Why is the Iraqi Government Supplying ISIS with Humanitarian Aid?

BasNews, a Kurdish magazine reports that the Iraqi government is tranferring, “thousands of tons of medicine are being transferred to the Islamic jihadists.”

Below is the video proof:

If the Islamic State falls apart, why is the Iraqi government who is headed by a secular Shiite aiding a Sunni Jihadist group?

The answer is simple, the Iraqi government has always functioned on two levels.  On the national level it is run by a Shia who heads a secularist Sunni party, but Iraq has its own Deep State, which has been penetrated by Baathists from the Saddam years.

More than that, a Der Spiegel report published two years ago, blew the lid off of the minds behind ISIS. The report details how the Islamic State was in fact birthed by the same Baathist leadership that had been behind Saddam Hussein.

The Der Spiegel report named Samir Abd Muhammad al-Khlifawi other wise known Haji Bakr as the architect of the Islamic State.

“The former colonel in the intelligence service of Saddam Hussein’s air defense force had been secretly pulling the strings at IS for years. Former members of the group had repeatedly mentioned him as one of its leading figures. Still, it was never clear what exactly his role was.

But when the architect of the Islamic State died, he left something behind that he had intended to keep strictly confidential: the blueprint for this state. It is a folder full of handwritten organizational charts, lists and schedules, which describe how a country can be gradually subjugated.”

The secular Baathists understood to regain control of Iraq they had to align with far more driven Jihadists.  It was in this vein that they penetrated the countless Jihadist cells fighting against the US and its nascent Iraqi government. Bakr methodically implemented a plan of using Islamic labels to attract and set up a Baathist control structure that allowed them to capitalize on the chaos in Syria to take over the Eastern part of the country in order to launch a war to regain Iraq.

To do this they needed Islamic underpinnings in order to attract young fighters as well as an excuse to use religion to control their planned Baathist superstructure.

“In 2010, Bakr and a small group of former Iraqi intelligence officers made Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, the emir and later ‘caliph,’ the official leader of the Islamic State. They reasoned that Baghdadi, an educated cleric, would give the group a religious face.”

Der Spiegel goes on to methodically build a case that the Islamic State is nothing more than a Baathist initiative to regain control of Iraq.

“Although Iraq’s dominant Baath Party was secular, the two systems ultimately shared a conviction that control over the masses should lie in the hands of a small elite that should not be answerable to anyone — because it ruled in the name of a grand plan, legitimized by either God or the glory of Arab history. The secret of IS’ success lies in the combination of opposites, the fanatical beliefs of one group and the strategic calculations of the other.”

Below is a channel 4 report on the real beginnings of the Islamic State:

The US Inadvertantly Lent Help to ISIS Under Obama

Whether the Obama administration understood the depths of the Baathist roots to ISIS or not may never be known, but what the White House and the Department of Defense believed was that transferring weapons to Sunni Jihadist in Syria would help aid the downfall of Assad.  Not only that the Department of Defense also believed that such “weak” mini caliphate would be able to hold off the Iranian march to the Meditereanean.  The White House wanted the caliphate to be strong enough to destabilize the region, but weak enought to allow the Iranians to march across the Middle East.

The Baathist roots to the Islamic State explains why the goup was successful in utilizing every opportunity to grow into a force that nearly took back Iraq, but why is Iraq still supplying them with weapons?

Although the Baathists as mentioned above have penetrated the government at various levels, another possibility for the transferring of such a large amount of humanitarian supplies is that Iran itself who influences the official army of Iraq and is control of large parts of Iraq through aligned Shiite militias is keeping the Islamic State.  The Iranians are doing this to encourage continued instability in Syria in order to bog down the American backed SDF while utilizing the chaos to establish their control.

What ever the reason behind the shipments of supplies one thing is clear: If we don’t stop the desire  to create chaos in order to establish neo-fascist controlthen the region will continue to experience war and instability.

 

 

 

JIHAD STRIKES IN EUROPE: Suicide Bomber Blows Up in Brussels

Radical Islamic terror is sweeping through Europe.  This evening in Brussels a man wearing a suicide vest detonated in a train station when soldiers attempted to arrest him.  Witnesses said he screamed “Allahu Akbar” before exploding.

After the explosion, police cordoned off the area as pedestrians fled in panic.

The upsurge in Islamic terror as more and more refugees flood Europe is beginning to weigh heavy on the populace. Despite the fear that is sweeping Western Europe, politicians are intent on bringing more and more Muslim refugees.

