Is Turkey Using Russia to Head off a Clash with Donald Trump?

With one little sentence declared by Turkish Prime Minister Binali Yildirim, there is now the potential to change many prime players and sides in the Syrian ongoing crisis/war.  While on his first visit to Russia, Yildrim was  quoted yesterday as saying both countries “understand each other better than before.”  Can the end of this arab bloodshed be on the horizon?  As we know, Turkey has been a staunch critic of Assad since the start of the uprising in Syria.

Turkey and Russia have also been backing opposing sides in the Syrian conflict for a long time.  Ankara has been combating ISIS and Syrian Kurdish forces while Russia has backed the Syrian regime dating back to even Assad’s father, well over 50 years ago. Turkey and Mother Russia have not exactly been the “best of friends” especially after the downing of a Russian Su – 24 bomber last year.  

So why is it that the two countries getting closer together? Could it be that Turkey wants to collaborate with Putin instead of Donald? More than likely, Turkey is vying for leverage with NATO and its own role in the coalition against ISIS and a post liberated Mosul.  By visiting Russia now before Donald Trump takes over, Turkey is hoping to gain bargaining power in the unfolding Middle East. This is especially important as it has become clear that it was Turkey’s hand behind the creation and growth of ISIS.  This is a fact that Donald Trump knows all too well.

As Trump gets ready to put strength behind Israel as its most trusted ally in the region, Islamist Erdogan and the Turkish government is struggling to find meaning in a reion soon to be carved up by the USA and Russia.

[huge_it_share]

Donald Trump, Israel, and the Potential for a Free Biafra

Most Africa observers believe Donald Trump will ignore the continent or at the most put the relationships Presidents Obama and Bush had built there on the back burner. While it’s true Trump does not see Africa as the central plank to his foreign policy, his black and white views of the world in regards to radical Islam may prove to be a perfect lens on how he will deal with the African continent.

Right now, the main way the USA fights radical Islam on the African continent is through Africom. Africom, is one of six of the US Defence Department’s “geographic combatant commands and is responsible to the Secretary of Defense for military relations with African nations.” Given the fact that Africom works with a number undesirable leaders, the main one being President Buhari of Nigeria, Trump may decide to tweak these relationships due to leaders like Buhari who are compromised by radical Islamic ties.

Israel as a Key Player

As Israel makes serious inroads into both West and East Africa in regards to trade and security, they are the ideal partner in building a force for tackling radical Islam.  Israel already has deep security relationships with Kenya, Ethiopia, Rwanda, Uganda, South Sudan as well as Ghana and now Togo.  With these deepening ties, the Trump administration would be wise to connect Africom to Israel’s presence in these areas.

Biafra Will Be The Test for Trump

If Trump is serious about fighting radical Islam then the first thing he needs to do in Africa is to break direct relations with the Buhari government in Nigeria.  Buhari is a known smypathizer of radical Islam and supports the spread of Sharia Law south of the Sahara. Furthermore, Biafra, the region made up of a unique Judeo-Christian culture dominated by the Igbo tribe was forcibly fused together by the British with the Yaruba and the Muslim Hausa in the North to form Nigeria in 1914.

Map of Biafra

Biafra has been continuously oppressed by their Muslim rulers for not following Sharia.  Buhari utilized his friendship with Obama to gain powerful weapons and instead of using them to destroy ISIS affiliated groups he has turned his guns on the south through proxies like the Muslim Fulani herdsman.  Thousands of Igbo have been put into jail, including IPOB leader Nnmadi Kanu for treason.

Trump can roll back radical Islam by using Israeli networking, relationships, and weapons to help liberate Biafra from radical Islam and create the first Judeo-Christian republic in West Africa.

[huge_it_share]

As the Battle for Mosul Turns Sour for Coalition Forces, Obama’s Legacy Lays in Tatters

In the waning days of Obama’s presidency, his grand strategy to wipe out ISIS by taking Mosul has gone from an ingenious weaving of various coalition members fighting under American leadership to a failed slog as the advance of Iraqi forces grinds to a halt.  The battle turned after Iraqi forces entered the Golgali neighborhood.  They have been stuck there fighting a far more ferocious enemy than they imagined. Each day they take to advance mere inches the American backed Iraqi units’ morale lowers, giving ISIS an increasing edge in Mosul. Before Golgali, experts gave ISIS weeks, but now it looks like months if not more.

Compounding the strategy is the fact Abu Bakr Baghdadi, the self appointed caliph of ISIS is no longer there. Despite his absence he continues to inspire all of ISIS through the airwaves. One mission for coalition forces was to take the Nouree Al Kaber mosque early on.  This is the mosque where Baghdadi proclaimed himself the leader of the caliphate 30 months ago.  Coalition forces still have a long way to go in getting close to the mosque, a destination that would crush the morale of ISIS if Iraqi troops succeeded in reaching it.

 

Source: Google Maps
Source: Google Maps

With the multi ethnic coalition collapsing and the Iraqi forces unable to break ISIS, Obama’s waning days in office are a nightmare.  Passing off ISIS to Trump is admitting failure, but with weeks to go it has become clear that Trump and Putin will attempt to work together to destroy ISIS in both Al-Raqqa and Mosul. Then again, ISIS may show to be just resilient to the new administration as they have been with Obama.

[huge_it_share]

Cablegate Exposes the Real Face of Keith Ellison

Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison is a front-runner for chairman of the Democratic National Committee. If you are following the ongoing developments in Rep. Keith Ellison‘s bid to become the next chair of the DNC, you may be interested in some primary source information from Wikileak’s Cablegate.

