A PLO Terror State for Iran?

Bee's note:  The following article by Fresno Zionism should raise red flags for Israel and her supporters.  Of course, there could be other alternatives we are not privy to, but whatever is being discussed behind closed doors during the "peace" talks cannot be good for Israel.

The West has been working diligently for the past five years, playing "Let's Make a Deal" between the PLO/PA's and Israel and every "deal" offered, to-date, has Israel at a disadvantage. 

So far, she has been forced to release Palestinian prisoners from its prisons; and in the past, froze building for almost a year, when the PA's were not even willing to accept that appeasement and refused to join discussions for "peace".

Meanwhile, Mr. "Flexibility" Commander-in-Chief has been caught making promises to world leaders BEFORE his Second Term in Office.  Not just to the Russians, but according to previous speeches by Abbas, Obama had also informed Abbas that AFTER his election for second term, the PLO's would have "Statehood".

Many have seen the videos of the Palestinians in Gaza passing out sweets and candy during the 9/11 attacks on America's soil, but as disgusting as that was, what is worse is having an administration today that seeks "closed door" solutions favoring those same Palestinians who rejoiced at the sight of almost 3,000 innocent American civilians at the hands of Muslim Jihadist terrorists.

My question today and one that should be on everyone's mind is this: "Why have we allowed our government to support and favor those who wish us death, rather than doing everything in our power to protect the one friend in the Middle East, that friend - Israel?  

One of the greatest lies is the West's claims that Fatah/Abbas is "moderate" vs. Hamas/Gaza Palestinians.  If Fatah were "moderate" and sincere about establishing a "peaceful" state within Israel's borders, why would they request the release of their own terrorist prisoners?

Please read: Why Abbas Will Never Make Peace With Israel.

If they were "moderate" and completely separate from Hamas/Gaza, why does Abbas speak for and support Hamas, as today's headlines demonstrate: "Hamas official applauds Abbas remarks on Gaza".  Hamas and Fatah have a "Love-Hate" relationship and that old saying "blood is thicker than water" holds true with the Palestinians.  The PA's are not moderate simply because the West chose sides, preferring the lesser of two evils. 

Another question to ask the Obama administration is: Why has this White House continually supported former Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood President Morsi?  Why has this White House chosen sides (as they did with the Palestinians) in the Syrian war, by announcing his support of al Qaeda terrorists in Syria?

I am well acquitted with the hobby of Embroidery, and the pattern of the Obama administration is so entangled with Islamic terrorists, we need to cut out the threads attaching our nation to any form of Islam that places our nation in jeopardy of further attacks - now!

A Palestinian child holds a key made of wood, symbolizing the key of a home lost during the creation of the state of Israel Photo Credit: Abed Rahim Khatib/Flash 90

FRESNO ZIONISM
September 18th, 2013 at 11:29 pm  

Iran for Palestine?

Leftish Israeli journalist Ben Caspit thinks that he knows what is going on between Obama and Netanyahu, and he may very well be right:

So what is the grand plan? In broad strokes, its tenets are as follows. This is a plan hatched between the US administration and Netanyahu, with Palestinian knowledge as well as the tacit knowledge of other elements in the Middle East. Its general underlying principle is “Iran for Palestine.” US President Barack Obama pledges, by also giving his own personal guarantee, to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear capability. In return, Netanyahu will reciprocate by awarding him a diplomatic achievement vis-a-vis the Palestinians. We have seen the first step in this direction in recent weeks in the arrangement Obama has worked out to disarm Syria of its chemical weapons. Netanyahu did not speak against this arrangement, partly because he has received US assurances that this will not be a precedent, that the Iranian issue is entirely different from the Syrian one and that the “credible threat” of a military strike on Syria still remains on the table.
Netanyahu is unable to reach a permanent status agreement with the Palestinians. Everyone in Ramallah, Washington, Jerusalem and the settlements knows that. According to the plan, at some point in the negotiations all the parties will have reached this conclusion, and at that juncture the Americans will lay out their alternative proposal. It will consist of a permanent arrangement in phases, beginning with an interim arrangement between Israel and the Palestinians in the setting of which a Palestinian state will be established under temporary borders.
Netanyahu hopes that he will not have to evict any settlements in the framework of this arrangement and that the Palestinian state will be established in areas A and B, which are under Palestinian security or civilian control. The United States will give the Palestinian Authority (PA) guarantees that this is not the final arrangement but rather an interim stage that is limited in time. The issues of Jerusalem, the refugees and final borders will be postponed to later stages. The Palestinian state will be recognized by the United Nations, with the support of Israel, which will withdraw to the separation fence line.

