows it. But he’s acting as he believes he must.

Obama is not likely to be very appreciative of someone who is attempting to block his easy way out with Iran (no matter the cost to the world). But one Israeli official commented that Netanyahu is used to playing the role of “spoil-sport”: as he did when he gave warnings about the “Arab Spring.”

According to the Sunday Times (London), Netanyahu plans to tell the General Assembly that Iran already has 219 kilograms (482 pounds) of enriched uranium, which is enough to produce a nuclear weapon. What is more, that “Iran has made significant progress in its nuclear program since the new president Hassan Rouhani was elected.”

The Times further said that Netanyahu is carrying an intelligence dossier for Obama, providing evidence that Iran is stepping up its nuclear program.



Oh, to be a fly on the wall, during the closed door session between Netanyahu and Obama.

Netanyahu has instructed all Israeli ministers and representatives to refrain from speaking on the subject of Iran, as he moves into his difficult diplomatic situation.

His position, about which we will hear more in the next couple of days, is that four criteria must be met by Iran in order for the world to know that it has genuinely abandoned its nuclear development:

Halting all uranium enrichment; removing all enriched uranium from the country; closing the Fordo underground uranium enrichment facility near Qom; and stopping the plutonium track.


Last week, Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Jarad Zarif met with P5 + 1 (Britain, France, Russia, China, and the US, plus Germany), and then Zarif met separately with his counterpart, John Kerry. There was a whole lot of talk about the encouraging change of tone and the work to be done. But statements made at this meeting give us a clue as to where all of this is heading:

Kerry, in a statement to CBS, spoke about the possibility of Iran demonstrating good faith by opening Fordo for inspection. But wait! that’s a long way from closing down the plant.

While, after the meeting, Zarif addressed Iran’s need for speedy relief from sanctions:

“Of course as we move forward, there has to be removal of sanctions and in the end game there has to be a total lifting of all sanctions and both bilateral sanctions, unilateral sanctions as well as multilateral sanctions and U.N. sanctions and we hope to be able to move in that direction within a short span of time.”


What would be the minimum Iran would have to do before Obama would be motivated to begin prematurely reducing American sanctions?


Evidence of US gullibility (or, perhaps, readiness to be “had”) abounds. There is, for example, this report by MEMRI (Middle East Media Research Institute):

September 29, 2013 Special Dispatch No.5461

The Success Of The New Iranian Strategy (I) – The U.S. Administration Swallows The Lie About Khamenei’s ‘Fatwa’ Against Nuclear Arms


“In his address to the U.N. General Assembly (September 24, 2013), U.S. President Barack Obama stated: ‘The Supreme Leader has issued a fatwa [religious ruling] against the development of nuclear weapons.’ In fact, such a fatwa was never issued by Supreme Leader Khamenei and does not exist; neither the Iranian regime nor anybody else can present it.

“The deception regarding ‘Khamenei’s fatwa’ has been promoted by the Iranian regime and its spokesmen for several years. Each time it was mentioned, the ‘fatwa’ was given a different year of issue – for example, 2005, 2007, or 2012 – but the text of the ‘fatwa’ was never presented.

“MEMRI has conducted in-depth research with regard to this ‘fatwa’ and has published reports demonstrating that it is a fiction. The Iranian regime apparently believe that their frequent repetition of the ‘fatwa’ lie will make it accepted as truth. To date, the Europeans refuse to accept it. According to unofficial sources, the legal advisors of the EU3 made an official request to the Iranian regime in 2005 to provide a copy of the ‘fatwa,’ but in vain.


What hangs over all of us, here, is the question of whether Israel will in the end act unilaterally against Iran. Time is truly running out.

YNet now reports that:

“Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will tell Washington that Iran’s nuclear program must be dismantled and not merely supervised when he visits the White House on Monday, Israeli media reported.

“According to the diplomatic correspondent of Israel’s Channel One television network, Netanyahu will tell US President Barack Obama that Israel will abandon the diplomatic path on Iran’s nuclear program [i.e., take unilateral military action] if it is not completely dismantled.” (Emphasis added)

Genuine intent, or empty threat?



The second biggest headache we face is the nonsense regarding “negotiations” with the PA. The negotiations that are farcical in light of the behavior of the Palestinian Arabs, and, even more significantly, in light of Israeli rights — too rarely enunciated — to the land.

The first encouraging news in this regard I’ve seen comes via a report from Maariv, cited by Israel National News:

“Negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority have arrived at an impasse, according to an evaluation by a senior foreign diplomat who is aiding in the brokering of an agreement between the two, as reported this morning (Sunday) by the Israeli daily, Maariv.

“According to the report, the subject of borders was first raised during the seventh round of talks, which were held before the Jewish holidays. During the discussions, Minister of Justice Tzipi Livni and Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu’s representative, Yitzhak Molcho, refused to consider the exchange of territory in exchange for keeping existing Israeli settlements in their places. Molcho also is reported to have made it very clear to the PA that Israel intends to maintain her territories and communities therein…” (emphasis added)


If this is true (have no clue who the “senior foreign diplomat” is), then it is very good news, and negates a host of rumors regarding all that Israel was said to be surrendering. Although I will confess that some of those “rumors” have come from pretty reliable sources.

But in any event the news is hardly all good. Is it ever?

The unnamed official commented that, “Until either the U.S. intervenes, or Netanyahu meets with Abbas – negotiations are futile.”

I’m uncertain what would change if the two met — assuming that their representatives are speaking in their names — and far more uncertain that they would be willing to do so.

What rings bells is the suggestion of US intervention.


What I want to do here is consider the possibilities of what we may be looking at down the road with regard to this situation.

Caroline Glick, in her most recent column, addresses the issue of a president of the US who is overtly hostile and pressures Netanyahu unremittingly. She says that both the ten-month freeze on building that Netanyahu instituted and his Bar Ilan speech embracing a “two state solution” came as a result of Obama’s pressure (which includes such threats as a readiness to refuse to veto Security Council resolutions hostile to Israel).