 

screenshot-3
Public Library of US Diplomacy (“Cablegate” document set search)

CODEL PELOSI APRIL 5 MEETING WITH MAJLIS AL-SHURA (2007 April 28)

https://www.wikileaks.com/plusd/cables/07RIYADH881_a.html

“…. On April 5, U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Rep. Tom Lantos (D-California), Rep. Henry Waxman (D-California), Rep. Nick Rahall (D-West Virginia), Rep. Louise McIntosh Saughter (D-New York), Rep. Dave Hobson (R-Ohio), and Rep. Keith Ellison (D-Minnesota) met with Majlis Al-Shura (Consultative Council) Chairman Sheikh Dr. Salih bin Humaid, Saudi Ambassador to the U.S. Adel Al-Jubeir, and eleven other Shura Council members.  Humaid … is also the imam of the Grand Mosque in Mecca …

… Before entering the meeting room, the U.S. delegation was greeted by the 11 Council members who participated in the main meeting. At one point during the meeting, Speaker Pelosi noted that when Congressman Ellison took the oath of office in January 2007, he did so on a Qur’an originally owned by President Jefferson. She pointed out that she told King Abdullah that Jefferson studied Arabic after he left the White House and that U.S. interest in Islam is at least 200 years old. (COMMENT: The Majlis members were visibly and audibly impressed. END COMMENT.) …

…. Shura Council representative Al-Hilwa conveyed his optimism regarding the Arab Peace Initiative, asking for USG support and initiative in pushing it forward.  He noted that the Arab Quartet (Saudi Arabia, UAE, Egypt, and Jordan) supports it and requested that the international Quartet do the same.  Al-Hilwa emphasized the necessity for Israel to accept the initiative, hoping that the U.S. Congress would press the Israelis to do so. Congressman Lantos said he was deeply impressed with the King’s proposal for a comprehensive settlement of the Arab-Israeli dispute, emphasizing his importance as a regional leader, as well as vis-a-vis the region’s religious hierarchy.  Congressman Lantos stressed that governments such as Egypt and Jordan that have relations with Israel would be useful in this process, adding that it is also important to involve United Nations Secretary General  Ban Ki-Moon because he enjoys global respect and can help move the proposal forward.  He warned that settling this dispute will not happen overnight and will require a great deal of give and take, consultation, and negotiation.

… Council member Fadhel said that everyone is very worried about military developments in the region, especially as they relate to nuclear weapons. He said people are especially worried about Israeli nuclear weapons that are ready for use, saying that the populace wants the region, including Iran, clear and free of nuclear weapons.  However, he doubted that this would happen unless the Arab-Israeli conflict is resolved comprehensively and justly.  He emphasized that most countries in the region do not accept that Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons is ignored while Iran is sanctioned.

… Noting that there are a number of initiatives in Congress to address energy needs, Speaker Pelosi emphasized that for environmental, energy, economic, and security reasons, the U.S. must increase its energy independence and reduce its dependence on oil.  She pointed out that there is not an endless supply of oil and that the U.S. must prepare for the future, adding that the U.S. must also stop global warming.  However, she welcomed further discussion, saying that the issue is important to all countries.”

MAJLIS EAGER TO ENGAGE WITH CONGRESS; REQUESTS OFFICIAL INVITATIONS (2007 August 8)

https://www.wikileaks.com/plusd/cables/07RIYADH1659_a.html

“… As Chair of the K.S.A.- U.S.A. Friendship Committee, Al-Aiban announced that he is developing a series of exchange visits to the U.S. Congress because there is a “need for greater contacts between Congress and the Majlis.”  He also confided that Minnesota Representative Keith Ellison, who accompanied Speaker Pelosi in April 2007, may be invited to take part in the annual Hajj.  Citing the current NOPEC legislation (ref A), Al-Aiban said it is vital to also bring “non-friends” to Saudi Arabia.  In closing, Al-Aiban shared that he and a small delegation will be traveling to the U.S. in early October to prepare logistics for the planned visit of Majlis President Sheikh Dr. Salih bin Humaid in late 2007. Referring to House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s verbal invitation in April 2007 (ref B) for Humaid to visit Congress, Al-Aiban requested official invitations from Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in order to follow up on that invitation.”

CODEL TIERNEY’S MEETING WITH PRESIDENT MUSHARRAF (2008 March 28)

https://www.wikileaks.com/plusd/cables/08ISLAMABAD1351_a.html

“… Codel Tierney (Representatives John Tierney, Keith Ellison, Jim Moran, Betty McCollum, Maurice Hinchey, and Barbara Cubin), accompanied by Charge and Polcouns met March 27 with President Pervez Musharraf.  Also attending were General Shaufkat and MFA Additional Secretary for Americas Attiyah Mahmood.”


 

ODEL TIERNEY MEETS WITH AHSAN IQBAL, PML-N INFORMATION SECRETARY (2008 April 4)

https://www.wikileaks.com/plusd/cables/08ISLAMABAD1450_a.html

“… Codel Tierney (Representatives John Tierney, Keith Ellison, Jim Moran, Betty McCollum, Maurice Hinchey, and Barbara Cubin), accompanied by Polcouns, met March 27 with Ahsan Iqbal, the newly elected National Assembly member and former Chief Coordinator and Information Secretary for the Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz (PML-N), and congratulated him on his new position within the National Assembly.

… Representative Tierney asked whether the new government would give the international community access to A.Q. Khan, the mastermind behind Pakistan’s nuclear
capability development.  Iqbal quickly pointed out that no political party within Pakistan would ‘give him over.’ However, both the PML-N and the PPP are committed to nuclear non-proliferation.  In addition, during his term as Prime Minister, Nawaz Sharif rejected the idea of selling the nuclear technology capabilities to other countries, as he was pressured to do.  Iqbal was quick to note that had the world’s super powers created a legitimate means of nuclear technology transfer, Pakistan would not have had to create their program using back channels.  Iqbal believed that Pakistan was willing to work with the US on creating such a legitimate system of technology transfer for other interested countries.”