If true, this explains a lot, including Netanyahu’s agreement toa shameful prisoner release last month. It also explains why Washington continues to push Israel to negotiate with the PLO, despite the ample evidence that a real final agreement is unreachable. This plan achieves the multi-decade high-priority US policy goal of getting Israel out of the territories, without a final agreement. And getting Israel out is what Obama and the State Department care about, more than almost anything.

A deal with the PLO as described above would be very bad for Israel’s security, since a sovereign Palestinian state in Judea/Samaria that the IDF can’t enter without violating the UN Charter will become a terrorist base far more dangerous than Gaza. And delaying the intractable issues of Jerusalem, refugees, etc. until after Israel withdraws from much of the territory means that Israel will lose its leverage on them when they are finally laid on the table.

I understand why Netanyahu thinks the problem of Iran is of overriding importance, because it is. But of course there is one literally fatal flaw in the logic that would trade submission to the PLO for US action on Iran.

Even given the best of intentions, today’s US cannot be trusted to keep its commitments. If there is one lesson from the shockingly incompetent fumble of the Syrian situation, it is that one cannot count on America. And we cannot assume the best intentions from Obama, whose anti-Israel bias has been evident from the very beginning of his presidency.

Recent overtures between Obama and Iranian President Rouhani indicate that Obama is prepared to accept some kind of diplomatic ‘solution’. But it is certain that Iran will not agree to anything that will deny it the weapons that it has been struggling to develop, despite international condemnation and economic sanctions, for more than a decade. As in the case of Syria, Obama wants an excuse to declare victory. But only a credible threat of military force will succeed in getting Iran to dismantle its weapons program.

A PLO terror state a few miles from its population center or an Iranian bomb are both unacceptable to Israel. There is no way it can trade one of these for the other — it is not in Obama’s power, nor does he desire, to keep such a bargain.

The proposed American deal, if it is as described, is a chimera. Israel needs to take the hard road, to destroy Iran’s nuclear program itself and to keep sovereignty over the territories, at least for the near future.

http://fresnozionism.org/2013/09/iran-for-palestine/

America is in danger of going rogue under Obama

Bee's note:  

Have you been listening to reports out of Washington, D.C.?  In the midst of more hearings on Benghazi and IRS scandals, Americans are learning the depths of this administration's betrayal of American citizens - from right here in our homeland, all the way to Benghazi.  What could possibly add to our shock?

Sorry, you asked!

The latest news of Obama's willingness to aid al Qaeda rebels in Syria is ringing in my ears and that ringing is more like the sound of America falling into the pits prepared by our enemies.

When I first began blogging, I said that if American citizens did not pay attention to foreign policy, what is happening to our economy and other issues on the homefront would seem like "child's play" compared to this administration's decision to play with poisonous snakes- America's enemies, while betraying our allies.  I didn't have a crystal ball, had no idea just how dangerous Obama's choices would become for our nation, but dear America, I think we've just hit rock bottom!  

We are falling into a bottomless pit and the bulldozer of Islam is about to cover that pit with the sands of Islamist terrorists.

Prepper's are preparing; headlines continue to warn of the economy falling out from under us; families are stocking up on canned goods; gas prices rising; all while the constant drone of Obama's voice can be heard, daily, lecturing the Republican Party and all of us about what is "best" for our country.  His voice is like the sound of chaulk scratching across the blackboard!  For the sake of our sanity, it might be a good idea if all of us clicked the mute button to our televisions.  And, for the sake of our nation, Washington must prevent this "president" from destroying what is left of our country.  Five years (and counting) is too long to allow one man to fill the White House and our federal government with members tied to the Muslim Brotherhood, all singing the song of the Arabian Nights!

The following article by Jeffrey T. Kuhner is better at describing the situation America is in today:

WORLD TRIBUNE

Friday, September 6, 2013

by Jeffrey T. Kuhner

President Obama is on the verge of plunging America into another war.

Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya, however, bombing Syria would trigger a regional conflagration — one that potentially could lead to a global war. World War I began in Sarajevo. World War III may start in Syria.

Hyperbole? In 1914, Europe became engulfed in a bloodbath. The spark was a conflict in a far-off corner of the Balkans. Britain, France, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy, Turkey, Russia and eventually, America — all were propelled into a larger war, resulting in the deaths of millions. By issuing reckless ultimatums, arrogant leaders were sleepwalking their nations into disaster.

Syria is a modern-day powder keg. For over two years, it has been torn apart by a vicious, sectarian civil war. Over 100,000 Syrians have died. Nearly one-third of the population has fled into exile. Iran, Hizbullah and Russia support Syria’s strongman Bashar Assad. The Islamist rebels have the backing of Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Al Qaida. Foreign jihadists have poured in to bolster the ranks of the anti-Assad opposition.

