Muslim Inman Calls For Killing “Infidels” Gets Hired By Eric Holder To Teach Classes To Prisoners

 Our Department of Justice has just hired a Pennsylvanian imam who issued death threats against a women's rights advocate to teach classes in “leadership and guidance” to federal prisoners. The imam is Fouad ElBayly, who was the leader of the Islamic Center of Johnston, PA until he called for the murder of Ayaan Hirsi Ali for statements she has made in opposition to the imposition of Sharia law. 

His death threats, which occurred in 2007, made national news, and led to his resignation from the Johnston Islamic Center. It is unclear how long that resignation remained in effect, however, given that he listed his job as leader of the Center in his application for the federal contracting position.  

While ElBayly goes about the business of pocketing your tax dollars to visit federal penitentiaries where he can imbue the inmates with the un-American values that he holds so dear, it is worth taking a moment to examine the lady whose death he called for. Hirsi Ali is a former Somalian who as a child was subjected to a clitoridectomy, and who later fled her native land, minus her clitoris, and immigrated to the Netherlands, where she rose to become a member of parliament.  

Hirsi Ali actively writes and speaks in opposition to radical Islam and Sharia law, and has received hundreds of death threats, many of them highly credible, for her trouble. Eric Holder’s Department of Justice, by directing a plum federal contract to ElBayly, is sending a clear message of support for Hirsi Ali’s persecutors and a thumb in the eye both to Hirsi Ali herself and to her defenders.  

It is theoretically possible that the DoJ simply didn’t notice that ElBayly was at the center of a national furore over death threats that he made against a leading champion of civil rights, women’s rights, and the right of women in the Middle East (but now including tens or hundreds of thousands of young Muslim women in America) to retain the portion of their bodies that permits sexual gratification. But has the DoJ not heard of Google? A simple search of ElBayly’s name results in an avalanche of articles detailing his 2007 call for Hirsi Ali’s assassination.   

Moreover, this is the same DoJ that just last week, at the same moment that it was forced to admit that the police shooting that led to the Ferguson “Hands Up, Don’t Shoot” protests was in fact justified, laid unfounded claims of systemic racism against the Ferguson police department. Eric Holder did this for no more purpose than to cover the DoJ's embarrassment, and to continue to offer to African-Americans a false vision of a racist America as the cause of that community’s disorders. ElBayly has been hired to extend that false vision into our penitentiaries.

70 women, including 9 schoolgirls, left Germany to join ISIS – report

More than 70 German women, nine of whom are schoolgirls, have left their home country for Syria and Iraq to join the Islamic State, the president of the German Domestic Intelligence Service (BFV) said.
According to Hans-Georg Maassen, 40 percent of those women are under the age of 25, Zeit Online reported.
While the recruitment of young girls and women by the Islamic State is not a rare phenomenon, Maassen warned that jihadists have lately focused on luring females to join the 'caliphate' via social networks.
Jihadists blog on the internet and are active on forums, where they look for women showing an interest in jihad, BFV’s president said. Islamic State (IS, formerly ISIS/ISIL) militants then contact the girls and women to inspire them to marry jihadists.
Maassen says they write blogs with “romantic descriptions” of life in extremist camps, and the females have no idea about the future they are actually agreeing to. Most often, those who travel to be with jihadists are completely isolated, their passport and phones taken away.
According to Islamic scholar Marwan Abou-Taam, who works for the Rhineland-Palatinate state police in Germany, women attracted by such scenarios have psychological problems or feelings of social exclusion, Zeit Online reported. They often come from extremely poor families and have low levels of education.
Meanwhile, the expert says there are still a few young women among them with higher levels of education, adding that ISIS may consider giving them “management” roles.

Read moreISIS has recruited 400 children in Syria since January - report

Security services currently have no information on whether European women are intended to be used by the jihadists as suicide terrorists, but say they cannot exclude the possibility.
The German Domestic Intelligence Service says the overall number of those who have left the country to fight in Syria and Iraq on the side of the jihadists is around 650 people.
Earlier in March, German Interior Minister Thomas de Mazière said around 200 of them had returned home. Actions have already been taken against some of the returnees, while others remain under strict surveillance.
The Syrian Observatory for Human Rights earlier this month reported that ISIS has intensified the recruitment of children and teenagers this year, since facing difficulties in attracting adults into their troops. At least 400 children from Syria alone were recruited by ISIS over the past three months.

Massive Protests Threaten Brazil’s Communist Leader Rousseff

After barely squeaking out a reelection victory last October in one of the country’s closest elections in modern times, Brazil’s President Dilma Rousseff now is the target of massive protests calling for her ouster. On Sunday, March 15, protests that had been building for days culminated in mass demonstrations that brought a reported 1.5 million protesters into the streets. The French news agency AFP reported that, according to police sources, over one million people rallied in São Paulo, Latin America’s largest city and Brazil’s central business and industry hub. Hundreds of thousands more marched in 83 cities shouting “Basta!” (Enough!) and demanding “Dilma Out!”

Brazil, which boasts the largest economy in Latin America, the second largest economy in the western hemisphere (behind only the United States), and the seventh largest in the world (by nominal GDP and purchasing power parity) was touted as an economic powerhouse over the past decade. Now, however, the unsustainable policies of its socialist government, which has been rampant with corruption, have sent the economy into a tailspin. Soaring inflation and unemployment are accompanying a national recession. A recent report by the Economist entitled “Brazil’s Coming Recession: The Crash of a Titan” noted, “Investment, which rose in eight of the ten years to 2013, often substantially, will sink in 2015. Petrobras, the partially state-owned oil giant that is Brazil’s largest investor, is mired in a corruption scandal that has paralysed spending: the affair may cost up to 1% of GDP in forgone investment. On February 24th Moody’s, a credit-rating agency,cut its debt to junk status; if Petrobras fails to publish audited results soon it may be unable to borrow at all.”


“Brazil’s parlous finances leave no room for debt-financed stimulus,” the Economist review continues. “At 66% of GDP its gross public debt is the highest of the BRIC countries. Its bonds yield 13% — more than Russia’s. Rates could rise further. Fitch, a credit-rating agency, puts Brazil one notch above junk, but it has more debt, bigger deficits and higher interest rates than most countries in that category. If growth evaporates, a downgrade would be a certainty, raising debt costs even more.”
Adding to Rousseff’s woes, on March 16 Brazilian prosecutors formally charged Joao Vaccari, the treasurer of her ruling Workers’ Party, and 26 others with corruption linked to the state-run Petrobras. The prosecutors accuse Vaccari of soliciting donations from former Petrobras services chief Renato Duque and other executives who allegedly funneled money from the oil company into party coffers.
President Dilma Rousseff, like President Obama, is the beneficiary of extraordinary treatment by the establishment world press. In fact, the favorable makeover she has received from the media is even more striking. While Obama has ties to communist Weather Underground terrorist Bill Ayers, Communist Party organizer Frank Marshall Davis, Marxist organizer/strategist Saul Alinsky, and many other subversives, Rousseff was herself a gun-toting communist revolutionary, a leader in a terrorist group that, in the 1960s, carried out bombings, bank robberies, and murder (see here and here). After serving under Brazilian President (and communist Workers Party chief) Lula da Silva, Rousseff moved up to take both positions from the retiring Lula. In addition, she has been a leading light in the São Paulo Forum (SPF), a global terrorist cabal organized by her pal Fidel Castro and only lightly disguised as a political forum.
However, Dilma Rousseff’s comrades in the global media choir may not be able to cover for her much longer; economic realities may outstrip their ability to  spin a positive image for Brazil’s Red Queen.

Military Drill Identifying “Hostile” U.S. States Sparks Alarm

A massive U.S. military drill dubbed “Jade Helm 15” lists Texas, Utah, and part of California as “hostile” or “insurgent pocket” territory. The unclassified information about this drill is causing widespread alarm nationwide, with more than a few analysts suggesting it may be some sort of exercise practicing to impose martial law on Americans fed up with an out-of-control federal government. During the exercises, which will take place over the summer, Special Forces from various branches of the military will work with local law-enforcement in scenarios that, to critics at least, sound suspiciously like they are aimed at subduing rebellious American civilians and states amid a civil war or large-scale unrest. The federal government issued a response dismissing the concerns and saying that the training is to help U.S. forces prepare for overseas missions, but not everyone is convinced.

The most alarming components of the drills highlighted by concerned citizens and media commentators surround an unclassified presentation about Jade Helm 15’s “realistic military training” that was apparently leaked. In a graphic showing the territory across which the training will take place — essentially the American Southwest — different states are colored based on the fictional status of their loyalty to Washington. Colorado, Nevada, and most of California, for example, are dark blue, indicating that they are “permissive.” Utah and Texas are both shaded red, indicating that they are “hostile.” Southern California is also red, with a note reading “insurgent pocket.” Arizona is light blue, which in the legend is listed as “uncertain (leaning friendly),” while New Mexico is brown, or “uncertain (leaning hostile).” Two more states, Florida and Louisiana, have reportedly been added to the exercise.