 

US-ISLAMIC WORLD FORUM: IMPACT COMES ON THE MARGINS (2009 February 25)

https://www.wikileaks.com/plusd/cables/09DOHA143_a.html

“… Congressman Keith Ellison (DFL-MN) spoke on a panel devoted to the Administration’s approach to the Muslim world …

… On the margins of the Forum, Ellison appeared on Al Jazeera’s Arabic channel as the “mid-day guest,” and was also interviewed by Turkish national television and Egypt’s Al Hayat TV … Ellison also granted an interview to Qatari Arabic daily ‘Al Watan’ …

… Ellison spoke to the dean, faculty and students at Qatar University’s Sharia College and responded to questions about religious freedom and the lives of ordinary Muslims in the United States.  The Congressman also spoke to a gathering of young Qatari men organized by the General Youth Authority.”


 

CODEL BAIRD DISCUSSES GAZA, INTERFAITH DIALOGUE, AND TECHNOLOGY POLICY IN AMMA (2009 March 3)

https://search.wikileaks.org/plusd/cables/09AMMAN569_a.html

“… During a February 17-18 visit to Amman, Congressmen Brian Baird and Keith Ellison (both members of the Friends of Jordan Caucus) took the pulse of Jordanian feelings on Gaza …

… During a reception hosted by UNRWA Commissioner-General Karen Abu Zayd, Baird and Ellison announced their intention to ‘bear witness’ to the impact of Israel’s operations in Gaza by traveling there.

… During a phone call with Prince Ghazi, the King’s primary advisor on religious issues, Baird and Ellison spoke about possibilities for advancing interfaith dialogue under the “Common Word” initiative, which identifies commonalities in the Muslim and Christian scriptures.  Ghazi flagged an upcoming Georgetown University conference on the subject and urged the Codel to write a letter to President Obama, asking  him to attend.  Ghazi also outlined his attempts to formulate a UN resolution declaring a World Interfaith Week — a cause he hopes to formally launch at the Georgetown conference. Ghazi plans to accompany the King on a sought-after visit to meet President Obama and hopes to lobby for the President to attend the conference on the side. 

… Baird voiced concerns that Judaism was not a part of the Common Word initiative, adding that the cause would be stronger if the common beliefs of three rather than two religions were included.  Ghazi responded that Judaism was left out of Common Word due to political sensitivities among Muslims, saying, ‘It’s a tough sell on my side.’”  

In 2009, the U.S. House ethics panel completed an investigation of Minnesota Rep. Keith Ellison, a front-runner for chairman of the Democratic National Committee, “after he failed to disclose that a group founded by members of the Muslim Brotherhood paid for him to make a pilgrimage to the Islamic holy site of Mecca in Saudi Arabia.

“After a months-long review by a U.S. House ethics panel, Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn., has disclosed the amount of his privately-paid trip to Mecca in December.

The trip, paid for by the Muslim American Society of Minnesota, cost $13,350, Ellison said Thursday.

The two-week trip to Saudi Arabia, which Ellison described as a personal religious pilgrimage, or Hajj, prompted little discussion until June when Ellison filed financial travel reports that failed to disclose the amount the Muslim group had paid for his travel.

In releasing the amount on Thursday, Ellison held to his previous assertion that he was following the instructions of the House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct, commonly known as the ethics committee.

‘I never had a moral objection to giving the number out,’ said Ellison, the first Muslim elected to Congress. ‘But the rules said I didn’t have to, so I didn’t. Now I am.’”

(from: “Ellison reveals cost of trip to Mecca: $13.5K”, Star Tribune – Oct. 2009)

However, it is unclear whether the U.S. House ethics panel during their review was privy to information contained in an August 8, 2007 diplomatic cable which mentions — within the context of discussion of plans for relationship-building between Majlis Al-Shura and U.S. Congress — the intention of Majlis Al-Shura member Dr. Bandar bin Mohammed Al-Aiban in speaking to Political Counsel to extend an invitation to the annual Hajj to Representative Ellison — and if they also reviewed related information in other cables:

** Note: internal links in the following added by this author for terminology and source references/context

MAJLIS EAGER TO ENGAGE WITH CONGRESS; REQUESTS OFFICIAL INVITATIONS

https://www.wikileaks.com/plusd/cables/07RIYADH1659_a.html

“As Chair of the K.S.A.– U.S.A. Friendship Committee, Al-Aiban announced that he is developing a series of exchange visits to the U.S. Congress because there is a ‘need for greater contacts between Congress and the Majlis.’  He also confided that Minnesota Representative Keith Ellison, who accompanied Speaker Pelosi in April 2007, may be invited to take part in the annual Hajj.  Citing the current NOPEC legislation (ref A), Al-Aiban said it is vital to also bring ‘non-friends’ to Saudi Arabia.  In closing, Al-Aiban shared that he and a small delegation will be traveling to the U.S. in early October to prepare logistics for the planned visit of Majlis President Sheikh Dr. Salih bin Humaid in late 2007. Referring to House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s verbal invitation in April 2007 (ref B) for Humaid to visit Congress, Al-Aiban requested official invitations from Speaker Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid in order to follow up on that invitation.”