I’m not sure if this is good news or bad news. On the one hand, it suggests that – contrary to the belief of many – it appears that Netanyahu is not really ideologically committed to a “Palestinian state.”

But on the other hand, it also suggests that Netanyahu does not have the capacity to buck Obama’s demands.

Glick says Israel cannot always refuse what the Obama wants, and that sometimes it’s wise to give in to him. But, she says, Obama has limits to his power because the American people are solidly pro-American. Israel, she maintains, has to make her case with the American people:

“Netanyahu can set out the international legal basis for Israeli sovereignty over Judea and Samaria and explain why Israel’s rights are stronger than the Palestinians’.

“The government can expose the fact that the demographic doomsday scenario that forms the basis of support for the two-state formula is grounded on falsified data concocted by the PLO.

“Demography, like international law, is actually one of Israel’s strategic assets.”

Well, it’s now or never, it seems to me. And there is more to Israel’s case than even the factors she mentions here. We cannot and must not cave to “US intervention” aimed at pushing us out of the land that is ours.


I’ve been engaged in dialogue with associates these past few days on the issues raised by Glick – primarily the issue of how much latitude Israel has to say “no.” I’ve never know Caroline Glick to be a shrinking violet and yet she believes that sometimes our prime minister is caught.

It’s important for us to recognize how much goes on behind the scenes and what extraordinary pressure is placed upon Netanyahu – no one should imagine that he makes his decisions lightly.

But it’s equally important for us to have the expectation that our prime minister is there to refuse the American president when he makes demands that are not in our best interest – and for us to communicate that to Netanyahu strongly now: Bravo on your strength in telling the truth on Iran. Now please, also tell the world the whole truth about Israel’s ancient and historical rights in Judea and Samaria and the impossibility of considering the PA a “negotiating partner.”

Glick herself comments on the way in which Menachem Begin, as prime minister, bucked the whole world when attacking the Iraqi nuclear reactor. There are multiple similar examples.

See http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=1689 for examples provided by Yoram Ettinger. “Just say NO” is one of Ettinger’s recurring themes.


Netanyahu is likely to touch on the subject of “negotiations” in his UN talk. More significantly, he is giving a second Bar Ilan talk in a week, at which he will be announcing new policy.

Rumor has it that he will be saying that a final deal is impossible now and that he will opt for an “interim” Palestinian state without final borders set. That would be very bad news — and I’m aware of persons in the government already alarmed by this possibility. (Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon spoke out against this at a Likud meeting – saying anyone who was for an interim state did not belong in Likud – and was subsequently chastised by the prime minister.)

An “interim” state would create the legality of a Palestinian state, with the leverage that sovereignty would imply for the Palestinian Arabs, without also including “end of conflict” and giving us any assurance about issues of borders or settlements or Jerusalem having been resolved. How could they sign on “end of conflict” when they would not know what their final borders would be? And so, we would have given them a legal reality while we would still be confronting “resistance” of the not so peaceful sort, as well as increased diplomatic pressure. On top of all of this, I would assume that there would be a core region within that “interim” sovereignty that would be off-base for the IDF, and thus permit a breeding ground for terrorism.

We don’t want to see anything of the sort offered, but I do note here that Abbas has categorically said he will not accept such a deal. It is my opinion that he could not go back to his people with this and survive, not when so many are radicalized and disapprove of any negotiations with Israel.


And then, I end here with one very tentative, but potentially positive, thought: In essence, Netanyahu is saying “no” to Obama now, by refusing to sign on to the charm offensive. He refuses to do this because he sees it as the primary existential issue for Israel – his back has apparently been stiffened by this reality (although the true and final test comes with his readiness to act militarily).

It could yet be – and in truth we do not yet know – that at the end of the day, our prime minister will find he has the courage to refuse a Palestinian state, as well, because of the deprivation of rights and security threat it would represent for Israel. A thought that does not, I confess readily enough, negate the niggling unease I feel. But it is a thought to be considered. And worked for.


A Geo-Political Time Bomb About to Explode: An Interview with Phyllis Chesler, author of “An American Bride in Kabul” (Palgrave MacMillan)

By: Fern Sidman

Dr. Phyllis Chesler, internationally renowned pioneer feminist, professor, psychotherapist and prolific author and op-ed contributor to Arutz Sheva has a feverish schedule these days. On October 1, her latest book entitled, “An American Bride in Kabul” is scheduled to be released and there is no question that the pre-publication copies have caught the attention of the media. As she juggles interviews with major outlets and plans an international speaking tour, Dr. Chesler graciously took time out to discuss her compelling memoir; a tome that is both an epochal personal narrative and scholarly monograph at the same time. There is no doubt that this is a book whose time has come.

Q Dr. Chesler, there is no secret that your life has taken many twists and turns and you have written about your experiences as a young woman held captive in Afghanistan previously. Why did you choose this particular juncture in time to write your account in full length book form?

A With the increasing persecution of Muslim women and with the rise in Islamic fundamentalism and terrorism, I had no choice. The time was right to expose my mystical but misguided romance with Ishmael and with the Muslim world. We are at a moment in history when gaining an understanding of Islamic gender and religious apartheid is imperative for our survival as a modern civilization. In addition, Heroic Muslim resisters—those who are anti-Islamists– need recognition and support from the Western world in their battle to stem the avalanche of Islamic fundamentalism.

The material is also so rich, so irresistible. The 9/11 plot was hatched in a country that I once lived in – how surreal, how destined is that! How could I remain silent? Wasn’t I obligated to share what I had seen and now know? The Afghan burqa seems to have followed me to America and into the future. I needed to provide an accounting of what I experienced, witnessed, and the lessons learned.

I could never forget the kindness of some Afghan women towards me. Their fate haunted me, our lives had touched, viewing their kind of powerlessness taught me that in many cultures and countries women did not really have power, freedom, education, any individual rights.

