Disputing Muslim Persecution of Christians


 

London 1940

John R. Houk

© January 19, 2017

 

On January 8th, I posted a Shamim Mahmood submission. Shamim’s submission was a slim rundown on his advocacy as a journalist and Rights activist for his fellow Christians in Pakistan. The rundown is to demonstrate Shamim is a worthy cause to support. Pakistanis don’t make a lot of cash and Pakistani-Christians by the majority earn even less.

 

By the way, Shamim is still worthy of Western aid that is best sent via Western Union.

dresden-1945

First contact Shamim in case he has found an easy way to donate. I like to use Western Union sending money with this LINK to the destination of Islamabad (Contact Shamim in case he has changed cities). Shamim’s email is shamimpakistan@gmail.com, Western Union may ask for Shamim’s phone – +92-300-642-4560

 

A well-meaning Muslim gal left a comment to that Shamim submission politely claiming the persecution of Christians and other non-Sunni Muslims was a myth used to get money of donors under false pretenses.

 

Below is that discussion back and forth between me and Aisha. Then follows a query by me to Shamim about Aisha’s perception. Which is followed by Shamim’s email response.

 

Aisha Khan

1/8/17

 

this is a blatant lie just to raise money, in fact there are Christians in my area and they are very safe and happy with their families. We have good relations with each other, we share our happy and sad moments with each other, we eat together and celebrate together.
This is a failed try to snatch money from people.

John Houk

1/15/17 (1/9/17 @ 9:10 AM & 9:58 AM on SlantRight 2.0)

 

+Aisha Khan Aisha I am guessing you are a Muslim. If my guess is correct, I can make a couple of assumptions from your comment:

1) You are a deluded Muslim with your head in the sand.

2) You are a Muslim Propagandist spreading deceit about the actual brutality of Sunni Muslims against all Pakistani minorities not just Christians (Ironically Pakistani Sunnis also are brutal toward Pakistani Shias & Ahmadiyyas – both of which consider themselves Muslims).

 

Aisha, this blog is full of reports about Muslim brutality against Christians not only in Pakistan but also in other Muslim dominated nations. To allude anything else is the actual lie.

Indeed Aisha, here is a link of the most recent use of the Pakistan Blasphemy Law that is obviously a FALSE allegation against a Christian man:

 

http://www.assistnews.net/index.php/component/k2/item/2524-pakistan-illiterate-christian-man-from-lahore-accused-of-blasphemy.

Using the Blasphemy Law as a vendetta is legalized terrorism, because the accused is imprisoned under horrendous conditions awaiting a death sentence or is suspiciously and mysteriously murdered awaiting the execution of a death sentence.

Aisha Khan

1/16/17

 

+John Houk Absolutely I’m a Muslimah and I’m telling you the truth, there are many Christian families in my area and they are quite safe and happy with their families. They are doing Jobs in various Govt. institutions and also their private jobs. What you are telling me is a different situation and can happen in any country. For example we all know about the wave of terrorism in Pakistan. A large number of Muslims were killed, injured in various bomb blasts and other terrorist attacks. But we can’t blame other sects for this act.

 
We also know that America a Christian country is killing thousands of innocent people including women and children in Iraq, Afghanistan and many other countries. In the name of peace they are waging war on Muslims but we are not blaming Christians for this act of terror.

 
I also know there are black sheep in every community, there may be some misguided Muslims who are involved in such wrong acts but we can’t blame the whole Sunni Muslims for personal act of any individual or a group of people.

 
Also, we have to respect each other’s faith. No one has the right to insult or humiliate other people’s faith. We must avoid such provoking acts which leads to an anarchy and crises like situation.

 
I think this is much worse to use a few events and get emotional sympathies of people to snatch some money.

 
I think this more worse than the act committed by some ignorant individuals.

 
I condemn both of them.

++++

Dear Shamim

 

I have been having a G+ discussion with one Aisha Khan about the last submission you sent to me entitled “Keep Shamim Reporting”. The conversation has been quite polite, but she (I assume “she” in case I am mistaken)  claims your position of Sunni-Muslims persecuting religious minorities in Pakistan is a lie. And quote:

 

this is a blatant lie just to raise money, in fact there are Christians in my area and they very safe and happy with their families.”

 

I read reports from other sources other than just yours; hence, I conclude there is a huge persecution problem in Pakistan. Nonetheless, she seems quite sincere in her belief. Below is the entire discussion between me and her to date on the G+ Community Anti-Islam:

 

 

My knee-jerk reaction is that Aisha is calling you and me a liar. An American colloquialism describes my emotion to being called a liar; viz., “That chaps my hide.” So, I am going to cool off about a day and blog this interaction with some further thoughts from myself. If you have any thoughts between now and the time I begin to construct an edited post, you are more than welcome to provide your perspective

 

+++

Shamim Mahmood

RE: Aisha Khan – Pakistani Muslim

1/16/2017 8:14 PM

 

Dear Brother John

 

I think the World is witness to it that how much Christians and other religious minorities are safe [tongue-in-cheek sarcasm] in Pakistan. The level of persecution is clearly reported and it’s not only me, others have reported as well.

 

Seven members of [one] family in Gojra and a Christian couple in Kot Radha Kishan were burnt alive on false blasphemy accusations.

 

Joseph Colony Lahore where more than 70 houses, including two Churches, were set ablaze.

 

Even today, Christians are treated as second-class citizens and in the [Pakistan] Constitution discrimination is clearly seen.

 

John, she is right that in many areas Christians and Muslims are living together and share their happiness and sorrows, but when it comes to a matter of religion these – Muslims – do not hesitate for a second to kill or persecute minorities.  And especially this kind of (Aisha) people become more aggressive and hit first.

 

Yes, there are broad minded and liberal Muslims but they are very few.

 

I’ve visited her G+ that clearly gives a message of her openness. Secondly brother, you know how much money I have raised, but issues Christians are facing [result in] day by day persecution.

 

Thanks now I’m going to take tea.

 

God bless you,

 

Shamim

+++

A Few Thoughts to Aisha’s 1/16/17

January 19, 2017

John R. Houk

 

Aisha wrote:

 

We also know that America a Christian country is killing thousands of innocent people including women and children in Iraq, Afghanistan and many other countries. In the name of peace they are waging war on Muslims but we are not blaming Christians for this act of terror.

 

Aisha consider the facts behind these quotes:

 

Thirty civilians have been killed in northern Afghanistan during an Afghan special forces mission supported by Nato, an Afghan spokesman says.

 

Provincial officials say many of the deaths were caused by Nato air strikes.

 

The air support was called in after troops were surrounded by Taliban militants, who took shelter in civilian homes, the spokesman said.

 

 

“US forces conducted strikes in Kunduz to defend friendly forces. All civilian casualty claims will be investigated,” the Nato-led Resolute Support mission said.

 

 

A further 25 civilians were wounded in the operation in Kunduz, Mr Danish said, and 26 Taliban fighters were killed, including two commanders. The Taliban say only three of their fighters were killed.

 

US soldiers killed

 

The US military said its soldiers died after coming under fire during a mission to clear a Taliban position.

 

Two other US soldiers were wounded, it said. General John Nicholson said the soldiers’ loss was “heartbreaking”.

 

Taliban fighters came close to overrunning Kunduz city last month and the security situation in the area remains febrile. The insurgents control large areas of the province around the city.

 

US combat operations against the Taliban officially ended in 2014 but special forces have continued to provide support to Afghan troops.