If the House ethics panel did not, in fact, have this information for context during their review, it is this author’s opinion that members of the panel should reopen the investigation to ensure that all relevant background information is considered.  It appears that the House ethics panel’s initial review was focused on whether the Rep. Ellison’s travel expenses were reported according to procedure insofar as the nature of private or public business conducted during the trip. In light of all of the background context revealed in the diplomatic cables, especially the information regarding Al-Aiban’s statement that revealed it was Majlis Al-Shura’s intention to bring Rep. Ellison over for Hajj, there are other questions that arise as to procedure — for instance, about the source of the funding for the travel and whether it was channeled or arranged by a foreign government.

 

Originally published on Reflections of Indwelling Light

[huge_it_share]

HIGH-STAKES GAME OVER SYRIA AS KHAMENEI-PUTIN AXIS ADVANCES

The news out of Syria this week is, as usual, complex—and seemingly contradictory.

On the one hand, the Russian-Syrian-Iranian-Hizballah alliance appeared to have overcome rebel resistance in Aleppo—a major turning point that would shift the war’s momentum in the alliance’s favor.

On the other hand, Arab and other media reported that on Wednesday the Israeli air force struck a Syrian weapons depot west of Damascus and a weapons convoy headed for Hizballah in Lebanon.

As of Thursday evening there had been no retaliation against Israel, and Israeli analysts generally saw a retaliation as unlikely.

Media outside of Israel have, of course, often reported in the past on Israeli airstrikes—usually against Hizballah-bound weaponry—in Syria.

Israel’s policy has been to keep mum, neither denying nor confirming the reports. Last April, though, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu acknowledged that Israel had carried out “dozens” of strikes in Syria against “game-changing weaponry” for Hizballah.

It’s no secret that, since the 2006 war between Israel and Hizballah in Lebanon, Hizballah has massively rearmed and now harbors tens of thousands of missiles. But Israel regards some kinds of weapons—precision rockets, advanced antiship and antiaircraft systems—as out of bounds for the terror group.

What has changed in the Syrian arena, though, is that late last year Russia deployed its powerful S-400 radar and antiaircraft system there. It covers Syria, Lebanon, and much of Israel and can track Israel’s northern airspace.

Since then there have been far fewer reported Israeli airstrikes in Syria. In one of them, last September, the outcome seemed ominous when Syria—not a military match for Israel by itself, but backed by Russia and Iran—fired missiles at two Israeli aircraft.

Why, then, the Israeli strike this week? Why no military response this time?

One conjecture: the weapons Israel struck in the Syrian depot and in the convoy would have been particularly unacceptable weapons in Hizballah’s hands.

Another conjecture: the much-touted Israeli-Russian coordination, whereby Netanyahu and Russian president Vladimir Putin are said to have worked out arrangements to avoid clashes, is still operative.

Other possible mitigating factors are that Israel reportedly hit the targets from Lebanese, not Syrian, airspace, and that no Syrian or Hizballah fighters appear to have been killed.

The larger question: what happens if Syria’s Assad and his backers have indeed turned the tide and will be looking to keep extending their control over Syrian territory?

Of interest here are remarks to the Algemeiner website by Yossi Kuperwasser, who has held major positions in Israel’s Military Intelligence.

Kuperwasser, as the site paraphrases it, says that

Iran is stepping up the speed at which it is arming its proxies in the region due to its fear that after Donald Trump assumes the US presidency in January, its room to maneuver in Syria will be greatly hampered….

And regarding Israel and Russia, in Kuperwasser’s own words:

There is a mutual understanding of each other’s interests. Though Russia and Iran are backing Hezbollah combat rebel forces fighting against the Assad regime, Russia understands that Israel cannot allow weapons from Hezbollah in Syria to be moved to Lebanon, where they will be aimed at the Jewish state.

How long can this relatively tolerable—for Israel—situation continue?

Indications are that its days may be numbered. Even if Putin’s strategic goals are not identical to those of his allies—he is clearly not a Shiite ideologue like the Iranians and Hizballah or a Shiite-aligned Arab like Assad—his steps have been increasingly brazen.

Along with the transfer of major weapon systems to Syria, and an aircraft carrier to its coast, they include major weapons sales to Iran, joint provision with Iran of weapons to Iran’s Houthi proxies in Yemen, and reports of Russian aid to Iranian-backed Shiite militias in Iraq.

As Kuperwasser puts it, Israel’s most serious concern is “Iran’s increasing territorial contiguity—crossing Iraq, Syria and Lebanon.”

For the incoming Trump administration, stemming this tide should be an urgent priority. Whatever Putin’s real motive, he is helping create a situation of unacceptable danger to Israel and a Middle East bifurcated between Shiite and Sunni blocs—a recipe for ongoing war and explosive instability.

Originally Published on FrontpageMag

[huge_it_share]

Erdogan Wants Jerusalem…and Syria Too

Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, president of Turkey has decided he wants Jerusalem and while he’s at it Syria belongs to him also.  Erdogan seemed to throw rapprochement with Israel out the window today when he stated “it is the common duty of all Muslims to embrace the Palestinian cause and protect Jerusalem.” He made the comments at the first Inter-Parliamentary Jerusalem Platform Symposium in Istanbul.

In the same speech Erdogan spoke about Syria:

“In my estimation, nearly 1 million people have died in Syria. These deaths are still continuing without exception for children, women and men. Where is the United Nations? What is it doing? Is it in Iraq? No. We preached patience but could not endure in the end and had to enter Syria together with the Free Syrian Army [FSA].”

“Why did we enter? We do not have an eye on Syrian soil. The issue is to provide lands to their real owners. That is to say we are there for the establishment of justice. We entered there to end the rule of the tyrant al-Assad who terrorizes with state terror. [We didn’t enter] for any other reason,” Erdogan said.