Is Europe Gone?

The sheer scope of the violence in Europe is staggering. While Eastern Europe has begun to close off its broders to migrants, Western Europe seems to be either blind to the problem or willfully ignorant. Even if Europe would shut down its borders today, the amount of migrants in most West European c0untries coupled with a negtive birthrate amongst non-Muslims means in less than a generation, Europe will be overrun by homegrown Islamists.

Can it be saved?  At this rate, the Europe as we remember it, is no longer.

New Bill Would Strip Terrorists and Their Families of Citizenship

A bill submitted yesterday (Sunday) to the Knesset would strip terrorists and their families of their citizenship and permanent residency status.

The legislation, submitted by Yisrael Beiteinu faction chairman Robert Ilatov with the backing of his party leader, Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman, was crafted in cooperation with the Zionist movement Im Tirtzu in response to the murder of 23-year-old border policewoman Hadas Malka this past Friday in Jerusalem.

According to the bill, originally proposed by the late Yisrael Beiteinu MK David Rotem, anyone found to be directly or indirectly involved in a terror attack will forfeit his citizenship and residency permit, along with the citizenship and permits of his family.

The bill would provide family members an opportunity to prove their innocence, which if established would enable them to retain their status.

Ilatov explained that the rights afforded to Israeli citizens and residents enable them to perpetrate attacks with greater ease, and the bill would serve as a powerful deterrent to the recent increase of Israeli citizens and residents involved in acts of terror.

The bill also stipulates that those found to have been complicit in terrorist attacks will lose their socioeconomic benefits, such as welfare payments and subsidized burial expenses.

“We will no longer allow the absurd situation in which terrorists and their accomplices enjoy the rights and benefits of Israeli citizenship while working to destroy the country,” said Ilatov.

 “The purpose of the bill is to send a clear message: Whoever tries to harm the State of Israel will no longer be a part of it.”

Im Tirtzu CEO Matan Peleg called attention to “extravagant” benefits enjoyed by terrorists sitting in Israeli prisons at the expense of the Israeli taxpayer, as well as the payments transferred to the terrorists by the Palestinian Authority.

“Today there exists an extreme situation wherein terrorists know that it is more worthwhile for them to murder an Israeli than to steal his car,”said Peleg.

Peleg also noted that the “bill will limit the power of foreign agent organizations in Israel that work on behalf of foreign governments to defend terrorists and their families in court.”

Burying Obama’s legacy

The fact is that Trump has given Netanyahu support as he has walked away from the failed policy paradigm of the Obama years.

It may very well be that this week was the week that Israel and the US put to rest former president Barack Obama’s policies and positions on Israel and the Palestinians.

If so, the move was made despite the best efforts of Obama’s team to convince the Trump administration to maintain them.

The details of Obama’s policies and positions have been revealed in recent weeks in a series of articles published in Haaretz regarding Obama’s secretary of state John Kerry’s failed peacemaking efforts, which ended in 2014.

The articles reported segments of two drafts of a US framework for a final peace treaty between the PLO and Israel. The drafts were created in February and March 2014.

The article series is predicated on the assumption that Kerry and his team were on the precipice of a historic breakthrough between PLO chief Mahmoud Abbas and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu. But a close reading of the documents shows that the opposite was the case.

There are two reasons that Kerry had no prospects for reaching a deal.

First, he, Obama and their advisers were too hostile to Israel and its citizens to ever convince Netanyahu that Israel’s interests would be secured.

A February 2014 draft framework agreement, which was based on conversations Kerry and his team held with Netanyahu and his advisers, makes this clear. The draft includes Netanyahu’s demand that Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria not annexed to Israel would remain “in place” after the implementation of a peace deal, and presumably, become towns in the future Palestinian state.

In other words, Netanyahu demanded that the Israelis in Judea and Samaria whose towns would be located in the territory of “Palestine” would enjoy the same rights and protections as Israel’s Arab citizens enjoy.

Kerry and his team would have none of it. The February draft agreement notes, “[US] negotiators need to check with PM [Netanyahu] on whether he wants to [maintain this position]… They believe that if so, he will push strongly for ‘in place.’ ‘In place’ is inconsistent with US policy and therefore unacceptable to us as well as the Palestinians.”

In other words, the position of the Obama administration was that all Israelis living in areas that would become part of the Palestinian state must be forcibly removed from their homes and communities.