 

Afghan forces have suffered thousands of casualties, with more than 5,500 killed in the first eight months of 2016. READ ENTIRETY (Afghanistan Nato: ’30 civilians killed’ during Taliban fighting; By Reuters; BBC; 11/3/16)

 

And more …

 

The war in Afghanistan continues destroying lives, due to the direct consequences of violence and the war-induced breakdown of public health, security, and infrastructure. Civilians have been killed by crossfire, improvised explosive devices (IEDs), assassinations, bombings, and night raids into houses of suspected insurgents. Even in the absence of fighting, unexploded ordnance from previous wars and United States cluster bombs continue to kill.

 

 

About 104,000 people have been killed in the Afghanistan war since 2001. More than 31,000 of those killed have been civilians. An additional 41,000 civilians have been injured since 2001. READ ENTIRETY (AFGHAN CIVILIANS; WATSON INSTITUTE FOR INTERNATIONAL AND PUBLIC AFFAIRS)

 

And more …

 

ISLAMABAD, PAKISTAN — A joint military operation in northern Afghanistan in early November killed 33 Afghan civilians and wounded 27, the U.S. military said Thursday in releasing details of its investigation into the incident.

 

The attack in Boz village in restive Kunduz province flattened dozens of houses, residents and Taliban insurgents said. The joint operation was conducted to capture Taliban leaders who were plotting to seize the provincial capital of Kunduz, Afghan and U.S. military officials said.

 

“To defend themselves and Afghan forces, U.S. forces returned fire in self-defense at Taliban who were using civilian houses as firing positions,” U.S. military officials said.

 

 

Afghan special forces had planned the raid against the Taliban hideout in Kunduz with the help of a small group of American military advisers. But the insurgents swiftly engaged them, opening fire from multiple civilian buildings, the U.S. military said in its investigation. [Blog Editor: Emphasis Mine]

 

“U.S. and Afghan forces were forced to request aerial fire support from U.S. platforms in self-defense. Aerial fires were also used to suppress Taliban who were firing on U.S. medical evacuation assets as the dead and wounded were evacuated,” it said. READ ENTIRETY (US Confirms Airstrike Killed 33 Afghan Civilians in Kunduz; By Ayaz Gul; VOA; Last Updated 1/12/17 7:29 PM)

 

In Iraq …

 

Another person said: “Before blaming Muslims for Isis, remember that Isis terrorist attacks is targeting more Muslims than any other groups.”

 

Many people were sharing an image bearing the slogan: “Isis is bombing Muslims in Muslim countries in the holy month of Ramadan. And you still say Isis represents Islam?”

 

 

Like in other recent attacks, Isis’ initial propaganda claim said it targeted a “gathering of the Popular Mobilisation” Committees – predominantly Shia armed groups fighting its militants alongside Iraqi security forces.

 

But authorities say there were many women and children among the civilian victims, and a later statement from the organisation made it clear religion was the target, saying: “The raids of the mujahedeen [holy warriors] against the Rafidha [Shia] apostates will not stop.”

 

 

Shias were also the main victims of Isis’ deadliest ever attack in Iraq, when militants massacred 670 prisoners in a raid in Badush in June 2014.

 

A handful of survivors recounted jihadists separating Shias and other religious minorities, driving them into the desert and lining them up on the edge of a ravine before opening fire with machine guns.

 

There are no definitive figures on the number of Muslims or other religious denominations killed by Isis but the huge number of Iraqi victims, where 99 per cent of the population is Muslim, suggests that the religion makes up by far the largest proportion of the dead. READ ENTIRETY (Baghdad bombing: Iraqis remind world that most of Isis’ victims are Muslims after more than 160 killed; By Lizzie Dearden; Independent; 7/5/16)

 

American involvement in Iraq …

 

 

The rate of Iraqi civilian deaths caused by US-led coalition forces has declined steadily from 2009, while the rate caused by Iraqi state forces has increased, with deaths resulting directly from actions involving US-led coalition forces falling to their smallest number ever, at a total of 19 reported by year end (down from 32 in 2010), and deaths involving Iraqi forces rising from 98 in 2010 to 147 in 2011.

 

 

Total deaths with combatants, combining IBC and official records:

 

Combining IBC civilian data with official Iraqi and US combatant death figures and data from the Iraq War Logs released by WikiLeaks, we estimate the documented death toll across all categories since March 2003 to be 162,000, of whom 79% were civilians.

 

Most deadly period of violence:

 

Iraq’s violence peaked in late 2006 but was sustained at high levels until the second half of 2008 – nearly 90% of the deaths occurred by 2009.

 

Weapons claiming the most victims:

graph-weapons-claiming-the-most-victims

 

Civilians killed by Gunfire Explosives Air attacks 2003 – 2011 by quarter Download data

 

64,575 of the civilian dead were reported killed by small arms gunfire; 39,273 by explosive weapons (such as IEDs, suicide attacks, and aerial bombardment); and 5,820by airstrikes (including cannon-fire, bombs and missiles).

 

Children killed:

 

Of the 45,779 victims for whom IBC was able to obtain age data, 3,911 (8.54%) were children under age 18.

 

Most-targeted group:

 

Police forces have been a major target, with 9,609 deaths reported – by far the largest toll of any professional group.

 

 

Civilians killed by US-led coalition

 

US forces killed far more Iraqi civilians than any other members of the US-led coalition, including various Iraqi military forces acting with or independently of them.3 The data on US forces killings show:

 

Total deaths from coalition forces:

 

15,141 (13%) of all documented civilian deaths were reported as being directly caused by the US-led coalition.

 

Children killed by coalition forces:

 

Of the 4,040 civilian victims of US-led coalition forces for whom age data was available, 1,201 (29%) were children.

 

 

  • Iraq Body Count 2003-2011 — 114,212

 

  • Iraq War Logs new ‘Civilian’ and comparable ‘Host Nation’ remaining – central estimate — 13,750

 

  • Iraq War Logs ‘Host Nation’ combatant – central estimate — 5,575

 

  • Iraq War Logs ‘Enemy’ (minus IBC overlaps) – central estimate — 20,499

 

  • Insurgents killed June-December 2003 — 597

 

  • Insurgents killed May 2004 — 652

 

  • Insurgents & Iraqi soldiers killed March 2009 — 59

 

  • Insurgents & Iraqi soldiers killed 2010–2011 – 2,187

 

  • TOTAL IRAQI — 157,531

 

  • US & Coalition military killed 2003–2011 — 4,802

 

  • TOTAL — 162,333

 

Official statistics

 

Official figures released monthly by Iraqi ministries continue to be lower than IBC’s, as in previous years, and this year more so than last. 7 However, longer-term official figures released in 2009 by the Iraqi Ministry of Human Rights show somewhat higher totals than IBC for 2004-6. This indicates, as does the WikiLeaks-published US military database, that a full accounting for the entire period from 2003 will be above, not below, IBC’s present count. Unfortunately official Iraqi data is presented in aggregate form, whereas IBC’s numbers are obtained from incidents individually listed on its website. This not only makes them open to public scrutiny for verification or amendment, but would allow item-by-item cross-referencing against other, similarly detailed sources.

 

READ ENTIRETY (Iraqi deaths from violence 2003–2011; Iraq Body Count; First published 1/2/12)

 

Aisha the reality about war is this: WAR IS HELL.

 

The history of war demonstrates civilians – innocent and not so innocent sympathizers to the enemy – is an inevitable reality. When you say Americans kill civilian men, women and children, it is a true statement. BUT it is also true that not only have Muslims killed Christians and other religious minorities in in Muslim dominated populations, they have killed themselves.