Erdogan like any other supporter of radical Islam believes in divine mandate on each muslim to conquer lands previously held by the caliphate.  For Erdogan it isn’t the caliphate, but rather the sultanate that has the divine power to institute rulership.

What is Erdogan Doing?

Erdogan is laying the groundwork for the passage of a constitutional amendment that gives him power until 2029. In order to pass the amendment  he needs the street behind him.  By showing off his radical Islamic bonafides he makes sure the street stays with him.  Furthermore he is giving context to his brutal attacks on the Kurds, both in Syria and Iraq.

For Erdogan, his broad use of terrorism is often times used to attack Kurds. For example, RT reports: “in October Turkey’s air forces killed between 160 and 200 fighters of the Kurdish YPG militia group in 26 airstrikes conducted in just one night.”

Essentially, the chaos in Syria has come to help Turkey regain a regional role in the Middle East in a way that is far more direct than it used to have. It has gained leverage against the EU and earned the respect of major powers like China.

In just a few months after Russia had Erdogan cornered and a failed coup attempt, Turkey is stronger than every and aiming to control both Northern Iraq and the Levant.

The ADL’s new bedfellows

In an interview this week with the Australian media, Jordan’s King Abdullah became the latest Arab leader to express hope that President-elect Donald Trump and his team will lead the world’s to date failed fight against jihadist Islam.

Like his counterparts in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, Abdullah effectively ruled out the possibility that President Barack Obama will take any constructive steps to defeat the forces of global jihad in his last months in power.

Speaking of the humanitarian disaster in Aleppo for instance, Abdullah said, “I don’t think there’s much we can do until the new administration is in place and a strategy is formulated.”

Egyptian President Abdel Fatah a-Sisi was among the first Arab leaders to welcome Trump’s victory. Sisi has been largely shunned by the Obama administration. President Barack Obama supported the Muslim Brotherhood regime that Sisi and the Egyptian military overthrew in 2013.

Sisi was the first foreign leader to speak to Trump after his victory was announced. He released a statement to the media saying that he “looks forward to the presidency of President Donald Trump to inject a new spirit into the trajectory of Egyptian-American relations.”

The support that the incoming Trump administration is garnering in the Arab world stands in stark contrast to the near wall-to-wall opposition to Trump expressed by the American Muslim community. According to a survey of Muslim American opinion taken in October by the Council for American Islamic Relations, (CAIR), 72 percent of American Muslims supported Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton. Trump was supported by a mere 4 percent of the Muslim community.

Muslim American activists played key roles in the Clinton campaign. They were particularly active in swing states like Ohio and Michigan where Trump won by narrow margins.

As the Jerusalem Post reported Wednesday, since the election, Muslim American leaders have expressed concern and hostility towards the incoming Trump administration. Muslim Democrat activist James Zogby, who also heads the Arab American Institute published an op-ed in the Jordan Times to this effect after the election. Zogby expressed concern that the Trump administration would harm the civil rights of Arab Americans.

The gap between the Arab world’s support for Trump and the Muslim American community’s opposition to him is particularly notable because it reverberates strongly the growing cleavage between the Israeli government and public and large swathes of the American Jewish community.

Led most prominently by the Anti-Defamation League and its executive director Jonathan Greenblatt, in the wake of the election, American Jews are at the forefront of efforts to delegitimize Trump and his senior advisors. Unlike their Muslim American counterparts, who are keeping their criticism of Arab regimes to themselves, Greenblatt, the ADL and their allies on the Left have linked their opposition to Trump to legitimizing opponents of Israel.

Before assuming his role at the ADL, Greenblatt worked in Valerie Jarrett’s political influence shop in the Obama White House. As ADL chief, Greenblatt has used his position as the head of a major Jewish organization to support the Obama administration’s policies. To this end, since the election, the ADL has worked to tar the incoming Trump administration as anti-Semitic, focusing its fire on Trump’s senior strategist, former Breitbart News CEO Stephen Bannon.

The ADL spearheaded the campaign to label Bannon an anti-Semite. When its claims were shown to be entirely spurious, this week the ADL quietly acknowledged that Bannon has actually never made any anti-Semitic statements. But its quiet admission of spreading lies didn’t stop the ADL from continuing to traffic in them.

Even after it admitted that “We are not aware of any anti-Semitic statements from Bannon,” the ADL continued to insist that Breitbart has been a home for anti-Semites because some Jew haters wrote anti-Semitic responses to Breitbart articles.

The ADL’s smear campaign against Bannon is a hard sell because Breitbart is among the most pro-Israel websites in the US. But this brings us to the second aspect of the ADL-led campaign against President-elect Donald Trump and his team.

With each passing day, it becomes increasingly clear that the ADL and its allies are using the Trump victory as a means to draw a distinction between pro-Israel and Jew friendly while arguing that anti-Semites support Israel and that people who hate Israel are not anti-Semites. This was the clear goal at the ADL’s summit on anti-Semitism last week.

As Daniel Greenfield reported Thursday in Frontpage Magazine, ADL used the conference to legitimize the so-called BDS campaign to boycott Jewish Israeli products and divest from businesses that do business with Jewish owned Israeli businesses. It similarly normalized the general argument that there is nothing inherently anti-Semitic about opposing the Jewish state.

In a panel with the disturbing title, “Is Delegitimization of Israel Anti-Semitism?” the ADL featured anti-Israel activist Jill Jacobs and the Jane Eisen. Both women argued that BDS is legitimate. At the same time, they denounced fervent supporters of Israel like Bannon and Center for Security President Frank Gaffney.

Greenfield reported that the ADL gave a prominent platform at the conference supposedly dedicated to fighting anti-Semitism to Ford Foundation CEO Darren Walker. The Ford Foundation is one of the leading contributors to anti-Israel organizations in the US and to anti-Zionist political front groups in Israel.