I learned that Muslim-on-Muslim violence, fratricide is pandemic and indigenous. Like stoning and honor killing, it has not been caused by the West. I also learned that so many Muslim are also kind, humble, funny, philosophical, principled and life-loving.

Q As much as your experience in Afghanistan was frightening, you also write so passionately of the people of the Eastern world. Did you always have an interest in that part of the world?

A I have always possessed an abiding love for Eastern culture; a powerful attraction to its people; its architecture, food, geography; to its rich and tapestried history and I weave that all into my book. Something had called to me. In the Bible, we know that Abraham was from Ur Kasdim (perhaps in Iraq near Turkey) and I saw biblical scenes in Afghanistan; camel caravans, veiled women, turbanned men, shepherds, and nomads. There was something about Eastern customs and traditional people that I found exotic and at the same time it was something familiar to me.

Q Can you tell us about the genesis of your relationship with your ex-husband? What kind of dynamic prevailed between the both of you?

A: I married a man from the East but in the West where I had met him. He was Muslim and I am a Jewish woman. We both felt a bit marginalized in America. We dated for two and half years and he said that if I want to visit his homeland, we must get married or we could not travel together in the Islamic world.. At the time, neither of us was religious, but the vision of Isaac and Ishmael living in harmony was a powerful, mystical dream. The half-brothers do make peace, They bury their father Abraham together. I was so young and naive.

Q As you have written, your feminism was forged in Afghanistan. Your book deftly but painfully offers graphic descriptions of the horrific treatment that women endured and still do in that region of the world. Do you think that contemporary Western society acknowledges the dangers that this represents to our freedoms?

A I fled Afghanistan at the very end of 1961, but I see the explosion of burqa clad women on the streets of New York City. This is an important point because it represents the nullification of women. Burqas are nothing more than sensory deprivation isolation chambers and have little to do with Islamic religious law. I am not talking about head covering, which are fine since they do not obscure identity and one can see, hear, taste, smell, talk, and be part of the public world. When a woman wear niqab, (a face mask) she exits the social conversation; she is totally isolated in her body bag. I am offended, frightened, when I see women wearing dark, black, heavy burqas. Why would we, in the West, welcome that or want to support such intolerance in the name of “tolerance”?

I also understand that it is particularly difficult for Jews to vocalize their opposition to such garb, as they feel that if the government intervenes and imposes laws against wearing such articles, as has happened in France, then perhaps their own rights to wear religious head coverings and other garb might be infringed upon. There is a huge difference, however. No one is physically suffocated in religiously Jewish style of dress and that difference stands in stark contrast to the oppressive garments that Muslim women are increasingly compelled to wear. Many girls and women have been honor murdered by their families for refusing to wear hijab or niqab.

There is no place in the Koran where it states that women are commanded to wear burqas and niqab. As a matter of fact,in the 1950s, the King of Afghanistan strongly supported modern dress for women, so there is a perilous regression taking place. Once, the women of Turkey, Egypt, Iran and some countries in the Arab Middle East, and the Mahgreb won or were granted the right to be naked-faced.

What I witnessed so long ago in Afghanistan was both religious and gender apartheid: polygamy, a shut-in purdah existence for women; honor killings, forced marriages. And the same rings true today. It is far worse, far more medieval today; post the Soviet invasion. We see the rise of the Taliban, the civil wars of the warlords, the growth of opium as a cash crop. We really have to understand the depth of this misogyny. In Israel, you can fight to change religious laws, but in tribal countries such as Afghanistan and Pakistan womens’ lives are highly circumscribed and endangered.

They are shot for trying to go to school or for wanting to marry someone of their choosing. This is true in Gaza and on the West Bank today, just as it is true in Afghanistan or Pakistan or Saudi Arabia.

Q As a winsome Westernized young woman, you describe the women in your ex-husband’s family with a sense of compassion and outrage. Can you tell elaborate on that?

A In my book I speak of my cruel and probably mentally ill mother-in-law and the fact that her husband was a polygamist. He had two other wives and three sets of children—twenty one in all–living in the same compound. My mother-in-law tried to control me in every way imaginable, but I will never forget the kindness of my sister-in-laws who did everything they could to physically protect me against my mother-in-law and my husband. There are memories that are seared in my soul; as I recount the brutal manner in which my mother-in-law treated her female servants, and how I literally had to force a sweater on a young female servant who was pregnant and cold and how my mother-in-law cursed her and then fired her for accepting it.

Q Your book contains a great many stories from writers dating back centuries ago who traveled throughout the length and breadth of Afghanistan. What sort of historical backdrop does this afford the reader?

A I wanted readers to gain an appreciation of the political, geographic and cultural history of Afghanistan. Westerners who traveled to the East have left a grand record of their adventures. This includes women who visited harems, married Bedoiun sheiks, climbed awesome mountains and survived dangerous sandstorms.

Like me, they also came down with dystentery and hepatitis, and unlike me, with malaria, parasites or worse. Their courage is amazing. They also confirm the gender and religious apartheid that I witnessed as well as the slavery and Dhimmi status of Jews and other infidels. Once, Afghanistan was a flourishing center of Paganism, Zoroastrianism, Buddism, Hinduism, and Judaism. Islam did not fully conquer this part of Central Asia until the ninth century. I once slept in what was once the crossroads of the known world.

Q You write that you have maintained a friendship with your ex-husband, Abdul Kareem and his children from another wife. In lieu of your support for Israel, has your relationship changed over the years?

A I do not regret this act of compassion to a stranger at my gate. He arrived here just after the Soviets had invaded his country. Once, he had married a Jewish woman. Now, over time my ex-husband’s views on Israel seems to have changed. His family has a “politically correct” position on Israel as well. Their opinions are heavily informed and shaped by the left-oriented, secular media. They are probably disappointed in me because they once viewed me as a “heroic, anti-racist” and now they feel betrayed because I am passionately pro-Israel. And these people are not mosque going Muslims. Even some assimilated, westernized Muslims believe Israel is gassing people and this causes me great anguish. Many educated Muslims and non-Muslims, for that matter, believe all the Big Lies told about Israel, that it is an apartheid state because they are fed such disinformation on a routine basis. One Muslim feminist writer, as brave as she is, begins one of her books by saying that she is not a Zionist and repeats this mantra throughout her work.