 

One thing to consider in Aisha’s concerns about civilian deaths by American hands IS THIS: The United States of America would not have invaded Afghanistan if the Taliban government had not stood by Usama bin Laden and al Qaeda after about 3,000 (plus) civilians on American soil with hijacked jet airliners on September 11, 2001 (WE call that cowardly infamous day “911”). If that attack had never occurred on American soil, our military would never have invaded Afghanistan. And if we never invaded Afghanistan, it is unlikely the U.S. would have invaded Iraq based on rumors of Weapons of Mass Destruction being manufactured by Saddam Hussein.

 

Aisha on a personal note I have to ask: What makes you think Christians and Jews can live continuously in peace side by side? Are you not aware that your prophet Muhammad’s last words in the Quran was to kill Christians and Jews? According Islamic theology, Muhammad’s last words abrogate any previous words of peace toward those he called the People of the Book.

 

Do you hear without cringing the Church bells ringing calling Christians to assemble and worship God openly and with loud reverence? How many Jewish Synagogues operate openly in Pakistan or any Muslim dominated society? What happens in Pakistan if a Christian publicly announces Jesus Christ is the Son of God and the only path to Salvation from a Satan dominated world? You have to realize a Christian not brainwashed by centuries of Islamic Supremicism would tell a Muslim that Muhammad was a false prophet for claiming Jesus was not the Son of God?

 

If you want more trust from Americans that consider themselves Christians and/or Jews, Muslim must reform their theology to not condemn others for blaspheming Islam. Just as Christians in America not knowing just how intolerant Islam is, are more than willing to accept a Mosque, Synagogue, Buddhist Temple or even a brainwashing religious cult to be on the same street as a Church. Christians may not like the idea and perhaps protest such a building that denies Christ as the Son of God, but Christians would not riot en masse over the situation resulting assault, property damage or murder.

 

Something to think about Aisha next time your news tells your peaceful Muslim/Christian community that Christians were slaughtered because they may have offended the Quran, Islam, Allah or Muhammad.

 

JRH 1/19/17

Please Support NCCR

Potential Ways to Defeat ISIS and Assad


John R. Houk

© October 22, 2015

An email sent by ACT for America highlights the reality that ISIS (ISIL, IS or Daesh) uses oil fields they have captured to finance their terrorist war machine that targets non-Muslims (primarily Christians and Yazidis) for slaughter, rape, pillaging and dhimmitude. The email links to a very informative article entitled, “Isis Inc: How Oil Fuels the Jihadi Terrorists” co-written by Erika Solomon, Guy Chazan and Sam Jones originally sourced at the Financial Times but cross posted on the ACT for America website.

The ACT for America email introduction to the entitled article is a pitch for Americans to support the House Bill Fuel Choice for American Prosperity and Security Act of 2015 (HR 2418). After reading HR 2418 that Bill actually has little to do with targeting ISIS’ oil financing of their terrorism agenda to establish an Islamic Caliphate. The Bill focuses on providing incentives to power vehicles with alternative resources other than fossil fuels that would reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases that pollutes the air we breathe.

ACT for America’s support for HR 2418 as a tool that would lessen the marketability of ISIS oil misses a short term targeting of ISIS. The thing for me is that it seems any actual effect on ISIS oil production would occur way down the road on any timeline hurting an ISIS oil economy. Apparently if the Bill became law the standards would not go into effect until 2018. HOWEVER on a long term basis in time, the design of HR 2418 would affect America’s dependence on foreign oil from nations that might have a contrary agenda to the USA’s National Security and national economy.

The FT article suggests the best way to slow down ISIS terrorism is to demolish any ISIS infrastructure – especially oil production – that provides material support for the existence of ISIS. I don’t have a problem with a long term plan to stifle American dependence on foreign oil in our economy; however to begin placing nails in ISIS’s coffin in a quicker time frame, it would be more advisable to attack any infrastructure controlled by ISIS.

America should provide air support to the Syrian rebels that do not have an immediate Radical Islamic agenda (I’m no friend of Islam in any form because of its antichrist/anti-Jew emphasis in the religion’s Quran and other revered writings [Hadith & Sira]) AND begin destroying the ISIS infrastructure and the Jew-hating Assad’s Syrian infrastructure.

Thanks to Obama Foreign Policy fecklessness the Russians have entered the Syria-Iraq-ISIS conflict to the favor of Assad’s Syrian dictatorship who is an ally of Iran, Hezbollah terrorists and probably Hamas terrorists. This means providing direct air support to protect the non-Islamist Syrian rebels will undoubtedly place America and Russia in a crisis that could be a situation comparable to the Kennedy-Khrushchev Cuban Missile Crisis that placed the USA and Russia on the brink of nuclear war in the early 1960s.

We all know who would blink in an Obama-Putin faceoff. Thus if such a crisis of supporting diverging allies in the conflict in Syria-Iraq-ISIS under Obama’s watch I am fairly confident that Russia will turn that region over to a cabal of Hezbollah, Assad and Iran. Guess which ally of America this affects the most in the Middle East? That would be Israel!

So if or when Obama a Middle Eastern chunk of land to Putin’s Russian designs, what do you think Obama will do to protect our ally Israel?

I think Obama will do his best to sell out Israel before he leaves Office in January 2017 making difficult for a new President to set things aright to reestablish American military superiority in the region without probable occurrence of a global war igniting. God help America and our exceptionalism that makes the world a safer place for Americans and our allies.

JRH 10/22/15

Please Support NCCR

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

ISIS Inc: How Oil Fuels the Jihadi Terrorists

Email Sent: ACT for America

Sent: 10/21/2015 7:03 AM

There is a “silver bullet” when it comes to stopping jihadi terror around the world: cut off their money supply.

See the important article below to learn more about how “oil is the black gold that funds Isis’ black flag — it fuels its war machine, provides electricity and gives the fanatical jihadis critical leverage against their neighbors.”

Then help do something about it, by taking action today.

Please contact your U.S. Representative to register your strong support for H.R. 2418, the Fuel Choice for American Prosperity and Security Act. We’ve done all the work for you, all you need to do is send the e-mail.

H.R. 2418 will help reduce the strategic importance of oil worldwide — while at the same time using an “all of the above” approach to transportation fuel that will provide consumer choice and create jobs. No preferred fuels, no mandates, no tax dollars.

It’s a win win — for our security, for our nation, and for the world.

+++

Isis Inc: How Oil Fuels the Jihadi Terrorists

 

By Erika Solomon in Beirut, Guy Chazan and Sam Jones in London

Originally: Financial Times

ACT for America Action Center

2015-10-20

 

On the outskirts of al-Omar oilfield in eastern Syria, with warplanes flying overhead, a line of trucks stretches for 6km. Some drivers wait for a month to fill up with crude.

Falafel stalls and tea shops have sprung up to cater to the drivers, such is the demand for oil. Traders sometimes leave their trucks unguarded for weeks, waiting for their turn.

This is the land of Isis, the jihadi organisation in control of swaths of Syrian and Iraqi territory. The trade in oil has been declared a prime target by the international military coalition fighting the group. And yet it goes on, undisturbed.

Oil is the black gold that funds Isis’ black flag — it fuels its war machine, provides electricity and gives the fanatical jihadis critical leverage against their neighbours.

But more than a year after US President Barack Obama launched an international coalition to fight Isis, the bustling trade at al-Omar and at least eight other fields has come to symbolise the dilemma the campaign faces: how to bring down the “caliphate” without destabilising the life of the estimated 10m civilians in areas under Isis control, and punishing the west’s allies?

The resilience of Isis, and the weakness of the US-led campaign, have given Russia a pretext to launch its own, bold intervention in Syria.

Despite all these efforts, dozens of interviews with Syrian traders and oil engineers as well as western intelligence officials and oil experts reveal a sprawling operation almost akin to a state oil company that has grown in size and expertise despite international attempts to destroy it.