According to the presentation, the eight-week training program involves Navy SEALs, Army Special Forces Command (Green Berets), Air Force Special Operations Command, Marine Special Operations Command, Marine Expeditionary Units, the 82nd Airborne Division, and unspecified “interagency partners.” Underneath the logo for the Jade Helm drills, a sword with two arrows crossing it, it reads: “Master the Human Domain.” What exactly that means was not clear, but at least some critics of the exercise have suggested it may be a euphemism for subjugating the population of the United States. Indeed, as other analysts have noted, citing available information, the drill almost certainly has nothing to do with defending the Southern border from invasion. The few details that have been provided, though, are causing concern among analysts.
On a slide explaining “what to expect” during the two-month training program for “unconventional warfare,” the document warns of “increased aircraft in the area at night,” possible noise complaints, personnel carrying weapons with blank ammo, and more. Especially alarming to critics of the program is that “some individuals may conduct suspicious activities designed to prepare them for complex environments overseas,” and that “some participants will be wearing civilian attire and driving civilian vehicles.” Separately, a slide describing what “realistic military training” means has also raised alarm. The document mentions that it will be conducted “outside of federally owned property” and that it is designed to “ensure proper coordination between DOD representatives and local and regional authorities.” News reports citing military officials said the DEA, FBI, and the “Joint Personnel Recovery Agency” (JPRA) would also be participating.
Citing other recently leaked U.S. military documents such as “FM 3-39.40 Internment and Resettlement Operations” about interning American civilians in camps, using “psyops” (psychological operations) on those detainees to affect their views, and more, David Hodges with the Common Sense Show said the drill is “undoubtedly the most frightening thing to occur on American soil since the Civil War.” In a widely re-published article about the training program, he said it could be “conclusively stated” that the drill was really about “preparing for a Red, White and Blue invasion.” “This is a massive rehearsal for martial law implementation as well as implementing the proverbial and much rumored Red and Blue List and the ‘snatch and grab’ extractions of key resistance figures from the Independent Media as well as uncooperative political figures,” Hodges added. “The various provisions of Jade Helm make it clear just how dangerous this drill truly is.”
Responding to widely expressed concerns that the scheme is “preparation for imposing martial law or subduing right-leaning groups and individuals,” as the military publication Stars and Stripes put it, U.S. Army Special Operations Command denied the accusation. “That notion was proposed by a few individuals who are unfamiliar with how and why USASOC conducts training exercises,” USASOC spokesman Army Lt. Col. Mark Lastoria was quoted as saying. “This exercise is routine training to maintain a high level of readiness for Army Special Operations Forces because they must be ready to support potential missions anywhere in the world on a moment’s notice.” He re-iterated those comments in other interviews as well. Despite being referred to as “routine,” it was not clear whether any similar drill identifying U.S. states as “hostile” had ever taken place — except perhaps amid the Civil War.
In comments quoted by the Houston Chronicle, which made its bias obvious in the first sentence by claiming that the drills had “stirred some ultra-right-wing fears of a government takeover in the Lone Star State,” local law enforcement officials also shed some light on what to expect. “They're going to set up cells of people and test how well they're able to move around without getting too noticed in the community,” Chief Deputy Roy Boyd with the Victoria County Sheriff's Office was quoted as saying by the paper. “They're testing their abilities to basically blend in with the local environment and not stand out and blow their cover.” A former Army Intelligence officer was also quoted downplaying fears about the drill and suggesting that it was largely routine training.
Separately, the Chronicle attempted to belittle concerns expressed by critics about the program. National radio host Alex Jones, for example — whose audience dwarfs the readership and listenership of many “mainstream” outlets, including the Chronicle — was introduced as part of the “far-right fringe” movement. Jones’ radio show and online portal Infowars played a key role in raising awareness about the drills under the headline “Feds Preparing to Invade Texas, List State as Hostile.” The supposed “journalist” at the Chronicle, apparently unable to contain himself or conceal his extreme bias, went on to describe the website Freedom Outpost, which also raised concerns about the drill and suggested it was practice for domestic martial law, as “ultra-libertarian.”
While local authorities quoted in news reports were aware of the programs and vowed to work with the community to prevent panic or paranoia, it would not be the first time that the Pentagon has alarmed U.S. civilians with its drills. In 2013, a series of “urban warfare” military exercises in major cities including Miami and Houston involving gun fire and black helicopters terrified locals who were unaware of what was going on. As The New American has also reported in recent years, under the Obama administration, military authorities have taken the unprecedented step of bringing troops from Communist China and Russia to do “training drills” with American forces. Other foreign militaries, primarily European, have for decades been practicing citizen disarmament and other drills on U.S. soil, as documented on video by Alex Jones.
Considering the fact that two-thirds of the American people in polls say the federal government is “out of control” and a "threat" to liberty, it is hardly surprising that many citizens do not trust the Obama administration when it performs military drills with law enforcement that it has been militarizing and attempting to nationalize — especially while identifying conservative states as “hostile” enemies. Obama’s invitation of foreign troops loyal to hostile regimes for military training drills in the United States certainly did not help matters. Nor does the fact that the current commander in chief began his political career in the living room of communist terrorist leader Bill Ayers — a man whose terror spree was backed by the Soviet puppet regime of Fidel Castro when it bombed the Pentagon and murdered police officers. Ayers’ terror group, the Weather Underground, planned to exterminate 25 million Americans in camps across the Southwest after taking over, according to FBI agent Larry Grathwohl who infiltrated the organization. “They were dead serious,” Grathwohl said in an video-taped interview.
Of course, the federal government’s recent behavior — ranging from Homeland Security stockpiling massive amounts of hollow-point ammunition to the multiple agencies producing propaganda demonizing U.S. military veterans, Christians, and Americans with mainstream political views as potential terrorists — is also unlikely to inspire trust. In fact, U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia warned just last year that “you are kidding yourself” if you do not think mass internment of U.S. citizens, as happened with Japanese-Americans during World War II, would eventually return to this country.
Jade Helm drill may well just be nothing more than training U.S. forces for “overseas missions,” as officials claim. However, considering the known details of the exercise and the accelerating anti-constitutional lawlessness of the federal government, it is hardly unreasonable to express concerns. In fact, anybody who is not concerned by the current state of U.S. affairs is simply not paying attention.

Offense Welcome: In Defense of Free Speech on Campus

by Daniel Mael

 

Banning such events, speakers and displays is not the answer. It is a stance not only intellectually bankrupt, but one that solidifies a dangerous precedent: the intolerance of free speech.
Removing dissent -- however morally intended -- is intrinsically antithetical to education, especially at a university.
The greatest problem with the current lot of anti-Israel voices is not that they are "offensive" or "mean;" it is that what they say contains outright lies and falsehoods.
However malicious or misguided, the speech and conduct of those who oppose Israel --who cannot or will not see the difference between an open, tolerant democracy and repressive, authoritarian governments -- should be refuted, not suppressed.

In 1902, the Russian Jewish author and early Zionist leader, Ze'ev Jabotinsky (1880-1940) responded to a fellow journalist's effort to label Zionism as "historically retrograde", "politically reactionary" and "unworkable". "Defame it if you must!" he wrote. "The dream is greater than its slanderers. It need not fear their calumny." [1]
In 2015, the pro-Israel campus movement, through its collective attempt to combat anti-Israel forces, risks failing to uphold Jabotinsky's proclamation.
Supporting Israel is now labelled an act of "racism" by some professors and certain campus organizations, such as Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) and Jewish Voice for Peace (JVP). Opposing Israel, however, is not considered the actual act of racism that it more likely is.
Hamas, which openly promotes genocide -- not only of Israel, but of all Jews -- is apparently considered justified in its behavior. Meanwhile Zionism, which has never even touched on the subject of genocide, is now thought of as a genocidal creed by the anti-Zionist groups on campus. In 2011, SJP founder Hatem Bazian organized the "Never Again for Anyone" speaking tour, which abused the memory of the Holocaust and claimed that Israel's actions toward its Arab neighbors resembled the actions of the Nazis. So how could Hamas not take up arms against "occupation"?

