Russian Strategy and Europe’s Refugee Crisis


Paul Sutliff sent me a link to a Center for Security Policy (CSP) pdf link with this recommendation:

 

This is a must read. I am hoping to have at least one of the authors on my June 28th show when I move to Thursdays. This is a must read!

 

That show, by the way, is Civilization Jihad Awareness with Paul Sutliff on Blog Talk Radio. The show comes on live, but it is archived. You should go there and catch up.

 

The pdf is 20 pages with foot notes. Take your time and thoroughly read the CSP analysis. I could probably write a whole other post trying to introduce this extremely important analysis, but I won’t.

 

That which I say will little justice to the content presented, but here goes a brief thought. The central bad guy as to American National Security is Russia. You will discover that Russia is at the heart of the Muslim Refugee crisis smacking Europe. AND in relation to that you should understand the Russian goal is destabilization first in Europe and second in the USA. Russia even has tentacle infiltrating European Nationalist movements to foment societal chaos while also publicly supporting the Multicultural Left ideals. This duo strategy has only one purpose: cultural destabilization designed to disunite European resolve and alienate a united Europe away from America.

 

TRUST ME! Those brief words about “Russian Strategy and Europe’s Refugee Crisis” is only the mere tip of the iceberg that I pray you take the time to fully understand what the authors J.R. Nyquist and Dr. Anca-Maria Cernea are trying to enlighten you concerning the survival of our Western Culture via strategic concepts of National Security and National Interests.

 

JRH 6/5/18

Please Support NCCR

************************

Russian Strategy and Europe’s Refugee Crisis

 

By J.R. Nyquist and Dr. Anca-Maria Cernea

May 29, 2018

Center for Security Policy

 

INTRODUCTION

 

Forty years ago, a serious long-term problem confronting Moscow was the USSR’s fast-growing Muslim population. It was then speculated that the Soviet Union’s high Muslim birthrate would turn the USSR into a majority Muslim country by the middle of the twenty-first century. It is a strange joke, and more than a curious twist of fate, that NATO faces this same prospect today.

 

The Russian armed forces officially moved into Syria on 30 September 2015. Already a massive Muslim “refugee” invasion of Europe was underway, stretching through the spring and summer of that year. This migrant flood occurred without a dramatic change in the Syrian crisis. According to a report by investigative journalist Witold Gadowski, published in mid-September 2015, the people then pouring into the heart of Europe included more than refugees, and possibly included ISIS terrorist infiltrators.1

 

Gadowski was a well-known war reporter, documentary film director, and winner of several journalism prizes in Poland and abroad. He went to Syria in 2015 and discovered that in the territory controlled by the Islamic State (ISIS), there was no chance for anyone to leave ISIS-controlled territory without permission. As he explained, the punishment for attempting to escape was crucifixion.2

 

In Gadowski’s opinion, the flood of refugees had been triggered by decisions made in Moscow, and perhaps in Tehran. In fact, the mass killing of Syrian civilians was an ongoing project of the Russian-backed Syrian dictator, Bashar al-Assad – whose troops were killing seven times more civilians than ISIS.3 Once the Russian bombers arrived, even more civilians were targeted.4

 

Of special interest, and contrary to public declarations, Russian and Chinese technicians were busy helping ISIS to maintain its captured oil rigs and refineries, while Russian trained Iraqi military officers (formerly in Saddam Hussein’s army), were leading ISIS forces against the Baghdad government (which government set up a joint intelligence headquarters in league with Iran and Russia).5 From this and other evidence it appears that Russia has been playing a double game in the Middle East.

 

Using the Iraqi oil infrastructure, relying on clandestine Russian technical support, ISIS earned $800 million in annual revenues by “selling more than 60,000 barrels of oil per day.” But this was not the Islamic State’s only source of income. According to Gadowski:

 

…the Islamic State trades artworks and archeological artifacts. It is not true that the monuments of antique culture are destroyed. They are sold and bring a large income. In 90 percent of the cases, this is happening through the Russian mafia. The Islamic State and the wave of refugees bring profits to the Russian, Turkish and Albanian mafias.6

 

In this matter the Russian mafia is not simply the Russian mafia, and the same can be said of mafia organizations which have appeared throughout the “former” communist world. As noted by Brian Whitmore of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, “Organized crime is now a major element of Russian statecraft.”7 According to Gadowski, Russia’s game is to “checkmate Europe, and to a lesser extent the United States.” Outwardly Russia pretends to fight ISIS. In reality, Russia helps ISIS. Essential to the plan, the Syrians were generating refugees by terrorizing civilians in Syria. As stated above, Gadowski believed that a secret Islamic State Terrorist Unit (AMNI) was placing fanatical killers among the refugees. In this way a vast network of suicide bombers and murderers entered Europe.8

 

After arriving in Syria, Russian air units launched bombing raids against Syrian civilians, adding to the refugee flow in late summer. Of course, the refugee crisis was well under way before the Russians arrived. It had peaked earlier. What the bombing showed, however, was Russia’s strategic intention. The Syrians and the Russians were following a pre-defined path. The bombers were the icing on a cake already baked. Long before the Russian bombers arrived other means of pressure had been employed by Syria – including the use of chemical weapons. Refugees (and terrorists) had long since flooded into neighboring Turkey. Through the spring and summer of 2015, the numbers were getting larger and larger. A significant proportion of these masses moved into Europe. This paper will present evidence and arguments that Russia and her allies (Syria and Iran) set this process in motion as part of a larger strategic design. The authors believe that Moscow does not act haphazardly. Rather, its moves are carefully thought-out in advance. The strategy being applied is complex, its objectives masked by disinformation and subterfuge, extortion and blackmail, organized crime and false flag terrorist operations.

 

THE ARAB SPRING

 

When rebellions began to break out in the Middle East several years ago, the former chief of Romanian intelligence, Ion Mihai Pacepa, wondered why the first rebellions in the series took place “only in Islamic countries that are pro-American.” He asked why the rebels were burning American flags. He thought it suspicious that the United States had no advanced warning of the mass demonstrations that swept the Arab world from Morocco to the Persian Gulf. Pacepa noted that “on the first day of the Cairo uprising” the demonstrators “were carrying flags displaying the hammer and sickle.” He called this “a mistake caused by overzealousness….”9

 

The rebellion that began on 17 December 2010 in Tunisia, and spread across the Arab world, was an attempt to sweep away “moderate” Arab regimes. It was not a revolution for freedom or democracy. As Richard Miniter wrote in a 2011 Forbes article, “Virtually every element of the media narrative [on the Arab Spring] … is wrong or misleading.” The rebellion was not a spontaneous reaction to local dictatorships. According to Miniter, Egypt’s chief of intelligence warned Gen. David Petraeus in 2010 that Iran – a close ally and client state of Moscow – was preparing to “bring down [Egypt’s] Mubarak regime.”10

 

Miniter was told by intelligence officials that “Iran’s agents are behind the street demonstrations and violent attacks on government buildings.” 11 Iran’s revolutionary activity throughout the region, however, was not merely Iranian. This activity was connected to Russia, and to Russia’s past support for the communist cause. According to an Iranian specialist, the Supreme Leader of Iran, Ali Khamenei, was educated in Moscow and may be a Russian intelligence asset. Worse yet, other top leaders in Iran were also educated in Russia, with ongoing ties to Moscow.12

 

In a recently published article by the Katehon Institute13 in Russia, B. Ozerov explained that the Soviet government in 1918 “was guided by understanding Islam as a close ideology to the communist doctrine.” After all, Islam favored ideals of equality, social justice, and the redistribution of wealth. According to Ozerov, Moscow’s initial plan in the region was “to transform Islam into an Eastern edition of Communism….”14

 

In a 4 July 1925 interview with the Tokyo Nichi Nichi Shimbun, Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin was asked if he believed revolutionary turmoil in China, India, Persia and Egypt was bound to sweep away the Western powers. “Yes, I do,” said the communist leader, who added that the West would be “attacked on two sides – in the rear as well as in front.”

 

RELATED INSIGHTS OF V. KALASHNIKOV AND A. ILLARIONOV

 

In June 2013 J.R. Nyquist interviewed a disaffected KGB officer in Russia named Viktor Kalashnikov. In reference to Syria, the former KGB lieutenant colonel said, “It’s all about struggle against the United States. All allies are measured in terms of their anti-Americanism. If they are anti-American, they are our friends.” Kalashnikov then referred to the deployment of “terrorist armies.” Armies composed of terrorists, said Kalashnikov, were better than old-fashioned Soviet tank armies. They were more flexible, and cheaper than tanks. “The head of the Russian state has publicly warned the West that … arms deliveries to the opposition in Syria might result in terrorist attacks against Europe. That’s a clear causus belli – a real terrorist threat,” said Kalashnikov.15

 

When Nyquist advanced the idea that the Cold War was over, Kalashnikov scoffed. This is yet another topic, he said. “But we have to ask what happened to the Soviet Union in 1991. It was dismantled for the sake of reorganization and for the sake of Russian power.” The Soviet generals were not happy with the strategic situation. The large tank armies of the Soviet Union were, in Kalashnikov’s words, “a wasting asset, especially after 1983.”16

 

The core strategy, he explained, “was splitting Europe from America.” In the 1980s this was attempted with the threat of war. But now, under present circumstances, a different method would have to be devised. “What happened on 9/11 was just an omen of things to come,” he explained.

 

In Part 1 of the interview, headlined “Russia’s Islamist Alliance, Plans to Destroy NATO,” the former KGB lieutenant colonel, who had been trained as a strategist, attempted to draw the interviewer’s attention to Russia’s support for the anti-immigrant parties in Europe. Here Kalashnikov referred to Islam as a Russian weapon in the destruction of NATO. Realizing the interviewer was perplexed, Kalashnikov said, “Let me talk about [the neo-fascists] in Hungary. They are pro-Putin. They are nationalists, and of course, they are absolutely anti-Semitic and anti-American.”17

 

What did the anti-immigrant parties have to do with “terrorist armies” in the Middle East? What did any of it have to do with splitting America off of Europe? Here was a question requiring careful consideration. To answer this question, one might well imagine how NATO would have prospered if Hillary Clinton and Marine Le Pen had won their respective elections. What if Europe followed France’s lead? Would the politically correct Americans remain allies with the new Europe? “What I would suggest,” said Kalashnikov, “is that your anti-terror experts read Vladimir Lenin who provided the textbook for terrorists. How they should set up combat units; who is to be killed first and second; what strategy and tactics to adopt. Lenin developed a complete theory for using terrorism to take power and govern a huge state. That was the beginning of Soviet strategy, statehood and government, as well as international policy.”18

 

Was Kalashnikov talking about Europe?

 

More than one year after Kalashnikov’s curious pronouncements, a former Kremlin economic advisor named Andrei Illarionov, made an even more curious statement. In a December 2014 television interview, Illarionov noted that Europe had reached its lowest level of defense readiness. He also noted that Russia was openly threatening the West with nuclear war. Illarionov then made an astonishing prediction, adding that “the European nations will not be very much surprised, let’s say, if in the spring of next year, 2015, there will be some kind of massive political movement – let’s say a kind of ‘Islamic spring.’”19

 

Being Russian himself, having worked in the Kremlin, it seems obvious that Illarionov had access to high-level sources. The coming “Islamic spring,” he said, would not occur in the Middle East, “but in Europe.” He mentioned destabilizing effects on “certain European countries” where the crisis would “consume the energy and attention of European leaders at a time when Mr. Putin would try and fulfill his neo-imperial project….”20

 

Illarionov was quite specific when he said the coming “Islamic spring” in Europe would involve “movements and activities … in European countries themselves.” When asked if this could be triggered by Russia, Illarionov said, “I am just warning … when it should happen … European societies should not be [too] much shocked and surprised.”