Minutely managed, Isis’ oil company actively recruits skilled workers, from engineers to trainers and managers.

Syria-Iraq ISIS map

Estimates by local traders and engineers put crude production in Isis-held territory at about 34,000-40,000 bpd. The oil is sold at the wellhead for between $20 and $45 a barrel, earning the militants an average of $1.5m a day.

“It’s a situation that makes you laugh and cry,” said one Syrian rebel commander in Aleppo, who buys diesel from Isis areas even as his forces fight the group on the front lines. “But we have no other choice, and we are a poor man’s revolution. Is anyone else offering to give us fuel?”

Oil as a strategic weapon

Isis’ oil strategy has been long in the making. Since the group emerged on the scene in Syria in 2013, long before they reached Mosul in Iraq, the jihadis saw oil as a crutch for their vision for an Islamic state. The group’s shura council identified it as fundamental for the survival of the insurgency and, more importantly, to finance their ambition to create a caliphate.

Most of the oil Isis controls is in Syria’s oil-rich east, where it created a foothold in 2013, shortly after withdrawing from the north-west — an area of strategic importance but with no oil. These bridgeheads were then used to consolidate control over the whole of eastern Syria after the fall of Mosul in 2014.

When it pushed through northern Iraq and took over Mosul, Isis also seized the Ajil and Allas fields in north-eastern Iraq’s Kirkuk province. The very day of its takeover, locals say, militants secured the fields and engineers were sent in to begin operations and ship the oil to market.

“They were ready, they had people there in charge of the financial side, they had technicians that adjusted the filling and storage process,” said a local sheikh from the town of Hawija, near Kirkuk. “They brought hundreds of trucks in from Kirkuk and Mosul and they started to extract the oil and export it.” An average of 150 trucks, he added, were filled daily, with each containing about $10,000-worth of oil. Isis lost the fields to the Iraqi army in April but made an estimated $450m from them in the 10 months it controlled the area.

While al-Qaeda, the global terrorist network, depended on donations from wealthy foreign sponsors, Isis has derived its financial strength from its status as monopoly producer of an essential commodity consumed in vast quantities throughout the area it controls. Even without being able to export, it can thrive because it has a huge captive market in Syria and Iraq.

Syrian Rebel Quote on buying ISIS oil

Indeed, diesel and petrol produced in Isis areas are not only consumed in territory the group controls but in areas that are technically at war with it, such as Syria’s rebel-held north: the region is dependent on the jihadis’ fuel for its survival. Hospitals, shops, tractors and machinery used to pull victims out of rubble run on generators that are powered by Isis oil.

“At any moment, the diesel can be cut. No diesel — Isis knows our life is completely dead,” says one oil trader who comes from rebel-held Aleppo each week to buy fuel and spoke to the Financial Times by telephone.

A national oil company

Isis’ strategy has rested on projecting the image of a state in the making, and it is attempting to run its oil industry by mimicking the ways of national oil corporations. According to Syrians who say Isis tried to recruit them, the group headhunts engineers, offering competitive salaries to those with the requisite experience, and encourages prospective employees to apply to its human resources department.

A roving committee of its specialists checks up on fields, monitors production and interviews workers about operations. It also appoints Isis members who have worked at oil companies in Saudi Arabia or elsewhere in the Middle East as “emirs”, or princes, to run its most important facilities, say traders who buy Isis oil and engineers who have worked at Isis-controlled fields.

Some technicians have been actively courted by Isis recruiters. Rami — not his real name — used to work in oil in Syria’s Deir Ezzor province before becoming a rebel commander. He was later contacted by an Isis military emir in Iraq via WhatsApp.

Targeting ISIS infrastructure by airstrikes infitisimalTargeting ISIS infrastructure by airstrikes infinitesimal

“I could choose whatever position I wanted, he promised me,” he said. “He said: ‘You can name your salary’.” Sceptical of the Isis project, Rami ultimately turned down the offer and fled to Turkey.

Isis also recruits from among its supporters abroad. In the speech he gave after the fall of Mosul, Isis leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi called not only for fighters but engineers, doctors and other skilled labour. The group recently appointed an Egyptian engineer who used to live in Sweden as the new manager of its Qayyara refinery in northern Iraq, according to an Iraqi petroleum engineer from Mosul, who declined to be named.

The central role of oil is also reflected in the status it is given in Isis’ power structures.

The group’s approach to government across the territories it controls is highly decentralised. For the most part, it relies on regional walis — governors — to administer territories according to the precepts laid down by the central shura.

However, oil — alongside Isis’ military and security operations and its sophisticated media output — is centrally controlled by the top leadership. “They are organised in their approach to oil,” said a senior western intelligence official. “That’s a key centrally controlled and documented area. It’s a central shura matter,” he added, referring to Isis’ ruling “cabinet”.

Until recently, Isis’ emir for oil was Abu Sayyaf, a Tunisian whose real name, according to the Pentagon, was Fathi Ben Awn Ben Jildi Murad al-Tunisi, and who was killed by US special forces in a raid in May this year. According to US and European intelligence officials, a treasure trove of documentation relating to Isis’ oil operations was found with him. The documents laid bare a meticulously run operation, with revenues from wells and costs carefully accounted for. They showed a pragmatic approach to pricing too, with Isis carefully exploiting differences in demand across its territories to maximise profitability.

Cut-Off ISIS kills ISIS

Oversight of the oil wells is carefully controlled by the Amniyat, Isis’ secret police, who ensure revenues go where they should — and mete out brutal punishments when they do not. Guards patrol the perimeter of pumping stations, while far-flung individual wells are surrounded by protective sand berms and each trader is carefully checked as he drives in to fill up.

At the al-Jibssa field in Hassakeh province, north-eastern Syria, which produces 2,500-3,000 bpd, “about 30-40 big trucks a day, each with 75 barrels of capacity, would fill up”, according to one Hassakeh oil trader.

Isis’ distribution network

But the biggest draw is al-Omar. According to one trader who regularly buys oil there, the system, with its 6km queue, is slow but market players have adapted to it. Drivers present a document with their licence plate number and tanker capacity to Isis officials, who enter them into a database and assign them a number.

ISIS oil: from well to market

Most then return to their villages, shuttling back to the site every two or three days to check up on their vehicles. Traders say that towards the end of the month, some people come back and set up tents to stay close to their trucks while they wait their turn.

Once in possession of al-Omar’s oil, the traders either take it to local refineries or sell it on at a mark-up to middlemen with smaller vehicles who transport it to cities further west such as Aleppo and Idlib.

Isis’ luck with oil may not last. Coalition bombs, the Russian intervention and low oil prices could put pressure on revenues. The biggest threat to Isis’ production so far, however, has been the depletion of Syria’s ageing oilfields. It does not have the technology of major foreign companies to counteract what locals describe as a slow drop in production. Isis’ need for fuel for its military operations means there is also less oil to sell in the market.

For now, though, in Isis-controlled territory, the jihadis control the supply and there is no shortage of demand. “Everyone here needs diesel: for water, for farming, for hospitals, for offices. If diesel is cut off, there is no life here,” says a businessman who works near Aleppo. “Isis knows this [oil] is a winning card.”

________________________

Potential Ways to Defeat ISIS and Assad

John R. Houk

© October 22, 2015

______________________

ISIS Inc: How Oil Fuels the Jihadi Terrorists

ACT for America Action Center home page

 

Engage FAQ

What is Engage?


Engage is ACT! for America’s new and improved grassroots advocacy platform.


Through Engage, ACT! for America members can:


• receive time-sensitive action alerts on important national security-related legislation

 

• become informed about critical national security-related public policy issues

 

• easily access information about their individual legislators

 

• easily and effectively make their voice heard on Capitol Hill and in their state legislatures.