UC-Berkeley Professor Hatem Bazian addresses an anti-Israel rally on July 20, 2014, appearing in front of a man carrying a sign saying, "We captured Israeli soldiers in Gaza". (Image source: YouTube video screenshot)

Students on campuses across the country are then left to decide how to respond. A select few on the pro-Israel side have attempted to carve out an argument that would call for censoring the "offending parties." Some have called for Students for Justice in Palestine (SJP) to be blocked from receiving school funding; others have called for racist or bigoted speakers to be banned from campus.
Groups such as SJP gave up on the concept of coexistence long ago, in favor of a policy of "anti-normalization," in which dialogue with "Zionists" is forbidden. To cooperate with "Zionists," the thinking seems to go, would be to legitimize their rights. The Anti-Defamation League accurately branded "Anti-normalization" a "Strategy of Rejection."
The hatred of groups such as the SJP is starting to manifest itself on campuses across the globe in "Israeli Apartheid Week," in which Israel is demonized as a racist state on a par with apartheid South Africa. The week is billed as an "international series of events that seeks to raise awareness about Israel's apartheid policies towards the Palestinians and to build support for the growing Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS) campaign," according to the campaign website. Campuses are rocked with incessant posturing, events and even large displays of "walls," representing Israel's defensive security barrier, but described as "apartheid walls."
Banning such events, speakers and displays, however, is not the answer. The flaws in such proposals are twofold. To begin with, they make it seem as if people, rather than defend their own views, would prefer to shut down the ability of those on the other side to express their views. It is a stance not only intellectually bankrupt, but one that solidifies a dangerous precedent: the intolerance of free speech.
Life in an echo chamber is not an education. Removing dissent -- however morally intended -- is intrinsically antithetical to education, especially at a university.
As long as the anti-Israel, or anti-anything, actors operate within the campus rules -- which, among others, require that they properly reserve their space and respect the space of others -- their speech should be protected. When intolerant individuals act out of line, such as the Temple University student who punched a classmate in August 2014, then a response is certainly warranted. The student who threw the punch was rightly charged by the Philadelphia District Attorney's office.
In addition, speech often can and should be offensive. As Trevor Burrus wrote in Forbes, "Offensive speech contributes to the marketplace of ideas by expanding its borders." The greatest problem with the current lot of anti-Israel voices claiming to represent the Palestinian cause on campus is not that they are "offensive" or "mean;" it is that what they say contains outright lies and falsehoods.
Speakers such as Max Blumenthal or Ali Abunimah, who compare the state of Israel to Nazi Germany, or claim that Israel has a policy of ethnic cleansing, should be heard and called out as the malicious slanderers and vilifiers they are. Last summer, Abunimah infamously tweeted that, "Making Yom Kippur a UN holiday to honor the genocidal "state" of Israel would be sure way to increase global anti-Jewish sentiment." Blumenthal has mocked Jewish prayer by pretending to pray to a bloodied image of Benjamin Netanyahu. That students claiming to speak for human rights would sponsor such speakers uncovers their real intent.
One needs rigorously to challenge speakers such as Blumenthal and Abunimah in the marketplace of ideas. As Harvard professor Steven Pinker put it recently, "It is only by bruiting ideas and seeing which ones withstand attempts to refute them that we acquire knowledge." If the pro-Israel community in unwilling or unable to refute the most heinous challengers of Israel it risks relying solely on dogmatic reasoning and the reverberations of the echo-chamber, at a serious intellectual cost.
After the recent Israeli elections, countless students and organizations -- both Jewish and non-Jewish -- have again accused Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of being a "racist" or "marginalizing Arab-Israeli citizens." Rather than also marginalizing those critical of Israel or its leaders off-hand, the pro-Israel campus movement would do well to examine such claims in an objective, dispassionate fashion.
Those who understand the moral breach between Israel and its enemies should welcome debate and exchange in the open campus space. However malicious and misguided, the speech and conduct of those who oppose Israel -- who cannot or will not see the difference between an open, tolerant democracy and repressive, authoritarian governments -- should be refuted, not suppressed.

Raising Children to be Soldiers of Allah

by Monir Hussain

 

 

 

 

"Moreover [the children's] mindset [in the Islamic Madrasa education] is nurtured with a message of hatred towards all non-Muslim communities... Islam is the only true religion, all other religions are false -- this is what they are taught from the beginning by the Madrasa teacher. They also chant nonstop the mantra that all nonbelievers (in Islam) are Kafirs and infidels fit to be destroyed by all true Muslims." — Shudhansu S. Tunga, author of A 20 Million Billion Trillion Dollar Loss: The Story of India's Downslide Independence.
In such a small land as Bangladesh, roughly the size of the U.S. state of Iowa, there are 15,000 officially registered madrasas, accompanied by 200,000 teachers "teaching" four million "students." If one adds to it the number of unregistered madrasas, the number is as high as 64,000.
"Bangladesh is appeasing the most insidious and violent strains of Islam... That appeasement of theocratic demands and naked threats must end, now." — Bob Churchill, Director of Communications, International Humanist and Ethical Union.
One can imagine from the number of madrasas and mosques -- abetted by a government that turns a blind eye to lawlessness -- how many people listening to hate preaching are now being raised to be "Soldiers of Allah."

Dissent is not tolerated in the monolithic Islamic society of Bangladesh. Extremist Islamic forces not only vandalize the idols and temples of the Hindus or Buddhists, they are also kill anyone who speaks out against radicalization or Islamization.
The extremist Islamic forces mostly target university teachers, engineers, writers and bloggers, one after another -- whoever is not in total accord with their faith, including anyone secular-minded.
Notably, it was after the founding the International Islamic Front for Jihad in 1998, that Bangladesh experienced the first major attack conducted by Islamists, on March 6, 1999. It killed 10 and critically injured 105 innocent people who were listening to music at a cultural program organized by Udichi, a secular cultural organization.
Since then, many terrorist attacks have taken place in Bangladesh. Nonetheless, the country's politicians do not take initiatives to prevent Islamic radicalization, presumably in fear of displeasing the country's huge Muslim populace. Rather, every incoming government not only winks and nods the Islamists, but also provides room to nurture extremism. Bangladesh, a country roughly size of the U.S. state of Iowa, has 15,000 officially registered Madrasas [Islamic religious schools], accompanied by 200,000 teachers "teaching" four million "students." If one adds to it the number of unregistered madrasas, the number is as high as 64,000.
It is no secret anymore that the madrasa is the main extremist breeding factory. Shudhansu S. Tunga writes,

"Frankly, the Madrasa education instead of uplifting the Muslim boys and girls, is keeping them downgraded on many points, especially to face today's job market competition. Moreover, their mindset is nurtured with a message of hatred towards all non-Muslim communities. This is the gravest of dangers not only for the future of the Muslims but also for the whole mankind. Islam is the only true religion, all other religions are false─ this is what they are taught from the beginning by the Madrasa teacher. They also chant nonstop the mantra that all non-believers (in Islam) are Kafirs and infidels fit to be destroyed by all true Muslims."[1]

In such a small land, there are also 250,399 mosques where believers are being summoned to hate non-Muslims. They especially curse the Jews by using the anti-Semitic Koranic verses and the widely read hadiths.
Bangladesh is now one of the most dangerous places for a dissident to live. Murders this year include Samiulla Afridi and Avijit Roy.
Samiulla Afridi, the lawyer who represented Dr. Shakil Afridi (no relation), was shot dead on March 17. Dr. Shakil Afridi had conducted a vaccination program to help the Central Intelligence Agency locate Usama bin Laden. Samiulla Afridi's murder was presumably retribution for having represented the doctor, whom the US let remain in a Pakistani jail.
Avijit Roy, an American citizen of Bangladeshi origin, who had a PhD in software engineering from Singapore, was hacked to death on March 17 after attending a book fair with his wife, also wounded in the attack. Roy, an engineer, was also the author of several books on science, atheism and freedom of expression. He was the founder of Mukto-Mona ["Free Mind"] blog, and well known for his writings which opposed religious fundamentalism. No one of course has been caught. It is not known if anyone has even looked for the perpetrators of both crimes.

Avijit Roy (left), an American citizen of Bangladeshi origin, was a blogger and opponent of religious fundamentalism. He was hacked to death in Bangladesh last week while attending a book fair with his wife, who was wounded in the attack.

The Director of Communications of the International Humanist and Ethical Union, Bob Churchill, said,

"Those who made the most credible threats on Roy's life have been allowed to do so with impunity, and now he is dead. As Roy himself warned, Bangladesh is appeasing the most insidious and violent strains of Islamism, and he knew his own life was under threat. That appeasement of theocratic demands and naked threats must end, now."

In an emotional piece in The Guardian, Alom Shaha writes,

"It is a land of lush green fields nourished by brightly burning sun. This is what is depicted on the nation's flag, a design that rejects the religious symbolism found in those of India and Pakistan -- the latter of which Bangladesh fought a bitter war of independence, partly so it could become a secular state. But that early commitment has been betrayed and instead Bangladesh has become a nation where those promoting secular values can expect to live their lives in fear, be threatened with death, and even brutally killed."