The conflict pits Shi’ite Alawites against Sunni Wahhabites, Muslims against Christians, and Islamic fundamentalists versus Arab secularists. In short, U.S. military intervention risks dragging in almost every major regional power — including Israel — because Assad’s allies have a vested interest in his survival. Hizbullah has vowed to attack Israeli and U.S. targets in the wake of American military action. Iran has also threatened to rain missiles upon Tel Aviv. Moscow has vowed to increase weapon shipments to Damascus. Bombing Syria will light the fuse that could set-off the Mideast tinderbox.

Obama is pushing the United States toward a disastrous war for one reason: to salvage his ego. In August 2012, he publicly drew a “red line” in Syria over the use of poison gas.

The administration claims that Assad’s forces recently launched a chemical weapons attack upon civilians in rebel-held territory, murdering hundreds. To redeem his ultimatum, the president is asking Congress to authorize military force. The House and Senate should vote no. Obama risks becoming the 21st century equivalent of Austro-Hungarian Emperor Franz Josef — a bungling buffoon, whose reckless military aggression triggers calamitous consequences.

The only justification to go to war is to protect America’s vital national security interests. Assad’s regime is brutal and ruthless. But it has not attacked or threatened us. Hence, Obama seeks to wage an illegitimate war. There is no moral or strategic basis to bomb Syria. It is bellicose imperialism masquerading as humanitarian interventionism. The Syrian civil war is none of our business.

In fact, Obama wants the United States to do the unthinkable: side with Al Qaida — the very group responsible for the mass murder of 3,000 Americans and the worst terrorist atrocity on U.S. soil. Contrary to the claims of Secretary of State John Kerry, the Syrian rebels are not dominated by “moderates”; rather, their ranks are filled with Muslim extremists, who have committed numerous atrocities.

The Al Qaida-backed jihadists have slaughtered priests, nuns, women, and children. Churches have been burned. Aramaic-speaking Christian communities, dating back to the time of Jesus Christ, are routinely attacked. The rebels’ goal: To cleanse Syria of all Christians. A shocking video reveals an Islamic fighter, after killing a Syrian soldier, cutting out his heart and liver and then eating the organs. Some rebels are engaging in cannibalism. If the U.S. intervenes, we will be allying ourselves with Islamist savages. Such a war would be a permanent stain upon America’s honor — a national disgrace.

Obama’s argument is not only morally indefensible, but perverse. The president and his supporters are essentially saying that the lives of those killed by poison gas are worth more than those shot, shelled, bombed, burned or hacked to death. Both the pro-Assad forces and the rebels have committed countless war crimes. To simply bomb Assad’s regime amounts to selective indignation, an act of blatant hypocrisy.

Kerry claims that allowing Assad to get away with employing poison gas will embolden other dictators to use such destructive weapons, thereby threatening global order. Hence, it is imperative — and urgent — that America intervene. This is puerile nonsense. Egyptian leader Gamal Abdel Nasser launched chemical weapon strikes upon Yemeni tribesmen.

Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein gassed countless Kurds — many more than have been allegedly murdered by Assad. Yet, this did not end world civilization.

In Rwanda, over 800,000 Hutus and Tutsis were butchered in one of the worst genocides of the late 20th century. The weapons of choice: machetes. Sarin gas is not necessary to commit unspeakable atrocities. The only thing required are evil men determined to do evil deeds.

Obama now says he never drew a red line; the world did. This is patently false. The United Nations, NATO, the European Union and the Arab League — none of them are willing to sanction or join a military attack on Syria. The president’s coalition of the unwilling consists of (maybe) France and the United States. That’s it. The American people are solidly against war. Obama is finding himself increasingly alone and isolated.

Like a Roman emperor drunk on power, he is becoming dangerously detached from reality.

Bombing Syria would transform Obama into a rogue president and America into a rogue nation. Congress must stop him before it’s too late.

Jeffrey T. Kuhner is a celebrated talk radio host at Boston’s WRKO and a columnist for The Washington Times and WorldTribune.com.

http://www.worldtribune.com/2013/09/06/america-is-in-danger-of-going-rogue-under-obama/

Israel cannot rely on Barack Obama to ensure its survival.