Why should I use Engage?


Your right to express your views and opinions to your legislators is explicitly protected in the U.S. Constitution. It is a critical component of our nation’s democratic form of government. Each day, issues are discussed in the federal and state legislatures that affect our national security. ACT! for America’s goal is to make it as easy as possible for you to be involved in the legislative process, so that good policies are enacted and bad policies are blocked. Through Engage you will be provided with all the tools possible to make you a better and more effective advocate.

How do I use Engage?


There are several ways to use Engage. ACT! for America members may be driven to Engage by action alerts emails. In addition, they may access national security-related legislation that ACT! for America has placed on its “High Priority List.” ACT! for America members are encouraged to review these bills at any time by logging on to their Engage account. Further, at any time they may register support for these bills with their legislators via e-mail, phone call, or social media (Facebook, Twitter, etc.). When timely, ACT! for America’s members will
READ THE REST

Donate to ACT for America

WATCH: Khamenei threatens ‘criminal America’ in chilling new video


So … this is the guy President Barack Hussein Obama made a nuke deal with which includes secret side deals not made available to Congress. Hmm … since I do consider Obama an intelligent person rather than an idiot, what nefarious intention does he have for the United States of America?

JRH 9/18/15

Please Support NCCR

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

WATCH: Khamenei threatens ‘criminal America’ in chilling new video

Iranian supreme leader says should war break out, US will be defeated, humiliated

 

By TIMES OF ISRAEL STAFF

September 18, 2015, 5:38 am

The Times of Israel

Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei released a video published to YouTube this week in which he warned of an American defeat in any war with Iran.

The clip — published September 13 to Khamenei’s official YouTube channel — is entitled “If Any War Happens.” It features Khamenei’s voice and is accompanied by English subtitles.

The video was viewed almost half a million times by September 18.

The clip begins by showing an image of US President Barack Obama sitting down for an interview in which he says that the US will not have a problem “knocking out [Iran’s] military with speed and dispatch if we choose to,” after which Khamenei’s voice appears to dismiss such a warning, calling it “boasting among strangers,” according to a translation provided in a report by MEMRI — the Middle East Media Research Institute.

The supreme leader then advises the Americans to “use their experiences [in the Middle East] correctly” as images play of suggested American “failures” in the background including photos of the advanced American RQ-170 drone that Iran brought down on its soil in December 2011; a photo of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah against a backdrop of a man flying the Hezbollah flag atop a missile and a mention of the Second Lebanon War in 2006; depictions of US forces being bombed in Afghanistan; and images of US forces carrying a coffin with the text “2003-2011 Iraq war” above it.

VIDEO: If any war happens… 

 

Published by Khamenei.ir

Published on Sep 13, 2015

“We neither welcome nor begin any war. They must know that should any war break out, one who will emerge humiliated out of it will be invading and criminal America,” says Khamenei, according to the English subtitles.

In the background of the clip, a crowd says: “We will stand until the end, Khamenei is the leader.”

The Iranian leader has issued several threats against the US — and Israel — following the Iranian nuclear deal signed July 14 with world powers, which allows for sanctions relief in exchange for Iran curbing its controversial nuclear program and submitting to inspections.

The US is set to start implementing the deal October 18, but it is not yet clear when punitive measures will be lifted, as the International Atomic Energy Agency must first ensure Iranian compliance with the accord.

__________________

© 2015 THE TIMES OF ISRAEL, All rights reserved.

About The Times of Israel

The Times of Israel is a Jerusalem-based online newspaper founded in 2012 to document developments in Israel, the Middle East and around the Jewish world.

It was established by veteran UK-born, Israeli journalist David Horovitz and his US-based capital partner Seth Klarman. Horovitz is the founding editor, responsible for the site’s editorial content.

The Times of Israel has no partisan political affiliation. It seeks to present the news fair-mindedly and offers a wide range of analysis and opinion pieces.

We also highlight developments from Jewish communities throughout the Diaspora, and thus serve as a global focal point for the Jewish world – informing and engaging members of the tribe everywhere.

We aim for the site to serve as a READ THE REST

Nuke Deal or Not, Iran Has Already Declared War on Us


Old ad: Think of the consequences of war with Iran: Fram Oil Filter Commercial- 1972


An Iran war is inevitable. We can fight a bloody conventional war now or fight a nuke war later with catastrophic results that will for future generations.

Has anyone noticed that as far as Iran is concerned they are in a state of war with the United States of America? From acts of terrorism conducted by client Islamic terrorist organizations who killed American civilians and military personnel, giving aid to U.S. enemies in Iraq causing deaths to American soldiers and harboring for a time al Qaeda operatives while the U.S. led an allied army invading Afghanistan whose Taliban government gave political sanction to the same al Qaeda organization.

AND YET media outlets and a significant amount of Dems do not want to rock Obama’s Titanic boat deal because the Obamasiah claims some deal with a nation not renouncing war against the USA while public railing for America’s and Israel’s death is better than no deal with a warmongering hate-America deceiving nation.

Obama’s Titanic will run into the iceberg Iran with dire consequences whether now or after Obama leaves Office. Lawrence Franklin below gives a picture of the idiocy of Iran Nuke Deal.

JRH 8/20/15

Please Support NCCR

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

Nuke Deal or Not, Iran Has Already Declared War on Us

By Lawrence A. Franklin

August 20, 2015 at 5:00 am

Gatestone Institute

Iran has been at war with the “Great Satan” (USA) since the establishment of the Islamic Republic in 1979. Its opening move was the regime’s seizure of the American Embassy and its taking U.S. diplomats hostage for 444 days in 1979-1980. Technically, the move was an internationally recognized casus belli, legitimate cause for war.

In addition, the Iranian regime’s proxy terrorist group, Hezbollah, engineered the murder of 241 U.S. soldiers, sailors, and marines in Lebanon on October 23, 1983. Iran also sponsored the truck bombing that murdered 19 US Air Force personnel at the Khobar Towers housing complex in Saudi Arabia on June 25, 1996,[1] in an attack allegedly executed by a Bahrain-based cell of Hezbollah, with the cooperation of a Saudi-trained Hezbollah cell.[2]

Iran was behind the September 11, 2001 World Trade Center and Pentagon attacks.[3] The Islamic Republic’s intelligence services facilitated travel across Iran by several of the hijackers in the weeks leading up to 9/11.[4]

Additionally, after the 9/11 attacks, Iran granted refuge, reconstitution, and a base of operations for several high-level al-Qaeda terrorists.[5]

After the overthrow of Saddam Hussein in April 2003, when Tehran activated its underground intelligence network in Iraq to target American troops, Iran was responsible either directly or indirectly for about a third of U.S. casualties in Iraq.[6]

The Islamic Republic also has given military assistance to the Afghan Taliban to kill U.S. and coalition troops in Afghanistan.[7]

Iran’s Islamic Revolution Guard Corps (IRGC) naval assets have repeatedly instigated confrontations with U.S. naval ships in Persian Gulf waters.

IRGC gunboats also have threatened commercial shipping, as well as U.S. and allied military assets in Persian Gulf waters, including the Strait of Hormuz. In late April 2015, Iran seized the Marshall Islands-flagged vessel Maersk Tigris, and detained the ship and crew for weeks. In July, several IRGC gunboats surrounded the U.S.-flagged Maersk Kensington.

The most recent Iranian provocation reportedly occurred this month, on August 4, when an Iranian Navy Vosper Class frigate pointed a deck-mounted machine gun at an American helicopter that had just landed on an allied warship.