Avijit Roy was not the first victim targeted by the Islamists in Bangladesh. Last year, Ahmed Rajib Haider, an architect by profession, was also hacked to death by machete-wielding attackers from an Islamist militant group, Ansarullah Bangla Team. It takes its ideology from Yemen, based on statements from the Al-Qaeda ideologue, Anwar Al-Awlaki, and associated with the Jamaat-E-Islami party in Bangladesh.
The same group attacked another blogger, Asif Mohiuddin, who through his writings opposed the Quranic chapter 4, verse 34, which says, "A man can beat his wife, if she does not obey her husband."
Mohiuddin, also involved with Mukto-Mona blog, was arrested by the Bangladeshi authorities for "hurting religious beliefs."
Professor Humayun Azad was an esteemed university teacher, and one of the most prominent scholars in the country. On February 27, 2004, Islamists attacked him him with machete; he narrowly escaped death. But on August 11, 2004, he was found dead in his apartment in Munich, Germany, where he had arrived a week earlier to conduct a research on the German poet, Heinrich Heine.
Bangladeshi militants have had longstanding relations with Al-Qaeda and its leaders, including Osama Bin Laden and Ayman Al Zawahiri. According to reports, Bangladesh's first openly-formed Islamist militant outfit, Harkat-ul-Jihad (Huji), is closely linked with Al-Qaeda. Huji emerged from a group of Bangladeshi Afghan war veterans, who had gone to Afghanistan and joined with mujaheedin ["jihad warriors"], addressed the press conference.
There are reports that Bin Laden, in February 1998, came up with a coalition of Islamic militants named "International Islamic Front for Jihad against the Jews and Crusaders" to fight against the U.S. Among five coalition founders, one of the Bangladeshi militants and Zawahiri were signatories of a statement, issued in February 1998.
Major Gen (Ret). Abdur Rashid, a Bangladeshi security analyst, said, "Many Bangladeshi militants had visited or re-visited Afghanistan through Pakistan and maintained the links established earlier. The communication between them became easier with the availability of internet."
One can imagine from the number of madrasas and mosques -- abetted by a government that turns a blind eye to lawlessness -- how many people listening to hate preaching are now being raised to be "Soldiers of Allah."

Christian Icons of Propaganda - Sabeel and Desmond Tutu

by Christine Williams

 

The troublesome truth is that there is no apartheid in Israel. Israel allows Arabs and Muslims full human and civil rights in all areas of life, including as full members of Israel's Parliament, the Knesset.
To brand Israel as an apartheid state when none of these restrictions exist is not only defamatory propaganda but, according to the black South African Reverend Kenneth Meshoe, trivializes the real suffering of blacks under apartheid.
While Tutu et al discuss Israel the "oppressor," Israel's surrounding enemies seek to obliterate it in accordance with their genocidal charter. Given the silence of Tutu et al on that subject, apparently an agenda of genocide is not seen by them as an injustice.
Tutu also disregards the countless Christians being slaughtered in Muslim states; that black slaves are still being held in Muslim states such as Mauritania; the forcible taking of "infidel" slaves by Boko Haram and ISIS; the racist genocide in Darfur and the 10 million Muslims slaughtered by other Muslims since 1948.
Critics of Sabeel suggest that it actually seems to be a political organization promoting anti-Israel propaganda while driving Church policy toward destroying Israel through BDS.
Why are Desmond Tutu, Sabeel and the anti-Semitic Churches that support BDS so tolerant of the persecution of Christians, global Islamist terrorism, the perpetual threat of Israel's obliteration and the fact that Muslims have driven Christians out of Bethlehem, the very place of Jesus's birth?
These calumnies and misrepresentations have nothing to do with peace and even less to do with justice. They are even more unacceptable coming from church groups or a man of the cloth.

A virulent global campaign by a powerful Christian lobby is trying to influence the Church and use it to delegitimize Israel. The lobbying group is the Sabeel Ecumenical Liberation Theology Center, with Nobel Prize Laureate and retired Anglican Bishop Desmond Tutu as its patron.
Tutu not only agreed to serve as Sabeel's patron but also to "assist the Palestinian Christian organization in its outreach and development work with Christian Churches around the world."
On its website, Sabeel refers to Israel in terms such as "oppressor," "occupier," "immoral", a violator of Palestinian human rights and its founder, Naim Ateek, refers to Israel's "crucifixion" of Palestinians:

"It only takes people of insight to see the hundreds of thousands of crosses throughout the land, Palestinian men, women, and children being crucified.... The Israeli government crucifixion system is operating daily."

As a principal agent of the Sabeel lobby, Desmond Tutu's words of indictment reference Israel as the "oppressor."
Tutu knows hate first-hand from South African apartheid, but acutely damages his stature and credibility by unjustly exploiting the tragedy inflicted by the South African regime. He does this in a defamatory propaganda message permeating the Christian Church under liberation theology. He stated outright in an article: "I know firsthand that Israel has created an apartheid reality within its borders and through its occupation. The parallels to my own beloved South Africa are painfully stark indeed." Meanwhile, Israel allows Arabs and Muslims full human rights in all areas of life, including as full members of Israel's Parliament, the Knesset.
Liberation theology is a radical movement that originally developed in South America before making its way to South Africa. The movement was apparently created in response to poverty and ill-treatment of ordinary people. It was caricatured in the phrase, "If Jesus Christ were on Earth today, he would be a Marxist revolutionary."
Liberation theology subsequently became influential in the Churches under South African apartheid. Black theologians, to answer the faith questions of the poor and oppressed, confronted the theology of the Christian status quo, which tended to align with the prevailing institutions of power. Hence, in 1985, the Kairos document was developed, which offered a necessary alternative to biblical and theological models. In essence, the Kairos document focused on the message of liberation theology by encouraging the reading and interpreting of the bible through the eyes of the poor.
To the theologians, the Kairos document was a challenge to the church to rise up against apartheid. The theologians deemed it to be "the moment of grace and opportunity, the favorable time in which God issues a challenge to decisive action." They continued: "If this opportunity is missed, and allowed to pass by, the loss for the Church, for the Gospel and for all the people of South Africa will be immeasurable."
What was once crafted as a just challenge to the Church in 1985 thus became warped into propaganda in 2009, when a new document, the Kairos Palestine , was written. Although based on the same "faith questions of the poor and oppressed" under the South African apartheid regime, this time the Palestinians were presented as the equivalently oppressed.
While Tutu et al discuss Israel the "oppressor," Israel's surrounding enemies seek to obliterate it in accordance with their genocidal charter. Given the silence of Tutu et al on that subject, apparently an agenda of genocide is not seen by them as an injustice.
Continuing to misuse South African black suffering as a launch pad, Tutu has also been forceful in his push for Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against Israel. He states that BDS helped to achieve South African democracy and that BDS will work toward ending "Israel's decades long occupation of Palestinian territory and the unfair and prejudicial treatment of the Palestinian people by the Israeli government ruling over them" -- despite the fact that Jews have lived in the area for nearly 4,000 years.
Tutu also states: "I have witnessed the systemic humiliation of Palestinian men, women and children by members of the Israeli security forces... their humiliation is familiar to all black South Africans who were corralled and harassed and insulted and assaulted by the security forces of the apartheid government."
The troublesome truth, however, is that there is no apartheid in Israel. Black South African Reverend Kenneth Meshoe, founder and president of the African Christian Democratic Party and member of the South African parliament since 1994, indicates that under apartheid South Africa, blacks could not vote or hold high government positions; the races were strictly segregated at sports arenas, schools, hospitals, public transportation, public washrooms, benches in waiting rooms; and blacks had inferior medical care, hospitals, and education; they were forced to live in separate residential enclaves. Blacks also carried IDs to show their place of residence at all times, or they faced the penalty of being beaten or thrown in jail. In other words, blacks were criminalized for being black and severely restricted by state laws. Further, marriage was also outlawed between different races.
To brand Israel as an apartheid state, when none of these restrictions exist, is not only defamatory propaganda, but, according to Meshoe, trivializes the real suffering of blacks under apartheid. Meshoe has visited Israel many times, and says that he has never seen any evidence of apartheid. In his reference to the purely defensive so-called "apartheid" wall, Meshoe accurately calls it the "security" barrier. "It is the responsibility of every government to assure the safety of its citizens," he says.
While Sabeel states as its mission support of the "oppressed" Palestinians of the "indigenous Church," it never highlights the oppression and abuses of Palestinians by their own leadership, or the leadership of other countries hosting them such as Jordan or Lebanon. Tutu also disregards the abuses by Hamas, which uses its Palestinian citizens as human shields in its wars to obliterate Israel.
As the patron of Sabeel Center, Tutu also disregards the countless Christians being slaughtered in Muslim states; that black slaves are still being held in Muslim states such as Mauritania; the forcible taking of "infidel" slaves and sex slaves by Boko Haram and ISIS; the racist genocide in Darfur and the 10 million Muslims slaughtered by other Muslims since 1948.