Q The latter part of your book is dedicated to the history of the people of Afghanistan and you even include a chapter on the tortuous history of the Jews living there.

A Jews have had a very long history in Afghanistan.. On mountain rocks on the Silk Road between Herat and Kabul there are Hebrew inscriptions that date back to the year 750 CE. When Arabs conquered the land, they forced Islam on the people. In 2011-12, a great deal of Jewish written material from the 11th century was found in a cave in northern Afghanistan. In the 19th century, Jews who had fled to Meshed, Iran, long ago, fled after one of many terrible pogroms—to Herat, in Afghanistan. Safe for a while, they soon encountered tragedy, returned to Meshed, where it was worse, and then returned to Afghanistan where they stayed for one hundred years.

Once, the Jews and Hindus were the consummate traders and bankers of Afghanistan. They exchanged currencies and had trading posts going up to Russia, China, Thailand, down to India, and to Europe and the new worlds. Their outposts were along the old silk road. They dealt in textiles, furs, carpets, spices, jewels, currencies and much else. However, overnight, they were literally impoverished by royal edict in in the very early 1930s.. Afghanistan made alliances with Nazi Germany and after World War II, sheltered Nazis (physicians, engineers, scientists) whom they also exploited.

Q: There are a multitude of facts about 20th century refugees, heroic Muslim women, and Jews, you cover them thoroughly in your book. What kind of effect do you think this will have on opinion makers?

A. Well, let’s start with the hypocrisy of the United Nations. In 1980, the UN and the ‘international community” did not help the five million Afghan Muslim refugees in Pakistan. Compare this to the heavily orchestrated campaign which funded and focused upon the 1.6 million Palestinian refugees (These are the UN’s own figures). The UN is not interested in helping Muslim refugees — only in demonizing Israel. . As I said in my book, in 2013, an Afghan acquaintance of mine told me that at least one and a half million Afghan refugees are still festering in camps.

As for women in Afghanistan, many are quite heroic as they stand up to surreal misogynists. They are death threatened and targeted for assassination and they still continue their work in hospitals, schools, as police officers and in public office. Western women can learn quite a bit about courage from them. The humanitarian work being done in Afghanistan has only been possible only because of the Western military presence. As the West pulls out — as it must – this landlocked country which has little infrastructure will be plunged into permanent civil war, tyranny, and a very fierce misogyny. Doctors Without Borders had to pull out many years ago because their physicians were being seen as infidel proselytizers and murdered.

In the 1930s, there was a highly significant Nazi influence in Afghanistan. Jews always had to wear distinctive clothing in Afghanistan and in other Muslim majority countries and Jewish women did not go to school.

My ex-mother-in-law used to speak of a Jewish family that she was close with named the Sharbani and kept asking me if I knew them and was in a quandary as to why they left Afghanistan after 1948. I document the heinous slaughters, forced conversions and the expulsion of Jews in Muslim majority countries including Afghanistan throughout the centuries, so that might give you some idea of why Jews were not welcome there. Interestingly enough, my ex-husband, in his capacity as a government official in Afghanistan was very proud that he had restored a Jewish synagogue in Herat.

Jews from Afghanistan eventually migrated to Israel and to Queens, New York.

Q Because your book is so very topical; a real eye opener in every respect, what kind of impact do you expect it to have?

A I think this book will appeaI to a very wide audience on both sides of the aisle. Many Muslims, both religious and secular have praised the book as have conservatives and feminists. Perhaps it will be a cross-over book, perhaps I will be able to get people to think about Islam’s history of imperialism and apartheid in a new way. Hopefully, my work will serve as a beacon of hope for all oppressed peoples and will be an inspiration in the perennial battle against Islamic misogyny, racism and anti-Semitism.

Q Speaking of the book’s release date; how can readers purchase this book and what venues can they hear you speak at?

A Anyone can purchase my book online at Amazon or any other online book retailers. For those who will be in New York City on October 1st, I will be speaking at the 92nd Street Y on Manhattan’s upper east side and I will be speaking at the Barnes & Noble at Columbia University on October 9th at 6 pm, I hope to be posting my entire speaking schedule on my web site which is: www.phyllis-chesler.com and please visit me on my Facebook page where I supply regular updates.


Forget the Alamo — Dallas Preps for the Apocalypse

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton
Cross-Posted by Right Wing News

Hard to tell whether they fear vampires, demons, ghouls, zombies or more likely, roving bands of Tea Party patriots… This is whacked and alarming. Just what the hell, does the Dallas County Sheriff’s Department need with MRAPs? They must want to serve one hell of a warrant.

Fox News:

The Dallas County Sheriff’s Office traveled to Fort Hood this month to acquire its own bona fide military vehicle – the International MaxxPro MRAP tactical vehicle — courtesy of a Department of Defense surplus program.

According to The Dallas Observer, the sheriff’s office obtained the 19-ton, diesel-operated behemoth with bullet-proof doors and tires, designed by Navistar Defense.

“The MaxxPro MRAP is built to withstand ballistic arms fire, mine blasts, IEDs, and other emerging threats,” according to the Navistar website. “Its V-shaped hull helps deflect blasts out and away from the crew and its armoring can be customized to meet any mission requirement.”

The specific vehicle obtained by the Dallas sheriff’s office was never used overseas and claims only about 10,000 miles of use, but other similar vehicles were reportedly employed by the military in war zones, and specifically to withstand roadside IEDs, or improvised explosive devices.

The Observer writes the sheriff’s office will now use it to serve warrants on wanted men.