Tehran’s assistance to the Shia Houthi tribesmen in Yemen has enabled Iran to expand its territorial control of the country. If the Houthi become the dominant force in Yemen, Iran would be in a position to threaten shipping in the Bab el-Mandab Strait, a maritime chokepoint between the Persian Gulf and the Red Sea. A blockade there, as well as at the Strait of Hormuz on the other side of the Arabian Peninsula, would be a clear violation of freedom of navigation on the high seas, a vital international interest acknowledged by the U.S.

Iran has also taken its offensive against the United States to the Western hemisphere. Iran has forged intelligence relationships with several Latin American countries that do not have friendly diplomatic relationships with the U.S., such as Cuba, Venezuela, Ecuador, Nicaragua, and Bolivia.

Hezbollah, Iran’s proxy terrorist group, has also infiltrated parts of the United States, with sleeper cells in Dearborn, Michigan; Charlotte, North Carolina; and several other locales.[8]

On a strategic political plane, Iran probably believes that it has been able to drive a wedge between the U.S. and its ally, the “Little Satan,” Israel, over the Obama Administration’s effort to forge a negotiated nuclear treaty with the Iran.[9]

This strategy has also been applied to America’s political and military alliances with the conservative Sunni Arab governments on the Arabian Peninsula.[10]

The IRGC also continues to manage several weapons-development projects, including intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) systems capable of launching nuclear-armed re-entry vehicles at the continental United States.[11]

It seems clear that despite the American political establishment’s failure to recognize that a state of war already exists between Iran and the United States, the Islamic Republic has no doubt with whom it is at war.

Left: Senior Iranian cleric Ayatollah Mohammad Ali Movahedi Kermani, speaking on July 17 in Tehran, behind a banner reading “We Will Trample Upon America” and “We defeat the United States.” Right: Iran’s Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, proclaims “Death to America” on March 2.

 

The diminution of American influence in the region, the destruction of the “Zionist Entity” (Israel), and challenging the legitimacy of Sunni Arab Gulf monarchies appear to be the main motive forces driving Iran’s foreign policy.

The regime’s hardliners use their hostility to the “Great Satan” (America) to demonstrate their loyalty to the Islamic Revolution.

U.S. policymakers who hope that the nuclear deal will help nudge the Islamic revolutionary state into becoming a normal member of the international community seem to forget the past. Policymakers, journalists, and intelligence analysts had all predicted that the era of former Iranian President Mohammad Khatami was a sure sign of the evolution of the revolution. Khatami was replaced by the even more hardline president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.

Dr. Lawrence A. Franklin was the Iran Desk Officer for Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld. He also served on active duty with the U.S. Army and as a Colonel in the Air Force Reserve, where he was a Military Attaché at the U.S. Embassy in Israel.

________________

Copyright © 2015 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved.

 

The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the [Gatestone] Editors or of Gatestone Institute.

 

About Gatestone Institute

 

“Let us tenderly and kindly cherish, therefore, the means of knowledge. Let us dare to read, think, speak, and write.” — John Adams

 

Gatestone Institute, a non-partisan, not-for-profit international policy council and think tank is dedicated to educating the public about what the mainstream media fails to report in promoting:

 

  • Institutions of Democracy and the Rule of Law;

 

  • Human Rights

 

  • A free and strong economy

 

  • A military capable of ensuring peace at home and in the free world

 

  • Energy independence

 

  • Ensuring the public stay informed of threats to our individual liberty, sovereignty and free speech.

 

Gatestone Institute conducts national and international conferences, briefings and events for its members and others, with world leaders, journalists and experts — analyzing, strategizing, and keeping them informed on current issues, and where possible recommending solutions.

 

Gatestone Institute will be publishing books, and continues to publish an online daily report, www.gatestoneinstitute.org, that features topics such as military and diplomatic threats to the United States and our allies; events in the Middle East and their possible consequences, and the transparency and accountability of international organizations.

 

Gatestone Institute is funded by private donors and foundations. We are grateful for your support.

 

Ambassador John R. Bolton, Chairman

 

Nina Rosenwald, President


Naomi H. Perlman, Vice President

 

Board of … READ THE REST

I’d rather go to War than Make a Deal with a Devil


John R. Houk

© July 31, 2015

Let me begin with a thirteen minute speech delivered by Caroline Glick. If you didn’t know that Glick was an American born Jewish gal that is now an Israeli citizen and senior editor for the Jerusalem Post, you would think she was an evangelical preacher. THIS IS GOOD PREACHING!

VIDEO: Caroline Glick speaks at Stop Iran Rally in New York City #StopIranRally

Published by Bob David

Published on Jul 22, 2015

Caroline Glick speaks out against Obama’s surrender to Iran and his facilitation of their mass murder terrorist operations and acquisition of nuclear weapons. (Video Hat Tip: United with Israel)

America has endured seven years of Obama cover-ups and lies. Combine this with a gullible duped electorate that admires America’s first Black President while ignoring the destructive nature of Obama’s transformation of America. You will see the full swing of tragedy engulfing America with Congress laying down its constitutional power to Executive Order authority.

International agreements that have the force of law comes under the category of a Treaty. The Constitution tells us all treaties need Congressional approval. Obama has flouted the Constitution by pushing the envelope of the rule of law with the fiat of an Executive Order. The Executive Order/Agreement is nothing new in the evolution of the Executive Branch stretching the bounds of the Constitution often with the consent of the Judicial Branch. UNFORTUNATELY this Iran Nuke Deal by Obama’s Administration has all the elements of a Treaty; however Obama’s EO power has placed Congress in the position of passing legislation to overrule an agreement that will affect America’s future National Security, Israel’s existence and undermine the few Arab/Sunni-Muslim allies the government has courted because of a threatening Twelver-Shia Iran.

Rather than being the constitutional position of the required 2/3 Senate approval of a Treaty, Obama is forcing legislation to pass both Houses and if there is a Presidential veto both Houses have to come up with 2/3 majorities to override the veto.

On a personal level it is my feeling that any agreement that allows a saber rattling and terrorist supporting nation such as Iran is not worth the paper signed upon. It is my understanding that Iran’s nuclear program is left intact including the ability to enrich weapons grade uranium. Iranians are just promising they won’t pursue such an enrichment for ten years. So even if we can believe weapons grade enrichment is suspended, Iran can pick up where they left off. And assuming there is no clandestine nuclear enrichment, Iran is more than free to develop weaponry including Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) capable of carrying some form of weapon(s) of mass destruction (WMD).

Also Obama’s nuke deal stops all economic sanctions against Iran BEFORE any verification of Iranian trustworthiness proceeds which includes releasing hundreds of billions of dollars confiscated due to previous sanction violations by Iran.

For clarity’s sake then, Iran can develop weaponry systems, continue to supply Islamic terrorists with weapons and plan Israel’s destruction pertaining to the death to America and death to Israel rhetoric that Obama dismisses as playing politics to the Iranian Twelver constituents who believe their Hidden 12th Imam will emerge to cause global chaos ushering in a Shi’ite-Islamic domination of planet earth.

The Obama supporters (including BHO) are planting the seeds of fear that the only alternative to the best deal that can be arrived at with Iran is war. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out that war with Iran in some form or another is inevitable. So is it better to engage in a military action now in which Iran can only respond with conventional weapons now better than a nuclear war later in which many more lives perish including creating inhabitable land due to radiation?

Also the Obama international cohorts seem to indicate they are going through with sanction lifting against Iran whether Congress thwarts Obama or not. Iran Nuke Deal supporters claim that European abandonment to economics and oil benefits Iran who continue to enrich uranium without a deal thus producing a nuke weapon. So again, is a conventional war in the present favorable or a nuke war in the future which includes psycho-Iranians that have a death culture? That death culture means the Cold War adage that prevented an American vs. a Sino-Soviet nuclear war via the military theory of Mutually Assured Destruction (MAD) will not stop Iran.