Clockwise from top right: Anglican Bishop Desmond Tutu; Anti-semitic writer Max Blumenthal addresses the Friends of Sabeel North America 2014 conference; A Friends of Sabeel North America activist in Portland, Oregon stands in front of a Target store, demanding the boycott of SodaStream, an Israeli company.

Critics of Sabeel suggest that it actually seems to be a political organization promoting anti-Israel propaganda in Christian churches globally, while driving Church policy toward destroying Israel through BDS.
Sabeel also states that, "for many years the Palestinians rejected the establishment of the state of Israel because it was founded on the denial and violation of Palestinian rights." Historically, however, it is the Jews -- then Romans, then Christians, then Arabs then later the Turks -- who lived on that land during nearly 4,000 years. Historically, it has always been the Arabs who rejected all Jewish rights, including, in the last century, their rejection of the UN partition plan. On the day of Israel's founding in 1948, a group of Arab armies invaded Israel. The Palestinians also refused to make even a counter-offer to generous plans set forth by Israeli Prime Ministers Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert, both of which offered 97% of everything the Palestinians were demanding.

According to a brief by the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, face-to-face surveys found that most Palestinians in east Jerusalem would prefer to become citizens of Israel rather than citizens of a new Palestinian state.
One must ask, then, why is it that Desmond Tutu, Sabeel and the anti-Semitic churches that support BDS are so tolerant of the persecution of Christians, global Islamist terrorism, the perpetual threat of Israel's obliteration and the fact that Muslims have driven Christians out of Bethlehem, the very place of Jesus's birth?
Bethlehem's Christians accounted for over 85% of the population in 1948, and the number dwindled since then, to 12% in 2006. The disputed territories of the West Bank and Gaza have for years been administered by the Palestinian Authority (PA) and by an elected Hamas. Under these regimes, Christian Arabs have been victims of human rights abuses, including beatings, torture, kidnappings, forced marriages, sexual harassment, intimidation, land thefts, firebombing of churches, denial of employment and economic boycotts.
In addition, PA Leader Mahmoud Abbas has declared about a future Palestinian state: "In a final resolution, we would not see the presence of a single Israeli -- civilian or soldier -- on our lands." And a declaration like that is not considered apartheid?
Friends of Sabeel conferences continue to take place several times annually in major North American cities, where calls for BDS are sounded, and where "overcoming Christian Zionism in a quest for Justice" in "seeking the peace of Jerusalem" is a major theme. These calumnies and misrepresentations of Israel have nothing to do with peace and even less to do with justice. They are even more unacceptable coming from church groups or a man of the cloth.

What a friend we have in Yeshua

Sunday March 29 at 12:00 noontime PST, if you would like sing or tell your story here is the call-in (347) 826-7353

A best friend is one who loves you just the way you are, and yet helps you to be all you can be. Jesus is my special Best Friend because no one has ever loved me as He does. He loved me so much that He gave His life for me. And He loves me today just as much as He did then

"Herein is love, not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son ... beloved, if God so loved us, we ought also to love one another. No man has seen God at any time. If we love one another, God dwells in us, and HIS LOVE IS PERFECTED IN US" (I Jn. 4:10-12). Can words make it plainer that God's love in Christ is given to pass into us and to become our life? We shall then love God as He loved us. We shall then love one another as Christ has loved us. And we shall then love the world with the same love which God in Christ revealed upon the cross!

 

Some who read these lines may be bruised and battered by life. Some of you may be lonely and cast down. Some of you may feel all alone. If you are a father, or a mother, then you know something of the love of a parent for a child. You know something of a love that reaches out after a child, even in its waywardness; a love that reaches out to a child that has been hurt; a love that reaches after a child who has deserted its family; a love that NEVER LETS GO. All of that tender compassion of a parent's love is but the faintest shadow of the infinite love of God which knows no measure; a love that, indeed, could never let us or any man go. When we become children of God, we enter into that parental love of God. How sad that so many who call themselves children of God are, as the apostle warned, "without natural affection," stubbornly willing to consign the vast majority of God's wayward sons to everlasting damnation, yea, demanding, as judge and jury, that they be damned, rather than loving them infinitely and omnipotently as God loves them!

 

http://www.blogtalkradio.com/sisterthundershow/2015/03/29/what-a-friend-we-have-in-yeshua