Bee's note:

***BREAKING NEWS***

September 19, 2013A short time ago (1:50 AM i.t), in the middle of the night, while the citizens of Israel slept after celebrating one of the most important holidays in the Jewish religion, terrorists from Gaza fired a rocket at Israel.
As a result of the shooting, Color Red alert system was sounded throughout the Eshkol Regional Council. After which the citizens in the Eshkol Regional Council rushed to bomb shelters or safe areas to avoid the possible attacks.
*They had only 20 seconds to find safe area*

____________________________

FRONT PAGE MAGAZINE

September 19, 2013 By Joseph Puder 

Israel’s Lessons From Two Painful Anniversaries

This past Friday, September 13, and Saturday, September 14, marked two milestones: The 20^th anniversary of the Oslo Accords signed on the White House lawn by President Bill Clinton, P.L.O. (Palestinian Liberation Organization) chairman Yasser Arafat, and Israel’s Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, and the 40^th anniversary of the Yom Kippur War of 1973 (according to the Jewish calendar).  Both events have been mired in controversy, and both cost the Jewish state significant losses. The Oslo Accords are regarded by most Israelis today as a failure. The Yom Kippur War cost Israel nearly 3,000 lives, shocking the country psychologically while underscoring the failure of the Israel Defense Forces intelligence, as well as, perhaps, its arrogance in dismissing Arab (Egypt and Syria) capabilities.

This reporter interviewed PM Yitzhak Rabin before the Oslo process began. PM Rabin expressed a resolute stance against negotiating with Arafat. One will never know whether Rabin changed his mind about negotiating with Arafat or was forced to accept the ongoing, back-door negotiations that were taking place in Oslo. As we reflect on the last 20 years it is easy to conclude that the Oslo Accords, which allowed Arafat’s terrorists to openly operate in the heartland of Israel from the outskirts of Jerusalem to the Gaza Strip, were a “Trojan Horse” and a grave mistake. Rather than fostering the much hoped for understanding and harmony, Israel was faced with terror and horror in the form of suicide bombing, stabbing, and roadside shootings.

Prior to the signing of the Oslo Accords, Arafat relayed a message to Rabin that the P.L.O. was willing to acknowledge Israel’s right to exist and adhere to UN resolutions 242 and 338. The message also noted that the P.L.O. was willing to commit to finding a peaceful solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, to relinquish all forms of terror and to revoke the clauses in the Palestinian National Covenant which negate Israel’s right to exist. None of Arafat’s stated “promises” were carried out.

Terror against Israel and Israelis resumed almost immediately after the Accords were signed. Arafat’s Tunis-based terrorist masters arrived in the West Bank and Gaza and, in coordination with the Islamist terrorist organization Hamas, went about terrorizing Israel. In the first five years following the signing of the Accords, more Israelis were killed by Palestinian terrorists than in the previous 15 years. In the period between 1993 and1998, 279 men, women, and children were killed as compared to 254.  Seven years later, in September, 2000, Arafat launched the Second Intifada. According to the far left group B’tselem, between September 27, 2000, and January 1, 2005, 1,063 Israelis were murdered.

The Palestinians pretended to change the P.L.O. Charter but did not make even one amendment. They promised to refrain from anti-Jewish, anti-Israel incitement in schools and mosques, and in public political statements. The incitement continued and continues to this day under Mahmoud Abbas, Arafat’s successor. Moreover, Oslo failed to bring peace.  Instead it divided the people of Israel as well as the land of Israel. It weakened Israel’s deterrence, and empowered Hamas.

The CATO Institute’s suggestions should be considered: “Instead of trying to micromanage the Arab-Israeli peace process, the U.S. should minimize its financial commitment to Israel and the emerging Palestinian entity and encourage economic cooperation between Israel and the Arab states, which could be the foundation for an independent Middle Eastern economy.  Regional prosperity will advance peace far more effectively than American payoffs to prop up an artificial pax Americana.” This is particularly significant as the Obama administration goes about orchestrating “peace talks” once again between Israelis and Palestinians. The CATO Institute further noted that “Washington has sought to reestablish a prominent American role in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process. That would be a mistake.”

The lessons of the Yom Kippur War and the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) intelligence failure to free itself from the “conceptions” is still relevant today, as Israel’s political leadership holds fast that Assad’s Syria will not attack Israel. The Yom Kippur War was a surprise attack on Israel during the Jewish state’s holiest day. But there were clear signs of the impending attack. Israel’s PM Golda Meir was told by the Nixon administration “not to mobilize the reserves,” and the assessment by Israeli Chief of Military Intelligence, Maj.  Gen. Eli Zeira that Egypt and Syria would not attack, despite intelligence to the contrary, doomed almost 3,000 IDF soldiers to an unnecessary death.

“The intelligence failure is generally noted as the main reason for the Yom Kippur 1973 fiasco,” according to a September 16, 2013 posting in the left-leaning Israel daily, Ha’aretz.  It charged that “The low probability the Military Intelligence Directorate ascribed on the eve of the war to the possibility of a coordinated Egyptian-Syrian offensive remains a source of eternal disgrace.”