Iran is not a secular nation that reasons in geopolitics in the same way that Western Nations and global economic minded despotic nations like Russia and China would reason even today. As far as Twelver-Shi’ites are concerned a MAD scenario will simply bring a global Islamic era under Allah quicker.

For all the bad things Iran Nuke Deal supports believe will read this Foreign Policy essay by Suzanne Nossel: “This Is What Will Happen if Congress Blows Up the Iran Nuclear Deal: If the naysayers manage to blow up the newly minted agreement, it will be a disaster for the United States — and will only push Iran closer to the bomb.” –July 30, 2015

I know I’m just a small time Okie blogger, but sure seems a “NO” to the Iran Nuke Deal means bad consequences now. AGAIN I’m here to tell you a “YES” to the Iran Nuke Deal means WORSE consequences in our future. AND if Iran proves untrustworthy as I suspect, those WORSE consequences will arrive sooner rather than later.

Iran Nuke Installation May 2015 Map

I believe Norman Podhoretz sums up the reality of the Iran Nuke Deal in the last paragraph of his July 28 Wall Street Journal editorial: “Israel’s Choice: Conventional War Now, or Nuclear War Later”.

The brutal truth is that the actual alternatives before us are not Mr. Obama’s deal or war. They are conventional war now or nuclear war later. John Kerry recently declared that Israel would be making a “huge mistake” to take military action against Iran. But Mr. Kerry, as usual, is spectacularly wrong. Israel would not be making a mistake at all, let alone a huge one. On the contrary, it would actually be sparing itself—and the rest of the world—a nuclear conflagration in the not too distant future. (Israel’s Choice: Conventional War Now, or Nuclear War Later; By Norman Podhoretz; WSJ; 7/28/15)

The best thing for the U.S. to do would be to back Israeli military action against Iranian nuke sites. When Iran counterattacks Israel, then would be a good time to demonstrate to Israel and other nominal Middle East allies that we protect our allies and nail Iran from all sides without necessarily planning an invasion. Incapacitating Iran’s infrastructure will cause Iran to run out of retaliatory options soon enough. AND thank god, a military strike now means no nuke WMD future options for Iran.

Further Reading:

Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (Iran Nuke Deal PDF) Vienna 7/14/15

Obama’s Gamble with Iran’s Theocratic RegimeIsrapundit cross posted from Gatestone Institute 7/28/15

Obama Administration’s “Side Deals” with Iran Make Waves in CongressBreaking Israel News 7/27/15

John Kerry hasn’t even seen one of the most crucial parts of the Iran agreementBusiness Insider 7/30/15

State Spokesman Repeatedly Refuses to Answer Whether There Are ‘Side Deals’ Between Iran and Nuclear WatchdogWashington Free Beacon 7/22/15

JRH 7/31/15

Please Support NCCR

Our Unfunded War with Islam


Crusades 2.0 - Liberating from Islam

Robert Smith makes a good case for Americans to understand that ‘We the People’ are at war with the theopolitical religion known as Islam or at best with nations that perpetuate that Islam will dominate the world ending Western Liberty (especially in the USA) with Jew-hating and antichrist Islam aka the religion of violence.

 

The only thing I am not sure that I agree with Robert is the concept of returning a mandatory Draft program for Americans to serve the maintenance of our Constitution. The all voluntary military service in all branches was quite successful prior to the decimation and the inculcation of bad morale in all the Branches.

 

America must find the special funding to maintain the voluntary military in a state of preparation for our National Security. If a full scale ware breaks out, only then would I be in favor of the return of the Mandatory Draft. If that full scale war includes nuclear WMD the reasons for a Draft will be rendered irrelevant. The only purpose for a military will be in the mop-up if there is a survival after a nuclear exchange.

 

Off the subject a bit: If Obama’s appeasement strategy of a bad Iran nuke deal leads to a nuclear armed Iran, because of the nature of the theopolitical Islamic Shia-Twelver messianic-Mahdi beliefs of the return of a 12th hidden Iman – a nuclear war will be forthcoming. To understand my point consider HERE, HERE and HERE.

 

JRH 4/3/15

Please Support NCCR

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

Our Unfunded War with Islam

 

By Robert G. Smith

Sent: 4/1/2015 11:26 PM

 

We are quite probably in the latter days. Read your Bible. There will be war and rumors of war, (Matthew 24:06).

 

We are now at war with Islam, although no one wants to admit it. The well-meaning people are saying give moderate Islam a chance to find peace. Because there are no such things as “moderate”. And “radical” Islamists are one and the same [as “moderates” – See HERE] with but one goal, to dominate all the world and make it all Muslim [HERE and HERE].

 

I know a great many of you do agree with this, but the truth is no farther than your nearest library. Research Islam and the manner in which it has decreed all Muslims must treat Christians and Jews and all other religions [HERE, HERE and HERE], if this does not awaken you nothing will.

 

I am beyond the age and physical ability to engage the enemy in the manner that must be prescribed and implemented, but after serving in three wars, I do know it must be done.

 

The atrocities that are being committed in the names of allah and Mohamed cannot be allowed to continue.

 

Our armed forces are at their lowest since WW1, having been decimated by Obama and the Democrats.

 

In my wildest dreams I never thought I would agree with Rep. Charles Rangel [D-NY]. However I find some of his recent statements, regarding a tax for the sole use of our military and reinstating the draft, are things I wholeheartedly support.

 

We cannot afford any more unfunded wars, our national debt will not allow it. As for the draft, every able-bodied male over the age of 18 needs to realize he owes a debt to our country for the freedom he enjoys.

 

The lack of patriotism that has occurred over the last three decades resulted from the knowledge they were not going to be called to serve our country and the fact our schools teach little or nothing about what it has taken to keep our country free, and no longer does the pledge of allegiance start the school day.

 

Someone must accept the challenge to protect our liberty and the principles upon which this great country of ours was built.

 

This challenge will fall upon my children, your children, our children’s children etc., but [the challenge must] be met if we are to retain our freedom.

 

PSG [ret] R.G. Smith

______________________________

Edited by John R. Houk

All links and any text enclosed by brackets are by the Editor.

 

© Robert G. Smith

 

More Than A Threat


A surface-to-surface missile is launched during the Iranian Revolutionary Guards maneuver in an undisclosed location in Iran July 3.

Intro to ‘More Than A Threat

 

Justin Smith writes one of the best essays he has ever written. So kudos to Justin!

 

Justin writes about the Joint Plan of Action (JPA) which is the appellation of Obama’s delusion of peace with Iran over nukes and in which Obama is also offering billions of dollars in “Sanction Relief” to Iran. All the U.S. and the other negotiating Security Council members plus Germany get in return from Iran is an unverifiable PROMISE.

 

Read the preamble to the JPA and ask yourself if Iran will even come close to its part of the agreement.

 

Preamble

The goal for these negotiations is to reach a mutually-agreed long-term comprehensive solution that would ensure Iran’s nuclear programme will be exclusively peaceful. Iran reaffirms that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek or develop any nuclear weapons. This comprehensive solution would build on these initial measures and result in a final step for a period to be agreed upon and the resolution of concerns. This comprehensive solution would enable Iran to fully enjoy its right to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes under the relevant articles of the NPT in conformity with its obligations therein. This comprehensive solution would involve a mutually defined enrichment programme with practical limits and transparency measures to ensure the peaceful nature of the programme. This comprehensive solution would constitute an integrated whole where nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. This comprehensive solution would involve a reciprocal, step-by-step process, and would produce the comprehensive lifting of all UN Security Council sanctions, as well as multilateral and national sanctions related to Iran’s nuclear programme.