The “Agenda for the 21st Century” is the root of your fight
Keep your eye on the ball!
You and I have been fighting it for years. We’ve made progress, but not enough. That lack of progress is enough to discourage many activists to leave our fight and try to fight something else – perhaps an easier victory. But, as an associate of mine used to say, “Saving America is not a 9:00 to 5:00 job.” It’s never easy. But this fight MUST be won. Agenda 21 is at the root of nearly every other issue we fight. Leave the Agenda 21 fight now and America’s precious Republic will never be restored. We must renew this fight with a spirit and energy like never before. Our battle cry must be to crush Agenda 21 in 2014.
I know it’s a hard issue to understand, and even harder to explain to our friends and neighbors. We’re told it’s just an environmental issue; a land conservation policy; a sensible development policy. Sustainable…what’s wrong with that? As usual, the problem is in the details. Are we hearing the truth? What are the consequences of the policy? Can it really be so dangerous? Or, as proponents claim, is our opposition to it really just a silly, overblown conspiracy theory?
Here’s what they tell us Agenda 21 really is: “Sustainable communities encourage people to work together to create healthy communities where natural resources and historic resources are preserved, jobs are available, sprawl is contained, neighborhoods are secure, education is lifelong, transportation and health care is accessible, and all citizens have opportunities to improve the quality of their lives.”
The UN’s Brundtland Commission on Global Governance described Sustainable Development as “Development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the needs of the future.” It’s just common sense to assure we don’t over use our resources, say proponents. If everyone will do their part, we can achieve total sustainability. We are all in this together! We are the world (everyone sing and hold hands)!
Better yet, let’s take each of these glowing ideas one at a time. How do we put such ideas into action? What are the consequences? Are we better off? Is the environment better off?
“Sustainable communities encourage people to work together…” There certainly are members of our society who take the whole Sustainablist agenda to heart and love to get involved improving their community. They clean out river banks, collect trash along roadways, recycle, watch their thermostats, and ride their bikes whenever possible. Good for them. That’s their decision and they are free to make it.
But there are others who may have a different vision on how they want to live. Perhaps they don’t agree with the dire predictions about environmental Armageddon. How do they fit in the Agenda for the 21st Century?
They are dealt with. Their children in the public schools are pummeled with the political correctness of being proper environmental stewards. Guilt plays a huge part in that indoctrination. It’s necessary so future generations will be prepared to “work” together in their communities. In addition, in many schools now, the children are required to fulfill a certain number of hours of community service in order to qualify for their diploma. In a Sustainable world, proper attitude is at least as important as scholarship. Today’s curriculum to ensure proper citizenship is called Common Core. It is the curriculum of Agenda 21 and is intended to be “life- long.”
Cooperation from adult citizens is just as structured. Where once public meetings to discuss new policy was based on the guidelines called “Roberts Rules of Order” through which everyone got a fair chance to have their say and then a vote taken, today, we have “facilitators” trained in psychology to assure they lead a gathering in exactly the direction needed for the predetermined and desired outcome. If the facilitator is really good at his job, everyone in the meeting will believe the outcome was their idea. And those in charge hail the meeting as a huge success in which all in the community “worked together” to put these plans in place.
*…to create healthy communities…” This can mean many things. Healthy? We see the growing power of the food police today who have declared many things in our diet unhealthy. We see the Mayor of New York declaring large sodas unhealthy and banning their sale. We see fast food establishments picketed for selling fries made with grease or hamburgers that are cruel to animal rights. There are mandatory vaccinations, without which children can’t enter schools and parents are charged with child abuse.
Local governments enforce grand comprehensive plans designed to pack and stack people on top of each other in massive high rise buildings. Is that what they mean by healthy? History would show that forcing people into massive containers reduces quality of life, spreads disease and promotes violence. These aren’t healthy communities. The Russians called them Gulags.
*… Natural resources are preserved… The fear is that over consumption will bring shortages of natural resources and so the sustainable plan is to erect endless forests of windmills. That is the natural way, we are told. Man will live on the surface of the Earth doing no harm. Of course, they never seem to mention that the massive wind turbines will take more energy to build than they will ever generate in their lifetime. In addition, to bring the power online so it can be used by society requires a massive infrastructure of wires, cement and roads. While one nuclear power plant located on ten acres can supply enough energy for a massive city, wind power would require thousands of acres of clear cut, cement wastelands. And then the power is unstable and unreliable, causing homes to grow cold or hot. And that isn’t healthy for our communities. Moreover, there is the side effect of millions of birds that are chopped up in the turbines, including “endangered” raptors like eagles. And they call that environmentally sound?
And one more question comes to mind as we lock away resources for future generations. At what point would these locked away resources ever be allowed to be used by a society so afraid of itself? Won’t there always be a future generation that might need them? Meanwhile, science keeps discovering that the dire predictions of resource depletion are outrageously overblown. It has recently been discovered that the United States has the largest oil and gas supplies in the world. Hydraulic fracturing is benign American technology that is ecologically sound and economically advantageous. But it has been deemed “unsustainable” by Sustainablists who quickly oppose any source of cheap energy. Yet, fracking stretches our energy reserves several hundred years into the future. That would certainly give science ample time to come up with new technology.
“…historic resources are preserved…” Frankly I have no idea what a historic “resource” is. But I do know that Sustainablists prey on America’s love of history as an excuse to lock away any land where once a historic person may have taken a walk. And they use it to generate massive federal grants so planners can stop development, even in towns where nothing of historic significance ever occurred. It’s a growth industry in the world of sustainable lockaways.
*…jobs are available…” What will magically happen in a Sustainable Community to suddenly create jobs that aren’t there now? Government doesn’t create jobs. Creative, driven, free people create jobs to fill needs they have discovered. No government-controlled economy would ever have created a factory that makes drink umbrellas or little pieces of plastic that go on the ends of your shoe laces. Bureaucrats don’t think that way. They only think in terms of need, urgency – bare minimum. Luxury is never part of the government plan. The fact is, Sustainable Development is one of the biggest killers of jobs. Its rules and regulation make it near impossible for many companies to survive. The EPA, enforcing Sustainable policies, is killing power plants, mines, farms, even, as was recently announced, bullet factories. They’re destroying economies of whole states. So where will these glorious Sustainable jobs come from? Government jobs! Perhaps the high rise apartments in the mega cities will need lots of NSA type eavesdroppers for mandatory surveillance to assure our healthy communities.
*…Sprawl is contained…” Evil sprawl — those areas of community growth where people run to escape the mega cities. In nearly every case, those new homes in their shiny developments are a place where a family first opened the front door with smiles on their faces because this was their home. They have back yards where the kids can play. They have a real sense of community. And those terrible strip malls that spring up around the new developments that supple goods and services for the new residents also create jobs and enhance the economy. Stack and pack cities are not livable if you actually believe in fresh air and a place for the kids to play. Cities are full of government drugs, disease, and inefficient use of energy and resources. Do the Sustainablists focus on stopping murders by drug cartels and beatings by gangs of illegal aliens? You never seem to hear anything about that in their plans. All of these facts were actually exposed in a report by the American Planning Association on the effects of Smart Growth. The report revealed that it doesn’t work. But that hasn’t changed the APA’s policies because Smart Growth is full of government grants. And that’s the real game – Sustainable income for Non-governmental organizations.
* “…Neighborhoods are secure…” How is this done? Massive police control? Cameras on every corner? Gun control? TSA in the subway and bus station? NSA listening in on every conversation, and computer key stroke? Security over privacy and individual choice? Certain, there is no Sustainable “freedom” in such a scheme.
* “…Transportation is accessible…” This one is easy. Public transportation. Trains for long distance, Bikes for the quick run to the store. No cars. You will rarely leave the neighborhood. Imagine the hassle involved in taking the family on a trip to the beach using inconvenient train schedules? Of course, humans flocking to the beach are unsustainable, so you won’t need to imagine it. Just read about it in a history book.
*”…Healthcare accessible…” Well, we used to have accessible healthcare, then government got into the game. Perhaps you think it’s unfair to mention Obamacare in an article about Sustainable Development. Simply Google “Sustainable Medicine” and find more than 5,850,000 references on the subject, and you will find almost all the provisions of Obamacare.
*…all citizens have the opportunity to improve the quality of their lives…”???? Really? What part above leads to improvement of the quality of life? We used to call it tyranny – now we call it quality of life. As George Orwell said in his landmark book, 1984 it’s all called doublespeak. Look around you now as Sustainable policy is being forced on us. America’s economy is in shambles and not improving. Costs of everything, especially healthcare, food and energy are skyrocketing. These industries are the very first to be impacted by Sustainable Development. How will it improve under a policy of planned shortages and locked away resources? What or who are they counting on to pull us out? Answer: individuals who will continue to produce no matter how many shackles they lock them in. Eventually, even the most determined give up.
The Sustainablists use such innocent sounding descriptions of their plans for us. Then they deny they are even doing it, and anyone who calls them on it is labeled a fringe nut.
But there is another way to say it, a much older description of Sustainable Development that explains the motivation behind the policy in a much more direct manner: “From each according to his ability. To each according to his need.” If you recognize that quote, then you fully understand the true nature of Sustainable Development
This is their Agenda for the 21st Century. Agenda 21. Every issue we face is tied directly to it. Yet, many concerned Americas get side tracked with the latest issue of the day, be it Obama scandals, Obamacare, illegal immigration, taxes, gun control, abortion, and so forth. All of these are important issues, to be sure. And those battles must be fought. But all of them have direct ties to Agenda 21/Sustainable policy and will be stopped if Agenda 21 is stopped. Proponents of this policy seek to distract you will fringe issues to take your focus off the ball – Agenda 21.
Agenda 21 is the battle we must fight if we are to restore the Republic. This is why we must make 2014 the year we crush this nightmare. Please, don’t be distracted or discouraged if progress against it feels slow. It took decades of quiet implementation to bring us this far. It will take time to stop it. But we are winning battles and the opposition is terrified of what we are accomplishing. Stay with me in this fight. The future of freedom depends on your commitment to preserve it. --- Tom DeWeese --

Europe Eager to Arm Islamist Extremists with Nuclear Weapons

European countries, such as Germany, expect huge economic benefits if Western sanctions on Iran are lifted.
Those economic benefits to Iran will pay for its nuclear weapons to attack the West – an updated version of Lenin's, "The capitalists will sell us the rope with which to hang them."