 

Illarionov’s prediction carries forward the suggestion that Moscow instigated the migrant crisis. For how else could Illarionov have known about an “Islamic spring” involving “movements and activities … in Europe”? His prediction was an unlikely direct hit. To know something in advance is to know something is being planned. Illarionov clearly predicted the most significant event of the following year. He also implied this event was planned to distract the West from Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. And this prediction fits perfectly with the analysis of Lt. Col. Viktor Kalashnikov, a resident of Moscow, who warned of Russia deploying “terrorist armies” in 2013. The fact is, people in Moscow knew what was coming. And why wouldn’t they? It takes enormous resources and real planning to move millions of people from the Middle East to the heart of Europe. A lot of people had to know in advance, if only to set up the needed transport system.

 

INSIGHTS OF A ROMANIAN GENERAL

 

Those who have lived under communist regimes, who were educated as strategists, are in a better position to properly evaluate recent events than their West European counterparts. During an August 2015 Adevarul Live television discussion, retired Army General Constantin Degeratu referred to the European refugee crisis as a “hybrid war” of aggression, conjured out of the Middle East by Russia. Superficially, the refugee crisis “completely covered the problem of the Russian aggression against Ukraine,” Degeratu noted. He then stated that the whole refugee operation was “well organized.” The general added, “Look at the people who are coming. They are better dressed and better fed than 10 to 15 percent of Romania’s population. This is a planned invasion, it doesn’t have a direct cause in the Middle East….” He then pointed out the logistical difficulties involved in moving millions of people hundreds or thousands of miles. “If somebody is to come from Afghanistan with a trolley to the border of Macedonia, this requires logistics.”21

 

As if to clarify Kalashnikov’s earlier point about Hungary, Degeratu pointed to a curious anomaly. “It is said that this threefold increase in the number of refugees compared to the numbers of last summer is taking everyone by surprise. But [this] occurred a week after Hungary completed the building of [a large border] fence. Doesn’t it seem interesting to you that first the fence was built and afterwards this migration started, in that particular area?”22

 

Retired Army General Alexandru Grumaz was also on the program. He agreed that the migration was “well supported.” He added that Turkey also had an interest in pushing the refugees along, toward Europe. It was, said Grumaz, a crisis of European institutions. Degeratu said the problem of the refugee invasion could not be solved. Why? “Because it is managed by Russia and thus it is meant not to be solved, but to be maintained.” The general then said, “Russia’s interest is to maintain this crisis.”

 

“It is clear,” said Degeratu, “that if the European Union doesn’t want to live the nightmare … which says that in the years 2030 to 2040 more than 60 percent of the active EU population will be Muslim … then the European countries should decide if they want to survive as a civilization or not.” According to Degeratu’s strategic assessment, “We have to understand that we are the target of a war, and we may call it hybrid, or an asymmetrical war, but this migrant wave is a consequence of it.” He then summarized the perilous cost of the migrants for Europe, noting, “the cost for each one of these people is three times the minimum retirement pension in Romania!”23

 

Surely, said Degeratu, “The political attitude [in Europe] with regard to this situation needs to change. So far, it’s been peace-time politics. Now we are the target of an aggression. Border control is absolutely mandatory.”

 

According to Prof. Przemysław Żurawski vel Grajewski, who was asked by Dr. Cernea to comment on Gen. Degeratu’s assessments, “The opinions of Gen. Degeratu are fully justified and I would subscribe [to] each of his statements….” Prof. Żurawski is one of Poland’s best political analysts. He teaches social science at the University of Łódz and the National School of Public Administration, serving in the National Council for Development, an advisory board to President Andrzej Duda. He is also a counselor to the current Polish Minister of Foreign Affairs, Jacek Czaputowicz. According to Prof. Żurawski, the Russians are not responsible for all the refugees who have flooded into Europe, but it is certain “they did their best to make [the problem] larger … to confuse the political scene in European countries … as much as they can. Russia is the main ally of Assad and Iran….” These allies of Russia, he said, have maximized “the scale of the refugees.” Prof. Żurawski also pointed to “the semi-criminal FSB/local mafias and hybrid structures in Bosnia and Herzegovina.” These also played a role in moving refugees through the Balkans into the heart of Europe. “The conclusion is,” he said, “that Russia had instruments to maximize the troubles” despite Europe’s inability to find “a smoking gun.”24

 

Prof. Żurawski also noted that, “Anti-immigrant parties in the West are usually pro-Russian (Front National, AfD); so deepening the crisis helps Russia’s followers in the West.” This point should not be overlooked. (Kalashnikov hinted at this factor with reference to Hungary more than a year before the refugee crisis began.) Here the manipulation of the European right that takes center stage. Moscow has every reason to believe the European anti-immigrant parties will gain political traction as the refugee crisis intensifies. Moscow, therefore, has reason to invest in the European right. Simultaneously, Moscow also uses its agents on the European left. These agents intensify the crisis through “politically correct” policies. As the left drives the crisis forward, the right opposition grows and seeks ready allies – and is driven into Moscow’s open arms.

 

This process may already be underway in Hungary where Prime Minister Viktor Orban has shifted toward Moscow.25 The Chief of the Hungarian General Staff, Gen. Tibor Benkő, says that Hungary does not have to buy equipment exclusively from NATO countries. Russia is currently modernizing Hungarian Mi-24 and Mi-17 helicopters for $64 million.26 Perhaps even more alarming is Prime Minister Orban’s tolerance with regard to Russian infiltration of the Hungarian right. Former Hungarian anti-communists are now celebrating Soviet cosmonaut Yuri Gagarin, linking arms with Russian officials. According to authors Péter Krekó and Lóránt Győri, Russia has invested political capital in “hate groups in Central Europe,” with financial ties “to violent organizations in Central and Eastern Europe as well….”27 This is a conscious strategy:

 

In Moscow’s toolkit of active measures and hybrid warfare, the boundaries between violent and nonviolent tools are increasingly blurry. And this process is two-directional: not only can information be weaponized; violent organizations can be used as soft-power tools. The Kremlin is highly effective at infiltrating fringe parties and paramilitary organizations in Central Europe. They are easy to purchase or control, as these extremist groups tend to be small and easily manipulated.28

 

What is the ultimate strategic value of the infiltration and manipulation of fringe parties and paramilitary groups? Keeping this question in mind, when we look at the present-day chaos in the Middle East, Russia’s past support for terrorist organizations of every kind becomes less and less of a riddle.

 

The former Romanian Minister for Communications and Information,29 Marius Bostan, was asked by Dr. Cernea if he agreed with Gen. Degeratu’s remarks. Bostan replied, “From the perspective of my own experience in public service and politics, I do agree with Gen. Degeratu’s opinion that Russia is likely to have been involved in the migrant crisis and … it should be regarded as a hybrid war operation against the West.” Bostan emphasized that “a very important component of the hybrid war is the cultural dimension.” Here the Internet plays a key role. The Russian long-term investment in “propaganda, disinformation, opinion and behavior-shaping” cannot be underestimated. A short-term view would be a mistake. Bostan explained,

 

There is something about the Russian strategy that is difficult to explain to our Western allies. It’s the fact that Russia usually acts on both sides of a (real or manufactured) conflict. For instance, on [the] Internet we notice that Russian propaganda, disinformation or trolling activity on forums and social networks typically carry messages meant to create/amplify conflicts between different ethnic or religious groups – Romanians versus Hungarians, Poles versus Ukrainians, Christians versus Jews, etc. And they encourage at the same time groups with opposed views – far left anti-market tendencies [versus] libertarian ones, LGBT-rights [versus] conservative Christian activism, open-border multiculturalism [versus] anti-immigration movements, etc. Thus, Russia is able to provoke conflicts and crises, and to influence the public agenda of the countries it targets for subversion.

 

This ambivalence may seem paradoxical to Western minds, used to a binary logic according to which something cannot be black and white at the same time. Well, Russians are not Westerners. In the East, black and white may be defined in many different ways. Moreover, the Russian leaders still function according to a mentality shaped by Marxist dialectics, which says that progress results from the constant struggle between contrary elements.

 

It looks like the West is only now discovering that, for instance, Russian internet trolls simultaneously support a certain cause and its contrary.30

 

Bostan has laid out one of Russia’s key strategies. He says this kind of strategy is “difficult” for the West to understand. As Rudyard Kipling expressed it, “East is East, and West is West, and never the twain shall meet.” At some point in the future, however, the West must learn to appreciate Russia’s “scissors strategy” – “that Russia usually acts on both sides of a … conflict.” If there is one central lesson to be drawn from this study, Bostan has underscored it.

 

In their Atlantic Council article, “From Russia with Hate,” Péter Krekó and Lóránt Győri explain how Polish counterintelligence “is currently investigating Mateusz Piskorski, the leader of the Polish leftist party … as well as former activists of the far-right Polish Congress of the New Right (KNP) on charges of espionage on behalf of Russia.”31 Here is the classic Russian “scissors strategy” at work If the refugee crisis is part of a Russian scissors strategy, how does Russia benefit? First, political tensions are intensified between the European right and left; second, the right can be pushed toward Moscow by a variety of mechanisms; third, a general weakening of NATO develops under a scenario of “divide and conquer”; fourth, a general demoralization and loss of belief in existing institutions naturally follows.

 

In his interview with Epoch Times in November 2015, General Degeratu showed the depth of this understanding when he said we “should see who takes profit” from the refugee crisis. “Well,” he explained, the Russians profited, and many cracks appeared in NATO. “We see how ‘united’ Europe has been,” Degeratu added. “Full unity! There have been 50 voices in our European ‘unity.’”32

 

Those who have set up the exercise have understood all our weaknesses and have exploited them properly. What else have they obtained … does anyone still speak about the Ukrainian crisis? Not anymore. There are also 1 million – in fact, 800,000 – refugees, from Eastern Ukraine and Crimea, most of them from Donbass. Eight hundred thousand. There are 8,000 dead. Around 2,000 children and pregnant women have died in this crisis. We almost haven’t seen them on the (TV) screen, there have been no gatherings, there was no session of the Romanian Parliament….33

 

Degeratu is extraordinarily perceptive, and other experts agree with his assessment that Russia is waging a hybrid war against Europe. “Maybe some of us are too militarily-minded and ask questions that shouldn’t be asked,” said Degeratu.

 

DIRECT TESTIMONY FROM A SYRIAN GENERAL ON RUSSIA’S DOUBLE GAME

 

There is a stunning revelation in the fragment of a September 2015 interview given to Witold Gadowski by Syrian Brigadier General Ahmad Aljjdeaa, a soldier with thirty years of experience in the Syrian Army who is also the deputy minister of defense in the Syrian government-in-exile. According to Gen. Aljjdeaa, “Russian officers are constantly present in the branches of the Syrian army supporting the regime of Bashar Assad….”