Does anyone, I mean anyone, see a problem with this militarization of our police forces? These are militarized vehicles… Meant to withstand IEDs, which I’m sure they expect to find in every pothole now. At least, that is how they are acting. Dallas is not alone of course. Murfreesboro, Tennessee and Ohio State University along with many others are also getting their ‘tactical defenses’ on. Tennessee tried to reassure everyone it was to protect them from armed gunmen. What? Militarized roaming gangs? Maybe al Shabaab and al Qaeda roaming the streets? Concerned American citizens would really like to know before their neighborhoods glow in the dark, if you know what I mean.

These guys are primary responders, but just what do they intent to respond to?

FILE: Soldiers of the 4th Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division play football in front of parked MRAP vehicles as they prepare to leave in a convoy inside FOB Joyce in Afghanistan’s Kunar Province. (REUTERS)

I suppose there’s just no telling when sectarian warfare will break out and Americans will start planting roadside IEDs willy-nilly. I’m telling you, government and local authorities are heavily preparing for civil unrest and they have American civilians in their sites. Guns, ammo, food… Why do you think they keep labeling the Tea Party as extremists? Anarchists? Terrorists? They are arming up their bad selves for a patriot apocalypse.

Dallas County Military SUV memo by Nick Lucchesi


CNN’s Iranian Propaganda Campaign

By: Cliff Kincaid
Accuracy in Media

Even before CNN falsely claimed that Iranian President Rouhani had denounced the Holocaust by name during his interview with Christiane Amanpour, Fareed Zakaria was peddling the notion that the Ayatollah of Iran, Ali Khamenei, was an intellectual. In reality, the evidence suggests he is a Russian agent trained by the KGB whose ultimate goal is to get United Nations help in disarming Israel.

Amanpour, CNN’s chief international correspondent, interviewed Rouhani during his trip to the U.N., and portrayed his comments as moderate and groundbreaking.

But the real power in Iran is Ali Khamenei, “the Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution” and the designated successor to Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, leader of the 1979 Iranian Revolution.

Before Rouhani’s visit, in an August 24 commentary, “How to understand Iran’s supreme leader,” Zakaria portrayed Ali Khamenei as “a clever, sophisticated, learned man, who does not seem prone to rash decisions or impulsive actions.”

Zakaria, host of CNN’s flagship international affairs program, “Fareed Zakaria GPS,” was basing his observations on an article by Akbar Ganji in Foreign Affairs, a publication of the Council on Foreign Relations. Ganji is an Iranian journalist who was imprisoned and later released by the regime.

“Ganji’s essay, entitled ‘Who is Ali Khamenei?’ provides fascinating insights into the most powerful man in Iran,” Zakaria said. It purports to explain his “worldview.”

What the article leaves out is the fact that Ali Khamenei was “educated” at the KGB’s Patrice Lumumba University in Moscow, along with the international terrorist “Carlos,” a convert to Islam and to the cause of al-Qaeda. It is now called the People’s Friendship University.

The book, The World was Going Our Way: The KGB and the Battle for the Third World, by Christopher M. Andrew and Vasili Mitrokhin, notes, “The University’s first vice-rector and a number of its staff were KGB officers who used the student body as a recruiting ground for Third World agents.” KGB Major Vasili Mitrokhin was a KGB archivist who defected to the West.

In his article titled, “Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei: A secret Russian life?,” scholar Ali Alfoneh of the American Enterprise Institute noted that the Iranian leader’s attendance at this “university” was disclosed by Moscow-funded Russia Today television in a report on the school’s 50th anniversary. Khamenei is mentioned among the university’s “most notable graduates.” Another Russian source, the November 25, 2003 issue of Kommersant, had also presented Khamenei as a People’s Friendship University graduate.

Smith Hempstone, a journalist who became United States ambassador to Kenya, wrote about this in a June 11, 1989 column. He had then predicted that Iran under Khamenei would “look to the Soviet Union” for an opening to the outside world. He wrote that Khamenei was not only a graduate of Patrice Lumumba University, but maintained “close ties to the Palestine Liberation Organization and has a record of supporting Iranian cooperation with the Soviet bloc and radical Third World states against the West.”

The new book, Disinformation, notes evidence that PLO chief Yasser Arafat was a KGB agent, and that the Russians have played a key role in sponsoring Islamic terrorism over the course of decades. The same book, written by Lt. Gen. Ion Mihai Pacepa and Prof. Ronald J. Rychlak, also identifies then-Senator John Kerry, now Obama’s Secretary of State, as a dupe of KGB disinformation operations.

Interestingly, a good source on “Carlos” and his time at Patrice Lumumba University is the book, International Terrorism: Challenge and Response, edited by Benjamin Netanyahu, the current Prime Minister of Israel. Netanyahu will speak to the U.N. on Tuesday and promises to tell the truth about the Iranian nuclear weapons program.

But CNN, which has increasingly emerged as an international “news” agency serving as a mouthpiece for the Iranian regime, can be expected to take issue with Netanyahu.

In order to portray Rouhani as a moderate, CNN had claimed that the Iranian president had condemned by name the “Holocaust.” But he in fact never used the term during the interview with Amanpour.

CNN’s transcript shows him saying:

“I have said before that I am not a historian personally and that when it comes to speaking of the dimensions of the Holocaust as such, it is the historians that should reflect on it.”

He actually said:

“I have said before that I am not a historian and when it comes to speaking of the dimensions of historical events, historians should explain and discuss it.”

CNN claimed its translation was correct, but other sources, such as Politico, consulted a translator who said the term “Holocaust” was not in Rouhani’s remarks.

Curiously, Politico called this omission “minor,” when in fact the difference is that the term “Holocaust” suggests acceptance of the fact of Hitler’s genocide of the Jews. Instead, Rouhani treated the matter as something to be discussed and debated by historians, an effort to minimize it.

In her own follow-up article, “Why Rouhani may be different,” Amanpour blamed former President Bush for the anti-Americanism of the preceding Iranian president, saying, “I can certainly never forget President George W. Bush’s infamous Axis of Evil speech, which ushered in the harsh period and policies of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.”

This is apparently the new version of “blame America first” media coverage. Bush is to blame for the Iranian regime’s anti-Semitism.