 

There would be additional steps in between the initial measures and the final step, including, among other things, addressing the UN Security Council resolutions, with a view toward bringing to a satisfactory conclusion the UN Security Council’s consideration of this matter. The E3+3 and Iran will be responsible for conclusion and implementation of mutual near-term measures and the comprehensive solution in good faith. A Joint Commission of E3/EU+3 and Iran will be established to monitor the implementation of the near-term measures and address issues that may arise, with the IAEA responsible for verification of nuclear-related measures. The Joint Commission will work with the IAEA to facilitate resolution of past and present issues of concern. (Copied from text version from The Guardian PDF posting of the JPA Agreement)

 

So who believes Iran will the kind of access this preamble insinuates? Just for clarity sake the “E3/EU +3” references these nations: USA, Russia, China/France, Germany and the UK.

 

No it is time to read Justin Smith’s brilliant essay.

 

JRH 12/1/13

Please Support NCCR

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

More Than A Threat

 

By Justin O. Smith

Sent: 11/30/2013 10:45 PM

J. O. Smith Facebook Notes

Posted: November 30, 2013 at 11:09pm

 

Now I am become Death, the Destroyer of worlds.” -Hindu scripture from the ‘Bhagavad Gita’

In the aftermath of the November 24, 2013 interim deal to halt Iran’s nuclear ambitions, which is called the Joint Plan of Action (JPA), Americans bear witness to an Iranian regime that has supported international terrorism, while waging war against the United States and Israel since 1979. We see Secretary of State John Kerry, with an anti-American bias in everything he approaches, purposefully and knowingly pave the way to ensure that Iran will soon acquire a nuclear weapon, while Tzipi Livni and Yair Lapid, two members of Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu’s cabinet, long “to be in a situation in which the Americans listen to us the way they used to listen to us in the past”. And properly so, America heard Benjamin Netanyahu reiterate that “Israel has the right and the obligation to defend itself, by itself, against any threat”.

Vali Nasr, dean of John Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies, released one of the most naive and idiotic statements in regards to the deal between the U.S, Western powers and Iran. He suggested that Iran might now be helpful in brokering a postwar settlement in Afghanistan, between the U.S. and the Taliban.

Does anyone really believe Iran will ever stop attacking the U.S. and Israel and their interests across the globe, as long as the mullahs, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei and Islam… the mother of all totalitarianisms-theocracy… keep Iran in a stranglehold?

For 444 days the islamoNazis of Iran held Americans hostage after deposing the Shah, and the attacks against the U.S. continued into the present. Eighty-five percent of the improvised explosive devices used in Iraq in 2004 were furnished by Iran, according to Lt General Moshe Ya’alon, former Israeli Defense chief of staff. Thirty thousand Revolutionary Guard Corps and Quds Force were actively fighting coalition forces in Iraq; throughout the Afghanistan War, these same forces formed hunter-killer teams for the sole mission of killing U.S. soldiers, according to the 5th Special Forces command hierarchy.

And when will Iran’s proxy “holy warriors” of Hezbollah ever be brought to a day of reckoning for the murders of 283 U.S. Marines in Beirut, Lebanon on October 23, 1983? Marines on a “peace-keeping” mission. One must wonder over President Ronald Reagan’s decision not to mount a swift retaliation… the only real failure of his Presidency.

Now, it is surreal to see John Kerry as the chief negotiator striving to limit Iran’s nuclear ambitions, when this is the same radical antiwar activist who never met an enemy of the United States that he didn’t like. Kerry should be criminally charged for not registering as an Iranian agent, because he advocated giving Iran nuclear fuel during the first presidential debate in 2004, as “a test” of Iran’s “true intentions”. And, this is seen as especially egregious, once one finds that Hassan Nemazee, top Kerry fund-raiser and alleged “agent” for Iran, stated in a 2004 deposition, that he “would not trust this regime (Iran) on the nuclear issue to have any intentions other than a weaponized program”.

Last week, Ruhollah Hossinian, a hardline lawmaker, stated, “It (JPA) practically tramples on Iran’s enrichment rights”. This is reminiscent of 2006, when the UN Security Council had set an August 31 deadline for Iran to halt its nuclear enrichment programs or face sanctions. On August 31, Iranian President Ahmadinejad, in a televised appearance, stated, “They should know that the Iranian nation will not let its rights be trampled on”. And by March 2007, Iran had added 3000 new centrifuges capable of manufacturing weapons grade uranium to its facilities at Natanz.

The ‘New York Times’ characterized the JPA agreement as “a chance to chart a new American course in the Middle East”, although its reality is virtually the exact same policies America has witnessed liberal Democrats employ for decades. In 1979, A.Q. Khan, a nuclear physicist, gave Pakistan nuclear weapons, under the careless watch of Zbigniew Brzezinski; Khan promptly proliferated this technology, first to North Korea and then to Iran, along with blueprints of a Chinese designed warhead. Madeleine Albright failed to halt Kim Jong Il’s nuclear weapons program during the Clinton administration, and now we see Obama and Kerry falling in line with the advocates of appeasement.

What does it mean to Iran’s mullahs that Obama and Kerry are unwilling to concede an Iranian “right” to enrich uranium? Absolutely nothing. The mullahs want nuclear weapons and a dominant position throughout the Middle East more than they desire peace and prosperity for their people, so no amount of sanctions will achieve a satisfactory result.

Utilizing numerous deceptions, such as tramp steamers off the U.S. and European coasts or physically crossing porous borders, it would not be too difficult for Iran to target 29 critical sites in America and the West, identified numerous times by successive Iranian presidents. Iran’s Shahab-4 missiles have a 2500 mile range and can carry biological, chemical or nuclear warheads. The destruction of these sites would seriously cripple Western power, killing millions of innocent people in the process.

How many times and in how many different ways do we have to hear Iran’s leaders state their intent to destroy “the Great Satan” – America and “the Little Satan” – Israel before we believe them and take their words to heart?

Make no mistake. President Hassan Rouhani is no different from his predecessors, Khatami and Ahmadinejad, and while he couches his statements in ambiguous and subtle nuances, ultimately he hopes to foist an Iranian Islamic nightmare on the world.

A few years after taking power, Ayatollah Ruhollah Musavi Khomenei said: “I say let Iran go up in smoke, provided Islam emerges triumphant in the rest of the world”.

The JPA is merely another delaying tactic for Iran’s mullahs, who are just mere weeks away from seeing their goal come to fruition. And, despite all the best efforts of those like Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) who asserts “…strong sanctions…brought Iran to the table”, Iran will have nuclear weapons soon.

The world stands at a critical crossroads, and unfortunately the only real solution is a war to destroy Iran’s nuclear facilities and possibly remove a rogue regime from power, one that should have been targeted long before Iraq or Afghanistan. Rife with cohorts to the jihadists desiring negotiations, no matter the cost, the Obama administration will not answer this call, and Iran fully realizes this due to Obama’s “red-line” failure with Syria. The weight of this solution, unfairly and even more unfortunately, sits on the shoulders of Israel.

In the early 1930s, many viewed Hitler’s ‘Mein Kampf’ as just rhetoric, although he clearly had laid out his program to exterminate the Jews. Sixty-one million deaths, including six million Jews, lay at the feet of Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement plan, because, as so eloquently stated by Winston Churchill, the world lacked the “democratic courage, intellectual honesty, and willingness to act”. Let America and the world not make this same mistake again with Iran.
__________________________

© Justin O. Smith

Edited by John R. Houk