Haaretz reporters Barak Ravid and Amir Tibon recalled that in previous rounds of negotiations, the Palestinians – unlike the Obama administration – had not rejected this Israeli position out of hand. That is, in demanding the mass expulsion of Israeli Jews from their homes, the administration adopted a policy more extreme than the PLO.

Then there is the problem with the PLO.

Abbas rejected Kerry’s February 2014 draft framework agreement, which was based on conversations with Netanyahu and his advisors. But he also rejected Kerry’s March 2014 agreement, which was based on the US’s conversation with him and his advisors.

The March 2014 draft was presented to Abbas by Obama himself during a meeting between the two in the White House. Not only did Abbas not accept Obama’s offer, he refused to respond to it.

This should have surprised no one. Abbas did the same thing in 2008 after then-prime minister Ehud Olmert presented Abbas with his peace proposal. Abbas’s predecessor, Yasser Arafat, responded in the same way in July 2000 to then-prime minister Ehud Barak’s peace offer, and in December 2000, to then-president Bill Clinton’s peace offer.

Given the consistent track record, it is beyond foolish to believe that anyone – even Trump – will fare differently from his American and Israeli predecessors.

Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the Haaretz series is what they tell us about Netanyahu.

Like him or hate him, the Netanyahu revealed in the articles is a brilliant statesman. In difficult diplomatic conditions, with the US openly siding with the PLO against him, Netanyahu managed to parry and duck. Although Haaretz tries to present Netanyahu as weak and compliant, the text shows that the opposite was the case.

In the face of massive pressure from Obama, Netanyahu refused to commit to anything. His only recorded position was that all Israeli communities in Judea and Samaria remain in place in perpetuity.

Rather than confront Kerry directly, Netanyahu stood aside and watched as the Americans drafted their anti-Israel proposals. He nodded. He smiled. He refused to commit to anything.

And he waited patiently for Abbas to walk away from the table.

Until this week, much to the dismay of many of his supporters, Netanyahu appeared unwilling to move beyond the defensive position he maintained throughout the Obama presidency. This week he took three great big steps forward.

First, Netanyahu announced that he supports amending Israel’s NGO law to ban foreign governments from funding political nonprofits registered in Israel.

For the past 20 years, Israel has been subjected to ever-escalating subversive campaigns funded and often directed by foreign governments and carried out by Israeli-registered NGOs. The purpose of these campaigns is to legitimize political and economic warfare against the Jewish state by European and other Western governments. The campaigns legitimize political and economic warfare against Israel by demonizing the Jewish state, its citizens and its soldiers.

In recent years, lawmakers have tried repeatedly to block the funding. But due to US pressure, Netanyahu scuttled all their attempts. Proposed reform bills were watered down until they were limited to instituting weak reporting requirements. Foreign government funds continue streaming into the coffers of NGOs whose positions are supported by no significant domestic constituencies.

By announcing that he now supports passing legislation that will bar foreign government funding of nonprofits, Netanyahu is striking a strategic blow at the political and economic war being waged against Israel by the EU and by the international Left.

This war, waged in the name of the Palestinians, has harmed Israel’s relations with the Palestinians by discouraging them from living peacefully with their Israeli neighbors.

Then there is UNRWA. The UN’s refugee agency dedicated to the Palestinians is arguably one of the central reasons for the perpetuation of the Palestinian conflict with Israel. Indeed, UNRWA was formed by the Arab governments to specifically block all prospect of peace between Israel and its neighbors.

UNRWA prevents the permanent resettlement of the Arabs who left Israel in 1948 and 1949 as well as their descendants. It has doomed five generations of “refugees” to live in the squalor of its camps, blocked from receiving citizenship in the countries of their birth and prevented from being resettled in other countries.

After Hamas took over Gaza in 2007, then-secretary of state Condoleezza Rice and then-foreign minister Tzipi Livni decided that the best way to respond to the move was by massively increasing UNRWA’s budget. They were unmoved by the fact that UNRWA employs Hamas terrorists. They ignored the fact that UNRWA schools in Gaza and elsewhere indoctrinate their students to embrace jihad and the cause of Israel’s annihilation.

Under Obama, the US increased its payments to UNRWA even as UNRWA schools, clinics and other facilities have been used as missile launching pads and storage depots in Hamas’s war against Israel.