The European Union says it is "not helpful" to "spread fears" about the impending nuclear deal with Iran. The so-called P5+1, the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany, hope to clinch a framework agreement with Iran by the end of this month and a final agreement by June 30. Three of the six P5+1 members -- Britain, France and Germany -- are EU member states.
Last week, EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini criticized Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and others who warn that supplying Iran with the means to make nuclear weapons is dangerous. Mogherini, successor to the infamous Catherine Ashton, said that the Iranian nuclear deal is "a good deal" and that she is committed to bringing the talks with Iran to a positive end.
In the proposed agreement, the international economic sanctions against Iran will be lifted in exchange for Tehran allowing international inspectors into the country to control whether Iran is enriching uranium exclusively for peaceful purposes. The deal is a major concession to Iran, since a 2010 UN resolution prohibited Iran from enriching uranium. Furthermore, the deal stipulates that all restrictions on Iran's nuclear program will be completely eliminated after ten years.
In a recent speech before the US Congress, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu warned that Iran should only be allowed to develop a nuclear program if it can prove that it meets three concrete demands: stop threatening the existence of Israel, stop bullying other countries, and stop exporting terrorism. Neither the Obama administration in Washington nor its European allies seem impressed with Netanyahu's request. They are of the opinion that any deal with Iran is better than no deal at all. The argument is that Iran will be able to develop a nuclear bomb anyway and that a bad deal, while not preventing this horror scenario, might be able to slow the Iranian plans down – a premise that is, however, totally false.
The current economic sanctions against Iran have been put in place to slow down any nuclear weapons plans the Iranian regime clearly has. A "bad deal" will only slow the Iranians down if the mullahs keep their promise to enrich uranium solely for civilian purposes. No one, however, could actually be expecting them to keep any promise. They never have in the past, or there would be no centrifuges enriching uranium to be arguing about in the first place. From the deal reportedly under discussion, Iranian nuclear-breakout capability is not only likely, but possible within months.
Allowing international inspectors into the country to control this would only be useful if there were an absolute guarantee, with "bullet-proof" safeguards, that the inspectors would be able to discover any cheating on the part of the Iranians -- an occurrence that would be a historical first, and has less than no chance of happening.
Iran has never made a secret of its intention to acquire a nuclear bomb in order, it has repeated, to put down Israel, which it calls "The Little Satan." In addition, it is also widely assumed by those watching Iran and its proxies encircle the Middle East oilfields, take over Iraq under the guise of fighting the Islamic State, and spread throughout South America, that Israel would be just the first stop. Iran's missile reach is already sufficient to control Europe -- not even by using nuclear-tipped missiles, just by threatening to.
With its current program of building intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs), presumably with the help of North Korea, another early violator of its commitments under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) -- Iran could then mount nuclear warheads aimed at the United States, "The Big Satan." Iran's Supreme Leader, Ali Khamenei, called for "Death to America" as recently as March 21.
While U.S. President Barack Obama is eager to conclude a deal with the Iranians, many in the U.S. Congress are unconvinced. Reportedly, according to them, putting one's trust in the mullahs is simply too big a risk for the national security of the free world, first and foremost the United States.
Considering that in the past century millions of Jews were exterminated by a genocidal ideology in Europe, one would expect Europeans to be particularly concerned about another attempt to slaughter millions of Jews, not to mention potentially themselves. But from recent articles saturating the media in recent weeks, it is hard not to draw the conclusion that this is exactly what the Europeans again want.
The media throughout Europe excoriated Israel's Prime Minister address warning the American legislature about the danger of Iranian nuclear weapons. But the question of why one should allow Iran a nuclear weapons deal, if it does not pledge never to obliterate Israel with nuclear weapons, should also be put before the European politicians.
Again, however, even if Iran did pledge not to obliterate Israel, what makes anyone think that Iran would honor this pledge, if it did not honor any of its other pledges? And if it did not honor this pledge, what would be the negative fallout for it? And administered by whom? The "negative fallout" for violating the NPT has been the ability to go right on violating it and having harsh sanctions lifted as well. With consequences like that, one can only wonder what the Europeans must be putting in their Chablis.
Sadly, the Europeans seem to prefer to appease Iran's international bullies. Perhaps they are of the dreamy hope that having nuclear weapons will cause the bullies stop being bullies instead of magnifying that trait.
At first, Mogherini attempted to dismiss the concerns of the U.S. Congressmen as a matter of "internal domestic political tensions" in America, where many Republicans disagree with President Obama on the Iranian deal. Last week, however, when 47 Republican Senators wrote an open letter to Iran, warning that a future American President could revoke Obama's agreement with the mullahs, the Europeans took aim directly at the Senators. "This is no small matter we're talking about," German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said. "This is not just an issue of American domestic politics." His British colleague, Philip Hammond, was not amused either. He said the letter "could become a spanner in the works," jeopardizing the deal with Iran.
Earlier, Senator Ted Cruz had said that the U.S. and European capitulation to Iran was reminiscent of Europe's appeasement of Hitler in 1938.
Senator John McCain reacted to Steinmeier's remarks by saying the German foreign minister "is in the Neville Chamberlain school of diplomacy" -- a reference to the British Prime Minister who, in 1938, signed the Munich agreement, which sold out Czechoslovakia to Hitler.
In the same way, the Europeans now seem prepared to sell out Israel to the mullahs, in the similar delusion that Iran's aggression would actually end there -- when history has already proven quite the opposite.
The criticism clearly hit a raw nerve among the Europeans and angered them immensely. Perhaps it forced them to see an uncomfortable truth they did not want to look at.
European countries, such as Germany, expect huge economic benefits if the Western sanctions on Iran are lifted. When some of the sanctions were eased last year, German exports to Iran increased with over 30 percent to 2.4 billion euros. Germany is Iran's biggest European trading partner. British companies, too, are eagerly preparing to carve out their share of the Iranian market once sanctions are lifted. Italy, the home country of EU foreign policy chief Mogherini, has also expressed the hope that a nuclear deal with Iran would expand economic relations between Tehran and Rome.
Those economic benefits to Iran will pay for nuclear weapons to attack the West -- an updated version of Lenin's, "The capitalists will sell us the rope with which to hang them."
Notably, of all the Western nations, France takes the most hawkish position regarding the nuclear weapons deal.

Appearances can be deceiving: Peter Martino writes that France's Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius is said to have "absolutely no trust" in the Iranian regime regarding a nuclear deal. Above, Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif hugs Laurent Fabius, at the close of nuclear talks in Geneva, Nov. 23, 2014. (Image source: ISNA)

So far, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius has adopted a tough stance on Iran. Fabius was Prime Minister of France in the mid-1980s when relations between Paris and Tehran were extremely tense as a result of Iranian-sponsored terror attacks in France and Lebanon. He is said to have "absolutely no trust" in the mullahs.
Most analysts, however, say they do not expect France to take the risk of ruining the negotiations, since it would jeopardize France's relations both with the Obama administration and with other European countries. But are those considerations actually a greater threat than arming Islamist fundamentalists with the ultimate weapon of death?
French companies also expect to benefit from the lifting of the sanctions. In fact, a French commercial delegation already went to Iran in February last year to scout for business opportunities. It was the first European economic delegation in decades to arrive in Tehran.

Turning on Your Neighbor:
This is not a suggestion that you give drugs to your neighbour, but rather a little missive in follow up to suggestions by others that Obama and crew are adopting the style and substance of the Nazis of WW 2 fame. What I am referring to is the heightened resentment over a particular ethic group that was well ensconced in business and society across Europe and became the first victims of the "turn in your neighbor" effort and reward system. If you turned in the accursed Jew, the SS left you alone and if you went out of your way to comply with the efforts of the regime to "cleanse" the Reich of this "disease", you would expect some reward. One thing that you could be assured of was that your name was added to a list and when the second wave of arrests were made, the collaborators (that would be you) would find themselves in the same prison camps or gas chambers as the neighbors that they had been active in "turning in". The rewards quite obviously were short lived and only the very significant of "useful idiots" had long lives. George Soros pops into mind at this juncture for some reason.
Following and obeying "laws" that strip away human dignity and life from those whose major crimes were that of birth, parentage, culture or religion, just because the law changed to include them in the "criminal class", was and is a crime against humanity. Soon there will be an expectation that you citizen of the United States will continue to obey the law, a law which will change with regulation that expects you to show your loyalty by turning in your neighbor when required. After all it is the law.
We saw an attempt by the bully class in its efforts to silence a gentleman farmer/rancher name Cliven Bundy. His "cause celeb" was standing up to the Bureau of Land Management and its attempt to close him down through regulation. A few hundred patriots from across the land saw this for what it was, a disgraceful use of "power" to shut down a farmer. As the famous stand off has various spins attached to it I would suggest that you call the Bundy Ranch and get the story from the "horses mouth". And yes I have chatted with the majority of the family.
Soon Soetoro/Obama, the guy I affectionately (mmm) call Bathhouse Barry in honor of his days trolling for rich white guys to do sexual favors for in exchange for cocaine and cash (note: clunkers would come later), will demand further abeyance from the populous and the law will be finessed to demand not only your compliance with law but also your complicity in "turning in your neighbor". Now that will be another line of demarcation in the sand not too far removed from the Bundy Ranch experience. Change the law to make us all criminals. I'm waiting for the criminalization of preaching from the Bible, the Torah, or gathering together in "House Churches or Assemblies". Christians and Jews are on the clock and don't have much time left before the next moves in the Nazi hierarchical list of Totalitarian effort is ready for Obama and crew to wreak havoc with.
Be prepared, the day of "travail" is approaching.
- Dr. Jim Garrow -

Gentle Christians:
There are brands of Christianity whose aversion to war is based in interpretations of various Scriptures. The notion that Christ himself will "show you another way", is popular. The folks opposed to the "just war" notion make up the majority of the congregations of the denomination of which I am a part. I however am part of the "still small voice". You could easily run me out of town for the misuse of that part of Scripture, and I thank you for not injuring your computer screens through blunt force trauma....lol
It is in the nature of the times that we are in, the outlandish words and actions of the man who was entrusted with the helm of the greatest Christian nation in the world, and the seething rage that is barely contained by many across this nation. The audacity and betrayal that we now see daily is mounting on the negative side of the ledger and one day the books will be balanced and the accounting justified. The national insult will be answered by "We The People", whether in protest or in action that would be violent and aimed specifically at the islamists who have wormed their way into trusted positions in order to act as a 5th column in the toppling of the Republic. I have heard enough voices raised, enough outrage expressed and enough shock displayed to know that the time of "taking it" is limited. When you understand that all Christians will be martyred if islamists have their way and adhere to their demonic books, you are beginning to see clearly where things are going. There is no bottom in the hand basket that this "hell" should contain.
My advice for all given what I know? Get prepared for the long haul, become a survivalist, get armed, armored and ammoed with a siege mentality. Get a bug out place to go, a plan to get there, provisioned for your family and fiends for two years, a source of well water, a solar array that can be put up or taken down at a moments notice, battery storage for the excess, and faraday caging for your chip based electrics - aka "hardening", and a heat source. In your faraday cage make sure that you have a two way handheld radio with wide band access. This will become very important as the grid is taken down and 90% of Americans die off because of lack of preparation. If you haven't discovered Radio Free America.ca on Facebook yet, go there. Its one of my sites and will have more significance as time moves on. Remember this - Obama's attempt to take us all down was thwarted by 3 heroes, and he will try again. Putin knows what he attempted, Netanyahu confronted him on it (and now you know why the antipathy between them has a good cause other than Jew hatred), and the Iranian influence in the Oval Office, Valerie Jarrett still controls the nation. As I said a number of years ago and have since seen others use the analogy, she is the nations Rasputin, the evil influence that is quite possibly demon possessed. And for those who think that Obama is possessed, wait until the Anti-Christ comes on the scene - no head spinning "The Exorcist" stuff here, he will be good looking, smooth talking, totally believable and may even pat Obama on the head in recognition of his paving the way for his appearance. But he is just around the corner and I believe that we are talking days not years before his influence is felt.
In the meantime brothers and sisters, "Do not grow weary in doing good", hold to the faith and keep looking up because you know what's coming.
- Dr. Jim Garrow -