Other speakers explained that it isn’t that Israel’s foes are anti-Semitic. It is just that Israelis and their supporters have become “hypersensitive” to criticism.

All in all, Greenfield concluded, “Instead of tackling anti-Semitism, the ADL was tackling Israel and pro-Israel Jews” and “normalizing anti-Israel rhetoric and organizations.”

A few days after the conference, the ADL took the next step towards normalizing hatred for Israel in America when it announced its support for Rep. Keith Ellison’s candidacy to serve as the next chairman of the Democratic National Committee.

Ellison became the first Muslim American elected to the House of Representatives in 2006. In the decades that preceded his election, Ellison built a long and documented history of membership in and advocacy and employment for the anti-Semitic Nation of Islam. In his capacity as a Nation of Islam spokesman, Ellison made anti-Semitic statements and promoted anti-Jewish and anti-Israel positions and activists.

Since joining the House of Representatives, Ellison has been one of the leading anti-Israel voices in Congress. He has spearheaded multiple anti-Israel initiatives. He openly supports the boycott of Israeli Jewish products and has castigated Israel as an apartheid state.

Together with James Zogby, last August Ellison served as a member of the Democratic Party’s platform committee. The men attempted to purge the platform of language in support of Israel.

Yet Wednesday the ADL released a statement extolling Ellison as “a man of good character.” The ADL praised him as “an ally in the fight against anti-Semitism and for civil rights.”

It even said that Ellison “has been on record in support of Israel.”

ADL is supporting Ellison – and opposing Trump and his pro-Israel advisors – because Greenblatt and his backers support Obama’s policies in the Middle East and want to make it difficult for Trump to abandon them.

Ellison and the leading American Muslim groups oppose Trump for the same reason. The difference between the two groups is that the ADL and its Jewish backers are acting in this manner because they support the Left, which Obama leads. Ellison and his allies at CAIR, the Islamic Society of North America, and the Arab American Institute and other groups oppose Trump because they support the substance of Obama’s policies.

The chief characteristics of Obama’s Middle East policies have been support for the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran against Israel and the US’s Sunni allies.

Former FBI agent and counterterrorism expert John Guandolo estimates that upwards of 80 percent of Islamic centers and mosques in the US are controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood.

The major American Muslim groups, including CAIR, ISNA and the Islamic Circle of North America are tied to the Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood in turn supports Iran.

During his year in power in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood’s Muhammad Morsi permitted Iranian warships to travel through the Suez Canal, hosted Iranian leaders and Hezbollah commanders in Cairo and took a series of additional steps to embrace Iran.

Trump’s foreign policy advisor Walid Phares gave an interview to Egyptian television after Trump’s election stating that Trump will support a bill introduced by Senator Ted Cruz to outlaw the Muslim Brotherhood in the US as well as its offshoots CAIR, ISNA and others due to their support for jihadist terror groups formed by Brotherhood members. Al Qaeda, Hamas and a host of other jihadist groups have all been formed by Muslim Brotherhood followers.

Trump’s National Security Advisor, Lt. Gen. Mike Flynn, Rep. Mike Pompeo, whom Trump has selected to serve as his CIA Director as well as Marine Gen. James Mattis, the leading contender to serve as Trump’s Defense Secretary are all outspoken opponents of Obama’ nuclear deal with Iran.

Given the stakes then, it makes perfect sense that the Arab American groups oppose Trump.

It also makes sense that Arab regimes threatened by the Muslim Brotherhood and Iran support Trump and eagerly await his inauguration.

And it clearly makes sense for Israel to welcome Trump’s election.

The only thing that makes no sense is the American Jewish campaign to demonize Trump. The ADL’s leadership of the campaign to smear Trump and his advisors while legitimizing BDS and supporting Israel bashers is antithetical to the interests of the American Jewish community.

In adopting these positions, Greenblatt and the ADL along with their allies in J Street, Jewish Voices for Peace, If Not Now, the Forward, other far left groups and mainstream groups that have lost their way show through their actions that they have conflated their Judaism with their support for the Left. To the extent that the interests of the Jews of America contradict the positions of the Left, the Jews of America are behaving in an “anti-Semitic” way.

It is the responsibility of the segment of the community that understands “Jewish” is not a synonym of “leftist” to oppose the ADL and its backers. If they fail to do so, they will contribute to the descent of the community into powerlessness and irrelevance, not only in the era of Trump, but into the future.

Originally published in The Jerusalem Post. 

[huge_it_share]

Nigeria’s Radical Islamic President is Suppressing Biafran Zionists and Pro-Secessionists

At the end of the Biafran War many experts came to the conclusion that genocide had been committed against the Igbo by the Nigerian government. In an effort to suppress the scandal, the Nigerian government with some help from Great Britain worked frantically to cover up the news about the atrocities. For almost fifty years that effort paid off. The crime of Biafran Genocide was carefully hidden away from the public.
 
However, today 2016 the agitation for the restoration of the defunct Biafran state is in the news again. This is coming nearly half a century after the country’s demise in 1970. After suffering a pogrom in which more than 100,000 of their people were killed by Nigerian civilians and various security forces of the Nigerian government, Igbo people with other southeasterners who also were affected in the killings declared an independent Biafran state in mid-1967. Immediately following the secession the Nigerian state levied a genocidal war of aggression that lasted two and half years against Biafra. With the help of Great Britain, USSR (Russia) and Islamic Arab states; all those countries supplied arms to Nigeria and the war resulted in the genocide of Igbo people.
 