This week, Netanyahu finally put to rest the dangerous folly that UNRWA is a foil to Hamas and a positive force in the region. He called for UNRWA to be dismantled and for the Palestinians and their descendants to be treated like every other refugee group in the world and be resettled by the UN’s high commissioner for refugees.

If Netanyahu’s move against UNRWA is translated into actual Israeli and US policy, it will mark the beginning of the end of one of the primary causes of the Palestinian conflict with Israel.

Finally, there is incitement. Palestinian terrorism would vastly diminish were it not for constant incitement that encourages terrorism and rewards and celebrates terrorists.

Since it was established by the Qatari regime in 1996, Al Jazeera has been a central engine of antisemitic and jihadist indoctrination of the Palestinians. And yet, Israel has never moved to close Al Jazeera’s bureau in Israel.

Israel has given the terrorist network a pass largely because it hasn’t wanted to deal with the Western outcry that such a move would provoke.

This week, for the first time, Netanyahu, along with Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman, announced they support Al Jazeera’s closure and have directed their staff to consider the best way to do so.

In so doing, Netanyahu and Liberman are making the most of the opportunity afforded Israel by the Arab states’ open cleavage with Qatar. Last week, Saudi Arabia and Jordan closed Al Jazeera’s bureaus in Riyadh and Amman. Egypt, which closed Al Jazeera’s offices in 2013, blocked its website.

Taken both separately and together, Netanyahu’s moves this week strike strategic blows at three central components of the Palestinian conflict with Israel. Incitement, political warfare and the eternalization of Palestinian refugee status all render the conflict intractable and prevent peaceful Palestinian leaders from emerging.

Notably, whereas the Obama administration would have subjected Israel to hysterical condemnations if Netanyahu had dared to take the steps he took this week, the Trump administration has taken no position on Netanyahu’s announcements.

The real reason that Trump appears to be burying Obama’s legacy is because unlike the ideologically- driven Obama, Trump is willing to consider evidence and facts when determining his opinions.

In May, Abbas came to the White House and told Trump that he abjured terrorism. Israel then presented Trump with evidence that Abbas publicly incites terrorism and uses the Palestinian Authority budget to support terrorists and their families.

Trump took in the information and upbraided Abbas for lying to him.

True, this week Secretary of State Rex Tillerson falsely told Congress that Abbas had cut off the payments. And true, Tillerson doubled down on his assertion after both the Palestinians and Israel said the payments have not been cut off.

True as well that Trump continues to believe that he can make “the deal” that his predecessors failed to secure.

But the fact is that Trump has given Netanyahu support as he has walked away from the failed policy paradigm of the Obama years.

In other words, Netanyahu’s moves this week, and the fact that the Trump administration has left him alone to make them without being second-guessed or condemned by Washington, indicates that we have finally moved past Obama’s legacy.

Where we are going is still unknown. But what is certain is that by going after the sources of the continued malignancy of the conflict and pushing back against the lies that informed Obama’s policies, both Israel and the US have abandoned them.

Originally published in Jerusalem Post

ISIS Strikes Jerusalem

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_btn title=”FOR $5/MONTH YOU CAN SUPPORT GAVRIEL’S WRITING” color=”primary” size=”lg” align=”center” button_block=”true” link=”url:https%3A%2F%2Fwww.paypal.com%2Fcgi-bin%2Fwebscr%3Fcmd%3D_s-xclick%26hosted_button_id%3DPBTQ2JVPQ3WJ2|||”][vc_column_text]For the first time ISIS pulled off a coordinated attack in Israel.  Border policewoman Hadas Malka, age 23, was stabbed to death near Damascus Gate in the Old City of Jerusalem.  The attack was one of two in the area.

The Jerusalem Division chief said, “One attack was carried out at Zedekiah’s Cave. Two terrorists, one with a knife and one with an automatic weapon, attempted to harm police officers.”

“The officers responded by firing their weapons and killing the terrorists on the spot.

“About 100 meters from there, a third terrorist stabbed a policewoman, critically wounding her. The terrorist was shot on the spot by other policemen in the area.

“The injured policewoman fought for a few seconds with the terrorist who stabbed her, and tried to draw her weapon. The other officers realized what was happened and shot the terrorist, who later died.”

 

The Islamic State claimed three “Lions of the caliphate” committed the attack and promised, “more to come.” Hamas praised the attackers, bu did not claim it.

Although there have been Palestinian Arab attacks in and around Damascus Gate before, this would be the first official ISIS attack.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][/vc_column][/vc_row]