For the last 14 months the world has witnessed an international relations debacle the likes of which no history book has yet recorded. The latest relations ruination tale unveils three more US ambassadors to Ukraine bereft of their senses.
This is a story some of you will not believe, and one some will be ashamed to hear. As for this American, I am outraged.
This asinine LA Times Op-Ed will have framed for you most of what is wrong in our world. When I heard that three former US diplomats had suggested moving the victory in Europe (VE Day) celebrations from Moscow to Kiev, Ukraine, I choked from laughter. I thought it was a joke, to be honest.
Then I read the piece, the madness in it sank in, and my dead ancestors whispered "Foul, this will not stand." Here is a quote from the piece, to save you the reader some time. Now remember, 20 times more Russians died that Americans or Brits in World War II.
"Western leaders could not sit in a reviewing stand on Red Square and watch parading Russian troops, whose comrades had recently waged... war in eastern Ukraine."
Let that sink in for a moment. They cannot pay their respects to an ally in the fight to end a planned 1000-year Reich that would have subjugated a billion people and exterminated an entire race? When your head is done wobbling, recall 100 other insipid ideas spewed from the mouths of such as these the last months. Whether or not you believe CNN or Fox News, rerouting history and debauching the honored dead is insufferable.
Europe is not speaking German and goose-stepping right now because tens of millions of Russians fought with bare hands if need be to prevent it. Their honor and dignity is something every human being on Earth should acknowledge, just as other nations are so revered.
Excuse me, I’m going to have to shine floodlights on Steven Pifer, John Herbst and William Taylor; the Three Stooges of all that is wrong in America. The victory celebrated on May 9 in Moscow, the conflict Russians refer to as ‘the Great Patriotic War’, should be no less venerated by Americans. Russians saved millions of our parents’ and grandparents lives. Surely intelligent people can calculate the forces arrayed against Imperial Japan, Nazi Germany, fascist Italy and the armies of the so-called Axis Powers. Pifer, Herbst and Taylor are uneducated, crazy or driven by unseen interests, in my view.
The leader of my Stooges, Steven Pifer, is a think tank fellow, if you can imagine that. A senior fellow at theBrookings Institution's Center on the United States and Europe, the former Ukraine ambassador is also (not surprisingly) Zbigniew Brzezinski’s fellow Russophobe. I’ve not space to aptly frame his part in the current US policy debacle, but the sentient reader can add two and two. These people are devout Russia haters, plain and simple, and somehow the American people do not see the danger.
Right Sector during a march on the 72nd anniversary of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army in Kiev. (RIA Novosti / Alexandr Maksimenko)
If you need more proof that Pifer belongs nowhere near a US embassy, track down a report named ‘Mutual Security on Hold? Russia, the West, and European Security Architecture’, via another think tank country club in America. These men write many books showing their intellectual prowess, but I put it to you, as Oscar Wilde once said “The books that the world calls immoral are books that show the world its own shame.”
On to former Ambassador John Herbst’s frolicking among this triumvirate of Brzezinski trolls, his bureaucratic resume reads is solidified in one post, in Ukraine about the time of the Orange Revolution. Herbst was “around” when everything going on in Kiev today was just a strategy on somebody’s agenda. Associations with alleged criminals like Yury Lutsenko, his efforts at setting up so-called ‘unbiased’ media in Ukraine.
The career diplomat has also been the director of the National Defense University Center for Complex Operations since 2010. For those who wonder if he is a ‘spook’ NSA or CIA type, the places he’s been posted and the initiatives and money he’s overseen are not mutually exclusive of such. The same faces being seen at critical events around the world, that’s the sort of clue any chief inspector might look for from the scene of the crime.
The third servant of US democracy, William Taylor, is a surprise for me personally. A graduate of the military academy at West Point, Taylor has all the earmarks of a man of honor. Unless he’s a product of Army Intelligence, he’s assuredly aware of EXACTLY how dishonorable shunning Red Square on May 9 will be.
If a man of honor, someone entrusted as Taylor has been, is somehow involved in a misinformation campaign, a mudslinging fit by the Obama administration, there’s deep trouble ahead in my view.
U.S. Lieutenant General Henry Obering (R), head of the missile defence agency, U.S. ambassador in Ukraine William Taylor (C) and other officials attend talks with Ukrainian officials in Kiev March 14, 2007. (Reuters / Gleb Garanich)
U.S. Lieutenant General Henry Obering (R), head of the missile defence agency, U.S. ambassador in Ukraine William Taylor (C) and other officials attend talks with Ukrainian officials in Kiev March 14, 2007. (Reuters / Gleb Garanich)
Taylor is key at the highly controversial United States Institute of Peace(USIP). While administration mouthpieces and senatorial supports claim USIP is a vital instrument for peace, detractors claim the so-called peace organization actually "looks more like the study of new and potential means of aggression." The trade embargoes, massive sanctions, and even the European austerity programs we see, are said to be levers Washington pulls to exert US worldwide hegemony.
If Taylor is not an Army Intelligence (INCSOM) product, Washington missed a good chance at one. Maybe the creed of these soldiers is aptly stated here:
“I am a Soldier first, but an intelligence professional second to none.
With pride in my heritage, but focused on the future,
Performing the first task of an Army:
To find, know, and never lose the enemy.
With a sense of urgency and of tenacity, professional and physical fitness,
and above all, INTEGRITY, for in truth lies victory.
Always at silent war, while ready for a shooting war,
The silent warrior of the ARMY team.”
As for ‘victory’ in truth, we all know that the end victory for humanity depends on who is defining what truth. Certainly making a lie of tens of millions of dead soldiers’ sacrifices, defiling their memory in a barefaced lie, this is an act of dishonor. A Japanese soldier would commit seppuku as an act of Bushido, and a Soviet soldier under then commissar Nikita Sergeyevich Khrushchev, he’d simply be handed a loaded pistol…
I hope I’ve made no secret of my personal disdain for what these men suggest, and for what they represent. After all, this is what op-ed pieces are for. Russia, like any other country, has her skeletons tucked inside dark closets. However deeply-buried any Kremlin state secret may be, the world today or tomorrow cannot be misled from the iron fact and utter decency that May 9 demands. I leave you with some thoughts on these matters from an institute founded to further the ideals of a great American WWII general and later president, Dwight Eisenhower.
On the ‘WW II Soviet Experience’ the Eisenhower Institute’s JT Dykman prefaces the perspective with a quote and footnote from Eisenhower himself, it is poignant for those of you able to imagine:
"When we flew into Russia, in 1945, I did not see a house standing between the western borders of the country and the area around Moscow. Through this overrun region, Marshal Zhukov told me, so many numbers of women, children and old men had been killed that the Russian government would never be able to estimate the total."
I urge you my fellow human beings to read what’s lain out via the good general’s institute, it should be mandatory reading at West Point, especially given American generals on Fox News calling for still more dead Russians today.
We’ve allowed indecent leadership, unruly secret interests, and complete nincompoops to sully every chance of peace in my lifetime. Let’s not dishonor our fallen forefathers further. What a travesty that would be, I hope you’ll agree. As for the men I’ve framed here, my father would have invited them on to the field at any hour of their choosing. So who am I to argue against his bronze star?
Phillip Butler for RT
Phil Butler is journalist and editor, and a partner at the digital marketing firm, Pamil Visions PR. Phil contributes to the Huffington Post, The Epoch Times, Japan Today, and many others. He's also a policy and public relations analyst for Russia Today, as well as other international media. You can find Phil's blog at http://www.phillip-butler.com.