 

Then he added, “Russia is interested in confusion in Syria. There are also four military training centers in Russia, in which fanatics are trained, who then fill the ranks of the Islamic State troops (ISIS). Among the trained are also Chechens.”34

 

Related to this, another curious headline reads: “In retreating from Iraq, ISIS terrorists

 

lost their Russian passports.”35  The facts are reported as follows: “The Iraqi military, who at the end of last week occupied the university building previously held by ISIS in the city of Mosul, displayed what was found in evidence as the identification papers of Islamic State terrorists, which mostly turned out to be Russian.”36

 

Again, it is a case of the “scissors strategy.” Moscow has perfected the fine art of stage-managing fake wars and phony splits with false fronts made up of “useful idiots.”37 Russia’s deployment of terrorist and counter-terrorist forces in Syria and Iraq should surprise no one. This procedure was used during the Soviet-Afghan War in the 1980s and again during the recent wars in Chechnya.38

 

At this juncture it may be useful to recite a bit of history. In July 2005 the Russian KGB/FSB defector Alexander Litvinenko told the Polish newspaper Rzeczpospolita that Ayman al-Zawahiri (then Al-Qaeda’s second in command) was trained by the FSB in Dagestan in 1997. According to the former KGB foreign intelligence officer Konstantin Preobrazhensky, Litvinenko “was responsible for securing the secrecy of al-Zawahiri’s arrival in Russia … in 1996-1997.”39

 

The Romanian intelligence defector, Lt. Gen. Ion Mahai Pacepa, has described Moscow’s use of Arab terrorist organizations throughout the Cold War in his books.40 We know that Russia stands firmly behind the Islamic terror regime in Tehran. Researcher Antero Leitzinger explained, “Modern terrorism was born within a year, 1967-68. International socialists (communists) started the fashion all over the world simultaneously, which should make us suspicious about the common roots. National socialists followed suit, turning Marxists of Muslim origin into Islamists of Marxist origin.”41

 

Among the closest associates of Khomeini, there were many Communists who had conveniently grown beards. Mustafa Ali Chamran had studied in California and Egypt before he founded a Red Shi’ite secret society. His pupils included later foreign minister Ibrahim Yazdi, oil minister Mohammed Gharazi, and Lebanese fellow student in Berkeley University, Hussein Shaikh al-Islam, who led the occupation of the US Embassy in Tehran. This occupation, shortly before the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, focused Iranian radicalism into anti-Americanism…. Mohammed Beheshti, whose death at a bombing on June 28th, 1981, remained a mystery, had resided in East Germany. Khomeini’s early companion and foreign minister, Sadegh Ghotbzadeh had successfully accommodated with the new regime. Both Ghotbzadeh and Chamran had received Palestinian terrorist training. As a student in the USA, Ghotbzadeh had been recruited by the [Soviet] GRU.42

 

With regard to the Soviet-Afghan War, Leitzinger explained that Soviet Military Intelligence (GRU) had developed special capabilities by the late 1980s, especially “how to manipulate Islamists and to make Communists (of the Khalq faction) to grow beards and join their declared enemies.” According to Leitzinger, “This ‘Khalq strategy” provided a successful alternative to the more orthodox “Parcham strategy” that relied on ideologically less unholy alliances.”43

 

Leitzinger argued that the Russian secret services “gained a tight hold on international terrorism, and [especially] on Islamism” in the 1990s. The terrorist is, in essence, a special kind of agent provocateur. A Western analyst finds it difficult to see the Afghan-Soviet War or the first and second Chechen Wars as utilizing provocation techniques on a broad scale. Former CIA official T.H. Bagley and KGB defector Peter Deriabin noted, “Soviet provocation … remains little understood in the West. People safe in a democratic system may find it difficult to conceive that rulers would systematically use such hostile techniques against their own subjects.”44

 

If Moscow’s wars in Afghanistan and Chechnya were built around terrorist provocations, and the objective was to radicalize and infiltrate Islam, and reorient Islam against the West, then the wars in Afghanistan and Chechnya appear in a more intelligible light. The Soviet Union did not invade Afghanistan for conventional reasons, or to attain classical military control.

 

With the advent of the refugee crisis in Europe, with the likelihood of thousands of terrorists settled within a mass of protected Muslim refugees, the least sign of Russian involvement – or the involvement of Russia’s Islamist surrogates – ought to inspire a shockwave of alarm through Europe’s security establishment. Given the history of Moscow’s infiltration of Islam, and the mounting evidence of Russia’s double game, the Kremlin would be the most natural suspect in any close study of the refugee crisis. Arguably, any other focus would be irresponsible.

 

As reported by the BBC, U.S. Gen. Philip Breedlove, the senior NATO commander in Europe, said that Russia and Syria were “deliberately weaponizing migration in an attempt to overwhelm European structures and break European resolve.” He cited Russia’s use of barrel bombs against Syrian civilians. What was the purpose of such indiscriminate attacks? The purpose was, he said, to “get them [masses of people] on the road” to Europe.45

 

Masses of homeless people, adhering to an alien religion, is one problem for Europe. Terrorism is yet another. Since the refugee crisis began Europe has been hit with an unprecedented wave of terrorist attacks (not to mention rapes and robberies). First came the Paris killings of November 2015, then the Brussels bombings of March 2016, then the Nice truck attack and the Normandy church attack of July 2016. Then there was the string of Islamic stabbings across Europe.46

 

Some of our sources (quoted above) have claimed that modern terrorism was introduced to the Muslims by the communist bloc half a century ago. This point must not be forgotten when evaluating the left’s strange love affair with Islam. “From the very beginning,” said former KGB Lt. Col. Konstantin Preobrazhensky, “the so-called Bolsheviks, or communists, were considering Muslims as the reserve [army], as the human resource for the world revolution. Not all … people know that the second appeal by Lenin, after the Great October Socialist Revolution in 1917, was addressed to Muslim toilers….” Preobrazhensky continued:

 

At that time Islam was the religion of the oppressed … of the people colonized by the West. As Lenin said by the time of the … Communist International, ‘The West is existing at the expense of the East.’ Even now we can hear such conclusions, such ideas. And as soon as the Russian Revolution took place, Russian Muslims immediately supported it, so that the communist Muslim military organizations were formed. The Muslim communists were dethroning the local bourgeois Muslim governments which appeared in the Russian Empire47.

 

MUSLIM REFUGEES TO EUROPE: A RUSSIAN POLICY

 

According to Antoni Rybczynski, “The migratory crisis in Europe is largely a work of Russian policy….” He further stated, “Already … when nobody expected Russian raids in Syria, Vladimir Putin warned that Europe would face the great problems associated with the influx of immigrants.” In this way Moscow supported Assad while undermining Europe.48

 

Another Niezalezna.pl headline underscores this same idea: “Putin’s diabolical game, Exporting Muslim immigrants to Europe.” The article begins, “The Norwegian authorities believe that the refugees’ invasion of their country is a Russian provocation.”49

 

In October 2015 the Czech Minister of Defense, Martin Stropnicky, suggested that Russia was possibly financing the transportation of refugees to Europe. “Although I do not have 100 percent proof of this information,” he said, “I cannot discount it either.”50 Given all we know, his surmise is logical. It is sensible. Why wouldn’t Russia – which has armed Islamic terrorists throughout Asia – arm Islamic terrorists in Germany, Britain, France or Sweden?

 

According to a member of the Estonian National Defense League, Ants Laaneots, “Putin’s aim is the disintegration of the European Union and NATO, if possible.” Russia, he added, is promoting “Euroscepticism.”51 More likely, Russia’s strategy includes many subtle and indirect objectives. As with the work of the late Mohammad Fahim in Afghanistan, Russia can take over a NATO-defended country through the work of an enterprising criminal. Russia can thereby paralyze the heart of Afghanistan or the heart of Europe in a way that mocks European compassion.

 

The Chairman of the Supreme Council of Lithuania, Vytautas Landsbergis, made an observation on 15 September 2015 about the refugee crisis almost identical to others we have seen:

 

I was thinking who had to profit, and I know now. In the current crisis, the whole attention is focused on Europe. Nobody is speaking of Ukraine any more, although there are almost 2 million refugees there as well. Putin has chased them away, and nobody is proposing them to go where life is better….52

 

According to Landsbergis, the current migration crisis is a threat to European civilization.

 

Europe has met a big danger for its own system, even for its own civilization. The Germans earlier had illusions, that they would manage to integrate a million Turks, that the Turks would become Germans and there would be no problem. It didn’t work. Ghettos were created, a state within the state, and these are big problems….53

 

The Ukrainian MP, Anton Gerashchenko, speaking on TV Channel News One, stated:

 

The crisis of migrants in Europe arose because of Putin. The war in Syria began in 2011, but migrants flooded [Europe] like a large river in the spring of 2015. Russia made a decision after Europe imposed economic sanctions on Russia: ‘Let’s create problems for them.” They created a problem: $1,000 was allocated for the head of [each] refugee who will be taken from Syria to Europe. A million refugees are a billion dollars. This is nothing to Putin….54

 

The cost to Europe, however, is much more than a $1 billion. Gerashchenko added that an atmosphere of xenophobia has been created in Europe along with the growing influence of various nationalist parties, which are known for their favorable position toward Putin’s Russia.

 

CONCLUSION

 

Whatever the causes of the Refugee crisis, Moscow’s strategists have taken full advantage of the situation. Those who know Russian policy best, who are geographically further east, know that Russia has something to gain. If a “smoking gun” is absent, in a strict sense, there is yet a loaded gun. One might say this gun is pointed at the heart of Europe.

 

With regard to proof, the strategist does not wear a white lab coat or follow some academic procedure to understand the world. He is not a prosecuting attorney who has to prove his case in a court of law. He is engaged in “a duel on an extensive scale” – which was Carl von Clausewitz’s famous definition of war. If military and political leaders only acted on the basis of scientific proof – or rely on proofs used to convince a jury – they would not be able to act at all. The soldier and the stateman exercise judgment on a more commonsense level.

 

Consider the following analogy: If it is 2 December 1941 and an American plane spots six Japanese aircraft carriers moving east between Alaska and Midway Island, a sensible strategist would assume that the Japanese were intending to attack the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor. The sensible strategist would be quite foolish to declare that “there was no proof” of a Japanese intention to attack. It would be pedantic, under the circumstances, to say there was “no smoking gun.” Strategy dictates an entirely different epistemology. The reported movement of the Japanese aircraft carriers would constitute a loaded gun, aimed at the U.S. Pacific Fleet. A responsible military leader does not wait for that gun to be fired. An American admiral, drawing the proper inferences, would know exactly what to do. He would alert the fleet at Pearl Harbor and take countermeasures. He would know, as one who directs fleets, that every enemy move speaks to intention. That must be the foundation of his certitude, of his practical knowledge.

 

In terms of the Muslim refugee crisis in Europe: reports of ISIS training camps in Russia, reports of GRU/SVR and Russian Mafia assistance to a massive influx of refugees, reports of Russian infiltration of terrorist organizations throughout the Muslim world, etc., constitute a loaded gun. We must judge these reports as strategists – not as social scientists or academics. This must be the foundation of a new strategic methodology for the Muslim Refugee problem. Clearly, this is not simply about Islam. Russian involvement is indicated. Russian strategy must be understood as part of a greater strategic whole in order to properly assess the larger situation.

 

NOTES

 

1 http://www.fronda.pl/a/gadowski-dla-frondapl-agenci-panstwa-islamskiego-wsrod-imigrantowf,57134.html?part=1

 

2 Ibid.

 

3 http://www.vocativ.com/news/224151/syria-government-assad-kills-more-civilians-than-isis/index.html

 

http://www.vocativ.com/news/247479/russian-airstrikes-killed-more-syrian-civilians-than-isis-fighters/

 

5 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_military_intervention_in_the_Syrian_Civil_War

 

6 http://ileanajohnson.com/2015/12/witold-gadowski-polish-journalist-talks-to-fronda-pl-about-syrian-refugees/

 

7 http://www.businessinsider.com/organized-crime-is-now-a-major-element-of-russia-statecraft-2015-10

 

8 http://ileanajohnson.com/2015/12/witold-gadowski-polish-journalist-talks-to-fronda-pl-about-syrian-refugees/

 

9 https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2011/02/usegypt_relations_under_attack_1.html#ixzz58Jw FkwoF

 

10 https://www.forbes.com/sites/richardminiter/2011/08/18/the-exciting-notion-of-arab-spring-is-a-jedi-mind-trick/#2ab603254ce7

 

11 Ibid.

 

12 The former intelligence official was interviewed by J.R. Nyquist on condition of anonymity.

 

13 Katehon’s president is Konstantin Malofeev, a Russian oligarch with close ties to Aleksandr Dugin, previously the co-founder of the National Bolshevist movement (along with Eduard Limonov). This was a movement which combined nationalism and communism (i.e., a Red-Brown prototype movement). More recently Dugin changed his ideological formula, mixing pan-European or Eurasianist ideas with nihilistic metaphysics in order to justify a worldwide anti-U.S. alliance between traditionalist and Marxists. All this is interspersed with a thinly disguised Lenin-style anti-capitalist millenarianism which seeks to hasten the “end times” with the destruction of Carthage (i.e., the United States). Dugin’s pretense at Orthodox Christianity should not be taken any more seriously than his nationalist pretenses. His entire ideology is an arcane justification for a renewed USSR/Third Rome. His enemies are the old enemies of the USSR. His friends are the old friends of the USSR. Dugin’s philosophic sophistication is not to be taken seriously, though his past fascination with Aleister Crowley’s black magic craves closer investigation. Of course, Dugin’s flirtation with esoteric ideas has helped to win adherents on the alt-right, particularly among neo-pagans, occultists and Sufis. His supposed positive attitude toward traditional Christianity leads to the conclusion that he is consciously toying with dialectically opposite theologies and ideologies. Using conspiracy theory as a tool to advance his anti-U.S. agenda, Dugin also pretends to support President Donald Trump, making English language broadcasts praising Trump for stopping globalism and “the expansion of liberal ideology.” Dugin also praises Alex Jones and Infowars. To watch Dugin’s English language broadcasts, see – “The Mystic Shaping Russia’s Future and Bringing Back the Dark Ages, https://godsandradicals.org/2017/03/28/the-mystic-shaping-russias-future-and-ending-the-modern-era/. See also, http://www.4pt.su/en/content/who-aleksandr-dugin and https://www.nationalreview.com/2014/06/dugins-evil-theology-robert-zubrin/.