Israel Defense Minister Moshe (Boogie) Ya’alon, reflecting on the lessons of the Yom Kippur War said, “One of the seeds of that war’s failure was the great sense of victory of the Six-Day War, which led to excessive self-confidence, arrogance, complacency, and carelessness. Senior officers had a culture then of ‘I am, and there is no other beside me.’ Immediately after I was appointed head of Military Intelligence (MI) Directorate in 1998, I set about reading the report of the Agranat Commission [the post-war inquiry commission, JP] and went to meet its protagonists, too. From them I learned the extent of the tragedy: MI’s leaders in those years were clearly excellent people. They were overcome, and not only they, by arrogance and immodesty. There was no room for another opinion, another view, different thinking.”

It is apparent that the scorn Israel’s military commanders and political leaders had for the Arabs’ ability following the Six-Day War was at the core of the 1973 fiasco. The relevant lesson for 2013 and beyond is to take potential enemies seriously and prepare accordingly.

Israelis in 2013 are in no mood for risk taking. Oslo brought in the “Trojan Horse” of Palestinian terrorists in their midst instead of leaving them in Tunisia. The unilateral withdrawal of Gaza encouraged by the Western powers brought Hamas terrorists to power in Gaza – a mere 38 nautical miles from Tel Aviv. At an AIPAC conference on March 22, 2010, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stated that “the status quo is unsustainable.” That message did not inspire Israeli confidence. To the contrary, it implied that a “piece of paper” such as the Oslo Accords can be a substitute for security.

Israel cannot rely on Barack Obama to ensure its survival. The recent Syrian debacle for Obama and his “red lines” demonstrated the U.S. administration’s reluctance to act militarily. Israel cannot wait for Obama’s “green light” to deal with Iran’s nuclear threat when its very survival is at stake. PM Golda Meir felt compelled to obey the Nixon administration admonition to Israel in 1973, “not to shoot first” or “mobilize reserves.” As a consequence Israel paid a steep price – the lives of almost 3,000 of its best men and women.  PM Rabin in 1993 was probably less than enthusiastic about trusting a deal with Arafat. He wanted however to please Clinton, Israel’s most important ally and friend. The lessons from last week’s two painful anniversaries are that Israel can only rely on itself on matters of war and peace.

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.  

Obama’s Move to Arm Al Qaeda in Syria

al Qaeda in Syria a/k/a "rebels" a/k/a terrorists

FRONT PAGE MAGAZINE
September 19, 2013 By Arnold Ahlert 

On Monday, twelve years and five days after al Qaeda precipitated the worst domestic attack in modern history, President Obama waived two sections of the Arms Export Control Act (AECA), allowing him to provide military assistance to “vetted” rebel grips in Syria. Though the AECA was designed to prevent arming terrorists, Obama announced that he had the authority to ”waive the prohibitions in sections 40 and 40(a) of the AECA related to such a transaction.”

Section 40, “Transactions With Countries Supporting Acts of International Terrorism,” and Section 40(a), “Prohibited Transactions by the United States Government,” ban sending munitions to any nation described in Section 40 (d), “Countries Covered by Prohibition:” ”The prohibitions contained in this section apply with respect to a country if the Secretary of State determines that the government of that country has repeatedly provided support for acts of international terrorism.”

Section 40(g), “Waiver,” grants the president the power to waive these provisions if he determines “the transaction is essential to the national security interest of the United States.” The same section requires the president to give Congress the name of any country involved in the proposed transaction, the identity of any recipient of the items to be provided pursuant to the proposed transaction, and the anticipated use of those items” at least 15 days before the transaction takes place.

In addition, he must provide a description of the items involved, the reasons the transaction is essential to our national security, the date of delivery, the name of every government “department, agency or other entity” involved in the transaction, as well as “every foreign government involved..and every private party with significant participation in the proposed transaction.”

Yet unless the Washington Post is inaccurate, Obama has dispensed with the notion that Congress gets their 15-day notification. Five days before the president announced his waiver, the paper revealed that the CIA and the State Department had already begun delivering weapons to Syrian rebels, along with vehicles, advanced communications equipment, and cutting edge medical kits.

Nonetheless, National Security Council Spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden contended that this action will allow the president to provide, “where appropriate, certain non-lethal assistance inside or related to Syria,” (italics mine) ostensibly related to giving rebel forces “life-saving chemical weapons-related assistance” currently prohibited by the AECA. Hayden further noted that the AECA no longer applies to ”international organizations…[and] select vetted members of the Syrian opposition, including the Supreme Military Council.”