The war was prosecuted with the declared intention of wiping out the Igbo from the face of the Earth. By the time the war was over a quarter of Igbo population, that is 3 million of them were further exterminated. About 2 million of the casualties died from starvation resulting from the Nigerian government official policy of “hunger as a legitimate weapon of war.” Almost fifty years after that horrific genocide which tends to have been largely forgotten by much of the world community, a new generation of Igbo people who are majorly Animists and Christians are reviving the call to free themselves and territory from the largely Islamic state of Nigeria.
 
A close look at most of the people who are championing the new struggle to separate Biafra from Nigeria reveals that they either did not witness the Biafran War or they were mere children during the war. For this reason some people have asked the question; why are people in this age bracket bent on defiantly reviving such a horrific episode and experience in their history half a century on. Some people have argued that it has something to do with the fact that the Nigerian government banned the teaching of history in Nigerian schools soon after the Biafran War. People were prohibited from mentioning the name, “Biafra” for many decades afterwards. The government wanted to hide the genocide permanently from public consciousness. As a result, subsequent generations which did not witness the war are unable to appreciate fully the devastating impacts of the war on their parents’ generation. But since the years following the war even the generations of Igbo people who did not witness it are being punished and marginalized by the Nigerian state. And this is part of what is fueling the independence protests.
 
Remembering how horrible the war was, people like the current Muslim President of Nigeria Muhammadu Buhari who incidentally fought on the Nigerian side to defeat Biafra have asked the new agitators for a revived independent state of Biafra to forget it. Of course he did not find it necessary to express any remorse about the Igbo Genocide which he helped to orchestrate. He instead believes that the people will just forget just because he asked them to forget the heinous crime that was committed against them. Insensitively, the president went on to argue that the agitators are doing this because they did not experience or witness the war. This has made many observers to interpret Buhari’s highhanded response by killing the peaceful nonviolent agitators as his way of trying to teach the “inexperienced” agitators a lesson. In the past one and half years Buhari has rolled out, on many occasions, the full strength of his country’s military force to violently suppress the peaceful nonviolent Biafran independence movement.
 
The human rights organization; Amnesty International reports that since the advent of Buhari administration in 2015 till now – the tail end of 2016, Nigerian government has killed more than 300 Biafrans and wounded many more while they held peaceful protests for Biafra’s independence. Amnesty International says that many of those pro-Biafra protesters were shot and killed in their sleep and others while they gathered in churches to pray. Many of the protesters were shot and killed from behind while they tried to escape.
 
The fact is that the peaceful protests for the separation of Igbo territory (Biafra) from Nigeria has been going on since the year 2000. The group known as Movement for the Actualization of the Sovereign State of Biafra (MASSOB) had spearheaded these protests. Various Nigerian administrations before the advent of the present one in 2015 had used mostly the incarceration of the leaders of the movement in trying to deal with and suppress it. MASSOB’s former leader Ralph Uwazurike suffered many jail times in Nigerian prisons. Sometimes the MASSOB leader was detained for many years at a time. Apart from many of the agitators who are being killed extra-judicially by government forces there are some notable individuals who are being held in various Nigerian prisons just because they are agitating for Biafra’s independence. Some were snatched off the streets into prisons for merely wearing vests with Biafran insignia or just being in possession of Biafran flags. There are such people like Benjamin Onwuka the leader of Biafra Zionist Movement (BZM,) Chidiebere Onwudiwe whose home was invaded by Nigerian security agents in the middle of the night. He was taken away from his house at 2 AM and has not been heard from again since the last one year. Then there is Nnamudi Kanu who runs an online radio called Radio Biafra London (RBL.) These individuals except for Onwudiwe whose fate is yet to be known, can be described as almost lucky because Buhari’s government has not yet executed them and their cases have been celebrated because of the relatively wide media publicity they have attracted.
 
But there are many unsung pro-Biafra agitator-victims who are not as lucky. They are currently suffering various kinds of persecutions in many detention centers around the world. Some of these less known victims are being prosecuted in different courts of law in many places around the world simply because they demonstrated publicly for the independence of Biafra. These people are being deprived of their freedom or are being subjected to other forms of hardships and inhumane treatments because of their involvement in Biafran freedom activism.
 
Over the years many critics have complained that the Nigerian government has used some unorthodox diplomatic manipulations to influence how some foreign government agencies carry out their duties in its effort to suppress Biafra’s independence and hide the Biafran Genocide. Since the time of Biafra War till now, Nigeria has deployed its diplomatic tentacles across the world to make sure that those who agitate for Biafra anywhere are suppressed. We will cite two little known examples of those who are going through persecutions in so-called civilized societies like European countries of Norway and England.
 
Lotachukwu Okorie used to serve as MASSOB’s District Officer in southeast Nigeria before he emigrated to Norway, fleeing from persecution by Nigerian government authorities. On getting to Norway, a civilized society, he believed that his problems were over and his human rights would be protected. Unfortunately, he discovered that they had only just begun. In what looked like a remotely influenced operation the Norwegian government detained Okorie and charged him with illegal immigration crime. He was then detained for one year and six months without any conclusive decision on his case. According to Norwegian laws he overstayed in jail the period he was legally supposed to. Just before he was arrested, Okorie was so frustrated by the various dehumanizing treatments he was receiving from Norwegian security agents that he was driven to attempt suicide with a kitchen knife.
 