 

14 http://katehon.com/article/tragic-loss-red-pasha

 

15 http://www.trevorloudon.com/2013/06/exclusive-part-2-former-kgb-colonel-victor-kalashnikov-on-the-dangers-of-putin-worship-russias-anti-western-alliance-with-islam-israel-syria-iran-and-the-kremlins-grand-strateg/

 

16 Ibid.

 

17 http://conservativeread.com/former-kgbs-victor-kalashnikov-dangers-of-putin-worship-russias-islamist-alliance-plans-to-destroy-nato/

 

18 http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2013/07/were-911-terror-attacks-false-flag.html

 

19 https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=27&v=F6vj0z_oZIs – at about 15 minutes into the interview.

20 Ibid. 

21 http://adevarul.ro/international/europa/adevarul-live-generalul-degeratu-despre-criza-imigrantilor-rusia-cea-genereaza-criza-acestei-migratii-excesive-1_55e05dbdf5eaafab2c014a6e/index.html

 

22 Ibid.

 

23 Ibid.

 

 24 From Żurawski’s written reply to Dr. Cernea.

 

25 newsweek.com/vladimir-putin-meets-hungary-viktor-orban-agenda-gas-soviet-sanctions-551263

 

26 http://www.defence24.pl/geopolityka/wegry-sie-zbroja-orban-kupi-sprzet-w-rosji

 

27 http://www.atlanticcouncil.org/component/content/article?id=35796:from-russia-with-hate-the-kremlin-s-support-for-violent-extremism-in-central-europe

 

28 Ibid.

 

29 Bostan was minister from Nov. 2015 to July 2016.

 

30 Written response to inquiry of former Communications and Information Minister Marius Bostan to Dr. Cernea, dated 3 March 2018.

 

31 atlanticcouncil.org/component/content/article?id=35796:from-russia-with-hate-the-kremlin-s-support-for-violent-extremism-in-central-europe

 

32 http://epochtimes-romania.com/video/constantin-degeratu-criza-refugiatilor-a-fost-o-operatiune-organizata—1099

 

33 Ibid.

 

34 https://wpolityce.pl/swiat/260088-syryjski-general-oskarza-w-rosji-szkoleni-sa-fanatycy-ktorzy-potem-zasilaja-szeregi-panstwa-islamskiego

 

35 org/wycofujac-sie-iraku-bojowcy-isis-zgubili-swe-rosyjskie-paszporty/

 

36 Ibid.

 

37 See, especially,Yao Ming-le, The Conspiracy and Death of Lin Biao (1983). There it is explained how Gen. Lin Biao secretly prepared to wage a phony war with the Soviet Union in 1971.

 

38 See, especially, Bearden and Risen, The Main Enemy: The Inside Story of the CIA’s Final Showdown with the KGB (New York: Random House, 2003), p. 233.

 

39 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexander_Litvinenko#cite_note-69

 

40 Ronald Rychlak and Ion Mihai Pacepa, Disinformation: Former Spry Chief Reveals Secret Strategies for Undermining Freedom, Attacking Religion, and Promoting Terrorism (WND Books, 2013). See also, Pacepa, Red Horizons: The True Story of Nicolae and Eana Ceausescus’ Crimes, Lifestyle, and Corruption (1990).

 

41 See also Antero Leitzinger’s article in the The Eurasian Politician – Issue 5 (April-September 2002), “The Roots of Islamic Terrorism,” http://users.jyu.fi/~aphamala/pe/issue5/roots.htm

 

42 In this matter Leitzinger offers citations from the following sources: Livingston & Halevy, Inside the PLO (USA, 1990), p. 153-154; and Kuzichkin, Inside the KGB – Myth and Reality (Frome, 1990), p. 302.

 

43 eitzinger referenced Finnish researcher Anssi Kullberg’s master’s thesis on Russian geopolitics focusing on the Islamic Renaissance Party founded in Astrakhan in June 1990, “under KGB surveillance.” Kullberg

 

44 Deriabin and Bagley, KGB: Masters of the Soviet Union (New York, 1990), p. 252.

 

45 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-35706238

 

46 http://time.com/4607481/europe-terrorism-timeline-berlin-paris-nice-brussels/

 

47 Konstantin Preobrazhensky: “How the Russian Communists Run Islam.” https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Preobrazhensky+Konstantin+How+the+Russian+Communists+r un+Islamic+Terrorism+https%3a%2f%2fwww.youtube.com%2fwatch%3fv%3d0AqMCLqTRFo&PC=ACTS &refig=ebf0ef63163f4c948bcf96c60aeb434a&ru=%2fsearch%3fq%3dPreobrazhensky%2bKonstantin%2 bHow%2bthe%2bRussian%2bCommunists%2brun%2bIslamic%2bTerrorism%2bhttps%253A%252F%252 Fwww.youtube.com%252Fwatch%253Fv%253D0AqMCLqTRFo%26FORM%3dEDGNCT%26PC%3dACTS% 26refig%3debf0ef63163f4c948bcf96c60aeb434a&view=detail&mmscn=vwrc&mid=19EC1DC31D497F37 378719EC1DC31D497F373787&FORM=WRVORC

 

48 http://niezalezna.pl/77702-jak-putin-i-asad-produkuja-uchodzcow-rosjanie-stosuja-taktyke-z-wojny-czeczenskiej

 

49 http://niezalezna.pl/73114-diabelska-gra-putina-rosja-eksportuje-islamskich-imigrantow-do-europy

 

50 http://www.uawire.org/news/czech-minister-of-defense-it-is-possible-that-russia-is-financing-the-influx-of-refugees-to-europe

 

51 http://www.uawire.org/news/estonian-politician-russia-uses-the-migration-crisis-as-part-of-its-hybrid-war#

 

52 http://zw.lt/litwa/landsbergis-o-kryzysie-z-uchodzcami-winna-jest-rosja/

 

53 Ibid.

 

54 https://newsone.ua/news/politics/gerashhenko-krizis-migrantov-dlya-evropy-pridumal-putin.html

 

________________

Center for Security Policy HOMEPAGE

 

About CSP

 

The Center for Security Policy was founded in July 1988 by 30 national security policy practitioners united by an overarching goal – to perpetuate the time-tested policy Ronald Reagan used to such transformative effect during his presidency: “Peace through Strength.” Led by Frank Gaffney, a former Reagan Defense Department official and aide to Senators Henry “Scoop” Jackson and Senate Armed Services Committee Chairman John Tower, they founded a non-partisan, educational public policy organization with a single, overarching mission: secure freedom.

 

“What an  exemplary organization you are — devoting yourselves to the pursuit of peace and national security.  I can think of no loftier purpose or goal.”  — 1995 letter from President Ronald Reagan to the Center for Security Policy

 

The Center has diligently advanced that goal ever since through a combination of: cutting-edge public policy research; the skillful and evolving use of multi-media platforms for outreach to – and impact with – the nation’s leadership and people; and, most uniquely, the creation and direction of coalitions to undertake effective advocacy.

 

In its early days, the Center for Security Policy became famous for  READ THE REST

 

Michael Hansen Places ‘Killing Europe’ on Youtube for Free


John R. Houk

© May 30, 2018

 

Michael Hansen produced the roughly hour-long documentary “Killing Europe.” The problem: Multiculturalist bureaucracies in Europe and Canada have used censorship powers to keep the documentary from being shown. Evidently, after Hansen realized censorship was preventing remuneration in European and Canadian markets, he decided to place the documentary on Youtube.

 

If you Google “Michael Hansen,” many people come up but not the Hansen that made “Killing Europe.” I have to wonder why? Has censorship hit this guy and his documentary so hard that search engines are scrubbing his significance to expose Islam destroying the fabric of European culture?

 

I managed to get a screen capture of Hansen from a video in which Bill Warner is interviewing him about the censorship Hansen was facing over the documentary in November 2017:

 

Michael Hansen screen shot cropped

 

Here is a brief bio from the Gates of Vienna featuring “Killing Europe” information:

 

Michael Hansen, a.k.a. “The Missing Dane”, came to America fifteen years ago from Denmark. He recently returned to Europe to make a documentary about the changes that have occurred since he left. The result is a 90-minute film called Killing Europe, which takes a hard look at all the cultural enrichment that has produced Modern Multicultural Europe. (The Missing Dane: “Killing Europe”; posted by Baron Bodissey; Gates of Vienna; 10/5/17)

 

And here is an IMBd paragraph on “Killing Europe”:

 

Terrorist attacks, riots, and gang rapes are striking at the very foundations of Europe. This is the story of a Danish expatriate and his quest to uncover the growing issues within the European society he left 15 years ago. (Killing Europe; IMBd)

 

Quite a few Counterjihad websites are sharing “Killing Europe” that Hansen is now placing on Youtube for free. I am going to Pamela Geller to show her post which includes a One News Now interview with Michael Hansen.

 

JRH 5/30/18

Please Support NCCR

************************

WATCH VIDEO: Killing Europe

 

By Pamela Geller

May 29, 2018

Geller Report

 

Eurabia Dhimmitude: Killing Europe

 

This eye-opening documentary tells the truth about what is happening in Europe — the truth not only that the political and media elites don’t tell you, but that they don’t even want you to know. The film’s producer, Michael Hansen, has faced roadblock after roadblock in getting this film out. Now he has decided to make it available on YouTube.

 

VIDEO: Killing Europe

 

Posted by WEare138 Productions

Published on May 20, 2018

 

I funded this movie myself because I feel its got an important message that needs to get out. If you liked the movie and would like to help me do more projects, you can donate at https://www.paypal.me/weare138productions

 

Hansen explains:

 

I am the film maker who produced the movie “Killing Europe.”

 

I have met with a lot of resistance in trying to get this movie out to people. Baroness Caroline Cox even requested the movie taken down and re-edited, as she retracted the interview she gave for the film. I have had several screenings shut down, and in Canada I’m not even allowed to talk about the shutdowns. This short video will explain in detail these issues and how they even shut down a speech that was suppose to be about the shutdown…that’s right, they censored a speech that was about how they censored my movie.

 

VIDEO: Killing Free Speech

 

Posted by WEare138 Productions

Published on May 21, 2018

How the movie “Killing Europe” was shutdown in Europe and Canada…AND how even talking about the shutdown got shutdown.

 

In light of all these attempts to censor the movie and censor me even talking about it, I have decided to put the movie out for free on YouTube.