The idea that the Obama administration can determine “select vetted members of the opposition” is utter nonsense. A new study by IHS Jane’s, a defense consultancy, estimates that, out of the approximately 100,000 rebels fighting the government of Bashar Assad, 10,000 are jihadists, including foreign fighters linked directly to terrorist organizations like al Qaeda. Another 30,000 to 35,000 are hardline Islamists who share the same sentiments, but are focused on the war in Syria, as opposed to the effort to realize a worldwide Islamic Caliphate. An additional 30,000 are so-called moderates, but even they belong to groups described by IHS Jane’s as having “an Islamic character.” Thus, non-Islamist, secular or nationalist groups comprise a minuscule minority.

Charles Lister, who authored the analysis, minced no words. ”The insurgency is now dominated by groups which have at least an Islamist viewpoint on the conflict. The idea that it is mostly secular groups leading the opposition is just not borne out.”

Apparently that reality is irrelevant to the true believers. “Our intelligence agencies, I think, have a very good handle on who to support and who not to support,” said Senator Bob Corker (R-TN) on CBS last Sunday. “And there’s going to be mistakes. We understand some people are going to get arms that should not be getting arms. But we still should be doing everything we can to support the free Syrian opposition.” Sen. John McCain dismissed the IHS Jane’s report completely. “Not true, not true!” he exclaimed, contending there are “about 70 percent still who are Free Syrian Army.”

That would be the same Free Syrian Army that coordinates regular military operations with al Qaeda and other terrorist entities, and the same John McCain who, along with our equally clueless Secretary of State John Kerry, cited research by the now-discredited Elizabeth O’Bagy to back up their assertions. O’Bagy, who was subsequently fired from her “senior analyst” job at the Institute for the Study of War (ISW) for lying about her education credentials, has now admitted that her original contention that she had defended her dissertation, and was only waiting for Georgetown University to confer her Ph.D. degree, was also a lie. She never enrolled in the Ph.D. program.

McCain remains undaunted. He insists his strategy is to provide “meaningful lethal assistance to moderate opposition forces.”

Unfortunately such silliness obscures the more ominous implication of Hayden’s contention that the AECA no longer applies to international organizations. That means the additional shipments the president intends to make to rebel forces also violates the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) of 2012. Section 1021(b)(2) of the law, upheld by the U.S. Court of Appeals 2nd District, allows for detention of citizens and permanent residents on “suspicion of providing substantial support” to groups engaged in hostilities against the U.S.

How this statute fails to apply to the “some people” Corker has essentially admitted are terrorists, is anyone’s guess.

The primary rationale for arming rebel factions is that the Assad regime crossed a “red line” by employing chemical weapons. The subsequent circus that ensued from those two words culminated in an agreement where Assad would submit a list of his chemical weapons cache within a week, allow U.N. weapons inspectors into Syria no later than November, and completely destroy the stockpile by the middle of next year. If Assad refuses to comply, the use of force may or may not be an option.

As advantageous as that deal is to Assad and Putin, highlighted by reports that Assad may already be moving his chemical weapons to Iraq and Lebanon to avoid detection, it may already be in jeopardy. Yesterday, Russia announced that it will present evidence provided by the Syrian government to the U.N. Security Council, revealing chemical weapons use by rebel forces in the Damascus suburbs. ”We will present all this in the UN Security Council, of course,” said Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, according to Interfax.

Earlier in the day, Russia denounced the U.N. report of the August 21 chemical attack in the al-Ghouta area of Damascus as “politicized, preconceived and one-sided,” according to Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov. Likely this is due to the reality that British, French and US envoys said the report leaves no doubt Assad’s government was responsible, even though the investigative team itself refrained from blaming either side. Thus, it seems likely that Russia is building a case to veto any punishment that France, Britain and the U.S. might mete out to Assad for any violations of his promise to abandon chemical weapons.

Yet none of these machinations negates the reality that the president, members of his administration, and members of Congress will be engaged in arming America’s mortal enemies, even as they claim they can sift the secular/nationalist wheat from the terrorist chaff.

Radio host Glenn Beck cut right through that pernicious assertion. He made the irrefutably logical case that if we are providing military aid to the “good guys,” it shouldn’t be necessary to waive sections of a law aimed at preventing terrorists from being armed.

On Monday, the remains of a 49-year-old man killed at the World Trade Center on September 11, 2001 were identified using an advanced DNA technique. Only 1,638 out of 2,753 people murdered that day have been identified. They were murdered by the same group of Islamist savages that President Obama and the useful idiots in his administration and Congress would arm a dozen years later. How long before these weapons are inevitably turn on us?

Freedom Center pamphlets now available on Kindle: Click here.