In that speech, Bush had said, “Iran aggressively pursues these weapons [of mass destruction] and exports terror, while an unelected few repress the Iranian peoples’ hope for freedom.”

CNN also ran a piece titled, “Why Rouhani deserves praise,” perpetuating the false notion that Rouhani had condemned the Holocaust and faulting Israel for not accepting this Iranian leader as new and different from the rest.

Recognizing reality, at least for a moment, Zakaria concluded that “it remains unclear whether he [Rouhani] has the authority to act on behalf of his government.” He explained, “One has to wonder: If Rouhani does not have the freedom to shake Obama’s hand, does he have the freedom to negotiate a nuclear deal?” This was a reference to Iran turning down a personal meeting between the two leaders.

The failure to shake hands, widely reported as a snub of Obama, was followed by a telephone call from Obama to Rouhani, laughably labeled by Politico as “something solid to celebrate on the foreign policy front” for Obama. Ignoring the fact that Khamenei calls the shots, the publication claimed, “Obama became the first American president in 34 years to speak directly with his Iranian counterpart…”

This is the kind of coverage we are likely to see more of in the weeks and months ahead as Obama and Iran pursue a deal for a “nuclear-free zone” in the Middle East that will put Israel on the defensive.

In fact, this is what Rouhani proposed in his second speech to the U.N. last week to the so-called High Level Meeting of the General Assembly on Nuclear Disarmament. He said, “Almost four decades of international efforts to establish a nuclear-weapon-free zone in the Middle East have regrettably failed. Urgent practical steps towards the establishment of such a zone are necessary. Israel, the only non-party to the Non-Proliferation Treaty in this region, should join thereto without any further delay. Accordingly, all nuclear activities in the region should be subject to the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency] comprehensive safeguards.”

As this plan is developing, the price of a nuclear deal with Iran seems to be shaping up as the nuclear disarmament of Israel, a development that would leave the Jewish state more vulnerable to attack.

Whether Khamenei is a Russian agent or not, we can easily see how Russian methods of disinformation and propaganda are already paying dividends for the Iranian regime.

Cliff Kincaid is the Director of the AIM Center for Investigative Journalism and can be contacted at [email protected].


Forum: Will There Be A Federal Government Shutdown And Do You Approve Or Disapprove?

The Watcher’s Council

Every week on Monday morning, the Council and our invited guests weigh in at the Watcher’s Forum with short takes on a major issue of the day. This week’s question: Will There Be A Federal Government Shutdown And Do You Approve Or Disapprove?

The Razor: I used to get worked up about these things, but they’ve happened so many times and become such a Washington DC insider sport that I’ve lost interest. I neither know nor care whether the federal government will shut down. As far as I’m concerned the less it functions the better. I hate to sound cynical but seriously, how many times have we gone through this?

The Independent Sentinel: I do believe there will be a shutdown and I also believe the media will successfully put the blame on Republicans. As much as I don’t want a shutdown or see Republicans blamed, I believe it is the right thing to do. The Republicans are trying to do the right thing. They are doing what most of their constituents want, not just the Tea Party as the Democrats would have us believe.

The reason I feel the way I do is because I see Obamacare as irrevocably damaging this country. I listened to Bill O’Reilly the other day talk about how melodramatic people are about Obamacare. This isn’t about melodrama, it’s about our freedom. Our Founding Fathers didn’t sacrifice all that they sacrificed to have us turn around and sell ourselves to the highest bidders in government.

Some of the things Obamacare does:

  • Obamacare gives the government the right to tax the people as much as they want on anything they want. This law should never have been declared constitutional.
  • The Affordable Care Act was supposed to give the people in this country access to affordable healthcare. The CBO says, however, that 30 million will be without healthcare under Obamacare.
  • The CBO also said it was unsustainable. Mr. Obama said that premiums would go down by as much as 3000% but they are skyrocketing in some cases.
  • Mr. Obama assures us there will be subsidies, but who pays these subsidies? Roughly, 41% of the country will pay for the other 59%. If that’s his idea of justice, I want no part of it.
  • Worst of all, we are losing the 40-hour work week. My guess is that Obama will make some concessions to unions and this could be one of them, but then who pays for that? Someone has to pay for this free healthcare.
  • Many believe that healthcare should not be profit making. However, instead of the insurance companies profiting, the government will profit. We can’t sue the government – there will be no judicial recourse. There is also the problem of doctors profiting. If they don’t make a profit, we will see the end of private practice and we will only get our health services through clinics and hospitals. The service will be lacking and the lines will be long.
  • Obamacare will ruin our healthcare system.
  • Obamacare isn’t ready for prime time and a lot of people will be hurt by it.
  • People who are opposed to paying for abortions will be forced to pay for them. That is unconscionable.
  • Kathleen Sebelius gets to decide who lives and who dies. What was that she said – some live, some die?
  • An IPAB comprised of non-medical, unelected bureaucrats will operate as a rogue government and decide the fate of the elderly and handicapped by limiting payments to doctors and hospitals. The IPAB operates independent of Congress and only the Executive controls it. IPAB can probably levy taxes. That is too much power in the hands of one branch of government.
  • Our healthcare records will not be secure and we could easily be subject to tyranny of government agencies and rogue employees.
  • The bill is almost 20,000 pages. That can’t be good.
  • Obamacare is about the government taking over 18% of the economy.

Every doctor I know thinks this is an awful bill. It was written in secret by special interests. There is a lot of money and influence involved. We are giving our health over to a small number of elite.

We will eventually be stuck with a single payer system and most freedom-loving Americans don’t see that as a good thing. The non-profit co-ops subsidized by the government and the many demands placed on insurance companies will force them out of business.

The White House is rewriting this bill, not Congress. They have amended it 19 times without going through Congress.

If this bill goes through as is, we won’t be the country we were.

The Republicans finally look like the party of Lincoln. It wasn’t easy for him and his party then and this won’t be easy now.