______________________

Michael Hansen Places ‘Killing Europe’ on Youtube for Free

John R. Houk

© May 30, 2018

________________

WATCH VIDEO: Killing Europe

 

Pamela Geller’s shocking new book, “FATWA: HUNTED IN AMERICA” is now available on Amazon. It’s Geller’s tell all, her story – and it’s every story – it’s what happens when you stand for freedom today. Buy it. Now. Here.

 

Donate to Geller Report

 

Pamela Geller is the President of the American Freedom Defense Initiative (AFDI), publisher of PamelaGeller.com and author of The Post-American Presidency: The Obama Administration’s War on America and Stop the Islamization of America: A Practical Guide to the Resistance.

 

Copyright © 2018 Geller Report

 

The Gaza Clashes: What’s Really Happening


There is one Constant Conservatives can rely on. Leftists lie and Arab pretenders calling themselves Palestinians lie. The proof in the pudding is every incident involving Israel and the lying pretenders is reported with twisted partial truth to no truth whatsoever.

 

JRH 4/9/18

Please Support NCCR

****************************

The Gaza Clashes: What’s Really Happening

 

By DANIEL POMERANTZ 

 APRIL 9, 2018

HonestReporting

Palestinian prostestors burn tires during clashes with Israeli security forces on the Gaza Israeli border east of Khan Yunis, in the southern Gaza Strip on April 6, 2018. Photo by Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash90  

 

Since March 30, there have been intermittent protests, riots, and even armed attacks at the Gaza border.

 

Much of the media coverage has been so poorly informed or even outright misleading, that it can be almost impossible to understand what’s really happening. Israel has, in many cases, been made out to be a violent aggressor intentionally killing peaceful protesters.

 

Nothing could be farther from the truth.

 

That’s why HonestReporting will be actively monitoring, analyzing and communicating throughout these events.

 

Here, for your use and information, is what we’ve seen so far:

 

Re-cap of events

 

  • On April 1, we posted this explanation and analysis of the events up to that date. It was immediately clear that the “protests” also included molotov cocktails, burning tires, rock throwing, and in one case even live gunfire at the IDF.  There were ongoing attempts by rioters to breach the border fence and enter Israel.

 

  • Of the 30,000 Palestinians present, 16 were reportedly killed by IDF sniper fire. The figure later increased to 19.

 

  • It was well known since April 1 that at least ten of the casualties had clear affiliations to terror groups, including Hamas. An analysis of open-source information from Palestinian media brought that number up to 15, and HonestReporting was the first to publish that new information on April 5.

 

  • Another protest/riot on April 6 brought 20,000 people and new violence: including the burning of what may have been 10,000 tires, and further attempts to both attack IDF soldiers and to  infiltrate Israel under the resulting smokescreen. Meanwhile, and this is not a joke, Hamas is now blaming Israel for what it claims is a “shortage” of tires in Gaza. Seriously. You couldn’t make this stuff up if you tried.

 

Palestinian Protesters

 

  • A number of Palestinians criticized Hamas for publicizing the deaths of its members, including holding military funerals and rallies. The main objection can be summarized as follows: by revealing that so many of the deaths were actually terrorists, Hamas undermines the PR illusion that this was a “peaceful protest.”

 

 

International investigations?

 

Fatou Bensauda, CC by Max Koot Studio

 

In the meantime, numerous international parties, including UN Secretary General António Guterres and EU chief Federica Mogherini have begun calling for an international investigation into the actions of the IDF.  Whether Israel adequately investigates itself, and whether the allegations have sufficient gravity are likely to be the key issues in determining whether the International Criminal Court (ICC) prosecutes a case.

 

If the ICC does prosecute a case, Israel is not the only party under the microscope:  Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, Fatou Bensouda has noted that Hamas or other Palestinian bodies could be subject to investigations related to war crimes for their use of civilians in covering violent activities.

 

The UN and EU, on the other hand, are primarily political bodies and can choose to launch their own investigations merely if their members wish to: without any regard to standards of international law.

 

When the dust settles and the burning-tire-smoke clears, international investigations will likely be the big remaining question.

 

In the meantime, the IDF has already appointed Brig. Gen. Moti Baruch, head of the General Staff’s Doctrine and Training Division to lead the IDF’s own investigation.

 

The latest updates

 

Some of the critical facts and images from Friday’s flare-up have made the mainstream news, yet some of the most informative have remained conspicuously absent.

 

Take, for example, this image round-up by Israellycool’s Aussie Dave: including telling, often dramatic pictures of events, some of which have not been published by any international news source.

 

Another telling scene was captured in this photo of a swastika flying alongside Palestinian flags, with tire-smoke all around:

 

 

 

 

A few nay-sayers on Twitter tried to claim the image was photo-shopped, until they came face to face with this video of the same:

 

Proof Swastika Not Photoshopped video

http://s22592.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/WhatsApp-Video-2018-04-06-at-21.41.40.mp4?_=1

And speaking of tire-smoke: in this particularly shameless tweet, the Palestine diplomatic office in the US preposterously claims that Hamas’s own tire-fire is actually an Israeli nerve agent.

 

 

Here is some additional video of tires and fires throughout the area.

 

Next time you hear about Palestinians throwing “stones,” keep in mind that in at least some cases, this is what they are really talking about:

 

 

Just outside Gaza, JPost’s Seth Frantzman caught up with Richard Kemp, former commander, British forces, Afghanistan. Kemp took the media to task pointing out that they don’t necessarily fully understand events even if they’re physically close up. Specifically, Kemp clarified that this is not a “peaceful demonstration” as is often portrayed by the media but rather:

 

…a deliberate and specific intent by a major terrorist organization, recognized around the world as terrorists, to penetrate the border of the State of Israel.

 

Arab world reacts

 

Though reactions are mixed, at least some residents of Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Jordan and other Arab countries, took to social media to lambaste Hamas for its exploitation of the inhabitants of Gaza. Meanwhile, despite a show of support at the official level, it seems Palestinians in the West Bank were largely apathetic to the events in Gaza. Notably, top Palestinian Authority cleric Mahmoud al-Habbash declared:

 

[Hamas is] sending Gazans to their deaths for good headlines… [is] trading in suffering and blood [and] no longer fools Palestinian people.

 

And though it’s not in the Arab world, as long as we’re talking reactions we should give credit where it’s due: Reuters was one of the few publications to ask Israelis living near Gaza what they think. Here’s one example:

 

“I’m sorry about what is happening there. I know the situation is very, very difficult,” Israeli farmer Daniel Rahamim said about economic hardship in Gaza, the Palestinian enclave ruled by Hamas, an Islamist group that advocates Israel’s destruction.

 

“But I don’t talk about a peace deal anymore. Maybe we can achieve a long-term ceasefire,” Rahimim, 63, said as he irrigated his crops. He said his 24-year-old daughter, still “traumatized by rockets” left the area after the demonstrations started.

 

Finally, if there was any doubt about the real point of these protests and riots, Hamas leader Yehya Al-Sinwar was crystal clear:

 

Yehya al-Sinwar quote on killing Jews (Hamas Leader)

 

As these events unfold, HonestReporting will continue to monitor, analyze and hold the media to account.

 

Watch this space.

 

If you see biased or inaccurate media coverage of these events, take action and demand fair coverage from your media. Let us know by informing us through our Red Alert page.

While you’re here, help us continue producing the analyses, articles, videos and hot news reaching thousands of viewers and holding the media accountable. Support us by DONATING HERE

_____________________________

About HonestReporting

 

HonestReporting monitors the news for bias, inaccuracy, or other breach of journalistic standards in coverage of the Arab-Israeli conflict. It also facilitates accurate reporting for foreign journalists covering the region. HonestReporting is not aligned with any government or political party or movement.

 

HonestReporting believes that a fully informed public is essential to progress and understanding in conflict resolution. It is not enough to correct inaccurate reporting and expose breaches of journalistic ethics. HonestReporting, through its MediaCentral project, provides support services for journalists based in or visiting Israel, the Palestinian territories, and the region to insure the free flow of information.

 

HonestReporting’s work serves the public interest by fighting misinformation. At the same time, it provides agenda-free services to reporters, including translation services and access to news makers to enable them to provide a fuller picture of the situation. Honestreporting has over 140,000 subscribers and its MediaCentral project handles over 1,000 inquiries from journalists each year.

 

Our Guiding Principles

 

  1. We believe Israel is entitled to fair treatment by the world press according to the same standards applied to any other country.

 

  1. We believe that public opinion is significantly shaped by media coverage.

 

  1. We believe that biased coverage of Israel distorts the public’s understanding of Israel and its motives, creating an obstacle to a peaceful resolution to the Arab-Israeli conflict.

 

  1. We believe people have as much right to criticize Israel as any other state. However, when criticism turns to demonization or delegitimization, it is no longer legitimate criticism.

 

  1. We believe that the media must be transparent, relevant, accurate, balanced, and ethical. Journalists, editors and publishers must be held accountable for slanted coverage.

 

  1. We support the working definition of anti-Semitism as adopted by the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance in May 2016. We note the fact that this definition stipulates that “Manifestations [of anti-Semitism] might include the targeting of the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity.”

 

To learn about how we objectively define media bias, see The Eight Categories of Media Bias.

 

Our Strategy

 

Monitoring the Media: HonestReporting combats the false depiction of Israel in READ THE REST

 

John Bolton’s Appointment Rattles The Muslim Brotherhood Echo Chamber


Act for America emailed an excerpt of an article from The Federalist with the email subject line “The Muslim Brotherhood is Rattled”. The Federalist article by Ben Weingarten highlights that John Bolton’s appointment as National Security Advisor has rattled the transnational Islamic terrorist organization the Muslim Brotherhood (aka Ikhwan to many Arab speaking people) because Bolton has had the correct assessment that the terrorist network indeed should be on the State Department’s designated a Foreign Terrorist Organization (FTO).

 

Here is the Act for America email intro:

 

The left has made it their mission to smear anyone who opposes violent jihad, and cast them as “Islamophobic.” Recently, former ambassador John Bolton has been the target of such attacks because of his appointment as National Security Advisor (NSA) to the President. This is not only an attempt to discredit John Bolton, it is an attempt to protect the Muslim Brotherhood from finally being designated a terrorist organization.

 

As patriotic American’s we must stand up and not only support the appointment of Ambassador John Bolton, but also tell Congress it is time, once and for all, to designate the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. Click here to tell your local Members of Congress enough is enough.

 

JRH 4/6/18

Please Support NCCR

***************************

John Bolton

 

John Bolton’s Appointment Rattles The Muslim Brotherhood Echo Chamber

The Trump administration ought not to concede one inch to those who wish to sideline the personnel and stifle the policies that would make its counterjihadist agenda a reality.

 

By Ben Weingarten

APRIL 5, 2018

The Federalist

 

The attacks on former ambassador John Bolton following his appointment as National Security Advisor (NSA) have inadvertently served as some of his strongest endorsements.

 

First there were the hysterical cries of “neocon warmonger!” This would come as news to the NSA-designate, who was never a “liberal mugged by reality” but a self-identified “Goldwater conservative” from the start; explicitly rejects the belief in democracy-building as imperative to achieving America’s national interest under democratic peace theory; and suggests, exaggerating for effect, that following the removal of Saddam Hussein, as soon as practicable he would have told the Iraqis, “You’re on your own. Here’s a copy of the Federalist papers. Good luck.”

 

Although the “neocon warmonger” moniker is inapt, to say the least, maybe it is not such a bad thing if our enemies buy this line. In fact, this may be part of President Trump’s strategic rationale as a dealmaker for elevating a “peace-through-strength” realist portrayed as a cantankerous cowboy to the top of the National Security Council.

 

Then followed another narrative: Bolton is not only a real-life Dr. Strangelove, but worse. He is actually an adroit bureaucrat—“crazy and dangerous.” Then-senator Joe Biden, a man prone to malapropism, actually put it best when, in Bolton’s retelling, Biden said of him in 2005: “My problem with you, over the years, has been, you’re too competent. I mean, I would rather you be stupid and not very effective.”