About Arnold Ahlert

Arnold Ahlert is a former NY Post op-ed columnist currently contributing to JewishWorldReview.com, HumanEvents.com and CanadaFreePress.com. He may be reached at atahlert@comcast.net.

Bee's note:

h/t Jack WV

Washington's Naval Yard Massacre - Likely a Jihadi Assault!

Washington Navy Yard "shooter" Aaron Alexis

WASHINGTON’S NAVAL YARD MASSACRE: MORE THAN LIKELY A JIHADI ASSAULT! Commentary 

By Adina Kutnicki

MOST especially, whenever a highly volatile situation arises, it is always prudent to listen to your gut instincts and to proceed from there. To wit, tune out the ‘white noise’, ‘mainstream’ media, political deflections and jibber jabber, then start looking at what makes the most sense. Of course, the damnable facts will seep forward, albeit without the help – even as they actively hinder the truth from coming out – of those who should be upfront from the get go. No matter.

Now, bear in mind that the shock factor always takes time to wear off, and this is why it is easier for media denizens/politicians/leftists to bob, weave and punt from sticky ‘areas of concern’. Again, tune the bastards out.

So, where does one commence the ‘process’? If one has the ears of reliable contacts – those who have yet to steer wrong – it is prudent to listen up. As such, this blogger/investigative journalist has been apprised of some interesting tidbits. One such dropping came from a highly reliable contact in NYC, the other from a‘birdie’ in Washington, D.C. Hmm. It was hinted – on both ends – there was much chatter among the jihadi subset, concentrated in the Brooklyn, NY ‘nabe alongside Atlantic Avenue. Makes sense. This section of Brooklyn produced/groomed (in tandem with other neighborhoods too) the 1993 World Trade Center bombers, plus lent their (jihadi) hands to other ‘events’. This is a fact. In addition, Jersey City was pointed out as well – as an ‘area of interest/concern’ – as a font of info, and those chattering reached the ears of the aforementioned Washington, D.C. contact. But this by no means indicates that other Muslim-concentrated cities/communities didn’t pitch in. Not at all.

Clearly, the biggest agencies/guns are working the case 24/7 and know what’s what. Yet, if past is prologue, you may not want to rely on them to offer up the truth. Just a suggestion.

In relation to the above, it is imperative to study The Opening of Jihad on U.S. Soil for several reasons, least of which is to understand how the so-called ‘big guns’ often fail to do their due diligence, for ‘this or that’ (political/ideological) reason. So, even though we are being told that the FBI and all relevant agencies are ‘on the case’, well, it depends what the meaning of ‘on’ is. The following is a section from the above link. Extrapolate within.

        “Immediately, Mr. Taylor approached the local New York office of the FBI and the US Attorney General’s office with sources of information. Acclaimed terror investigator Steve Emerson produced a documentary,Jihad in America, that exposed that the FBI had buried moles and spies deep within some of the Islamic terror cells. However, no tangible results on Rabbi Kahane’s murder were forthcoming from the FBI. Coincidentally, Mr. Taylor had the occasion to speak with the newly retired CIA head, William Sessions. Mr. Taylor was flabbergasted to learn that Mr. Sessions never saw the crime scene pictures taken of Rabbi Kahane’s murder. This should have been the first order of business, to hand over the pictures to the head of the CIA. After all, that was a logical conclusion to make when Islamic terrorists were being pursued. What was later revealed, though, managed to fill in the blanks as to why no results were forthcoming in Rabbi Kahane’s assassination investigation. 

          In a nutshell, the FBI was not only taken off Rabbi Kahane’s case, but all Islamic “infiltrating” was halted. President Clinton ordered the CIA, and the CIA then demanded that the FBI cease and desist. The Congress also put the squeeze on the FBI. Why? The true motives are anyone’s guess. However, from 1990 until the 1993 first World Trade Center bombing, these groups were not monitored…..”

As a result, the following is more than germane and must be taken seriously, much more so than what the general ‘news’ agencies/political mouthpieces are positing. But do recognize the oh so close timing of the attack to the anniversary of 9/11/01, MIRRORING the terror attack in Benghazi (Sept 2012), and the criminal cover up proferred up by Obama Inc. AND the lying media!

AL-QAIDA LEADER CALLED FOR ‘LONE WOLF’ ATTACK

Threat came 2 days before shooting killed 13 in Navy Yard violence

September 17, 2013

Authorities in Washington say their investigation so far gives them no reason to believe Navy Yard shooting suspect Aaron Alexis, 34, is linked to organized terror even though just two days earlier, al-Qaida’s leader had called for a “lone wolf” attack on Washington.