GrEaT sAtAn”S gIrLfRiEnD: Shut it down. Keep the Gov out of our hair for a while. Besides, they can’t harm us while they’re out of biz.

JoshuaPundit: I think the chances of a shutdown are 65-35 that it will happen. I see it, overall, as a positive thing.

For five years, we’ve been governed by a dysfunctional, arrogant demagogue and his enablers engaged in the looting of the treasury to reward their political cronies, Chicago-style. It’s the height of irony to see a president and his allies who wasted a trillion taxpayer dollars on a bogus ‘stimulus’ that did nothing but enrich their political cronies, who have made an art out of ‘digitizing’ money that doesn’t exist now raging about ‘political terrorists’ and fiscal responsibility merely because someone finally said no, we’re not going to raise the amount of your credit line again unless we can negotiate over some things we want to happen.

This president has a long history of governing by diktat and executive order, including his de facto imposition of the Dream Act congress rejected three times and modifications to ObamaCare (the name ‘Affordable Care Act’ is an unintended joke on the country). Both of these acts are illegal under U.S. law along with other actions by this president.

I’d remind everyone exactly why ObamaCare is the train wreck it is – because this president, Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker Pelosi shoved it through with Republicans literally locked out of the room and without the normal negotiations and deliberations with the Senate. They did it because Republican Scott Brown won a special election in Massachusetts and would have been a vote not to end debate, holding ObamaCare up indefinitely. So they pushed the bill through without even reading it. Now they, or rather the American people, are stuck with this mess. President Obama and the Democrats own it.

So all in all, it’s high time an attempt was made to have this president do something he’s consistently refused to do – negotiate with Republicans. Whether the House Republican leadership will hold steady is, of course, another matter. If they don’t, if they cave, I doubt the GOP will survive as a party.

The Glittering Eye: Yes, the federal government will shut down. Default is also possible. No, I do not approve of it. I think it’s an abrogation of responsibility on the part of our elected leaders and there’s plenty of blame to spread around. Refusing to fund the PPACA was like waving a red flag in front of a bull. Whatever Congressional Republicans’ views of the program, shutting down the federal government to poke a thumb in the eye of the Senate Democrats and the president is just irresponsible.

However, the Senate Democrats are irresponsible, too, in refusing to deal with the legislation passed by the House and the president has been decidedly unhelpful by refusing outright to negotiate with House Republicans. Sometimes I fear for the republic.

Bookworm Room: No, there won’t be a government shutdown, because Republicans always blink. And without regard to the shutdown, I disapprove of Republican’s blinking problem. As for the shutdown itself, I think it would be a useful exercise for all Americans to see what happens if the federal government is reduced to its essential services. It will shake people up, one way or another.

I was reminded of a mini-government shutdown just today when I found myself at San Francisco’s beautiful Marina and Chrissy Fields. Looking out at the Bay and at Alcatraz, I was truly saddened when I thought that the sequester means that, for the first time in 25 or so years, there won’t be a Fleet Week event in San Francisco. When the sequester hit, the Pentagon didn’t trim waste (and there’s lots of waste in our wonderful military). Instead, it immediately punished the American people. The Pentagon is, after all, first and foremost a bureaucracy. The loss isn’t just emotional, it’s financial. Fleet Week is a very profitable weekend for the towns that host it. In addition to sailors and Marines, Fleet Week brings in about 100,000 tourists and their money. Nevertheless, the important thing to remember is that, in the grand scheme of things, life goes on. A government service was cut and it’s no biggie.

Well, there you have it.

Make sure to tune in every Monday for the Watcher’s Forum. And remember, every Wednesday, the Council has its weekly contest with the members nominating two posts each, one written by themselves and one written by someone from outside the group for consideration by the whole Council. The votes are cast by the Council and the results are posted on Friday morning.

It’s a weekly magazine of some of the best stuff written in the blogosphere and you won’t want to miss it.

And don’t forget to like us on Facebook and follow us on Twitter… ’cause we’re cool like that, y’know?


Shut It Down! Don’t Fear The Shutdown…

By: Terresa Monroe-Hamilton
Hat Tip: The Right Planet
Cross-Posted at Right Wing News

While Democratic Senators railed about the end of the world as we know it, evidently they felt they could take Sunday off and golf or whatever while it all burns down. They. Don’t. Give. A. Crap. Life and death, but maybe I’ll show up around 2 PM or so — maybe.

The Hill:

“The Senate decided not to work yesterday,” Boehner said in a rare speech on the House floor. “Well my goodness, if there’s such an emergency, where are they?”

Boehner was joined by Republicans like Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-N.C.), who said the Senate needs to work quickly to help the House avoid a government shutdown.

“The Senate needs to hustle,” she said.

“Where, oh where, has the Senate gone?” asked Rep. Ted Poe (R-Texas). “Where, oh where, can they be?”

The House passed a spending resolution early Sunday morning that would delay ObamaCare and repeal the medical device tax. Senate Democrats have said they would reject the GOP bill when the Senate reconvenes at 2 p.m. today.

But Boehner said people around the country support a delay in ObamaCare, and that the health law is a major reason why companies aren’t hiring.

“The fact that nobody knows what the rules are, employers scared to death to hire new employees, cutting the hours many of their current employees, and for what reason?” he asked. “This law is not ready for prime time.

“It’s time for the Senate to listen to the American people, just like the House has listened to the American people, and pass a one-year delay of ObamaCare and permanent repeal of the medical device tax.”

And as the train wreck of Obamacare and the debt ceiling bears down upon America, the Obamacare website quietly deleted their reference to ‘free healthcare.’ Why? Because it doesn’t exist. It never did – it was another lie.

Listen to Michele Bachmann, who makes a very persuasive argument for a shutdown:

“There is a very large group of us who believe that this is it, this isn’t just another year, this isn’t just another CR fight,” Bachmann told me. “This is historic, and it’s a historic shift that’s about to happen, and if we’re going to fight, we need to fight now.”