 

But the truly revelatory attacks concern Bolton’s positions on Islamic supremacism, which reflect an understanding that jihadists pose a mortal threat that must be countered using every element of national power. You know these attacks are meaningful partly because they have been made under cover of a smear campaign.

 

Opposing Jihadis Isn’t the Same as Opposing Islam

 

Bolton has been cast as an “Islamophobe” for the thought crime of being a counterjihadist who supports other counterjihadists. The charge of “Islamophobe” is a baseless, intellectually dishonest, and lazy slur. Although it does not deserve to be dignified with a response, it goes without saying that there is nothing to indicate Bolton harbors an irrational fear of Islam, and everything to indicate he holds the very rational belief that we must defeat Islamic supremacists who wish to subject us to their tyrannical rule or destroy us.

 

“Islamophobe” is being lobbed at Bolton to try and discredit him and ultimately scuttle policies he supports intended to strike at the heart of Islamic supremacism. The “tell” is that the articles raising such accusations frequently cast counterjihadist policy positions themselves as de facto evidence of Islamophobic bigotry.

 

As the representative par excellence of the position that America should exit the Iran deal, it should come as no surprise that the Iran deal echo chamber in exile has sprung into action in savaging the ambassador with the most outlandish of insinuations. For the Islamophobia campaign, the lesser-recognized and perhaps more insidious Muslim Brotherhood echo chamber has been activated. Bolton is on record as supporting its designation as a terrorist organization, and Brotherhood apologists and true believers cannot abide this.

 

Either We Work With Terrorists or We Don’t

 

Recall that the national security and foreign policy establishment has long held that as a “political Islamist” group, the Muslim Brotherhood ought to be treated as a legitimate diplomatic partner. The theory is that we have to choose between violent and seemingly peaceful Islamic supremacists, ignoring the fact that their differences are tactical and strategic, not ideological. They are all still Islamic supremacists.

 

Most infamously, the Obama administration supported the ascension of Mohamed Morsi, leader of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood, to president during the Arab spring, with predictably horrific consequences in particular for the nation’s Christians that persist even in the era of the much-maligned counterjihadist Gen. Abdel Fattah al-Sisi.

 

Such disastrously naïve policy pushes ignore that the Muslim Brotherhood is the tip of the Sunni jihadist spear. It’s the ideological fountainhead from which violent jihadist groups from Hamas to al-Qaeda and ISIS spring. The “political” element of the Muslim Brotherhood is, if anything, more pernicious precisely because its adherents do not goose-step, guns in hand, in the public square.

 

No, the political arm engages in political and ideological warfare, tactfully seeking to impose its will through policy and subterfuge. “Social welfare” activities provide a convenient cover for the group’s ultimate aims. As the Brotherhood put it in its 1991 Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Group in North America:

 

The Ikhwan [Muslim Brothers] must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.

 

On account of the Brotherhood’s nature and activities, it has been designated as a terrorist organization from Egypt to Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. A bill first introduced by Sen. Ted Cruz in 2015, calling for the U.S. secretary of state to submit a report to Congress on designating the Brotherhood as a foreign terrorist organization in America, lays out several other reasons the group merits this, including:

 

The [group’s] explicit calls for violent jihad, with the end goal of imposing Islamic law over all the world of the group’s founder and spiritual leader Hassan al-Banna, and the consistently violent Islamic supremacist content of the Brotherhood’s core membership texts

 

The terrorist efforts of numerous jihadist groups explicitly tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, and the efforts of individual Muslim Brotherhood members designated as terrorists by the U.S. government themselves

 

The litany of terrorist financing cases involving the Muslim Brotherhood, including the…Holy Land Foundation case [the largest terror financing case in U.S. history] …

 

Do What We Like or Get Smeared as a Bigot

 

On the campaign trail and in its early days the Trump administration indicated an interest in designating the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization. But within months it shelved these plans. What happened? The Muslim Brotherhood echo chamber deployed.

 

The Brotherhood undertook an extensive lobbying and information operation designed to dissuade the administration’s plans, reportedly backed by millions of dollars. The U.S. foreign policy establishment quickly proliferated articles and comments in prominent mainstream publications defending the Muslim Brotherhood against charges of being a jihadist group, adding that designated it as such would be impractical and impracticable. Notably, The New York Times went so far as to print an op-ed in the Brotherhood’s defense written by Clinton Foundation-linked Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood spokesman Gehad el-Haddad.

 

In the midst of this flurry of articles, it leaked to the media that the CIA and State Department both produced memos against Muslim Brotherhood terrorist designation.

 

Concurrently, counterjihadists throughout the Trump administration were subjected to a barrage of attacks. Many would ultimately be sidelined, though some like Secretary of State-designate Mike Pompeo survived. He, like Bolton, is being attacked as an Islamophobic bigot as well.

 

Bolton recognized at the time that these events were not random. During a July 2017 interview he noted:

 

There’s been an amazing campaign. It’s always amazing to me how these stories and op-eds and lines of chatter appear simultaneously, all very well-coordinated…The argument being the Muslim Brotherhood is a complicated organization, not every part of it is devoted to the support of terrorism. Some of them do humanitarian work and so on; a declaration that the entire Brotherhood is a foreign terrorist organization would actually buttress the cause of the jihadis; so, therefore, don’t do anything.

 

Bolton’s riposte?

 

Let’s take the notion inherent in that argument as having some validity, that there are pieces of the Muslim Brotherhood that don’t qualify under the statutory definition we have of a foreign terrorist organization…My response to that is, ‘Okay, we need some careful drafting based on the evidence we have now that excludes some affiliates, some components of the Muslim Brotherhood from the designation.’ I’m prepared to live with that, of course, until we get more complete information.

 

This position is what really draws the ire of the Brotherhood echo chamber. CAIR, the unindicted co-conspirator in the previously mentioned largest terror financing case in U.S. history, published a press release condemning the appointment of “Islamophobe John Bolton” as NSA, citing corroborating articles from such non-biased sources as Think Progress, The Nation, Islamophobia.com, Vox, and Huffington Post.

 

As I have written previously, CAIR’s Muslim Brotherhood and jihadi ties are numerous and longstanding, involving not only its founders and present leaders to Hamas, but its harboring of apologists for Islamic terrorism, and alleged impeding of counterterrorism efforts.

 

Bolton’s endorsement of designating the Muslim Brotherhood a terrorist organization illustrates a keen understanding of the size, scope, and nature of the Islamic supremacist threat that the national security and foreign policy establishment lacks. It is a proxy for a worldview that if followed to its logical conclusion would turn our largely futile efforts to beat back jihadists over the last 17 years on their head. This view takes Islamic supremacists at their word in their desire to impose upon us the Sharia-based, totalitarian theopolitical ideology to which they adhere. Hence the pushback.

 

Applying this worldview would lead to decisions antithetical to the progressive Wilsonian internationalists and political Islamists on myriad issues in the Middle East, including:

 

  • Treatment of Israel versus the Arabs

 

  • The Iran deal

 

  • Iran policy more broadly, including appropriate measures against its proxies in Syria and Lebanon

 

  • Qatar’s bellicosity

 

  • Turkey’s behavior under Islamic supremacist Erdogan

 

The Trump administration ought not to concede one inch to those who self-evidently wish to sideline the personnel and stifle the policies that would make its counterjihadist agenda a reality. This specious and slanderous smear campaign reflects all the better on the appointment of Bolton as NSA.

 

Photo Gage Skidmore / Flickr

________________________

Ben Weingarten is a senior contributor at The Federalist and senior fellow at the London Center for Policy Research. He is the founder and CEO of ChangeUp Media, a media consulting and production company dedicated to advancing conservative principles. You can find his work at benweingarten.com, and follow him on Twitter @bhweingarten.

 

Copyright © 2018 The Federalist, a wholly independent division of FDRLST Media, All Rights Reserved.

 

McMaster Out – Bolton In and the Muslim Brotherhood


John R. Houk

© March 23, 2018

 

The swamp is draining slowly but to date, it is draining with the Dems and Deep State Obamanites/Clintonistas screaming all the way. With that in mind, President Trump’s business globalist-minded business-oriented Secretary of State is out. And Three-Star General H.R. McMaster is out seemingly more for abrasiveness with President and his own National Security staff than ideological differences.

 

I think a March 4 Wall Street Journal article provides the most cogent explanation of how Lt. Gen. McMaster lost favor in the Trump Administration:

 

 

… Gen. McMaster through the year positioned himself as one of Mr. Trump’s most hawkish allies in fractured debates on the president’s top national-security challenges, including North Korea.

 

But that, in turn, has put Gen. McMaster at odds with other members of the national-security team, especially Secretary of State Rex Tillerson [Gone] and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis, who have pushed for more measured approaches in policy debates, according to current and former Trump administration officials.

 

 

Hobbled in his ability to translate Mr. Trump’s sometimes-unorthodox ideas into concepts acceptable to more cautious members of the national-security team …

 

 

“In general, I think H.R. has been slightly more hawkish on most questions than most cabinet members and, in that regard, he’s aligned with the president’s instincts,” said Sen. Tom Cotton …

 

The issue that has brought the internal divisions to the forefront is North Korea, where Gen. McMaster has been a firm advocate for beefing up the military options, according to administration officials.

 

Gen. McMaster has raised the idea of taking a “preventive” strike against North Korea’s nuclear-missile program if diplomacy fails. And he has promoted the administration’s “maximum pressure” strategy against Pyongyang.

 

That has created alarm at the Pentagon and State Department, where officials worry that Gen. McMaster’s efforts could make it more likely that Mr. Trump would decide to strike North Korea.

 

 

Gen. McMaster also has alienated prospective allies in the military by directly calling combatant commanders around the world without first telling Mr. Mattis, U.S. officials said. …

 

 

Inside the White House, meanwhile, he has struggled to retain support from a volatile president who has lashed out over Gen. McMaster’s successful push to send more U.S. troops to Afghanistan and to preserve former President Barack Obama’s nuclear-containment deal with Iran.

 

He has been known to speak over other members of the national-security team in Situation Room meetings when he doesn’t like what he’s hearing and to frustrate the president with lengthy policy dissertations in the Oval Office.

 

“He doesn’t have any chemistry with the president,” said one former Trump administration official. “He lectures, and you can’t lecture the president.”

 

Last month, Mr. Trump READ ENTIRETY (Undermined and Beleaguered, H.R. McMaster Soldiers On; By Dion Nissenbaum and Gordon Lubold; WSJ; Updated 3/4/18 6:36 p.m. ET)

 

If the WSJ perspective is accurate, it seems to me McMaster didn’t disagree with the substance of President Trump, but rather the method. McMaster is being replaced by former UN Ambassador John Bolton as National Security Advisor. Mr. Bolton definitely follows the same substance of the President and Lt. Gen. McMaster. The trick will be if Mr. Bolton and President Trump can work together without arguing. I suspect Bolton will run into the same issues with the National Security Council staff as McMaster did. Time will of a Bolton/Military camaraderie.

 

Now that John Bolton will become the National Security Advisor, Counterjihad writer Ryan Mauro believes the stage is not complete to move to place the Muslim Brotherhood on the State Department’s Terrorist Watch List. Certain obstacles within the Trump Administration has been preventing the obvious move to occur. The exit of Tillerson being replaced by Mike Pompeo as Secretary of State and the fortuitous anti-terrorist Gina Haspel as the first female CIA Director (pending Senate confirmation) were some of the first moves making it possible the Muslim Brotherhood where it belongs – bloody global Caliphate-minded Islamic terrorists.