The attack Monday at the Washington Navy Yard left 13 dead, including Alexis, a military contractor, authorities said. Authorities said the motive was unclear and authorities even still wondered whether the gunman was alone, or whether there were others involved.

At the Debkafile intelligence report, a submission Monday said, “Two days ago al-Qaida leader Ayman Zawahiri issued a videotaped call for an adherent to carry out a ‘lone wolf attack’ inside the United States.”

And at the Washington Free Beacon, a report from Bill Gertz confirmed that several online jihadists were linking Islamists to the violence.

He reported, “Several jihadists wrote in Arabic on Twitter shortly after the shooting began around 8:20 a.m. ET that it appeared to be motivated by Islamist extremism. Some used the hashtag ‘Al Qaeda’ to report news of the shooting.”

He continued, “Some jihadists said the shooting was part of global jihad but none indicated inside knowledge of the killings, suggesting the comments are probably speculation or propaganda.”

He reported one jihadist on Twitter “said the attacks took place close to the 12th anniversary of the al-Qaida attacks on New York and Washington and thus appeared to be linked to Islamism.”

District of Columbia Mayor Vincent C. Gray affirmed that there is no evidence to link the attack to Islamist terror, but he told the Washington Post he could not rule it out.

While Gertz noted there was no immediate claim of responsibility from known terror groups, he reported a jihadist named Idaat Amniyah (@abdallahsaker) who claimed to be part of the Middle East group Fatah al-Islam stated that the shooting showed “we have moved from the defensive to the offensive stage” of global jihad.

Gertz identified another jihadist, Abu-Osama al-Muwahhid (@ab_osama1), who tweeted praise for the attack.

Washington Police Chief Cathy Lanier said for a time police were seeking two others as possible suspects, but one was found and ruled out. The third person still remained of interest to authorities.

She reported “multiple pieces of information” raised the prospect of more than one suspect involved.

The Debkafile further said that the participation of more than one gunman would point to a coordinated attack.

The target was a base where about 3,000 service members are assigned, and it’s only a couple of miles from the Capitol.

Larry O’Daniel, a member of the 250,000-strong National Vietnam and Gulf War Veterans Coalition’s Counter Terror Committee, said his group concluded that Zawahiri has great influence on al-Qaida’s tactics.

Noting that Gertz had reported as early as January that an al-Qaida website was lobbying for attacks on the U.S., O’Daniel said the warning was “strikingly similar” to Zawahiri’s statements.

“In February, WND reported that CIA asset ‘Reza Kahlili’ alleged Iran was targeting American utilities including cell towers, power utilities, water supplies, high voltage towers, and public transportation,” O’Daniel’s report said.

“Also in January, Mohammad al Zawahiri, younger brother to Ayman, echoed the jihadist call for action against a number of countries, roughly equivalent to those mentioned later in August 2013, who helped France as outlined in the Gertz article. Zawahiri asked for help from ‘all Muslim brothers’ as part of Quranic duty,” he said.

The report noted Zawahiri did give specific instructions.

O’Daniel’s report said while some interpreted Zawahiri’s call for lone wolf attacks as a sign of weakness, his coalition found that al-Qaida’s forte is a decentralized leadership group “providing aid, resources, guidance, and other assets for localized allied groups who carry out reconnaissance and actual attacks.”

“History shows that 19 well-trained men killed almost 3000 persons on 9/11/01. A small well-trained group came close to killing many times that number in the first WTC attack in early 1993. Al Qaida uses well-trained small groups. They are good in putting in place sleeper cells with no prior law enforcement exposure to slip under security radar,” the report said.

For good measure, let our memories meander back to the shooting at Fort Hood, you know, by the ‘soldier for Allah’ – currently given a death sentence – even though the motive (by the media, pols and the courts too) is still ascribed as‘workplace violence’! Mind you, this is even after Islamist Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan shouted “Allahu akbar!” (“Allah is greater!”) and brutally murdered 14 people (including an unborn baby) and injured 30 others at Fort Hood, Texas. 

It gets worse. Obama Inc. has been – and still is – paying jizya to the ‘soldier for Allah’. In effect, with the above as rock solid background info, why would anyone believe the ‘official’ reports on this (more than likely)  jihadi massacre? Can’t think of a valid reason.

Oh yeah, and ‘the voices’ – in the captured shooter’s head – made him do it, as the narrative starts to spin. Never mind the fact that he wasn’t declared ‘unfit for duty’, even as they start to blame the ‘event’ on his mental illness. You got that? 

This blogger prefers to listen to her ‘ears on the ground’, plus well honed instincts. What say you?

http://adinakutnicki.com/2013/09/18/washingtons-naval-yard-massacre-more-than-likely-a-jihadi-assault-commentary-by-adina-kutnicki/