Another case which is fast becoming a source of embarrassment to the British government is that of Yahgozie Immanu-el victim of political persecution by British authorities that apparently are trying hard to please Nigerian government which it is believed are tele-guiding and influencing the current ordeals of Yahgozie. It appears that the British government is willing to compromise their country’s very reputable centuries-old national respect for the fundamental human and civil rights of all people simply to please the Nigerian government. Yahgozie is an independent journalist as well as a pro-Biafra activist who is based in London. He got arrested by the British police while he covered the recent official visit to Britain by the Nigerian President Buhari. He was subsequently taken to court on frivolous and trumped up charges that he was trying to attack President Buhari’s motorcade. Some eyewitnesses of the incident are still unable to understand how the actions of someone who only had a microphone and was trying to cover the unfolding events could have been interpreted as an intention to attack President Buhari. Yahgozie’s case comes up again in the City of London Magistrates Court later in this month of November. Many people think that the case is actually turning into an embarrassment to the human rights image of the British government.  
[huge_it_share]        

ISIS in Ohio State…Beginning of a Terror Wave?

With today’s terror attack in Ohio St. we can cleary state that the refugee rettlement program has turned deadly. As the main stream media and police vacilate over whether or not to call the actions of 18-year-old Abdul Artan a terrorist attack, it is clear to anyone with even semi clear vision that plowing one’s car into pedestrians and then jumping out to stab whoever did not get knocked down is without a doubt a terror attack.

Attacker Dead on Street Source: Gateway Pundit/OSU Student
Attacker Dead on Street Source: Gateway Pundit/OSU Student

Abdul Artan was a Somali refugee who left his East Africa with his family in 2007.  He lived in Pakistan and then in 2014 came to the United States as a legal permanent resident.

“This car just swerved and ran into a whole group of people,” said Nicole Kreinbrink, who was walking nearby. “All these people were running and screaming and yelling,” Kreinbrink added.

“I heard someone yell, ‘He’s got a knife.’ And I saw a guy with a big-ass knife just chasing people around. When I saw that, I grabbed all my stuff and started running,” said Jacob Bowers an OSU sophmore.

So far there has been 9 wounded from the attack with police shooting Artan dead.

Are There More Attacks to Come?

The answer is yes. Now that Trump has won, the massive migrant infiltrations into the USA will reveal the thousands upon thousands of Jihadsts that were embedded among them. The purpose of continued attacks is to force a Trump administration to overreact thus encouraging more Jihad. This is the cycle that fits perfectly into the ISIS playbook.

Similar to Israel’s Knife Intifada of Last Year

The attack mimics the car ramming and knifing attacks that were prevelant in Israel last year.  Whether this sort of tactic is being carried over to Americais not clear.  Americans are primarily not prepared for this sort of combat.  Time to consider building the sort of barriers Israel has in public places.

[huge_it_share]

Who is Shuhada al-Yarmouk and Why Did They Start Attacking Israel?

With yesterday’s attack being the first direct confrontation between an ISIS related group and Israel, the question stands who is Shuhada al-Yarmouk and why did they decide to attack the IDF?

Jihad Intel a Middle East Forum Database for tracking Jihad groups says the following:

Liwa Shuhada al-Yarmouk (Yarmouk Martyrs Brigade) was founded in 2012 in southwestern Deraa province (the Yarmouk Valley), bordering the Golan Heights. Once a part of the Western and Gulf-backed ‘Southern Front’ rebel coalition, the group came to blows with Jabhat al-Nusra in December 2014 as the latter accused Liwa Shuhada al-Yarmouk of secret ties with the Islamic State. Though other Southern Front members denied the claims at the time, the group has since the clashes openly embarked on a program of ‘reform’ in the Yarmouk Valley area it controls, advertising greater affinity with the Islamic State. Besides adopting the Islamic State flag in its emblem, members openly show support for the Islamic State and echo its talking points. The administration of the Yarmouk Valley likewise mimics the Islamic State with an Islamic court , Islamic police and Diwan al-Hisba, though no official pledge of allegiance to the Islamic State has been announced.

Links between Liwa Shuhada al-Yarmouk and the Islamic State can be traced to the summer of 2014, as certain members visited the Islamic State’s de facto Syrian capital in Raqqa. In March 2016, Islamic State dispatched a Saudi- Abu Abdullah al-Madani- to take over the group as a new offensive was launched against rebel forces, cooperating with the Islamic Muthanna Movement that controlled some towns to the east. Islamic Muthanna Movement was subsequently forced to retreat into Liwa Shuhada al-Yarmouk. At the end of May 2016, a new amir was dispatched by the Islamic State and a merger of Liwa Shuhada al-Yarmouk and Islamic Muthanna Movement was announced under Jaysh Khalid ibn al-Waleed, referring to an early figure in Islamic history who was key in the defeat of the Byzantines in the Levant in the Battle of Yarmouk.

So Shuhada al-Yarmouk was an American invention that decided to change sides in order relive the good old days of Islamic history.  So why attack Israel now?

Let’s face it, ISIS and its many affiliates are in a bit of a bind.  The Shuhada al-Yarmouk organization is in worst shape than others.  It has always been cut off from the rest of the “caliphate” and with Russian backed air strikes in the region, an Iranian military presence, and Hezbollah, its future is now compromised.  It has really only two options to stay relevant with the local populace. Either attack Jordan to its South or give it a go against the “Zionist Entity.” It chose the latter.  Does its failure in its first strike mean it won’t be dangerous down the road?  Not at all.  In fact, to its supporters it is victorious in being true to the Koran, because of its attack on the infidels. Recruitment will rise from this one attack, which means there will be more.

As the border area along the Golan increasingly becomes crowded look for more skirmishes between Syrian troops and ISIS as well as attempts to penetrate the Golan border.  The key anchor in stability in the region are the Druze.  With the animosity between ISIS and the Druze very high, Shuhada al-Yarmouk may decide to strategically alter its plans altogether.

[huge_it_share]