 

Haspel detractors despise that she was involved in Black Site waterboard interrogation. Those that call waterboarding torture do not understand what true torture is. Torture that maims, physically and mentally incapacitates or results in death is true torture. Waterboarding does none of those things. It does provide the illusion of drowning which regardless of what detractors tell you, worked effectively in gaining information against Islamic terrorists (See: WATERBOARDING: A TOOL OF POLITICAL GOTCHASmall Wars Journal; The Architect Of Bush’s ‘Enhanced Interrogation’ Program Wrote A Book About What Terrorists Told Him And It Is ELECTRIC Daily Caller 11/30/16; Perspectives on Enhanced Interrogation TechniquesCongressional Research Service 1/8/16, The CRS pdf shows facts without right and wrong conclusions).

 

Sign The Clarion Project’s petition to place the Muslim Brotherhood on the Terrorist Watch List now that the stage is set to make such a move effective.

 

JRH 3/23/18

Please Support NCCR

***************************

American Day of Reckoning for Muslim Brotherhood?

 

BY RYAN MAURO 

March 22, 2018 

Clarion Project

Supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt (Photo: Reuters)

 

The Muslim Brotherhood’s sigh of relief after being rescued by Secretary of State Tillerson and National Security Adviser McMaster has been replaced by a sweaty panic.

 

With Tillerson out and Pompeo in and McMaster’s days numbered, it is now probable that the Muslim Brotherhood will finally be designated by the State Department as a Foreign Terrorist Organization, paving the way for its infrastructure in America to begin being dismantled.

 

Groups associated with the Muslim Brotherhood network like the Jamaat-e-Islami and Jamaat ul-Fuqra are likely to see a similar fate. President Trump’s desire to pressure Pakistan and more closely ally with India adds to the likelihood that these Pakistani-led groups will be blacklisted.

 

The incoming secretary of state, Mike Pompeo, was one of the earliest cosponsors of the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act when he was a member of Congress. Now, as secretary of state, he has the authority to designate Foreign Terrorist Organizations (FTOs).

 

The newest version of the legislation is backed by 75 members of the House of Representatives and the Senate version introduced by Senator Ted Cruz has 4 cosponsors.

 

Now, most of the Trump Administration’s top officials are staunch foes of the Brotherhood, including:

 

  • Attorney General Jeff Sessions, who was one of the few early cosponsors of the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act when he was a Senator.

 

  • Secretary of Defense James Mattis, who was forced to withdrawa senior appointment he desired who was a strong ally of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. However, he has articulately made the case for identifying the enemy as “political Islam” and described the negative impact of the Obama Administration’s friendly attitude towards the Brotherhood.

 

  • Director of the Office of Management and Budget Mick Mulvaney, who was a cosponsor of the legislation when he was a congressman.

 

  • Senior adviser and chief speechwriter Stephen Miller

 

  • National Security Council’s Deputy Assistant to the President for Strategic Communications Michael Anton

 

  • Senior White House Adviser to the Department of Homeland Security Frank Wuco

 

  • Senior Department of Homeland Security Adviser Katharine Gorka (who is the wife of former Deputy Assistant to the President Dr. Sebastian Gorka)

 

It is almost universally reported that National Security Adviser McMaster is about to be replaced, despite Trump’s denials (just like his denials before Tillerson was fired).

 

The leading candidate for his job is former U.N. Ambassador John Bolton, another known supporter of FTO designation for the Brotherhood.

 

Trump’s pick for CIA Director, Gina Haspel, is presumably on the same page because Pompeo recommended her. However, she is expected to have a fight ahead of her to get confirmed by the Senate.

 

U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley’s position is not known. She previously struck a neutral tone when asked about designating the Brotherhood, stopping short of defending Tillerson and McMaster’s known positions at the time, saying, “That is not something that has been discussed within the administration.”

 

Outside of the White House, President Trump is back to consulting with his former Deputy Assistant Dr. Sebastian Gorka, a passionate voice for designating the Brotherhood as an FTO.

 

Pompeo’s appointment represents a stunning reversal of fortune for the Muslim Brotherhood, which previously succeeded in getting plans for such a designation shelved. One Brotherhood official said the Islamist group had spent $5 million to lobby officials and influence the media. Brotherhood apologists even succeeded in influencing CIA assessments that conveniently leaked to the media.

 

The Brotherhood also deployed its defenders to Washington, D.C. and Qatar went on a spending binge hiring lobbyists, particularly those with close ties to the Trump campaign and the ability to influence Jewish Americans.

 

Qatar even managed to seduce a former senior staffer to Senator Ted Cruz—the very man who introduced the Senate version of the Muslim Brotherhood Terrorist Designation Act—with a contract for $50,000 per month. Even President Trump reversed course on Qatar.

 

And now—the Muslim Brotherhood network is screaming.

 

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), identified by the Justice Department as an “entity” of the Muslim Brotherhood, is fighting tooth and nail to stop Pompeo from getting confirmed by the Senate. One of the favorite tactics of the Brotherhood, especially CAIR, is deception.

 

CAIR has predictably labeled Pompeo as an “Islamophobe,” even though he empowered a convert to Sunni Islam at the CIA to fight Al-Qaeda and Iran. Its factsheet uses out-of-context quotes to paint Pompeo as an extremist, while CAIR paints the Brotherhood as “moderate.”

 

The evidence that the Muslim Brotherhood is a terrorist group is overwhelming, including terrorist activity in the U.S. Hamas, a designated foreign terrorist group, is the Brotherhood’s Palestinian wing. Al-Qaeda’s 9/11 plot had links to the Brotherhood’s network in America.

 

The terror-funding trial of the Holy Land Foundation proved, in detail, that the Brotherhood’s international leadership runs a Hamas support network on American soil.

 

The Yemeni Muslim Brotherhood has long been intertwined with Al-Qaeda, just like the Libyan and Syrian branches. The Jordanian branch is essentially a single unit with Hamas. The biggest resistance is in regards to the Egyptian wing, the birthplace of the Brotherhood.

 

Investigator Patrick Poole’s three-part interview with a former senior Egyptian counterterrorism official connects the dots between the Brotherhood and the terrorists it claims are “rogues” that it should not be held accountable for.

 

Failing a blanket designation of the Brotherhood, an alternative approach would be to designate several Brotherhood branches where the group’s connection to terrorism is clearer. This approach would meet less political resistance.

 

The changes within the Trump Administration indicate that the Muslim Brotherhood’s day of reckoning is finally near.

 

PETITION – NO PLACE FOR MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD IN U.S.

 

PETITION – NO PLACE FOR MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD IN U.S.

_______________________

McMaster Out – Bolton In and the Muslim Brotherhood

John R. Houk

© March 23, 2018

____________________

American Day of Reckoning for Muslim Brotherhood?

 

Ryan Mauro is ClarionProject.org’s Shillman Fellow and national security analyst and an adjunct professor of counter-terrorism. He is frequently interviewed on top-tier television and radio.

 

The Clarion Project (formerly Clarion Fund) is a 501(c)3 non-profit organization dedicated to educating both policy makers and the public about the growing phenomenon of Islamic extremism. The Clarion Project is committed to working towards safeguarding human rights for all peoples.

 

About Clarion Project

 

Clarion Project is a non-profit organization that educates the public about the dangers of radical Islam.

 

Clarion’s award-winning films, seen by more than 85-million people, expose how radical Islamists use terrorism, murder, subjugation of women, indoctrination of children, religious persecution, genocide of minorities, widespread human rights abuses, nuclear proliferation and cultural jihad — to threaten the West.

 

The ClarionProject.org web site delivers news, expert analysis, videos, and unique perspectives about radical Islam, while giving a platform to moderate Muslims and human rights activists to speak out against extremism.

 

Clarion Project engages in grassroots activism to achieve its goals.

 

Clarion Project is READ THE REAT

 

 

Dear Zohreh


My Internet Jewish friend Ari Bussel writes about Iranian expatriates living in the USA demonstrating in support of the brave souls protesting the Mullah regime in Iran.

You might find it interesting a pro-Israel Jew is standing with Iranians in America protesting against the Islamic Republic of Iran’s repressive regime. After all it is Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and his predecessor Khomeini, call Israel little Satan and America Great Satan.

 

The Iranians living America are protesting the Mullahs as exiles that fled Iran after the fall of the monarchy of Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. These protesting Iranian had become used to the Shah’s modernization and did not desire to live in an Iran thrust back into the medieval days of a Shia Islam in totalitarianism was the rule of law.

 

In full disclosure the Shah was no modern saint. The Shah had a secret police organization called SAVAK that was quite brutal toward the Shias that resisted Iranian modernization. The Mullocracy secret police (or whatever they are called) make SAVAK look like kindergarten bullies controlling the school yard.

 

According to historian Ervand Abrahamian, “Whereas less than 100 political prisoners had been executed between 1971 and 1979, more than 7,900 were executed between 1981 and 1985. . . . Prison life was drastically worse under the Islamic Republic than under the Pahlavis. One who survived both writes that four months under [the ayatollahs’ warden] took the toll of four years under SAVAK. In the prison literature of the Pahlavi era, the recurring words have been ‘boredom’ and ‘monotony.’ In that of the Islamic Republic, they are ‘fear,’ ‘death,’ ‘terror,’ ‘horror,’ and most frequent of all ‘nightmare.’” READ ENTIRETY (Iran: The Truth about the CIA and the Shah; By JOSH GELERNTER; National Review; 7/24/15 3:34 PM)

 

JRH 1/9/18

Please Support NCCR

**********************

Dear Zohreh

Iran Demonstration – Los Angeles, Sunday, January 7, 2018

 

By Ari Bussel

Sent 1/7/2018 8:10 PM

 

Totally immersed 

 

A lot of work went into it.  For the ten days preceding the demonstration, all I heard from you was “flags,” “posters,” “coordination,” “permit,” “notices” and “press outreach.”  So many details, so much effort beyond the technical aspects.

 

The situation in Iran so occupied your mind and being, that there was no time left for anything else, and yet, on Shabbat you were at Shul (our synagogue) and after Shabbat you went to visit the sick.

 

Even then, you could not resist, walking from Century City to Beverly Hills with the Iranian flag; a solitary march, in preparation for today.

 

Futility?

 

I discounted the entire affair; for what good would it do?  For the young Iranians in Iran are well educated, with relatively good access to the West (a mutual acquaintance of ours raised and spent tens of millions of dollars of the American tax payer money to ensure exactly that).  They were all born into the regime of the Islamic Republic of Iran.  They know nothing different, would not remember with great admiration the late Shah, the same way I do, and if Iran is pushed or attacked, their loyalty will be with Iran; only with Iran.

 

Are they dreaming of an “Iranian Spring?”  To what end?  Replacing the Mullahs with a dictator of a different persuasion?  Allow me to remind us all – this happened once before, in 1978-1979, when Ayatollah Khomeini took over following President Carter’s pressure on the Shah of Iran.

 

Today’s kids, youth and young Iranians know nothing better or different, and their aspirations will be quashed most harshly, in a similar manner to the way the Green Revolution ended, about some nine years ago, or to the manner in which some one million Syrians have received the blow from the current regime – murder, rape, torture, imprisonment.

 

And yet, it is good to dream; even when it is evident the support of Hizbollah, Hamas and global terrorism will not lessen; on the contrary, it will only intensify.

Iranians Against Terrorist Islamic Regime

 

PST (Persian Standard Time)

 

Sunday, 1PM in front of the Federal Building in Los Angeles.  You intended to arrive half an hour early, to bring the flags you bought and the signs you printed.  You and I have often arrived early to events, at times being the first to arrive.  Not today.

 

In front of the Federal Building in Los Angeles

 

When I arrived at 12:30, there were already a few hundred demonstrators, with flags and signs (one in particular caught my eye: “Make Iran Great Again”).  Alas, “Persian Standard Time” happened in the reverse today.  For the next three hours, there will be a non-stop stream of people, adding up to some 2,500 strong.

 

The Absent Youth

 

Noticeably absent?  Children and youth.  There was one infant, two kids, another youth and later a handful of others.  Not even 1% of the attendees.