“This isn’t just another bill,” Bachmann continued. “This isn’t load limits on turnip trucks that we’re talking about. This is consequential. And I think the reason why you’ve come to this flash point is that this is an extremely consequential bill that will impact every American, and that’s why you have such passionate opinions. And we’re not giving up and we’re not caving in that easily.”

For Bachmann and many of her colleagues, the enormity of the issue serves to highlight the problem with less extensive anti-Obamacare measures. “The Vitter Amendment isn’t going to help real people,” Bachmann told me. “It’s going to be a political move, but it’s not going to help real people. Obamacare will continue to destroy the economy. Now, repealing the medical device tax does help the economy. Here in the Beltway, we get the medical device tax issue. And in my state of Minnesota, we get the medical device tax issue. That’s our industry. And I’m all for [repealing] it, but for most Americans, that is not something that they see that they want to get.”

And what about delaying just the individual mandate for a year, as opposed to all of Obamacare? “That’s worthless,” Bachmann said.

She’s absolutely right and now is the time to fight. Obamacare will finish off America as we have always known her and Amnesty will put the final nails in our red, white and blue coffin. We are bankrupt and Obamacare puts us into a debt spiral there is no way out of as a nation. Individually, it taxes us literally to death and turns us into a groveling third world country with a massive redistribution of wealth globally and a Marxist iron fisted regulatory mandate at home. Amnesty will ensure that there will never be another Conservative leadership in this country. America will have finished morphing from a Constitutional Republic into a dictatorship and Americans will simply wonder how it happened.

Listen to Mark Steyn:

Obama’s pointless, traceless super-spending is now (as they used to say after 9/11) “the new normal.” Nancy Pelosi assured the nation last weekend that everything that can be cut has been cut and there are no more cuts to be made. And the disturbing thing is that, as a matter of practical politics, she may well be right. Many people still take my correspondent’s view: If you have old money well managed, you can afford to be stupid — or afford the government’s stupidity on your behalf. If you’re a social-activist celebrity getting $20 million per movie, you can afford the government’s stupidity. If you’re a tenured professor or a unionized bureaucrat whose benefits were chiseled in stone two generations ago, you can afford it. If you’ve got a wind farm and you’re living large on government “green energy” investments, you can afford it. If you’ve got the contract for signing up Obamaphone recipients, you can afford it.

But out there beyond the islands of privilege most Americans don’t have the same comfortably padded margin for error, and they’re hunkering down. Obamacare is something new in American life: the creation of a massive bureaucracy charged with downsizing you — to a world of fewer doctors, higher premiums, lousier care, more debt, fewer jobs, smaller houses, smaller cars, smaller, fewer, less; a world where worse is the new normal. Would Americans, hitherto the most buoyant and expansive of people, really consent to live such shrunken lives? If so, mid-20th-century America and its assumptions of generational progress will be as lost to us as the Great Ziggurat of Ur was to 19th-century Mesopotamian date farmers.

George Orwell, after attending a meeting of impoverished but passive miners, remarked sadly that “there is no turbulence left in England.” The Democrats, and much of the Republican establishment, have made a bet that there is no turbulence left in America, and the citizenry will stand mute before Obamacare’s wrecking ball. Unless they’re willing to accept a worse life for their children and grandchildren, middle-class Americans need to prove them wrong.

Our children’s and grandchildren’s futures are being destroyed — right here, right now. The Progressive Marxist elitists have crossed the red line. Will we take it sitting down America? Shut it down! Don’t fear the shutdown. Fear the Obamacare Reaper.


You’re Invited to Hear Author and Political Activist Trevor Loudon in Howell, MI, Tues. Evening, Oct. 8th

Pacific Freedom Foundation

The Brighton, Lakes Area, Rattle With Us, Retake Our Gov Tea Party and West Oakland Patriots TEA Parties invite you to meet best-selling author, Trevor Loudon, on Tuesday Evening, Oct. 8th in Howell!

The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress is like no other book written on American politics. The book exposes, in layman’s terms, the comprehensive communist, socialist and extreme progressive infiltration of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate.

The book profiles fourteen Senators and more than fifty Representatives and their ties to the Communist Party USA, Democratic Socialists of America, Workers World Party, and the Institute for Policy Studies, Council for a Livable World and other radical anti-American organizations. Trevor has done the hard work to connect the dots of why the U.S. Congress has moved further and further left over our lifetime and you won’t want to miss him.

We look forward to seeing you there! Bring a friend!

Tuesday, Oct 8, 2013 | 7:00 pm
The Brighton Tea Party,
Lakes Area Tea Party,
Rattle With Us Tea Party,
Retake Our Gov Tea Party
and West Oakland Patriots TEA Party are hosts

Crystal Gardens Banquet Center
5768 E. Grand River Avenue
Howell, MI 48843

Questions? Contact: Regina Thompson


The Lapeer County Tea Party Patriots Invite You To Hear Trevor Loudon Speak on ‘The Enemies Within,’ Tues. Afternoon, Oct. 8th

Pacific Freedom Foundation

Meet a modern-day Paul Revere, Trevor Loudon — author, political researcher and activist who will inspire you to take back America. Come to the book signing and hear Trevor speak!

The Enemies Within: Communists, Socialists and Progressives in the U.S. Congress is like no other book written on American politics. The book exposes, in layman’s terms, the comprehensive communist, socialist and extreme progressive infiltration of the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate.

The book profiles fourteen Senators and more than fifty Representatives and their ties to the Communist Party USA, Democratic Socialists of America, Workers World Party, and The Institute for Policy Studies, Council for a Livable World and other radical anti-American organizations. Trevor has done the hard work to connect the dots of why the U.S. Congress has moved further and further left over our lifetime and you won’t want to miss him.

We look forward to seeing you there! Bring a friend!

Lapeer County Tea Party Patriots

Tuesday, Oct 8, 2013 | 1:00 pm

Louie’s Sports Tavern
3100 Davison Rd
Lapeer, MI 48446

Questions? Contact: Regina Thompson