 

What was visible are the real Iranians; those who had to flee and can only dream of going back.  They came dressed immaculately, some with walkers, others with canes, still others on wheelchairs or being supported by a spouse.  They carried on with dignity and a sense of purpose.  Their children, themselves parents now, came in droves.  They remember Iran of the Shah, and they grew up on their parents’ upbringing, where Iran was the essence of life.  But their kids, those “30 year after,” did not bother to show up.

 

People Have Spoken: Iran– No Fascist Theocracy – YES Secular Democracy

 

(Iran) was vandalized and later the Jews targeted.  That ended 2017, and 2018 began with protests that spread throughout Iran, then were harshly quashed, as expected.

 

But those in their 30s, those already born here, stayed at home.  It is Sunday after all, and there are more important things to do on such a beautiful day.

 

For them, Iran is part of their cultural heritage, but definitely not the meaning of life.  They are similar to young American Jews who see themselves as Americans first, and if Israel ceases to exist, the world for them will not come to an end.

 

And herein lies the real danger.  Young Iranians in Iran are very focused and loyal, no matter how “difficult” the present may seem.  Their counterparts who were born and raised in the USA have no focus, no loyalty (other than to themselves) and no obligation (such as military or national service).  It is a generation completely self-centered, void of any obligations and absorbed in a strange world of social-networks “friends” and “likes,” “petitions” and “action,” and an overall attention span of seconds.

 

The Stranger in Your Midst

 

Having worked closely with the Iranian community over the past year, it was obvious I should be there.  Unlike other non-Iranians, I actually lived in Iran of the Shah, and to this day I speak most highly about the Shah’s concern and action for his people and his ancient kingdom, as he tried to bring it fast-forward into modernity.

 

Iran Flag under Shah

 

I was surprised to be greeted time and again: “Ari, what are you doing here?”

 

Well, it is a most familiar place for me, for on the side stretch the rows of dead, those who fought for all the freedoms we enjoy.

 

And here, exactly on the four corners of Wilshire Blvd and Veteran Ave, just a short distance away from my alma mater UCLA campus, I stood numerous times, defending Israel against external and internal enemies.

 

I am used to police, but not so many like today.  Veteran Ave. was shut down on both sides, and the police, most patiently, stayed away, allowing the expanding crowd to swell, grow, move outward.

 

Down with Islamic Republic of Iran

 

Overall, it was touchy, fulfilling and sad to see a people exiled from their land, gathered together in a futile plea for change.  Hope and Change, neither of which can materialize.  Not in Iran; not in N. Korea – both posing grave threats to world peace, to the world as we know it today.

 

Support of Passersby Cars

 

We stood next to the heart of Teheran-geles (combination of Teheran and Los Angeles), Westwood, so one would expect that some of the passing cars would be of Iranian Americans.  But the nonstop honking confused me.  Are so many supporting the demonstration?  Most Americans would not even know to recognize the flag of Iran, or to differentiate between the flag of the monarchy and that of the Islamic Republic.

 

These are the same Americans that would spit toward the Flag of Israel and crush or burn the American Flag, while stay oblivious to the flag of Daesh (Isis/Isil as President Obama liked to refer to the Islamic Caliphate).

 

So why are they honking?  And to what end?  I soon figured it out.  It is in this very intersection that regular demonstrations against Israel take place, under the banner “Free Palestine.”  The colors are similar (green, white, red for Iran, same with black for so-called Palestine).  People surely thought they were honking against the Jews, against Israel, wishing to “End the Occupation” and “Free, Free Palestine from the River to the Sea!”

 

The March of 2,500 Strong

 

The singing, chanting and calls over the loudspeakers were familiar: “Regime change in Iran.”  “Human rights for Iran.”  “Long Live ….”  “Freedom for Iran; no more Ayatollah!”  And a sea of flags and posters.  The swelling crowd, growing by the minute, getting ready for the march.

 

Regime Change for Iran

 

A permit was issued to march on Wilshire Blvd (closing east bound traffic lanes) to Westwood Blvd, turn onto Westwood (where the south bound lanes were closed) and continue south to Ohio.  The march, like the gathering beforehand, was very well organized, a mid-Sunday outing.  People hugged and kissed; took picture, waved flags, carried signs, sang and chanted.  In short, they enjoyed the freedoms afforded to every American, those that are not tolerated in Iran or in Arab countries throughout the Middle East.  And they were safe.

 

The group, a block and a half long and 15 – 20 deep, marched onward, carrying their dream – a memory 40 years old and beyond – with them.

 

I was inspired, full of respect and sorrow, sadness that you are celebrating a world that will not return, to which you are not allowed to return.

 

But you must not stop.  And do not be discouraged.

 

We have seen that Israel, constantly warning of the grave danger from Iran, has stopped its radio broadcasting in Farsi (something to do with lack of budget, more likely indicating lack of importance assigned to it); its President just weeks ago during an official, rare visit did not find the time to meet with the Iranian community in Los Angeles or its leadership.  Actions talk louder than words, and Israel apparently is focused on action of a different type (something similar to Stuxnet maybe).

 

We have seen American Jewry “help defeat the opposition to the Iran deal,” and AIPAC, the Israel lobby waste tens of millions of dollars failing to stop it.  The result was the same – a deal for which a second Nobel Prize was forthcoming to President Obama, for using diplomacy to achieve “Peace in our Lifetime!”

 

And here, today, some 2,500 Iranians (with one exception) who realize the danger, understand that Iranians are not Arabs, that most are very educated and determined, loyal and clear in their look, and whose time horizon is different than that of Western Civilization came out to demonstrate.  I stood amidst you and I was smiling, proud, grateful.

 

 Photos of Mullocracy Abuses

 

And as you chanted “Regime Change in Iran,” I felt safe enough to stand there amongst you – the only non-Persian – and sing “Yerushalaim, Yerushalaim….”

 

Always,

Ari Bussel

bussel@me.com
__________________

Edited by John R. Houk

 

© Ari Bussel

 

Civilization Jihadis are not terrorists. THEY ARE SEDITIOUS ENEMIES!


Petition saying “NO” to the Muslim Brotherhood in the United States of America. The Constitution protects Religious Freedom, but NOT seditious religious terrorism!

 

Join the Clarion Project in drumming up support for the U.S. government to add the Muslim Brotherhood to the State Department’s terrorist list:

 

Say No to Muslim Brotherhood in the US

 

The Muslim Brotherhood is committed to replacing the American Constitution with sharia (Islamist) law. The Muslim Brotherhood is a supporter of terrorist organizations. It has no place in the United States.

 

By clicking the title of the above excerpt, you can add your name to the petition!

 

Perhaps even send the pdf composed by Paul Sutliff to your Senator and Congressmen which recognizes Islamic terrorist immigrants or homegrown terrorists operating under the design of the Muslim Brotherhood, are seditious traitors to the U.S. Constitution.

JRH 1/3/18

Please Support NCCR

*******************

Civilization Jihadis are not terrorists. THEY ARE SEDITIOUS ENEMIES!

 

By Paul Sutliff

January 1, 2018

Paul Sutliff on Civilization Jihad

 

Wake Up – Civ. Jihadis are Seditious Enemies

 

After being given some great perspective into what I had deemed terrorism, I now have to change what I have been saying in order to more accurately provide in US legal terminology a truthful portrait of the war America is engaged in today.

 

That war is a war against jihadists both violent and non-violent. Violent jihadists are under US Law demined terrorists while non-violent jihadis are not. BUT they are both engaging in acts against the USA. Both are acting for the same reasons.

 

Attempted bombings, murders, and even financing those actions can be pursued and prosecuted under the law. Those jihadis which work in what is defined by the Muslim Brotherhood as Civilization Jihad are not able to be pursued under the Patriot Act, because their actions do not constitute what is defined in legalize as terrorism.

 

Both the Civilization Jihadist and the violent jihadist (aka terrorist) have the same objective. Their threat doctrines are indistinguishable from one another. The only difference is one has a short-term plan of action, the other has a long-term plan of action.

 

What can be done to stop the long-term plan jihadist? Lets begin by defining what a long-term jihadist does from their own written material. According to the Explanatory Memorandum of the Muslim Brotherhood of North America, their ultimate goal is to:  “eliminate and destroy the Western civilization from within and “sabotage” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.”

 

With this being the goal the objectives are obvious:

(1) Infiltrate college campuses for the purpose of:

 

a. stopping education on Islam that disagrees with what Muslim Brotherhood teaches.

b. disabling Americans as to the real intention and purpose of the Muslim Brotherhood.

c. Promoting misinformation that will create more sympathetic non-Muslims to endorse the actions of the civilization-jihadis as “moderates.”

d. Recruit new civilization-jihadists to engage in the agenda in a post college environment. Infiltrate government for the purpose of:

a. Protecting fellow Muslims.

b. Destroying the government from within. This could be as simple as slowing or stopping the machine called government from working as it is intended.

c. Sharing intelligence with the civilization jihadi leadership team.

d. Disrupting communications.

e. Placing misinformation

f. Enabling greater infiltration

(2)  Infiltrate government for the purpose of:

a. Protecting fellow Muslims.

b. Destroying the government from within. This could be as simple as slowing or stopping the machine called government from working as it is intended.

c. Sharing intelligence with the civilization jihadi leadership team.

d. Disrupting communications.

e. Placing misinformation

f. Enabling greater infiltration

(3) Make society accept and endorse the relevance of sharia in the USA. This means:

 

a. Push for acceptance of Islamic beliefs as the norm

b. Push for the acceptance of sharia in courts.

c. Running public relations campaigns with misinformation to recruit sympathy voters.

d. Running public relations campaigns against those who are exposing the civilization jihadi agenda.

With this said are their legal actions possible to protect Americans from this type of jihadi? The answer is both yes and no. It requires that those who commit violent jihadi actions be prosecuted not for terrorism but TREASON and those who are found working as civilization jihadis infiltrating organizations and government who are caught disabling the machine called government, or providing misinformation/propaganda with the intention of protecting their groups or membership should be charged with SEDITION.

IT IS ALL IMPORTANT TO CHANGE THESE TACTICS! We, myself included, need to stop referring to the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist entity but as an entity that suborns sedition in every country it is present. This means that Muslim Brotherhood in North America should be defined NOT as a terrorist entity but as entity whose sole purpose is to aide and abet in sedition in America. Due to it having declared war against North America. This is very important! It is why my proposed joint resolution has more teeth than Senator Cruz’s bill to declare the Muslim Brotherhood entity a terrorist group.

My resolution which follows is a recognition of a declared war against North America in the Explanatory Memorandum AND its recent declaration to wage war and shed blood in actions against the USA on December 6, 2017. Perhaps most enlightening in this declaration is its statement that its members in the Administration should consider themselves activated to actively work against the American government’s pledge to move the embassy to Jerusalem. This declaration should make them an enemy of the USA and thus make their organization in this country considered enemy combatants. How else do you interpret “we make blood, freedom and life, and we fight every aggressor and every supporter of aggression,” after declaring the USA to be an aggressor?

The Joint Resolution I proposed this past August now has an urgency to be passed! It will enable us to begin to act against the civilization jihadists by recognizing they have declared war against us. IF this resolution passes, then those persons and groups affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood can be prosecuted with the charge of sedition. The US does not need to declare war against an entity to recognize that a group is acting in pursuit of a declared enemy’s goals. Please read the proposed resolution below and email me to receive a PDF copy.

 

 

 

___________________________

John R. Houk, Blog Editor

 

Paul Sutliff books with best deal at bottom of “Civilization Jihadis are not terrorists. THEY ARE SEDITIOUS ENEMIES!” post on his blog:

 

What Social Studies Teachers Need To Know About Islam

 

Stealth Jihad Phase 2: Infiltrate American Colleges

 

Civilization Jihad and the Myth of Moderate Islam by Paul Sutliff